Dr. Orly Taitz today reported that Salem Communications radio talk show host Michael Medved made some defamatory remarks against her. She is asking to come on his show to refute his assertions. If that doesn’t happen, Dr. Taitz says she’ll push for oral and written retractions, including on numerous associated web sites:

Salem Communications
4880 Santa Rosa Road
Camarillo, Ca 93012
Joe Davis, President of Radio Division 
Chris Henderson, Vice President and General Counsel

Dear Mr. Davis and Mr. Henderson,

On Monday, January 19th, during Michael Medved’s Radio Show, Mr. Medved made some very disparaging and slanderous remarks concerning my character, mental state and my motives for pursuing legal actions that question Barack Obama’s eligibility to serve as President of the United States. Mr. Medved also made “false” statements concerning the merits of the legal actions that I have filed and insinuated that my primary motive for pursuing these matters is to receive monetary donations from an unsuspecting and misinformed public.

I find that Mr. Medved’s willful ignorance on the issues surrounding Mr. Obama’s “Natural Born Citizenship” status, and his unwillingness to familiarize himself with the merits of the numerous lawsuits that have been filed by concerned citizens, not conspiracy theorists, across this great County, is a great disservice to your listeners and the American public as a whole. 

Under California law, statements, like the ones that Mr. Medved spewed on your radio broadcasts are considered defamatory. In a court of law, I would not need to show special damages (e.g., damages to property, business, trade, profession or occupation, including expenditures that resulted from your defamation statements) because the statements are defamation per se. See Cal. Civ. Code § 45a; Yow v. National Enquirer, Inc. 550 F.Supp.2d 1179, 1183 (E.D. Cal. 2008). 

To remedy these slanderous and defamatory statements, California has a retraction statute, Cal. Civ. Code § 48a, that applies to the “publication of libel in a newspaper” or “slander by radio broadcast.”

Under the California retraction statute, I have a right to serve you with a written request for retraction against the slanderous and defamatory statements that Mr. Medved has made about me, my character, statements he has made about my mental health and my motives for pursuing legal actions on behalf of my clients concerning Barack Obama’s eligibility to serve as POTUS. Additionally, I have the right to request that Mr. Medved and your company and your affiliate stations that broadcast Mr. Medved’s Show issue a retraction based on the misleading and misinformed derogatory comments that Mr. Medved made concerning the merits of the legal cases that I have filed involving matters relating to the Nov 4, 2008 Presidential election.

Therefore, I am demanding that you instruct Mr. Medved to invite me onto his radio show and allow me to defend myself against the slanderous and defamatory statements that he has made about me to your listeners. I am hopeful that this request will allow me to discuss these false statements and correct the misinformation that Mr. Medved has made public to your radio station listeners. I am requesting ample opportunity to discuss the legal merits of the cases I am litigating on the airwaves so your listeners can be fully informed on the issues concerning Mr. Obama’s lack of eligibility to serve as POTUS.

If you do not allow me ample opportunity on Mr. Medved’s show or equal time on your radio stations to personally present facts that directly contradict Mr. Medved’s slanderous and defamatory statements, I demand that you issue an immediate oral retraction on your radio stations, and that this retraction include a fair and accurate historical outline of my background, my character, my mental health status and my motives for filing legal actions on behalf of my clients. I also request that this oral retraction present a fair and unbiased presentation of the legal merits of my case, and the merits of similar lawsuits that Mr. Medved lumped together with mine.

In addition, I demand that Mr. Medved and your affiliate stations issue a written retraction to be placed on Mr. Medved’s personal/business web site, on the TownHall.com web site, on ALL your affiliate stations web sites in which you broadcast Mr. Medved’s show, and to make certain that these written retractions specifically address the issues that I outlined above.

I ask that each retraction be placed in a prominent position on your corporate web site and all of your affiliate station web sites and that “RETRACTION-Dr. Orly Taitz, Esq.” be placed in the heading of the section where the retraction appears. I also request that you publish this letter along with Mr. Medved’s and your company’s written retraction.

Please respond to this written retraction request by email, no later than February 3, 2009 and send a hard copy of your response and written retraction to me at my Mission Viejo address via Certified Mail/Signature Required no later than February 10, 2009. 

Sincerely,

Dr. Orly Taitz, Esq.

26302 La Paz, Suite 211
Mission Viejo Ca 92691
29839 S. Margarita Pkwy
Rancho Santa Margarita Ca 92688
Office: 949-586-8110
Cell: 949-683-5411
Fax: 949-586-2082
Email: dr_taitz@yahoo.com

Copy of Letter sent to TownHall.com and Michael Medved

TownHall.Com
1901 N. Moore Street, Suite 701
Arlington, VA 22209

To: Michael Medved
RE: Michael Medved Show
Email: michael@michaelmedved.com
Online Email Form: http://www.michaelmedved.com/askmike

Date: January 23, 2009

Dear Mr. Medved,

On Monday, January 19th, during your Radio Show, you had made some very disparaging and slanderous remarks concerning my character, mental state and my motives for pursuing legal actions that question Barack Obama’s eligibility to serve as President of the United States. You had also made “false” statements concerning the merits of the legal actions that I have filed and insinuated that my primary motive for pursuing these matters is to receive monetary donations from an unsuspecting and misinformed public.

I find that your willful ignorance on the issues surrounding Mr. Obama’s “Natural Born Citizenship” status, and your unwillingness to familiarize yourself with the merits of the numerous lawsuits that have been filed by concerned citizens, not conspiracy theorists, across this great County, is a great disservice to your listeners and the American public as a whole. 

Under California law, statements, like the one’s you spewed on your radio broadcast are considered defamatory. In a court of law, I would not need to show special damages (e.g., damages to property, business, trade, profession or occupation, including expenditures that resulted from your defamation statements) because the statements are defamation per se. See Cal. Civ. Code § 45a; Yow v. National Enquirer, Inc. 550 F.Supp.2d 1179, 1183 (E.D. Cal. 2008). 

To remedy these slanderous and defamatory statements, California has a retraction statute, Cal. Civ. Code § 48a, that applies to the “publication of libel in a newspaper” or “slander by radio broadcast.”

Under the California retraction statute, I have a right to serve you with a written request for retraction against the slanderous and defamatory statements that you made about me, my character, statements you made about my mental health and my motives for pursuing legal actions on behalf of my clients concerning Barack Obama’s eligibility to serve as POTUS. Additionally, I have the right to request that you issue a retraction based on the misleading and misinformed derogatory comments that you made concerning the merits of the legal cases that I have filed involving matters relating to the Nov 4, 2008 Presidential election.

Therefore, I am demanding that you invite me on your radio show and allow me to defend myself against the slanderous and defamatory statements that you made about me so we can further discuss these false statements and the misinformation you made public regarding the legal merits of the cases I am litigating. If you do not allow me ample opportunity on your show to personally present facts that directly contradict your slanderous and defamatory statements, I demand that you issue an immediate oral retraction on your radio show, which includes a fair and accurate historical outline of my background, my character, my mental health status and my motives for filing legal actions on behalf of my clients. I also request that this oral retraction present a fair and unbiased presentation of the legal merits of my case, and the merits of similar lawsuits that you lumped together with mine.

In addition, I demand that you issue a written retraction on your personal/business web site and on the TownHall.com web site, that specifically addresses the issues outlined above. I ask that this retraction is placed in a prominent position on the site and that “RETRACTION-Dr. Orly Taitz, Esq.” be placed in the heading of the section where the retraction appears. I also request that you publish this letter along with your written retraction.

Please respond to this written retraction request by email, no later than February 3, 2009 and send a hard copy of your response and written retraction to me at my Mission Viejo address via Certified Mail/Signature Required no later than February 10, 2009. 

Sincerely,

Dr. Orly Taitz, Esq.

26302 La Paz, Suite 211
Mission Viejo Ca 92691
29839 S. Margarita Pkwy
Rancho Santa Margarita Ca 92688

Office: 949-586-8110
Cell: 949-683-5411
Fax: 949-586-2082
Email: dr_taitz@yahoo.com

Update: Steve Marquis, Plaintiff in the first Secretary of State lawsuit in Washington State, Marquis v. Reed, also wrote to Mr. Medved:

Defamation of Character
Sent to:
http://www.michaelmedved.com/askmike
I hear you trashed Dr Orly. Will you also defame me. I was the 1st to sue the secretary of state. Many other fine citizens have followed suit. I have never seen such amazing selfless dedication to the constitution and our fellow man. I can tell you a great deal as to what I have seen in this movement and Orly’s participation. She has spent a tremendous amount of her own cash and has received only small donations in comparison. She has spent an enormous amount of time and energy to carry this torch of freedom. She has flown across the nation and to far flung places at midnight to help a fellow citizen. She is an astounding patriot; an immigrant who knows 1st hand a little something about tyranny. She, I and many others are fighting with every thing we have to try and preserve that constitution that you abused recently.
We have a valid case and thousands of us are working diligently to bring this Usurper to square with the law. The cases and essays therein are no rants and the folks behind this quest are not wackos. It seems the only defense against our facts is to argue – “no big names are backing you so you must be nuts” – What kind of journalism is that???
Show us why we are wrong. I would very much like to be wrong. I know that is true of Orly and every leader in this movement. I am beginning to think the talk show jockeys have lost their spine. If it’s just ignorance Michael – allow for some education. Orly, Myself – I can give you other names if you desire of very well spoken individuals that can articulate the case against Obama.
Steve Marquis
peoplespassions.org

-Phil