Jerome Corsi's New Book Proves Obama's Ineligible! ("This is going to make Watergate look like a political sideshow by comparison.")

[tank]

Re: Jerome Corsi's New Book Proves Obama's Ineligible! ("This is going to make Watergate look like a political sideshow by comparison.")

Read much???Oh no I mentioned the SUBPOENA here and explained why it was not valid but Joe has to go on with another epic fail!!You are out doing yourself here today!!:shoot:

:LMAO:LMAOReading and thinking are not your strong suits!

 

[tank]

Re: Jerome Corsi's New Book Proves Obama's Ineligible! ("This is going to make Watergate look like a political sideshow by comparison.")

It's fun to just step out of the way and watch the manic Obot spam monkey argue with himself...

Originally Posted by tank
Where has anyone said it was not a subpoena???????????WHERE???????Where does anyone say it is not a subpoena???
Joe is off to a typical start here on page 64 asking strawman questions claiming someone said it was not asubpoena when no one said it!!:shoot:

Originally Posted by tank
IT WAS A HEARING FOR THE HUNDREDTH TIME AND WAS NOT A COURT ORDERED SUBPOENA!!Why can you not get that through your head??]

Hey Joe....was it a court ordered SUBPOENA or a SUBPOENA for a hearing?:LMAO
Does a SUBPOENA for a HEARING include people that do not live in Georgia??:LMAO

 

[tank]

Re: Jerome Corsi's New Book Proves Obama's Ineligible! ("This is going to make Watergate look like a political sideshow by comparison.")

So on page 64 we have Joe's ''great'' debating skills here for all to see;

Originally Posted by Joe Contrarian
Very well.

If you insist on acting like an infantile useful idiot spam monkey, you will be treated like one.

Originally Posted by Joe Contrarian
tank's "debunking" summary (page 63 version):

Making you look like an ass by simply reposting your OWN WORDS is "lies to spread".

You can't make this shit up! ::LMAO::

Can't wait for Page 64 version!

Because the subpoena is only valid in GA, not AZ.

The Kenyan's lawyer Jablonski is based in GA, therefore he was obligated to show up.

Just because I ignore you doesn't mean I can't easily debunk your underwear blogger garbage.

I am done with your infantile hysterical rants.

tank's off to a great start for the page 64 "debunking birthers" summary!

Only the Obot underwear bloggers insist it wasn't a subpoena.

As I mentioned a couple pages ago, a growing number of attorneys are beginning to speak out against the biggest fraud ever perpetrated on the American people.

It's fun to just step out of the way and watch the manic Obot spam monkey argue with himself...


Way to stay on topic there and great debating skills once again!!:shoot:
:3dapplaudir:

 

[tank]

Re: Jerome Corsi's New Book Proves Obama's Ineligible! ("This is going to make Watergate look like a political sideshow by comparison.")

Hey Joe....was it a court ordered SUBPOENA or a SUBPOENA for a hearing?:LMAO
Does a SUBPOENA for a HEARING include people that do not live in Georgia??:LMAO

Of course not and you even said it here!!Remember??
Originally Posted by Joe Contrarian
Because the subpoena is only valid in GA, not AZ.

But of course Obama lives in Georgia in birfer world correct??:LMAO

 

[Joe Contrarian]

Re: Jerome Corsi's New Book Proves Obama's Ineligible! ("This is going to make Watergate look like a political sideshow by comparison.")

Oh boy! The manic Obot spam monkey bumped my thread to page 65...and you know what that means, right kids?

Time for tank's "birther debunking" summary (page 64 version)

Here we go! :houra

BTW this does deal with the topic at hand...aka...the birth certificate.Prove it wrong!!Since you cannot do your usual whining and crying screaming foul.

:mutley:mutley

Notice how these are all the same old stupid shit from the previous 62 pages with a different blogger???:LMAO
Notice how Joe does not have shit to refute anything Doc say's ???He can't!!:blah​

Joe must have missed this refute too;
''why this same thing does not apply to Sheriff Joe since he got the same subpoena since I never have an answer for that one and never will.''

I am still waiting for you to attempt to answer that and you have skipped it for over 5 pages now.
Debate much???Naw just keep on going spreading more idiotic shit and never try to answer anything that exposes you as a liar!:thumbsup

And you have yet to refute or debunk anything that is said that exposes your lies!!:LMAO
What PROOF have you posted ??
What FACTS have you posted??
What has been PROVEN in court??
How many of your PREDICTIONS have come TRUE??

ZERO!!!!!NOTHING!!!
It is obvious you have no ANSWERS for your lies since I have exposed all of them rather easily.

IT WAS A HEARING FOR THE HUNDREDTH TIME AND WAS NOT A COURT ORDERED SUBPOENA!!Why can you not get that through your head??
Just to play your stupid game.....was the plaintiff a resident of Georgia??HUH??Quit wasting my time with your idiotic shit.You are a joke!
Now since Obama was not a resident in Georgia and Sheriff Joe was not please answer the question again??Like usual you cannot but I expect some more idioitc stupid shit from you since it is well documented from the last 63 pages!!:shoot:

:LMAO:LMAOWas the plaintiff a resident of Georgia????You see how stupid you are??All you can do is post shit from WND or ORYR and you cannot think for yourself and cannot answer shit!
When you do try like with this latest attempt you look dumb as Hell!Hey was the plaintiff a resident of Georgia???:LMAO:LMAO

I have to give Joe credit here since that is true!!The only problem is that like Sheriff Joe , Obama is not a resident of Georgia either but like a good little birfer he fails to mention that.That would ruin his lie and smears that he spouts.

Good God!!!!HEY IDIOT WAS THE PLAINTIFF A RESIDENT OF GEORGIA????
HEY IDIOT WAS SHERIFF JOE A RESIDENT OF GEORGIA???IS IT SINKING IN YET??I DOUBT IT!

Yes now let's see your debunking!!
IT WAS A HEARING FOR THE HUNDREDTH TIME AND WAS NOT A COURT ORDERED SUBPOENA!!Why can you not get that through your head??
Just to play your stupid game.....was the plaintiff a resident of Georgia??HUH??Quit wasting my time with your idiotic shit.You are a joke!
Now since Obama was not a resident in Georgia and Sheriff Joe was not please answer the question again??Like usual you cannot but I expect some more idioitc stupid shit from you since it is well documented from the last 63 pages!

Was the plaintiff a resident of Georgia????You see how stupid you are??All you can do is post shit from WND or ORYR and you cannot think for yourself and cannot answer shit!
When you do try like with this latest attempt you look dumb as Hell!Hey was the plaintiff a resident of Georgia???

The only problem is that like Sheriff Joe , Obama is not a resident of Georgia either but like a good little birfer he fails to mention that.That would ruin his lie and smears that he spouts.

Good God!!!!HEY IDIOT WAS THE PLAINTIFF A RESIDENT OF GEORGIA????
HEY IDIOT WAS SHERIFF JOE A RESIDENT OF GEORGIA???IS IT SINKING IN YET??I DOUBT IT!


And what is Joe's response to all this????
tank's off to a great start for the page 64 "debunking birthers" summary!

:LMAO:LMAO:LMAO:LMAO:LMAO:LMAO
You have not refuted or debunked shit!What an idiot!!

Get a good look at Joe's ''refuting'' or ''debunking'' skills here in action on page 64!! :thumbsup

As you are aware OSAH RULE 616 -1-2-17 cited in your letter only applies to parties of a hearing.

:LMAO:LMAOYou answered your own question but are not smart enough to even realize it!!
:mutley

And where in here does it say the Plaintiff has to show up??Where in here does it even mention the subpoena??????????????
Like all your stupid shit this has no bearing or presents ZERO FACTS to anything!!Just a waste of space and time and does not PROVE anything!!What an idiot!!

Page 64 and you are still stupid!!
Where has anyone said it was not a subpoena???????????WHERE???????Where does anyone say it is not a subpoena???
Joe is off to a typical start here on page 64 asking strawman questions claiming someone said it was not a subpoena when no one said it!!:shoot:
Great debating skills here by Joe once again.Like usual he has ZERO answers for the questions I have posed to him but what's new right?
So on page 64 I have exposed his LIE that the Plaintiff and Sheriff Joe both do not live in Georgia and both never had to show up to the hearing because the subpoena is only valid to people living in Georgia and this is what we get!:shoot:Idiotic strawman stupid shit making shit up saying someone said it was not a subpoena!!:shoot:Stick to posting shit from WND and ORYR and do not try to answer anything since you look dumb as Hell trying okay?You are a joke and are simply out classed here!

Because you can't!!Never have and never will be able to!This is what happens when you only have lies and smears and cannot think for yourself or use logic.This is a typical birfer here.

:LMAO:LMAO:LMAOIt was just a mirage in Georgia!!:LMAO
Who should we believe??The idiots that have lost 99 cases and 6 state challenges??You would have to be awfully stupid to believe those cranks!
Growing list of attorneys??:LMAO:LMAOEveryone you presents all writes for WND!!:LMAO

Still no progress here on page 64 with Joe refuting or debunking anything .But hey he can repost shit from WND or ORYR though!:thumbsupJust look at Joe's debating skills here on display!Talk about a spam monkey!!Geez!!

Was this a court ordered subpoena??????????????????????More idiotic strawman stupid shit from you!!This is all you have!!It was a subpoena for a hearing and only applies to residents of Georgia and like I have been saying for the entire page it is not anymore valid to Obama then it is to Sheriff Joe!!DO YOU GET IT YET??God you are getting more dumber as the day goes!!

PST here is your answer....was it a court ordered subpoena??If it was then Sheriff Joe would be in jail by now right??The SUBPOENA is only valid to Georgia resident because it was a HEARING!!You are dense as Hell!!

Read much???Oh no I mentioned the SUBPOENA here and explained why it was not valid but Joe has to go on with another epic fail!!You are out doing yourself here today!!:shoot:

Just look at these great debating skills Joe has on display!!:LMAOGreat job!:shoot:

 

[tank]

Re: Jerome Corsi's New Book Proves Obama's Ineligible! ("This is going to make Watergate look like a political sideshow by comparison.")

So on page 64 we have Joe's ''great'' debating skills here for all to see;

Originally Posted by Joe Contrarian
Very well.

If you insist on acting like an infantile useful idiot spam monkey, you will be treated like one.

Originally Posted by Joe Contrarian
tank's "debunking" summary (page 63 version):

Making you look like an ass by simply reposting your OWN WORDS is "lies to spread".

You can't make this shit up! ::LMAO::

Can't wait for Page 64 version!

Because the subpoena is only valid in GA, not AZ.

The Kenyan's lawyer Jablonski is based in GA, therefore he was obligated to show up.

Just because I ignore you doesn't mean I can't easily debunk your underwear blogger garbage.

I am done with your infantile hysterical rants.

tank's off to a great start for the page 64 "debunking birthers" summary!

Only the Obot underwear bloggers insist it wasn't a subpoena.

As I mentioned a couple pages ago, a growing number of attorneys are beginning to speak out against the biggest fraud ever perpetrated on the American people.

It's fun to just step out of the way and watch the manic Obot spam monkey argue with himself...


Way to stay on topic there and great debating skills once again!!:shoot:
:3dapplaudir:

And you start off on page 65 without still proving anything!!Great job!You still have not answered shit and continue to lie, evade and dodge everything.Hey tell me more about that subpoena would ya??You continue to make yourself look stupid!:thumbsup

 

[Joe Contrarian]

Re: Jerome Corsi's New Book Proves Obama's Ineligible! ("This is going to make Watergate look like a political sideshow by comparison.")

Maybe Team Kenyan should add tank, FAGBLOW and DR CON to their legal team? :+clueless

 

[Joe Contrarian]

Re: Jerome Corsi's New Book Proves Obama's Ineligible! ("This is going to make Watergate look like a political sideshow by comparison.")

Hey Joe....was it a court ordered SUBPOENA or a SUBPOENA for a hearing?:LMAO
Does a SUBPOENA for a HEARING include people that do not live in Georgia??:LMAO

What's the definition of 'subpoena', tank?

OP:

 

[tank]

Re: Jerome Corsi's New Book Proves Obama's Ineligible! ("This is going to make Watergate look like a political sideshow by comparison.")

Maybe Team Kenyan should add tank, FAGBLOW and DR CON to their legal team? :+clueless

Why??Exposing you birfers is so easy a caveman could do it!65 pages later and 99 court cases and 6 state challenges that you got laughed out of court with and lost big time is the only proof anyone needs to see.Keep trying though since you are the best entertainment on the net!
Everyone has seen how easy it is to make you look like a fool.

 

[tank]

Re: Jerome Corsi's New Book Proves Obama's Ineligible! ("This is going to make Watergate look like a political sideshow by comparison.")

What's the definition of 'subpoena', tank?

OP:

See pages 64 and 65!I have explained to you so many times now and you still do not get it.My 12 year old son get;s it but you can't!!That say's it all.Maybe if you thought for yourself and used some logic rather then believing everything WND and ORYR ram's up your ass you would not be so stupid.Just a thought!

 

[tank]

Re: Jerome Corsi's New Book Proves Obama's Ineligible! ("This is going to make Watergate look like a political sideshow by comparison.")

Of course not and you even said it here!!Remember??
Originally Posted by Joe Contrarian
Because the subpoena is only valid in GA, not AZ.

But of course Obama lives in Georgia in birfer world correct??:LMAO

But, but, but....Obama's lawyer is in Georgia!!!:shoot::shoot::shoot:
My God you are clueless!This is what happens to your brain from believing everything WND and ORYR rams up your ass.

 

[Joe Contrarian]

Re: Jerome Corsi's New Book Proves Obama's Ineligible! ("This is going to make Watergate look like a political sideshow by comparison.")

IT WAS A HEARING FOR THE HUNDREDTH TIME AND WAS NOT A COURT ORDERED SUBPOENA!

You really don't know what a 'subpoena' is, do you?

 

[tank]

Re: Jerome Corsi's New Book Proves Obama's Ineligible! ("This is going to make Watergate look like a political sideshow by comparison.")

You really don't know what a 'subpoena' is, do you?

This is rich!!I have explained it to you for over 2 pages now , and to try and hide your stupidity for those last 2 pages you ask this!!
Originally Posted by Joe Contrarian
Because the subpoena is only valid in GA, not AZ.

Hey Joe where does Obama live?
Hey Joe where does Sheriff Joe live?
Hey Joe why are you saying the subpoena is good for Obama but not Sheriff Joe??
Hey Joe do you realize how stupid you look??
Hey Joe tell me what the difference is between the 2 subpoena's would ya?:LMAO

 

[tank]

Re: Jerome Corsi's New Book Proves Obama's Ineligible! ("This is going to make Watergate look like a political sideshow by comparison.")

But, but, but....Obama's lawyer is in Georgia!!!:shoot::shoot::shoot:
My God you are clueless!This is what happens to your brain from believing everything WND and ORYR rams up your ass.

This will be Joe's next reply I am sure.

 

[tank]

Re: Jerome Corsi's New Book Proves Obama's Ineligible! ("This is going to make Watergate look like a political sideshow by comparison.")



Hey Joe why didn't this subpoena work???:LMAO:LMAOKeep digging that hole genius.

 

[Joe Contrarian]

Re: Jerome Corsi's New Book Proves Obama's Ineligible! ("This is going to make Watergate look like a political sideshow by comparison.")

IT WAS A HEARING FOR THE HUNDREDTH TIME AND WAS NOT A COURT ORDERED SUBPOENA!

What's a subpoena, tank?

OP:

 

[tank]

Re: Jerome Corsi's New Book Proves Obama's Ineligible! ("This is going to make Watergate look like a political sideshow by comparison.")



Notice what it say's ??:LMAO:LMAOGet a clue dolt!!

