Posted on 01/25/2012 5:57:22 PM PST by Mr. K
Michael Jablonski260 Brighton Road, NEAtlanta, Georgia 30309michael.jablonski@comcast.com
RE: Georgia Presidential Preference Primary Hearings
Dear Mr. Jablonski:I received your letter expressing your concerns with the manner in which the Office of StateAdministrative Hearings ("OSAH") has handled the candidate challenges involving your client andadvising me that you and your client will "suspend" participation in the administrative proceeding. WhileI regret that you do not feel that the proceedings are appropriate, my referral of this matter to anadministrative 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 thereferring agency, the Secretary of State's Office is not a party to the candidate challenge hearingsscheduled for tomorrow. To the extent a request to withdraw the case referral is procedurally available, Ido 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 judgeto report his findings to me after his full consideration of the evidence and law. Upon receipt of thereport, 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 myreview of the initial decision; however, if you and your client choose to suspend your participation in theOSAH 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 thismatter.Sincerely,Brian P. Kemp
Beg to differ. The contempt issue is not based on failing to appear for a particular hearing but failing to comply with a subpoena which is compulsory process with the effect of a court order to appear. And it is not a question of Jablonski being held in contempt but his client, who is the object of the subpoena, unless Jablonski continues being so damn obnoxious to the court, in which case he may find himself held in contempt for his own reasons, unrelated to the subpoena.
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.
If you notice, he states (on the now wholly discredited theory that he does not meet the citizenship requirements).
He has avoided the natural born citizen issue. He is not NBC regardless of his place of birth.
I think you miss the point. He can’t file any documents at all because he has never been given any documents to file.
Every challenge to Obama has been stopped before it got that far. The Obamanites had it down to a science. Whenever one of these things looked like it was gaining traction, by hook or by crook, they would get to the judges and get them dismissed.
It’s worked for the last three years and they thought it would work this time. It didn’t, hence the Hail Mary pass trying to get the Georgia SecState to take the proceedings off the judge.
It may STILL work. I am sure that, very quietly, things are proceeding behind the scenes. The Obama crew play rough and they play for keeps.
Yes, this is real. Here is the link to the actual letter Brian Kemp sent to Obama’s lawyer.
http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Letter-to-Obama-from-Sec-of-State-Kemp.pdf
Your welcome!!
Your welcome!!
I have to ask. What is your take on the Minor V Happersett case Van Irion will use to declare Obama is not a ‘Constitutional’ natural born Citizen?
It’s a crying shame the Court couldn’t hire someone who could TYPE, or at a minimum, would know how to use the SPACEBAR! No wonder the scum in the white hut disrespect it. For an “official” document to be THAT poorly done is almost a crime in itself!
that was copied and pasted by the indivual who posted it here. Did you not read and see the offical letter from Kemp to Obama’s lawyer on here that someone posted?
About time someone held their feet to the fire!
“Should they receive an adverse ruling on the ballot issue at the state level they will just ask for and likely get a stay on any state court ruling pending a hearing in federal court. “
Doesn’t seem to me that it’s a federal issue at all. The states make the rules regarding the state ballot. The election of a president at a state level is not even a vote for the candidate, it’s for state electors. It’s the electors that actually vote for the president.
What I like BEST about the letter are the references to ‘your client,’ unnamed.
Thanks. Will print and frame. BTTT.
Thanks. I was thinking more about it and I would guess (being totally ignorant of the legal world but...) that the fancy pants lawyers aren’t touching this because they have reputations they care about, so the little nickel and dime local lawyer realizes he can’t present a forged pixel image or printout of a forged pixel image; and then there’s the foreign parent issue as well.
So he doesn’t want to get burned.
I cant’ wait until tomorrow!
See link to actual letter at #104, above.
The guy made a big show after Trump started asking questions, and they claimed to have TWO hard copies of the birth certificate. The obvious question is why have they not made any effort to show one of those two copies to the court. It could have been filed with the motion to quash ... "here's the LFBC that proves these challenges are baseless" ... and the court probably would have bought it. So the LMSM, Obots, Deniers ... everyone should be asking, "Why isn't Obama showing his long form to the court?? What is he afraid of??"
LOL! YOUR CLIENT!
oooh boy...is that a flicker of a light at the end of the tunnel I see?
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.