Posted on 10/13/2010 3:04:13 PM PDT by BuckeyeTexan
On consideration of the Petition for Extraordinary Relief in the Nature of a Writ of Mandamus and Application for a Stay of Proceedings, the petition is DENIED.
(Excerpt) Read more at caaflog.com ...
Maybe because OholyO knew it resembled his own future too well.
The Supreme Court did not say English common law controls American law, but that it provided the Founders with a common vocabulary as they wrote legal phrases into the Constitution.
Also, the Supreme Court REJECTED the idea that English COMMON LAW supported someone being born overseas as being a NBS, or even a subject. See Section 4 in WKA.
In matter of fact. None of the charges Lakin is facing have anything to do with Obama.
Wasn't the delay at the request of the defense? And don't you think Lakin's new team needs some time to prepare their case? Or would you have them give up?
...because the political winds and other discoveries that may happen will get worse for Obama.
That isn't going to save Lakin.
So would PFC Lee and PFC Johnson be in the right if they said, "Sir, I refuse to fill sandbags because I believe Obama is not qualified to be president" and would you support them if they did so?
And if the answer is 'yes' then is it your position that every order given by every officer and NCO in every branch of the military since noon on January 20,2001 has been illegal?
Check and mate.
Oh we're just warming up.
It threw me for a loop when jbjd dissed me. Not just to say I was mistaken in a conclusion or didn’t have all the facts, but to smear my integrity and motives. She’s done a lot of great work so it’s not that she’s either a fool or a troll, so that’s the kind of hit that blindsides a person.
I’ll let One Winged Shark answer for himself; probably should just let him answer because his answers are better than mine anyway, and he has more knowledge about the military.
My understanding is that they are all unlawful because they are all contrary to the Constitution. They must be obeyed because of the de facto officer doctrine because superficially Obama is being accepted as POTUS.
But Obama has never even LAWFULLY been certified as the winner of the electoral vote, which means the results of the election are still legally pending. At this point even if Obama was eligible the orders he’s given so far would be unlawful because neither Obama nor Biden “qualified” by Jan 20th since they had not been lawfully certified as the electoral winners.
IOW, Lakin can actually go beyond what he’s stated. He’s been asking IF Obama qualifies, when in fact we can know for certain that Obama at this point has NOT qualified. Knowing that to be the case, that may actually shift the balance to where there is a DUTY to disobey the orders. De facto officer only applies if it is not known that the person giving the orders is acting beyond their authority, correct? Once it is known that the person doesn’t lawfully hold the position, there is a duty to disobey, correct?
lol. I just realized that in that post I went from saying the orders had to be obeyed to saying they had to be disobeyed. lol. Obviously I’m still sorting this through in my mind.
Next time I’ll just wait for One Winged Shark, Red Steel, and the others to clue me in. lol
And what clause of the Constitution pertains to filling sandbags?
Once it is known that the person doesn’t lawfully hold the position, there is a duty to disobey, correct?
Nope.
What clause of the Constitution refers to abortion?
According to the Supreme Court there is an implied right to privacy which extends to a woman's decision to choose whether or not to have a baby. One can question the court's logic behind that ruling but there it is.
Now, what clause of the Constitution applies to orders to fill sandbags?
“`course there’s many people here how think that’s a bit much. I disagree with them”
As a member (reserve) of the Armed Forces, I must warn you that such thinking will not be allowed on my watch. We ARE NOT a banana republic. IF the POTUS is ineligible (and I think he his) he should and must be removed, but in a peaceful and constitutional (not revolutionary) manner. As much as I support LTC/Dr. Lakin’s quest, I adamantly oppose those that expouse lawlessness and violence.
Article II, Section 2: “The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States”
“He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Adice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whos Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law”
Article II, Section 1:
“No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.”
Amendment XII
“The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted”
Article I, Section 8:
“The Congress shall have Power... To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces (BDZ’s note - like the rules which prompted the manual OWS quoted to say that lowest-level orders are an execution of the orders down the chain of command, which begins with the Constitution that names the President as CINC)...To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States or in any Department or Officer thereof.” (BDZ’s note - such as the laws requiring objections to be called for when the electoral votes are counted)
Amendment XX, Section 3:
“If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the President elect shall have died, the Vice President elect shall become Prsident. If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified.”
A note about Article II, Section 2:
One of the “Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law” is the Secretary of Defense, a cabinet position. By law the Secretary of Defense maintains the military and provides for movement orders, etc. BUT THE POTUS IS THE ONE WHO APPOINTS THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE AND ALL OTHER OFFICERS REFERRED TO.
Article II, Section 2 says the President SHALL (must)appoint these officers.
You seem to think that the president, any president, it a generalissimo, strutting around and ordering the military to do his bidding come what may. That can’t be further from the truth because in order to accept your view of the presidential powers you must ignore the Constitution, specifically the clause in Article I, Section 8: “Congress shall have the power to make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces?” That is the relevant clause here, not Article II. That is where Colonel Roberts and Colonel McHugh and Lieutenant Colonel Judd got their authority to order Lakin to report to his brigade commander and to report for duty with the 101st. Not from Obama or any other occupant of the Oval Office, legitimate or illegetimate. But from the rules and regulations adopted by the Army under the authority granted them by act of Congress. That’s why people can be ordered to fill sandbags or stand a post or report for duty. That’s why the orders of the three officers were lawful. That is why Lakin will be convicted, cashiered, and probably jailed for his actions regardless of what happens or doesn’t happen to Obama.
Did Congress rule that the Secretary of Defense maintains the military?
And is that SecDef required to be appointed by the President, according to the Constitution?
Remember that manual that One Winged Shark quoted from, where the “filling sandbags” quote even came from - saying that all orders right down to filling sandbags are the execution of the entire chain of command, stemming from the authority of the Constitution?
How do you think that manual came up with that? Do you think it has anything to do with the laws that Congress has passed regarding who authorizes what in the military?
I’ve already answered your questions previously on this thread.
I beat you soundly.
Screw off.
Still LOL!
You see when the blind leads the blinded Benedict Arnolds, and you have few numbers of them here on this thread (aka SPs), no wonder in which direction our country, the former United States of America, now the new USSA, is heading down the RAThole!!
They are visible enablers and traitors or as BOH “Pinheads” doing their very best to keep their dear Fuehrer in office at any cost, even some of them helping to sacrifice a real Patriot and former colleague, Lt.Col Terry Lakin to the slaughter house with loudly gleefulness!!!
With such conviction they certainly are promoting political chaos as seen in Athens, Parish and other cities in Europe and then the muzzies ready to take over???
Dude, how many times have I corrected your BS over the last year? More times than I remember. You throwing around the word ‘dishonesty’ is laughable.
—
All that you have ever done is state a different personal opinion. Your “corrections” are merely divergent points of view.
However when you stated that the reason for Judge Lind’s postponements was because she was “kicking the can down the road,” that was a flat out lie that I felt you should be pulled up on.
“Many of us believe that ObamaCare is unconstitutional. Does that belief prevent its effect upon us right now? No. Unless and until it is found to be unconstitutional, it has the full effect of law.
The same holds true for Obama as the sitting POTUS. Unless and until he is found to be constitutionally disabled, he sits in the Oval Office and executes his duties.”
Seems you are pulling a fast one here???
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2607561/posts
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.