Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

OBAMA ELIGIBILITY COURT CASE…BLOW BY BLOW
The National Patriot ^ | 01/26/2012 | Craig Andresen

Posted on 01/28/2012 5:48:45 PM PST by GrandmaPatriot

Given the testimony from today’s court case in Georgia, Obama has a lot of explaining to do. His attorney, Jablonski, was a NO SHOW as of course, was Obama.

The following is a nutshell account of the proceedings.

The case revolved around the Natural Born clause of the Constitution and whether or not Obama qualifies under it to serve. More to the point, if found ineligible, Obama’s name would not appear on the 2012 ballot in Georgia.

Over the last several weeks, Obama’s attorney, Michael Jablonski, had attempted several tactics to keep this case from moving forward. He first tried to have it dismissed, then argued that it was irrelevant to Obama. After that, Jablonski argued that a state could not, under the law, determine who would or would not be on a ballot and later, that Obama was simply too busy with the duties of office to appear.

After all these arguments were dispatched by the Georgia Court, Jablonski, in desperation, wrote to the Georgia Secretary of State attempting to place Obama above the law and declared that the case was not to he heard and neither he nor his client would participate.

Secretary of State, Brian Kemp, fired back a letter hours later telling Jablonski he was free to abandon the case and not participate but that he would do so at his and his clients peril.

(Excerpt) Read more at thenationalpatriot.com ...


TOPICS: Conspiracy; Government; Miscellaneous; Politics
KEYWORDS: certifigate; election; obamanbc

1 posted on 01/28/2012 5:48:49 PM PST by GrandmaPatriot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: GrandmaPatriot
telling Jablonski he was free to abandon the case and not participate but that he would do so at his and his clients peril.

Ya know - the thing about making threats is if you don't follow through, your credibility suffers.

2 posted on 01/28/2012 5:53:34 PM PST by grobdriver (Proud Member, Party Of No! No Socialism - No Fascism - Nobama - No Way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GrandmaPatriot

Got a working link? Thank you!


3 posted on 01/28/2012 5:54:02 PM PST by satan69 (garden)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GrandmaPatriot

“Error establishing a database connection” at link.


4 posted on 01/28/2012 5:54:02 PM PST by Clay Moore (The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of a fool to the left. Ecclesiastes 10:2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: satan69

The link in the post worked for me...Took me here:

http://www.thenationalpatriot.com/?p=4138#more-4138


5 posted on 01/28/2012 5:58:36 PM PST by AlexW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Clay Moore; satan69

http://www.thenationalpatriot.com/?p=4138


6 posted on 01/28/2012 6:01:09 PM PST by Revel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: GrandmaPatriot

Bflr


7 posted on 01/28/2012 6:01:48 PM PST by F15Eagle (1 John 5:4-5, 4:15, 5:13; John 3:17-18, 6:69, 11:25, 14:6, 20:31; Rom10:8-11; 1 Tim 2:5; Titus 3:4-5)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: grobdriver
Anyone choosing to advocate an ethics probe of Obama's Attorney Michael Jablonski for his willful neglect of his professional duty by choosing not to attend this hearing, can consult guidelines of the Georgis Bar Association.

http://www.gabar.org/ethics

"Georgia lawyers are bound by strict rules of ethics in all of their professional dealings. The Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct help define a lawyer's obligations to clients, to the judicial system, and to the public.

Although the Supreme Court of Georgia retains ultimate authority to regulate the legal profession, the State Bar of Georgia's Office of the General Counsel serves as the Court's arm to investigate and prosecute claims that a lawyer has violated the ethics rules.

The Rules of Professional Conduct are found at Part IV, Chapter 1 of the Bar Rules. Part IV, Chapter 2 contains the procedural rules for disciplinary actions against lawyers. In addition to the Rules, the Bar and the Supreme Court periodically have issued Formal Advisory Opinions that clarify a lawyer's obligations in certain situations. A complete list of Formal Advisory Opinions follows Part IV, Chapter 3 of the Bar Rules.

