Roberts' resume is irrelevant. Hopefully the court won't be discussing that.
(2) The prosecution has on its witness list for sentencing, the wife of the doctor who took Lt.C. Lakin’s place in Afghanistan.
Definitely an irrelevant witness. We've been told repeatedly that Lakin WASN'T ordered to deploy to Afghanistan, so there would not be a doctor who took his place, much less his wife. If the prosecutor is admitting that Lakin WAS being deployed to Afghanistan, then they are admitting that Obama's authority over that deployment is indeed relevant. Lakin then has a legal right to challenge that authority.
(3) Colonel Lakin requested and took his pre-deployment leave AFTER he refused deployment.
Again, the official charges do not say anything about Lakin refusing deployment. This is more irrelevant detail.
How do you feel about your track record of advice concerning Lakin's case so far? Could you have been more perfectly wrong?
I wish those advising Lakin on the Internet would take my challenge: Refuse to obey any law passed since 20 Jan 2009. After all, they have never been considered or signed by a REAL President, and are thus as invalid as Lakin's orders supposedly are...then you TOO will have 'standing' when the IRS, etc take you to court.
Odd, isn't it, that the Internet heroes supporting Lakin never take up that challenge.
They know the order was to deploy.
Good of you to catch them trying to have it both ways though. You’re absolutely right.