Main Menu

Helpful Maryland judge nurtures Taitz suit

Taitz v. Colvin is the subject of much excitement among the birthers. Taitz is attempting to obtain, through FOIA, the social security application for someone she thinks rightfully owns the social-security number that Barack Obama used on his tax returns in years past. Birthers think that proof is just over the horizon—SSA says it doesn’t have any such records.

Taitz was able to file the suit because the Social Security Administration did not respond to the FOIA request in the time allowed by statute. Eventually the government responded, saying they didn’t have any records matching one Taitz request, for Harrison (Harry) J. Bounel and a birth year of 1890, immigrant from Russia who received a Social Security number in the state of Connecticut in and around March 28, 1977. The judge dismissed the complaint because once the government responds to the FOIA request, the grounds for the lawsuit evaporate. However, helpful Federal District Judge Ellen Hollander told Taitz that should she allege that the search was inadequate, she might be allowed to continue, and the court said it would entertain an amended complaint. That amended complaint was filed. The government moved to dismiss again, or in the alternate for summary judgment. The motion to dismiss details the search performed:

SSA also conducted alternate searches [beyond the SSN] of the Numident using Mr. Bounel’s name (the following variations were searched: Harrison Bounel, Harrison J. Bounel, Harry Bounel, and Harry J. Bounel) and year of birth (i.e., 1890). Because Plaintiff did not provide a full date of birth, SSA performed a date range search for any Numident records with dates of birth between January 1, 1890 and January 1, 1894.

Our helpful judge, not assuming that Taitz knows that she has to respond to the motion to dismiss, has sent Taitz a letter (or rather the clerk of court did), explaining that Taitz must respond and the consequences if she doesn’t (having her complaint dismissed :shock: ) . There’s even an attached copy of the rules!

Taitz’ response is due Tuesday (18 Feb 2014). And please, no more than 50 pages, including attachments (the 2nd amended complaint was 181).

Print Friendly

51 Responses to Helpful Maryland judge nurtures Taitz suit

  1. avatar
    Nancy R Owens February 15, 2014 at 12:05 pm #

    Interesting.

    http://WWW.IFORGEDOBAMASBIRTHCERTIFICATES.COM

  2. avatar
    Arthur February 15, 2014 at 12:45 pm #

    [This comment has been removed for a violation of Editorial Policy item 15. Doc.]

  3. avatar
    RetiredLawyer February 15, 2014 at 1:43 pm #

    Sounds like standard procedure for all SSN suits in that court. While one could say that it is giving advice from the court, (generally prohibited) what it does do is get the case moving on to eventual dismissal with a minimum of fuss over procedure. Similar missives from a court are used in all sorts of cases, the letter and such are form letters generated by the clerk, not the judge.

  4. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy February 15, 2014 at 1:50 pm #

    I don’t doubt it. This tongue-in-cheek article is facetiously playing with Orly’s interpretation of the judge’s earlier order allowing the amended complaint.The primary purpose of this article is to refresh the context for Taitz’ presumed filing next week.

    RetiredLawyer: Sounds like standard procedure

  5. avatar
    The European February 15, 2014 at 2:26 pm #

    That letter is worthless. It is “Dr zahnwalt Orly Taitz Esq., Cand. AG Gen. CA” and not just “Dear Orly Taitz” !

  6. avatar
    Arthur February 15, 2014 at 2:54 pm #

    Arthur:
    [This comment has been removed for a violation of Editorial Policy item 15. Doc.]

    What’s to be done with a crazy Floridian who repeatedly attempts to draw attention to nutty assertions that she has participated in everything from murder to forged documents?

  7. avatar
    The European February 15, 2014 at 3:07 pm #

    Arthur, you found the right words. I dare to say – though – that Mrs. Owens and Mrs. Taitz as well would do themselves a favor by seeking professional – [Redacted. Doc] - help.

  8. avatar
    Nancy R Owens February 15, 2014 at 3:40 pm #

    [Comment deleted. Off topic for blog. Doc.]

  9. avatar
    Andrew Vrba, PmG February 15, 2014 at 4:04 pm #

    Hey Nancy, not that you had any credibility to begin with, but spamming a link that’s in all caps isn’t going to improve your chances any.

  10. avatar
    Nancy R Owens February 15, 2014 at 4:22 pm #

    Andrew Vrba, PmG:
    Hey Nancy, not that you had any credibility to begin with, but spamming a link that’s in all caps isn’t going to improve your chances any.

