It was a good day for Justice in Vermont!
– H. Brooke Paige

H. Brooke Paige tried to impress the Vermont Supreme Court yesterday with a thick pile of books¹ that he at one point attempted to approach and hand to them, violating their personal judicial space, and according to the Burlington Free Press, raising some alarm.

Paige wanted to make it clear to the justices that he was not one of those crazy birthers, saying:

Don’t pay any attention to them. The birther argument is just a sheer flight of fancy.²

Paige is one of those crazy Vattelians. Like other cranks, Paige focuses just on what supports his theories, interpreting the evidence as if the theory were fact, and excluding everything against it, and so cannot objectively evaluate evidence. The judges were more interested in the law. Reportedly birther attorney Mario Apuzzo, who has argued classic birther conspiracy theories on behalf of Charles Kerchner, helped Paige with his arguments.

The Vermont Superior Court previously rejected Paige’s definition of “natural born citizen,” repeating the conclusions of many other courts on this question.

¹Vattel’s The Law of Nations

²Quote of the Day for sure

The post Paige tries to lay down the Law to the Vermont Supreme Court appeared first on Obama Conspiracy Theories.

The expression “natural born citizen” is not dependent on the nationality of the parents but reflects the status of a person born into citizenship instead of having citizenship subsequently bestowed.

Read the article at the Burlington Free Press.

Read the decision here:

VT – Paige v Obama Et Al – DeCISION – (Vt Super. Ct Nov 2012)

The post Vermont judge tosses crank “natural born citizen” suit appeared first on Obama Conspiracy Theories.

Alabama Circuit Court Judge Eugene W. Reese has granted a 15-minute hearing on December 6 to hear motions in the case of McInnish v. Chapman (the latter Alabama’s Secretary of State). Attempts to keep Barack Obama off the Alabama ballot would seem doubly moot now that the election is over and Obama didn’t get any electoral votes from Alabama anyway. There is no actual controversy, nor can an Alabama Circuit Court provide any relief requested by the Plaintiffs and their attorney Larry Klayman. It’s moot.

The post Moot court appeared first on Obama Conspiracy Theories.

NBC also reports that Defendants Barack Obama, Dianne Feinstein and Elizabeth Emken have been dismissed from her California suit for several reasons that cannot be remedied. So that’s the end of that.

Taitz has active federal lawsuits in California, Mississippi and Texas. Her RICO claims, of course, are not made moot by the election; they are made moot because the lack any basis in fact.

The post Winding down appeared first on Obama Conspiracy Theories.

Taitz v Elections Commission (Indiana Superior Court)

• Order Denying Motion to Intervene (October 30). Keith Judd and Leah Lax petitioned the court to intervene in the case. Judge S. K. Reid denied the motion. No specifics given.
• Post-Trial Order Granting Judgment in Favor of the Indiana Election Commission and the Indiana Secretary of State on Plaintiffs’ Claim of Declaratory Relief and Injunctive Relief (October 30). It appear that the Indiana Attorney General’s proposed order was signed as-is and without alteration. The money quote from this order is: “In the end, this Court is not ‘Wonderland’ and and ‘simply saying something is so does not make it so.’ Rhodes v. MacDonald, 2009 WL 299705, at *4,”
• Order on Plaintiff’s Motion for Default Judgment Against the Indiana Election Commission and the Indiana Secretary of State (October 30). Taitz had moved for summary judgment in her favor because the Defendants filed a response late. They didn’t. Motion denied.

Taitz v. Democrat Party of Mississippi (Mississippi Federal Court)

• Defendants Barack H. Obama, II, Nancy Pelosi, Obama for America and the Mississippi Democratic Party Executive Committee’s Notice of Action by Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation Striking Motion of Orly Taitz to Coordinate and Consolidate Cases Under 28 USC § 1707(C)(II). Orly Taitz had attempted to consolidate three of her cases, Judd v. Obama in California (later dismissed), Taitz v. Democrat Party of Mississippi and Taitz v. Sebelius in Texas. The Judicial Panel ordered Taitz’ petition stricken and the defendants listed here are providing a copy of that order to the Court in Mississippi. Orly’s motion to the JPML was stricken because she didn’t follow the rules.

Taitz v. Obama (Superior Court, Orange County, California)

• Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Opposition to Ex Parte Application of Plaintiff Orly Taitz for Motion to Compel Production of Documents from Third Party Respondent Occidental College; in Support of Motion to Quash Subpoena; and in Support of Request for Sanctions in the Amount of $4,000 (November 1, 2012). Attorneys explain why Orly Taitz’ motion to compel them to produce Obama’s college records is frivolous and that they should be reimbursed for $4,000 in expenses responding to it. Occidental attorneys characterize Taitz’ action as “blatantly vexatious” and “an abuse of process” because the motion to compel came before the subpoena and because it gave one days’ notice when 20 was required. Occidental described Taitz as a “well-known and vexatious litigant.” A litany of defects in Taitz’ case are recounted in the 9-page brief. Also included were the Declarations of D. Jay Ritt and Carl Botterud that have some entertainment value of their own.

The post Latest legal appeared first on Obama Conspiracy Theories.