"Birther" Doc a No Show At Campbell

military.com ^ | 4/12/10 | Bryant Jordan

[jamese777]

An Army flight surgeon apparently is sticking to his vow not to deploy until he is satisfied that President Barack Obama is a "natural born" citizen.

Lt. Col. Terrence Lakin did not report for duty at Fort Campbell, Ky. as ordered today, and a spokesman for the post said it's not likely he will.

Lakin's failure to report essentially dares the Army to bring charges against him for being an unauthorized absence.

Margaret Hemenway, a spokeswoman for a group called the Patriotic American Foundation, which is supporting the 18-year officer, said the Army should not expect Lakin to report unless he sees an original birth certificate showing that Obama was born in Hawaii.

The Army has not said yet what it intends to do about Lakin. Calls to his unit -- Headquarters Company, Medical Brigade, Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington -- were not returned by post time.

To this point the Army has ducked taking serious action against the decorated flight surgeon, claiming his public statements and threat to disobey orders did not constitute any punishable offense. On March 31 -- the day after the video was released -- he was given a letter of counseling. In the letter, his commander at Walter Reed warned him against not reporting for duty as ordered.

The orders, Lakin was told, "are presumed to be valid and lawful orders issued by competent military authority." The letter warned Lakin that not showing up at Campbell could result in his facing AWOL charges, as well as missing movement, willfully disobeying a lawful order and showing contempt toward officials. A conviction on any of the charges could mean a dishonorable discharge, imprisonment and loss of all pay and allowances.

[danamco]

Here’s another name that’s fitting: QUISLING!!!

[danamco]

Did you ever take an oath, and what kind of oath???

[I'll be your Huckleberry]

1LT Easterling is currently assigned to Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 3d Sustainment Command (Expeditionary) in the Support Operations Division.

After this incident and subsequent investigation and action, 1LT Easterling was not involved in any other incidents. As a result, his supervisors recommended him for promotion on his officer evaluation report.

_________________________________

There is one scenario that no one has yet mentioned - so cowboys often rush in where wise men do not tread....

For some time I have wondered whether this case might be a set-up.

The rank and service record of this officer suggest a higher level challenge to the question.

The armed forces of the United States are loyal and disciplined but (like in the population as a whole) there is an element within that community who feel deeply concerned with the current POTUS.

It is not too abstract to wonder if there is support and planning behind this challenge.

If this officer is indeed a “stalking horse” we should know rather quickly.
Should he be quietly removed as a focus of the challenge - then it was an admirable choice of conscious.

If, however, the officer refuses to go quietly into the night and the case moves into a more open judicial realm (with accompanying publicity and leaks) - then one might prudently ask if there is deeper backing/command/control behind his position.

I am uncertain whether this President is equipped to play back channel politics at this level.

Huck

[jamese777]

What would the grounds be? I don’t see “not eligible” in the list in the Constitution.

“Treason or other High Crimes and Misdemeanors” are the choices.

---

Bill Clinton was impeached for perjury and obstruction of justice. Barack Obama could be impeached for forgery and fraud which are felonies and therefore “high crimes” if it were proven that his birth documents are phony.

[BP2]

They can probably get him on contempt towards official (Article 88) ... blah, blah, blah ...

Drew, where did you learn so much about the Law — Bull on Night Court ?!

Once again, you're talking out of your arse about issues of which you know nothing.

For example, let me address your assertions about Article 88, by reiterating its modern roots.

Following WWII, Congress created the Uniform Code of Military Justice in 1950. Beforehand, Senators debated with particular fervor the meaning and use of Article 88 (Contempt towards officials). In the end, Congress agreed to use the 1949 Army Manual for Courts-Martial, which defined Contempt in this manner:

This article covers both (i) words which are contemptuous in themselves, such as abusive epithets, denunciatory or contemptuous expressions, or intemperate or malevolent comments upon official or personal acts, and (2) words which are contemptuous because of the connection in which they are used and the surrounding circumstances.

Therefore, based upon this Army and UCMJ definition, please attempt to make your ridiculous claim that Lt Col Lakin has made contemptuous statements, even violating Article 133... OR, perhaps you should just STFU!

As for the rest of your blatherings, yes, Lt Col Lakin would ULTIMATELY be in violation IF the order was Legitimate, from an Eligible President. That's the question his lawyer will address in Military and later, Federal Court.

Lt Col Lakin WILL LIKELY BE COURT MARTIALED; he's FULLY expecting it. Military men and women are accustom to making sacrifices. Taking the entire UCMJ into perspective, he's left with the ultimate irony:

Sometimes the ONLY way to challenge the validity of an order IS TO challenge the validity of an order.

Also ... Gen Casey's Command Authority trickles down from the SECDEF (yet another non-elected official) -and- the POTUS/CinC, comprising the NCA. Or as those in the military say, SH!T ROLLS DOWNHILL.

That's WHY in the morning of January 20, 2009, before Obama took the Oath of Office ON Inauguration Day (and the day after, too), Obama was signing DoD paperwork to officially assume the Nuclear Football (heaven help us) -and- the NCA's operational authority over from Bush ... transferred on Orders via TS communique for authentication to Command Posts all around the world that day.

The Chain of Command is like a pyramid, ALL parts below taking orders ULTIMATELY from the tippy top — the Commander in Chief (CinC).

The CinC answers to the ULTIMATE command authority of ALL civilians and military personnel of our nation — the U.S. Constitution.

And when the CinC doesn't answer to the Constitution, that's when the Command Structure breaks down ... regardless of who's commanding the Armed Forces of the United States.

[jamese777]

“And when the CinC doesn’t answer to the Constitution, that’s when the Command Structure breaks down ... regardless of who’s commanding the Armed Forces of the United States.”

---

Who gets to determine whether or not the Commander-in-Chief is “answering to the Constitution?” I would think that would be the US Supreme Court and/or the US Congress and ultimately the American electorate in a presidential election.

[Danae]

Has anyone ever mentioned to you that you are a very good debater?

I would have to think hard about which I would rather face, a loaded 4-10 shotgun or opposite you in a debate! I am so glad you are on OUR side! :)

[Danae]

Ping to the man with some REAL stones!

I have to say though, he is on the wrong tac, Obama isn’t an NBC because he was born British as well as American. With his parentage, he could never have been a Natural Born Citizen. Regardless if he was born in Hawaii or the steps of the Lincoln Memorial. He was Not a Natural born Citizen at Birth and never could have been.

[BP2]

Who gets to determine whether or not the Commander-in-Chief is “answering to the Constitution?”

That's what quo warranto is all about in this case ... "By what warrant" IS the man acting as the POTUS actually Eligible under Art II, Sect 1, Clause 5?

And ... how do you get the SCOTUS to answer this question? Bring them a Plaintiff in a case showing Injury, Causation and Redressability. Entering from stage Right is Lt Col Lakin.

I would think that would be the US Supreme Court and/or the US Congress ...

First of all, Congress is INCAPABLE of answering such a partisan and politically-charged question.

Second of all, IF:

- Nancy Pelosi on August 28, 2008 -and-
- the Senate on January 8, 2009 ...

... had actually DONE their DUE DILIGENCE in the FIRST PLACE — instead of accepting the word of the dubious FactCheck and Obama himself — we wouldn't be in this Constitutionally-FUBAR situation right now, would we?!

and ultimately the American electorate in a presidential election.

As Barnum Bailey reportedly said, “a sucker's born every minute.”

Seeing how 63.7 million got snookered in 2008, an INFORMED electorate is FAR MORE POTENT than the CLOWNS who TRUSTED a Snake-Oil Salesman selling them Hope and Change.

[Danae]

WRONG.

Quo Warranto.

You can’t impeach someone who should never been allowed inside the office. You put them in prison.

[Danae]

WOAH, now that is going old school.

[little jeremiah]

That is one of the most interesting comments I’ve read in a long time.

I don’t know if you haven’t been around FR for a while but I haven’t run into you lately.

Reading that comment was like a thin cold breeze.

Hmmmmm.

[little jeremiah]

RS - ping to an interesting comment by Huckleberry.

[FTJM]

Great, let them do it then.

[FTJM]

The military will probably not require discovery as has been mentioned, which is too bad, but they can only go two ways...reassign or prosecute. If they prosecute and convict, the sentence could only be dishonorable discharge without a PR nightmare and major uproar. They will be backed into a corner, reassignment will be another tacit admission and discharge will encourage others to do it.

[mojitojoe]

EXCELLENT post!!!!!!

[roaddog727]

LTC Lakin, True Patriot bump!

[Non-Sequitur]

If he shows up for work every day, he he can hardly be considered AWOL. Disobeying an order or failing to deploy is another matter.

Apparently he isn't showing up. Or so the article would have us believe.

If they just discharge him, he still gets his retirement since he already has 18 years in. That would be a bit awkward since there is a shortage of doctors on active duty.

They'll probably court martial him and make an example of him.

[Non-Sequitur]

And from whom does Gen. Casey get HIS orders, check mate???

Secretary of the Army. Secretary of Defense. And yes one can argue that the chain eventually stops at Obama. But there are so many layers between Lakin and the President that the Army could court martial him a dozen times over and never bring the President into it.

[bushpilot1]

Obama is in the chain of command every orderly room in the country has a photo of him being in the chain.