Skip to comments.Judge Tosses Out Captain's Complaint Questioning President's Birth; Orly Taitz Put on Notice
Posted on 09/17/2009 7:04:49 AM PDT by BobMV
U.S. District Court Judge Clay Land tossed out on Wednesday a complaint by an Army captain fighting deployment to Iraq by questioning the legitimacy of President Barack Obama.
Land also put attorney Orly Taitz, who represents Capt. Connie Rhodes and is a leader in the national birther movement, on notice by stating that she could face sanctions if she ever again files in his court a similar frivolous lawsuit a document that at one point the judge states that a middle school student could find irony in.
(Rhodes) has presented no credible evidence and has made no reliable factual allegations to support her unsubstantiated, conclusory allegations and conjecture that President Obama is ineligible to serve as president of the United States, Land states in his order. Instead, she uses her complaint as a platform for spouting political rhetoric, such as her claims that the president is an illegal usurper, an unlawful pretender, [and] an unqualified imposter.
* Judge Land's court ruling
Rhodes, who filed her complaint Sept. 4 in the Columbus Division of U.S. District Court, argued that some facts point to Obama not being naturalized or possibly an illegal immigrant.
This plaintiff cannot in good conscience obey orders originating from a chain of command from this merely de facto president, Rhodes complaint states. This plaintiff cannot be lawfully compelled to obey this de facto presidents orders.
In his order, Land states in a footnote that Obama defeated seven opponents in a grueling primary campaign that cost the contenders more than $300 million. Obama then moved on to the general election, where he faced Sen. John McCain, who Land states got $84 million to wage his campaign. ...(more)
Been posted before.
Oh, sorry. I searched and didn’t find it.
The judge needs a bib. He’s got some Oboma on his chin.
Don’t feel bad. Yours is number four.
It sounds like the judge is trying to take the law into his own hands illegally.
For Orly Taitz, it's back to Santa Ana, CA. But after reading Judge Land's (a GWB appointed former Republican State Senator with a conservative record) 14-page smackdown, I'm pretty sure this woman is insane and she's probably not going to fare much better in Judge Carter's courtroom.
For Capt. Rhodes? She's likely off to Iraq with her military career incapable of ever being repaired after this fiasco.
“FREE THE LONG FORM!”
This is exactly why we need to pass laws in every state legislature requiring presidential and vice presidential candidates, in order to be placed on the state ballot, the authentication, certification and publication of their long-form birth certificate, and to set the definition of a “natural born” citizen as a person being born of two U.S. citizens. If we can change the laws in every state, this kind of thing can be avoided in the future, say in 2012.
This was a bullying eomtional outburst by a Judge, hardly a legal ruling — a rant!
When representatives of the gov’t start becoming a law unto themselves,
the citizens of America will need to remind them about whose consent they need in order to govern.
What does ANY of that have to do if Obama is Constitutionally qualified? Just release the appropriate documentation and put this issue to bed. Why is that so hard for Obama?
I would suggest it wouldn't have to be every state legislature. If just a couple of states passed such laws it would be a victory on the issue. For instance, if Texas and Florida passed it that would be 61 electoral votes out of the 270 needed to be elected. A sizable number. However, even if it was just Montana and Wyoming and their whopping 6 electoral votes it would surely open the door to questioning if the Obama campaign opted not to file campaign papers in those states. Point being, just get it passed in any state now and build from there.
No, it sounds like the judge is rightfully chewing out a plaintiff for wasting his time with little more than “serious accusations”. There is no legal evidence that any law has been broken here, and no demonstrable harm done to warrant court-ordered investigation thereof.
You don’t formally & publicly question the legitimacy of your boss’s boss’s boss’s boss’s boss’s boss without solid evidence bringing that legitimacy into question.
I too think, based on _circumstantial_ evidence and a desire to believe it, that the Obama is ineligible. I also recognize that there is a complete absence of anything positively incriminating him, and conclude that like it or not we’re stuck with him. This issue cannot move forward without some solid evidence of ineligibility, which we don’t have, and you can’t just waltz into a courtroom demanding the judge demand evidence of the accused.
