Category Archives: Election

Election

Lakin court martial, Obey orders, Disobey orders, Oath of office, US Constitution, Citizen Wells open thread, August 5, 2010

Lakin court martial, Obey orders, Disobey orders, Oath of office, US Constitution

Several days ago we learned.

“PRESS RELEASE
Army Refers Charges Against Lakin To Court Martial
Military Judge Appointed
Arraignment Set for Hearing on August 6, 2010
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.”

The military officers oath of office.
“I, _________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.”

Under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, UCMJ, it is a crime to disobey a lawful order. Ultimately all orders flow from the commander in chief, the office of the president of the US. Here is an example of an order that should be challenged. Let’s suppose that a coup was taking place in the US. Let’s suppose that a rogue Speaker of the House was keeping the the president and vice president captive in a secret place and announced that they had been killed. Let’s further suppose that the Speaker gets sworn in rapidly and then begins issuing orders to the military. Let’s further suppose that an order is issued for an invasion of a country. Should military officers blindly follow this order?

The answer is obvious. The orders and the Speaker taking the presidency should be questioned, more information obtained.

We have a very similar situation now with Barack Obama illegally occupying the White House with no proof whatsoever that he is eligible. Terry Lakin has every right and duty to question this. Obama continues to use government attorneys to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and other records. We have a usurper in the White House and thus every military order is subject to question.

LTC Lakin has a duty to defend the US Constitution and disobey illegal orders. It is Lakin’s superiors who should be court martialed.

Notice the emphasis placed on eligibility in the presidential line of succession.

 US Code

TITLE 3 > CHAPTER 1 > § 19
§ 19. Vacancy in offices of both President and Vice President; officers eligible to act
(a)
(1) If, by reason of death, resignation, removal from office, inability, or failure to qualify, there is neither a President nor Vice President to discharge the powers and duties of the office of President, then the Speaker of the House of Representatives shall, upon his resignation as Speaker and as Representative in Congress, act as President.
(2) The same rule shall apply in the case of the death, resignation, removal from office, or inability of an individual acting as President under this subsection.
(b) If, at the time when under subsection (a) of this section a Speaker is to begin the discharge of the powers and duties of the office of President, there is no Speaker, or the Speaker fails to qualify as Acting President, then the President pro tempore of the Senate shall, upon his resignation as President pro tempore and as Senator, act as President.
(c) An individual acting as President under subsection (a) or subsection (b) of this section shall continue to act until the expiration of the then current Presidential term, except that—
(1) if his discharge of the powers and duties of the office is founded in whole or in part on the failure of both the President-elect and the Vice-President-elect to qualify, then he shall act only until a President or Vice President qualifies; and
(2) if his discharge of the powers and duties of the office is founded in whole or in part on the inability of the President or Vice President, then he shall act only until the removal of the disability of one of such individuals.
(d)
(1) If, by reason of death, resignation, removal from office, inability, or failure to qualify, there is no President pro tempore to act as President under subsection (b) of this section, then the officer of the United States who is highest on the following list, and who is not under disability to discharge the powers and duties of the office of President shall act as President: Secretary of State, Secretary of the Treasury, Secretary of Defense, Attorney General, Secretary of the Interior, Secretary of Agriculture, Secretary of Commerce, Secretary of Labor, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, Secretary of Transportation, Secretary of Energy, Secretary of Education, Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Secretary of Homeland Security.
(2) An individual acting as President under this subsection shall continue so to do until the expiration of the then current Presidential term, but not after a qualified and prior-entitled individual is able to act, except that the removal of the disability of an individual higher on the list contained in paragraph (1) of this subsection or the ability to qualify on the part of an individual higher on such list shall not terminate his service.
(3) The taking of the oath of office by an individual specified in the list in paragraph (1) of this subsection shall be held to constitute his resignation from the office by virtue of the holding of which he qualifies to act as President.
(e) Subsections (a), (b), and (d) of this section shall apply only to such officers as are eligible to the office of President under the Constitution. Subsection (d) of this section shall apply only to officers appointed, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, prior to the time of the death, resignation, removal from office, inability, or failure to qualify, of the President pro tempore, and only to officers not under impeachment by the House of Representatives at the time the powers and duties of the office of President devolve upon them.
(f) During the period that any individual acts as President under this section, his compensation shall be at the rate then provided by law in the case of the President.

Philip J Berg Obama lawsuit, Update, August 4, 2010, Obama should resign, Same advice as Rangel

Philip J Berg Obama lawsuit, Update, August 4, 2010, Obama should resign

From Philip J Berg August 4, 2010.

