© By Bridgette @ WTPOTUS
Obama’s Eligibility Lawsuits to be Heard on the MERITS!
Countdown by Days: 5, 4, 3, 2, 1
ZERO!!
Will History Be Made Today? Will Justice Prevail?
Bless the Judge, Secretary of State, Attorneys, Plaintiffs, and all the Patriots in Georgia for coming forth to save our country! May the Constitution and Rule of Law be enforced!
Tune In! LIVE BROADCAST!
Spread the News!
Late Wednesday afternoon Georgia’s Secretary of State wrote to Obama’s attorney. He was responding to their request that the SOS suspend the hearing. Both Obama and his attorney believe he is above the law and doesn’t have to prove he is eligible to be on Georgia’s presidential ballot. The SOS responded. A short excerpt from the letter:
However, if you and your client [Obama] 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
Secretary of State
U.S.A., U.S.A., U.S.A, U.S.A.!
#######
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE January 21st, 2012
ARTICLE II SUPER PAC TO BROADCAST JANUARY 26TH, 2012 OBAMA ELIGIBILITY HEARINGS IN ATLANTA, GEORGIA – LIVE!
Article II Political Action Committee will be on site with uncut, uncensored, complete, live streamed, gavel-to-gavel video coverage of the first ever “Obama” Constitutional Presidential eligibility hearings.
“The PAC saw the need to do this last month, because of the often incomplete and biased coverage of this issue by MainStream news media and recently received permission from the court,” said Director Helen Tansey, who will personally manage on-site efforts.
The PAC describes this upcoming event as “The hearing of the century, for the (alleged) political crime of the century,” referring to the breathtaking implications of an illegal “President” in the White House or on the presidential ballot.
These proceedings could lead to the removal of the incumbent from the Georgia ballot, which would raise questions nationwide. This would be the first time that these issues and related evidence are deliberated in open court. Numerous ballot challenges have been filed in dozens of states, contesting “Obama’s” questionable eligibility, based upon natural born citizenship requirements, in Article II of the U.S. Constitution and laws in multiple states. Georgia will be one of the first states heard. This is due to the timing of challenge filings and its unique state administrative court set up to handle such matters, in a jurisdiction potentially receptive to such cases.
Three cases are being heard on one momentous day, in this order:
1. Plaintiffs David Welden (represented by Van Irion);
2. Carl Swensson and Kevin Powell (represented by Mark Hatfield);
3. David Farrar, Leah Lax, Cody Judy, Thomas Malaren, Laurie Roth (represented by Dr. Orly Taitz).
#####
Let’s pony up for the Article II PAC We the People! If you intend to watch the cases live, even if you aren’t, they can use our support and donations! This will be the best movie you will attend all year! We expect some real action, drama, and ? What stars will be there? What stars won’t?
Call in some friends, have breakfast, lunch, and dinner, and keep the champagne on ice! Pull out your party hats! Start the popcorn! Let the lawsuits begin! Send a special invitation to your Representatives and Senators to join the party!
We will keep this post open for cheering and thoughts throughout the day!
Yes, please add your comments when you read this too! I know you are as excited as we are. We are thrilled that we won’t be missing out on this DAY IN HISTORY! In fact, we HOPE that someone GOES DOWN in History! That would be the CHANGE we’ve been waiting for!
Question for Obama on Thursday.
“Are you wearing your Depends today?”
#######
Thursday, January 26 at 9:00 a.m. EST
For live video coverage from the hearings, go to http://www.Art2SuperPAC.com.
NOTE: Our fellow blogger, Helen, is the Director of the Super PAC and will be there. Her website is: The T Room U.S.
itooktheredpill
newssleuth
Miri
reneemary1001
Bridgette
This may be off topic and I’m sorry. You-all remember when the economic crises happened in Sept. 2008? Remember how quickly it just happened…like wham! See, I never blamed Pres. Bush at all, as I do think this was a total shocker to him. It was planned that way.
I pretty much know and trust that money was messed around, manipulated with, and it had to do with Sorry “George” Soros. That’s my feeling on this all. I think that Soros was like holding up the strings to move money around, and it caused many types of crises in our nation, plus other nations as well. I think that he almost caused Britain to become bankrupt several years ago, don’t remember a date on it, when he fiddled with their money.
I guess what I’m getting at is, it seems pretty clear to me that BO was just the Soros plan all along to take down this nation. Here’s the thing about it all, no matter the arrogance of some men, the money/power that they think that they have, it won’t happen if people trust in the deity, Yahweh. I’m amazed at the amount of trust people put in mankind to “save” them, and especially arrogant, so-called powerful men. Like the rest of us, they only have the same air that we breathe, and they are as a fading flower as the rest of mankind; i.e., here one minute, gone the next. Riches, power are all just a facade.
When you get a chance, look at pictures of Soros and see if he doesn’t have the same arrogant appearance as BO in many ways.
yep. blackmail. contrived. we remember well.
or else, was the command.
how come Dodd and Frank, et al, got off scott free?
Bush may appear dumb so Sum , but it just isn’t so. He had to have known. Paulson was the most evil part of that scheme, no matter who knew what was coming. He’s still a scumbag and a President can’t be that far removed . I liked Bush, only part of the time and I defended him even when I knew there was something wrong with this administration,only cause the alternative was way worse in appearance anyway. But I am not going down that road anymore. None of em will get my loyalty anymore unless they prove to me they’re not part of this ONE World Global Governance crowd who cares about no middle class, no poor except what they produce. NO, Bush knew. How else was he supposed to break it to the public? That folks was the October suprise and Bush was part of it.
I found this comment and I wonder if there is any merit in this case also:
Years ago my ex-wife sued me chid support. I offered cancelled checks to her attorney, but he declined saying he didn’t need them, just a list of what I paid. Of course it didn’t match what she claimed, so he then told me he needed the cancelled checks. Upon him recieving them he promptly sent me a letter stating he was no longer representing her since the nut case was obviously making a false claim.
My point is did Obama’s attorney not show up or did he really just quit, because he knows he would be making false representations to the court?
Imagine yourself as an attorney telling your client that it is in your best interest to just pony up the LFBC or COLB and he won’t. Do you still continue to represent him and risk losing your law license?
On another note, we can now see how Oscama or Moochelle could have lost their licenses.
He really looks like nothing more than big cry baby not showing up and also crying about what’s fair in the state of the union campaign speech.
That’s exactly what I asked, except you presented it from a different angle. I still want to know IF Jablonski was on the record as Barry’s lawyer at 9:00 a.m. EST today. IF he was, then how is it ethical for him to not show up in court with his client? Of course he couldn’t show up and make false representations. As Papoose said, they won’t comply BECAUSE THEY CAN’T. As Bridgette said, HIS GOOSE IS COOKED.
You make a good point that Jablonski was between a “Barack and a Hard Place” (O’Reilly pun intended). He can’t present the bogus documents AND he’s not about to tell what he knows about his client. That would be unethical, too. He can’t say, the bc’s are fake, can he? Or can he? Does an officer of the court have a duty to report crime when he knows about it? I’m rusty on my Perry Mason knowledge of the law. IF a murderer tells his lawyer that he did it, does the lawyer have a duty to say anything? Does he have a duty to resign the case and then say something?
You know, I used to have faith in the integrity of the vast majority of my fellow Americans. Day after day, as the truth oozes out, and the obots CONTINUE to defend their messiah, I’m losing that faith. HOW can they possibly, after seeing Barry thumb his nose at the court, at a legal subpoena, at the law and the Constitution–how can they possibly continue to follow him blindly? How can they not ask themselves, at least: SINCE HE HAS THE SUPPOSED CERTIFIED LONG-FORM BIRTH CERTIFICATE, WHY DOESN’T HE JUST PRESENT IT IN COURT? There’s no logical answer BUT that he is not eligible and what’s on that paper will prove it. Are they happy with an ineligible person who lies to the entire country? Are they happy with a “leader” who is that fundamentally dishonest?
If it’s true, as one ANONYMOUS OBOT CLAIMS AT ORYR, that Sec. of State Kemp has a certified, signed COLB in his possession, then why wasn’t it presented in court? How can it be kept hidden from the attorneys in the case, if he’s going to consider it in his decision? THAT would be unethical, too. I seriously doubt, after reading Jablonski’s letter, that Barry or his lawyers sent a COLB to Kemp. They LIE. They LIE. It’s Alinsky 101, designed to demoralize. Don’t fall for it.
Just continue to pray for justice and pray for our Republic.
“Day after day, as the truth oozes out, and the obots CONTINUE to defend their messiah, I’m losing that faith. HOW can they possibly, after seeing Barry thumb his nose at the court, at a legal subpoena, at the law and the Constitution–how can they possibly continue to follow him blindly?”
Miri, you have to stop and consider this, are most obots even from the USA? $20.00 a week and a free computer to a Kenyan goes a long way.
True, but the most infamous ones ARE here.
Denial can be thought of as a complex psychological process where there may be some conscious knowledge or awareness of events in the world, but somehow one fails to feel their emotional impact or see their logical consequences.
Denial is an attempt to reject unacceptable feelings, needs, thoughts, wishes–or even a painful external reality that alters the perception of ourselves. This psychological defense mechanism protects us temporarily from:
-Knowledge (things we don’t want to know)
-Insight or awareness that threatens our self-esteem; or our mental or physical health; or our security (things we don’t want to think about)
-Unacceptable feelings (things we don’t want to feel)
The Wonderful World of Denial allows someone to believe something is true, when it is obvious to everyone else it is false. Iit permits someone to pretend they are feeling “love” or other altruistic emotions when they are actually behaving in a hateful manner; it hides the truth by using big words and grand concepts to prevent an individual from feeling unacceptable feelings (some have referred to “intellectualizion” (example)–which is a defense mechanism related to denial– as “denial gone to college”).
Denial can make otherwise intelligent individuals/groups/nations behave in a stupid or clueless manner, because they are too threatened by the Truth and are unable to process what is perfectly apparent to everyone.
http://drsanity.blogspot.com/2005/11/in-denial.html
People who live in this Wonderful World go through their daily lives secure in the knowledge that their self-image is protected against any information, feelings, or awareness that might make them have to change their view of the world. Nothing–and I mean NOTHING–not facts, not observable behavior; not the use of reason or logic; or their own senses will make an individual in denial reevaluate that world view. All events will simply be reinterpreted to fit into the belief system of that world–no matter how ridiculous, how distorted, or how psychotic that reinterpretation appears to others. Consistency, common sense, reality, and objective truth are unimportant and are easily discarded–as long as the world view remains intact.
You’re describing Barry, too.
I can understand that. It’s a disease. Don’t tell them; they’ll apply for disability and bloat the federal deficit even more. This is also what happened in Nazi Germany.
Model Rules of Professional Conduct for attorneys:
http://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/publications/model_rules_of_professional_conduct/model_rules_of_professional_conduct_table_of_contents.html
Rule 1.6 confidentiality of information
http://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/publications/model_rules_of_professional_conduct/rule_1_6_confidentiality_of_information.html
“Client-Lawyer Relationship
Rule 1.6 Confidentiality Of Information
(a) A lawyer shall not reveal information relating to the representation of a client unless the client gives informed consent, the disclosure is impliedly authorized in order to carry out the representation or the disclosure is permitted by paragraph (b).
(b) A lawyer may reveal information relating to the representation of a client to the extent the lawyer reasonably believes necessary:
(1) to prevent reasonably certain death or substantial bodily harm;
(2) to prevent the client from committing a crime or fraud that is reasonably certain to result in substantial injury to the financial interests or property of another and in furtherance of which the client has used or is using the lawyer’s services;
(3) to prevent, mitigate or rectify substantial injury to the financial interests or property of another that is reasonably certain to result or has resulted from the client’s commission of a crime or fraud in furtherance of which the client has used the lawyer’s services;
(4) to secure legal advice about the lawyer’s compliance with these Rules;
(5) to establish a claim or defense on behalf of the lawyer in a controversy between the lawyer and the client, to establish a defense to a criminal charge or civil claim against the lawyer based upon conduct in which the client was involved, or to respond to allegations in any proceeding concerning the lawyer’s representation of the client; or
(6) to comply with other law or a court order.”
Jablonski might have applied number 6 and presented the documents subpoenaed. Huh?
“Advocate
Rule 3.3 Candor Toward The Tribunal
(a) A lawyer shall not knowingly:
(1) make a false statement of fact or law to a tribunal or fail to correct a false statement of material fact or law previously made to the tribunal by the lawyer;
(2) fail to disclose to the tribunal legal authority in the controlling jurisdiction known to the lawyer to be directly adverse to the position of the client and not disclosed by opposing counsel; or
(3) offer evidence that the lawyer knows to be false. If a lawyer, the lawyer’s client, or a witness called by the lawyer, has offered material evidence and the lawyer comes to know of its falsity, the lawyer shall take reasonable remedial measures, including, if necessary, disclosure to the tribunal. A lawyer may refuse to offer evidence, other than the testimony of a defendant in a criminal matter, that the lawyer reasonably believes is false.
(b) A lawyer who represents a client in an adjudicative proceeding and who knows that a person intends to engage, is engaging or has engaged in criminal or fraudulent conduct related to the proceeding shall take reasonable remedial measures, including, if necessary, disclosure to the tribunal.
(c) The duties stated in paragraphs (a) and (b) continue to the conclusion of the proceeding, and apply even if compliance requires disclosure of information otherwise protected by Rule 1.6.
(d) In an ex parte proceeding, a lawyer shall inform the tribunal of all material facts known to the lawyer that will enable the tribunal to make an informed decision, whether or not the facts are adverse.”
The conclusion of the tribunal being when the boycott was announced? A way out for someone who has a DUTY but which, following such duty, may lead to death or bodily harm? A Barack and a Hard Place?
http://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/publications/model_rules_of_professional_conduct/rule_1_2_scope_of_representation_allocation_of_authority_between_client_lawyer.html
“(d) A lawyer shall not counsel a client to engage, or assist a client, in conduct that the lawyer knows is criminal or fraudulent, but a lawyer may discuss the legal consequences of any proposed course of conduct with a client and may counsel or assist a client to make a good faith effort to determine the validity, scope, meaning or application of the law.”
Isn’t condoning a “boycott” of a legal subpoena and a hearing at which client is expected to appear assisting the client in conduct that is criminal? Or is ignoring a subpoena not criminal? How about offering that allegedly fraudulent birth certificate as evidence?
“Transactions With Persons Other Than Clients
Rule 4.4 Respect For Rights Of Third Persons
(a) In representing a client, a lawyer shall not use means that have no substantial purpose other than to embarrass, delay, or burden a third person, or use methods of obtaining evidence that violate the legal rights of such a person.”
Orly.
“A lawyer shall not:
(a) unlawfully obstruct another party’ s access to evidence or unlawfully alter, destroy or conceal a document or other material having potential evidentiary value. A lawyer shall not counsel or assist another person to do any such act;
(b) falsify evidence, counsel or assist a witness to testify falsely, or offer an inducement to a witness that is prohibited by law;
(c) knowingly disobey an obligation under the rules of a tribunal except for an open refusal based on an assertion that no valid obligation exists;
(d) in pretrial procedure, make a frivolous discovery request or fail to make reasonably diligent effort to comply with a legally proper discovery request by an opposing party; …”
http://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/publications/model_rules_of_professional_conduct/rule_3_4_fairness_to_opposing_party_counsel.html
Is (c) the explanation for the letter to the Sec. of State? btw, if it’s true that Kemp has a certified copy of the birth certificate, where did he get it and if he has it, why doesn’t ORLY have one, too? If it came from Jablonski or any other of Obama’s lawyers, is it not then obstructing Orly’s right to the evidence, too?
There is a long discussion at ORYR about what the default judgement means. I was going to post some of the comments but I will post the link. I suppose we will learn what this means but after reading the discussion there I am afraid nothing will come of this. One thing is for sure. The legal system is too complicated to navigate for any of us. Should they have presented anything after the default judgement? I have no idea. Will it hurt them in the end? Not sure.
http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2012/01/georgia-ballot-hearing-judge-wanted-to.html?showComment=1327635816211#c1733009266169658163
tdr, please do not listen to the obots.
(d) Judgment Against the United States. A default judgment may be entered against the United States, its officers, or its agencies only if the claimant establishes a claim or right to relief by evidence that satisfies the court.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode28a/usc_sec_28a_00000055—-000-_combined.html
Thanks, I needed that.
tdr;
http://theobamafile.websitetoolbox.com/post/Live-thread-Ballot-challenge-hearings-(Georgia)-5679903?trail=75
http://puzo1.blogspot.com/
What happened at Obama-no-show trial
Sworn testimony reveals fake Social Security number, other gaps
January 26, 2012 Snips
Georgia citizens today delivered sworn testimony to a court that Barack Obama is slam-dunk disqualified from having his name on the 2012 presidential ballot in the state, because his father never was a U.S. citizen, which prevents him from qualifying as a “natural-born citizen” as the U.S. Constitution requires for a president.
The historic hearing was the first time that a court has accepted arguments on the merits of the controversy over Obama’s status. His critics say he never met the constitutional requirements to occupy the Oval Office, and the states and Congress failed in their obligations to make sure only a qualified president is inaugurated. His supporters, meanwhile, argue he won the 2008 election and therefore was “vetted” by America.
~
[Titus, a constitutional lawyer] told WND the fact that Obama’s father was a Kenyan citizen should be sufficient. “That is much stronger than the question of where he was born,” he said. “That alone is evidence. … They don’t need anything additional.”
Taitz argued multiple prongs of the case: that the birth certificate released by the White House is a forgery; that he probably has had several citizenships, such as when he was listed in Indonesia as an Indonesian citizen; and that he’s been known under the names Obama, Soetoro and Soebarkah.
http://www.wnd.com/2012/01/georgia-court-told-obama-slam-dunk-disqualified/
http://gulagbound.com/25486/courtroom-details-of-obamas-126-eligibility-hearing-georgia/
Reference to your posts:
Stories in the “Obama Birthplace Controversy” categoryObama is Born Again? Two Kenyan Hospitals Provide BC’s! Updated8
By We the People of the United States on Friday, January 27, 2012 7:46
Obama Eligibility Hearings to be Broadcast Thursday, Jan. 262
By We the People of the United States on Friday, January 27, 2012 7:46
Is Obama’s Goose Cooked? UPDATE #37
By We the People of the United States on Friday, January 27, 2012 7:46
http://beforeitsnews.com/stories/in/0000000000000145
http://www.whitehousedossier.com/2012/01/25/obama-ignore-order-atlanta-court/
This is a really interesting discussion regarding the name on a birth certificate when a child is adopted. The discussion is centered on Obama being born in Kenya and when adopted the Kenyan BC was amended to show his adopted name Soetoro. This is a new twist. Although we never knew where he was born, it was assumed that he had a COLB from Hawaii. Now we all think most likely his original BC was amended to show his adopted name but the kicker is that this would be a Kenyan BC….LOL. So he has a COLB for Hawaii which is allowed at the time but an original BC from Kenya with an amended BC to show the adopted name…where would this be filed? Kenya? Food for thought, anything is possible at this point.
Sorry, forgot to add the discussion is in the comment section.
Which Government Organization Was The First To Say, “Obama was born in Hawaii”?
I also recommend that you read this:
http://obamasgarden.wordpress.com/2011/03/03/proof-it-was-in-front-of-our-faces/
There is evidence of some kind of irregular “vital records” on file with the HDOH for Obama.
And we know that he was adopted. Not only by Lolo Soetoro but also by Hartford and Mary Black Eagle, Crow Reservation, Lodge Grass, Montana during an adoption ceremony in May 2008, when he was given the name “Awe Kooda Bilaxpak Kuxshish”.
http://wtpotus.wordpress.com/2009/11/13/awe-kooda-bilaxpak-kuxshish/
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/05/19/scenes-from-the-trail-obama-in-montana/
Right, we all thought that he did not release the Hawaiian LFBC because it has Soetoro as his Father. This could still be the case.
Admission of an adoption opens up another can of worms regarding citizenship. See he has change NBC definition in the eyes of the american people to be born in this country, i.e. a native citizen. But he has a problem because his BC may show an adoption by a foreigner. He cannot explain that away because if he cant prove citizenship he cant prove eligibility. He cooked his own goose.
Deleted as information was not pertinent – it discussed rules for Manila.
What country is this from, if it speaks about pesos?
Matsy Takabuki
According to USA Today, “[Matsy] Takabuki is credited with making the Bishop Estate a player on Wall Street.”
Moved to:
http://wtpotusresearchblog.wordpress.com/2009/08/20/hawaii/#comment-39696
OMG! ALFY!! TY, TY, TY……Excellent find!!
Moved to:
http://wtpotusresearchblog.wordpress.com/2009/08/20/hawaii/#comment-39696
Links please Alfy.
Alfy, please copy your comment re delayed birth etc., if you want to save it. It appears to apply to Manila or the Philipines and not to the USA. The comment will be removed.
http://www.hawaiibusiness.com/Hawaii-Business/June-2005/Part-3/
I am pretty sure it was in here. some other interesting ones as well. I didn’t know how much I had copied when I put that here. Just wanted to make sure I got CORZINE. I think this may be very signifigant. Don’t you guys. The fact that he’s tied with Goldman’s and HAWAII and the Scool, anything to do with Bishop Trust. It’s just all too weird ain’t it.
Read about the first Senator Fong too. He was the one that would have been on that immigration committee back in the day. The 1965 Immigrationa Act. All that.
Also did you see Lyndon Johnson and I forgot who else digging the first shovels full for the East West Center? It ‘s in that same thing with Corzine. (probably below here now)
Alfy, noticed Johnson…the thing is, you have more here than you realize. Good job!
I’ve got Georgia on my mind…
There’s a glaring ommission here:
There certainly is! When will Obama’s name be listed?
de lurking for an important linky.
http://www.thenationalpatriot.com/?p=4138#more-4138
Gotta check out that Jablonski connection Foxy…welcome here.
Yes, welcome lurker. And thanks for liking my posts.
This comment was great!
# southrngirl77 Says:
January 26th, 2012 at 1016am
Thank you Judge Malihi for agreeing to hear this case. Please show the country that this is a nation of LAWS and not of MEN. Obama has been lawless in so many, many things as President of the US. He should have to face the consequences. I’d suggest his next Term be served in prison.
I posted this on April 12, 2011:
Gitmo is to good for him. But he would be among his terrorist peers. They could all bow down together. Would Kenya even want him when they find he is corrupt? Will they remove the security surrounding Granny Sarah if he is removed from office?
Granny Sarh’s got a sack of tators for him to carry. Hurry on home Barry.
I just thought this was cool! In 1961 The surfing dude ,Duke Kuhanamoku was the sheriff in Honolulu.
http://www.gnosticliberationfront.com/bloodlines_of_the_illuminati.htm#2. The Bundy Bloodline This stuff is long , weird, but right on. I’ve done lots of checking myself. But just read this first paragraph. You don’t have to read all this stuff ,less you’re interested. It’s the first paragraph that grabbed me when I went to this bloodline. I thought about Obama and that Indian tribe ya’ll have brought up. I’d say just a wee bit relative maybe. What tribe was that Obama did rituals with and was inducted into their tribe? You guys posted it recently as today or yesterday.
OK, go down to the Bundy bloodline. It didn’t post for me the way I had it.
Click on Bundy bloodline and read the first paragraph.
And by the way this site in indespensible. I have come across things in here that now make perfect sense from the histories I’ve read….like Sun Yat Sen for instance and all the Triad secret societies. If you read enough of this and then go back and read Sun’s history and history about his brother,other people involved you can plainly see it’s these secret societies he is involved with and as far back as the dynasty before the Manchu(qing/quing)dynasty, and the tsing dynasty.This stuff will become very clear. It’s not conspiracy ,it’s real, just like Li KaSheng (billionaire today)goes to these same groups. I think Mark Ndesandjo’s wife fits right in. She has several names, several spellings just like all Chinese do. Anyway Read the first paragraph . And save this page, you’ll need it folks. Renee needs this page, many things will fall into place.
Does anyone have a list of the usurpers who have been removed from office in the United States?
no list redpill, but you can probably find many compiled lists of people in offices of the US. that have died, committed suicide or died unusual or mysterious circumstances. I’d say that’s kind of a form of US-urping.
But I know that I’ve seen writings about usurpers in the past who were exposed, removed from office, and all of their actions performed with that usurped authority were stricken from the record. I just can’t find where I saw that before… If anyone can help me find it, I’d be very appreciative.
I found part of it, and will post it as its own comment below…
I would help if I knew how to look for that. Sounds like a good piece to look at. Usurpers I mean.
I know this is old news, but I wanted to comment on it:
Reminds me of:
This is part of what I was looking for. But I seem to remember reading elsewhere about a Governor in the midwest who was found to be a usurper because he had not lived in the state long enough when he was elected, so when his usurpation was exposed, he was removed from office and his actions stricken from the record. I’m still looking for that, but here’s what I did find:
http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/2009/03/05/quo-warranto-legal-brief-part-2-the-federal-quo-warranto-statute-is-the-only-constitutional-means-of-removing-a-sitting-president-other-than-impeachment/
EXHIBIT 7: Analogous Congressional precedent – the voiding of “Mr. Shields” and “Mr. Galatin’s” US Senate elections after they were found to be usurpers who did not meet the qualifications for office enumerated in the Constitution.
While the Constitution doesn’t provide for impeachment of Senators or Representatives, it does provide for their “expulsion” by a vote of two thirds of all members of each body respectively. Article 1 Section 5 states:
Each House may determine the rules of its proceedings, punish its members for disorderly behavior, and, with the concurrence of two thirds, expel a member.
Like impeachment for a President, expulsion is sometimes erroneously assumed to be the only Constitutional process by which a Senator can be removed from office. But that’s not accurate. The Senate can remove a sitting Senator should he be found to be a usurper, just as they can remove a President found to be a usurper… and they have done so at least twice that I am aware of.
At Senate.gov, all fifteen of the Senators who have been removed by the Constitutionally enumerated process of expulsion are listed. Please notice that the list doesn’t include Senator Shields who was removed by Congress in 1849.
Senator Shields was removed by the Senate after it was discovered that he was an alien by birth, and that when he was elected in January 1849 – from the State of Illinois, to serve as a US Senator – he had not been a US citizen for the requisite nine years. However, he was not removed pursuant to the Article 1 section 5 expulsion power.
Instead, the Senate held that his election was entirely “void”. Senator Shields even offered his resignation to the Senate, but his resignation was not accepted by the Senate who held that since Shields was never qualified, he was never a Senator even though he had been sworn in and had been serving as a Senator until March 1849 when his election was completely made void and the seat declared vacant.
Since Shields it was discovered – after Shields had occupied the Senate seat – that he didn’t meet the Constitutional qualifications for the office of Senate, the Senate held that he was never an actual Senator and so his removal is not recorded as an expulsion.
Nowhere in the Constitution does it explicitly state that the Senate may remove a Senator by making a determination that his election was void and that he was a usurper. But that’s exactly what happened. If the power to remove a usurper wasn’t Constitutionally allowed, the Senate couldn’t have voided Mr. Shields election and vacated his Senate seat. But they did.
The Congressional Globe account of the Shields removal is preceded by an account of a similar precedent regarding a Mr. Albert Galatin. Mr. Galatin was elected to the US Senate from Pennsylvania in 1793 and it was later found that he had never become naturalized. The Senate again voided his election stating that the election wasn’t just “voidable”, but that since there was no way to cure the qualification defect… the election was completely “void”… it didn’t happen.
It’s important to note that the first quo warranto statue enacted by Congress didn’t take effect until 1787 [typo - that should read "1878"] so in 1793 and 1849 the Senate chose to void the elections of the two usurpers.
So here we have precedent for Congressional authority to remove Senators other than by expulsion. Usurpation of office resulted in elections being voided and the Senate record do not even record usurpers as having been members of the Senate. If Congress can remove a usurper to the Senate without expelling him, this provides evidence that Congress can remove a usurper to the Presidency without impeaching him.
It appears there is no possible separation of powers issue to confront. If a person occupying the Presidency is found to be a usurper, then his Presidency is a fiction to be voided in history and his name removed from the record books. A usurper isn’t allowed to have been said to be President. His occupation is a fiction.
In the Galatin case the Senate made clear that since there was no possible way the failure to qualify could be cured, then the election was a total fiction and is void, not voidable, but void, as if it never happened.
[Special thanks to reader Kamira, who discovered the Galatin information in the Congressional Globe. ]
Precedent for removing a usurper…
Here’s the other part of what I was looking for:
http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2011/04/new-ad-obama-not-born-in-hawaii-per.html
Thanks redpill. Great information. Shields is one of my names I found with Marina Shields Ndesandjo,Sheila shields. Funny, I think , isn’t that a name in Michelles’s family names?
How it’s being covered today:
http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/2012/01/26/1908472/judge-considers-whether-to-keep.html
“ATLANTA — A Georgia judge has heard arguments and is considering a complaint that seeks to keep President Barack Obama off the state’s ballot.
Obama’s local attorney Michael Jablonski boycotted Thursday’s hearing in Atlanta. Plaintiff’s attorneys urged Deputy Chief Judge Michael Malihi to hold him and the president in contempt. The judge didn’t set a timeline for a ruling.
About 100 people listened to hours of arguments from the attorneys, who included state Rep. Mark Hatfield, a Waycross Republican.
The complaint contends Obama isn’t a natural-born U.S. citizen and therefore should not be on the state’s ballot. Similar complaints have been filed in other states with no success.
Obama’s attorney argues that the president has long made his birth certificate and other documents proving his citizenship available to the public.
The Georgia complaint wants to keep Obama’s name off the state’s presidential primary ballot in March. …”
http://www.examiner.com/pop-culture-in-atlanta/pres-obama-and-the-georgia-motion-to-quash-birther-case-the-unbiased-facts
“The AJC reported on Jan. 26, 2012, however, that President Obama’s Atlanta attorney representing him in the case, Michael Jablonski, has said he will not be appearing at the hearing to be held at the Fulton County courthouse on Thursday.
This is essentially an attorney of law refusing to obey an order of the court. But it gets worse. According to Bill Rankin of the AJC, Pres. Obama’s White House press secretary says the president will be in Denver, Detroit and Las Vegas on Thursday. That insinuates the president plans to disregard the court’s order as well.
Should no president be compelled to attend a court hearing, as Pres. Obama’s motion to deny stated? During former President Richard Nixon’s era that was not the case. During former Pres. Bill Clinton’s era that was not the case either. Is that the case in 2012?
Possibly more importantly than the question of whether our country’s president has the right to disregard a legal court order requiring him to appear is another question: Can we rely on a Commander-in-Chief to lead us globally who is unable to form–or have his legal counsel form–a simple response that will “enlighten the court with legal authority”–so judges like Malihi can quash any such subpoena of him…legally?”
http://www.fitsnews.com/2012/01/27/is-georgia-now-birther-country/
“Georgia Deputy Chief Judge Michael Malihi convened a hearing on Thursday in Atlanta to hear the merits of a complaint regarding said eligibility. And while Obama was subpoenaed to attend the hearing, neither he nor his attorney, Michael Jablonski, showed up to give their side of the story.
Malihi has no authority in the case beyond making a recommendation to Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp – the public official statutorily charged with enforcing the integrity of the Georgia ballot.
Earlier this week Obama’s administration called on Kemp to “bring an end to this baseless, costly and unproductive hearing by withdrawing the original hearing request as improvidently issued,” however the Republican refused.
In fact, Kemp fired back a letter to Obama’s attorney warning him that he was ignoring the hearing “at (his) own peril.”
Pretty feisty talk over a “sideshow.”
So … what evidence did the birthers present at Malihi’s hearing? According to the mainstream press in Atlanta, they provided nothing to warrant even a hearing, let alone a recommendation to remove Obama’s name from the Georgia ballot.
“Nothing presented in the absurdist comedy of that courtroom would justify barring a sitting president of the United States from the Georgia ballot,” wrote Atlanta Journal-Constitution columnist Jay Bookman. “It was a farce.”
Of course the conservative website The American Thinker offered a more flattering recap of the proceedings (and there’s an even more detailed blow-by-blow of the hearing at The National Patriot, in case you’re interested).
What do we make of this drama?
Again, not much … however by refusing to appear at the hearing Obama’s attorneys did open the door to the possibility that Malihi could rule against them by default. More importantly, they once again stoked conspiracy theories regarding the validity of Obama’s birth certificate – giving those inclined to buy into “birtherism” a reason to believe that they have something to hide.
Do they?
We don’t think so … however the startling lack of national mainstream media coverage is likely to further fuel those theories.”
http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/11385388-president-obama-lawyer-no-show-may-face-sanctions
“The President was issued a subpoena to appear and to bring certain certified documents with him by attorneys representing eight plaintiffs. The plaintiffs hope that these documents would prove their contention that President Obama is not a natural born citizen and thus illegible to serve as the nation’s Commander-in-Chief.
Late yesterday, Mr. Jablonski notified Brian Kemp, Georgia’s Secretary of State, that he was suspending his representation as counsel to the President in this matter and would not be in attendance at this morning’s 9 a. m. hearing.
Moreover, Mr. Jablonski asked Secretary of State Kemp to halt the administrative proceedings and certify the Democratic Primary ballot as presented to him by the Democratic Party of Georgia.
Mr. Kemp informed Mr. Jablonski that if he did not attend the hearing he would do so at his and his client’s peril.”
That one seems to answer the question about whether Jablonski was Barry’s lawyer yesterday morning, but that wasn’t in the letter to Kemp, unless it was only implied. This person seems to have some inside knowledge. While this is accurate so far, the rest of the article goes on to ridicule the expert witnesses. The writer doesn’t exclude Orly, calling her a “Euro Asian.” WTF? Then the writer pointed out that the expert witnesses were white males who called Barry only “him” or “Obama.”
http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/01/georgia_ballot_challenge_obama_walks_on_by_comments.html#disqus_thread
“President Obama has a habit of turning his back and walking away from those with whom he disagrees, as recently discovered by Arizona Governor Jan Brewer. Professor John Lott, in an interview with Teri O’Brien, recalled similar experiences with Obama while at the University of Chicago. Ms. O’Brien commented to Professor Lott: “Gods don’t debate. They just issue decrees.”" EXCELLENT as usual from American Thinker. Do read the entire article.
http://blogs.ajc.com/jay-bookman-blog/2012/01/27/some-cold-water-on-overheated-birther-mania/
“Under state law, Deputy Chief Judge Michael Malihi’s job was to gather the evidence in the case through the hearing process and then issue a recommendation on whether Barack Obama’s name should remain on the Georgia ballot. His role in the process was to serve as a fact-finder rather than final arbiter.
According to the birther movement, Malihi told their lawyers during pre-hearing conference that he would enter a “default judgment” against Obama for refusing to appear and for refusing to even send lawyers to participate in the hearing, and that he would in fact recommend Obama’s removal.
I think that’s highly dubious. I know you will be shocked to hear this, but Orly Taitz and others have a record of claiming important legal victories that turn out to be inglorious defeats. Among other things, it keeps the contributions flowing in. Nothing presented in the absurdist comedy of that courtroom yesterday would justify barring a sitting president of the United States from the Georgia ballot. It was a farce. The birthers’ only chance is a recommendation from Malihi based not on their “evidence,” but on the refusal of the Obama camp to put up a defense against it. Until I sat in that courtroom yesterday, I wasn’t sure why the Obama legal team had chosen not to appear. But in hindsight, they were right. Showing up to refute the nonsense presented would have given the birther arguments a dignity they do not deserve. You cannot refute air and sheer fantasy. How many times can an opposing lawyer say, in so many words, “Your honor, this is just really and truly stupid”?
In either case, Malihi makes only a recommendation. The official decision on whether Obama will be listed on the ballot will be made by Secretary of State Brian Kemp, a Republican. … Regardless of what Malihi recommends, Kemp does not want to become the Republican secretary of state who ruled Barack Obama off the ballot in Georgia. Becoming a birther hero would not begin to compensate for the lasting infamy such a step would bring him, especially because such a ruling would be challenged in state or federal court and almost immediately overturned on any number of reasons. Kemp would then look like a fool and put an end to any further political ambitions he might have. I doubt that’s the course he will choose to take.
In the end, there is no chance whatsoever that Obama’s name will not be on the Georgia ballot come November.”
Oh, dear sir. That’s how a Secretary of State SHOULD make decisions about the law and the Constitution, huh? How history will see HIM? How his political future will play out? This is obviously an Alinsky-like shot across the bow. Let’s hope and pray that Mr. Kemp is as honorable and faithful to the LAW and the CONSTITUTION as Barry Soetoro OUGHT TO BE.
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/rachel-maddow-takes-on-georgia-courts-birther-case-against-obama-its-like-dividing-by-zero/
Last and worst: Madcow.
“On Thursday, MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow took on the “birther” movement, warning viewers not to Google “Obama born” lest they find themselves plummeting down an online rabbit hole of “crazy.” She pointed out several attempts in Alabama to take Barack Obama off the ballot in that state on the grounds that he’s not really a U.S. citizen.
In Georgia, meanwhile, a judge ordered President Obama to appear in an Atlanta court, where the plaintiffs were to be represented by none other than birther movement poster woman and “astonishing Russian dentist” Orly Taitz, as well as by State Representative Mark Hatfield
“You don’t want to dignify this nonsense,” said Maddow, describing the cases as “dividing by zero.”
President Obama did not, obviously, attend yesterday’s hearing in Atlanta, nor did his lawyer, who called the case “baseless” as well as a “sanctionable abuse of our legal process.” Georgia’s Secretary of State wrote back saying that if “you and your client choose to suspend your participation in the OSAH proceedings, please understand that you do so at your own peril.”
Maddow invited Georgia’s Democratic party chairman Mike Berlon to the show. “Do you think that Georgia Republicans realize,” Maddow asked him, “how — I’m sorry to use the phrase — but how backward and racist the birther trip seems?”
“I think the mainstream Republicans really do understand that it’s way beyond the pale,” said Berlon. “I think most Republicans in Georgia would just like to get on to addressing the issues.””
“Who Is Rachel Maddow?”
Where’s Bridgett, Here you go Bridgett, if you feel like slapping anybody, I’d love to see some big red handmarks on Rachels smirky face.
Thanks to all the patriots who let Carl know of their disdain at his dissing of Orly!
Orly posted this 3 minutes ago! No kidding Carl, we are in this together!
Carl Swensson, I accept your apology
January 27, 2012
this was posted by Carl Swenssen, chair of the Republican party of Clayton County GA and one of the plaintiffs for another attorney. I accept his apology
I must now make a Public apology for words I used, in a deragatory fashion, concerning Patriot Orly Taitz. We all make mistakes and that one was a real boner on my part. I do hope Orly will accept my apology as we are ALL in this fight together.
Leo Donofrio just keeps on Keeping On.
The Dirty “little” Secret Of The Natural Born Citizen Clause Revealed.
http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/2012/01/27/the-dirty-little-secret-of-the-natural-born-citizen-clause-revealed/#comment-20850
Georgia Ballot Challenge: Obama Walks On By
By Cindy Simpson and Alan P. Halbert
January 27, 2012 Snips
Two AT writers attended yesterday’s hearing in Georgia over President Obama’s eligibility for the presidential ballot. Cindy Simpson writes:
President Obama has a habit of turning his back and walking away from those with whom he disagrees, as recently discovered by Arizona Governor Jan Brewer. Professor John Lott, in an interview with Teri O’Brien, recalled similar experiences with Obama while at the University of Chicago.
Ms. O’Brien commented to Professor Lott: “Gods don’t debate. They just issue decrees.”
And apparently they also tend to place themselves above the law.
~
Regardless of the outcome in Georgia, it appears that Obama has openly shown his disregard for the laws of that state. According to Irion, Obama has also “decided that he is above the Courts, the law, and the Constitution. He has just indicated…that he is not subject to their authority. This is the true story from today, yet almost no one will report it.”
Obama has deliberately turned his back, and walked on by.
And most of the media has followed along right behind him.
Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/01/georgia_ballot_challenge_obama_walks_on_by.html#ixzz1kh7n9wVS
From above article also: Snips
Alan P. Halbert also attended the hearing and writes:
Many people who are unfamiliar with the Legal System do not know that the hearing or trial level is known as the “trier of the facts”. Only matters of Law can be appealed, not the facts that are developed, presented or testified to in any hearing or trial. Only when there is overwhelming evidence of malfeasance, gross perjury or the denial of the admissibility of probative evidence is a new trial or hearing ordered when a mistake of law has been found on appeal. As a practical matter appellate courts rarely order such remedy, when ordered it is believed that the defendant did not have his constitutional right to face his accusers at the trier of the facts level!
