1. Yes - he refused to submit it and the judge was prepared to order a summary judgement.
2. So Obama would give the judge a paper copy. The plaintiffs would question it. To settle the issue, the judge or SoS would request Hawaii send them a certified copy directly. Easy to see how it would play out.
3. Don’t know if it was against the law. Do you think Obama cares?
4. He sent it to Kemp as a political message.
5. Pointing out political reality is not supporting it. There is an entire thread about how the media was threatened to keep the CCP out of the news. Do you think for a second that sending two BCs as a political message would bother Obama? He plays bare knuckled politics.
6. Two separate issues. He ignored the court. He send a message to the SoS.
2. So Obama would give the judge a paper copy.
Then why didn't he show up and do that?
The plaintiffs would question it.
Is that why he didn't show up with it?
To settle the issue, the judge or SoS would request Hawaii send them a certified copy directly.
The Defendant was ordered to produce evidence, not the State of Hawaii! The State of Hawaii had no obligation before the court.
Easy to see how it would play out.
I can imagine it playing out in a completely different way than that.
3. Don’t know if it was against the law.
And you don't care to know either, do you?
Do you think Obama cares?
He should.
4. He sent it to Kemp as a political message.
So you agree with the coercion of public officials?
5 and 6 aren't even worth responding to.
From earlier...Where have I threatened you?
Is today a day off for the Harlan of yesterday? You're far more...verbose.
@O.C.G.A. 16-10-94 (2010)
(a) A person commits the offense of tampering with evidence when, with the intent to prevent the apprehension or cause the wrongful apprehension of any person or to obstruct the prosecution or defense of any person, he knowingly destroys, alters, conceals, or disguises physical evidence or makes, devises, prepares, or plants false evidence.
So what do you think now?