(Updated) ForgeryGate: New Jersey Judge Admits Obama Hasn’t Provided Proof Of Birthplace, Then Rules Obama Born In Hawaii

Obama Official Portrait SC 752x1024 (Updated) ForgeryGate: New Jersey Judge Admits Obama Hasnt Provided Proof of Birthplace, Then Rules Obama Born in Hawaii

To watch videos of these proceedings, click here and here.

By Daniel Noe

A judge in New Jersey just ruled yesterday afternoon against two concerned citizens who questioned Obama’s eligibility to be on their state’s presidential primary ballot. Essentially, Obama was cleared to be put on the ballot.

Attorney Mario Apuzzo, arguing for plaintiffs Nick Purpura and Ted Moran argued that Obama should not be on the ballot and that the NJ Secretary of State is obligated to make sure that only qualified candidates appear on future ballots.

Last week, Mr. Purpura, accompanied by Mr. Apuzzo, filed an objection to the nominating petition of Obama to appear on the state’s primary election ballot.

Obama was represented by attorney Alexandra Hill of the firm of Genova, Burn, and Giantomasi of Newark. The name of the Administrative Law Judge who heard the case was Judge Jeff Masin.

While Mr. Apuzzo clearly argued how Obama’s birth certificate was clearly inauthentic, Ms. Hill struggled to dismiss the suit as irrelevant. Although she conceded that Obama has not furnished a birth certificate to the appropriate parties in the state, she nevertheless said that he is under no obligation to do so. Unfortunately, this is true, not just of New Jersey but of all fifty states.

Judge Masin asked a lot of questions about the eligibility issue, repeatedly interrupting Mr. Apuzzo’s presentation. He refused to hear anything about the issue of Obama’s forged documents and did not allow any evidence to be entered into the court’s official record since Obama had not presented his birth certificate or draft registration documents in any form.

What was most interesting was that despite no record of Obama being born in Hawaii was entered into the court’s official record, Masin ruled that Obama was born there anyway.

The plaintiffs and Mr. Apuzzo vowed to appeal.

Below is the PDF of Judge Masin’s decision.

Purpura-Moran Initial Decision of ALJ Masin

UPDATE: Here is the response of Mr. Apuzzo and the plaintiffs to the ruling:

Purpura-Moran Exceptions to Initial Decision 4-10-12

Related posts:

  1. Judge Malihi Rules Obama Eligible To Be On Georgia Ballot An administrative law judge in Georgia today ruled that Barack…
  2. Judge Rules Obama Must Prove Presidential Eligibility In Georgia Courtroom On Thursday For those who have waited 3 years for a judge…

Do you have $25,000 in your IRA or 401(k)? This "Loophole" in IRS Code lets you move your savings to gold ... get this NO-COST Info Guide >

16 comments to (Updated) ForgeryGate: New Jersey Judge Admits Obama Hasn’t Provided Proof Of Birthplace, Then Rules Obama Born In Hawaii

  • Bloodless Coup

    Are the New Black Panthers and La Raza teaming up for a race war against whitey?

    According to this racist nut job who calls himself an Aztec al-Qaeda Warrior (aka E. F. Mohammed Martinez) La Raza and the Black Panthers have been teamed up for a long time already.

    See his myspace page by clicking on the link
    http://www.myspace.com/aztecchicanointifada/blog#!

    • Elaine

      Homeland Security has given John Wiley Price, a radical Black Politician who sits on the Commissioner's Board in Dallas, TX — the Command over the New Black Panther Party as "his" Military. I want to introduce you to John Wiley Price; and I want you to understand that they are GIVEN the protection of the Federal Government against U.S. Citizens:
      Price is the one mouthing off: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kx7D2BjlXC4

      This video has John Wiley Price telling White People to "Go to Hell". http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aifas6SzyYk&fe

      My question now is "How many others has he given Command to in other large cities like Chicago, NY, etc.?

      • Elaine

        Articles and Video(s) have always been on the Internet + You Tube. EVERY TV Station received this over the AP Wire…they ALL knew and did nothing to stop him.

        From the AP in 2004: Kenyan-born Obama all set for US Senate
        Hmm…An AP story from 2004 entitled Kenyan-born Obama all set for US Senate has been discovered on archive.org by many sites (and twitter where I got this). Does this mean now that the AP is nothing but a bunch of birthers?
        Kenyan-born US Senate hopeful, Barrack Obama, appeared set to take over the Illinois Senate seat after his main rival, Jack Ryan, dropped out of the race on Friday night amid a furor over lurid sex club allegations.
        The Republican choice will become an instant underdog in the campaign for the seat of retiring Republican Senator Peter Fitzgerald, since Obama held a wide lead even before the scandal broke.
        “I feel for him actually,” Obama told a Chicago TV station. “What he’s gone through over the last three days I think is something you wouldn’t wish on anybody.”
        The Republican state committee must now choose a replacement for Ryan, who had won in the primaries against seven contenders. Its task is complicated by the fact that Obama holds a comfortable lead in the polls and is widely regarded as a rising Democratic star.
        http://www.fireandreamitchell.com/2009/10/14/from

  • Mountain Man

    Swiss bank account or cement overshoes in Hudson River?

  • Carol

    Does this surprise me NOT in the least I will just bet that this judge's life was threatened along with his family so he wouldn't stop this from happening.

    To me something is happening because there are way to many people scared straight that shouldn't be scared because they are the very people who we depend upon to do the right thing and protect us all.

  • forhisgloryandpraise

    What? The judge says Obama hasn't proven his eligibility, nor presented an official birth certificate, and acknowledges that Obama's father is not a citizen of the U.S. and still rules the Obama was born in Hawaii! Throw this judge off the bench! What a fraud, and this judge in my perspective is guilty of aiding and abetting a crime…the crime of fraud and treason against the United States!

    • Elaine

      You have brought up a very good point. Hmmmm….wonder what it takes to "remove a judge"? Who does it? Is there a prosecutor who does that? Do citizens demand it?

      • Elaine

        Sorry this is so "squished" together…it was printed like this when I Google'd how to remove a Judge:
        Pt 1: Methods of Removing State Judges

        Summary

        A number of methods have been established to remove state judges. Removal methods available in a specific state are typically set forth in the state’s constitution. Most states employ some form of removal that involves the state’s highest court and the state’s judicial conduct organization. Other methods include impeachment, legislative address, and recall election.

        Impeachment

        Nearly all fifty states have constitutional provisions for removal of state judges by impeachment. In most states, the impeachment procedure begins with the House of Representatives voting on whether a judge should be impeached. If the impeachment measure passes in the House, it then goes to the state Senate for a trial and the Senate will vote on whether to convict. Grounds for impeachment often include terms such as “malfeasance,” “misfeasance,” “gross misconduct,” “gross immorality,” “high crimes,” “habitual intemperance,” and “maladministration.”

        • Elaine

          Pt 2:
          Recent Impeachments

          Impeachment is a rarely used method of removing judges. In the last 15 years, only two state judges have been impeached, only one has been convicted, and only five more have been involved in impeachment investigations.

          On July 12, 2000, the New Hampshire House of Representatives voted to impeach Chief Justice David Brock. The four articles of impeachment charged that Brock:

          Oversaw a practice allowing recused and disqualified justices to receive draft opinions, attend conferences on the cases, and comment on and influence rulings.
          Discussed with then-Justice Stephen Thayer who would serve as substitute justices on the appeal of Thayer's divorce case.
          Telephoned a lower court judge 13 years ago to check the status of a case involving a company owned by the then-state senate majority leader and did not tell his colleagues about the call when the case was appealed to the supreme court.
          Lied under oath to the House's judiciary committee when he denied making the call.
          The House defeated attempts to impeach two other justices.

          On October 10, the New Hampshire state senate voted not to convict the chief justice on any of the four articles of impeachment. With 15 votes (two-thirds of the 22 participating senators) needed to convict, the closest vote was 14-8 in favor of acquittal on the charge of overseeing a practice that allowed justices to comment on cases from which they were recused.

          Rolf Larsen of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court was removed from the bench and barred from holding any public office in 1994 after being convicted by the Pennsylvania Senate of improper contact with an attorney. Larsen was acquitted of six additional charges in the same proceeding.

          In 1997, James Heiple of the Illinois Supreme Court was the subject of an impeachment investigation by the Illinois House of Representatives. In April 1997, the Illinois Courts Commission had censured Heiple for failing to cooperate with law enforcement officials during four traffic stops, one of which resulted in an arrest. In May 1997, a ten-member committee of the Illinois House of Representatives concluded its impeachment investigation by recommending that no articles of impeachment against Heiple be referred to the Senate. The investigation included charges that: when the other justices were voting on whether to make Heiple chief justice, Heiple failed to disclose to them the fact that the Judicial Inquiry Board was investigating him; Heiple failed to recuse himself from voting on the appointment of a fellow justice as chair of the Illinois Courts Commission even though he knew the chair would preside over a hearing if the Board filed a complaint against him; and Heiple improperly avoided jury duty.

          The Rhode Island Supreme Court has seen two of its chief justices resign amid impeachment proceedings. In 1985, Joseph A. Bevilacqua was suspended for four months without pay and publicly censured by the Rhode Island Commission on Judicial Tenure and Discipline for “bringing his judicial office into serious disrepute.” The Commission’s actions stemmed from Bevilacqua’s frequent socializing with reputed mobsters and meeting women at a motel purportedly owned by men linked to drug smuggling and illegal gambling. After Bevilacqua served his suspension, the governor and legislators initiated an investigation into whether Bevilacqua’s actions constituted grounds for impeachment. In 1986, while impeachment hearings were taking place, Bevilacqua announced he was retiring from the bench because of “ill health.”

