The Fix Is In - Kangaroo Court for LTC Lakin Scheduled 11 June

safeguardourconstitution.com ^ | June 3, 2010 | Staff

[jamese777]

I believe that there was 3-4 Congressman who had their elections voided , will have to look up again to provide you with a link.

In the Wong KIm Ark case Ark was declared a Native born naturalized citizen. He did not have to go though the immigration /naturalization process because of his birth to parents who had immigrated to the U.S.(legally). If your parents are not yet naturalized at the time of your birth, you become naturalized citizen though their naturalization.No certificate will be issued.

At the same time McCain had to submit his birth records to vertify his citizenship , a hearing was also requested ofr obama. pelosi and reed blocked the hearing.

Congress has used the wording CITIZENS and the Supreme court has used the wording PARENTS . Why do you think that these word are refering to one parent?

Of course Taitz case was dismissed she has no standing to demand a”quo warranto”

Your “logic” can work both ways , show me the proof that Citizens and Parents do not imply both parents?citizens.

A massive amount of money and time is being spent making sure that this issue never makes it to trial. A reasonable person might assume that obama is afraid that if it ever goes to trial he stands a good chance of losing his office.

---

Here are some direct and pertinent quotations from the “US v Wong Kim Ark” decision:
“the Fourteenth Amendment affirms the ancient and fundamental rule of citizenship by birth within the territory, in the allegiance and under the protection of the country, including all children here born of resident aliens, with the exceptions or qualifications (as old as the rule itself) of children of foreign sovereigns or their ministers, or born on foreign public ships, or of enemies within and during a hostile occupation of part of our territory, and with the single additional exception of children of members of the Indian tribes owing direct allegiance to their several tribes.”

“It was contended by one of the learned counsel for the United States that the rule of the Roman law, by which the citizenship of the child followed that of the parent, was the true rule of international law, as now recognized in most civilized countries, and had superseded the rule of the common law, depending on birth within the realm, originally founded on feudal considerations….There is, therefore, little ground for the theory that, at the time of the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, there as any settled and definite rule of international law, generally recognized by civilized nations, inconsistent with the ancient rule of citizenship by birth within the dominion….Here is nothing to countenance the theory that a general rule of citizenship by blood or descent has displaced in this country the fundamental rule of citizenship by birth within its sovereignty…..So far as we are informed, there is no authority, legislative, executive or judicial, in England or America, which maintains or intimates that the statutes (whether considered as declaratory or as merely prospective) conferring citizenship on foreign-born children of citizens have superseded or restricted, in any respect, the established rule of citizenship by birth within the dominion.”

“[An alien parent’s] allegiance to the United States is direct and immediate, and, although but local and temporary, continuing only so long as he remains within our territory, is yet, in the words of Lord Coke in Calvin’s Case, 7 Coke, 6a, ’strong enough to make a natural subject, for, if he hath issue here, that issue is a natural-born subject”
The entire decision in Wong Kim Ark can be read here:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0169_0649_ZO.html
U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark,169 U.S. 649,693 (1898).

I agree with you that Orly Taitz was not going to be granted standing to file quo warranto in the District of Columbia District Court. Judge Lamberth did lay out very precisely who could file quo warranto as an “interested party” and that is someone with a legitimate claim to the contested office. That “someone” in this instance is John Sidney McCain.

I already linked to the law of the land on citizenship and the word “parents” does not appear in the first definition of who is a “citizen at birth”: “The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:
(a) a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof;”
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/8/1401.html
It is by the above definition that Obama claims natural born citizenship status and no court has contradicted that.

[jamese777]

Which US law is that? Is there one which specifically says that? Thanks.

---

Here’s the law of the land on certifying the vote of the Electoral College
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/3/usc_sec_03_00000015——000-.html
The law above is paired with the Article 2, Section 1 of the Constitution plus the 12th Amendment and the 20th Amendment in determining who is the duly elected President.
http://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_Am12.html
http://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_Am20.html

[jamese777]

The problem is that Obama never used his COLB - either genuine or faked - to get on a ballot. All he had to have to get on the ballots were perjurious statements by himself and Nancy Pelosi.

He did break the federal false statements law though - by failing to tell anyone that the posted COLB was a forgery, even though Congress members were obviously trusting that false document when deciding whether to certify the electoral vote. I would think that could have implications for state AG’s because it was tampering with a federal election in which the state electoral votes were at issue.

I hate all this legal tail-chasing. We’ve got so many loopholes and interpretations that anybody can get away with murder if they just get somebody willing to fart around forever this way.

What I had asked for was the original record - the original birth index, which was submitted for review in 1980 (when the system switched to electronic) and approved for permanent retention as the original and as a microfilm security copy. A microfilm security copy was never requested, according to the Archivist, and the HDOH has said the original doesn’t exist. They also say that the index of foreign births designated as permanent in 1982 doesn’t exist and that the birth certificate for a specific individual doesn’t exist.

---

It doesn’t matter if the actual COLB was used or not. If the information used to get on the ballot in any state is fraudulent, there is a possibility of a Grand Jury investigation. And if there is a Grand Jury investigation, there is the possibility of an indictment and if there is an indictment, a Special Counsel will be named and if a Special Counsel is named, who knows where an investigation might lead.
The major legal hurdle is that most states have a short statute of limitations on election fraud and nearly two years after the fact is well beyond that time limit in most locales.
ANY perjury or fraud that is proven beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law would doom the Obama presidency.
However civil lawsuits are not the way to get to that conclusion. What is needed is a criminal investigation.

[colorado tanker]

What do you call it when officiers follow orders when they know that the person giving the order has no right to do so?

Doing their job and maintaining good order and discipline in the Army.

[omegadawn]

After WWII we excuted a number of Germans and Japanese who were just following orders. American soldiers have tried and convicted for just following orders in the Iraq war. This whole case is about politics not military discipline. No one dares to question the eligibilty of obama, so much for a Constitutional Republic.

[colorado tanker]

You'll not get anywhere with me by comparing the men and women of our Armed Forces with German and Japanese war criminals.

It is not the place of the Armed Forces to determine the qualifications of the Commander in Chief. To do so would undermine the bedrock Constitutional principal of control of the military by the civilian government. It's up to the other branches of government sort through this one.

The questions about Obama's qualifications are no excuse for soldiers to disobey orders.

[omegadawn]

“The child of an alien, if born in the country, is as much a citizen as the natural born child of a citizen, and by operation of the same principle. “
This statement from Wong Kim Ark implies that there is a difference between Natural born and Native born. Ark was born on U.S. soil to parents( aliens) who owed allegiance to the U.S. ( legally immigrated but not yet naturalized)). While this makes him a”citizen” from the way I read the case it does not make him a Natural born citizen. This case does seem to add Native born as a class of citizenship.

While I do not agree with your point of view , it’s nice to see that you actually research and have some bias for your point of view.

[omegadawn]

Wrong , the Armed Forces are required to protect the Constitution. If the “president” is not Constitutionally qualified to be President , then the Armd Forces need to correct the problem. Our Republic can only survive if citizens are willing to stand up corrupt politicans.

[drypowder]

Would these same US military commanders/leaders follow orders from Putin or some other communist/Marxist foreign leader's? If there was any doubt before now, this military covering for Obama’s ineligibility to serve confirms we have no country, the constitutional republic of the USA is dead and gone. The law is what the thugs in DC say it is.

[colorado tanker]

If the “president” is not Constitutionally qualified to be President , then the Armd Forces need to correct the problem

You're out of your mind. The US Armed Forces don't do coups.

[omegadawn]

Did you forget that our nation resulted from a military coup! The Citizen Militia “army” threw out the British government. Don’t be stupid enough to think I meant a armed revolt of the Military. The military leadership could order a “stand down” of all military actions which would force congress resolves this issue. obma could be removed without a shot being fired.

[cvq3842]

I agree that Obama is hiding something. I defer to the legal experts on whether this proceeding will “work” to get Obama’s records unsealed.

And I think people are missing something. I can’t read Col. Lakin’s mind. But it’s just possible that, when all is said and done, he would rather go to jail than follow orders he believes to be questionable and a violation of his oath. I assume like everyone else that he would rather not land in prison. But there have been others in the past who, rightly or wrongly, have made such decisions.

Just a thought.