Obama birthplace attorney files new allegations

Orange County Register ^

[USALiberty]

Laguna Niguel attorney Orly Taitz had her lawsuit challenging Barack Obama’s presidency thrown out on Oct. 29, but that hasn’t stopped her from filling a new document in the case with a broad array of allegations.

“There was a concerted and a well orchestrated effort by a number of individuals to assassinate my character, endanger my law license and ultimately derail my case against Mr. Obama,” Taitz writes in the document filed with the federal court today. “A number of criminal activities were perpetrated upon this court.”

[sometime lurker]

Not sure of the make and model of her car, but it looks more like someone was conspiring to give her bad gas mileage.

Good one. I think you were conspiring to have me spray coffee on my screen.

[tired_old_conservative]

“There was a concerted and a well orchestrated effort by a number of individuals to assassinate my character, endanger my law license and ultimately derail my case against Mr. Obama.”

“Orly's doing a bang up job of accomplishing all that on her own. She doesn't need the help of a number of individuals.”

And how. The thoroughness and attention to detail with which she manages to make any discussion point completely insane is impressive.

[BuckeyeTexan]

Asking a court to accept a website as EVIDENCE is not at all the same thing as mentioning something as background/context.

Yes. I think the Obama defense attorney(s) mentioned the website in a footnote.

[Brytani]

I’m pretty sure when Mario Apuzzo’s case was thrown out the judge cited online sources in the dismissal. I can search Scribbed and see if I can find the case. The one I’m specifically speaking of is where the judge fined Apuzzo and threatened further sanctions if he continued to file frivolous suits.

There have been so many cases it’s hard to keep them all straight - like I said, I’ll search Scribbed to see what I can find plus I can go onto Pacer if needed.

I am absolutely positive websites have been cited from parties other than Taitz.

You’re 100% right that there is a huge difference between citing a website and introducing it into evidence. That is actually one of the reasons I get so infuriated by Obama and his supporters; they constantly point to a .jpg on a website as “proof” Obama is a US citizen.

While that “evidence” would never hold up in a court of law, some consider it as rock solid evidence of Obama’s eligibility while others, including me, find their “evidence” opens up more questions then answers and it is only proves that Obama will not provide authentic, certified documents that would prove his eligibility.

[tired_old_conservative]

I seriously doubt that Taitz is “free of any mental disease and psychological impairment.”

I laughed at that. Good one.

[BuckeyeTexan]

Sometimes I deprive myself of sleep because certain people on the Internet are wrong, wrong, wrong and they must be corrected and shown the error of their ways.

;-p

[BuckeyeTexan]

That EO is irrelevant, as you suggest. WND continues to perpetuate the Internet rumor that Obama’s first EO was to seal all of his records. It’s repeated ad nauseum here on FR but it has no basis in fact.

[deport]

That EO is irrelevant, as you suggest.

---

Granted but the birthers can’t grasp that and continue to act like it has some reference when it doesn’t.

[BuckeyeTexan]

Here’s a link to a spreadsheet formatted document that lists the eligibility cases and various details about them. It’s decidely biased against birthers, but it’s a list nonetheless.

http://tiny.cc/BirtherScore

[MilspecRob]

She is exhausted. She is nervous. She is frustrated.

She is a nutter butter.

[Sibre Fan]

Judge Land, in dismissing Rhodes' TRO case, said in the "background" section of the Opinion (i.e., not in the "Discussion" portion of the ruling in which the rationale for the ruling was set forth) as follows: Plaintiff’s counsel speculates that President Obama was not born in the United States based upon the President’s alleged refusal to disclose publicly an “official birth certificate” that is satisfactory to Plaintiff’s counsel and her followers. She therefore seeks to have the judiciary compel the President to produce “satisfactory” proof that he was born in the United States.Counsel makes these allegations although a “short-form” birth certificate has been made publicly available which indicates that the President was born in Honolulu, Hawaii on August 4, 1961. (Opinion at 3.) So - he didn't rely on it, and didn't say that it was proof of anything. He merely noted that the short form had been made publicly available. Again - this type of "aside" comment is far different from the situation where Orly, and others, have repeatedly submitted copies of blogs, etc., as EVIDENCE to support their various claims.

[El Sordo]

“I think you were conspiring to have me spray coffee on my screen.”

I had hopes...

[Brytani]

It is my understanding that cases where Obama is specifically listed in the complaint, he has used private law firms paid from his PAC and/or campaign funds; once he was sworn into office the Justice Department took over his defense. Justice also took on the defense of Cheney, Pelosi and others who currently or previously held elected/government positions and have been named in various complaints.

I’m of the opinion that there is a huge conflict of interest allowing Justice to defend Obama. Especially on cases filed prior to his inauguration when he was for all intents and purposes a private citizen.

After he took office our tax dollars should not be used to defend a person who in all likelihood should never have been allowed to run for President let alone be sworn in. Our own tax dollars are being used to assure a usurper is able to stay in office.

Whether Obama is paying his legal bills or our tax dollars are paying is irrelevant. The real question is why someone who holds one of the most powerful positions in the world would spend one single cent or fight against showing an authentic document that would satisfy the requirements of the US Constitution and put to rest the question of their legal right to hold office.

[Sibre Fan]

It is my understanding that cases where Obama is specifically listed in the complaint, he has used private law firms paid from his PAC and/or campaign funds; once he was sworn into office the Justice Department took over his defense.

Not quite. For cases that were filed before he was sworn in -- and that were not dismissed by the Court sua sponte before any defendant had to appear, either DNC counsel or his private counsel handled the defense. In those cases, private counsel continues to handle the defense today. For example, private counsel is handling the current appeal in Hollister For all cases filed after he was sworn in, DOJ (or some other gov't agency) is handling the defense.

However, in most of the cases filed before and after he was sworn in, courts dismissed the case sua sponte before any defense attorney had to appear. So, in the vast majority of cases, no defense was needed.

The real question is why someone who holds one of the most powerful positions in the world would spend one single cent or fight against showing an authentic document that would satisfy the requirements of the US Constitution and put to rest the question of their legal right to hold office.

As I noted before, Orly and Kerchner and Hemenway have made crystal clear in their court documents, that "just showing his actual long form birth certificate" would end absolutely nothing. These attorneys (and other plaintiffs) say that it doesn't matter where Obama was born because his father was a UK citizen and so, under their "theory," he's not a NBC even if he was born in the US. So, in truth, there's no point -- or advantage to Obama at all -- in producing his long form, because that will have exactly ZERO effect on plaintiffs' two-citizen parent argument.

[Brytani]

Thank you for the link, it will come in handy.

Btw, is anyone else having problems with FR running INCREDIBLY slow today, even to the point of timing out?

[deport]

Btw, is anyone else having problems with FR running INCREDIBLY slow today, even to the point of timing out?

---

Yep...................

[patriot08]

Go back to DU. You’re not making a headway here.

[Brytani]

Basically the judge in his footnotes states a short form b/c has been made public and uses this as rational for part of his ruling in Rhodes. Yet, the very evidence he is alluding to has been brought up in multiple cases as a fake, insufficient to prove eligibility etc.

Not being a lawyer I may not understand why a judge would rely upon a .jpg on a website to reach a decision when the validity of the image is in question.

By relying on the image, isn’t the judge giving credence and authenticity to both the website and an image that appears on it without holding any hearing to determine if the image is authentic in the first place?

[RowdyFFC]

You just keep on deluding yourself, and I’ll keep on supporting the work Orly Taitz is doing...AGAIN, if you’re a lawyer, pull your big boy pants up and help her! BUT of COURSE you won’t...it’s above your pay grade!

[roaddog727]

“One thing I have noticed is that justice seems to be a game for lawyers. Not knowing how to file a brief derails an entire proceeding.”

Bingo!