Section 1. Policy. (a) When agencies determine the fitness of individuals to perform work as employees in the excepted service or as contractor employees, prior favorable fitness or suitability determinations should be granted reciprocal recognition, to the extent practicable. . . . b) "Contractor employee" means an individual who performs work for or on behalf of any agency under a contract and who, in order to perform the work specified under the contract, will require access to space, information, information technology systems, staff, or other assets of the Federal Government. . . . c) "Excepted service" has the meaning provided in section 2103 of title 5, United States Code, but does not include those positions in any element of the intelligence community as defined in the National Security Act of 1947, as amended, to the extent they are not otherwise subject to Office of Personnel Management appointing authorities.
Yes Deep, I read it all. I am only trying to understand what the document may be that is requested. I am not a attorney. I still think there may be some legalese in there that Orly and others found in their favor.
The title of the E.O. is:
"Executive Order: Granting Reciprocity on Excepted Service and Federal Contractor Employee Fitness and Reinvestigating Individuals in Positions of Public Trust "
I'm reading that as 'Federal Contractor Employee' AND 'Individuals in Positions of Public Trust' which would include POTUS. Isn't POTUS in a position of public trust? I believe the answer would be yes. The E.O. doesn't appear to be 100% exclusive to Contractor employee's.
In addition, why would Dr. Orly Taitz submit this lawsuit with plaintiffs Alan Keyes, PhD., Wiley S. Drake, and Markham Robinson. Are those people ignorant as to what the E.O. pertains to?
The legal argument could be that this executive order requires more background research on Public trust positions than POTUS which is considered the highest elected position in the land.
MBI - Minimum Background Investigation (Typically reserved for Public Trust positions and/or when there is a break in federal service)
With the High security clearance for POTUS, some say Obama failed to pass, this could be a precedent if argued correctly.
If Obama has passed the security clearance then I would think the DNC would pass that information to the people. Instead they are silent and refuse to show their vetting documents in court.
Executive Order 13467 of June 30, 2008;
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2008/06/20080630-6.html
Executive order of June 2008 pertaining to same.
(g) “Covered individual” means a person who performs work for or on behalf of the executive branch, or who seeks to perform work for or on behalf of the executive branch, but does not include:
(i) the President or (except to the extent otherwise directed by the President) employees of the President under section 105 or 107 of title 3, United States Code; or
(ii) the Vice President or (except to the extent otherwise directed by the Vice President) employees of the Vice President under section 106 of title 3 or annual legislative branch appropriations acts.
The January 2009 amendment reads;
c) This order shall not suspend, impede, or otherwise affect Executive Order 10450 of April 27, 1953, as amended, or Executive Order 13467 of June 30, 2008;