Dr. Orly Taitz, Esquire

Defend Our Freedoms Foundation
29839 Santa Margarita Pkwy, Ste 100
Rancho Santa Margarita CA, 92688
Copyright 2014

Review of Politics, Economics, Constitution, Law and World Affairs by Attorney and Doctor Orly Taitz


If you love your country, please help me fight this creeping tyranny and corruption.
Donations no matter how small will help pay for airline and travel expenses.





The articles posted represent only the opinion of the writers and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Dr. Taitz, Esq., who has no means of checking the veracity of all the claims and allegations in the articles.
Mail donations to:
Defend Our Freedoms Foundation, c/o Dr. Orly Taitz
29839 Santa Margarita Pkwy, Ste 100
Rancho Santa Margarita, CA 92688.
Contact Dr. Taitz at
orly.taitz@gmail.com.
In case of emergency, call 949-683-5411.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny.
When the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

During times of universal deceit, telling the truth
becomes a revolutionary act.
 -- George Orwell

First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they
fight you, then you win.
 -- Mahatma Gandhi



Posted on | January 6, 2013 | No Comments

LETS HEAR IT 0 approved

The halo is not from a scan. In Arpaio’s investigation expert Mara Zebest analysis states that the White house PDF was never scanned from a paper document, and was produced using a Mac computer and 2 different programs to produce it.  According to her, this document is only a paper document when you hit print on your computer.  The defense should be happy that Dr. Taitz is asking for the origins for comparison to the PDF’s. Because they did not provide a defense to her charges, and are in default, the judge should be compelled to rule against them.

The best defense to her charges, is to provide the originals and prove her allegations are false.  In a normal case like this the defense would subpoena the origins to prove Dr. Taitz wrong.

Very simply- Dr. Taitz and her clients have an injury, the courts can provide relief, the clients have standing, the filing was ripe and timely,  the case was not moot, the defense did not refute the charges.  At this point the the judge should rule in Taitz’s favor.  The defense should be requesting an evidence hearing to disprove her charges.  She is helping the defense because she subpoenaed the evidence that could disprove her charges.

If her case does not advance are the Judges in dereliction of their duty?  Are they denying rights?  Are the politicizing the courts?  Are they to be named in Dr. Taitz’s RICO suit?  Are they Treasonous in the Usurpation of the USA?  Are these grounds for judicial impeachment by the legislative branch?

These are questions I would not want to have to answer if I were a judge.  I would either rule in Taitz favor or move to evidence hearing ASAP.

And regarding the “what part of second do not understand”.  If your injured party were in first they would not be in front of the judge.

Share

Comments

Leave a Reply





*