Skip to comments.OBAMA ELIGIBILITY TRIAL....BLOW BY BLOW
Posted on 01/27/2012 8:02:50 AM PST by freedommom
Given the testimony from todays 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.
Promptly at 9am EST, all attorneys involved in the Obama Georgia eligibility case were called to the Judges chambers. This was indeed a very interesting beginning to this long awaited and important case.
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, Obamas name would not appear on the 2012 ballot in Georgia.
With the small courtroom crowded, several in attendance could be seen fanning themselves with pamphlets as they waited for the return of the attorneys and the appearance of the judge.
Obama himself, who had been subpoenaed to appear, of course was nowhere near Georgia. Instead, Obama was on a campaign swing appearing in Las Vegas and in Colorado ignoring the court in Georgia.
Over the last several weeks, Obamas attorney, Michael Jablonski, had attempted several tactics to keep this case from moving forward.
Here’s the link about the SS# from Phillip Berg...
In the following motion, Orly is asking the judge to exert authority on the officials in Hawaii to allow, require access to Obamas original BC as is the case in Hawaiian law. This could finally force the issue and get Obamas ORIGINAL BC (if one exists) into Georgia court for examination. The worm is turning.”
Sorry, but reality is already intruding again. The judge's order today is as follows:
” Order: The parties may file any post hearing pleadings by Wednesday, February 1, 2012. The Court will issue a recommendation to the Secretary of State shortly thereafter.
The Court has reviewed the motion by Plaintiffs, Farrar, Lax, Judy, Malaren, and Roth, to direct and/or request the Court in Hawaii to order the release of certain Hawaii documents to the Plaintiffs. This Court lacks jurisdiction or authority to direct or request documents from Hawaii. Plaintiffs motion is denied.
SO ORDERED, this the 27th day of January, 2012.”
It is simply a fact that the “subpoenas” in question were incorrectly used by Orly and place no obligation upon Obama, Hawaii, Arpaio, etc. It is simply a fact that the Georgia Court in question has no authority to compel documents from Hawaii.
Don't expect this to be the magic moment. All the Democrat attorney has to do is produce a legal Hawaii document attesting to Obama’s birth. A COLB will suffice. He can provide it to the Court at any time. The full faith and credit clause will do the rest, since the “experts” claiming fraud do not meet any legal standard of expertise.
From the other long thread....
I just read this on Orlys site:
Important update! Judge Malihi expedites the date for post trial motions. Moves it from February 5th to February 1st, will issue his ruling shortly thereafter
Posted on | January 27, 2012 | No Comments
Judge Malihi shortened the time to file any post trial trial pleadings. He moved the date from February 5th to February 1. He will issue his ruling shortly thereafter. I believe, he will issue his ruling by the end of the day on February 1 or on February 2 at the latest. I believe Brian Kemp, the Secretary of State of GA, will announce on February 2 or 3rd whether Barack Hussein Obamas name will be allowed on the ballot in the state of GA as an eligible Presidential candidate.
1,090 posted on Fri Jan 27 13:58:50 2012 by Elderberry
Click to see Brian Kemp’s response to O’s lawyers:
The real issue in this is a President is not elected to these 49 United States, but Constitutionally must be elected by all 50 states, unless they have seceded from the Union as the Confederates did. Unless an event as that has taken place, the Constitution is not about Electoral Colleges or being ratified by Congress, but it is about the Union electing a President of all 50 states. Understand that any President can loose the popular vote as President Bush had, and win the electoral votes, along with numerous states, but no President can be President of these United States if he is not on the ballot or certified in all 50 states.
Scholars have missed this ultimate check and balance in the "silence of the Constitution". No state can keep any legal candidate off the ballot, but a state can keep anyone off the ballot who does not provide legal documentation they are qualified to be President. That is the Constitution at it's core in the Articles concerning the Presidency. 49 states can state a fraud can be President in their super majority, but if one state demands proof and the candidate does not provide that legal proof, the one state in checks and balances can negate a national Presidential Election.
...The experts will try to state that .. can not override a majority vote by 49 other states, ..A President must be accepted by all 50 states according to legal Constitutional requirements. Any subject failing to provide natural born status can legally be rejected by any one state, and that one state in its minority rights will negate the other 49 states in the check and balance the Founders left silently in the Constitution to protect America from threats domestic and foreign.
It's possible that if this unwinds BIG TIME that the Republican nominee will be running against a newly announced Democratic candidate, possibly Hillary Clinton.
BTTT for possible forwarding...
I have a couple .jpg copies of Colorado State certification documents signed by Nazi Pelosi and Alice Travis Germond, the DNC secretary.
They are both notarized by a Colorado Notary Public and one is dated 8/28/08 and the other is dated 8/29/08.
The the later one, the language saying the candidates Obama and Biden:
“are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution.”
HAS BEEN CLEARLY REMOVED.
PM or freepmail me if you want them sent to view or debunk.
The the = On the
I’d like to post them, but they are on my hard drive, not a server. I’ll gladly sent them to a freeper who can get them on a server to post.
Do you know which set was actually used and are you able to post them here?
They are on my hard drive, and cannot be posted unless they are on a web server...I’m just not computer savy enough to put them on a server.
If someone sends me a PM, I’ll gladly email them to you if you want to see them, or can post them.
I’m not sure which one was used, but it should be investigated. I saved them from an article I read months ago, and they may be scrubbed from the net by now.
I thought that that may be the case - we really do have two Americas - one for politicians and the other for the rest of us. It’s strange that when the decision is made as to whether or not to file a case, part of the decision is based on who the person is and who that are connected too.
Obama has been well-protected .... a lot of folks are complicit in covering up his past and will continue to attempt to do so. For the first time, I think there is a dent in his armor, if not a crack.
Now, that would be a wonderful event to witness and the timing - although late in the first term would work out well to eliminate a second term.
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.