Orly Taitz - Another "birther" case bites the dust

Once again, the Realtor/ Lawyer has had her most recent case thrown out of court.

Judge Carter wrote in his decision that the plantiffs were asking the Court "to effectively overthrow a sitting president who was popularly elected by We the People‚ sixty-nine million of the people."

I'm almost starting to feel sorry for her......... NOT.

Dave Weigel points out that the decision also confirms that witnesses complained Taitz wanted them to lie on the stand.

This all comes on top of her recent sanctions in Georgia.

Earlier this month, Taitz was slapped with a $20,000 sanction by a judge in Georgia for "wasting the judicial resources" of the Middle District of Georgia with her "frivolous and sanctionable conduct."

Don Quixote without a horse, or horse sense.

Source

I noticed the Judge didn't throw out the case on the grounds that Obama had already proven his citizenship.

What the judge is effectively saying is:

"While the president may be foreigner, I'm not going to allow this case to go forward because you might unseat the president and I think he's still a popular guy."

In fact that's pretty much verbatim what the judge said.

Its the judges opinion that the case is frivilous, which of course is a subjective opinion that has no legal standing. The constitution is pretty clear on the requirements.

I find your glee over a sitting president not having to prove his constitutional eligiblity bit odd.




[edit on 29-10-2009 by mnemeth1]

reply to post by mnemeth1


Indeed. Now justice is a joke. Justice is now political. Politicians are above the law and above the constitution according to this scummy judge... Way to go... NOT.

Originally posted by mnemeth1

"While the president may be foreigner, I'm not going to allow this case to go forward because you might unseat the president and I think he's still a popular guy."

In fact that's pretty much verbatim what the judge said.

Mmm, here's the transcript of the court document with the disposition at the bottom ...

Can you tell us where the judge says that "verbatim?"

Oh, and here's the original story from which the huff post is sourced: Orly Taitz Smacked Down: Birther Lawsuit Dismissed

Which includes the following:

That’s the end of the story. But the ruling is limned with criticism of Taitz for the screwball, media-grabbing tactics she used to promote her doomed, frivolous lawsuit. Here, Carter confirms that he got complaints from Taitz witnesses like Larry Sinclair, claiming that Taitz wanted them to lie on the stand.

[edit on 29 Oct 2009 by schrodingers dog]

reply to post by mnemeth1


Some people are so predictable..

That's not "pretty much" what the Judge said,

What the Judge did say, is that the case was "frivolous", meaning the case had No Merit.

Oh, and then there's the whole "Witnesses testified that Taitz wanted them to lie" thing...

reply to post by Rhetoric


Is Larry Sinclair mentioned in that ruling?
Is Lucas Smith mentioned in that ruling? As I understood it Lucas Smith had an accusation that Orly asked him to lie. But if you accept he is being truthful then you would have to accept he is being truthful about his Kenyan birth certificate. If Larry Sinclair is mentioned anywhere, which I cannot find, and you accept that he is being truthful in saying Orly asked him to lie, then you would have to accept that he was being truthful in his allegations of sitting in the back of a limo having sex with Obama while smoking crack coc aine…so which is it?
I cannot find the word ‘frivolous’ in Judge Carter’s ruling, can you?
Judge Land called her frivolous, but that is not what we are talking about.
Funny how you all gloat at allegations of lies and perjury directed at Orly, but at the same time totally accept as president someone with absolutely no evidence of who they are or where they were born or any evidence of eligibility.
None of this ends here.

reply to post by oneclickaway

Earlier this month, Taitz was slapped with a $20,000 sanction by a judge in Georgia for "wasting the judicial resources" of the Middle District of Georgia with her "frivolous and sanctionable conduct."

Oh, excuse me, I thought the word "Frivolous" was used by a judge.



[edit on 29-10-2009 by Rhetoric]

Originally posted by Rhetoric
Once again, the Realtor/ Lawyer has had her most recent case thrown out of court.

Give this woman the credit she deserves please... she's also a dentist.
Or so I've read.

Originally posted by mnemeth1

I find your glee over a sitting president not having to prove his constitutional eligiblity bit odd.

I still for the life of me cannot understand this line of thought. There is a process an individual goes through to determine their eligibility. Obama is the President, apparently the people that conduct this process believe he is eligible.

