Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

I find it amazing that a federal judge did not dismiss an Orly Taitz case without a hearing. That means that the judge did not see Dr. Taitz's case as frivolous or without merit on its face.

As with the case in 2009 before Judge Carter, this is still a pre-trial hearing so "no witnesses and/or exhibits will be permitted" to prove identity and selective service fraud.

If Orly gets past this hearing then the judge will schedule a hearing on Orly's "Motion to Recuse Counsel for Defendants."

In Orly's "Motion To Stike The Motion To Dismiss" that resulted in the judge ordering the hearing, Orly argues:

"Department of Justice filed a motion to dismiss this case supposedly on behalf of the U.S. Congress without any knowledge and consent of the U.S. Congress, keeping the members of the U.S. Congress in the dark. Later, if and when the U.S. Congress decides to impeach Obama due to his illegitimacy to the U.S. Presidency, due to fraud committed by Obama and due to his use of forged and stolen IDs, Obama will use this action and current motion to dismiss filed on behalf of the U.S. Congress and without knowledge of the U.S. Congress, in order to evade future impeachment, possibly claiming double jeopardy, Res Judicata or collateral estoppel. For this reason alone current motion to dismiss by the Department of Justice has to be stricken and the U.S. Congress has to be given time to file a response by the counsel chosen by the U.S. Congress, specifically by the Office of the Chief Counsel of the U.S. House of Representatives.

"b. Motion to dismiss by the State defendants: Governor Brown and Secretary of state Bowen was filed by the Attorney General of California Kamala Harris.

"Attached news paper article (Exhibit 1) shows that Harris is a fundraiser for Obama and Obama is a fundraiser for Harris.Moreover, Kamala Harris is related to #2 in Obama Department of Justice, Tony West. Maya Harris, the sister of Kamala Harris is married to West, therefore Tony West is the brother in law of Kamala Harris. West is a well known bundler, who bundled reported 65 million dollars for Obama's campaign. Clearly a person who bundled 65 million for a campaign of a politician, did not do it just to prosecute such candidate and send him to prison for his use of forged and stolen IDs. Kamala Harris had an ethical obligation to advise this court of the conflict of interest. As an Attorney General of CA, she is listed as an attorney for the State defendants in this case: Governor of California and Secretary of State of California. In relation to the elections, the goal of the Secretary of State and the Governor was to sign a legitimate certificate of vote and a legitimate certificate of ascertainment. Defendant Secretary of State is the top State election official whose main job description is assuring lawful elections. The goal of Barack Obama was to defraud the Federal and State Elections officials, as he ran and got the position of the President by fraud and use of forged and stolen IDs. Harris had a duty to disclose to the court that she is a fundraiser for Obama, that Obama is a major fundraiser for herand that her brother in law is a major bundler for Obama and #2 in ObamaDepartment of Justice. Harris had a duty to recuse herself due to conflict of interest, so that this court could appoint an independent firm to representthe State defendants to be paid from the funds allocated by the state forlegal defense of state officials sued in their official capacity."

1 posted on 04/16/2013 9:21:37 PM PDT by Seizethecarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: null and void; LucyT; Cold Case Posse Supporter; Red Steel; Kenny Bunk

ping to Orly actually getting a pre-trail hearing on standing before a US district judge in CA! Get the popcorn for this 1.5 hour hearing next Monday, April 22.


2 posted on 04/16/2013 9:24:10 PM PDT by Seizethecarp (Defend aircraft from "runway kill zone" mini-drone helicopter swarm attacks: www.runwaykillzone.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Seizethecarp; Absolutely Nobama; aragorn; Art in Idaho; Aurorales; autumnraine; azishot; ...
Constitutional Eligibility

3 posted on 04/16/2013 9:25:48 PM PDT by null and void (Republicans create the tools of oppression and Democrats use them. Gun confiscation enables tyranny.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Seizethecarp

Isn’t Bammy in the dictionary as the example for the definition of fraud?


4 posted on 04/16/2013 9:28:31 PM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Seizethecarp
Can Taitz limited herself to these legal topics? Does she even know what they all are?

Oral argument will be limited to: (1) mootness, (2) standing, (3) political question doctrine, (4) the Speech and Debate Clause, and/or (5) service of process on defendants.

5 posted on 04/16/2013 9:35:39 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Seizethecarp

Can we get the Cliff Notes version for those of us who have given up on this?


6 posted on 04/16/2013 9:36:05 PM PDT by Michael.SF. (Obama lied, Stevens died.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Flotsam_Jetsome; WildHighlander57

It is hard to believe but the judge might have actually responded to some part of the following from Taitz’s motion:

“On the issue of the most egregious crime in the history of this nation, usurpation of the U.S. Presidency by a criminal using forged and stolen I.D.s , the U.S. Department of Justice defrauded the U.S. Congress, this court and American people and went behind the back of the U.S. Congress in order to cover up Obama’s forged and stolen IDs. U.S. Department of Justice became criminally complicit in the Racketeering Scheme to cover up Obama’s forged IDs.

“IF THIS COURT GRANTS A MOTION TO DISMISS FILED BY THE U.S. ATTORNEYS’OFFICE, THIS COURT WILL ABUSE ITS’ JUDICIAL DISCRETION AND WILL GRANT AMOTION BY AN ATTORNEY,( IN THIS CASE THE ATTORNEY IS THE DEPARTMENTOF JUSTICE), WHO DOES NOT REPRESENT ONE SINGLE PARTY IN THIS CASE. BY DOING SO THIS COURT WILL BECOME COMPLICIT IN THE RACKETEERING SCHEME TO COMMIT THE ELECTIONS FRAUD AND TO USURP THE U.S.PRESIDENCY WITH THE USE OF FORGED AND STOLEN IDs.”


8 posted on 04/16/2013 9:45:10 PM PDT by Seizethecarp (Defend aircraft from "runway kill zone" mini-drone helicopter swarm attacks: www.runwaykillzone.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Seizethecarp

Appreciate the ping Seizethecarp. I noticed this from the April 4, 2013 order by Judge England. It states:

“Oral argument will be limited to: (1) mootness, (2) standing, (3) political question doctrine, (4) the Speech and Debate Clause, and/or (5) service of process on defendants. No witnesses and/or exhibits will be permitted or considered at the hearing.”

According to that, it’s going to be tuff for Orly since she can’t put show any exhibits like his fraudulent selective service registration. The reason I say that is because Judge England seems to have made his mind up already. He also stated this:

“…there is no requirement that there be any type of identification shown at any time for any person to be the President of the United States, as required by the United States Constitution, because the only credible information that this Court has received and has been released was from the Director of the Hawaii Health Department who has certified and attested to the authenticity of the certified copies of the original certificate of live birth which was published approximately a year and a half ago. That is credible testimony.” Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. January 3, 2013.

Looks like he is siding with the Hawaiian Department of Health.


9 posted on 04/16/2013 9:46:26 PM PDT by Cold Case Posse Supporter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Seizethecarp
Why do I feel like some character in an old Charlie Brown cartoon with Lucy and a football very time I click on one of these threads?

I am personally convinced the post turtle is a fraud and an usurper, but this tilting at windmills is getting me down, where is the closure??

Years after the bastard is gone and his damage done do not do any of us any good, beyond a "told you so".

14 posted on 04/16/2013 10:15:49 PM PDT by doorgunner69
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Seizethecarp
GUILTY! And we sentence you, Obama, to LIFE in prison. Bailiff take this man away. May God have mercy on his soul.

That's how it plays out in my dreams.

22 posted on 04/16/2013 11:46:33 PM PDT by Casie (democrats destroy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Seizethecarp
Even if all this is proven beyond a shadow of a doubt I hope nobody here thinks that anything will actually *come* of it...like coverage by the “drive by media” or impeachment.It won't even warrant an asterisk in the history books as Billy Bob Blythe's impeachment will.
26 posted on 04/17/2013 5:28:41 AM PDT by Gay State Conservative (Leno Was Right,They *Are* Undocumented Democrats!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Seizethecarp
What it really means is that they want to slap this suit down more forcefully. I predict the 'reasoning' behind it will be mootness and standing.

Our political and legal systems are incapable of dealing with fraud at this level.

29 posted on 04/17/2013 7:12:59 AM PDT by zeugma (Those of us who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Seizethecarp
This goes to the point that the Sect of State, and the AG, and every office attending to the case at hand, has a primary duty to insure that any criminal act in this case is prosecuted to the full extent of the law under both State and Federal jurisdiction. They are representatives of the people of the State of California, not the candidates, nor to any political affiliations that are popular at the given time of the event. The State is obligated to the protection of the people who are it's citizens, and those who are employed by the State do not have an option to waver from that duty. The omission to perform that duty, when they have received information that indicates that a crime against the people may have occurred, makes them derelict in their performance of duty. If a political agenda is apparent in their actions, they should be prosecuted right along side with the individuals that they are trying to protect.

The Judge should have an obligation to insure that the people's interests are protected as well. The fullest benefit possible to the plaintiffs in this case should be give above and beyond the positions held by the defendants in this case, and in the event of any possible conflict of interests, either personal or in the professional conduct of these people, the plaintiff should be allowed to proceed.

45 posted on 04/18/2013 6:41:44 AM PDT by dude911 (Half stepping is when you don't want to tell the truth, the WHOLE truth, and nothing BUT the Truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Seizethecarp
Carp, reading an Orly brief is worse than having root canal without novocaine.

Good luck to the dear woman on this one.

a federal judge did not dismiss an Orly Taitz case without a hearing.

The man is a saint.

72 posted on 04/20/2013 8:41:09 AM PDT by Kenny Bunk (The Obama Molecule: Teflon binds with Melanin = No Criminal Charges Stick)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Seizethecarp

The hearing was this morning. According to ObamaReleaseYourRecord (http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2013/04/california-judge-morrison-england.html) the judge dismissed the lawsuit.


78 posted on 04/22/2013 2:31:26 PM PDT by ConstantSkeptic (Be careful about preconceptions)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson