Monday, January 30, 2012
Going forward--and without getting too deeply into the weeds--it is important to keep the following points clearly in mind:
Per existing constitutional law, to be eligible for President or VP one must be a natural born citizen, meaning that, at a minimum, one must have been born of two US Citizen parents. As Obama's purported father was not a US Citizen, Obama is ineligible to serve as President. (Primary references: Art II, Sec 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution; unanimous opinion in Minor v Happersett -1875 regarding the definition of natural born citizen; et. al. cases)
1. Judge Malihi will rule on either Feb 1st or 2nd on whether or not the evidence of Obama's ineligibility presented at the hearing on January 26th is sufficient to warrant his recommending to the GA Secretary of State, Brian Kemp, to keep Obama's name off the state ballot. (Having spoken with plaintiff attorney Carl Swensson today, there is the highest confidence that both Malihi and Kemp will, in fact, rule against Obama, and such a ruling would establish a solid legal precedent for similar lawsuits to go forward around the country.)
2. If Sec. of State Kemp does, in fact, decide on Feb 2nd to keep Obama's name off the ballot, Obama could appeal the action to the US Supreme Court.
3. If Obama does appeal the Secretary's action, the evidence of ineligibility presented at the January 26th hearing would need to be contested in court by Obama. This means he would need to present authoritative documentation to effectively refute that ineligibility evidence already on the record, something Obama and his attorneys have doggedly avoided.
4. If the Supreme Court does review the case, and if Obama loses, his eligibility to hold the office of President, his entire administration, and all laws and executive orders issued under his signature, and his Supreme Court appointees will be rendered retroactively illegitmate, null and void. (For this reason alone, the sense of the plaintiff attorneys is that Obama will NOT appeal the GA decision. By not contesting the GA decision, Obama will be denied Georgia's 17 electoral votes in November, electoral votes he most likely wouldn't have won anyway in a "red" state.)
5. With the Georgia ruling as solid legal precedent, judges around the country will be compelled to hear ineligibility suits in their states as well. (Currently, there are at least 6 similar suits underway around the country--AZ, IL, NH, NC, TN, AL. And with a Georgia judgement against Obama, the number would likely grow.)
Note: It is speculated that Obama might opt to either ignore any and all state rulings on his ineligibility (unless the aggregate electoral votes denied him around the country are too large in number for him to prevail in an election), or he would resign before November in favor of another Democratic candidate. (A Hillary Clinton candidacy has been seriously and publicly pushed by Democratic apparatchiks.) There has also been speculation about a desperate Obama's imposing martial law, but it is generally believed that military and police forces would not cooperate. (Napolitano's Homeland Security has already branded veterans as "potential terrorists", so even Obama understands that the vast majority of vets would not support such an extra-constitutional action.) Not yet fully fleshed out is when criminal actions would be brought against those persons in the Democratic hierarchy who may have knowingly been a party to this fraud. Also not yet fully thrashed out are the nature and extent of likely felony charges against Obama for, at the minimum, birth certificate, social security and other ID fraud.
Keep your ear to the ground. This historical drama has only begun.