Developing: Pakistani Plane Escorted by UK Fighter Jets — 2 Men Arrested

Doc Thompson’s 24-hour radio marathon, ‘#24forok,’ continues until 9 am ET — Listen Live!

Business

Updated With Audio of Warren’s Admission — Professor’s Bombshell Charge: Elizabeth Warren Practiced Law in Mass. Without a License

Sep. 24, 2012 1:21pm Becket Adams

UPDATE III:

Here’s the audio of the radio interview where Warren acknowledges that she is not a member of the Bar of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts:

–

UPDATE II:

In an emailed statement to TheBlaze, the author of the Legal Insurrection article, William A. Jacobson, responds to critics who claim his charge doesn’t hold because Warren practiced at the federal level:

It has nothing to do with federal versus state. As detailed in my post, in order to maintain an office for the practice of law or to practice law in Massachusetts, one needs to be licensed in Massachusetts. Separately and in addition, one must comply with rules for admission of attorneys in whatever courts one practices. So a Massachusetts lawyer practicing law in Massachusetts but appearing in a case in Texas, would have to be licensed in Massachusetts and comply with whatever rules the Texas court has on admission of attorneys.

–

UPDATE:

During an interview on Boston’s 96.9 FM radio show “Jim & Margery” Monday morning, Warren flatly stated that she is not a member of the Bar of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. She also maintains that she doesn’t practice law in the Bay State.

“I have the weirdest things from a guy who says he’s your biggest supporter but says he got an email this morning saying something about — and he’s nervous about this — you resigned from the Jersey bar in the last two weeks and you’re not admitted to the Massachusetts bar. What is that about? Is that true and what’s that have to do with anything?” asked host Jim Braude.

“I’ve been inactive in the New Jersey bar for a very, very long time and they had changes in their Continuing Legal Education and I couldn’t go down to New Jersey and take –” Warren started to respond.

“Are you not admitted to the bar in Massachusetts?” asked Braude.

“No.”

“You’re not admitted?”

“No.”

“Don’t you practice?”

“No.”

“Oh, you don’t. Okay,” Braude said sounding somewhat surprised.

However, as this story continues to unfold, here’s an important point to consider [via a veteran lawyer who wrote National Review’s Jim Geraghty]:

The [Legal Insurrection] post indicates that this is a federal case. You do not need to be licensed to practice law in Massachusetts to practice law in federal courts located in Massachusetts or anywhere else. Federal courts decide who can practice before them, and individual states can’t tell federal courts that an attorney cannot practice before them. It’s that whole supremacy clause thing. Constitution 101 and all that.

It is really well established that a federal district court can admit an attorney to practice before it even if the attorney is not licensed in that state. You most certainly do not need to be licensed in the state where a federal court of appeals sits to appear before the federal court of appeals. I am clearly practicing law when I argue before the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati. It does not matter that I am not licensed in Ohio.

The blurb also mentions taking the case to the US Supreme Court. I have submitted an amicus brief in the United States Supreme Court on a case that originated in West Virginia state courts even though I am not licensed to practice there. I was not practicing law without a license when I did so because I was admitted to practice before the Supreme Court.

But also bear in mind the following [via another veteran lawyer who wrote NRO]:

I have practiced law for 30 years. Your correspondent is correct that a federal court can permit an attorney from a state outside the state wherein the federal court sits to appear before that court. The practice is called “pro hac vice,” which is Latin for “for this occasion.” Here are the pro hac vice requirements for the District Court of Mass, which would be the relevant court in this case.

However, this does not conclude the issue. There would still need to be an attorney licensed in Mass. who moved for Ms. Warren to be admitted pro hac vice for the case at hand. Such a document would have to be in the docket of the case as to which she was representing her client. If Ms. Warren simply filed pleadings without first being admitted to the court pro hac vice, she would be implicitly representing to the court that she was, in fact, licensed to practice in Mass., and if she was not so licensed, she would have violated the court’s rules, and, in effect, have committed a fraud upon the court.

The Warren campaign has not yet responded to TheBlaze’s request for comment.

Original story below.

–

It looks like Massachusetts senate candidate Elizabeth Warren’s credibility may take a turn for the worse, and this time it has nothing to do with her claims of Native American heritage.

According to Associate Clinical Professor of Law and Director of the Securities Law Clinic at Cornell Law School William A. Jacobson, Warren practiced law in Massachusetts without a license.

Here’s how he explains it.

During their senate debate last week, Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass.) “hammered” Warren over her private legal representation of The Travelers Insurance Company in an asbestos-related case.

“Warren attempted to deny her role, and referred to a Boston Globe article, but the Globe article supports Brown’s account,” Jacobson reports.

“The Globe article indicated the representation was for a period of three years and Warren was paid $212,000. The case resulted in a Supreme Court victory for Travelers arising out of a bankruptcy case in New York,” he adds.

But that’s not all.

“Warren represented not just Travelers, but numerous other companies starting in the late 1990s working out of and using her Harvard Law School office in Cambridge, which she listed as her office of record on briefs filed with various courts,” Jacobson notes.

“Warren, however, never has been licensed to practice law in Massachusetts,” he adds.

Here’s part of what his investigation turned up [via Legal Insurrection, his blog]:

Warren is not licensed to practice law in Massachusetts. Warren’s name does not turn up on a search of the Board of Bar Overseers attorney search website (searches just by last name or using Elizabeth Herring also do not turn up any relevant entries).

Did Elizabeth Warren Really Practice Law in Massachusetts Without a License?

Courtesy Legal Insurrection

I confirmed with the Massachusetts Board of Bar Overseers by telephone that Warren never has been admitted to practice in Massachusetts. I had two conversations with the person responsible for verifying attorney status. In the first conversation the person indicated she did not see any entry for Warren in the computer database, but she wanted to double check. I spoke with her again several hours later, and she indicated she had checked their files and also had spoken with another person in the office, and there was no record of Warren ever having been admitted to practice in Massachusetts.

Warren’s own listing of her Bar admissions is consistent with not being licensed in Massachusetts. In a June 25, 2008 CV Warren listed only Texas and New Jersey.

Warren’s Texas Bar information indicates she is not eligible to be licensed in Texas, but does not indicate when she went on that inactive status. Consistent with our finding that Warren was not admitted in Massachusetts, Warren listed only one other place of admission on her Texas record, New Jersey:

Courtesy Legal Insurrection

Warren became licensed in New Jersey in 1977. She famously and speculatively claimed to be the “first nursing mother to take a Bar exam” in New Jersey.

Warren, however, is not currently licensed in New Jersey:

Courtesy Legal Insurrection

While the date of termination of her New Jersey license is not on the website, telephone inquiries to the New Jersey Board of Bar Examiners and the New Jersey Lawyers Fund For Client Protection indicated that Warren resigned her license on September 11, 2012 (one of the people remarked to me “that’s a memorable day”). It’s odd that in the middle of a campaign Warren would take the time to resign her New Jersey Bar membership, particularly since she would have to retake the Bar exam to be readmitted.

Neither office in New Jersey could state whether her license was continuously active until her resignation because the computer only shows the current status, so I have made the request in writing as instructed. By resigning her New Jersey license earlier this month, Warren made it more difficult for the public to determine her pre-resignation status.

By all available information, Warren never has been licensed in Massachusetts, but at varying times has had active law licenses in Texas and New Jersey, although currently she is not licensed in either jurisdiction. It is unclear whether during the years she represented Travelers and others Warren was actively licensed anywhere.

And this just a part of his investigation. There is much, much more where that came from.

Jacobson’s main point is this: Warren may have violated two provisions of Massachusetts law by a) using her Cambridge office for practicing law without a license and b) actually practicing law without a license. If this is true, and as mentioned in the beginning of this article, Warren’s credibility may take a huge hit — and Sen. Brown will no doubt profit.

Click here to read Jacobson’s full investigation.

Follow Becket Adams (@BecketAdams) on Twitter

Front page photo source courtesy the AP. This story has been updated.

Benghazi, IRS, AP...What's next? Only TheBlaze TV offers the truth from Glenn Beck, Andrew Wilkow, and Real News from TheBlaze. Get instant access and a free trial here.

Back to The Blaze »

Comments (282)

phrogdriver
Posted on September 24, 2012 at 1:40pm
This was a Federal case. She doesn’t need to be licensed in Massachusets to represent someone in Federal court – she needs to be licensed in the jurisdiction hearing the case or admitted “pro hac vice” to appear in the case assisted by local counsel.

I can’t stand Elizabeth Warren – she is clearly a Marxist kook – but without more information, this is a dishonest story. There is nothing here to suggest she practiced without a license.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- DarkJello
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 1:45pm
  Personally, I don’t think “Native Americans” should need a license. Amirite? lol
  
  Report this comment
- 13th Imam
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 1:51pm
  Phrog
  Does she have to be registered in at least One State to do a federal case. If not, can I as a non attorney represent myself as a lawyer?
  
  Report this comment
- vic138
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 2:04pm
  I tried to google this but couldn’t come up with an answer. I think the state you’re working in will always figure out a reason for their cut. Of course, I’m just guessing, as I think you are too.
  
  Report this comment
- darkeningskies
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 2:05pm
  “Warren represented not just Travelers, but numerous other companies starting in the late 1990s working out of and using her Harvard Law School office in Cambridge, which she listed as her office of record on briefs filed with various courts,”
  
  Report this comment
- phrogdriver
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 2:13pm
  @vic – No, I’m not guessing. I’ve been an attorney for almost 20 years. I’ve practiced in both state and federal court. I’ve handled cases in federal court where the attorney was not only not licensed in my state, but was not admitted to practice in my federal district. He was admitted “pro hac vice” – which is a term you CAN google.
  
  Report this comment
- QuincySmith
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 2:16pm
  driver;
  
  You base your opinion on what. William Jacobson teaches law (Cornell), I think, for the moment, I’ll go with his opinion.
  
  Report this comment
- doomytram
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 2:19pm
  Your political career is over ridiculous leftist Warren. You didn’t build that lie Warren! Somebody else built that lie for you. It’s over pathetic puke Warren you lose.
  
  Report this comment
- Tresse
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 2:20pm
  13th, if that is the case why didn’t she say that immediately to Brown during the debate? Should have been an easy response to the Brown question.
  
  Report this comment
- phrogdriver
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 2:24pm
  @quincy – that’s fine, but unless there is something more than I see here, you are being lied to.
  
  pro hac vice (proh hock vee-chay) prep. Latin for “this time only,” the phrase refers to the application of an out-of-state lawyer to appear in court for a particular trial, even though he/she is not licensed to practice in the state where the trial is being held. The application is usually granted, but sometimes the court requires association with a local attorney.
  
  Report this comment
- sillyfreshness
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 2:33pm
  Elizabeth Warren=fake, fraud, Bolshevik who the “chosen people” controlled Marxist Media won’t look into because they are on the same side as her.
  
  The Founding Fathers never anticipated our media getting hijacked and taken over by leftist, progressive, Marxist “chosen people” and using that very media for leftist propaganda to the masses.
  
  Report this comment
- QuincySmith
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 2:36pm
  driver;
  
  I am not an attorney, as I now see you are. The referenced blog shows Warren ‘Of Council’, not ‘pro hac vice’. I assume these are not the same.
  
  Report this comment
- phrogdriver
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 3:03pm
  @quincy -“Of Counsel” can mean a number of different things. In relation to the pleadings and filings, it would probably mean she advised the attorneys who actually represented the party. She would not have appeared on behalf of a client in court – which means she would not have to be licensed in that particular jurisdiction if it was federal court.
  
  By way of example, Alan Dershowitz appears in courts all over the country where he isn’t licensed. It simply is not at all uncommon.
  
  Report this comment
- PIGSWILLNEVERFLY
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 3:07pm
  NO surprise that she would do this. all progressives are fakes and frauds of one sort or another. I am surprised someone dug around enough investigating her that she was found out. I have never seen so much flat out evil everywhere in my life. But then again, it’s been speeding up this way since CARTER and the Trilateral Commission was formed by Rockerfeller (corporate) and Brzizinski (academic) joined forces in 1973. see www. augustforecast.com
  
  Report this comment
- ambrosia
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 4:30pm
  Seems to me,
  this crazy, ole’ squaw
  is more likely to be related to Bonnie & Clyde
  than Pocahontas & Geronimo.
  
  Hey, Sandrag Fluke-
  take a good look at Indian maiden, Jane Hathaway-
  this is YOU….in the next 20 years.
  
  Surely,
  her nutty lineage & yours
  meet & cross somewhere in history-
  2 ugly broads,
  abusing the law of the land
  to bamboozle America !
  
  Report this comment
- VioletWeed
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 4:34pm
  I agree with you. This is a story by someone who doesn’t do their homework. There is no point in writing a story denigrating someone if you don’t have your facts correct. It just makes the person you are denigrating look BETTER not ‘worse’. tsk tsk!
  
  Report this comment
- martyinhagerstown
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 4:51pm
  IN RESPONSE TO :phrogdriver Posted on September 24, 2012 at 1:40pm
  
  who said, “There is nothing here to suggest she practiced without a license.”
  
  Maybe not but I say there is something VERY WRONG that she is covering her tracks by doing what seems illogical and stupid.
  
  She must be very scared.
  
  Report this comment
- Maji
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 5:09pm
  This woman is some kinda nut!
  If you read the iPhone 5 story above you think thats sad or maybe
  this little girl doesn’t react to pressure to well…but know there’s a problem!
  
  When someone like this woman says (or reacts) the same way,
  because of who vouches for her, people (libs) give her crediblity and defend her!!
  
  Report this comment
- BODYBAG
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 5:24pm
  QUINCYSMITH
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 2:16pm
  @driver;
  William Jacobson teaches law (Cornell), I think, for the moment, I’ll go with his opinion.
  ________________________________________________________________________
  
  I concur. Warren doesnt have a valid law license in any state. NJ license was
  surrendered 09/11/2012. Wonder why?
  
  Report this comment
- SLAPTHELEFT
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 5:41pm
  Excellent info phrog.
  
  But I don’t care.she practiced without a license it’s up to her to prove she didn’t. And if she did, legal proceedings should ensue.
  
  I like to refer to it as the Harry Reid charge. I have it on record from a credible source.
  
  See how this works?
  
  Report this comment
- SLAPTHELEFT
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 5:45pm
  Btw, phrog, since you are a lawyer-
  
  What is the penalty for being unlicensed and practicing law then recieving 220k and saying you weren’t involved in the case?
  
  And also, I didn’t see a lie in the story, looked like she wasn’t licensed. Looks like investigative journalism. Did you hear that mitt Romney put his dog on the top of a car?
  
  Report this comment
- Nigel2
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 6:16pm
  <>”"
  
  The article clearly states the investigation (search for information) is still ongoing and made no absolute claim of criminal activity.
  
  Report this comment
- 1947
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 6:28pm
  KICK the Marxist out she better Obama…….a Commie
  
  Report this comment
- 1947
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 6:33pm
  Her family told her she was “Indian” and who did that. Also her family told she was good LOOKING…..what a Bull Sh_t story just like being an “Indian”
  
  Report this comment
- RTFM
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 6:37pm
  Doesn’t she need to be licensed in “A” state though? It seems to me she is not on the Bar for any state. I would think you would need to be licesed somewhere to go before any court. Supreme or otherwise.
  
  Report this comment
- GETLIFE
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 6:51pm
  SOO… Was she or was she not admitted to the District Court of Mass “pro hac vice” for the case in question?
  
  Report this comment
- jblovesAmerica
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 7:09pm
  I suppose we need to ask-”what States is she qualified to practice law”.
  She is a liar and a fraud.
  How can one believe anything this person says.
  
  Report this comment
- dwf1
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 7:09pm
  Snake Oil Salesperson = legless-low-belly practicing law (EW)
  
  Report this comment
- Devildog0166
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 7:30pm
  It just is surprising to me that she was able to get accepted to a bar that you don’t drink cocktails at. I guess that 1/32th pulls a lot of weight. I just wish my 1/4 Osage had that much pull but then I’m not a liberal either. Semper Fi
  
  Report this comment
- dublinthewagons
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 7:36pm
  She is AKC registered, with shot records, and liability insurance in case she bites someone. Does she need a license too?
  
  Report this comment
- phrogdriver
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 7:47pm
  It occurs to me (after reading Prof. Jacobson’s blog) is not whether or not she was “practicing law” without a license – clearly, that allegation is false. The real case Jacobson is making is whether or not she represented herself as a MA attorney by listing her Cambridge address in her pleadings. In legal terms, it’s known as “holding yourself out” as a MA attorney.
  
