Posted on 07/13/2009 2:24:35 PM PDT by real_patriotic_american
U.S. Army Maj. Stefan Frederick Cook filed a request last week in federal court seeking a temporary restraining order and status as a conscientious objector with the intent to stall and eventually prevent an upcoming deployment to Afghanistan.
In the 20-page document — filed July 8 with the United States District Court, Middle District of Georgia — Cook’s California-based attorney, Orly Taitz, asks the court to consider granting his client’s request based upon Cook’s belief that President Barrack Obama is not a natural-born citizen of the United States and is therefore ineligible to serve as commander-in-chief of U.S Armed Forces.
Cook further states he “would be acting in violation of international law by engaging in military actions outside the United States under this President’s command, and that Plaintiff would thus be simultaneously unable to perform his duties in good Rule 65(b) Application for Temporary Restraining Order 22 conscience and yet be simultaneously subjecting himself to possible prosecution as a war criminal by the faithful execution of these duties.”
Cook received the orders mobilizing him to active duty on June 9, 2009. According to this document, which accompanies Cook’s July 8 application for a temporary restraining order, he has been ordered to report to MacDill Air Force Base in Tampa, Fla. on July 15. From there, the Florida resident will to go to Fort Benning, Ga. before deploying overseas.
A hearing to discuss Cook’s request for an injunction or temporary restraining order will take place in federal court Thursday at 9:30 a.m.
Was difference does "knowingly" make? He either is or is not natural born. If he's not, he's not President, even if he really did think he was natural born.
Positive Proof is mighty hard to come by when the State where he claims to have been born won't release the information it says it has, and the person in question will not authorize them to do so, as he could if he wished.
As far as the need for an impeachment and removal trial in Senate, those only apply to Presidents. The Constitution says that in order to be eligible to be President, one must meet 3 criteria: (1) Be 35 years old or older. (2)Have resided in the US for 14 or more years and (3) be a natural born citizen.
In order to actually take the office, the person must in addition get a majority of the electoral votes and take the oath of office. If the person satisfies all 5 conditions, they become President at noon on January 20th, in the appropriate year.
Look it up, the Constitution does NOT say that swearing the oath makes one President, the 5 criteria plus the clock/calender, do that. If no one has met all those requirements, that is they have in the words of the Constitution (amendment XX) "failed to qualify", then the Vice President elect becomes president, assuming he/she meets the same criteria, with the exception that the majority of votes were for VP instead of President.
Because the method of filling the office, as well as the date the new office holder takes over have changed since the Consitution was originally written, you need to look at Art. II section 1, Amendment XII and Amendment XX to get the full picture.
Unfortunately the Constitution is silent as to how to proceed should a violation be discovered after the fact. Clearly someone who is not eligible to the Office of President can never have actually held it. Doesn't matter if the person was not natural born, was less than 35 or had not resided in the US for 14 years, or some combination of those, not eligible means just that, they can't hold the office.
Note that "support and defend the constitution of the united states" comes before "obeying the orders of the president". First things first.
That's only in the oath of enlistment. It's not in the Officers Oath of office.
The wordings of the current oath of enlistment and oath for commissioned Army officers are as follows:
"I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God." (Title 10, US Code; Act of 5 May 1960 replacing the wording first adopted in 1789, with amendment effective 5 October 1962).
"I, _____ (SSAN), having been appointed an officer in the Army of the United States, as indicated above in the grade of _____ do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservations or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God." (DA Form 71, 1 August 1959, for officers.)
Both
Most likely, but "pretty much" is not "for sure and for certain". We can at least hope that the case is not thrown out for lack of standing.
Actually that's not quite true, the Solider says that there are serious questions about the issue, and that Obama *might* not really be President, not that he is not. Big difference, he's just asking for clarification. It would have been nice if the case could be settled prior to the guy's reporting date. That way, if he loses, or BHO is proven to actually be a NBC, although his career might be ruined, at least he would not have violated any law or regulation and could retire in peace, after this deployment of course.
Does this mean I can refuse to go too?
I hope he gets the BC revealed but I’m not holding my breath.
Well, OK then. I guess we'll see about that. But there is no "conflicting information". There is evidence, along with quite reasonable probability that his mother was living in Hawaii when he was born. We know she lived there. I don't think that's in dispute. Without something better than speculation, it's not going anywhere.
All we have is some speculation that for some imponderable reason she traveled pregnant in 1961 to Africa to have the baby in their wonderful hospitals there. That was a really, really expensive trip back then. Oh... and then she came back with the baby. Now I know that she was a total fruitbasket, but c'mon... that don't make no sense.
But anyway... time will tell whether this goes anywhere. If it does and he has to step down, I'll cheer and be first in line to gladly apologize to you and welcome President Biden. (ouch... that's kinda scary too... but maybe less scary than BHO. Hard to say).
No. Obama’s parents were living in Kenya. His father is a Kenyan (British Colony) which would be his birth right. Mother was to young to pass along U.S. citizenship since she was to young and had not been in the States 5 years. OBama’s camp admitted Obama had dual citizenship up until 1982 (his Kenya/British citizenship probably expired). Where did he get the Kenyan citizenship? Because he was probably born there.
Experts believe Obama’s COLB to be a forgery?
The authorities cannot ignore this forever. It’s in The Constitution!
You wrote- “I hope he gets the BC revealed but I’m not holding my breath.”
He’s a coward, no better than 1LT Watada.
Same here.
Every motion such as this raises the issue just a scooch more up the flag pole.
The absence of proof is not proof. Until there is proof that the Constitution of the USA was upheld in Obama even being a Constitutionally defined lawful candidate, there is no authority in the USA that can legally establish Obama as President -not even millions of illegal, Acorn bought votes, can make his Presidency legal.
We have had a coup from the Marxist revolutionaries, which coup was years in the making, and now finally accomplished with corroborating leftist operatives in the Government, the Media, and academia.
Right on! Let’s keep the heat on!
I hope that they have signs for the cameras at tomorrow’s MLB All-Star game saying “Where’s Obama’s Birth Certificate?”
From Plains Radio chat room:
Obama eligibility case will be heard on merits Please distribute everywhere. Just got off the phone with Orly Taitz, the attorney in Keyes v. Obama. At the hearing today at the Federal Court building in Santa Ana, Judge Carter said the following: 1. There will be a trial. 2. It will be heard on the merits. 3. Nothing will be dismissed on proceedural issues. 4. The trial will be expeditious, and the judge pledged to give case priority. 5. Being a former Marine he realizes the importance of having a Constitutionally qualified Potus/cinc. 6. Judge stated that if Obama isn’t Constitutionally qualifed he needs to leave the White House.
http://www.plainsradio.com/radio.html
The Major is seeking a temporary restraining order from a federal judge.
The Major states in his brief that he is “ready, willing, and able” to deploy.
The Major states that his single intent is to “clarify” how he can identify an illegal order (viz. Obama’s eligibility) without violating his legal orders.
The lawyer is a woman, I think a Russian immigrant.
“But the reality is that he was, in fact, born to a U.S. citizen in Hawaii and there is simply zero credible evidence to suggest anything else.”
Not clear why you think that's a fact.
In 1961 a foreign born child was legally entitled to obtain a Hawaiian Certification of Life Birth, which is the document the Obama campaign released.
Also, no one knows what hospital Obama was born in, and no one knows what doctor was present at the birth.
Also, Obama has steadfastly blocked release of all hospital and birth documents that would resolve the issue in a matter of minutes.
Personally, and like you, I think Obama was born in Hawaii.
But, there is no credible evidence for OR against birth in Hawaii.
I just reveived this via E-Mail:
Dr. Orly being interviewed by LA Times re; her good news about hearing today
From abc| 07/13/2009 6:28:54 PM PDT read
Obama eligibility case will be heard on merits Please distribute everywhere. Just got off the phone with Orly Taitz, the attorney in Keyes v. Obama. At the hearing today at the Federal Court building in Santa Ana, Judge Carter said the following:
1. There will be a trial.
2. It will be heard on the merits.
3. Nothing will be dismissed on proceedural issues.
4. The trial will be expeditious, and the judge pledged to give case priority.
5. Being a former Marine he realizes the importance of having a Constitutionally qualified Potus/cinc.
6. Judge stated that if Obama isn’t Constitutionally qualifed he needs to leave the White House.
http://www.plainsradio.com/radio.html
Why will he lose?
Does he not have a case?
I just don’t see this soldier winning against the White House. It doesn’t mean I disagree with him.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.