123
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1219
20
21
22
23
2425
262728
Case
1:1
0-cv-00151-RCL Document 29 Filed 05/19/10 Page 1
of
11
Dr.
Orly
Taitz,
esq
29839
SantaMargaritaParkway,
STE
100
Rancho Santa
Margarita
CA
92688Tel: (949) 683-5411;
Fax
(949) 766-7603
E-Mail:
drtaitz@yahoo.com
UNITED
STATES
DISTRICT COURT
FOR
THE
DISTRICT OF
COLUMBIA
§
r.
ORL
Y T AITZ, ESQ,
PRO
SEPlaintiff,
§HONORABLE
ROYCE
LAMBERTH
v.
Barack Hussein
Obama,Defendant.§
PRESIDING
§ Civil Action: 10-151
RCL
§
§REPL Y
TO
05.11.10
OPPOSITION
§
§
TO
MOTION
FOR
§
RECONSIDERATION
§§§§
Motion
for Reconsideration is allowed
and
granted
when
new
evidence ispresented and
when
there was a mistake
of
fact
or
law
in the previous order.Three
new
facts are making
an
order for reconsideration justified
and
urgentlyneeded.
On
May
17,2010
Taitz has received a letter from
Holder
department
of
Justicedemanding $20,000 (Exhibit 1) for filing a legal action
on behalf
of
CaptainRhodes,
which
Judge
Land
erroneously considered frivolous. This fact shows
that
indeed damages
and not
conjectural,
but
rather imminent
and
substantial,
which
makes the complaint for fraud filed
by
Taitz, proper and justified. Taitz hassubmitted to this court a transcript
ofthe
assembly
of
the republic
of
Kenya
March
25,2010
session, where Minister
of
Lands, James Orengo, clearly stated
thatObama
was
born in
Kenya. Affidavits from former senior deportation officer
with
the department
of
Homeland
security
John
Sampson, as well as investigatorSusan Daniels
and
retired Scotland Yard investigator
Neil
Sankey
and
officialrecords
of
Selective Service
showObama
using Social Security
number
_4425,
which
was assigned
in
the state
ofCo=ecticut
to another individual
bornin
1890,
which
is consistent
with
all the other evidence
of
Obama's
foreign birth and
need
to use a stolen social security number. All
of
this evidence points to the fact
Taitz v Obama. Reply to Opposition to Motion for reconsideration
1
12345678910111219202122232425262728
Taitz v Obama. Reply to Opposition to Motion for reconsideration
2that Barack Hussein Obama indeed committed massive fraud by submitting hiscandidacy for the position of the President. It was
foreseeable
, that proudmembers of US military, particularly officers will rise and revolt and demanddisclosure of the original birth records of the Commander in Chief to ascertain if the orders coming from him down the chain of command are legal, as well asexplanation, as to why Obama is using stolen social security numbers. It was
foreseeable
, that those members of the military will hire an attorney. It was
foreseeable
that such attorney will be persecuted for representing members of themilitary standing up to this massive fraud perpetrated by Obama. Current letter of
demand of $20,000 and threat “to pursue enforced collection against you’ directly
flaws from the fraud committed by Obama. As such, this new evidence showsthat Taitz has proper standing to sue Obama for fraud, as she was a foreseeablevictim, foreseeable plaintiff and she suffered damages as a result and as aforeseeable consequence of fraud committed by Obama.Additionally, new evidence presented in the form of
today’s
article in Mother Jones magazine Exhibit 2 shows that there was a concerted effort of intimidationand harassment of Taitz. Previously in her complaint Taitz presented evidence of her car being tampered with, a group of convicted felons, convicted forgers wereworking in unison and were submitting perjured affidavits, that looked prepared
by the same law firm, as well as “art work”, despicable in nature with a common
desire to intimidate and harass Taitz and her whole family and pressure her togive up her legal pursuit of fraud committed by Obama and her campaign for the position of CA secretary of state. Defense claimed that all of those incidents wereunrelated and did not show concerted effort or damages. Recent article byWashington burro
correspondent Stephanie Mencimer shows that “artist” DanLacey, who painted despicable art work series “Birther Orly Taitz”, showing
