msnbc: Army to court martial 'birther' officer

[JMS]

I wonder if this gives the Lt Col standing to challenge Obama's citizenship in court? To my knowledge of the 8-12 lawsuits filed in support of the birthers, none have really been heard by the court. They were dismissed because the folks filing the suits had no standing in the case.

When I first read this I thought holly b-jesus... dudes a Lt. Col... that's a fairly big deal..... Then I saw he was a doctor..

Anyway I hope a court does does rule on this issue. It's rather amaizing to me such allogations can exist without being offically answered by the courts and law. Seems to me any American should have standing. Seems to me it's an open and shut case too.

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2010/04/13/2267021.aspx

Army to court martial 'birther' officer

From NBC's Jim Miklaszewski and Mark Murray

U.S. military officials tell NBC News that the U.S. Army will court martial a lieutenant colonel who refuses to deploy to Afghanistan because he considers orders from President Obama to be "illegal."

Army doctor Lt. Col. Terry Lakin believes Obama does not meet the constitutional requirements to be president and commander-in-chief, because he believes (incorrectly) that Obama wasn't born in the United States.

Lakin refused this week to report to Fort Campbell, KY for deployment to Afghanistan, but instead showed up at the Pentagon, where he was confronted by his brigade Commander Col. Gordon Roberts, a Vietnam Medal of Honor recipient.

Lakin was informed by Roberts that he would face court martial, and his Pentagon building pass and government laptop computer were seized.

[AsburySkinsFan]

I hope he gets a better lawyer than Orly Tait, but then I hope he gets the entire UCMJ thrown at him.

[Predicto]

It does not give him standing. He is going to be nailed for refusing to follow an order to report. Cut and dried case. It will never give him any opportunity to force discovery on his pet conspiracy theory.

[Kilmer17]

Good. Send him to Leaventworth.

[AsburySkinsFan]

Good. Send him to Leaventworth.

We agree on something.

[DarrellsMyHero28]

What a moron.

[twa]

Hardly a surprise

JMS I doubt the court martial will bother much with the birth certificate:ols: ,though it might give him standing for a different suit if he pursues it.

[Predicto]

Anyway I hope a court does does rule on this issue. It's rather amaizing to me such allogations can exist without being offically answered by the courts and law. Seems to me any American should have standing.

I say that George Bush is a Martian and has no navel. He must come to court and prove me wrong. If he doesn't it will prove I'm right. What is he scared of?

I say that Bill Clinton is really Vladimir Putin in heavy makeup. He must come to court and prove me wrong. If he doesn't it will prove I'm right. What is he scared of?

I say that George Bush senior is Jack the Ripper. He must come to court and prove me wrong. If he doesn't it will prove I'm right. What is he scared of?

Just because crazy people make up internet rumors and invent new law, and get stupid gullible, ignorant, scared, people to believe them, does not mean that a court should call the President of the United States to the carpet to defend himself.

Especially since our Constitution explicitly says that only CONGRESS may remove a sitting president, through the impeachment process.

[Larry]

Have to admit that, if I honestly believed that the guy actually believed what he's claiming, I'd support him.

IMO, it takes a lot of guts to pull the trigger on the kind of big guns this guy could be facing. Refusing to report when ordered for combat operations in a war zone isn't something the military takes lightly.

Problem is, I don't for a second believe that the guy actually believes this doodoo.

Maybe I just have an unjustifiably high opinion of mankind, but I don't for a second believe that there's anybody out there actually that stupid. Certainly not someone who's capable of becoming, somebody said, a Doctor (MD?), and a field-grade officer in the US military.

Instead, my opinion (admittedly, arrived at in a complete absence of any facts whatsoever) is that the guy is staging a publicity/political stunt, and is also firmly convinced that they won't do anything serious to him.

(Part of me hopes he's correct on the second point. I assume that these are the kind of charges that could get a guy executed. I hope it doesn't go that far, even if my opinion is correct. But I'm not gonna feel sorry if he gets 20 years.)

[JMS]

I hope he gets a better lawyer than Orly Tait, but then I hope he gets the entire UCMJ thrown at him.

What can they do to him? Can they shoot him? The country is in a time of war.

I think the last soldier hanged by the US army was in 1994...

The last soldier executed (shot) for desertion was Eddie Slovik in 1945. Eisenhower confirmed the execution order on December 23, 1944, noting that it was necessary to discourage further desertions.

Also the last soldier executed for desertion since the Civil War.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

It does not give him standing. No military court is going to find that his orders came from Obama.

Even if the court did, you can't use discovery to come up with proof to support your claim.

It would be like me saying, I think Predicto is embezzling money from me. I demand access to his bank accounts.

[Predicto]

Hardly a surprise

JMS I doubt the court martial will bother much with the birth certificate:ols: ,though it might give him standing for a different suit if he pursues it.

No it won't. An order to deploy issued to you by your superior officer is not a facially illegal order. There is no basis on which a military officer may refuse to comply with such an order.

[AsburySkinsFan]

What can they do to him? Can they shoot him? The country is in a time of war.

I think the last soldier hanged by the US army was in 1994...

The last soldier executed (shot) for desertion was Eddie Slovik in 1945. Eisenhower confirmed the execution order on December 23, 1944, noting that it was necessary to discourage further desertions.

Also the last soldier executed for desertion since the Civil War.

I guess it depends on what the charges are and what they pursue. For me personally since I'm anti-death penalty I'd rather him just sit in jail for a good long while so he can think about how stupid he was being.

[Predicto]

It does not give him standing. No military court is going to find that his orders came from Obama.

Even if the court did' date=' you can't use discovery to come up with proof to support your claim.

It would be like me saying, I think Predicto is embezzling money from me. I demand access to his bank accounts.[/quote']

It would be like you saying: someone on the internet speculated that Predicto might be embezzling money from LKB. I have no evidence that it is true, but the burden should be placed on Predicto to prove that it isn't true.

[Predicto]

Problem is, I don't for a second believe that the guy actually believes this doodoo.

Maybe I just have an unjustifiably high opinion of mankind, but I don't for a second believe that there's anybody out there actually that stupid. Certainly not someone who's capable of becoming, somebody said, a Doctor (MD?), and a field-grade officer in the US military.

A lot of people believe it. A lot of people also think that no plane hit the Pentagon and Bush was behind 9/11. (a lot of them happen to be birthers too).

If you live in an echo chamber where the only information you allow in is information by other conspiricy theorists, you can easily lose track of reality.

Especially if you hate Obama and desperately want something like this to be true.

[JMS]

I say that George Bush is a Martian and has no navel. He must come to court and prove me wrong. If he doesn't it will prove I'm right. What is he scared of?

I say that Bill Clinton is really Vladimir Putin in heavy makeup. He must come to court and prove me wrong. If he doesn't it will prove I'm right. What is he scared of?

I say that George Bush senior is Jack the Ripper. He must come to court and prove me wrong. If he doesn't it will prove I'm right. What is he scared of?

Just because crazy people make up internet rumors and invent new law, and get stupid gullible, ignorant, scared, people to believe them, does not mean that a court should call the President of the United States to the carpet to defend himself.

you know alot more about standing than I do... You are a lawyer after all and I'm just an opinionated guy with time on my hands....

Having said that... Didn't Obama have lawyers on hand for every one of the court cases which were dismissed for lack of standing? Would it really have been that hard for the judge to look over the evidence... ( A BIRTH CERTIFICATE, Newspaper article anouncing his birth, and the Governor's and Atterney General of Hawaii's statements supporting Mr. Obama and excalimed... Dude, he's a citizen what are you thinking...

I think the question of citizenship for Obama, as outlandish as is sounds; is far more plausible than being a martian, being jack the ripper, or being vladimir putin in makup.

I think the question calls for a legal finding, and I think that shouldn't be that big a deal.

Especially since our Constitution explicitly says that only CONGRESS may remove a sitting president, through the impeachment process.

The constitution also puts limits on who can hold that office... Are you suggesting that even if Obama were not a citizen he should remain in office? Is that really even a concern?

[JMS]

It does not give him standing. No military court is going to find that his orders came from Obama.

Even if the court did' date=' you can't use discovery to come up with proof to support your claim.

It would be like me saying, I think Predicto is embezzling money from me. I demand access to his bank accounts.[/quote']

Well then this dude is pretty much toast, and his "principled" stance really serves no purpose.

[JMS]

If you live in an echo chamber where the only information you allow in is information by other conspiricy theorists, you can easily lose track of reality.

Especially if you hate Obama and desperately want something like this to be true.

You make a pretty strong case.

