Obama eligibility: NJ judges suspend American common law
Nicholas E. Purpura
New
Jersey’s courts made themselves a laughingstock by their handling of
our Obama eligibility case. The people of New Jersey should hang a
plaque at the door to each courthouse:
Welcome to Disneyland! See with your own eyes living cartoon characters masquerading as judges!
Resident cartoon character at large
Administrative Law Judge Jeff Masin,
alias “Dumbo,” heard
arguments regarding Barack Hussein Obama’s right to place himself on
ballots in New Jersey. This judge epitomizes the lack of understanding
of American Common law on the bench. (Or did he take orders from the
political bosses?)
Masin, quite simply, pre-judged the case. Sour grapes? I
think not. Why did Masin hold up the Georgia ALJ’s decision on the
Obama eligibility issue and wave it about? Why did he, smiling, boast that he was a personal friend of Judge Malihi?
I know Judge Malihi; he’s a friend of mine.
Now why did he have the decision by Malihi (the Muslim
with a persona history) on his desk, and why did he throw it in our
face? How does a decision in other State (and a
defective one, at that!) affect the election laws in the sovereign State of New Jersey?
Does America know that even the Board of Elections’ Director, Mr. Robert Giles, before witnesses and the press said that the State had no proof of eligibility
for Mr. Obama on file in New Jersey, now nor in 2008? Or that Alexandra
Hill, who argued Obama’s case before Masin, said in effect,
No evidence of his eligibility is needed, even “Mickey Mouse” can be on the Presidential ballot in New Jersey.
If you are a judge, do you not think to yourself, Doesn’t
the law require a candidate, and those submitting signatures to
nominate him, to sign off on his eligibility to the office he seeks? Oh, but that would adhere to the election statutes.
Obama eligibility: the concession that wasn’t
Obama's long-form birth certificate, as released by the White House. This is not evidence. Obama's own lawyers admitted that it is not evidence. Screen capture by CNAV from White House image.
Secondly, defense counsel conceded that there is/was no evidence. She even declined to admit the
computer image
(read: forgery) as evidence of eligibility. So has not the public and
the court a right to know? Why didn’t Masin ask for proof? Did he
decline because no proof was available? Or did he seek to avoid asking
for proof? Did he, perhaps, fear that he might prove a forgery is all we
have of Obama’s
birth certificate?
Mason behaved like a political hack. He refused plaintiffs an
opportunity to call expert or other witnesses on this or any other
evidentiary matter on Obama eligibility. A judge is supposed to know the
law. Why did he not realize that such a denial is inconsistent with
court rulings in other cases? By refusing to hear argument for
consistent judicial treatment, he denied us due process of law. Our
legal culture strongly associates consistency with fairness and
correctness. Once he had before him a question of a forged birth
certificate, he should have made the defendants introduce evidence.
None exists. So what does he do? He joins other “hoodlums in black robes” who protect their Marxist master, and d__n the public.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.