Shocker! Judge orders trial on eligibility issue

WND ^ | 9/8/09 | staff

[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.

[presently no screen name]

Ah! Wondered why the repetitive robot hadn’t shown up. Thanks for the update.

[KylaStarr]

Thank you for all the pings, Fars.

[FARS]

Some good Sunday reading from http://AntiMullah.com

http://noiri.blogspot.com/2009/09/my-new-motto-and-alarm-warning.html

http://noiri.blogspot.com/2009/09/oba-hussein-government-can-video.html

http://noiri.blogspot.com/2009/09/wtach-we-people-video-of-912-march.html

http://noiri.blogspot.com/2009/09/retirement-in-florida.html

http://noiri.blogspot.com/2009/09/protest-ahmaghi-nejad-turd.html

http://noiri.blogspot.com/2009/09/obama-delighted-by-meeting-with-ahmadi.html

http://noiri.blogspot.com/2009/09/soviet-type-suppressing-threatenening.html

http://noiri.blogspot.com/2009/09/where-is-birth-certificate-where-were.html

http://noiri.blogspot.com/2009/09/behesht-neda-neda-paradise.html

http://noiri.blogspot.com/2009/09/265-speeches-in-232-days-in-office-more.html

http://noiri.blogspot.com/2009/09/democrats-want-to-know-as-long-as-it-is.html

Be happy, be well

[Quix]

THANKS.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[Non-Sequitur]

OK, any lawyers that can explain this?

It's Judge Carter's order setting October 5th for the hearing on the defense's motion to dismiss. Taitz and Kreep have until September 21 to reply to the motion in writing giving their reasons why the judge should not grant it. Then the defense has until September 28th to reply in writing to the plaintiff's reply. Then the judge will hold the hearing on October 5th and will issue his ruling then or shortly thereafter. This is what they are discussing:

Motion to Dismiss

[Non-Sequitur]

I’m still waiting for the official transcript link...since you read transcripts.

It's in. Link

And yes, I read it.

[Non-Sequitur]

Transcripts available at what link?

Official transcript from last Tuesday. Link

[Non-Sequitur]

Oops, my bad. It’s the transcript from July and not Tuesday. Never mind. I’ll keep looking.

[Sibre Fan]

Still. Pretty interesting. Thanks for posting.

[Non-Sequitur]

Transcripts available at what link?

Now we have the transcript from last Tuesday. Link