tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7267011437681190669.post3009148839173812472..comments2023-03-29T19:06:00.208-04:00Comments on Reality Check Radio Blog: New Hampshire to Taitz: Take your nutiness back to La-La LandReality Checkhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00126783152381564733noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7267011437681190669.post-65050067210761779902011-11-22T06:22:42.288-05:002011-11-22T06:22:42.288-05:00@ Anonymous
Several points. First, standing is a ...@ Anonymous<br /><br />Several points. First, standing is a merit of a case. It is probably the most important merit. Without standing it is not a case and doesn't belong in a court. What Orly's "evidence" seems to indicate is that several well motivated amateur detectives possibly found some errors in databases prone to errors and used them illegally at worst or at least outside the terms of service of the databases. You might not care how Hollister obtain Obama's draft record but a court would. Even if admitted all it could prove is that at one time Obama may have had a social security number starting with 042. So just what law would that have broken? Am mere mistype of a zip code on an application by a clerk would explain the prefix.<br /><br />Orly thinks that if she got one case to discovery that she is has Obama. She is wrong. None of her birth certificate analysis would see the light of day in a court because none of the so called experts would be allowed to testify. Obama's place of birth has been a settled question as far as a court would be concerned since the first birth certificate was issued in 2008. No serious Constitutional attorney buys into the silly two citizen parent definition of NBC and a parade of experts could be called to testify against it.Reality Checkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00126783152381564733noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7267011437681190669.post-14196286028539324812011-11-22T02:23:39.661-05:002011-11-22T02:23:39.661-05:00What Greg Hollister did I don't as much relava...What Greg Hollister did I don't as much relavance. I think Orly was interested in the results of that which seem indicate fraud. As for her case in California, it has not been dismissed yet because it is still on appeal. Nonetheless, the other guy felt it prudent to point out that no court has decided on the merits because of a lack of standing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7267011437681190669.post-80189425865351731762011-11-21T22:59:56.561-05:002011-11-21T22:59:56.561-05:00Taitz was also less than honest when chairman Cook...Taitz was also less than honest when chairman Cook asked her about "her case in California". She said the case had not been decided but that is not correct. Her case has been dismissed and is on appeal.Reality Checkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00126783152381564733noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7267011437681190669.post-25785685640646690542011-11-21T22:55:11.069-05:002011-11-21T22:55:11.069-05:00The point is Cook wanted to know if any government...The point is Cook wanted to know if any governmental body had agreed with Taitz rantings. He asked if she had anything from the Social Security Administration and her answer was "they are stonewalling". Of course Taitz failed to disclose that several items in her evidence presented to the commission were obtained by apparently fraudulent means. For example, the Selective Service letter she mentioned was obtained when Greg Hollister pretended to be Barack Obama and requested a copy of the President's draft card. That would have certainly been something the commission might have been interested to know.Reality Checkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00126783152381564733noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7267011437681190669.post-54316675140668157912011-11-21T18:59:52.898-05:002011-11-21T18:59:52.898-05:00"very telling moment came at the end of Taitz..."very telling moment came at the end of Taitz presentation when the Commission Chairman Bradford Cook (R) asked Taitz if she had any real evidence other that innuendo and opinion and Taitz said "No"."<br /><br />This is a lie. Cook never asked that. I listened to the hearing and read the transcript. Cook as if any "body" had settled the issue and Orly said no. She then followed up to explain that reasoning as well as another individual who explained that nothing has ever been settled on the merits because of a lack of standing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com