Shocker! Judge orders trial on eligibility issue

WND ^ | 9/8/09 | staff

[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.

[Red Steel]

Obama: "Because the terrorist threat continues, the national emergency declared on September 14, 2001, and the powers and authorities adopted to deal with that emergency, must continue in effect beyond September 14, 2009. Therefore, I am continuing in effect for an additional year the national emergency the former President declared on September 14, 2001, with respect to the terrorist threat," Obama wrote to Congress."

Obama is thinking can use this to hide my documents? Yeah, that's the ticket! '^)

[Blu By U]

What’s the skinny-
Is Judge Land friend or foe?

[Red Steel]

Well if true, it follows what Judge Carter expressed in his statements at the hearing:

From the OC Register.

"Carter repeated said he was eager to get the matter settled.

“If President Obama fits the qualifications under the rules of the court, the longer the delay the more credibility it lends to the complaint,” he said. “If President Obama does not meet the court’s requirements, the delay also causes a problem.”

He even repeated it...wants this matter expedited.

[Elderberry]

“Is Judge Land friend or foe?”

I don’t know. In an email from Orly she had these comments:

-—Judge Land was gracious and a real Southern gentleman in that he waived the technical requirement of a signature of the local counsel as a contact.  
I hope that members of the military and other patriots of this country will be in the courtroom to support Cpt. Rhodes MD.

[TheBigJ]

I don’t know, no time to research. But we definitely found a gem with Judge Carter. He’s taking care of business before Zero get’s crafty... hope the expediated discovery is verified true.

[Kevmo]

Well it must be nice to feel relieved. While you’re relieving yourself, don’t be pissin’ down someone’s back and callin’ it rain.

[Kevmo]

I smell troll, probable retread of someone who travels the stars in her head and has been told to stay off these threads. Whaddaya think?

[FARS]

Some expanded info on Expedited Discovery

http://noiri.blogspot.com/2009/09/breaking-news-expedited-discovery.html

[campaignPete R-CT]

I’ve tried my best to understand the unique theory that is prevalant here and I believe that I at least have a rudimentary understanding of it. They think that if a judge discovers evidence indicating that Obama is not a NBC, that the judiciary branch has the authority to invalidate the ‘08 election and remove him from office. And judges are primary “justice seekers”.

This is different from impeachment. They believe that judges have an obligation to see to it that laws and the Constitution are enforced. The following idea is trivia and a judge can easily overlook it:

“Only actual cases and controversies may be heard by the federal courts; the judicial power does not extend to cases which are hypothetical, or which are precluded because of problems with standing, mootness, or ripeness. Generally, a case or controversy requires the presence of adverse parties”

I try to let my imagination wander to see if this theory could possibly have any connection to the real world. It is a difficult mental experiment. I get stuck at the point where it seems clear that the threshold for impeachment would be much lower than the threshold for the judiciary to remove the president, under this alleged authority that they have. And impeachment would come long before Justice Roberts sent an email over to the Joint Chiefs demanding that he remove the POTUS from the premises (outside of the impeachment process).

[campaignPete R-CT]

Perhaps we could call this the “Judge as superhero” theory. Judge must act as Attorney General, Detective, prosecutor, grand jury ... 4-in-1 deal. The Constitution demands it and the Republic must be preserved.

[Hang'emAll]

Some expanded info on Expedited Discovery...

Thanks for posting the good news.

[Blood of Tyrants]

Nothing on Orly’s blog about this so I am going to be cautious.

[steviep96]

All judges want matters expedited. Whether that means that he wants to see a trial on the merits - whatever they are is one thing.

Or it could mean that he doesn’t want to spend the next year reading badly-written motions and wants to get to dismissal as quickly as possible.

Judges say a lot of things - and most of them are to encourage settlement.

Case in point: back in my days as a law clerk, I was assisting on a property line dispute and the judge said in open court “Settle this before someone gets really hurt.”

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[Vendome]

The thing is, it doesn’t matter to us either way. If it is proven that Barry O. is a fraud and we already know he is the star of his own sitcom, he will be removed. Period.

There will be no support for him to continue using Air Force One. All and I mean All of his support mechanisms in the Senate and Congress will immediately throw him under the bus.

They and the Judiciary have any number of ways to make life harsh for this caricature. Heck, what if the Congress suddenly stopped sending bills for him to sign, waiting for his replacement?

That would be a huge slap in the face of anyone who is pretending to be something he is not and I guarantee you he will leave, in a D.C. taxi.

[RummyChick]

Has anyone confirmed this with the parties or with Carter’s office?

I can’t get excited until I see verified proof.

[RummyChick]

here is the order in question
http://c2.api.ning.com/files/bUWvV3M4GoI6VNzFgVb1GoaWei0uXsN9XrrF-pmT7L2*BObmQBy8pU-3iWW0I*tgTyidrJq5LQlEIbOzaRfT4I*nYes0bBpJ/COURTORDER2BARNETTCASE1954707203118728478.pdf

[MHGinTN]

Perhaps October 5th is ‘expedited in Orly's thinking. Nothing in that Carter ruling indicates any subpoenas will be issued before Oct 5.

[faucetman]

http://c2.api.ning.com/files/bUWvV3M4GoI6VNzFgVb1GoaWei0uXsN9XrrF-pmT7L2*BObmQBy8pU-3iWW0I*tgTyidrJq5LQlEIbOzaRfT4I*nYes0bBpJ/COURTORDER2BARNETTCASE1954707203118728478.pdf

OK, any lawyers that can explain this?

[bayouranger]

BTTT!