UPDATE: Prediction #1 Fulfilled in a Matter of Hours

Posted by: Dean C. Haskins
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
202.241.3648
Posted: January 19, 2012
© 2012 The Birther Summit

Download a PDF

Let me preface my remarks with the fact that they are not from anybody else associated with The Birther Summit (although I do know that some with whom I have spoken share my sentiments). Additionally, there is no hidden agenda in this statement, as I have nothing to gain by making it. I just believe it is time for someone in our movement to state the truth and to stand up for it. Moreover, I fully understand why it appears nobody else is willing to do this (other than ORYR). They are aware, from experience, that any statement like this will immediately result in attacks aimed at discrediting me personally, rather than addressing the substance of my statement.

But, I'm a birther, so a steady stream of personal attacks on the internet has become my daily diet. So far, I haven't a single mark on my body from any verbal assaults.

I understand what it is to want something so intensely that one is willing to believe statements that suggest there might be a chance that those desires will come to fruition, regardless of the validity of those statements. I've been right there with everyone else in this. I have donated money and voiced public support for this person; however, I came to a point where I found it necessary to evaluate the truth about certain claims, and to change my position accordingly.

In so doing, I have discovered a disheartening parallel that can be drawn. For more than three years, we have literally screamed our disapproval of the vast numbers of Americans who have accepted statements at face value made by a campaign, an administration, Congress, and the media, and we have labeled such people "sheeple." But, sadly, many in our movement have done the same thing regarding the one person who has garnered the lion's share of public attention in this matter, by accepting at face value that anything positive was occurring.

At issue are two dynamics concerning Orly Taitz I believe need to be addressed—namely, a lack of understanding of the law, and a megalomaniacal persona. As to the former, I am not a lawyer, I am a musician who sometimes writes personal commentary. I stepped away from my career some months ago for this initiative, and have not drawn a penny, personally, from the efforts of The Birther Summit. To understand Orly's lack of legal knowledge, I've had to do some research on my own—but that's something a lawyer is supposed to have done before bringing any action to court.

I think we have all been very forgiving of Orly's numerous legal "missteps" in the past, because we have all believed that she would eventually do something right, and our case would finally be "heard." I am now convinced that will never happen—at least not at the hand of Orly Taitz. Before you level your criticisms at me for being unfair in my evaluation, please consider some things.

Just as you likely did, I saw articles pop up across the internet proclaiming that a judge had issued a subpoena for Loretta Fuddy to appear in Georgia, and to bring certain documents with her, including Barack Obama's original birth certificate. I then saw articles stating, in no uncertain terms, that Barack Obama had been ordered by a judge to "stand trial" in Georgia, and that Orly Taitz was finally granted "discovery." Out of intense curiosity, I began looking seriously into these claims (something, I fear, many of us have been remiss at doing).

Here is what I discovered about those fantastic claims: none of them were actually true—at least, not in a legal sense. First, what has been repeatedly referred to as a "trial," will not be a trial, but an administrative hearing. Folks, it is being conducted by Georgia's Office of State Administrative Hearings. That should be the first clue about what will actually take place! The entire purpose of the hearing is for the administrative judge to make a recommendation to Georgia's Secretary of State, who is under no legal obligation to adhere to the judge's recommendation. Understanding, then, the purpose of this hearing, it is highly irregular that it is being treated as bigger than the OJ trial (which actually WAS a trial). I'm not suggesting that it is unimportant; it's just not what it's being deceptively spun to be.

The Subpoenas

Next, is the matter of the subpoenas. A Georgia court has jurisdiction to subpoena residents of the State of Georgia. Period. If someone who resides in a state other than Georgia is to be issued a subpoena, the attorney requesting the subpoena would first have to request the Georgia court for a commission and/or a letter rogatory, which would go to a court in the state in which that person resides, and that court would have to issue a subpoena. Orly skipped that step and merely mailed out multiple subpoenas as if they were enforceable (which, they most certainly, are not).

Then how, you may ask, did Orly get subpoenas signed by a judge to send out in the first place? I'm glad you asked. As a matter of convenience for attorneys admitted to practice in the State of Georgia, the OSAH had made available a blank pre-signed subpoena form to be downloaded, filled out, and served. That practice is not unusual, as it is assumed that proper officers of the court would not abuse the forms, and it alleviates the need for attorneys to clog the court with signing requests. Of course, attorneys using the form normally understand that it is their responsibility to adhere to the rules and regulations pertaining to such subpoenas, chief of which is proper service.

Now, here is one of those blank subpoena forms: http://www.scribd.com/doc/77702629/Georgia-Pre-Signed-and-Pre-Stamped-Blank-Subpoena-Forms-Office-of-State-Administrative-Hearings-of-State-of-Georgia

And, here are a few of the subpoenas Orly states she "served:" http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=30273

Comparing the first link with the second, are you led to believe that the judge "signed" or "ordered" Orly's subpoenas, or do you understand that the blank form was something Orly merely downloaded? Orly released a list of 22 witnesses that she has supposedly "served," even though she never actually went to the trouble of doing what one must do to obtain proper service, so, any of those 22 who don't actually reside in the State of Georgia have not actually been served, and have no legal reason to respond or appear. Any of them may choose to ask the judge to quash a subpoena, but that would be out of respect for the court and the legal process, and not because there is any validity to the subpoena itself. In fact, any such motion to quash would likely include the fact that the subpoena is legally invalid as a reason for it to be quashed.

Interestingly, one of the "witnesses" Orly lists is "Custodian of records Assissi [sic] school Jakarta, Indonesia;" so, not only does Orly believe that Georgia somehow has jurisdiction over Hawaii and other states (which, it doesn't), she seems to believe that it has jurisdiction over Jakarta, Indonesia as well. Are you beginning to see the problem here?

Not only has no judge in this country (or any other) ordered Barack Obama to "stand trial," Orly has not been granted the discovery she has claimed to have been granted. In fact, administrative hearings don't even allow for discovery:

616-1-2-.38 Discovery. Amended.

Discovery shall not be available in any proceeding before an Administrative Law Judge except to the extent specifically authorized by law. Nothing in this Rule is intended to limit the provisions of Article 4 of Chapter 18 of Title 50 or Rule 37.

And, for the record, what is excluded from the discovery rule are public records (or, records that are not protected by statute, which H.R.S. 338-18 would certainly apply in this case, making whatever "discovery" Orly thinks she's been granted a moot point).

Moreover, the Georgia Administrative Court has no jurisdiction over a federal agency or any part of the federal government, so there go most of Orly's subpoenas—including the one to Sheriff Joe, who, unfortunately for Orly, lives in Arizona, and not Georgia. He could certainly travel to Georgia by choice, but he is not compelled to do so by law.

The Law

Here's the part that Orly really doesn't seem to comprehend: every time she submits a motion asking for the Hawaii DOH to allow inspection of Obama's original "birth certificate," she is asking for them to break the law. When they don't acquiesce to her request, she shrieks and shrills that everyone involved is corrupt. Setting aside the possibility that everyone involved IS corrupt (or, maybe even the probability of it), they are not corrupt simply because Orly hasn't gotten access to the document. In that issue, they are only obeying the law (which, by definition, might actually be the opposite of "corrupt").

Let me try to explain the applicable law in layman's terms. A birth certificate is a vital record, and vital records are the property of the State (not individuals). The State assigns the responsibility for maintaining vital records to the Department of Health, making the DOH the "keeper of the records." When the keeper of the records provides a copy of a record to someone who has a direct and tangible interest in it, that person is free to do whatever he wishes with that copy, such as posting an image of it on the internet, coffee mugs, or his forehead. However, the person about whom the record is being kept is not the owner of the original record; the State is.

Here is why Orly will NEVER get what she has repeatedly requested. The law makes it clear that the only people who are entitled to receive a copy of the record are those with a direct and tangible interest, most often being immediate family members. Under the law, there is no way to interpret it such that Orly (or anyone other than Obama's immediate family) has a direct and tangible interest in his birth certificate.

And, legally, Barack Obama doesn't have the authority to release that of which he is not the owner, only the State can do that—because it is the owner of the record. Additionally, the State has made the law regarding those records impenetrable by also requiring that those records, which it owns, are subject to privacy laws that prohibit it from releasing them to anyone except those with a direct and tangible interest.

The Vexatious Litigant

The fact that Orly has been told the law (which she should have initially researched on her own), and it has been reiterated every time she has made the request, shows that she has either ignored the law purposely, or she just doesn't understand it, for disagreeing with a law is not sufficient to repeatedly request that it be broken. And, now it appears Orly believes that an administrative judge in Georgia has the power and jurisdiction to demand that Hawaii break its own laws, since she hasn't been able to convince the court in Hawaii that it's in their best interest to do so. But, not only does it look like that's what she believes, she downloaded a blank subpoena form that was pre-signed by Judge Malihi, and tied him to an instrument, to which he has not even been a party, to attempt to coerce the Hawaii Court into breaking Hawaii law. Repeatedly filing motions and "subpoenas" to obtain something to which she has no legal right is what will eventually win her "vexatious litigant" status.

Believe me, I understand the principle of flinging enough poo against the wall in the belief that, eventually, something will stick; and generally, I know that, in the right situation, that can be an effective approach. Unfortunately, in this instance, it has not been; and my gut feeling is that both the Hawaii and Georgia courts have intercepted the proverbial poo before it has hit the wall, and very soon, will be tossing it at a fan.

Add to the seemingly insurmountable task of working within the current law to obtain any damning evidence for our cause, there is yet another legal mountain that would have to be scaled, and that is the proper legal use of the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the Constitution. While it was improperly, and laughably, argued in Hawaii that the FFC Clause would give Georgia jurisdiction over Hawaii, the proper interpretation of the FFC Clause would be that, in a court of law, whatever a state certifies as a birth certificate is deemed to be "self verifying," meaning that a court will regard it as valid apart from any corroborating evidence. If a court automatically regards evidence as valid, then no counter-evidence will be considered. We might not like it, but it's the law, folks.

To overcome the present laws that apply to birth certificates, if that is even possible, would require a legal mastermind and a brilliant argument that has not yet even been constructed. It is as if we have been trying to catch, with our bare hands, just one fly that would allow the truth to be exposed, and, try as we might, the flies have eluded our efforts. Some have viewed Judge Malihi's denial of Obama's Motion to Dismiss as one of those flies miraculously being ushered into our home. However, it appears that Orly's method for capturing that fly is to use a fire hose, as she is trying to unleash torrents of water upon the fly. Ultimately, she will not capture the fly, but her fire hose method will do vast damage to our house.

I am well aware of how some will perceive what I have said so far, but it is my belief that one can go after the right thing in the wrong way—and that it is never right to do wrong to get to what is right. We have been saying for nearly four years now that all we want is the truth; but, to me, we should not use deception and outright lies to obtain that truth—and, incompetence is not an excuse for dishonesty, neither is it conclusive proof that the other side is corrupt. I am not suggesting that corruption doesn't exist, but incompetence on one side is not what proves corruption on the other.

I think it is important for all of us to understand the truth in this matter, and what we're up against, and I just haven't been seeing all that much truth being bandied about in this particular case. However, if these were the only issues at hand, it is very possible I would have just allowed the inevitable to "play out" without any commentary from me (for, again, I have nothing to gain through this statement, and possibly, much to lose—at least in practical terms). There is something that, to me, transcends the legal incompetence I have discussed, and that is the hateful arrogance that accompanies the ineptitude. That, above everything else I have stated, I must condemn.

Not long after the genesis of The Birther Summit, I was made privy to an email Orly had sent to an unknown number of people. In it, Orly shared things about me that were demonstrably false. In discussing what, possibly, could have caused her to disseminate such lies, the explanation I received from several people came down to, "That's just what Orly does." As inappropriate as I believed that email to be, I chose to publicly ignore it, and eventually, even donated money to Orly's cause.

However, recently, there have been some good, upstanding people who have been on the receiving end of Orly's baseless wrath, and there have been statements made about those people—friends of mine—that were not only untrue, they were mean-spirited and bordered on libel. These are people who have been working tirelessly in our cause since its beginning, and, because they are working in areas apart from what Orly is doing, or they merely tried to ascertain the validity of some of Orly's claims, they were branded as "Obama operatives." Additionally, Orly's tirades against these people have consistently equated them as traitors to our cause because she "accuses" them of not sending money to her, or she believes that the financial needs of what they are trying to accomplish might divert funds away from being donated to her—and, from her statements, it appears Orly believes she deserves ALL funds that might be donated to our cause.

And, her rants always include her statement that she is the one who is doing most all the work in our movement. Folks, that is an outright lie! There are many of us who have worked very hard on this for a very long time, and I take great offense, on behalf of all those people, at those ridiculous, self-serving, and utterly false statements.

So, to those who read this article, who may be inclined to donate money to the efforts at hand, by no means are you to infer that I am suggesting that you not donate to Orly; but, understand that, in my opinion, she will see no form of success. In fact, I personally believe that the proceedings in Georgia might very well be her swan song.

My recommendation for donations (if the success/failure paradigm is part of your decision making process) would be to also consider organizations like the Article II Super Pac (http://www.art2superpac.com/index.html ) or The Birther Report (http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/ ) or the Obama State Ballot Challenge (http://obamaballotchallenge.com/ ).

I do want to provide an additional clarification here. Orly published on her website that ORYR stated that her subpoenas were "illegal." That never happened, as ORYR simply posted statements questioning the validity of the subpoenas, which, as I've explained here, are perfectly valid questions. However, the fact that Orly stated that about ORYR goes to the very heart of the deception and spin. She tells lies, and, unfortunately, those who refer to her as "Lady Liberty" (for whatever reason), blindly believe what she posts.

I wish that after such a brutally honest commentary, I could conclude with some consoling sentiment such as, "but I'm sure she's a really nice person," but after so many vicious, unwarranted attacks on friends, I can't even do that.

And, I know that, using her typical M.O., she may try to say that I never "donated even one penny" to her, but that wouldn't be true. She may try to say that she has been doing all the work, and that I have stayed behind a keyboard doing nothing but criticizing, but that wouldn't be true. She may try to say that I am cowardly hiding behind a fictitious name, but that wouldn't be true. She may try to say that I haven't been involved in filing any lawsuits for this cause, but that wouldn't be true. And, after everything I have been doing for our cause, one can hardly call me an "Obama operative," so, I would hope nobody would try leveling such a ridiculous accusation!

Aside from all that, I am certain there will be personal attacks against me—but, in the end folks, watch what happens in Georgia (and Hawaii). Just watch. I don't have to be a prophet to accurately predict that one. And, for those who might be doubting what I have said, do a little research; that's all it took for me to find out what the truth is. And, the truth is the reason I found it necessary to write this article in the first place; for I'm not interested in popularity contests.

Personal attacks to start in 3 . . . 2 . . . 1 . . .

UPDATE: Prediction #1 Fulfilled Within a Matter of Hours

This, posted on the Orlysite, about an email from "John Smith."  I'll be looking for Pocahantas to comment soon. 

A LETTER FROM A SUPPORTER JOHN SMITH SENT TO A BLOGGER AND UNEMPLOYED MUSICIAN DEAN HASKINS, WHO CALLS HIMSELF BIRTHER SUMMIT(A BLOG, THAT HAS VERY FEW READERS AND LOW RATING ON THE NET) 

http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=30532

To which I commented (but, am pretty sure it won't make it out of moderation):

I'm not so sure you want to publicize that an "unemployed musician" (LOL!) understands the law better than you do.

###

If you would like more information about the Birther Summit, please visit our website often at www.birthersummit.org or contact Dean Haskins at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it .