Judge questions Orly Taitz claims to have Obama birth certificate in hearing ...

Ledger Enquirer ^ | Sept. 14, 2009 | CHUCK WILLIAMS

[SvenMagnussen]

During a hearing in U.S. District Court Monday, an attorney for an Army officer fighting deployment to Iraq questioned Barack Obama’s legal right to serve as president, asserting he was born in Kenya, not Hawaii.

Judge Clay Land, inquisitive throughout the 90-minute hearing, said he will issue a decision on Capt. Connie Rhodes’ request for a temporary restraining order by noon Wednesday.

Rhodes was represented by Orly Taitz, a California lawyer and a national figure in the “birther” movement that claims Obama does not meet the qualifications to be president.

California attorney Orly Taitz, the president of the Defend Our Freedoms Foundation, stands on the steps of the Columbus federal courthouse Friday with what she claims is a copy of a birth certificate for President Barack Obama from Mombass, British Protectorate of Kenya.

Maj. Rebecca Ausprung, with the Department of the Army, Litigation Division in Washington, told Land this case was about Rhodes, not Obama.

“There was a lack of any reference to Capt. Rhodes,” Ausprung said. “This case is about Capt. Rhodes and her deployment.”

Taitz kept going back to Obama’s birth certificate. Twice she called Obama a “usurper.”

[antiRepublicrat]

Strange thing on image #2, why is the information not in metric?

The UK government didn't start making the push to transition to the metric system unil after Obama was born. In fact, the UK still hasn't completed the transition.

The use of IU is actually in favor of authenticity.

[rahbert]

What revelations? If Pelosi could be nailed as having
‘misstated’ facts on paper, that might be huge.

[rolling_stone]

The check off for Obama on natural citizenship was conveniently REMOVED.

I’m not following you, he states he is a natural born citizen then signs it.

[spacejunkie2001]

read this, as it pertains to fraud by Pelosi. But, particularly, go to post #49 and read the article in the link.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2338769/posts

[Dan(9698)]

When there is a change in the Command Structure, there is a change of command routine that is followed.

If there is a new Battery Commander, the old Battery Commander introduces the new and formally turns over the command authority.

That is followed at each level of the chain of command.

As soon as the authority is changed, the old commander cannot order anyone in that command to do anything.

When a former commander of a unit in Germany wanted to accompany Obama into a Hospital that he formerly commanded, he was denied entrance. The people in the hospital knew he was a former commander, but that did not give him authority to enter the building.

Ordering troop movements are the same. George Bush no longer had the authority, so all orders originated from him became void.

Unless there are proper orders to carry out previous orders, all commanders in the chain of command are without authority to issue orders.

It has been that way since George Washington. It is nothing new.

[mnehring]

From the original article from back in November, it was added for Hawaii because of their wording requirements, not removed from the others. That is from a blog though so it hasn’t been verified.

[SpaceBar]

Late last week, WND broke a story about a candidate eligibility form signed by Nancy Pelosi that had been doctored, and an important paragraph stating constitutional eligibility was omitted from the copies sent to the states. See link below.

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=109363

[Red Steel]

First of all Rhodes is doing what she feels is right. She must have thought out the consequences of her actions, and despite the possible consequences, she chose to pursue this course of action to question the legitamacy of her order(s).

Second, if the case cannot satisfactory be resolved in Judge Land’s court, she goes on with her deployment no harm no foul. And I’m sure others will come along to question Obama’s eligibility to hold office and retake the issue back to court.

[mnehring]

Just so proper credit is given, a FReeper broke this back in November of last year. The writer with Canada Free Press copied him almost word for word and took credit for the finding.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2337432/posts?page=28#28

[SpaceBar]

True, Canada Free Press. I was trying to recall where I saw it first and WND came to mind, but you are correct.

[rolling_stone]

I am aware of that I was referring to the “checkoff” that is supposed to be missing..that is new to me.

[mnehring]

Not CFP either, the writer there is the one that ripped it off from the guy I linked to. The guy at Canada Free Press (JB something) is trying to take credit when he copied it from a FReeper.

[Dan(9698)]

Technically all military orders come from the Commander in Chief..

Legally, not technically.

The authority to issue orders is not a technicality.

An officer from one unit cannot issue orders to someone in another unit. The authority comes from the chain of command.

[mnehring]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2337432/posts?page=28#28

Again, if the claim is true about the requirement.

[SpaceBar]

I was unaware that the information was lifted from a freeper blog. Thanks for the heads-up.

[mnehring]

I just want the right person to get credit if this thing is real. Especially after looking at the Nov 08 article and the current article and seeing it was copied almost word for word.. (plagiarists are a pet peeve of mine)

[rolling_stone]

Do you understand my question? What checkoff?
I know the difference between the two DNC forms “legally eligible” on one not the other. I am referring to the checkoff on the posted Arizona form signed by Obama.

[normanpubbie]

No one has mentioned the most salient facts from the hearing. Quoting the article,

In her final argument, Taitz asked Land why she had to prove a “Kenyan birth certificate” she submitted as evidence was authentic, yet her opponents didn’t have to prove Obama had an authentic United States birth certificate.

“Who has the burden of establishing that the president of the United States is not eligible to serve in his office?” Land asked Taitz.

The judge pointed out that burden fell on Rhodes because she sought the restraining order to stop her deployment.

And at the bottom of the article, it turns out that CPT Rhodes was at the hearing as the judge had ordered on Friday:

Under questioning from Land, Rhodes said she had not declined any other orders since Obama became president.

“If Sen. McCain would have won, would you be objecting to deployment to Iraq?” the judge asked. Rhodes said no.

Land then asked the question another way: If President George W. Bush still was the commander in chief, would she be fighting the deployment?
“No, sir,” Rhodes answered.

Also, the judge chastized Orly Taitz:

“Whenever I give you a minute, you go off on these talking points,” Land said.

“We have not seen Mr. Obama’s birth certificate,” Taitz responded.

“This is not a forum to lay ground work for a press conference,” Land said. “This is a court of law.”

It doesn't look like the judge will issue the TRO, much less rule that Obama has to produce the birth certificate.

[oldfart]

All military orders originate from the Commander In Chief. He (or perhaps “she” in the future) may not personally sign the orders and indeed may have no knowledge that they were even given but the ultimate responsibility still lies with the CIC.

Anybody remember the sign on Harry Truman’s desk? It said “The Buck Stops Here.” He understood that principle. After ordering the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and then firing McArthur he had to know the tremendous burden of responsibility that he carried. Obama does not.

[Non-Sequitur]

Only lawful orders. The question still remains if Obama can give lawful orders.

Irrelevant. Everyone else in her chain of command can.