Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: David
I guess you may not recognize it but that is exactly where they are now under the result in Cook.

Sure they are.

Now I suppose you might argue that withdrawing Cook's orders was voluntary on their part--they were faced with a choice of producing evidence of Obama's eligibility to serve or doing something to get rid of the case.

You are assuming that any court martial would allow the defense subpoena anything remotely relating to Obama's birth certificate. Or that Taitz's federal suit would have made it any further than any of the other Birther lawsuits. A very big assumption on your part. IMHO, of course.

But there are a handful of other cases filed since where plaintiff seeks evidence that the Commander in Chief is really the Commander in Chief before Plaintiff is required to obey orders.

And they are?

242 posted on 08/08/2009 1:52:46 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 241 | View Replies ]


To: Non-Sequitur
You are assuming that any court martial would allow the defense subpoena anything remotely relating to Obama's birth certificate. Or that Taitz's federal suit would have made it any further than any of the other Birther lawsuits. A very big assumption on your part. IMHO, of course.

No. That's not the way it works. You're out of bounds again as is often the case.

243 posted on 08/08/2009 2:05:42 PM PDT by David (...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 242 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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