9/11 Terrorists to Have Criminal Case; Holder to Graham: “It Depends”
Wednesday, November 18, 2009 update:
Via RightSoup.com, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) took Attorney General Eric Holder to task over KSM and the “criminal theory” versus the “enemy combatant” theory.
As you watch the video, ask yourself this question: If Mr. Holder and the Administration’s policy is to survey the evidence before deciding whether or not an enemy combatant will be tried in a military tribunal or civilian Court, what does that do to our assets on the ground? How do you take into custody someone who may or may not need to be read their Miranda rights? And what if they are told that they have the right to be silent? So much for information-gathering, eh?
See also the ChicagoBoyz article on “How Obama is Bringing Martial Law to America.”
Tuesday, November 17, 2009 update:
Could this be KSM’s opening statement (h/t LegalInsurrection)?
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed’s Opening Statement?
As attorney William Jacobson points out:
Here is an excerpt:
With regards to these nine accusations that you are putting us on trial for; to us, they are not accusations. To us they are badges of honor, which we carry with pride….
We ask you; who initiated the attacks on civilians? Who is attacking civilian objects? And who is causing grave bodily harm against civilians? Is it us, or is it you?
…. was it not you that attacked an entire population in Iraq, destroying civilian targets and its infrastructure? Was it not you that has killed one million Iraqi children caused by your oppressed economic sanctions, which you imposed after the first Gulf War?
In fact, it was you who had wiped out two entire cities off the face of the earth and killed roughly half a million people in a few minutes and caused grave bodily harm by nuclear radiation? Did you forget about your nuclear bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
You are the last nation that has the right to speak about civilians and killing civilians. You are professional criminals, with all the meaning the words carry. Therefore, we kill treat you the same. We will attack you, just like you have attacked us, and whomever initiated the attacks is the guilty party.
Legally worthless. Eerily similar to political rhetoric we hear in this country. Possibly music to the ears of a secretly sympathic juror.
But to KSM, the chance to give such a lecture in the shadows of the former Twin Towers, a short distance from where thousands of infidels died, in a room face to face with the loved ones who still mourn …. to him, it will be priceless.
Monday, November 16, 2009 update:
New York Governor David Paterson is being reported by WCBS TV 2 that holding a civilian trial in DC for terrorists is “a decision I would not have made:”
NEW YORK (CBS) — Gov. David Paterson openly criticized the White House on Monday, saying he thought it was a terrible idea to move alleged 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and four other suspected terrorists to New York for trial.
“This is not a decision that I would have made. I think terrorism isn’t just attack, it’s anxiety and I think you feel the anxiety and frustration of New Yorkers who took the bullet for the rest of the country,” he said.
Paterson’s comments break with Democrats, who generally support the President’s decision.
“Our country was attacked on its own soil on September 11, 2001 and New York was very much the epicenter of that attack. Over 2,700 lives were lost,” he said. “It’s very painful. We’re still having trouble getting over it. We still have been unable to rebuild that site and having those terrorists so close to the attack is gonna be an encumbrance on all New Yorkers.”
And while the SECDEF is doing his best to stop the leaking, RedState posts that “The Last Time We Tried A Terrorist In New York, Classified Documents Went To Al Qaeda:”
As James Galyean noted, and this is well worth repeating:
Documents from that discovery production [ in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing case ], which were never supposed to be provided to anyone outside the defense team, were later found in an al-Qaeda hideout.
Further, let’s be honest — we know that no President of the United States would chance a man like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed going free. Barack Obama would not risk a civilian trial without being sure of a conviction. This then amounts to a show trial, but one where the prosecutors will have to comply with discovery requirements that will potentially put classified material into the hands of Al Qaeda.
It has happened before.
And for any who are still stuck on the rush to judgment, AllAmericanBlogger posts a fine comparison between Major Hasan’s actions and those of Abdul Walid Hamid.
Sunday, November 15, 2009 update:
Semantics or stupidity? You can only choose one and there’s no in-between as Mr. Obama said the following back in 2006 RE: KSM (h/t HotAirPundit):
Obama: “I think there are alot of dangerous people, particularly dangerous are people like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, ironically those are the guy who are gonna get real military procedures…The irony of the underlying bill as it’s written is someone like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is gonna get basically a full military trial” [emphases from site]
And apparently a group of individuals have come together to form a group making an attempt to block the trial from happening in NYC (yesterday via FreeRepublic):
As you know by now, President Obama and Eric Holder are planning on bringing the 9/11 masterminds toNYC for trial. There is a massive grassroots movement to block this -- retired members of the FDNY, theBravest.com, have partnered with 9/11 Families for a Safe & Strong and America and Keep America Safe to bring attention to this travesty. They are recruiting the families & friends of the FDNY to combat this ill-conceived policy of the current administration. They are asking that all of America join in with them by signing their petition at the following link:
http://www.thebravest.com/fdny.htm
Over the past 48 hours, 60,000 people have signed the petition. l heard the founder of thebravest.com on a NYC talk show tonight -- he was in the WTC when it was hit, he is passionate about this, he is ready to go to the wall over this -- he needs us to stand with him.
—-
The Obama Administration is preparing to bring 5 of the terrorists behind the 9/11 attack to New York city to undergo a civilian, criminal trial, where the chief murder is Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (IWatchObama has a run-down on the terrorists involved).
That is correct. Not a military tribunal, though HotAir.com reports that other Gitmo prisoners — such as USS Cole attacker Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri — will face a military tribunal. They also note that while some may be justifying the Cole attack as purely military, the 9/11 attackers also hit the Pentagon, so why not bring all of these individuals under the jurisdiction of a tribunal?
What’s more, since a civilian Court would be given jurisdiction, that means that KSM shall have all of the Constitutional rights at trial that any other American citizen has. The really scary part? KSM has already admitted that he’s guilty. So exactly what would he be defending against except the “evil” American government?
And it gets even weirder still. By trying KSM as a criminal in civilian Court, so many things could potentially occur — individuals associated with the Court could get threatened, New York city becomes a “live” target (once again), and, God forbid, the case could actually get thrown out on a technicality — something that readers of this site are all too familiar with concerning the Judiciary! That certainly wouldn’t make some 9/11 victims’ families too happy.
As WashingtonExaminer.com poses in their “The question of the Day:”
Ask yourself this question: Suppose that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed’s trial results in an acquittal or a hung jury. Would the Obama administration really let him go? If so, they are crazy. If not, why are they holding the trial?
