Skip to comments.Obama birthplace lawyer denied new trial
Posted on 01/14/2010 10:08:15 AM PST by STARWISE
Laguna Niguel attorney Orly Taitzs effort to have President Barack Obama removed from office because he was born in Kenya - or perhaps Indonesia - has run into another dead end, as U.S. District Judge David O. Carter issued this order denying her request to move the case from Santa Ana to Washington, D.C.
In his order, Carter states simply that he dismissed her case on Oct. 29 - meaning that there is no action currently pending, and so no case to transfer. In that dismissal, Carter ruled that the federal courts do not have the constitutional power to remove a sitting president - that only Congress has that authority.
Taitz responded to the Oct. 29 ruling with a number of unorthodox filings. On Nov. 9, she filed a fiery declaration to Carter, which among other things claimed that a Carter law clerk previously worked for a law firm defending Obama, and that that clerk wrote most of Carters ruling dismissing Taitzs suit. She also denied witnesses affidavits saying shed asked them to lie to the court.
The same day as she filed the declaration lashing out at Carter and others, shed filed a motion asking Carter to reconsider his dismissal of her case.
On Dec. 3, she filed new allegations with Carters court.
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 wrote. A number of criminal activities were perpetrated upon this court.
On Dec. 4, Carter denied her request for reconsideration, saying legal language that he had ruled once and for all - and that meant the case was finished in his court.
This doesnt have anything directly to do with her court case, but its of interest to note that on her blog later in December, she suggested armed rallies and protests might be in order.
The day before Christmas, she asked Carter to send the matter to Washington, D.C. court. But neither Santa nor Carter granted her wish. Carter issued his ruling Tuesday.
This judge was either bought or given an offer he couldn't refuse. Nobody was asking him to remove Obama from office. Only to require him to demonstrate that he is constitutionally qualified to act as Commander in Chief and give orders to the troops.
If he can demonstrate that he is qualified by coming up with the evidence in court. Fine. If not, then the Judge can demand that he come up with the proof. And then Obama's lawyers can appeal.
Obviously he can't fire Obama on his own authority. But he can require discovery: that Obama produce his proper birth records or be found in contempt.
Carter is a POS and a Democrat.
Read Orly's Complaint. That's exactly what she asked for.
If he can demonstrate that he is qualified by coming up with the evidence in court. Fine. If not, then the Judge can demand that he come up with the proof. And then Obama's lawyers can appeal. Obviously he can't fire Obama on his own authority. But he can require discovery: that Obama produce his proper birth records or be found in contempt.
Federal courts don't work that way. A case cannot be filed simply asking for discovery. Discovery is merely a way of gathering evidence for a trial. Before you can ask a federal judge to order discovery, there must be a case which asks the court to do something that the court has the authority to do.
Right, and I believe thats all she is trying to do..get his documents opened up. Someone else can take it from there.
Re-posting for reference:
The following is information I was able to cull readily from the official Federal Elections Commission website for disbursements from the Obama campaign to the law firm of Perkins Coie, which is or did represent Obama in various eligibility suits. The FEC links follow the entries.
Perkins Coie 314,018.06
July 2009 quarterly:
Perkins Coie 270,754.18
Perkins Coie 688,316.42
Perkins Coie 173,052.52
Amended post-general election:
Perkins Coie 205,323.00
Perkins Coie does not appear in the pre-general election filing or a few others I checked randomly. You are free to pursue any further information that is of interest. But one would assume that the official FEC website to which the Obama and other campaigns must report their financial activity would be taken by even the most skeptical among us as valid documentation of the reported $1.4 or $1.8, or anything in between, figure expended to defend the eligibility suits.
This information is about the legal fees only of that one law firm, not the DOJ attorneys, court time, or other related costs.
Thank you, Ed!
2008 -2009 published FEC data for Obama For America
A week before the decision you had been calling him a stand-up marine and a real American patriot. My are you fickle, Wilkie.
The fact that the plaintiff's attorney was an incompetent boob and a total nutcase didn't help the case along any either.
Even if irrefutable proof of Obama’s birth in Kenya or Indonesia was provided it would change nothing. We are so afraid of the rampant carnage (burning cities, murdering people of West-European descent) that would follow his removal from office that absolutely nothing would be done about it (other than maybe shooting the messenger).
IMHO that “we” is not all inclusive as right is right not whatever the hell they say it is.
“We” being you and the mouse in your pocket, I suppose.
I for one want to know he’s Eligible. Too many people have turned a blind-eye on this, and ultimately the cover-up needs to be exposed. Just the mere fact that we are discussing this means that a whole lot of people did not do their jobs.
This man is an idiot, a traitor, and a disgrace to his uniform. How hard is it to write and sign “Defendant should show his long form birth certificate to the court”? A very very very simple step to clear this matter up.
WHERE IS YOUR F-ING BIRTH CERTIFICATE HUSSEIN!?
I would advise anyone who had dental work done by this woman to find a new dentist, and make sure it was done properly.
Indeed, and I couldn’t agree more. Some of us would rather be dead than live in a PC gulag with no hope of ever changing it back to the country America was before the libs began their big wrecking-ball thrust via the 1960’s hippie revolution. The “we” I spoke of referred to that mass (dwindling daily, I hope) of people in this country who are scared to death of saying or doing something politically incorrect and then having to suffer the consequences from the Left that will most certainly follow.
It would change everything, but there is no proof, never mind "irrefutable proof," and it's not the Court's job to find proof.
That's what Orly, and many people who follow this issue, refuse to understand.
If you think he's not eligible, first you have to present some sort of verified, substantiated, certified proof of ineligibility to get the court, or Congress, to act.
Not one of these lawyers, least of all Taitz, has done that.
Does she have no idea how the legal system works?
Does she have no idea how the legal system works?
It’s not that hard to do. I’m not lawyer and I could put it together in a week to 10 days.
I hope it turns out that you’re right, browardchad, but I remain skeptical. The ruling elite has demonstrated its disdain for the Constitution to the point now that they don’t even try to sugar coat it. And, for the most part, the American sheeple cower in fear of being accused of racism, that being considered now the most egregious of sins in the Universe, and anyone who suggested Obama be deposed would be called a racist, proof of his foreign birth notwithstanding. I just don’t see, given the present climate of PC we live in, that “[I]t would change everything...” For one to “...get the court, or Congress, to act” one blithely assumes a court that unwaveringly adheres to the rule of law (a foolish assumption) or one trusts Congress—and we should all by now know what a den of jackals Congress is.
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.