LTC Lakin Makes Formal Request of Hawaii Deposition

safeguardourconstitution ^ | 7/29/2010 | American Patriot Foundation

[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

[danamco]

Please tell us WHEN and WHERE he went to court???

[Mr Rogers]

Odd. Those don’t look like court decisions.

As I have pointed out to you and others multiple times, there was disagreement from the beginning on what NBC meant. And over time, the Supreme Court has consistently used English common law, not Vattel. And that was true long before Obama was born.

[El Sordo]

Why would that matter? It wouldn't change the fact that BHO has never proven in a court of law that he traveled to Pakistan.

[Mr Rogers]

"WOW, you must be busy up there with the three horses, dogs and a foreign wife."

My wife is a US citizen, xenophobic swine. BTW - my 2 oldest kids were adopted while we were in the Philippines. One is in the Army Guard, has been in Iraq and is preparing to deploy to Afghanistan. The other was in the Marines, did a tour in Iraq and is now married to ex-Marine infantry. Tell me, does that bother you? Naturalized citizens serving their country in foreign lands...what have YOU done?

And yes, I do keep busy. Unlike birthers, I don't live to read every utterance of World Nut Daily. 3 horses, 3 dogs, 3 kids, 1 grandchild and 2 more on the way...I have a life. It is a pity you do not, but I cannot help you there.

And anyone who pays as much attention to me as you seem to do would know that I am a bitter opponent of Obama on many issues. However, I am also honest, and will not lie to make a kook without a life happy.

[Mr Rogers]

USAF, not Army. I did do several tours attached to the US Army, and another in a Navy squadron. Given your attention to my personal life, I’m surprised you didn’t know...

[Mr Rogers]

No, I did not step on my dick. Had my sister been raised in Germany as a German, she would have been German - unless she made a claim to US citizenship after attaining majority.

Obama was not raised in the UK or Kenya. He has never asked to be a UK citizen, applied for a UK passport or lived in the UK. He is ineligible for Kenyan citizenship.

[El Sordo]

But he’s got the vibe of Kenyan citizenship.

That counts.

[Mr Rogers]

He THINKS he is a citizen of the world, and all the world are citizens of the US. And based on a recent ruling in AZ, some judges agree with him. THAT is frightening.

[danamco]

I have been gone for a while searching on the BNA on different sites. Among Mario Apuzzo’s and from there through many other sites and blogs I ran over this post, wow???

Interesting take on Indonesian adoption rules,

BHO, mmmmm...mmmmm...mmmmm!!!

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2457491/posts?page#41

[danamco]

I have been gone for a while searching on the BNA on different sites. Among Mario Apuzzo’s and from there through many other sites and blogs I ran over this post, wow???

Interesting take on Indonesian adoption rules,

BHO, mmmmm...mmmmm...mmmmm!!!

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2457491/posts?page#41

[danamco]

Sorry, I got sooooooo scared of Mrs. Rogers post that I triggered it twice!!!

[danamco]

And yes, I do keep busy. Unlike birthers,

ABSOLUTELY!

You started here at 5:58 AM and still here 12+ hour later!!

That's what called busy in the military!!!

[Spaulding]

Learning first hand about disinformation tactics has been illuminating. The past couple of years have been an introductory course.

The troll Mr. Rogers established a “straw dog.” which appears, to the casual reader, to impart an air of objectivity to the troll’s next assertion. Troll Rogers suggests that there was deception. “To pretend it is supposed to apply to those born in the US is dishonest.”The intention of Senate Resolution 511 was not the issue, and barely mentioned, in the original Spaulding response. Senate Res. 511 was always about McCain who was well known not to have been born on our soil, and indirectly, about Obama, because it dishonestly claimed to validate McCain's eligibility. As the honest among us have known, or since learned, no law can amend the Constitution. Further, Senate Res. 511, a resolution, doesn't create law -it is an expression of resolve or belief.

SenRes 511 was hurriedly concocted when McCaskill’s bill, Sen. Bill 2678, February 28, 2008, the “Children of Military Families Natural Born Citizen Act” went nowhere. Would Senators McCaskill, Clinton, Menendez, Leahy, have tried to pass a law making McCain eligible if he were already eligible? When S2678 failed, McCaskill and Leahy took an approach often used which presumes citizens don't understand the jargon of senate process and passed the Res. 511 in April 30 of 2008. The purpose of both Obama campaign advisor McCaskill's senate actions was to insure that McCain would be Obama's opposition. With McCain running no one would dare raise the issue of Obama's ineligibility. Knocking out Obama meant McCain too would be disqualified, and Hillary would likely have defeated any of the dispirited Republican contendors.

When trolls, or anyone for that matter, uses terms like “well accepted,” “room for doubt,” “many writers held,” and “dominant view,” you should presume they have no argument. Troll Rogers asserts that the dominant view held that “someone born in the USA was a NBC.”

Honesty and clarity are synonymous. Here is just one at least thirty examples to demonstrate the truth, as well as warn readers about the tactics of trolls:

From Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 from 1874, Chief Justice Morrison Waite's Opinion of the Court: “At common law, with the nomenclature of which he framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.” The term "native" used by Chief Justice Waite is one of many, including "birthright citizenship" used by Dr. Ramsay and the french terms from the original Law of Nations. The term Obama used to define himself, "Native born citizen of the U.S." is defined in State Department documents as someone born on our soil, which includes "anchor babies." These are citizens by statue, law, and not "born on the soil of citizen parents."

Thank you Troll Rogers for providing the context to again clarify the meaning of Article II Section 1, and to help illuminate the techniques of disinformation propaganda.

[danamco]

“My wife is a US citizen, xenophobic swine.”

---

My loving wife would kick me out of the house, if I ever called her by that name!!!

But I’m not surprise that’s probably why you chose an Asia(?) wife to be treated that way???

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenophobia

[danamco]

And anyone who pays as much attention to me as you seem to do would know that I am a bitter opponent of Obama on many issues.

You never proved that to us here, and for the records, just the contrary!!!

[danamco]

But you can’t deny that he was also raised (adopted) in Indonesia???

[jamese777]

That’s oral argument: its not a written court decision. I think the supreme court would be mortified if every verbal utterance carried the same weight as a carefully thought out written decision. Its interesting to post, but of little help to us.

---

Well the Supreme Court has already rejected hearing any eight appeals of Obama eligibility lawsuits.
It would appear that this issue is having trouble finding those needed four justices who want to hear an appeal before the full court.

[danamco]

Since you were mum about this link, here’s the link from that link:

http://obamacrimes.com/?p=376

[centurion316]

I assume that you have a charter appointing you as official designator of trolls. Oh, you don’t? and you just apply that to anyone who does not agree with you? I see.

In the absence of evidence, all opinions have equal value, Zero. Since Mr. Obama has been quite successful in hiding or destroying whatever evidence may be extant, we are left with nothing but opinion and wild conjecture. Who knows where the truth is? If you claim that you do, then you should produce your evidence. Otherwise your opinion, my opinion, Mr Rogers opinion are are all worth a $0.00 discount on a happy meal.

But, for you to attack those who hold an opinion that quite accurately describes how the law, politicians, and the public in general are treating this issue just demonstrates that your opinions and rants are not worthy of serious consideration.

Your argument is going nowhere, the courts don’t want to deal with it, the politicians certainly don’t want to deal with it, and no one has any evidence to force them to do otherwise. Life is just a beetch isn’t it.

[jamese777]

We will have a test of your theory in Kirchner v Obama et al.
If Apuzzo has asked the right questions, perhaps the supremes will hear the appeal - or not, as the case may be.

---

No, we won’t have a test of my theory in Kerchner. The only issue that would be on appeal in Kerchner v Obama is whether the district court and then the court of appeals erred in not granting standing to Kerchner. Since the Court of Appeals labeled the appeal to them as “frivolous,” it is highly unlikely that the Supreme Court will take up the standing issue on further appeal. The Supremes have already rejected an almost identical appeal in Berg v Obama.