Main Menu

Archive | March, 2013

Court considers reconsidering and decides not to

Yes, the latest motion to reconsider from Orly Taitz in Grinols v. Electoral College has been denied by Judge England. Taitz tried to have the President declared in default for not appearing in the case, but she bungled the service and so he’s not (yet) a party, and so has no duty to respond. Judge England explained to her in great detail how she went wrong when he denied her motion, and taking this to heart, Taitz ignored it, and asked for reconsideration.

No dice, says the Judge. Read the order:

Continue Reading →


Birther radio host Gillar reneges on debate

I mentioned previously an article, “’Birtherism’ and the tyranny of ignorance,” at the Western Free Press site, where I had left a few comments. The discussion there has grown, attracting “Tea Party Power Hour” Internet Radio host, and Cold Case Posse video narrator Mark Gillar, and anti-birther HistorianDude.

Gillar challenged HistorianDude to debate him on his radio show but now, after HistorianDude accepted, has backed out. You can read some of the exchange where HistorianDude says:

Mark Gillar has now formally backed out of this debate, which had been scheduled for taping on April 5, for an April 6th broadcast. I formally accepted the debate offer, but once Mike Zullo of the Maricopa County Cold Case Posse got wind of the debate he asked Gillar to rescind the invitation and cancel the debate.

The excuse for turning tail and running from the debate is that Gillar presumably knows something about the ongoing “investigation” of the Cold Case Posse, and so is somehow muzzled from engaging in debates, lest he spill the beans, or perhaps lose because he can’t use all he knows. This excuse is essentially the same one given by John Sampson for refusing a subpoena from Orly Taitz last year. Love those magic phrases, “person of interest” and “ongoing investigation,” smoke screens to hide behind.

This would all be funny if it weren’t so pathetic. The truth is that Gillar would be reduced to a smoldering heap in a debate that tried to excuse the misconduct of the Cold Case Posse. Mike Zullo and the Cold Case Posse has been caught lying and fabricating evidence. If there is any justice in the world, they are the ones who should be investigated.

See also:


McInnish wants oral argument before birther judge

Hugh McInnish’s lawsuit against Alabama Secretary of State Chapman to require her to verify eligibility of presidential candidates was dismissed with prejudice, a dismissal affirmed by a circuit court in Montgomery.

McInnish argues now before the Alabama Supreme Court that the District Court was in error and that Chapman has an “affirmative duty” to verify eligibility. Chapman said no. McInnish argues:

It would be paradoxical beyond measure if the real and grave question of the legitimacy of the de facto President, a question which lies at the very heart of our American Constitutional Government, were left unresolved for want of the simplest of documents, a birth certificate.

This of course ignores the fact that no less than two other secretaries of state (Arizona and Kansas) asked for and received certifications of the facts of Obama’s birth from Hawaii.

The case is now before the Alabama Supreme Court and it’s newly-elected birther Chief Justice Roy Moore. Plaintiffs’ attorneys are L. Dean Johnson of Huntsville and Larry Klayman.

Read the brief:

Continue Reading →


The relevance of the “natural born citizen” clause

I made a comment on another article, saying:

Based on my reading of the debates on Presidential eligibility and other commentary, my opinion is that the concerns that prompted the NBC clause are no longer relevant as our form or government is no longer novel, and that the US is now a powerful and wealthy nation. That said, I see no groundswell of sentiment that would reach the high bar necessary for a Constitutional amendment, so we’re left with what we have.

Commenters at The Free Republic seemed to think my remark was significant, and also somewhat misrepresented what I said. Let me dismiss out of hand part of the Free Republic’s beef:

What you just read is the mindset of a (sic) Obama supporter. I do not agree with his opinion, nor with his other supporters who agree with him 100%, that Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5 is no longer relevant. In my opinion, it has become more relevant than ever since we have had a non-natural born Citizen become president five (sic) years and counting.

Barack Obama is no more ineligible under the Constitution than he has been president for five years.

I wrote an article a while back, titled The Framers on “foreign influence,” in which I talked about the debates on eligibility for office at the Federal Convention of 1787. It is clear to me that there was a strong feeling among the delegates that they wanted to preserve liberty for their posterity, and that they wanted to preserve the constitutional form of government, and that they did not want to slide into monarchy. They wanted a President who understood the (at that time) uniquely American form of government. They knew all too well the intrigues of European politics, and wanted to keep that out of the new United States. They were afraid that some monied European interest could bribe their way into office in the United States.

Today, there are other constitutional republics in the world, and commitment to that form of government is not unique to Americans. I think that today the risk of money influencing a presidential election is far greater from America than from a foreign source. And today, the information available to the electorate is totally unlike what was available to voters in 1789, and foreign campaign contributions today are illegal. What I am saying here is that the specific concerns from the mouths of the Framers are not applicable, not relevant to the present day. We have new concerns, and new problems. It is certainly possible that those Framers, presented with a different set of conditions, might have proposed a different eligibility requirement.

It may be that the character of Americans today is such that it is properly represented only by a natural born citizen. Whether that is true or not, I can’t imagine Article II being amended in my lifetime,  and so our Presidents will be natural born citizens. The United States being a nation of laws is a far more important principle than argument about relevance. If the Constitution needs change, we can amend it, but we do not ignore it. Since the natural born citizen clause is law, it is relevant.


Is birtherism good for Ted Cruz?

I’m talking about Ted Cruz. The Dallas Observer is talking about Ted Cruz. Atlantic Wire, Town Hall, News/Talk 790 KFYO, NBC, Fox News, National Review, the Houston Chronicle, the Huffington Post, and Vanity Fair are all talking about Ted Cruz.

How much press does a junior senator usually get? It seems to me that Ted Cruz has a much higher name recognition, and has become a national figure thanks to the birther angle. What’s the saying, “all publicity is good publicity?”


Taitz under attack, surrounded–threats loom

While I’m at the dentist’s office, you can read this tale of Orly Taitz inserting herself where she is not wanted, but herself found wanting a legal theory to support her action.

Thanks to the Jack Ryan collection for this tidbit that contains some perhaps over-the-top language, which I borrowed for the headline.

Taitz’ motion is subject to attack on many fronts; between Plaintiffs and the Defendants, she is surrounded.

In sum, Taitz has not articulated any specific common question of law or fact, much less one compelling enough to overcome the looming threats of delay and undue prejudice.

Hon. William T. Lawrence, Judge

Judicial Watch v King (SD Ind) – Order Denying Taitz Motion to Intevene by Jack Ryan