"Read all about it"

Posts Tagged ‘judge Malihi’

Corrupt Judicial Branch harasses Van Irion, founding fathers warned of this day

In Government on March 3, 2012 at 9:22 AM

I became nauseous while reading this letter from Van Irion regarding the events of that disappointing day in Georgia regarding Obamas eligibility.

Our country is in a heap of trouble! Our founding fathers wrote the constitution to protect us from such tyrannical and maniacal attitudes toward citizen who attempt to apply the law in order to be represented and have a voice! We no longer have the power of the people. We can no longer assume that because we are American we will get a fair hearing in a high court in this country!

Our goose is cooked, stick a fork in it, we are done, fineesh!

Our dishonorable judges have lost their moral compass and have quickly become a cancer that is spreading to shield our tyrannical Kings and Queens from being accountable to the people within the confines of the Constitution!

The once sacred document, behind thick glass in a museum has been shredded and desecrated! The document exists only as a piece of tattered paper with a passing historical side bar as it’s memory!

We must stand strong with Van to continue this fight! It’s not cheap or inexpensive! He, as a representative of your conservative psyche is counter punching and is leaning back on his heels getting punch drunk from the constant barrage of blows! He is facing the battle essentially alone and is hunkering down for the assault! He is standing in the gap and giving it all he can! But to be honest with you it’s not cheap!

I dont usually do this bit I am asking you to please visit Liberty Legal Foundation website and donate any amount of money to give him and LLF the fuel to continue the fight! Only if it is 5.00 or 5, 000 dollars any amount will make a difference! He is giving his time to the fight of his life, the least we can do is send him a few dollars! Please pass this around to all your friends! Van didn’t ask me to do this but I know how important it is to have a war chest to fight this horrible corrupt regime! Thank you and as he faces these giants he will know he has our support! Please give now and freely if you are able and send around to your friends list and ask them to do the same! Our freedom is dependent on it, our Republic is worth every dime of it!

Read below and see if you will feel exactly as I do! Read this blatant disregard for our laws of this land! Contempt is not good enough. Please read and tell me how you feel in the comments section of this blog. We need to sound off on this epic failure of our government! Get busy patriots!

So much has happened recently demonstrating the lack of honor in our judicial system that I’m now forced to review these incidents in bullet point format:

The President’s attorney dishonors the Georgia Administrative Court by sending a letter directly to the Secretary of State requesting the executive branch of Georgia to take a lawsuit away from the judicial branch.
The President and his attorney dishonor the Georgia Administrative court again by violating that court’s order to appear.
The Georgia Administrative Court refuses to forward Liberty Legal Foundation’s motion for contempt to the Georgia Supreme Court, despite Georgia law leaving the Administrative court no discretion on this matter.
The Georgia Administrative court refuses to even respond to correspondence regarding our motion for contempt.
The Georgia Superior Court fails to comment on the motion for contempt or require the Administrative court to forward records, as required by law.
The Georgia Superior Court Clerk initially refuses to file LLF’s appeal document, then backs down after being instructed on the law.
The Georgia Superior Court Clerk refuses to file LLF’s emergency motion for preliminary injunction because $1 was not included with our filing. Then, when LLF hand delivers $1 to the clerk, the clerk sits on the motion for 10 days and mails it back to LLF claiming that the correct staffer didn’t get the $1. Our plaintiff gave the case number, name of the motion, and name of the staffer, who was literally pointed at in the room. Yet the clerk’s office still claims that that staffer didn’t get the $1. The motion had to be completely re-filed and was then delayed another two days before finally being filed.
The Chief Judge of the Superior Court was made aware of all of the incidents occurring in her Clerk’s office, yet she did nothing to correct the situation.
The President’s motion to dismiss was filed on his first attempt. After three days the Court notified LLF that the Court had shortened the time to file an opposition to that motion, giving us less than a day to file.
Late that same day the Chief Judge signs an order denying LLF’s motion to have Van Irion admitted as a visiting attorney in this case, preventing LLF from filing the opposition that the Court had ordered us to file 6 hours earlier. (Note that I’ve been admitted as a visiting attorney in 5 states and at every level of court, both state and federal. I’ve never been denied admission before. Further, my local attorney sponsor was a sitting member of the state’s legislature, making this denial even more shocking.) Even more outrageous is the timing of the denial, made just hours before a Court-set deadline, after the Court sat on our motion for more than two weeks.
The Georgia Secretary of State has, to date, refused to forward the record of the case to the Superior Court, despite Georgia law absolutely requiring this action and requiring that it be done as soon as possible.
The Superior Court does nothing to require the Secretary of State to forward the record of the case.
Only 90 minutes after our plaintiff files an opposition himself (because LLF was denied the ability to file it for him), the Chief Judge issues a three-page opinion granting Obama’s motion to dismiss our appeal. It seems obvious that the Court’s opinion was written before they asked us to file an opposition. Also, the dismissal was granted while the Court had not even received the record of the hearing held by the lower court. In other words, it ruled without even reviewing the record or reading our plaintiff’s opposition.
Our system of government is based upon an assumption that the people placed in high office are honorable. This is an absolute requirement for the survival of our nation. The Founding Fathers understood that when dishonorable people begin to take high office, the system of government they set into motion would begin to fail. Unfortunately America’s judicial system is proving this principle.

These are just the incidents associated with our Georgia case and we are not discussing the substance of the breathtakingly absurd rulings from any of these courts. Without needing to discuss judicial rulings, the incidents cited here demonstrate the harassment, bias, and lack of honor in the administrative operation of our courts. This bias effectively prevents those on one side of an issue to have basic access to the courts.In other words, the courts are now barring specific viewpoints from entering the front doors of the court. When we do get through we are harassed by means of the timing of orders and one-sided enforcement of procedural requirements.

Georgia is an example of what is happening across our country. Laws are being blatantly ignored by those in high office, while other laws are being used to punish their political opponents. This type of corruption reflects the practices historically found in third world nations, dictatorships, and communist tyrannies. Freedom cannot survive where such practices go unpunished.

Yet it is practically impossible to punish individuals holding high office. This is why such individuals must have honor, allowing them to resist their own selfish temptations. Unfortunately America’s high offices are now populated by corrupt people with no moral compass. Our leaders have no honor. Our Founding Fathers are being proven correct, once again.   

Our opponents are trying to frustrate and exhaust us to the point that we will give up. They don’t want their bias and dishonor to be seen in the light of day.  The corrupt individuals in high office are harassing us for our efforts. This tells us that we are having an effect. Even when we don’t win a legal battle, our efforts shine the light of truth on their corruption. That corruption is responding by lashing out at us.

We will be appealing the Georgia Superior Court’s ruling. But we need your help. We need your help to keep the spotlight on the dishonorable actions of those in high office. Please do what you can to support Liberty Legal Foundation.

In Liberty,

Van Irion, Founder
LIBERTY LEGAL FOUNDATION

Malihi, Kemp issue final decision on Obama eligibility case, to appeal

In Government on February 9, 2012 at 8:07 AM

ATLANTA – On Tuesday morning, Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp (r) issued a final decision, adopting Administrative Law Judge Michael Malihi’s initial decision contending President Barack Obama meets the eligibility requirements to appear on Presidential Preference Primary ballot.

On Friday, Feb. 3, Malihi issued his decision in three challenges to Barack Obama’s eligibility.

During the Jan. 26 hearing Malihi noted neither Obama nor his Attorney Michael Jablonski appeared or answered and said ordinarily the court would enter a default judgment against a party that fails to participate in any stage of the proceeding.

“Nonetheless, despite defendant’s failure to appear, plaintiffs asked this court to decide the case on the merits of their arguments and evidence,” wrote Malihi, adding, “The court granted plaintiffs’ request.”

Malihi (l) also said, “By deciding this matter on the merits, the court in no way condones the conduct or legal scholarship of defendant’s attorney, Mr. Jablonski,” and stated his decision was based entirely on the law as well as the evidence and legal arguments presented.

His order was in two parts.

The first part addressed plaintiffs David Farrar, Leah Lax, Cody Judy, Thomas Malaren and Laurie Roth, represented by Attorney Orly Taitz.

The second part addressed all the plaintiffs, including those represented by Taitz as well as plaintiff David Welden, represented by Attorney Van Irion, and plaintiffs Carl Swensen and Kevin Powell, represented by Attorney Mark Hatfield.

In Part I, Malihi basically discredited the eight witnesses and said he found their testimony, as well as the exhibits tendered, “to be of little, if any, probative value, and thus wholly insufficient to support plaintiffs’ allegations.”

He stated, “None of the testifying witnesses provided persuasive testimony,” and said none of the written submissions had any probative value.

In conclusion, Malihi stated, “Given the unsatisfactory evidence presented by the plaintiffs, the court concludes that plaintiffs’ claims are not persuasive.”

In Part II, Malihi addressed the claim that Obama is not a natural born citizen of the United States and is, therefore, ineligible to run in Georgia’s presidential primary election.

Malihi said he considered, for the purpose of analysis, the following facts: 1) Obama was born in the United States; 2) Obama’s mother was a citizen of the United States at the time of birth; and 3) Obama’s father was never a U.S. citizen.

It was the plaintiff’s contention, because Obama’s father was not a U.S. citizen at the time of his birth, Obama is constitutionally ineligible for the office of President of the United States.
Malihi said, “The court does not agree.”

Citing a 2009 Indiana Court of Appeals case, Arkeny (sic) [Ankeny] v. Governor of Indiana, in which plaintiffs argued “there’s a very clear distinction between ‘citizen of the United States’ and ‘natural born citizen’ and the difference involves having [two] parents of U.S. citizenship, owing no foreign allegiance.”

Pointing out the Indiana court rejected the argument that Obama was ineligible, Malihi stated, “[C]hildren born within the United States are natural born citizens, regardless of the citizenship of their parents,” and said, “This court finds the decision and analysis of Arkeny (sic) [Ankeny] persuasive.”

While plaintiffs argued the term natural born citizen was defined in 1875 in Minor v. Happersett, Malihi said the Indiana court explained that Minor did not define natural born citizen.

He went on to say, “In deciding whether a woman was eligible to vote, the Minor court merely concluded that children born in a country of parents who were its citizens would qualify as natural born, and this court agrees. The Minor court left open the issue of whether a child born within the United States of alien parent(s) is a natural born citizen.”

Citing United States v. Wong Kim Ark, with which the Indiana court agreed, Malihi said the court extensively examined the common law of England in its decision and concluded Wong Kim Ark, who was born in the United States to alien parents, became a citizen of the United States at the time of his birth.

Malihi stated, “The Indiana court determined that a person qualifies as a natural born citizen if he was born in the United States because he became a United States citizen at birth.”

He wrote, “For the purposes of this analysis, this court considered that President Barack Obama was born in the United States. Therefore, as discussed in Arkeny (sic) [Ankeny], he became a citizen at birth and is a natural born citizen,” and concluded, “President Barack Obama is eligible for the presidential primary election under O.C.G.A. § 21-2-5(b).

Using Malihi’s analysis, anyone born in the United States is a natural born citizen.

In other words, according to Malihi, children born within the United States to illegal aliens, tourists and/or terrorists are natural born citizens and are, therefore, eligible to become President of the United States.

Malihi’s conclusion is more analogous to saying: All dogs are mammals and all cats are mammals and therefore, all cats are dogs.

Over the weekend, Taitz filed a petition with Kemp to set aside the recommendation issued by Malihi and find Obama ineligible to appear as a candidate for President of the United States on the Georgia ballot.

Taitz cited a 2000 Georgia case, Haynes v. Wells, which she said establishes the precedent “that a candidate seeking to hold office through an election in the state has the affirmative duty to prove their eligibility.”

Taitz said a 2008 Malihi decision in O’Brien V. Gross, from which she quoted, “The burden of proof is entirely upon respondent to establish affirmatively his eligibility for office,” relied on Haynes.

Since neither Obama nor Jablonski appeared, Taitz asked, “On what basis did Judge Malihi consider Obama to be born in this country? 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 … 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?”

Taitz went on to state Malihi’s reliance on Ankeny “is a  travesty of justice and an embarrassment to the state of Georgia.”

Taitz stated Malihi was required to base his decision on what was in the record and his introduction of an obscure Indiana case was used to advocate for Obama rather than judge the case on the record at hand.

Hatfield sent a letter to Kemp via e-mail prior to Kemp issuing his final decision to point out “several significant flaws in Judge Malihi’s findings and conclusions.”

On behalf of his clients, Hatfield requested that Kemp render a decision that treats Obama no different than any other candidate seeking access to the Georgia ballot that fails and refuses to present evidence of his or her qualifications for holding office and disregards the authority of our judiciary.

Now that Kemp has issued a final decision in the matter, Hatfield stated, “[W]e are going full bore and taking it up on appeal.”

Irion has also indicated his client will be filing an appeal. 

Georgia court ignores basic rules of interpretation

In Government on February 6, 2012 at 8:16 AM

From the moment I saw Judge Malihi I could tell something was not right!

I had read his many opinions, I was encouraged by them, I believe Van was too! Loads of optimism abounded from the realization that a State Judge would finally stand up to a runaway government using the Constitution to render a decision based on the words in the Constitution. We were hoping that this Judge would interpret the Constitution in a way that would push back a runaway president and his oppressive government. To possibly prevent a socialist progressive from ascending to the highest office in the land! That was evidently not going to happen!

I knew while herding the attorneys in his side chambers to request a default judgement that we were in for long morning, but, I remained hopeful.

This judge did not rule by the law or his real beliefs! When he returned from the side bar he was almost despondent, mad, like a child with a dilemma and now has a tough decision to make. After the side bar conversation he seemed confrontational as if contemplating his next move to appease a very encroaching POTUS!

The tone in the courtroom was different when he reentered! I could tell someone or some element of the machine had tapped into his pockets and this man was doing something he deeply didn’t believe in or was being whipped into shape by unseen force. A quagmire of sorts he has allowed himself to retreat too and be trapped within! A dilemma I hope I never have to face because it means I have to give up on my core beliefs and values and tread among the communists and Socialists that have plans for this country way beyond what I care to comprehend!

His almost constant, disinterested gaze off to his right showed me dishonesty and that he was perhaps in his mind fighting a thought process he was not accustomed to dealing with! The jut of his chin forward and his quick scolding remarks when our attorneys would pry into sensitive areas that may have perhaps revealed more than our naive public or media could comprehend!

Perhaps a position somewhere inside the fed, a lump of cash! Follow this guy! I believe his career is very bright within the fed and the OBAMA administration. Look for Secretary of State Kemps career to take off real soon too. Mark my word!

Breaking News, although I’m not sure how breaking it is anymore, our judicial system is dead. Our constitution has been rendered as parchment only and our America is well on her way to becoming controlled by a Socialist/Marxist regime!

These are my thoughts and in no way reflect the opinion of Liberty Legal Foundation, this is my blog, my thoughts only, although I feel the sentiment may be echoed in other venues! Have a great day!

Georgia Court ignores basic rules of interpretation
2/5/2012

By now many of you have probably heard that the Georgia court ruled that Obama is a natural born citizen. (Link to opinion) More importantly it ruled that any person born on U.S. soil is a natural born citizen. According to the Georgia court, a woman from any country can visit the U.S. for one day, give birth, take the baby back to any country to be raised under any culture, and that baby can return as an adult, live here for 14 years and run for President. The end result of this ruling is outrageous. It runs contrary to common sense as well as to established law.

So, what happened in Georgia? The court determined that a clear definition of natural born citizen from Supreme Court precedent was overturned by dicta in another Supreme Court case. Precedent is any statement by the court that is pivotal to reaching the court’s ruling. Dicta is the opposite of precedent. Dicta is a statement by the court about matters that are not pivotal to reaching its ruling. Dicta is persuasive, but it cannot overturn precedent.

In other words, the Georgia court violated a basic rule of legal interpretation by ruling as it did. But wait, there’s more! The Georgia court also violated rules of Constitutional interpretation that have been around since the earliest Supreme Court. Our first Chief Justice explained that no part of the Constitution should be interpreted in a way that leaves any other part of the Constitution without independent meaning. By ruling that anyone born on U.S. soil can run for President the Georgia court concluded that the 14th Amendment was intended to alter article II of the Constitution. Such an interpretation is 180 degrees in opposite to Chief Justice Marshall’s explanation of how to interpret the Constitution.

But WAIT, there’s more! In order to reach this conclusion the Georgia court ALSO had to disregard yet another part of the holding from the Minor v. Happersett Supreme Court ruling. Even if you ignore the rules of Constitutional construction and the rule that dicta can’t overturn precedent, even if you agree with the Georgia court that the definition of natural born citizen in the Minor decision was dicta, you still can’t reach the Georgia court’s ruling. You see, the Minor Court ALSO explicitly ruled that the 14th Amendment didn’t create any new privileges and immunities. So, if a person couldn’t run for President before the 14th Amendment, they couldn’t run for President after the 14th Amendment. This means that the Minor Court explicitly ruled that the 14th amendment didn’t alter the definition of natural born citizen under article II of the Constitution. Yet the Georgia court ignored this Supreme Court ruling as well.

The Georgia court was aware of all of these arguments because these arguments were made at the January 26 hearing and they were included in our written brief after the hearing. Yet the Georgia court’s ruling only addresses one of these three arguments and poorly at that.

The one point of good news from this ruling is that we have FINALLY gotten a court to rule on the merits of our argument. This may seem like a hollow victory, but it isn’t. Before this everyone that has brought a challenge against Obama’s eligibility has been dismissed on procedural grounds. Nothing is more devastating to the rule of law than a judicial branch that refuses to do its job. Before this case we had courts across the country telling Americans that they had no right to enforce the Constitution. That was absurdity at its most extreme. Liberty Legal Foundation found a case that we believed would at least get a ruling on the merits. We hate the ruling we got, but at least we got a ruling. Now we can appeal that ruling. The appeals process now will focus on the definition of “natural born citizen” rather than procedure for the first time since the issue of Obama’s eligibility was raise in 2008.

For all the reasons I’ve mentioned in this message, we will be appealing the Georgia Court’s ruling. We will continue to fight for Constitutional rule of law. Failing that we will continue to force Courts to show their true colors. If our judicial branch will not uphold the rule of law, that fact needs to be exposed to the harsh light of day for all the world to see.

In Liberty,

Dawn Irion
 
Co-Founder
LIBERTY LEGAL FOUNDATION

Van Irion on Obama Eligibility: Is our Judicial Branch dead?

In Government on January 28, 2012 at 12:47 PM

One of my earliest childhood memories is of my parents talking about Nixon and the Watergate scandal. I remember the newspaper headline: “Nixon Resigns!” President Nixon’s fight against court subpoenas made international news. Yesterday President Obama completely ignored a court subpoena, and the world shrugged.

Obama’s behavior yesterday is even more disturbing than Nixon’s. Nixon at least respected the judicial branch enough to have his attorney’s show up in court and follow procedure. Nixon’s fight in the courts followed existing law. Nixon acknowledged the authority of the judicial branch even while he fought it. Obama, on the other hand, essentially said yesterday that the judicial branch has no power over him. He ordered his attorneys to stay away from the hearing. He didn’t petition a higher court in a legitimate attempt to stay the hearing. Instead he showed complete contempt for the entire judicial branch and for the rule of law. Rather than respecting the legal process, Obama went around the courts and tried to put political pressure directly on the Georgia Secretary of State. When that failed, he simply ignored the judicial branch completely.

The rule of law, and our three-branch system of government, now hang in the balance. If the Georgia court issues a ruling on the merits and an order finding Obama in contempt of court, and if that contempt order actually results in real punishment of some kind, then we will still have a Constitutional Republic. If this doesn’t happen, then Obama will have been rewarded for showing complete contempt for the judicial branch.

Understand that the goal of the Georgia ballot challenge was to have a court rule on the merits of the Constitutional question: Does the term “natural born citizen” in Article II of the Constitution require a Presidential candidate to have two parents that were U.S. citizens at the time the candidate was born? Obama wants to avoid having a court rule on this question. That is why he didn’t show up and ordered his attorneys to not show up. Obama was hoping that the Georgia court would enter a default judgment rather than rule on the merits. If the court enters a default judgment, Obama will have succeeded in avoiding the Constitutional eligibility question. He will then appeal the default judgment, get the appellate court to suspend the default judgment pending appeal, and then delay the appeal until after the primary. This is undoubtedly Obama’s plan.

If the Georgia Court rules that Supreme Court precedent must be followed and therefore Obama simply does not meet the minimum Constitutional requirements to hold the office of President, then we will at least have succeeded in finding one court in the nation willing to do its job. If that court finds Obama in contempt of court, then we still have three viable branches of government. The Georgia court has the authority to do both of these things. The world should be holding its breath.

Unfortunately the world is apparently unaware that our great Republic is on life support. The Roman Empire died a slow death. It’s death was so gradual that few people living at that time probably noticed the individual events that marked the death throes of that great empire. Apparently the same is true of America. Yesterday marked a stunning turn of events in the constant power struggle between the three branches of our government. Our President openly showed that he believes he is completely above the law. I wonder if the court even noticed its own death certificate. We will see in a few days.

I will certainly try to explain this to the court in our proposed findings of fact and law that the court requested we file before February 5th. Please pray with me that Judge Malihi rules on the merits of our case.

All of your encouragement and prayers have been greatly appreciated. They are needed even more over the next few weeks. This battle is FAR from over. And it has taken on importance beyond what we predicted (which is truly astounding). Please tell everyone you know about Obama’s contempt of the judicial branch. Please explain to them what it really means. Even those that agree with Obama politically and disagree with our ballot challenge should be shocked, appalled, and scared of Obama’s contempt for the judicial system.

In Liberty,

Van Irion

%d bloggers like this: