If you got to the link of the subject of this thread at 6mins Zullo states that now the Sheriffs department has allocated public funds.
PS: Nice job KB!
Posted on 11/22/2013 7:04:58 PM PST by Seizethecarp
“Voluntary Surender of the license: It is not a good thing.”
Congressman Peter Roskam: Voluntarily inactive and not authorized to practice law - Last Registered Year: 2013
Congressman Quigley: Voluntarily inactive and not authorized to practice law - Last Registered Year: 2013
Senator Durbin: Voluntarily inactive and not authorized to practice law - Last Registered Year: 2014
So did these guys also get kicked out because their status is the same as Obama’s.
The whole point of "Voluntary Surrender," from the surrendering attorney's point of view is that the details behind the Bar asking one to voluntarily surrender the credential are forever sealed from prying eyes.
Yes, Virginia, there are those attorneys who allow their credential to lapse as they go onto bigger and better things (one hopes). This is most certainly not, NOT I assure thee, the case in the Obama legal family.
Instead of forcing me to take time away from refurbishing my lobster traps, kindly direct your next inquiry on the subject of "Voluntary Surrender" to a member of the Bar in your state (who is not a registered Democrat).
BTW, a primary source of candidates for both elected and appointed public office is the enormous pool of failed and always growing pool of small-time, small-town attorneys.
O'Reilly is apparently not an attorney, merely a lying POS who continues to successfully operate the broadcast ruse that he is "fair and balanced," when in actuality he is probably a Democrat Party operative.
I feel safe in advising you that if Jesus H. Christ were to run for Mayor of NYC, with the 12 Apostles seeking Council Seats, O'Reilly would vote for Satan if he and the Demons of Hell were on the Democrat ticket.
“Voluntarily Inactive” does not equal “Voluntary Surrender”
So what is up now, did Arpaio wrap this whole issue up and go home or what is happening?
Damned if I know. Arpaio and the CCP are in the rather unenviable position of having a ton of really good evidence with nowhere to take it. Since this lash-up is not publicly funded, he and the CCP also have to raise funds to keep the show going, hence (IMNVHO) the "marketing" and "tease" campaign.
E.G., that Press Kit the CCP has created for the nation's County Sheriffs had to cost a pretty penny to create and distribute.
Barack Hussein Obama - Voluntarily retired and not authorized to practice law
Michelle Obama - Voluntarily inactive and not authorized to practice law
So what is the difference between “retired” and “inactive”? WND discussed in detail back in 2009
http://www.wnd.com/2009/08/105998/
“In 2005, after Barack Obama was elected to the U.S. Senate, he changed his status to inactive as well [there is a screen shot].”
“By 2005, which is several years later than his wife, the rule had changed such that you no longer had to file a petition that was such a pain for the court,” Grogan explained. “Instead, the court had changed it to two types of status: inactive or retired. Either situation involves merely sending a letter to us basically saying, ‘I want to transfer to inactive status.’”
[skip]
“Barack Obama remained listed as inactive until he retired this year.[2009]”
““If you are currently inactive and want to get back in, all you have to do is send us a letter and pay the current balance of your registration,” Grogan said. “However, if you’re retired and want to come back in, you have to pay the full registration fee for the years you were out. I don’t think Obama’s going to come back to Chicago to practice, you know what I mean?””
Other websites say pretty much the same thing.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/lawlicenses.asp
“Barack Obama did not “surrender” his law license. Like Michelle, Barack Obama had no need for an active law license for the work in which he was engaged, so in February 2007 (after announcing his candidacy for the presidency) he chose to have his law license placed on “voluntarily inactive” status, and after becoming president he opted to change his status to “voluntarily retired.” Neither of the Obamas was irrevocably stripped of their law licenses through the action of “surrendering” them.
http://www.factcheck.org/2012/06/the-obamas-law-licenses/
The Obamas haven’t said exactly what prompted them to change the status of their licenses. But Grogan said that it was fairly common for lawyers who didn’t intend to continue practicing law to go on inactive status. It was actually one of the reasons, he said, that the rule was changed so that lawyers wanting to switch to inactive status no longer had to petition the Illinois Supreme Court to do so. In 2011, more than 12 percent of the state’s 87,943 registered attorneys were on inactive status (see Chart 2), according to the ARDC’s annual report for that year.
This is the kind of documentation I originally asked for.
If you like your documentation, you can keep it. Period.
You don’t trust World Net Daily (WND)?
If you got to the link of the subject of this thread at 6mins Zullo states that now the Sheriffs department has allocated public funds.
PS: Nice job KB!
That could be quite a shrewd chess move on ole Joe's part. If those authorities who have (or think they have) fiscal oversight have a problem with it, it will bring it out in open court ... or at least be a newsworthy mud-fight.
BTW, do you know if I can link to that "press kit" the CCP is sending out to Sheriff's Departments?
Generalized placemark...
In thinking over this issue of "Voluntary Surrender" vs "Voluntarily Inactive" it became apparent that we are on the receiving end of a rather devious PR effort on the part of Team Obama. That is, the conflation of "Surrender" with "Inactive." What they are telling you is that once the license is surrendered, that lawyer is certainly "inactive!"
Suffice it to say that Madame Obama was ORDERED by the court to relinquish her license to practice. Nothing "Voluntary" there. She became "Inactive" by court order! This matter of public record was easily ascertained until quite recently.
Barack Hussein Obama, did "Voluntarily Surrender" his law license. However, this terminology is a legal euphemism, as any attorney in any state can tell you. It really means hand in your license or face disciplinary action. Hand it over and we'll seal the file. The only thing "Voluntary" is the choice of "Surrender" or face the music. Thus, Barack Hussein Obama is indeed "Inactive;" permanently. He may never re-apply to the Bar of the State of Illinois.
"Voluntarily Inactive" is a horse of an entirely different color. It means that a lawyer retires, or goes on to another career. The attorney really needs to do nothing. If he does not pay his bar dues, or does not receive required continuing education credits, or merely informs the Bar that he no longer wishes to practice, he is truly said to be "Voluntarily Inactive."
To apply that terminology to the Obama's, husband and wife, is a very sleazy bit of word play. Clearly, both Obama's are no longer members of the Bar through no choice of their own. Thanks to skillful PR, and complaisant media, that simple fact was one hell of a lot easier to document in 2007 than it is today.
This is an excellent example of the deliberately confusing "fog" surrounding this President, and in this case, his wife.
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.