Main Menu

Taitz demands retraction

Orly Taitz

I wish it were from me (I could use the publicity), but it is from the LA Times according an email announcement from Orly today.

Says Tea Party snub not about birtherism

In a letter to the LA Times, Orly objects to an article titled “Activist who challenges Obama’s citizenship is booted from Tax Day Tea Party”. The Times article gives the definite impression that Republican candidates were calling “like crazy” asking that Taitz not be allowed to speak because of her role as a major proponent of birtherism.

Taitz, in her letter to the Times, says that the birther issue was not the reason, but rather her attacks on her opponent, Damon Dunn, as reported here on Obama Conspiracy Theories.

In a shocking disclosure, Taitz gives a hint that there may be some truth that she pulls her legal theories out of her rear, saying that she is “seeking disclosure of all the orifinal vital records of Mr. Obama.” Come on woman, you composed this in Microsoft Word; use the freaking spell checker!

Taitz threatens a RICO lawsuit

California statutes §18203 and §18500 provide for up to 3 years in state prison for elections fraud. If you do not issue a correction and apology, you and Los Angeles Times will be guilty of aiding and abetting elections fraud and being part of a conspiracy to commit elections fraud under RICO, as well as all the damages stemming from it.

45 Responses to Taitz demands retraction

  1. avatar
    Saint James April 17, 2010 at 11:25 pm #

    “you and Los Angeles Times will be guilty of aiding and abetting elections fraud and being part of a conspiracy to commit elections fraud under RICO”?

    I’m so tired of the words “aiding” and “abetting”. Orly throws in these words when she wants to threaten anybody who opposes her.

    Orly should sue the USSR for causing her mental illness!

    http://blogs.ocweekly.com/navelgazing/dr_orly_taitz_pancake_birther.jpg

    http://www.faithmouse.com/orly_taitz_pancake_birther_two.jpg

    http://www.faithmouse.com/orly_taitz_spot.jpg

    http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_VizIrBQwA8w/Snw49ypedJI/AAAAAAAAHJ4/Rk3hMLg5TgE/s400/Orly+Taitz.gif

  2. avatar
    G April 18, 2010 at 12:07 am #

    Dang! Orly just loves throwing RICO lawsuits around, doesn’t she? LMAO!

    Can’t wait to see when she tries her class action suit against all the voters that don’t vote for her!

  3. avatar
    Don Sanders April 18, 2010 at 12:22 am #

    Where is this throwing lawsuits come from,, The understanding I got that they were brought,, So far the corrupton in our judical systum is loud and clear to every one.. When is one judge going to stand up and defend the constitution?

  4. avatar
    Bovril April 18, 2010 at 12:59 am #

    Donnie dear,

    Orly and the rest of the birfer crew have raised almost 70 lawsuits…..ALL of which have been tossed out of court….ergo…throwing lawsuits around.

    As for your view on the judicial system…..can be summed up as

    WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH, I WANT MY LOLLYPOP NOW !!!!!!!

  5. avatar
    G April 18, 2010 at 1:34 am #

    Every single judge so far has stood up and defended the constitution by applying the law properly and tossing out these frivolous and faulty birther cases.

    Furthermore, Orly has been throwing the “RICO” threat around quite a bit over the last several months, trying to pursue such actions for a variety of silly and improper reasons.

    It is pretty obvious to most people that Orly doesn’t seem to understand the law or how to apply it very well.

    If you are so delusional to actually believe these birther lawyers or that their cases are going to go anywhere…

    …then keep dreaming, but you’d better get used to continued disappointment.

  6. avatar
    BatGuano April 18, 2010 at 1:45 am #

    When is one judge going to stand up and defend the constitution?

    if orly sues the l.a. times i predict a judge will stand up for the first amendment of the constitution .

  7. avatar
    Lupin April 18, 2010 at 4:11 am #

    That woman should be disbarred yesterday.

  8. avatar
    SluggoJD April 18, 2010 at 4:25 am #

    LOLOL

    Well perhaps we can all counter sue!

  9. avatar
    Saint James April 18, 2010 at 2:09 pm #

    Don Sanders,”So far the corrupton in our judical systum is loud and clear to every one”?

    Please quantify “everyone”? YOU CAN’T SPEAK FOR EVERYONE! You and Orly Taitz DO NOT represent the MAJORITY of the great AMERICAN PATRIOTIC PEOPLE!

    It’s apparent that you’ve not even read how those judges concluded why Orly’s frivolous lawsuits lost.

    I’d advice you to try the judicial system of the Talibans. Try the judicial systems of China, Myanmar, North Korea, Iran and some Islamic countries. I’d bet that you’ll cry foul and unfair!

  10. avatar
    YellowDog April 18, 2010 at 3:39 pm #

    Was Orly’s internet connection down when her constitutional law class covered the 1st amendment? Election fraud? RICO? She doesn’t even a case for libel. Someone needs to intervene, now, and flush the peroxide down the toilet.

  11. avatar
    BatGuano April 18, 2010 at 3:52 pm #

    She doesn’t even have a case for libel.

    orly’s law:

    reporting = RICO violation
    critical editorial = hate crime
    minor auto repair = assassination attempt

  12. avatar
    G April 18, 2010 at 4:20 pm #

    Very succinct and true synopsis of Orly paints the world through her paranoia! Good job BatGuano!

  13. avatar
    Keith April 19, 2010 at 12:01 am #

    In Australia, a few years ago, we had a rather xenophobic politician record a video of herself that started with the words “Fellow Australians, if you are seeing me now, it means I have been murdered. Do not let my passing distract you for even a moment…” (Google Pauline Hanson Death Video).

    Rather embarrassing for her when her ex-campaign manager/ex-lover/cum political rival ‘arranged’ for it to be leaked around about the time she was on trial for electoral fraud (The actual circumstance of the leak is unclear, but he is the most likely suspect). (Look out you Brits, she lives in the UK now – you’re).

    It wouldn’t surprise me to find that Orly has one of those up her duff someplace too.

  14. avatar
    US Citizen April 19, 2010 at 7:23 am #

    Once our Lady Liberty is disbarred, I imagine she will attempt to sue the bar association for not disbarring her earlier and allowing her to continue bringing on vexatious lawsuits which resulted in her $20K fine.
    That or her law school for not preparing her well enough for the real world of law.

  15. avatar
    Paul Pieniezny April 19, 2010 at 8:35 am #

    Holywood. “I did not have sex with that woman” Oldfield. (http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/i-was-not-hansons-lover-says-oldfield/2007/03/18/1174152885240.html)

    Of course, Hanson was basically stopped by Abbott and Costello.

    Perhaps we need another double act to stop Taitz? A law firm called Laurel and Hardy? Fry and Laury? Smith and Jones?

  16. avatar
    aarrgghh April 19, 2010 at 9:30 am #

    us citizen, forgetting who we’re dealing with:

    “Once our Lady Liberty is disbarred, I imagine she will attempt to sue the bar association for not disbarring her earlier …”

    forget the bar — if orly’s license is yanked, it’s the usurper who’ll pay: houston, we haz standing!!!

  17. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy April 19, 2010 at 6:40 pm #

    aarrgghh: if orly’s license is yanked, it’s the usurper who’ll pay: houston, we haz standing!!!

    Joking aside, while she will have a particular harm befall her, she will not be able to show a direct link between Obama’s actions and her harm. Therefore, no standing.

  18. avatar
    Scott Brown April 19, 2010 at 8:33 pm #

    you hope

  19. avatar
    G April 19, 2010 at 8:44 pm #

    Hey “Scott Brown”, still waiting to hear what state you were born in…

  20. avatar
    nbC April 19, 2010 at 8:46 pm #

    It’s a clear issue of logic and reason. So far Orly is lightyears away from such a claim which is concrete and particularized, not general, furthermore it needs to be actual or imminent not conjectural and speculative.

    Worse is the redressability requirement… The Courts can really do little here.

    There are three requirements for Article III standing: (1) injury in fact, which means an invasion of a legally protected interest that is (a) concrete and particularized, and (b) actual or imminent, not conjectural or hypothetical; (2) a causal relationship between the injury and the challenged conduct, which means that the injury fairly can be traced to the challenged action of the defendant, and has not resulted from the independent action of some third party not before the court; and (3) a likelihood that the injury will be redressed by a favorable decision, which means that the prospect of obtaining relief from the injury as a result of a favorable ruling is not too speculative. Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 112 S. Ct. 2130, 2136 (1992) (Lujan). The party invoking federal jurisdiction bears the burden of establishing each of these elements. Id.

    Keep hoping Scott… Perhaps a little prayer…

  21. avatar
    aarrgghh April 19, 2010 at 9:38 pm #

    scott brown, reduced to a chufho-squeak:

    “you hope”

    it’s pretty clear that birfers have no inclination whatsoever to figure out or admit what legal standing means. it’s simply not in their interest. otherwise, game over — they’d have to pack up their toys and go home. better to treat it like some kind of black magic. at least that helps keep the donations coming.

  22. avatar
    racosta April 19, 2010 at 9:42 pm #

    after catching scott in his lies, figured scott would be too ashamed to come back.

  23. avatar
    Black Lion April 19, 2010 at 9:49 pm #

    I somehow think we will be waiting a long time to get that information…

  24. avatar
    G April 19, 2010 at 10:22 pm #

    You should all check out Patrick’s latest post on his badfiction blog, where he posts an image of the full page color ad that Orly just took out, where she not only spews her usual crazy, but also outright lies about the status of her court cases:

    http://badfiction.typepad.com/badfiction/2010/04/dispatches-from-birtherstan-for-1719-april-2010.html#more

  25. avatar
    MsDaisy April 19, 2010 at 10:29 pm #

    She may not be able to link it to Obama, but she’ll damn well try anyway!

  26. avatar
    J. Edward Tremlett April 20, 2010 at 12:33 am #

    Quick! To the Tardis!

  27. avatar
    J. Edward Tremlett April 20, 2010 at 12:35 am #

    also waiting to hear if he’s “Scott” or “Samantha.”

  28. avatar
    Lupin April 20, 2010 at 2:09 am #

    Wow. That’s a lot of crazy in a single page.

  29. avatar
    misha April 20, 2010 at 3:56 am #

    You have to realize it was printed in The Washington Times, which is actually expensive kitty litter.

    I lined Max’s litter box with pages cut from that newspaper. Max walked up to my desk and said, “I can’t use my litter box. It’s full.”

  30. avatar
    Lupin April 20, 2010 at 4:38 am #

    Yes, I think I’d be afraid of wrapping fish into that, for fear it might pollute them.

  31. avatar
    BatGuano April 20, 2010 at 7:23 am #

    You should all check out Patrick’s latest post on his badfiction blog, where he posts an image of the full page color ad that Orly just took out, where she not only spews her usual crazy, but also outright lies about the status of her court cases:http://badfiction.typepad.com/badfiction/2010/04/dispatches-from-birtherstan-for-1719-april-2010.html#more

    the bottom photo looks like it was pulled from the OCweekly. did orly pay for the usage rights ?

  32. avatar
    Rickey April 20, 2010 at 10:45 am #

    I wonder if Orly has been reporting her PayPal donations to the IRS.

  33. avatar
    BatGuano April 20, 2010 at 3:46 pm #

    I wonder if Orly has been reporting her PayPal donations to the IRS.

    is she a ” non-profit ” or…. ???

  34. avatar
    G April 20, 2010 at 4:26 pm #

    Now that she is a candidate for public office, won’t her tax returns and full sources of income become subject to public scrutiny?

  35. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy April 20, 2010 at 8:37 pm #

    I didn’t think so.

