Klayman v Judicial Watch Miller Deposition Pt. 2

8/12/2019 Klayman v Judicial Watch Miller Deposition Pt. 2

1/27

GEORGE MILLER - 5/23/2014

1-800-325-3376 www.merrillcorp.com/law

Merrill Corporation - New York

Page 65

1 didn't tell the whole story about what went on at all.

2 She didn't also mention that the ex-wife had

3 refused visitation rights to Larry Klayman, which, under

4 the Hartman case, he was perfectly justified. She

5 didn't mention that he had given her a house; that had

6 he paid over a million dollars already; that these

7 children were living comfortably in upper middle class

8 circumstances, and they were hardly starving. Instead,

9 giving the impression that he's a heartless bastard, who

10 is starving his kids. Excuse me. That's BS.

11 Q That's the way you read it, correct?

12 A That's the way a lot of people read it, sir.

13 MR. KLAYMAN: That's not what he testified to.

14 BY MR. KRESS:

15 Q Okay. Let me ask you some more questions. And

16 I can stay as long as I want, but I would ask you to

17 please try to direct your answers to my questions.

18 Are there any written documents in which you

19 stated or suggested that you were not going contribute

20 money to Larry Klayman's Florida Obama efforts because

21 of what was read on Orly Taitz's website?

22 A I don't know.

23 Q Okay.

24 A There was various e-mails going back and forth.25 There might have been something. I can't say for sure.

Case 1:13-cv-20610-CMA Document 127-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/27/2014 Page67 of243GEORGE MILLER - 5/23/2014



Page 66

1 Q You guys didn't fire Larry Klayman, did you?

2 A No, we didn't.

3 Q Okay. He continued to represent Mr. Voeltz, as4 the client, and the group, as the customer, as you put

5 it, correct?

6 A Correct.

7 Q Do you know -- let's me ask you this.

8 Did -- did anyone, to your knowledge, based on

9 your interactions with the group, did anyone know, prior

10 to reading Orly Taitz's website, that Larry Klayman had


2/27

11 been indicted, criminally indicted, for failure to pay

12 child support?

13 A I can't tell you what other people knew. I

14 didn't know it, and no one told me that he had been

15 indicted. So, no. We are not aware of that.

16 Q Okay. So, you have no personal knowledge based

17 on anything someone told you or wrote to you, correct?

18 A Correct.

19 Q Okay. For instance, you know, Sam Sewell never

20 said, "Hey, did you know Larry Klayman has been indicted

21 for failure to pay child support?"

22 A He didn't use the word "indicted." All we knew

23 was about he was behind on his child support. That was

24 common knowledge.

25 Q Okay. Do you know what impact the indictment




Page 67

1 had on donors as opposed to this comment about -- this

2 alleged comment from -- that's on the website about

3 conviction?

4 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Assumes facts not

5 testified to. Not in evidence.

6 BY MR. KRESS:

7 Q You can answer.8 MR. KLAYMAN: Compound question.

9 THE WITNESS: Repeat the questions

10 individually, please.

11 BY MR. KRESS:

12 Q Sure. Sure.

13 Do you know if Larry Klayman's indictment for

14 failure to pay child support impacted donors with

15 respect to the Florida Obama litigation?

16 MR. KLAYMAN: Do you understand the question,

17 George?

18 THE WITNESS: Excuse me?19 BY MR. KRESS:

20 Q If you don't --

21 MR. KLAYMAN: Can the court reporter read back

22 the question?

23 THE WITNESS: Based on the feedback we heard,

24 yes, it definitely impacted donors. In fact, there's

25 even evidence here and comments on Orly Taitz's website.


3/27



Merrill Corporation - New YorkPage 68

1 BY MR. KRESS:

2 Q That the indictment had an impact?

3 MR. KLAYMAN: No. Objection. That's not what

4 he testified to. Not in evidence.

5 BY MR. KRESS:

6 Q That's what the -- let me make sure we are

7 clear. I don't want there to be any confusion.

8 Did Larry Klayman's indictment for failure to

9 pay child support have an impact on donors with respect

10 to the Florida Obama litigation?

11 A Yes.

12 MR. KLAYMAN: He's asking about --

13 BY MR. KRESS:

14 Q Okay. Thank you.

15 And the effect would be a negative effect,

16 correct?

17 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Calls for

18 characterization.

19 MR. KRESS: It does.

20 THE WITNESS: The sum total of all these

21 comments had an effect. I cannot pars how much was for

22 the indictment or how much about the lie about the23 conviction and how much about the misleading and the

24 other things. No, I can't. How can I possibly break

25 that down into portions? I don't know.




Page 69

1 BY MR. KRESS:2 Q Okay. Understood.

3 In fact, if we go to the next page of the

4 article, uhm -- and just so we are clear, the top it

5 says "page 3 of 12" -- there's also reference there to,

6 uhm, a Florida Bar grievance against Larry Klayman,

7 correct?

8 A Correct.


4/27

9 Q Do you know what impact, if any, that the --

10 let me strike that. Let me ask it this way.

11 Prior to reading Orly Taitz's website article,

12 dated February 23, 2012, did you know that Larry Klayman

13 had been the subject of a Florida Bar grievance?

14 A Yes.

15 Q Okay. Did donors know that, other donors, if

16 you know?

17 A They -- they did, but at the time, we contacted

18 Larry to get the details on that. And the way that the

19 blogs wrote it made it appear like he just stiffed this

20 gal for 25,000 and walked away, and it turns out that

21 wasn't the case at all. He performed substantial work

22 for her. She had many other problems. She was a very,

23 you know, very tough client to work with; that Larry

24 worked with her, visited her in jail, performed services

25 for her. It was only when she was transferred to




Page 70

1 Orlando that he wasn't representing her anymore, by her

2 choice, not by his, by the way. But the way this is

3 presented is like she stiffed him (sic).

4 Now, I'm sure that your Mrs. Ruffley knew that;

5 yet, she characterized Larry as a deadbeat in doing6 that, which was very, very misleading.

7 Q Do you know if this comment about the Florida

8 Bar case came from Connie Ruffley or from Orly Taitz?

9 Do you know one way or the other?

10 MR. KLAYMAN: Document speaks for itself.

11 Objection.

12 BY MR. KRESS:

13 Q I'm just asking if you know. Well, let me ask

14 it this way.

15 Did you hear the conversation between Connie

16 Ruffley and Orly Taitz?17 A No. I wasn't there. All I have is her

18 characterization of what happened there. Presumably,

19 you deposed Ms. Ruffley, and Larry has, too.

20 Q Okay. Do you know what, if any, impact the

21 comments regarding the Florida Bar complaint had on

22 donors with respect to Larry's Florida Obama litigation?

23 A No, I don't.


5/27

24 MR. KLAYMAN: Asked and answered.

25 THE WITNESS: No.

Case 1:13-cv-20610-CMA Document 127-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/27/2014 Page72 of243

GEORGE MILLER - 5/23/20141-800-325-3376 www.merrillcorp.com/law


Page 71

1 BY MR. KRESS:

2 Q Okay. Do you think it had a negative impact on

3 potential donors?

4 A Well --


6 speculation.

7 THE WITNESS: The way it was presented on --

8 MR. KLAYMAN: George, hold on, hold on, hold

9 on. George, let me -- objection. Calls for

10 speculation.

11 You can answer.

12 BY MR. KRESS:

13 Q You can answer.

14 MR. KLAYMAN: I have to make an objection as to

15 form. Okay.

16 THE WITNESS: Okay.

17 MR. KLAYMAN: And substance.

18 Go ahead. Go ahead.

19 THE WITNESS: Can I measure the impact, no?

20 BY MR. KRESS:21 Q Okay. Do you believe it had some impact?

22 A Do I believe it had impact?

23 Q The Florida Bar complaint?

24 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Relevancy.

25 BY MR. KRESS:




1 Q You can answer.

2 MR. KLAYMAN: You can answer, George.

3 THE WITNESS: I can answer. Okay. You know,

4 it did have an impact on us when we were first

5 investigating it until we found out what really

6 happened. But this information, given, in itself,


6/27

7 without a balanced approach, is obviously -- I would

8 think it would have a negative impact on donors.

9 BY MR. KRESS:

10 Q Okay.


12 speculation. Move to strike.

13 BY MR. KRESS:

14 Q Prior to retaining Larry Klayman, did you know

15 that he had been -- or that he had sued his own mother?

16 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Relevancy. That's

17 not even part of this case. I mean, it's -- you can

18 answer, George.

19 Relevancy.

20 BY MR. KRESS:

21 Q Did you know he sued his mother?

22 A I read the descriptions on the blog, and then I

23 researched it and found out what really happened.

24 Q Okay. Did you -- prior to hiring Larry

25 Klayman, did you know that an Ohio magistrate -- and I'm




Page 73

1 not suggesting this happened by any means -- that an

2 Ohio magistrate had found that Larry Klayman had

3 improperly touched his children?4 A No. I only found that out --

5 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Relevancy.

6 THE WITNESS: I only found out later.

7 BY MR. KRESS:

8 Q When did you find that out?

9 A I can't remember the exact date, but it was

10 well after we had engaged him. And again, that was also

11 -- turned out to be a lie also.

12 Q Okay. But that wasn't a lie from --

13 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. You are not to

14 characterize what the magistrate did. It speaks for15 itself.

16 MR. KRESS: I haven't even asked the question.

17 MR. KLAYMAN: I can see where you are going,

18 Mr. Kress. It's one of your calculated ways to twist.

19 MR. KRESS: Please stop.

20 MR. KLAYMAN: Your comments are inappropriate.

21 Ask the appropriate questions, and you will get an


7/27

22 objection.

23 MR. KRESS: If I can just ask a question before

24 I get an objection, I'd be --

25 MR. KLAYMAN: Well, I have to -- I have to

Case 1:13-cv-20610-CMA Document 127-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/27/2014 Page

75 of243GEORGE MILLER - 5/23/2014



Page 74

1 object.

2 BY MR. KRESS:

3 Q Let's back it up.

4 At some point, you learned that a magistrate

5 had made that finding about Larry Klayman and his

6 children?


8 BY MR. KRESS:

9 Q Correct?

10 A At some point, yes.

11 Q Okay. Do you remember how soon after retaining

12 Larry Klayman, you learned that?

13 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. That assumes facts

14 not in evidence, not testified to.

15 THE WITNESS: I can't remember the exact timing

16 anymore. It was, like, years ago.

17 BY MR. KRESS:

18 Q Okay. Was it, uhm, within a couple months, if19 you know?

20 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. It's indefinite as to

21 time. You haven't said the time, and he just said he

22 doesn't know the time.

23 BY MR. KRESS:

24 Q Was it before Larry Klayman issued his bill on

25 July 23, 2012?




Page 75

1 A Most likely. I can't say for sure. Probably

2 was, though.

3 Q Okay. From what source did you learn that

4 Larry Klayman -- that an Ohio magistrate had made that


8/27


9/27

20 BY MR. KRESS:

21 Q Whose blog did you read this information on

22 about the -- about the contact with the children?

23 A I can't remember exactly anymore.

24 Q Okay. It wasn't attributed to Judicial Watch

25 in any way, was it?




Page 77

1 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. That is facts not

2 testified to. He said he can't remember. So,

3 consequently, how are you able to ask him that question,

4 Mr. Kress? That's an improper question.

5 BY MR. KRESS:

6 Q Well, did you --

7 A I already told you I didn't remember where. I

8 understand what you're trying to accomplish. You're

9 doing everything you can to protect your organization,

10 and that's your job, but I really don't know, sir.

11 Q That's fine.

12 At that time, you had already -- well, we will

13 leave that for now.

14 So, you are not aware of any documents in which

15 -- well, strike that. Let me start again.

16 Are you aware of any written documents in which17 a donor stated or potential donor stated that he or she

18 would not be contributing to Larry Klayman's Florida

19 Obama Challenge because of what was stated on Orly

20 Taitz's website?

21 Please, don't answer for him.

22 Are you aware of any written comments?

23 A I had received --

24 MR. KLAYMAN: My objection is documents speak

25 for themselves.





Page 78

1 Go ahead, George. Go ahead and answer.

2 THE WITNESS: I received e-mails to that


10/27

3 effect. I received phone calls to that effect. I had

4 received calls that, quote, Larry is damaged goods.

5 When someone is damaged goods and he's a lawyer and has

6 to trust the public, that makes it very hard to raise

7 money, indeed.

8 Our job became almost impossible after that.

9 And the donations went off to a trickle. You can

10 correlate the donations with the different announcements

11 and things that went on. That's a matter of fact. I

12 did not save all those documents because I never thought

13 I would be sitting here today doing a deposition on it.

14 BY MR. KRESS:

15 Q Okay. So, you don't -- you don't have in your

16 possession any documents which state that donors would

17 not be donating because of comments on the Orly Taitz

18 website?

19 A I might. I don't know. I could search. It's

20 possible.

21 Q You haven't given any to Mr. Klayman?

22 A I don't remember what I might have sent him

23 back in 2012. I don't recall. I might have.

24 Q Okay. All right. You said someone had said

25 that Larry Klayman was damaged goods.




1 Do you remember who that was?

2 A No. I've had so many conversations, so much

3 e-mail, but that was the general tenor of what happened

4 after that. There were people that didn't want to use

5 him after that. There were people that slowed down or

6 stopped their contributions. There were people that

7 didn't voice the same level of vocal support that didn't

8 want to be associated with him because of all those

9 things. Yes.

