Orly Taitz: Phone Call from Obama’s Attorney, then Hunger Strike

ELLISON SYMPATHIZES WITH “OCCUPIERS;” TAITZ SEEKS AN END TO FRAUD

by Sharon Rondeau

Dr. Orly Taitz has fasted since last night but is continuing to work on several legal challenges to Obama's placement on state ballots for the 2012 election

(Dec. 20, 2011) — Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN) fasted last Friday to express his sympathy with several “Occupy” protesters who want full voting rights for residents of the District of Columbia instead of the “non-voting delegate” who currently represents them.  Article I, Section 8, clause 17 of the U.S. Constitution designates that the federal government was to occupy a district “not exceeding ten Miles square” as the seat of its operations and with the consent of the states to which the district had belonged.

Ellison joined the protests in favor of “budgetary independence” with four Occupiers who have not eaten since December 8.  The protests have cost the District of Columbia more than $1.6 million.

Also on Monday evening at 6:00 p.m. PT, Atty. Orly Taitz began a similar fast for different reasons:  she is protesting what she describes as “rigged” elections” dictated by easily-corruptible voting machines as well as “a usurper in the White House.”  She objects to the electronic voting machines and ballot-counting scanners used to count votes in U.S. elections, contending that the machines “can be easily hacked.”

Taitz has brought numerous lawsuits against Barack Hussein Obama for allegedly using a stolen social security number, presenting a forged birth certificate to the public, and allegedly failing to qualify as a “natural born Citizen” as required by Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution.

This week, Russian citizens have also been protesting what they claim are “rigged elections,” and another protest is scheduled for Christmas Eve, December 24.  Some protesters have been jailed.  A Russian political analyst contends that Putin, who is considered a front-runner for the presidential election scheduled for March 2012, considers himself part of a “strong elite group” and the protesters “sheep.”

Taitz was born in the Moldavian SSR (Soviet Socialist Republic), and immigrated to the U.S. as a young woman.  She is currently running for the U.S. Senate from California against incumbent Dianne Feinstein.

Taitz said she was working today despite the lack of food and water.

She has an active ballot challenge to Obama’s eligibility filed in the state of Georgia, where recently Judge Michael Malihi consolidated several cases on the same issue.  Taitz reported that a “signed court subpoena” was sent to the Hawaii Department of Health Director Loretta Fuddy and was received as evidenced by the certified-mail receipt.  Taitz stated that on December 19, Obama’s attorney called her and Taitz said to him, “I want to depose your client,” and the attorney responded, “I’m opposing that.  No need for depositions and subpoenas.”  Taitz stated that “They find all kinds of things for dismissal on procedural grounds instead of arguing on the merits.”

11 Responses to "Orly Taitz: Phone Call from Obama’s Attorney, then Hunger Strike"

  1. drljr   Tuesday, January 3, 2012 at 5:02 PM

    Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN) should take the time to read ALL of Article 1 Section 8 Paragraph 17. Washington D.C. is part of the State of Maryland on loan to the federal government for the seat of government. If the residents of D.C. want to participate in voting for Representatives they should move to Maryland or Virginia. People forget this is not a democracy but a Republic. Besides which, the minute the boundaries of Washington, D.C. are changed the land automatically reverts back to Maryland. Arlington, VA (originally part of Washington D.C.) was returned to Virginia in 1847 I believe.

  2. drljr   Tuesday, January 3, 2012 at 4:56 PM

    Which is why people must be told and reminded over and over that Mr Obama’s father precludes him from being President.

  3. drljr   Tuesday, January 3, 2012 at 4:55 PM

    The Southern States made a fundamental flaw in not adhering to the US Constitution. Before you start criticizing Lincoln please read Article 1 Section 8 Paragraph 15 and 18, Article 1 Section 10, Article 3 Section 3, Article 6 Paragraphs 2 and 3. When you look at the Constitution there was never an option for any State to unilaterally leave the Union. Article 2 of the Articles of Confederation may have allowed it but the US Constitution does not.

    As for Article 1, Section 8, Paragraph 17 all that does is give CONGRESS authority over the District of Columbia and property owned by the US Government. For the record the District of Columbia is part of MARYLAND and under Article 4, Section 3 prohibits any Statehood for the District unless Maryland should approve and I don’t see that happening. Besides which, the minute the boundaries of the Washington D.C. are changed the land automatically reverts back to Maryland. Arlington, VA (originally part of Washington D.C.) was returned to Virginia in 1847 I believe.

    Persons does not include corporations. A corporation is business that is given certain operative authority. You should really read the Ark and Elk Supreme Court rulings on what Amendment 14 means. And remember, Mr Obama is not President since he is not a natural born citizen due to his father being a foreign citizen.

  4. rust23   Wednesday, December 21, 2011 at 8:51 PM

    Doubt that. Not politically advantageous, and risking more wrath of media to openly espouse “birtherism”. Candidates quickly become smeared my MSM. Ron Paul has served in Congress for years so he is not going to add to the level of distrust he creates with MSM by attacking Fed, soft on Iran, AND taking on “birther issues’. Hence he does two out of three. That is my guess. Lots of people in IA though seem to distrust the official version of the long hidden long form, at least by polling. That issue is left to Donald Trump.

