Alas..they may just court-martial him, and bury the issue at hand. Legal delays could extend past the end of Hussein’s 2nd term in office. And the Dem’s might repeal that amendment anyway, as “too limiting” for our times!
This will look real good on 1LT Easterling’s next fitness report (or whatever the Army calls them).
“In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot.” Mark Twain (1904)
Pingie
Why do I think that this is a lawyer “using” an Army officer?
It may come to a military coup to stop the coup by the Communist usurper sitting in the WH and destroying our country day by day. It’s only been a MONTH, and look what all he as done. He is going to take us down fast. I have a very bad feeling this isn’t going to end with an election in 2010. I think by then, there will be no elections and I truly believe that as do many others.
God bless this guy.
She has quite a few people joining her suits including congressmen and inactive military.
The question has always been if they have standing or not, I can’t see how he does not have standing, but that is up to what the SCOTUS says.
Regardless, it is now time for us to watch the news and see that he is not crucified for speaking out.If he is we MUST defend him as he is defending us.
ping, may be interesting to see what happens to Lt Easterling.
Thank you Mr. Easterling!
"Obedience to Orders as a Defense.—To determine how far obedience to orders may be pleaded in defense, it is necessary first to understand the military duty of obedience. " The Article enjoins obedience to the ' lawful ' order of a superior. The order of a proper superior is presumed to be lawful, and should be obeyed where it is not clearly and obviously in contravention of law," for, as will presently be seen, an inferior will not in general be held liable by a court-martial for an injurions conséquence of his execution of the order of a superior,1 unless the same was palpably illegal on its face. Unless, therefore, the illegality of the order is unquestionable, the subordinate should obey first and seek redress, if entitled to any, afterwards.'"
At this point, it appears Lt. Easterling isn't disobeying orders, but rather is seeking clarification on weather or not any orders given by Barry are lawful.
Is that a court marshal offense?
A CLM?
We need to get thousands of officers and enlisted soldiers to join him.
"Col. Riley former division chief national security agency joins our action"
We ask our patriots from MO, OK , VA, and FL, where Colonel Harry Riley lives and was stationed to join the action and support their brave military constituents and fellow State Representatives!
Profiles A Retired Colonel, Riley is "the recipient of the Silver Star, Legion of Merit, Bronze Star and other awards and badges – including the Combat Infantry Badge, Parachute Badge, and Army Staff Badge. He served over 34 years in the US Army. He was commissioned as a 2LT in 1966 and promoted to Colonel in 1989. He served in command positions from Detachment through Battalion level and staff assignments from Brigade to Chief of Staff Army level. He served two tours in Viet Nam and did several tours in Germany."
This is starting to gain momentum. Soon, the MSM will find it very difficult to keep this hush hush.
Too bad he's not MI. He might *know* things the rest of us can only surmise.
“That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”
Declaration of Independence July 4, 1776
[snip]
"Now, this one is interesting. When Easterling refuses to obey a "lawful order" of a superior officer, he will be subject to court martial under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). This is what Easterling seeks.
As a defendant he will definitely have "standing" to subpoena individuals, records and documents for his defense.
This guy is putting his personal freedom and career on the line to force this issue. He is a patriot."
http://www.theobamafile.com/ObamaLatest.htm
I'm starting to believe that that is probably the Lt's stategy. To try and force the issue via discovery during a court martial.
[Quote]
Should a Soldier serve if he doesn't believe the president is legitimate?
Yes, a Soldier takes an oath to serve the nation and President Obama was duly elected. 1st Lt. Easterling is just trying to get publicity and he should be court martialed.
26%
If a Soldier in good conscience does not believe the president is constitutionally eligible to serve, he should not execute his duties and is right to protest the president's orders.
42%
Easterling should continue to honor the dignity of his men by executing his orders as given. He should pursue other avenues to challenge the legitimacy of the president.
31%
http://www.military.com/pollresults?poll_frame_src=/votingpoll/vote.do&poll_id=4181&option=4243
[End quote]
Here is the Law Read it for yourself:
http://uscode.house.gov/download/pls/18C115.txt
TITLE 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
PART I - CRIMES
CHAPTER 115 - TREASON, SEDITION, AND SUBVERSIVE
ACTIVITIES
Sec. 2387. Activities affecting armed forces generally
-STATUTE-
(a) Whoever, with intent to interfere with, impair, or
influence the loyalty, morale, or discipline of the military or naval forces of the United States:
(1) advises, counsels, urges, or in any manner causes
or attempts to cause insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny,
or refusal of duty by any member of the military or naval forces of the United States; or
(2) distributes or attempts to distribute any written
or printed matter which advises, counsels, or urges
insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty by any member of the military or naval forces of the United States -Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five years next following his
conviction. (b) For the purposes of this section, the
term “military or naval forces of the United States” includes the Army of the United States,
the Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, Coast Guard, Navy
Reserve, Marine Corps Reserve, and Coast Guard Reserve of the United States; and, when any merchant vessel is
commissioned in the Navy or is in the service of the Army or the Navy, includes the master, officers, and crew of such vessel. ]
***********************************************************
And this is what Orly allegedly said to Military.com about her knowledge of said Law:
California dentist turned attorney Orly Taitz, who has brought the lawsuit, told Military.com Tuesday that it is her “understanding that there will not be a serious consequence to his career [for his statements], but I don’t know for sure.”
At the very least Orly owes a duty to her clients to posts said Laws on her Blog and state her understanding of said Laws.
National Association of Military Defense Lawyers
For any Military Officers with questions about how to proceed in a case against Bo.
Go here for answers to your Questions: