Natural Born Citizen…Orly?

This blog is the hangout of Dr. Orly Taitz, a California attorney who appears here in the Who’s Who section. Dr. Taitz is big into recruiting helpers, and today she lists her helpers and those who donated money (all 83 of them). Dr. Orly claims 200,000 visitors a month on her blog. Misinformation from that blog will be added here, as I happen upon it. I’m not going to bother with cases when Orly is arguably wrong, but when she misstates the facts.

Scrubbed from the Internet

January 16, Orly Taitz DDS ESQ posted an article by Zapem that says: “Attempts such as The Natural Born Citizen Act were known to have failed and the text scrubbed from the internet, with only a shadow-cached copy left, that only the most curious public can find.”

Scrubbed from the Internet? They missed ONE copy, the official copy on the US Congress web site. Type this in Google:

“natural born citizen act”

and there it is. And why did this piece of legislation go nowhere? Perhaps it had something to do with the part that makes children adopted by citizens “natural born”.

[Orly Taitz has abandoned this blog and started a new one at]

About Dr. Conspiracy

I'm not a real doctor, but I have a master's degree.
This entry was posted in Orly Taitz, The Blogs and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

39 Responses to Natural Born Citizen…Orly?

  1. laughinghysterically says:

    The medallion is OBVIOUSLY a super-secret power amulet and a communicator, it allows him to hypnotize people AND communicate with other Illuminati at all time. Duh. Everyone knows THAT!

  2. laughinghysterically says:

    Also, if she wants her followers to help her figure out what his mysterious medallion actually represents, she might post a picture of it!

    Seriously, what the heck is she even talking about? UGH!

  3. bogus info says:

    Doc Orly knows that she’s fighting a losing cause and is looking for anything to keep those “donations” coming in. (she has to appear to be doing something to continue to get that money.) Plus, she will lose her “faithful followers” soon and will go into “withdrawal.” Berg has pledged to “continue the fight” but I have a feeling when those “donations” stop coming in, Berg’s “pledge” will fall by the wayside. Hopefully, these “faithful followers” will wise up after the 20th.

  4. bogus info says:

    “There are many other questions swirling around the subject of citizenship and how he has represented himself to the nation. For starters, why was he issued his SSN in Connecticut in 1976-77–was it because he was just returning to the U.S. from Indonesia, after he and his Mother had renounced their U.S. citizenship to be Indonesian citizens, and therefore was starting over?”

    Dr. C., Any proof of the above? How many false and misrepresentations are in the above article?

  5. How doth she misrepresent? Let me count the ways…

    The partial SSN in question is from Connecticut, but I don’t know why we should conclude that it is Barack Obama’s. I would not be possible for his Mother to have renounced “their” citizenship. And why Connecticut?

  6. Tes says:

    Yeah, break it down:

    ?Why was he issued his SSN in Connecticut….?
    —What evidence exists that he did? None.

    ?Why was he issued his SSN in…1976-77?
    —What evidence exists that he did? None.

    ?Was it because he was just returning to the U.S. from Indonesia….
    —No. He returned to the US from Indonesia in 1971, five-six years before that date.

    ?Was it because…after he and his Mother had renounced their U.S. citizenship to be Indonesian citizens…?
    —What evidence exists that he (or she) did? None. In fact, it was impossible for him to do so as a minor.

  7. bogus info says:

    Ah, and they totally ignore the Dunham/Soetoro divorce decree that clearly states Obama’s mother is a U.S. citizen. LOL And they accuse us of “cherry picking.”

  8. Given the way the SSN was presented, I’m guessing it came from a public record of a real estate transaction, perhaps the Obama house in Chicago. (Orly lists the SSN next to his address in Chicago). Only WorldNetDaily claims that Obama doesn’t own his house, but rather it is owned by Tony Rezko who also has no connection to Connecticut that I know of. I don’t know any publicly available source that would tell when a particular social security number was issued.

    I give up. It makes no sense.

  9. bogus info says:

    Think anyone will come forward?

  10. laughinghysterically says:

    Oh, come now, it makes perfect sense! Obama is from the future, you see, and was sent back in time to accomplish an Illuminati takeover of the USA and the world. Duh. Everyone knows THAT! He doesn’t even HAVE a social security #, technically he won’t even be born for another 600 years!

  11. laughinghysterically says:

    Yeah, right. I know I am going to jump right on that opportunity! Or not.

  12. Andrew A. Gill says:


    I hear lawyers just live for filing emergency class action lawsuits against Congress, and that they love to do it free of charge.

  13. laughinghysterically says:

    Well, not this lawyer. While I do take a lot of pro-bono work, I have this picky crazy requirement that the cases I take on have a snowballs chance in hell of succeeding! Y’know, I also like to comply with that whole legal ethics thing and not file frivolous cases.

    I know, I’m just wacky that way!

  14. bogus info says:

    Ever get the urge to “reach out and touch someone?” LOL

    GeorgetownJD posted this on the Yes to Democracy blog:

    “Gary Kreep has subpoenaed Obama’s academic and housing records from Occidental College. Has fast can you say “motion to quash”?

    Says that is probably where Doc Orly got her idea. LOL

  15. bogus info says:

    BTW, a “motion to quash” I’m sure means to keep them from getting the records, but how does it work and on what grounds?

  16. laughinghysterically says:

    Motion to quash essentially says the subpoena is total BS, you can make an arg to quash under any number of legal theories (standing, jurisdiction, improper form, improper service, etc, etc).

    And here, quashing would be quite simple.

  17. bogus info says:



    Sure you don’t want to take the case???? You could be on “Plains Radio” and all those other talk radio shows like Doc Orly. ROTFL.

    Of course, you could also lose all credibility as a lawyer.

  18. laughinghysterically says:

    Let’s see, class action with no legal argument to justify filing the case and a bunch of clients with no money whatsoever and who should likely all be in a psych ward.
    Tempting (NOT).

    No thanks.

    However, I’d happily help Obama’s side with the defense, but it’s not like there’s much to do here!

  19. bogus info says:

    The real perk to taking that case would be the “talk show radio” appearances. Chance of a lifetime!

  20. bogus info says:


    Maybe you could get Doc Orly to be your co-counsel too. Wouldn’t that be fun!

  21. laughinghysterically says:

    Well, apparently that would give me a free and neverending supply of nitrous oxide to huff at my pleasure, which would have me laughing even more than I am now. Somehow, I think my existing clients might take issue with that plan.

  22. bogus info says:


  23. laughinghysterically says:

    Precisely what I would be doing!

  24. George Orwell III says:
  25. GeorgetownJD says:

    <Somebody should tell Dr. Orly that attorneys never supposed to refer to themselves with the title “Esq”.>

    Yeah, and she’s receiving all sorts of congratulations on being admitted to the Supreme Court bar. All it means is Doc Orly filled out the paperwork and her $200 check didn’t bounce.

  26. I’m thinking of a song about Orly, sung to the tune of She’ll be comin’ round the mountain.

    She’ll be filin’ six more motions when she comes
    She’ll be filin’ six more motions when she comes
    She’ll be filin’ six more motions
    She’ll be filin’ six more motions
    She’ll be filin’ six more motions when she comes

    They will all be denied when they come
    They will all be denied when they come
    They will all be denied
    They will all be denied
    They will all be denied when they come

  27. Maybe he needs it to do the shape shifting thing since he’s only half reptoid.

  28. See Wikipedia article here.

  29. Andrew A. Gill says:

    It almost sounds like she can’t come up with the crazy anymore, so she’s farming it out to her readers. Whatever sounds the scariest will become the new truth.

  30. Andrew A. Gill says:

    I still think it sounds funny to have a doctor referred to as Esquire. Doesn’t a doctorate trump those baccalaureate degrees?

  31. bogus info says:

    I can’t make up my mind if Doc Orly isjust”playing to her followers”or really believes there is some great significance to her being admitted to the Supreme Court bar. Either way, it doesn’t leave someone (normal, sane, with half a brain)with ahigh regard for Doc Orly. And, speaks volumes about her followers. I have found her “legal expertise” to be lacking and I don’t have a legal background.

  32. bogus info says:

    I think the misinformation regarding the alleged “huge amount of legal fee PE Obama has spent” has a two fold purpose. First, to make it appear as if PE Obama has something to hide; second, to distract Berg/Orly followers to focus on what the other side is “allegedly spending”, so people will not “do the math” and realize that their “donations to the cause”are probably more that what the actuallegal fees are. LOL

  33. Andrew A. Gill says:

    For those who are curious, Wikipedia’s entry on Orly taitz has been deleted.

    It took a few more hours, but they also deleted the article on Orly Taitz. (note the capitalization)

    Actually, I’m the one who got it deleted after I pointed out that the other capitalization was still extant.

  34. mimi says:

    Why? If it was accurate, why couldn’t it stay? I think people should know she’s a dentist/realtor/correspondence school lawyer.
    I’d like to know more about her background. What’s her problem, other than the obvious?
    Some of the petitions she’s filed are downright nuts. Basing petitions on self-described internet rumours.
    But, I guess they don’t go into that kind of thing.
    Maybe an entry at the dickopedia might be better serving.

  35. Andrew A. Gill says:

    Here’s the discussion. I don’t really have an opinion on whether it should have stayed, but I’m willing to go with the consensus.

  36. I’ve been active some over at the Wikipedia trying to keep the Barack Obama Citizenship Conspiracy Theories accurate, and not deleted. I really wanted to get the thing renamed.

  37. For someone like that to be in Wikipedia, they have to get significant coverage in the national media. Orly’s simply not “newsworthy”.

  38. mimi says:

    Read the discussion. I suppose she doesn’t deserve an entry, other than on the “conspiracy” page that was referred to. Thanks.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.