Georgia judge will hear Obama eligibility lawsuits!

Rate this post

More than a year ago, on December 2, 2010, I noted that the adamant refusal to verify and investigate Obama’s eligibility is a grand conspiracy — by the Democratic and Republican parties, the Supreme Court, the U.S. Army, the Social Security Administration and, of course, the media. I concluded with this lamentation:

“If Diogenes were alive today, he’d be consigned to an eternal and fruitless wandering in his search for just one honest man in the U.S. government. Sadly, there is none.”

Diogenes (412/404-323 BC) was a Greek philosopher and one of the founders of Cynic philosophy. An iconoclast and gadfly, he believed that virtue was better revealed in action than in theory and spent his life in a relentless campaign to debunk the social values and institutions of what he saw as a corrupt society. Diogenes became notorious for his provocative behaviour and philosophical stunts such as carrying a lamp in the daytime, claiming to be looking for an honest man.
Beginning in 2008, a succession of attorneys and citizens brought lawsuit after lawsuit before state courts, challenging Barack Obama’s constitutional eligibility to be President. In each case, Obama’s hired guns — at a reported cost of $2 million in attorney fees — filed motions to dismiss. And in case after case, the presiding judge agreed with the defendant, Obama, and dismissed the lawsuits on the grounds that the plaintiffs all lacked “standing.”
In law, “standing” refers to the legal right to initiate a lawsuit. To do so, a person must be sufficiently affected by the matter at hand, and there must be a case or controversy that can be resolved by legal action. Although Obama’s eligibility pertains to nothing less than the integrity of the United States Constitution, and although the eligibility plaintiffs include Alan Keyes (a 2008 presidential candidate), retired and active U.S. military officers, and “ordinary” U.S. citizens, judge after judge nevertheless dismissed the lawsuits on the grounds that the plaintiffs had no “standing.”
At long last, one judge is breaking from his peers, thereby ending Diogenes’ long quest.
Dr. Orly Taitz is one of the valiant attorneys doggedly tilting at the Obama eligibility windmill. Yesterday on her blog, Taitz finally has good news to announce.

Deputy Chief Judge Michael Malihi

A judge in Georgia has done what all previous judges refused to. Michael Malihi, Deputy Chief Judge of the Administrative Court in Georgia, just ruled in four eligibility cases that Obama’s motion to dismiss is denied. This means that Obama will have to stand trial and prove his eligibility for office!

The four lawsuits are:

  • David Farrar, Leah Lax, Cody Judy, Thomas Malaren, Laurie Roth v. Barack Obama (Taitz is the counsel representing the plaintiffs David Farrar et al.)
  • David P. Welden v. Barack Obama (Counsel for the plaintiff is another valiant attorney Van R. Irion.)
  • Carl Swensson vs. Barack Obama (Counsel for the plaintiff is J. Mark Hatfield.)
  • Kevin Richard Powell v. Barack Obama (Counsel for the plaintiff is J. Mark Hatfield)

Michael Jablonski


+
Representing the defendant, Barack Obama, in all four cases is high-powered attorney Michael Jablonski, who is also the General Counsel for the Democratic Party of Georgia.
+
This is the ruling of Deputy Chief Judge Michael Malihi:

ORDER ON MOTION TO DISMISS
On December 15, 2011, Defendant, President Barack Obama, moved for dismissal of Plaintiffs’ challenge to his qualifications for office. The Court has jurisdiction to hear this contested case pursuant to Chapter 13 of Title 50, the “Georgia Administrative Procedure Act.” For the reasons indicated below, Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss is DENIED.

The most important reasons for Judge Malihi’s ruling are Nos. 6-8:

6.

Code Section 21-2-5(a) states that “every candidate for federal and state office” must meet the qualifications for holding that particular office, and this Court has seen no case law limiting this provision, nor found any language that contains an exception for the office of president or stating that the provision does not apply to the presidential preference primary. O.C.G.A. 21-2-5(a) (emphasis added). Although the word “candidate” is not explicitly defined in the Code, Section 21-2-193 states that the political party for the presidential preference primary “shall submit to the Secretary of State a list of the names of the candidates of such party to appear on the presidential preference primary ballot.” O.C.G.A. 21-2-193 (emphasis added). Accordingly, this Court finds that Defendant is a candidate for federal office.

7.

Code Sections 21-2-190 to 21-2-200 set out the procedures of the presidential preference primary and also provide no exception to the Section 21-2-5 qualification requirement. This Court finds no basis under Georgia law why the qualification requirements in Section 21-2-5 would not apply to a candidate for the office of the president in the presidential preference primary.

8.

Accordingly, this Court finds that Defendant is a candidate for federal office who has been certified by the state executive committee of a political party, and therefore must, under Code Section 21-2-5, meet the constitutional and statutory qualifications for holding the office being sought.

Which leads the judge to issue his decision:

II. Decision
Based on the foregoing, the motion to dismiss is DENIED.
SO ORDERED, this the 3rd day of January, 2012.
MICHAEL M. MALIHI, Judge

To read Judge Michael Malihi’s court order in pdf, click here.

We need to pray for protection of this brave man — that God sends St. Michael the Archangel, the prince of the Heavenly hosts, to protect Michael Malihi from all evil and harm. (For the Prayer to St Michael, click here.)
Let Judge Malihi know you support and are praying for him. Here’s his contact info:

Deputy Chief Judge Michael Malihi
Georgia Office of State Administrative Hearings
230 Peachtree St. NW, Suite 850
Atlanta, Georgia 30303

Email of Judge Malihi’s case management assistant, Valerie Ruff: vruff@osah.ga.gov
Tel: (404) 651-7595
Fax: (404) 818-3751

Another way we can help is to donate whatever we can afford to the legal funds of eligibility plaintiffs. An Article II Legal Defense Fund has been established to support legal actions to help reinstate a Constitutional Presidency, per Article II, Section 1. These actions may include civil or criminal complaints, lawsuits in multiple jurisdictions, including, but not limited to: direct eligibility challenges, ballot challenges, indirect suits against third parties, which would seek to clarify eligibility, or inhibit parties from supporting actions that benefit ineligible candidates and/or officials.
Click here to make a secure donation to the Legal Defense Fund.
A big h/t to beloved fellow Tina.
~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
0
 

0 responses to “Georgia judge will hear Obama eligibility lawsuits!

  1. WELL it’s about time, since Congress doesn’t want to do their job. The Socialist have taken over the government, that is why they are planning on another war with Iran, we have become a bloodthirsty country just like Bama’s home country Keyna! That is all they know is war and murder, and it seems the greed and power hungry Socialist of this government want the same thing! Semper Fi.

     
  2. My friend, an attorney, wrote this e-mail to me:
    “Fascinating stuff. But Obambi could survive ineligibility to run by pulling an LBJ. This opens the way for Hillary, who might well beat any of the GOP contenders.
    Alternatively, if – as I expect – Obama stonewalls the case, refusing compliance with discovery motions, the political pressure will sharply escalate. His remaining play is to shop this to a federal judge on some pretext getting an order staying the whole matter until after the election hen it will become moot.
    But, all in all, I am happy to see the issue alive and well.”

     
  3. Bravo to Judge Michael! Thank you so much, Tina, and Dr. Eowyn, for telling us about this absoluely wonderful news! I encourage everyone to pray the prayer to St. Michael for this honest Judge, all of the plaintiffs involved in the litigation as well as all of the plaintiff’s attorneys. They are opposing a man who is narcissist who believes he is a messiah, and such people are very vengeful and mean.

     
    • Another way we can help is to donate whatever we can afford to the legal funds of eligibility plaintiffs. An Article II Legal Defense Fund has been established to support legal actions to help reinstate a Constitutional Presidency, per Article II, Section 1. These actions may include civil or criminal complaints, lawsuits in multiple jurisdictions, including, but not limited to: direct eligibility challenges, ballot challenges, indirect suits against third parties, which would seek to clarify eligibility, or inhibit parties from supporting actions that benefit ineligible candidates and/or officials.
      Please visit the site at https://www.Article2LegalDefenseFund.com and consider making a secure donation.

       
  4. Are you people serious? Obama’s mother was born in Wichita Kansas and is a citizen of the U.S.. No matter where he was born, he’s still a Citizen of the United States because his mother is!
    -I- was born in Wichita Kansas. I’d like to think that if I went to some other country (or even just happened to meet up with someone here in America who was a citizen of another country) and was the baby mamma for some man in that country, that my child would be a citizen of this country.
    The people who protest and say this is not true to me, are threatening the very fabric of how our country is constructed.
    I mean, for instance, what if an American couple went to another country and just happened to have their child there. Would suddenly that child be a citizen of France or wherever just because the child’s American parents had the misfortune to be in another country when it happened? Seriously??
    And from all accounts, many people have actually SEEN, touched, and felt Obama’s official Hawaiian birth certificate that proves he was born in a U.S. country, so the point should be moot. Imho, the fact that his mother is an American citizen is all the proof he needs, and no one is disputing who his mother is.

     
    • Are you serious, Brandie? Your display of ignorance is abysmal. Do you not know about what the US Constitution specifies as to the necessary qualifications to be President? Read the Constitution’s Art. 2, Sec. 1, Para. 5, which specifies a person must be a “natural born” U.S. citizen — and natural born is understood to mean both parents must be U.S. citizens at the time of the child’s birth.
      As for your assertion “And from all accounts, many people have actually SEEN, touched, and felt Obama’s official Hawaiian birth certificate that proves he was born in a U.S. country” —
      Isn’t it curious that you give no source(s) for your assertion? But I have sources for what Tim Adams, who was the chief election clerk in Honolulu in 2008, claims. Adams has sworn in an affidavit that the Hawaiian state government does not have an original longform birth certificate for Barack Hussein Obama, Jr.
      https://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/2010/06/12/there-is-no-birth-certificate/
      Regardless, since you are so confident that Obama is eligible, then you should have no problem with Judge Michael Malihi allowing these 4 lawsuits to proceed to trial!

       
      • Actually, Federal law right now–in the case of the vice-president, and thus would likely have to apply to the president by default since the VP needs to be someone who could qualify to step into that office–says that you’re a “natural born citizen” if one parent was and spent at least 14 of their first 21 years on U.S. soil. The court would thus have to prove that this didn’t apply to Obama’s mother.
        But there’s another prickly legal possibility: The way things shook out with Obama becoming a candidate, he could be removed from office if found to not be a natural born citizen, but not stand trial personally. He was vetted by the State Department, standard operating procedure, and they declared him a natural born citizen. So legally, Obama wouldn’t be culpable if he proved to not be natural born, but rather the officials in the State Department would.

         
        • marlene hessler

          Danny,
          The requirement to be a ‘natural born citizen’ is that BOTH parents are US citizens at the time of birth of the ‘natural born citizen’. Redundancy is intentional to avoid misinterpretation. No, he was not vetted. He has acknowledged his father was a Kenyan. The Supreme Court has previously determined that BOTH parents must be US citizens at the time of the birth.
          Even if 0 had been born on the White House lawn, with all his czars present, he would not qualify under the Constitution.
          Native born just means born in the USA. Could be from 2 illegal parents. The criteria for Natural Born IAW the Constitution are higher.
          Disagree with your last paragraph. Whether or not the State Department is guilty/cupable has no affect on 0’s guilt/culpability. Just because a person cons another into committing an act does not relieve them of responsibility.

           
          • The Supreme Court did not determine any such thing, Marlene. In fact the Supreme Court literally ruled the opposite of your claim — even the child of two non-citizens — for whom it was illegal at the time for them to become citizens because of the Chinese Exclusion Act — is a US natural born citizen if born on US soil Read Wong Kim Ark. Minor v Happersett also proves your claim to be wrong.

             
      • Are you unaware that all of your claims have been disproven? Obama in fact is the first and only US presidential candidate in history ever to provide to the public his actual official state certified birth certificate that proves his natural born citizenship. Case is closed on this matter.

         
    • Hi Brandie. The point you raise about BO”s mother doesn’t fly, because in order to confer US Citizenship upon a child, this lady has to have spent the requisite amount of time in the US, and because Stanley Ann Durham, the alleged mother of BO was so young when she allegedly gave birth to BO that rules her out.
      You can check this out with any immigration lawyer who is dealing with a citizenship issue to get US citizenship for a child born to one US citizen parent. I know this because my ex husband had spent the requisite amount of time in the US before my daughter was born, which we proved from his Social Security records. If you are really interested to take up this issue on behalf of Ms. Durham, then why don’t you get a lawyer and start participating in this matter actively, instead of contradicting Dr. Eowyn. Many people have attempted to challenge the eligibility of BO and at last they are going to have a chance to have their day in court…………

       
  5. Now that the repubs have handed Little Caesar Obumma the keys to the gulags, I sure hope this courageous judge, along with the plaintiffs, don’t wind up in one of them.
    -Dave

     
  6. Dear Dr. Eowyn, thank you for allowing all this to be written about on FOTM. I wonder if your two articles have been submitted to Dr. Pastor James David Manning of the Atlah World Ministries in Harlem NY.
    He has been fighting the eligibility issue for years now and certainly would be interested. He broadcasts on weekdays on his Atlah site The Manning Report which is available on demand as well as live. I will be praying for your safety too. AW

     
    • I’m an admirer of Dr. Manning too! If I can find his e-mail address, I’ll send these two posts to him.
      Thank you for your prayers! God bless you, Alice. 🙂

       
      • Atlah World Ministries in New York, New York 10027 – SILive.combusinessfinder.silive.com/…/Atlah-World-Ministries-New-York-NYCached
        You +1’d this publicly. Undo
        Locate Atlah World Ministries in New York, New York 10027 – 212-427-2839. Get phone … Business Rating. No User Ratings Yet … Need to contact us? ..
        This is the best I can do, for some reason the AMIN web networking site is not providing me with an email address, for some reason. I”ll listen to his show tonight and see if he has picked up on your information already..

         
  7. Finally, a Judge who is unafraid and an attorney (Van Irion) with a brain. It is a pity that Lt. Col. Lakin, who had the “audacity” to challenge the eligibility of his “Commander in Chief”, did not have the opportunity to be represented by Irion. However, history has a long arm and the truth will ultimately be revealed. Irion reveals the God given brilliance of the founding fathers who put the necessary protections within The Constitution to protect “the minority” (all of us) from tyrants.

     
    • Terry Lakin had good military counsel; he just chose to ignore it and follow the abysmally bad advice of his nut-case birther attorney Paul Jensen, believing that he could somehow resolve the eligibility question by forcing a trial in the military. By the time Lakin dumped Jensen and got a top-notch private attorney, the damage had already been done and all that the attorney could do was to try to limit the punishment.

      It is a pity that Lt. Col. Lakin, who had the “audacity” to challenge the eligibility of his “Commander in Chief”, did not have the opportunity to be represented by Irion.

       
  8. Terry,
    I was also wondering about the name Malihi. Maybe Judge Michael, being from Hawaii, knows far more about Skippy’s alleged Honolulu birth and birth certificate! LOL

     
  9. Currently, Title 8 of the U.S. Code fills in the gaps left by the Constitution. Section 1401 defines the following as people who are “citizens of the United States at birth:”
    Anyone born inside the United States *
    Any Indian or Eskimo born in the United States, provided being a citizen of the U.S. does not impair the person’s status as a citizen of the tribe
    Any one born outside the United States, both of whose parents are citizens of the U.S., as long as one parent has lived in the U.S.
    Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year and the other parent is a U.S. national
    Any one born in a U.S. possession, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year
    Any one found in the U.S. under the age of five, whose parentage cannot be determined, as long as proof of non-citizenship is not provided by age 21
    Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is an alien and as long as the other parent is a citizen of the U.S. who lived in the U.S. for at least five years (with military and diplomatic service included in this time)
    A final, historical condition: a person born before 5/24/1934 of an alien father and a U.S. citizen mother who has lived in the U.S.
    this is taken right from: https://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_citi.html

     
    • anonymous,
      The Constitution didn’t say that a necessary qualification to be President is U.S. citizenship. There are many types of U.S. citizenship. I am a U.S. citizen by means of naturalization, but that doesn’t make me a Natural Born citizen. The latter is a special type of U.S. citizen, understood to mean being born of parents who are BOTH U.S. citizens at the time of the child’s birth.

       
  10. To Brandie Mostrom,
    According to legal definition between a naturalized citizen and a natural citizen….
    Obama is not a natural citizen just because his mother was born in the US. Prior to the late 1800, he would have been deemed a natural citizen. That was change 100 years ago however. Google it and read for yourself. Sorry Brandie, he’s not who you think he is.

     
  11. The article says: “At long last, one judge is breaking from his peers…”
    I don’t agree that Malihi has broken from his peers, or that he as done anything different from all of the other judges in all of the other eligibility lawsuits. All the judges have followed the law. The difference in this instance is that the challenge filed against Obama is legal. There is law in Georgia that gives voters the right to challenge candidates.

     
  12. @ AlCum: “Minor v Happersett also proves your claim to be wrong.” Um, no it does not. M vs. H dealt with a woman’s right to vote and has nothing to do whatsoever with the eligibility of a president as it pertains to the citizenship of either parent not to mention there is a longstanding prerequisite that the parent must reside in the state for which the offspring is born for at least 14 years subsequent to the mother turning 18 years of age. You shills and hacks are getting to be too much spouting your unedgemumcated (uneducated) nonsense. Besides, if the Messiah Barry Soetoro is innocent of ALL the secrets surrounding him then he should have dealt with this earlier and not spent millions of dollars hiding the truth when it could have been put to rest months ago. At some point, every idiot obamobot has to come to the realization that something just isn’t right. Hello!?!?!?

     
  13. You must not confuse the definition of citizen with the definition of natural born citizen. The framers made a distinction in their qualifications for representatives, senators, vp and president. There was a reason! . We must look at how it was used and why. Refer to the early statements regarding this decision and the letters of the framers to each other. A natural born citizen can not be born with any other foreign allegiance.

     
  14. “We need to pray for protection of this brave man — that God sends St. Michael the Archangel, the prince of the Heavenly hosts, to protect Michael Malihi from all evil and harm”
    You are nuts. Its that simple.

     
  15. I never heard such absurd comments from a bunch of nut cases who do not have any of their facts right. They try to interpit the constituion to fit their misguided theories. Stop wasting tax payers money and get to more serious bussiness . I have thought some may have learned by fact checking first before they open their mouths and shown how ignorant they are. Come on people we are suppose to be above this kind on talking.

     
    • Hey, Bob,
      Given how you feel, I’m sure you’d have no problems with us “nut cases” being proven wrong in court. See you in Judge Michael Malihi’s court this Thursday! 😀

       
    • You got facts? Please provide links. I know it’s easier to call us names though but really doesn’t prove anything other than you lack critical debating skills.
      You know who REALLY needs to stop wasting tax dollars? The government! Have you seen the national debt lately? Hint, it’s above $15 Trillion! Talk about absurd…

       

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *