Main Menu

MS: Judge offers tentative hearing dates in ballot challenge

Orly Taitz has received a communication from Judge R. Kenneth Coleman in Mississippi that he has given tentative dates for hearing motions in the case of Taitz v Democrat Party et al.

The dates are March 28th and 29th, 2012, April 2nd through 24th, 2012, subject to the availability of a court reporter and courtroom.

Orly is asking her supporters for air fare.

In a related story, Orly’s paperwork (motions and fees) finally arrived in Jackson after a marathon 10-day Priority Mail® transit. She’s starting an investigation of why it took so long. In a further related story, I received a Priority Mail® package today that took 3 days from Pennsylvania and now I am doing the happy dance with my new (used) shortwave  radio.

, ,

24 Responses to MS: Judge offers tentative hearing dates in ballot challenge

  1. avatar
    john March 15, 2012 at 9:19 pm #

    If Orly can actually get to the merits of her complaint, she finally add Sheriff Joe’s Investigative report into the record.

  2. avatar
    Sef March 15, 2012 at 9:45 pm #

    john:
    If Orly can actually get to the merits of her complaint, she finally add Sheriff Joe’s Investigative report into the record.

    And you actually think that Sheriff Joe is going to sign his name to something for which he can be accused of perjury? Ha! Ha! Ha!

  3. avatar
    Arthur March 15, 2012 at 9:58 pm #

    john: If Orly can actually get to the merits of her complaint, she finally add Sheriff Joe’s Investigative report into the record.

    Correct me if I’m wrong, John, but wasn’t most of what was presented at Sheriff Joe’s media event already public? Fpr example, when Orly gave her massive file to Judge Malihi, didn’t it include all that junk about the “forged” pdf?

  4. avatar
    Jim March 15, 2012 at 10:01 pm #

    john:
    If Orly can actually get to the merits of her complaint, she finally add Sheriff Joe’s Investigative report into the record.

    Oh please, YES!!! Another Judge calling her so-called evidence “crap” would be priceless!!! And now, she can call the good Sheriff and Zullo to the stand to testify about their findings!!! The only thing that would make it more fun is if they would let Doc do the cross-examination!!! Where’s the popcorn?

  5. avatar
    Thinker March 15, 2012 at 10:33 pm #

    In Orlylaw, if the person who downloaded something from the internet signs an affidavit saying that she personally downloaded it, then the content of the downloaded material is deemed to be true and correct. It’s called orthentication.

    Sef: And you actually think that Sheriff Joe is going to sign his name to something for which he can be accused of perjury? Ha! Ha! Ha!

  6. avatar
    J. Potter March 15, 2012 at 10:37 pm #

    john:
    If Orly can actually get to the merits of her complaint, she finally add Sheriff Joe’s Investigative report into the record.

    John, before you get all excited about the prospect of Arpaio being sworn in to taitztify down on the might Mississip’, recall the Law of Zullo:

    “You don’t want to go there.”

  7. avatar
    richCares March 15, 2012 at 10:47 pm #

    “…add Sheriff Joe’s Investigative report into the record.”
    silly goose, the second Obama’s certified BC is introduced, Sheriff Joes silly report goes to the garbage (full faith and credit clause)

  8. avatar
    Northland10 March 15, 2012 at 11:09 pm #

    J. Potter: sworn in to taitztify

    Brilliant!!!

  9. avatar
    Northland10 March 15, 2012 at 11:10 pm #

    john: If Orly can actually get to the merits of her complaint, she finally add Sheriff Joe’s Investigative report into the record.

    Is John really just doing a birther version of Stephen Colbert?

  10. avatar
    ASK Esq March 15, 2012 at 11:52 pm #

    In addition to a court reporter and courtroom, they need to make sure they have availability of seltzer bottles, cream pies, high wires, trapeezes (trapeezii? trapeezium?), fire eaters and guys selling popcorn.

  11. avatar
    John Reilly March 16, 2012 at 1:09 am #

    I read Dr. Taitz’ comment. I believe Judge Coleman offered a choice of dates from which counsel could confer and pick one. While Dr. Taitz thinks this is the time to dump more stuff in the record, it seems to me that Judge Coleman is interested in determining the motion to dismiss. I do not think he intends to have witnesses or evidence.

  12. avatar
    The Magic M March 16, 2012 at 5:08 am #

    ASK Esq: In addition to a court reporter and courtroom, they need to make sure they have availability of seltzer bottles, cream pies, high wires, trapeezes (trapeezii? trapeezium?), fire eaters and guys selling popcorn.

    Not to mention enough tin foil, a couple of dictionaries from 1945 and a provisional number of marching frogs.

  13. avatar
    The Magic M March 16, 2012 at 5:11 am #

    Jim: And now, she can call the good Sheriff and Zullo to the stand to testify about their findings!

    That would be priceless. Can we offer her some assistance so she gets the whole “subpoena and proper service” thingy right this time? I wouldn’t want her to screw *that* one up. 🙂

    Didn’t I always say, though mostly on birfer sites, that Orly is the best thing that ever happened to Obama (with regard to birthers)? 😉

  14. avatar
    Scientist March 16, 2012 at 6:43 am #

    I’m confused. Didn’t the Mississippi primary already happen this week? How can you remove someone from the ballot of an election that already happened? On the other hand, if this concerns the general election, then the case is premature, since neither Obama nor his opponent have been nominated yet and will not be for several months.

  15. avatar
    The Magic M March 16, 2012 at 7:32 am #

    Scientist: Didn’t the Mississippi primary already happen this week? How can you remove someone from the ballot of an election that already happened?

    I think that’s why Orly is screeching her priority mail was deliberately delayed.

  16. avatar
    Scientist March 16, 2012 at 7:53 am #

    The Magic M: I think that’s why Orly is screeching her priority mail was deliberately delayed.

    Well, first, the primary date was known months ago, and second, she never heard of Fed Ex? Regardless, the primary is over and there is nothing the court can do.

  17. avatar
    Northland10 March 16, 2012 at 7:55 am #

    There you go again. Thinking about things in terms of real law and now OrlyLaw How silly of you. In OrlyLaw, an elections should be challenged years after it is over. For reference, see Taitz v. Dunn, still active in the California 4th Appellate.

    Scientist: I’m confused. Didn’t the Mississippi primary already happen this week? How can you remove someone from the ballot of an election that already happened?

  18. avatar
    RuhRoh March 16, 2012 at 8:32 am #

    Scientist: I’m confused. Didn’t the Mississippi primary already happen this week? How can you remove someone from the ballot of an election that already happened? On the other hand, if this concerns the general election, then the case is premature, since neither Obama nor his opponent have been nominated yet and will not be for several months.

    Some of the Birther Attorneys have tried to stop SOSs from certifying election results, but I don’t believe that Orly has hopped on that train yet.

  19. avatar
    J. Potter March 16, 2012 at 8:36 am #

    Scientist: Didn’t the Mississippi primary already happen this week?

    Space-time continuum be damned! Birfers gotta birf! Veritas revelare!

    This isn’t the first venue in which an ex post facto birf has been attempted. A little post electionem pariemus effect. Clearly, Genuitores are working on a higher plane than the rest of us mere mortals.

    Or perhaps this is an attempt to prevent certification of the primary results.

    Or, more likely, as in all things, los birthers know not what they do.

  20. avatar
    Scientist March 16, 2012 at 8:40 am #

    RuhRoh: Some of the Birther Attorneys have tried to stop SOSs from certifying election results, but I don’t believe that Orly has hopped on that train yet.

    I’m not sure that certification has any weight for a primary. The Democratic Party is not bound by a certification issued by a Republican SoS. In fact, all of these ballot challenges are legal nullities (as are the lawyers involved).

  21. avatar
    thisoldhippie March 16, 2012 at 9:28 am #

    Someone on her site mentioned FedEx and she immediately said they don’t track to PO Boxes. In truth they don’t deliver to PO Boxes, but apparently she has never heard of FedExing to the clerk at the physical address of the court.

  22. avatar
    Thomas Brown March 16, 2012 at 9:36 am #

    Thank you Thinker and JPotter for adding “Taitztifying” and “Orthentication” to the growing list of Orly Traits.

  23. avatar
    The Magic M March 16, 2012 at 10:36 am #

    Thomas Brown:
    Thank you Thinker and JPotter for adding “Taitztifying” and “Orthentication” to the growing list of Orly Traits.

    We should compile a dictionary. I submit the following for entrance:

    malihide – v., intr.; to cover one’s head in shame after losing to an empty table

    nishimural – n.; the writing on the wall warning you that your amended complaint isn’t before the court

    van irion out – v., tr.; to remove all sensible parts from your legal briefs (“he van irioned out all references to Wong Kim Ark”)

    taitz – v., tr.; to hit with the fury of a Moldovan dentist (“don’t taitz me, bro!”)

    taintz – v., tr.; to destroy all hopes of a legal case to ever succeed (“all these cases are thoroughly taintzed”)

  24. avatar
    Reality Check March 16, 2012 at 12:25 pm #

    A couple of folks at The Fogbow pointed at this appears to be a form letter sent to all plaintiffs in all the cases before Judge Kenneth Coleman and there is no guarantee that a hearing will be held a a particular case. The operative wording is “Please confer and advise me upon dates agreeable for hearing these motions as soon as possible. It is my intention to hear motions in the county of their filing.”