Cook v. Good: Job Threatened; Keyes v. Obama: Judge Will Hear Case Merits
With Major Stefan Cook’s deployment orders to Afghanistan having been revoked after he filed to have a TRO on those orders in federal Court in Columbus, GA, Dr. Orly Taitz, his attorney in Cook v. Good, has filed an Application for Injunction as a protection against what appears to be allegations of malicious intent on the part of the Defense Department.
The actual verbiage of the Injunction can be found on Dr. Taitz’ site. The excerpt, below, explains Major Cook’s current predicament:
DOD RETALIATION AGAINST MR. COOK IS SWIFT AND BRUTAL
Moreover, however, retaliation has occurred or begun against Plaintiff Stefan Frederick Cook for the exercise of his First Amendment right to petition for redress of grievances and Plaintiff Cook accordingly here seeks an injunction against the continuance or full implementation of this official governmental retaliation or in the alternative for a writ of mandamus, order to show cause, or rule nisi be issued to the Department of Defense commanding it to cease, cure, or remedy all retaliation against Plaintiff Cook. The circumstances are as follows:
Late on Tuesday afternoon, July 14, 2009, at around about 4:30 pm, Plaintiff Stefan Frederick Cook returned a call to an unknown telephone call from (813) 828-5884 and was told that his services were no longer required in Afghanistan and that he need not report for duty. In addition Plaintiff an e-mail with the revocation order attached from Master Sargent Miguel Matos (Exhibit C). Upon receipt of the revocation, Plaintiff Major Cook called his civilian boss, the CEO of Simtech, Inc., a closely held corporation that does DOD contracting in the general field of information technology/systems integration, at which Plaintiff Major was employed until taking a Military Leave of Absence on Friday July 10, 2009, a senior systems engineer and architect, in preparation for his deployment to Afghanistan. (Plaintiff has five Cisco Systems certifications in information technology dating from 2000 and just recertified in June 2009 for the Cisco Certified Design Expert qualification exam.)
The CEO of Simtech, Inc., Larry Grice, explained to Plaintiff over a series of four conversations within the next two hours, that he had been terminated. Grice told the Plaintiff that he would no longer be welcome in his former position at SOCOM but that Grice wanted to see whether he could find something within the company (Simtech, Inc.) for Cook. The upshot was that at this time Grice did not have anything for Plaintiff to do. Grice told Plaintiff, in essence, that the situation had become “nutty and crazy”, and that Plaintiff would no longer be able to work at his old position. …
Grice explained that he had been in touch with Defense Security Services (an agency of the Department of Defense[1], with regional offices located in SOCOM Headquarters at McDill Airforce Base in Tampa, Florida), and that DSS had not yet made a determination whether Plaintiff Major Cook’s clearances would be pulled, but Grice made clear to Cook that it was DSS who had compelled Cook’s termination. Essentially, because of the “nutty and crazy” situation and the communications received from DSS was no longer employable by him at all. So he was not optimistic about getting me another job at the company. Grice also reported to Plaintiff that there was some gossip that “people were disappointed in” the Plaintiff because they thought he was manipulating his deployment orders to create a platform for political purposes. Grice then discussed Plaintiff’s expectation of receiving final paychecks (including accrued leave pay) already owed, without any severance pay, and wished the Plaintiff well.
A federal agency (such as the Department of Defense, acting through the Defense Security Services Agency) clearly violates the Whistleblower Protection Act if it takes or fails to take (or threatens to take or fail to take) a personnel action with respect to any employee or applicant because of any disclosure of information by the employee or applicant that he or she reasonably believes evidences a violation of a law, rule or regulation; gross mismanagement; gross waste of funds; an abuse of authority; or a substantial and specific danger to public health or safety. What has happened in the present case of Stefan Frederick Cook is that a federal agency appears to have taken action against Stefan Frederick Cook’s private employer, Simtech, Inc., which is a closely held corporation owned and operated by members of a single family, who are as much victims of the Department of Defense’ heavy-handed interference with Plaintiff Cook’s private-sector employment as is Plaintiff Cook himself. [emphasis mine]
The following comes from portions of WorldNetDaily’s coverage of the above:
Messages left with Grice’s office had not been returned at the time of this report. …
A hearing on the questions raised by Maj. Stefan Frederick Cook, an engineer who told WND he wants to serve his country in Afghanistan, is still scheduled for July 16 at 9:30 a.m. …
Taitz said she will attend the hearing to amend the temporary restraining order to an injunction because more members of the military have joined the cause.
“We are going to be asking for release of Obama’s records because now this completely undermines the military. It revoked this order, but it can come up with another order tomorrow. It can come up with orders for other people,” she said. “Am I going to be flying around the country 1,000 times and paying the fees every time they issue an order?”
Defendant Col. Wanda Good filed a motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s action for a temporary restraining order “for lack of jurisdiction” today.
“This case no longer presents a live case or controversy, nor does Major Cook have standing to pursue his claim,” it states, “therefore, the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over his claims and they should be dismissed.”
It continued, “The Commanding General of SOCCENT has determined that he does not want the services of Major Cook, and has revoked his deployment orders. .. Without mobilization orders, Major Cook lacks standing to pursue his claims.”
But Taitz said the issue “must be resolved immediately,” and she will continue working to ensure Obama proves he is eligible for office.
“We’re going to be asking the judge to issue an order for Obama to provide his vital records to show he is legitimately president,” she said. “We’re going to say, we have orders every day, and we’ll have revocations every day. This issue has to be decided.”
She said there cannot be any harm to the president if he is legitimately holding office.
“If he is legitimate, then his vital records will prove it,” Taitz said. “If he is illegitimate, then he should not have been there in the first place.”
Asked what this decision means for every other serviceman who objects to deployment under a president who has not proven he is eligible for office, Taitz responded:
“Now, we can have each and every member of the military – each and every enlistee and officer – file something similar saying ‘I will not take orders until Obama is legitimately vetted.’”
I think that Dr. Taitz or associate should also be looking at issues surrounding wrongful termination of an employee. I don’t think that a business can terminate someone’s employment solely because of what the employee does on their own time, unless that company can show, via published corporate policy, that such a reason for termination is clearly defined and the employee had every reason to know of that policy’s existence.
Circumstantially, based on the above, it is becoming clearer that the reason for Major Cook’s order revocation wasn’t just about getting rid of the case, but also about getting him out of the military so that not only does this not happen again, but that an example can be set.
In related news, Dr. Taitz filed her First Amended Complaint in the case, Keyes v. Obama:
Amended Complaint – 15 July 2009
In what appears to be further testimony on the part of non-”birthers,” the site YesToDemocracy.com posted the following regarding another perspective on Dr. Taitz’ experience with US District Court Judge “King David” O. Carter:
13 July – Orly had her court date for Keyes v Obama today. And, courtesy of Politijab reader “Wavy Davey”, we have a description of what happened.
“WAVEY DAVEY’S REPORT OF THE MOTION TO SHOW CAUSE HEARING IN KEYES V OBAMA 7/12/09
AS DICTATED TO ME BY BB
I received a call from wavey davey who attended today’s hearing in the Central District of California. The outcome is not what we expected, but it is clear that the judge wants to position the case so that he can rule on the merits.
The judge had stern words for Orly a number of times, although he showed a lot of patience. She kept going off on her litany regarding the hundreds of Social Security numbers, and the judge let her bather on for a while. She also repeatedly asked the Court, “Why are the United States attorneys here? They have no standing, they’re not allowed to be here,” and the Court corrected her on that.
She wanted to talk about the merits of the case and the court said, “Today is not about merits, it is about procedure.”
The court made clear, several times, that he wants this case to go forward on the merits but he did say that proper service had not been achieved on Obama. The U.S. Attorney’s office was represented by DeJute. At first Mr. DeJute said that he was not authorized to accept service on behalf of the United States but it was determined that the U.S. Attorney for the district could accept service and so the court ordered Orly and DeJute to confer and to march downstairs together to properly serve the United States Attorney.
Charles Lincoln was present as a “law clerk.”
Wavey davey described him as “short, dumpy, early middle-age, balding.”
Orly continually argued with the judge. The judge responded, “I’m giving you a gift.” When she continued to want to argue the merits and that she had achieved service the judge said, “I think you must be deaf. You aren’t listening. You’re stubborn.”
The judge kept saying that he wanted “what gets this case into court on the merits.”
So what was agreed was that the service would be achieved on the United States Attorney, the United States would have 60 days to respond, and the United States many not ask for any extensions of time.
Orly still wasn’t even satisfied with this result and the judge kept saying, “If you want this expedited I’ll do this, but we need to get this resolved for once and all.”
At one point then Orly said she wanted mediation. The judge’s response was, “What’s to mediate? Either Obama is president or he is not.”
At one point Orly started to read the motion that she filed today. The judge cut her off saying, “I can read.” He noted that he had worked all weekend and would have been available to read this had she filed it earlier. “I’ve seen it. It’s not relevant, you’re wasting your time reading it into the record.”
Waveydavey did note that, as expected, Orly exhibited that she really does not have the socialization skills of others in the legal community. He said it was rather funny, when she first came into the courtroom she was beaming at her Orlybots — there were a number of them there — he was the only Obamabot or Obot there — she had a huge bag stuffed full of things, as well as her purse, and she marched right up beyond the gate and sat down at counsel table.
The courtroom deputy to whom she had not entered her appearance, spoke to her and told her, “It’s not your turn. Go back to the gallery and sit down. Your case will be called,” and Orly was quite flustered because she obviously doesn’t know the custom of a docket call.
Waveydavey also described her as being very pushy and that the judge, on a number of occasions, cut her off. At one point he called for a recess saying, “You need to calm down.”
The judge, several times, indicated that he wants to be able to rule on the merits of the case stating, “This needs to be resolved. We need to get rid of all these doubts.”
Orly indicated that she intends to file a FOIA request. The Court said, “Go ahead, but it would be a waste of time. If we’re going to hear this on the merits there may be rulings, you know, regarding documents.”
END OF REPORT BY WAVEYDAVEY”
Regardless of anyone’s accounting of what went on in the Courthouse, we will still need to confirm via reporter notes exactly what was said. However, it is interesting that this individual, someone clearly not aligned with challenging the President’s eligibility, provides for some very interesting direct quotes of Judge Carter; if we were to rely solely on this testimony, I could see why Dr. Taitz is upbeat about her chances, however low they may be.
If I were advising Dr. Taitz, I would simply recommend that she take a very large chill pill in terms of her presentation. To date, as I’ve said via commentary on my blog, she has done an excellent job of being an activist — defined as taking absolutely every opportunity available to advance the cause. Now that she has two good leads (and by “good,” I mean that she hasn’t been tossed out of Court on a techicality at this point), she should proceed assertively but judiciously so as to give each Courtroom every reason to consider her position.
That’s how I would do it if I were in her shoes. Let the evidence sell itself.
Site Note: For those of you who would have regularly partaken in my site’s RSS feed, I have fixed it such that it should now be working correctly (as opposed to having been a week behind). The feed ended up being too big content-wise, so I reduced the number of postings from 30 to 15. My apologies for the issue.
See the following links regarding the eligibility saga:
- Obama’s Presidential Eligibility: What You Need to Know
- Obama’s Sealed Background Documentation
- What’s the Difference Between a Birth Certification Versus a Birth Certificate?
- Keyes v. Lingle: Forensic Examiner and IT Expert Disprove Certification of Live Birth
- Obama Citizenship Facts
- The State Department and Sen. Patrick Leahy’s (D-VT) Natural Born Citizen Resolution (April 10, 2008)
- Citizen Grand Jury Updates and Eligibility Lawsuit Listing
-Phil
Twitter: @trsol -=- Facebook (TRSoL) -=- Facebook (Rightside Phil)
45 responses to Cook v. Good: Job Threatened; Keyes v. Obama: Judge Will Hear Case Merits
I think that Dr. Taitz or associate should also be looking at issues surrounding wrongful termination of an employee. I don’t think that a business can terminate someone’s employment solely because of what the employee does on their own time
Employment in Florida is at-will. An employer can fire an employee for any reason — including no reason — as long the firing is not based on illegal discriminatory reason (such as race, religion, disability, etc.).
Phil, I think your advice to Dr. Orly is good. She has the evidence, lots and lots of it, and doesn’t need to convnce the judge of anything. He seems smart enough to see it when he hears the case, and even from waveydavey, my impression is that Judge Carter is very fair and feels the case should be heard on the merits, which is all we want.
The other thing is that no one provided a critique of the U.S. attorneys. Were they rude, or disheveled, or late, or disorganized? Everyone criticizes Orly but no one ever criticizes anyone on Obama’s side. What about the fact that Obama didn’t even answer the summons? His arrogance is astounding, especially because he doesn’t even qualify for a defense from the government!
Bob,
It’s also the same way in Georgia. However, that doesn’t mean that a case could not be made over wrongful termination, especially if no published policies covered any such circumstance. That’s the reason why HR makes a very big deal about corporate policies in corporations, so that all employees “have every reason to have known” that they exist.
-Phil
NewEnglandPatriot,
Simply keep in mind that these views are merely that — certain individuals’ perspectives of what actually happened in the Courthouse. And “Wavey Davey’s” “testimony” of what occurred, as someone who claims they were present at the meeting, is being filtered through their particular biases.
Besides, don’t forget — this is the opposition we’re talking about. I don’t expect them to be any more objective about what went on than certain folks in the media.
-Phil
Can Cook now sue for blatant retaliation?
My Question is, how did the US Attorneyes know to be there, if neither Zero nor the US AG was not properly served?
CAN FOIA be used to find out?
However, that doesn’t mean that a case could not be made over wrongful termination
It would be a losing, meritless case.
especially if no published policies covered any such circumstance.
No published policies further support an at-will dismissal, as the absence of a published policy cannot somehow rebut the presumption of at-will.
I hope the SS are keeping a very close eye on Cook. In the last few months we know that he has bought a number of high velocity weapons, has separated from his wife and is about to be divorced, is trying to unseat a President and has now been fired (with cause) from his job. Can anyone else see a tragedy waiting to happen? I think he may very well have a malpractice case against Orly for getting him into this situation.
BO Campaign Managers are the Masters of Psy Ops. They have DUPED some of BRIGHTEST Reporters on Earth.
Reasonably intelligent reporters are so deep into the Obama Campaign Spell that they forget to ask the most basic questions like:
Is Orly Taitz licensed to represent Mr. Cook in Georgia?
Does anyone remember when Orly, despite conclusive audio/video proof otherwise, proclaimed that Chief Justice John Roberts had “agreed…promised” etc. to hear one of her previously NON-EXISTANT cases?
Has there ever been any proof of the veracity of any of Orly’s “legal filings?”
Yet, now even Sean Hannity is heralding Orly’s latest FOLLY in Georgia?
Has any “reporter” “thought” to check with the Clerk of the Supreme Court of Georgia and see if Orly has been admitted to practice law in Georgia?
Even if Orly, by some “Judicial Miracle” has managed to get herself admitted to practice law in Georgia, Orly has NO PROOF to support her RIDICULOUS claim that the fact that Cook’s deployment order was rescinded proves that BO is not qualified to be President.
Let me hasten to say that there is abundant proof that BO is NOT Constitutionally qualified, but Orly is clearly incapable of presenting said proof properly in any court of law.
I am as always dedicated to the LEGAL REMOVAL of BO.
Bob,
Can one be fired in Florida for their legitimate political views, party membership, court activities?
I think not, as that is an attempt to deny or intimidate and thus prevent due process of law, or excercise of civil liberties…
Imagine if a black was fired in florida for litigating civil rights issues in court?
You get my drift…?
NewEnglandPatriot:
What summons? The whole reason for the hearing was that he had never been served.
That was not the result of “Obama’s arrogance.” It was entirely and completely the result of Orly’s incompetence.
That is why she gets criticized, and others do not.
Phil:
As evidenced by his own posts on Free Republic, MAJ Cook was explicitly aware that his job security depended on his security clearance.
I have never heard of a security clearance surviving a refusal to follow orders. Have you?
Cook v. Good
DISMISSED!
http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/292/story/779031.html
But, if correctly reported, Cook’s employer mentioned gossip by co-workers was also an excuse for termination!! He must have thought that he might be challenged about this wrongful termination when he mentioned that he would look for another position and I suppose let Cook know at some later time if anything turns up!
At least Cook didn’t get sent to a re-education camp. That may come later – when Obama orders all military to such type seminars for their own re-education to his way of looking at things – like his different interpretation of terrorists or his orders to limit their aggressive maneuvers because they just might commit human error at a time of war.
Before we get all worked up that Major Cook was fired as a retaliation for the lawsuit, we need to remember why he is no longer going to Afganistan and his orders were rescinded….
“Lt. Comm. William Speaks, a spokesman for Centcom, spoke with TWI today about Maj. Stefan F. Cook’s controversial request for conscientious objector status.
“Maj. Cook volunteered for the one year assignment to Afghanistan, in May of this year,” said Speaks. “After he brought this stuff to the fore, the unit that owned his billet canceled his orders.”
Speaks dismissed comments that Cook’s attorney Orly Taitz, made to WorldNetDaily, specifically her claim that “the military has directly responded by saying Obama is illegitimate.”
http://washingtonindependent.com/51247/centcom-yes-the-president-is-an-american-citizen
So let us recap the situation and timeline of Major Cook…
“In short – Cook never had to go in the first place. Unlike most soldiers who deploy as part of a unit, Cook – a reservist – had volunteered to go as an individual augmentee. The Army generally seeks volunteers to fill such assignments first – if no one does so then a non-volunteer is tapped.
The timeline…
March: Cook acknowledges he’s among the plaintiffs in a class-action suit “on behalf of 120 military officers” challenging President Obama’s authority as Commander in Chief.
In May, Cook tells the Army he wants to be sent to Afghanistan.
In June, the Army accepts Cooks offer.
In July, Cook sues to “get out” of that assignment, based on the same grounds (Obama not qualified) and using the same attorney (who actively seeks military members to participate in such suits) for a previous suit he was involved in that pre-dates his volunteering to deploy to Afghanistan.
Even without going to court, the Army says – essentially – hey, no problem. You were the one who wanted to go in the first place.
Actually, there is one “Major” problem. Because Cook waited to the last minute to take this action, either someone is going to get a very short notice non-volunteer assignment, or else the unit in Afghanistan will have to get by without one soldier for a while. Since that soldier would be a field grade officer, it’s likely that the position will be of some significance.”
“This in no way validates any of the outlandish claims made by Maj. Cook or his attorney,” said Speaks. “The idea that this validates those charges about the president’s fitness for office is simply false.”
And now he lost his job. If anyone has worked for a company that does military contract work you need remember that your job is “at will” and the Department of Defense can revoke your security clearence at any time. So Major Cook sues the Army, Department of Defense, and the President, over a clearly transparently political issue like was described above, when in truth he could have declined to deploy, and wonders why the DoD revoked his security clearence. He “blue falconed” his unit and wants to know what happened?
He didn’t get fired by the government. The DoD revoked his security clearence, which since he is a civilian contractor, means that he could no longer work on government projects or work at any military bases. Since he could no longer do his job, then his company had no choice but to lay him off. Major Cook brught this upon himself.
To think he can use the “whistle blower” statute to sue is laughable. He is not “blowing the wistle” on anything. There are attorney’s on this thread so they can comment also. He rolled the dice and risked his job on a unwinable case with a barely competent attorney and lost. If his attorney was any good, she would have informed him of all the risks before signing on to this ridiculous suit.
If I remember correctly Major Cook declared in his lawsuit the following…
“Plaintiff asks that he therefore be granted status as a conscientious objector on moral, religious and philosophical grounds, …”
However there is a downside to this request…
PART 710—CRITERIA AND PROCEDURES FOR DETERMINING ELIGIBILITY FOR ACCESS TO CLASSIFIED MATTER located at http://www.dba-oracle.com/… one of the disqualifying conditions is “Having petitioned to be declared a conscientious objector to war”
It is just amusing that this movement is filled with retired former military officers, convicted felons and disbarred attorneys (Charles Lincoln), and court martialed former miltary officers (Fitzpatrick). I can see why President Obama is “so scared”.
The article states above…
“Circumstantially, based on the above, it is becoming clearer that the reason for Major Cook’s order revocation wasn’t just about getting rid of the case, but also about getting him out of the military so that not only does this not happen again, but that an example can be set.”
Not quite. His security clearence was revoked. You cannot do government defense work without one. He brought it upon himself. His case was dismissed…Se below…
“A federal judge this morning dismissed the suit filed here by a U.S. Army reservist who says he shouldn’t have to go to Afghanistan because he believes Barack Obama was never eligible to be president.”
“Judge Clay Land sided with the defense, which claimed in its response to Maj. Stefan Frederick Cook’s suit, filed July 8 with the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia, that Cook’s suit is “moot” in that he already has been told he doesn’t have to go to Afghanistan, so the relief he is seeking has been granted.”
“Federal court only has authority of actual cases and controversies,” Land said. “The entire action is dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.”
http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/292/story/779031.html
This case was a loser for the birther movement from the begining. If Orly was a competent attorney, she would have done her research and been knowledgable of the law. But since she is having a disbarred attorney (Charles Lincoln) writing her pleadings, it is not a surprise.
Chill pill is right.
I worked directly with Dr. Taitz earlier this year when she represented a client in central Texas who brought an eligibility suit. After that case was dismissed by an obviously biased judge, I escorted her to the local US Attorney’s office in Austin, TX where we dumped a ream of documentaiton on that office and asked for an investigation. (They asked if this was April Fool’s Day or Candid Camera.)
That done, I delivered her to the AUS airport, during which time we had a chance to chat whenever she wasn’t on the phone, but that was most of the time.
Her heart is in the right place. She, as a Russian immigrant, has a better sense of American patriotism than many natural born citizens of this country.
That said, she over-communicates and does not know when to shut up. I have advised her that I cannot work with her directly anymore unless she can transcend her compulsion to be a firehose of data and become instead a fountain of information. Apparently she cannot; poor thing.
I wish her temperance – and the best of luck!
He lose his hearing, it’s over
Major Cook’s case, not surprisingly, was dismissed. The fallout, however, will continue. Greg Skilling, writing for the Louisville Independent Examiner, articulated a frightening after-effect.. I urge you to read, and then read it again.
“Maj. Cook retained the services of an attorney, Orly Taitz, who made the following statements in a filing on his behalf before United States District Court, Middle District of Georgia, Columbus Division which reiterated the claim by Maj. Cook that he, and by extension all U.S. Servicemembers serving in combat, were “war criminals” and therefore not entitled to the protections granted by the Geneva Conventions:
“Plaintiff seeks to avoid not only court-martial in this country, but also treatment as a war-criminal or terrorist, not eligible even for protection under the Geneva convention, if he were found to be a merely mercenary soldier in a private army of slaves, “owned” or controlled by an unconstitutional and therefore illegal commander, if he does not ask the question: “is this order legal?”
By recklessly advancing his unfounded theory that U.S. soldiers are “war criminals” and allowing his attorney to state that they are, “merely mercenaries in a private army of slaves”, Maj. Cook has provided enemies of the United States with a ready-made excuse to execute captured U.S. servicemembers using the statements of a commissioned officer in the United States Army Reserve as justification for their actions. Furthermore, given that it has been widely reported that a U.S. soldier was captured by the Taliban in Afghanistan on June 30, 2009, Maj. Cook’s public statements and those of his attorney have put the life of that soldier in direct and irrefutable jeopardy. In addition, Maj. Cook has provided extensive recruiting material for terrorist groups around the world, thereby aiding enemy efforts to oppose ongoing combat operations.”
Now consider this headline in today’s news:
“Taliban Threatens to Kill U.S. Soldier Captured in Afghanistan
Thursday, July 16, 2009
KABUL — Local Taliban commanders threatened Thursday to kill a captured American soldier unless the U.S. military stops operations in two districts of southeastern Afghanistan.”
GeorgetownJD
“It’s also the same way in Georgia. However, that doesn’t mean that a case could not be made over wrongful termination, especially if no published policies covered any such circumstance. That’s the reason why HR makes a very big deal about corporate policies in corporations, so that all employees “have every reason to have known” that they exist.”
If he lost his clearance, as reported, and his clearance was required for his position with Simtech, then they would certainly be justified in the termination. The fact that they may have positions within Simtech that do not require his level of clearance does not mean they have to find one of those jobs for him.
Taitz won’t be able to help herself, she will file motions and garbage that will talk about “100 SSNs” and other crap so that the judge will grant the US Attorney’s motion to dismiss on the basis that the court has no jurisdiction to grant the relief requested, and that the plaintiff has not stated an injury…
New England Patriot
First, congrats to Phil for using Politijab as a source. I am certain wavey davey’s account is much more accurate that lunatic Orly Taitz.
NEP:
Perhaps no one criticizes anyone on Obama’s side because they are professional, deal in the facts, are respectful of the court and follow proper procedures? These are all things Orly is not.
Obama did not answer the summons because he was never served properly and for all we know, despite Judge Carter’s gift to Orly and literally leading the horse to water, we still do not know if Orly bothered to execute the service with the US Attorney.
Orly had a great week. She made a fool of herself in Judge Carter’s court and possibly managed to get her Key v Obama case back to where it should have been in January (we do not know as mentioned above and the amended complaint is complete crap). Then she got Cook fired and possibly up for a court marshal hearing in the near future. Yes, his case was dismissed today by the way. Orly is an idiot and anyone who argues otherwise is too.
Dr. Taitz had the issue pinned to the wall, and the only way out was to cancel his orders. It seems that the issue now is to find any and all that want to question their deployment and file the same pleadings. I would be interesting to see how many orders are cancelled, to many would brighten the cause. It would be nice if the former Marine (Judge) can bring at least discovery about, but I do believe that Obama will refuse the Order…. Contempt charges will only bring more questions when they are disregarded by Obama.
Orly seems to have over step her bounds when it comes to adding plantiffs to various lawsuits. Major General Childers is very upset with her.
http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/news/story/779856.html
“Later Thursday afternoon, the person identifying himself as Childers in an e-mail said several months ago he signed a “motion” Taitz filed requesting that a judge unseal specific personnel records, which Taitz thinks will either verify or disprove Obama’s status as a natural born citizen of the United States.”
“Not being a lawyer, I was not aware that other subsequent court filings, in such cases as Major Cook, might also tie me to such subsequent cases,” the e-mail said. “I have notified Dr. Taitz that I am no longer a plaintiff in any motion she might process.”
Cook’s firing sounds like retaliation to me. I happen to know that certain businesses and companies will not stand for any type of retaliation. This is especially true in sexual harassment cases in which person who files the harassment complaint is relatiated in some way. This is completely uncalled for and could be illlegal in certain organizations and companies even in the state of Florida.
Congratulations Dr. Orly on getting there. Further, the judge sounds like he might be fair, reasonable and has the concern of America and the Constitution at heart from what what is reported above.
All people have their specialties. Getting it to this point is obviously because of Dr. Taitz’s tenacity, great love and heart for America, our Constitution and what it has been. She is truly a Great American, Warrior and Modern Day Heroine of old! The kind Americans use to aspire to be! The one’s that stood for everything and every virtue that is Right under God and our Constitution! The kind that fought and gave great sacrifices including their lives to make America the Beacon of Hope on the Hill for the entire world.
At this point though, it appears the very thing that got her here could be what becomes her downfall, if she’s not carefull(her blessing if not handled right, may become her curse?). Her enthusiam with an alleged lack of techinical protocol appears might get the best of her and is about to overwhelm her from what this report reflects. It seems the judge may be exactly who we have been praying for and appears is working with her, finally! I don’t think she is pridefull. So I can’t say she needs to put her pride aside, but I agree with Phil, she needs to chill and sit back and take a quick assessment of the situation and her strategy. But, also, she may want to consider other wise outside counsel(a team) at this point and stratagize the situation, something easy for me to tell others but hard for me to suck up and do myself. As in baseball, she may want to call in her closer from the bullpen…say Stephen Pidgeon or someone she trusts. She’s the coach.
I think they might make a great team.
We love her and are so proud of her!
We will keep praying for her and her unbelieveable strength, never quit atttitude and love for us!
DJ
[PS: Even God substituted Joshua in the game to get the Israelites accross the Jordon into the Promised Land, after Moses spent 40 years of blood sweat and tears on a journey through the dessert to get them to the point of opportunity(the court room, in this case!). God handed the ball to someone else to finish the game. On the other hand, it may be wise to leave the starter in to finish the game with some good counsel and adjustments. Please Dr. Taitz at least consider a pause(I think you have 60 days to improve on your game plan?) and consider other wise counsul with your trusted legal allies. We're not owed anything.
The Houston Oilers were so excited and overwhelmed just to be one step(game) from the superbowl that they started celebrating as if it were in the bag! They foolishly forgot the hardest part was yet to come. "CLOSING OUT THE GAME." The Oilers blew a 32 point half time lead in the playoff game with the Buffalo Bills who even had to use a second string Quarterback. The Oilers were sent home humiliated. We got to the game, but: THERE IS ALOT OF WORK LEFT TO BE DONE!] The enemy gets tougher when wounded and backed in a corner.
Again, we love you Dr. Taitz! And have been and will continue to support you!
God Bless You Dr. Taitz!
Phil,
I wonder why so many posters have been silenced. I have been waiting on those who have characterized Attorney Taitz as an “on-line” degree having attorney and some of the other derogatory names they have presented. I hope that you can start a “where are they now” file because they will soon find out the truth about Mr. Obama, and all of the nonsensical arguments will be made null. I am ready to see this unfold!!!
Phil,
“Now that she [Orly] has two good leads (and by “good,” I mean that she hasn’t been tossed out of Court on a techicality at this point), …”
True, Orly was not tossed out of court in the federal district court on Monday, but rather than serve the United States Attorney as she was instructed by Judge Carter, Orly instead hit the reset button by filing an amended complaint. She’s back to square one. Hence, the following docket entry:
“Filed: 07/16/2009
Entered: 07/17/2009
Minutes of In Chambers Order/Directive – no proceeding held
Docket Text: MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS): ORDER held before Judge David O. Carter re: First Amended Complaint [22]. Plaintiffs are ORDERED to properly serve the First Amended Complaint on or before August 16, 2009 and file Proof of Service of such on or before August 23, 2009. (dg)”
Never look a gift horse in the mouth.
bystander,
What was the cause? Rumor and innuendo?
-Phil
HistorianDude,
I am ignorant of this area and so am only observing the process at this time.
-Phil
Vincet Omnia Veritas,
Wavey Davey claims to have been inside the same room as the other folks. They also used a few direct quotes from the Judge, and based on what I’ve gathered about the Judge, the quotes seemed to fit his profile. Also, the “testimony” of Wavey Davey was more objective than either of the two other recollections that I had gathered.
I’m not sure why I wouldn’t use such a source, especially since it appears to be closest of the 3 to the truth of what happened.
-Phil
Breaking News!
Lou Dobbs had Orly Taitz and Alan Keyes on CNN LIVE tonight. It was great.
Finally, a major MSM commentary has finally decided to bring this issue to light.
All great Hails and Honor goes to Lou Dobbs for finally discussing this issue.
It quite clear and evident that Lou Dobbs is seriously interested in this issue.
However, I believe Lou Dobbs is yet to be completely won over into believing Obama is ineligible to be the POTUS.
There is one more step that Lou Dobbs needs to take to be 100% convinced that Obama ineligible:
Lou Dobbs NEEDS and MUST interview Charles Kerchner and Mario Apuzzo at http://puzo1.blogspot.com/
If Lou Dobbs interviews Charles and Mario, he will be 100% convinced Obama is ineligible.
Therefore, I ask everyone he reading and seeing this message to take the following steps:
1. Send emails, write letters, and make phones calls pleading and urging Lou Dobbs to interview Charles Kerchner and Mario Apuzzo from http://puzo1.blogspot.com/.
2. Blog here, there and everywhere urging every person who has an interest in this issue to tell others to tell Lou Dobbs he NEEDS and MUST interview Charles Kerchner and Mario Apuzzo.
3. If anyone has the means or knows how Charles and Mario can directly contact Lou Dobbs, please send all information to http://puzo1.blogspot.com/
Below are the following places people can go to tell Lou Dobbs:
TO STAY ON TOP OF THIS ISSUE!
INTERVIEW CHARLES KERCHNER AND MARIO APUZZO!
http://www.cnn.com/feedback/forms/form5.html?9
http://www.loudobbsradio.com/pg/jsp/help/contact.jsp#form6
PLEASE MAKE HASTE AND DO NOT DELAY
THANKS!
Good Luck and God Bless!
Can one be fired in Florida for their legitimate political views, party membership, court activities?
Political views and party membership are not an exception to at-will employment. As for court activities, it would be depend on the court activity.
I think not, as that is an attempt to deny or intimidate and thus prevent due process of law, or excercise of civil liberties…
Generally speaking, a private employer is not obligated to protect an employee’s due process rights or civil liberties.
Imagine if a black was fired in florida for litigating civil rights issues in court?
Race (unlike political viewpoint) is protected class.
Phil said:
I’m not sure why I wouldn’t use such a source, especially since it appears to be closest of the 3 to the truth of what happened.
Funny that. At last the message seems to be sinking in that birthers, particularly Orly and WND, distort the truth. If you want an accurate record of what happened, or what will happen – go to Politijab. They have a 100% record on predicting outcomes of cases, and will post the actual legal ruling – not orly’s fantasy version of it. Incidentally, I suggest anyone that wants to know what really happened in Keyes vs Obama read Judge Land’s ruling – again, not quite how Orly reported it.
Why anyone continues to trust anything Orly says is beyond me. Her misrepresentations are bizarre – they are clearly disprovable within hours, yet she continues. Delusional, stupid or wicked? Maybe all three.
The comments on Maj Cook — citizen soldier — retribution by yanking his clearance creates a major problem as there is specific procedures that must be followed before the clearance is taken away. At first, Maj Cook would have it pulled administratively — but this would not be sufficient reason to remove him from his job. Even being expedited, the entire process may take months. However, Maj Cook termination BEFORE the process was complete makes this whole process stink to high heaven.
Also Orly’s reputation just got tarnished after she apparently added the General’s name to the suit without his permission. She just lost an ally — and makes one question her judgment as a lawyer in such an important case.
It is plain to see that Cook’s boss was intimidated into firing him, but that is going to come back and bite someone. BUT this has nothing to do with the Obama fight as we are talking a Florida case dealing with retribution. Is Orly going to be involved here??? Cook would be better off finding another lawyer.
As to Orly’s case with Keyes, her enthusiasm and spirit is infectious, but I agree that she is out of her league when you see who is stacking the deck against her. What she’s done — and is doing — has earned her my respect. However, I’ve watched her public appearances from the start and I agree with most commentary that she gives out too much info. She needs to be like old Joe Friday (TV cop of long ago) who only wants “the facts…just the facts, Ma’am.” She can be the leader, but another public spokesman would be helpful.
In the Keyes case, she’s facing the entire US government legal corps, Obama’s private legal team and God knows who else. This is a David and Goliath fight — but this time if David (Orly) doesn’t get some backing, the cause is lost. SHE NEEDS HELP. Are all the lawyers in this country pro-Obama — or never want to do pro-bono work? This is the first case that MAY stand a chance of going forward on its “merits” — and as the judge said, “settled once and for all.” This is not one that is going to be dismissed on “standing.” ORLY NEEDS A TEAM OF LAWYERS — HIGH POWERED ONES IF POSSIBLE. Hopefully, Orly will accept others onto her team — if they are out there. This is too important to mess with.
GeorgetownJD,
Look up the information on Thomas Lowell Tucker, Kristian Menchaca, Byron Fouty, Alex Jimenez, Joseph Anzak. Terrorists don’t need an excuse. I would say the same to Major Cook regarding that aspect of his argument.
I have never heard of a security clearance surviving a refusal to follow orders. Have you?
Where was the refusal to follow orders? The only message implied by the reason given for revoking Cook’s orders was that a volunteer is able to unvolunteer by a certain date and therefore there was no reason for him to use the court for such an action. That was apparently the limit to which this civilian court acted.
If some choose to see actions taken as political or for some broader reasoning on the part of plaintiff – then that is to be ascertained as well through the courts. Before that is done there could be seen no basis for the removal of security clearances, except on some clause of “at will” by the authorities. Otherwise, yes, it would appear that measures taken against Cook could be seen as being beyond what was established thus far in this particular complaint being handled by the civilian court.
The employer would also be expected, in fairness, to abide solely by what is in any contract with the DOD governing employees IF they were specifically hired to comply only with a particular contract. Also, there would have to be shown whether Cook was employed solely through this contract with DOD or did he have other duties or was used in other ways by the employer. Unfortunately the civilian employer will be caught in the middle of any further suit. He is siding with the hand that feeds him!
Orly got a gift from the Judge and turned around and filed what amounts to an entirely different case. This shows Orly is in this for publicity and money. The only reason for her to kick the can down the road a few months, is to give her more chance to put herself into the limelight, get publicity and shake you folks down for more donations. But she just screwed her case, and all of you who are hoping on her. Throwing in the “100 social security numbers, and 10 California addresses” dossier puts this case on the crazy train to a dismissal. Except the dismissal will come next winter instead of this fall. Think about what her motivation is and ask yourselves why you think she is such a great hope for you. You are simply her meal ticket.
GeorgetownJD,
It is widely recognized that the US Soldier held by Taliban is most probably a lie. Second of all, you think that they need reasons beyond their religion and “foreign occupation” to recruit people? You know nothing about history or Islam by stating such foolish things.
Your link is tenuous at best, unhealthy (illogical) at worst. The latter is as probable as their lying about having a soldier.
Simple Interest says:
July 17, 2009 at 6:01 pm
“I wonder why so many posters have been silenced. I hope that you can start a “where are they now” file because they will soon find out the truth about Mr. Obama, and all of the nonsensical arguments will be made null. I am ready to see this unfold!!!”
I’ll tell you why I am mostly silent. I think Orly Taitz is a con-woman getting her 15 minutes of fame and as much $ as she can grub up on the way.
In the meantime, I have been busy calling, writing, bugging my Congress members and Senators, as well as every member of the House and Senate committees marking up the Health Care bill, to urge them to pass the Health Care bill with a public option available on Day ONE to ANY American who wants it. Right now OUR US Capitol is crawling with health care and pharma lobbyists throwing money at any representative or senator who will jam a stick in the spokes of the Health Care Reform bill.
I want Health Care Reform a lot more than I want to poke fun at you guys, Orly and her lost cause. By filing her first amended complaint in Keyes, really she filed an entirely different case, she showed you she’s not interested in justice, she’s interested in stringing out this process for as long as she can. Now why would she want to do that? Carter was going to hear her case right? Her foolishness will go on for the better part of the rest of the year. There will be plenty of time to mess with you folks down the road.
We are all still here. There is really nothing new to report. The Birthers are still 0 for 20 something or more in court motions and counting. Obama is still President and is going to remain there. Orly’s case in California will eventually be dismissed for valid constitutional reasons unless she blew the second chance to serve Obama that Judge Carter gave her and in that case he will probably dismiss it.
The most exciting things coming down the pike will be the resolution of the disbarment complaint against Orly and sanctions against both Orly and Berg that will eventually come.
Berg v Taitz may offer some entertainment from time to time until they all run out of money. Yes, Orly is a mail order lawyer. Phil pretty much admits it in his public letter to Orly.
Phil,
Some friendly advice: Asking Orly to be more like Berg is not a good way to get her to listen.
Simple Interest says:
Did you notice that her petition for a TRO in Cook v. Good and her motion for default judgment in Keyes v. Obama were both denied?
Observer:
He had orders in hand to deploy on July 15. He filed suit to prevent that ordered deployment. That, in case you were aware, is a rather spectacular and public refusal to follow orders.
Do not forget that he had options to achieve the end of noncompliance that did not constitute refusal. He did not choose tho avail himself of them.
And?
Ah…. am I to understand that you have never held a security clearance? That would explain your apparent confusion here.
First and foremost, the loss of a security clearance requires no basis whatsoever. A clearance is not a “right,” and the granting or retraction of a clearance is entirely at the discretion of the controlling authority. That said, there is not a complete absence of criteria for withholding a clearance, and by formally declaring himself a “conscientious objector” he explicitly committed an act that, by regulations, denies him continuance of his clearance.
Second, since it is not a “right,” there is no legal remedy for the loss of a security clearance. No court (civilian or military) has authority to review the decision by a command authority to grant, deny or revoke a security clearance.
Kalani:
No, there are not.
The loss of a security clearance requires no process beyond a command decision. You do realize that there is a national security implication to such clearances? Right?
You are simply making stuff up. Do you honestly think that something as a sensitive as access to national security secrets requires a process of “months” to protect? Thankfully for our safety, it does not.
The most recent excuse from the government as to why Cook was allowed to refuse service was that he volunteered for duty therefor he can also volunteer not to go — case closed. Only thing they did not explain was the government will bend over backwards to destroy your life if you do. They make the rules up as they go.