Lakin not allowed witnesses, documents, explanation at court-martial Dec. 14!

"Lakin not allowed witnesses, documents, explanation at court-martial Dec. 14!
Lakin Family Attempts to Avoid Confrontation Ignored by Obama

Letters obtained by The Gazette reveal the extent to which a decorated Army officer and his brother struggled to resolve concerns over the President’s eligibility prior to the officer being court-martialed.

The Lakins are long-time Greeley residents. Three Lakin brothers; Dr. Greg Lakin, Capt. Gary Lakin USCG and Lt. Col. Terrance Lakin graduated from University High School in 1977, 1980 and 1983 respectively. The brothers' parents still live in Greeley and have a long history of supporting humanitarian causes in the area.

Lt. Col. Lakin is currently scheduled to be court-martialed Dec. 14 for disobeying orders to deploy after exhausting numerous attempts to resolve issues regarding the President’s eligibility to be Commander-in-Chief. The specific issue involved is the Constitutional requirement that the President be a natural born citizen.

Dr. Greg Lakin has previously been a member of the Greeley Police Department and was a prosecutor in Hawaii. Greg, who was interviewed on the Peter Boyles radio show on Nov. 9, said Lakin, “mulled over this for a long period of time” before he made his decision to refuse to deploy to Afghanistan. He strongly disputed the contention that his brother was a coward for deploying, noting Terry had already served in both Bosnia and Afghanistan.

In an interview with the Gazette, Dr. Lakin shared copies of letters he and his brother sent to the President and Hawaiian Governor Linda Lingle asking for a resolution of this issue. Greg said the letters were written with a very humble spirit in an attempt to seek information verifying Barack Obama’s birthplace.

Lt. Col. Lakin sent a letter to the President prior to being charged saying, as part of the deployment orders, he was required to submit his long form birth certificate and he was “glad to obey this order, and will provide a certified copy of my original birth certificate with common, standard identifiers, including the name of an attending physician and a hospital.” He said he “attempted through my chain of command for many months to get answers to the relentless questions surrounding your eligibility, but was informed that I lack standing. I also sought answers, unsuccessfully, through my Congressional delegation.” He went on to explain the reason for his request had nothing to do with personal differences. “Please assure the American people that you are indeed constitutionally eligible to serve as Commander-in-Chief and thereby may lawfully direct service members into harm's way. I will be proud to deploy to Afghanistan to further serve my country and my fellow soldiers, but want to do so with the knowledge and peace of mind that this important provision of our Constitution is respected and obeyed.”

Dr. Lakin, in his first letter to the president prior to his brother’s arraignment, implored Obama to put the matter to rest stressing his brother tried to resolve the matter through proper channels but was rebuffed. “Approximately 20 months ago while continuing to serve in the Army he attempted to seek clarification regarding your birth certificate through proper military channels. Lt. Col. Lakin filed his requests through the normal chain of command (as the military advised) but continued to meet with frustration as the Army was unable to provide any clarification with regard to your place of birth. He believes this raises a Constitutional issue, a Constitution which he has sworn to uphold.” He stresses that his brother would gladly deploy in an instant once his questions have been answered, saying Terry “remains ready and willing to continue to serve his country in areas of conflict - as he has done in Afghanistan and Bosnia. I believe that upon meeting with my idealistic and principled brother you would find him professional, compassionate and worth helping.” Dr. Lakin even suggested a way to defuse the situation saying that “a meeting with him or our family, whether you chose to do this in private or public setting, would likely defuse this matter.”

He also sent a letter to Hawaiian Governor Linda Lingle who he met several times while he was a prosecuting attorney in Maui County. He told her that “a short meeting or phone with him or family (whether done privately or publicly - your choice), would completely defuse this matter.”

Dr. Lakin sent another letter to the President after the initial court-martial date was set. In the letter Greg told the president he was a supporter who was pleased to see him elected in 2008. He reiterated that Terry made this decision only after other options had been exhausted. “It is a shame that no one above him in the military ranks and no one in Congress, who represents him, could address his concerns so that he could have avoided the prospect of such an enormous penalty for staying faithful to the oath he swore as an officer.” He went on to say that Col. Lakin was far from alone in his concerns saying, “Many others in uniform share this concern and have conveyed their support to my brother.”

Showing he understands the divisiveness the issue has caused, he told the President, “We should use all means necessary to avoid an escalated controversy this fall when his court-martial is scheduled. There is much strife and tension in this nation now and this would not be healthy or productive.” Emphasizing the desire to find a resolution of the eligibility issue once and for all so the matter could be put to rest, Lakin said, “My family stands ready to provide any further information you might need and to offer our assistance to try to broker any compromise or negotiation that might be acceptable to all parties. We are deeply distressed over this situation, and do not believe that Terry deserves to be imprisoned simply for seeking assurances that he is following legal orders.”

Greg stated that he has not received any response to his letters and is concerned the Army will simply take the easy way out by avoiding the issue and simply lock up his brother. He said based on his experience as a prosecutor in situations like this where there is no case law, “Judges go in with a pre-determined idea how they are going to decide it and take case law and policy statements to say whatever they want. There is no magic law that supports either position.”

Greg said if his brother is not allowed to present evidence on his behalf and is convicted he would be forced to leave his practice to advocate for his brother saying, “My reluctant but determined response would be to forego my busy medical practice treating drug addicts and elderly patients to organize a public outcry for America’s new military political prisoner.”

As the issue drags on, more members of the media appear to be mentioning the issue. Conan O’Brien joked about the President being ineligible in one of his monologues. Rush Limbaugh, who has previously made comments regarding Obama’s birth certificate, said last week, “We have an imposter for all intents and purposes serving in the White House.”

Saturday Night Live has also mentioned the issue with an opening skit having Sen. Harry Reid asking the President to produce his birth certificate. ABC News Jake Tapper questioned White House Security Advisor David Axelrod’s statement that the President has released his birth certificate asking specifically about the long form containing the name and signature of the attending physician."

Obviously officers can issue some lawful orders. That is a duh. All that matters, though, is whether they can LAWFULLY issue the orders they gave Lakin. Lind said those orders have nothing to do with the President; they are independent of the President.

But those orders were orders for Lakin to deploy in the use of force, which Congress only gave the President the authority to do. Lakin’s orders are ABSOLUTELY tied to the President, because nobody but the President has the authority to use force - which means to order the chain of command to do what is necessary to use force.

No President, no lawful orders to use force.

No President, and brigade commanders are acting beyond their authority if they order somebody to Afghanistan in the use of force.

If Obama is not Constitutionally allowed to “act as President” (and he’s not, because he failed to qualify by Jan 20, 2009 - and he was arguably never even lawfully declared the electoral winner) then the orders he issued were not lawful because nobody authorized to use force issued the orders. Without a President’s decision to use force, all the under-officers acted beyond their authority so their orders are similarly not lawful.

You can argue that Obama’s orders had to be obeyed anyway because of the de facto officer doctrine. But that doesn’t make them lawful, according to the elements of Article 92.

And it doesn’t work to say that Lakin’s orders are independent of the POTUS AND to say that he still has to obey them because of the de facto officer doctrine. Either Lakin’s orders are associated with the POTUS or not. If Obama has nothing to do with Lakin’s orders from the brigade commanders, then all that matters is whether the brigade commanders could lawfully give those particular orders to Lakin. Lakin’s brigade commanders are not de facto officers so de facto has nothing to do with Lakin, if Lind’s claim is true. But

In that event all that matters is whether Lakin’s brigade commanders have authority to deploy Lakin in the use of force. If no President ordered the use of force, then the brigade commanders don’t have authority - since only the President has the authority to use force - and their orders to Lakin are beyond their authority.

You can’t have it both ways. Either Lakin’s orders are connected to the POTUS, or they aren’t. If they’re not connected to POTUS, then the brigade commanders had no authority to give them.

#1 is the one I already addressed. There is no way to know if it is Obama’s COLB because the print is illegible. But it appears to be missing 2 line that are on Obama’s alleged COLB. Right under the fold should be FATHER’S NAME, with BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA directly underneath. Those 2 lines are missing. This really doesn’t even seem to be the same COLB.

#2 is the other one I talked about, where the circle on the top fold distorts but the “authenticating seal” doesn’t.

#5 similarly doesn’t bend with the fold.

#6 similarly doesn’t bend with the fold, although with the right side of the paper held down the page is flat enough that it shouldn’t necessarily bend.

#7 there’s no way to know if it’s Obama’s COLB or not.

So I’ve addressed all of these. None of them has a seal that bends with the fold, although #2 and #5 have angles that would REQUIRE it to noticeably bend.

Do what I did. For #2 and #5, take a piece of plastic or an overhead transparency and press it against your computer screen. With permanent marker trace the outline of the circle that is on the top fold and then trace the outline of the “seal”. Take the transparency and lay it against a plain sheet of paper and just look at it where your eyes don’t try to make it 3D. Figure out the radius of the top circle and draw a circle of that size; then compare the folded top circle with a true circle to see how the shape differs. Do the same thing with the “seal” and see how the shape of the supposedly folded “seal” compares with a perfect circle.

You can do the same thing with all of these photos. That “seal” is and remains round on all of them, regardless of what the paper it’s supposedly on does.

I have not ignored any of the photos. There is not one photo that proves there was a 3-dimensional seal really on a piece of paper having Obama’s name on it. But there are 2 images of a “seal” on Obama’s COLB that doesn’t bend when it’s supposed to, and one image of a seal on a COLB other than the one with Obama’s name on it.

No images proving a real “seal”. Two images strongly suggesting a “Photoshopped” seal. Two images that are inconclusive of anything. That’s what Factcheck posted.

The truth just is what it is, whether anybody “validates” it or not. All we can do is either believe the truth, remain agnostic about it, or violate it.

The authority to use force was given only to the President. Anybody else “using appropriate force” without valid Presidential orders is acting out of line - giving orders beyond their authority, which renders those orders “not lawful” according to the very definitions of Article 92.

That’s just the truth. It is what it is. Unless you can show me someplace where Congress grants military officers the authority to use force without the President being involved, I have no choice but to believe this is the truth.

You are appealing to the CURRENT state of our courts as an authority?

What are you, a 9th Circus justice? Our legal system these days couldn't rule correctly on if water was wet.

I notice you STILL don't make even a half-assed attempt at giving any citations or links to back up your bluster. All you do is say that those sources posted, including the MCM I posted earlier, don't matter and YOU know better.

Not that I expect any out of blowhard newbies like you. Run along now while the adults talk.

You are appealing to the CURRENT state of our courts as an authority?

Actually, I'm appealing to the Constitution, which is what the most recent cases have specifically cited. I've asked you to read it, but that seems beyond your capabilities.

What are you, a 9th Circus justice? Our legal system these days couldn't rule correctly on if water was wet.

Nice meaningless folksy ad hominem. That's what people who don't know what they're talking about do.

I've told you the relevant section and article in the Constitution, the Article of the United States Code in which the relevant statues, including the UCMJ, reside, and told you the legal case in which to find a succinct, lucid explanation of the above. If you've got too much of a dead corpse intellect to make it from there, that's your problem.

And you don't actually understand where the MCM fits in all that, do you?

Not that I expect any out of blowhard newbies like you. Run along now while the adults talk.

If you're capable of identifying adult talk, let me know where they are. Anything would beat this.

Please tell us why Congress..authorized the President.. the authority to convene Courts Martial.

Was it because his orders and the officers and NCOs representing him are followed.

It is law all orders and regulations represent the President.

Perhaps this is their goal.

We who are retired can speak this..those on active duty must hold their voice.

LTC Lakin crossed the Rubicon..now we are in dangerous territory and you know it.

If an innocent LTC Lakin is convicted to protect an illegal obama there may be collisions.

Lakin is probably going to be convicted unless his new attorney has some crackerjack procedural moves in the bag not related to the Obama eligibility question. If Lakin gets a stiff penalty, that will be a sad outcome for what otherwise seems to be a decent guy. But it will be because he got bad advice from his first lawyer.

History Lesson:

The Framers of the Constitution were cognizant of the power struggle between Parliament and the King regarding the powers of the military. Many of the Framers were combat veterans from the Continental Army and understood the demands of military life and the need for a well-disciplined fighting force. The solution to the government of the armed forces was a classic balancing of constitutional interests and powers. They assured that Congress - with its responsiveness to the population, its fact-finding ability, and its collective deliberative processes - would provide for the government of the armed forces.

The Framers of the Constitution had a great respect for the value of separation of powers. One of the primary goals of the Constitutional Convention, in remedying the defects of the Articles of Confederation, was to create a government in which separate branches of power served as a check and balance against the other. Principles of separation of powers also applied to the military. The Framers vested power in the executive and legislative branches, but left the judiciary with only a collateral role in governing the armed forces.

By distributing power over the armed forces between the legislative and executive branches, the Framers "avoided much of the political-military power struggle which typified so much of the early history of the British court-martial system." Moreover, the Framers made it clear that while the command of the military lie with the executive, the military would be governed and regulated according to the law handed down by the legislative branch. Therefore, the government of the armed forces would always reflect the will of the people as expressed through their representatives in Congress.

Every one who has read a book knows Obama is illegal. The problem I have is the misinformation being spewed..it is not logical obama is a legal president..there are few who have done as much research as I have on this subject... This goes beyond LTC Lakin..we are in the realm of treason..there is an active campaign to surplant the constitution.. LTC Lakin is a stepping stone..to their goal..

If I read anything..making obama a natural born citizen I would cease posting..on the subject..but I have found nothing supporting obama. We are in the mists of a Civil War.. the Courts must intervene..but I am afraid it is too late..the die was cast..with the passing of the 14th Amendment and the fraudulent election of obama. The republicans and the democrats are nothing more than pawns for trinkets.

Yeah, yeah, I know. Every generation thinks the world is going to heck as it gets older. The wolves are always circling in the dark while the camp fires slowly die out. Except experience has taught me that mindset primarily serves just to inspire a sense of significance in the people addicted to it. It also saps will and resolve.

Buck up! We lost an election in 2008. It happens. That didn't doom us. We won back one house of Congress in 2010. It happens. That doesn't guarantee victory in 2012. Victory will go to the side that keeps its head, crafts a plan, and rides it with a little luck. Talk of a Civil War ain't gonna’ cut it.

If you haven't read anything supporting Obama as a natural born citizen, you should read more. There's a court case from last year that specifically said he was. Whether you agree or not, that's a lot stronger pedigree than anything the birthers have got. So get over it. And whining about the 14th Amendment 143 years after the fact ain't winning any elections either.

The die is never cast. The future belongs to what Reagan asked us to be, the happy warriors who don't lose their heads over nonsense.

**** the wolves. America has kicked their tails before, and we will do it again.

The Indiana court was trickery and a play with words..the 14th Amendment gave citizenship to Obama..if he was born in Hawaii.

The 14h amendment cannot make a natural born citizen any more than a box of cracker jacks.

The word natural means descent..posterity..means descent..forefathers means descent..obama has no claim to any of the above..

Obama has no kindren blood to our ancestors...would George Washington or Thomas Jefferson accept him as their kindred blood..you know the answer.

>The future belongs to what Reagan asked us to be, the happy warriors who don’t lose their heads over nonsense.

I find it somewhat amusing how oft-toted Reagan is to people who wish to link ‘conservatism’ to the Republican party; being under 30, I have no actual memories of him on the political-scene and so, according to my experience, Regan was an abnormality. Furthermore, the Republican party plays the “bitter gun-and-bible clinging” people for fools:
When was the last time they pushed for ACTUAL responsible spending, even to the point of ending big/popular social programs?
When was the last time they, AS A PARTY, even symbolically proposed a law to outlaw abortions federally*? How about a Constitutional amendment to spit in the faces of those black-robed tyrants who declare themselves to be higher than the Constitution?

Hell, as a party, the Democrats are at least honest! They at least strive for what they say they’re going to strive for!
As far as I’m concerned, this 112th Congress is the Republican-party’s Last Chance... if they don’t “perform as advertised” I’m going to the Constitution Party, or perhaps I’ll make my own**.

*An actual stated Republican party plank.
**How does “The American Ammunition Party” sound?

The Indiana court was trickery and a play with words..the 14th Amendment gave citizenship to Obama..if he was born in Hawaii.

The 14h amendment cannot make a natural born citizen any more than a box of cracker jacks.

The word natural means descent..posterity..means descent..forefathers means descent..obama has no claim to any of the above..

Obama has no kindren blood to our ancestors...would George Washington or Thomas Jefferson accept him as their kindred blood..you know the answer.

Ahem...

In your case, we seem to be at the root of this, don't we? And it really has nothing to do with the Constitution or the law. I'll let your own words speak for you, because they do so distastefully enough. It's a nice bit of "blood and soil," though. Would fit right in with some of America's historical enemies.

Let's just say I think somewhat more highly of the ideals of this country than you.

P.S. That stuff definitely is not an election winner. Keep it in the closet.

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.