After going through the comments by Leo on his blog and looking at Orly’s (she is publicly asking Leo to share any documentary evidence he has that she can present in her California case), it will be interesting to see if these two great, but quirky, lawyers can interact to reach the same goal: proving Obama is not constitutionally eligible to be POTUS.
Leo has said that Orly is not presenting her case in the right court venue; you can read all about his “Quo Warranto” argument on his blogsite. TerriK has blasted Orly for introducing as evidence two different Kenyan birth registrations for Obama (neither has been proven legitimate).
Both of these lawyers are passionate in presenting their cases and I think I can state they wish each other well. I hope they can share any knowledge or insights that might help the other lawyer’s case, and limit petty criticism. For the first time since the POTUS eligibility became an issue, there appears to be some hope; hope that will facilitate a change in who occupies the Oval Office and is our Commander in Chief. We desperately need that change.