| News: USA
USA Obama's a NO-SHOW, ... Judge is Entering a Default Judgement in Georgia (karma: 10)
en>fr fr>en
By TexanForever  Comments: 19274, member since Thu Jun 10, 2004On Thu Jan 26, 2012 04:19 PM
Edited by TexanForever (74535) on 2012-01-26 16:33:04
... As expected, neither Obama nor his lawyer appeared in court in Georgia as ordered. Accordingly, Judge Malihi is reportedly issuing a Default Judgement, against Obama because he refuses to verify his eligibility as a candidate in the State of Georgia. Just as Obama can't be compelled to appear because he's federal, Georgia doesn't have to put him on the ballot because he hasn't complied with state law. ... this might become a 10th Amendment state's rights issue for the SCOTUS.
.
Results Of Obama’s Eligibility Hearing In Georgia
JANUARY 26, 2012 BY BREAKING NEWS
Update: We are sorry for those of you who experienced the 502 Gateway Error. So many people were trying to access our website that our server could not handle it. If this happens in the future, please wait an hour and try again. We are working on a permanent solution.
Update: Dean Haskins at Obama Release Your Records is saying that the Judge is entering a default judgement against Obama because he did not appear. This could mean that Obama might not appear on Georgia’s ballot, although the Obama administration will certainly appeal.
Today was an important day in the fight for truth. Despite Obama’s no-show, today’s court proceedings could have a great affect on the eligibility movement as a whole.
A blow by blow of the entire court proceeding was made by Craig Andersen of the The National Patriot. His article is found below. We will be updating this page with a synopsis of what today’s proceedings mean for the entire Obama eligibility movement and what results we might see. In the meantime, read the following blow by blow account:
Given the testimony from today’s court case in Georgia, Obama has a lot of explaining to do. His attorney, Jablonski, was a NO SHOW as of course, was Obama.
The following is a nutshell account of the proceedings.
Promptly at 9am EST, all attorneys involved in the Obama Georgia eligibility case were called to the Judge’s chambers. This was indeed a very interesting beginning to this long awaited and important case.
The case revolved around the Natural Born clause of the Constitution and whether or not Obama qualifies under it to serve. More to the point, if found ineligible, Obama’s name would not appear on the 2012 ballot in Georgia.
www.westernjournalism.com . . .
--------------
Here are courtroom details of the court proceedings:
Courtroom Details of Obama’s 1/26 Eligibility Hearing, Georgia
January 26, 2012, 2:33 pm By Guest Author
Details from this morning’s eligibility hearing in Georgia, to accompany the Breaking News, “Default Judgment Against Obama Discussed: Today’s Eligibility Hearing in Georgia.”
Sharon Rondeau
The Post & Email (site is under maintenance at time of publishing; see The Post & Email for further details on this and other Obama eligibility cases, documentation, and history)
Judge Michael Malihi is presiding over the Obama ballot challenges being heard today in Atlanta, GA
(Jan. 26, 2012) — The court convened at approximately 9:30 a.m. Judge Michael Malihi began by asking those present to stand and reading the last paragraph of Atty. Michael Jablonski’s letter to Brian Kemp, Georgia Secretary of State, “into the record,” commenting that Jablonski was not present at the hearing.
The judge called plaintiff David Welden to stand and asked where he resided and if he were a registered voter in the state of Georgia. Then his attorney, Van Irion, stood and stated that there were three types of citizenship in the United States. He then provided argument on the definition of “natural born Citizen,” referring to Minor v. Happersett.
“The court should recognize that the term ‘citizen” is not ‘natural born Citizen,’ Irion said. “The Minor court’s definition of ‘natural born Citizen’ says ‘parents.’
“In closing, this case is about the Constitution,” Irion said. We’ve shown that Barack Obama’s father was never a citizen…and that means he is not constitutionally qualified…Finally, the defendant was ordered to be here, and I wish to state on the record that that shows not just a contempt for this court…”
Then Irion was interrupted and stopped speaking.
9:54 a.m.: Atty. J. Mark Hatfield stood and stating that he represents Kevin Richard Powell and Carl Swensson. Hatfield mentioned the White House schedule as he saw that it related to Obama’s lack of attendance at the hearing.
Carl Swensson was sworn in at 9:56 a.m. and stated his residence and county. Then Kevin Powell was asked the same. Both were asked if they were able to vote for President of the United States.
Swensson and Powell explained their challenges filed with the Secretary of State’s office to the judge.
