Judge tosses out Army captain's complaint questioning president's birth; Orly Taitz on notice

http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/news/breaking_news/story/841419.html ^

[vikk]

U.S. District Court Judge Clay Land today tossed out 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 files a similar “frivolous” lawsuit in his court.

“(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.’”

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 president’s 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.

“It would appear that ample opportunity existed for discovery of evidence that would support any contention that the president was not eligible for the office he sought,” Land says.

The judge adds that Congress hasn’t started impeachment proceedings against Obama, appears satisfied that he can hold the office and has rejected the suggestion he isn’t.

[Red Steel]

OK , they could resubmit by changing the Title and use the same arguments that was used in their Opposition to Limit Discovery, And add all the plaintiffs to it. We do like paperwork. ;-)

[ecinkc]

I hope this is a slice of humble pie to Orly who was railing against Berg, Kreep, Phil from therightsideoflife.com and others just days ago, because she has decided that they are all secret Obama supporters and/or miserable failures at making any difference on this issue. She sees herself as the one great success story on this matter because she has pushed her cases into higher courts and farther along than anyone else had. I can’t help but think that the Bush appointed judge’s charge says a great deal negative about Orly’s tactics and competency when practicing law at this level.

I dislike always pointing out the problems with Taitz because she doubtless stands alone in terms of tenacity, enthusiasm, resourcefulness, personal investment and elbow grease. I do suppose that is why Alan Keyes retains her services and why she has gotten a tiny step farther than any other similar case by getting hearing tentatively on the schedule in California. (To those who say this in actually no farther than any other case: yes, I can see your point). Nevertheless, as good as a uniquely impassioned heart and a commitment to try one’s hardest are, they are not always enough.

I will grant her that she has likely fought harder for us than anyone else has and that no “more competent, professional” lawyers have stepped up to the plate as wholeheartedly as she has, but at the end of the day it looks as though we need something more than we have gotten from anyone so far. We need a lawyer or law firm that is both full of tenacity and thoroughly competent to present a tight case at in the higher courts.

This is terribly disappointing. To me, the logic dictates that Rhodes’s case should at least be on the border line of being considered a viable case. I wonder if it had been presented differently if the judge wouldn’t have been more open to it—-at least not placing counsel on notice.

Admittedly, I'm no lawyer, but I think the question that this case should be seeking to answer is whether Rhodes has just grounds to delay deployment in order to demand clarifying evidence that 0 is qualified to head the chain of command through which her orders come. It would seem to me that her counsel's arguments should not bear the burden of proving that Obama is ineligible, but instead proving just that his eligibility is unacceptably uncertain and that due diligence has yet to be performed or published to answer that question.

Whether the judge was biased or not or whether he had unfair expectations or not, it seems hard for me to believe that a more experienced, competent lawyer could not have made this case more palatable to him—again, at least enough so as to elude being served notice.

Counselor Taitz, I know you take this seriously, and I can imagine that you feel betrayed and attacked when you’re out there risking so much and working so hard only to see your methods criticized by me and some other would-be supporters who are acting like armchair attorneys. Nevertheless, the best vigilance includes an honest ability for one to recognize his or her limitations and to lean on the counsel and aid of others--sometimes admitting mistakes and sometimes passing the ball along to a teammate ready in the wings to proceed from here.

Unfortunately tenacious people can sometimes lean toward unwise stubbornness and narcissism. For the sake of doggedly proving themselves mighty before all who would criticize, they risk rendering as void all their own valiant, tireless advances.

Ms. Taitz, please, please keep this in mind as you proceed from here.

[Non-Sequitur]

Exactly like every other useful idiot has thought at every other "this time" in history.

And when this is over all you guys will go back to your villages and resume your duties.

[OldDeckHand]

"So, if Obama is not legitimate, our troops have no legitimate excuse to be fighting wars, and would be vulnerable to international courts"

Again, this is first year law school stuff. But, I see it repeated, with great frequency, by people who have NO CLUE how US court system works, only how the believe it should work - two wildly distinctive and different realities.

Look up "de facto officer doctrine" which was held most recently in "Ryder v. United States". This case, and several others give great guidance in this matter.

Obama IS the President. Whether or not he was eligible to hold the office, the fact is he was elected to that office and he currently holds the title office and that is what matters in a US court of law with respect to the "legitimacy" of the orders that he gives, bills he signs into laws and other executive actions he undertakes or executes.

This isn't even a close call, despite the protestations to the contrary. People wonder why no well-known, conservative attorney or legal think-tank has championed this battle, this is the reason why.

[autumnraine]

By Clinton, yes.

[Non-Sequitur]

Kreep the other lawyer wrote the response...

So when's Orly going to respond? Since she's representing the lion's share of the plaintiffs then shouldn't she be submitting something on their behalf? It's due Monday.

[mountainbunny]

He wasn't depicting Obama as an underdog. He was illustrating that Obama has had multiple well-funded opponents during his campaign that presumably had access to a wellspring of opposition research available on Obama. And, none of those opponents voiced ANY concerns, let alone substantive concerns about Obama's eligibility based on facts, not conjecture and supposition.

Additionally, during the campaign, McCain went out of his way to tell a woman at a rally that Obama was a citizen. Quite a risk to take if he wasn't sure.

McCain Supporter: "Obama is an Arab" (^ YouTube)

[Red Steel]

I have now read Kreep’s response to the discovery stay motion and I see that he also addresses the issues raised by the U.S. Attorney in the motion to dismiss. He and/or Orly will still need to file a separate document formally responding to the motion to dismiss, but at least Kreep has done the work needed to state an argument.

What's that old saying? The more paperwork to cover your @s$ the better. The courts like paperwork.

[autumnraine]

According to everyone here, he is the bastion of conservatism.

Of course ‘conservative’ today in a judge or politician is equal to ‘stuck so far up Obama’s a&& that they have to ask if it’s daylight yet’.

[Sibre Fan]

Well that sucks but the arguments that he put forth counters the Government arguments in the same case will same amount weight to the judge as it would to Orly's plaintiffs. Her plaintiffs still benefit.

Yes, to a certain extent. However, for example, Kreep has no military clients, and he has no state representative clients. So, there's no argument on the record with respect to them. Orly - to represent her clients effectively -- simply MUST file her own papers, making THEIR arguments, not just the argument of an elector and a VP candidate.

OK , they could resubmit by changing the Title and use the same arguments that was used in their Opposition to Limit Discovery, And add all the plaintiffs to it. We do like paperwork. ;-)

I suspect that Kreep's Motion to Dismiss will contain much of the same arguments as in his Opposition. Of course, Taitz has said that she will refuse to work with him and is working on a motion to disqualify him, so there's just no way she is going to let him put all the plaintiffs/ names on his papers. Again, Taitz still must represent HER clients, who have different interests than Kreep's clients.

[TChris]

Looks to me like Ms. Taitz got rope-a-doped.

This judge allowed the case to proceed to this point for precisely this opportunity. It has done nothing but strengthen Obama's position.

[autumnraine]

I know, I was afraid she was going to blow it. Glad we have someone so dedicated, but God she’s a loon.

[Lurking Libertarian]

Of course ‘conservative’ today in a judge or politician is equal to ‘stuck so far up Obama’s a&& that they have to ask if it’s daylight yet’.

It has always been the conservative view of the law that courts should stay out of fights that should be resolved by the elected branches of government. It was conservative Supreme Court judges who authored all of the decisions limiting plaintiffs' standing, for precisely those reasons.

[null and void]

She had to keep her mouth shut. She was in checkmate with Obama

Nope. Stalemate maybe.

IF she has the goods on 0bama, she can still use them, provided the release can't be traced back to her.

What happens if her flying monkeys release the damning data as soon as the bloom is off the 0bama rose (not quite yet!)?

• 0bama gets lead away from the Offal Office in irons (possibly to face treason charges and hanging).
• Bidet becomes president.
• Biden selects the most logical candidate for Veep: the first runner up in the race, the woman who never actually quit the race, the respected senator, and former occupant of the Whine House, and did I mention she's a gurl?
• Congress will promptly approve 'one of their own' (who happens to have the FBI files close at hand)...

Poor old gaff-machine Joe. *sniff* His heart just couldn't take the strain. *sob* We'll sure miss him!

[Red Steel]

Since the judges want more evidence, we will have to commit the crime of breaking and entering. What else can be done when a fraud suspect will not reveal the documents?

Yes, it's hard to get to the evidence when the perpetrator controls the evidence, using laws to help him hide, something akin to under the color of law.

[khnyny]

bump.

[autumnraine]

Absolutely. The entire campaign I said that McCain was his own mole. Even now he is chastizing a soldier for asking if Obama is a liar (about the Joe Wilson thing). McCain was Obama’s biggest supporter and if you ask me, I don’t think he expected Palin to be what she was. He nominated someone he thought would help him lose and got blindsided.

John McCain did not want to be President. That was evident in the non-campaign he ran.

I feel like I just found out my parents sold me into slavery or something. Seriously, the conspiracy is that no one cares and that perplexes me more than anything. To say it’s not important is one thing, but we must question something when SO MANY PEOPLE are ACTIVELY preventing anyone from finding out the truth.

[ecinkc]

I can’t help but chuckle. You just said basically the same thing that I said in response to antiRepublicrat’s post as I did, but a little more succinctly.

It took me over 600 words. Lol. Reminder to self: Brevity is the soul of wit.

[Red Steel]

I hope this judge can straighten these two out or they may end up E’ffing up this golden opportunity.

[null and void]

There is one school that thinks it does not list SAD as the mother. Wouldn’t that be fun!

Hebrews 7:3
Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God...