Posted on 09/14/2009 9:09:33 PM PDT by FARS
Early Discovery Video
(Excerpt) Read more at antimullah.com ...
I was going to asnwer the same thing, but was sure with this many posts, someone else had probably already answered it before me ;) And I am hoping for the best with Orly.. Everyone keep your fingers crossed! |
Hardly LoL! Just pissed with putting up with trolls.You were close enough. Your comments to me are both snide and pissy.
you don't seem to acknowledge the Judge's statements as they don't exist as relevant unless pressed then you claim you did.
I didn't make any claims about the judge's statements. Again, you're just making up things about which to argue.
Obama and the defense can ignore Carter's words at their on peril. His words are unequivocal. He explicitly puts the burden on Obama to cooperate:
Carter repeated said he was eager to get the matter settled. "If President Obama fits the qualifications under the rules of the court, the longer the delay the more credibility it lends to the complaint," he said. "If President Obama does not meet the court's requirements, the delay also causes a problem."
The above comments by Judge Carter that you cited are not concerning delay tactics on the part of the defendants, which is what you implied when you made the comment above Judge Carter's quote.
The OC article that you reference specifically states that the immediate delay concerning Judge Carter was the fighting between Taitz and Kreep. And before that it was Taitz' failure to properly serve the defense. Go back and read the article you keep quoting to me.
That means they have little chance to sway him on 12B rules.
I never suggested otherwise. I said that there are other issues of substance in the motion to dismiss besides FRCP 12b concerns. And since the judge hadn't actually read the motion to dismiss when he made those comments, he could not have known what else was in the motion. And since that is the case, he also could not have given any indication in his comments how he would rule concerning those other substantive issues. You can quote Judge Carter to me all day long but that won't validate your opinion that he's going to automatically rule against the motion to dismiss.
But if he does deny the motion to dismiss, that's fine by me! This conversation is no longer productive - if it ever was. I'm done.
...remember....Roberts initially flubbed the first swearing in.....and "forgot" to use a bible for the second and in private re-do of the swearing in...
What did Roberts know .....and when did he know it...enquiring minds seek.
You have always come across to me someone going to bat for Obama. As you come across as sounding like a baby.
You: You can quote Judge Carter to me all day long but that won't validate your opinion that he's going to automatically rule against the motion to dismiss.
When the judge makes statements at his hearing to the lawyers they do have meaning.
You: The above comments by Judge Carter that you cited are not concerning delay tactics on the part of the defendants, which is what you implied when you made the comment above Judge Carter's quote.
The judge's words again:
Carter repeated said he was eager to get the matter settled. "If President Obama fits the qualifications under the rules of the court, the longer the delay the more credibility it lends to the complaint," he said. "If President Obama does not meet the court's requirements, the delay also causes a problem."
You: The OC article that you reference specifically states that the immediate delay concerning Judge Carter was the fighting between Taitz and Kreep. And before that it was Taitz' failure to properly serve the defense. Go back and read the article you keep quoting to me.
Oh really? The above passage from the article has to do with Obama not Kreep v. Orly. I mean pleeeease.
It's as plain as day -- "If President Obama fits the qualifications under the rules of the court" and "President Obama does not meet the court's requirements, the delay also causes a problem."
The statement was clearly about Obama and a warning for Obama to cooperate.
You: "I said that there are other issues of substance in the motion to dismiss besides FRCP 12b concerns. And since the judge hadn't actually read the motion to dismiss when he made those comments, he could not have known what else was in the motion. And since that is the case, he also could not have given any indication in his comments how he would rule concerning those other substantive issues. You can quote Judge Carter to me all day long but that won't validate your opinion that he's going to automatically rule against the motion to dismiss."
You know what those are besides the jurisdictional issues? Do tell.
You have no idea what the judge did or didn't know in the motion at the time since he could have gotten the jist of most it but didn't read it for total content. It better be more than 'Twittered' and 'a blogged issue' like the Hollister judge cited. *snicker*
Apparently, the judge knew enough about the motion to dismiss since the article said it was the "primary thrust" [jurisdiction] of their motion to dismiss...the other stuff is not going to be enough to sway the judge for Obama.
From the article again:
"the primary thrust of that motion, scheduled to be heard by Carter on Oct. 5, is that the issue of whether or not Obama meets the citizenship requirements to be president is a matter for Congress and the Electoral College to decide - not the courts.
During this morning’s proceedings, Carter said he had not yet read the motion to dismiss the case. But he said such motions, when based on Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12 (b), rarely succeed. That is the rule cited by West in his motion."
This conversation is no longer productive - if it ever was. I'm done.
Then don't respond to this post then.
I know it is a very long shot that he will be declared “illegal to hold office”, but I do pray it happens.
Yes—BOR needs more vacation-days (I love it when Laura takes over).
But—speaking of BOR—what about his claim that BHO’s Hawaiian birth was “announced” in the state’s two biggest newspapers? O’Reilly didn’t name the two papers or give the date(s) the birth-announcement appeared. Nor did he state whether his researchers found the announcement on the internet, on microfiche, or in an archived copy of the paper.
I really can’t understand how this woman operates. I saw someone accuse her of working for Bibi. Get real, he would have had a more competent attorney involved.
Is she a Russian spy trying to blow this..or a Democratic undercover operator...or is she just incompetent.
I don’t know what the deal is ..but people who have tried to help her have complained.
It really isn’t that hard to read the rules of the particular court and submit your documents in the appropriate manner.
I hope Judge Carter ignores her incompetence and her mouth..and recognizes that this should go forward despite the attorney involved.
No more suspicious than the president spending over a million dollars to hide something that could be produced for $10.
My guess is that the zero will stall and move to dismiss on some technical grounds.
Well I was making the description to non-lawyers. By voluntary I mean that no Order has to be obtained. You are correct it is not voluntary but it is an Open Order governed by statute.
Fair enough. I don’t think we’re in disagreement about the rules of discovery or the discovery process itself. The only other point I would make is that Judge Carter referred Orly’s motion for expedited discovery back to the magistrate for initial review. In the order doing so, he encouraged early discovery, which is “voluntary” to use your term and not a demand.
See the following regarding Orly Taitz.
http://investigatingobama.blogspot.com/2009/09/orly-taitz-watch-saboteur.html
Question: would Carter encourage early discovery if he was leaning towards granting obama’s MTD? It just seems to me that “encouraging” early discovery is a clear sign of which way he’s headed but I don’t know enough about court’s actions....
If you read Carter's words in context - he was suggesting that Orly stop cutting off her nose to spite her face.
Either that or he's giving her all the rope she needs to hang herself.
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.