He pleaded not guilty to missing movement on the basis that he had not been ordered to take that specific mode of transport. He was not charged with not deploying.
“But she wouldn’t allow Lakin to show any evidence that Obama is not Constitutionally able to “act as President”.”
And since all 50 states allowed Obama on the ballot, and a majority of voters voted for him, and the Electoral College voted for him, and Congress accepted the results without any dissent, and the Supreme Court swore Obama in as President, he IS THE PRESIDENT until someone with constitutional authority (Congress) acts to remove him.
THAT is why the birth certificate was irrelevant. Nothing on the birth certificate could impact the legality of the orders already given. At best, it could give cause to Congress to remove Obama, and THEN any subsequent orders would be illegal. But that would not make the orders already given to Lakin illegal, any more than it would repeal Obamacare.
The 20th Amendment says that if a President elect has “failed to qualify” by Jan 20th the Vice President elect is to “act as President until a President shall have qualified.”
So whether Obama is or isn’t the President is irrelevant to the issue of whether he can authorize combat operations.
To even BE the “President elect”, Congress had to already have certified him as the electoral winner. So the issue of “qualifying” is at that point beyond any authority or power that Congress has, if they ever even HAD any authority to judge someone’s Presidential qualifications.
IOW, even after the states are done with their role and after Congress is done with its role, there is still the hurdle of “qualifying”, which must be accomplished by Jan 20th if not before. There is no other branch of government that is given any authority or responsibility to determine whether the President elect and VP elect have “qualified” by Jan 20th. Therefore the Third Article applies, which says that all cases and controversies arising out of the Constitution or the law are to be decided by the federal judiciary.
There are cases within the federal judiciary that raise the issue of whether Obama can “act as President” according to the 20th Amendment. Only the federal judiciary - not the military - can decide those cases.
Lind has allowed the military to usurp the role of the federal judiciary. The military can’t interpret the Constitution and judge in matters of fact between Obama and Biden, to say which is to “act as President”. Furthermore, the military can’t decide whether Obama and Biden were ever even LAWFULLY declared to be the winners of the electoral vote, since Cheney didn’t ask for objections as required by law.
Article 92(1) - under which Lakin was charged - says that an order is not lawful if it is contrary to the Constitution. If the Constitution requires Joe Biden to “act as President”, then the authorization for Lakin’s deployment order was unconsitutional, thus making the order itself unauthorized.
The point: the Constitutionality of the authorization for the troop surge is critical to the lawfulness of Lakin’s deployment order.
When Lind denied Lakin the opportunity to defend himself on the grounds of unconstitutionality and unauthorized orders, she violated his due process and Sixth Amendment rights.
Regardless of how he pleaded, she denied him those rights, and that should allow him to file a lawsuit, if there’s any justice left in this country, which is probably not likely at this point.
So what you are saying is that if George Soros ran for president and all states allowed him on the ballot, a majority of voters voted for him the electoral college voted for him and the congress accepted the results without question, and Sottomayer swore him in, he would be president?
Right?