Posted on 04/13/2010 8:19:14 AM PDT by Man50D
Washington, D.C., April 13, 2010. Army doctor Lt. Col. Terrence Lakin yesterday met with his brigade commander, Col. Gordon R. Roberts, who proceeded to read LTC Lakin his Miranda rights, and who informed LTC Lakin he had the “right to remain silent” because LTC Lakin is about to be charged with serious crimes. Col. Roberts was at age 19 awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor, the only recipient of the nation’s highest honor currently on active duty in the Army.
LTC Lakin had previously been ordered in writing to report yesterday to Ft. Campbell, KY and then on to deploy for his second tour of duty in Afghanistan. Lakin refused to obey these orders and instead came to work yesterday morning at the Pentagon. Late yesterday afternoon he was confronted by his brigade commander.
Before the meeting was over, LTC Lakin’s Pentagon Access Pass had been revoked, and his laptop computer was set to be confiscated.
The message to LTC Lakin is clear; through official channels, he was informed yesterday that he will shortly be court-martialled for crimes (specifically, missing movement and conduct unbecoming an officer) that for others has led to lengthy imprisonment at hard labor.
Lakin has announced in a YouTube video that has now been viewed more than 110,000 times that he considers it his duty to refuse to obey orders that would be illegal if President Obama is ineligible to hold office.
Meanwhile, cries mount for proof of that eligibility, but nothing has been forthcoming. The Obama campaign at one point released a copy of computer-generated abstract of information purportedly in Hawaii's records system, but the source of this information is unclear and need not have been a birth certificate issued contemporaneously and signed by the doctor who attended the birth. Even the document released was only a copy, and the version printed in the Los Angeles Times on June 16, 2008 is on a form only in use since late 2001. Even as it is, the document contains a warning that it is merely “prima facie”--threshold, rebuttable and thus inconclusive --evidence of birth, and the copy the Times printed mysteriously has the certificate number blacked out, thereby rendering the document unusable according to language on the bottom.
Given the seriousness of the offenses with which LTC Lakin is about to be charged, the American Patriot Foundation today renewed its plea for donations to its legal defense fund for LTC Lakin. Details are available at APF's website, www.safeguardourconstitution.com
If you read enough to ask the question, you read the legal brief, that explained it. I reread the post and the answer it there for anyone to read.
***
I have. Unfortunately for you, there is simply no basis under the law at that time for Obama to have been expatriated.
There’s another problem. No record of Obama holding an American passport prior to the one he received once becoming a U.S. senator has been found.
In orther words, you have no evidence other than the word of a known liar and conspiracy theorist.
However the fact that Obama never got a US Passport before becomeing a US State Senator is a matter of Public Record.
***
Please direct me to this public record. I have yet to see it.
Cool — a classic “baffle ‘em with BS post” - 18 graphs by my counting, which no human will probably ever read, care about, or understand.
Keep birther-n, etraveler13! Keep going back and drinking from the fountain of conspiracy — there’s no plot too complex, no act too vile, no directions too complicated, for the true birther believer!
Yes, but she went back to Indonesia to continue her career as an anthropologist, and she lived there until she found out she had ovarian cancer, which I believe was late 1994.
Unless she went back to pal around with the man she divorced, she wasn’t there at the time of Obama’s visit.
No, she went back to continue her career as an anthropologist.
There’s another problem. No record of Obama holding an American passport prior
How do you know that?
Since Obama had to apply for a US Passport to travel for the state,
How do you know he had to apply for a passport to travel for the state? What is your evidence?
it implies that he never held a previous US Passport, or he would simply be updating and existing one. Passports have to be updated in the US every 5 years, same thing in Indonesia. Which is why he went to indonesia when his mother was in Hawaii.
You have no evidence of either a) that he applied for an Indonesian passport or b) that his mother was in Hawaii when he was in Indonesia. In point of fact, given that she had been living in Indonesia since 1977 (with, perhaps, a brief stay in Hawaii in 1980 to file for divorce), it is more that likely that she was in Indonesia when he was there in 1981.
You have produced no evidence that his had a US passport at the time either, have you.
Passport application records are protected by privacy laws.
Yet, he had to apply, rather than re-apply for his Senate passport, according to court records filed by 3 attorneys.
Unfortuantely, unsubstantiated assertions by attorneys don't count as evidenece of anything.
To date, no attorney has produced any evidence that Obama made a first-time application for a US passport when he was a Senator. If you know of such evidence, please direct me to it.
But you can wipe all their statements out, by simply proving your side of the argument that he had a US Passport. Show us all how brilliant your are, and produce evidence.