For Immediate Release:  – 08/04/2010
For Further Information Contact:
Philip J. Berg, Esquire         
555 Andorra Glen Court, Suite 12                         
Lafayette Hill, PA 19444-2531
Cell (610) 662-3005
(610) 825-3134
(800) 993-PHIL  [7445]
Fax (610) 834-7659

philjberg@obamacrimes.com

Berg Says That Obama
Should Do As He Said Regarding
Congressman Rangel
and End Your Career with Dignity
and
Wishes Obama or rather Soetoro a Happy Birthday

(Lafayette Hill, PA – 08/04/10) – Philip J. Berg, Esquire, the first Attorney who filed suit against Barack H. Obama challenging Senator Obama’s lack of “qualifications” to serve as President of the United States says that “Obama Should Do As He Said Regarding Congressman Charlie Rangel, D–N.Y. and End Your Career With Dignity.”

Obama’s comments were directed to Congressman Rangel who is under investigation for violating Congressional Ethics Rules with 13 violations and Obama said he hopes the 80-year-old lawmaker can end his career with dignity now.

Obama, speaking on the issue for the first time, praised Rangel for serving his New York constituents over the years, but said he found the ethics charges “very troubling.”
Obama continued, “He’s somebody who’s at the end of his career. I’m sure that what he wants is to be able to end his career with dignity. And my hope is that it happens,” Obama said in an interview that aired last Friday on “CBS Evening News with Katie Couric.”

Berg said, “The charges against Obama are much more serious than Rangel’s as Obama’s actions rise to the level of treason as Obama is an Imposter; Obama is a Phony and has committed Fraud as this is the largest ‘Hoax’ against the United States in the history of our country, over 230 years !”

Berg also wishes Barry Soetoro [Barack Hussein Obama] a Happy and Hopefully Truthful 49th Birthday.

Berg has been demanding that Obama resign because he has failed to produce his long form [vault] Birth Certificate to show he is “Constitutionally eligible” being “natural born” to be President and citizenship documentation that he is even “naturalized” after being adopted/acknowledged in Indonesia with his name being changed to “Barry Soetoro” and his return to the United States at age ten [10] and evidence that he has legally changed his name back to Barack Hussein Obama. 

    I am proceeding for the 305 + million people in ‘our’ U.S.A., for ‘our’ Forefathers and for the 3.2 million men and women that have died and/or been maimed defending our Constitution with our ‘Peaceful Revolution’ to prove that Obama is not Constitutionally qualified/eligible to be President.” 

Berg continued, “I still have a case pending in the Federal Courts.  Go to obamacrimes.com to see the status of the case.”
For copies of all Press Releases and Court Pleadings, go to:
http://obamacrimes.com

Lakin court martial, August 2, 2010, Fort McNair Washington DC, American Patriot Foundation press release

Lakin court martial, August 2, 2010, Fort McNair Washington DC

From American Patriot Foundation August 2, 2010.

“PRESS RELEASE
Army Refers Charges Against Lakin To Court Martial
Military Judge Appointed
Arraignment Set for Hearing on August 6, 2010
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.
 
LTC Lakin is a doctor and is in his 18th  year of service in the Army.  He is Board Certified in Family Medicine and Occupational and Environmental Medicine.  He has been recognized for his outstanding service as a flight surgeon for year-long tours in Honduras, Bosnia and Afghanistan.  He was also awarded the Bronze Star for his service in Afghanistan and recognized in 2005 as one of the Army Medical Department’s outstanding flight surgeons. 
 
In March of this year, he announced in a video posted on YouTube that he would refuse to obey orders until receiving proof of the President’s eligibility.  So far, more than 200,000 people have viewed that video.
 
Army Col. Denise R. Lind will preside over the trial.  Before becoming a judge, she served tours of duty both prosecuting and defending soldiers in court martial proceedings. She is a 1982 magna cum laude graduate of Siena College, and earned her law degree from Albany Law School in 1985.  As Military Judge, she will decide all matters of law, including requests from the defense for discovery, and a motion the prosecution has said it will make to determine the lawfulness of the orders LTC Lakin is charged with refusing to obey.  A “jury” comprised of Army officers will decide based on the facts whether Lakin is guilty or not guilty of the various felony-equivalent charges pending against him.
 
In standing up for his convictions and in keeping with his training that illegal orders must be disobeyed, LTC Lakin has been widely praised for upholding the rule of law and the paramount supremacy in our society of the United States Constitution.
 
Lakin is represented by military counsel, and by Paul Jensen, a civilian attorney from California who has been provided to him by the American Patriot Foundation, a non-profit group incorporated in 2003 to foster appreciation and respect for the U.S. Constitution, which has established a fund for Lakin’s legal defense.
 
Further details are available on the Foundation’s website, www.safeguardourconstitution.com.
 
—-end—-
For further information, contact: Margaret Hemenway at 202-725-7659
 

http://www.safeguardourconstitution.com/press-release/pressrelease20100812.html

Philip J Berg lawsuit, Update, July 31, 2010, Alex Jones interview, Citizen Wells open thread

Philip J Berg lawsuit, Update, July 31, 2010, Alex Jones interview

Why has Obama employed so many private and government attorneys to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?

Alex Jones interviews Philip J Berg who initiated a lawsuit in August of 2008 to challenge Obama’s eligibility.

2010 commitment and beyond, 2010 elections beginning not end, Citizen Wells open thread, July 30, 2010

2010 commitment and beyond, 2010 elections beginning not end

Phil, from The Right Side of Life, and I have been in regular contact for several years. He has done a great job of covering eligibility lawsuits and other topics. He has a new article up about commitment.

“The question: Do you really want change? As in, honest-to-goodness change towards freedom and liberty for individual rights?

To be perfectly honest, through the end of 2009 and the first part of 2010, while I have supported the proposition of the Tea Party movement, I questioned its ability (and presently still do) to truly effect change in the body politic. Granted, when the likes of Senator Arlen Specter got “primaried” in Pennsylvania’s voting (there have been other poignant examples; this just happens to be the key point I could think of at the moment), I began to realize that this Tea Party thing truly meant business and wasn’t a huge fad; but can it keep it up?”

“Are you really ready to make that kind of commitment to America? It’s not just about one election; after all, modern liberalism in all of its forms has been building the welfare/nanny state over the past several decades. You do realize that it’s going to take more than one election to turn things back towards individual freedom and liberty for the American society, yes?”
“Oh, you thought that politics and religion were mutually exclusive? Then you’ll have to ask yourself why the American founding fathers decided to invoke the Creator in the Declaration of Independence.”

“Please realize that this year’s election is but one step on the journey of a thousand miles. And those with whom we disagree are not going to go away silently into the proverbial night. They are going to fight at least as strongly against those who believe in individual freedom and liberty as we (hopefully) will be fighting towards that end.

Are you willing to make that kind of commitment beyond 2010?”

Read more:

http://www.therightsideoflife.com/2010/07/29/a-commitment-is-required-for-those-who-want-change/

Blagojevich trial closing arguments, Trial fixed, Verdict US Justice Department corrupt, Citizen Wells open thread, July 26, 2010

Blagojevich trial closing arguments, Trial fixed, Verdict US Justice Department corrupt

Closing arguments in the Blagojevich trial will begin, and,  according to Judge James Zagel, end today, Monday, July 26, 2010. Of course the verdict is already in. The fix was in years ago. I am convinced that Blagojevich, Obama and Rezko made a deal some time ago. The arrest of Blagojevich was conveniently delayed until after the 2008 election. The conclusion of the trial has conveniently been hurried to end months before the 2010 election. The trial continues to be misportrayed as mostly about selling the senate seat when, in fact, Blagojevich, as indicated in the legal documents, was involved in corruption going back to at least 2002. No witnesses such as Tony Rezko or Stuart Levine were called, no witnesses who would reveal the depth of corruption that Blagojevich and, yes, Obama, were involved in.

Anita Moncrief ACORN voter fraud, ACORN background, NY Times, Obama ACORN ties, Documentary, US House report

Anita Moncrief ACORN voter fraud, ACORN background, NY Times, Obama ACORN ties

Many of you have seen the following video. Below the video are just some of the articles presented here over the past year or so about ACORN voter fraud.

October 12, 2009

Vote Fraud Criminal Darnell Nash Should Be ACORN’s Poster Boy

Read more

October 5, 2009

ACORN voter fraud in Minnesota?

Read more

September 28, 2009

US House of Representatives report on ACORN

Read more

September 25, 2009

Documentary update: “We will not be Silenced”

Read more

September 15, 2009

Catholic Bishops cut funding to ACORN and reveal truth about ACORN agenda

Read more

August 19, 2009

Nevada ACORN director guilty

Read more

August 14, 2009

Obama lied about his connections to ACORN

Read more

April 3, 2009

NY Times admits pulling ACORN story before 2008 election

Read more

Anita Moncrief FEC charges against Obama administration, ACORN whistleblower, Video, Citizen Wells open thread, July 25, 2010

Anita Moncrief FEC charges against Obama administration, ACORN whistleblower, Video

“ACORN whistle-blower Anita Moncrief held a press conference today at the Right Online Convention in Las Vegas. She announced today that she will press FEC charges against the Obama Administration for the campaign’s illegal work with ACORN during the 2008 election.”

Thanks Charles.

Kerchner v Obama and Congress, Update, July 22, 2010, Attorney Mario Apuzzo not liable for costs, US Third Circuit Court of Appeals

Kerchner v Obama and Congress, Update, July 22, 2010

Just in from Charles Kerchner, lead plaintiff in Kerchner v Obama and Congress.

“For Immediate Release – 22 July 2010

Attorney Mario Apuzzo’s Legal ‘Response’ to the U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeal Order is Successful.

The U.S. Third Circuit Court of Appeals Finds Attorney Apuzzo Not Liable for Obama’s/Congress’ Damages and Costs Incurred by Them in Defending the Kerchner Appeal | by Attorney Mario Apuzzo

http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2010/07/third-circuit-court-of-appeals-finds.html

—————————————————–

The Third Circuit Court of Appeals Finds Attorney Apuzzo Not Liable for Obama’s/Congress’ Damages and Costs Incurred by Them in Defending the Kerchner Appeal
On July 2, 2010, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals issued its decision affirming the New Jersey Federal District Court’s dismissal of the Kerchner et al v. Obama/Congress et al case for lack of Article III standing. The Court ordered that I show cause in 14 days why the Court should not find me liable for just damages and costs suffered by the defendants, not in having to defend against the merits of plaintiffs’ underlying claims that Putative President Obama is not an Article II “natural born Citizen,” that he has yet to conclusively prove that he was born in Hawaii, that Congress failed to exercise its constitutional duty to properly vet and investigate Obama’s “natural born Citizen” status, and that former Vice President and President of the Senate, Dick Cheney, and current Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, were complicit in that Congressional failure, but rather in having to defendant against what the court considers to be a frivolous appeal of the District Court’s dismissal of their claims on the ground of Article III standing. On Monday, July 19, 2010, I filed my response. This afternoon, on July 22, 2010, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals issued its decision on whether it should impose the damages and costs upon me. The Court has decided not to impose any damages and costs upon me and has discharged its order to show cause. This means that the matter of damages and costs is closed. Here is the Court’s decision:

“ORDER (SLOVITER, BARRY and HARDIMAN, Circuit Judges) On July 2, 2010, this Court filed an Order to Show Cause directing Appellants’ counsel to show cause in writing why he should not be subject to an Order pursuant to F.R.A.P. 38 for pursuing a frivolous appeal. In response, Mario Apuzzo filed a 95-page statement that contains, inter alia, numerous statements directed to the merits of this Court’s opinion, which the Court finds unpersuasive. His request that the Court reconsider its opinion is denied, as the appropriate procedure for that issue is through a Petition for Rehearing. However, based on Mr. Apuzzo’s explanation of his efforts to research the applicable law on standing, we hereby discharge the Order to Show Cause, filed. Sloviter, Authoring Judge. (PDB).”

I want to thank everyone who supported and encouraged me in this battle. This includes everyone who expressed their feelings on this matter through blog posts, articles, and comments, and emails.

Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
July 22, 2010
http://puzo1.blogspot.com
###
——————————————————

For additional information and/or comment contact Attorney Mario Apuzzo of Jamesburg NJ at:

Blog: http://puzo1.blogspot.com
Email:  apuzzo@erols.com
Tel:  732-521-1900
Fax: 732-521-3906″

Justice Department corruption in Black Panther case, Washington Post, July 18, 2010, Andrew Alexander Post Ombudsman, National Editor Kevin Merida, Wished The Post had written about it sooner

Justice Department corruption in Black Panther case, Washington Post

From The Washington Post July 18, 2010.

“Why the silence from The Post on Black Panther Party story?”

“Thursday’s Post reported about a growing controversy over the Justice Department’s decision to scale down a voter-intimidation case against members of the New Black Panther Party. The story succinctly summarized the issues but left many readers with a question: What took you so long?

For months, readers have contacted the ombudsman wondering why The Post hasn’t been covering the case. The calls increased recently after competitors such as the New York Times and the Associated Press wrote stories. Fox News and right-wing bloggers have been pumping the story. Liberal bloggers have countered, accusing them of trying to manufacture a scandal.

But The Post has been virtually silent.

The story has its origins on Election Day in 2008, when two members of the New Black Panther Party stood in front of a Philadelphia polling place. YouTube video of the men, now viewed nearly 1.5 million times, shows both wearing paramilitary clothing. One carried a nightstick.”

“The controversy was elevated last month when J. Christian Adams, a former Justice Department lawyer who had helped develop the case, wrote in the Washington Times that his superiors’ decision to reduce its scope was “motivated by a lawless hostility toward equal enforcement of the law.” Some in the department believe “the law should not be used against black wrongdoers because of the long history of slavery and segregation,” he wrote. Adams recently repeated these charges in public testimony before the commission.

The Post didn’t cover it. Indeed, until Thursday’s story, The Post had written no news stories about the controversy this year. In 2009, there were passing references to it in only three stories.”

“National Editor Kevin Merida, who termed the controversy “significant,” said he wished The Post had written about it sooner. The delay was a result of limited staffing and a heavy volume of other news on the Justice Department beat, he said.”

Read more:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/16/AR2010071604081_pf.html