Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Her Sister

(6,444 posts)
Fri May 27, 2016, 06:29 PM May 2016

Subject: Re: Voting Rights Defense Project v. Padilla: We are seeking an ex parte hearing

To:
Cc:
Bcc:
Subject: Fw: Voting Rights Defense Project v. Padilla: We are seeking an ex parte hearing

From: Joshua White/CTYATT
To: Bill Simpich <bsimpich@gmail.com>@SFGOV,
Date: 05/26/2016 05:26 PM

Subject: Re: Voting Rights Defense Project v. Padilla: We are seeking an ex parte hearing

Mr. Simpich,

I am in receipt of your email, in which you state that you will be filing an ex parte request
with the Court tomorrow at 3:00 p.m. to shorten time on a motion for preliminary
injunction, and that you will provide me with your “papers” by tomorrow at noon.
I have major concerns with how you have approached this litigation and with your
decision to wait a full week after filing your complaint to ask the Court to set an
expedited briefing schedule on your motion, in which you will presumably be asking the
Court to order significant injunctive relief regarding a major election that’s occurring in
less than ten days.

You first contacted my client, the San Francisco Department of Elections, almost two
weeks ago, on May 13, 2016. We spoke on the same day, and you told me that you
believed the Department was in violation of Elections Code section 3006(c), which
requires the Department to provide certain information to voters who have not
expressed a party preference. On Monday, May 16, I provided you a full explanation
about why this was not the case. I even included screenshots of the Department’s
website, which contain all of the statements you claimed were lacking. I encouraged
you to re-contact me to continue our discussion. A copy of that email is attached
hereto. Instead, you ignored me and filed your lawsuit, which contains many of the
same allegations that I refuted in my email.

We spoke again on Monday, May 23, 2016, and I informed you yet again that the
allegations in your Complaint are meritless, and the Department has gone above and
beyond its legal duty to educate San Francisco voters and provide them with the
opportunity to vote in the presidential primary. In our conversation, you told me that you
were “working on” your preliminary injunction motion and that you would attempt to
provide it to me by Tuesday (i.e., May 24).

Now, almost two weeks have passed since our first conversation and a full week has
passed since you filed your Complaint. It is, in my view, inappropriate to go in to Court
on an emergency ex parte basis on a Friday afternoon, ten days before a major
election, and ask the Court to set a hearing on a motion that you have not even
provided to me on a schedule about which you have not solicited my input. An ex parte
hearing is simply not appropriate for a shortened schedule when, among other issues,
you have had a week to propose a schedule to me and have failed to do so. What
schedule are you proposing? If there is a statutory or other basis for your motion,
please send me that citation immediately.

Finally, please copy me on all communications with the Court. Also, let me know what
direct communications you have had with the Court on this scheduling issue and when.

Best,

Joshua S. White
Deputy City Attorney
Office of San Francisco City Attorney Dennis J. Herrera
City Hall • 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, Room 234
San Francisco, CA 94102
Phone: (415) 554-4661
Fax: (415) 554-4745


More here, including emails/correspondence: http://www.sfcityattorney.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/VRDP-Email-Correspondence.pdf
26 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Subject: Re: Voting Rights Defense Project v. Padilla: We are seeking an ex parte hearing (Original Post) Her Sister May 2016 OP
In other words, it was filed as a nuisance. Or showboating. Or both. TwilightZone May 2016 #1
and they waited to file so it'd seem like an emergency because by then Her Sister May 2016 #2
Yep, and it was bound to be dismissed out of hand or delayed because of the timing. TwilightZone May 2016 #3
I wonder if William Simpich is the left's version of Larry Clayman? Anyone know anything about him? still_one May 2016 #4
lol, there's a Bill Simpich on YouTube who posted some stuff about Lee Harvey Oswald being framed. TwilightZone May 2016 #5
lol, it is the same guy. TwilightZone May 2016 #6
I found 1 client's review of him still_one May 2016 #9
Looks like the Sanders fans will get punked. riversedge May 2016 #23
I think this guy is exactly what they wanted. TwilightZone May 2016 #25
I agree. They want to generate publicity, charge of unfair, fraud, and hope it gets them more still_one May 2016 #26
I think so! Look at this twitter! I see BS there and further down Lee HarveyOswald!!! Her Sister May 2016 #7
Yep. Wow, is that appropriate or what? TwilightZone May 2016 #8
Another lawyer involved: William M. Simpich and Stephen R. Jaffe Her Sister May 2016 #10
This is beyond ridiculous still_one May 2016 #13
I understand that: American Independence Party - Is a very conservative Party Her Sister May 2016 #15
WOW still_one May 2016 #18
It is!! That's the best part of the whole story. Well, until JFK Bill came along, anyway. TwilightZone May 2016 #20
Yep, looks like he is. TwilightZone May 2016 #14
bwahahaha sarae May 2016 #16
thanks. While some things appear legit, further down the page he seems to involve himself in a still_one May 2016 #11
oh, you did a nasty.. riversedge May 2016 #24
Another day, another stupid lawsuit NastyRiffraff May 2016 #12
I wondered also and looked for some information--or even a response from riversedge May 2016 #21
Thanks Her Sister. This should be an embaressment to the Sanders' camp, but still_one May 2016 #17
Great letter. this really is telling... riversedge May 2016 #19
Yep, political stunt all the way. TwilightZone May 2016 #22

TwilightZone

(25,342 posts)
1. In other words, it was filed as a nuisance. Or showboating. Or both.
Fri May 27, 2016, 06:57 PM
May 2016

They haven't taken it seriously since it was filed.

Or before, for that matter.

TwilightZone

(25,342 posts)
3. Yep, and it was bound to be dismissed out of hand or delayed because of the timing.
Fri May 27, 2016, 07:07 PM
May 2016

So, they were pretty much guaranteeing the "it's all rigged" crowd would get what they want. Proof!!!

TwilightZone

(25,342 posts)
5. lol, there's a Bill Simpich on YouTube who posted some stuff about Lee Harvey Oswald being framed.
Fri May 27, 2016, 07:20 PM
May 2016

Suppose it's the same guy?

The first couple pages of Google search for "Bill Simpich" are JFK conspiracy stuff.

still_one

(91,937 posts)
9. I found 1 client's review of him
Fri May 27, 2016, 07:38 PM
May 2016
https://www.avvo.com/attorneys/94612-ca-william-simpich-357624/reviews.html

I do NOT recommend this attorney
1.0 star

Posted by a Civil Rights client
September 19, 2014

Around July 20XX, I retained Mr. Simpich to represent me in a federal civil rights lawsuit, titled, XXXX v. YYYY in the US District Court for Northern California. I paid him an initial retainer of $XXXX and any potential subsequent recovery on a contingency-fee arrangement. Shortly after taking the case over, in which I was originally self-represented, Mr. Simpich promised me that he would file a reply brief to a pendent motion for a protective order as well as an opposition to opposing counsel’s request for expenses. Mr. Simpich did not file any reply brief nor did he ever file an opposition to opposing counsel’s request for expenses. This was obviously a breach of his promise to me as well as a breach of his fiduciary duty. Fortunately, for me, the court’s ruling was favorable. Mr. Simpich never provided me with any explanation for his failure to file a responsive pleading in this matter.

https://www.avvo.com/attorneys/94612-ca-william-simpich-357624/reviews.html

Here is another lawsuit he was involved in, and his client doesn't appear too happy here also:

https://cynthiajeanneleemd.wordpress.com/2013/01/12/what-do-katya-komisaruk-william-m-simpich-and-kenneth-frucht-have-in-common/

Here is his twitter page:

https://twitter.com/billsimpich

If you read further down, besides the JFK/Oswald was framed themes, he seems to tilt toward a lot of conspiracy based themes.

No wonder he is working for Sanders




TwilightZone

(25,342 posts)
25. I think this guy is exactly what they wanted.
Fri May 27, 2016, 08:00 PM
May 2016

They wanted someone who could throw together a good conspiracy theory.

This guy's *literally* written the book. Several, actually. lol

still_one

(91,937 posts)
26. I agree. They want to generate publicity, charge of unfair, fraud, and hope it gets them more
Fri May 27, 2016, 08:24 PM
May 2016

donations

Sounds like a good ponzi scheme to me

 

Her Sister

(6,444 posts)
7. I think so! Look at this twitter! I see BS there and further down Lee HarveyOswald!!!
Fri May 27, 2016, 07:26 PM
May 2016
https://twitter.com/billsimpich



Bill Simpich
@BillSimpich
Civil rights attorney and antiwar activist in the San Francisco Bay Area.

San Francisco
Joined February 2009


TwilightZone

(25,342 posts)
8. Yep. Wow, is that appropriate or what?
Fri May 27, 2016, 07:28 PM
May 2016

Bernie has a conspiracy theorist filing lawsuits to support his conspiracy theories.

Can't make this shit up. Well, they can. lol

 

Her Sister

(6,444 posts)
10. Another lawyer involved: William M. Simpich and Stephen R. Jaffe
Fri May 27, 2016, 07:39 PM
May 2016
http://abcnewsradioonline.com/politics-news/bernie-sanders-supporters-to-file-emergency-injunction-again.html

WASHINGTON) -- Attorneys representing a group of Bernie Sanders supporters informed San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera Thursday night that they plan to file an "emergency request" with U.S. District Court Judge William Alsup in the city Friday "for a preliminary injunction" in California's June 7 presidential primary," Herrera's office said.

