Michele Bachmann – Woman of Mystery

Author: March 20, 2011 11:18 pm

Even though Michele Bachmann has become this shiny ‘rock star’ of the tea party movement, she remains this kind of elusive, mysterious woman when you think about it. Sure, we can read her bio on her website or even on Wikipedia, but what does it say really? Just the basics. One thing I noticed though, when I googled Michele Bachmann, I found people just bashing her and the lack of intelligence she has. No one, not even these high paid journalists and/or television commentators are asking the right questions though.

When I googled “Michele Bachmann bar exam”, the only thing that came up was “HOW did this woman pass the bar exam???” I mean that is a good question if you are talking about her intelligence level, but no one is asking the right question. What is the “right” question you ask? When…. Yep no one is asking WHEN Michele took the bar exam or even WHERE. She worked in the US Treasury department the same year she graduated from William and Mary school of law, but there is no mention as to where and when she took her bar exam. There is also no mention of when she took the Multistate Professional Responsibility Examination, which Minnesota requires before she can take the bar exam in that state. Now, it COULD be because it was so long ago, however, since she is a public figure and represents the public, those records should be made available.

Now, I agree that Obama’s records should also be made available, but he is a lot easier to research and I have found several sites which verify he DID take the bar and when. Michele’s constant smoke screen of misinformation about Obama though is what is troubling. She keeps bringing up “Obama’s Harvard Law degree” as a negative, yet let’s take a look at Bachmann’s previous scholarly endeavors shall we. (This is where it gets a bit tricky).

Here first college was Winona State University in Minnesota in 1978. She graduated with a bachelor’s degree in political science with a minor in English (hey I am JUST the messenger!) I decided to check on this school just because she keeps making light of Obama’s Harvard education. Let’s compare the two shall we.

Winona:

Admissions Data (2009):

  • Percent of Applicants Admitted: 71%
  • Test Scores — 25th / 75th Percentile
    • SAT Critical Reading: 440 / 600
    • SAT Math: 510 / 640
    • SAT Writing: – / -
    • ACT Composite: 21 / 25
    • ACT English: 20 / 25
    • ACT Math: 20 / 25
  • Total Enrollment: 8,657 (8,060 undergraduates)
  • Gender Breakdown: 40% Male / 60% Female
  • 94% Full-time
  • Tuition and Fees: $7,800 (in-state); $12,540 (out-of-state)
  • Books: $1,160
  • Room and Board: $6,920
  • Other Expenses: $2,790
  • Total Cost: $18,670 (in-state); $23,410 (out-of-state)
  • Percentage of New Students Receiving Aid: 83%
  • Percentage of New Students Receiving Types of Aid
    • Grants: 53%
    • Loans: 66%

Enrollment (2009):

Costs (2009 – 10):

Winona State University Financial Aid (2008 – 09):

Average Amount of Aid

  • Grants: $3,121
  • Loans: $8,187

Most Popular Majors:

Biology, Business Administration, Communication Studies, Criminal Justice, Elementary Education, Nursing, Social Work

Transfer, Retention and Graduation Rates:

  • First Year Student Retention (full-time students): 75%
  • Transfer Out Rate: 30%
  • 4-Year Graduation Rate: 25%
  • 6-Year Graduation Rate: 51%

Harvard:

Test scores for the middle 50 percent (from the 25th to the 75th percentile) of recently admitted classes range from 700 to 790 on the SAT critical reading section and 690 to 790 on the SAT math section.

Graduation rate – 97%

Tuition                                       $34,976

Health Services Fee                     $1,166

Student Services Fee                    $2,273

Room                                            $7,525

Board                                            $4,783

Subtotal                                     $50,723

Estimated Personal Expenses       $3,227

Estimated Travel Costs           $0-$2,800

Total billed

and unbilled costs               $53,950 – $56,750

So basically, not really a comparison, which we all knew, I just wanted it to be in print because I am so strict on the facts.

Ok, so now that we have determined that, this is where it gets a little tricky and funny all in one. Bachmann’s next school was a Christian college located in Tulsa, OK called O W Coburn School of Law, of Oral Roberts University. Now, in some of her bios on conservative websites, it lists just Oral Roberts University as her school, but it was not. Now, why would ANYONE not list the actual school? It may strike some as weird, but here is why; the year Michele Bachmann graduated with her Juris Doctorate from Coburn (1986) is the same year the school was forced to close because they lost their accreditation. Why did they lose their credentials? Well, let’s look into that for a minute.

I found an article about the Coburn School that was very intriguing to say the least. This was the first paragraph of the article: “U.S. Supreme Court Justice Byron R. White challenged the new Oral Roberts University law school Wednesday to produce “graduates who are competent enough to furnish the enormous variety of legal services that society must have if it is to function in a civilized and peaceful manner.”” Basically the school was teaching too much about religion and mixing with law, well, those two subjects just do not mix. (Here is the link to the full article http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleid=20080326_222_26420)

But the major question NO ONE is asking, if the school lost its accreditation, why was Michele Bachmann allowed to keep her Juris Doctorate degree? Well, maybe she wasn’t because 2 years later she graduated from William and Mary in 1988 with a Master of Law degree in taxes. I just find it odd though how with all of the information we can uncover today, why no one knows where or when Michele Bachmann took her bar exam. I looked into William and Mary school of law and it is a pretty tough school to get into. They only take 27% of applicants and list of requirements are tough. In order for her to achieve her LLM, she would have to have a JD (Juris Doctrate), but technically, her school lost the accreditation for that, so technically, she has no JD. (Website for the American Bar Association http://www.americanbar.org/groups/legal_education/resources/post_j_d_non_j_d.html)

She said she worked for the US Dept. of Treasury and was an attorney FOR the IRS, collecting taxes from people who did not pay. (Weird because now she is on the standing that people shouldn’t pay taxes.)

Regardless if she is smart enough for anything, what needs to be uncovered is her previous college and how she was able to practice law. If she never achieved her Juris Doctorate, what makes her qualified for the bar association? (That is a pre-requisite of the bar association by the way). So, if she did not take the bar, how was she able to try (in her words) “thousands of cases” for the IRS in a court of law? Although, I could not find any cases she has tried…. Ever.

So while Bachmann talks about Obama only having a copy of his birth certificate (which I do not have my original either, lost it in a move, so I have a copy of mine), what I want to know is, is she trying to cover up her own indiscretions? These are some pretty serious indiscretions if she cannot provide some kind of proof.


facebook comments:

53 Comments

  • This was from the New Yorker article, Doesn’t sound like a lot of experience gained.

    Bachmann usually describes herself vaguely as a “former federal tax litigation attorney,” but, in part because she was new, she didn’t do much litigating. I talked with six of Bachmann’s former colleagues in the small I.R.S. office where she worked. Three of them still work there. No one would speak on the record, but they all said that Bachmann was not on the job long enough to gain much experience.

    Two of Bachmann’s five children were born while she worked for the I.R.S., and all six former colleagues said that the primary fact they remembered about Bachmann was that she spent a good portion of her time on maternity leave—the I.R.S. had a fairly generous policy—and that caused resentment.

    “Basically, the rest of us that were here were handling Michele’s inventory,” one former colleague said. “In her four years, she probably didn’t get more than two, two and a half years of experience. So she was doing lightweight stuff.” A second colleague said, “She was an attorney here, but she was never here.” (Bachmann declined a request to respond.)

    Many of the cases she worked on were settled without going to trial, and there is only one Bachmann case on file that ended up in a courtroom. According to court documents, in 1992 Bachmann sought six thousand dollars in taxes from a Chippewa Indian who failed to report three years of income from Youth Project, Inc., a community-organizing nonprofit dedicated to “social justice and peace.”

    Bachmann doesn’t like to say directly that she worked for the “I.R.S.,” but she often cites her work in the tax office as part of the reason she’s qualified to be President. The job, her campaign Web site declares, “solidified her strong support for efforts to simplify the Tax Code and reduce tax burdens on family and small business budgets.”

  • Just the Facts Please

    Are you kidding with this? You did not research this at all.

    ” I just wanted it to be in print because I am so strict on the facts”

    Well, let’s see, I have a few minutes before bed time; so, here goes…

    “Now, in some of her bios on conservative websites, it lists just Oral Roberts University as her school, but it was not. Now, why would ANYONE not list the actual school? It may strike some as weird, but here is why; the year Michele Bachmann graduated with her Juris Doctorate from Coburn (1986) is the same year the school was forced to close because they lost their accreditation. ”

    I don’t know who owns the conservative websites you refer to, but the one SHE is responsible for (her congressional bio) lists all of her schools. And Oral Roberts University is the University she graduated from. http://www.congress.org/bio/id/36577

    Coburn was NOT forced to close because they lost their accreditation and the trouble they had with initial accreditation had to do with their religious discrimination in admissions and hiring (and they won that issue) and nothing to do with curriculum. See Tulsa Oklahoma news story here: http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleid=20080326_222_11725 (ORU ‘transferred’ the school along with all first and second year students and the contents of the law library to CBN University in Virginia – now known as Regent University). AND SEE http://books.google.com/books?id=xCbZmx1–5sC&pg=PA1491&lpg=PA1491&dq=ORU+Coburn+school+of+law+may+lose+accreditation&source=bl&ots=7Dw2Ge6NUf&sig=ESmkjeLhDj7icz43EGgN_iXvU3U&hl=en&ei=kTAFTszLLMm4tgek_53ZDQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CCkQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q&f=false (ABA review of 1981 ABA activity with regard to debate on ORU accreditation)

    “This was the first paragraph of the article: “U.S. Supreme Court Justice Byron R. White challenged the new Oral Roberts University law school Wednesday to produce “graduates who are competent enough to furnish the enormous variety of legal services that society must have if it is to function in a civilized and peaceful manner.”” Basically the school was teaching too much about religion and mixing with law, well, those two subjects just do not mix. ”

    How did you come to this conclusion from the article cited? Did you READ the article? It never mentioned teaching too much religion and there is nothing from which you could infer that they were. The article cited was about an inspirational speech given to the student body, faculty, judges and others at the dedication ceremony of the Coburn College of Law. http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleid=20080326_222_26420

    “Yep no one is asking WHEN Michele took the bar exam or even WHERE”. “I just find it odd though how with all of the information we can uncover today, why no one knows where or when Michele Bachmann took her bar exam.”

    You do know: She graduated from law school in 1986, all bar exams are given in February and July of each year. She was admitted to the Minnesota Bar Association (which confers the ‘license’ to practice law) in December of 1986 – so she must have taken the Bar exam in Minnesota. AND she either sat for the exam in Feb 86 (allowed in some states to take exam before graduation) or in July of 86 (because you can’t be admitted to the bar and given a license if you haven’t passed the bar).

    “But the major question NO ONE is asking, if the school lost its accreditation, why was Michele Bachmann allowed to keep her Juris Doctorate degree? “… “she would have to have a JD (Juris Doctrate), but technically, her school lost the accreditation for that, so technically, she has no JD. (Website for the American Bar Association”

    Technically you are wrong – and your link is out of order – so I cannot even tell why you believe Accreditation has anything to do with whether a college can confer a JD. She graduated from law school – meaning she obtained a JD. Accreditation has nothing to do with whether a college can confer a JD. Accreditation has everything to do with whether you can sit for the bar exam. If the school is accredited during the time you are earning your degree, you can sit for the exam. Losing accreditation after obtaining a JD would not affect your qualification to sit for the bar exam. (I do not know of any State Bar that will allow a law school graduate from an unaccredited school to sit for the Bar – there may be).

    “So, if she did not take the bar, how was she able to try (in her words) “thousands of cases” for the IRS in a court of law? Although, I could not find any cases she has tried…. Ever.”

    First, your statement begins with a fallacy – you cited authority which CONFIRMS that she DID sit for the bar exam (no one is the member of any state bar association unless they passed the bar exam). As for the thousands of trials: A citation to her quote would be nice since there were so many erroneous statements in your piece. Maybe she said she “handled” thousands of cases – which would not be difficult to believe given the time she was with the IRS.

    “These are some pretty serious indiscretions if she cannot provide some kind of proof.”

    Please, tell us, what indiscretions? You didn’t mention a SINGLE indiscretion in your piece. zilch, zip, nada.

    This is NOT a personal attack against the writer. And I do not like Bachmann or her politics (she’s an opportunistic phony IMO) but if you are going to do a piece like this – use something factual. Use her statements against her (she misstates stuff all the time), use her politics, anything that is factual – anything that can back up your opinion that she has serious indiscretions that she is trying to cover up. This is a sad attempt, and sadder still, it took only a few minutes to eviscerate all of the ‘facts’ that you are ‘so strict about’.

