As this World Net Daily article of May 10 shows, Orly Taitz is still actively pursuing legal action over President Barack Obama’s qualifications. Taitz is a southern California attorney. She has not been as well-publicized as Phil Berg, the Pennsylvania attorney who first launched this cause, but she has been working at this since before the November 2008 election and now seems more active than Berg.
Answers by DOJ/DHS/DOS are due in USDCs DC and NJ have greatly extended DOJ answer/return due dates now the first week in June.
Yawn! People who have too much free time on their hands or are looking for some fame and fortune.
billvanallen (really Jean Biden): Remember you will be held to your absurd prediction that Mr Obama will resign by July 4, 2009, despite all real-world evidence to the contrary. When (not if) July 4 dawns and a proud President Obama presides over the festivities I will call you out and you will be exposed once and for all as an insane lunatic.
Your son Joe will just have to wait his turn.
get over it, current POTUS is no NBC
I’ve enjoyed watching you birfers make utter and complete fools of yourselves since last summer. It has been most entertaining. Let’s review the record:
1. The birfers told us that Obama would be disqualified before the election.
2. The birfers told us that Obama would be disqualified before the Electoral College met.
3. The birfers told us that the Electoral College would disqualify him.
4. The birfers told us that Obama would be disqualified before Congress met to count the Electoral College ballots.
5. The birfers told us that the Congress would disqualify him.
6. The birfers told us that Obama would be disqualified before the Inauguration.
7. The birfers told us that Obama would be disqualified a few days after the Inauguration.
You are 0/7.
Now you assure us that Obama will be disqualified by July 4. 55 days until you are 0/8.
Given your abysmal record, let me try my hand at prediction. Obama will complete his term. I will be 1/1. If I wanted to go out on a limb I would say the odds are better than even for re-election, but I won’t guarantee that. I will guarantee that his re-election will hinge on his accomplishments in his first term and will have ZERO to do with anything regarding his birth or ancestry. I will be 2/2.
2/2 is MUCH better than 0/8.
get over it already, current POTUS is no NBC
Why should anyone believe someone with a record of being wrong about everything they predict?
If you predicted tomorrow will be Monday, I would want at least 2 corroborating sources. If you predicted sun, I would bring an unbrella.
get over it, current POTUS is no NBC. You might consider using a real name on these blogs while you are at it.
What Federal or State court case mentions ANY legal history regarding *natural born citizen* ???
For legal MORONS – natural born = ALLEGIANCE at birth to a regime — due to the ALLEGIANCE status of the father-mother of the kid — regardless of the place of birth — i.e. PRIMITIVE tribal stone age stuff.
See Blackstone’s Commentaries.
New Age confusions regarding (1) alleged different ALLEGIANCE status of a father and a mother of a kid and (2) so-called dual citizenships — one more legal MESS created by MORON legislators and the courts.
billvanallen (if that is your name): The fact that you say something means the opposite is the case. 54 days now until July 4. When Obama is still in office, what will your new BS “taget” be? January 2010? How about January 2013?
54 days Tick Tock
get over it, current POTUS is no NBC.
One of the biggest mistakes people make in politics — and perhaps in real life, too — is questioning other people’s motives, doubting other people’s sincerity.
For example, ETJB, whoever that really is, says people who have spent apparently countless hours and dollars on the question of Barack Obama’s legal qualifications to be president, are only after fame, or something.
Shame on such cynicism!
Why can’t you, ETJB, whoever you really are, accept that other people are just as sincere and honest as you surely think you are?
Perhaps they are wrong, but that doesn’t mean they’re dishonest.
And maybe they’re not even wrong.
Mike Morrison: There are a whole host of motives that while sincere and honest are far from worthy, including prejudice, personal grudges and mental illness, among others. I don’t know these individuals personally, so I can only judge by their behavior.
And what I see there speaks poorly of them. They have presented their case to the voters, the Electoral College, the Congress and numerous state and federal courts and been soundly rejected by all. Assuming they still believe they are right, the appropriate course at that point is to do some serious research to find new facts or really novel arguments. Instead they return over and over again with the same tired “facts” and arguments. Regardless of their motivation, that is simply abuse of the judicial system and deserves approbation and court sanctions.
Jerry, I think the solution is simple: allow them their day in court and require BO to produce his actual birth certificate from Hawaii, not a COLB. That’ll settle the issue once and for all and put it to rest.
Instead they’ve been stonewalled every step of the way.
I don’t think that’s unreasonable. I think that’s due process.
The COLB says the place of birth was Honolulu, which last I checked was in Hawaii. The issue is settled in the eyes of those whose opinion counts-all the judges who have heard every one of the cases, all 538 members of Congress and the majority of voters. With all due respect your opinion doesn’t trump those parties anywhere but in your own mind.
There’s a larger point IMO, which is that there should be a time limit to court resolutions of election matters. I look at the travesty of the Minnesota Senate race, for example. Winners need to be declared and allowed to take office, even at the risk that an error will be made from time to time. Nowhere is it promised that elections, trials or anything else are perfect; all that any verdict, electoral or legal represents is the best determination that fallible humans can make at a moment in time. Peeple need to move on; there will always be another election and you can choose to rehash the past at that time 9though that is likely a losing strategy).
Whatever happenned to that full briefcase of ‘evidence’ that Taitz reportedly gave to John Roberts at some conference or another a few months back. It was reported in one of these exchanges here. I guess the whole briefcase of evidence must have not been too convincing.
train111
Jer Bak: Yes, of course, there are many different motives, but you cannot ever know what is any other individual’s motive.
My point was, simply, do not make judgments about another person’s motives.
Sure, judge the action, if you know what you’re talking about and, alas, an awful lot of people don’t, but do not try to guess their motives.
And certainly do not disparage them for motives that you might — most likely — not know or understand.
And, as I said, though you might be disagreeing with them, they still could be right.
I don’t care what their motives are. If I decided to sue you over something, whether I was right or wrong, I could go to court and if I lost I could appeal to the highest court. Fine. But what would you say if after I lost I came back and sued you again and again and again in courts all over the country? Whatever my motives that would be harassment and abuse of the court system. And that’s what these 2 clowns have done. they’ve been rejected by at leasr 20 or 30 judges, in a bunch of state and federal courts, up to the Supreme Court on multiple occasions. Whether their motives are noble, self-serving or they are simply delusional, they need to stop. Yesterday.
Interesting that this article has more than 18 posts, but the article about the long-fought victory to get the state of West Virginia to ease signature requirements has only one post. Interesting.
M&M (or whomever that may be). These lawsuits could have had a, clearly small, shred of cred to them if taken a few simple steps.
Yes, most of the lawsuits are dishonest — morally, legally and intellectually.
I only have one question. Why would anyone hire several high priced law firms to keep their birth certificate sealed and under wraps if they had nothing to hide?????
All things being equal, the simplest explanation is probably the correct one…i.e, he is hiding something.
Mike: Simply untrue. First Obama hasn’t hired “several high-priced law firms”. He is not even the defendant in most of the suits-various Secretaries of State are and the costs to defend these junk lawsuits are unfortunately borne by the taxpayers of those states. In the few where he is a defendant they have simply declined to answer. The suits are so worthless that they have been dismissed anyway.
As far as the birth certificate, he has displayed the only one Hawaii provides, namely the famous COLB. Those who claim that people born abroad can get one may have been correct at one time in the distant past when Hawaii first became a US territory. Regardless, it would not say place of Birth: Honolulu, which is what Obama’s does.
As far as the so called “vault copy”, records are in the vault under the control of the State Dept of Health. They don’t let people have access to them. Just call the DOH in your state and see if they will release those records. You will get a big, fat “no”.
This entire “case” is junk law writ large. But you don’t have to take my word for it. You can read the decisions of the numerous state and federal judges who have dismissed these “cases”.
O RLY?
Wasn’t putting up a copy of his birth certificate enough?
Orly Taitz is a joke. Got her law degree at a correspondence school. Came here from Russia but no record of citizenship. Has numerous malpractice suits vs. her dental practice — she got her license to practice in Israel. This lady is a nut. Her legal paperwork looks like it was prepared by a 6th grader.