Posted on 07/29/2010 1:01:40 AM PDT by rxsid
"Press Release: Lakin Makes Formal Request of Hawaii Deposition
American Patriot Foundation, Inc.
1101 Thirtieth Street, N.W., Suite 500
Washington, D.C. 20007
www.safeguardourconstitution.com
DECORATED ARMY DOCTOR LTC TERRY LAKIN MAKES FORMAL REQUEST TO COMMANDING GENERAL FOR DEPOSITION OF HAWAII STATE DEPT OF HEALTH
Testimony Sought of “Custodian of Records” AND Production of all records relating to President
Decision to be made by Army Major General
Washington, D.C., July 29, 2010. The Army doctor who is facing a court martial for refusing to obey orders, including a deployment order for his second tour of duty in Afghanistan, has formally requested his Commanding General approve a deposition in Hawaii of the records-keeper of the State Department of Health—and the production of all of their records concerning Barack Obama.
The records Lakin seeks have been the subject of intense interest ever since the closing days of the 2008 presidential campaign when a document appeared on the internet purporting to be a certification that Hawaii’s Dept. of Health had records showing he had been born in Honolulu. Since then, Dr. Chiyome Fukino the head of that agency has made public statements on the subject, but has refused all requests for copies of the actual records in the Department’s custody. Recently, a former Hawaii elections clerk has come forward saying that he was told that the Department’s records showed Obama was NOT born in Hawaii.
The United States Constitution requires that a person be a “natural born citizen” to be elected to the presidency. If Mr. Obama was not born in Honolulu as he has claimed, then he is unlikely to be a “natural born citizen”. An examination of the records kept by the Hawaii Dept. of Health are an essential first step in ascertaining Mr. Obama’s constitutional eligibility to hold the office to which he was elected in 2008.
While no civil litigant has obtained discovery of these records, and all the civil lawsuits seeking those records have been dismissed on procedural grounds, Lakin’s case is different because he is the subject of criminal prosecution, and upon conviction stands in jeopardy of being sentenced to years at hard labor in the penitentiary.
Lakin’s request was submitted by his counsel to the Commanding General of the Military District of Washington, Major General Karl R. Horst, under Rule 702(b) of the Rules for Courts-Martial, which provides that “A convening authority who has the charges for disposition or, after referral, the convening authority or the military judge may order that a deposition be taken on request of a party.”
Lakin’s civilian attorney has been provided to him by the American Patriot Foundation, a non-profit group incorporated in 2003 to foster appreciation and respect for the U.S. Constitution, which has established a fund for Lakin’s legal defense to LTC Lakin. Further details are available on the Foundation’s website, www.safeguardourconstitution.com."
http://www.safeguardourconstitution.com/press-release/pressrelease20100728.html
Congress could go through the motions of impeachment, trial, and then his removal. Or since he was not really ever the president, they could remove him by force and escort out of office if he fails to leave.
Mr. Clinton didn’t have to step aside just because the Congress decided to impeach him and the courts do not have the authority to pass judgment on a sitting President even if he admits to a crime.
Yes he did not step aside, and there was no dispute to his presidential qualification. Clinton calculated correctly that there was not enough Senators to vote against him upholding the impeachment and his removal from office.
It's my sense, from your recent posts, that you at least question the extension of the WKA decision to a finding of NBC, for anybody born in the US, regardless of the citizenship of their parents.
In light of that sense, I wonder if you think WKA was correctly decided as to citizenship.
I think the WKA holding has been the subject of some amount of contention, at least to the extent the decision underpins citizenship of anchor babies. As for the decision upholding NBC status, I think Obama is the first opportunity presented to probe the issue, and Congress just blew it off with nary a remark. By silence, it adopted the position that WKA is an NBC decision. "Born on US soil" is enough, dual citizenship at birth is not a barrier.
I would say that a small fraction of the public is aware that Obama was a dual citizen at birth; and to the extent the public is aware, many of them reject the NBC requirement anyway, and would find any naturalized person to be eligible. Heck, I bet there is a significant number who would admit a foreigner to the office, that's how far gone "patriotism" is in this once-fine land.
You wish that was the only answer.
A person who takes pleasure in watching anther human being’s frustration or pain is a cruel assh**e.
A person who causes it or adds to it is even worse.
No loopholes, excuses or jokes you make to explain your behavior on these threads can justify what you do.
I would be ashamed if I were you.
But I’m not you.
Keep enjoying your “hobby”. Just know that many of us recognize it for what it is.
LTC Lakin is right to be concerned about the destruction of this magnificent Nation. He has placed his livelihood at stake to prove that Obama is Constitutionally invalid as President.
Why is it that some folks refuse to acknowledge that it is wrong of Obama to hide every shred of his existence from the public knowing that a decent man's life hangs in the balance?
The really disgusting part is that some of these advocates are current/former military.
They would rather stand idly by as a principled and decorated man like LTC Lakin is destroyed.
These types must be a real pleasure to work for.
Barack Obama isn’t even Barack Obama - that is an alias. Ther British father/dual citizenship angle would be great if his father was actually Barack Obama Sr.
“Tim Adams was an elections clerk. Hardly an expert and absolutely not an authority on this issue.”
What’s the difference between an elections clerk and a Senior election clerk??
You still believe Snopes is a bi-partisan source like your beloved FactCheck???
Yeah, this present college professor is just a unbelievable scam, who would know!!!
http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2010/06/hawaii-confirms-tim-adams-was-senior.html
"Apparently, according to the Obama campaign, In 1981 -- the year Obama transferred from Occidental College to Columbia University -- Obama visited his mother and sister Maya in Indonesia. After that visit, Obama traveled to Pakistan with a friend from college whose family was from there. The Obama campaign says Obama was in Pakistan for about three weeks, staying with his friend's family in Karachi and also visiting Hyderabad in Southern India."
Apparently, it was a romantic trip with 0bagger's boyfriend. It must be the one who was photographed with him, sitting on a couch, thigh to thigh.
Nothing wrong with that, I think. He's only our CIC, MoveOn and forget it. /s Love to see 0b0z0's education records with all their brilliant negative GPAs and IQs, if any!
And I'm not you. And for that I'm eternally grateful.
I understand he's a big Master debater.
Why do you think Lt. Harris was shot???
They could do the first. As for the second, why bother. Why not just shoot him? Neither would be legal or Constitutional.
My point is that we are left with two choices at this point: vote him out of office at the the next election or impeach him. If states were to enact legislation that required certification of eligibility by a state authority rather than by a political hack, so much the better. But, its going to take an election. Lets say for the purposes of argument that the country lost its collective mind and elected a psychopathic narcissist who may not even be eligible to be President and that this guy was somehow sworn into office... Oops, that's exactly what we have done and some poor misguided Lieutenant Colonel, or some crackpot lawyer is not going to get us out of this mess.
“Natural Born citizen is an exclusive term from Vattel’s “Law of Nations””
Incorrect. The first translation of Vattel to use NBC was published after the Constitution. Meanwhile, as the Supreme Court has argued in WKA:
“The Constitution nowhere defines the meaning of these words, either by way of inclusion or of exclusion, except insofar as this is done by the affirmative declaration that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.” In this as in other respects, it must be interpreted in the light of the common law, the principles and history of which were familiarly known to the framers of the Constitution...
...II. The fundamental principle of the common law with regard to English nationality was birth within the allegiance, also called “ligealty,” “obedience,” “faith,” or “power” of the King. The principle embraced all persons born within the King’s allegiance and subject to his protection. Such allegiance and protection were mutual — as expressed in the maxim protectio trahit subjectionem, et subjectio protectionem — and were not restricted to natural-born subjects and naturalized subjects, or to those who had taken an oath of allegiance, but were predicable of aliens in amity so long as they were within the kingdom. Children, born in England, of such aliens were therefore natural-born subjects. But the children, born within the realm, of foreign ambassadors, or the children of alien enemies, born during and within their hostile occupation of part of the King’s dominions, were not natural-born subjects because not born within the allegiance, the obedience, or the power, or, as would be said at this day, within the jurisdiction, of the King...
They then approvingly quote Dicey: “”Natural-born British subject” means a British subject who has become a British subject at the moment of his birth.” “Subject to the exceptions hereinafter mentioned, any person who (whatever the nationality of his parents) is born within the British dominions is a natural-born British subject. This rule contains the leading principle of English law on the subject of British nationality.”
They continue:
“It thus clearly appears that, by the law of England for the last three centuries, beginning before the settlement of this country and continuing to the present day, aliens, while residing in the dominions possessed by the Crown of England, were within the allegiance, the obedience, the faith or loyalty, the protection, the power, the jurisdiction of the English Sovereign, and therefore every child born in England of alien parents was a natural-born subject unless the child of an ambassador or other diplomatic agent of a foreign State or of an alien enemy in hostile occupation of the place where the child was born.
III. The same rule was in force in all the English Colonies upon this continent down to the time of the Declaration of Independence, and in the United States afterwards, and continued to prevail under the Constitution as originally established.”
You can read the full decision here:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0169_0649_ZO.html
The Supreme Court has already ruled that the source of the meaning of NBC is to be found in Common Law, not Vattel.
Congress could go through the motions of impeachment, trial, and then his removal. Or since he was not really ever the president, they could remove him by force and escort out of office if he fails to leave.
Yes he did not step aside, and there was no dispute to his presidential qualification. Clinton calculated correctly that there was not enough Senators to vote against him upholding the impeachment and his removal from office.
And men like Ehren Watada who basically said, "The war in Iraq is an illegal and immoral war. I will not obey illegal orders to deploy until someone shows it is otherwise?" Or women like Yolanda Huet-Vaughn who basically said, "The war to liberate Kuwait is an illegal and immoral war. Any orders to deploy are illegal until someone shows it is otherwise?" Were they showing the kind of fortitude you expect an officer to show? Should Bush 1 and Bush 2 both taken the time to show proof to both officers that the war's were legal? Do you condemn their court martials as roundly as you condemn Lakin's? Are they fine examples on military officers in your eyes? Or how about Michael New who said, "Wearing the UN beret and serving on duty with the UN is unconstitutional. I will refuse orders because of that." Should his officers taken him in hand and shown him chapter and verse why their orders were legal and why he should obey? Did he show the kind of fortitude you were hoping for? Or should they have done what they did, court martial his sorry ass and boot him from the military?
I mean after all, what is wrong with asking the president to justify his war? It's such a simple thing to do.
The only difference between an elections clerk and a senior elections clerk is how it’s listed on the persons resume.
My sources of this drivel are as good as any of the partial-birthers. Ain’t the internet great?
Lakin will be serving time or will be (less than honorable) discharged.
Busy day. Lots of Birthers out and about.
Well let’s see and as I said before; she is actually a medical doctor by profession, so to have a cover or alibi, she could have meant that the the - still - usurper was born natural as and American(?) instead of by a C-section, “un-natural”???
Yep, I quoted Snopes alright. If the partial-birthers can quote their godforsaken rags and sites so can I.
I think WKA is correct in that someone born in the USA of parents living here IAW US law is a natural born citizen. I think WKA opened up the idea that someone born of folks passing thru are also NBCs, which I think goes too far. As the dissent noted, someone born of a tourist in the USA should not be eligible for President.
I think the 14th Amendment has been misconstrued to say anyone born in the US is a citizen. Someone here illegally is not acting under the jurisdiction of the US, and should not be a citizen. However, I doubt either the courts or elections would support my view on this.
I’ve never heard of Lt. Harris. Thus, I have no opinion on why he/she was shot.
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.