How can you heartily disagree that it is not important if you dont know what it means?I'll let somebody else far more knowledgeable and learned than I provide my answer...
@
All That Is Wrong with Georgia State Judge Michael M. Malihis Decision that Putative President Obama Is a Natural Born CitizenBut there is no evidence before the Court that Obama was born in the United States. The court can only rest its finding of fact on evidence that is part of the court record. The judge tells us that he decided the merits of the plaintiffs claims. But he does not tell us in his decision what evidence he relied upon to consider[] that Obama was born in the United States. The judge considered that Obama was born in the United States. What does considered mean? Clearly, it is not enough for a court to consider evidence or law. It must make a finding after having considered facts and law. The judge simply does not commit to any finding as to where Obama was born. Using the word considered is a cop out from actually addressing the issue.
Snip...
Hence, what evidence did the judge have to rule that Obama is born in the United States? The answer is none.
Besides Irion’s stipulation that Obama was born in Hawaii and the BC that he entered into evidence?
One lawyer stipulated Obama is born in Hawaii, the other never challenges Obama’s birthplace, and the third lawyer invalidates all her evidence through her incompetence.
With all that, I don’t think the judge is going to spend much time pondering Obama’s birthplace. Lets not forget the standard of proof is much lower than a criminal trial - the judge merely had to believe that the evidence indicated that it was “likely” that Obama was born in Hawaii. It would be easy to reach that level.