Lawyers who would like to discuss an ethics dilemma with a member of the Office of the General Counsel staff should contact the Lawyer Helpline at 404-527-8720, 800-334-6865 or by e-mail. Members of the public who believe that a Georgia lawyer has violated the rules of ethics should contact the Bar's Consumer Assistance Program at 800-334-6865 "

8 posted on 01/28/2012 6:12:47 PM PST by research99
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: GrandmaPatriot

Is this case being held in a Federal Court - in Atlanta?


9 posted on 01/28/2012 6:28:40 PM PST by cricket (America restored;. . .Newt CAN make it happen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GrandmaPatriot

I’m surprised to find out that Jablonski is a GA attorney. I figured he was just one of several attorneys from DC that would represent the president. There’s absolutely no excuse for him not to have appeared as long as he is local and if I were the judge and the SOS, I would make sure he pays dearly for not appearing in the hearing. According to a search, he represents the Democrat Party of GA.


10 posted on 01/28/2012 6:36:49 PM PST by Thank You Rush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GrandmaPatriot

The only way out of this is for an apparent epidemic of apparent suicides to happen to all those testifying for the prosecution, not to mention the judge. Can you say “Vince Foster?”


11 posted on 01/28/2012 6:39:56 PM PST by immadashell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: grobdriver
"the thing about making threats is if you don't follow through, your credibility suffers. "

That's the difference between a threat and a promise.

12 posted on 01/28/2012 6:43:08 PM PST by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: cricket

It is being held in Georgia so I assume it is Atlanta.


13 posted on 01/28/2012 6:47:02 PM PST by GrandmaPatriot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: immadashell

OH Ya!!! Vince Foster times 1000.


14 posted on 01/28/2012 6:48:59 PM PST by GrandmaPatriot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: AlexW

Thank you, Kept giving me a 404 error!


15 posted on 01/28/2012 7:12:02 PM PST by satan69 (garden)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: cricket

“Is this case being held in a Federal Court - in Atlanta?”
______________________________________

It is not a federal issue.
It involves only the state.

By the way, the posted link seems to have quit working, but
Nationalpatriot.com does work.


16 posted on 01/28/2012 7:16:20 PM PST by AlexW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: GrandmaPatriot

bttt


17 posted on 01/28/2012 7:45:54 PM PST by TEXOKIE (... and HAPPY NEW YEAR to all FREEPERS EVERYWHERE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GrandmaPatriot

Ping for later...


18 posted on 01/28/2012 7:46:26 PM PST by BigCinBigD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GrandmaPatriot

try www.thenationalpatriot.com/


19 posted on 01/28/2012 7:56:32 PM PST by GrandmaPatriot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AlexW
It is not a federal issue. It involves only the state.

LOL, Obama's attorneys disagree.

20 posted on 01/28/2012 7:58:57 PM PST by Talisker (Apology accepted, Captain Needa.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: GrandmaPatriot

for later


21 posted on 01/28/2012 8:10:50 PM PST by ElayneJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AlexW

Thanks on Federal classification but is Court ‘in’ Atlanta or ‘where’? Anyone know; Perhaps I missed it?


22 posted on 01/29/2012 6:56:32 AM PST by cricket (America restored;. . .Newt CAN make it happen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Thank You Rush
A possible "strategy" for the non-appearance by Jablonski has been explained at Liberty Legal Foundation's website. "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.

Obama 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."

http://libertylegalfoundation.org/1665/is-the-judicial-branch-dead/

23 posted on 01/29/2012 10:09:07 AM PST by research99
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: research99
Obama 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.”

You make it sound so easy..any appeal will generate “discovery”. That is why Orly, Farrar etc. entered a mountain of evidence into the record during the hearing. obama may have wanted a default judgment in lieu of the hearing in order to preclude entering any evidence by the plaintiff’s. Now the court has evidence on file and in the court record that obama will have to defend on appeal...a perfect storm.
24 posted on 01/29/2012 10:46:18 AM PST by AFret. ("Charlie don't surf ! ")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson