I know Gary Kreep. He and I have had some disagreements, dating back to our days in Young Americans for Freedom, but he's a godo solid conservative and I'm happy to hve him on the case. Why does Taitz want Gary removed, and what is the alleged "conflict of interests"?
It sounds like she's trying to monopolize the case for herself.
Some of the legal opinions submitted by Mr. Kreeps appear very well written. However, according to Orly, his lack of urgency and delinquency caused undue conflict and delays in the Lightfoot vs. Bowen case which was frustrating because (according to my understanding) that was a case that would’ve been difficult to dismiss on standing.
Also, when Judge Carter proposed to render a decision on the Motion To Dismiss on 9/11/09, after just indicating a strong likelihood of denial, he objected and postponed this case another MONTH ! I personally found this egregiously unconscionable ! We FINALLY have a case with an ‘ethical’ judge who gives a strong indication of ruling against a MTD and he “OBJECTS” to it ???? Maybe in his own mind, he really felt the need to familiarize himself with the defendant’s MTD, but A LOT can happen within a month. Example : discovery has now been referred back to the other judge which could very well adversely impact the direction of this case.
Atty. Kreeps is also of the opinion that dual citizenship is “OK” as long as one is born on U.S. soil. This is an issue that Atty. Apuzzo and Leo Donofrio have made a strong case against. Even in Resolution 511, the Democratic panel (which included Obama himself) stated McCain was qualified because he was born on a U.S. naval base and was a child of “U.S. citizens.” (PLURAL !)
This is tantamount to a “self proclaimed disqualification” on the part of the Usurper and should be brought to the court’s attention. Just my take.