I’m not sure that I get your point. Are you suggesting that Malihi ruled in zero’s favor BECAUSE Orly Taitz was involved?? That seems to be a bit of a reach to me.
We are all speculating about an issue that, in our collective opinion, sucks swampwater. How or why Malihi ruled the way he did is known only to him. He didn’t justify his ruling, he just ruled that way, so we don’t have any clear answers on this.
Nonetheless, we know that he ruled in zero’s favor DESPITE that fact that neither zero or his representative appeared at the hearing, nor did he offer any evidence to show why he should be allowed on GA’s ballot. So, this suggests a couple of things to me; 1) Malihi was threatened by zero and/or his goons and he dropped a hot potato before he got burned (skeletons in his closet that he didn’t want revealed!); 2) the fix was in from the outset and he played an excellent game of charades, or 3) it was as FReeper butterdezillion suggested that Malihi used a tactic of sharia law in which the judge made his ruling on the basis of no evidentiary standard and, instead, used his own “knowledge” (whatever that may consist of), regardless of its basis in fact, to make his ruling.
Whatever the reason, zero, tyranny, treason and lying won, and America and freedom lost! This is what makes this case so groundbreaking - a standard of “law” has been introduced that destroys all previous standards of American law. Although we have not been a “nation of laws and not men” for quite awhile, now, today, we are a nation of outlaws in which truth and justice have no place. IOW, we have truly become a thugocracy!!
No, I’m suggesting that Orly’s legal skills may not be up to par and she did not make her case.
I don’t know. I’ve read arguments on both sides, and what seems patently clear to me may not be clear when presented ineptly in court.