Friday, May 13, 2011

HORNBECK v SALAZAR, et al. v Orly Taitz

Hornbeck v Salazar was a case filled last year after the gulf oil disaster to challenge the legality of the Federal Government’s 6-month moratorium on deepwater drilling. Now in reality, what that has to do with the price of tea in Birfistan I’m not sure. Evidently one morning as Orly was having an in-depth breakfast conversation with her bowl of Froot Loops she decided that she should intervene in that court case. So on 3/28/11 Orly filed her “Motion to Intervene”. 

“Intervener asserts that she possesses documents and knowledge, which would expeditiously resolve current action and multiple similar actions around the nation. Such documents will clearly show that the current stalemate in this case is intentional and part of a wider scheme and her intervention will help to stop continuous de-facto harassment and destruction of the U.S. oil and gas industry by Obama administration. Without such knowledge, facts and evidence this case will stay in limbo, as it was for nine months now with continuous stonewalling and delays of drilling, which will continue indefinitely, while Barack Obama is in office.”

Of course those documents she possesses are all of same ole lame ole “birfer” and “after-birfer” documents she’s been waving around the courts like a mad woman.

“Plaintiff-intervener suffered similar financial damages due to abuse of authority, which was experienced by the Plaintiff in this case. Intervener asserts that her damages as well as damages of the Plaintiff in this case are governed and related to the same legal principals, which would show fully upon discovery in this case, that Secretary Salazar, defendant herein, had no legal authority by either Mr. Salazar of Mr. Obama to issue orders that detrimentally affect the plaintiff, the Intervener-Plaintiff”

The financial damage she suffered was to be fined and sanctioned for her arrogant courtroom ignorance, how is that even close to any of the legal principles of this case? She continues with page after page outlining her allegations that are as usual more full of shit than a Christmas turkey, but that’s never stopped her before.

“Additionally, as an attorney who brought forward information incriminating Barack Obama and negating legitimacy of his administration, and as an attorney representing members of the military, questioning legitimacy of Obama, Taitz was subjected to persecution, sanctions, harassment, and defamation. As such, she has direct, substantial and legally protectable interest in this litigation. Her participation will allow for expedient resolution of this litigation and will allow for resolution of the protectable legal interests of both the Plaintiff and the Intervener Plaintiff. Taitz believes that all of the injuries, sustained by her, as well as injuries sustained by the Plaintiff are a part of one scheme.”

Persecution, sanctions, harassment, and defamation? And rightfully so I say, for anyone who is so thick that they can’t see what an absolute ass they make of themselves.

1. Taitz respectfully seeks a leave of court to join the action at hand as an intervener.
2. Taitz seeks a declaratory relief deeming Obama not eligible to issue any executive orders, sign bills or perform any functions of the President or Commander in Chief due to ineligibility.
3. Taitz seeks a declaratory relief deeming Ken Salazar, secretary of the Interior, not eligible to perform any functions as a Secretary of the Interior, as his appointment as the Secretary of the interior was not legitimate, as an appointment of the ineligible President.
4. Taitz is seeking a declaratory relief that Presidential eligibility is not a political question, but a legal question, to be decided by the district court as a federal law question based on Article 2 question 1 of the U.S. Constitution.”

I swear she’s nucking futz! She’s asking a federal court to declare Obama ineligible to hold the office of POTUS, and a federal court can do no such thing. Something she might know if she’d ever read the Constitution of United States.

The government responded with an “Opposition to the Motion”  saying:

“Finally, the main action in this case does not have a “question of law or fact” in common with Ms. Taitz’s putative challenge to the country of birth of the President. The allegations, statutory bases, factual evidence, and expert witnesses in the two matters would be completely different. In fact, Ms. Taitz’s challenge has nothing to do at all with the now-expired moratorium on deepwater drilling in the Gulf of Mexico. On this ground alone, Ms. Taitz’s motion to intervene should be denied.”

Well somehow a motion “hearing” was granted. But Orly considered that to mean she was being granted an “Oral Argument”. She posted:

“Great news!!! I was granted oral argument in yet another case, in New Orleans. If you are my supporter in LA or neighboring state, call me at 949-683-5411”
“I was granted an oral argument on my motion for a leave of court to join an ongoing case HornBeck v Salazar. This case revolves around Obama administration’s capricious actions in imposing moratorium on drilling in the Gulf of Mexico, and after the District Judge ordered to lift the moratorium, Obama regime is de facto refusing to comply with the order by refusing to grant drilling permits.”
“Keep in mind, there are no guarantees in anything, but the fact of the matter is, that the courts refused to grant any oral arguments for 2 years. Just getting an oral argument and being able to air these issues in open court is an achievement in itself. I can’t guarantee that my appeal in the 9th circuit will be granted, I can’t guarantee that my motion in Louisina will be granted, but these are very important steps in today’s environment, when oil prices are skyrocketing and americans are burried in mounting debt. I can guarantee one thing- I will keep fighting, until I will win, until this complete fraud and illegitimkate usurper is kicked out of the White House and until he and his accomplices are criminally prosecuted for this unprecedented Social Security fraud, elections fraud and treason against the people of the United States of America. Please, spread the word and support my effords”

Well anyone with a lick of common sense could guarantee that the motions would NOT be granted. It’s really a shame that a person can’t be “criminally prosecuted” for terminal stupidity. She’d get life in a padded room!

Lucky for us, Expert Obot spies were on the case, and thanks to Fogbow’s “Butterfly Bilderberg” and “Realist” we have an eye witness account of the entire event.


Taitz’s version of the events were a little different:

“Posted on May 12, 2011 Yesterday I had a an oral argument in Hornbeck v Salazar. This case deals with the fact that Obama administration de facto destroyed oil and gas industry in the gulf of Mexico by placing a moratorium and later, when the federal judge placed an injunction on the moratorium, Obama regime contimued destroying the oil and gas industry by refusing to grant drilling permits. Most of the rigs left the region and moved to Brazil. Recently Obama visited Brazil and congratuled them on their offshore deep water drilling and stated that US will be their biggest customer, showing him as the the most antiAmerican president this nation ever saw.
My argument was that the damages suffered in the case at hand were rooted in the same problem: antiAmerican usurper in the White House, who got there by virtue of fraud and use of a forged birth certificate and invalid Social Security number, issued to another individual in another state.
While it was a really long shot, I was able to get an oral argument. For the first time in U.S. history I was able to get into the official court record, a historic record of the Federal District court sworn expert affidavits, attesting to the fact that an individual occupying the position of the U.S. president, is there by virtue of forgery. this is a serious criminal offense, for which Obama needs to be removed from office immediately and criminally prosecuted.
I will get a copy of the oral argument and will post it as well.
Presiding magistrate judge Joseph Wilkinson let me speak for about 10-12 minutes.
Assistant US attorney Carl Mansfield spoke after me and later David Rosenblum, attorney for Hornbeck offshore industries.
Mansfield just submitted on the pleadings and Rosenblum stated that he did not oppose my intervention and did not file an opposition.
While previously judges tried to keep this matter quiet, now they allow oral argument. I, also, noticed that before judges would keep all the ObamaFraudGate cases to the end, so that other attorneys and spectators don’t hear and don’t know those cases even exist. Judge Wilkinson did the opposite. He let me speak first. This way all the attorneys in this full courtroom could hear my argument and would go to their fims and report, that they heard reports, expert affidavits of forgery in Obama’s birth certificate, evidence that Obama is using an invalid Social Security number, whch was never issued to him.”

I seriously doubt any competent attorney would consider anything she produced as even remotely sane, but I’ll bet they all went back to their law firms and reported on the spectacle she made of herself. They’re probably still laughing!

“As the Assistant US attorney Mansfield entered the courtroom, I handed him my reply brief and could see him reading it and reviewing the evidence. I could see that he was not a happy camper, he loooked like he just swollowed a dead rat. When his turn came to speak, he didn’t say anything, he just said that he submits on the pleadings. I felt bad for him. it must not be pleasant, to be an assistant US attorney in a case, which shows, that his boss, occupying the position of the president, is using forged documents.”

More likely he was speechless at her profound ignorance.

"Judge Wilkinson asked me, what happened in Carter’s court. i explained that originally Judge Carter stated on the record that there ios juridiction in his court, later when Obama’s defense firm attorney was placed as his clerk, Carter changed his position and suddenly decided that there is no jurisdiction. Wilkinson did not say anything, but just smiled, and by his face expression I could tell that he knew exactly what I was telling and what was going on.
He asked me about the 9th circuit,m what happened there, whether I provided all this evidence there. I responded that i could not provide all this evidence in the 9th circuit, as Obama released his BC only 2 working days before the hearing, I did not have an ecxpert opinion yet and I was limited in time and in what was part of the case in the District court.
I was able to argue the issue of the Social Security fraud, Selective Service certificate fraud and forged BC.
One of pro-obama operatives was there. they always come to my hearings. This woman goes by a pseudonim Butterfly Bildeberg. She is one of a group of attorneys, posting on pro-Obama web sites, attacking patriots and helipng Obama in cover up of his SS fraud and elections fraud. Next to her name on fogbow there is a drawing of a beautiful young woman with a butterfly covering her mouth. She looked completely different from the drawing. She looked about mid fifties, short statute, about 5′2″-5′3″, she looked husky, wide build. she reminded me of Elena Kagan, but with darker and a bit longer hair. She was talking to the the US attorney Mansfield and it appeared they knew each other. Most of these attorneys attacking us, work for the federal government: US attorney’s office or as clerks in different courts.”

Well she was really tooting her horn there, but alas, “Motion Denied”

“I cannot conclude that the proposed intervention shares any common issue of law or fact with the main case. While the intervenor – like the original plaintiffs – asserts the invalidity of the moratorium action taken by defendants, the legal and factual basis of intervenor’s claim – i.e., the President’s place of birth or citizenship – is entirely different from the legal and factual assertions of the original claimants. Evaluating the timeliness factors also weighs heavily against permitting this intervention. The intervenor’s actual stake in the original litigation is negligible when compared to the stake of the original plaintiffs. The prejudice to the existing parties in permitting the intervention would be extreme, given the wholly extraneous nature of the proposed intervenor’s legal and factual assertions to the claims and defenses raised by the original parties.
Finally, the “unusual circumstances” of the timing of the assertion of intervenor’s claims and the President’s recent public postings contesting those claims, which the proposed intervenor and her experts assert in the reply papers are forgeries, weigh against any exercise of this court’s discretion to permit this intervention in a different existing case.
For all of the foregoing reasons, the motion is DENIED. This intervention should not be permitted.”

In other words, take your crazy shit and GTFOOMC!

No comments:

Post a Comment