Dis Guy??? Mr. Jablonski

Well I certainly hope Orly manages to get this one videotaped.

if it even happens.

Let me make a wild guess that this guy charges an hourly commensurate with his skills. I hope Orly ends up paying him to pimp-slap her into next century.

This could be one for the ages.

This may be worth going just to watch a real pro in action. I don't feel too much like a trip to GA though, maybe I can get one of my commie relatives in Atlanta to attend after one of his drummings.

Once the date for the hearing is known I can decide whether I will attend. So long as not between the 21st and 31st, I should be able to go.

Same for the Alabama clown show.

That would be worth some frequent flier miles to see in person, if both were guaranteed to actually officially interact.

Like killing a fly with a howitzer.

WRT fees incurred on Obama's side; wouldn't those be covered by the campaign, rather than out of pocket from the President?

Yes. Unlike candidate Taitz, Obama has fund separate from a personal bank account. In this case, Obama will not be defended by the U.S. DOJ (or by "proxy" by a Secretary of State).

Certainly no match for a noted Konstitutional Scholar/Civil Rights/Elections atty like Taitz or Merooni.

I doubt there's the opportunity for sanctions here. Remember, even in Land's case the sanctions were as a result of her conduct and failure to abide by the judge's instructions, not by virtue of the filing itself.

Possibly of note, though, a fellow attorney tells me that for an attorney to be admitted pro hac vice in Georgia, there's a $2,500 fee from the Bar. I haven't confirmed that amount, but if it's true, that's a lot of money that could've been spent on a better lawyer than Orly.

Does that hold true to be admitted before an administrative board?

He said it did, and he's been an attorney a LOT longer than I have. But I'm still a skeptical of that amount. Even the Bar website seems to suggest the fee is more like $200 for the Superior Courts. So maybe he misremembered, or I misheard.

Pat wrote something over at Dispatches that I wanted to correct:

"Actually it's going to hearing first, and if the judge decides there's enough evidence and proper standing, then it might go to trial."

Er, no. Barring some unexpected complication, here's what's going to happen. There will be a hearing in front of an Administrative Law Judge, where Obama's attorney will present evidence that Obama *is* eligible and the challenger will present a case that he's not. Witnesses are permitted and exhibits are expected. After the hearing, the Administrative Law Judge will prepare an Order expressing his ruling. The Secretary of State then decides whether to adopt the Administrative Law Judge's conclusion (which is pretty much just a formality; the SoS always does this). That's the extent of the hearing; judge only, no jury. I suppose you could think of it as a small bench trial. But the hearing is not an intermediary step towards a larger trial; the hearing is *it*.

Whoever loses in front of the Administrative Law Judge can then appeal to the Superior Court of Fulton County. On appeal, the Superior Court judge can then review the evidence and the holding of the Administrative Law Judge, but there is still no jury and there is no new evidence allowed. The Superior Court judge simply rules on the existing record as presented in the Administrative Law court. So that's definitely not any sort of trial; it's just an appellate review.

I stand corrected. Thanks for clarifying it!

So we may see a birth certificate? That would be a victory for Orly.

Time to review the definition of "evidence." While the rules in an administrative proceeding may be relaxed, they are not completely thrown out.

Something tells me this isn't what's going to happen at this hearing.

And you know how curious I always am

Something tells me that too. The same something that is whispering the word "jurisdiction" in my ear.

Because he was ignorant?

After all, remember that when he was on RC's show, Rep. Hatfield said that he was sure that all members of the Georgia House met the qualification requirements...and then minutes later admitted that he didn't know that the state required members of the Georgia House to be U.S. citizens.

Ignorant yes, but beside my point.

I don't believe the administrative hearing will get to the evidence stage and I think some Georgia reps realize why.

I have no idea what "court" she's talking about (okay... administrative court ) and I've not read her "Motion" yet, but if granted, I suspect Mr. Farrar's eligibility challenge is about to get more screwed up than it already is...

http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=28464

motion for leave of court to file an amended complaint in GA

Posted on | December 1, 2011 | No Comments

Farrar v Obama motion for leave to file an amended complaint

Orly thinks she got skoooled in Hawai'i? Meet Mr. Jablonski, and let the games begin: