©2010 Bridgette WTPOTUS


The Great Purge Orchestrators - Voroshilov, Molotov, Stalin, and Nikolai Yezhov




Show Us the Changes! 


On August 31, 2010, pResident Obama signed his latest Executive Order amending the “Manual for Courts-Martial.”

The White House website shows the Executive Order, but the changes  that were made were not published.  The cover page states they are “described in the Annex attached.”

As of yesterday, the changes were not listed on these websites: The Federal Register;  Department of Defense; Library of Congress; or the JAG database.

On September 30, 2010, these new amendments will take effect.

Until the amendments are released, we will not know if these changes will affect LTC. Lakin’s lawsuit.  It is certainly suspicious and beyond coincidence that these amendments are being placed into law by the very person whose credentials to be Commander in Chief are being questioned by LTC. Lakin.

There have been no changes to the Courts-Martial sections since 1984. What has changed? Why did Obama need to sign an Executive Order for these amendments to be in place within 30 days? Why now? We will see just how far Obama and his administration will go to protect his eligibility secrets, and if these changes protect him and skewer LTC. Lakin or some unknown.

Did Robert Bauer, White House Counsel and Personal Attorney to Obama,  pen the new amendments? Will the changes affect and prevent other soldiers from stepping up to protect our Constitution? Was Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates, responsible for these new changes? Did General David Petraeus know about these amendments before he was sent overseas? Will there be an outcry from citizens, if indeed, this new executive order will or can affect LTC. Lakin’s case? Section 2 seems to allude to this case unless there are other courts- martials also in play.  How will these changes affect our troops?   Will those of you who visit military blogs please keep us apprised?



Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release August 31, 2010


– – – – – – –


By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including chapter 47 of title 10, United States Code (Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. 801-946), and in order to prescribe amendments to the Manual for Courts-Martial, United States, prescribed by Executive Order 12473 of April 13, 1984, as amended, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1. Parts II and IV of the Manual for Courts-Martial, United States, are amended as described in the Annex attached and made a part of this order.

Sec. 2. These amendments shall take effect 30 days from the date of this order.

(a) Nothing in these amendments shall be construed to make punishable any act done or omitted prior to the effective date of this order that was not punishable when done or omitted.

(b) Nothing in these amendments shall be construed to invalidate any nonjudicial punishment proceedings, restraint, investigation, referral of charges, trial in which arraignment occurred, or other action begun prior to the effective date of this order, and any such nonjudicial punishment, restraint, investigation, referral of charges, trial, or other action may proceed in the same manner and with the same effect as if these amendments had not been prescribed.



August 31, 2010.

The affected Sections of the Uniform Code of Military Justice are:

Sub Chapter II. Apprehension and Restraint

Article 7. Apprehension.

Article 8. Apprehension of deserters.

Article 9. Imposition of Restraint.

Article 10. Restraint of persons charged with offenses.

Article 11. Reports and receiving of prisoners.

Article 12. Confinement with enemy prisoners prohibited.

Article 13. Punishment prohibited before trial.

Article 14. Delivery of offenders to civil authorities.

Sub Chapter IV. Court-Martial Jurisdiction

Article 16. Courts-Martial classified.

Article 17. Jurisdiction of courts-martial in general.

Article 18. Jurisdiction of general courts-martial.

Article 19. Jurisdiction of special courts-martial.

Article 20. Jurisdiction of summary courts-martial.

Article 21. Jurisdiction of courts-martial not exclusive.

Easily, I could be jumping to conclusions, but LTC. Lakin’s trial and these new amendments that are not yet published remind me of the 1930’s Soviet Show Trials and Stalin’s “Great Purge.” If you are unfamiliar with Stalin’s show trials, they were held in Moscow between 1936 and 1938 and involved a large part of the old Bolshevik guard. Stalin’s hunt was for so-called enemies of the people and their trials were theatrical and a spectacle. “Enemies” were imprisoned and brutally tortured to confess to crimes against the state. Campaigns were carried out against those who were accused of acting against the Soviet state and the politics of the Communist Party. Stalin even victimized his own officers. More can be read in the article, “And They All Confessed.”

The photo above and the one below were found by researchers a year ago. The resemblance of Nikolai Yezhov to Obama is uncanny.

Nikolai Ivanovich Yezhov

Nikolai Ivanovich Yezhov was born in St. Petersburg, Russia, in 1895. Because he was only a mere five feet tall and had a crippled leg, he was nicknamed the “Dwarf” by his comrades. He was a member of Stalin’s Secret Police, NKVD, and one of history’s real monsters. He ranks along side Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Saddam Hussein, and Mao Zedong.


According to Wiki, Nikolai Yezhov wrote a paper in 1935 “which he argued that political opposition must eventually lead to violence and terrorism; this became in part the ideological basis of the Purges. Under Yezhov, the purges reached their height, with roughly half of the Soviet political and military establishment being imprisoned or shot, along with hundreds of thousands of others, suspected of disloyalty or “wrecking.” Yezhov himself fell out of Stalin’s favour and on April 10, 1939 he was arrested and on February 4, 1940 he was shot.”

With his Executive Order is Obama defending the people and the Constitution of the United States?  Does this Executive Order protect individual rights or does it protect his own?  His actions will speak louder than his empty words.

Until we see the amended Courts-Martial sections, we are in the dark.  Is Obama using his pen to rid himself of any military opposition? Is he like other dictators who falsely imprisoned or silenced those who opposed them? 

Will these new amended changes explain LTC. Lakin’s being tazered and held at Walter Reed Hospital in the Psychiatric Ward?  Will it make it a law that all those being courts-martialed will require a brain scan?  Will there be a definition of political prisoner?

With Obama’s regime, we can hope and pray for the best.  Yet,  history is proving that anything he touches will be worse than we imagined.  As Pelosi once said, “we will have to read it to know what is in it.”


H/T Do they look alike photo: http://www.inmirror.com


Part III
The President
Executive Order 13552—2010
2010 Amendments to the Manual for Courts-Martial, United States 8/31/10



163 responses to “OBAMA AMENDS COURTS-MARTIAL RULES! (Open Thread)

  1. Good post Bridgette, but looks really bad for Lakin, amazing. Simply unbelievable.

  2. I should call my congressman in the morning. They should be able to fax the annex I would think.

  3. Bridge,

    This section below I believe will pertain to Lankin’s case. I do not think the new order’s will effect Lankin, I hope!!

    (a) Nothing in these amendments shall be construed to make punishable any act done or omitted prior to the effective date of this order that was not punishable when done or omitted.

    • Article 9. Imposition of Restraint.
      Article 10. Restraint of persons charged with offenses.
      Article 16. Courts-Martial classified.

      Those are the sections I’d like to see. Restraint–how to keep the accused incommunicado? As in–you can’t speak to the press, LTC Lakin, or we’ll tazer you.

      Courts-Martial classified–now does this mean the proceedings will be classified? Not accessible to media or the public? Or does it have some more innocent meaning, concerning how different cases are classified?

  4. Nikolai Ivanovich Yezhov resemblance to Obama is uncanny. When Renee first researched Nikolai and found that picture it blew us all away. I did some research on Nikolai also. I found that they have never proven Nikolai was executed. Some say he was sent to Turkey I believe (have In my old research) and lived until 1961…ya, I did a humm on that. But then we have the height differance..still, makes me “wonder”.

  5. Yes, excellent post Bridge. You have me thinking though. By now Im sure everyone has read or heard about the Florida minister and the Quran-burning this weekend at Rev. Terry Jones church in Florida. Jones church only has 50 members. Obama signed the above order August 31, 2010 right about the same time Rev. Jones announced his intentions of his church.

    The Muslims are saying if Rev. Terry Jones and his church members follow through with the Quran – burning they will retaliate. We have stood strong as a nation, for the last two years our patience has been intentionally tried. Just waiting for us to “Jump”, we have not done so. We unlike other nations take it up in the voting booth’s.

    This Rev. Terry Jones, who is he?? What really are his intentions? When I first read about this, I thought a protest to the mosque in NY, OK. But then my American brain kicked in, and said wait a minute!! that is not how we do things in this country. We do not burn flags of other country’s, stone people, behead them, BURN others bibles, we do not lower ourselves as Americans to this level.

    Just WHO has put Rev. Terry Jones up to this? We have not yet “jumped” and we will not unless forced. We all know what is happening here, have they put Jones up to this to give these people an “open’ for attack? We all know “the One” will think of anything to stay in power. Nov 2 mos. away, marshal law only a pen stroke away………..Just sayin.

    • Fla. pastor will ‘not today, not ever’ burn Quran

      © 2010 The Associated Press
      Sept. 11, 2010, 9:39AM

      NEW YORK — A Florida pastor says his church will “not today, not ever” burn a Quran, even if a mosque is built near ground zero.


      • Oh the games people play now
        Every night and every day now
        Never meaning what they say now
        Never saying what they mean

        • ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~‘Islamophobia’ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

          Im sorry, but I saw this whole Quran burning as a set up from the word go. Another game played on US, now we have Muslim Nations Calling for U.N. to Track ‘Islamophobia’…

          Muslim Nations Call for U.N. to Track ‘Islamophobia’

          cns news ^ | September 24, 2010 | Patrick Goodenough

          Posted on Friday, September 24, 2010 2:38:09 PM by NYer

          Muslim Nations Call for U.N. to Track ‘Islamophobia’
          cns news ^ | September 24, 2010 | Patrick Goodenough

          Posted on Friday, September 24, 2010 2:38:09 PM by NYer

          (CNSNews.com) – The Quran-burning controversy in the United States has prompted the Islamic bloc at the United Nations to revive its call for the U.N. to set up an “international monitoring mechanism” to track incidents of “Islamophobia.”

          Five years after establishing an “Islamophobia Observatory” of its own, the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) is now calling on the U.N.’s top human rights official to set up a comparable body at her Geneva office. According to the OIC, human rights commissioner Navanethem Pillay has agreed to consider the proposal.

          At the U.N. Human Rights Council this week, OIC members are also seeking support for a resolution condemning Florida pastor Terry Jones’ abortive call to burn copies of the Quran on September 11.


  6. Rev. Terry and Sylvia Jones. Daughter calls them a cult…
    Too many people named Jones…hummm..


  7. Sorry but I cannot stop laughing ! Not the same no ? Please tell me not the same ! Leza, LOL ! Tell me !


    • You have got to be kidding me…

      Terence Graham Parry Jones (born 1 February 1942) is a Welsh comedian, screenwriter, actor, film director, children’s author, popular historian, political commentator and TV documentary host. He is best known as a member of the Monty Python comedy team.

    • No not the same Renee, I belive that was some non – sence put out there by the left. What I’ve been able to find out about Reverend Terry Jones – He was a Methodist associate minister in TX. He moved to FL. and started his own following there. I found a few pdf files that mentions him, he apparently has helped the people of Africa such as blood drives, ect while he was in Tx. interesting !!

    • Rosemary Woodhouse

      From the Wiki article:
      “The first recorded instance of Terry Jones and Michael Palin” …. Palin!

      STOP. My head hurts!

  8. We will most likely see more of this behavior. This is exactly how the other side completes their agenda. This minister has created problems first by starting this and then by backing down. I am not saying he should have followed thru but that he should have thought it thru before he started. It is obvious that those radical jihadists will use any excuse as a justification for violence and now they know it works. It was an equally dangerous move by the military to have acknowledged this Jones guy.

  9. What’s interesting is that Obama had no problem speaking to the lack of “wisdom” demonstrated by Rev. Jones’s “stunt” and Obama did not assertively proclaim, chip on his shoulder, how in America Rev. Jones has the RIGHT to burn a Koran, even if we don’t agree with that action. Nor did he lecture us that we MUST defend that right because otherwise we’d betray the intentions of our Founders.

    Yet he was VERY assertive in proclaiming the Imam’s “right” to build a mosque at Ground Zero and would not in any way entertain the notion that this is also a “stunt” designed to incite people and is not wise.

    Now we have Imam Rauf vaguely threatening the US with violence IF he’s not allowed to proceed with the mosque. He implies that if he has to move it, we bring upon ourselves whatever follows from OUR inflaming anger in “the Muslim world.”

    At the same time, we have a growing meme in the lamestream media reporting about an uptick in anti-Muslim actions (all supposed, all unproved). They cite as examples a Muslim cabby who was slashed in NYC (a typical robbery? an argument?), the “firebombing” of a mosque under construction in TN (not yet determined if arson, perhaps poor wiring), and anecdotal “evidence” of anti-Muslim sentiment (which they define as anyone being offended by or speaking out against the planned mosque at Ground Zero). We even have a Rauf supporter and co-worker ginning up the same meme on Hannity’s show last night.

    So let’s concede his point, but only for the sake of argument: This mosque at Ground Zero is causing a rash of anti-Muslim incidents in the USA. It’s inflaming the American world. It’s inciting Americans to violence against Muslims.

    Therefore, USING THE IMAM’S VERY OWN “LOGIC”, Imam Rauf HIMSELF needs to be very “careful” how he “proceeds.” HE has to consider the results of HIS inflammatory actions. By being insensitive to hundreds of millions of Americans, HE’S CAUSING these anti-Muslim activities in America, like firebombings, slashing, hate crimes. His actions are the proximate cause. Americans themselves are not responsible for their actions IN REACTION TO HIS INCITEMENT. They cannot control themselves. The devil in the form of Imam Rauf MADE THEM firebomb mosques or slash cabbies.

    So what MUST he do? MOVE THE MOSQUE!! He MUST capitulate to the anger of Americans. Otherwise, HE will have “the blood of innocent Muslims on his hands” because he’s the one who incited the violence against Muslims by building that mosque in the first place.

    Note to obots and others who willfully misunderstand logic and debate (or pretend to): The above is NOT a call to violence. This is a presentation of a HYPOTHETICAL SITUATION for the sake of demonstrating what an ASSHAT HYPOCRITE IMAM RAUF IS. Furthermore, the minister is AS WRONG as RAUF. Offending millions of people by burning their holy book for no reason other than to offend is wrong. Just as offending millions by building a mosque on hallowed ground is similarly wrong.

    Hypocrites, all. But this is Taquiyya at its finest.

    Btw, did you listen to Rauf and Obama over the weekend? Same tone. Same inflection. Same creepy little smile threatening to break out on their faces. Same low, reasonable-SOUNDING voices. What a far cry from the whiner-in-chief who complained that “they” talk about him “like a dog.”

    • It is beyond ridiculous that the Muslims threaten violence at every bend, twist, or turn in the road. They are always violent, so what does it mean when they threaten violence? As individuals they can only blowup, explode, themselves once. As tribes and nations, eons and eons before they ever called themselves Islamic(s) or Muslims, they were in a perpetual state of conflict, upheavel, and war. These people have been violent since eternity past, so what does it mean when they threaten violence? I mean, like, can they make the ocean any wetter? Niether can those people be any more violent than they already are and have been since Adam. After-all, Cain killed his own brother. Bunch of nerds

    • The Pakistani’s apparently think Glenn Beck’s words will have an effect… Don’t you wonder why they didn’t ask Obama to take a stand instead? Very curious. I guess they might know that Obama’s words have no effect. We don’t need to show anyone we are tolerant. It is already known. Ask any illegal Mexican.

      Pakistan envoy says TV host Glenn Beck should renounce Qur’an burning, show US is tolerant

      Sept. 9

      WASHINGTON — Pakistan’s ambassador to the United States is calling on conservative radio and television host Glenn Beck to denounce the planned burning of the Qur’an to show that Americans are tolerant of other faiths.

      “I think it would help if Mr. Glenn Beck came out against it, and said that people of faith do not burn the books of people of other faith,” Husain Haqqani told The Associated Press on Wednesday.

      Beck wrote this week in an Internet blog posting that burning the Qur’an is like burning the flag or the Bible — something people can do in the United States, but shouldn’t.

      He said Pakistani leaders understand the concept of free speech and will do what they can to manage the reaction in their country.


      • ROLMAO! Wouldn’t you like to see Obama when he hears this? Beck speaks for the American people not Obama. Also, they know he is one of them, so his opinion does not count.

    • Well said Miri. I find it unfathomable that the Iman thinks in any way that his mosque would allow us to heal. What planet did he come from? Let’s sit those supporters through some of the films of 9-11 and the ensuing tragedy..and then have them tell us they have our best interests at heart. Waterboard the idiots.

        • That totally clears it up! Uranus!

          Trump tried to buy the building and they said no. He got the feeling that all they wanted to do was to incite people, then someone would come along and purchase the building at a huge increase over what they paid.

          The last I read, the iman had $18,000 total. So Trump may be right. Donald wanted to end the controversy so he was willing to buy it to calm everyone. Apparently they want more than he offered, and he said it was more than the building was worth. I think he offered around $4.5 m with other perks included.

  10. btw, when Kerry said our troops terrorize women and children in the dark of night, when Durbin suggested they kill innocents indescriminately, when Kennedy espoused similar lies about the troops, when the NY Times ran almost 50 stories, with photos, about Abu Ghraib, where were Obama, Clinton, Petraeus, and Gates to warn about how all of this rhetoric is inflaming violence and putting our troops in danger?

    If they worry so much that the Koran burning will incite violence against our troops, and seeing as how they are perfectly capable of completely shutting down the media with regard to ANY story about Obama’s lack of a birth certificate and his INELIGIBILITY to be POTUS, why did they NOT tamp down this Koran-burning story, instead of ginning it up? If they care so much about the troops? Hmmm?

    • Lovely rant Miri. I could not have ranted better myself. This is on purpose of course, just like Gates. Just one big, trouble stirring, miserable gang, spreading-infecting others with their hateful, arogant meaness. Paid poo poo makers…

    • Who incites the Middle Eastern people in the first place since most are illiterate? Does their media operate like the MSM does here? What don’t we speak out about them burning the minister in effigy? They can do that, but they want to dictate to us and say what we can and can’t do..no cartoons, no burning the Koran, and the Iman says to expect violence if the mosque isn’t built? When did we start bowing down to barbarians?

  11. No Court Martial rules were changed….Lakin is responsible for his own actions. From CAAFlog, actual military legal experts had predicted that Lakin would be unsuccessful

    The following post says it all….

    (Former JAG attorney and defense counsel) Charles Gittins says:
    (Quote) I told LtCol Lakin that he was being badly advised when he called me to join his legal team. I gave him my (very) candid advice. I told him to seek opinions from other military justice experts if he was not willing to accept my advice. He is where he is for a reason. I am very sad for him. He has been deluded by a very incompetent attorney, who has done a disservice you our profession and military justice. If I was the detailed counsel, I would not go along to get along. Integrity must have some meaning. Just my $.02


    • “Integrity must have some meaning” – Yes, it does, and he has it. He abided by his code of honor. Integrity and honor are unrecognized in the Obama administration. But we sure know it when we see it!

      Doesn’t it also say something about the legal counsel that didn’t want to join the team? That attorney didn’t want to put himself on the line …something our troops do all the time.

      The term “Hero” might come back into vogue and have real meaning.

      • Possibly. However it could have been that the attorney was advising him that he did not have a case and he should not pursue that course of action. If you think about it there are hundreds of attorney’s with military experience out there. But Lakin gets the one guy that has never handled a criminal case nor has any military experience. That tells me that attorney was trying to give Lakin some sound advice.
        Remember what Lakin is charged with. He is charged with disobeying a direct order and missing his unit’s troop movement. Anyone that has ever served would tell you that disobeying an order from your direct commanding officer, who by the way won the Congressional medal of Honor is a career ending thing to do.
        I agree with you that the term “hero” might come back into vogue and have meaning soon. Because the real heros are the individuals right now over in Afganistan and Iraq that are risking their lives for the US because the code that a soldier or sailor lives by supeceeds who is President. Your code of honor is to your brothers in your unit and to the Army.

        I just wanted to also point out that in her ruling, the judge in Lakin’s case stated the following:
        “For purposes of ruling on this motion, the Court takes judicial notice of the following adjudicative facts under MRE 201: President Barrack Obama is the 44th President of the United States. He was elected on November 4, 2008 and inaugurated on 20 January 2009. He has served as President and Commander in Chief since 20 January 2009 and continues to serve in that capacity.”

        • All Military take an oath to defend the Constitution against all enemies, both foreign and domestic. Obama is both.

        • I just did a search and MRE 201 wasn’t found in the Manual for Courts-Martial United States (2008 Edition) 980 pages
          MRE 201 no matches found (I tried 210 in case the number was transposed; no match).

          Click to access mcm2008.pdf

          Do tell where that quote came from and give the citation please Lion.

          • MRE is “Miltary Rules of Evidence” which in turn is Part III of the manual – you’ll find Rule 201 there.

          • Brigette, the info regarding MRE 201 is here, on page 2: http://court-martial.com/Media/military-rules-evidence.pdf (Rule 201. Judicial notice of adjudicative facts)

            • Thanks Lion. Regarding your second citation, I will look for another citation rather than use the URL for a site that is totally disrespectful to visitors. Our readers should not be subjected to ridicule or name calling, and we won’t refer people to sites like that. Therefore I am eliminating the referral.

              I did find the MRE 201 yesterday and will post it as a typed version as soon as I see the judge’s ruling that refers to it. I do appreciate your response.

              • Hey, Bridgette! Thanks for explaining. I thought I was losing my mind. I tried to find the link so I could read it (wasn’t sure I wanted to for exactly the reason you took it off) but poof! Gone. Ha! Ha! Good one. Thanks for sparing me.

                The LAST THING we want on OUR blog is disrespect and name-calling. Be warned, new readers. You will find us to be very like Gov. Christie:

                Have respect and you will receive respect. Be intellectually honest and debate fairly, and we will do the same.

                Yes, where exactly is the judge’s COMPLETE ruling?

          • Section II Judicial Notice Rule 201 (b): Kinds of facts. A judicially noticed fact must be one not subject to reasonable dispute in that it is either (1) generally known universally, locally, or in the area pertinent to the event or (2) capable of accurate and ready determination by resort to sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned.”

            Gee, let’s take a guess upon which clause this judge depended. I wonder if she instructed “the members that they may, but are not required to, accept as conclusive any matter judicially noticed?”

            I vote for: LET’S NOT ACCEPT HER “FACTS” AS CONCLUSIVE until “resort to sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned” has occured.

            btw, who the heck is BARRACK Obama? Is this a typo or does the judge not even know the correct name?

        • The simple FACT is that all Obama has to do to save LTC Lakin’s career and freedom is to show the birth certificate that his supporters believe will prove he’s eligible to hold the office that, yes, he’s occupying.

          What sort of honor and integrity could possibly be ascribed to any “man” who will not prove what he claims to be true? An HONORABLE man would do all in his power to save another HONORABLE man. A man with INTEGRITY would produce the proof, no matter how embarrassing the truth may be, because some things are far more important than a little embarrassment.

          btw, what could possibly BE embarrassing on those vital records? The COLB is a true and faithful representation of what’s on his birth certificate. His spokespersons have said so. There’s nothing that I can see that anyone would define as embarrassing on that COLB, so why won’t he simply release the documents, prove to LTC Lakin that he’s eligible to be commander in chief, and be done with it?

          If no court-martial rules were changed, then why is there an executive order that refers to changes?

          • Miri, do you know the actual violations of the UCMJ that Lakin is charged with? He is charged with disobeying a direct order from his immediate superior, who by the way is a Congressional Medal of Honor winner. He is also charged with missing a movement of his unit. Neither charge would be dismissed even if somehow the President of the United States released another copy of his BC.

            The military is different than the civilian world. You cannot decide what orders you can disobey. If you don’t believe me than ask a real attorney. Take note that no attorney except for Jensen, has come out to defend Lakin. Even attorney’s that hate Obama have not defended his actions. Wouldn’t that at least make you question the logic of Lakin’s defense? If after the disputed 2000 election military personnel decided that they would question every order because they felt that GW Bush was not rightfully elected, would you be defending them? Probably not. Don’t mix dislike of the President with the ability for any soldier to question or disobey orders. If that was the case then our military could never function.

            • First, yes, I do know the charges. I have read everything pertaining to this case.

              Second, you proclaim, “Neither charge would be dismissed even if somehow the President of the United States released another copy of his BC.”

              In whose opinion?

              You further state, “You cannot decide what orders you can disobey.”

              No? And yet Nazi soldiers were prosecuted exactly FOR refusing to disobey orders. In other words, for following lawful orders, as defined by THEIR system of government.

              You said, “If after the disputed 2000 election military personnel decided that they would question every order because they felt that GW Bush was not rightfully elected, would you be defending them? ”

              Oh, yes, indeed, I would. I would say, let them have their day in court. Let them produce all evidence. Let them have discovery. Let the sunlight shine and soon it will become apparent, as it became apparent to the mainstream media and everyone else who investigated, that George Bush was legally elected president of the United States. All votes were counted. Bush won. Get over it and stop repeating a lie.

              How about simple logic and an unbiased look at this situation?

              Obama’s supporters claim he is a NBC. His supporters claim he was born in Honolulu. They claim that the unprovenanced, digital image on partisan blogs and campaign websites, is a true representation of a Hawaiian Dept. of Health-issued, certified, and authenticated document, produced for Obama in 2007. They and Robert Gibbs, claim that this digital image is Obama’s “birth certificate.” They claim that what is on that document is true and that it proves his eligibility for office.

              Therefore, logic dictates that there is ABSOLUTELY no reason that passes a common-sense smell test for the man to refuse to produce the original documents, since they WILL prove his eligibility.

              Produce the paper documents. The certified, authenticated documents. Especially when it will save LTC Lakin’s career and freedom. Especially when it will provide the troops, who Obama claims to revere, long sought evidence that he is truly eligible to lead them and give them sorely needed confidence in their Commander in Chief.

              • Well said Miri. Black Lion the 28th Infantry Regiment ?

              • No reply’s left under my first question to Black Lion. Could it be you are Black Lion with the Black Lions (organization) ?

                I ask because you come here with Reverse psychology bs. If I am wrong I apologize in advance, but it sure seems that is the game you are playing here.

              • hummm…interesting names Black and Lion…

              • So have I. And I note that not one charge against Lakin involves the President. Disobeying a direct order is serious. Period. The real hero in this matter is Lakin’s superior, who unlike Lakin has won the Congressional Medal of Honor. I like how you equate Lakin’s cowardice in disobeying a direct order to go to Afganistan with how reprehensible the Nazi’s were. Was Lakin ordered to kill, rape, or commit any crime? No. He was ordered to go along with his unit and report to Ft. Campbell. If you can show me where reporting with your unit is the same as committing a crime, then I could see your point. The hate of Obama has confused people with supporting Lakin. Fortunately in this country we have real military heros like Gen. Ray Ordinero, Gen. Petreaus, and Gen. McCrystal who are following orders and protecting this great country of ours…

              • Can you tell me what is “the Black Lion’s organization”? I have never heard of them. My internet handle has no real meaning other than a favorite color and a college mascot….Are you trying to imply something? I am not playing any games other than being amazed how people could support someone who disobeyed orders and has put our country in general. I am a believer in the Constitution and the law. So far in my opinion I feel that the President has qualified under the law. The state of HI has stated that Obama was born in HI and the GOP governor has also supported that contention. As far as documentation goes, if you can show me where in the Constitution it states that someone needs 2 parents being US citizens for one to be a NBC or where it requires a “long form” BC to prove eligibility, then I would see the merit in your argument. Or if you could show me evidence of any of the other 43 President’s BC’s or COLB’s. Which would be kind of tough since past President’s like Reagan were not born in a hospital.

                And by the way I am not saying that he released it. It is the state of HI that is saying that he was BORN in HI. I will follow the Constitution and the Full Faith and Credit Clause and take the word of the state regarding the President’s birth.

            • Whoops. Nearly slipped that one by. Nope.

              “even if somehow the President of the United States released another copy of his BC”

              ANOTHER copy? How clever, Black Lion. This is fact:
              The President (if you mean the current one) has NEVER released anything remotely resembling his birth certificate. First of all, a digital image is not and never will be a birth certificate. Second, his campaign released that digital image of something that purports to be a scan or photograph of a real certificate of live birth. Not a birth certificate. A digital image, btw, NEVER, EVER mentioned BY the president, much less attested to by him as being a true and an authentic representation of his certificate of live birth. His lawyers have not even presented to any of the judges the actual paper document that FactCheck blog staffers claim exist. The paper document that these blog representatives claim to have seen in Chicago, at Obama campaign headquarters. So if, as they say, it’s real, why not present it to the judge(s) and be done with it? Why not? BECAUSE IT’S BOGUS, FAKE, FUGAZZI, A LIE. That’s why.

              He has NOT EVER released his birth certificate. NEVER.

              • Remember the Obama attorney, Robert Bauer, ( I think) never presented to the court even a copy of the certification…instead he mentioned it in a footnote that it was public information and was on the internet. Didn’t someone say that he was worried about perjury or being disbarred so he inserted it into footnotes. If they were on the up and up, even the original faux certification would have been attached as evidence. Instead he pointed to what was on the internet as evidence.

                Also, the army had to come up with something to charge the Lt.C. with because he was disobeying orders, and those can be substantiated. ..and yet none of his superiors would direct him as to how to handle his issue. He followed protocol according to the military rules prior to taking action. This man knew the consequences. Yet he stood by his principles and acted for his country and our constitution.

                Honest, honorable, principled, and loyal are characteristics easily seen in LtC. Lakin. Why can’t those attributes be seen in Obama? Because he doesn’t have them. He is the antithesis of all those values. Show me some articles that describe Obama in the same fashion. Show me how he adheres to the constitution and just doesn’t give it lip service. Obama is the one that thinks our constitution is old and flawed and wants it changed. Lt.C. Lakin is trying to uphold the constitution.

                What a contrast between the two men. Obama isn’t fit to lick his boots. In fact, I wouldn’t hire Obama to mow my lawn. I only hire legal, honest, hard working citizens to do that.

              • Pg 883 of Military Law and Precedents by Winthrop…

                “If it were open to a soldier to be the judge of the propriety of the orders given him there would at once be an end of all military discipline.” Harcourt 14. “In military affairs it would be intolerable.” Code ML 75. “A subordinate officer must not judge of the danger propriety expediency or consequence of the order he receives.” Sutton v Johnstone, 1 Term, 546. “While subordinates are pausing to consider whether they ought to obey or are scrupulously weighing the evidence of the facts upon which the commander in chief exercises the right to demand their services, the hostile enterprise may be accomplished without the means of resistance. Martin v Mott, 12 Wheaton, 30. “Soldiers should obey without cavil or inquiry;” they “have no right to inquire of their superior officer as to the object of a detail upon which they are ordered by him”. Riggs v State, 3 Cold, 90 .And see McCall v McDowell Deady 244 5 Dinsman v Wilkes 12 Howard 403 Trammell v Bassett 24 Ark 499 2 Opins At Gen 713


              • Regarding the word “embarressment” as it was used in Judge Lind’s ruling against Lakin, The Oxford English Dictionary says:
                [ad. F. embarrasser, lit. ‘to block, obstruct’, f. embarras: see prec.]

                1. trans. To encumber, hamper, impede (movements, actions, persons moving or acting).

                b. pass. Of persons: To be ‘in difficulties’ from want of money; to be encumbered with debts. Cf. EMBARRASSED ppl. a., EMBARRASSMENT.

                2. a. To perplex, throw into doubt or difficulty.

                b. To make (a person) feel awkward or ashamed, esp. by one’s speech or actions; to cause (someone) embarrassment.

                3. To render difficult or intricate; to complicate (a question, etc.).
                From reading the ruling it is obvious she was referring to the first definition listed by the dictionary….In the case Baker v Carr the root “embarrass” is used in the following ways:
                a)Nor do we risk embarrassment of our government abroad , b) the potentiality of embarrassment from multifarious pronouncements by various departments on one question, c) it would hardly embarrass the conduct of war.

              • Miri, according the Federal Rules of Evidence, the COLB that was presented by the President is admissible in a court of law. Because it is certified, the Hawaii COLB comes in under FRE 902 (4) pertaining to certified records:



                (4) Certified copies of public records. A copy of an official record or report or entry therein, or of a document authorized by law to be recorded or filed and actually recorded or filed in a public office, including data compilations in any form, certified as correct by the custodian or other person authorized to make the certification, by certificate complying with paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of this rule or complying with any Act of Congress or rule prescribed by the Supreme Court pursuant to statutory authority.



                So you might think it is a fake, but a court of law would think otherwise. YES I DO! And fake analysis by guys like Polarik and Techdude don’t count. WHY? BECAUSE THEY DON’T ALIGN THEMSELVES WITH THE DISHONEST OBAMA REGIME AND THEY CERTIFY THEIR WORK? WHY WOULD THEY SULLY THEIR REPUTATIONS?



  12. “10 U.S.C. § 807 : US Code – Section 807: Art. 7. Apprehension
    Search 10 U.S.C. § 807 : US Code – Section 807: Art. 7.


    (a) Apprehension is the taking of a person into custody.
    (b) Any person authorized under regulations governing the armed forces to apprehend persons subject to this chapter or to trial thereunder may do so upon reasonable belief that an offense has been committed and that the person apprehended committed it.
    (c) Commissioned officers, warrant officers, petty officers, and
    non-commissioned officers have authority to quell quarrels, frays, and disorders among persons subject to this chapter and to
    apprehend persons subject to this chapter who take part therein.”

    As of yet civilians are not subject to the UCMJ and/or Apprehension by military authorities so long as the civilian is not on a military installation or areas/zones that are under military jurisdiction.

    10 U.S.C. § 821 : US Code – Section 821: Art. 21. Jurisdiction of courts-martial not exclusive
    Search 10 U.S.C. § 821 : US Code – Section 821: Art. 21.

    Jurisdiction of courts-martial not exclusive

    The provisions of this chapter conferring jurisdiction upon
    courts-martial do not deprive military commissions, provost courts, or other military tribunals of concurrent jurisdiction with respect to offenders or offenses that by statute or by the law of war may be tried by military commissions, provost courts, or other military tribunals. This section does not apply to a military commission established under chapter 47A of this title.

    Overview Resources In case law definition
    1.Power of a court to adjudicate cases and issue orders.
    2.Territory within which a court or government agency may properly exercise its power.See, e.g. Ruhrgas AG v. Marathon Oil Co. et al., 526 U.S. 574 (1999).

    Jurisdiction: an overview
    One of the most fundamental questions of law is whether a given court has jurisdiction to preside over a given case. A jurisdictional question may be broken down into three components:

    1.whether there is jurisdiction over the person (in person am),
    2.whether there is jurisdiction over the subject matter, or res (in rem), and
    3.whether there is jurisdiction to render the particular judgment sought.

    Dealing with “Apprehension and Jurisdiction”. I doubt seriously if Obama is amending those sections so he can have the US Armed Forces Apprehend and put on Trial the illegal aliens, but rather legal US private citizens in order to “quell quarrels, frays, and disorders.” Marshall Law? or, Dictatorial Rule? Under Obama both would be the same.

  13. Russian spies and now Russian saboteurs?

    Effingham, Georgia deputies call feds after arresting Russians with shovel, wire cutters outside Georgia Power plant
    September 9, 2010

    SPRINGFIELD — Effingham County sheriff deputies have reported the early Sunday morning arrest of three men to the federal Joint Terrorism Task Force.

    The men, two from Russia and one from Kazakhstan, were found near Georgia Power’s Plant McIntosh on Old Augusta Road about 1 a.m. Sunday after a ranger with the Department of Natural Resources reported a suspicious vehicle,
    Effingham County sheriff’s spokesman David Ehsanipoor said.

    Deputies reported the men, who were inside a 1995 Nissan Pathfinder, had a machete, shovel, wire cutters and ski masks. One man also had black silk stockings in his front left pocket.

    Arrested were Evgeniy Luzhetskiy, of Kazakhastan Nail Idiatullin and Rustem Ibragimov of Russia. All three reported they lived in Charleston, S.C., deputies reported.


  14. FYI – Fox new has been reporting on this all day. They are supposed to have the arthor on later. This book had been cleared by the Army. Something’s fishy. Red Pill – Heads Up 9-11 ????ssss
    EXCLUSIVE: Pentagon Attempts to Block Book on Afghan War


    • Able Danger – ( Clinton’s Administration)

      Able Danger was a classified military planning effort led by the U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM). It was created as a result of a directive from the Joint Chiefs of Staff in early October 1999 by Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Hugh Shelton, to develop an information operations campaign plan against transnational terrorism, “specifically al-Qaeda.”

      In December 2006, a sixteen-month investigation by the US Senate Intelligence Committee concluded “Able Danger did not identify Mohamed Atta or any other 9/11 hijacker at any time prior to September 11, 2001,” and dismissed other assertions that have fueled 9/11 conspiracy theories. The Senate Judiciary Committee first attempted to investigate the matter for the Senate in September, 2005.

      According to statements by Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer and those of four others, Able Danger had identified the September 11, 2001, attacks leader Mohamed Atta, and three of the 9/11 plot’s other 19 hijackers, as possible members of an al Qaeda cell linked to the 1993 World Trade Center bombing

      The Pentagon “ordered five key witnesses not to testify”, according to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter. “That looks to me as if it may be obstruction of the committee’s activities,” Specter, R-Pennsylvania, said at the start of his committee’s hearing into the unit.

      Citizens studying the events of 9/11 find actions such as the Pentagon’s apparent obstruction of the Senate Judiciary Committee’s investigation to be circumstantial, but not conclusive, evidence of a cover up.


        • Oh what a tangled web they weave! Will we ever find out exactly what’s been going on and who the fake pres. is?

        • You mention Able Danger and Clinton. Was Able Danger effective when the 4-19-95 OKC bombing took place? I live in Oklahoma and a significant amount of Oklahomans don’t believe the FBI story. There is alot of I witness reports that don’t fit, including that the entire ATF office was absent that day.

          • I do not know whether or not Able Danger was effective when the 4-19-95 OKC bombing took place.

          • You can be sure that whatever they want hidden is something else “embarrassing” for Clinton and others. As for Oklahoma City, I have always believed that Muslim jihadists were involved. What happened to that other man–the swarthy one? Let’s hope Specter grows some and actually gets to the bottom of this. He’s been a good foot soldier for these folks and seems as if they make a fool of him. And the 9/11 commission. btw, did you see that a report is coming out from members of that commission regarding how they have been too lax with looking for home-grown terrorists? And I don’t mean Tea Partiers. They will talk about the Ft. Hood terrorist and other Islamists who left the US for training in Muslim countries, in order to return and wage war on us here, on our own soil, while our lovely DHS focuses upon moral equivalence and Tea Partiers as potential terrorists. And while, today, on the anniversary of the worst attack in history on the United States of America, on its own soil, the POTUS can only speak about how bigoted we tend to be as a people and how Muslims are the victims. This is how he “honors” the REAL victims. Gee, if only we were more tolerant, they wouldn’t hate us.

  15. Interesting… Libya again….
    Old Friend Challenges Bin Laden


  16. I posted this in a previous thread recently but since this topic of islam/jihad is in this thread, I’ll repost here so all can view it. Very interesting set of videos preoduced by an Egyptian Christian.


  17. I guess Fox News, Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin are off the radar for two months or 54 days until the election. Obama has a new enemy. John Boehner is now being attacked by Obama..the same John Boehner who is the House Minority Leader and may take Nancy Pelosi’s place. The Same John Boehner who told Obama a week ago to fire all of his economic advsors. The same John Boehner that Obama will have to “work with.” Don’t you think Obama sees the writing on the wall?

    Democrats are going to lose the House this coming election…Ba bye Nancy! How will she get back and forth to California ? Let’s give her a one way BUS ticket.

  18. Hillary told the Council on Foreign Relations this week that the US’s $13 Trillon Debt is a National Security Threat! We are losing our ability to chart our own destiny! Wow, at least she can see the financial ruin that her party has exacerbated under the name of Bush. But wasn’t that their goal to destroy the USA and their enemies the capitalists i.e., republicans?

    While the Mutt says he wants to spend another $50 billion for jobs..but weep, weep, the republicans aren’t going along with his useless and already failed plan. Sniff. Sniff.

    • ROLMAO agian. Mutt……………..Good one.

    • Hillary’s preparing to challenge Obama because when they lose the House, he will be ripe for challenge. His goal is to ruin the US for his masters. I’m not sure Hillary’s ever was, but I would never, ever, consider voting for her because of how she has been complicit in this fraud and supported this regime. But she did speak well the other day. What got into her? She almost sounded like a patriot. Almost.

      • Add to Hillary’s speech, the unbelievable switch in the Bush rhetoric by Obama and Biden ..Both were praising President Bush! I haven’t looked to see how the left was responding to their praise. But if they don’t attack them for that, then we know it is part of their campaign strategy. It would be for no other reason. I could believe Biden, but never Obama, never.

        • Are you kidding? Obama praised Bush? Impossible, unless it’s all for show. All in order to keep power. It’s so insulting, isn’t it? He really does think we’re complete and total idiots. That we won’t even notice this sudden change of heart. What universe does he live in? Total fantasy land. Magical thinking. What else could we expect?

        • Oh, Bridge. Do you mean he praised Bush when he said that he was impressed by Bush saying we’re not at war with Islam? That figures. The only thing he can find to praise GWB for is protecting Muslims.

          • That was the one for Obama! The one where Biden praises Bush seemed very sincere. He was on the Colbert show.

            Biden: Bush deserves ‘a lot of credit’
            By Christina Wilkie – 09/09/10 06:25 AM ET

            Vice President Joe Biden on Wednesday night said that former President George W. Bush deserves “a lot of credit” for his handling of the initial Iraq war drawdown

            “Mr. President, thank you,” said Biden, addressing a hypothetical Bush. “I’ve known you for all eight years of your presidency, and I’ve never known a time when you didn’t care.”

            Asked whether Bush deserves credit for the end of combat operations, Biden said earnestly, “You deserve a lot of credit.”


            • Yeah, I meant what Obama said. That’s all he could figure out to say: A backhanded compliment to GWB for kowtowing and a**-kissing the Muslims.

              I generally thought well of Biden until Obama came along. He seemed like one of the best of the liberal-leaning Dems and a patriot, especially when he held court in hearings. Then along came Obama and Biden’s son’s involvement in the illegal treatment of Larry Sinclair and then Biden was inexplicably handed the VP slot. Well, there you go. Credibility seriously undermined. He’s corruptible.

              Now, he’s very good at talking and very good at coming out in support of the troops and to applaud Bush, under orders by Obama. Biden MUST be the stand-in for this task because Biden, at least, can say such things with a modicum of emotion coming straight FROM HIS HEART. For the most part, he’s not lying.

              Obama, despite being a fairly good actor, in no way can muster up enough fake emotion to pretend that he honors the troops as much as Biden does and especially, he cannot honor Bush at all because, like Muslims, he despises Bush for Iraq and the War on Terror.

              As a matter of fact, suffering from the psychological disorders that he exhibits (actually textbook cases), he has a hard time faking emotion about anything, because such people FEEL no emotion, no empathy for others. They feel nothing except self-love and at the same time, self-hate/shame/inferiority.

              As for Biden, extract him from Obama’s sphere, and he is most likely a decent man at his core.

              As were many who collaborated with the Nazis.

  19. This Federal judge didn’t cave into Obama’s lawyers…is he available for Eligibility cases? To bad, he isn’t a Federal judge. Now the taxpayers will not be paying for stem cell research. It will go back to private funding like it was previously. Of course, the Obama regime will appeal.

    Judge Upholds His Stem-Cell Federal Funding Ban
    Sept. 7, 2010

    U.S. District Court Judge Royce Lamberth, the federal judge who imposed a ban on federal funding of human embryonic stem cell research rejected the Obama Administration’s request that he lift the prohibition as the winds its way through the appeals court process.

    U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth was unmoved by the administration’s urgent warning that the ban would seriously damage efforts by U.S. scientists to find cures for diseases for which such cells hold great promise.

    The order, while not a surprise considering how forceful the judge’s opinion was, was another setback for the Obama Administration and victory for the opponents of such research

    The Obama Administration’s now has to stake its hopes on appellate judges overturning Lamberth in a case that is likely to go to the Supreme Court because the stakes are seen as so high.


  20. Who Would Succeed Rahm?
    September 8, 2010 Multiple choices are analyzed. Snips

    Rahm Emanuel has not even said if he’ll leave his job to run for mayor of Chicago, but Washington’s favorite parlor game is already well under way: Who would succeed him as White House chief of staff? The question was set into motion Tuesday when Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley said he would not run for re-election, opening the way for Emanuel to pursue a job he has openly coveted.

    Valerie Jarrett: A senior adviser, Jarrett’s relationship with the Obamas is longer and tighter than any other. Obama has said she is like a sibling, Jarrett vacations with the Obamas, and no one doubts that the president trusts her instincts and advice.

    This one is frightening!! John Podesta: A former Clinton chief of staff, Podesta ran the Obama transition after the 2008 election but then returned to his job as president of the Center for American Progress, a Democratic-heavy think tank. [He is the guy that sends out the daily talking points to all the obots, and is more than likely Soros’ right hand man. Moveon.org Think of the propaganda increase with this guy.]


  21. What a joke the self proclaimed mutt is. I had never seen this before. Enjoy!

  22. Want more snickers? I visited ” Another Publicity Stunt – This Time It’s An Obama Press Conference” at Hillaryis44 where they gave a blow by blow account of his answers to questions in this morning’s conference. They had some great one liners in their running commentary.

    Today’s press conference publicity stunt won’t save Obama Dimocrats. They don’t deserve saving. They’re invited to be the dinner at the November fish fry the voters are having.

    Luckily, it’s too early to start a BO drinking game. I’d be drunk already.

    His handlers need to get the hook!!!

    His stuttering has decreased.

    You guys better appreciate how we are destroying our eyes and ears this Friday morning watching Obama – so you don’t have to. 🙂
    This is very painful work.

    “Jake Tapper points out that the cost curve is going up. Obama says he has not read that report.” Told ya! Someone’s gonna get a face full of presidential petulance! You said I didn’t have to study that part, D@mn it!

    Oh no! He got his start as a community organizer working in the shadows of the Chicago steel plants! Break out the violins. What was that question again?

    Yes, this is extremely painful work. I’m about to break open the bottle of Stoli in my freezer.

    I’m fading.
    Here comes the crescendo again.

    I would save it for a more deserving occasion.

    We deserve combat pay for tackling this dangerous to normal brain function assignment.

    Meanwhile, BO dithers.
    OK. I want double overtime for this. It’s past lunch time


    • In his press conference, The GOLD really GOLD drapes are hanging behind him. There are two flags, one the US flag. What is the other? What are those designs on those drapes? Looking for the you tube.

    • Thanks Jorge for posting that information from 1984. Below compares a couple paragraphs from 1984 to the wording in Obama’s EO.

      This Manual shall take effect on August 1, 1984, with respect to all court-martial processes taken on and after that date: Provided, That nothing contained in this Manual shall be construed to invalidate any restraint, investigation, referral of charges, designation or detail of a military judge or counsel, trial in which arraignment had been had, or other action begun prior to that date, and any such restraint, investigation, trial, or other action may be completed in accordance with applicable laws, Executive orders, and regulations in the same manner and with the same effect as if this Manual had not been prescribed; Provided further, That Rules for Courts-Martial 908, 1103(j), 1105-1107, 1110-1114, 1201, and 1203 shall not apply to any case in which the findings and sentence were adjudged by a court-martial before August 1, 1984,

      Obama’s EO in 2010

      (a) Nothing in these amendments shall be construed to make punishable any act done or omitted prior to the effective date of this order that was not punishable when done or omitted.

      (b) Nothing in these amendments shall be construed to invalidate any nonjudicial punishment proceedings, restraint, investigation, referral of charges, trial in which arraignment occurred, or other action begun prior to the effective date of this order, and any such nonjudicial punishment, restraint, investigation, referral of charges, trial, or other action may proceed in the same manner and with the same effect as if these amendments had not been prescribed.

    • Just a warning – the 1984 Manual has been amended many times since 1984 ,the amendments are cumulative so the latest EO is actually amending the manual as it stood after amendments in 2008 not the the original 1984 version.
      I’d summarize the changes as:

      They clarify and limit what CM can do with civilians “serving with or accompanying an armed force in the field”

      In post trial review they have clarified the form of the judge advocate’s report – there was some doubt whether or not the 2008 amendments inadvertently deleted some paras unintentionally.(They also reword this but that seems to be purely stylistic)

      They clarify the distinction between “Military Property” and “Government Property”

      They correct at least one and probably two typos in the existing rules

      Nothing particularly exciting

  23. Here’s a link to the ruling in LTC Lakin’s case:

  24. I’m reading that Scribd document about the court-martial ruling. Why do they spell his name as Barrack Houssein Obama II throughout? Do they know something we don’t?

  25. “The President has prescribed Rule for Court Martial (RCM) 703 to govern production of witness and evidence.”

    Uh, doesn’t it seem particularly odd, in this instance, that the president sets the rules for courts-martial, yet in this case he’s personally and crucially involved in the case itself, especially with regard to witnesses and vital documents to be subpoenaed?

    How can there BE justice when the person who’s in essence accused of being ineligible to be POTUS is the same person who sets the rules? Can anybody say, conflict of interest? Shouldn’t the POTUS recuse himself in some way, such as turning this case over to civilian courts? This sounds like a kangaroo court.

    • Which president signed RCM 703? How right you are Miri, we haven’t been down this path before, so they should take notice of that fact. When I first read that, I wondered how he could be contacted to make a decision about a case against him. I guess when you are top Mutt you can do that.

      • Rule 703 Bases of Opinion Testimony by Experts

        The facts or data in the particular case upon which an expert bases an opinion or inference may be those perceived by or made known to the expert, at or before the hearing. If of a type reasonably relied upon by experts in the particular field in forming opinions or inferences upon the subject, the facts or data need not be admissible in evidence in order for the opinion or inference to be admitted. Facts or data that are otherwise inadmissible shall not be disclosed to the members by the proponent of the opinion or inference unless the military judge determines that their probative value in assisting the member to evaluate the expert’s opinion substantially outweighs their prejudicial effect.

        Click to access military-rules-evidence.pdf

        Page 39/47

        There is another Military Rules of Evidence

        Military Rules of Evidence Part III 53 pages. Not dated No amendments

        Click to access Part%20III%20-%20MCREs%20%28FINAL%29.pdf

        This says” final” in the url which might be different than the one above. There are page differences. One is 53 pages and the other 47 pages long.
        Both had the identical paragraph for RCM 703

        I find it interesting there are no dates on these, and the government gives everything a document number and a date on every page. Nor could I find any amendments and those would also be dated. That is how things are filed, by document numbers.

        • Good points, Bridgette. One could almost read this is, as a last resort, instead of presenting the original vital records, they’ll deign to put forth a so-called “expert” on documents to proclaim that Obama is eligible and is a NBC. Perhaps the expert will be Fukino? Pshaw.

  26. There are concerning errors within that document. One would expect a legal document to be perfect: “jusiticiable?” “Massadonia?”

  27. Courts Martial of LTC Terrance L. Lakin
    Page 4/10
    “For purposes of ruling on this motion, the Court takes judicial notice of the following adjudicative facts under MRE 201: President Barrack Obama is the 44th President of the United States. He was elected on November 4, 2008 and inaugurated on 20 January 2009. He has served as President and Commander in Chief since 20 January 2009 and continues to serve in that capacity.”

    Military Rules of Evidence, MRE, Rule 201 is on page 2/47

    (1 ) Domestic Law. The military judge may take judicial notice of domestic law. Insofar as a domestic law is a fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action, the procedural requirements of Mil.R.Evid. 201 –except Mil. R. Evid. 201(g) apply.

    (2) Foreign Law. A party who intends to raise an issue concerning the law of a foreign country shall give reasonable written notice. The military judge, in determining foreign law, may consider any relevant material or source including testimony whether or not submitted by a party or admissable under these rules. Such a determination shall be treated a ruling on a question of law.

    Part III
    Military Rules of Evidence
    Section II is on page 2/47
    Rule 201. Judicial notice of adjudicative facts

    (a ) Scope of rule. This rule governs only judicial notice of adjudicative facts.

    (b) Kinds of facts. A judicially noticed fact must be one not subject to reasonable dispute in that is is either
    (1) generally known universally, locally, or in the area pertinent to the event or
    (2) capable of accurate and ready determination by resort to sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned.

    (c) When discretionary. The military judge may take judicial notice, whether requested or not. The parties shall be informed in open court when, without being requested, the military judge takes judicial notice of an adjudicative fact essential to establish an element of the case.

    (d) When mandatory. The military judge shall take judicial notice if requested by a party and supplied with the necessary information.

    (e) Opportunity to be heard. A party is entitled upon timely request to an opportunity to be heard as to the propriety of taking judicial notice and the tenor of the matter noticed. In the absence of prior notification, the request may be made after judicial notice has been taken.

    (f) Time of taking notice. Judicial notice may be taken at any stage of the proceeding.

    (g) Instructing members. The military judge shall instruct the members that they may, but are not required to accept as conclusive any matter judicially noticed.

    Click to access military-rules-evidence.pdf

  28. I am SOOOOOO very angry right now, word’s would not be enough!!!

    Ground Zero Victory Mosque Imam Issues Threat: If You Don’t Build It “They Will Attack”

    Gateway Pundit ^ | SEPTEMBER 9, 2010 | Jim Hoft

    Posted on Thursday, September 09, 2010 12:51:59 PM by Hojczyk

    Ground Zero Victory Mosque Imam Faisal Abdul Rauf issued a threat to America in his interview with CNN this week. The radical imam warned that if America did not get down on its knees and allow the victory mosque to be built on the bones of dead Americans that… “They will attack.”

    (Excerpt) Read more at gatewaypundit.firstthings.com


    • Leza, relax and walk through this. It is all connected.Showing Bridgette this too.Look.It is the names again.
      RATHKE-Bridgette works on-ACORN.

      RAUF is a child..
      RAUFCHILD he is. See:


    • This is where the Iman gave his threats …and is now saying in a video today that they weren’t threats. (He is in an interview with Amanpour) I think this video was on Breitbart last Thursday. When I checked the URL, the title of it was changed, and the dialogue, but it is the same.

      Iman Defends Islamic Center – Video

      This started because Politicians began politicizing the building of it in May. It was first announced in December. Radicals in the world will say that Islam is under attack if the mosque isn’t built. People traveling overseas will be compromised.

      Ground Zero Mosque Imam: If You Don’t Build It, They Will Attack

      Everything we thought about Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf was true. Tonight, on CNN’s Larry King Show, he confirmed it.

      While the left continues to be romanced by his calm, even and soothing tones, he personally raises the rhetoric to new and foreboding heights with every television appearance justifying his plan to build a 13-story mosque at ground zero.

      In an interview with guest host Soledad O’Brien, the Imam laid out his latest argument for the American people and his words can have only one meaning: Build this mosque or face the wrath of radical Islamists.


      • When I heard him, it sure sounded like a threat..or blackmail. Who is inciting those Muslims over in the Middle East about a mosque controversy in the US? We should be concerned because they will ramp up their hate further than what they are already doing?

        I think the Iman is a front for terrorists. Anyone ever talk to any ofl his 500 followers that attend services in his one bedroom apartment? Anyone ever taken a picture of the 500 people crammed into his apartment for services? Don’t they occur 5 times a day? The apartment listing is how he got his non-profit status for his mosque.

        • Who’s inciting them? He was, on his US taxpayer-funded junket to the Middle East. btw, somebody speculated that Rauf himself was the guest on that Air Force One flyover in NYC. Scouting out the site for his mosque. You know how important symbolism and sightlines are to Muslims. I heard that he made a statement yesterday. I had hoped that he would announce that he’ll move the mosque in the interest of sensitivity, compassion, and outreach. WRONG! As is typical, he’s doubling down. So is Obama, with his absolute support of building the mosque. You know, they want so much to hide the funding, it wouldn’t surprise me if a huge amount came or will come from the “stimulus” package. Maybe that mosque was the price that was paid in return for all the illegal campaign contributions from the Middle East.

          • Miri you may be right ….

            Maybe that mosque was the price that was paid in return for all the illegal campaign contributions from the Middle East ??????

  29. Interview with Amanpour.

    Appearing on ABC’s “This Week”, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf continued to claim that he is reluctant to move the mosque at Ground Zero because he feared the headlines in the Islamic world. He also claimed that he never imagined that his plans to build the mosque at Ground Zero would cause a controversy and if he had known he would have never gone ahead with the plans.

    September 12, 2010 at 12:32 pm – ABC News

    • He also claimed that he never imagined that his plans to build the mosque at Ground Zero would cause a controversy and if he had known he would have never gone ahead with the plans.

      Oh yeah right ! I believe that don’t you all ? hahaha, okayeeee
      I guess he just never thought of that ? Oh brother what a lie.

    • If he never imagined, then that shows how lame he is and how culturally blind he is, which completely disqualifies him from any role as a State Dept. “negotiator” between the US and the Muslim world. We ought to ask for our money back.

      How could he be so stupidly, so deliberately obtuse? He isn’t. He’s pretending. Taquiyya. He knew the reaction. That’s WHY he did it. That’s WHY he chose THAT site.

      If he never would have gone ahead if he knew it would cause controversy, then since he now knows it caused not only controversy but a great deal of pain to the families and to all citizens of America, NOW IS THE TIME to CANCEL the mosque.

  30. A Catalog of Evidence – Concerned Americans Have Good Reason to Doubt that Putative President Obama Was Born in Hawaii
    by: Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
    as of: 22 June 2010

    The New York Times on April 21, 2010, did a story entitled, Obama and the ‘Birthers’ in the Latest Poll, by Dalia Sussman and Marina Stefan. The article reported that “[i]n a recent New York Times/CBS News poll, 58 percent said Mr. Obama was born in the United States. That leaves a significant minority who said they thought he was born in another country (20 percent) or said they did not know (23percent).”

    Question No. 50 in the poll was: “According to the Constitution, American Presidents must be ‘natural born citizens.’ Some people say Barack Obama was NOT born in the United States, but was born in another country. Do YOU think Barack Obama was born in the United States, or was he born in another country?” The result was: Born in US 58%, Another country 20%, Don’t Know 23%. Hence, these numbers show that 43 percent do not believe that Obama was born in the United States. What a serious national security situation we are living in when the de facto President and Commander of our vast military power has not convincingly proven with certainty to almost half the people of this nation that he was truly born in the United States.

    The New York Times article, as usual from this pro-Obama paper, is written in such a way as to give the reader the impression that Obama has convincingly proven that he was born in Hawaii and that those who do not believe that Obama was born there are misinformed and poorly educated. What the authors of the article fail to realize or refuse to report is that concerned Americans have very good reasons to doubt that Obama was born in Hawaii.

  31. *The 15 Most Obvious Lies in President Obama’s Ohio Speech and 1 Damning Freudian Slip *
    September 8, 2010

    The naked lies were too numerous to count in President Obama’s speech in Ohio today. But let’s try and respond to a couple.

    *15. “We also hoped for a chance to get beyond some of the political divides between Democrats and Republicans…”*

    One cannot “get beyond” the political divides of this country when the objective is to “fundamentally transform” the United States. Obama’s talk of bi-partisanship has been clearly demonstrated to just be a campaign technique to woo moderates. He could have ruled from the Center — the model was there in Bill Clinton’s second term. Instead he chose to push a leftist agenda, thus further exacerbating the divide.

    *14. “Because we are proud to be Democrats, we are prouder to be Americans.” *
    Says the Post-American President who rejects the concept of American exceptionalism and bows to foreign kings.



    • *13. “I ran for President because for much of the last decade a very specific governing philosophy had reigned about about how American should work.”* (sic)

      No, he ran for POTUS because for all of the last 223 years “a very specific governing philosophy had reigned about how America should work.” That would be the CONSTITUTION of the United States of America, which he disdains, which he wants to throw away, because it’s a “flawed document,” in his own words. Why? Because it fundamentally disagrees with his guiding philosophy–that being that the government exists to do things FOR you, instead of that the Constitution exists to prevent the government from doing things TO you. The difference between being a LEASHED SUBJECT of the government or being FREE BEINGS, created by GOD TO BE FREE.

  32. Retired JAG Officer Says Judge’s Ruling Against Discovery for Lakin Could
    Derail Case Based on Legal Precedent.

    See full article:


    • Good article…The military lawyers over at CAAFlog, including one that was involved in that case has looked into his theory and addressed it….


      4. Now, let’s look to sentencing in United States v. Lakin. It is generally recognized that the ability to present evidence in extenuation and mitigation is broad and that an opportunity for the accused to testify or make an unsworn statement is similarly broad. However, the right to say anything at all has some limits. For example the issue of comparative sentences, the issue of administrative discharges, and some other collateral issues. See e.g., United States v. Barrier, 61 M.J. 482 (C.A.A.F. 2005); United States v. Snelling, 14 M.J. 267 (C.M.A. 1982); United States v. Mamaluy, 10 U.S.C.M.A. 102, 27 C.M.R. 176 (C.M.A. 1959).

  33. Black Lion | September 12, 2010 at 7:59 pm

    Black Lion | September 12, 2010 at 8:21 pm

    I am moving this response to here because the comment threads only go to a certain point and then no response can be added.

    Black Lion | September 12, 2010 at 7:59 pm
    “I feel that the President has qualified under the law. The state of HI has stated that Obama was born in HI and the GOP governor has also supported that contention.” Lion… SHOW US THE DOCUMENTS. The state of HI never stated Obama was a certifiable Natural Born Citizen. In fact, they refused to authenticate that fraudulent online Certification of Live Birth. The term “African” to describe race instead of using the term Negro was the first clue.

    When the person who wrote that information, perhaps they were thinking he was born in Kenya, so he must be African.

    You say you believe in the constitution…yet you are supporting a man who refuses to abide by the law and supply his own credentials to prove he is eligible and is a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN? His actions speak louder than words. (You do realize that Obama’s connections are radicals, communists, socialists and Marxists.. don’t you? So in fact, you are supporting those that want to transform/change the constitution. You want to turn our country into another Cuba or Venezuela? Have you ever traveled to one of those countries to see how they live?

    On the other hand you are asking how we can support LTC. Lakin who has tried to abide by the law, and let it be known what he was doing when he refused orders? LTC Lakin’s credentials and service are a testimony to his love of country. If Obama loved his country, he would have stopped the nonsense 2 years ago. Why didn’t he?..because he can’t.

    We are well aware of the Constitutional Requirements for President. His father was born in Kenya…Simple and easy. He was ineligible by that fact alone, if indeed his father is BO Sr. He states he was a CITIZEN by the 14th Amendment. A true Natural Born Citizen does not need a law to determine his status. Anyone who received citizenship under an amendment or law, is not eligible for the presidency. His mother is not the qualifier. History has shown that parentage was involved in lineage…noting parentage means having two parents who were citizens when one was born.

    The concept is easy..Blood and Soil. If we say he was born in Hawaii… he still would be ineligible because of his father’s allegiance to Kenya and under Kenya’s laws he was a British subject and he was never an American citizen.

    Black Lion | September 12, 2010 at 8:21 pm
    I believe our readers are well aware of what the definition of embarrassment is. Our readers are well educated and well read, so please don’t try to embarrass or question their intelligence.

    So according to the 1st definition, the judge thinks Obama would be
    encumbered, hampered, and impeded (movements, actions, persons moving or acting) by having to show proof of his eligibility. That certainly makes sense.

    This is exactly what we would like to see. We would like to prevent any further movements to transform our country, we would like to encumber his ability to do so. We would like to see him his actions hampered until he can produce documentation to prove his eligibility to serve. We wholeheartedly do not think he can. He is a conman and a fraud. In fact Obama is an embarrassment to our country. He is an embarrassment to those who voted for a fraud, a black man with no credentials and no papers. That is why he called himself a MUTT. (And you thought he called himself a mutt because he was half black and half white? ) He is a USURPER (we don’t need a definition.)

    I refer you to just one of the many articles on this blog regarding NATURAL BORN CITIZEN. The most recent was

    Just the Facts, Ed


  34. From Burton’s LEGAL thesaurus, a text more likely to be used in a legal setting, than the Oxford dictionary:

    EMBARRASS–verb: abash, annoy, baffle, bedevil, beset, bewilder, bother, burden, cause confusion, cause discomfort, cause to feel ill at ease, chagrin, confuse, discomfort, discompose, disconcert, disquiet, disturb, encumber, fluster, impedire, incommode, make self-conscious, make uncomfortable, mortify, nonplus, perturb, plague, put at a disadvantage, render flustered, render ill at ease, shame, trouble, upset, vex, worry

    I do so hope that the legal cases and questions about Obama’s ineligibility do cause Obama to experience ALL OF THE ABOVE.

    Word of the day: impedire. (Had to look that one up.) It means “clog, embarrass, encumber, fetter, hamper, hinder, impede, incriminate, prevent.”

    My favorite probable definition: INCRIMINATE

    Bridgette: ROFLMAO! Excellent job of responding to Black Lion’s cut-and-pasted talking points. They are not welcome here. Black Lion, if you wish to debate fairly, politely, and respectfully, please note: no boring, repetitive, lame talking points. Address the points made by others. Do not answer questions not asked. Answer questions that were asked. Respond to points made by your opponents with logic and facts, not supposition and innuendo. Not strawmen and red herrings. No personal attacks. No snide remarks.

    Bridgette said, “Didn’t someone say that he [Obama lawyer Bauer, husband of Obama minion/Mao lover Anita Dunn] was worried about perjury or being disbarred so he inserted it into footnotes.” Yes. That was writer extraordinaire, jbjd, who has a law degree and, therefore, ought to know the implication of putting this into a footnote instead of submitting the so-called birth certificate to the judge.

    btw, I am quite fond of legal dictionaries. Here’s a pertinent LEGAL definition of “to verify,” as used by the Hawaiian Dept. of Health when they addressed Obama’s “original vital records” (plural), which we know because they admitted that prior to making the statement, they consulted with the Attorney General about the wording:

    VERIFY: “To make certain, to substantiate, or to confirm BY FORMAL OATH, AFFIRMATION, OR AFFIDAVIT [emphasis added]. The U.S. legal system relies on its participants to tell the truth. Before witnesses can give testimony at a trial or some other proceeding, they must swear or affirm that the testimony about to be given will be truthful. Apart from witnesses, when a particular Pleading, statement, or other document is submitted to the court, the court requires that the person offering it verify its correctness, truth, or authenticity. The verification takes the form of a written certification that is generally attached to the document in question. The most common form of certification is an affidavit. An affidavit is a written statement sworn to or affirmed before an officer authorized to administer an oath or affirmation, usually a Notary Public. The affidavit names the place of execution and certifies that the person making the affidavit states particular facts and that he appeared before the officer on a certain date and swore to and signed the statement.” From: http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/verify

    All of which lends credence to the theory that Obama’s original vital record(s) consist of (1) a registration of his birth FILED (but not accepted until later) by someone claiming knowledge of the birth and (2) at least one affidavit later submitted (possibly as late as 2008) by that same or another person, swearing that he was born in Honolulu (but not in a hospital). Why not a hospital? Because if he were born in a hospital, there would be one and only one document–the long-form birth certificate generated by the hospital, signed and sworn to by the doctor. We know such a document does not exist because there is a former HDoH employee who is willing to swear to that as fact in any court of law. These are other known inconvenient truths:

    **His birth certificate was amended or late, proven by most-excellent researcher butterdezillion.

    **The number on his COLB is completely inconsistent with a hospital birth, because it is impossibly out of sequence with numbers assigned to known hospital births from the same week, also proven by butterdezillion and ladysforest, another most-excellent researcher.

    **Two different hospitals, neither of which will claim the honor, have been named in NUMEROUS news stories, even cited by members of his own family, as the location of his birth. Subsequently, after this discrepancy was pointed out, most stories citing Queen’s as the birth hospital, were scrubbed from the Internet. A letter from Obama claiming Kapiolani as his birthplace was posted on Kapiolani’s website and used as a fund-raising tool. When people pointed out that it was a crime to use false statements to raise money, the letter was quickly pulled off the website. Kapiolani has no desire to be accused of fraud, apparently. Bottom line: It would be quite a feat for a man to be simultaneously born in two different locations.

    **The Dept. of Health spokesperson specifically declined to authenticate that online digital image, which purports to be a true copy of his COLB. In fact, she specifically stated that she cannot say WHAT it represents.

    **The digital image was posted only on partisan blogs and a campaign website. It was NEVER presented to any court of law in any form, digital or paper document. More important, the underlying document, that was supposedly photographed by FactCheck blog staffers, only days before the passport files at the State Dept. were breached by someone who was in the employee of ex-CIA agent/then Obama campaign supporter John O. Brennan, has NEVER BEEN SEEN by anyone from the media, nor any member of the public (other than FactCheck minions and Obama’s staff).

    **Obama will not ask the State of Hawaii to produce his vital records, despite that they WILL produce them–every single item–upon request by Obama and payment of a tiny fee, less than $20. Instead, he spends millions of dollars to prevent production of these documents that he claims exist. If the HDoH will not produce the documents upon Obama’s request, such as if they’re sealed due to an ADOPTION, Obama’s lawyers can ask any of the judges in the cases to subpoena the documents. Similarly, instead of fighting discovery, they could allow LTC Lakin’s lawyers discovery. The documents that the HDoH used to declare Obama “a natural born American citizen” would be revealed. Then all could see what they used to come to their conclusion. btw, Martin Short is a natural born AMERICAN citizen, as Canada is America, too. So is Pres. Calderon of Mexico, as Mexico is America, too. Will the HDoH declare Obama a “natural born citizen of the United States of America,” which is what the Constitution requires?

    Black Lion asked, “Was Lakin ordered to kill, rape, or commit any crime?” Well, according to John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, Dick Durbin and many other Democrats, yes he was. This is how they describe what our troops do in the Middle East. Remember? It is a non sequitur to continue to repeat that Lakin’s superior officer won the Medal of Honor.

    Black Lion said, “Fortunately in this country we have real military heros like Gen. Ray Ordinero, Gen. Petreaus, and Gen. McCrystal.” Yes, that is fortunate for us. What’s unfortunate is that you profess to honor these men, yet you are O for 3 on spelling their names: Odierno, Petraeus, McChrystal. However, LTC Lakin is also a “real military hero”. He is highly decorated. He has served honorably. You are wrong to disrespect him solely because you disagree with his actions with regard to Obama’s ineligibility. LTC Lakin honors his oath to the Constitution, unlike your number one hero, Zero. btw, Major General Paul E. Vallely, U.S. Army (Ret.) and Lt. General Thomas G. McInerny, U.S. Air Force (Ret.) both support LTC Lakin.

    From http://sonoranweeklyreview.com/contributors/
    “Major General Paul E. Vallely (U.S. Army Ret.) graduated from West Point and was commissioned into the U.S. Army in 1961. He graduated from Infantry School, Ranger and Airborne Schools, Jumpmaster School, the Command and General Staff School, The Industrial College of the Armed Forces and the Army War College. His two combat tours in South Vietnam included positions as infantry company commander, intelligence officer, operations officer, military advisor and aide-de-camp. He has served on US security assistance missions on civilian-military relations to Europe, Japan, Korea, Thailand, Indonesia and Central America with in-country experience in Indonesia, Columbia, El Salvador, Panama, Honduras and Guatemala. He was one of the first nominees for Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations under President Reagan. From 1982-1986, he commanded the 351st Civil Affairs Command that included all Special Forces, Psychological Warfare and Civil Military units in the Western United States and Hawaii. He was the first President of the National Psychological Operations Association. He retired in 1993, at the rank of Major General from his position as Deputy Commanding General, Pacific. His units participated in worldwide missions in Europe, Africa, Central America, Japan, Solomon Islands, Guam, Belgium, Korea and Thailand. He has served as a consultant to the Commanding General of the Special Operations Command as well as the DOD Anti-Drug and Counter -Terrorist Task Forces. He also designed and developed the Host-Nation Support Program in the Pacific for DOD and the State Department. Most recently, he has in-country security assistance – experience in El Salvador, Columbia and Indonesia in the development of civil-military relations interfacing with senior level military and civilian leadership.”

    McInerny’s major military awards and decorations include:
    Distinguished Service Medal with oak leaf cluster
    Defense Superior Service Medal
    Legion of Merit with oak leaf cluster
    Distinguished Flying Cross with oak leaf cluster
    Bronze Star Medal with “V” device and oak leaf cluster
    Meritorious Service Medal with oak leaf cluster
    Air Medal with 17 oak leaf clusters
    Air Force Commendation Medal with oak leaf cluster
    Vietnam Service Medal with six service stars
    McInerney has also been awarded the Third Order of the Rising Sun by the Japanese government for outstanding service in enhancing relations between the US government and Japan.

    McInerney was inducted into the Order of the Sword in July 1980. This award recognizes both military and civilian individuals for conspicuous and significant contributions to the welfare and prestige of the noncommissioned officer corps and the military establishment. Hel was the sixth Pacific Air Forces officer and the 63rd officer overall inducted into the order since the Air Force became a separate branch of the armed services in 1947.
    (Above from Wikipedia)

    These sound like “real heroes” to me.

    • Thank you Miri !

    • Not bad…I like dictionaries also….

      Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition:
      Native. A natural-born subject or citizen; a citizen by birth; one who owes his domicile or citizenship to the fact of his birth within the country referred to. The term may also include one born abroad, if his parents were then citizens of the country, and not permanently residing in foreign parts. U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649, 18 S.Ct. 456, 42 L.Ed. 890.

      And regarding the COLB issued from the state of HI that you so dismiss…remember that the “Full Faith and Credit clause of the Constitution” is what give the HI issued COLB its legitimacy. President Obama’s COLB is self-authenticating in Federal Court, under the federal rules of evidence (FRE 902), because it is under seal from the state of HI. No matter how many theories you come up with that he was born elsewhere, the state of HI has stated otherwise. So in order to impeach the state of HI, you would need to present some legally admissible evidence that would allow a court of law to not believe what the state of HI says. I will go with the following…

      “I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of the Hawai‛i State Department of Health, have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawai‘i State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawai‘i and is a natural-born American citizen. I have nothing further to add to this statement or my original statement issued in October 2008 over eight months ago.”

      Click to access 09-063.pdf


      “You know, during the campaign of 2008, I was actually in the mainland campaigning for Senator McCain. This issue kept coming up so much in the campaign, and again I think it’s one of those issues that is simply a distraction from the more critical issues that are facing the country. And so I had my health director, who is a physician by background, go personally view the birth certificate in the birth records of the Department of Health, and we issued a news release at that time saying that the president was, in fact, born at Kapi’olani Hospital in Honolulu, Hawaii. And that’s just a fact. And yet people continue to call up and e-mail and want to make it an issue. And I think it’s, again, a horrible distraction for the country by those people who continue this. … It’s been established. He was born here.”—Governor of Hawaii Linda Lingle (R)

      Born in Hawaiil seems pretty specific to me. All the constitution requires is that the President be natural born, 35 or older, and to have lived in the US for 14 years. Whether you like it or not the President meets all of those qualifications.

      Race on a birth certificate doesn’t come from a hospital worker looking at the father and writing down the father’s race; it is determined by asking the father what he considers his race to be. This is the instruction for filling out a birth certificate from the National Center for Health Statistics:

      25. FATHER’S RACE (Check one or more races to indicate what the father considers himself to be).

      Click to access birth11-03final-ACC.pdf

      So since the information is not filled out by the hospital but by the individual, and there is no way a person from Africa would identify themselves as “Black” or “Negro”, focusing on the fact that Obama’s father identified himself as African does not prove a forgery. Hawaiian is not a race but we have seen that individuals identified themselves as that. Or Japanese. Same thing.

      Thanks for the info on McInerney. Unfortunately he was not a lawyer so has no clue about rulings and a Congressional Medal of Honor which Lakin’s direct superior has is the highest award you can receive in the military. I will continue to point that out because it shows that true heros like him follow orders.
      Besides Valley and McInerny are not exactly unbiased observers. They are both frequent critics of Obama, have authored many articles and papers together, and on the extreme right. However there are hundreds of former generals and only 2 have come out to support Lakin. And they are both retired. How come not one active duty officer has come out in support? Maybe the guy that was forced to take Lakin’s place in Afganistan could be a character witness for him.

      You state “A letter from Obama claiming Kapiolani as his birthplace was posted on Kapiolani’s website and used as a fund-raising tool. When people pointed out that it was a crime to use false statements to raise money, the letter was quickly pulled off the website. Kapiolani has no desire to be accused of fraud, apparently.”

      Really? It was removed due to HIPPA or privacy reasons. The reason that the hospital cannot confirm his birth is the same reason that no hospital is allowed to confirm yours to the press. We are all protected by privacy laws. The President also. And the letter can still be found on the website I hear.

      • we issued a news release at that time saying that the president was, in fact, born at Kapi’olani Hospital in Honolulu, Hawaii. And that’s just a fact.

        No, that’s not a fact. Whether Governor Lingle realizes it or not, what she said is demonstrably false. Untrue. A lie.

        Contrary to Governor Lingle’s claim, neither of the news releases said that Obama was “born at Kapi’olani Hospital in Honolulu, Hawaii”.

        Again, whether Governor Lingle realizes it or not, what she said is demonstrably false. What she said is not “just a fact”, but rather a lie.

        The first news release did not specify Obama’s birth location.

        The second news release said, “Obama was born in Hawaii”, but ONLY AFTER THE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES VOTED IN FAVOR OF A HOUSE RESOLUTION THAT INCLUDED THOSE EXACT WORDS. Dr. Fukino went months on end without releasing anything saying “Obama was born in Hawaii”. Then, once she had the “cover” provided by the U.S. House, she released her second news release mere hours later.


        Just the Facts, Ed


        Obama’s Eligibility: It’s a Matter of Faith

        • From Politifact.com:
          “When we spoke to a spokeswoman for the Hawaii Department of Health, she said too much was being made of the difference between the so-called “long” and “short” forms.

          “They’re just words,” said spokeswoman Janice Okubo. “That (what was posted on the Internet) is considered a birth certificate from the state of Hawaii.”

          “There’s only one form of birth certificate,” she said, and it’s been the same since the 1980s. Birth certificates evolve over the decades, she said, and there are no doubt differences between the way birth certificates looked when Obama was born and now.

          “When you request a birth certificate, the one you get looks exactly like the one posted on his site,” she said. “That’s the birth certificate.”

          As for the theory that Obama’s original birth certificate might show he was foreign-born, Okubo said the “Certification of Live Birth” would say so. Obama’s does not. Again, it says he was born in Honolulu.”

          Which is what I find interesting. What are people expecting the long form to say that the COLB does not say? The only relevant portion of the COLB is the place of birth. Which says Honolulu. I would be impossible for the so called long form to say something different. Besides the long form would be much easier to forge and doesn’t have the newer security features that the COLBs have. So how would that satisfy anyone who thinks the COLB is a forgery?

          • 1) You completely ignored the FACT that what Governor Lingle said was DEMONSTRABLY FALSE. The news release DID NOT say what Lingle claimed it said. That is a big deal. The truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth matters.

            2) Don’t give me internet URLs. Don’t give me what Politifact says that a spokeswoman for the Hawaii Department of Health told them. Don’t give me anything but hardcopy versions of the documents that are accepted for an I-9 form. If it’s not acceptable documentation for an I-9 form, then it’s not acceptable documentation in this discussion. Period.

            3) “The only relevant portion of the COLB is the place of birth. Which says Honolulu.” — WRONG. No vital record document has ever been released directly from the state of Hawaii to prove that Obama’s “birth narrative” is true. The actual hospital of Obama’s birth is relevant because if it wasn’t Kapi’olani, then at a minimum the law was broken by using fraudulent information in fundraising documents for Kapi’olani. And, it would indicate wider fraud involving Obama and Neil Abercrombie. Even if born elsewhere in the U.S., if Obama was not born at Kapi’olani, he could be impeached for fraud and obstruction of justice. And, if Obama was born at Kapi’olani, then either his father was a British subject who passed British subjecthood on to Obama at birth, or Obama’s father was not who he has claimed it was… and again that would be an issue of fraud. If Obama was born a British subject, then the only way he could qualify to be Preisdent is if he had been a U.S. Citizen at the time of the ratification of the U.S. Constitution. He wasn’t, so he doesn’t qualify. Someone born a British subject cannot also be born a natural born citizen of the U.S.

            A citizen by statuatory law, yes. But a citizen by natural law, no.

            The founders read and referenced Vattel, and “natural born citizen” is a reference to those born a citizen under natural law… i.e., they were naturally a citizen of one and only one country becuase they were born in the country to parents who are its citizens.

      • “They are both frequent critics of Obama, have authored many articles and papers together, and on the extreme right.” EXTREME RIGHT???

        The extreme right would be John Birchers ( not KKK members)..that is extreme right. Conservatives are not extreme unless you want to say MAINSTREAM.
        We understand the Left is trying to paint the Teapartys as extreme also. Anything in opposition to the Marxists in office are considered extreme.

        Radical Leftists are those that want to transform our country…with their many associated names, i.e., Marxists, communists, socialists, progressives, and terrorists.

        I guess from where you are leaning the conservatives would be considered extreme.

        • The extreme right would be KKK members..that is extreme right.

          Whoa! The KKK was the terrorist wing of the DEMOCRAT party, not the Republican party!

          • Darn it all…did I read a Progressive History book and didn’t know it? I stand so corrected. The John Birchers are the extreme right.

            • Darn it all…did I read a Progressive History book and didn’t know it?

              Yes. Most of us did, because the “Progressives” successfully infiltrated the educational system decades ago, and most history books used in public schools are “progressive history”.

              I stand so corrected. The John Birchers are the extreme right.

              I would say that the the John Birch Society are “far” right. But are they “extreme”? Only to the extent that they are extremely opposed to Communism. They’ve been called “extreme” and “racist” by the far left, but so have most of us here at WTPOTUS. And if you haven’t realized it already, the Alinskyites who call us “birthers” are the same Alinskyites who call them “Birchers”.

              I’m not a member of the John Birch Society, but I don’t consider them “extreme”. Take a look at their web site, and see just how much you agree with their stand on the issues.

              And, speaking of remembering heroes, be sure to read this.

          • While we’re reminding people, the Nazis were the extreme LEFT. Socialists.

            To whom it may concern: The Constitution mentions Natural Born Citizen. There was no definition, because the Founders knew what the definition was: Born on the soil to TWO citizen parents. No allegiance whatsoever to any other country. That means, no British subject AT BIRTH need not apply to be POTUS. Persons with thinly veiled obscene pen-names or angry-looking avatars will not be allowed to comment at this blog.

        • Brigette, you would be surprised. I am actually a moderate from NJ that voted for Christie for gov. I work in Manhattan with an office that overlooks Ground Zero. I grew up in the time of the red scare and the big bad USSR so I have no love for communism. So that is why I find it hilarious when the opponents of the President call him a Marxist or a Communist. Really? When large corporations are showing huge profits, CEO compensation is higher than last year and all of the companies that Bush bailed out in 2008 are showing profits. Socialist programs are Medicare and Social Security, as well as government pensions. However I don’ t see anyone willing to give those entitlement programs up. The real reason the President and the administration are called those names are because they are attempting to regulate industries that need it. And the GOP, who has been in the pocket of big business does not want that. The bottom line is neither party is a friend of the middle class working individual. The GOP only cares about you if your are big business or rich and the Democrats only want to keep people on govenment programs. If Obama was so against the middle class, why is he fighting to keep the tax cuts for them while allowing them to expire for those making over $250K? Even GOP leader Boehner, who was opposing Obama had to come around and support his because of the middle class. That doesn’t seem Marxist, Communist, or Socialist to me.

          • Socialist programs are Medicare and Social Security, as well as government pensions. However I don’ t see anyone willing to give those entitlement programs up.
            Entitlement programs are Medicaid and welfare. SS and Medicare are programs WE pay for our entire WORKING lives. They come out of the money we WORK for and EARN our entire careers. That is not an entitlement program in my eyes- it is bought and paid for by those that actually work for a living. Welfare and medicaid are available for the disabled and the lazy that do not work. They get the freebies. Your statement is incorrect in my eyes Black Lion. Workers have been entitled all right. Entitled to pay for slackers.
            Thus the reason the kitty is empty. Too many people getting the free ride while the workers run like dogs each day hoping there will be something left for them someday since they paid for it ALL….
            My opinion at least.

          • 1) Did you work in Manhattan with an office that overlooks Ground Zero back on 9/11/2001? If so, what was that day like for you?

            2) Barack Hussein Obama spent 20+ years attending a “Black Liberation Theology” church. “Liberation Theology” is Marxist.

      • fyi, Black Lion, there is a ban on the very mention of Wong Kim Ark on this blog. It does not apply. Do NOT bring Wong Kim Ark up ever again.

        Now that you have once again regurgitated your cut-and-pasted talking points, again, we do not like cut-and-pasted talking points. You’re on notice. Do not repeat them again. Once is enough.

        A link, please, to the definition you cite.

        We get that you conflate Native with Natural-Born. There is a crucial difference that scholars disagree about. This is WHY the SCOTUS must definitively rule. However, analysis of the intent of the Founders shows that their concern was with undivided allegiance to THIS country and no other. Obama, being a self-admitted British citizen AT BIRTH, later a Kenyan citizen, also an Indonesian citizen (provided that his stepfather did not lie on school registration forms), cannot have undivided allegiance to the United States. The fact that he was a British SUBJECT AT BIRTH proves him ineligible. The fact that he was and may REMAIN a dual or even triple citizen, proves him ineligible.

        Because we do not know the exact circumstances of his birth, we do not know IF he was born within this country. We do not know, for certain, when he was born. If he was born in Hawaii, was Hawaii a state at the time of his birth? Was he born on Native Hawaiian lands, into the allegiance of yet another “nation” within our nation?

        By your definition, his parents (plural) must be citizens of the U.S., for him to be a U.S. CITIZEN at birth, if born elsewhere. But, again, we do not KNOW the circumstances of his birth. Heck, we don’t even know his name.

        The Full Faith doctrine does not apply to digital images on partisan blogs and campaign websites. If he would produce the document to a court, then perhaps that doctrine may come into play. You have no COLB issued by the state of Hawaii. Do you?

        Present it to a Federal Court and we shall see what we shall see. However, he’s not presenting any COLB from Hawaii in any federal court. Far from it.

        The state of Hawaii cannot seal anything from a federal court, if the court should subpoena the documents. In fact, by their own laws, they WILL release the documents if subpoenaed. Seal or no seal. Adoption or no adoption. Privacy laws or no privacy laws. Certain things are far more important than embarrassment or individual privacy.

        Father’s race: nobody asked the father what he considers his race to be. It has been documented elsewhere that Obama Sr. was not present at the birth. Was not present at any hospital because Obama Jr. was not born in a hospital. Was not asked what race he is by anyone at the HDoH.

        At best, if the birth was filed by a person “with knowledge” of the event, that person wrote African on the registration. That is, if you accept as fact what’s on that digital image that pretends to be a COLB. But I don’t accept anything on that digital image as fact.

        Self-categorization of “race” is the norm NOW, not in 1961, so it’s useless to cite current procedures.

        If you think blindly following orders equals a “true hero” then you must really admire the guards at Nazi death camps. It is beyond the pale for you to personally attack McInerny and Vallely simply because they disagree with Obama and you about whether he’s eligible or not. They are heroes. They served this country admirably. They deserve the respect of all Americans.

        “Extreme right?” Well, perhaps so. They are extremely right in their evaluation of this situation.

        Just because someone disagrees with Obama or contends that he is ineligible, does not make them biased. Does not make them WRONG. Does not make them extremists or bigots or racists.

        Perhaps others who are not retired do not come out in support of LTC Lakin because they see what is happening to him: Threats of tasering? Isolation? Prevention of due process? Ridicule in the media? Media blackout of the events in this case?

        Black Lion, if that Kapiolani letter was removed because of HIPAA then why was it there for months UNTIL someone pointed out the nexus between fundraising and false statements?

        This had nothing to do with HIPAA. Hospitals are well acquainted with that law. If it violated the law to post a letter from someone who wrote about his own birth there, who by writing the letter surrendered any claim to privacy, who has a perfect right to reveal any personal information about himself that he cares to reveal, then the letter would NEVER have been on the website in the first place.

        • What cut and paste talking points? Don’t accuse me of something that is not true. I cited a source and showed the link. Period. If that is cut and paste then you need to redefine that. As far the WKA, I again did not cite that. My cited link to Blacks Law Dictionary did. Just as an FYI is the legal reference for all attorneys, including the SCOTUS. As for the ruling that you feel does not apply, I can understand that. It is an unrefutable ruling that superceeds the Minor and is the ruling used by the courts and attorney’s regarding anything having to do with citizenship.

          If it has nothing to do with HIPPA, then try calling a hospital and ask for information about someone that admiitted that they went there for treatment. See how far you would get.

          I never attacked either general. I just pointed out that both of them since they have retired are ideologically opposed to Obama. I never called them a name nor disparaged them in any way. And yes I admire military officials that follow orders. I loved it when General Powell followed orders in the first Gulf War and defeated the Iraquis. I loved it when Eisenhower followed the orders of Roosevelt and Truman and ended WWII. I loved it when Grant followed the orders of Lincoln and ended the Civil War. Throughout the history of this country many fine soldiers have followed orders and done great things. It is fitting that the only lame example you can use is the Nazi’s during WWII. Equating ordering to kill to supporting your brother soldiers by reporting with your unit to Ft. Campbell is ridiculous. Which is why Lakin will be reporting to Ft. Leavenworth, KS sometime in the near future.

          You say that “Self-categorization of “race” is the norm NOW, not in 1961, so it’s useless to cite current procedures.” That is not true. There are examples in HI that people self reported themselves as Japanese and Hawaiian in the 1960’s. So unless you were living in HI at the time, you could not know for sure. But as far as African people go, I definately know they don’t self identify themselves as Black, Negro, or African American.

          • We’re not talking about citizenship. We’re talking about NATURAL BORN CITIZENSHIP.

            Black Lion said, “If it has nothing to do with HIPPA, then try calling a hospital and ask for information about someone that admiitted that they went there for treatment. See how far you would get.”

            I explained to you why it has nothing to do with HIPAA.

            If you think a digital image on the Internet is a legal document, then try getting a passport by linking to a URL.

            Calling someone biased and “extreme right” is not disparaging? In what universe?

            LTC Lakin will not be reporting to Ft. Leavenworth. Mark my words. Obama dare not do it. Wait and see.

        • Miri: If it violated the law to post a letter from someone who wrote about his own birth there, who by writing the letter surrendered any claim to privacy, who has a perfect right to reveal any personal information about himself that he cares to reveal, then the letter would NEVER have been on the website in the first place.

          I just wanted to correct the record on this point. While the Kapi’olani web page featuring the White House letter from Barack Obama that mentions that he was born there isn’t up any more, the letter remains on their web site at http://www.kapiolanigift.org/doc/centennial-magazine.pdf (see page 6). There is certainly nothing HIPAA related about this letter and its publication.

          • I agree–Nothing HIPAA related about the letter because a person has no privacy rights when the person himself made the statement. IF he did, which is the question. However, I see nothing on the link you provided about the letter being used for fundraising, as it was used previously. And it was taken down from the page it had been on after questions were raised about it.

        • Miri:there is a ban on the very mention of Wong Kim Ark on this blog. It does not apply. Do NOT bring Wong Kim Ark up ever again.

          Do you have a list of the cases that are forbidden to discuss here? It might save a lot of time to know what one is not allowed to say.


          • Dr. Conspiracy: No, I have no list of cases. My statement about Wong Kim Ark was said, for the most part, tongue-in-cheek because I am worn out from responding to the same tired talking points. You may disagree, which is your right; but we prefer not to have the comment section of our blog clogged up, over and over, with the same discussion. Let’s agree to disagree on Wong Kim Ark.

            Certain individuals seem to do little more than cut and paste talking points but avoid honest, rational debate. They will never concede a point. Will not respond to direct questions. Will not respect logic and reason or, especially, those with whom they disagree.

            I have read your blog and am happy to see that you do not seem to engage in ad hominem attacks simply because you disagree with someone. I was heartened to see that you complimented our friend butterdezillion. Although you do use the derogatory term “birthers”, which we ask that you refrain from using here because it is insulting, you, unlike many of your commenters, do not seem to personally attack and ridicule the intelligence or educational background of those with whom you disagree.

            If you notice, many of the comments on your butterdezillion post are ad hominem attacks instead of discussion of the issues that you and she raise. They ridicule her, attack her intelligence and sanity, and call her names: nutter, mad (crazy, not angry), birfer (particularly juvenile, wouldn’t you say?), martyr, compulsive, right winger. Got the picture? And then you have a few who seem to try to shame you out of even engaging with her, as if by debating her, you somehow betray them.

            I’d like to point out to one of your commenters that even if butterdezillion is biased, so is he. And even if biased, a person can still state FACTS and TRY to debate them fairly without smearing an opponent simply for being an opponent.

            So, welcome. Thanks for stopping in. I look forward to seeing what you get from your own FOIA requests. Thanks for your efforts to get to the bottom of the conundrum.

            Have you seen this, btw?
            SEE comment 9, by Sven Magnussen.

            Interesting take on Soebarkah and why Barack Hussein Obama was excluded from his mother’s passport. btw, can you answer for us what his real name is? Is it Barack Hussein Obama II, as on the COLB, or is it Barrack Houssein Obama II, as shown on the records from the LTC Lakin court-martial? Curious, huh?

            Sir, Dr. Conspiracy, does it concern you AT ALL that this man will not prove to We the People that he was indeed born in Hawaii to the persons he claims as parents?

            If the digital image of the COLB is true and accurate and if staffers from FactCheck blog saw an actual, authentic, certified, Hawaiian-DoH-produced, three-dimensional document, front side and back side, then why doesn’t Obama simply produce that same document for the judge in LTC Lakin’s trial and be done with it? Has he no compassion for the man? This is one of his troops, who has served honorably and who has children, for goodness sake. No compassion whatsoever that would lead him to simply show LTC Lakin the proof his conscience requires?

            Sometimes, indeed, common sense tells us that absence of evidence is (at least circumstantial) evidence of ABSENCE.

            How can anyone come to the conclusion that Obama is eligible under the Constitution to be POTUS, when there IS NO EVIDENCE? None.

            All we have EVER asked for is evidence. There is NONE. Instead of answers, those who question this POTUS and his staffers (see Gibbs, R.) get RIDICULE in response, but no answers.

            Would that Obama would spend even 5 minutes with his birth certificate pasted on his forehead. If only.

  35. Certainly Miri.
    The amendments are at :

    Click to access 2010-22279.pdf

    and the 2008 Manual is at (amongst other places):

    Click to access mcm.pdf

    Never posted links on this site before so apologies if they don’t work – just cut and paste if they don’t.

    • sorry made a mess of second link s/b:

      Click to access mcm.pdf

      • Thanks Welsh,
        I also found the amendments on Scribd and posted it as an update on the article. Haven’t had a chance to read them yet.

        UPDATE Obama Executive Order 13552 – 2010 Amendments and Annex to the Manual for Courts-Martial, 8/31/10

      • I fixed it for you.

  36. We have a new open thread.

  37. Feel free to continue the natural born citizenship discussion and/or the LTC Lakin discussion here. I just wanted to point y’all to some new issues. Not “breaking news”, just puzzling things. Wanted to hear your opinions. Ta!

  38. http://www.thepostemail.com/2010/09/14/statement-on-ltc-lakin-courts-martial/

    Maj. Gen. Vallely has posted a statement about LTC Lakin’s case. It sounds as if he’s going to lend more assistance to the case. Perhaps good news.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s