We now have confirmation from LTC Lakin’s counsel, Neal Puckett, that the accused will plead not guilty when his court-martial convenes next week. Mr. Puckett revealed the intended plea in an interview with Denver talk show host Peter Boyles, which can be found on YouTube here. Mr. Puckett offers some other thoughts about the Lakin case that may foreshadow the defense strategy at trial.

Thanks to commenter Ouch for the heads-up on the interview.

237 Responses to “LTC Lakin to plead not guilty, says counsel”

  1. Christopher Mathews says:

    And for those who wondered if there would be a deal in the case, the answer appears to be “no.”

  2. Dwight Sullivan says:

    Judge Mathews the Greatest, at the end of the second part of the interview, Peter Boyles sounds like he says that LTC Lakin will be on his show the day after tomorrow. Is that correct? Will LTC Lakin be doing an interview less than a week before his court-martial begins?

  3. Capt. Obvious says:

    Peter Boyles sounds like he says that LTC Lakin will be on his show the day after tomorrow.

    That sounds like a really bad idea. Wouldn’t counsel advise against this?

  4. John O'Connor says:

    I guess from the interview that this is, in effect, a slow guilty plea that will be heavy on blaming the chain of command for not pulling the highly educated Lakin aside (whose brother is a lawyer) and explaining that he’s not going to get birth certificates, etc., by petulantly refusing to deploy and inviting a court-martial.

    The one potential downside to doing this through a not guilty plea is that you have to make two arguments, one on findings and one on sentencing. And the TC gets to talk an awful lot to the panel (twice on findings and once at senntencing). If you plead guilty, the TC gets to argue once, and you get the last word. The reason why I think this might be important is that some of Lakin’s arguments have a razor-thin veneer of reasonableness to them, but can be absolutely destroyed in rebuttal argument. In that situation, I might prefer that the TC be stuck with anticipating my arguments on sentencing rather than getting to respond to my themes. But ultimately, the decision on how to plead rests solely with the client.

  5. mikeyes says:

    Is there some super-secret defense that you all are not telling us non-lawyers about such as piss poor preparation on the part of the prosecution or some legal judo with the facts? Or is LTC Lakin still having problems with reality? Or is this an attempt at jury nullification perhaps at the sentencing end of things?

    Dwight seemed to imply that a few of the charges might not pass muster in court and only one or two charges survive. In addition bringing in LTC Lakin’s heretofore invisible family may have some bearing on this at least in an attempt to influence the panel.

    And why are Puckett and company going on far right wing radio to tell the world what has happened?

    I guess we will find out next week.

  6. Christopher Mathews says:

    Dwight, Mr. Boyles says “we’ll be back in touch the day after tomorrow” and then says “and we’re gonna try and speak with Colonel Lakin.” I think there’s some wiggle room in that.

    I’m sure Mr. Boyles would love to give the accused an open mike, but were LTC Lakin my client, I would do everything in my power to make sure he missed that interview. There’s no telling what he might say to a sympathetic interviewer.

    It may be hard to imagine how he could make things worse, but that represents a failure of imagination; nothing more. There’s no situation so bad it can’t be made worse.

  7. sg says:

    It may be hard to imagine how he could make things worse, but that represents a failure of imagination; nothing more. There’s no situation so bad it can’t be made worse.

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
    I guess this is the point that all the birthers were gloating about in the beginning about how they’re going to pull something out, and get Lakin acquitted and cause the Army to depose the President, and we’re all going to be shocked and surprised.
    I’ve bought gourmet popcorn, and the beer is in the fridge.

  8. BigGuy says:

    I really question the wisdom of a members trial. If Lakin’s going to go birther, does he really want the panel of O-6’s (more or less) to be saying to themselves, “I got pulled away from my job for this?!”

  9. Christopher Mathews says:

    I really question the wisdom of a members trial. If Lakin’s going to go birther, does he really want the panel of O-6’s (more or less) to be saying to themselves, “I got pulled away from my job for this?!”

    I once prosecuted an 18-year E-6 on drug charges at a SAC base in Texas. I proved beyond a reasonable doubt that he used marijuana three times: really, I did. But he took the stand in findings and testified that he had smoked marijuana every day for seventeen years. He may have believed his 6,205 admitted uses put the three uses I proved to shame.

    It was not an effective litigation strategy.

    Desert Storm began the day before he took the stand, and I still remember the look on the B-52 crewmembers’ faces while he was testifying. It pretty eloquently said: Instead of bombing Saddam back to the Stone Age, I have to listen to this?

  10. Dwight Sullivan says:

    Big Guy, Judge Lind is known as a harsh sentencer. Since guilt is a foregone conclusion, it’s probably wise to go members. Even if it was likely a wash between members and judge alone, a members trial gives the defense oodles more opportunity for reversible error to creep into the record, so going members is the better long-term strategy. (Given the military justice system’s extremely low appellate reversal rate, it would be a bad idea to sacrifice a short-term benefit for a potential appellate issue, but where the judge would likely give as harsh or a harsher sentence than members, going members is well-advised.)

  11. sg says:

    So you’re saying that having been handed a pile of steaming manure for a defense, his best bet is to plant lots of flowers and see what blooms?

  12. Cheap Seats says:

    sg – Or throw it against the wall and see if anything sticks.

  13. Anonymous says:

    Ah, the Monkey Defense.

    That one is used even less rarely than the Chewbacca Defense.

  14. nbc says:

    Puckett appears to be torn here… But bordering on some foolish statements. What’s going on… No plea bargain was offered and now no defense remains at all?

  15. Lohengrin says:

    Is there some super-secret defense that you all are not telling us non-lawyers about such as piss poor preparation on the part of the prosecution or some legal judo with the facts? Or is LTC Lakin still having problems with reality?

    It may simply be that the prosecution has such a slam-dunk case that they have virtually no reason to offer Lakin any kind of tempting deal. It may also be that Lakin is still champing at the bit to go full birfer at trial. If so, Puckett would be obliged to advise him that this is not prudent, but it is not Puckett who decides what is in Lakin’s best interest. Puckett is obliged to cater to Lakin’s view of his own interests, not to substitute his own judgment for that of his client. Short of advancing sanctionably frivolous legal arguments, he has a fiduciary duty to act as his client wishes or, if his moral qualms are substantial enough, withdraw for cause.

    I think Puckett is trying to make the best of an awful situation, not alienate Lakin from his few remaining allies, and at the same time, avoid entering the “thicket of legal frivolity,” as Judge Land put it in his sanctions ruling against Orly.

    I don’t envy him his task. I do envy him his compensation for the extra hazardous duty pay that I hope he insisted upon receiving.

  16. Ama Goste says:

    One other likely explanation for the “not guilty” plea is that Lakin can’t make it through a Care inquiry. Admitting to violating an order which he had a duty to obey might be a tough one for him.

  17. BigGuy says:

    Assuming he goes with a NG plea and members, do we expect him to testify?

  18. Birthin' for a Livin' says:

    You folks greatly underestimate the power of the Truth. I suggest you follow the events of the coming weeks closely. You will see that things aren’t always what they seem.

  19. Anonymous says:

    The power of Truth can never beat the power of Cheese.

  20. Phil Stackhouse says:

    I would just like to go back to the point wherein LtCol Lakin thought “Hey, I have a good idea…” and find out what was really going on that started him down this path. It’s probably posted somewhere, but I can only read so much of this at a time. (…power of the Cheese, classic!)

  21. Nbc says:

    Ha… That’s promissory note again…
    I have a bridge for you…

  22. Capt. Obvious says:

    The power of Truth can never beat the power of Cheese.

    Nor the Power of Tyrone.

  23. Just wondering... says:

    That one is used even less rarely than the Chewbacca Defense.

    I may have a box of Twinkies around here somewhere.

    In all seriousness, this may be a client control issue, as in “I don’t care, there’s no way I’m pleading guilty.” Many a defense counsel have been there before. And “truth” has nothing to do with it.

  24. Greg says:

    A question about the technical defense to MM. Gonzalez, at least, was about a flaw in the allocution (care inquiry, right?). Is this defense something that comes up often in defending against MM. It seems like the burden on the prosecution, a verbal “butt in the seat” order, is so light that it’s not something you charge if you don’t have that element covered.

  25. Christopher Mathews says:

    Greg, Colonel Sullivan’s musings on possible defenses to the charges in United States v. Lakin were very much on point.

    I think he and I part company slightly over whether the government took the Gonzales/Kapple issue into account; I may tend to be slightly more optimistic when it comes to the government’s competence in such things. That might just be a difference in upbringing: as a Marine trained in the arts of aggressive maneuver and combined-arms operations, and with a long background in defense community, our esteemed leader embodies the “can-do” attitude of defense counsel who think they can whip the prosecution with one arm tied behind their back. As someone who grew up on the prosecution side of the house, I too believe I can win any case with one arm tied behind Colonel Sullivan’s back.

    In any event, as you note, it’s not much of an effort to order a guy not to deviate from his itinerary, and inasmuch as LTC Lakin was signalling his intent not to obey orders to pretty much the entire world, an “I expect you on that flight tomorrow morning” order was very likely given. But missing movement charges are not the most common and it’s possible the government just whiffed the issue.

    We’ll find out in a week or so.

  26. The Magic M says:

    > You will see that things aren’t always what they seem.

    Ah, the Perry Mason moment. I’ve waited for it in “SCO vs. Novell” and I’m positive I won’t see it in “US vs. Lakin” either.

    At best we’ll be getting a Popcorn Moment if Lakin decides he’s lost anyway and uses his last word for the Big Birfer Address, aka his “I have a dream” speech.

  27. Greg says:

    What is the opposite of “jury nullification”?

    It seems to me likely that the members of Lakin’s panel will be falling over themselves in their rush to get themselves as far away from Lakin’s crackpot theories as possible. As others on this site have already observed: any mitigating defense that calls into question the members’ own patriotism and honor – is unlikely to be well-received.

  28. SueDB says:

    CM sez:

    There’s no situation so bad it can’t be made worse.

    I couldn’t agree more…

  29. mikeyes says:

    I just listened to the entire interview.

    Atty Puckett all but concedes a guilty verdict and said that the sentencing portion will be crucial. He predicted a year in confinement and dismissal. He was not sure what will happen to LTC Lakin’s medical licenses. (I predict he will retain at least one since LTC Lakin’s actions probably don’t fit the CO or MD list of bad things to do and are not actually felonies.)

    On the other hand, Peter Boyles predicted a huge popular uprising to remove LTC Lakin from being a “political prisoner” that will be the central force in confining President Obama to one term. I withhold judgment on that one. :grin:

    I take back my previous question about supersecret tactics.

  30. Rob M says:

    I notice how Puckett makes a thinly veiled stab at Lakin’s “supporters” where he says that if you really support him, you should help him and his family out after the court gets done stripping him of his entire livelihood, which he pointlessly sacrificed on the altar of birtherism.

  31. sg says:

    What’s the trial date, again?

  32. Capt. Obvious says:

    This morning, Denver radio talk-show host Peter Boyles featured retired General Paul Vallely, United States Army. Vallely candidly spoke his thoughts on jihad, our open border problem, the court martial of LTC Terry Lakin and the “unresolved issue” of Barack Obama’s Constitutional eligibility to hold office.

    Below is the link to Boyles’ show. Click on the Dec 7, 2010 7:00am link on the left to hear Vallely’s interview.

    http://www.khow.com/pages/boyles.html

    Boyles brings up A.G. Eric Holder putting terrorists on trial:

    Retired General Paul Vallely: “Well, he should be locked up. He should be, put handcuffs on him and also Obama, and taken away. I think they’re conducting treason, myself…”

  33. Capt. Obvious says:

    P.S. Thanks to Black Lion on obamaconspiracy.org for the heads up on the Vallely interview.

  34. publius says:

    Client on TV in the middle of (or on the dawn of) trial? It’s the Puckett special. See US v Wuterich.

  35. Christopher Mathews says:

    What’s the trial date, again?

    The trial is currently scheduled for December 14-15.

  36. sg says:

    Thank you, Sir. I have VA stuff to do on the 14th, so I’ll have to catch the after hours recap.

  37. Dew_Process says:

    CPT Huet-Vaughn kept her medical license after a prolonged administrative process.

    Wise or not, it is the client’s absolute right to (1) decide what pleas to enter; (2) chose the forum (members or not here); and (3) whether or not to testify. If there’s no deal (or from the government’s perspective, any incentive to deal), # 3 is Mr. Puckett’s nightmare.

  38. Charles Gittins says:

    I love Paul Vallely, but since his son was killed in combat, he has not been the same. He was once a voice of conservative reason. Now . . . not so much. Very sad. I wish only the best for him and his family. Unfortunately, he is no longer a voice of reason, conservative or otherwise.

  39. mikeyes says:

    CAPT Huet-Vaughn kept her license but was censured and fined ($5000) by the KS Board of Healing Arts. There was a lot of discussion about taking her license away, but in the end, because she served a very poor section of Kansas City and partly because physician members of her unit pointed this out, she was able to continue to practice.

    One of the ironic parts of her story was that the Reserve unit she was with had too many family physicians and had she asked politely she probably could have ended up TDY in Ft. Leavenworth or Ft. Riley as a doc for the duration. Instead she made the decision to travel around the country with her lawyer telling sympathetic audiences that she was being railroaded by a fascist government.

    She had been in the Reserve and Guard units for 11 years before she decided to leave and she let her service pay for a lot of her schooling. The parallels between her and LTC Lakin are strong.

  40. Anonymous says:

    I love Paul Vallely, but since his son was killed in combat, he has not been the same.He was once a voice of conservative reason.Now . . . not so much.Very sad.I wish only the best for him and his family.Unfortunately, he is no longer a voice of reason, conservative or otherwise.

    There’s a conservative voice of reason?

    I kid, I kid.

    Sorta.

  41. Rickey says:

    The trial is currently scheduled for December 14-15.

    Over on Doc Conspiracy’s blog, nutjob birther Christopher Strunk has announced that he plans to attend the court-martial.

  42. sg says:

    Has he said how he intends to get access to the post for the CM? Is he an ID card holder or a member of the press?

  43. Cheap Seats says:

    sg – Pesky thing that right to a public trial. Looks like the Command will have to figure out how to allow him access. Otherwise, sounds like a good issue for the Defense to raise.

  44. sg says:

    Well, CS, they could just as easily issue him a limited day pass at the gate.
    I’m all for the right to a public trial, but we don’t hold courts-martial in federal court houses downtown. We hold them on bases and posts which are usually access controlled. I’m just wondering if Mr. Strunk has worked out for himself how he’s going to do that.

  45. SueDB says:

    Well, CS, they could just as easily issue him a limited day pass at the gate.
    I’m all for the right to a public trial, but we don’t hold courts-martial in federal court houses downtown.We hold them on bases and posts which are usually access controlled.I’m just wondering if Mr. Strunk has worked out for himself how he’s going to do that.

    Does he have any record of “UnAmerican” activities such as weapons charges or any specific actions against the military or has called for violence against the military???

    I don’t know his record, I would suppose those items would make the govt hesitate about letting him on.

    So – how does his right to know/attend clash with the Commander’s duty to keep a secure, safe, and orderly post/base?

  46. sg says:

    That’s what I’m asking, Sue. I mean, if the guy doesn’t have a felony in his past, and he goes to the visitor center with the registration, proof of insurance, and valid ID, and says “I’m here to attend this court-martial” do they escort him to the site, do they give him a pass which only allows parking at the site and drive routes to and from, do they hand him a post map and say “have a nice day” or do they demand some kind of press credential or what?
    I’ve never tried to get on a post without an ID so I don’t know how this works.

  47. BigGuy says:

    Hey, it’s like the Seinfeld finale! Everyone who was in an earlier episode will be there.

  48. Black Lion says:

    You’re welcome. I will have to say that Valley does seem to be a bit unhinged and despises Obama in his interview…

    P.S. Thanks to Black Lion on obamaconspiracy.org for the heads up on the Vallely interview.

  49. Paul says:

    Add another birther

    http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/blog/big_league_stew/post/Answer-Man-Luke-Scott-talks-Nugent-hunting-and?urn=mlb-292970

  50. Brian le chien says:

    Well, I will try to be there. I will of course be in disguise – the name tag on my uniform will not say “Le Chien.”

  51. Randy says:

    Lakin has many supporters lying in wait.
    Three scenarios:
    Lakin convicted: Bad for Obama
    Lakin acquitted: Bad for Obama
    Lakin gets a deal with a gag order: Good for Obama

  52. sg says:

    How would any trial outcome be bad for the President? He has no vested interest one way or the other in Lakin’s trial except that justice be done and good order and discipline in the armed forces be upheld.

  53. Randy says:

    How would any trial outcome be bad for the President?

    Come now, you can answer that one yourself.
    Bad Press.
    Very bad, out-of-control, Pandora’s Box is open press.
    Go get the “beer and popcorn” press.

  54. sg says:

    Well, since NOBODY outside of the us here and the birfer “community” cares enough to even know about it, I don’t see bad press coming out of it. And perhaps you hadn’t noticed, but all the actual professional military justice lawyers that have spoken on this case have all said that conviction is all but inevitable.
    If I were a birfer, I’d go ahead and eat my popcorn now. It will be stale long before they ever have anything to celebrate.

  55. Capt. Obvious says:

    Add another birtherhttp://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/blog/big_league_stew/post/Answer-Man-Luke-Scott-talks-Nugent-hunting-and?urn=mlb-292970

    Statement from Greg Bader, Orioles Director of Communications:
    “Luke Scott’s comments do not reflect the opinion of the Baltimore Orioles organization. The fact is that Barack Obama is our President, duly elected by the people of the United States. End of story.”

  56. Greg says:

    Go get the “beer and popcorn” press.

    We’ve got our popcorn, alright. I think, though, that we prefer to drink a vintage of birfer tears.

    At least when Dick Morris said, every week from 2004-2008, that Bill and Hillary were “about” to be indicted, there was a hint of possibility there.

    The proof is, as they say, in the pudding, and your pudding tastes of a record of 72 losses and ZERO wins. You’d think you’d get tired of sucking!

  57. BigGuy says:

    Hey Randy —

    For months the Lakinistas have been telling us that the case was going to lead to a devastating surprise conclusion, but they would tell us what it was.

    But now you’ve blown it, you’ve spilled the beans! The big surprise is going to be

    BAD PRESS!

  58. Randy says:

    Three subsequent posts since my last and all from authors that seem very agitated.

    The truth will come out.
    I can wait.
    In the mean time I’ll watch you squirm.
    And, I can get more popcorn….

  59. Capt. Obvious says:

    Lakin has many supporters lying in wait.

    Hiding and giggling inside of a giant Trojan rabbit anxiously waiting for nightfall?

    When that fails, have you got a giant, wooden badger ready?

  60. Capt. Obvious says:

    In the mean time I’ll watch you squirm.

    Is that you crouching in the bushes again, pervert?

  61. FullBird31 says:

    Gentlemen, we must NOT allow this highly decorated Vet to go down when our POS in chief has NOT proven himself worthy in an actual court of law.

    I call on all you who care for obama to urge him to prove himself so that there are no more questions from the American public and that a true American hero does not go to jail. Obama’s current status is dividing the country and the Democrat party.

    Other than the internet COLB (HOAX) we have not seen obama’s original BC. Would that stand in a court of law? HELL NO! Besides obama’s father was a British subject. We need to see both of the “birther” issues settled by a court of law and this should be the one next week!

  62. sg says:

    Where in the constitution is there a requirement for the President or any person elected to the Presidency to prove his eligibility for office in a court? This should be interesting.
    In your second paragraph, I don’t buy for a minute that you want the President to prove anything. You certainly don’t want the “democrat” party to be united.
    Obama’s father could be a subject of the King of Sweden and it wouldn’t matter. The United States of America does not now, nor have we ever taken instruction from other countries as to who is eligible for US citizenship. Curious, that you wish the US to give up our sovereignty that way. Not very patriotic of you. Why do you hate America?

  63. FullBird31 says:

    sg, nice try trying to turn this around but a commie like you would be much more comfy in Korea, North that is.

    I hate to have to break this down to you kid, as I assumed you were intelligent but I must be wrong!

    Constitution-The Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, states, “No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President.” Obama should have been “vetted” by Congress and the Secretary’s of each State. This was not done. Because it was not done it is up to the courts to right this wrong.

    In my second paragraph, yes I want him to prove himself as I had to prove I was a citizen when I entered the service 41 years ago yesterday!

    I used to be a Democrat but when they took a hard left and got in bed with the communists and socialists they left me as that has what we have been fighting against for years!

    While I have an english major, your rational in the last two sentences baffles me as nowhere did I recommend taking instructions from other countries. Must have been the acid you did in the 60’s!

    As far as hating America, you must but I don’t and I have 41 years in uniform to prove it!

    I find it hard to believe in a government that is not making its president go by the same rules that I had to follow! Admit it, he is a fraud and for fools like you who blindly follow him I ask does TREASON mean anything to you?

    ps-will look form your post card from that great utopia-N. Korea!

  64. Christopher Mathews says:

    I ask does TREASON mean anything to you?

    It suggests to me that your caps lock key has an intermittent sticking problem.

  65. FullBird31 says:

    Obama supposedly is a constitutional scholar. This is most likely why he has spent a large sum of money and now DOJ lawyers (on our dime) to argue all of these cases in court and seek to have them dimissed on “standing” issues. Obama and even you sg know that if any of these cases goes to the discovery phase he is toast. I also ask why, when these cases go in front of a judge the DOJ lawyers do not show up with a Birth Certificate but they argue other issues? Why is that?

    I know when one of my soldiers brought in a certificate or a diploma I asked to see the original. We have NOT seen this with obama. When I signed my children up for baseball I had to show the BC, hell even my dogs have papers! OBAMA DOES NOT!

    So until obama or a rep from him goes into a courtroom with a valid long form BC we will be having this debate but for now he has NOT proven himself to me and I doubt a jury would believe this snake oil salesman!

  66. sg says:

    Well, I wasn’t alive during the sixties. So we’ll dispense with that nonsense right there. As for your assertion of 41 years in uniform, you seem to have never dealt with or read the UCMJ in that time. One would think that somebody with that amount of experience would understand how the military works, especially somebody whose username implies that he’s an O-6. I suppose that we forget things when we get old, though. The alternative is that you’re full of crap.

  67. Capt. Obvious says:

    “While I have an english major, your rational in the last two sentences baffles me . . .”

    Well, there’s the problem. Unless the birther meant english as in the spin in billiards, this school was obviously a front masterminded by foreign spies who didn’t speak English.

    That must have been their rationale! :-D

    Birthers whine loudly that British law trumps U.S. law and sovereignty with regards to citizenship and jurisdiction and then have absolutely no clue what they are implying.

    Baffling!

    “This is most likely why he has spent a large sum of money and now DOJ lawyers (on our dime) to argue all of these cases in court and seek to have them dimissed on “standing” issues.”

    How many birther myths is this misguided fool going to spout? All of them?

    Don’t let us down! There’s travel to Pakistan in 1981 and a few more excellent tidbits of birther ignorance!

    P.S. Lakin is most likely headed to Ft. Leavenworth soon from his own foolhardy actions alone.

  68. FullBird31 says:

    Capt Obvious, I could care less if he went to Pakistan as travel there WAS legal when he went. I am not dealing with “birther myths”. I’m dealing with the facts like a COLB of which three different ones exist. I ask you, which one is the right one???? If you were on a jury would you take a picture of a (most likely hoaxed) COLB. Hell NOOOOO! (If your smart and you seem to be)!

    I also believe those remarks by the frauds in Hawaii were coaxed and the State was probably threatned with a cutoff of federal aid and if you don’t believe Obama would do that, see the Wikileaks files on how they bought off foreign countries on the gloabal warming scam.

    I ask you how much has he paid the lawyers to seal all of his past records, as he has a very small paper trail! Now the DOJ lawyers are representing him! How much is that costing me and prove me wrong here!

    I say, Cut the BS – President Obama and “MAN UP” to the American people like myself and all of you who pay your salary and show us your long form BC!

    ps-I don’t doubt that LTC Lakin is in trouble but it is up to upstanding people here to defend him, not the Hoaxster that has yet to prove to us that he is legitimate! I also say that if you believe in his photoshopped COLB, call me as I have a bridge to sell you, CHEAP!

    If Obama has nothing to hide then he should cut out the DOJ lawyers and personally provide his BC at the next court case!

  69. FullBird31 says:

    This I found on COL Sullivan, if this is true I have NO respect of tolerance for this type of behavior!

    Sullivan was also the chief defense counsel for the Gitmo Jihadists. Yes, he was the chief defender of the 7th Century Throwbacks that would cut off his head quicker than he can publish a hit-piece on LTC Lakin. I find it a bit hypocritical that Col. Sullivan spent a lot time crying about how the Jihadists were not getting fair trials under the military tribunals and now spends some of his time championing the fact that LTC Lakin himself is not getting a fair trial in his court-martial. Nevermind that under U.S.C. Rule 46, a defendant put on court-martial has the right to call any and all witnesses and obtain any evidence in his defense.

    According to the USA Today, this is the ilk that Col. Sullivan was sworn to defend; “In a one-year span, Guantanamo Bay detainees made 726 threats, engaged in 227 physical assaults and there were 422 incidents of detainees throwing bodily fluids at guards, said Rear Adm. Harry Harris Jr., commander of the Joint Task Force-Guantanamo.”

    I’m guessing if LTC Lakin was a sodomizing, poop throwing, God-hating Jihadist, Col. Sullivan would be singing a different tune!? Instead he is going after a person who is trying to live up to his oath to defend the Constitution.

    Bonus; The audio below is Col. Sullivan speaking with Amnesty International, praising them and talking about the Jihadists not getting fair trials.

    If this is true COL Sullivan, shame on you!

  70. Anonymous says:

    Couple o’ questions FullBird.

    Why is “vetted” in quotes? Is it an ironic vetting that is required?

    You spent 41 years in uniform? That seems…improbable.

    Oh, and it’s the Democratic Party, as someone who claims to have been a member would think you would know that. Maybe though you are part of the Republic Party now, I dunno.

    Congrats On That english Degree.

  71. FullBird31 says:

    sg, I’m old yes, but NOT full of crap, prove me wrong with facts rather than belittle and disrespect and old timer like me!

  72. Greg says:

    This is most likely why he has spent a large sum of money

    Hey, Freebird, do you mind if I sue you? Don’t worry, it will be for something entirely frivolous, well, slightly less than frivolous so that I won’t be sanctioned. I’m sure you won’t mind if it goes to discovery, right?

    According to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP) I’m allowed to ask you 25 “interrogatories.” These will be paragraph long questions designed, specifically, to trick you into admitting parts of my case. They’ll have multiple parts, but be worded in such a way as to not have sub-parts, so they’ll ask 150 different things, but I’ll only have to number them 25.

    At this point, you may want to go to court to convince them that since the first five questions I asked each had 5 distinct sub-parts, that should count as my 25 questions. We can do that, but it’ll cost you.

    I’m also going to ask for admissions. These will be another 50 or 60 questions asked in such a way as to trick you. If you don’t answer these questions within 30 days, we’ll just assume you admitted them all.

    Now, the FRCP allow me to ask you for any document which might be relevant to the case. If I can describe the document with “particularity” and I can make it sound relevant (and relevant here means anything that might have the potential to prove or disprove my case) I can force you to make a copy of that document.

    I’m also going to want you to make sure that each document is produced to me in situ – meaning I want the file-folder organization preserved.

    Oh, and do you mind putting a little number on the right-hand corner, so we all know what document we’re talking about?

    And, I’ll want electronic documents, as well. Please produce those in both printed copies and in native electronic format.

    As an example, here’s what Berg wanted:

    On September 15, 2008, plaintiff Berg served on Senator Obama’s office a request for production of seventeen different categories of documents, including copies of all of the Senator’s college and law school applications, requests for financial aid, college and law school papers, and “a copy of your entire presidential file pertaining to being vetted.”

    “Entire presidential file pertaining to being vetted?” Yeah, that’s where you get a mountain of documents.

    You, Freebird, won’t mind if I ask you to produce, say, every document that could, in any way, be related to any financial transaction you’ve had in the past 15 years, right?

    Now, have a team of lawyers take a look through each document to make sure that no privileged document is produced, and then make a log of all documents they withhold. And, we’ll fight about how broadly to read my document requests, because I guarantee you’re going to read them more narrowly than I intended, so I’m going to have to file a motion to compel (and you’ll file a motion for protective order).

    Once that’s done, I get, by right, 10 depositions, and can take as many more as I can convince the judge I need. You don’t mind spending a day with me as I ask you the same question 15 different ways, all in an attempt to get you to admit the facts I want, right? And your wife? And your children? Your business partners?

    Now, didn’t all that sound like absolute nirvana? And downright cheap, right? Birthers have filed 72 frivolous lawsuits against Obama. Multiply the above nirvana by 72.

    Now, you can skip all that by getting my nearly-completely-frivolous lawsuit dismissed. I don’t even have standing to sue you, since I’m actually suing about something you did to your neighbor, not me!

    Earlier this year, a lawsuit against Clinton was dismissed – filegate. It had gone through more than a decade of discovery. The judge finally decided that the plaintiffs never did get around to proving they had anything remotely like a case.

    In what effed-up universe is it less expensive and more expedient to go through discovery than to get an early dismissal?

  73. Greg says:

    Sullivan was also the chief defense counsel for the Gitmo Jihadists.

    Hi. I’d like to welcome you to America. This is clearly your first time here. You might want to familiarize yourself with our customs. We have a justice system that prides itself on being the fairest in the world. Some backwards countries will simply read out the charges, put up a token defense and then execute the accused. We call those “kangaroo courts.” Here in America, we offer the accused counsel. We believe that in order to punish someone, the prosecution must prove guilt beyond a reasonable defense. The defendant is entitled to put the prosecution’s case to a vigorous test.

    Our country has always believed in providing a fair system of justice, even to those who are hated. John Adams, one of the Founders of our Great Nation and widely acknowledged as a leading champion of independence defended the soldiers accused of murder in the Boston Massacre. He succeeded in getting 6 of the 8 acquitted, and 2 were convicted of less serious crimes than they were charged with.

  74. BigGuy says:

    FB31 — “…a (most likely hoaxed) COLB … I also believe those remarks by the frauds in Hawaii were coaxed and the State was probably threatned with a cutoff of federal aid and if you don’t believe Obama would do that…”
    __

    The online COLB was released several months before the election. So you think these behind-the-scenes machinations took place under the presidency of George W. Bush and the governorship of Linda Lingle, who spent much of the campaign on the trail with John McCain?

    It’s hard to imagine that not a single current or former official of either the Hawaii Attorney General’s Office or the Hawaii Department of Health has brought the fraud to anyone’s attention, isn’t it? To this day? Gotta tell you, hard to believe.

  75. sg says:

    @Halfchick31,
    Being old doesn’t make you worthy of respect. It makes you old.
    In our system, we give the accused counsel. We even go so far as to assign that job to people whether they particularly want to or not. We even judge their professionalism in doing that job to the best of their ability. But enough of that, as Col Sullivan is more than adequate to defend himself from the likes of you should he feel the need to do so. I strongly suspect that I could marshal all the facts available at my command for days on end, and you wouldn’t be convinced under any circumstance. I rather think that you, like every birther that has come here before you, will simply move the goalposts and claim that you haven’t been convinced yet.

  76. gorefan says:

    I ask you how much has he paid the lawyers to seal all of his past records, as he has a very small paper trail! Now the DOJ lawyers are representing him! How much is that costing me and prove me wrong here!

    You do understand that President Obama’s paper trail is exactly the same size as every other President’s or Presidential candidates paper trail. Or can you show us any other President’s birth certificates, school transcripts, passports, etc.

  77. yguy says:

    In what effed-up universe is it less expensive and more expedient to go through discovery than to get an early dismissal?

    There’s another alternative. Obama could designate, say, a dozen reporters as his agents under HRS §338-18(b)(7), who could inspect the vault copy and any other documents Obama is entitled to access, photograph it, and/or get certified copies. If it all corroborated his claim of Hawaiian birth, that would take 90% of the steam out of the birther movement.

  78. Joey says:

    Obama supposedly is a constitutional scholar. This is most likely why he has spent a large sum of money and now DOJ lawyers (on our dime) to argue all of these cases in court and seek to have them dimissed on “standing” issues. Obama and even you sg know that if any of these cases goes to the discovery phase he is toast. I also ask why, when these cases go in front of a judge the DOJ lawyers do not show up with a Birth Certificate but they argue other issues? Why is that?I know when one of my soldiers brought in a certificate or a diploma I asked to see the original. We have NOT seen this with obama. When I signed my children up for baseball I had to show the BC, hell even my dogs have papers! OBAMA DOES NOT!So until obama or a rep from him goes into a courtroom with a valid long form BC we will be having this debate but for now he has NOT proven himself to me and I doubt a jury would believe this snake oil salesman!

    When Senator McCain and the Republican National Committee were sued in New Hampshire on the grounds that McCain’s birth in the Panama Canal Zone made him ineligible to be a natural born citizen, Senator McCain and the Republican National Committee argued that the lawsuit should be dismissed for lack of standing, and it was dismissed on those grounds.

  79. Joey says:

    I forgot to add a link to the lawsuit that challenged John McCain’s natural born citizen status that was dismissed for lack of standing as argued by McCain’s lawyers and the Republican Party’s lawyers.
    http://www.fredhollander.com/McCain%20Complaint.pdf

  80. BigGuy says:

    @yguy — “…that would take 90% of the steam out of the birther movement.”
    __

    90%? Oh, are you empowered to negotiate for the movement?

  81. Capt. Obvious says:

    There’s another alternative. Obama could designate, say, a dozen reporters as his agents under HRS §338-18(b)(7), who could inspect the vault copy and any other documents Obama is entitled to access, photograph it, and/or get certified copies. If it all corroborated his claim of Hawaiian birth, that would take 90% of the steam out of the birther movement.

    Designate? You’re a lonely, little fool and only mildly amusing.

    Steam? Please stop masturbating on these threads, y-idiot.

    You are now and have always been full of shit. Every time you get spanked you run like a coward.

    Please continue to disregard actual U.S. law and further prove your bat crap insanity, idiot birther.

  82. Capt. Obvious says:

    So you think these behind-the-scenes machinations took place under the presidency of George W. Bush and the governorship of Linda Lingle, who spent much of the campaign on the trail with John McCain?

    I’ve asked birthers about this many, many times. It implies that United States Attorney General Michael Mukasey is complicit in the cover up and guilty of fraud. Birthers go dark and give the clueless head tilt, Whaaa?

    Birthers are scum.

  83. Joey says:

    There’s another alternative. Obama could designate, say, a dozen reporters as his agents under HRS §338-18(b)(7), who could inspect the vault copy and any other documents Obama is entitled to access, photograph it, and/or get certified copies. If it all corroborated his claim of Hawaiian birth, that would take 90% of the steam out of the birther movement.

    An even better alternative is to get any prosecuting attorney in the nation (a district attorney, a state Attorney General, a US Attorney or US Special Counsel Peter Fitzgerald) to go to their favorite judge and get a subpoena for Obama’s birth certificate as a part of a Grand Jury investigation into election fraud.
    Under Hawai’i Revised Statutes 338-18(b)(9) a confidential birth record can be released without the permission of the person named on the record to a person “whose right to inspect or obtain a certified copy of the record is established by an order of a court of competent jurisdiction.”
    At any point in time from February, 2007 when Obama announced his candidacy until today, a Grand Jury could have subpoenaed documents and compelled witnesses to testify under oath. There are no issues of standing to get in the way of a Grand Jury investigation.

  84. Capt. Obvious says:

    I’ve asked birthers about this many, many times. It implies that United States Attorney General Michael Mukasey is complicit in the cover up and guilty of fraud. Birthers go dark and give the clueless head tilt, Whaaa?Birthers are scum.

    Or conspiracy? IANAL.

  85. Greg says:

    There’s another alternative. Obama could designate, say, a dozen reporters as his agents under HRS §338-18(b)(7), who could inspect the vault copy…

    The problem with this plan is that there is no “vault copy” of anyone’s Hawaiian birth certificate – including Obama’s. The birth record of every individual born in Hawaii is now maintained in a computer database – so I suppose someone could hunt down the hard drive holding Obama’s birth record and verify that it exists on the disk – yet Obama’s (already public) Certificate of Live Birth already proves that such a record exists. So what exactly would be gained by such an exercise?

    Now, there may be an archived birth document for Obama in the Hawaiian State Archives – but such a document would no longer be a birth certificate for any legal purpose. Furthermore, many Hawaiians (those born in the last decade or so) have no archival record of their birth certificate – so are these individuals forever barred from being elected President?

    According to your logic, the answer would have to be yes.

  86. Arthur says:

    Hi. I’d like to welcome you to America. This is clearly your first time here. You might want to familiarize yourself with our customs. We have a justice system that prides itself on being the fairest in the world. Some backwards countries will simply read out the charges, put up a token defense and then execute the accused. We call those “kangaroo courts.” Here in America, we offer the accused counsel. We believe that in order to punish someone, the prosecution must prove guilt beyond a reasonable defense. The defendant is entitled to put the prosecution’s case to a vigorous test.
    Our country has always believed in providing a fair system of justice, even to those who are hated. John Adams, one of the Founders of our Great Nation and widely acknowledged as a leading champion of independence defended the soldiers accused of murder in the Boston Massacre. He succeeded in getting 6 of the 8 acquitted, and 2 were convicted of less serious crimes than they were charged with.

    Thank you, Greg. I appreciate your defense of the American justice system.

    And to you, FullBird31, it’s a pity that when you earned your english (sic) degree, you didn’t take American Civics 101.

    You blithering crank, “fall to thy prayers;/How ill white hairs become a fool and jester!” (As an English major, you may know the reference.) I’d like to see evidence that you’ve even been on a college campus, much less earned a legitimate degree from one. And as for your military record, you apparently think that watching re-runs of “Rat Patrol,” “Combat,” and “McHale’s Navy” qualify as actual experience. Go spew you unpatriotic, ill informed garbage elsewhere.

  87. Greg says:

    There’s another alternative. Obama could designate, say, a dozen reporters as his agents under HRS §338-18(b)(7), who could inspect the vault copy and any other documents Obama is entitled to access, photograph it, and/or get certified copies. If it all corroborated his claim of Hawaiian birth, that would take 90% of the steam out of the birther movement.

    That’s a red herring. It might satisfy the birther movement, but you’ve still got a birther lawsuit pending.

    Let’s go back to Berg’s suit. It asked for Obama’s birth certificate, sure, but it also asked for:

    all of the Senator’s college and law school applications, requests for financial aid, college and law school papers, and “a copy of your entire presidential file pertaining to being vetted.”

    Plus, being one of the first suits filed, Berg hadn’t gotten to some of the issues the birthers have metastasized into – 2-citizen parent theory, fraudulent SSNs, etc.

    So, even if you release the birth certificate in whatever form you want, you’ve got to either: 1) move to dismiss the lawsuit; or, 2) go through discovery.

    Can you even point to a single lawsuit that asked only about Obama’s birthplace?

    Even if one of Obama’s attorneys thought it was a good idea to release the birth certificate, he/she would not allow a frivolous lawsuit to proceed unchallenged. Setting aside the experiences of the last Democratic president and lawsuits (Paula Jones, Filegate) any attorney who hasn’t been disbarred knows that the most expensive part of any case is discovery.

    Look at the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, rules 26-37, and all the methods of discovery allowed (depositions, interrogatories, requests for admissions, document requests), imagine a court battle with briefs for each of those methods (motion for protective order, motion to compel, motion for sanctions for failure to produce, etc.), imagine employing lawyers to do a privilege check of every document you produce, then remember that with the advent of electronic media and ever-increasing hard-drive sizes, the volume of producible documents has grown exponentially.

  88. mikeyes says:

    FullBird31 says:
    December 8, 2010 at 10:32 pm (Quote) sg, I’m old yes, but NOT full of crap, prove me wrong with facts rather than belittle and disrespect and old timer like me!

    As the LTC Lakin Court martial grows closer, the “noise” part of the signal to noise ratio seems to grow.

    I’m especially fascinated by those who claim or imply that they have been senior officer or NCOs but continue to claim that LTC Lakin has a case under UCMJ. The facts are quite different from what they state and all one has to do is look no farther than the Constitution and the laws that govern the military.

    As Atty Puckett said in his Peter Boyles interview, Article I courts are not there for universal justice, they are there to maintain good order and discipline in the armed forces. A court martial is the last place to air political grievances and there is plenty of law to back that up.

    I suspect that a lot of the new commentors are simply trolling or blindly venting. The old timers here such as yguy have presented their cases and their bonefides and are an accepted (if not honored) part of the discussion here. I don’t expect yguy (I’m not picking on you yguy, just using you as an example) to call COL Sullivan a traitor and other scurrilous names and expect a military background (or faked credentials which this probably is) to protect him or her. I especially find it ironic that these persons call members of this blog, most of whom are either active or retired military and many of whom are actually O-6 grade, hippy liberals. :grin:

    I suspect that this is a last chance with the pros since the trial will most likely not result in anything but a dismissal and confinement.

    One thing I will say, if those who make us think that they are senior officers hold that it is OK to promulgate chaos in the military are what they say, then they should be ashamed of themselves. While they are not obligated to the oath that they took as an officer now, most retired that I know are still proud of their service and the oath. All this birther stuff does when applied to the service does is to give aid and comfort to our enemies. If you bother to look at the rest of the Constitution, you might see what that means.

  89. yguy says:

    Every time you get spanked you run like a coward.

    Since I’m still, here, I guess we can take this as an acknowledgment that I’ve never been spanked here. 8)

    But by all means continue to be a fount of mindless invective. It does wonders for the credibility of your position. Really. :)

  90. yguy says:

    The problem with this plan is that there is no “vault copy” of anyone’s Hawaiian birth certificate – including Obama’s. The birth record of every individual born in Hawaii is now maintained in a computer database –

    The problem with this objection is that USA Today quoted a DoH official to the effect that, true to form, you don’t know what the hell you’re talking about:

    In 2001, Hawaii’s paper documents were reproduced in electronic format, but “any paper data prior to that still exists,” Health Department spokeswoman Janice Okubo said.

  91. sg says:

    He did go on to say:

    Now, there may be an archived birth document for Obama in the Hawaiian State Archives – but such a document would no longer be a birth certificate for any legal purpose.

    Which your quote of Ms. Okubo does not refute, unless there’s more to that interview.

  92. Randy says:

    Being a Conservative, it is amusing to drop by here and poke these Liberal skunks with the stick of truth about their dear leader. They swarm together like Hornets to defend him and comment on each others brilliance. You hive-minded Liberals don’t have an independent bone in your body.

    And, FullBird31, great posts!

  93. Christopher Mathews says:

    Mikeyes

    I suspect that a lot of the new commentors are simply trolling or blindly venting.

    You’re probably right.

    Our latest guest, who claims to have been a member of “the Democrat party” and relies on “U.S.C. Rule 46” for the proposition that a defendant has a right to “any and all witnesses,” before proceeding on to attack Colonel Sullivan personally, is a good example. Their frustration is almost palpable.

    The Lakin case has been, for his supporters at least and likely for the accused himself, a prolonged exercise in wishful thinking. Those tend not to end well.

  94. mikeyes says:

    Say, Randy, just how conservative are you?

    I’ll bet that you would lose that competition with a lot of the veterans here who are appalled with LTC Lakin’s actions if it were to come to pass. I suspect that your “conservatism” is limited to a few social issues and that you have very little intellectual knowledge of the conservative movements.

  95. yguy says:

    He did go on to say:
    Which your quote of Ms. Okubo does not refute,

    It hardly needs refuting by Okubo, since the relevant HI statutes are more than adequate to accomplish that.

  96. Greg says:

    It hardly needs refuting by Okubo, since the relevant HI statutes are more than adequate to accomplish that.

    Nope.

    (It’s so easy to argue when freed from the responsibility to back up my claims with evidence. Why didn’t I try to emulate yguy earlier?)

  97. James says:

    Being a Conservative, it is amusing to drop by here and poke these Liberal skunks with the stick of truth about their dear leader. They swarm together like Hornets to defend him and comment on each others brilliance. You hive-minded Liberals don’t have an independent bone in your body.And, FullBird31, great posts!

    And yet here is this fool is cuddling up to a fellow paranoid right wing wacko! The conservative hive mentality is just as instinctive. Rush and Glenn Beck tell them what to think and when to think.
    Luckily for liberals, its such fun to watch 86 Obama eligibility lawsuits (and counting) crash and burn and to giggle at the Republicans who are forced to defend Obama’s eligibility, like the (outgoing) Governor of Hawaii Linda Lingle did! The Governor’s exact words: “It’s a fact, he was born here.”

  98. sg says:

    It’s actually rather depressing to see this man’s (LTC Lakin’s) folly turned into something other than what it really is. Pure folly.
    It’s even more depressing to realize that there are a whole bunch of apparently functional adults in this world whose response to data they don’t like to stomp their feet and shout NO! NO! NO! like a child having a tantrum.

  99. Anonymous says:

    “I’m guessing if LTC Lakin was a sodomizing, poop throwing, God-hating Jihadist, Col. Sullivan would be singing a different tune!?”

    You know you can talk bad about Jihad and sodomy, but I will not sit here and let you denigrate the time-honored custom of poop-throwing sir!

    Particularly since that is all you and your ilk have been engaging in throughout this thread/blog.

  100. yguy says:

    Why didn’t I try to emulate yguy earlier?

    Because you’re not nearly clever enough to pass yourself off as someone who considers the law an expression of the will of the people rather than a means of deception.

    You’re welcome.

  101. sg says:

    “Because you’re not nearly clever enough to pass yourself off as someone who considers the law an expression of the will of a certain class of people rather or a means of deception.”
    Well, you aren’t either. I don’t think there’s anyone here who believes that you are someone who considers the law an expression of the will of the people rather than a means of deception, regardless of how hard you try to pass yourself off as that.

  102. Veitch says:

    sg, stop stomping your feet and look at the house of cards President Obama has erected and the type of man you are following, one who has represented terrorists that would kill you if left alone. LTC Lakin is a hero and deserves to see the evidence. Obama has personally shown nothing other than a photoshopped hoaxed certificate. I agree with the Gentleman above, wanna buy a bridge, I guess there is suckers born everyday! Besides obama’s father was a British national which makes him a duel citizen which would probably NOT hold up in court very well under the Natural Born Citizen clause and Obama knows this which is why he will not go to court!

    Besides, if LTC Lakin is found guilty, I am told there will be a congressional investigation by the new Republican dominated House of Reps. I would hate to be the prosecutor or the judge when they get done with them!

  103. BigGuy says:

    @Veitch —

    You have presented one of my favorite aspects of birferism!

    His COLB is a hoax — and he’s disqualified by virtue of his father’s British citizenship.

    Our President is doubly ineligible! He had the nerve to try to skate in two entirely unrelated, independent categories. And both forms of ineligibility completely escaped the congressional oversight of the Electoral College!

    Doesn’t that strike you as remarkable? I mean, doesn’t it?

  104. James says:

    sg, stop stomping your feet and look at the house of cards President Obama has erected and the type of man you are following, one who has represented terrorists that would kill you if left alone. LTC Lakin is a hero and deserves to see the evidence. Obama has personally shown nothing other than a photoshopped hoaxed certificate. I agree with the Gentleman above, wanna buy a bridge, I guess there is suckers born everyday! Besides obama’s father was a British national which makes him a duel citizen which would probably NOT hold up in court very well under the Natural Born Citizen clause and Obama knows this which is why he will not go to court!Besides, if LTC Lakin is found guilty, I am told there will be a congressional investigation by the new Republican dominated House of Reps. I would hate to be the prosecutor or the judge when they get done with them!

    Except one House of Congress, no matter who is in control of it, has no power to do anything but to conduct an investigation.
    You’re so ignorant of the facts that you don’t even know that there have already been 86 different attempts to have the Courts declare Obama to be ineligible and not one of them has succeeded. The following appeals and applications have been at the Supreme Court of the United States: Berg v Obama, Beverly v FEC, Craig v US, Donofrio v Wells, Herbert v Obama, Kercnner v Obama, Lightfoot v Bowen, Schneller v Cortes, and Wrotnowski v Bysiewicz.
    You can “google” any of those appeals and learn a little something about Obama eligibility appeals so that you don’t look like such an idiot when you post.

  105. Veitch says:

    The claims are that Obama does not meet the U.S. Constitution’s requirement that a president be a “natural born citizen.” The lawsuits have asserted he either was not born in Hawaii as he claims or was a dual citizen because of his father’s British citizenship at the time of his birth.
    The Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, states, “No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President.”
    However, none of the cases filed to date has been successful in reaching the plateau of legal discovery, so that information about Obama’s birth could be obtained.
    Besides Obama’s actual birth documentation, the still-concealed documentation for him includes kindergarten records, Punahou school records, Occidental College records, Columbia University records, Columbia thesis, Harvard Law School records, Harvard Law Review articles, scholarly articles from the University of Chicago, passport, medical records, his files from his years as an Illinois state senator, his Illinois State Bar Association records, any baptism records, and his adoption records.
    Several states already have begun working on various requirements for candidates to document their eligibility, and one proposal remains pending at the federal level. This basically will ensure he is a one termer IF he is not impeached OR taken out by the Democrat Party like has been discussed.

  106. Capt. Obvious says:

    Because you’re not nearly clever enough to pass yourself off as someone who considers the law an expression of the will of the people rather than a means of deception.You’re welcome.

    STFU, you pompous, delusional ass.

  107. Veitch says:

    The Hawaii Department of Health in 1961 would issue a Certification of Live Birth on the basis of family testimony, without any additional proof the child was actually born in Hawaii
    The Hawaii Department of Health has refused to substantiate the claim made by FactCheck.org and other Obama supporters that the short-form COLB is an authentic document issued by the Hawaii DOH.

  108. OneStarNY says:

    When Obama wrote a book and said he was mentored as a youth by Frank, (Frank Marshall Davis) an avowed Communist,
    People said it didn’t matter.
    When it was discovered that his grandparents, who were strong socialists, sent Obama’s mother to a socialist school, and introduced Frank Marshall Davis to young Obama,
    People said it didn’t matter.
    When people found out that he was enrolled as a Muslim child in school and his father and stepfather were both Muslims,
    People said it didn’t matter.
    When he wrote in another book he authored I will stand with them (Muslims) should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.
    People said it didn’t matter.
    When he admittedly, in his book, said he chose Marxist friends and professors in college,
    People said it didn’t matter.
    When he traveled to Pakistan , after college on an unknown national passport,
    People said it didn’t matter.
    When he sought the endorsement of the Marxist party in 1996 as he ran for the Illinois Senate,
    People said it doesn’t matter.
    When he sat in a Chicago Church for twenty years and listened to a preacher spew hatred for America and preach black liberation theology,
    People said it didn’t matter.
    When an independent Washington organization, that tracks senate voting records, gave him the distinctive title as the “most liberal senator”,
    People said it didn’t matter.
    When the Palestinians in Gaza , set up a fund raising telethon to raise money for his election campaign,
    People said it didn’t matter.
    When his voting record supported gun control,
    People said it didn’t matter.
    When he refused to disclose who donated money to his election campaign, as other candidates had done,
    People said it didn’t matter.

  109. OneStarNY says:

    When he received endorsements from people like Louis Farrakhan and Mummar Kaddafi and Hugo Chavez,
    People said it didn’t matter.
    When it was pointed out that he was a total, newcomer and had absolutely no experience at anything except community organizing,
    People said it didn’t matter.
    When he chose friends and acquaintances such as Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn who were revolutionary radicals and domestic terrorists,
    People said it didn’t matter.
    When his voting record in the Illinois senate and in the U.S. Senate came into question,
    People said it didn’t matter.
    When he refused to wear a flag, lapel pin and did so only after a public outcry,
    People said it didn’t matter.
    When people started treating him as a Messiah and children in schools were taught to sing his praises,
    People said it didn’t matter.
    When he stood with his hands over his groin area for the playing of the National Anthem and Pledge of Allegiance,
    People said it didn’t matter.
    When he surrounded himself in the White house with advisors who were pro gun control, pro abortion, pro homosexual marriage and wanting to curtail freedom of speech to silence the opposition
    People said it didn’t matter.
    When he aired his views on abortion, homosexuality and a host of other issues,
    People said it didn’t matter.
    When he said he favors sex education in Kindergarten, including homosexual indoctrination,
    People said it didn’t matter.
    When his background was either scrubbed or hidden and nothing could be found about him,
    People said it didn’t matter.
    When the place of his birth was called into question, and he refused to produce a birth certificate,
    People said it didn’t matter.

  110. Veitch says:

    The Bottom Line on Obama is he is NOT a “natural-born citizen” of the United States of America, no matter which Obot propaganda argument you choose to buy. He can, therefore, not legally hold the office of President or Vice President of the United States and all laws and orders given while he fraudulently holds that office are null and void.
    Legal US citizens or sovereign states are NOT obligated to follow illegal laws from a fraudulent resident of the people’s White House. Obama has “no constitutional standing” as an “undocumented resident” of the Oval Office.
    With each passing day, our nation is being driven deeper and deeper into irreversible disaster. Obama & Co. have no intention of backing up or backing off their anti-American agenda of global Marxism via American assets.
    The courts have never ruled on Obama’s constitutional standing. In fact, they have refused to hear evidence from the people on the matter, or force Obama to unseal all of his records to answer legitimate questions coming from a growing number of US citizens.

  111. interested onlooker says:

    LTC Lakin is a hero and deserves to see the evidence.

    Lakin may have been heroic in past actions, but he’s done nothing heroic here. It doesn’t matter who the President is; when your commanding officer gives you a lawful order to report to their office, you are obligated by that same oath to obey the order (“I will obey the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to law and regulations.”) You want heroic, look at the record of COL Gordon Roberts, the gent who issued one of those orders that Lakin is charged with disobeying: http://www.health.mil/About_MHS/MedalofHonor/details/Colonel_Gordon_Ray_Roberts.aspx

    Obama has personally shown nothing other than a photoshopped hoaxed certificate.

    I’m sorry, could you provide a reference to text in the US Constitution where it says he has to provide his long form birth certificate complete with name of attending physician and hospital? Or even a Federal statute to that effect?

    Besides obama’s father was a British national which makes him a duel citizen which would probably NOT hold up in court very well under the Natural Born Citizen clause and Obama knows this which is why he will not go to court!

    What’s a duel citizen? Someone who is naturalized at gunpoint?

    Are you aware that Jimmy Carter was the first US President to even be born in a hospital? Did you know that Chester Arthur’s father was a British national at the time of CA’s birth, making the child both a US citizen and a British subject?

    Besides, if LTC Lakin is found guilty, I am told there will be a congressional investigation by the new Republican dominated House of Reps. I would hate to be the prosecutor or the judge when they get done with them!

    Uh, yeah. What is it exactly that you think the House of Representatives is going to do to punish an individual officer in the US Army? Hold them in contempt of Congress for refusing to say they are sorry about finding Lakin guilty?

  112. BigGuy says:

    But, Veitch, you skipped my whole question!

    Both forms of ineligibility completely escaped the congressional oversight of the Electoral College? Not a single member of either house, of either party, thought there was any reason to object? Even though it’s so obvious to you?

    Doesn’t that strike you as remarkable? I mean, doesn’t it?

  113. OneStarNY says:

    Conservatives can mistakenly assume that liberals think like they do, in a learned and rational way. This is an exercise in futility since liberalism is not based on logic.
    To become a conservative, I’ve had to learn a whole new language, one based on reason. If conservatives want to understand the liberal mind, they should consider becoming bilingual, too.
    Liberals live in a stratosphere centered on emotions and magical thinking. If you’ve tried to reason with your daughter and she looks at you blankly; if your neighbor changes the subject during your compelling arguments; if your cousin says this about Obama: “I don’t know why. I just like the guy”…that’s why.
    Are these folks “stupid”? I looked up the word, and my dictionary reads, “lacking intelligence or common sense.” Going by that definition, it would be hard to argue no.
    Liberals are certainly capable of intelligence. They may be adept at their careers and hobbies. But the problem is that their naïveté and a delusional way of looking at the world impedes common sense and street smarts.
    Further, when liberals take the time to tune in, they get their “information” from progressive propaganda. And they don’t question the Left’s authority.
    That’s the biggest problem — not questioning the party line even though there are obvious gaps and gaffes. A big reason for this is fear.
    Liberals will fight to stop wars, but abortion is okay.
    Liberal wants to legalize pot, but ban smoking.
    Liberals want to ban God, but will allow false religions-like Islam.
    Liberals love to tell you how to raise your children, but don’t want to have any of their own.
    Liberals are all about freedom of speech, as long as you don’t disagree with them.
    Liberals believe in a ban on drugs, but don’t want to close any borders to keep the drugs out.

  114. OneStarNY says:

    sg-I’m sure you question why I wrote the above and below, because it sounds like you and others here. One other question are you aware that your good COL Sullivan worked for the ACLU which is a liberal/socialist/Communist/Progressive (is there really a differnce as they look like the pig with lip stick theory) front orgainzation?

    Liberals are full of compassion for terrorists, but will be the first to convict a person on circumstantial evidence.
    Liberals believe they have all the answers, but refuse to answer any questions.
    Liberals love to help everyone from different countries, but will allow their own neighbors to go homeless.

  115. Veitch says:

    And it sure looks like he does. Obama is the only president who has suppressed vital personal information; every other has made full disclosure. When the press raised a fuss about John McCain’s birth particulars – since he was born in the Panama Canal Zone – he immediately released all his actual documents, thousands of pages worth, including those showing that he was a natural-born American citizen, as per the United States Code [8 U.S.C. 1403 (a)]. Obama did not follow suit, and the media let him off the hook. The document released online is not an authentic birth certificate. It is the “short form” affidavit, a Certificate of Live Birth (COLB) with standard information left out, such as the actual name of the birth hospital and the name of the attending physician. In “Dreams from My Father,” Obama mentions having found his birth certificate, which, as it turns out, was then conveniently lost in a small house fire. Nor would the two announcements in Honolulu newspapers confirming his birth constitute proof of American citizenship or be accepted as such in a court of law, for obvious reasons.

  116. BigGuy says:

    @OneStar — “Liberals believe in a ban on drugs…”
    __

    Hmmm, I think your screed is still in need of a little editing.

  117. OneStarNY says:

    Some people consider the “birther” controversy an unfortunate distraction from more important matters, as, for example, Obama’s propensity for making inexplicable decisions or the mass of other significant documents kept under seal. Focusing on the affair, they say, is counter-productive. Many feel it is nothing but a slanderous and partisan campaign that does not merit the attention of mature observers. Still others are simply afraid of being mercilessly ridiculed and written off as wingnuts, or intuit it is demonstrably unsafe to meddle in such concerns.

    And many, too, simply cannot believe that a hoax of this enormity can have been successfully perpetrated in a free society and consequently cannot but regard the birther claims as the product of deranged minds – but then, the worldwide AGW scam might have educated us to such possibilities. The malign influence of a complicit media is extremely powerful, seeping into the consciousness of even the most hardened skeptics and leaving a residue of unwarranted belief in the untenable or problematic.

    Finally, some who suspect the birthers may be right feel it would do more harm to America to expose an imposture of this magnitude than to let it run its course until the next election when Obama might be voted out of office. “Might be,” regrettably, is not “will be.”

  118. sg says:

    To all one of the newcomer(s)–I would like somebody to explain how and when the Marines ever assign an officer to work with the ACLU? How does that work exactly, and what does it say about the Marines? What does it say about the idiots that believe and push such claptrap?
    Hey, any of you tell me what the great secret birfer plan is for LTC Lakin’s trial that will get him acquitted and get the US Army to collectively throw aside our oaths and march on Washington to arrest the President? Cause I’d really like to know.

  119. Veitch says:

    Even if we refrain from coming to unequivocal conclusions on this issue, it seems almost certain that his records must contain damaging information that could bring his presidency into serious, if not terminal disrepute. How else would one explain the fact that his university transcripts and his records as an Illinois state legislator, like his “long-form” birth certificate, are inaccessible and that Obama has hired a team of lawyers to make sure they remain that way? This behavior is completely unprecedented in POTUS annals, and he should be duly challenged on it. Requiring Obama to open his dossier is not a sign of conspiratorial suspicions; it is quite simply a civil responsibility and the most reasonable of demands since this is precisely what all U.S. presidents should do and have done. Shirking this responsibility, however, is largely a symptom of either moral cowardice or false propriety, irrespective of how it may be embroidered for public consumption or self-protection. Of course, there are some who demur out of a sense of fundamental decency which, we might note, goes unreciprocated by the president and his team.

    So the obvious questions are: Why has Obama not consented to this request? Why does he not dispel suspicion by making his papers available to the public if he has nothing to fear? What makes him noli me tangere? What is he reluctant to shed light upon? Why is the debate about his origins not stopped dead in its tracks by the publication of valid, irrefutable documentation? And why are those who ask these logical and totally justifiable questions dismissed as madmen and conspiracy theorists? The conspiracy, it would seem, travels the other way.

  120. sg says:

    Of course, OnStar, the truth in this matter is that I think you and your birfer ilk are sad little fractions of men who’ve never done anything important with your lives and seem to think that this is your shot at fame. The difference between a birfer and a militia-type is that the militia guys at least pretend to have the courage of their convictions. The birfers want other people, like Lakin to take the legal risks, and want the Army to engage in the insurrection they so desperately want against the brown-skinned usurper.
    Say, OnStar–could you tell me where I can find the nearest Starbucks?

  121. sg says:

    Later Birfers. I’ll be back next week to taste the sweet taste of wingnut tears when Lakin loses and gets sentenced to confinement and dismissal.

  122. Charles Gittins says:

    Rarely have I seen so much stupidity flaunted for the world to see. LTC Lakin is not “entitled” to discovery of the President’s birth certificate in a case alleging an orders violation. He never was and never will be. Arguing with a small, but loud, group of retards, who wouldn’t know a Manual for Court-Martial if it hit them in the face is an incredible waste of time. While they await the “miracle” or whatever they expect, LTC Lakin will be looking for a new job after he is adjudged a dismissal (and possibly a pretty good taste of confinement). You simply cannot argue with ignorance and it is a waste of oxygen to do so. My $.02. Go Navy!

  123. yguy says:

    I don’t think there’s anyone here who believes that you are someone who considers the law an expression of the will of the people rather than a means of deception, regardless of how hard you try to pass yourself off as that.

    Then surely it is passing strange that the best anyone here can come up with by way of refutation is almost invariably limited to distortions and outright lies, or, in the case of mental giants like Capt. Oblivious, vacuous insolence; or, when the going gets really tough, falling back on such gargantuan imbecilities as this:

    [E]ven if there were a usurper, [] then it wouldn’t matter because the will of the people is expressed in and by Congress.

  124. Dwight Sullivan says:

    yguy wrote: “Because you’re not nearly clever enough to pass yourself off as someone who considers the law an expression of the will of the people rather than a means of deception.” Do you know what is certainly “an expression of the will of the people”? A President election.

  125. Capt. Obvious says:

    The Hawaii Department of Health in 1961 would issue a Certification of Live Birth on the basis of family testimony, without any additional proof the child was actually born in Hawaii
    The Hawaii Department of Health has refused to substantiate the claim made by FactCheck.org and other Obama supporters that the short-form COLB is an authentic document issued by the Hawaii DOH.

    You’re a deranged idiot and a liar. And your delusional opinion is irrelevant.

    LINDA LINGLE
    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH News Release
    GOVERNOR ______________________________________________________

    CHIYOME LEINAALA FUKINO M.D. DIRECTOR
    Phone: (808) 586-4410 Fax: (808) 586-4444
    ______________________________________________________
    For Immediate Release: October 31, 2008 08-93
    STATEMENT BY DR. CHIYOME FUKINO
    “There have been numerous requests for Sen. Barack Hussein Obama’s official birth certificate. State law (Hawai‘i Revised Statutes §338-18) prohibits the release of a certified birth certificate to persons who do not have a tangible interest in the vital record.
    “Therefore, I as Director of Health for the State of Hawai‘i, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, have personally seen and verified that the Hawai‘i State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures.
    “No state official, including Governor Linda Lingle, has ever instructed that this vital record be handled in a manner different from any other vital record in the possession of the State of Hawai‘i.”
    For more information, contact: Janice Okubo Communications Office Phone: (808) 586-4442
    ###

  126. yguy says:

    yguy wrote:“Because you’re not nearly clever enough to pass yourself off as someone who considers the law an expression of the will of the people rather than a means of deception.” Do you know what is certainly “an expression of the will of the people”?A President election.

    To be sure; but in the good old US of A, there is another expression of the will of the people which trumps a Presidential election and everything else.

    Do I need to tell you what that is?

  127. Capt. Obvious says:

    Then surely it is passing strange that the best anyone here can come up with by way of refutation is almost invariably limited to distortions and outright lies, or, in the case of mental giants like Capt. Oblivious, vacuous insolence; or, when the going gets really tough, falling back on such gargantuan imbecilities as this:

    You’re a little, little man; a hypocrite with a fragile ego and a pathological liar who runs from site to site desperate for recognition. You get spanked for your imbecilic, ignorant remarks and spend countless hours scrambling to find retorts to cover your vacuous ramblings and pathetic shortcomings.

    Get a life, birther idiot.

  128. Dwight Sullivan says:

    yguy, the people in 2008 exercised their choice within the constitutionally prescribed manner.

  129. Christopher Mathews says:

    A fascinating debate, to be sure, but as we all understand by now it’s irrelevant to LTC Lakin’s court-martial charges.

    I would like to ask the birthers who’ve decided to stop by, though, whether they expect to continue supporting the accused once his case is finished.

  130. yguy says:

    yguy, the people in 2008 exercised their choice within the constitutionally prescribed manner.

    I don’t seen anyone contesting that, so I don’t know what your point is.

  131. Rickey says:

    The Bottom Line on Obama is he is NOT a “natural-born citizen” of the United States of America, no matter which Obot propaganda argument you choose to buy. He can, therefore, not legally hold the office of President or Vice President of the United States and all laws and orders given while he fraudulently holds that office are null and void.

    So if the extension of the Bush tax cuts is passed and signed into law by Obama, does that mean that you are going to calculate and pay your income tax on the 2000 tax rates? Won’t the extension of the Bush tax cuts be illegal?

  132. Rickey says:

    When the press raised a fuss about John McCain’s birth particulars – since he was born in the Panama Canal Zone – he immediately released all his actual documents, thousands of pages worth, including those showing that he was a natural-born American citizen…

    Really? You’ve seen McCain’s birth certificate? When and where? Please provide a link.

    Did McCain authorize the release of his complete Navy records? Did he allow anyone to see his fitness reports?

  133. Capt. Obvious says:

    I don’t seen anyone contesting that, so I don’t know what your point is.

    “I don’t seen” that you’re competent or sane.

  134. sg says:

    “I don’t seen (sic) anyone contesting that, so I don’t know what your point is.”
    Go look in the mirror, and you’ll see the guy contesting it.

  135. SueDB says:

    Sorry – but I haven’t seen such a rampant display of ignorance, stupidity and paranoia since I read Oily Titz’s last appeal. The birfers just can’t accept that brown guy as President. Ain’t life a bitch.
    Well Pimp Daddy McCain could have been elected. It seems he has lost his memory lately. He now opposes all the stuff he pushed and supported all those years. He was against torture then he voted to torture. He was for immigration reform going so far as to write the bill, then wimped out. Whatever he was before he isn’t now. Arizona made a lousy choice this time.

  136. SueDB says:

    Between BirdTurd, moron guy, and others, it looks like a birfer daisy chain. Each one of them tickling the other…

  137. yguy says:

    “I don’t seen (sic) anyone contesting that, so I don’t know what your point is.”
    Go look in the mirror, and you’ll see the guy contesting it.

    Were that the case, you’d be able to provide a verbatim quote to that effect…

    …but of course I know damn well you can’t…

    …which makes you a liar.

  138. Capt. Obvious says:

    I don’t seen anyone contesting that, so I don’t know what your point is.

    Your quote verbatim, dumbass.

  139. sg says:

    yguy, who hasn’t told the truth in his life, as if he would know the truth anyway, just called me a liar.
    ==sniff==I think my fee-fees have been hurt.
    I think it would be the opinion of most everybody here that the whole aim of birferism is to contest the 2008 presidential election. Since their activities have no other logical context, it is a safe assumption. Just as Hitler never used the words “kill the Jews” but we can tell by his actions that was what he was after, so too are the birfers, with yguy leading the way, all about contesting the 2008 presidential election.
    It doesn’t take a lawyer to figure that one out.

  140. MAJSasquatch says:

    At the behest of Barack Obama, and of those who by silence and inaction join in support of his contempt for the U.S. Constitution, military authorities seem intent on denying Lt. Col. Lakin any semblance of due process. They officially libel and slander him with the public statements that assert his disrespect for the honorable traditions of the U.S. military. In fact it is they who now depart from those traditions. American soldiers have always been trained to remember their obligations as citizens and human beings, that is, to their country and to God.

    Unlike the disciplined tools of evil they faced in the wars against totalitarian powers such as Nazi Germany and Communist North Korea, American officers are legally and morally forbidden to be the mindless automatons of lawless power. Lt. Col. Lakin remembers this. In the ordeal he now faces for doing so, Americans who share and admire his true American patriotism will pray for and stand with him.

  141. sg says:

    I don’t know what sasquatch is a “MAJ” of, but it damn sure isn’t the US military I served 21 years in. It my Army, we obey the orders we are given by our superiors, especially when one of those superiors has the Medal of Honor, we do our jobs to the best of our abilities, we lead our Soldiers with honor and integrity, and we keep our politics to ourselves.

  142. Christopher Mathews says:

    Americans who share and admire his true American patriotism will pray for and stand with him.

    That’s a very pretty speech, but once the court-martial is over, will you still “stand with him,” and if so, what form will that standing take?

    On the one hand, it’s easy to envision LTC Lakin following the G. Gordon Liddy-Ollie North career path, speaking to various right-wing groups and garnering a comfortable living off of the honoraria for his appearances. I would think a stint as a FOX News “analyst” is pretty much a given, too. But there’s always the cautionary example of Paula Jones and her short ride to obscurity. I wonder which is in the cards for this accused?

  143. MAJSasquatch says:

    Does Obama and McCrystal want us to win this war or placate the bad guys? Raed below and see what I put up with in Afganistan. We need a pres that wil “grow some” and do the right thing and change the ROEs and win!

    Four U.S. Marines died Tuesday when they walked into a well-laid ambush by insurgents in Afghanistan’s eastern Kunar province. Seven Afghan troops and an interpreter for the Marine commander also died in the ambush and the subsequent battle, which lasted seven hours..

    Airstrikes by coalition forces in Afghanistan have dropped dramatically in the three months Gen. Stanley McChrystal has led the war effort there, reflecting his new emphasis on avoiding civilian casualties and protecting the population which is most likely coming from above him.

    The shift is the result of McChrystal’s new directives – , said Air Force Col. Mark Waite, an official at the air operations center in southwest Asia. Ground troops are less inclined to call for bombing or strafing runs, though they often have an aircraft conduct a “show of force,” a flyby to scare off insurgents, or use planes for surveillance, Waite said. ( Note: the directives McChrystal was following were issued by Obama )

    Dashing from boulder to boulder, diving into trenches and ducking behind stone walls as the insurgents maneuvered to outflank us, we waited more than an hour for U.S. helicopters to arrive, despite earlier assurances that air cover would be five minutes away.

    U.S. commanders, citing new rules to avoid civilian casualties, rejected repeated calls to unleash artillery rounds at attackers dug into the slopes and tree lines — despite being told repeatedly that they weren’t near the village

  144. OneStarNY says:

    You guys are defening Obama why????

    What about Obama’s qualifications and experience led people to expect any better from him?
    He was brought up by grandparents who were socialists, his mentor as a child, Frank Marshall Davis, was an extreme socialist, he was steeped in Marxist-oriented black liberation theology by Rev. Wright in Chicago, his political colleagues were extreme Palestinian radicals like Rashid Khalidi, unrepentant domestic terrorists like Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn and thugs like Tony Rezko. He was considered the most liberal member of the Senate. He had never authored a single bill as a Senator. He was very partisan and never reached across the aisle. He had a well know reputation of using people and then throwing them under the bus if they became inconvenient.
    Obama as a viable candidate was a myth created by his own brazen lies and those of the mainstream media as well as the blogosphere exemplified by the collusion we have seen with the Journolist scandals.

  145. sg says:

    WTF does this have to do with LTC Lakin not obeying to orders of his immediate superiors to report to Fort Campbell, KY or to his Brigade Commander?
    And again, I don’t think you’re a “MAJ” of anything except in your own mind.

  146. Starfish says:

    Obama’s “Birth Certificate” has never been made public. What was possibly released (State of Hawaii denies releasing anything)is a document titled “Certification of Live Birth” (was probably photoshopped) and was used at the time of Obama’s birth to document births that occurred outside a hospital or outside of the country. Until last year the state of Hawaii did not accept these documents to prove Hawaiian native birthright claims! The newspaper announcements at that time were issued automatically whenever a “Birth Certificate” or a “Certification of Live Birth” were registered. The announcements prove nothing other than a document recording Obama’s birth was issued, which document would not have been used if he were (as he and his supporters claim) born in a Hawaiian hospital! If Obama wants to put the matter to rest release his original, long-form Birth Certificate!

  147. OneStarNY says:

    • Even if he was born in the White House, his father was an alien, therefore Obama, Soetoto, or whatever his name is– is NOT a NATURAL BORN citizen(not the same as native born or naturalized).

    There is also some serious doubt that he was even born in the USA.

    Don’t forget that he has used 16 Social Security numbers, including 042-68-4425 (Google it!), the one he gets paid with in the White House, which was issued to a man born in Connecticut in 1890!

    Add to that a phony Selective Service registration, possible hidden disbarment from the Illinois Bar, election fraud, and other things, adding up to enough felonies to keep in locked up for a long, long time.

  148. OneStarNY says:

    sg-it has everything to do with having a Commander in Chief that as President, meeting the same Constitutional requirements that we had to meet to get our commissions. Face it, the CoC has not proven himself beyond a resonable doubt except to people that will not review the mounds of evidnece against him. Besides with his past, he sure the hell could not get a security clearence and you know it!

  149. sg says:

    No, OnStar,
    We are defending the military concepts of good order and discipline and subordination to civilian authority.

    And you still owe me the directions to the nearest Starbucks.

  150. sg says:

    If you ever actually had a commission, OnStar, you’d understand what we’re after here. Where’s my Starbucks directions?

  151. Veitch says:

    The Certification of Live Birth that was published on AKA OBAMA’s campaign web site is not a Birth Certificate. It is easy to tell the difference between the two types of documents. It is very likely that the COLB used by AKA OBAMA’s campaign is a fraudulent document. Several forensic document examiners have carefully scrutinized the COLB and declared it suspicious or an obvious forgery.
    Forensic document examiner Sandra Ramsey Lines, a Former Federal Examiner with a long history of expert testimony in state and federal courts, has testified in an affidavit that states, in part:

    Sandra Lines says, “I can state with certainty that the COLB presented on the internet by the various groups, which include the “Daily Kos,” the Obama Campaign, “Factcheck.org” and others cannot be relied upon as genuine. Dr. Polarik raises issues concerning the COLB that I can affirm. Software such as Adobe Photoshop can produce complete images or alter images that appear to be genuine; therefore, any image offered on the internet cannot be relied upon as being a copy of the authentic document.” Sandra Ramsey Lines summary is posted at U. S. Law Blog.

  152. MAJSasquatch says:

    Who Certified AKA Obama as “Natural Born” at FactCheck?
    Joe Miller and Jess Henig, that’s who! They are a couple of partisan Obots — just what you’d expect — Jess took the photos presented on their webpage and did all of the writing, while Bob basically held the COLB open for Jess to photograph. Those two are completely unqualified to perform any kind of forensic examination of any document, and FactCheck.org knows it — and so do Henig and Miller.
    Here is another thing to consider. Birth Certificates might be protected by privacy laws in Hawaii but transactions for purchase should be available as public record. The COLB that AKA Obama offers as his proof (and has been deemed unreliable) just showed up without explanation. There is nothing from the State of Hawaii about AKA Obama requesting a copy of his BC. Obama, nor the DNC has come forward with evidence of a request for the copy so where did it come from? These cost $10 to get and if requested via the phone someone would have had to use a credit card or sent a check or money order by mail, yet, nothing is, or ever has been, offered as proof of even a request for the copy. Someone could have said here is a CC receipt, or a canceled check, or the remitter’s copy of a money order.

  153. The Magic M says:

    Veitch, that’s a straw man argument. Of course no-one can vouch for the authenticity of something he has only seen on screen.
    That’s like saying “It cannot be relied upon that Obama is black by looking at a photo on his website”.
    But since no-one claims the image on the website is the original COLB but that the thing that was photographed is the original COLB (which again was verified by FactCheck), your “expert opinions” fall flat since they only state the obvious.

  154. sg says:

    Funny how I never had to supply anything other than a computerized printout of a certificate of live birth from the Colorado Department of State Bureau of Vital Statistics, created in 1988 from a database of information from a typed form created in 1970 when I was born. Nobody currently living that I know has ever seen the original form. And yet, I joined the Army, got a SECRET clearance, got that upgraded to a TOP SECRET clearance, got a civilian job requiring a clearance, got a passport, a passport renewal, and several Soldier Readiness Packets completed, got married, bought two houses, gotten several driver’s licenses in different states and two foreign countries, and reenlisted several times all with my certificate of live birth, issued in 1988. I’ve never seen any other version of a birth certificate form from the state of Colorado. And it doesn’t have any of the information you people claim to need. Ergo, when you say you needed that stuff to do those things, I know from personal experience that you are full of shit.

  155. MAJSasquatch says:

    sg, nice of you to question me. Forget about me and look at the issues of your CoC and ask yourself: Does he meet the Constitutional requirements for the job? Do you agree with the ROEs he and GEN McCrystal have implemented in Afhganistan, do you agree with the past of COL Sullivan’s in regards to the “people” he has been representing.

    This whole house of cards will collaspe soon, possibly with a congressional hearing or the Dems turning on him (does the term thowing him under the bus mean anything)? I hope you and others here are on the right side of history!

  156. The Magic M says:

    > evidence of a request for the copy

    Why should that be necessary? They showed the copy and the Hawaiian authorities acknowledged that it’s identical to what’s on the record.

    What more silly “proof” do you demand next time? Do they have to prove the person who said the COLB corresponds to the record can read?

  157. The Magic M says:

    The announcements prove nothing other than a document recording Obama’s birth was issued, which document would not have been used if he were (as he and his supporters claim) born in a Hawaiian hospital!

    So, if I parse your claim correctly, you’re saying the fact that the birth was reported in these two newspapers proves he was not born in a hospital? I.e. you’re saying only babies not born in hospitals had birth announcements posted in newspapers?

    Now that’s a new low for “in the face of reality”, given that the opposite has already been proven to be true.

  158. Christopher Mathews says:

    Veitch, MAJSasquatch, and OneStarNY, perhaps you can answer a question for me: why do you all have the same IP address and email address?

    Two of you are headed for the spam filter. All three, if I don’t get a satisfactory answer.

  159. Anonymous says:

    Way to plagierize, Sasquatch.

    The paragraphs beginning “Four U.S. Marines died Tuesday…”, “Dashing from boulder to boulder…”, and “U.S. commanders, citing new rules…” are from an article written by embedded journalist Jonathan S. Landay of McClatchy newspapers, published on 8 September 2009.

    The paragraphs beginning “Airstrikes by coalition forces…” and “The shift is the result of…” are from a USA Today article by Jim Michaels, also published on 8 September 2009.

    The parenthetical “(Note: the directives McChrystal was following were issued by Obama)” is not in the original article, and appears in a couple of places on Orly Taitz’s website and on the pressdemocrat.com forum under the thread “Why we should pull out New Rules of Engagement,” dated 8 December.

  160. interested onlooker says:

    McChrystal this, McChrystal that, everyone is so concerned with documenting an unbroken chain of command yet they haven’t even noticed that McC hasn’t been issuing orders to anyone except maybe his dog for months…

  161. Christopher Mathews says:

    Veitch, MAJSasquatch, and OneStarNY, perhaps you can answer a question for me: why do you all have the same IP address and email address?

    Two of you are headed for the spam filter. All three, if I don’t get a satisfactory answer.

    Oh, and Starfish and FullBird31 — you, too.

    None of you are all that original, and writing under five separate names doesn’t really change that.

  162. Greg says:

    Because you’re not nearly clever enough to pass yourself off as someone who considers the law an expression of the will of the people rather than a means of deception.

    You think I consider the law a means of deception?

    Were that the case, you’d be able to provide a verbatim quote to that effect…

    …but of course I know damn well you can’t…

    …which makes you a liar.

  163. Anonymous says:

    Oh, and Starfish and FullBird31 — you, too.None of you are all that original, and writing under five separate names doesn’t really change that.

    How do we make up for our complete lack of logic?
    One word.
    Volume.

  164. sg says:

    We need a better class of trolls. When someone like me can see the sock puppets, and I don’t even have access to the transaction log, you just KNOW that the trolls are sad. CAAFlog deserves better trolls!

  165. yguy says:

    yguy [] just called me a liar.

    And properly so.

    I think it would be the opinion of most everybody here that the whole aim of birferism is to contest the 2008 presidential election.Since their activities have no other logical context, it is a safe assumption.

    Well as long we’re OK with assumptions, bearing in mind that you are the author of a pronouncement regarding the office of the Presidency which can only have been rooted in insanity or in enmity with the United States, I think it is safe to assume the distinction is of no great moment.

  166. Greg says:

    you are the author of a pronouncement regarding the office of the Presidency which can only have been rooted in insanity or in enmity with the United States

    ONLY in insanity or in enmity with the United States?

    You can’t think of ANY other possible roots?

    Not very creative, are you?

  167. yguy says:

    You think I consider the law a means of deception?
    Were that the case, you’d be able to provide a verbatim quote to that effect……but of course I know damn well you can’t…

    On the contrary, your responses to me over the last few days will demonstrate your essential dishonesty to any dispassionate observer who follows the conversations.

  168. Rickey says:

    Veitch, MAJSasquatch, and OneStarNY, perhaps you can answer a question for me: why do you all have the same IP address and email address?Two of you are headed for the spam filter.All three, if I don’t get a satisfactory answer.

    Ah, sock puppets. One would think that real retired officers would be aware of the fact that General McChrystal was relieved of his command last summer.

    The number of birthers is actually quite small, so they often use sock puppets to make it appear that their numbers are larger. A rally to support LTC Lakin in Phoenix last week drew all of about two dozen people.

    The reality is that apart from birthers, few people outside of the military (other than those civilians who track the birther movement closely) have any idea who Lakin is. Even conservative sites such as National Review Online and Human Events make no mention of him. Birthers who believe that Lakin’s inevitable conviction will lead to some sort of popular uprising are living in a fantasy world.

  169. sg says:

    That’s because he’s not very bright. But at least he’s kind of more or less honest enough to not be a sock puppet. That’s not much, I’ll grant you, but it is something.

  170. Greg says:

    On the contrary, your responses to me over the last few days will demonstrate your essential dishonesty to any dispassionate observer who follows the conversations.

    And if I were dishonest, that would show that I view the law as a means of deception? Maybe I view lying as a means of deception. One would think that showing I was “essential[ly] dishonest[]” that would simply show my “essential dishonesty?”

    Not very logical, are you?

    I think we’ve confirmed that you are either: 1) a liar; or, 2) incompetent at logical reasoning.

    Which is it?

  171. sg says:

    Remember Greg, that just being one doesn’t rule out his being the other as well.

  172. yguy says:

    ONLY in insanity or in enmity with the United States?

    What is there, an echo in here?

    You can’t think of ANY other possible roots?
    Not very creative, are you?

    Neither, I suppose, am I “creative” enough to think of any possible real solutions to x=√4 other than 2 and -2.

    Now of course it’s possible he just doesn’t have the cojones to admit it was a gaffe made in desperation; but denial is arguably a form of insanity, let’s face it.

  173. yguy says:

    That’s because he’s not very bright.

    Neither, evidently, are you “bright” enough to contrive a rationale for your idiotic assertion…but then I don’t suppose anyone is.

    Not that it wouldn’t be interesting to see someone try; but it’s a safe bet no here one is up to it, else someone would have done it by now..

  174. SueDB says:

    WTF does this have to do with LTC Lakin not obeying to orders of his immediate superiors to report to Fort Campbell, KY or to his Brigade Commander?
    And again, I don’t think you’re a “MAJ” of anything except in your own mind.

    Could be a Major of Douchebag, but he has was promoted to General Douchebag…paging Lord and Lady Douchebag…

  175. yguy says:

    One would think that showing I was “essential[ly] dishonest[]” that would simply show my “essential dishonesty?”

    One whose thinking is as lamentably shallow as yours certainly would.

  176. SueDB says:

    “I’m guessing if LTC Lakin was a sodomizing, poop throwing, God-hating Jihadist, Col. Sullivan would be singing a different tune!?”You know you can talk bad about Jihad and sodomy, but I will not sit here and let you denigrate the time-honored custom of poop-throwing sir!Particularly since that is all you and your ilk have been engaging in throughout this thread/blog.

    You mean he’s not??? We witnessed LTC Lakin and his dog bite boy throwing poop on the wall through various posting and legal excuses to throw poop They were hoping something would stick, but when it is all just diarrhea…

  177. SueDB says:

    Lakin has many supporters lying in wait.
    Three scenarios:
    Lakin convicted:Bad for Obama
    Lakin acquitted:Bad for Obama
    Lakin gets a deal with a gag order:Good for Obama

    Correction
    Lakin convicted: Good for the Military and the country – Obama? no one gives a rat’s ass
    Lakin acquitted: Not a chance in hell – Obama?? again no one gives a rat’s ass.
    Lakin get a deal: Justice quickly but not as complete as being sentenced at a court marshall – Obama? No one gives a rat’s ass…
    See there is NO connection between a clown disobeying a lawful order from a superior (especially a soldier who earned the CMH) and our fine upstanding President.

  178. SueDB says:

    Besides, if LTC Lakin is found guilty, I am told there will be a congressional investigation by the new Republican dominated House of Reps. I would hate to be the prosecutor or the judge when they get done with them!

    Demand all you want. Berg demanded all kinds of crap. He is still standing there trying to figure out why when demanding stuff and a comparison of filling your hand with feces, the feces hand fills while the document hand is painfully empty.

  179. SueDB says:

    •Even if he was born in the White House, his father was an alien, therefore Obama, Soetoto, or whatever his name is– is NOT a NATURAL BORN citizen(not the same as native born or naturalized).
    There is also some serious doubt that he was even born in the USA.
    Don’t forget that he has used 16 Social Security numbers, including 042-68-4425 (Google it!), the one he gets paid with in the White House, which was issued to a man born in Connecticut in 1890!
    Add to that a phony Selective Service registration, possible hidden disbarment from the Illinois Bar, election fraud, and other things, adding up to enough felonies to keep in locked up for a long, long time.

    Lying again? Let’s see the proof of your “claims”…you’re the loony making the claims.

  180. SueDB says:

    People said it didn’t matter.

    And they are right, the status of the President makes absolutely no difference to this Court-Marshal.

    It’s a tough titty said the Kitty when the milk ran dry…

  181. SueDB says:

    McChrystal this, McChrystal that, everyone is so concerned with documenting an unbroken chain of command yet they haven’t even noticed that McC hasn’t been issuing orders to anyone except maybe his dog for months…

    He tried to order his wife around, but she supported DADT and told the old fart to FO&D!

    It’s not nice to piss off mama…

  182. Greg says:

    Neither, I suppose, am I “creative” enough to think of any possible real solutions to x=√4 other than 2 and -2.

    Oh, he can do math. Your mom must be so proud. But, this isn’t math.

    Here are some other possibilities:

    1. You are insane.
    2. You are in enmity with the United States.
    3. You misunderstood his interpretation.
    4. You misunderstood the Constitution.
    5. He has information that you don’t have.
    6. He has knowledge of the law that you don’t have.
    7. You have information that he doesn’t have.
    8. You have knowledge of the law that he doesn’t have.
    9. You are a figment of his imagination.
    10. He is a figment of your imagination.
    11. You both are a figment of my imagination.

    In the past, you’ve expressed an understanding of standing law that is, to put it mildly, at odds with the current understanding of the legal profession. You’ve expressed an understanding of Hawaiian law that is at odds with how Hawaiian officials understand their law.

    Perhaps his understanding of the Constitution comes from a good-faith interpretation of the current state of the law, which, as you’ve demonstrated, is at odds with your personal view of the law.

    Me: One would think that showing I was “essential[ly] dishonest[]” that would simply show my “essential dishonesty?”

    Yguy: One whose thinking is as lamentably shallow as yours certainly would.

    So, my nephew lies to his parents a lot. Does that mean he views the law as a means of deception? You said I viewed the law as a means of deception, and when pressed you didn’t point to a place where I’d said the law was a means of deception, but to my essential dishonesty.

    Your claim, then, is that proving essential dishonesty also proves that one views law as a means of deception.

    You’ve clearly skipped a step, yguy.

    It’s really amusing, though, your pretense of superiority, both moral and intellectual.

    (NB: you point to the “dispassionate observer” to prove that I possess essential dishonesty. Your view of the world, with respect to standing and Hawaiian law, suggest that you may lack insight into the “dispassionate observer.”)

  183. Greg says:

    Earlier, yguy, you whined:

    Then surely it is passing strange that the best anyone here can come up with by way of refutation is almost invariably limited to distortions and outright lies, or, in the case of mental giants like Capt. Oblivious, vacuous insolence; or, when the going gets really tough, falling back on such gargantuan imbecilitie

    What is there to refute? In this thread, you’ve posted several times. Let’s review:

    December 8, 11:16 pm – Non-sequitur (distortion)
    December 9, 12:15 pm – Vacuity
    December 9, 12:27 pm – USA Today (distortion)
    December 9, 1:40 pm – Unsourced assertion (distortion)
    December 9, 4:30 pm – insult
    December 9, 7:30 pm – insult
    December 9, 7:47 pm – Vacuity
    December 9, 10:42 pm – Vacuity
    December 10, 12:53 am – insult
    December 10, 1:03 pm – insult
    December 10, 1:29 pm – insult
    December 10, 4:17 pm – insult
    December 10, 4:22 pm – insult
    December 10, 4:25 pm – insult

    So, you have, at best, 2 meaningful comments which could be refuted.

    A lot of noise, and not a lot of signal, yguy. I mean, really, how does one “refute” a comment like:

    It hardly needs refuting by Okubo, since the relevant HI statutes are more than adequate to accomplish that.

    I have to give you one thing, yguy, you are a very good troll. You can lob an unsupported and tenuous allegation like the best of them.

    You’re not so great with reasoned debate, however.

  184. Joey says:

    Some questions for the birthers posting here:
    1) Why has no one simply sought a subpoena for Obama’s birth records? Release without Obama’s permission is allowed under Hawai’i Revised Statutes 338-18(b)(9).
    2) If Obama released a long form birth certificate which stated exactly what is on the COLB, would you believe that it is authentic?
    3)Why has the (former)Republican Governor of Hawai’i, Linda Lingle stated publically that Barack Obama was born at Kapi’olani Medical Center in Honolulu, Hawai’i?
    4)Why did Dr. Chiyome Fukino, (former)Director Of Health for the state of Hawai’i testify under oath before the Hawai’i Senate Committee on the Judiciary and Government Operations that “For more than a year, the Department of Health has continued to receive approximately 50 e-mail inquiries a month seeking access to President Barack Obama’s birth certificate in spite of the fact that President Obama POSTED A COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ON HIS FORMER CAMPAIGN WEBSITE.”–Chiyome Fukino, M.D. Director of Health, February 23, 2010.
    5) Now that Barack Obama’s closest political ally, Neil Abercrombie is the new Democrat Governor of Hawai’i, do you still expect a long form birth certificate to have information on it that isn’t on the short form?

  185. sg says:

    The funny thing about yguy–or I should say, the funny thing about yguy THIS TIME is that he’s going on and on about something to which I’m not even paying attention. I caught him in two disingenuous statements earlier of the type “I don’t know who’s doing that thing, certainly not me” when he’s famous for doing that thing, and one outright lie earlier, to which he tried the “I’m rubber, you’re glue!” defense.
    yguy has got to be three or four different people. That explains how he’s posting here, there, and everywhere at all hours of the day and night. It would also explain how lines of attack are abandoned for hours or days and then suddenly taken up again as if they were never left off. Pro tip guys: You need to communicate with each other more thoroughly at the staff meetings because you’re missing stuff.
    Of course, I could be wrong and it could be one person, but that would point to someone with a couple of different mental disorders.

  186. yguy says:

    Just to touch on what little is worth messing with:

    It’s really amusing, though, your pretense of superiority, both moral and intellectual.

    You may rest assured that irrespective of whatever sense of inferiority you may understandably have as a consequence of displaying such craven duplicity, that produces no sense of superiority in yours truly.

    The funny thing about yguy–or I should say, the funny thing about yguy THIS TIME is that he’s going on and on about something to which I’m not even paying attention.

    That you don’t pay attention to the absurdities you post suggests something along the lines of a multiple personality disorder, I should think.

  187. SueDB says:

    Correction on Yguy – “That you don’t pay attention to the absurdities “I” post suggests s…
    A self diagnosis that fits with the known facts.

  188. sg says:

    Behold, the “I’m rubber, you’re glue” defense in action–he responds to a sideways implication of multiple personality disorder with a straight out invocation of multiple personality disorder. That’s just sad. Like I said earlier, not very bright.
    As the cat eventually tires of batting around the rubber mouse toy, I too am bored now. I’ll see you next week after Lakin’s trial.

  189. Capt. Obvious says:

    Just to touch on what little is worth messing with:
    You may rest assured that irrespective of whatever sense of inferiority you may understandably have as a consequence of displaying such craven duplicity, that produces no sense of superiority in yours truly.
    That you don’t pay attention to the absurdities you post suggests something along the lines of a multiple personality disorder, I should think.

    GFY, little man.

  190. Randy says:

    Some questions for the birthers posting here:
    1) Why has no one simply sought a subpoena for Obama’s birth records?
    2) If Obama released a long form birth certificate which stated exactly what is on the COLB, would you believe that it is authentic?
    3)Why has the (former)Republican Governor of Hawai’i, Linda Lingle stated publically that Barack Obama was born at Kapi’olani Medical Center in Honolulu, Hawai’i?
    4)Why did Dr. Chiyome Fukino, (former)Director Of Health for the state of Hawai’i testify under oath before the Hawai’i Senate Committee on the Judiciary and Government Operations that “For more than a year, the Department of Health has continued to receive approximately 50 e-mail inquiries a month seeking access to President Barack Obama’s birth certificate in spite of the fact that President Obama POSTED A COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ON HIS FORMER CAMPAIGN WEBSITE.”–Chiyome Fukino, M.D. Director of Health, February 23, 2010.
    5) Now that Barack Obama’s closest political ally, Neil Abercrombie is the new Democrat Governor of Hawai’i, do you still expect a long form birth certificate to have information on it that isn’t on the short form?

    1 Hawaii’s current standard would be to release another COLB. We already have one of those. Only Obama can request and receive a certified copy of the original which Hawaiian officials have said still exists.
    2 Yes
    3 Irrelevant to the issue at hand.
    4 Again, irrelevant.
    5 Yes, I expect the long form to tell me who the doctor was, what hospital, and witnesses. The COLB does not.

    Birthers accuse Obama of covering up the “lack of evidence” confirming absolutely he was born in a hospital on Hawaiian soil as he himself, family members, and his allies have professed to be a fact.
    So the question to you is: Has Obama’s original long form even been made public and why are you afraid of what it may reveal?

  191. Christopher Mathews says:

    Randy, the issue at hand in LTC Lakin’s court-martial is whether or not he is guilty of the charges that have been referred to trial.

    As a matter of law, the hospital in which the President was born, the doctor who attended his birth and the names of the witnesses are all, to borrow your phrase, “irrelevant to the issue at hand.” If you want to know those details, you need to find a different vehicle for doing so.

  192. Greg says:

    1. Incorrect, a subpoena could allow the inspection of the entire birth file. When someone points to a law, it sometimes helps to read that law. 338-18(b) allows that:

    The department shall not permit inspection of public health statistics records, or issue a certified copy of any such record or part thereof unless it is satisfied that the applicant has a direct and tangible interest in the record. The following persons shall be considered to have a direct and tangible interest in a public health statistics record:

    (1) The registrant
    (9) A person whose right to inspect or obtain a certified copy of the record is established by an order of a court of competent jurisdiction;

    If Obama could get a “long form” he gets it through 338-18, and so does someone with a subpoena.

    3. Do you think that the Republican governor was lying? Why?

    4. Do you think that Fukino perjured herself when she confirmed, under oath, that Obama posted his birth certificate? Why/why not?

    5. What relevance could this have to Obama’s eligibility.

    Let me explain that last one. Pretend, for a second, that you draw to an inside straight and the “long form” is as favorable to your case as it possibly can be given the facts we know. It will say:

    Obama was born at home. His birth was attended only by his mother. And his family members testified to his home birth.

    Now what?

    You are still in the same position you are in today.

    In this hypothetical world, the evidence of birth was accepted by the DOH and the facts contained on the certificate are STILL prima facie evidence of his Hawaiian birth! And you STILL lack any affirmative facts that Obama was born elsewhere.

    The CRS memo explains just how hosed you are in footnote 60:

    In Liacakos v. Kennedy, 195 F. Supp. 530, 632-633 (D.D.C. 1961), the court found that “a record of birth contemporaneously made by governmental authority in official records would be almost conclusive evidence of birth.” However, with no such official foreign (or domestic) contemporaneous documentation, a “delayed birth certificate” produced by the plaintiff, even though issued by the State of West Virginia 46 YEARS AFTER THE ALLEGED BIRTH THERE, would provide prima facie evidence of “natural born citizenship.” That prima facie evidence, un-rebutted by any official foreign documentation, along with collateral evidence of assumed citizenship, would establish “natural born” status by a “fair preponderance of the evidence.”

    So, if a birth certificate issued 46 years AFTER birth trumps no evidence of foreign birth, how can simply showing that the family attested to a home birth get you any further than, well, losing?

  193. Randy says:

    4)Why did Dr. Chiyome Fukino, (former)Director Of Health for the state of Hawai’i testify under oath before the Hawai’i Senate Committee on the Judiciary and Government Operations that “For more than a year, the Department of Health has continued to receive approximately 50 e-mail inquiries a month seeking access to President Barack Obama’s birth certificate in spite of the fact that President Obama POSTED A COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ON HIS FORMER CAMPAIGN WEBSITE.”–Chiyome Fukino, M.D. Director of Health, February 23, 2010.

    I know you are bent over for the Left, but even you should be able to recognize the difference between a “COLB” and an “Original long form certificate of live birth”. Your lack of knowledge and obvious bias has you blinded to the obvious.
    No one, nor I, have ever disputed that the COLB was posted “ON HIS FORMER CAMPAIGN WEBSITE”.
    Fukino did not however, testify that the original long form had been posted. Well that would have been a lie wouldn’t it? Using Fukimo in defense of your want to conceal the truth lacks credulity.

    So I ask you again, why are you so deathly afraid to see what is on the original long form? Huh?

  194. Randy says:

    Randy, the issue at hand in LTC Lakin’s court-martial is whether or not he is guilty of the charges that have been referred to trial.As a matter of law, the hospital in which the President was born, the doctor who attended his birth and the names of the witnesses are all, to borrow your phrase, “irrelevant to the issue at hand.”If you want to know those details, you need to find a different vehicle for doing so.

    For the record, I believe Lakin is guilty and I hope he will be imprisoned.
    I also believe that’s what he wants.

    As a matter of Constitutional law I do believe it matters whether a president is still allowed to hold an office won on false pretenses and concealing information. Complicit acquiescence to ensure the election of a/any fellow democrat is common behavior from modern democrats (reference:ACORN)and should be of utmost concern to everyone, yourself included.
    So me, I won’t be filing any lawsuits or marching. I have better things to do.
    But I have questions and concerns that will not be dismissed by quoting precedent.

    We will have to just agree to disagree.
    And when the chips fall, say our “told you so’s”.

  195. Randy says:

    Greg says:
    1. Incorrect, a subpoena could allow the inspection of the entire birth file.

    The entire issue is about a president relying on judicial impasse to supplant legislative responsibility. You and I will have to wait for a legislative subpoena to resolve the issue. Would you support congressional efforts to clear up the issue? I think not.

  196. BigGuy says:

    @Randy — “Complicit acquiescence to ensure the election of a/any fellow democrat is common behavior from modern democrats…”
    __

    Doesn’t your argument fall apart right there? I mean, Bush v. Gore, however you feel about the outcome, was a hotly contested issue, with the country split down the middle and high-powered attorneys on both sides battling it out before SCOTUS.

    But how can you attribute Obama’s purported fraud to “fellow democrat[s]” ? Weren’t there plenty of Republicans in the administration of Linda Lingle who could easily have pointed to irregularities concerning the COLB? Couldn’t the McCain campaign have taken legal action, or at least raised a public stink? Why was not a single objection raised to the vote of the Electoral College, not by a single member of Congress? And who are the high-powered attorneys on your side now — Phil Berg, Orly Taitz, Mario Apuzzo?

    I don’t see how you can make an even remotely credible case on the basis of complicity by Democrats. The Republicans had plenty of chances to get their point on eligibility across, and the only reasonable explanation for what happened is that they knew they didn’t have one.

  197. Joey says:

    I know you are bent over for the Left, but even you should be able to recognize the difference between a “COLB” and an “Original long form certificate of live birth”. Your lack of knowledge and obvious bias has you blinded to the obvious.No one, nor I, have ever disputed that the COLB was posted “ON HIS FORMER CAMPAIGN WEBSITE”.Fukino did not however, testify that the original long form had been posted. Well that would have been a lie wouldn’t it? Using Fukimo in defense of your want to conceal the truth lacks credulity.So I ask you again, why are you so deathly afraid to see what is on the original long form? Huh?

    The information on a Certified Copy of a Hawaii COLB comes directly from the original long form birth certificate and the information on a COLB is all that the Constitution requires to qualify under Article II, Section 1: Place of Birth and Date of Birth. The other Constitutional requirement is 14 years residence in the US, and that information is not found on a birth document.
    Dr. Fukino issued a media release that said the following: “I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of the Hawai’i Department of Health have seen the ORIGINAL vital records maintained on file maintained by the Hawai’i Department of Health VERIFYING Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawai’i and is a natural born American citizen.”–July 27, 2009

    I have no need to see what’s on the long form because there is no additional information on a 1961 state of Hawaii issued long form that is relevant to qualifying as a natural born citizen.
    Now paranoid right wing wackos such as yourself may be curious as to what is on Obama’s long form but it has no relevance to qualifying for the presidency.
    There have now been 86 lawsuits filed on Obama’s eligibility including nine appeals or applications at the Supreme Court of the United States and not one court or judge has ordered release of Obama’s long form birth certificate.
    Here’s what a Ronald Reagan appointed CHIEF US District Court Judge had to say: “This is one of several suits filed by Ms. Taitz in her quixotic attempt to prove that President Obama is not a natural born citizen as required by the Constitution. This Court is not willing to go tilting at windmills with her.”–US CHIEF District Court Judge for the District of Columbia, Royce C. Lamberth in dismissing the Quo Warranto claim of Orly Taitz in Taitz v Obama, April 14, 2010
    I suggest that you “google” “Nordyke Twins Long Form” and look at a real 1961 Hawai’i long form and see what additional information could be on that document that is relevant to whether Barack Obama is eligible or not.

    “And so I had my health director who is a physician by way of 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 stating that the president was, in fact, born at Kapi’olani Hospital in Honolulu, Hawai’i. And that’s just a fact. It’s been established. He was born here.”–Governor Linda Lingle of Hawai’i (R), May 2, 2010.

  198. Greg says:

    Would you support congressional efforts to clear up the issue? I think not.

    I would love for a Republican Congress to waste their time on this nonsense.

    As I pointed out above, the absolute best you can hope for is that the form says Obama was born in Hawaii at home with only his mother/grandmother witnessing/attesting to the facts.

    (It cannot say his parents were other than BO Sr and Stanley Ann, because then the COLB couldn’t say that. It cannot say he was born somewhere other than Hawaii, because Hawaii has confirmed he was born in the state. It cannot say he was born on some other date, because the index data confirms the birthdate.)

    Which puts you in the same place. You’ve got NO FACTS that say Obama was born anywhere but Hawaii.

    What does Obama fear about releasing the long form? What does Brer Rabbit fear about the Briar Patch?

  199. Joey says:

    1 Hawaii’s current standard would be to release another COLB. We already have one of those. Only Obama can request and receive a certified copy of the original which Hawaiian officials have said still exists.2 Yes3 Irrelevant to the issue at hand.4 Again, irrelevant.5 Yes, I expect the long form to tell me who the doctor was, what hospital, and witnesses. The COLB does not. Birthers accuse Obama of covering up the “lack of evidence” confirming absolutely he was born in a hospital on Hawaiian soil as he himself, family members, and his allies have professed to be a fact.So the question to you is: Has Obama’s original long form even been made public and why are you afraid of what it may reveal?

    Do you really, seriously think that the Constitution requires a president to be born in a hospital, be delivered by a physician and have witnesses to the birth?
    If Obama was born on the beach at Waikiki and was delivered by a midwife, he’d still be a natural born citizen.
    Here’s what a former Republican state Senator from Georgia who was appointed to the federal judiciary by George W. Bush had to say on this subject:
    “A spurious claim questioning the President’s constitutional legitimacy may be protected by the First Amendment, but a Court’s placement of its imprimatur upon a claim that is so lacking in factual support that it is FRIVOLOUS would undoubtedly disserve the public interest.”–US District Court Judge for the Middle District of Georgia, Clay R. Land is dismissing Captain Connie Rhodes v Thomas MacDonald, September 16, 2009.
    (Captain Rhodes didn’t want to deploy to Iraq until she was certain that the President was truly eligible). She went to Iraq after the dismissal of her suit. Her attorney was fined $20,000 for wasting the Court’s time with nonsense.
    I do not need to see Obama’s long form birth certificate because I am not a “crank” or a “conspiracy nut.” I believe the REPUBLICAN officials of the state of Hawai’i including the Governor, the Attorney General, the Director of Health and the Registrar of Vital Statistices who have all confirmed Obama’s birth in that state.

    “If Tea Party groups are to maximize their influence on policy, they must now begin the difficult task of dissaociating themselves from cranks and conspiracy nuts. This includes 9/11 deniers, “birthers” who insist Barack Obama was not born in the United States and militia supporters espousing something vaguely akin to armed rebellion.” Karl Rove, Wall Street Journal Editorial, February 17, 2010.

  200. Joey says:

    The entire issue is about a president relying on judicial impasse to supplant legislative responsibility. You and I will have to wait for a legislative subpoena to resolve the issue. Would you support congressional efforts to clear up the issue? I think not.

    You are DEAD WRONG. ANY prosecuting attorney in the nation can go to a judge and get a subpoena and specify exactly what information is being subpoenaed. At any point in time a Grand Jury investigation could have been held into Obama’s eligibility to be on the ballot in any state where his name was to appear. Under Hawai’i Revised Statutes 338-18(b)(9) a confidential birth record can be released without the permission of the person named on the certificate to “a person whose right to inspect or obtain a copy of the record is established by an order of a court of competent jurisdiction.”

    You are also dead wrong that Obama has relied on judicial impasse. About half of the 86 already adjudicated lawsuits regarding Obama’s eligibility didn’t even name Obama as a defendant so he had no attorneys in those lawsuits. A few examples: Rhodes v MacDonald, Ankeney et. al. v. The Governor Of Indiana, Donofrio v Wells, Lightfoot v. Bowen.
    Any court could have ordered release of Obama’s birth records without any input from him in lawsuits (for example) challenging state Secretaries of State for not properly vetting Obama.

  201. SueDB says:

    1 Hawaii’s current standard would be to release another COLB. We already have one of those. Only Obama can request and receive a certified copy of the original which Hawaiian officials have said still exists.
    2 Yes
    3 Irrelevant to the issue at hand.
    4 Again, irrelevant.
    5 Yes, I expect the long form to tell me who the doctor was, what hospital, and witnesses. The COLB does not.
    Birthers accuse Obama of covering up the “lack of evidence” confirming absolutely he was born in a hospital on Hawaiian soil as he himself, family members, and his allies have professed to be a fact.
    So the question to you is: Has Obama’s original long form even been made public and why are you afraid of what it may reveal?

    You might get a hold of Dr. West who is the physician on record. It would be real difficult as he is dead, but at least one witness heard him speak of a baby with the strange name Barak Obama…
    Even Snopes tell you to FO&D

    http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthcertificate.asp

  202. BigGuy says:

    @Joey — “You are also dead wrong that Obama has relied on judicial impasse.”
    __

    Good point. There is certainly no “impasse” in any rational sense.

    What Randy is referring to as an impasse is the fact that the courts have ruled and he doesn’t like the results.

  203. SueDB says:

    You & other birthers bandy about the word “issue”.An “issue” only exists in what pases for your gray matter. The rest of us see none. Nor, I might add, do the courts.

    What issue? It was settled a long time ago. Randy just hasn’t kept up or is being deliberately stupid. Take your pick

  204. SueDB says:

    I would love for a Republican Congress to waste their time on this nonsense.
    As I pointed out above, the absolute best you can hope for is that the form says Obama was born in Hawaii at home with only his mother/grandmother witnessing/attesting to the facts.
    (It cannot say his parents were other than BO Sr and Stanley Ann, because then the COLB couldn’t say that. It cannot say he was born somewhere other than Hawaii, because Hawaii has confirmed he was born in the state. It cannot say he was born on some other date, because the index data confirms the birthdate.)Which puts you in the same place. You’ve got NO FACTS that say Obama was born anywhere but Hawaii.
    What does Obama fear about releasing the long form? What does Brer Rabbit fear about the Briar Patch?

    That index data the Birfers whined about just is another straw man that bit them on the ass big time.

    Ignorance is getting boring…

  205. SueDB says:

    @Joey — “You are also dead wrong that Obama has relied on judicial impasse.”
    __Good point. There is certainly no “impasse” in any rational sense.What Randy is referring to as an impasse is the fact that the courts have ruled and he doesn’t like the results.

    Sounds like a personal problem to me rather than anything else. I guess Randy didn’t get enough breast feeding when he was a young’in.

  206. Anonymous says:

    The entire issue is about a president relying on judicial impasse to supplant legislative responsibility. You and I will have to wait for a legislative subpoena to resolve the issue. Would you support congressional efforts to clear up the issue? I think not.

    I think not too, why? He just told you why. Because the long form certificate at BEST for your position leaves the doctor and hospital blank.

    You certainly can’t believe that somehow there is either nothing there at all, or there is something that says “born in Kenya.”

    Even you can’t think that. He also points out that the burden of proof is much lower than you and your friends want it to be, preponderance of the evidence at the highest, possibly even a lower standard.

    Even in your best possible dream result, you are going to have a “long form” birth certificate missing the doctors signature.

    Do you really think the difference between NBC and not is a doctor’s signature and location of the hospital? Because prior to modern medicine, most NBCs wouldn’t have had either. They’d have the family saying yep he was born here, and they might have neighbors saying, yep he grew up around here.

    Obama has both of those.

  207. yguy says:

    You might get a hold of Dr. West who is the physician on record.

    What “record” would that be, and just how does one contact a dead man?

  208. SueDB says:

    What “record” would that be, and just how does one contact a dead man?

    That sounds like another personal problem to me, since it doesn’t cause anyone to pause except for you.

    http://www.wgrz.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=63539&catid=13

    Looks like she went on the record. It may be hearsay, but it is one hell of a lot more than 2 totally fabricated BC.
    Birfer are soooo gullible.

  209. SueDB says:

    Since his COLB confirms his birth on Oahu, HI…There isn’t an issue here.

    Your denial of offical Hawaii State Records does not portend a good end for you. Get help fast!

  210. SueDB says:

    That sounds like another personal problem to me, since it doesn’t cause anyone to pause except for you.http://www.wgrz.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=63539&catid=13Looks like she went on the record.It may be hearsay, but it is one hell of a lot more than 2 totally fabricated BC.
    Birfer are soooo gullible.

    In fact this sounds like 2 personal problems…;)

  211. Capt. Obvious says:

    What “record” would that be, and just how does one contact a dead man?

    Why would it matter? You’re a proven liar, pathetic loner and a political enemy.

  212. Joey says:

    That would be the “record” of births at Kapi’olani Medical Center in Honolulu for August 4, 1961 at about 7:24 in the evening. The (former) Republican Governor of Hawai’i, Linda Lingle has identified that facility as the birth hospital and Kapi’olani recently celebrated its centennial anniversay and published a congratulatory letter from the 44th President of the United States in its Centennial Anniversary Publication which stated in part: “As a beneficiary of the excellence of Kapi’olani Medical Center-the place of my birth-I am pleased to add my voice to your chorus of supporters.”
    Dr. Rodney T. West can be contacted by se’anace.

  213. SueDB says:

    And again, the bc has NOTHING to do with LTC Lakin going to the big house. He refused an order from a Colonel in the US Army who does outrank him. LTC Lakin was obligated to follow that order…period…See US Title 10 –
    Congress gave the power to Military Officers to issue orders. While the President is the CIC, he his more like a CEO that answers to a board. And the board sez ynuts is just that…nuts.

    Read Title 10, then get back to us…

  214. Joey says:

    Here’s a link to Kapi’olani Medical Center’s Centennial magazine which contains the letter from President Obama referring to Kapi’olani as “the place of my birth” on the front page.
    http://www.kapiolanigift.org/doc/centennial-magazine.pdf

  215. Christopher Mathews says:

    Randy,

    As a matter of Constitutional law I do believe it matters whether a president is still allowed to hold an office won on false pretenses and concealing information.

    As a matter of Constitutional law, I tend to agree. I haven’t, however, seen any persuasive evidence demonstrating the truth of the assumption implicit in the word “still” — i.e., that the President took office on false pretenses in the first place.

    You may not be satisfied with the certificate that’s been made public and the two birth announcements in the Honolulu papers, but others undoubtedly are. I don’t know of any particular reason why the President should be required to prove his bona fides to your satisfaction rather than someone else’s, but should you find an appropriate forum, you’re welcome to try to make him do so.

    Complicit acquiescence to ensure the election of a/any fellow democrat is common behavior from modern democrats (reference:ACORN)and should be of utmost concern to everyone, yourself included.

    It’s comments like this, frankly, that underscore the political nature of your question. You blithely assume that every member of one of America’s two major political parties is likely to be complicit in whatever manner of malfeasance is necessary to win an election.

    I’m reasonably certain that there are Democrats who would take great offense at that suggestion. I’m also reasonably sure there are others who would level similar charges against Republicans. I’m positive a military court is not the place for you to fight with your political enemies.

    But I have questions and concerns that will not be dismissed by quoting precedent.

    No doubt. I frankly don’t believe there is any precedent, nor any evidence, that will satisfy all the birthers. Confronted with the original certificate, some percentage will say it’s a forgery, and will likewise disbelieve any contrary evidence. Others will say it doesn’t matter where he was born anyway, because his father wasn’t a U.S. citizen. But whatever your questions and concerns, and no matter how hardy they may be, a general court is not the place to work them through.

    As for saying “I told you so” — pretty much anyone who has even the slightest familiarity with military law can already say that. The verdict and the sentence, if any, are still to be resolved; but the legal issues were never in doubt.

  216. Greg says:

    Looks like she went on the record. It may be hearsay…

    Fed R Ev 803(19) It’s clearly reputation about birth, so the only question is whether she is close enough to Obama to be considered part of his community. If she could find the letter she wrote to her dad, I think you could almost certainly get it into evidence.

  217. SueDB says:

    Here’s a link to Kapi’olani Medical Center’s Centennial magazine which contains the letter from President Obama referring to Kapi’olani as “the place of my birth” on the front page.
    http://www.kapiolanigift.org/doc/centennial-magazine.pdf

    Nice letter on White House letterhead and signed by The President…

  218. Randy says:

    1 If you are representing a defendant who you know is guilty, what is your defense? Keep evidence hidden? Attempt to place blame on others or circumstance, plead the 5th, delay, delay some more?
    2 If you are fortunate enough to represent a defendant you know to be innocent and can prove it, you put up the proof willingly and savor a win.

    The simplest of simpletons can see Obama is acting like a defendant, and not the innocent kind.

  219. BigGuy says:

    @Randy — “The simplest of simpletons can see Obama is acting like a defendant, and not the innocent kind.”
    __

    No disagreement there!

    Trouble is, no one else see it that way.

  220. Randy says:

    I agree with you
    BigGuy<Simpleton

  221. Greg says:

    If someone files a frivolous lawsuit, you move to dismiss it at the earliest opportunity and savor the early win. Obama’s acting like someone faced a lot of frivolous lawsuits.

  222. Randy says:

    Here’s a link to Kapi’olani Medical Center’s Centennial magazine which contains the letter from President Obama referring to Kapi’olani as “the place of my birth” on the front page.
    http://www.kapiolanigift.org/doc/centennial-magazine.pdf

    Convenient, a dead link to anecdotal evidence of nothing relevant or even interesting. I bow to your overwhelming brilliance. Just like Obama does.

  223. Randy says:

    If someone files a frivolous lawsuit, you move to dismiss it at the earliest opportunity and savor the early win. Obama’s acting like someone faced a lot of frivolous lawsuits.

    You are right but I am only opining on the court of public opinion. So Na..na-na-na-na.

  224. Randy says:

    Nice letter on White House letterhead and signed by The President…

    Why is Obama so protective of a birth certificate that proves his birth at Kapi’olani yet eager to leak the same super-duper secret information to the public in this letter? Could it all be a ruse or is he schizophrenic?

  225. interested onlooker says:

    Why is Obama so protective of a birth certificate that proves his birth at Kapi’olani yet eager to leak the same super-duper secret information to the public in this letter? Could it all be a ruse or is he schizophrenic?

    He heard that doing so would really annoy you and the rest of your ilk, and that there would be precious little you could do about it. Seems to be working out well for him, too!

  226. Randy says:

    He heard that doing so would really annoy you and the rest of your ilk, and that there would be precious little you could do about it.Seems to be working out well for him, too!

    Actually, not much is working out well for your dear leader BUT being an annoyance.

  227. Rickey says:

    Why is Obama so protective of a birth certificate that proves his birth at Kapi’olani yet eager to leak the same super-duper secret information to the public in this letter?

    Actually, Obama has done nothing to “protect” his birth certificate. The “protection” is afforded to him (and everyone else who was born in Hawaii) by Hawaii’s privacy laws. You have no more right to see his birth certificate than I have to see your birth certificate.

    Also, the information about the hospital was far from “super-duper secret.” The fact that Obama was born at Kapi’olani was well known before the letter which he sent to the hospital in 2009. For example, this Washington Post article, published in August, 2008, identifies Kapi’olani as the hospital where Obama was born:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/23/AR2008082301620.html

    If Obama were to ask Hawaii to release a copy of his original birth certificate, it wouldn’t dissuade the birthers. Even if they could be convinced that he was born in Hawaii, they would simply focus entirely on the well-debunked “two-citizen parent” argument. There is no way to satify them, so why should Obama try? Better to let them spend their time and money on failure after failure.

  228. Welsh Dragon says:

    Works for me!

    Me too – they must have deploy the new anti-birther firewall!

  229. SueDB says:

    Works for me!

    Seems to work for anyone except a birfer, go figure…

  230. SueDB says:

    Actually, Obama has done nothing to “protect” his birth certificate. The “protection” is afforded to him (and everyone else who was born in Hawaii) by Hawaii’s privacy laws. You have no more right to see his birth certificate than I have to see your birth certificate.Also, the information about the hospital was far from “super-duper secret.” The fact that Obama was born at Kapi’olani was well known before the letter which he sent to the hospital in 2009. For example, this Washington Post article, published in August, 2008, identifies Kapi’olani as the hospital where Obama was born:http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/23/AR2008082301620.htmlIf Obama were to ask Hawaii to release a copy of his original birth certificate, it wouldn’t dissuade the birthers. Even if they could be convinced that he was born in Hawaii, they would simply focus entirely on the well-debunked “two-citizen parent” argument. There is no way to satify them, so why should Obama try? Better to let them spend their time and money on failure after failure.

    He already presented the lawful document from the State of HI. Just because YOU have a problem with it, doesn’t mean any court in the land won’t. See fine print at the bottom…

  231. Trevor says:

    Ah the ever popular Birfoon…”out any day now” argument, one immortalized by Mad Ole Orly and her “Out in 30 days” screech.

    Alas for the Birfoons, you’ve been saying that for over 2 years now and guess what you have to show for it…?

    That would be in fact less than nothing as you are currently at the butt end of 70 lost lawsuits.

    As for LonelyStar, starting a diatribe with “After doing some non biased research” (2 lies in the first 6 words) demonstrates only your fatuous ignorance of facts, law, the Constitution, the Supreme Court rulings and actual reality.

    You’ll be whining like this until such time as the President finish his term or terms and nothing you will have said or done will have made one iota of difference.

    Sucks being a Birfoon.

  232. Bob Ross says:

    Trevor its the Friedman unit all over again. Just 60 more days and we’ll be out of Iraq just 60 more days etc etc

  233. Randy says:

    The link does work. It just took forever to load. However, I only retract my dead link comment and stand by the rest.
    How about posting a link to any elected Democrat or paid Demo-spinster who has ever questioned the adequacy of the COLB? You can’t find one. A self-inquisitive Democrat is as elusive as Obama’s records. Two years and/or 72 lawsuits, whatever, the bell still tolls for he and me.

  234. Randy says:

    You have no more right to see his birth certificate than I have to see your birth certificate.

    True.
    If you asked to see my original long form birth certificate, I’d gladly show you. I have it in a file cabinet no more than 12 feet away from me. Moreover, If I could send you into harms way I would gladly agree and give you that right.
    I guess it all a question of character.

  235. Christopher Mathews says:

    I guess it all a question of character.

    And not a matter of law. On that, we can agree.

  236. SueDB says:

    And not a matter of law.On that, we can agree.

    You’re a character…happy now?

  237. Christopher Mathews says:

    You’re a character…happy now?

    Indeed. And on that happy note, I will close this thread.

    Tomorrow we can start anew with updates from the actual trial.