Is Obama risking national security by hiding identity?
By Linda Bentley | July 22, 2009
Eligibility questions still loom for Hillary Clinton
COLUMBUS, Ga. – On July 16, U.S. District Court Judge Clay D. Land dismissed Major Stefan Frederick Cook’s complaint in which he sought a temporary restraining order against his deployment orders to Afghanistan, citing President Barack Obama is not constitutionally eligible to serve as President of the United States and Commander in Chief.
Rather than produce documents to verify Obama’s legitimacy, on July 14, two days before Cook and his Attorney Orly Taitz were to appear for oral arguments, the Department of the Army notified Cook his extended active duty order was “revoked or rescinded.”
The following day, Assistant U.S. Attorney H. Randolph Aderhold filed a motion to dismiss, arguing Cook’s application for a temporary restraining order should be denied as moot.
Aderhold stated, “The Commanding General … has determined that he does not want the services of Major Cook, and has revoked his deployment orders,” adding, “Without mobilization orders, Major Cook lacks standing to pursue his claims.”
Land agreed and stated, “The same Constitution upon which Major Cook relies in support of his contention that President Barack Obama is not eligible to serve as President of the United States very clearly provides that federal courts shall only have the authority to hear actual ‘cases and controversies.’”
Because Cook’s orders have been revoked, Land said, “He is under no present order to report anywhere. There is no evidence that he is subject to future deployment. Any such contention is sheer speculation and entirely hypothetical. Thus, he has suffered no particularized or concrete injury … And the only remedy he sought from this court, avoiding deployment, has already been provided … Based on all of these reasons, Major Cook does not have standing to pursue this action.”
Taitz found the military’s revocation of orders stunning and said they revoked Cooks orders so they wouldn’t have to “show their cards, because they have no cards.”
That wasn’t the end of it for Cook, though, as the federal government leaned on Cook’s civilian employer, which has contracts with the U.S. Department of Defense, to fire Cook.
However, Taitz has a roster, about 140 active, reserve and retired military men and women, of additional plaintiffs.
Upon receipt of orders, will each of those who question the legitimacy of the President of the United States and Commander in Chief get a pass as well?
What about those on active duty that just want to go home? Can they simply question the legitimacy or their orders too?
How many troops can the military sacrifice before Obama is required to reveal his identity?
Those military men and women, who have placed themselves in harm’s way, took an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic, and many take that oath seriously.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton also remains under a cloud of ineligibility since her appointment.
On July 2, Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, filed a motion in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia with a special panel of three judges asking the court to declare Clinton ineligible to serve as Secretary of State.
Filed on behalf of U.S. Foreign Service Officer and State Department employee David C. Rodearmel, the complaint maintains the "emoluments clause" of the U.S. Constitution prohibits Clinton from serving as Secretary of State until January 2013.
The Constitution states: “No Senator or Representative shall, during the Time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil Office under the Authority of the United States, which shall have been created, or the Emoluments whereof shall have been increased during such time; and no Person holding any Office under the United States, shall be a Member of either House during his Continuance in Office.”
During Clinton’s tenure as U.S. Senator, the salary for Secretary of State was increased several times, including three times during her second term.
If Rodearmel were forced to serve under the former Senator, it would be in violation of the oath he took as a Foreign Service Officer in 1991 to "support and defend" and "bear true faith and allegiance" to the U.S. Constitution.
To “fix” the problem, Congress passed a joint resolution reducing the “compensation and other emoluments” to those in effect at the time Clinton was sworn in as Secretary of State until January 2013, which, according to Judicial Watch, is when her second term in the Senate would have ended and the earliest she would become eligible to accept such an appointment.
Attorneys for the defendants filed a motion to dismiss. Judicial Watch responded in opposition to that motion and with a cross motion for summary judgment.