Posted on 08/14/2011 11:23:46 AM PDT by bitt
“What the Secret Service agents say about past and present Presidents.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e5INFAuM1xI&feature=player_embedded “
Do you really think so little of Secret Service Agents that you believe agents on protective duty passed along those “little inside scoops”, that WildBill there put on the Internet?
Yep.
And if you don’t believe me, this book is a great read. You can get it on Ebay for a few bucks.
http://www.amazon.com/Presidents-Secret-Service-Behind-Protect/dp/0307461351
If everything is on the up and up and there is nothing to hide, then why does it always look like they are hiding something???
REGARDING HIS TRANSCRIPTS:
He knew right away that he had to hide ALL transcripts from Columbia and Harvard Law because I bet all his courses were ‘revolutionary’..He probably took “Take it Down 101”, “Da Man is The Enemy” and “The Genius, Alinsky”.
As for any finance courses....IF HE EVER EVEN TOOK ONE!...they were probably “Socialism is Good for You” and “Mao shows us the Way”. Maybe “Bottom Up, Top Down”, and he sat next to that commie rat, Van Jones.
He does not have a background that is acceptable to regular Americans..thus the made-up history and the obfuscation in his releasing any records.
Apparently, the only privacy left to protect is Obama's right to lie.
If a person knowingly lies about being born in a state, and the said state has evidence proving the lie, can they withhold the evidence citing the person's "right to lie," and therefore the state would be violating that right by disclosing the truth of the lie?
That kind of twisted logic would destroy our legal system if it is ever argued that lying is a privacy right that cannot be challenged by the state without violating the "privacy" of the lier.
-PJ
A much, much better tactic is to make high profile (but respectful) and frequent requests for Mister Obama to release his full, complete, and unexpurgated college transcripts (all of them, undergrad and post grad).
We want all (all) classes, grades, professors, textbooks, and theses; and we'd like to find classmates. There is nothing at all wrong with wanting to know these things about a president and a presidential candidate.
The Obama minders can come up with fake bcert docs and they can ridicule those who request to see them. It is much more difficult to ridicule anyone asking for collegiate records. Even Dems might want to see these, and should understand why their release is important.
One suspects that he is hiding much, eh?
.
STJPII wrote: “The State had a ‘duty’ to object? I subpoena and obtain state records almost every week. The state has never filed a Motion to Quash or for seek a protective Order. The opposing party may do that but not the State.”
See Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c)(1): “A party or any person from whom discovery is sought may move for a protective order in the court where the action is pending — or as an alternative on matters relating to a deposition, in the court for the district where the deposition will be taken.”
That aside, I don’t think Hawaii sought a protective order nor moved to quash. They held that Taitz’ subpoenas were not properly issued and served, so they responded with a letter back to Taitz rather than a motion to the Court. http://www.scribd.com/doc/57878406/Letter-to-Orly-Taitz-From-Hawaii-AG-Re-Subpoena-BC-Cannot-Be-Provided-Per-HI-State-Law
“I have no more proof than did Trump when he made his statement, but I will not lie and say I have investigators over at Trumps house.”
That isn’t what the Donald told me. ;)
Thank you for your reply.
It seems to be a hot topic on both sides.
If anyone can prove that Zero lied about his eligibility to campaign for the Presidency, can you imagine the law suits brought after he fraudulently raised almost $1 BILLION in funds? A lot of these people are already very unhappy with the performance of their chosen messiah.
Connecticut Social Security number? Still, why do the first 3 digits of former President Eisenhower's Social Security number refer to California, when Eisenhower was living in Pennsylvania when he applied in 1962?
Recently, I accidentally ran across Pro-Obama messages on the internet that point to Eisenhower's Social Security number mix-up as proof that the Social Security administration may have also made a simple mistake when it assigned Hawaii resident teenager Obama a Connecticut number in the 1970s, when Hawaii resident teenager Obama should have received a Hawaii number back in the 1970s.
I'm confused.
Could someone help me? Thanks.
“MAY move for a protective order” seems dispositive here and corroborates my point, which was that while the state may have the legal right to object, they seldom do in my experience. In other words, the state ususally doesn’t have a dog in the fight and absent and overriding policy consideration will not object. The Hawaii’s sandbagging here is politically motivated and suspicious, IMHO.
Aren’t most, if not all, state records of private citizens, subject to privacy laws in every state? For instance, if I subpoena the Department of Labor, Licensing and Regulation in my state to determine a party’s employment status in a civil/personal injury case, am I not seeking private information protected by the state? Yet, I have NEVER had the state object to my subpoenas. If an objection is raised, it invariably comes from the opposing party.
Employment status is not equivalent to a birth certificate. Hawaii has very strict privacy laws to protect their vital records. They have a duty to protect those vital records unless they’re compelled to release them by a court order. Taitz v. Astrue is a FOIA case out of D.C. that hasn’t yet progressed to discovery. Orly can’t prove she’s entitled to inspect Hawaii’s vital records simply because she filed a complaint in D.C.
“Employment status is not equivalent to a birth certificate.”
Response: Any authority for that? Unearthing the employer, wages earned, SSN etc seems equally private. Especially with the ostensible waiver of privacy concerns from the recent release of the LFBC.
“FOIA case out of D.C. that hasn’t yet progressed to discovery.”
Response: Subpoenas = Discovery in my practice. Has a scheduling order been promulgated? If so, does it state discovery dates?
The only real question is whether the court will rely on FRCP 45 (c)(1), FRCP 11(c), or both when it imposes sanctions on Orly for this latest publicity stunt.
Undue burden under FRCP 45 (c)(1)? Plueeese. That is is the most often used but least meritorious legal arguement. It is the epitome of boiler plate. BTW, I would love to hear Hawaii make the “undue burden” arguement without laughing or smirking.
FRCP 11(c)? Which subsection.
While the LFBC release may have temprarily squelched political questions, it opened the waiver door.
Thanks for engaging on this topic. I’m learning a lot from your posts: they’re succinct and informative. One thing I never hear the other side say is that it’s illegal to make public a document that’s already public. I guess that’s what they believe, but they never come right out and say it. That’s one reason, among many, that your posts make more sense.
Orly tries to issue a subpoena as an officer of the court, but she isn't admitted to practice before the court; a subpoena from the DC Circuit is void under Rule 45 (a)(2)(C) anyway and she tries to engage in discovery before the mandatory Rule 26 (d)(1) hearing has been held.
Either she has engaged the court's process for an "improper purpose" or she is too stupid to breath.
The reference should have been to a Rule 26 (f) conference, by the way.
Thanks, I am just comparing what I do everyday to what is taking place wtih the Birth Certificate. From the “Best Evidence” Rule last year, to the FRCP subpoena requirements this year, I have entered into numerous, hypertechnical legal arguments. We are not even discussing the merits, openess, transparency of good government etc., we are discussing things like the Federal rules of discovery and evidence? Crazy.
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.