Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: True Republican Patriot
“The Law Suit needs to be Refocused!”

This suit was not dismissed “with prejudice”. I believe that means Kreep and Taitz (hopefully just Kreep at this point) are not barred from bringing the suit back to Carter's court with the defects that Judge Carter identified corrected (dumping the non-political plaintiffs and all defendants except Obama, and not asking for removal of Obama but asking only monetary damages).

The WSJ Blogger Jones read Carter's at times confusing musings in dicta to mean that the political plaintiffs actually could have standing that Carter was willing to recognize if a remedy was available to the judge. The de facto removal of Obama requested by Kreep and Taitz was not seen as an available remedy, but a monetary judgment just might be!

Judge Carter seems to have actually invited a new lawsuit by the political plaintiffs!

How often have the anti-birthers and other scoffers declared that Taitz and Kreep would fail “just like all the others” because “none” of the plaintiffs had standing? Yet the WSJ legal blogger Jones says the anti-birthers and others are wrong. Judge Carter found that the political candidates could have standing if the case was timely filed and a remedy were available, according to Jones.

Finding standing for the political plaintiffs is huge!!!

17 posted on 11/01/2009 12:18:57 PM PST by Seizethecarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]


To: Seizethecarp

FANTASTIC NEWS!! THANK YOU!! THANK YOU!!
Hopefully, Everyone will take the time and efoort to read,
digest and fully understand your Great Analysis of Judge Carter’s Findings!!!!!!! HUGE!!!!

OBAMA IS A FRAUD AND THE ALLIGATORS ARE CLOSING IN!!


26 posted on 11/01/2009 1:14:45 PM PST by True Republican Patriot (May GOD Continue to BLESS Our Great President George W. Bush!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

To: Seizethecarp
Judge Carter found that the political candidates could have standing if the case was timely filed and a remedy were available, according to Jones.

When Carter refers to the timing of the filing, he means that relief could, conceivably, have been granted before the inauguration. That's why he scolds Taitz for not filing in a timely manner.

I agree that he did find standing for the third party candidates, but nowhere did he suggest that there's any relief the court could grant now, and even if that were possible Taitz would still have to present credible evidence, in a professional brief, for any judge to allow the case to go forward.

She's done neither of those things. Flinging fake African birth certificates, hundreds of pages of rambling, disconnected internet research and unsubstantiated charges of fraud at the court, then insisting that it's the courts responsibility to help her find evidence, is not a formula for success.

38 posted on 11/02/2009 3:51:50 AM PST by browardchad ("Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own fact." - Daniel P Moynihan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


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