Posted on | November 5, 2012 | 25 Comments
On November 16th at 1pm we have a hearing in Mississippi. I will be facing 6 attorneys and their law firms, this is truly a David and Goliath battle. So, I will post pleadings. I am asking my supporters, who followed this case, to read the material. I will need to file oppositions to motions to dismiss by Alvin Onaka and Loretta Fuddy filed by Duke firm. I have 2 weeks since October 26, till the 9th, probably, to be on the safe side, I will need to file by the 8th. Also, the same attorney Scott Tepper, who represents the Dem party of MS, now represents Obama, Pelosi and Astrue. They filed an answer, just as Dem party and Sec of State, but after the answer they filed a motion for Judgment on the pleadings. (JOP)
So far I answered to to Dem party and Sec of state. By the 8th I have to answer to Onaka and Fuddy and afterwards I will have to answer to Obama, Pelosi, Obama for America.
They are fighting hard because in this case I filed not only causes of action of Declaratory relief and Injunctive relief, but I also filed RICO (racketeering)
Tepper was seeking a a judgment with prejudice and Judicial notice of Obama’s BC, that he was born in Hawaii and that he is a Natural Born citizen.
Judicial notice is issued on undisputed facts: for example, there can be a judicial notice that it is Monday today, however since I provided multiple affidavits, showing forgery, a judicial notice cannot be issued, it is a disputed fact.
I opposed judicial notice and sought sanctions. In response Tepper sought a certification from HI, but requested was worded in a very vague way. He was seeking a verification that there is an original birth certificate on file and that the information on the original correspondents with the copy. The wording is suspicious in itself. Typically you would have wording: this is the true and correct copy of the original, not that the information corresponds to the original. Moreover, attached to the request for certification was a copy of BC, which according to the sworn affidavit of Henry Wayland Blake and others represents a heavily modified, doctored version of the BC originally posted on WhiteHouse.gov. It had a number of changes, which made it look less of a forgery. Specifically, the file was flattened and there were no layers, the stamp of the registrar resided on the same layer as the rest of the document. so, there is a clear effort to clean up evidence of forgery, which is listed on the affidavits and press conferences of Zullo, Arpaio and others. This is very serious. Today I talked about it during the conference call. So, what is the registrar certifying? The original forgery or the later, cleaned up better looking forgery?
I will have 35 pages for each brief. (not including exhibits) Today I told Judge Wingate and all of the attorneys that this is akin to Watergate. During Watergate we had the original crime and cover up, erasing the tapes.
I will be posting the docs as fast as I am able to. Let me know, if I am forgetting anything. Also, since I am facing 6 attorneys, it would be great to have a local counsel there. If you know a Jackson, MS attorney, who is on our side and is willing to assist, let me know.