Posted on 10/09/2010 9:21:44 PM PDT by patlin
Who is Thune’s Armed Services Personnel Staffer, John Costic & What are His Credentials Regarding USMCJ?
Posted by constitutionallyspeaking on October 9, 2010
I hadn’t posted this as I have been waiting for the Thune staffer, John Costic, responsible for this reply to my request regarding Lt. Col. Terry Lakin. John has had a week to answer my questions regarding the reply he sent on behalf of Thune. I guess he thinks he is really clever. I’ll let you decide. Did Thune actually see the request or did Costic act independently regarding the grave situtation of Lt. Col. Terry Lakin, a highly decorated Army officer & battle tested doctor to the brave men & women in harms way?
original request:
Sept. 24, 2010
Dear Sen. Thune,
As a member of the Armed Forces Committee & member of the sub-committee on Personnel, I am imploring you to please take this seriously & take immediate action.
The Commander in Chief has begun court martial proceedings against Lt Col Terry Lakin. Now Lt Col Lakin is being refused access to documents that are critical to his defense. The most current ruling from the military judge who refused release of Obama’s original vault birth certificate & ALL school & college records stated:
Sept 2, 2010 Fort Meade, Maryland
“The potential for embarrassment from multifarious pronouncements by various departments on one question are uniquely powerful to ensure that courts-martial do not become the vehicle for adjudicating the legality of political decisions and to ensure the military’s capacity to maintain good order and discipline in the armed forces.”
http://www.greeleygazette.com/press/?p=5329
If there is no question as to the location of Obama’s birth, then why for over 2 years now has he been fighting in courts all over the country to keep his original vault records from seeing the light of day. This is “NOT” the actions of an honorable commander of the US military.
In July of this year, in a blatant disregard of orders of a federal judge, the US State Dept. released only partial passport records of Stanley Ann Dunham-Soetoro.
However, after careful study of the files that were released, what the records do conclusively show is that in 1968 Barack-Barry-Hussein-Obama II-Soetoro-Soebarkah was “NOT” a US citizen.
http://constitutionallyspeaking.wordpress.com/2010/09/24/us-state-dept-confirms-obama-not-a-us-citizen-in-1968/
This has gone on far too long & it’s time to put politics & elections aside for the sake of our nation & our national security.
I am trusting, that in light of all this new evidence, you will do the honorable thing and put your country before yourself. Please do the right & moral thing by serving your state & country as an upright public servant of honor & integrity by once & for all putting an end to this abuse of political power currently being displayed by Obama & his administration. I implore you to request the immediate release of all the records requested on behalf of Lt Col Terry Lakin by his defense team.
No one is above the law, especially those public servants who took an oath to protect & defend it.
Respectfully,
Linda Melin
http://constitutionallyspeaking.wordpress.com/
I will be in contact with your office on Monday, Sept. 28, 2010. The day of the next hearing for Lt Col Lakin in his legal defenses efforts to get the vital records for his defense released.
_______________________________________________
Lt Col Terry Lakin Defense @ http://www.safeguardourconstitution.com/
Reply from John Costic, Thune staffer on Armed Services Personnel Issues:
Correspondence from Senator Thune
correspondence_reply@thune.senate.gov
To: xxxxxxx@unitelsd.com
September 30, 2010
(address redacted by me)
Dear Linda:
Thank you for contacting me about the qualifications necessary to serve as President of the United States. I appreciate hearing from you.
Like you, I believe we must vigorously uphold the provisions of our Constitution. Although all three branches of the federal government must abide by the Constitution, the interpretation and applicability of its terms are usually determined by the judicial branch.
As you may know, Article II of the United States Constitution states the requirements for an individual to be President. A presidential candidate must be a natural born citizen of the United States, be 35 years of age, and have been a resident within the United States for 14 years.
On December 8, 2008, the Supreme Court of the United States turned down an appeal from Leo Donofrio, a New Jersey man who argued that President Barack Obama is ineligible to serve as president because of the British citizenship of his father. A similar appeal by a Connecticut man, Cort Wrotnowski, was also rejected by the Supreme Court on December 15, 2008.
On July 28, 2009, the Senate passed S. Res. 225 by unanimous consent. This nonbinding resolution, which commemorates the 50th anniversary of the entry of Hawaii into the United States as the 50th State, also states that, “the 44th President of the United States, Barack Obama, was born in Hawaii on August 4, 1961.”
Thanks again for contacting me. If you would like additional information on my activities in the Senate, please feel free to visit my website, http://thune.senate.gov. Please keep in touch.
Kindest regards,
JOHN THUNE
United States Senator
Who is John Costic & what are his credentials regarding the USMCJ? Or for that matter, what is his education background regarding the US Constitution?
Impeachment is the only remedy available short of the next election. I doubt that the politicians will have the stomach for it.
Probably not.
The failure of congress, et. Al. to properly check credentials but instead be a rubber stamp does not make President Obama qualified to be POTUS. It may make him “President” but it “could” be in disregard to the U.S. Constitution.
Of course the proper constitutional means MUST be followed to remove a constitutionally unqualified POTUS. However, that cannot occur until the evidence, if any, is fully discovered and made public.
Full public disclosure is what is wanted, that is what LTC/Dr. Lakin wants. It really is that simple. IF the currentl POTUS is constitutionally qualified, and not just allowed to enter office unchallenged, then there is nothing to be concerned about. His proof (copies of original documents - not a COLB) of eligibility would silence most of those with concerns. Of course, it will never silence all.
I fail to see why the right of discovery in the LTC/Dr. Lakin case hurts either the current POTUS or the military. I only see it as a plus. Ultimately, I believe it would stregthen military discipline. If I didn’t think so, I would be opposing discovery.
All the legalese in the world is useless if it serves only to suppress what “may” be truth.
The failure of congress, et. Al. to properly check credentials but instead be a rubber stamp does not make President Obama qualified to be POTUS. It may make him “President” but it “could” be in disregard to the U.S. Constitution.
Of course the proper constitutional means MUST be followed to remove a constitutionally unqualified POTUS. However, that cannot occur until the evidence, if any, is fully discovered and made public.
Full public disclosure is what is wanted, that is what LTC/Dr. Lakin wants. It really is that simple. IF the currentl POTUS is constitutionally qualified, and not just allowed to enter office unchallenged, then there is nothing to be concerned about. His proof (copies of original documents - not a COLB) of eligibility would silence most of those with concerns. Of course, it will never silence all.
I fail to see why the right of discovery in the LTC/Dr. Lakin case hurts either the current POTUS or the military. I only see it as a plus. Ultimately, I believe it would stregthen military discipline. If I didn’t think so, I would be opposing discovery.
The reason discovery hasn’t been granted in the Lakin case is because of the actual charges against Lakin which have nothing to do with the eligibility of Obama.
Lieutenant Colonels do not get to challenge the legal orders of their DIRECT superior officers. The Court has already ruled that the orders that Lakin ignored were legal orders. Lieutenant Colonel Lakin didn’t get on a plane in Baltimore and fly to Charlotte, North Carolina when he was ordered to do so. Under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, that’s the charge. Then, when ordered to explain why he didn’t get on that plane by two direct superior officers, he failed to report to their offices. Under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, those are the only charges. Lakin had announced in advance that he planned to disobey those orders so there is no possibility of him not being guilty, however jury nullification in support of his previous service and his exemplary record may come into play.
The reasons for Lakin’s refusal of orders might help to mitigate his sentence.
The military has never taken kindly to officers who decide for themselves which orders of their direct superiors that they will follow and which orders they will ignore, regardless of the reason for ignoring the legal order.
The appropriate judicial way to uncover Obama’s eligibility is via a Grand Jury investigation with subpoena power and the ability to compel witnesses to testify under oath.
Grand juries have always been used in cases of questions of presidential culpability in criminal acts. Election fraud is a crime. Grand juries were used in Watergate, Iran-Contra, Whitewater and CIA Leaks-Valerie Plame. Those are just a few examples.
In order to get on the ballot in several states, Barack Obama HIMSELF (not Nancy Pelosi or the DNC) had to sign official statements saying that he was eligible and that he was a natural born citizen of the United States. Those signed documents would be the evidence needed to launch a Grand Jury investigation.
Obama signed such a statement in December, 2007 in order to get on the ballot in Arizona. Here’s a link to a scanned image of the document that I am referencing: http://moniquemonicat.files.wordpress.com/2008/12/arizona-election-nomination-papers-barack-obama-signed-statement-he-is-a-natural-born-citizen2.pdf
Since the state of Hawai’i through its Governor, its Attorney General, its Director of Health and its Registar of Vital Statistics has verified Obama’s birth in that state and since a state court of appeals has ruled that a person born in the United States does not need two American citizen parents to be considered a natural born citizen and since no court and no credible evidence has yet been presented to counter the state of Hawai’i or the decision of the Indiana Court of Appeals, the presumption of innocence is clearly on the side of the current president.
This would not be the first time that there were political opponents of a president who refused to accept the legitimacy of his claim to office. President Rutherford B. Hayes, for example was known as “his fradulency” and “Rutherfraud” B. Hayes for his entire term in office.
Why we even had a president whose election was considered so illegitimate that half of the nation left the union in protest. I think his name was “Lincoln.”
“a state court of appeals has ruled that a person born in the United States does not need two American citizen parents to be considered a natural born citizen and since no court and no credible evidence has yet been presented to counter the state of Hawai’i or the decision of the Indiana Court of Appeals, the presumption of innocence is clearly on the side of the current president.”
More legalese and very little common sense. Sorry, but on issues of the U.S. Constitution a “state” court means squat (at least to me and many). I want a ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court which is the ONLY court that can speak definitively on the issue. In regards to Hawaii....too many things that are strange about the statements issued...those have been repeatedly discussed. Quite frankly, like many officials, I think the Hawaiian ones “could” be lying. Never should I have to take someone’s “word” on it. Show us the originals....or stay silent in their case.
I find your saying President Obama has a “presumption of innocence” to be humorous. You say he isn’t on trial, but you defend him as if he was.
Other than a poor ruling by COL Lind, I have yet to see anyone provide definitive high level precedence that a constitutionally unqualified POTUS doesn’t taint the chain of command. Indeed, others have claimed that a order was illegal because of a war being illegal, but never that the POTUS was not properly POTUS. I have read multiple textual quotes, here on FR, that make it extremely clear that all military authority draws its power from the POTUS.
I work full time with the military both as a civilian and reserve “field grade” officer (BTW when I was reappointed in 2007 is was “by direction of the president” on my orders). I am seeing discipline decline like after Vietnam (I have been in and out of military service since 1972). It is my opinion, as an officer and citizen, that military discipline would be more fully upheld and stregthened IF the LTC/Dr. Lakin trial were to proceed under a more open defense of the LTC’s chosing.
To serve in the military, one gives up many civil liberties afforded to regular citizens. It must be this way, and it is proper. However, when issues are potentially momentous, it is extremely important that military trials are done correctly with the defendant being allowed a full defense of their chosing. If this person isn’t given a full chance to defend, it weakens everything.
The military got a bad image for the “Billy Mitchel” court martial. We don’t want to repeat that again.
All, to include the military, are under the “rule of law.” That is not the “rule of lawyers” with excessive legalese.
Bottom line is that I, and others, consider the constitutional legitimacy of the current POTUS to be of the greatest importance for the national defense. Silence by those responsible to root out irregularities scares me, as does the attempt to use legal formalities to silence a brave and honorable man (LTC/Dr. Lakin) that is attempting to do what others have failed to do.
BTW - Just because I disagree with you doesn’t mean I hold you in contempt or fail to see you point of view. I just means I disagree and see things differently.
IF your concern is to uphold military discipline, which is the case for non-sequiter, then I can respect that. I just don’t think military discipline will be harmed by allowing full discovery in the Lakin court martial. I believe it will ultimately streghten it. That is my opinion, and I don’t equate my opinion with fact.
More legalese and very little common sense. Sorry, but on issues of the U.S. Constitution a “state” court means squat (at least to me and many). I want a ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court which is the ONLY court that can speak definitively on the issue. In regards to Hawaii....too many things that are strange about the statements issued...those have been repeatedly discussed. Quite frankly, like many officials, I think the Hawaiian ones “could” be lying. Never should I have to take someone’s “word” on it. Show us the originals....or stay silent in their case.
I find your saying President Obama has a “presumption of innocence” to be humorous. You say he isn’t on trial, but you defend him as if he was.
Other than a poor ruling by COL Lind, I have yet to see anyone provide definitive high level precedence that a constitutionally unqualified POTUS doesn’t taint the chain of command. Indeed, others have claimed that a order was illegal because of a war being illegal, but never that the POTUS was not properly POTUS. I have read multiple textual quotes, here on FR, that make it extremely clear that all military authority draws its power from the POTUS.
I work full time with the military both as a civilian and reserve “field grade” officer (BTW when I was reappointed in 2007 is was “by direction of the president” on my orders). I am seeing discipline decline like after Vietnam (I have been in and out of military service since 1972). It is my opinion, as an officer and citizen, that military discipline would be more fully upheld and stregthened IF the LTC/Dr. Lakin trial were to proceed under a more open defense of the LTC’s chosing.
To serve in the military, one gives up many civil liberties afforded to regular citizens. It must be this way, and it is proper. However, when issues are potentially momentous, it is extremely important that military trials are done correctly with the defendant being allowed a full defense of their chosing. If this person isn’t given a full chance to defend, it weakens everything.
The military got a bad image for the “Billy Mitchel” court martial. We don’t want to repeat that again.
All, to include the military, are under the “rule of law.” That is not the “rule of lawyers” with excessive legalese.
Bottom line is that I, and others, consider the constitutional legitimacy of the current POTUS to be of the greatest importance for the national defense. Silence by those responsible to root out irregularities scares me, as does the attempt to use legal formalities to silence a brave and honorable man (LTC/Dr. Lakin) that is attempting to do what others have failed to do.
Presidential elections in the United States are conducted on a state by state basis with an accumulation of Electoral College votes from each state plus the District of Columbia determining who shall be the president.
If the state of Indiana had invalidated Obama’s electoral college votes on the basis that he was ineligible to receive those votes because his father was not an American citizen, other states would have followed suit and Obama would not have had enough electoral college votes to assume the office.
We’ll all have to wait and see whether Judge Lind’s rulings on lawfulness of LtC. Lakin’s orders and discovery are upheld by the Army Court of Criminal Appeals or whether those rulings are reversed. If Colonel Lind was wrong on denying discovery to LtC. Lakin, she will be reversed.
Colonel Lind granted the Lakin defense motion to postpone the Court Martial so that they could have time to appeal her ruling to the Army Court of Criminal Appeals.
I was under the impression that ALL defendants in civil and criminal actions in the United States had a presumption of innocence, not just Obama. Am I wrong about that?
Does the Constitution or any state or federal law require that Obama prove that he is not guilty of election fraud?
Or rather does the Constitution and the laws of the land, both federal or state require that Obama’s accusers prove that he is guilty of election fraud?
Does Lieutenant Colonel Terry Lakin have to prove that he did not disobey orders or does the US Army have to prove that he did disobey orders?
I never said anything remotely like “Obama is not on trial.” There have already been 72 adjudicated lawsuits concerning Obama’s eligibility. He has been constantly “on trial” since the primary election season. So you were mistaken about that.
I still maintain that a Grand Jury investigation with subpoena power and the ability to call witnesses to testify under oath is the best way to resolve the Obama eligibility issue.
“We conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are “natural born citizens” for Article II, Section I purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents...”—Indiana Court of Appeals in Ankeny et. al. v The Governor of Indiana, Mitch Daniels, November 12, 2009
The statements above are the two hurdles that those challenging Obama’s eligibility must overcome.
You may not accept the word of Hawai’i state government officials, but judges and justice do. You may not accept the decisions of state courts, but its obvious that the federal judiciary does.
BTW - Just because I disagree with you doesn’t mean I hold you in contempt or fail to see you point of view. I just means I disagree and see things differently.
IF your concern is to uphold military discipline, which is the case for non-sequiter, then I can respect that. I just don’t think military discipline will be harmed by allowing full discovery in the Lakin court martial. I believe it will ultimately streghten it. That is my opinion, and I don’t equate my opinion with fact.
“You may not accept the word of Hawai’i state government officials, but judges and justice do. You may not accept the decisions of state courts, but its obvious that the federal judiciary does.”
Officials have never lied before, and all courts make the correct decisions? :-) Kinda speaks for itself.
Officials have never lied before, and all courts make the correct decisions? :-) Kinda speaks for itself.
“Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others that have been tried.”—Sir Winston Churchill
“It’s a pretty easy argument to make when you think that anyone who disagrees with you is a liar and any court decision that goes against your point of view is incorrect.”
True, but isn’t it also a little naive, my respected friend, to be too trusting?
It just so happens in my lifetime I have seen the State Registar of Vital Records (the keeper of Birth Certificates) go down for extreme corruption in my home State. He took himself the commissioner or health and all the legal staff with him for complicity.
Also, it is no stretch to say that many many wrong court decisions have been made. Goodness, look at the nonsense that comes out California courts in reference to the homosexual marriage issue. No, I’m afraid courts are not always to be trusted. That is reality.
True, but isn’t it also a little naive, my respected friend, to be too trusting?
It just so happens in my lifetime I have seen the State Registar of Vital Records (the keeper of Birth Certificates) go down for extreme corruption in my home State. He took himself the commissioner or health and all the legal staff with him for complicity.
Also, it is no stretch to say that many many wrong court decisions have been made. Goodness, look at the nonsense that comes out California courts in reference to the homosexual marriage issue. No, I’m afraid courts are not always to be trusted. That is reality.
O.K., that makes sense! {sarc]
“So you really think that a Republican Governor would lie and cover for a liberal Democrat, even knowing that at any time a subpoena could be issued that could prove her to be dishonest and corrupt and ruin her future political career?”
Yes, I do actually. She isn’t a conservative, she is a RINO. Conservatives don’t get elected in Hawaii. Also, do you think ANY governor of Hawaii would want to be the one that helps bring down that State’s favorite son? Nope.
Realistically, I don’t think the governor actually checked anything. Just because someone is has a “R” by their name doesn’t make them truthful anymore than having a “D” automatically makes them a liar.
I prefer to see the evidence for myself. Do I personally think that President Obama wasn’t born in Hawaii? I honestly don’t know or have a firm opinion. I do have doubt, as do others, and I would like for the records to be open. At any rate, I think LTC/Dr. Lakin’s legal team should be granted full access to those and any other records that may cast doubts on the NBC status or loyalty of the current POTUS. That is the issue at hand. Like I have repeatedly stated, it will, IMO, help military discipline not harm it. It will streghten, IMO, the viability of the court martial system not impair it.
Yes, I do actually. She isn’t a conservative, she is a RINO. Conservatives don’t get elected in Hawaii. Also, do you think ANY governor of Hawaii would want to be the one that helps bring down that State’s favorite son? Nope.
Realistically, I don’t think the governor actually checked anything. Just because someone is has a “R” by their name doesn’t make them truthful anymore than having a “D” automatically makes them a liar.
I prefer to see the evidence for myself. Do I personally think that President Obama wasn’t born in Hawaii? I honestly don’t know or have a firm opinion. I do have doubt, as do others, and I would like for the records to be open. At any rate, I think LTC/Dr. Lakin’s legal team should be granted full access to those and any other records that may cast doubts on the NBC status or loyalty of the current POTUS. That is the issue at hand. Like I have repeatedly stated, it will, IMO, help military discipline not harm it. It will streghten, IMO, the viability of the court martial system not impair it.
Governor Lingle never said that she personally checked Obama’s birth certificate. She said that “I had my Director of Health, who is a physician by way of background, go personally view the birth certificate in the birth records of the Department of Health...”
However, if Obama wasn’t born in Hawai’i, why were there birth announcements for him published in the December 13th and December 14th, 1961 editions of the Honolulu Advertiser and the Honolulu Star-Bulliten? Both newspapers have confirmed that they have always gotten their birth, death and marriage data directly from the Bureau of Vital Statistics and that they do not accept that information from family members or friends. In fact the section of the newspapers where those announcements appeared is entitled “Health Bureau Statistics.”
Military discipline has nothing to do with whether LtC. Lakin is guilty or not guilty of disobeying orders from his direct superior officers. Thus far there have been five members of the active duty military who have challenged the legitimacy of the Commander-in-Chief and a million three hundred thousand members of the military and the ready reserve who are doing their jobs including sacrificing their very lives for honor and country.
If a member of the Joint Chiefs was questioning whether Obama was a legitimate Commander-in-Chief, then we’d have something serious to talk about but Lieutenant Colonel Lakin is just too far down the chain of command to matter.
My guess is that he will be convicted and Obama will make political use of him by pardoning him or commuting his sentence.
I also believe that Obama will eventually present a long form birth certificate but it will be at a time much closer to the next election than two years out. I think that he will want to maximize the political fallout to his most ardent opposition.
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.