|
The military has no legal authority to investigate the civilian command of the military. That is correct. The UCMJ is understandably ill-suited to allow for an investigation of the qualifications of a CinC. If the Judge decides to subpoena a CERTIFIED copy of the Certification of Live Birth (as depicted on FactCheck) directly from Hawaii, that will be a game changer in that a true prima facie copy of Obama's COLB has never appeared in Court. At that point, the action shifts hard to other Eligibility cases as there's now PROOF POSITIVE prima facie evidence that Obama's father was a British subject. We all know this is the case, but a certified hard-copy would represent the FIRST time that such prima facie evidence would appear in a Courtroom. Such a twist would jeopardize Obama later ... it would certainly not redeem or help him. However, unless something very unexpected happens, Lt Col Lakin WILL in all likelihood be successfully prosecuted and sentenced by the US Army under UCMJ Articles 87 & 92. Although he does not WANT to be found guilty — and his attorney will argue tooth and nail against it — it will most likely happen and Lakin is ready for it as it leads to the ultimate conclusion. Again, Lt Col Lakin is FULLY aware what the Military Court system has in store for him, and thus why he knows the Relief he seeks can only be delivered from the Federal Courts. He won't find such relief in the Army Court of Criminal Appeals or the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces; consult Articles 66(c) and 67(a) for more on that. However, although the US Army JAG will prosecute this case as just another set of Article 87 & 92 violations, it's anything but SOP. A field grade officer physician is questioning the SPECIFIC and UNIQUE Eligibility requirements of the POTUS under Art II, § 1, Clause 5 of the US Constitution, not his Commanding Officer's, Colonel Roberts. Although the Constitution Eligibility of the CinC matters not to the US Army, Lt Col Lakin’s questions of his POTUS is NOT an everyday Court Martial occurrence and I'm hard-pressed to find strikingly similar examples. Just 4 years ago, US Army 1Lt Ehren Watada was ALSO charged under UCMJ Article 87, for refusing to deploy to Iraq. His first trial ended in MISTRIAL after the military judge ruled that the military justice system was unable to decide if the question of whether the deployment order to Watada was unlawful; Watada's argument would thus be deduced to an admission of guilt. Although the Army tried again, in the end a District Court Judge intervened and stayed all but his Article 134 charges until the ENTIRE trial was dismissed under the 9th Circuit by Obama and his Justice Department request last May. Although Watada’s grievances was more like that of a “conscientious objector”, his attorneys argued that Command Responsibility placed the Army O-2 in jeopardy of War Crimes, in essence, from a de facto President and an illegitimate war. In that regard, Watada’s and Lakin’s basic rationale is similar. One final thought about Venue ... IF the Army DID want to investigate Obama’s Eligibility, HOW would they eventually DEFINE “natural-born Citizen” for the purposes of Art II, § 1, Clause 5 of the US Constitution? THEY CAN'T. Congress has TRIED nearly 30 times since the 1870s to define such a Constitutional definition and have been unable to do so. A Constitutional Amendment is CERTAINLY unattainable in the current political environment. SO WHO'S LEFT? The Supreme Court, using the language that the Framer's used at the end of the 18th Century — chiefly Vattel and Blackstone. Unless something else happens, like Obama is undone by old Chicago buddy Blaggo or some other scandal, Lt Col Lakin’s Relief lies only in the US Supreme Court.
 |