Posted on 10/03/2009 10:12:08 PM PDT by devere
Attorney Orly Taitz, the “birther” lawyer under threat of sanctions by U.S. District Court Judge Clay Land for filing a “frivolous” lawsuit, filed a motion Friday asking the judge to recuse himself because of personal contacts and financial stakes he may have with President Barack Obama’s administration.
Land was appointed to the bench by President George W. Bush.
Taitz represented Army Capt. Connie Rhodes when she filed a Sept. 4 complaint arguing Rhodes shouldn’t be deployed to Iraq because Obama couldn’t legitimately hold office. Land not only ruled against Rhodes, but ordered Taitz to explain why he should not fine her $10,000 for filing a “frivolous” lawsuit.
On Friday, Taitz asked for an extension to respond to that order, but also asked that Land recuse himself from the case. In her motion for recusal, Taitz:
* States Land may have improperly been in contact with U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder.
* States that Land’s ownership of stock in Microsoft and Comcast could give the judge a financial stake in the outcome.
* Likens her plight to that of the late civil rights icon Thurgood Marshall in the 1940s and ’50s.
“The primary reason for the undersigned counsel to file this motion to recuse, however, is that Judge Clay D. Land has by his own actions created a constitutionally intolerable situation in which he is both complaining party, prosecuting attorney, judge and jury regarding the charges of frivolous filing and sanctionable conduct which he has leveled ...” Taitz states.
“What, for example, was ever more political in 20th century Georgia than the question of school desegregation?” Taitz asks. “Surely this distinguished southern judge would have jailed Thurgood Marshall in the 1940s and ’50s for contempt when the future Supreme Court justice repeatedly filed cases demanding on constitutional as well as ...
(Excerpt) Read more at ledger-enquirer.com ...
” It would be great if some high-powered competent legal team unseated Obama. I seriously doubt it will be Taitz.”
You mean you’re not sure? And you heap abuse on the only person willing to try?
Obama doesn’t need CBS, ABC, NBC, CNN, MSNBC, Daily Kos, Democratic Underground, and Huffington Post any more. He’s got plenty of folks here on Free Republic working on his behalf.
Call it a personal dislike.
He’s got plenty of folks here on Free Republic working on his behalf.
Those would be anyone with an opinion differing from your own, hmm?
And yet what could be higher comedy than the laughs that the Obama prevaricators, provocateurs, equivocators, fraudsters are having at the expense of the American people by continuing their charade. Their joke is on all those like you who will shortly be getting the bill.
Nobody here loves Obama’s policies. Most regard them with distaste. But we also regard Orly's filings with distaste because they demonstrate no respect for the rule of law, which is a crucial gift in the history of Western Civilization. One without which democracy is not possible. The rule of law in this country is a miraculous thing, settling disputes in an orderly manner every single day that in other places and times would be settled by murder, pillaging and coups. It is one of the bulwarks of a civilized society.
If you truly respect the Constitution, you have to respect that. Now, come up with proof that Obama was not born in the United States, and I'll be the first to tell you you've got something you can then try to fashion into an actionable case. I think lots of real lawyers would be interested at that point. But we're talking real proof that meets real evidentiary standards—not “I assert I bribed various people to give me a copy of something no one has ever seen before” or “I saw someone eating in a restaurant that I just assumed was so-and-so and maybe that has something to do with a case.” The idea that it's unfair to have to find evidence sufficient for a case without discovery is a nonstarter. Plaintiffs successfully do that all the time.
These are not the comments of ‘conservatives’....rather, just a bunch of UGLY TROLLS whose only hope, at this point, is to criticize the opposition !
They have NO answers of their own and many are Obama supporters who should spend their time building a new mosque for their Lying Commie, Muslim false messiah !
I suggest they build it on the ‘sand’, as a famous CARPENTER once indicated !
In the course of history what you think hardly matters much. Surprising I know.
I would not suggest wasting your time bickering with Non-Sequitur. On occasion some of us humor him with sarcastic replies, but for the most part we try to ignore him.
He is an “Obama worshipper”.
If Glen Beck released a video of Obama having sex with 3 under-age boys, Non-Sequitur would say :
“I watched the video and it very clear that Obama is not having sex with them; they are having sex with him !”
Yes. And then he became the actual President on Jan. 20.
"So far he hasn’t seemed to qualify for the office, so it’s anyone’s guess if he is legally the President, or just an imposter."
In fact, so far he seems to qualify perfectly well. That's a case the birthers have never been able to make. It is their burden, which is the point here.
"The courts need to rule on the law and the facts, since the constitution is unclear on the correct procedure for proving qualification for office."
No, the constitution is clear. It doesn't specify that anyone needs to submit a birth certificate or anything like that, but it's not vague. It would be up to the states, who conduct the elections and approve the candidates, to decide what they require to validate a candidate. The constitution gives a role for the Electors, and Congress. It is quite clear about those roles.
He is an “Obama worshipper”.
No, I am a Birther Ridiculer. And people like you keep me supplied with ammunition.
If Glen Beck released a video of Obama having sex with 3 under-age boys, Non-Sequitur would say ...
No, I would say, "At least Beck has some evidence. Unlike those Birther morons."
Yep! You're just one of the “conservatives” who are trying to face reality. I know. I know. You care so much for the Constitution and rule of law.
If birthers cared about the Constitution and rule of law, well, they wouldn't be birthers.
“It would be up to the states, who conduct the elections and approve the candidates, to decide what they require to validate a candidate.”
That’s not what the constitution says. The 20th Amendment speaks of a President-elect possibly not qualifying, and the Vice President acting in his stead. Which implies that some process of qualification may occur once Congress counts the electoral votes and establishes a President-elect. The constitution is silent on whether the Courts or Congress might conduct that further qualification process. In my opinion the Supreme Court deserves severe censure for not taking the Philip Berg case in January and settling this matter in a timely fashion. Either Roberts or Alito refused to grant certiorari (most people guess Roberts), but the issue won’t go away, and the collateral issues have only gotten more severe. No matter what happens now, it’s a big mess.
My opinion is that everyone Should have a right and “standing” to demand upholding the constitution: Congress, the Courts, the Executive branch, and private citizens. Right now Joe Biden plus a majority of the Cabinet could invoke the 25th amendment and declare Obama ineligible. But that should not preclude private legal action, or Congressional action.
Hey, they even called Noah a “ NUT “ or “ Crazy “ when God told Noah to build a ark, but, those who called Noah a “ NUT “ or “ Crazy “ stopped laughing when the flood waters came.
And what makes you think that the truth is on your side ? .... defend your cause.
“YOU LIE” ! ! !
Nope. Morons is an accurate term for a lot of you.
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.