Maybe if you come up with enough questions, you can somehow convince yourself that I’m wrong. The judge contradicted himself thoroughly in the decision he issued. No mind reading was required to see that he was never going to issue a default judgment against the Kenyan coward.
The only mind reading necessary is the mind-reading Malihi did when he “believed” or “considered” that Obama was born in Hawaii, etc when he had no probative evidence on which to base that belief. He wasn’t being asked to read minds or consult his crystal ball - or to claim “judge’s knowledge”. He was being asked to determine the facts of the case and to rule according to the facts. There was no probative evidence admitted into the record so his only choice - regardless of what the plaintiffs did or didn’t do - was to say that Obama had not proven himself qualified and thus the statute would not allow him to be on the ballot.
This very thought of judges deciding on the basis of “mind reading”, crystal ball, or “judge’s knowledge” rather than submitted, cross-examined evidence in the legal record is what WE’RE all crying out against. Not this guy who just signed up to FR last month and accuses you of “mind reading” (after he had asked you why you thought the judge had done something, IOW had ASKED you to try to read Malihi’s mind).