Orly Taitz Gets Joy Behar Very Nervous About the Obama Eligibility Case (Video)

You Tube ^ | 10/14/2009 | Joy Behar Interviews Orly Taitz

[kellynla]

Orly Taitz gets Joy Behar very nervous about the Obama Eligibility case.

[humblegunner]

Are you a conservative?

Are you?

Do you remember how the left came up with all manner of outrageous
accusations against President Bush? And how ridiculous they were?

Do you recall how conservatives saw this as pathetic and weak and delusional?

That is exactly what the Taitz followers are doing, and it is helping nothing and nobody.

Birthers are the truthers of 2009.

[Prof. Jorgen]

The one thing Judge Carter did order last week was to make the dates final. Including the dates for a motion for summary judgment and the trial date.

If the Motion to dismiss is not granted, I'd think the case will be settled by summary judgment after discovery.

Yes, he finalized the calendar but I think it's a mistake to go on TV talking about dates for a jury trial that you don't know if you'll have yet. It makes it too easy for people to dismiss what she's fighting for when she makes claims like that. Instead of people focusing on Obama, it gets people focused on her statement and if she's wrong or overstates it like she did with her appeal to the Supreme Court, claiming it being sent to conference was a 'warning to Obama' and that it would be heard...well, we all found out that wasn't the case and it made it easy for everyone to ignore the actual case and why it's important to bring it to court!

I guess I'd go with the more cautious approach to public statements and let discovery speak for itself when it happens, there will be no way to ignore or ridicule that!

[Labyrinthos]

Going back to original intent, it would seem that the Founders expected the electors to satisfy themselves that the candidate they were voting for was in fact eligible, and that the Congress would confirm the eligibility of the electoral vote recipients when the votes were counted before a joint session of Congress.

Exactly. In additon, the Founders left to each state the option to set its own rules with respect to the ballot and voting, including the procedure for a candidate to get his or name on the ballot and the process for challenging the qualifications of a candidate. In my state, the procedure is both administrative and judical: An opposing candidate or political party first petitions the Elections Commission to block or remove a candidiate from the ballot for any number of reasons, including residency, errors on the nominating petition, or other irregularities, and if the Elections Commission refuses to act, the aggrieved person can then commence a legal action to review the administrative determination under a number of statutory grounds. The time to commence such a challenge is extremely short and the administrative and judical review is expedited to ensure that the matter is resolved prior to the election. After that, the remedy is political, not judicial.

[PA-RIVER]

Drew, a man born with British Citizenship is now president.

I think we are all admitting that as a fact now. This was not a well known fact last November.

We are making progress. It isn't over. There are dozens of documents he is refusing to show because they will disqualify him. Relax. This is going to be on his heals until he packs his basketball and leaves Washington. Americans know a Con Man when they see one, and they are tenacious.

[XenaLee]

"....neither you nor anyone else has the legal standing to seek his removal from office for failing to uphold his Constitutional duties."

Nobody is frothing here but you... as you essentially call me stupid (a typical leftist tactic, btw). What I'm getting at, which whooshed over your head, apparently (and you insinuate that I'm stupid?), is that there are actually TWO points, not one.

1. Yes, I do (and yes, we American citizens do) have legal standing re: the question of Obama's eligibility, since every single bill he signs into law would have to be thrown out as unlawful if he were, in fact, ineligible to BE President. As mentioned already in many other posts, it would be a constitutional nightmare/crisis of mega proportions. So yes, we DO have standing to know and or see proof that he is legally in office.

2. The FACT that Obama has failed to uphold the oath he took re: the constitution is grounds alone for impeachment. The founding fathers would probably have already tried and hung him (and half or most of the DemocRats) for treason by now.

I can always tell when I'm talking to a leftie by how they always resort to the insults and patonizing bs. They just can't help it.

[Sibre Fan]

And his campaign paid those legal fees.

Thanks for correcting my "correction."

I'm not aware of any cases that were dismissed before the defense even put in an appearance.

I believe that there were a few cases filed before January 20, that were dismissed before defendants entered an appearance (e.g., Cohen v. Obama, the Aryan Nation case, Essek v. Obama, Hunter v. Obama, Stamper v. Obama) -- as well as a few filed after that date (e.g., Dawson v. Obama, American Grand Jury Presentment, Patriot Hearts Network Media Grand Jury Presentment, and, I believe, a couple more).

[Lundy_s Lane II]

Yes it amazes me.

The writers of the Constitution defined the requirements to be President. The writers used the term Natural born Citizen. The definition that was in use at the time of the Constitution for Natural Born Citizen is given by Vattel.

No one, who is trying to verify that the current _resident is eligible, needs to define or invent a definition for Natural Born citizen. The definition has been there since 1758.

Others are trying to say that the Constitutional requirement does not exist. Others are trying to redefine what Natural Born Citizen means. Not the “birthers”. We are conservative Constitutionalists. We believe that the framers meant what they wrote.

Yes you are right Obama can not and does not meet the requirement to be President. Thank you for recognizing that fact. He might not even be a US citizen.

Anyone who was born here, but their parents were not US citizens at the time of their birth are not Natural born citizens. They are not second-class citizens they just can not hold the office of President or Vice President. This was Chester Arthur’s problem. Vattel presents the reasons why the framers included the requirement for the PResident and Vice President to be Natural Born Citizens. Interesting reading.

What I can not believe is that there are posters on Free Republic that try to argue that there is no difference between a citizen and a natural born citizen. Or there are people on Free Republic that do not see the folly of letting an anchor child who leaves the country and comes back as an adult to run for President.

Chief Justice Roberts flubbed the oath and it was re administered in private. Cheney did not ask for objections. And everyone in the MSM and almost all of the conservative media are ignoring this.

And there are 10s of thousands of people that hold the same belief as I do. At some point there will hundreds of millions. And Chester Arthur obviously had the same view which proves the point.

[Sibre Fan]

The definition that was in use at the time of the Constitution for Natural Born Citizen is given by Vattel.

The definition that was in use by the state statutes and court case opinions at the time the Constitution was written was most definitely NOT the one given by Vattel. The definition in use by the original 13 state statutes and courts at the time was based on jus soli, and the only time that jus sanguinis applied was for children born outside the boundaries of the states (and, pre-statehood, colonies). That is an established historical fact.

[john mirse]

parsy, who almost hates to see the fun end

Oh, it's just getting started. 30 days from now when Orly is hauled away in handcuffs for failing to comply with Judge Land's order, the birthers will have their first "political prisoner of the Obama dictatorship" and the fireworks will really go off!

*****

I don't like Obama.

But if Orly is hauled away in handcuffs, she will become an instant martyr and the controversy of Obama's birth certificate can't will certainly jump from internet websites to the mainstream media.

Does Obama want an Orly martyr story all over the news during his fight to pass health care?

I would not think so, but if Orly goes to jail in handcuffs and her picture in handcuffs is all over the news, such a scene can't help but turn Orly into an instant birther martyr, and bring the issue of Obama's long form birth certificate instantly into the mainstream media.

So, if I were Obama, I would try to talk the judge out of sending Orly to jail in handcuffs, if he doesn't want to bring even more unwanted publicity to the issues of birthers and of Obama's long form Hawaii birth certificate.

[Red Steel]

No-Joy Behar ran out of bogus talking points around the 6 minute mark floundering in more nonsense. LoL! Behar threw out silly Non-Sequitur after Non-Sequitur. The same tactic After-Birthers do here.

[Non-Sequitur]

You need to ask yourself when did the alledged criminal acts take place. BEFORE he was elected. If the allegations are true, he lied to get himself on the ballot.

And you need to look at when the suits were filed - after he was inaugurated. He is the president so his defense is handled by the U.S. Attorney. Now, if it is found that he is ineligible and is removed from office then any future defense from prosecution would be funded by Obama himself.

I am not a birther.

Of course you're not.

You're contining to protect the guy by mischaracterizing my interest in the truth and my concern for the US constitution is incorrect and dishonest.

I doubt that I'm characterizing anything.

[humblegunner]

as you essentially call me stupid (a typical leftist tactic, btw).

What if it's true? What kind of tactic is it to call a stupid person stupid?

[Non-Sequitur]

So you do not think that the framers of the Constitution used the extant definition of Natural Born Citizen?

And what definition would that be?

To me it makes more sense that they understood "Natural Born Citizen to mean exactly how Vattel used that term. A Natural Born Citizen is one born in the country by parents that are citizens. And Vattel explains why that makes sense. IF only people today were as clear thinking as those in the past.

There is a problem with that. Any copy of Vattel's work available to the Founders did not define natural-born citizen in that way. Link

[XenaLee]

"What if it's true? What kind of tactic is it to call a stupid person stupid?"

It's a matter of personal opinion, of course. But usually, it's an over-used tactic by lefties, liberals, etc., to demean and silence their opposition. At least that's been my experience.

And you ask this of me.....why? You trying to start something with me now?

[El Gato]

If you got pulled over for speeding and when the cop asks to see your driver’s license shouldn’t you just be allowed to say; “Hey, the state said I was eligible when I first got it, that should be good enough for you, too.”?

Or you pull out your phone and show him an image of it that you posted to some Anti Police website. Yea that will do it.

[little jeremiah]

Odd comment...

[Lundy_s Lane II]

I suppose I tend to be more libertarian than “conservative”. I signed up on Free Republic back in 1999 during the Florida recount farce. (I was Lundy’s Lane I or something like that). But tend to only turn to FR when I believe there is a constitutional crisis.

But not sure how that really matters. I suppose it is dumb to question someone’s “conservative” credentials. And for that I apologize. But it seems that conservatives or thinking libertarians do not mock those trying to make sure the Constitution is upheld.

There is a big difference between the lunatics on the left and those of us who want verification that Obama was born in Hawaii. And also want the Supreme Court to rule on who is a Natural Born Citizen.

I disagree with you on your analogy. The lunatic left had all the support that wanted for any of their attacks on President Bush. And they used the same ridicule and mocking and attack methods that some people here are using for those of us who question Obama’s eligibility.

There is enough smoke out there that it makes sense to believe that there are at least burning embers under the grey ash and smoke.

You are entitled to your opinion but I back everyone who is trying to get documents released and find out what Obama is hiding. But I believe in Vattel’s NBC definition so do not believe that Obama meets the constitional requirements in any event.

[thecraw]

You birthers invented a definition of natural born citizen that is found nowhere in the U.S. Constitution or any established case law, a definition that Obama couldn't possibly meet and a definition that would render millions of Americans, born and raised here, to the status of second-class citizens

You Hussein Obama enablers just don't get it do you?

How in the world is a naturalized US citizen a SECOND-CLASS CITIZEN? Barbra Streisand! I myself am a naturalized (that means NOT natural born) citizen and I have ALL THE RIGHTS of my fellow US Citizens, except for one thing:

I AM NOT ELIGIBLE TO BE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES!

...and neither is Barry Soetoro.

[Labyrinthos]

What if it's true? What kind of tactic is it to call a stupid person stupid?

I didn't call him stupid; I wrote that he is "sounding really stupid." I rest my case. And based upon his response, there is absolutely nothing that I can do to educate him on legal issues such as standing to sue, the constitutional requirements for federal court jurisdiction, the political question doctrine, and the proper procedure for challenging the qualifications of candidates for public office. Despite the fact that many of these legal principles date back to the Founding Fathers and have their roots in the English common-law, I am nearly certain that in XenaLee's mind, every judge who rules against Oily Taitz and the Birthers --not on the merits, but upon the threshold jurisdictional and procedural issues -- is a commie, traitor, and guilty of treason, and every Freeper who challenges XenaLee's illogical and gross misunderstanding of Constitutional Law and Federal court procedure is a troll, leftest, and DU infiltrator.

[humblegunner]

You trying to start something with me now?

Consider it response to your participation in the queer posts to me earlier, to which you responded without pinging me.

Call the Justice Brothers.