  If Prof. Jacobson can point to one single case in all of the 50 states where any attorney anywhere has been sanctioned or prosecuted for listing an address in Federal pleadings where they were not licensed to practice, I will concede the point. But it doesn’t happen. If you meet the requirements to appear in Federal Court, I don’t know of any state court in the land that is going to claim it was illegal.
  
  Even for a republican.
  
  Report this comment
- PATTY HENRY
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 8:07pm
  Elizabeth Warren is the worse type of individual…she is a slimy, PASSIVE AGGRESSIVE, sneaky broad. About as bad as it gets. SHE has no conscience. She has no ethics. She is totally a Katherine Sibelius (“LAWS ARE FOR THE LITTLE PEOPLE” ) Clone, these are UGLY women. THEY are gutted from all sense of Motherhood, all sense of gentility, decency. Pelosi, Boxer, Feinstein (most of the time), This witch, Sibelius, Jarrett, Janet Napolitano, McKaskill (MO tax cheater), and of course the crazy Maxine Waters, that crazy Texan liar. ….ALL of these women have had feminine lobotomies. And they are so damned dumb. They are helping the COMMIE, MARXIST, ISLAMIC dude in the WH WHO WILL TOSS THEM ASIDE LIKE TRASH AS SOON AS HE’S USED THEM UP.
  
  Report this comment
- 000degrees
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 8:25pm
  If you keep investigating she will play her indian card……
  
  Report this comment
- Obama_Forward_Over_The_Cliff
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 8:30pm
  So, what’s with Progressives/Communists/Marxists/Socialists/Liberals/Democrats and their “missing” licenses/birth certificates/college records/passports/social security numbers/ad infinitum?
  
  Report this comment
- SolitudeBliss
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 8:47pm
  I’m sorry but did you read the whole article? Did you miss the part where she represented private clients in Massachussetts (Travelers Ins. for one) for which she was paid $212,000.00 (without the need to pay for a Law License) using her Harvard office. She is a COMPLETE FRAUD !!!!!
  Native American my Arse…….
  
  Report this comment
- pallyden
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 9:21pm
  Gee, what else has she lied about. It keeps rolling, Are you sure she isn’t Obama in drag?
  
  On the other hand what lawyer vouched for her & by doing so got half the fee for all legal work she did while at HARVARD. BY THE WAY, you have to have a license to do all that work in her office at HARVARD, which is in Massachusetts, not New Jersey
  
  Report this comment
- phrogdriver
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 9:31pm
  @solitude – that (and this accusation) is a little like saying she was spotted deep sea fishing and she did not have a license to fish in the Penobscot River. You could scream headlines “WARREN FISHING WITHOUT A LICENSE” or you could look at the actual law. I don’t want my side to become like the liberals – I want to crush the left with facts, not fiction like this.
  
  Report this comment
- flyer7777
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 11:40pm
  you missed the point about ” pro hac vice”; she was not legal to be a lawyer on the case.
  
  Report this comment
- ishka4me
  Posted on September 25, 2012 at 12:42am
  actally in Mass she needs to bea member of the bar. You will find out soon enough she has been involved in several Mass cases. They are just letting her lie some more before they release the cases in Ma she was on. Fun to watch
  
  Report this comment
- CH46GUNS
  Posted on September 25, 2012 at 1:09am
  PHROGDRIVER, Does she not have to have someone from the state who can practice law in the state provide a letter saying she can pro hac vice? And is this required for every case?
  
  Report this comment
- realindependent
  Posted on September 25, 2012 at 4:29am
  ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
  
  Again republicorps got nothing………
  
  epic fail.
  
  Report this comment
- D-Fence
  Posted on September 25, 2012 at 5:41am
  What are a thousand dead attorney’s at the bottom of the sea? A good start!
  
  Report this comment
- Rickfromillinois
  Posted on September 25, 2012 at 6:59am
  Perhaps you need to read the whole article more closely. They address the whole “pro hac vice” issue and also stated that they couldn’t find any paperwork where she applied or informed the court of her pro hac vice status. I am beginning to believe that Ms Warren is one of those people that believe that not all rules apply to her.
  
