Cpt Connie Rhodes, MD refuses deployment to Iraq until Obama’s legitimacy for CinC is verified

U.S.D.C. Western District of Texas ^ | 8/28/2009 | rxsid

[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"

[Sibre Fan]

a) Orly’s motion to recuse Judge Nakazato. Since he struck her motion for not following the rules, he must be biased against her.

I read somewhere she corrected the filing mistake and resubmitted the questionable Obama BC to the court for authentication?
----------------------------
She did resubmit a "corrected" document, although whether she fixed all errors remains to be seen.

However, the "fixed" document is not the subject of the September 8 hearing. Even though she fixed the reported errors, she's still contending that the Magistrate is biased for striking the original motion due to the errors. THAT is the subject (or one subject) of the Sept. 8 hearing.

---

b) Whether Orly has properly served the Defendants yet. When the Judge filed that order, she had still (!!!) not yet properly served defendants. It appears that she may have finally properly served them, although her proofs of service still have technical problems.

How hard is it to re-serve the defendants? I do not think it would be. Someone should ask Orly about this.
----------------------------
It's not. But Orly seems to be challenged in this area. (In her TRO motion in THIS CASE, the one actually filed with the court -- she used the old Cook v. Good Caption rather than a WD Texas Caption! She also forgot to change all the references to plaintiff from "he" to "she" so that she refers to Rhodes as a "he" a bunch of times.)

---

PREDICTION: The judge is going to accept the service, since the defendants accepted the service, regardless of the technical problems with her proof of service.

As I recall, Obama used the Secret Service as a firewall to keep from being served at the White House, and the server was told to go to the State Department to drop it off there. Later, the Obama lawyers argued Obama was not properly. Appears to be a BS maneuver to avoid justice. The judge should take this into account.
----------------------------
That's not correct, actually. She shouldn't have been trying to serve him at the White House anyway. The rules say that she needs to serve the proper DOJ person. Anyway, that was the first time, way back in January.

In July, the Judge ORDERED the DOJ to accept proper service that day. Problem is that Orly still didn't serve them properly. You can read the chronology here.

However, as I said, it seems that she just did properly serve them last week. We'll see for sure on September 8, but I believe that her recent service was (finally) sufficient.

[OldDeckHand]

""What do you do? What are the ramifications of letting that contract if it turns out that she had no authority to issue that order? If you do let the contract, is the contract itself enforceable by FlyByNight?"

Think of it this way, the Pentagon doesn't restart it's ongoing procurement negotiations, or nullify any existing contracts every time there's either a new SOD or POTUS, do they?

[BonRad]

Thanks for ping & hoping for the best.

[Non-Sequitur]

On what terms was it denied?

Well for one reason Taitz apparently neglected to sign the paperwork. But the court also noted that the odds of success hover somewhere between zilch point sh*t and none.

Read the order for yourself: Link

So what does Captain Rhodes plan to do now that her military career is at an end?

[hoosiermama]

This was discussed in great details months ago, including the case you cited and many others. Several of the lawyers on FR were involved. You are again late to the discussion and need to get up to date. The case you mentioned is not relevant to a case of conspiracy to usurp the Constitution.

The general consensus at the end of the discussion IIRC was that the lawyer was only protected up to the point that he was not acting himself against the Constitution, that he was breaking his oath to defend the Constitution. At that point he became a part of the conspiracy. That it is a very thin line one that BO’s attorney/ judges etc should seriously think about.

[Non-Sequitur]

Another one? Great!

Don't get too thrilled about it. TRO was filed on the 28th. TRO was denied on the 29th. Who said justice isn't swift?

[Sibre Fan]

When Orly explained what happened when she tried to serve the paper, the judge took the paper from her and handed them to the US Attorneys (who have offices on the next floor of the building/The same ones who tried to defend and generally make excuses for BO because counsel had not appeared for him).

Comments of the judge was “considered them served”

---

This is NOT correct.

If it were correct, then the Judge wouldn’t have ordered, on August 21, that she still needs to properly serve the defendants. In other words, if Orly had properly served at the hearing as stated above, then the Judge would not have ordered her, again, to properly serve by September 8

At that hearing, the DOJ representative said that he wasn’t the proper person to accept service, but the Judge ordered him to accept service anyway. Problem is that Orly still didn’t - until this past week - properly serve the DOJ representative that the Judge ordered to accept service.

[El Gato]

I wouldn't be too hard on Google, I tried Alta Vista and the first hit that was *this* Connie roads was for this FR thread. I went through three pages and did not find another.

Pretty much the same with Yahoo search.

In this case, I think we have to blame the "news" media, not the search engine folks.

[OldDeckHand]

"So what does Captain Rhodes plan to do now that her military career is at an end? "

First, it's not a surprising outcome. Second, her "career" is probably over, but that doesn't mean she won't be able to fulfill her scholarship-based obligations to the Army. And, so long as she doesn't do something crazy - like not reporting for duty - she won't be in ANY administrative trouble with the Army and her medical license will no longer be in peril.

And honestly, as short as the Army is right now in some medical specialties, her career might not even be over. Time will tell.

[Sibre Fan]

The official order denying the TRO Motion is now available: Link

[OldDeckHand]

'But the court also noted that the odds of success hover somewhere between zilch point sh*t and none. "

"Plaintiffhas no substantial likelihood of success on the merits. Plaintiff presents nothing but conjecture and subjective belief to substantiate the basis for her claims, citing, for example, “opinion” and “doubt.”"

Ouch, that's was the proverbial judicial slap down. And, it's from a Bush appointee to the federal bench, no less. He doesn't mince words, at all.

[El Gato]

Agreed - and a Med Corps Captain is a baby officer

Just like the JAG officers.

[rolling_stone]

I appreciate you discussing the case especially since you are experienced in this narrow field of Military Justice, and do believe the good Captain should consider the pros and cons of her future actions at length. As you state she has a lot to lose and she needs to recognize that. It doesn't look like she is a “ring knocker” and might catch a break.

I am aware in California when an Attorney like Orly practices in an area that may be somewhat unfamiliar to them they are supposed to seek assistance or advice from someone who is familiar, such as another attorney or judge. I admire Orly's perseverance, drive and belief in her actions, but I am not so sure she is presenting the cases in the best manner. Sometime she reminds me of the movie “My Cousin Vinnie”, I sure hope the outcome will be positive, but there seems to have been some missteps along the way. I wish her the best of luck and good hunting.

As far as the COLB or BC being all that is needed to prove eligibility, that is just the beginning. At FR both real attorneys and to use the Navy term “head lawyers” (er restroom)have been debating the Natural Born Citizen definition (and evidence)for months. I believe and hope public pressure as well as so many lawsuits will eventually end up with the USSC deciding the issue, unless of course Obama is found before hand to not even be a citizen, thus mooting the question. Failure to have the case heard maybe enough to ignite the masses in serious civil disobedience or worse in a quest for Justice and a government responsive to their grievances. The extreme manner in which Obama is presiding is going to also push the issue to a conclusion sooner or later. Grievances can only be ignored for so long before they escalate.

Here is some background on NBC:

http://federalistblog.us/2008/11/natural-born_citizen_defined.html

http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/

Kercher vs Obama by Atty Apuzzo links to filings on lower right, interesting take on standing states the Executive and Legislative Branches have failed in their duty to examine eligibility and if the Judicial Branch does not, then Article II on Presidential eligibility is unenforceable. I am sitting on pins and needles waiting to see the response of the judge in that case.

http://puzo1.blogspot.com/

fair winds and following seas
rs

[null and void]

Well, I would’ve said that there’s always 2012, but knew that I’d get slammed for that ...............

Yup. Are you certain there will even be an election in 2012?

};^P

[El Gato]

The original BC, or a true paper version, with raised seal and signature, from the State of Hawaii, would at minimum be legal proof of who his father was. If that is BHO Sr, then that is also legal proof, or a piece of it, that his father was not a US Citizen, not even a permanent resident alien. That of course bears on the question of "natural born".

Hmm, just had a thought, dangerous I know. But do we know who picked the member of the group of "African" students who studied in Hawaii? Is there a possibility that BHO Sr was effectively acting as a an official representative of the Colonial Government of Kenya? If so, then there is no way that his offspring is even a citizen of the US, let alone a natural born citizen, since "subject to" is the 14th amendment and common law exception to citizenship via place of birth. It's also an exception to the general rule that foreign government actions do not affect US citizenship, since a foreign government must by necessity be involved in it's representatives appointments.

Just a thought.

[rxsid]

The Kenyan Constitution can not strip away British citizenship from someone, any more than British law can strip US citizenship from someone or the US Constitution involuntarily strip British citizenship from someone. All the Kenya Independence Act 1963 did was to give Barry an additional citizenship (Kenyan). By your logic, the US (for example) could write a Constitutional amendement (or law) that states anyone residing within the territory of the US would have their foreign citizenship (if having any) involuntarily stripped from them. One country's Constitution can not do that to another's citizens involuntarily.

Fact remains, as far as the "Natural Born Citizenship" requirement goes...he was born with British citizenship. Therefore, the question for the courts, for the legislators and the American people is..."HOW CAN A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN'S STATUS BE "GOVERNED" BY GREAT BRITAIN?"

[Kevmo]

Our scenario is worse than your hypothetical. The roads are already being paved and continue to be paved and it looks like the rumors of the commander being relieved are unfounded. How do you get rid of this commander in your analogy? He’s there by the force of law, even if those forces are messed up.

[El Gato]

Personally, I was and continue to be in the camp that his eligibility to be president is still questionable, even if he was born in HI. But, SCOUTS disagrees with me, and has signaled that they have no appetite to entertain such challenges - disappointing.

When did they disagree? I'm not aware of any ruling on the parameters of "natural born citizen" as regards to Art. I Section 2 eligibility. It's just never come up before.

But about their appetite, I tend to agree.

[Sibre Fan]

Didn’t you just answer your own question? Great Britain can’t govern who a US NBC is anymore than it can strip someone of US citizenship. It’s irrelevant.

[null and void]

How it would turn out, would be anyone's guess.

No man's life, liberty, or property are safe while court is in session...

[apologies to Mark Twain]