Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: philman_36; Doc Conspiracy

I have not ignored the context. If anyone wants the FULL context, it can be found here:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/80417613/Farrar-Welden-Swensson-Powell-v-Obama-Judge-Malihi-Final-Decision-Georgia-Ballot-Challenge-2-3-2012

A sitting President had his eligibility challenged. He offered a summary judgment, but the plaintiffs refused:

“Plaintiffs asked this Court to decide the case on the merits of their arguments and evidence. The Court granted Plaintiffs’ request. By deciding this matter on the merits, the Court in no way condones the conduct or legal scholarship of Defendant’s attorney, Mr. Jablonski.”

They wanted Obama refused on the merit of their arguments. However, the judge decided the witnesses called were fakes without relevant expertise. He also said that the Indiana decision and WKA meant the existing law supports the idea that a NBC does not require citizen parents. He politely rejected the idea that the Minor decision was a ruling on the exhaustive meaning of NBC - which is painfully obvious to anyone who reads the entire paragraph in Minor.

The Plaintiffs insisted on a decision make on the strength of their argument, and the judge ruled them nuts. Their case was so weak that the defendant didn’t even need to show up in court to win. Think about that.


40 posted on 02/04/2012 12:33:41 PM PST by Mr Rogers ("they found themselves made strangers in their own country")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]


To: Mr Rogers
Let's get the whole thing in...

Nonetheless, despite the Defendant's failure to appear, (here is where you start the quote you posted with quotation marks, despite the sentence having started earlier than you've indicated) Plaintiffs asked this Court to decide the case on the merits of their arguments and evidence. The Court granted Plaintiffs' request.
By deciding this matter on the merits, the Court in no way condones the conduct or legal scholarship of Defendant's attorney, Mr. Jablonski. This Decision is entirely based on the law, as well as the evidence and legal arguments presented at the hearing.

What's that?! He decided the matter on the merits and not the merits and evidence? There must not have been any evidence since he states quite clearly that the matter was decided on the merits alone.

44 posted on 02/04/2012 12:59:12 PM PST by philman_36 (Pride breakfasted with plenty, dined with poverty, and supped with infamy. Benjamin Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]

To: Mr Rogers

SNIP >>> Their case was so weak <<<

... that the judge RUSHED the Plaintiff’s time to enter evidence into the court record, because of the pending default judgement.

You DO remember that exquisite bum rush technique don’t you?


58 posted on 02/04/2012 3:21:28 PM PST by freepersup (Hi, I'm Michael Jablonski, and right about now my you know what is tighter than a tree's rings.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson