Posted on 10/13/2009 12:26:51 PM PDT by RobinMasters
A Georgia judge has blasted attorney Orly Taitz, who has handled a number of court challenges to President Barack Obama's eligibility under the constitutional demand the Oval Office be occupied only by a "natural born" citizen, fining her $20,000 for what he called "frivolous" court actions, and he then mocked the concern over Obama's background.
"Although counsel's present concern is the location of the president's birth, it does not take much imagination to extend the theory to his birthday," wrote U.S. District Judge Clay Land in an order released today.
"Perhaps, he looks 'too young' to be president, and he says he stopped counting birthdays when he reached age thirty. If he refused to admit publicly that he is older than the constitutional minimum age of thirty-five, should Ms. Taitz be allowed to file a lawsuit and have a court order him to produce his birth certificate?
"Or perhaps an eccentric citizen has become convinced that the president is an alien from Mars, and the courts should order DNA testing to enforce the Constitution. Or, more to the point, perhaps the court should issue a nationwide injunction that prevents the U.S. Army from sending any soldier to Iraq or Afghanistan or anywhere else until Ms. Taitz is permitted to depose the president in the Oval Office," he continued.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
Ping.
Judicial tyranny at its finest. If the judge believed that such cases are completely without merit (no citizen has the right to be concerned over the president's background), then the judge should be recused from the case as having already formed an opinion prior to trial.
“”Or perhaps an eccentric citizen has become convinced that the president is an alien from Mars, and the courts should order DNA testing to enforce the Constitution. ...” he continued. “
Ok, tell me again how this guy’s actions are because Orly’s ‘nuts’?
“Ok, tell me again how this guy’s actions are because Orly’s ‘nuts’?”
For real. It takes one to know one, doesn’t it??
Well, yes. Is there a problem with that your honorship? Shouldn't someone be requires to prove he meets the minimum requirements for the office? The judge's mockery of her makes a statement more about him than her. If she is a buffoon, he's a bigger one as well as an ass to boot
Perhaps the judge would like to produce the qualifying birth certificate, and Obama’s State Department citizenship records. wouldn’t that end the thing right there.
When you don’t, and spend all this time wasting money, it’s got to be for some other reason, doesn’t it.
Of course, that would then mean the media lied, which is actually becoming a quite common occurrence. They may want to pay close attention to what happens to their brethren in Venezuela as it all starts to spiral down.
This is nothing more than a planned coverup
from the Dept of “Justice”, directed by the corrupt,
racist, AG Holder.
U.S. District Judge Clay Land is obviously insane.
What is Barry and friends hiding?
“he’s a bigger one as well as an ass to boot”
Agreed! I wonder who elevated him to “His Royal Federal Judgeshipness”? Someone whose wife is the Secretary of State, perhaps?;)
I guess we serfs and the soldiers sent to die for Islam and the Islamist are not allowed to ask for proof.
Just make sure soldiers not to fire back because the same corrupt judicial system might prosecute you too.
This judge is a very sick and demented person, IMO. He is accepting as fact, things that are not proven, in order to silence a reasoned challenge. He needs to be removed from the bench for incompetence.
In stark contrast, congressional hearings were held to determine whether Sen. John McCain was constitutionally eligible to be president as a "natural born citizen," but no such hearings for Obama. Why does this judge not verify whether Obama is a natural born citizen?
No controlling legal authority has sought to verify Obama's claim to a Hawaiian birth, or to certify that he is a "natural born" citizen (being as Obama has admitted that his father was a British citizen).
“FREE THE LONG FORM!”
We sefs have no rights in these judges eyes.
Soldiers need to do their duty, do not fire back at the Muslims and take a bullet for the usurper.
Is Judge Land suggesting that Obama might be an alien from Mars? I don’t recall Orly Taitz ever suggesting that.
Also, if anyone thinks that Obama looks too young to be president, he can quickly lay that theory to rest by producing his BIRTH CERTIFICATE.
Maybe Judge Land has been reading too many left wing sources, since they seem to be the only people who imagine that Obama is really a space alien. Just google it. Here’s one example:
http://www.slate.com/id/2159574/
This judge is either wound way too tight or his doctor left a screw on the assembly room floor.
