Let's see: she's lost every eligibility lawsuit; been sanctioned $20,000 for filing frivolous motions (sanctions upheld on appeal); she is, by her own admission, under investigation by the California Bar; and she's been denied intervenor status in the Florida Federal HCR suit. She's accused her webmistress of theft, accused her Republican primary opponent of fraud, and continues to preach that any media outlet that criticizes or ignores her should have FCC charges filed against them. And she has abolutely nothing to show for it all, unless you count YouTube videos of endless rambling speeches.
I'd say "discredited" is appropriate.
I think the bc issue is valid & symbolic of how poorly this guy was vetted. There are tons of missing documents—we have no records of anything.
That said, Orly is the wrong person to be deemed by the MSM as head of the birther movement. She is not a competent litigator, she clearly does not understand the process & makes the movement look ridiculous.
Hopefully during the runup to 2012, some competent attorneys will step up.
How does this prove Obama’s certificate is on the up and up?
I don't stand with those who say that the COLB is a post-Hawaii forgery (some digital image altered in a computer that does not exist on paper).
I only raise the same questions of speculation. Why spend $1,000,000 to fight its release if nothing is there? Why do judges insist it has been “released already” when it has never been introduced as court evidence? If the certificate HAD been released, there would be no further case. Instead we are repeatedly told that we have no right to know. That concept STILL has not been discredited. The American public does have a right to know if the president is eligible. His appointee for the head of the IRS is a known tax cheat.
I have difficulty criticizing failures made against a monolithic and illegitimate regime.
Especially when I have done absolutely nothing to help nor a suggestion conveyed on how to better her cases(s)
Actually the fact is that Taitz has not ‘lost” any cases, because the cases were all blocked prior to going to trail.
obama’s attorneys have managaged to block all the cases on “standing”. Under “standing “ a citizen does not have the right to question the qualification of a president. The evidence against obama all points towards him being born in Kenya, but unless the A.G. of the U.S. (holder) issues a QUO WARRANTO ( show proof that you are qualified) to obama nothing is going to happen. Article 2 of the Constitution requires that the President must be a Natural Born citizen.
The original Congress defined that meaning as being born to PARENTS who were citizens.The Supreme Court has also defined Natural Born as being born to parents who were U.S. citizens. obama does not feel that the constitution is still valid and now it should only require that one parent be a citizen not both to be a “natural born citizen”. So the question is should politicans have the right to “change “ the Constitution to fit their personal interests. There have been no Constitutional amendment to change Article 2 to allow Natural born citizenship with only one U.S. parent. Orly Taitz may be a nutcase , but in this instance she is correct, obama is not the legal President of the U.S. There is no law granting Natural Born Citizenship by merely being born on U.S. soil,if born to one parent (citizen) or to parents who are legally here but not yet citizens then you are a Native born Naturalized citizen. Article 2 was a security measure to prevent foreign influence from affecting the office of the President . The founding fathers felt that if both your parents were citizens at the time of your birth , it would limit any foreign influence.
And of course we know no one fighting and true and right cause has ever had this happen to them. :::sarc tag in case it is needed:::