Posted on 09/08/2009 2:15:45 PM PDT by pissant
A California judge today tentatively scheduled a trial for Jan. 26, 2010, for a case that challenges Barack Obama's eligibility to be president based on questions over his qualifications under the requirements of the U.S. Constitution.
If the case actually goes to arguments before U.S. District Judge David Carter, it will be the first time the merits of the dispute have been argued in open court, according to one of the attorneys working on the issue.
In a highly anticipated hearing today before Carter, several motions were heard, including a resolution to long-standing questions about whether attorney Orly Taitz properly served notice on the defendants, which she had.
In a second ruling, Carter ordered that attorney Gary Kreep of the United States Justice Foundation can be added to the case to represent defendants Wiley Drake and Markham Robinson, who had been removed by an earlier court order. Drake, the vice presidential candidate for the American Independent Party, and Robinson, the party's chairman, were restored as plaintiffs.
But the judge did not immediately rule on Taitz' motion to be granted discovery – that is the right to see the president's still-concealed records. Nor did Carter rule immediately on a motion to dismiss the case, submitted by the U.S. government, following discussion over Taitz' challenge to the work of a magistrate in the case.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
Judge Carter needs to ask the DOJ attorneys “What actual and specific harm will be done by allowing discovery and letting the case move forward in the interest of justice and transparency?”
Carter has had the opportunity to toss it twice now, and hasn’t. That is good news, as far as it goes. Compare that to some of these other ahole judges that snarkily dismissed the cases before them before even reading the materials.
Sounds good.
I’m a bit skeptical that the trial will see completion.
They’d just as soon pull the house down on his ears, too, first.
Also more time for the Alinsky acolytes in the WH (Whore House now) to dredge something on the judge.....or for ACORN to threaten some of his friends or family.
He's giving Obama the opportunity to come clean and/or evidence to prove his case, and Taitz to argue to keep the tentative trial date. Still in pretrial mode until the actual court date.
Call me cynical(!), but I do know the basics of O-bummer "justice." i.e., the rules don't apply to him, and no stinkin' piece of paper (the way he views the Constitution) is gonna get in his way.
LOL!
camel’s head.
I heard he eats bloody horse heads, along with Chuck Norris, for breakfast every third Saturday, after Chuck jogs from Texas to the judges courtroom in So Cal. /h
The Constitution is a flawed document, according to barney Obamarama.
Darn straight, newbie!
(Except you forgot to include treason, bribery, reverse racism, and deviant sexual behaviour.)
SITREP
Just signed up today, huh?
Considering in the past we’ve gotten a-hole judges who consider “twittering” as evidence and vetting.
This judge appears to be a stand up guy. We are cautiously optimistic.
Now go and rain on someone else’s parade.
LOL!
The Networks are air-dropping in hundreds of reporters and stringers to cover this, just like they did for sarah Palin’s announcement, RIGHT???
...what he really meant.
|
> I predict Judge Carter will wake up with a bloody horse He's went against the Aryan Brotherhood and Mexican Mafia and didn't flinch throwing their asses in the slammer. He's also support the Gay-Straight Alliance to meet on campus in Orange County. So he's "balanced" for a California judge — not a right-wing activist judge as will soon be claimed by the Left. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_O._Carter All things consider, I don't think the Cook County goon squad will intimidate him either. |
Be lucky if it makes page d16 of the Wash Post.
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.