Main Menu

Archive | Who’s Who

Information about people and web sites that discuss Barack Obama

How do I make this sound interesting?

Readers may recall that the FOIA lawsuit Taitz v. Colvin, an attempt to force the Social Security Administration to release a non-existent record for the apparently equally non-existent Harrison J. Bounel, was decided in favor of the Social Security Administration. They looked, and didn’t find anything.

Cover-up, screams Taitz and blames a conflict of interest on the part of Judge Hollander, who was appointed to the federal bench by Barack Obama.

In an article [link to Taitz web site] including her motion to re-open and recuse, Taitz cites the rules on judicial recusal and, in my opinion, fails to find anything relevant.

Update:

Thanks to a commenter here, perhaps it got more interesting. This is from Taitz’ motion:

Further, revelation of a conflict of interest by a judge represents a new evidence, which satisfies Rule 60(b)(2).

But was it “new evidence”? Here is a screen shot from Orly Taitz’ web site:

image

And here’s another:

image

Taitz responds to comment 41, suggesting that she was well aware last January that Judge Hollander was an Obama appointee. Is Taitz trying to deceive the Court?

Read more:

33

“Any day now” gets closer

It’s been a slow week and I am reduced to republishing Birther Report. One of them had the stomach to listen to Carl Gallups Freedom Friday program and this comes from that:

Carl Gallups: Been talking to Mike Zullo. Both the birth certificate and criminal investigations are still ongoing. Sheriff Arpaio is getting close to holding the press conference. They are in the process of getting over two legal hurdles so they can release some of the information. All sources and information must be extensively vetted.

So “any day now” becomes “getting close” and “getting VIPs on board” becomes “getting over two legal hurdles.” I wonder what those legal hurdles are. Could they be:

  1. No evidence
  2. No jurisdiction

Perhaps we will find out, any day now.

41

Birther sues to deport children

I need wonder no longer when Orly Taitz is going to sue the federal government over the tens of thousands of unaccompanied children who crossed the US border and have been apprehended by immigration officials.

Taitz has been actively blogging on immigration topics for some time, including this title:

None of the individuals who crossed the US border in the last year or earlier from Mexico or Central America qualify as refugees or asylees. Asylum is given only to people who are persecuted due to their religion, race, ethnicity or political opposition. As such, all of them should be deported immediately

and

Please, not, only people, who are outside the U.S., can ask for a refugee status. If they are already in the U.s., they do not qualify as refugee

Taitz might want to review the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008. While that Act is a little more dense than I want to dig into, press reports indicate that the law requires a hearing before a child from a non-contiguous country can be deported, for example Carl Hulse of The New York Times wrote:

Originally pushed by a bipartisan coalition of lawmakers as well as by evangelical groups to combat sex trafficking, the bill gave substantial new protections to children entering the country alone who were not from Mexico or Canada by prohibiting them from being quickly sent back to their country of origin.

Taitz wants them summarily loaded onto boxcars cargo planes and shipped back to their country of origin. She filed a federal lawsuit in Texas, Taitz v. Johnson [Draft of complaint filed], to prevent transportation of detained children from Texas to California citing:

[a] serious threat to public health, spread of infectious diseases, national security threat, crime threat and economic damages

Further Taitz demands that the these persons be immediately deported, or placed in quarantine in a FEMA facility.

One would think that Taitz lacks standing to bring such a lawsuit and that the case will be dismissed on that ground.

Read more:

36

Are you blogging more… But enjoying it less?

Borrowing an advertising slogan from Camel cigarettes, I introduce this research article about the Orly Taitz web site. I have never fully trusted poll numbers on birthers because a poll respondent does not necessarily tell the truth, nor do polls measure birther enthusiasm. One other source for information comes from the public participation on birther blogs.

I have published site statistics from this blog covering the past 3 years, and at the present time interest measured in page views on this blog is on the decline. What about birther sites? Generally birther web sites do not publish their activity statistics. Orly Taitz has a page hit counter2 of dubious value, and as of last month, verified numbers from her site are available at Alexa.com, but there is no historical data.

One way to value site engagement is to look at comments1, and while it is tedious to do, it is possible to count comments on a WordPress blog by crawling the entire site, and this is what I have done for Orly’s blog. Here’s the result  from March of 2010 to the present:

TaitzComments

The high point is January of 2013, the month Barack Obama began his second term as president. Of course any measure of comments at the Taitz site is affected by her moderation policy and the fact that she deletes comments and articles. Also this doesn’t account for any technical errors in my data-gathering software, or historical data loss.

Just for comparison, here are the comment numbers for my site added for the same period:

WebComments

Given statistics that suggest Taitz has twice the number of page views than here, the relatively small number of comments is really striking.


1Most blog visitors do not comment, so comment numbers don’t equal visits, but comment numbers can be studied over time. One thing of note is that visitors here have more to say about the articles than they do at Orly’s site. While the average article here has about 65 comments, the number there is around 4. Of course Taitz has many times the number of articles that I do.

2The Taitz hit counter first appeared in November of 2011 with an initial value around 22,518,751. Here is a chart roughly showing monthly values over the prior month using historical values from the Wayback Machine:

TaitzHits

While her comment totals are tapering off the past few months, her hit counter seems to be trending up.

20

Cold Case Posse gets a pass

In a move that’s leaving this writer’s head shaking, the Arizona Corporation Commission has confirmed that the Cold Case Posse is now in good standing with the Commission, and that it’s corporate filings now conform with statutory requirements (even though that hardly seems possible).

A copy of the following email was forwarded to me:

Thank you for the additional information regarding the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Cold Case Posse.  We have reviewed the recent submissions relating to this entity and can accurately state that all approved filings are in compliance with applicable statutes.  The entity record has been updated to reflect those approved filings.

Thank you again for the information.

Sincerely,

Tanya M. Gibson, Deputy Director

I will refrain from saying something catty at this point.

Update:

Some folks have gone over the CCP filing in detail and have concluded that the letter of the law has been followed, if perhaps not the intent. What we see here is the continued program of hiding and non-disclosure from the Cold Case Posse that I think is in appropriate for an organization that gets a tax exemption from the government.

32

Flash: Cold Case Posse in good standing. Why?

Updates to the Arizona Corporation Commission web site show the Cold Case Posse now in good standing. I said it would be simple to fix. What is strange is that the corporation’s address remains the address of a post office and the Agent physical address a FORMER location of the Sheriff’s Office, where we confirmed that the Cold Case Posse and Mike Zullo do not have an office.

Stay tuned.

Update:

Some folks have gone over the CCP filing in detail and have concluded that the letter of the law has been followed, if perhaps not the intent. What we see here is the continued program of hiding and non-disclosure from the Cold Case Posse that I think is in appropriate for an organization that gets a tax exemption from the government.

18