A friend of mine’s favorite saying is that “even a blind squirrel finds an acorn once in a while.”  This is usually used after a miraculous, but unexpected, golf shot.  Orly Taitz filed a requested for information on Obama’s social security number.  She has a good point.  There are a lot of reasons to suspect this is a fraudulent number.  The judge, as always, ruled against her:

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=339629#ixzz1WbXE5voC

But his reasoning behind the decision is chilling:

He concluded that there’s no real interest in determining whether the Obama Social Security number is genuine or fraudulent, arguing that the need for privacy for the president trumps all else.

“The SSA explained that the Privacy Act of 1974 … protects the personal information of social security number holders,” he wrote. “The SSA determined … the plaintiff had identified no public interest that would be served by disclosure.

Plaintiff makes no secret of her intention to use the redacted Form SS-5 to identify the holder of social security number xxxx-xxx-4425 – or, as plaintiff puts it, to confirm her suspicion that the president is fraudulently using that number,” the judge wrote.

but Lamberth wrote in the case against Michael Astrue, Social Security commissioner, that whether Obama is using a fake number isn’t his concern.

“Even if plaintiff’s allegations were true, an individual’s status as a public official does not, as plaintiff contends, ‘make exemption 6 irrelevant to him and his vital records.'”

The judge did not rule that Obama’s social security number was valid.  He did not rule that Orly Taitz didn’t have good cause for suspicion.  Instead he ruled that it didn’t matter whether or not Obama was using a fraudulent social security number.

Just think of the ramifications of this.  For anyone else, using a fraudulent social security number would be a felony:

http://www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/ssact/title02/0208.htm

Orly Taitz has a long history of losing at court.  I doubt that the trend will change anytime soon.  But sometimes you win by losing.  Someone is going to read this decision and pick up on the significance of this ruling.  It’s too bad Donald Trump made his move on the birth certificate, because the social security number is a much bigger issue.  It will be interesting to see if someone, who matters, figures how just how explosive this could be.  Richard Nixon once said:  “people have got to know whether or not their president’s a crook.”  Someone who uses a fraudulent social security number is, by definition, a crook.  We will soon learn if anyone was paying attention.

 TDM