Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

LTC Lakin Formally Charged (Violation of UCMJ Articles 87 & 92)
American Patriot Foundation ^ | 04/22/2010

Posted on 04/22/2010 2:54:33 PM PDT by BuckeyeTexan

Lieutenant Colonel Terrence L. Lakin was charged today with four violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) under Articles 87 and 92.

(Chargesheet at the link in PDF format.)

(Excerpt) Read more at scribd.com ...


TOPICS: Extended News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: army; bhodod; birthcertificate; certifigate; courtmartial; lakin; military; naturalborncitizen; obama; terrylakin; ucmj
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 421-440441-460461-480481-490 next last
To: Red Steel

This particular situation seemns substantially more promising than the Lakin fiasco.


441 posted on 04/26/2010 5:22:32 AM PDT by verity (Obama Lies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 423 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand; deport; butterdezillion
Obama is ass-deep in this. The chances of Obama quashing Blago's subpoena is small, very very small.

IIRC Blago want Soetoro - that's his real name - to testify FOR him, and that seems to be a pickle!

So if the motion is granted and Soetoro does NOT do that, what then?

Blago - his narcissistic projection or not - seems very self-assured when he goes on camera, that he has a "trump card" somewhere!!

Will be very interesting to follow!!!

442 posted on 04/26/2010 5:41:32 AM PDT by danamco (")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 397 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur; All
> Facts are facts.

Facts are facts?

Really?! Where?

Please present your “FACTS”.

Oh yeah ... that picture again, of that “document” ...
... that has never appeared in a courtroom ...
... Only a picture of it, on your computer monitor ...



443 posted on 04/26/2010 5:44:31 AM PDT by BP2 (I think, therefore I'm a conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 439 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan
Will Lakin be the 21st Century equivalent to John Brown?
444 posted on 04/26/2010 5:50:55 AM PDT by surfer (To err is human, to really foul things up takes a Democrat, don't expect the GOP to have the answer!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel; The Pack Knight; butterdezillion

Article 138 is one of the most powerful rights under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), but it is one of the rights least known and least used by military personnel. Under Article 138 of the UCMJ, “any member of the armed forces who believes himself (or herself) wronged by his (or her) commanding officer” may request redress. If such redress is refused, a complaint may be made and a superior officer must “examine into the complaint.”

Article 138 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) gives every member of the Armed Forces the right to complain that he or she was wronged by his or her commanding officer. The right even extends to those subject to the UCMJ on inactive duty for training.


445 posted on 04/26/2010 5:57:17 AM PDT by danamco (")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 431 | View Replies]

To: surfer

From Wiki....:

When Brown was hanged after his attempt to start a slave rebellion in 1859, church bells rang, minute guns were fired, large memorial meetings took place throughout the North, and famous writers such as Emerson and Thoreau joined many Northerners in praising Brown.[3]

Historians agree John Brown played a major role in starting the Civil War.[4] His role and actions prior to the Civil War as an abolitionist, and the tactics he chose, still make him a controversial figure today. He is sometimes memorialized as a heroic martyr and a visionary and sometimes vilified as a madman and a terrorist. Some writers, such as Bruce Olds, describe him as a monomaniacal zealot, others, such as Stephen B. Oates, regard him as “one of the most perceptive human beings of his generation.” David S. Reynolds hails the man who “killed slavery, sparked the civil war, and seeded civil rights” and Richard Owen Boyer emphasizes that Brown was “an American who gave his life that millions of other Americans might be free.” For Ken Chowder he is “at certain times, a great man”, but also “the father of American terrorism.”[5]

Brown’s nicknames were Osawatomie Brown, Old Man Brown, Captain Brown and Old Brown of Kansas. His aliases were Nelson Hawkins, Shubel Morgan, and Isaac Smith. Later the song “John Brown’s Body” (the original title of the “Battle Hymn of the Republic”) became a Union marching song during the Civil War.


446 posted on 04/26/2010 6:12:56 AM PDT by danamco (")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 444 | View Replies]

To: BP2
Please present your “FACTS”.

I was responding to another poster. But since you asked, the 'fact' in question is the fact that yes, I'm here because I find the stuff you post to be so damned funny. Sorry if that offends you but there it is.

447 posted on 04/26/2010 6:34:39 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 443 | View Replies]

To: butterdezillion; OldDeckHand; tired_old_conservative

Goodnight, butterdezillion! You sound like a complete idiot. Do you realize that?

The Congress of the U.S. didn’t certify your election as POTUS and you weren’t sworn into the office of POTUS by the Chief Justice of the SCOTUS, but guess who was? That’s why his orders are presumed lawful down the chain of command. He’s the sitting President of the U.S. until and unless he is impeached by the House and convicted by the Senate.

It’s really not that complicated.


448 posted on 04/26/2010 7:19:53 AM PDT by BuckeyeTexan (Integrity, Honesty, Character, & Loyalty still matter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 361 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur; All

> I’m here because I find the stuff you post to be so damned funny

yeah, that picture of Obama’s so-called birth certificate ...
that IS a riot, isn’t it?!

Obama’s pretty funny, too ...
... fooling the American public like that in 2008.

ha ha ha < /sarc>


449 posted on 04/26/2010 7:26:11 AM PDT by BP2 (I think, therefore I'm a conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 447 | View Replies]

To: BP2
ha ha ha < /sarc>

Now you're getting it. Everyone loves a good laugh.

450 posted on 04/26/2010 7:28:34 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 449 | View Replies]

To: butterdezillion; OldDeckHand
If Obama is not the right age, is not a natural born US citizen, and has not lived in the US long enough, then he is not a Constitutional president - the only kind of president the officers? oath will allow them to obey.

Who is authorized by the Supreme Law of the Land to interpret the Supreme Law of the Land? (Hint: Not LTC Lakin.) So until the political entity who is granted Constitutional authority to interpret the Constitution actually interprets the eligibility clause to which you refer, guess who is the sitting POTUS and CIC?

451 posted on 04/26/2010 7:34:22 AM PDT by BuckeyeTexan (Integrity, Honesty, Character, & Loyalty still matter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 367 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur; All

> Now you’re getting it. Everyone loves a good laugh.

Yep. And when you’re standing in a soup line after Obama announces
America can’t meet its obligation to pay that 27-year Military Retirement
pension you claim, the joke will be on you too.


452 posted on 04/26/2010 7:40:41 AM PDT by BP2 (I think, therefore I'm a conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 450 | View Replies]

To: danamco
"So if the motion is granted and Soetoro does NOT do that, what then?"

Clearly, US v. Nixon gives the Judiciary subpoena power over POTUS in a criminal trial. That is settled law. If Obama was unable to quash subpoena and then refused to testify (or give a deposition), then Clinton v. Jones would indicate that the Judge has the authority to find Obama in contempt. Of course, Clinton v. Jones dealt with civil and not criminal litigation, but I imagine it would still apply.

453 posted on 04/26/2010 7:57:50 AM PDT by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 442 | View Replies]

To: butterdezillion; deport
What you say may well be the case, but before the military can convict a man they better get the answer from the civilian entities regarding whether Obama is a Constitutional president.

The military obtained their "answer" from the designated civilian authorities that Obama is eligible when the Congress certified his election and Chief Justice Roberts swore him into the office of POTUS. Until and unless those civilian authorities reverse that "answer," it stands and the military is obligated to accept their decision whether or not the military agrees.

Does it suck? Yes. Is it fair? Maybe not. Is it the law? Yes.

454 posted on 04/26/2010 8:04:13 AM PDT by BuckeyeTexan (Integrity, Honesty, Character, & Loyalty still matter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 389 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan; butterdezillion
Goodnight, butterdezillion! You sound like a complete idiot. Do you realize that?

BTW, B.T. that is a title YOU have earned here long ago without any competition!!!

Article 138 is one of the most powerful rights under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), but it is one of the rights least known and least used by military personnel. Under Article 138 of the UCMJ, “any member of the armed forces who believes himself (or herself) wronged by his (or her) commanding officer” may request redress. If such redress is refused, a complaint may be made and a superior officer must “examine into the complaint.”

Article 138 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) gives every member of the Armed Forces the right to complain that he or she was wronged by his or her commanding officer. The right even extends to those subject to the UCMJ on inactive duty for training.

455 posted on 04/26/2010 8:27:21 AM PDT by danamco (")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 448 | View Replies]

To: danamco

Oh, I’d say you’re in stiff competition for any such title, precious.


456 posted on 04/26/2010 8:52:39 AM PDT by BuckeyeTexan (Integrity, Honesty, Character, & Loyalty still matter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 455 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan
Oh, I’d say you’re in stiff competition for any such title, precious.

ROLMAO!

I wouldn't even try to challenge you!!

You are the superior Freeper/Cassius Clay for that title and you sure have earned it well!!!

457 posted on 04/26/2010 9:17:31 AM PDT by danamco (")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 456 | View Replies]

To: danamco
I trust you are not implying that Article 138 permits a military member to commit an action that is specifically prohibited by the UCMJ.
458 posted on 04/26/2010 9:59:18 AM PDT by verity (Obama Lies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 445 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan

Being certified and sworn is not what the Constitution says is the requirement. Being natural born, old enough, and a resident long enough is.

And we know for a fact that none of those things were even CHECKED - because Hawaii law says that a legal determination has to be made by an administrative or judicial person or body when an amended certificate is involved. That is precisely what Obama has been spending big bucks to PREVENT.

Nancy Pelosi’s certification for Hawaii was absolutely perjury. Even if she had looked at everything herself (which she didn’t) she couldn’t make a ruling on it because she is LEGISLATIVE, not administrative or judicial.

So what she says in “certifying” the election means absolutely diddly-squat legally or otherwise, because we already know that she perjured herself in that whole process.


459 posted on 04/26/2010 11:03:27 AM PDT by butterdezillion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 448 | View Replies]

To: verity
I trust you are not implying that Article 138 permits a military member to commit an action that is specifically prohibited by the UCMJ.

Could you please explain the meaning of that???

460 posted on 04/26/2010 11:14:55 AM PDT by danamco (")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 458 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 421-440441-460461-480481-490 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson