Category Archives: Obama impeachment

Obama pardons echo Clinton Holder pardon of Marc Rich?, Last months of Obama administration ugly?, Who is going to pardon Obama?

Obama pardons echo Clinton Holder pardon of Marc Rich?, Last months of Obama administration ugly?, Who is going to pardon Obama?

“Why has Obama, since taking the White House, used Justice Department Attorneys, at taxpayer expense,  to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?”…Citizen Wells

“Why did Mutual Bank fire whistleblower Kenneth J Conner after he
challenged the appraisal on the land purchased by Rita Rezko, just
prior to the land sale to Obama?”…Citizen Wells

“Why did Patrick Fitzgerald and the US Justice Department wait until December 2008 to arrest Rod Blagojevich?”…Citizen Wells

 

The following was written by Debra J. Saunders of the San Francisco Chronicle and reported at the Greensboro News Record on May 22, 2013.
“Obama may use power to pardon sparingly, if at all”

“Last week, Attorney General Eric Holder gave Washington a preview of how the last few months of the Obama administration are going to look, and they’re going to be ugly.

Holder knows ugly. He was, after all, deputy attorney general when President Bill Clinton issued his infamous 140 out-the-door pardons to unworthies such as Marc Rich, who fled to Switzerland after federal prosecutors issued a 51-count indictment against him in 1983 for tax evasion, racketeering and illegal trading with Iran. Even though Rich was a fugitive from federal prosecution, Holder issued a “neutral, leaning towards favorable” opinion on the pardon; Rich’s attorney also used to be Clinton’s attorney.”

Will Obama pardon Blagojevich?

Was a deal struck just before Blagojevich was arrested in 2008?

ObamaBlagoNov2008

From Citizen Wells May 21, 2013.

One has to wonder that if Obama appears to be in jeopardy if Blagojevich or even Rezko will talk.

Don’t believe Obama can be touched?

From WND May 19, 2013.

“HALF OF AMERICA WANTS OBAMA IMPEACHED”

“The faux stone columns from his Denver acceptance speech are crumbling, the fireworks have fizzled and the unadulterated adulation of Barack Obama is a sour feeling of disillusion, as a new poll reveals half of America wants him impeached, including a stunning one in four Democrats.

“It may be early in the process for members of Congress to start planning for impeachment of Barack Obama, but the American public is building a serious appetite for it,” said Fritz Wenzel, of Wenzel Strategies, which did the telephone poll Thursday. It has a margin of error of 4.36 percent.

“Half or nearly half of those surveyed said they believed Obama should be impeached for the trifecta of scandals now consuming Washington.””

http://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2013/05/21/obama-arrest-impeachment-resignation-imminent-benghazi-gate-irs-gate-usdoj-gate-al-vt-supreme-court-eligibility-cases-arpaio-investigation-blagojevich-appeal-fdic-mutual-bank-lawsuit/

Who is going to pardon Obama?

Philip Berg DC eligibility rally, Removal of Obama with or without Issa, Citizen Wells open thread, October 24, 2010

Philip Berg DC eligibility rally, Removal of Obama with or without Issa

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

From World Net Daily October 23, 2010.

“D.C. eligibility rally boldly blasts Obama as ‘fraud’
Attorney Berg motivates crowd to ask, ‘Where’s birth certificate?’”

“A rally today at the U.S. Capitol pulled no punches in declaring President Barack Obama an “imposter” and “fraud” who should resign before a constitutional crisis of his own making rips apart the nation.

The rally was called by Philip Berg, a Pennsylvania attorney who runs the ObamaCrimes.com website and was the first to sue over allegations Obama is constitutionally ineligible to occupy the Oval Office.

“The main thrust of the rally,” Berg told WND, “was to get out the continuing message that Obama is a phony, a fraud, an imposter, and [his eligibility to serve as president] is the biggest hoax committed against the U.S. in 234 years.”

Berg believes there is enough evidence, both hard and circumstantial, to justify an investigation into whether or not Obama is a “natural-born citizen” as required by the Constitution to serve as president. Berg is looking for a court with “the guts” to demand Obama provide proof of his eligibility.”

“Berg told WND he isn’t pushing for Obama’s resignation out of some right-wing venom – he’s a life-long Democrat – or racism or hatred, but out of dedication to preserving the U.S. Constitution and out of concern about what will happen to the country if Obama continues his presidency and is discovered ineligible years down the road.
“My goal is to have a peaceful revolution before something worse breaks out,” Berg said. “The sooner the better.”

He continued, “Obama is walking all over the Constitution, destroying the Constitution through holding office while ineligible, through a health-care plan that is clearly unconstitutional, and he has plans for more unconstitutional actions. I’m doing this because nothing is more important to the U.S. than its Constitution.”

Berg’s initial emergency appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court when Obama first took office, like those of a number of other attorneys, were not accepted by the panel. He has one case pending, and it is being prepared for presentation to the high court now.”

“He says that if it weren’t for the U.S. media, Obama would already have been exposed and removed from office.

“The media gave him a free ride,” he said.”

“Berg’s is not the only one who has challenged Obama’s residency in the White House. A case is developing involving Lt. Col. Terrence Lakin, who has questioned the legitimacy of the orders in the U.S. military under a president whose eligibility is under question.

Another case being handled by California attorneys Gary Kreep of the United States Justice Foundation and Orly Taitz is on behalf of another presidential candidate and challenges Obama’s inclusion on the ballot.

Yet another claims Congress failed to perform its constitutional obligations to investigate Obama.

There’s even been a series of discussions about impeachment.”

Read more:

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.printable&pageId=219109

“The court concludes … that the public’s need to know is more compelling

From The Wall Street Journal .

“Republican candidate for U.S. Senate Joe Miller meets supporters at his Anchorage, Alaska, campaign headquarters Thursday.“Mr. Miller is a public figure by virtue of the fact that he’s a candidate for the U.S. Senate,” said Superior Court Judge Winston Burbank at a hearing. He continued, “The court concludes … that the public’s need to know is more compelling than Mr. Miller’s right to privacy.”

He ruled some information shouldn’t be disclosed for reasons including the privacy of the people involved and client-attorney privilege. He added that the records shouldn’t be disclosed any earlier than Tuesday at 4 p.m., to give Mr. Miller time to appeal the decision before then. “Joe is going to confer with his attorney to see if an appeal is even necessary,” said a spokesman for Mr. Miller.

The decision was a twist in a battle involving several news organizations who had together sued the Fairbanks North Star Borough, where Mr. Miller once worked as a lawyer, for records about the Republican candidate’s potential misuse of government computers and the circumstances of his departure from the job.

Mr. Miller was allowed Tuesday to intervene in the lawsuit to push for the protection of the records. If the employment records are ultimately released, they could cast a spotlight on the candidate’s previous professional behavior at a critical point in the election.

Mr. Miller, who is backed by former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin and the Tea Party Express, beat Sen. Lisa Murkowski in the GOP primary and now faces Ms. Murkowski who is running a strong campaign as a write-in candidate, and Sitka Mayor Scott McAdams, the Democratic candidate.”

Obama can be removed with or without Darrell Issa.

From Citizen News.

““If Republicans take control of the House, there is “not a chance at this point” that they will try to impeach President Obama, a top Republican lawmaker said this week.

Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), who would helm the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee if the GOP wins on Election Day, said that his party will not try to bring impeachment charges simply because it disagrees with the president.
“Not a chance at this point. I don’t see it happening,” Issa said when asked if there is a chance of impeachment on Bloomberg’s “Political Capital,” which airs over the weekend.”

“Before proceeding, I want to be crystal clear. Obama is apparently not a legal president, is in fact a usurper, and as such does not have to be impeached, but simply arrested and removed from the White House in hand cuffs.

The First Amendment to the US Constitution provides for petitioning government, specifically the US House of Representatives, for a redress of grievances. This includes a petition or demand for the arrest or impeachment of Barack Hussein Obama.

From the 110th Congress House Rules Manual — House Document No. 108-241.

Petitions, memorials, and private bills

“Petitions, memorials, and other papers addressed to the House may be presented by the Speaker as well as by a Member (IV, 3312). Petitions from the country at large are presented by the Speaker in the manner prescribed by the rule (III, 2030; IV, 3318; VII, 1025). A Member may present a petition from the people of a State other than his own (IV, 3315, 3316). The House itself may refer one portion of a petition to one committee and another portion to another committee (IV, 3359, 3360), but ordinarily the reference of a petition does not come before the House itself. A committee may receive a petition only through the House (IV, 4557).”

Jefferson’s Manual as adopted in the US Congress House Rules Manual.

“In the <<NOTE: Sec. 603. Inception of impeachment proceedings in the
House.>> House there are various methods of setting an impeachment in
motion: by charges made on the floor on the responsibility of a Member
or Delegate (II, 1303; III, 2342, 2400, 2469; VI, 525, 526, 528, 535,
536); by charges preferred by a memorial, which is usually referred to a
committee for examination (III, 2364, 2491, 2494, 2496, 2499, 2515; VI,
543); by a resolution dropped in the hopper by a Member and referred to
a committee (Apr. 15, 1970, p. 11941; Oct. 23, 1973, p. 34873); by a
message from the President (III, 2294, 2319; VI, 498); by charges
transmitted from the legislature of a State (III, 2469) or territory
(III, 2487) or from a grand jury (III, 2488); or from facts developed
and reported””

Read more:

http://citizenwells.com/2010/10/23/obama-impeachment-impeachment-process-issa-not-a-chance-of-obama-impeachment-oh-really/

Philip Berg thanks Pravda for article, Obama not natural born citizen, Thanks to Sam Sewell and PRAVDA

Philip Berg thanks Pravda for article, Obama not natural born citizen, Thanks to Sam Sewell and PRAVDA

Just in from Philip J Berg, lead plaintiff in Berg v Obama, September 17, 2010.

For Immediate Release:  – 09/17/2010
For Further Information Contact:
Philip J. Berg, Esquire         
555 Andorra Glen Court, Suite 12                         
Lafayette Hill, PA 19444-2531
Cell (610) 662-3005
(610) 825-3134
(800) 993-PHIL  [7445]
Fax (610) 834-7659

philjberg@obamacrimes.com
Berg Thanks “PRAVDA” for
article about Obama “Not” Being “Natural Born”

while U.S. Press continues to Refuse
to discuss Obama

regarding Obama “Not”
“Constitutionally Eligible”
to be President
 (Lafayette Hill, PA – 09/17/10) – Philip J. Berg, Esquire, the first Attorney who filed suit against Barack H. Obama challenging Obama’s lack of “qualifications” to serve as President of the United States stated that “WE THE PEOPLE” by and through Philip J. Berg and obamacrimes.com THANKS “PRAVDA” for an article about Obama “NOT” being “Natural Born’ while U.S. Press continues to refuse to discuss Obama regarding Obama “NOT” “Constitutionally Eligible” to be President.

Berg is sponsoring the OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE / ELIGIBILITY/ OBAMACARE Rally in Washington on Saturday, October 23, 2010 – 12 Noon to 4:00 p.m. at U.S. Capitol – West Front.
 
Philip J. Berg, Esquire has commented on the PRAVDA article on their page and sets forth the text of his comments hereinafter:

“Philip J. Berg, Esquire here – WOW !  Thanks to Sam Sewell and PRAVDA for printing what the United States National Media [Radio, TV & Newspapers] has refused, I believe on purpose, to bring forth the facts regarding Obama.

Obama knows he is an Imposter, a Fraud and a Phony and has planned and exercised the greatest “HOAX” in the history of the United States, in over 234 years !   All of this information is on our web site:  obamacrimes.com

Join with obamacrimes.com on Saturday, October 23, 2010 at the U.S. Capitol – West Front for a RALLY – regarding:  OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE / ELIGIBILITY / OBAMACARE RALLY to expose Obama – to demand he prove he is “Constitutionally Eligible” [which he cannot] and demand he resign from office.

Obama belongs in jail, along with Michelle Obama, Howard Dean [former head of the Democratic National Committee], senior campaign officials and senior administrative officials, who had to know of this conspiracy.  Yes, conspiracy by Obama !   Actually, all of them must be subjected to our criminal justice system, tried and those convicted must go to jail.  Yes, even these individuals are entitled to rights guaranteed by our U.S. Constitution !

I was the first attorney to bring the issue of Obama “not” being “Constitutionally Eligible” in a law suit I filed on August 21, 2008, BEFORE the Democratic National Convention.  I sued Obama and the Democratic National Committee.  I wrongly thought that Howard Dean, the then head of the DNC would call Obama in and demand that he prove that he is “Constitutionally Eligible”, that being “natural born”.  No, instead, collusion.  No response from the DNC until a “joint” response with Obama a month later.

The crucial piece of evidence, more important than Obama’s Birth Certificate, is the fact of Obama’s adoption and/or the fact he was “legally acknowledge” by Lolo Soetoro.

Two [2] important facts from Obama’s own books:  1. He said he found his Birth Certificate – so show us !  2. Obama states [his parents had divorced and his mother remarried] that his step-father, Lolo Soetoro, returned to Indonesia before his mother and Obama.  Obama then said when he went to Indonesia he immediately went to school.  Indonesia was in turmoil and only Indonesian citizens were allowed in school.  Well, those adopted or acknowledged by their stepfather were also considered “natural born” Indonesian citizens.  On our web site: obamacrimes.com   we have Obama’s school record from Indonesia:  Name = Barry Soetoro; Nationality = Indonesia;  Religion = Islam [which is Muslim].

FACT:  If Obama has “not” legally changed his name, his legal name is: BARRY SOETORO !    Therefore, every time Obama uses the name Barack Hussein Obama, he has committed and still commits FRAUD.  Yes, one can use an alias, but “not” for fraudulent purposes.

SIGNIFICANT CASE still pending:  In the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, the case of:   Berg as Relator vs. Obama, Case No. 09-5362.  In this case, I allege that Obama/Soetoro is “not natural born” and “not naturalized”, but that, based on the following, that Obama/Soetoro is an “illegal alien” and therefore, his term as the U.S. Senator from Illinois was fraudulent and therefore, the salary & benefits Obama/Soetoro received of over $1 million dollars must be returned to the U.S. Treasury.  This type case is called “False Claims” or “Qui Tam” and are “sealed” when initially filed and are usually used in Medicaid or Medicare fraud cases.  The issue on Appeal is whether a “Conflict-of-Interest” exists with Eric Holder and/or his Offices litigating the matter against Obama.  I have stated a “Conflict-of-Interest” exists and I requested a “Special Prosecutor” be appointed.

Why “Conflict-of-Interest” ?   In this type case, the decision after a case is filed is made by the U.S. Attorney Generals Office and the U.S. Department of Justice, both who come under the Attorney General of the United States who is ERIC HOLDER.  Well, ERIC HOLDER was a Senior member of Obama’s campaign staff;  ERIC HOLDER was selected by Obama to be one of three individuals to select the Vice President – and they selected Joe Biden; ERIC HOLDER was nominated by Obama and confirmed by the U.S. Senate to be Attorney General of the U.S. who is the highest law enforcement person in the U.S. who reports and advises the President [Obama].  IF THAT IS “NOT” A “CONFLICT-OF-INTEREST”, then “CONFLICT-OF-INTEREST” must be removed from our legal system and the Code of Federal Regulations.

WE CAN ONLY HOPE THAT THE D.C. COURT OF APPEALS, COURT EN BANC [entire Court] WILL HAVE GUTS ENOUGH TO HEAR OUR APPEAL.  WE CAN ONLY HOPE !

I could go on and on, but again, thanks to Sam Sewell and PRAVDA.  Continue reading PRAVDA on what the U.S. Press has refused to discuss.  IF the U.S. Press had vetted Obama/Soetoro just a little, Obama/Soetoro would never have been nominated, yet elected.

Respectfully,

Philip J. Berg, Esquire
obamacrimes.com”

Again, Berg is sponsoring the OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE / ELIGIBILITY/ OBAMACARE Rally in Washington on Saturday, October 23, 2010 – 12 Noon to 4:00 p.m. at U.S. Capitol – West Front.

Donate today to help cover the expenses of this Rally and Defend our Constitution.

An updated flyer regarding our Rally is attached.  Please spread the word to as many people as you can and stay tuned to obamacrimes.com.”
For copies of all Press Releases and Court Pleadings, go to:
http://obamacrimes.com

Obama Pravda article, Obama The Narcissist Liar and Con-man, Birth certificate con

Obama Pravda article, Obama The Narcissist Liar and Con-man, Birth certificate con

I received the following email from Dr. Sam a short while ago.

“This morning I received this note from the Editor of the USA edition of Pravda.  Many of you will remember Pravda as the leading newspaper of the Soviet Union and an official organ of the Communist Party.   Since the collapse of the USSR Pravda has become an independent world wide publication known for exposing the problems inside Russia and causing Russian leaders to be uncomfortable.  They also cover political news from around the world. 
 
This morning I received this note from the USA Editor of Pravda.  The eligibility issue is finally going to get the international attention it needs.
 
Dear Sam,
Thank you very much for writing.
We are going to publish your article, but since it is a very lengthy one, it will appear on Pravda English in several parts. If the article proves to be successful, we will post it all the parts of it. The article will be signed as Sam Sewell, USA – please let me know if it’s acceptable.
The first part will appear on the main page in Opinion section, please check back to see it and read people’s comments.
Kind regards,
Dmitry Sudakov
Pravda.Ru English editor”

From Pravda:

 
“1. Oh what a tangled web we weave…
It isn’t hard to imagine the gnawing anxiety that AKA OBAMA lives with, day in and day out. Much has been written about AKA OBAMA’s behavior that reminds mental health experts and others of NPD (Narcissistic Personality Disorder.) A frequent manifestation of such a disorder is The Narcissist, as Liar and Con-man.
This disorder is frequently misunderstood as “self-love.” A more accurate understanding is love of a reflection of one’s self. Abused, abandoned and neglected children will compensate for damaged egos by creating an ideal reflection of themselves that they then embellish and vigorously defend. A person with NPD is quite capable of a mind twisting position like, “I have nothing to hide, but I am hiding things anyway.” AKA OBAMA certainly fits the model of having such a childhood. While I am not in the position to deliver an official In Absentia diagnosis of a full strength NPD case, many of the indicators are present.

If AKA OBAMA were not in a position of public trust, most of us would probably overlook such deception and secrecy. For those of us who care about our Constitution and the rule of law, the issue becomes clear in this article that appeared in on-line Pravda by international columnist Mark S. McGrew, The Mysterious Shadow: Code Name Obama. Most Americans do not want their president to be secretive about his past. However, if one is living a lie to preserve the ego compensating, idealized reflection of self, one will go to great lengths to hide things that most would routinely reveal.

 
For the person who has NPD tendencies, the lies used to create the reflection become so numerous that eventually the man in the mirror cracks, and so does the real human being hiding behind the reflection.

A useful tool in evaluating things that are not known with certainty is Occam’s razor. When multiple competing hypotheses are equal in other respects, the principle recommends selecting the hypothesis that introduces the fewest assumptions and postulates the fewest entities. It is in this sense that Occam’s razor is usually understood. I condense this to the simple question: what is most likely? In our discussion of the documents which AKA has hidden, most of this article is an examination of which explanation is most likely.

For example, which is most likely;
(a) AKA OBAMA is hiding documents that are innocuous?
(b) AKA OBAMA is hiding documents that are damaging?

What we know with certainty is that AKA OBAMA is not practicing the virtue of full disclosure. ” The biggest question, and the biggest reason for asking more questions, is the fact Obama has enlisted law firms across the nation to battle every attempt to access, among other documents, his birth, schooling, immigration or passport records.” New Jersey attorney Mario Apuzzo

There are so many potential sources that can end AKA OBAMA’s Presidency that it is impossible to keep them all quiet. It’s just a matter of time. As columnist Davvy Kidd says, IMPOSTOR PRESIDENT OBAMA: VICTORY WILL BE SHORT LIVED. First, let’s think of all the lawyers and support staff involved in keeping the birth certificate issue quiet. Isn’t it likely that some of them know what they are hiding? Isn’t it likely that several people at the Hawaiian Department of Public Health know what is, or is not, on the original birth certificate that AKA OBAMA refuses to release? Did you know that there is a one million dollar reward offered for AKA OBAMA’s Hawaiian birth certificate?

2. Please get this straight:

Hawaiian officials have not validated AKA OBAMA’s place of birth. What they have said is that they “have the original document” on file. They haven’t offered a clue as to what information is in that document nor have they said what kind of birth certificate is on file; a conventional birth certificate issued by a hospital with a doctor’s signature or the kind of birth certificate issued by Hawaii on the basis of an affidavit? The Hawaiian officials are not part of a cover-up. They can not legally validate what is on that document without a court order or permission from “our” Chicago con-man. Recently a Hawaiian government official stepped over the legal line and overtly stated that AKA Obama’s “vital records” showed that he was born in Hawaii. It is entirely possible for the “vital records” of Hawaii to show than a person was born in Hawaii when in fact that person could have been born elsewhere.”

Read more:

http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/feedback/16-09-2010/114949-obama_fans_OMG-1/

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

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

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

From BirtherReport.com September 15, 2010.

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

Read more:

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

Here is the wording they are referring to:

Democratic Party of Hawaii

2008 Official certification of nomination

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

“Six degrees of separation.

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

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

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

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

Wells

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

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

From Alan Keyes September 4, 2010.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more:

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

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

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

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

 

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

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

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

Glenn Beck, call me.

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

Lakin court martial, Commander in Chief, Chain of command

“I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and
defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies,
foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to
the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental
reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully
discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter.
So help me God.”…US Military officer’s oath of office
Officers in the service of the United States are
bound by this oath to disobey any order that
violates the Constitution of the United States.

From Citizen Wells August 5, 2010.

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

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

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

From the US Army Study Guide.

Chain of Command List

Posted Monday, July 23, 2007

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

Read more:

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

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

Read more:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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