Britty, one suggestion (actually a couple of places):

frivolous instead of "frivilous".

</anal spelling weenie>

Fan chew very much I knew it didn't look right.

You might want to add the URL to Orlys website / page, as others may not be quite as familiar with her as this community.

Beats me ... but maybe LADY Liberty knows ...

NWAMMW!

I like it!

Is it possible that if he does try and head her off at the pass, that the heading off could include notifying to the CA bar to control their beast?

It looks like an update to a meeting that had already been previously scheduled BEFORE the birfer poo.

I am hesitant to refer people to Orly's website due to the security issues. We want people to listen to those who warn others about Orly, not blame them for frying the office computer. Orly's pleadings that are available at Jack Ryan's for instance are a safer measure establishing her character, legal ability, and efforts.

YMMV, etc.

Oh, another thing that may be helpful would be to add a link to her elections challenge filings at Jack Ryan’s Scribd. Let him see for himself what an incompetent twit of a lawyer she is.

Britty, I think you should refer to Taitz as either Dr. Taitz, Ms. Taitz, or Orly Taitz. I think just "Orly" is too casual for this letter. Similarly, I would remove references to our little circle of Orly mockers. I think you want this to come across as a serious letter from a NC citizen on a serious matter. IMO, informing him that you are part of a group of Internet mockers cuts against that.

Thank you all for your input!

"For the record:"

Vestal v. Clinton, 106 F.3d 553 (4th Cir. 1997) (“breaking ‘Laws of God’” claim found frivolous; enjoined from further civil suits in the 4th Circuit).

Vestal v. Clinton, No. 96-6089, 1996 WL 267289 (4th Cir. May 21, 1996) (unknown; affirmed M.D.N.C. 95-752).

Vestal v. Freeman, No. 95-7672, 1995 WL 739393 (4th Cir. Dec. 14, 1995) (rejecting claim of lack of access to certain educational programs).

Vestal v. Hunt, No. 95-7402, 1995 WL 734447 (4th Cir. Dec. 12, 1995) (rejecting Privileges and Immunities Clause claim to amenities enjoyed by federal and other states’ prisoners).

Vestal v. Brown, No. 95-7401, 1995 WL 734450 (4th Cir. Dec. 12, 1995) & Vestal v. Freeman, No. 95-7673, 1995 WL 739397 (4th Cir. Dec. 14, 1995) (denial of higher custody status due to a refusal to participate in psychological counsel did not violate First Amendment).

Vestal v. Murphy, No. 95-7161, 1995 WL 607816 (4th Cir. Oct. 17, 1995) (understaffing at prison did not violate right to “better security”).

Vestal v. Freeman, No. 95-6938, 1995 WL 551277 (4th Cir. Sept, 12, 1995) (denied request to visit terminally ill grandmother not cruel and unusual punishment).

I agree and would suggest "Dr. Orly Taitz"--she might be incompetent, but her title is legitimate (you could refer to her as Orly Taitz, DDS if you wanted to emphasize that her doctorate was in dentistry). I would also remove "Queen of the Birthers"--I think that would appear to be name calling to someone who wasn't familiar with Orly already (and how she glories in the title).

Given that Orly is Orly and is directing some of her batshittery at North Carolina, I think your goal should be to motivate the person to whom you're sending it to examine Orly's behavior more carefully (both in relation to NC and her past insanities) themselves--it doesn't take too much poking around to see just how professional Orly is. The more respectful, polite, and professional you appear, the more serious your complaint seems and the more contrast will be drawn with Orly's behavior.

Hope that helps.

Good for you for writing this!

p.s. I agree with others about linking to Orly's house of malware--people unfamiliar with her are unlikely to take any warnings seriously enough and you don't want to be the cause of the person you are trying to convince getting a virus...

Gee, that could be a fly in the ointment at some point...

I'd be honored to co-sign your letter when you finish it, Britty.

That's because you learned to spell the British way first.

Great letter. Thank you for taking the time to write. Every little bit helps.

It's about time to push this story to the NC press?

***Upcoming Orly Post**** (3..2..1..)

“Dirty Obots, are trying to sabotage me, and defame me, and my character, by undermining my quest, to save this country, from the biggest fraud, ever committed, bigger even, than Watergate, by keeping that no good, usurping mooslem, with a forged BC, stolen SS#, 123-45-6789, which was, never assigned to him, and, whose real name, we don’t even know, off the ballot in NC, with LIES, LIES, LIES!”

Inflammatory and serving little purpose. So far his follies fail because of unfamiliarity with the statutes. Are we not better than the National Enquirer ?

YMMV

Not to mention that he would never be able to figure out how to navigate the fucking thing. I don’t think I’ve ever been there and gotten the flow twice. Click on one post and you are suddenly a week behind and the post you just looked at is no longer there.

Britty, one more for grammar and a suggestion.

First, don't use "myself" but "I." It may look funny, but "I" is correct, "myself" not so much.


Second, why not send him the California Rule of Professional Conduct which says what Taitz is doing is unethical under California law.

I'd like North Carolina to take action. But I also believe that when enough courts and public officials complain to California about the incompetent idiot the California Bar will have to take action.

I think the citation should be to the Model Rules, and specifically, to those adopted by North Carolina (and every State in the Union other than California), since it is those rules which apply to Orly's "practice" in North Carolina. I seriously doubt North Carolina cares much about California's idiosyncratic conduct rules (after all California itself does not seem to care about its own rules). They have their own, which Orly is violating.

Yes, my mileage varies.

The original title of this thread would be incorrect in light of what we know today. There is no NC election challenge. There are numerous emails to the election board from a convicted violent felon who has been deemed a vexatious litigant in North Carolina.

This man does not seek privacy for his past. To the contrary, he craves the attention that emailing 100 bogus "complaints" has brought to him.

He is now assisted by Orly Taitz, who has repeatedly supported convicted felons and their frivolous claims on her website and before the courts: Lucas, CEL3, Manning, etc. She should be known by the company she keeps.

Not only is she assisting Vestal, she is threatening members of a state agency with criminal prosecution, in violation of the ethical rules of two states and very likely in violation of penal statutes of at least one.

The new title is accurate. The underlying "story" supports it completely. Dr. Taitz associates with criminals, neo-Nazis and convicted sex offenders so long as they support her lunatic quest to unseat the President. That should not be a secret.