Update: Breaking: Atty. Orly Taitz Provides Updates on Hawaii Birth Certificate Case and Obama Ballot Challenges

Print This Article


by Sharon Rondeau

Orly Taitz will be representing a plaintiff who has challenged the placement of Obama's name on the 2012 ballot in Georgia. Ballot challenges have also been filed in New Hampshire and Hawaii

(Dec. 2, 2011) — On December 1, 2011, Atty. Orly Taitz provided The Post & Email with first-hand updates on actions she has undertaken in Georgia, New Hampshire, and Hawaii regarding Obama’s name being placed on the 2012 presidential ballot in those states.

A tentative schedule of Republican 2012 primaries and caucuses is here.  Along with nine other states, Georgia’s presidential primary takes place on March 6, 2012.  Taitz, who is an attorney and dentist from California, is running for U. S. Senate against long-time incumbent Dianne Feinstein.

Taitz had just returned from Hawaii, where a hearing was held on November 30 in front of Judge Rhonda Nishimura regarding Taitz’s request to inspect the original birth certificate which the Hawaii Department of Health allegedly has on file for Barack Hussein Obama II.  Taitz contends that Obama is using a stolen social security number and therefore may not ever have had a valid U.S. birth certificate.

Taitz was in New Hampshire on November 18 for a hearing in front of that state’s Ballot Law Commission, which decided there and then that Obama’s name would remain on the ballot because he had completed his Declaration of Candidacy and paid the $1,000 filing fee.  However, in both 2008 and for the 2012 presidential election, two candidates were disqualified due to their respective births in foreign countries by the New Hampshire Secretary of State’s office.

Atty. Taitz reported:

In Georgia, the deputy chair judge of the Administrative Court, Judge Michael Malihi, entered my motion to represent plaintiff David Farrar pro hac vice.  Even though I do not have a local attorney as a co-sponsor, he did allow me to represent him.  I submitted paperwork showing that I ma licensed in California with the Courts of Appeals, and he granted it.  He gave me an extension to prepare. I also asked for a leave of the court to file an amended complaint, and he granted that as well.  So far, he granted three of my motions. He set a tentative date for trial from January 12-16, 2012.

This is a ballot challenge in the state of Georgia and will be decided by an administrative court.

In New Hampshire, I got a script of the hearing.  I am in touch with a state representative.  We have satisfied all of the requirements to file with the New Hampshire Supreme Court.  I will be filing a case against Obama’s designation on the ballot with the Supreme Court, and several state representatives will be joining me.

I just came from Hawaii; I flew red-eye there and back.  I filed a ballot challenge there and a specific petition with the chief elections officer of the State of Hawaii.  There are a couple of citizens of the state of Hawaii who co-signed it with me.  Everything is posted on my website. According to their rules, they are supposed to provide a public hearing, so we are waiting for that date.

We had a hearing with Judge Nishimura in the First Circuit Court in Honolulu.  As you know, the state was pushing to dismiss the case to deny my motion for reconsideration, claiming it was frivolous.  So far the judge did not grant their request.

When we had a hearing first thing, the deputy attorney general, Jill Nagamine, brought an oral motion to forbid cameras and TV in the courtroom while the case was being heard.  She said, “These people are birthers; their complaints are frivolous, and we shouldn’t be encouraging them by having TV there, and we should not allow TV recording of the hearing.”  Of course, I argued in opposition.  I stated that this is not a private matter.  Typically the court will grant such motions when it is a private matter:  a divorce, for example.  This is a matter of public importance; we’re talking about the eligibility of the person serving as President of the United States.  There are serious concerns in light of the fact that his social security number has been shown not to be correct; the name he is using, according to other documents, is not his legal name; there is no legal birth certificate, and the public has a right to know.

The citizens who signed the complaint with me the day before were in the courtroom.  I pointed them out, and there were several supporters.  They have a right to know what was happening in the courtroom.  I stated, “On the issue of the eligibility of the President of the United States, if this is not a matter of public domain and disclosure, what is?”  The judge then wrote in my favor and denied the motion by the state and said, “Switch on the cameras.”

Nishimura had previously ruled in favor of Nagamine.

Taitz also told The Post & Email that several documents which she sent to Judge Nishimura’s court have not been given to her.  She reported:

My pleadings have disappeared.  I have filed a Motion for Reconsideration, then I filed an Amended Motion.  I actually submitted this Amended Motion twice by certified mail, and I have two receipts which I posted on my website.  They were signed for by a clerk named Lorraine N. Kamzai, but these pleadings  were never docketed as to when they were given to the judge.  They never docketed them and never gave them to the judge.  I showed the judge the receipts, and I am sending everything via FedEx or certified mail. This went by certified mail.

Moreover, another pleading, Reply to Opposition, that I sent last week – I paid $78,.00 – was refused by the court.   So I questioned the judge, “If I am filing a new motion, how can I be assured that it will be docketed and get to you, because it has happened three times?”  It is really a concern.  I was there the day before, and I checked; I prepared a motion asking the clerks to first docket the First Amended Motion and provide it to the judge for review and also for the judge to investigate why my documents are not being docketed and given to the judge.  I posted this Motion on my website.

I had this type of problem before where documents were not docketed, not filed; I had one situation where a court reporter removed 14 pages from an official transcript; there were sabotage and tampering of my website and my email account; there was tampering with my car.  I stated in my motion to the judge, “Your Honor, I am the leader of the political opposition; I brought the most explosive evidence against a sitting president.  Until and unless something is done about it, there is an incentive to harm my family and me and sabotage my submissions.”

In regard to the hearing, the judge said, “What do you want to do?  I don’t have a First Amended Complaint.  You can argue on your original complaint.”  But that is what’s missing a lot of material that came later:  it did not have the ruling of Judge Lamberth; it did not have the information from New Hampshire or Georgia.  Those are new developments.  So she said, “You can either argue on the original motion or you can come back.”  And I said, “Your Honor, it’s kind-of hard for me to come back.  I live in the state of California.  It’s extremely expensive and time-consuming.  Your Honor, can we make an agreement whereby we argue the First Amended Motion today with the stipulation that the state has the leave of the court to file an opposition later?”  As a matter of fact, this would have been even better for the state, but they would have heard all of my arguments.  And of course, they could have just responded.

Apparently Jill Nagamine was upset because she didn’t get what she wanted.  The judge asked her if she would agree to that, and Nagamine said, “No, we will not agree.”  I will have the court reporter’s transcript shortly and you will see it from the transcript, and the media was there.  At that point, the only thing we could do was to reschedule.  I will have to go back to Hawaii anyway because there will be a public hearing with the chief elections officer, and I’m going to try to coordinate those.

After the hearing, I filed an Emergency Motion, and we went for the second time to the office of the Chief Elections Officer.  It seem as if he is nowhere to be found.  Nobody could locate him; it’s as if he went underground.  He was supposed to call me back, but he is hiding.

I submitted an appeal in the District of Columbia, and there is a problem there.  I filed appeals in the case against the Commissioner of Social Security, Taitz v. Astrue; and Taitz v. Ruemmler (White House Counsel Kathy Ruemmler).  I got a letter saying I needed to pay $450 for each, so I sent two checks for $450 each.  About a month later, I got a letter from the District Court saying that the fee is $455, not $450, and they voided those checks.  So I attached new checks and sent them with a letter for $455 each.  I sent it certified mail and I have the receipt.  Now I have a letter from the Court of Appeals saying that the fee is $450 and they didn’t get my checks.  They also assigned a different number which I posted on my website.  I sent a letter to them again with all of the exhibits and information.  I could never even imagine what those people are doing:  they’re not accepting documents, hiding documents, not accepting checks; they’re just playing games.  I feel as if I’m back in the Soviet Union.

Miki Booth submitted the following synopsis of the events of November 30 in Hawaii:

Miki Booth and Atty. Orly Taitz in Hawaii earlier this week

I’m here also on behalf of Birther Summit to do research and investigations. The hearing on Wednesday was stunning, surreal even.  Two sets of pleadings that were sent by certified mail and confirmed received by the Circuit Court disappeared. Since they did not make it into the judge’s docket, Orly was not allowed to plead BO’s other fraudulent records, Social Security number and Selective Service.  AAG Jill Nagamine set a tyrannical tone by demanding a reporter’s camera not be allowed in the court. She questioned the reporter’s credentials and said Orly was a leader in the “birther” movement and this was a “frivolous lawsuit” and should not get attention when there are too many other important things going on.

The judge allowed the camera to be turned back on when Orly argued that the case did not involve family and children and was a very important case the public needs to know about.

Nagamine’s insulting and inappropriate remarks were made off-camera. Her conduct in court clearly showed she is definitely unfit for her position.

Every time Orly tried to bring up the evidence contained in the lost pleadings, it was objected to and ultimately she had no other recourse than to ask for a rehearing. The judge allowed Orly to file an amended motion. Several supporters were there including Jeff LaFrance, who was filming the proceedings for cable Channel 8 News, which will go into production on Monday, airing on PBS. Mr. LaFrance joined Orly’s Complaint and Request for Hearing at the Hawai’i Elections Commission located in Pearl City along with other supporters. Scott Nago, Elections Commissioner, and his legal counsel were both MIA. Orly joked they might have gone into the “Russian underground.”

On a personal note, I’d never met Orly in person before I saw her for the first time in courtroom #12 on the 4th floor of Honolulu District Court. However, everything about her was familiar. I have followed her efforts for years and spoken by phone a number of times while we fought together on different battlefields: birth certificate, eligibility.

Orly conducted herself with grace throughout the sabotaged courtroom ordeal. The Fedex packet she sent to AAG Nagamine was refused. Orly happened on to the courier who told her he remembered it and thought it strange that the person who refused it did so because one of the letters in “Nagamine” “didn’t look right.”

Again, this was something she could not bring up in court.

Nago and his counsel never showed up. I told Orly I would hang out for awhile in case they came back, which they didn’t nor returned calls left for them.

Orly had to get back to the courthouse where she had left her car and rode with a supporter to the elections office. As they pulled away Orly flashed me the “shaka” sign and I signaled back…thumb up, pinkie up and a wiggle of the hand: hang loose, my friend, see you again soon.


Update, December 5, 2011:  Video of the court hearing in Hawaii can be seen here, courtesy of ObamaReleaseYourRecords.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Categories: National