Posted on 09/03/2010 5:05:10 AM PDT by cycle of discernment
Judge to Lakin: Find another defense Rules that officer challenging Obama's eligibility can't see evidence
Posted: September 02, 2010
FT. MEADE, Md. – A career officer in the U.S. Army acting as a judge in the prosecution of Lt. Col. Terrence Lakin today ruled that the military is no place for Barak Obama's presidential eligibility to be evaluated.
Army Col. Denise R. Lind today ruled in a hearing regarding the evidence to be allowed in the scheduled October court-martial of Lakin that he will be denied access to any of Obama's records as well as any testimony from those who may have access to the records.
With her decision, Lind mirrored a number of federal judges who have ruled on civil lawsuits over Obama's eligibility. They have without exception denied the plaintiffs' access to any requested documentation regarding the president's eligibility.
Lind ruled that it was "not relevant" for the military to be considering such claims, that the laws allegedly violated by Lakin were legitimate on their face and that the chain of command led up to the Pentagon, and that should have been sufficient for Lakin.
Paul Rolf Jensen, Lakin's civilian attorney, said the case would continue. But he said the courts now have denied his client the opportunity to present his defense.
Jensen had argued that under U.S.C. Rule 46, a defendant put on court martial has the right to call any and all witnesses and obtain any evidence in his or her defense.
Lind, who took 40 minutes to read her decision to the court, disagreed.
She said opening up such evidence could be an "embarrassment" to the president, and it's up to Congress to call for impeachment of a sitting president.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
jeez..title should read “Opening records of Obama”.....dyslexia attack!
> She said opening up such evidence could be
> an “embarrassment” to the president,
I musta missed something. The judiciary have no problems with evidence that may embarrass conservatives.
> and it’s up to Congress to call for impeachment of a
> sitting president.
Unless I misread the Constitution, the Judiciary participates in checking and balancing the Executive.
Its about not Opening the records.
That really begs the question.
“...opening up such evidence could be an “embarrassment” to the president...”
Some animals are more equal than others.
No elected public official has a right to protection of embarrassment from the FACTS of their record.
These are NOT healthcare records.
BOGUS argument.
What the judge is saying is that if you are a leftwing nut you are protected by the court and if you are conservative the court will hang you.
You can't call for an impeachment without some form of probable cause, which is being concealed by the judiciary.
This is just another political decision.
hey-c of d.....a half a cup o’joe later-and I didn’t even notice it!
“embarrassment to the president”
The exact WRONG thing to say
If he's not eligible, then he's not President so he cannot be impeached.
Whatever might the "judge" be thinking? I guess this "judge" never heard of a non-public examination of records as hard as it is to understand what might be embarrassing, it is even harder to understand what would be so embarrassing for her to examine the requested documents in camera.
ML/NJ
If this flies does it give precedent to future Court Martial(s) seeing same defense? “releasing that evidence might embarass the General/Colonel/Major/Captain”, etc.
Bring the Col. up on charges of obstructing justice.
Interesting the Judge used the wording “potential embarrassment.”
It would be an embarrassment if the historic first black precedent in history turned out to be a complete and utter fraud.......
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.