LTC Lakin Formally Charged (Violation of UCMJ Articles 87 & 92)

American Patriot Foundation ^ | 04/22/2010

[BuckeyeTexan]

Lieutenant Colonel Terrence L. Lakin was charged today with four violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) under Articles 87 and 92.

(Chargesheet at the link in PDF format.)

[OldDeckHand]

"The burden of proof with respect to the lawfulness of his orders, falls to the defendant see: United States v. Smith, 21 U.S.C.M.A. 231, 45 C.M.R. 5 (1972)."

That wasn't very well put. I should have said that "the burden of proving the order unlawful, falls to the defendant...."

And no, the military judge is neither going to grant discover or entertain even for a moment the assertion that Barack Obama may be ineligible for the office, as Barack Obama didn't order Lakin deployed - SecDef Gates did, or someone subordinate to him.

[Red Steel]

the President of the Senate shall call for objections,

Yes, Cheney failed to call for objection. The word "shall' is mandatory.

I believe Apuzzo in his brief has noted the failure to follow the US code for counting electoral votes by Congress.

[little jeremiah]

IIRC it seemed as thought one Congressman was trying to raise his hand and might have even spoken something, it was dicussed on FR at the time. But Pelosi started right in with shouting.

[edge919]

The release of one document by the HI DOH would be all it takes to reach that conclusion.

[tired_old_conservative]

You are just completely losing it, aren't you?

The Howe court martial was about the officer in question holding up a sign perceived as using contemptuous language against the President. The context of that decision did not, does not, and will not mean that the military vets the President for acceptability before anyone takes an order from anyone. The army will have no trouble whatsoever telling LTC Lakin that his orders were presumptively lawful.

And how dare you characterize what's going on in the Middle East as “Obama’s wars against Muslims?” Those are our soldiers fighting and dying honorably for the American people, as directed through their elected representatives in a continuous chain that includes George W. Bush. Which means it's AMERICA'S WAR, OUR war, and YOUR war, too, you pretend patriot.

[tired_old_conservative]

“Moreover, the lawfulness of the order is a matter of law to be decided by the military judge, not the jury panel. The judge will instruct the jury panel that the orders were indeed lawful, and they will never hear Barack Obama’s name mentioned, and certainly there will be no mention of his alleged ineligibility to hold office.

The prosecution will establish that Lakin missed movement by entering into evidence his deployment orders as well as testimony from superior officers that Lakin didn't deploy. That's the ballgame.”

Exactly.

[BP2]

> I found this interesting link/post when I searched “UCMJ discovery”.

Good find.

Another problem that vexes Obama is the double-edge sword contained within the INFAMOUS UCMJ Article 66(c) when Lt Col Lakin’s case goes to Appeal:

In any case reviewed by it, the Court of Military Appeals may act only with respect to the findings and sentence as approved by the convening authority and as affirmed or set aside as incorrect in law by the Court of Military Review.

This section of the UCMJ means many things to many people, including the interpreted legal convention that the Military Appeals Court cannot consider evidence outside the record in conducting its legal and factual sufficiency ... especially a COPY of a birth certificate off the internet. And yet, that's EXACTLY what Obama’s house of cards is based upon (shown at BOTTOM of post).

UCMJ Article 66(c) also can complicate Obama's ability to keep his secret, depending on how this is prosecuted and if Lt Col Lakin's case is remanded outside of the Military Court system, such as to the Court of Criminal Appeals for additional fact-finding. This from the case of "United States v. White" (2001):

Unlike civilians, military prisoners have no civil remedy for alleged constitutional violations. United States v. Palmiter, 20 MJ 90, 93 n. 4 (CMA 1985), citing Chappell v. Wallace, 462 U.S. 296 (1983), and Feres v. United States, 340 U.S. 135 (1950). Thus, they must rely on the prison grievance system, Article 138, UCMJ, 10 USC § 938, the Courts of Criminal Appeals, and this Court [the US Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces] for relief.

As such, the UCMJ can also act as an expressway to the SCOTUS in these circumstances,
as expressed by UCMJ Article 67(a) ("REVIEW BY THE SUPREME COURT"):

(a) Decisions of the Unites States Court of Military Appeals are subject to review by the Supreme Court by writ of certiorari as provided in section 1259 of title 28.

The truth about Obama's birth certificate (FactCheck.org)
–by Jess Henig, with Joe Miller

Jess Henig has an M.A. in English Literature.
Joe Miller has a Ph. D. in Political Philosophy.

[Red Steel]

The Congressman from Ohio with the beard.

[BP2]

> Those are our soldiers fighting and dying honorably for the American people, as directed
> through their elected representatives in a continuous chain that includes George W. Bush.

Bush's fault. Just damn. That didn't take you long ...

Save your feigned and disingenuous incredulousness for Obama ... he deserves the REAL THING far more than anyone here.

And yes, it is quite sad that our sons and daughters are dying in foreign lands, ordered there by a defacto President, elected by an unwitting American public. That's why Lt Col Lakin’s success in exposing Obama’s LIES is quite important, and thus why Lt Col Lakin makes his sacrifice.

> “Obama’s wars against Muslims?”

Yes, you read right: OBAMA'S WAR AGAINST MUSLIMS.
Not the Amish, the Christians or even the Buddhists ... the MUSLIMS.

It's Obama who TOILED, AGONIZED and STALLED for months before finally making the COMMAND DECISION of a mere 30,000 troops to send to Afghanistan (including Lt Col Lakin) ... just nine days before Obama traveled to Oslo, Norway to accept his Nobel Peace Prize.

Just trying to Obama credit where credit is due.

[dixiechick2000]

Are you JAG?

[tired_old_conservative]

“Bush's fault. Just damn. That didn't take you long.”

That is a flat out lie. I never said it was Bush's fault. I said this was a commitment we as a nation embarked upon under the previous President. It is OUR war, every last one of us who understands what real patriotism is. I supported it when Bush ordered it, I supported it through his potential errors, I still support it when Obama has the burden of leading it, and I will support it through his potential errors. If it is an achievable and worthwhile goal, that's what patriotic Americans do, regardless of whether the President has a R or a D by his name.

“And yes, it is quite sad that our sons and daughters are dying in foreign lands, ordered there by a defacto President, elected by an unwitting American public. That's why Lt Col Lakin’s success in exposing Obama’s LIES is quite important, and thus why Lt Col Lakin makes his sacrifice.”

You're pretty much mental, aren't you? On the one hand, you blame Obama for stalling in deciding how best to continue prosecuting a war handed off to him, while on the other you claim someone needs to make a sacrifice to stop Obama from prosecuting a war handed off to him. Americans are dying in foreign lands from a chain of events that stared with 9/11. I support whomever the President is in prosecuting that to some semblance of a successful conclusion.

“Yes, you read right: OBAMA'S WAR AGAINST MUSLIMS.
Not the Amish, the Christians or even the Buddhists ... the MUSLIMS.”

Again, it is not Obama’s war. It is America's war. We as a nation have been prosecuting it for nine years. I'm sorry your hatred for one man trumps realization of that.

And, just as an aside simpleton, if it's purely a war against Muslims, why are we supporting governments run by Muslims against their Muslim insurgencies?

You are a sad, pitiful excuse for a patriot.

[Lucius Cornelius Sulla]

If fact, the First Congress codified the Declaration of Independence as the fist statute

Only laws passed under the Constitution are valid. Laws passed under the Articles of Confederation or earlier are not law today, unless enacted again under the Constitution.

[SeaHawkFan]

I know the burden is on Lakin to prove the order is unlawful. It will be interesting to see how far up the chain of command he can go, which might be higher than you think. He should be able to get at least Gates. Depending on what he says, maybe even higher.

[danamco]

Pilsner, it’s just amazing how evasive “AFTER-BIRTHERS” are to answer very simple questions regarding the Constitution!

Pilsner beer/ale it far tooooo strong for you!!

You definitely need to change and go O’Doul’s instead!!!:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgQepPpqWFk

[Non-Sequitur]

This is an excellent summary—a summary explaining the most important fact that can be derived from all the comments ever posted on this issue by N-S and the rest of them.

I can't speak for the others but I'm here for the comedic content of the posts from people like BP2.

[Non-Sequitur]

But the fact is that — JUST LIKE YOU Non-Sequitur — the Army will also have a difficult time arguing your position separating Lt Col Lakin's deployment orders and his CinC’s Military Directives ... the SAME CinC that Lt Col Lakin’s attorneys will argue is de facto.

I do not believe that the Army will have any problems with that at all. And I'm prepared to sit back and watch it happen.

[danamco]

It is precisely because the People have already disposed of this argument, once directly and twice through representatives, that no court now can or should touch it with a ten foot pole.

And that's explained in post 265 why being evasive.....

[verity]

Again, why do you assume that anyone who disagrees with anything you propound is a Lefty?

[verity]

"You are just completely losing it, aren't you?"

BP2 never had it to lose in the first place. lol

He is the classic example of pseudointellectualism.

[BP2]

> I do not believe that the Army will have any problems with that at all.
> And I’m prepared to sit back and watch it happen

What is your basis for such a belief?

Something you saw on the Internet — much like Obama’s so-call birth certificate?