>Realworld 101.
>He never received an order from President Obama.
>His charges stem from disobaying an order from a supperior officer.
Question: From where does an officer gain the authority to issue orders to a subordinate?
Follow up: Are all orders legitimate?
>That makes his excuss not pertenant to the case.
Answer the above in such a way that authority does not “flow downhill” and then we’ll address this point.
>Even if Obama is inelegible, the senior officer that actually did give him his orders was perfectly legal in doing so and his actions in refusing them are criminal under UCMJ.
So then, if I were to impersonate an officer, say a full-bird Colonel, and ordered some troop movement [say from the barracks to bivouac point A for a training exercise] and the Major gave orders to the Captain of some company, who had reason to doubt I was a real Colonel, he would be completely unjustified to request assurance of the legitimacy of the orders?
>His actions in inciting mutney in a time of war could carry the death sentance if the authorities wished to push it.
The actions of the city council of Chicago, including the mayor thereof, as well as the police of that city, could legitimately be put to death for their violation of this law: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00000241——000-.html
{Or are you willing to assert that the false arrest of MacDonald and other inhabitants of Chicago for firearms is NOT a kidnapping made with the threat of the use of deadly force?}
"Under the DOD Reorganization Act, the Secretaries of the Military Departments assign all forces to combatant commands except those assigned to carry out the mission of the Services, i.e., recruit, organize, supply, equip, train, service, mobilize, demobilize, administer and maintain their respective forces. The chain of command to these combatant commands runs from the President to the Secretary of Defense directly to the commander of the combatant command."