New Hampshire Ballot Challenge

realist · **Joined:** Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm **Posts:** 23582

bob wrote:

Quote:

Great news. I just got a call from NH State Representative Harry Accornero. He is joining me in my elections challenge of Obama

Now two State Representatives from New Hampshire: Harry Accornero [the legislator accusing Obama of treason] and Larry Rappoport [a birther] called me and stated, that they are joining me in my elections challenge of Obama in NH. They stated, that they are forwarding my complaint to other State representatives and State Senators, asking them to join. In NH they have a Republican majority in both houses. I was told that representatives Delimas and Commerford will probably join, too.

xxx-http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=27738

The more the merrier I suppose.

It will certainly save time for the AG to only have to write denined once. $\:D/$

Mikedunford · **Posted:** Tue Nov 15, 2011 2:59 pm

Clairez wrote:

SuEdB wrote:

And it is up to the government whether to charge/prosecute or not. Apparently, no one has elected to prosecute these clear violations of federal law - for some reason.... :?:

I think more action would have been taken if the President complained but he most likely had other things on his mind.

When Palin's Yahoo was hacked they sent the guy to jail for I think it was six months or so. I bet if she hadn't pursued a case against the guy nothing would have happened to him either. I think it is likely that the victim in these sort of crimes has to push for prosecution in order for the matter to be taken seriously.

There was also a bit more victimization in Palin's case. That was an email account she was using, and contained a lot of private correspondance. The selective service registration is a record of Obama doing one required thing a long time ago.

bob · **Posted:** Tue Nov 15, 2011 3:09 pm

realist wrote:

The more the merrier I suppose.

It is hi-larious that Taitz was trolling for New Hamshirites* and she is representing at least two of them in Barnett.

A properly organized client list might have disclosed that.

* Hamshirians?

June bug · **Posted:** Tue Nov 15, 2011 3:15 pm

Mikedunford wrote:

Clairez wrote:

SuEdB wrote:

And it is up to the government whether to charge/prosecute or not. Apparently, no one has elected to prosecute these clear violations of federal law - for some reason.... :?:

I think more action would have been taken if the President complained but he most likely had other things on his mind.

When Palin's Yahoo was hacked they sent the guy to jail for I think it was six months or so. I bet if she hadn't pursued a case against the guy nothing would have happened to him either. I think it is likely that the victim in these sort of crimes has to push for prosecution in order for the matter to be taken seriously.

There was also a bit more victimization in Palin's case. That was an email account she was using, and contained a lot of private correspondance. The selective service registration is a record of Obama doing one required thing a long time ago.

It wasn't just illegally accessing one old record. In the course of doing that, Hollister chose to and was able to change Obama's address in the Selective Service system. That requires a systems fix, but I would argue that the "system" also needs to send a message of zero tolerance for actions like that.

Epectitus · **Joined:** Fri Jan 23, 2009 3:55 pm **Posts:** 2361

bob wrote:

* Hamshirians?

New Hamsters.

:-bd

SueDB · **Posted:** Tue Nov 15, 2011 4:03 pm

Epectitus wrote:

bob wrote:

* Hamshirians?

New Hamsters.

:-bd

Can you train one of them to say "row"???

Foggy · **Posted:** Tue Nov 15, 2011 4:05 pm

Who stole the "p"?

SueDB · **Posted:** Tue Nov 15, 2011 4:06 pm

Foggy wrote:

Who stole the "p"?

Birfers - who else?

verbalobe · **Posted:** Tue Nov 15, 2011 4:08 pm

Foggy wrote:

Who stole the "p"?

Coulda been anyone. Everyone's always sayin', "gotta take a p." Now we know which one.

jtmunkus · **Joined:** Mon May 23, 2011 7:33 pm **Posts:** 3513

June bug wrote:

It wasn't just illegally accessing one old record. In the course of doing that, Hollister chose to and was able to change Obama's address in the Selective Service system. That requires a systems fix, but I would argue that the "system" also needs to send a message of zero tolerance for actions like that.

Anyone consider the possibility that Hollister performed a followup address change, back to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave., after he was done felonizing with Orly Taitz?

Then he'd (they'd?) be double guilty.

I'd be curious if the SSS takes a "shot-across-the-bow" approach, sending out a harshly-worded letter, as a first line of defense against these miscreants who so obviously misuse the system.

raicha · **Posted:** Tue Nov 15, 2011 5:04 pm

bob wrote:

thorswitch wrote:

Is there anyone that Jordan and Hollister can be reported to for their criminal actions in misusing the E-Verify? I'm serious.

1. The government agencies in question;
2. The FBI;
3. The U.S. Attorneys for the districts in which they live.

These things were reported. To all those folks and to some others not included in the list. In the case of Hollister, I have no doubt that there was an investigation and that he was contacted. I base this on the fact that he shut up and on the fact that the Selective Service website has been revised to warn everyone that it is illegal to impersonate someone to access the records.

Prosecutorial resources are scarce. The "victim" is not complaining. There are only so many hours in a day and only so many tax dollars to spend. Move on, nothing to see here.

A Legal Lohengrin · **Joined:** Tue Oct 26, 2010 9:56 pm **Posts:** 9397

raicha wrote:

Prosecutorial resources are scarce. The "victim" is not complaining. There are only so many hours in a day and only so many tax dollars to spend. Move on, nothing to see here.

While I agree with you on the ultimate outcome in this case, the mere delay is not a reason to make any solid conclusion. In similar cases, I have seen the feds take up to two years to prosecute. Computer crime cases are highly technical and just drafting the complaint is often a highly time-consuming process, unless it is against some generic offense commonly prosecuted like DDoS attacks, where they have a boilerplate complaint they just plug their details into before filing.

bob · **Posted:** Tue Nov 15, 2011 7:10 pm

Quote:

Alec wrote:

This is great news. It’s about time the States got involved. 3-1/2 years late but better late than never.

Klaus wrote:

It’s been festering since 1865.

xxx-http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=27738#comments

lyssandri · **Posted:** Tue Nov 15, 2011 10:15 pm

Mikedunford wrote:

It bugs me too, but then I remember that I don't know a single government employee who isn't overworked and under-resourced.

[snip]

If having a couple of guys in suits pay him a visit is enough to keep him from being that stupid again, I just can't see any reason to think that prosecuting him would be a good use of limited resources.

Good point, Mike - thanks!

realist · **Joined:** Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm **Posts:** 23582

I sent it... really, I did. :lol:

http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=27766 :evil:

You can track receipt of my election challenge to Obama in NH. You can fax your letter to AG of NH, asking to join you as an additional complainant

Posted on | November 16, 2011 | No Comments

Quote:

Track & Confirm

Search Results

Label/Receipt Number: 9502 9000 1389 1318 0003 93
Expected Delivery Date: November 16, 2011
Class: Priority Mail®
Service(s): Certified Mail™
Return Receipt
Return Receipt Electronic

Edit: ETA to add:

Detailed Results:

Bullet Processed through USPS Sort Facility, November 16, 2011, 12:09 am, ANAHEIM, CA 92899
Bullet Processed through USPS Sort Facility, November 15, 2011, 9:44 pm, ANAHEIM, CA 92899
Bullet Depart USPS Sort Facility, November 15, 2011, ANAHEIM, CA 92899
Bullet Acceptance (APC), November 14, 2011, 5:25 pm, LAGUNA NIGUEL, CA 92607

A Legal Lohengrin · **Joined:** Tue Oct 26, 2010 9:56 pm **Posts:** 9397

realist wrote:

I sent it... really, I did. :lol:

All this proves is that even Orly knows that even her flying monkeys are suspicious of even so mundane a claim as that she put something in the mail. She is desperate to prove anything in any of her cases to anyone and has utterly failed. The only thing it appears she is ever able to prove is that she put something insanely stupid in the mail, and even so, she hasn't even proved that whatever she put in the mail is what she put on her virus and Trojan-riddled blog. It could be a shim of wood for all anyone knows.

However, her shrinking horde of flying monkeys has something to click on and marvel, goggle-eyed, at whatever TF it is "Lady Liberty" (and nobody calls her that any more) has failed at today.

bob · **Posted:** Wed Nov 16, 2011 12:45 pm

P&E comment:

Cody Judy wrote:

Just wanted to note, that if it makes any difference for a FEC Registered Democrat Candidate for President 2012 to join the Mrs. Taitz complaint, I would be happy to do so. However, i would need someone to contribute the $1,000 candidate filing fee by this Friday, which gives us 3 days.

This is where the Constitution hits the road hard, and many of us fighters hit a wall. I too have filed $450 dollar filing fees, and had to pay my own expenses traveling in the fight. I certainly understand Mrs. Taitz circumstances and voice my own appreciation for her efforts.

Thank you for anyones consideration.

It is as if governments had intentionally set high filing fees to discourage non-serious candidates.
:-k

A Legal Lohengrin · **Joined:** Tue Oct 26, 2010 9:56 pm **Posts:** 9397

bob wrote:

P&E comment:

Cody Judy wrote:

Just wanted to note, that if it makes any difference for a FEC Registered Democrat Candidate for President 2012 to join the Mrs. Taitz complaint, I would be happy to do so. However, i would need someone to contribute the $1,000 candidate filing fee by this Friday, which gives us 3 days.

This is where the Constitution hits the road hard, and many of us fighters hit a wall. I too have filed $450 dollar filing fees, and had to pay my own expenses traveling in the fight. I certainly understand Mrs. Taitz circumstances and voice my own appreciation for her efforts.

Thank you for anyones consideration.

It is as if governments had intentionally set high filing fees to discourage non-serious candidates.
:-k

Well, anyone who calls himself a "Democrat Candidate" has branded himself a non-serious candidate. No Democratic Candidate would call himself that, and he is apparently running in a primary for a nonexistent party.

majorbabs · **Posted:** Wed Nov 16, 2011 1:05 pm

bob wrote:

P&E comment:

Cody Judy wrote:

Just wanted to note, that if it makes any difference for a FEC Registered Democrat Candidate for President 2012 to join the Mrs. Taitz complaint, I would be happy to do so. However, i would need someone to contribute the $1,000 candidate filing fee by this Friday, which gives us 3 days.

This is where the Constitution hits the road hard, and many of us fighters hit a wall. I too have filed $450 dollar filing fees, and had to pay my own expenses traveling in the fight. I certainly understand Mrs. Taitz circumstances and voice my own appreciation for her efforts.

Thank you for anyones consideration.

It is as if governments had intentionally set high filing fees to discourage non-serious candidates.
:-k

Too bad for Jody, the deadline for filing for the NH primary was Oct 28.

ZekeB · **Posted:** Wed Nov 16, 2011 1:23 pm

majorbabs wrote:

Too bad for Jody, the deadline for filing for the NH primary was Oct 28.

There you go again, spoiling it for everyone. I was just about to hit the ol' PayPal button.

majorbabs · **Posted:** Wed Nov 16, 2011 1:43 pm

ZekeB wrote:

majorbabs wrote:

Too bad for Jody, the deadline for filing for the NH primary was Oct 28.

There you go again, spoiling it for everyone. I was just about to hit the ol' PayPal button.

I'm sorry. :oops:

There are, however, lots of other primaries coming up. I found two different news stories that make mention of South Carolina's filing fees. One says $25,000. The other says $35,000. I couldn't find any reference to filing fees at the South Carolina website.

realist · **Joined:** Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm **Posts:** 23582

http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=27775 :evil:

Orly still doesn't get the idea of free speech and freedom of the press in America.

Another attack on me, which is full of defamatory verbiage, is coming from far left “Daily Cos”

Posted on | November 16, 2011 | No Comments

From Daily Kos...

Orly Taitz wants to challenge Obama's place on the NH ballot

Quote:

Late yesterday, Orly Taitz announced plans to challenge Obama's place on the New Hampshire ballot. Seems she's charging through a loophole in state law that allows anyone--even a non-resident--to challenge a candidate.

The Mad Moldovan has assembled what she claims to be voluminous evidence--including 66 pages of documents. They contain the usual claims--Obama's birth certificate is a forgery, and his Social Security number is fraudulent. However, any credibility she has evaporates when she, once again, uses an unredacted Social Security number--the main reason I'm not linking to her post.

One interesting tidbit--the contact information Orly uses on her complaint form contains a link to the Website for her windmill-tilting Senate campaign.

Anyone see any defamatory language there? I didn't think so.

Orly further sez... or rather lies...

Quote:

Note from Orly:
please, write to Daily Cos and provide them with information, demand that they remove defamatory language and honestly report to the public the fact [-(

that Obama does not have a valid SSN and does not have a valid BC. :^o

Additionally, I can post CT SSN xxx-xx-4425 [my redaction, of course], which Obama is fraudulently using, as it was never assigned to him according to E-verify and SSNVS :^o

A Legal Lohengrin · **Joined:** Tue Oct 26, 2010 9:56 pm **Posts:** 9397

realist wrote:

:evil: http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=27775 :evil:

Orly still doesn't get the idea of free speech and freedom of the press in America.

Another attack on me, which is full of defamatory verbiage, is coming from far left “Daily Cos”

This pinhead can't spell a three letter word correctly even when it is in a huge banner on top of the site! How the hell is anyone this stupid?

bob · **Posted:** Wed Nov 16, 2011 2:49 pm

Quote:

Paul Jackson wrote:

Pardon my legal ignorance, please, Dr. Taitz, but could you point out where, exactly, any defamatory language appears in that article.

Taitz wrote:

“crazy Moldovan” is highly defamatory

xxx-http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=27775&cpage=1#comment-103702

:-bd

Contra McNamee v. [Roger] Clements, No. 09-1647 (E.D.N.Y. Feb. 3, 2011) ("Unlike the statements implying McNamee has lied or been dishonest, statements implying McNamee has a mental disorder are rhetorical hyperbole and thus nonactionable.")

SueDB · **Posted:** Wed Nov 16, 2011 2:50 pm

bob wrote:

Quote:

Paul Jackson wrote:

Pardon my legal ignorance, please, Dr. Taitz, but could you point out where, exactly, any defamatory language appears in that article.

Taitz wrote:

“crazy Moldovan” is highly defamatory

xxx-http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=27775&cpage=1#comment-103702

:-bd

The best defense against defamation is the truth. Orly can just suck on it.

Falsehoods unchallenged only fester and grow.

New Hampshire Ballot Challenge

Who is online