OrlyTaitzEsq.com

TaitzReport.com

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
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


Why WND didn’t write about Obama SS fraud for a year and a half, that I have been writing about it?

Posted on | May 25, 2010 | 5 Comments

Svetlana

I just don’t understand why WND didn’t run with the SSN story long time ago ???

Answer from Orly: I can’t tell for sure. I have been outspoken about SS fraud for a year and a half now. For the first time that I remember speaking  about it publicly, was a press conference at the National Press Club December 12, 2008. It was shown on C-span. I included this info in all the pleadings. When my site was hacked and erroneous messages of malware were posted by Google, some were blaming me, now  of course, anyone who writes about Obama’s SS fraud, experiences hacking of his web site and malware warnings from Google.

I sought mass e-mailing through WND, however it can be done in 2 ways only: either by splitting donations in half, and I don’t have a set up for this. Pay pal told me that they can’t do it, they can’t split donation in half, or it can be done by paying their fee, which is high. WND charges $9,000 for one round of mass e-mails to 300,000 of their readers. Other conservative publications charge $12,000-$18,000 for one round of e-mails. For example, when Gary Kreep sends his monthly appeals for donation, he splits donations in half with WND or pays a fixed fee of $9,000 for one time use of their 300,000 e-mail addresses of their readers, who might donate. If he sends his mass e-mail through Newsmax, he pays $12,000-$18,000 to Newsmax every time he sends a mass e-mail. Same is with the Republican pack.   It was just too expensive for me to push. 

Recently I took out a full page ad in Wash times, which is a competitor of WND.    They charged me $1,200 for the ad. It was much more affordable. Wash Times writer John Spokes has written a lengthy article about it on his own blog. When WND writer Jerome Corsi saw my pleadings and Wash Times ad and the article by John Spokes, he decided to copy it and write an article in WND and went on Jeff Kuhner show in DC and spoke about it. Too bad, that when he went to this Jeff Kuhner show, he didn’t mention that the material came from my pleadings. O, well, that’s life.

 So, I don’t know, why exactly they didn’t advertise this issue that much for a year and a half that I’ve been speaking and writing about it. Maybe, the reason is in the fact that Gary Kreep was paying a lot in advertising dollars and I wasn’t, so they wanted to promote him more, that is why people were getting a lot of e-mails asking for donations for United States Justice Foundation- which is Gary Kreep. That why most donations went to Kreep and WND, while I got very little in terms of donations, even though I brought most of legal actions, traveled all over the nation to popularise the issue and currently spent a fortune on my campaign for CA sec of state, to clean up elections in my capacity as a secretary of state. WND still have written about me, as it was news and promoted the paper, and it’s standing in ratings, it brought advertisers to them, but all the targeted appeals for donations went to Gary Kreep because of the financial deal made by Gary Kreep with WND. 

At this point the most important thing is to bring Obama to justice. Let the bygons be bygons. It will help me though, if people spread the word and help with me with donations to my campaign and legal actions.

After 2 years of my pleadings and a full page ad in Washington Times, media is finally getting what I said all along: Obama is sitting in the White House with a SS number of another individual

Comments

5 Responses to “Why WND didn’t write about Obama SS fraud for a year and a half, that I have been writing about it?”

  1. Steve
    May 25th, 2010 @ 8:24 am

    It take a lot of research to find what is fact in law and what is nonsense and completely false.
    I will give you just two examples.
    In the Presidencial clause they list Citizens of the United States which is domiciled in the Constitution. What people do not realize is that anyone born before the adoption of the Constitution are all dead and have been dead for over 150 years. The only pertinent fact in the Presidencial Clause today is the reference to natural born citizens.
    There are two other uses of the term Citizens of the United States which are domiciled in
    Laws of Congress specifically naturalization Acts passed since 1790 not the Constitution. The first refers to Immigrants born in foreign lands who immigrate to the United States and they are referred to as Citizens of the United States. The second case are children
    born to American citizens in foreign countries military and non military. They received a certificate of birth from the country of birth
    and a certificate of Automatic Naturalized Citizen from the United States and are referred to as derivative citizens. In English law before American independence derivative Citizens are the 5 Acts of Parliment. English common law considered such persons born in non English land aliens and it took an Act of Parliment to reverse specific cases.
    In McCain’s case in United States Federal District Court of New Hampshire case number 1:08-cv-00099 McCain was ruled a native born citizen of Panama because he was born in Colon Panama and an Automatic Naturalized Citizen of the United States or a derivative citizen.

  2. dr_taitz@yahoo.com
    May 25th, 2010 @ 10:08 am

    I have not seen a ruling, saying that McCain is a naturalized citizen. If he is naturalized, he can’t be a presidential candidate

  3. Bob
    May 25th, 2010 @ 10:54 am

    No. Hollander v. McCain, 566 F.Supp.2d 63 (D.N.H. 2008) was dismissed for lack of standing. It did not rule either way about McCain’s citizenship.

  4. Steve
    May 25th, 2010 @ 11:08 am

    Orly
    A month or two ago I sent you a very thick certified file
    on McCain and the various laws regarding types of Citizenship and I received the return certificate that it was received.
    I will right now send you an electronic version. The court case regarding McCain is listed above. United States New Hampshire District Court case number 1:08-cv-00099.
    The court case will come in two sections. One for certified birth records and another for court ruling. There will be 3 birth records. Two list birth in Colon and the fact they were residing in Colon at the time. 3rd bith record is from 1980 when he retired from the Navy.
    McCain was ruled a native born citizen of Panama and an Automatic naturalized Citizen of the United States.
    Also, if you look at the 1st sentence of 14th Amendment you will find the reference born in the United States and naturalized immigrant.
    No reference is made referring to derivative citizens.
    Throughout American history they have been outside in left field like aliens under British Common law. Senator Hatfield of Utah tried to do something about it about 20 years ago but nobody would listen or was willing to go through the process of a Constitution amendment.

  5. dr_taitz@yahoo.com
    May 25th, 2010 @ 11:43 am

    I have not received all my mail. two people told me that they sent large donations, but I didn’t get them

Leave a Reply





*