I have a serious concern, what do you think?

There is one issue that really concerns me: why in light of evidence of forgery would plaintiffs seek a certified copy of Obama’s birth certificate and not examination of the original?

Originally there were 45 attorneys and hundreds of pro se plaintiffs, who filed election challenges and legal challenges. At the end, people got frustrated, overwhelmed and aside from me only one other attorney has a case, and he recently filed an appellant’s brief in AL. The brief is seeking an appeal of the denial of the Petition of writ of mandamus, an order for the Secretary of State to seek a certified copy of Obama’s birth certificate.

Probably there is no person in the country who wants this case to be heard on the merits and succeed more than I do, I hope this case is heard on the merits, however I am concerned about a couple of problems. One, of course, is the notion by the Secretary of State that she has no duty to seek the certified copy and that it is moot. Let’s say 2 out of 3  judges on the panel rule for the plaintiffs (there are 7 judges in this court and we do not know if Roy Moore will be on the panel of 3 who actually hear this case), let’s say the court grants requested relief, which of course is very unlikely. What happens next?  I am extremely concerned that the same registrar from the state of HI, who was complicit for 4 years now will certify another copy of the same forgery and this will be used as a big victory by Obama over the birthers. Obama will claim that this is the ultimate proof. Why are attorneys in AL asking for a certified copy instead of the examination of the original?

Rule 1003. Admissibility of Duplicates

This happened twice before. Rules of civil procedure require production of the original in light of the evidence of forgery. Any attorney knows that. However, Secretary of State of KS Chris Kobach and Secretary of State of AZ, Bennett, requested certified copies, Alvin Onaka certified the same forgery and not only this did not help, it actually hurt the case, as all the media trumpeted that Conservative Secretaries of state Kobach and Bennett announced that they are satisfied with the certified copies. This caused Obama media machine to attack me 10 times more, calling me names, saying:  how come Attorney Orly Taitz is continuing the fight, she must be a racist. I am afraid that the same can happen in AL and it will only hurt us. Moreover, I am concerned about the fact that in their case they only provided one affidavit from Arpaio and no other affidavits. In my cases I have 150 pages of affidavits from law enforcement and experts. The court might state that if Arpaio were to believe that a crime was committed in his state of AZ, he had a duty to file a criminal complaint with his District Attorney. If he did not do this, it indicates to the court that he is not sure that the crime was committed. I do not know, why didn’t they include other evidence. The complaint talks only about Arpaio, who never filed a criminal complaint, which a sheriff would normally do if a crime is committed, and they are talking about Corsi, who is just a journalist. I do not know, why the complaint does not include, for example, a sworn affidavit of Jeffrey Stephan Coffman, who is a retired Chief Investigator of the special investigations unit of the U.S. coast guard. Coffman sent to Arpaio the results of his findings regarding Obama’s forged Selective Service certificate. Arpaio only confirmed those findings, just as he confirmed other findings. If one does not have a valid Selective Service certificate he cannot work in the executive branch, meaning he cannot work as a U.S. President.

I do not know if any changes can be made in AL cases in this late stage, after the Appellant’s brief was already filed, but I am concerned that it might backfire. What do you think?