  36. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy April 20, 2010 at 8:42 pm #

    She is non-profit, but not a charity and not tax-deductible.

  37. avatar
    BatGuano April 20, 2010 at 9:26 pm #

    She is non-profit, but not a charity and not tax-deductible.

    oof. i made a big boo-boo on my return.

  38. avatar
    Rickey April 20, 2010 at 11:48 pm #

    Yes, I doubt that anyone is going to be clamoring for the release of tax returns of fringe candidates for California Secretary of State. However, all of the publicity which Orly gets could catch the attention of the IRS, which may want to look into her record keeping. Since she has demonstrated ignorance and incompetence in so many areas of the law, it wouldn’t surprise me if her non-profit is not following the rules.

  39. avatar
    Black Lion April 22, 2010 at 4:42 pm #

    Interesting comment from the Post and Fail…Funny stuff….Anytime you need a good laugh, read the comments over at that site….Especially the ones from the same delusional cast of characters…

    Leo Patrick Haffey says:
    Thursday, April 22, 2010 at 1:03 PM
    When a proper case with Standing is brought before the Supreme Court, they will hear it. Justice Scalia told Orly that in March of 2010. His exact words were, “Bring your case…I will hear it.” I wrote a Brief for Orly and a Motion for the case to be brought directly to the Supreme Court, but she never filed it. Instead she went off on the Easterling diversion.

    I am an lawyer licensed in Tennessee who took an interest in Constitutional Law after seeing BHO steal the primary elections from the Democrat Party in 2008. I heard Former President Bill Clinton say that the qualifications for the Presidency are contained in the Constitution. I heard Chief Justice John Roberts say, “Read the Constitution. It’s not that hard to understand.”

    I read everything that Phil Berg, Leo Donofrio, Mario Apuzo, Dr. Sam Sewell, Larry Wells and Orly Taitz wrote on the ineligibility of BHO. I communicated with all of them. I wrote my first essay on the Constitution for Orly’s original Blog. For weeks, I spoke with and/or communicated with Orly almost every day. My daughter, Olivia, and I attended the National Religious Broadcasters Convention as her quests. I wrote legal briefs and motions for Orly.

    The Supreme Court did not drop the ball. The lawyers dropped the ball by not properly filing cases. The people dropped the ball by not exercising their rights to form Citizen Grand Juries.

    Form your Grand Juries, render your Indictments. Be prepared to serve your Indictments early in May. We will be serving our Indictments of Criminally Corrupt government officials in Tennessee in May. There will be Hundreds, if not Thousands of cameras recording these events.

    But as my Mom always told me, “Don’t talk about it. DO IT!”

    http://grandjury.blogtownhall.com

    http://www.constitution.org/duepr/standing/winter_standing.htm

  40. avatar
    thisoldhippie April 22, 2010 at 9:54 pm #

    David Tennant or Matt Smith? We’re almost out of doctors!

  41. avatar
    G April 23, 2010 at 1:37 am #

    Christopher Eccleston. 😉

  42. avatar
    JoZeppy April 23, 2010 at 9:21 am #

    Go old school…Patrick Troughton

  43. avatar
    thisoldhippie April 23, 2010 at 9:36 am #

    Tom Baker was my first foray into the good Doctor in the ’70s. My daughter then became a fan with David Tennett once we got BBC America. Now she and her little sister are watching Matt Smith. But we’ve never watched it “from behind the sofa.”

  44. avatar
    Rickey April 23, 2010 at 5:08 pm #

    I apologize if this has been posted here before, but it is hilarious.

    http://ohforgoodnesssake.com/?p=9532

  45. avatar
    Rickey April 27, 2010 at 12:15 pm #

    Orly is now comparing herself to Susan B. Anthony, Golda Meir and Margaret Thatcher.

    She also compares Ronald Reagan to Sancho Panza.

    She is the gift that keeps on giving.

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/30565037/TAITZ-v-OBAMA-QW-24-First-MOTION-for-Reconsideration-gov-uscourts-dcd-140567-24-0