Trainwreck Pamela Swain / DocHoliday1977 / MsPhoenix1969 / Observer1977 / danishlace2003 / Writer_thriller - Victim of grand #MeToo conspiracy, litigious wannabe starfucker, off her meds and online

[DocHoliday1977]

I've done nothing for Weinstein at any point.



Literally no one has ever said nor intimated that you did, Pam. We are not having the same conversation any more.



No, a random fucknugget on a random fucknugget website said that that was happening in order to fuck with your delusional mind because you will believe literally anything that feeds into your absurd delusions.



Not Tony.
Charges will not be filed.



Neither Donald Trump Sr. or Jr. know you exist, Pam. You cannot have them charged with anything in civil court either.



Non Sequitur gibberish. I'm not a republican.

Are you President Joe Biden to say this or are you a member of the department of justice to be saying this?

Answer this:

I'll request it.

@LoverofPi
I'm not talking local county or state, weirdo. They are too corrupt themselves.

Seeing as how Donny Trump Jr and Donny Trump can just call the county sherriff and DA and cover their asses. I bypassed those avenues of justice to seek relief

 

[Viridian]

Answer this:



Not seeing your attachments

I don't know what's up with me today, but I fixed them.

Again, despite what Piggy claims, these aren't court transcripts. They're the text of one of Based Judge Ray's filings from Swain v. Stewart et al. Swain v. Stewart et al never went to trial (save within Porky Pammy's diseased mind, apparently). Based Judge Ray tossed it out because it was complete nonsense, just as he's recommending Swain v. Weinstien et al be tossed out now.

 

[Useful_Mistake]

Are you President Joe Biden to say this or are you a member of the department of justice to be saying this?

Private Citizens have the right to comment and share their opinions. The fact that all the caselaw in USA says your suit is gonna be dismissed does not mean I am bribing people to dissmiss it

I'll request it.

Supreme Court has ruled that the courts do not have the authority to grant such a request. Federal Courts have ruled the same. Here's the caselaw:

Attica Correctional Facility v. Rockefeller, 477 F.2d 375 (2d Cir. 1973) "It is not appropriate for the judiciary to order prosecutors to bring criminal prosecutions" Linda R. S. v. Richard D., 410 U.S. 614 (1973) " in American jurisprudence at least, a private citizen lacks a judicially cognizable interest in the prosecution or nonprosecution of another"

Seeing as how Donny Trump Jr and Donny Trump can just call the county sherriff and DA and cover their asses. I bypassed those avenues of justice to seek relief

That's how you get your case dismissed for lack of jurisdiction and failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted.

I don't know what's up with me today, but I fixed them.

Yeah, I see it now.

Again, despite what Piggy claims, these aren't court transcripts. They're the text of one of Based Judge Ray's filings from Swain v. Stewart et al. Swain v. Stewart et al never went to trial (save within Porky Pammy's diseased mind, apparently).

I wonder where she got the barely understandable quote from. I mean this:

" you have no idea what you're up against" cause you and your faggot father called him and told him to throw it out.

Did she just make it up?

 

[DocHoliday1977]

I don't know what's up with me today, but I fixed them.

Again, despite what Piggy claims, these aren't court transcripts. They're the text of one of Based Judge Ray's filings from Swain v. Stewart et al. Swain v. Stewart et al never went to trial (save within Porky Pammy's diseased mind, apparently). Based Judge Ray tossed it out because it was complete nonsense, just as he's recommending Swain v. Weinstien et al be tossed out now.

Ok. Let me explain this.
Court transcripts speak of what the court judge said.
Its not the same suit. As a matter of fact, you e jumbled everything up together. Perry Mason.

 

[Useful_Mistake]

Court transcripts speak of what the court judge said.

Literally no. Court transcripts are a written version of what happened during a hearing written by a court transcriber.

Its not the same suit.

Then are you referring to Swain v. Stewart et al? If so, it's still didn't get to a hearing and as such no transcripts have been made.

 

[Viridian]

I wonder where she got the barely understandable quote from. I mean this:

Did she just make it up?

I can answer that! She did, in fact, completely make it up. It's an excerpt from the rape fantasy "memoir" she self-published about Harvey Weinstein and her obsession with him back in 2019. I know this because I saw it posted on her Tumblr when I did that deep dive a bit ago.

This "scene" supposedly happened during Piggy's attempt to get a restraining order against Weinstein in 2018. That case also never went to trial and was thrown out before a single hearing happened, as far as I know. So not only did she make the phrase up, but she's now trying to attribute it to a completely different case than she did originally!

 

[DocHoliday1977]

You've established tonight that you've- - aided and abetted stalkers
- used government agencies to stalk me for them.
- contacted local sherriff and judges to corrupt the rule of law.
- repeatedly violated my privacy.
- and then tried to get me to give credit to your father for settling this.

Also,
- was viciously apart to a hate website that mined my data.
- hacked my phone and accounts.
- gaslighted me repeatedly.
- had people follow me around.
- had local officials corrupt rulings to harm me.

@LoverofPi
Are you Jay Stewart?

So, Trump did and still does hav ed influence on judges.

Well if that don't beat all.

 

[Useful_Mistake]

This "scene" supposedly happened during Piggy's attempt to get a restraining order against Weinstein in 2018

Do we have those docs or should I look into them?

You've established tonight that you've- - aided and abetted stalkers
- used government agencies to stalk me for them.
- contacted local sherriff and judges to corrupt the rule of law.
- repeatedly violated my privacy.
- and then tried to get me to give credit to your father for settling this.

Also,
- was viciously apart to a hate website that mined my data.
- hacked my phone and accounts.
- gaslighted me repeatedly.
- had people follow me around.
- had local officials corrupt rulings to harm me.

All of these are false accusations. Also, gaslighting is not a crime, even if we had done it.

So, Trump did and still does hav ed influence on judge

If he did, he would be president. That simple.

 

[DocHoliday1977]

Are you judge Christopher Ray? I hope not. I hope you didn't let dumbass Donny jr talk you into posting here.

 

[Viridian]

Do we have those docs or should I look into them?

I don't believe we have the docs, but I think we had a screenshot of the docket at one point. It's a while back in the thread, I'll try to find it.

 

[Trombonista]

So, Trump did and still does hav ed influence on judges.

Trump can give judges erectile dysfunction? No wonder he lost re-election.

 

[DocHoliday1977]

Do we have those docs or should I look into them?

All of these are false accusations. Also, gaslighting is not a crime, even if we had done it.

If he did, he would be president. That simple.

Save it for court.

All of these are false accusations. Also, gaslighting i

So this thread doesn't exist. Huh?

 

[Useful_Mistake]

Are you judge Christopher Ray? I hope not. I hope you didn't let dumbass Donny jr talk you into posting here.

Ray's not here, although nothing is stopping him from coming here.

I don't believe we have the docs, but I think we had a screenshot of the docket at one point. It's a while back in the thread, I'll try to find it.

I'll try to look up the case in ~20 min

Save it for court.

Save what?

So this thread doesn't exist. Huh?

It wasn't in the list.

 

[DocHoliday1977]

Ray's not here, although nothing is stopping him from coming here.

I'll try to look up the case in ~20 min

Save what?

It wasn't in the list.

- created an unwanted hate thread, notified me, and shopped MY IP address from it.
Sending me this:

That's how you get your case dismissed for lack of jurisdiction and failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted.

*shrugs*

Maybe.

Also.

There are other DAs looking to prosecute the Trumps and violating rule of law for Harvey Weinstein's accusers is a good place to start.

 

[Useful_Mistake]

- created an unwanted hate thread, notified me, and shopped MY IP address from it.
Sending me this:
View attachment 1921534

I never created this thread, never did anything with or to your ip, and never sent you that message.

*shrugs*

Maybe.

Not maybe. Really. Read up on US caselaw.

Also.

There are other DAs looking to prosecute the Trumps and violating rule of law for Harvey Weinstein's accusers is a good place to start.

Please write understandable sentances

 

[DocHoliday1977]

I never created this thread, never did anything with or to your ip, and never sent you that message.

Not maybe. Really. Read up on US caselaw.

Please write understandable sentances

*sentences



This means that if corrupt local and state refuses to prosecute, the us prosecutors can press charges.

 

[Useful_Mistake]

This "scene" supposedly happened during Piggy's attempt to get a restraining order against Weinstein in 2018. That case also never went to trial and was thrown out before a single hearing happened, as far as I know. So not only did she make the phrase up, but she's now trying to attribute it to a completely different case than she did originally!

I don't believe we have the docs, but I think we had a screenshot of the docket at one point. It's a while back in the thread, I'll try to find it.

Only cases I could find:

If it ever happened the it should have been in Swain v. Stewart et al case.

*sentences

View attachment 1921567

I really don't care what your blogs say. Criminal charges can only be brought by criminal courts. Supreme Court confirmed this in Linda R. S. v. Richard D., 410 U.S. 614 (1973) and Federal Court has confirmed it in Inmates of Attica Correctional Facility v. Rockefeller, 477 F.2d 375 (2d Cir. 1973)
You cannot overturn the will of the Supreme Court.

This means that if corrupt local and state refuses to prosecute, the us prosecutors can press charges.

View attachment 1921580

That did not say that.
Regardless, yes, if someone commits a crime they can be punished. Refusing your frivolous complaint, however, is not a crime

 

[DocHoliday1977]

I really don't care what your blogs say. Criminal charges can only be brought by criminal courts. Supreme Court confirmed this in Linda R. S. v. Richard D., 410 U.S. 614 (1973) and Federal Court has confirmed it in Inmates of Attica Correctional Facility v. Rockefeller, 477 F.2d 375 (2d Cir. 1973)
You cannot overturn the will of the Supreme Court.

It's the US Department of Justice.

That did not say that.
Regardless, yes, if someone commits a crime they can be punished. Refusing your frivolous complaint, however, is not a crime

You dream, Rudy.

I don"t want Christpher Ray to lose his job, Rudy.

Let's negotiate, just me and you.

 

[Useful_Mistake]

It's the US Department of Justice.

Which brings all of it's prosecutions via Criminal Courts, and is therefore subject to the caselaw of the Supreme Court.

It's the US Department of Justice.



You dream, Rudy.

I don"t want Christpher Ray to lose his job, Rudy.

Let's negotiate, just me and you.

I cannot negotiate as I am not Rudy, and if I did negotiate I would be committing an actual crime

 

[DocHoliday1977]

Which brings all of it's prosecutions via Criminal Courts, and is therefore subject to the caselaw of the Supreme Court.


I cannot negotiate as I am not Rudy, and if I did negotiate I would be committing an actual crime

This is bad for you and your side.

I wash my hands.