News from Alan Keyes: Judge Confirms Eligibility Trial to Proceed

AIPNews.com ^ | October 7, 2009 | Alan Keyes

[EternalVigilance]

By Alan Keyes
October 7, 2009
Loyal to Liberty

 

I just received a call from Orly Taitz, my attorney in the case seeking proof of Obama's eligibility for the Office of President of the United States. Judge Carter has released a statement declaring that the dates he set for the hearing and trial on the eligibility issue are confirmed, and it will move forward as scheduled. Apparently he was not swayed by the Obama lawyer's arguments.

Loyal to Liberty ...

[mnehring]

semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit is mostly supported by case law such as Schaffer ex rel. Schaffer v. Weast where the Supreme Court stated "the burden of persuasion, the court will 'begin with the ordinary default rule that plaintiffs bear the risk of failing to prove their claims."
2 J. Strong, McCormick on Evidence § 337, 412 (5th ed. 1999), which states: The burdens of pleading and proof with regard to most facts have been and should be assigned to the plaintiff who generally seeks to change the present state of affairs and who therefore naturally should be expected to bear the risk of failure of proof or persuasion.

However, there are arguments that the accused must prove they didn't commit the charged act such as Keyes v. Sch. Dist. No. 1 (US 189- 1979). Even in this the Supreme Court referred to the standing that "Nonetheless, “[a]bsent some reason to believe that Congress intended otherwise, therefore, [the Supreme Court] will conclude that the burden of persuasion lies where it usually falls, upon the party seeking relief."

All of this is to basically state that discovery may not be the saving grace people are hoping for.

[Quix]

AMEN! AMEN! AMEN!

[Dewey Revoltnow]

As Robert Byrd has severe health problems and may be deemed unfit to serve, that would put Hillary Clinton a heartbeat away from the acting-Presidency.

Which means Biden would be Marcy Parked.

[RightField]

If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified.

I hope this is not a stupid question, but, has Congress so provided?

[STARWISE]

Oh .. and what is AIP?

Alan Keyes stands as an individual plaintiff
due to his status as a candidate, is he not?

[Quix]

There’s a fairly heavy duty prophetic post at #290
re OThuga here:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/2351466/posts?q=1&;page=251

And a VERY sobering ‘coincidental’ pic leaving him looking like he has blood on his hands at the UN at post #295

on the above thread link.

[stockpirate]

From the site:

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
CV-90 (12/02) CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL Page 1 of 1
Case No. SACV09-0082 DOC (ANx) Date October 5, 2009
Title CAPTAIN PAMELA BARNETT, ET AL. V. BARACK HUSSEIN
OBAMA, ET AL. Present: The
Honorable
David O. Carter, U.S. District Judge
Kristee Hopkins Debbie Gale N/A
Deputy Clerk Court Reporter / Recorder Tape No. Attorneys Present for Plaintiffs: Attorneys Present for Defendants:
Orly Taitz
Gary Kreep
David DeJute, AUSA
Roger West, AUSA
Proceedings: 1. MOTION BY DEFENDANTS TO DISMISS CASE 2. SCHEDULING CONFERENCE
Cause called and counsel state their appearances. Argument by counsel. Motion taken under submission.
On September 8, 2009, the Court previously set tentative case management dates. The Court now orders those dates be made final. Case Management dates are as follows:
Motion for Summary Judgment Hearing December 7, 2009, at 8:30 a.m.
File Motion for Summary Judgment November 16, 2009
Opposition to Motion for Summary Judgment November 26, 2009
Reply to Motion for Summary Judgment November 30, 2009
Final Pretrial Conference January 11, 2010, at 8:30 a.m.
Jury Trial January 26, 2010, at 8:30 a.m.
3 : 21 01 Initials of Preparer kh
Case 8:09-cv-00082-DOC-AN Document 81 Filed 10/05/2009 Page 1 of 1

[LibertyVote]

HERE is a real copy of the LONG FORM. So what if they said that now? It would deserve more scrutiny than any previous document given how long its been withheld. Given what is at stake and how long its been hidden so many more questions would have to be asked before people could honestly trust that it wasn’t some forgery or that every element of it was factual, no?

[Hostage]

I would add that if scotus ruled that Biden could not ascend, then in fact Pelosi would be recognized as President. That would be horrible. On the other hand people do not like Pelosi at all, and if there were a special election cslled, then may just maybe we could get a real conservative in. Sarah Palin?

However, if Pelosi could be implicated in the duplicity of all this, then there may be grounds for her to be blocked from ascending.

Too bad we don’t have a Republican House or Senate, for then we could have happy prospects by way of members like Senator Demint or any Republican conservative in Congress.

[mlo]

"Exactly, I’ll believe it when Orly says so on her blog"

Well that's not a very good indicator either.

[OldDeckHand]

"Here you go, let’s hear how happy you are that you have been DEAD WRONG and that this is actually proceeding."

You don't have the faintest clue how federal court works, do you? This is just an entry into the official record regarding housekeeping issues that were decided on Monday morning. If Keyes had a competent attorney who had actual trial experience, he would know that.

In any event, being the magnanimous person that I am, when Carter finally issues his decision on MTD, I won't say, "I told you so".

[stockpirate]

THE ORDER:

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
CV-90 (12/02) CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL Page 1 of 1
Case No. SACV09-0082 DOC (ANx) Date October 5, 2009
Title CAPTAIN PAMELA BARNETT, ET AL. V. BARACK HUSSEIN
OBAMA, ET AL. Present: The
Honorable
David O. Carter, U.S. District Judge
Kristee Hopkins Debbie Gale N/A
Deputy Clerk Court Reporter / Recorder Tape No. Attorneys Present for Plaintiffs: Attorneys Present for Defendants:
Orly Taitz
Gary Kreep
David DeJute, AUSA
Roger West, AUSA
Proceedings: 1. MOTION BY DEFENDANTS TO DISMISS CASE 2. SCHEDULING CONFERENCE
Cause called and counsel state their appearances. Argument by counsel. Motion taken under submission.
On September 8, 2009, the Court previously set tentative case management dates. The Court now orders those dates be made final. Case Management dates are as follows:
Motion for Summary Judgment Hearing December 7, 2009, at 8:30 a.m.
File Motion for Summary Judgment November 16, 2009
Opposition to Motion for Summary Judgment November 26, 2009
Reply to Motion for Summary Judgment November 30, 2009
Final Pretrial Conference January 11, 2010, at 8:30 a.m.
Jury Trial January 26, 2010, at 8:30 a.m.
3 : 21 01 Initials of Preparer kh
Case 8:09-cv-00082-DOC-AN Document 81 Filed 10/05/2009 Page 1 of 1

[ecinkc]

Ugh! This frustrates me so much! Why would Keyes be so quick to pass along this hearsay? I want to believe it, but in order to avoid the appearance of gullibility and the same kind of earlier mistakes that have sometimes earned that label for those who question eligibility, I think we shouldn't pass along info like this from Taitz who tends to interpret everything with unjustified optimism.

When we see an item on the official docket that says Motion to Dismiss Denied and that is actually signed into effect by Carter himself, we should ignore this. No offense intended to EternalVigilance, who is the messenger. However I am disappointed by Keyes and others who seem to be taking this at face value too soon, IMHO.

Time will tell.

[Frantzie]

So it is not confirmed. Just scheuling things and he could still dismiss.

Why did Keyes say Orly called? Did she not understand?

[stockpirate]

And as such all laws and executive orders he signed would be null and void!

[EternalVigilance]

AIP, nationally, is America's Independent Party.

In California, it is the American Independent Party. That the CA affiliate of the national party.

[freekitty]

Thank heavens for that.

[connjdllm]

This order was entered today in Keyes v Obama. While it takes the motion to dismiss under advisement (decision to be forthcoming), it sets a schedule for future events. This is a good indication that the case will NOT be dismissed and will go to TRIAL in January! PASS THIS ALONG.....

MINUTES OF taking under advisement 56 Motion to Dismiss Case ; Motion Hearing held before Judge David O. Carter:; Scheduling Conference held before Judge David O. Carter. Case Management dates are as follows: Motion for Summary Judgment Hearing December 7, 2009, at 8:30 a.m. File Motion for Summary Judgment November 16, 2009 Opposition to Motion for Summary Judgment November 26, 2009 Reply to Motion for Summary Judgment November 30, 2009 Final Pretrial Conference January 11, 2010, at 8:30 a.m. Jury Trial January 26, 2010, at 8:30 a.m. Court Reporter: Debbie Gale. (ade) (Entered: 10/07/2009)

[trumandogz]

Wiley Drake.

Is he the one that is praying for Obama’s death?

http://blogs.ocweekly.com/navelgazing/a-clockwork-orange/rev-wiley-drake-prays-for-obam/

[LibertyVote]

1. Its not Obama’s fault he was born in Kenya.
2. Its not fair to change things now.
3. It wouldn’t have changed the fact of his election as the issue of his Kenyan birth was know my many in the electorate and they voted for him in spite of this.
4. Its too disruptive to change things now as our enemies would see this as chaos and weakness.
5. We are all World citizens to what difference does it make

These would be just a few of the lefts justifications.