Birthers Hail Judge’s Decision That Could “Depose” Obama

Quote from stu:

You said I was lying whether Obama needs to "proffer evidence"
Completely untrue and unfounded.

You then seemed to imagine I said Lawyers in front of "ALJ judges" or the judges themselves do not have the power to issue "subpoena's"
Completely untrue and unfounded. I said no such thing.

Apparently you meant to say this ...

"ALJ judges and lawyers in their court do in my experience have the power to compel testimony."
...which is nothing the same or even similar to do with "proffer evidence" claim or your false accusations. So why do you make such unintelligent remarks in the first place?


If you have a reasonable comment to make about being 'compelled to testify' I suggest you quit all the pathetic childlike insults as they are obviously confusing the hell out you anyway.

Were you not so vitriolic and hateful all the time you may have read a few pages ago where in reply to one of your rants I already mentioned, a Georgia Administrative Judge is to refer to a superior court. The Judge must do so for appropriate action to be considered against their certified findings in any failure of testimony or whatever else.

You know I don't believe you were a lawyer, partly because of the things you don't know, and partly because to think any lawyer could act like you do in ET or as badly as Oily Titz and still be called a lawyer, to me just puts the profession into disrepute.
More...

1. You are so ignorant on so many levels. Your distinctions manifest your ignorance in a comedic manner. They also distort the "record" of our exchanges. But... I will note... you seem to have no idea of how a court compels testimony.

2. A "SUBPOENA to appear" is how a court frequently compels testimony. See that word... "subpoena". You have been so wrong, so many times .... you turned into a clown troll.

3. you once again ducked the question... answer the question loon.
you are using words you do not understand... and you are using them incorrectly.
 
Quote from jem:

1. You are so ignorant on so many levels. Your distinctions manifest your ignorance in a comedic manner. They also distort the "record" of our exchanges. But... I will note... you seem to have no idea of how a court compels testimony.

2. A "SUBPOENA to appear" is how a court frequently compels testimony. See that word... "subpoena". You have been so wrong, so many times .... you turned into a clown troll.

3. you once again ducked the question... answer the question loon.
More...

Read my last sentence in my previous post to you.
Then go read Georgia Code.
Idiot.
 
Quote from stu:

Read my last sentence in my previous post to you.
Then go read Georgia Code.
Idiot.
More...

why don't you give a quote from the georgia code.
show us in the code where it says...

"Quote from stu:

...
Administrative law judges as Malihi is in this case , don't have the authority to compel testimony. That would take an order from the Superior Court. ..."
 
Quote from jem:

Quote from stu:
Were you not so vitriolic and hateful all the time...
More...
You've managed to produce one single civil response. Apparently all it required was that you didn't say anything in it.
 
How many on this thread are sitting with bated breath and crossed fingers looking skywards to The Great , with tears in their eyes . . . . '' Dear Lord Please make him ineligible '' ?
 
Quote from Spiker:

How many on this thread are sitting with bated breath and crossed fingers looking skywards to The Great , with tears in their eyes . . . . '' Dear Lord Please make him ineligible '' ?
More...

Most.... it is the only way they can win, and they know it.
 
Stu, rather than stewing over jem's endless nonsense, why not just let the fullness of time show him for the doof that he is? I admit I'd occasionally get taken in by the irresistible urge to set him straight, but it has never worked for me, and it has yet to ever work for you either, despite the considerable time you have invested in his education. He is a bottomless cup of daft.
 
Quote from Brass:

Stu, rather than stewing over jem's endless nonsense, why not just let the fullness of time show him for the doof that he is? I admit I'd occasionally get taken in by the irresistible urge to set him straight, but it has never worked for me, and it has yet to ever work for you either, despite the considerable time you have invested in his education. He is a bottomless cup of daft.
More...

the old passive aggressive coward trick.

why don't you show me where I have been incorrect.
the fullness of time already vindicated my position.
On ET in threads with optional 777 and stu I predicted we would get a hearing. You loons said never.
I predicted obama would either produce proof or not show up. You loons laughed and pointed to a internet birth certificate.

As an american we had our requested day in court. The decision is now in the courts/state body's hands. They system has reviewed the evidence of eligibility Obama wished to proffer. They system is now working.

Oddly, we saw Obama offered no proof of his eligibility.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top