Posted on 01/27/2012 10:04:17 AM PST by Oldpuppymax
At the beginning of yesterday’s hearing to determine the legal and Constitutional eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama for placement on the State of Georgia ballot in November, Judge Michael Malihi was said to have read “the last paragraph of [Obama] Attorney Michael Jablonski’s letter” to Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp.
And in the barely 2 hour proceedings which reviewed 3 lawsuits demanding Obama not appear on that ballot, this might have been the most significant “statement” made by the otherwise reserved Malihi. (1)
Like Obama, Jablonski was a no-show in the Georgia courtroom, leaving Obama represented by no counsel at the proceeding.
And although the judge adjourned the hearing with no decision, no ruling, in fact nothing more than a “thank you” to the participants, the last paragraph of Jablonski’s letter states “We await your taking the requested action and as we do, we will, of course, suspend further participation in these proceedings, including the hearing scheduled for January 26th.” (2)
Well Obama had been subpoenaed to appear in that courtroom. The subpoena had been specifically and without reservation upheld by Judge Malihi just 6 days earlier. So Obama was in obvious violation of the court’s order.
So maybe, just maybe Judge Malihi read the final words of Jablonski’s hyper arrogant, “we don’t believe your little state or your silly hearing are worth our time” letter for the purpose of reading into the record the fact that it was indeed the decision of Obama and his attorney to NOT attend and to NOT honor legal subpoenas.
And if that is the case, it means Malihi is clearing the decks...
(Excerpt) Read more at coachisright.com ...
Reading some links, yesterday, after the session, I got the impression that the judge offered the plaintiffs the default judgement, but the plaintiffs wanted to enter their evidence into the record.
I took it to be some tactic that would require 0bama and his minions to respond to that evidence if they appeal or choose to move forward in some manner?
Perhaps the fine legal minds here on FR can clarify for us.
This is all about jurisdiction.
Federal versus State.
Even better, one entire arm of the Federal Government - the President - versus State.
There was NO WAY Obama’s lawyers were going to acknowledge that this State court has jurisdiction to subpoena the president of the United States.
We’re watching a set-piece play, a chess game where the first n moves are already a given. The only question is whether the opposition is going to actually bar Obama from the State ballot, or just make noise about it. But there is no question that any bar will not be recognized as valid by Obama’s lawyers.
The administration will simply wait to see what happens. If Obama is declared barred from the ballot in Georgia, then the preliminaries are finished, and the main event opens with a FEDERAL suit by Obama to deny jurisidiction in this matter to the States, on the claim that it is a federal election, and the States are acting in their Federal administrative capacities concerning any aspect of it.
Then, if argument is still necessary about his natural born citizenship (and the entire subject will be dismissed as irrelevent for as long as possible), it will be argued that the fact that Obama was elected and sworn in is de facto proof of his Constitutional legitimacy for the position, AND that as a sitting president, he cannot be forced to act as if he was not.
Georgia, on the other hand, will assert that all of that is crap, and that the issue is its right, under the Constitution, to vet candidates according to the Constitution.
It’s going to the Supremes.
What happened at Obama-no-show trial Sworn testimony reveals fake Social Security number, other gaps
http://www.wnd.com/2012/01/georgia-court-told-obama-slam-dunk-disqualified/
Complete obot drivel. You're scared. And you should be.
I can't see how this can help Obama in the “court of public opinion”. Geeze! It is a **simple** matter to prove one’s natural born citizenship. And...Normal American citizens pass e-verify and have legitimate social security numbers.
What? Go to the Supreme Court over something so simple? This can NOT help Obama.
The plaintifs want a finding of facts entered by the court. They’re then going to play “full faith and credit” games in other states using adjudicated facts. A default judgement doesn’t give them that option because each state’s laws are different.
Or so says a conservative lawyer buddy of mine - and he doesn’t think it will work. I dunno.
Obama will be forced to step down by his own party before it gets that far.
Most likely.
I'd kind of like to see it go the Supreme Court just to embarrass Obama and possibly bring some more facts about him to light in the process.
But there is also a question whether a big rhubarb over the birther issue would be a net win or loss in votes for the GOP. If it is seen as persecution by a bunch of racist right-wing wackos, it might only serve to turn out Obama's base and lose as many GOP-leaning independents as it gains.
In any case, I think Obama is just as natural born as his infamous neighbors Billy Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, and I don't want to see the definition changed to exclude the likes of Rubio, Jindal, or Haley or military brats (including Captain McQueeg, who won't be running again anyway).
You need to face reality.
“I took it to be some tactic that would require 0bama and his minions to respond to that evidence if they appeal or choose to move forward in some manner?”
The Judge will make a recommendation to the GA SoS about Obama’s ballot eligibility. The GA SoS will make a decision on Obama’s ballot eligibility with the assumption the Judge’s recommendation is advisory and not a writ.
After the GA SoS makes a decision, a lawsuit may be filed in Georgia Superior Court, but it will be de novo or a fresh start. Obama’s failure to appear at the Administrative Hearing or comply with a subpoena will be moot.
Those cup handles look like his ears.
When he falls, it will be a crash heard ‘round the world.
Don’t you mean Moochelle?
Let’s hope the ruling by Judge Malihi, and decision by the SOS occur BEFORE the Georgia primary (if Wikipedia is correct, it’s on February 5!)
...but wouldn't it be fun to watch a squad of Georgia Troopers showing up at the White House to enforce an order from this judge?
Talk about getting out the popcorn....
IMO this is going to really pi$$ off the blacks with lots of race rioting. Does Rodney King or Watts ring a bell.
Duck, they are perpetually POed and going to riot anyway. If they do, then all pretense is suddenly dropped.
The judge is an administrative law judge and apparently he issues not a ruling in this type of case, but a "recommendation" and then, the final decision as to whether Obama's name appears on the ballot rests with the Secretary of State.
The judge does not issue any true ruling that is binding on anybody and it's the Secretary of State who is subject to the political pressure involved regardless of what the judge does recommend.
Further, the failure to appear does not automatically result in a default judgement, the judge can still rule on "the facts" as he sees them, not necessarily default to ruling in the plaintiff's favor because the defendant failed to appear.
I am suspecting this one also will be swept aside without a true ruling on the merits of the case. But I hope I'm wrong
Yesterday’s cases involve Obama’s ballot access for the Georgia Democratic Party Presidential Preference Poll. Does anyone know if a ruling against Obama in this case, would even apply to O’s ballot access for the GA general election? Or will the current case become irrelevant post-primary?
My guess is that a new complaint be required, after the Democrats nominate and try to Obama on the ballot for the general election. Then the fireworks will begin. Obama doesn’t care a whit about GA’s primary delegates, and might write GA off for the general election. But GA Dem’s will be desperate to have a candidate at the top in November to avoid a down-ticket bloodbath. The tension between their interests is part of why this is all worthwhile.
Doesn't "natural born" mean, born of parents who are both American citizens? If so, then the fact that Obama's father was a foreigner disqualifies him.
We need to look at the definition of "natural born" as it was understood at the time of the Constitution's writing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.