You asked a question over at Orly Taitz’ blog—you said:
how does one find out what the case is all about on Nov 16th? I have searched this site with no result on this cases information. Very frustrated.
I can understand why you’re frustrated! I have a hard time finding things on the Orly Taitz blog too. She is not very well organized and she doesn’t take the trouble to link things up, place them in categories or tag them, and make reference pages. Here you can find all my articles about this case with one click. And I made a special index page for the documents in the case. This is because I care about my readers, and I’m willing to do extra work to give them the best possible information.
I tried to reply to you, but Dr. Taitz just keeps censoring most of my comments. So here is the answer I posted for you over there.
Basically the Taitz v. Democrat Party of Mississippi lawsuit has two parts:
The first part is an attempt to keep Barack Obama off the Mississippi ballot or to prevent any electoral votes for him to be certified in Mississippi. Defendants are the Mississippi “Democrat” Party and the Mississippi Secretary of State. Of course now the election is over, and Barack Obama didn’t get any electoral votes from Mississippi anyway.
The second part of the case is a civil RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) suit aimed at Barack Obama, Obama from America (the Obama campaign organization), Nancy Pelosi (Chairperson of the 2008 Democratic National Convention), Dr. Alvin Onaka (Hawaii head of vital records), Dr. Loretta Fuddy (Director of the Hawaii Department of Health) and Michael Astrue (Commissioner of the Social Security Administration). In this part of the case, Dr. Taitz alleges that these individuals conspired to engage in criminal acts which were against her commercial interests.
Other Plaintiffs in the case are Brian Fedorka, Laurie Roth, Leah Lax and Tom MacLeran.
On November 16, Judge Wingate will hear arguments from the parties on two Defense motions:
1. Motion for judgment on the pleadings. The Democratic defendants argue that enough has been provided in the briefs already filed by all parties for the Judge to decide to dismiss the case against them.
2. Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. The Hawaii defendants argue that a federal court in Mississippi does not have jurisdiction over Drs. Fuddy and Onaka because they don’t live or have any interests in Mississippi.
Note: to my knowledge, Mr. Astrue has not appeared in the case, nor have any of the Plaintiffs other than Dr. Taitz. Judge Wingate ordered that the other Plaintiffs appear personally at the Nov. 16 hearing, since Dr. Taitz is not their attorney and cannot represent them.
If you are an Orly Taitz fan, you probably don’t want to miss the hearing because it will be an excellent opportunity to see her in action. Opponents will want to be there too for entertainment. However, the outcome of the case is rather important because it points the way as to how her remaining cases will go.
To learn more, there are no less than 94 documents (!) in on Scribd from this case.
I hope that helps.
I should add that none of the Plaintiff’s except Taitz actually signed the first amended complaint, so I don’t know that they can really be called plaintiffs or not.