Posted on 02/01/2012 7:17:02 PM PST by Sallyven
[snip]...Jablonski remained true to his word -- neither he nor Obama showed up for the January 26 hearing. I noted last week that Obama was not scheduled to be anywhere near Atlanta on the date of the hearing, although I had wondered if still, perhaps, Georgia might be on his mind. According to reports in the blogosphere, the president's schedule on the morning of the 26th was open, and according to an unnamed source, Obama watched the live feed of the hearings.
Perhaps Obama, as well as the several mainstream media news outlets I spotted at the hearing, were merely watching in hopes that the "crazy birthers" would really do something...well, crazy. Or unlawful. In fact, though, it was the president himself and his defense team who were the ones defying the rule of law.
The mainstream media, in lockstep with Obama, reported nothing of the events, in a stunning blackout on a truly historic hearing -- one that discussed the eligibility of a sitting president to run for a second term. And more troubling was the fact that the media failed to acknowledge the even more sensational news -- that the president and his defense attorney snubbed an official subpoena.
Today, Attorney Van Irion, on behalf of his client, Georgia resident David Welden, filed a "Motion for Finding of Contempt" with Judge Malihi...
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
snip-”New evidence conclusively establishes that 25 U.S. Supreme Court opinions were sabotaged then republished at Justia.com during the run up to the ’08 election. My prior report documented the scrubbing of just two cases. But last week, a third sabotaged case was discovered which led to a thorough examination of all US Supreme Court cases which cite “Minor v. Happersett” as they appeared on Justia.com between 2006 and the present.
Since Justia placed affirmations on each tampered opinion which state “Full Text of Case”, personnel may also be guilty of violating 18 U.S.C. 1018 by intentionally passing off tampered versions of US Supreme Court opinions as if they were official versions published by the US Supreme Court.”
Well...according to post number 12 you’re good to go. lol
Just a question in principle: Is there need for case law in a first instance? Further, doesn't the applicable definition derive from the time the law at issue was adopted? Else we are in the land of "living Constitution."
Yes, I think he was adopted by Lolo Soetoro.
Minor v. Happersett
The US Constitution explicitly excuses Congressmen from such a thing, at least while they are on official business. But I haven’t heard of any parallel provision for a president, or a court case where the USSC heard the question concerning a question. This little Georgia court seems to be the mouse that roared.
question concerning a question
I mean the question concerning a president
Obama always has thought he was better than the rest of us & had his nose in the air to show his contempt for the U.S. & its citizens. He shows it with his over 90 rounds of golf, parties & overseas trips that are costing our people $$$$$ along with all the $$$$$ he gave to the Unions & his “special” friends. I’ve had enough & will relish the day he gets his “just rewards”.
If she became a naturalized citizen by the time of your birth, that would fix that. In little barry dunham’s case, his claimed father was never a citizen of the U.S. and at the time of barry’s birth, his mother Stanley Ann Dunham was not old enough to pass even citizenship on to him, so if he was not born in HI (ahem, he wasn’t), he wasn’t even a citizen until someone at some past time (perhaps no more than five years ago) in Hawaii forged a birth documentation for the bastard.
I thought it was Goebbels.
This pro Obama nonsense is revolting. And the fact that they use irrelevant cases such as Wong Ark Kim (a 14th amendment case not a Article II; Sec. I case prove the speciousnes of the claims ofthe Messiah's apologists.
“Incidentally, since my mother was born in Canada, I am not a natural born citizen either.”
Nonsense. Your parents’ birth doesn’t matter. It’s YOU who matters.
My father was likewise born in Canada (of US parents, incidentally). But while we always have to go through conniptions any time employment/clearance is applied for, it’s because of him, not me.
The above pdf is the proposed order drafted by one of the attorneys in the Georgia challenge to Obama’s placement on the GA ballot and contains a cogent argument based on the law.
I’d say many agree with this position.
He is and has committed HIGH TREASON, so the penalty for that is in order upon summary of trial. What does the U.S. now use as their means to punish HIGH TREASON? ... And he has guilty accomplices, too, who have committed treason.
This is how the system works.
Learn the system before you argue, OK?
So you are another 0bamunist - one of Hussein’s butt boys who is anxious to protect him against those who think The Constituion should be upheld and 0bama shouldn’t get an affirmative action pass just because he is black.
Before anyone embarrasses himself by asserting that Bill Clinton was compelled to testify and then perjured himself, that was to a federal judge.
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.