When I was a teenager (in the 70’s) I took a summer camping trip once to the Florida Keys with a group of friends. As we set up camp on a beautiful little stretch of beach somewhere on the Atlantic side I remember just standing and looking out at the breathtaking view before me. When suddenly I heard a voice behind me, “So like, where y’all from?” I turned around and there stood a guy who called himself Moses. He was standing there completely naked, except for a “lucky seed” necklace and he was toking away on a big ole Cheech and Chong sized joint. I was speechless.
Moses introduced himself and said he lived in a tree house behind the lagoon. Among other things he claimed he had come to this country on a big ship with Ponce de Leon. Now that happened nearly 40 years ago and in all this time I don’t think I’ve ever come across anyone or anything as completely crazy as I thought Moses was. My encounter with Moses now ranks 2nd on my craziest shit I’ve ever seen list.
Even before listening to Orly Taitz’s “presentation” at the Georgia eligibility hearing, which at times was hard to follow even sitting right there in the courtroom, I thought she easily ranked 2nd place on my list. But now that I’ve read the “Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law” brief she submitted yesterday, she has moved into 1st. I certainly hope that when Judge Malihi reads this he is not drinking coffee because there is no doubt it will shoot right out of his nose.
I do believe that Orly must think that she has died and come back as Archibald Cox… (only on acid). For nearly 3 years she has run across this country from court to court, state to state trying desperately to get a Judge, any Judge to give her the chance to “present her case on the merits”. Of course she has never found one that would give her tripe the time of day, until now.
In reality, (a place I doubt Orly Taitz has ever been) there was only one question before the court in this case. That question is whether or not Obama is eligible to be on the presidential ballot for 2012. Before the hearing on December 20th 2011 the Judge “Ordered” the following:
“All parties must be prepared to submit Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law by 5:00 PM, February 5, 2012. The parties are encouraged to limit their proposed order to twenty-five (25) or fewer pages, and only include pertinent facts and law. All citations will be reviewed carefully. Therefore, it would be injudicious to embellish the testimony of witnesses or points of law.”
(The date of Feb 5th was moved up to Feb 1st after the hearing.)
If I ever had any, I have no doubts now that Obama’s attorney blowing off the entire hearing and refusing to even participate in the birfer circus was the best move he could have made. And after reading what Orly filed as her “Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law” I imagine that the poor boy is still laughing his ass off.
Orly’s filing can be read in its entirety “Here” at Jack Ryan’s Scribd. But to highlight the certifiable insanity of it all here are a few choice bits, not including the fact that she misspelled her own name at the very beginning.
“Plaintiffs seek their attorneys’ fees and costs. Plaintiffs also assert that evidence of criminality as well as contempt of court and rule of law exhibited by the defendant, Obama, is so egregious that it warrants forwarding of the evidence and findings of this court to the Attorney General of Georgia for criminal prosecution of Obama for elections fraud, uttering of forged and altered documents, Obstruction of Justice and Social Security fraud. Additionally, the evidence submitted to this court warrants forwarding to the immigration and deportation services of the Department of Homeland Security for criminal prosecution; as well as to the U.S. Congress for impeachment for High Crimes and Misdemeanors committed by Defendant, Obama. Furthermore, Defendant and his attorney should be held in contempt of court and properly sanctioned for failure to comply with the subpoena duly issued and served on the defendant by the Plaintiffs counsel, Orly Taitz.”
She started off on a real roll there! In regard to the citizenship of Obama’s father she explains.
“At the time of Obama's birth, his father, who came from Mombasa, Zanzibar region of Kenya, was a British "protected person". Obama automatically inherited his father's British citizenship upon the British Nationality act of 1948. Upon the declaration of the Independence of Kenya on December 11, 1963, Barack Obama automatically received his Kenyan citizenship on December 12, 1963. As Obama was around five years old his mother remarried one Lolo Soetoro, Indonesian national. According to Obama's memoirs (Dreams from my Father) and official biography, it is common knowledge that the family immigrated to Indonesia around 1967. Obama's school records from Indonesia (P trial exhibit 7) show him using last name Soetoro and nationality Indonesian. So, from birth until today, Obama had citizenship of three other countries, he is a son of a foreign national and a step son of another foreign national, therefore not eligible to be considered a natural born U.S. citizen according to the precedent of Minor v Happersett.”
She rolls on from there with all the “evidence” she’s ever discovered in the last 3 years that she claims proves Obama is not eligible to be POTUS along with laying out the testimonies of all her “expert wittiness”. Every bit of which is still nothing but hearsay, speculation, Internet rumors, and down right delusions. This bit is priceless.
“Defendant did not produce any evidence, any documents verifying his birth. The only thing he is relying on, is that on April 27, 2011 he posted a computer image on line and claimed that this computer image is a true and correct copy of his birth certificate, issued in 1961. He posted this image on mugs and T-shirts and sells them for $25 apiece, claiming it to be a verification of his eligibility. It is possible, that an image on a mug constitutes a prima facia evidence in Mombasa, Kenya, maybe an image on a T-shirt represents a competent, admissible evidence in Jakarta, Indonesia, however in the United States of America, where we hopefully retained a rule of law, an image on mugs and T-shirts represents neither prima facia evidence, nor competent, admissible evidence. The only thing it represents, is complete disrespect of law and of 311 million American citizens.”
Right. Correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t Orly submit on several occasions a picture of a tee shirt with a bunch of letters on it as evidence that Obama’s BC was a forgery?
"Defendant did not present any evidence to refute above testimony and to refute evidence showing him using different last names: Soetoro and Soebarkah and him having Indonesian citizenship. As an Indonesian citizen he does not qualify to run for the U.S. Presidency. There is no evidence to show Obama legally changing his name from Soetoro or Soebarkah to Obama. If Obama is not his legal name, he cannot be on the ballot in the state of GA under the name Obama.”
He didn’t present any evidence to refute anything because he had better sense that to even show up at this farce. I wonder how she expects Obama to present “evidence” that he changed his name back to Obama if there is no actual proof that he changed if from Obama in the first place. As for her interpretation of his not showing up?
“DEFENDANT’S BEHAVIOR SHOWS GUILTY MIND
Defendant's behavior shows guilty mind. Defendant had an opportunity to appear in court and provide certified copies of his vital records. He chose not to show up and not to produce any records. An inference can be made, that he does not possess any valid records, which would explain his behavior. This particularly significant, as this is the first time the issue of Obama's eligibility is being heard on the merits. Until now all of the eligibility challenges were dismissed on procedural grounds, such as lack of standing to challenge a sitting president, lack of jurisdiction or abstention. This is the first challenge, where electors have standing to challenge Obama and can have their challenge heard on the merits. It is reasonable to believe, that if Obama were to possess any valid identification papers, he would have produced them and would have stopped all further challenges on res judicata or collateral estoppel. Obama's contempt of court, refusal to show up in court for trial and lack of any valid identification papers represents circumstantial evidence of guilty mind and inability to respond on the merits and prove his Constitutional and statutory eligibility.”
I guess under Orlylaw the word “inference” constitutes rock solid proof, and the words “circumstantial evidence” means got ‘um by the balls proof. Certainly proof that he has a “guilty mind” is all the proof that’s needed. Well, that AND the OMFG crème de la crème evidence of her entire argument. (Warning, go pee before you read this and make sure there is nothing in your mouth that can spew on your computer monitor or keyboard.)
“Exhibits entered into evidence Case records, p186 show a picture of Obama with his friend Scott Inoue signed Third Grade Honolulu, Hawaii, 1969 (Jerome Corsi Where's the birth Certificate, 2011 edition p 218). This picture contradicts Obama's accounts in his Memoirs and official biography place him in Indonesia from 1967. School records from Assisi school in Jakarta show him attending school there under the name Barry Soetoro from January 1967. On the other hand, his picture from Noelani elementary school in Honolulu Hawaii shows him attending school there in 1968, 1969 under the name Barry Obama. It appears that for a period of two years there were two distinct separate individuals: Barry Obama, who attended Noelani elementary school in Hawaii and Barry Soetoro, who attended Assisi school in Indonesia. It is not clear, how these two individuals merge into one person. It is not clear, who came back from Indonesia: Barry Obama or Barry Soetoro. We have no idea, who is residing in the White House: is it Barry Obama or Barry Soetoro? If it is Barry Soetoro, what happened to Barry Obama?”
That’s right folks, Orly is claiming that for a period of two years Obama somehow split himself into “two distinct separate individuals” not that she explains how this could possibly have occurred, but she admits that she doesn’t know how or if they were ever merged back into one person. I’m telling you, this woman is certifiable!
I have no idea what the Judge will make of this laughable excuse for a court filing. At least the other two lawyers had the good sense to stay out of the twilight zone when they submitted their briefs and stuck to their single claim that a person is required to have 2 citizen parents to qualify as a Natural Born Citizen. Not that that can hold any water either, but I can certainly see why they wanted nothing to do with the Carnival Barking side show that Taitz put on. Weldon v Obama FF&CL can be read “Here” and Swensson/Powell v Obama can be read “Here” .
So now the ball that Judge Malihi asked for is in his court, and Taitz has finally gotten the chance to present her case on what she claims as “the merits”. I just hope he doesn’t fall off his chair when he reads it. My guess is that he will be as speechless as I was when I came face to face with Moses all those years ago on the beach in Florida. One thing is certain; his reply will be very interesting.