I have been looking at the purchase of an interactive map to build a website to list the states where people can recommended their 2010 Congressional candidates they would like to see Sarah Palin endorse, such as Marco Rubio in Florida. It seems to be the lowest cost map yet for this kind of thing. It's at Fla-Shop, for $69.
We can just as easy build another interactive map of the United States to keep tract of this effort as well.
Anyway, that's my idea. Dos anybody else have any others?
This judge should be tossed out for incompetence, and for unlawfully threatening a lawyer for representing a legitimate case. There is no way that this case could be determined frivolous without discovery.
Gee ya think
What's next? Under the category of "People who just cannot take a hint" we have this:
Keep your sword sharp, we’re just starting to get at the truth. This is bigger than 1 judge, one plaintiff or some idiot on the internet celebrating a setback. You can laugh and fight it all you want. The search for the truth is the highest value. We’ll carry the water for those of you who want to giggle and ridicule.
Or the moron who filed her legal documents without signing them? Again?
Did you ever write that letter to OB asking him to open the files so he could prove what idiots we are?
You don't need Obama to see that.
NS: seeking the truth = being an idiot. I rest your case.
ABSOLUTELY. Only need just a few by 2012 to stop Obama. What excuse would Obama use to decline to run in several states? Or just ONE for that matter? “Oh, I'm gonna skip Texas.”
What’s next? Under the category of “People who just cannot take a hint” we have this:
If I had seen your name I wouldn’t have bothered to check out the link, but I had already clicked. BUT, this looked like a motion by Orly for the judge to change their mind. In it she points out all kinds of errors by the judge and more or less tells her off. Have I got this right? If so I miss your point.
As I understand it, the judge ordered Orly to pay the legal fees of Obama's lawyers.
If Obama's lawyers submit a legal fees bill to Orly, at least we will finally find out how much it is costing Obama, or the Democratic party, or the taxpayers to defend Obama in court.
1. That is, if we multiply Obama lawyers' fees in this case by the number of legal cases throughout the country, we should be able to get a rough estimate as to how much it is costing Obama to defend himself in court.
2.As we know, some people say it is costing Obama or the Democratic Party or us taxpayers at least 1 million dollars so far to defend Obama.
3.However, some other people say it is costing Obama nothing. Let's see who is right.
4. What is sad and disgusting is this: We all know if Obama called Hawaii officials today to allow Hawaii officials to release Obama's long form birth certificate to the public, it would probably cost Obama nothing.
Birth certificate on Internet: I found the judge's statement that Obama's birth certificate is found on the internet an amazing statement coming from a federal judge in a court of law.
As we know, the Obama birth certificate on the internet was displayed on an Obama controlled site and was not displayed directly on the website of a Hawaii agency.
Note: Obama proudly shows his short form birth certificate on his Obama controlled site, but if anyone asks Obama to give Hawaii permission to publicly release the same short form birth certificate so that the public can examine the same short form birth certificate in one's hands, Obama won't do it.
And if one argues to the Hawaii government that it should release Obama's short form birth certificate to the public because Obama has already released it on his website, the Hawaii government won't do it.
1. So, I found it amazing that the judge would refer to and vouch for a document that one can only see on a site controlled by the Obama camp. Also, it is a document that we can only see and examine on our computer monitor as opposed to seeing and touching the original document while holding it in one's hands.
2. That is, I would think that a federal judge would want to see a birth certificate sent to him directly by the Hawaii government that he can examine in his own hands as opposed to a birth certificate that he can only examine at an Obama controlled website.
3. To my surprise, the following doesn't seem to occur to the judge: If the only place one can see Obama's short form birth certificate is at Obama's own site, then there might be a strong possibility that some person in the Obama camp touched up Obama's short form birth certificate before it was displayed on Obama's site.
4. In other words, the good judge seems to accept the idea that the Obama camp is one truly pure and honest camp, where no one would think about cheating or making illegal changes to Obama's short form birth certificate, when, it is reported on the same internet that some Hawaii officials deny that Hawaii sent anyone an Obama short form birth certificate with the stamp date of June 2007 on the back in June 2007.
5. And doesn't the good judge wonder why a Senator Obama would order a birth certificate from Hawaii in June 2007? Did the judge wonder if Senator Obama lost his original birth certificate and that is why Obama ordered a new one?
6. Maybe it is me, but I find it bizarre that a federal judge would stoop so low as to download Obama's short form birth certificate from Obama's own site and be legally satisfied with what he downloaded.
7. For instance, wouldn't it be legally better and more objective if the good federal judge ordered his own copy from Hawaii of Obama's short and long form birth certificates so that he could be sure that no one outside of the Hawaii government, especially no one in the Obama camp, touched the short and and long form birth certificates before the judge could examine them personally while he held them in his own hands?
8. One good thing I see coming out of all these Obama eligibility court cases that are being dismissed one after another: The community organizer and state senator won't get a free pass during the upcoming 2012 presidential primaries, because Obama will be challenged in every state before he is allowed to put his name on the primary ballots.
9. That is, when Obama signs a state form where he declares that he is a natural born citizen, he better show up with his long form birth certificate, because anti-Obama voters---voters inspired by the failed eligibility court cases--will demand that Obama provide proof that he is a natural born citizen as he stated on his application form.
Not entirely. The judge is a guy, to begin with. And while detailing the list of errors that the judge supposedly made she compounds them by failing to sign it. And you expect Judge Land to take it seriously?
Obama's lawyers are from the U.S. Attorneys Office in Georgia so it shouldn't be hard to find out what they make.
Hey, I spent 12 years in legal litigation.
You don’t know what the heck is going on, do you.
Every member of the Supreme Court, every member of congress, every member of the Joint Chiefs, most members of the DOD, CIA, FBI, Secret Service and state run media, ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, PBS, NPR, MSNBC, Fox and print news, knows that Barack Hussein Obama does NOT meet Article II Section I constitutional requirements for the office he holds. By his own biography, there is NO way he can pass the test. The hard evidence is so far beyond overwhelming, it is ridiculous.
But not ONE member of Americas most powerful people will dare confront Obama and his anti-American cabal on the subject. The Constitution does NOT stand.
Half of the people you expect to stop this insanity are quiet co-conspirators in the silent coup. The other half is paralyzed by fear, motivated only by political self-preservation.
Americans keep asking what they can do because they see that none of their leaders are doing anything to stop the demise of their beloved country. Its the right question, because those leaders are NOT going to stop this thing.
WHO WILL SAVE FREEDOM?
A brave few This is how it was in the beginning, how it has always been and how it will be.
DR. ORLY TAITZ, Phil Berg and Gary Kreep, ALL OF WHOM HAVE MADE DEFENDING THE CONSTITUTION AND THE AMERICAN WAY OF LIFE A PERSONAL AMBITION, IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY CONSTITUTION LEADERSHIP.
A PRECIOUS FEW, BUT THEY EXIST and the walls are indeed closing in on Obama and his evil cabal. IF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE FAIL TO GET BEHIND THESE BRAVE FEW WHO ARE SEEKING PEACEFUL REDRESS, ALL THE PEACEFUL OPTIONS WILL EVAPORATE AS IF THEY NEVER EXISTED. WE WILL RETURN TO A PRE-1776 AMERICA OVERNIGHT..
Do YOU fear Obama?
A precious few, indeed. Lets get behind those few brave patriots who are out there in the trenches every day working to prove Obamas inelgibility:
Dr. Orly has put her lifes blood into this fight. SHE HAS MADE DEFENDING THE CONSTITUTION AND THE AMERICAN WAY OF LIFE A PERSONAL AMBITION, IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY CONSTITUTION LEADERSHIP FROM COWARDLY REPUBLICANS AND THE SCOTUS.
Dr. Orly is the ONLY one out there in the trenches EVERY day hitting Obama on multiple fronts and trying to bring him down. It is reported that she is more than $8,000 in debt from using her own funds for expenses in her flights across the U.S for interviews, speeches, serving papers and meeting with officials.
She has even gone to Isreal and Russia to spread the message about Obamas inelgibility!
She states the case expertly, including the bc and natural born citizen aspect, when not abused by the U.S. state-controlled media. http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/132880
Sure, Dr. Orly makes mistakes. We all do. But Dr. Orly is no dummy. How many of us could go to a foreign country, learn 5 languages, establish a successful dental practice, a successful real estate business AND pass the California state bar- one of the hardest in the U.S. to pass?
She may be a mail order attorney and not a Harvard lawyer, but she IS an attorney with all the rights and privilages of a Harvard lawyer nevertheless!
The point is; she has the passion, the zeal, the courage of her convictions and the love of America and its freedoms (unlike many of our great attorneys and patriots who criticize her) that will not let her give up!
She is exhausted. She is nervous. She is frustrated. It is reported that she gets by on 4-5 hours of sleep per night, and her family is very worried about her health- as well as her safety.
She makes mistakes. But she will NOT give up. She will keep on until she gets it right.
So lets get behind this great little Russian refugee and great American patriot.
Stop tearing her apart. The Obots dont need our help.
The obots are scared to death of this little lady and her determination. Thats why they come out in droves all over the net on forums, chat rooms and even the national news to attack and ridicule.
These threads really bring out the paid Obots, don’ they?
irregardless of what her feelings about the present commander-in-thief is, President Bush (God rest him) began Operation: Iraqi Freedom. The mission has not changed; she is still culpable!!
What the hell kind of nonsensical statement is this? Obama is not being accused of a crime, he is applying for a job. The burden of proof IS on him. This, along with his rant about the "grueling election" (as if that has jack-shit to do with anything) makes me seriously question the competence of this judge.
He’s not applying for a job. He has the job. The plaintiff seeks to change the status quo and has the burden of presenting a factual case.
The reference to the “grueling election” is explained in the text.
He is not being placed in jeopardy. He is enjoying a privileged position. The burden of proof is still on him, before or after the fact of him being hired.
The reference to the grueling election is explained in the text.
I did read the text before I made my statement, which still stands. The judge simply stated that there were many opportunities for discovery, that doesn't mean that discovery was done. We STILL have no PROOF that he is eligible for the job. That fact cannot be gotten around.
No. The burden is on the one bringing the suit.
Given the effort, attention and funds available during the election, if nothing was uncovered that showed Obama to be ineligible, there's a *reason*. You can't find something that doesn't exist. That's the point.
As for proof, there is sufficient legal proof that he was born in Hawaii. That's enough.
No, the burden of proof was always on Obama. Before or after the fact.
Given the effort, attention and funds available during the election, if nothing was uncovered that showed Obama to be ineligible, there's a *reason*.
Nonsense. You could have 100 lawyers backed with billions of dollars, and as long as Barak refuses to sign the form, all of the "available resourses" and "grueling" arguements mean nothing. And we are not lookiing for something that "showed Obama to be ineligible , we are looking for something that showed Obama to be eligible. As for "there is sufficient legal proof that he was born in Hawaii. That's enough.", that's not "enough", that's "the question".
Sorry, you don't get to make it up as you go along. Obama has no burden to prove anything at this point in time. If someone wants to go to court to sue him, that person has a burden to present facts to prove their case. It doesn't matter if you think it shouldn't work that way, it does.
Nope. Nobody produced evidence that Obama wasn't eligible because none existed. None exists now.
"As for "there is sufficient legal proof that he was born in Hawaii. That's enough.", that's not "enough", that's "the question"."
It is enough. Being born in Hawaii would make him eligible.