  5. geodan   Wednesday, December 21, 2011 at 5:46 PM

    Read “http://www.usa-the-republic.com/abatements/Background%20Studies%20To%20American%20Law.pdf,” page 55, which states:

    “At least seven years before Lincoln’s War, a number of states began to adjourn their state legislatures sine die [without day (to return)]. This discovery makes no sense until we realize that the U.S. Senators of these Northern states, appointed at that time by state legislatures, were the most radical proponents of policies that would drive the South out of the Union.”

    Their success [on not returning to Congress in sufficient numbers] caused the U.S. Congress to become disabled on March 27, 1861, due to lack of a quorum in states that remained. Three weeks later Lincoln took Executive control of the nation as Commander In Chief by declaring martial rule. This was the start of Civil War and the decade of treason that installed the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments and, purportedly through the U.S. Congress’ 100% authority under Article 1, Section 8, clause 17, replaced the disabled Constitutional government with the foreign-owned, for-profit, three branch municipal UNITED STATES (Inc.) government that it installed in the District of Columbia via the Organic Act of 1871, whose laws are “not inconsistent with” those of the U.S. Constitution.

    The present CEO of this corporation is Barak Obama. Its owners and board of directors are the international bankers Thomas Jefferson had warned us about. It seems everything else is a charade. Under the 14th Amendment, “All persons born or natrualized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.” “Persons” include corporations, trusts, and other man-made entities. Is Barak Obama a trust born in the U.S. of U.S. citizens?

  6. BobSR   Wednesday, December 21, 2011 at 12:03 PM

    I think you are more than a bit off with your 99.9% believing Obama is a NBC due to being born in Hawaii. Ron Paul could force the Obamamedia, which includes Fox News, to discuss the subject of NBC and Obama’s bogus SS number, locked up records, etc., etc., and he would do absolutely nothing to hurt his chances of being president, which are 99.9% that he isn’t going to be.

    On the contrary, he would immediately increase his chances of being the Republican nominee if he would bring the subject up.

    Yes, he has been “Alinskyed” into silence on the subject, and also told by a complicit Congressional leadership and Republican National Committee not to discuss Obama’s ineligibility or other crimes, and he obeyed their orders.

    Ron Paul is not going to save us.

    If a miracle occurs and Paul is the Republican candidate for president, I’m betting there will be not a word from him about Obama’s ineligibility or other crimes.

  7. Jedi Pauly   Wednesday, December 21, 2011 at 11:01 AM

    Because 99.9% of people believe that Obama is a natural born citizen because he was born in Hawaii. That is the official government position and the official position of the news media and everyone knows that the government and news would not lie or cover up, so anyone who says that Obama is not a natural born Citizen is a “birther” and insane. Therefore Ron Paul would lose all credibility and any chance to be President.

    Ron Paul must first get the Republican Nomination as the Republican candidate for President and then things will change. Then the gloves will come off and he will bring out the fact that Obama is not an nbC.

  8. uwho   Tuesday, December 20, 2011 at 11:47 PM

    unbontir you are absolutely right. I just hope America has learned her lesson. We should be conducting our own vetting of candidates instead waiting for someone else to do it. Good post. Thanks

  9. Constitution   Tuesday, December 20, 2011 at 11:28 PM

    Carefully watch polling procedures and places. Ron Paul is clearing the field and making the commies very very nervous, so expect and be prepared for tampering. We need to quickly strengthen polling regulations and laws based especially on the last venture of the Nothing New Black Panthers.

  10. BobSR   Tuesday, December 20, 2011 at 11:00 PM

    Why does Ron Paul refuse to discuss Obama’s ineligibility? One would think someone who claims to support the Constitution as Ron Paul does would be all over Barry’s usurpation of the presidency.

    Why is Ron Paul, like the others, silent on the only issue that really matters right now??

  11. unbontir   Tuesday, December 20, 2011 at 8:30 PM

    There is a spiritual power that God affords His Children, those who have been born again, called Christians when they fast and pray. In these evil times wherein a Muslim practicing taqqiya has usurped the office of the president of the United States of America and is employing Marxist methods in order to institute Socialist policies that he may advance the multi-faceted Islamic strategy of dhimmitude thereby furthering the Islamic agenda of world domination and can even get away with presenting forged documents to our elected representatives in order to cover-up his high crime against the highest law of this land, the Constitution of the United States of America – we need the empowerment of the Holy Pneuma now more than ever. God is in control; Jesus is the answer…and Ron Paul is the best chance we have of getting this country back to the biblical standards of righteousness that – to the degree that we adhered to them – made this country great. To the degree that we have deviated from the teaching of Scripture: such as slavery, abortion, toleration of the depraved homosexuals, etcetera…, etc…, we have reaped ‘the whirlwind.’

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.