Just dropping in to add an update, rather than start a new thread.
www.americanthinker.com...
February 2, 2012
Obama Got Served
(snippet)
According to reports in the blogosphere, the president's schedule on the morning of the 26th was open, and according to an unnamed source, Obama
watched the live feed of the hearings.
(snip)
Today, Attorney Van Irion, on behalf of his client, Georgia resident David Welden, filed a "Motion for Finding of Contempt" with Judge Malihi.
Irion asserts that "... Defendant Obama willfully defied this Court's order to appear and testify[,]" and his "actions represent a direct threat to
the entire judicial branch and the separation of powers between the branches of government." Irion argued that "[s]uch a declaration cannot go
without response from this Court" and moved that the Court refer the "matter to the Superior Court of Fulton County for confirmation that the
Defendant violated Administrative Rules of Procedure ... and to determine appropriate sanctions."
Now, will we get the opportunity to debate the meaning of "subpoena" -- or whether the law even applies to this president?
(emphasis mine)
Interesting turn of events.
In case the trial confused you, there were 3 seperate cases, all 3 were heard the same day. The first case was Weldons, which argued the simple case
of Natural Born Citizen, and argued that Minor V. Happersett outlined clearly the meaning of Natural Born Citizen v. Citizen, and that the 14th
ammendment cannot change the context of the base meaning of the Constitution, which in and of itself is written into the Constitution. It was a very
powerful argument that I think flew largely under the radar with all the hupla over Squirly Orly. Remember, 3 different cases, Orly was only one, and
the one that anti-birthers will throw up and vomit ad nauseum to throw rocks into the werks. However, Orly had nothing to do with the first case, nor
did the birth certificate.
I still hold that the judge will find for the defendants by simple default, for failure to appear. Any attorney or judge will tell you that simply
failing to appear will end in a default win outcome, it is as plain as the nose on your face. Obama's huge mistake was simply not taking this
seriously.
The judge actually agreed Obama should not be compelled to come to court, however, and this is what he wrote in the letter.
The judge asserted that "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."
Instead of doing the obvious, and replying with legal reasoning, they went over his head, which promptly failed. The hearing went on as scheduled. Big
fail on Obama's attorneys' part. I do believe the judge told them they would win by default due to a now show, and I do believe he allowed them the
opportunity to have the hearings to get the evidence into record. It is totally reasonable this was the case, I see no reason to disbelieve this
wasn't what happened.
The rest yet remains to be seen. Stay tuned!
ETA: Link to the PDF of the Motion for Contempt filed today
libertylegalfoundation.org...edit on 2-2-2012 by Libertygal because: added
ETA
ETA: They also filed their proposed findings, which is not the judges ruling, but a proposal on how the judge should rule in the case.
libertylegalfoundation.org...edit on 2-2-2012 by
Libertygal because: another ETA
