It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Shocker! Judge orders trial on eligibility issue

page: 2
7
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 17 2009 @ 09:29 PM
link   
reply to post by kinda kurious
 


That's the same judge that dismissed the Major Cook case after his orders were rescinded.

Judge Land's Ruling was a bit disturbing in that we have a judge using the IMAGE of a "birth certificate" posted at FactCheck.org as evidence -- he references it at least twice in his decision -- but refused to even look at any other "evidence."

It puzzles me how this judge can point to an electronic image posted on an Internet website to support his decision, and, at the same time refuse to even consider what appears to be a genuine, hard-copy, government-issued birth certificate.

The judge found, "...mere allegations of a constitutional violation unsupported by a reasonable factual foundation are insufficient to warrant judicial review."

How does he know Orly's case was "unsupported by a reasonable factual foundation?" He never looked at a single piece of evidence.




posted on Sep, 17 2009 @ 09:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by kinda kurious

And in a scorching order dismissing the suit, United States District Judge Clay Land, a Bush appointee, let her know all about them. He also threatened her with sanctions if she files any more "similarly frivolous ... actions in this Court."

Interesting update...thanks!

So this is a different case than the one Judge David Carter has scheduled for a trial?

I'm not real clear on exactly how many lawsuits Taitz has filed.



posted on Sep, 17 2009 @ 09:44 PM
link   
Now that would be a COURT TV I would watch, bad thing if it is shown he couldnt have legally run, then we have a crisis.

Actually, I think in a round about way, he is helping. He is pissing so many off as well as Congress that maybe we can start all over again in 2010, VOTE EM ALL OUT.....



posted on Sep, 17 2009 @ 10:24 PM
link   
reply to post by redhatty
 


Funny that you would direct your ire toward the judge and not the nutty lawyer lady.

Actually, not funny at all. Typical. Read the link in my post. She cited an AOL poll as part of her case evidence.


[edit on 17-9-2009 by kinda kurious]



posted on Sep, 17 2009 @ 10:37 PM
link   
reply to post by kinda kurious
 


Oh I know she's nuts, I've expressed that in other threads. Even nuttier than Berg was.

But just because SHE's nuts, doesn't mean that the judge wasn't prejudiced too, before ever even considering to hear the case.



new topics

top topics
 
7
<< 1   >>

log in

join