Posted on 05/24/2011 12:54:31 PM PDT by RobinMasters
I know what ‘pro se’ means. But is she a member of the USDC-DC bar? I tend to think not. And, if not, she would not be an authorized “issuing officer” as called for to issue a subpoena, would she?
I’d bet m bottom dollar this will get quashed in any case.
She has active case in this particular court doesn’t she? So she is not an officer of the court? The tell me how she was allowed to lead the case?
Well that’s my point, why dismiss one front one that hasn’t even surfaced yet? That will win all kinds of wars.
And this front takes no effort on our part besides spreading the word and getting it out there!
Isn’t that how Trump got on board. If the polls didn’t show that “birthers” were not a major “voting” block then we would be ignored LIKE WE WERE IN 08!
Bring on Orly and anyone else that gives “us” something to spread around, because more and more people are starting to hear us.
We know full well that there is an election on 12. People who who tout that as our front in this war are just trying to silence the Lamb.
A pro se litigant is anyone who represents him/herself. SHE (Taitz) is the litigant. The pro se litigant can be a lawyer or not, usually not.* That does not make him/her an officer of the court. Only admission to the bar of the court makes him/her an officer of the court. And the subpoena form seems to say that the ‘issuing officer’ must be a member of the court’s bar to be authorized to issue the subpoena.
Hotlanta Mike can sue anyone he wants in that court and represent himself. Voila! You are lead counsel!! (not saying your case wouldn’t be dismissed, much less that you wouldn’t be sanctioned for filing a frivolous suit, but you COULD file suit and represent yourself).
Now, it’s possible Taitz is a member of the bar of this court; it’s also possible she was admitted pro hac vice but in that case it would be her local counsel (member of that court’s bar) who would issue the subpoena.
5/17 default denied
04/08/2011 3
AMENDED COMPLAINT against MICHAEL ASTRUE filed by ORLY TAITZ. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibits)”Let this be filed” by Chief Judge Royce C. Lamberth.(rdj) Note: Portions of these exhibits are illegible in paper form and on ECF. (Entered: 04/11/2011)
04/08/2011 4
AFFIDAVIT of Mailing by ORLY TAITZ. “Let this be filed, The Court notes mailing was sent to improper address for the U.S. Attorney, and time to respond doesn’t run until U.S. Attorney is properly served.” by Chief Judge Royce C. Lamberth.(rdj) (Entered: 04/11/2011)
04/08/2011 5
RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed on United States Attorney General. Date of Service Upon United States Attorney General 3/30/2011. (rdj) (Entered: 04/13/2011)
04/21/2011 6
AFFIDAVIT of Mailing to the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia with Summons and First Amended Complaint by ORLY TAITZ. (rdj) (Entered: 04/25/2011)
05/17/2011 7
AFFIDAVIT FOR DEFAULT by ORLY TAITZ. “Let this be filed. Request DENIED. No proof of service has been filed ; only proof of mailing.” by Chief Judge Royce C. Lamberth(rdj) (Entered: 05/19/2011)
05/20/2011 8
RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed. MICHAEL ASTRUE served on 3/28/2011, RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed as to the United States Attorney. Date of Service Upon United States Attorney on 4/3/2011. ( Answer due for ALL FEDERAL DEFENDANTS by 5/3/2011.) (rdj) (Entered: 05/23/2011)
05/23/2011 9
NOTICE of Appearance by Patrick George Nemeroff on behalf of MICHAEL ASTRUE (Nemeroff, Patrick) Modified on 5/24/2011 to correct filer(rdj). (Entered: 05/23/2011)
05/23/2011 10
ANSWER to 3 Amended Complaint by MICHAEL ASTRUE. Related document: 3 Amended Complaint filed by ORLY TAITZ.(Nemeroff, Patrick) Modified on 5/24/2011 to correct filer (rdj). (Entered: 05/23/2011)
05/23/2011 11
MOTION to Strike 1 Complaint, 3 Amended Complaint and Attached Exhibits by MICHAEL ASTRUE (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Nemeroff, Patrick) Modified on 5/24/2011 to correct filer (rdj). (Entered: 05/23/2011)
I’m kinda curious, how did you chose the name humblegunner? I haven’t seen much humility coming from you...
There is also more than one way to spell subpena correctly.
Bump for later ..................................... FRegards
Fuddy can’t cite HIPAA on this; it only applies medical entities, not to the DOH.
OMG LOL
WND Warned About Possible Obama Birth Certificate Document Fraud –
If the judge does not order it forget it. HI is not going to comply.
Isnt this a character in an outer-space-online-RPG game called Eve? He has pleasure hubs in lots of different solar systems across the galaxy.
What court issued the subpeona? I’m a little confused as to whether this is a proposed subpoena or an issued one.
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.