Defend Our Freedoms Foundation (DOFF)
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
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

Emergency motion for reconsideration filed in IN. Shocking evidence of corruption and bias by the members of the IN elections commission. More evidence to come later

Posted on | March 1, 2012 | 8 Comments

Dr. Orly Taitz ESQ

29839 Santa Margarita Pkwy, ste 100

Rancho Santa Margarita CA 92688

Ph. 949-683-5411 fax 949-766-7603




This motion is brought by a witness Dr. Orly Taitz ESQ, who presented testimony and submitted exhibits into evidence at the Election Commission Hearing in the cases of petitioners Edward Kesler and Andrew Swihart, seeking to remove the name of a candidate Barack Hussein Obama from the Indiana state ballot due to the fact that Barack Hussein Obama (Hereinafter “Obama”)  is not a natural born US citizen and does not possess any identification papers to show him to be even a citizen,  and due to the fact that the decision by the commission to place Obama’s name on the ballot will constitute election fraud, aiding and abetting elections fraud, aiding and abetting forgery of the identification papers and treason against the state of Indiana and people of the state of Indiana, as well as treason against the United States of America and the people of the United States of America on part of the commission members Mr. Dumezich, Mr. Long, Ms Steele-Riordan and Mr. Bennett. This motion is brought by Dr. Taitz , ESQ (hereinafter “Taitz”) not as an attorney representing any parties, but as a witness  who testified at the  administrative hearing in front of the commission. While Petitioners are not represented by Taitz, they join Taitz in this motion. Taitz is asserting, that the members of the commission abused their discretion and showed an impermissible bias by not following the Indiana Code rules of administrative hearings by refusing to admit into evidence some 300 pages of documents submitted by Taitz and assuming that Obama is qualified, even though Obama defaulted, did not show up at the hearing, showed contempt towards Indiana Election Commission and contempt towards the state of Indiana and people of the state of Indiana and could not find one single attorney or proxy willing to risk his law license and his freedom by submitting to the commission Obama’s identification papers in light of the fact, that it was shown, that the alleged copies of the identification papers posted by Obama on line represent a forgery. Out of abundance of caution Taitz is submitting herein a certified copy of the evidence, which is available to her and ordered certified copies of other evidence.

Due to possible charges of high crimes and misdemeanors, including treason, due to potential of violation of civil rights and human rights by the actions of this commission and due to the damage to the US national security by continuing presence of Obama in the White House, Taitz is forwarding a copy of this motion and evidence to the Attorney General of Indiana, US Attorney for Indiana, District Attorney, Public Integrity Unit of the Department of Justice, Inspector General of the Department of Justice, InterAmerican Commission of Human Rights and United Nations commission for Human Rights.



IC 31-33-19-3
Hearsay evidence
31-33-19-3 Sec. 3. During an administrative hearing under section 1 of this chapter, the administrative hearing officer shall consider hearsay evidence to be competent evidence and may not exclude hearsay based on the technical rules of evidence. However, a determination may not be based solely on evidence that is hearsay.
As added by P.L.1-1997, SEC.16. Taitz provided the commission with the court transcripts from the eligibility challenge against Barack Obama, which was held in the administrative court in the state of Georgia. Taitz testified, that she was an attorney at that hearing, she was admitted pro hac vice in the administrative court in Georgia, where she represented several plaintiffs and brought multiple witnesses, who testified that Barack Obama is using a Social Security number from a state, where he never resided, which does not pass the E-Verify, and he posted on the Internet an alleged copy of his long form birth certificate, which was found to be a forgery. Additionally, she provided evidence, that Obama was using different last names and was hiding his identity under the names Soetoro and Soebarkah. Taitz, also testified in regards to her own research, which showed the same findings. Members of the commission refused to enter any of the documents into evidence, but lodged them into evidence and suggested, that this issue can be further reviewed in the court of law. Taitz argued, that as a private individual, she is limited to the types of evidence she can uncover. Obama was on notice in regards to the hearing and it was up to him to rebut the evidence. Neither Obama nor his attorney showed up, therefore the presumption should be, that Obama is unable to present any documentary evidence to rebut findings by Taitz, therefore Obama cannot be placed on the ballot. Members of the commission erred and abused their authority by not entering into evidence any documents. They showed impermissible bias in favor of Obama.

Taitz brings as an example Indiana election commission meeting minutes from March 10, 1998 meeting. This 18 page report, (Exhibit 1) published by the office of the Secretary of state of Indiana at http://www.in.gov/sos/elections/2612.htm   shows startling difference in behavior of the commission members in relation to evidence presented on the same issue: correct full name of the candidate. Most striking is the difference in attitude and behavior of the Vice Chair S. Anthony Long, who was a commission member since 1997 and was present at both meetings: 1998 meeting discussing removal from the ballot of the candidate Bob Kern and during 2012 meeting, when Taitz brought forward evidence, showing a different legal name for Barack Obama, which was brought in conjunction with the myriad of other issues, such as lack of a valid Social Security number and lack of a valid birth certificate by Obama. Pages 12-16 of the 1998 report are dedicated to lengthy deliberations on the candidacy of candidate Bob Kern. Minutes of February 24, 2012 meeting were not available and were not posted as of the date of this motion.

In 1998 candidate Bob Kern was challenged by Mr. Laudig, an attorney linked to the Democrat party establishment in Indiana, due to Kern’s change of name, as petitioner argued, that Kern changed his legal name and the voters would be defrauded as Kern is concealing his identity.

In parallel, Taitz,  who is an attorney, licensed in the state of CA, several courts of Appeals and the Supreme Court of the United States, was barely allowed to talk, was rudely interrupted and was given little opportunity to authenticate her report of over 300 pages, which contained over 208 pages of exhibits and sworn notarized affidavits, which showed that Obama was listed in his mother’s passport under the name Barack Obama Soebarkah and in his school records in Indonesia he was registered under the name Barry Soetoro (last name of his step father, Lolo Soetoro). In South -Asian tradition the names are blended. For example, a woman  by name Ranga and a man by name Raj would take a blended last name Rangaraj. Similarly, it appears, an eccentric, “proletariat united” mother of Obama, Stanley Ann Dunham,  blended her second husband’s last name Soetoro and her son’s given first name Barack and came  up with a blended name Soebarkah, under which he is listed in her official passport records. In the packet, submitted to the commission by Federal Express Taitz provided the commissioners with the evidence, showing, that not only Obama went by different names, he made a conscious effort to conceal his identity in his Illinois bar application and was committing fraud and possibly perjury, if his bar application was under oath, as usually those applications  are. Taitz  provided a sworn affidavit, showing that she complained to the Illinois bar about Obama concealing his identity under the name Soetoro. Originally she got a response, that Obama is inactive and there will be no investigation. When Taitz complained the second time, arguing that the inactive status can be activated at any time, and there has to be an investigation into fraud and perjury in relation to Obama’s concealment of his name, Obama resigned from the bar completely and gave up his expensive Harvard law degree and his law license in order to continue concealment of his identity under the names Soetoro and Soebarkah.  One would believe, that the commissioners would use an even handed approach to these two cases. One would believe that they would show more concern, as Obama is running for the position of the U.S. President and Commander-in- Chief. It is also important to note, that candidate Kern showed up and testified  on his behalf during 1998 meeting. Most of the other presidential candidates either showed up  or sent their attorneys and showed respect to the election commission and the people of the state of Indiana. Taitz, as a concerned citizen showed up, flew thousands of miles from California and paid for the expensive trip. Obama de facto spit in the face of the people of the state of Indiana and in the face of the commissioners by not showing up, by not sending his attorney or any other representative with any valid identification papers, even though threatened with default by the commission, and the commission ignored everything, and after being spit in the face, said thank you to Obama and promptly placed his name on the ballot.

Even though both candidate Kern and candidate Obama changed their names, the difference between candidate Kern and candidate Obama in a nut shell consisted of the difference in the attitude of the establishment towards those candidates. Kern was an embarrassment to the establishment, as he had a record of felony conviction, while Obama, of course, is the most important establishment puppet, with trillions of dollars of dispersements and allocations pursuant to the Presidential orders  at stake.

Surprisingly, Kern and Obama had somewhat similar childhood. Both were children abandoned by their fathers and raised by young single mothers.  Kern testified, that Bob Kern was his given name at birth. It was his mother’s maiden name. Just as Obama, he was cared for by his grandparents. Kern testified, that when he was a baby, his mother changed his last name from Kern to Hidalgo, last name of his father, so that it would be easier for her to get child support. Kern stated, that he wanted to give respect to his maternal grandfather, Mr. Kern, who raised him and cared for him and later changed his name to Bob Hidalgo Kern. He ran in the prior election under the name Hidalgo Kern. Later he officially changed his last name on the voter registration from Hidalgo Kern to Kern and was listed in 1998 ballot as Bob Kern. The staff attorney testified, that the name of the candidate on the ballot should be the same name, as one listed on his voter registration, which would be Bob Kern.    That should have resolved the problem, however this was not sufficient for the commissioners, particularly for the commissioner Long.

The record shows, that the commissioners grilled Kern on his records. They were demanding to see Kern’s drivers license. Kern responded, that due to his history of epilepsy, he cannot drive and does not have a driver’s license. At issue was, that the Democrat party did not want Kern, as their candidate. The wanted a different candidate, so the commissioners, particularly the two Democrats on the commission went into lengthy discussion about the need for Kern to pay a few dollars and get a valid ID from the DMV, even though he does not drive. Noteworthy, that the same Democrat party argues for abandonment of all ID checks during voting, claiming that  a requirement for an ID disenfranchises the voters. Of course, it is all the matter of politics. When the Democrat party wants more votes and does not care, whether those are illegal aliens voting or citizens, they claim disenfranchisement of voters and abandonment of need for IDs. When they want to remove from the ballot an inconvenient candidate, who changed his affiliation and running as a Democrat, they demand an ID. What’s important, is that they never    paid any attention to the fact that neither Obama nor his representatives never showed up and never presented any identification papers.

Record shows, that Commissioner S. Anthony Long  showed real dedication to his duty. At the hearing  Long testified, that he took it upon himself to check the phone book, to see if Kern is listed under the name Hidalgo or Kern. He took it upon himself to testify before the commission that in the phone book there was no Bob Kern listed. Kern testified, that the phone is under his aunt’s name.  What’s most important is utter hypocrisy, bias, lack of impartiality and possible violation of the 14th amendment equal protection rights provision towards evidence in case of Kern and evidence provided by attorney Taitz in Obama’s challenge.

Long, as a commissioner, was not under oath. He, as a commissioner, did not base his decision on evidence, which was presented in the challenge and by the candidate. He took it upon himself to do investigation, review the phone book and testify at the hearing about his findings. This testimony was a clear hearsay. The phone book was not in evidence. Long was engaged in hearsay testimony, he was not under oath and he was not a party. There was no competent admissible evidence. He, as a commissioner, who was supposed to be an impartial trier of fact, was simply bringing prejudicial hearsay into the hearing. As a licensed attorney Anthony Long knew better, he knew that his behavior was inappropriate, prejudicial, unethical and violated the most basic rules of professional conduct.

On the other hand, Taitz brought 208 pages of evidence. She, as an attorney and an officer of the court of multiple courts testified under oath and flown thousands of miles to authenticate the evidence and attest, that the court records and transcript that she provided earlier to the commission, were true and correct copies of the transcripts, that she received from the court reporter in Georgia, and from the staff attorney in the administrative court in Georgia, where she was the attorney on the challenge of Obama.  In spite of all that members of the commission refused to admit into evidence her exhibits and agreed to only lodge them into evidence. They clearly used different standards of admissibility of evidence. There has to be an even handed approach and lack of bias and impartiality. The commission has to reconsider its’ decision and enter into evidence exhibits presented by Taitz. Respondent had an opportunity to respond. He did not do so. The evidence has to be admitted and the responded has to be removed from the ballot as unqualified.

Further on Commissioners disregarded Taitz sworn testimony, that she tried to obtain best evidence in this case, that she traveled five times to Hawaii to different court hearings and in furtherance of a federal subpoena on the Director of Health of Hawaii to allow inspection of Obama’s original birth certificate. Health department refused to comply. While Obama is posting, what he claims to be his birth certificate on mugs and T-shirts, he never produced any valid identification records. Not one single judge in this nation, not one single elections commission  saw any valid certified copies of Obama’s identification records, which can be used to inspect the original records, nobody ever saw any admissible evidence. We saw an empty chair arrogantly presented by Obama as evidence of his eligibility  and bureaucrats admited this as evidence of his eligibility.

It is  telling, that the commissioners did not want the candidate to “degrade the integrity of the state by perpetrating a fraud on the public”, but commissioners couldn’t care less about the integrity of the state and fraud on the public, if the fraud was committed by Obama. Quite telling was a remark by the same diligent commissioner Long, where he asked the Petitioner and Taitz, where does it state in the Constitution, that the president is supposed to have valid records or valid Social Security number. Could there be more of a bias and lack of impartiality and judicial misconduct? It is hard to imagine.


Indiana code 3-10-1-14(b) states

“A candidates given name and surname as set forth in candidate’s voter registration record shall be printed in full” on the primary ballot (emphasis added).

During the 1998 hearing for Bob Kern  it was shown that Bob Kern has changed his name on his voter registration card to Kern.

In case of Obama there is no evidence anywhere to ascertain, what Obama’s full name is. Obama’s different documents show his full name to be either Barack Obama or Barack Hussein Obama or Barack A Hussein Obama (nobody knows what initial A. stands for, though it is rumored to be Abdullah), Barack Hussein Obama, II,  or Barack Obama Soebarkah, or Barry Obama or Barry Soetoro. Nobody knows, what is this man’s full name. Obama or his representatives got the complaint and had an opportunity to provide competent admissible evidence of his full name. They never did it. Commission has no knowledge of Obama’s full name.

Due to violation of Indiana statute 3-10-1-14(b) the commission has to reconsider its’ decision and remove Obama’s name from the ballot or at the very minimum schedule another hearing and demand that Obama present valid certified copies of his primary identification papers or be removed from the ballot.



Prior to the commission hearing Taitz, as well as petitioner Karl Swihart, submitted to the commission some 300 pages of transcripts and case file exhibits entered into evidence by the administrative judge in the stat of Georgia. Three of the commission members did not even have this evidence before them and there is no evidence to believe, that they read a single word of what was written, One of the commission members, Ms. Steele-Riordan stated that she glanced at the paperwork.   It was clear that it was just a cursory review and she didn’t even understand what was provided to her. She either was not understanding or was not willing to understand what was submitted to her. She was stating that there was no value in submission of the proposed summary of facts and law, even though it provided an explanation and references to the rest of the evidence.

At the beginning of the hearing, when petitioner Edward Kessler stated that the petition alleges, that Obama is not eligible due to the fact, that  Obama was a foreign national at birth and does not have a valid birth certificate and Social Security number  and there is no evidence to believe, that the name he is using is indeed his legal name. At that time commissioner Long asked, where in the Constitution does it state that the President is supposed to have a valid Social Security number. The whole auditorium gasped hearing the question. The question in itself represented such an unprecedented level of corruption of the governmental bureaucrat, that the audience gasped. If one were to look up in the Merriam- Webster dictionary the word corrupt, he would find, that it means, “does not work properly”.  A commissioner, who works properly should be able to grasp, that if a requirement for one to be a natural born citizen, it means one should have valid primary identification documents, such as  a valid original birth certificate and a valid Social Security number.  Not everything is written and spelled out in the Constitution and surely the framers of the Constitution believed that the bureaucrats, who will come after them, will have some minimal IQ and some logical thinking to understand such simple facts. Moreover, Mr. Long proceeded to ask “Surely you are not saying that our President is an illegal alien from Mexico”. It showed, that Mr. Long not only did not use any minimal logical thinking, he did not spend any minimal time to read the case and the evidence submitted with the edition. If he were to do any due diligence, he would know that the evidence shows Obama not to be an illegal alien from Mexico, but one from Kenya and a citizen of Indonesia


Even though Indiana code dictates that the hearsay evidence should not be excluded, Taitz submits certified copies of the court transcript and case file of the eligibility hearing against Barack Obama held in Atlanta, Georgia.

IC 31-33-19-3
Hearsay evidence
31-33-19-3 Sec. 3. During an administrative hearing under section 1 of this chapter, the administrative hearing officer shall consider hearsay evidence to be competent evidence and may not exclude hearsay based on the technical rules of evidence.

Additionally Taitz provided a separate complaint of election fraud, submitted on proper Indiana Secretary of State forms and along the guidelines of HAVA (Help America Vote Act). This complaint was forwarded to both Secretary of State Jerald Bonnet, immediate Secretary of State Charlie White and the Election Commission by both electronic mail and FederalExpress. This  complaint was completely ignored by the Secretary of state and the Elections commission in flagrant violation of HAVA.

It did not go unnoticed, that all of the members of the media demonstratively walked out of the chambers, when the hearing against Obama was announced, the marched back in, when Obama’s case was over. It was crystal clear, that the members of the mainstream media were literally under the “marching orders” from the Obama regime and  what is presented to the public as a “main stream media” is nothing, but the “back water media” of corrupt Obama regime. Similarly, behavior of the commissioners was so different during the Obama hearing from their behavior during the other hearings, that it was clear that the commissioners are under the same “marching orders”. While the commissioners took a lot of time to discuss evidence in other cases and challenges, they were preventing the petitioners from speaking during Obama challenge, they cut them off, did not give them nearly as much time and consideration.    It felt like an administrative hearing in a Communist Stalinist Soviet Union or a  Nazi Germany in the 1930s.


Chairman of the commission Dumezich did everything in his power to shut up Taitz. When Taitz made a true and correct statement, that the members of the commission will be aiding and abetting elections fraud, if hey put Obama on the ballot with  a stolen Social Security number, forged birth certificate and by name, that is not legally his, Dumezich got irritated and did not like the truth, so he personally attacked Taitz with rude and unprofessional statements, which can be appropriate for a farmers market, but not the state capitol. His behavior was so rude and unprofessional and unbecoming of a governmental official, that Dumezich should resign from the commission immediately.


Evidence presented to the commission showed Obama using a last name, which is not legally his and forged identification papers. Not one single judge or election official around the nation ever saw Obama’s original identification papers or any valid certified copies, which can be used to even seek the originals. This represents a serious threat to the U.S. national security


Obama received a notification of this hearing and was warned that he might be found in default. He received a copy of all the evidence against him. He failed to appear, he was in default and he showed contempt towards the Election Board Commission, the state of Indiana and the people of the state of Indiana. His failure to appear or send a representative constitutes a circumstantial evidence of guilty mind and of absence of any valid identification papers. His failure to send an attorney or a representative, shows a guilty mind and provides circumstantial evidence that no attorney was willing to risk losing his law license and possibly his freedom by submitting to the commission  alleged copies of Obama’s identification papers, which Obama posted on line, as those were deemed to be a forgery as stated by the sworn witness testimony in exhibits.

IX Additional information shows Obama to be committing a crime of uttering forged documents

Today, at 1pm Mountain time sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa county, Arizona, held a press conference, where he announced results of 6 months investigation conducted by a number of investigators and attorneys. His conclusions were, that Barack Obama’s alleged copy of a long form birth certificate represents a computer generated forgery. Without a valid birth certificate there is no evidence of Obama’s birth anywhere in the U.S., therefore there is no evidence of him being a natural born U.S. citizen. Taitz is in process of getting a certified copy of this report by Sheriff Arpaio. This evidence alone should be the basis for at least a temporary injunction from placement of Obama on the ballot in the state of Indiana until at least he provides admissible evidence proving his natural born status.

  1. II. Conclusion

In conclusion this commission has to reconsider its decision and enter into evidence documents submitted by Taitz. In light of the documents submitted, Obama cannot be allowed on the ballot. The evidence is so incriminating against Obama, that it is a civic duty of the members of the commission according to their oath of office  not only to disallow Obama on the ballot, but, also, to forward these findings to the fraud investigation unit of the office of the Secretary of State, as well as Marion county district attorney and Attorney General of Indiana for criminal investigation and prosecution of Obama.


8 Responses to “Emergency motion for reconsideration filed in IN. Shocking evidence of corruption and bias by the members of the IN elections commission. More evidence to come later”

  1. Russell Bennett
    March 3rd, 2012 @ 12:04 pm

    How much of a security risk is Barry. If Scottland Yard knows about him other Counties do to. They are not going to share Information with him for fear of what he would do with it. We know he gives information to Russia.

  2. orly taitz
    March 3rd, 2012 @ 12:53 pm

    the whole world knows he is a fraud
    our corrupt judges and officiaLS SIMPLY DON’T CARE

  3. Dr. Taitz is America's Giant Fighter
    March 4th, 2012 @ 8:25 am

    Wow! Dr. Taitz, surely ANYONE with an IQ of at least 60 should be able to see that you are not only brilliant, but courageous.

    May God grant you unconditional FAVOR and WISDOM as you continue to pursue justice in a completely corrupt system. God hates corruption, but LOVES grace, truth, honor, and glory…which He will give to you through Yeshua. You will be crowned with glory and honor.

    I am sending in another donation…wish it could be more.

  4. RacerJim
    March 5th, 2012 @ 6:22 am

    @Russell Bennett

    Barry is more of a national security risk than Rudolf Abel and the Rosenbergs (Ethel & Julius) ever were for the very reason you mentioned — Scotland Yard et al intelligence agencies of friendly nations are well aware of who/what Obama is and won’t share intelligence with our intelligence agencies out of fear of what Obama would do with same.

  5. Jim F
    March 5th, 2012 @ 8:23 am

    I think what you meant was “anybody with an IQ of up to 60…” That makes a lot more sense.

  6. Jason Hodge
    March 6th, 2012 @ 7:06 am


  7. RacerJim
    March 6th, 2012 @ 7:37 am

    @Jim F

    I’d say “…ANYONE with any common sense…”. That makes the most sense.

  8. Rachel Spelling
    March 6th, 2012 @ 8:17 am

    As of today, almost half the states are already voting with Obama on the ballot. It’s setting a bad precedent.

    We need to get those Georgia transcripts mailed out, pronto!

Leave a Reply