[eDebate] Alleging stuff in a lawsuit doesn't make that stuff true

Logan Martin logan.martin
Wed Oct 22 02:12:36 CDT 2008


On October 6, 2008 Defendants filed a Motion for Protective Order Staying
Discovery Pending Decision on Dispositive Motion
On October 9, 2008 Plaintiffs filed a Response to Defendant's Motion for
Protective Order.

The court has not ruled on Defendants' Motion.

Yesterday, Plaintiff moved for an Order Deeming Requests for Admissions
Admitted.
Yesterday, Plaintiff also moved for an " Expediting Ruling on Plaintiffs
Motion Deeming Plaintiffs Request for Admissions Admitted."

Defendant has not yet filed a response to Plaintiff's two most recent
motions.

Given that there's still no Order on Defendant's Motion for a Protective
Order, no response to Plaintiff's most recent two motions, and, for that
matter, no Order regarding the most recent two motions filed by the
Plaintiff, it is HIGHLY misleading to claim that Obama has "admitted" Berg's
allegations.  That's kindof like claiming the aff dropped a disad...after
the 1nc.

Now then, with respect to...

OS:  4) logan martin, say what you want, mr. Berg, the man who has filed the
case in which obama FAILS TO PRODUCE HIS WEBSITE BIRTH CERTIFICATE, mr. Berg
is the former deputy attorney general of the state of Pennsylvania. Perhaps,
he lost one case or even more than one case but he's not the fool you make
out with your incomplete version of his resume. Get it, former DEPUTY
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA. Not a crackpot.
LM:  Look, most of those words weren't mine, they were those of the
Honorable Curtis Joyner for the United States District Court for the Eastern
Pennsylvania.  And if you read the Memorandum and Order, you'll notice that
the issue really wasn't just one of winning and losing and...Now, maybe back
when Berg was a Deputy AG he was a not the same Berg whose crackpottitude
was elucidated in painstaking (read: hilarious) detail in Joyner's Order,
but I've got my doubts.  Anyhow, why would Obama produce anything pending a
Motion to Dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction?

Logan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/attachments/20081022/f3ca2396/attachment.htm 



More information about the Mailman mailing list