Main Menu

Georgia on my mind

It’s been an interesting couple of weeks — first the anticipation of the “hearing of the century” in Atlanta, the battle of the titans Orly Taitz and Barack Obama. Then there was the chance to meet some of my fellow anti-birthers who are without exception, exceptional. The hearing itself was draining as I listened with just a tiny bit of anxiety as nonsense was entered into the record without challenge, Obama and his attorney having chosen not to show up. Then there was the wait to see what the court would say, as birthers commented here while visions of inevitable victory danced in their heads.

It was around 5 PM today that I checked Google News to search for “Malihi” and saw the headline at the Atlanta Journal Constitution, Judge: Obama eligible to be Georgia Candidate. I raced to get something up on the blog and then took time to actually read the ruling from Judge Malihi.

What struck me was the wholly unremarkable nature of the ruling: it was all so anti-climactic. In fact, it is just like all those other unremarkable court decisions I’ve read, going back to the 18th century. They all make perfect sense (well, except Dred Scott).

What the judge in Atlanta said was that he uses the same rules of evidence as other courts. Expert testimony has to come from experts, and the qualifications of experts must be established — and they weren’t. The judge said that a methodology must be validated, and Susan Daniels didn’t show why her searches of error-filled public databases constituted a valid methodology. I’ve said over and over again that nothing the birthers think is “evidence” would be admissible in court. Today I’m proven right.

Today’s ruling reminds me of a joke from my youth (and I apologize in advance to those who take offense at animal cruelty). The story goes that a man was unable to get his mule to turn in the direction he wanted. A passerby said that you just had to know how to talk to a mule. The fellow took a two-by-four and hit the mule upside the head and yelled “gee” and the mule turned. The mule’s owner said, “I thought you said you could just talk to the mule” and the reply was, “yes, but first you have to get their attention.”

Birthers aren’t very good at paying attention, and in particular to the Indiana Court’s ruling in Ankeny v Daniels. Birthers have simply blown off this case: some say the Court got it wrong, some say it was dicta. I said that Ankeny shows how any court will look at claims that US Presidents must have citizen parents — they will take one look at US v Wong and say “not so.” I was right as Judge Malihi found the Court’s argument in Ankeny persuasive. Birthers get their hopes up so high when there’s no justification whatever for their optimism. I hope (and it’s a small hope) that this new ruling from Georgia will be the two-by-four upside the mulish heads of the birthers. They’ve lost 100 court cases and they should stop making excuses and read the handwriting on the wall: “YOU ARE WRONG.”

So I challenge birthers, and in particular Dean Haskins, to stop and think a minute. The Indiana Court of Appeals says that you’re wrong about what defines a “natural born citizen.” The hearing officer and counsel for the Illinois State Board of Elections just said that you’re wrong. Judge Malihi in Atlanta said today that you’re wrong. No court has ever agreed with you. Did it ever occur to you that the Congress unanimously certified the 2008 election without objection because you’re wrong? Why don’t you change the name of The Birther Summit to Oops!

,

32 Responses to Georgia on my mind

  1. avatar
    Arthur February 3, 2012 at 10:14 pm #

    I enjoyed your op-ed, Dr. C., and your mule story reminded me of other examples of intransigence, e.g., Japanese soldiers and sailors who refused to admit WWII had ended, and wasted years, sometimes decades, fighting for a cause that no longer mattered, fighting an enemy who no longer existed.

  2. avatar
    Nathanael February 3, 2012 at 10:53 pm #

    I know we’re in the neighbourhood of 100 northern losses. Does anyone have an exact count? About the only thing that could be more poetic about the Georgia case is if it were precisely the 100th loss.

  3. avatar
    G February 3, 2012 at 11:28 pm #

    The difficult thing about the count is that there are also a lot of the crazy jail house frivilous cases on this same nature that have been filed over the past 3+ years that are sometimes counted and sometimes ignored as well…often because they go off the rails into all sorts of other kooky stuff in addition to demonstrating signs of Birther-type arguments.

    The Birther Scorecard (which can be accessed via the menu here under Docket) is a good reference.

    Nathanael: I know we’re in the neighbourhood of 100 northern losses. Does anyone have an exact count? About the only thing that could be more poetic about the Georgia case is if it were precisely the 100th loss.

  4. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy February 3, 2012 at 11:30 pm #

    As I read the birther scorecard (assuming you roll ballot challenges with the others) Georgia represents slots 96-99.

    http://tesibria.typepad.com/whats_your_evidence/BIRTHER%20CASE%20LIST.pdf

    Nathanael:
    I know we’re in the neighbourhood of 100 northern losses. Does anyone have an exact count? About the only thing that could be more poetic about the Georgia case is if it were precisely the 100th loss.

  5. avatar
    G February 3, 2012 at 11:35 pm #

    Would the all important Tisdale ruling in VA then make the magic 100??

    Dr. Conspiracy: As I read the birther scorecard (assuming you roll ballot challenges with the others) Georgia represents slots 96-99.http://tesibria.typepad.com/whats_your_evidence/BIRTHER%20CASE%20LIST.pdf

  6. avatar
    donna February 3, 2012 at 11:45 pm #

    dr c:

    i enjoyed your repartée this evening on the radio

    just curious – the show ended right in the middle of a conversation

    what was the result?

    tia

  7. avatar
    richCares February 3, 2012 at 11:45 pm #

    curious thing Doc, you did a blog on Amercan Thinker and you made a few comments there. Recently 3 different people posted Mahili’s ruling and/or links to scribd, each one in turn showed “in moderation” then dissappeared. Maybe If he keeps it from his readers he thinks they will never know.
    http://onemorecup.wordpress.com/2012/01/30/why-does-our-president-feel-as-though-hes-above-the-law/

  8. avatar
    G February 3, 2012 at 11:51 pm #

    The actual show continued for at least another 10 more minutes after I believe the live feed must have cut off. I believe RC said that the recording of the show was still happening, even though the online live broadcast ended.

    As soon as RC gets to post that feed, you should have access to the *full* show conversation and be able to catch all the rest you missed after the live broadcast stopped. As I was listening in as a caller at that time and not listening to the live feed, I’m not sure where the discussion was at when the live feed must have stopped, otherwise I’d answer your question more specifically.

    donna: dr c:i enjoyed your repartée this evening on the radiojust curious – the show ended right in the middle of a conversationwhat was the result?tia

  9. avatar
    John February 3, 2012 at 11:54 pm #

    I would submit that the Georgia case was not decided on the facts and law of the record in the case. Judge Malihi clearly knows that Obama is not an NBC and he can’t counter Irion’s masterful argument. Instead of addressing and rejecting Irion’s arguments, Judge Mahili ignored what was in the record and decided to reach out of the record for a possible escape resolution to the case. Malihi apparently discovered the Ankeny Vs. Indiana case and decided to use that case to rule Obama an NBC. Although Irion’s argument as well Leo’s brief which what was on the record clearly contradicted Ankeny, Judge Mahili ignored all of it and simply ruled and let it go. Judge Mahili made little or no attempt to address what was on the record; he simply refused acknowledge it even existed. Irion’s argument was unique in that is discussed NBC in manner inconsistent or different from Ankeny. Again Judge Mahili simply ignored all of this and stuck with Ankeny.

  10. avatar
    Scientist February 6, 2012 at 7:46 am #

    This has been a Giant defeat for true Patriots. The entire contest was fixed from start to finish. Those Indiana judges were bought off or intimidated by the New York Mafia or the Jews or the Muslims or all of the above. The ball had layers and the yellow line on the TV screen was fake. Manning to Manningham-am I supposed to believe that is just a coincidence?

  11. avatar
    hermitian February 6, 2012 at 8:35 am #

    HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

    Judge Malihi in his ruling stated that:

    “For the purpose of this section’s analysis, the following facts are considered: 1)
    Mr. Obama was born in the United States; 2) Mr. Obama’s mother was a citizen of the
    United States at the time of his birth; and 3) Mr. Obama’s father was never a United
    States citizen.

    Now no evidence was placed before the court “that Obama was born in the United States”.
    Consequently Judge Malihi made a finding of fact with no evidence of the fact before the court. He also ruled that all evidence before the court had no probative value.
    HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

  12. avatar
    Reality Check February 6, 2012 at 8:42 am #

    I asked Mario on his blog why he doesn’t put his money where his mouth is and represent Mr. Tisdale pro bono on appeal in the 4th Circuit. I don’t think Mario is up for another embarrassment in court.

    http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2012/02/all-that-is-wrong-with-georgia-state.html

    (Comment February 5 @ 8:34 am)

  13. avatar
    Scientist February 6, 2012 at 8:48 am #

    hermitian: Now no evidence was placed before the court “that Obama was born in the United States”.

    The plaintiffs stipulated that he was. Facts stipulated to by both sides are facts under the law.

    What “new” evidence would you like for a 50 year old birth? Why is it so hard to believe that a baby was born where his parents lived at the time of his birth? I was and everyone I know was and I bet you were too. You are treating what is normal and usual as something odd, which seems quite absurd.

  14. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy February 6, 2012 at 8:49 am #

    Yes, Apuzzo lied about that. See my new article Arrogant Apuzzo attacks Atlanta ALJ.

    hermitian: Now no evidence was placed before the court “that Obama was born in the United States”.
    Consequently Judge Malihi made a finding of fact with no evidence of the fact before the court. He also ruled that all evidence before the court had no probative value.

  15. avatar
    hermitian February 6, 2012 at 8:58 am #

    ScientistFebruary 6, 2012 at 8:48 am (Quote)#

    hermitian: Now no evidence was placed before the court “that Obama was born in the United States”.

    The plaintiffs stipulated that he was. Facts stipulated to by both sides are facts under the law.

    What “new” evidence would you like for a 50 year old birth? Why is it so hard to believe that a baby was born where his parents lived at the time of his birth? I was and everyone I know was and I bet you were too. You are treating what is normal and usual as something odd, which seems quite absurd.

    HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

    Sure! Orly Taitz stipulated that Obama was born in Hawaii and then proceeded to argue that his birth certificate was a forgery. Sure…when pigs can fly. This proves again to the world that all lawyers are totally incapable of applying logic to any question.

    HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

  16. avatar
    Scientist February 6, 2012 at 9:04 am #

    hermitian: Sure! Orly Taitz stipulated that Obama was born in Hawaii and then proceeded to argue that his birth certificate was a forgery. Sure…when pigs can fly. This proves again to the world that all lawyers are totally incapable of applying logic to any question.

    The other plaintiffs absolutely stipulated that Obama was born in Hawaii and the cases were consolidated, so anything one plaintiff stipulates to applies to all.

    I’m not sure what your remark about lawyers signifies. i am not a lawyer.

    Now answer my questiion,, please. Why is it so hard to believe that someone was born where their parents, especially their mother, lived? In fact, it stories that claim otherwise that are far-fetched and need a very high level of proof.

  17. avatar
    bovril February 6, 2012 at 9:09 am #

    Poor old Herman the Hermit

    Actually Orly didn’t, the OTHER two lawyers did and Mad Ole Orly didn’t object.

    So, all 3 Birfoon lawyers accepted, as read and entered into the record that the President was born in Hawai’i.

    Only Birfoons would enter into the record facts that blows all their other asinine nonsense out of the water.

    Since it was entered as fact into the record the only remaining part was for the judge to make a determination as to whether that FACT was sufficient….which he did by looking to the existing case law, like, well a jurist is supposed to.

    Only Birther lawyers can fight a case against an emoty seat, enter their cack without objection, have all their nonsense in the record, reject a “default” and STILL lose.

    Ahh the sweet sweet taste of Birther tears, like nectar.

  18. avatar
    hermitian February 6, 2012 at 9:25 am #

    ScientistFebruary 6, 2012 at 9:04 am (Quote)#

    hermitian: Sure! Orly Taitz stipulated that Obama was born in Hawaii and then proceeded to argue that his birth certificate was a forgery. Sure…when pigs can fly. This proves again to the world that all lawyers are totally incapable of applying logic to any question.

    The other plaintiffs absolutely stipulated that Obama was born in Hawaii and the cases were consolidated, so anything one plaintiff stipulates to applies to all.

    I’m not sure what your remark about lawyers signifies. i am not a lawyer.

    bovrilFebruary 6, 2012 at 9:09 am (Quote)#

    Poor old Herman the Hermit

    Actually Orly didn’t, the OTHER two lawyers did and Mad Ole Orly didn’t object.

    So, all 3 Birfoon lawyers accepted, as read and entered into the record that the President was born in Hawai’i.

    Only Birfoons would enter into the record facts that blows all their other asinine nonsense out of the water.

    HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

    You’re both wrong because then Judge Malihi would have said that the fact of Obama’s Hawaiiian birth was stipulated by all attorneys and he didn’t do that. Instead he stated” the following facts are considered: 1) Mr. Obama was born in the United States;”

    He didn’t say that the fact that Obama was born in the United States had been stipulated.

    His ruling reads more like an Obot dream.

    HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

  19. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy February 6, 2012 at 9:28 am #

    In Obot dreams, judges act reasonably and in accordance with the law and the rules of the court.

    hermitian: His ruling reads more like an Obot dream.

  20. avatar
    Arthur February 6, 2012 at 9:30 am #

    hermitian: Sure! Orly Taitz stipulated that Obama was born in Hawaii and then proceeded to argue that his birth certificate was a forgery. Sure…when pigs can fly. This proves again to the world that all lawyers are totally incapable of applying logic to any question.

    No, what this proves is that birthers are incapable of understanding how the law works; just as they are incapable of learning from mistakes, admiting errors, or writing truthfully about anything. However, bithers did inspire a jaunty song by Smashmouth:

    “Somebody once told me
    The world is gonna roll me
    I ain’t the sharpest tool in the shed.

    “She was looking kinda’ dumb,
    With her finger and her thumb,
    In the shape of an “L” on her forehead.”

    Wake up your morning: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5xxQs34UMx4

  21. avatar
    hermitian February 6, 2012 at 9:30 am #

    Dr. ConspiracyFebruary 6, 2012 at 9:28 am (Quote)#

    In Obot dreams, judges act reasonably and in accordance with the law and the rules of the court.

    hermitian: His ruling reads more like an Obot dream.

    HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

    The word “stipulated” appears nowhere in Judge Malihi’s ruling.

    HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

  22. avatar
    Scientist February 6, 2012 at 9:33 am #

    hermitian: HHHHHHHHHHH

    I’m not even going to waste time responding to someone who can’t even figure out how to use the Quote function. Enjoy the next 5 years of the Obama Presidency.

  23. avatar
    Arthur February 6, 2012 at 9:36 am #

    Do Obots dream of electric sheep?

    Dr. Conspiracy: In Obot dreams, judges act reasonably and in accordance with the law and the rules of the court.

  24. avatar
    J. Potter February 6, 2012 at 9:39 am #

    Dr. Conspiracy: In Obot dreams, judges act reasonably and in accordance with the law and the rules of the court.

    And it’s a waking dream everyday, everywhere.

  25. avatar
    hermitian February 6, 2012 at 9:48 am #

    Dr. ConspiracyFebruary 6, 2012 at 8:49 am (Quote)#

    Yes, Apuzzo lied about that. See my new article Arrogant Apuzzo attacks Atlanta ALJ.

    hermitian: Now no evidence was placed before the court “that Obama was born in the United States”.
    Consequently Judge Malihi made a finding of fact with no evidence of the fact before the court. He also ruled that all evidence before the court had no probative value.

    HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

    Yes I read your drivel and it is totally pathetic. You are trying to make a case that the judge relied on the evidence presented by the plaintiffs’ attorneys to find that Obama was born in Hawaii. That argument is just laughable. The judge ruled than none of the plaintiffs’ evidence had any probative value.

    Moreover, I have already posted on this site that current HDOH regulations do not permit certified copies of standard birth certificates to be prepared by computer printout. Consequently, any copies of certified standard certificates that have been produced by digital scanning and printing are necessarily alterations of a certified document and are therefore forgeries.

