Main Menu

What does Orly Taitz not want you to see?

I reported that Dean Haskins has been critical of Orly Taitz as of late, and speculates that she will not present the birthers in the best possible light at the hearing in Atlanta tomorrow. I agree, as will most people who have seen Orly in action and read her legal briefs.

Dissention in the birther ranks

Haskins says he’s gotten hate mail, and Orly reports that one prominent birther has severed ties with Haskins over it.

Dean,

I would appreciate it if you remove my bio and all references of my association with Birther Summit immediately.

Your attacks against Orly Taitz are despicable and I will not tolerate it.

I also want to go on record that I asked several times to reconsider the name of the summit because the word “birther” is insulting and damages our credibility on the most important issue of our lifetime. I have worked too hard trying to save our country from tyranny and evil and your ego along with the egos of those who have chosen to stand with you against Orly is only defeating my purpose.

Sincerely,

Miki Booth

I also reported that a newcomer to the Birther movement, the Article II Super PAC, is collecting money for a live video feed of the Atlanta hearing. That’s excited many birthers who feel that the hearing will be favorable to them and want to enjoy the moment live. Orly is not on board. She wrote [link to Taitz web site].

please, do not support any blogger, who has on his website a sign “art2superpac” and who asks to donate  to “art2superpac” legal fund.

Taitz (at the link preceding) writes a lot more about the Article 2 Super PAC, saying that they act like “Chicago thugs.” Is Taitz just angry because the Article 2 Super PAC isn’t giving her any money? Is it because they complete for attention? Is it payback for criticism of her at Obama Release Your Records run by one of the folks at the PAC? Or is it because she doesn’t want that video feed of her in the courtroom?

In my article, Experts witnesses in Georgia, I pointed out  that most of what Orly calls a witness list will never make to the stand, either on the issue of relevance, or on the issue of (lack of) expertise. Does Taitz want the world to see that she has no real case?

,

40 Responses to What does Orly Taitz not want you to see?

  1. avatar
    RuhRoh January 25, 2012 at 2:14 pm #

    As Orly has never been what one might call media-shy, I really think her main issue with the Article SuperPac is that it diverts funds that could be going directly to her.

    Orly’s not self-aware enough to consider that she may not perform well in a courtoom. My coffee table is more self-aware than Orly.

  2. avatar
    RuhRoh January 25, 2012 at 2:24 pm #

    I did a little search on the internet and found that Helen Tansey, owner of the Article II Superpac, had some veryuncharitable things to say about Orly and her legal prowess and suggested that birthers should turn away from the “fiasco” that is dentist/realtor/attorney Taitz! It’s not ONLY about the money, it’s also about Orly’s hurt feelings.

    From Orly’s website on 1/16/12:

    “art2 superpac was organizaed by a woman by name Helen Tansey. This woman claims she is a big supporter of eligibility issue, that she used to be a Democrat, possibly a registered Democrat, but she saw the light and now she is a Republican fighting Obama. I am not so sure this is the case.

    […]

    This woman, Helen Tansey, sent e-mails to numerous supporters attacking me, saying that it was a fiasco. She was claiming that I need to be replaced as a leader of this movement. Many wrote back to her and told her that she really has the nerve. She never donated 1 cent to my work, she never filed any law suites herself. She was just bad mouthing me.

    After she was told to shut up, she started a blog art2superpac. She operates using this name. Officially, the goal is to promote understanding that according to Article2 of the constitution Obama is not a natural born citizen, due to his fathers citizenship. Well, we all know this. Why give money to this blogger? But, what I’ve seen, is that lately she started cooperating with a couple of other bloggers. Those couple bloggers are promoting her, it’s like a pac. One of these bloggers in Bob Nelson, who is running a blog ObamaReleaseYourrecords (ORYR). Lately he wrote several highly defamatory articles about me. At the same time he is heavily promoting this art2suoerpac. This is done on the eve of a legal action in GA, where I am working very hard, bringing witnesses to court, paying for airfare and hotel of several witnesses, flying to HI, trying to get a judge in HI to enforce the subpoena from GA. So, these defamatory articles are hurting my ability to raise funds and fly to different locations and fly witnesses to trial.


    What I am questioning is, who is behind this art2superpac? In whose best interest is it to attack the only attorney who brings the most explosive evidence? In whose interest is it to come up with a gimmick, which is diverting funds from the movement, from the supporters in order to make it impossible for me to succeed? Make your own conclusions. More on attacks on me by people who pretend to be on our side”

  3. avatar
    Paul January 25, 2012 at 2:41 pm #

    I’m pretty sure Orly had that post about Article 2 Super PAC up several days before they announced they would be broadcasting from the courtroom.

  4. avatar
    Majority Will January 25, 2012 at 2:44 pm #

    RuhRoh: My coffee table is more self-aware than Orly.

    Probably a lot more stable.

  5. avatar
    Bob January 25, 2012 at 2:54 pm #

    Forming a group out of paranoids isn’t an easy task.

  6. avatar
    G January 25, 2012 at 2:55 pm #

    Helen Tansey came to Birtherism via being a disgruntled PUMA. That was one of the proto-Birther movements built on irrational resentment and hate that was first susceptible to the rabbit-hole lure of this nonsense. That was her path to the dark side.

    In terms of why is Orly angry and all the reasons you listed Dr. C – I place my bet on ALL of the above…

  7. avatar
    G January 25, 2012 at 2:57 pm #

    Agreed. When all they’ve got is fevered dreams and grifting to go on… there is no real foundation underneath them to build on…

    Bob: Forming a group out of paranoids isn’t an easy task.

  8. avatar
    El Diablo Negro January 25, 2012 at 3:29 pm #

    Egotistical women do not tolerate other egotisical women around them very well. This is from my own experience.

  9. avatar
    Thomas Brown January 25, 2012 at 3:46 pm #

    I love the blanket statements: “Everyone knows he’s not a NBC.” “The BC is obviously a forgery.” “The truth will come out.” etc.

    Hilarious.

  10. avatar
    Nathanael January 25, 2012 at 4:17 pm #

    RuhRoh:
    she never filed any law suites herself

    How do you file a law suite? Rent one, sure. Work out of one, no doubt.

    File?

  11. avatar
    Patrick McKinnion January 25, 2012 at 4:18 pm #

    I guess my main questions boil down to:

    1) WIll be Article II Super Duper Extra Crispy PAC stop their video feed when Dr. Orly’s portion of the hearing comes up?

    2) Will Dr. Orly throw a tantrum when she realizes the cameras aren’t on her?

    3) Will Carl Swensson throw a fit if the courtroom has a gold-fringed flag on it??

  12. avatar
    G January 25, 2012 at 4:19 pm #

    Yeah, that always cracks me up too.

    I look at it this way – one of the things these bitter folks can’t accept most of all is that the majority of the country chose differently than them. Obama’s election victory wasn’t close – it was a commanding majority win in every sense of the word. That is too much for these denialists to accept – period.

    They simply have to pretend to themselves that they are much bigger a force than they really are. Part of their inability to deal with reality is being able to accept that they are just a very small minority of a minority and that most of the world disagrees with them and their views.

    They simply need their delusions of size to not feel utterly helpless and hopeless… for if they admit reality, they are forced to deal with how utterly inconsequential they are.

    Thomas Brown: I love the blanket statements: “Everyone knows he’s not a NBC.” “The BC is obviously a forgery.” “The truth will come out.” etc.Hilarious.

  13. avatar
    charo January 25, 2012 at 4:50 pm #

    *FYI*

    BREAKING NEWS:

    Orley Taitz is reporting on her website (orleytaitzesquire.com) that OBAMA’s attorney Mr. JABLONSKI in a letter to BRAIN KEMP, secretary of State for the state of Georgia to take the case due to be heard tomorrow morning away from Judge Maliki’s authority.

    Jablonski also says in this rubbish letter that he is awaiting the SOS’s action and that HE WILL NOT BE ATTENDING THE HEARING TOMORROW PENDING THE SOS’s ACTION.

  14. avatar
    aarrgghh January 25, 2012 at 4:50 pm #

    G: They simply have to pretend to themselves that they are much bigger a force than they really are.Part of their inability to deal with reality is being able to accept that they are just a very small minority of a minority and that most of the world disagrees with them and their views.

    yes, part of the wingnut psyche insatiably craves validation, a topic i explored in my shadenfreude-drenched apr 2009 daily kos diary “why i love certifigate”:

    “the noise machine provided a reassuring red teat for the densest of dittoheads, no matter how infantile their misconceptions, and well-funded wingnut welfare spawned numberless well-dressed zombie spokespeople from numberless impressive-sounding organizations, like the american enterprise institute and the heritage foundation, to validate their nonsense …

    … for two full years birthers have struggled mightily to get the kind of teabag-worthy full court press coverage they could enjoy if and only if the noise machine wanted their demands on headlines and tv sets across the nation. instead, they’re forced to share shelf space with bat-boy, subsisting on the occasional crumbs dropped by a tabloid like the globe and the formerly-reviled commie mouthpieces pravda and rzeczpospolita. wouldn’t dear daddy reagan be so proud?”

  15. avatar
    Majority Will January 25, 2012 at 4:51 pm #

    Nathanael: How do you file a law suite? Rent one, sure. Work out of one, no doubt.

    File?

    A political decedent files a suite with an emery bored, of coarse.

  16. avatar
    charo January 25, 2012 at 4:55 pm #

    charo:
    *FYI*

    BREAKING NEWS:

    Orley Taitz is reporting on her website (orleytaitzesquire.com) that OBAMA’s attorney Mr. JABLONSKI in a letter to BRAIN KEMP, secretary of State for the state of Georgia to take the case due to be heard tomorrow morning away from Judge Maliki’s authority.

    Jablonski also says in this rubbish letter that he is awaiting the SOS’s action and that HE WILL NOT BE ATTENDING THE HEARING TOMORROW PENDING THE SOS’s ACTION.

    Not my quote

  17. avatar
    Nathanael January 25, 2012 at 5:05 pm #

    Patrick McKinnion:

    1)WIll be Article II Super Duper Extra Crispy PAC stop their video feed when Dr. Orly’s portion of the hearing comes up?

    Sounds to me like it’s more Taitz has a problem with art2superpac than the reverse. In any case, if a2sp does have it in for Taitz, I suspect they could do no better than to give Taitz excactly what she wants — exposure. While the screechy types think they’re getting heard, most people’s reactions tend to be along the lines of, “What’s wrong with HER?”

  18. avatar
    Wile January 25, 2012 at 5:08 pm #

    Patrick McKinnion:

    1)WIll be Article II Super Duper Extra Crispy PAC stop their video feed when Dr. Orly’s portion of the hearing comes up?

    When I talked to Helen on the phone the other day, I asked that very question.

    She told me that her video feed would show the whole show…even if it lasted for more than one day.

  19. avatar
    Paul January 25, 2012 at 5:08 pm #

    Bob:
    Forming a group out of paranoids isn’t an easy task.

    HAHA!!! Oh God, that would make a GREAT SNL sketch!!!

  20. avatar
    Majority Will January 25, 2012 at 5:15 pm #

    Wile: When I talked to Helen on the phone the other day, I asked that very question.

    She told me that her video feed would show the whole show…even if it lasted for more than one day.

    Considering the latest developments, she’ll have to record herself making animal shadow puppets as of right now.

    BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA ! ! !

  21. avatar
    richCares January 25, 2012 at 5:23 pm #

    “Considering the latest developments, she’ll have to record herself making animal shadow puppets as of right now.”
    .
    I resent this comment, do you realize that I now need a new keybord, It is very hard to hold a hot cup of coffee when you are laughing your a_____ off.
    .
    in other news , Jablonski’s letter on not going along with this sideshow is on fogbow, if you are not a member, sign up.

  22. avatar
    Nathanael January 25, 2012 at 5:28 pm #

    charo:
    Jablonski also says in this rubbish letter that he is awaiting the SOS’s action and that HE WILL NOT BE ATTENDING THE HEARING TOMORROW PENDING THE SOS’s ACTION.

    Full text has now been posted over at Fogbow: http://www.thefogbow.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=88&t=6845&start=3875

    There was discussion earlier at Fogbow that non-attendance might, in fact, be Jablonski’s best response to the media circus Malihi has allowed this to turn into. The argument goes that with all the evidence already available in favor of the president, there is little to be served by Jablonski showing up at the hearings anyway, except to lend an aura of more credibility to the screechers than they deserve.

    The biggest concern seems to be the political mileage birthers/republicans could make out of Jablonski’s non-attendance — something along the lines of a picture of an empty chair with the caption, “Barack Obama thinks he’s above the law”.

    However, based on the wording of the letter, it sounds to me like Jablonski hasn’t even bothered to submit a copy of the birth certificate. Is that wise?

  23. avatar
    Majority Will January 25, 2012 at 5:33 pm #

    Nathanael: Full text has now been posted over at Fogbow: http://www.thefogbow.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=88&t=6845&start=3875

    There was discussion earlier at Fogbow that non-attendance might, in fact, be Jablonski’s best response to the media circus Malihi has allowed this to turn into. The argument goes that with all the evidence already available in favor of the president, there is little to be served by Jablonski showing up at the hearings anyway, except to lend an aura of more credibility to the screechers than they deserve.

    The biggest concern seems to be the political mileage birthers/republicans could make out of Jablonski’s non-attendance — something along the lines of a picture of an empty chair with the caption, “Barack Obama thinks he’s above the law”.

    However, based on the wording of the letter, it sounds to me like Jablonski hasn’t even bothered to submit a copy of the birth certificate. Is that wise?

    Idiotic, delusional birther rhetoric exemplifies the phrase, “damned if you do and damned if you don’t”.

  24. avatar
    Majority Will January 25, 2012 at 5:37 pm #

    Nathanael: it sounds to me like Jablonski hasn’t even bothered to submit a copy of the birth certificate. Is that wise?

    He mentions FFAC and Hawaii and frivolous suits. It seems the implication is neither the SOS or the Judge would doubt the veracity of the Hawaii DOH and their well established certification of the President’s birth there on August 4th, 1961.

  25. avatar
    Wile January 25, 2012 at 5:57 pm #

    Majority Will: Considering the latest developments, she’ll have to record herself making animal shadow puppets as of right now.

    BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA ! ! !

    Well that’s an interesting twist.

    Works for me. Thursday is my busy day.

    I bet you’ll still be watching though…right?

  26. avatar
    Nathanael January 25, 2012 at 6:09 pm #

    Majority Will: He mentions FFAC and Hawaii and frivolous suits. It seems the implication is neither the SOS or the Judge would doubt the veracity of the Hawaii DOH and their well established certification of the President’s birth there on August 4th, 1961.

    Yeah, I guess so. Since Malihi is only tasked with fact-finding, on the one hand, the facts are already out there – certified BCs, multiple statements from the Hawaii DOH, so technically, there’s no need for Jablonski to submit so much as the HDOH’s phone number.

    On the other hand, particularly in light of last week’s widely perceived gaffe with the motion to dismiss, it strikes this NAL-type that prudence might call for a little extra precaution by placing the evidence directly in Malihi’s hand.

  27. avatar
    G January 25, 2012 at 6:26 pm #

    WOW! Just getting over here again and seeing this latest development…

    I’m currently of the mindset of what you just described. While I can understand Jablonski’s argument of not wanting to give credence to craziness, I too am concerned that his very own obstinate actions are just making things worse and are more arrogantly foolhardy than wise.

    I’m with you, all he has to do is simply pull out a certified paper COLB or even a signed form that attested to the filer (Obama) having understood and met the requirements. That is all. No drama. Case is pretty much done and shut.

    By just being obstinate, Jablonski seems to be a key part of turning this whole thing into a much bigger circus act than it ever would have been in the first place.

    I understand his points, but I think it is unwise and poor legal representation for him to pull a tantrum and not show up to do his job for what should be a simple slam dunk case to make his arguments and satisfy the requirements of the hearing.

    It seems that both he & the judge have contributed to the atmospherics of raising an otherwise simple and low-level hearing into a full blown clusterf&ck…

    Nathanael: The biggest concern seems to be the political mileage birthers/republicans could make out of Jablonski’s non-attendance — something along the lines of a picture of an empty chair with the caption, “Barack Obama thinks he’s above the law”.

    However, based on the wording of the letter, it sounds to me like Jablonski hasn’t even bothered to submit a copy of the birth certificate. Is that wise?

  28. avatar
    G January 25, 2012 at 6:28 pm #

    Agreed. Obstinance is just making an unnecessarily mountain out of a molehill…

    Nathanael: On the other hand, particularly in light of last week’s widely perceived gaffe with the motion to dismiss, it strikes this NAL-type that prudence might call for a little extra precaution by placing the evidence directly in Malihi’s hand.

  29. avatar
    Scientist January 25, 2012 at 6:49 pm #

    G: Agreed. Obstinance is just making an unnecessarily mountain out of a molehill…

    There is no obstinance and no mountain. The second-to-last paragraph of the letter is quite clear-the political parties run the primaries. For example the national parties have punished states for holding their primaries too early and will do so again this year.

  30. avatar
    G January 25, 2012 at 6:53 pm #

    Sure there is. The defense could have clearly made that argument from the very beginning…not just here at the last minute.

    Scientist: There is no obstinance and no mountain. The second-to-last paragraph of the letter is quite clear-the political parties run the primaries. For example the national parties have punished states for holding their primaries too early and will do so again this year.

  31. avatar
    Scientist January 25, 2012 at 6:59 pm #

    G: Sure there is. The defense could have clearly made that argument from the very beginning…not just here at the last minute

    Jablonski and the SoS undoubtedly know each other very well, and have interacted on other cases, so I would be surprised if they haven’t discussed this more than once.

    This is NOT a judicial proceeding in front of an independent judge. It is an administrative matter and the ALJ is actually under the SoS as the letter points out.

  32. avatar
    Majority Will January 25, 2012 at 7:19 pm #

    Wile: Well that’s an interesting twist.

    Works for me.Thursday is my busy day.

    I bet you’ll still be watching though…right?

    Probably not. Schadenfreude overload.

  33. avatar
    RuhRoh January 25, 2012 at 7:52 pm #

    Nathanael: How do you file a law suite? Rent one, sure. Work out of one, no doubt. File?

    Nathanael,

    You didn’t quote MY words, you referred to a quote of Orly Taitz’s that was included in my post.

    PLEASE do NOT ever represent Orly’s words as falling from MY mouth.

    THANK YOU.

  34. avatar
    Majority Will January 25, 2012 at 7:56 pm #

    RuhRoh: Nathanael,

    You didn’t quote MY words, you referred to a quote of Orly Taitz’s that was included in my post.

    PLEASE do NOT ever represent Orly’s words as falling from MY mouth.

    THANK YOU.

    I saw that and I’m sure it was an honest mistake.

  35. avatar
    G January 25, 2012 at 8:15 pm #

    I completely agree with that. I, along with everyone else, am simply extremely surprised by all the bizarre turn of events here and that thing could be allowed to spiral out of control so much in the first place.

    I’ll do my best to refrain from speculation on what will happen. From a pure entertainment standpoint, the unexpected always makes for a better show. Of course, debacles are always a black mark on society as a whole.

    Regardless of what happens tomorrow, there are people who are down in GA and will have cameras at the ready to record the situation on the ground. Hearing or not, we’ve got a full-blown circus on our hands and I still look forward to keeping my schedule clear in the morning to find the live feeds and simply observe how it all plays out.

    It has simply become a much greater spectacle than either anticipated or necessary. I still have no worries about the eventual outcome. But I completely admit that the events leading up to this are certainly ones that have taken me by surprise…. and that is on all sides of the equation, nearly every step along the way.

    Scientist: This is NOT a judicial proceeding in front of an independent judge. It is an administrative matter and the ALJ is actually under the SoS as the letter points out.

  36. avatar
    Expelliarmus January 26, 2012 at 5:58 am #

    G: Sure there is. The defense could have clearly made that argument from the very beginning…not just here at the last minute.

    They did. It’s very clearly set out in the motion to dismiss Jablonski filed in December.

  37. avatar
    charo January 26, 2012 at 6:12 am #

    G:
    I completely agree with that.I, along with everyone else, am simply extremely surprised by all the bizarre turn of events here and that thing could be allowed to spiral out of control so much in the first place.

    I’ll do my best to refrain from speculation on what will happen.From a pure entertainment standpoint, the unexpected always makes for a better show.Of course, debacles are always a black mark on society as a whole.

    Regardless of what happens tomorrow, there are people who are down in GA and will have cameras at the ready to record the situation on the ground.Hearing or not, we’ve got a full-blown circus on our hands and I still look forward to keeping my schedule clear in the morning to find the live feeds and simply observe how it all plays out.

    It has simply become a much greater spectacle than either anticipated or necessary.I still have no worries about the eventual outcome.But I completely admit that the events leading up to this are certainly ones that have taken me by surprise…. and that is on all sides of the equation, nearly every step along the way.

    Even if the argument was made, he lost, even if wrongly. So the proper tactic is not to threaten not to show up? Dicey IMO.

  38. avatar
    charo January 26, 2012 at 6:13 am #

    Sorry, that was supposed to quote Exp.

  39. avatar
    charo January 26, 2012 at 6:14 am #

    Oh boy, “the proper tactic is to threaten not to show up” (too many nots)

  40. avatar
    G January 26, 2012 at 12:24 pm #

    After watching the whole event transpire live, I now concede that there turned out to be no real value for Jablonski to bother showing up. The whole thing was just a free-for-all venting session. The judge pretty much let just about anybody speak on anything they wanted and only intervened here & there to cut things short and keep it moving along. Orly even decided to depose herself! (Most entertaining part of the spectacle).

    By letting them just have their day of venting with little interruption, it actually went fairly quickly and Orly actually wrapped up more quickly than I’ve seen her do in the past. The judge just called the hearing done at that point and quickly got up and left to his chambers, without further comment.

    As everyone is supposed to provide arguments in writing to the judge by Feb 5th, I can now see why there was no point in the defense wasting time being there. Had they showed up, the entire thing would have been objecting to every other sentence and action by the litigants and would have just bogged down by lowering themselves to the level of participating in this dog & pony show.

    So now that I’ve seen how the judge was letting this play out and how nothing was going to be decided today anyways, I finally grasp the wisdom of the defense deciding not to be a party to this charade at all.

    Hey, the Birthers got to vent their steam. They can claim now that they finally “had their day in court” and that someone let them be heard. Let them have that. That’s all that they accomplished today. A bizarre show of entertainment, but that is all today turned out to be.

    Again, not what I had anticipated at all, but nothing that I take much issue with either. The court simply let them blow off their steam and be heard. I may view that as an unnecessary waste of court time, but seemingly very little harm done in the end… other than being a bit of a mild freakshow.

    charo: Even if the argument was made, he lost, even if wrongly. So the proper tactic is not to threaten not to show up? Dicey IMO.