Has anyone tracked down where obama's legal defense told the court that the BC had some embarassing details to obama and the DNC on it? I read that but was not able to track the quote anywhere.
If so, what if at this point Obama no longer cares about embarassment and will reveal whatever in full knowledge whatever is on there he has 60 votes to keep him in office?
Okay so he comitted fraud. He will do a EO that fraud is a good thing for America. No joking either. Much!
Previous discussion re this question:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2292609/posts?page=175#175
read down to #174.
The defense never actually did that. What they did was say in a filing (#15 in the Berg v Obama case) was:
Rule 26(c)(1) authorizes the Court to enter a protective order to protect a party “from annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden or expense,” including an order forbidding the discovery or specifying terms for discovery. “While the court should not automatically stay discovery because a motion to dismiss has been filed, ‘a stay is proper where the likelihood that such motion may result in a narrowing or an outright elimination of discovery outweighs the likely harm to be produced by the delay.’”
But as I read that filing, they never allege that Obama would suffer embarrassment if discovery were to proceed.
But in the event, the Court ruled "no standing" and "lack of jurisdiction".