Posted on 08/02/2009 1:35:53 AM PDT by rxsid
Edited on 08/06/2009 12:10:02 AM PDT by John Robinson. [history]
Attorney Taitz filed a NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Expedite authentication, MOTION for Issuance of Letters Rogatory for authenticity of Kenyan birth certificate filed by Plaintiff Alan Keyes PhD.
http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/blog1/ (site has been the target of hackers, proceed with caution — John)
Orly Taitz’s Star Witness: The Dentist Asked Me To Lie In Court
By Spencer Kornhaber in Politics
Dr. Orly Taitz believes that Barack Obama wants to destroy America, but lately she’s been dealing with a different threat: the defection of her former allies in the “eligibility” (a.k.a. “birther”) movement.
The lawsuit against Taitz from fellow birther lawyer Phil Berg has been given a full public airing, as has been her in-court kerfuffle with co-counsel Gary Kreep. It’s been widely reported, too, that potential crazy person Larry Sinclair — the guy who claims he had gay sex in a limo with Obama in the ‘90s — says he’s submitted an affidavit stating that Taitz asked him to lie under oath about Obama killing people.
Now, it looks like she’s lost the support of the very person she called “crucial” to her case. Lucas Smith, the 29-year-old Iowan whom Taitz flew from the Dominican Republic to testify in Santa Ana federal court about obtaining Obama’s birth certificate, now says he can no longer work with her. Like Sinclair, he says that Taitz asked him to lie in court.
“I finally told her to forget it, we’ll part ways,” Smith told the Weekly on the phone. “I definitely do not want anything to do with this dentist wannabe movie star.”
The story of the falling out between Smith and Taitz is buried in the comments stream on Smith’s YouTube channel. YouTube, after all, was where Smith debuted the supposed Kenyan birth certificate of Barack Obama. (hat tip to BadFiction on this)
As Smith tells it, the “blow up” between him and Taitz came this past Tuesday as a result of Taitz’s recent quest, made only more fervent by Judge David Carter’s attempt to end it, to get Wiley Drake’s lawyer Gary Kreep out of her lawsuit. Smith says Taitz told him to testify in court that Kreep had tried to buy the Kenyan birth certificate off of him so as to “bury it.” Smith says that never happened. He also says she tried to get him to vounch for the other possibly fake Kenyan birth certificate that Taitz filed with her lawsuit
“I’m not going to discredit my own story for her lawsuit,” Smith said. “Let’s not fight lies with lies.”
Smith also has a litany of complaints about Taitz’s personal demenor, actions and motives. He says she used him by promising to put him in a hotel room but then having him stay at the home of a supporter. He says she had no interest in researching leads that might help the case against Obama, and that she offended him by telling him to “get a job.”
In court last week, Taitz unsuccessfully pleaded with the judge to let Smith testify that very day because he might soon be killed. “She made a big deal about that in open court,” Smiths says. “Once court was over, she definitely had no concern for my life.”
It should be noted that Smith’s credibility had been called into question even before Taitz flew him to California. World Net Daily — yes, the birther clearinghouse World Net Daily — has attacked the veracity of Smith’s Kenyan birth certificate and spotlighted Smith’s criminal record, which includes an attempt to sell his own kidney.
When contacted by the Weekly, Taitz responded to Smith’s version of events by saying in an email that “none of it is true.” There is one exception, of course: “The only true thing is the declaration that he filed with court under penalty of perjury, stating that the attached certified copy of Obama’s Kenyan BC is the true and correct copy.”
http://blogs.ocweekly.com/navelgazing/politics/orly-taitzs-star-witness-the-d/index.php
she offended him by telling him to “get a job.”
__________________________________________________________
That would be offensive to this guy regardless who said it...
He has a job. An “ebay salesman”. LOL
I saw the Herlihy article some time ago. It can be found here:
If those are the images I think they are, they are pdf.s, or otherwise protected, and I cannot post them.
many thanks!
Great find, thank you. I have downloaded that...
Anybody want to call her and ask if motorized one or two documents on August 28, 2008? Shalifa Williamson (303) 400-1430 3223 S Hannibal St,Aurora, CO 80013
Leo Donofrio has a very interesting take on the limited discovery. http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/2009/09/17/barnes-v-obama-important-discovery-is-available-now-according-to-judge-carters-order-of-sept-17-2009/
Ping, Meant to include you in the above post.
The argument for limited discovery is a great one since it would be necessary to challenge the gov’t’s deceptive pleading that the Legislative Branch is exclusively responsibile for determining eligibility and they did their job impeccibly. Leaving nothing for the Judiciary to review. LOL Who are these deceptive gov’t lawyers working for anyway? We are paying their salaries!! Their primary responsibility is to represent the United States and defend the Constitution.
It has always been an intriguing issue as to why Cheney never polled the House members for possible objections. It is just another odd failure of official responsibility in this crazy case.
I’ve sent it to Orly, but she has missed previous suggestions. If anyone knows how to reach her she needs to be told about Donofrio post to her motion for depostions of the House members in to the magistrate immediately.
It is my understanding that Pamela Barnett, one of the Plaintiffs, was sent Leo’s analysis also copied to Orly and Pamela has responded and given thanx.
PS Based on your opinion isn’t the AG office’s representation of Obama a conflict of intrest?
Listen towards the end, when she questions the "reporter": ... who has seen the B.C. with the hospital or Dr. on it? He clearly has no answer for it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wcChG5pRTOE
There's obviously so much more to this issue than what she was able to say during that "interview." At least, she got out the question re: birth hosp & doc not being on the internet jpeg given as "proof."
Absolutely, Holder’s lawyers better start thinking about their professional ethics and their futures as attorneys. Before a DOJ lawyer can take on the personal representation of any gov’t employee, there has to be an examination into whether representing the employee is in the interest of the government. There can never be a conflict of interest between the government’s interest and the employee’s interests. If there is, the gov’t lawyers are not authorized to expend taxpayer dollars to represent the employe’s interests and the employee must obtain personal counsel at his or her expense. As soon as the employee requests gov’t representation, the Civil Division is required to examine into the conduct of the gov’t employee. Before taking on the representation, the Civil Division must conclude that the gov’t employee was acting ‘in the scope of his employment’ with regard to the alleged acts If the gov’t lawyers have not exaimined into the Article II issue, they are incompetent. If they think they can take on the representation and not even look into the eligibility issue because they deem it is a pure political issue that is beyond judicial review and otherwise plaintiff’s lack standing, they are again incompetent as attorneys because the argument is specious. If they have examined into the eligibility issue and found Obama qualified, their defense of the plaintiff is as simple as producing the proof. Lastly, if they have examined into and found Obama unqualified, they are part of the coverup and need to be taken to task for perpitrating a fraud on the court. If I were Judge Carter, I would show cause them to determine why their representation of Obama is not in conflict with their primary obligation to represent the the interests of the U.S. Government.
That’s great news. The motion should be easy to put together and the argument appears compelling and certainly relevant to contesting the MTD filed by the gov’t. After all, the gov’t ‘opened the door’ with their contention that the electoral process was legitimate.
MSNBC, Ratigan ... why do any non-obama sycophants ever go on these networks? The taunting MSNBC ‘host’ had an agenda, so he put on his Obama kneepads and spewed the axelgrewasy lies fed to his network from his messiah’s oriifice. Orly was correct in asking how it is that these enemedia continue to lie to their viewers ... perhaps that’s why their viewer numbers are tanking in to the sludge of their propaganda septic tank.
Looks like a letter to the editor to me....
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.