You are making wild speculations about what the judges did or did not do prior to the hearing. You do not know, and just because one hearing officer asked questions of concern to the panel doesn't mean no other judge read the materials. Have you never watched such a panel or an appellate proceeding before? This is exactly how they go, and you cannot make unfounded conclusions based upon what occurred. It's ludicrous. (And you're ignoring that the initial comment about the SSN being irrelevant, which indicates that hearing officer did, in fact, know of the claims they were about to make. This was mentioned above. Perhaps you missed it?)

Can you give us the possible text of a rule that might have been violated, at least in spirit?

Yes, I have watched them before. This is how the bad ones go. Win or lose, good ones go differently.

Yup. Poor "cross-examination" by the commission. The commissioners should first have asked Taitz if she intended to appear as an attorney for the challengers. If she said yes, that would be the end of it. Instead, the female commissioner advised Taitz in advance Taitz couldn't appear as a lawyer. And Taitz then tried to turn to her ever-ready witness mode.

I second that 'You rock', very much appreciated

Well, I guess when the hearing panel award nominations come due, you won't be nominating this panel.

Most states have similar rules:

A JUDGE SHALL UPHOLD THE INTEGRITY AND INDEPENDENCE OF THE JUDICIARY.

1.

An independent and honorable judiciary is indispensable to justice in our society. A judge should participate in establishing, maintaining and enforcing high standards of conduct, and shall personally observe those standards so that the integrity and independence of the judiciary will be preserved. The provisions of these Canons are to be construed and applied to further that objective.

Commentary:

Deference to the judgments and rulings of courts depends upon public confidence in the integrity and independence of judges. The integrity and independence of judges depends in turn upon their acting without fear or favor. Although judges should be independent, they must comply with the law, including the provisions of these Canons. Public confidence in the impartiality of the judiciary is maintained by the adherence of each judge to this responsibility. Conversely, violation of this Canon diminishes public confidence in the judiciary and thereby does injury to the system of government under law.


A judge shall perform judicial duties without bias or prejudice. A judge shall not, in the performance of judicial duties, by words or conduct manifest bias or prejudice, including but not limited to bias or prejudice based upon race, sex, religion, national origin, disability, age, sexual orientation or socioeconomic status, and shall not permit staff, court officials and others subject to the judge's direction and control to do so. This Section 3B(5) does not preclude proper judicial consideration when race, sex, religion, national origin, disability, age, sexual orientation or socioeconomic status, or similar factors, are issues in the proceeding.

http://www.courts.state.va.us/agencies/ ... 12398.html

I suppose it is possible to kick someone's butt out of court with decorum.

Why? Half the state is a wind farm

The other half is Amish.

Excellent, thank you.

Duly ignored. Y'all have a great weekend!

How does a commissioner's behavior (of any sort) reflect upon the integrity and independence of the judiciary? (even in spirit)

How on earth does the fact that one of the panelists speaks in detail about Orly's submissions prove in any way that "3 of the 4 did not read it in any depth". Where's your evidence for this?

What took you so long?

But for Foggy vouching that he is an anti-birther I think he would feel right at home in the middle of Taitz's pile of smear. Ignoring evidence. Constantly asserting false claims and repeatedly misrepresenting the proceedings. (How many times did he say it was a "court" or that there was "evidence"? And on and on.) Moving the goal posts. Commiserating for the poor Orly Taitz.

Give me a break.

And I removed "Curious Blue" from ignore on advise of others.

Is that not what happened? And garbage is as garbage does. These are all attorneys and they understand the concept of evidence and why Orly's 300 pages of rubbish fails.

Um, I spoke too soon , thinking it would be a simple button to click. How do I "ignore" someone?

I have made the points I wanted to make. I can not add anything else here. So, ignore away.

Yes, especially since the Commission Members are not judges. For goodness sakes my friend, you are all over the map with your 'arguments' but none appear to stick.

Go to your profile and manage friends and foes. Then click on Foes and add this poster's name to the Hall of Ignominy.

Add him to your "Foes" list.

Go to your user control panel, click on the bit that says manage foes, add the ignored user to your foes list et voila! They will only exist in quoted form.

There is a difference between 'making points' and 'scoring points', the first one is often pointless, the latter one has more relevance. Like Orly's 'evidence' your points have been mostly lacking in substance. No worries, I appreciate the effort.