Posted on 09/19/2009 11:29:41 AM PDT by jamese777
Army Capt. Connie Rhodes, who filed a complaint Sept. 4 in U.S. District Court that sought to stop her deployment to Iraq by arguing that President Barack Obama can’t legitimately hold office, says in a Friday letter that she never authorized her attorney to appeal a Wednesday ruling against her.
Additionally, Judge Clay Land – who denied Rhodes’ request and threatened sanctions against her lawyer, Orly Taitz, a national figure in the “birther” movement – states that Taitz has two weeks from Friday to explain why he shouldn’t impose a $10,000 penalty against the California lawyer.
Both Land’s order and Rhodes’ letter came on the heels of a Thursday request from the captain that Land reconsider his Wednesday order against her. In that order, Land called Rhodes’ Sept. 4 complaint “frivolous,” and says Taitz could face sanctions if she ever again filed in his court a similar frivolous action. In her Friday letter, Rhodes states that she never told Taitz to file for a reconsideration, and that she intends to formally complain about her attorney.
“I became aware on last night’s local news cast that a motion to stay my deployment had been entered on my behalf,” Rhodes’ Friday to Land states. “I did not authorize this motion to be filed.
“Furthermore, I do not wish for Ms. Taitz to file any future motions or represent me in any way in this court. It is my plan to file a complaint with the California State Bar due to her reprehensible and unprofessional actions,” Rhodes states.
Rhodes says she is currently deploying to Iraq, and that it’s evident her initial complaint was “full of political conjecture, which was not my interest. I had no intention of refusing orders nor will I. I simply wanted to verify the lawfulness of my orders.”
(Excerpt) Read more at ledger-enquirer.com ...
Where is the followup, ace? THis is a rehash of “her” letter.
Please point out the “confirmation” part of this
IS LETTER TO U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE LAND A FORGERY?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2343741/posts
Can you remove the “Confirmed” from the title, since this article does not do that, but rather rehashes the supposed letter itself.
I heard there were other lawyers were working with Orly on this case. One of the primary reasons for the other lawyers I thought was because Orly seemed to have a problem with proper protocol. If so how did this become such a mess?
It’s getting press, but is it real?
see post 4 link.
I think the other lawyers are HOPEFULLY working on the case with Judge Carter in CA. The Carter case is a gift. Orly and gary Kreep have a real shot there.
Leo Donofrio posted important info about how Orly and Kreep have a new huge opening thanks to Obama’s DOJ lawyers screwing up big time. Orly needs to focus on the Judge Carter case and read Leo Donofrio’s web site twice a day as Leo is doing the best research on the BC/NBC issue.
GO to link in post 4. Fishy stuff
It maybe fishy stuff but has Captain Rhodes or Orly denied that the info posted by the Newspaper is not legit? I’ve seen nothing and normally Orly is all of her blog with denials if she doen’t think something is correct.
If it isn’t legit then the Judge will be pissed to no end. Who would fax or fake a letter to the Judge?
An Obamarrhoid.
I heard there were other lawyers were working with Orly on this case. One of the primary reasons for the other lawyers I thought was because Orly seemed to have a problem with proper protocol. If so how did this become such a mess?
Kreep is a co-counsel in the CA case. The Georgia case as far as I know is Orly alone, thus the screwed up mess.
Then why hasn’t the Captain or Orly denied the fax and stated it is a fraud?.....
Has anyone talked to the Captain in (probably in Kuwait by now) or Orly? Where they even aware of it before now?
Do you have any credible evidence that the letter was a forgery? Where is this accusation coming from?
Read my other ping to you. It’s our buddy Larry
Pissant, I’m on your side, as you know, but didn’t Land fine Taitz $10,000 over this, or something of that nature? Or isn’t there any independent confirmation of that either? I’m not giving you a hard time....
Every pleading I have seen by Taitz has been unusual to say the least, sloppy and scattershot might be a better term for it.
It's often said that someone can be fortunate for having a particular set of enemies, because those enemies discredit themselves and the substantive allegations they make disappear with their personal credibility.
You have to be agnostic on the subject of Obama's natural citizenship - because none of the facts are in evidence (the supposed birth certificate has been sealed and not released to the public, or to any credible neutral who might verify it). Doing a sloppy job of pursuing these cases only jaundices the public eye on the topic of the substantive validity of the citizenship claims, even though no evidence (pro or con) has been adduced. Taitz should step out of this effort and others should only move ahead in court when they can surmount the very difficult issues of jurisdiction and standing (which I would say, and have said here, are just about impossible). What most people, mainly non-lawyers, have a hard time understanding is that the Constitution could prescribe a thin set of minimal qualifications for serving as President, yet fail to provide for a method of verifying or verifying those qualifications have been met.
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.