Breaking: Georgia Judge Subpoenas Obama, Original BC, College Admissions, Passport & Immigration/Naturalization Records (McCain, highway)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Judge Mahili Denies Obama's Motion To Squash Subpoenas And To Not Appear At Georgia Ballot Challenge Hearing!!!
The Order:
Defendant, President Barack Obama, a candidate seeking the Democratic nomination for the office of the President of the United States, has filed a motion to quash the subpoena compelling his attendance at the hearing on January 26, 2012.
In support of his motion, Defendant argues that "if enforced, [the subpoena] requires him to interrupt duties as President of the United States" to attend a hearing in Atlanta, Georgia. However, Defendant fails to provide any legal authority to support his motion to quash the subpoena to attend. Defendant's motion suggests that no President should be compelled to attend a Court hearing. This may be correct. But Defendant has failed to enlighten the Court with any legal authority. Specifically, Defendant has failed to cite to any legal authority evidencing why his attendance is "unreasonable or oppressive, or that the testimony... [is] irrelevant, immaterial, or cumulative and unnecessary to a party's preparation or presentation at the hearing, or that basic fairness dictates that the subpoena should not be enforced." Ga. Comp. R. & Regs. r. 616-1-2-.19(5).
Defendant further alludes to a defect in service of the subpoena. However, the Court's rules provide for service of a subpoena upon a party, by serving the party's counsel of record. Ga. Comp. R. & Regs. r. 616-1-2-.19(4). Thus, the argument regarding service is without merit.
Accordingly, Defendant's motion to squash is denied.
God bless you Judge and keep you safe - this is going to be ugly and dangerous, but worth the price.
claud, would you accept a verdict from the judge that a COLB is sufficient to prove place of birth and minor v happersett does not give an exclusive definition of NBC?
or would you see that decision as further evidence of a conspiracy?
Why then are you so completely clueless on the history and the meaning of the Constitution?
No IC, you are an unrefined Birther.
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent
And furthermore, the time factor IS important. WKA asserts: "The same rule was in force in all the English Colonies upon this continent down to the time of the Declaration of Independence, and in the United States afterwards, and continued to prevail under the Constitution as originally established."
Which if read properly covers the entire history of the United States of America.
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent
I've already proven that Blacks and Native Americans were NOT granted birthright citizenship until a century and more AFTER the Constitution was drafted.
In a single sentence you combine one lie and one red herring.
As we both know, the 14th Amendment's citizenship clause is simply declaratory of the law that was already in effect. The fact that it was racially applied prior does not indicate any alteration of the law.
And as you would know had you ever actually read the Wong Kim Ark decision, native Americans are an exception because they were not under the jurisdiction of the United states... but under a circumstance not covered by English common law.
WKA talks all about it, IC. Just read the d@mn decision for once, will you?
So to return to reality we must depart again from the bigoted babbling of a Birther to a real authority, a real panel of real judges in a real court applying the only Supreme Court decisison that has ever been cited as precedent for the definition of natural born citizen:
Quote:
Based upon the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are “natural born Citizens” for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents. Just as a person “born within the British dominions [was] a natural-born British subject” at the time of the framing of the U.S. Constitution, so too were those “born in the allegiance of the United States [] natural-born citizens.”
claud, would you accept a verdict from the judge that a COLB is sufficient to prove place of birth and minor v happersett does not give an exclusive definition of NBC?
or would you see that decision as further evidence of a conspiracy?
If this judge accepts a copy of the forgery as good enough, that would be evidence of conspiring to defraud the people. If that ruling came down, I have no doubt an appel would be sought immediately.
Here we go again - 14th amendment citizens, not Natural Born Citizens!!!!
There is no such thing as "14th Amendment citizen."
The Constitution recognizes only two types; naturalized and natural born.
There is no third. Even Minor v. Happersett says so.
Quote:
Additions might always be made to the citizenship of the United States in two ways: first, by birth, and second, by naturalization. This is apparent from the Constitution itself, for it provides that "no person except a natural-born citizen, or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of the Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President," and that Congress shall have power "to establish a uniform rule of naturalization." Thus new citizens may be born or they may be created by naturalization.
If this judge accepts a copy of the forgery as good enough, that would be evidence of conspiring to defraud the people.
So... that would be a "No." You will not accept the decision of judge.
Thanks for confirming.
Quote:
Originally Posted by claudhopper
If that ruling came down, I have no doubt an appel would be sought immediately.
So... you would be doubling down on, "No."
Birthers never disappoint.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
