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"
As I understand it..Donofrio has been made aware of the law and that the marriage was a VOID marriage....and is choosing to ignore it.
He is going forward as if the marriage was a valid contract.
Why don’t you write him and ask him why he is ignoring that Sr was already married and couldn’t legally marry Ann in Hawaii.
Oh, and if his response is that it doesn’t matter if Sr and Ann were married for the British citizenship if born in the US..then you KNOW he hasn’t done his research or is ignoring it.
Because I don’t know that position well (or convinced) enough to attempt an articulate point/question. As you authoritatively stated many times, “I’m only beginning.” Therefore, a seasoned investigator such as yourself with all the answers regarding this would be in a better position to challenge either of them. So...why don’t ya?
I think he is just too invested his claim to fame (in his mind) of being the first and only person to focus exclusively on Obama’s lack of two citizen parents and insists on ignoring long form HI BC and Kenya birth issues which he now derisively calls “Big Foot”.
I think that must be the key. I was thinking of dual prosecutions. The second after the person was acquitted of the charges in the first prosecution for the same conduct, even though the charges might be different though based on the same conduct.
Read the post after yours. People have tried. He is ignoring the issue. I believe he is representing himself so that is not a problem other than it undermines his credibility.
If he was representing a client..yeah...IMO..a big problem and borders on malpractice.
It definitely undermines his credibility when he claims that the fact that Sr was already married is not relevant.
It isn’t relevant to the argument based on his father’s citizenship. It is relevant if you are trying to argue that Obama’s UK citizenship is relevant..and apparently he is making that argument.
I am looking at all facts...and trying to understand the whole scenario...not just facts that support one position.
I keep seeing posters claim that there was a divorce so that makes the marriage valid. IMO, not really...but
they are missing the point that the marriage can be attacked collaterally after parties are dead. Would Obama do it if it suited his purpose? You betcha!
I am not surprised that posters here are buying Donofrio’s story hook line and sinker...but he is doing them an injustice to continue to ignore the reality.
obumpa
That would apply to Attorney Apuzzo then...wouldn’t it?
Official Obama story continues to unravel Girlfriend places mother in Seattle in August 1961
Simply go ask him what law he is using to get around the fact that the marriage was void Ab Initio.
At least Donofrio has taken to repeating frequently that we don't have a whole range of documents that we need to establish Obama’s citizenship. He just won't mention lack of contemporaneous evidence of the Dunham-Obama marriage.
I disagree with him. With the facts as we know them at this time..it is likely he was not a UK citizen.
There was a law that legitimized illegitimate births if there was a subsequent valid marriage. There are problems with this in a number of ways.
What you are saying is basically...hey, I was not in reality a UK citizen...but I thought I was...so I shouldn’t be a natural born citizen. Do you really believe a court would throw out a sitting President born on US soil to a US citizen... on that basis alone.
This argument is far different than Donofrio claiming Obama, was in fact, a UK citizen. It appears to me that is what he is claiming. Thinking you are a UK citizen is far different than actually being a UK citizen.
UK citizenship law does not grant citizenship just because you think you are a UK citizen. If you read the link in my profile, there is some talk about how they dealt with certain registrations of void marriages..but you have to go actually look at the law they reference. Furthermore, there is no indication that anyone applied to register Obama as a UK citizen.
There are some details in the law as it pertains to assets..but those laws are for when parent is domiciled in the UK.(if my memory is correct) and other specific requirements.
UK citizenship law is quite complex. they had to take into account such a variety of factors that we in the US did not have to consider.
Did Obama ever have a British Passport..because if so...that kicks up other issues as to how he obtained it.
I agree with you that it is unlikely that Obama would have been recognized at birth as a UK citizen due to lack of a documented marriage of his parents, so far. The claim of marriage in Stanley's divorce filing is hearsay.
Obama II would never be removed as POTUS without finding the marriage license or other contemporaneous documentation of the marriage. I don't think Stanley Ann's hearsay claim of marriage in her divorce filing (that Obama Sr never contested) would be sufficient grounds to somehow declare Obama II to be a non-NBC and removed from office, as Donofrio imagines.
Even if documents are found to substantiate the hearsay Maui marriage, the bigamy issue regarding Obama Sr's 1956 marriage to Ketzia would have to be legally assessed.
Whether an unmarried US citizen mother's baby can be NBC under the constitution (even if the natural father is a non-US citizen) could likely only be decided by SCOTUS.
Perhaps that is why Fukino declared Obama II an NBC knowing there was no legal marriage of the parents on record in HI. She might have been advised to conclude that even if Obama Sr was on the BC as the father, with no marriage license of record, there was no dual citizenship issue. Fukino has the marriage vital records as well as the BC records in the same department, I would think.
Perhaps only if Stanley Ann and Barack Sr were married in Kenya in some manner that conferred British citizenship to their children, perhaps in a legal polygamous tribal marriage and then Stanley Ann returned to the USA and gave birth to Obama, then Obama II might be removed for not being an NBC due to dual citizenship. (My brain hurts). It seems to me the only hope for a clear declaration of non-NBC status that US citizens would understand and support and the only realistic political threat to Obama II is validation of a non-US BC such as either of the complimentary Orly and Lucas BC's.
It is a convoluted mess. When devising the argument, you have to go with the known facts and known law, find your counter argument if it doesn’t fall in line with what you want (but you can’t totally ignore the law).....and then bring in how each possible variation of detail would effect the analysis.
It is an incredible mess..before you even get to the Indonesia aspect of it.
As for the Kenyan marriage...there is a UK law about marriages before 1971 or 1972. That is another wrinkle to the whole mess since Ann was domiciled in the US.
I saw someone state on another site that being white would effect the customary marriage part of this as per Kenyan law. I don’t remember if I looked at that law or not. There is a Kenyan law website where you can read the old laws.
I would say there is near zero probability that Obama would be declared ineligible on this basis, even if it is possible. The necessary documents to prove BNA status one way or the other are not public and may not exist. A means of bringing this speculative dual citizen matter to federal court hasn't been achieved, so far. The federal court simply cannot entertain speculation. Even if Apuzzo and Donofrio want Obama’s 1948 BNA admission to be taken as fact on Obama’s word, no-nonsense federal judges appear unlikely to touch such speculation, even if “against interest”.
It seems to me that the Indonesian events have nothing to do with Obama’s NBC status as all Indonesian events occurred subsequent to Obama's birth. Even if Indonesia doesn't recognize dual citizenship (set aside NBC status for the moment) Indonesia's law does not govern US citizenship. If it can be proved that Obama renounced US citizenship to obtain an Indonesian passport to get foreign student benefits for example, that would matter but without proof, that is just speculation that a court can't touch it. I keep coming back to a verified non-US BC knowingly hidden by Obama as the only thing Obama has to fear. A HI BC based on a home birth would leave open such a foreign birth possibility and that is the only reason I can come up with for Obama to hide his HI vital record.
McCain is a natural born citizen since his dad was deployed out of the country while working for the government (in the Navy).
Did Taitz at least get her gender right in the new filing. If you read the original TRO, Captain Rhodes is referred to as he or she, him or her interchangeably.
Simple solution for SECDEF and Obama. Revoke her orders. That was easy.
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.