// ]]>
No award for Orly
The American Bar Association frequently gives awards to lawyers who show a commitment to justice. Unfortunately, the ABA is about as far left as the Communist Party, so those who usually get those awards are lawyers committed to socialism, not freedom.
Orly Taitz has waged an almost one-woman war on the eligibility issue. She is absolutely convinced that Barack Obama is not legally qualified to be President. She had endured insults, threats, some from Judges, fines and every roadblock the Obama regime could throw her way. Had she been as tenacious on a similar issue with George W. Bush, she would be the toast of the legal community.
Orly probably does not want an ABA award, but she may be getting closer to something of great importance to her. It is the “holy grail” of the eligibility movement.
Orly Taitz may be about to get the original, type written birth certificate of Barack Obama.
Taitz filed a Freedom of Information Act request to the Social Security Administration for information on Barack Obama’s social security number. Obama, for anyone not familiar with it, has a Connecticut issued social security number. You can tell the point of issuance of a social security number by the first three digits of the number. For baby boomers, social security numbers were generally issued when they started working. Now, it is more common to get a social security number at the birth of a child.
Obama was raised in Hawaii. He started working as a teenager in Hawaii. According to all available information, he never worked in Connecticut. So how did he end up with a Connecticut social security number?
Inquiring minds want to know. Orly Taitz wants to know.
She has now issued a subpoena for the original birth certificate. Not the forged birth certificate Obama released to the public. She wants the original.
Things are now going to get interesting.
If Obama was really born in Hawaii and everything is as advertised, his lawyers can simply let the birth certificate be provided to Orly Taitz and that will end the matter. Given the history of the Obama regime and his defense of his birth certificate, even though he has released a forged birth certificate, that is unlikely.
If the Obama regime fights this, they will file a motion to quash the subpoena. Taitz has already received at least one favorable ruling in this case. The news articles on the subject do not specify what the ruling was, but presumably it was a motion to dismiss the lawsuit summarily.
Some conservatives derisively dismiss anyone who supports the eligibility issue as a “birther.” There certainly is enough evidence out there to raise questions. The significance of the eligibility issue is what happens if we are right. If Obama was never eligible to serve as President, everything he did is void. Two Supreme Court Justices, gone. A host of Federal Judges, gone. Every bill he signed, gone. Obamacare, gone.
What are the chances of this happening? Who knows? The bigger question is, given the potential reward of undoing everything Obama has done, why any conservative dismisses the eligibility issues, as “birtherism” is simply beyond belief.
If Orly Taitz wins, she will deserve a place among the great lawyers of this country, who fought incredible odds to win justice. The left wing American Bar Association will never give her an award for this. But I’m willing to bet she’s not saving any space on her wall for an ABA award either.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Andrew Freeman on -
What?
-
Permalink Reply by Gregory W. Pellegrino on -
Yeah... Ukelele! Can't get much more Hawaiian than that, right!?
-
Permalink Reply by Raeann Klouse on -
I support Orly 100%, but that signature is not proof of his fake BC, I was married in Hawaii in 1967 and that is the same Registrar signature I have on my Marriage certificate, sorry...
-
Permalink Reply by David J Edwards on -
I hope you are joking.
"Cutsie things happen in Hawaii... things that appeal to their tropical "culture" while seeming rather odd to us non-Islanders. However, having a Registrar named in UK L Lee in Hawaii still seems as likely than having a politician named *B. Anjo Player* or *Aguit Arpicker* in Nashville, TN.
Seeing would be believing and there better be some kind of record that UK L Lee was a lighthearted and whimsical Asian person with a first name properly written as "Uk", rather than 'UK'.
The handwriting better match too.
Or...
Is it possible that Hawaii had some kind of law or administrative rule that allows clerks to sign "UK L Lee" to forms? ..perhaps to commemorate their small version of the guitar?
After all, it was the goofy 1960s when both of those happened.
-
Permalink Reply by M. V. Griffin on -
I think she should have her own talk show with Nancy Grace.
-
Permalink Reply by Joseph H Greenberg on
-
I'm glad that Orly is finally being credit that she so richly deserves. If Obama falls from office in disgrace,which he should, this country owes Orly a vote of thanks. What is so obvious from the mountains of evidence presented by Orly is that Obama's presidency is the biggest fraud of at least the century.When will people, including so called conservatives,wake up to this?
-
Permalink Reply by Larry Self on -
Judson - Right on.
Also, the paragraph that begins with "If Obama was really born in Hawaii" is missing something in the second sentence.
-
Permalink Reply by Judson Phillips on -
Thanks Larry. Sometimes I will make changes and not save them and well, you see what happens.
-
Permalink Reply by Mike Young on
-
Judson, I like and respect your opinion, but I wish you would respond or address the issue to the fact that our status as a Sovereign nation has been changed by Congress to that of a Corporation by
UNITED STATES CODE 283002 Sec. 15 (A) (B) (C) This code created by Congress allows anybody from any nation in the world to be the President of the united states because as you should be well aware of a President of a Corporation can be from any nation in the world. That being the case, and the fact that we are operating under a Corporate Constitution as insinuated by the Capital Lettering in the title of our Constitution as opposed to the original Constitution given to us by our founding fathers the letters united states is all lower case lettering in the origonal. Could you please address in an upcoming article. I welcome your reply.
-
Permalink Reply by Judson Phillips on
-
No, you are not going to welcome my reply. The sovereign crap is just that. Bovine Scatology. I have dealt with sovereigns for over 20 years. The idea that this country is a corporation is lunacy. Every sovereign I have ever deal with was certifiably nuts. TPN tolarates a variety of opinion in the conservative movement. There are two exceptions to that. Truthers and Sovereigns.
-
Permalink Reply by David J Edwards on
-
Here is a copy of UNITED STATES CODE 283002 Sec. 15 (A) (B) (C)
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/28/3002.html
A careful reading of that USC entry will show that the USA was NOT changed in its nature or sovereignty at all. Those definitions merely pave the way for transactions between the USA and others (whoever it may be) wherein contracts are "instruments" which use or require exchanges between legal entities called "corporations". In those cases, a subordinate Federal corporation is a legally established sub-section within the government acting on our behalf (whether we like what they do or not).
The US Constitution was not changed by USC 283002 Sec. 15 (A) (B) (C) at all.
Only a duly confirmed Amendment to the US Constitution can change the US Constitution. For that process, see US Constitution Article V.
Anything less is sailboat fuel (hot air in motion).
The UNITED STATES CODE (USC) by itself does not, and cannot change or violate the Constitution of the United States. The assertion that the USA was transformed from a sovereign nation to a corporation is un-Constitutional, and therefore null and void.
On the other hand, too many USC Laws have been passed and accepted in US Courts. Many of those laws are Un-Constitutional. The USC is in dire need of a good house cleaning. Getting that crew of self-serving slackers and twits in Congress to take up the cause of cleaning up the USC is about as easy as teaching a cat to play a violin. Getting the Supreme Court to do that work is can be even harder in most cases. It takes a LOT of money, time, and HARD WORK.
-
Permalink Reply by David J Edwards on
-
At the risk of sounding like an enraged Patriot almost 200 years ago -
The two houses of Congress have degenerated into little more but a corrupt Law manufacturing device which enslaves and extracts the Wealth of the People. Once that great Wealth is stolen by those deceivers, a pittance is turned back to The People for the purpose of bribing us for our votes in order to maintain this travesty against our once bold and honorable nation.
No mystical powers are needed to envision a day, not far off, when that debased system will forgo formalities and cost of elections to do this evil at its leisure. On that wicked day, we shall all feel the sting of the cruel Master's whip across out backs.
© 2012 Created by Judson Phillips.
