Being an usurping president is not legal but there he is.
And no one forced Lt. Col. Lakin as he came to his own conscientious decision. No one used him.
Posted on 04/22/2010 2:54:33 PM PDT by BuckeyeTexan
Equal to Lt. Q. Harris and Donald Young???
http://www.meetup.com/WeSurroundThemGathering/messages/boards/thread/7482385
I don’t think we ought to be using our military to hold politicians or ordinary men on the street accountable to the law. That is emphatically not what they’re there for.
In Blago’s case, Obama looks squarely in the middle of it. Obama is a material witness. Blago has the right to confront the witness, Obama, against him per the 6th Amendment Confrontational Clause. Written statements by Obama or some teleprompted tv show will not do or satisfy Blago’s 6th Amendment rights since that’s not good enough to cross the witness in court.
“I can’t speak for the others but I’m here for the comedic content of the posts from people like BP2.”
That one didn’t really work, NS. Bless your heart.
If the HDOH was following their rules I would have absolute proof right now that Obama committed forgery, because I would have Obama’s non-certified COLB as I am authorized to receive, and it would show a 2006 certificate number and note of the amendment.
There is a reason that the HDOH is breaking their laws. Right now the HDOH is not even pretending to answer lawful requests for documents they are required by law to give.
They are thumbing their noses boldly peeing on the laws and saying, “So what?” if we threaten to report them to the OIP - because the OIP is also breaking their laws.
If that is acceptable to you, and if you think it’s the behavior of people who should be trusted because they are so full of integrity - enough integrity to hold the fate of the entire USA in their hands - then I don’t know what else to say to you.
Thing is - even if I had all his documents personally in my possession there would be no way for me to force a corrupt government, media, and law enforcement system to do a dang thing about it.
That doesn’t trouble you at all? Where is my right to petition the government for a redress of grievances? Does that mean I have the right to cuss, or does that mean that the government has to answer to me when I accuse them of something? Who has the government ever had to answer to in this issue?
Now we are entering the McDougal “territory”!!!
No wonder Atta and his pals were registered to vote. I suppose that was a state thing too, and only state people could investigate it?
Right after the FBI rep told me on the phone 3 times that they don’t investigate document fraud I went online to find where I could report it. I found an online form and when I submitted it, it said that it would forward the report to the FBI.
A person signing a statement saying they are eligible to be president, when they know they were not even born in the country, is perjury and if they do that in order to get on ballots for a federal election I would call that tampering with a federal election.
The letter Obama signed on White House stationery with raised seal claiming he was born at Kapiolani Hospital in order to help raise funds for the hospital is charity fraud and perjury.
Obama’s lawyers telling all the media heads that he would revoke their FCC licenses if they reported on this issue - leading to the media heads making veiled threats of physical violence to families as well as to ending employees’ careers if they reported the eligibility issue - would qualify as extortion, if I understand correctly. (This one was referenced on the start page for my blog, at http://www.butterdezillion.wordpress.com ). But then, Obama’s people did the same thing with the Chrysler lawyers. And Obama illegally fired Gerald Walpin and a bunch of other stuff. There are some links at my start page where I documented the travesties committed during the first 6 months of the Toyota Regime)
And making an oath to uphold the US Constitution when you know you are violating the US Constitution by not being eligible for the office would qualify as treason, I would think.
Exactly how are our military officers supposed to protect America and her Constitution from “domestic enemies” if they aren’t even allowed to find out who those domestic enemies are?
In this case I’m not saying that the military needs to be the investigative body, but I just don’t think that the military should be able to convict a man for disobeying a Constitutional order when the civilian entities responsible to check the Constitutionality have documentably NEVER DONE SO.
That’s all Lakin is asking. If the military court wants to convict Lakin I just think they need to get the confirmation that the civilian authorities actually did the checking they were supposed to. And I KNOW that they didn’t, because Hawaii law requires all the documents in Hawaii to be seen before any legal determination can be made at all.
BP2 has the photos of this "event", including with the laughing "Evading" Clarence Thomas present!!!:
The Article II Red Herring (“Look at *this *Article II concern)
Such apparent meticulous attention to Article II Section 1 of the Constitution provides cynical and stark contrast to what was really going on in the months prior to the inauguration oath taken by Barack Hussein Obama. As time-honed experience tells us, “We” should always be looking at the hand the Obama people are not pointing at. Obama visited with Justice Roberts specifically in his private chambers in a meeting closed to the public on January 14, 2009. Mr. Obama and Mr. Biden also met with the other Supreme Court members, in the Court’s ceremonial West Conference Room, just before his inauguration.
Obama and Biden, without the plaintiffs present, met with the very justices who were deciding a case which exacted that Barack Hussein Obama was a British Citizen at birth and thus ineligible to be president by, none other than, Article II Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution. The case filed by Orly Taitz, which appeared, and then mysteriously after the Roberts-Obama meeting, *disappeared* from the Supreme Court dockets. Further, Roberts and the other eight justices had already held two ‘Distribution for Conferences’ on the Donofrio and Wrotnoski cases on Obama’s citizenship ineligibility.
For the first time in 16 years, a President-elect (Obama) and Vice President-elect (Biden) paid a pre-inaugural visit to the Supreme Court. Interestingly, Obama supporter Jeffrey Toobin’s analysis tries to avert attention from this pre-inauguration closed-door face-to-face meeting, when he writes that “Through intermediaries” the flow and pattern of the oath recitation was agreed to between Roberts and Obama. However, all evidence shows that Roberts and Obama themselves, two Harvard graduates with exquisite seasoned speaking abilities and didactic timing capabilities, decided the exact flow of their historic interchange, not “through intermediaries”.
Pictured: Defendant President Elect Barack Obama and Vice President Elect Joe Biden meet with Supreme Court Justices January 14, 2009, while several pending presidential eligibility cases were before the Court. Justice Alito chose to be absent. (c/o Change.gov)
Pictured: Defendant President Elect Barack Obama and Vice President Elect Joe Biden meet with Supreme Court Justices January 14, 2009, while several pending presidential eligibility cases were before the Court. Justice Alito chose to be absent. (c/o Change.gov)
Being an usurping president is not legal but there he is.
And no one forced Lt. Col. Lakin as he came to his own conscientious decision. No one used him.
Birth certificate fraud looks like a federal offense:
"(a) Whoever, in a circumstance described in subsection (c) of this section— "
"(4) knowingly possesses an identification document (other than one issued lawfully for the use of the possessor), authentication feature, or a false identification document, with the intent such document or feature be used to defraud the United States;"
(A) the production or transfer of an identification document, authentication feature, or false identification document that is or appears to be— (ii) a birth certificate, or a driver’s license or personal identification card;"
I think you missed his point.
That’s a classic Clintoooon video.
“every last one of us who understands what real patriotism is”
Let’s see if you understand it. If you’re not a “simpleton” you’ll know how to be concise.
I have a feeling I’ll need to educate you on this one.
The redacted Blago motion to subpoena Obama appears to show that Rezko has been singing to Fitzgerald with what he knows about the whole Chicago crowd including Obama. They can't all get rubbed out (I hope) and Rezko apparently has been moved by Fitzgerald to a very secret location to prevent exactly that sort of “witness tampering.”
Too late, I would think. If the military was going to revoke his orders they would have done that before he was charged.
Cook volunteered to go active and deploy and orders were drafted. The military simply deemed his refusal to deploy to be a retraction of his prior unsolicited offer to deploy.
Lakin is already active and was ordered to deploy. Not the same thing as Cook. The military must maintain discipline and must be able to order deployment and not grant “get out of deployment free” for any military person who questions Obama’s eligibility.
|
The military has no legal authority to investigate the civilian command of the military. That is correct. The UCMJ is understandably ill-suited to allow for an investigation of the qualifications of a CinC. If the Judge decides to subpoena a CERTIFIED copy of the Certification of Live Birth (as depicted on FactCheck) directly from Hawaii, that will be a game changer in that a true prima facie copy of Obama's COLB has never appeared in Court. At that point, the action shifts hard to other Eligibility cases as there's now PROOF POSITIVE prima facie evidence that Obama's father was a British subject. We all know this is the case, but a certified hard-copy would represent the FIRST time that such prima facie evidence would appear in a Courtroom. Such a twist would jeopardize Obama later ... it would certainly not redeem or help him. However, unless something very unexpected happens, Lt Col Lakin WILL in all likelihood be successfully prosecuted and sentenced by the US Army under UCMJ Articles 87 & 92. Although he does not WANT to be found guilty — and his attorney will argue tooth and nail against it — it will most likely happen and Lakin is ready for it as it leads to the ultimate conclusion. Again, Lt Col Lakin is FULLY aware what the Military Court system has in store for him, and thus why he knows the Relief he seeks can only be delivered from the Federal Courts. He won't find such relief in the Army Court of Criminal Appeals or the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces; consult Articles 66(c) and 67(a) for more on that. However, although the US Army JAG will prosecute this case as just another set of Article 87 & 92 violations, it's anything but SOP. A field grade officer physician is questioning the SPECIFIC and UNIQUE Eligibility requirements of the POTUS under Art II, § 1, Clause 5 of the US Constitution, not his Commanding Officer's, Colonel Roberts. Although the Constitution Eligibility of the CinC matters not to the US Army, Lt Col Lakin’s questions of his POTUS is NOT an everyday Court Martial occurrence and I'm hard-pressed to find strikingly similar examples. Just 4 years ago, US Army 1Lt Ehren Watada was ALSO charged under UCMJ Article 87, for refusing to deploy to Iraq. His first trial ended in MISTRIAL after the military judge ruled that the military justice system was unable to decide if the question of whether the deployment order to Watada was unlawful; Watada's argument would thus be deduced to an admission of guilt. Although the Army tried again, in the end a District Court Judge intervened and stayed all but his Article 134 charges until the ENTIRE trial was dismissed under the 9th Circuit by Obama and his Justice Department request last May. Although Watada’s grievances was more like that of a “conscientious objector”, his attorneys argued that Command Responsibility placed the Army O-2 in jeopardy of War Crimes, in essence, from a de facto President and an illegitimate war. In that regard, Watada’s and Lakin’s basic rationale is similar. One final thought about Venue ... IF the Army DID want to investigate Obama’s Eligibility, HOW would they eventually DEFINE “natural-born Citizen” for the purposes of Art II, § 1, Clause 5 of the US Constitution? THEY CAN'T. Congress has TRIED nearly 30 times since the 1870s to define such a Constitutional definition and have been unable to do so. A Constitutional Amendment is CERTAINLY unattainable in the current political environment. SO WHO'S LEFT? The Supreme Court, using the language that the Framer's used at the end of the 18th Century — chiefly Vattel and Blackstone. Unless something else happens, like Obama is undone by old Chicago buddy Blaggo or some other scandal, Lt Col Lakin’s Relief lies only in the US Supreme Court.
 |
Facts are facts.
And tired too? lol
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.