Here is another viewpoint, from a civilian, about the need to court-martial LTC Lakin.
The (Greeley, CO) Tribune opinion says:
When you become a soldier of the United States of America, you lose some of your rights.
Except in extreme cases, you no longer have the right to refuse orders of superiors. You don’t have the same freedom of speech that other Americans enjoy. You serve at the pleasure of your commander in chief.
Lt. Col. Terry Lakin, while exercising rights that many Americans enjoy, now needs to suffer the consequences for his actions. He has violated the requirements of his office.
Greeley is LTC Lakin’s home town I believe.
Columnist John Kanelis, on amarillo.com has this to say.
It will surprise no one to disclose that some – perhaps many – Panhandle residents do not believe President Obama is constitutionally qualified to serve as commander in chief.
How might this play out in civilian court? Randall County Assistant District Attorney Richard Gore also believes the burden of proof falls on the defense.
Gore compared it to someone alleging that an arresting police officer isn’t duly certified by the state to slap handcuffs on a suspect. "It would be ridiculous to ask the officer to prove he is certified to do his job," Gore said.
A court-martial could answer a lot of questions once and for all, even for the nut jobs who keep suggesting the ridiculous.
Take this guy to court – and hope we can bid farewell to this moronic birther cult.
Unfortunately for Mr. Kanelis, I don’t see that happening, even if LTC Lakin is court-martialed. Military law and the rules of evidence, are likely arrayed against LTC Lakin. If proof is for some strange reason offered, it won’t be believed by those outside the court-room, and if the rules of procedure, law, and evidence are followed, and LTC Lakin is in fact convicted, the military will be accused of a cover-up. A court-martial is a political no-win. But, a court-martial might be the appropriate palliative for good order and discipline.