The once queen of the “birthers” seems to be emphasizing other issues on her web site of late. Of the 15 articles comprising the home page of OrlyTaitzEsq.com, none of them are about President Obama’s eligibility. Indeed, one has to go back to the 3rd page to find something birther-related, the Sibley/Vogt/Fuddy bribery faux story.
Taitz seems more oriented towards her run for California Attorney General, anti-Muslim bigotry, and advocating tolerance of racism. Oh, and Benghazi!
On April 7, there was this typical Taitz article:
Update: no decision yet in outstanding 5 cases filed by Attorney Orly Taitz in relation to Obama’s use of a stolen CT SSN and bogus IDs. Decisions are expected any day now.
On the Taitz lawsuit front as you may recall, Taitz moved in Mississippi asking the Court for leave to file new evidence and authority. This was opposed by defendant Mississippi Democratic Executive Committee, joined by other defendants. Taitz would have had her decision in Mississippi if she hadn’t muddied the waters filing more stuff the day before the decision was to have been handed down.
She’s trying to “clean up her act” by doing “civil rights” attorney “work.” She is releasing press releases like she’s a real attorney. She’s a fraud and she again, misrepresents herself. When one of her minions (hey! wait a minute – that would make a great photo) or herself wrote on an insignificant rag, she claimed the newspaper endorsed her instead of a letter to the editor. She’s chumming around with pro-gun groups (in California?) and she’s blasting democrats and republicans, and I will bet $100 that she will sue the Secretary of State and the State itself when she loses – she’ll blame “voter fraud” (translation: that negroes and mexicans aren’t legal voters). She was on Team Bundy and scattered like the troll that she is when his words were made public. And she still has yet to renounce James David Manning, who has called for the stoning of “homos” (his words not mine). Not to mention she has a horrible legal record (has she ever won a case?) and she has made threats by insinuation of the POTUS and His Family by signing off and allowing some comments (which she recently scrubbed) about this “American Spring.” She should be deported.
“She’s chumming around with pro-gun groups (in California?) and she’s blasting democrats and republicans, and I will bet $100 that she will sue the Secretary of State and the State itself when she loses – she’ll blame “voter fraud” (translation: that negroes and mexicans aren’t legal voters). ”
Don’t forget the LA Times. If it weren’t for them, she wouldn’t have been in the car accident that derailed her campaign for over a month and undoubtedly will cause her to lose the election.
All any opponent of her’s has to do is go “She’s that crazy birther chick!”, and that’s all she wrote for Orly’s plans.
She’s trying to pivot, but she’ll always be irrelevant.
I have been curious about Taitz’s status with the California State Bar.
The money sanctions previously imposed by a federal judge were reportable and it’s difficult for me to believe that she would avoid entirely some form of discipline. She could have received a private reproval.(And that would constitute unusually minor punishment given the circumstances.) Or there could be disciplinary proceedings pending. But if the latter, you would assume that she might publicize the situation if for no other reason than to highlight some real or imagined persecution.
Very perplexing to me given the inclination of the Cal Bar to police its membership to an extent that oftentimes violates common sense.
Can we expect Mr. Zullo will also shift gears and go back into the car biz?
“I’ve got this wonderful sporty model that was gently driven by a kindly old woman who loved cats and children and she was prominent in the upper crust of society in Pasadena. This luxury vehicle is now available for your consideration. What? Oh yes, the clown suits and makeup and the emergency lights, siren and government plates? They’re included! As I said, this kindly, elderly woman simply loved children and she wanted to pass her love for children on to the new owner of this fine automobile. Shall I write it up?”
Larry Klayman has a disciplinary hearing with the District of Columbia Bar in June over an incident that happened in 2008 (ETA: and probably other things as well). The existence of this action became public in February of this year when the DC Bar posted a schedule for upcoming disciplinary hearings that included Klayman’s name and when, around the same time, Klayman filed something in his current case against Judicial Watch that acknowledges it. (If you’re not familiar with this story, here’s the Fogbow link for it, http://www.thefogbow.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=53&t=10743&hilit=peter+paul&start=50#p588754) My point being…this complaint about Klayman’s unethical behavior has probably been brewing privately for 6 years.
In Birtherstan, Taitz is a big fish in a small pond. But once the venue is expanded to Greater Wingnuttia, she’s a small fish in a slightly bigger pond. She became the face of the birther movement because there wasn’t much competition for the position. And the little competition there was, she outlasted them because they had to work for a living and she didn’t. But Greater Wingnuttia has a lot of established pundits and web sites that make money. That wipes away money as her comparative advantage, and she really has nothing else. She’s dumb as a rock. Her written English sucks. For some inexplicable reason, she doesn’t use a spellchecker. Her narcissism causes her to jump to ridiculous conclusions in an attempt to confirm that she’s correct and admired and feared. She may spend the rest of her life writing poorly written screeds about how awful the United States of America is, but nobody outside of birtherstan will give her the respect and admiration she pines for.
Well put.
In general, she has horrendous social skills. She alienates everybody she meets.
I say nuts to that.
California supposedly has the hardest Bar exam process in the country too; yet Orly managed to pass it.
I have consulted extensively with Mr. Google about the professional standards in California, and the California Bar Code of Ethics. Neither seem to exist under any common understanding of those words. As far as I can tell, the only thing that can draw disciplinary action what-so-ever is if one lawyer physically attacks another lawyer in open court. Attacking and killing the Judge in open court might get you suspended for a while.
I see NO evidence what-so-ever that there is any actual effective statutory standards for professionals in general in California, or specifically for members of the Bar (California lawyers are required by law to be members of the Bar).
Where did this myth of the difficult California Bar Exam and the stringent professional ethics controls get started? Why isn’t the Bar Association seeking to positively reinforce this mythology in such a way that it is demonstrated to be fact and not myth?
How likely is it that she deliberately caused the delay? She has to know that she’s already lost, and the only remaining question is whether she gets sanctioned. Isn’t it credible that she’s trying to avoid a huge defeat, and disciplinary action, on the eve of the election?
As for “changing emphasis”, an entry in the twitfeed turned me on to the candidates’ statements in the CA elections: http://voterguide.sos.ca.gov/candidates/attorney-general.htm
Orly’s closes with this:
So, while there’s, arguably, been some change, it ain’t exactly been a “road to Damascus” event.
No this is Orly. It’s all about Orly. She didn’t cause the delay deliberately, she honestly believed she had some further information that needed bringing to the attention of the court. And she never believes she has already lost. It’s a defect in her psychological make up – she can’t accept the possibility that she could be wrong. Look at her history and that is all she is. From the Bounel SSN to the hose falling off her car. The first conclusion that suits her needs is the correct and only one possible.
Some complaints were made and Taitz mentioned on her blog that she had some expenses defending herself in some sort of Bar proceeding. What I have heard is that to get in trouble with the Cal Bar, you have to harm a client and they file a complaint. I’m not aware of that happening (unless Connie Rhodes did). Articles here tagged “California Bar.”
The notion that CA has the most difficult bar exam comes from passage rates. It consistently has one of the lowest passage rates. That is due in part to the fact that it has lower standards than most states on who can take the test. But I came across a study that considered just passage rates of people who graduated from ABA-accredited (and I think somehow normalized across states for differences in LSAT scores and undergraduate GPAs) and still found CA’s passage rate to be the lowest. “As expected, California takes the top spot for the most difficult bar exam in the nation. At 18 hours of testing spread over three days, this one was a gimme.” The low passage rate has to do with the length of the exam, and not necessarily the content. One of Taitz’s most salient characteristics–and one that does not always work in her favor because it allows her to keep fighting fights long after all paths to victory have been blocked–is her stamina.
http://abovethelaw.com/2013/04/which-state-has-the-most-difficult-bar-exam/
I just received my California Primary Election mail in ballot. I think I’ll vote for Orly Taitz for Attorney General since we no longer vote by party affiliation in California.
(Just Kidding!)
Why not? My partner and I are voting for her in the primary. Five more months of Taitz running for AG is comedy gold.
The rigors of running a campaign, as high strung as she is cannot be good for her health. I say let her run herself ragged!
A couple of years ago I sent the California Bar a long, detailed letter with examples of Orly publicly accusing judges of being corrupt traitors, and I pointed out the sanctions assessed by Judge Land. I received an acknowledgment of the letter, but obviously the Bar didn’t care.
Orly is still practicing law, I’d say “The Bar didn’t care.” is an apt statement.
“Taitz would have had her decision in Mississippi if she hadn’t muddied the waters filing more stuff the day before the decision was to have been handed down.”
She is merely trying to extend her shelf life, She will still fail in the end, no matter what date it occurs.
It’s a bit like being a novel writer – whoever comes up with the conspiracy theory that most appeals to the (crazy) masses wins the day. Orly obviously tries to extend her local fame from Birtherstan to the bigger world. It may work, but it’s not likely. (She might have a chance if she plays up her Moldovan roots and claims to “know people” in the right places.)
She got punked again . . . http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/i-did-not-find-this-book-on-amazon/
If she had bothered to go to nationalreport.net she would have seen that it is a news spoof site.
Or maybe she wouldn’t have figured it out.
Most of the people commenting on said “book” over there didn’t notice it either, so it doesn’t take Orly grade stupidity to fall for it. In fact, not knowing it was a spoof site, it took the Diana Ross claim to tip me off it was satire – Poe’s Law and all -, then the missing link to the book itself plus the link to an obvious spoof review of the book (mentioning “vampires” as part of the story) did the rest. 😉
I see our latest birther Kevin Lankford is posting at orly’s
And he went for the hoax……hook, line and sinker:
Kevin J Lankford
May 12th, 2014 @ 5:06 pm
With all that is known, and has been known from the very beginning about this perverted demon worshiping fraud, how can so many be so willing to cover for him and protect him from what he deserves. How can any one of the secret service live with themselves, or are they themselves evil infiltrators. They do have much to answer for, and are proving themselves enemies of America with their fealty for this fraud.