At hearing on Atlanta

Courtroom full. Media here. Taitz here. Jablonski nyet so far. Can’t post after hearing starts.

About Dr. Conspiracy

I'm not a real doctor, but I have a master's degree.
This entry was posted in Ballot Challenges, Orly Taitz. Bookmark the permalink.

226 Responses to At hearing on Atlanta

  1. Wile says:

    Sit down. We can’t see what’s going on. *wink*

  2. Judge called pretrial conference. No Jablonski in sight.

  3. egh says:

    Hello to you and Mrs C! (pray presume for your sake.)

  4. G says:

    LOL! Getting a kick out of seeing Dr. C right there in the lower left-hand corner! He sure seems to be having a blast chatting away so far! Glad to see he made it there in person. πŸ™‚

    Wile: Sit down. We can’t see what’s going on. *wink*

  5. G says:

    That is what I feared when all the lawyers who went into chambers were all from one side…

    …NOT good… πŸ™

    Dr. Conspiracy: Judge called pretrial conference. No Jablonski in sight.

  6. Sarina says:

    The page is not opening, why?

  7. Scientist says:

    G: That is what I feared when all the lawyers who went into chambers were all from one side…
    …NOT good…

    No, GOOD. He said he wouldn’t attend and he is a man of his word.

  8. J. Potter says:

    “Vattelevison” … LOL … can’t out-Poe the birthers! πŸ˜‰

    Loud sneeze at 9:15 got me all excited.

  9. G says:

    To clarify, he said he wouldn’t attend unless he got a response indicating why he should…

    …which he did…

    Of course Birtherism is a farce. But unless he sent info in advance to the judge, not being there means not providing ANY defense position at all. For that: NOT good.

    Oh well, just got the popcorn in the microwave. It should be ready in time for this debacle to get underway…

    Scientist: No, GOOD. He said he wouldn’t attend and he is a man of his word.

  10. G says:

    Yeah, noticed that listed as a “backup site”… πŸ˜‰

    J. Potter: “Vattelevison” … LOL … can’t out-Poe the birthers! Loud sneeze at 9:15 got me all excited.

  11. J. Potter says:

    G: To clarify, he said he wouldn’t attend unless he got a response indicating why he should…
    …which he did…
    Of course Birtherism is a farce. But unless he sent info in advance to the judge, not being there means not providing ANY defense position at all. For that: NOT good.

    Life cereal here πŸ˜‰
    To reiterate my question which has gone ananswered all week …. even if no defense is entered, how do the birthers win?

  12. G says:

    Long term – none.

    But if this just increases and extends the “fiasco”… not smart.

    J. Potter: To reiterate my question which has gone ananswered all week …. even if no defense is entered, how do the birthers win?

  13. Scientist says:

    J. Potter: To reiterate my question which has gone ananswered all week …. even if no defense is entered, how do the birthers win?

    They don’t. Unless the SoS wants to do something dumb. Which I think Karl Rove will “suggest” he not.

  14. Wile says:

    When did the guy at the defense table get there. After the pre-conference? Was he with the judge already?

  15. J. Potter says:

    Sarina: The page is not opening, why?

    Not sure, the address is … http://www.art2superpac.com/
    Judge is seating and they taking testimony.
    The rowers keep on rowing …. πŸ˜‰

  16. Bob says:

    The birthersummit.org streaming seems to be working a bit better.

  17. Rennie says:

    What the heck is that beeping.

  18. Bob says:

    I can’t believe they’re actually presenting their Vattelism gobbledygook.

  19. J. Potter says:

    Well, this is it, looks like birthers are gonna get to air it all out …. this could take a loooooong time. If Malihi hasn’t interrupted yet, he probably ain’t gonna.

    Soon they’ll be reading websites into the record.

    I wonder what the makeup of the audience is? local media? Birthers, TPers? Orlikins?

  20. Sarina says:

    J. Potter: egh

    I think everybody was trying to download and the page was slow, but finally I got it.

    thanks!

  21. Dave says:

    So, no Jablonski still? I don’t know what he looks like, so I can’t tell from the video feed.

  22. G says:

    Agreed… *rolls eyes*

    Bob: I can’t believe they’re actually presenting their Vattelism gobbledygook.

    J. Potter: Well, this is it, looks like birthers are gonna get to air it all out …. this could take a loooooong time. If Malihi hasn’t interrupted yet, he probably ain’t gonna.Soon they’ll be reading websites into the record.I wonder what the makeup of the audience is? local media? Birthers, TPers? Orlikins?

  23. Bob says:

    Wow! They’ve proven that Sr. wasn’t a citizen!

  24. J. Potter says:

    Is that a marmot in the back of that guy’s pants? Oh, no, just a hat.

    I think.

    Proper placement for a birther. πŸ˜‰

  25. Bob says:

    How long did the judge tell her she has?

  26. G says:

    Judge to Orly: “I don’t need to see the video.” LOL!

  27. Rennie says:

    I’m having a hard time hearing over the background noise. What did he tell her was irrelevant (so far)?

  28. G says:

    Judge to Orly: “Council, please address the court”. LOL!

    Crazy Orly thinks she’s here to put on a show for the audience… ROTFL!

  29. y_p_w says:

    Looks like the judge is having problems with Orly. He hasn’t really interrupted any other attorneys or witnesses.

  30. DPM says:

    How did this conclude? When I looked at the feed, all I saw were people milling about.

  31. richCares says:

    Frog Marching starts right after Orly nails it down with such fantastic logic

  32. Bob says:

    I thought that Orly didn’t ascribe to Vattelism but she seems to be talking about that (it’s difficult to understand her).

  33. DPM says:

    Oops, never mind, it’s back.

  34. donna says:

    has she 12 minutes i think

  35. G says:

    Orly calls Christopher Strunk to the stand… LOL!

  36. donna says:

    sorry

    she has

  37. G says:

    *rolls eyes* So he was just there to point out the meaningless Soebarakh crossed out line….

  38. Bob says:

    The word “soebarkah” on a form!

  39. G says:

    Now Orly calls the crazy PI lady from OH who did the amateur Lexus-Nexus search on SSNs and sent Orly down that path of stupidity…

    Wow…this court really is just letting them blather down any meaningless rabbit hole possible!

  40. US Citizen says:

    Admitting to an illegal SSN search now.

  41. richCares says:

    the judge is letting her go on and on ssn (Daniels’ testimony)

  42. Dave says:

    Taitz has shown signs of being equalling accepting of all theories why Obama is ineligible and/or a crook. She has argued Vattel before.

    Bob:
    I thought that Orly didn’t ascribe to Vattelism but she seems to be talking about that (it’s difficult to understand her).

  43. G says:

    Seriously??? Arguing on the stand that he was born in 1890??? *facepalm*

  44. Bob says:

    The judge says Orly can have two hours.

  45. Dave says:

    I really can’t understand the audio track — some technical issue — but has Taitz argued that the failure of Jablonski to comply with her subpoenas is preventing her from making her case?

  46. donna says:

    so daniels swore under oath that she ILLEGALLY gained access to ss #s?

  47. G says:

    Yeah, she’s simply of the mindset of sling any poo against the wall and hope it sticks…

    Dave: Taitz has shown signs of being equalling accepting of all theories why Obama is ineligible and/or a crook. She has argued Vattel before.

  48. richCares says:

    if the judge rules in birther side, Georgia in for major law suits

  49. G says:

    Hey judge…how does anything to do with crazy SSN conspiracy nonsense have anything to do with the matters before the jurisdiction of your court??? !

    What a silly dog & pony show this is!

  50. y_p_w says:

    Where did they find all these people? They pretty much just shop for “experts”. OTOH – I know that attorneys often have paid experts for hire who will say anything they want.

  51. US Citizen says:

    donna:
    so daniels swore under oath that she ILLEGALLY gained access to ss #s?

    Yep and her voice reflected her nervousness in conveying that.

  52. J. Potter says:

    Bob: The judge says Orly can have two hours.

    She only asked for … 40 min?

    This guy is from ITT Tech?!? *palmface*

  53. Rennie says:

    Please please please mention the smiley face.

  54. y_p_w says:

    G:
    Hey judge…how does anything to do with crazy SSN conspiracy nonsense have anything to do with the matters before the jurisdiction of your court??? !

    What a silly dog & pony show this is!

    If this were a trial judge, most of this would have been shut down as irrelevant to the case even without a defense attorney present.

  55. Dave says:

    I’m no lawyer, but I worry about the judge ruling for Taitz not on merits but in the nature of a sanction for failing to comply with the subpoenas.

    richCares:
    if the judge rules in birther side, Georgia in for major law suits

  56. J. Potter says:

    PDF Madness. In your courtroom!

    Go, Georgia, go, Georgia, go, go, go Georgia……

  57. Sarina says:

    Can Orly practice law in GA? Isn’t she suppose to practice in California only?

  58. Majority Will says:

    Rennie:
    Please please please mention the smiley face.

    πŸ˜€

  59. y_p_w says:

    Actually – in a real trial, there would have to be a defense, but I’ve seen judges shut down a line of irrelevant questioning even when the defense attorney didn’t say anything.

  60. Bob says:

    US Citizen: Yep and her voice reflected her nervousness in conveying that.

    I noticed that too. On top of that she was lying about SSN’s being tied to a particular state.

  61. Majority Will says:

    richCares:
    if the judge rules in birther side, Georgia in for major law suits

    That’s the plan.

  62. G says:

    Now the PDF nonsense? Seriously??? This is really turning into a laissez faire free-for-all!

    Wow, this judge takes the most liberal definition of “hearing” possible! Any clown who wants to get on the stand and be heard can simply do so, for any reason whatsoever at all…

    What a farce!!!

    I’ll be the first to admit that I was completely wrong and did not think that any serious court would allow this to just be a free form forum for merely venting and for allowing anyone who wants to sit in a chair to simply do so willy-nilly!

    These aren’t “witnesses” nor are they providing “expert testimony” is even the most lax definition of the legal terms! You might as well pull any random person off the street and put them on the stand to read off screens and documents put in front of their faces…

    What an utter joke this has become!!!

  63. y_p_w says:

    Dave:
    I’m no lawyer, but I worry about the judge ruling for Taitz not on merits but in the nature of a sanction for failing to comply with the subpoenas.

    I think it would be one thing for him to deny the motion to quash, but I’m guessing that attempts to sanction a sitting President could probably be shut down in Federal court. I don’t think the judge (or a superior court judge) is that stupid.

  64. Bob says:

    Ukeleles! Smiley faces!

  65. G says:

    Well, at least for those Birthers who simply want their “day in court” to vent their butt-hurt little fee-fees… they are getting to do just that – vent…

  66. US Citizen says:

    Bob: I noticed that too.On top of that she was lying about SSN’s being tied to a particular state.

    I can give her the benefit of the doubt and coin it as being mistaken instead of lying, but Daniels still accessed a database with a specific disclaimer that indicated it was for employment verification only. A federal offense to use it for any other purpose. So she’s gone on record incriminating herself. Sweet.

  67. Majority Will says:

    G:
    Now the PDF nonsense?Seriously???This is really turning into a laissez faire free-for-all!

    Wow, this judge takes the most liberal definition of “hearing” possible!Any clown who wants to get on the stand and be heard can simply do so, for any reason whatsoever at all…

    What a farce!!!

    I’ll be the first to admit that I was completely wrong and did not think that any serious court would allow this to just be a free form forum for merely venting and for allowing anyone who wants to sit in a chair to simply do so willy-nilly!

    These aren’t “witnesses” nor are they providing “expert testimony” is even the most lax definition of the legal terms!You might as well pull any random person off the street and put them on the stand to read off screens and documents put in front of their faces…

    What an utter joke this has become!!!

    This irrelevant farce is an utter waste of time and taxpayer resources. The TPers should be pissed.

  68. alg says:

    Gotta remember, Mr. Malihi holds no substantive authority. All he is statutorily authorized to do is collect facts, establish a record and make a recommendation to the Secretary of State.

  69. Bob says:

    Quiet! The copier salesman is testifying!

  70. Scientist says:

    Majority Will: richCares:
    if the judge rules in birther side, Georgia in for major law suits
    That’s the plan.

    Yes. And in the news that actually matters http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0112/71994.html

  71. y_p_w says:

    G:
    These aren’t “witnesses” nor are they providing “expert testimony” is even the most lax definition of the legal terms!You might as well pull any random person off the street and put them on the stand to read off screens and documents put in front of their faces…

    What an utter joke this has become!!!

    I think these types of hearings often host people without attorneys. This is obviously not a trial court, because a trial court judge would never allow a trial to continue without an attorney.

  72. DG says:

    Really wishing for a clearer stream, I’m getting lots of gobbly-gook.

    This is great.

  73. JoZeppy says:

    I take it Jablonski never showed. Personally, don’t agree with that approach. If you’re there, you at least have the opportunity to call it like it is. Tell the judge he has created a media circus that is offensive to the Office of the President, and to the institutions of the State of Georgia. Slam the certified COLB on the table and say, “there is your eligibility, can we move on now?” That, and the last thing in the world you want is someone later down the line trying to argue that you waived the right to contest the proceedings by not appearing and following the state procedure (like Gingrich did in the VA primaries)….altough it doesn’t really matter. Obama doesn’t need the Georgia primary, but if they tried to keep him off the ballot, it’s a good way of painting Republicans as crazy nut jobs (and Georgia trying to keep the black man off the ballot…shades of Jim Crowe…not a bad thing to win over independants with). As long as you avoid a claim of waiver, if the SoS tried to keep him off the ballot, it’s just a quick filing with the Federal Court for the District of Georgia away from smacking the state in its place.

  74. Dave says:

    I’m way out on a limb here, but states do have the right to set up hoops to be jumped through to get on the ballot — forms to be filled out, petitions to get signed, etc. — and if they argue that complying with those subpeonas was one of those hoops, I think that could be very difficult to overturn.

    y_p_w: I think it would be one thing for him to deny the motion to quash, but I’m guessing that attempts to sanction a sitting President could probably be shut down in Federal court.I don’t think the judge (or a superior court judge) is that stupid.

  75. G says:

    I agree with you.

    JoZeppy: I take it Jablonski never showed. Personally, don’t agree with that approach. If you’re there, you at least have the opportunity to call it like it is. Tell the judge he has created a media circus that is offensive to the Office of the President, and to the institutions of the State of Georgia. Slam the certified COLB on the table and say, “there is your eligibility, can we move on now?” That, and the last thing in the world you want is someone later down the line trying to argue that you waived the right to contest the proceedings by not appearing and following the state procedure (like Gingrich did in the VA primaries)….altough it doesn’t really matter. Obama doesn’t need the Georgia primary, but if they tried to keep him off the ballot, it’s a good way of painting Republicans as crazy nut jobs (and Georgia trying to keep the black man off the ballot…shades of Jim Crowe…not a bad thing to win over independants with). As long as you avoid a claim of waiver, if the SoS tried to keep him off the ballot, it’s just a quick filing with the Federal Court for the District of Georgia away from smacking the state in its place.

  76. Scientist says:

    G: What an utter joke this has become!!!

    Hence no attendance by Jablonski. If the President wants to partcipate in jokes, he will go on Stewart and Colbert.

  77. Bob says:

    If Jablonski were there he would have to be interrupting ever other word.

  78. Majority Will says:

    Perhaps a few more birthers like Dean Haskins will realize that this birther squawk fest is an idiotic circus of bigots and an embarrassment to the U.S.

  79. Lord Basil says:

    Well the illegal president is going to go out because he did something illegal…LOL.

    I am relieved there are still judges who care about the constitution. This man is a great patriot.

  80. J. Potter says:

    G: What an utter joke this has become!!!

    Oh, I don’t know, assuming the state isn’t about to go whole-hog birfer* (and they aren’t), this could be a great way to deal with the birthers.

    It’s like Malihi’s court has been invaded by 4 carloads of door-to-door proselytizers. You know they’ll just keep knocking if you ignore them. So let ‘im on in. Sit a spell, Let them carry on while you do laundry. While you do dishes. Offer them a drink, talking is thirsty work. And when they finally air out, thank them for coming and send them on their way.

    They can’t say they didn’t get a hearing, that they were ignored. They go quietly, all smiles.

    Of course when they’re decided against, they’ll rant, rave, and rend their hair, but be doing so from a safe distance and from behind keyboards. Not in the guy’s courtroom.

    * New UGA mascot: Birfdogs! (Picture Orly on sidelines on a leash (or don’t))

  81. Daniel says:

    G: What an utter joke this has become!!!

    OTOH can you imagine the deathblow to the birthers if they actually got their day in court, with no opposition, and allowed as much time as they wanted to lay out on the table absolutely everything they had, without interruption… and still lost?

    Certainly would put a kibosh on the “not heard on the merits” crap.

  82. Scientist says:

    Dave: I’m way out on a limb here, but states do have the right to set up hoops to be jumped through to get on the ballot — forms to be filled out, petitions to get signed, etc. — and if they argue that complying with those subpeonas was one of those hoops, I think that could be very difficult to overturn.

    Keep in mind that this proceeding ONLY concerns the Democratic primary. Not being on a primary ballot does not mean you can’t be on the general election ballot (the Republicans could decide to nominate someone who is not even running now-many think they might). The general election ballot would involve a completely separate challenge, hearings and rulings.

  83. Dave says:

    This is a typical birther pre-hearing assessment of judges.

    Lord Basil:
    This man is a great patriot.

  84. J. Potter says:

    Dave: and if they argue that complying with those subpeonas was one of those hoops, I think that could be very difficult to overturn.

    Doubt it / slash won’t happen. This is the equivalent of assuming a default judgment for the party challenging the eligibility.

  85. Arthur says:

    Absolutely.

    Lord Basil: I am relieved there are still judges who care about the constitution. This man is a great patriot.

  86. G says:

    You probably should hold your “praise” until you see a ruling. All you have so far is a dog & pony show of letting a bunch of people vent their cases…

    So don’t count your chickens until they hatch.

    Lord Basil: Well the illegal president is going to go out because he did something illegal…LOL.I am relieved there are still judges who care about the constitution. This man is a great patriot.

  87. yutube says:

    Orly is one of the worst attorneys I’ve ever seen, seriously. Not addressing the court properly, not asking the right questions. The witnesses are much articulated and professional than this lady. What a shame.

  88. US Citizen says:

    Well, they always said that no one would listen to them.
    Here Orly has 2 hrs to “enter evidence.”
    After she finishes, the birthers can no longer say they haven’t been heard. No win. A loss really.

    It would be nice if the opposition was there to present her own foibles in a similar vaudeville show like hers.
    2 hrs wouldn’t be enough tho.

  89. G says:

    AGREED.

    J. Potter: They can’t say they didn’t get a hearing, that they were ignored. They go quietly, all smiles.
    Of course when they’re decided against, they’ll rant, rave, and rend their hair, but be doing so from a safe distance and from behind keyboards. Not in the guy’s courtroom.

  90. Majority Will says:

    alg:
    Gotta remember, Mr. Malihi holds no substantive authority.All he is statutorily authorized to do is collect facts, establish a record and make a recommendation to the Secretary of State.

    Shhhh. The delusional bigots think this is their Trial of the Millennium.

  91. J. Potter says:

    yutube: Orly is one of the worst attorneys I’ve ever seen, seriously. Not addressing the court properly, not asking the right questions. The witnesses are much articulated and professional than this lady. What a shame.

    Do online law schools provide courtroom experience?

  92. Dave says:

    Yes, but I still don’t understand why Jablonski’s approach is sensible. I just doesn’t seem to be in the best interests of his client.

    Scientist: Keep in mind that this proceeding ONLY concerns the Democratic primary.

  93. Wile says:

    Is that Richard Trumpka on the stand?

  94. y_p_w says:

    Dave:
    I’m way out on a limb here, but states do have the right to set up hoops to be jumped through to get on the ballot — forms to be filled out, petitions to get signed, etc. — and if they argue that complying with those subpeonas was one of those hoops, I think that could be very difficult to overturn.

    But to sanction a sitting President for not answering an out of state subpoena is another matter. If he went to a default judgment, I’m not sure if the Feds do anything. If they move to have him placed in contempt of court, they will get slapped down so fast they won’t see what hit them. No superior court judge would ever do that.

  95. Majority Will says:

    J. Potter: Do online law schools provide courtroom experience?

    In chat rooms?

  96. Bob says:

    Further investigation warranted!

  97. This old hippie says:

    From experience in Georgia administrative hearings you can pretty much submit anything as your evidence. Copies don’t have to be certified, etc. this will turn on appeal to a higher court.

  98. Cry Me a River says:

    “Please keep in mind, however, that the failure to have properly raised and preserved a particular issue in the trial court (or before the agency or administrative body making the decision) will almost always result in the waiver of that issue, thereby precluding appellate review and negating any need to consider the question of the proper standard of review. Very few issues can avoid the waiver rule.

    Preservation of error. Issues and objections not raised to the trial court and ruled on by the trial court cannot be raised for the first time on appeal because they are deemed waived. City of Dalton v. Smith, 210 Ga. App. 858, 859 (1) (437 SE2d 827) (1993).”

    http://www.gaappeals.us/standards_of_review.php

  99. Scientist says:

    Dave: Yes, but I still don’t understand why Jablonski’s approach is sensible. I just doesn’t seem to be in the best interests of his client.

    It is presumably being done at the instructions of his client-or more properly speaking the White House counsel and Axelrod/Plouffe et al, since I doubt the President has personally spoken with Jablonski. This is a political, not a legal proceeding and they gave a good track record.

  100. Arthur says:

    Absolutely.

    yutube: Orly is one of the worst attorneys I’ve ever seen, seriously.

  101. G says:

    Sampson talks about “deporting Obama” *rolls eyes*

    Judge to Orly – “Are you testifying?”… Orly asks to testify under oath!

    LOL!

    Now this is priceless!!! ROTFLMAO!

  102. Rennie says:

    Just when you think it can’t possibly get any better.

  103. Arthur says:

    Cry Me a River:

    Don’t just quote-bomb; unpack it’s meaning and signifcance for us lesser fellows.

  104. Wile says:

    G:
    Sampson talks about “deporting Obama”*rolls eyes*

    Judge to Orly – “Are you testifying?”…Orly asks to testify under oath!

    LOL!

    Now this is priceless!!!ROTFLMAO!

    Just Wow!!!

  105. Daniel says:

    Cry Me a River:
    “Please keep in mind, however, that the failure to have properly raised and preserved a particular issue in the trial court (or before the agency or administrative body making the decision) will almost always result in the waiver of that issue, thereby precluding appellate review and negating any need to consider the question of the proper standard of review. Very few issues can avoid the waiver rule.

    Preservation of error. Issues and objections not raised to the trial court and ruled on by the trial court cannot be raised for the first time on appeal because they are deemed waived. City of Dalton v. Smith, 210 Ga. App. 858, 859 (1) (437 SE2d 827) (1993).”

    http://www.gaappeals.us/standards_of_review.php

    That would be an excellent point…. if this were a trial court.

  106. G says:

    Judge had enough of that … stops Orly on stand and asks her to submit the rest of her “testimony” in writing!

    I see Dr. C. laughing too… LOL!

  107. Bob says:

    They should just let Orly act out ALL the parts.

  108. y_p_w says:

    I’m getting the suspicion that he’s just sort of allowing all this and will just decide that it’s all a pile of warm poo that he can’t properly adjudicate.

  109. Arthur says:

    River Tears:

    Did you add that italicized section or does it actually appear in the law?

    Cry Me a River: (or before the agency or administrative body making the decision)

  110. y_p_w says:

    She’s bringing up T-shirts and coffee mugs?

  111. yutube says:

    Thanks God that the two previous counsels are not part of this Orly debacle.

  112. G says:

    LMAO! I think she should use hand puppets to play the different roles… πŸ˜‰

    Bob: They should just let Orly act out ALL the parts.

  113. Scientist says:

    A poster on NBC’s site, alg, says that the parties have until Feb 5 to submit materials into the record. So, Jablonski can look over the transcripts of the hearing (maybe he even has a spy there?) and if he feels it necessary, he can submit a COLB. Or he can just say, they proved ZIP.

  114. US Citizen says:

    “Furthermore, meester Obama is a shape shifting reptilian…”
    Gawd, what a trainwreck.

  115. Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) says:

    G: Sampson talks about “deporting Obama” *rolls eyes*Judge to Orly – “Are you testifying?”… Orly asks to testify under oath!LOL!Now this is priceless!!! ROTFLMAO!

    You gotta be kidding me she’s deposing herself?

  116. y_p_w says:

    Wow. I’m rather speechless. That’s it? I was almost sure this would prattle on for 10 hours.

  117. G says:

    Seems to be that way. The judge let them be “heard”. That is all.

    He just ended it with saying “have a good day” and left to his chambers. Farce adjourned…

    y_p_w: I’m getting the suspicion that he’s just sort of allowing all this and will just decide that it’s all a pile of warm poo that he can’t properly adjudicate.

  118. This old hippie says:

    Objections will be made in filings afterward. Also, while an issue may not be objected to evidence submitted to a trial court must meet definitions set out in Georgia civil procedure. They must be certified by the issuing office as true and correct. Nothing orly has meets that criteria.

  119. G says:

    Crazy OH PI Sue is now doing a post-hearing interview on “Vattelvision”…

  120. G says:

    So far, she hasn’t said anything she didn’t already mention on the stand. Going on about the 1890 dates over and over again…blah, blah, blah…

    Now she’s talking about Obama playing in JV sports finals one month before getting CT BC. That was about it… Feed just went black on me.

    G: Crazy OH PI Sue is now doing a post-hearing interview on “Vattelvision”…

  121. US Citizen says:

    Yep… he couldn’t possibly play basketball while applying for a social security number….

    (smash to black- scene ends)

  122. DG says:

    I gotta’ give the judge credit for keeping a straight face through all of that.

  123. G says:

    That is correct. The Feb 5th date for submitting materials has been mentioned here, there, etc. repeatedly. This isn’t anything new and has been part of the process outlayed since December.

    Scientist: A poster on NBC’s site, alg, says that the parties have until Feb 5 to submit materials into the record. So, Jablonski can look over the transcripts of the hearing (maybe he even has a spy there?) and if he feels it necessary, he can submit a COLB. Or he can just say, they proved ZIP.

  124. Scientist says:

    Well, Barnum and Bailey have finished their Atlanta appearance leaving behind nothing but a big pile of elephant dung. I hope no one got sick from eating too much popcorn.

  125. Scientist says:

    G: That is correct. The Feb 5th date for submitting materials has been mentioned here, there, etc. repeatedly. This isn’t anything new and has been part of the process outlayed since December.

    So why were you so worried about Jablonski playing hooky and not showing up with a b.c.? He can submit one if he feels it’s necessary. Given the lack of relevant evidence on the other side, he may not. Or he may.

  126. Bob says:

    There is no benefit in arguing with people who have no compunction to lie.

  127. Expelliarmus says:

    Scientist: So why were you so worried about Jablonski playing hooky and not showing up with a b.c.?He can submit one if he feels it’s necessary.Given the lack of relevant evidence on the other side, he may not.Or he may.

    He doesn’t need to — the birthers introduced their downloaded copies of the COLB & LFBC in the first cases & conceded their authenticity.

  128. J. Potter says:

    Expelliarmus: conceded their authenticity.

    So, the Vattelists undermined the PDF sniffers? BWAHAHAHA!
    Well, Doc did say there was dissension in the Birther ranks.
    They have collectively unbirthed themselves.

  129. El Diablo Negro says:

    Good thing I went about my day.

    Come on, people, move along, nothin’ to see h- OH MY GOD, a flaming plane crash!! Come on, crowd around!
    — Chief Wiggum, The Simpsons

  130. jayHG says:

    Arthur: Absolutely.

    tee hee…..you birthers are so gullible…….

  131. Expelliarmus says:

    Well, the Vatellist’s needed the birth certificates to prove their contention that Obama’s father was from Kenya. Without said birth certificate, there’s no evidence of parentage.

  132. Majority Will says:

    Expelliarmus:
    Well, the Vatellist’s needed the birth certificates to prove their contention that Obama’s father was from Kenya.Without said birth certificate, there’s no evidence of parentage.

    So, every bit of this nonsense hinges on Leo the Parakeet’s failure as an attorney and legal scholar?

  133. misha says:

    US Citizen: So she’s gone on record incriminating herself.

    Yeah, she should take the 5th, and drink a fifth.

  134. donna says:

    if i were jablonski, i would do as attorneys usually do, submit my documents/refuting evidence via fax at 4:55 pm on the 5th leaving plaintiffs one month to scramble with lawsuits all the way up to the supremes

  135. Arthur says:

    Absolutely.

    jayHG: tee hee…..you birthers are so gullible…….

  136. G says:

    YES she did… I think the judge was just being rhetorical and trying to stop her rambling and making bold claims when he first asked her if she was trying to testify…

    …but that only encouraged the Drama Queen! A few minutes later, she herself ASKED to take the stand…and practically hopped into the chair before anyone could say otherwise.

    So YES, she totally started to testify under oath…and the judge let her do it for a bit until he too decided to put an end to that part of the farce.

    By far, I rate that my *FAVORITE* moment from today’s Birther Vent Farce… πŸ™‚

    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross): You gotta be kidding me she’s deposing herself?

  137. G says:

    I have to admit, the bag of popcorn this early in the morning doesn’t seem to settle on the stomach as well as it should… oh well, it was still worth having. I think I’ve thrown off my plans for lunch though…

    Scientist: Well, Barnum and Bailey have finished their Atlanta appearance leaving behind nothing but a big pile of elephant dung. I hope no one got sick from eating too much popcorn.

  138. JoZeppy says:

    Cry Me a River: “Please keep in mind, however, that the failure to have properly raised and preserved a particular issue in the trial court (or before the agency or administrative body making the decision) will almost always result in the waiver of that issue, thereby precluding appellate review and negating any need to consider the question of the proper standard of review. Very few issues can avoid the waiver rule.Preservation of error. Issues and objections not raised to the trial court and ruled on by the trial court cannot be raised for the first time on appeal because they are deemed waived. City of Dalton v. Smith, 210 Ga. App. 858, 859 (1) (437 SE2d 827) (1993).”http://www.gaappeals.us/standards_of_review.php

    As someone else already mentioned, this is not a trial, it is an administrative hearing. An administrative hearing that results in a recommendation to the secretary of state, which the secretary of state need not pay any attention to. It is an entirely different question as to what the procedure is following an action of the Secretary of State (does it constitute an agency decision to be appealed in the court of appeals, or is it the basis of a cause of action in the lower courts? I have no clue). It’s something I have not researched (nor do I have the time or interest to do so now…but feel free to let me know if you are so inclined). Also, President Obama doesn’t need to be on the primary ballot in Georgia. There is no question he will be nominated by the Democratic party. Heck, the Democratic party may very well refuse to see the Georgia delegates (that should p.o. some folks right there). Rest assured. the President will be on the ballot of every state in the general election, including Georgia. If the state tries to fight it, you can be sure that the matter will be taken up in a Federal Court, where a Georgia state AG will have to defend their decision, which will result in the state being b!tch slapped back in line.

