Supply, Demand
They didn’t get much traction with their claim last week that Obama is really the Antichrist (isn’t everybody?), so WorldNetDaily is back from their magical mystery tour with what they purport is Barry’s real birth certificate from Kenya.
Er, excuse us — the real Kenyan “certified copy of the original”.
Not to be confused with Hawaii’s certified copy of the original, which WND dismisses as an obvious fraud. Apparently you can trust government bureaucrats, as long as they’re not American.
But let us not be critical, and instead celebrate the glory of the free market. WND has offered $10,000 to “anyone who can prove he or she was present at the birth of Barack Obama”, after all, so the sweepstakes is just getting started. Our own entry will be submitted as soon as we can find a fresh ribbon for our very dusty Underwood.





11:27 pm • Sunday • August 2, 2009
Per the notary stamp that appears directly next to that line of text in the WND article, obviously.
The funny thing is, this was actually presented to a Court. A real one. With judges and rules and stuff.
Specifically: this was attached to a motion in a lawsuit filed by Taitz entitled (oh dear) Ambassador Alan Keyes PhD et al v. Barack Hussein Obama, et al, in U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.
The news here is that (a) apparently Alan Keyes has changed his first name to “Ambassador,” (b) according to the docket sheet, it appears that Ms. Taitz learned civil procedure from a textbook that was not so much as a textbook, as it was a cocktail napkin, and (c) she has brought this action in federal court — which, it seems, has bent over backwards not to (i) hurt itself laughing and (ii) dismiss the case for want of… anything, really.
Beyond the fact that she can’t seem to get a handle on serving the government with a summons, she filed this — at 10pm on a Saturday night, it must be said. (Warning: linque leads to website of people who have a Level C-3 case of crazy.)
This part is hilarious:
Oh, honey. No.
In the parlance of our times: this is not Nam. This is a lawsuit. There are rules. Whenever somebody says “letter and spirit of the rules,” you can best believe that the letter of the rules is telling that person, “oh hell no.”
And that is true here — Rule 27 is designed to allow discovery (a) prior to the filing of a lawsuit, or (b) pending appeal. This is extraordinary relief, which a Court must approve. Rule 27 exists to provide relief when a lawsuit is not pending.
When a lawsuit is pending, you do not need the Court to order discovery. All you have to do is (crayons ready, Ms. Taitz? Good!) meet and confer with the other side. That would be Rule 26(f). This involves (a) an attorney purchasing, and learning to use, a telephone, and (b) calling the opposing attorney to discuss settlement and discovery planning. Which obviously she has not done yet, because she apparently just got a handle on serving summonses.
(To be fair: I would suppose that she has called the AUSA who, on a dare, took this case, and that he or she has not returned the call. I can only imagine why.)
There is more crazy here, of course. As in, “secretary of State Candoleeza Rice,” for example. And “Lt. Querl Harris.” I may have missed something here, but I think I would have remembered a name like Querl. And openly admitting that your motion is based on an attempt to prove up hearsay evidence. But it would take me all night to unpack it all.
Anyway — the government should just go ahead and give her notice under Rule 11 (sanctions for horrible lawyering) on her sorry ass. And it should do so right freaking now. Why? Well, before seeking sanctions, you have to give the other side 21 days notice by (this gets hard) serving the other side with papers, by mailing them to the other side’s attorney. Which presents a problem for our friend Orly:
Go ahead, pranked AUSA who was stuck with this moron by some higher-up who hates you. Loosen up your sneaky muscles and serve this twit with a Rule 11 motion. THIS MUST HAPPEN.