Ga. judge orders president to appear at hearing , page 1
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 66 times
Topic started on 21-1-2012 @ 09:18 AM by Iamonlyhuman

Ga. judge orders president to appear at hearing


www.thestate.com
ATLANTA — A judge has ordered President Barack Obama to appear in court in Atlanta for a hearing on a complaint that says Obama isn't a natural-born citizen and can't be president.

A Georgia resident made the complaint, which is intended to keep Obama's name off the state's ballot in the March presidential primary.

Deputy Chief Judge Michael Malihi on Friday denied a motion by the president's lawyer to quash a subpoena that requires Obama to show up.
(visit the link for the full news article)

edit on 21/1/2012 by Iamonlyhuman because: (no reason given)



reply posted on 21-1-2012 @ 09:30 AM by Iamonlyhuman
Seems this judge has experience in qualification suits:

www.peachpundit.com... citizen-case/
Judge Malihi is no rookie: he has served since 1995 as a Judge on the Georgia Office of State Administrative Hearings.

The Judge has previously ruled in political campaign residency cases, including a finding in 2006 that Democratic Senate candidate Mell Traylor was not a resident of Senate district 1 in the Savannah area. Traylor was challenging Republican Sen. Eric Johnson at the time. Judge Malihi’s ruling was upheld and Traylor was disqualified.




reply posted on 21-1-2012 @ 09:36 AM by Iamonlyhuman
This excerpt from the Judge's Order on Motion to Quash Subpoena:

www.art2superpac.com...
Defendant's motion suggests that no President should be compelled to
attend a Court hearing. This may be correct. But Defendant has failed to enlighten the Court
with any legal authority. Specifically, Defendant has failed to cite to any legal authority
evidencing why his attendance is "unreasonable or oppressive, or that the testimony... [is]
irrelevant, immaterial, or cumulative and unnecessary to a party's preparation or presentation at
the hearing, or that basic fairness dictates that the subpoena should not be enforced." Ga. Comp.
R. & Regs. r. 616-1-2-.19(5).




Obama: I'm President and I don't have to do anything I don't want to.

Judge: Sorry, that's not good enough, sir. Motion to quash is denied.

edit on 21/1/2012 by Iamonlyhuman because: (no reason given)



reply posted on 21-1-2012 @ 09:44 AM by syrinx high priest
Originally posted by Iamonlyhuman
This excerpt from the Judge's Order on Motion to Quash Subpoena:

www.art2superpac.com...
Defendant's motion suggests that no President should be compelled to
attend a Court hearing. This may be correct. But Defendant has failed to enlighten the Court
with any legal authority. Specifically, Defendant has failed to cite to any legal authority
evidencing why his attendance is "unreasonable or oppressive, or that the testimony... [is]
irrelevant, immaterial, or cumulative and unnecessary to a party's preparation or presentation at
the hearing, or that basic fairness dictates that the subpoena should not be enforced." Ga. Comp.
R. & Regs. r. 616-1-2-.19(5).




Obama: I'm President and I don't have to do anything I don't want to.

Judge: Sorry, that's not good enough, sir. Motion to quash is denied.

edit on 21/1/2012 by Iamonlyhuman because: (no reason given)




from your source

"This may be correct"

nothing will come from this


reply posted on 21-1-2012 @ 09:55 AM by Iamonlyhuman
reply to post by syrinx high priest



Actually, it's not a motion to remove Obama from office. It seems this is a challenge to his eligibility to run in the 2012 election and the plaintiffs, this time around, have standing.

Judge Malihi’s decision appears to accept the plaintiffs’ standing to defend the requirements for President set forth in Article II: Both the Secretary of State and the electors of Georgia are granted the authority under the Code to challenge the qualifications of a candidate. The challenge procedures are defined in Code Section 21-2-5(b), which authorizes any elector who is eligible to vote for a candidate to challenge the qualifications of the candidate by filing a written complaint with the Secretary of State within two weeks after the deadline for qualifying. O.C.G.A. § 21-2-5(b).
edit on 21/1/2012 by Iamonlyhuman because: (no reason given)




reply posted on 21-1-2012 @ 10:01 AM by syrinx high priest
Originally posted by Iamonlyhuman
reply to
post by syrinx high priest



Actually, it's not a motion to remove Obama from office. It seems this is a challenge to his eligibility to run in the 2012 election and the plaintiffs, this time around, have standing.

Judge Malihi’s decision appears to accept the plaintiffs’ standing to defend the requirements for President set forth in Article II: Both the Secretary of State and the electors of Georgia are granted the authority under the Code to challenge the qualifications of a candidate. The challenge procedures are defined in Code Section 21-2-5(b), which authorizes any elector who is eligible to vote for a candidate to challenge the qualifications of the candidate by filing a written complaint with the Secretary of State within two weeks after the deadline for qualifying. O.C.G.A. § 21-2-5(b).
edit on 21/1/2012 by Iamonlyhuman because: (no reason given)


interesting, but I don't expect he will appear, the most you can hope for is his lawyers are compelled to show documentation. I think he has it, and uses this to gain sympathy votes. the republican strategists know this and never bring it up. it strengthens him like lightning for king kong

I am in the camp that natural born means you gained your citizenship by way of your birth, and has absolutely nothing to do with your parents, so I have always felt he was born in hawaii by way of the newspaper announcements.

so for me, he is eligible and uses this type of thing to make his rivals seems like nutters

what is nice going forward is maybe we'll never have to go through this again if they are all properly vetted at the right time
edit on 21-1-2012 by syrinx high priest because: (no reason given)



reply posted on 21-1-2012 @ 10:08 AM by TheRedneck
I'm sure I am about to get lambasted again for stating my opinion on this, but I really don't care.

I also don't care whether the silly Birth Certificate challenge is viable or not. Anything, and I mean anything so far as legal action that affects Obama's day is a good thing in my opinion. The President is not above the law, and if he is sued, he should be required to show up and answer the complaint just like any other citizen. The day we allow a sitting President to thumb his nose at the law or the Constitution is the day we no longer have a law or a Constitution... or a republic.

The difference between a dictatorship and a democratic republic is that in a dictatorship, the dictator is above the law; in a democratic republic he is not. In a dictatorship, all a dictator must do is declare his will and it becomes law; in a democratic republic, a president has no such power and must bend his will to the will of the country, which is the law.

When anyone is above the law, any law, then all laws are at risk of being moot... and that includes Constitutional protections ensuring Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Assembly, Freedom from unreasonable Search and Seizure, and Freedom from government-imposed Religion.

It is my sincere and fervent hope that Obama is forced to appear in Georgia court in person, and this ruins at least a week of his life.

He that lives by the sword shall die by the sword, and he that lives by the lawsuits shall die by lawsuits.

TheRedneck


reply posted on 21-1-2012 @ 10:15 AM by g146541
reply to post by pointr97



Yer killin me!!
I see reality tv in the making here, BarryO avoids the service and they send Dog the booby hunter after him.
Ghetto/trailer park type fight ensues...


reply posted on 21-1-2012 @ 10:47 AM by Xcathdra
reply to post by Iamonlyhuman



US Marshals are the only ones who can legally arrest the President. The head Marshal for each zone is appointed, the deputy marshals underneath are not. It would be like me going to arrest the City Manager of my city. Just because he is technically my boss, he cant issue an lawful orders for me to stop, and if he did they would be invalid.
edit on 21-1-2012 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)
edit on 21-1-2012 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>    ^^TOP^^



People are marching in the streets all over Quebec
  Posted 5 days ago with 72 member flags
Breaking: Ron Paul to end active campaigning - cnn
  Posted 15 days ago with 26 member flags
Anon has released 1.7 GB of files....
  Posted 8 days ago with 24 member flags
Police Tasings Might Finally Be Ruled Brutality
  Posted 14 days ago with 23 member flags
US judge blocks indefinite detention of Americans
  Posted 13 days ago with 21 member flags
Canada is gonna be in for a really big mess!
  Posted 1 days ago with 21 member flags
Ron Paul, Adam Smith Push To End Indefinite Detention Of Americans
  Posted 13 days ago with 20 member flags