I'm not the one making the allegation that he had a foriegn passport. That puts the burden of proof on you, not me.
Given that he was a US citizen at one point, and that there are no provisions in the 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act under which he would have lost his citizenship, then the presumption must he traveled on a US passport, until it is proven otherwise.
No, your wrong, the divorce was filed in August 1980,
I said it was filed in the summer of 1980. Are you now denying that August is in the summer?
the tail end of the Semester at Occidental, and 4 weeks before the fall semester at Columbia.
So?
Your as bad as Curiosity, you shoot the messenger and ignore the message.
Berg is acting like whitness, not a messenger. You are asking me to take his word for something. Unfortunately, given his history as a 9-11 truther, his word is worthless.
Facts are facts, unless you can disprove them,
You got it backwards. Something isn't a fact until it is proven. Until then, it is mere speculation, and when coming from someone like Berg, with a history of lying, it can be presumed false until prove true.
So, your calling him a liar without hearing the evidence.
I'm calling him a liar because he has a history of lying. As to hearing his evidence, I'd be happy to do it. Unfortunately, he hasn't produced any.
You call him a liar and conspiracy theorist,
So you think his theory that Bush was behind 9-11 is plausible?
Your correct, those records are part of lawsuits, yet to be heard, but not debated by Obama himself.
There doesn't need to be a lawsuit heard in order for there to be public record. Either that public record exists, or it does not. Where is it?
He sealed his passport records as well.
He did nothing of the sort. His passport records are protected by privacy laws, just like yours and mine.
That SHE stated that Kenya was her husbands HOME country, not America.
It prove nothing. Unfortunately, lots of first-generation US-born children of immigrants refer to their parents' country of origin as their home country.
How so?
No one disputes he was harmed.
That's precisely what they dispute. The court's argument is that Keyes had not even the remotest chance of winning the 2008 election, so he couldn't possibly have been harmed by having Obama in the election. Seems like airtight reasoning to me.
Where do you find fault with it?
Okay. Then show me precisely under which provision of the immigration and nationality act of 1952 Obama was expatriated when he was living in Indonesia.
Its all about the constitution man, just the constitution. He is not a natural born citizen. His father is a British Subject. He at best is a dual citizen, at worst not a citizen at all.
Keep drinking the after-birther kool-aide man.
Scribd has all the lawsuits Berg filed, I will not dig them up for you.
Since you are not open to what these lawyers are filing, or even the possibility that they may be correct, it is now evident to me that nothing much will be accepted by you.
Had Obama not been in the election, many things could have happened that never had the chance to happen. You can speculate, but you do not know with certainty, no one can, that the outcome would not have been a positive one for Keyes.
I went back and read it again. If you disagree with what the statutes say, It will do me no good to debate you on those issues.
It comes down to premise, Berg steps you thru it, if you don’t see it, you either don’t agree, or can’t follow it.
I don't think there is a credible news source that would have anything to do with API or Chief Editor Korir.
It was no secret that his father was not a US citizen and still they believed that Obama was a NBC.
Being ignorant does not make them correct.
If there were, I think you would immediately impugn them.
But there aren't so your point is moot.
Good. Then you should have no trouble pointing out the section of the statute under which he was expatriated.
If you disagree with what the statutes say, It will do me no good to debate you on those issues.
I don't disagree with the statutes. I just want to be told under which provision he was expatriated.
Well, the judge disagrees with you.
I am open to anything for which they have evidence. Unfortuantely, as far as I can tell, they have none. But if you can point to some real evidence, then I'll take a look at it.
You cannot prove that he has a US Passport, or ever had a US passport,
Of course I can't. I can't prove anyone, except members of my immediate family, has a passport because passport application files are protected by privacy laws.
but two people were fired and one was shot execution style for, it appears, trying to find out. Passport information is available thru FOIA by attorneys,
No it is not. An attorney could ask a judge to subpoena it, but such a motion would only be granted if the said attorney had some evidence that said information is relevant to a legitimate case. Unfortunately birthers, their attorneys have failed to do this.
law enforcement, and the secret service all the time.
Only if they can show probable cause.
I hold you to the same standard you hold me to. Prove it,
The burden of proof is on you, not me, since it is you who are accusing Obama of an expatriating act.
or say its your opinion, or its outstanding litigation. But then, litigation means nothing unless its heard by the courts and decided on.
The courts have already decided on 40+ of these cases, and in ever instance, it was dismissed. What makes you think that any of the cases are going to have better luck in the future.
But my point is not.
And I refuse to hold your hand thru something I clearly read. Your looking for an argument, and your not going to get one.
So your statement implies that Judges ALWAYS make the right decision?
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.