Snopes.com, the leading debunker of urban legends, Internet rumors and assorted tall tales of questionable origin, just took on the fantasy that President Barack Obama has been charged in federal court with treason--and discovered that Rancho Santa Margarita's own lawyer/dentist/real estate saleslady/Ivanka lite Orly Taitz is at the center of it.
In "Treason to Believe," the Snopesters note that the American News Facebook page featured this headline on June 13, 2015: "BREAKING: Federal Court Formally Charges Obama with Treason ... This Is It."
If you click on the headline, you are not taken to breaking news--not if your idea of breaking is news that just, well, broke. You go instead to a story with the same headline on the American News website dated April 1, 2015.
An April Fools Day prank? Only if you confine the foolishness of Orly Taitz to a single day each year. Because the Obama treason claim actually goes back even further in time, to June 2014, when American News reported that the ... cough-cough ... lawyer had filed a motion in one of her gazillion lawsuits against Obama that judges toss out like Tom Brady's ball boy hurling properly inflated footballs.
Yes, dear citizens, Snopes.com obviously concluded the treason claim is "false."
If you like this story, consider signing up for our email newsletters.
SHOW ME HOW
You have successfully signed up for your selected newsletter(s) - please keep an eye on your mailbox, we're movin' in!
"In summation, President Obama was not 'formally charged with treason' by any legal entity capable of bringing such charges in June 2014, July 2014, April 2015, or June 2015," the researchers write. "The only legal action that blogs making such a claim referred to was a specious civil lawsuit brought by well-known 'birther' crank Orly Taitz.
Crank gives a bad name to trucker pick-me-ups. A better buzz comes from Snopes.com including this from Maryland federal Judge Ellen Lipton Hollander, who despite her best efforts could not abide by Taitz's demand that Her Honor recuse herself from a birther case.
"Plaintiff can rest assured that if any reasonable grounds existed for me to recuse myself from this case, I would have done so, if for no other reason than to avoid spending precious time on such frivolous filings," Lipton ruled. "But, my responsibilities require me to handle dutifully the cases assigned to me."