"We don't intend to turn the Republican Party over to the traitors in the battle just ended. We will have no more of those candidates who are pledged to the same goals as our opposition and who seek our support. Turning the party over to the so-called moderates wouldn't make any sense at all." - Ronald Reagan, Nov. 10, 1964

Obama’s Contempt for the Rule of Law

January 31, 2012   ·   By   ·   21 Comments

Listen to the author read this article

Install Microsoft Silverlight

The so-called “mainstream” media are despicable. The government propaganda news reporters of the past in places like Soviet Russia and their modern contemporaries do not hold a candle to the current communist Democrat mouthpiece news “reporters” here in America in their ability to lie to the people. Those of us who have watched the sickeningly fawning, fiercely biased reporting on Barack Obama (or whatever his name is) since before the 2008 presidential election know exactly what I mean. Reporters for the media establishment would not report the truth about Obama even on pain of death.

So it comes as no surprise that the most spiked (unreported) story of the past several weeks is that of three legal complaints against Obama in the State of Georgia that demand he prove his constitutional eligibility to hold the office of President, and thus, his ability to legally be on the ballot in Georgia. This story has not been covered by the mainstream media, except in rare isolated instances of vitriolic presentation. Have you seen it on your local evening news? Have you read it in your local bird cage liner newspaper? Nope and nope.

This story is huge, yet the Obot media, in lockstep with the sinister character in the White House, refuse to report on it. In the event you are unaware of this story, the bottom line is that finally after more than three years’ worth of legal challenges, one judge has been willing to allow the case against Obama to proceed on its merits. At last, we find a judge who appears to respect the Constitution. That judge is Michael M. Malihi of the Georgia Office of State Administrative Hearings.

Judge Malihi rejected the Obama team’s demand that he dismiss a subpoena requiring Obama to appear in court in Altanta to prove his eligibility. The judge refused. Then, Obama’s attorney, Michael Jablonski, tried to go around Judge Malihi’s court and sent a letter to Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp demanding that he abolish the court case and announcing that neither Obama nor his counsel would attend (“contempt of court” anyone?). To his credit Secretary Kemp basically told team Obama to put it in their pipe and smoke it.

So the hearings were held last Thursday sans Team Obama. Arguments were heard which include that Obama is not a natural born citizen—as required by the Constitution—because his supposed father was not a U.S. citizen and that Obama possibly possesses a fraudulent Social Security number. The judge has yet to issue a ruling.

He could have issued a default ruling against Obama, but as WND’s Bob Unruh reported last Friday,

“Attorneys who argued in a Georgia court this week that Barack Obama isn’t eligible to be president say Administrative Law Judge Michael Malihi considered granting a default judgment before they even argued the case.

That presumably could have recommended that Obama failed to prove his eligibility and therefore should not be on the 2012 ballot, since he and his lawyer snubbed the hearing, for which Obama was subpoenaed.

But the attorneys argued against such an easy victory on the point of the single hearing, expressing instead their desire to get the evidence concerning Obama’s eligibility or lack of it in the record, so that it would be there should the case elevate to an appellate level.

The attorneys also said the strategy decision by Obama to simply ignore the subpoena and the hearing may ultimately backfire, because judges typically aren’t pleased to listen to arguments from someone who wants to introduce evidence during an appeal.”

The fact that Obama did not show when subpoenaed further illustrates his complete contempt for the rule of law in America. He has repeatedly violated the United States Constitution with non-recess recess appointments, taking over private sector car companies, signing the takeover of the health care industry and mandating that all Americans buy health insurance, running guns into the hands of enemies of America in the Mexican drug cartels, bypassing Congress to enact his will, etc.

As I have said before, Obama is behaving as a dictator, and someone needs to hold him accountable. I am not holding my breath for anyone to arrest him for contempt of court, but someone most certainly should. Despite what he seems to believe, he is not above the law; however, if no one is willing to hold him accountable to the law, by default he is above it. This is a terrible place in which we find our nation—with an utterly lawless man in the office of President.

Besides Orly Taitz and Mark Hatfield, another attorney who argued against Obama before Judge Malihi last Thursday was Van Irion, co-founder of the Liberty Legal Foundation. He had some serious observations about Obama’s disregard for the authority of the court, and in part, he wrote,

“One of my earliest childhood memories is of my parents talking about Nixon and the Watergate scandal. I remember the newspaper headline: ‘Nixon Resigns!’ President Nixon’s fight against court subpoenas made international news. Yesterday President Obama completely ignored a court subpoena, and the world shrugged.

Obama’s behavior yesterday is even more disturbing than Nixon’s. Nixon at least respected the judicial branch enough to have his attorney’s show up in court and follow procedure. Nixon’s fight in the courts followed existing law. Nixon acknowledged the authority of the judicial branch even while he fought it. Obama, on the other hand, essentially said yesterday that the judicial branch has no power over him. He ordered his attorneys to stay away from the hearing. He didn’t petition a higher court in a legitimate attempt to stay the hearing. Instead he showed complete contempt for the entire judicial branch and for the rule of law. Rather than respecting the legal process, Obama went around the courts and tried to put political pressure directly on the Georgia Secretary of State. When that failed, he simply ignored the judicial branch completely.

The rule of law, and our three-branch system of government, now hang in the balance. If the Georgia court issues a ruling on the merits and an order finding Obama in contempt of court, and if that contempt order actually results in real punishment of some kind, then we will still have a Constitutional Republic. If this doesn’t happen, then Obama will have been rewarded for showing complete contempt for the judicial branch.”

Yes, indeed.

There is most certainly contempt in every aspect of Obama’s being. He displays contempt for our nation, our military, our freedoms, our Constitution and rule of law, all while insulting our intelligence with his interminable lying. We will have to wait to see what Judge Malihi decides. I have no word on when he may issue his ruling, but it is said to be soon. I pray—and patriots throughout our nation pray—that he makes the right decision.

It is far past time for someone to hold this lawless criminal in the White House accountable. Yes, I said criminal! If you consider that to be too strong of a word to describe the behavior of Barack Obama, then you are simply uninformed or of like mind with him. The time for mincing words and playing polite with this communist Democrat regime is over—actually, the time for it never was. Now, more than ever, we must tell it like it is with this administration and shout it from the rooftops.

When you consider polling (if you believe any of the polls) that indicates about fifty percent of Americans support Obama for reelection, then you know how much trouble we are in. If after three years of Obama’s outrageous behavior in office, we see that that many Americans are still truly so clueless, it is only a matter of a very short time before the commie zombies will completely rule over us. We must fight to educate and inform the voter zombies where we find them, and hope they will listen. Otherwise, it may soon be too late.


Note: Reader comments are reviewed before publishing, and only salient comments that add to the topic will be published. Profanity is absolutely not allowed and will be summarily deleted. Spam, copied statements and other material not comprised of the reader’s own opinion will also be deleted.


Similar Posts:

Gina Miller, a native of Texas and current resident of the Mississippi Gulf Coast, is a radio/television voice professional.
Gina Miller
View all articles by Gina Miller
Ginas website
Print Friendly

If you enjoyed this article, please consider leaving a comment below (subject to the comment guidelines listed at the bottom of the article), sharing it to Facebook or Twitter or another social media site, subscribing to the RSS feed to have future articles delivered to your feed reader, or have a daily digest of the latest American Clarion articles delivered to your email inbox each morning..

  • Pingback: Obama’s Contempt for the Rule of Law « CDR Kerchner's Blog

  • http://retiredday.wordpress.com/ retiredday

    Yes, the commie zombies need to be dealt with. But here’s a Christian zombie alert for all of you believers who use Romans 13 to justify your submission to the Obama administration. 

    (It begins, “Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.”) 

    You need to read “Romans 13, The True Meaning Of Submission” by Timothy and Chuck Baldwin and understand what this passage actually teaches. God does not contradict himself. He does not expect the Godly to bow down to ungodly leadership. God is righteous and expects those in authority over us to reflect that righteousness. When they do not, it is our duty to hold them accountable. 

    If you believe that God desires good government (verse 4, “For he is God’s servant to do you good.”), it is your duty to see that whoever usurps that goodness be removed from his position of authority. 

    Christians, stop sitting on the sidelines!

    • Anonymous

      Those are excellent points, RetiredDay!

  • charles

    Barack Obama is NOT a “natural born Citizen of the United
    States” and is thus constitutionally ineligible to be the President and
    Commander in Chief of our military. Obama was born to a FOREIGN NATIONAL
    FATHER who was NEVER a U.S. Citizen nor was Obama’s father even an
    immigrant to the USA or even a permanent resident in the USA.  For no
    other U.S. President in the history of the nation since the founding
    generation (who were exempt from the natural born Citizen clause in the
    U.S.  Constitution via a grandfather clause in Article II Section 1) was
    that the case, i.e., having a foreign national father who was never a
    U.S. Citizen or even an immigrant to this country. Obama being seated as
    the putative president is an outrageous violation of Article II Section
    1 of the U.S. Constitution, the presidential eligibility clause.  Obama
    was not born with sole allegiance to the USA. Sole allegiance and unity of Citizenship at birth
    was the goal and purpose for putting the natural born Citizen clause
    into Article II Section 1 of the Constitution as to who could serve as
    president once the founding generation has passed away.  Obama (II) was born a British Subject via his foreign national father
    Obama (Sr.) who was a British Subject.   Obama is not a “natural born
    Citizen of the United States” to constitutional standards since he was
    born with dual allegiance and citizenship.  The founders and framers did not want anyone with foreign allegiance to ever get command of our military, i.e., be the president. Obama is constitutionally not eligible to be president and commander in chief of our military.

    Adjectives mean something.  A “Citizen at Birth” is not logically identically equal to a “natural born Citizen at Birth”.
    Barack Obama may be a ‘Citizen of the United States’  but he is not a
    ‘natural born Citizen of the United States’ and does not meet the
    constitutional standards as to who can be the President and Commander in
    Chief of our military: http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2010/03/obama-maybe-citizen-of-united-states.html

    The natural born Citizen clause in our Constitution is a national security clause inserted into our Constitution by John Jay and George Washington.  Read why the natural born Citizen clause is still important and worth protecting.

    Five Citizenship Terms Mentioned in the U.S. Constitution: http://www.scribd.com/doc/11737124/Citizenship-Terms-Used-in-the-US-Constitution-The-5-Terms-Defined-Some-Legal-Reference-to-Same 

    Of Trees and Plants and Basic Logic and Citizenship Types: http://www.scribd.com/doc/44814496/Of-Trees-and-Plants-and-Basic-Logic-Citizen-at-Birth-NOT-Identical-to-Natural-Born-Citizen

    See evidence Obama forged the birth certificate posted on White House servers 27 Apr 2011: http://www.scribd.com/collections/3166684

    See evidence Obama is using a SSN 042-68-4425 not legally issued to him: http://www.scribd.com/collections/3260742

    See evidence of Obama’s forged and back dated draft registration here: http://www.debbieschlussel.com/4428/exclusive-did-next-commander-in-chief-falsify-selective-service-registration-never-actually-register-obamas-draft-registration-raises-serious-questions/

    The Obama constitutional eligibility issue is
    not a fringe issue!  South Carolina Poll Results – A poll done by
    Public Policy Polling (PPP) shows that almost 2/3 of GOP voters want
    Obama’s constitutional eligibility and true legal identity investigated.
    This is not a fringe issue: http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.printable&pageId=340805

    CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret)
    Lehigh Valley PA USA
    http://www.protectourliberty.org/
    http://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/

    “The American people will never knowingly adopt
    Socialism. But under the name of liberalism they will adopt every
    fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a
    Socialist nation without knowing how it happened.” Ronald Reagan
    alerting us to Norman Thomas’ and the socialist/progressives’ long-term
    stealth agenda to transform the USA from a constitutional republic into a
    top-down, central controlled, socialist form of government

    • retiredday

      Of course what you say is correct. But so what? Obama (OWHNI) and his minions don’t care either about the constitution or the law. He bends it to mean whatever he wants it to mean. And when he’s subpoenaed by a court, he simply ignores it. We are way beyond the question of constitutionality. Now the question is, who’s going to call Il Duce’s bluff? Are all our elected officials and law enforcers afraid that if they speak up, they’ll end up being snuffed out in some “accident”? It sure seems that way.

      • Anonymous

        My thoughts, exactly!

  • Anonymous

    There is no requirement that a defendant in a civil action defend himself.  Sometimes the most rational course of action for a defendant is to allow the plaintiff to get a default judgment against him.  I have obtained many default judgments in civil actions on behalf of clients.

    One perfectly rational and lawful reason for not defending an action is to avoid having to respond to discovery requests.

    Obama has many faults. But permitting plaintiffs in the Georgia action to obtain a default against him is not one of them. 

    I speak as a retired civil litigation attorney with a great many years fighting in the trenches.

    • Anonymous

      That’s why the attorneys in Georgia did not want that default, and they got their arguments entered into the record.

      As you know, Judge Malihi’s decision will only be a recommendation to the GA Secretary of State, who is the one who will make the call on whether “Obama” will be allowed on the ballot.

      I really, really hope the Judge and Secretary of State make the right decision.

    • retiredday

      Thanks for the enlightening clarification. Perhaps you can shed more light. Soon after Obama became President in 2008, I read that there were something like 17 pending law suits in various states, challenging Obama’s “natural born” status. I heard one or two of these cases were dismissed, but why, after three years, is this question still unsettled? And why is this legal question scoffed at? The media calls us “birthers”, as if to pigeon-hole us as goof balls, and the Obama administration flashed the problematic long form birth certificate, as if that’s all there is to it, now shut up. If we don’t believe it’s real, something is wrong with us. How long will it take the legal experts to do their job in this matter? A huge slice of the public is outraged at this scandal. And we aren’t all racists or “haters”. This needs to be resolved for the sake of justice. People like me, who aren’t experts in the law wonder why, after three years, a lying pretender still holds the highest office in the land.

      • Anonymous

        The cases to which you refer were all filed in the federal court system and all challenged obama’s right to his PRESENT TERM of office.  All the federal district courts (the trial courts) dismissed the cases for “lack of standing” to bring the suits; all the U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeal  affirmed the dismissals; and the U.S. supreme Court refused to hear the appeals from the Circuit Courts.

        The supreme Court “denied cert” – i.e., refused to hear the appeals  – without any comment as to their reasons.  [It is customary for the supreme Court to decline to set forth its reasons for not hearing an appeal].

        I do not have an “in” to any of The Nine, but it very well may be that the supreme Court saw it as a violation of the separation of powers for THEM to remove obama from office. 

        Congress is clearly the branch of the federal government which has the specifically delegated power to remove a President from office via impeachment, trial, and conviction.  I have written elsewhere in some detail about this power – but in a nutshell, Congress may impeach & remove a President for any “political offense”; and since Congress’ decision to impeach & remove is not reviewable  – it is final – they may impeach & remove a President for any reason whatsoever.

        So Congress is the branch of the federal government which has fallen down on the job with respect to ridding us of obama.

        The Georgia case is altogether different.  It was filed by registered voters in Georgia under a provision of the Georgia Code which specifically provides for any registered voter to challenge the qualifications of any candidate for state or federal office.  The remedy for a successful challenge is to remove the candidate from the ballot.

        So, the Georgia case is not addressed to obama’s present term  – it is addressed to his eligibility to be on the upcoming ballot for the primary and general election.

        Why are we in the “birther” movement scoffed at?  Because we deserve to be scoffed at.  We live in THE AGE OF OPINION – every ignorant person has strong opinions and views about matters of which he is completely ignorant – and he has a compulsion to spout off about what he thinks he knows. I have seen much rubbish about the NBC issue put out by people who don’t know what they are talking about.  The rubbish they put out swamps the Truth spoken by the few people who actually know what they are talking about.

        We will pay an awful price for our infatuation with our own ignorant opinions. Today, we just want to spout off – we are not willing to actually learn.

         

         

  • Paul Edward Irey

    Gina … you are quite correct but even come up short of the whole truth.  The judge will announce his decision tomorrow … the first of Feb. and we already know what that decision is … because Doug Vogt … my friend from Seattle, Washington … who was in the court as a witness for Orly Taitz … called me on his cell phone just after the hearing concluded and stated that Orly and the two other lawyers were called into Judge Malihi’s chambers at 9 am … when it was apparent that Obama’s attorney was making good on his threat to not appear … since the first row reserved for him and potential witness’s was empty.

         In the chambers … Judge Malihi announced that he would render a “SUMMARY JUDGEMENT” against Obama effectively removing him from the Georgia ballot and eliminating 17 electoral votes for Obama.  The attorneys insisted on presenting their evidence anyway and the judge allowed them a more brief presentation … and accepted the entire written documentation of evidence for his consideration.  Never the less … even though the evidence was not contested … it was entered into the record record.  Apparently Judge Malihi … to his credit … is not going to allow Obama on the Georgia Ballot without his contesting the evidence.

         Media … such as FOX News ignored this information … and reported that the hearing was held … but no decision was made … not even mentioning the words … “summary judgement” … or reporting any of the evidence that was presented during the hearing that was fully available on an internet site … and of course I watched … because Doug Vogt was also presenting the evidence that we jointly worked on showing that a typewriter could not have created his birth certificate in 196l because the typed letters that could have been stolen from other birth certificates were apparently placed in by eye by the forger.  Why we know that is because no mechanical letter spacing is evident … and was shown by our evidence to be highly irregular.  For example we found that the two letter combination “an” … found on the Obama long form birth certificate has 4 variations of space between those letters. Typewriters are precision mechanical instruments that simply do not do that.   Comparative examples that I provided from my own 50 year old Olivetti-Underwood manual typewriter showed that those two letters were always the same distance from each other in my comparitive typing of the words on the Obama long form birth certificate.  The evidence in total …. was persuasive and clearly shows forgery.

         Jablonsky did not dare appear in a court of law to oppose this kind of evidence because … had he failed … then evidence would have been seen to convict Obama of birth certificate forgery and potentially … in a sane world … led to his arrest … not impeachment … as he is then shown to have obtained the office through fraud.

         That … Gina is why Obama’s lawyer failed to show up.  Susan Danies evidence is also conclusive that the SS number Obama has been proven to have used … is stolen.  Another felony that he would have been shown in a court of law to be guilty of and the lawyer … who had the evidence already sent to him … could not take that chance of not winning the decision.  There is more … but this is too long already.  I am Paul Irey … who … along with … and in cooperation with Douglas Vogt ,,, have prepared a lot of still uncontested evidence … some of it not yet presented … that the birth certificate is a forged document.   The media lies.

  • Anonymous

    It’s not all gloom and doom.

    Let’s never forget our Founders who gave us the tools to restore constitutional order: 2nd Amendment and 10th Amendment.

    This means civil disobedience and to assert our natural right and Constitutional DUTY to revolt, nullify and, yes, secede.

    In the final analysis, our founders understood that union at any price is foolhardy and an invitation to tyranny. 

    If Obama is re-elected, the civil tumult will be such that Obama will have no choice but to resign, failing which Congress will be compelled to impeach and remove him. And if that fails to restore constitutional order, then every option is and must be on the table if we are to prevent tyranny.

    • campamento

          That sounds well and good but if Obama is allowed to run and gets re-elected the same fools that vote for him will again protect him and it takes a majority to win an election even if some are dead or duplicate votes.  The people that love their messiah will fight to keep him just as many will fight to remove him and it will be another civil war compliments of our dictator usurper.

  • Anonymous

    If Judge Malihi and/or Sec. of State Kemp duck and run on this one, the disappointment will be painful indeed. The level of disservice would be of historical proportions. That said, at least the ineligibility evidence is on the record for all to see and for other plaintiffs around the country to draw upon in their suits. Also, when I spoke to plaintiff atty Carl Swensson a couple days ago he seemed absolutely convinced that Obama would not be allowed on the ballot. God willing

  • Robert Laity
  • Pamela Barnett

    Gina, what an excellent commentary.  I loved that I was able to listen to you read your commentary while I worked on coordination with http://www.obamaballotchallenge.com.  I posted an intro to this commentary there with a link to the rest.

    Joan Swirsky and Dr.Lauria Roth interview with me about obamaballotchallenge.com
    http://obamaballotchallenge.com/presidential-candidate-dr-laurie-roth-interviews-capt-pamela-barnett-joan-swirsky-carl-swensson

    • Anonymous

      Pamela, thanks so much.  I’m listening to the interview now (paused for a moment).  You’re doing all the good in New Hampshire!

      It is also great to hear Ms. Joan Swirsky’s voice.  She and I are email friends, but we have never talked, and I love finally hearing her voice.

      Thank you for your kind words and for posting my column on your site.  I’m glad you enjoyed the recording of it.  That recording is actually one of my twice-weekly radio broadcasts which air here locally on our conservative talk radio station on the Mississippi Gulf Coast.

      Keep up your important work!

      • Pamela Barnett

        Gina, please contact me.  I would like to see if you would like to do a research project on bho with some other writers.  director at obamaballotchallenge.com

        • Anonymous

          I’ll email you, Pamela.

  • Anonymous

    I am sorry to say that it appears we lost the NBC case in Georgia.  I haven’t seen the judge’s signed Order yet; but one of the attorneys for plaintiffs, Orly Taitz, says on her web site that we lost. Sickening. http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/

    obama is above the law.  We all need to do a better job in choosing our candidates at all levels.

    But Orly isn’t giving up.  Note she is looking for plaintiffs for a lawsuit in another State.

    • Anonymous

      This makes me want to puke. Someone “got to” the judge. There is no judge in America who will not bow to intense intimidation by the Obama Chicago Machine. Of course we can’t prove it, but there is no other possibility that makes sense.

      We are so screwed. This is beyond a Constitutional crisis. We are in a dictatorship.

Featured Articles

OReilly_Miller_f

Dennis Miller on Gender Neutral Restrooms

Bob Ellis

I love Dennis Miller. He isn't as conservative as I'd like, but we see eye to eye on most of the important stuff. His appearance on Bill O'Reilly's show was pretty good, until he got to the discussion of the nutty idea of gender-neutral bathrooms, then it became hilarious. I normally try to steer clear of scatological humor, but if we're going to go down this asinine path as a society (as it seems the homosexual activists and their "useful idiots" seem intent on taking us), then there are some serious (though funny at times) issues we really need to consider.

voting_f

Politics As Usual?

Michael Day

The United States of America can't do much worse than Obama. That said, whether you vote Democrat or Republican, you are voting for politics as usual. What we've been getting for a long, long time is lip service, empty words, just plain lies; thinking we can save the whole world, spending irresponsibly beyond our means; no accountability to ethics, the law or the Constitution; government intrusion into every aspect of our private lives… politics as usual. Politics as usual will be the death of America.

42-16470832

Wind Energy Running Out of Air

Guest Author

The wind energy industry has been having a hard time. The taxpayer funding that has kept it alive for the last twenty years is coming to an end, and those promoting the industry are panicking. Despite twenty years of taxpayer funding, says the Financial Times, “Most of these technologies are unable to stand on their own commercially, particularly in competition with a resurgent natural gas industry that has created a supply glut and driven prices to 10-year lows.” The WSJ opines: “the tax subsidy has sustained the industry on a scale that wouldn’t have been possible if they had to follow the same rules as everyone else.”

river_f

Water Threats from the Communist Enemies of Freedom

Gina Miller

What better way to control citizens of a country than to control the water supply? What better way to control the countries of the world than to control the seas? We have two stories in our face this week that are seemingly unrelated, yet at the same time, they both represent the anti-American, anti-freedom, dictatorial advancement of tyranny. A nation’s water supply is one thing, and the seas and oceans of the world are another.

Zimmerman_Grandfather_f

When the Information was Wrong: The Inaccurate Public Conviction of George Zimmerman

Carrie K. Hutchens

While we can't take back how things played out with the Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman encounter or anything that led up to those final moments of life-death changing events, we do have a responsibility of calling the media, our president, Al Sharpton, Jessie Jackson, Black Panthers and a few others to account for their irresponsible responses, reporting and race baiting behavior thereafter. Turns out that, Zimmerman, the "white Hispanic", is not only nearly as Black in heritage as our president, if not completely so -- he was raised under the influence of a half-black grandmother, rather than, a white grandma as Obama was.

Archives

Other News

Other Commentary

Featured Blogs

"We don't intend to turn the Republican Party over to the traitors in the battle just ended. We will have no more of those candidates who are pledged to the same goals as our opposition and who seek our support. Turning the party over to the so-called moderates wouldn't make any sense at all." - Ronald Reagan, Nov. 10, 1964

Switch to our mobile site

NewMedia blog