Skip to comments.Georgia Freepers, I Need Urgent Help!
Posted on 01/22/2012 1:30:04 PM PST by butterdezillion
click here to read article
I believe an attorney would have to gain permission from the court to file an Amicus Brief. I am not sure though. I am unfamiliar with Georgia’s Rules of the Court.
What do you have that’s so important?
Walker Chandler is a libertarian lawyer who has won cases before scotus
And a recent Facebook ad suggests that this may well be the route that Obamas people are going to take.
This was all discussed in detail here (over 700 posts): ...http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2835505/posts?q=1&;page=1
Including the new pic of Obama in the library claiming he was born of "a single mother"
Basically the father is that person named on the birth cwertificate ...weather or not he is the biological father.
Can only get taken off after a DNA test.
(1) Contact Jay Sekulow @ ACLJ; I am sure they could gladly refer--
COPY & PASTE: www.aclj.org
There are some ADF (Alliance Defense Fund) lawyers here in GA...
COPY & PASTE: https://www.alliancedefensefund.org/LegalHelp **************
There is a list of Christian advocacy legal groups HERE:
COPY & PASTE: http://www.alliancedefensefund.org/About/Allies
"Attorney Mark Hatfield on behalf of Carl Swensson and Kevin Powell filed a notice to produce records against Obama in the Georgia Ballot Challenge. Attorney Hatfield also filed a motion for determination of placement of burden of proof in the challenge. Also Judge Malihi issued an order today related to the motion for determination which is linked below. All 3 new filings linked below.
From the Notice to Produce:
Pursuant to OSAH Rule 616-1-2-.19, Defendant Barack Obama is hereby notified to be and appear before the Georgia Office of State Administrative Hearings, the Honorable Michael M. Malihi presiding, at the Fulton County Justice Center Building, 161 Pryor Street, Courtroom G-40, Atalanta, Georgia on January 26, 2012 at 9:00 a.m., and to bring with him into said Court the following items to be used as evidence by the Plaintiffs in the above-styled case:
(a) One (1) of the two (2) original certified copies of Defendant Barack Obama's ("long form") Certificate of Live Birth as referenced in the four (4) pages of Exhibit "A" attached;
(b) All medical, religious, administrative, or other records of or related to Defendant Barack Obama's birth;
(c) Any and all United States Passports, passport applications, and passport-related records for Defendant Barack Obama;
(d) Any and all passport, passport applications, and passport-related records for Defendant Barack Obama from any country, nation, or sovereignty;
(e) Any and all college and university admission information, both undergraduate and postgraduate, for Defendant Barack Obama, including, but not limited to, admission applications; letters of recommendation; school transcripts; financial aid applications; scholarship applications; and any and all correspondence awarding admission, financial aid, scholarships, or the like;
(f) Any and all applications and accompanying materials submitted by or for Defendant Barack Obama to the State Bar of Illinois, the State Supreme Court of Illinois, the Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission of the Supreme Court of Illinois, and any other similar entity regulating the admission to the practice of law;
(g) Any and all other documents, materials, and papers having any relation to the subject of the birthplace, citizenship, denizenship, and national origin of Defendant Barack Obama;
(h) Any and all other documents, materials, and papers having any relation to the subject of the birthplace, citizenship, denizenship, and national origin of Defendant's father, Barack Obama Sr.
(i) All correspondence between Defendant Barack Obama and any other person, firm, political party, or entity discussing Defendant's status vel non as a natural born Citizen pursuant to Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the United States Constitution.
Defendant will note that the preceding items are requested hereby, whether they pertain to Defendant under his name Barack Obama or any other name, including but not limited to Barack Hussein Obama II; Barry Soetoro; Barry Soebarkah; Barry Obama, or the like.
“Even the Obots over at Fogbow say over and over that Obamas attorney should just show up with one of the two alleged self-authenticating LFBCs next Thursday and the hearing would be over.”
An attorney needs a witness to submit evidence for admission to the record. For example, the Judge reads the case file number and ask representatives of the parties to introduce themselves for the record. The Judge then says, “Call your first witness.”
I’ve seen posts indicating Obama’s attorney could use the Georgia Democratic Chairman to submit the certified copy of Obama’s COLB, but that calls into question the chain of custody. How did he obtain it? How did he preserve it? Who’s had access to it? In this case, it would probably be disallowed as hearsay.
The only viable way to have a certified copy of Obama’s COLB submitted as evidence is to call Obama as a witness and have him produced it for the Court’s consideration. If admitted, Obama’s attorney could ask Obama how he obtained it. Who’s had access to it? How has he preserved it?
Of course, opposing Counsel would have the opportunity to cross-examine the witness and impeach the evidence through his sworn testimony.
Is this a certified copy of the only birth record you’ve requested from the Hawai’i DoH?
Can you describe the certified copy of any other birth record you’ve requested and received from Hawai’i DoH?
Does the certified copy of the birth record you’ve submitted to the Court as evidence have signatures of witness(es) who attested to your birth?
Did the certified copy of the “long form” you’ve requested have witness(es) who signed statements attesting to the act of your birth?
Why have those witness(es) withdrawn their signatures and attestation from your current birth record?
Obama won’t show and his lawyer can’t introduce evidence of his birth certificate without him or a Hawai’i official to submit it.
Something’s odd. The contact info on this website shows a Knoxville, TN mailing address, but the area code listed is incorrect for Knoxville. The ONLY area code we have is 865, not 423. The 423 area code is for upper or lower East Tennessee. Hmmm.
Listings for lawyers in GA per the State Bar of GA:
Local Government Law
State/locale message boards. link below to the one for Georgia. All the Freepers that are registered in Georgia will be there, that’s what they’re their for.
Dad has said all along he won’t show. The MSM will not cover the results even if the judge denies him a place on the ballot.
I'm not an attorney, but IIRC under the Federal Rules of Evidence no witness is needed to introduce a “self-authenticating document” such as a United States state vital record that is properly certified with a seal and signed.
Such a certified record is presumed to be prima facie (on its face) valid...but can be contested if sufficient cause is presented to the judge.
“Rule 902. Evidence That Is Self-Authenticating
“The following items of evidence are self-authenticating; they require no extrinsic evidence of authenticity in order to be admitted:
“(1) Domestic Public Documents That Are Sealed and Signed. A document that bears:
“(A) a seal purporting to be that of the United States; any state, district, commonwealth, territory, or insular possession of the United States; the former Panama Canal Zone; the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands; a political subdivision of any of these entities; or a department, agency, or officer of any entity named above; and
“(B) a signature purporting to be an execution or attestation.”
Orly keeps trying to do this but doesn't seem to know how. At times she seems to think she is in criminal court where the defendant is entitled to a much higher threshold of proof than preponderance of the evidence that you have in a civil proceeding.
WOW .. both barrels loaded!
God bless and protect Judge Malihi, his family and
Obamas Motion to Quash Subpoena Denied and a Likely Explanation
Saturday, January 21st, 2012
Thanks to those who have emailed me info regarding the current eligibility subpoena process. I wanted to take some time to aggregate whats publicly available and then provide my own non-attorney opinion on what appears to be going on.
Lets back up and follow the subpoena issue from the beginning.
I originally questioned whether or not a State-based web site-posted subpoena that had already been pre-filled with the GA Admin Courts judges signature stamp was legitimate and, as has become exceedingly obvious, it is.
In that posting, I asked the following questions, which I think can now be answered:
Does he have jurisdiction to do so? If so, why? If not, why not?
Is he merely attempting to retrieve evidence to bolster his capacity to advise the Georgia Secretary of State on Obamas eligibility and this is his only way to do it?
Is this a fluke and someone is attempting to set up Internet readers because administrative law judges cant issue subpoenas? (I would have thought a judge is a judge is a judge, they can do these kinds of things within the scope of their jurisdiction)
First: Yes, the judge does have jurisdiction to do so, even in other States, assuming that, per the Interstate Subpoena Deposition Service, the receiving Court in the differing State allows for said subpoena to be enforceable in that other jurisdiction. Per the same posting on this site to which I referenced, that wont be known until January 26, 2012. Personally, I suspect that in Hawaiis case, theyll consider it unenforceable.
Second: Judge Malihi apparently does think that further evidence can be retrieved. The rest of this posting will explain this point.
Third: No, this situation is not a fluke, is for real, and could have ramifications at the State level.
Furthermore, not only is the subpoena for real, but on January 18, 2012, Michael Jablonski, the Georgia-based attorney representing Obama as the Defendant in a handful of cases here in Georgia, filed a Motion to Quash Subpoenas.
Ill leave it to you to read the associated PDF; Ill point out a glaring admission regarding the Electoral College and Joint Session of Congress shortly.
This simply and in a straightforward manner helps to bolster the fundamental case that States do, in fact, regulate the manner in which Electors (of the Electoral College) are appointed. Ironically, this part of the Constitution is also the impediment against term limits, because while States can regulate how federal elections are held in their respective jurisdictions, they cannot supersede what the Constitution already stipulates.
Of course, I enjoy using the fact that since States have this regulating ability, they can therefore (again, within their respective jurisdictions) demand and/or require anything they wish regarding the eligibility of any candidate for office insofar as such demands and/or requirements do not supersede whats already in the Constitution.
Now, Id go a step further and suggest that, since Mr. Jablonski has yet to legally bolster his arguments, I dont think he can, for the fact that there is presently no case law that stipulates legality in the area of presidential eligibility, because
(1) no such presidential eligibility case has ever been heard on its merits, and
(2) there isnt even a Supreme Court decision that has ever been made regarding presidential eligibility.
In fact, even the State Department agrees with this assessment (see my posting of June 29, 2009, based on attorney Leo Donofrios work at the time):
Ed. 7 FAM 1131.6-2 Eligibility for Presidency
a. It has never been determined definitively by a court whether a person who acquired U.S. citizenship by birth abroad to U.S. citizens is a natural born citizen within the meaning of Article II of the Constitution and, therefore, eligible for the Presidency.
Next, also understand the following. Mr. Jablonski makes the following claim in his motion (Section 1, paragraph 3):
Pursuant to the scheme established in the Constitution of the United States (Article II, Section 1) voters selected presidential electors on November 4, 2008. Presidential electors voted for president on December 15 pursuant to 3 U.S.C. § 7.
A joint session of the United States Congress counted and certified the votes of presidential electors on January 8, 2009. Vice President Dick Cheney announced that the presidential electors selected Barack Obama as president with 365 presidential elector votes, exceeding the absolute majority of 270 votes required. President Obama took office on January 20, 2009.
Presidential electors and Congress, not the State of Georgia, hold the Constitutional responsibility for determining the qualifications of presidential candidates. The election of President Obama by the presidential electors, confirmed by Congress, makes the documents and testimony sought by plaintiff irrelevant.
All of the above turns on one missing key word: solely. As I stated back in February 26, 2010
The Joint Session Congress has the final but not sole role of determining eligibility of a presidential candidate, especially at the beginning of an election campaign! After all, what would be the point of having a campaign with primaries and then subsequently an Electoral College except to actually vet a candidate?
~ ~ ~ ~
Van Irion - Liberty Legal Foundation
~ ~ ~ ~
I thought it was quite curious when OReilly interviewed Huckabee, and Huck wandered into this mirage at the very end:
Huckabee on O’Reilly: Did Obama Get Foreign Student Loans in College?
423 IS the right area code for knoxville...
“Can only get taken off after a DNA test.”
That is only true for custody and child support paternity issues but NOT for NBC citizenship or UK subject at birth determinations, IMO.
On closer inspection the alleged Obama 2012 Facebook ad that says “born to a single mother” also says “raised in Kansas” for which there is absolutely no support, so it looks like the ad is BS.
Is he/she one of Soros’ clowns?
“... but can be contested if sufficient cause is presented to the judge.”
In Georgia administrative hearings, the rules of evidence as applied in the trial of non-jury civil actions shall be followed, subject to special statutory rules or agency rules as authorized by law.
Judges in a non-jury trial may review all proffered materials while excluding from consideration any evidence that they determine to be inadmissible under the law.
In a non-jury civil suit, a jury won’t be prejudiced by evidence entered on a provisional basis. Consequently, Orly can make her case with a copy of the long form posted on the WH website and articulate her argument there are anomalies between the long form, signature and attestation of witnesses, and the COLB, attestation of witnesses withdrawn. And the PDF has too many layers.
If I wanted to submit evidence can I submit it in an affidavit that Orly then presents?
Does an amicus brief contain evidence, or does it just make an argument?
If we’re talking about an affidavit, I’d just need to know how GA requires it to be formatted and submitted, etc. That’s exactly what I need a GA attorney for.
In my opinion, you would have to submit your proposed evidence to Orly ask to be called as a Plaintiff’s witness for a rebuttal for Defendant’s submission of evidence.
There are rules for filing an Intervention with the Court, but you will have to obtain permission from the parties to the civil suit. It would be easier to submit your evidence to Orly and ask to be called as a Plaintiff’s witness. You’ll have to testify how you obtained the evidence and how you preserved it.
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.