Barack is not Legal to Be President!
Could Barack Obama, the President of the United States, be held in contempt of court? Actually, it is likely.
A Georgia resident initiated the case, and a Georgia judge has ordered Barack Obama to appear, with full documentation to prove that he is a natural born citizen of the United States. Mr. Obama’s lawyers immediately made a motion to quash the subpoena, but Georgia Deputy Chief Judge Michael Malihi denied the motion.
At heart, this is appears to be another bid by ‘Birthers’ to disqualify Barack Obama from the office he holds.
The court case will, no doubt, go nowhere, for only the Supreme Court has the power to deal with the President of the United States. Still, if Barack Obama refuses to appear, the Georgia Judge can find him in contempt, and could, conceivably, order him removed from the Georgia presidential ballot come November.
At this point this writer is not sure what would happen, but there are several scenarios possible.
The federal government (Supreme court?) could order the lower court to put him back on the ballot, and that would be the end of the story.
However, one must remember that there are some 26 states in a suit against healthcare, and one could ask what would happen if those 26 states all refused to allow Barack Obama on the ballot?
What would happen is that President Barack Obama would be president no longer. Removed from so many ballots, he would be unable to win the Presidential Election.
What makes this case a bit bizarre is that Mr. Obama has provided documentation of his status as a natural born citizen in the past. Still, there is so much animosity towards the President of the United States that many people would not balk at this ‘back door’ way of removing him from office.
Opponents of Mr. Obama point to his ramming the health care program into law, barring economic recovery by such acts as refusing to build oil pipelines, attempting to run the country by decree (presidential order, czars, etc.), and various other imperious actions as cause for his removal.
Their argument, and it is an interesting one, is that it is perfectly legal to shade the law to get rid of somebody who shades the law.