10 Q When you say all those -- when you say "all11 those things," what are "all those things"?

12 A Well, basically negative things that come out;

13 especially things like Mrs. Ruffley's statement. This

14 was the worst one of all because it came from the

15 organization that he founded, from something that has

16 high credibility in the conservative community. So, it

17 was the most damaging statement of anything that could


11/27

18 possibly happen.

19 If Obama, himself, got up and said something,

20 it would not have been as bad as this, coming from our

21 supposed ally.

22 MR. KRESS: Move to strike.

23 BY MR. KRESS:

24 Q But there were -- there were other things

25 besides the conviction comment, correct?




Page 80

1 MR. KLAYMAN: Ask and answered.

2 MR. KRESS: No. Also the indictment -- please,

3 I haven't even finished my question.

4 BY MR. KRESS:

5 Q Was the indictment --

6 MR. KLAYMAN: Motion to strike.

7 BY MR. KRESS:

8 Q -- also one of the negative things that was out

9 there?

10 MR. KLAYMAN: Ask and answered. We've now been

11 over this several times. Asked and answered.

12 BY MR. KRESS:


14 A Probably.15 Q Okay. Was the --

16 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Move to strike.

17 Calls for speculation. Go on.

18 BY MR. KRESS:

19 Q Was the finding from the Ohio magistrate about

20 touching the children also one of those negative things

21 that impacted --


23 speculation.

24 THE WITNESS: That came out later. So, I don't

25 recall that was an issue then, really. I'm just -- it'sCase 1:13-cv-20610-CMA Document 127-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/27/2014 Page82 of243GEORGE MILLER - 5/23/2014



Page 81


12/27

1 just the icing on the cake, I guess. But that's just

2 speculation, like he says.

3 BY MR. KRESS:

4 Q Okay. But the Florida Bar issue was also out

5 there, correct, at the time?

6 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Asked and answered.

7 Calls for speculation.

8 THE WITNESS: Presented the way it was

9 presented here, it was very unbalanced. So it had more

10 negative effect than it did to the people who had been

11 fully informed. There was a few people, who were very

12 informed. There are large masses of people who only got

13 this propaganda, which is far more negative than seeing

14 the whole situation.

15 BY MR. KRESS:

16 Q Okay. Uhm... going back to Exhibit 14, I'm

17 going to refer you again to page 2 of 12, and then I

18 want to also refer you to Exhibit 2.

19 MR. KLAYMAN: Please do one at a time so as not

20 to be confused.

21 MR. KRESS: I'll ask the questions.

22 MR. KLAYMAN: I'll have a continuing objection.

23 MR. KRESS: Okay.

24 THE WITNESS: Which one, 14 or 2?

25 BY MR. KRESS:




Page 82

1 Q Okay. Look at that -- look at the last

2 paragraph --

3 A 14 or 2? Which exhibit?

4 Q 14.

5 A 14, okay.

6 Q 14. Look at the last paragraph, which starts

7 with: "Larry Klayman, 60, of Los Angeles, California."

8 Let's do it this way, since Mr. Klayman will probably9 object.

10 Can you, please, read for me into the record

11 the last paragraph of page 2 of 12 on Exhibit 14?

12 MR. KLAYMAN: If you are going to ask him to

13 read a portion of a document, then I'm going to ask him

14 to read the whole document because that's a distortion

15 of the document. So, objection.


13/27

16 BY MR. KRESS:

17 Q I guess, let's -- because I want to get out of

18 here before it's too late, is -- take a look for

19 yourself, just read paragraph -- the last paragraph of 2

20 of 12. Let me know when you are done.

21 A Done.

22 Q Okay. Then go to Exhibit 2.

23

24 (Exhibit 2 identified.)

25




Page 83

1 A Got it.

2 Q And read what's -- what's labeled as, uhm,

3 paragraph 1 to yourself.

4 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. The document speaks

5 for itself. Go ahead. I'll object again. And wait for

6 my objection, Mr. Miller.

7 THE WITNESS: Okay. Where am I on this now?

8 Am I answering it or not?

9 BY MR. KRESS:

10 Q Okay. Here's the question.

11 Isn't paragraph 1 on Exhibit 2 identical to

12 paragraph the last paragraph on page 2 of 12 on13 Exhibit 14?

14 MR. KLAYMAN: Don't answer that. The document

15 speaks for itself.

16

17 (Witness instructed not to answer.)

18

19 MR. KRESS: You are telling the witness not to

20 answer that question?

21 MR. KLAYMAN: Correct. The document speaks for

22 itself. I mean -- what is the issue here, Doug?

23 MR. KRESS: It's Mr. Kress.24 MR. KLAYMAN: You know, the documents speak for

25 themselves.




14/27


Page 84

1 BY MR. KRESS:

2 Q Let me ask you this. Exhibit 2. Exhibit 2

3 appears to be a press release from the Cuyahoga County

4 Prosecutor, February 3, 2012.

5 Have you ever seen this press release before?

6 A Not until this -- not until these proceedings,

7 no.

8 Q Not until the lawsuit?

9 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection.

10 THE WITNESS: Not until right now.

11 MR. KRESS: Okay. That's what I'm trying to

12 clarify what he means by "these proceedings."

13 MR. KLAYMAN: You -- you weren't trying to

14 clarify. That was a very improper way to try to elicit

15 something and not giving him a chance to testify. Cute,

16 but not correct.

17 BY MR. KRESS:

18 Q What did you mean by "these proceedings,"

19 Mr. Miller?

20 A Excuse me?

21 Q When you said "these proceedings," what did you

22 mean by "these proceedings"?

23 A Well, the deposition.


25 MR. KLAYMAN: You should have asked the





Page 85

1 question that way the first time, Mr. Kress. That's why

2 I have to object.

3 MR. KRESS: It meant the same thing.

4 MR. KLAYMAN: It didn't mean the same thing.

5 And I object and move to strike.

6 BY MR. KRESS:7 Q Based on what you see here, doesn't it appear

8 that Orly Taitz obtained the last paragraph of page 2 of

9 12 from this press release?


11 speculation. And I'm not going to have him sit here

12 look at every single word. The documents speak for

13 themselves.


15/27


16/27

GEORGE MILLER - 5/23/2014



Page 87

1 was, like, a couple years ago. And only more recently,

2 he asked me if I --

3 MR. KLAYMAN: You are not to get into

4 substance, George; just that you had the conversations.

5 THE WITNESS: Excuse me?

6 MR. KLAYMAN: Attorney-client privilege here.

7 There's an attorney-client privilege. I'm going to make

8 an objection. You are not to get into the substance of

9 our conversations.

10 THE WITNESS: Okay.

11 BY MR. KRESS:

12 Q I'm asking you what the substance of the

13 conversation was.

14 MR. KLAYMAN: And I'm going to instruct you not

15 to answer as attorney-client privilege.

16


18

19 BY MR. KRESS:

20 Q What was the substance of the conversation

21 with Larry Klayman?

22 MR. KLAYMAN: Instruct you not to answer.

23


25Case 1:13-cv-20610-CMA Document 127-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/27/2014 Page89 of243GEORGE MILLER - 5/23/2014



Page 88

1 BY MR. KRESS:

2 Q Are you going to follow that instruction?

3 A Well, would you listen to your attorney?

4 Q So Mr. Klayman is your attorney?5 A That's what you told me before, right?

6 Q I didn't tell you that. But is Mr. Klayman

7 your attorney?

8 MR. KLAYMAN: For purposes of the deposition.

9 MR. KRESS: I would like to hear it from the

10 witness.

11 BY MR. KRESS:


17/27

12 Q Is Larry Klayman your attorney?

13 A We had this conversation earlier. We spent

14 about 10 minutes on it, did we not?

15 Q Is Larry Klayman your attorney?

16 A Refer back to our earlier conversation.

17 MR. KLAYMAN: Answer the question, George.

18

19 (Mr. Klayman speaking at the same

20 time as the witness.)

21

22 THE WITNESS: Excuse me?

23 BY MR. KRESS:

24 Q The question was posed for purposes of

25 deposition.




Page 89

1 A Right. We had this discussion.


3 THE WITNESS: I thought that everyone left it

4 that he was helping me for this deposition. Was that

5 not your understanding also at the time?

6 BY MR. KRESS:

7 Q Do you -- do you view Larry Klayman as your

8 attorney for this -- for this deposition or this case in9 general?

10 MR. KLAYMAN: No. That's a compound question.

11 For the deposition.

12 BY MR. KRESS:

13 Q Do you view Larry Klayman as your attorney for

14 the purpose of this deposition?

15 MR. KLAYMAN: Fine. That's fine.

16 THE WITNESS: We had this conversation already,

17 and that was the --

18 BY MR. KRESS:

19 Q It's a "yes" or "no" question, sir.20 MR. KLAYMAN: You can answer, George.

21 THE WITNESS: Yes, again. Deposition.

22 BY MR. KRESS:


24 All right. Uhm... as of -- as a person who is

25 considering donating to Larry Klayman's Florida Obama


18/27




1 efforts, did you weigh all the evidence related to Larry

2 Klayman, the evidence and information?

3 MR. KLAYMAN: Asked and answered. This is

4 badgering the witness at this point.

5 MR. KRESS: This is not.

6 MR. KLAYMAN: It's badgering.

7 BY MR. KRESS:

8 Q Did you weigh the evidence?

9 A Again, yes.

10 MR. KLAYMAN: Wait, wait, wait. I object to

11 the use of the word "evidence." That's a legal

12 conclusion. I object to that. That's a

13 mischaracterization. And asked and answered. You are

14 badgering the witness. You've asked this three, four,

15 five times.

16 MR. KRESS: At this point, we are going to take

17 a break from the deposition. I want to call the court

18 -- the court to get a ruling on whether this gentleman

19 is your client and whether you can instruct him not to

20 answer.

21 MR. KLAYMAN: He said I was representing him

22 for purposes of the deposition. You can take this up23 with the judge at trial. And that's the way she

24 instructed it to be done. She's in trial right now.

25 MR. KRESS: I think I can talk to a magistrate.




Page 91

1 MR. KLAYMAN: I don't think that's what you can2 do.

3 MR. KRESS: I understand. I will call, and we

4 can stay on the record. I'm going to make a call to the

5 -- attempt to make a call to the magistrate.

6 MR. KLAYMAN: If the court rules in your favor,

7 which I don't believe it will, he can certainly testify

8 live.


19/27

9 MR. KRESS: There are things we would like to

10 know in discovery.

11

12 (Mr. Kress making phone call.)

13

14 MR. KRESS: Hi, my name is Doug Kress. I'm an

15 attorney.

16 MR. KLAYMAN: Can you put her on speakerphone,

17 please?

18 MR. KRESS: Sure. Can you hear me? This is

19 Doug Kress, and actually, I have Larry Klayman with me.

20 We are in a deposition. And I have a concern regarding

21 objections being raised; that if possible, if the

22 magistrate or the judge is available, I would like to

23 speak to either the magistrate or the judge.

24 UNIDENTIFIED PERSON: If it's a discovery

25 issue, you would need to talk to Judge O'Sullivan's




Page 92

1 office.

2 MR. KRESS: Do you have that contact

3 information?

4 UNIDENTIFIED PERSON: It should have been in

5 the docket when you -- when you filed, uhm, you know,6 the judge entered the order, the trial order. I don't

7 have it right offhand. Like the procedure for discovery

8 matters.

9 MR. KRESS: Okay. I will -- I'll call my

10 office. I think when the -- when the order went out, I

11 think that Judge Simonton or which --

12 UNIDENTIFIED PERSON: Okay.

13 MR. KLAYMAN: She's no longer the magistrate on

14 the case.

15 UNIDENTIFIED PERSON: Okay. Hold on.

16 UNIDENTIFIED PERSON: Judge O'Sullivan's17 chambers. Brendan speaking.

18 MR. KRESS: My name is Doug Kress. I'm an

19 attorney. We are in a deposition on a case that's

20 pending before Judge Altonaga and Judge O'Sullivan, I

21 believe, was recently added as the magistrate. We have

22 an issue that -- we have certain -- I have certain

23 objections or plaintiff has made certain objections in


20/27

24 the deposition that I would like to, if possible,

25 discuss with the magistrate and try to get a ruling on




Page 93

1 as to how to proceed if the magistrate is available.

2 UNIDENTIFIED PERSON: Sure. I will see if he's

3 available. I'm not sure if he is right now, but I

4 didn't get your name. Would you mind repeating it for

5 me?

6 MR. KRESS: Doug Kress, K-R-E-S-S.

7 UNIDENTIFIED PERSON: K-R-A-E-S-S.

8 MR. KRESS: K-R-E-S-S.

9 UNIDENTIFIED PERSON: Oh, K-R-E-S-S.

10 MR. KRESS: Yes.

11 UNIDENTIFIED PERSON: Okay. I will

12 double-check to see if he's available, and I will be

13 right back. All right. Thanks for holding, Mr. Kress.

14 MR. KRESS: Thank you.

15 UNIDENTIFIED PERSON: I do think the judge has

16 stepped out for lunch, but I would be happy to take a

17 message and make sure that he calls you back when he

18 does return.

19 MR. KRESS: Okay.

20 UNIDENTIFIED PERSON: What's the best phone21 number for you?

22 MR. KRESS: I'll give you my cell phone number,

23 which is (561) 693-9897.

24 UNIDENTIFIED PERSON: Just to make sure I have

25 it right, (561) 693-9897, correct?




1 MR. KRESS: Correct. And I can give you the

2 case name and case number just so if -- you have that.

3 UNIDENTIFIED PERSON: Sure.

4 MR. KRESS: The case is Klayman, K-L-A-Y-M-A-N,

5 versus Judicial Watch. And the case --

6 UNIDENTIFIED PERSON: You said Judicial Watch?


21/27

7 MR. KRESS: Yes. And the case number is

8 1320610.

9 UNIDENTIFIED PERSON: 13-20610?

10 MR. KRESS: Yes.

11 UNIDENTIFIED PERSON: All right. Thanks very

12 much.


14 UNIDENTIFIED PERSON: I'll have him call you

15 back when he returns.


17 UNIDENTIFIED PERSON: Okay. Bye-bye.

18 MR. KRESS: We will continue on and see if the

19 magistrate returns the call.

20 Is the court reporter there still and ready to

21 continue on?

22 COURT REPORTER: I would like to have a

23 5-minute break to use the rest room.

24 MR. KRESS: Absolutely. Let's do that.

25




Page 95

1 (Off the record.)

2

3 BY MR. KRESS:4 Q Let's take this a little bit at a time to go

5 through some of these exhibits. And the ones we haven't

6 referred to yet. Please look at Exhibit 1.

7


9

10 A Got it.

11 Q Have you seen Exhibit 1 before today?

12 A No.

13 Q Okay. I'll represent to you that it's the

14 criminal indictment of Larry Klayman. I take it --15 well, I leave it at that. I don't need to ask more

16 questions about that.

17 We have already referred to Exhibit 2. So

18 let's skip that one, and if we can go to Exhibit 3.

19


21


22/27

22 A Okay.

23 Q And I'll represent that this is a decision from

24 an Ohio domestic relations judge, which found

25 Mr. Klayman in contempt of court.





Page 96

1 MR. KLAYMAN: Object. What's the point of this

2 if you are just identifying documents, which were

3 already in the record. Are you just running out the

4 clock?

5 BY MR. KRESS:

6 Q Have you ever seen this document before Mr. --

7 A No, I haven't.

8 Q -- Mr. Miller?

9 A No.

10 Q Okay.

11 MR. KLAYMAN: If you want, I can do my cross.

12 I mean --

13 MR. KRESS: No. I -- I -- I want to -- I want

14 to ask these questions.

15 MR. KLAYMAN: That's fine, as long as you are

16 asking questions, and you are not running out the clock.

17 MR. KRESS: I have these and I have actually

18 more. I'm not running out the clock.19 BY MR. KRESS:

20 Q Can you refer to Exhibit 4, please?

21


23

24 A Okay.

25 Q This appears to be similar to Exhibit 3.




Page 97

1 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. The document speaks

2 for itself.

3 BY MR. KRESS:

4 Q Well, let me just ask it this way.


23/27

5 Have you seen Exhibit 4 before?

6 A No.

7 Q Prior to retaining Larry Klayman in February of

8 -- of 2011, did you know that he had been found in

9 contempt of court twice by an Ohio court for failure to

10 pay child support?

11 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Asked and answered.

12 Facts not testified to. Lacks foundation. See, this is

13 the problem, is that you are testifying and putting

14 words in his mouth in an improper way, Mr. Kress, and

15 that's why -- I am sorry if I have to use that language,

16 but that is not an ethical approach to asking questions.

17 BY MR. KRESS:

18 Q Sir, did you know, prior to retaining Larry

19 Klayman to represent your group in the Florida Obama

20 Challenge, whether -- I'm sorry. We had an interruption

21 there. Something happened with connection, so I just

22 want to ask the question again.

23 Did you know prior to retaining Larry Klayman,

24 for the purposes of the Florida Obama litigation, that

25 he had been found in contempt of court twice in Ohio for




Page 98

1 failure to pay child support?2 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Assumes facts not in

3 evidence. No foundation.

4 BY MR. KRESS:

5 Q Did you know that, sir?

6 A No.

7 MR. KLAYMAN: You can answer.

8 THE WITNESS: No.

9 BY MR. KRESS:

10 Q Thank you.

11 MR. KLAYMAN: And relevancy.

12 BY MR. KRESS:13 Q Do you know whether -- well, in your meetings

14 with the other members of your group, prior to retaining

15 Larry Klayman, was -- was -- or were findings of

16 contempt of court against Larry Klayman ever discussed?

17 A Excuse me?

18 Q I understand that you talked to members of the

19 group before you hired Larry Klayman for the purposes of


24/27


25/27

3 questions? It's badgering with the witness.

4 MR. KRESS: It's not badgering the witness.

5 MR. KLAYMAN: You are asking the same questions

6 over and over again.

7 MR. KRESS: I think you are badgering the

8 attorney.

9 MR. KLAYMAN: No, I'm not badgering you because

10 you are not doing it proper. I have to make an

11 objection.

12 MR. KRESS: I believe I am.

13 BY MR. KRESS:

14 Q Do you have an understanding of what contempt

15 of court is?

16 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Calls for legal

17 conclusion.

18 THE WITNESS: I am not a lawyer.

19 BY MR. KRESS:

20 Q Based on your lay understanding of legal terms,

21 whatever that may be, what do you think about the term

22 "contempt of court"?

23 A It's very negative.

24 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. That's vague and

25 ambiguous.




1 BY MR. KRESS:

2 Q I can't hear the answers.

3 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Vague and ambiguous.

4 Calls for legal conclusion.

5 BY MR. KRESS:

6 Q What -- what -- what impact does the term

7 "contempt of court" have on you?

8 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Calls for legal

9 conclusion. And indefinite as to time. Irrelevant.

10 Contempt to court as to him generally? Irrelevant.11 Overly broad. Calls for legal conclusion.

12 BY MR. KRESS:

13 Q Mr. Miller, can you answer the question,

14 please?

15 A Again, I'm not a lawyer, so I would only give

16 you a very rough layman's perception of what it is. So,

17 if you would hold me to that, then I might give an


26/27

18 answer which is legally incorrect.

19 Q But that's all I'm looking for, is what is your

20 understanding of the phrase "contempt of court"?

21 MR. KLAYMAN: In a general -- objection. In a

22 general sense? Or in a specific sense? That's what I

23 -- that's why I say it's vague. It's vague.

24 BY MR. KRESS:

25 Q Okay. In a -- what is your -- I can ask it in




Page 102

1 a general sense.

2 What is your understanding of the phrase

3 "contempt of court"?

4 A Well, five years ago, it would be a very

5 negative term to me, but since I've seen it applied to

6 people doing right and still being held in contempt of

7 court, all it means is that it is a disagreement with

8 the judge, and the judge wants to impose some kind of a

9 sanction that's a prelude to doing that.

10 Q As of the time you hired Larry Klayman or your

11 group hired Larry Klayman, however it worked out, how

12 did you view the term "contempt of court"?

13 A About the same as I just described.

14 Q Okay. If you can refer to Exhibit 5, please.15


17

18 A Okay. Excuse me. I'm on 3. Okay.

19 Q I'll represent to you that Exhibit 5 is an

20 order from the Ohio -- an Ohio court, domestic relations

21 court, dated February 22, 2010, in which a capias was

22 ordered for Larry Klayman.

23 MR. KLAYMAN: I object to the characterization

24 of the document. The document speaks for itself.

25 BY MR. KRESS:Case 1:13-cv-20610-CMA Document 127-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/27/2014 Page104 of243GEORGE MILLER - 5/23/2014



Page 103


27/27

1 Q Do you know what a capias is?

2 A No.

3 Q Did you know that in February of 2010, two

4 years before Larry Klayman was hired, a capias had been

5 issued for his arrest?

6 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. Calls for facts not

7 testified to. Lacks foundation. That's your testimony,

8 not his.

9 BY MR. KRESS:

10 Q Did you know that a capias had been issued for

11 Larry Klayman's arrest in February 2010?

12 MR. KLAYMAN: Same objection.

13 BY MR. KRESS:


15 A No.

16 Q Does that reflect negatively on Larry Klayman?

17 MR. KLAYMAN: Objection. He just testified he

18 didn't know what a capias is.

19 BY MR. KRESS:

20 Q Does the issuance of an arrest warrant affect

21 -- negatively reflect on the person --

22 MR. KLAYMAN: Same objection. Lacks

23 foundation. Facts not testified to.

24 THE WITNESS: It might.

25 BY MR. KRESS:




Page 104


2 Skipping ahead to Exhibit 15.

3


5

6 A Okay.

7 Q And specifically, page 3 of 12.

8 A Yes.9 Q And if we look at that paragraph 4 -- well, let

10 me back up one second. I need to start again. Let's

11 look at page 2 of 12.

12 Do you recall reading this article from Orly

13 Taitz?

14 A Yes.

15 Q And it was posted on February 26, 2012,

Klayman v Judicial Watch Miller Deposition Pt. 2

Documents

Transcript of Klayman v Judicial Watch Miller Deposition Pt. 2