Skip to comments.Breaking News: Obama's Attorney In Georgia Ballot Challenge Refuses To Appear At Hearing
Posted on 01/25/2012 2:39:58 PM PST by Obama Exposer
President Obama's private attorney Michael Jablonski has issued a letter to the Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp confirming that he will not attend the Georgia Access Ballot Challenge hearing set by the Honorable Judge Michael Malihi for January 26, 2012 at 9am.
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 plaintiffs 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 herea 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 candidates 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 officeand by extension, yoursto 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. Plaintiffs 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 plaintiffs 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, Plaintiffs counsel has attempted to use litigation to provide the legal foundation for her political agenda. She seeks to use the Courts 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 officerthe clear-cut decision to be on the merits, and the flagrantly unethical and unprofessional conduct of counseland he has allowed the plaintiffs counsel to run amok. He has not even addressed these issueschoosing to ignore them. Perhaps he is aware that there is no credible response; perhaps he appreciates that the very demand made of his officethat it address constitutional issuesis 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.
As Jerome Corsi said when they produced the PDF file, “they blinked”.
Introduce a forgery or play golf. LoL.
You suggest that BHO’s birth certificate is a serious problem. May be. But something tells me that EVERYTHING in this joker’s background is a crippling liability. (soc. sec. record, passport(s), college transcripts, etc.)
Since 2008 the MSM has ignored and pooh-poohed this story. More recently, there have been an increasing number of public observations indicating that Obama does not think and act like an American.
Too bad, nobody has ever found the video
Was it Polarik? Or Fred?
not me...all I kept hearing was...he might have said it, but it wasn’t recorded.
Anyway, here's how it looks to me.
The Sovereign state of Georgia has requested a very simple set of documents, easily obtainable. Obama has decided to insult the SOS and ALJ of Georgia, and all its people, and has decided to politicize the qualification procedures in Georgia. As a side issue, he has also decided to attack the state of Arizona and its Sheriff with Fast and Furious and illegal immigration.
This is looking pretty ugly for the president: THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES IS ATTACKING SEVERAL STATES OF THE UNITDED STATES OF AMERICA.
My reply on Mr. K's thread.
This is hysterical.
Nobody was prepared beforehand for this issue in '08. By the time appropriate action was taken it was too late to correct the problem.
Now that people are aware of the issue, what should be a simple matter for any presidential candidate to resolve has become a running joke about one particular presidential candidate.
“Dear Judge. We dont like whats happening. Put an end to it. We wont be participating. Shove it.”
An excellent summation! :)
I was just made privy to a very important piece of research I had not previously been aware of. It comes by way of a comment forwarded to me by the author of the h2ooflife blog:
I had presumed that the idiom natural born citizen appeared nowhere in U.S. Law other than A2S1C5, but I found it in administrative law and it is contrasted with native and naturalized citizenship. Ive never seen any mention of this fact before and wonder how many are aware of it in the ineligibility camp. Heres the quotes:
He then quoted two provisions from the link provided, but theres actually three at the official INS .gov site which establish official recognition by the federal government that native-born and natural-born should be separately delineated. When you visit the suggested link to the Immigration and Naturalization service, it brings you to Interpretation 324.2 Reacquisition of citizenship lost by marriage.
Interpretation 324.2 (a)(3) provides:
The repatriation provisions of these two most recent enactments also apply to a native- and natural-born citizen woman who expatriated herself by marriage to an alien (Emphasis added.)
Then, Interpretation 324.2(a)(7) provides:
(7) Restoration of citizenship is prospective . Restoration to citizenship under any one of the three statutes is not regarded as having erased the period of alienage that immediately preceded it.
The words shall be deemed to be a citizen of the United States to the same extent as though her marriage to said alien had taken place on or after September 22, 1922″, as they appeared in the 1936 and 1940 statutes, are prospective and restore the status of native-born or natural-born citizen (whichever existed prior to the loss) as of the date citizenship was reacquired. (Emphasis added.)
And again, Interpretation 324.2(b) provides:
The effect of naturalization under the above statutes was not to erase the previous period of alienage, but to restore the person to the status if naturalized, native, or natural-born citizen, as determined by her status prior to loss. (Emphasis added.)
:) Jablonski is making making Taitz look like Perry Mason.
Might ought to remind the SOS that a good man, COL. Lakin, was allowed to go to jail as well!
No. Just Twitter them to the judge..... ala Judge Robertson, who was going to sanction John Hemenway for having the audacity to expect a legal process to decide a legal issue.
The only evidence of Obama’s Hawaii birth that the HDOH has produced is the 1960-64 birth index with his name in it.
Which they had deliberately altered so that it would include legally non-valid records...
>>> :) Jablonski is making making Taitz look like Perry Mason. <<<
Paging humblegunner, please answer the white courtesy phone.
I still luv ya’ Gunny. ;o)
Good point! Everyone should be reminded.
You have been suckered by the "birth certificate" smoke and mirrors. The BC is merely an Øbozo misdirection ploy.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.