Obama's Attorney Files Motion To Quash Subpoenas In The Georgia Access Ballot Challenge

http://www.scribd.com/doc/78686303/Farrar-Taitz-v-Obama-Motion-to-Quash-Georgia-Subpoenas-Obama-Ballot-Access-Challenge-1-18-2012 ^

[Obama Exposer]

Obama's motion to quash:

"The sovereignty of the State of Georgia does not extend beyond the limits of the State. O.C.G.A. § 50-2-20. Since the sovereignty of the State does not extend beyond its territorial limits, an administrative subpoena has no effect. Thus, OSAH rules specify that subpoenas must be served within the State of Georgia. Ga. Comp. R. & Regs. r. 616-1-2-.19(5) (“A subpoena may be served at any place within Georgia….”)."

"Plaintiff‟s attorney violates two rules of practice with these subpoenas. First, they must be served within the State of Georgia. Ga. Comp. R. & Regs. r. 616-1-2-.19(5) (“A subpoena may be served at any place within Georgia….”). The sovereignty of the State of Georgia does not extend beyond the limits of the State. OCGA 50-2-20. The attempted use of these subpoenas to obtain documents from Hawaii and State of Washington is improper. Subpoenas issued by Georgia courts do not have extraterritorial power. Hughes v. State, 228 Ga. 593, 187 S.E.2d 135 (1972)

[Obama Exposer]

It seems that his legal argument with respect to the administrative subpoenas having only limited powers and only within the State of Georgia is correct. Obama's attorney Michael Jablonski also takes a jab at Taitz witness Doug Vogt (CEO of Archive Index System) who is to testify about the layers and anomalies in Obama's long form abstract birth certificate January 26,2012. He calls him a 'office machine salesman'.

[Hoosier-Daddy]

Those witnesses are agreeing to testify.

[Andy from Chapel Hill]

Thomas Watson and Steve Jobs were “office machine salesmen”.

[Hoosier-Daddy]

I suspect the judge will rule that Steve will have to produce documentation. Whether or not Hawaii complies is irrelevant.

[VeniVidiVici]

Yes, the subpoena is only valid in Georgia. And if the Democrats wish to certify Obama in Georgia using only documents obtained and available in Georgia I’m sure Taitz would enjoy that very much.

[Hoosier-Daddy]

Here's to hoping Steve goes golfing during a storm:

[Pearls Before Swine]

Help me out here. Suppose that Georgia can’t force anything out of Hawaii due to questions of state sovereignty. But, isn’t Georgia in control of its own nominating process?

Then, although it Georgia may not be able to compel document production from Hawaii, Georgia could also decide that the defendant Barry isn’t documenting his qualifications because those document were not produced. In other words, it could become in Barry’s interest to produce documentation supporting his claim as a legal candidate if he can.

[Red Steel]

Still, I have no doubt that Hawaii would honor these subpoenas if no personal attorney did not intervene to quash them if this was before the day Obama arrived on the national scene. They don’t follow their own laws or regulations and play evasive games to protect Obama.

[Hoosier-Daddy]

Which he can’t IFF his father was born in Kenya.

[Red Steel]

Obama makes the choice not to support his case with birth documents makes him one step closer of not getting on the ballot in Georgia.

[Hoosier-Daddy]

Actually IFF his father or mother was not a citizen of the US.

[dagogo redux]

Great word, “Quash”.

Obama, Quasher-in-Chief.

Hmm, hmm, hmm.

[Obama Exposer]

Here is Taitz response to the ‘Motion To Quash’ her subpoenas.

Here’s an excerpted response from Dr. Taitz, Esq.’s blog:

1. most of his motion is a total BS, irrelevant material, improper attacks on plaintiff’s counsel with an attempt to prejudice the court

2. Obama has no standing to challenge subpoenas issued and addressed to other parties. If other parties want to challenge, it is up to them. It is interesting that he mentions Susan Daniels, John Smpson and Loretta Fuddy, I wonder why? Is there something in their testimony he does not want to be heard by the judge?

3. there is nothing in subpoena issued to him, that is improper or oppressive

4. he was properly served through his attorney in Atlanta GA, within the jurisdiction

[Goreknowshowtocheat]

Exactly, no docs no play. GA is holding all the cards. They control who gets on the ballot.

[GregNH]

So let’s see if I can get this right. The court in GA is saying we need to verify that the candidate is qualified. No one on the candidates side is offering qualifying documents so the court says to HI we need some docs. Then the candidates lawyers argue that GA has no authority to ask for the docs. So there will be no docs and the GA court will have no choice but to say no tickie no laundry....

In other words I am at a loss to understand why the candidates lawyers want to squash a subpoena that is being ignored in the first place. This is Russian Roulette IMO.

[neverbluffer]

I think some are missing a valid point here.

The Court and Plaintiff’s dont need Hawaii necessarily to provide evidence.

The subpeona can be issued against OBAMA himself to produce the records!!!!

[bluecat6]

“Quash” - interesting term.

http://www.ehow.com/how_7879251_file-motion-quash-subpoena.html

BTW.

A F-Bow the thread on this is up to 80+ pages.

http://www.thefogbow.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=88&t=6845

[yldstrk]

great point

Georgia can say fine, if Obama can’t produce any documents, he ain’t getting on the ballot

I think his “attorney” has outsmarted himself

[bluecat6]

The big guns are laying cover for the small guns (Hawaii officials).

The small guns may go public under pressure. They have been allowed to get away with their dancing since 2008. And the shells are being ‘walked in on them’ now. So the covering fire is coming from WH to make them feel safe.

Brian Schatz should be put on the stand and asked directly:

“Why did you provide invalid candidate documents in 2008 that did not include the eligibility statement? What it an attempt to defraud the elections commission?”

Schatz knows, as do others in Hawaii. Emails and phone calls between Hawaii and Washington must be burning up the wires.

[iontheball]

Another important factor is who has the ultimate burden of proof. As I see it is on Obama once his eligibility is challenged by a Georgia citizen. The burden of proof standard is usually preponderance of the the evidence. The only way the ALJ can rule in favor of Obama on the motion is if he is bought out or threatened. The case has to go to trial on the merits if the ALJ is going to be able to come up with findings of fact and recommendations for the Sec of State.