Posted on 08/28/2009 8:21:55 PM PDT by rxsid
New Law suit filed in the Western District of Texas. Flight Surgeon Cpt Connie Rhodes, MD refuses to be deployed to Iraq until Obama’s legitimacy for the position of the Commander in Chief is verified Orly Taitz, Esq
Attorney & Counselor at Law
26302 La Paz ste 211
[snip]
(Application for Admission Pro Hac Vice
U.S.D.C. Western District of Texas
Submitted August 28, 2009)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
Western district of Texas
CPT Connie Rhodes MD,
Plaintiff,
v.
Dr ROBERT GATES, UNITED
STATES SECRETARY OF DEFENSE,
BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA, de facto
PRESIDENT of the UNITED STATES,
Defendants.
APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER
Plaintiff Captain Dr. Connie Rhodes has received what appear to be facially valid orders mobilizing her to active duty with the United States Army in Iraq on September 5th, 2009 (Exhibit A). Captain Rhodes is both a US army officer and a medical doctor, a flight surgeon. On May 15th of this year 501 brigade out of Fort Campbell, KY, currently stationed in Iraq, has requested a support of medical personal in Iraq. Two days ago, August the 23rd, an order was given through the chain of command via e-mail for Captain Rhodes to arrive in San Antonio TX, Fort Sam Houston for Tactical Combat Medical Care Course (TCMC) to be held from August 30th till September 4t and next day, on September the 5th to arrive in Fort Benning in Columbus GA for immediate deployment to Iraq for a period of one year and twelve days from September 5th, 2009 until September 17th 2010. Captain Dr. Connie Rhodes wants to serve her country and fulfill her tour of duty, however as a US army officer and a medical doctor she has severe reservations regarding legitimacy of Barack Obama as the Commander in Chief and repercussions of her service under his orders, particularly in light of mounting evidence of him having allegiance to other Nations and citizenship of Kenya, Indonesia and Great Britain.
...
Continued: "http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/blog1/?p=4038"
I take it you don’t practice family law...
All sorts of evidentiary rules don’t apply to the family law arena— income tax returns, hearsay, “Riflerize” etc.
The case you cited to to prove paternity is completely different than a civil case. Family law looks to provide support for spouses and especially children, and there the family law judge would seek to find paternity, for the child’s welfare. Evidentiary rules notwithstanding.
That is not our case here.
Obama should submit the vault copy of his birth certificate, anything else will be viewed with distrust (per the jury instruction).
First of all, he is a US citizen if born overseas unless there was a subsequent marriage or you can find a law that would protect the child from a lying bigamist father.
Secondly, an argument could be made that a child born of a foreign parent on US soil , who then has dual loyalties/citizenships..should not be an NBC.
However, for those making that argument...in this case, it is more likely that Obama never had British citizenship.
There is an individual who was involved with the Bay of Pigs invasion that has ALLEGEDLY wrote an email that said a Cuban was Obama’s father.
So what happens then if there are CIA files that say a Cuban was his father?
We are never going to find that out. Someone needs to get in touch with Oswaldo and ask if Cundo was really the father.
I've seen thsi exact same phrasing you used coming out of other Axelgreasy agitprops. The fact is, if you were even remotely accurate, you would have phrased your assertion without leaving the undistributed middle dangling. I think we're now getting into a level of your dishonesty! The man you now make apology for has committed fraud on the American people by presenting a fraudulent exhibit as evidence he is Constitutionally eligible. That criminal act is relevent and if any court ever reaches discovery phase it will hang your nasty little lying messiah imemdiately.
Actually, I believe the case (going from memory) was one to determine custody, or visitation rights. Paternity had already been established or stipulated to, and the plaintiff was not the biological father.
No, I've never practiced family law - of any kind - but, I suspect you might not have a lot of experience in federal court. The rules for "Proving an Official Record" are quite clear. A certified copy of a Certification of Live Birth more than meets the federal standard.
Of course, this is all just wild and meaningless speculation as one of these cases would actually have to be heard on it's merits for this to be relevant. I don't believe that's very likely.
When they come for you in the middle of the night, and take you into their spaceships, is there probing that goes on?
MHG, feel free to look through my entire posting history, if you can find a post from me that - in any way - is defensive of Obama or his administration, or is even remotely moderate in any way, please put it up. Otherwise - yawn.
All this “wild and meaningless speculation” would be cut short by the release of the vault copy of his birth certificate.
So, if anyone is to blame for all this wild speculation, its Obama.
Oh, he's to blame all right. I just can't think of anyway to old him to account.
To be clear, I think he probably isn't eligible even he was born in HI, and he clearly isn't if he was born someplace outside the US. But, the time to adjudicate that would have been before the Inauguration.
All effort now should be put into the passage of these state-wide initiatives that clarify and define what documents need to be presented to the state before a name can go on the state ballot.
If the Founding Fathers had done that with every phrase in the Constitution it would have been the size of the IRS code.
The success of our experiment in self-rule depends upon whether or not the people are honest, moral, and upright, and are a people with the good will to make the experiment work.
It is impossible to write enough laws that are tightly enough constructed that it can corral immoral people who are determined to corrupt the experiment.
An honest, upright, straightforward, and moral person would be **HONORED** to prove he was a natural born citizen and qualified to fill the post of president. That Obama has not done and has had so many enablers bodes ill for this nation.
May God save our Republic from the Commufascists.
Its not very polite to mention someone in your post and not ping them. But manners were never your strong suit.
To be fair, I did say "or the legislative sessions immediately after the adoption of the USC should have addressed this issue".
The Constitution is pretty darn vague with respect to the set-up of the actual judicial branch of government. Which is exactly why the "Judiciary Act of 1789" was one of the very first acts of Congress.
For whatever reason, Article 2, Sec 1 is one of the few (perhaps the only) constitutional clauses that hasn't been addressed or built upon legislatively.
OldDeckHand,
I bet the intelligentsia joked about Pol Pot, Mao, Hitler, Castro..etc., until **they** were hauled off in the middle of the night in cattle cars.
Please listen to Yuri Bezmenov, the former KGB spy. He states the **first** people lined up and shot were the Useful Idiots in the intelligentsia.
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x32cxf_yuri-bezmenov
I believe that Our Founding Fathers would not want those who defend the Constitution to give up. There is still the possibility that some judge will allow a break through to discovery. Also, it has Saul Alinsky value in that it deligitimizes Obama. Obama, by his actions, has shown that he is NOT an honest, straightforward, upright, and moral person who who be honored to prove his is natural born.
While I agree with you that citizens must pressure their governors, secretaries of state, and state legislatures to tighten eligibility for the ballot, it is possible to do this still support current legal challenges to Obama’s natural born status.
His own campaign web site even admits it.
Barry was born "governed" by Great Britain at birth...and possibly governed by the US (assuming birth in HI). Thus, dual citizen, divided allegiences possible.
Well, I've certainly been called an idiot. But, my wife reminds me with some frequency that "I'm useless", so I should be safe.
Whew!
When they come for you in the middle of the night, and take you into their spaceships, is there probing that goes on?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
By the way, the above is pure personal insult and reflects poorly on you.
By the way, he started. Which I suppose reflects poorly on him, and worse for you not recognizing that while lobbing your own insult.
Well, I’ve certainly been called an idiot. But, my wife reminds me with some frequency that “I’m useless”, so I should be safe.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Surely, it shouldn’t be necessary to define, “Useful Idiot”, ( attributed to Lenin) for someone as well educated and intelligent as you seem to be.
No it won't. And, don't call me Surely.
Again, you need to read the law as it pertains to a marriage that was Void Ab Initio.
Clearly, you haven’t read British citizenship law.
By the way, he started.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
You are a well educated and intelligent grown up. I doubt that you are a prodigy posting here on Free Republic.
“He started it!” , is something I hear from my preschool grandchildren ( with appropriate foot stamp, pout, injured expression, and whine).
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.