Posted on 10/26/2009 8:29:54 PM PDT by Fractal Trader
{...}l'm a Republican. Conservative....income-support programs.....Each instance of solicitation for false testimony by attorney Orly Taitz is listed below. ... includes instances where attorney Orly Taitz advised and encouraged me to engage in other illegal activity. Each instance of attorney Orly Taitz asking me (1) to provide false testimony in civil action
(Excerpt) Read more at scribd.com ...
I hope you don't let her work on your teeth.
If she's as good a dentist as she is a lawyer, she could do serious damage to your mouth.
Oh barf.
I've decided that's got to be one of the oddest twists in the whole history of Orly Taitz's Traveling Circus.
I really would take anything that Lucas Smith says with a grain of salt. The guy is obviously a compulsive liar and attention hound.
More drama for Orly.
You mean like when dentists do serious damage to people’s mouths, and are unable to establish a practice because of their reputation?
Cause I’m not?
I’m not a troll?
Do I even know the answer myself? Is this a trick question?
(Parsy, you’ve got to hang in there! Don’t lose perspective, get the job done!)
parsy, who might be losing perspective
Go back to DU. You’re not making any headway here.
Neither is Lady Liberty.
Because you wouldn’t have heard the ping with Obama’s tight grip on your ears.
It's getting difficult, keeping track of nonsense.
On Smith's own personal YouTube channel, he admits that he is the author of the aforementioned document, and that he is the one who posted it on-line.
We will have to take his word that he actually delivered it to the clerk. But, it wouldn't be unusual for it not to be entered into the record, yet. Because the affiant isn't a party to the suit, the judge wouldn't be obligated to make this "ex parte" communication immediately available to the record. He may want to investigate it himself. He may want to refer it to the USA for further investigation, and he may have discounted it entirely - which is unlikely, but I suppose not out of the question. Or, he may not yet even be in receipt of it, as Smith - as a certifiably unreliable witness - may not have even delivered it.
So, to be clear, while I did accept the document as "authentic", I also made it clear up-thread that I wasn't commenting in any way on the veracity of the affiant's allegations. Someone in a positions of authority, would need to investigate this matter fully to make that determination.
Lucas is showing his nuttiness about like Orly shows hers it seems to me.
Here is a copy of his Filing with the US District Court on Sept 4, 2009. It includes his trip description and certificate he secured in Keyna........
Here is a FR thread of 9-4-09 about the filing of the Declaration with the court.
http://209.157.64.200/focus/chat/2332619/posts?
Unlike the modest and publicity-shy Orly Taitz?
We would agree, but time is running and if it was actually filed with the court we would expect at some point soon there would have to be something in the actual record about it. While it is common for there to be a delay beetween filing and docketing, the docketing is generally a clerical decision and it should not take as long as this for it to appear there.
Not at all. In high-profile cases, federal courts get all manner of communique from members of the public, and they are virtually never docketed. I used the term "filing" earlier. I shouldn't have. This is really nothing more than a letter to the court, a piece of correspondence. Of course, it's a letter alleging serious and potential criminal misconduct by a member of the bar, and the attorney of record on a matter before the court.
I still think it's much more likely that either Smith never delivered the document, or it's being investigated. But, I wouldn't necessarily read anything into the fact that it's not yet docketed.
Well, I’d say that she’s willing to believe anyone or any piece of information that buttresses and advances her arguments, whether there’s supporting info or not. She’s already shown herself willing to throw anything at the wall to see what sticks.
This Lucas Smith guy seems to be the fly that gets attracted to that kind of s***.
What they both have in common is the willingness to fling mud in public when someone stops following the narrative. I just finished reading his “deposition”, and whoo boy, she’s never come up with anything that nutty. I wanted to take a shower after that.
I think Smith seems like more of an unstable confidence man. Taitz seems to be such a true believer that can’t critically analyze the information that she has come in contact with.
One is a little more aware of what they are doing than the other.
I’m sure all of Smith’s chatter about her infidelities is a load of crap.
Or wishful thinking on his part.
This is problematic.
If Lucas Smith is telling the truth, then it puts Orly Taitz in an extremely bad light (to put it mildly).
If Lucas Smith is lying, what does it say about Orly Taitz that she was willing to put a liar on the stand?
For the record, Larry Sinclair has been making similar accusations against Orly Taitz:
Larry Sinclair: Orly Taitz Told Me to Lie, Claim That Obama Had People Killed (^)
I don’t know, and I really don’t care.
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.