Taitz nude, with her legs spread, giving birth and holding bloody placenta, whichwere sent to her children, posted on the Internet and a local paper, did not work on his own accord. Dan Lacey admitted, that he was commissioned, paid bysomeone to do this, it was a clear attempt to intimidate Taitz and pressure her towithdraw as a candidate. As far as damages are concerned $20,000 is only the tipof the iceberg, as immeasurable emotional damage was caused to Taitz and her whole family. Lacey refused to provide the reporter Stephanie Mencimer with thename of the person who hired him, who paid him, however during the depositionsand upon subpoena this information will be available and will be provided to
Case 1:10-cv-00151-RCL Document 29 Filed 05/19/10 Page 2 of 11
12345678910111219202122232425262728
Taitz v Obama. Reply to Opposition to Motion for reconsideration
3court. At the onset of the litigation Taitz cannot provide all the evidence and isnot obligated to do so. Taitz has showed sufficient evidence to show that she hasstanding to proceed. This particular evidence is crucial, as it shows concertedeffort. At this time Taitz cannot state with certainty who paid Dan Lacey,however it is common knowledge, that Billionaire George Soros, one of the biggest backers of Obama, through his organization Moveon.org, hascommissioned numerous artists to promote Obama and denigrate his opponentsand critics. Only discovery will provide the names of all the Jane Does and JohnDoes involved. At the end of the day Watergate was unraveled by tracing themoneys received, the bank accounts of the Watergate burglars, ObamaFraudGatewill be fully exposed by tracing the bank accounts of individuals who wereinvolved in intimidation and harassment of Taitz, her family and others and the bank accounts of individuals and organizations that commissioned them, as wellas tracing financial transactions correlating to multiple social security numbersfound in the National databases for Barack Obama, Barry Obama and MichelleObama as well as multiple current job employments listed in the dossiers.1.
Yet another fact, that became known after the original order was issued, isthe fact that Obama has appointed Solicitor General Elena Kagan to the position of the Supreme Court judge. Many wondered why would thePresident appoint a candidate, who never worked as a judge, not even as asmall claims court judge, not even as a traffic court judge. This fact becomesless perplexing in light of the following information: Taitz forwarded toKagan, as a solicitor general, not only her pleadings of Lightfoot v Bowen,submitted to the Supreme Court and distributed by Chief Justice John Robertsfor conference of all nine justices, not only Quo Warranto submitted to theSupreme Court, but also all the dossiers sent to Attorney General Holder.Kagan was sworn to uphold the Constitution and act on behalf of the People of the United States of America, as a solicitor, top advocate for the United Statesof America, not as a private attorney for Obama, she received information
regarding the fact that Obama’s
Social Security number was assigned toanother individual, that the certification of life birth provided by Obama to the public could not be considered genuine without analyzing the original, yet shedid not take action and remained silent. In light of all of the above a question begs to be asked: was there a quid pro quo, was the appointment to theSupreme Court a thank you for her silence? This new development makes it so
Case 1:10-cv-00151-RCL Document 29 Filed 05/19/10 Page 3 of 11
Search History:
Result 00 of 00
00 results for result for
p.
TAITZ v OBAMA (QW) - 29 - REPLY to opposition - dcd-04502981918.29.0
05/19/2010 29 REPLY to opposition to motion re 25 Amended MOTION for Reconsideration filed by ORLY TAITZ. (TAITZ, ORLY) (Entered: 05/19/2010)
Orly states she has received her collection letter for the $20,000 in sanctions which was levied in Rhodes v MacDonald, and which has now been upheld by the 11th Circuit.
Orly states she has received her collection letter for the $20,000 in sanctions which was levied in Rhodes v MacDonald, and which has now been upheld by the 11th Circuit.
2.0K
Reads
18
Readcasts
28
Embed Views
More From This User
Notes
Load more