Naturally, GOP leaders in Washington are all-out furious over the Administration’s decision. And the Woman Who Would Be President ™ has quite forthrightly weighed in on this story as well, especially the following:
Criminal defense attorneys will now enter into delaying tactics and other methods in the hope of securing some kind of win for their “clients.” The trial will afford Mohammed the opportunity to grandstand and make use of his time in front of the world media to rally his disgusting terrorist cohorts. It will also be an insult to the victims of 9/11, as Mohammed will no doubt use the opportunity to spew his hateful rhetoric in the same neighborhood in which he ruthlessly cut down the lives of so many Americans.
It is crucially important that Americans be made aware that the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks may walk away from this trial without receiving just punishment because of a “hung jury” or from any variety of court room technicalities. If we are stuck with this terrible Obama Administration decision, I, like most Americans, hope that Mohammed and his co-conspirators are convicted. Hang ‘em high.
A site that tracks Gov. Palin’s Facebook postings and her goings-on posted the following stark verbiage regarding Attorney General Eric Holder and the rest of the Administration:
This doesn’t just lay at the feet of Barack Obama though. Every single member of the United States Senate who voted in favor of confirming this man as Attorney General is guilty as well. Holder’s radical bent was well known, and well discussed before he was confirmed. It would have been very easy for the Republicans to have blocked Holder’s confirmation from ever coming to a vote. Instead, many actually voted to confirm this traitor.
I promise you, the democrats have blocked more than a few Republican nominees over the years, with no good reason, except petty politics. Allowing Eric Holder to be confirmed was a serious lack of judgment, and yet another reason there needs to be a mass turn over in Congress. We need to throw a bunch of these lifetime “you scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours” politicians out of this office, and replace them with commons sense leaders.
It’s bad enough to have a Congress full of inept, corrupt, hangers on, but this latest act of stupidity has the potential to bring great harm to our nation. The act of confirming Eric Holder proves these Republican Senators in incapable of using good judgment.
To see a full list of who voted to confirm Holder, those who needs to start looking for a new job, look here. …
This is simply outrageous. Either Obama knew this guy, and his terrorist ways, or he has the most incompetent vetting staff in the world. Either way, our nation’s security has been compromised at the very highest level.
But still not as outrageous as bringing the 9/11 terrorists to American soil and civilian court.
Will this finally be the straw that breaks the camels back? Will this finally be the act of treachery that will cause the American people to demand that Barack Obama resign and take the rest of his insane administration with him?
So, why is this occurring? That is, why is it that the federal government is wanting a trial in civilian court? As Michelle Malkin recently tweeted, it may literally be as simple as political payback (via NRO):
This summer, I theorized that Attorney General Eric Holder — and his boss — had a hidden agenda in ordering a re-investigation of the CIA for six-year-old alleged interrogation excesses that had already been scrutinized by non-partisan DOJ prosecutors who had found no basis for prosecution. The continuing investigations of Bush-era counterterrorism policies (i.e., the policies that kept us safe from more domestic terror attacks), coupled with the Holder Justice Department’s obsession to disclose classified national-defense information from that period, enable Holder to give the hard Left the “reckoning” that he and Obama promised during the 2008 campaign. It would be too politically explosive for Obama/Holder to do the dirty work of charging Bush administration officials; but as new revelations from investigations and declassifications are churned out, Leftist lawyers use them to urge European and international tribunals to bring “torture” and “war crimes” indictments. Thus, administration cooperation gives Obama’s base the reckoning it demands but Obama gets to deny responsibility for any actual prosecutions.
Today’s announcement that KSM and other top al-Qaeda terrorists will be transferred to Manhattan federal court for civilian trials neatly fits this hidden agenda. Nothing results in more disclosures of government intelligence than civilian trials. They are a banquet of information, not just at the discovery stage but in the trial process itself, where witnesses — intelligence sources — must expose themselves and their secrets. …
So: We are now going to have a trial that never had to happen for defendants who have no defense. And when defendants have no defense for their own actions, there is only one thing for their lawyers to do: put the government on trial in hopes of getting the jury (and the media) spun up over government errors, abuses and incompetence. That is what is going to happen in the trial of KSM et al. It will be a soapbox for al-Qaeda’s case against America. Since that will be their “defense,” the defendants will demand every bit of information they can get about interrogations, renditions, secret prisons, undercover operations targeting Muslims and mosques, etc., and — depending on what judge catches the case — they are likely to be given a lot of it. The administration will be able to claim that the judge, not the administration, is responsible for the exposure of our defense secrets. And the circus will be played out for all to see — in the middle of the war. It will provide endless fodder for the transnational Left to press its case that actions taken in America’s defense are violations of international law that must be addressed by foreign courts. And the intelligence bounty will make our enemies more efficient at killing us.
On top of all of this, as Atlanta’s AM750WSB’s Washington correspondent Jamie Dupree points out on his blog, the 2010 Defense Authorization Act (HR2647) appears to spell out rather specific conditions regarding transferring Gitmo detainees to American soil:
SEC. 1041. LIMITATION ON USE OF FUNDS FOR THE TRANSFER OR RELEASE OF INDIVIDUALS DETAINED AT UNITED STATES NAVAL STATION, GUANTANAMO BAY, CUBA.
(a) Release Prohibition- During the period beginning on October 1, 2009, and ending on December 31, 2010, the Secretary of Defense may not use any of the amounts authorized to be appropriated in this Act or otherwise available to the Department of Defense to release into the United States, its territories, or possessions, any individual described in subsection (e).
(b) Transfer Limitation- During the period beginning on October 1, 2009, and ending on December 31, 2010, the Secretary of Defense may not use any of the amounts authorized to be appropriated in this Act or otherwise available to the Department of Defense to transfer any individual described in subsection (e) to the United States, its territories, or possessions, until 45 days after the President has submitted to the congressional defense committees the plan described in subsection (c).
(c) Comprehensive Plan Required- The President shall submit to the congressional defense committees a plan for the disposition of each individual described in subsection (e) who is proposed to be transferred to the United States, its territories, or possessions. Such plan for each individual shall include, at a minimum--
(1) an assessment of the risk that the individual described in subsection (e) poses to the national security of the United States, its territories, or possessions;
(2) a proposal for the disposition of each such individual;
(3) the measures to be taken to mitigate any risks described in paragraph (1);
(4) the location or locations at which the individual will be held under the proposal for disposition required by paragraph (2);
(5) the costs associated with executing the plan, including technical and financial assistance required to be provided to State and local law enforcement agencies, if necessary, to carry out the plan;
(6) a summary of the consultation required in subsection (d); and
(7) a certification by the Attorney General that under the plan the individual poses little or no security risk to the United States, its territories, or possessions.