  139. G says:

    You are right about that.

    This old hippie: Objections will be made in filings afterward. Also, while an issue may not be objected to evidence submitted to a trial court must meet definitions set out in Georgia civil procedure. They must be certified by the issuing office as true and correct. Nothing orly has meets that criteria.

  140. misha says:

    Bob:
    There is no benefit in arguing with people who have no compunction to lie.

    If you argue with a fool, make sure you’re not doing the same thing.

  141. Expelliarmus says:

    donna: submit my documents/refuting evidence

    There’s nothing to “refute”.

    Birthers introduced both versions of the birth certificate. Evidence shows Obama born in Hawaii in 1961.

  142. G says:

    Well, I was certainly not expecting it to just become an open venting forum, so yes, I completely didn’t expect it to turn out as it did.

    Now that I’ve seen the result, I can understand why Jablonski didn’t need to show up and give this free-for-all circus any credibility. It truly would have been a waste of his time and wasn’t necessary.

    However, I am still expecting him to file something by Feb 5th – as others have pointed out, that is all that really needs to be done now. If he somehow didn’t do that… I would consider that to be extremely irresponsible.

    Scientist: So why were you so worried about Jablonski playing hooky and not showing up with a b.c.? He can submit one if he feels it’s necessary. Given the lack of relevant evidence on the other side, he may not. Or he may.

  143. G says:

    Interesting point… I’ll take that under advisement. Thanks.

    Expelliarmus: He doesn’t need to — the birthers introduced their downloaded copies of the COLB & LFBC in the first cases & conceded their authenticity.

  144. J. Potter says:

    Expelliarmus: Birthers introduced both versions of the birth certificate. Evidence shows Obama born in Hawaii in 1961.

    Thanks for confirming that Exp. I couldn’t hear very well (at work πŸ™ ). Hilarious that they unbirthed themselves with conflicting cases. I never anticipated the Vattellists would have to concede authenticity (duh). No wonder Malihi cut her off (“you got to be sh*tting me”) despite spotting her 2 hours.

    Looking forward to the opinion. A summary blowoff, or a detailed burndown? My vote is for detail. Got to slam the door and document why.

  145. Expelliarmus says:

    G: However, I am still expecting him to file something by Feb 5th – as others have pointed out, that is all that really needs to be done now.

    There’s a fogbow rumor that a paper COLB was hand delivered to the Secretary of State’s office this morning.

  146. Scientist says:

    G: Well, I was certainly not expecting it to just become an open venting forum, so yes, I completely didn’t expect it to turn out as it did.

    Orly was there, how could it not have become a venting forum?

    G: Now that I’ve seen the result, I can understand why Jablonski didn’t need to show up and give this free-for-all circus any credibility. It truly would have been a waste of his time and wasn’t necessary

    Indeed.

  147. Scientist says:

    Expelliarmus: Well, the Vatellist’s needed the birth certificates to prove their contention that Obama’s father was from Kenya. Without said birth certificate, there’s no evidence of parentage.

    To be rigorous, they have not proven that Obama Sr was not a US citizen. They have proven that he was Obama Jr’s father of record and that he claimed to have been born in Kenya. They would actually need his immgration file for his student visa to show whether or not he was a US citizen.

  148. Expelliarmus says:

    Scientist: To be rigorous, they have not proven that Obama Sr was not a US citizen.They have proven that he was Obama Jr’s father of record and that he claimed to have been born in Kenya.They would actually need his immgration file for his student visa to show whether or not he was a US citizen.

    Actually, I believe they did put on the guy who made the FOIA request for the immigration file, for exactly that purpose.

    CBS Atlanta comments,

    Mitt Romney’s father was born in Mexico and Rick Santorum’s father was born in Italy.

    No one has filed a complaint about either of those candidates’ eligibility.

    See: http://www.cbsatlanta.com/story/16607410/judge-considers-whether-to-keep-obama-on-ballot

  149. donna says:

    under the FOIA docs, there is a handwritten note from immigration that obama’s father was here on a student visa

  150. jayHG says:

    G: YES she did… I think the judge was just being rhetorical and trying to stop her rambling and making bold claims when he first asked her if she was trying to testify……but that only encouraged the Drama Queen! A few minutes later, she herself ASKED to take the stand…and practically hopped into the chair before anyone could say otherwise.So YES, she totally started to testify under oath…and the judge let her do it for a bit until he too decided to put an end to that part of the farce.By far, I rate that my *FAVORITE* moment from today’s Birther Vent Farce…

    Did she question herself……I mean, when you are in the witness chair, someone has to question you, right? Did she whip out a legal pad with the questions on them, state the question – Mrs. Dr. Orly, did you to online and print out the PROOF that Obama is a socialist?” and then answer it???? Was the crazy this entertaining, or did she point to a minion in the audience and hand him the legal pad with the questions…….whew….??

  151. G says:

    Please let us know if you can CONFIRM that rumor… and any evidence to back that up, thanks.

    That would pretty much seal the deal in terms of making this an open & shut case.

    Expelliarmus: There’s a fogbow rumor that a paper COLB was hand delivered to the Secretary of State’s office this morning.

  152. Expelliarmus says:

    G: Please let us know if you can CONFIRM that rumor… and any evidence to back that up, thanks.

    My guess is that there may be confirmation from an official source fairly soon. I’d suggest keeping an eye on the Georgia Democratic Party web site for updates/press releases.

  153. J. Potter says:

    Expelliarmus: http://www.cbsatlanta.com/story/16607410/judge-considers-whether-to-keep-obama-on-ballot

    “Deputy Chief Judge Michael Malihi last week ordered Obama to appear at Thursday’s hearing.”

    *sigh*

    “Taitz put herself on the stand. She claims the president was born in Indonesia and went under different names as a young student during his time in Indonesia.”

    ( bwahahahaha. aha. he. *ahem* )

    Looking forward to any add’l news coverage.

  154. jayHG says:

    misha: Yeah, she should take the 5th, and drink a fifth.

    too funny……..

  155. G says:

    At times, it almost felt like she was going to start questioning herself…

    …but she pretty much just got on the stand and prattled on in typical Orly fashion…until the judge decided it went on long enough and brought an end to it. It was certainly very bizarre & entertaining (about as entertaining as her beginning, where she turned away from the judge and was preaching her arguments to the audience… LOL!)

    She had a lot of frantic handwaving and her typical tics & speech mannerisms on display. There was a point when one of her PDF witnesses (I think Voght?) wasn’t quite saying things the way she wanted to him to say them…and she started to seemingly treat him as a hostile witness… that was pretty bizarre and hilarious too!

    So yeah, overall, the Mad Orly show did not disappoint for pure theatrics and entertainment value. Certainly she deserves the bulk of the highlights reel.. πŸ˜‰

    jayHG: Did she question herself……I mean, when you are in the witness chair, someone has to question you, right? Did she whip out a legal pad with the questions on them, state the question – Mrs. Dr. Orly, did you to online and print out the PROOF that Obama is a socialist?” and then answer it???? Was the crazy this entertaining, or did she point to a minion in the audience and hand him the legal pad with the questions…….whew….??

  156. JoZeppy says:

    Expelliarmus: There’s a fogbow rumor that a paper COLB was hand delivered to the Secretary of State’s office this morning.

    Now that is something that would make a little more sense of this all. I did get the feeling that up until now, Jablonski was very sloppy in handling this (the idea of submitting a motion without citing to anything is a bit Orlysque in my world). I had some issue with the judges denial of the motion to dismiss. While I can understand his position the Georgia law permitted its citizens to challenge the eligibility of a candidate, he should have dismissed Orly’s clients, as they were candidates, none of whom were residents. My understanding of the law (which I’ll admit, is limited…just not worth my time at the moment) is that it only give the citizens the right to challenge, not other candidates. The motion to quash was an equal mixed bag. The judge should have addressed Orly’s abuse of subpoenas being sent to the four corners of the world. Instead, he ignored that part entirely, and only focused on the Obama subpoena. Had Jablonski written a better argument on quashing the Obama subpoena (you know…with actual citations as to why a state agency cannot compel a sitting President to appear), and the ALJ still denied it, I would have been more comfortable at the get go about not appearing at the hearing. However, seeing how the ALJ just permitted a birther free for all, I’m really not sure how I feel. I really don’t expect the ALJ to buy into all the bogus Vattel arguments. He’s a judge. He graduated from law school. He knows better, and a simple reading of Minor will expose the birther lie (and if as I expect, the kept mentioning it as precident, I full expect him to read the decision). But I would have preferred him appear, hand a certified copy of the COLB (and as the copies provided by the birthers are not official version are not admissible), simply say even the most cursory reading of WKA exposes the birther lies, scold the judge for permitting this circus, say thank-you, and walk out. Get it done in less than three minutes (if kept under 1, even better). I think that way you get you dig in to the ALJ, get everything you need on the record, and make it very clear to the birthers where they stand.

  157. misha says:

    Expelliarmus: Mitt Romney’s father was born in Mexico and Rick Santorum’s father was born in Italy. No one has filed a complaint about either of those candidates’ eligibility.

    I wonder why? I can’t quite put my finger on it, but there must be something different about Obama…

  158. J. Potter says:

    Well I hoipe everyone is strapped in, after all, we were warned this would be “100 time bigger than Watergate”. I am braced for impact.

    Meanwhile, Obama doesn’t seem too worried.

  159. J. Potter says:

    misha: I wonder why? I can’t quite put my finger on it, but there must be something different about Obama…

    He has a genuine smile?

  160. Paul Pieniezny says:

    G: Crazy Orly thinks she’s here to put on a show for the audience… ROTFL!

    She is not being crazy, but lucid. Even if Malihi birfs, it is going to be appealed and the audience is therefore more important than the bench. The bench will not hit PenPal.

  161. Expelliarmus says:

    JoZeppy: But I would have preferred him appear, hand a certified copy of the COLB (and as the copies provided by the birthers are not official version are not admissible), simply say even the most cursory reading of WKA exposes the birther lies, scold the judge for permitting this circus, say thank-you, and walk out. Get it done in less than three minutes (if kept under 1, even better).

    The ALJ can’t make a decision, he can only make findings of facts and recommendations to the SoS. So Jablonski has taken the position that the birther hearing is a farce, and (apparently) simply delivered the COLB to the SoS, who is the person who actually makes the determination.

    The paper copy certificates [b]were[/b] admitted into evidence, as no one objected. There was also a lot of other silly stuff admitted into evidence, without objection… but not that relates to the qualification to be President. (The US Constitution does not specify that having social security number issued from Connecticut is a disqualifier).

    Given what actually took place at the hearing, Jablonski’s position seems to have been vindicated. Probably just saved the Obama campaign a days’ worth of legal fees by staying home. (Lawyer’s typically charge a per diem, often at a higher rate, for contested court hearings & trials)

  162. jayHG says:

    I’m convinced that Orly had someone at the door taking a cover charge (manual paypal) and informing them that there is a two drink minimum……….stupid birthers!!!

  163. Majority Will says:

    Expelliarmus: (The US Constitution does not specify that having social security number issued from Connecticut is a disqualifier).

    And also irrelevant but it would certainly be difficult to prove since states don’t issue SSNs. πŸ˜€

  164. Expelliarmus says:

    Aw gee, lord Basil, isn’t a shame that none of the lawyers brought those videos up in the hearing today?

  165. Rickey says:

    jayHG: Did she question herself……I mean, when you are in the witness chair, someone has to question you, right?Did she whip out a legal pad with the questions on them, state the question – Mrs. Dr. Orly, did you to online and print out the PROOF that Obama is a socialist?” and then answer it????Was the crazy this entertaining, or did she point to a minion in the audience and hand him the legal pad with the questions…….whew….??

    Sort of like this…

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4zP7247W7o

  166. aarrgghh says:

    G: “YES she did… I think the judge was just being rhetorical and trying to stop her rambling and making bold claims when he first asked her if she was trying to testify…

    …but that only encouraged the Drama Queen!A few minutes later, she herself ASKED to take the stand…and practically hopped into the chair before anyone could say otherwise.

    yes, this was the exact impression i got

  167. jayHG says:

    Lord Basil: Both Barack and his wife confessed that he was born in Kenya.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Se5zvGF6u9ghttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6M7Rp_Ghv6k

    You did send this to Dr. Orly Birther Queen Dentist to use in today’s TRIAL, right? I mean, you DO want her to win………stupid a$$ birther.

  168. J. Potter says:

    Lord Basil: Both Barack and his wife confessed that he was born in Kenya.

    :O

    For once Basil’s right! They even posted a Hawaiian translation!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Pe3zn7FPN4&feature=related

    ( Silly Basil, YouTube’s for kids. )

  169. Egh says:

    Checking in at lunch. Just read elsewhere summary judgement against. Recommendation to SOS will be followed to keep mr Obama off ga ballot.

    Heard that the meeting was a non event quick walk through.

    Any good restaurants in Atlanta?

  170. Arthur says:

    Absolutely.

    Egh: Checking in at lunch. Just read elsewhere summary judgement against. Recommendation to SOS will be followed to keep mr Obama off ga ballot.Heard that the meeting was a non event quick walk through.Any good restaurants in Atlanta?

  171. J. Potter says:

    Egh: Checking in at lunch. Just read elsewhere summary judgement against. Recommendation to SOS will be followed to keep mr Obama off ga ballot.Heard that the meeting was a non event quick walk through.Any good restaurants in Atlanta?

    Wow, that’s all news to Malihi. And counter to his instructions. Take the silly wannabe rumors to more fertile soil.

  172. yutube says:

    From Mario’s blog:

    “Regarding the Georgia hearing, report from Gary Wilmott:

    “I just got off the phone with Dean Haskins who was in the courtroom this morning assisting with the Art 2Pac live stream. Judge Malihi talked to the attorneys in chambers before the hearing this morning and told them that he was going to enter a DEFAULT JUDGMENT against Obama and recommend that Obama’s name not be on the Georgia ballot! Alll the attorneys expressed a desire to put an abbreviated streamlined case on the record and the judge agreed. How does the mainstream media spin this? The Georgia SOS has already indicated that he will follow the judge’s recommendation. Obama will not get any popular vote or electors from the great state of Georgia! Congratulations to all freedom-loving Americans!”

    Dr. can you confirm this?

  173. G says:

    *rolls eyes*… Yeah, good luck with that. Mail in ballots already sent out. Obama will remain on GA ballot – count on it.

    Egh: Checking in at lunch. Just read elsewhere summary judgement against. Recommendation to SOS will be followed to keep mr Obama off ga ballot.Heard that the meeting was a non event quick walk through.Any good restaurants in Atlanta?

  174. gorefan says:

    yutube: Obama will not get any popular vote or electors from the great state of Georgia! Congratulations to all freedom-loving Americans!”

    He is talking about the general election, this hearing is about the primary election – he should know better.

  175. J. Potter says:

    yutube: I just got off the phone with Dean Haskins

    Gosh, the Mario is contradicting the Orly ….

    I presented my case and gave interviews to all the major networks: CBS, NBC, ABC and so on. 6 witnesses testified to Obama’s use of a forged BS and a stolen SSN
    Posted on | January 26, 2012 | No Comments

    No ruling in birther’ challenge
    Atlanta Journal Constitution – β€Ž1 hour agoβ€Ž
    By Bill Rankin After hearing evidence with neither President Barack Obama nor his lawyers in attendance, a state administrative law judge on Thursday did not issue a ruling as to whether Obama can be allowed on the state ballot in November.
    Missives from the land of the birthers
    Atlanta Journal Constitution (blog) – β€Ž2 hours agoβ€Ž
    I’m in the courtroom of Judge Michael Malihi, awaiting arguments in a case attempting to remove Barack Obama from the 2012 Georgia presidential ballot. Roughly 100 people are in the courtroom, most of them older white Americans.

    Pretty sad when anyone is less factual than Orly! πŸ˜€

  176. Daniel says:

    yutube:
    From Mario’s blog:

    “Regarding the Georgia hearing, report from Gary Wilmott:

    “I just got off the phone with Dean Haskins who was in the courtroom this morning assisting with the Art 2Pac live stream. Judge Malihi talked to the attorneys in chambers before the hearing this morning and told them that he was going to enter a DEFAULT JUDGMENT against Obama and recommend that Obama’s name not be on the Georgia ballot! Alll the attorneys expressed a desire to put an abbreviated streamlined case on the record and the judge agreed. How does the mainstream media spin this? The Georgia SOS has already indicated that he will follow the judge’s recommendation. Obama will not get any popular vote or electors from the great state of Georgia! Congratulations to all freedom-loving Americans!”

    Dr. can you confirm this?

    Mario apparently is under the impression that this hearing was for the election ballot, instead of just for the primary ballot.

  177. Majority Will says:

    Egh: Any good restaurants in Atlanta?

    Kevin Rathbun Steak

    http://www.kevinrathbun.com/restaurants.html

  178. J. Potter says:

    AJC website: No Ruling in birther Challenge

    Lawyers for area residents mounting “birther” challenges told Deputy Chief Judge Michael Malihi that Obama should be found in contempt of court for not appearing when under subpoena to do so. But Malihi did not indicate he would recommend that and cut off one lawyer when he criticized Obama for not attending the hearing.

    “It shows not just a contempt for this court, but contempt for the judicial branch,” lawyer Van Irion told Malihi.

    “I’m not interested in commentary on that, counselor,” Malihi quickly replied. [ πŸ˜€ ]

    Thursday’s hearing was held before a packed courtroom with almost every seat taken — except for those at the defendant’s table facing the judge.

  179. Majority Will says:

    yutube: Dr. can you confirm this?

    Confirm that Puzz is once again talking out of his ass?

    Why would you need confirmation?

  180. Dave says:

    Obviously, only people who were present at the prehearing conference could confirm or deny it. And the only people there were a bunch of birthers and an administrative judge. I doubt any credible information will emerge.

  181. El Diablo Negro says:

    yutube: udge Malihi talked to the attorneys in chambers before the hearing this morning and told them that he was going to enter a DEFAULT JUDGMENT against Obama and recommend that Obama’s name not be on the Georgia ballot!

    Eh? Im guessing there is some missing info here, I though judges are not supposed to have a pre-determined outcome without weighing all the evidence…why go through all of that if you already made up your mind?

    And why would you blog about the private meeting you had with the judge? Seems counter-productive.

  182. J. Potter says:

    J. Potter: AJC website: No Ruling in birther Challenge

    PS: *BOOM!* *BAM!* *Ka-POW!*

    Down goes Taitzer (and company).

    This may be construed, for all intents and purposes, as a prediction.

  183. Dave says:

    The comment posted at Apuzzo’s blog traces the rumor chain back to Haskins, who is not a party. So we would have to suppose Haskins heard it from someone else, but we don’t know who.

    El Diablo Negro:

    And why would you blog about the private meeting you had with the judge? Seems counter-productive.

  184. Scientist says:

    yutube: Congratulations to all freedom-loving Americans!”

    Wouldn’t “freedom-loving Americans” want the freedom to CHOOSE who to vote for? Would they appreciate some unelected state functionary making the choice for them?

  185. Expelliarmus says:

    RANK SPECULATION: The lawyers arrived and were called into chambers. The ALJ told them that it he intended to rule that Obama’s lawyer had the burden of proof to show qualifications for office, and as the lawyer had not appeared — that the present state of the evidence would not support Obama’s eligibility. ALJ suggests, strongly, that attorneys might want to simply rest their case & go home.

    Instead, attorneys say they want to present their evidence quickly, to preserve the record..

    They open by immediately submitting the COLB downloaded from the internet. ALJ, incredulous, asks if they are accepting it as a genuine, certified copy of Obama’s birth record — they agree & the COLB is thus admitted. They follow by doing the same thing with the LFBC.

    Birther lawyers:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRBkgshj8Cw

  186. G says:

    Ah, poor gullible yutube. Simply repeatedly echoing the same info from dubious sources doesn’t suddenly give it magical powers of truthiness… Sorry…

    yutube: The default judgement story is spreading, it may be true…http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2012/01/georgia-ballot-hearing-judge-wanted-to.html

  187. Majority Will says:

    El Diablo Negro: And why would you blog about the private meeting you had with the judge? Seems counter-productive.

    Textbook definition of prejudice.

  188. Expelliarmus says:

    The ALJ doesn’t have the legal power to enter a “default”.

    His job is to report findings of fact to the SoS.

    I do think that it is plausible that he attempted to point out to the attorneys before the case began the likely result given that Jablonski was not there to present evidence on behalf of Obama.

    Obviously, the lawyers’ weren’t smart enough to get the hint.

  189. J. Potter says:

    We’re already seeing the denialists digging in 1 level deeper. Seriously, these people are gonna be beyond recovery. They may continue going through the motions of daily life, but mentally, they’re curling into a permanent fetal position.

    I think I’ll take in a dinner and a show tonight, maybe watch a replay of the SotU address πŸ˜‰

    yutube: The default judgement story is spreading, it may be true…

  190. Bob says:

    Taitz didn’t ask the court to enforce her subpoenas (as pointed out of Fogbow). She knows they are crap.

  191. Majority Will says:

    J. Potter: Seriously, these people are gonna be beyond recovery.

    That ship sailed away forever three years ago when McCain got trounced.

  192. Bob says:

    Taitz didn’t ask the court to enforce her subpoenas (as pointed out on Fogbow). She knows they are crap.

  193. aarrgghh says:

    yutube: (mario) The Georgia SOS has already indicated that he will follow the judge’s recommendation. Obama will not get any popular vote or electors from the great state of Georgia! Congratulations to all freedom-loving Americans!”

    yutube: The default judgement story is spreading, it may be true…

    and this is how those sweet sweet birfer tears are made …

  194. JD Reed says:

    Well, if the COLB or long form ceretified by the Hawaii DOH was submitted, then that should end the matter. No lawyer, as I said before, but it seems to me that the full faith and credit clause bars Georgia officials, and even courts, from trying to make a determination about whether the Hawaii document is legit, no matter how strong the evidence allegedly is that it’s a fraud. Basically, what the constitution says is that if one state certifies a document as legit, any other state has no option other than to deem it legit.
    It would seem to me then that federal court would be the only venue somoeone could access to tr contest the document’s legitimacy.

  195. richCares says:

    “The default judgement story is spreading, it may be true”
    yes it is true, Obama will be on the ballot, that’s the default position

  196. JD Reed says:

    Youtube, I suspect that Obama’s name will appear on the Georgia primrary ballot, and I’m 100 percent certain that he will be listed on the general election ballot, so he’ll get some popular votes. The reason he won’t get electoral votes is that Georgia is a deep red state.
    I wish that people who make such statements as woudl lay say $1,000 on the line,
    as prooof that they really believe what they say.

    What I suspect is that deep down, you’re not sure that Obama won’t get on the primary ballot, and you don’t really believe there’s much of a chance of his not making the GE ballot.
    If you think the president’s team is going to stand idly by and let this happen, I can get you a good deal on a bridge tto nowhere in Alaska.

  197. Scientist says:

    yutube: Obama will not get any popular vote or electors from the great state of Georgia!

    He got no electors from Georgia last time.

  198. misha says:

    J. Potter: Seriously, these people are gonna be beyond recovery.

    The Republican party died with Nelson Rockefeller.

  199. Bob says:

    Plan B: Fly a banner over a closed-dome stadium.

  200. y_p_w says:

    JD Reed: Well, if the COLB or long form ceretified by the Hawaii DOH was submitted, then that should end the matter. No lawyer, as I said before, but it seems to me that the full faith and credit clause bars Georgia officials, and even courts, from trying to make a determination about whether the Hawaii document is legit, no matter how strong the evidence allegedly is that it’s a fraud. Basically, what the constitution says is that if one state certifies a document as legit, any other state has no option other than to deem it legit.It would seem to me then that federal court would be the only venue somoeone could access to tr contest the document’s legitimacy.

    I would think in the absence of credible evidence to the contrary, FF&C would have to take place.

    There are some birth certificate forms with clearly deficient security (California Abstract of Birth), or where the issuing authority has decided to invalidate them up to a certain date (Puerto Rico). If they could clearly document some sort of fraud, and not just kook theories by copier salesmen, then they might be able to impeach the credibility of a birth document.

    If the ALJ buys all that stuff about layers, then he’s probably looking at a serious misconduct charge. It’s my understanding that they probably hear a lot of crap stuff brought before them all the time (often from parties without attorneys), and it’s their job to weed out all that crap without sounding too dismissive.

    However, Malihi certainly did sound like he was dismissive of some of the merde that was brought up in this hearing.

  201. Arthur says:

    I got a mighty laugh out of this earnest but ill-informed comment made at Obama Release Your Records,

    “Once locked up, does Soetoro get his day in court, or is today’s hearing actually his day in court? What I’m looking for is, how soon can we expect to move on to the punishment phase?”

    Oh, la. La indeed.

  202. J. Potter says:

    Just noticed typo at Orly Land:

    “Obama’s use of a forged BS and a stolen SSN”

    It’s Christmas all week! πŸ˜€

  203. Majority Will says:

    Arthur:
    I got a mighty laugh out of this earnest but ill-informed comment made at Obama Release Your Records,

    “Once locked up, does Soetoro get his day in court, or is today’s hearing actually his day in court? What I’m looking for is, how soon can we expect to move on to the punishment phase?”

    Oh, la. La indeed.

    It’a birther bigot Viagra. They’re risking priapism at this point.

  204. It’s an old Jedi mind trick. I just waved my hand and said “you don’t need to see the video. this isn’t evidence you want.”

    G:
    Judge to Orly:“I don’t need to see the video.”LOL!

  205. She was admitted for this case only presumably under sponsorship of some unnamed Georgia attorney who was not there.

    Sarina: Can Orly practice law in GA?

  206. I have reliable information that Jablonski watched the feed.

    JoZeppy: I take it Jablonski never showed.

  207. I’m not a lawyer, but of ANY employee of mine made an important presentation so obviously unprepared, I would have fired them on the spot.

    yutube: Orly is one of the worst attorneys I’ve ever seen, seriously.

  208. Expelliarmus says:

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    I have reliable information that Jablonski watched the feed.

    Probably feeling happier and happier about his choice to skip the hearing with every passing second …….

    (Plus, those of us watching the feed didn’t have to worry about stifling our laughter during the Orly show).

  209. Let me point out a few things:

    Barack Obama’s long-form birth certificate was introduced into evidence by the Plaintiffs. United States v Wong was referenced by the plaintiffs. Jablonski MAY be able to submit additional written material to the court before it rules. If anyone knows the rule here, please cite.

    Cry Me a River: Preservation of error. Issues and objections not raised to the trial court and ruled on by the trial court cannot be raised for the first time on appeal because they are deemed waived.

  210. Expelliarmus says:

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    Let me point out a few things:

    Jablonski MAY be able to submit additional written material to the court before it rules. If anyone knows the rule here, please cite.

    I can’t figure out what else he would need to submit.

  211. Joe Acerbic says:

    Re: Haskins lies about “default judgement”

    It’s very simply the old standard birfoon conspiracy generator: lie about the judge promising to find for the birfoons and when the truth showing the exact opposite comes out, scream “THEY GOT TO THE JUDGE!!!!!!!”. That’s all, folks.

  212. Went to Mary Mac’s last night. Reservation under “Vattel.”

    Majority Will: Kevin Rathbun Steak

  213. gorefan says:

    Expelliarmus: I can’t figure out what else he would need to submit.

    Maybe Jack Maskell’s memorandum.

  214. Well perhaps not “need” to submit. I’d be happy if he sent a paper COLB and a copy of the CRS report just to make it look better for the state to rule in their favor. It would be a whole lot cleaner. I don’t know. Maybe clean is to stay out of the argument. What do I know?

    If the recommendation is to include Obama on the ballot and Mr. Kemp accepts the recommendation, then he is, in effect, endorsing the conventional definition of natural born citizen and the CRS report gives him well-written cover.

    Expelliarmus: can’t figure out what else he would need to submit.

  215. Expelliarmus says:

    Dr. Conspiracy: I’d be happy if he sent a paper COLB and a copy of the CRS report just to make it look better for the state to rule in their favor.

    I believe Mr. Kemp already has at least the COLB… don’t know about the CRS report.

    Keep in mind that it is up to Kemp, as advised by the state AG, to make any legal determinations, especially on Constitutional issues.

  216. Bob says:

    There was no “default judgement.” Why take the chance of sabotaging your own case when presenting it? Yes I know, they’re that stupid.

  217. gorefan says:

    Expelliarmus: I believe Mr. Kemp already has at least the COLB… don’t know about the CRS report.

    Mr. Jablonski referenced the CSR memo in his letter to the SoS.

  218. Expelliarmus says:

    gorefan: Mr. Jablonski referenced the CSR memo in his letter to the SoS.

    That’s what I thought, but it wasn’t clear to me whether he also submitted a copy.

  219. gorefan says:

    Bob: There was no “default judgement.”

    This seems confusing.

    Assume for the moment the judge told the attorney’s he was ready to rule in their favor due to the President’s default?

    Why take any evidence? And if the challenger’s own evidence disproves their claim, doesn’t that create a dilema for the judge?

  220. J. Potter says:

    gorefan: This seems confusing.

    No, it’s not, it’s desperate birther misinformation. Planted in hopes of sowing confusion and making a stir. They had their chance to air their grievance, per GA law. Now it will be buried and the air cleared … the birther stench dissipating like the vapor it always was.

  221. Majority Will says:

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    Went to Mary Mac’s last night. Reservation under “Vattel.”

    NICE!

    It would have been funny if they had had a Swiss Steak special.

    And also pretty strange for Mary Mac’s Tea Room. πŸ˜€

  222. G says:

    Best part of the watching the video was also getting to watch you in the audience and how you reacted the whole time too, oh Obi-Wan! πŸ˜‰

    Dr. Conspiracy: It’s an old Jedi mind trick. I just waved my hand and said “you don’t need to see the video. this isn’t evidence you want.”

  223. G says:

    LOL!!!

    Dr. Conspiracy: Went to Mary Mac’s last night. Reservation under “Vattel.”

Comments are closed.