FARRAR v OBAMA ACT II (APPEAL FCSC)

realist · **Joined:** Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm **Posts:** 23560

Placeholder for discussion and posting documents as soon as we obtain them.

Farrar v Obama - Appeal and Emergency Application for Stay

Farrar v Obama - Motion for Pro Hac Vice

Farrar v Obama - Civil Case Filing Information

tjh · **Joined:** Wed Oct 07, 2009 4:18 pm **Posts:** 2474

Small greenie request -- could please you add GEORGIA to the topic titles?

Edit: Thank you kindly. :wenotworthy:

bob · **Posted:** Wed Feb 15, 2012 3:04 pm

Loren wrote:

For future reference, this is the link to [Taitz's] case's entry on the Fulton County Superior Court Clerk's website:

http://www.fcclkjudicialsearch.org/Scri ... 253D746399

AnitaMaria · **Joined:** Tue Mar 29, 2011 5:41 pm **Posts:** 2115

Orly posted her Farrar v Obama appeal among her blather about her non-existent Indiana ballot challenge--

:evil:

http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/wp-content/ ... county.pdf :evil:

Reality Check · **Posted:** Wed Feb 15, 2012 3:23 pm

Hmm, she gave Barack Obama a new job. He is now Secretary of State. Would someone let Hillary Clinton know? =))

Edit: How is this for some concrete facts?

Quote:

f. The majority opinion in Kim Ark was drafted by the associate justice Horace Gray, appointee of President Chester Arthur. It was rumored, that Gray's commission and subsequent decision in Kim Ark was done to sanitize Arthur's own lack of eligibility. William Arthur, Chester Arthur's father was an Irish citizen and there is no clear evidence, that he became a U.S. citizen prior to Chester Arthur's birth. ReportedlyChester Arthur burned his identification papers and his eligibility is covered in mystery. Chester Arthur is the only other U.S. President, whose eligibility is questioned. Just because Arthur burned his documents, does not give Obama green light to disrespect the court and the nation and show a contempt to the judiciary and refuse to produce any verifiable documents, any evidence of his natural born status.

Yep, some Internet rumors on birther blogs make Wong Kim Ark null and void. [-X

neonzx · **Joined:** Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:27 am **Posts:** 4216

This board requires you to be registered and logged-in before you can view hidden messages

neonzx · **Joined:** Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:27 am **Posts:** 4216

Quote:

Did he consider him born in this country based on his wild imagination? The only thing Obama provided, was an empty chair. Did the empty chair testify under penalty of perjury in front of judge Malihi and told him, that Obama was born in this country? Did the empty chair provide Malihi with any evidence, with the original birth certificate or a certified copy?

This behavior of judge Malihi was so outrageous, that not only his advisory opinion needs to be set aside, as not grounded in any fact or law, but state and county grand juries and the Attorney General of Georgia need to launch an investigation into actions of judge Malihi and possible direct or indirect undue influence by Obama. Decision by Malihi reads, as if it was entirely written by Obama's personal attorneys Robert Bauer and Judith Corley of Perkins Coie and rubber stamped by Malihi.

This board requires you to be registered and logged-in before you can view hidden messages

AnitaMaria · **Joined:** Tue Mar 29, 2011 5:41 pm **Posts:** 2115

Reality Check · **Posted:** Wed Feb 15, 2012 3:41 pm

This board requires you to be registered and logged-in before you can view hidden messages

Lola_Getz · **Posted:** Wed Feb 15, 2012 3:44 pm

Quote:

Yep, some Internet rumors on birther blogs make Wong Kim Ark null and void. [-X

I don't believe the word "rumor" should ever appear on anything filed by a lawyer. The law is not about rumors.

Reality Check · **Posted:** Wed Feb 15, 2012 3:45 pm

I think Judge Wright should grant her admission and immediately impose sanctions on the POS.

tjh · **Joined:** Wed Oct 07, 2009 4:18 pm **Posts:** 2474

Kemp denied such twelfth hour request ...

ObjectiveDoubter · **Posted:** Wed Feb 15, 2012 3:52 pm

realist wrote:

Placeholder for discussion and posting documents as soon as we obtain them.

Does the Court have to respond when it is so ridiculous? Didn't she file a pile of poo to NH Supreme Court? I don't think there was ever an answer. Do I recall correctly?

Loren · **Joined:** Wed Jan 28, 2009 4:20 pm **Posts:** 3897

Quote:

ARGUMENT
Petitioners filed a challenge to a candidate. Challenge was denied by the Secretary of State Kemp. Under rule 21-2-5 Petitioners have a right to petition Superior Court of Fulton County

That's the caption on page 2. It certainly reads like it was written by someone who learned English as a second language.

Additionally, I can't help but notice that on multiple occasions throughout her pleading, Orly repeatedly refers to "judge Malihi." Lower-case 'j'.

realist · **Joined:** Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm **Posts:** 23560

Loren wrote:

Quote:

ARGUMENT
Petitioners filed a challenge to a candidate. Challenge was denied by the Secretary of State Kemp. Under rule 21-2-5 Petitioners have a right to petition Superior Court of Fulton County

That's the caption on page 2. It certainly reads like it was written by someone who learned English as a second language.

Additionally, I can't help but notice that on multiple occasions throughout her pleading, Orly repeatedly refers to "judge Malihi." Lower-case 'j'.

Orly ALWAYS refers to any judge with a lower-case "j"... always.

Mikedunford · **Posted:** Wed Feb 15, 2012 3:57 pm

Loren wrote:

Quote:

ARGUMENT
Petitioners filed a challenge to a candidate. Challenge was denied by the Secretary of State Kemp. Under rule 21-2-5 Petitioners have a right to petition Superior Court of Fulton County

That's the caption on page 2. It certainly reads like it was written by someone who learned English as a second language.

Additionally, I can't help but notice that on multiple occasions throughout her pleading, Orly repeatedly refers to "judge Malihi." Lower-case 'j'.

That's standard for any Orly filing. Respect is something that is supposed to be extended to her, not something she is supposed to extend to others.

bob · **Posted:** Wed Feb 15, 2012 4:00 pm

ObjectiveDoubter wrote:

Does the Court have to respond when it is so ridiculous?

Yes. But may do so summarily. (See Jackson v. Obama ballot challenge.)

Quote:

Didn't she file a pile of poo to NH Supreme Court? I don't think there was ever an answer. Do I recall correctly?

Yes; SCONH denied the petition.

neonzx · **Joined:** Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:27 am **Posts:** 4216

Loren wrote:

Additionally, I can't help but notice that on multiple occasions throughout her pleading, Orly repeatedly refers to "judge Malihi." Lower-case 'j'.

I'd like to give her the benefit of the doubt (perhaps a screw-up with a global search/replace?), but it looks intentional to me.

She starts her conclusion with:
"Advisory opinion by the Administrative Court judge Malihi."

I think it's clearly a diss at Malihi.

tjh · **Joined:** Wed Oct 07, 2009 4:18 pm **Posts:** 2474

Quote:

The court shall not substitute its judgment for that of the Secretary of State as to the weight of the evidence on questions of fact.

which was ... little, if any, probative value.

Litlebritdifrnt2 · **Posted:** Wed Feb 15, 2012 4:18 pm

You gotta love Orly

Accuse the Judge of Fraud - check

Accuse the SOS of Fraud - check

Accuse two attorneys unrelated to the case whatsoever of Fraud - check

Demand everyone be locked up - check.

=))

BTW is it just my browser or was the formatting in that POS just awful?

Piffle · **Posted:** Wed Feb 15, 2012 4:25 pm

ObjectiveDoubter wrote:

Does the Court have to respond when it is so ridiculous? Didn't she file a pile of poo to NH Supreme Court? I don't think there was ever an answer. Do I recall correctly?

Yes, there was an "answer". The New Hampshire Supremes dismissed her pile of poo with an almost instant two-line FOAD order.

Edit: Oops. Didn't pick up that Bob already answered this question.

Chilidog · **Joined:** Mon Jan 09, 2012 12:36 pm **Posts:** 1966

Quote:

Defense did not provide Ankeny v Daniels at the hearing. Malihi was supposed to base his opinion on what is in the record. Ankeny v Daniels was not part of the record. The most basic rules of courtroom decorum and basic fairness, were supposed to preclude Malihi from even entering Ankeny in his opinion. This case was never cited by the defense. Plaintiffs had no opportunity to provide a rebuttal and explain numerous points, as to why Ankeny is erroneous and why it does not apply. A presiding judge cannot suddenly pull out of a hat some case, brought in a circuit court of another state by some truck driver, who could not even afford an attorney, and use this case as the basis of his final ruling in the case at hand when it was never part of the record in the case at hand.

Good, lord, this, woman, is, dumber, than a box of commas.
(and she is wrong about one issue, as well. Jablonski DID mention Ankeny in his letter to Kemp, which he cc’d to the Judge as well)

Reality Check · **Posted:** Wed Feb 15, 2012 4:36 pm

Yes, it was in Michael Jablonski's Motion to Dismiss as some have noted here. It was in a footnote with the long string of Birfer Fail case cites. It is just a flat out lie when Orly says Judge Malihi pulled it out of his hat.
I hope when realist posts the "official" docs we see the PHV application. Tnx realist. =D>

Citizen Like Obama · **Posted:** Wed Feb 15, 2012 4:37 pm

Does President Obama have to respond?

Chilidog · **Joined:** Mon Jan 09, 2012 12:36 pm **Posts:** 1966

Since when are judges only allowed to uses cases that have been brought up in arguments? In that case, Orly could have based her entire argument on Dred Scot, and been done with it.

Falsehoods unchallenged only fester and grow.

FARRAR v OBAMA ACT II (APPEAL FCSC)

Who is online