Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Orly Taitz Flock Shootin'
Lame Cherry ^ | 0/19/09 | staff

Posted on 09/19/2009 9:56:00 PM PDT by pissant

I have not dealt a great deal with the lawyers and their cases concerning Bearick Obama, as in analysis none of them have produced anything, and none of them has proceeded in ways which would set cases to leverage the exact Obama documents sought.

It is like if you wanted a date with a person who was ignoring you. You don't keep after the person who says, "NO", you instead find another person who is interested to help you make the person envious. That is why I stated that tax cases etc... would be how to get Obama's records and would have by now.

In that attorney Orly Taitz is what hunters would call a "flock shooter". She has just loaded up her gun, pulled both barrels and poured lead in a flock of birds to see if she could hit something. She has wasted a great deal of lead in this in trusting judges to work for her when the correct method has always been to do the work and make the court law work against the judge, so he has to work for you.

Whether by flock shooting, or if Mrs. Taitz has figured this hunt out, she has now the opportunity to blow the Obama hidden information wide open due to the arrogance of a federal judge named, Clay Land, down south.

Land has been an ass in this to a Soldier, named Capt. Connie Rhodes, who was questioning being deployed illegally. He has in prejudice which has been correct in accusing Orly Taitz of being a John Edwards ambulance chaser for fame. That though should never be a reason to deny a Soldier their concerns and to protect that United States Citizen.

Judge Land though went ballistic in firing a nasty ruling at Orly Taitz and threatening her with sanctions. The good part is now that Mrs. Taitz either I said by blunder, stupidity, arrogance or planning has walked right into a situation which is about to trap Land in his own rulings.

See Land has now gone berserk as he was already on a short fuse as Taitz has jerked his cord good in basically accusing him of being a shill for Obama politics and it got Land so furious he has read "treason" into the Taitz reply concerning him. So much so that he has levied a ten thousand dollar fine on the platinum blonde.

This is where the spit hits the fan now, because there are numerous precedents which are basic common law in when someone is accused and punished as Mrs. Taitz is about to, that she will now have a hearing and appeal by higher authorities where she can demand now the Obama secret papers to defend herself.

That was the happening earlier this year when another judge named James Robertson tried to bitch slap an 82 year old lawyer named John Hemenway, with fines over an Obama case. This was the infamous "Twitter" clause Robertson quoted as Obama was legal because he read it on Twitter. Attorney Hemenway was no fool and fired back in reply and appeal that the minute he was sanctioned with threats of fines, Hemenway then had full right of disclosure of all Obama papers to defend himself.

Robertson's testicles shriveled up at that one and simply reprimanded Hemenway, but Hemenway is on appeal and the courts don't know what to do with the case obviously as Hemenway has his precedents and rights to Obama's records now.

This is where Orly Taitz has now plunged into. If she plays this correctly, she can do what John Hemenway did and more in demanding full disclosure of Obama's papers to defend herself and her client. Clay Land in his arrogance has blundered this immensely for the Obama cause and Mrs. Taitz should utilize Mr. Hemenway's reply along with something of Land being part of the old boys network protecting Obama on top in thinking all women should be tied to the bed post, barefoot and pregnant, like Obama tried to hang around for the fun sex and then dumped the kids on Muchelle.

Bring Muchelle into this, Obama and feminism, and see Clay Land really gulp before and Olbermann volcano goes off or he runs for the woods.

It would make great fodder for the press to have this all fester and Clay Land have to prove that his ruling was not against American women alone, because where else in Judge Land's rulings has there ever been such a diatribe against a flashy male attorney?

One can never get their hopes up as there has been nothing to hope for, but there is a golden goose now if Orly Taitz places her Russian ammunition correctly in demanding her defense using Obama's records and placing this now in the feminist center for American women, Attorney Orly Taitz and Capt. Connie Rhodes in being attacked by the Old Obama Club.

Let the fun begin. Judge Clay Land slings a scoop of it, you bring a manure spreader load to the contest.


TOPICS: Chit/Chat
KEYWORDS: birthcertificate; birthers; certifigate; larrysinclairlslover; obama; orlytaitz; truthers
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 201-220221-240241-260261-273 next last
To: john mirse
1. And when presidential candidate Obama appears alongside other candidates during national debates, I have no doubt that he will be asked repeatedly to explain why he won't release his Hawaii long form birth certificate and his Occidental, Columbia, and Harvard college records.

Only if the states pass laws requiring proof of eligibility. Otherwise, they'll not want to be called racist pigs, and will shut up.

241 posted on 09/20/2009 9:30:32 PM PDT by El Gato ("The Second Amendment is the RESET button of the United States Constitution." -- Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: OCCASparky
I guess you don't think those 2 DNC documents that Pelosi signed to certify Obama is questionable and raises a red flag ?
242 posted on 09/20/2009 9:35:40 PM PDT by American Constitutionalist (There is no civility in the way the Communist/Marxist want to destroy the USA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah

Did you know that, that was that type of line of chain of command the Germans had during WWII ?


243 posted on 09/20/2009 9:44:49 PM PDT by American Constitutionalist (There is no civility in the way the Communist/Marxist want to destroy the USA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 215 | View Replies]

To: john mirse

However, IF he is not removed in this term, everything he signed, every appointment he made, every program he stopped, etc. will stay in place.
If he is removed as unqualified to be POTUS, all of it is reversed, and nothing he did will stand.

Do you understand the importance of him being removed, not impeached, removed?


244 posted on 09/20/2009 10:49:17 PM PDT by etraveler13
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: john mirse

1. I say the above for this reason: If Taitz faces a disbarrment investigation and trial, she will become an instant martyr in the eyes of the anti-Obama people, and she will receive instant national publicity.


I thought you only became a martyr when you died. Would she then get 70 male virgins??? Her husband might have something to say about that....FDLMAO...

sorry, I really do get your point, just being funny.
Many think she is a puppet (although unwilling) to the Obama cause. Keep the spotlight on her, and he can accomplish so much. Notice he does not give any time to this, he has lawyers keeping her busy, while he continues in the background on his agenda.

But in fact, the more that gets known about him, the faster he has to get the thing on his checklist accomplished. Hence the increased pressure on getting Healthcare legislation signed, with our without bipartisan support.

He is losing, people are sending fake stuff to the courts...great...it takes a long time to determine its fake...more time to do what he needs to get done...the old bob and weave...rope a dope..Obama style...best part is, his fanatic supporters are the fodder tossed to the courts, with no danger to him...they are doing it for him...or his lawyers...Delay delay delay, until it is too late.

People demonize, or defame, or insult the only person working on a solution, but lawyers need to be the big name on the news or pro bono is not a consideration. Quit the whining lawyers, ask not what America can do for you, ask what you can do for America...and then do it. Support Orly Taitz in any way you can...and do it for America.


245 posted on 09/20/2009 10:57:28 PM PDT by etraveler13
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: American Constitutionalist

In so far as she performed them as her duty as Speaker of the House? Wow—talk about your whole world coming apart at the seams.


246 posted on 09/21/2009 4:38:34 AM PDT by OCCASparky (Steely-Eyed Killer of the Deep)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 242 | View Replies]

To: etraveler13

You would be incorrect. Look up Ryder Vs. United States.


247 posted on 09/21/2009 4:43:07 AM PDT by OCCASparky (Steely-Eyed Killer of the Deep)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 244 | View Replies]

To: American Constitutionalist

Great insight! That’s it, exactly.


248 posted on 09/21/2009 8:02:22 AM PDT by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 238 | View Replies]

To: OCCASparky

I would say you need to be specific concerning exactly what I am incorrect about. I wrote quite a bit. Be specific.


249 posted on 09/21/2009 8:31:23 AM PDT by etraveler13
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 247 | View Replies]

To: pissant

Actually, I would say that we have a quite a few numbers of QUISLINGS posting on F.R.!!!


250 posted on 09/21/2009 8:47:43 AM PDT by danamco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: OCCASparky

NO, because they and many more DNCs and some RNCs would probably be following Barry in lockstep all the way to sunny GITMO!!!


251 posted on 09/21/2009 8:50:35 AM PDT by danamco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: etraveler13
If he is removed as unqualified to be POTUS, all of it is reversed, and nothing he did will stand.

Specifically, that's what I took issue with. Just because he was or would be removed from office does not mean legislation he signed becomes moot.
252 posted on 09/21/2009 8:51:06 AM PDT by OCCASparky (Steely-Eyed Killer of the Deep)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 249 | View Replies]

To: OCCASparky

As a veteran, I hope you are NOT an “After-Birther”???


253 posted on 09/21/2009 8:53:56 AM PDT by danamco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: OCCASparky

And what will you think when she and Joe is also complicit in this whole scam ?


254 posted on 09/21/2009 9:03:49 AM PDT by American Constitutionalist (There is no civility in the way the Communist/Marxist want to destroy the USA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 246 | View Replies]

To: OCCASparky
Why is it that you are sooooo eager to shot the messenger instead of the message???

It seems to me that you have some old fashion a Male(?) chauvinistic agenda!!!

255 posted on 09/21/2009 9:08:44 AM PDT by danamco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: OCCASparky

You are incorrect. If YOU signed legislation in washington, and were not even a US Citizen, lot less the POTUS, should anybody take anything you said as law???? Of course not.

If Obama is shown to be unqualified, then anything he signed requiring the Presidents signature would be meaningless. Anyone he installed in and office, or appointed to an office, like Chief Justice Sotomayor, would be vacated, because he was unqualified (did not have the constitutional permission)to do so.

So, all the stuff he has done, IMO, to destroy this nation, would be reversed. This is not to say that a NEW President, who is qualified, might not do the same thing, but, he would have to start from scratch.

My concern is that something might happen to Obama before he is removed from office. It is not that the investigation would not continue, but it would take longer to reverse his decisions until it was proven that he was not qualified. In the interim, Joe Biden would fill the position, and might just continue with what Obama started. So removal of Obama, disqualification of Biden, as he ran under a false ticket, et al...would happen.


256 posted on 09/21/2009 9:17:42 AM PDT by etraveler13
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 252 | View Replies]

To: danamco
I have a problem with those deluded fools who follow Orly and try to get out of deployments based on a very thin line of suppositions. Not only are you putting your career at risk, it screws over your entire command and some other poor schlub who has to take YOUR place because of it.

I'm becoming less and less convinced of her motives. From what I'm seeing, it's less and less about getting rid of Obama, and more and more about her and her attempts at self-promotion.

Finally, in the absence of proof that he is NOT a legitimate president (and failing to answer someone's questions regarding eligibility does not constitute "proof") any orders he gives have to be considered lawful. I didn't like serving under Clinton, either, but he was still my C-in-C. As a wise old chief once said to me, "You get to defend democracy, you don't get to practice it!"
257 posted on 09/21/2009 10:23:54 AM PDT by OCCASparky (Steely-Eyed Killer of the Deep)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 253 | View Replies]

To: etraveler13
Once again, incorrect. Look at it yourself:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/94-431.ZO.html

A similar principle applies here, specifically, "The de facto officer doctrine confers validity upon acts performed by a person acting under the color of official title even though it is later discovered that the legality of that person's appointment or election to office is deficient."
258 posted on 09/21/2009 10:27:14 AM PDT by OCCASparky (Steely-Eyed Killer of the Deep)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 256 | View Replies]

To: pissant
"Silly me. And all this time I thought the Constitution actually had some requirements. Now that I know its merely recommendations, well that changes everything."

You're response has nothing to do with what I said.

Of course there are constitutional requirements. That doesn't mean what you said makes any sense. There is no "applicant". He has no burden to prove anything now.

259 posted on 09/21/2009 11:07:33 AM PDT by mlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 227 | View Replies]

To: OCCASparky

None of the three judges were appointed by Obama, they could be appointed in 3 possible manners. So this is not an argument where Obama appointed them, and the conviction could be overturned because of that possibility. And indeed, until it happens the court action could not begin.

I disagree that this is a valid argument, in opposition to what I stated. I would suggest, if you have a mind to, to check United States v. Carpenter, 37 M. J. 291 (1993), to see clarification for the dismissal of claims.


260 posted on 09/21/2009 11:08:14 AM PDT by etraveler13
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 258 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 201-220221-240241-260261-273 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson