While the future sometimes holds surprises, most things are fairly predictable, particularly when they are governed by rules (the legal system is a good example). It doesn’t take much prescience to look at a birther lawsuit and predict that it will be dismissed.
I think birthers and anti-birthers both approach a birther lawsuit with the presumption that the judge is competent and fair, particularly on the federal bench. The anti-birthers watch the cases proceed as we expect them to proceed and the decisions are what we expect them to be based on the facts and the law. Birthers, however, tend to interpret any fair application of the rules that goes in their favor as a sign that the judge is sympathetic to their case, and their ultimate loss (and they always lose) comes as a shock and evidence to them of a corrupt judiciary.
We get a taste of this in a comment yesterday from Orly Taitz about her FOIA case, Taitz v. Colvin:
The judge can see through all the lying. The question is, whether she will withstand the pressure or whether she will fold.
I look forward to Wednesday’s decision in Taitz v. Democrat Party of Mississippi with quiet confidence. Taitz’ motion for remand back to state court will be denied. Certainly the claims against the Hawaii defendants will be dismissed for lack of personal jurisdiction over those defendants. Taitz’ motion for sanctions against the various opposition attorneys are silly, and will be denied. I expect the defense motions for judgment on the pleadings will be granted. This is all law and facts. About the only thing I don’t know is whether Leah Lax will be let go from the lawsuit—my guess is that she will.
What I do not know is what defendants will do in an attempt to extract their well-deserved pound of flesh from Taitz. That is up to them, and they may do what they choose.
Without looking it up, isn’t this the case where one of the defendants offered to settle for Orly paying them $25000 and she refused. So now they have had to continue we can expect a request for a much higher amount.
Yes, this is the one. Such offers are supposed to remain confidential, but Orly Taitz ….
Here’s a link to the document where she disclosed that offer. Batshit-wise, it’s pretty dense, even by Orly Taitz’s standards. She goes into some detail on her “forgery of a forgery” nonsense. And she goes off on Begley and Tepper for saying that their clients–the Executive Comittee of the Mississippi Democratic Party–do not believe President Obama’s LFBC is forged even though they had her fake evidence–in the form of ridiculous (though notaritzed) affidavits from crank experts who rely on crank methodologies to do their crank analyses–proving it was a fake. http://www.scribd.com/doc/113367865/MS-ECF-69-2012-11-14-TvDPM-Plaintiff-Opposition-to-Obama-Et-Al-Joinder-in-Motion-for-JoP
I like how she compares herself to Thurgood Marshall:
“The only difference, is that Thurgood Marshall fought for the rights of only some of the people to have voting rights, while plaintiffs here represent all of the people regardless of gender, race or ethnicity…”
Wicked witch & ex-KGB operative: “The judge can see through all the lying. The question is, whether she will withstand the pressure or whether she will fold.”
Quelle surprise!
Yup, she’s better than him because she also fights for white people. Or whatever that deranged statement was supposed to mean.
I believe that a loose translation would be: “Thurgood good. Orly better. Usurper! Usurper!”