Jump to content
Paulding.com
Sign in to follow this  
lotstodo

Report: Plantiff to win default judgement in Obama citizenship case

Recommended Posts

I can't believe that a judge would even hear the case....

 

Wait this is Georgia....... never mind....

 

Wasn't Georgia a dry state less then a dozen years ago?

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

 

I also thought you could not sue a sitting president? That all law suits were put on hold until after the presidency?

 

Wait this is Georgia .... never mind

 

 

Ask yourself honestly (if your liberal brain will let you), "if this exact scenario were concerning a conservative president, would it still be a non-issue?" HECK NO! CNN, MSNBC and all "main-stream" media would camp at the White House 24/7 until congress setup and investigational commity.

 

Would you feel the same if, let's say Newt was the POTUS? Of course not, it would be one of the most important cases in history.

 

Of course, the main-stream media wouldn't have ever stood for a conservative being a serious candidate if they had hint of and un-dotted "I" or and un-crossed "T". Once the GOP has its nominee, if he refused to produce a Birth Cert or any required document, it would be all you would hear throughout the media and liberal comedians until either the candidate produced and perfect resolution that would withstand microscopic scrutiny from every "expert" the media and congress could produce, or the candiate would be forced to drop out of the race.

 

Think about it.

 

I'm sure you probably don't realize or admit that the main-stream media have a liberal bias, but appeal to you and all liberals not to drink the cool-aid and do a little research and back up your opinions with facts.

 

Remember the Dan Rather documents painting Bush as a favored VIP in military. Yeah, even if that was true, it was not illegal. Of coure, the document was admittedly fabricated by Rather and his collegues. All media covered it as if it was the next Watergate. When Rather admitted that the documents were fake, it got a one line mention and forgotten about.

 

Here's an even better comparison. It's been proven that Bill Ayers (founder of the Weather Underground) is a longtime friend of Obama. Bill Ayers has claimed responsibility for dozens of bombings. He has actually said "My only regret is that we didn't do enough". That's a fact. Check it out. Okay, now what if George W. Bush were have been friends with let's say David Duke or someone high up with the KKK? Do you think the media would have swept it under the rug?

 

If Obama was a conservative, the media would make sure he couldn't get elected as a dog catcher.

 

Come on wake up! You liberals never let the facts get in the way of your agenda.

 

I'm somewhat conservative and I don't trust anything I hear in any news until I research the facts for myself. Everyone in the media on both sides (very few in the middle) have an agenda. Trust nothing and verify everything.

 

Facts are your friends.

 

Oh yeah, regarding your comments on Georgia; that just illustrates the liberal mindset. People in rural, fly-over country are just inbred idiots. We are backwoods, inbred uneducated people that marry our cousins who are stupid enough to love our country and expecting the rule of law to be applied to everyone. Well, I'm sure there are other parts of the country that would welcome you with open arms.

 

Gunny,

US Patriot

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Coming from someone that voted both ways many times the Republican party is loosing credibility with flash points and these issues. Do they think we are so stupid we can't see beyond a simple statement. I saw a list the other day where one statement was gas when Bush left office $1.85, with Obama $3.50. Do they think we forgot when the prices rose because we are just that dumb? I Voted republican last time but I am having a hard time sticking with it, I don't need to follow the other sheep when it comes to selecting the best of two evils.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Coming from someone that voted both ways many times the Republican party is loosing credibility with flash points and these issues. Do they think we are so stupid we can't see beyond a simple statement. I saw a list the other day where one statement was gas when Bush left office $1.85, with Obama $3.50. Do they think we forgot when the prices rose because we are just that dumb?

Apparently they do. Gas prices went sky high when Hurricane Katrina hit and never recovered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is odd is that nobody is talking about the question before the judge. It was not if the President is a citizen or not. It was whether or not the President can invoke executive privilege in this case and if he is required by law to answer a state subpoena. Contrary to what some believe, the President is not above the law. Case law concerning the concept of executive privilege has clearly laid out the situations under which this privilege can be assumed, and those are when testimony would impair the candid exchange of advise within the executive branch, keeping the executive from carrying out their constitutional duty. The other situation is when national security is at stake. The President must, in all cases lay out the reasoning for claiming privilege, and that reasoning is subject to a review by the court.

 

The President's lawyers made two appearances before the judge without claiming executive privilege. It wasn't until the judge made it plain that he was not going to dismiss the case without a hearing that they made the claim. They made the claim without supporting evidence that it was valid. This is what the judge ruled on. He gave the Presidents council an extra chance to show evidence of their right to invoke executive privilege in this case by citing pertinent case law. They refused because there is no pertinent case law that supports their claim. The judge had no choice but to issue a default verdict in the case, given that the defense refused to make a case at all. The plaintiffs were within their right to request that evidence be entered into the record.

 

The judge never ruled on the question of President Obama's Citizenship status nor his qualifications for the Georgia Ballot. A default verdict is not a finding of fact other than the defense refused to present a case. Whether or not the reading of the plaintiff's case into the record will affect any appeal remains to be seen.

 

What also remains to be seen is if this was a clever ploy by the President's political staff to garner negative press for the Republicans by painting them as "Birthers" and obstructionists attempting to hijack the election process. I have no doubt in my mind that is precisely what this is, JMHO, based on the ease with which his defense could likely have otherwise won this case had they bothered to show up.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is odd is that nobody is talking about the question before the judge. It was not if the President is a citizen or not. It was whether or not the President can invoke executive privilege in this case and if he is required by law to answer a state subpoena.

I look at this like I would Jim Skinner seriously showing up for a meeting that the fry cook at the Dallas McDonald's demanded :pardon:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This court case is a glorified political witch hunt of the lowest form. Most folks in this country are sick of hearing about the 'Brither conspiracy theories', '911 conspracy theories', and other related wacko inspired rhetoric.

 

Extremist efforts like this will do little more than help improve Obama's approval rating and make the GOP out to be a party of radical extremists who can't debate on the merits. It's a shame because an incumbent presiding over a several trillion dollar trade deficit and a high unemployment rate would usually encourage a pragmatic approach to winning the election.

 

That's how Clinton was able to beat Bush in 92'. By focusing on the economy and the desires of middle-of-the-road America.

 

Yet what do the independents and centrists get out of all these courtroom theatrics?

 

That the Republicans have to resort to the most extreme arguments in order to sway public opinion. These tactics will go as well in 2012 as the 911 conspiracy nuts did for the Dems back in 2004.

 

I have no dog in this fight. The GOP has gone from conservative to corporatist. While the Democrats have become too reliant on unions and... corporatists. On a national level neither party has done a good job of representing the citizens.

 

But if the GOP wants to hand Obama stronger approval ratings by re-invoking a Kenneth Starr styled campaign, then have at it. I hope the powers that be on both sides of the aisle who encourage this type of mudslinging go down in flames come November.

Edited by Steven Lang
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This court case is a glorified political witch hunt of the lowest form. Most folks in this country are sick of hearing about the 'Brither conspiracy theories', '911 conspracy theories', and other related wacko inspired rhetoric.

 

Extremist efforts like this will do little more than help improve Obama's approval rating and make the GOP out to be a party of radical extremists who can't debate on the merits. It's a shame because an incumbent presiding over a several trillion dollar trade deficit and a high unemployment rate would usually encourage a pragmatic approach to winning the election.

 

That's how Clinton was able to beat Bush in 92'. By focusing on the economy and the desires of middle-of-the-road America.

 

Yet what do the independents and centrists get out of all these courtroom theatrics?

 

That the Republicans have to resort to the most extreme arguments in order to sway public opinion. These tactics will go as well in 2012 as the 911 conspiracy nuts did for the Dems back in 2004.

 

I have no dog in this fight. The GOP has gone from conservative to corporatist. While the Democrats have become too reliant on unions and... corporatists. On a national level neither party has done a good job of representing the citizens.

 

But if the GOP wants to hand Obama stronger approval ratings by re-invoking a Kenneth Starr styled campaign, then have at it. I hope the powers that be on both sides of the aisle who encourage this type of mudslinging go down in flames come November.

WOW!!! Really, really, really good post!! +1000

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This court case is a glorified political witch hunt of the lowest form. Most folks in this country are sick of hearing about the 'Brither conspiracy theories', '911 conspracy theories', and other related wacko inspired rhetoric.

 

Extremist efforts like this will do little more than help improve Obama's approval rating and make the GOP out to be a party of radical extremists who can't debate on the merits. It's a shame because an incumbent presiding over a several trillion dollar trade deficit and a high unemployment rate would usually encourage a pragmatic approach to winning the election.

 

That's how Clinton was able to beat Bush in 92'. By focusing on the economy and the desires of middle-of-the-road America.

 

Yet what do the independents and centrists get out of all these courtroom theatrics?

 

That the Republicans have to resort to the most extreme arguments in order to sway public opinion. These tactics will go as well in 2012 as the 911 conspiracy nuts did for the Dems back in 2004.

 

I have no dog in this fight. The GOP has gone from conservative to corporatist. While the Democrats have become too reliant on unions and... corporatists. On a national level neither party has done a good job of representing the citizens.

 

But if the GOP wants to hand Obama stronger approval ratings by re-invoking a Kenneth Starr styled campaign, then have at it. I hope the powers that be on both sides of the aisle who encourage this type of mudslinging go down in flames come November.

^^^^Case in Point. This is precisely what the President's team hoped would come out of this. This is exactly what cases of this type can generate, and the President played it brilliantly. Absolutely brilliantly. The longer this is in the news, the less he will have to defend his abysmal record. The more he can deflect, point and ridicule. The more he can paint the Republican Party with the "Birther" brush. Ridicule is your most potent weapon. It is impossible to counterattack ridicule because ridicule is not based in reason. The plaintiffs in this case handed him a one of a kind gem.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't believe that a judge would even hear the case....

 

Wait this is Georgia....... never mind....

 

Wasn't Georgia a dry state less then a dozen years ago?

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

 

I also thought you could not sue a sitting president? That all law suits were put on hold until after the presidency?

 

Wait this is Georgia .... never mind

 

 

It is a buyer's market right now, so I'm sure you could easily find another state in which to reside at a great price, where you would be much happier. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...