According to AZCentral.com, the “birther” eligibility bill that was vetoed by Arizona Republican governor Jan Brewer, is coming around for the third attempt, to be introduced by Rep. Carl Seel of Phoenix. The text of the upcoming proposal hasn’t been published, but you can bet that it targeted in some way to exclude Barack Obama from the ballot.
Check out the article for more insider info from Arizona.
It’s so hard to exclude people of color nowadays! The dream goes on.
There is a big flurry of activity over on Orly’s site. It seems that she has several more court cases on hand and now she has (at least) two Dem candidates who want to challange Obama. The problem is that none of them have the cash to lodge with the states’ elecltoral commissions so unless the gullible dig again they will not be on the ballots. Isn’t it ironic that Orly has the begging bowl out for Dem canditates?
She is also looking for a lift to Seatle so that she can get a deposition from someone.
Its no wonder she gets things muddled up in her head . If all of these cases and appearances were being handled by a well paid lawyer he would have a staff of 20 to assist. She really is a wonder woman! On the other hand could she be the human version of the duracell bunny and one day (probably ater another court defeat ) she will stop suddenly, never to go again?
To dream the impossible dream…
The depositions in Seattle appear to be of lawyes at the Perkins Coie firm, designed to prove that someone got to Judge Carter, who, if I understand things correctly, used to be a decorated Marine war hero, but is now less highly regarded. The deposition in Hawaii is of Dr. Fuddy. Since Ms. Dr. Taitz has not yet figured out how to subpoena someone for a deposition despite an expensive and continuing education, these depositions will not happen.
I wonder how long it will be before a birther decides that, since the Framers would have considered Obama only 3/5 a person, he can’t be natural born by their definition.
Candidates will have to provide a copy of their birth certificate that says caucasian for race.
You mean that hasn’t happened multiple times already? (Just the other day I saw someone on WND refer to Obama as “that 3/5 of a person”).
This is not nearly enough. It will also have to say “Christian” for religion, “male” for gender (after all, the Founders never envisioned a female President, either) and list the parents’ citizenship at the time of birth.
Additionally, it will have to certify no halal food was given to the child while in maternity ward, and the delivering physician’s instruments haven’t been blessed in the name of Allah.
The latter provision may be waived if the person can prove he enlisted with the KKK within 24 hours of his birth.
Until the last couple of weeks, I never really looked at Orly’s site. Besides just the stupidity and incompetence, her posts come across as weirdly naive. It’s one of those personality traits that are funny/endearing in movie characters but in real life are really quite disturbing.
I see she’s trying to get all sorts of people’s personal information including the man who took over the practice of the doctor who delivered Obama. If that isn’t a sign of insanity I don’t know what is.
Which of course, is just a waste of time, because the depositions will never happen. She sent Georgia State administrative subpoenas to Washington State, and Hawaii. You’d think she would have learned from her last attempt to subpoena Fuddy that a subpoena has to be issued from the jurisidiction where the person is served. A Georgia subpoena mailed to a person in either Hawaii or Washington is nothing more than junk mail.
I met her once, and talked with her for a couple of minutes (I would say more, but I don’t want to be subpoenaed myself, heheh). She is beyond naive. She really has no clue what is going on, or how the courts work, or anything. It is remarkable.
I’ve passed the California Bar examination, and it is by far the hardest thing I have ever done, and I have absolutely no idea how Orly passed it.
While resisting the urge to give into, or originate, conspiracy theories myself….I assume there are mechanisms in place to prevent cheating? For instance, I assume there are mechanisms in p[lace to prevent someone impersonating Orly, and taking the exam for her?
From an entertainment standpoint, I just want her to focus on her Senate campaign. Nothing would be funnier than her getting the GOP nomination for that role! LOL!
It would be like mixing 1 part Christine O’Donnell, 2 parts Sharron Angle and adding a splash of Alvin Greene x1000!
Beyond that, it astounds me how her Flying Monkey Brigade is gullible and slavish enough to constantly do her bidding and send money her way.
I mean really, based on her multi-million dollar household & husband’s income alone, she should be able to afford all of these jaunts herself without barely making a noticeable dent in her family fortune…
When she sets up a paypal account and just asks people to send her money for nothing in return, is that considered income she would be obligated to report to the IRS? (I asked her that question on her website and she responded that she reports every penny.) After the hassle of dealing with reporting it and actually paying the taxes how could it possibly be worth it to solicite any money?
Maybe they have a “special test” for “special people”, i.e, those who are going on to greatness as “defenders of the Constitution”.
I think she did well in the evening gown and swimsuit portions.
If Orly can pass it, then it can’t be much of a test. If it was ‘by far the hardest thing’ you have ever done, then you can’t possibly be very good.
Remind me not to hire you, thanks.
I’m boycotting California lawyers until they do something about that crazy woman. I know for a fact that there have been at least 3 official complaints about her to the Bar Association (they were documented on this site awhile back), but you are all in ‘see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil’ mode.
Doesn’t the California Bar have a mandate from its members to protect the reputation of the membership against incompetence?
Do you think I’m being unfair tarring all California lawyers with the goo from Orlys left over makeup? I probably am, but if that is what it takes for you to do something about getting her disbarred, then it does its trick. A professional organization that does nothing to maintain weed out the unprofessional frauds with in its ranks is deserving of nothing but contempt.
Like I said in the above post, the Bar Association is clearly in ‘see no evil’ mode.
Well said! I completely agree!
The CA Bar has only shamed itself by not taking action long before now. Orly’s rants & threats alone against any judge, official, etc. who rules (or even might rule) against her are so offensive to common decency and professionalism that there is absolutely no excuse for the CA Bar to tolerate such behavior.
Folks, we’ve been rumbled. Someone over on Orly’s site just figured out that Mc Cain was an Obama plant! This was supposed to be a secret. if McCain has blabbed we are entitled to get our money back. When you think of it, it was a GREAT plan. Get John in under the wire and then he nominates Sarah for VP. It worked brilliantly and we got our man in by a landslide. I hope that they don’t catch onto the fact that Newt is our man, too , or Barak might have to face up to a real candidate. I see that Sherriff Joe is being touted as a candidate. Now we really shoud be worried.
The secret planning committee will be meeting at option c on the usual date. Those who matter will know what I mean.
No, Joe is in on it (your security clearance probably wasn’t high enough for that info, but since birfers will never suspect that, it’s safe to say it here, after all we’re all just lyin’ Obots anyway).
We are only worried that Orly could run for President. Which is the real reason all attempts to remove the “natural born” requirement were struck down.
No, the real secret is that the real McCain (just like the real Slim Shady) has long been replaced by either a clone or an android (I’m not sure which because I never bothered to read memo FC4711).
BTW our Alien Overlords told me to wish you all a merry Jrxeena’x and a happy new Shwoorn.
I was gonna suggest that as a joke, but I decided I might jinx it.
Sheriff Joe would be the best Vice President since Spiro T. ‘Brown Bag’ Agnew.
Well said.
Where is the outrage from Californian lawyers? Are they practicing dentistry as a joke?
My question is more serious: do they allow candidates to peruse the services of an interpreter? With her Ladino from Kishinev (her Yiddish is so awful she must belong to the other tribe), Orly has the right accent to impersonate a Latina: “me no understand vee inglish, por favor.
If yes, I have a suspicion who may have been her helpful interpreter, but I do not want to be sued by a minister of the government of Cabinda before the Star Chamber in London.
That adds an interesting slant to her status. Would this person’s assistance have been made a part of her test record?
Sheriff Joe’s parents were immigrants from Italy. Were they U.S. citizens when he was born? Oh, wait – he’s white, so it doesn’t matter.
Sheriff Joe has bigger problems to deal with –
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2011/12/feds-to-announce-results-of-probe-of-arizona-sheriff-arpaio/1?loc=interstitialskip
Thanks for the words of support. I know they were tongue in cheek, but they still felt kinda bad, especially as you don’t know a thing about me or what I have accomplished. FYI, the California Bar Exam is three grueling days of misery, and it has the lowest pass rate in the nation, by far.
Anyhow, the reason that the California Bar hasn’t gone after Orly is that they have limited resources and too much on their plate. California is huge, with 38 million people and it has a couple hundred thousand practicing lawyers. The Bar is going after the ones that steal from their clients, or show up drunk in court, or lose meritorious cases because they are incompetent, or whatever. You know, real lawyers with real law practices that are actually a threat to the public.
Orly is a sideshow. She has no real clients, no meritorious cases. No one is hurt by her incompetence, no client suffers. Some court time is wasted, and we all get a good belly laugh, and we move on. I’d like to see Orly get nailed, but I understand why she hasn’t been yet.
Lots of mechanisms, and people have been caught doing just that.
My guess is that she did a lot of guessing and got lucky on the multiple choices. With that many people taking the Bar, statistically it is bound to happen that a few guessers will guess right. On the essays, they cant cover all subjects – perhaps Orly got questions in some narrow area where she sort of understood the issue. Oh hell, I don’t know how she did it. I have a couple of very, very smart friends who did well at top law schools, studied for months, and still failed the California Bar exam. Orly’s passing is one of the great mysteries of our time.
I think she needs to release her original bar application, just to be sure. She should go ahead and release her law school records while she’s at it. You know, just to be on the safe side. I find it strange that no one has come forward to say that they remember her from school. What is she hiding?
I agree that Orly can’t really hurt her clients since her “clients” are basically co-conspirators with no actual interests in any of the cases beyond scoring poiltical points. However, I don’t understand why so few judges have sanctioned her. It doesn’t require resources for a judge to levy fines or declare her a vexatious litigator banned from filing further suits on the same or a related matter. Everyone is entitled to their day in court, but she is at 3 years and counting.
I totally agree. And if she was sanctioned enough, the Bar would move against her based on that alone.
Again, however, in my experience, judges usually sanction attorneys who are dishonest and deceitful, and rarely sanction pro pers (non attorneys) who are simply delusional. In this context, Orly might as well be a pro per.
That’s a part of the problem. Court sanctions and reports of bad behavior from other attorneys are one thing, but the most damaging things would come from her clients, if any of them would file bar complaints. Those are the things most likely to get the attention of the bar association of any state.
The mail carriers?
AGREED!
Her clients really have no grounds to complain, since none of them had a case to begin with.
And I have a problem with that, because we all pay for the court system as taxpayers. And in fact, because of budget cuts, many courts are swamped and people wiith real lawsuits, who may be experiencing real suffering, are having to wait inordinate lengths of time to be heard. There is harm to the public interest in her actions. At a minimum she should be barred from filing any further suits on eligibility matters.
I don’t know of you have read the complaints that were filed. I’ll pass you a link to one of them. One disturbing thing that Orly did was to advertise her services to military families, suggesting that their loved ones were in harms way because of Obama’s ineligibility. Birthers suggested that because Obama was ineligible, any acts of war by the military were really war crimes, and that service members wouldn’t be protected by the Geneva Conventions.
Orly also got one of her clients fired from a lucrative job. Now that person may have gone ahead without Orly’s encouragement, but maybe not.
http://nativeborncitizen.wordpress.com/2009/04/19/orly-taitz-complaint-to-the-state-bar-of-california/
After all this time and all the complaints, I figure the CBA *has* looked into it and has decided she’s their poster child for why the law actually DOES work.
She runs around trying every possible ridiculous angle, they’re struck down usually with prejudice and makes public record an example to all. A $20K fine here and there doesn’t hurt either.
It kind of reinforces the message “Try this shit and you’ll be sanctioned!”
So I think at this point, they’re well aware and letting her run amuck deliberately.
I mean, she’s *not* trying serious cases with real stakes.
No one is really getting shafted via a court decision.
She’s just their little acid test with a public display mode.
Agreed!
blockquote cite=”comment-140331″>
Scientist: And I have a problem with that, because we all pay for the court system as taxpayers. And in fact, because of budget cuts, many courts are swamped and people wiith real lawsuits, who may be experiencing real suffering, are having to wait inordinate lengths of time to be heard. There is harm to the public interest in her actions. At a minimum she should be barred from filing any further suits on eligibility matters.
Lots of people have been hurt by Orly’s incompetence and she is definitely a real threat to the public. Talk to Siddarth Velamoor, Judge Land, Judge Carter, Loretta Fuddy, Danny Bickel, the woman in WA who Orly thought was Stanley Ann Dunham, the members of the NH State Ballot Law Commission…the list is very long of people who have been harassed and threatened by Orly’s lunatic followers.
I don’t think that CA lawyers (except those employed by the Bar Association) bear any responsibility for the fact that Orly Taitz has not been disbarred, but I think defending the Bar Association in their handling of her by saying that she is not a threat to the public is a misrepresentation of facts.
I think that there will be birfer-related violence this election and I think it will be committed by a lone wolf against a state official who Orly Taitz has accused of corruption in connection with her delusions about the President.
I respectfully and wholeheartedly disagree.
If you’re into the “the Koch brothers are behind the birther movement” conspiracy theory, you might surmise they just bought her the exam. Occam’s razor.
The most probable explanation would’ve been “she went crazy years after taking the exam”, but that doesn’t coincide with the facts.
Doc, did Orly and other birthers contend that US military personnel participating in foreign wars were ipso facto committing war crimes due to Obama’s supposed ineligibility to be commander-in-chief, or did they say that the soldiers could be preceived by their enemies to be committing war crimes? A significant distinction, although either way Orly’s and her disciples’ conduct is reprehensible and seditious — at least in spirit, if not technically by the law.
In a nutshell, I find the woman to be simply evil. Even if you don’t consider her deliberately evil, but merely honestly delustional. Her conduct creates great evil, Predicto’s analysis to the contrary.
To have heightened the anxiety of military families already anxious because their loved ones are in a war zone is simply wicked. The notion that Mr. Obama’s status makes US military activities illegal would never in a million years have occurred to our enemies without the birthers raising the issue. So if any captured American soldiers were to be treated as war criminals based on the Obama ineligibility theory, their blood would be squarely on the hands of the birthers who came up with this idiotic idea.
I’ve said it before, but I’ll repeat. Orly is lucky she didn’t live during the Jackson presidency and pull the same stunts. She’s fond of envisioning others’ necks in a noose, but if she’d done with Jackson what she’s done with Obama, Jackson (who once hanged an opposing general and threatened to hang his former VP) would have done all in his power to see her swinging,
I doubt any country would dare pull such a stunt. Even if Obama were ineligible, even if he were a dictator who grabbed power by force, actions of the US military would never qualify as “war crimes” per se (otherwise many countries would be committing war crimes all over the world simply because they don’t have a “legal” ruler). This is, after all, still the official US military, not some private militia without any government backing.
You are right. Birfer lawyers and fans propagated this misconception based on some of the rulings of the Nuremberg War Crimes Court. This court ruled that the Nazi regime had been both criminal and illegal (note: not merely illegal, that is the first point the birfers got wrong) from its conception. This allowed for two things:
1) anyone who had been instrumental in helping the Nazis come to power could be prosecuted as a war criminal. In reality, apart from Schaft, and some almost unknown stand-in for Goebbels (would make a very difficult Trivial Pursuit question to ask for that guy’s name, I think he was actually acquitted), no “ïnstrumental civilians” were tried at Nuremberg, but both Germanies would later give stiff sentences to politicians who had helped the Nazi take absolute power between 1932 and 1936, with industrialists and bankers who had obviously been the primary targets of this ruling, basically escaping prosecution. It would also have applied to most of the officers who participated in the various assassination attempts after 1939 but had been good Nazis until Hitler invaded Poland.
2) no general or subordinate was allowed the defense “I was only following orders”, which would normally have worked to claim at least extenuating circumstances in a normal court of law before 1945.
But there is the rub: these officers were not, as Orly claimed, put on trial for “obeying the (illegal) orders of a Usurper” as the courts had already ruled “no, you were not following orders, does not count in your favour”, they were put on trial for what they had done, because the deed constituted a war crime. Like killing innocent civilians (which is what most of the condemned had done). Merely obeying a Fuhrerbefehl to hold on to a desperate and lost position, did not constitute a war crime- but executing soldiers (and even civilians, happened at Aachen) for protesting such an insane order could be – and some officers were later put on trial for that – in both Germanies.
This point has been made so often, one wonders why a constitutional lawyer cannot understand such a simple basic fact and continues to muddy the waters. /sarcasm
Magic M, I myself wouldn’t expect another country to try such a stunt, I’m merely pointing out that the birthers raised the possibility recklessly, with no apparent care about the irony that the very danger (however remote) they claim to fear is one that they themselves were creatig. Excellent point about other countries engaging in wars without a :”legal’ ruler.
Re: ORLY:
Orly’s law license was in place before there was any Birther movement at all. Based on her history, she likely got it for the mere reason of defending her practice and her children… in other words, it is more of a “hobby” skill she picked up for personal needs.
Some people are good at mere memorization but woefully inadequate at then putting learned concepts into practice. Orly may simply fall into that category.
Then again, we’ve seen how she also suffers from an overblown sense of self-entitlement and as a result is sort of “lazy” in her own habits by always demanding others do stuff for her. Who knows how much of her law schooling she did herself or had “help” from getting someone else to get her through. From what I understand, her schooling itself was online. However, I would assume she would have had to take the Bar Exam in person and at that point would just need strong enough skills in memorization and being able to demonstrate sufficient “theory” comprehension abilility to generate adequate essay responses. Of course, all of this is purely speculation and we simply do not know the circumstances behind her legal study and ahievement of her CA law license.
Her “craziness” may be in part a remenent of whatever oppression she experienced while growing up in Moldovia. ODS likely became the tipping point, as it seems to have been for many, which took them over the edge from merely emotionally irrational to full-blown crazy. Once she allowed herself to become so taken and consumed with this issue, such madness overtook her quite rapidly. There is a good possibility, based on her character traits, that she was always had a high susceptibility to going mad or had signs of other mental illness characteristics…but based on what we know, ODS was likely a tipping point.
Re: Bigger Funding:
The Koch Brothers are clearly behind many conservative/libertarian “think tanks”, causes and movements, such as the Tea Party. However, I’ve yet to see any credible link between their money to Birtherism itself, so I would consider that an irresponsible conspiracy rumour, without evidence.
Obviously, there is some “benefactor” person or group who is backing and funding certain Birther causes, such as the whole Terry Lakin situation and also behind Dean Haskins efforts (and possibly Mario’s). Possible suspects include WND and the Kercheners. The money trail possibly goes deeper and further than that, but I see no evidence at all that connects it to the Koch Brothers or anything on that scale.
The Bar has limited funds for enforcement, and must allocate them as best it can. Orly may be a high priority for you, but I can understand why the Bar instead chooses to spend it money going after the bad apple lawyers that are flat out stealing from their clients.
It is also very difficult to see how the wrongful actions of all lunatic birthers can be attributed to Orly, from a Bar enforement point of view.
I’d love to see Orly disbarred, but it doesn’t just “happen” by a snap of the fingers.
IMHO, the California bar is waiting out the 2012 electioin, to keep Orly’s case as disentangled from politics as possible. Then after the election, with Obama’s political fate no longer an issue, the bar can proceed with any discipline it feels justified against Orly. Of course she and her followers will scream retaliation by Obama, whether he wins or loses his race. But with the election in the rearciew mirror, the numbers of the general public who care about Orly’s case enough to pay attention would be much smaller,
Personally, without any legal background, I’m wondering if she didn’t go far enough in some of her most egregious actions to merit deportation. Wouldn’t that raise the howls!
And Georgia weighs in:
Georgia Birthers Challenge Obama’s Placement On Presidential Ballot
Possibly. But I think Predicto is right – as long as she does not harm any real clients (like she did before Judge Land with Rhodes). she won’t be sanctioned.
As I said elsewhere, the California Bar seems to consider Birferism– so preposterously frivolous by nature, that there is no way choosing Taitz as your lawyer, rather than some far more gifted constitutional expert such as De Berg, the Putz and the Paraclete, could possibly harm your case.
Recent word has it that the CBA *did* listen to Orly.
But all they heard was “Let me feenish!!!”