"I think it's unfortunate -- and selfish, frankly -- that these plaintiffs would inject confusion and uncertainty into an election that has been underway for weeks," Herrera said in a statement Thursday night. "San Francisco's Department of Elections and its employees have been doing an exemplary job, and I'm equally confident that our co-defendants are also meeting or exceeding their legal duties. This lawsuit is without merit, and there is no basis for an emergency injunction. I intend to fight it aggressively."

Voting by mail began in California May 9.

A news release from the Office of the City Attorney, noted, "San Francisco, Alameda County, and state elections officials were sued last week by an unincorporated association of Sanders backers called the 'Voting Rights Defense Project,' who together with the American Independence Party and two San Francisco voters leveled an array of allegations in their May 20 civil complaint that Herrera calls wholly baseless."


The release continued, "The activists are seeking sweeping injunctive relief in their suit, including provisions to force 58 counties to segregate ballots already cast by unaffiliated voters; to allow "re-votes" by those voters for presidential primary candidates; and to extend the state's voter registration deadline -- which passed on May 23 for eligibility to vote in the June 7 primary -- until election day itself."

Two lawyers for the group -- William M. Simpich and Stephen R. Jaffe -- did not immediately respond to ABC News' request for comment.

Sanders has not issued a statement on the matter.


There is more correspondence/emails in the link in the OP. Probably, S. Jaffe is more serious than Simpich.



http://www.jaffetriallaw.com/StephenJaffe.shtml?wldpid=2945842_1
 

Her Sister

(6,444 posts)
15. I understand that: American Independence Party - Is a very conservative Party
Fri May 27, 2016, 07:50 PM
May 2016

Like nutso conservative! So the Bernie people have aligned themselves with this group for this case!?

The American Independent Party (AIP) is a far right political party of the United States that was established in 1967 by Bill Shearer and his wife, Eileen Knowland Shearer, a cousin of the late Republican U. S. Senator William F. Knowland of California. The AIP is best known for its nomination of former Governor George Wallace of Alabama, who carried five states in the 1968 presidential election running on a segregationist platform against Richard M. Nixon and Hubert H. Humphrey. The party split in 1976 into the modern American Independent Party and the American Party. From 1992 until 2008, the party was the California affiliate of the national Constitution Party. Its exit from the Constitution Party led to a leadership dispute during the 2008 election.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Independent_Party

Here their website: http://www.aipca.org/

TwilightZone

(25,342 posts)
20. It is!! That's the best part of the whole story. Well, until JFK Bill came along, anyway.
Fri May 27, 2016, 07:56 PM
May 2016

They're a bunch of crazies. Complete loons. They make the Tea Party look halfway reasonable.

In 2012, they ran Alan Keyes' political group's former political director as their candidate. He got 40k votes.

In 2008, they ran...Alan Keyes. I completely forgot he ran. He got 47k votes.

TwilightZone

(25,342 posts)
14. Yep, looks like he is.
Fri May 27, 2016, 07:47 PM
May 2016

In a funny coincidence, there was a Steve Jaffe involved in the Garrison investigation of JFK's assassination, but it's not the same guy. I did a Google search for Steve Jaffe JFK just for laughs and it came up.

still_one

(91,937 posts)
11. thanks. While some things appear legit, further down the page he seems to involve himself in a
Fri May 27, 2016, 07:42 PM
May 2016

lot of conspiracy stuff also

NastyRiffraff

(12,448 posts)
12. Another day, another stupid lawsuit
Fri May 27, 2016, 07:42 PM
May 2016

by Sanders supporters and/or the Sanders campaign. I have to wonder how directly the campaign is involved in this crap.

riversedge

(69,707 posts)
21. I wondered also and looked for some information--or even a response from
Fri May 27, 2016, 07:57 PM
May 2016

the Sanders camp via a tweet--but found nothing. Could easily have missed it.

still_one

(91,937 posts)
17. Thanks Her Sister. This should be an embaressment to the Sanders' camp, but
Fri May 27, 2016, 07:54 PM
May 2016

I suspect it isn't, since they only want publicity

riversedge

(69,707 posts)
19. Great letter. this really is telling...
Fri May 27, 2016, 07:55 PM
May 2016

--in bold. seems like a dumbo! (the folks pushing the law suit).


........... I even included screenshots of the Department’s
website, which contain all of the statements you claimed were lacking. I encouraged
you to re-contact me to continue our discussion.
A copy of that email is attached
hereto. Instead, you ignored me and filed your lawsuit, which contains many of the
same allegations that I refuted in my email.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Hillary Clinton»Subject: Re: Voting Right...