Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

D'OH! Orly Taitz Does It Again! Files For Rehearing Of Rhodes v. MacDonald In Georgia

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
WeDidIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 11:27 AM
Original message
D'OH! Orly Taitz Does It Again! Files For Rehearing Of Rhodes v. MacDonald In Georgia
Edited on Thu Sep-17-09 11:28 AM by WeDidIt
This woman is just asking for sanctions! There is no other possibility, she thinks being sanctioned by the court will make her a martyr or something. There's no other explanation!

http://ia311028.us.archive.org/1/items/gov.uscourts.gam...

Perhaps the most batshit insane part of any filing I've ever seen:

Plaintiff avers that there is increasing evidence that the United States District Courts in the 11th Circuit are subject to political pressure, external control, and, mostly likely, subservience to the same illegitimate chain of command which Plaintiff has previously protested in this case, except that the de facto President is not even nominally the Commander-in-Chief of the Article III Judiciary.


That'll get another charge under Article 88 of the UCMJ for Cpt. Rhodes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
LynneSin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 11:28 AM
Response to Original message
1. She's got a mail order law degee - she has no clue what the hell she's doing
And if I were the head of the birthers, I would find myself a lawyer that perhaps has some knowledge on being a lawyer. That would be right after I got a lobotomy for spearheading a movement like this
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Javaman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 11:33 AM
Response to Reply #1
5. Dogma is more important than knowledge to them. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gratuitous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 11:37 AM
Response to Reply #1
9. If they got a real lawyer
They'd have to give up on the lawsuits, because a real lawyer wouldn't touch this with a 10-foot subpoena.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LynneSin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 12:52 PM
Response to Reply #9
16. Good point.
Edited on Thu Sep-17-09 12:53 PM by LynneSin
And I'm not dissing mail-order Law Degrees. But to me, at least in this dingbat's world, it seems more like a piece of paper for her than an actual skill. I mean I could probably learn how to do brain surgury from reading stuff on the internet but would you want me to operate on your brain?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeDidIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 12:56 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. The online law school teaches one thing and one thing only
Three years of prep for the California Bar Exam.

It teaches absolutely nothing else.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-18-09 04:24 PM
Response to Reply #17
27. Yup. I'm only a paralegal but we got respect hammered into our heads big time--
and we can't even assist in court.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-18-09 04:21 PM
Response to Reply #9
26. It wouldn't get past the intake interview.
Edited on Fri Sep-18-09 04:23 PM by blondeatlast
But I know what happens in the back offices; this would've been the stuff of office giggles for decades. "Remember that chickenshit who didn't want to go to Iraq and challenged the president?" :rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlooInBloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-18-09 04:17 PM
Response to Reply #1
24. Ah - an online degree person. Makes sense.
Edited on Fri Sep-18-09 04:18 PM by BlooInBloo
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-18-09 04:21 PM
Response to Reply #1
25. Y'know, I've been considering the ramifications of the Mail order degree (I'm a paralegal--but no,
I'd never consider a mail order law school).

One thing that was hammered, big time, into our heads in our education was respect for the system and those who serve it. That's what is glaringly lacking in Ms. Taitz, "Esq." She completely missed out on that part of the education.

I so wanna see the burnout that is surely coming.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Taverner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 11:29 AM
Response to Original message
2. She is bored isn't she?
Either that or insane - isn't one of the definitions "repeating the same process but expecting a different outcome?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluestateguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 11:29 AM
Response to Original message
3. Why are they allowed to just keep on suing and suing?
Hasn't there been some kid of a global resolution case that makes all of these birther lawsuits invalid?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hello_Kitty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 11:30 AM
Response to Original message
4. Vexatious Litigation, thy name is Orly. eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Winterblues Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 11:33 AM
Response to Original message
6. She is so..."out there" that it is almost as if the Left planted her...
We could not ask for anything more than her.... she shows the whole bunch for the batshit crazy they truly are.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cliffordu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 11:35 AM
Response to Original message
7. I think she's a new kind of stalker - she has the same overwhelming
obsession with the Prez that those fuckers in hollywood have for the starlets.....

Only this is all on a political level. Who's picking up the tab for all this??





And I don't want ANYONE saying ANYTHING about the thingy I have with Uma...we are soulmates....it's not stalking just because she can't remember our sweet canoodling...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeDidIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 11:37 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. She's getting donations hand over fist from the batshit insane Freepers
Edited on Thu Sep-17-09 11:40 AM by WeDidIt
and Worldnutdailyers.

Read the entire filing. It's the most batshit insane collection of ravings ever filed in a federal district court.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
atreides1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 11:47 AM
Response to Reply #8
11. At least we know her true motivation
She probably never made this much money as a dentist, so why should she give up the goose that keeps laying the golden eggs.

This time may very well be the last time for though. The judge warned her, and now she calls the whole 11th Circuit corrupt, that's going endear her to the judges.

Captain Rhodes is just digging her own grave, because now she's going to force the Army's hand.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeDidIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 12:48 PM
Response to Reply #11
15. This is also why she's tried to get Kreep thrown out of her case in CA
and has come down on Phil Berg. She's muscling the competitioin out of the picture because tehre are only so many batshit insane people in the coutnry willing to donate cash to this batshit insanity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tsuki Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 01:08 PM
Response to Reply #8
18. The donations are the thing. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tempest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 11:41 AM
Response to Original message
10. Who is paying Rhodes' judgements against her?

Land ruled Rhodes has to pay the government's court costs, and the judge in this case will most likely do the same.

Rhodes doesn't have the money, so who's funding her?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeDidIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 11:47 AM
Response to Reply #10
12. Her employer is the United States Army adn the defendent is the United States Army
Rhodes won't get the paycheck of a slick sleeve E1 after this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tabatha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 11:47 AM
Response to Original message
13. "increasing evidence"
Does she provide that?
I guess not.
Dismiss.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeDidIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 11:48 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. This time they'll use Land's ruling to enforce sanctions under Rule 11
She's getting herself in deep shit and doesn't even know it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tabatha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-17-09 07:35 PM
Response to Reply #14
19. Glad to hear that.
She really needs to be taught a lesson.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tabatha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-18-09 03:56 PM
Response to Reply #14
20. That is exactly what they did.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
subcomhd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-18-09 04:05 PM
Response to Original message
21. USMJC - isn't this in US Disrict Court? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Viking12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-18-09 04:16 PM
Response to Reply #21
22. Yes, but the brief is filed on behalf of military 'officer'
Given the claims made, merely participating in the suit could be read as a breach of USMJC
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
subcomhd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-18-09 05:18 PM
Response to Reply #22
32. Got it. thanks nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlooInBloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-18-09 04:17 PM
Response to Original message
23. *yawn*
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Qutzupalotl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-18-09 04:55 PM
Response to Reply #23
28. Get some sleep.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-18-09 05:10 PM
Response to Original message
29. News: Taitz has been sanctioned $10,000; Rhodes filing complaint against her w/CA Bar
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Saphire Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-18-09 05:17 PM
Response to Reply #29
30. Oh, my. I see the cookie starting to crumble.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
msanthrope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-18-09 05:18 PM
Response to Reply #29
31. I love any judge who quotes Yogi Berra...... n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mayberry Machiavelli Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-18-09 10:56 PM
Response to Original message
33. Rhodes appears to have had some second thoughts about her involvement with Taitz.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-18-09 11:30 PM
Response to Reply #33
34. If I were staring right down the muzzle of a dishonorable discharge or worse, so would I.
Too bad for her that right here on DU in one of the earlier threads on this there is a photo of her with Taitz at the filing.

She's too damn dumb for the Army anyway.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 18th 2014, 07:10 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC