There’s been buzz in recent weeks on websites and blogs sympathetic to Obama birthplace skeptics that Laguna Niguel attorney Orly Taitz had received a subpoena to get the president’s original, hand-typed birth certificate.

But click here to see a copy – downloaded from the federal courts’ Pacer website – of the request Taitz filed in Hawaii today for a court order for the birth certificate. (The procedure is you provide a draft of the proposed language of the court order you’re seeking).

A subpoena is, in fact, a court order for a document or a witness. If Taitz already had a subpoena, why would she be seeking another? I don’t know. And what was that document she previously said was a subpoena? I don’t know.

Here’s the World Net Daily story from this morning by birthplace author Jerome Corsi which, unless its been subsequently altered, shows a copy of the clerk’s alleged subpoena along with an explanation that Taitz would be presenting it to state health officials today.

A copy of the alleged subpoena was also included in Taitz’s motion today, which I linked to above, along with a copy of the FedEx receipt showing it was delivered. I’ve been subpoenaed to be a witness in cases about which I’ve written, but the subpoena has always been presented by a subpoena server in person – I didn’t know you could just FedEx them. (Typically, newspaper lawyers argue successfully that I’m not required to disclose anything other than what appeared publicly in print.)

Here’s a May letter from the state’s Department of Health telling Taitz why she can’t have the birth certificate – because it’s private, confidential information – along with what appears to be a computer generated version of the deputy clerk’s handwritten order, as they appeared on Taitz’s website.

Here’s a copy of the clerk’s alleged handwritten subpoena as posted on Taitz’s site, along with the explanation that she planned to present it today to health officials.

Here’s a copy of Obama’s long-form birth certificate released by the White House, which Taitz and Corsi claim is fake despite statements for Hawaii health officials that he was born there

5 Responses to “from Orange County register political observer MartinWisckol”

1. johnny 5
   August 9th, 2011 @ 6:10 am

   confidentiality expired when obama put the LF BC on the WH Web site….(it is an official government site as well)…there is no “expectation” that the BC is a privacy concern…the action at present is to determine the validity of the document…which is not protected under any privacy laws anywhere…

2. Florence Stone
   August 9th, 2011 @ 3:30 pm

   Orly also asked for Fuddy to be found in contempt of court for not honoring her subpoena, and for a bench warrant to be issued for Fuddy’s arrest if she did not produce the document on Aug 9. Orly has covered all the basis. She knows what she is doing. A ‘commoner’ would be arrested; however, due to Fuddy’s standing in the government, Orly does not expect the court to issue the arrest warrant. Orly is going above and beyond, on behalf of ALL Americans, even the ones who are so quick to criticize and try to find fault. And with regard to those aforementioned critcs, “What are YOU doing to right this wrong of an ineligible person being in OUR White House? If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem, and Orly needs your support, not your criticism while you sit on the sidelines doing squat!!”

3. turnright
   August 9th, 2011 @ 5:00 pm

   Visual hit piece number two for the media in just a week. Newsweak printed some expletive- included photo of Bachmann, implying craziness.

   The OC Register perfoms visual sacrilege with Orly in their photo of her. The chicken poop rag is a disgrace to truth, biased beyond yellow journalism, having sunk toward the red. And the content. Move over Hugo, we’re putting the Kendonesian on your pedestal with you.

4. taino21
   August 9th, 2011 @ 9:16 pm

   Mr. Wisckol, why instead of questioning the subpoena you don’t question all the traitors in congress, that despite five supreme court rulings explaining what a natural born citizen and what a citizen is choose to ignore the law of the land, the U.S. Constitution. If you are so lazy as to do some research why should we listen to your idiotic comments? The Venus, 12 U.S. 8 Cranch 253 253 (1814), Shanks v. Dupont, 28 U.S. 3 Pet. 242 242 (1830),Minor v. Happersett,U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark,and Perkins v. Elg. Remember about a year and a half back when the N.Y. City Library joked about having to fine Persident Washington if he was alive for not returning two books? One of those was The Law Of Nations. The same mentioned in the U.S. Constitution.

5. john
   August 10th, 2011 @ 10:05 am

   Turnright, I think Orly looks great in that photo.
   Taino, what the hell are you talking about? WKA is the case that clearly defined jus soli citizenship rights, which you clearly choose not to believe in. If the Framers had intended anything other than jus soli (which was well established in English common law – remember that all the Framers were English by birth), they would have clearly stated that intent. They did not – jus soli it was, is and will be.

Leave a Reply