[ED.: An update from Atty. Orly Taitz...]
[In Larry Klayman's case, Goode, McInnish v. Chapman, before the Supreme Court of Alabama,] "Affidavit of Mike Zullo" was attached as an exhibit to the motion to strike the Amicus Curiae brief of AL Dem Party; it is not a part of the underlying case or Appellant’s brief or a reply to the brief by the Appellee, [Alabama] Secretary of State [Beth Chapman.]
Posted on | May 15, 2013
Please, see for yourselves: Mike Zullo’s affidavit is only an exhibit to the motion to strike the Amicus Curiae (friend of the court) brief by the Democratic Party of AL. I was correct in what I was saying.
This "affidavit of Mike Zullo" is not a part of the case in the lower court, it is not an exhibit to the Appellate Brief or a reply to the Appellate Brief. Most courts of Appeals or higher courts disregard most of the Amicus Curiae, they have absolutely no duty to even look at them. For example, Lucas Smith filed a Amicus Curiae in this case; nobody even bothers to respond to it. So, if the Supreme Court of Alabama decides to simply disregard this Amicus Curiae by the Dem party or strike it from the record, they will also disregard the motion asking to disregard it and an exhibit, "affidavit of Mike Zullo," attached to it.
The Supreme Court of AL has a duty to look only at the lower court case, what was filed there, Appellant’s brief, Appellee’s brief, and the reply by the Appellant. "Affidavit [of] Mike Zullo" is not a part of any of these documents and cannot be considered and will be disregarded by the court, just as an exhibit filed by the Alabama Democratic party will be disregarded, as those are new exhibits filed after the case was dismissed in the lower court. The Supreme court, which is reviewing the appeal, needs to rule based on the evidence that existed in front of the judge which reviewed the case in the lower court, to see if this judge made an error. I hope they rule for the plaintiffs/Appellants, however Mike Zullo’s affidavit will have no bearing on this decision. We do not know how the court will rule. I do not know how long does it take for this court to come up with a decision. (Can someone check how long does it take for the Supreme Court [of Alabama] to rule on average?) In the [U.S.] 9th Circuit it took the court nearly a year from the time it was filed to come to the decision. I filed my case in Judge Carter’s court on January 21, 2009. Decision by the 9th circuit came sometime in the end of 2011.
As I stated that even if the court rules in favor of the plaintiffs and reverses the decision of the lower court, still there is the same problem. Plaintiffs asked for the certified copy of the birth certificate. Look up what the Dem party of MS did in my case in MS: they provided the court with a certified copy of another copy of the same forgery. By the way in MS they made some changes to this forgery according to sworn affidavits. So, what do you do then? The obots will say: you wanted a certified copy, here you go, here is the certified copy. Obama will declare this as yet another victory. He will state: they asked for the certified copy, they got the certified copy, case closed. [But in the retrial before the lower Alabama court, the "affidavit of Mike Zullo" will be admitted, and it will discredit the counterfeit Certificate of Live Birth, which was not refuted in the Mississippi case.]
For that reason for the hundred and first time I am explaining that Sheriff Arpaio and Mike Zullo need to do their job. Arpaio needs to file a criminal complaint in his county, where he is a sheriff, in Maricopa County, AZ; he needs to file a signed, stamped complaint with the District Attorney and Attorney General. He needs to go to the judge on duty and seek a subpoena for production of the original (wet ink) birth certificate, original Selective Service registration, and original SS-5 [Application for a Social Security Card] for the CT SSN [beginning with "042" which] Obama is using. Either Sheriff or District attorney can appear before a judge in HI and in DC and seek a reciprocal local subpoena based on a subpoena issued by the judge in the sister jurisdiction in AZ. When they have the local subpoenas, they need to bring the document experts and compare Obama’s originals (if they exist) to the other similar documents from the same time period, which are kept on file. With the reports of the experts the District Attorney or Attorney General of the state can file a criminal complaint in court. That’s what needs to be done now, immediately. Please, call Arpaio and tell him that he needs to do his job as a duly elected sheriff and file the proper criminal complaint with his District Attorney and Attorney General, not wait another half a year or a year for the Supreme court of Alabama to rule and in the best case scenario get another certified copy of the same forgery as they already filed in Taitz et al v Democratic Party of MS, Obama, Astrue, Onaka (this case is still going on, no decision from the District court yet). Tell Arpaio to file the criminal complaint ASAP!!!
["Justice delayed is justice denied."]
_____________________________________________
[In 13-15627 James Grinols, et al v. Electoral College, et al “Clerk Order Filed” before the U.S. Appeals Court for the 9th Circuit,] It looks like judge England [in the lower court] did not issue the final order to dismiss the Grinols case, and there is no transcript from the clerk either. I am still waiting for the transcript. The 9th circuit states that they do not have jurisdiction as there is [no] final order to dismiss by judge England.
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Notice of Docket Activity
The following transaction was entered on 05/15/2013 at 10:22:08 AM PDT and filed on 05/15/2013
Case Name: |
James Grinols, et al v. Electoral College, et al |
Case Number: |
13-15627 |
Document(s): |
Document(s) |
Docket Text:
Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: SLJ): A review of the record suggests that this court may lack jurisdiction over the appeal because an order denying a motion for default judgment is not a final appealable order. See 28 U.S.C. § 1291; Bird v. Reese, 875 F.2d 256 (9th Cir. 1989) (order). Moreover, a review of the district court docket shows that a final order granting appellees’ motions to dismiss has not yet been filed. Within 21 days after the date of this order, appellants shall move for voluntary dismissal of the appeal or show cause why it should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. If appellants elect to show cause, a response may be filed within 10 days after service of the memorandum. If appellants do not comply with this order, the Clerk shall dismiss this appeal pursuant to Ninth Circuit Rule 42-1. Briefing is suspended pending further order of the court. [8629706] (WL)
[Stall, stall, stall . . . then, when you can stall no longer, delay with motions and continuances . . .]
__________________________________________________
[May 15, 2013:] I can’t believe it, but I got a call back from the Department of Treasury, from the special agent who left a message for me. I was busy with a patient and could not get to the phone. We’ll see what happens next. I hope they will actually move on the issue of Obama’s stolen SSN used in his tax returns. The agent wanted me to call back and provide more info. I called and left a message. I hope Holder is not bugging my phone.
[Later that day:] [I] talked to the special agent. The complaint was divided between offices, I forwarded to her additional information that she needed.
_________________________________________________
[May 16, 2013:] I just got this from an analyst. We can track all the notations and changes in Obama’s [IRS] file [at the Treasury Dept.], and we can get the names of everyone who made the changes. [IF you can find a judge who will order release of the IRS files.] Same with my files and any other files.
"I have already sent him a message on how to track the IRS computer changes,
that will lead to who authorized it. Each change in a gov. computer system is
documented and authorized, each expenditure. Forget the asking of questions,
follow the paper trail/program trail."