2minkey
bootlicker
hah. it's myth-making, playing out in front of a pre-literate audience. you might as well be living in a hunter-gatherer society 30,000 years ago. meh, i guess nebraska is close enough.
Birthers Hail Judge’s Decision That Could “Depose” Obama
- Thread starter Gotholic
- Start date
hah. it's myth-making, playing out in front of a pre-literate audience. you might as well be living in a hunter-gatherer society 30,000 years ago. meh, i guess nebraska is close enough.
catocom
Well-Known Member
ResearchMonkey
Well-Known Member
ResearchMonkey
Well-Known Member
Letter from defendants lawfag to the GA SoS....
Hon. Brian P. Kemp
Georgia Secretary of State
214 State Capitol Atlanta, Georgia 30334
via email to Vincent R. Russo Jr., Esq.
Re: Georgia Presidential Preference Primary Hearings
Dear Secretary Kemp:
This is to advise you of serious problems that have developed in the conduct of the hearings pending before the Office of State Administrative Hearings. At issue in these hearings are challenges that allege that President Obama is not eligible to hold or run for re-election to his office, on the now wholly discredited theory that he does not meet the citizenship requirements. As you know, such allegations have been the subject of numerous judicial proceedings around the country, all of which have concluded that they were baseless and, in some instances – including in the State of Georgia - that those bringing the challenges have engaged in sanctionable abuse of our legal process.
Nonetheless, the Administrative Law Judge has exercised no control whatsoever over this proceeding, and it threatens to degenerate into a pure forum for political posturing to the detriment of the reputation of the State and your Office. Rather than bring this matter to a rapid conclusion, the ALJ has insisted on agreeing to a day of hearings, and on the full participation of the President in his capacity as a candidate. Only last week, he denied a Motion to Quash a subpoena he approved on the request of plaintiff’s counsel for the personal appearance of the President at the hearing, now scheduled for January 26.
For these reasons, and as discussed briefly below, you should bring an end to this baseless, costly and unproductive hearing by withdrawing the original hearing request as improvidently issued.
It is well established that there is no legitimate issue here—a conclusion validated time and again by courts around the country. The State of Hawaii produced official records documenting birth there; the President made documents available to the general public by placing them on his website.
“Under the United States Constitution, a public record of a state is required to be given ‘full faith and credit’ by all other states in the country. Even if a state were to require its election officials for the first time ever to receive a ‘birth certificate’ as a requirement for a federal candidate’s ballot placement, a document certified by another state, such as a ‘short form’ birth certificate, or the certified long form, would be required to be accepted by all states under the ‘full faith and credit’ clause of the United States Constitution.” Maskell, “Qualifications for President and the “Natural Born” Citizenship Eligibility Requirement,” Congressional Research Service (November 14, 2011), p.41.
Nonetheless, the ALJ has decided, for whatever reason, to lend assistance through his office—and by extension, yours—to the political and legally groundless tactics of the plaintiffs. One of the attorneys for the plaintiffs has downloaded form subpoenas which she tried to serve around the country.
Plaintiff’s attorney sent subpoenas seeking to force attendance by an office machine salesman in Seattle; seeking to force the United States Attorney to bring an unnamed “Custodian of Records Department of Homeland Security” to attend the hearing with immunization records; and asking the same U.S. Attorney to bring the same records allegedly possessed by “Custodian of Records of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.” She served subpoenas attempting to compel the production of documents and the attendance of Susan Daniels and John Daniels, both apparently out of state witnesses, regarding Social Security records. She is seeking to compel the Director of Health for the State of Hawaii to bring to Atlanta the “original typewritten 1961 birth certificate #10641 for Barack Obama, II, issued 08.08.1961 by Dr. David Sinclair…,” even though Hawaii courts had dismissed with prejudice the last attempt to force release of confidential records on November 9, 2011. Taitz v. Fuddy, CA No. 11-1-1731-08 RAN.
In Rhodes v. McDonald, 670 F. Supp. 2d 1363, 1365 (USDC
MD GA, 2009), Judge Clay Land wrote this of plaintiff’s attorney:
When a lawyer files complaints and motions without a reasonable basis for believing that they are supported by existing law or a modification or extension of existing law, that lawyer abuses her privilege to practice law. When a lawyer uses the courts as a platform for political agenda disconnected from any legitimate legal cause of action, that lawyer abuses her privilege to practice law….
As a national leader in the so-called ‘birther movement,’ Plaintiff’s counsel has attempted to use litigation to provide the ‘legal foundation’ for her political agenda. She seeks to use the Court’s power to compel discovery in her efforts force the President to produce a ‘birth certificate’ that is satisfactory to herself and her followers.” 670 F. Supp. 2d at 1366.
All issues were presented to your hearing officer—the clear-cut decision to be on the merits, and the flagrantly unethical and unprofessional conduct of counsel—and he has allowed the plaintiffs’ counsel to run amok. He has not even addressed these issues—choosing to ignore them. Perhaps he is aware that there is no credible response; perhaps he appreciates that the very demand made of his office—that it address constitutional issues—is by law not within its authority. See, for example, Flint River Mills v. Henry, 234 Ga. 385, 216 S.E.2d 895 (1975); Ga. Comp. R. & Regs. r. 616-1-2-.22(3).
The Secretary of State should withdraw the hearing request as being improvidently issued. A referring agency may withdraw the request at any time. Ga. Comp. R. & Regs. r. 616-1-2-.17(1). Indeed, regardless of the collapse of proceedings before the ALJ, the original hearing request was defective as a matter of law. Terry v. Handel, 08cv158774S (Superior Court Fulton County, 2008), appeal dismissed, No. S09D0284 (Ga. Supreme Court), reconsideration denied, No. S09A1373. (“The Secretary of State of Georgia is not given any authority that is discretionary nor any that is mandatory to refuse to allow someone to be listed as a candidate for President by a political party because she believes that the candidate might not be qualified.”) Similarly, no law gives the Secretary of State authority to determine the qualifications of someone named by a political party to be on the Presidential Preference Primary ballot. Your duty is determined by the statutory requirement that the Executive Committee of a political party name presidential preference primary candidates. O.C.G.A. § 21-2-193. Consequently, the attempt to hold hearings on qualifications which you may not enforce is ultra vires.
We await your taking the requested action, and as we do so, we will, of course, suspend further participation in these proceedings, including the hearing scheduled for January 26.
Very truly yours,
MICHAEL JABLONSKI
Georgia State Bar Number 385850
Attorney for President Barack Obama
cc: Hon. Michael Malihi Van Irion, Esq. Orly Taitz, Esq. Mark Hatfield, Esq. Vincent R. Russo Jr., Esq. Stefan Ritter, Esq. Ann Brumbaugh, Esq. Darcy Coty, Esq. Andrew B. Flake, Esq.
Bypass the court entirely, get the referring party to drop the referral.Georgia Secretary of State
214 State Capitol Atlanta, Georgia 30334
via email to Vincent R. Russo Jr., Esq.
Re: Georgia Presidential Preference Primary Hearings
Dear Secretary Kemp:
This is to advise you of serious problems that have developed in the conduct of the hearings pending before the Office of State Administrative Hearings. At issue in these hearings are challenges that allege that President Obama is not eligible to hold or run for re-election to his office, on the now wholly discredited theory that he does not meet the citizenship requirements. As you know, such allegations have been the subject of numerous judicial proceedings around the country, all of which have concluded that they were baseless and, in some instances – including in the State of Georgia - that those bringing the challenges have engaged in sanctionable abuse of our legal process.
Nonetheless, the Administrative Law Judge has exercised no control whatsoever over this proceeding, and it threatens to degenerate into a pure forum for political posturing to the detriment of the reputation of the State and your Office. Rather than bring this matter to a rapid conclusion, the ALJ has insisted on agreeing to a day of hearings, and on the full participation of the President in his capacity as a candidate. Only last week, he denied a Motion to Quash a subpoena he approved on the request of plaintiff’s counsel for the personal appearance of the President at the hearing, now scheduled for January 26.
For these reasons, and as discussed briefly below, you should bring an end to this baseless, costly and unproductive hearing by withdrawing the original hearing request as improvidently issued.
It is well established that there is no legitimate issue here—a conclusion validated time and again by courts around the country. The State of Hawaii produced official records documenting birth there; the President made documents available to the general public by placing them on his website.
“Under the United States Constitution, a public record of a state is required to be given ‘full faith and credit’ by all other states in the country. Even if a state were to require its election officials for the first time ever to receive a ‘birth certificate’ as a requirement for a federal candidate’s ballot placement, a document certified by another state, such as a ‘short form’ birth certificate, or the certified long form, would be required to be accepted by all states under the ‘full faith and credit’ clause of the United States Constitution.” Maskell, “Qualifications for President and the “Natural Born” Citizenship Eligibility Requirement,” Congressional Research Service (November 14, 2011), p.41.
Nonetheless, the ALJ has decided, for whatever reason, to lend assistance through his office—and by extension, yours—to the political and legally groundless tactics of the plaintiffs. One of the attorneys for the plaintiffs has downloaded form subpoenas which she tried to serve around the country.
Plaintiff’s attorney sent subpoenas seeking to force attendance by an office machine salesman in Seattle; seeking to force the United States Attorney to bring an unnamed “Custodian of Records Department of Homeland Security” to attend the hearing with immunization records; and asking the same U.S. Attorney to bring the same records allegedly possessed by “Custodian of Records of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.” She served subpoenas attempting to compel the production of documents and the attendance of Susan Daniels and John Daniels, both apparently out of state witnesses, regarding Social Security records. She is seeking to compel the Director of Health for the State of Hawaii to bring to Atlanta the “original typewritten 1961 birth certificate #10641 for Barack Obama, II, issued 08.08.1961 by Dr. David Sinclair…,” even though Hawaii courts had dismissed with prejudice the last attempt to force release of confidential records on November 9, 2011. Taitz v. Fuddy, CA No. 11-1-1731-08 RAN.
In Rhodes v. McDonald, 670 F. Supp. 2d 1363, 1365 (USDC
MD GA, 2009), Judge Clay Land wrote this of plaintiff’s attorney:
When a lawyer files complaints and motions without a reasonable basis for believing that they are supported by existing law or a modification or extension of existing law, that lawyer abuses her privilege to practice law. When a lawyer uses the courts as a platform for political agenda disconnected from any legitimate legal cause of action, that lawyer abuses her privilege to practice law….
As a national leader in the so-called ‘birther movement,’ Plaintiff’s counsel has attempted to use litigation to provide the ‘legal foundation’ for her political agenda. She seeks to use the Court’s power to compel discovery in her efforts force the President to produce a ‘birth certificate’ that is satisfactory to herself and her followers.” 670 F. Supp. 2d at 1366.
All issues were presented to your hearing officer—the clear-cut decision to be on the merits, and the flagrantly unethical and unprofessional conduct of counsel—and he has allowed the plaintiffs’ counsel to run amok. He has not even addressed these issues—choosing to ignore them. Perhaps he is aware that there is no credible response; perhaps he appreciates that the very demand made of his office—that it address constitutional issues—is by law not within its authority. See, for example, Flint River Mills v. Henry, 234 Ga. 385, 216 S.E.2d 895 (1975); Ga. Comp. R. & Regs. r. 616-1-2-.22(3).
The Secretary of State should withdraw the hearing request as being improvidently issued. A referring agency may withdraw the request at any time. Ga. Comp. R. & Regs. r. 616-1-2-.17(1). Indeed, regardless of the collapse of proceedings before the ALJ, the original hearing request was defective as a matter of law. Terry v. Handel, 08cv158774S (Superior Court Fulton County, 2008), appeal dismissed, No. S09D0284 (Ga. Supreme Court), reconsideration denied, No. S09A1373. (“The Secretary of State of Georgia is not given any authority that is discretionary nor any that is mandatory to refuse to allow someone to be listed as a candidate for President by a political party because she believes that the candidate might not be qualified.”) Similarly, no law gives the Secretary of State authority to determine the qualifications of someone named by a political party to be on the Presidential Preference Primary ballot. Your duty is determined by the statutory requirement that the Executive Committee of a political party name presidential preference primary candidates. O.C.G.A. § 21-2-193. Consequently, the attempt to hold hearings on qualifications which you may not enforce is ultra vires.
We await your taking the requested action, and as we do so, we will, of course, suspend further participation in these proceedings, including the hearing scheduled for January 26.
Very truly yours,
MICHAEL JABLONSKI
Georgia State Bar Number 385850
Attorney for President Barack Obama
cc: Hon. Michael Malihi Van Irion, Esq. Orly Taitz, Esq. Mark Hatfield, Esq. Vincent R. Russo Jr., Esq. Stefan Ritter, Esq. Ann Brumbaugh, Esq. Darcy Coty, Esq. Andrew B. Flake, Esq.
ResearchMonkey
Well-Known Member
GA Dims chime in....
Chairman Mike Berlon on Hearing to Address President Obama’s Inclusion on the Georgia Presidential Primary Ballot
By Georgia Democrat On January 25, 2012 · In Georgia Republicans
Georgia –Democratic Party of Georgia Chairman Mike Berlon releases the following statement on tomorrow’s administrative hearing to address President Obama’s inclusion on the Georgia Presidential primary ballot:
Validated in many courts? Have any of those cases ever discussed the merits of the case or just procedural and standing issues? -- Nope, none.By Georgia Democrat On January 25, 2012 · In Georgia Republicans
Georgia –Democratic Party of Georgia Chairman Mike Berlon releases the following statement on tomorrow’s administrative hearing to address President Obama’s inclusion on the Georgia Presidential primary ballot:
“Several lawsuits were recently filed against President Obama questioning whether he is an American citizen in an attempt to remove him from the Georgia primary ballot. Despite the fact that these issues have been thoroughly litigated, a hearing has been scheduled in these cases for Thursday, January 26, 2012. The Democratic Party of Georgia is not a party to any of these lawsuits.
“This afternoon we received a letter from counsel for the President directed to the Georgia Secretary of State asking him to intervene in these lawsuits and bring them to a halt, because it is well established that there is no issue here – a fact validated time and again by courts in this country.
“In the letter, counsel also indicated that they had no interest in continuing to appear or participate further in the litigation and have suspended their involvement.
“We respect the President’s position and urge the Secretary of State to bring this matter to a conclusion. We also believe that each political party has the absolute legal right to determine who should appear on their primary and general election ballots according to their own rules without interference from outside parties.
“In light of these developments the Democratic Party of Georgia has no plans to continue to be involved in these baseless cases. Furthermore the Democratic Party of Georgia will cooperate with the President and his campaign in any way requested to make sure that his name appears on the primary and general election ballots for 2012.”
“This afternoon we received a letter from counsel for the President directed to the Georgia Secretary of State asking him to intervene in these lawsuits and bring them to a halt, because it is well established that there is no issue here – a fact validated time and again by courts in this country.
“In the letter, counsel also indicated that they had no interest in continuing to appear or participate further in the litigation and have suspended their involvement.
“We respect the President’s position and urge the Secretary of State to bring this matter to a conclusion. We also believe that each political party has the absolute legal right to determine who should appear on their primary and general election ballots according to their own rules without interference from outside parties.
“In light of these developments the Democratic Party of Georgia has no plans to continue to be involved in these baseless cases. Furthermore the Democratic Party of Georgia will cooperate with the President and his campaign in any way requested to make sure that his name appears on the primary and general election ballots for 2012.”
ResearchMonkey
Well-Known Member
GA SoS is having none of this crap.
January 25, 2012
Michael Jablonski260 Brighton Road, NE Atlanta, Georgia 30309
RE: Georgia Presidential Preference Primary Hearings
Dear Mr. Jablonski:I received your letter expressing your concerns with the manner in which the Office of State Administrative Hearings (”OSAH”) has handled the candidate challenges involving your client and advising me that you and your client will “suspend” participation in the administrative proceeding. While I regret that you do not feel that the proceedings are appropriate, my referral of this matter to an administrative law judge at OSAH was in keeping with Georgia law, and specifically O.C.G.A. § 21-2-5.
As you are aware, OSAH Rule 616-1-2-.17 cited in your letter only applies to parties to a hearing. As the referring agency, the Secretary of State’s Office is not a party to the candidate challenge hearings scheduled for tomorrow. To the extent a request to withdraw the case referral is procedurally available, I do not believe such a request would be judicious given the hearing is set for tomorrow morning.
In following the procedures set forth in the Georgia Election Code, I expect the administrative law judge to report his findings to me after his full consideration of the evidence and law. Upon receipt of the report, I will fully and fairly review the entire record and initial decision of the administrative law judge.Anything you and your client place in the record in response to the challenge will be beneficial to my review of the initial decision; however, if you and your client choose to suspend your participation in the OSAH proceedings, please understand that you do so at your own peril.
I certainly appreciate you contacting me about your concerns, and thank you for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely,Brian P. Kemp
cc: Hon. Michael Malihi, Van Irion, Esq., Orly Taitz, Esq., Brian P. Kemp
Michael Jablonski260 Brighton Road, NE Atlanta, Georgia 30309
RE: Georgia Presidential Preference Primary Hearings
Dear Mr. Jablonski:I received your letter expressing your concerns with the manner in which the Office of State Administrative Hearings (”OSAH”) has handled the candidate challenges involving your client and advising me that you and your client will “suspend” participation in the administrative proceeding. While I regret that you do not feel that the proceedings are appropriate, my referral of this matter to an administrative law judge at OSAH was in keeping with Georgia law, and specifically O.C.G.A. § 21-2-5.
As you are aware, OSAH Rule 616-1-2-.17 cited in your letter only applies to parties to a hearing. As the referring agency, the Secretary of State’s Office is not a party to the candidate challenge hearings scheduled for tomorrow. To the extent a request to withdraw the case referral is procedurally available, I do not believe such a request would be judicious given the hearing is set for tomorrow morning.
In following the procedures set forth in the Georgia Election Code, I expect the administrative law judge to report his findings to me after his full consideration of the evidence and law. Upon receipt of the report, I will fully and fairly review the entire record and initial decision of the administrative law judge.Anything you and your client place in the record in response to the challenge will be beneficial to my review of the initial decision; however, if you and your client choose to suspend your participation in the OSAH proceedings, please understand that you do so at your own peril.
I certainly appreciate you contacting me about your concerns, and thank you for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely,Brian P. Kemp
cc: Hon. Michael Malihi, Van Irion, Esq., Orly Taitz, Esq., Brian P. Kemp
ResearchMonkey
Well-Known Member
The question isn't "Citizenship", its "Natural Born"Citizen
Obammy seems to be in a pickle.
Obammy seems to be in a pickle.
ResearchMonkey
Well-Known Member
ResearchMonkey
Well-Known Member
Highlight: Orly's last witness on the stand was.... Orly. Defense didn't appear in any of the 3 cases.
Judge will recommend to the SoS, that the Won be struck from the GA ballot.
Judge will recommend to the SoS, that the Won be struck from the GA ballot.
2minkey
bootlicker
Taitz's claims regarding Barack Obama
Main article: Barack Obama citizenship conspiracy theories
Taitz alleges that President Obama is not a natural-born citizen of the United States and is therefore ineligible to serve as President. She claims he was born in Kenya and that he falsified his Selective Service papers and his application to the Illinois bar.[20] "I believe [Obama] is the most dangerous thing one can imagine, in that he represents radical communism and radical Islam: He was born and raised in radical Islam, all of his associations are with radical Islam, and he was groomed in the environment of the dirty Chicago mafia. Can there be anything scarier than that?"[21]
Taitz has made other Obama-related claims, including:
Taitz has also supported a number of other theories not directly related to Obama, including:
but i'm sure it's all lies... (source)
Main article: Barack Obama citizenship conspiracy theories
Taitz alleges that President Obama is not a natural-born citizen of the United States and is therefore ineligible to serve as President. She claims he was born in Kenya and that he falsified his Selective Service papers and his application to the Illinois bar.[20] "I believe [Obama] is the most dangerous thing one can imagine, in that he represents radical communism and radical Islam: He was born and raised in radical Islam, all of his associations are with radical Islam, and he was groomed in the environment of the dirty Chicago mafia. Can there be anything scarier than that?"[21]
Taitz has made other Obama-related claims, including:
- A number of homosexuals from Obama's former church have died mysteriously.
- Obama has dozens of Social Security numbers, and his passport is inaccurate. Taitz claims that a person who was cooperating with the FBI in connection with Obama's passport died mysteriously, "shot in the head".
- A Kenyan birth certificate with the name "Barack Obama" is authentic.
- Obama's first act as President was to donate money to Hamas, which she claims will be used to build Qassam rockets.
- Obama, or someone connected to him, has made threats to Taitz's life and vandalized her car.[19]
- Obama is having the Federal Emergency Management Agency build internment camps for "Anti-Obama dissidents".[14]
- Osama bin Laden was killed years ago, with his body kept on ice, and the announcement of his death was timed to divert attention from an upcoming court case she is litigating challenging Obama's citizenship.[22]
Taitz has also supported a number of other theories not directly related to Obama, including:
- Goldman Sachs runs the United States Treasury.[21]
- Baxter International has developed a bird flu vaccine that kills people.[21]
- Representative Alcee Hastings and the House of Representatives are planning to build at least six labor camps.[21]
- Hugo Chávez owns the software that runs American voting machines,[19]
- FactCheck is untrustworthy because of its links to the Annenberg Foundation.[19]
- Taitz has also advocated numerous Internet-related theories, including PayPal attacks, the deletion of her Wikipedia entry, and Google's flagging her webpage as an attack site and suppressing search results for her name.[19]
but i'm sure it's all lies... (source)
ResearchMonkey
Well-Known Member
Yeah, she was entertaining for sure. The Judge was tolerant and patient with her, mostly. She was all over the place, she did get 2 good witness' on the record.
It was the other 2 cases that made it hold, that and, no defense offered. The other cases got it on court record that NBC is the issue. What it all means, thats new ground and its gonna get painted with Orly and that O is a citizen.
He has no recourse for the primary, the GE is still up in the air. If more states follow suit this could be the end of the line for the Won. -- Cue Hillary.
It was the other 2 cases that made it hold, that and, no defense offered. The other cases got it on court record that NBC is the issue. What it all means, thats new ground and its gonna get painted with Orly and that O is a citizen.
He has no recourse for the primary, the GE is still up in the air. If more states follow suit this could be the end of the line for the Won. -- Cue Hillary.
2minkey
bootlicker
regardless, there is legal precedent - REALLY FUCKING WELL ESTABLISHED legal precedent for him to ignore subpoenas of this nature, and they will never prove that he is NOT a natural born citizen... because he is, and the birther "legal argument" on that particular aspect is incredibly weak... the whole "dad is a british subject" is complete nonsense.
gee, clogging up the courts with this weak-assed, redundant shit... what a great bunch of americans.
fucking idiots.
i would love to get gotholic and orly in a room together though. perhaps he could try to convince her that 9/11 was an inside job.
gee, clogging up the courts with this weak-assed, redundant shit... what a great bunch of americans.
fucking idiots.
i would love to get gotholic and orly in a room together though. perhaps he could try to convince her that 9/11 was an inside job.