Posted on 10/18/2009 6:07:15 PM PDT by blueyon
In a stunning blow to the impartiality of the American Judicial system, Federal Judge David O. Carter, who is hearing the case Barnett vs. Obama, in the Central District, Southern Division Court at Santa Ana, California, has just hired a lawyer who works for a law firm where Robert F. Bauer, one of Obama’s top lawyers is a partner. And that, just days before the Oct. 5, 2009 hearing on the Motion to Dismiss, in which his demeanor radically changed, according to Dr. Orly Taitz, esq., lead counsel for the Plaintiffs.
Siddharth Velamoor is the lawyer chosen by Carter to serve as one of his two official clerks, from Oct. 1, 2009, till Sept. 30, 2010, according to Wikipedia. Velamoor is listed as an associate with Perkins Coie, LLP’s office in Seattle, Washington. It is not clear if he has broken his relations with the firm.
C, is a partner of Perkins Coie, LLP’s office in Washington, D.C.. His bio at the company identifies him as holding the Chair of the Political Law group at the firm; general counsel to Obama’s Campaign for America and general counsel to the Democratic National Committee.
Mr. Bauer’s wife is none other than Anita Dunn, the Whitehouse Communication’s Director.
(Excerpt) Read more at thepostnemail.wordpress.com ...
you have mail
Yes, but this alleged conflict-- hiring a law clerk from Perkin Coie-- is known to Orly now. If she doesn't move to recuse Judge Carter now, she can't wait for his decision on the motion to dismiss and then move to recuse him.
If you believe Judge Carter to be an honorable man, a patriotic Marine, who swore an oath to defend the Consititution and a solid member of the federal judiciary, who has faced death threats when he undertook a case against the highly LETHAL Mexican Mafia, then you will also believe that he would not allow the Founding Document to be shredded by anyone for any reason.
On that basis alone, public reaction that he hired an “enemy camp” person for his team and thus created a conflict of interests - or lack of impartiality toward Alan Keyes and Orly Taitz or Gary Kreep and their clients, does not ring true.
Even with the obvious consideration that he has been pressured into finding a way out for himself and chose this “conflict” one to recuse himself at a later date.
Or, as many fear, be so influenced by a junior, “opposing camp” lawyer that he dismisses the case.
Here is a more honorable analysis for his action:
1. He wants to ensure that his decision is NOT tainted by any accusation of bias against Obama on appeal by either side. Specially the Obama lawyers.
2. With the enormous import of this decision to try the case on its merits, he needs to :
a) Get his legal facts straight as far beyond challenge as anything can be.
b) Get an experienced political law thinker to do the research that the Obama side would use. (The new law clerk would function as this “knowledgeable” person).
c) Use the research to balance or offset his own forming conclusions.
d) Find contradictions or conflicts, if any, to the research he is provided by the new Law Clerk by tasking other sources to examine and confront them.
d) Provide himself with a bullet proof logic for whatever decision he reaches about dismissing or not dismissing.
e) With that solid footing to do what needs to be done for the country according to the Constitution. Not politics.
f) Without fear of consequences such as Obama supporters rioting.
g) Without fearing the temporary political chaos of defending the Constitution, requiring straightening out of laws and orders, appointments etc.
h) Nor concern that many, like Pelosi or Reid might be felons alongside Obama if the jury decides he is ineligible and perpetrated fraud on the nation with their assistance of negligence.
NOTE: He is NOT obliged to simultaneously pursue Quo Waranto (removal of Obama) in the primary case which would serve ONLY to establish eligibility. The next step, which might have to be filed in Washington D.C., could be step two and dealt with as appropriate.
3. The final chapter would be to try to legally PREVENT Obama pardoning himself nor Joe Biden, or Pelosi or anyone in the chain of succession doing so if acting as President. The reasonin/logic would be that they were co-conspirators (willing or unwillinig) of Obama’s and illegible to do so.
Would you not prefer Judge Carter took his time, used his expertise as a complex case judge, used the political research experience of his new Law Clerk as a foil to the opposing side and arrived at a decision he can defend as just, even handed and viable instead of hurrying and dumping the case off the cliff?
excerpt from:
http://noiri.blogspot.com/2009/10/will-judge-david-carter-ignore.html
I like your analysis.
I would have “prefered” that Judge Carter had NOT hired this clown in the first place...a clown who appears to have at least TWO resumes.
Judge Carter is probably well aware of who this person is by now. Up to this point, he has bent over backwards to do the right thing. I reserve judgement until I see his reasoning one way or another.
I have the feeling that he is probably trying very hard to settle legal issues within the proper guidelines so that when he makes a decision, it will stand.
If he was inclined to dismiss, plenty of other judges have dismissed at the drop of a hat so he has enough cover to go the same route, but he has not done that.
The longer he takes, the more I believe he is trying to find the way to allow this to go forward without having it dismissed on appeal, which will certainly follow.
With at least TWO resumes, this clown would have NEVER darkened my office doorway. PERIOD
Thanks for the ping!
NOTE: He is NOT obliged to simultaneously pursue Quo Waranto (removal of Obama) in the primary case which would serve ONLY to establish eligibility. The next step, which might have to be filed in Washington D.C., could be step two and dealt with as appropriate.
You have the greatest graphics. I am enjoying.
Great research, great information, great connections.
BOOKMARK
Plaintiffs have encouraged the Court to ignore these mandates of the Constitution; to
disregard the limits on its power put in place by the Constitution; and to effectively overthrow a
sitting president who was popularly elected by “We the People”–over sixty-nine million of the
people. Plaintiffs have attacked the judiciary, including every prior court that has dismissed
their claim, as unpatriotic and even treasonous for refusing to grant their requests and for
adhering to the terms of the Constitution which set forth its jurisdiction. Respecting the
constitutional role and jurisdiction of this Court is not unpatriotic. Quite the contrary, this Court
considers commitment to that constitutional role to be the ultimate reflection of patriotism.
Therefore, for the reasons stated above, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED
Unreal.......................so I guess it’s over
Well, Carter caved! I wonder if this clerk had anything to do with Judge Carter dismissing the case?
This from the obama file!
Carter Caves
“Therefore, for the reasons stated above, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: October 29, 2009”
It looks like the Judge has been had. He granted the motion to dismiss the suit against Obama, stating that over 69 million people wanted the Obamamessiah and he wouldn’t overthrow him. In saying so, he is also saying that The Constitution is no longer in effect — and he used a bogus Constitutional argument to do it.
“Plaintiffs request asking this Court to sweep away the votes of over sixty-nine million Americans with the stroke of a pen and order a new election during which the country would be in a state of turmoil, ignores the Constitution’s processes and separation of powers that were developed by the founders.”
What Carter said:
• It’s OK to ignore Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 of the U. S. Constitution.
• Votes trump the U. S. Constitution.
• The U. S. Constitution does not allow the judicial branch to interfere in a coup d’etat.
The fix was in. Velamoor probably brought Judge Carter’s ruling with him from Perkins Coie.
http://theobamafile.com/ObamaLatest.htm
You have the wrong end of the Constitution stick or hallucinating.
What nonsense about your take on the constitution. Oba-Hussein is the one who has blatantly trashed the Constitution and refuses to answer for it. Or bother to show that he has not done so.
Do you INSIST he is above the the law? And does not have to produce any documents? Documents you need to get a Driver’s Permit or enroll in many venues?
What are you smoking?
That explains much.
My HUMBLE aplogies, I could not believe my eyes and thought you were making it up. What a travesty.
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.