Orly Taitz is noted for posting articles on her blog that are just long titles with no text in the body of the article. Now she’s taken to doing that with the federal courts in a new notice in the case of Grinols v. Electoral College. Her latest filing titled: “Notice of clarification regarding the fact that defendant Barack Obama was sued as an individual, as a candidate for office who committed fraud and used forged IDs and a stolen SSN as a proof of identity and proof of legitimacy for office.”
To be precise, there is a partial sentence in the body of the “clarification” that says:
This is to confirm that on 02.01.2013 at 3:30 pm Counsel for defendants Assistant U.S. Attorney Olsen called the Counsel for Plaintiffs Orly Taitz, whereby Mr. Olsen
And that’s all there is besides the case identification and a signature of Lila Dubert attesting to heaven knows what. What did Olsen say? What did Taitz say? Things aren’t clarified at all.
The title is itself somewhat at odds with birther claims up until this time. Birthers have complained that Obama has shown no proof of identity. Taitz says that he has. This is just another example of the incompetence that has plagued Taitz’ rationally-challenged legal complaints against Barack Obama.
Or, as Doc C stated in the previous thread, “No News is Good News.”
I suspect that at least one or more pages did not get transmitted to the court. Even if the missing pages are added to the court papers, Orly won’t clarify anything.
I know, just poking fun.
If the document stored over at Scribd is the entirety of what was transmitted to the court, then I think Orly just achieved the total opposite of a clarification…
The copy linked in my article was downloaded directly from the Court’s ECF system. It is exactly what she filed.
The original draft of this article had some more criticism of Taitz at the end, but I decided to keep the article more level.
What I would like to say is that while Orly Taitz is first in line to file a lawsuit, or to post something on her blog about the latest crank rumor about Obama, she has never been willing to do the real work of finding out what the law is, writing a well-written legal brief, or getting competent experts to evaluate her claims. Her work is just plain shoddy.
It’s also totally the wrong way to amend court filings, and calls into question (again) if he has ever been properly served. And as he has now taken the oath of office, it’s difficult to see what there is for the court to do, especially as Judge England said he can’t answer a question that the Constitution reserves for Congress.
But, but…all of this, again, goes to a point I’ve raised before, which is how did Orly pass her law school and CA Bar exams? There are mandatory courses in evidence and procedure, and I assume also in how to draft legal documents. It just isn’t possible that someone who can generate such drivel managed to scrape a pass in any of these courses. Did she get someone to take them for her, with forged IDs? Probably not too difficult for the online law school, though I don’t know what the Bar exams require. And this isn’t just mischief-making. Lawyers have immense privileges. We are entitled to answers to these questions.
Who knew that one can orally amend a written complaint? That wasn’t covered in my Civil Procedure class at Georgetown.
Oh well. Live and learn.
Considering Orly’s and birther conduct in toto, I found this recent quote from the dentist, more than a bit ironic:
Obama feels that any means justfy the goal. there is no doubt that his appointees will share in his position. Can you imagine Secretary of the Social Security,Director of Secret Service, director of the CIA with the framemind that anything justifies the end goal.
And she will not even take the time to do the simplest things herself:
I suspect that Orly has cleverly figured out that if she files a notice which has no body to it, the defendants cannot challenge what she did not say. Or something like that.
It was teh evile law clerks at teh court orofice that stoal part of Orly’s filing, to place her in disrepoo…. disreputt… disre….. to make her look bad.
She has an article saying that the solution to unemployment is to fire federal government workers….and give their jobs to the unemployed. Fascinating logic.
So I say let’s file a FOIA request to the CA Bar, to release Orly’s exam papers. We need to know – and a simply analysis will tell us – if she got someone to impersonate her, because there is just no way she could have passed the exams herself.
That one.
The thought has occurred to me that she passed the Bar legitimately, but since that time has had a stroke or head injury or some trauma that has resulted in the damaged individual we see today.
I’m really, really trying hard to be generous.
But that won’t stop me from taking the piss when I see the opportunity.
Ouroboros strikes again!
Not a government agency?
Keith – Not a government agency?
No, but sometimes these regulatory bodies are subject to disclosure obligations. However, We The People shouldn’t have to resort to that. Orly should prove that she did actually write the Bar exams. And if she did, then some serious overhaul is needed of those exams. And the Taft Law School exams. And admission criteria.
Going to back to her “clarification”, is it possible to designate the capacity in which you sue someone? I suppose it might be, but (as Judge England pointed out) he was and still is President, and I wonder if you can parse this down so that he has a separate, temporary identity as a candidate? Presumably her motive is to force him to hire separate representation and not to use the U.S. Attorney.
I note in passing that she’s changed her blog theme so that post titles are NO LONGER SCREAMING AT US IN ALL CAPS.
It turns out that they’re really not any more pleasant in mixed case.
I agree. Orly Taitz’s web site is indicative of the way she treats the legal system, total disregard for quality and for the people that read her junk. In the former, she should hire a webmaster, and in the second a lawyer.