Selected quotes are below the fold.
MS. RIORDAN: I don't want to admit them (Orly's "evidence") until somebody goes through them, if we could consider that as a commission. Okay, so I would ask that the commission would wait before admitting all of these exhibits that have been submitted so we have some sense of their provenance.The commissioners started by establishing the 300 pages of crap provided by Orly wouldn't be admitted as evidence.
MR. DUMEZICH: Let's just say that they've been lodged with the commission, how's that?
MR. ? (commissioner): I've got a question before we take any witnesses. Can you cite as to some law in Indiana or the United States that makes the candidacy on our ballot -- that's the only issue here is is whether the President of the United States is an eligible candidate to be on our ballot, under our laws, that anything, any reference to a Social Security Number and any require -- I'm asking you the question.The ground rules were set from the start and the tone was set when the challenger (Kesler) interrupted the commissioner followed by the commissioner cutting him off and shortly afterwards Orly buts in with her Indonesian citizenship shit.
MR. KESLER: The Constitution of the United States requires certain things.
MR. ?: Does it require a Social Security Number?
MR. KESLER: No, but --
MR. ?: Okay, that's my question. Is there any law that you can cite us to that requires a Social Security Number, valid or otherwise, as a prerequisite to being candidate for the United States of America, for the President.
MR. KESLER: No, sir, there is not, but with that kind of reasoning, any illegal alien from Mexico wouldn't have to have one either.
MR. ?: Surely you're not contending the President is an illegal alien from Mexico.
MR. KESLER: No, sir. I did not say that.
MS. TAITZ: But from Indonesia.
MR. ?: Okay, all right.
MR. ?: All I'm going to say to you today is we've come here -- and my position is very simple. The evidence you're offering is under oath.The warning came next.
MR. KESLER: Yes, sir.
MR. ?: And you'd best well have proof, because to offer testimony under oath can be a crime in this state, and your testimony may well be certified to the prosecutor of this county for review. We have been for four years hearing people nationwide talking about the birther movement, and Ms. Taitz is all over the news on this issue, and I'm just telling you, I don't think that's an issue in this thing here today.
MR. KESLER: Sir, with having listened to you, I'm not concerned about the birth certificate, whether it's valid or not. I really am not. But what I am concerned about is that none of us were really given a proper chance to vet this gentleman the last time around. I want to make sure he's vetted this time.With that, I'll turn it over to Ms. Taitz.Orly was smacked down from the start. Indiana law requires pro hac vice even when representing a client at a hearing, and (surprise) Orly hadn't applied for that. Itn't doesn't take long until Orly starts quoting law and acting as attorney instead of as a witness.
MS. RIORDAN: Ms. Taitz, Dr. Taitz, are you a member of the Bar of the State of Indiana?
MS. TAITZ: I'm not here as an attorney. I'm here as a witness to authenticate all of the evidence and all of the documents that you want authenticated. I'm the researcher who's done all the research.
MR. ?: Then Mr. Kesler said that you're here representing him.
MR. KESLER: Well, she is our spokesperson.
MS. TAITZ: He is -- he misspoke. I'm here only as a witness, not as an attorney.
MS. TAITZ: Okay, with that I will provide and authenticate the evidence, and according to Indiana code 3-8-1-6 and 3-8-2-14, the candidate for the U.S. president has to be a natural born citizen according to Article 2 Section 1 Paragraph 4 of the U.S. Constitution, which --
MR. ?: Tell me what evidence you have he was not born in the United States.
MS. TAITZ: Yes, sir. First of all, what does natural born citizen mean? According to --
MR. ?: Ma'am, we're all attorneys. I think we know what natural born citizen means.
MR. ?: Do you have -- show me evidence -- we're going to -- I will treat you with the respect that you deserve, and I expect to be treated the same. Show me the evidence that you have that this person you're identifying in Indonesia is Barack Obama, and I want you offering that certified, properly certified authenticated records from Indonesia that you're identifying as [inaudible].As many of you know, the only thing Orly has is a screenshot from a televised fluff piece on Obama's upbringing where he is listed as an Indonesian Muslim named Barry Soetero. That is enough for Orly to conclude that he was adopted by Soetero and granted Indonesian citizenship. The people who follow this as an obsession know Indonesia didn't grant citizenship to minors due to adoption, and that Muslim tradition allows for someone to raise the child of another, but adoption is very rare and almost unheard of while the father still lives.
MS. TAITZ: Sir, yes, first of all, this is from the United States of America Department of Justice. You received two Federal Express packages with the records (300 plus pages of crap) (snip) He was supposed to be here and rebut this evidence, and first of all, with prior candidates, you have issued a default ruling when the candidate did not show up (no they didn't) to rebut any evidence, and before we even go into this, I would like to know why a default is not being issued against Mr. Obama. Is there preferential treatment against somebody who is --Orly believes she doesn't need to get her crap authenticated since she has the records from the January 26th Georgia Administrative Law Hearing where her "evidence" was authenticated so she tried the default method this time.
MR. ?: You are a witness. You are a witness.
MS. TAITZ: Okay, Mr. Swihart will ask.
MR. SWIHART: Okay, I'll ask why there isn't a default.
MR. ?: I'm going to object to that question, because it's totally irrelevant for you to ask -- you don't ask questions to us.
MR. SWIHART: Okay, why isn't there a default against Mr. Obama?
MR. ?: We're not here to -- we're not witnesses and --
MR. SWIHART: Okay, I demand a default judgment.
MS. TAITZ: Default ruling.
The Commission stopped there and had a vote on entering a default judgement. The vote was 0 yeas, 4 nays. (The commission is split with two Democrats and two Republicans. The Chairman is actually Mitt Romney's Indiana State Chairman and he was very fair when they overturned with the Santorum and Gingrinch challenges.)
You need to read the whole thing or watch the video. Even though the author of the transcript has given blanket authority for reproduction, I'll just direct readers there for the rest of the goodies and stop with the play by play but add a few nuggets.
MR. ?: I would move that we deny this evidence, because it is not properly certified, and you hold yourself out as an attorney. You would know that you're not the person to certify court records.
MS. RIORDAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I've reviewed these materials, and actually they're not 300 pages of sworn testimony. There are several unnumbered pages of proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law, which is a so-called legal document that you (Orly) drafted, no grounds for admission, 100 percent hearsay.
MR. DUMEZICH: Whoa, whoa. You're out of order.
AUDIENCE MEMBER: Okay, well, you're out of order.
MS. TAITZ: You're all out of order.
AUDIENCE MEMBER: [Inaudible]
MR. DUMEZICH: I didn't attack anybody.
MS. TAITZ: Yes, you did. You wouldn't let us speak.
AUDIENCE MEMBER: [Inaudible]. People have a right to speak.
MR. KESLER: It's fraud. That's the what.
MR. ?: Then take it to the House of Representative and seek to have him impeached.
MR. KESLER: And you know what they would say? Well, we can't impeach him because, gosh, he's probably not the president. What would you do then?
MS. TAITZ: Sir, sir, we need to provide evidence.
MR. DUMEZICH: Excuse me, I'm speaking. I'm going to say this once. One person talks at a time. This is not the Spanish Inquisition here where people are arguing back and forth.
MS. TAITZ: Okay, thank you... (They let her ramble on)... This man (Obama) is a criminal, ma'am and gentlemen, and you are covering up forgery and Social Security --
MR. DUMEZICH: Whoa, whoa. Let's stop. Stop right there. Present your case. We're not covering anything up.
MR. DUMEZICH: Please give me that.
[Ms. Taitz presents document to commission.]
Okay, this goes to quality of evidence. This is not a form from an income tax return. This is a United States gift tax return. It has -- quiet, I'm talking.
MS. TAITZ: May I respond?
MR. DUMEZICH: No, because you're wrong. You can respond to it. This was not filed with a federal income tax return. I mean, you can slap the desk all you want, but the fact of the matter is when someone represents that this is an income tax return that the President filed, it's wrong in its face. This goes to the credibility of everything somebody says. When she's going to tell us that this is an income tax return, it's just not accurate. If this isn't accurate, it calls into question the rest of the evidence.