Today Orly Taitz’s First Amended Complaint in Keyes v. Obama was filed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California (Southern Division).
Gone is the Bush Executive Order that formed the basis of the original complaint. Gone are some of the defendants (e.g. Condoleezza Rice), replaced by new faces including Michelle L. R. Obama herself and Hillary Clinton. Found are a motley crew of new plaintiffs including many of the military persuasion and some state representatives. In fact, Orly has even changed the name of the lawsuit to CAPTAIN PAMELA BARNETT V. BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA ET AL. Indeed the First Amended Complaint has nothing to do with the original suit, except that it is full of lies and targets President Obama.
Orly is even threatening to bring a RICO claim!
125. Because of the complexity of RICO pleading, and because there is presently a rush of time to get the pleadings in this case lodged and served, Plaintiffs reserve their pleadings of allegations under RICO for their Second Amended Complaint, and ask that the Court accept their filings of such pleadings when submitted without further leave of court, because it would have been desirable to consolidate and present all Plaintiffs’ viable claims at the present time.
Can you spell “kitchen sink?”
Orly seems to have invented a new standard of proof: not satisfied by a “preponderance of the evidence”, she demands “clear-and-convincing evidence”. Footnote 1, Page 3.
While Orly claims jurisdiction under FOIA and RICO (I’m not making this up), the meat of the claim seems to be that “knowing without doubt that the president is eligible” is a “civil right” and that the court should (if nobody can find an existing one) invent a law to enforce that civil right (42 U.S.C. §1988(a)). Orly also indicates that Barack and Michelle Obama are residents of California although in California he spells it “Barak”).
Given that all the evidence was invented, I guess it makes a perverted kind of sense to invent the law too.
And to top it all off, she writes:
FILED JULY 14, 2009, BASTILLE DAY
However, don’t spend too much time getting to know this complaint (trying to find that “gold coin in a bucket of mud”), or marking your calendar for 60 days hence. A Second Amended Complaint is threatened with even more plaintiffs and even more unfounded allegations.