Have attorneys for Barack Obama’s 2012 re-election campaign given “birthers” a foot in the door to challenge Obama’s eligibility to be President in of all places Georgia? It might look that way at first glance, but one has to consider what self proclaimed queen of the “birther” movement, Orly Taitz filed with Judge Michael Malihi during a hearing before the Georgia Office of State Administrative Hearings today in Atlanta.
It is extremely important to point out that what is taking place in Georgia has NO effect on Obama’s currently holding the office of President, as the challenges in Georgia are made by Georgia voters who challenge Obama’s eligibility to be on Georgia’s 2012 primary ballot.
In Georgia, a state law requires “every candidate for federal” office who is certified by the state executive committees of a political party or who files a notice of candidacy “shall meet the constitutional and statutory qualifications for holding the office being sought.”
State law also grants the secretary of state and any “elector who is eligible to vote for a candidate” in the state the authority to raise a challenge to a candidate’s qualifications, the judge determined.
Citizens bringing the complaints include David Farrar, Leah Lax, Thomas Malaren and Laurie Roth, represented by California attorney Orly Taitz, who has handled numerous cases concerning Obama’s eligibility; David Weldon represented by attorney Van R. Irion of Liberty Legal Foundation; and Carl Swensson and Kevin Richard Powell, represented by J. Mark Hatfield. Cody Judy is raising a challenge because he also wants to be on the ballot.
read more HERE
We question what Orly Taitz filed with the court today for a reason, Ms. Taitz has a long documented history of filing fraudulent documents with both Federal and State Courts in her efforts to prove Barack Obama is not a “natural born citizen” as defined by the US Constitution. Ms. Taitz had documents filed with the United States District Court in the District of Columbia stricken from the record by the Courts Chief Judge. The Judge pointed out the documents filed by Taitz clearly were obtained through fraudulent and unlawful means.
US District Court Judge Calls Taitz On Fraudulently Obtained Documents
If Taitz went into the Georgia Administrative Hearings court and filed fraudulent documents representing them to be authentic as she has done in multiple courts across the country then she will have effectively destroyed any chance at all the citizens of Georgia would have had to challenge Obama’s eligibility to be on the Georgia ballot. Yet for now it appears that the actions of the Obama campaign attorney has given the citizens of Georgia a slim chance of making their case. Georgia Secretary of State Brian P. Kemp (left), notified Obama for America attorney refusal of the Obama campaign to participate in the hearing set before Judge Michael Malihi of the Georgia state Office of State Administrative Hearings today would be at Obama’s own peril.
Obama attorney Michael Jablonski sent a letter to Secretary of State Brian P. Kemp on January 25, 2012 demanding the SOS withdraw its original referral to the Office of State Administrative Hearings of challenges filed by a number of Georgia citizens challenging Obama’s eligibility to be on the Georgia ballot. In the letter Mr. Jablonski told the SOS the State of Georgia basically had no authority to determine Barack Obama’s eligibility to be on the states ballot.
January 25, 2012
Hon. Brian P. Kemp Georgia Secretary of State 214 State Capitol
Atlanta, Georgia 30334via email to Vincent R. Russo Jr., Esq.
Re: Georgia Presidential Preference Primary Hearings
Dear Secretary Kemp:
This is to advise you of serious problems that have developed in the conduct of the hearings pending before the Office of State Administrative Hearings. At issue in these hearings are challenges that allege that President Obama is not eligible to hold or run for re-election to his office, on the now wholly discredited theory that he does not meet the citizenship requirements. As you know, such allegations have been the subject of numerous judicial proceedings around the country, all of which have concluded that they were baseless and, in some instances – including in the State of Georgia - that those bringing the challenges have engaged in sanctionable abuse of our legal process.
Nonetheless, the Administrative Law Judge has exercised no control whatsoever over this proceeding, and it threatens to degenerate into a pure forum for political posturing to the detriment of the reputation of the State and your Office. Rather than bring this matter to a rapid conclusion, the ALJ has insisted on agreeing to a day of hearings, and on the full participation of the President in his capacity as a candidate. Only last week, he denied a Motion to Quash a subpoena he approved on the request of plaintiff’s counsel for the personal appearance of the President at the hearing, now scheduled for January 26.
For these reasons, and as discussed briefly below, you should bring an end to this baseless, costly and unproductive hearing by withdrawing the original hearing request as improvidently issued.
It is well established that there is no legitimate issue here—a conclusion validated time and again by courts around the country. The State of Hawaii produced official records documenting birth there; the President made documents available to the general public by placing them on his website. “Under the United States Constitution, a public record of a state is required to be given ‘full faith and credit’ by all other states in the country. Even if a state were to require its election officials for the first time ever to receive a ‘birth certificate’ as a requirement for a federal candidate’s ballot placement, a document certified by another state, such as a ‘short form’ birth certificate, or the certified long form, would be required to be accepted by all states under the ‘full faith and credit’ clause of the United States Constitution.” Maskell, “Qualifications for President and the “Natural Born” Citizenship Eligibility Requirement,” Congressional Research Service (November 14, 2011), p.41.
Nonetheless, the ALJ has decided, for whatever reason, to lend assistance through his office—and by extension, yours—to the political and legally groundless tactics of the plaintiffs. One of the attorneys for the plaintiffs has downloaded form subpoenas which she tried to serve around the country. Plaintiff’s attorney sent subpoenas seeking to force attendance by an office machine salesman in Seattle; seeking to force the United States Attorney to bring an unnamed “Custodian of Records Department of Homeland Security” to attend the hearing with immunization records; and asking the same U.S. Attorney to bring the same records allegedly possessed by “Custodian of Records of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.” She served subpoenas attempting to compel the production of documents and the attendance of Susan Daniels and John Daniels, both apparently out of state witnesses, regarding Social Security records. She is seeking to compel the Director of Health for the State of Hawaii to bring to Atlanta the “original typewritten 1961 birth certificate #10641 for Barack Obama, II, issued 08.08.1961 by Dr. David Sinclair…,” even though Hawaii courts had dismissed with prejudice the last attempt to force release of confidential records on November 9, 2011. Taitz v. Fuddy, CA No. 11-1-1731-08 RAN.
In Rhodes v. McDonald, 670 F. Supp. 2d 1363, 1365 (USDC MD GA, 2009), Judge Clay Land wrote this of plaintiff’s attorney:
When a lawyer files complaints and motions without a reasonable basis for believing that they are supported by existing law or a modification or extension of existing law, that lawyer abuses her privilege to practice law. When a lawyer uses the courts as a platform for political agenda disconnected from any legitimate legal cause of action, that lawyer abuses her privilege to practice law….
As a national leader in the so-called ‘birther movement,’ Plaintiff’s counsel has attempted to use litigation to provide the ‘legal foundation’ for her political agenda. She seeks to use the Court’s power to compel discovery in her efforts force the President to produce a ‘birth certificate’ that is satisfactory to herself and her followers.” 670 F. Supp. 2d at 1366.
All issues were presented to your hearing officer—the clear-cut decision to be on the merits, and the flagrantly unethical and unprofessional conduct of counsel—and he has allowed the plaintiffs’ counsel to run amok. He has not even addressed these issues—choosing to ignore them. Perhaps he is aware that there is no credible response; perhaps he appreciates that the very demand made of his office—that it address constitutional issues—is by law not within its authority. See, for example, Flint River Mills v. Henry, 234 Ga. 385, 216 S.E.2d 895 (1975); Ga. Comp. R. & Regs. r. 616-1-2-.22(3).
The Secretary of State should withdraw the hearing request as being improvidently issued. A referring agency may withdraw the request at any time. Ga. Comp. R. & Regs. r. 616-1-2-.17(1). Indeed, regardless of the collapse of proceedings before the ALJ, the original hearing request was defective as a matter of law. Terry v. Handel, 08cv158774S (Superior Court Fulton County, 2008), appeal dismissed, No. S09D0284 (Ga. Supreme Court), reconsideration denied, No. S09A1373. (“The Secretary of State of Georgia is not given any authority that is discretionary nor any that is mandatory to refuse to allow someone to be listed as a candidate for President by a political party because she believes that the candidate might not be qualified.”) Similarly, no law gives the Secretary of State authority to determine the qualifications of someone named by a political party to be on the Presidential Preference Primary ballot. Your duty is determined by the statutory requirement that the Executive Committee of a political party name presidential preference primary candidates. O.C.G.A. § 21-2-193. Consequently, the attempt to hold hearings on qualifications which you may not enforce is ultra vires.
We await your taking the requested action, and as we do so, we will, of course, suspend further participation in these proceedings, including the hearing scheduled for January 26.
Very truly yours,
MICHAEL JABLONSKI Georgia State Bar Number 385850 Attorney for President Barack Obama cc: Hon. Michael Malihi (c/o Kim Beal (kbeal@osah.ga.gov)) Van Irion, Esq. (van@libertylegalfoundation.org) Orly Taitz, Esq. (orly.taitz@gmail.com) Mark Hatfield, Esq. (mhatfield@wayxcable.com) Vincent R. Russo Jr., Esq. (vrusso@sos.ga.gov) Stefan Ritter, Esq. (sritter@law.ga.gov) Ann Brumbaugh, Esq. (abrumbaugh@law.ga.gov) Darcy Coty, Esq. (darcy.coty@usdoj.gov) Andrew B. Flake, Esq. (andrew.flake@agg.com)
Georgia Secretary of State Kemp responded to Mr. Jablonski yesterday with the following:
VIA REGULAR MAIL & EMAIL
Michael Jablonski
260 Brighton Road, NE
Atlanta, Georgia 30309
michael.jablonski@comcast.comRE: Georgia Presidential Preference Primary Hearings
Dear Mr. Jablonski:
I received your letter expressing your concerns with the manner in which the Office of State Administrative Hearings (“OSAH”) has handled the candidate challenges involving your client and advising me that you and your client will “suspend” participation in the administrative proceeding. While I regret that you do not feel that the proceedings are appropriate, my referral of this matter to an administrative law judge at OSAH was in keeping with Georgia law, and specifically O.C.G.A. § 21-2-5.
As you are aware, OSAH Rule 616-1-2-.17 cited in your letter only applies to parties to a hearing. As the referring agency, the Secretary of State’s Office is not a party to the candidate challenge hearings scheduled for tomorrow. To the extent a request to withdraw the case referral is procedurally available, I do not believe such a request would be judicious given the hearing is set for tomorrow morning.
In following the procedures set forth in the Georgia Election Code, I expect the administrative law judge to report his findings to me after his full consideration of the evidence and law. Upon receipt of the report, I will fully and fairly review the entire record and initial decision of the administrative law judge. Anything you and your client place in the record in response to the challenge will be beneficial to my review of the initial decision; however, if you and your client choose to suspend your participation in the OSAH proceedings, please understand that you do so at your own peril.
I certainly appreciate you contacting me about your concerns, and thank you for your attention to this
matter.Sincerely,
Brian P. Kemp
Georgia Secretary of State
It is important to remind readers we have always held the position that a “definition” as to the “natural born citizen” phrase of the US Constitution is going to have to be made sooner or later. It will come up in the future and in some circles has already been mention as the reason why Sen. Marco Rubio will not be able to run for President. Perhaps the Georgia citizens who brought the challenge over Obama’s eligibility have been able to keep Taitz in line but from personal experiences of some here at LS News we seriously doubt it.
Several of the attorneys introduced passages from Obama’s own writings that Barack Obama Sr. was his father. They then introduced evidence that the man never was a U.S. citizen, that he was a citizen of Kenya at the time of junior’s birth and was therefore a subject of the United Kingdom.
His father’s citizenship, they said, precludes him from serving as president, since the Founders required that officer to be a “natural-born citizen,” not just a “citizen.”
The term is not defined in the Constitution, but evidence introduced included a passage from a 1975 Supreme Court opinion that states:”The Constitution does not in words say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.”
Weldon explained in his presentation that the 14th Amendment granting citizenship did not redefine Article 2, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution, which includes the requirement for a president to be a “natural-born citizen.”
The attorney argued also that another later court case referenced citizenship in the dicta, not the central holding in the case, and thus was not controlling.
Many of Irion’s arguments were echoed by Hatfield, a strategy that at least one constitutional expert, Herb Titus, said was sound.
Titus taught constitutional law, common law, and other subjects for nearly 30 years at five different American Bar Association-approved law schools. From 1986 to 1993, he served as the founding dean of the College of Law and Government in Regent University in Virginia Beach, Va. Prior to his academic career, he served as a trial attorney and a special assistant United States attorney with the United States Department of Justice in Washington, D.C., and Kansas City, Mo.
He 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.”
While some attorneys in the case presented exactly what the Court must consider in defining “natural born citizen,” the same report of the testimony given in the Atlanta hearing makes clear Taitz has continued to present documents and illegally obtained e Verify documents which have been thrown out of every other Court Taitz has brought complaints in challenging Obama’s eligibility to be present.
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 citizenship’s, 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.
She also had a private investigator, Susan Daniels, testify that it appears Obama is using a fraudulent Social Security number.