Because he doesn't show his birth certificate to mnemeth1, or any of the delusional "birthers" really doesn't mean anything to me. His right to privacy, President or not, is not superceded by your "right to know".

"Birthers" last arguement seems to be that, "why doesn't he just show it?" Would you like to see his penis to verify he is a male? Would you also like all the election results brought to your house so you can verify them? Or will you accept the people, who conduct that process' word that he infact won?

I don't understand why he has to prove to you, anything. The fact that he is President, should be the proof. Unless you thing a couple hundred other people and a few other organizations are also culpable in this conspiracy.

If that is the case, then its far larger than just Obama. You should go after them, they would probably be the weak links in this supposed chain of deception.

Just like I stated in another thread.

It wouldn't be a case of Obama just pulling a fast one and getting in. The organizations that determine if he is eligible would be involved.

Unless

Any joe schmoe can become President, THEN they ask for some proof of eligibility.

Considering if the thread about him being related to all President's but one is valid, do you think any birther argument is really going to matter?

To the Op:
If these "birther" stories are such a non-issue, why did you create a thread about this very subject?
Seems to me, you may be struggling with this yourself.

Truth is, this turd hasn't exactly flushed and it will continue to rear it's ugly head until Obama finally reveals his BC, once and for all.

I believe someone in the Democrat party knows the truth and was probably instructed to lay low with this information, for now anyway.

It may be Pelosi, it may be Clinton.

Originally posted by mnemeth1
I noticed the Judge didn't throw out the case on the grounds that Obama had already proven his citizenship.

What the judge is effectively saying is:

"While the president may be foreigner, I'm not going to allow this case to go forward because you might unseat the president and I think he's still a popular guy."

In fact that's pretty much verbatim what the judge said.



[edit on 29-10-2009 by mnemeth1]

Actually, here is what he said. In context...

Interpreting the Constitution is a serious and crucial task with which the federal courts of this nation have been entrusted under Article III. However, that very same Constitution puts limits on the reach of the federal courts. One of those limits is that the Constitution defines processes through which the President can be removed from office. The Constitution does not include a role for the Court in that process. Plaintiffs have encouraged the Court to ignore these mandates of the Constitution; to disregard the limits on its power put in place by the Constitution; and to effectively overthrow a sitting president who was popularly elected by “We the People”–over sixty-nine million of the people. Plaintiffs have attacked the judiciary, including every prior court that has dismissed their claim, as unpatriotic and even treasonous for refusing to grant their requests and for adhering to the terms of the Constitution which set forth its jurisdiction. Respecting the constitutional role and jurisdiction of this Court is not unpatriotic. Quite the contrary, this Court considers commitment to that constitutional role to be the ultimate reflection of patriotism

Here's another tidbit...

The hearings have been interesting to say the least. Plaintiffs’ arguments through Taitz have generally failed to aid the Court. Instead, Plaintiffs’ counsel has favored rhetoric seeking to arouse the emotions and prejudices of her followers rather than the language of a lawyer seeking to present arguments through cogent legal reasoning. While the Court has no desire to chill Plaintiffs’ enthusiastic presentation, Taitz’s argument often hampered the efforts of her cocounsel Gary Kreep (“Kreep”), counsel for Plaintiffs Drake and Robinson, to bring serious issues before the Court. The Court has attempted to give Plaintiffs a voice and a chance to be heard by respecting their choice of counsel and by making every effort to discern the legal arguments of Plaintiffs’ counsel amongst the rhetoric. This Court exercised extreme patience when Taitz endangered this case being heard at all by failing to properly file and serve the complaint upon Defendants and held multiple hearings to ensure that the case would not be dismissed on the technicality of failure to effect service. While the original complaint in this matter was filed on January 20, 2009, Defendants were not properly served until August 25, 2009. Taitz successfully served Defendants only after the Court intervened on several occasions and requested that defense counsel make significant accommodations for her to effect service. Taitz also continually refused to comply with court rules and procedure. Taitz even asked this Court to recuse Magistrate Judge Arthur Nakazato on the basis that he required her to comply with the Local Rules. See Order Denying Pls.’ Mot. For Modification of Mag. J. Nakazato’s Aug. 6, 2009, Order; Denying Pls.’ Mot. to Recuse Mag. J. Nakazato; and Granting Ex Parte App. for Order Vacating Voluntary Dismissal (Sep. 8, 2009). Taitz also attempted to dismiss two of her clients against their wishes because she did not want to work with their new counsel. See id. Taitz encouraged her supporters to contact this Court, both via letters and phone calls. It was improper and unethical for her as an attorney to encourage her supporters to attempt to influence this Court's decision. Despite these attempts to manipulate this Court, the Court has not considered any outside pleas to influence the Court's decision.

