WND report
Posted on | October 18, 2011 | 4 Comments
‘Plaintiff’s allegations lack any basis in fact’ A federal judge in Washington has dispensed with a lawsuit by prominent California attorney Orly Taitz, who wanted to be able to examine Social …
|
Category: HOT ITEMS!, Latest News, Obama Fraud Gate, orly taitz attorney, Orly Taitz civil rights leader, Orly Taitz doctor and attorney, Orly Taitz for U.S. Senate 2012, Orly Taitz Hawaii, Orly Taitz Obama birth certificate, Orly Taitz Obama social Security number, Orly Taitz ObamaFraudGate, Orly Taitz subpoena, Other Criminal or Suspicious Activities, Radio and Media Broadcasts, Supporting Documentation
Comments
4 Responses to “WND report”
Leave a Reply
October 19th, 2011 @ 3:07 am
Judge Lamberth wrote, “However, suffice it to say that plaintiff’s argument is premised on the incorrect assumption that Social Security numbers assigned prior to 1973 have an correlation to the recipient’s residence …”
It is possible for a child in the Federal Foster Care system to have legal jurisdiction in one state while residing in another state. Obama admitted he traveled alone from Jakarta to Hawaii when he was 10 years old, i.e. an unaccompanied minor.
Shortly after Obama arrived in Hawaii, Obama Sr. flew from Kenya to Hawaii. While in Hawaii he regained his parental rights and a COLB was ordered to be “filed” with the HI DoH to indicate BHO Sr. was the father. The OLFBC was sealed and archived earlier by Order of the Court.
The HI AG’s office has asserted the OLFBC cannot and should not be inspected or authenticated. The Court has accepted the HI AG’s opinion the HI registrar’s affirmation is good enough. Yet, the HI registrar is vouching for the contents of a Court Ordered sealed document. That’s not appropriate.
First, the OLFBC must be unsealed by Court Order. Then and only then can the contents of the document be authenticated.
October 19th, 2011 @ 5:31 am
this is an absolutely new story with no basis in fact. Desparate attempt to make up something
October 19th, 2011 @ 5:50 am
Alright, forget why the OLFBC was sealed and archived and focus on how it is legal for a HI DoH official to comment on the content of a sealed and archived document.
HI officials, in previous news stories, have alluded to the fact it was they who sealed the document for safe keeping. Is that true? Under what authority? Or did they seal it under Court Order?
Is it legal for a sealed document to be copied and certified as an exact copy if it is supposed to be sealed? Is it true Obama had to scan the copy and then digitally remove the statement on the computerized file which stated the document was sealed and invalid for identification for identification?
How do we know Obama didn’t hand a printout of the WH edited OLFBC to a news reporter and not the copy made by HI DoH?
October 19th, 2011 @ 6:23 am
@ Todd…
You are just making “stuff” up.