Replies

So then you DO agree that Lind said Joseph Stalin could be President and it would be “irrelevant” to the lawfulness of Lakin’s orders?

Let me lay this out flat. AFter 9-11-01 Congress authorized the use of force to fight terrorism, at the sole discretion and decision of THE PRESIDENT. The lawfulness of combat operations in any particular foreign country was specifically made by Congress to be TOTALLY DEPENDENT ON THE DECISION OF THE PRESIDENT. A person legally able to “act as President” can order troops to Iran right now if he so desires. Nobody from SecDef down to (for instance) company commanders can do that right now; they have to wait until they have authorization from THE PRESIDENT, according to Congress’ legal authorization to use force. Those are the conditional terms of Congress’ legal authorization; they are critical to the lawfulness of ANY foreign combat operations against terrorism.

The 20th Amendment says that if the President elect FAILS TO QUALIFY by the beginning of his term, the Vice President elect must “act as President” until a President shall have qualified.

Joseph Stalin would fail to qualify. Every time. He’s not eligible to be President unless he is a natural born US citizen, and he can never be that. Joseph Stalin could NEVER lawfully “act as President” according to the 20th Amendment of the US Constitution. No vote of Congress can get him to qualify. No electoral vote can get him to qualify. There is no way he can qualify. Period.

There are no orders that Joseph Stalin could ever give that would be lawful because the 20th Amendment would always prohibit him from “acting as President”.

If people didn’t know he failed to qualify he might act under “color of authority”, and his orders must be obeyed under the de facto officer doctrine UNTIL IT IS DETERMINED THAT HE ACTED APART FROM THE CONSENT OF THE CONSTITUTION. That doesn’t meant that his orders were ever LAWFUL (something which can only be determined when the evidence is examined and it is seen who the 20th Amendment COMMANDS to “act as President”). And without the approval of a Constitutionally-acting President, there is no authorization to use force, because Congress left that decision to the President to decide. If the person who is Constitutionally required to act as President (Joe Biden) did not decide to approve additional forces in Afghanistan, then that use of force FAILS TO COMPLY with the terms in Congress’ authorization to use force. Without the lawful order of Joe Biden, all orders down the chain of command lack the legal authorization of Congress because they failed to meet the conditions of the authorization. They are UNLAWFUL.

Joseph Stalin could never qualify and thus could never lawfully order combat under the terms of the Authorization to Use Force. If the chain of command implemented combat operations without meeting the legal requirements of Cognress’ Authorization to Use Force, those implementing orders would all be unlawful.

The ONLY WAY to know if the orders were lawful is by knowing which man is required by the 20th Amendment to “act as President” - Barack Obama, or Joe Biden.

The 20th Amendment makes no exceptions. It doesn’t say that if the President elect takes an oath then the requirement to qualify is null and void. It doesn’t say that Congress certifying the President elect as the electoral winner nullifies the requirement to qualify. (In fact, it specifically says that the President elected by the voters and certified by Congress can still “fail to qualify” - and in that situation is Constitutionally DISABLED from “acting as President”.)

None of those things could get Joseph Stalin to “qualify”. And none of those things could get Barack Obama to “qualify” either.

Lind had one job: to find out whose approval for combat operations would fulfill the conditions of Congress’ authorization to use force, so she could determine whether Lakin had disobeyed a lawful order (the charge against him), or had done the lesser crime of failing to obey an order he was required to obey. She should have ordered the SecDef to file a Quo Warranto case on behalf of Terry Lakin, to have the judiciary determine the facts of Obama’s birth so it could be determined who can lawfully authorize foreign combat operations under the Authorization to Use Force.

If she had done so, the military would not be deciding who is President OR who can “act as President” - the civilian courts would be REQUIRED to give our military officers the answers they need in order to be able to keep their oaths. No problem with the military overstepping its bounds. The judge could have simply forced the SecDef to do what integrity should already have compelled him to do, when Lakin came forward for clarification in the first place.

There would have been no “political issue” problem because the 20th Amendment gave Congress no role in deciding who would “act as President” if the President elect failed to qualify; they are only given the responsibility if BOTH the President elect and Vice President elect failed to qualify - and they have already enacted law giving the order of succession so that job is already done.

There would have been no problem with “standing”. The SecDef would automatically have standing.

It would have been a win-win. It would have been right. But it wouldn’t have served the communist-Islamist coup, and that’s why the powers-that-be would not let Denise Lind do what both her oath and the US Constitution compelled her to do.