If they got to the judge, why did he offer the plaintiffs a default judgement that would have take Obama off the ballot?
He offered them everything they wanted and they rejected the deal.
Can you point to and link any proof that that happened?
posted on 02/21/2012 2:00:48 PM PST
(Should we be more like them or they more like we used to be?)
If you review their reasoning, you'll see it was actually a sound decision. If they had accepted the default, there would have been a decision with no evidence to support it
, other than the default - a decision that the SOS would have been free to ignore.
By rejecting the default, they were able to introduce their evidence and make it part of the legal record - and, therefore, a sound basis for an appeal.
posted on 02/21/2012 2:04:33 PM PST
(I don't worship the State; I don't worship the Environment - I only worship God.)
Then neither Obama , nor his lawyer showed up, and instead of forcing the subpoena, he just makes a ruling agains those who did show up.
Doesn’t make sense.
posted on 02/21/2012 5:09:33 PM PST
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson