Judge David O. Carter betrays the Nation!

DISMISSES CASE WHICH SOUGHT REMEDY FOR MASSIVE ELECTION FRAUD IN 2008

by John Charlton

(Oct. 29, 2009) — In a ruling that has stunned none but those who love this Nation, Judge David O. Carter has granted the Motion to Dismiss presented by the Department of Justice, in the case Captain Pamela Barnett et al. vs. Obama et al..

The case involved the massive election fraud which occurred in 2008 General Election, when Barack Hussein Obama, though not an eligible candidate, was admitted to the ballot in California, and thus harmed and disadvantaged candidates running on third-party tickets, such as Wiley S. Drake, Alan Keyes, Gail Lightfoot, and Markham Robinson.  Other plaintiffs included tax-payers and military personnel who demanded Obama prove his eligibility, since his lack thereof impacted upon their intangible rights.

The ridiculous ruling was characterized by Dr. Orly Taitz, lead counsel for the Plaintiffs as something “written by the Defense,” according to the World Net Daily report.

The Post & Email will highlight the most vicious and erroneous statements in the ruling.

CARTER SHOWS HIMSELF TO BE A VICIOUS BAITER OF PATRIOTS

What Judge Carter did was not only deny justice, he viciously insulted and baited patriotic Military personnel everywhere, by his outrageous statement regarding the military plaintiff, Jason Freese in the case:

This Court will not interfere in internal military affairs nor be used as a tool by military officers to avoid deployment. The Court has a word for such a refusal to follow the orders of the President of the United States, but it will leave the issue to the military to resolve.

Just prior to this outrageous insult, the Carter shows himself to be a true supporter of dictatorship over law, when he claims that U.S. Military must serve even if their chief commander has no lawful authority to command them:

Furthermore, Lieutenant Freese’s claims are based upon the notion that his duty to serve is based upon who is in office. The duty to defend is not dependent upon a political or personal view regarding the individual who serves as President and Commander-in-Chief. It is an unequivocal duty to defend our country.

He then ridiculously claims that those who participate in the reception of funds taken unlawfully from the national treasury are not capable of being found guilty of crime, so long as they claim a reasonable doubt as to the legitimacy of the theft.  For a Judge famed for his opposition to Mexican Mafia, he seems to have entire support for the Chicago Mob.  Isn’t that a racist attitude, from the liberal point of view?

Carter’s laughable ruling also claims that you have a duty to pay taxes to the IRS, but you have no rights to ask whether the President who signs the spending bills for those taxes is legitimate: or in other words, you are a feudal serf, and must pay no matter how illegitimate or corrupt the Federal Government becomes, because, in the Judge’s words, the Supreme Court says so!

Then, while Carter begrudgingly admits that third-party candidate suffered injury by being opposed by a potential ineligible candidate, he finds that his court cannot remedy the crime, and therefore he will not take action on the complaint!  His argument ignores completely the question of eligibility of office, and presumes the fact that Obama is eligible, contrary to the fact of the case!  He even implies that Congress can change the definition of what a Natural Born Citizen is, by its choice of a presidential candidate in Joint Session!

On quo warrento, Carter makes the bold face lie of claiming the D.C. code gives exclusive jurisdiction over quo warrento proceedings regarding the President to the D.C. courts!

Carter closes by personally attacking Dr. Orly Taitz

Finally, if there is anyone who thought that Judge Carter was impartial, his closing remarks, in which he devotes a very long paragraph insulting Dr. Orly Taitz should be read in full:

The hearings have been interesting to say the least. Plaintiffs’ arguments through Taitz have generally failed to aid the Court. Instead, Plaintiffs’ counsel has favored rhetoric seeking to arouse the emotions and prejudices of her followers rather than the language of a lawyer seeking to present arguments through cogent legal reasoning.

Imagine that! Taitz’s supporters are “followers” and “prejudiced”! My my, what bigots we patriots are!

Judge Carter continues his diatribe thus:

While the Court has no desire to chill Plaintiffs’ enthusiastic presentation, Taitz’s argument often hampered the efforts of her cocounsel (sic) Gary Kreep (“Kreep”), counsel for Plaintiffs Drake and Robinson, to bring serious issues before the Court

Any objective listener will remember, however, that it was Attorney Kreep who often criticized Taitz’s arguments in court, and not the other way around.

The Court has attempted to give Plaintiffs a voice and a chance to be heard by respecting their choice of counsel and by making every effort to discern the legal arguments of Plaintiffs’ counsel amongst the rhetoric. This Court exercised extreme patience when Taitz endangered this case being heard at all by failing to properly file and serve the complaint upon Defendants and held multiple hearings to ensure that the case would not be dismissed on the technicality of failure to effect service.

While the original complaint in this matter was filed on January 20, 2009, Defendants were not properly served until August 25, 2009. Taitz successfully served Defendants only after the Court intervened on several occasions and requested that defense counsel make significant accommodations for her to effect service.

Imagine that! When Obama and his lawyers pretended not to receive service, it is Taitz who is at fault!

Carter descends further into the house of the mad, when he writes:

Taitz also continually refused to comply with court rules and procedure.

Perhaps Judge Carter should ask himself if he has continually refused to comply with his duty to uphold the Constitution?  — But those who strain gnats, often swallow camels; as Jesus Christ observed 2 millenia ago.

Then Judge Carter gives a tantrum, because citizens wrote him letters encouraging him to be a patriot — clearly an offense that this usurper supporter will not pardon!

Taitz encouraged her supporters to contact this Court, both via letters and phone calls. It was improper and unethical for her as an attorney to encourage her supporters to attempt to influence this Court’s decision. Despite these attempts to manipulate this Court, the Court has not considered any outside pleas to influence the Court’s decision.

Then Judge Carter defames Attorney Taitz:

Additionally, the Court has received several sworn affidavits that Taitz asked potential witnesses that she planned to call before this Court to perjure themselves. This Court is deeply concerned that Taitz may have suborned perjury through witnesses she intended to bring before this Court.

While the Court seeks to ensure that all interested parties have had the opportunity to be heard, the Court cannot condone the conduct of Plaintiffs’ counsel in her efforts to influence this Court.

If  Carter — he obviously does not deserve the title of “Judge” — showed his ethics by hiring Siddhart Velarmoor as law clerk, it is clear tha he has shown himself a traitor to the Nation, by his ruling in Barnett vs. Obama.

Finally, Carter closes with the most exquisite piece of pharisaical self-defense in the history of the American judiciary:

Respecting the constitutional role and jurisdiction of this Court is not unpatriotic. Quite the contrary, this Court considers commitment to that constitutional role to be the ultimate reflection of patriotism.

27 Responses to "Judge David O. Carter betrays the Nation!"

  1. Pingback: Judge Carter is afraid to face Orly Taitz | The Post & Email

  2. Pingback: Dr. Wiley Drake & Markham Robinson appeal to the 9th Circuit «

  3. JEANNIEMAC   Monday, November 16, 2009 at 6:41 PM

    The very fact that Judge Carter hired as a law clerk, a lawyer associated with Obama’s own defense firm, would seem to be a conflict of interest.
    Orly Taitz said, that after the clerk was hired, Judge Carter’s “demeanor changed drastically”
    I wonder why . I would not be surprised to learn that the Judge was threatened in some way. Obama has the power of rich bullies behind him.

  4. JCB   Saturday, November 14, 2009 at 6:16 AM

    This whole Obama / Carter thing makes me sick! How anyone can say that they “love Obama” is beyond me!

    I’ve had people email that to me and it turns my stomach!I had such high hopes that someone was finally going to make Obama reveal himself.

    Someone please forward to me (rosecsvc@bellsouth.net) Judge Carter’s email address or mailing address, telephone number. I definitely will contact him and let him know what a _____ he is. Can you impeach a Superior Court Judge? If so, he as well as Obama should be impeached!

    Obama says we’re no longer a Christian nation. I’ll bet all of our founding fathers turned over in their graves! Let’s prove Obama WRONG! Everyone pray together continuously that a brave soul will surface quickly and right this wrong that Obama is leving on our country and every true American. He needs to be stopped before it is too late.

  5. ken   Tuesday, November 3, 2009 at 1:24 PM

    Does anyone have an accurate email address or webside where we can send David O. Carter our thoughts on his tratoristic actions? No one should ever refure to him as a former Marine…..he wore the uniform, but he obviously was never a Marine, just as he is a resident of the United States of America, but he is not a patriotic American. I can only hope that his shame will rule the rest of his life.

  6. NANCYRUSSELL   Friday, October 30, 2009 at 8:51 AM

    DOES ANYONE HAVE INFORMATION ON THE OTHER WELL FUNDED ATTORNEYS WHO ARE TAKING ON THIS CASE?

  7. Sunnstarr   Friday, October 30, 2009 at 5:48 AM

    Just as in the O.J. Simpson case, our legal system has been used to avoid a ‘perceived’ violent and damaging reaction by the general population to justice being served – and so, one more cowardly judge resorts to tortured logic and avoids doing the right thing.

    This lawsuit was never about military personnel avoiding deployment to a war zone! It has always been about Obama’s ineligibility to serve as President of the United States and to issue orders as Commander-in-Chief, potentially placing hundreds and thousands of lives in harms way.

    In dragging his feet about additional troops to Afghanistan, as requested by the very same General he put in charge, Obama has proven that he is more interested in giving the Muslim world a hand than winning a war for the very American citizens that elected him.

    Judge David O. Carter has just missed his place in history as a patriot, and instead joined the ranks of cowardly and immoral traitors to the United States Constitution.

    Judge Carter’s lack of knowledge beyond his military and legal experience has proven to be his Achilles’ heel. He most obviously does not understand what the real dangers to our nation are. Namely, that Obama and his handlers are only interested in dismantling the Constitution and destroying the Dollar, in order to surrender American sovereignty and make way for the North American Union and a New World Order.

    Obama and his ilk probably believe that in this New World Order, with the backing of International Law and hate crime legislation, supported by multiple nuclear-armed Islamic groups and countries; that somehow, we are all going to reach ‘détente’ and live happily ever after.

    Maybe Judge Carter does not understand that Islam will not stop until it conquers the entire world and converts it to follow its ways, or die trying.

    Judge Carter definitely does not understand that there is enough evidence this very day that Obama is not only a fraud, but that all of his actions thus far betray a childish ideology and a most distinct loyalty to the Muslim world. To say that this is evidence of a ‘divided loyalty’ would be to give him too much credit for attempting to achieve a balance. This just simply is not the case.

    The truth will eventually come out. However, it may be too late to save our Republic.

    God help the next Judge Carter that is tested during this critical time in American history. All we need is one righteous man to stand up for the truth. God save America.

  8. problem   Thursday, October 29, 2009 at 10:49 PM

    The lawyers and all cases need to stop bringing up the birth certificate. It doesn’t matter where he was born.

    What matters is this and only this!!

    Obama stated on his website that he was “governed” at birth by England by way of his fathers kenyan citizenship.

    How on earth could Obama be a Natural Born Citizen when he was “governed” at birth by another country?

    Remember, Natural “BORN” Citizen. BORN means at BIRTH. No matter what Obama is today he already admitted at BIRTH he was “GOVERNED” by another country.

    You have to go through the DC court on quo warranto. Any other filing outside of the DC court will just get thrown out.

    There are a few high powered, well funded lawyers working the proper channels. Hopefully we will see results.
    ——————
    Mr. Charlton replies: We’ve seen an excellent case that did not mention the BC, thrown out (brought by Leo Donofrio pro se in NJ) before the election; we’ve seen every excuse in the book, saying a case should be brought elsewhere, even excuses that contradict other excuses (have to bring it before the election, after the election, to court, to Congress, to D.C.).

    By all means bring one to D.C., if you can: but you will find that all the interested parties, which meet the test for standing have already been coopted by Obama into his regime one way or another.

  9. Follow the Constitution   Thursday, October 29, 2009 at 10:01 PM

    Jim Garrison`s (Kevin Costner) final speech

    People should really listen to this speech.

  10. Themis2009   Thursday, October 29, 2009 at 9:34 PM

    RE: Judge Carter’s ruling of 10/29/2009 – A NEW POSSIBILTY

    According to the transcript Kurt Fuqua is a relative of the president. The Hawaii UIPA provides exception to relatives from the privacy regulation.

    So Kurt Fuqua could with or without an attorney file a request, stating and substantiating that he is a relative and HI must release the long-form-bc to him. I don’t have the link at my fingertips but it can be obtained by Leo’s blog or from HI directly.

    If anyone is in contact with Kurt or Orly please transmit this idea to them.
    ———–
    Mr. Charlton replies Fuqua tried that and was told he had to wait a year!

  11. Pingback: Twitter Trackbacks for Judge David O. Carter betrays the Nation! « [thepostnemail.wordpress.com] on Topsy.com

  12. Harry H   Thursday, October 29, 2009 at 7:16 PM

    Having just read Judge Carter’s 30-page dismissal, which I found unconvincing and deplorable, I was absolutely dismayed to find Carter closing his ruling by claiming for himself the highest honor: he called his ruling “the ultimate reflection of patriotism.” What a gag! (literally)

    Judge Carter is, among other things, a blatant liar. He claims he could not accept the case because if Orly won it would “shut down the functioning of the government of the United States and leave this country defenseless.” How absurd. Under the 20th Amendment Congress can select an acting president until a qualified one is elected, and to imply that the Secretary of Defense, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, CIA, etc. would ever “leave this country defenseless” is a base, desperate lie.

    What a load of manure this Carter is!

  13. Pennie Davis   Thursday, October 29, 2009 at 5:49 PM

    “Plaintiffs argue that despite the fact that Obama has produced a birth certificate from the state of Hawaii, there was evidence to show that Obama was actually born in Kenya, thus, making him ineligible to serve as president of the United States.”

    What is Carter saying there? Was he making an indirect ruling? Why? Was he threatened in some way?

    No birth certificate – just a “certification. However, he DID say there was evidence he was born in Kenya. Why would he let it go this far and back out?

    PM

  14. misanthropicus   Thursday, October 29, 2009 at 5:25 PM

    “PC Thirty-One,
    Says “We caught the dirty one”,
    Barry is his name –

    Rose and Valery,
    Screaming from the gallery,
    “Let Barry go free!”
    Bang, bang, Carter’s little hammer –
    Bang! On Orly’s head!”

    Re Perkins Coie-Velamoor-Judge Carter connection:

    Examing pearls from the judge Cater’s ruling:
    […] “Plaintiffs request asking this Court to sweep away the votes of over sixty-nine million Americans with the stroke of a pen and order a new election during which the country would be in a state of turmoil, ignores the Constitution’s processes and separation of powers that were developed by the founders.” […]

    Wrong, judge Carter –
    A) no one asks you to sweep away the votes of over 69 millions with the stroke of a pen – all what you’re requested is to empower some citizens to verify whether the current president had, was the moment of his election constitutionally eligible to seek that position…
    B) … action during which mister Obama has plenty of opportunies to demonstrate his eligibility….
    C) … positive opportunity to gratify his supporters’ choice, SUPPORTERS WHO, HAD THEY BEEN PROPERLY INFORMED BEFORE THE ELECTIONS ABOUT THIS SITUATION, WOULDN’T HAVE VOTED FOR HIM…
    D) … but interesting enough, by writing “to sweep away the votes”, you not that astutely hedged, by admiting that further exploration of that matter MAY (HAVE) PROVIDE(D) LEGAL GROUNDS for removing mister Obama –

    Cowardice? Partisanship? Who knows – but what is clear is the fact that the US District Court has entered in the business of perpetuating the fraud that envelopes Obama’s presidency –

  15. Jack   Thursday, October 29, 2009 at 5:20 PM

    Before bashing Judge Carter for his October 29 Order, consider that he gave Dr. Taitz three openings wide enough through which to drive a Mack truck.

    First, Judge Carter misstates Orly’s argument as follows: “Plaintiffs argue that despite the fact that President Obama has produced a birth certificate from the state of Hawaii, there is evidence to show that the President was actually born in Kenya, thus making him ineligible to be President.”

    This sentence could have two applications and meanings, each of which is flatly wrong and grounds for error. If it means that Orly ARGUED that Obama produced the Hawaii birth certificate, that is clearly wrong. She did not argue that. On the other hand, if it means that despite the fact that President Obama has produced a birth certificate, Orly ARGUED there is evidence to show Obama was actually born in Kenya, that is judicial error premised on a fact — “Obama produced a birth certificate from the state of Hawaii” — still in dispute and to be tried.

    Judge Carter then compounds the above with a misstatement of Orly’s case in the very next sentence as follows: “Plaintiffs also argue that, even if the president was a natural born citizen, he abandoned his citizenship while living in Indonesia and has not gone through the proper immigration procedures to regain his United States citizenship.”

    First, Orly’s argument of “natural born citizen” is not premised on whether or not Obama was born in Hawaii rather than Kenya, but on Obama’s father being a Kenyan/British citizen on baby Obama’s birth. Second, Judge Carter applies the two terms, “citizenship” and “natural born citizen” in a context as if they are the same. To the contrary, only “citizenship” could be lost through Obama’s intervening Indonesian status, that intervening status would have no bearing on “natural born citizen” — entailing the two citizen parent requirement attached only at birth. (Judge Carter may have announced what was Attorney Gary Kreep’s argument, but it was not Orly’s, leaving us to contemplate Judge Carter retaining Kreep’s and Orly’s cases together over Orly’s strenuous objections.)

    And finally, Judge Carter cites Plaintiffs’ failure “to bring their claims in this Court until after President Obama was sworn into office” as meaning that Orly lost the right to ask the Court to interpret the candidate’s qualifications to run for office (we’ll leave consideration of Gary Kreep’s role in delay of Orly filing for another day) insisting that Orly’s sole relief claimed is removal from office.

    At least with respect to Candidate Keyes who bases his claim on tortious fraud against “Candidate” Obama, not ‘President’ Obama, that removal is not the sole relief sought. First of all, whether or not Orly’s case was filed at a time of day on January 20, 2009 before or after Obama was sworn in, the Court would be faced with same actual problem at the present time of addressing a “current President” rather than “political candidate” in terms of relief, hence the distinction is a red herring. On the other hand, IF the “before-or-after Oath” IS crucial vis a vis Orly’s filing as Judge Carter maintains, the time and date of Obama’s Oath is, at the very least, a fact to be tried and a fact in dispute considering that the Chief Justice was called upon to administer the Oath at the Whitehouse, the following day, January 21, 2009 — the day after Orly filed the case.

    Since federal statute affords grounds for Recusal of Judge Carter by reason of the appearances of, if not real, conflict of interest, there is certainly basis for Orly’s Motion for Recusal by reason of Judge Carter’s hiring as his clerk a lawyer from the very same firm whose senior partner represents Obama in his eligibility cases during the pendency of this case. Coupling that with Judge Carter’s blatant errors, above, yet exhaustive (very well written) legal analyses as well as concluding harsh rebuke of Orly in “hamper[ing] the efforts of her co-counsel Gary Kreep” (one could only wonder at the possible intrigue there), one is left to wonder about Judge Carter’s actual judicial motive, that is, ala Judge Land proceeding. We may never know.

  16. natural born citizen party   Thursday, October 29, 2009 at 5:19 PM

    USDC-DC Judge Leon has the last case “standing” in the proper jurisdiction for quo warranto challenge.

    The US District Court for the District of Columbia has the case 08-2234 Strunk v US DOS et al. Originally a simple FOIA case for travel records of Stanley Dunham and other dead relatives of non-nbc tourist. Case was amended to include quo warranto removal from office for ineligibility.

  17. Observer   Thursday, October 29, 2009 at 4:20 PM

    seeking to arouse the emotions and prejudices of her followers

    Rather, it would appear that the only emotions “aroused” were those of the “Judge” …. through the weak answers of the defense and apologies for the plaintiffs by Kreep – Obama traits. Truly a “mutual admiration society”. Obama …”blame Bush”. Carter and Kreep … “blame Orly”. Real men indeed!

    And just how come Carter wasn’t as serious about the sworn affidavit re: the Kenyan BC by the same person who gave him the “sworn affidavit” against Orly which he gave much more creedence?

    It was High Noon and Gary Cooper was a no show. Thus the town is left vulnerable to the thugs who will rule it.

  18. Gabe   Thursday, October 29, 2009 at 4:00 PM

    It goes like this.
    From the moment you step inside ANY court building WHATSOEVER, you are then under their control, or ‘law’, or is it thumb?.
    You’ll never win your case if the courts themselves are allowed to make the laws up at a whim.
    The court system, in general, is nothing but a money machine, and taxpayers fund them all!
    You can’t win out of court so the judges themselves MUST be removed.

  19. kailuagirl   Thursday, October 29, 2009 at 3:53 PM

    All of the Congress. All of the State Governors. All of the Judges and Courts. All of the so called Press. All of the MSM. All of it gone to absolute corruption. The fix is in.

    I GRIEVE.

    Thank you Post & Email for your reporting of the facts relating to this horrific action by this filthy man Carter.

  20. JJ   Thursday, October 29, 2009 at 3:13 PM

    Additionally, the Court has received several sworn affidavits that Taitz asked potential witnesses that she planned to call before this Court to perjure themselves. This Court is deeply concerned that Taitz may have suborned perjury through witnesses she intended to bring before this Court.

    Isn’t this very unprofessional of a judge to release this information characterized as ‘he said’she said’??

  21. JJ   Thursday, October 29, 2009 at 3:10 PM

    Carter, you forgot with your tantrum to add the real reasoning behind your ruling……..it’s Bush’s fault.
    (sarcasm here)

  22. jtx   Thursday, October 29, 2009 at 3:08 PM

    There are MANY errors in Carter’s opinion. One of the ones in the very first portion of the opinion (while attempting to justify his “reasoning”) he states:

    “Plaintiffs argue that despite the fact that President Obama has produced a birth certificate from the state of Hawaii, there is evidence to show that the President was actually born in Kenya, thus making him ineligible to be President.”

    In fact it should be clear from the action presented by the plaintiffs that Obama NEVER “… produced a birth certificate from the state of Hawaii …”. NEVER – shame on you, judge, for such apparently intentional misreading of the papers before you.

    We’ll leave the other errors for later comment. Truly a shameful exercise by Carter. Afraid to hear the case on the merits. Shame!!!

  23. Pingback: Judge Carter dismisses Barnett vs. Obama « Politicaldoc's Dx

  24. JJ   Thursday, October 29, 2009 at 3:05 PM

    seeking to arouse the emotions and prejudices of her followers

    Carter, I am not a cult member.

  25. John Charlton   Thursday, October 29, 2009 at 2:24 PM

    Donors, please read this important Notice from the editor of The Post & Email, regarding the sucess of our fundraiser, and action you need to take.

    http://thepostnemail.wordpress.com/2009/10/27/letter-from-the-editor-to-our-donors-%e2%80%94-thank-you/

    I sent you all an email, twice, but only have heard back from about 8 of 24 of you!

  26. 12th Generation AMERICAN   Thursday, October 29, 2009 at 2:09 PM

    Now we know that both Land and Carter are bought and paid for by Barack Hussien Obama Soetoro?!!?!?!?

  27. jtx   Thursday, October 29, 2009 at 2:01 PM

    In the final Carter comment in your observant article, I wonder why Carter then turned around 180 degrees and did what is called “… treason to the Cponstitution …” as declaimed by John Marchall in 1821 in Cohens v. Virginia???

    The world seems upside down to these guys apparently. Perhaps lifetime cushy appointments to the federal bench is a poor idea after all!! It seems to inflate their own self-images beyond belief.

    And he even has the temerity to call Obama “President” when the man has not yet demonstrated himself eligible to hold the office he now occupies … not that Carter gives a good G*ddamn!!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.