Orly Taitz is back!

Famous Dentist, Real Estate Agent, Birther, and sometimes Lawyer Orly Taitz is moving on up! She has been given a special invitation to the supreme court where she will no doubt put on a good show. I have seen so many interviews and court performances from this woman that all I have is hope that she talks as much as they allow her.

Alito refers 'birther' attorney Taitz's request to Supreme Court Read more: www.miamiherald.com...

She is fighting $20,000 in sanctions against her for her previous courtroom antics. Basically, the courts got sick of her coming to court with no case and no evidence so she was given the opportunity to explain why she should not be punished and/or fined for these repeated wastes of tax payer dollars and public time. Apparently her explanation did not suffice and sanctions were levied.

Orly appealed the sanctions which were upheld by an appeals court in Atlanta. Taitz then applied for a stay from the supreme court which was denied. She tried again and this time Alito decided that if she really wanted to make a case of it, he would grant it to her. The case has now been referred to the entire 9 person court. The problem here is that now she has opened to floor to additional action against her by the court. She could have gone another route but being the showman that she is, or the poor lawyer the courts claim, she had to go for a stay. Now the court can fine her and punish her farther. Orly has already been threatened once with disbarment. I will be interested in how this turns out for her.

reply to post by Adevoc Satanae


What a stupid person...

How can you fight against a "hand picked" court???

Now if the accused was allowed to pick who was judging them,hmmmm..

BTW, we call it a kangaroo court here in OZ

Oh god PLEASE televise it! I want to see the court just smack this idiot with so many fines and penalties and anything else they can for wasting the American people's time with this crap.

BTW OP, you forgot to put the words (It Begins) in your title. Like every single time the birthers here put up a thread wasting all of our times with this nutcase.

reply to post by Adevoc Satanae


I am unsure how she will convince the courts to lift the $20,000 court charge from last year (I had assumed her paypal button gathered enough funs from loyal birthers already?). Her numerous lawsuits have consisted of lies and deception and complaints, some from her own clients. While she and others have the right to file a lawsuit against somebody they do not have the right to repeatedly lie about the evidence presented nor do they have the right to waste the courts time.

In any case the main republican establishment have been keeping a good distance from her, unfortunately tea party groups and individuals have her strapped to their backs. Maybe they can somehow just ignore her in an effort to stay as far as possible from embarrassment ? I don't know, we'll see. Where's the popcorn?

reply to post by Southern Guardian


Yeah, I do not know how she is still allowed to practice law at all. It is one thing to just be a bad lawyer but this is the behavior of someone with a mental disorder. She is only inviting more punishment based on a record so far of going to court with fake Kenyan birth certificates and lies. What could it take for her to realize she is doing herself more harm than good with these tactics? I cannot imagine what she thinks she is going to accomplish.

I get a chuckle knowing that the birthers have latched onto a complete unknown to make their "case".

O'Rly Taitz?

reply to post by The Sword


Oh she's not unknown in the birther world, she is the Queen Birther.

en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by whatukno


Judging by her ties to Israel, I'm thinking Mossad.

Regardless, birthers should quit worrying so much about a damn birth certificate and worry more about the economy and the roof over their heads. Talk about being a bunch of easily-led automatons with Ms.Taitz as their pied piper.

reply to post by The Sword


That is what I do not understand. People hated and complained about the last president because of things like the WMD lie, starting two wars with countries that did not attack us, letting 9/11 happen, the patriot act, free speech zones, tax policy, foreign policy, domestic policy, etc, etc.

Yet when I look at ATS I learn that Obama is the worst president in all of history and is destroying this country as fast as he can...

...based on the 'fact' that he is Kenyan?

*UPDATE*

Supreme Court upholds birther sanction

Source: www.rawstory.com...

I'm not so sure if I'd side with the birthers but I certainly don't agree with fining them for seeking the truth. This appears to be an attempt to silence those looking for the truth, nothing more. This should send a clear signal that the peasants shouldn't _______ with the elite.

--airspoon

reply to post by airspoon


Put it this way, would you accept being sued again and again when you have done nothing wrong?

The search for truth is fine. But what this idiot is doing is wasting court time, wasting the American people's time, and basically harassment. The court should yank her license to practice law.

reply to post by airspoon


I'm not so sure if I'd side with the birthers but I certainly don't agree with fining them for seeking the truth. This appears to be an attempt to silence those looking for the truth, nothing more. This should send a clear signal that the peasants shouldn't _______ with the elite.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
She's not being fined for "seeking the truth"!
She's being fined for bringing frivolous lawsuits in which he either has no evidence or standing to sue.
People think the Courts are for just filing a bitch, then showing up to rant about whatever. Not so!
Courts have rules and proceedures, without them there would be no order , fairness and consistentcy. As a "lawyer" Orly should know that! She incompetant as well as nuts.
A basic education in the Law, the courts and civil proceedure would be
advantageous to Orly, as well as citizens in general. The Courts are clogged enough already.

reply to post by whatukno


I haven't seen any evidence to suggest that the lawsuit is frivolous. There may just be said evidence but I haven't seen it so I'll adjust my opinion accordingly. I'm not saying that Obama was born anywhere other than HI, though why not just prove it and get over it? If I have to provide my BC to get a DL, I think the elites should have to do the same for running the show.

I know, I know, he showed the BC form, but go to your local DMV and try to use that same form. They won't even give you the time of day. In fact, you liable to be arrested if you show up over and over again while insisting that this "form" should work.

If this BC form isn't good enough to prove my birth at the DMV, it shouldn't be good enough to prove your birth for a position that sends young heroes off to war or has the power for a nuclear strike.

Furthermore, if peasants can be brought in to the court over and over again for harassment purposes without the "harassee", then I think it shows a little bias when someone is simply trying to get a question answered by a public official.

Frankly, I could care less as I believe that it wouldn't matter anyway, though I respect those who feel otherwise.

--airspoon

reply to post by airspoon


NO NO NO NO NO NO NO there are plenty of useless pointless birther threads where all of your questions have been answered HUNDREDS OF FREAKING TIMES ALREADY!!!

This thread is about that batcrazy wingnut Taitz wasting the courts time and bringing frivolous lawsuits up that have no business in our judicial system.

Bad thread derail-er, please stay on topic!

[edit on 8/16/2010 by whatukno]

reply to post by whatukno


I posted an update on Miss Taitz, you *tried to discredit my commentary on said update and I offered a rebuttal. The only post yet off topic was your last one. I have yet to see those questions answered on any thread and I stand by my assertion that her continued litigation is anything but frivolous, for those stated reasons. Don't try to suggest that I'm derailing the topic, simply because you don't have any kind of viable rebuttal. Her lawsuit/s, IMO, are not frivolous, especially when compared with the massive amounts of frivolous litigation put forth by the elites/corporate/sepcial interests and allowed by these very same courts.

--airspoon

reply to post by airspoon

I have yet to see those questions answered on any thread and I stand by my assertion that her continued litigation is anything but frivolous, for those stated reasons.

Those questions have been answered many many times, I think you may be in fact ignoring those posts and only reading posts that support your assumptions.

Taitz has wasted a lot of people's time, including the courts. She has used made up evidence, fake birth certificates, and complete bull to try and push this non issue.

She deserves to be disbarred, she is lucky that she is just getting a fine.

reply to post by whatukno


There is no evidence to suggest that she is making up evidence or passing evidence that she knows is fake, or at least not enough evidence. If there was evidence of such, she would be prosecuted for it, as it is a crime. Furthermore, that is what a court is for, at least in part, to prove whether evidence is sound or not.

Also, the questions posed by me above, have not been answered by anyone, in any kind of accurate and or satisfactory manner. There is no logical reason presented yet by anyone to suggest why my standard of proof to certify citizenship for something as relatively unimportant as a state-issued ID should be much more rigorous than that of someone who has his finger on the nuclear button or sending brave souls to war. Until something is proven or disprovem one way or another, it is more than fair to pursue that proof and this goes both ways.

Finally, most who know me here on ATS, also know that I would never allow subjective reasoning to sway my conclusions. I do not ignore sound or even reasonable evidence to fit a personal bias and I always take an objective look at everything before forming an opinion. The reason why those viable questions were posed, is because they have yet to be answered with any kind of logic or reason, as opposed to episodic and discursive side-stepping. Furthermore, I have no biases when it comes to that particular issue, so I could care less about the outcome of it. The issue of whether Obama is or isn't a US citizen is really just a drop in the bucket compared to the issue of justice, freedom or liberty. Not that it matters, but I do believe him to be a US citizen, though that doesn't give me the right to quell those who demand proof of it and it certainly doesn't allow me the liberty to ignore justice, or lack thereof.



--airspoon

reply to post by airspoon


Really? Well that's quite insulting to me personally, I have put forth this...

whatukno.com...

Which does a very good job at pointing out the folly that is the birther movement. But apparently you haven't seen that despite the numerous times I have posted it in birther threads. The reason I put that up is so that I wouldn't have to rehash all the same information thread after thread.

Originally posted by airspoon
reply to post by whatukno

 

There is no evidence to suggest that she is making up evidence or passing evidence that she knows is fake, or at least not enough evidence. If there was evidence of such, she would be prosecuted for it, as it is a crime. Furthermore, that is what a court is for, at least in part, to prove whether evidence is sound or not.

The third time you show up to court with fake evidence, no case, and no knowledge of courtroom etiquette, and again for the 4th or 5th time, it tends not to matter whether you meant it or not. It shows that if you are not a willing criminal, you are a piss-poor lawyer and should go fill some cavities and show a house instead of putting the tax payers on the line for your hobby.



[edit on 16-8-2010 by Lessinterested]

reply to post by Lessinterested


A judge decides which evidence can or can't be included so if she has presented the same evidence over and over again, yet that evidence has been proven to be a hoax, the judge w/shouldn't have permitted the evidence.

Furthermore, prosecutors the nation over, try cases sometimes five times with the same faulty evidence, yet where is the Supreme Court or Court of Appeals then? Corporations (i.e Monsanto) bring defendants to litigation all of the time based on little to no evidence, yet were are the courts to "punish" these frivilous suits?

The point here, is that entities and attorneys bring frivolous lawsuits all of the time with not one single person yelping a word, except the scorned victims. Moving along, it is a judge who decides the merit of a lawsuit and whether it can or can't go forward, based upon the law. This same standard for evidence presented therein.

--airspoon

reply to post by whatukno


Look, I'm not arguing the authenticity of the BC form presented by the Obama Administration. Rather, I'm arguing that this same form wouldn't be accepted at the DMV. The DMV in most, if not all, states doesn't consider this type of Birth Certificate to be satisfactory relieving the BC requirement because it is not considered proof for which state you were born in.

How do I know this? Because just last year, I too tried to use that form to get a simple state ID. I have my military retirement ID, VA ID and another state's drivers license, yet all of these forms were not good enough, if I didn't have an actual Birth Certificate. Not the Birth Certificate form, but an actual certificate (the pretty kind). There is a difference between the two. On the form presented by Obama, it is basically the state saying that he has a birth certificate, it is not a copy of the certificate itself. The issue of whether his certificate form is authentic or not, is really irrelevant to the argument presented.

Furthermore, it might be a little presumptuous to assume something as fact because Factcheck.org or even snopes says so. I would hope that you are more astute than to put this kind of trust in any media outlet. It could be quite dangerous to allow any political entity to be the end-all authority.

With that being said, I'm not really arguing against what either one of those outlets have to say about the issue, though it is the wrong argument for this debate.

--airspoon