Press Release: Army Refers Charges Against Lakin To Court Martial

Safeguard Our Constitution ^ | August 2, 2010 | Margaret Hemenway

[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.

[Brown Deer]

I think it's pretty well established we're talking about American laws as they apply to American hospitals.

Really? Where was it established that we were only talking about American hospitals? I certainly haven't been. You seem to make a lot of assumptions with your tiny little brain.

You have made the comment many times that your president's birth certificate is protected by HIPAA laws, yet you have shown no proof that he was born in an American hospital.

[Exmil_UK]

This is not a legal point.

Why change the number of a clause in the constitution even if it is inactive?

What happens when an amendment amends an amendment, partly reactivating the old constitutional clause but still keeping part of the amendment to it active?

If an amendment changes the numbering system, how does that help clarity?

In a Statute Law, referred to every day by the courts, it makes sense just to delete the changed paragraph and just renumber everything.

Doing that to an important and permanent historical record of legal changes like the Constitution of the United States of America, seems, to this UK Citizen and non-lawyer, to be harmful.

[Brown Deer]

(This Rothschild seems to have no relation to the Banking family).

I wouldn't be so sure about that. His father was Alan Friend Rothschild (Aug 15, 1925-May 8, 2004), who was the son of Irwin Bernard Rothschild (Aug 11, 1890-Oct 1967), who was the son of David Rothschild (May 1860-Mar 29, 1947), who was the son of Nathan Baruch Rothschild (Jul 7, 1831-Apr 28, 1917). All of them lived in Columbus, Georgia, but the latter two mentioned were German immigrants arriving here in about 1880, from an area very close to Frankfurt. This is the 1858 marriage registration for Nathan Rothschild, which shows the name of his parents.

[Uncle Chip]

You have made the comment many times that your president's birth certificate is protected by HIPAA laws, yet you have shown no proof that he was born in an American hospital.

Excellent Point -- HIPAA is irrelevant to this issue.

[Exmil_UK]

Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't
I.D. Document fraud a offense under Federal laws?, so in theory it can be prosecuted as a criminal case by a US Attorney in any state [the COLB was transferred over the Internet for the purpose of deception]

US attorneys work for the US DOJ, but obviously some of these were appointed by Bush. They can be fired by the current president at his will, but if Obama is at his last gasp politically its not impossible for a fearless Bush appointed US attorney to attempt to prosecute Gibbs.

Since we are talking about the COLB, here is the relevant Polarik vid from his youtube channel, start at 1:30 to get to the point:-

http://www.youtube.com/user/TheDrRJP#p/c/C2281523DF8C0230/6/BbpjYeZXaVs

Mr Gibbs has publicly admitted his hand at putting this on the Internet. This would all be too late to assist Lt. Col Lakin, but at least it would force Obama to act, possibly in a way that will expose him.

[penelopesire]

Thanks for the info. I figured as much with the obfuscation,misdirection and lib talking points lifted wholecloth from Obot sites....LOL.

[OldDeckHand]

"I.D. Document fraud a offense under Federal laws?"

Just ID? Like a library card or parking garage stamp? Nope, not necessarily. We're talking about a state document, not a federal document. It only becomes a federal case if that state document is used in a scheme to assume a person's identity, and that conspiracy to assume someone's identity involves interstate commerce, or some other plainly federal jurisdiction.

Just creating a false image of a birth certificate isn't necessarily a federal crime - in fact, it's not necessarily any crime at all - as I said, it's dependent entirely on the circumstances. Did the person who "mocked up" the document to so with the intent to commit crime?

"US attorneys work for the US DOJ, but obviously some of these were appointed by Bush. "

All but one or two of the current USAs were appointed by Barack Obama. Assistant US attorneys are career positions. They are not appointed. They are hired and they do not serve at the pleasure of this president, or any president. They are civil servants. Some were hired by Obama, Bush, Clinton, Bush and Reagan (maybe even Carter).

"Mr Gibbs has publicly admitted his hand at putting this on the Internet. "

Tell me counselor, what crime are you going to charge Gibbs with? And, before you answer that, look up the definition of "mens rea".

[jamese777]

NO!

But contrary to you as being a paid “Obot-spammer”, they feared the RACE CARD more than anything, just ask Bill Clinton!!!

---

Ah, I see the “logic!”
Everyone is afraid of the race card. If that’s really the case: “no guts, no glory.”
Obama’s original, long form, vault copy, Certificate of Live Birth can be released under subpoena without Obama’s permission. I guess the race card is such a powerful card in the deck that it has intimidated every single prosecuting attorney and judge in the nation. Whew, that’s some powerful card.

[jamese777]

Really? Where was it established that we were only talking about American hospitals? I certainly haven’t been. You seem to make a lot of assumptions with your tiny little brain.

You have made the comment many times that your president’s birth certificate is protected by HIPAA laws, yet you have shown no proof that he was born in an American hospital.

---

The Republican Governor of Hawaii, Linda Lingle says that Obama was born at Kapi’olani Medical Center. Dr. Chiyome Fukino, director of the Hawaii Department of Health says that Obama was born in Hawaii. Her exact words were: “I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of the Hawaii State Department of Health, have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawai‘i State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawai‘i and is a natural-born American citizen. I have nothing further to add to this statement or my original statement issued in October 2008 over eight months ago.”

Some people may not accept the statements of the Governor or the state Health Department Director or the Attorney General of Hawaii or the Registrar of Vital Records of Hawaii (all Republicans or Republican appointees) but I can guarantee you that judges and justices will accept those statements as being authenticating.

There is no constitutional requirement that a president be born in a hospital. If there was, quite a few of our former presidents would have been ineligible.

In any event, if anyone really, truly, honestly wants to see Barack Obama’s original, long form, vault copy, Certificate of Live Birth in order to see if a birth hospital is listed on it, the document can be released without Obama’s permission via a subpoena. Hawaii Revised Statutes 338-18(b) point 9 allows for a birth vital record to be released to “a person with a valid court order from a court of competent jurisdiction.”

[Exmil_UK]

Its a Gordian knot proving mens rea for Gibbs and Axelrod.

You need the sword of the house subcommittee system to cut through it and investigate Obama’s finances, both campaign and where possible, personal.

Even then the investigation has to begin at square one, a difficult and time consuming process. The general principle is "follow the money," and the main villains will be revealed. The actual actus rea depends on the exact circumstances of the actors involved and precise times. A prediction for you is that John O. Brennan and Analysis corp will come up. 90 Days to go until the American people can take their revenge out on the "Democrats" in the November 2nd mid term elections. Barack Obama has only succeeded in awakening a sleeping giant

[Exmil_UK]

the phrase “natural-born American citizen” is not present in the constitution, and it is no accident.

“natural born citizen” is used, and it is subtle legal trickery to substute a similar sounding term.

It won’t work anymore.

[OldDeckHand]

"Its a Gordian knot proving mens rea for Gibbs and Axelrod."

Well, that can be said about virtually any conspiracy case. Despite mountains of evidence, even taped conversations, it can be VERY difficult to prove any criminal conspiracy absent the direct testimony of a cooperating indicted (or indicted) co-conspirator.

[Exmil_UK]

Exactly, that's why Obama has to be finished politically, in the dying embers of his presidency, for a subcommitte to gain decisive traction.

Once people know he won't be around for a second term to retaliate, then the tipping point will be reached.

I don't think any of the DSA/CoC/CP USA crew will betray him, as they are almost fanatical. A career politician like Crist in attitude is more likely to deliver the knife in the back to save his own worthless skin.

The reason it matters is because of the number of senators the “Democrats” will have to defend in 2012. If this whole eligibility mess comes out before the 2012 election just imagine what a constitutional conservative President could do with a house majority and 65 senate seats.

That right there is the power to repeal vast quantities of progressive laws.

They might even take the time to amend the constitution to Define NBC exactly according to the long form of vattels definition. That would be poetic revenge on Obama and his ilk.

[jamese777]

“the phrase “natural-born American citizen” is not present in the constitution, and it is no accident.

“natural born citizen” is used, and it is subtle legal trickery to substute a similar sounding term.”

---

Now you’re just being silly. If Dr. Fukino had said, “natural born citizen” some true believers would have said “natural born citizen of Kenya” or “natural born citizen of the United Kingdom.” She was just clarifying her authentification. If Dr. Fukino is ever deposed by a court of law, she can verbally state her exact meaning.

---

“It won’t work anymore.”

---

Oh, I don’t know about that. It seems to have “worked” quite a bit more, Obama: 71/Birthers: 0 in adjudicated eligibility/ineligibilty lawsuits including the latest dismissals of Kerchner v. Obama last week, Jones v Obama the week before that and the revelation in the Strunk Freedom of Information Act request that the state department found in 1967 that Lolo Soetoro had a step-son born in Honolulu on August 4, 1961:
Memo to file
A 14 128 294
Sept. 14, 1967

Pursuant to inquiry from Central office regarding the status of the applicants’ [Lolo Soetoro] spouse’s child by a former marriage.

The person in question is a united states citizen by virtue of his birth in Honolulu, Hawaii Aug. 4, 1961. He is living with the applicants’ spouse in Honolulu, Hawaii. He is considered the applicant’s step-child, within the meaning of Sec. 101(b)(1)(B), of the act, by virtue of the marriage of the applicant to the child’s mother on March 15, 1965.

W. L. Mix

[Exmil_UK]

The law is all about defintions.

Its a “I did not have sexual relations with that woman” trick.

Linking natural to born with a hyphen and inserting the word American before citizen breaks up the meaning. The effect cannot be defined exactly.

Fukino is a medical docter, not a constitutional lawyer, that makes her use of “natural-born” *especially* dangerous.

[tired_old_conservative]

“Why change the number of a clause in the constitution even if it is inactive?”

No one is changing the number of a clause in the Constitution. The Constitution assigns no numbers to clauses. For legal purposes, where one wants to be specific about the passages cited, numbers are assigned. When doing that, it is not at all uncommon in legal matters to delete from the numbering clauses that are no longer in effect. As I noted previously, there is no right or wrong way to do it, per se. Leave the superseded ones in, take them out, whatever. What is important is that a convention be applied consistently for reference purposes.

“What happens when an amendment amends an amendment, partly reactivating the old constitutional clause but still keeping part of the amendment to it active?”

Typically amendments are simply negated by their replacement. If a clause is only partially modified and is still needed to make sense with the amendment, it would presumably be retained in the numbering system. Depending, of course, on the convention being used.

“If an amendment changes the numbering system, how does that help clarity?”

Again, there was no original numbering system. And once a document such as the Constitution is changed, it is actual a new document. It would be Constitution rev. 1, rev. 2 , etc. The technical question that arises is how, for purposes where specificity matters, to cite the correct passage of the current revision of the Constitution. Like I said, there is no correct answer to that. Clarity problems can arise with any convention, but as long as the convention used is understood, legal documents can be matched to the revision of the Constitution in effect when they were issued.

“In a Statute Law, referred to every day by the courts, it makes sense just to delete the changed paragraph and just renumber everything.

Doing that to an important and permanent historical record of legal changes like the Constitution of the United States of America, seems, to this UK Citizen and non-lawyer, to be harmful.”

I have no personal preference. As noted, all conventions are somewhat arbitrary.

What is simply the folly of willful idiots is to run around braying about how courts can't count when the footnotes of the ruling point out the dueling conventions and which one the court is applying.

[Exmil_UK]

And as for the Strunk FOIA, they lost her passport application for the 1960/61 passport but found a little piece of text saying xyz.

Grade ‘A’ Bull droppings.

If thats the best Mr. Brennan can do, the house subcommittee will clean Obama's clock after the elections.

[jamese777]

And as for the Strunk FOIA, they lost her passport application for the 1960/61 passport but found a little piece of text saying xyz.
Grade ‘A’ Bull droppings.

If thats the best Mr. Brennan can do, the house subcommittee will clean Obama’s clock after the elections.

---

OK, if you say so, it must be true.

[RowdyFFC]

Oh right! There are a couple of young soldiers who followed the orders of their superior to shoot military age insurgents on site, that might be wishing they had questioned the legality of their orders, that are sitting in 18 and 25 years in prison as we speak. Strange isn’t it, their superior, Col. Steele got a slap on the hand. Whose orders WAS he following that he got off so lightly and they didn’t? Hmmmm?

TLC Lakin is doing his duty. He is not some PFC new recruit, nor is he un-knowledgeable about HIS duty, like perhaps some others might be now serving in Afghanistan or Iraq. Or posting on this board. He has served for many years under the UCMJ, and been highly decorated for doing so. I think I will trust his judgment, even if he winds up in serving time, which I don’t think Ayatollah Obama can afford to let happen. I suspect they’ll just ruin his military career and try to bury the whole thing. But Americans are watching this issue closely, and it’s a thorn in his side that is NEVER going to allow itself to be buried.

[RowdyFFC]

Oh right! There are a couple of young soldiers who followed the orders of their superior to shoot military age insurgents on site, that might be wishing they had questioned the legality of their orders, that are sitting in 18 and 25 years in prison as we speak. Strange isn’t it, their superior, Col. Steele got a slap on the hand. Whose orders WAS he following that he got off so lightly and they didn’t? Hmmmm?

TLC Lakin is doing his duty. He is not some PFC new recruit, nor is he un-knowledgeable about HIS duty, like perhaps some others might be now serving in Afghanistan or Iraq. Or posting on this board. He has served for many years under the UCMJ, and been highly decorated for doing so. I think I will trust his judgment, even if he winds up in serving time, which I don’t think Ayatollah Obama can afford to let happen. I suspect they’ll just ruin his military career and try to bury the whole thing. But Americans are watching this issue closely, and it’s a thorn in his side that is NEVER going to allow itself to be buried.