Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Robert A. Cook, PE

The license of Barack and Michelle Obama were not revoked. They voluntarily chose to “retire” from the practice of law and surrendered their active licenses.

The obvious reason for doing so is that an attorney is no longer engaged in the practice of law. The advantage of doing so is that one is no longer obligated to pay annual fees, to comply with continuing education requirements, or subject to legal discipline from the bar.

For both of the Obamas, their law licenses were largely empty credentials used to advance themselves in politics. Neither one was actually a significant attorney.


10 posted on 09/23/2016 6:20:46 AM PDT by PBRCat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]


To: PBRCat

She ‘retired’ long before coming to Washington, DC. Lawyers, even those who don’t practice law, tend to keep their licenses, especially relatively young lawyers, as Michelle Obama was at the time she ‘retired’ her license. Most bars allow lawyers to take ‘inactive’ status. No really viable reason for a young attorney to just ‘retire’ her license.

Even before coming to DC, Michelle Obama was a community outreach shill for U of Chicago hospital, making $300K+ a year. Certainly a few hundred $ bar dues would not be an issue. Excuse away all you will. There is something ‘fishy’ here.


19 posted on 09/23/2016 7:55:51 AM PDT by EDINVA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson