President Barack Obama’s name will remain on the Georgia primary ballot after a state law judge flatly rejected legal challenges that contend he can not be a candidate.
In a 10-page order, Judge Michael Malihi dismissed one challenge that contended Obama has a computer-generated Hawaiian birth certificate, a fraudulent Social Security number and invalid U.S. identification papers. He also turned back another that claimed the president is ineligible to be a candidate because his father was not a U.S. citizen at the time of Obama’s birth.
The findings by Malihi, a judge for the State Office of Administrative Hearings, go to Secretary of State Brian Kemp, who will make the final determination. Last month, at a hearing boycotted by Obama’s lawyer, Malihi considered complaints brought by members of the so-called “birther” movement.
With regard to the challenge that Obama does not have legitimate birth and identification papers, Malihi said he found the evidence “unsatisfactory” and “insufficient to support plaintiffs’ allegations.”
But at least one person demurs [hat tip reader Judi]
But there is no evidence before the Court that Obama was born in the United States. The court can only rest its finding of fact on evidence that is part of the court record. The judge tells us that he decided the merits of the plaintiffs’ claims. But he does not tell us in his decision what evidence he relied upon to “consider” that Obama was born in the United States. The judge “considered” that Obama was born in the United States. What does “considered” mean? Clearly, it is not enough for a court to consider evidence or law. It must make a finding after having considered facts and law. The judge simply does not commit to any finding as to where Obama was born.
He goes on at great length, but I just don’t have the juice. I want to believe Obama is a fraud: he certainly acts like one. But this is one windmill at which I will not tilt. I don’t have the evidence, or the expertise to interpret it, so I have to rely on others—and I can’t bring myself to do that here. I can share my suspicions (because they are mine) that Obama is hiding and stonewalling, but I won’t go on about it because this is a blog about a little more than my suspicions (though very little more, some days). I have more than enough material in what he is (a socialist) than what he isn’t (a citizen, maybe).
Like this, for instance:
Even though Malihi ruled in Obama’s favor, he expressed displeasure that the president’s lawyer, Michael Jablonski of Atlanta, refused to attend the recent hearing.
“By deciding this matter on the merits, the court in no way condones the conduct or legal scholarship of defendant’s attorney, Mr. Jablonski,” Malihi wrote.
How many other defendants get to stiff a judge and walk? Besides the New Black Panthers, that is?