 

[tank]

Re: Jerome Corsi's New Book Proves Obama's Ineligible! ("This is going to make Watergate look like a political sideshow by comparison.")

Notice what it say's ??:LMAO:LMAOGet a clue dolt!!

Gee I wonder if this applies to Obama too??No of course not!!How can Sheriff Joe say this but Obama cannot??:LMAOYes that subpoena only works for Obama and not Sheriff Joe!!You just cannot make this shit up!!

 

[tank]

Re: Jerome Corsi's New Book Proves Obama's Ineligible! ("This is going to make Watergate look like a political sideshow by comparison.")

What's a subpoena, tank?

OP:

I guess another free lesson is in order for you.Sadly you still will not get it!
[h=1]Subpoena[/h]From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[TABLE="class: metadata plainlinks ambox ambox-content ambox-globalize, width: 1"]
<tbody>

[TD="class: mbox-image"]

[/TD]
[TD="class: mbox-text"]The examples and perspective in this article

deal primarily with United States and do not represent a worldwide view of the subject

. Please

improve this article

and discuss the issue on the

talk page

. <small>

(December 2010)

</small>[/TD]

</tbody>[/TABLE]
[TABLE="class: metadata mbox-small plainlinks, width: 238"]
<tbody>

[TD="class: mbox-image"]

[/TD]
[TD="class: mbox-text"]Look up

in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.[/TD]

</tbody>[/TABLE]
A subpoena /səˈpiːnə/ is a writ by a government agency, most often a court, that has authority to compel testimony by a witness or production of evidence under a penalty for failure. There are two common types of subpoena:

1. subpoena ad testificandum orders a person to testify before the ordering authority or face punishment. The subpoena can also request the testimony to be given by phone or in person.
2. subpoena duces tecum orders a person or organization to bring physical evidence before the ordering authority or face punishment. This is often used for requests to mail copies of documents to requesting party or directly to court.

[TABLE="class: toc, width: 1"]
<tbody>

[h=2]Contents[/h] [hide]​

• 1 Etymology
• 2 Subpoena process
• 3 See also
• 4 References
• 5 Further reading

</tbody>[/TABLE]
[h=2][edit]Etymology[/h]The term is from the Middle English suppena and the Latin phrase sub poena meaning "under penalty".[SUP][1][/SUP] The term may also be spelled "subpena".[SUP][2][/SUP] The subpoena has its source in English common law and it is now used almost with universal application throughout the English common law world. However, for civil proceedings in England and Wales, it is now described as a witness summons, as part of reforms to replace Latin terms with English terms which are easier to understand. John Waltham, Bishop of Salisbury, is said to have created the writ of subpoena in the reign of Richard II.[SUP][3][/SUP]
[h=2][edit]Subpoena process[/h]Subpoenas are usually issued by the clerk of the court (see below) in the name of the judge presiding over the case. Additionally, court rules may permit lawyers to issue subpoenas themselves in their capacity as officers of the court. Typically subpoenas are issued "in blank" and it is the responsibility of the lawyer representing the plaintiff or defendant on whose behalf the testimony is to be given to serve the subpoena on the witness. If a witness is reluctant to testify, then the personal service of subpoena is usually required with proof of service by non-party server.
The subpoena will usually be on the letterhead of the court where the case is filed, name the parties to the case, and be addressed by name to the person whose testimony is being sought. It will contain the language "You are hereby commanded to report in person to the clerk of this court" or similar, describing the specific location, scheduled date and time of the appearance. Some issuing jurisdictions include an admonishment advising the subject of the criminal penalty for failure to comply with a subpoena, and reminding him or her not to leave the court facilities until excused by a competent authority. In some situations the person is paid.
Pro se litigants who represent themselves, unlike lawyers, must ask a court clerk to officially issue them subpoena forms when they need to call witnesses by phone or in person, or when they need to officially request documents to be sent to them and/or directly to court.[SUP][4][/SUP] Any documents that have not been subpoenaed to court or verified by a witness may be dismissed by the opposite party as hearsay, unless excepted by hearsay rules or permitted by judge. If the witness is called via long-distance phone call, then the requesting party is responsible for initiating the call and providing a payment with a prepaid phone card.
Some states (as is the case in Florida) require the subpoenaing party to first file a Notice of Intent to Serve Subpoena, or a Notice of Production from Non-Party 10 days prior to issuing the subpoena, so that the other party may have ample time to file any objections.
Also, the party being subpoenaed has the right to object to the issuance of the subpoena, if it is for an improper purpose, such as subpoenaing records that have no relevance to the proceedings or of persons who would have no evidence to present.

 

[Joe Contrarian]

Re: Jerome Corsi's New Book Proves Obama's Ineligible! ("This is going to make Watergate look like a political sideshow by comparison.")

Looks like tank's page 65 "debunking birthers" summary is going to be as entertaining as page 64 was.

And knowing the manic Obot spam monkey, he'll probably reach page 66 by midnight at the latest.

 

[tank]

Re: Jerome Corsi's New Book Proves Obama's Ineligible! ("This is going to make Watergate look like a political sideshow by comparison.")

What's a subpoena, tank?

OP:

What's the difference between a subpoena that is court ordered and one that comes from a STATE administrative HEARING? :LMAO

 

[tank]

Re: Jerome Corsi's New Book Proves Obama's Ineligible! ("This is going to make Watergate look like a political sideshow by comparison.")

Looks like tank's page 65 "debunking birthers" summary is going to be as entertaining as page 64 was.

And knowing the manic Obot spam monkey, he'll probably reach page 66 by midnight at the latest.

SAY'S THE IDIOT THAT HAS REPLIED 3 TIMES NOW ASKING WHAT A SUBPOENA IS!!
:LMAO:LMAOComedy Gold here yet again!You still have not refuted one thing all day!What an idiot!

 

[tank]

Re: Jerome Corsi's New Book Proves Obama's Ineligible! ("This is going to make Watergate look like a political sideshow by comparison.")

Originally Posted by Joe Contrarian
What's a subpoena, tank?

Originally Posted by Joe Contrarian
What's a subpoena, tank?

Originally Posted by Joe Contrarian
What's a subpoena, tank?


Yes folks this is Joe in action presenting FACTS and PROVING stuff !You just cannot make this shit up!

 

[tank]

Re: Jerome Corsi's New Book Proves Obama's Ineligible! ("This is going to make Watergate look like a political sideshow by comparison.")

This is rich!!I have explained it to you for over 2 pages now , and to try and hide your stupidity for those last 2 pages you ask this!!
Originally Posted by Joe Contrarian
Because the subpoena is only valid in GA, not AZ.

Hey Joe where does Obama live?
Hey Joe where does Sheriff Joe live?
Hey Joe why are you saying the subpoena is good for Obama but not Sheriff Joe??
Hey Joe do you realize how stupid you look??
Hey Joe tell me what the difference is between the 2 subpoena's would ya?:LMAO

What a shock!Joe never answered or refuted anything again!Shocked I tell ya!

 

[Joe Contrarian]

Re: Jerome Corsi's New Book Proves Obama's Ineligible! ("This is going to make Watergate look like a political sideshow by comparison.")

What's the difference between a subpoena that is court ordered and one that comes from a STATE administrative HEARING? :LMAO

Legally, there's no difference.

"SUBPOENA TO APPEAR AND TESTIFY AT A HEARING OR TRIAL IN A CIVIL ACTION"
http://www.uscourts.gov/uscourts/FormsAndFees/Forms/AO088.pdf

IT WAS A HEARING FOR THE HUNDREDTH TIME AND WAS NOT A COURT ORDERED SUBPOENA!

Okay, okay, maybe in Obot Underwear Blogger World there is a difference.:shoot:

 

[Joe Contrarian]

Re: Jerome Corsi's New Book Proves Obama's Ineligible! ("This is going to make Watergate look like a political sideshow by comparison.")

Just for the record, (for anyone crazy enough to sift through all of the Obot spam monkey's feces), these eligibility ballot access challenges in all the states are CIVIL trials, NOT criminal. Candidate 'Obama' (or whatever the hell his name is) MUST provide certified documented proof who he says he is in order to appear on the election ballot in any given state, it's that simple.

The CRIMINAL side of the judicial system via a grand jury investigation with indictments for social security fraud, forged documents and student loan fraud will kick in later. :thumbsup

 

[tank]

Re: Jerome Corsi's New Book Proves Obama's Ineligible! ("This is going to make Watergate look like a political sideshow by comparison.")

Legally, there's no difference.

"SUBPOENA TO APPEAR AND TESTIFY AT A HEARING OR TRIAL IN A CIVIL ACTION"
http://www.uscourts.gov/uscourts/FormsAndFees/Forms/AO088.pdf



Okay, okay, maybe in Obot Underwear Blogger World there is a difference.:shoot:

Only except that this subpoena from an administrative hearing is only valid in Georgia like I have been telling you now for over 2 pages.
Under the rules for procedure for the office of state administrative hearings subpoenas may be issued ''at any place within the state of Georgia''See rule 616-1-2 -19. No rule allowing it outside the state!!WHAT DO YOU NOT GET ABOUT THIS??For over 2 pages now I have been slapping you upside the head with this and you are still to stupid to understand it!Are you trying to bore me with your stupidity?Are you just asking the same question over and over again thinking their will be a different answer, or are you just this damn dumb?WHAT PART DO YOU NOT GET??Why do you think Obama did the same thing that Sheriff Joe did?Why do you think it will be a different outcome when they both did the same thing??They both got the same subpoena?My 12 year old son knows the difference and your dumbass still keeps saying the same old stupid shit over and over again.

 

[tank]

Re: Jerome Corsi's New Book Proves Obama's Ineligible! ("This is going to make Watergate look like a political sideshow by comparison.")

Just for the record, (for anyone crazy enough to sift through all of the Obot spam monkey's feces), these eligibility ballot access challenges in every state are CIVIL trials, NOT criminal. Candidate 'Obama' must documented proof who he says he is in order to appear on the election ballot -- that simple.

You mean they will issue subpoena's for state hearing challenges??NNNNOOOOOOO!:shoot:
My God I think it might be sinking in for the tard!

 

[tank]

Re: Jerome Corsi's New Book Proves Obama's Ineligible! ("This is going to make Watergate look like a political sideshow by comparison.")

The CRIMINAL side of the judicial system via a grand jury investigation with indictments for social security fraud, forged documents and student loan fraud will kick in later. :thumbsup

Yes these are the most important requirements for being President.They cannot even prove shit with the birth certificate so they hope these lies and smears will go somewhere too but like all the other idiotic shit it will fail like these losers always do!

 

[tank]

Re: Jerome Corsi's New Book Proves Obama's Ineligible! ("This is going to make Watergate look like a political sideshow by comparison.")

[h=2]The dog ate my attorney[/h]by Dr. Conspiracy on <abbr class="date time published" title="2012-02-11T19:32:20-0500" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; border-image: initial; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; border-bottom-style: dashed; border-bottom-color: rgb(153, 153, 153); cursor: help; ">FEBRUARY 11, 2012</abbr> in BALLOT CHALLENGES

Excuses, excuses​

Birthers have lost a lot of lawsuits and ballot challenges (the number 99 is mentioned). Birthers don’t address the disparity between their optimism at the outset and the results they get, but they do make excuses. By far the most common excuse is a defect in the courts. “The judge ruled against us because…”

• Obama bribed the judge
• Obama threatened the judge
• The judge is an Obama supporter
• The judge is a left-wing ideologue
• The judge is a traitor
• The judge didn’t look at the evidence
• The judge didn’t know the law
• The judge is an evil man
• The judge is afraid of riots in the streets

With every loss that excuse gets thinner and thinner and so we’ve seen a glimmer of a new strategy. Instead of blaming the judge, blame the Birther attorney.
Dean Haskins has most recently taken the lead in his criticism of the competence of Birther attorney Orly Taitz. However, Orly Taitz is at best responsible for just a handful of losses (one out of three in Georgia). No, the attorney most to blame for sheer incompetence is one able to practice in all 50 states, pro se. Birthers say that they are losing cases because individual birther defendants aren’t competent to represent themselves (and lack resources), and so they lose. When real lawyers (excluding Orly Taitz of course) are involved, the losses are the fault of the court for one or more of the reasons listed above.
We’re seeing this new excuse tried out on the Article II Super PAC site. The Birthers are tying to raise money to hire a good lawyer (for some reason Apuzzo was not invited) and they have settled on Larry Klayman[SUP]1[/SUP]. The Article II PAC says:

Someone representing himself in court has a fool for a client – some eligibility challenge plaintiffs lack representation, funding.
​

Of course the Article II Super PAC is trying to raise money not excuse prior losses, but the principle is out there and I wouldn’t wonder if the excuse gains in popularity.

---

[SUP]1[/SUP]I couldn’t get a solid sense of Klayman’s competence from all the biased material I’m finding. It does seem that Klayman thinks like a prosecutor (which he was). I would think an Obama attorney would take Klayman more seriously than they did Moe, Larry, and Curly.
Klayman writes a weekly column for WorldNetDaily where he wrote:

Barack Hussein Obama, our president, is a traitor. Finally, his hatred for our nation and his plan to destroy it are crystal clear. He must be forced from office – legally – before our entire country goes down the drain for the final count!
Much has gone on in the last three years to show Obama’s true colors, sympathetic not to Judeo-Christians values and culture, but Islam and its surrogate-controlled states.

:3dapplaudir:
:3dapplaudir::3dapplaudir:​

 

[Joe Contrarian]

Re: Jerome Corsi's New Book Proves Obama's Ineligible! ("This is going to make Watergate look like a political sideshow by comparison.")

Only except that this subpoena from an administrative hearing is only valid in Georgia like I have been telling you now for over 2 pages.

No, you haven't.

You've been saying THIS for FIVE pages ("for the hundredth time):

Originally Posted by tank
IT WAS A HEARING FOR THE HUNDREDTH TIME AND WAS NOT A COURT ORDERED SUBPOENA!

:3dgros3:

Do you know what a subpoena is now?

Under the rules for procedure for the office of state administrative hearings subpoenas may be issued ''at any place within the state of Georgia''See rule 616-1-2 -19. No rule allowing it outside the state!! WHAT DO YOU NOT GET ABOUT THIS??

We get you're an idiot but to say so would be an insult to idiots.

For over 2 pages now I have been slapping you upside the head with this and you are still to stupid to understand it!Are you trying to bore me with your stupidity?Are you just asking the same question over and over again thinking their will be a different answer, or are you just this damn dumb?WHAT PART DO YOU NOT GET??

We get that you're a moron and are ignorant of the fact that legally there is ZERO difference between a subpoena for a hearing and one for a civil trial.

Why do you think Obama did the same thing that Sheriff Joe did?Why do you think it will be a different outcome when they both did the same thing??They both got the same subpoena?

Sheriff Joe isn't trying to get his name on the election ballot in GA, therefore has ZERO incentive or reason to comply with the subpoena.

And you're the imbecilic amateur that brought this idiotic "Sheriff Joe subpoena" strawman to the table in the first place.

You are beyond hope.

My 12 year old son knows the difference and your dumbass still keeps saying the same old stupid shit over and over again.

Yes, we all can see the Grand Canyon-sized gap between his reading comprehension skills and yours.

 

[Joe Contrarian]

Re: Jerome Corsi's New Book Proves Obama's Ineligible! ("This is going to make Watergate look like a political sideshow by comparison.")

Will the Obot poo-flinging monkey make it to page 66 before midnight?

Stay tuned.

op:

 

[tank]

Re: Jerome Corsi's New Book Proves Obama's Ineligible! ("This is going to make Watergate look like a political sideshow by comparison.")

No, you haven't.

You've been saying THIS for FIVE pages:

Originally Posted by tank
IT WAS A HEARING FOR THE HUNDREDTH TIME AND WAS NOT A COURT ORDERED SUBPOENA!

