Obama motion to dismiss DENIED. Must appear in court!

Subject: JUST BREAKING TODAY 1/20 GEORGIA JUDGE AGAIN DENIES OBAMA MOTION. HE PREVIOUSLY DENIED MOTION TO DISMISS THE CHALLENGE AND NOW THE ONE TO QUASH THE SUBPOENAS

Yes, Yes, Yes--- I know you'll not hear this on any of the networks including Fox News but it would appear that the Criminal, Usurper in the White House could soon be removed from office and Tried for Treason.  This very well could build up to that and they can take Holder, Biden, the whole Cabinet, Czars, George Soros, Heads of Federal Reserve and give them all the same punishment.  Maybe it would be good to put most of Congress and some of the Judiciary on notice too! It's about time!  Friday, January 20, 2012   Georgia Judge Malihi Denies Obama's Motion to Not Appear At Georgia Ballot Challenge Hearing ObamaRelease YourRecords on 10:10 AM  Georgia Judge Malihi Denies Obama's Motion to Not Appear At Georgia Ballot Challenge Hearing Swensson-Powell v Obama, Notice to Produce, Georgia Ballot Access Challenge - 1/20/2012 ORDER ON MOTION TO QUASH SUBPOENAS Defendant, President Barack Obama, a candidate seeking the Democratic nomination for the office of the President of the United States, has filed a motion to quash the subpoena compelling his attendance at the hearing on January 26, 2012. In support of his motion, Defendant argues that "if enforced, [the subpoena] requires him to interrupt duties as President of the United States" to attend a hearing in Atlanta, Georgia. However, Defendant fails to provide any legal authority to support his motion to quash the subpoena to attend. 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). Defendant further alludes to a defect in service of the subpoena. However, the Court's rules provide for service of a subpoena upon a party, by serving the party's counsel of record. Ga. Comp. R. & Regs. r. 616-1-2-.19(4). Thus, the argument regarding service is without merit. Accordingly, Defendant's motion to quash is denied. SO ORDERED, this the 20th day of January, 2012.