Skip to comments.Lakin case is end of 'rule of law'
Posted on 12/30/2010 6:46:03 PM PST by Rabin
A retired military officer who pursued all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court a legal challenge to Barack Obama's occupancy of the Oval Office says the conviction and sentencing of an active duty officer who raised similar questions signals the end of the "rule of law" in the United States. Cmdr. Charles Kerchner's legal case, handled by attorney Mario Apuzzo, alleged that Congress failed its constitutional duty to examine the legitimacy of a successful candidate during the Electoral College vetting process on Capitol Hill. The Supreme Court ultimately decided not to hear arguments, leaving standing a lower court's dismissal.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
White people still operate under the “rule of law.”
The Supreme Court only does the right thing.
....Dredd Scott Decision.....er, wait....
Hugo Chavez would be proud of the way things are running in this country. Maybe he’s even envious.
The Hot Potato That Nobody Wants To Touch.
He was very impressed with Obama’s takeover of GM/Chrysler, he even called Castro in Cuba to say that Obama was more of a socialist than they were.
Lakin pled guilty to 3 counts of disobeying orders and was convicted by a jury of his peers on a 4th count of missing movement.
How is that the end of the rule of law?
I love throwing that at people who say that the USSC “does only the right thing” OR, perhaps, “that earlier USSC decisions are more valid because they are closer to when the Constitution was written.” I had that last one thrown at me when I was grousing that the USSC went about illegitimately amending the Constitution as early as 1798 when, in the Calder v. Bull case, they declared that the prohibition against Ex Post Facto law applied only to criminal laws.
What is interesting is that the Congress uses this rationale to pass ex post facto tax laws which they label as “administrative” or “regulatory” laws; but then when the IRS pursues someone for violating one such law it is done so in a CRIMINAL court. So, if a tax law is not criminal so that it can be retroactive, why is it prosecuted criminally? And if a tax law IS criminal, why are the legeslatures allowed to make them in an Ex Post Facto manner?
Of course that is no quandary if one rejects the notion that the Constitution is whatever the USSC says that it is; in that case what the legislatures are doing is wrong, period. And that is why the government cannot bear the thought of being held to an absolute standard of the Constitution: it limits their own powers.
Especially if the powers that be ARE wrong they will punish the person who points out that fact.
The entire corrupt political structure will NOT unseat the fraud ,obama.They all have interests to cover.
Remember how the Ohio legislature and Congrss 40 years later retroactively "corrected" Ohio's non-ratification of the federal income tax? I know the federal income tax wasn't ratified as per the Constitution but there is and was no way in hell that government at any level is ever going to admit it.
Remember Andy Jackson's violations of treaty law in dispossessing the Cherokee ?
Only dedent God-fearing men respect the law as written;the average politician and his handlers just view the law as something to be twisted and evaded.
Keep watching TV Obot.
Even many here who love Prince Al Waleed’s Fox News may be shocked because another freeper said their darling Megan Kelly is bashing birthers. Everyone loves the saudi puppet on TV and the media.
Coups, tyranny and takeovers just require sheep and cowards. Lakin is neither.
He was denied the ability to present evidence and witnessed on his behalf contrary to the 6th Amendment, for one.
Further, the judge declared that the eligibility of the President has NO impact on the validity of the orders his superiors issued... that in itself flies in the face of established/codified military law.
Lakin capitulated on every thing he claimed he stood for and repeatedly stated that he was wrong to challenge BO’s legitimacy. Had he stood his ground, he would have had a basis for appeal. Since he pled guilty he lost his chance to appeal. Certainly he got bad legal advice, but he has only himself to blame for following the bad advice.
Please realize the TRUTH: Lawlessness was elected on 11/4/08...and didn’t start with this case. There is nothing Congress or anyone else is going to do to remove Obama from office.
Everything about socialism is sham and affectation. - 23.11 Ch23; Evil; Economic Harmonies; Frederic Bastiat 1801-1850
You and I agree that by pleading guilty he capitulated; I suspect there was some plea-bargaining going on there but that is ultimately irrelevant.
That he did capitulate does NOT negate that it was a travesty that his 6th Amendment rights were so completely cut-off.
That a 'guilty' plea will likely prevent appeals is very sad and disappointing.
I agree that his 5th and 6th amendment rights were violated. Unfortunately by pleading guilty, he surrender his right to appeal those violations.
I agree that his 5th and 6th amendment rights were violated. Unfortunately by pleading guilty, he surrendered his right to appeal those violations.
“How is that the end of the rule of law?”
The view from under a bus is typically dismal. Having established that no one in the known universe has “standing” to inspect the credos of our dear leader, one can but wonder, from our now perspective. None the less, it seems this valiant soul said take me first. The monolith did so.
Smart career move, not. But this is the stuff that heroes are made of.
But to your lead Q. I completely agree, were the “rule of law” that all so frail. We should all have been toast long before the invention of bread.
Yes Hyperbole is the Hallmark of WND.
The Heros are the ones who stand their ground and never surrender.
Nathan Hale (June 6, 1755 September 22, 1776) was a soldier for the Continental Army during the American Revolutionary War. A spy for the Continental Army, he volunteered for an intelligence-gathering mission in New York City but was captured by the British. He is probably best remembered for his purported last words before being hanged: “I only regret that I have but one life to lose for my country.”
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.