26 Responses to “Hearing in HI 01.13.2012. You can see the actual motion that mentions rule 624-24.5 and 624-27 and the judge totally ignoring it, relying only on one rule and denying the motion”

1. Patty
   January 17th, 2012 @ 8:48 am

   You do much better when you read your argument.

2. Jim
   January 17th, 2012 @ 9:23 am

   Very Sad and pathetic!

   First off, I am no lawyer nor do I claim to be one however I can “read” people just like anyone else.

   This Judge and this Hawaii deputy AG or whomever she is are so full of it. The deck is so stacked here. American people should watch this because you can literally watch corruption in our courts take place right in front of your own eyes. I’ve never seen anything like this nor did I think I ever would. But wow, this is corruption.

   This video will haunt these two people for the rest of their lives. The narrow sighted-ness of the Judge is astounding. She’s not thinking of the ramifications that will be served when the people that influence or otherwise directed her to act this way are no where to be found. She should think twice about her oath to of being a judge 1st.

   The AG person too as you watch her facial expressions and mannerisms is just flat out lying. Again, clearly influenced or directed to say make this stuff up.

   Keep the fight up because these people are just digging bigger and bigger holes for themselves. If you look at corruption in any country in the world, these people always end up in big, big trouble. They never, ever win. Time always catches them.

3. Larry
   January 17th, 2012 @ 9:42 am

   Patty

   She’s alot better than Obama without his teleprompter…urr…urr..urr…sound familiar

4. Patty
   January 17th, 2012 @ 9:51 am

   Orly, I could not find Rule 624-24.5 nor Rule 624-27. The ruels don’t go that high in numbers.

   Would you post them, please?

5. Thomas/PatriotofPast
   January 17th, 2012 @ 11:12 am

   I was surprised that the Asst. AG did not stand up and scream “Objection” when you said she was part of a Criminal Coverup…
   She just sat there, knowing what you said was TRUE!

6. 2discern
   January 17th, 2012 @ 11:43 am

   The compilation of lies upon lies always, ALWAYS
   comes out. The enormity of corruption cannot be hid. The people of Hawaii should be occupying the Courthouse demanding REAL justice. The sums paid for this cover up must be enormous. Investigations are in order. We thought CHicago was bad (and it is) this is an extension of barry soetero evil of deceit.

7. David J
   January 17th, 2012 @ 12:02 pm

   Naked Corruption. Image of “Birth Certificate” is plastered over t-shirts and mugs all around the world. Exactly what is it that they are protecting again? 1st criminal here is the Hawaiian governmental agencies and courts allowing this crime against the American people and Constitution to continue. The second criminal here is the media who are actively covering up this crime. Truth will always be known. People will be going to prison. Americans will not forget.
   God Bless you Orly

8. John
   January 17th, 2012 @ 12:39 pm

   Patty:

   just search Google and you’ll find the material. For example, at

   https://codes.lp.findlaw.com/histatutes/4/33/624/I/624-24.5

   you read:

   Haw. Rev. Stat. § 624-24.5 : Hawaii Statutes – Section 624-24.5: Compelling attendance of witness; commission for taking testimony.
   Search Haw. Rev. Stat. § 624-24.5 : Hawaii Statutes – Section 624-24.5: Compelling attendance of witness; commission for taking testimony.

   * Search by Keyword or Citation

   (a) When the taking of a deposition is authorized by statute or rule of court, the attendance of the witness and the answering of questions may, except as otherwise provided, be compelled:

   (1) By any court when the action or proceeding is pending before it or the taking of the deposition has been ordered by it;

   (2) By the circuit court of the circuit in which the deposition is being taken, when the action or proceeding is pending before, or the taking of the deposition has been ordered by, another circuit court or an arbitrator or other person, other than a court;

   (3) By the district court of the circuit in which the deposition is being taken, when the action or proceeding is pending before, or the taking of the deposition has been ordered by, another district court.

   (b) When the taking of a deposition outside the State is authorized by statute or rule of court and the issuance of a commission or letters rogatory is appropriate, the same may be issued by any court before which the action or proceeding is pending, or which has ordered or given leave for the taking of the deposition. [L 1972, c 143, §1(b)]

9. Benjamin F. Paulson
   January 17th, 2012 @ 3:09 pm

   Ms. Taitz:

   1: Patty is right. You argue better when reading.

   2: Is it possible that the 624 references might have been in a different version of the motion than the one you first submitted?

10. orly taitz
    January 17th, 2012 @ 3:18 pm

    no, I submitted only one motion to expedite, it was stamped, the judge ruled on it, she saw it and ignored

11. Benjamin F. Paulson
    January 17th, 2012 @ 3:37 pm

    Why would she ignore it??? That sounds bad. Can you appeal? Will she reconsider?

12. Patty
    January 17th, 2012 @ 5:03 pm

    Are you sure that your amended motion was on the calendar? Maybe you should get a court date for that one.

13. Patty
    January 17th, 2012 @ 5:04 pm

    John, thank you for those links. I never would have thought to look in statutes for “rules.”

    What’s a commission or letters rogatory?

14. orly taitz
    January 17th, 2012 @ 5:06 pm

    I personally went to the clerk and had it stamped and went upstairs and gave to the clerk in the chambers, everything was stamped.

15. Raul Blackstone
    January 17th, 2012 @ 6:48 pm

    Then Orly, you admit in your comment #14, that you handed it to the clerk in chambers, and therefor it wasn’t docketed.

    You argued the wrong motion – again.

16. Bluto Ruffian
    January 17th, 2012 @ 7:14 pm

    I have been in several court cases and when all the testimony was given, the judge either recessed or took time to consider the points of testimony (15 minutes was the shortest wait in in 9 separate trials…) before giving a decision. This judge read her decision from prepared notes immediately (10 or 15 seconds later) upon the conclusion of testimony. This judge has been threatened with more than just her well being…

17. Nick
    January 17th, 2012 @ 10:55 pm

    Forgive my ignorance, but let me ask: What would happen if Georgia can’t secure the original birth certificate by the trial date? Couldn’t the Georgia judge simply declare that there isn’t sufficient evidence that Obama is eligible to be on the ballot? (I understand it’s not up to the judge to determine who is and isn’t on the ballot.)

    (Is it odd to me that Hawaii is not trying to prove to Georgia just how eligible Obama is. If he’s so eligible, why don’t they prove it to everybody?)

18. orly taitz
    January 17th, 2012 @ 11:53 pm

    the judge can declare him ineligible
    Why HI is not proving, because, they can’t they have no papers and the officials are corrupt

19. js
    January 18th, 2012 @ 6:44 am

    Strage but true.

    I called the OSAH and asked them if they were considered a Court or something else.

    The reply was yes, that they actually are a court. What else does the Attorney in Hawaii think they are if they have over 15 Judges assigned to them?

20. 5214chief
    January 18th, 2012 @ 7:33 am

    The judge can’t “declare him ineligible”–all he does is advise the GA Sec of State. But all he needs to document his eligibility is a certified copy.

21. Harry
    January 18th, 2012 @ 8:25 am

    I recall Obama saying, shortly after he was inaugurated: “I won. That trumps everything.”
    Evidently he believes that his winning an election trumps the Constitution — except when the Constitution trumps gimmicks, as the press secretary recently said.

    Obama’s right to privacy does not trump the Constitution, nor does it trump the right of We the People — 300 million — to know if a person is a natural born citizen and eligible to the Office of the President.

    The Constitution is the sacred fundamental law of the land. Supporting and defending the Constitution is not a “frivolous” activity.

    The fix was in. The judge had her marching orders and had her decision in hand when she entered the court room.

22. orly taitz
    January 18th, 2012 @ 8:58 am

    so far officials are following all of his advises

23. orly taitz
    January 18th, 2012 @ 8:59 am

    attorney in HI is corrupt. Supreme Court will not be enough for her

24. orly taitz
    January 18th, 2012 @ 9:01 am

    not if there is evidence, that the official committed fraud in releasing a forged document

25. Nick
    January 18th, 2012 @ 11:20 am

    So, correct me if I’m wrong, but it seems like it’s not a big deal if Georgia doesn’t get any original document from HI. If Georgia doesn’t get the original, then, based on the experts view of the “copy of the original,” Obama is guilty until proven innocent. Is that how the GA judge sees Obama? As guilty until proven innocent?

26. orly taitz
    January 18th, 2012 @ 1:05 pm

    drop the BS Nick

Leave a Reply