New documents filed in Barnett v. Obama

Orly Taitz

Orly Taitz

In an unusual Sunday posting (perhaps due to system maintenance on the court electronic filing system), new documents have appeared in the Barnett v. Obama lawsuit today, October 11, 2009.

Attorney Orly Taitz filed a brief asking the court to take judicial notice that “Individual Damages are not required in public sector mail & wire fraud relating to political corruption under 18 U.S.C. §1346”, continuing her assertion that the RICO statute gives her standing. You will notice that this lawsuit has been changing colors like a chameleon, originally started as a suit under an inapplicable Bush presidential order, morphed into a hodgepodge of other things, and now she’s trying to be turned into a RICO lawsuit. As evidence Orly continues to push the false social-security number allegation she and her detectives have skimmed from various questionable sources. Most recently, she has included an affidavit from her number 2 detective  in Ohio, Susan Daniels.

Plaintiffs' Request for Judicial Notice – 11 Oct 2009 by GeorgetownJD

[UPDATE!] The second document (the Daniels affidavit) has been deleted from the Obama Conspiracy Theories library. It contains clumsily redacted social-security numbers of private individuals (one at least who is still living) that are easily readable.

About Dr. Conspiracy

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

68 Responses to New documents filed in Barnett v. Obama

  1. richCares says:

    Orly’s social security numbers story should be enough to get this tossed, what a complete idiot! This gets to be an odd view!

  2. Mary Brown says:

    So someone could attach a social security number to my name, I suspect. Or better yet to my family name, which is much less common than my own. Don’t you have to prove that the named person did it?

  3. Rickey says:

    It’s just another example of Orly’s recklessness and desperation. The list of Social Security Numbers would not be admissible in any court of law. Neither she nor the investigator can authenticate it by identifying and certifying the original source of the information, and of course there is no admissible evidence that Obama has ever used or tried to use a Social Security Number other than his own.

    I work with similar lists all the time. If an investigator has a permissible use to obtain them, they are useful tools for verifying identity, locating people, etc. But that’s all they are. They don’t prove anything.

  4. thisoldhippie says:

    Rickey – I agree. I use Lexis Nexis to locate people and it is not unusual to find someone with several different DOBs and SSNs or two people with the same one. This information is gathered from various sources – such as you applied for a credit card – and can be keyed in incorrectly at any point along the way. Orly is an absolute idiot to not understand this. Further “similar” names do not equal the same person!

  5. Mary Brown says:

    It always seemed silly to me that given the birther theory that President Obama belongs to some all powerful world conspiracy,that he would use his own name to hide something. Their stories sound like some my preschoolers relate. The children get going and their logic leaks as all sorts of variables and wild scenarios come into play. Birthers, I think, have never left the preopeational stage of reasoning in many respects. And the followers are very prone to suggestion as are young children.

  6. misha says:

    Here, it can work with Glenn Beck, too. Is this a different person, or the same. It could easily be twisted:

  7. euphgeek says:

    It’s not just that they’re prone to suggestion, it’s that they want to believe anything bad about Obama so much that they leave reason behind to blindly believe anything they come across. We could probably have a contest to think up the most ludicrous thing about Obama, post the winner to a right-wing blog and the sheep would gobble it right up.

  8. DrunkenObots says:

    Nice work, Orly. The chattering class is nervous. I wonder why?

    If anyone listened to the Andrea Shea King show with Gary Kreep, Kreep announced he was filing or was aware of 9 additional lawsuits to be filed against BO in the near future.

  9. Rickey says:

    Having seen the original list compiled by Neil Sankey, it’s apparent to me that some of the entries started showing up shortly after Obama announced his candidacy, and some of them clearly were prank entries with non-existent addresses.

    I could submit an application for a credit card with anyone’s name, a Social Security Number and a fake address, and the credit issuer is going to order a credit report. Even though the credit app would ultimately be dismissed, the simple fact that the credit check was ordered will result in that name and Social Security Number being entered into various databases. Experienced investigators are used to seeing such anomalies, and in fact I recall seeing a note from Sankey to Orly in which he warned her that the Social Security Number information is unreliable. However, Orly doesn’t want to hear that. She gloms on to anything negative she can find about Obama, regardless of how shaky the information is.

  10. Elmo says:

    Hmm, “DrunkenObots,” maybe if you tried sobering up you’d realize that the “chattering class” isn’t nervous but amused by the ridiculous antics of these birther lawsuits. Really, they are the best comedy team around these days.

    Kreep can file all the lawsuits he wants…at least until he comes under court order as a frivolous litigant.

  11. sarina says:

    Nice job?
    haha wait till she gets another $10K penalty fee or 20K! or… disbarment!

    We obots are going to say:
    Nice job judge! Just about time!

  12. DrunkenObots says:

    Dear Patriots;

    Orly has sent out a request for assistance:

    Please read carefully the dossier of Susan Daniels and dosier #1 with the report from Neil Sankey.(in archive on the right) By putting together the dossiers you will have enough info to do the search of this person, who was born in 1890, applied for his social between 1977-1979 in CT and whose social Obama used most of his life. We need to find out as much info about this person, as possible I am particularly interested about his years in the old age: where did he reside, how did he die?? Please send FOIA requests to SS administration, FBI, CIA, Dep of Jusitce, Atty Gen of CT, DAs in CT, who ever else you can think of. Send a copy to me to If you find abnything, call me 949-683-5411.

    Let’s get to work people.

  13. sarina says:

    Do you have the evidence that Obama used this SS “most of his life”?

  14. Greg says:

    Is it just me (perhaps a sneaky plan to make sure I don’t feed the energy creatures) or are other people getting a second “Hidden due to low comment rating” when they hit the “Click here to see.”

  15. First off, the “dossier” from Susan Daniels says that the preponderance of dates associated with the magic Social Security number in question say August 4, 1961 (which is coincidentally the date of birth of Barack Obama). A few of the references have the month and day switched. So the person Orly is sending out her scavenger hunters to find, born in 1890, does not exist. And why does Orly need volunteers to send in FOIA requests? Why do they need to be sent by multiple people? This is harassment, pure and simple.

    Now if one indeed searches the Social Security Death Index for Barack H Obama or Barack Obama, there are no records found — so no one named Barack Obama and is now dead ever had a Social Security number. I know the Social Security Number Orly has in mind due to her sloppy privacy procedures, and it’s not in the death index either. So throw that theory out the window.

    SSN’s consist of an an area number (3 digits) a group number (2 digits) and a serial number (4 digits). The area number tells you WHERE the SSN was issued, and in the case of the magic SSN, it was indeed Connecticut. (See for information on SSN structure).

    It’s funny that Orly in her court document attempted to mark out the LAST FOUR digits of the alleged SSN while other commentators mark out the FIRST FIVE digits. So all you have to do is consult two sources and get the whole thing.

  16. thisoldhippie says:

    I am as well.

  17. DrunkenObot says:

    Thanks, Doc. I’ll pass the info along to Orly. I’m glad you’re interested in getting to the truth and not just protecting BO at any cost.

  18. nBc says:

    Has there ever been any doubt about what motivates the good Doctor?

  19. Rickey says:

    Just to clarify, not every deceased person who had a Social Security Number is listed in the Social Security Death Index. A deceased person gets into the index if (and only if) his or her estate files a claim for the Social Security death benefit. Most estates do file for it, but not all.

    Finding someone listed in the death index is confirmation that the person is dead (and also confirms the person’s SSN), but not finding the person is not proof that the person is alive, nor is it proof that the person did not have a SSN. The absence of a record could simply mean that no death benefit was claimed.

  20. DrunkenObots says:

    Thank you, Rickey. That’s information I didn’t have before I read your message.

    Let’s keep up the good work, people. Rickey is actively participating, why aren’t you?

  21. JoZeppy says:

    Interesting…Orly files a “Request for Judicial Notice” (which is really nothing more than an attempt throw another argument at the judge in an unauthorized surreply, without asking leave of court) for the shocking notion that individualized harm, the first test of finding standing (which is a requirement rooted in the Constitution’s “case or controvery” language), is somehow not required in Civil RICO suits. Yet she does not site a single case for this most shocking of concepts. I wonder why? Oh yeah…because the case law shows that suits for private recovery under RICO do require a showing standing, and thus individualized harm.

    The fact that the government doesn’t have to show any individualized harm is immaterial. Most criminal statutes don’t require a showing of harm. The harm is assumed against the polity in the form of violation of duly legislated laws (is there any individualized harm if I’m going 100mph on an empty stretch of road at midnight?). Just because there are criminal sanctions and a possible civil cause of action stemming from a single statute, doesn’t mean the rules are the same for both the civil litigant and the government.

  22. Mark says:

    The Susan Daniels affidavit claims she is 68 and “free of any mental disease”.

    Doth protest too much??

  23. catbit says:

    JoZeppy: ….(is there any individualized harm if I’m going 100mph on an empty stretch of road at midnight?).

    If you count the Possum, then YES.

  24. Rickey: A deceased person gets into the index if (and only if) his or her estate files a claim for the Social Security death benefit.

    In the United States, all deaths are required to be reported to the SSA by the state vital statistics agency (although individuals are also supposed to report it if the person is receiving benefits). This reporting is independent of any application for the Social Security death benefit. The reporting is electronic and there are incentives to the states for doing it quickly and accurately. Of course if someone dies and this fact is not discovered, then SSA (nor anyone else) will not know. The SSA Death Index is as close to a national death index as there is. Nearly all deaths since 1980 are in the index. The specific estimated coverage for individuals for particular years and age ranges is detailed in this document:

  25. I doubt it all the time 😉

  26. Rickey says:

    Thanks for the clarification. I should have said the the only way to be certain that a deceased person gets into the death index is for the person’s estate to file for the death benefit.

    Leaving it us to the states is, in my experience, a hit or miss proposition. I recently tried to get a death certificate from New York City’s Department of Health and they could not find it, even though I provided them with the deceased’s full SSN. The person died more than a year ago, yet he is not listed in the death index. It’s possible that the NYC DOH did not know his SSN and issued a death certificate without it.

  27. ss employee says:

    I am an employee of ss and can easily look up any number and requests a report from all 4 credit bureaus. If the SS numbers appear on the same or different reports with the name of BO we will have an issue. If Judge Carter orders discovery and Banks or other institutions are ordered to release information regarding those ss numbers and they belong to BO he will have a problem. Let’s not prejudge and let the good man decide if he orders discovery. He is working on the decision now.

  28. My “yeah sure you are…” alert has gone off.


  29. richCares says:

    right wingers do a lot of projection but they are mosted noted for “appeal to authority”, which is why they make up crap.

    “I am an employee of ss”
    you lie!

  30. ss employee says:

    Use to do loans for a living and any loan officer in the US can pull up a credit report on anybody and nobody can stop it. No I work in a SS office. What is the big deal. Something to hide?

  31. nbc says:

    Why don’t you help out poor Orly then?

  32. Expelliarmus says:

    You won’t have your job for long unless you brush up on the law and privacy requirements. A loan officer who pulls up a credit report on “anybody” just for the heck of it is committing a crime. No loan officer can pull up Barack Obama’s credit record unless they have a credit application from Obama on their desk.

  33. JoZeppy says:

    Except for that little thing called The Fair Credit Reporting Act.

    So I’ll call you on your B.S. No, any loan officer in the US CANNOT pull up a full credit report. That is actually illegal. A full credit report can only be pulled with your express permission. Every time your full report is pulled (a Hard Pull) it actually appears on the report. If your report is pulled without your permission, you can actually go after the company who did so in court.

    As working for SS and being able to look up anyone’s SSN….more BS. A little something called the Privacy Act?

  34. This is fixed.

  35. milspec says:

    I don’t know Mary that’s a far out name you have there tee he.

  36. kimba says:

    Man, I love you guys! Thumbs up all around!

  37. wendy says:

    LMAO!!! a 4th grader would probably be able to explain to Orly/ Ms Daniels, how completely useless any online search engine can be, as far as showing that “someone used numerous social security numbers”. Or, the next step, which would be to somehow prove that Obama himself is intentionally behind database errors.
    It’s par for the course, for someone who files an sworn affidavit that Holder had a secret meeting with Judge Land, when 30 seconds of research can validate that Holder was in Calif.
    Just as par for the course as believing that the number of pixels from a digital image, is “proof” that a document is false..even after the legal authority (who is the ONLY one capable of original knowledge).. has already validated the place of birth.
    I might as well sent Taitz a comic book. She would probably file that as proof of something. Well.. it is proof, but not of what she might think. It would be proof of her gullibility.

  38. Mary Brown says:

    My married name is but my family name is almost as rare as obama.

  39. thisoldhippie says:

    Just like the use of Lexis-Nexis and NCIC. You have to have a reason to be pulling someone’s info. I am not supposed to do a search for someone unless I have a legitimate reason to do so, and we can be audited. For NCIC info, (this is what the police officers got in trouble for), you cannot run background checks on someone unless you are performing an active investigation. You are either full of BS or you are breaking the law on a regular basis.

  40. MsDaisy says:

    How much longer will the courts allow this numb nut to continue wasting resources and court time with all this crap? She files and re-files and re-files again the same allegations, forgeries and hearsay. If she is in fact a lawyer don’t you think she would understand the meaning of the word “Proof”? I never went to law school, (not even an online one) but I’m pretty sure having an understanding of how to actually “prove” something is in the curriculum somewhere! And if you have no “Proof” you have no case, but she seems to think that allegations and hearsay are enough and it’s Obama that has to prove his innocence, but he can’t because her allegations are enough to remove him as POTUS. Meanwhile she continues to slander judges and calls for the removal of every one that slaps her down, has accused the entire US government of treason, has called for the military to openly revolt and overthrow the government, has threatened anyone who opposes her with legal action, and yet so far has been thrown out of every court she has set foot in with this nonsense. I think this woman has been blinded to truth by those plastic eyelashes. Or maybe it’s brain damage from peroxide poisoning.

  41. ObotsREvil says:

    I wonder if Madelyn Dunham knew or could find out if a decedent’s death was not reported to the SSA in her capacity as an estate account manager with her bank?

  42. JoZeppy says:

    We are talking about someone who filed a picture of forged birth, a birth certificate provided by a convicted criminal who repeatedly tried to sell it on ebay, and someone’s whose court filings have no basis in the reality based world. I think the comic book stands better than average chances of getting attached to some nonsensical filing.

  43. JoZeppy says:

    I don’t think Ms. Taitz has much more time left in the spotlight. There have been two supposed complaints filed to the CA bar about her. One is annonomous, so I don’t think that one would be considered, but the second one has a name attached to it, and if actually filed, may give the bar reason to give her a call. Also Judge Land has been none to pleased with her. My guess is that when he finally rules on his Order to Show Cause, in addition to the $10k fine he’ll slap her with, he will refer his misbehavior to the Cal bar for additional sanctions, possibly including suspension of her license to practice.

    Also, the more cases that get dismissed, the more possible it will be that she will start racking up additional Rule 11 sanctions with each filing. Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 11, an attorney is required to do the minimum research that the suit has a reasonable basis in both law and fact. Judge Land already slapped her upside the head on the basis of filing a TRO totally detached from reality. Should Judge Carter smack down trying to use the military folks for gaining standing, and Keyes, as someone running for elected office, Orly will have few options. Keep filing based on the rejected facts and arguments (leading to more Rule 11 sancitons), or try to be creative to find a different way to get standing. Granted she probably will just pull something from her backside, that contradicts standing case law, but I don’t think she’ll be able to craft a real argument to get standing.

    I think by Christmas time, we’ll see her cohort Lincoln in the ranks of the disbarred.

  44. AdrianInFlorida says:

    Kind of like those who preface statements with “I’m not a racist, but….” or “I have plenty of friends who are gay, but…”

  45. richCares says:

    Orly;s case Rhodes v McDonald
    Judge Land imposes $20,000 SANCTIONS, 43 PAGE OPINION. Judge Land has also sent the order to the California State Bar.

    read the order and cheer

  46. AdrianInFlorida says:

    Well, wonder if Orly’s “Exodus” begins now…

  47. AdrianInFlorida says:

    Wow, the Judge’s order is a must read, Orly Smack Down….

  48. Bob says:

    Lincoln is already disbarred, and it takes a long time to actually disbar someone. But perhaps the State Bar will initiate proceedings against her by then. (I do now and again check their docket, but so far nothing public.)

    If she is sanctioned at least $1000, she has to report that to the bar. And other people can also tell the bar, because her failure to self-report is by itself punishable conduct.

  49. AdrianInFlorida says:

    From pg 27 of the order, Mr “Fisticuffs”, who commented on Orly’s site, gets a mention…
    “The Court does not make this observation simply as a rhetorical
    device for emphasis; the Court has actually received correspondence
    assailing its previous order in which the sender, who, incidentally,
    challenged the undersigned to a “round of fisticuffs on the Courthouse
    Square,” asserted that the President is not human.”

  50. ballantine says:

    Not sure I have ever seen a judge admonish a lawyer like that. And to have a federal judge send something like that to the state bar. She’s history.

  51. Rickey says:

    An employee of the SSA who went into the SSA database, without permission, to check out Orly’s list would be summarily fired, or at least severely disciplined.

    This entire issue is ridiculous on its face. People who use multiple Social Security Numbers don’t use the same name with all of them, because that raises a red flag with prospective creditors, which kind of defeats the purpose. And it makes even less sense when you have an unusual name such as “Barack Obama.”

  52. AdrianInFlorida says:

    From Orly’s Facebook, they really outsmarted that Judge Land….
    ‘Denise McCarthy Drake:
    Does she now have the ability to get discovery in defending herself against these sanctions???????????????
    7 minutes ago’

    Yep, Immediate depositions of Obama, Holder, The Dali Lama and Pope Benedict to be ordered, as well as automatic subpeona of all documents related to anything ever involving anyone named Barack, Obama or Mickey Mouse. Brthers win! Birthers Win!….
    Sorry, got caught up on the excitemeint, my bad.

  53. JoZeppy says:

    I saw that…just shook my head when I read that.

    Some birfers just aren’t particularly smart.

  54. wendy says:

    triple crown, and ROUND OF APPLAUSE goes to Judge Clay Land…
    20 grand, 43 pages of legal education for Taitz (why we call you a dipshit) , and it goes to the Calif bar, for any actions they choose.

  55. JoZeppy says:

    Just finished reading it.

    Wow. Just wow.

    Now just waiting on Judge Carter on the Motion to Dismiss. Perhaps today can be a two-fer?

  56. JoZeppy says:

    And just when I thought birfers couldn’t get any dumber, I saw this on Orly’s Facebook page:

    Martin WaltGreat now she has the right to a jury trial.This will give her the home advantage.The right to face her accusers,theright to complel witmnesses on her behalf,the right to question Barak Obama,and all defendents including the lawyers for the defense.Awesom now we get them frombeing able to shield themselves from self incrimination,she has right to … Read Morediscovery and she is innocent until proven guilty in the court of law by a jury of her peers.They have now painted themselves in the corner with this move on thier part.They can no longer hide from the truth.
    3 minutes ago

    The stupidity of that statement just is beyond compare. I don’t even thing Orly could have mustered the sheer lack of knowledge of anything legal to come up with such a more universally wrong statement.

  57. nbc says:

    Ignorance of law seems to be a prevailing characteristic of the Birthers.
    Yet the depth and breadth of it never ceases to amaze me.

  58. Bob says:

    But don’t forget: Taitz and her minions know the correct definition of “natural born Citizen,” and you don’t.

  59. SFJeff says:

    “You are either full of BS or you are breaking the law on a regular basis.”

    Neocons are very comfortable with the idea of breaking the law “because we know better”, so I would go for “all of the above”- breaking the law and full of BS.

  60. sarina says:

    Now the birthers have another billboard “Where is the birth certificate” in Ocala Florida.

    (roll eyes)

  61. SFJeff says:

    Thank you for posting that link Rich.

    My favorite quotes:

    “Counsel and her followers certainly have the right, as citizens, to seek from their President proof of where he was born.”

    I fully expect that the Birthers will seize upon this quote as proof that they can file more motions, even though thats not what he said.

    “…is so shockingly devoid of reality that it is difficult to know how to respond.”

    Finally someone with authority saying what is so obvious to everyone else.

    “Her response to the Court’s show cause order is breathtaking in its arrogance and
    borders on delusional.”


    I loved reading this ruling. Really- he outlined how much time was wasted on this case, how baseless the accusations and how Orly slandered the judge and the President’s father for political purposes.

    Really looking forward to more of the same.

  62. AdrianInFlorida says:

    Head –> Desk

  63. Rickey says:

    Agreed. Never have I seen such a collection of ignoramuses.

  64. AdrianInFlorida says:

    I used to live there. This kind of crap is perfectly suited for the occupants of that “fine city”. Rednecks, Republican Retirees and Swamp Rats, a lovely place, not.

  65. Bob says:

    When told of the sanction, Taitz said, “So he didn’t recuse himself?”

  66. SFJeff says:

    Okay from Beckistan comes this:

    “On his radio show today Glenn Beck claimed Barack Obama is on a mission to take out Fox News or any media that challenges him. Beck called Obama a dictator, and compared Fox News to the Jews during the Holocaust, while warning that when Obama is done with FNC, he is going to come after other news organizations”

    Yeah….Orly is not the only one using delusion to try to earn money.

  67. SFJeff: Beck called Obama a dictator

    I find that totally ironic from someone who dresses up like this:

  68. thebabbster says:

    Then there’s this jackass, who apparently doesn’t want to do business with anyone voted for Barack Obama:

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.