Douglas Bailey (trystero) wrote,
Douglas Bailey

Taitz one to know one.

Orly Taitz strikes back! Or I think she does, at least. It's kind of hard to tell, what with her being a terrible writer and all.

Her appeal filing in Rhodes v. McDonald ends with this stirring point:
In this appeal, the undersigned counsel will address the critical questions omitted by the court, to show that the Court appears never even to have considered, much less addressed or ruled upon, the original Plaintiff's key question of whether an officer's obedience to her constitutional oath is NOT nothing more than a political claim which does not give rise to a case or controversy to be heard in federal court.
I'm really not certain there isn't anything I can NOT fail to omit doing in order to not improve upon this.  :-)
Tags: bizarretude, humour, politics
  • Post a new comment


    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

  • 1 comment