That's just for starters of course. Reagan's view of R v. W should be studied as well.
Posted on 02/23/2009 6:47:18 PM PST by Joiseydude
A U.S. soldier on active duty in Iraq has called President Obama an "impostor" in a statement in which he affirmed plans to join as plaintiff in a challenge to Obama's eligibility to be commander in chief.
The statement was publicized by California attorney Orly Taitz who, along with her Defend Our Freedom Foundation, is working on a series of legal cases seeking to uncover Obama's birth records and other documents that would reveal whether he meets the requirements of the U.S. Constitution.
"As an active-duty officer in the United States Army, I have grave concerns about the constitutional eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama to hold the office of president of the United States," wrote Scott Easterling in a "to-whom-it-may-concern" letter.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
UCMJ
“ART. 88. CONTEMPT TOWARD OFFICIALS
Any commissioned officer who uses contemptuous words against the President, the Vice President, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of a military department, the Secretary of Transportation, or the Governor or legislature of any State, Territory, Commonwealth, or possession in which he is on duty or present shall be punished as a court-martial may direct. “
“His oath is to the Constitution. This must put his immediate superiors in an uncomfortable situation.”
He does have a point...
An unlawful leader cannot give a lawful order. And an Officer is not required to follow an unlawful order.
The War Crimes trials of the Nazi’s and the Japanese made that precedent perfectly clear.
That's just for starters of course. Reagan's view of R v. W should be studied as well.
“Hasn’t happened yet.”
Theses cases have all been thrown out on the basis of LEGAL STANDING.
A SOLDIER expected to follow the LAWFUL ORDERS of the leadership DOES have the standing to demand to know if that leader is legitimate.
An UNLAWFUL leader cannot issue a LAWFUL ORDER!
“Any commissioned officer who uses contemptuous words against the President”
These are not “Contemptuous words”, they are the words of a soldier asking for LAWFUL CLARIFICATION of the orders he is following.
I for one am calling my congresscritters tomorrow to ask them, as well as Richard Shelby, to insert themselves into this matter. I’m going to use plain old common sense here, so don’t lambaste me with legalese: the Officer swore an oath to protect and defend the Constitution. The Constitution requires the President to be, amongst other things, a Natural-Born citizen. Obama has not provided the necessary proof that he is in fact Natural Born. The Officer would then be in violation of his Oath because of O’s actions if he followed O’s orders: O could very possibly be a Usurper. I know this this is simplistic, but simplicity sells when you present it to the American people. Easterling could be our first official political prisoner.
I would clarify that to include that the orders must be lawful. If they are not, he is bound not to obey them.
That said, he made his point and he may well find himself out of the service. There was an officer who was a reservist during the Clinton years who made a critical remark about the Slickster in off duty off base civilian status and he lost his billet and his career was then over for all intents and purposes.
These kinds of officers and enlisted who go to this extent believe they are right to do so and know the stakes.
I think that the actual damages and losses that anarchists, blacks and Leftists would do (trillions of dollars) will, unfortunatly derail anything ever being pursued. When his term(s) is/are over NBC or CBS will do a pseudo-story and realize he was Kenyan. OJ was acquitted for the same reasons, urban chaos and anarchy.
Bring it on.
In addition , if they want to argue "Officers appointed over him say Obama is Ok," then all he has to argue is that, as a commisioned officer, he is responsible for the orders he passes down. They cannot argue that the COC concept limits him, but that he then has no responsibilities thereunder to those who follow his orders.
Obama can not succeed with a “unduly burdensome” argument, since one production by a civil servant from Hawaii puts all these cases to rest. Throw in testimony from a few Expert Questioned Document Examiners and it's over.... so why haven't the Dems just......
?
This is how the whole ball of yarn unravels... No, not the Obama Government — the nation.
This noble officer will likely be discharged in short order. Questioning the C-in-C is not generally acceptable... But now, if there WERE. say, 10,000 other Military personnel standing with this officer...
Here’s when I hope ALL our military personnel actually know they have pledged an oath “to defend THE CONSTITUTION,” and not a Government, a President, or any other entity.
Pray for their discernment...
Add something positive for once...I'm thinking a suicide note would be nice about now.
JC! That’s the same sort of thinking that brought Sharia to England! If the law is not respected, it gives Carte Blanche to those very same anarchists, blacks and Leftists to threaten time and time again. Eventually, we have to stand up to the Bullies in the schoolyard and kick their ever-loving a$$.
FUBO is pwned! It gets gooder and gooder every day.
Rick Santelli, Scott Easterling, who else with a backbone will stand up and speak truth.
Watch your back guys!
A Congressman or Senator has to stand up in session and demand that Obama produce his Vault Copy BC to clear up this concern of the American People.
FUBO. Let’s spread the word.
There is nothing wrong with asking this employee of the people, and that is all he is, to show if he is eligible to hold the office he was elected too. We are his boss, not the other way around. For him to hire lawyers to obfuscate and refuse to show tells me one thing: Bozo isn't a natural born citizen.
In general soldiers do not need to *be* citizens. Although joining the military is a shortcut to citizenship. (You do have to be a *legal* alien however). Officers though, must be citizens. Naturalized is fine.
For example, the Air Force Colonel who headed up the Clementine mission which first found water ice on the moon, (They were testing sensors developed for Strategic Defense.) is a naturalized citizen, his family having fled Castro's Cuba when he was a pre-teen.
Officer candidates must indeed prove their citizenship before they are commissioned. Enlisted must prove they are a citizen *or* a legal resident alien.
BHO,OTOH, needs to prove that not only is he a citizen, but that he is a natural born citizen.
I guess you didn't watch the trial. OJ was acquitted because his jury was prejudiced and wanted the black man to get away with killing two white people. It had nothing to do with riots or anarchy.
Unless it comes out in the Court Martial that order was illegal. Or in this case issued by an ineligible national command authority.
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.