Posted on 01/25/2012 2:39:58 PM PST by Obama Exposer
This is indeed the bum's rush at the GA SoS, hoping he'll recind his request. If that were the result, I'm sure we could safely say the process has been illegally been tampered with.
The ALJ will perfunctorily appear tomorrow just to give Obama an opportunity to appear and be responsive, but I trust he'll have spent the most time on the scenario contemplated by Jablonzky's letter of this afternoon. Hence, default judgment to Plaintiff, with no further evidence to be considered on appeal. That's probably OK with Jablonsky, as his being an officer of the court would only nature display aversion to submitting a fraudulent document.
I think it was aruanan upthread, who pointed out the flawed logic displayed by Jablonzsky as he cast aspersions both on Taitz and previous legal procedings as if they had already covered the ground of whether Obama was entirely and Constitutionally eligible to be placed on a GA ballot for president. GA SoS would really have to feel an inappropriate threat not to see through that tissue of lies.
Although Jablonsky obviously pointed his bat to the court's right field, the judge won't truly have been tangibly insulted until the non-appearance tomorrow. After all, Zero could (theoretically) have a change of heart (if he had one). Assuming the GA SoS could recind based on an awareness that what his office was doing was "ultra vires", it's conceivable the judge would have nothing left to say. However, Jablonszky's claim is ludicrous on its face. The SoS is surely empowered to vet candidate eligibility, as evidenced by many quotes on FR from GA statues to that effect.
HF
Notice the parsing of words? "The State of Hawaii produced official records documenting birth (whose?) there." Notice that Jablonski says very carefully that the pResident made "documents" available. Nowhere in this statement does Jablonski say that the "documents" made available are the same as what the State of Hawaii produced, even though he (Jablonski) disingenuinely tries to suggest such, by surrounding the statement with references to the Full Faith and Credit language. Busted!
If this has been brought up already further down in the thread, my apologies.
He can’t be president of 50 states, if he is shown to be illegal in one of the 50.
The default judgement with no further evidence is exactly what they (Obama) wants.
Here is why:
It creates a decision on weak circumstances (no evidence from the defense), thus creating the weakest possible judgement against Obama.
AND
Obama is now not required (or even allowed) to submit his official birth records to the court. Submitting these records, and opening them up to legal verification is something Obama cannot afford to do, in my opinion.
The default judgement with no further evidence is exactly what they (Obama) wants.
Here is why:
It creates a decision on weak circumstances (no evidence from the defense), thus creating the weakest possible judgement against Obama.
AND
Obama is now not required (or even allowed) to submit his official birth records to the court. Submitting these records, and opening them up to legal verification is something Obama cannot afford to do, in my opinion.
Well, I’m not a constitutional lawyer, but I think all this would prove legally is that he failed to make the ballot in Georgia. Candidates sometimes do so, for one reason or another, but that doesn’t disqualify them from winning if they get enough electoral votes.
Doesn’t provide a definition of Natural Born Citizen
There are three separate cases:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/79088747/Farrar-Welden-Swensson-Powell-v-Obama-Amicus-Brief-From-Attorney-Donofrio-Georgia-Ballot-Challenge-1-23-2012
I think two cases deal with whether he is a natural born citizen. Orly’s deals with fraud.
Anyone have a summary of the three cases?
Worse case result, the SOS may decide there is no need for proceeding with tomorrows hearing. In which case, one can ask WTH was plaintiffs counsel thinking?
Best case, plaintiffs counsel is prepared with arguments that will defeat the defense position. And, defense counsel may regret his lack of civility.
Defense has cited two Georgia cases that stand for the proposition that
1) the ALJ does not have jurisdiction over constitutional issues (two parent citizenship which one plaintiff counsel Orion stipulates is yet undecided) law (Flint River Mills v. Henry, 1975);
and, the even broader issue
2) 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. to be named on the ballot (Terry v. Handel, 2008)
Tomorrow could easily produce another disappointing outcome similar to that in NH.
If he is willing to write off over 20% of the states right off the bat then he does not plan on being re-elected.
Put the attorney in cuffs.
The GA SoS could rescind if he's convinced the GA court's Handel decision means his setting this process in motion excedes his authority. As was mentioned earlier, however, the GA SoS would be taking all the risk personally without hearing from the opposing parties at this late date. He therefore won't do that I don't believe.
The procedings will return a rather bland result against Obama, which his minions and the media will be able to portray in the most Obama-favorable way.
However, a finding based on the merits presented in court--I think--will have legs, first in the alternate media, then also with the MSM as other states jump on the "bandwagon."
Defensibly the GA SoS is holding this proceding not merely on the basis of the primary, but also on the general, if not ONLY the general (to avoid having to quash this on the basis of the Handel precedent, which I give default credence by ObamaExposer's representation).
HF
OBots and their lawyers gets the slap down from the Secretary of State. LoL!
“The Office of Secretary of State
January 25, 2012
VIA REGULAR MAIL & EMAIL
Michael Jablonski260 Brighton Road, NE Atlanta, 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 State Administrative Hearings (”OSAH”) has handled the candidate challenges involving your client and advising me that you and your client will “suspend” participation in the administrative proceeding. While I regret that you do not feel that the proceedings are appropriate, my referral of this matter to an administrative 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 the referring agency, the Secretary of State’s Office is not a party to the candidate challenge hearings scheduled for tomorrow. To the extent a request to withdraw the case referral is procedurally available, I do 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 judge to report his findings to me after his full consideration of the evidence and law. Upon receipt of the report, 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 my review of the initial decision; however, if you and your client choose to suspend your participation in the OSAH 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 this matter.
Sincerely,Brian P.
Kempcc: Hon. Michael Malihi (c/o Kim Beal - kbeal@osah.ga.gov)Van Irion, Esq. (van@libertylegalfoundation.org)Orly Taitz, Esq. (orly.taitz@gmail.com)
Brian P. Kemp”
http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2012/01/obamas-attorney-jablonski-slapped-down.html
Breaking News: The Georgia Secretary Of State Brian Kemp Slaps Down Obama’s Attorney And Responds To His Letter.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/79405341/Obama-s-Attorney-Jaberwoki-Slapped-Down-By-Georgia-SOS-1-25-2012
Here is the Sec Of State Response:
VIA REGULAR MAIL & EMAIL
Michael Jablonski
260 Brighton Road, NE
Atlanta, Georgia 30309
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
Obamas lawyer basically stated in his letter that Judge Malihi has lost control. This will infuriate Malihi
It will most likely not infuriate Justice Malihi. He has seen this tactic before. All judges have. Any justice will tell you these legally-mischeveous attempts are very revealing. They sometimes perform a "squeeze play" to get a feel for guilt, and the implied admission thereof.
Malihi now knows there is merit to the plaintiffs' cases. His superiors also know, and I am sure they have discussed the issue with the Secretary of State already.
The lady doth protest too much, methinks.
I got to hand it to ya Red Steel. You beat me by 1 minute posting Kemps letter to Jablonski lol.
Too bad, nobody has ever found the video from his Illinois Senate Debate, in which Alan Keyes told him "you don't meet the Natural Born Citizen requirement" to which O replied "doesn't matter, I'm not running for President of the United States, but for Illinois Senator for the next 6-years"
I believe it was videotaped by CBS Chicago station.
Nice response...
“Peril” is an appropriate word for Obama and his “legal” team.
I’m everywhere. ;-) That OBot Paul from Foggy la la land dislike me intensely. LoL.
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.