[greenspandan]

these threads are no fun unless some takes the this guy's side.

[19Skins72]

Maybe I just have an unjustifiably high opinion of mankind, but I don't for a second believe that there's anybody out there actually that stupid. Certainly not someone who's capable of becoming, somebody said, a Doctor (MD?), and a field-grade officer in the US military.

US Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan set the stupidity bar far lower than this idiot birther, and he meets your field officer/doctor criteria.

[twa]

No it won't. An order to deploy issued to you by your superior officer is not a facially illegal order. There is no basis on which a military officer may refuse to comply with such an order.

I figured the would make apparent how much weight I thought the military would give to his excuse...guess I was wrong:silly:

Standing if possible would be in a civil suit (which I believe is next to impossible with POTUS)

[Predicto]

you know alot more about standing than I do... You are a lawyer after all and I'm just an opinionated guy with time on my hands....

Having said that... Didn't Obama have lawyers on hand for every one of the court cases which were dismissed for lack of standing?

No. That's a birther myth. Obama has not had representation at virtually any of these cases. For example, in California v. Bowen, the Orly Taitz lawsuit, the only party to appear was a representative of the California Secretary of State.

Or here is a link to a recent case in Indiana (one that destroys the made up alternative legal theory that BOTH of Obama's parents had to be citizens for him to be eligible for the presidency). Read the opinion and look who made appearances - just the petitioner and an Indiana state official.

http://www.ai.org/judiciary/opinions/pdf/11120903.ebb.pdf

Would it really have been that hard for the judge to look over the evidence... ( A BIRTH CERTIFICATE, Newspaper article anouncing his birth, and the Governor's and Atterney General of Hawaii's statements supporting Mr. Obama and excalimed... Dude, he's a citizen what are you thinking...

Judges don't just "look over evidence" like that. They aren't king, sitting around deciding whatever they want to decide. The powers of the court are very specific. If the court has no constitutional power to proceed, it dumps the case and that's the end of it. Even if the court DID have the power to proceed, some evidence would have to be provided by the party seeking relief in order for there to be a real controversy - and of course the birthers don't have ANY evidence at all. Zilch.

I think the question of citizenship for Obama, as outlandish as is sounds; is far more plausible than being a martian, being jack the ripper, or being vladimir putin in makup.

It doesn't really matter what you think. Once elected, individual citizens do not have the power to remove a President. Only Congress does.

I think the question calls for a legal finding, and I think that shouldn't be that big a deal.

It would be a huge deal under our Constitution. There is specific venue for such matters. It is Congress (by way of impeachment), and the Electoral College (by way of certification). If the courts were to invade that province, it would be a constitutional crisis.

The constitution also puts limits on who can hold that office... Are you suggesting that even if Obama were not a citizen he should remain in office? Is that really even a concern?

No, I'm not saying anything of the sort. If the birthers had any proof (they don't), they could take it to Congress, and Congress could remove the President. Courts can't do that under our Constitution.

[ABQCOWBOY]

This whole issue of Citizenship is an annoyance of the greatest magnitude. However, saying there is no proof is not all together true. There is proof but the records are sealed and access to them is not possible. I do think that this is a subtle, yet important distinction.

[Predicto]

This whole issue of Citizenship is an annoyance of the greatest magnitude. However, saying there is no proof is not all together true. There is proof but the records are sealed and access to them is not possible. I do think that this is a subtle, yet important distinction.

There is actual evidence that Obama was born in Kenya? That's what the birthers have to show, in order to raise a genuine controversy about the issue. Making up speculations is not evidence.

To put it in lawyer terms - the birthers fail in their burden to create a triable issue of fact upon which a court could rule.

Of course, there is plenty of evidence that Obama was born in Hawaii. But Obama doesn't have to do anything to reinforce that if he doesn't want to. Why should he? He was already certified by the Electoral College and is officially the President. His proving period is done.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

This whole issue of Citizenship is an annoyance of the greatest magnitude. However, saying there is no proof is not all together true. There is proof but the records are sealed and access to them is not possible. I do think that this is a subtle, yet important distinction.

Obama produced a Certificate of Live Birth from Hawaii. Such a document would get him a passport.

There are also birth records in Hawaiian newspapers.

There is a school record from Indonesia that lists his birthplace as Hawaii.

What evidence is there that counter-balances this evidence?