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 am a Vietnam combat vet and a member on the National Guard for 16 years. I think that you performed the career equivalent of throwing yourself on a hand grenade for your country and the constitution.
Since your orders to deploy to Afghanistan were lawful on their face, it is certain that in a properly functioning chain of command, the next step should have been a direct order for you to deploy, and a subsequent court martial were you to refuse. The fact that your orders were revoked within 48 HOURS of the filing of the lawsuit is an unmistakable sign of improper command influence from the very top of the chain of command. This marxist usurper KNOWS that he cannot withstand the legal discovery motions that your defense would have entitled you to. Chain of commands EVERYWHERE must be wondering as to how they can maintain order and discipline in the teeth of this obvious command interference. I was a trained Military Police Investigator in the National Guard and I have NEVER heard of such a circumstance.
Again I salute you sir. Godspeed to you and yours. You are the type of military patriot that we need to expose this couterfeit that claims to be POTUS.
That cuts both ways. You'd be asking the judiciary to act in a way that's not supported by statute or Constitutional authority. Just saying.
Seriously? That doesn't rise to the level of a Weekly World News headline on the credibility scale.
The man definitely was involved with the Bay of Pigs . He is exiled in the US. he says he has CIA contacts which is likely. He has many writings on the internet that have nothing to do with Obama.
The question is whether he really wrote the email.
btw, you should really contemplate hard about who has the ability to create such a black hole in obama’s history and that of his family. Not many could do that...in fact..it is very likely a three letter alphabet company.
And take a closer look at what Lolo was involved in.
I keep saying over and over again..that someone who is actually being court martialed needs to bring this up...Obama has to sign off on the court martial.
No I'm not. I was just listing some *general* concerns with emailed orders, having nothing directly to do with the case in question. I certainly did not say that orders received via email were not valid.
Heck in some situations orders were given over the commercial radio during WW-II. Something like "all soldiers return to your barracks, all sailors return to your ships". I think there may have been such announcements canceling leaves within the CONUS at the beginning of WW-II. Those orders had the same sorts of issues as emailed orders. My grandparents did not have electricity, if my Uncle had been on leave, he very well might not have heard the order to return to his ship/post for days. The attack on Pearl harbor occurred some hours after they would have returned from church. (Although to be completely truthful, I seem to recall my mother saying that they heard of the attack on their battery powered radio, but not everyone had one of those either, and they had to be used sparingly, as those old tube sets went through the batteries pretty quickly.).
But to repeat, none of that relates to this case, because the filing specifies that she got the orders.
Obama’s twin brother is stuck in Mexico, he never got a Hawaiian COLB.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2300645/posts
What if Americans by the millions upon millions reminded them that they have a duty before God ( and especially with regard to their men) to obey only lawful orders from a president who lawfully occupied the White House?
What if Americans by the millions upon million **persistently reminded the highest ranking officers that they are **obligated** by oath to defend the Constitution?
What if family members (especially) of those serving in the military were to silently stand vigil before their offices?
I would like to know how the Honolulu Advertiser got the idea that Obama was born in Indonesia!
You are true patriot. May God bless you.
Technically it would not be a case of removing the President. For no person not eligible by the criteria of the Constitution can actually *be* President. The Court would merely declare him not to be eligible, and thus not the President.
An honest man would then step down, but then an honest man would not run or take office knowing he was not eligible. Some have suggested that the provisions of the XXVth amendment concerning a President not able to exercise the duties of the office might be applied, but then again if he wasn't the President, they might not be applicable.
The problem is of course that the Constitution doesn't contemplate an ineligible person becoming de facto President. But that does not, and cannot, mean that he would get to continue exercising the powers of the office. That would make a mockery of the Constitution.
It's possible that once the Supreme Court declared him to be ineligible, the Congress would step up to the plate, impeach and remove him from office. In fear of their own re-election if for no other reason. Of course impeachment is for Presidents not usurpers, so that might be problematic as well. They might instead have to pass a special law or resolution.
There was a period when some ROTC/OCS got regular, but most did not. Then none did, but Academy grads still did.
Thanks for the info.
Indeed! I had not thought of that so simple approach. I do believe out military is repository for the strongest patriots of the nation. And the command structure is not yet corroded to a base level ofliberal generals in command. So, what you suggest , though it is unlikey millions would write, could in fact bring this to a head. If just conservative ex-military personnel would write, the effect would be most dramatic. Add the letters from average citizens and it becomes a wave of tsunami proportions! Also, writing letters to newppaper columns—Letters To The Editor columns—can open the issue to more public familiarity. I think you’re onto a great idea. Lets make it a plan, somehow, Fellow Freepers!
We could ask Joseph Farrah what he thinks of the idea.
You've left out Justice Roberts in this whole debacle. Does he have to recuse himself because he actually swore the Barry into office? It's tough to listen to a case that says the President isn't really the President, when you're one of the key figures involved in his installment in the office.
"The problem is of course that the Constitution doesn't contemplate an ineligible person becoming de facto President."
This above all others, is the primary problem, at least legally. Wherever it is we are today, no one - included the Framers - ever anticipated that we would be here.
the Congress would step up to the plate, impeach and remove him from office.
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
How can the Congress impeach someone who is not president. I would think he would simply be arrested for the crime of massive fraud and frog marched out of the White House.
I can envision the scenario where the already dishonest DNC hold a mock hearing in the Senate Judiciary and proclaim Obama ineligible on a technicality, then move to swear in Joe Biden as President immediately. Covering for their criminality will be the primary motivator for PelicaNazai and RancidReid.
You proved you weren’t acting like a “big boy” as soon as you entered this thread.
There were holes in your argument from the first page of posts.
I quoted your ignorance on the BC issue early on in this thread, and you threw insults at me and ran up to your room.
Now I see you are still on this thread, attempting to show some expert knowledge, which according to how you are posting, only you possess.
You are a new FReeper posting “I know everthing” responses. What you don’t seem to understand is, most of your arguments have been debated on this board for over a year.
I asked you in the beginning of the thread to please stop being rude and read up on the old BC threads.
I will say it again, go gulp up your Barry kool-aid. You must be getting very weak after insulting almost everyone here and bragging about your resume for the last 2 days.
Go take a break. I’m sure Barry is mixing up a fresh batch of refreshment.
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.