If The great Oh's defense didn't consist entirely of mockery, "no you can't", "they're racists", and claims that they've already shown us a Certificate, maybe the suits would stop.
Judge Land is a Bush appointee, recommended by GA Republican Congressman Saxby Chambliss.
This judge was appointed to the federal bench by George W Bush after serving as a conservative Republican in the GA legislature. He did offer Dr Taitz several opportunities to prove her case, and she didn’t do it. Her client (Capt Rhodes) fired her, and she went over the top in her accusations against the judge when she could have filed a more reasonable Show of Cause and gotten a much lighter sanction.
The Judge ordered $20K, not the threatened $10K, to be transmitted to the United States and then the United States is to transmit the $20K to the Judge’s favorite charity.
Stunningly corrupt.
Is is not unbecoming of a judge to demonstrate such prejudice? Is he not supposed to ensure that all of the the facts and pertinent information is available for him to make a decision?
It just seems to me that no one of authority wants to address the substance of issues at hand in this matter.
There were a number of ways to secure a birth certificate in Hawaii in 1961. The primary one is the long form that identified the hospital and attending physician. But if the child was not born in a hospital the applicant could still make a declaration and secure an equivalent to the long form as a Certificate of Live Birth. In this case there might not be a hospital or attending physician. The legal requirements for this avenue to acquire a Hawaiian Certificate of Live Birth were "loose" at the time. Taking a look at the long form would clarify whether Mr. Obama was born in a hospital in Hawaii or elsewhere in Hawaii. Of course the possibility exists that a close relative could have secured a Certificate of Live Birth for Obama even though he was born elsewhere. Many people just do not know. They would like to feel assured that all is well and in order in this case.
The real story is the unprecedented lack of openness by our President in connection with his kindergarten records, Punahou school records, Occidental College records, Columbia University records, Columbia thesis, Harvard Law School records, Harvard Law Review articles, scholarly articles from the University of Chicago, passport, medical records, files from his years as an Illinois state senator, his Illinois State Bar Association records, any baptism records and adoption records, not to mention his sources of funding.
I believe that being a natural born citizen meant that both of your parents were US citizens. Obama has acknowledged that his father was not a US citizen. What gives?
Works for me!! Frankly, this alleged "judge's" snotty, condescending demeanor toward Ms. Taitz, IMO, is sufficient to justify him being thrown off the bench and into the unemployment line.
He is not providing impartial judicial review, but extremely prejudiced political discourse. It begs the question how many times this fool judge has been overturned on appeal?
Amen!
Fact is he can’t be a NBC because of parent ineligibility i.e., mother lacked residency and father non citizen. Questions are who is his blood father and is O a foreigner as claimed by relatives. And who the hell is this guy and how does his admin top our Constitution.
His mocking tone makes a mockery of the Constitutional requirement that someone be eligible to hold the office, AND PROVE IT
Perhaps this judge thinks we should just take his word for it?
How about this:
Has BH0bama provided ANY documentation regarding his fulfilling the eligibility requirements?
only two bits of information have been provided to date.
1. a jpg on a website proven to be a forgery (not admisible anyhow)
2. witness testimony by his paternal grandmother stating she was at his birth in Kenya
if any other information has been officially provided (and not just Internet bs) please let me know
The problem is substantially bigger than that. First, zero has sealed ALL of his records so that NO ONE can get a copy of them under an FOIA request. Second, zero claimed on his Facebook page that he was born in 1958 - until he realized that Hawaii wasn't a state until 1959!! Then he changed his birth date to 1961 so he could claim to be born in a US state; thereby meeting the "natural born" requirement.
In addition, research has proven that his parents never lived at the address of record listed on his COLB. This raises more questions about what he is hiding.
Where there's smoke, there's fire; and the smoke is definitley getting a lot thicker around zero's BC issue!!
“He did offer Dr Taitz several opportunities to prove her case, and she didn’t do it.”
Counselor, first you have to provide some proof of what you allege in order to proceed.
Well your honor, that’s why we need you to order discovery first—so I can do just that.
Me? But your claim is bare counselor. What would that prove?
What? Our claim that ...
No, I mean who would benefit from this discovery?
Uh, the American peo ...
I mean right now, here, not some hypothetical, crazy world.
In the instant case?
Yes, now.
Well, first, we all would benefit by seeing that Article 2 of the US Const ...
OK, let’s start over, let me try again crazy lady. If what I order results in you being able to prove your case who benefits?
What—me?
Are you getting smart with me?
Who me?
Costello: Well then who’s on first?
Abbott: Yes.
Costello: I mean the fellow’s name.
Abbott: Who.
Costello: The guy on first.
Abbott: Who.
Costello: The first baseman.
Abbott: Who.
Costello: The guy playing...
Abbott: Who is on first!
Costello: I’m asking you who’s on first.
Abbott: That’s the man’s name.
Costello: That’s who’s name?
Abbott: Yes.
Costello: Well go ahead and tell me.
Abbott: That’s it.
Costello: That’s who?
Abbott: Yes. PAUSE
Costello: Look, you gotta first baseman?
Abbott: Certainly.
Costello: Who’s playing first?
Abbott: That’s right.
Costello: When you pay off the first baseman every month, who gets the money?
Abbott: Every dollar of it.
Costello: All I’m trying to find out is the fellow’s name on first base.
Abbott: Who.
Costello: The guy that gets...
http://www.phoenix5.org/humor/WhoOnFirstTEXT.html
I produced a birth certificate to join the Navy. It was a computer-generated short form that looked just like the one Obama displayed.
I think it’s that she accused him of treason, among other things, in both her filings and in comments to the media. No judge is going to stand for that.
In any courtroom, the judge is the boss. If I go in and don’t get what I want and start disrespecting him, I shouldn’t expect much more than to be thrown out on my a**.
So it goes here...
Yes, that might be true in the judge's view of things. But doesn't the First Amendment guarantee of free speech offer Ms. Taitz protection against being penalized by government in retaliation for her public criticism of a government official outside the courtroom?
Separately, it would seem obvious that the lawsuit that Judge Land describes as "frivolous" is anything but. Taitz' failure to cite precedents to justify her claims can be explained simply by the fact that hers is a case of first impression (no case remotely similar to the this was ever presented to any court in the past). There is no case law barring any federal court from hearing a case merely because it presents a novel factual context.
Article III, Sec. 2 of the Constitution confers federal judicial authority "to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution..." The question of whether Obama is constitutionally qualified to be president is clearly within this jurisdiction. A military officer, sworn to uphold the Constitution of the United States, has a personal interest in this question, because he or she must know whether orders issued from the top are given by a constitutionally qualified CIC or by a usurper, and can only act appropriately with such knowledge in hand.
“I produced a birth certificate to join the Navy. It was a computer-generated short form that looked just like the one Obama displayed.”
First of all, Obama has NEVER PROVIDED ANYTHING. His “campaign” provided a COLB to a website, sao the website says. I have never seen or heard Obama state that he has provided any PROOF to anyone. The White House won’t even validate the letter Obama sent to Kapi’olani Medical Center for Women and Children in Honolulu, Hawaii.
She has a First Amendment right to criticize the judge outside of court, but anything she puts in papers filed with the court can subject her to sanctions. She made accusations of bias against the judge, in papers filed in court, which are factually and legally bogus. (He is prejudiced against her because he owns stock in Comcast?) That is a violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct, and lawyers have been disbarred for that.
And...I bet the Navy had every right to check it against the long form, if the officers in charge of the enlistment process cared to do so.
And?...When has Obama even acknowleged having provided a short form to be freely inspected?
Drew...I really do respect the other Obama defenders. At least they are very careful to post accurate information. They may draw conclusions that sometimes infuriate the Constitutionalists but at least they don't deliberately distort the issue.
That may sound farfetched, but Comcast is "regulated" by the Obama-controlled Federal Communications Commission. As you may know, there has been some concern among people in broadcasting about the possibility of O's FCC abusing its authority by shutting down outlets as political retaliation against perceived "enemies." I think that might her point, although I'm not sure.
