Lolcow Melinda Leigh Scott & Marshall Castersen - Sue-happy couple. Flat earth conspiracists. Pretending to be Jewish. Believe Kiwi Farms is protected by the Masonic Order. 0-6 on lawsuits. Marshall is dead.

[Anonymus Fluhre]

That's not what gaslighting is.
But I'm not going to share what I know. I'll save it for the hearing

You wouldn't know what gaslighting is even if we linked you evidence with hand drawn pictures and used the smallest words possible so your subpar intellect could understand it.

 

[Burmese Rice Farmer]

That's not what gaslighting is.
But I'm not going to share what I know. I'll save it for the hearing

Actually, it's much closer to gaslighting than what you know about. Granted, it's not a perfect example, but gaslighting involves using inflammatory and often false statements to induce doubt, shame, or confusion. 90% of what we say isn't gaslighting, and the actual gaslighting that's been done before you've been legitimately too fuckin stupid not see it as such.

 

[Mushroom Tip]

Your motion to strike was procedurally improper and should not have come at all.

Because it doesn't mean what she wants it to mean.

She's aware that word gets psychos what they want, so she chants it like a magic spell.
Much like her inane legal jargon, doesn't matter if it applies or not.
I found the instructional video where Mel learned her legal skillz, BTW:
Klaatu Varada Nikto (Army of Darkness - 1992) - YouTube

 

[Deadpool]

But I'm not going to share what I know. I'll save it for the hearing

BS to english translation: I don't have anything intelligent to say, so I'm just going to plead special knowledge because I'm a dumb nigger.

 

[Useful_Mistake]

And I'll save my response to the legal part for a pleading before the court

...yet you keep responding

A bunch of babbling that is easily defeated with case law in a pleading before the court

Defeat it then. I dare you. Show me the caselaw. As the cool kids say, "put up or shut up"

You clearly didn't read your own source

The rest of your legal argument will be addressed in my upcoming pleadings

Which link were you responding to?

The Federal Rules also allow 21 days for each litigant to respond. T

I'm going to assume you mean rule 12. It only applies to counterclaims and crossclaims, and not every reply is either one of them. They usually require the defendant to sue the plantiff back.

Inaccurate. There's a whole rule book defining what can be said in a pleading and when.

FRCP? Those mainly affect plantiffs/defendants. While it does address the courts a bit, there is no rule (point it out if there is) that prevents the judge from looking at external evidence. For example, when judges judge vexatious litigants, they must look outside of that specific suit to find evidence to judge, namely the litigants past suits

Relieved to know the Kiwi Farms cult is not a sex trafficking ring.

Your reading ability never ceases to amaze me.

Actually I did. You're just too stupid to understand. Starting to agree with Deadpool that you should Epstein yourself.

Wouldn't that require a third party?

The case law in my next reply/pleading answers that

The only reason you'd need that was if you agreed that it was improper

Also, why are you writting a responce either way? You told us your Motion to strike was to remove the amount of responce you have to write, it seems counterproductive to start writting before the rulling. Proof of my claims of your words:

The judge can either (a) GRANT or (b) GRANT IN PART or (c) and DENY IN PART or (d) DENY my Motion to Strike. Once he does that, I will then file a response to whatever the judge hasn't gutted out of their Motion to Set Aside Default.

If he strikes the whole thing I don't even have to respond, the Default still stands.

If he strikes only a part of it, I only have to respond to whatever is not striken.

If he denies my motion completely, then I have to prepare a lengthier response to all of their Motions

Assuming I'm incorrect has always been your greatest folly

And yet we've seen you fail every step of the way in this suit.

Figures that now you can't make up your mind what to call it.

Funny thing that there is a difference. The fact that she doesn't know what she's writting is hilarious.

w. I'll save it for the hearing

Mel, the hearing was postponed. Prepare for your replies, not the hearing.

 

[LoverofPi]

Inaccurate. There's a whole rule book defining what can be said in a pleading and when.

Out of everything in my last post, that's what you responded to?
In any case, I wasn't talking about information said in a pleading. I was talking about a judge being aware of information relevant to the case.

Assuming I'm incorrect has always been your greatest folly

We are not assuming it. We know.

That's not what gaslighting is.
But I'm not going to share what I know. I'll save it for the hearing

Why are you going to talk about the definition of gaslighting in a federal trial?

 

[Mushroom Tip]

Out of everything in my last post, that's what you responded to?
In any case, I wasn't talking about information said in a pleading. I was talking about a judge being aware of information relevant to the case.



We are not assuming it. We know.

Why are you going to talk about the definition of gaslighting in a federal trial?

So it's gonna be more "poor meeeeee". Have you no sense of self awareness, dignity, or shame, Mel?

She'll say it for the same reason she brought up Cousel's upbringing and demographics. Because she has nothing relevant to offer the Court.
Also because she is a retarded pig.

