Yes, the latest motion to reconsider from Orly Taitz in Grinols v. Electoral College has been denied by Judge England. Taitz tried to have the President declared in default for not appearing in the case, but she bungled the service and so he’s not (yet) a party, and so has no duty to respond. Judge England explained to her in great detail how she went wrong when he denied her motion, and taking this to heart, Taitz ignored it, and asked for reconsideration.
No dice, says the Judge. Read the order:
EDCA ECF 103 2013-03-26 = Grinols v Electoral College – ORDER Denying Motion for Reconsideration by Jack Ryan
A court-ordered pimp slap, from a real honest-to-God pimp would do that woman some good.
The judge said ‘Unfortunately, this so-called evidence is not new’. What evidence did Taitz submit that she thought was new?
‘This is the most important case in the whole universe, and you should do what I demand. We don’t have time. So there.’
The new “evidence” she presented to the court was an affidavit from the process server stating that he tried to serve the President at the White House and that the Secret Service told him to serve the President through the US Attorney’s office.
Perhaps, if Orly in all of her wisdom and supreme intellect, had just followed the court’s detailed explanation on how she needed to serve the President in his personal capacity, she wouldn’t have needed to include the worthless affidavit from the process server that didn’t provide any details of when he or she tried to serve the president or for what case he or she had tried to serve him for.
Orly is and always will remain the worst attorney in the history of the world.
via freeperville:
[chuckle]
I guess you could say that she is to lawyering, what an Imperial Storm Trooper is to marksmanship.
Hmmmmm….it looks like Orly is now soon to give up lawyering and will instead go directly to the “people” by prevailing upon them to “recall of officials who refuse to take action and are complicit in the cover up of Obama’s forged IDs and a stolen SSN.” She suggests they “start with a low ranking official, where we need less signatures for recall.”
I feel sorry for the dogcatchers in Rancho Santa Margarita who may find themselves at the wrong end of a recall campaign, but with their complicity in this dog gone cover up do they deserve any less?
Orly’s post threatening recalls will be the pinnacle of her entire recall effort.
I assume that it’s a disbarrment offence for an attorney to initiate a recall against a judge who ruled against her.
Yes, right. And THAT also means the California Bar is not going to do anything about it.
Only 19 states (plus D.C.) allow recall petitions. Orly couldn’t get a dogcatcher recalled.
http://www.ncsl.org/legislatures-elections/elections/recall-of-state-officials.aspx
I see. Sort of a Suzuki Method of recalls.
I think many of us remain stumped, after the last four years of Orly, as to what’s left for a disbarment offense to actually be. Perhaps if she started bringing in live skunks and throwing them at the judge.
Naw, it’s just more proof of Orly’s ignorance. Federal judges aren’t subject to recall; they can be removed from office only by the impeachment process…just like you know who.
She’ll never get past “Twinkle, Twinkle Little Star.”
I see that Orly has filed a notice of appeal, claiming that Judge England abused his discretion in denying her motion to reconsider entering a default judgment against Obama. Her notice reminds Judge England that this makes him complicit in a cover up and treason, and requests that he stay the motions to dismiss. Of course her motion to stay pending appeal is “ex parte expedited”. http://www.scribd.com/doc/133502684/Grinols-Notice-of-Appeal-and-Ex-Parte-Expedited-Motion0001
At the risk of sounding like a broken record, I again mention that it is axiomatic that default judgments are not favored in the law. And that little axiom pertains to cases where there has been service of process, and where there has been no subsequent filing of an amended complaint…
She does this every time she loses a couple cases in a row. Nothing new, and of course nothing ever materializes since birtherism has nowhere near the required number of people to succeed with such an attempt.
I just wonder when Orly will suggest all her followers move to the same state in the hope that at least this will generate enough local pressure. She did it before when she needed three people to contest an election.
Whatever happened to her big plan to arrest President Obama in Connecticut? That would have resulted in nothing less than checkmate.
taitz: Very important! Federal Judge Morrison C. England scheduled a new hearing for April 22, 10 Am, Courtroom 7. I am asking my supporters to come to the hearing. It will mean a lot to me.
And she has been told that there will be no witnesses and no zibits She’ll have 30 minutes to speak and Judge England has made it clear that he is going to control the hearing.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/134126048/GRINOLS-ECF-117-OrDER-Continuing-M2D-Hearing-to-April-22-and-Continuing-Motio
Rickey: And she has been told that there will be no witnesses and no zibits She’ll have 30 minutes to speak and Judge England has made it clear that he is going to control the hearing.
thanks: caramel corn ordered in bulk
I really wish she’d file a suit in CT that would be fun to see in action.
If I lived anywhere near Sacramento I would take the day off to be there. I’m sure that The Fogbow will have boots on the ground, though.
Dr Kenneth Noisewater:
are you surprised that there was so little notice from her that she was going to be in CT at their SS office?
3/26/2013 taitz: Today I travelled to the Social security office in Stamford, CT where the SSN fraudulently used by Obama, was issued. I recorded all the information received from them and they forwarded to Washington DC all the evidence of fraud provided by me
why didn’t she inform the media?
re the 4/22 hearing, england has limited arguments to 30 minutes, no exhibits or witnesses and arguments are limited to 1. mootness, 2. standing, 3. political question doctrine, 4. speech and debate clause, 5 service of process.
that’s 6 minutes per issue including time for england to interject – i can picture taitz’s hair on fire
Is this 30 minutes per side, or 30 minutes total? If it is 30 minutes total, and as the defendants as moving parties go first, Orly is going to have a whopping 15 minutes to cover all five topics. It’s going to be such fun!
RetiredLawyer:
“each side” has a maximum of 30 minutes
—-
I wish I could be there to hear/see it! Well, at least the federal court will have a transcript, although we’ll miss the body language…
Not at all. I learned that she was in town only after Tracy Fair posted about it on amazon. The SS office is just down the street and it would have been fun to see the screeching in action and me telling her to get lost as a civlian.
Dr Kenneth Noisewater:
i too live close by in weschester and would have attended and learned about her visit from her website after the fact –
we could have told her to “get lost” together – what are the chances she wasn’t there at all? there were no media accounts in the local ct news