(d) Consultation Required- The President shall consult with the chief executive of the State, the District of Columbia, or the territory or possession of the United States to which the disposition in subsection (c)(2) includes transfer to that State, District of Columbia, or territory or possession.
(e) Detainees Described- An individual described in this subsection is any individual who is located at United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, as of October 1, 2009, who--
(1) is not a citizen of the United States; and
(2) is--
(A) in the custody or under the effective control of the Department of Defense; or
(B) otherwise under detention at the United States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
[emphasis mine]
Some may say that, within context, this has to do with actually shutting down Gitmo (a totally unrelated issue) versus merely transferring detainees from Gitmo to some holding facility in the US with the understanding that they may be brought back to Gitmo. Yet, per another tweet:
From what Senate staffers are telling us, if the White House has a new GTMO plan, then they can transfer detainees
I think that former New York city Mayor Rudy Giuliani provides the best commentary in the following two videos:
-Phil
Subscriptions -=- Twitter: @trsol -=- Facebook (TRSoL) -=- Facebook (Rightside Phil)
Photo courtesy MaggiesNotebook
kj,
The only effective means to impose what you’re suggesting is for me to revert back to my “no comments get through until after I’ve moderated every comment.” While that’s certainly not terrible, I’ve had lots of positive feedback that the currently open means of discussion tends to suit individuals better.
Regarding how heated the discussions can be at times, I think that’s the risk of having an open debate. And while I have seen certain individuals calling each other “liar,” I think that’s about as strong as it’s gotten, to date. Yet, charges of “racism,” “bigotry,” and what not will, unfortunately, always be lobbed by the opposition to questioning this President’s background on topics such as eligibility.
As long as things keep to a dull roar and the threads keep moving forward, I’m OK with that. I also invite anyone who chooses to to become involved in the discussion. Just because someone says “You’re wrong” doesn’t mean that you don’t have a right to your opinion.
After all, most individuals here are merely armchair-quarterbacking legalities and what not anyway.
-Phil
Pat Smith says:
November 22, 2009 at 11:18 pm
*Why would Michelle Obama who worked at a prestigious law firm in voluntarily give up her law license?*
She didn’t “give up her law license”, she’s Inactive. All she has to do to become active again is give notice she intends to change her status, pay her dues to the bar and get malpractice insurance. Attorneys who go into professions other than the legal profession go inactive all the time. There is no reason to pay your bar dues, which also requires you to carry Malpractice Insurance, if you are not engaged in actively practicing the law. Michelle Obama will not practice law as the First Lady. One of the foremost reasons for becoming inactive is to avoid the impropriety of being in a situation where someone thinks you’re giving them legal advice or representation. 2/3 of the US Congress are trained attorneys and members of the bar, yet it is common practice while serving in elected office to become inactive. How strange that you would take “voluntarily inactive” and stretch it all the way to “giving up her license, have to take the bar all over again.” I swear you people must live in caves or something.
Phil,
The flame on this site is pretty high and I was wondering if there was a simple way to close the valve a little bit and still allow people to have their say.
Several commenters on both sides are posting comments several times a day that are devoid of any new information. These multiple posts make it hard to find any new and interesting information that is posted.
Surely each commenter can chose a topic or two to comment on and accept a posting limit of one or two comments a day? Not a total ban, but kinda like the sharing and self restraint you were taught in preschool.
If a maximum number of daily posts is instituted, some people might try to hog the comments by switching from frequent posts to every long posts, and the post length might have to be limited too.
Just a thought. Don’t want to see anyone shut out, especially the people who might have a good idea or two.
KJ
Pat Smith says:
November 22, 2009 at 11:18 pm
Why would Moochelle Obama who worked at a prestigious law firm in
Chicago, who had graduated from one of the most prestigious law schools in
the country, and who had endured the grueling task of sitting for the bar
exam TWICE, then voluntarily give up her law license?
SisBoomBa…Change We Can Believe In…Yes, We Can
___________________________________________________________________
Wow Pat…A direct recycle of a internet rumor except you took out the words “Black Woman”…
This was the actual quote of the question you used….And it was from October of 2008
“Why would a black woman who worked at a prestigious law firm in
Chicago, who had graduated from one of the most prestigious law schools in the country, and who had endured the grueling task of sitting for the bar exam TWICE, then voluntarily give up her law license?”
From Wikpedia….
“In 1996, Obama served as the Associate Dean of Student Services at the University of Chicago, where she developed the University’s Community Service Center.[28] In 2002, she began working for the University of Chicago Hospitals, first as executive director for community affairs and, beginning May, 2005, as Vice President for Community and External Affairs.[29] She still holds the position, though she is working part time in order to devote more time to being a mother.[30]”
Maybe she gave up her law license (when inactive) because she had become a mother and her job did not require her to have her law license active…So why pay for the dues, fees, and malpractice insurance if you don’t need to…I know a couple of attorneys that have done the same thing… Unless you have some evidence of other reasons why she had it go inactive, this is just you birthers recycling the same debunked theories because you have nothing else. Just pathetic.
Birthers…The same crap for idiots to believe it…
Why would Moochelle Obama who worked at a prestigious law firm in
Chicago, who had graduated from one of the most prestigious law schools in
the country, and who had endured the grueling task of sitting for the bar
exam TWICE, then voluntarily give up her law license?
SisBoomBa…Change We Can Believe In…Yes, We Can
A vert interesting article for all those on the right that vilify the President and the Administration regarding spending…The legacy that the US was left with by the Bush administration…
“Last week, Mike Allen and Jim Vandehei at Politico reported that the White House planned on making deficit reduction a centerpiece of the next State of the Union address. Allen and Vandehei called the decision “practical” saying that “Obama has spent more money on new programs in nine months than Bill Clinton did in eight years, pushing the annual deficit to $1.4 trillion. This leaves little room for big spending initiatives.” This fact is taken completely out of the context of the recession. The title of the article refers to the White House’s “spending binge.” The deficits, tax cuts, and spending of the previous administration are ignored entirely.
It’s not exactly news that most members of MSM are almost purposely amnesiac. There is no greater insult to a reporter than to call his story “history.” And yet once upon a time, it was only yesterday that was old news. Nowadays, with the new neverending cable/talk-radio/blogosphere-driven news cycle, we are all supposed to have forgotten the past fifteen minutes. (There is actually a headline on the Drudge Report as I write this that the Associated Press went to the trouble of looking at the record and seeing whether any of the outrageous claims made in Sarah Palin’s memoir are true. The idea appears to be if it says so in a book, it’s wrong of a journalist to actually check the record. The (surprise, surprise) Fox News story contains no link to the AP story, further making the point that the record is really irrelevant to the story.)
The Bush tax cuts: When the Bush tax cuts sunset at the end of 2010, the previous administration will have left the government holding the bag for well over $2 trillion in lost revenue. The extraordinary debt and deficits accrued during Bush’s tenure have been compounded by the implosion of the financial system. In addition, the estimated eventual costs of the costly, unnecessary, and counterproductive Iraq war are now in the trillions to say nothing of the costs of more than six years of failure in Afghanistan. What have they done for America?
As David Cay Johnston, a former New York Times reporter, recently noted, based on data compiled by the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, by the time the Bush tax cuts expire next year, people in the top one percentile of annual household incomes will have received 23.5 percent of all the savings in the cuts. The combined savings of the bottom three income brackets was less than that.
The Bush war: The opaque appropriations process for funding the Iraq war has generally allowed the Bush administration to shield itself from a great deal of scrutiny by the public on the total cost of the war. Congress approved “bridge funding” and emergency spending requests and so the full costs of the war were kept out of the budget. None of the dollar amounts for the funding requests have been included in the Pentagon’s annual operating budget.
So what does the Iraq war really cost? As early as 2006, Joseph Stiglitz and Linda Blimes estimated that the cost of the war could exceed $2 trillion, including health care for veterans and other expenses. The Congressional Budget Office, in 2008, called it a $1
trillion war, but a trillion strikes us as an overly modest estimation today.
Afganistan: The legacy of Bush’s runaway military spending and his tax cuts is doing more than just destroying the fiscal health of our government—it is also endangering our security. Look at Afghanistan. According to a recent report in The New York Times, “Some administration estimates suggest it could also cost up to $50 billion over five years to more than double the size of the Afghan army and police force, to a total of 400,000. That includes recruiting, training and equipment.”
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/11/ta111909.html
“It’s a challenge to respond to this nonsense quickly; Matthews said a lot of dumb things in a short period of time. But it’s worth noting that Obama isn’t “leading with his chin”; he’s tackling the issues in front of him. That’s what presidents do. Obama bowed to the Japanese emperor as a matter of protocol, and no one cares except the media establishment. Obama isn’t “dithering” — though it’s good to know Chris Matthews is willing to read directly from Dick Cheney’s script — he’s crafting a forward-thinking U.S. policy, which is what Bush/Cheney should have done a long time ago.
And Khalid Sheikh Mohammed isn’t being invited to NYC for story-telling — he’ll be on trial for mass murder.”
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2009_11/021103.php
FOR The OBAMATONS:
You need some relaxation, here is the latest anti-Obama billboard in Wheat Ridge, Colorado – oh, I know, I know, those bitter guys in
Brooks suits…
“PRESIDENT OR JIHAD?”
But as Obama’s latest move of bringing his Muslim fellows to a favorable New York trial shows, the billboard is a bit wrong – dba Obama is just KINDA, TEMPORARELY a president, but SURELY A JIHADIST -
Have fun:
http://www.kdvr.com/news/kdvr-obama-billboard-112009,0,2612065.story
go to the website of the Illinois Bar Association.
http://www.isba.org/index.html
At their Lawyer Finder page, you can look for attorneys by area of practice. They tell you:
http://www.illinoislawyerfinder.com/search.html
“If you want to look up the name of an Illinois Lawyer, please visit the ARDC’s website”
And lo and behold, look where you’re right back to!
https://www.iardc.org/index.html
Michelle Obama: Voluntarily Inactive.
Now run along tminu. You’ve been pwned.
1. There is no mention of Rule 770 anywhere on the screenshot of Michelle Obama’s license status, nor on the site itself as of 30 seconds ago.
2. Once again, Rule 770 has changed over time. Rule 756(7) refers to people on voluntarily inactive status pursuant to Former Rule 770.
3. If Michelle Obama was disciplined there would be a note of that.
4. The “Report” you refer to refers to whether Michelle Obama reported carrying any malpractice insurance. She did not, because she is on voluntary inactive status.
5. At the time Michelle Obama voluntarily relinquished her license, a court order was required to go to that status.
Evidence that the 770 you’re citing is not the same at the time Michelle Obama gave up her license:
http://www.iardc.org/orginfo_annualreport.html
tminu says:
November 22, 2009 at 9:19 pm
You are a LIAR. Michelle Obama is Voluntarily Inactive. She has not been disbarred, she has not been disciplined and to continue to insist so without citation is disgusting on your part.
RSOL readers: Go Here: https://www.iardc.org/lawyersearch.asp
Put in Obama, Michelle and you can see to that Michelle Obama’s status is Voluntarily Inactive.
Siseliar stop lying about Michelle’s RECORD
She was not 756′ed she was DISCIPLINED PERSUANT TO RULE 770
Rule 770. Types of Discipline
Conduct of attorneys which violates the Code of Professional Responsibility Rules of Professional Conduct contained in article VIII of these rules or which tends to defeat the administration of justice or to bring the courts or the legal profession into disrepute shall be grounds for discipline by the court. Discipline of attorneys may be:
(a) disbarment;
(b) disbarment on consent;
(c) suspension for a specified period and until further order of court;
(d) suspension for a specified period of time;
(e) suspension until further order of the court;
(f) suspension for a specified period of time or until further order of the court with probation;
(g) censure; or
(h) reprimand by the court, the Review Board or a hearing panel.
(i) No Effect on Disciplinary Proceedings. The provisions of this rule pertaining to registration status shall not bar, limit or stay any disciplinary investigations or proceedings against an attorney.
——
What Is the ARDC? (this is NOT the Illinois Bar-where one can voluntarily be inactive) As our name implies, the ARDC is the agency of the Supreme Court of Illinois which registers attorneys and investigates complaints of misconduct filed against attorneys holding a license to practice law inIllinois.
Our principal purpose is to assist the Supreme Court to determine a lawyer’s fitness to practice law in Illinois. If a complaint is made that an attorney, licensed to practice law in Illinois, has engaged in illegal, unethical or dishonest conduct, we will investigate and, if warranted, bring formal disciplinary charges. TheSupreme Court of Illinois will then ultimately decide if a lawyer should be censured (publicly rebuked), suspended (having the law license to practice either taken away for a certain period of time or placed on a probationary period) or disbarred (having the law license taken away indefinitely).
