The judge was prepared to give the plaintiffs everything they wanted - EVERYTHING. Explain that to me if you can. Did he use a Jedi mind trick to compel them to make the wrong choice?
They had victory in their hands and threw it away. You cannot blame the judge for that.
How can a judge offer to say that Obama is not eligible and then, on the basis of anything other than actual evidence to support the change, all of a sudden say instead that Obama is definitely eligible? Obama added no evidence so what would justify the change in his decision?
I should not have responded to this post of yours because I am still waiting for you to answer:
Did Obama prove his eligibility in the Irion case, and if so what probative evidence did he present?
Did Obama prove his eligibility in the Hatfield case, and if so what probative evidence did he present?
Did Obama prove his eligibility in the Taitz case, and if so what probative evidence did he present?
To qualify as probative evidence according to Full Faith and Credit standards Malihi had to see a paper document with the proper certifying statement and the legally-prescribed raised seal. When in that hearing was Malihi handed a paper birth certificate with those authenticating marks? When did he certify the provenance of the document, including the chain of custody?