Category Archives: Obama impeachment

Hawaii 2008 Obama certification, United States Constitution omitted, Obama not certified per Constitution, Citizen Wells open thread, September 16, 2010

Hawaii 2008 Obama certification, United States Constitution omitted, Obama not certified per Constitution

“Why has Obama, for over 2 years, employed numerous private and government attorneys to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells and millions of concerned Americans

From BirtherReport.com September 15, 2010.

“The State Democratic Party of Hawaii would not certify in 2008 that Obama was constitutionally and legally eligible for the Office of President that he was running for which was the normal procedure by the State Democratic Party of Hawaii in all the prior election cycles. See the State Democratic Party of Hawaii certification of nomination forms attached[embedded below] for the Presidential election years of 2008 for Obama, 2004 for Kerry, and 2000 for Gore.”

Read more:

http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2010/09/breaking-democratic-party-of-hawaii.html

Here is the wording they are referring to:

Democratic Party of Hawaii

2008 Official certification of nomination

“This is to certify that the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the national Democratic Parties”
2004 Official certification of nomination

“This is to certify that the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution”

Lakin Court Martial, Obama eligibility, Military support, Six degrees of separation, Citizen Wells open thread, September 8, 2010

Lakin Court Martial, Obama eligibility, Military support, Six degrees of separation
“Six degrees of separation is the theory that anyone on the planet can be connected to any other person on the planet through a chain of acquaintances that has no more than five intermediaries. ”

Lt. Col. Terry Lakin believes in the US Constitution as the supreme law of the land. He takes his oath to defend the Constitution seriously. He is facing an unjust court martial as a result of his convictions and patriotism. We must give him our full support.

Many people are still unaware of Terry Lakin and his predicament. Aside from posting articles on this blog, I share information with those around me, those in my sphere of influence. My brother was in town a few days ago and I mentioned Lakin. My brother was not familiar with the case, even though he tries to keep up with the real news. He is just too busy. Now my brother knows and he will tell others.

On October 29, 2009, I wrote the following before the NJ Governor’s race.

“Six degrees of separation.

“Six degrees of separation is the theory that anyone on the planet can be connected to any other person on the planet through a chain of acquaintances that has no more than five intermediaries. ”

This is a simple strategy that is at the heart of grassroots efforts.

Contact as many people as possible and have them do the same. If you have a blog or website, put up article(s) about what is going on in New Jersey. Quote this site, borrow info from this site or create your own article. I am not looking for credit, just results.”

If you haven’t been spreading the word, do so now. And keep letting people like Glenn Beck know that they have a duty to report this.

Wells

Lakin court martial Judge Lind, Col. Denise R. Lind words and ruling prejudicial, Alan Keyes, Citizen Wells open thread, September 6, 2010

Lakin court martial Judge Lind,  Col. Denise R. Lind words and ruling prejudicial, Alan Keyes

From Alan Keyes September 4, 2010.

“Is Lakin’s court-martial an American ‘Dreyfus affair’?

I doubt that most people would be shocked to learn that sometimes the influence of power can interfere with and even derail the course of justice in our legal system.  Behind the scenes, a phone call from a powerful politician, or a corporate mogul often affects the actions or judgments of people whose personal ambitions they are in a position to help or hinder.  Usually though, people giving heed to such considerations have enough sense to cloak what they do with words or actions that give their corruption at least the appearance of probity.  Maybe its the tribute that vice renders to virtue.  Maybe its nothing more than self-serving prudence (the mask of honesty that facilitates corruption.)

However, when court officers conclude that such hypocrisy is no longer worth the effort, things are pretty far gone.  The video featured with this post  focuses on the recent decision by Col. Denise R. Lind, the military judge charged with presiding over the court martial of Lt. Col. Terry Lakin.  People who still care about American justice will recognize the facts as confirmation that America has passed ‘far gone’ and is approaching the point of no return.

Judging by Col. Lind’s demeanor, the court marital is apparently slated to be the inaugural “show trial” of Obama style Stalinism in the United States.  Without even a show of rational argumentation ( as WND’s story reporting Judge Roy Moore’s insightful comments makes clear) she has denied Lt. Col Lakin “the right to obtain potentially exculpatory evidence” for use in the Court Martial proceedings brought against him on the charge of refusing to obey lawful orders from the military chain of command until the issue of Barack Obama’s eligibility for the Office of President has been investigated and resolved by the decision of a properly constitutional  authority.

The Judge’s derelict disregard for constitutional right adds this military tribunal to the long list of civilian courts that have made themselves vehicles for the anti-American elite’s purposeful derogation of the authority of the U.S. Constitution.  In the course of her dereliction, however, Lind spoke of the documentary evidence Obama has thus far abused government power to suppress.  She proclaimed that “opening up such evidence could be an “embarrassment” to the president.”

It’s marvelous that a supposedly competent legal officer of the United States military could cram so much prejudicial nonsense into so few words.  She refers to Obama as president.  But because, among other things, of her own action, his status as president is, as the lawyers might say, a fact not in evidence.  If he is in fact not constitutionally eligible for the office, then he is not president.  If he is not in fact constitutionally eligible, then no lawful authority emanates from him to the military chain of command.  Therefore,  Lt.Col Lakin is not guilty of the charge against him.  Judge Lind’s language is prima facie evidence of prejudice, and she should either recuse herself or be removed from the case.

She suggests that the evidence might be embarrassing to Obama.  Since when is the embarrassment that may attend the discovery that a public official has sworn or acted dishonestly a lawful reason to suppress evidence tending to establish his official malfeasance?  Since when does the mere possibility of such official embarrassment justify suppressing the constitutional rights of a person accused of a serious crime and liable, upon conviction, to onerous punishment?

Judge Lind’s words appear at the very least, prejudicial. However, they may also raise the possibility of serious malfeasance on her part.  How has she reached the conclusion that the evidence in question may be embarrassing to Obama?  Has she privily received communications to that effect?  If so, why did she not publicly indicate the source or sources of these communications, so that Lt. Col. Lakin could claim his constitutional right to confront, in a proper hearing, the witnesses against him?”

Read more:

http://loyaltoliberty.com/WordPress/2010/09/is-lakins-court-martial-an-american-dreyfus-affair/

Glenn Beck hypocrisy, TheBlaze.com, Lt Col Terry Lakin court martial, Obama eligibility, Obama birth certificate, Dr. Manning video

Glenn Beck hypocrisy, TheBlaze.com, Lt Col Terry Lakin court martial, Obama eligibility, Obama birth certificate, Dr. Manning video

“Why has Obama, for over 2 years, employed numerous private and government attorneys to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells and millions of concerned Americans

 

Glenn Beck, it was cowardly and un American when you did not ask that simple question above. When you mocked and criticized millions of concerned Americans, including those in the military, who question Obama’s eligibility, you crossed the line.
Glenn Beck stated that he started The Blaze, TheBlaze.com, to counteract misinformation from websites like the Huffington Post. I will not let Beck get away with insulting concerned Americans who question Obama’s eligibility. Especially three star generals.

https://citizenwells.com/2010/09/01/the-blaze-theblaze-com-lakin-court-martial-glenn-beck-v-arianna-huffington/
In the following video Dr. James Manning reveals the injustice of the ruling by Judge Lind in the Lt. Col Terry court martial hearing. He speaks of the Restoring Honor rally led by Glenn Beck and asks why there was no mention of Terry Lakin. He accuses Glenn Beck of hypocrisy.

Thank you Dr. Manning for speaking the truth, for telling it like it is.

Glenn Beck, call me.

Lakin court martial, Commander in Chief, Chain of command, Citizen Wells open thread, September 5, 2010

Lakin court martial, Commander in Chief, Chain of command

“I, [name], 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.”…US Military officer’s oath of office
Officers in the service of the United States are
bound by this oath to disobey any order that
violates the Constitution of the United States.

From Citizen Wells August 5, 2010.

As you read the following, be aware of another important point, there is no time restriction on the president being found to be ineligible.

“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.”

Much has been said orders being tied to the Commander in Chief and the chain of command. Here is what a US Army soldier must understand about the chain of command.

From the US Army Study Guide.

Chain of Command List

Posted Monday, July 23, 2007

Commander-in-Chief  -President George W. Bush
Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff  -General Peter Pace
Army Chief of Staff
 -General George W. Casey, Jr. 
Theater Commander  –
Corps Commander  –
Division Commander  –
Brigade Commander  –
Battalion Commander  –
Company/Troop Commander  –
Platoon Leader  –
Section/Squad/Team Leader

Read more:

http://www.armystudyguide.com/content/army_board_study_guide_topics/chain_of_command/chain-of-command-list.shtml

From Army Command Policy April 27, 2010
“1–5. Command
a. Privilege to command. Command is exercised by virtue of office and the special assignment of members of the
United States Armed Forces holding military grade who are eligible to exercise command. A commander is, therefore,
a commissioned or warrant officer who, by virtue of grade and assignment, exercises primary command authority over
a military organization or prescribed territorial area that under pertinent official directives is recognized as a “command.”
The privilege to command is not limited solely by branch of Service except as indicated in chapter 2. A
civilian, other than the President as Commander-in-Chief (or National Command Authority), may not exercise command.”

Read more:

http://www.army.mil/usapa/epubs/pdf/r600_20.pdf

Judge Lind decision flawed, Defense of LTC Terrence Lakin, White paper, Citizen Wells open thread, September 4, 2010

Judge Lind decision flawed, Defense of LTC Terrence Lakin, White paper

Courts Martial Defense of LTC Terrence Lakin September 3, 2010 researched and Prepared by J.B. Williams and Timothy Harrington

We find foundational flaws in Col. Lind’s decision, which Lakin’s defense team must seize upon in orderto alter the current course of this trial.

  • Lind’s authority is derived from the same place as LTC Lakin’s and all other members of the United States Military – from the supreme command of the office of Commander-in-Chief, the President of the United States.
  • Lind is attempting to use her authority under her Commander-in-Chief to break the military chain of command, isolating the Commander-in-Chief of the US Military specifically, exempting the President from his position of authority in the chain of command, without which, Lind herself has no authority to convene the Courts Martial.
  • Lind then reaches outside of the US Military Justice system to the Civil Court, relying upon civil court precedent to deny Lakin any access to discovery and thereby, a proper defense guaranteed him by the US Constitution and UCMJ, Uniform Code of Military Justice. Civil Court precedent has no legal standing in a UCMJ criminal proceeding. In fact, the UCMJ is based upon the Articles of War (aka War Articles) and is a “penal system” unlike the US Justice System – as explained by Col. William Winthrop in Military Law and Precedents. As a result, precedents set in courts outside of the UCMJ are without legal standing in any UCMJ proceeding.
  • Not even in the UCMJ can the United States government deny the accused his/her right to a trial, complete with discovery of related evidence. Yet Lind attempts to do so, under the authority derived from her Commander-in-Chief. If the chain of command is broken, then Lind herself has no authority.
  • Lind’s statement that the legality of the Commander-in-Chief is “not relevant” in matters ofmilitary command is false on its face. As stated in a sworn affidavit filed by LTG Thomas G. McInerney executed on August 20, 2010 – “In refusing to obey orders because of his doubts as totheir legality, LTC Lakin has acted exactly as proper training dictates. – By thus stepping up to the bar, LTC Lakin is demonstrating the courage of his convictions and his bravery. – That said, it is equally essential that he be allowed access to the evidence that will prove whether he made the correct decision.”
  • Lind attempts to break the chain of command at The Pentagon level, which she claims has no issue with the current Commander-in-Chief and that this should be good enough for Lakin. Yet she cannot break this chain of command without eliminating her own authority, and Lakin’s oath requires that he decide for himself whether or not his orders are legal, as affirmed in LTG McInerney’s sworn affidavit.

At issue is not whether or not LTC Lakin refused orders, but rather whether or not he “unlawfully” refused orders. If his orders were not “lawful,” including but not limited to, emanating from a “lawful”chain of command which begins with a lawful Commander-in-Chief, then Lakin must be found NOTGUILTY of “unlawfully” refusing orders.

Read more:
https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=gmail&attid=0.1&thid=12ad99e56f2bb6c8&mt=application/pdf&url=https://mail.google.com/mail/?ui%3D2%26ik%3D2485918dad%26view%3Datt%26th%3D12ad99e56f2bb6c8%26attid%3D0.1%26disp%3Dattd%26zw&sig=AHIEtbQq8K2LEI7Jyn8E46_77A76s6qtiA&pli=1

Lt Col Terry Lakin update, Three star general supports Lakin, Retired Air Force Lieutenant General Thomas McInerney affidavit, American Patriot Foundation

Lt Col Terry Lakin update, Three star general supports Lakin, Retired Air Force Lieutenant General Thomas McInerney affidavit

Here is an update from American Patriot Foundation on the Lieutenant General Thomas McInerney affidavit in support of Lt Col Terry Lakin.

“McInerney’s affidavit can be viewed at www.safeguardourconstitution.com. The following are extracts:

The President of the United States, as the Commander in Chief, is the source of all military authority. The Constitution requires the President to be a natural born citizen in order to be eligible to hold office. If he is ineligible under the Constitution to serve in that office that creates a break in the chain of command of such magnitude that its significance can scarcely be imagined.

As a practical example from my background I recall commanding forces that were equipped with nuclear weapons. In my command capacity I was responsible that personnel with access to these weapons had an unwavering and absolute confidence in the unified chain of command, because such confidence was absolutely essential– vital– in the event the use of those weapons was authorized. I cannot overstate how imperative it is to train such personnel to have confidence in the unified chain of command. Today, because of the widespread and legitimate concerns that the President is constitutionally ineligible to hold office, I fear what would happen should such a crisis occur today.

In refusing to obey orders because of his doubts as to their legality, LTC Lakin has acted exactly as proper training dictates. That training mandates that he determine in his own conscience that an order is legal before obeying it…Indeed, he has publicly stated that he “invites” his own court martial, and were I the Convening Authority, I would have acceded to his wishes in that regard. But thus stepping up the bar, LTC Lakin is demonstrating the courage of his convictions and his bravery. That said, it is equally essential that he be allowed access to the evidence that will prove whether he made the correct decision.

For the foregoing reasons, it is my opinion that LTC Lakin’s request for discovery relating to the President’s birth records in Hawaii is absolutely essential to determining not merely his guilt or innocence but to reassuring all military personnel once and for all for this President whether his service as Commander in Chief is Constitutionally proper. He is the one single person in the Chain of Command that the Constitution demands proof of natural born citizenship. This determination is fundamental to our Republic, where civilian control over the military is the rule. According to our Constitution, the Commander in Chief must now, in the face of serious– and widely held– concerns that he is ineligible, either voluntarily establish his eligibility by authorizing release of his birth records or this court must authorize their discovery. The invasion of his privacy in these records is utterly trivial compared to the issues at stake here. Our military MUST have confidence”

Read more:

http://www.safeguardourconstitution.com/press-release/aug-31-three-star-general-swears-affidavit.html

Blagojevich retrial, Protecting Obama, Patrick Fitzgerald conspirator?, Fitzgerald and Justice Dept delayed arrest of Blagojevich

Blagojevich retrial, Protecting Obama, Patrick Fitzgerald conspirator?, Fitzgerald and Justice Dept delayed arrest of Blagojevich

Patrick Fitzgerald has zero credibility with me. However, with rats jumping ship left and right, will Fitzgerald throw Obama under the bus?

From the Chicago Tribune.
“Moments after a rare setback, a chastened U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald was acting nothing like the swaggering prosecutor who just 20 months earlier proclaimed he had arrested a sitting governor to stop a political crime spree.

He would not take questions from reporters about his office’s failure to convict former Gov. Rod Blagojevich on 23 counts against him, winning a guilty verdict only on a single count of lying to the FBI,  among the least serious of the charges he faced.