Regardless of what any ones personal beliefs are on the eligibility issue as to Barack Obama being President, one thing is certain, the United States Supreme Court or Congress is going to eventually have to define the meaning of “natural born citizen” as it relates to the present time.
I enjoyed Obama being identified as an African American on his "birth certificate" . When that term was not in use for at least 6 years after his birth. They were listed as negro.
I'd like to read this article. Unfortunately the combination of the stupid font you used and my poor eyesight has made that impossible. Try focusing on the substance of your words and less on the fancy presentation otherwise it's just a waste of time.
The present administration and Democratic party have been successful in their lies, deceit and destruction of the USA. This aspect demonstrates that the US Government is not in control. The elites are in control. Read "Unintended Consequences" to learn the solution.
IF YOU HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE, THEN WHY ARE YOU HIDING IT?????
GIVE IT UP OBAMA. IN YOUR OWN WORDS YOU SAID THAT YOUR FATHER WAS A CITIZEN OF KENYA. THAT IN IT'S SELF DISQUALIFIES YOU TO BE THE PRESIDENT. AND WHY IN GODS NAME ARE YOU USING TAX PAYER MONEY TO DEFEND YOUR LFBC? AND WHY ARE YOU SPENDING SO MUCH TIME IN CONCEALING YOUR SCHOOL RECORDS IF IN FACT YOU HAD ATTENDED THESE SCHOOLS. GIVE IT UP. I LOOKED AT THE LFBC THAT WAS POSTED ON THE WEB SITE. THEY MADE ONE BIG MISTAKE, THEY POSTED THE FILE IN A PDF FORMAT. WITH IN TWENTY FOUR HOURS OF IT'S POSTING, THEY TOOK IT DOWN AND CHANGED IT TO A FLAT COPY SO YOU CAN'T DOWNLOAD IT. I LOOKED AT THE LFBC IN PHOTOSHOP CS5 AND I CAN TELL YOU WITH OUT ANY DOUGHT, IT IS A FAKE AND A BAD ONE AT THAT. NICE TRY OBUMER.
IF IN FACT YOU DO HAVE A LFBC, THEN LET'S SHOW IT TO THE EXPERTS AT ADOBE AND LET THEM LOOK AT IT. BOY, THESE DC ELITES THINK WE ARE DUMB. IT'S THEY THAT ARE THE DUMB ONES. THEY CAN'T GET THEIR STORIES STRAIGHT.
Here is a twist that no one seems to talk about and that is the fact that the United States of America is now the UNITED STATES INC. and all elections are a "dog and pony show" because only the board of directors of a corporation appoint the President, Vice President, Secretary and Treasurer of said corporation. If these weasels in DC ever let that cat out of the bag they would all be hung !
TEN GOLD STARS FOR BASSMAN !!! This is THE ISSUE that no one will touch with a HUNDRED foot pole. It's the why and the how B.O. was selected, the reason for ongoing, in your face vote fraud and the reason the Supremes will never hear any case on elegibility : td do so it would expose the U.S. government as a (for profit?) corporation in which U.S. citizens have no interest (standing). So pay yer taxes and STFU, cuz it's a club and you ain't in it…
" If these weasels in DC ever let that cat out of the bag they would all be hung !"
I think you mean hanged.
I would not care if Obama was born in the gamma quadrant and was the half brother of chairman Mao, he's the best President we've had in a long time. My wife got her cancer treatment when our insurance wanted to cancel her….Thank you Obama Care. He get's my vote.
You are confusing the the issues. He may, or may not be Presidential material. His eligibility is an entirely different question.
Carl Lewis was a great runner. That didn't make him eligible to run in the women's races.
Still missing the point here. Obama, Romney, Clinton, Gingrich, or Paul should have to prove who they say they are. The onus is on those making a claim, to prove their right.
Obama may well be a natural born citizen, but if he is, he isn't who he says he is. Isn't that committing a fraud?
Can you explain why Presidential Candidate Alan Keyes was 'denied standing'? I know it was not brought up in this article, but I feel it pertinent to the discussion.
ALSO – didn't I hear Willard 'Mitt' Romney state on CNN during the Florida Debate that his father was born in Mexico? I guess if it's Mitt and Barack in the 'finals', it isn't likely to be brought up as an issue… (GNURK)
Vattel must be spinning in his grave at a speed to match Jefferson and Adams.
Ed, Romney did say his father was born in Mexico, and his father was born to US Citizen parents who never gave up their American citizenship. Look the bottom line is that unless Taitz and others take a step back and join forces and approch the matter from the stand point the other attorneys did yesterday in Atlanta without all the "everything and the kitchen sink approach" Taitz has taken there will never be a Court rendering of that all important definition as to the meaning of "Natural Born Citizen." We believe the court in Barnett v Obama was decided the plaintiffs lacked standing because Taitz waited until after Obama was sworn into office one, and to the best of our recolection (without going back and reading the case files) we think Keyes had moved to have his name taken off the case at one time.
What is the problem? The Voters should know wether he is eligible or not. Obama tried that once and he presented a fraudulent birth certificate. Why would the President of the USA present a false birth certificate to prove he is not eligible when it actually proves that he commits a crime.
What has become of the American people that a President can so openly mock them?
Obama is criminal and a shady person. He wrote a false biography in order to deceive the American people. How can American people just put that aside as a pittance. Do you accept a criminal in the highest office of the USA and do nothing about it?
It is time to stand up and clean house.
@OCKO
You are correct, however filing faked birth certicates and going into a court with every single thing you read on the internet and ask people to go into a courtroom and lie does not make you or anyone else any better than Obama. One thing I know that Mr. Sinclair has always said, “you cannot ask a court to listen to you when you say Obama is a fraud and his birth certificate is a forgery etc…, when you file forged birth certificates claiming them to be real when you KNEW them to be fake, nor can you accuse him of fraudulently using someone elses SS# when someone with an Employer ID Number submitted a SS# with Barack Obama’s name through e-verify where you swear under penalty of perjury the individual has applied for employment with you.”
We know just how shady of an individual Obama truly is, and we agree that the Courts are ultimately going to have to redender an definition of “Natural born citizen,” but it will not be done by the repeated filing of someone who ignores the Court rules,who repeatedly makes claims that they have been granted court ordered discovery or rulings by judges that they have never been given, or by asking people to go into a courtroom and say things that other people told them, they said you said when you never made any such statements. This article is a factual and reasonable veiw as far as we are concerned.
Kicking Orly Taitz is something Sinclair started over a year ago, after he got his nose out of joint. All right, Taitz is not as smooth as Hillary Clinton. She is not a robot or mind-controlled, or she would be 'working' better. orly is menopausal, she is emotional, she has maxed-out credit cards, and I thank God for her every day. Maybe Larry is the one who is not what he seems to be. I am still waiting for the truth about his motel suicide attempt to come out, whatever it may be, His denials later have seemed hollow, and his complaint against the people who may have saved his life seemed curious indeed. If Orly obtained E Verify documentation about the POTUS SSN fraudulently, then why is it that the actual report is that Orly only submitted an Affadavit about it from someone else, from one Linda Jordan who obtained the E Verify records herself. Connecting the dots reveals the smear here.
CHT: Larry is not the one who wrote the article, nor is he the one who has responded to the comments here. Orly Taitz is required by law to make reasonable effort to ensure she is not providing knowingly false exhibits or testimony as an agent of the Court. She has failed miserably at that. We are sure that if you have a question you wish to ask Mr. Sinclair regarding his Sept 27, 2010 overdose you are welcome to email him your question. It is interesting that you claim Mr. Sinclair denied his overdose as we are aware of two interviews Mr. Sinclair gave in 2011 that dealt with exactly what took place, why and how he had regained his determination to fight even harder.
I personally would ask you to please be so kind as to post examples and links to them where you say Larry had started kicking Orly over a year ago. You may thank God every day for Taitz, but you might want to ask him to help make Taitz stop single handily destroying any valid effort to get a definition of "Natural Born Citizen" from a court which is they only way any challenge to Obama will be successful. The one way you will not get that ruling is when Taitz follows USSC Justices around the country and walk up to him and hand them documents and discuss what it is she is alleging which only ensures those Justice will never sit on the court if a case ever did make it that far.
Barack X was born in the USA, but for obvious reason his father's identity had to be concealed.
You don't think he looks anything like Mr. Obama, do you?
No, he looks like his father.
You use the word "fraudulent" documents in your article. This is a lie. The truth is that Orly has not been to court because every one of her court cases was dismissed for lack of legal "standing." She never even made it before a jury. In this instance she does have standing as a voter and she is attempting to block Obama, who is NOT a natural born citizen, from being on the ballot. Obama is NOT your president. He is an illegal usurper and if you had done your homework you'd know that. Maybe you should bone up on your Vattel and English common law before trashing someone who cannot understand.
Mr. Webber we have multiple witnesses who Orly Taitz told the day before a hearing in Barnett v. Obama in Sept 2009 she knew the "Kenyan Birth Certificate" she was filing was a forgery but she wanted to make the State Dept have to prove that.
Taitz flew out to the 9/12 March & Rally in Washington walking in the crowd with an individual video taping her and a man with a megaphone declaring to the crowd how she was holding in her hand an order from Judge Carter ordering Obama to present himself and the documents she was seeking through discovery in her office within 30 days, all while waving papers around claiming she was holding the order in her hands.
If you or anyone else who wanted to challenge Barack Obama as not being a "Natural Born Citizen" as defined by the Constitution we would suggest that you follow the argument of the other attorneys who were in the hearing in Atlanta yesterday and stay away from the filing of e-verify documents which someone committed a crime by running under their EIN; or the Selective Service registration form also obtained by fraud and/or forgery since they were not the individual it belonged to. Perhaps rather than reading what Taitz or Joseph Farrah put on the Internet, you should invest in PACER and download the courts docket entries yourself.
We can said with absolute certainty that Taitz herself filed perjured affidavits in Barnett v Obama as well as knowingly solicited a perjured affidavit for her to file from a "Linda Starr" where Taitz asked Starr to say she was on a 3-way call with Mr. Sinclair and Berg assistant Lisa L. and "Starr" was to say she heard Phil Bergs assistant telling Sinclair to file the affidavit he filed. All of which Taitz knew before hand was untrue as she herself wrote what Starr was to say.
We can say with absolute certainty that Taitz went as far as to file a complaint against Mr. Sinclair with the UN and the World Court which was complete fantasy on her part.
The truth is that Orly has filed more fraudulent documents in more courts that most attorneys file truthful ones. Taitz filings of fraudulent and illegally obtained documents with these courts is extensive and all available through the courts PACER system.
From what was published by WND it was stated Taitz went into the Atlanta hearing submitting the same stuff that was stricken in DC in August 2011. We suggest you read the Judges memorandum and opinion in Taitz v. Astrue as well as Rhodes v. MacDonald
"…Ms. Taitz has a long documented history of filing fraudulent documents with both Federal and State Courts…"
"The Judge pointed out the documents filed by Taitz clearly were obtained through fraudulent and unlawful means."
which is it? fraudulent documents? or documents obtained through fraudulent and unlawful means? or fraudulent documents obtained through fraudulent means? and while yer at it, which cases are you specifically referring to? you claim that taitz has a long documented history of filing fraudulent documents with both federal and state courts. will you cite specific cases? and are you aware that attorneys filing fraudulent documents is grounds for disbarment? why hasn't ms taitz been disbarred if she in fact has a long history of filing fraudulent documents with the courts? something stinks about your article.
Tyrone, we ask that you read our reply to Mr. Webber's comment. Its both, its fraudulent documents ie Barnett v Obama; Rhodes v MacDonald; Taitz v Astrue; etc… Taitz had been reported to the California Bar and she has been sanctioned $20,000.00 in one case alone.
What you feel stinks of our article is that we report the facts as they pertain to Orly Taitz. Taitz is not licensed to practice law anywhere except California without going through local counsel and approval by the court. Our article makes clear the facts as they pertain to Taitz and we make clear that as long as Taitz continues to present the same old documents she has already been admonished for it is only going to hurt the credible case and argument set forth by the other attorneys at yesterdays hearing.
Thanks for your reply. So let me see if i have this straight. Taitz, as the attorney of record in the cases you cited, submitted both fraudulent and fraudulently obtained documents to state and federal courts and nothing (other than monetary sanctions) has happened to her? And according to you, she has a "long documented history" of doing so? Well, I knew the justice system was corrupt, but I had no idea just how corrupt. Lawyers can repeatedly, and over long periods of time, perpetrate fraud (commit crimes) on the courts and they're still allowed to retain their law licenses and practice law? Incredible. But at the same time, nothing should really surprise any of us when it comes to lawyers and judges and the so-called judicial system. Unfortunately, if we're dealing with a completely corrupt legal system, that also means that any and all "Birther" issues stand little chance of ever being properly and fairly prosecuted in any court of law.
Having been a party to several state and federal actions, I am quite familiar with the PACER database. I guess I will need to take your advice and start downloading the court documents myself. Obviously, getting information second hand from "reputable" news sources is no longer an option. You just don't know who to believe anymore.
"Taitz is not licensed to practice law anywhere except California without going through local counsel and approval by the court."
What is your point? Orly Taitz is appearing pro hac vice in this case and is a member in good standing according the the State Bar of California. So she has permission from the GA court to act as an attorney in this case and has no record (public, anyway) of discipline with the Bar in the state in which she is licensed.
It is my understanding that Taitz wants to depose Obama. I say, let her do it. Allow Taitz to present evidence and have Obama answer questions under oath.
If Ms. Taitz has filed fraudulent documents then she must be working for O'Bomba or the folks that run him. If she gets all these challenges thrown out due to fraud then we are stuck with O'Bomba, qualified or not.
ALL THOSE THAT SUED OBAMA AND WON BECAUSE HE WAS A N0-SHOW AT HIS TRIAL IN GEORGIA SHOULD DEMAND PUNITIVE DAMAGES BE AWARDED . WHAT IS YOUR COUNTRY WORTH–400 TRILLION DOLLARS. OR MORE.
Get a clue. If he was eligible, he would have showed up or representatives would have and brought said documentation to prove he is eligible and all this nonsense would cease.
But, he continues to dodge this question at all costs, and where there is smoke, there usually is fire.
Another thing…..Why should he not be found in default? This is how it works for all citizens when you do not show up in court. He is not above the law as he thinks he is and do our politicians in general.
Its not exactly a case of "default" in Administrative hearings, and this was exactly why the writer published this particular article, because people are being told this Administrative process will do something it cannot do. The SOS will be given the Administrative Law Judges findings and opinions where the SOS will then decide if their is cause to move forward on whether Obama should or should not be on the Georgia ballot. That's it.
We do however agree that by Obama campaign attorneys refusing to participate in the hearing they have put the 2012 campaign (not the White House) in a position where they may be having to answer to other states as well. Problem is that in the end Federal Election Law will more than likely over turn anything accomplished on the state level.
You comment proves a point we have made over and over again as to why every case Taitz has been involved in gets tossed. You think that these challenges to him being eligible for a State ballot entitles you to demand all these documents and Taitz goes into the cases with documents she has already been sanctioned on in multiple courts. Obama campaign attorneys were clearly not thinking when they sent the SOS a letter demanding he withdraw the referral to the Administrative Hearings Judge. From what we have seen from sources we know not to misrepresent the actual facts, there were several attorneys who made a strong case on the simple fact of Obama Sr. not being a US Citizen, but then Taitz goes in there with documents she has filed with multiple courts before and been called out on filing forged documents and documents which were obtained through acts that are clearly felony crimes under federal law.
Xmen, you are 100% correct!
America is fast becoming a laughing stock.
Your President is clearly bogus.
His father was not an American citizen therefore he is not natural born and therefore not eligible under the constituton for the office of POTUS.
Yet biassed articles like this desperately trying to deny the obvious are all the average Joe gets presented with.
It seems that not only does the US flout international law right across the planet it even chooses to flout its own laws and constitution.
I don't think you can sink any lower.
What a fascist cesspit of a police state you have become.
And you dare to spread your sort of corrupt 'democracy' laugh a minute, at the point of a missile right across the world.
Russia and Iran have more democracy than the USA. At least they both have Presidents legally entitled to hld office and therefore legitimate.
What a farce. Your denial of reality could be pitied in a third world nation.
In an international bully its unforgiveable.
The name of the registrar on Obama's latest version of his birth certificate says it all: U.K.L. Lee (ukulele). The forger had a snse of humor.
First word should be Have, not Has..
DO NOT CENSOR THIS POSTING!!! THANKS!! THERE IS NOTHING IN THIS POST THAT WOULD JUSTIFY CENSORING IT!!
The issue is quite simple. To be President of the USA or to run for the Presidency of the USA, Obama must be a "natural born citizen" according to the Constitution of the USA. The term "natural born citizen" has been defined previously and it requires two conditions:
1) Obama must be born in the USA.
The forged document provided by the White House web site of Obama's supposedly long form birth certificate is simply that, a bad forgery!
Therefore, the only way to check this long form birth certificate is to go to Hawaii and to check directly the original long form birth certificate and in particular to assess if even this original is genuine that is if it is not also a forgery!!
2) Obama's parents MUST BOTH be American citizens.
We know that Obama's father was a Kenyan and that he NEVER was an American citizen!!!!!
Therefore, THIS SECOND CONDITION ALONE DISQUALIFIES OBAMA TO RUN FOR THE PRESIDENCY OF THE USA AND IT ALSO DISQUALIFIES OBAMA TO BE PRESIDENT OF THE USA, NO MATTER THE FACT THAT HE WON THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION!!!!!!
More, Obama is a former lawyer. Therefore, he knew perfectly well that he was not entitled to run for the Presidency of the USA but he nevertheless did it DISHONESTLY, FRAUDULENTLY, deceiving purposefully the entire American people.
Furthermore, Obama was confronted with the definition of what a "natural born citizen" is when he directly participated in the investigation of John McCain's eligibility to run for the Presidency of the USA. Obama then signed Senate Resolution 511 from April 30, 2008 that reveals the indispensable requirement of having two US citizen parents in order to be a "natural born citizen" according to the Constitution of the USA and therefore to be eligible to run for the Presidency of the USA or to be President of the USA!!!!!
Therefore, once again, Obama knew very well that he FRAUDULENTLY decided to run for the Presidency of the USA despite the fact that he knew perfectly well that he was NOT a natural born citizen and therefore that he was not entitled, according to the Constitution of the USA, to be President of the USA.
First Conclusion:
—Obama is NOT a natural born citizen and therefore he is not entitled to run for the Presidency of the USA nor is he entitled to be President of the USA, no matter the fact that he won the Presidential election!!!!
—Finally, Obama is a former lawyer and therefore OBAMA CONSCIOUSLY, INTENTIONALLY COMPLETELY DECEIVED THE ENTIRE AMERICAN PEOPLE BY RUNNING FOR THE PRESIDENCY OF THE USA WHEN HE KNEW PERFECTLY WELL THAT HE WAS NOT ENTITLED TO DO SO SIMPLY BECAUSE HE KNEW VERY WELL THAT HE WAS NOT A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN, AS THE CONSTITUTION OF THE USA REQUIRES ONLY ON THE PRESIDENT OF THE USA!!!!
—THIS HUGE DECEPTION IS MORE THAN A FRAUDULENT ACT, IT IS WORSE THAN ANYTHING IMAGINABLE BECAUSE:
1) IT RELATES TO THE HIGHEST POSITION IN THE LAND, THE PRESIDENCY OF THE USA, THAT OBAMA HAS FRAUDULENTLY OBTAINED;
2) IT RELATES TO THE CONSTITUTION OF THE USA BEING TRAMPLED UPON FRAUDULENTLY AND ILLEGALLY BY OBAMA;
3) IT RELATES TO THE FACT THAT OBAMA INTENTIONALLY DECEIVED AND MISLED THE ENTIRE AMERICAN PEOPLE!!!
ANY PERSON GUILTY OF SUCH SERIOUS FRAUD SHOULD AT LEAST GET A JAIL SENTENCE, NO MATTER THAT OBAMA HAS FRAUDULENTY HELD THE POSITION OF PRESIDENT OF THE USA FOR A PERIOD OF TIME!!!
If you really want to have an expert legal explanation on what a "natural born citizen" truly is according to the Constitution of the USA and why legally speaking it is this way, then I suggest that you read at least a few articles on Attorney Mario Apuzzo's web site "Natural Born Citizen – A Place to Ask Questions and Get the Right Answers" at http://puzo1.blogspot.com/
In particular, read:
—"The Natural Born Citizen Clause of Our U.S. Constitution Requires that Both of the Child’s Parents Be U.S. Citizens At the Time of Birth" at http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2009/09/natural-born-ci…
Second conclusion:
—If you are a rational person, no matter your political affiliation, you surely will be forced to conclude that the facts speak for themselves and that there is no doubt legally that a "natural born citizen" indeed requires that a President of the USA has two parents that were BOTH American citizens at the time of birth.
—The Constitution of the USA is sacred to any American citizen AND it applies to every single American citizen, no matter one's political affiliation, no matter one's color of the skin, no matter what!!!!
Therefore, BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA IS UNDER THE RULE OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE USA LIKE ANYBODY ELSE!!!!
—You now have the facts fully on the table concerning what a "natural born citizen" truly is, you cannot evade the truth about these facts!!!
Now, what path are you going to choose?
1) Keep Lying and hiding the facts, hoping that they will disappear by themselves!! Or
2) Choose to acknowledge these facts fully and be determined to fight for the truth?
The choice is yours! But the Constitution of the USA is at stake!!!
Your comment was not censored, please be aware that any comment posted on this site which contains links in the comment will automatically go into moderation. Thats the way it is and the way it will remain. It is for the protection of our readers computer systems as well as ours. We will not approve any comment containing links until the link is scanned first, that includes any website domains listed in the comment sign up box.