Posted on 02/06/2012 4:32:19 PM PST by Para-Ord.45
Friday, February 3, 2012, for some kind of a bribe or because he was threatened, Georgia Judge Michael Malihi sold out his country and defecated on the constitution of The United States of America.
As an Administrative law judge in the State of Georgia, a case was presented to him to have Barack Obama removed from the ballot to run for President in the State of Georgia.
His actions have set precedence in American law that if a person is charged with a crime, the best defense, is to not show up for court. Law schools may now offer a course in "The Obama Defense".
Three separate legal teams presented evidence and witnesses to show that Obama is not eligible to run for President because he is not a natural born citizen. Obama produced no evidence, no witnesses and both he and his lawyer failed to show up for court in violation of a subpoena to do so.
Forget about what we think, whether he is, or is not a natural born citizen. Opinions don't count. Only evidence and witnesses count. But we're not dealing with rational minds in this case. We never have.
Judge Michael Malihi violated a basic rule of legal interpretation in his ruling. He violated our earliest Supreme Court ruling on how to interpret the Constitution. He ignored evidence. He ignored witnesses. He ignored earlier Supreme Court rulings establishing that the term "natural born citizen" means, one who is born in America to two American citizen parents.
As attorney Leo Donofrio points out on his website: http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com
"...this Court is 'not authorized either to read into or to read out that which would add to or change its meaning.' ...There is no dispute that Obama was born to a non-U.S. citizen father (his father was a British citizen) and U.S. citizen mother. Being born to an alien father, Obama also inherited his father's British citizenship under the British Nationality Act 1948.
All this demonstrates that Obama was not born in the full and complete legal, political, and military allegiance and jurisdiction of the United States. He is therefore not an Article II "natural born Citizen" and cannot be placed on the Georgia primary ballot."
It is impossible to believe, that Judge Michael Malihi, himself, believed, he was following the constitution and legal precedent. He knows he's a crook. He knows he's a liar. He knows, that in his ancestral home country, that unlike America, he would have his head chopped off for what he did.
He ignored the Constitution and at least three US Supreme Court rulings, defining Natural born citizen as one who is born in America to two citizen parents. He ignored the Law of Nations, that the founders of this country used to draft our constitution. He ignored the countless letters, written back and forth by our founders, defining natural born citizen and their reasons for why they would only accept a natural born citizen as their President.
(Excerpt)
You lost
You lost badly
If you lost to “spam” that only makes you look bad.
“On 25 July 1787, John Jay wrote a letter to George Washington, recommending that the new Constitution should require that the President be a “natural born citizen”. The stated purpose of this requirement for eligibility was to exclude “foreigners” from exercising Presidential powers:
“Permit me to hint whether it would not be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of foreigners into the administration of our national government; and to declare expressly that the command in chief of the American army shall not be given to, nor devolve on any but a natural born citizen.”
Also on 25 July 1787 (the very same day,) James Madison made the following comment to the delegates of the Constitutional Convention then in progress in Philadelphia (the topic of the debate was whether or not it would be a good idea to have Congress , State legislatures, the Governors of the States or courts—Federal or State—choose the President):
Mr. MADISON. ...Besides the general influence of that mode on the independence of the Executive, 1. [4] the election of the Chief Magistrate would agitate & divide the legislature so much that the public interest would materially suffer by it. Public bodies are always apt to be thrown into contentions, but into more violent ones by such occasions than by any others. 2. [5] the candidate would intrigue with the Legislature, would derive his appointment from the predominant faction, and be apt to render his administration subservient to its views. 3. [6] The Ministers of foreign powers would have and [7] make use of, the opportunity to mix their intrigues & influence with the Election. Limited as the powers of the Executive are, it will be an object of great moment with the great rival powers of Europe who have American possessions, to have at the head of our Governmt. a man attached to their respective politics & interests. No pains, nor perhaps expense, will be spared, to gain from the Legislature an appointmt. favorable to their wishes. Germany & Poland are witnesses of this danger. In the former, the election of the Head of the Empire, till it became in a manner hereditary, interested all Europe, and was much influenced by foreign interference. In the latter, altho’ the elective Magistrate has very little real power, his election has at all times produced the most eager interference of forign princes, and has in fact at length slid entirely into foreign hands. The existing authorities in the States are the Legislative, Executive & Judiciary. The appointment of the Natl. Executive by the first, was objectionable in many points of view, some of which had been already mentioned. He would mention one which of itself would decide his opinion. The Legislatures of the States had betrayed a strong propensity to a variety of pernicious measures. One object of the Natl. Legislre. was to controul this propensity. One object of the Natl. Executive, so far as it would have a negative on the laws, was to controul the Natl. Legislature, so far as it might be infected with a similar propensity. Refer the appointmt. of the Natl. Executive to the State Legislatures, and this controuling purpose may be defeated. The Legislatures can & will act with some kind of regular plan, and will promote the appointmt. of a man who will not oppose himself to a favorite object. Should a majority of the Legislatures at the time of election have the same object, or different objects of the same kind, The Natl. Executive would be rendered subservient to them.—An appointment by the State Executives, was liable among other objections to this insuperable one, that being standing bodies, they could & would be courted, and intrigued with by the Candidates, by their partizans, and by the Ministers of foreign powers. The State Judiciarys had not [8] & he presumed wd. not be proposed as a proper source of appointment. The option before us then lay between an appointment by Electors chosen by the people—and an immediate appointment by the people. He thought the former mode free from many of the objections which had been urged agst. it, and greatly preferable to an appointment by the Natl. Legislature. As the electors would be chosen for the occasion, would meet at once, & proceed immediately to an appointment, there would be very little opportunity for cabal, or corruption. As a farther precaution, it might be required that they should meet at some place, distinct from the seat of Govt. and even that no person within a certain distance of the place at the time shd. be eligible. ... “
Madison,also known as Publius from the Alexandria Herald 1811. James McClure is judged by Madison not to be a citizen:
To date I have multiple Founders, common law and 2 USSC cases cited, you have very little.
CASE CLOSED
“
Since 'legal' is nothing more than positive law , I wouldn't expect them to acknowledge that Natural Law precepts are beyond their control.
-----
However, your lack of response to my pointing out that the Wong Kim Ark decision doesn't say what we're constantly told it does is quite telling.
I'm sorry.
I was under the impression I was dealing with someone who had passed puberty.
My mistake.
It IS proper paragraphing. And I provided the link to the entire ruling at the end.
Sorry you don’t like how the US Supreme Court writes rulings.
And, it might be pointed out, that Jay was only ONE PERSON, and you contort yourself to say he was on your side, at all. How do you know that John Jay's definition of Natural Born Citizen meant anything other than “Citizen at Birth” just as I have tried to tell you?
Why did we need a Constitutional Convention if all were in agreement?
If all were in agreement on the final document, why did Madison say, clearly, that Congress had more work to do on Citizenship issues, long after ratification?
“Cite the Congressional legislation that overturned Minor and Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution”
Minor doesn’t and never has said what you claim it says, which is why no court has ever sided with a birther. Same for the NBC clause.
But then, if birthers could read, they wouldn’t be birthers.
Just as Madison, Father of the Constitution, said that Congress had the power to do!
Natural Born Citizen means CITIZEN AT BIRTH, based on the laws in place at the time of birth.
What does natural mean?
Why did the Founders remove born a citizen and replace with natural born Citizen?
15 There are three paths to citizenship in the United
16 States, all of them founded within the Constitution. The
17 first one is Article II, natural-born citizen, as defined by
18 Minor v. Happersett. The second one is naturalized
19 citizens, which is defined under — excuse me — which is
20 defined by Congress as they are authorized to do under
21 Article I. And then there's the 14th Amendment.
HUGE mistake, HUGE!!! And this is why EVERY case will fail!!! Because of sheer ignorance due to lack of study & the use of "current valid" law aka the Expartiation Act of 1868 that defines "subject to the jurisdiction" as one allegiance, wither at birth or upon naturalization. So as the saying goes "Stupid is as stupid does", which is why the judge's decision did not surprise me one iota. Let the circus will resume with their folly. Anyone hear when the next side show to cover-up the truth of the 14th begins?
Because “Natural Born” is being distinguished from “Naturalized”
The Terms Natural Born, Native Born, and many others were all used, interchangeably at that time.
Natural Born meant that no one could become a Naturalized Citizen and then become President.
You have no case
Looks the same, at least for the parts I quoted.
None. My comments are for people who are pursuing tin foil hat theories and expecting judges to rule against settled law. Orly brings crazy theories and insults the judges and expects to win? Sheesh.
In the case of Birthright Citizenship vs Naturalization,
NATURAL MEANS CITIZENSHIP DID NOT REQUIRE ANY FORMAL LEGAL PROCESS!
I’ll read comments from anyone on this. I was also hoping for comments on those more knowledgeable about legal process than I am.
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.