Barnett v. Obama: Judge Sets Conference, Tentative Trial Date; Taitz, Davis Video
After so many cases — chronicled on this blog (see links at the end of this posting) and elsewhere — have come and gone, eligibility attorney and activist Dr. Orly Taitz’ Barnett v. Obama case has gone the furthest of them all.
US District Judge David O. Carter has order a scheduling conference between the parties to the case to occur on Monday, October 5, 2009 at 8:30am PT with tentative trial dates following up thereafter, assuming that the Court finds reason to go so far.
According to WorldNetDaily’s Jerome Corsi (TheRadioPatriot is also covering):
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 plaintiffs 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, also were restored to the case.
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.
The judge did comment that if there are legitimate constitutional questions regarding Obama’s eligibility, they need to be addressed and resolved.
Carter ordered a hearing Oct. 5 on the motion to dismiss and ordered arguments submitted on the issue of discovery.
If the case survives that challenge, a pretrial hearing has been scheduled for Jan. 11 and the trial for two weeks later.
The case would be the first time, according to Kreep, that the actual merits of the dispute will have been heard in open court. A multitude of such disputes have been rejected out of hand by various state and federal courts. Even the U.S. Supreme Court repeatedly has rejected urgent appeals to hear the evidence.
The suit alleges Obama is actually a citizen of Indonesia and “possibly still citizen of Kenya, usurping the position of the president of the United States of America and the commander-in-chief.” …
In the U.S. Justice Department’s motion to dismiss, attorneys didn’t address the concerns directly, but instead focused their efforts on technical procedures, suggesting the matter can’t be decided in court and that the dozens of plaintiffs cannot demonstrate they have been injured by having Obama in the Oval Office.
“It is clear, from the text of the Constitution, and the relevant statutory law implementing the Constitution’s textual commitments, that challenges to the qualifications of a candidate for president can, in the first instance, be presented to the voting public before the election, and, once the election is over, can be raised as objections as the electoral votes are counted in the Congress,” wrote Assistant U.S. Attorneys Roger West and David DeJute. “Therefore, challenges such as those purportedly raised in this case are committed, under the Constitution, to the electors, and to the Legislative branch.”
President Obama’s defenders also said they would file a motion seeking to block any discovery of evidence at this point.
Kreep said said his addition to the case probably will mean additional arguments over the president’s eligibility.
Among the long list of plaintiffs are former ambassador and presidential candidate Alan Keyes and longshot vice-presidential candidate Gail Lightfoot, both of whom ran in 2008.
Justice officials say because neither had a mathematical chance at winning, they were not directly harmed by the election of Obama.
First, the day’s motions (via @tesibria):
Keyes|Barnett -- 58 ORDER Re 9-8 Hearing (2009-09-08)
Next, via FreeRepublic.com, here is a copy of the actual scheduling order. Notice that counsel is expected to conference together prior to the scheduling conference to formulate plans as if they were to go all the way through to a full-fledged trial and are even encouraged to begin the discovery process under the auspices of deciding exactly what would be meant to be discovered:
Tuesday, September 8, 2009 Update: From a concerned citizen, Mr. Jeff Schwilk, founder, San Diego Minutemen, wrote the following email after having been in the courtroom today:
The expedited trial has been set for Jan. 26, 2010, just 4 1/2 months from now!
I and many other concerned veterans and citizens attended the hearing today in Federal Court in Santa Ana in the lawsuit against Barack Obama to determine his eligibility to be President and Commander in Chief. About 150 people showed up, almost all in support of the lawsuit to demand that Obama release his birth certificate and other records that he has hidden from the American people.
Judge David Carter refused to hear Obama’s request for dismissal today, instead setting a hearing date for Oct. 5, since Obama’s attorneys had just filed the motion on Friday. He indicated there was almost no chance that this case would be dismissed. Obama is arguing this lawsuit was filed in the wrong court if you can believe that. I guess Obama would prefer a “kangaroo court” instead of a Federal court! Assuming Judge Carter denies Obama’s motion for dismissal, he will likely then order expedited discovery which will force Obama to release his birth certificate in a timely manner (if he has one).
The judge, who is a former U.S. Marine, repeated several times that this is a very serious case which must be resolved quickly so that the troops know that their Commander in Chief is eligible to hold that position and issue lawful orders to our military in this time of war. He basically said Obama must prove his eligibility to the court! He said Americans deserve to know the truth about their President!
The two U.S. Attorneys representing Barack Obama tried everything they could to sway the judge that this case was frivolous, but Carter would have none of it and cut them off several times. Obama’s attorneys left the courtroom after about the 90 minute hearing looking defeated and nervous.
Great day in America for the U.S. Constitution!!! The truth about Barack Obama’s eligibility will be known fairly soon -- Judge Carter practically guaranteed it!
Video from the press conference after the hearing coming soon. Congratulations to plaintiffs attorney Dr. Orly Taitz! She did a great job and won some huge victories today. She was fearless!
Jeff Schwilk, Founder
www.SanDiegoMinutemen.com
Regarding the affidavit of Mr. Lucas Smith’s alleged Obama Kenyan birth certificate, the GiveUsLiberty blog reports that Dr. Taitz wanted to depose Mr. Smith “on the spot:”
Orly Taitz asked special permission to depose Lucas Smith on the spot. The defense argued Plaintiff had sprung an ambush witness and they hadn’t been allowed to prepare deposition questions.
Carter ruled against immediate deposition of Smith. Orly Taitz argued strenuously for the deposition stating Smith feared for his life. Taitz also asked for Witness Protection for Smith. I’m not clear where that stands.
Taitz asked for an earlier trial date sooner than 1/26/10 giving her reasons as death threats against herself and witnesses, the likelihood of more evidence disappearing, and the possibility of witnesses being killed before they can testify.
Gary is outside the courthouse interviewing participants so hopefully we’ll have some more comments.
Gary will be writing his own take on the days events about 5 hours from now.
Wednesday, September 9, 2009 Update: From commenter “Black Lion,” here is some perspective from “wavey davey,” an individual from the “opposition” site (despite the clear bias against the case, it’s useful to see where the corroborating points are for what happened yesterday):
Keyes v Obama -- Motions Hearing -- 8-SEP, 2009
Wednesday, September 9, 2009 Update: The following is the promised YouTube video of Dr. Taitz and Missouri State Rep Cynthia Davis after yesterday’s hearing:
Other case coverage:
- Birthers win a victory in court on Obama birth certificate issue (Examiner.com)
- Orly Taitz’s Day In Court (an “opposition” blog at the Orange County Weekly)
The American Independent Party’s site had a bit of live-blogging earlier today (also based on a posting from the GiveUsLiberty blog):
Tuesday, September 8, 2009 Reports from Gary are starting…He is about 25th in line out of approximately 300 people waiting to get into the courtroom. Almost all spectators are anti-Obama.
Orly Taitz arrived just a few moments ago and the throng applauded.
Lucas Smith is also present. Smith has claimed the Obama birth certificate he has shown on the Internet as real. That remains to be seen. However it is interesting he has joined the proceedings.
Steve
8.39 am pst 9/8/09
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++When court is in session cell phones and camera’s will be banned so we will experience a news blackout.
This hearing may last from 30 minutes to a couple of hours. Taitz apparently wishes to include Lucas Smith so that an investigation of his proffered document can be be forensically examined and by which means he came by it.
Justice Carter is expected to throw out the last minute attempt Motion to Dismiss submitted by Obama’s counsel late in the afternoon this past Friday. Taitz is also hoping for court approval to depose Sec State Clinton and Sec Defense Gates. Justice Carter may also rule for discovery. This is what we are hoping for, because once discovery is ordered the case is over. Obama would then have to unseal his records and produce.
Steve
9.11 am pst 9/8/09
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Gary also mentioned there was no visible media turnout for this hearing as in no SatCam Uplink Trucks. The LA Fox Channel was expected to report on this hearing. Perhaps they are awaiting a “courthouse steps” exit interview from the pertinent parties.
Back to you Gary…..
Steve
9.26 am pst 9/8/09
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Justice Carter noting the packed courtroom and overflow crowd waiting in the hallways has ordered a change to a larger courtroom and has taken a 2 hour recess to accommodate the transfer of officers of the court and spectators.
Steve
10.02 am pst 9/8/09
In the meantime read some articles watch our “Burning Down The House” video (rate it I’m curious: )
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++As far as crowd demographics the estimated age range is 18 to 80
70% Men
30% Womenage 60+ seems to be the majority. About the same mix as an August Town Hall crowd.
Orly Taitz appeared relaxed-- calm cool and collected.
More as I receive it………….
Steve
10.30 pst 9/8/09
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Posted 2009-09-08 1:47 PM (#22200) By: EternalVigilance
Posted 2009-09-08 1:55 PM (#22202 -- in reply to #22200) By: EternalVigilance May I ask who Steve at the courthouse is? He’s getting information
directly from Gary Kreep? Fantastic!
Posted 2009-09-08 3:12 PM (#22206 -- in reply to #22202) By: Savvy He may have been. Frankly, I’m not sure. But things concluded some time ago.
The bottom line is this:
The case goes forward, and Markham and Wiley were reinstated with the attorney they requested, Gary Kreep.
Posted 2009-09-08 3:26 PM (#22208 -- in reply to #22206) By: EternalVigilance Regarding msm press coverage: It’s my understanding a researcher from FoxNews’ Glenn Beck Show was present through the interviews that took place outside the courthouse after the hearing was dismissed. Someone in the crowd mentioned seeing a network news truck drive by earlier in the morning (NBC, I believe ) … but their cameras were no where to be seen during interviews taking place outside the courthouse.
Posted 2009-09-08 3:28 PM (#22209 -- in reply to #22206) By: Savvy Here are some cellphone pics from the Ronald Reagan Federal Courthouse in Santa Ana, CA today:
I arrived on the 9th floor at about 8:30 a.m. … at about 9:30 a.m., a two hour delay was announced.
I was within the first 100 people in line to enter the entrance to the courtroom when a sign-up list was sent around:
Judge Carter’s courtroom …
Attorney Orly Taitz in the 9th floor hallway before the hearing …
Interviews taking place outside the courthouse following the proceedings:
YouTube reporter William Wagener, host of www.onsecondthought.tv, interviewed a variety of notable people.
Orly Taitz [attorney for Alan Keyes] speaking, as a crowd begins to form:
Rep. Cynthia Davis, MO being interviewed.
Rep. Cynthia Davis made the interesting observation that states falsify birth certificates
all the time in the case of adoption. Birth parents are apparently redacted and
adoptive parents added to represent they were present at the birth, when
indeed, they were not. Interesting.
Military Naval Commander Clint Grimes read a statement for the press questioning Obama’s
decision to withhold a variety of records:
Lucas Smith stated he is 29 years old and was born in Iowa. He states that on 2/19/2009
he visited Kenya and obtained a signed, certified copy of Obama’s Kenyan birth certificate stating the hospital at which Obama was purportedly born.He displayed the document for all present to see.
Mr. Smith handed the document to Mr. Wagener, who read from it for our benefit.
I believe he said it was Certificate #3201A (unsure ) and recorded Obama’s birth weight as
7 pounds, 1 ounce and length at birth, 18″. Also cited was the width between
Obama’s shoulders. It was reported to Judge Carter that Mr. Smith was prepared to
testify in court regarding the authenticity of the document. Per Orly Taitz, Mr. Smith
fears for his life because of this matter and it is important that his information be
made part of the official record should, God forbid, anything happen to Mr. Smith.Regardless of reporting daily death threats against herself and an incident of
tampering with her vehicle which could have proven fatal for Orly Taitz and
her three (3 ) children, as well as a Obama passport related death … the
judge chose not to allow Mr. Smith to testify today after hearing The Govt’s
(DOJ -- Dept. of Justice attorneys are defending Obama in this matter )
objection to admission of testimony today.
I’m thinking this may be Mark Seidenberg pictured left of Pastor Wiley Drake (center )
(though I’ve never met Mr. Seidenberg, but often heard his informative comments on the
old conference calls. )
I believe this is an interview with Mark Seidenberg:
Pictured is Pastor Wiley Drake, Mark Seidenberg, pictured to the right.
Posted 2009-09-08 5:09 PM (#22211 -- in reply to #22209) By: Savvy I’m hopeful YouTube videos created by those present will be available for viewing later this evening.
Posted 2009-09-08 5:26 PM (#22212 -- in reply to #22211) By: Savvy
Thanks, WorldNetDaily, for featuring The Right Side of Life as a part of your eligibility/PhotoNetDaily section!
See the following links regarding the eligibility saga:
- Obama’s Presidential Eligibility: What You Need to Know
- Obama’s Sealed Background Documentation
- Newsmax.com: Obama Birth Certificate Not Released
- What’s the Difference Between a Birth Certification Versus a BirthCertificate?
- Keyes v. Lingle: Forensic Examiner and IT Expert Disprove Certification of Live Birth
- Obama Citizenship Facts
- The State Department and Sen. Patrick Leahy’s (D-VT) Natural Born Citizen Resolution (April 10, 2008)
- Citizen Grand Jury Updates and Eligibility Lawsuit Listing
-Phil
Subscriptions -=- Twitter: @trsol -=- Facebook (TRSoL) -=- Facebook (Rightside Phil)
Similar Posts:
- Keyes v. Obama: Judge Agrees to Move Case Forward
- Barnett v. Obama: Judge Confirms Hearing Dates; Official Transcript Added
- Barnett v. Obama: Order, Motion on Letters Rogatory, Discovery; Subpoenas? Really?; More Docs
- Dr. Taitz’ Upcoming Military Lawsuit to Include Obama Relative
- Lightfoot v. Bowen: Filed with SCOTUS
[...] as a part of one of the upcoming dates concerning summary judgment (that aspect of law, per the Conference Schedule, that attempts to ascertain whether or not a trial is needed to satisfy the grievances stated in [...]
what is interesting is that the Lucas BC does not show explicit place of birth for Obama, that is the first time I have ever seen this. All BC’s I have seen show place of Birth. Strange huh!
I am expecting the same kind of smackdown as Judge Land did in the Rhodes case.
Judge Land bounces Lucas Smith’s affadavit under FRE 901.
And affidavits that claim to be attesting to the legitimacy of some document do not count as documents that are admissible in Court?
Lucas Smith cannot make a declaration as to the Kenyan birth certicate’s authenticity; only the custodian of records for the document’s source can do that.
In other words, everything in Smith’s declaration could be true and the birth certificate won’t be admitted because there is still no basis for knowing what Smith has obtained is genuine.
An affidavit may be used by a judge to make a determination of a motion or for purposes of weighing authenticity to determine the admissibility of the document itself, but absent extenuating circumstances that prevent the witness from appearing in court, an affidavit is hearsay and therefore inadmissible under the Federal Rules of Evidence.
GeorgetownJD,
And affidavits that claim to be attesting to the legitimacy of some document do not count as documents that are admissible in Court?
I’m not asking because I think the Kenyan Birth Cert via Mr. Smith is legitimate; I’m asking to get your opinion.
-Phil
Phil,
“Of course the alleged COLB can be admitted into Court; but so can anyone else’s alleged documentation.”
Phil, the first half of that statement is correct; the second half, not. A certified copy of the COLB is self authenticating and admissible. Take a look at Rule 901: authentication is required of “anyone else’s alleged documentation,” which means that Orly has to establish that the document(s) is(are) what they claim to be BEFORE they are admitted into evidence. That will require the testimony of witnesses with first hand knowledge — which neither Lucas Smith nor Neil Sankey nor any other witness that Orly may proffer, has.
Phil says:
Why do you think that? I think that a state record with a seal and attestation is admissible, contrary to Taitz’s claims, because I checked the Federal Rules of Evidence. See rule 902(1); also note 28 USC 1739 and United States Constitution, Article IV, Section 1. Now what source did you use to determine the admissibility of Taitz’s photograph?
You say that you seek answers to legitimate questions. Isn’t looking up the rules of evidence the right way find out which documents are admissible? You are free to imagine that Obama’s Certification of Live Birth has the same status as the photograph that punked Orly Taitz, but doing so exposes you for what you are.
And you constantly run articles on how that would not be enough. Birthers were also requesting official confirmation from Hawaii, and they got it: http://hawaii.gov/health/about/pr/2009/09-063.pdf That’s direct from our 50′th state, run by the Lingle administration, not the Obama campaign. Great — question answered. Obama was born in Hawaii; he’s a natural-born citizen.
I’d be interested in your citation showing that “anyone else’s alleged documentation” is admissible in court. You can go ahead and check mine — I wasn’t just makin’ ‘em up.
brygenon,
You have proven nothing except to waste a bit of my site’s bandwidth with some claptrap about how I somehow would actually say that a legitimate certification of live birth would not be admissible into a Court of law.
Let me put it to you this way: if Dr. Taitz can submit a picture of an alleged Kenyan Birth Registration and a photocopy or original of an alleged Kenyan Birth Certificate, then I think that the Defense can submit whatever they may claim to have RE: Obama’s Hawaiian COLB.
In fact, brygenon, guess what? Many of us so-called “birthers” have been requesting exactly that — submitting the COLB to Court (especially cross-examination) scrutiny.
So, get a clue! Of course the alleged COLB can be admitted into Court; but so can anyone else’s alleged documentation.
-Phil
Phil says:
So there’s a fine example of you refusing to admit that the document is admissible in court. When presented with the truth on the issue, you change the subject. You say this state record is good enough for “mundane” activities? We’re talking about a Taitz case, and she has said repeatedly that the COLB is a piece of garbage and not admissible in any court. We obots told you otherwise. Have you figured out who is telling the truth?
Except I keep proving it.