 

[Useful_Mistake]

Why are you going to talk about the definition of gaslighting in a federal trial?

Shit, that's a great question. Is she gonna accuse the judge of gaslighting her?

 

[Mushroom Tip]

Shit, that's a great question. Is she gonna accuse the judge of gaslighting her?

Nope, she will accuse Null's lawyer of it.

 

[TamarYaelBatYah]

....but gaslighting involves using inflammatory and often false statements to induce doubt, shame, or confusion.

Ya don't say?

90% of what we say isn't gaslighting,

I'll save a response to that for my legal responses.

I'm going to assume you mean rule 12. It only applies to counterclaims and crossclaims, and not every reply is either one of them. They usually require the defendant to sue the plantiff back.

Well, either way, the judge set the time deadline as Dec. 31, 2020

Prepare for your replies

Yeah, time to get back to work for me. Bye!

 

[Mushroom Tip]

Ya don't say?



I'll save a response to that for my legal responses.




Well, either way, the judge set the time deadline as Dec. 31, 2020



Yeah, time to get back to work for me. Bye!

If you accuse anyone (esp Null's lawyer) of gaslighting you, it'll be about the 9th most ridiculous thing you've proffered in the lolsuit so far.

* she thinks any citation of fact that casts her in a rightfully negative light must be false, because her mental illness convinces her she is without any fault, and everything she says/does/believes is ordained by her fake God. It's really pointless to keep arguing this with her.

 

[Гиджет]

Yeah, time to get back to work for me. Bye!

Six tits confirmed.

 

[Useful_Mistake]

Nope, she will accuse Null's lawyer of it.

I can imagine

Null's Lawyer: Now, Melinda, how did Mr. Moon cause you 50,000 worth of damages?

Mel: Gaslightining! I don't have to prove nuthin!

Judge: That's nice, dear, now, please answer the question.

Ya don't say?

Mel, I don't know what you think you've read, but it is not what we all read.

I'll save a response to that for my legal responses.

What we say on here should have no bearing on your legal responces were this suit not to just complain about Null and us.

Well, either way, the judge set the time deadline as Dec. 31, 2020

Weird how you didn't rebute me. He did, yes. And you responded. The deadline is now meaningless.

Yeah, time to get back to work for me. Bye!

See you in an hour.

Also, weird how you dodged the part that proved that your motion to strike was frivolous. Wonder why?

If you accuse anyone (esp Null's lawyer) of gaslighting you, it'll be about the 9th most ridiculous thing you've proffered in the lolsuit so far.

If she does it in a hearing, it will likely be the most ridiculous things, IMO

 

[Pat Fried Rice]

If you accuse anyone (esp Null's lawyer) of gaslighting you, it'll be about the 9th most ridiculous thing you've proffered in the lolsuit so far.

I wonder if she even realizes that she's up against a actual, real lawyer, not some sperg who went to a shitty college and grabbed a degree a lobotomized chimp could have been granted?

 

[Deadpool]

Ya don't say?

Yes he does, because you need to be told since you have no idea what it means.

 

[Anonymus Fluhre]

Yeah, time to get back to work for me. Bye!

"Work". Pigs don't work Melinda, they roll around in dirt all day to keep the flies off and eat slop.

I wonder if she even realizes that she's up against a actual, real lawyer, not some sperg who went to a shitty college and grabbed a degree a lobotomized chimp could have been granted?

She does, but she doesn't know his qualifications.

 

[Mushroom Tip]

I wonder if she even realizes that she's up against a actual, real lawyer, not some sperg who went to a shitty college and grabbed a degree a lobotomized chimp could have been granted?

TBF he DID go to a shit lawschool. Same one she flunked out of. But he actually excelled in practice and life.

 

[Pat Fried Rice]

TBF he DID go to a shit lawschool. Same one she flunked out of. But he actually excelled in practice and life.

Honestly, that makes this entire situation all the better.

See Piglinda? That's what happens when you put forth effort, and are a decent human, instead of the swine-esque filth you are now.

 

[LoverofPi]

So it's gonna be more "poor meeeeee". Have you no sense of self awareness, dignity, or shame, Mel?

She'll say it for the same reason she brought up Cousel's upbringing and demographics. Because she has nothing relevant to offer the Court.
Also because she is a retarded pig.

I feel like we're being too mean to pigs, you know?

Shit, that's a great question. Is she gonna accuse the judge of gaslighting her?

She's already accused judges of being biased against her, so who knows.

Nope, she will accuse Null's lawyer of it.

It's her go to strategy.

 

[Mushroom Tip]

Yeah, time to get back to work for me. Bye!

LOL, by "work" do mean your ludicrous quasi-legal spergery, or your "self-employment" which consists of driving your eldest piglets around in the dark to pilfer legitimate donation boxes, and resale the rags and baubles to your fellow welfare parasites at Flea Markets, swapmeets and consignment stores?
(she actually does that, btw)