Posted on 09/10/2009 9:42:35 PM PDT by moonpie57
Thank you, Fred. I never read that report ...
how telling about their arrogance from day
one. I’ll always wonder about the swearing-in
fiascoes. Interesting to see the press was
initially doing their job, and then chose to
just consume the BHO pablum and have ever
since.
~~~~~~~~
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jan/23/obama-spokesmans-debut-marked-by-discord/
“How is it transparent,” another reporter asked, “when you control the only image of the re-swearing - there’s nobody in there but four print reporters, there’s no stills, there’s no television? And the only recording that comes out, as I understand it, is one that a reporter made, not one that the White House supplied.”
~~~~~~~
2nd time, no Bible.
And why would Obama’s college admission documents be admissable?
Here are the rules relating to discovery. It would probably be good for everyone to read them before commenting.
(1) Scope in General.
Unless otherwise limited by court order, the scope of discovery is as follows: Parties may obtain discovery regarding any nonprivileged matter that is relevant to any party’s claim or defense — including the existence, description, nature, custody, condition, and location of any documents or other tangible things and the identity and location of persons who know of any discoverable matter. For good cause, the court may order discovery of any matter relevant to the subject matter involved in the action. Relevant information need not be admissible at the trial if the discovery appears reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. All discovery is subject to the limitations imposed by Rule 26(b)(2)(C).
(2) Limitations on Frequency and Extent.
(A) When Permitted. By order, the court may alter the limits in these rules on the number of depositions and interrogatories or on the length of depositions under Rule 30. By order or local rule, the court may also limit the number of requests under Rule 36.
(B) Specific Limitations on Electronically Stored Information. A party need not provide discovery of electronically stored information from sources that the party identifies as not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or cost. On motion to compel discovery or for a protective order, the party from whom discovery is sought must show that the information is not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or cost. If that showing is made, the court may nonetheless order discovery from such sources if the requesting party shows good cause, considering the limitations of Rule 26(b)(2)(C). The court may specify conditions for the discovery.
(C) When Required. On motion or on its own, the court must limit the frequency or extent of discovery otherwise allowed by these rules or by local rule if it determines that:
(i) the discovery sought is unreasonably cumulative or duplicative, or can be obtained from some other source that is more convenient, less burdensome, or less expensive;
(ii) the party seeking discovery has had ample opportunity to obtain the information by discovery in the action; or
(iii) the burden or expense of the proposed discovery outweighs its likely benefit, considering the needs of the case, the amount in controversy, the parties’ resources, the importance of the issues at stake in the action, and the importance of the discovery in resolving the issues.
Explain why obamas attorneys are not involved? Why is the army because of the surgeon to be deployed?
1. Judge Carter merely referred the motion filed by the Plaintiffs (Taitz) to the Magistrate Judge who will preside over discovery when/if it is granted. He did not order expedited discovery at this time.
2. The defendants filed a motion with a proposed order to limit discovery. In (most) federal courts, when filing a motion or an opposition, the parties (attorneys) have to file a proposed order. It’s merely a matter of following the rules of this specific court to file a ‘proposed’ order and means absolutely nothing until the judge rules on and signs one of the proposed orders (or one drafted by the judge).
It’s getting to be the case way too often that what is actualy said/done by a judge is misinterpreted, getting folks hopes up when all that’s really happened is following the slow procedures of the court.
This seems more reasonable. I saw Plains Radio mentioned early on, that is a BIG red flag. Trust NOTHING associated with Plains Radio.
If he signed up as a foreign student for a free ride it is fraud if his original BC says he is a American citizen. Some suggest the college knew also. That would mean they advised him to sign up so the college would get federal money. Fraud on both sides.
The theory is obama's mom and grandmother saw a free ride for college so they pulled out his dads citizenship for Obama. At the time the college was receiving lots of federal money for foreign students.
Please, you are spoiling all the fun.
The fact is this: Judge Carter called an emergency hearing for tonight at midnight. He has said - off the record - that he is going to issue a bench warrant for Obama and order federal marshalls to arrest him. He will then be immediately tried for high crimes and misdemeanors under - for reasons that remain unclear - the law of the sea.
So it’s confirmed by the investigator, Doug Hartmann, that FR is targeted by volunteer and paid Obama operatives to disrupt and muddy the “birther” issue. That only confirms that he is hiding a LOT.
Ok. That’s a fun theory.
And how does that relate to this case? He is not on trial for fraud. None of the plaintiffs are claiming that they defrauded him. Occidental College is not a plaintiff.
Only someone extremely naive would believe that the only original BC was in Obama’s possession and it burned in a house fire. Hall of records is required to keep originals on everyone. Even hall of recordshave burned down and the BC retrieved in the past. Missouri was one and all BC’s were recovered.
Unless of course it is a Kenyan BC and truly the only one. But then he would have to use to get into the country which would then go into records for his citizenship.
So You want Us to bet that the Sun will NOT rise tomorrow?
The Canada free Press has a great article highlighting the
two versions of the DNC Official Certification of OBOZO
and PLUGS as their Official Candidates for TOTUS and VTOTUS!
both signed and approved by Bugeyes Piglousy:-) Seems she
couldn’t make up her mind on whether OBOZO was in compliance
with a small detail like OUR CONSTITUTION!
So you don’t think using college admissions records to validate consistency with other documentation fits this?
There is very little transparency with Obama - and plenty of inconsistencies.
Having been on the receiving end of a discovery motion, I can assure you that it goes very wide and very deep.
Welllll, if the college documents say he was on a foreign scholarship he has a lot of explaining to do.
Then his explanation might be what is theorized that he used his dads citizenship to abuse the system. I was American but we needed the scholarship. We were poor, my mom could not afford much.
or it may be true he was foreign.
Either way it is relevant.
And how does that relate to this case? He is not on trial for fraud. None of the plaintiffs are claiming that they defrauded him. Occidental College is not a plaintiff.
Uh did you read the complaint?
How about to impeach the witness Obama and show his propensity to deceive and possibly use other names? Your theories are fun too, you remind me of a couple of matchbook school of law and shoe repair attorneys posting here.
Relevant information need not be admissible at the trial if the discovery appears reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence
I sent that link to the author of the story. Maybe he can enlighten us.
Do you think possibly it was given to Hawaii after when the request was made?
It would be great if the author comes back and says that is not the one they sent me.
It is true
Well that’s good to know. I hope you’re right. Perhaps more people are “awake” than I thought. :)
*sniff* *sniff* You smell like a troll.
Did you know that Jon Klein of CNN tried to float that idiotic lie for Obama, in Klein’s effort to get Lou Dobbs to shut up? He even made Dobbs repeat the lie on air! I was so insensed by the grossness of the lie, the boldness of telling such a lie to the world that I picked up the phone and called Hawaiian Vital Reocrds from here in Tennessee! They were amused that anyone would asked such a silly question as ‘were all the archive documents destroyed when the electronic files were created! The lady assured me that Hawaii still sends photostatic copies of archived documents like originial BCs if appropriately requested, like from a court.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
