There are rumors swirling among the birthers that the Alabama Supreme Court will rule on the McInnish v. Chapman case this week. I don’t have any reason to think one way or the other about this prediction, but whatever the Court says, the affidavit of Mike Zullo, submitted to the court, is irrelevant. (On March 12, there was a Zullo Affidavit page on the Cold Case Posse Web site, but it was gone this morning. I don’t know if it was intentionally scrubbed or if it was lost in the recovery from a recent hacking incident.) The Zullo affidavit was submitted by the Appellants as part of a motion to strike an amicus brief from the Alabama Democratic Party because that brief contained items not part of the record of appeal. The Zullo affidavit, of course, is itself full of things not in the record of appeal.
The problem with predicting with certainty what the Alabama Supreme Court will do is that there are at least two birther sympathizers on the court, Chief Justice Roy Moore and Associate Justice Tom Parker. It’s possible there there will be a split decision and it is also possible for them to rule against McInnish, but insert birther-friendly language whining about having their hands tied by the law in an otherwise serious question about Obama. I have confidence in the ultimate victory of right over chaos and so I think the Alabama Supreme Court will look at the merits of the case and affirm the Montgomery Circuit Court’s ruling.
The sole questions to be decided by the Alabama Supreme Court are whether or not the “Jurisdiction Stripping Statute,” prevents the court from hearing this case,1 and if not whether or not the Secretary of State of Alabama had a duty in the last election to investigate President Obamas qualifications to appear on the ballot in Alabama.
The parties to the case and an amicus brief from the Alabama Democratic Party argue the issues upon which the court will rule. Several nut case amicus briefs were also submitted making wild claims about President Obama; they are not relevant to the question of law in this case. (See also my article: “Zullo’s irrelevant affidavit.”)
The first few sentences of the Zullo affidavit show that it is incompetent. Zullo swears that he has personal knowledge of things he’s heard from other people and that’s not how it works. Such testimony would not be allowed in court. One would think that anyone who was familiar with law enforcement would know what is testimony and what is not, but Zullo appears not understand this, nor apparently does he know what’s being decided in Alabama. But whatever opinion one has of the Zullo affidavit, it is irrelevant to this Alabama Supreme Court decision because it does not address the questions of law that the Court is deciding. The Alabama Democratic party references the Zullo affidavit in its response to the motion to strike thusly:
…the ADP assumes that it is unnecessary to further address whether this Court should consider the rambling screed that passes for an “affidavit” attached to the Appellants’ Motion to Strike. Virtually none of the information contained in the affidavit is admissible or credible…. The “affidavit” is inadmissible on its face and is composed of hearsay, speculation, and unsupported conclusions.
Read all of the briefs:
1The Jurisdiction Stripping Statute (Ala. Code 17-16-44) precludes Alabama courts from hearing cases regarding the “legality, conduct or results of any election except so far as authority to do so [is] specially and specifically enumerated and set down by statute.”
Besides which — and I’m not a lawyer, so perhaps I have this wrong — appellate courts do not deal with evidence, so what are they supposed to do with any affidavit, relevant or not.
The only reason this case is of any interest at all is that Roy Moore is a known lunatic who is happy to ignore the law when it suits his agenda; there’s nothing I wouldn’t put past him.
The Zullo affidavit is on Mike Volin’s new site: http://obamaseligibility.com/affidavit.pdf
This document can be found linked to this page about the Alabama case: http://obamaseligibility.com/page_8.html
I see the basis for this rumor is that Post & Email says a “reliable source” spoke to Moore in person.
That would normally be the kiss of death for this rumor, but since Moore is a full-blown wingnut I suppose it actually is possible Moore told this to some whackjob who passed it along to Rondeau.
The comments at BR indicate that the birthers think this case is about election fraud. I don’t see any sign that they have a clue that McInnish winning this case would have zero effect on Obama.
We went through this once before back in September, when the birthers were convinced that the Alabama Supreme Court was about to issue a ruling.
http://beforeitsnews.com/obama/2013/09/big-news-al-supreme-courts-decision-may-be-the-end-of-obama-forged-selective-service-card-2455990.html
BamaLaw, an Alabama attorney who posts at The Fogbow, has said repeatedly that there are only two justices on the Court who would even consider ruling for Klayman.
The irony is that if the Court did rule for Klayman, it would be re-writing Alabama law, exactly the kind of “judicial activism” which conservatives despise. And some birthers actually realize that it would be a meaningless victory insofar as Obama is concerned, because the relief which Klayman is asking for would have no effect upon the results of 2012 election.
