Sunday, May 5, 2013


Pat Almighty seems to think he is going to play the press and social media to convince the jury pool in advance he is not guilty.  Pat Almighty is delusional.  Homeland Security is after something in these cases.    If he has broken the law Homeland Security will push for his conviction.  Also, as the evidence develops, he could find himself with federal charges.  The more he acts to try this case in the press and social media the more attention he will bring to himself in the context of Homeland Security.

Judge Lopez refused to sign his TRO.  Until Monday when I can read the pleading I cannot speak to the basis for the TRO.  But Judge Lopez may have refused to sign the TRO because in the case of Yolanda De Leon and Villalobos, Judge Lopez proved her total lack of knowledge of the law and in the end paid a price to her reputation.

Judge Lopez signed the De Leon  TRO to stop Villalobos from presenting the evidence to the grand jury.  She was reversed.  The law on the issue was so basic, only a corrupt judge would have signed the TRO.  Judge Lopez did not want another repeat of her contempt for the law in the Pat Almighty case.

Here is the BV's original post on the De Leon matter explaining why the TRO was wrong.

Read a copy of Yolanda De Leon's request here:

Read a copy of Judge Migdalia Lopez's order here:

You can get a TRO against enforcement of criminal statutes.  We  see this all of the time in abortion law cases.  Before someone is prosecuted, a civil rights group will file for a TRO  for the doctors, so they can still perform abortions.  We have seen several of these filed in undocumented immigration cases.  The US Supreme Court just refused to hear a case out of Alabama.  Alabama lost in the lower courts.

I for example could file for a TRO to prevent enforcement of the class "C" misdemeanor law concerning nudity of the beach.  The court would hear it.  In Texas at this time I would lose.  After the US Supreme Court rules in the California case, I could win on the argument Texas law fails to provide accommodations.  The case I could win is the wearing of a jock strap on the beach.  Texas law enforcement tends to not know anatomy and will arrest you for exposing your butt, although not a crime.  Your butt is not your anus, but the police are unaware of this.

On Monday I will pull Ahumada's lawsuit and see what formed the basis of his TRO request.  You cannot argue your conduct is legal to get a TRO.  You can argue the law is too vague to be enforced.  Or you can argue the law is unconstitutional on its face. 

But if people were able to go to civil court and simply ask for an injunction against a criminal statute on the claim they are not violating it, our civil courts would be very busy indeed and criminal charges would never be filed.

But I will hold final judgment until I read his pleading.


The story not being printed is the most important.  Her campaign is being managed by Tony Martinez.  He failed to see the mistake concerning corporate donations.  The mess speaks volumes about Tony's legal acumen.


I do not fault Montoya for taking Peter the Fool's money to run his propaganda. Like I have said, business is business.


Peter the Fool wants people to think that he somehow lead the battle cry against Judge Limas and Villalobos on the corruption.  A total and complete lie.  The Amit Livingston case had been fully covered and veted by the blogs  by the time Zavaletta started to  discuss the issue.  Zavaletta brought nothing to the public on this issue.  They were already educated.  He was right about nothing.  The community was already fully educated.

And for the record, what did Peter the Fool do about it other than to use this tragedy for personal gain, nothing?  I on the other hand spent thousands suing FBI Director Mueller and collecting the evidence to force the issue. 

Peter played dirty - he tried to destroy the reputations of people innocent of charges related to children.  His ad was 100% deceptive.  It reflected his lack of honor as a human being,  My long term readers remember the time in court when I saw Peter  the Fool illegally testify for his client that this elderly woman brought an STD into her husband's bedroom.  Not a word  from the husband.   He would not verify Peter the Fool's lies and defamation of this poor woman.


The Texas Supreme court refused to here the Herald/Zavaletta case not because of the Limas issue, but because the court was too divided on the question of law in the case.  The Herald/Zavaletta did not win on the facts.  The court assumed they defamed these people, but under the law the victims were not entitled to sue.

The 13th Court of Appeals issued a ruling agreeing with the victims stating they had the right to sue, under the facts.  The appeal before the Texas Supreme Court had nothing to do with Limas.  It was purely a legal question based on the opinion of the court of appeals, and not Limas.

The case is headed back to the same court of appeals which has already ruled that as a matter of law the plaintiffs have a right to sue.  It will go to the same panel of judges which already once ruled in favor of the plaintiffs. 

This has nothing to do with Judge Limas.  But when the only way you can get your story out is to pay Montoya (again I do not judge Montoya - he has a fool willing to pay him money - more power to him), you have no story.



Anonymous said...

Homeland is looking for the bribing of Public officials .While he was Mayor, I'm sure this guy took money from the 8 liner crowd and after he got voted out he himself was paying for pre raid tip offs..They are putting cases together after a long investigation...Still curious who's sweepstakes was closed down in PI? Homeland put out the "nobody"s untouchable " raids so these crowds got the message that you wont be laundering your money here anymore, at least this way...

BobbyWC said...

I did not want to approve this comment because it includes allegations for which there is no known evidence at to Pat Almighty - but beyond Pat Almighty that is exactly what Homeland Security if after - I know of one elected official in particular who is already under tight investigation - but until the allegation becomes forward by Homeland or the DA I am not going to start a distruction of this mans reputation. Once they come forward it will be an allegation - it will then be up to a jury to decide if he is guilty.

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...

There after a few of them....Why else would you have DEA and Homeland and the FBI on the same cases ?...Not a secret that these agencies aren't usually team players.They work their own cases and there is not a whole lot of man power here to be wasted stepping on each others toes,so the fact that they are all involved and will be moving on to Willacy once Cameron"s mess hits the fan should tell us all something...For the record I can appreciate you not wanting to ruin somebody's reputation but have faith they have and/or will do this all by themselves.A couple of them are some real scumbags though and deserve whatever it is they get.

Anonymous said...

Ok so how come the local prosecutor is leading the way? A Zeta brother was caught and charged for cartel involvement here in "I think"Arizona. If the Feds had proof Saenz would not be prosecuting

BobbyWC said...

Nice try, but no cigar - Saenz was brought in to handle the state law issues - the state law issues will lead to federal issues - in time - at that time the feds will act.

But for now the only crimes being alleged are state crimes - the feds have no jurisdiction over prosecuting state crimes

But nice try at a bogus distraction

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

These raids are being led by a taskforce that used to be controlled by Villalobos. The feds obviously didn't trust him and have more respect for Saenz. Many agencies involved with these types of task forces in order to have some feds involved in case a local yocal leaks info. This is a good thing