Tag Archives: September 6

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/

Van Jones resignation, Mainstream media ignored, Glenn Beck and Fox covered, Real story, September 6, 2009, MSM bias, Van Jones radical communist

From the Washington Examiner, September 6, 2009:

“Van Jones resigns, says he was victim of ‘vicious smear campaign’

By: Byron York

“The White House announced the resignation of green jobs adviser Van Jones early Sunday morning. In a departure letter, Jones, whose extensive record of radical politics became public in recent weeks, said he was the victim of a “vicious smear campaign” and that “opponents of reform” had used “lies and distortion” against him.

Observers had been predicting Jones’ departure after word spread that Jones signed a 2004 petition supporting the so-called “9/11 Truther” movement; that he was a self-professed communist during much of the 1990s; that he supported the cop-killer Mumia abu-Jamal; that in 2008 he accused “white polluters” of “steering poison into the people of color communities”; that he was affiliated with an anti-American publication called “War Times” from 2002 to 2004; that in 2005 he said, “You’ve never seen a Columbine done by a black child”; and that earlier this year he called Republicans “a–holes.” When controversy erupted, Jones apologized for the “Truther” episode and his remarks about the GOP.

Jones as a favorite of Valerie Jarrett, who is one of President Obama’s closest advisers. “We were so delighted to be able to recruit him into the White House,” Jarrett said in August. “We were watching him — really, he’s not that old — for as long as he’s been active out in Oakland. And all the creative ideas he has.””

“But it was Jones’ radical politics that did him in. He left a long trail of statements, many of them on video, covering a variety of hot-button political and racial issues. The controversy over those statements grew slowly at first but snowballed in recent days, and Jones’ fate was signaled by the White House on Friday, when spokesman Robert Gibbs declined say that President Obama continued to have confidence in his green jobs adviser.”

Here is the big story regarding Van Jones, his past and the Main Stream Media continuing to give Obama a free ride.

“Coverage of the Jones controversy was a case study of some of the deep divisions within the media. Fox News’ Glenn Beck devoted program after program to Jones’ past, and a number of conservative blogs were responsible for finding some of Jones’ most inflammatory statements. Yet even as the controversy grew — and even after Jones himself apologized for some of his words — several of the nation’s top media outlets failed to report the story. As late as Friday, as the Jones matter began to boil over, it had not been reported at all in the New York Times, the Washington Post, and the evening newscasts of ABC, CBS, and NBC. Although the Post and CBS went on to report the Jones story on Saturday, the Times did not inform its readers about the Jones matter until after Jones resigned.”

Read more:

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Van-Jones-resigns-says-he-was-victim-of-vicious-smear-campaign-57602467.html

Van Jones resigns, Green Energy Czar, September 6, 2009, Obama Czar, Communist, Radical, Insulted Republicans

Van Jones has resigned. The Obama Green Energy Czar, communist, left wing radical, resigned on Saturday, September 5, 2009.

From the Guardian UK, September 6, 2009:

“Obama adviser Van Jones resigns”

“Jones was linked to efforts suggesting government role in 9/11 attacks and to derogatory comments about Republicans”

“An adviser to Barack Obama has resigned in a row over past inflammatory statements, the White House said .

Van Jones, who worked with the White House council on environmental quality, was linked to efforts suggesting a government role in the 2001 terror attacks and to derogatory comments about Republicans.

“On the eve of historic fights for healthcare and clean energy, opponents of reform have mounted a vicious smear campaign against me,” Jones said in his resignation statement. “They are using lies and distortions to distract and divide.”

He said he had been “inundated with calls from across the political spectrum urging me to stay and fight”, but he said he could not in good conscience ask his colleagues to spend time and energy defending or explaining his past.

Jones issued an apology on Thursday for his past statements. When asked the next day whether Obama still had confidence in him, the White House press secretary, Robert Gibbs, said only that Jones “continues to work in the administration”.”

Read more:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/sep/06/obama-adviser-van-jones-resigns

Obama, Chicago corruption, Rezko, Daley, Levine, Blagojevich, Emil Jones, John Kass, Chicago Tribune, September 6, 2008, A Democratic machine in Chicago? Don’t be naive

Once again, John Kass and the Chicago Tribune come through and address the ties between Obama and Chicago corruption. This time the approach is tongue in cheek, in response to Giuliani’s reference to the Chicago machine at the Republican National Convention. Here are some exerpts from the article:
“A Democratic machine in Chicago? Don’t be naive
John Kass
4:40 PM CDT, September 6, 2008”

“There is no Chicago Democratic machine. Mayor Richard Daley says so.”

“Rather, the current mayor was applying reason. When Republicans dared suggest that Obama was not a mythic reformer riding on a unicorn named Change, but actually some sort of silky creature of the Daley machine (which does not exist), those foolish Republicans were so very wrong.”

“The reporters might put on tinfoil hats to shield them from the channeling of Daley/Obama strategist David Axelrod, and such newfound clarity might cause the journalists to wonder, horrified, whether Obama’s gentle unicorn is actually named Cosmo and draws a paycheck from the Department of Streets and Sanitation.”

“When Obama is president and the red phone rings at 3 a.m. and Cosmo says that the Russians have put planes in the air, don’t worry about it. He’ll make a decision. He’ll call White House chief of staff Bill Daley. Bill will call Rich. And Rich will call the boss of all the brothers, Michael Daley, the city’s top zoning lawyer who’ll be running the Justice Department, and a decision will be made. So don’t worry.”

“By Daley’s reasoning, Obama’s first machine patron, state Sen. President Emil Jones (D-ComEd) wasn’t part of the machine either, even though for years Jones was double-dipping as a city sewer inspector. According to legend, Jones inspected sewers while wearing a luxurious camel’s hair coat and alligator shoes and never got a speck of dirt on his finery.

And all the Daley political hacks in federal prison now, convicted of illegally rigging city jobs to build a giant army of political workers who had to get out the vote to get promotions, they’re probably just dreaming. They’re not really in prison. They’re just having a nightmare. They’ll wake up on Nov. 5.”

Read more of the article here:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/chi-kass-rnc-bd07sep07,0,6575704.column

God bless John Kass and thank you Chicago Tribune for covering Obama.

Palin is absolutely correct, Chicago tribune, September 6, 2008, Decent article, Thank you Chicago Tribune

The Chicago Tribune has a new article that echoes what most of us have been thinking. The article came out today, Saturday,  September 6, 2008. Here are some exerpts:

“Palin is absolutely correct”

“First of all, it’s preposterous to suggest that Palin is or was a bad parent simply because her daughter got pregnant outside of marriage. I can’t imagine Palin has in any way encouraged her children to engage in risky and illicit behavior, and she certainly doesn’t encourage teenagers in general to do so. Granted, her daughter used poor judgment, but she is now making a morally acceptable decision to keep the baby and get married (the other morally acceptable choice would, of course, be adoption).”

“The bottom line: If impeccability were a requirement for a particular job, no one on this Earth could do it.

—Matt C. Abbott ”

Read more of this article here:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0906vplettersbriefs0sep06,0,5426074.story