[Kansas58]

“II. Discussion

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.”

---

the above taken from Obama’s motion.
-— “oppression” is not the reason, we are talking about the POTUS.
-—”undue burden or expense” is not the reason, he has spent more to defend himself than it would cost to produce the documents in question.

[Michael Michael]

the above taken from Obama’s motion.
-— “oppression” is not the reason, we are talking about the POTUS.
-—”undue burden or expense” is not the reason, he has spent more to defend himself than it would cost to produce the documents in question.

You conveniently left out "annoyance." How could you miss it? It came even before "embarrassment."