We cannot impose fines, imprison, obtain monetary damages, enforce remedies between the lawyer and client, or seek civil or criminal relief against a lawyer as part of the disciplinary process. We can affect only the lawyer’s ability to practice law inIllinois.
We are not funded by taxpayers’ money. We are funded entirely by the annual registration fees paid by attorneys authorized to practice law inIllinois.
What Is a Request for an Investigation of an Attorney?
It is a request to us that we look into the conduct of an attorney who you believe has acted improperly. We will review your request to determine if an investigation is warranted. In most cases, we will initiate an investigation where the information you provide us suggests that the attorney engaged in illegal, dishonest or unethical conduct. Filing a request accusingan attorney of unethical conduct is a serious matter to the lawyer. We recommend that, whenever practical, you try to resolve any differences or disputes that do not concern claims of unethical conduct directly with the lawyer.
How Do I Request an Investigation of an Attorney?
By mailing to our office, either in Chicago or Springfield, a request that you want an attorney to be investigated by our office. Your request should be in writing. No special form is necessary. For your convenience, you may download a Request for Investigation form. Please return the Request by postal mail or hand-delivery. The ARDC does not accept an e-mail transmission of a Request for Investigation.
tminu says:
November 22, 2009 at 8:48 pm
Stop trying to smear the First Lady. This foolishness was debunked over a year ago. That notation is about whether she has Malpractice INSURANCE. She is voluntarily inactive so she is not required to carry malpractice insurance you ninny. This is a real problem, tminu, that you don’t have the ability to absorb new information and learn. You are assuming a court order means something bad. A court order doesn’t have to mean something bad. A court order can be simply a proclamation or acknowledgement. Michelle Obama is clearly listed as VOLUNTARILY Inactive. Compare to Phillip Radmer – Not authorized to practice law due to discipline. That’s a disbarrment. Now stop trying to make it into something it’s not. Voluntary means Voluntary.
qwerty: Nope, 770 is disciplinary.
READ CAREFULLY WHAT THE COURT WROTE IN MICHELLE’S FILE
““NO MALPRACTICE REPORT REQUIRED AS ATTORNEY IS ON COURT ORDERED INACTIVE STATUS””
She would otherwise have a MALPRACTICE REPORT if she had not gone on COURT-ORDERED INACTIVE STATUS.
COURT ORDERED IS NOT MICHELLE ORDERED
COURT ORDERED IS NOT VOLUNTARY
Jeez she got into lawschool on affirmative action then lost her law license after only 4 freeking years due to malpractice!!
WTF don’t you brainstemobots understand? It’s right there in front of you!!!
Your research was faulty, as you overlooked Rule 756(7). The current Rule 770 is not the same as the one in effect when Michelle Obama relinquished her license.
There is absolutely no evidence to support the accusation you make, but then again, that’s nothing new for a birther.
tminu says:
November 22, 2009 at 8:28 pm
Nope. You’re wrong. Michelle Obama voluntarily resigned. Barack Obama voluntarily retired. You will find the same thing is true of most attorneys who leave the practice of the law to enter business fields, temporarily or permanently, and in particular the legislature. The attorneys in the House and Senate do not practice law while in office. You see, if you had more real-life knowledge instead of “researching” for whatever piece or parse supports your argument if you twist it in a pretzel, these things wouldn’t seem nefarious to you. In short, as usual, you’ve taken nothing and contorted it by misrepresentation into what you think is something. People with experience in the world know otherwise.
and Siseliarpervert, you are definitely projecting your own perversions as per Michelle’s inappropriate garb.
you call THIS your Jacquelyn?
http://www.gircweb.org/Michelle%27s%20teeth.jpg
NBC, easy as 1,2,3!
You get one point for
Mom=US Citizen, any race/religion/ethnicity = 1 point
Dad=US Citizen any race/religion/ethnicity = 1 point
Born in-country any race/religion/ethnicity = 1 point
“Natural Born Citizen” requires 3 points, only permutation not defined by 14th amendment
“Citizen” requires only 1 or 2 points any permutation, defined by 14th amendment, or can be naturalized.
Natural Born Citizen = 3 points
Born Citizen = 1 or 2 or 3 points (3 point version overlaps w/NBC)
Naturalized = 0 points
tminu says:
November 22, 2009 at 8:22 pm
*NBC, easy as 1,2,3!*
How many times are you going to copy and paste it here today? Just another attempt by southern right-wing whites who feel left-behind to feel better about the world passing them by.
Let me translate:
3 points = white
2 points = white immigrants
1 point = blacks
0 points = the browns, yellows, in-betweens
See, Barack Obama can’t be President because no matter where he was born he only gets 1 point. 1,2,3, easy as do re mi, as simple as a retarded sweet potato. Yay us!
siseliar: I did original research on the disciplinary code, idiot.
It says the truth right there on her Illinois file;
“NO MALPRACTICE REPORT REQUIRED AS ATTORNEY IS ON COURT ORDERED INACTIVE STATUS”
Which means for you brainstemmers, that she averted a MALPRACTICE REPORT by going INACTIVE as ORDERED BY THE COURT.
RULE 770 IS DISCIPLINARY
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/.shared/image.html?/photos/uncategorized/2008/12/25/michelleobamaardcrecord.jpg
NBC, easy as 1,2,3!
You get one point for
Mom=US Citizen = 1 point
Dad=US Citizen = 1 point
Born in-country = 1 point
“Natural Born Citizen” requires 3 points, only permutation not defined by 14th amendment
“Citizen” requires only 1 or 2 points any permutation, defined by 14th amendment, or can be naturalized.
Natural Born Citizen = 3 points
Born Citizen = 1 or 2 or 3 points (3 point version overlaps w/NBC)
Naturalized = 0 points
A new video is out on YouTube about the words – Natural Born Citizen – Three Little Words. Definitely worth watching. Here is the link:
http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=B278681E23614868
RJ
qwertyman says:
November 22, 2009 at 7:47 pm
*Wow, looks like it’s rerun week here at TRSoL. *
The birthers are going “green”! Recycling all their old debunked foolishness and trying to sell at as something new and shiney.
Sharon 2 says:
November 22, 2009 at 7:38 pm
*Lame Cherry concerning Michelle Obama, which is where some of t’s comments came from.*
So tminu isn’t a nasty little perv, he’s a simple-minded parrot, copying and pasting what he read somewhere else? Figures. He wasn’t faking that excitement about “camel toe” though.
Absolutely nothing new. Just a repeat of everything Taitz and Apuzzo and all the rest of the birthers have been saying from the beginning.
Oh, and he doesn’t allow comments from those he disagrees with. It’s easy to seem authoritative when you refuse to listen to opposing viewpoints.
Wow, looks like it’s rerun week here at TRSoL. The old Michelle disbarment theory, bringing out a story from a year and a half ago about an actually interesting thesis written by Michelle, and a youtube saying the exact same thing as other birthers have been saying for over a year, with absolutely nothing new to add to the argument that we should follow a legal interpretation of citizenship law that was rooted in sexism, racism and xenophobia (see Leo’s “holy grail” Collins article). A legal interpretation of citizenship law that was key to the reasoning of the Dred Scott case.
Looks like birthers are running out of crap to throw at the wall and are just trying the old ones out again, hoping for a better outcome the second time around perhaps.
Geeze Sis, you are acting like a little old lady “Well I never.” People are offensive and rude on the internet all the time. Palin is treated far worse.
You would never survive a reading from Lame Cherry concerning Michelle Obama, which is where some of t’s comments came from.
Phil, I am not citing Lame Cherry for any other purpose here. I want to stick to your rule about links, even though I did not give one.
Some levity, let’s amplify the comfort zone: bellow is the link for Michelle Obama’s Priceton thesis – hilarious? or maybe an early intallement for Wright’s “God damn America!” and today’s anti-American conspiracy for bringing the terros trial in New York City -
Michelle Obama’s Priceton thesis:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8642.html
Here’s a repeat of the short, educational video that’s driving the Obots NUTS!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OsX5DzZHkIU
qwertyman says:
November 22, 2009 at 6:23 pm
*good job citing the wrong rule. Michelle Obama is voluntarily inactive under a rule different from the one you cited. Former Rule 770 is not the same as the current Rule 770.*
Thanks qwerty. Looks like tminu should stick to his “camel toe” fetish!
Rule 770 has gone through a number of changes over the years. What Rule 770 is now is not what it was when Michelle Obama voluntarily relinquished her license. Here’s Rule 556(7):
So yeah, good job citing the wrong rule. Michelle Obama is voluntarily inactive under a rule different from the one you cited. Former Rule 770 is not the same as the current Rule 770.
Further, this stuff about alleged insurance fraud is something made up by right wingers without a single shred of evidence to support it.
WTF even SNL is starting to get a CLUE about the colossal FRAUD FAILURE that is Obama??
http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/clips/china-cold-open/1178451/
This is funny!
RE tminu RE Siseliar:
[...] COURT ORDERED INACTIVE NOT MICHELLE ORDERED INACTIVE. HA HA HA. NICE TRY. AND YOU DIDN’T EVEN ATTEMPT TO EXPLAIN HER EMBEZZLEMENT AND PATIENT DUMPING. [...]
Two additions here:
1) Michelle’s job after she quit was scrubbed – no more! Why? They said that she did an extraordinary job, she was inspiring, etc! (Indeed so, and here a character referrence: Blajo confirmed Michelle’s merits when dealing with Rahm about the Illinois senatorial appointment: “… and I also want for Patricia a job like Michelle used to have at the hospital.”)
2) When Michelle got her rise of more than 100 K (after hubby got elected) she was the ONLY one in the staff that got a big rise – all other people got just a few grand or a better parking spot -
3) “Barack’s gonna put you to work!” Heh-heh-heh!
Siserda, you’re such a loser -
The birth issue is written of kindly first time by big UK paper: the Guardian.People can get very UPSET reading through the paper “drinking their morning tea” ! It looks like Scotland Yard is investigating him by the looks of the article.
YUP ! Let’s see where this goes.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/nov/22/barack-obama-british-conspiracist
It’s also roaring INSIDE THE US
http://www.kdvr.com/news/kdvr-obama-billboard-112009,0,2612065.story
Anti-Obama billboard stirs controversy
WHEAT RIDGE, Colo. – Call it Freedom of Speech. A billboard recently erected in Wheat Ridge compares President Barack Obama to a terrorist and questions his U.S. citizenship.
The billboard, located at 4855 Miller Road, shows two cartoonish images of Obama wearing a Muslim turban and reads “PRESIDENT or JIHAD?”
It also says “BIRTH CERTIFICATE – PROVE IT!” alluding to the conspiracy theory which claims Barack Obama was born in Kenya rather than Hawaii, which would disqualify him for the office of President.
The words “WAKE UP AMERICA! REMEMBER FT. HOOD!” appear on the bottom of the billboard.
The sign belongs to a car dealership.
Geir: It links the Ft Hood killing and the birth issue, which is an explosive mix and brings the birth issue mainstream very fast. Smart move. The guy’s world famous now. People approve of it.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/113980/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Job-Approval.aspx
OBAMA’S APPROVAL RATING TANKING WILDLY
GALLUP SHOWS 48%
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/obama_approval_index_history
Rasmussen has him “only” at NEGATIVE TEN APPROVAL INDEX
Sisesickoliar, nice try LOL. You’re not EVEN at third grade playground level.
Michelle Obama’s DISCIPLINARY CODE WAS FOR COURT-ORDERED
HA HA HA
DISCIPLINARY CODE 770
http://www.state.il.us/court/SupremeCourt/Rules/Art_VII/
Rule number 770..it is all about types of Discipine…and reasons for a lawyer to be disbarred
See, Rule 756 is about voluntary inactive status, which simply costs $105/year, no biggie. That’s what you’d do if you were a lawyer wanting to go inactive, voluntarily without any extraneous forces.
But Rule 770 is all about DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS. An attorney may be on “voluntary inactive status persuant to Rule 770″ but that is not the same as Rule 756, which is invoked purely on personal whim. Michelle’s ARDC report states: “No malpractice report required, as attorney is on court ordered inactive status.”
Court ordered means court ordered, not Michelle ordered.
If Michelle had ordered it, that would be via Rule 756. Michelle Obama is on “Court Ordered Inactive Status” pursuant to Rule 770, i.e. disciplinary rules, to avoid reporting of malpractice. Compelled to go voluntarily inactive would be the kindest description of this outcome.
