The bill is in for Orly Taitz, the California lawyer leading the “Birther” litigation: $20,000 for sanctionable conduct. U.S. District Court Judge Clay Land previously issued a stern warning to attorney Orly Taitz and others in the so-called “birther” campaign: do not file another such “frivolous” lawsuit or you will face sanctions. Land threw out the lawsuit filed on behalf of Capt. Connie Rhodes who is an Army surgeon challenging her deployment orders due to President Barack Obama’s alleged ineligibility to serve as President. Land (a Bush appointee) noted that “[u]nlike in ‘Alice in Wonderland,’ simply saying something is so does not make it so.” In the most recent order, Land said that Taitz’s conduct “borders on delusional.”
Rhodes previously accused Taitz of filing new papers in Rhodes v. MacDonald without her approval and after she agreed to be deployed by the military. Taitz declared in one filing: “This case is now a quasi-criminal prosecution of the undersigned attorney.” She is already facing a California bar complaint and Rhodes is promising to file a new complaint against her for “reprehensible” representation.
When Rhodes learned that Taitz had filed a motion to stay deployment after she had decided to forego further litigation, she proceeded to fire Taitz by sending a remarkable letter from Office Max on the advice of “Tim who works in the District Clerk’s office.” She stated in the fax:
September 18th, 2009
To the Honorable Judge Land:
Currently, I am shipping out to Iraq for my deployment. I became aware on last night’s local news that a Motion to Stay my deployment had been entered on my behalf. I did not authorize this motion to be filed. I thank you for hearing my case and respect the ruling given on September 16th, 2009. It is evident that the original filing for the TRO and such was full of political conjecture which was not my interest. I had no intention of refusing orders nor will I. I simply wanted to verify the lawfulness of my orders. I am honored to serve my country and thank you for doing the same.
With that I said, please withdraw the Motion to Stay that Ms. Taitz filed this past Thursday. I did not authorize it and do not wish to proceed. Ms. Taitz never requested my permission nor did I give it. I would not have been aware of this if I did not see it on the late news on Thursday night before going to board my plane to Iraq on Friday, September 18, 2009.
Furthermore, I do not wish for Ms. Taitz to file any future motion or represent me in any way in this court. It is my plan to file a complaint with the California State Bar to her reprehensible and unprofessional actions.
I am faxing this as was advised by Tim, who works in the District Clerk’s office. I will mail the original copy of this letter once I have arrived in Iraq.
Respectfully,
CPT Connie M. Rhodes, MD
In her Motion for Leave to Withdrawal as Counsel, Taitz suggested that her client is lying to the Court.
She states that she not only has a (rather obvious) conflict with her former client but may present evidence that is embarrassing to her:
The undersigned attorney comes before this Court to respectfully ask for leave to withdraw as counsel for the Plaintiff Captain Connie Rhodes. The immediate need for this withdrawal is the filing of two documents of September 18, 2009, one by the Court, Document 17, and one apparently by Plaintiff Connie Rhodes, which together have the effect of creating a serious conflict of interest between Plaintiff and her counsel. 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, and take a position contrary to her client’s most recently stated position in this litigation. 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. A copy of this Motion was served five days ago on the undersigned’s former client, Captain Connie Rhodes, prior to filing this with the Court and the undersigned acknowledges her client’s ability to object to this motion, despite her previously stated disaffection for the attorney-client
relationship existing between them. This Motion to Withdraw as Counsel will in no way delay the proceedings, in that the Plaintiff has separately indicated that she no longer wishes to continue to contest any issue in this case. In essence, this case is now a quasi-criminal prosecution of the undersigned attorney, for the purpose of punishment, and the Court should recognize and acknowledge the essential ethical importance of releasing this counsel from her obligations of confidentiality and loyalty under these extraordinary circumstances.Respectfully submitted,
By:_________________________
Orly Taitz, DDS, Esq.
California Bar ID No. 223433
FOR THE PLAINTIFF
Captain Connie Rhodes, M.D. F.S.
SATURDAY, September 26, 2009
“Quasi-criminal prosecution”? The judge had ordered Taitz to “show cause” why a sanction should not be imposed in the case. He had previously told Taitz that he would consider sanctions if she filed similar claims in the future. After the denial of the Motion to Stay deployment, Land said that the latest filing was “deja vu all over again” including “her political diatribe.” He noted:
Instead of seriously addressing the substance of the Court’s order, counsel repeats her political diatribe against the President, complains that she did not have time to address dismissal of the action (although she sought expedited consideration), accuses the undersigned of treason, and maintains that “the United States District Courts in the 11th Circuit are subject to political pressure, external control, and . . . subservience to the same illegitimate chain of command which Plaintiff has previously protested.”
Then the kicker:
The Court finds Plaintiff’s Motion for Stay of Deployment (Doc. 15) to be frivolous. Therefore, it is denied. The Court notifies Plaintiff’s counsel, Orly Taitz, that it is contemplating a monetary penalty of $10,000.00 to be imposed upon her, as a sanction for her misconduct. Ms. Taitz shall file her response within fourteen days of today’s order showing why this sanction should not be imposed.
I am frankly not convinced that sanctions would be appropriate for filing for a motion to stay deployment per se. At the time of his order, Land did not presumably know that the filing was made against the wishes of the client. If Rhodes was interested in appealing Land’s decision, which is her right, a stay is a standard request. However, the fact that the filing may have been made after Taitz was terminated as counsel and after she was told that Rhodes was abandoning the case is more cause for possible sanctions. Moreover, the low quality and over-heated rhetoric of the filing can support such sanctions. Her filings appear more visceral than legal. In demanding reconsideration of the Court’s earlier order, she used language that does cross the line:
This Court has threatened the undersigned counsel with sanctions for advocating that a legally conscious, procedurally sophisticated, and constitutionally aware army officers corps is the best protection against the encroachment of anti-democratic, authoritarian, neo-Fascistic or Palaeo-Communistic dictatorship in this country, without pointing to any specific language, facts, or allegations of fact in the Complaint or TRO as frivolous. Rule 11 demands more of the Court than use of its provisions as a means of suppressing the First Amendment Right to Petition regarding questions of truly historical, in fact epic and epochal, importance in the history of this nation.
She also (as noted by Land in his later order) essentially accused Land of treason, as she has in public statements:
Plaintiff submits that to advocate a breach of constitutional oaths to uphold the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, is in fact a very practical form of “adhering” to those enemies, foreign and domestic, and thus is tantamount to treason, as Defined in Article III, Section 3, even when pronounced in Court. The People of the United States deserve better service and loyalty from the most powerful, and only life-tenured, officers of their government.
Taitz is also facing a California Bar complaint, here. Ohio lawyer (and inactive California bar member) Subodh Chandra wrote the bar, stating “I respectfully request that you investigate Ms. Taitz’s conduct and impose an appropriate sanction. She is an embarrassment to the profession.” For that complaint, click here.
A complaint by a former client would likely attract more attention by the Bar. These are now serious allegations including misrepresentation, false statements to the Court, and other claims that will have to be addressed by a Bar investigation. This could take years to resolve — perhaps just in time for Obama’s second inauguration.
The court ruled that Taitz violated Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in filing frivolous papers. Declaring the filings as made in “bad faith,” the court concluded that Taitz’s legal conduct was “willful and not merely negligent.” Sanctions were warranted, he held, because “Counsel’s frivolous and sanctionable conduct wasted the Defendants’ time and valuable judicial resources that could have been devoted to legitimate cases pending with the Court.”
“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,” Land writes. “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. . .
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.
I expect that Taitz will appeal the decision, given her past statements. The opinion goes into considerable detail on her conduct and interaction with the court, as shown below.
For the decision, click here.
For the story, click here
H1N1, what H1N1? freakin payoff to Big Pharma. How many here went and got a flu shot? If you answer I, your a sheep.
Pants, so what part of the statement “The so-called certificate produced by Smith is a proven forgery” is a lie? Even WorldNutDaily would not verify it. What is your proof that it is genuine?
Give it a rest, Pants. Fukino spoke for the State of Hawaii. She is the State official with custody of the records. She saw the original and said it verified Obama’s birth in Hawaii.
The definitions that I posted are the conventional, common definitions used by all US citizens, for over a century. If he was born in the US and was subject to its jurisdiction, then he is a natural born citizen. There are only two kinds of citizens, natural born (that is, citizen by virtue of their birth) and naturalized (citizens by naturalization). What is so hard about that?
It you are serious, try your approach in court. Prepare yourself for the type of sanctions imposed on Orly in the caption to this thread.
Are you really going to put Lucas Smith on the stand and have him produce that Kenyan birth certificate and have him testify that it is genuine? Does the phrase “subornation of perjury” ring a bell with you?
Even the birther lawyers are treating Smith like an H1N1 carrier.
Slart as I said it’s all good, it is what it is, and we all shall move along, after all, thats what sheep do.
Where will they lead us to next. It’s been good drama up to this point and in the end it still comes down to will you or won’t you. To be or not to be, I believe that was the original question to begin with. And I think that was the beginning of the division in this country. Now here were are 14,15 months later and look at us, look at the world. All you can do is keep trying to take another step in the right direction. No pun intended 🙂
Vince Treacy “The so-called certificate produced by Smith is a proven forgery.”
That’s a lie!
“The State of Hawaii issued the COLB. What definition did they use?”
The State of Hawaii did not make a statement declaring Barack Obama to be a natural born American citizen. That statement was made by Dr. Fukino. Dr. Fukino is not an attorney and you don’t know what definition or source she used.
Janice Okubo, Spokesperson for the Hawaii Department of Health looked at the online image of Obama’s COLB and said “I don’t know that it’s possible for us to even say beyond a doubt what the image on the site represents.”
Bdaman,
But I wouldn’t pop out and say it’s okay – not because I care about someone seeing my grades or have something to hide, but because I don’t think that there’s any reason that you need to see my grades. Nor do I think that I need to (or have the right to) see the grades of any presidential candidate.
do you think that they will tell you?
No, not if Bdaman walked up to the counter and said, Hi I’m here to see Slarti’s records. Them people would say boy, you out your ever lovin mind not get your black ass on outta here and don’t come back.
But see, see you, you peek from behind me and say. It’s Ok, he can see them. You being the highly respected mathematician they so no problem.
Slart it’s all good, it is what it is a we all shall move along, after all thats what sheep do. Where will they lead us to next.
“His political science classmate, Michael Ackerman, CC ’84, recalled him as “almost chameleon-like, spy-like, slipped in and out. He tried to keep to himself.”
“He is like a chameleon, like a spy”
“He was very smart at Columbia and not a novice who got an A but was like a chameleon and like a spy.”
This is why you are simply not credible. One classmate, notice not a friend, from more than two decades ago describes him as “spy-like” and that is presented by you as evidence he was “like a spy,” with all of the obvious contextually negative connotations that brings. I think any of us could find we have an acquaintance from the past who says negative things about us. to birthers like you that is added to your all too gullible “chain of evidence” because you want to prove your wacky beliefs in the face of truth.
There has not been a shred of credible evidence posted here to refute the fact that Manning is a liar.
Bdaman,
So are your school record or mine (ask Duke or Michigan State what my grades were – do you think that they will tell you?). My point is that EVERYONE’S records are ‘sealed’ i.e. Barack Obama did not do anything to ‘hide’ his school records, it is just standard policy.
The State of Hawaii issued the COLB. What definition did they use? The same definition that all competent attorneys use. For example:
# 551 Vince Treacy 1, February 24, 2010 at 11:12 pm
To everyone, from Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition: “Natural born citizen. Persons who are born within the jurisdiction of a national government, i.e. in its territorial limits, or those born of citizens temporarily residing abroad.”
The other troll, hooch, asked for three sources of the definition of natural born citizen. Scroll up to # 571 Vince Treacy, February 26, 2010 at 8:54 am, for all the definitions compiled by the posters at Dr. Conspiracy’s site.
Seriously, all these pentagonian birherisms are at least a year out of date. All have been asked and answered.
Slart
A spokesman for the university, Brian Connolly, confirmed that Mr. Obama did not receive honors, Mr. Connolly said, though specific information on his grades is sealed.
# 679 Pentagon Charlie, March 5, 2010 at 10:14 am, asked, “You want to know where Obama was born? Here’s a picture.”
Lucas Smith? Please, everyone, just copy “Lucas Smith convicted forger” or “Lucas Smith convicted perjurer” and paste it into your google or other search engine.
Take a look at the results that pop up.
Here is the first that I found, from the very reliable Dr. Conspiracy:
“In a declaration posted on the Internet, and supposedly filed with the district court in California in the case of Barnett v. Obama, convicted felon and birth certificate forger Lucas Smith claims that birther lawyer Orly Taitz asked him to commit perjury regarding conversations about co-counsel Gary Kreep and about one of the fake birth certificates that Orly Taitz filed in the case [that was rejected by the court due to technical problems with the filing], and described in graphic language, Taitz’s sexual exploits with the legal team in the case.”
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2009/10/second-batshirt-award-winner-lucas-smith/
Old timers may remember the radio refrain, LS/MFT: Lucas Smith/Means Forged Testimony
I wish the Pentagon had been this skeptical about the WMDs in the Middle East. Back then, they believed EVERYTHING they heard. Maybe Smith was another source, along with Chalabi and “Cueball,” for all the rumors, speculation and innuendo that they accepted so gullibly.
So this poster is seriously relying on a convicted forger as the source of a valid birth certificate?
Ha!
The so-called certificate produced by Smith is a proven forgery.
Bdaman,
This is just a pet peeve with me, but President Obama has not had his records SEALED, he has just not RELEASED them. Universities will not release records (beyond degrees and honors earned) to the public. Complaining that the president didn’t release his school records during the campaign is legitimate (if petty in my opinion), but saying that he had his records sealed is a disingenuous tactic intended to portray something normal as evasive. How many presidential candidates have released their college grades? Under what circumstances did John McCain release his medical records? (Note: I know the answer to this one and it is extremely important for those of us that think President Palin would have been a travesty for our country.)
I got ya, I’ll try that. It just caught my attention cause I saw the other day I was comment number 666 and it scared the shit out of me.
Copied the entire entry to Word, and the number showed up, I do now know how. I edited and pasted the result here.
Here’s the problem I have with it. Quotes taken from links provided by Vince @ 1, March 5, 2010 at 7:24 am
Not sure of the exact comment number. Still waiting on Vince to tell how he came up with that.
A spokesman for the university, Brian Connolly, confirmed that Mr. Obama spent two years at Columbia College and graduated in 1983 with a major in political science. He did not receive honors, Mr. Connolly said, though specific information on his grades is sealed. A program from the 1983 graduation ceremony lists him as a graduate.
His grades are sealed.
People assume he’s a novice,” says Michael L. Baron, who taught Obama in a Columbia seminar on international politics and American policy. “He’s been thinking about these issues for a long time.” In fact, in a paper for Baron’s class, Obama considered how a President might negotiate nuclear-arms reductions with the Russians. (He got an A.)
He got an A. This guy is smart
Michael Wolf, economist and former president of MTV – Friend and classmate at Columbia of President Barack Obama: “He was very smart.
See told ya he was smart, remember he got an A.
Obama lived off-campus after transferring from Occidental College in Los Angeles. His political science classmate, Michael Ackerman, CC ’84, recalled him as “almost chameleon-like, spy-like, slipped in and out. He tried to keep to himself.”
He is like a chameleon, like a spy
Occidental Magazine, Fall 2004: He was a good student at Occidental (where President Richard Gilman nominated him for a Truman Scholarship during his sophomore year).
So now we know he was a good student at Occi. He was very smart at Columbia and not a novice who got an A but was like a chameleon and like a spy.
old friends and former teachers at the well-regarded 120-year-old school proudly described him as a serious scholar…
In Boesche’s European politics class, Sulzer said he was impressed at how few notes Obama took. “Where I had five pages, Barry had probably a paragraph of the pithiest, tightest prose you’d ever see…
Here we see that he was a serious scholar that took very few notes. He’s smart, not a novice, who got an A, who’s a chameleon, like a spy.
So with all the accolades and how the ones interviewed tell of how smart he is he still keeps all of his records sealed.
If that was me I would be proud to show the world my grades, after all everybody already knows how smart I am.
I see that a new group of anonymous (of course) posters has entered the fray. Kudos to Vince for having the patience to even address their nonsense.
We are 682 comments into this thread and there have been thousands on JT’s site alone. Every lame idea that “birthers” imagine has been debunked primarily by Vince and despite what he writes they keep coming in new persona’s like “Pentagon Charlie.” The truth is that there is no proof that they will accept because they can’t believe that their guy is President. My guess is that when George Bush stole the 1980 election they had not one word of protest because their guy won and he was a white guy.
“Birthers” are not about protecting, or upholding the Constitution they have reduce politics in their small, rigid minds to the level of rooting for ones football team. To give them credence is like giving credence to someone arguing that the Sun revolves around the Earth. On one side is demonstrable reality and on the other there is blind ignorance. To be a “birther” at this point is to describe yourself as either a propagandist, liar or moron. There is of course one other large category of “birther” that must be added and that is the large percentage of “birthers” who are bigots, hate that a Black man is now President and will find any means to make him illegitimate in his Constitutional role.
Each new “birther” antagonist that takes up the cudgel against Vince gets defeated but won’t “cry uncle.” That is because their
hatred, stupidity or partisanship (or all of the above)cannot allow it. They ask questions, but reject answers. Their mind is made up and locked shut an indication of their disconnect from reality and hatred of the government of this country.
“You want to know where Obama was born? Here’s a picture.”
*****************
I really want to know where you were born and why you’re using the Pentagon in your name. Here’s my best guess as to your place of origin:
http://www.hoax-slayer.com/images/mars.jpg
“If the birthers have not believed an official birth certificate issued by the public official with custody, or her statement that she has seen the originals and that they verify he was born in Hawaii and is a natural born citizen, then nothing will ever convince them.” `Vince Treacy
Who issued Obama’s COLB? Please tell us Vince. You must know more than you’re telling us. Does Vince know that Hawaii will not confirm that a COLB for Barack Obama was issued in June of 2007? That would be a public act, and the record of that transaction including the fee would be subject to the UIPA. Yet nobody will FOLLOW THE LAW when it comes to Obama’s records.
Do you think Dr. Fukino has the ability to arrive at legal conclusion about the natural born citizen status of Barack Obama? What legal source did she use to arrive at her legal determination? She’s your expert counselor. Don’t make her look like a fool who exceeded her capabilities. If she attempted to make a legal declaration with insufficient knowledge of the subject matter you can tell us.