[PUBBY]

Rep. Braddock's challenger talks about Wednesday's qualification hearing Wayne Morgan stopped by Paulding.com earlier this evening with a passel of documents and a little fire in his gut as he prepared for his challenge of State Rep. Paulette Braddock's qualifications to run. Click for the PDFwith documents regarding the liens and the hearing. The challenge is based on a handful of liens for unpaid taxes ranging from Cobb County property tax to state taxes taken from her employees paychecks and never remitted and sales taxes ... all dating from 2006. For her benefit, Rep. Braddock was publicizing her endorsement by former Presidential candidate Newt Gingrich and an A+ rating by the Georgia Chamber of Commerce. Asked about these issues on at least one occassion, Ms. Braddock's response has been 'no comment' followed by a smile. Notably, Mr. Morgan received a notice that a payment scheduled regarding the Internal Revenue Service lien/tax debt made in the initial filing had been, in the terms of the Georgia Constitution, been satisfied by a payment plan. The Georgia Constitution bars from holding office those who owe state, local or federal taxes allowing an exception for those who have made arrangements for payment to be judged qualified. LPPT will be attending the meeting scheduled for 9:00 am in Atlanta on July 11. We do not expect an immediate decision from the administrative law court but will report on the event.

Click for RECENT TOPICS click for RECENT TOPICS click for RECENT TOPICS

[Wineguy]

I couldn't have said it better myself.

[Wineguy]

2 hours and counting. Wish me luck.

[WHITEY]

Wayne you are to be commended for exposing Paulette, I wish you the best of luck today in the hearing.
I am also a District # 19 citizen,And,I would also like my Representive to pay up all of her taxes before being eligible to run for this office

[bimbyga]

Wineguy, on 11 July 2012 - 06:12 AM, said:

2 hours and counting. Wish me luck.

i applaud your efforts and hope very much that you are successful - all will be waiting to hear the results

[feelip]

Wineguy, on 11 July 2012 - 06:12 AM, said:

2 hours and counting. Wish me luck.

Okay, I'm slow. Didn't know it was you. Good luck and thank you for trying to sweep the white trash out of our capitol.

Win or lose I would like to buy you a burger and a beer for your efforts.

[lowrider]

Dude! I didn't know this was you either.
Good luck and way to go!

[Wineguy]

lowrider, on 11 July 2012 - 07:25 AM, said:

Dude! I didn't know this was you either.
Good luck and way to go!

I tried to keep it on the down low as long as I could. Mrs. Braddockjust arrived at the court this should be fun.

[dana]

Best of luck to you, I commend you for doing this! Thank you.

[lowrider]

Quote

For her benefit, Rep. Braddock was publicizing her endorsement by former Presidential candidate Newt Gingrich and an A+ rating by the Georgia Chamber of Commerce.

Asked about these issues on at least one occassion, Ms. Braddock's response has been 'no comment' followed by a smile.

It's a shame, but that's all she can do. She has no ability to speak intelligently and she can't think without her "handlers". I think she's oblivious to the debt she's in because of the folks that surround her,'they have probably assured her they will take care of it, and I'm sure they are.

An endorsement from Newt? and an A+ rating from the CC? How? Can you buy ratings?

Politicians are so corrupt. All of them.

[Wineguy]

4 minutes, my heart is racing. David vs Goliath.

[Animal]

It's sad to imagine her in office,but the local GOP loves her and supports her. Virgina and company thanks for you supporting a criminal. People we can't allow this convict to be re-elected,what message are we sending? The dark side is showing there power now we deserve better.

[bimbyga]

Animal, on 11 July 2012 - 08:26 AM, said:

It's sad to imagine her in office,but the local GOP loves her and supports her. Virgina and company thanks for you supporting a criminal. People we can't allow this convict to be re-elected,what message are we sending? The dark side is showing there power now we deserve better.

not everyone in the local gop "loves her" - there are plenty of us who want her gone, gone, gone!!! she has her "posse" but i don't think they can help her now Melissa Morrison is my choice.

[NewsJunky]

Wineguy, on 11 July 2012 - 07:56 AM, said:

4 minutes, my heart is racing. David vs Goliath.

Let us know how it turns out.

[Animal]

Thank you,there is hope and by your reply is a good example. If every one was more into electing the person and less into the party.There is good people out there that may lack experience but are well grounded and love Paulding.

And welcome to P.Com

[bimbyga]

Animal, on 11 July 2012 - 08:56 AM, said:

Thank you,there is hope and by your reply is a good example. If every one was more into electing the person and less into the party.There is good people out there that may lack experience but are well grounded and love Paulding.

And welcome to P.Com

definitely it is the person - not the R or D after someone's name on the ballot - it's sad to say, but if you asked the majority of folks who voted for her in the last election, they couldn't tell you her name, only that they voted for the "R"

[mrnn]

I had no idea this was your work either, Wineguy! Very well done, sir. I can only hope your efforts are fruitful. You present yourself well....you should consider a run in the future.


mrnn

[Wineguy]

Stay tuned. It was bittersweet. I will say she will be on the ballot, but she did nothing to clear herself.

[mrnn]

Wineguy, on 11 July 2012 - 10:28 AM, said:

I will say she will be on the ballot

unbelievable. truly.


mrnn

[bimbyga]

mrnn, on 11 July 2012 - 10:43 AM, said:

unbelievable. truly.


mrnn

so what is next, this just can't be happening - if any of us did this we would be locked up!!

[WHITEY]

bimbyga, on 11 July 2012 - 10:47 AM, said:

so what is next, this just can't be happening - if any of us did this we would be locked up!!

It is time to ban together, with an all out assault in District 19 to make sure all of the voters in this District know all the details of Paulette.
Go door to door in your neighborhood TODAY and campaign against her.

[Wineguy]

The case was thrown out based on the technicality that it was 14 days past qualification at noon on the day I filed, I filed at 4:57pm which based on a former case has to be dismissed. We have the full recording of the hearing in which Paulette's attorney uses the defense that any liens and taxes owed by her former company that is no longer in business is not reflected upon her. Even if I have documents showing she owes it, without a court order saying she has to pay it, she isn't responsible for it. I encourage ALL constituents of District 19 to listen to the entire court hearing and to evaluate both sides based on what is presented. Her defense first and foremost tried and discredit me by using my affiliation with Paulding.com and my support for Mellisa Morrison on Facebook. I took the stance however that I was in support of Melissa, but I am in support of either candidate as long as it was not Mrs. Braddock. It will be a great listen for anyone who wants to hear it. I hope it will be published sometime soon.

As for what is next.....I hope both candidates choose to voice why they are the clear choice and both also choose to inform the voters why the current representative has approached the tax and legal system in ways that we as voters would find unbecoming.

As for me, I am a 29 year old technologically savvy constituent who will use the advances in social media and the media at large to share my support for Melissa and to help others in the district make informed choices on the coming primary election.

This post has been edited by Wineguy: 11 July 2012 - 11:05 AM

[Glassdogs]

Wineguy, on 11 July 2012 - 10:28 AM, said:

Stay tuned. It was bittersweet. I will say she will be on the ballot, but she did nothing to clear herself.

nevermind

This post has been edited by Glassdogs: 11 July 2012 - 11:08 AM

[Wineguy]

Glassdogs, on 11 July 2012 - 11:06 AM, said:

Nevermind.

Its all good.

This post has been edited by Wineguy: 11 July 2012 - 11:09 AM

[mrnn]

Wineguy, on 11 July 2012 - 11:04 AM, said:

The case was thrown out based on the technicality that it was 14 days past qualification at noon on the day I filed, I filed at 4:57pm which based on a former case has to be dismissed.

So what in the hell does that have to do with the fact that these issues exist? Does the state election board not proactively monitor candidacies for eligibility or do they entirely rely upon private citizens to do their job for them?

I seriously cannot believe the ineptitude displayed by our state today. What a trucking embarrassment.


mrnn

[bimbyga]

Wineguy, on 11 July 2012 - 11:04 AM, said:

The case was thrown out based on the technicality that it was 14 days past qualification at noon on the day I filed, I filed at 4:57pm which based on a former case has to be dismissed. We have the full recording of the hearing in which Paulette's attorney uses the defense that any liens and taxes owed by her former company that is no longer in business is not reflected upon her. Even if I have documents showing she owes it, without a court order saying she has to pay it, she isn't responsible for it. I encourage ALL constituents of District 19 to listen to the entire court hearing and to evaluate both sides based on what is presented. Her defense first and foremost tried and discredit me by using my affiliation with Paulding.com and my support for Mellisa Morrison on Facebook. I took the stance however that I was in support of Melissa, but I am in support of either candidate as long as it was not Mrs. Braddock. It will be a great listen for anyone who wants to hear it. I hope it will be published sometime soon.

As for what is next.....I hope both candidates choose to voice why they are the clear choice and both also choose to inform the voters why the current representative has approached the tax and legal system in ways that we as voters would find unbecoming.

As for me, I am a 29 year old technologically savvy constituent who will use the advances in social media and the media at large to share my support for Melissa and to help others in the district make informed choices on the coming primary election.

so it's not that she isn't guilty (which she is) but it was the timing of when you filed? that stinks - and you can be sure that Virginia and company were in on this - she isn't qualified to hold office now or to run - what was the judge thinking - technicality or not

[Wineguy]

mrnn, on 11 July 2012 - 11:20 AM, said:

So what in the hell does that have to do with the fact that these issues exist? Does the state election board not proactively monitor candidacies for eligibility or do they entirely rely upon private citizens to do their job for them?

I seriously cannot believe the ineptitude displayed by our state today. What a trucking embarrassment.


mrnn

Based on what I found today, candidacy is relied completely on knowledgable citizens. No proof is required to show you are in good standing and no research is conducted either. You will hear when the audio is released that the judge felt the case should be held, but by law she couldn't let it continue.

[cobb transplant]

mrnn, on 11 July 2012 - 10:43 AM, said:

unbelievable. truly.


mrnn

you want to know what is sickening? you are on another post cheering the fact that Carruth lied about his residency and remains qualified because the law allows "wink, wink, nudge, nudge" on residence answers. Yet here, you show disgust at this kangaroo court's antics. The fact that either of these politicians has any support at all is depressing. It's great evidence to show that the populace has reduced itself to treating political races as if they are reality t.v. "hurray! my favorite character just voted your favorite character off of the island! I win! I win!" Uh, no...we all loose by empowering a group of common thieves. Well, not everyone...Carruth and Braddock will do quite well for themselves.

[PUBBY]

Wineguy:

Sorry to hear that the technicality resulted in the challenge being thrown out. I hope there is a way to appeal as the intent of the law - barring people from office who feel they are above the law and show it by ignoring the taxes they owe while our tax dollars go to pay them.

I did get that the discussion involved the statement from her or her attorney that all the debt owed was assigned to the company which might open another avenue regarding the March 2012 backdating of her 2011 dissolution of her company. The point being if the debts were all assigned to that corporation, then there may be some sanctions regarding her stipulating in the dissolution papers that all debts of the dissolved corporation have been satisfied.

pubby

[Wineguy]

cobb transplant, on 11 July 2012 - 11:27 AM, said:

you want to know what is sickening? you are on another post cheering the fact that Carruth lied about his residency and remains qualified because the law allows "wink, wink, nudge, nudge" on residence answers. Yet here, you show disgust at this kangaroo court's antics. The fact that either of these politicians has any support at all is depressing. It's great evidence to show that the populace has reduced itself to treating political races as if they are reality t.v. "hurray! my favorite character just voted your favorite character off of the island! I win! I win!" Uh, no...we all loose by empowering a group of common thieves. Well, not everyone...Carruth and Braddock will do quite well for themselves.

I do not know him nor do I speak for him, but I do know that the two challenges were in two different ball parks in scale of offense. Bill Carruth was challenged on he didn't live where he said he did, not breaking any actual laws. The D19 Rep was being challenged on owing large sums of money to the Federal, State, and Local governments while not addressing any of them until challenged.

[mrnn]

cobb transplant, on 11 July 2012 - 11:27 AM, said:

you want to know what is sickening? you are on another post cheering the fact that Carruth lied about his residency and remains qualified because the law allows "wink, wink, nudge, nudge" on residence answers. Yet here, you show disgust at this kangaroo court's antics. The fact that either of these politicians has any support at all is depressing. It's great evidence to show that the populace has reduced itself to treating political races as if they are reality t.v. "hurray! my favorite character just voted your favorite character off of the island! I win! I win!" Uh, no...we all loose by empowering a group of common thieves. Well, not everyone...Carruth and Braddock will do quite well for themselves.

Bill Carruth had a fair hearing and was found to be NOT in violation of candidacy rules. Ms. Braddock managed to escape a hearing entirely based on a ridiculous technicality. Quite a difference.


mrnn

[WHITEY]

cobb transplant, on 11 July 2012 - 11:27 AM, said:

you want to know what is sickening? you are on another post cheering the fact that Carruth lied about his residency and remains qualified because the law allows "wink, wink, nudge, nudge" on residence answers. Yet here, you show disgust at this kangaroo court's antics. The fact that either of these politicians has any support at all is depressing. It's great evidence to show that the populace has reduced itself to treating political races as if they are reality t.v. "hurray! my favorite character just voted your favorite character off of the island! I win! I win!" Uh, no...we all loose by empowering a group of common thieves. Well, not everyone...Carruth and Braddock will do quite well for themselves.

Only if we let them, If we can get a grass roots effort to defeat these two then justice will prevail.
I challenge all of those that disagree with these two rulings today to get involved and go door to door in your neighborhood and campaign against the liars and tax cheats

[Wineguy]

PUBBY, on 11 July 2012 - 11:32 AM, said:

Wineguy:

Sorry to hear that the technicality resulted in the challenge being thrown out. I hope there is a way to appeal as the intent of the law - barring people from office who feel they are above the law and show it by ignoring the taxes they owe while our tax dollars go to pay them.

I did get that the discussion involved the statement from her or her attorney that all the debt owed was assigned to the company which might open another avenue regarding the March 2012 backdating of her 2011 dissolution of her company. The point being if the debts were all assigned to that corporation, then there may be some sanctions regarding her stipulating in the dissolution papers that all debts of the dissolved corporation have been satisfied.

pubby

I agree completely. There are many venues to go down here, but unfortunately as the attorney also mentioned, this is a very time sensitive matter and we are essentially out of time. I am not versed as to if there is even the possibility of appeal, but even if there were it would be well into the voting and by law it is too late to bring any new challenges. It would take a well versed attorney to find a way to get this appealed and to find grounds to have a challenge brought about this far after the official challenge date.

[cobb transplant]

Wineguy, on 11 July 2012 - 11:32 AM, said:

I do not know him nor do I speak for him, but I do know that the two challenges were in two different ball parks in scale of offense. Bill Carruth was challenged on he didn't live where he said he did, not breaking any actual laws. The D19 Rep was being challenged on owing large sums of money to the Federal, State, and Local governments while not addressing any of them until challenged.

think so? try writing a false address on any gov't form yourself and see what happens. Google "Jessica Colotl" if you need an example...it's a felony in Georgia (for some people). Common thieves - that's the similarity.

[surepip]

mrnn, on 11 July 2012 - 11:34 AM, said:

Bill Carruth had a fair hearing and was found to be NOT in violation of candidacy rules. Ms. Braddock managed to escape a hearing entirely based on a ridiculous technicality. Quite a difference.


mrnn

And she still owes the State $55,000+ and Cobb County $17,000+.

She claims on her dissolution forms for Atlanta Marketing Systems, Inc. that "arrangements have been made to satisfy all obligations and debts", and that is now, and was then a blatant lie. A pdf of that dissolution form is attached.

In addition she stuck other non-secured creditors for thousands and thousands of dollars using the same tactic. She hid behind bankruptcy protection, filed 12-27-2007 for over a year, then requested the bankruptcy be dismissed, which it was in January 2009. She continued operating her business during 2009, 2010, 2011. Then she filed the dissolution forms lying about what she still owed and possible liens and judgments not to mention all of the other creditors.

By the Article II, Section II, Paragraph III of the Constitution of the State of Georgia Braddock is ineligible to hold office or run for office.

Attached File(s)

•  Atl Marketing Dissolution.pdf (158.72K)
  Number of downloads: 43

[cobb transplant]

surepip, on 11 July 2012 - 11:51 AM, said:

And she still owes the State $55,000+ and Cobb County $17,000+.

She claims on her dissolution forms for Atlanta Marketing Systems, Inc. that "arrangements have been made to satisfy all obligations and debts", and that is now, and was then a blatant lie. A pdf of that dissolution form is attached.

In addition she stuck other non-secured creditors for thousands and thousands of dollars using the same tactic. She hid behind bankruptcy protection, filed 12-27-2007 for over a year, then requested the bankruptcy be dismissed, which it was in January 2009. She continued operating her business during 2009, 2010, 2011. Then she filed the dissolution forms lying about what she still owed and possible liens and judgments not to mention all of the other creditors.

By the Article II, Section II, Paragraph III of the Constitution of the State of Georgia Braddock is ineligible to hold office or run for office.

Hurray! My character voted your character off the island!!! I win, I win!!

[LisaC]

Wineguy, on 11 July 2012 - 11:35 AM, said:

I agree completely. There are many venues to go down here, but unfortunately as the attorney also mentioned, this is a very time sensitive matter and we are essentially out of time. I am not versed as to if there is even the possibility of appeal, but even if there were it would be well into the voting and by law it is too late to bring any new challenges. It would take a well versed attorney to find a way to get this appealed and to find grounds to have a challenge brought about this far after the official challenge date.

You can appeal. From the Official Code of Georgia (OCGA 21-2-5(e)):

The elector filing the challenge or the candidate challenged shall have the right to appeal the decision of the Secretary of State by filing a petition in the Superior Court of Fulton County within ten days after the entry of the final decision by the Secretary of State. The filing of the petition shall not itself stay the decision of the Secretary of State; however, the reviewing court may order a stay upon appropriate terms for good cause shown. As soon as possible after service of the petition, the Secretary of State shall transmit the original or a certified copy of the entire record of the proceedings under review to the reviewing court. The review shall be conducted by the court without a jury and shall be confined to the record. The court shall not substitute its judgment for that of the Secretary of State as to the weight of the evidence on questions of fact. The court may affirm the decision or remand the case for further proceedings. The court may reverse or modify the decision if substantial rights of the appellant have been prejudiced because the findings, inferences, conclusions, or decisions of the Secretary of State are:

(1) In violation of the Constitution or laws of this state;

(2) In excess of the statutory authority of the Secretary of State;

(3) Made upon unlawful procedures;

(4) Affected by other error of law;

(5) Clearly erroneous in view of the reliable, probative, and substantial evidence on the whole record; or

(6) Arbitrary or capricious or characterized by an abuse of discretion or a clearly unwarranted exercise of discretion.

An aggrieved party may obtain a review of any final judgment of the superior court by the Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court, as provided by law.

This post has been edited by LisaC: 11 July 2012 - 12:01 PM

[WHITEY]

Pubbu are you going to provide the video of the hearing?

[Wineguy]

WHITEY, on 11 July 2012 - 12:34 PM, said:

Pubbu are you going to provide the video of the hearing?

The hearing was not allowed to be video recorded due to a lengthy request process prior. However there will be audio provided I believe. The court records all hearings and allows audio of it to be released to the public.

[PUBBY]

I hope to have the audio of the proceedings. I've got a picture or two of Representative Braddock to put with it.

pubby