OrlyTaitzESQ.com

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



Press Release: Motion to dismiss by the defendants in Grinols v Electoral College was withdrawn

Posted on | February 21, 2013 | 28 Comments

Activity in Case 2:12-cv-02997-MCE-DAD Grinols et al v. Electoral College et al Notice – Other

Inbox
x
caed_cmecf_helpdesk@caed.uscourts.gov
12:14 PM (30 minutes ago)

to CourtMail

This is an automatic e-mail message generated by the CM/ECF system.  Please DO NOT RESPOND to this e-mail because the mail box is unattended. ***NOTE TO PUBLIC ACCESS USERS*** Judicial Conference of the United States policy permits attorneys of record and parties in a case (including pro se litigants) to receive one free electronic copy of all documents filed electronically, if receipt is required by law or directed by the filer. PACER access fees apply to all other users.  To avoid later charges, download a copy of each document during this first viewing. However, if the referenced document is a transcript, the free copy and 30 page limit do not apply.

U.S. District Court

Eastern District of California – Live System

Notice of Electronic Filing

The following transaction was entered  by Waters, George  on 2/21/2013 at  12:13 PM PST and filed on 2/21/2013

Case Name:Grinols et al v. Electoral College et al
Case Number:2:12-cv-02997-MCE-DAD
Filer:Governor of California
Secretary  of State of California
Document Number:72

Docket Text: NOTICE of Withdrawal   by Governor of California, Secretary of State  of California  re [58]   MOTION to DISMISS. (Waters, George)

2:12-cv-02997-MCE-DAD Notice has been electronically mailed to:
Edward               A Olsen                                              , GOVT &nbsp &nbsp edward.olsen@usdoj.gov, karen.james@usdoj.gov, monica.lee@usdoj.gov, teisha.stogsdill@usdoj.gov
George               Michael Waters                                             &nbsp &nbsp george.waters@doj.ca.gov, lydia.sandoval@doj.ca.gov
Orly                 Taitz                                              &nbsp & nbsp orly.taitz@gmail.com
2:12-cv-02997-MCE-DAD Electronically filed documents must be served conventionally  by the filer to:

The following document(s) are associated with this transaction:

Document description:Main Document Original filename:n/a Electronic document Stamp: [STAMP dcecfStamp_ID=1064943537 [Date=2/21/2013] [FileNumber=5990950-0 ] [606b19178e6d2441e6d9ff054a81572b8ae6d490789030e82206245d55d1b09e5ac 6d63cde0f9ed6bcbf15e1ff5f3497acc1637fc4aaa02968b553ba865c6164]]

Comments

28 Responses to “Press Release: Motion to dismiss by the defendants in Grinols v Electoral College was withdrawn”

  1. Axel Foley
    February 21st, 2013 @ 12:57 pm
  2. Phillip McKraq
    February 21st, 2013 @ 2:03 pm

    Looks like you have them on the run! You go girl! CHECKMATE!

  3. Gaye Barr
    February 21st, 2013 @ 2:55 pm

    When you win this, will there be a special election between your plaintiffs? This is the first I heard of this lawsuit and didn’t realize you were representing 3 presidential candidates. How will this work? Do you get to select one of them to replace Obama?

  4. RJ
    February 21st, 2013 @ 3:05 pm

    What is the practical significance of this? A delaying tactic? A refusal to acknowledge the authority of the court or deny its jurisdiction?

    It certainly isn’t acquiescence or an admission of wrongdoing . . .

  5. Ricardo Cabeza
    February 21st, 2013 @ 3:13 pm

    Can you use that as an admission that you are right? The Supreme Court needs to see this ASAP, how about an emergency motion for reconsideration?

  6. Jonathan L. Gal
    February 21st, 2013 @ 3:22 pm

    You should connect with Rand Paul.

    He does a lot of online petitioning and he has a large list of Constitutionally oriented voters.

    He is also a Senator.

  7. Curious Dr. Dan
    February 21st, 2013 @ 4:05 pm

    Sorry. Not a lawyer, and maybe not too smart. What does that mean?

  8. dr_taitz@yahoo.com
    February 21st, 2013 @ 5:14 pm

    we tried, so far no response. I need people to do things, not talk. If you feel tat Paul will do something, get on the phone and keep calling until he responds

  9. jojo
    February 21st, 2013 @ 5:17 pm

    honestly u feel you have the them on the run. ….u get domer n domer everyday. ..when obama shows up to 1 of your court hearing then can say we have his attention rite now u r not on his raider when he shows up in front of the senit then I will give credit where credit is due

  10. Kay
    February 21st, 2013 @ 5:17 pm

    TURN ON FOX NEWS. THEY ARE GOING TO INTEVIEW OBAMA’S UNCLE – SAYING THAT HE IS HERE ILLEGALLY.

  11. jojo
    February 21st, 2013 @ 5:24 pm

    gaye barr dont hold your bret on her wining

  12. Jonathan L. Gal
    February 21st, 2013 @ 5:35 pm

    I don’t have any particular leverage with Rand Paul, nor do I have the time to do much on this.

    I’ve been spreading your URL on Facebook. Maybe that is generating some petition sigs and/or some contributions. I don’t know.

    I am so saddened that the judiciary branch is being so unresponsive to your filings. Justice is elusive.

    I suppose that they have some sort of justification for ignoring you. Something like “It would be too destabilizing to challenge the election.”

    In reality, it is the other way around. Destabilization springs from the kind of hypocrisy and lawlessness that is being shown on this issue.

    Shutting off the last peaceful remedy in the courts is not in the least bit stabilizing. Rather, it will cause instability, because people will see that the peaceful system is broken and corrupt.

  13. Tammy
    February 21st, 2013 @ 5:54 pm

    “do things” do the same thing others posted that they have done. click on red button in the upper right. pass the word.. leave links to this website and links to the little red button on different on different websites.. also go to the http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com for info then start working on NULLIFYING UN constitutional laws in your state.Dont waste time. make every minute count.. you can even leave links to the BIG articles on this web page. check on the nullifications already being worked on as they may only be for a county or city..

  14. Dick Kerr
    February 21st, 2013 @ 6:05 pm

    I had been waiting for some good news. Was nice to see this on Twitter. It looks like the “bow will break and the baby will fall”.

  15. John Gault
    February 21st, 2013 @ 6:09 pm

    CAN CITIZENS FORM THEIR OWN GRAND JURY AND INDICT POLITICIANS FOR CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR

    “Yes,” according to Hal Von Luebbert,” author of “Citizen Power Now.” “The US government has no power to bring anyone to trial. The government can not find any person guilty of anything. Both of those powers belong to The People through use of a jury.”

    Von Lubbuert says. “Our elected officials have lost the vision of our forefathers. The Bill of Rights is still the supreme law of our land, and that law provides for indictment only by a Grand Jury composed of common people. That law provides for conviction only by a Petit Jury, a jury of your peers. Think about it,” he said. “When you go to a trial, the charges are brought by “The People.” The jury decides whether you are innocent or guilty – not the judge. The jury does not have to follow the law. In fact, the jury can ignore the law and set free an obviously guilty person if they want. The jury is the final word, not the judge, not the prosecutors. The power to create freedom belongs to the jury.”

    But the power to convene a Grand Jury is not recognized today in America by most judges. Leo Donofrio, a New Jersey attorney explains. “The constitutional power of ‘we the people’ sitting as grand jurors has been subverted by a deceptive play on words since 1946 when the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure were enacted. Regardless, the power still exists in the Constitution and has been upheld by the United States Supreme Court.”
    Donofrio says the 5th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides the power for a Grand Jury of the people without reliance upon a U.S. Attorney to concur in such criminal charges.

    The issue has been discussed often in legal journals. Roger Roots, writing in the “Creighton Law Review,” stated: “In theory, the grand jury is a body of independent citizens that can investigate any crime or government misdeed that comes to its attention. In practice, however, the grand jury is dependent upon the prosecutor to bring cases and gather evidence.

    Thus, while the grand jury still exists as an institution — in a sterile, watered-down, and impotent form — its decisions are the mere reflection of the United States Justice Department.

    The powers for citizen grand juries have been affirmed by several Supreme Court decisions. Justice Powell, in United States v. Calandra, 414 U.S. 338, 343 (1974), stated:
    “The grand jury’s historic functions survive to this day. Its responsibilities continue to include both the determination of whether there is probable cause to believe a crime has been committed and the protection of citizens against unfounded criminal prosecutions. Branzburg v. Hayes, 408 U.S. 665, 686-687 (1972).”

    In United States v. Williams, 504 U.S. 36 at 48 (1992), Justice Scalia, delivering the opinion of the court, laid down the law of the land:

    “’Rooted in long centuries of Anglo-American history,… the grand jury is mentioned in the Bill of Rights, but not in the body of the Constitution. It has not been textually assigned, therefore, to any of the branches described in the first three Articles. It “‘is a constitutional fixture in its own right.’”

    Robert Campbell, founder of the American Grand Jury, says that this passage sets the stage for a revolutionary new FOURTH BRANCH of the Government in the United States. “Besides, the Legislative, Executive, and Judicial branches, I submit that there is a fourth branch, THE GRAND JURY, and “we the people” when sitting as grand jurors, are, as Scalia quoted in US v. Williams, “a constitutional fixture in its own right.”

    He quotes more of Scalia’s opinion regarding the Grand Jury:

    In fact, the whole theory of its function is that it belongs to no branch of the institutional Government, serving as a kind of buffer or referee between the Government and the people.

    “The law is on our side,” Campbell says. “We the People have the right and power under the 5th Amendment of the Constitution to charge this government with crimes whether the US Attorneys or the federal judges agree with us. As the Supreme Court has so brilliantly stated, we are the “buffer between the Government and the people.”

    Campbell’s American Grand Jury team is actively pursuing decisions in a number of United States District Courts located in multiple jurisdictions including: the District of Columbia, Tennessee, Alabama, Florida, Kansas, New York, Texas, California, Arizona, Connecticut, and others.
    Campbell says that a federal judge, Royce Lamberth, U.S. District Court in Washington, DC, has issued two opinions in response to the filings including the statement that the presentments are constitutionally permitted…”

    For more information go to http://www.americangrandjury.org/

  16. DonnaLS
    February 21st, 2013 @ 6:10 pm

    To Gaye Barr – There is no ‘When Orly wins this” – - she presented evidence to have been in conference with the Supreme Court – Orlys documents were not received by all 9 Justices, if any – - if there had been a conference it would have been up to the Surpreme Justices as to whether there would be a hearing – - if Obama was ‘ousted’, as a result of a hearing, VP Biden would take his place.

  17. TJ Marvin
    February 21st, 2013 @ 6:15 pm

    http://www.dayofresistance.com/ Orly that’s the link Pamala Bennett sent out.

  18. F. Hart
    February 21st, 2013 @ 6:17 pm

    It looks like this is finally getting ready to blow. Good luck and God speed!

  19. Marge
    February 21st, 2013 @ 6:37 pm

    utilize this in a smaller fashion??

  20. Verga Grande
    February 21st, 2013 @ 7:09 pm

    You have the rats abandoning ship! Is it time to file for a default judgment since there is no timely answer?

  21. Marge
    February 21st, 2013 @ 8:06 pm

    Nullify the TSA

    - Nullify the Patriot Act

    - Nullify the drug war

    - Nullify Obamacare

    - Nullify any Federal gun control laws; past, present and future

    - Legalize Hemp production/farming and bring hundreds of millions if not billions of dollars into the New Jersey economy

    - Block all unconstitutional drone surveillance

    - Undo the militarization of the police department and push for accountability for police brutality

  22. TJ Marvin
    February 21st, 2013 @ 8:15 pm

    This is bs. I’m not surprised that Fox isn’t telling about the Day Of Resistance but why isn’t WND telling about it?

  23. dr_taitz@yahoo.com
    February 21st, 2013 @ 10:37 pm

    no, it is just a temporary delay, they will refile a motion to dismiss the amended complaint

  24. Randy McKay
    February 22nd, 2013 @ 1:37 am

    I’m not a lawyer either, but I have a good heart and I care. What should I do to assist? Call, E-mail or fax what to who?

  25. Bloodless Coup
    February 22nd, 2013 @ 2:21 am

    Why has there there been no motion for a default judgement?

    I thought Obama was in default.

  26. alice h
    February 22nd, 2013 @ 7:20 am

    @jojo,,
    you need to take advantage of ovomits grants and go back to school to learn to spell for one thing.
    god bless you orly !!

  27. blackyb
    February 22nd, 2013 @ 12:56 pm

    Jojo, are you mispelling on purpose to throw us off as to your being more educated than you are appearing? Perhaps ‘appearing to be’ of foreign origin? Just wondering.

  28. blackyb
    February 22nd, 2013 @ 12:58 pm

    Johnathan L. Gal: You say the truth.

Leave a Reply