Replies

I gave money to Taitz, but given my personal court experience face-to-face pro se with judges (not a pretty sight) and subsequently with hired counsel, Taitz jumped the shark when she went after Judge Land.

Then Lucas Smith's affidavit came out accusing Taitz of taking an “ends justifies the means” approach to removing Obama, but also Taitz clearly failed to understand the FRE and what it would take to be able to enter Smith's CPGH BC and the Lavender BC into evidence.

Those of us who support full transparency of Obama’s vital records and a SCOTUS ruling on his NBC status were then forced to chose between Taitz and Smith, if possible.

Lucas Smith, even thought he is not a lawyer, showed greater understanding of the FRE in his affidavit than Taitz. This was extremely disappointing to me, as I had supported Taitz because she could articulate for the cameras the basic two prongs of Obamas eligibility problem (soil and blood).

Taitz could not, unfortunately, argue effectively before a federal judge, which Kreep was able to do. At the end of the Oct. 5 hearing when Judge Carter said he hadn't made up his mind yet thus sending chills down the spine of the DOJ, it was because of Kreep’s arguments as to third party candidate standing, not Taitz’s wild criminal accusations.

Taitz did a lot to publicize the issue in a “no publicity is bad publicity” sort of way, but in my view she will have no success getting further clients or filing cases, especially after a federal judge states that he has concern that she has suborned perjury.

I have the same concern about Taitz that Judge Carter did based on Smith's affidavit and Taitz's own repeatedly reckless behavior. This is not bashing Taitz, it's just the way it is.

Future success in attempting to compel release of the HI vital records will come only with other attorneys with federal appeals court experience pursuing the existing long-shot appeals or in quo warranto.