Link to Klayman’s letter, which Kobach received on Sept 7th: http://butterdezillion.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/complete-klayman-letter-to-bauer.pdf
An article which helps explain why neither MDEC’s verification nor Kobach’s means anything: http://butterdezillion.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/wheel-of-fortune-v-family-feud-final.pdf
Ping. The Kansas verification means nothing, and Kris Kobach knows it full well.
Dear Secretary of State Kobach,
Either today or on Monday you will be served with summons and complaint in regards to a legal challenge to Candidate Obama. I am emailing you the complaint and exhibits to give you an early notice and to conduct a “Meet and Confer” in regards to October 3rd hearing. I would like to know, whether you would stipulate to a preliminary injunction, barring Mr. Obama from the ballot, pending production and expert examination of several documents in light of Prima Facia evidence of forgery in those documents.
I am seeking:
1. original application for Connecticut Social Security number 042-68-4425, which Obama is using, while E-Verify and SSNVS show that it was not assigned to Obama
2. original application to the Selective Service in light of the laughable forgery posted on line by Obama, which shows a 2 digit year postal stamp instead of a 4 digit year postal stamp
3. original long form 1961 birth certificate and original microfilm of the birth certificate in light of the forgery provided.
as an attorney, who was educated in Yale, Oxford and Harvard, you clearly understand that when you have 87 pages of sworn expert affidavits and other exhibits showing a prima facia evidence of forgery in IDs, you cannot accept a letter from a corrupt governmental official, a Registrar in Hawaii, who is involved in releasing this forgery in the first place, as evidence that there was no forgery. What did you expect Alvin T. Onaka to say? Yes, I am involved in forgery, send me to prison. His letter is not an effective rebuttal of the prima facia evidence of forgery, only original documents would constitute an effective rebuttal.
I trust that you will not be complicit to this elections fraud and forgery and will not commit treason by knowingly allowing a foreign national with forged IDs on the ballot and I trust that you will voluntarily stipulate to preliminary injunction pending expert examination of the aforementioned original documents. U.S. National security is at stake.
If you consent/stipulate to preliminary injunction, please advice whether you, as a Secretary of State, will subpoena the aforementioned original records or whether you would want me to do it and seek enforcement of subpoenas by Judge Hendricks, as from prior experience I know that there is stonewalling and lack of cooperation.
I would like to know, when will I get the requested Agency record and the hearing transcript.
Lastly, I need to know, whether you will represent yourself in this legal action or whether you will be represented by a counsel, and if so, who will be your counsel in this action.
Dr. Orly Taitz ESQ
cc U.S. and international media
Taitz Walters v Sec of State KS final
Taitz Walters v Sec of state of Kansas Exhibits1-7
Taitz Walters v Sec of state of Kansas Exhibits 8-14
Taitz Walters cover page
Honorable Larry D. Hendricks
District Court Judges
Title: Division Six