[edge919]

I didn’t ask you about the rest of The Court’s decision, but about his specific statement you quoted. If you want to quote actual legal principles from the decision, that makes sense, but what you quoted about tilting at windmills makes the judge look like he’s biased and partial, or maybe just an idiot. Is that what you intended??

[jamese777]

I didn’t ask you about the rest of The Court’s decision, but about his specific statement you quoted. If you want to quote actual legal principles from the decision, that makes sense, but what you quoted about tilting at windmills makes the judge look like he’s biased and partial, or maybe just an idiot. Is that what you intended??

---

I can’t speak for Judge Lamberth but I believe his comment was in reference to his frustration with wasting the Court’s time filing a quo warranto claim when it is so patently clear if a person who is admitted to the Bar simply reads the DC Code exactly who can file quo warranto and who would have standing under the DC Code to file quo warranto against a federal elected or appointed official.
Judge Lamberth is certainly not the first trier of fact to express frustration with Orly Taitz. She was sanctioned to the tune of $20,000 by a different federal judge, she appealed for a stay of her sanctions to Justice Scalia and to Justice Thomas and they both rejected her appeals. Ms. Taitz then accused Supreme Court clerks of forging Justice Thomas’ signature and of not showing her appeal briefs to the Justices. The Supreme Court then ignored her accusations.

Another federal judge said of Orly Taitz in his dismissal of a different Obama eligibility suit: “Plaintiffs have encouraged the Court to ignore the mandates of the Constitution, to disregard the limits put on its power put in place by the Constitution, and to effectively overthrow a sitting president who was popularly elected by “We the people.”—over sixty nine million of the people.
Plaintiffs have attacked the judiciary, including every prior court that has dismissed their claim, as unpatriotic and even treasonous for refusing to grant their requests and for adhering to the terms of the Constitution, which set forth its jurisdiction. Respecting the Constitutional role and jurisdiction of this Court is not unpatriotic. Quite the contrary, this Court considers commitment to that constitutional role to be the ultimate reflection of patriotism.”—US Federal District Judge David O. Carter in his Opinion dismissing Captain Pamela Barnett, et. al. v Barack H. Obama, et. al.—October 29, 2009

If Judge Lamberth’s statement shows bias, then the plaintiff has grounds for an appeal. Taitz v Obama has not been appealed.

Orly Taitz has a unique ability to piss judges off.