Since Obama and his attorney chose not to be present a defense and dispute the evidence that was presented, this can be taken as an admission that all of the evidence admitted were indeed facts and may not be disputed at a later time on appeal! The irony of this course is that Obama is declaring that the court has no Jurisdiction in this matter and will appeal as a matter of law though these damning facts may very well stand! It also gives the impression that he considers himself above the law — Georgia’s. We have a plethora of data points on the sequestering of all of Obama’s records and bona fides which he has spent millions of dollars to keep out the public’s hands for the last four years. After this hearing we may eventually know why.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/01/georgia_ballot_challenge_obama_walks_on_by.html#ixzz1kh8veqrD
Below is a summary list of the physical evidence introduced in yesterday’s hearing in GA.
P2. Affidavit of Senior Deportation Officer with the Department of Homeland Security John Sampson, showing that Obama is using Connecticut SSN 042-68-4425.
p3. Affidavit of Adobe Illustrator expert Felicito Papa, showing Obama’s alleged true and correct copy of his birth certificate to be a computer generated forgery.
P4. Affidavit of witness Linda Jordan, attesting to the fact, that SSN 042-68-4425, used by Obama, does not pass E-verify.
p6. Selective service certificate showing Obama using SSN 042-68-4425 and official printout from Social Security Number Verification Services, showing that 042-68-4425 was never issued to Barack Obama, attached e-mail from Colonel Gregory Hollister.
p7. Affidavit of Adobe Illustrator expert Felicito Papa, showing that Obama is using CT SSN 042-68-4425 on his 2009 tax returns.
p9. Hawaiian birth certificate 61-00637 of Susan Nordyke, born a few hours after Obama in Kapiolani Hospital, looks completely different from alleged copy of birth certificate of Obama
p10. Passport records of Stanley Ann Dunham Obama, mother of Barack Obama, showing Obama listed in her passport under the name Barack Obama Soebarkah, attached affidavit by Chris Strunk, recipient of Obama’s passport records under FOIA.
p11. Barack Obama’s Indonesian school registration card #203, date accepted January 1, 1968, released by the Associated Press in Indonesia, showing him using last name Soetoro and listing citizenship -Indonesia….
Amicus Brief. Mr. Leo Donofrio, Esq.
Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/01/georgia_ballot_challenge_obama_walks_on_by.html#ixzz1khB5PlFL
Bridgette, somewhere yesterday I posted Obama’s letter refusing to be availabale for the case, but the letter was in it’s intirety that sited the case law to support their case. It doen’t mean anything except it was a stall tactic or the judge can hold the case without them. I don’t know what all gives them the ablility,but they can and they did, with that letter being entered into the record, or a letter like it. I can’t remember where I posted it last night sometime,but the whole thing is there. Ya’ll are getting too technical. It won’t do yu lots of good til you see what the judge says. Things could go all sorts of ways, and you could guess from now till who knows when and when you finally hear something you will have to start again.
A favorite reader of ours sent this information to WTPOTUS. Anyone want to send this information to the 3 attorneys?
[This] answers the question, I think, about how could the court accept documents downloaded from the web, which they did:
Georgia Administrative law rules 8-1-2.18
(e) documentary evidence in the form of copies if the original is not readily available, if its use would unduly disrupt the records of the possessor of the original, or by agreement of the parties. Upon request, parties shall have an opportunity to compare the copy with the original. Documentary evidence may also be received in the form of excerpts, charts, or summaries when, in the discretion of the Administrative Law Judge, the use of the entire document would unnecessarily add to the record’s length. The entire document shall be made available for examination or copying, or both, by other parties at a reasonable time and place.
http://www.osah.ga.gov/documents/procedures/administrative-rules-osah.pdf
“Upon request, parties shall have an opportunity to compare the copy with the original.”
Yet according to the above section of Georgia’s Administrative Law rules – if Obama’s attorney presented a copy of Obama’s BC, then the Plaintiff’s can ask to see the original if I am understanding this correctly. The Letters Rogatory can be denied, but can another motion using the above Section of their law entitle the Plaintiffs to see the original of the copy of the BC that was presented to the judge but was not given to the court during the hearing?
Farrar|Welden|Swensson| Powell v. Obama – Order Denying Orly Taitz’s Letters Rogatory for Hawaii Documents Related to Obama
Order: The parties may file any post hearing pleadings by Wednesday, February 1, 2012. The Court will issue a recommendation to the Secretary of State shortly thereafter. The Court has reviewed the motion by Plaintiffs, Farrar, Lax, Judy, Malaren, and Roth, to direct and/or request the Court in Hawaii to order the release of certain Hawaii documents to the Plaintiffs. This Court lacks jurisdiction or authority to direct or request documents from Hawaii. Plaintiffs’ motion is denied.
SO ORDERED, this the 27th day of January, 2012.
Full Order below and here: http://www.scribd.com/doc/79613378/Farrar-Welden-Swensson-Powell-Order-Denying-Taitz-s-Letters-Rogatory-for-Hawaii-Documents-Related-to-Obama-1-27-2012
Did his lawyers give a copy of the birth certificate to the judge?
Yes, I am almost sure I saw it in one of Jablonski’s initial motions. Anyone else remember?
I searched everywhere looking for evidence that Jablonski submitted a BC or anything and couldn’t find a single thing.
~~~
Bridgette, Miri
someone says “hello” to you and send greetings.
http://weaselzippers.us/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Obama-Smile.jpg
Just thanks for that! Not what I was expecting!
I will search for it. I know it was in one of those darn scribd files. Probably on the thread Obama Must Resign or Prove his Eligibility for 2012 or another one.
Blech.
From Orly’s 1/27/12:
Judge Malihi shortened the time to file any post trial trial pleadings. He moved the date from February 5th to February 1. He will issue his ruling shortly thereafter. I believe, he will issue his ruling by the end of the day on February 1 or on February 2 at the latest. I believe Brian Kemp, the Secretary of State of GA, will announce on February 2 or 3rd whether Barack Hussein Obama’s name will be allowed on the ballot in the state of GA as an eligible Presidential candidate.
As far as being adopted, my daughter was adopted at a young baby age, 4 1/2 months old. We are listed as her parents, and she’s considered natural born. Which she was anyway, but what I’m saying is that with adoption, the people who adopted you are your parents, period.
Of course, I don’t know how it is with Barky.
I agree,Kittyc. you are her parents, but somewhere, there is a record of your childs recorded birth(most likely), even if there is a certificate with her name and you and your husband as the parents. There is usually the paper trail,closed to the public. You may not even have record of your child’s original bc. or you could. There are options, but somewhere there are documents,legal papers, ect. of what took place.
I found this in my notes and I didn’t post. But it was important. Why? Because the Defendant [Obama] didn’t stipulate he was a natural born citizen.
Defendants [Obama] Pretrial Order Submission
Page 4
(7) The following facts are stipulated (if any): Plaintiff did not ask counsel for the defendant about stipulations. In an effort to save time at any hearing, Defendant [Obama] offers the following stipulations of fact:
~
Page 5
18. The New Hampshire Ballot Law Commission unanimously ruled that Barack Obama should stay on the primary ballot.
19. Barack Obama was born in the State of Hawaii.
20. Barack Obama is not a naturalized citizen of the United States
(8) The following is a list of all exhibits that will be tendered at the hearing. Unless noted, the parties have stipulated as to the authenticity of the exhibits listed may be admitted without further proof of authenticity. All exhibits shall be marked by counsel prior to hearing.
~ A copy of the exhibits shall be given to the opposing party no less than 5 days before the hearing and to the Judge when first identified at the hearing.
Defendant has no plans to offer any exhibits at this time, but reserves the right to use exhibits after hearing the plaintiffs case in chief.
In an effort to expedite any hearing on this matter, defendant shows that it will object to P1, P2, P3, P4, P5, P6, P7, P8, P9, and P 10 on the ground that they constitute hearsay, among other objections specific to each document. Defendant will insist on the right to cross-examine each individual making a statement in the documents. Defendant will insist on a foundation establishing the authenticity of documents.
(10) The following are lists of witnesses and a brief description of each witness’ expected testimony and relation to the issues for determination:
Defendant may not have witnesses present.
The only potential witness is Michael Berlon. The substance of his testimony is set forth in the affidavit attached to the Motion to Dismiss.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/75913036/Farrar-v-Obama-Def-s-Pretrial-submission
Motion to Dismiss by Obama was filed on December 16, 2011.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/75905432/Farrar-et-al-v-Obama-et-al-
Motion-to-Dismiss-12-6-2011
****
Plaintiff’s (Orly)- Draft of Pre-Trial Order – Farrar, et al v Obama
P-1 Affidavit of Susan Daniels
P-2 Affidavit of John Sampson
P-3 Affidavit of Chito Papa
P-4 Selective Service Verification
P-5 Affidavit from Linda Jordan
P-6 Email from Colonel Gregory Hollister
P-7 Copies of purported Birth Certificates and related documents
P-8 Affidavit of Douglas Vogt
(9) The testimony of the following persons may be introduced by
depositions:
Plaintiffs are not aware of any testimony to be introduced by depositions, however,Plaintiff does intend to offer the affidavits and/or declarations of Susan Daniels,John Sampson, Chito Papa, Linda Jordan, Douglas Vogt and an email by GregoryHollister.
(10)(9) The testimony of the following persons may be introduced by depositions:
Plaintiffs are not aware of any testimony to be introduced by depositions, however,Plaintiff does intend to offer the affidavits and/or declarations of Susan Daniels,John Sampson, Chito Papa, Linda Jordan, Douglas Vogt and an email by Gregory Hollister
(10) The following are lists of witnesses and a brief description of each witness’expected testimony and relation to the issues for determination:
Susan Daniels (May offer affidavit from Daniels, a private investigator, regarding the results of various public records searches pertaining to candidate Obama’s birthcertificate and use of a Connecticut Social Security Number.)
John Sampson (May offer affidavit from Sampson regarding the candidate’s use of a Connecticut Social Security Number.)
Chito Papa (May offer affidavit from Papa regarding the “birth certificate”allegedly released online by candidate Obama with particular focus on the use of the“Adobe Illustrator” software Plaintiffs allege was used to fabricate such document.)
Linda Jordan (May offer affidavit from Jordan regarding inability to verify theidentity of the candidate through the “E-Verify” System.)
Gregory Hollister (May offer email from Hollister regarding inability to verify theidentity of the candidate through the Social Security Number Verification Systems.)