          • Elaine

            Pt 3: How to remove a Judge:

            Shortly after Bevilacqua’s resignation in 1986, Thomas Fay was sworn in as Chief Justice of the Rhode Island Supreme Court. In 1993, Fay also resigned under threat of an impeachment investigation. Fay was being investigated for allegedly using court funds to pay for personal expenses, choosing a business partner to arbitrate contract disputes, using court secretaries for private business, and writing letters to municipal judges on official stationery asking them to fix parking tickets for friends and family members. In 1994, Fay was convicted of fraud in criminal court for using court funds to pay personal expenses and received a suspended sentence.

            Legislative Address

            Another method of removal is the bill of address, which allows the legislature, often with the governor’s consent, to vote for a judge’s removal. Approximately sixteen states have provisions for legislative address. Legislative address is a remnant of colonial times when, in English law, kings had the power to "address" judges from office with the consent of Parliament. Most states, when drafting their constitutions, discarded the bill of address and incorporated some form of the impeachment process. Unlike narrow impeachment provisions, legislative address is quite broad and allows a judge to be removed by the legislature for nearly any reason, including laziness or illness.

            Recent Bills of Address

            An attempt to remove New Hampshire Supreme Court Chief Justice David Brock by a bill of address was unsuccessful in 1999. Among the charges alleged in the bill were that Brock “usurped legislative and executive authority” and “allowed the court to engage in policy-making that should be off-limits to the courts.” A twelve-member legislative committee rejected the bill.

            Recall Election

            A few states allow for judges to be removed from office by recall election. Judges may be subject to recall for serious offenses, which may or may not be specified in recall provisions. The two-part process is initiated by a recall petition signed by voters and presented to election officials. If the required number of signatures is obtained and any challenges to the recall petition are unsuccessful, a date is set for a recall election and the judge is removed if a majority of voters vote for recall.

            Recent Attempts to Recall Judges

            An unsuccessful recall campaign was waged against Judge Nancy Wieben Stock from the Orange County Superior Court in California. In 1997, Judge Stock was targeted for recall after she granted O.J. Simpson custody of his children. Recall organizers failed to obtain the requisite number of signatures to place the recall before the voters.

            Judicial Conduct Commissions

            To bridge the gaps left by impeachment and legislative address provisions, judicial conduct commissions have been created by state constitutions, court rules, or statutes. First established in California in 1960, judicial conduct commissions are now a part of every state’s judicial disciplinary process. Commission members include judges, lawyers, and lay members. A confidential investigation by a judicial conduct commission is generally initiated by the filing of a complaint by a member of the public.

            If a formal statement of charges is filed by a commission, a hearing (open to the public in most states) is held and members of the commission vote on whether the evidence supports the allegations in the complaint. Sanctions may be imposed on the judge and may include reprimand, admonishment, censure, fine, suspension, involuntary retirement, or removal. Depending on the state, the commission either makes a recommendation to the supreme court as to the appropriate sanction or imposes a sanction the judge can ask the supreme court to review.

            Recent Disciplinary Actions

            In 2006, as a result of state judicial discipline proceedings, 12 judges were removed from office; 11 judges resigned or retired in lieu of discipline pursuant to agreements with judicial commissions that were made public; 1 judge was required to retire; and 4 former judges were barred from serving in judicial office. 111 additional judges (or former judges in 9 cases) were publicly sanctioned in 2006. There were 18 suspensions without pay with the length of the suspensions ranging from 5 days to 2 years. There were 18 public censures, 30 public admonishments, 35 public reprimands, 2 public warning, 2 cease and desist orders, and 6 public informal adjustments.

            http://www.ajs.org/ethics/eth_impeachement.asp

          • Watching/waiting

            the only problem is that the House and all of the other means of
            impeaching a judge, are as corrupt as the judge.. They will not
            do anything to utilize the methods that are legal and just.

            I have come to the conclusion that this is all supernaturally
            orchestrated .. I cannot believe that our justice system
            as it once was in the by gone years, is still incorruptible.

            I may sound like a religious fanatic, which I am NOT,
            but the scenario is sooooo against justice and
            the laws protecting Americans from such flagrant
            judicial decisions, that it has to be from a dark side.

            There is no other reason, unless they have all been
            threatened with death throughout their entire families.

            If that is the case, they need to fall on their knees
            and ask for courage and wisdom. Their bending
            over to protect their own hides, is reprehensible.

            It only takes one honorable and non-intimidated
            judge to bring these thugs down and imprisoned.

            Wherefore art thou, oh judge?

      • Rpbert Berry

        Its easy…You pick him up by the back of his belt …drag him around for a while…find the front door…and through his lying ass out on the street….easy……By the way…Same thing works for the rest of the lying cowards in Congress and …other places as well….

  • When a Judge makes a decision that does not even meet the standards of common sense he should be removed from the bench as incapable of preforming his job.

  • This is garbage and no one, with authority, cares to get to the truth. What is the Kenyan, in the WH, hiding!

  • Ira L. Imler

    The socialist regime is pulling the strings on the puppet judges!! I t is obviously a violation of the constitution of the United States of America. The dictator and all of the socialists in our government are holding the others hostage somehow!!! There has got to be a way to stop the destruction of our country before it is too late!!!!

    Ira

Leave a Reply

  

  

  

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>