Replies

It’s a new HOAX with Orly every week. First she commits prima facie violations of Federal Law in the Lt. Easterling case. Are we to believe that BO’s Justice Dept. let her get away with breaking Federal Law? No way, BO’s Justice Dept. is using Orly to discredit all the Legitimate Patriots who question BO’s Eligibility. Leo Donofrio had Orly pegged months ago.

http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/2009/02/24/clarifiying-officer-easterlings-comment s-and-other-misc-stuff/

http://www.military.com/news/article/February-2009/officer-calls-obama-usurper-imposter-pr esident.html?col=1186032325324

Just last week Orly was saying it was all over for BO because of her Cook cases. Then Orly incompetently loses two cases for Maj. Cook in record time and then Cook lost his civilian job at Simtech. Some “lawyer” that Orly.

http://www.examiner.com/x-5325-Orlando-Republican-Examiner~y2009m7d30-Stefan-Cooks-birth-c ertificate-case-gets-short-shrift-in-Florida

Do you really believe that anyone in their right mind who really had a copy of BO’s BC would entrust it to a “lawyer” like Orly? No way, Orly is being used again by the BO campaign to humiliate legitimate Patriots who question BO’s Eligibility.

Fool us once, shame on you. Fool us twice, shame on us. How many times has Orly fooled us? So many times I have lost count, but Orly doesn’t fool me anymore. I don’t believe anything she says or does.

"Orly incompetently loses two cases for Maj. Cook"

Incorrect. Obama backed down on the deployment issue to avoid the discovery process re: his BC. That Obama had him fired from his civilian job displays just asking about the BC infuriates the WH. It's very revealing and helpful as part of the process.

On the document in question here, though. I suspect due the questions about it - many of them raised here - that it won't fly in court, IMHO.

“Orly is being used again by the BO campaign to humiliate legitimate Patriots who question BO’s Eligibility.”

Although all of this remains an open question at this point, I do think that this type of manipulation is plausible. The Clintons did this type of thing often, floating tidbits of misinformation that cast them in a negative light, and then having one of their ‘defenders’ refute these things publicly in a way that brought ridicule to their detractors and that made them look ‘above it all’.