Tweet
What Price Freedom?
POST-MALIHI RULING ANALYSIS AND INTERVIEW WITH CARL SWENSSON
The Post & Email
Jedi Pauly, ©2012
2/7/2012
Excerpt:
"Where do we go from here?
As most people are probably aware by now, Georgia Administrative Law Judge Malihi handed down his decision on Friday, February 3, 2012, ruling in favor of the eligibility of Mr. Barack Obama to be on the Georgia ballot for the Presidential election in 2012.
The case was filed in a challenge to Mr. Obama’s eligibility by several plaintiffs in Georgia. Their attorneys contend that Mr. Obama does not meet the Constitutional requirements stated in Article II, Section 1 of the United States Constitution, specifically, that Mr. Obama is not a “natural born Citizen” as defined by the Constitution, history, Natural Law, and U.S. case law, due to his father never having been a United States citizen.
We caught up with Carl Swensson, the head of the Republican Party of Clayton County, GA, one of the plaintiffs in the Georgia case that was before Judge Malihi, and he generously agreed to answer a few questions to help us understand where we go from here.
Jedi Pauly: “Hello, Carl. Thank you for agreeing to give us some time and help us understand the process we are in at this time.”
Carl: “My pleasure.”
Jedi Pauly: “Did you have a chance to talk to your attorney, Mark Hatfield, or to Atty. Irion regarding the judge’s finding? What was their take or response?”
Carl: “Well, their take was that they were totally, greatly flabbergasted by what this judge said. He [the judge] didn’t deal with the facts as presented; he came up with his own facts. He did not deal with any facts in the law here. He dealt with opinion. And, he used opinion from the Ankeny case to formulate his decision, a case, by the way, that comes from or went on in… Indiana????”
“Instead of referring and dealing with the issues that we put before him, which were strictly constitutional and strictly based upon Supreme Court decisions, he decides to wander off into another State’s court that didn’t even use theirs as case law. They used it strictly as an opinion. And this judge was somehow convinced that that court put forth the most persuasive argument.”
Jedi Pauly: “Carl, let me ask you this. Do you think it is possible that this judge knows you are going to appeal this decision and that he reached across States to Indiana in order to send a signal to the higher courts that now we have a situation where the State courts are attempting to redefine Article II “natural born Citizen” via the 14th Amendment soil, making it that anyone born on U.S. soil is defined to be a “natural born Citizen” regardless of the citizenship of the parents, even though by definition those born on soil regardless of parents are naturalized citizens at birth, which is the opposite of natural born? Do you think he is doing this to show that there is a trend among the States to redefine Article II, or is it something else?
Carl: “I think there are two things at play here. The trend has been going on for the past ten years to redefine that so that people like Arnold Schwarzenegger, Marco Rubio, and people who have ascended [politically] who have some appeal, and could raise money for the various parties, would be eligible to be marketed. I think that is a large part of what we are seeing here. I do think it all comes down to the money. It has nothing to do with the Constitution. They couldn’t care less about the Constitution.”
Jedi Pauly: “You see this as an ongoing example of the erosion of our sovereignty and sovereign political rights, opening things up to any foreign nation or foreign corporation, essentially wealthy agents, the rich, regardless of any rule of law?”
Carl: “Yes. This is a nation of political capitalism, not marketplace capitalism. They are using commerce to accomplish everything that they could not accomplish through the legislative process. However, there is another aspect. Keep in mind that should this judge have given us a favorable decision, the ramifications to the State of Georgia would have been twofold. First, they would have had the costs of fending off the challenge that would be coming from DC. They did not want that. Secondly, they ran the risk of losing federal funds. The cost for the State of Georgia to do the right thing was overwhelming. They chose the financial aspect over the Constitutional one.”
View the complete article at:
http://www.thepostemail.com/2012/02/...price-freedom/
POST-MALIHI RULING ANALYSIS AND INTERVIEW WITH CARL SWENSSON
The Post & Email
Jedi Pauly, ©2012
2/7/2012
Excerpt:
"Where do we go from here?
As most people are probably aware by now, Georgia Administrative Law Judge Malihi handed down his decision on Friday, February 3, 2012, ruling in favor of the eligibility of Mr. Barack Obama to be on the Georgia ballot for the Presidential election in 2012.
The case was filed in a challenge to Mr. Obama’s eligibility by several plaintiffs in Georgia. Their attorneys contend that Mr. Obama does not meet the Constitutional requirements stated in Article II, Section 1 of the United States Constitution, specifically, that Mr. Obama is not a “natural born Citizen” as defined by the Constitution, history, Natural Law, and U.S. case law, due to his father never having been a United States citizen.
We caught up with Carl Swensson, the head of the Republican Party of Clayton County, GA, one of the plaintiffs in the Georgia case that was before Judge Malihi, and he generously agreed to answer a few questions to help us understand where we go from here.
Jedi Pauly: “Hello, Carl. Thank you for agreeing to give us some time and help us understand the process we are in at this time.”
Carl: “My pleasure.”
Jedi Pauly: “Did you have a chance to talk to your attorney, Mark Hatfield, or to Atty. Irion regarding the judge’s finding? What was their take or response?”
Carl: “Well, their take was that they were totally, greatly flabbergasted by what this judge said. He [the judge] didn’t deal with the facts as presented; he came up with his own facts. He did not deal with any facts in the law here. He dealt with opinion. And, he used opinion from the Ankeny case to formulate his decision, a case, by the way, that comes from or went on in… Indiana????”
“Instead of referring and dealing with the issues that we put before him, which were strictly constitutional and strictly based upon Supreme Court decisions, he decides to wander off into another State’s court that didn’t even use theirs as case law. They used it strictly as an opinion. And this judge was somehow convinced that that court put forth the most persuasive argument.”
Jedi Pauly: “Carl, let me ask you this. Do you think it is possible that this judge knows you are going to appeal this decision and that he reached across States to Indiana in order to send a signal to the higher courts that now we have a situation where the State courts are attempting to redefine Article II “natural born Citizen” via the 14th Amendment soil, making it that anyone born on U.S. soil is defined to be a “natural born Citizen” regardless of the citizenship of the parents, even though by definition those born on soil regardless of parents are naturalized citizens at birth, which is the opposite of natural born? Do you think he is doing this to show that there is a trend among the States to redefine Article II, or is it something else?
Carl: “I think there are two things at play here. The trend has been going on for the past ten years to redefine that so that people like Arnold Schwarzenegger, Marco Rubio, and people who have ascended [politically] who have some appeal, and could raise money for the various parties, would be eligible to be marketed. I think that is a large part of what we are seeing here. I do think it all comes down to the money. It has nothing to do with the Constitution. They couldn’t care less about the Constitution.”
Jedi Pauly: “You see this as an ongoing example of the erosion of our sovereignty and sovereign political rights, opening things up to any foreign nation or foreign corporation, essentially wealthy agents, the rich, regardless of any rule of law?”
Carl: “Yes. This is a nation of political capitalism, not marketplace capitalism. They are using commerce to accomplish everything that they could not accomplish through the legislative process. However, there is another aspect. Keep in mind that should this judge have given us a favorable decision, the ramifications to the State of Georgia would have been twofold. First, they would have had the costs of fending off the challenge that would be coming from DC. They did not want that. Secondly, they ran the risk of losing federal funds. The cost for the State of Georgia to do the right thing was overwhelming. They chose the financial aspect over the Constitutional one.”
View the complete article at:
http://www.thepostemail.com/2012/02/...price-freedom/