latest draft of the PTO in GA
Posted on | December 9, 2011 | 4 Comments
Orly Taitz, ESQ.
29839 Santa Margarita Parkway, Ste. 100
Rancho Santa Margarita, CA 92688
Ph 949-683-5411 F949-766-7603
CA Bar License 223433
Pro Hac Vice GA
Attorney For Petitioners
OFFICE OF STATE ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
STATE OF GEORGIA
DAVID FARRAR, :
LEAH LAX, :
CODY JUDY, : DOCKET #: OSAH-SECSTATE- THOMAS MacLAREN : CE-1215136-60-MALIHI :
:
Plaintiffs, :
:
v. :
: PRE-TRIAL ORDER
:
BARACK OBAMA, BRIAN KEMP, :
GA SECRETARY OF STATE, :
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OF THE :
DEMOCRAT PARTY OF GA :
Defendant. :
____________________________________ : Filed: December 9, 2011
COMES NOW the Plaintiffs and file the following Pre-trial Order:
(1) The name, address, phone number, fax number and E-mail address of the attorney(s) (or Pro se party) who will conduct the hearing is as follows:
Dr. Orly Taitz, ESQ.
29839 Santa Margarita Parkway, Ste. 100
Rancho Santa Margarita, CA 92688
Ph 949-683-5411 F949-766-7603
(2) The estimated time required for hearing:
Direct examination: 6 hours
Cross examination: 4 hours
Total: 10 hours
(3) The following motion(s) are pending/anticipated for consideration by the Court:
None anticipated by Plaintiffs.
(4) The issues for determination by the Court are as follows:
A. Whether Barack Obama is eligible for the Presidential Ballot in Georgia.
B. Whether other candidates should be allowed on the Presidential Ballot in Georgia.
(5) The following is an in depth outline of the case and contentions including specific statutes or rules or other source of law upon which each issue is based and any special authorities relied upon (please attach a copy of any case, statute, rule, and/or regulation cited):
1. For the reasons set forth at length in the First Amended Complaint, incorporated herein by this reference, the Plaintiffs contend that Barack Obama is not eligible to be placed on the Ballot in the State of Georgia, and thus challenge his inclusion by the Democratic Party on the Ballot.
2. Further, the Plaintiffs (other than Farrar) request the Court to order their inclusion on the Ballot.
APPLICABLE LAWS AND REGULATIONS
United States Constitution (U.S. Const. art. II, § 1, cl. 5)
O.C.G.A. §§ 21-2-5(a) and (b)
O.C.G.A. § 21-2-193
The case of Haynes v. Wells, 538 S.E.2d 430 (Ga. 2000) establishes that a candidate seeking to hold office through an election in the state has the affirmative duty to prove their eligibility. The case notes that under the Official Code of Georgia, when filing a notice of candidacy, a candidate must swear by affidavit “[t]hat he or she is an elector of the county or municipality of his or her residence eligible to vote in the election in which he or she is a candidate.” Ga. Code Ann. § 21-2-132(e)(4) (1998).
The court therefore held, “Thus, the statutes place the affirmative obligation on Haynes to establish his qualification for office. Wells is not required to disprove anything regarding Haynes’s eligibility to run for office, as the entire burden is placed upon Haynes to affirmatively establish his eligibility for office. He failed to make that showing. Hence, his candidacy for the fifth district seat was invalid.” See Haynes, 538 S.E. 2d 430, 433 (Ga. 2000).
This principal is expressed in earlier decisions by the United States Supreme Court. For example in the case of Bute v. Illinois, 333 U.S. 640, 653 (1948), the court there stated: “The burden of establishing a delegation of power to the United States * * * is upon those making the claim.” And if each of the General Government’s powers must be proven (not simply presumed) to exist, then every requirement that the Constitution sets for any individual’s exercise of those powers must also be proven (not simply presumed) to be fully satisfied before that individual may exercise any of those powers.”
In O’Brien v. Gross (2006) OSAH-SECSTATE-CE-0829726-60MALIHI, this court noted the threshold standard that “all candidates for state office must meet all the constitutional statutory requirements for holding the office sought by the candidate.” O’Brien at page 11. The court further cited the Haynes decision in support of its finding that the Defendant in that matter had not met his burden of proving his eligibility requirements for the particular office he sought.
While it is true that these cases construe statutes designed for those running for state office, it is necessary to argue by analogy that the constitutional principles of the Gerogia Constitution are enshrined in that statutory scheme and thus should be observed by the Secretary of State in assessing the qualifications of Presidential candidates who are to be placed on the Ballot in the State of Georgia.
(6) The types of relief sought are stated as follows:
A. Injunctive Relief
B. Declaratory Relief
C. An Order Excluding Barack Obama from the Presidential Ballot in Georgia.
D. An Order Allowing the Plaintiffs (other than Farrar) to be included on the Presidential Ballot in Georgia.
(7) The following facts are stipulated (if any):
At present the Plaintiffs are not aware of any facts to which the Defendants have are are willing to stipulate.
(8) The following is a list of all exhibits that will be tendered at the hearing. Unless noted, the parties have stipulated as to the authenticity of the exhibits and the exhibits listed may be admitted without further proof of authenticity. All exhibits shall be marked by counsel prior to hearing. Parties shall consolidate exhibits by eliminating duplicates and use a common numbering system for joint exhibits so that one set of joint exhibits is presented to the Judge. Exhibits shall be pre-marked by the parties sequentially starting with “P-1” for the Plaintiff’s exhibits, and “D-1” for the Defendant’s exhibits. A copy of the exhibits shall be given to the opposing party no less than 5 days before the hearing and to the Judge when first identified in the hearing.
P1. Affidavit of Licensed investigator, certified by the Department of Homeland Security, Susan Daniels, showing Obama using a Connecticut SSN 042-68-4425
P2. Affidavit of Senior Deportation Officer with the Department of Homeland Security John Sampson, showing that Obama is using Connecticut SSN 042-68-4425 and stating, that there is no legitimate reason for him to use a Connecticut SSN, as he was never a resident of Connecticut
P3. Affidavit of Adobe Illustrator expert Felichito Papa, showing Obama’s alleged true and correct copy of his birth certificate to be a computer generated forgery
P4. Affidavit of witness Linda Jordan, attesting to the fact, that SSN 042-68-4425, used by Obama, does not pass E-Verify
P5. Affidavit of attorney Orly Taitz, and selective service printout, showing Obama using CT SSN 042-68-44245
P6. Selective service certificate showing Obama using SSN 042-68-4425 and official printout from Social Security Number Verification Services, showing that 042-68-4425 was never issued to Barack Obama, attached e-mail from Colonel Gregory Hollister
P7. Affidavit of Adobe Illustrator expert Felichito Papa, showing that Obama is using CT SSN 042-68-4425 on his 2009 tax returns
P8. Affidavit of printing and scanning machines expert Douglas Vogt, attesting to the fact, that Obama’s alleged copy of his birth certificate, is indeed a forgery
P9. Hawaiian birth certificate 61-00637 of Susan Nordyke, born a few hours after Obama in Kapiolani Hospital, looks completely different from alleged copy of birth certificate of Obama
P10. Passport records of Stanley Ann Dunham Obama, mother of Barack Obama, showing Obama listed in her passport under the name Barack Obama Soebarkah, attached affidavit by Chris Strunk, recipient of Obama’s passport records under FOIA
P11. Barack Obama’s Indonesian school registration card #203, date accepted January 1, 1968, released by the Associated Press in Indonesia, showing him using last name Soetoro and listing citizenship -Indonesian
P12. Swarn Declaration by a Presidential Candidate Leah Lax, Attesting to being arbitrarily excluded by the Executive Committee of the Georgia Democrat Party and forbidden to participate in the Democrat Presidential primary
(9) The testimony of the following persons may be introduced by depositions:
Plaintiffs are not aware of any testimony to be introduced by depositions, however, Plaintiff does intend to offer the affidavits and/or declarations of Susan Daniels, John Sampson, Chito Papa, Linda Jordan, Douglas Vogt and an email by Gregory Hollister
(10) The following are lists of witnesses and a brief description of each witness’ expected testimony and relation to the issues for determination:
Susan Daniels (May offer affidavit from Daniels, a private investigator, regarding the results of various public records searches pertaining to candidate Obama’s birth certificate and use of a Connecticut Social Security Number.)
John Sampson (May offer affidavit from Sampson regarding the candidate’s use of a Connecticut Social Security Number.)
Chito Papa (May offer affidavit from Papa regarding the “birth certificate” allegedly released online by candidate Obama with particular focus on the use of the “Adobe Illustrator” software Plaintiffs allege was used to fabricate such document.)
Linda Jordan (May offer affidavit from Jordan regarding inability to verify the identity of the candidate through the “E-Verify” System.)
Gregory Hollister (May offer email from Hollister regarding inability to verify the identity of the candidate through the Social Security Number Verification Systems.)
Douglas Vogt (May offer affidavit of Vogt as to the techniques and properties of “scanning” documents, in particular relating to the scanned “birth certificate” at issue in this case.)
Orly Taitz (May testify as to authenticity of certain documents she herself obtained or created.)
(11) The hearing can be avoided if the parties are able to settle the dispute voluntarily. Mediation is available as a possible means of resolving your differences without the necessity of a formal hearing The possibilities of settling the case are:
Plaintiffs are not aware of any present possibility of settling this dispute prior to the hearing.
This is the 9th day of December 2011.
Submitted by:
Dr. Orly Taitz, Esq.
_____________________
Attorney for Plaintiffs
ORDER
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the foregoing, including the attachments thereto, constitutes the PRE-TRIAL ORDER in the above case upon filing with the Clerk and supersedes the pleadings that may not be further amended except by order of the Court to prevent manifest injustice.
SO ORDERED, this ___________ day of ___________________, 2011.
__________________
Comments
4 Responses to “latest draft of the PTO in GA”
Leave a Reply
EVIDENCE AGAINST OBAMA — YouTube Indiana Trial of Obama !
Petition the White House to institute Edward Snowden, National Whistleblower – Patriots against Government Corruption Day
OrlyTaitzEsq.comTAITZ REPORT
Official Facebook
IMPORTANT NOTICES – PLEASE READ!
Historic DVD Now Available!
DVD of the historic trial in GA and DVD of a historic testimony in NH, where evidence was provided showing Obama using a forged birth certificate and a stolen social security number. The DVDs are in a beautiful commemorative case with personal autographs from attorney Dr. Orly Taitz $22.50 each +$2.50 for shipping and handling.
---------
To order these DVDs, donate $25.00 by credit card on the website RunOrlyRun.com and email orly.taitz@gmail.com with you name and address. Or send a $25.00 check with your name and address to: Orly Taitz for US Senate 2012, 29839 Santa Margarita ste 100, RSM, CA 92688.
Advertisement / Sponsors
29839 Sta Margarita Pkwy,
Ste 100
Rancho Sta Margarita, CA 92688
orly.taitz @gmail. com
(949) 766-7687
--------------------------------------
Videography by Barbara Rosenfeld
--------------------------------------
Bumper Sticker
$9.99 thru PayPal--------------------------------------
--------------------------------------Orly Taitz Photo Collections
December 9th, 2011 @ 3:28 pm
Dr. Orly – there are people talking about shooting you when you are in Georgia. Some people at this forum are talking about having someone shoot you at your office. You should check it out at the link and show it to law enforcement.
December 9th, 2011 @ 3:32 pm
This is very frustrating. Trying to call you on your phone gives me a message the number is no longer in service. Trying to email you only returns my message as undeliverable. And now I tried to warn you on your website and this stupid word verifucation never lets me post anything. I hope my first message went through.
December 9th, 2011 @ 4:00 pm
Way cool. Who is getting cross examined?
December 10th, 2011 @ 7:24 am
please, forward this info to the FBI and the Secret Service ASAP