WOLF v FUDDY (HI CIR CT)

User avatar
SueDB
Posts: 27756
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 2:02 pm
Location: FEMA Camp PI Okanogan, WA 98840

WOLF v FUDDY (HI CIR CT)

#151

Post by SueDB » Fri Jan 13, 2012 6:30 am

As expected.


“If You're Not In The Obit, Eat Breakfast”

Remember, Orly NEVAH disappoints!

User avatar
Kriselda Gray
Posts: 8645
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2009 4:17 am
Location: FEMA Camp 2112 - a joint project of the U.S. and Canada
Contact:

WOLF v FUDDY (HI CIR CT)

#152

Post by Kriselda Gray » Fri Jan 13, 2012 7:09 am

Thank you again, Mike. You've been doing so much of this lately and doing such a great job of it! It's really VERY much appreciated!(3) You might need anything related to the case in any hearing.I learned that when I had to go be the company representative in a small claims case many years ago. I had no idea what I'd need, so I grabbed what I thought would be the most useful stuff, and had one document I didn't think would be necessary, but decided at the last minute to take with me. Of course, that ended up being the ONE thing we had that could win the case for us, because it proved the other guys had already accepted a settlement from us. :)


Ignorance and prejudice and fear walk hand in hand... - "Witch Hunt" by Rush

SCMP = SovCits/Militias/Patriots.

Thor promised to slay the Ice Giants
God promised to quell all evil
-----
I'm not seeing any Ice Giants...

User avatar
Kriselda Gray
Posts: 8645
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2009 4:17 am
Location: FEMA Camp 2112 - a joint project of the U.S. and Canada
Contact:

WOLF v FUDDY (HI CIR CT)

#153

Post by Kriselda Gray » Fri Jan 13, 2012 7:15 am

So Carroll's big argument is that the president waived his privilege [that he didn't possess], therefore the state should waive its privacy law. Sounds familiar.Very, but I love how in this MtD (and, it sounds like, in some of the comments made in the hearing today,) the explanation of why Obama's having chosen to make his COLB/LFBCs public did NOT affect the state's obligation to deny releasing the docs to anyone else. Most other cases that I've read (and there are some I've missed, so it's possible someone else has included something similar) make the *statement* that the President's actions have no effect on the DoH's obligations and responsibility, but this one goes into much greater detail and spells it out baldly. I also like that it points out that the plaintiff has no authority to vet the President.


Ignorance and prejudice and fear walk hand in hand... - "Witch Hunt" by Rush

SCMP = SovCits/Militias/Patriots.

Thor promised to slay the Ice Giants
God promised to quell all evil
-----
I'm not seeing any Ice Giants...

Post Reply

Return to “Birther Case Discussion”