Instead, Fitzgerald vowed to retry the case, then quickly ending his news conference.

“So, for all practical purposes, we are in the mode of being close to jury selection for a retrial,” he said.”

Read more:

http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2010/08/defense-jubilant-prosecutors-look-to-retrial.html

From the Chicago Tribune.

“The counts on which the jury could not agree framed the heart of the government claims that Blagojevich schemed to profit from his post from his earliest days in office and in the 2008 attempted to auction off the U.S. Senate seat vacated by President Barack Obama.”

“Lawyers in the case are to be back in court Aug. 26, possibly to pick a retrial date. Prosecutors are expected to push for the case to be back before a jury this fall, while the defense is likely to drag its heels and promised to appeal the single count the former governor was convicted on.
While gaining a conviction of the former governor on one count, the result of the trial was a far cry from the sweeping convictions in public corruption cases that Fitzgerald and his prosecutors have grown accustomed to. In his nine years at the helm of the prosecutor’s office here, Fitzgerald has secured guilty verdicts for an array of public officials, ranging from aldermen to the patronage chief for Mayor Richard Daley to Blagojevich’s predecessor as governor, Republican George Ryan.
The government case against Blagojevich was a vivid example of how slowly the wheels of justice can grind in public corruption cases. Blagojevich was arrested just weeks after he allegedly began plotting to sell Obama’s Senate seat, but federal agents had been probing wrongdoing in the governor’s administration since at least 2004 — his second year in office — and questioned Blagojevich for the first time in 2005 during his first term.”

Read more:

http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2010/08/blagojevich-convicted-on-1-of-24-counts.html

Thanks to the Tribune for pointing out that Blagojevich was under scrutiny at least by 2004.

Now for the rest of the story.

From Citizen Wells July 15, 2010
“The question is, why did Patrick Fitzgerald and the US Justice Department wait until December 2008 to arrest Rod Blagojevich?”

“The US Justice Department had plenty of evidence indicting Rod Blagojevich by 2006. Why did the US Justice Department wait until December 2008, after the election, to arrest Blagojevich?”

“From in or about 2002 to the present, in Cook County”

“Since approximately 2003, the government has been investigating allegations of illegal activity occurring in State of Illinois government as part of the administration of Governor ROD BLAGOJEVICH.”

“Timeline is revealing

Patrick Fitzgerald was aware of Blagojevich’s corruption in 2003

“Pamela Meyer Davis had been trying to win approval from a state health planning board for an expansion of Edward Hospital, the facility she runs in a Chicago suburb, but she realized that the only way to prevail was to retain a politically connected construction company and a specific investment house.

Instead of succumbing to those demands, she went to the FBI and U.S. Attorney Patrick J. Fitzgerald in late 2003 and agreed to secretly record conversations about the project.””

Patrick Fitzgerald and US Justice Dept. delayed Blagojevich arrest

LTC Terry Lakin, CNN retraction of defamatory comments, Citizen Wells open thread, August 16, 2010

LTC Terry Lakin, CNN retraction of defamatory comments

From American Patriot Foundation a few minutes ago.

 
“PRESS RELEASE
 
ARMY DOCTOR LTC TERRY LAKIN SUCCESSFUL IN DEMAND FOR CNN TO RETRACT DEFAMATORY STATEMENTS
 
JEFFREY TOOBIN WITHDRAWS VICIOUS STATEMENT HE MADE ABOUT LAKIN SAYS HE NEVER INTENDED THEM TO APPLY TO DECORATED ARMY DOCTOR
Washington, D.C., August 16, 2010. The Army doctor who is being court martialled for refusing to obey orders has demanded – and received – a retraction from CNN of defamatory comments made by Jeffrey Toobin about Lakin.
 
Lakin appeared on the “Anderson Cooper 360” program with his lead counsel, Paul Rolf Jensen on May 7, 2010. A few days later, CNN aired on the same program a panel discussion with three lawyers, the purpose of which was to discuss LTC Lakin and his case. During that program, the following colloquy took place between Messrs. Cooper and Toobin, and a photo of LTC Lakin was displayed during Mr. Toobin’s remarks:
 
COOPER: It is sad, this guy has given 18 years of service, apparently served honorably, was a doctor, and then seems to be tossing out his career for this. I mean there are principled stands you can take…
 
TOOBIN: In your interview you kept saying what an honorable man he is. You know, as they say at the Supreme Court, I think I dissent. You know, these people are bigots, they’re racists, they’re freaks, they’re lunatics, these are not rational players in American politics…
 
On June 8, 2010, Jensen wrote CNN President Jonathan Klein as well as Mr. Toobin. In that letter, Jensen wrote: “Mr. Toobin’s statement is patently false. LTC Lakin is neither irrational, a racist, a bigot, a freak, or a lunatic. Nor is there any rational basis to conclude he is any of these things, which of course was Mr. Cooper’s point. Mr. Toobin, unlike Mr. Cooper, made this statement without ever speaking with LTC Lakin (or likely anyone that knows him.) Mr. Toobin’s statement was understood to pertain to LTC Lakin and appears to have been made with actual malice, and particularly in the context given, which is Mr. Toobin contradicting Mr. Cooper saying LTC Lakin’s professional service was honorable, attacks my client’s professional character and standing.
 
For these reasons, Mr. Toobin’s statement constitutes per se defamation, and is unconscionable, and LTC Lakin demands it be immediately retracted, on air during the “Anderson Cooper 360″ program. Your failure to make such a retraction will leave us no choice but to sue for defamation without further notice or demand.”
 
Immediately upon receipt of Jensen’s letter, CNN’s Vice President and General Counsel David Vigilante contacted Jensen, and although he denied the statement was defamatory, he agreed that CNN would require Toobin to retract the statement, and true to his word, last month this is exactly what aired:
 
TOOBIN: Anderson, can I just add one point on an unrelated matter?
 
COOPER: Sure. Yes.
 
TOOBIN: A couple of weeks ago, we did a story about Lieutenant Colonel Terrence Lakin. He is the officer who has tried to get out of military service because he believes that President Obama was not born in the United States. He’s one of the so-called birthers. In the course of that report, I made the statement that a lot of the birthers are bigots and racists and there was a picture of Lakin behind me.
 
I didn’t mean to suggest that he was a bigot and a racist. I was just talking more generally. And I also should correct myself. He wasn’t trying to get out of military service. He is the subject of a court Martial, that’s why we were doing the story. But I didn’t mean to imply that about him.
 
COOPER: OK, Jeff, thanks.
 
The videos can be viewed on the website of the American Patriot Foundation, www.safeguardourconstitution.com.
 
LTC Lakin accepts this second statement as a complete retraction of the first. Although it is regrettable that it took Jensen’s threat of litigation to compel Toobin to take back his vile words, the fact remains that CNN did the right thing in airing this retraction. “The matter is now closed,” Lakin stated today. “CNN and Toobin did the right thing to clear my name, and while I was ready to file suit if necessary to protect my reputation, I am glad my attorney was successful without having to do so.”
 
Lakin is a Lt. Colonel with almost 18 years of unblemished service to the Army, with six tours of duty abroad, including tours in Bosnia and Afghanistan. He is a physician and has been awarded the Bronze Star for his service. He believes that his oath to support and defend the United States Constitution has compelled him to act as he has, because President Obama’s eligibility under the Constitution to hold office has been seriously questioned, and the President has refused all requests to release documents claimed to exist which could determine his eligibility.
 
Immediately prior to Lakin’s refusal to deploy, his commander, COL Dale Block wrote of Lakin, “Dr. Lakin is an extremely talented, highly knowledgeable senior Army clinician…he can always be counted on to provide me with expert advice…LTC Lakin is clearly one of the top clinicians in the Northern Regional Medical Command. He has superb clinical skills, rapport with patients and staff…Terry is the best choice for tough assignments…Already on the promotion list to Colonel, he should be groomed for positions of greater responsibility.” COL Block concluded by describing LTC Lakin as “best qualified” and recommended that LTC Lakin be selected for duty as a Clinic Commander (in other words, Block’s own position).
 
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 to LTC Lakin. Further details are available on the Foundation’s website, www.safeguardourconstitution.com.
—-end—-
For further information, contact: Margaret Hemenway at (202) 725-7659
WHAT YOU CAN DO NOW
Support Terry’s Efforts
http://www.safeguardourconstitution.com/support-the-foundation.html

Add a Banner to Your Website
http://www.safeguardourconstitution.com/banners-and-graphics.html
Forward this email to anyone you feel may have an interest in Terry’s case.
Click here for forward this email to a friend.”

Robert F Bauer, Patrick Fitzgerald, Elena Kagan, Obama puppets, Citizen Wells open thread, August 13, 2010

Robert F Bauer, Patrick Fitzgerald, Elena Kagan, Obama puppets

What do Robert F. Bauer, Patrick Fitzgerald and Elena Kagan have in common?

This will help jog your memory on Bauer.

“Case 2:08-cv-04083-RBS Document 15 Filed 10/06/2008 Page 2 of 10

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
PHILIP J. BERG, :
:
Plaintiff :
:
v. : Civ. Action No. 2:08-cv-04083-RBS
:
BARACK OBAMA, et al., :”
“MOTION OF DEFENDANTS
DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE AND
SENATOR BARACK OBAMA FOR A PROTECTIVE ORDER
STAYING DISCOVERY PENDING DECISION ON DISPOSITIVE MOTION
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c)(1), defendants Democratic National Committee
and Senator Barack Obama respectfully move the Court for a protective order staying all
discovery in this action pending the Court’s decision on defendants’ motion to dismiss
the action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim upon
which relief can be granted.”
“Respectfully submitted,”
“Robert F. Bauer
General Counsel, Obama for America
PERKINS COIE
607 Fourteenth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20005-2003
Telephone: (202) 628-6600
Facsimile: (202) 434-1690

RBauer@perkinscoie.com
“I. Procedural Background
In his Complaint, plaintiff Berg alleges that Senator Barack Obama, the
Democratic Party’s nominee for President of the United States, is not eligible to serve as
President under Article II, section 1 of the Constitution because, Mr. Berg alleges
(falsely), Senator Obama is purportedly not a natural-born citizen. Complaint ¶3. Mr.
Berg seeks a declaratory judgment that Senator Obama is ineligible to run for President;
an injunction barring Senator Obama from running for that office; and an injunction
barring the DNC from nominating him.

On September 15, 2008, plaintiff Berg served on Senator Obama’s office a
request for production of seventeen different categories of documents, including copies of
all of the Senator’s college and law school applications, requests for financial aid, college
and law school papers, and “a copy of your entire presidential file pertaining to being
vetted.” Plaintiff also served 56 requests for admission on Senator Obama. On that same
date, plaintiff served on the DNC 27 requests for admission and requests for production
of five categories of documents, including all documents in the possession of the DNC
relating to Senator Obama.1

On September 24, 2008, defendants filed a motion to dismiss the complaint for
lack of subject matter jurisdiction and failure to state a claim, on the grounds that, as a
matter of law, plaintiff has no standing to challenge the qualifications of a candidate for
President of the U.S. and has no federal cause of action.”

“In this case, as in Weisman and Norfolk Southern Rwy., defendants’ pending
motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction would dispose of the entire
action. The motion does not involve any disputed issues of fact: defendants contend that,
as a matter of law, plaintiff lacks standing to challenge the qualifications of a candidate
for President and that there is no federal cause of action that could serve as a means for
such a challenge. Thus, discovery is not needed in order to rule on the motion. In these
circumstances, a stay of discovery is warranted and appropriate.”

“For the reasons set forth above, the Court should grant the motion of defendants
DNC and Senator Barack Obama for a protective order staying discovery pending a

decision on their motion to dismiss.
Respectfully submitted,”
Robert F. Bauer
General Counsel, Obama for America
PERKINS COIE
607 Fourteenth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20005-2003
Telephone: (202) 628-6600
Facsimile: (202) 434-1690

RBauer@perkinscoie.com