Orly Taitz sues over healthcare

Birther attorney Orly Taitz has launched her personal campaign against health reform, claiming it prevents her from practicing dentistry according to TPM Muckraker.

Is this a new lawsuit? No, she just tacked this on to her complaint in Taitz v. Obama.

“Health bill, as being prepared and reconciled, will create an enormous machine of governmental burocracy which will intrude into Plaintiff’s practice, will affect her doctor-patient relations, will undermine her Hippocratic oath, will force her to ration medical care and de-facto deny medical care to elderly, whom some committees of burocrats will deem to be too old to receive such care, meaning too old to live.”

Page 18.

Orly’s First Amended Complaint is 145 pages! (I didn’t count the social-security numbers, but there are a bunch of them — all looking the same).

About Dr. Conspiracy

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

66 Responses to Orly Taitz sues over healthcare

  1. Scientist says:

    Many of you will be shocked, shocked to find that Orly is once again wrong. In fact, HCR will be a boon to dentists because it will require that all health insurance plans include dental care for those 21 or under. There are no provisions affecting dental care for the elderly.


  2. misha says:

    Orly’s spouse drives a Tesla. She is hardly someone to complain about anything. She’s done quite well for a streetwalking shonde.

  3. misha says:

    Orly once lived in Romania.

    A refusnik from Romania is living in Tel Aviv, and a man proposes to her. She tells him she wants to talk to her rabbi first.

    She tells the rabbi she was a refusenik, and when she declared she wanted to go to Israel, she was fired from her job. She turned to shoplifting and streetwalking. Finally, the authorities had enough and let her emmigrate.

    The rabbi said, “well, you’re here, a man has proposed, you’re starting over. Mazel tov.”

    “There’s just one problem, rabbi.”
    “Problem? How should there be a problem?”
    “What should I tell my fiancé?”

    The rabbi says, “tell him everything, but don’t tell him you’re Romanian.”

  4. YellowDog says:

    Lies, big or small, are still lies. Dentists are not required to take the Hippocratic Oath. Typically, upon graduation, they take an oath crafted by their dental school that may be similar or identical to the Hippocratic Oath. In fact, MD’s are not required to take the oath; it is more tradition than anything else. And it is not legally binding. Why is it relevant to Taitz’s case? Only the voices in her head know.

  5. Paul Pieniezny says:

    “Orly once lived in Romania.” Yes, why did she go to Ceaucescu’s Romania after meeting her future husband?

    Someone ought to ask her if the violent overthrow of Obama would lead to the Health Care Reform being invalidated, then why did not the violent overthrow of Ceaucescu invalidate her Romanian dentistry diploma?

  6. thisoldhippie says:

    So, Ms Taitz who also claims to be a realtor apparently allowed her broker’s license to expire in 2004 and has not been re-licensed for anything else with the California Dept. of Real Estate. http://www2.dre.ca.gov/PublicASP/pplinfo.asp?License_id=01410896
    So she is lying when she says she is a realtor. Oh, and I’d like to see her original application because on here it says she has never gone by another name. Isn’t that fraud??
    I also want to know when she exactly registered to vote, has she always been a Republican, where are her naturalization papers?

  7. BatGuano says:

    “…..an infinity amount of dollars….”


  8. Benji Franklin says:

    Dear Yellow Dog,

    Orly demonstrates the problems that sirmount (sic) a woman when she is the master of 5 languages but the mistress of only one disbarred fast talker. Keep in mind that the “th” in “birther” is actually pronounced,”ff” (birffer).

    So what she SPELLS as, “Hippocratic Oath”, is PRONOUNCED, “Hypocritic Oaf”

    Benji Franklin

  9. Black Lion says:

    From the Post and Fail, an interesting article regarding the protest and passage of Healthcare reform….

    “At one point, when Miki asked the police where they could go if neither the sidewalk nor the road was allowed, she was told to “go over there behind that tree.” She said she observed a capitol policeman carrying a shotgun, and others had assault rifles. She also reported a stark difference in the way black capitol policemen treated black and non-black demonstrators.

    Miki said she observed no police harassment of those who supported illegal immigration and the health care bill.”

    OK. Lets make the conspiracy out of everything and make it also a Black / White issue…

    “Miki reports that no one from the “mainstream media” reported on those protesting the health care bill; however, they were spotted at the La Raza activities on Sunday. Miki saw only internet reporters covering the protests in which she and approximately 50,000 others against health care reform were involved.”

    So now instead of about 2000 people it is now 50,000. You have to love wingnut math…

    And finally the comment below says it all in regards to the wingnuts out there and how far they are willing to go in order to spite themselves…

    hank says:
    Wednesday, March 24, 2010 at 7:38 PM
    gosh dang it, even though i can’t afford insurance i’m not gonna get this nazi stuff even if it helps me and my family!

  10. SFJeff says:

    Yes, the thing I most identify the Nazi’s with is universal healthcare….

  11. Tomtech says:

    Orly is looking for help from real lawyers.

    She has asked that her Quo Warranto(?) suit be combined with the 13 SOS’s suit in Florida.

    I think that’s a lovely idea.

  12. Rickey says:

    Of course, Orly’s legal basis for suing Obama over the health care bill is faulty, never mind the standing issues. The fact is that while Obama did in fact sign the legislation, his signature was not necessary for it to become law. The Constitution provides that the president can decline to either sign or veto a piece of legislation which is sent to him, and after ten days it automatically becomes law. The only exception is if Congress adjourns during that ten-day period, in which case the failure to sign the bill is considered to have been vetoed (a “pocket veto”). Since Congress is scheduled to be in session at least until April 9, absent a signed veto the health care bill would have become law even without Obama’s signature.

    And her motion to consolidate is laughable. Obama isn’t even a named defendant in the suit filed in Florida by the various attorneys general, and the two actions involve issues which are entirely distinct.

  13. Dave says:

    I think anyone who wishes to argue that a law is invalid because the President isn’t eligible will find that this is a non-starter. The judge is likely to be of the opinion that the President is President when the electoral college results are certified by Congress and he’s sworn in. And if there’s any reason he’s ineligible, he’s still President until Congress removes him. And that no actions he took while President are invalidated by that removal.

  14. G says:

    I agree completely, Dave.

    What is even funnier and will make this whole thing even more entertaining is that Orly is working hard to get those 13 AG cases and her’s consolidated into one. LOL!

    There’s a good write-up about it at:


  15. nbc says:

    Typically you cannot attack the validity of the office or the occupant incidentally to the primary issue which is the constitutionality of the Law passed.

    Quo Warranto is an action on itself, and under the de-facto officer doctrine, the eligibility issue can unlikely be raised when arguing the constitutionality of the law which was passed by Congress and signed into law by the President (de facto or de jure).

    Combine this with the problem that it is unlikely that a QW can be used to challenge the office of the President and one comes to the quick conclusion that Orly’s approach is doomed to failure.
    Of course, the fact that she has no direct interest in the office is the most likely reason why the Court is going to reject her lawsuit.

  16. Arthur says:

    I so glad you highlighted that! I’ve never heard adults use that phrase, unless they were telling a joke, suffering from mental illness, or pretending to be 2nd graders. And Orly used it in a legal document!!! Wow. Just wow.

  17. misha says:

    She meant an infinite amount. Her English is not good enough to be an advocate.

  18. Arthur says:

    Oh come on Jeff, you must remember Shirer’s, “The Rise and Fall of Nazi Health Care” and Goldhagen’s “Hitler’s Willing Health-Care Executioners.” There’s also Riefensthal’s, “Triumph of the Health Care Bill” (in which Hitler explains the real enemy of Germany is uninsured Bavarians).

    And don’t forget Hitler’s prophetic speech (WARNING: PARODY COMING) on the eve of WWII when he told the world, “if conservative activists, in and outside Germany, should succeed in denying Germany universal health care, then the result will not be a conservative victory, but the annihilation of conservatives, the seizure of handguns, and the introduction of death panels!”

    Hitler-Holocaust-Health Care, there’s a reason they all start with H!

  19. misha says:


  20. Mike says:

    Yes, the thing I most identify the Nazi’s with is universal healthcare….

    Just ask the loathsome Jonah Goldberg…

  21. Arliss says:

    Burocracy??? Burocrats???

    Please tell me that she filed this with all the spelling errors intact! Too sweet!

    How the heck did this woman get to where she is without knowing how to spell?

  22. Arliss says:

    Every time someone is asked about attendance the number gets bigger.

  23. misha says:

    You don’t have to know how to spell to fix teeth.

  24. Arthur says:

    Before she developed her remarkable command of English, Orly relied on a few well-worn phrases in her dental practice:

    1. Open mouth. Ech! Don’t look so good in there.
    2. Spit! Ok, next time, spit farther.
    3. You want anesthesia, go to democrat.
    4. Stop crying! Pain is weakness leaving teeth.
    5. No, I’ll see YOU in court!
    6. Bleeding is good, means heart is working.
    7. Molar is usurping mouth, must be impeached.
    8. Regular extraction cost $100; for ten bucks, you get shot of vodka and kick to mouth.
    9. Paying with check? Ok, need driver’s license plus vault copy of long-form birth certificate.
    10. You have spider in mouth! No wait, false eyelash just fell on tongue.

  25. misha says:

    “the loathsome Jonah Goldberg”

    Conservative Jews – yuck!

    He only got his job because of his mother. He’s a third rate writer. All these conservatives scream ‘merit only,’ and then they turn out to be affirmative action for the wealthy. See Shrub.

    Just like Kristol. He’s been 100% wrong on everything. If it wasn’t for his father, he’d be a toll collector. I’m not belittling toll collectors – I just wouldn’t have one pontificating about foreign policy, and getting some people to listen.

  26. aarrgghh says:

    misha, knocking (nachting?) kristol:

    “Just like Kristol. He’s been 100% wrong on everything. If it wasn’t for his father, he’d be a toll collector.”

    … which reminds me of my all-time favorite anecdote about the kristols:

    So how did [Bill Kristol] end up with such a sweet gig? (Especially given that the Times already employed an incomparably more talented conservative columnist in the person of David Brooks.)

    The answer goes back to Farley’s observation about the extreme nepotism of the contemporary right-wing media machine. Kristol may be an utter mediocrity, but he’s an extraordinarily well-connected utter mediocrity. (Indeed, as this column went to press it was announced that the Washington Post Writers Group had hired Kristol.)

    Which brings me to this charming vignette, courtesy of blog commenter Harry Hopkins:

    “I remember back in the late 1990s, when Ira Katznelson, an eminent political scientist at Columbia, came to deliver a guest lecture. Prof. Katznelson described a lunch he had with Irving Kristol during the first Bush administration.

    “The talk turned to William Kristol, then Dan Quayle’s chief of staff, and how he got his start in politics. Irving recalled how he talked to his friend Harvey Mansfield at Harvard, who secured William a place there as both an undergrad and graduate student; how he talked to Pat Moynihan, then Nixon’s domestic policy adviser, and got William an internship at the White House; how he talked to friends at the RNC [Republican National Committee] and secured a job for William after he got his Harvard Ph.D.; and how he arranged with still more friends for William to teach at Penn and the Kennedy School of Government.

    “With that, Prof. Katznelson recalled, he then asked Irving what he thought of affirmative action. ‘I oppose it,’ Irving replied. ‘It subverts meritocracy.’ “


  27. misha says:

    True story: when I worked in NY as a licensed optician, the fellow who owned the optical store I was employed in, wanted his son to go to optometry school. Unfortunately, his son had a C average in biology. He told me he made a substantial donation to a school’s endowment, and they admitted his son. So how did the kid do? He failed out his first semester.

    My half-brother wanted to go to law school. Same thing, C average. He told me he made a breathtaking donation to a school near San Francisco, and was admitted. He did pass the California bar.

    And then this crowd howls about affirmative action.

  28. bovril1 says:

    Oh she is SOOOOO the gift that keeps on giving.

    Can we say paranoid delusions.

    (from her site)

    I also need help of computer experts, investigators, former FBI agents and police detectives to identify certain people and to trace their transactions and check, who is paying:

    1. the hackers, who constantly hack my web site and redirect traffic to derail my campaign and my law suits and prevent me from getting donations. This is not a random hacking. I paid for all of the security and protection of the web site, this is a targeted expensive hacking.

    2. who tampered with my pay-pal and who paid these people.

    3. who tampered with my car and who paid this person

    4. who paid all of these media thugs on Wikipedia, blogs and news papers to write garbage about me and refuse to write truthful information

    5. Who pays this lawyer Scott J Tepper from Malibu to harass me with frivolous complaints

    6. Who pays this deranged artist to paint a serious of paintings, showing me nude and holding bloody placenta and who sent it to my children

    7. who is paying to harasss my whole family

    8. who is paying to scrub info from the Internet, plant disinformation, turn counters and so on

    9. who paid this thug to make up a song about Orly Taitz which was full of f… words and post it on OC Weekly web site? Were the editors of OC weekly paid to keep this Spencer Kornhaber employed after he repeatedly slandered me and instigated hate crimes against me?

