Jump to content

Obama Name Will Not Appear On Georgia Ballot!


SrWoodchuck

Recommended Posts

obamafly20100622.jpghttp://conservativeb....blogspot.com/:

This is developing; it really could be factual considering the proceedings that were held today.

 

This guy is pretty straight shooting, so I assume that... Well I guess we will see. At this point it is just on the word of a few bloggers who were there.

 

To me -- being totally unbiased ;) -- they seem credible, but I have learned to not give something my stamp of approval until it hits the mainstream media.

 

True or not, the have to confirm and affirm before they print it.

 

Either way, history has been made today!

 

I just got off the phone with Dean Haskins who was in the courtroom this morning assisting with the Art 2Pac live stream. Judge Malihi talked to the attorneys in chambers before the hearing this morning and told them that he was going to enter a DEFAULT JUDGMENT against Obama and recommend that Obama's name not be on the Georgia ballot! All of the attorneys expressed a desire to put an abbreviated streamlined case on the record and the judge agreed.

 

How does the mainstream media spin this? Scissors-32x32.png


Edited by clearvision
For News Articles Need to use plain text editor switch or text paste. Pasting into the rich text editor copies all links, images, videos, etc. Not good for copyright issues.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you read the article.....the plaintiffs distance themselves from Orly Taitz, [described as the "patron saint of birthers"] and base their challenge strictly on the fact that Obama Sr was not a US citizen, was "deported" in essence & not allowed a passport to come back.....ergo....Obama Jr is not a Natural Born citizen & so.......cannot be president.

 

I personally don't give a rats a** whether he is or not, as it is just one more splinter in his craw that he or someone else has to deal with.....and I'm tired of him creating a hell on earth for US citizens & feel he out to have to put up with plenty'o'petty crap himself, until it comes out his big ears. At least Kagan will no longer be available to represent him in court....as she did for about 4 years.

 

Snopes blows their credibility.

It’s time to take a close second look at a lot of issues that were thrown under the bus by Snopes.

It’s now common knowledge that it’s owned by an ultra-liberal San Francisco Bay area couple, but until now only a handful of people knew they were bankrolled by George Soros, one of Obama’s primary financial supporters.

For instance, on a hunch some folks performed a search on Snopes to look into the dockets of the newest Supreme Court Justice, Elena Kagan, an Obama appointee. According to Snopes the online email about this topic was false and no such dockets existed. So they Googled the Supreme Court website, typed in Obama-Kagan, and viola, Snopes matter-of-factly lied. Each of the dockets had been posted and made readily available.

Many people discovered several years ago that the Snopes couple always tended to side with the leftwing, but this was simply an outright lie and they’ve had their hand called on it online.

So this group decided to dig a little deeper and confirmed some additional information that may rock you back in your chair.

1) Kagan has been representing Obama in every petition attempting to prove his citizenship.

2) She may have an opportunity rule on them in the near future—not exactly ethical in the eyes of the general public. It’s now becoming clear about the reason Obama nominated Elana Kagan for the Supreme Court in the first place to protect his murky background.

It gets better; Kagan was also the Solicitor General for every suit against him filed with the Supreme Court to show proof of natural born citizenship. He owed her and the nomination was the payback that just happened to work fine since at the time the Democrats controlled the House and Senate.

 

http://tucsoncitizen.com/compoundcaptive/2011/10/07/snopes-fails-truth-test/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the judge does enter a default, it will be overturned on appeal faster than you can sneeze.

 

A procedural point......a Default Judgement that is entered when a defendant fails to appear and present arguments cannot be appealed. The only recourse that The "o" and his legal staff have at this point is to get a higher court to declare that the court in question had no jurisdiction in the matter, a tough argument to make in this case.

 

For those who wish to read the article, a correction to the link that Srwoodchuck posted: http://conservativeb...on-georgia.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you read the article.....the plaintiffs distance themselves from Orly Taitz, [described as the "patron saint of birthers"] and base their challenge strictly on the fact that Obama Sr was not a US citizen, was "deported" in essence & not allowed a passport to come back.....ergo....Obama Jr is not a Natural Born citizen & so.......cannot be president.

 

I personally don't give a rats a** whether he is or not, as it is just one more splinter in his craw that he or someone else has to deal with.....and I'm tired of him creating a hell on earth for US citizens & feel he out to have to put up with plenty'o'petty crap himself, until it comes out his big ears. At least Kagan will no longer be available to represent him in court....as she did for about 4 years.

 

Snopes blows their credibility.

It’s time to take a close second look at a lot of issues that were thrown under the bus by Snopes.

It’s now common knowledge that it’s owned by an ultra-liberal San Francisco Bay area couple, but until now only a handful of people knew they were bankrolled by George Soros, one of Obama’s primary financial supporters.

For instance, on a hunch some folks performed a search on Snopes to look into the dockets of the newest Supreme Court Justice, Elena Kagan, an Obama appointee. According to Snopes the online email about this topic was false and no such dockets existed. So they Googled the Supreme Court website, typed in Obama-Kagan, and viola, Snopes matter-of-factly lied. Each of the dockets had been posted and made readily available.

Many people discovered several years ago that the Snopes couple always tended to side with the leftwing, but this was simply an outright lie and they’ve had their hand called on it online.

So this group decided to dig a little deeper and confirmed some additional information that may rock you back in your chair.

1) Kagan has been representing Obama in every petition attempting to prove his citizenship.

2) She may have an opportunity rule on them in the near future—not exactly ethical in the eyes of the general public. It’s now becoming clear about the reason Obama nominated Elana Kagan for the Supreme Court in the first place to protect his murky background.

It gets better; Kagan was also the Solicitor General for every suit against him filed with the Supreme Court to show proof of natural born citizenship. He owed her and the nomination was the payback that just happened to work fine since at the time the Democrats controlled the House and Senate.

 

http://tucsoncitizen...ils-truth-test/

 

I was researching something the other day and went to Politifact.com - you talk about left leaning!!!!!!! Guess someone has to start a site to fact check the fact checkers!!!!!!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing yet on the Atlanta TV stations newscasts (or their websites) about a default judgment.

 

Maybe they're writing their stories for the 6:00pm edition.

 

I won't hold my breath waiting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The original page doesn't exist anymore.

 

The judge was taking this matter under advisement for 30 days. What is the deadline for appearing on the ballot?

 

base their challenge strictly on the fact that Obama Sr was not a US citizen, was "deported" in essence & not allowed a passport to come back.....ergo....Obama Jr is not a Natural Born citizen & so.......cannot be president.

 

That is key.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OBAMA ELIGIBILITY COURT CASE…BLOW BY BLOW

 

 

 

Scissors-32x32.png

Disc received from Immigration and Naturalization Service entered into evidence. This disc contains information regarding the status of Obama’s father received through the Freedom of Information Act.

This information states clearly that Obama’s father was NEVER a U.S. Citizen.

Scissors-32x32.png

State Licensed PI takes the stand.

She was hired to look into Obama’s background and found a Social Security number for him from 1979. Professional opinion given that this number was fraudulent. The number used or attached to Obama in 1979, shows that Obama was born in the 1890. This shows that the number was originally assigned to someone else who was indeed born in 1890 and should never have been used by Obama.

Same SS number came up with addresses in IL, D.C. and MA.

Scissors-32x32.png

Document entered regarding SS number assigned to Obama. SS number is not verified under E Verify. It comes back as suspected fraudulent. This is the system by which the Government verifies ones citizenship.

Scissors-32x32.png

Next witness, Mr. Sampson a former police officer and former immigration officer specializing in immigration fraud.

Ran Obama’s SS number through database and found that the number was issued to Obama in 1977 in the state of MA. Obama never resided in MA. At the time of issue, Obama was living in Hawaii.

Serial number on birth certificate is out of sequence with others issued at that hospital. Also certification is different than others and different than twins born 24 hours ahead of Obama.

Mr. Sampson also states that portion of documents regarding Mr. Sotoroe, who adopted Obama have been redacted which is highly unusual with regards to immigration records.

witness, Mr. Sampson a former police officer and former immigration officer specializing in immigration fraud.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A Message From One Of The Attorneys At Obama’s Eligibility Proceedings In Atlanta

 

Scissors-32x32.png

Understand that the goal of the Georgia ballot challenge was to have a court rule on the merits of the Constitutional question: Does the term “natural born citizen” in Article II of the Constitution, require a Presidential candidate to have two parents that were U.S. citizens at the time the candidate was born? Obama wants to avoid having a court rule on this question. That is why he didn’t show up and ordered his attorneys to not show up. He was hoping that the Georgia court would enter a default judgment rather than rule on the merits. If the court enters a default judgment, Obama will have succeeded in avoiding the Constitutional eligibility question. He will then appeal the default judgment, get the appellate court to suspend the default judgment pending appeal, and then delay the appeal until after the primary. This is undoubtedly Obama’s plan.

 

If the Georgia Court rules that Supreme Court precedent must be followed and therefore Obama simply does not meet the minimum Constitutional requirements to hold the office of President, then we will at least have succeeded in finding one court in the nation willing to do its job. If that court finds Obama in contempt of court, then we still have three viable branches of government. The Georgia court has the authority to do both of these things. The world should be holding its breath.

Scissors-32x32.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Georgia was Florida, you bet the story would be getting traction. Georgia is not, so even if he got knocked off the ballot, it wouldn't make any difference in the battleground states, except to make the Obamadrones more rabid.

 

Now we'll see if this judge has the cojones to follow through on his duty.

 

As far as Argyle goes: yeah, yeah - but any appellate court is likely to throw it out on the grounds that this matter is a POLITICAL question and therefore outside the jurisdiction of the court.

 

Now whether that sounds credible or not (it doesn't technically), THAT is the way they will get out of it, even if the lower court judge does enter a default.

 

Which is kind ironic given that courts have been deciding de facto political questions for at least the last 50 years .... (of course, they never call them that) ..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • 1709120678
×
×
  • Create New...