LTC Lakin's Appeal Denied

U.S. Army Court of Criminal Appeals ^ | 10/12/10 | Clerk of the Court

[BuckeyeTexan]

On consideration of the Petition for Extraordinary Relief in the Nature of a Writ of Mandamus and Application for a Stay of Proceedings, the petition is DENIED.

[Celtic Cross]

Yeah yeah yeah, I'm sorry too and all that. Should've watched my mouth.

I doubt this is our last, er, debate, but nontheless...

[STE=Q]

I haven’t been reading these threads much. Not an issue I regularly get into, mainly because nothing much can be done about it. The powers that be have decided that the little people have ‘no standing’ to know where their president was born.

Key words:

"nothing much can be done about it"

We believe that there IS much that "can be done about it"... and "the powers that be" can be replaced!

We are at war with those that would destroy our beloved country.

Losing this war is NOT an option.

There is no room for defeatism.

If you do not wish to fight beside us... at least do not battle against us!

If you fight those that are fighting the enemy... than you give comfort to the enemy, do you not?

If you have other issues that you prefer, than go fight on those issues.

I'm all for a multi-prong-attack, but why hinder are efforts?

If you really want the con-artist out of the White House as much as you say you do then go for it... and I'm sure we all (including Ron) will support your efforts.

STE=Q

[STE=Q]

I see you guys have made up... good!

Now lets get Bammy and his anti-American entourage out of OUR white House!

STE=Q

[OneWingedShark]

Not even “liberal activist judges,” which is the modern connotation, look at when they decided that: ** 1798! **

[Mr Rogers]

“John Jay did not have English common law in mind when he wrote that letter to Washington.”

Of course not. He had in mind a translation of Vattel that would be made 10 years later, right? You’re a mind-reader, and Jay predicted the future...

[Red Steel]

** 1798! **

Or is that 1898? Justice Gray disregarded the intent and meaning behind the 14th Amendment and the 1866 Civil Rights Act.

[OneWingedShark]

Concern trolls who use fake identities are sometimes known as sockpuppets.

And, Speaking of sock-puppets, read this: Genma ga kutsushita guujin desu!
It's not mine, but I think it's pretty funny.

[Mr Rogers]

IIRC, that came about the time I (Mr Rogers) confessed to being part of an Army PSYOPS group, getting paid a daily flat fee plus bonuses by the word.

Trust people who doubt Ohio was a state prior to 1952 to take stuff like that seriously...

[OneWingedShark]

Calder v. Bull in 1798, wherein the straightforward prohibition against Ex Post Facto law was taken to be only applicable to criminal law.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calder_v._Bull

Very early on the Judiciary “set precedent” for disregarding the Constitution in it’s rulings. It has ever after only become worse, IMO.

[Red Steel]

I don't have to be a mind reader because Jay explicitly says "natural born Citizen" in his letter to the President of the Philadelphia Constitutional Convention of 1787.

"John Jay wrote in a letter to George Washington dated 25 Jul 1787:

"Permit me to hint, whether it would be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expressly that the Commander in Chief of the American army shall not be given to nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen. ""

So where does John Jay say "natural born Subject"? No, he does not.

[Red Steel]

I’ll give it a look.

[patlin]

quoad in law refers to “as it to this (or) as far as”. We know “naturam” refers to nature so the phrase in latin would read as follows:

“and were children only as to nature”

jus refers to law and of course civitatem (noun) is the citizen

so the children of slaves were not according to the law, citizens, they were merely the natural children of slaves that held no political status.

The term "quoad naturam" is used in many theological studies of religion & the bible. Here is an example:

By the law is the knowledge of sin, quoad naturam peccati (transgression, sin). There are many things we should never know but by the law of God, though we have some general notions of good and evil. Rom. vii. 7, saith the apostle, ‘I had not known sin but by the law; for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.’ Those first stirrings and secret lingerings of heart and inclinations to that which is cross to the will of God, that they go before all consent of will, and all delight, these things we could never discern by the light of nature.

[little jeremiah]

Well said!

[patlin]

small error in typing & miscommunication, IOW, I had a “DUH” moment. here is the correction:

quoad in law refers to “as it to this (or) as far as”

should read as:

quoad = “as to this”

jus = “law”

so the phrase “quoad jus” = “as to the law”

The final part of that doc reads in English:

“were the children only as to nature, not as to the law a citizen”

May I ask which book you are reading this out of?

[STE=Q]

Typo on my post 1,122

hinder are efforts = hinder our efforts

Time for bed!

Night all.

STE=Q

[STE=Q]

Well said!

Thank you!

STE=Q

[Mr Rogers]

He used the phrase “natural born citizen” because we are a REPUBLIC and not a MONARCHY! It substitutes ONE WORD because that allows a common, well known legal term to transfer over from English law into American law.

What did Jay MEAN by NBC? Well, since he is using a phrase derived from English common law, he means the same person who would be a natural born subject if in England would be a natural born citizen if born in the USA. And that means people having alien parents - if they are here ‘in amity’ - would be natural born citizens in the US, just as they would be natural born subjects if born in the UK.

We do not fall under English common law, but it provided the language used by all colonial lawyers at the time the Constitution was written. That is what Jay was thinking, because he was writing a legal document. English common law provided the lingua franca of colonial lawyers.

It wouldn’t matter if he had memorized every line in Vattel - when writing law, he would use the language of English common law to express his ideas.

[bushpilot1]

Please provide documentation the proposed 14th Amendment was sent to the President, as required by the Constitution, for approval or veto.

[patlin]

here is another example from bible translation:

Heb 11: 16

Nunc vero meliorem appetunt, id est, coelestem; quare non erubescit Deus vocari Deus ipsorum, paravit enim illus civitatem.

translated and defined by John Calvin as:

translation - 15-16. And truly, if they had been mindful of that country from whence they came out, they might have had opportunity to have returned. [16]But now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a city.

defined - 16. Wherefore God is not ashamed, etc. He refers to that passage, “I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.” (Exodus 3:6.) It is a singular honor when God makes men illustrious, by attaching his name to them; and designs thus to have himself distinguished from idols. This privilege, as the Apostle teaches us, depends also on faith; for when the holy fathers aspired to a celestial country, God on the other hand counted them as citizens. We are hence to conclude, that there is no place for us among God’s children, except we renounce the world, and that there will be for us no inheritance in heaven, except we become pilgrims on earth; Moreover, the Apostle justly concludes from these words, — “I am the God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob,” that they were heirs of heaven, since he who thus speaks is not the God of the dead, but of the living.

Ther is NOT one word in law that can not be defined by bible translation:

Summa Theologica

Whether right is the object of justice?

Augustine says (De Moribus Eccl. xv) that “justice is love serving God alone, and consequently governing aright all things subject to man.” Now right [jus] does not pertain to Divine things, but only to human affairs, for Isidore says (Etym. v, 2) that “’fas’ is the Divine law, and ‘jus,’ the human law.” Therefore right is not the object of justice.

On the contrary, Isidore says (Etym. v, 2) that “’jus’ [right] is so called because it is just.” Now the “just” is the object of justice, for the Philosopher declares (Ethic. v, 1) that “all are agreed in giving the name of justice to the habit which makes men capable of doing just actions.”

It stymies the mind how these drones think they can interpret law without going to the origins of the law. Our founders were very religious men & our country & government were founded for only a religious & moral society where a man would know the true intent & meaning of the law because they are/were learned in “The Book”. And people wonder why the progressive judges want to strip every speck of the Bible from our history, libraries, schools & especially government buildings. They can not handle the TRUTH.

[Bubba Ho-Tep]

Please provide documentation the proposed 14th Amendment was sent to the President, as required by the Constitution, for approval or veto.

Please provide the article of the Constitution that requires the president to approve or veto an amendment. Hint: it doesn't. Presidents sometimes do sign them to show their endorsement or to get some political mileage, but there's no requirement that they do so.