25 votes

The Judge in the Lawyers for Ron Paul Lawsuit

As most of us know, there is a lawsuit out there against the Republican Party for all the crap that's going on. (http://www.toolsforjustice.com/1_COMPLAINT_SACV-12-00927-DOC(JPRx).pdf) To the best of my knowledge the judge presiding over the case is Hon. David O. Carter.

This thread is just to inform anyone curious as to the background of the judge:





Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

When is the court date? Time

When is the court date? Time is ticking if they expect to get a ruling before the convention?

Not Sure

Not sure if they've set a date, but in the phone conference a few days back, one of the lawyers was absolutely positive they'd have a ruling before Tampa. He was also very positive that Romney's lawyers wouldn't be able to bog the case down and delay it till after Tampa.

Press Release

“Righteous Mutiny” Orchestrated by Paul Supporters to Secure the Win

"FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Righteous “Mutiny” in Ron Paul Campaign; Executive Committee for LAWYERS FOR RON PAUL Takes Over the R3VOLUTION Santa Ana, CA, June 15, 2012:

The Executive Committee for LAWYERS FOR RON PAUL launches takeover of the campaign.

Refusing to be sold downstream for political or monetary gain, the REAL Ron Paul R3volution without reservation is “in it to win it!” They are sending unbound delegates to Tampa under the protection of a federal lawsuit filed on Monday, June 11, 2012. The Ron Paul Federal Delegates Case was filed at Ronald Reagan Courthouse, Santa Ana, California. Federal Judge David Carter, Ninth Federal Circuit presides over Case Number SACV12- 00927."
Read more: www.libertyusapac.org/wordpresspac/2012/06/16/righteous-muti...

more here: http://www.dailypaul.com/240611/press-release-ron-paul-suppo...

"Mutiny" was the right word choice for it.

And aside from that, it was full of lies.
They have NOT "taken over the Revolution", and Ron did NOT "tell them to take it from here" and has not endorsed this "mutiny".

You are cutting Ron Paul out, and replacing him with some unknown scam-artists.
Why you cannot see this, I have no idea.
I suppose it's the desperation. That's the classic mark that the scam artists look for.
"There's no time for naysaying".." as the press release says.
And apparently no questions are allowed either, since any reasonable questions are met with a litany of bots saying "listen to the audio,...listen to the audio,...listen to the audio....".
Like zombies.

I don't oppose a solid lawsuit with a good case and a well-designed strategy and tactic, for the purposes of justice.
I DO resent the statements of taking Ron Paul's campaign away from him and redirecting the supporters in a direction that Ron Paul does NOT endorse, and claiming to be doing it at his behest.
There is more to this than meets the eye, because there is NO need for that kind of language in an honest action. Something is afoot.


I made similar comments about the 'Taking Over The Campaign' statement in one of their original threads, got down voted pretty quickly.

I'm no lawyer, and have no idea if this lawsuit will win. I hope it does. But people will get behind it without the lawyers needing to make those kind of statements. From what I can see, they're doing something good.. but it's only a matter of time before the MSM picks up on that statement alone and turns it against the movement.

I did nothing but pass on the news release

because we were asked to share. Guess I reserve my opinion until more information is available.

This makes no sense

to me. Rule 38 and 37, Section (b) of the RNC says no state can bind their delegates to the National Convention. So just ease on down to Tampa and vote Ron Paul first ballot. Make Romney hire him some lawyers to fight us then we can go to court and win because we have the rules of the RNC and Federal law backing us. I mean why are we filling civil suits when we already have the rules and law behind us to start with.
Now as for the voter fraud, sure press charges and lock up a few dozen of the crooks.

LIBERTY2ME's picture

I think that the lawsuit is

I think that the lawsuit is not just for unbinding delegates. I believe it is going to include all of the voter fraud that has been going on. Which who knows, maybe this could spill over into the presidential election against Obama, cause who are we kidding, if we think this is voter/election fraud, we are in for a treat from Obama...
They have all of the videos and proof they need to show the fraud and neglect. I can't remember which article I read this in. If i remember I will come back and tell you.
However, from everything that has happened at these conventions, it doesn't matter if we have the law on our side. The RNC/Romney group will do what ever it takes to win even if it is the complete opposite of the rules/laws that they actually helped put in place. So it would be very smart to have the law on our side BEFORE we enter the "dungeon" of the RNC (Tampa convention).
I get what you are saying, but unfortunatley that would only be in a perfect world. Which we are oh so very far from...


here is the thing....I sorta agree with your assessment. I would just do it and then deal with legal repercussions if the law is clearly on our side, and it seems it is. One issue is they might simply NOT count those votes. So that is the question, and it seems like a pre-emptive strike was opted for instead. It's a really tough call either way. I think the momentum is building for this case so we really have no choice anymore than to get behind it and force a ruling in our favor that just reinforces the previous rulings and law.

yea, his mistake is to assume

yea, his mistake is to assume that the establishment follows the rules. If they did, then there would be no need for Dr. Paul


post the judges name so he can be gotten too or bribed. Very smart

“When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic.” – Dresden James

yea, you're right. It's not

yea, you're right. It's not like it's public information and the defendants aren't legally obligated to be notified of this either. I guess I just ruined it for everyone because if it wasn't for me then the judge would never have been known..... moron

You replied to

my comment like I was serious. Don't know if you seen the "#sarcasm" in it. Geeze someone really needs to invent a sarcasm font.lol Thanks for calling me a moron for being sarcastic, that was extremely nice of you. I love how you put Dr Pauls principles to good use. (If you cannot tell, that is some more #sarcasm.)

“When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic.” – Dresden James

sorry but if you make your

sorry but if you make your words sarcastic they have the opposite intention of their composition. So when you say "very smart," you actually mean the opposite. Thus, I'm not very smart for what I was doing. You may not have meant to give the reaction with what you wrote, but the mistake was in how you wrote it. It should have ended with a "just kidding" or the like, because sarcasm is a bitter jibe or taunt. So I apologize for taking your words the wrong way, but the use of sarcasm was improperly used to convey the point you were trying to make. Not me misunderstanding what the definition of sarcasm is.

There is no need

For your condescending apology. The comment was meant to "jibe or taunt" the conspiracy theorists and if anyone should be making any apologies it should be me for your excessive sensitivity (and for that condition I truly am sorry.) And no honey, the use of sarcasm was applied perfectly, it’s just that you ass.u.me.d it was pointed at you. =P

“When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic.” – Dresden James

of course I assumed it was

of course I assumed it was pointed at me. It's a comment on a thread I created and not a reply to another comment.

The same judge that promised

The same judge that promised an Obama eligibility challenge would be heard on the merits, then a week later caved to Obama's lawyers threats and pressure and just dismissed the case without hearing it at all. Nice. Will be interesting to see how far this gets then.

Blessings )o(


As far as I've been able to discover, up to now the eligibility cases were thrown out because Obama's defense attorneys disputed the qualifications of those testifying against Obama's claim of eligibility.

This Monday at 9 am in Leon County, Florida might be a different story, with Sheriff Joe Arpaio's sworn affidavit (along with those of his lead investigators) having been admitted by Judge Terry Lewis:


I wish I could drive up there myself, but it is being livestreamed at www.wnd.com, so if you're interested (hee hee), CHECK IT OUT.

A Judge Could Be Threatened or Bought

...or he could end up in the history books and legal libraries if he were to try it fairly. Become famous and with new career opportunities available.

I would most definitely support such a judge for a Supreme Court Justice position...a judge who helped people fairly vote for their elected officials. Huge opportunity for that judge to do the "right thing."

I can't help but believe that there are many people (especially as they are closer to the end of their lives than the beginning) who have regrets about choices they have made and would see it as an opportunity to right some wrongs past by taking a historic stand on the side of liberty.

Seeing the glass half full.


What makes you think it will be Judge Carter?

Hope it is him. From what I've seen of that judge, he seemed to me to be dedicated to getting at the truth and is nobody's fool.

Do you have more info to confirm?

“It is the food which you furnish to your mind that determines the whole character of your life.”
―Emmet Fox

I think that Ron should let us all know how he feels about this.

And he is a United States Marine. That is a big plus in my book. Hopefully he is one of those Jarheads who believes that the oath that he swore to is not something that ends or goes away just because your enlistment time is up. We can all hope. At this point, I am very curious how Ron Paul feels about this new tact. I wish he would say something about this new legal approach, the two men on his campaign who seem to be less than trustworthy and let his supporters know if he really wants the job or not. So far, his silence is deafening!

Larry in North Carolina
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men and women to not support Ron Paul!

I too am curious

I believe the lawyers called it a mutany to protect Ron Paul from anyone who would find a way to turn this on him, making Ron Paul appear to be a sore loser, or manipulator.

I don't believe Ron Paul can say anything and remain inncocent.

Except'n Obama huh?


Wha? .....hey....who stole my country?

I heard it on a radio

I heard it on a radio interview and on a youtube vid from matt larson. If I'm wrong, please correct me.

I have no idea whether you are right or wrong...

Just really, really, really hoping you are right!

If you know anything more about Judge Carter that either confirms or refutes my optimism about him being the one to hear this case, I would appreciate it. Don't want to get my hopes too high just yet.

“It is the food which you furnish to your mind that determines the whole character of your life.”
―Emmet Fox


He's the Anna Nicole Smith judge...

Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves. - Matthew 10:16

The one who reversed the

The one who reversed the Houston judge's bad rulings? If so, that is great.

RON PAUL 2012 * Restore America * Bring The Troops Home


For relevance.

"Jesus answered them: 'Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is a slave to sin. The slave does not remain in the house forever; the son remains forever. So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed.'" (John 8:34-36)

Thanks so much for the

Thanks so much for the information!

"It is the duty of the patriot to protect his country from his government." - Thomas Paine

(╮°-°)╮┳━┳ (╯°□°)╯┻━┻ "RON PAUL 2012 DAMNIT!"