Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: Red Steel

The lawyers arguing for Obama in the eligibility case, at least some of them, have to know the truth. They would have explored closing the cases by providing a birth certificate to the court. The decision to argue on ‘standing’ and not provide a direct refutation must have been debated.

So its a fair call that the Perkins Coe lawyer that picked up a document in Hawaii - and handed it to some PDF/scanning/potential forger was in on the game.


90 posted on 05/19/2011 8:42:21 PM PDT by Triple (Socialism denies people the right to the fruits of their labor, and is as abhorrent as slavery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies ]


To: Triple
The lawyers arguing for Obama in the eligibility case, at least some of them, have to know the truth. They would have explored closing the cases by providing a birth certificate to the court. The decision to argue on ‘standing’ and not provide a direct refutation must have been debated.

About two and a half years ago in the Hollister or the Berg case against Obama, I believe it was Robert Bauer (now White House Counsel) who is quoted as saying it would "be an embarrassment" if Obama showed his birth certificate.

...

Taking a look around...

and I found this at http://www.theobamafile.com/_eligibility

"She said opening up such evidence could be an "embarrassment" to Obama, and it's up to Congress to call for impeachment of a sitting president.

There's more here . . .

Well, we mustn't embarrass Obama. 

This is the same argument Obama's lawyers presented in the original "Birther" case filed by Phil J. Berg, Esq, a former Deputy Attorney General of Pennsylvania; former candidate for Governor and U.S. Senate in Democratic Primaries; former Chair of the Democratic Party in Montgomery County; former member of Democratic State Committee, back in 2008.

The Obama team contented itself with a motion to dismiss the case and a protective order.  In these motions, Obama’s lawyers argued that revealing the information (birth certificate, citizenship in other countries, college admissions records etc.) would "cause a defined and serious injury" to Obama and/or the DNC.  They argued that revealing these documents raises a "legitimate privacy concern" and the above mentioned risk that "particularly serious embarrassment will result from turning over the requested documentation."

Makes you wonder, what's on that birth certificate -- or not on that birth certificate -- that could be soooooo embarrassing to the Obamamessiah?
"

-end snip-

Another inconsistency.

So what was so embarrassing and that would cause "serious injury" to Obama and the DNC in his "released COLB?" I don't see the big serious injury or embarrassment in Obama's latest art work. More like the reason to forge Obama's COLB.

104 posted on 05/19/2011 9:05:55 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies ]

To: Triple
So its a fair call that the Perkins Coe lawyer that picked up a document in Hawaii - and handed it to some PDF/scanning/potential forger was in on the game.

That may very well be the case. The law firm partners seem to flow back and forth between the firm and the DNC.
109 posted on 05/19/2011 9:14:55 PM PDT by PA Engineer (Time to beat the swords of government tyranny into the plowshares of freedom.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson