Al Halbert has been sending me emails about the Voeltz v. Obama case in Florida. He seems to think that Larry Klayman did a wonderful job at the hearing yesterday. It just takes too much time to engage in substantive email arguments with folks arguing the same subjects that we do here on the blog. Of late, I’ve been sending Al short responses, the last of which was the title of this article, “Judge Lewis will explain it to you” in the context of why there can be no election contest when there was no election yet in Florida.
I could address the same response (different judge) to Jerry Collette, who has filed yesterday his final Motion in Opposition to the Defense Motion to Dismiss in Collette v. Obama (embedded at the end of the article). Jerry is scheduled to be on Reality Check Radio tonight, and I hope I will be able to call in. However, I really don’t want to argue his case or the definition of “natural born citizen.” We’ve done that in email, and here on the blog. To me the interesting thing is not the lawsuit (which will be dismissed like a hundred others), but rather the question of why someone sees themself as that person who should file the suit.
Three are many points in the Collette MTD, and I’m not gung ho enough to dig into them all (I try just to say stuff for which I have authoritative sources). I will say one thing, that there seems to be an essential lack of understanding on the part of Mr. Collette of how the court rules on a motion to dismiss. I got this part of my “legal education” reading court decisions on motions to dismiss, in particular from Judge Surrick in Berg v. Obama et al. When deciding a motion to dismiss, the court considers the plaintiff’s factual allegations as true (unless they are really wacko). Collette, however, spends 4 of his 24 pages attempting to provide evidence that Barack Obama was foreign-born and that the birth certificate is a forgery. He needn’t have done that; the court will assume that they are true for the purpose of deciding the MTD.