Should LTC Lakin be embarrassed?

Some reporting of last weeks Article 39(a), UCMJ, hearing appears to attribute the military judge’s ruling to a desire to save the president embarrassment. I believe this is a gross distortion of a small part of what the military judge said.  I was there and heard her read her findings and conclusions which were then made a part of the record of trial and available to the parties.  These are the relevant references.

image

The above is from the discussion of the political question doctrine.  The sole use of the word embarrassment is here:

imageDoes the above compute with what World Net Daily or others have said?  You decide.

Posted in:
Updated:

29 responses to “Should LTC Lakin be embarrassed?”

  1. […] Practice blog has posted portions of Judge Lind’s ruling denying discovery in the Lakin case here.  The excerpt is relevant to the meaning of the word “embarrassment” in Judge […]

  2. James says:

    Lakin was never asking the court the impeach Obama or to remove him as the POTUS or CIC. Judge Lind is in error to assume this.

    In Layman terms, yes is would be an embarressment for the military to establish that Obama is either eligible or not eligible to the Commander In Chief but have no active role in removing him from that position.

    “Let me remind you, it’s not good for the country. It’s not good for the country, if he is qualified to be POTUS, that these rumors swirl. And if he is not, it’s not good for the country that he is Commander In Chief.” – Judge David O. Carter, Federal District Court of California.

    If what Judge Lind says is true, how can the possibility of Obama’s ineligbility be BAD for the country?

    Judge Lind is obviously hiding behind the Political Question Doctrine.

    Instead of providing assurance to Lakin, the military and to the American people that Obama is a valid Commander In Chief, which a former marine has recognized has being a BAD situation for those not to know, Judge Lind is willing to strip LTC Terry Lakin his rights and to have him be subjected to 4 years of hard labor. (Judge Lind has also forbidden Lakin to this defense as defense for the mitigation of sentence.)

  3. John says:

    Lakin was never asking the court the impeach Obama or to remove him as the POTUS or CIC. Judge Lind is in error to assume this.

    In Layman terms, yes is would be an embarressment for the military to establish that Obama is either eligible or not eligible to the Commander In Chief but have no active role in removing him from that position.

    “Let me remind you, it’s not good for the country. It’s not good for the country, if he is qualified to be POTUS, that these rumors swirl. And if he is not, it’s not good for the country that he is Commander In Chief.” – Judge David O. Carter, Federal District Court of California.

    If what Judge Lind says is true, how can the possibility of Obama’s ineligbility be BAD for the country?

    Judge Lind is obviously hiding behind the Political Question Doctrine.

    Instead of providing assurance to Lakin, the military and to the American people that Obama is a valid Commander In Chief, which a former marine has recognized has being a BAD situation for those not to know, Judge Lind is willing to strip LTC Terry Lakin his rights and to have him be subjected to 4 years of hard labor. (Judge Lind has also forbidden Lakin to this defense as defense for the mitigation of sentence.)

  4. John says:

    “Let me remind you, it’s not good for the country. It’s not good for the country, if he is qualified to be POTUS, that these rumors swirl. And if he is not, it’s not good for the country that he is Commander In Chief.” – Judge David O. Carter, Federal District Court of California.

    If Obama is ineligible I wonder why that would be BAD for the country? (Nevermind that Judge Carter dismissed the case but I believed dismissed it due to some threat or coersion. Those who attended the Carter hearings said that Judge Carter was Gun Ho about getting to bottom of this contraversy. However, in a matter of weeks the brakes were put on the case and Judge Carter’s demeanor changed 180.)

    Judge Lind also said the Lakin’s orders came from the Pentagon and that should been sufficient for Lakin.

    First, the orders may have come the Pentagon but their authority to carry them out came from the Commander In Chief which is Obama.

    I didn’t know that Pentagon ordered 30,000 troops to deploy to AF?

    I didn’t know that the Pentagon fired General McCrystal?

    Addition, why would Lind assume that Lakin would been satisfied with an answer from the Pentagon regarding the lawfulness of his orders when Lakin has spent nearly a year trying to determine the authority behind his orders which is the eligibility of the Command in Chief. Lind was clearly trying to confuse the issue and taint the facts of the case which ultimately concluded with a DIRECT plea from Lakin himself to Obama as to lawfulness of his orders by establishing Obama’s eligiblity to serve as the Commander in Chief.

  5. brygenon says:

    Ah, thanks for the quotes. Judge Lind is simply applying the criteria the U.S. Supreme Court stated for the political question doctrine in Baker v. Carr.

    “Prominent on the surface of any case held to involve a political question is found a textually demonstrable constitutional commitment of the issue to a coordinate political department; or a lack of judicially discoverable and manageable standards for resolving it; or the impossibility of deciding without an initial policy determination of a kind clearly for non judicial discretion; or the impossibility of a court’s undertaking independent resolution without expressing lack of the respect due coordinate branches of government; or an unusual need for unquestioning adherence to a political decision already made; or the potentiality of embarrassment from multifarious pronouncements by various departments on one question.” [Baker v. Carr , 369 U.S. 186 (1962).]

  6. John says:

    Lind shouldn’t be able to use civil court precedent in a military court. I guess it is ironic. Judge Lind is using CIVIL judgement in a miltary court to deny Lakin his CIVIL rights even though he is in a military court.

  7. John says:

    Actually it does. Jensen is right and Judge Lind is wrong. Judge Lind contends as other courts have, that Obama’s eligiblity has been essentially already been established and that he is the 44th sworn POTUS. This is basically true. Obama won the election, the election was certified by Congress, and Obama was sworn in. This was the politcal process which put Obama in his place. Is Lakin asking the court to intrude on this process? No.
    Lakin is not asking to redo the election.
    Lakin is not asking for a recertification of the election
    Lakin is not asking for a reswearing of Obama
    Lakin is not asking Obama to be impeached.

    What Lakin is asking for is access to Obama’s records. Jensen as argued that these records have no provacy defense which could resist these documents from being released.

    They documents play no role in the elgibility of Obama as they are not part of the Congressional Record.

    However, the records do prove or disprove whether not Obama is a Natural Born citizen and therefore eligible to be the POTUS.

    But, I would argue that since Obama’s records are outside the political process by which Obama was installed as the 44th POTUS, it would not overreaching to the courts to allow access to them.

    Addition, there is a ton of law out there protects the rights of the accused, and Lakin has the right and is entitled to a defense.

  8. Sterngard Friegen says:

    John demonstrates that to be a birther lack of reading comprehension is a necessary requirement.

  9. John says:

    http://networkedblogs.com/7CJqN
    Via WND; – The reckoning: This single report could sink Obama’s presidency – Free, landmark summary explains eligibility issue clearly, suggests what you should do –

    The citizens of the United States have a right to know if their president is constitutionally eligible to hold the office,” says the report, now available from WND.

    “Obama’s hospital of birth, birth documents, passport and Social Security number are all in question, and his legal defense never addresses the merits of the eligibility challenges. Instead, Obama relies on procedural objections and compliant judges to get the cases thrown out of court,” says the report.

    “President Obama could quickly and easily resolve the issue by releasing his personal historical documents to authenticate his claims,” it concludes.

  10. NBC says:

    Haha, John… this is so funny. Of course, the President presented his personal historical document that shows him born on US soil and it never ‘resolved’ anything.
    But back to Lind, as expected the term ’embarrased’ was used in a somewhat embarrasing manner by Lakin’s supporters, ignoring the context and relevance.
    Judge Lind indeed did an excellent job at presenting precedent rulings which as expected and predicted have led her to her expected ruling.

  11. obsolete says:

    Actually John, you can stop there, because none of those documents are in any question. The U.S. Military and Executive Branch should not grind to a halt because some small fringe group of conspiracy theorists still haven’t had their nappy since the last election.
    And you know that whatever documents Obama releases, the birthers will label a fake within minutes and demand more.

    Here’s a rundown:
    Obama releases COLB – Birthers cry “fake”
    Obama Selective Service registration released through FOIA – Birthers cry “fake”
    State Dept. releases docs from late 60’s via FOIA in which they conclude Obama is born in Hawaii, Birthers cry “what are they hiding?”
    Two contemporary birth announcements found in Hawaiian newspapers – Birthers cry “fake”
    Hawaii releases birth index data showing Obama born in Hawaii in 1961 – Birthers cry “not conclusive”
    Hawaii Governor and Health Director release statements that they verified that Obama was born in Hawaii and his original BC is on file – Birthers cry “They are parsing words! By what authority do they have?”
    White House shows Obama passport on YouTube – Birthers cry “fake”

    Now, if you see this anytime in the future:
    Obama releases “Long Form” Birth Certificate
    Do you honestly believe it won’t be followed by:
    Birthers cry “fake”
    within minutes?
    You birthers have soiled your own sheets and are not entitled to one more document.

  12. NBC says:

    What Lakin is asking for is access to Obama’s records. Jensen as argued that these records have no provacy defense which could resist these documents from being released.

    Since the documents have no relevance to Lakin’s case, why should these documents be released?

  13. obsolete says:

    Actually, my post header was cut off- it should have quoted this from John:
    “Obama’s hospital of birth, birth documents, passport and Social Security number are all in question”
    followed by the rest of my post.

  14. NBC says:

    Lind shouldn’t be able to use civil court precedent in a military court. I guess it is ironic. Judge Lind is using CIVIL judgement in a miltary court to deny Lakin his CIVIL rights even though he is in a military court.

    No civil rights have been denied to Lakin.

  15. Miriam Mata says:

    Sterngard Friegen 09.08.10 at 07:31

    John demonstrates that to be a birther
    ————–
    John is not alone.

    http://usurpador.blogcindario.com/

  16. Miriam Mata says:

    John
    You are not alone.

  17. NBC says:

    Let me see if I can put this in as simple a sentence as possible without losing the legal argument:

    1. Lakin – I refuse to follow direct orders from my superiors, causing me to miss a troop movement because I do not believe that our President is eligible, making the direct orders unlawful
    2. Court – The eligibility of the President is an issue our Constitution has assigned to Congress
    3. Court – Congress has found President Obama to have qualified and he was duly sworn in.
    4. Court – In fact, I will take judicial notice of this fact
    5. Court – The orders are lawful
    6. Lakin – Darn…

    In other words, the documents requested have no relevance to the Court’s decision.

    The end.

  18. obsolete says:

    Quote:
    Miriam Mata 09.08.10 at 09:43

    John
    You are not alone.
    *********************************

    Stupidity never is.

  19. Miriam Mata says:

    an obsolete expression.

  20. BigGuy says:

    John —

    LTC Lakin’s argument for the production of the documents is that, in Lakin’s view, they would lead the court to conclude that Obama is ineligible and therefore Lakin was correct in disobeying his orders. But the court has ruled (as have many other courts) that it has no power to decide the eligibility of a sitting president.

    In addition, the court has determined (as have many other courts) that the validity of the orders that Lakin disobeyed is in no way contingent upon the eligibility of the president. Hence any eligibility considerations are irrelevant to Lakin’s defense.

  21. The Law Office of Philip D. Cave Viking says:

    Re NBC’s point 3.
    I think that what is being said is that as of 20 January 2009 any question of legitimacy was done and over with. Now it’s up to Congress to impeach. There’s a finality argument there. And they need to go to Congress not the judiciary.
    AND MR. JENSEN agreed to the taking of judicial notice.
    I’m uncertain how, if, and when all this was explained to LTC Lakin.
    Darn.

  22. John says:

    I would if Judge Lind voted for Obama. I thinking mostly she did judging from her ruling.

  23. nbc says:

    I would if Judge Lind voted for Obama. I thinking mostly she did judging from her ruling.

    Hard to tell as any judge would have come to the same ruling. Precedent and our Constitution leave no other choices.

    Which is perhaps why some are using ad hominem to make their ‘arguments’?

    Quite telling

  24. Bob Ross says:

    Yeah John absence of you having proof must always denote some massive conspiracy

  25. Dwight Sullivan says:

    John, serious questions — do you believe that every member of the military has the option of disobeying any order he or she receives? Do you believe that every member of the military is legally obligated to disobey any order he or she receives?

  26. obsolete says:

    John, serious questions — do you believe that every member of the military has the option of disobeying any order he or she receives? Do you believe that every member of the military is legally obligated to disobey any order he or she receives?

    If it would get the scary black man out of the White House, then John & James would say “Yes!” to both.

  27. katahdin says:


    Congress has already spoken on the matter of the president’s eligibility. Enough said.

  28. HORUS says:

    I see now that John and James are the exact same person.
    Screw you, hypocrite!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *