OrlyTaitzEsq.com

TaitzReport.com

Defend Our Freedoms Foundation (DOFF)
29839 Santa Margarita Pkwy, Ste 100
Rancho Santa Margarita CA, 92688
Copyright 2014

Review of Politics, Economics, Constitution, Law and World Affairs by Attorney and Doctor Orly Taitz


If you love your country, please help me fight this creeping tyranny and corruption.
Donations no matter how small will help pay for airline and travel expenses.





The articles posted represent only the opinion of the writers and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Dr. Taitz, Esq., who has no means of checking the veracity of all the claims and allegations in the articles.
Mail donations to:
Defend Our Freedoms Foundation, c/o Dr. Orly Taitz
29839 Santa Margarita Pkwy, Ste 100
Rancho Santa Margarita, CA 92688.
Contact Dr. Taitz at
orly.taitz@gmail.com.
In case of emergency, call 949-683-5411.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny.
When the government fears the people, there is liberty.
-- Thomas Jefferson

During times of universal deceit, telling the truth
becomes a revolutionary act.  -- George Orwell

First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they
fight you, then you win.  -- Mahatma Gandhi

update on 4 legal actions and collections

Posted on | September 2, 2010 | 1 Comment

From August 9 I got $6,281 of the $20,000 judicial extortion to keep me and all of you as silent slaves about illegitimacy of the Kenyan usurper. I need to collect $13,719.

It appears the military has no intention of upholding the Constitution against all enemies: foreign and domestic, it was reported that at today’s hearing they refused to provide discovery to Lt. Col Lakin.

Currently I have 4 cases, that hopefully will bring results.

1. I am waiting for the decision by judge Lamberth regarding  my 60 B motion for reconsideration of Taitz v Obama

2. I am waiting for the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco in regards to my appeal on behalf of ambassador Keyes, 10 state Representatives and 30 members of the military (Barnett, Keyes et al v Obama et al)

3. Supreme Court gave me additional 60 days to resubmit my Petition for Writ of Certiorary. The new due date is October 25. My understanding is, that the Supreme Court will review it after the election. If Republicans take the Congress, there is a higher probability, that the Supreme Court will remand the case to the District Court for a sanctions hearing and a limited discovery to prove that Obama was indeed illegitimate, my case was not frivolous and the sanctions not warranted. (in relation to Cook v Good and Rhodes v MacDonald)

4. The case against Damon Dunn (CA Republican primary race for Secretary of State) was scheduled for January 10 for the case management conference, which means that he mandatory settlement conference will be in May of 2011 and the trial in August of 2011. At the motion hearing presiding judge Hon Judge Glass stated on the record, that if I prove my case, there will be a remedy of a new election.  With special election in 2011 I will still have enough time to demand from Obama his vital records should he chose to run  in 2012 and refuse to put him on the ballot, if he refuses to provide such records.    

I am concerned though  about mail not being delivered and some other nefarious activity.

Category: Events, Legal Actions

Comments

One Response to “update on 4 legal actions and collections”

  1. Jim
    September 2nd, 2010 @ 11:05 pm

    “It appears the military has no intention of upholding the Constitution against all enemies: foreign and domestic, it was reported that at today’s hearing they refused to provide discovery to Lt. Col Lakin.”

    From the hearing :
    The judge said opening up such evidence could be an “embarrassment” to the president, and it’s up to Congress to call for impeachment of a sitting president.

    The judge sounds like a defense attorney for Obama.
    First of all. “judge”, Lakin isn’t calling for the impeachment of Obama. Do you even read the case you are supposed to be ruling over ?

    Second, “opening up such evidence could be an “embarrassment” to the president ?”.How does she know opening evidence could be an embarrassment for the president? Does she know what is in them ? If so, how did she know ? Has the judge been having communications with the administration ? Isn’t that a bit unethical,your “honor”?

    So, it seems this judge is more interested in protecting possible “embarrassment” to the president than allowing the accused discovery to defend himself.

Leave a Reply