I am sorry this post didn't come out perfect... I copied it exactly as I received and it was interesting to me anyway. If you are interested in it - read it. If not, go on from here...

[b]CERTIFIGATE


Judge whacks Obama in eligibility case


'Defendant has failed to enlighten the court with legal authority'

Published: 4 days ago
by Bob UnruhEmail | Archive Bob Unruh joined WND in 2006 after spending nearly three decades writing on a wide range of issues for several Upper Midwest newspapers and the Associated Press. Sports, tornadoes, homicidal survivalists, and legislative battles all fell within his bailiwick. His scenic photography has been used commercially, and he sometimes plays in a church worship band.More ↓Less ↑

Subscribe to author feed

<LI class=facebook>

<LI class=twitter>
<LI class=google>

<LI class=linkedin>
inShare72

<LI class="print-friend right">
<LI class="email right">
<LI class="font-small right">Text smaller

• Text bigger
  

A Georgia judge has refused a demand from Barack Obama to quash a subpoena to appear at a series of administration hearings Jan. 26 at which residents of the state are challenging, as allowed under a state law, his name on the 2012 presidential ballot.
WND reported this week when Obama outlined a defense strategy for a number of state-level challenges to his candidacy in 2012 which argue that states have nothing to do with the eligibility of presidential candidates.


“Presidential electors and Congress, not the state of Georgia, hold the constitutional responsibility for determining the qualifications of presidential candidates,” Obama’s lawyer argued in a motion to quash a subpoena for him to appear at the hearings in Atlanta Jan. 26.
“The election of President Obama by the presidential electors, confirmed by Congress, makes the documents and testimony sought by plaintiff irrelevant,” the lawyer said.
Judge Michael M. Malihi, however, took a different view.
“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,” he wrote in his order, released today.
“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,” the judge continued.
“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.’”
Hearings have been scheduled for three separate complaints raised against Obama’s candidacy. They all are raised by Georgia residents who are challenging Obama’s name on the 2012 ballot for various reasons, which they are allowed to do under state law.
It is states, usually through the office of secretary of state, that run elections, not the federal government. The national election is simply a compilation of the results of the individual elections within states.

The schedule for the hearings was set by Malihi of the Georgia state Office of State Administrative Hearings. In Georgia, a state law requires “every candidate for federal” office who is certified by the state executive committees of a political party or who files a notice of candidacy “shall meet the constitutional and statutory qualifications for holding the office being sought.”
State law also grants the secretary of state and any “elector who is eligible to vote for a candidate” in the state the authority to raise a challenge to a candidate’s qualifications, the judge determined.
Three different plaintiffs’ groups are lined up for separate hearings, including one represented by California attorney Orly Taitz. She had the judge sign a subpoena for Obama’s testimony, and Michael Jablonski, Obama’s attorney for the cases, argued that he should be exempted.
“Make no mistake about it. This is the beginning of Watergate Two or ObamaForgeryGate. I believe this is the second time in the U.S. history a sitting president is ordered to comply with a subpoena, and produce documents, which might eventually bring criminal charges to the president and a number of high-ranking individuals,” Taitz said.
She told WND that it’s been 40 years since any court issued such a ruling concerning a president.
Separately, Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio in Arizona told WND he also had gotten a subpoena to be at the hearings in Georgia. He said the goal apparently is to ask him about his Cold Case Posse investigation of Obama’s eligiblity, but he said since the investigation remains open, he wouldn’t be able to say much about it.
Citizens bringing the complaints include David Farrar, Leah Lax, Cody Judy, Thomas Malaren and Laurie Roth, represented by Taitz; David Weldon represented by attorney Van R. Irion of Liberty Legal Foundation; and Carl Swensson and Kevin Richard Powell, represented by J. Mark Hatfield.
Hatfield also had filed with the court a “Notice to Produce” asking for Obama’s documents and records.
He wants one of the two original certified copies of Obama’s long-form birth certificate.
Also, required are medical, religious administrative and other records about Obama’s birth; passports, applications and related records; college and university applications; bar association applications and materials; details on the citizenship of Obama’s father and other documents.
Taitz had filed an opposition to the motion to quash, taking Obama directly to task over what many consider an important constitutional question – the eligibility of a presidential candidate.
“It is noteworthy, that [the quash request] comes on the heels of his extended 17 day Hawaiian vacation, which cost U.S. taxpayers 4 million dollars. Mr. Obama has earned a dubious distinction as a Vacationer in Chief, Tourist in Chief, Partier in Chief and a Golfer in Chief due to his endless vacations, parties and rounds of golf. Considering … it is not too much to ask for Mr. Obama to show up once at a hearing and present his original identification records, which were not seen by anyone in the country yet,” she argued.
Obama’s attorney, Jablonski, also had argued that the state should mind its own business.
“The sovereignty of the state of Georgia does not extend beyond the limits of the State. … Since the sovereignty of the state does not extend beyond its territorial limits, an administrative subpoena has no effect,” the filing argues.
Taitz’s supporters joined a discussion on her website, where she also solicits support for the expenses of the battles she’s confronting, judging that Obama is on the defensive.
“What a joke. He claims to be too busy performing the duties of the president of the United States. How many days of vacation has he taken? How many rounds of golf? If he is too busy to provide the documents that provide the basis for meeting the requirements of the office, then perhaps he better sit out the next four years,” said one.
Wrote another, “The election of President Obama by the presidential electors, confirmed by Congress, makes the documents and testimony sought by plaintiff irrelevant. … This is complete utter nonsense!”
In fact, a presidential elector in California brought a lawsuit challenging Obama’s eligibility at the time of the 2008 election and was told the dispute was not yet ripe because the inauguration hadn’t taken place. The courts later ruled that the elector lost his “standing” to bring the lawsuit after the inauguration.

Barack Obama

Irion said his argument is that the Founders clearly considered a “natural born citizen,” as the Constitution requires of a president and no one else, to be the offspring of two citizen parents. Since Obama himself has written in his books that his father, Barack Obama Sr. was a Kenyan, and thus subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom, Irion argues that Obama is disqualified under any circumstances based on his own testimony.
Those who argue against his birth in the United States note that numerous experts have given testimony and sworn statements that they believe Obama’s Hawaiian birth documentation to be fraudulent.
It is that concern that also has prompted Arpaio to turn over an investigation of that issue to his Cold Case Posse. Its investigative report is expected to be released in the next few weeks.
The Georgia hearing apparently will be the first time among dozens of so-far unsuccessful lawsuits brought over Obama’s eligibility issue that evidence will be heard in a court. Other cases all have been dismissed over issues such as standing, without a presentation of the evidence.
There are similar challenges to Obama’s 2012 candidacy being raised before state election or other commissions in Tennessee, Arizona, Illinois, New Hampshire and other states.
The image released by the White House in April:

Obama long-form birth certificate released April 27 by the White House

Top constitutional expert Herb Titus contends that a “natural born citizen” is born of parents who are citizens. That argument also is supported by a 19th-century U.S. Supreme Court decision, Minor v. Happersett in 1875. The case includes one of very few references in the nation’s archives that addresses the definition of “natural-born citizen.”
That case states:
The Constitution does not in words say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.
An extensive analysis of the issue was conducted by Titus, who has taught constitutional law, common law and other subjects for 30 years at five different American Bar Association-approved law schools. He also was the founding dean of the College of Law at Regent University, a trial attorney and special assistant U.S. attorney in the Department of Justice.
“‘Natural born citizen’ in relation to the office of president, and whether someone is eligible, was in the Constitution from the very beginning,” he said. “Another way of putting it; there is a law of the nature of citizenship. If you are a natural born citizen, you are a citizen according to the law of nature, not according to any positive statement in a Constitution or in a statute, but because of the very nature of your birth and the very nature of nations.”
If you “go back and look at what the law of nature would be or would require … that’s precisely what a natural born citizen is …. is one who is born to a father and mother each of whom is a citizen of the U.S. or whatever other country,” he said.
“Now what we’ve learned from the Hawaii birth certificate is that Mr. Obama’s father was not a citizen of the United States. His mother was, but he doesn’t qualify as a natural born citizen for the office of president.”

[/b]

Patti, thanks for the post-- finally a judge that enforces the law and subpeona- YEAH!

[therealbutterfly] For those that are so opposed to Obama, prove that he is not a US citizen. Prove that he is not or is who he says he is. As far as credentials, prove he has none. Im sure affirmative action didn't apply to the Presidency. And the policies that he is completing are policies the last Presidential elect left behind. That's the protocol. Laws the last admin. left behind. It's not this admin. fault. He will not succeed,because he is the scapegoat. And to have him put in the history books as The first Elected Black President to have had a successful term, would be to much to bare. Mind you, I said FIRST ELECT BLACK PRESIDENT, because historically , he was not the first Black President of the US. There are a few things about this President that I know for sure. 1] He was born and he is black, the rest is speculation.

I'm with you spirit144! It is just so stupid!!!!

Its like if this is all they got to discredit this man then they need to get a life!

I watched the State of the Union last night and as usual I was impressed with what a great speaker he is. He inherited the mess that we are all in and because he can't wiggle his nose and make it all disappear he is somehow at fault. WTF kind of logic is that? Just maddening.

And I am on the line about him, Im not impressed at his skin color. That's not what my argument is about. My argument is the negativity directed at this administration, when Busch sat in the WH, for 2 terms and literally mucked up the country and NO ONE SAID A WORD! He sign and approved policies that has affected this country as a whole and it's citizens. And the voters were from all nationalities that voted for Obama. What did the white voters have to feel guilty about? Oh, slavery, systematic oppressions, all by design! Remember, white america has nothing to feel guilty about. They will always acknowledge the holocust, what happened to the indians and black people don't count. We not looking for sympathy. In the constitution [black people are not even considered a human] .For the black voters, voting for Obama made some feel like after all these years there was an accomplishment, not really knowing that the votes never counted, Bush proved that, when he roguely sabatoge the voting process for his second term. So I take no cheap shots. The truth that's all. Citizenship for black people in the US is no such thing. For those who don't know, you are considered federal property.

I AM FOR WHAT IS RIGHT AND GOOD FOR THE PEOPLE. I DONT CARE IF OBAMA WAS PURPLE

Could not agree more spirit!

Go back before the frat boy and Hill/Billy Clintons and yet more corruption. I often scream "ARE YOU ALL BLIND???".

Part of the problem is the bs that kids are taught (or not taught) with regards to history. White washing is a pun that applies here.

Though there are some of us out here that get it there needs to be more. Some need more than Awakening. They need a good [email=b@#%]b@#%[/email]^ slap to open there minds.

AMEN!! THIS POST WAS A RESPOSE TO BUTTERLY'S COMMENTS IN OOM. POTUS SPEAKS NOW

So if you all don't care about his skin color(your words say the opposite) and you want to do the right thing.....what is SO hard about BO presenting his credentials.....NO ONE has seen them and the birth certificate has been proven to be a fraud.......I don't think SKIN color is the problem.......I think it's more about FRAUDULENT documents and his social security number NOT being his....have you read the case??? The American people deserve to get to the bottom of all this nonsense! Our rights are being taken away on a daily basis and IT DID NOT start with Obama....those before him are just as guilty and skin color has NOTHING to do with it.....many will be arrested once TSHTF.....BO is NOT in this alone.....that I know for sure!

Ron Paul react to Obama State of the Union

"Tonight, President Obama once again showed that he does not represent the fundamental change this country needs. Instead of offering solutions to the problems our country faces, the President was intent on delivering a campaign speech, further dealing in the typical Washington political gamesmanship that has gotten us exactly nowhere close to improving the lives of the American people.

"In a speech where much of the rhetoric was devoted to job creation, it was strange that President Obama would brag about his job-destroying national health care plan, Obamacare, and the Dodd-Frank bill, which, contrary to the President's claims, guarantees future taxpayer bailouts of large institutions. Unfortunately, President Obama's 'job creation' policies amount to little more than continuing to allow government bureaucrats to pick winners and losers, which is a recipe for continued economic stagnation.

"President Obama claims to want an economy where everyone gets a fair shot, everyone does their fair share, and everyone plays by the same set of rules. Yet he remains committed to the same old system of debt, deficits, bailouts, and cronyism that created our economic problems. The President speaks of giving us energy independence from unstable nations, yet he refuses to allow the type of development needed to achieve this goal, while at the same time his administration hands out favors to the politically connected - those given to the likes of Solyndra, who fail to produce jobs or energy but succeed in ripping off the taxpayers.

"Of course, President Obama refuses to even mention the role the Federal Reserve plays in creating an economic system where some are denied a fair shot or even to support my efforts at bringing transparency to the Federal Reserve. Also not mentioned by President Obama is the very crucial need for reining in spending and balancing the federal budget. What is called by some 'the greatest threat to our national security' seems not to be of great importance to this President, although I, like many Americans, believe it to be cause for immediate measures, like the $1 trillion in spending cuts that would take place in my first year as President under my Plan to Restore America.

"In the area of foreign policy and civil liberties, President Obama's rhetoric may be different, but the substance of his polices - as shown by his administration's defense of the TSA's treatment of my son, Senator Rand Paul, is hardly 'change we can believe in.' No wonder more and more Americans, especially young people, are rejecting the phony alternatives of Obama and establishment Republicans and embracing my campaign to Restore America Now."

- Ron Paul

How do our words say the opposite?

Maybe all of the so called politicians need to prove who they are and where they are from huh? Most of them act like they are from another planet. You know... Uranus! Cause they all do such a crappy job!

shakes... you need to reread my posts.

The only time I even mention a color is the word whitewashing. I see no color. I know that there are only 2 races on this planet. RH-'s and RH+'s.

btw.... I kind of like Ron Paul. But then again I tend to prefer the company of goof balls.

BTW...I am white but I have nieces and nephews who are black through adoption or marriage.....some of my white family members are avid BO supporters while some of my black family members can NOT stand him....it's not a matter of liking him or disliking him it should be all about following the rule of law which is our Constitution....this is the only thing that sets us apart from other countries and our BILL OF RIGHTS tell us we have the right to be FREE and PROSPEROUS with our GOD given rights!

No problem shakes
I AM FOR WHAT IS RIGHT AND GOOD FOR THE PEOPLE. I DONT CARE IF OBAMA WAS PURPLE.... says spirit144


I wish he was purple cause then he would be even cooler! If Ron Paul was a nice shade of lavender I might vote for him also! But if Newt or Romney were a color of that palette I would NEVER vote for them no matter how pretty the hue was!!! Uh UH! No Way!!!!

I do admire your conviction to Dr. Paul though. Keep fighting the good fight shakes!

Spirit, you don't understand that he has NEVER proven he IS who he says he is, and that is unprecendented for a US President. There are so many documents out there PROVING that he is lying about this, and that is the reason that SO MANY suits are filed for full disclosure. It's up to Obama to counter this proof with evidence that what has been discovered about him is false. The allegations about his use of a fraudulent SS#, traveled and registered in college as a foreign national, and has used various aliases are questions that NO ONE else would be elected with hanging over his head. Instead of answering the questions (look at how OTHER candidates are vetted...raked over the coals down to their tax returns), he BLOCKS, diverts and dismisses the questions. We should KNOW who he is, and what he believes! He has been given a pass, and for the life of me I can't understand WHY. If you listen to his words, his speeches, they are designed to elevate emotion, but are very short on SUBSTANCE. He pledged to unite Americans, but since day one has marginalized and discredited the "other side" whose views differ from his. This is not leadership. He is the cheerleader of Liberal Democrats, and not acting as the the President of a NATION. His arrogance is astounding, as he spends more time on the golf course and vacationing, living like a KING with LAVISH spending while our nation is HURTING.
You are incorrect when you say that no one said a WORD when GWB was making his mistakes. In fact, it could honestly be stated that hate-filled rhetoric hit new lows under Bush. I agree that Bush made critical errors in policies, but Obama hasn't corrected those errors, but MAGNIFIED them. WE are less free by the day, while Obama only seems concerned with pleasing the extremists of his own party at the expense of our economy.
There is so much wrong with this man's actions and words since taking office, I'm surprised that it's not obvious to everyone by now.
We have to divorce ourselves of the need to be entertained by a "superstar." Obama has charisma, and he makes a good character in a movie, but he's a terrible leader. He is divisive and fails to take the many opportunities to lead that he's been given. He was awarded a Peace prize for Rhetoric, then went into Lybia without Congressional approval! He's not out there creating peace, but appears to be wiling to wage a war of words against those with whom he ideologically disagrees, and wars of drones and destruction on nations at a whim. He's a very dangerous example of a narcissist with unlimited power. History depicts many such leaders in our human history, and it never ends well for anyone.
The basic questions about his character could be answered quickly and easily. A leader who wants to unite people would not shield himself from scrutiny, but welcome it to display that he has nothing to hide, and that he isn't a threat to our freedoms. That has proven over three years NOT to be the case.
The man has serious problems, and you would recognize this if you questioned what he says. However, if you continue to blindly trust him, you will be in for a rude awakening when reckoning comes, and it always does.

Also, watch what happens tomorrow. He will display that he is ABOVE the law and not show for the hearing. He will thumb his nose at our laws because they do not apply to him. My education teaches me that these are the actions of a DICTATOR, not the President of a Republic. In a Republic, NO ONE Is above the rule of law. It is the only thing that keeps us from total chaos.

I'm sorry if this comes off harsh, it just shocks me still that people can't see the validity and substance of this argument. It isn't "foolish" or "silly" to expect that the man changing our nation be transparent. Another promise he made repeatedly while campaigning that he never had an intention to keep. If he is guilty of FRAUD, that is a serious situation. It needs to be addressed, once and for all.

Great thread! I love hearing the differences of opinion! Thanks so much for continuing the discussion from the other side and not letting it die. You guys and ladies are great !!!

[gmahunni] HI!, I understand the arguement on both perspectives. Yet, how did he get to be president, had not all the requirements met before he ran for office? My understanding is, he was appointed by someone/orginazation. The people that filled his coffers had to know these things prior to his appointment in office. How could he have gotten this far [at the end] before the flags went up? What was the agenda? And as far as him being black, it doesn't matter. The person should be one that is for the people. Why all of this now? If this is how our government has operated since the presidency appointments came into play, then we have been duped all the while. Im just reading the comments, and you can almost here what's not being really said. And again the CONSTITUTION does not recognize [black american born] people as being wholely human. It is people like,shakes4life, myself and others that have fought and made the difference. Maybe BO is from Paliedian? NO ONE RACE OR COLOR OF SKIN IS BETTER THAN THE OTHER, WE ARE ALL GODS CHILDREN!

:flower: [SHAKES4LIFE] I RESPECT YOUR POST. THE ONLY WAY TO UNDERSTAND A MATTER IS TO PUT IT OUT THERE AND ALLOW OTHERS TO HELP YOU SEE IT FROM ALL PERSPECTIVES. IM THINKING THAT THE ARGUEMENT HAS ALWAYS BEEN BECAUSE HE IS A BLACK MAN THAT HAPPENS TO A PRESIDENT. AND THE SCRUTINY IS A TARGET TO DISCREDIT. IM READING AND VIEWING THE RESPONSES AND AM ABLE TO BROADEN MY PERSPECTIVES. THANK YOU ALL FOR GRACIOUSLY CHATTING WITH ME. I LIKE LEARNING, EVEN IF WE AGREE TO DISAGREE. I HOPE I HAVE NOT OFFENDED ANYONE HERE. IF SO, PLEASE FORGIVE ME.

[gmahunni] :flower: THANK YOU SO MUCH!! I WILL LOOK THIS THINGS UP AND STUDY THEM.

I CUT AND PASTE YOUR POST, SO THAT I CAN REFERENCE IT AS I STUDY YOUR SUGGESTED READS. I APPRECIATE YOU!

You are so very welcome, Spirit! Be BLESSED! <3

MAY YAHWEH BLESS YOU ALWAYS!

Thanks Shakes. These are some, not ALL, pieces of the puzzle. I was actually surprised that I remembered all this. My research was extensive back around the time of the election. When he won I went into a period of depression, sad and disappointed that our questions were never answered and people didn't seem to care. There is much more research that I had on my old computer, but amazingly, this all came from memory and came out so fast I didn't even realize what I had written until I went back to read it! Sounds like divine inspiration to me!

Another thing I want to mention is that I was "called" to be a watcher in those days. The Lord would awaken me each night at midnight and I was to pray for the nation. I would typically stay up from 12-3am, praying and listening to the Lord. Right before the elections, the Lord revealed to me that Obama would be elected, but that the result would be that HE (the Lord) would raise up a Righteous Black Man to set a standard that would open the eyes of the people. This was revealed during one of the times when I would write quickly what I was hearing from the Lord, and while it has given me some comfort, I'm still looking for the "Righteous standard" to rise up. My understanding is that THEN eyes will open and the people will see how they've been deceived. I don't necessarily believe this will be in the form of a Presidential candidate, but rather a spokesman, an example that people will see as a shining light that contrasts the darkness we've become accustomed to. http://wenotice.com/clients/dgrayson/ I can't say that it is TMOT, but I have no doubt that the Lord will fulfill His promise, and the blind will see.
Blessings and Peace to all of you <3