However, the time line of the 2008 COLB and its role in the presidential campaign would logically figure in the plaintiff's side's presentation in Discovery conference as a means of plaintiffs justifying a wide discovery of Obama’s documentation to the presiding judge.
If a Que Warrento case advances, it goes to jury trial. Plaintiff's lawyer can then show the difference in the seals between a real certified Hawaii DOH COLB of the year the Obama says Hawaii produced his and the weird “composite” presented to the American people in 2008.
Or at least, the above is my take on it. My Interpretaion of the rules for Quo Warrento is based on Leo Donofrio’s explanations on his Blog.
“If a Que Warrento case advances, it goes to jury trial. Plaintiff’s lawyer can then show the difference in the seals between a real certified Hawaii DOH COLB of the year the Obama says Hawaii produced his and the weird “composite” presented to the American people in 2008.”
First, I haven’t looked up to see if QW is a “jury” thing or not. But on the photos-—what do you think would be the basis for introducing allegedly phony internet COLB photos, if an Hawaiian registrar introduced a certified COLB....
parsy, who is sure there must be some legal basis a Plaintiff could use to get those “phonies” into evidence for some reason, but can figure it out yet——(sigh!)