:3dgros3:

Do you know what a subpoena is now?



We get you're an idiot but to say so would be an insult to idiots.



We get that you're a moron and are ignorant of the fact that legally there is ZERO difference between a subpoena for a hearing and one for a civil trial.



Sheriff Joe isn't trying to get his name on the election ballot in GA, therefore has ZERO incentive or reason to comply with the subpoena.

You are beyond hope.



Yes, we all can see the Grand Canyon-sized gulf between his reading comprehension skills and yours.

My God what an idiot!!Obama and Sheriff Joe got the same subpoena correct???It has NOTHING to do with being on the ballot!!They both were subpoena to APPEAR at an administrative HEARING correct?That subpoena for an administrative HEARING is only VALID within the state of Georgia!Neither one live in Georgia and neither one had to LEGALLY APPEAR!!WHAT DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND ABOUT THIS?I have posted the rule 616-2-1-19 2 TIMES NOW for you to see and yet you still are ignorant to these facts.
WHAT DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND ABOUT THIS?? I know you are an idiot but it is getting old repeating the same facts and you not getting it.Fucking retard!

 

[Joe Contrarian]

Re: Jerome Corsi's New Book Proves Obama's Ineligible! ("This is going to make Watergate look like a political sideshow by comparison.")

My God what an idiot!!Obama and Sheriff Joe got the same subpoena correct???It has NOTHING to do with being on the ballot!!They both were subpoena to APPEAR at an administrative HEARING correct?That subpoena for an administrative HEARING is only VALID within the state of Georgia!Neither one live in Georgia and neither one had to LEGALLY APPEAR!!WHAT DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND ABOUT THIS?I have posted the rule 616-2-1-19 2 TIMES NOW for you to see and yet you still are ignorant to these facts.
WHAT DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND ABOUT THIS?? I know you are an idiot but it is getting old repeating the same facts and you not getting it.Fucking retard!

"Obama and Sheriff Joe got the same subpoena"

::LMAO::

 

[Joe Contrarian]

Re: Jerome Corsi's New Book Proves Obama's Ineligible! ("This is going to make Watergate look like a political sideshow by comparison.")

Just for shits and giggles, I actually Googled "Obama and Sheriff Joe got the same subpoena", and look what came up as the first hit!

http://www.google.ca/#hl=en&sa=X&ei=rSo3T6i8MdDegQfg6dnnBQ&ved=0CBkQvwUoAQ&q=Obama+and+Sheriff+Joe+got+the+same+subpoena&spell=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=896609a829c84a47&biw=1279&bih=748

Would you believe it???



Here's the first hit on Google:

http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2012/01/arizona-sheriff-blows-off-taitz-subpoena/

:3dmdr:

 

[tank]

Re: Jerome Corsi's New Book Proves Obama's Ineligible! ("This is going to make Watergate look like a political sideshow by comparison.")

"Obama and Sheriff Joe got the same subpoena"

::LMAO::

:LMAO:LMAO:LMAO:LMAO:LMAO:LMAO:LMAO:LMAO:LMAO:LMAO:LMAO:LMAO:LMAO:LMAO:LMAO:LMAO:LMAO
:LMAO:LMAONo, no of course they were different kinds of subpoena's right?:LMAO:LMAO:LMAO:LMAO:LMAOWhat a fucking RETARD!!

 

[tank]

Re: Jerome Corsi's New Book Proves Obama's Ineligible! ("This is going to make Watergate look like a political sideshow by comparison.")

Just for shits and giggles, I actually Googled "Obama and Sheriff Joe got the same subpoena", and look what came up as the the first hit!

http://www.google.ca/#hl=en&sa=X&ei=rSo3T6i8MdDegQfg6dnnBQ&ved=0CBkQvwUoAQ&q=Obama+and+Sheriff+Joe+got+the+same+subpoena&spell=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=896609a829c84a47&biw=1279&bih=748

Would you believe it???



Here's the article:

http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2012/01/arizona-sheriff-blows-off-taitz-subpoena/

:3dmdr:

Well by all means prove this wrong!!
BTW thanks for proving that all you have is ''Google'':LMAO:LMAO
PROVE that their is a difference in subpoena's!!Please do!!:lol

 

[tank]

Re: Jerome Corsi's New Book Proves Obama's Ineligible! ("This is going to make Watergate look like a political sideshow by comparison.")

Hey I got the attention whores idiotic thread up to 66 pages!!Let's see if the spam monkey will continue to lie, evade and dodge all facts and post stupid shit that only a retard would believe.

 

[Joe Contrarian]

Re: Jerome Corsi's New Book Proves Obama's Ineligible! ("This is going to make Watergate look like a political sideshow by comparison.")

As I predicted, the Obot poo-flinging monkey made it page 66 before midnight, and you know what that means!

Tank "Debunking Birthers" (page 65)

:LMAO:LMAOReading and thinking are not your strong suits!

Hey Joe....was it a court ordered SUBPOENA or a SUBPOENA for a hearing?:LMAO
Does a SUBPOENA for a HEARING include people that do not live in Georgia??:LMAO

But of course Obama lives in Georgia in birfer world correct??:LMAO

And you start off on page 65 without still proving anything!!Great job!You still have not answered shit and continue to lie, evade and dodge everything.Hey tell me more about that subpoena would ya??You continue to make yourself look stupid!:thumbsup

Why??Exposing you birfers is so easy a caveman could do it!65 pages later and 99 court cases and 6 state challenges that you got laughed out of court with and lost big time is the only proof anyone needs to see.Keep trying though since you are the best entertainment on the net!
Everyone has seen how easy it is to make you look like a fool.

See pages 64 and 65!I have explained to you so many times now and you still do not get it.My 12 year old son get;s it but you can't!!That say's it all.Maybe if you thought for yourself and used some logic rather then believing everything WND and ORYR ram's up your ass you would not be so stupid.Just a thought!

But, but, but....Obama's lawyer is in Georgia!!!:shoot::shoot::shoot:
My God you are clueless!This is what happens to your brain from believing everything WND and ORYR rams up your ass.

This is rich!!I have explained it to you for over 2 pages now , and to try and hide your stupidity for those last 2 pages you ask this!!

Hey Joe where does Obama live?
Hey Joe where does Sheriff Joe live?
Hey Joe why are you saying the subpoena is good for Obama but not Sheriff Joe??
Hey Joe do you realize how stupid you look??
Hey Joe tell me what the difference is between the 2 subpoena's would ya?:LMAO

This will be Joe's next reply I am sure.

Hey Joe why didn't this subpoena work???:LMAO:LMAOKeep digging that hole genius.

Gee I wonder if this applies to Obama too??No of course not!!How can Sheriff Joe say this but Obama cannot??:LMAOYes that subpoena only works for Obama and not Sheriff Joe!!You just cannot make this shit up!!

What's the difference between a subpoena that is court ordered and one that comes from a STATE administrative HEARING? :LMAO

SAY'S THE IDIOT THAT HAS REPLIED 3 TIMES NOW ASKING WHAT A SUBPOENA IS!!
:LMAO:LMAOComedy Gold here yet again!You still have not refuted one thing all day!What an idiot!

Yes folks this is Joe in action presenting FACTS and PROVING stuff !You just cannot make this shit up!

What a shock!Joe never answered or refuted anything again!Shocked I tell ya!

Only except that this subpoena from an administrative hearing is only valid in Georgia like I have been telling you now for over 2 pages.
Under the rules for procedure for the office of state administrative hearings subpoenas may be issued ''at any place within the state of Georgia''See rule 616-1-2 -19. No rule allowing it outside the state!!WHAT DO YOU NOT GET ABOUT THIS??For over 2 pages now I have been slapping you upside the head with this and you are still to stupid to understand it!Are you trying to bore me with your stupidity?Are you just asking the same question over and over again thinking their will be a different answer, or are you just this damn dumb?WHAT PART DO YOU NOT GET??Why do you think Obama did the same thing that Sheriff Joe did?Why do you think it will be a different outcome when they both did the same thing??They both got the same subpoena?My 12 year old son knows the difference and your dumbass still keeps saying the same old stupid shit over and over again.

You mean they will issue subpoena's for state hearing challenges??NNNNOOOOOOO!:shoot:
My God I think it might be sinking in for the tard!

Yes these are the most important requirements for being President.They cannot even prove shit with the birth certificate so they hope these lies and smears will go somewhere too but like all the other idiotic shit it will fail like these losers always do!

My God what an idiot!!Obama and Sheriff Joe got the same subpoena correct???It has NOTHING to do with being on the ballot!!They both were subpoena to APPEAR at an administrative HEARING correct?That subpoena for an administrative HEARING is only VALID within the state of Georgia!Neither one live in Georgia and neither one had to LEGALLY APPEAR!!WHAT DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND ABOUT THIS?I have posted the rule 616-2-1-19 2 TIMES NOW for you to see and yet you still are ignorant to these facts.
WHAT DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND ABOUT THIS?? I know you are an idiot but it is getting old repeating the same facts and you not getting it.Fucking retard!

It's a good thing I'm not sending this stuff to my fellow birthers...or, 'birfers' as the poo-flinging monkey ingeniously calls us. I mean, if every 'birfer' actually read this insight, they would become so disheartened and quit...the entire movement would collapse overnight!

Talk about Birthergeddon!

It's official: 'birfers' are simply not worthy of tank's infinite wisdom!

:3dmondieu2:

 

[tank]

Re: Jerome Corsi's New Book Proves Obama's Ineligible! ("This is going to make Watergate look like a political sideshow by comparison.")

As I predicted, the Obot poo-flinging monkey made it page 66 before midnight, and you know what that means!

Tank "Debunking Birthers" (page 65)






































It's a good thing I'm not sending this stuff to my fellow birthers (or, 'birfers' as the poo-flinging monkey ingeniously calls us). I mean, if every 'birfer' actually read this insight, they would become so disheartened and quit...the entire movement would collapse overnight!

Birfers are not worth of tank's infinite wisdom!

:3dmondieu2:

Yep you still have not refuted or debunked shit after 66 pages.At least 15 of your replies was asking the same stupid questions over and over again so I have to give you some credit for playing the idiot which you do very well I might add.
So I take it we will not be blessed with an idiotic answer on the difference between to the 2 subpoena's???:LMAO
Will we ever get an answer on whether the subpoenas are valid outside the state of Georgia for a hearing??I have already answered this while Joe monkey just continues to regurgitate the same old stupid shit not proving anything and only making a fool of himself.
Gee I wonder if Joe can evade, dodge and ask more stupid questions to get it up to 67 pages ?:LMAO