Posted on 02/15/2012 7:15:45 AM PST by Elderberry
.
Appeal Filed: Case No. 2012CV211398 DAVID FARRAR VS. BARACK OBAMA
Ping
.
I was wondering when you would pop up. Hope your day is going well.
It seems we have a new planted SP here!!!
New planted SP!!!
Have Hatfield or the other non-Orly attorney filed anything yet?
Well, if you keep picking chunks of sky out of your hair then you should consider the possibility.
If your ideas fail every time in the legal arena then you should also consider the possibility.
The eligibility movement is like a self licking ice cream cone - self contained and self validating. It is not the real world. There is a reason no respected conservative legal authority agrees with you.
You should consider the possibility that you might be wrong.
A most informative portrait if you go back a bit and then proceed forward.
.
There will be many new SP’s this election year.
.
There will be many new SP’s this election year.
One big clue is Hatfield whining about it to the SoS:
“On January 19, 2012, Plaintiffs Swensson and Powell filed a “Motion For Determination of Placement of Burden of Proof” in which Plaintiffs sought an order of the Court, pursuant to Haynes v. Wells, 273 Ga. 106, 108-109, 538 S.E. 2d 430, 433 (2000), requiring Defendant Obama to affirmatively establish his eligibility for office. Not only did Judge Malihi not rule on Plaintiffs’ motion in advance of trial, as was requested by Plaintiffs, but the judge never even addressed or resolved the motion in his final ruling.”
So we know what the judge felt about that particular motion.
“Have Hatfield or the other non-Orly attorney filed anything yet?”
Not that I have found.
So you are retread? What was your other(s) FR screen names?
So where did you come by your “quote”? Surely you have a link.
Sorry, thought you were familiar with the case.
It is from Hatfield’s letter to the SoS just after the judge’s decision.
On the many threads about that whole thing it was opined that the plaintiffs did not want a default judgment because that way none of the evidence or arguments would have been public record.
I’m probably not using correct legal terminology but hopefully someone else will verify, expand and edify further.
This motion wasn’t granted nor was it cited in Malihi’s decision. Do you think it was entered as evidence of something??
Has been sent here to challenge or distorts what has been posted against his comrade friend and illegal alien in the Whit-Hut!
Should be ignored by not feeding this Pest!!
Withou a profile page, you just know, hmmm!!!
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.