Posted on 10/13/2009 7:45:31 AM PDT by BuckeyeTexan
When a lawyer files complaints and motions without a reasonable basis for believing that they are supported by existing law or a modification or extension of existing law, that lawyer abuses her privilege to practice law. When a lawyer uses the courts as a platform for a political agenda disconnected from any legitimate legal cause of action, that lawyer abuses her privilege to practice law. When a lawyer personally attacks opposing parties and disrespects the integrity of the judiciary, that lawyer abuses her privilege to practice law. When a lawyer recklessly accuses a judge of violating the Judicial Code of Conduct with no supporting evidence beyond her dissatisfaction with the judge’s rulings, that lawyer abuses her privilege to practice law. When a lawyer abuses her privilege to practice law, that lawyer ceases to advance her cause or the ends of justice.
-snip-
Regrettably, the conduct of counsel Orly Taitz has crossed these lines, and Ms. Taitz must be sanctioned for her misconduct. After a full review of the sanctionable conduct, counsel’s conduct leading up to that conduct, and counsel’s response to the Court’s show cause order, the Court finds that a monetary penalty of $20,000.00 shall be imposed upon counsel Orly Taitz as punishment for her misconduct, as a deterrent to prevent future misconduct, and to protect the integrity of the Court. Payment shall be made to the United States, through the Middle District of Georgia Clerk’s Office, within thirty days of today’s Order. If counsel fails to pay the sanction due, the U.S. Attorney will be authorized to commence collection proceedings.
(Full Order at the link.)
I already agreed you are 35 and presume it to be so until proven otherwise.
Now I want to test that assumption. May I?
Do you dontate to DU too, then?
I’ve been a monthly donor to FR since one month after I joined. What’s your point?
I’m a monthly donor. Are you?
Insulting potential donors is a brilliant strategy, dude....
If you're going to make up a timeline to suit your own ends, it's a good idea to make sure there aren't sources that directly contradict it.
I didn't willfully make it up my as I didn't go Googling around, although maybe I should have.
Did that discussion make the numbers appear?
And that statement coming from someone who claims that Obama is not a natural born citizen and thus not qualified to sit in the Oval Office and yet sees himself as the self-appointed leader of those who claim otherwise. Just who is the real laughing stock here??? LOL
Ain't that the truth! All you can do is correct them.
Actually, her statement doesn't say that she verified O as being NBC. She says ‘the original vital records on file’ verify ‘Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawaii and is a natural-born American citizen’.
““I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of the Hawaii State Department of Health, have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawaii State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawaii and is a natural-born American citizen.”
Leo has shown that her statements and those from DoH leave some legal wriggle room, subject to interpretation and whether ‘on file’ is the same as ‘accepted’ or has a different legal meaning. Could someone have filed the DNC presidential nominee form, (the one where Pelosi certifies O as being qualified), with the DoH as a verifying document to O's vital records, thus making it an orginal vital record also? Just askin'.
I'm sure you give them enough for the both of us.
I’m not anyone’s leader. I ping others to participate in a discussion with me.
Is LucyT your leader? OMG. Grow up.
Just like I noticed another Obama freeper hanging out on David ‘little fag’ Weigel’s site cheering on the Obama crowd. Simply stunning.
Okay, I don’t want to overburden your undercapitalized intellect but, a fact exists only when proven
A fact is a pragmatic truth, a statement that can, at least in theory, be checked and confirmed. Facts are often contrasted with opinions and beliefs, statements which are held to be true, but are not amenable to pragmatic confirmation.
Your childish intellect is under appreciated, as you know, and I have posited questions to ascertain your claim of a “Fact” which cannot be, until proven as evidence to others that the thing exists. Until then, your claim that you are 35 is not a fact, it is a thing you have uttered with absolutely no benefit to us, without unassailable proof of the fact, by way of evidence.
You probably heard this as a kid. There is a place called Africa and it has lions, elephants, giraffe’s and a Serengeti. Now, not having been there, how are we to know that indeed, it is a fact, that Africa and things I described exist?
We already had a list of most of them, but it was nice of him to list all of them for us.
A fact can also be synonymous with truth or reality. mlo doesn’t have to prove he’s 35 in order for it to be true. It’s an actuality, a reality.
You claim that a fact is also a pragmatic truth that can be checked and confirmed. An uncomfirmed fact in your opinion in no way negates the actuality (truth) of mlo being 35.
Something can be true, real, and actual without being proven as a scientific fact to someone’s satisfaction.
Your argument boils down to a claim that “a physical document” (the actual vital records, whatever they are)will not “ever” have “more authority” than the hearsay statement of Fukino (”seen the original vital records”).
Obviously, the actual vital records have infinitely more authority than any hearsay statement about the records.
Granted, under the FRE the COLB (if properly executed) is “self-authenticating” and both it and Fukino'statements are accorded a “hearsay exception” to the “best evidence” rule (the actual vital records being the “best evidence.” But that self-authentication and hearsay exception can be challenged if evidence of fraud, tampering or error can be introduced in discovery.
It is my sincere hope that contrary to your blanket assertion the public will hold the actual vital records in the near future that will be superior to Fukino’s statement.
I accept your argument but how am I to know what is, is? How it came it be? and what it means?
BS. I don't buy into the Donofrio argument that McCain and Obama are not NBCs based on his theories. I think it is unhelpful to have Donofrio pushing his crap, while disparaging the people who demand to see the HI documents.
Yet, other than maybe a 1/2 dozen comments to the effect of me calling his theories misguided and going nowhere, I've refrained from jumping into those threads and slamming him and the the people pushing it here. Even though I could, and have been tempted a time or two. I ignore them.
Oh, and I wouldn't want to be aligned with a bunch of DNC operative trolls already doing that, either.
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.