Michelle Obama
In an email in response to a public inquiry the ARDC replied:
Michelle Obama holds a valid license to practice law in Illinois, has never been disciplined or the subject of a disciplinary proceeding in Illinois and is on voluntary inactive status as an Illinois lawyer. Voluntary inactive status is simply a lawyer registration category for lawyers who are not currently practicing law. Attorneys on voluntary inactive status may resume active status at any time as a matter of course.
See also:
- The Obama’s law licenses – FactCheck.org
Dr. C. ,
I didn’t realize I was to click on the words “Disbarred” and “Not Disbarred”. Thanks.
I added underlining. Perhaps that will help.
Odd… the Michelle Obama link goes to a blank search result. This is what worked for me:
Not Disbarred
_delete if need be.
The problem is that the link that worked yesterday didn’t work today, leading me to wonder if the ID numbers change from time to time.
I went round and round with someone on this one…
Michelle voluntarily gave up her license so she wouldn’t face sanctions IMHO. It was an option available through the route she chose to take…
She used the “court” avenue that was based on setting a court date to decide on punishment and/or sanctions, or to avoid such… To voluntarily give up her license rather than face punishment and/or fine. This court route could be taken for simply inactivating one’s license voluntarily w/o santions but why take it when there was a simpler clerical alternitive?
She instead could have chosen the clerical/administrative action, if she wasn’t facing sanctions, which simply involved filing a form requesting her license be placed on inactive status and having a clerk sign it, stamp it and send a copy of the completed process to Michelle stating the process was complete(Which of course didn’t involve setting a court date, entering a plea, or voluntarilty giving up her license by a court procedure when it could be handled clerically if no sanctions were involved, etc.).
That’s simply not true. Michelle’s bar status in Illinois is exactly the same as mine in California — she chose to list herself as voluntarily inactive because she was not practicing law.
“Inactive” lawyers pay a significantly reduced rate for annual bar association dues and do not have to carry malpractice insurance. They remain in good standing with the bar association and can reinstate their “active” status at any time.
The records clearly show that she is on voluntary inactive status. That is NOT something that can be done as a way of avoiding sanctions or discipline — it is simply something that is done in order to PRESERVE good standing with the state bar during periods when the individual is not employed as a lawyer.
Punishment for what? Your comment is fantasy.
Here is the rule that explains inactive status in Illinois:
Link:
Rules Governing the Legal Profession and Judiciary in Illinois
http://www.iardc.org/rulesSCT.html
If you search Barack Obama’s status, you will see that he is listed as “retired”, as of this year. Here is the rule explaining what that means:
Link:
Rules Governing the Legal Profession and Judiciary in Illinois
http://www.iardc.org/rulesSCT.html
Subdivision (j) which is mentioned in both the “inactive” and “retired” provisions above is an exception that allows the attorney to do pro bono work:
Speaking of First Lady Michelle Obama:
Michelle Obama is a racial-minority individual, and in her heart and mind she inevitably does not endorse hate crimes committed by George W. Bush.
George W. Bush committed hate crimes of epic proportions and with the stench of terrorism (indicated in my blog).
George W. Bush did in fact commit innumerable hate crimes.
And I do solemnly swear by Almighty God that George W. Bush committed other hate crimes of epic proportions and with the stench of terrorism which I am not at liberty to mention.
Many people know what Bush did.
And many people will know what Bush did—even to the end of the world.
Bush was absolute evil.
Bush is now like a fugitive from justice.
Bush is a psychological prisoner.
Bush has a lot to worry about.
Bush can technically be prosecuted for hate crimes at any time.
In any case, Bush will go down in history in infamy.
Submitted by Andrew Yu-Jen Wang
B.S., Summa Cum Laude, 1996
Messiah College, Grantham, PA
Lower Merion High School, Ardmore, PA, 1993
“GEORGE W. BUSH IS THE WORST PRESIDENT IN U.S. HISTORY” BLOG OF ANDREW YU-JEN WANG
_____________________
I am not sure where I had read it before, but anyway, it is a linguistically excellent statement, and it goes kind of like this: “If only it were possible to ban invention that bottled up memories so they never got stale and faded.” Oh wait—off the top of my head—I think the quotation came from my Lower Merion High School yearbook.
Barak Obama is NOT a Citizen ofthe United States and is hiding the factor, He has born in Kenya to an underage mother that could not transfer citizenship.
Obama is a HOAX and FRAUD and will be found out and he is a Socialist and ruining this country the stupid asshole Racial and Muslim Terrorist friend and Anti Christ.
Release you real Birth Certificate if you have the nerve but Obama won’t because he is not what he claims.
Other than a lack of evidence, what do you have to offer in support of your claims.
Sigh…
In order for Barack Obama to support his eligibility as president of the United States he must prove that he’s not a usurper by presenting his vaulted copy of his valid certified Birth Certificate. Without the bonified evidence Obama cannot support his credibility or validity to be Commander in Chief.
There is no such requirement. President Obama has supported his eligibility through his COLB which shows him born in Honolulu.
That’s all folks
He must be “bonafide?” Kinda like in “O Brother Where Art Thou?”
Bonlass said: “In order for Barack Obama to support his eligibility as president of the United States he must prove… ”
Barack Obama is already president. He doesn’t have to prove or support anything. If you wish to challenge what is, then you must prove that he is whatever you claim.
There is all kinds of evidence to prove he is not eligible to be president. No court has yet ruled on the validity of the evidence — they have only declined to hear the case on the grounds that it’s not “appropriate” for them to take the case.
For starters, let’s take the forged COLB released by the Obama campaign to “prove” he was born in Hawaii. This document has been examined by multiple forensic document experts who have all shown it to be a blatant forgery. If you study the information about this forgery, it is not difficult to see for yourself that that document is fake. Case in point the border pattern does not match ANY COLB *EVER* produced by the State of Hawaii.
For you coolaid-drinking Obama supporters, yes I know the document was supposed declared to be “real” by a Democratic activist and operative who also happens to be the Health Director. However, despite what you might have heard, she did not verify that he was born in Hawaii. And, she did not verify that the certificate on file in Hawaii matches the “COLB” published by Obama. She only said that she can confirm the existence of Obama’s birth records on file with the State of Hawaii, and that it would be against the law for Hawaii to release these documents to anyone but Obama.
It’s not a question of IF the COLB is a fake. It IS a fake. The question you should be asking yourself, is WHY was it necessary to post a fake COLB?
It was examined by one expert who stated that she could not tell if it was a fake or not without examining the original. The other ‘so-called’ expert wasn’t.
In fact, I have looked in quite a bit of detail at the so called fake and found no evidence of forgery.
The question thus become, why was it necessary to call the documents released by Obama to be fakes and forgeries?
Because no such evidence exists.
Don’t you feel used by allowing your ignorance to conclude something which is at odds with the facts?
Actually they have declined to hear the case because the plaintiffs lack in standing, and more. The problem is with the plaintiffs who have no legal case.
I’ll address the point 1 by 1.
1. The Certificate of Live Birth. What if I told you that one of the biggest sites purporting the Birth Conspiracies also did their own forensic experts to take a look at the document, and declared it to be genuine? Would that satisfy you? WorldNetDaily, shortly after the Birth Certificate came out posted this in one of their articles: “A separate WND investigation into Obama’s birth certificate utilizing forgery experts also found the document to be authentic. The investigation also revealed methods used by some of the bloggers to determine the document was fake involved forgeries, in that a few bloggers added text and images to the certificate scan that weren’t originally there.” Remember, WND is one of the big ones that states that Obama isn’t a natural-born citizen.
Here’s the article that it displayed it in: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=73214
It’s about half-way down the article, right next to the school records.
2. Which forensic experts? Do you have their names, their backgrounds, their qualifications, and their history? Would they be willing to testify in a court of law?
3. Governor Linda Lingle has stated that the birth certificate looks like the one that the state issued her. This discounts the so-called border problem.
4. I’m getting tired of this. So, let’s just link you to where this is documented with sources.
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/category/birth-certificate/
Here’s your border issue: http://hackerfactor.com/blog/index.php?/archives/235-Bad-Science-How-Not-To-Do-Image-Analysis.html
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2008/jun/27/obamas-birth-certificate-part-ii/
Need any other things?
And the answer to your final question is “It’s not a fake birth certificate. It’s a scanned image of an actual birth certificate.”
IN Sensed (in italics) said:
You’re in fantasy land. Both Onaka (the head of Vital Statistics) and Fiyume (the Director of the Health Department) are Republicans, along with the Republican governor that appointed them.