But there’s no indication he ever tried to abuse a lawsuit to inject his lunacy into anything. He may be lunatic, but he’s no idiot. And after the Ten Commandments failure, I doubt he’ll risk losing his job again. If he were prone to, this would’ve happened already.
(In fact, were he birther-friendly, he could’ve endorsed them out of court, he could even have legally supported them. However, zilch. Seeing him as the birther’s Great White Hope is foolish birther belief, something that does not merit being taken seriously by us.)
IMO, the kiss of death for this rumour isn’t Moore being involved but the anonymity of the source. If “some whackjob” had actually been told this by Moore, birthers would’ve said something like
“Patriot Heywood Jablomee of Burnt Scrotum, AL, and a delegation of the B.S. Tea Party talked to Roy Moore last Tuesday in his office at the Alabama Supreme Court. Here’s Heywood’s personal account of the discussion: …”
Since that didn’t happen, the whole thing is obviously made up.
(Even worse than Birther Report, most P&E latest articles seem to consist of a single line of “news” followed by a rehash of standard birther talking points. I wonder how many subscribers they still have.)
And if you’re ever in Burnt Scrotum, try to stay away from the barbecue joints.
I can only imagine the painful Yelp reviews.
That’s true. And no matter how many times people have tried to explain what this case is really about, birthers always fall back to what they wish it was about.
There was only one lower court ruling.
OK someone has to say it:
Zullo is not only irrelevant in Alabama he is irrelevant everywhere. 😆
Damn!! You beat me to it.
I’m sure Zullo will find a way to turn even this anticipated debacle into a money-making opportunity.
Would it be more correct to say that the issue before the Court is whether the unique Alabama jurisdiction-stripping statute prevents the courts from entertaining any claims?
Notwithstanding the obvious wisdom of what you’ve said, I reiterate: he is a delusional, end-times, Dominionist theocrat. Predicting the behavior of such a lunatic to a certainty is impossible, and I still put no insane behavior past him. Particularly now that he knows he can get his job back in the next election cycle.
Nailed it.
Absolute worst case scenario is a 7-2 split dismissing/remanding the case with Moore and his faithful sidekick Tom Parker writing some whiney dissent about how they belive that n*gger*, sorry Democrats’, should be “vetted” in some spurious and inventive way a’la Jim Crow laws.
Followed of course by the ever traditional Birfoon screams of how the Regime done got to dem…….. 8-(
There is a Burnt Corn in Alabama.
“The Supreme Court doesn’t give us justice. I am relying on Sheriff Joe for that.”, a birther from BR’s latest story on Alabama.
Thanks, Bob. The article has been corrected.
Both parties argue that the issues before the court are the Secretary of State’s duty and the applicability of the Jurisdiction-Stripping Statute. If the latter applied in this case, then the court would have no jurisdiction to hear the case, preventing the court from looking at the other issue.
The Jurisdiction-Stripping Statute (Ala. Code 17-16-44) prevents the courts from hearing lawsuits about the conduct of elections.
I have updated the article add the question Stern speaks of, and added hyperlinks to some of the briefs.
Shucks! Maybe birthers should search there for a kernel of truth.
Zullo’s affidavit is just another example of Larry Klayman’s chronic abuse of the legal system. A competent lawyer acting in good faith would not have submitted Zullo’s pile of irrelevant and inaccurate information.
This article has been updated to reflect the fact that the Zullo affidavit was submitted by appellants, not in an amicus brief.
A sleight of Zullo: This from his affidavit:Notice that he says “office” not “officer.” The unwashed birther will read it as “officer,” but of course Zullo is not a law enforcement officer.
Welll………………he was an officer on the little New Jersey department (names escapes me at the moment) so I think that’s what he was referring to but you are absolutely correct…..he has never been a sworn (certified) officer in Arizona.
As far as I’ve understood it, a panel of three judges has the case, not the full panel. Which is why even some anti-birthers have theorized that there may be a 2-1 decision in favour of plaintiffs. (Not that it makes a difference because plaintiffs winning this case would not have any birther implications except maybe give them the impression that if they only got one “real” eligibility case in front of Moore, the frog-marching would begin.) And even if Moore went full-tilt birther in his ruling (which I’m still betting against), it wouldn’t have much impact on anything because Moore’s reputation is so tainted it would only get him on more “This Week in Crazy” lists (and possibly some FOX talk shows).
Perhaps that was intentional on Zullo’s part, but given the typos and misspellings that litter the Birthiverse, I think a liberal application of Hanlon’s razor* is appropriate here.
*Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.
Demarest, I believe.
I feel a little vindicated these days. Some centuries ago – when I still was a participant at the FogBow and Mr. Zullo jumped out of his box – I suggested to look into his credentials. People thought it was not worth the struggle.
Yes!! The department with more school crossing guards than patrol officers.
http://www.demarestnj.net/Police.php
I’ve found Zullo doing tricks like that often in spoken text. This one could be a typo, but I don’t think so.
And NO Lieutenants.
I’m with you on that one. I was a ZRYR’er from the beginning.
I have a policy myself of not taking anything a birther says at face value. It saves a lot of trying to explain things that weren’t true to begin with.
Good for them !!
Or detectives. I’ll look for it but there is a report on crime in Demarest that shows virtually no serious crime in the prior ten years (from about now) but, who knows, that leafy suburb – population 5,000, median family income around $150k – could have been a hot bed of crime in the 1990’s and Zullo fought it to standstill and decided to move west.
Oh, wait…..average price of a home for sale in Demarest is $1.5 million.
Indeed! They have their priorities straight.
You people sound like a bunch of junior high girls. Zullo was a commissioned peace officer, and so he should be able to say he is a former police officer just as I do. He obviously dropped the “r” in officer. WOW!! what a CRIME!! You girls got him and by the looks of your previous post, this is the most important reason to ignore hundreds of pages of expert testimony proving Obama was not born in Hawaii. Proving that he is using someone else’s SS# and he never applied with the selective service department. Please tell me where to find your court certified experts. If you have none to back up your statements, then you are just telling unsubstantiated lies. EG Bullshit!!
I just noticed the3 hour time difference. How are things going in the land of Obama?
In the Affidavit, Zullo said “I am” not “I was” or “I am a former.”Nevermind.This isn’t the “land of Obama.” This is the land of critical thinking on claims about Obama.
I have seen hundreds of pages of unscientific nonsense from ciphers on the Internet, but I have never seen any pages of expert testimony say Obama wasn’t born in Hawaii. And don’t try to claim Reed Hayes because he’s never released his report.
In the Farrar case in Georgia, Orly Taitz presented hundreds of pages of testimony, only to have the judge rule that her “experts” were not qualified. If you think you have any evidence that Obama was not born in Hawaii that would be admissible in court, you are sorely mistaken.
Where are my court certified experts? Experts on what? Documents? We have Ivan Zatkovich; he’s testified in court many times.
I have personally obtained Obama’s draft application from the Selective Service, so your claim that he never registered is delusional, and if you think they are covering up for Obama, then explain to me how the same record was released by the Bush Administration in 2008.
Before continuing to make a fool of yourself, do the background reading.
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/debunk/
I am emboldened enough by the posts of others and bored enough with birther nonsense elsewhere today to indulge in a brief pedantic moment myself and to remark that it seems you probably meant say that “there’s nothing you WOULD past him”. Double negatives sometimes sneak up on us and what you did say actually conveys the opposite meaning :insert imaginary smiley:
“To argue with a man who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead.”
– Thomas Paine, The American Crisis No. V (1776)
Of course, I’m hardly one to talk.
I have not been able to confirm that he was, in fact, an officer with the Demarest, NJ police department and how long he worked there. Can you provide details on that? I’m not saying he wasn’t just that it would be interesting to know and get some insights into what he did on a department of about a dozen officers.
You do acknowledge, don’t you, that he isn’t POST certified in Arizona? How about the Lieutenant stuff?
We admit we don’t have any court certified experts. But we do have people who are more knowledgeable on the subjects under consideration than the birthers that former police officer Zullo fell for.
The problem for you is that you don’t understand that there are no pages – hundreds or otherwise – that have been accepted in any court of law that say what you think. There are no “court certified experts” that have proven anything. Zip. Nada.
The person sitting in bovine feces, sir, is you.
Actually, the quote you provided does say “I am a former…”
OK, I screwed up.
I see that Bama Law at the Fogbow said that the Alabama Supreme Court denied Klayman’s request for oral argument in this case, which he says means that there is a pretty good chance that the decision in the case will be released tomorrow.
http://www.thefogbow.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=88&t=8405&start=1625#p597102
Obviously, this case isn’t going anywhere but into the trash bin, but if Roy Moore birfs in the process of tossing the case, we may see the best birfer tears since Judge Malihi issued his ruling in the Georgia ballot challenge over 2 years ago.