It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Xcalibur254
Or it could be these people didn't have standing. In the US in order to have standing one must first show the injury has been caused or is imminent. This injury must be concrete and not abstract. Second, you must be able to show how the person you're suing directly caused the injury. Third, you must demonstrate how suing this person will redress the injuries suffered. None of the people Taitz has represented has been able to demonstrate how Obama has directly and concretely had a negative impact on their life.
Let me ask you a question. If Obama is clearly ineligible to be President like so many birthers claim why do they see the need to keep forging evidence? You'd think that if they had a slam dunk case they wouldn't need to create fake Kenyan birth certificates and take small sections of interviews out of context.
Originally posted by EricR
So the case was not judged on it's merits. It was simply removed from the court.
Then the court tally of ..... +1 to "another case failed" ...... ends up being skewed beyond anything useful.
When this politicians sidesteps all due process and creates "law" out of thin air, with executive orders, he has the ability to harm or affect every single citizen whether or not they are legal age
A lawsuit showing false credentials is meant to start the process of removing a Constitutionally unqualified individual from the office of the president.
I believe that the evidence Attorney Taitz has collected appears to have merit.
I'm waiting for one of these knowledgeable anti-birther-types to come forward with concrete evidence of a case number and judge's decision on the facts of one of Attorney Taitz's lawsuits concerning false documentation.
Originally posted by hellobruce
['The Court finds the testimony of the witnesses, as well as the exhibits tendered, to be of little, if any, probative value, and thus wholly insufficient to support Plaintiffs' allegations. 3 Ms. Taitz attempted to solicit expert testimony from several of the witnesses without qualifying or tendering the witnesses as experts. See Stephens v. State, 219 Ga. App. 881 (1996) (the unqualified testimony of the witness was not competent evidence']
['For example, two of Plaintiffs' witnesses testified that Mr. Obama's birth certificate was forged, but neither witness was properly qualified or tendered as an expert in birth records, forged documents or document manipulation. Another witness testified that she has concluded that the social security number Mr. Obama uses is fraudulent;however, her investigatory methods and her sources of information were not properly presented, and she was never qualified or tendered as an expert in social security fraud, or fraud investigations in general']
[' None of the testifying witnesses provided persuasive testimony. Moreover, theCourt finds that none of the written submissions tendered by Plaintiffs have probative value. Given the unsatisfactory evidence presented by the Plaintiffs, the Court concludes that Plaintiffs' claims are not persuasive. 5 ']
['For the purposes of this analysis, this Court considered that President Barack Obama was born in the United States. Therefore, as discussed in Arkeny, he became a citizen at birth and is a natural born citizen. Accordingly, CONCLUSION President Barack Obama is eligible as a candidate for the presidential primary
election under O.C.G.A. § 21-2-5(b). SO ORDERED,
February d ,2012. MICHAEL M. MALIHI, Judge']
So TWLITWW could not even present proper evidence, her "experts" were not experts and none of their "evidence" had any value. The court declared that Obama was constitutionally qualified....
Originally posted by EricR
The judgment that obama is "natural born" is subject to diverse definition and may not hold in other courts due to the fact obama's father was a foreign national.