Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
2012-03-31 - MS - TAITZ - DRAFT of Response of MSDC Motion in Limine (From Orly's Site)

2012-03-31 - MS - TAITZ - DRAFT of Response of MSDC Motion in Limine (From Orly's Site)

Ratings: (0)|Views: 230|Likes:
Published by Jack Ryan

More info:

Categories:Types, Research, Law
Published by: Jack Ryan on Mar 31, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





Dr. Taitz, Esq. has no means of checking the veracity of all the claims and allegations in the articles.
Dtaft of the opposition to motion in liminein Taitz v Dem party of MS and Sec of state of MS 
Posted on
| March 31, 2012 |No Comments Dr. Orly Taitz, ESQ29839 Santa Margarita, ste 100Rancho Santa Margarita, CA 92688p. 949-683-5411 f 949-766-7603orly.taitz@gmail.com IN THE FIRST CIRCUIT COURTHINDS COUNTYSTATE OF MISSISSIPPITaitz ) Hon. R. Kenneth ColemanV ) Case #2012-107) Opposition to motion in limineDemocratic Party of Mississippi ) Petition for subpoenas orSecretary of State of Mississippi ) Alternatively petition for) a motion hearing to issue) subpoenas)Motion in limine by the)Plaintiff _____________________________________________
)Opposition to pro hac vice for Scott J TepperOpposition to motion in limine by the defendant Democratic Party of MississippiMotion for subpoena duces tecum for appearance at the hearing and production of documents by party of interest, candidate on the ballot in the state of Mississippi Barack Hussein Obama, attorney General of Mississippi Jim Hood, defendants –members of theExecutive committee of the Democratic party of Mississippi, attorney for the DefendantsSamuel Begley, Director of the Social Security administration for the Southern Districtof the State of Mississippi, Director of Selective Service for the state of Mississippi,director of Health of the State of Hawaii Loretta Fuddy.
 Comes now Plaintiff, Dr. Orly Taitz, ESQ, hereinafter “Taitz:, and responds to themotion by the Defendant, Democratic Party of Mississippi as follows. Latest motion bythe defendant, Democratic Party of the state of Mississippi reads as a sign of desperation.Information requested is impertinent and immaterial for the legal action at hand.In its’ motion in limine Defendant, Democratic Party of Mississippi demands to put theplaintiff on the stand, seeking to get information in regards to her donors and believingthat someone is helping the plaintiff or incited her to bringing the action at hand.The motion in itself is a sign of an unprecedented level of corruption, total lack of integrity, human decency and any values by the defendants and their attorney, Mr.Samuel Begley.Plaintiff presented defendants with affidavits and videotaped sworn testimony of a seniordeportation officer, licensed detective and other experts and videotaped press conferenceof the sheriff of Maricopa county, Arizona, showing that Barack Hussein Obama postedon line a computer generated forgery, claiming it to be a true and correct copy of his birthcertificate. Additionally, plaintiff provided evidence of Obama using a fraudulentlyobtained Social Security number.Any decent human being would realize that it is the number one priority of nationalimportance to remove from the White House and criminally prosecute an individualusurping the U.S. Presidency .Apparently, members of the executive committee of the Democratic Party of Mississippiand their attorney, Samuel Begley, do not have a drop of decency, as they believe thatthere must be somebody behind the Plaintiff, somebody supporting her and telling her tofile this action.Apparently the level of corruption of the defendants and their attorney is such that theybelieve that the usurpation of the U.S. Presidency by a criminal with a forged birth
certificate and a stolen Social Security number does not represent a problem, does notrepresent a crime or a threat to the national security. They believe that one can act only if she gets some financial benefit.First, Taitz is acting as a decent human being (a concept which is obviously foreign to theDefendant and Mr. Begley). Second of all, as a licensed attorney in California she took anoath of office to uphold the rule of law and constitution. She came across evidence of thebiggest crime ever committed in this nation and she is doing everything in her powers toend it. The motion in limine is totally frivolous. Even if one were to assume arguendothat there is somebody assisting her with donations, it still does not change the essenceof the case, it does not change the material facts of the case.Will placing Taitz on the stand change any facts about Obama? Will getting a name of any donor make Obama an honest person? No.Will getting a name of any donor somehow make Obama’s forged birth certificate valid?No.Will getting a name of any donor somehow make Obama’s stolen Social Security numbervalid? No.So, the whole motion is simply frivolous and should be denied and defendants and theirattorney should be severely sanctioned for bringing such a ridiculous motion, which isnothing but an insult to one’s intelligence.So, why was this motion filed in the first place?The answer is simple. Defendants cannot negate the facts of the case. They did notprovide any valid documents for Obama, as those simply do not exist. So, the defendantis simply trying to kill the messenger, as they do not like the message.Defendant’s Allegations of Obama’s legitimacy and allegations of Obama’s valid birthcertificate are baseless and fraudulent.Defendants are making an assertion that Barack Obama “provided his birth certificate”.This assertion is without merit. Obama never provided either an original or a certifiedcopy of his birth certificate to any judge or jury or Secretary of State. Taitz provided thedefendants with affidavits showing Obama committing fraud and using a computergenerated forgery. Defendants are intentionally and maliciously attempting to defraud thecourt. They are engaged in misprision of felonies and are aiding and abetting felonies,such as elections fraud and forgery. This motion in itself is yet another reason, why thePlaintiff should be given a leave of court to file and amended complaint with additionalRICO cause of action against the defendants, including an additional predicate offense of Misprision of felonies under 18USC Chapter 1, §4 .
Similar legal challenge was brought to court by a Mississippi judge

Activity (7)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 hundred reads
Sue D'Bastards added this note
Very funny. This should make it to the all time Legal Comedy Gold List.
funnyhaha71 liked this
Jack Ryan liked this
funnyhaha71 liked this
funnyhaha71 liked this
Jack Ryan liked this

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->