Douglas Vogt (May offer affidavit of Vogt as to the techniques and properties of “scanning” documents, in particular relating to the scanned “birth certificate” atissue in this case.)
Orly Taitz (May testify as to authenticity of certain documents she herself obtainedor created.)
http://www.scribd.com/doc/75229593/Georgia-Orly-Taitz-Draft-of-Pre-Trial-Order-Farrar-Et-Al-v-Obama-Et-Al
http://wtpotus.wordpress.com/2012/01/07/georgias-obama-ballot-challenge-lets-crow-about-it-open-thread/comment-page-2/#comment-71846
We discussed this issue on the other ballot issue thread. (The cursor won’t position correctly. The conversation begins on Jan. 18 at 2:47 p.m.)
Hayden gave some insight into stipulations and I thought it was very significant that Jablonski called Orly’s exhibits “hearsay” and then he turned around and referred to the “hearsay” birth certificates in his letter to the Sec. of State. But might they be acting tricksey? Let’s assume that he’d already resigned as Barry’s lawyer and was just “advising” Kemp of their decision to blow off, ignore, DISOBEY the order of the court by “boycotting” the hearing. So is this his clever way of getting Kemp to consider the “document”, while avoiding any of the illegalities associated with presenting something IN COURT that’s bogus?
If he entered it in a court then he could possibly lose his license to practice if he KNOWS it’s bogus, and also if that GA law would then allow Orly to get access to the ORIGINAL. For the hearing (before they disobeyed the LAW), Jablonski produced NO exhibits, so he didn’t even enter the bogus documents (although he may have referred to the “fact” that Barry posted them on the Internet and the LIE that the documents have been available to the public for years).
I just rechecked the text of Jablonski’s letter and he signed it AS attorney for Barry, so he WAS still Barry’s lawyer the night before the hearing. Did he later resign as Barry’s lawyer before the moment that the hearing convened, so that he could evade any responsibility for allowing a client to break the law? Since they’re filing ethics charges against Orly, she should return the favor.
I really do wish that our lawyers had clearly presented the FACT that NO DOCUMENT ON THE INTERNET IS A LEGAL DOCUMENT. That SHOULD BE obvious to Kemp, and actually the entire press corpse, too. (Not only is that a play on the way Barry says corps, but it’s accurate because the media IS deceased at this point, so biased and useless are they. Zombies, if nothing else. The Zombie media. Dead as a doornail and less useful.)
Judge Malihi asked Jablonski to cite law. He decided not to respond to the judge and instead cited laws to the Sec. of State, who isn’t the finder of fact in this case. WHY? Because they finally ran up against a judge who follows the law and expects them to, also. So they had to go back to the old Chicago Way. Intimidation.
Not only will the DemocRATS, the media, and many of the obot supporters of Barry in Atlanta be pressuring Kemp, so will the RINO establishment because they fear the media, too, and the race card. Possibly because they have annointed their own candidate with sketchy natural born citizenship issues. Maybe two candidates with the same problem, because they’re polling a Romney/Rubio ticket. This is 2008 redux.
And on that note, did you hear the Romney told Newt in the most recent debate that he’s not “anti-immigrant” because his father was born in Mexico? He went on to say his father “came to” this country. He called his father an immigrant! (Just like Barry FALSELY called his own father an immigrant when he NEVER planned to live in the USA.) Prevaricators upon prevaricators.
Still waiting for one honest person. Just one. It’s all it takes.
Well, if Jablonski signed the letter lawyer for BARRY, shouldn’t the state of Georgia , if they get to put Barry on the ballot……Shouldn’t the new ballot say Barry Obama for President? That’s not a nickname exactly is it? And a lawyer doesn’t usually refer to his client so nonchalantly on a legal document,….Maybe Jablonsky should have signed his letter,” Good Buddy Jablonsky”
I’m the one who called him Barry; his lawyer didn’t. My point was that when Jablonski wrote to Kemp, he did so still as Obama’s lawyer. He hadn’t resigned when he wrote the letter. So he’s in writing as complicit, at the very least, in Barry disobeying a subpoena that ordered him to show up at the hearing. In other words, Jablonski put it in writing to a Sec. of State that he assisted his client (sounds like encouraged him) to “boycott” a legal hearing with a duly constituted officer of the state of GA, so Jablonski seems to have helped his client break the law. Refer back to the code of ethics that the Bar Association follows, that Hayden linked to earlier. I would think that Orly can make a valid complaint against Jablonski with the Bar Association. What kind of lawyer writes letters for a client to notify someone OTHER THAN THE JUDGE that his client plans to DEFY the judge’s order? That is contempt of court and there’s no way around it. Are lawyers supposed to take part in such behavior on the part of THEIR CLIENTS? I would think that, rather than writing and delivering that letter to Kemp, a lawyer would have instead counseled his client to OBEY A VALID COURT ORDER. Obviously, Jablonski’s client must have, at some point, told him that he had no intention of complying with the order. That’s the point at which he should have advised his client otherwise and, if the client wouldn’t listen, then he should have resigned as his attorney. Right? Had he done so, there would have been no letter to Kemp.
Sorry, you said Barry, ..I wondered as I posted that comment if it was just you talking or the actual letter. I digress……but it wouldn’t be unusual for Jablonsky’s letter to go out to all parties involved…one to Orly,one to SeC. State, one to the Judge. This is just standard, nothing unusual there. And every piece of their litigation isn’t part of internet property.
“I think you ought to listen to Alinsky,” Romney told his white allies, according to T. George Harris’s 1968 book, “Romney’s Way.” “It seems to me that we are always talking to the same people. Maybe the time has come to hear new voices,” he said.
Romney says his father was his mentor. Does this explain “Romney Care” and the case for Mitts socialized medicine?
http://www.wnd.com/2012/01/romneys-dad-you-ought-to-listen-to-alinsky/
Follow the link…above………………… Read the full story>
Mittens likes socialized medicine, so Mittens is not for me.
Good catch harvey g.
Comment moved to:
http://wtpotusresearchblog.wordpress.com/2012/01/12/when-is-a-church-not-a-church/#comment-39714
..Romney ,no thank you,please.
Perhaps one should look at who introduced the healthcare legislation in DEMOCRATIC Massachusetts. It was not Mitt. The legislature was 85% democratic when it was passed. I went through the exercise 4 years ago and read through the bill and all of the vetoes that Mitt did on that legislation.
Were people aware of Alinsky and his connections in the 1960′s? I sincerely doubt it. Was Alinsky considered a real radical at that time or was he connected through the churches? What was the context that George said everyone should understand or read Alinsky..was it a warning to others? Alinsky was a “new” voice, I bet it was. Are there multiple instances of George meeting with radicals? Were all his associates and connections radicals like Obama’s? When did you learn about the Alinsky way?
Simple questions and the answers might be more revealing than finding one sentence that smears another. Character assassinations are out of control. We already have one person to compare others to: the usurping, lying, corrupt, radical, Marxist, communist, Muslim or black liberation, bowing Obama!
Photo Exclusive: When George Romney Met Saul Alinsky
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2837345/posts
http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/photo-exclusive-when-george-romney-met-saul-alins
There are six parts on the URL.
You Know You’ve Arrived When Your Videos Are Pirated– Atlanta Videos Surface- on Internet- Rebranded
January, at 08 : 49 AM
Imagine our surprise when we saw our Article II PAC video we financed, produced and livestreamed, of the Atlanta Obama eligibility hearings, magically appearing on Western Center for Journalism. It was the only such live production of the event. After doing one, now we know why. Lessons learned will be applied.
Our experts have been wrestling with the original from the camera, which is better than what ended up on the Internet, to edit, convert and hopefully improve the sound, ahem, quality before posting it.
I held up on posting this until some legalities were addressed. Since our intention was to make it available to the public as quickly and widely as possible, it is in the public’s best interest to leave it there for now.
It’s here:
http://www.westernjournalism.com/exclusive-video-of-georgia-obama-eligibility-hearing/
Action – Channel 2 News Atlanta
The Eligibility Hearing
Jan.26
http://bcove.me/0rqq5jgt
I thought this was a succinct news report.
gotta love this: “he didn’t see the need to show up” “baseless”.
oh, I guess we don’t need to show up in court when tethered to a subpeona because we feel it’s baseless…
Really?
reporter says: he was “requested” to appear
hah!
The Zombie press corpse will NOT report the truth because the TRUTH will hurt Barry across this land and they KNOW IT. The public would be outraged to learn that Barry set himself above the law and IGNORED, FLOUTED, DISOBEYED A COURT ORDER TO APPEAR. He didn’t even bother to respond to cite case law allowing a potus to refuse subpoenas. IF THE ENTIRE COUNTRY KNEW THAT BARRY BELIEVES HE DOESN’T HAVE TO FOLLOW THE SAME LAWS WE DO AND THAT HE DISRESPECTS OUR JUDICIAL SYSTEM, THEY WOULD BE OUTRAGED. SO THE ZOMBIE PRESS CORPSE SIMPLY DOESN’T TELL THE PUBLIC THE TRUTH ABOUT BARRY.
Stick a fork in them. The Walking Dead.
More Zombie Press coverage:
http://www2.wsav.com/news/2012/jan/28/judge-determining-if-obama-will-be-georgia-ballot-ar-3129514/
“They say he is using a forged birth certificate and stolen social security number, and is making a “joke” of the country.
Savannah Tea Party chairman Marolyn Overton says she won’t call the president a “liar” [Why not?] but she does still have questions.
“I think Obama should not be able to just kind of force his way through this, not produce any answers” explained Overton. “He’s stonewalling us. He has partially contributed to the controversy because he has not produced any papers that would prove or disprove anything to end the controversy. I would like to see the controversy end for our country, for President Obama so we can get on with what is important to this country, bring it back to its consitutional roots.”
The president of Georgia’s Democratic Party has no questions about the President’s citizenship. …”With the changes we’ve had in demographics it’s a pretty sound political strategy. They are doing their best to keep him off the ballot because there’s a pretty good chance we could win Georgia for the President in 2012
“There’s always a chance this judge could remove him from the ballot then the Secretary of State has to make tough decision about wether he wants to do that. If he does then we are ready. Our rebuttal as a party would be to go to federal Court and have him restored to the ballot we’re pretty confident that would happen.”
The President was subpoenaed for the hearing, but he didn’t show.
President Obama’s attorney wrote a letter to the state attorney general asking him to suspend the “baseless, costly and unproductive” hearing.
