Update: Obama’s response in my GA case Farrar et al v Obama et al
Posted on | December 16, 2011 | 6 Comments
Farrar Pretrial defendant submission
Farrar – MATERIALS REFERENCED IN DEFENDANT
Farrar et al v Obama et al motion to dismiss
Farrar et al v Obama et al Obama’s statement of undisputed facts
Category: HOT ITEMS!, Latest News, Legal Actions, LINKS, Obama Fraud Gate, orly taitz attorney, Orly Taitz civil rights leader, Orly Taitz doctor and attorney, Orly Taitz for U.S. Senate 2012, Orly Taitz Hawaii, Orly Taitz Obama birth certificate, Orly Taitz Obama social Security number, Orly Taitz ObamaFraudGate, Orly Taitz subpoena, Other Criminal or Suspicious Activities, Radio and Media Broadcasts, Supporting Documentation
Comments
6 Responses to “Update: Obama’s response in my GA case Farrar et al v Obama et al”
Leave a Reply
December 16th, 2011 @ 5:58 pm
Orly, if I were youy, I’d try to get, Michael Jablonski disqualified, and his brief struck from, the record.
His brief, has real case citations, in it, and all the lost, birther cases.
He’s also, trying to keep you from getting a trial and DISCOVERY. He’s objecting, to all your experts! You will need to have them, all there. Unless he wins to motion, to dismiss which looks, likely.
I told you, to get the judge, disqualified.
Outrageous.
December 16th, 2011 @ 6:43 pm
enough with obot insanity
December 16th, 2011 @ 8:58 pm
The motion to dismiss is going to be granted. But I do, look forward to your reply.
December 17th, 2011 @ 8:35 pm
Where’s the insanity? The rules say you must have your witnesses in court to authenticate their statements and they will be subject to cross-examination. Will be able to get them all to Georgia?
December 18th, 2011 @ 5:12 pm
If Jablonski offers to allow other presidential candidates on Georgia’s primary ballot in exchange for dropping your challenge of Obama’s eligiblity to be on the ballotg, I would simply say “No.”
December 18th, 2011 @ 8:38 pm
Karl – the only Democrat the Democratic Party wants on the ballot is Obama. Why would anyone offer to allow other candidates to be on the ballot. And Jablonski is the opposing lawyer. He can’t grant something prohibited by statute.