Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Judge applies different standard to Obama than to Orly Taitz
24AheadDotCom ^ | 9/16/09 | 24AheadDotCom

Posted on 09/17/2009 10:56:30 AM PDT by lonewacko_dot_com

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-27 next last

1 posted on 09/17/2009 10:56:30 AM PDT by lonewacko_dot_com
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: lonewacko_dot_com

Good post, lonewacko. That struck me, too. He swallowed the COLB, no questions asked. What a judge.


2 posted on 09/17/2009 10:58:28 AM PDT by Genoa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lonewacko_dot_com; LucyT

This was a setup IMHO. For this judge to all of a sudden have this hearing the day after the CA judge set a hearing date smelled fishy to me, but I am just part of the 55% of Americans who don’t want O’s policies to work and therefore I am a racist.


3 posted on 09/17/2009 10:59:19 AM PDT by stockpirate (Joe Wilson Truth Czar for a Free Republic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lonewacko_dot_com

Perhaps Taitz should start posting her stuff on a web page to point out to the judge the stupidity of accepting Zero’s JPG file as a BC.


4 posted on 09/17/2009 11:02:51 AM PDT by RingerSIX
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lonewacko_dot_com

That is horse hockey. No digital image on the internet is proof of anything. No document expert would vouch for its authenticity for that simple reason—it could be a wholly digital creation and have no paper image at all to back it up.

I admire Orly’s pluck but she really needs more experienced assistance in these cases. The deck is stacked against her to begin with simply because of who her target is but she now has the additional burden of having developed the reputation of a courtroom novice who can be shoved around by plaintiffs’ attorneys and the bench.


5 posted on 09/17/2009 11:02:53 AM PDT by Scanian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lonewacko_dot_com

6 posted on 09/17/2009 11:04:56 AM PDT by Hodar (Who needs laws .... when this "feels" so right?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lonewacko_dot_com; stockpirate; Fred Nerks; null and void; george76; PhilDragoo; Candor7; BP2; ...
.

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

7 posted on 09/17/2009 11:06:15 AM PDT by LucyT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lonewacko_dot_com

Did Obama’s attorneys pout the COLB into evidence? Was it authenticated? Then it should not have been considered. So now the internet, twitter, political party contributions count as vetting authentication and evidence? I guess we don’t need any judges, we should be able to vote online from evidence we gather on the internet. Yeah that’s the ticket


8 posted on 09/17/2009 11:07:03 AM PDT by rolling_stone (no more bailouts, the taxpayers are out of money!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Genoa

Sorry, but the Judge was perfectly correct. Ms. Taitz bore the burden of proof. The birth certificate proffered by Ms. Taitz not being admissible, there was no basis on which to proceed.


9 posted on 09/17/2009 11:07:57 AM PDT by Mr. Lucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: LucyT

Huh? So all you have to do is put it on the internet to make it authentic?


10 posted on 09/17/2009 11:22:41 AM PDT by azishot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Lucky

The Twitter argument should equally apply to the authenticity of the so called COLB. I.e. it is widely held as fraudulent.


11 posted on 09/17/2009 11:24:56 AM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (Unashamed Sarah-Bot.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: lonewacko_dot_com

You aren’t supposed to expose the duplicity of an obamanoid shil like Clay Land. Shhhhh


12 posted on 09/17/2009 11:27:20 AM PDT by MHGinTN (Dems, believing they cannot be deceived, it is impossible to convince them when they are deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck

Fine, but the Plaintiff has the burden of proof.


13 posted on 09/17/2009 11:28:19 AM PDT by Mr. Lucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: lonewacko_dot_com

I read this as the judge making an obervation that other supposedly BCs are out there. I don’t see where he declared that the Obama website BC was authenic. Thus you need to have evidence of the one you produce as being authenic.


14 posted on 09/17/2009 11:28:55 AM PDT by deport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Scanian

The obamanoid kneepad judge coneviently ignores thaqt TRUTH that Obama first posted an obvious fraud ont eh Internet to prove his eligibility. That first image lacked a raised seal. So when that image exhibit was questioned, the obama goons redid it to add a raised seal, but it was added to the first exhibit as easily proven by markers which may someday come out at trial. So why would a judge accept anything the proven liar/fraud posts on the Internet?... Because as a good little commie stooge he does as he is told.


15 posted on 09/17/2009 11:30:36 AM PDT by MHGinTN (Dems, believing they cannot be deceived, it is impossible to convince them when they are deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: lonewacko_dot_com

The reference to Obama’s “short form” is only an acknowledgement that Orly has ignored it. The judge doesn’t draw any conclusion from it.

The reference to Orly’s Kenyan certificate is different. She has the burden of proving the document, and the judge correctly points out that she fails to do so.


16 posted on 09/17/2009 11:31:36 AM PDT by mlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Lucky

Discovery was never allowed. There was no shortage of people willing to testify that the image bore the signs of fraud.


17 posted on 09/17/2009 11:32:02 AM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (Unashamed Sarah-Bot.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN

Exactly. I’ve defended Orly vigorously here in the past but I’ve started to wonder how much of the rejection she receives from Dhimmi judges is the result of their bias and how much is the result of her presentation. I’d like to see her enlist the services of a good tort lawyer who has been around for a while and knows how to push the right buttons and not make silly procedural mistakes which incur the judges’ wrath.


18 posted on 09/17/2009 11:45:22 AM PDT by Scanian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN

And in the mean time, other court stooges overturn the Indiana voter ID law while we can’t get a little discovery.


19 posted on 09/17/2009 11:45:27 AM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: LucyT

Thanks.

No surprise there.

Globalists have long played favorites to the max.


20 posted on 09/17/2009 11:52:08 AM PDT by Quix (POL Ldrs quotes fm1900 2 presnt: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2130557/posts?page=81#81)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-27 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson