. . . . Check out # 144.
Posted on 08/02/2010 5:29:53 AM PDT by captjanaway
Washington, D.C., August 2, 2010. The Army has now referred charges against LTC Terrence Lakin for a General Court Martial. This action triggered the appointment of a Military Judge to preside over the trial, which will likely be scheduled before October, and held in Washington, D.C. at Ft. McNair.
On August 6, 2010 at Ft. McNair in Washington, D.C., the court will convene for the purpose of Judge Lind taking Lakin’s plea to the charges which consist of “missing movement” and of refusing to obey orders. Today Lakin stated: “I am not guilty of these charges, and will plead ‘not guilty’ to them because of my conviction that our Commander-in-Chief may be ineligible under the United States Constitution to serve in that highest of all offices. The truth matters. The Constitution matters. If President Obama is a natural born citizen then the American people deserve to see proof, and if he is not, then I believe the orders in this case were illegal.” If convicted, Lakin faces up to four years at hard labor in a federal penitentiary.
(Excerpt) Read more at safeguardourconstitution.com. ...
Sir,
Your arguments are always solid and well founded in the law, however I would like to raise a point that I believe needs consideration.
I would ask you to consider the possibility that this officer fully understands that he is about to be convicted and will have no chance to argue his main thesis.
Perhaps the game is more complex than it seems.
It is odd, is it not, that an highly educated and intelligent officer would make such an idiotic move.
No reasonable person with full understanding would assume that he would be able to force the President to produce the papers he has requested.
So why.....
Mental breakdown with delusions of grandeur?
Bad legal advise?
I think not, and I am reasonably certain you agree.
Sometimes brave men are called upon to lead - even when the issue is in serious doubt.
If I might be so bold (being that your perceptive skills are, thus far, nearly perfect) ask you the following:
Where do you think the appeal will be heard?
Who do you believe will represent him on appeal?
Huck
My opinions are merely predicts, but I'm happy to put them on the record so that we can look back later when we know the outcome. The judge will deny its admission. The case will be appealed, but will not be successful at any level. The case will finally be appealed to the Supreme Court who will decline to hear it, affirming the judgment of the Court Martial. If you go back to my earlier posts, you will discover that I predicted that charges would go to a Court Martial. That happened today even though many on this forum predicted that the charges would be dismissed to avoid embarrassing Obama. This case has nothing to do with Obama, and LTC Lakin should be using his medical skills to treat soldiers in combat rather than playing this silly little political game.
Perhaps LTC Lakin ought to be using his medical skills to treat wounded soldiers. No, not perhaps. That’s exactly what he ought to be doing.
Chris Strunk says:
Monday, August 2, 2010 at 4:38 PM
Strunk is in opposition to a summary judgment filed by the DOJ in my case Strunk v DOS et al.
DCD 08-cv-2234 seeks further disclosure in regards to DOS spoliation of documents in regards to my request under FOIA the passport and related records of Stanley Ann Dunham et al..
I have been awaiting these records and more since October 2008 when I first filed a FOIA request related to my active case in New York Supreme Court where the records will be used when the disposition of the Summary Judgment is complete;
Hopefully, I will receive the additional records that exist from 1960 onward too.
Clearly when the DOS release is combined with the US Customs and Immigration service release to Ken Allen amounting to about 90 pages shows that Lolo Soetoro and Ann Soetoro were having difficulties that would only explain the removal of BHO from her passport in 1968
especially since the Indonesian Government in Soetoro’s words, any American, was in jeopardy there in Indonesia due to the anti-American feelings”
is shown at page 103 of
attached to the U.S. Government memo of January 12, 1966 with pages marked 000077 through 000080
therein at page 000078 regarding Lolo Soetoros request for a INA section 212(e) waiver and two year extension for his stay in the USA with Ann Soetoro,
(that according to the US Government document of August 6, 1968 all three returned to Indonesia on July 20, 1966);
Soetoro states:
“Most importantly, anti-American feeling has reached a feverish pitch under the direction of the Indonesian communist party, and I have been advised by both family and friends in Indonesia that it would be dangerous to endeavor to return with my wife at the present time.
Of secondary importance is the fact that my wife does not yet speak Indonesian,
Not only would she be forced to cut short her college education, but she would be left in a position of isolation in the community,”
It appears from the cross comparison on both the Customs and DOS FOIA released documents that
on October 20, 1971 Stanley Ann Dunham Soetoro (SADS) and BHO (a.k.a Saebarkah Soetoro) together boarded Pan Am Airlines Flight 812 unaccompanied by Lolo M. Soetoro in Djakarta Indonesia
and arrived in Honolulu Hawaii on October 21, 1971
and sought entry into the USA on an expired Passport issued July 19, 1965
according to the DS 1423 Form for REQUEST BY UNITED STATES NATIONAL FOR AND REPORT OF EXCEPTION TO SECTION 53.1, TITLE 22 OF THE CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS
with use of the expired Passport of July 19, 1965 shown as page 6 of
It is important to discover whether or not based upon SADS’ August 13, 1968 Passport Renewal Application to DOS shown as page 3 and 4 of
SADS excluded Saebarkah Soetoro (BHO)from her Passport of July 19, 1965;
and therefore, left no way for BHO
who is presumed to also have the right to an Indonesian Passport under Lolo Soetoro
to reenter the USA with SADS except by use of the expired July 19 1965 passport.
That Declarant
among other items of interest in the analysis presented by Dr Corsi in his Worldnet Daily Article (WND)
takes issue with the insinuation that the 1965 edition of SADS passport was only good for 3 years when in fact it was to expire July 18, 1970 according to the actual reference by the US Government shown in the upper right corner of the application located at page 3;
however in August 13 1968 SADS made an early application to renew the 1965 to remove BHO (a.k.a. Saebarkah Soetoro) from her own passport.
At that time, Lolo Soetoro was in a difficult effort with the State Department and US Customs and Immigration to obtain reentry into the USA and needed to reflect Saebarkah Soetoro (BHO) as an Indonesian for his own safety.
That Saebarkah Soetoro (BHO) according to his own writing in 1971 would re-enter back into the USA to live with his Grandma Madelyn Dunham
Except for the fact that the Exception request for use of the expired July 19, 1965 passport
without use of an American passport as Saebarkah Soetoro as an Indonesian citizen
which he was also entitled to an Indonesian Passport made without being on SADS renewed Passport of August 13 1968
made it easier for Saebarkah Soetoro / BHO to travel and obtain a renewed Indonesian Passport,
rather than a British or even Kenyan passport that would be more difficult to explain or obtain to the Indonesian Government
(having a USA passport there in Indonesian would dangerously expose Lolo Soetoro to government scrutiny since BHO was born in Kenya not the USA was adopted by Lolo Soetoro as a Indonesian citizen).
Thereafter 1971, Saebarkah Soetoro living in the USA went to the Indonesian Embassy in Hawaii
to obtain or renew the Indonesian passport
as part of his college funding program
and that in 1981 through 1984 was then used while attending Columbia University
to enter Indonesia, Pakistan and Afghanistan
while working for Zbigniew Brzezinski then of the Scholl of Foreign Affairs and the National Security Council with the Carter Administration and Reagan Administration transition.
Found at ThePostEmail
Sir,
You are certainly entitled to your opinion. There are few callings greater than “to treat the ill”.
However, to lead (at the risk of personal destruction) when other will not - is a calling of the highest order as well.
Do you believe that the professional cadre of the American military is concerned with the presidency of Mr. Obama?
Are you familiar with the term “stalking horse”?
Huck
. . . . Check out # 144.
Thank you for your afterbirther perspective.
Excuse me, but who are you to tell me I am ‘out of control’ when a poster who purports to be a soldier doesn’t even know what his Oath of office is ? And then bolts from any discussion of it. Maybe you didn’t read HIS idea of his oath as an alleged soldier? NOT A WORD about the Constitution that is part of every officers and every enlisted soldier’s oath. I suspect he’s not in the Army; if he is, he should go back and review the Oath he did take.
Both Oaths, officers and enlisted, begin with “support and defend the Constitution of the United States.” Enlisted goes on about obeying orders of the POTUS and officers. Officers’ oath for good reason doesn’t have that obeying orders language. Nary a word about the president.
I would not have advised Lakin to pursue the path he is on, but that was his decision. I suspect he’s been in the Army longer than our friend has been alive. He knows the entire drill, and chose this path. He has, in fact, already done a tour in Afghanistan. I don’t know what ‘real soldiers’ you’ve spoken to who have divined Col Lakin’s mental processes in coming to a career-ending decision, but those military officers I know think similarly to Lakin about the eligibility of the sitting POTUS, but have not been willing to let their careers be destroyed by challenging it.
Well said.
Hmmm Looks like we've got still another name he has used. Illinois Bar association should be notified at the very least.
Looks like there was a bit of fruit produced from SADOs passport after all.
Also in the just released 97 pages of Freedom of Information Act request documents is this memo from 1967:
Memo to file
A 14 128 294
Sept. 14, 1967
Pursuant to inquiry from Central office regarding the status of the applicants’ [Lolo Soetoro] spouses’ child by a former marriage.
The person in question is a united states citizen by virtue of his birth in Honolulu, Hawaii Aug. 4, 1961. He is living with the applicants’ spouse in Honolulu, Hawaii. He is considered the applicants step-child, within the meaning of Sec. 101(b)(1)(B), of the act, by virtue of the marriage of the applicant to the childs’ mother on March 15, 1965.
W. L. Mix
The memo quoted above is on page 38 of the documents.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/35192432/Lolo-Soetoro-U-S-Records-Allen-v-DHS-State-and-Allen-v-USCIS-FOIA-Releases-Final-7-29-10
Where does anyone get the idea that someone ineligible to the office of President can ever be President?
You can remove a President in one of four ways:
But if he's not eligible, he's not President, and never was. Elections, oath taking, etc aside. No one, No One, has certified his eligibility, only his election. The votes were properly cast, but properly cast electoral votes cannot make someone who is not eligible, suddenly eligible. Impeachment is for President, not ineligible usurpers.
The courts get their powers from Art. III of the Constitution, which says in part:
You can remove a President in one of four ways:
...
Section. 2. The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;
This would be a case arising under Article II of the Constitution, and thus the federal courts have jurisdiction to decide it.
How many names does one person need? Who created this guy?
The officer's oath does not mention obeying the orders of the President or officers appointed over them. It only mentions supporting and defending the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic. (As does the enlisted oath, but it does have the obeying orders language as well).
whoa! SEE #144!
The plot thickens!
Thanks, Lucy!
Thanks for the ping!
are your eyes popping out yet?? :)
LOLOL!
Well, well well......
You moron, officers take no such oath. Get your facts straight. They don’t take an oath to obey the faux president you fool.
Ty for the ping.... what a tangled web we weave .......
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.