Posted on 10/29/2009 10:19:10 AM PDT by Elderberry
Judge Carter Ruling on MTD
Buddy, you don’t even understand that I’m giving you the benefit of the doubt on your intelligence.
Quote please?
In the transcript. The question of properly serving the defendants takes most of the session.
The fine was levied for her on inappropriate actions.
But this case has merit and to call it frivilous is, as I said, assinine.
Carter didn't call it frivolous. He didn't agree it had merit, but at least he didn't call if frivolous.
While I think Taitz is an idiot, in the extreme, and a poor excuse for an attorney - and I believe that the courts are the wrong place to seek "justice" (however you describe that) on this issue, I do believe that the fine and the label of "frivolous" was a bit premature on Land's part.
While Land was correct on the law and in his decision, he was incorrect in his temperament. There's a school of thought, and one I happen to subscribe to, that teaches judicial opinions should be delivered absent emotion. Land has almost as much emotion in his opinion as Taitz has in her pleadings - both are wrong. Now, I understand Land's pissed at getting called a "traitor", not just on a blog but in papers filed in his court, but a well-tempered jurist would rise about it. Also, the $20K sanction borders on ridiculous. Perhaps a sanction was in order, perhaps not, but $20K is excessive and is likely to be reduced on appeal.
Carter, on the other hand, has demonstrated not only an ability to delivery a calm and well-reasoned opinion, he doesn't crawl into the gutter with Taitz. He gave Taitz a tremendous amount of latitude, probably much more than would a less experienced jurist (as witnessed by Land) and all the opportunity in the world to succeed or fail. She failed.
Having said that, I think it's still likely that Carter will forward his ruling, and any supporting documentation he has in his possession, to the CalBar, which won't be a pleasant development for Taitz.
You reply: “You posts reek of it, don’t have to look far.”
In response to: “Disagreement without needing to be vindictive or puff your ego up through insults. Look into it. “
What you just said then was that my posts reek of disagreement without needing to be vindictive or puff your ego up through insults.
I am glad you are finally recognizing this.
Thank you. I hope you will learn to follow this example.
STOP posting to me!! I said ‘give it up’ - I’m not into your liberal whiny ways and GREAT NEED for constant dribble about NOTHING!
I was replying to your post to me.
That’s fair game.
Buddy? ... Bwahahahaha
Cállate!
I just wrote something my neighbors used to say to their dog when it was acting up.
Oh, I forgot. I needed to add something....
Siéntate y Cállate!
It is what came to mind after reading your garbage.
I’m not surprised.
Shouting “Shut up!” seems to be about your level of argument.
But that’s OK.
I only save it for “special” people.
Really?
From the looks of it you apply it to most anyone who doesn’t agree with you.
Its more than lack of experience, its total lack of understanding of our Constitution and system both inside and outside the courtroom; for instance, promoting her case to a Supreme Court Justice at a book signing.
If Obama were using fascist tactics to further his marxist agenda, Orly wouldn't be doing what she's doing.
Cállate!
No. The Judge says there would be lots of hearings to establish whether proper service had happened, and encouraged Orly to redo service to avoid future un-necessary hearings. Nowhere does Carter say that the original service was incorrect.
By the way, I van always spot one who when asked for a quote refers to the whole document.
You’re just another Obama shill.
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.