Posted on 09/08/2009 2:15:45 PM PDT by pissant
A California judge today tentatively scheduled a trial for Jan. 26, 2010, for a case that challenges Barack Obama's eligibility to be president based on questions over his qualifications under the requirements of the U.S. Constitution.
If the case actually goes to arguments before U.S. District Judge David Carter, it will be the first time the merits of the dispute have been argued in open court, according to one of the attorneys working on the issue.
In a highly anticipated hearing today before Carter, several motions were heard, including a resolution to long-standing questions about whether attorney Orly Taitz properly served notice on the defendants, which she had.
In a second ruling, Carter ordered that attorney Gary Kreep of the United States Justice Foundation can be added to the case to represent defendants Wiley Drake and Markham Robinson, who had been removed by an earlier court order. Drake, the vice presidential candidate for the American Independent Party, and Robinson, the party's chairman, were restored as plaintiffs.
But the judge did not immediately rule on Taitz' motion to be granted discovery – that is the right to see the president's still-concealed records. Nor did Carter rule immediately on a motion to dismiss the case, submitted by the U.S. government, following discussion over Taitz' challenge to the work of a magistrate in the case.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
No. Not according to the judges' order. Link Early discovery “temporarily” denied! Till the MTD is accepted or denied. This has to follow a logical sequence and Judge Carter is not going to allow instrusion into evidence till it becomes a legal option or necessity. The need would disappear if he decides to dismiss the case.
Agreed. But it was a motion submitted by Taitz and it was denied.
You are showing a strong bias against Orly, why?
Because I think she's an inept boob.
Since you cited the Bible, I will mention that since Moses was a poor speaker, God used Aaron to speak for Moses. This case is similar.
On can readily see that Judge Carter wants this case heard on the merits in an expeditious manner and Taitz working by herself will not permit that to happen.
Again; Taitz has accomplished a great deal and when it is all over, she will receive the recognition she deserves.
Well said, and great points FRiend!
From that court’s mouth to God’s ear ... dare we hope? (I dare!)
Good for you! This guy is rejoicing at every possible “set-back’ and decrying any positive aspects. Ever more and more likely to be an Obamabot troll."
----------------------
Now you get it. They are trolls that's what they do. ;-)
Just replying to mail from yesterday...and laughing at the comments I missed over night.
Have you taken the 0bama pledge yet? You might as well since you're already proving that you are indeed his 'servant'.
Not yet. Can you send me your copy?
Have a nice day chinslurp.
You too, butthead.
What positive aspects are there to decry? Taitz went in there yesterday and every motion she submitted was denied. She's split the plaintiffs into two completely disfunctional teams fighting the same suit. She's facing a hearing on the motion to dismiss in 30 days and I'm looking forward to reading her response. All in all I'd say nothing has changed and won't change until some time next month.
I get the impression that attorney Kreep is not disfunctional. I see that he worked with Liberty Counsel on the marriage stuff in California. Liberty Counsel would not be working with a disfunctional attorney. If anything, it indicates that Kreep is more interested in the result than his personal glory.
Non-Sequitur,
have you gotten the message yet that the kind of reasonable discussion that you are engaging in is offensive and not welcome on this thread or anywhere else?
Well, Obama's well known for his Freudian slips.
Here's one where he slipped on the rug when reaching
to kiss King Abdullah's ass.
I believe that with this post two days ago you have met your quota of certifiable prefabrications on this forum. You should take the rest of the week off.
Was FOX there?
I can easily picture you saying to the ravaged body of our dying Republic, “put some ice on that”.
You are truly pathetic.
And you would trample the rule of law in your haste to take down one man. And once you've done that and made a mockery of the Constitution in the process - something you accuse Obama himself of doing - then what will you turn to for protection for yourself or the next person?
This is bigger that Obama or any single man or woman. This is the law, the foundation of our society. All I want is for it to be held to the strict letter. All you want is whatever it takes to cram your agenda through. By my way of thinking you're the pathetic one.
Nope. Having too much fun.
Some time ago. But if I abandon it then I let the loonies win and spread their nonsense unchallenged. Someone has to ask the questions that they don't want to have to answer.
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.