Skip to comments.Orly Transcript from July 13 hearing
Posted on 10/06/2009 9:59:10 AM PDT by Elderberry
Transcript from July 13 hearing, please read extremely important. Posted on | October 6, 2009 | No Comments
I am publishing this transcript of the July 13 hearing so that the public can see the truth. What Ive noticed it that Obama supporters are publishing some COMPLETE GARBAGE calling it unofficial transcripts. In reality they are distorting each and every word I am saying and trying to show me in a negative light. Somebody by name Waveydavey has written such garbage and distortions and Phil from Right side of Life posted it. When the transcript of the October 5 hearing is ready, I will post it. In reality I carried most of the hearing on my shoulders. Kreep showed up an hour late and was not prepared. He did not have any precedents, he did not provide a substantial argument. I have provided numerous points and precedents in the argument and counted any and all ridiculous assertions by the US attorneys claiming that no one citizen of this country has standing to bring challenge to this massive fraud and treason perpetrated upon the citizens of this nation by the usurper and his accomplishes (as you understand US attorneys didnt use this very language and definitions). the public was applauding me repeatedly. Kreep also lied to the judge, where he stated that I have written on my blog that people should sue Kreep. I never written that- the man is a pathological liar- it is appalling what he and Wiley Drake are doing. Drake is telling the public, media and donors that I was thrown of the legal team, so that all the donations go to Kreep. Somebody, also, told the judge that I have written on my blog to people to call the judge. It never happened. I tried to correct the record but the judge would not let me speak further. What concerns me more then anything else, is that Judge Carter sounded completely different from what he was in prior hearings on July 13 and September 8.
On July 13 I was entitled to get a Default judgment against Obama and postdefaultdiscovery, as I have properly sued Obama as an individual fora fraud that he committed as an individual before the election. I demanded from Judge Carter default or, if he is refusing to give me the default, I demanded a leave of court to get an interlocutory appeal. US attorney showed up at the hearing as a party of interest, representing USA and demanded to be served with the pleadings. He was stating that Obama was supposed to be served through the US attorneys office. I countered by stating that the service through US attorneys office is done, and defense by US attorneys at the expense of the tax payers is allowed only when a person is sued as a governmental official for what he did as an official. Obama defrauded the whole Nation, before becoming the president, by claiming to be eligible, and we the people should not pay for his defense, I served him properly and I am supposed toget a default judgment against him and a post judgment discovery. Judge Carter refused to give me the default. He twisted my arm time and again and pressured me to serve Obama yet again through the US attorneys office. At three different occasions at 10:40, 11:01 and 11:07 of the hearing judge Carter has assured me that if this deal is made, if I serve the US attorneys office, the case will be heard on the merits expeditiously and will not be dismissed on technicality. As I was refusing, I stated that I have great concerns that the US attorneys will be playing games, as they did in prior cases and will try to dismiss this case on technicality such as jurisdiction os standing. Please read 10:40 line 5. Court (meaning judge Carter ) is saying In talking to you this way you are basically told, we are going to get to the MERITS (emphasis added) of this very quickly. The government is just asking for what THEY believe is proper service. He did not state that I didnt serve Obama properly, he is saying what They, the government, believes is the proper service. At 11:01 line 13. he says I wish this would be resolved on its MERITS QUICKLY. And he is either not the president or he is At 11:07 line 1 Judge Carter states I mean if he is not president, he shouldnt be president, if he is he should be. And we need to resolve it on the MERITS On September the 8th judge Carter told the US Attorneys West and DeJutte that the chance of him granting motion to dismiss due to lack of standing is extremely law and he is ready to rule and have a hearing on this on Sept 11 in 3 days. At that time Gary Kreepsqueezed himself in the case representing 2 out of 48 plaintiffs and demanded more time. The hearing was postponed by nearly a month. During this month something happened. At October 5 hearing Judge Carter sounded as a completely different person. He did not sound as a brave Marine any more. He sounded scared, intimidated by somebody or something. He was trying to find ways to dump this case on another court- like DC court, drag his feet by telling us to plead the case again or dismiss on technicality- claiming no one has standing. I poured my heart out for over an hour, and at least he didnt come up with a negative decision right then and there, but I am concerned. We had a clear deal back in July. If Judge Carter makes a 180 degrees turn now and rules for Obama and does not give me expedited discovery and hearing on the merits as he repeatedly promised during the July 13 hearing, then I and my clients were defrauded by the court. Then there is no system of justice for the citizens of this country.
I understand that a lot of people feel a strong emotional investment in this case. I sympathize with that. Lawyers inevitably confront that situation, and it's always hard when a person's expectations aren't grounded in reality. That can happen to the best of us, and birthers are people, too. But this description in her own words really should dissuade anyone from pinning their hopes on Orly.
I think she really does believe in what she's doing. But she doesn't know enough about procedure, precedent, or basic practice to even understand what has happened in these cases. The description she provides of what went on in court and her “deal” is make believe. It's an alternate reality in her head. And I do feel sorry for her because it's obvious she believes in this case and thinks she just has to find the right judge who will recognize the inner truth of what she is saying. Kind of like a bad writer hopelessly shopping the same old story. But courts don't work like that, as so many have ably pointed out, and so every judge betrays her in turn. She's always betrayed, because the alternative— that she doesn't have an actionable case—simply will not be acknowledged. It can't be, for reasons that are psychological and emotional, not factual.
I hope she gets over that before it does too much damage to her. And I hope people who have invested themselves in her can gain a little distance. Getting angry over make believe isn't worth it.
“The 180 degree about face by this judge just confirms my suspicion that the fix is in and this contention is doomed to fail.”
I really do hope you’re wrong, but that’s what my gut tells me. Carter could have ruled on standing a month ago. This whole thing is sinister. But I take heart from my tagline.
I think there is considerable doubt about venue, standing, and even some aspects of the merits themselves, but I must say that Orly’s craziness is seeming to cause many in the legal community to want to find a way to dismiss her and her case. She gets no benefit of the doubt. It’s sad, because at the end of the day, it’s not about her at all.
He didn't do an about face. The birthers had been spinning his ordinary neutral acts as supportive. Yesterday they got a hint he may not agree with them.
If you want to remove a president, impeachment. There is recourse for the mistake of electing Obama. You wait for the next election and vote for someone else, or you get Congress to impeach him. These are political acts, not legal ones.
That's a very charitable interpretation. Unfortunately, it hasn't stopped her from grabbing the spotlight in any venue that's willing to focus on her, and giving the left a good laugh in their portrayal of her as a buffoon of the right.
Based on this it's not clear if Orly was listening to the judge on the 13th...or those little voices in her head.
It's a basic rule of due process that the judge can only consider the evidence and arguments that were presented in court in the presence of both sides. If you were a defendant in a lawsuit, would you want people calling up the judge, when your lawyer wasn't there to respond, and telling the judge bad things about you?
He could. But instead he quite properly gave the plaintiffs a chance to respond to the government's motion to dismiss before issuing his ruling.
"Besides, Clinton was impeached, and I don't recall him having the decency to step down, so why would this usurper do so?"
Clinton was not convicted by the Senate. If he were, it wouldn't be a matter of choosing to step down. He would have been removed.
Nobody in the Senate had the mind or spine to actually put on a trial. And the majority of these who sat in 'judgment' of Clinton were NOT about to require a literal trial to take place. Had there been a literal trial we would NOT have BamaKennedy sitting in the oval office on this day. WE the people are reaping exactly what our votes have sown. Corruption and perverseness from the bottom UP.
I don’t disagree. But those aren’t legal questions.
Absolutely. They put on a stupid farce only because they had to. They would have much rather the whole thing gone away. The Republicans in the Senate, as usual, were spinless wimps. I was glad to see Trent Lott eventually go.
But this is a digression.
The Government has a strong case for dismissal.
The people have spoken clearly. They want the “Son of a Kenyan” delivering trillion dollar deficit spending, with multi billion dollar interest payments each month, 20 percent unemployment, and a communist style health care system.
Actually it is not a digression, because the seeds sown through the years of the history of this nation are finally being reaped wherein liberalism has through 'precedence' made the Constitution darn near null and void.
BamaKennedy would not be sitting atop the world tearing apart every institutional fabric of our society brick by brick had this nation NOT given over to 'precedence' the tool that that now creates the law.
Liberalism is now the law of the land.
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.