Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Attorney Orly Taitz files motion to withdraw as lawyer for Capt. Connie Rhodes
Columbus Ledger-Enquirer ^ | Sept. 28, 2009 | ALAN RIQUELMY

Posted on 09/28/2009 10:15:01 AM PDT by vikk

Attorney Orly Taitz, a national figure in the “birther” movement and lawyer for an Army captain who sought to stop her deployment to Iraq on arguments that President Barack Obama can’t legitimately hold office, has filed a motion to withdraw as the captain’s lawyer.

Taitz, who represents Capt. Connie Rhodes, filed her latest motion Saturday. It cites two court documents as reasons for withdrawing from the case — a Sept. 18 order from U.S. District Court Judge Clay Land threatening $10,000 in sanctions against Taitz and a letter purportedly signed by Connie Rhodes, which asks for Taitz to be removed as her attorney.

“In order to defend herself, the undersigned counsel will have to contest and potentially appeal any sanctions order in her own name alone, separately from the plaintiff, by offering and divulging what would normally constitute inadmissible and privileged attorney-client communications,” Taitz states. “The undersigned attorney will also offer evidence and call witnesses whose testimony will be adverse to her (former) client’s most recently stated position in this case.”

It appears, however, that Taitz didn’t sign her motion. Court records filed Monday state that the motion must be filed again because Taitz didn’t sign it.


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: birthcertificate; birther; birthers; certifigate; orlytaitz
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 281-300301-320321-340 ... 501-519 next last
To: HiTech RedNeck

All her previous experience was in defending herself in malpractice cases relating to her dental practice.


301 posted on 09/29/2009 3:36:33 AM PDT by MilspecRob (Most people don't act stupid, they really are.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Frantzie

Mario Apuzzo is an ambulance chasing DWI layer with no constitutional law trial experience.


302 posted on 09/29/2009 4:00:14 AM PDT by MilspecRob (Most people don't act stupid, they really are.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies]

To: nufsed
Is there anything someone can say that will cause to you to see the facts that prove your statements are wrong? Stop spinning, squirming, asking 5th and 6th level questions and wake up.

Certainly. Post the California law that said the Secretary of State was required to check the qualifications of all presidential candidates. That would do it, and would show that the law was violated. And I would certainly agree that some sort of legal action against the Secretary of State would be called for.

Do that and the facts are there for all to see. Even I couldn't spin out of that. Let me know when you're ready.

Every time you have been proven wrong, I leave when you change the subject. I really have a low tolerance for your failure to acknowledge you are wrong and to fight for the truth. Is is a dishonest form of discourse.

And where have you proven me, or anyone else, wrong?

303 posted on 09/29/2009 4:08:35 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 225 | View Replies]

To: mlo
Star Traveler.

You know I answer your questions and prove you wrong, but you never acknowledge the answer or being wrong. You question me as if you think I'm a liar. It's because you seem to be in denial that you could be wrong.

304 posted on 09/29/2009 6:34:13 AM PDT by nufsed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 288 | View Replies]

To: pissant; mlo

The secretary of state’s staff in cal admitted they didn’t check his qualifications. They left it to Howard dean and Nancy Pelosi. Is MLO saying that they reviewed his father’s British citizenship and his BC and verified that he was “natural born?” Were’s the proof of that mlo?


305 posted on 09/29/2009 6:37:25 AM PDT by nufsed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 293 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
The sec of state has to place qualified candidates on the ballot. The examples of past practice are proof of the law, the authority and the responsibility. She took an oath of office that she would uphold the state and US constitution. This has all been explained to you half a dozen times. The fact that you can't see it is indicative of your lack of willingness to acept the facts of Cal practice.

Your last questions has been answered many times. I'm not going to dredge up every post I have made to you. You're welcome o do that for your own reminder. Your calling for that information is again indicative of your disengenuous posting practices.

306 posted on 09/29/2009 6:41:26 AM PDT by nufsed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 303 | View Replies]

To: nufsed
The sec of state has to place qualified candidates on the ballot. The examples of past practice are proof of the law, the authority and the responsibility. She took an oath of office that she would uphold the state and US constitution. This has all been explained to you half a dozen times. The fact that you can't see it is indicative of your lack of willingness to acept the facts of Cal practice.

Yeah. What I'm still waiting for is a quote from the actual law that they violated. As I've said half a dozen times.

307 posted on 09/29/2009 6:46:40 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 306 | View Replies]

To: mlo
In a case where the suspect is hiding the evidence, it is not my responsibility to provide it. The court has the responsibility to require the suspect to bring the evidence to court. The best evidence of place of birth is the birth certificate. I cannot produce it without comitting a burglary. A judge will have to require the information to satisfy your "requirements."

As you know from being told many times there is a constitutional requirement that the candidate meet the qualifications of office. It is his responsibility to do so. Not mine to do an expensive investigation to prove he is not. Since no governmental entity required him to do so, citizens are now asking the court to have him do it. You see the burden of proof is on him. The requirement is on him and the information is in his control.

One has to ask, again, why you keep repeating these often answered questions and why are you trying to delay the search for truth and protect the fraud suspect.

308 posted on 09/29/2009 6:47:38 AM PDT by nufsed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 290 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

The allegation is that he violated the law and they are negligent for not checking qualifications, as they have admitted. Did you read the links. They used to do it and last year they didn’t. Got it now? I cannot explain it at a more remedial level.


309 posted on 09/29/2009 6:49:53 AM PDT by nufsed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 307 | View Replies]

To: American Constitutionalist

What is more amazing is that coinservatives are protecting the suspect instead of calling for the full disclosure and the truth.


310 posted on 09/29/2009 6:51:46 AM PDT by nufsed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 283 | View Replies]

To: pissant

“BTW, those factual legal cases consisted of the election officials checking the birth records, something they will be forced to do sooner or later.”

I thought the state of Hawaii had already officially confirmed that they have his original birth certificate on file and that he was born in Hawaii.

What other facts do you wish to be checked?


311 posted on 09/29/2009 7:56:18 AM PDT by Natufian (The mesolithic wasn't so bad, was it?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 255 | View Replies]

To: Natufian

In two separate and distinct statements. And run through lawyers to not incriminate herself.

It proves nothing, but fortunately, the public is entitled to know what basis she made the limited claims she did. So the idiots may have shot themselves in the foot.


312 posted on 09/29/2009 8:01:54 AM PDT by pissant (THE Conservative party: www.falconparty.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 311 | View Replies]

To: pissant

What makes you think she gave out false information?


313 posted on 09/29/2009 8:03:53 AM PDT by Natufian (The mesolithic wasn't so bad, was it?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 312 | View Replies]

To: Natufian

I didn’t say she gave out false information. She gave out CYA lawyerese and withheld most of the information. But according to HI law, the public has a right to know the basis of her proclamations. So we’ll see how that suit goes.


314 posted on 09/29/2009 8:08:51 AM PDT by pissant (THE Conservative party: www.falconparty.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 313 | View Replies]

To: MilspecRob

What have you done lately? MilSpec? What is that? Some contractor govt worker?


315 posted on 09/29/2009 8:08:59 AM PDT by Frantzie (Do we want ACORN running America's healthcare?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 302 | View Replies]

To: pissant

So.... they do have his original birthcertificate and he was born in Hawaii. OK. What other information do you want to know?


316 posted on 09/29/2009 8:10:48 AM PDT by Natufian (The mesolithic wasn't so bad, was it?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 314 | View Replies]

To: Natufian

Like I said. they were two distinct statements. They never said the BC said he was born in HI. In fact the purposely avoided saying that.


317 posted on 09/29/2009 8:12:56 AM PDT by pissant (THE Conservative party: www.falconparty.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 316 | View Replies]

To: pissant

“Like I said. they were two distinct statements. They never said the BC said he was born in HI. In fact the purposely avoided saying that.”

Maybe they thought that the first statement would be enough to satisfy everyone?

If they have not made any false statements and they’ve said that they have his original birth certificate and they have also said that his records show that he was born in Hawaii then maybe you could paint me a possible scenario as to what you suspect may be being hidden from us?


318 posted on 09/29/2009 8:24:48 AM PDT by Natufian (The mesolithic wasn't so bad, was it?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 317 | View Replies]

To: Natufian

I thought the state of Hawaii had already officially confirmed that they have his original birth certificate on file and that he was born in Hawaii.

What other facts do you wish to be checked?


Here’s that official statement, and I quote: “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.

I have nothing further to add to this statement or my original statement issued in October, 2008 over eight months ago.”


319 posted on 09/29/2009 8:28:17 AM PDT by jamese777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 311 | View Replies]

To: jamese777
..............and is a natural-born American citizen.

Was nice of the Dr. to include his legal opinion since place of birth is only one of the criteria.

320 posted on 09/29/2009 8:31:13 AM PDT by nufsed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 319 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 281-300301-320321-340 ... 501-519 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson