OBAMA ELIGIBILITY HEARING TO BE STREAMED LIVE STARTING AT 0900 EST

Article II SUPERPAC ^ | 01/26/2012 | Article II SUPERPAC

[RaceBannon]

Article II SUPERPAC streaming live video and audio at this link

[frog in a pot]

Some of us read 1. VIDEO TODAY 1/26/2012 at the beginning of the article, concluded it was a new Alabama action and went off on a tear. Damn!

[Fred Nerks]

sorry about that...

Alabama Judge Dismisses Al Hendershot's Obama Ballot Challenge Lawsuit Because He's White: Two More Injunctions Filed

Al Hendershot: "The opposing attorney told the Judge that she did not have jurisdiction to hear the case. Judge Lee stated in a meeting in her chambers that the Motion for Recusal was denied. Judge Lee's comment regarding my reasoning of judicial bias stated: "Is the bias due to me (Judge Lee) and our President Obama are both black?" The Judge denied my constitutional right to legal council as well as a Court Reporter. Therefore, I requested to withdraw my case which was summarily denied. The Judge, after denying my request to withdraw the case then stated "Case dismissed."

This Morning unbenounced to the court, there were two other cases filed at exactly 8:30AM (before my case was even heard at 9:15AM) in two other separate cases asking for the same temporary injunction. So technically these two other cases will have to be heard on their merits. So we now have two more temporary injunctions which will still prevent the anointed one from being added to the 2012 Primary Ballot in Alabama by 01/19/2012. They will be served again..."

BIRTHEREPORT

[bushpilot1]

Obama the Chicken is Being Plucked

“The thing known as Obama is committing one large theft after another of the American people’s money, work and trust. He is the most disgusting example of human life we have ever witnessed.”

“The amazingly tenacious, Carl Swensson, fighting to get Obama out of the office of the President, by knocking on every official’s door he could find for four years, finally found two government employees who were not traitors and took their Oath of Office seriously: The Georgia Secretary of State, Brian Kemp and Deputy Chief Judge Michael Malihi of the Georgia Office of Administrative Hearings.

The author lives in El Paso

http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/30-01-2012/120356-obama_the_chicken-0/

[MamaDearest]

Don't want anyone to miss an Alabama Court announcement posted on # 1,272.

This will determine whether Americans should continue to have faith in the judicial system of this nation. Thus far the picture hasn't been rosy (liberal judges, anti-constitutional rulings and politics meted from the judicial bench).

[bitt]

ping to #1312

[Danae]

A second ping to this post (1272). Alabama is on the list for hearing primary ballot eligibility of B.H. Obama.

Man o MAN! I sure hope the Super PAC’s have a grip on this one!!! Please, someone tell me, it’s FISH ON!

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[Fred Nerks]

both of your links appear to be broken, what’s going on?

[Fred Nerks]

Sorry, I can’t follow the dates, I have no idea if that’s still ongoing.

[bushpilot1]

there’s big problems..the bc may no longer be an issue. it was entered into the record as valid copy without a seal.

[bushpilot1]

foggy is being permitted to post on obamareleaseyourreleaserecords to openly trash orly and claim the birth certificate is valid without a seal.

[Fred Nerks]

What about this?

Georgia Administrative law rules 8-1-2.18

(e) documentary evidence in the form of copies if the original is not readily available, if its use would unduly disrupt the records of the possessor of the original, or by agreement of the parties. Upon request, parties shall have an opportunity to compare the copy with the original. Documentary evidence may also be received in the form of excerpts, charts, or summaries when, in the discretion of the Administrative Law Judge, the use of the entire document would unnecessarily add to the record’s length. The entire document shall be made available for examination or copying, or both, by other parties at a reasonable time and place.

http://www.osah.ga.gov/documents/procedures/administrative-rules-osah.pdf

“Upon request, parties shall have an opportunity to compare the copy with the original.”

[little jeremiah]

Sven just posted this elsewhere, I hope someone explains the import and I find the comment, I assume it means all the evidence/testimony shown in the GA case will have to be done all over again, by which ever lawyers show up?

---

“It is the understanding of the first two attorneys to present their cases that, whichever way the judge decides will ultimately result in an appeal, and with their evidence being presented, they have prepared their cases to proceed to the highest court in the land, if necessary.”

No!

An appeal will be to Georgia Superior Court and it will be de novo (fresh start, new case). Evidence and testimony will have to be introduced, again.

The Administrative Hearing is a function of the Georgia legislative branch. Georgia Superior Court is a function of the Georgia Judicial branch. Obama and his attorney know this and are not worried about a default judgement which will result in the GA SoS taking Obama off the Georgia Preferential Ballot. They’ll appeal the GA SoS’s action and new trial will be held in Georgia Superior Court, de novo.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2840204/posts#30

[bushpilot1]

Haskins and Foggy will announce their wedding engagement in a few days.

[Fred Nerks]

Here’s the link:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2840204/posts?page=42#42

[Fred Nerks]

RELATED THREAD - (VANITY)

GEORGIA HEARINGS – TWO OUT OF THREE AIN’T BAD
The Birther Summit ^ | 01-30-2012 | Dean Haskins

Posted on Tuesday, 31 January 2012 9:22:24 AM by Music Producer

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2840204/posts

[Flotsam_Jetsome]

"Lol! Perfect graphic."

Heh. Iaughed twice over that one; first when I made an involuntary mental connection between Foggy's photo posted earlier in the thread (and which now appears to be nulled) and Golum, and then again when I found that little gem. :)

"Now I understand why the Befoggers monkey-turd fling the term ‘nutburgers’ around so frantically. It’s just more of the ubiquitous projection that marks the site. They’re hoping if they furiously label enough people ‘nutburgers’, it will deflect attention from the creepy mental weirdness that pervades their site...starting right at the top."

Couldn't agree more. Well, maybe I could agree more, if only to suggest that the mental weirdness emanates from the very, very t0p.

As an aside: People have talked ad nauseam about the look on Scooter's face in that photo, but seldom does anyone mention Biden's countenance. Dude looks like he's watching a rerun of No Reservations. ;)

[Smokeyblue]

Two professional and credible witnesses have testified under oath in an administrative court during an administrative hearing in Georgia that Obama’s SSN# appears to be fraudulent.

Does Obama have a tax attorney? Does this tax attorney know about these claims of fraud? Does this tax attorney have an obligation to ask Obama if he is using a stolen SSN#?

Does this attorney have any liability if he has been informed of possible fraud? Is this attorney willing to submit Obama’s tax forms this year?

Tides turn, public mood shifts, power changes hands, information previously unavailable suddenly becomes available. Those who think they are protected will find themselves without protection.

Who else wants to go down on the S.S. Obama?

[GregNH]

Sven is a turd! I had this back and forth with him already. He choose to keep spreading mis-information.

Sven; Judge Malihi offers an advisory opinion to the GA SoS. If an adverse decision is made against Obama by the GA SoS, then he can appeal the GA SoS decision to Georgia Superior Court. The case will be de novo, or a fresh start, because GA SoS will only have access to Judge Malihi’s opinion and not a trial transcript and evidence presented.

Obama can submit his certified COLB as proof and the Georgia Superior Court may accept it as proof he’s qualified to be on the ballot. It really depends on how aggressive the GA AAG defends the GA SoS decision. Will the GA AAG present MvH dicta as precedent? What about WKA? How does Schneider v Rusk (quoting Osborn) fit into the eligibility question?

Greg To Sven;Wrong!On this thread the "appeal" process is described in GA law.

[snip]On review, the reviewing agency shall consider the whole record or such portions of it as may be cited by the parties. In reviewing initial decisions by the Office of State Administrative Hearings, the reviewing agency shall give due regard to the administrative law judge’s opportunity to observe witnesses. If the reviewing agency rejects or modifies a proposed finding of fact or a proposed decision, it shall give reasons for doing so in writing in the form of findings of fact and conclusions of law.

Sven To Greg;

You’re dreaming. The only acceptable conclusion is a default Order. Otherwise, you have parties arguing their cases without objection or cross examination.

Here are the rules on default:

OFFICE OF STATE ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

CHAPTER 616-1-2

ADMINISTRATIVE RULES OF PROCEDURE

616-1-2-.30 Default. Amended.

(1) A default order may be entered against a party that fails to participate in any stage of a proceeding, a party that fails to file any required pleading, or a party that fails to comply with an order issued by the Administrative Law Judge.

(2) Any default order may provide for a default as to all issues, a default as to specific issues, or other limitations, including limitations on the presentation of evidence and on the defaulting party’s continued participation in the proceeding. After issuing a default order, the Administrative Law Judge shall proceed as necessary to resolve the case without the participation of the defaulting party, or with such limited participation as the Administrative Law Judge deems appropriate, and shall determine all issues in the proceeding, including those affecting the party in default.

My original response to the default order was "A default order was averted"

But lets look at the above.

(1) A default order may be entered

(2)After issuing a default order, the Administrative Law Judge shall proceed as necessary to resolve the case without the participation of the defaulting party,

So no matter how you look it, evidence was presented and will be considered at the hearing level as well as at the SoS, and if appealed at the SC level. You have offered nothing to back up your claims and in fact you have argued against your own comments.

[Marine_Uncle]

Thanks for the ping. But after a basically sleepless night and morning, I shortly will prepare to leave for a family funeral. My eye balls are shot. Perhaps later I will read some of this rather extensive post.