Posted on 09/17/2009 2:08:06 PM PDT by pissant
(Sept. 17, 2009) Dr. Orly Taitz, counsel for Captain Connie Rhodes, M.D, filed today an Emergency Request for Stay of Deployment, pending the filing of a Motion for Re-Hearing, in the Case Rhodes vs. Mac Donald.
Yesterday, Judge Clay D. Land garnered nationally notoriety for his rejection of Captains Rhodes case, with a severe ruling that was widely faulted by legal experts across the nation.
Attorney Taitz in todays filings details the errors of Lands ruling. What follows is The Post & Emails summary of Tatizs Motions, using a copy forwarded us, by Mr. Neil B. Turner.
First, Attorney Taitz alleges that Judge Lands ruling violates the 5th Amendment rights of her client, to due process of law, in particular, by the Courts violation of Local Rule 7 of the United States Middle District of Georgia, to wit:
7.2 RESPONSE. Respondents counsel desiring to submit a response, brief, or affidavits shall serve the same within twenty (20) days after service of movants motion and brief.
In other words, Judge Land could not have given a final ruling, on the basis of the Defenses Motion to Dismiss, without allowing Rhodes counsel to reply to that Motion, and that, after alloting 20 days for Dr. Tatiz to prepare and file it (October 1, 2009), which rule must be followed, if no notice from the Court is given, regarding the variation of observance of local rules. Thus Lands ruling was precipitous and surreptitious.
Dr. Taitz then charges Land with unethical behavior:
Plaintiff avers that there is increasing evidence that the United States District Courts in the 11th Circuit are subject to political pressure, external control, and, mostly likely, subservience to the same illegitimate chain of command which Plaintiff has previously protested in this case, except that the de facto President is not even nominally the Commander-in-Chief of the Article III Judiciary. th Circuit are subject to political pressure, external control, and, mostly likely, subservience to the same illegitimate chain of command which Plaintiff has previously protested in this case, except that the de facto President is not even nominally the Commander-in-Chief of the Article III Judiciary.
Attorney Taitz therefore requests the Court to vacate (annul) its Sept. 16th Dismissal against Rhodes, and grant a stay of deployment to Rhodes, pending further hearing of the case.
Taitz then alleges that Rhodes and her counsel were denied meaningful access to the court, since Judge Lands ruling never addresses the key issues raised in her complaint or TRO. Taitz cites the textual evidence, that Lands ruling never cites anything in Rhodess complaint by page number, putting in doubt that his ruling had anything to do with the substance of her case. Attorney Taitz enumerates these key points:
(1) a U.S. ARMY OFFICERS OATH TO UPHOLD THE CONSTITUTION AGAINST ALL ENEMIES, FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC, (2) the historical importance of an independent army corps to the constitutional balance of powers and Republican Form of Government guaranteed by the Constitution, and
(3) the Ninth Amendment reservation of rights in the people to question the legitimacy and eligibility of their elected officials when questions arise from time-to-time which were not contemplated by the Founding Fathers.
For this reason, Dr. Taitz requests a 10 day Stay of Redeployment to allow her time to file a Motion for Reconsideration, since Lands ruling, Taitz alleges, is
manifestly unjust and incorrect within the meaning of jurisprudence construing Rule 59(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and will surely result in a VOID JUDGMENT for denial of due process within the meaning of Rule 60(b)(4) by reason of the Courts unexpected wild deviation from the 20 day response period provided by the Local Rules of this very Middle District of Georgia.
Taitz then attacks the substance of Judge Lands argument, saying:
This Court has threatened the undersigned counsel with sanctions for advocating that a legally conscious, procedurally sophisticated, and constitutionally aware army officers corps is the best protection against the encroachment of anti-democratic, authoritarian, neo-Fascistic or Palaeo-Communistic dictatorship in this country, without pointing to any specific language, facts, or allegations of fact in the Complaint or TRO as frivolous. Rule 11 demands more of the Court than use of its provisions as a means of suppressing the First Amendment Right to Petition regarding questions of truly historical, in fact epic and epochal, importance in the history of this nation.
Attorney Taitz then demolishes Judge Lands treatment of the evidence presented in the case:
This Court has threatened the undersigned counsel with sanctions for failure to present facts, and yet has ignored or disregarded the facts concerning Barack Hussein Obamas birthplace sub iudice aliena which were submitted to the Court in the form of the 1961 Hospital Birth Certificate submitted in the Plaintiffs request for judicial notice (Document 10, entered September 11, 2009) in addition the consistent but later dated Certificate which was submitted as an Exhibit to the Complaint and original Application for Temporary Restraining Order. These documents are FACTS and they went unimpeached, unquestioned, and yet utterly unaddressed in this Courts order of summary dismissal. The fact that the President has admitted his Father was not a citizen, but a British Subject, at the time of birth, is an incontrovertible fact, which supports Plaintiffs charges that the President is an alien.