Hatfield held up the Certification of Nomination which Nancy Pelosi signed in 2008 to place Obama’s name on the ballot. The judge asked if it was a “certified copy,” and Hatfield answered that it was. He then read from it, stating that it did not affirm that the candidates met constitutional requirements to serve, while the wording from the Republican National Committee for its candidates did contain that wording.
The judge asked if the documents were from a “United States government source,” and Hatfield answered “Yes, sir, they were.”
Hatfield cited Jablonski’s January 25 letter “indicating that they did not want the proceedings to go forward and did not want to participate.” Hatfield also entered into evidence Obama’s book, Dreams From My Father.
Ken Allen, a resident of Arizona, stood to present the documentation he had received from the State Department after submitting a FOIA request early in 2009, which The Post & Email reported on here. He stated that “Barack Obama Sr.” was “never a citizen.”
At 10:09 a.m. someone said, “Let’s take a short break,” and people stood up and began moving around and talking with one another.
At 10:17 a.m., the court was called back in to order.
Atty. Orly Taitz was called upon to speak. The Georgia registered voter whom she represents, David Farrar, stood and identified himself.
Taitz utilized a projector on the wall to the right of the judge as an aid in her presentation. She then stated that evidence existed that Obama possessed Indonesian citizenship, to which the judge was heard by this writer to say, “That’s not relevant.” Taitz then discussed the court’s decision in Minor v. Happersett and was interrupted by the judge, who said, “Counselor, can you save your argument for the closing?” She then stopped speaking.
Mr. Christopher Strunk of New York then went up to the front of the courtroom to testify, and Taitz began to ask him questions about the passport records of Stanley Ann Dunham, one of which contains the name “Soebarkah.” Strunk stated, “She wanted that expunged from her record, but we never got that.”
Susan Daniels, Private Investigator from Ohio, then took the stand, and spoke about her investigation which revealed that Obama had reportedly been using a social security number which she contended had not been assigned to him.
Taitz asked Daniels, “What was the social security number attached to your request?” and Daniels read off “042-68-4425.” Daniels said, “In all my years, I’ve never seen anything like this.” She stated that the person who had originally owned the number had been born in 1890.
“First I ran the social security number to check the address, and the same number came up for him in Massachusetts, Illinois, and Washington, DC. It showed a phone number, and it was always the same number…It would show intermittently ‘August 4, 1961′ and ’1890.’” Daniels stated that she obtained information “directly from the Social Security Administration.”
At 10:30 Mr. Chito Papa took the stand. He stated that he works in the field of Information Technology including Adobe® software.
Taitz asked Papa if the “birth certificate” which “Obama posted online” had flattened layers. ”Did you see one layer or multiple layers? Taitz asked. ”I saw multiple layers,” he answered.
Taitz asked Papa about Obama’s social security number which appeared on his tax return posted on the internet, and Papa stated that the layers had not been flattened. Taitz then thanked Papa for his testimony.
At 10:36 a.m. another witness, Linda Jordan, was called to the stand. Taitz adjusted her Powerpoint presentation by means of a laptop computer and began by asking a question about “E-Verify,” the U.S. government’s system for flagging potential illegal immigrants from working. Jordan stated that she ran Obama’s number through the E-Verify system and said, “When I read it, it was 2011, and it could not verify it. It came back.”
At 10:39 a.m., Douglas Vogt took the stand. Vogt stated that he owns a typesetting company and has been “in the business for 18 years now.”
Taitz asked Vogt if he examined the birth certificate which was posted online, and he said, “Yes, I did.” He stated that “sloping lines” would not be seen if the image had been made from a paper document.
Taitz asked, “Would you expect to see a clear embossed seal on the document?” and Vogt answered, “Yes, I would.” However, he stated that such was not present on Obama’s birth certificate. Regarding the number of Obama’s purported birth record, Vogt stated that “federal regs” require that “all birth certificate numbers have to be sequential, starting on January 1.”
At 10:49, witness John Sampson took the stand. He stated that he has a background in criminal justice, served as a police officer in New York City and worked as an immigration inspector. His background includes working for the INS in the area of “immigration fraud” and he was also a deportation officer. He stated that he has testified in front of “federal grand juries.” He stated that he started his own consulting firm in 2009 and has been self-employed since then.
Taitz asked Sampson about Obama’s social security number, and Sampson said that he “ran” the number 042-68-4425 and that it was assigned to Obama since 1977.
Taitz asked if Sampson had examined the birth certificate, and he said, “Yes.” He raised the issue of the Nordyke twins’ birth certificate, whose numbers were lower than Obama’s even though their birth occurred a day later. He stated that the registrar’s name was different than that on the Nordyke twins’ documents and that it was unlikely that the registrar would have been different in the “same hospital” regarding births one day apart.
Sampson recommended further investigation, including subpoenas and court orders, to obtain more information on the number “042-68-4425.”
Sampson mentioned that Obama has also been known as “Barry Soetoro.”
Taitz asked what Sampson thought needed to be done regarding the questions about Obama’s background, and he recommended asking for an official copy of the SS-5 for his social security number application and the Hawaii Department of Health to see “if he was born in Hawaii.” Sampson stated that an investigation would be “a criminal investigation” through a U.S. attorney’s office. He said that if a person has been found to be impersonating a U.S. citizen, he would be subject to “deportation.”
Shortly thereafter, Sampson’s testimony ended, and Taitz began discussing Obama’s alleged years in Indonesia from 1968-71, during which he was known as “Barry Soetoro.”
“We have another boy who from 1968-69 was in Hawaii,” she said. The judge then said, “Are you testifying? Do you know how?” which brought laughter from the assembly. The judge then said she could discuss the matter during closing arguments. Taitz responded, “I would like to testify,” after which she took the stand.
Taitz stated that “Mr. Obama has resigned from the bar.” The judge asked, “How is that relevant?” Taitz said that it was pertinent because Obama was “hiding his identity.”
“I’m going to ask you to submit your testimony in writing,” the judge said. ”OK,” Taitz said. She then left the stand and spoke from the assembly once again. She stated that “We have clear evidence of fraud and forgery…Mr. Obama has used other last names…” She then stated that of all the lawsuits filed against Obama regarding his eligibility, none were heard on “the merits.” Taitz asked Judge Malihi to order the release of Obama’s records in Hawaii and to hold Obama in “contempt of court” for failing to appear at the hearing.
The judge said, “Thank you” and adjourned the court at 11:12 a.m.
gulagbound.com . . .
___________________
Here is the letter from Jablonski stating the reasons why he as well as the president will not show:
Hon. Brian P. Kemp
Georgia Secretary of State
214 State Capitol Atlanta, Georgia 30334
via email to Vincent R. Russo Jr., Esq.
Re: Georgia Presidential Preference Primary Hearings
Dear Secretary Kemp:
This is to advise you of serious problems that have developed in the conduct of the hearings pending before the Office of State Administrative Hearings. At issue in these hearings are challenges that allege that President Obama is not eligible to hold or run for re-election to his office, on the now wholly discredited theory that he does not meet the citizenship requirements. As you know, such allegations have been the subject of numerous judicial proceedings around the country, all of which have concluded that they were baseless and, in some instances – including in the State of Georgia - that those bringing the challenges have engaged in sanctionable abuse of our legal process.
Nonetheless, the Administrative Law Judge has exercised no control whatsoever over this proceeding, and it threatens to degenerate into a pure forum for political posturing to the detriment of the reputation of the State and your Office. Rather than bring this matter to a rapid conclusion, the ALJ has insisted on agreeing to a day of hearings, and on the full participation of the President in his capacity as a candidate. Only last week, he denied a Motion to Quash a subpoena he approved on the request of plaintiff’s counsel for the personal appearance of the President at the hearing, now scheduled for January 26.
For these reasons, and as discussed briefly below, you should bring an end to this baseless, costly and unproductive hearing by withdrawing the original hearing request as improvidently issued.
It is well established that there is no legitimate issue here—a conclusion validated time and again by courts around the country. The State of Hawaii produced official records documenting birth there; the President made documents available to the general public by placing them on his website. “Under the United States Constitution, a public record of a state is required to be given ‘full faith and credit’ by all other states in the country. Even if a state were to require its election officials for the first time ever to receive a ‘birth certificate’ as a requirement for a federal candidate’s ballot placement, a document certified by another state, such as a ‘short form’ birth certificate, or the certified long form, would be required to be accepted by all states under the ‘full faith and credit’ clause of the United States Constitution.” Maskell, “Qualifications for President and the “Natural Born” Citizenship Eligibility Requirement,” Congressional Research Service (November 14, 2011), p.41.
Nonetheless, the ALJ has decided, for whatever reason, to lend assistance through his office—and by extension, yours—to the political and legally groundless tactics of the plaintiffs. One of the attorneys for the plaintiffs has downloaded form subpoenas which she tried to serve around the country. Plaintiff’s attorney sent subpoenas seeking to force attendance by an office machine salesman in Seattle; seeking to force the United States Attorney to bring an unnamed “Custodian of Records Department of Homeland Security” to attend the hearing with immunization records; and asking the same U.S. Attorney to bring the same records allegedly possessed by “Custodian of Records of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.” She served subpoenas attempting to compel the production of documents and the attendance of Susan Daniels and John Daniels, both apparently out of state witnesses, regarding Social Security records. She is seeking to compel the Director of Health for the State of Hawaii to bring to Atlanta the “original typewritten 1961 birth certificate #10641 for Barack Obama, II, issued 08.08.1961 by Dr. David Sinclair…,” even though Hawaii courts had dismissed with prejudice the last attempt to force release of confidential records on November 9, 2011. Taitz v. Fuddy, CA No. 11-1-1731-08 RAN.
In Rhodes v. McDonald, 670 F. Supp. 2d 1363, 1365 (USDC MD GA, 2009), Judge Clay Land wrote this of plaintiff’s attorney:
When a lawyer files complaints and motions without a reasonable basis for believing that they are supported by existing law or a modification or extension of existing law, that lawyer abuses her privilege to practice law. When a lawyer uses the courts as a platform for political agenda disconnected from any legitimate legal cause of action, that lawyer abuses her privilege to practice law….
As a national leader in the so-called ‘birther movement,’ Plaintiff’s counsel has attempted to use litigation to provide the ‘legal foundation’ for her political agenda. She seeks to use the Court’s power to compel discovery in her efforts force the President to produce a ‘birth certificate’ that is satisfactory to herself and her followers.” 670 F. Supp. 2d at 1366.
All issues were presented to your hearing officer—the clear-cut decision to be on the merits, and the flagrantly unethical and unprofessional conduct of counsel—and he has allowed the plaintiffs’ counsel to run amok. He has not even addressed these issues—choosing to ignore them. Perhaps he is aware that there is no credible response; perhaps he appreciates that the very demand made of his office—that it address constitutional issues—is by law not within its authority. See, for example, Flint River Mills v. Henry, 234 Ga. 385, 216 S.E.2d 895 (1975); Ga. Comp. R. & Regs. r. 616-1-2-.22(3).
The Secretary of State should withdraw the hearing request as being improvidently issued. A referring agency may withdraw the request at any time. Ga. Comp. R. & Regs. r. 616-1-2-.17(1). Indeed, regardless of the collapse of proceedings before the ALJ, the original hearing request was defective as a matter of law. Terry v. Handel, 08cv158774S (Superior Court Fulton County, 2008), appeal dismissed, No. S09D0284 (Ga. Supreme Court), reconsideration denied, No. S09A1373. (“The Secretary of State of Georgia is not given any authority that is discretionary nor any that is mandatory to refuse to allow someone to be listed as a candidate for President by a political party because she believes that the candidate might not be qualified.”) Similarly, no law gives the Secretary of State authority to determine the qualifications of someone named by a political party to be on the Presidential Preference Primary ballot. Your duty is determined by the statutory requirement that the Executive Committee of a political party name presidential preference primary candidates. O.C.G.A. § 21-2-193. Consequently, the attempt to hold hearings on qualifications which you may not enforce is ultra vires.
We await your taking the requested action, and as we do so, we will, of course, suspend further participation in these proceedings, including the hearing scheduled for January 26.
Very truly yours,
MICHAEL JABLONSKI Georgia State Bar Number 385850 Attorney for President Barack Obama
cc: Hon. Michael Malihi Van Irion, Esq. Orly Taitz, Esq. Mark Hatfield, Esq. Vincent R. Russo Jr., Esq. Stefan Ritter, Esq. Ann Brumbaugh, Esq. Darcy Coty, Esq. Andrew B. Flake, Esq.
www.freerepublic.com . . .
. 9 Replies to Obama's a NO-SHOW, ... Judge is Entering a Default Judgement in Georgia |  re: Obama's a NO-SHOW, ... Judge is Entering a Default Judgement in Georgia (karma: 3)
en>fr fr>en
By Dewi_Sant Comments: 22911, member since Wed Jul 06, 2005On Thu Jan 26, 2012 04:43 PM
although the Obama administration will certainly appeal.
I do not see how the administration can appeal when obama's defence team did not bother attending !! yeah OK I can understand why obama did not attend cos he was out campaigning/playing golf/holidaying etc but his 'sillysitter' should have attended or at least sent their 'teaboy' 2 give some sort of excuse |  re: Obama's a NO-SHOW, ... Judge is Entering a Default Judgement in Georgia (karma: 1)
en>fr fr>en
By ReBourne Comments: 7522, member since Sat Oct 24, 2009On Thu Jan 26, 2012 04:44 PM
I won't be happy 'till I'm singing.....
"Hail to the darkie!
Hail nigger-o.
Hail to the darkie!
BACK to Africa you go!
 | re: Obama's a NO-SHOW, ... Judge is Entering a Default Judgement in Georgia (karma: 2)
en>fr fr>en
By Dewi_Sant Comments: 22911, member since Wed Jul 06, 2005On Thu Jan 26, 2012 05:51 PM
that's not very Christian |  re: Obama's a NO-SHOW, ... Judge is Entering a Default Judgement in Georgia en>fr fr>en
By lookanlearn Comments: 5434, member since Sun Jun 10, 2007On Thu Jan 26, 2012 05:57 PM
I dont know how such a simple issue can be made so complicated.
Fishy. |  re: Obama's a NO-SHOW, ... Judge is Entering a Default Judgement in Georgia (karma: 1)
en>fr fr>en
By jukinj3 Comments: 15065, member since Tue Apr 08, 2003On Thu Jan 26, 2012 06:12 PM
His great lord 0bama shall not bow to any American, only his muslim overlords. |  re: Obama's a NO-SHOW, ... Judge is Entering a Default Judgement in Georgia (karma: 1)
en>fr fr>en
By PopsFrost Comments: 10118, member since Mon Jan 21, 2008On Thu Jan 26, 2012 06:19 PM
lookanlearn wrote:
I dont know how such a simple issue can be made so complicated.
That's because you're an idiot.
lookanlearn wrote:
Dummer than dumb; Here is an education in `MAD`.
As usual you fail to understand that ALL the Nuclear nations (Russia, China, USA, UK, France, [Israel excluded with their ILLEGAL stash the USA ignores]) India and Pakistan signed later, ALL OF EM, made a signed agreement that if ANY of them (any nuclear country) EVER initiated the use of even one (more) nuclear weapon, then that country would be an automatic target by every member of NATO and the UN and ALL the other Nuclear countries combined for a non-stop military barrage.
Those are the rules dude..you just make your knowledge of the subject appear rather light.
P.S.
I didn`t make up those rules.
www.fuckfrance.com . . . | |
re: Obama's a NO-SHOW, ... Judge is Entering a Default Judgement in Georgia en>fr fr>en
By ReBourne Comments: 7522, member since Sat Oct 24, 2009On Thu Jan 26, 2012 07:19 PM
 PopsLost wrote:
That's because you're an idiot.
.....says the mindless ass clown. | re: Obama's a NO-SHOW, ... Judge is Entering a Default Judgement in Georgia en>fr fr>en
By lookanlearn Comments: 5434, member since Sun Jun 10, 2007On Thu Jan 26, 2012 07:30 PM
PopsFrost wrote:
lookanlearn wrote:
I dont know how such a simple issue can be made so complicated.
That's because you're an idiot.
lookanlearn wrote:
Dummer than dumb; Here is an education in `MAD`.
As usual you fail to understand that ALL the Nuclear nations (Russia, China, USA, UK, France, [Israel excluded with their ILLEGAL stash the USA ignores]) India and Pakistan signed later, ALL OF EM, made a signed agreement that if ANY of them (any nuclear country) EVER initiated the use of even one (more) nuclear weapon, then that country would be an automatic target by every member of NATO and the UN and ALL the other Nuclear countries combined for a non-stop military barrage.
Those are the rules dude..you just make your knowledge of the subject appear rather light.
P.S.
I didn`t make up those rules.
www.fuckfrance.com . . .
OK so a little `artistic liscence` was used; it doesnt change the facts; when you set off any nukes these days; you will be in for one hell of a ride.
Or are you just a complete ignorant tool PopsTossed? |  re: Obama's a NO-SHOW, ... Judge is Entering a Default Judgement in Georgia en>fr fr>en
By TheMadPoet Comments: 35484, member since Mon Nov 07, 2005On Thu Jan 26, 2012 10:48 PM
lookanlearn wrote:
I dont know how such a simple issue can be made so complicated.
Fishy.
Only Obama makes it complicated by not following the law. |
ReplySendWatch
|
Advertise Here
The Ban ChroniclesArthurH banned Fredmasse for 48 hours on Thu Apr 26 10:39 with the message 'popular request'
Antiricain banned WilyB for 48 hours on Thu Apr 26 08:21 with the message 'expatrié sarkozyste.Traître à la nation française'
Antiricain banned jeanv for 48 hours on Thu Apr 26 07:45 with the message 'VIVE LE PEN !'
ArthurH banned shon for 48 hours on Wed Apr 25 02:10 with the message 'simple test'
shon banned webmaster for 24 hours at Sun Apr 22 23:51 with the message 'Because webmaster has not contributed anything useful or amusing to the site'
|