    10. Is someone paying the MSNBC management to unleash all of these thugs like Olbermann, Maddow, Mathews to derail my election and my law suits and to instigate hate crimes against me and my family?
    well, this is for starters, there is more. I really need your help, since law enforcement and the Department of Justice under Eric Holder is absolutely worthless

  29. Lupin says:

    Why can’t I get a job harassing Orly? How much it pay already?

  30. Scientist says:

    A bit off topic, but I wonder of any of the lawyers here could comment on the AG’s suit itself, aside from Orly’s insane rantings. From my non-lawyer’s perspective, I see serious issues of standing.

    First, the only part about which there seems to be a question is the mandate to have insurance. I see this as an excise tax, which one can avoid by having insurance, and therefore I don’t see a constitutional issue. But, even if you take the other side, this provision doesn’t go into effect until 2014, so how does anyone have standing to sue today? Aren’t the damages speculative until the law takes effect?

    Second, even once the law takes effect, how do state AGs have standing, since the law applies to individuals? Wouldn’t the supposedly aggrieved parties be those who refused to get insurance and were assessed the tax? There are certainly provisions in the bill that affect the states, like increased Medicaid eligibility, but I can’t see any constitutional issues with setting the income limits for a program at Y instead of X.

    Any thoughts on this?

  31. Arthur says:

    Quoting Orly,

    “4. who paid all of these media thugs on Wikipedia, blogs and news papers to write garbage about me and refuse to write truthful information”

    Who needs to be paid? Writing garbage about Orly is its own reward! Besides, I’m a realist; I write what I see.

  32. Lupin says:

    Some of Orly and Mario’s supporters are being charged with seditious conspiracy:


  33. Scientist says:

    Meanwhile, birther Congresscritter Nathan Deal, he of the letter to Obama demanding a birth certificate, resigned just before he was found by the Office of Congressional Ethics to have improperly used his influence to benefit his family’s auto salvage business.


    These birthers are a wonderful bunch, aren’t they?

  34. Black Lion says:

    Well it seems like Mario, who is not only pretending to be a Constitutional Legal Scholar, is now pretending to be an economist and health care expert….Fully stuff destined for the circular filing cabinet under Dr. C’s desk….


    “By nature, Man is born free and independent. But to live in a state of nature alone is not safe and offers no security. Hence, Man created government for his or her protection and to achieve maximum happiness. Under a constitutional republican form of government, Man delegates to that government limited powers to best achieve that protection. What rights and powers Man does not delegate to that government are his or her to exercise to his or her best advantage in the pursuit of his or her happiness. Let us examine the liberties which the People have retained and enjoyed since the Founding of the Constitutional Republic.

    Our current economic woes have not been caused by war but rather from bad economic decisions made by government, industry, and individuals. But we have seen the same in our history and as a nation we always overcame those times and eventually prevailed. Regardless of the cause of economic problems, what is important is that there is a remedy for curing them which is the same remedy offered by Melancthon Smith with reference to any post-war period. That remedy is “frugality,” “industry and economy; limit your expences within your earnings; sell more than you buy…”

    Indeed, if health care shall be the social problem upon which we are obliged to act, then let us act upon that problem alone and not allow the central government under the guise of curing that “evil” to intrude upon so many cherished liberties of the people. Why are we to give to the central government so much power and control over our private lives and industry in the name of health care? Can the central government not offer a more limited and balanced plan which would address the very concerns it expresses without intruding so much upon our liberties? We Americans are a wise and practical people. I cannot imagine that we cannot put together a plan that would address our current health care problems without the need of the central government taking over so much of our private lives and industry and forcing employers and individuals to purchase health insurance under circumstances dictated by the central government or face various forms of punishments. The danger with such government encroachment upon our individual liberties is that “history affords us no examples of persons once possessed of power resigning it willingly.” Melancthon Smith at 100. That Obama has not even tried to develop a much more limited and reasonable approach to the health care problem should tell a cautious and prudent person that his plan is not one of only solving the problem of health care, but rather one of taking advantage of a moment in history to gain power and control over private lives and industry and thereby achieve his grand plan of “redistribution of wealth” and slowly but eventually transform our free enterprise system into a government-controlled socialist/communist/Marxist way of life.”

  35. JoZeppy says:

    5. Who pays this lawyer Scott J Tepper from Malibu to harass me with frivolous complaints

    Oh, the irony.

  36. Black Lion says:

    And some of Mario’s insightful commentary….

    Puzo1 said…
    Before Obama and his Congressional supporters can impose their radical and unprecedented ideology upon Americans, they have to follow the dictates of the Constitution. That means that they have to first deal with the force and power of America, We the People. Let’s see who is going to win this battle over the Constitution, Obama or the Rest of America who does not support his radical attempt to transform free enterprise into socialism/communism/marxism. Since Obama is not an Article II “natural born Citizen,” I think he either forgot or is oblivious to the fact that he is messing with America and not some other part of the world.

    Giving Obama a chance to be President is one thing, but letting him destroy what Americans throughout history sacrificed so much and worked so hard to make is something completely different. Maybe Obama missed that lesson, too, but he will soon learn We the People did not.

    March 27, 2010 6:47 AM

    Puzo1 said…

    I do not honestly see how any judge appointed by Obama could decide the question of whether he is eligible for the office he holds. If he is not eligible, then the legality of the judicial appointment itself is put into doubt. Such a scenario clearly presents a conflict of interest for any such judge.

    March 26, 2010 1:29 PM

  37. Black Lion says:

    I wonder if he will stil be a hero to the birthers. Better yet will he finally release his infamous letter that he sent “demanding” the President produce his BC? Not likely….

  38. “I do not honestly see how any judge appointed by Obama could decide the question of whether he is eligible for the office he holds. If he is not eligible, then the legality of the judicial appointment itself is put into doubt. Such a scenario clearly presents a conflict of interest for any such judge.”

    Not a problem. Obama has not appointed that many judges.

  39. I don’t know about the connections to Orly and Apuzzo, but I am comforted by the fact that law enforcement is working when the nuts go off the reservation. (Can you say that?)

  40. nbc says:

    Ssshtt, do not confuse Mario with facts.

  41. Benji Franklin says:

    Dear Regulars,

    While there is no better site than Doc’s here to find debunking information concerning the birthers’ crazy theories, Mario’s presence here realistically indicates, I think, that he never expects to be heard in court.

    What serious lawyer trying to oust a sitting President would be here participating in name-calling battles and other such drivel?

    Benji Franklin

  42. G says:

    Me too. I’m glad to see Sedition prominently as Count 1 of 5. I am also very comforted to know that law enforcement had been monitoring these dangerous nuts for a long time and glad they were able to act in time to prevent their violent intentions.

    I’m hopeful that many of the potentially violent groups & individuals are being similarly monitored and will be stopped before they attempt to act out their aggressions.

  43. G says:

    After reading Mario’s screed against Health Care that Black Lion posted, I have to now wonder if Mario’s entire over-the-top tantrum behavior over the past week was predicated upon his reaction the signing into law of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

    He’s definitely gotten moody in the past, but over the past week, it seemed that all he he offered was bitter lashing out, without any substance or even attempt to discuss portions of his court arguments.

    I didn’t make the correlation between the two until now, but it makes sense.

  44. Black Lion says:

    G, you may be right. It seems like Mario really went off the rails with that screed….

  45. bovril1 says:

    And the Theater of the Absurd continues……

    Ultimate Leader Orly, trumpets on her web site of an interview given to The Independant, a newspaper of general good character in the UK.


    Alas, the muppet who did it failed to grasp just what a nettle this is to grasp.

    Apart from a couple of lightweight comments about her amaaaaaaazing makeup it ends up with something that is easy to view (particularly by birthers) as an endorsement and press release.

    Feeling that such should not just skate past I sent a mildly barbed notette to the writer and his editor.

    Based on the tone of reply, they are less than amused how it backfired on them…


    Eh?? You must be bloody nuts … anybody with a pulse can see that this woman is a crank and the clear and obvious purpose of the piece is to present her as such …

    and do pass this on to the PCC if you want


    Alas Orly’s site doesn’t want to hear about this turn of events…..8-(

  46. Dave says:

    I had to google PCC. Is that “Press Complaints Commission”? Did you threaten to rat them out?

  47. Black Lion says:

    Wow…That article was a tough read. I thought it must have been written by someone at WND. The second paragraph alone was tough to get through….

    “But the one thing Dr Orly Taitz really can’t stand is the way she’s usually described in print: queen bee of the so-called “birther” movement. “When you say ‘birther’ you’re using a pejorative term,” she says, with lawyerly aggression. “I’m in fact a constitutional attorney, who believes that Barack Hussein Obama could be guilty of a major fraud, and should therefore be investigated.” We are at a branch of TGI Friday’s about five minutes’ drive from the building in Orange County where Dr Taitz runs a dental surgery, a dormant estate agency, a solicitor’s practice and a high-profile international campaign to expose the President of the United States as a fraud.”

    I mean she claims to be a Constitutional attorney? That is like Sven/Dick claiming that his fiction is actually a plausible theory. And the fact that they have to meet in a TGI Fridays is just classic. Plus the writer must not understand what “high profile” really means.

    ” Dr Taitz began taking an interest in President Obama shortly before the 2008 election. Helped by a photographic memory, which allows her to quote obscure laws on cue, she threw her energies into trying to have his election declared illegal. Her blog was launched that summer, and her first lawsuits – seeking to get California’s Secretary of State to demand to see a copy of the then-Democratic candidate’s birth certificate – was filed a few weeks later.”

    Photographic memory? Really? Quote obscure laws? Did Orly write this herself? She has never written a coherent brief, cited the correct law, or made any legal sense and the writer puts such crap in print. For a minute I thought that Mario wrote this article.

    ” But there is the issue of race. If President Obama had white skin, the “birther” question wouldn’t exist. Protesters at recent Tea Party events, including Dr Taitz, are almost all white. Are the noisy right inserting themselves into the foreground of US politics motivated by a degree of racism?

    “That’s an interesting question,” she replies. “I would answer: in 2008, whites voted for Barack Obama in large numbers, close to 50-50. But nearly 90 per cent of blacks voted for Obama. So what does that tell you? I would say that the blacks of this country showed themselves to be more racist than whites.”

    Again I ask is Orly ane. She now claims that because Blacks voted for Obama at such a high percentage then they are “more racist than whites”. However under her logic then all of the whites that voted for McCain are racist because they voted for him. Every time she opens her mouth she proves how stupid she really is.

  48. Black Lion says:

    Even more interesting was one of the comments to the article….The poster is right. How do we know anything that Orly tells us about herself is actually true?

    Orly Taitz is a fraud.
    tangotanzer wrote:

    Tuesday, 30 March 2010 at 08:31 am (UTC)
    Did you check Wikipedia before you interviewed her? Did you at least google her? Perhaps you may then have realized that for someone who claims Obama was not born in Hawaii, she has got more than one wardrobe full of skeletons. Next time, you could ask her the following questions:

    1) a Red army reservist biography on the interent suggests her father served in the same Red Army unit as the father of Avigdor Lieberman and that they were born in the same town. What is HER present relationship to Avigdor Lieberman?

    2) why did she go to Romania (ruled by Ceaucescu at the time, so forget all these claims about anti-communism) a few years after settling in Israel? Does she have a Romanian dentistry diploma?

    3) at one time she claimed she was naturalized because of her marriage to Yosif Taitz, who himself was born in Latvia. Is she really an Amercian citizen?

    4) noticing her utter lack of basic English language skills, does she have corroborative evidence that she was the one who passed the California bar exam? Did she have a translator at her side to help her out, and if so, who was that translator?

    5) for someone who was born in Moldavia, her Russian accent is remarkable. Virtually no hint of Southern Russian influence – or any other accent for that matter (if you do not believe me, ask the new owner of your newspaper). Is there something in her Soviet past that we are not supposed to know?

  49. G says:

    Yeah, I just read the entire article and I agree that the author put out a lazy, hack-job that hardly qualifies as journalism. A lot of his info seemed very outdated and he seemed to just write whatever Orly told him, without any fact checking whatsoever. Therefore, I support your efforts of letting them know what a crap piece they put out there.

    Here are some of the specific area’s of the article I took issue with & why:

    ARTICLE: “We are at a branch of TGI Friday’s about five minutes’ drive from the building in Orange County where Dr Taitz runs a dental surgery, a dormant estate agency, a solicitor’s practice and a high-profile international campaign to expose the President of the United States as a fraud.”

    G’s RESPONSE: Minor issue to nitpick, but “dormant” estate agency? That sounds only like she’s not doing anything with it at the moment. From my understanding, her real estate license expired a few years back. That’s expired, not dormant.

    ARTICLE: “She is also pursuing 18 legal cases on behalf of around 200 US soldiers who are contesting their deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan. Her clients are arguing that Mr Obama is unqualified to act as their Commander in Chief because he was born overseas; possibly, they say, in Kenya or Indonesia.”

    G’s RESPONSE: This part was the most irresponsible reporting in the entire article. First of all 18 cases? Really??? We’ve been following this, and outside of a case or two still on appeal, where is the basis of 18 cases???

    Second, like a lot of the article, it seems most of the reporting is quite outdated by many months and makes it sound like there’s a lot of current activity out there, when there is not.

    Third and most important – “200 US soldiers who are contesting their deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan.” That is completely and utter BS and most irresponsible. Most of her so-called “military” clients are “former” military – retired or even kicked-out of the military, and they certainly don’t total anywhere near 200 from anything I’ve seen. Other than the 2 clients last summer where she tried to use their cases to pull a stunt related to their deployment, I’m not aware of any of them that are “active” or even seriously likely to ever get called up again. And those 2 cases were quickly and harshly shot down by the judge & military, with consequences for the bad judgment those 2 clients showed.

    ARTICLE: “‘AOL has also published a study saying 80 per cent of Americans believe there’s an issue with Obama’s birth,” adds Dr Taitz. “A Pew poll said 85 per cent would like to see his birth certificate. So there is a vast majority who think there’s a problem and say that we cannot have an unknown sitting in the White House.'”

    G SAYS: More irresponsible journalism. Yes, we’ve all seen some of these various polls that show disturbingly high percentages of people expressing “birtherism” amongst certain GOP, Tea Party, conservative, and/or Southern groups. But we all know that “birtherism” in the broader context of the American populace is a very minority view and there aren’t that many actual people asking or caring about this issue outside of the wingnut fringe. His quoting of the further overblown AOL statistics and Orly’s 85% of Americans claim without adding any challenge or context to such statements that shows a complete lack of journalistic integrity and paints an extremely misleading and picture of American’s viewpoints to his British audience.

    ARTICLE: “Though once considered taboo, the issue of where the President was born has entered the mainstream. CNN’s Lou Dobbs actively encourages debate of it. Republican politicians call for his birth certificate to be published.”

    G SAYS: Again, this is completely irresponsible and misleading. First of all, the issue is hardly “mainstream”, other than the aspect that a lot of people have heard the birthers squawking by now. Most people don’t view the birthers or their issue as credible or worthy of time. If anything, the birther movement has been steadily loosing steam for quite some time now.

    Second, Lou Dobbs pretty much lost his job at CNN and his credibility because of his “birther” statements last summer and he hasn’t really been heard from since. To report on Dobbs now as if this is current or if he still works at CNN is beyond outdated, it is utter journalistic negligence.

    Finally, his description of GOP politicians calling for it to be published is further journalistic malfeasance and portrays the reality of the situation as much more than it is. Yes, a number of state level and sometimes even federal level GOP folks have tried to play “footsie” with the birthers with their statements & actions. Nathan Deal, the now disgraced ex-congressman of GA probably took it the further in the letter he claimed to have written to Obama on the issue, which went nowhere. Yet every single one of them, when confronted about the issue have tried to back down or soft-peddle their statements. Other than trying to score cheap political points with a frothing rabid-mad base, no one in the GOP has made any serious efforts to pursue this issue.

    I could go on. The rest of the article continues to make similar mistakes and tries to portray Orly, her website and her “movement” as larger and much more “popular” that it really is and although it makes a few lazy references to it, really seems to downplay that she is viewed as nothing but an entire crazy joke within the mainstream from every direction; from within the legal community, the media and the public at large.

  50. G says:

    Yeah, totally agree Black Lion. It really did feel like a WND article.

    There was just so much that was wrong within the article, that in my response comment about its problems, I already ran so long that I stopped before even mentioning the crazy claims that she has a “photographic memory” (Really? Based on what?), fawning statements about how “intelligent” she is, and letting her call herself a “Constitutional Attorney” without a challenge.

    No mention of her online law degree I see either.

  51. bovril1 says:


    One never threatens, one makes simple statements of fact and one delivers, Press Complaints Commission complaint filed at 13:59 pm Eastern Time.

    The Indie, as a paper, is a relative newcomer to the British market, started 1986 and is generally leftish in lesning.

    It does however gets up it’s own arse periodically and thinks itself better than squalid business of news….IMHO…>8-)

    The intent may have been a jokey, “nudge-nudge, wink-wink”, laugh at the crazy woman but singularly failed to deliver.

    In fact my Obot slaves have noted a number of bat-shit crazy birther sites posting it approvingly.

    If you feel the article needs poking for its general crapness, feel free to file a complaint with the PCC.

    Not being a resident of the UK is NOT an issue if the matter ocurrs in their remit.


    Being a person of a particularly nasty minded bent I’m going to drop a note to Private Eye, a truly viciously satirical weekly and see if they want to run it in the Street of Shame Section.

    A magazine I heartily reccommend for the best of well written back, front and side stabbing in the press…….8-)


  52. Rickey says:

    I haven’t been able to find any record of a Pew Poll which shows that 85% of Americans want to see Obama’s birth certificate. The closest thing that I can find is a 2009 Pew Poll which showed that 83% of respondents were aware of the claims that Obama wasn’t born in the U.S., but nowhere does it say that those people were demanding to see his birth certificate.


    Of course, it’s typical of Orly to misrepresent things, and sadly the reporter made no effort to find out if claims she makes are true.

  53. misha says:

    “for someone who was born in Moldavia, her Russian accent is remarkable. Virtually no hint of Southern Russian influence”

    From what I remember from my grandfather, she speaks Russian like a Moscovite. She has plenty of skeletons in her closet.

    Was she a street walker?

  54. Rickey: I haven’t been able to find any record of a Pew Poll which shows that 85% of Americans want to see Obama’s birth certificate.

    Hey, I would love to see Obama’s hospital birth certificate. If I had a copy, I would blow it up, frame it and hang it on my study wall. I would also like to see the Swiss Alps, the Louvre and the Hermitage in Russia. My desire for these is for the pleasure of it, and not because of any doubts I have about Obama’s eligibility, nor do they imply any obligation on the part of President Obama to satisfy my viewing desires.

    Should I start putting up billboards: “Where’s my plane ticket to Paris?”

  55. Black Lion says:

    Misha, I figured you would like that comment…You had always suspected that she may be affiliated with Avigdor Lieberman and it is interesting to see the connection there. Beyond her incompetence, I think Orly may have some secrets that she would not want exposed to the general public….

  56. Rickey says:

    The U.S. Attorney’s office has filed a Motion to Dismiss on behalf of Obama in Orly’s Quo Warranto case.


    It is not surprising to see that Orly has made a number of serious procedural errors, including serving Obama with her False Claims Act claim. Such claims are to be filed under seal and are not to be served on the defendant. Orly’s mistake in and of itself dooms that claim.

  57. Did Phil and Orly go to the same law school? They made the same mistake. I suspect Phil Berg just made a mistake; Orly doesn’t think rules apply to her.

  58. Thanks, I added a link to the docket.

  59. misha says:

    “I think Orly may have some secrets that she would not want exposed to the general public…”

    I’m sure she has plenty. I supported Sharansky until he went off the deep end. Russia gave him a world class education, and all he does now is spit at them, and use his office to harass Arabs.

    Good job, Natan!

  60. Rickey says:

    Orly has filed a Motion to Intervene in State of Florida, et al. v. U.S. DHHS, et al. I’m sure that the plaintiffs will be thrilled to have her help them out.


  61. Bovril says:

    It is quite plain that Mad Ole Orly dinna write this one Cap’n.

    Grammatical, spelt correctly, concise, actual cases cited, no “3,231 SSN’s”, no “USURPER” etc etc…..

    Do we smell the whiff of CEL and the Dentist Chair of Endless Joy…?

    Inquiring minds need to know…>8-)

  62. More likely Jonathan Levy.

  63. G says:

    LMAO! I’m not surprised, but I must admit that it would have been so much fun to see her actually leech onto these cases and turn them into further doomed circus acts than they already are.

    I found p5 of the denial to be particularly interesting, although also not surprising.

    It mentioned that quite a number of other “pro se” requests for intervention on this have been received. (I wouldn’t be surprised if these turn out to be mostly from hyperventilating, hysterical TeaBaggers with too much time on their hands.)

    Second, I love how crisp and dismissive the court is of all of her crazy birther claims in one succinct sentence, describing them as “collateral issues” that the court should not concern themselves with as such were unrelated to any of the actual real legal issues being pursued in these cases.

    Queue up the usual over-reactive hissy-fit reaction by Orly in 1-2-3…

  64. Rickey says:

    More hilarity from Orly. She now claims that because Judge Vinson acknowledged that she has “an interest” in the outcome of the Florida lawsuit challenging health reform, that somehow gives her standing in her Quo Warranto case.


    She also accuses the U.S. Attorneys involved in the case of being complicit in Obama’s “fraud.” Once again, you couldn’t make this stuff up.

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.