A judge still has to make a final decision on this case.”
Bring it on! Go ahead and take it to a federal court. Let’s see what they say when he can’t produce that REAL, 3-D, authentic, certified, delivered-by-the-state-of-Hawaii, ORIGINAL birth certificate. And when they subpoena the underlying paperwork, including a real version of that 1961 newspaper.
Despicable Huffpo: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/27/georgia-birther-hearing-obama_n_1236719.html
“Georgia Deputy Chief Judge Michael Malihi subpoenaed the president last week after refusing to hear his legal team’s challenge to the case, but neither Obama nor his lawyers ever planned on showing up.
Instead, Obama attorney Michael Jablonski wrote a letter to Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp, a Republican and the ultimate arbiter on the question of Obama’s ballot eligibility, telling him that he expected Kemp to throw out the “baseless, costly and unproductive” case.
Kemp responded, telling Obama’s counsel that they would skip the ballot hearing “at your own peril.”
The true nature of the “peril” Obama might face, however, began to play out during Thursday’s proceeding.
The complaints being presented at the hearing are based off various claims that Obama is either beholden to an 1875 Supreme Court ruling that determined “natural born citizens” were people born in the United States to parents who are both U.S. citizens, or that he is using fraudulent documents to prove his eligibility.
California attorney Orly Taitz, queen bee of the birthers and a proponent of the latter belief, stood before what Jay Bookman of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution described as “100 people … most of them older white Americans” to argue her plaintiff’s case.”
At least they’re finally reporting that he WAS subpoenaed but didn’t show up. In other words, he broke the law.
Even Clinton complied with subpoenas.
http://www.conservativeactionalerts.com/2012/01/georgia-judge-orders-obama-off-the-ballot/
These guys are premature in their announcement BUT I like how they recap the issue.
“OBAMA PRESIDENCY CHALLENGED IN GEORGIA COURT TODAY: INELIGIBILITY EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN TRIAL FOR THE FIRST TIME ~ STATE OF GEORGIA JANUARY 26, 2012″
Article & A Video Of Susan Daniels 1/26/2012
At The Court Hearing And Many Articles & Links & 4 Videos Here:
http://politicalvelcraft.org/2012/01/26/video-today-obama-on-trial-in-georgia-constitutional-eligibility-hearing-in-georgia/
* * * *
“OBAMA BLOCKED FROM REGISTERING FOR ALABAMA STATE PRIMARY UNTIL ELIGIBILITY IS VALIDATED BY COURT”
http://politicalvelcraft.org/2012/01/13/obama-blocked-from-registering-for-alabama-state-primary-until-eligibility-is-validated-by-court/
* * * *
“BREAKING => TWO NEW STATES MASSACHUSETTS AND OBAMA’S VERY OWN ILLINOIS CHALLENGE BARACK’S OFFICIAL BALLOT ELIGIBILITY”
http://politicalvelcraft.org/2012/01/21/breaking-two-new-states-massachusetts-and-obamas-very-own-illinois-challenge-barracks-official-ballot-eligibility/
Attorneys who argued in a Georgia court this week that Barack Obama isn’t eligible to be president say Administrative Law Judge Michael Malihi considered granting a default judgment before they even argued the case.
That presumably could have recommended that Obama failed to prove his eligibility and therefore should not be on the 2012 ballot, since he and his lawyer snubbed the hearing, for which Obama was subpoenaed.
But the attorneys argued against such an easy victory on the point of the single hearing, expressing instead their desire to get the evidence concerning Obama’s eligibility or lack of it in the record, so that it would be there should the case elevate to an appellate level.
http://www.wnd.com/2012/01/georgia-judge-considered-default-against-obama/
If this is already posted please delete
it bears repeating, harvey.
That’s what I said yesterday, that at least it’s on record.This is a very major move.Like I said no matter the judgement in this case the fact also,that on record the judges recommendations can be taken to mean further investigations,cases ,ect. It leaves it open. If the judges language has reccommendations, it will be another good step. I hope Manners video is right, that the judge is going to not allow B. on the ballot. Not exactly clear if that was 100% or just theorizing.
This is what I was afraid of–that the lawyers turned down the default judgment and RISKED the ruling going against them after they presented their evidence. Is this the correct interpretation? That’s not what we were led to believe at first. It sounded originally as if the judge agreed to a perfunctory introduction of evidence but not INSTEAD OF the default judgment. So they turned down a SURE WIN? I understand that if there’s an appeal, they have to stick with the evidence in the hearing, but what if there’s no judgment in favor of Orly? Can SHE appeal?
I was afraid that this is what happened. That Orly and the others turned down the summary judgment. So why the ABBREVIATED case instead of the 2 hours she was supposed to have?
What’s your take on this? Good or bad?
In this chess game, is this a good move in response to what Barry planned by DISOBEYING THE ORDER OF THE COURT? Did Barry plan to get a summary judgment if he couldn’t get that dismissal from the Sec. of State? If a default judgment, then he could appeal to a more friendly judge and there’d be no case to rebut from Orly? My head spins. No wonder I never became a lawyer. I could never play games like this.
“Hatfield and Irion told WND the expected process is that Malihi will make a decision over the course of the next week whether Obama, without appearing or being represented at the hearing, documented his eligibility to the court’s satisfaction.”
So it seems with no evidence at all from candidate Obama, there’s NO WAY the judge could decide that he “documented his eligibility” AT ALL. But what if Malihi decides otherwise?
As I said earlier, did Jablonski figure this end run around the judge and his letter to Kemp would get the bogus “document” into Kemp’s consideration for a decision, without it having to be sworn to as authentic in any court?
“Hatfield told WND that he specifically asked the judge at the end of the hearing to close the record, and he did that. Hatfield said that should make it clear that as the decision is made, and any challenges progress, no new information can be added to the evidence already submitted.
He said it’s very clear that the court had jurisdiction to take the case and accept evidence, since the ballot at issue is a ballot with which the state election in 2012 will be conducted.
And Hatfield noted that although Obama’s lawyer at least made a motion to quash the subpoena from Taitz for his testimony and records, Obama’s attorneys never even bothered to respond to his own motion to produce records. … He said he explained to the judge that awarding a default judgment actually would have been rewarding Obama for failing to respond to the subpoena.
The attorneys said they would be watching for Obama’s next move in the contest. And they said they believe there is a possibility that because of the dispute, Obama may end up not being on the Georgia ballot in the fall.”
Leave it to Leo!
““That President Obama’s attorneys didn’t show respect for the court, the citizens, the secretary of state, and the statutes of Georgia reveals the true character of the administration as being completely and utterly against state’s rights,” said attorney Leo Donofrio. “The federal government is growing out of control with every administration and this action today is a loud announcement that this administration is going to do what it likes, and you can imagine that their response to this judiciary would be exactly the same if this had been the U.S. Supreme Court. … “My personal belief is that if the U.S. Supreme Court held that he was ineligible, he might simply ignore the ruling, and test the will of the nation, just as he is testing the will of the state of Georgia,” he said.””
EXACTAMENTE, Leo. Exactamente.
““He’s thumbed his nose at the court. He’s thumbed his nose at the secretary of state in Georgia. He’s thumbed his nose at the people and said, ‘I’m above it all. I’m above the law,’” Kreep said.
Mario Apuzzo, who also shepherded a case to the Supreme Court, said Obama, by not showing, “actually failed to meet his burden of proof, to show that he is eligible and should be placed on the ballot.”
“For him to just ignore due process here is really telling a lot,” he said, noting, “This decision will have a ripple effect.”
“He’s not above the law. That’s a very important thing here. He’s a private person running for office, so he had no business not showing up. So the court can enter the judgment, and then the secretary of state does what he wants with it. And this will have a ripple effect for other secretaries of state, for other states, for the public. Also for any case that could be pending in the Supreme Court, where the issue of Mr. Obama’s eligibility is implicated,” he said.”
It COULD have a ripple effect, IF Kemp does what he should do. But will he? Maybe it’s time for patriotic citizens to flood KEMP’S office with OUR VOICES.
harvey g: I don’t know if this has been linked before and I don’t really care. IT NEEDS TO BE REPEATED AND SHOUTED FROM THE ROOFTOPS.
THIS MAN IS NOT ABOVE THE LAW. HE NEEDS TO BE IMPEACHED NOW, BECAUSE HE OBVIOUSLY HAS NO INTENTION TO HONOR ANY OATH HE TOOK TO THIS COUNTRY, ITS CONSTITUTION, OR ITS LAWS. WHICH IS WHY THE FOUNDERS REQUIRED A POTUS TO HAVE SOLE ALLEGIANCE TO, AND LOVE FOR, THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
http://invisibleingredient.blogspot.com/2012/01/obama-not-showing-up-to-court-in.html
This guy sums it up nicely I think. My feelings exactly
Is Obama planning an escape soon to some remote island ,first I guess after he’s extracted all his loot from who knows where all. You know it’s those robbers or criminals that say” just one more deal, one more heist and I’m through”, but they get caught in the most uncanny circumstances on that last criminal act gone Wrong. Wonder what it will be. I have a hunch something big is going down, we just can’t possibly know what it is. I feel there’s an ominus cloud on the horizon somwhere. Today it still looks bright and sunny, but I’m preparing for a big storm.
I am just beginning to understand the inplications of the default ruling. If the SOS follows the judge’s default decision, Georgia defaults to the republican candidate. All are saying that Georgia would go republican anyway but if the challenges continue it leaves him off other states. Is he really thinking that he will not attend any red state challenges and no one will report it? Curious. I expect that a blue state will ignore any recommendations regarding the ballot.
This was 2004 electoral votes .Lets see which states lost would do the most harm. I’ll post this here then I’ll go to a site that shows what’s happened since the census which has changed it some. Thought it wouldn’t hurt to coomare; 2004
States with the Most Electoral Votes
Rank State Electoral Votes
1. California 55
3. Texas 34
2. New York 31
4. Florida 27
5. Pennsylvania 21
6. Illinois 21
7. Ohio 20
8. Michigan 17
9. Georgia 15
9. New Jersey 15
9. North Carolina 15
Effective November 2004.
