Posted on 08/02/2010 5:29:53 AM PDT by captjanaway
Washington, D.C., August 2, 2010. The Army has now referred charges against LTC Terrence Lakin for a General Court Martial. This action triggered the appointment of a Military Judge to preside over the trial, which will likely be scheduled before October, and held in Washington, D.C. at Ft. McNair.
On August 6, 2010 at Ft. McNair in Washington, D.C., the court will convene for the purpose of Judge Lind taking Lakin’s plea to the charges which consist of “missing movement” and of refusing to obey orders. Today Lakin stated: “I am not guilty of these charges, and will plead ‘not guilty’ to them because of my conviction that our Commander-in-Chief may be ineligible under the United States Constitution to serve in that highest of all offices. The truth matters. The Constitution matters. If President Obama is a natural born citizen then the American people deserve to see proof, and if he is not, then I believe the orders in this case were illegal.” If convicted, Lakin faces up to four years at hard labor in a federal penitentiary.
(Excerpt) Read more at safeguardourconstitution.com. ...
First, do you see any numbers on the paragraphs in the Constitution under the numbered sections? If the answer is yes, see an eye doctor.
Second, given that you passed the eye test, do you comprehend that any numbers you see assigned to the sub-section paragraphs in reproductions of the Constitution are, in fact, external constructs of a given convention? That is, they are variable depending on the rules of the construct.
Third, the most simple construct is to simply number the paragraphs as they lay. Of course, one could also number the individual sentences as opposed to paragraphs, but that would tend to clutter the presentation. Now, do you understand that different numbering schemes can be used?
Fourth, do you understand what the word superseded means?
Fifth, given that the original third paragraph of Article II, Section 1, was superseded (there's that word again), some conventions will not count it. If they do so, the original fifth paragraph becomes the fourth. Still with me?
In sum, numbering mechanisms for things that weren't assigned numbers in the first place are inherently variable. For documentation where specificity matters, a convention is chosen and followed to preclude that variability. The convention cited by Courts and many of your fellow birthers assigns the 5th paragraph as Clause 4. You assign it as Clause 5. Neither is correct in any absolute sense, as it could just as easily be Clause 27 (or whatever) if we were counting by sentences.
In short, assuming multiple courts can't count is a simpleton's take on this issue.
Well, that’s rather the POINT. He doesn’t think he received a LEGAL ORDER. AND his standing orders tell him not to obey an order that he deems illegal until he finds out whether it’s legal OR NOT! The burden of proof of submitting a legal order is on the COC at this point!
Judge Robertson, however, apparently felt that Obama's Factcheck and his other prefabricating sites on the internet were equally valid sources of information for his decision.
What happens if you knowingly alter a government document and put it on your internet site to deceive the people. Then a Federal Judge sees the document and it influences his decision in a matter before his court. Then what???
In your world perhaps. But, in the real world a commissioned officer disobeys an order at his peril. He must defend himself against any charge of disobeying orders by proving that by obeying the order, he would be committing a criminal offense. Do you believe that any soldier who deploys to Afghanistan commits a criminal offense by so doing?
No, that's not accurate. Per the RCM, orders are "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."
IOW, an order is presumptively lawful, and as such, the burden falls to the defendant to prove that the order wasn't lawful. Moreover, the lawfulness of an order is a question of law, not fact. Therefor, it is something that is heard and decided outside the presence of the jury panel, and solely by the MJ.
Facially, there is nothing "unlawful" about a deployment order. And, the order did not come from Barack Obama, as such, Obama's eligibility for office is irrelevant, in the eyes of the military court. The order came from Lakin's direct superior - a two-star general, I believe. This is the primary reason Lakin has absolutely no chance of prevailing at trial.
Then the state in whose name a fraudulent document containing fraudulent information has been proffered will respond, as it has every right, and indeed obligation, to do. When that state does not take action, it is understood that the information presented corresponds with the state's records.
Perhaps. Nevertheless, I do believe that the hatred has transcended the policies.
It might be criminal fraud, it might be civil fraud, or it might be no fraud at all. It's complicated and is highly dependent on the circumstances. Is the alleged forger enriching or otherwise benefiting himself in some way? If not, it's not impossible to make a fraud case, but it becomes more difficult.
Then a Federal Judge sees the document and it influences his decision in a matter before his court. Then what???"
Assuming the document in question was actually submitted to the court, the judge can hold contempt hearings, he can refer the attorney (if it was an attorney who knowingly submitted the fraudulent documents) to his/her state bar for disciplinary action, and he can ask the government - vis-a-vis the USA - to open a criminal investigation on the matter. He can do all that, some of that or none of that.
Again back to these particular cases - none of them have turned on documents. They have all been decided not on matters of fact, but solely on matters of law. Don't lose sight of that. Whether or not a document has been falsified in these cases, is immaterial to the decisions these judges have reached.
It is obvious to me that every single ‘point’ you make is stolen right off of the OBOT websites.A quick google proves it. You are spinning the same set of obot talking points over and over again.
Bottom line...Obama is hiding something and it’s obviously something big. It is also obvious that his BC is most likely one of the things that have been redacted from this FOIA document dump concerning his mother’s passports. The authorities were asking for proof of her son’s citizenship and status. I have my doubts about this letter you and the Obots have zeroed in on. It seems out of place and has no supporting evidence of fact.
Remember...the truth always rises to the surface. Make sure you are prepared to open your eyes to the truth when the time comes.
That's an interesting allegation, so I looked to see what James posted - and "what he posted" came DIRECTLY from Judge Land's opinion in the Rhodes case. Judge Land was a three-term Republican state senator from one of the most conservative districts in Georgia before he was nominated the District Court by GWB.
But, in your world, I guess that makes him an "OBOT".
It's what cults do—all or nothing. The slightest deviation and you are an apostate.
Yes..it does make him an Obot...lol. I didn’t ask for an opinion from any judge and don’t care if the man was a republican or democrat. My observation was about the documents from his link. page 40..go have a look see. Obama is hiding something big. He and his accomplices are getting sloppy. It won’t be long now until the whole thing comes crashing down around his head. Who know what it is...but it’s not gonna be pretty. He has spent an awful amount of time and money tryng to hide what-ever it is.
You are making entirely too much sense for this thread and certainly for this crowd. I warn you, keen legal minds are at work here and they will slice you to ribbons with their knowledge and understanding of the law. The best thing about all of this is that assertions trump facts, statutes, precedent, and anything else that might challenge the opinions running amok. I am very disappointed that in my world I can’t make assertions that cannot be supported in fact and in law.
I believe that LTC Lakin has gone around the bend on us. This is a real shame because his superior medical skills are sorely needed in Afghanistan. I say let the civilians step up to the plate and take care of this political mess.
I feel like I’m trapped in a Lewis Carroll novel. Fortunately, the Military Judge and the Court Martial panel will not have to deal with this Wonderland.
100% libtard troll that one is. All one has to do is check his past posts. How he hasn’t been banned is beyond me. Check your FReepmail for more info.
I feel like I’m trapped in a Lewis Carroll novel. Fortunately, the Military Judge and the Court Martial panel will not have to deal with this Wonderland.
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.