Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

To: Lurking Libertarian
The MDEC's lawyers are also representing Obama. I'm not sure about the other federal defendants; many of them have not appeared in the Mississippi case because Orly hasn't managed to serve them. The Hawai'i officials have hired their own lawyers.

The motions filed by the legal team only represent the MDEC, and the letter to Hawaii, requesting a Letter of Verification specifically says the lawyers are representing the MDEC, and says NOTHING about representing Obama himself. If they were representing Obama, they shouldn't need to contact the HI DOH for a letter of verification; they could just get one of Obama's TWO hard copies of his alleged LFBC.

The case hasn't gotten to discovery yet, so no one has been required to produce anything.

Discovery is irrelevant. They've already filed a letter of verification and a printout of the PDF. They could have simply provided one of the two hard copies of Obama's alleged LFBC, which would be more legally compelling, since a legitimate certified LFBC is considered self-authenticating.

The MDEC lawyers did offer a letter of verification from Hawai'i-- not of the Birth Certificate, which they claim is irrelevant (no statute says a presidential candidate has to produce a b.c.), but of the birth facts-- that Obama was born in Hawai'i in 1961.

No statute says they have to offer a letter of verification and a printout of a PDF of an alleged LFBC, but they submitted one. Again, they COULD haved simply submitted one of the TWO alleged hard copies of the LFBC. Why settle for a vague letter of verification when there's a self-authenticating certified document available?? /i

113 posted on 01/11/2013 10:06:16 PM PST by edge919
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies ]

To: edge919

This is a pre-trial dispositive motion that includes exhibits for the judge to take under advisement.
Attorneys Begley and Tepper have asked Judge Wingate to dismiss the Taitz lawsuit on the pleadings. We’ll all have to wait and see how Judge Wingate rules.
If the lawsuit isn’t dismissed, it will move to a discovery/evidence phase where introducing best evidence would be appropriate for both plaintiffs and defendants.

115 posted on 01/11/2013 11:48:28 PM PST by Nero Germanicus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies ]

To: edge919; Lurking Libertarian; Nero Germanicus

Orly Taitz has file a motion for a writ of mandamus with the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. A copy is at her website.

These are the attorneys that Dr. Taitz believes are representing the various defendants:

MDEC - Begley and Tepper

Obama - Begley and Tepper

Obama for America - Begley and Tepper

Nancy Pelosi - Begley and Tepper

SoS of Mississippi - Pizzetta and Matheny (MS AG’s office)

Dr. Onaka - Walter Drake (hired by the Hawaii AG’s office)

Dr. Fuddy - Walter Drake (hired by the Hawaii AG’s office)

Michael Astrue - none listed (may not have been served properly)

Jane Does - none listed

John Does 1-100 - none listed

Comments in parentheses are mine.

BTW and FWIW - For the SCOTUS to grant a motion to stay, it takes five Justices to vote for the motion not four like for a writ of certiorari.

116 posted on 01/12/2013 12:36:57 AM PST by 4Zoltan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

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