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.)
LOL! The little minx!
parsy, who should have known
you just did. lol
The law says he has to be qualified. One of the qualifications is age and another is natural born.
The sec of state of cal has the responsibility to see that candidates are qualified for statewide election. The presidential primary is a statewide election.
They have checked BCs in the past and excluded non-qualified candidates from the presidential primary based upon a review of thei birth certificates.
Nowhere in Cal or the US constitution does it say present BC.
How would you suppose they meet their requirements? Or is the constitution just so much toilet paper, not to be enforced? Maybe they could cut the candidates in half and count the rings for an age check.
Why didn't the candidates challenge the sec of state's authority in ca? Why has no one written about this abuse of power?
Why does some redundant poster on the internet think that every ministerial procedure must be spelled out in the constitution when the elected officials have the power to carry out their duties, as required and without every step being codified.
Why would someone ask the same ridiculous question over and over and not develop an understanding of the law, without proposing the preposterous assumption that there is no way to check a candidates age or place of birth, because the founders forgot to write a thousand page constitution?
She basically said that she would not accept it because of the NBC argument. So she wants to see the birth cert so she can say that it’s not acceptable.
I think she should pick an argument and stick to it. Jumping around from the COLB to the NBC to the SS arguments gives off an air of frivolity.
She sounded totally relaxed, though. When she has a favorable interviewer, she does not get emotional. Most judges are going to expect you to tell your story walking and won’t have much patience. That’s obviously not helping her in court.
You have been selected as best non-screen name of 2008/09.
Rather, his case against Obama was premised on the argument that Obama might have been born overseas and that the New Jersey SoS hadn't conducted any independent verification of a Hawaiian birth. Nothing about his father's citizenship being a disqualifying factor in-and-of itself.
Not exactly, they certified that he was eligible, by accepting documents from the DNC that certified he was eligible.
Granted New Orleans was far more devastating but it didn’t have to be nearly that bad. When evacuation orders go up, we evacuate. The thought of 10 feet of storm surge at my back door and 12-24 hours of howling winds, things breaking, hospitals closed, no chance of an airlift, very little law enforcement, no thanks. We leave. If it misses us, good, If not, we come home and begin the cleanup. It’s the price we pay to live in what we consider paradise.
You had quite a lot of damage there from Ike. We don’t have a lot of big trees near roads, but sometimes they have to get the sand from the ocean off of them. Wilma made new beaches where none were before, confiscated some small, islands, filled in some cuts for a brief period of time. I hope to never see another one, but that’s not likely.
FOX.
You’re correct. That’s when he filed his suit. Regardless, Donofrio doesn’t like to be associated with birthers. He doesn’t want on their bandwagon. Birthers would have the law twisted and broken just to remove Obama from office.
While I believe that Obama isn’t eligible based on his dual citizenship status at birth, I would accept and support a ruling from the SCOTUS that declared him eligible. I respect the law, even when it doesn’t suit my personal agenda.
The secretary of state is in charge of the state elections. The primaries are state elections. In Cal she had the responsibility to see that the candidates were qualified. It is the Nov election for which she accepts the candidates that the parties supposedly qualified. A fox and the chicken house process.
Which doesn't contradict anything I said. "They had no evidence that he was NOT eligible, so they allowed him on the ballot. That's all they were required to do."
What law are birthers asking to have twisted and broken, or is Donofrio blowing more smoke out his arse again?
See 652, the right track would be to look at individual state statutes to find out how to removed sec of state for violation of oath of office.
You seem to have missed this statement in the post you are replying to.
"In fact, as another freeper has shown, the CA Secretary of State is compelled to put the major party candidates on the ballot, with no discretion allowed. So that's not the law either."
Your stating that he can be qualified and not prove it, is opening the highest office in the land to fraud. Does the current situation ring a bell?
I hope you are not hiring airline pilots. I have a flight next weekend and I just don't want to take their word that they are qualified. I have more concern for safety and this country than to take some one's word that they are qualified to lead the country and command the military.
A state can’t recall the President.
“While I believe that Obama isn’t eligible based on his dual citizenship status at birth, I would accept and support a ruling from the SCOTUS that declared him eligible. I respect the law, even when it doesn’t suit my personal agenda.”
The first part of this statement does not square with the last sentence of this statement.
SCOTUS doesn’t make law! If you believe he is ineligible due to his dual citizenship status (and he is) then if SCOTUS were to declare him eligible they would be legislating from the bench. If you “respect the law” then you should be outraged by this... unless of course you have a horse in this race and I think you do.
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.