21 Responses to “Update on my FOIA case”

1. Israel D. Jones
   February 18th, 2011 @ 5:54 pm

   Royce Lamberth? WOW what a shocker. Is this the same judge that said your case last year had standing in DC and he would hear it, wasted months and months of your time, then said your case did not have standing and refused to hear it? Is this the same judge? What a coincidence that your SSN FOIA case would fall to this same judge. Orly you are being led around in circles. You might as well move on to another strategy because we all know how this one will turn out. Exactly the same as his last ruling against you.

2. Pixel Patriot
   February 19th, 2011 @ 5:04 am

   Godspeed Orly

3. Politijabber
   February 19th, 2011 @ 5:28 am

   Judge Lamberth is familiar with eligibility cases. This assignment is quite fortunate.

4. dr_taitz@yahoo.com
   February 19th, 2011 @ 5:54 am

   Judge watch the mood of the public. Today more people want eligibility heard. Do you have any other ides? I don’t

5. BJP
   February 19th, 2011 @ 8:04 am

   The judge would do well to be fair and objective in this case and to do what his objectivity tells him. As more and more people are questioning Obama’s eligibility and his illegal activities, everyone who has not done the right thing will be held accountable by a very angry public. Let’s face it. What Obama is doing is affecting all of us; our children, our grandchildren, and so on. We need to know the truth and make a course correction before it’s too late. God bless Orly.

6. hippybiker
   February 19th, 2011 @ 9:11 am

   Politjabber, it seems to me that this case is about “Constructive Fraud” not about eligibility. If Obama is illegally using another persons SSI# then he needs to be brought to justice. what part of ILLEGAL don’t you and the rest of the Trolls not understand?

7. Baghdad Bob
   February 20th, 2011 @ 6:24 am

   This case is about made up bs from people with screwed up minds. It won’t see the light of day other than to be dismissed and, with the grace of Allah, sanctions for the good Orly Taitz.

8. Politijabber
   February 20th, 2011 @ 9:20 am

   Hippytrippy, this case is about FOIA. Perhaps you missed the headline.

9. hippybiker
   February 20th, 2011 @ 1:11 pm

   Baghdad Bob, Allah was a (edited by Orly) who worshiped the Moon. Go drink your tasty Koolaid, (edited by Orly)

10. hippybiker
    February 20th, 2011 @ 1:18 pm

    No Polit Jabba the Hut, this case is about a government agency refusing to release public domain documents that will show the Usurper in OUR White house is committing a Federal Crime by having and using multiple Social Security numbers.

    hippytrippy, how unoriginal. You Obunghole trolls need to tell Eric Holders people to hire some new writers. GAG!

11. turnright
    February 20th, 2011 @ 6:17 pm

    I like the part in history where the American clefties run over to Spain in the mid ’30s as the Abraham Lincoln Brigade, to hook up with their communist comrades and fight that evil General Franco, only to be sold out by Stalin.

    Uncle Joe, being terrified of Trotsky’s ability to rally the troops for international communism, recognized a very real threat to Stalin’s hegemony over the world-wide communist movement, so he axed the revolution in Spain, thus guaranteeing Franco’s victory… in addition to axing Trotsky literally, in Mexico City in 1940 or 41.

    Pj and BB, you two are dupish enough to have gone to Spain, and though fighting for your cause and seeing it sold down the river by the murdurous thug in charge you thought to be one with, still carry the torch. Your learning curve is essentially horizontal.

12. Politijabber
    February 20th, 2011 @ 8:15 pm

    Hey hippy. This case is going nowhere because Orly did not exhaust administrative remedies. The documents are agency documents, and no, they are not publicly available, they are protected by the Privacy Act and certain exemptions in FOIA. “Public domain” BTW is a term that refers to created works such as intellectual work or music, etc, to which intellectual property rights no longer exist.

13. Leonard McCauley
    February 21st, 2011 @ 6:21 pm

    Hasn’t this Judge already proven himself Treasonous? Shouldn’t he recuse himself for his Treasonous Track Record?

14. lsb
    February 22nd, 2011 @ 11:01 am

    Judge Lambert is very well known and very respected and conservative. I think of all the judges there in DC he will be the most open to your cause so it is lucky he is the judge.

15. Don in California
    February 22nd, 2011 @ 1:08 pm

    Politijabber

    The documents are on deceased persons and are open to FOIA requests. The SSN she is requesting info on was assigned to a person that is deceased. Mr. obama may be useing the number, but since it was assigned to a person that is now deceased, it is open to FOIA.

16. Fred
    February 22nd, 2011 @ 2:51 pm

    To Don in California,

    My understanding is that requests for information deceased individuals is not protected and will be granted.

    But there is a problem with your theory. If the SSN Obama uses had originally been assigned to someone now deceased, that number would show up in the index of SSN numbers of deceased individuals. Obama’s number is not on that list.

    -Fred

17. Chum Lee
    February 22nd, 2011 @ 3:10 pm

    Don:

    The SSN she is requesting was allegedly assigned to someone other than Obama. No government documents showing that the number belongs to anyone else has surfaced. None at all. That being said, there are numerous exemptions under FOIA.

    Even if the info is not subject to an exemption Orly needed to exhaust her administrative remedies before filing in federal court. To do that she needed to make the request, and then if denied or took too long, she needed to file an administrative appeal. Only after that appeal could she file in federal court. PJ says she did not exhaust – I do not know, so I’ll toss the question to Orly.

    Orly, did you file an administrative appeal of the FOIA denial or failure to take too long to respond? If so, when?

18. dr_taitz@yahoo.com
    February 22nd, 2011 @ 5:49 pm

    yes, I did, sent it by certified mail and it was ignored as everything else

19. dr_taitz@yahoo.com
    February 22nd, 2011 @ 5:50 pm

    not always one’s death is reported. that is why I requested to know if Ballantyne had anything to do with this file. Either it was not reported or was deleted by someone with access to docs

20. Phil
    February 22nd, 2011 @ 10:50 pm

    Hmmm…interesting! But what about this angle:…if a number has been used already (BY SOMEONE ELSE!), then, there is a problem that the S.S. Office allowed! What? The number shouldn’t have been allowed to be used again!!!

    This is a crime! If this would’ve happened to anyone else, they’d be in court, and the prosecution would be “crucifying them,” something like what LTC Lakin is going through! Orly is facing too many “illegal activities” that continue to happen!

    So…since this is the Survival of America that is involved, it appears to me that there are waaaay too many “detours” that Orly has to take, to solve this! If we were in 1776, 1812, we wouldn’t have to even think of going to court!

    This is another “road-block” to keep us bottled up! But…we shall see! Keep praying, Patriots! It’s not over…till it’s over! And keep spreading the news, as much as possible!

    Davey Crockett…

21. chum lee
    February 23rd, 2011 @ 6:36 am

    PJ

    Can you explain why Orly did not exhaust admin remedies? If the info is FOIA-able that is another question, but can you explain your statement.

Leave a Reply