    Hawaii law does not permit replacement copies of standard certificates to be prepared by computer scanning and printing.

    §338-19 Photostatic or typewritten copies of records. The department of health is authorized to prepare typewritten, photostatic, or microphotographic copies of any records and files in its office, which by reason of age, usage, or otherwise are in such condition that they can no longer be conveniently consulted or used without danger of serious injury or destruction thereof, and to certify to the correctness of such copies. The typewritten, photostatic, or microphotographic copies shall be competent evidence in all courts of the State with like force and effect as the original. [L 1949, c 327, §23; RL 1955, §57-22; am L 1957, c 8, §1; am L Sp 1959 2d, c 1, §19; HRS §338-19]

    Moreover the word “stipulated” appears nowhere in Judge Malihi’s ruling. Therefore, the fact that Obama was born in Hawaii could not have been stipulated by the plaintiffs” attorneys.

    HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

  26. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy February 6, 2012 at 9:53 am #

    It must be difficult not to be able to read and understand the English language. I don’t know how birthers get by in normal life with their handicap.

    The judge divided his ruling into two sections. The first section was directed solely at the Farrar case presented by Taitz and it is in this section where the “no probative” comment appears. It does not apply to the second section of the ruling. It’s quite plain in the text for anyone who wants to understand.

    Oh, right, you and Mario don’t want to understand. You just want Obama out.

    hermitian: Yes I read your drivel and it is totally pathetic. You are trying to make a case that the judge relied on the evidence presented by the plaintiffs’ attorneys to find that Obama was born in Hawaii. That argument is just laughable. The judge ruled than none of the plaintiffs’ evidence had any probative value.

  27. avatar
    Jim F February 6, 2012 at 9:54 am #

    Wow! I just read over on Orly’s site that Ankeny is an anagram of Kenyan. If this is true (and I haven’t checked it out yet) then it cannot be a co-incidence. It seems that threre is something to this birther business after all.

  28. avatar
    J. Potter February 6, 2012 at 10:30 am #

    Dr. Conspiracy: It must be difficult not to be able to read and understand the English language.

    Ironically, a commenter at Orlyville alleged that Malihi didn’t understand Orly’s case because he isn’t a native English speaker.

    Seeing as the case was not presented in English …. by a non-native English speaker … they’re on to something, all right!

  29. avatar
    J. Potter February 6, 2012 at 10:35 am #

    Jim F: Wow! I just read over on Orly’s site that Ankeny is an anagram of Kenyan. If this is true (and I haven’t checked it out yet) then it cannot be a co-incidence. It seems that threre is something to this birther business after all.

    She just noticed that? or was it a commenter? If from Orly, makes me wonder if she was totally unaware of Ankeny. And if that’s true …. *sigh*

    She is on a tear this morning, trying to dig up dirt on Malihi for her smear campaign. To the point of demanding to know his middle name. Let’s pass the hat and chip in toward her shame deficiency.

  30. avatar
    Reality Check February 6, 2012 at 11:12 am #

    You should let Hawaii know this ASAP since they have issued literally thousands of these illegal birth certificates since 2001. I suggest that you call Director Fuddy today. I am sure they will be most appreciative to know a Birther caught this glaring error.

    hermitian: Hawaii law does not permit replacement copies of standard certificates to be prepared by computer scanning and printing.

  31. avatar
    J. Potter February 6, 2012 at 11:28 am #

    Reality Check: You should let Hawaii know this ASAP since they have issued literally thousands of these illegal birth certificates since 2001. I suggest that you call Director Fuddy today. I am sure they will be most appreciative to know a Birther caught this glaring error.

    Be forewarned, RC, hermitian is the world’s foremost expert on Hawaii vital records. He’s armed with Google and not afraid to misuse it.

  32. avatar
    G February 6, 2012 at 1:13 pm #

    Good one! H/T for the reference. I love that song.

    Arthur: “Somebody once told me
    The world is gonna roll me
    I ain’t the sharpest tool in the shed.
    “She was looking kinda’ dumb,
    With her finger and her thumb,
    In the shape of an “L” on her forehead.”
    Wake up your morning: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5xxQs34UMx4