Dr. Orly Taitz then points out that the evidence objected to by Land, concerning Social Security Numbers was gathered by a famous detective of Scotland Yard, and cannot be summarily dismissed without violating the very same standards Land appeals to in his ruling; and thus represents a third basis, for an appeal for reconsideration.
In summary, Taitz asks for to vacate its own judgment of dismissal immediately and simultaneously grant this Plaintiffs Emergency Request for Stay of Deployment.
Noteworthy is the fact, that Rhodes counsel has filed this Emergency Stay request on the anniversary of the ratification of the U.S. Constitution.
Well yes perhaps, but not in the way you think.
Just throwing trash talk right back at the judge.
Yeah, I guess so. But old Orly ain’t going nowhere with this. Do you have any kind of link to the decision itself? He probably has some good reasons, like justiciability, going on.
parsy, who thinks Orly is a dip
She may be a dip, but she is in the arena fighting a marxist quisling
Go long on the marxist quisling and short the dip.
parsy, who provides this market advice
Here comes the judge!
Though Land, of course, takes the time in his decision to patiently explain the legal concerns of a court ruling over this particular type of military matter, he also devotes a few paragraphs to some old-fashioned ass-handing. For example:
Plaintiff’s challenge to her deployment order is frivolous. She has presented no credible evidence and has made no reliable factual allegations to support her unsubstantiated, conclusory allegations and conjecture that President Obama is ineligible to serve as President of the United States. Instead, she uses her Complaint as a platform for spouting political rhetoric, such as her claims that the President is “an illegal usurper, an unlawful pretender, [and] an unqualified imposter.” She continues with bare, conclusory allegations that the President is “an alien, possibly even an unnaturalized or even an unadmitted illegal alien . . . without so much as lawful residency in the United States.” Then, implying that the President is either a wandering nomad or a prolific identity fraud crook, she alleges that the President “might have used as many as 149 addresses and 39 social security numbers prior to assuming the office of President.”
In further support of her claim, Plaintiff relies upon “the general opinion in the rest of the world” that “Barack Hussein Obama has, in essence, slipped through the guardrails to become President.” Moreover, as though the “general opinion in the rest of the world” were not enough, Plaintiff alleges in her Complaint that according to an “AOL poll 85% of Americans believe that Obama was not vetted, needs to be vetted and his vital records need to be produced.” Finally, in a remarkable shifting of the traditional legal burden of proof, Plaintiff unashamedly alleges that Defendant has the burden to prove his “natural born” status. Thus, Plaintiff’s counsel, who champions herself as a defender of liberty and freedom, seeks to use the power of the judiciary to compel a citizen, albeit the President of the United States, to “prove his innocence” to “charges” that are based upon conjecture and speculation. Any middle school civics student would readily recognize the irony of abandoning fundamental principles upon which our Country was founded in order to purportedly “protect and preserve” those very principles.
parsy, who says sorry, but the judge is right
Parsy like kneepads
"Ex Parte meetings Rule! Long live tyrants! Death to the American Constitution."
Here is a link to the whole Order. Like I thought, justiciability. Court generally stay out of military matters.
http://ia311028.us.archive.org/1/items/gov.uscourts.gamd.77605/gov.uscourts.gamd.77605.13.0.pdf
parsy, who hopes you enjoy this, even if you don’t like it
Pissy, parsy need to take Obama member out of mouth so we understand what parsy say.
We all read deluded judge crap yesterday
Read the whole 14 pages. It is quite entertaining.
The judge just nailed it. All she has is a hunch. Not even a good hunch. She’s lucky he’s not turning her over for discipline. Her complaint is like something a precocious 10 year old might write. It is so pathetic, that now her client has to pay the attorney’s fees on the other side.
parsy, who says her client needs to visit the local committee on professional conduct
Thank you! I found one. It is amusing. I’ll have to remember to start citing AOL opinion polls from now on.
parsy, who wonders how this clown isn’t getting a “You must submit all future Motions and Complaints to the Court before filing with the Clerk” Order
A hunch? You must have seen Obama’s BC then? I didn’t know he’s released it now.
Oh, you mean the good judge read factcheck to see that Obama has been vetted?
Are you retarded?
You’ll enjoy this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xes0F36eTJA&feature=related
parsy, who is looking for the classic line
Parsy full of wee wee.
And here is how he ends it. The Amazing Criswell must be related to Orly Taitz:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_DEtfvv9MU
parsy, who says the logic is the same
Yesterday, Judge Clay D. Land garnered nationally notoriety...
That speaks volumes there, huh?
Any judge who grants standing will no longer be sitting.
We’ll see if judge Carter follows that chickensh*t prescription
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.