Skip to comments.Dr. Taitz demands a hearing within 20 days
Posted on 02/15/2010 6:58:57 AM PST by Vincent Jappi
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Civil Action: 10-151 RCL
Dr. ORLY TAITZ, ESQ, PRO SE Plaintiff,
HONORABLE ROYCE LAMBERTH PRESIDING v.
Barack Hussein Obama, Defendant.
APPLICATION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
ORAL ARGUMENT REQUESTED
Notice of Application For Preliminary Injunction pursuant to LCvR 65.1 (c), LCvR 65.1 (d)
Plaintiff is seeking a Preliminary Injunction to recuse the US attorneys office from representing the defendant.
Plaintiff is seeking a Preliminary injunction-Injunctive relief to obtain the vital records of the defendant prior to the February 26 deadline for document and response submission of the response by the Plaintiff to the CA Bar.
Plaintiff is seeking a preliminary injunction hearing within 20 days, as prescribed by LCvR 65.1 (d) to be scheduled by the court prior to March 1st.
Memorandum of point and authorities
The only relevant authority in this case, is the unanimous decision rendered by the Supreme Court of the United States and provided by the opinion written by two justices: John Paul Stevens and opinion by Steven Breyer.
Sitting president of the United States has no immunity from civil law litigation against him from acts done before office and not related to the office.
Clinton v Jones, 520 US 681 (1997).
Decision was made based on Article 2 of the Constitution of the United States.
Background of the Case and Factual Allegations
(Excerpt) Read more at docs.google.com ...
They say persistence pays off....
I think he's justified in being a little miffed.
Just keep mashing the DONATE button!
She appears to have made a pretty clever move by using the charges against her, as proof of standing.
Not sure her request for a BC has much to do with her being sanctioned by the Judge in GA. My guess is she’ll be denied.
Got to agree, that was a masterstroke.
In a sane world there would already be a film version of all this, perhaps starring Milla Jovovich.
all this for an id check. hell, if you want a job in the US, you must fill out a W-9 form. this requires that you provide full citizenship information.
i guess its become fairly obvious... checking IDs is only for little people and not the elites.
18. Additionally I see a group of convicted criminals, convicted document forgers, who appear to be working in concert, submitting perjured affidavits, forging my signature in order to derail my cases and endanger my license.Is this the way Taitz squirms out of the affadavit she submitted claiming that Judge Land met with Attorney General Holder in a coffee shop across the street from Land's courthouse?
“...all this for an id check.”
Obama couldn’t get a clearance for a job sweeping The White House floors as a regular citizen if he didn’t have proof of citizenship.
“FREE THE LONG FORM!”
“Just keep mashing the DONATE button!” ~ 1rudeboy
Isn’t THAT the truth. Looks to me as if she’s just an opportunist trying to get a piece of Berg’s action:
Big time DemocRAT Hillary Clinton supporter, Philip J. Berg, Esquire, was the first Attorney who filed suit against Barack H. Obama challenging Senator Obamas lack of qualifications to serve as President of the United States
Berg said, .... he has not proven that he is Constitutionally eligible to be President and ... Obama has not produced legal documents to show he legally changed his name from his adopted name of Barry Soetoro from Indonesia. I am proceeding for the 305 + million people in our U.S.A., for our forefathers and for the 3.2 million men and women that have died and/or been maimed defending our Constitution with our Peaceful Revolution to prove that Obama is not Constitutionally qualified/eligible to be President. I still have cases pending in the Federal Courts. Go to obamacrimes.com to see the status of each case. http://obamacrimes.com/
...since a DemocRAT was the first “Birther”, I’m quite content to allow the ‘RATS to own the issue.
23 posted on Thursday, July 30, 2009 8:28:12 PM by Matchett-PI http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2304853/posts?page=23#23
July 29, 2009
Suborned in the U.S.A.
The birth-certificate controversy is about Obamas honesty, not where he was born.
By Andrew C. McCarthy
July 30, 2009
Obamas birth certificate and the real issues
I doff my cap and bow low to Andrew McCarthy of National Review Online, who has produced essential reading for anyone wondering what to think about the birther controversy rocking the right, and now breaking into the mainstream media, which sees an opportunity to mock and discredit the right.
He and I agree: the entire Kenyan birth theory is a distraction, and a useful tool in the hands of Alinskyites on the ridicule and destroy mission. But before moving on to other significant issues, McCarthy acknowledges that NROs editorial yesterday accidentally mischaracterized the nature of the documentation that is available from Hawaii. He writes:
The information in the certification may be identical as far as it goes to whats in the complete state records, but there are evidently many more details in the state records than are set forth in the certification. Contrary to the editors description, those who want to see the full state record - the certificate or the so-called vault copy - are not on a wild-goose chase for a secondary document cloaked in darkness. That confuses their motives (which vary) with what theyve actually requested (which is entirely reasonable). Regardless of why people may want to see the vault copy, whats been requested is a primary document that is materially more detailed than what Obama has thus far provided.
McCarthy then lays out the real issue: Obamas extraordinary secrecy, amounting to a scrubbing of his paper trail, combined with his demonstrated record of lying about his past. Obama is a phony, though and through. A former assistant US Attorney, McCarthy economically but methodically assembles the evidence, including sources, that Obama has presented a false story of his life. He lists a startling number of lies about his life story, with documentation. [snip] Continue at above link.
I think she means Lucas Smith, Larry Sinclair and Charles Edward Lincoln, III people she brought to the party.
To continue my refrain to, “Let the ‘RATS own this issue”:
Lets not Forget: Bill Clinton was the first Birther
The PostEmail ^ | Jan. 11, 2010 | John Charlton
“He couldn’t get a job sweeping floors”. Love it...every job was a “created” job for this usurper, until he was handed the Presidency. Hooray for Orly Taitz. I’m for anyone who furthers this just cause, or for increasing publicity about this just cause. Focus everybody...the bad guy is Obummer. Anyone getting super supercilious about Orly or any of the “birthers” is not on the right side of this argument. OT, but couldn’t help but think if/when Obama gets his walking papers, can we then say to China the loan was illegal so we’re not paying it back. One can dream.
“Im for anyone who furthers this just cause, or for increasing publicity about this just cause. Focus everybody...the bad guy is Obummer.”
Yes, but let’s put the focus on him with the mantra:
“Obama is a British Subject. Obama is a British Subject.” I say again, “Obama is...” Let the nay-sayers defend that!
I know that the “Long Form Birth Certificate” is the linch-pin to his fraudulent ascendecy and his deception but I think it’s not gotten the traction it needs. Perhaps we’ll get more attention by the “British Subject” thingy?
I like this approach.
“Your honor. I insulted the court. I accused a judge of treason. I slept my my disbarred attorney/law clerk and he started filing things in my name. I can’t file things on time.
Due to all my screw-ups, my law license is now at risk.
Because all the cases I screwed up involve the president, his eligibility is therefore putting my law license at risk.
Therefore, I have standing.”
This is like shooting yourself in the foot and then suing the government for not having stricter gun laws.
It’s a novel approach.
If the new definition of novel is “batpoop crazy.”