Friday, February 8, 2013

Formally dismissed Case by Orly Taitz against Barack Obama reinstated in California (Bonus Orly Taitz interview Video)

On Feb. 4, California's Fourth District Court of Appeals reinstated a birther case against President Barack Obama after a lower court ordered its dismissal last year. FindLaw, one of the largest legal search engines, reported Monday's surprising decision. 
The state's appellate court, which has three branches in southern California, reinstated the appeal by Dr. Orly Taitz against U.S. senator Diane Feinstein (Calif., Democrat) and Barack Hussein Obama. Taitz, who is a senatorial candidate, argues that the Golden State had 1.5 million invalid voter registrations. Additionally, the plaintiff charges that Barack Obama is ineligible to serve as the nation's chief executive due to his use of forged IDs and a stolen social security number.
Read the whole story HERE and view a related video below.

I thought you might be interested in this interview with Orly Taitz published online Feb 5:
 

If you like what you see, please "Like" us on Facebook here.
Please follow us on Twitter here.

10 comments:

CRUZ COUNTRY said...

I'm fairly confident that Supreme Court Justices Thomas, Alito and Scalia would like to pursue the eligibilty issue, but I'm not so confident about Kennedy and Roberts.

Breyer, Ginsburg, Kagan and Sotomayer are obviously in the tank for Obama, regardless of the law, the facts or the merits of each case.

If Reagan, Bush 41 and Bush 43 had appointed true conservatives to the Court, instead of RINOs like Anthony Kennedy, David Souter and John Roberts, Obama would be in the big house instead of in the White House.

Anonymous said...

Newark, what gives you the idea that Scalia or Thomas want to pursue it? Have they said anything that leads you to believe that? I have not seen anything, and unfortunately I think this issue is still dead in the water.

-Martha

CRUZ COUNTRY said...

Martha -

"We're EVADING the eligibility issue." ~ Clarence Thomas, a year or 2 back, criticizing fellow justices for not granting a full hearing to Obama eligibility cases

Scalia and Alito are every bit as conservative as Thomas is, and the 3 of them are in agreement on virtually 100% of the cases that they hear.

Anonymous said...

Newark, I did not know Thomas said that! That is encouraging.

But just because Alito and Scalia are conservative doesn't mean they want to open the can of worms.

-Martha

kelly said...

I listened to the Taitz interview.

She makes a lot of sense and seems confident that the documentation she has is indisputable.

The fact that Roberts agreed to a hearing with the full court may indicate an olive branch of sorts to Thomas, Scalia and Alito after the Obamacare fiasco.

CRUZ COUNTRY said...

Martha -

If the Supreme Court continues to evade the eligibility issue, it not only allows a usurping imposter to remain Commander-In-Chief, it also sets a terrible precedent which encourages more of the same from future presidents and candidates for that office.

The Obama hoax - the biggest hoax in American history - has created a constitutional crisis which MUST be addressed by the Supreme Court.

The sooner they address it, the better.

Anonymous said...

Newark, I agree with you, but the reality is that it is a long shot that anything will ever be done.

-Martha

MrX said...

Supreme Court will not hear any birther case. Plenty of them have gone to the Supreme Court and the reason is always that none of them have standing. IOW, there is no enforcement of the natural born citizen clause.

CRUZ COUNTRY said...

MrX -

That's a bunch of baloney.

Judicial review, first established in Marbury v. Madison(1803), allows the Court to overturn executive and legislative actions it deems unlawful or unconstitutional.

"Standing" is a highly dubious legal doctrine used by activist judges to dismiss cases that don't fit their political agendas.

But even with the "standing" requirement, several "birther" cases involved plaintiffs who were on the ballot running against Obama, and several others involved plaintiffs who were in the military under Obama's command.

To suggest that these plaintiffs had no legal "standing" to challenge Obama's eligibility, just doesn't pass the smell test, the laugh test, or any other test you want to use, regardless of how many activist judges say otherwise.

Anonymous said...

If you knew that it was possible for this challenge find you, wouldn't you give yourself the power to declare a National Emergency to suspend the Constitution and then make it legal to use drones against rebelling citizens? If our President was really Islamic Osama, aren't these actions what you would do act out your revenge on Infidels? Yes!! You need to call your Congressmen every day until this is outrage is stopped!