Main Menu

Orly goes SHOPPING

I’m not talking about after-Christmas sales. I’m talking about shopping for judges.

Taitz and a group of birther legislators in New Hampshire brought a motion before the New Hampshire Supreme Court, seeking to prevent President Obama from appearing on the ballot. They alleged that the President is not eligible because he has too many social-security numbers or something. The New Hampshire Elections commission, who saw nothing resembling evidence in the rambling presentation of Taitz and 5 NH legislators, previously approved Obama for the ballot after verifying that the proper forms had been filed by the President’s campaign. Taitz asked the NH Supreme Court to intervene.

According to Taitz [link to Orly Taitz web site] the NH Supreme Court has declined to assume jurisdiction in the dispute. (As an attorney on another web site has observed, New Hampshire law RSA 665:9 states: “The decision of the ballot law commission shall be final as to questions of both law and fact, and no court shall have jurisdiction to review the decision.”) Next step, the US Supreme Court. Taitz said:

I will be filing with the Supreme Court of the United States  a petition for stay of counting of Obama’s votes pending decision on certiorari petition. As NH is in the first circuit, it will go to Justice Breyer. If he denies, I will refile with one of the conservative justices.

In further news, Orly seems not to know what a trial is. According to her description, the hearing scheduled for January 26 in Georgia on another ballot challenge is a “trial.” As usual, she is asking her supporters to show up.

, ,

31 Responses to Orly goes SHOPPING

  1. avatar
    richCares December 28, 2011 at 11:19 am #

    to her followers she appears to be commited, I say she should be commited.

  2. avatar
    Reality Check December 28, 2011 at 11:44 am #

    Orly should know by now that the procedure for emergency motions:

    First the assigned justice denies the motion. When the petitioner submits the request to the second justice he or she always refers it to the full conference. It doesn’t matter who she chooses after Breyer. This is exactly what happened in her motion for stay in Lightfoot v Bowen:

    ~~~Date~~~ ~~~~~~~Proceedings and Orders~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Dec 12 2008 Application (08A524) for a stay pending the filing and disposition of a petition for a writ of certiorari, submitted to Justice Kennedy.
    Dec 17 2008 Application (08A524) denied by Justice Kennedy.
    Dec 29 2008 Application (08A524) refiled and submitted to The Chief Justice.
    Jan 7 2009 DISTRIBUTED for Conference of January 23, 2009.
    Jan 7 2009 Application (08A524) referred to the Court.
    Jan 13 2009 Suggestion for recusal received from applicant.
    Jan 22 2009 Supplemental brief of applicant Gail Lightfoot, et al. filed. (Distributed)
    Jan 26 2009 Application (08A524) denied by the Court.

    It happened again in Rhodes v MacDonald:

    ~~~Date~~~ ~~~~~~~Proceedings and Orders~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Jul 8 2010 Application (10A56) for a stay, submitted to Justice Thomas.
    Jul 15 2010 Application (10A56) denied by Justice Thomas.
    Aug 4 2010 Application (10A56) refiled and submitted to Justice Alito.
    Aug 10 2010 Application (10A56) referred to the Court.
    Aug 16 2010 Application (10A56) denied by the Court.

    History will repeat itself.

  3. avatar
    Norbrook December 28, 2011 at 11:48 am #

    I assume the NH Supreme Court declined it because, well, they don’t have jurisdiction on it, according to NH state law. Orly keeps running into judges that not only have law degrees, they know the law. I’m sure somewhere in this country she can find one who doesn’t, but she’s going to have a long, hard slog.

    I expect her to fail miserably in her “appeal” to any of the Supreme Court justices. The only question is how fast she fails, not if.

  4. avatar
    Reality Check December 28, 2011 at 1:04 pm #

    We can even hazard a good guess on that. In both previous cases it was about 5 to 6 weeks from initial docketing to final denial. If one assumes she submits it by the end of next week it should be toast around the time of the conference on February 17.

    Norbrook: I expect her to fail miserably in her “appeal” to any of the Supreme Court justices. The only question is how fast she fails, not if.

  5. avatar
    jayhg December 28, 2011 at 2:50 pm #

    Why won’t someone who loves Orly Taint help her/talk to her and try to get through to her that she needs mental help? I’m serious. If I were her husband/sister-brother/friend, there is no way I’d just stand by and let her humiliate herself and her family like she has done….or maybe they all agree with her, but have no nterest in joining her “crusade.”

    I can’t believe that her entire family/friends agree with Orly in light of how things have gone for her so far, and how she is universally thought to be a loon. I say universally because I’m not counting other loons who thinks she’s the cat’s meow. Outside of those loons, she’s thought to be a nut……….universally.

  6. avatar
    Majority Will December 28, 2011 at 3:36 pm #

    jayhg:
    Why won’t someone who loves Orly Taint help her/talk to her and try to get through to her that she needs mental help?I’m serious.If I were her husband/sister-brother/friend, there isno way I’d just stand by and let her humiliate herself and her family like she has done….or maybe they all agree with her, but have no nterest in joining her “crusade.”

    I can’t believe that her entire family/friends agree with Orly in light of how things have gone for her so far, and how she is universally thought to be a loon.I say universally because I’m not counting other loons who thinks she’s the cat’s meow.Outside of those loons, she’s thought to be a nut……….universally.

    Her youngest son is allegedly attending an Ivy League law school. So, she might get help but not entirely the kind you have in mind.

  7. avatar
    G December 28, 2011 at 4:25 pm #

    I’ll just quote another well known poster, who pointed out the following at NBC’s site:

    GeorgetownJD says :December 28, 2011 at 19:56
    Unlike Orly, the justices on the New Hampshire Supreme Court have no difficulty construing RSA 665:9, which rather unambiguously states:

    “The decision of the ballot law commission shall be final as to questions of both law and fact, and no court shall have jurisdiction to review the decision.”

    Not that such things ever stop Orly, but any sane person could see that any appeal to other courts to overturn this decision was DOA. But flogging dead horses is what Birthers do best…over and over and over again…

  8. avatar
    Thrifty December 28, 2011 at 7:05 pm #

    jayhg: Why won’t someone who loves Orly Taint help her/talk to her and try to get through to her that she needs mental help? I’m serious. If I were her husband/sister-brother/friend, there is no way I’d just stand by and let her humiliate herself and her family like she has done….or maybe they all agree with her, but have no nterest in joining her “crusade.”

    Well maybe some people are, but when someone is really committed to a failed cause, it’s gonna be tough to talk them out of it.

  9. avatar
    John Reilly December 28, 2011 at 11:47 pm #

    If I understood Dr. Taitz’s motion, she was seeking an order from the Ballot Commission to remove President Obama’s name. Her motion (or whatever it was called) was denied. The Supreme Court of New Hampshire has declined to hear the case. So Dr. Taitz is going to seek a stay from the Supreme Court while she seeks cert. The lawyers here can tell me if I have got that right.

    What is she going to stay? The decision of the NH Supreme Court to do nothing? Does she want SCOTUS to tell the NH Supreme Court to do nothing longer? What am I missing?

  10. avatar
    G December 28, 2011 at 11:58 pm #

    LOL! I’m with you on this…

    …not that I expect her to make any real argument other than spewing the same irrelevant conpiracy dreck as always…

    …but if she actually *did* try for once to write a legitmate motion, I can’t fathom how she’d be able to argue it…for exactly the reasons you stated!

    John Reilly: What is she going to stay? The decision of the NH Supreme Court to do nothing? Does she want SCOTUS to tell the NH Supreme Court to do nothing longer? What am I missing?

  11. avatar
    Bob J December 29, 2011 at 1:00 am #

    I am not a betting man,

    but anyone have a guess as to what state will sanction the good Dr. Esq? I will go with Georgia.

    Another prediction: she will lose the senate primary and find a frivolous lawsuit target amongst the candidates who beat her.

    Sheriff Joe will admit that the birther thing is nonsense, and the only reason he did the cold case thing was to get a distraction from the impending DOJ complaints/ investigations into his departments, seemingly, unsavory actions.

    Daryn Moran and Darren Huff will join forces and make a movie with the proceeds going to the Walter Fitzpatrick Defense Fund.

    Jerome Corsi will go on a book signing tour with the guy who fudged his Oprah Book Club autobiography. The title will be ” The Truth We Wanted”

  12. avatar
    G December 29, 2011 at 2:45 am #

    Personally, I’m hoping for a two-fer of harsh sanctions from both HI and GA for her…

    Bob J: but anyone have a guess as to what state will sanction the good Dr. Esq? I will go with Georgia.

  13. avatar
    Reality Check December 29, 2011 at 8:30 am #

    I think Hawaii is the best bet for sanctions. The deputy AG has already stated her intentions to seek them once the dead Taitz v Fuddy case is declared not only dead but most assuredly dead.

    Another threat to Orly is the alienation she is fomenting in the rest of Birthistan. That is probably worthy of another topic, however.

  14. avatar
    john December 29, 2011 at 9:33 am #

    This is what Orly needs to do. Amend her motion in Hawaii claiming new evidence. Orly can claim that she now has a client to act on her behalf who has a direct and tangible interest in the record because he and Obama share a common ancestor. This can be her plaintiff from the Carter case. Orly can claim it is new evidence because her client has now completed requistion of the required vital records which will show her plaintiff is an 8th cousin to Obama – That is a common ancestor to Obama which will satisfy provision #5 of HRS 338-18.

    ATTENTION!!! Obama’s birth records can be obtained! Under Provision # 5 of HRS 338-18 anyone who has common ancestor to Obama is legally entitled to Obama’s birth records. HRS § 338-18(b)(5) “a person having a common ancestor with the registrant.” However, Hawaii DOH has limited common ancestors to those shown by verifiable vital records. Again if you are a birther with a love for geneology and can prove your ancestory intersects with Obama with verifiable vital records even if it goes way way back, then you are legally entitled to Obama’s birth records in Hawaii.

    Orly apparently has a plaintiff from the Carter case who is an 8th cousin to Obama. Based on limited information, it appears this plaintiff does have the vital records to prove it. If this is true, then Orly’s plaintiff is entitled under Hawaii Law to inspect and receive all of Obama’s birth records. Based on a recent memo by the Hawaii DOH, Hawaii limited the “Common Ancestor” to those that can be verified by vital records. The Hawaii DOH make no other limitations so an 8th cousin to Obama can get his records if he has the vital records to prove it.

  15. avatar
    John Reilly December 29, 2011 at 9:42 am #

    I think we have learned that sanctions and referral to the bar ethics committee happens to Jack McCoy on Law and Order, but not in the real world. My guess is that judges face many pro per litigants with unusual ideas, and simply dispose of their cases without making them martyrs. That has certainly been Dr. Taitz’s path. Maybe Hawaii will assess her attorney’s fees for the State, but the Judge there seems to give every benefit of the doubt to Dr. Taitz, and then rules against her.

  16. avatar
    Sef December 29, 2011 at 10:45 am #

    john: The Hawaii DOH make no other limitations so an 8th cousin to Obama can get his records if he has the vital records to prove it.

    Once again, John is quite wrong. The limitation is to a common grandparent. So 1st cousin or closer.

  17. avatar
    nbc December 29, 2011 at 10:51 am #

    John ignores the fact that the DOH gets to determine what and who are common ancestors who have a tangible interest. An 8th cousin is not going to qualify.

    Fail

    Even Orly is not going to try this foolishness. Of course John has attempted to argue other ‘legal theories’ which even Orly has rejected. That should give you an idea about their quality.

    So whose side is John working on? Is he really an obot?..

    john:
    This is what Orly needs to do. Amend her motion in Hawaii claiming new evidence. Orly can claim that she now has a client to act on her behalf who has a direct and tangible interest in the record because he and Obama share a common ancestor. This can be her plaintiff from the Carter case. Orly can claim it is new evidence because her client has now completed requistion of the required vital records which will show her plaintiff is an 8th cousin to Obama – That is a common ancestor to Obama which will satisfy provision #5 of HRS 338-18.

  18. avatar
    nbc December 29, 2011 at 10:55 am #

    UIPA Informal Decision – Memo 11-7

    Requester asked whether the Office of Health Statistics, Department of Health (DOH), properly denied Requester’s request for a certified copy of the Certificate of Live Birth for Barack Hussein Obama II (Obama Birth Certificate) under part II of the UIPA.

    Requester asked for a copy of the Obama birth certificate citing the provision of Hawaii’s vital statistics law that makes vital records confidential, but permits copies to be provided where DOH is satisfied that the requester has a direct and tangible interest in the record, such as a “a person having a common ancestor with the registrant.” HRS § 338-18(b)(5). The Requester claimed a common ancestor of either Noah or Adam from Biblical reference or the most recent common ancestor (MRCA) from scientific theory. DOH denied access, applying HRS § 338-18(b)(5) to limit common ancestors to those shown by verifiable vital records, and rejecting a construction that included all of humankind.

    OIP found that DOH’s withholding was proper under HRS § 338-18(b)(5) and HRS § 92F-13(4). HRS § 1-15(3) (under Hawaii law, every construction of the law “which leads to an absurdity shall be rejected.”).

  19. avatar
    Lupin December 29, 2011 at 11:13 am #

    I bet Orly makes a lot more money at this milking her idiot supporters than any of us here suspect.

  20. avatar
    bob December 29, 2011 at 12:12 pm #

    john also “overlooks” that Taitz is not licensed in Hawaii, and can only file lawsuits there in her own name, and not for some alleged 8th cousin.

  21. avatar
    G December 29, 2011 at 1:03 pm #

    Poor John. Always living off the fumes of destined to fail OMG moments…

    Sorry, but the common ancestor only applies to CLOSE relatives and doesn’t meet the standard of having “direct and tangible interest”. No distant cousin counts. Fail again.

    john: This is what Orly needs to do. Amend her motion in Hawaii claiming new evidence. Orly can claim that she now has a client to act on her behalf who has a direct and tangible interest in the record because he and Obama share a common ancestor. This can be her plaintiff from the Carter case. Orly can claim it is new evidence because her client has now completed requistion of the required vital records which will show her plaintiff is an 8th cousin to Obama – That is a common ancestor to Obama which will satisfy provision #5 of HRS 338-18.ATTENTION!!! Obama’s birth records can be obtained! Under Provision # 5 of HRS 338-18 anyone who has common ancestor to Obama is legally entitled to Obama’s birth records. HRS § 338-18(b)(5) “a person having a common ancestor with the registrant.” However, Hawaii DOH has limited common ancestors to those shown by verifiable vital records. Again if you are a birther with a love for geneology and can prove your ancestory intersects with Obama with verifiable vital records even if it goes way way back, then you are legally entitled to Obama’s birth records in Hawaii.Orly apparently has a plaintiff from the Carter case who is an 8th cousin to Obama. Based on limited information, it appears this plaintiff does have the vital records to prove it. If this is true, then Orly’s plaintiff is entitled under Hawaii Law to inspect and receive all of Obama’s birth records. Based on a recent memo by the Hawaii DOH, Hawaii limited the “Common Ancestor” to those that can be verified by vital records. The Hawaii DOH make no other limitations so an 8th cousin to Obama can get his records if he has the vital records to prove it.

  22. avatar
    G December 29, 2011 at 1:05 pm #

    Another good point. With Orly, there are so many terminal failures in her methods and thought processes that it is hard to keep track of all of them…

    bob: john also “overlooks” that Taitz is not licensed in Hawaii, and can only file lawsuits there in her own name, and not for some alleged 8th cousin.

  23. avatar
    bovril December 29, 2011 at 1:46 pm #

    Not to mention of course that the ONLY document this “common ancestor” would get would be……drum roll maestro…….The IDENTICAL birth certificate as released in 2008……………Birfoon FAIL is FAIL

  24. avatar
    GeorgetownJD December 29, 2011 at 9:38 pm #

    john:
    This is what Orly needs to do. Amend her motion in Hawaii claiming new evidence. Orly can claim that she now has a client …

    You can stop right there, john. Orly is not authorized to represent clients in the courts of Hawaii. Not even in viable cases, and most assuredly not in dismissed cases.

  25. avatar
    Bob J December 29, 2011 at 11:34 pm #

    john,

    even Orly rejects your attempts at advice. What is your angle?

  26. avatar
    G December 30, 2011 at 5:11 am #

    Blind cult worship stupidity.

    Bob J: john,even Orly rejects your attempts at advice. What is your angle?

  27. avatar
    The Magic M December 30, 2011 at 5:54 am #

    nbc: Even Orly is not going to try this foolishness.

    You never know. When I made a comment referring to the “Adam and Eve” theory on her website, Orly replied something to the effect of “there’s always six degrees of separation”. So I wouldn’t put it past her to try that, at least if she realizes any other path will not succeed.

  28. avatar
    The Magic M December 30, 2011 at 6:00 am #

    John Reilly: What is she going to stay? The decision of the NH Supreme Court to do nothing? Does she want SCOTUS to tell the NH Supreme Court to do nothing longer? What am I missing?

    I suppose Orly means to stay the decision of the ballot commission to put Obama’s name on the ballot. But apparently she was, again, unable to properly formulate that into a case.

  29. avatar
    Northland10 December 30, 2011 at 8:35 am #

    The Magic M: You never know. When I made a comment referring to the “Adam and Eve” theory on her website, Orly replied something to the effect of “there’s always six degrees of separation”.

    To get to an 8th cousin, I think you have to go back 9 generations. If I figured it correctly, that would be somewhere around 200 years. The amount of people that would encompass would be quite large, especially with the larger families of old. Would 9 generations be closer to 14 degrees of separation?

  30. avatar
    The Magic M December 30, 2011 at 10:08 am #

    Northland10: Would 9 generations be closer to 14 degrees of separation?

    Likely, since “six degrees” refers to living people and only to “have a connection” and not “are related”.

    Still the idea shows that the respective Hawaiian law is, IMO, worded too broadly. If they really meant to restrict access to close relatives, they should’ve written that in the law. No wonder it’s always laws like this that invite the abusers and word-twisters.

    (In a remotely related story: two years ago a large retailer ran a campaign saying “shop with us and save the VAT” by which they meant “we slashed prices by 19%”. Some people argued that you always pay VAT no matter how low the price, so they should be entitled to get the stuff for free since that’s the only way to not pay VAT. This was fueled by some people claiming they actually got their money back when they reasoned that way with the retailer. Of course this was poppycock from legal laymen, but it shows how willing people are to twist words into their opposite as long as they see some personal gain.)

  31. avatar
    Bob J January 2, 2012 at 10:09 am #

    More nuggets from Orly’s site. I love how anyone who disagrees with her, or doesn’t think the sun shines out her {BLEEP}, is an Obot. She had a mental illness: Narcissistic Personality Disorder:

    Obama Nemesis
    January 2nd, 2012 @ 3:05 am

    Orly I think you should allow all comments as long as they don’t violate the law. You have blocked my comments too and I am not an Obot. Let’s live up to the name “Defend Our Freedoms” Foundation. You are behaving just like them.

    2.orly taitz
    January 2nd, 2012 @ 3:40 am

    this is not a blog for regime propaganda, I am trying to even the playing field. You have all of the corrupt main stream media, corrupt government and corrupt judges, I have just one blog and my law license to fight this corruption as much as I can and my knowledge of 5 languages to bring this fight to the international arena and international courts for human rights. As it is, it’s a David and Goliath battle. David at least needs his sling shot. Allowing an army of obots like you will break the sling shot, as I will spend all my time fighting the obots and will have no time, no emotional resources to fight our dear El Presidente, our Thief in Chief.