    I’ve given you the facts that the FBI, CIA, etc. won’t give you. Am I competing in a beauty contest here? *g*

  11. avatar
    Arthur February 15, 2014 at 4:30 pm #

    Nancy R Owens: Umm…..investigate?

    Since neither the rational agents of the FBI nor the nutty denizens of Birther Report take you seriously, why should I? I’m not in the habit of wasting my time on goofination.

    But what about hiring a private investigator? There are some wonderful PI’s who have been instrumental in pursuing birther claims, for example, Linda Jordan and Neil Sankey. Grease their palms and they’ll do what you ask.

  12. avatar
    Daniel February 15, 2014 at 4:30 pm #

    Nancy R Owens: I’ve given you the facts that the FBI, CIA, etc. won’t give you. Am I competing in a beauty contest here? *g*

    The law requires a plausible reason to investigate.

    Your delusions are not plausible reasons.

  13. avatar
    Nancy R Owens February 15, 2014 at 4:46 pm #

    [Comment deleted. Off topic for blog. Doc.]

  14. avatar
    Notorial Dissent February 15, 2014 at 4:48 pm #

    And they don’t care anymore than anyone else does, since they know you are a certified nut job and serial liar with absolutely no credibility and no grip on reality. You wouldn’t even come in last in a beauty contest, so no issue.

    Nancy R Owens: I’ve given you the facts that the FBI, CIA, etc. won’t give you. Am I competing in a beauty contest here? *g*

  15. avatar
    Daniel February 15, 2014 at 4:53 pm #

    Hey Doc, I usually find Nancy Nutbar’s ravings as amusing as the next guy, but can we please put a kibosh on the more graphic details of her feverish imaginings?

  16. avatar
    Nancy R Owens February 15, 2014 at 4:54 pm #

    Notorial Dissent:
    And they don’t care anymore than anyone else does, since they know you are a certified nut job and serial liar with absolutely no credibility and no grip on reality. You wouldn’t even come in last in a beauty contest, so no issue.

    And yet, so funny that I look just like an older version of the girl in the picture that “Obama” claims is his half-sister.

    SHhhh…….they always tell the public the truth and there is no conspiracy….shhhh!

    http://WWW.IFORGEDOBAMASBIRTHCERTIFICATES.COM

  17. avatar
    Arthur February 15, 2014 at 4:54 pm #

    And shall this malicious, grinning madness remain? I ask again, what’s to be done with this crazy Floridian? She’s not a birther, she’s an attention-seeking nut, whose posts are becoming more offensive by the hour.

    Nancy R Owens: Oh, but they did. Again, did you note the closing of the Tiffany Sessions case this past week? Poor ol’ “Daddy” Sessions apparently didn’t want to share the details of his daughter’s murder with you. Let me clue you in. He’s milked the public of 25 years worth of “Poor, poor, daddy” when he knew the truth which is that his daughter was a wanna-be assassin who just couldn’t quite survive one of Pablo’s own.

  18. avatar
    Nancy R Owens February 15, 2014 at 4:57 pm #

    Arthur:
    And shall this malicious, grinning madness remain? I ask again, what’s to be done with this crazy Floridian? She’s not a birther, she’s an attention-seeking nut, whose posts are becoming more offensive by the hour.

    Well,
    Man up and call the Alachua County Sheriff’s Department or America’s Most Wanted @ 1-800-CRIMETV.

    Shhh…..they always tell the public the truth and there is no conspiracy…..shhhh!

    http://WWW.IFORGEDOBAMASBIRTHCERTIFICATES.COM

  19. avatar
    Arthur February 15, 2014 at 5:08 pm #

    Nancy, you are not the worth dust that the rude wind blows in your face.

  20. avatar
    Nancy R Owens February 15, 2014 at 5:18 pm #

    Yeah, that usually shuts them up. Easier to believe the lie than it is to pursue the truth. Easier to turn on the boob tube where everything in life is perfect and comedic than to pick up a gun and fight. You don’t even have the nerve to pick up a phone to make a call. I know the Doc will. And, at the end of it all, you’ll ask yourselves, “How is it that we have lost our country to a foreign King?”

    http://WWW.IFORGEDOBAMASBIRTHCERTIFICATES.COM

  21. avatar
    HistorianDude February 15, 2014 at 5:45 pm #

    Nancy. Be honest.

    You’re a performance artist. Right?

  22. avatar
    Bonsall Obot February 15, 2014 at 5:47 pm #

    You’ll never get the part about the scalp and the orgy past the studio heads or the MPAA, but we’ll take a look at a re-write.

  23. avatar
    Nancy R Owens February 15, 2014 at 5:51 pm #

    Bonsall Obot:
    You’ll never get the part about the scalp and the orgy past the studio heads or the MPAA, but we’ll take a look at a re-write.

    Sad.

  24. avatar
    Benji Franklin February 15, 2014 at 6:24 pm #

    Nancy R Owens: I’ve given you the facts that the FBI, CIA, etc. won’t give you. Am I competing in a beauty contest here? *g*

    No, Nancy, you obviously have an inner beauty that blows away anyone whose murder you accept on contract.

    But getting back to Obama’s unfinished second term as President of the United States, do you by any chance have a degree in, or do you grant degrees in, Universe Shattering?

  25. avatar
    JPotter February 15, 2014 at 6:38 pm #

    Nancy R Owens: call the Alachua County Sheriff’s Department or America’s Most Wanted @ 1-800-CRIMETV.

    And report that loons incessantly post delusional rants on the internet? No crime there, unless the loon starts making threats, or starts supplementing their online ranting with offline actions.

    Really? “America’s Most Wanted” is your go-to with suspicions of criminal activity? Your loved ones need to limit your screen time.

    How is it that you can manage ‘Alachua’, but not ‘dilimma’?

  26. avatar
    Nancy R Owens February 15, 2014 at 6:50 pm #

    [Comment deleted. Off topic for blog. Doc.]

  27. avatar
    Majority Will February 15, 2014 at 6:54 pm #

    Nancy R Owens: Sad.

    When you went to the police station to confess your many crimes, did they at least offer to drive you home once they stopped laughing hysterically at your completely idiotic stories?

    How many birther sites have banned you? Just curious.

  28. avatar
    Nancy R Owens February 15, 2014 at 7:05 pm #

    Let me spell it out for you. PDF file means they prove America incompetent to vet candidates. An actual PAPER document brings in the forger which is me forcing Russians to disclose their Cuban/ Russian agents which they’re not prepared to do. Especially with Cuba’s Ted Cruz trying so desperately to get on the running board. Isn’t Orly Taitz Russian?

    https://www.youtube.com/user/amendment28now

  29. avatar
    Majority Will February 15, 2014 at 7:12 pm #

    Nancy R Owens: Let me spell it out for you.

    When you went to the police station to confess your many crimes, did they at least offer to drive you home once they stopped laughing hysterically at your completely idiotic stories?

    How many birther sites have banned you? Just curious.

  30. avatar
    JPotter February 15, 2014 at 7:19 pm #

    JPotter: ‘dilimma’?

    That is, ‘dilemma” LOL

  31. avatar
    realist February 15, 2014 at 7:24 pm #

    I always find it fascinating that people can not just ignore a troll. Utterly fascinating.

  32. avatar
    Majority Will February 15, 2014 at 7:28 pm #

    I find it fascinating that some hardcore birther bigots have the attention span of a fruit fly.

  33. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy February 15, 2014 at 7:30 pm #

    Note sign in right sidebar.

    Arthur: What’s to be done with a crazy Floridian who repeatedly attempts to draw attention to nutty assertions that she has participated in everything from murder to forged documents?

  34. avatar
    Thomas Brown February 15, 2014 at 7:37 pm #

    I find it fascinating that ‘Nancy’ ignores me even though I know exactly who ‘she’ is and what ‘her’ real story is.

  35. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy February 15, 2014 at 7:40 pm #

    Point well taken. Nancy’s comments have gone far afield from the issue of Obama Conspiracy Theories. I have removed some comments that do not belong here.

    Her explosive participation caught me off guard. I may have to put her in moderation.

    Daniel: Hey Doc, I usually find Nancy Nutbar’s ravings as amusing as the next guy, but can we please put a kibosh on the more graphic details of her feverish imaginings?

  36. avatar
    Egipcios February 15, 2014 at 9:33 pm #

    I wish we could get a consensus to ignore trolls, rather than banning anyone. Banning is too much of a Birther tactic. If you don’t respond to the trolls, there is no feedback that they desire, so they go elsewhere.

    Reminds me of an old Doris Day movie. Somebody was calling her on the phone and breathing. My idea would be not to answer. Or leave it to the answering machine or one of her servants. (She was a rich lady in the movie with servants to do anything.) But oh no. She HAD to answer. Every time it rang, she got a terrified expression and started to hyperventilate. But her hand reached compulsively to clutch the ringing monster… Because SHE HAD TO PICK IT UP!

    Don’t ban anyone. Just let’s ignore the trolls. We don’t HAVE TO ANSWER THEM. We don’t have to acknowledge their presence.

  37. avatar
    Andrew Morris February 15, 2014 at 9:46 pm #

    It’s all such a waste of public resources. The default Orly screech if something doesn’t exist is to say it must have been scrubbed. However, party time. She says she can’t find cases she needs on Westlaw (because they’ve been scrubbed, of course, not because there are no such cases or she can’t find them) and she wants her supporters to help. I think we Obots have a civic duty to help her, and I can find time I plan to send her details of some that are directly on point. I’ll include citations. As she won’t check, she’ll likely include them in her filings. This will be such fun!
    There is actually a Canadian case on an agency misleading a court. But as a true Scalia/Thomas nutbar conservative, she couldn’t possibly approve of an American court relying on a foreign precedent, although funnily enough she does sometimes include non-US courts in her lengthy cc lists.

  38. avatar
    Rickey February 15, 2014 at 10:13 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    Point well taken. Nancy’s comments have gone far afield from the issue of Obama Conspiracy Theories. I have removed some comments that do not belong here.

    Her explosive participation caught me off guard. I may have to put her in moderation.

    I’m not a psychiatrist, but my concern is that allowing her to post here only serves to enable her delusions. She is desperate for attention, and we’re not helping by giving it to her.

  39. avatar
    Keith February 15, 2014 at 10:15 pm #

    Nancy R Owens: And yet, so funny that I look just like an older version of the girl in the picture that “Obama” claims is his half-sister

    So? I get mistaken for Richard Dreyfus all the time. In my younger days it even got me laid. Who cares who you resemble, or not.

  40. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy February 15, 2014 at 10:32 pm #

    She has other places to post.

    Rickey: I’m not a psychiatrist, but my concern is that allowing her to post here only serves to enable her delusions. She is desperate for attention, and we’re not helping by giving it to her.

  41. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy February 15, 2014 at 10:35 pm #

    Funny you should mention that. I was thinking about an article just today that was pretty much what you described, but I didn’t write it. I figured she’d read it.

    Andrew Morris: . I think we Obots have a civic duty to help her, and I can find time I plan to send her details of some that are directly on point. I’ll include citations. As she won’t check, she’ll likely include them in her filings. This will be such fun!

  42. avatar
    Bob February 15, 2014 at 10:36 pm #

    Mostly what Orly is doing is having an Orly-thon. She’s currently trying to raise money to put towards the filing costs associated with running for AG of California.

    Apparently, just out-and-out begging on the internet is what works best for her.

  43. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy February 15, 2014 at 10:45 pm #

    I’m with you 100% on this (see sign about trolls in right sidebar), but reaching the consensus has been the sticking point.

    There are many messages you never see, like this one:

    Aw, this was an exceptionally nice post. Finding the time and actual effort to generate a superb article… but what can I say… I put things off a lot and don’t seem to get anything done.
    click here [advertising url]

    They’re spam, and really no different from the off-topic comments from Nancy Owens, one of which was the single word “interesting” followed by a URL.

    There are several things I could do including banning Nancy, or putting her in moderation so I can filter out or move to the Open Thread irrelevant comments. What I will do is to delete anything that is off-topic for the blog. Or I could create a single “the one and only Nancy Owens thread, knock yourself out.”

    Egipcios: I wish we could get a consensus to ignore trolls, rather than banning anyone. Banning is too much of a Birther tactic. If you don’t respond to the trolls, there is no feedback that they desire, so they go elsewhere.

  44. avatar
    RanTalbott February 16, 2014 at 1:12 am #

    Egipcios: I wish we could get a consensus to ignore trolls, rather than banning anyone. Banning is too much of a Birther tactic. If you don’t respond to the trolls, there is no feedback that they desire, so they go elsewhere

    That sounds good in theory, but it doesn’t work in practice. And I speak from the experience of moderating political forums on CompuServe through over a million postings.

    You can get the “consensus”, but, as long as its purely voluntary, it will “leak”: inevitably, someone’s especially-sensitive hot button will get pushed, and s/he’ll decide “This is so far beyond the pale, I have to break the rule, just this once”. And it’s not always because they’re weak, or jerks: a lot of really bad stuff has happened in the world, and political discussions often involve that bad stuff. No matter how hard and sincerely they try, people who have been/known victims of that bad stuff will sometimes fail in their resolve when they see their experience being denigrated, or the perpetrators excused. And most people, including me, will occasionally slip up at even lower thresholds.

    If no one moderates the forum, the threshold at which responding to trolls is considered “understable” starts to creep downward, until you wind up with something like Usenet.

    Additionally, not all trolls will go away if they don’t get an immediate response. Sometimes, they’ll keep escalating until they do. And, even if everyone maintains discipline, the sight of those turds floating in the puchbowl diminishes what the kids call the “user experience”.

    If you want to have a meeting-place that a broad spectrum of people will value and participate in, some of those who do their worst to damage it must occasionally feel the squeeze of the iron hand in the pubkeeper’s velvet glove.

    It can be a difficult job, trying to maintain reasonable levels of both “freedom of speech” and “freedom from brawls”. I think we should occasionally make a point of thanking Doc for taking the time to do it, and commend him for doing it well.

  45. avatar
    Joey February 16, 2014 at 1:48 am #

    “Troll” is often synonymous with “an opinion I don’t want to hear.” In my humble opinion it’s an easy label to apply when you’re thin skinned and don’t want to deal with opposing views.
    I was banned from freerepublic.com for being an anti-birther “troll.” I was always polite, never abusive, but just presented opposing views to the birther party line.
    It saddens me when anti-birthers are no better than birthers in their tolerance for those who don’t see things the anti-birther way.

  46. avatar
    Rickey February 16, 2014 at 2:27 am #

    Joey:
    “Troll” is often synonymous with “an opinion I don’t want to hear.” In my humble opinion it’s an easy label to apply when you’re thin skinned and don’t want to deal with opposing views.
    I was banned from freerepublic.com for being an anti-birther “troll.” I was always polite, never abusive, but just presented opposing views to the birther party line.
    It saddens me when anti-birthers are no better than birthers in their tolerance for those who don’t see things the anti-birther way.

    I consider a troll to be someone who posts inflammatory comments in order to rile people up. Nancy isn’t a troll in that sense. I don’t believe that she posts here to rile people up, but she certainly doesn’t post here to have a rational discussion, either. For example, she refuses to answer when asked how she forged Obama’s birth certificate, where she got the details to include in the birth certificate, etc. (never mind her claims that she killed Pablo Escobar). She is just looking for attention, in my opinion.

    I don’t believe that Doc has ever banned anyone simply for having opposing views. However, many of the birthers have justifiably gone into moderation when they refuse to engage with people who challenge their views.

  47. avatar
    RanTalbott February 16, 2014 at 2:49 am #

    Joey: “Troll” is often synonymous with “an opinion I don’t want to hear.”

    Mmmm, no: like “spam”, it’s often abused by people who want it to mean that, but Rickey is right about its “proper” (though no longer widely respected) meaning.

    Alas, a lot of once-useful geekspeak words have been debased by the widening of the Information Superhighway™ and the spread of advanced technology to the non-geek masses.

    Personally, I blame AOL ;-)

  48. avatar
    Majority Will February 16, 2014 at 2:59 am #

    Rickey: However, many of the birthers have justifiably gone into moderation when they refuse to engage with people who challenge their views.

    Hence my comment about the attention span of a fruit fly. There is something telling about deliberate silence especially from a troll or attention seeker.

  49. avatar
    Andrew Vrba, PmG February 16, 2014 at 11:11 am #

    I just hate that Spam has come to mean what it does on the internet. Its an affront to one of my favorite foodstuffs.

  50. avatar
    JPotter February 16, 2014 at 12:00 pm #

    Andrew Vrba, PmG: I just hate that Spam has come to mean what it does on the internet.

    Have to send that complaint to those Python boys. You got to admit, it makes a great verb :D

  51. avatar
    JPotter February 16, 2014 at 3:36 pm #

    Nancy R Owens: stuffstuffstuff

    … and not a bit of it on topic.

    [ Yeah, bit of a hypocrite I am, I am, but I would beg a distinction between single-subject, one-line asides and rambles through menageries! ]