"Documents? What documents?"
Posted on 10/06/2008 4:30:11 PM PDT by NoobRep
TWO FILINGS: Berg Files Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint, Obama and DNC File Motion to Delay Discovery Until Judge Decides on Prior Motion to Dismiss
It was a busy day in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania today. First, attorney Philip Berg files a motion asking the court to permit him to file an amended complaint with several additions, and then next, attorneys for Barack Obama and the DNC file a motion asking the court for a protective order, essentially asking that the judge rule on their motion to dismiss for lack of standing before ruling on Berg's motion for expedited discovery.
Bear with me, here. Geez, I wish I could just do this for a full-time job -- it would be so much easier without all this other stuff (work, school, etc.) in the way!
Keep checking back. Due to the amount of information, I may split this up into two separate posts. We'll see.
-- Jeff
4:45 p.m. -- Obama, DNC File Motion for Protective Order
I'll pretty it up and explain things a little bit better later on this evening, but here's what's going on, so far and in brief:
As I was talking with one of my contacts at the courthouse about this motion, my phone rings and it is Philip Berg. He's fired up. Apparently, he had just been contacted by John LaVelle, attorney for Barack Obama and the DNC, and asked whether he would "put off discovery until Judge Surrick ruled on the motion to dismiss."
Until I have time to get into this more specifically, here's the rub:
Basically, the law states that Judge Surrick can order discovery even in the face of a pending dispositive motion such as the motion to dismiss filed on September 24 by Obama and the DNC. In other words, he can order full discovery, limited discovery, or none at all before ruling on the dismissal. The attorneys for Obama and the DNC, however, just filed a motion asking for a protective order stopping "all discovery in this action pending the Court's decision on defendant's motion to dismiss the action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted."
Just like with the amended complaint, an attorney cannot simply file a protective order but must file a motion for one, essentially asking the court to issue one. Make sense so far? That's what this is -- defense attorney John LaVelle filed such a motion this afternoon, a motion asking the judge to issue a protective order which would allow for a ruling to come down on the motion to dismiss before the commencement of any discovery.
Obviously the first reaction is "what do they have to hide?" or something along those lines. Rule 26(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides authorization to the court for just such a matter, ostensibly to protect one of the parties from embarrassment or oppression or the like. I'm sure there's some case law on it as well. Still, even knowing the rules, I will admit that my first reaction was one of suspicion.
As for Philip Berg, while he and I will chat later on, here's a snippet of what he had to say in our brief conversation:
"He's asking to delay discovery and, Jeff, I'm obviously going to oppose it, " he said. "This isn't right. This just isn't right. By tomorrow, we'll have a response and put out a press release. The American people should hear about this and, if they do, they should go nuts. It's time to put up or shut up."
How about we start calling and emailing all our local televisioin and radio stations.
I think Berg has a valid case. Why would Obama simply not produce a valid US birth cert, if he had it. Obviously he doesn’t have it.
You know, all along I have thought that this was a crock o’ ——. But it would be so simple just to produce the documents and end all of it. But he either can’t or won’t. There is something to this story.
I was pretty skeptical in the beginning myself.
The constitution exists to safeguard our individual rights as citizens and to make sure that government functions in a coherent fashion based on laws. We may have a situation that over half of the electorate wants something to occur that is unconstitutional. How will this play out?
I wonder what is taking the judge so long to rule? How complicated can this be?
Wouldn’t the State of Hawaii have some kind of Constitutional responsibility to provide proof...or bring forward the lack of proof of a presidential candidate who was claiming to be a natural born citizen of their state?
Hawaii either can produce this document or they can’t. If they can’t then he wasn’t born there...and isn’t eligible. Couldn’t they subpoena the state to produce a certified copy of his birth certificate?
SO what’s the big deal, Barry. If you are an American born citizen just produce the record of birth. Why would this not be required of an Presidential candidate if so requested? It is a Constitutional requirement.
Bet 50 bucks the ass does not have a valid American BC. Bet this F*up is one they did not even bother to check when he became the “ONE” They are in deep dodo now.
If they had one why not show it.???? Konan wants to know!
"Documents? What documents?"
USE THE SUBJECT LINE - OBAMA HIDING BEHIND A LAWER - WONT PRODUCE COLB! OR SOMETHING OF THAT NATURE.
Probably like the 1967 riots.
I wouldn’t waste my time with this, Sinclair or calling Barry a muslim. We have much stronger ammo like this video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S8QcpdUtxNQ
How about Obama openly campaigning for his communist cousin Odinga who signed a pact with Muslims to enact Sharia Law if elected and started riots when he lost. Obama campaigned for an openly Anti-American candidate in a foreign country in 2006 at taxpayer expense.
I know. The problem is Obama won’t produce documents. I would think even the Judges would want to know if Obama is LEGALLY able to run as President of the United States.
After all, isn’t that the business they are in?
Nothing will come of this if it’s proven he was born in Kenya. First, he’s a democrat. Second, he’s a minority. And third, a liberal judge would explain to us that that’s not what the constitution really means.
It cannot cost more than $20 bucks to order a copy of a birth certificate. How many $10,000’s has O’s campaign spent in legal fees on this already? Not mind you that his lawyers are going to be particularly scrupulous about efficient disposition of the matter when pockets are deep and there are fees to be earned.
Diversionary technique?
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.