As for your so-called “forensic experts” I just challenge you to give the name of one of them (fake names don’t count). Warning: Sandra Lines never said the document was a fake.
http://hackerfactor.com/blog/index.php?/archives/210-Bad-Science-How-Not-To-Do-Image-Analysis.html
http://hackerfactor.com/blog/index.php?/archives/235-Bad-Science-How-Not-To-Do-Image-Analysis-Part-II.html
Forget the BC or COLB.Forget the FACT it describes Saetoro as “African-American” when that language had yet to enter the legal lexicon. Forget that the Kenyan gov’t erected a plaque at the Mumbasa hospital where Saetoro was born. Forget the FACT that Barry’s Kenyan grandmother IS ON VIDEO talking about how she remembers the day he was born and how she held his mother’s hand in the Kenyan hospital!
Forget that his g’ma in Hawai’i NEVER, EVER mentioned ANYTHING about him being born there. Forget how that on his COLB the border around his name is in B&W while the rest of the document is GREEN. You know, for all the trillions the NWO has, you’d think they’d AT LEAST pay for a Photoshop course! The Clone tool is cake to use.
Oh, how about how he wrote in his own book how he vacationed in Pakistan in 1983. Hmmm…interesting since India (US ally) was at war with Pakistan then and ANY US citizen caught entering the country would be guilty of TREASON. So…
Either Barry Saetoro entered as an Indonesian citizen, or he committed treason. Oh, how about how he wrote on his Indonesian school records he was a MUSLIM! Is it wrong to be Muslim? No! But it is wrong to tell America he is a Christian…
Nuff said.
Eat it, trolls!
Demon, I think you may have set a record for misinformation in a comment that short!
First, Obama’s COLB says neither “Saetoro“ nor “African-American”.
Second, there is no plaque at the Mombasa hospital.
Third, there is no video of Sarah Obama saying anything about her step-grandson´s birth.
Fourth, while there is an audio tape of Sarah Obama, it says nothing about Kenyan hospitals, or holding anyone´s hand.
Fifth, all Hawaiian birth certificates are black printed on green security paper.
Sixth, the visit to Pakistan was in 1981 (I don´t think it´s in his book), but there are contemporary State Department bulletins from that year describing how to get a visa to Pakistan.
Seventh, he is a Christian.
Eighth, He, didn´t write on his Indonesian school records anything. Someone else did.
Look around the links on this web site that document all of this. You´re incredibly full of it.
Smedley Butler, USMC warrior, Tim Vegan, Promethius11, Demon Cleaner, KRS-1, Luke, “doc conspiracy, gordon & NBC are the same person!”, “9/11 Was An Inside Job” and “Tear Down the FED” said: “Eat it, trolls!”
I think someone who posts provocative nonsense under 11 different names fairly deserves the name of “Troll”.
WOW, there isn’t a single Birther that has a thing on this Loose Canon Psychopath. When did they get Internet in the Section 8 ward? YuJen Wang needs his meds.
Yeah, he sounds too much like some of those truthers, birthers, poor guy.
He has of course one thing right, Bush was a pretty poor president and his actions deserve further scrutiny by the Courts, if we as a country want to face up to what happened in the last 8 years.
THIS is liberal ideology. THIS is why these people MUST be stopped!
How do you purpose to stop the flow of free speech and idiotic ideas Heavy? We certainly can’t stop yours.
That’s for you to figure out, “Detective”.
Heavy, meett Andrew Yu-Jen Wang
Andrew Yu-Jen Wang, meet Heavy
Enjoy yourselves.
AWESOME!! Its great to see your true colors shine through NBC. You want a Previous President investigated. Have you been sharing Kool-aid with YuJen Wang? You refuse to budge on the idea of looking at just ONE more document for proof of birth, as simple of a task as that would be, but your willing to devote money, probably hundreds of thousands, into investigating the decisions a President of the United States had to make, and for what benefit?…to hopefully find SOMETHING no matter how big or little that you can blame Bush for then do your Mr. Bean dance while singing “We Win We Win!”
YET, we can’t even look legally into the background of a President Elect(at that time) that used to chum around with a known terrorist, no matter how you try to Spin that he was(is) a terrorist(self admitted), and we elect the man President. He did shady land dealings with a criminal that is now in prison, but we don’t look into any of that for whatever excuses you again spin, and you elect him POTUS.
Gotta luv those priorities.
Crimes should be investigated, especially ones as severe as these as they impact not just our past but also our future.
I appreciate and even understand your efforts to distract but you cannot logically and reasonably reject investigations into known potential criminal acts of a previous president when you insist on investigating a sitting president, now can you?
Funny how your standards seem to slip quickly…
Why not comment with a solution….instead of asking someone else to do your work stud!
What’s a “bonified”?
Something like bonafide although I doubt that he understands that concept either?
Remember that at a minimum President Obama is a de facto officer, duly elected. If it can be shown that he is not eligible, he would not be a de jure President. However, lacking such, he is at a minimum de facto and at the moment, de jure President.
Time to get used to the facts.
This is my first visit here and I am bored. First, I believe that some of you are mad that a black man is president and just won’t admit it and that’s ok. I mean, I am a black female and I don’t like white male supremacy and I don’t have a problem saying so. Second, it is quite clear that some of you are not independent thinkers because all of your info and opinions are based on what the media has fed you. If the government thought that Obama’s papers weren’t in order believe me he would not be in office. They can access anyone’s information that they choose because the laws that they use to control you don’t apply to the elite. Hell the hackers do it all the time on the net! And third, there is no difference between either party whether republican or democrat, black or white – so who actually sits in the presidential seat doesn’t matter. Both president Bush and Obama traveled to Europe and bowed before the queen of England. They all serve the same objective. I mean really, how many presidents do you have to live through to see that its all a game and you don’t know the rules? MASS DISTRACTION is such a powerful tool as you all have so blatantly proved. The plans that “they” have for this country extends beyond US borders. It has nothing to do with a birth certificate, nationality or any of this shit. By the time you guys get your heads out of the rumor-mill we will have lost more rights and more lives to this worthless war. I would think watching Bush STEAL his first election without being stopped would give people a clue about the governments the people of the world exist under. Watch what people do, and not what they say.
Response to complaints against “Birthers”
Bob Benitez
09-27-2009
When posting from some ISPs the address appears the same leading some to mistakenly think the posters are the same people.
That said, let’s look at complaints directed at “Birthers.” Most are from liberal Democrats, often leftists with little understanding of or disdain for the Constitution, who refuse to admit that the Democrat Party challenged the right of Sen. Goldwater of AZ, Gov. Romney of MA, and Sen. McCain of AZ to run for the presidency claiming they WERE NOT native born citizens as required by the Constitution. These claims were based on the facts that Goldwater was born in AZ Territory before it became a state, Romney was born in Mexico, and McCain in Panama.
Claims were admitted by courts, and in the case of McCain the Democrats even held a congressional hearing to try and bar him from running. Documents were demanded including birth certificates and WERE PROVIDED as requested by all three individuals. Not one ever attempted to block such requests.
The courts ruled that those born in US Territories like Goldwater were in fact eligible, that both Romney’s parent were US natural born citizens by birth on business in Mexico, and that McCain’s parents were also natural born citizens and that his father, a US Naval officer, was assigned by military orders to the CANAL ZONE which was also at the time US Territory. Thus all three were eligible despite Democrat Party attempts to disqualify them. I might add, why is that Democrats often try to bar ballots for servicemen and women voting from overseas?
With that background, why is it unreasonable or hypocritical to demand the ORIGINAL certificate of live birth of Obama? Why are court challenges to Republicans allowed but not of Democrats? Is there a double standard here? Considering that Obama’s mother married a British citizen, was a minor when she gave birth, supposedly arrived in HA from Kenya just before giving birth, and HA was in the habit of giving certifications of birth, not certificates of live birth, to people who had given birth recently outside the state and country without verifiable certification, the questions raised about Obama’s place of birth are completely reasonable and legitimate.
Yet Obama has spent over $1 million dollars to hide not only his certificate of live birth, but also his admission records from all his schools which would list his admission status for the sake of possible scholarships for foreign born students. The fair question is, why?
Now you can respond with obscurations, lies, epithets, or ad hominem attacks, claiming such questions are unpatriotic and racist, but that doesn’t change the fact there are legitimate reasons to question Obama’s status as a NATIVE born US citizen and therefore his qualification to hold the office of the presidency. You can even claim that the Constitution is outdated and therefore not relevant, but that raises far more serious issues.
I might add, it is Obama’s furtive and herculean efforts to hide relevant documents that have led me to believe that he is indeed not qualified to hold the presidency; not his race or his politics. But then you can always just call me a prevaricator. But if you do, at least don’t be aliterate and please also have the cajones to back up your claims, not just suppositions.
Capice?
By the way, why does the Democrat Party refuse to consider a proposed bill to require all future candidates to provide relevant documents to establish their qualifications to run for various federal offices? I had to do so to become a military officer in order to take an oath to protect the Constitution from all enemies, both foreign and domestic. Could it be for the same reasons the Democrats don’t want to permit time to read massive bills such as the Healthcare bill before being voted on; that is they don’t want the American people to know what they’re up to? Is there a pattern here?
the duly-elected, certified and sworn-in president has already presented the only prima facie* document he is required to provide, a certified state-issued certificate attested to by the department of health.
because the birthers have no evidence whatsoever to invalidate that document, they want the courts to treat them to an all-expense-paid no-return-date deep-sea fishing trip into the president’s lifetime personal records wherever they may be found — many of which are protected at some level by privacy laws their keepers are mandated to follow — all based on rumor and outright lies from people with a vested interest in discrediting them.
request denied.
case dismissed.
capice?
* prima facie: accepted as correct until proved otherwise
Most are from liberal Democrats, often leftists with little understanding of or disdain for the Constitution, who refuse to admit that the Democrat Party challenged the right of Sen. Goldwater of AZ, Gov. Romney of MA, and Sen. McCain of AZ to run for the presidency claiming they WERE NOT native born citizens as required by the Constitution.
Which democrats challenged McCain?
Claims were admitted by courts, and in the case of McCain the Democrats even held a congressional hearing to try and bar him from running.
Which hearing was held to try to bar McCain?
Documents were demanded including birth certificates and WERE PROVIDED as requested by all three individuals.
When did McCain provide his birth certificate?
The courts ruled that those born in US Territories like Goldwater were in fact eligible, that both Romney’s parent were US natural born citizens by birth on business in Mexico, and that McCain’s parents were also natural born citizens and that his father, a US Naval officer, was assigned by military orders to the CANAL ZONE which was also at the time US Territory.
Which court ruled that about McCain?
With that background, why is it unreasonable or hypocritical to demand the ORIGINAL certificate of live birth of Obama?
You mean your “background” of lies?
Why are court challenges to Republicans allowed but not of Democrats?
Frivilous suits, of all stripes, are stupid and ought to be dismissed.
HA was in the habit of giving certifications of birth, not certificates of live birth, to people who had given birth recently outside the state and country without verifiable certification
Except “HA” (Hawaii) is not in any such “habit.”
Yet Obama has spent over $1 million dollars to hide not only his certificate of live birth
Except there’s no evidence that he did.
but also his admission records from all his schools which would list his admission status for the sake of possible scholarships for foreign born students.
There’s no evidence he was a foreign student and Obama is president.
Now you can respond with obscurations, lies, epithets, or ad hominem attacks, claiming such questions are unpatriotic and racist, but that doesn’t change the fact there are legitimate reasons to question Obama’s status as a NATIVE born US citizen and therefore his qualification to hold the office of the presidency.
Except there are no legitimate reasons.
I might add, it is Obama’s furtive and herculean efforts to hide relevant documents that have led me to believe that he is indeed not qualified to hold the presidency;
What effort?
By the way, why does the Democrat Party refuse to consider a proposed bill to require all future candidates to provide relevant documents to establish their qualifications to run for various federal offices?
Because it is unnecessary and clearly birther nonsense.
Is there a pattern here?
Other than your pattern of lies?
Wow. Nice mess of misinformation. First off, the Romney that was born in Mexico was George Romney, former Governor of Michigan, not Mitt Romney, former Governor of Massachusetts. George’s parents weren’t in Mexico on business, they lived in a Mormon community. There were no lawsuits about his eligibility and no court ruled on it. http://amxfiles.com/amc/romney.html If you have different evidence, please provide a citation. (On this site, unlike many others, citations are part of the discussion.)
As for McCain, no Congressional hearings were held on his eligibility. The only place this appears is an aside in a Senate hearing on a different topic, where Sen. Leahy and Sec. Chertoff both agreed that Sen. McCain was a natural born citizen. http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_senate_hearings&docid=f:45594.pdf Page 18 of the pdf. In the transcript, Democratic Sen. Leahy is quite supportive of McCain’s position.
“Chairman LEAHY. We will come back to that. I would mention one other thing, if I might, Senator Specter. Let me just ask this:
I believe—and we have had some question in this Committee to have a special law passed declaring that Senator McCain, who was
born in the Panama Canal Zone, that he meets the constitutional requirement to be President. I fully believe he does. I have never had any question in my mind that he meets our constitutional requirement.
You are a former Federal judge. You are the head of the agency that executes Federal immigration law. Do you have any doubt in your mind—I mean, I have none in mine. Do you have any doubt in your mind that he is constitutionally eligible to become President?
Secretary CHERTOFF. My assumption and my understanding is that if you are born of American parents, you are naturally a natural-born American citizen.
Chairman LEAHY. That is mine, too. Thank you.”
No documents were demanded, none were shown, no witnesses were called. Same with Goldwater and Romney. No courts ruled on any of their eligibility. If you have different information, please link to the hearing transcripts or court cases.
The circumstances behind the birthplaces of these three gentlemen were well known. Birth certificates would have been useless to provide any relevant information. No requests were made by a court, none were blocked. McCain’s birth certificate has never been published — this very site has much information on that. (With links, even.)
I highly doubt if everyone here is a Liberal Democrat. I personally am a moderate Republican, Libertarian on privacy issues. I think you’ll find that on this site in particular, the single issue of constitutional eligibility as it relates to the legal history of the natural born citizen definition is the most important thing posters have in common, not party ideology.
Let’s not short change Demon in counting his falehoods:
Ninth, India and Pakistan were not at war in 1981.
Tenth, India was not an “ally” of the US in 1981
His father’s nationality was listed as African. If you are in anyway familiar with the Pan African movement of that era, you would see the logic in his father’s doing that.
Justice Ginsberg’s grandson was born in France to US Citizen parents. She has always considered him a natural born citizen. She doesn’t believe in de Vattel either.
See my article here:
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2009/04/the-african-race/
That argument might make sense if the facts were true. But they are not. Rational people will reach irrational conclusions when given false premises. I think the above comment is a poster child for that scenario.
What happened to jtx and Heavy? This Demon character and REB are an even lower form of Troll. They sound like the have Freepers on the minimizer for reference.
Another popular Michelle Obama myth. Michelle worked at the University of Chicago Hospital in it’s Urban Health Initiative Program. She has been accused of participating in the hospital’s patient dumping scheme, where the hospital steered poor patients to neighborhood hospitals. My sister was an administrator at the U.of C. The scheme by the hospital had been in the works long before Michelle began working their. They did not implement it while she was employed there because she was adamantly against patient dumping. When she went on leave of absence that is when the hospital implemented this policy.
Why then does the ARDC state that Michelle is on COURT ordered inactive status. Court in this sense is the Illinois Supreme Court.
True, she was not disbarred but she was ordered by the court to be inactive. I can not imagine anyone just deciding to become inactive 4 years after getting their license and paying for all of that education at Harvard
But yet Dan there is no evidence that anything happened other than she is inactive…Now if you can contact the IL State Board and find out what that means, and if it does mean something negative, then you have an argument. If not then you are engaging in blatent speculation with no real facts to support your theory. She is not disbarred. If she decided to go inactive that is her choice. You are trying to invent something here with no evidence.
Dan you pulled that little snippet off some Right Wing blog. I live in Ill. There is no such designation on Mrs. Obama’s law license
By requesting the court to relieve her of active status, Michelle Obama, who was no longer practicing law, didn’t have to carry insurance and meet continuing education requirements.
I think Dan is a little confused about the term “ordered.” If I remember correctly, for a court to decided something it must be in an “order.” They could be deciding something that would benefit the petitioner but it would still be court ordered. In this case, an order is not a demand but just a method of announcing a decision (granted, dismissed, etc.).
What it somewhat ironic, is the explanation of her inactive status is covered by WND and appears to explain that it was by her choice alone with no other issues.
http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=105998
Why Barry Soetero Barrack Hussein Obama has paid over 1 million US dollars to his lawyers to keep top secret his records?
Please answer that……
First, you answer what evidence you have that President Obama has paid over 1 million US dollars to his lawyers to keep top secret his records?
Why am I expected to explain something somebody just made up?