Judge says no to Obama subpoena in Blago case

Well, isn't this convenient... I'm sure that this will make a select few happy around here.

CHICAGO (AP) - A federal judge in Chicago has refused to issue a subpoena for President Barack Obama to testify at former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich's political corruption trial.

U.S. District Judge James Zagel ruled Friday that lawyers for Blagojevich had not produced sufficient evidence that Obama would have anything material to say on the witness stand.

Defense attorneys had claimed that the president could shed light on charges that Blagojevich schemed to sell or trade Obama's former U.S. Senate seat.

Blagojevich has pleaded not guilty to the charges. The trial is set to start June 3.

www.breitbart.com...

Given everything that has surfaced to date, I find this decision to be rather startling. Yes I know it's tough to subpoena the POTUS. However, Obama was neck deep in Chicagoland politics during his time there and still is.

Makes you wonder...

OR, it could be just what the Judge says?
You have evidence to bring us to prove otherwise?
Or just suspicion!!
As for Blago, yes he's very credible don't you think?

I knew this was never going to happen.

Did we really think a sitting POTUS would get to testify in a corruption scandal. I wonder how many promises of further advancement the judge was given in this case. This deal really stinks, going to see how it develops further.



[edit on 30-4-2010 by prionace glauca]

Would it matter if the POTUS is involved in politcal fraud at that level, or may have information on such that his testimony could be relavent? This sets a dangerous precidence, cause not even the POTUS is above the law.
The question is if the POTUS has nothing to hide, then what is the problem with him being depositioned for this case?

I wouldn't be surprised if Obama wrote his own
pardon, before leaving office.