It makes me want to vomit. Orly Taitz has started one of her witch hunts investigations only this time the victim is a child, an innocent child who lived only 55 days and whose only crime was to have “Obama” as part of her name. There for all to see on the Taitz cesspool blog is her name, date of birth, date of death, her Social Security number, and the dirty paw marks of Orly Taitz, sending out her flying zombie monkeys followers to seek birth and death certificates for the child.
Why? To add the sick, Sick, SICK assertion that the child’s death was some sort of Obama family ritual satanic murder to the Orly repertoire. This child has parents. Orly have you no decency left as a mother or has your obsession with destroying President Obama consumed you totally?
In a desperate gamble against incredible odds, crusading nobot lawyer, Orly Taitz, already rejected by her client, presses on by filing an appeal of her $20,000 sanction by federal judge Clay Land in Georgia.
Having her lawsuit, Rhodes v. MacDonald, identified as “frivolous”, the unrepentant Taitz is now filing a frivolous appeal with the Circuit court of appeals. Perhaps mail order lawyer Taitz is unaware that not only are there rules against filing frivolous lawsuits, there are also rules against filing frivolous appeals.
If a court of appeals determines that an appeal is frivolous, it may, after a separately filed motion or notice from the court and reasonable opportunity to respond, award just damages and single or double costs to the appellee.
What is her argument? Bias by the judge. What is the proof the judge was biased? He didn’t rule her way. She actually wrote:
…the court proved its pervasively extreme and outrageous (extrajudicial) prejudice and bias against the undersigned [yes, she remembered to sign it] counsel by not only denying her Motion to Recuse but also her Motion for Extension of Time to Respond… [citations omitted, emphasis in original]
And here it is, the whole notice for your r0tten vegetable throwing pleasure:
“She’s nuts,” Mason said. “Based on what I saw and read, she’s nuts.” … “First of all, a lawyer has an ethical duty not to advance an argument that either you know is not true or you do not have an honest basis to argue,” Martin said. “She’s the type of person who gives lawyers a bad name.”
Christmas came early this year for the Obots. In a 43-page order, Judge Land in Georgia raked birther lawyer Orly Taitz over the coals. But not only did he excoriate her and sanction her, he included the following cherry on top of the Obot ice cream sundae:
The Court further directs the Clerk of this Court to send a copy of this Order to the State Bar of California, 180 Howard Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, for whatever use it deems appropriate.
Court to California Bar: You have a problem. Deal with it!
Oh dear, poor little Orly. The big bad old judge has sanctioned you to the tune of $20,000. But think of it as a learning experience. You really have to learn some respect for the legal profession that you are trying to be a part of.
Read federal Judge Land’s scathing order here. The judge called your contentions “laughable”, your claims “frivolous” and your allegations “fictitious”!
You have 30 days to pay up the $20,000. Better get filling those teeth because I don’t think you have any future in the legal field.
Cleveland lawyer, and native-born United States citizen, Subodh Chandra filed a complaint against birther crusader Orly Taitz with the California bar–at least the second formal complaint to be so filed. In explaining his reasons for filing the complaint Chandra said:
While lawyers have a wide range of latitude to advocate for their clients, they do not have professional license to just make things up. In a self-regulating profession, lawyers have a responsibility to report when other lawyers engage in conduct that reflects on fitness to practice law.
Here, Ms. Taitz has waived around demonstrably phony documents (the Republic of Kenya was the “Dominion” of Kenya on the date of the fake “Republic of Kenya” birth certificate she’s been brandishing), ignored the state of Hawaii’s own official statement that its records reflect the President was born in Hawaii and failed to explain how a Hawaii newspaper reported on President Obama’s birth back at the time — did the wily conspiracy extend to the president’s grandparents when he was infant?
Ms. Taitz also accused a (Bush-appointee) federal judge in Georgia of “treason” and corruption without any reasonable basis. She reportedly advocated positions contrary to her clients’ direct instruction. And the federal judge sanctioned her for “frivolous” conduct. These are things for which we mere mortal lawyers normally face consequences.
In proceedings in Santa Ana, California, in the case of Barnett v. Obama, Judge David O. Carter complained that Orly had been urging her followers to pressure the court. He said:
Quietly, calmly, Carter replied that he didn’t want to “chill” the audience’s enthusiasm, but the America that Taitz alluded to was not the America he grew up in: one where opposing parties could confront one another in a “thoughtful” manner in the courts and in the legislature. He said that he had heard that Taitz had exhorted followers on her blog to contact the court, and that his receptionist had to take as many as forty calls a day from Taitz’s supporters. “I can assure you that during the proceedings, the government or President Obama haven’t contacted me,” he said. “If there’s any undue pressure [on the court], it’s from you.
The Judge wondered why President Obama should be called to testify about his eligibility to hold office:
“He doesn’t have any memory of his birth,” Carter said.
While I do not have the full transcript, I think Orly replied something like: “In Soviet Union all Citizens are required to remember birth.”
By flooding the court with last minute filings, the final judgment [pun intended] will be delayed as the Judge ponders the complex issues before him. Despite birther spin, there is no indication that the Judge will do anything other than dismiss the case.
In a remarkable legal brief, Attorney Taitz, included this affidavit:
BEFORE ME, the undersigned Notary, Lamar Rozier
on this 26th day of September, 2009, personally appeared Robert D. Douglas, known to me to be a credible person and of lawful age, who being by me first duly sown on his oath deposes and says:
On the day of he hearing for Major Stephan Cook before Federal Judge Clay D. Land, Columbus, Ga., my wife, my wife’s sister, her husband and I had entered the little coffee shop directly across from the Court House while waiting for the doors to open to the public. I was sitting in the small seating area, set aside for their customers, while facing and looking directly at the entrance to the shop. All persons entering had to pass withing 8-10 feet from where I was sitting.
NOT Eric Holder
I looked up and immediately recognized an individual entering and approaching the serving counter, due to his well known TV displayed distinguishing features: his trim upper lip mustache, not large of stature and general olive complexion. I knew instantly it was non[e] other than Eric Holder, the current Attorney General of the United States. I called this to the attention of those present and all agreed it appeared to be who I readily recognized. He entered unguarded, no accompanying entourage and probably thought he would not be recognized.
Not Eric Holder either
Red flags went up immediately in my mind and the questions remain, as yet. Why does the Attorney General of the United States need to be present in an obscure hearing well of his beaten path? Could it possible be, since Holder did not present himself in open court, he may have had a little “whisper in the ear” to a Federal Judge in order to bias his judicial vision and adhere to the President’s agenda of obstruction?
Only Judge Clay D. Land can answer those question.
Robert D. Douglas
What’s the problem? The hearing in question was in Georgia on July 16th. Holder was in California on that day. I guess to birthers all blacks look alike.