So, if anything, Land should be biased against Obama, not in favor of him.
In any event, stock ownership doesn't disqualify a judge from any case unless the company whose stock he owns is a party or has a direct financial interest in the outcome.
Finally, if you think a judge's stock ownership disqualifies him, the law is that you have to say so before the judge rules on your case. Otherwise you can go into the hearing and say, "if I win I won't say anything but if I lose I'll say the judge is biased." Courts don't stand for that kind of gamesmanship.
Yes, that's the general way that the judicial ethics rule is stated. But Ms. Taitz was possibly thinking of the (proverbial) unseen 800 pound gorilla in the room: Obama's FCC, which could possibly harm Comcast (and any shareholder's interest in it) in retaliation if Judge Land didn't dismiss her case against Obama quickly. This administration is capable of things more vindictive than that - it's called "the Chicago way."
Yes, that's the general way that the judicial ethics rule is stated. But Ms. Taitz was possibly thinking of the (proverbial) unseen 800 pound gorilla in the room: Obama's FCC, which could possibly harm Comcast (and any shareholder's interest in it) in retaliation if Judge Land didn't dismiss her case against Obama quickly. This administration is capable of things more vindictive than that - it's called "the Chicago way."
By that reasoning, every judge in America is disqualified, because there is theoretically something Obama could do to any of them.
Sorry, if you are going to move to disqualify a judge, you'd better have the law on your side.
Did you scan them a copy of it onto the Kos website with the id # blacked out or did some unbiased human get to actually hold it in their hand and examine it?
After the blackout was removed Obama’s # has 1961 in it whereas the twins born at about the same time have 61 in theirs instead of 1961. Please explain how this might have happened.
obumpa
justiceseeker,
This wasn’t ‘outside the courtroom.’ Dr. Taitz filed her “Show of Cause” with the court to which she is not admitted but to which she was afforded the extraordinary courtesy of appearing pro hac vice without local counsel.
As an attorney and an officer of the court, subject to the court’s rules, she accused the judge of treason, of colluding with an ally of the defendants, of having a bias in the case because he owned stock in comcast. She further threatened to reveal attorney-client correspondence.
As we all know the First Amendment doesn’t allow one to shout ‘fire’ in a crowded theatre. The Rules of the court, which I again emphasize govern behavior in the courts and to which Dr Taitz subjected her self by appearing and filing, don’t allow those accusations to go without penalty. This penalty should not surprise.
This is a link to the story showing the birth certificates of the Nordyke twins who were born the day after Obama in the same hospital claimed as that of his birth. Notice the difference in the numbering system on the certificates of the twins versus Obama.
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=105347
“She made accusations of bias against the judge, in papers filed in court, which are factually and legally bogus. (He is prejudiced against her because he owns stock in Comcast?) That is a violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct, and lawyers have been disbarred for that.”
While I agree that stating such things in court papers is a little over the top. How can you state they are “factually and legally bogus.” It is a matter of opinion....it might have made him prejudiced.
Also, as a previous poster pointed out....this “judge” was already biased before he heard the case. His smart ass comments emphasize that bias. He should not have heard this case. I hold him in contempt. In my opinion, as a private citizen, this judge should not be on the bench and his actions are contemptable...and possibly treasonable. I emphasize that is my opinion as a private citizen.
You mean they didn't just take your word for it??? Why didn't you hire a legal team, and cadre of bloggers to stonewall for you???
It was a computer-generated short form that looked just like the one Obama displayed.
Obama has displayed nothing and you know it.
Wow, looks like the judge isn’t being as impartial as we would hope a judge would be.
Obama, Obama's handlers, his campaign, whatever. I really don't care. The one of Factcheck looks just fine to me (despite what a self-proclaimed, pseudonymous "forensic image analyst" who turned out not to be one at all says). Hawaiian officials says he was born there. Good enough for me. None of his opponents contested this. Chief Justice Roberts swore him in.
As far as I'm concerned, Birthers have produced no compelling evidence that Obama was born anywhere besides Hawaii.
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.