Replies

Ok, yes. I think I understand what you're asking now.

The Judge's statement that "a 'short-form' birth certificate" has been made publicly available is true. That's not the judge's opinion. That is a fact that cannot be contested -- and that Orly states that in her papers. Orly contends that the short-form/COLB that was released is a fraud, but she does not contest that a short form was released.

And, here, the Judge isn't saying that the COLB is authentic. He didn't say that the short-form was authentic, or confirmed to be state-issued, "official," or anything of the sort. He merely said that Taitz wants an "official" long form even though a short form had already been released publicly. (Note: He didn't say an "official" short form.) Given that Orly doesn't contest that Obama publicly released a short form indicating that he was born in Hawaii, that statement by the judge was merely a statement of uncontested fact.

Now, whether the COLB is authentic is an entirely different issue - and was simply not at issue at this phase of the litigation, and the Judge did not rule on that issue. Stated another way, no, the judge shouldn't -- and he didn't -- determine whether the image released on the net is in fact genuine. But he could -- and did (as did Orly in her briefs) -- note that one had been released.

Let me try this a different way. IF the Judge had determined that the COLB was authentic, don't you think that the DOJ and Obama's attorneys would have immediately filed that opinion with all the courts where cases were still pending, notifying the courts that a judge had already ruled that the COLB was authentic and, so, the claims by Taitz/Kerchner/Hollister/Berg that he was born in Kenya had to be dismissed? And, since the media always seems to report when Taitz "loses," wouldn't that have been a breaking news story? I'm fairly certain that that would have happened if any judge had ruled that the COLB was authentic. But - it didn't happen, because this Judge did not rule that way. He noted a simple, uncontested, fact that a COLB had been released.

You answered my question perfectly.

Let me see if I have this right. Obama’s eligibility issue will continue to go in circles since nobody has standing or can show damages or that an act of fraud was committed. No judge will rule on the validity of the COLB released on Fight the Smears/FactCheck, nor will a judge order discovery compelling Hawaii or Obama to release his information.

The other tact of filing this case Quo Warranto (sp?) will also go nowhere given Holder is the Atty. General and he isn’t going to accept any case that could potentially harm his boss.

Even though we have a requirement in the Constitution demanding a person must be a NBC we have no mechanism to force someone to prove they qualify and no means of removing someone if it’s determined at a later date they did not fulfill the requirement.

The only way we can prevent a situation like this from happening in the future is for the states to put into their election law that all persons whose names appear on the ballot for POTUSA must provide certified documents proving their eligibility as well as immigration records to see if the person even gave up or took on another countries citizenship.

Even if the states pass such laws they won’t matter since no court has ruled on the legal definition of NBC we only have John Jay’s letter to Washington and contemporaneous writings and they are not sufficient to prove or disprove a persons NBC status.

In a nutshell, we’re screwed!!!