Long dead case comes to life
When I think of the Keyes v. Obama lawsuit, later named Barnett v. Obama in California, I feel like I’m discussing ancient birther history. It was Orly Taitz’ first birther case, I think, recruited by the unsuspecting Gary Kreep (much bad blood developed between the two). It’s been dead for years.
Orly Taitz has a filed a motion to reconsider the RICO portion of her case, that Judge David O. Carter dismissed, on the basis of new “evidence.” The evidence is Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s affidavit entered in another case saying that he “believes” that fraud has “likely” been committed in Barack Obama’s documents. Of course, what Arpaio believes is not evidence, nor is he even willing to point the finger at Barack Obama as the culprit. It’s a waste of time, but Orly is like the Energizer Bunny, and just keeps on filing and filing and giving me something to write about.
In Orly’s mind, Barack Obama is at the center of a massive criminal conspiracy, and in her RICO action Taitz names the conspirators as defendants:
-
Barack Obama, President of the United States
-
Alvin Onaka, State Registrar of Hawaii
-
Michael Astrue, Commissioner of Social Security
-
Obama for America, official campaign organization
-
Brian Schatz, former chair Hawaii Democratic Party
-
Lynn Matusow, former chair Hawaii Democratic Party
-
Nancy Pelosi, former chair of the National Democratic Convention
-
Alice Germond, former secretary of the National Democratic Convention
-
Eric Holder, Attorney General of the United States
-
Loretta Fuddy, Director of the Hawaii Department of Health
-
William A. Chatfield, former director of the Selective Service System
While Taitz clearly says that this case is only about the RICO portion of her original suit, she still asks f0r a declaratory judgment.
Choice quotes:
Orly Taitz, attorney in this case brought Quo Warranto in DC, however presiding judge in that case simply twisted the statute and claimed that Quo Warranto can be brought only by the Attorney General [or United States Attorney], which of course is not the case and represents a perversion of the statute. …
New evidence submitted herein is as follows. Plaintiffs are submitting a true and correct sworn affidavit of Sheriff Joseph Arpaio of Maricopa county (sic) attesting to the fact that Obama’s birth certificate, selective service certificate (sic) and Social Security card are fraudulent and forged (Exhibit 1). … [Note: in the barely legible attachment of this affidavit, one page is upside down and the other is sideways.]
Defendant Alvin Onaka, Registrar of the State of Hawaii, aided and abetted Obama and was complicit in the cover up of the fact that Obama is using a forged birth certificate. …
Defendant Michael Astrue, commissioner of the Social Security (sic), aided and abetted Obama by covering up the fact that Barack Obama is fraudulently using a Connecticut Social Security number. …
Here’s her motion:
CA – Barnett v Obama – 2012-08-13 – Taitz Rule 60B Motion for Reconsideration
Welcome back to I Love 2008!
A definite golden oldie. This is where I first became fascinated by Birther, Inc., as I saw some web site called WND breathlessly touting their NATIONAL PRESS CLUB event, featuring a REAL LAWYER and everything!
And this is when I learned that the NATIONAL PRESS CLUB is every bit as exclusive a venue as my local Elks Lodge, and that Orly Taitz turned out to be the kind of lawyer who thought that Wikipedia was a great citation to include in ones lawsuit.
Well, I wonder how she is going to handle Arpaio’s and Zullo’s multiple statements to the effect of, “Oh no, we aren’t accusing President Obama of doing anything wrong.” Because if Obama ain’t done nothing wong, then you lose your old multiple requisite “predicate acts” which underlie RICO.
Plus, Courts HATE RICO with a capital H.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
Also, note the end of her peitition, in which she asserts that if Judge Carter
doesn’t grant her motion, he will be criminally complicit in RICO conspiracy crime and treason.
What a great way to win friends and influence people!
A Rule 60 B motion after the Ninth Circuit heard and denied the appeal and after the Supreme Court declined to hear the case. This has to be a first in the long history of juris prudence. I am just speechless.
Me too. Even for the Zombieland that is Birtherism, where ressurecting long dead zombie horses happens as often as a full moon. *EVEN* for Orly…
I wonder why Judge Kronstadt didn’t grant Dr. Taitz’s motion and transfer the case now before Judge Gee to Judge Carter in the Southern Division. Doesn’t Judge Kronstadt have a sense of humor?
Doc C:
But… but… but… Orlena repeatedly states that there is “undeniable evidence”. How can you, me, we, all the sane folk, deny it when The Nitrous Tooth Fairy tells us it’s undeniable?
With her implicit threats against Judge Carter at the end, which I believe is unethical according to lawyers’ mutual admiration rules (“diss the marks, not the brothers”), will the CA bar spot this and act? Almost certainly not.
The sickening thing about all of this is that it’s the same old lies, lie after lie after lie, from Ms Taitz. She can’t even be bothered to think up new lies, it’s just the same cold dead lies – zomblies? Every one of them convincingly and repeatedly exposed and disproven, yet this evil, evil woman continues her campaign of sedition and subversion without check.
Only if Judge Carter refers her to the bar. Even then, the chances whether they’ll pay any attention is between slim and none.
Many ethical complaints have been filed against her, including Judge Land referring her to the CA bar, and they were ignored.
Judge Carter has already refused one birther case transfer.
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2010/05/federal-judge-david-o-carter-declines-2nd-birther-case/
christ almighty! is this for real?
how she doen’t get ripped a new one every time she presents crap like this, i don’t know. maybe she just likes FOAD letters.
BTW, when did tim adams become assistant registrar in hawaii? oily has stated all is true under threat of perjury, but surely that one is most certainly false and KNOWN to be false.
Is this a California thing or a general approach about not overusing sanctions? Or?
Judge Carter won’t do anything. I was always very suspicious of Judge Carter’s action in Orly’s case. At first he was Gung Ho and told Orly the case would be heard on the merits, then he had a new law clerk brought from the same law firm that defended Obama in past eligibility cases. I have always thought and suspected that Judge Carter could have been threatened or coerced by his law clerk into dismissing the case. All it would take for his law clerk was phone call. With the prospect of George Soros and Obama operatives possibly making threats on Judge Carter’s career, life and even his family, he was going to cooporate.
This is why I installed that cybernetic third arm, that face-palms myself for me! That way I still have both hands free for those FFS moments.
Somehow I think ex-Marine Carter has more courage and integrity than any birther on the planet.
LOL!!!
That postulate certainly requires no stretch of the imagination at all. Somehow, I think water must be wet, too…. 😉
The filing gives us a hint about what she means about the California Bar and national security. Someone, presumably Orly Taitz since no one else would get a answer, filed a complaint against Scott Tepper, a California attorney, for fraud — submitting a forged Obama birth certificate in Mississippi. Apparently the CA Bar replied that that would be a criminal or national security matter and not a Bar matter.
All he said he wouldn’t dismiss Orly’s case on a technicality. And that’s exactly what he did, despite Orly’s complete inability to do anything according to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (he could have dismissed her on her repeated failure to serve the complaint properly, but held out for several months until some kind of service was eventually accomplished). The requirement that a plaintiff have standing is not a technicality, and is a Constitutional requirement. There is no way under the law that Judge Carter could proceed when Orly failed to show she had standing to bring the suit. It is a decision on the merits, because it ultimately showed that Orly’s claim had no merits. I thought you birthers were supposed to be all about the Constitution? I guess you feel free to ignore those parts that get in the way of your agenda?
Secondly, judges select their clerks. And if you think a junior associate, from an entirely unrelated office of a huge law firm that did some work for the President is somehow going to exert any pressure, then you have just shown that you don’t have the first clue about either how the courts work, or the legal community in general….but then again, you statement about Judge Carter implying that he would let the Orly circus run wild in his court room is proof enough that you’re pretty clueless.
I also enjoyed the part where she claims that the California Bar agreed with her that this is a matter of national security. What happened is she filed a complaint against attorney Scott Tepper for introducing a “forged document” in a court proceeding,.Among other things, she also alleged that it was a national security matter. The complaint was summarily rejected and, Orly being Orly, she has included the rejection letter as one of her exhibits. One sentence in the rejection letter states that her complaint raises an issue of national security and that is beyond the purview of the California Bar. In Orlythink, that means that the Bar agrees with her that her case is a grave national security matter.
She also included as an exhibit the DVD of her loss to an empty chair in Georgia, because that will so impress Judge Carter. Her exhibits are here:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/102805971/CA-Barnett-v-Obama-2012-08-13-Taitz-Rule-60B-Motion-Exhibits
I have been reading Orly’s pleadings and hearing her speak for a couple of years now. This pleading is remarkable. And we all know when the motion is denied and the Defendant’s seek sanctions, she will do her usual name calling and threats, but the motion itself does not border on the insane, it crosses several bridges to get there.
I will not rehash what others have pointed out, but what never ceases to amaze me is the arrogance of her incorrect positions when she routinely lambasts judges and lawyers who do not agree with her twisted psychotic lack of understanding of the law and procedure. Her lack of respect and court decorum is appalling to me. I am astounded by the fact that so few judges have smacked her down.
Here, she tells this judge, who has already dismissed her case and had the dismissal upheld by the Court, where she accused him of slandering her in his opinion when she argued in front of the 9th Circuit, that he essentially promised her a hearing on the merits and then denied her that right. Keep in mind that she has publicly stated that he was bought off or threatened, that she saw the fear in his eyes when he dismissed her case, and the other usual lies. Also keep in mind that it was this judge who put in his opinion that Orly had subjourned perjury and was more interested in pushing a political agenda than she was in representing her client I anticpate that Carter will have her on s a short leash. I am hoping that this is the case where she gets some serious sanctions, get completely school by the Judge, dressed down in Court and it leads that psychotic break that is just waiting to happen.
In the years since this case was decided, Orly, if anything, has become an even worse lawyer. No one in their right mind would interpret the letter from the CA bar as she has done, let alone use it as evidence. But remember that this is the same person who was punked with a fake Keyan BC and used it without verifying it. Orly is good for one thing and one thing only, entertainment. I would pay to watch a reality TV show about her.
I find most judges aren’t big fans of slapping sanctions. It’s much easier to dismiss and wave them away. There are exceptions, and those usually come when the opposing partying starts asking to recoup fees for a long history of abuses (i.e. long dragging litigation, where one party had a long history of not fully responding to discovery, and had a long series of motions to compel). I think Orly is starting to develop enough of a history of going before the same judges that they would be willing to hand out fees, but the defendant has to start asking.
Now for the bar sanctioning her….well, from what I have seen from most bars is that unless you’re stealing from a client, co-mingling funds, or sleeping with a client (and that one is iffy), they won’t do much. Since as far as I know, Orly never had a paying client, she dodges what bar associations are most likely to punch attorneys for.
Well, Zombies eat brains so birthers are safe!
Keyes v. Bowen and Lightfoot v. Bowen (filed in state court) were Taitz’s entry to birtherdom. Keyes v. Obama was Taitz’s first federal birther case.
John–
Let’s pretend for a nanosecond that your wild fantasies are true, and that Obama, etc. “got” to Judge Carter.
Please explain why the appellate court affirmed the dismissal, and SCOTUS refused to hear the case. And why not a single legal commentator thinks these rulings were unusual. Thanks.
Her first actual appearance in a courtroom for a birther case was Brockhausen v Andrade, where she flew to TX, arriving in the middle of the night to save the world on behalf of poor Ms. Brockhausen. Her propensity for lying to the court began there and has only grown since.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/18284002/BROCKHAUSEN-v-ANDRADE-Transcript-of-Proceedings-Pleas-to-Jurisdiction-Hearing-12209
This case is nuts even for a loon like Orly. I don’t try to read much into what she says or does because she is so obviously mentally ill that rational thinking doesn’t really work in understanding her. However, unless she has decompensated substantially very recently (a possibility I don’t completely discount) I think this motion shows that she sees the writing on the wall. She knows that she will not get Obama out of office or keep him off the ballot based on any birther nonsense. This is her version of a Hail Mary pass. Unfortunately for her, she is throwing the ball straight up in the air rather than advancing it towards the goal. If Judge Carter allows the ball to fall harmlessly to the ground next to her, she will pick it up and toss it again, and again, and again. He needs to pick up the ball and spike it on her head, hard and repeatedly.
Now that is a bold-faced lie…..
I’m just glad Doc’s still talking about Zombies.
Well, they could’ve done better with Orly’s voice, but the live action’s pretty good:
http://ohforgoodnesssake.com/?p=9532
Folks, is it possible to discuss both points of view without name-calling, sarcasm, and just plain meanness? I seriously wonder if I am the only person out here that listens, reads, and watches with an open-mind the opposing viewpoint. What’s finding the actual truth mean to anybody now days?
Says the same one who says “Communists, Marxists, socialists, and the Muslim Brotherhood permeate our White House!”
Can someone explain the difference between a Communist and a Marxist? Thanks.
I see you’ve got that Indonesian goofiness on your website, too.
As somebody who is genuinely interested in “finding the actual truth”, that really steams my cabbages, coming from somebody who has such flagrant insults to the truth posted on their website. You don’t want the truth; you want the truth to be what suits you, and will not accept it until it does.
Then you come on here with a plea that we “discuss both points of view without name-calling, sarcasm, and just plain meanness”. The way I see it, spreading a lie is just plain low-down and mean. If you can’t take the heat that comes with such activity, give it up.
And you’re about as open-minded as a brass doorknob, so don’t go climbing on that high horse.
When you demonstrate a genuine interest in “finding the actual truth”, with an open mind, you’ll get some respect. Til you do, you’ll get what you deserve.
If one is interested in finding the actual truth, then one quickly must come to the realization that Orly Taitz’s opinions on the matter, and her actions, are ridiculous. Whether or not various people also are mean or sarcastic toward her is irrelevant to the truth-seeker. That is a different concern about how to treat people. People interested in truth may tend to be less judgmental than others because truth turns out to be more lively than yes/no the/that dichotomies. But truth-seekers also give very short shrift to the obvious lies, distortions, fantasies and hatreds in this world. The actions and statements of Birthers in general, and Orly Taitz in particular, DESERVE ridicule, and anyone who spends more than five minutes on the subject and does not realize the absurdity and hate and meanness emanating from the birther ethos is not actually interested in truth. That is the great truth Birthers teach by their actions and statements.
There are not too many areas of life where I myself would say such, but I am exceedingly grateful to Birthers for giving me the opportunity to see real lies and nonsense in action. It is so refreshing to have at least one area of life where there is no real doubt. Because if the President was not born here, then we are indeed living in the Matrix or some such, and then in that scenario caring who is President doesn’t much matter.
All the Birthers have in the beginning, middle and end is that it could be, anything is possible. They have no logical sequence of events, no sensible pattern of human behavior, no facts.
Maybe you want to treat them nice, but give it a few years and you may not be so hard on those who have lost any semblance of patience with such lies and hatred and foolishness and profit-mongers. But regardless, if your interest is in the truth, you need not follow the ways of others, but you will need to put birther thinking in the trash can where it belongs. You can do so politely if you wish.
You will notice I focus on the actions and statements of the Birthers, because it is also true that as human beings we are all bigger than our stupidities, and we all have our own stupidities, as well. “But for the grace of G-d, there go I.”
Thus, I am exceedingly grateful. Birthers make me feel grateful more than anything else. Humble and grateful that in this fragile world of becoming who we are that I did not become like many in my family or those such as Orly Taitz spending their time on such hateful endeavors, whatever their motivation is.
What “both points of view” are you talking about? I assume you are just as eager to call for a serious discussion of “both points of view” of the heliocentric model of the solar system vs. the Flat Earth Society’s geocentric one? Right???
…Because what you are asking is akin to claiming that both of those models would somehow merit weighing the “points of view”…
So tell me “Just Me”…are you “open minded” about the possibility of the stars being fixed points in the “firmament” of “quintessence” and in seriously entertaining claims that the Earth is really the center of the universe and that the sun and all the planets really revolve around the Earth…?
Because that is the closest equivelent I can come up with to being “open minded” about an “opposing viewpoint” as Birtherism is to reality…
Go to any West Bank settlement, and you’ll find a colony of meshuggeners like her.
Remember this?
Settler leader calls democracy an obstacle to Israel’s higher calling – Veteran settler leader Benny Katzover: ‘We didn’t come here to establish a democratic state.’
http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/settler-leader-calls-democracy-an-obstacle-to-israel-s-higher-calling-1.407490
Too bad the name wasn’t “Katy Bennzover” instead.
And there is the lie exposed, Just Me. The lie that you are really interested in the truth. You may think you are, you may sincerely believe you are. That is your business. But when you tell lies or throw out loose accusations without real investigation, don’t go whining about how people should be open-minded. Don’t think you can ride scot-free on the ancient and difficult and arduous road of truth-seeking with such disregard.
Regarding truth, to quote a famous philosopher….”You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YIP6EwqMEoE
I am waiting with bated breath.
Marxism: Outside of a dog, a book is man’s best friend. Inside of a dog, it’s too dark to read.
Communism: “Does anyone want seconds, or can I finish the meat loaf?”
If you want to learn her dental skill level, just watch “Marathon Man.”
The term you want is “suborned perjury.”
The actual truth (which is redundant), is that Obama is a Pastafarian.
Carter didn’t hear the case on its merits because it has been proven to be without any merit.
[bada-bing]
Actually, Judge Carter was VERY clear about the case before him…”Taitz encouraged her supporters to contact this Court, both via letters and phone calls. It was improper and unethical for her as an attorney to encourage her supporters to attempt to influence this Court’s decision. Despite these attempts to manipulate this Court, the Court has not considered any outside pleas to influence the Court’s decision.”
Sounds like it wasn’t a law clerk making threats…sounds like it was Orly and her minions. Were you one of them John?
Also we see that…”Additionally, the Court has received several sworn affidavits that Taitz asked potential witnesses that she planned to call before this Court to perjure themselves. This Court is deeply concerned that Taitz may have suborned perjury through witnesses she intended to bring before this Court.While the Court seeks to ensure that all interested parties have had the opportunity to be heard, the Court cannot condone the conduct of Plaintiffs’ counsel in her efforts to influence this Court.”
We see that people were asked by the plaintiffs’ attorney to LIE! Not the President or his side, but YOUR SIDE!
Sounds to me like Judge Carter saw right through this case John. Seems to me like he was an honest man doing his job. So John, are you suborning perjury and trying to illegally influence the court?
She could still be a veteran of being at the forefront of the settlers. They still have forefronts, you know.
An American woman walks into a Tel Aviv leather goods store. She says, “I want to buy some wallets as souvenirs.”
The clerk takes several wallets from the case.
“This one is 1,000 shekelim. This next one is 2,000 shekelim. This third one is 3,000 shekelim, and the fourth is 10,000 shekelim.”
“What are the differences?”, she asks.
“The one for 1,000 shekelim is made from cowhide. The one for 2,000 shekelim is made from calfskin, and the one for 3,000 shekelim is made from lambskin.”
“Why is this one 10,000 shekelim?”
“The one for 10,000 shekelim is made from foreskins. When you rub it, it turns into a suitcase.”
Thank you. I’ll be here all week.
I was watching a “religious” channel one day, and there was Efrem Zimbalist Jr., reading the Bible, a chapter a day. And just my luck, that day’s chapter was Genesis 34. The guy’s a real pro.
I have never understood the “Government is all powerful and taking our rights” meme such as seen on Just Me’s and other Birther sites. I did not understand it during the 1990s anti-government militia craze. They are lamenting the oppression of an organization that, as FDR once put it, you can kick in the ass and the head will not feel it for two years. This is a government whose process in purchasing toilet paper would make a 14th Century Roman Curia blush. If there ever was a statement of our time, it might be:
“Bureaucratic idiocy is a sure defense against tyranny.”
If the government were really oppressive and efficient, would the anti-government types even know?
If I said that the Earth was flat, and that we should debate the controversy with an open mind, how would you react?
Stop me if you heard this one.
A man is visiting Israel when his watch breaks. He wants to get it fixed. He looks around for a watchmaker’s shop. The problem is that all the signs are in Hebrew and he can’t read the language. So he searches around and finally he sees a store with a bunch of clocks in the window.
He walks in to the store and says “Excuse me sir, my watch has broken. Can you fix it?”
The shopkeeper says “I’m sorry, I’m not a watchmaker. I’m a mohel. I do circumcisions.”
The tourist asks “So then why do you have all those clocks in your window?”
The shopkeeper says “Well, what should I put in the window?”
Cuckoo clocks?
Well I would have suggested hot dogs or sausages, but those tend to spoil.
That you’re desperate for any attention and hits on your bigot blog?
There’s your sign.
Best. Article. Title. Ever!
Bwahahahahahaha!
Good thing you spotted them in California; in New Jersey you can’t tell the difference.
I can see Camden from my window at night. It glows.
Dr. Taitz reports that her case was dismissed without prejudice because of improper venue. She attached what appears to be an order from Judge Gee so stating. I have not analyzed a copy of the order to see if there are layers.
Dr. Taitz is now searching for a good place to file her lawsuit. Misha, that sounds like a straight line for a Borscht Belt comedian, which I am defintely not.
I can put her in touch with an expert on venue. I think he lives in Florida and has a gifted legal mind.
She said: “I definitely do not want to pick the northern CA, where Pelosi ir as they call her Polosi lives. The courts there are more to the left than the courts in the Communist China.”
ROFL!
Shouldn’t she be filing in Maracopa County? That way Sheriff Joe would be right there to help her, and if the judge doesn’t seem cooperate Joe can have him prosecuted?
Orly should file on Mars. That way she will have the entire universe covered.
The U.S. District Court in California has decided that it will rule on Orly’s motion without oral arguments, which in effect means that she has struck out again.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/104073547/CA-BvO-2012-08-24-ORDER-Cancelling-Hearing-Taking-Matter-Under-Advisement