  • As for the question of Oral Roberts accreditation, that was a matter of some controversy. As I recall the ABA tried to deny certification and Oral Roberts successfully sued claiming religious discrimination. Eventually, a compromise was reached whereby Oral Roberts received “provisional accreditation.” Bottom line, the Oral Roberts law school was accredited.

    • Just for clarification, the Coburn School of Law lost its accreditation just after Bachmann graduated because it closed. Bachmann was in the last accredited class that graduated. It was accredited (provisionally) when Bachmann went there and when she graduated. It’s subsequent loss of accreditation when it closed does not affect the status or legitimacy of her J.D. for purposes of sitting for the Bar Exam. When applying for the Bar Exam, she would have been regarded as having a degree from an accredited school because it was accredited when she graduated.

  • Is this some sort of silly response to the “Birthers” and their nonsense? I have lots of problems with Bachmann’s lack of honesty about a lot of things. She’s among the most frequent liars exposed by factcheck.org. But she graduated from law school and passed the Bar. That I am certain of. If you googled my name and “bar exam” you wouldn’t get anything meaningful either. That’s now how it works.

    Apparently the author of that article did not even consider the simple task of looking up at the Minnesota Bar website to see if she is listed as a licensed attorney there. She is. Though, like the Obamas, she is not currently licensed to practice law having allowed her license to go inactive because maintaining it would cost time and money and is not necessary if not actively practicing law. But she would not be on that list had she not passed the bar.

  • Remember: Bachmann’s job is to make Pawlenty look reasonable. She may not realize that (…she is bona fide nutzo …) but focussing on her only makes garden-variety extremists like T-Paw seem relatively normal. I’d suggest not falling for the trap.

    That said, I’d like to commend you for doing research and hope you keep it up. Citizen-journalism is the only antidote to corporate journalism. As others have written above, the dates and stuff of Bachmann’s career aren’t out of line, but you would not necessarily know the difference between law school, the bar exam, bar association membership and so forth. Even lawyers get confused on those points (…as I know from having worked at one for years.)
    It may be better to concentrate on Bachmann’s present-day nuttiness or, better still, the GOP’s attack on voter registrations. I suspect no-one will be Obama so the GOP will concentrate on Congress and the states; if they can keep you from voting, they will get all they want and Obama will be a figurehead.

  • No one loses their degree if a school loses accreditation. In fact an un-accredited school can issue all the degrees they want (Like Bob Jones University). The accreditation is just a means by which a third party says, “Yes, this is a good school”.

  • While I no way want to appear to be defending this whackjob (Bachmann, that is), I would like to point out that in some (all?) states, a law degree is not required to take the bar exam. So regardless of whether or not her law school lost it’s accredited status, if she can demonstrate the necessary legal knowledge, she can pass the bar…

    • The only remaining state where a law degree from an accredited school is not required to sit for the Bar Exam is California. That’s how Birther flake and all around nutjob Orly Taitz managed to get a license there even though she went to law school by correspondence.

      • Just a FYI–Virginia does not require a law degree as you can still study under an attorney or firm that is willing to sponsor you and “read the law” You may then take the bar exam however you may also only practice in VA.

  • Joan J. Fahlgren

    I am a retired IRS attorney. Believe me NO IRS attorney tries thousands of cases, most cases settle and the average attorney generally tries no more than three or four cases a year. To be an above average trial attorney would take many years of experience. IRS attorneys practice only in the Tax Court which is a traveling court, visiting districts only a few times per year, not a court where there is the opportunity to make an appearance every week.

    • As a current Federal employee, I can check for personnel records for IRS employees. The database has no record of Bachmann under that name or her maiden name. Unless her records have been deleted for some reason, it doesn’t appear that she was an IRS employee during the period of time she claims.

  • Should be investigated for being UnAmerican!

    • Do we really need to be throwing around a term (un-American) her group’s predecessors used to smear people who didn’t agree with them?

  • Voice of Reason

    All of this is much ado about nothing. There are plenty of stupid lawyers and Bachmann is one of them. All bar passage means is that one has crammed for and successfully passed an artificial standardized test. One need only to reference her public statements to determine conclusively that she does not know how to think.

  • I find it infinitely amusing that someone (Joey) questioning another’s level of sophistication had not even the miniscule amount of sophistication required to distinguish the proper use of “too” vs. “to.” I’m sorry, but most grade school children know when to use one vs. the other. BTW – FULL snark intended!

  • Interesting. At the very least, there are some questions here that MB needs to clear up. Question is, why has no one (especially the press) dug this up before? If she were a Democrat, this would have been spread all over the news long ago.

    Liberal media, my ass!

  • Bowling for Revenge brings up a good point: maybe she just worked in the legal department. I’m in MInnesota and I heard a few weeks ago on the radio that if you end up in a job like Bachmann had with the IRS, it’s usually because you screwed up the bar exam.

    She’s touting her ‘resume’. We all polish the wording on on our resume’s to make it sound more impressive. HOWEVER, when you are a public figure, you need to be more factual than Bachmann has the ability to be.

    In March 2011 her staff told a reporter “Mrs Bachmann is focusing on work in her district this weekend”. The reporter found out she was actually in Hawaii that same weekend. How does that help her constituents??

  • Courtney, as an attorney I can tell you this: if she was admitted to the Minnesota bar in 1986, that is when she took the bar exam. Like most law school graduates, she took it right after she graduated from law school or she would not have been admitted to the bar in Minnesota in 1986. She had to pass the ethics exam (professional responsibility) and probably took it her last year of school, like many of us did. As far as losing accreditation, the school still had it when she graduated, which is why she had the degree necessary to sit for the Minnesota bar exam. The school she graduated from was losing it going forward which is why the school closed.

    I’m no fan of MB. In fact I found this site doing a search for whether she ever passed the bar. Also, you should know that the standards for graduate work (the LLM) tend to be a bit lower than for entry to the same school for the JD. And as an attorney for the IRS in the DC area, she would have had an advantage getting in. This was the Reagan era and she probably had some nice references because of her politics, which gave her an additional advantage.

    • Margie has the most cogent comments here. MB had to pass the bar (unless Minn. has rules like some states about either govt. attys. or law school teachers). The “timing” explanation is right on. And the comments about graduate work is also very accurate (in fact often the LLM studies are pretty much slam-dunk admissions because so few people pursue them) – along with the comments about govt. recs she might have gotten. So – with no offense to Winona State students, MB better stay away from high school sophomores taking AP American History.

  • As a current student of Winona State, I’d just like to point out that we would very much like to not be reminded of the fact that she got her BA here or that she ever stepped foot on this campus. Nearly all of the university, with the exception of the college Republicans here, find her a much greater source of embarrassment for the university than anything else.

    Just pointing out that we’re not proud of being stuck with her.

  • I am awaiting approval – but there is a new article that has mroe info in it – thanks to those of you who looked into it.

    Jane I encourage anyone to do research and I do not mind being called out on my bullshit, but the comment was a bit much listing the ‘time’ it took you to find the info.

    I am just a girl with a computer who is studying marketing – not journalism or law.

  • BowlingFor Revenge

    Her Martindale listing does not even mention Wm&Mary…which is very strange. Does anyone know for certain she has a real “degree” and not an honorary one?
    http://www.martindale.com/Michele-M-Bachmann/760284-lawyer.htm
    Sorry this is so choppy but my mind works that way :/

  • BowlingFor Revenge

    Oh, and are you looking under her MAIDEN name AMBLE?

  • BowlingFor Revenge

    What’s the possibility she never passed ANY bar and just worked in the legal dept at the IRS?
    I’ve known a few who slugged through law school and gave up after their 2nd attempt at the state bar.

  • What I put up was MN law license, not bar association. Law license is definitely pertinent to your subject, more even than bar membership. My snark, I guess, had to do with your search terms which, with all due respect, were on the lame side. No offense, take it as an offer of help if you can. I only meant to be mildly snarky.

    But the law license makes the whole thing less odd looking – I imagine there are reasons for attending a school in one state while licensed in another. That said – MB at W&M? That’s ridiculous. I can’t imagine her gaining admission there unless the law school is on a whole different level (or planet) than the college.

    No question her background is sketchy. She’s sketchy. Have you seen the video of her first breakout PR? She was a MN state legislator and was filmed hiding in some shrubbery spying on a pro-choice demonstration. When she was exposed we all got an early look at her now trademark word salad with bullshit dressing and I still have no clue what she thought she was doing. She started out ridiculous.

    She came to national prominence calling for the press to investigate anti-Americanism in congress – I think what we as a country need more is a thorough press investigation of her biography. (And I think you do shed interesting light on it despite my snark.)

    Because I am old I have a photocopy (way pre-Xerox) of my handwritten birth certificate (1949). She is probably closer to my kids’ ages than mine, as is the president, and all I have ever had for their bcs are those computer generated forms with a state seal. They look almost identical to BO’s.

    Now you can go ahead and let this appear, I hope I’ve been nice enough. But, as an old woman, let me advise you this, if you’re going to do this political blogging thing, especially with the relatively aggressive tone you have here (and don’t get me wrong, I love an aggressive tone in politics), you gotta get yourself a slightly tougher skin.

    Regards (and keep hunting)

    • Second Amendment Democrat

      Jane, you said that like someone who believes this is politics. Sorry, politics is the art of compromise, and the GOP has made it clear they are not interested. So it is no longer discourse, that has failed. We are at war. It is the billionaires and who they can buy against the rest of the world (not just the U.S.)

      So you, my dear, are living in the past along with the majority of ‘regular’ Republicans who see this current spate of posturing as rhetoric. It is not. It is war, fascists against humans, and we SHALL respond appropriately.

    • Actually, Jane, she was born in 1953, so she’s much closer to your age than to your kids’. Of course, that will just lead to an investigation of her plastic surgery…

  • Jim the lib in purgatory

    It is about time that these dispicable people get exposed for what they are. Lairs that prey upon the weak-minded, to lazy to check the facts tea baggers just to exploit them to further their ideas. I do believe that they say whatever they happen to think will get them ahead, truth be damned. Their followers have been conditionede by years of Rush and Glen telling them “don’t waste your time doing any research, I already took care of that for you”, and a whole lot of “trust me”.

  • I just want to say Jane – that being a part of the MN bar association in 1986 – during the time she was supposedly enrolled in a VA law school OR living in OK…. does that not strike you as funny? I was looking for bar exams in the states she *was* IN not the ones she is in NOW.

    MN bar association means crap especially at the time of filing she did not live in MN…. so while that took you 3 minutes, you came up empty everywhere else that I came up empty as well. No need to be smart and get an attitude about it.

    • It is not unusual that she would have a bar license while getting an LLM in law from William & Mary. While it may seem backwards to the usual routine, a LLM in a particular area of law generally requires that one get their J.D. in law first. Most those in school for an LLM are already licensed lawyers. Put simply, a LLM is a way to get a specialization within law once you are already a lawyer.

      • Keith you are right that one must have their JD from an accredited law school prior to attempting to obtain their LLM. However in Ms. Bachmann’s case there are too many red flags. I am well familiar with the programs and degrees offered at William and Mary’s College of Law and first of all they have not and do not offer an LLM in taxation–check out their home page—http://law.wm.edu/academics/programs/index.php and you will note that the only LLM is for foreign students. From their website: “Our innovative LL. M. program is designed for foreign-educated attorneys who want a comprehensive overview of the American legal system. We have welcomed students from all over the world, from India to China, Czech Republic to Thailand” I don’t believe Bachmann falls into this category. Additionally W&M hosts one of the best law schools in the country and is not an easy to be accepted. If she only had a supposed JD from a non-accredited law school I have no idea how she was allowed into W&M. My conspiracy theory is that she enrolled in W&M about the same time I entered University of Miami’s law school which did offer an LLM in Taxation and at that time women were needed in the law schools. If she scored high enough on her LSAT’s then she may have received her JD and not an LLM from William and Mary but I am unable to prove that theory. Once the presidential campaign goes into full speed I am sure her opponents in the GOP and the Democrats will leave no stone unturned and this could be her downfall. In this day of instant communication, internet, Youtube and fact check sites it is still inconceivable to me that politicians stretch the truth to this degree and think that the truth will not be disclosed.

  • Well, that took a good 3 minutes.

    The Minnesota lawyer registration database:

    http://www.mncourts.gov/mars/AttorneyDetail.aspx?id=0179863

    Suspended for non payment of fees.

    Lawyer ID 0179863
    Date Admitted 12/19/86
    Last Payment 01/05/09

    Authorized to Practice Law? NOT AUTHORIZED: SUSPENDED FOR NON-PAYMENT OF FEES
    CLE Status VOLUNTARILY RESTRICTED (BY CHOICE)

    Last Name BACHMANN
    First Name MICHELE
    Middle Name MARIE
    ————————————–
    Didn’t show up in the DC bar.

    A Compilation of State Lawyer Licensing Databases
    http://www.llrx.com/features/lawyerlicenses.htm
    didn’t show up in VA
    OK requires a phone call.
    didn’t show up in IA.

    I don’t know if any of them would go back before ’86.

    Couldn’t find individual bar exam results for any time.

    —————————————-

    Not a defender of MB, the woman’s an idiot and an embarrassment but come on, “Michele Bachmann bar exam”? I googled “Minnesota Law License” and then other states.

    Minnesota took ~3 min. The others + typing this took another 5-10 or so. I do not have a college degree.

    • An impressive response but at some points too sparse to comprehend. Some college grads never let facts get in their way …! (Palin, Bachman, Rove, et al.)

  • One of the readers found this http://www.mncourts.gov/mars/AttorneyDetail.aspx?id=0179863

    This still does not explain how she was able to take the exam when the college she received her JD from was found to be not an accredited law school and was under investigation since 1979

  • Ohhhh, I hope someone does some research into this whack-jobs background. I’d absolutely love it if something is revealed that makes her slink back under the rock she, and She Who Shall Not Be Named, crawled out from under. I’d love to find out she and her husband have been rooking the country outta money too.

    • wOW…..Maybe you should do this kind of thorough research on Obama. If you put this much time into his background, you might discover how unqualified (for many reasons) he is to be president. Michelle Bachman really has no power to hurt this country. Obama, on the other hand, is destroying the constitution. Seems to me you wasted a lot of time digging up facts on the wrong person.

      • Seriously? You people constantly asking for more information on Obama — who I can safely assume has publically released more than any previous President, all at the behest of his naysayers — are just like the Creationists asking for more transitional fossils no matter how many are found. Both groups have gone past the point of healthy skepticism and well into stubborn ignorance.

      • Second Amendment Democrat

        Destroying the Constitution – aren’t you talking about the asshole that lied about WMDs to invade a sovereign nation in violation of every principle the nation was founded on? The one who conspired to commit 9/11, gave away the surplus Clinton created? Authorized torture, violation of civil rights and creation of a fascist society? That Obama? OH, NO, sorry, that was BUSH, you ignorant troll! Go shoot yourself before someone does it for you. The war is ON, motherfucker. Your lies are exposed, and we are coming for YOU.

      • vanessafromdc

        You sound like one of the nut’s that still want to see his Birth Certificate….Get a life!!!

      • Gosh… Obama isn’t qualified to be President? Really? And by what set of criteria did you use to make that useless, and silly judgement? Hmm… let’s see: Graduated with honors from what is the most demanding law school in the country, and maybe the world; elected Senator to the US from one of the most demanding states in the Union; learned politics in the city that defines 20th Century political machinery; continually demonstrates a superior intellect by navigating the endless trough of useless spew from a crazed and energised right wing, without losing his charm, and grown-up sense of position and place in history; and actually has been getting things accomplished, despite the overwhelming resistance and prevaricative efforts from the right wing? Statements like yours are increasingly hollow echoes of regressive racism and fear, and continue to devalue anything from the Republican side of politics. This kind of bleating only serves to make those who put it out there appear more and more irrelevant, shallow and useless. Try to grow up.

        • Has he ever created a job?

          • Courtney Lynn

            Yes, he has created many opportunities for jobs such as infrastructure and government jobs because that is all ANYONE in a public office can create. The better question to ask is how many jobs has the GOP destroyed? By cutting programs – even government programs, the GOP caused the unemployment to rise. Because believe it or not government jobs are still JOBS.

      • Jan NEH Civil

        “Obama is destroying the constitution.”

        Show how. Cite the part that he’s destroying and show how.

        Better, cite the source you’re parroting. Beck? Limbaugh?

        Show how Obama is less-than-qualified. It’s easy to say, show it. Does it follow your received wisdom from Glenn or Rush? Show something.

        YOU WON’T.

        • Um, he’s destroying all of the same parts that Bush did, actually. He just signed a renewal of the Patriot Act, and the intervention in Libya hasn’t stopped even though Congress hasn’t formally reauthorized it as required by the War Powers Act. But since conservatives approve of the government having, for example, the power to arrest people without charges, they never cite those things as real objections to Obama.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

x
Click "Like" to get the latest updates