If she’d have wanted to go VOLUNTARY INACTIVE she’d have used Rule 756:
http://www.state.il.us/court/SupremeCourt/Rules/Art_VII/artVII.htm#Rule770
“(5) An attorney may advise the Administrator in writing that he or she desires to assume inactive status and, thereafter, register as an inactive status attorney. The annual registration fee for an inactive status attorney shall be $105. Upon such registration, the attorney shall be placed upon inactive status and shall no longer be eligible to practice law or hold himself or herself out as being authorized to practice law in this State, except as is provided in paragraph (j) of this rule. An attorney who is on the master roll as an inactive status attorney may advise the Administrator in writing that he or she desires to resume the practice of law, and thereafter register as active upon payment of the registration fee required under this rule and submission of verification from the Director of MCLE that he or she has complied with MCLE requirements as set forth in Rule 790 et seq. If the attorney returns from inactive status after having paid the inactive status fee for the year, the attorney shall pay the difference between the inactive status registration fee and the registration fee required under paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(4) of this rule. Inactive status under this rule does not include inactive disability status as described in Rules 757 and 758. Any lawyer on inactive disability status is not required to pay an annual fee.”
Sisesickoliar, nice try LOL. You’re not EVEN at third grade playground level.
Michelle Obama’s DISCIPLINARY CODE WAS FOR COURT-ORDERED
HA HA HA
DISCIPLINARY CODE 770
http://www.gallup.com/poll/113980/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Job-Approval.aspx
OBAMA’S APPROVAL RATING TANKING WILDLY
GALLUP SHOWS 48%
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/obama_approval_index_history
Rasmussen has him “only” at NEGATIVE TEN APPROVAL INDEX
http://www.state.il.us/court/SupremeCourt/Rules/Art_VII/
Rule number 770..it is all about types of Discipine…and reasons for a lawyer to be disbarred
See, Rule 756 is about voluntary inactive status, which simply costs $105/year, no biggie. That’s what you’d do if you were a lawyer wanting to go inactive, voluntarily without any extraneous forces.
But Rule 770 is all about DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS. An attorney may be on “voluntary inactive status persuant to Rule 770″ but that is not the same as Rule 756, which is invoked purely on personal whim. Michelle’s ARDC report states: “No malpractice report required, as attorney is on court ordered inactive status.”
Court ordered means court ordered, not Michelle ordered.
If Michelle had ordered it, that would be via Rule 756. Michelle Obama is on “Court Ordered Inactive Status” pursuant to Rule 770, i.e. disciplinary rules, to avoid reporting of malpractice. Compelled to go voluntarily inactive would be the kindest description of this outcome.
If she’d have wanted to go VOLUNTARY INACTIVE she’d have used Rule 756:
http://www.state.il.us/court/SupremeCourt/Rules/Art_VII/artVII.htm#Rule770
“(5) An attorney may advise the Administrator in writing that he or she desires to assume inactive status and, thereafter, register as an inactive status attorney. The annual registration fee for an inactive status attorney shall be $105. Upon such registration, the attorney shall be placed upon inactive status and shall no longer be eligible to practice law or hold himself or herself out as being authorized to practice law in this State, except as is provided in paragraph (j) of this rule. An attorney who is on the master roll as an inactive status attorney may advise the Administrator in writing that he or she desires to resume the practice of law, and thereafter register as active upon payment of the registration fee required under this rule and submission of verification from the Director of MCLE that he or she has complied with MCLE requirements as set forth in Rule 790 et seq. If the attorney returns from inactive status after having paid the inactive status fee for the year, the attorney shall pay the difference between the inactive status registration fee and the registration fee required under paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(4) of this rule. Inactive status under this rule does not include inactive disability status as described in Rules 757 and 758. Any lawyer on inactive disability status is not required to pay an annual fee.”
tminu says:
November 22, 2009 at 5:00 pm
Voluntary is Voluntary. There’s no mention of discipline.
Still searching for pictures of the First Lady to turn you on?
Does your wife know what you’re writing about our First Lady? What would your daughters say about their daddy searching for pictures that show the First Lady’s “camel toe”? You’re a nasty, dirty old man, aren’t you tminu?
tminu says:
November 22, 2009 at 4:59 pm
*Blood camo cocktail dress with big dangling earrings*
She excites you. That’s why you write about her. You fantasize about her.
Siseliar, can’t stop yourself from your perversions can you?
Truth is truth.
Siseliar you’re so pathetic. The DISCIPLINARY CODE WAS FOR COURT-ORDERED INACTIVE. You know the score toots, she was looking at being dragged through proceedings, or she could bail. She bailed. She was guilty of insurance fraud, got busted, and that’s just the way it is.
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/.shared/image.html?/photos/uncategorized/2008/12/25/michelleobamaardcrecord.jpg
Blood camo cocktail dress with big dangling earrings to really show her disrespect at a military funeral.
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_3xyJDLYT0Bg/SsjzuCVQz_I/AAAAAAAADec/vtDu5OecFNg/s1600-h/muchelle_obama_blood_camo.jpg
tminu says:
November 22, 2009 at 4:39 pm
Voluntarily inactive means Voluntary. Parse it however you like. YOU LIE>
Does your wife know you write things like “camel toe” and “f me shoes” on the internet? You typed with one hand and pleasured yourself with the other when you wrote those things, didn’t you?
Michelle Malkin calls her the “FIRST CRONY”
so corrupt she oozes criminal puss from the core
case in point WALPIN, spoiled race baiter, hypocritical racist, exploitative, hates military, whitee
she wears blood-red camo sleeveless cocktail dress w/fme heels to memorial services
aqua blue bondage belt dress with nazi brownshirt boots to veteran’s day services, laughing
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_3xyJDLYT0Bg/SwCwXTXhAtI/AAAAAAAADxs/zimH5RlMY9U/s320/michelle_obama_disgraceful.jpg
of course lots of muslim green
camel toe pants and http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_3xyJDLYT0Bg/SkwpkIs-_II/AAAAAAAACp0/5qdEr9jX6Vc/s400/muchelle_too_much.jpg ugh she’s an EMBARRASSMENT
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_3xyJDLYT0Bg/SvW3FZy7iCI/AAAAAAAADtc/q9AHSrqSiaQ/s320/hideous_michelle_obama.jpg
“SHHHHHHHHHHH, OBAMA’S TRIP TO ASIA WAS A TOTAL FING FAIL”
Obama’s Asia Failure
“Bruce Nussbaum writes: Sitting here in Singapore as Obama went through China and flew home from his 8-day trip to Asia, it is perhaps easier to see the true truth of his trip — it’s deep failure. The entire neo-liberal economic model promoted by the US over the past decades is now held in such disregard in Asia that Obama, representing the US system, must suffer from the model’s decline. Soft power, such as culture and economic models, is always a major component of projecting a nation’s power around the world. Right now Wall Street, Alan Greenspan and the Chicago-school of market mania has so undercut America’s standing in Asia by the horrible recession they caused, that even Obama’s popularity couldn’t overcome it’s negative impact.
Obama came home empty-handed. He made little headway in his single most important mission — China’s revaluation of its currency, the yuan. A higher value for the yuan makes sense for the global economy, for the US economy and for the Chinese economy. But Obama couldn’t persuade Beijing of that because you can’t muscle your banker and China is America’s banker. And everyone in Asia knows this. You can feel the shift in the way people talk and in the way nation’s are beginning to accommodate China. Expect more visits from China’s growing blue-water fleet. Expect more Asian students studying in Chinese universities. Asian children are already beginning to learn Mandarin in a big way.
I visited an old British Air Force base in Singapore today while I was out birding. It was a strange, nostalgic scene. Unless the US gets its act together and reverses it’s global decline, it may, one day soon, also be remember with nostalgia.”
http://www.businessweek.com/innovate/NussbaumOnDesign/archives/2009/11/president_obama_7.html
Siseliar: COURT ORDERED INACTIVE NOT MICHELLE ORDERED INACTIVE
HA HA HA
NICE TRY
AND YOU DIDN’T EVEN ATTEMPT TO EXPLAIN HER EMBEZZLEMENT AND PATIENT DUMPING
keep trying to defend your disbarred insurance fraud patient dumping embezzling whitee-hating wife of the resident
it’s pathetic
9/11 Terrorists Will Use Trial For Propaganda
Breitbart is reporting that the five Islamofascists facing trial in the Sept. 11 attacks will plead not guilty so that they can air their criticisms of U.S. foreign policy, the lawyer for one of the defendants said Sunday.
Scott Fenstermaker, the lawyer for accused terrorist Ali Abd al-Aziz Ali, said the men would not deny their role in the 2001 attacks, but “would explain what happened and why they did it.”
The U.S. Justice Department announced earlier this month that Ali and four other men accused of murdering who murdered nearly 3,000 people, including Muslims, in the nation’s deadliest terrorist attack will face a civilian federal trial just blocks from the World Trade Center site.
Ali, also known as Ammar al-Baluchi, is a nephew of professed 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.
Mohammed, Ali and the others will explain “their assessment of American foreign policy,” Fenstermaker said.
“Their assessment is negative,” he said.
Fenstermaker met with Ali last week at the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba. He has not spoken with the others but said the men have discussed the trial among themselves.
Critics of Attorney General Eric Holder Barack Obama’s decision to try the men in a New York City civilian courthouse have warned that the trial would provide the defendants with a propaganda platform.
Dean Boyd, a spokesman for the Department of Justice, said, “yada, yada, yada.”
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9C4N4M01&show_article=1
misanthropicus says:
November 22, 2009 at 4:18 pm
*the “whitey” tape*
Ah yes, the mythical tape that was going to bring down the whole Obama campaign. aJust like any other evidence you’ve insisted exists, You’re never able to produce. You are reduced to recycling your old BS. You’re like foolish old men, you talk big about what you’ve got, but you can’t produce.
RE siseduermapierda Re tminu:
[...] You are a liar. And a lazy, desperate one at that. Anyone who knows anything about birther-ology knows this one was debunked before the election. It is pathetic that you have become so desperate that you circle back and try to recycle year-old birther bullsh!t that even the birthers know is bullsh!t. You are to be pitied that your hatred runs so deep and you stoop so low. Even birthers will shun you. [...]
Siserda, save you hystericals for later, ’cause you’ll badly need them:
1) when it comes to desperation, even one who doesn’t know the issue you are pretending to answer (to tminu) will see in your rant only frustration and desperation -
2) now, coming to the issue: the “whitey” tape, exactly like the “Khalidi” tape was seen, exists -
3) what the timing of its release will be, no one knows – but Breitbart did a very good job challenging the DOJ in opening an inquiry of the ACORN under the menace of releasing more and OTHER tapes at the moment of his choice –
4) desperation – do I need to remind you that dba Obama is inexorably slipping (as of today’s Gallup, at 48%!!!!!) and this is actually the reason behiond your barking left and right?
Relax – the ACORN and “whitey” tapes will hit the fan, sooner or later, be sure of that –
Now a consolation for you – visualize the NYT headline “Obama Went To China And All He’s Came Back With Is A T-shirt!” (and the Japanese people’s comment that he’s an unmannered boor).
Have a nice Gallup polls reading -
tminu says:
November 22, 2009 at 3:48 pm
Liar Liar Liar. Another piece recycled debunked poo.tminu is so stupid he picks things that can be so easily checked and re-debunked.Desperation is a sad thing. Michelle Obama’s status is Voluntarily Inactive. Barack Obama’s status is Voluntarily Retired. Does your wife know how easily you lie?
At this site:
http://www.iardc.org/lawyersearch.asp
Type in Radmer, Phillip, then click the name.
Illinois Registration Status: Not authorized to practice law due to discipline.
That’s an example of a disbarred attorney.
Now do the same for Obama, Michelle.
Illinois Registration Status: Voluntarily Inactive and not authorized to practice law.
Sise defending Obama
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oM8l3X_7Hkg
Siseliar, you are the one who’s totally full of crap.
MICHELLE OBAMA WAS COURT ORDERED INTO INACTIVE STATUS.
COURT-ORDERED, NOT MICHELLE ORDERED
HER PART TIME HOSPITAL BOARD POSITION FOR WHICH SHE HAD NO EXPERIENCE TRIPLED IN SALARY ONCE OBAMA BECAME SENATOR TO OVER $300,000
SO MUCH FOR CARING ABOUT LOW INCOME PATIENTS
SHE HAD THEM DUMPED AT OTHER HOSPITALS
Siseliar, you are the one who’s totally full of crap.
This is Sise’s Theme Song: http://s0.ilike.com/play#Missy+Elliott:Get+Ur+Freak+On:45060:s31631275.8793810.8977571.0.1.71%2Cstd_31ec5f1d5b9106e2d8f7c1ae0680a57c
Sise, the Early Years
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BeBGd-UgdLk&feature=player_embedded