“Both the Democrats’ Amicus Brief and the Zullo affidavit are likely to be ignored.”
True, but both affidavits are tactical PR stunts from the two camps...but with one BIG difference.
The Zullo affidavit (sworn under penalty of perjury) is a nearly complete criminal indictment of the party or parties that forged Barry’s BC. Zullo claims have a certification of the legal certainty of the forgery by an expert that is court certified (to meet the Daubert standard).
The Zullo affidavit destroys the Obot affidavit which offers NO claim of having any expert certification of authenticity for their BC image.
Therefore the Zullo affidavit is a roadmap for any brave state attorney general or county district attorney to empanel a grand jury to prepare an indictment of the forgers of Barry’s White House pdf BC. If Hawaii were not in the grip of criminal co-conspirators, the Zullo affidavit could be the basis of a criminal forgery investigation there and also of criminal conspiracy by state officials to conceal the original vital records and authenticate the forgery.
Zullo and Arpaio have shown all state and federal officers sworn to uphold the constitution the evidence that will be available in any discovery hearing by a trail court on the merits the next time such a hearing takes place.
The ball is now fully in the court of the Obot legal team to find an equally qualified expert to rebut Zullo’s expert. John Woodman’s embarrassingly inadequate resume obviously doesn’t meet the expert witness requirements for certification under the Daubert standard as explained in detail in Zullo’s affidavit.
Nah, the affidavit would need to be introduced in an original jurisdiction proceeding for it to have probative value.
Since Obama is not a party to the Alabama appeal, his legal representation will ignore it, as will the Alabama government attorneys representing the defendant.
You don’t fight in legal fights that you weren’t asked to join and the Alabama squabble is a Republican-only affair: Republican plaintiffs, Republican defendant, and 9 Republicans on the state Supreme Court.
“Zullo and Arpaio have shown all state and federal officers sworn to uphold the constitution the evidence that will be available in any discovery hearing by a trail court on the merits the next time such a hearing takes place.”
From the for what its worth department, recently there was an exchange between someone claiming to be an ex-deputy county prosecutor from Arizona and the folks at Obama Ballot Challenge.
The alleged prosecutor’s contention is that there will never be a criminal case (for various reasons with jurisdiction being the main one).
In the comments section (Lillie v. George M>).