Hearing Will Challenge Obama's Eligibility

The New American ^ | May 20, 2010 | Raven Clabough

[OldDeckHand]

"Come on, picture biden with a hammer ... dont tell me you didnt laugh!"

What makes you think biden knows what a hammer is, let alone how to use one?

[OldDeckHand]

"As it stands, you are lying and I can't help you dig yourself out of your hole"

That's a lie? Hardly. That was a poor choice of words when quickly typing.

If that's the best you got, I'll sleep easy.

[PA-RIVER]

I watched a few good men the other night.

Jack Nicholson at Guantanamo.... its priceless....

If Lakin had Tom Cruise defending him .... Obama would be in big trouble. LOL

[BIGLOOK]

I just love specious arguments....they're never ending!

Here we are again comparing apples and oranges or in this case apples and.....durians?

[PA-RIVER]

Looks like Biden hit himself in the head with a hammer ...

[Lurking Libertarian]

Attorney John Hemenway was threatened with sanctions by a federal judge when he attempted to challenge Obama’s presidency. Hemenway welcomed the threat, however, as he believed it would lead to a “discovery hearing,” which would necessitate the search for documentation proving Obama’s eligibility. At that point, the court rescinded its sanction threats.

Nonsense. Hemenway was sanctioned; he appealed the sanctions order; and it was affirmed. There was no discovery permitted. Ditto with Orly Taitz's $20,000 sanctions award, which was also affirmed on appeal, with no discovery permitted.

[philman_36]

A new fact or set of facts that operates to defeat a claim even if the facts supporting that claim are true.
Affirmative defenses operate to limit, excuse or avoid a defendant's criminal culpability or civil liability, even if the facts of the plaintiff's claim are admitted or proven.
Many of these defenses fall into the "boilerplate" (stated in routine, non-specific language) category, but one or more of the defenses may help the defendant.

[edge919]

A president doesn't have to prove his eligibility to anyone but the people who place him on the ballot for office. That would be the 50 state Secretaries of State. The Electoral College also has a role to play, which they played.

There's no evidence that Obama proved his eligibility to any of these entities. Signing a form to get on a ballot doesn't prove eligibility. Lakin noticed the oversight and is trying to protect the Constitution. Wish we could say the same for the 50 secretraries of state (or 57 secretaries of state in Obama's mind).

Who doesn't have a role to play, here? The US military, that's who. It's not the role of the US military to inspect the Commander-in-Chief for constitutional infirmities.

How exactly do they defend the Constitution by standing down to a fraud??

[El Gato]

BTW, my opinion is reflective of virtually every career officer I have ever served with, many serving under Presidents that didn't vote for or particularly like or even respect as men.

But this has nothing do with liking, voting for or respecting. It has to do with Constitutional eligibility. You know, the Constitution, that document we swore to support and defend against all enemies, foreign and domestic. What sort of domestic enemies do you think it meant? The Tea Party crowd?

[El Gato]

anyone who hopes that this hearing will shed some light on the issue will soon see themselves disappointed.

This hearing is unlikely to, but the trial by Court Martial could be another matter.

But just as a thought experiment, what if it does, and the trial judge rules that the ultimate order giver had no authority to issue any such order, making it unlawful. Then what? Does the government appeal the ruling?

[philman_36]

That was a poor choice of words when quickly typing.
Richard Blumenthal made a poor choice of words too.
HANNITY: All right, Jim or — do either of you believe the spin of Blumenthal? Either one of you. Jim?
NICHOLSON: No, not at all. I mean it's preposterous. The guy is a trained lawyer. He's very precise about what he says, always has been.

If that's the best you got, I'll sleep easy.
I'll sleep easy as well.

[OldDeckHand]

'There's no evidence that Obama proved his eligibility to any of these entities." Yes, there is. He was elected by the Electors and those results were certified, without objection. The military has no role to play with respect to presidential eligibility.

This alleged fraud is a civilian crime. The military doesn't investigate, prosecute civilian crimes, nor does it enforce civilian law on civilians.

If Obama has committed fraud, then this is something for the Congress to sort out, not the US Armed Forces. That's what my copy of the Constitution say, anyways.

[philman_36]

...based upon almost 25 years as a JAG...

The guy is a trained lawyer.

[PA-RIVER]

“How exactly do they defend the Constitution by standing down to a fraud?? “

To be honest, that is a minefield. Imagine if the Military refused to take orders because Bush was “Selected not Elected”.

However ..... in this case, the Military should allow discovery to clear the air. Its just a BC and some college records. We all know Obama to be honest and intelligent, so there should be nothing to fear about discovery. He has also stated that he wants transparency, so this is a good thing.

[OldDeckHand]

"The guy is a trained lawyer. "

Which guy is a trained lawyer? Lakin is a medical doctor. His civilian defense counsel has no practical military law experience.

[philman_36]

Which guy is a trained lawyer?
Didn't you spend "almost 25 years as a JAG"?

[OldDeckHand]

Yes, I did.

I still don't know which guy, you're talking about. You said to m, ""The guy is a trained lawyer."". That's it.

[philman_36]

I still don't know which guy, you're talking about.
Read 131.

Didn't you spend "almost 25 years as a JAG"?
Yes, I did.

Would you consider yourself to be a trained lawyer?

[OldDeckHand]

I see, now you're comparing me to a guy who lied about his Vietnam service. Nice

Have you always been an ass, or is this something that you've had to work on and develop?

[philman_36]

Have you always been an ass, or is this something that you've had to work on and develop?
I'm not an ass, I'm an ogre!

I see, now you're comparing me to a guy who lied about his Vietnam service.
I'm making a comparison, but it isn't about a guy who lied about his military service.

Would you consider yourself to be a trained lawyer?