Posted on 11/17/2009 12:06:33 PM PST by mnehring
Would she get a hearing with presenting evidence, sworn witnesses and cross-exam? Or just a star chamber?
California has a special court for hearing disbarment cases. If she is disbarred, she will get a full trial before the State Bar Court, with witnesses, sworn testimony and cross-examination, but no jury.
I *think* (I don’t read her blog) that she did address it when it first went public, but she did so in a way that made it seem as if her accusers were just attacking her in public and hadn’t filed any documents. As usual, that was BS. They had filed complaints.
I’m sure she’ll be given an opportunity to present a defense before any action is taken against her.
I think the mere fact that she will be permitted to have witnesses, sworn testimony and cross pretty much means a slam dunk that she’ll be disbarred (should it reach that stage) as those are the very things she has demanded at every level of litigation in these cases but unable to use.
It will turn mere allegations about her actions from states-unknown into a three-ring circus in the Bar’s own-chambers. I’d offer good odds she subpoenas Obama himself to her disbarment hearing.
I’d buy a ticket to see that.
She wouldn't be able to do that. Obama has no relevance to a disbarment hearing.
Agreed completely.
But I would wager she would disagree (it’s not like she has understood the legal process thus far).
What I mean to say is that she will attempt to subpoena Obama and/or his records, and when she is (inevitably) denied, call the CBA traitorous for not permitting her to depose Obama over the matter of her own disbarment.
Then again, with Lincoln no longer writing her pleadings (or providing other “services”), who knows what Orly alone will think of.
Thanks for your humorous post. I needed a smile today.
The Peyton Place scenario might be something of a red herring, since the issue is whether Lincoln forged her name on a court document or not. He may have, or their working relationship might have been such that he automatically generated pleadings, signed her name and filed them, since she's too busy flitting about the country giving interviews and batting her false eyelashes to give two hoots about the actual legal work (which is way beyond her capabilities anyhow).
There's really only one thing for sure in this drama: they're trying to destroy each other, and I personally hope they both succeed.
And there is lies the problem. Throughout all of this, if Orly Taitz has shown one thing it's that she's completely ignorant of the law and the rules governing the judicial process.
I would love to see what evidence and what witnesses she could call supporting her charge of treason by Judge Land.
Obama’s a terrorist. Land aided and abetted a terrorist conspiracy. That’s treason.
Thanks for clearing that up for us. </sarcasm>
Where is Justice these days? Look at Holder and Obama, they know it not. The great body of American Jurists today are abject cowards of callous men and women who have left the system of Justice to rot.
Obama and Holder and their deadly malevolence is an opportunistic infection.
Then how lucky we are that we've got you.
The rules are where it’s at, for sure. I notice that at the Supreme Court level there are specialists who just practice there and almost no where else. The rules can be deadly.
Our Founders wrote that only a moral and religious people could handle freedom. We are proving that as a nation now.
And you.
Are Obama's birth records being handled any differently than tens of thousands of Hawaiians?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.