As I noted on Friday, Orly Taitz has embarked on her latest inane effort to remove President Obama from office with the help of a U.S. Army Major who doesn’t want to go to Afghanistan:
U.S. Army Maj. Stefan Frederick Cook, set to deploy to Afghanistan, says he shouldn’t have to go.
Barack Obama was never eligible to be president because he wasn’t born in the United States.
Cook’s lawyer, Orly Taitz, who has also challenged the legitimacy of Obama’s presidency in other courts, filed a request last week in federal court seeking a temporary restraining order and status as a conscientious objector for his client.
In the 20-page document — filed July 8 with the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia — the California-based Taitz asks the court to consider granting his client’s request based upon Cook’s belief that Obama is not a natural-born citizen of the United States and is therefore ineligible to serve as commander-in-chief of the U.S. Armed Forces.
Cook further states he “would be acting in violation of international law by engaging in military actions outside the United States under this President’s command. … simultaneously subjecting himself to possible prosecution as a war criminal by the faithful execution of these duties.”
It turns out that Cook isn’t just any retired military officer, he’s also a frequent contributor to the far-right Free Republic, where he’s been a member since 2003. So, the fact that he’s signed on to the wacky birther crusade is not at all surprising.
Here’s Orly’s Motion for a TRO, which will be heard Thursday in Federal Court in Columbus, GA:
Cook’s case is remarkably similar to Hollister v. Sotero, a case that was pending in the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C. before it was dismissed. In that case, the Plaintiff was a retired military officer who was arguing that he needed to have the issue of Obama’s citizenship resolved so that he would know whether or not he was obligated to obey any orders he might receive if he was recalled to duty. The Judge dismissed the case in a sharply worded Order.
While Cook’s case is different in that he has actually received Orders to report for duty, I expect that his claims will be dealt with in much the same manner.
Orly’s got other problems here, of course, not the least of them being that she isn’t admitted to practice in the State of Georgia, or before the Federal Courts there, and apparently has not associated with local counsel as required by the Rules of Court.
Orly not following the rules; where have I heard that one before ?