Read more: The Top Ten: States with the Most Electoral Votes http://www.infoplease.com/toptens/electoralvotes.html#ixzz1knJUtzNV
http://www.270towin.com/blog/2012-election/2012-electoral-votes-by-state
Now we can compare what states have been reapportioned . What states would effect or have an upset in 2012 election? What state could have a huge effect on the election for Barry. I tell you if Obama runs, then something big is going to happen because even the dems see he’s useless. I can’t see him winning with out vote rigging,or some big catastrophe that causes us to suspend elections. Course,lets suppose Obama pulls out with his tail still intact, and we get somebody lilke Hillary running against any one of the liberal Republican nominees (just liberals who have been put thru the rinse cycle). We’re going to get more of the same ,only we’ll just have to refocus a bit to see the same crap for four more years.
Don’t forget that DemocRAT/Soros effort in many states where they agreed that no matter how their state votes turned out, their electors would ALL vote for the winner of the nationwide POPULAR vote, so long as their state laws didn’t require them to vote the way their state voters said. They want to do away with the electoral college so basically all they need to win are CA, TX, NY, and other population-heavy states. This project of theirs is the next best thing. It should be unconstitutional. But it may not be. It certainly goes against the will of the people, which DemocRATS claim only they respect.
You’re right Miri, forgot the whole Soros effort thingy. Maybe California will get outed from the union by election time and Soros can rule there as leader of a new drug infested country. Everybody at some point is going to get tired of their TAX burden they’re heaping on Americans. No , I’m kidding , California is still a beautiful state with some real people. But you could right, California and New york would probably go Obama anyway with electoral or popular vote. Calilfornia would be the upsetting factor. Wonder if California will figure out before election time that its the environmentalist,watermongers,and subsidies,union from the libs that are ruining their state? All it would take is to lose one of these and upset the apple cart. I can’t imagine NC. going for him again.
Actually I am over my head on which states would disrupt the democratic sway. I should be looking into it . It would help broaden my scope as to what could really happen.This lawsuit stuff for sure is going to effect this race though…could be good or bad, depending on the coverage. Keep up your blogs like this will surely help.They’ed love to shut your Mouth and people like you guys.
sorry about my spelling that word was ‘ Compare ‘ the electoral votes. Althought I like that new word ‘coomare’. Sorry really
What I am thinking is even though Obama is president today and for the rest of the year. However, this upcoming Nov presidential election is an entirely new and different ball game. Obama is running as any other private citizen candidate, Santorum, Romney, Paul, or Gingrich. My question is this. Was the Georgia Court Subpoena issued for Private Citizen(?) Obama or for CIC Obama? Can Obama invoke executive privilege or is he in this case just another peon like myself who could have the devil (or whatever)fined out of him? I think this is going to get plenty hairy before its over with.
It’s already been said that he was being challenged as a private citizen. We can tell because the lawyer was NOT an administration lawyer. Not the WH lawyer. It was a personal lawyer, just like he sent his personal lawyer Corley to Hawaii to get those records. He’s a private citizen in this case. No better than any other citizen of the USA who MUST OBEY ITS LAWS. No matter what he thinks about himself as messiah. No way he can invoke executive privilege. IMHO. Although he must have invoked something to somehow get the Dept. of State to REDACT LOLO’s INS records.
What really irks me is people like Boener who won’t EvEN go looking into his records. It tells me, everybody there knows something. That the CIA /FBI ATTY. General (course know Holder), everybody is cover his A–. This should let us know that the Republican/Democrat thing is a hoax for us little people so we sleep better at night,thinking somebody is looking out for us. Everybody is manning the ship right now for the elite handful of Puppetmasters and we’re at their mercy.
Public record for those court records is still public record no matter what the white house puts in their files about this case.Like you said, he was supenaed as a private citizen running for public office. These records cannot be expunged. And if any real journalist wants to make a case that he shows a stolen fraudulent social security number they can sure do it all over the news if they want to. Just let em try to go after someone if they splash that across the headlines. I wish some journalist would do it, say that there are questions about OBAMA is Questioned about HIS stolen SOCIAL SECURITY #. They will not be breaking the law to report it.
I guess they value their lives more than a Pulitzer prize. Zombie Press.
I’m really not too crazey about any of the choices among the candidates running for prez today. May the best man win. Not the best at debating but the best for the United States of America. But here is an opportunity if the little round-man, Newt, should win. We could all apply for Moon Duty and let the Obama’s and OWSers have this place and they would all eventually starve and die out. Then we could return and sweep em all up and start all over again. Sort of like a new Nina, Pinta, and Santa Marie. Oh and by the way. There is another opposing theory to the Big Bang, its called “The Big Bounce”. In short, this has all happened befor. :0 :0
.
I like it. It sounds like a plan. Meet you on the Moon, harvey g.
“they would all eventually starve and die out.” Ain’t that the truth? All takers and no doers. Good one!
“Fly me to the moon” as it was crooned has more meaning now. Newt should use it as background music. I get where he is coming from …but he took the thought way, way out there. A colony of moon walkers in our lifetime? Well, they already have some people that live up there for awhile, but the trip cost is very expensive! That Obama put a damper on the whole space odyssey and exploration should have made everyone concerned. Great products and experiments have come because of the space program. Then Obama comes along and says he’d rather us go green. The whole climate scam and green scam is being shown as the companies fail one by one. Where is the money?
I think we are at 14 failed companies that this administration has backed. We needed to add that battery company to the list. I want all of them investigated as to where their money went. There must be common links or fake companies that were paid. Think about it…14 companies are now defunct! In 3 years…14 so far!
Yep. I agree. Newt’s “moon Colony” is a little far out, especially in the space of time he inferred. I like his idea about the incentatives to award prizes for private ventures in space and research. Contrast that to the “Bail Outs Programs” of the current administration. That is where America is at her very best, FREE ENTERPRISE and the money and technology will follow. God! Sometimes i sure wish it was 40-50 years ago but then I think, I don’t want to go through all this “stuff” again. But as the “Theory of the Big Bounce” suggests–everything that is- has happened before, and just look–WE HAVE SURVIVED!! LOL! But I don’t think we are so lucky to get out of this with only losing 14 companies. I am hoping that all YOU YOUNGER PEOPLE don’t lose YOUR NATION and live free long enough to enjoy it as I have.
I meant to say “and,that you all live free long enough to enjoy it as I have…………………”
I gotta learn this word press or quit trying to comment–sorry
A challenge would have to be mounted in a swing state, FL, OH, PA, i forget the rest. We need to determine how many electoral votes are required to win and then mount challenges in those swing states to shift the balance.
The Obama Ballot Challenge 2012 (link in Blog roll) is helping citizens do just that. There are many challenges going on now that we just have not heard about. Multiple challenges in states by ordinary citizens is one way Obama’s illegality of being on the ballot as a candidate is exposing Obama. They show the targeted states at that site. Is it working or will it, we will see.
One way to help is to keep up with the challenges in your state and to post the news blips about them. Citizens are on the front lines with getting news out that the MSM won’t report, but local papers might cover. Post the news on several sites. Expose Obama in 2012. Get involved somehow…everyone can do something!
Our most current example – Georgia. MSM not reporting! How long can they remain silent if this starts occurring all over the country. Even if it fails, report it.
Let’s see what happens come Monday. Not making the weekend news is sort of interesting. Wonder if the news has been wrestling with the story or if theyve got muzzles on. Just hope this doesn’t backfire someway .
Changing the subject sort of, I haven’t seen much news on Wallstreeters either lately. Have ya’ll?
It’s about time some of those wallstreet homeless people to get homesick and wonder what they’ve been doing with their lives, and go home. Or better yet, that they move on to the whitehouse lawn and camp out. Michelle could use some help in her wedgie garden I’m sure. They could start a commune .Couldn’t it be Lovely?
Does anybody have some sort of list of the states where there are challenges?
Thats what I was thinking , which states might get challenge on his credentials, is what I had initially posted the electoral states’ numbers for thought. I meant to comment on that but I was too busy getting caught up in my own rant. What state next,with a high electoral vote count that the Dems would be counting on, could have a lawsuit challenge? That’s what I was thinking about when I posted earlier. That’s why Florida would be a nice state for a journalist with some balls to just put out a few articles for all those nice retired people on SoCial Security; a story of how their own president doesn’t APPEAR to have a real social security number, or why is he able to get away with using someone elses ss# that belonged to an OLD dead guy from 1890. How dare he take advantage of people like that. That might have some influence on Florida voters.
WAIT A MINUTE! Is that RaCist to challenge somebody about their fake social Security # ? How do you reckon they can spin that one into a racist cause?
Below is a “place holder” video of the complete January 26, 2012 Georgia State Administrative Hearing. Article II Super PAC will be replacing this video with an enhanced audio quality version in the next few days.
http://www.art2superpac.com/
Is President Obama’s Presidency Unconstitutional?
Nathaniel Hamrick
Jan.30
Judges are now looking closer at Malihi and the Georgia case, as they have long been told that their public lives would be ruined if they ever question the President’s eligibility. [What judges? Where did the writer get this information?]
http://www.policymic.com/articles/3654/is-president-obama-s-presidency-unconstitutional/category_list
This article is also saying that judges have been threatened.
WEBCommentary Contributor
Author: Sher Zieve
Date: January 29, 2012 Snip
UPDATE: Obama Georgia Ballot Eligibility Hearing
Note: Many judges and their families appear to have been under multiple threats from the Obama administration, if they failed to follow through with Mr. Obama‘s orders.
As an additional side note, a recent investigation uncovered numerous threats to Glenn Beck’s staff from one of Mr. Obama’s mentors and frequent Obama White House visitor multi-billionaire George Soros. Even after Beck left Fox News to pursue his own Internet network and other ventures, President of America’s Survival, Inc. (ASI), a public policy organization, Cliff Kincaid reports that the Soros people are still after Beck for exposing the Soros and Soros-Obama schemes to destroy our country. Recently, Beck’s staff has come under fire from the Soros syndicate and the life of at least one investigative reporter on Beck’s staff and her child have been threatened.
These “New World Order” people play for keeps and will apparently do anything and everything to shut down any and all truth in their determination–as Soros alludes to–to rule the world. We can only pray that Judge Malihi and the State of Georgia will remain strong and courageous in their efforts to uphold the truth. Please remember: “If we refuse to rise up and fight, we’ll be forced to lie down and die.”
http://www.webcommentary.com/php/ShowArticle.php?id=zieves&date=120129
Glenn Beck Staff Threatened by Soros Operatives:
http://chasvoice.blogspot.com/2012/01/glenn-beck-staff-threatened-by-soros.html#axzz1kqmXqKrR