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

Skip to comments.

Officer to Army: See you in court
World Net Daily ^ | June 11, 2010 | Bob Unruh

Posted on 06/11/2010 10:36:30 AM PDT by Smokeyblue

An Army officer who invited his own court-martial to resolve for the nation questions about Barack Obama's eligibility to be president has waived a preliminary hearing in his case.

Lt. Col. Terrence Lakin, who refused orders from a chain of command led by Obama, also today released a new video explaining why documentation needs to be released by Obama that could confirm that he qualifies to be president under the Constitution's demand that the office by held only by a "natural born citizen."

Lakin was scheduled for an Article 32 military hearing tomorrow, the equivalent of a civilian preliminary hearing in a court case. But Daniel J. Driscoll, an Army hearing officer, had banned Lakin from bringing in evidence about Obama's birth as well as testimony from Hawaii officials who may have information on the subject.

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


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: army; birthcertificate; certifigate; lakin; ltclakin; military; naturalborncitizen; obama; terrylakin
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 301-336 next last
"Lakin expects his court-martial to be sometime this fall, but it has not been scheduled. According to the SafeguardOurConstitution website, which is run by the American Patriot Foundation, a nonprofit group incorporated in 2003 to foster appreciation and respect for the U.S. Constitution, since Lakin has waived the Article 32 "preliminary hearing," the next step will be the formal referral of charges by Lakin's commander, Maj. Gen. Carla Hawley-Bowland, followed by an arraignment. Both are expected this month."
1 posted on 06/11/2010 10:36:30 AM PDT by Smokeyblue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Smokeyblue

Brave man to risk his career, retirement and prison time to try an challenge this. However, I believe the fix is already in and he will not be allowed to bring any evidence about Obama into the court room nor will he be allowed to discover any such evidence.


2 posted on 06/11/2010 10:41:43 AM PDT by taxcontrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol

Maybe, since this is a criminal case, the information will be forthcoming.


3 posted on 06/11/2010 10:42:59 AM PDT by nikos1121 (Praying for minus 24 today....at least minus 23...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Smokeyblue

Waiting for the idiot posters to show up to say “well he needs to do his duty and salute Obama and the top brass.”


4 posted on 06/11/2010 10:43:27 AM PDT by Frantzie (Democrats = Party of I*lam)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol

What are is law about disobeying orders that may have been illegitimately made?

Does he have to defer that decision to his line commander, who has to defer to his?


5 posted on 06/11/2010 10:44:16 AM PDT by chuck_the_tv_out ( <<< click my name: now featuring Freeper classifieds)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Frantzie

Lol, so true!


6 posted on 06/11/2010 10:44:46 AM PDT by ForAmerica (Christian Conservative Black Man!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Smokeyblue

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ


7 posted on 06/11/2010 10:45:51 AM PDT by verity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol

I believe the fix is definitely in, but I believe the UCMJ allows him to appeal a conviction to the SCOTUS. That is where the facts about 0bama need to be examined anyway.


8 posted on 06/11/2010 10:45:52 AM PDT by The Sons of Liberty (The 0bama regime represents an "Clear and Present Danger" to the US - Mene, Mene, Tekel, Upharsin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Arthur McGowan; Beckwith; bgill; bitt; butterdezillion; bvw; conservativegramma; Danae; dennisw; ...

NBC Ping


9 posted on 06/11/2010 10:46:18 AM PDT by ASA Vet (Natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. De Vattel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol
There is ZERO chance he'll get anything during discovery, otherwise case never would have gone to trail. BTW, I doubt Obama wasn't born in Hawaii, highly likely he's covering up personal information on his long form BC or playing rope-a-dope with us.
10 posted on 06/11/2010 10:46:30 AM PDT by Red Dog #1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Smokeyblue

An American hero


11 posted on 06/11/2010 10:47:26 AM PDT by pissant (THE Conservative party: www.falconparty.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Smokeyblue

Godspeed, Lakin.


12 posted on 06/11/2010 10:49:45 AM PDT by bgill (how could a young man born here in Kenya, who is not even a native American, become the POTUS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol

My bet is this will never go to trial. How many of these have taken place, still no proof from Obama. There won’t be unless the American people demand it and they aren’t doing that right now.

If we take back the house and the senate however I think we should pressure the congress to do something. We simply can’t afford to let this go. The American people must know who thier president really is.


13 posted on 06/11/2010 10:50:56 AM PDT by precisionshootist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Smokeyblue
The Colonel doesn't have a prayer here.The military judge won't allow a single word about "eligibility" to be uttered by the defense during the proceedings.The only hope he has is if the SCOTUS chooses to review the case and by the time that happens (if it happens) Hussein will be long gone.

I fear that the Colonel has wagered everything he has on a game with loaded dice.

14 posted on 06/11/2010 10:53:24 AM PDT by Gay State Conservative (Host The Beer Summit-->Win The Nobel Peace Prize!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gay State Conservative

A gamble he is willingly and methodically taking. He will be vindicated.


15 posted on 06/11/2010 10:56:42 AM PDT by pissant (THE Conservative party: www.falconparty.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: chuck_the_tv_out
What are is law about disobeying orders that may have been illegitimately made?

Don't know if you've ever been in the Armed Forces but we were taught in BCT (*many* years ago) that a soldier isn't obliged to obey an "illegal" order.The problem for the Colonel is that there's no way the military judge will allow the defense to even bring up that subject.

16 posted on 06/11/2010 10:58:07 AM PDT by Gay State Conservative (Host The Beer Summit-->Win The Nobel Peace Prize!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: pissant

The people who founded this country lost a lot more. Sadly idiots who empower Obama watching TV support doing nothing. “If the general tells me to salute the usuper - I do my damn duty cause I get cheap beer and smokes at the PX.”

The Pentagon, Joint Chiefs and SCOTUS are cowards.


17 posted on 06/11/2010 10:59:12 AM PDT by Frantzie (Democrats = Party of I*lam)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Gay State Conservative

“The problem for the Colonel is that there’s no way the military judge will allow the defense to even bring up that subject.”

Then I would say it’s a kangaroo court


18 posted on 06/11/2010 10:59:42 AM PDT by chuck_the_tv_out ( <<< click my name: now featuring Freeper classifieds)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Smokeyblue
There was also an indication that he used a social security number for college that was 999 (I believe) which colleges generally generate for those that are foreign exchange students. If true, then he also committed fraud by claiming to be a foreign student and possibly receiving aid for that reason. No wonder his college records are sealed! ----------- He didn't commit fraud cuz he IS a foreign born student who just needed some free money.

so he could room with another foreign born student

his gay muslim Paki boyfriend.

Occidental College, right?

Check it out...

Obama Espoused Radical Views in College [advocated revolution] 
Dr. John Drew PhD : --- who knew him very well as a gay passionate Marxist.

http://www.breitbart.tv/the-b-cast-interview-was-obama-a-committed-marxist-in-college/

Dr. John C. Drew, a grant writing consultant in Laguna Niguel, Calif., tells Newsmax he met Obama in 1980 when Obama was a sophomore at Occidental College in Los Angeles. Drew had just graduated from Occidental and was attending graduate school at Cornell University.

During Christmas break, Drew says he was at Grauman-Boss’ home in Palo Alto when Obama came over with Mohammed Hasan Chandoo, his roommate from Pakistan.

“Barack [Obama] and Hasan showed up at the house in a BMW, and then we went to a restaurant together,” Drew says. “We had a nice meal, and then we came back to the house and smoked cigarettes and drank and argued politics.”

For the next several hours, they discussed Marxism.

“He [Obama] was arguing a straightforward Marxist-Leninist class-struggle point of view, which anticipated that there would be a revolution of the working class, led by revolutionaries, who would overthrow the capitalist system and institute a new socialist government that would redistribute the wealth,” says Drew, who says he himself was then a Marxist.

“The idea was basically that wealthy people were exploiting others,” Drew says. “That this was the secret of their wealth, that they weren’t paying others enough for their work, and they were using and taking advantage of other people. He was convinced that a revolution would take place, and it would be a good thing.”

Drew concluded that Obama thought of himself as “part of an intelligent, radical vanguard that was leading the way towards this revolution and towards this new society.” ..."

Referring to Obama’s quote from “Dreams of My Father” that he associated with Marxist professors, Drew says, “What he’s not saying is that he was in 100 percent total agreement with those Marxist professors.

When you understand that, Obama’s later associations and policies make more sense, including why he was taken in by Rev. Wright’s ideology.”

19 posted on 06/11/2010 11:00:36 AM PDT by DontTreadOnMe2009 (So stop treading on me already!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Smokeyblue

“And in at least one of the earlier disputes, the Army simply canceled the orders rather than allow the argument to come to a head. “

The probable outcome of this situation.

Obama will not release any information on his birth history because there is something in his background he wishes to conceal. His natural birth status is a possibility. There may be another reason.


20 posted on 06/11/2010 11:01:06 AM PDT by ZULU
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Sons of Liberty
I believe the fix is definitely in, but I believe the UCMJ allows him to appeal a conviction to the SCOTUS.

I think I read that there's only one situation where the SCOTUS would even have the option to review it.Can't recall the details but it said that it's very rare for a court martial conviction to be reviewed by the SCOTUS.

21 posted on 06/11/2010 11:01:32 AM PDT by Gay State Conservative (Host The Beer Summit-->Win The Nobel Peace Prize!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: pissant
A gamble he is willingly and methodically taking. He will be vindicated.

You have far more faith than do I.

22 posted on 06/11/2010 11:03:29 AM PDT by Gay State Conservative (Host The Beer Summit-->Win The Nobel Peace Prize!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: ASA Vet

It’s sad that a officer has to put his career on the line for this case. But a high profile case like this may be the only answer to removing obama. Another officer is making a little noise also, Maj. General Paul Wallely( retired). If enough military officers speak up the media will have a hard time ignoring it.


23 posted on 06/11/2010 11:12:11 AM PDT by omegadawn (qualified)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ASA Vet

It’s sad that a officer has to put his career on the line for this case. But a high profile case like this may be the only answer to removing obama. Another officer is making a little noise also, Maj. General Paul Wallely( retired). If enough military officers speak up the media will have a hard time ignoring it.


24 posted on 06/11/2010 11:12:38 AM PDT by omegadawn (qualified)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: chuck_the_tv_out

The UCMJ is very clear about illegal orders. I do not believe it addresses illegitamate orders and highly doubt that they would.

As a uniformed services member, you are responsible for your behaviour, determining whether your superior at any level of the chain of command is legitimate would not fall upon the member and I’m sure would be frowned upon.

Can you imagine the uproar here if a colonel refused to deploy when the war started because the votes weren’t adequately counted in Florida?


25 posted on 06/11/2010 11:12:41 AM PDT by dangerdoc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Gay State Conservative
Me too, I doubt the court wants set a precedent allowing any military member the option of refusing orders because someone in the chain of command may not be legitimate.
26 posted on 06/11/2010 11:14:29 AM PDT by dangerdoc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: chuck_the_tv_out
"What are is law about disobeying orders that may have been illegitimately made?"

Per the Manuel for Courts-Martial...

(2) Disobeying superior commissioned officer.

(a) Lawfulness of the order.
(i) Inference of lawfulness. An order requiring the performance of a military duty or act may be inferred to be lawful and it is disobeyed at the peril of the subordinate. This inference does not apply to a patently illegal order, such as one that directs the commission of a crime

What about decisions that are made by civilian command (to include the CIC) that the service member believes to be unlawful (to include unconstitutional), and therefor are disobeyed? Well, CAAF (which is the highest military court of appeals before SCOTUS), had this to say in a case involving another doctor from the first Gulf War who believed that to be an unconstitutional action...

“[t]he duty to disobey an unlawful order applies only to a positive act that constitutes a crime that is so manifestly beyond the legal power or discretion of the commander as to admit of no rational doubt of their unlawfulness.”

United States v. Huet-Vaughn, 43 M.J. 105, 114-15 (C.A.A.F. 1995)

Lakin is charged with missing movement and failure to obey. Facially, there is nothing in a deployment order that is criminal, which is the standard set-forth in Huet-Vaughn.

Moreover, Lakin was formally counseled before directly disobeying the orders and missing movement that the orders were indeed lawful. If he had obtained competent counsel, they would have informed Lakin that he absolutely no chance of prevailing at trial, nor would any of the "Obama isn't really eligible" business come in at trial. It's as simple as that, unfortunately.

27 posted on 06/11/2010 11:19:09 AM PDT by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Smokeyblue

There is NO office of president to respect not since Reagan.


28 posted on 06/11/2010 11:20:34 AM PDT by Cheetahcat (Zero the Wright kind of Racist! We are in a state of War with Democrats)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Frantzie
"The Pentagon, Joint Chiefs and SCOTUS are cowards."

Some of the most admirable people in the country serve in these institutions, and you paint them all with the same brush?

Were I to paint you with such a broad brush who else would it swipe? Helen Thomas?...Michael Moore?...Bill Maher?...Rosie O'?...They, and countless others, despise the same institutions as you, so why are you different from them?

29 posted on 06/11/2010 11:21:53 AM PDT by diogenes ghost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: dangerdoc
Me too, I doubt the court wants set a precedent allowing any military member the option of refusing orders because someone in the chain of command may not be legitimate.

I think this is specific to Hussein.*All* orders issued by military officers and NCO's are deemed,legally speaking,to have ultimately come from the Commander-In-Chief.If the CiC is deemed to be occupying the office of POTUS unconstitutionally then one could reasonably believe that *all* orders issued by the military are illegal/invalid.

30 posted on 06/11/2010 11:24:48 AM PDT by Gay State Conservative (Host The Beer Summit-->Win The Nobel Peace Prize!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: precisionshootist

“still no proof from Obama”

I wonder if proof has been obtained but, never presented in court?


31 posted on 06/11/2010 11:25:05 AM PDT by wolfcreek (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lsd7DGqVSIc)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Smokeyblue

From this angle, it appears that the Lt. Colonel is taking a vacation to Leavenworth.

He had a couple of options when he decided to go rogue, and he chose poorly. He could have just resigned his commission, and that would be the end of it. Then he could spend the rest of his life and money trying to prove that Obama is not an American.

Now, he will be discredited and broken. He might have gone off the reservation to think this would fly.


32 posted on 06/11/2010 11:28:40 AM PDT by Mr. Quarterpanel (I am not an actor, but I play one on TV)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pissant

It looks as if Lt. Col. Terrence Lakin has thought this through very thoroughly. I can’t wait to see what happens next in this grand chess match.


33 posted on 06/11/2010 11:29:29 AM PDT by Bloody Sam Roberts (You can only get smarter by engaging a smarter opponent.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Smokeyblue
Officer to Army: See you in court

Army to Officer: It's a date!

34 posted on 06/11/2010 11:30:35 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol
However, I believe the fix is already in and he will not be allowed to bring any evidence about Obama into the court room nor will he be allowed to discover any such evidence.

It was ruled not relevant to the charges against him. He's being tried for refusing to obey the orders of his brigade commander and with missing movement.

35 posted on 06/11/2010 11:31:55 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

Comment #36 Removed by Moderator

To: Gay State Conservative; The Sons of Liberty
"I think I read that there's only one situation where the SCOTUS would even have the option to review it."

Generally speaking, there are two ways in which SCOTUS can review judgments from courts-martial. First, there is a formalized appellate process in military law. After conviction and sentencing, the convening authority reviews the case and either approves, disapproves or mitigates the judgment and/or sentence. Once the convening authority has acted, the guilty may then appeal the trial court's judgment to the first appellate court called the US Court of Military Appeals(CMA). This court is staffed by active duty JAGS.

If that appeal is unsuccessful at CMA, they(the guilty) may then appeal to the US Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces(CAAF). This is a military court that is staffed by civilians, civilians that by statute, must be prior service JAGS.

If CAAF denies the petition for extraordinary relief, then that's that. The appellate process is over and the case cannot be appealed to the Supreme Court. Many people want this changed, but today that is the way it works. If CAAF does here the case (which is rare, as they hear less than 10% of all cases) and affirms the lower court's rulings, then the guilty may then file a petition for cert with the Supremes.

There is another way to get to the Supreme Court, however, even if denied at CAAF, but it takes some time. If the service member is confined for a period of time long enough to exhaust all appellate options, they can - with some limitations - file what is known as a habeas petition with the Supremes. Such petitions are extraordinarily rare, but not completely unheard of.

In Lakin's case, if convicted he wouldn't be confined for a period time even remotely close enough to file a habeas petition.

37 posted on 06/11/2010 11:34:44 AM PDT by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Gay State Conservative
The Colonel doesn't have a prayer here

Yep.

There would be an appeal to the Army Court of Criminal Appeals. There would be an appeal to the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces ONLY if the JAG orders it or the Court exercises discretionary jurisdiction to take it. If the Court of Appeals has denied discretionary review, there is no SCOTUS jurisdiction.

A bill is pending in Congress to change this, but even if passed may be too late to affect this case.

38 posted on 06/11/2010 11:35:26 AM PDT by colorado tanker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Smokeyblue

Based on his video I am becoming inclined to think that the Army is better off not having this guy practice medicine on soldiers.


39 posted on 06/11/2010 11:44:39 AM PDT by El Sordo (The bigger the government, the smaller the citizen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gay State Conservative

“If the CiC is deemed to be occupying the office of POTUS unconstitutionally then one could reasonably believe that *all* orders issued by the military are illegal/invalid. “

Military expert question;
If Obama found ineligible (snowball chance in hell) would that mean that every order given until that date were dismissed?


40 posted on 06/11/2010 11:46:56 AM PDT by vanilla swirl (Where is the Black Regiment?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Bloody Sam Roberts
“It looks as if Lt. Col. Terrence Lakin has thought this through very thoroughly.”

It's a crying shame that he didn't bother to think this through very clearly.

41 posted on 06/11/2010 11:47:57 AM PDT by El Sordo (The bigger the government, the smaller the citizen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Gay State Conservative
See my other post. Can you imagine the meyham if 10% of the military decided not to follow W’s orders because the vote recounting was stopped by the supreme court?

Zero needs to go but I have qualms about chaos in the military being the tool to remove him.

42 posted on 06/11/2010 11:48:55 AM PDT by dangerdoc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol
Brave man to risk his career, retirement and prison time to try an challenge this. However, I believe the fix is already in and he will not be allowed to bring any evidence about Obama into the court room nor will he be allowed to discover any such evidence.

Soap Box, Ballot box, Jury Box .....

43 posted on 06/11/2010 11:50:27 AM PDT by Centurion2000 (If I don't like you, it's most likely your culture or your ideology that pissed me off.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Bloody Sam Roberts
"It looks as if Lt. Col. Terrence Lakin has thought this through very thoroughly. I can’t wait to see what happens next in this grand chess match."

I don't believe he has, at all. He's a doctor, not an attorney. If he is ignoring advice of counsel and continuing to walk this path, the doctor has a fool for a patient.

If he's actually receiving legal advice from counsel that this is a good idea, the bright side is that he has a legitimate claim for ineffective assistance of counsel upon which to build his appeal.

But, this isn't a "chess match". From a legal standpoint, this is about as straightforward as a court-martial can get. Lakin is going to lose and no military judge is going to allow any of this Obama business in at trial (perhaps at allocution, but not trial) and there's not an appellate court in the country that will find fault with that lower court decision.

44 posted on 06/11/2010 11:52:11 AM PDT by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand
Thanks for refreshing my memory.

Lt Col Lakin truly is courageous, but he has a long uphill battle with the deck stacked against him.

45 posted on 06/11/2010 11:54:37 AM PDT by The Sons of Liberty (The 0bama regime represents an "Clear and Present Danger" to the US - Mene, Mene, Tekel, Upharsin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

Officer to Army: See you in court
Army to Officer: It’s a date!

Public to Army & Officer: We’re following this trial!


46 posted on 06/11/2010 11:59:39 AM PDT by TauntedTiger (Keep away from the fence!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Smokeyblue

This dude has some BRASS BALLS.


47 posted on 06/11/2010 12:02:28 PM PDT by Hemingway's Ghost (Spirit of '75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TauntedTiger
Public to Army & Officer: We’re following this trial!

Public: why can't Obama prove that he was born in Hawaii?

48 posted on 06/11/2010 12:10:32 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Wondererbythebay

Soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan are getting pawned by the usurper because his is a Saudi mole.

The Pentagon, DOD, govt are filled with Mus Brotherhood and Hamas moles probably leaking intel back to Al Qeada and the Taliban. People have no clue cause they watch TV and empower Hussein by watching TV. STupid sheep.


49 posted on 06/11/2010 12:12:16 PM PDT by Frantzie (Democrats = Party of I*lam)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: vanilla swirl

Military expert question;
If Obama found ineligible (snowball chance in hell) would that mean that every order given until that date were dismissed?


Here’s what Lieutenant Colonel Driscoll, the Investigating Officer in the Lt.Colonel Lakin court martial said about that in his Investigation Memorandum:
“The Government does not charge that the President gave an order directly to LTC Lakin. For the President’s credentials to have any bearing on the charges against LTC Lakin, the Defense proposition must be that military orders issued by superiors to juniors are all ‘invalidated’ during the period the President improperly holds office. This proposition fails to account for the law of lawfulness of orders, which in essence requires that a facially proper order be obeyed so long as it does not require the commission of a criminal act. See, e.g., United States v. New, 55 MJ. 95, 107 -108 (2001) (medic who doubted lawfulness of order to deploy with United Nations uniform accoutrements unable to overcome presumption of lawfulness of superior’s orders to so deploy). Moreover, the Defense proposition fails to account for the de facto officer doctrine, a military variant of apparent authority. The Defense offers no legal support whatever for its position, which I find to be far from ‘axiomatic.’ As far as I have found, the position has no basis in law.”


50 posted on 06/11/2010 12:14:07 PM PDT by jamese777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 301-336 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