Additionally, the Court has received several sworn affidavits that Taitz asked potential witnesses that she planned to call before this Court to perjure themselves. This Court is deeply concerned that Taitz may have suborned perjury through witnesses she intended to bring before this Court. While the Court seeks to ensure that all interested parties have had the opportunity to be heard, the Court cannot condone the conduct of Plaintiffs’ counsel in her efforts to influence this
Court

Ruling here...Judge Carter Ruling

Originally posted by Alxandro
Truth is, this turd hasn't exactly flushed and it will continue to rear it's ugly head until Obama finally reveals his BC, once and for all.

I guess you just skipped my post above yours, selective reading eh.

I'll quote myself here, since you missed it...

Because he doesn't show his birth certificate to mnemeth1, or any of the delusional "birthers" really doesn't mean anything to me. His right to privacy, President or not, is not superceded by your "right to know".

"Birthers" last arguement seems to be that, "why doesn't he just show it?" Would you like to see his penis to verify he is a male? Would you also like all the election results brought to your house so you can verify them? Or will you accept the people, who conduct that process' word that he infact won?

Feel free to replace "mnemeth1" with Alxandro.

And I guess either A, you haven't seen this, or B, its not "acceptable" for you. Either way, my above argument is valid.



On ATS, a large majority of the people are quick to cry about the government, and the apparent push into a society where "show me your papers" would be the norm. Yet many of the same are demanding this man "show his papers". Just so YOU can have what you would still not regard as TRUTH.

reply to post by ThaLoccster


Now i dont believe the "birther" thing. I think its stupid but i think your miss-stating their argument ... they dont want a cert of live birth they want the actual certificate with a doctors signature and a footprint....

I guess im just saying that this whole stupid thing could be put to rest.

On topic this Orly woman is a sham, Shes using PTB strategy without actually having power... thats why its failing on her, also it could be becuase its a crock

Hell I don't even have one of those. The ones that my children had that had their foot prints on it was lost, the replacement didn't have their prints.

I guess we're Indokenyan too. Maybe Obama is my uncle.

But I don't understand why they won't accept one document, but will accept another. Its like saying blood isn't enough, we want semen. Then when semen is given. They'll want spinal fluid.

Nothing short of an 80 year old Hawaiian doctor saying "I pulled Obama from his mothers vagina" would suffice, hell everyone can admit that even that wouldn't.

Its honestly just an attack on Obama, they found the flimsiest thing they could to run with and did.

I don't support Obama any more or less than I have any president, well maybe more than Bush. But birthers, I see as delusional.

I've posted the same question in 3 different threads now, and not once has it been answered.

I'll post it in this thread, again.

Why aren't birthers going after the organizations responsible for determining a person's eligibility to be president? Why are they attacking Obama as if he's some super duper con man who pulled the wool over everyones eyes? IF Obama was determined to be ineligible because he was born in a foreign country then it would involve a conspiracy by many people on many levels.

Birthers ignore this fact, and act like Obama could just "sneak" in to office without anyone checking his background. If his background is so flimsy a random poster on ATS can see the holes in the story, wouldn't the state election committee, FBI NSA and CIA also have had to missed those holes?

The only organization I know for a fact that conducts a process to determine eligibility is the state election board. But assuredly FBI, CIA, and/or NSA would conduct their own if even independant investigations into any candidates background. They are surely not going to let some person with an unknown background and history lead this country. Its ridiculous to assume they would. Not to mention hundreds of reporters and political opponents. If any SOLID evidence existed that showed Obama was not born in the U.S. I truely believe they would have found out years ago. Probably when he was running for senate, if not earlier.

Even Taitz doesn't know what her argument is. And her argument is that he either wasn't born here, or he was born here but lost his eligibility and citizenship because he moved. So what is it? Atleast hardcore "birthers" usually have a stance, and thats that he wasn't born here, not one or the other. She just did all of this for the sake of doing it, and creating a ruckus and getting her 15 minutes of fame. In my opinion anyways...

reply to post by Rhetoric


Yep this is indeed a smack down to Orly, and I think this will be another issue put forward towards the Californian bar association. She may very well loose her online licence.

In anycase this doesnt end birthers from attempting new suits. Although it certainly makes it much harder for them to bring anything new to the courts that hasnt already been dismissed in other suits.

Originally posted by ThaLoccster

Originally posted by Alxandro

I knew it! Hawaiian officials are in on it, as was the "doctor" who "delivered" Obama.

Don't worry Birthers, Ortiz may be down but she's not out! She will be back again with more lies, more speculation, more forgeries, more bribed witnesses and more FUN!

Don't let repeated courts throwing out your maniacal case dissuade your insanity. Don't let the fact that courts don't have jurisdiction over removal of the president stop you from trying. I am sure you will find that piece of evidence proving once and for all Obama was indeed born on Mars.

Oh please make sure you guys send a candidate against Obama that will make sure to bring this up during the campaign in 2012.

Originally posted by oneclickaway
Is Larry Sinclair mentioned in that ruling?
Is Lucas Smith mentioned in that ruling? As I understood it Lucas Smith had an accusation that Orly asked him to lie. But if you accept he is being truthful then you would have to accept he is being truthful about his Kenyan birth certificate.

What world do you live in? If a person is up front about one thing, this makes them honest about everything else? What world are you from buddy??

Is it that easy to convince you?? You mean this supposed Kenyan BC from Lucas Smith??
msgboard.snopes.com...

See I find it interesting as you are falling in the same trap this fake one has fell into. This is supposedly to be Obamas long form Kenyan birth certificate, registered only afew days following his birth in 61' supposedly in Mombasa Kenya. The problem is Mombasa was part of Zanzibar until 1963, 2 years following Obamas birth. There for the first big flaw of this fake is that its suppose to be a Zanzibar birth certicate, not a Kenyan one. Seriously?? And you choose to buy this over the Hawaiian authenticated short form birth certificate? Come on Oneclick, atleast keep on top of it if your going to continue to push this conspiracy.

And Obama's family tribe lives around lake victoria, where Nairobi is closer, and larger. Why on earth if Ms Dunham was in kenya would she choose to travel an extra 270 miles into what was another country back then if Nairobi is right there close to the village? Seriously?? and this is after the fact Ms Dunham managed to afford a plane ticket to get there, and to fly for 7 days to get there 8 months pregnant... then after all those stop overs from the flight, shes arrives in Nairobi, the only city with an international airport back then, and from there she feels shes going to have Obama so she chooses to travel for another few costly hours out of Nairobi to another country.... dang that makes sense!

Oh wait hold on.... now I know why Mombasa is the center of attention here..... its because that part of africa is known to be mostly arab and muslim... Oh ok so the fakers tried to tie in the whole muslim theory to it as well... oh ok I get it.

Keep on top of it man.

[edit on 29-10-2009 by Southern Guardian]

reply to post by Southern Guardian


this is probably going to be the only time i ever agree with you SouthernGuardian, this woman should be disbarred as she never provides any evidence and makes outlandish claims based on things that are equally outlandish

Its amazing she even passed her bar.

I might be able to help you all if I had access to a NPR chicago radio interview played on that puke Hannity's show (god I can't stand him, but that was the only place where the real info about B.O. was being exposed/aired ) where, before he was elected to the senate, Obama is asked about his "Foreign Birth" in which he states, (approximation) "I'm NOT RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT", Then the interviewer goes on to another subject.

So, if anyone knows how to get that kind of recording this all could be solved ( I tried to see if I could get info from lexus nexus, but you have to be a subscriber, and I'm not wealthy, but I have an eidactic memory (near perfect recall) and am too moral to use my superior brain to hoard money/attain power to abuse others and crap like that. HA HA , But seriously, someone kick-down and get a copy of that interview and EXPOSE THE USURPER!!!!!


Then send it to taitz/some other patriot and lets TAKE BACK OUR COUNTRY!!