Attorneys Scott Tepper and Sam Begley representing the Mississippi Democratic Executive Committee participated in a special edition of Reality Check Radio and other representatives of the anti-birther community have filed reports on the September 24, 2012 hearing in Jackson, Mississippi before federal district judge Henry T. Wingate, in a case where Orly Taitz claims Obama isn’t eligible to be President and that he, along with the Democratic Party and the State of Hawaii, are engaging in an organized criminal conspiracy (RICO) to hide all of this.
Now we have the official transcript of the hearing, thanks to Jack Jack Ryan collection on Scribd, and I include that below.
Before continuing, consider that these court transcripts and docket entries don’t come cheap. Many thousands of dollars have been spent in obtaining the Jack Ryan collection. If you enjoy these informative documents, I hope you will consider joining me in making a generous contribution to the Friends of the Fogbow.
Its a GREAT read. She gets curb stomped by the judge.
I noticed something interesting that I hadn’t known before. In her argument for not properly serving the additional defendants, she said that she did the best she could, but that she couldn’t effect proper service because the case was in limbo at the Mississippi Supreme Court. However, it seems that she should have served the complaint at least by certified mail IF SHE HAD CHECKED the individual delivery box. So she blew it because she didn’t read the rules. Also, Mr. Tepper pointed out that the case, while the Supreme Court was in the process of assigning a new judge, was not stayed, and the Clerk of the Hinds County court could have issued the necessary summons.
Orly’s argument is factually incorrect as well as legally incorrect. She seems to be saying that since it wasn’t possible for her do something, she is excused from having to do it, even though the rules requirement, and that it is unfair for a defendant to take advantage of the rules. Well, the rules are not there just when they make things go Orly’s way.
It would have been defective. Orly merely sent copies of the First Amended Complaint to the newly-added defendants, WITHOUT THE SUMMONS. The summons is what hails a defendant into court and sets the lawsuit in motion, so serving the complaint without the summons was defective. Checking the box for restrictive delivery would not have cured that.
What Orly doesn’t get is that these judges are still accepting her cases despite these requirements so they can make a ruling and get rid of her.
Sort of a “your case wasn’t legal, but now the ruling is recorded. Go away.”
I’m reading it right now. I don’t usually follow the stories about court cases quite as closely, because I have a hard time understanding legal stuff. I feel like this is some sort of professional in-joke that I’d have to be a lawyer to get. But I’m only on page 20 so far. Maybe it’ll get better.
I see that now.
So Orly argued that she did the best she could under the circumstances, but the facts are that she didn’t. She could have easily obtained the summons and checked the individual delivery box and effected service.
Of course the speedy motion for removal to Federal Court did place some time constraints on serving the new defendants, but 5 days is doable I think.
In any case, even if she had served them all in time, they would all have joined in the removal anyway, so this whole show was pointless.
Page 19 is where the fun begins and it gets really interesting at about page 70. I read it in a couple of hours last night and had wildly entertaining time while doing so. It DOES get much better. 🙂
Doc, thanks for posting this and I will surely make a contribution.
Thrifty: Maybe it’ll get better.
the “good stuff” begins around page 70
p 72 tepper: But Ms. Taitz has been going around the country making speeches, suing the Democratic Party in every state and Obama for America and President Obama and spreading her smear throughout the country. And what she’s desperate for is an evidentiary hearing so that she can put on her totally unqualified partisan experts to smear President Obama and to distract from the campaign that’s now going on.
Ms. Taitz would like to haul President Obama into her offices and take his deposition. And, Your Honor, this is a matter that should be decided on the papers, and Ms. Taitz should not be allowed to continue her smear in federal court.
Both Judge Land, Clay Land in Georgia and Judge David Carter in the Central District of California have in the past commented and it’s in our papers that we filed, that Ms. Taitz does this for political purposes and not for a proper judicial purpose.
p 75 DR. TAITZ: I understand, Your Honor. But I’m asking
Your Honor on this one issue of the authenticity of Mr. Barack Obama’s birth
THE COURT: I’m not getting into that.
I find it endlessly amusing that the judge is referred to as “The Court”. I get this image of Orly arguing with a building and can’t stop giggling.
Taitz Mississippi Hearing – Part 1 – Introduction of Arguments
http://nativeborncitizen.wordpress.com/2012/09/30/taitz-mississippi-hearing-part-1-introduction-of-arguments/
Taitz Mississippi Hearing Transcript – Part 2 – Orly on the hot seat
http://nativeborncitizen.wordpress.com/2012/09/30/taitz-mississippi-hearing-transcript-the-removalremand-with-comments/
I am on p.63. Why did the judge tell Orly to “stand right there” twice? Was she trying to testify on the stand like she did in GA?
I read my wife (a University Professor, and not a Birthistan observer) a section where the Judge speaks several paragraphs, another long patch from Mr. Tepper… and then a spot where Orly is allowed to drone on for a similar length of time.
By the time she was able to speak, all she could say was “What the hell is wrong with her?
Okay I did get a laugh out of this part on pgs. 46-47.
“…you’re not saying anything new, and you’re not providing me any case authority or any statutory authority like the other side did. All you’re doing is repeating something which is not founded in the law.”
On page 71, when Orly refers to “a senior deportation officer from the Department of Homeland Security”… is that supposed to be Arpaio?
No, it’s a man named John Sampson who has offered some sort of affidavit at one point.
I think he was included in the Georgia evidence-like-pile.
I’d guess because he wasn’t finished with her, and wanted her to understand that he was coming back to her after he clarified something with the defendants. He clearly did not trust her to understand that concept and wanted to make sure that the step-by-step structure he was insisting she stick too was as explicit as possible.
He just wanted to spare her the indignity of jumping up and down like a jack-in-the-box and having to spend 3 or 4 minutes to get her back on topic again and again. He had enough problems keeping her on topic as it was.
In fact, I see that he’s running for the state Senate here in Colorado. Yikes.
http://www.sampsonforsenate.com/
Can anyone help me on this:
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-2D5beUoSKb4/Tb0ogc6rbDI/AAAAAAAAC14/2XOLTZ_NOHE/s1600/3.+OBAMA+NORDYKE+COMPARISON.png
The one on the left is alleged to be a scan of one of the Nordkye twins’ birth certificates, and it is alleged to be an example of how a scan can pick up the raised seal.
But there is something funny about it. I remember that the images of the Nordkye twins’ birth certificates were black and the letters on them white on WND’s site, and yet this example is white. And I could not see the raised seal on WND’s site, yet you can see the ring of the seal on this one. It is being used as an example of a PDF scan being able to pick up a raised seal. Well, for sure it is not PDF–but still anything at all about the alleged raised seal on it or it not being the real Nordyke Twins’ BC would be helpful.
Can anyone help?
By the way, I am an anti-birther.
It appears that what you are looking at is the white on black image that has been processed to reverse the colors and add green. The original image is like this one:
http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/dailypix/2009/Jul/28/M1139416728.GIF
The raised seal is visible in both the original and reprocessed versions.
When I experimented with my own certificate, I found that the raised seal was visible with one scanner and invisible with another. In the same way the White House PDF of Obama’s certificate doesn’t show a seal, but the photo Savannah Guthrie took of it does.
Sampson testified at the hearing in Atlanta. I spoke to him for a while afterwards. Basically what he said was the Connecticut social-security number was suspicious and should be investigated. His testimony is in the transcript.
an interview of orly after the mississippi hearing
her bat#$%t viewpoint
This video was shot by something called ‘Mississippi Patriots’ outside the courthouse on September 24, while the microphone pictured shows Channel 3 WLBT, who was conducting the interview:
“no one has ever heard this case on the merits”
poor orly – she has no access to the resources of the big firms representing obama
“racketeering at this point”
she advised the court that obama has avoided service
call arpaio to testify 602-876-1801 press #6
oh and send money
http://ohforgoodnesssake.com/?p=23810
The page claims that the Nordyke was negative-reversed and tinted green to look more like the Obama. That is, they changed black to white and vice-versa, and then tinted the white. I just checked – the seal is visible on the WND pic.
The stupid thing is that they are going on about the aging of the Nordyke certificate. It was a photostat copy made back in 1966! It’s been in the Nordyke’s possession (and out of the proper document storage environment) for over 40 years, and has probably been handled numerous times in the interim, before finally being photographed -not scanned- a few years ago. The Obama certificate is a photocopy of the original (said original being stored in a proper environment since 1961), made only a last year, printed onto security paper, and immediately scanned.
I am a licensed Professional Engineer, which means I have a raised seal and an inked stamp. Earlier this year, we had to digitally add my seal and signature to a drawing set. Without thinking, I grabbed my raised seal, impressed it onto a blank sheet of paper, signed it, and was about to run it through the scanner (a Brother MFC) when I realized I should ink up the stamp instead. The raised seal didn’t show at all on the scan. But it shows up fairly well when you have light striking it at an angle.
In the transcript, you can see that the judge tried to point in her the right direction regarding how to properly serve the POTUS. Orly, as usual, refused to listen.
She’ll likely never properly serve the POTUS.
Re the raised seal.
May thanks Doc and W. Kevin Vicklund.
If I get it right, the answer is that the image of the Nordyke Twins BC has been reversed and tinted, but that it accurate and that it shows the raised seal.
HOWEVER, the thing to stress is that it is not a scan, it is a photographic representation, and so it does not have the problems of scanners, and it certainly does not have the problems of PDF?
Doc. I know that the image of the raised seal must be visible on the Savannah Gutherie photo, but I’ve have difficulty seeing it. Is there a copy in which it is fairly clear?
Thanks again.
Ellen
I wouldn’t exactly stress that it’s a scan vs a photo. Some scanners do show raised seals and some don’t. It’s a matter of lighting. If the light source is dead on perpendicular to the paper, it’s hard to make out impressions in the paper. It’s like not seeing your shadow when the sun is directly overhead. What you see in an impressed seal is just shadow.
Seeing the seal on the Guthrie photo is a little difficult unless you know where to look, particularly because the image is so dim. The original Guthrie image is one linked at the bottom right of this site under the Reference links:
http://lockerz.com/s/96540937
I cropped the image to just show the seal, and applied an automatic light level operator in a photo program, applied an auto contrast operator, and zoomed in 2x. This is what came out:
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/GuthrieSeal2.png
You can see the seal pretty well in that.
Tell me if I’m wrong, if the case was STAYED as she is whining about, then she couldn’t file an amended complaint and add new parties and the RICO anyway, so that filing was moot. However, since it had not been stayed, they accepted her filing and she should have gotten summons from the lower court in order to perfect service.
Sounds about right.
Having read the transcript, I am amazed that the judge had enough patience to avoid walking over and slapping the stupid right out of her.
Oh, I’m sure that in his mind, he was beating her mercilessly with his gavel. If I were a judge, my gavel would regularly be used to hit stupid people. Granted, my time on the bench would last all of five seconds.
Okay I read this whole thing last night. It was pretty late when I finished, so I didn’t post this last night.
I’m a little confused what the whole hearing was about in the first place. As I understand it:
1) Orly filed some ballot challenge in Mississippi.
2) Orly amended the challenge to utilize the Racketeering Influenced Corrupt Organizations (RICO) law.
3) Now being federal in nature, the defendants had the option to have the case transferred from Mississippi state court to federal court (the removal that they keep talking about). They had 30 days from the day the first defendant is served to exercise this option.
4) There were numerous defendants, but only two of them were properly served. If ANY of the properly served defendants had objected to the case being transferred to federal court, they could have stopped it
5) Orly is complaining that the defendants had the case transferred to federal court after only 5 days, and that this didn’t give her enough time to properly serve all the defendants. So she just sort of gave up.
I got really lost at this point. She was complaining about something about how she couldn’t serve all the defendants, and she thought she had more time because the defendants had 30 days to request transfer to federal court? I guess she thinks that if all the defendants had been served, one of them would have kept the case in state court?
I think what really perplexes me is how mundane these challenges are. What is she even fighting for at this point? She wants to get her awful case heard in MS state court instead of federal court because she thinks the federal courts are too corrupt? But then she can’t even manage this pathetically small victory because she’s such a terrible lawyer.
I gotta hand it to Orly, she’s about as good a lawyer as I am. Well, except that I understand concepts like “self authenticating documents”, “innocent until proven guilty”, and “full faith and credit”. Did I just conclude that I’m a complete moron when it comes to the law, but I’m still a better lawyer than Orly Taitz?
Exactly. What makes me laugh the most is that her tunnel vision here is now, by her own request for 3 more weeks to serve the rest of her RICO summons, causing an extended delay in this “emergency” case, which will push it back until after the election is over, as the new defendants get their normal time frame to respond to Orly’s summons. LMAO!!
She did the same thing in Kansas. That October 3rd hearing that she still advertises on her website was “indefinitely postponed” due to Taitz’s actions in the teleconference on September 28.
I realize that she is too stupid to get out of her own way, but I also think she likes delaying the proceedings so she can claim she has “x number of active cases” in order to prolong her 15 minutes of fame and further claim martyrdom.
Interesting. Now that I know where the seal is located, I can see it in the White House version of the BC (as linked in the bottom right) – if I zoom in. In particular, you can see the upper right quadrant of the arc of the seal, and to a lesser extent the lower right quadrant. The rest of it is nearly indistinguishable from other scanning artifacts (but still there).
What was really perplexing was her attempt to “bargain” with the court for more time. Orly conceded that if the case were remanded to state court to allow her to properly serve the newly-added defendants, the defendants would once again file a notice of removal and bring the case right back to federal court. This accomplishes — what? She doesn’t think strategically. It would further delay a case that she has diddled away nearly five months, at the same time she was asking for truncated case procedures. The incongruities are astonishing.
Let’s see, she’s got 3 weeks to
A) properly serve additional defendants
B) Enter her motions against the SOS and MDEC requests for Judgments on the merits
C) Get her RICO complaint completed and turned in
Now, knowing Orly here’s what will happen
A) She will not get any of the additional defendants properly served and the Judge will move on without them
B) Her motions will be terrible, defendants’ responses will be entertaining
C) Her RICO claim will be passed around by lawyers and law schools around the country as the absolute WORST RICO complaint ever.
One would also note that even had she properly served all her defendants, a number of them are Federal officials which she is including in their Federal capacity – the Commissioner of Social Security, a number of federal judges (I know she has those I her California RICO, not sure if she’ll try to include them in this one), etc.
Federal officials sued in said capacity, if I recall (please correct me if I do not) have fairly unrestricted rights of removal even without consent of the rest of the defendants. As soon as she served the Federal defendants, she’d likely have seen the case removed regardless of whether or not one of the other defendants objected to the removal. So the fact that she didn’t serve them all yet really means very little.
Orly sort of reminds me of a henpecked husband to a horrid, shrewish wife. This kind of man is so weak that loses even the smallest battles, and if he gets some miniscule victory, he lauds it all over town.
Scene: Henpecked Man and Shrewish Wife are out to dinner at Applebees.
Man: Honey, I’m getting a steak.
Wife: No, money is too tight for steak.
Man: Yes dear. Well then I’ll just get a hamburger with french fries.
Wife: The saturated fat in the fries is bad for your heart.
Man: Yes dear. Well I’ll have a baked potato with my hamburger.
Wife: Red meat is bad for your heart. Have a turkey burger.
Man: Yes dear. I’ll have a beer to drink with that.
Wife: No alcohol! You’ll have a Diet Pepsi.
Man: Can it be a regular Pepsi?
Wife: Fine.
Man: Thank you dear. man smiles, proud at his victory
I agree with your assessment – it is a bit of both. I think the crazy lady truly believes in her “Konstitushunal Crisis!!! ZOMG 11!!!”. At the same time, I think her narcissism compels her to happily extend the number of steps and filings and appearances she can squeeze out of every case. To her, these are her moments in the limelight.
Indeed.
Professionalism, what a concept.
OH! The light bulb just turned on! Judges are being so lenient with this nitwit because they’re all collecting examples for the law text books they are writing. Since truth is stranger than fiction, they all see her as a gold mine of ‘lousy way to do things’ anecdotes.
An it sort of follows from there that the reason that the California Bar isn’t all over her like flies on dog poop is that they are watching her make their case for their future campaign to change the rules so that correspondent school wannabe lawyers won’t be allowed to take the Bar exam.