spot on
Personally, I think that he was born in Hawaii, possibly with the cover of Sr. to make Mom’s dalliance legit, but was later adopted by Lolo S., or the grandparents, with a revision being made to the BC accordingly. Thus, he was not longer BHO. He probably failed to take steps to establish citizenship after turning of age after the Indonesia excursion, and then took the name he wanted, regardless of his papers. After that, there was just too much water under the bridge to go back.
Just attended the hearing. Judge Lewis told each side to submit an order in digital form that he could use when he reached a decision. In other words, he reserved judgment on the Motion to Dismiss of BO and the Fla. Secretary of State. The parties have until June 25 to submit their proposed orders.
The main argument of the BO attorneys was that 1. BO is not the nominee until after the convention so he is not a candidate for president, and 2. voters elect electors, not presidents.
The main argument of the plaintiff was that the buck has to stop somewhere, that BO is the defacto nominee, since he would have to elect in writing (under Florida law)if he were NOT going to seek nomination, and the Founding Fathers were concerned about divided loyalties, citing Vattel, etc.
Klayman did give an excellent example of parental influence in citing to the recent executive order on immigration, relating it to the fact that O senior was deported as the result of an expired student visa.
Lewis asked a lot more pointed questions of Klayman than he did of the defense attorneys. He posed some odd scenarios to Klayman with respect to what ‘natural born’ means, including the effects on the definition of ‘natural born’ of artificial insemination, parents who expatriate after a child is born here, etc. Klayman was pretty steadfast in saying that the Founders did their best with what they understood, in light of the potential divided loyalties they feared.
All in all, I would say that the continued technical arguments which include the amorphous means by which presidents are elected, and the legal maneuvering, claiming the priorities of federal law over state law, etc. will again carry the day. I believe Lewis will grant the motion to dismiss with leave to amend.
Just attended the hearing. Judge Lewis told each side to submit an order in digital form that he could use when he reached a decision. In other words, he reserved judgment on the Motion to Dismiss of BO and the Fla. Secretary of State. The parties have until June 25 to submit their proposed orders.
The main argument of the BO attorneys was that 1. BO is not the nominee until after the convention so he is not a candidate for president, and 2. voters elect electors, not presidents.
The main argument of the plaintiff was that the buck has to stop somewhere, that BO is the defacto nominee, since he would have to elect in writing (under Florida law)if he were NOT going to seek nomination, and the Founding Fathers were concerned about divided loyalties, citing Vattel, etc.
Klayman did give an excellent example of parental influence in citing to the recent executive order on immigration, relating it to the fact that O senior was deported as the result of an expired student visa.
Lewis asked a lot more pointed questions of Klayman than he did of the defense attorneys. He posed some odd scenarios to Klayman with respect to what ‘natural born’ means, including the effects on the definition of ‘natural born’ of artificial insemination, parents who expatriate after a child is born here, etc. Klayman was pretty steadfast in saying that the Founders did their best with what they understood, in light of the potential divided loyalties they feared.
All in all, I would say that the continued technical arguments which include the amorphous means by which presidents are elected, and the legal maneuvering, claiming the priorities of federal law over state law, etc. will again carry the day. I believe Lewis will grant the motion to dismiss with leave to amend.