Bill O’Reilly tried to separate “fact from myth,” and put “internet propaganda” to rest. Most of the dialog was about Obama and his legitimacy for natural-born status, but at the end he states Michelle Obama’s law license is inactive – which is true, but is not nearly the whole story. Her license is inactive, and it was voluntary, but her choices were not choices you or I might want to face. We know this because we have a screen shot of the disciplinary record under which she went inactive. There is a “Rule” under discipline, and there is a “Rule” that is voluntary and not binding to discipline. If she wants to reactivate her law license, she must appear for a hearing having to do with the Disciplinary action. That is not true for a simple Inactive status. Then there is this: the year Barack was elected to the U.S. Senate from Illinois, someone started deleting, adding, changing, and retitling official “Rules.” The truth may have been disguised a bit, but if you examine the convoluted history of the “Rules,” you can clearly see she is inactive under discipline. See the “Rules” below. Also see a video below.
Michelle Obama
Quoting Bill O’Reilly:
Item: Michelle Obama lost her law license.
False. She currently has an inactive law license.
Michelle went inactive – all the way through the process – under a disciplinary rule. Here are the details (mostly from my earlier post):
The record keeper in Illinois for attorney registration, fees and oversight is the Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission (ARDC) of the Supreme Court of Illinois.
Pamela Geller at Atlas Shrugs found the ARDC form online about December 2008, with Michelle’s maiden name, Robinson, dated 1993. The form clearly says it is a “disciplinary record.”
The record keeper in Illinois for attorney registration, fees and oversight is the Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission (ARDC) of the Supreme Court of Illinois.
There is speculation that the only way Michelle could choose to go inactive was to use a “disciplinary” form. Think about that for a minute. Do you really think a group of attorneys would put their name on a “disciplinary” form, with Rules hanging out there, explaining what that status means, when they have not been disciplined? Do you really think a proper form would not be available?
ARDC is governed by a set of rules. Michelle Obama eventually became inactive through Rule 771, April 1, 2004, approximately 11 years after the First Lady went inactive in 1993, and the same year Barack Obama was elected to the U.S. Senate. Rule 771 was changed. Some serious “reorganizing” of the rules happened. She was inactive first under the Code of Professional Responsibility, later retitled Finality of Orders and Effective Date of Discipline, then renumbered and titled Rules of Professional Conduct. Why would anyone voluntarily go inactive under any of those specifications?
Rule 771 became Rule 770 which did not exist before April 1, 2004.
Rule 771 was originally titled Code of Professional Responsibility
Rule 771 was retitled Finality of Orders and Effective Date of Discipline
Rule 770 was born and was titled Rules of Professional Conduct
Rule 770 covered disbarment, suspension, censure, reprimand
It appears that the Finality of Orders and Effective Date of Discipline was separated from Types of Discipline.
Rule 756 became effective February 1, 1973. This rule is titled Registration and Fees. Rule 756 is the vehicle for becoming voluntarily inactive, for whatever reason you want to do so, unless you have reason to be considered under Rule 753 – review and hearings.
Note that if you were “voluntarily inactive” pursuant to former Rule 770 see Rule 756(7), you must make a “petition for restoration” under Rule 759, and your petition must be reviewed by the Administrator – I assume because Rule 770 covers only disbarment, suspension, censure, reprimand. The Administrator decides to consent to the application or refer it to the Hearing Board. If you go inactive under 771 770, you cannot become active again without hierarchal consideration. That is not the case for normal restoration procedure.
Rule 759 pertains to those attorneys inactive due to “disability” or “hearing and review” (Rule 753). Rule 759 says that if an attorney is restored to active status under Rule 759, which is not the normal route to restoration, any “disciplinary proceedings pending against the attorney may be resumed.
Rule 753 “hearing and review” appears to be the first step before disciplinary action.
Lynn Stuter, another writer, did some great work on Michelle’s legal standing. The ARDC sent records at her request. They sent Rule 770, which did not exist in 1993. The page said that 770 was “Reserved” – and – it had no text attached to it.
Both 771 and 770 dealt with professional responsibility and professional conduct. Neither dealt with voluntarily going inactive, simply because an attorney chooses to do so. That would be under Rule 756.
I’m not an attorney. I cannot make a conclusive statement about this, but I can consider what I and others have found, and make an educated guess. My guess is that Michelle Robinson Obama gave up her license rather than go through some type of investigative review which might become public. And if this is not the case, then what? Why not Rule 756?
See the ARDC disciplinary form for Michelle at Pamela Geller’s Atlas Shrugs. One of Pam’s readers contributed the link to the ARDC rules. Read the transcript of the entire O’Reilly video at Fox Nation.
Bill O’Reilly on Michelle Obama’s Law License (video)
My observation is O’Reilly seems to have been brow-beaten by his critics into seeking the appearance of “balance” even when the facts lead one elsewhere.
d(^_^)b
http://libertyatstake.blogspot.com/
“Because the Only Good Progressive is a Failed Progressive”
LibertyAtStake recently posted..Contemporary Politics and Newton’s Three Laws Of Motion Part 15
@LibertyAtStake – he has a long history of not doing his homework.
Maggie recently posted..Bill O’Reilly Michelle Obama’s Law License- Michelle’s Law License Inactive Voluntarily Under Discipline
I heard about this for the first time about a year and half ago. I did some research on it. What I am came up with was that the law in IL at the time didn’t distquinsh between the two. The law was changed about two years later and they now have a voluntary and involuntary status. But the year she stopped practicing it was the only option. Which of course means we will never know. It could be that was discplinary or simply that she didn’t want to continue to pay the fees involved in keeping it active. Just like everything else with them it is a gray area.
just a conservative girl recently posted..Just How Unengaged are Parents
@just a conservative girl: Rule 756 was enacted in 1973 and is the Rule under which you voluntarily take inactive status, and which can be easily reinstated.
Maggie recently posted..Bill O’Reilly Michelle Obama’s Law License- Michelle’s Law License Inactive Voluntarily Under Discipline
It seems to me that the more any rational person looks into the Obamas, the more is discovered that has been memory holed. People who have nothing to hide don’t hide stuff. Too bad our media never thought to ask the Obamas directly about any of this stuff for fear of incurring their wrath or being branded RAAAAcist! Bill O has been bought & sold by the Obama machine, he is loathe to speak an ill word of them or truly fact check their questionable and murky backgrounds.
Zilla recently posted..That Squid Aint Going Away On Its Own- You Know
You can just look it up. Attorney discipline is a matter of public record. This has likely all been sifted by the news media before, so I would be surprised if there is something there. The thing is that if you speculate baselessly, (without evidence), you look bad if it turns out to be not true. So I counsel caution. Just go look it up, then make a statement.