OrlyTaitzEsq.com

TaitzReport.com

Defend Our Freedoms Foundation (DOFF)
29839 Santa Margarita Pkwy, Ste 100
Rancho Santa Margarita CA, 92688
Copyright 2014

Review of Politics, Economics, Constitution, Law and World Affairs by Attorney and Doctor Orly Taitz


If you love your country, please help me fight this creeping tyranny and corruption.
Donations no matter how small will help pay for airline and travel expenses.





The articles posted represent only the opinion of the writers and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Dr. Taitz, Esq., who has no means of checking the veracity of all the claims and allegations in the articles.
Mail donations to:
Defend Our Freedoms Foundation, c/o Dr. Orly Taitz
29839 Santa Margarita Pkwy, Ste 100
Rancho Santa Margarita, CA 92688.
Contact Dr. Taitz at
orly.taitz@gmail.com.
In case of emergency, call 949-683-5411.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny.
When the government fears the people, there is liberty.
-- Thomas Jefferson

During times of universal deceit, telling the truth
becomes a revolutionary act.  -- George Orwell

First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they
fight you, then you win.  -- Mahatma Gandhi

Why isn’t judge Lamberth ruling?

Posted on | November 16, 2010 | 11 Comments

Jim

A question for Politijabber:

You being an attorney, although a judge has no legal obligation to do so, do you agree that he has an ethical obligation to investigate ( or refer it to the US attorneys office for investigation ) the report of a felony ( the illegal use of a SS number ) committed by a party in a case presented to him ? Especially when such judge, Royce Lamberth, was the former Chairman of the Professional Ethics Committee of the Federal Bar Association. When this same judge SUSPECTED that perjury was committed in his court in the litigation to open the health care task force, he asked Holder, who at the time was the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, to investigate Ira Magaziner for possible perjury and criminal contempt of court. He also suggested that Attorney General Janet Reno should appoint an independent counsel to investigate. So we know that this judge is not reluctant to ask for investigations when suspected crimes are committed. Also, don’t you think the US attorneys have both a legal and an ethical obligation to investigate a report of a crime committed against the United States

 I did not close the comments, somebody else did it, more evidence of tampering with my blog, in order to lower it’s rating and visibility
0 #
Category: Uncategorized

Comments

11 Responses to “Why isn’t judge Lamberth ruling?”

  1. Chum Lee
    November 16th, 2010 @ 4:49 am

    Perhaps Judge Lamberth does not find the SSN matter to be credible nor determinative in the case before him. His rulings began and ended at standing. Namely, that Dr. Taitz is not the proper party to bring the action she brought.

    The example you raise sounds quite different.

  2. dr_taitz@yahoo.com
    November 16th, 2010 @ 5:15 am

    How so? He clearly stated, that taxpayer has standing under the establishment clause. Did you even read his opinion?

  3. Michelle
    November 16th, 2010 @ 5:39 am

    Dear Dr. Orly-
    I wonder if Operation Greylord in Chicago has something in it that might help–precedence???
    https://www.ipsn.org/greylord.html
    “Most people will agree that the broken wheels of justice – as they spin in the Cook County Circuit Court system after the massive Greylord investigation and trials -”
    From the IPSN Archives, Summer 1994. A look back at Operation Greylord and Operation Gambat, the far-reaching 1980s judicial corruption scandals in the Cook County Circuit Court system. Can it happen again? Retired Circuit Court Judge James M. Bailey talked to Rich Lindberg about the likelihood of a re-occurrence in the following article.”
    This was a huge scandal in Chicago/suburbs at the time-FBI sting operation. Lots of judges went to jail-corruption-big time, for a long time.

  4. Chum Lee
    November 16th, 2010 @ 5:52 am

    Yes I did. You read Flast a bit broad. It is extremely narrow – and involves direct spending on religious matters.

    Bottom line the decision was a standing decision – it involved who had a right to bring it, and found against you.

    Not sure what Flast has to do with alleged misuse of SSNers.

  5. stormyweather
    November 16th, 2010 @ 7:30 am

    How does one go about removing a sitting judge as this one definitely needs to go!

  6. James Carnew
    November 16th, 2010 @ 8:09 am

    > do you agree that he has an ethical obligation to investigate

    No, he only has the duty to report it to the proper authorities.

    Why he should issue a “ruling” on any “report on a felony” that is sent to him is really beyond me. Where did you get that bar admission again? Any school child knows more about how the legal system works.

  7. Alec
    November 16th, 2010 @ 4:28 pm

    Obama admitted, before he ran for President, that he was born a British subject. A British subject at birth is not an Article II Natural Born Citizen. This is a simple dichotomy. Either you support the Constitution, or you undermine it.

  8. Jim
    November 16th, 2010 @ 6:49 pm

    “No, he only has the duty to report it to the proper authorities.’

    I agree. That is what I said.

    “Why he should issue a “ruling” on any “report on a felony” that is sent to him is really beyond me.”

    I never said he should issue a ruling on it. I said he has an ethical obligation under the code of judicial ethics to report it to the proper authorities for investigation. The ball is then in their court. They can decide to investigate or not.

  9. Chum Lee
    November 16th, 2010 @ 10:51 pm

    Jim:

    Please cite the section of the Code of Judicial Ethics you are relying on.

  10. Jim
    November 17th, 2010 @ 6:11 am

    Canon 1:
    A Judge Should Uphold the Integrity and Independence of the Judiciary

    CANON 2:
    A. Respect for Law. A judge should respect and comply with the law and should act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.

    By ignoring a report of a felony to the court, do you think that “promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary ” ? I think not. If he had referred it to the US attorneys for investigation or said in his ruling that the thought there was no basis for it, that would be fine. But by ignoring it, it erodes public confidence in the court.

  11. hippybiker
    November 17th, 2010 @ 6:16 am

    Judicial Ethics, like Judicial Honesty are still something that I consider OxyMorons.

Leave a Reply