  Report this comment
- copatriots
  Posted on September 25, 2012 at 7:22am
  Surely a RINO is better than a Marxist but…..
  
  It is tough to get excited if Lyin Lizzie can’t cheat her way to a win and somehow loses we get Playboy Scott Brown again. Woo hoo. (sarc)
  
  Report this comment
- poetopoet
  Posted on September 25, 2012 at 8:59am
  Maybe she signed her briefs “pro se”, but not her bra at the bar
  
  Report this comment
- phrogdriver
  Posted on September 25, 2012 at 1:59pm
  “The general counsel for the state’s regulatory body for lawyers told Massachusetts Lawyer Weekly he doesn’t think Warren broke any rules by taking cases sometimes while working as a full-time Harvard professor.
  
  Law professors might break the rules if they “actually practice” in Massachusetts without a license or have an office there, Massachusetts Board of Overseers GC Michael Fredrickson told Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly.”
  
  Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/elizabeth-warren-law-license-2012-9#ixzz27VP3M1sl
  
  Report this comment
- oneshiner
  Posted on September 25, 2012 at 6:34pm
  Just one more user of our system. Her kind always find a way to sneak around the system to garner their own needs. Just like she used an indian heritage to get into schools. She learned well to be a sneak and a thief and a totally disreputable person using whatever is nailed down. Her kind we DO NOT need in our government. That gives her an open end to cheat all she wants and use the government to get all she wants, just like nancy pelosi has done.
  
  Report this comment
richauthor
Posted on September 24, 2012 at 1:39pm
It appears more and more that the core of Liberal politicians in this country are nothing more than simple SOCIOPATHs. They will do or say ANYTHING they think will help them beat a Republican or Conservative.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- woodyee
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 2:19pm
  They’re merely practicing what they’ve been taught. You’ll see a LOT more of this as you get older; watch for the police forces to be fully politicized – our Los Angeles Police Chief (position) has been politicized since the Rodney King fiasco, and the current chief (Charlie Beck) is a political suck-up – his nose has had the L.A. mayor Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa* brown stain on it etched permanently, but he doesn’t mind the odor.
  
  The L.A. County Sheriff Lee Baca is, according to some writers, becoming the Joe Arpaio of California. We Californians should be so lucky…
  
  * His real name is Tony Villar. Villa-r-aigosa is a combination of his name and his (first) ex-wife’s name (Raigosa). He decided to keep it as is, even after he was dumped unceremoniously by that classy lady, after she found out he was dipping his stick wherever it would fit on whoever it would fit.
  
  Report this comment
13th Imam
Posted on September 24, 2012 at 1:38pm
Me thinkum squaw no needum shingle.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- G-WHIZ
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 2:16pm
  E.W. is 1/300%(approx..) American “indian” Therefore you have to shave-off 1/64th of an inch from either side of the registration, that will be the “not-needed” portion of her registration…if she were registered in the foistplace….Soitenly!!
  
  Report this comment
- Bill Rowland
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 5:36pm
  According to Lizzies family lore Native Americans are not required to be licensed as they were here first and don’t recognize the white mans boundries. Therefore she can practice law any where she wants. The main Medicine Man of her tribe has assured her that she is in the right, she can’t figure out which tribe yet, but thats another story.
  Just another example of our glorious leaders in the Democratic Party making up the rules as they go along.
  
  OMG Nov 6,2012
  
  Report this comment
- BannedByHuffpo
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 11:05pm
  She speak with forked tongue
  
  Report this comment
- Bum thrower
  Posted on September 25, 2012 at 8:45am
  Cherokees don’t need no ‘stinkin’ license’…..that’s for ‘pale faces’…..
  
  Report this comment
cubber
Posted on September 24, 2012 at 1:38pm
Oh, I wish you could see my surprised look.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
PhineasJWhoopee
Posted on September 24, 2012 at 1:37pm
This squaw speakem with fork tongue.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- chips1
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 8:10pm
  Obama’s list for Pardons is getting longer than his Hit list.
  
  Report this comment
woodyee
Posted on September 24, 2012 at 1:36pm
Warren is a misfit, and obviously should not be elected to public office.

But…the “Occupy’er” in the WH is guilty of MUCH more than Warren’s comparable picadillo’s…is he even QUALIFIED to sit in the WH?!?

The media will never tell you what you need to know about THEIR candidate.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- toto
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 2:53pm
  No, just your average Marxist. Unfortunately, they have multiplied.
  
  Report this comment
- 1TrueOne55
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 3:53pm
  With Obama the black version of “Alfred E. Neuman” is it no wonder that those that come from within his administration follow the same logical path? No experience but OTJT (on the job training), even another 4 years will not fix what they broke.
  
  And Warren will only do to Massachusetts what Obama has done to the whole of the country.
  
  Report this comment
CLEttinger
Posted on September 24, 2012 at 1:36pm
So whats the penalty?

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
term limits for congress
Posted on September 24, 2012 at 1:36pm
This is a badge of honor for Warren and the dems because she was stickin’ to the man. She don’t need no stinkin’ license!

Now, ask to see her tax returns for that time period to see if she reported that un-licensed income.

Maybe native Americans do not need to be licensed. Hmmm

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Melvin Spittle
Posted on September 24, 2012 at 1:33pm
I am getting tired of these GOP witch hunts. Warren IS licensed to practice in Mass! If they would have done just a little bit of research, they would have found that she is licensed under her Native American name! Sheesh….

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- 13th Imam
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 1:44pm
  Did you mean Indian Massacre? She is not a witch.
  
  Report this comment
- darkeningskies
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 2:10pm
  chief-lies-a-lot???? I checked and could not find a license under that name
  
  y
  
  Report this comment
- kettererbg
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 3:36pm
  Fauxcahontas or Liarwatha?
  
  Report this comment
- hold_my_stones
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 5:57pm
  Elizabeth Warren runs her mouth alot, & it’s is alot like a police station, Fuzz constantly running in & out.
  
  Report this comment
- Taquoshi
  Posted on September 25, 2012 at 11:53am
  Oh, yeah. I forgot. Is it filed under “Dances with Lies”?
  
  Report this comment
blackyb
Posted on September 24, 2012 at 1:33pm
Well, the man in the White House is practicing presidency without really being a President, so I guess anything goes? It is time to stop all this illegal workings of those to stupid or lazy to go the right route to success. This includes allowing illegal immigrants into this country. It is time to take this country back under the Constitution and prosecute those law breakers making fools out of those who are keeping the laws and operating under the law. This country cannot and should not be expected to operate at the whims of thugs and criminals. It is no wonder many do not have respect for the law when those who are running the country are mocking the laws of this country.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- bdandsl
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 6:35pm
  Obama thought it was one of those ‘no-show jobs’, all the perks without the work.
  
  Report this comment
- kat747
  Posted on September 25, 2012 at 8:15am
  Absolutely right…..and that is how you tear down and destroy a country from within.
  
  Report this comment
darkeningskies
Posted on September 24, 2012 at 1:33pm
hmmmmmm……..maybe she stashed proof of her fictional licenses with her Native American birth cert

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
thegreatcarnac
Posted on September 24, 2012 at 1:32pm
I am so tired of liberals who think that rules and laws are for everyone but them. They get away with things consevatives would be jailed for. I guarrantee you now…a day is coming when being a liberal will not be so gratifying……wait for it.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- scuba13
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 1:50pm
  She is a Indian lawyer who isn’t an Indian or a lawyer. Now that’s a Democrat politician the liberals can be proud of.
  
  Report this comment
NO_MORE_OBAMA
Posted on September 24, 2012 at 1:31pm
Wonder if the good people of Mass will still elect her? I am guessing the answer in yes

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- RGB
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 5:22pm
  Of course they will, they aren’t very bright.. Can’t even say “cab” correctly. They also can never get there from here.
  
  Report this comment
- Born In MA
  Posted on September 25, 2012 at 12:18pm
  @ No More, your guess would be WRONG!! Maybe the lunatics in Boston might support her but the rest of the state, does indeed know what a lying liberal piece of crap she is.
  If you knew anything about this state you would know that. MOST of the people in this state are independant, they vote the person NOT the party. And lizzie can go burn in hell as far as I’m concerned.
  
  Report this comment
vamom2
Posted on September 24, 2012 at 1:31pm
Sounds like “Ms” Warren is in for a Scooby-Doo moment…..”Ruh-roh, Raggy!”

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Unbelievable
Posted on September 24, 2012 at 1:31pm
I just don’t understand what the problem is… She’s a progressive and everyone knows progressives are above the law. So just move along people, nothing to see here, nothing at all!

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- westtitus
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 6:27pm
  Exactly! Liberals only know how to lie and then they try to look so innocent and just say “I didn’t know I wasn’t above the law, all the other Liberals are so why not me”? Bunch of lying better than thou losers! America please wake up and turn the trash T.V. off for an hour out of your day to get educated. Maybe read a book, now that is a novel idea. (pardon the pun)
  
  Report this comment
Detroit paperboy
Posted on September 24, 2012 at 1:30pm
Democrats make the rules,,,,,,,they don’t follow them, we don’t need no stinking license…….

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Josiah13
Posted on September 24, 2012 at 1:30pm
As usual, enlightened progressives do not feel the rule of law applies to them. This is disgusting. Time to pay for your disregard for the law Elizabeth… “bah-bye now”

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- muffythetuffy
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 1:37pm
  IS THERE ONE LAW DEMOCRATS DON’T BREAK?
  
  Did she get away with this because she was an American Indian. Why didn’t the Mass State Bar go after her. What she did is a felony and she can be prevented from ever practicing law. When the hell is every one going to be compelled to obey the Rule of Law. The Democrats have set themselves up as some kind of Royalty.
  
  Report this comment
- QuincySmith
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 2:22pm
  Muffy;
  
  There are many examples of lawyers practicing law when their license expired (didn’t renew). The bar does not monitor who is practicing and who is not (I believe it is assumed if you are practicing you get a license). This, however, is quite different from practicing without ever obtaining a license; where again the bar has no indication that anyone is practicing without first getting a license. I venture a guess now the Mass bar may just look into the matter.
  
  Report this comment
iratd
Posted on September 24, 2012 at 1:28pm
Lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies, lies. Warren lies!!!!

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
thop1960
Posted on September 24, 2012 at 1:27pm
I’m shocked! Not really…

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
TEARS FOR AMERICA
Posted on September 24, 2012 at 1:27pm
You just have to wonder about the thugocracy surrounding these people…they make their own laws as they go…

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
DenisWTexas
Posted on September 24, 2012 at 1:27pm
Boy, she sure likes to claim a ton of “firsts.”

Hopefully, she will be the first “unemployed, Native American, ex-nursing, non-licensed swindler to win the Massachussets Prison System Rodeo.”

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- BetterInformed
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 1:45pm
  Funny !
  
  Report this comment
- Bonnieblue2A
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 4:46pm
  Maybe she’s working on her credentials to become the next Democrat appointed Attorney General of the USA, or grab a seat on the bench of SCOTUS.
  
  Report this comment
- OccamsSword
  Posted on September 25, 2012 at 2:34am
  I like!
  
  Report this comment
thom1
Posted on September 24, 2012 at 1:26pm
What your saying is that maybe Warren is a lying democrat? Who would have thought.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
strawberry411a
Posted on September 24, 2012 at 1:26pm
Hmm. What a surprise…a lying liberal.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- CatB
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 1:38pm
  Seems to be the job description . … case in point .. Pelsoi, H. Clinton, Debbie Washerwoman-Schultz … etc.
  
  Report this comment
- CatB
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 1:42pm
  Not only lying .. I believe this is ILLEGAL!
  
  Report this comment
korbin
Posted on September 24, 2012 at 1:26pm
Does anyone have any morals any more? We all know she will be censured with a wet noodle, and will win election as 99% of voters do not have a clue nor does character matter.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
strawberry411a
Posted on September 24, 2012 at 1:25pm
Hmm…what a surprise. A lying liberal.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- poetopoet
  Posted on September 24, 2012 at 3:20pm
  She is very Broad Minded though.
  
  Report this comment
- OccamsSword
  Posted on September 25, 2012 at 2:40am
  Broad cheek boned
  
  Report this comment

It appears that you have Javascript Disabled. Please enable Javascript in your browser preferences for a better user experience on TheBlaze. You can not comment without Javascript enabled.