-RSS Feeds
The Boiled Frog Blog
Boil a frog slowly and it fails to appreciate its own peril.
Subscribe to Comments
Comment RSS Stick a Fork in Orly Taitz
Maybe a silver bullet or a wooden stake is required. Tatiz' latest misadventure, Barnett v. Obama has been dismissed [PDF]. Nothing new there. However, it is the following section that is amusing. The judge is less than pleased with Ms. Taitz, Note in particular the section in bold print about suborning perjury:
Conduct of Plaintiffs’ Counsel
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 co- counsel 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.
One has to wonder how borderraven would explain President Chester A. Arthur. It seems that history and the facts are not on borderraven's side. Poor little birther.
Borderraven spams the Internet with birther misinformation. Yes Obama was born in Hawaii to a British subject. U.S. Immigration Law CLEARLY states that only ONE parent need be a U.S. citizen in order for his/her child to become a Natural Born U.S. citizen by birth. And, since Obama's mother was a native of Kansas, she would qualify as a U.S. citizen. Regardless what the child's OTHER parents citizenry is, and, regardless of WHERE he/she is born, since ONE parent is a U.S. citizen, the child automatically acquires U.S. citizenship upon birth. Therefore, since President Obama's mother was a U.S. citizen, he acquired his U.S. citizenship via his mother. It's called citizenship by "Acquisition." Thus, even IF he was born in Kenya, he is STILL a U.S. citizen, which citizenship passed from his mother to him. However, there is no evidence that his mama was EVER in Kenya. This has been confirmed by the Kenyan govt. which also stated that his papa was not in Kenya in 1961.
Vattel was a Swiss philosopher. US Law is based upon British common law. You try to align the Constitution with Vattel, yet it was Vattel who wrote that only the nobility should be allowed firearms. He also wrote that religion should be regulated by the government. There is no way that Vattel would be seriously considered by the SCOTUS. Nice try.
The Law of Nations, " The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights."
When Kenyan born Barack Hussein Obama Sr., age 25, a British Subject, married Stanley Ann Dunham, US citizen, age 18, on February 2, 1961, he already had a wife and kids, in Kenya, and Ann was 3-months pregnant with Barack Hussein Obama II.
Under Hawaii laws they were not legally married, when Barack Hussein Obama II,was born, nothing changes that.
Under the Law of Nations, Barack Hussein Obama II, was born a British citizen, nothing changes that.
British citizen, Barack Hussein Obama II, did serve unconstitutionally in the US Senate, nothing changes that.
Barack Hussein Obama II, is now unconstitutionally acting as the POTUS, we are going to change that.
It appears cases are approaching the objective from different avenues, but not taking a direct path. Orly goes to Kenya, Berg goes to the Senate. The document displayed on FactCheck, sits like a shield. I say go past it, with a court order, then someone claims "Fair Faith and Credit" will block. However, I see no plausible reason preventing candidate Obama, from acquiring a certified copy of the original record, if he requested. I fail to see "Fair Faith and Credit" applying in such manner as to preclude candidate Obama, from acquiring a certified copy of his personal original record, when the intent of "Fair Faith and Credit" is to remove challenge to validity of an original record from another state.
HRS §338-13 Certified copies. (a) Subject to the requirements of sections 338-16, 338-17, and 338-18, the department of health shall, upon request, furnish to any applicant a certified copy of any certificate, or the contents of any certificate, or any part thereof. (b) Copies of the contents of any certificate on file in the department, certified by the department shall be considered for all purposes the same as the original,...
Consider Berg's case goes to the Senate. COTUS says only citizens can be US Senators. The Senate is the womb of laws. Obama was born a dual-national. Does the Senate investigate candidates? Would they allow a non citizen to be a Senator? Berg is suing the Senate to discover how Obama got in. Berg has appealed.
Expect more law suits, but also a proper quo warranto in DC USA vs Obama.
I advise a turnover of the Senate. Toss all incumbants, and put them out to pasture. Register American Independent Party and vote smart.
JUDGE CARTER IN A NUTSHELL: Expanded Orly Taitz default judgment case against CANDIDATE Obama for fraud into a Presidential Removal case against PRESIDENT Obama (promising a trial), but then ruled the Court lacks said Presidential Removal authority, not only dismissing the Judge-expanded Presidential Removal case (reneging on the trial), but throwing out Orly's Candidate fraud case as well -- all this on a red herring that Orly's case was filed 1/20/09 after Obama was sworn in on 1/20/09 despite Obama was sworn in on 1/21/09 and despite the Orly-alleged fraud was committed by Candidate Obama prior to becoming President and for which there is no Presidential immunity in any case. Thus Judge Carter set up and knocked down his own straw man, and misstated fact and law to bury Orly's actual case. Pretty nifty!!!
Did you even bother to read the dismissal or are you just parroting Orly's talking points? Aside from the fact that Mr. Obama became President on 1/20, there are so many issues including standing (or actually lack thereof). Get over it and get on with your life. Obama is likely to be your president for another seven years. He was born in Hawaii as claimed and is the lawfully elected President of the US. like it or not.
What really pisses me off is that Taitz and her mongoloid horde still don't realize that they don't have a leg to stand on. They keep saying the same things over and over. "Obama could make this all go away in shows us his brith certificate". HeHAS, dummies! He showed the same document to the state department that any of us would have to show if we were running for President and they approved it. They think it is Obama's burden to give more documentation to satify them. They don't see that it is the burden of the Prosecution to prove that Obama ISN'T a citizen. not Obama's to prove that he is. It's the basic foundation of the law system. They say, "Well... then why is he spending so much on legal fees to fight this when he could produce the document?" Because when a plaintiff tries to take you to court, you HAVE to answer! It would be a hell of a legal system if defendants could just say "screw you" and not be forced to answer the complaint. They also don't recognize that Taitz has shot her credibility (not that she had any, but now everyone knows it). She's given too many crazy speeches, screwed up too many cases and has tried to produce evidence and witnesses that have turned out to be fraudulent too many times. Clients have walked away from her and potential witnesses are saying that she wanted them to perjure themselves. But the birthers don't see this. All the want is to be rid of the black guy with the funny name. They just can't accept that such a man could be legally elected president. Well, I got it off my chest.
Craig, apply for a job, provide minimal documents, and lie on your resume, then ask to be CEO, get caught in a lie, and spend $2 million in law suits to keep your job.
What pisses me off is that this is all at taxpayers' expense. Unfortunately the judge did not sanction Taitz, refer this to the bar association or refer it to the DA. Under federal law, Orly could do three years in the iron motel.
dobsonsux, Taxes? You are worried over taxes, on this issue? Is that all hat really concerns you? Nothing else? This issue is costing you less than 2 US cents per year*. Let's say it costs you $.25 per year to verify that a US President lawfully ran for the US Senate and got elected, wrote a bunch of laws affecting you and your family for the next 300 years, then he got into the White House. Now he potentially can cost you much more than $1.00 per year. Can you spare a dime?
*Recent WND estimate of $1.7 million cost of all Obama cases, rounded up to $2.0 million divided by roughly 11 million voters out of a population estimated at 330 million.
Considering Obama is in control of this "puppet show", and he holds a historic document, discovered in the pages of a book, and on his order the state of Hawaii, could release the original 1961 long form certificate -- admitted to exist by public statements made by State of Hawaii government officials -- why the obsession on on Taitz. Yo
You got pun and yd you are letting yourself be played. I can care about you for awhile, but my survival plan says I abandon any drag on my chances of survival. I got my personal load to bear. You've gotta ruck up.
Pay your taxes, the just went up. Obama took $10 trillion from the US Treasury. You do the math.
Ship the ugly buffoon back to Russia after she serves significant time for suborning perjury. Often times, foreigners like Taitz think Americans are a bunch of saps and that they can walk all over us and our laws. Well, usually they can -- for a while. But once "the system" gets fed up the perp can pretty much kiss his/her life goodbye.
If this doesn't get the moron disbarred, nothing will.
Post new comment