One of the challenges faced by the defense trial team in United States v. Lakin was dealing with the accused’s motivation: an explicit, overt, and protracted public challenge to the eligibility of the President of the United States.

LTC Lakin, of course, pled guilty, acknowledging that regardless of his personal beliefs, the orders which he chose to disobey were lawful orders.  In sentencing, lead counsel Neal Puckett chose to portray his client as a well-meaning but fundamentally naive man who got bad advice from his former counsel.  This decision probably helped limit his client’s sentence, but it did not sit well with the band of birthers who had for months been cheering LTC Lakin on from the sidelines.  One in particular, Theresa Cao, took personal offense, according to this article from Baltimore Sun reporter Andrea Siegel:

Others were upset with the way Lakin’s civilian defense attorney, Neal A. Puckett, a retired Marine Corps lawyer and lieutenant colonel, spoke about them when he depicted Lakin as a naive man who now realizes that he followed the wrong advice by pressing his questions about Obama with the Army.

“He essentially called us crazy. The audacity of him to call us crazy,” said Theresa Cao … 

Today, according to Slate’s David Weigel, Ms. Cao disrupted the reading of the Constitution on the floor of the House of Representatives, shouting out during the reading of Article II, Section 1’s “natural born citizen” clause, “Except Obama!  Except Obama!  Help us, Jesus!”

46 Responses to “Puckett critic disrupts U.S. House of Representatives”

  1. Anon says:

    Please make it stop!

  2. Anonymous says:

    I promise it will stop on 20 January 2017…..

  3. Steve B says:

    …or 21 December 2012.

  4. Charlie F. says:

    I don’t know how many of you have met any of these people, but this one had particularly crazy eyes. Help us Jesus indeed.

  5. Anonymous says:

    Teh stupid, it burns.

  6. publius says:

    “Teh stupid, it burns.”

    A minor, though distressing, impact of all-things-Lakin: the arrival of sub-literate internet lingo at CAAFLOG.

  7. Christopher Mathews says:

    Have you heard about our new comparative sentencing venture, icanhasbigchickendinner.com?

  8. Anonymous says:

    “Teh stupid, it burns.”A minor, though distressing, impact of all-things-Lakin:the arrival of sub-literate internet lingo at CAAFLOG.

    sorry gramps, I “refudiate” your distress.

  9. sg says:

    Have you heard about our new comparative sentencing venture, icanhasbigchickendinner.com?

    Isn’t that the site with the Loljags?
    Instead of cute pictures of cats making sad eyes and begging near the dinner table with captions like “I can haz cheezeburger nao?” we’ll have cute pictures of military lawyers making sad eyes and begging near the Bench with captions like “I can haz diskovawy nao?”

    Heh. Cool.

  10. Capt. Obvious says:

    Isn’t that the site with the Loljags?
    Instead of cute pictures of cats making sad eyes and begging near the dinner table with captions like “I can haz cheezeburger nao?” we’ll have cute pictures of military lawyers making sad eyes and begging near the Bench with captions like “I can haz diskovawy nao?”Heh. Cool.

    Oh my gosh, I’m laughing out loud!

    In my humble opinion, it would be so cool if there was a quicker way to type that.

  11. Snuffy says:

    “He essentially called us crazy. The audacity of him to call us crazy,” said Theresa Cao

    BAHHAAAAHAAAAAA! This just kills me. No really. I choked on my coffee and coulda died. Toujours L’Audace!

  12. publius says:

    “sorry gramps, I “refudiate” your distress”

    No worries, hipster. Give the cool kids at “Above the Law” and “Wonkette” my best.

  13. mari says:

    I attended the Lakin trial and am now patting myself on the back that in my Lakin Trial Birther Profiles at http://www.thefogbow.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=5127&p=198358&hilit=birther+profiles#p198358 my title for Theresa was “in a field of crazy, managing to stand out” :)

    Dwight and Phil sat right by her. Lucky them. NOT!

  14. Anonymous says:

    “The horror………the horror……”

  15. Anonymous says:

    Poll: Who is more obsessed? Birthers or CAAFlog posters who cannot let it go?

  16. Christopher Mathews says:

    Poll: Who is more obsessed? Birthers or CAAFlog posters who cannot let it go?

    … asks the person who cannot bear to skip over a Lakin article without adding a comment or two.

  17. SueDB says:

    … asks the person who cannot bear to skip over a Lakin article without adding a comment or two.

    Tell me about it…[snicker]

  18. Anonymous says:

    “This just in: Lakin had a hamburger and fries for chow today. Word is he’ll have pizza for dinner tonight.”

  19. Anonymous says:

    “Our reports tell us it’s really cold today in Kansas and Prisoner Lakin watched Oprah this morning.”

  20. Capt. Obvious says:

    “Our reports tell us it’s really cold today in Kansas and Prisoner Lakin watched Oprah this morning.”

    And hopefully, Lakin’s cell window is facing southwest towards Wichita, Kansas, the birthplace of our President’s mother, a natural born citizen of the United States just like her son who was born in Honolulu, Hawaiʻi on August 4th, 1961.

  21. Justafly says:

    Why did you mislead your readers by claiming Dr. Lakin plead guilty, as if he acknowledged guilt on both counts?

    He only acknowledged that he was poorly counseled by his first attorney (can defendants sue for malpractice?) to “be consistent” if he was challenging Obama’s eligibility to issue legal orders and not obey the order to meet with his commander. (A question that is still not answered.)

    I understand that the truth often times does not fit with one’s agenda. But intellectual dishonesty in presenting the facts casts a shadow over your character and gives pause to any other statements held out as fact.

  22. Justafly says:

    I understand that the truth often times does not fit with one’s agenda. But intellectual dishonesty in presenting the facts casts a shadow over one’s character and gives pause to any other statements held out as fact.

  23. Christopher Mathews says:

    Justafly, LTC Lakin did plead guilty to the orders violations, and to a fourth specification under Article 92 as well. Your statement that “he only acknowleged that he was poorly counseled” is factually wrong.

    If you’d like to take the time, you can peruse this blog’s coverage of the Lakin trial here.

  24. sg says:

    I understand that the truth often times does not fit with one’s agenda. But intellectual dishonesty in presenting the facts casts a shadow over one’s character and gives pause to any other statements held out as fact.

    Irony, thy name is Justafly.
    LTC Lakin plead “guilty” to ALL of the Orders Violation charges. That includes the charges and specifications that he did not go to Fort Campbell as he was ordered to go. That includes the charges and specifications that he did not report to his Brigade Commander as he was ordered to do.
    The judge put LTC Lakin under oath, and questioned him at length to determine whether or not he knew, understood, and appreciated that he was pleading guilty to several crimes. He stated under oath that he knew that he was pleading guilty to the crimes in question, and that he understood the consequences of this plea. She also questioned him closely, again under oath, as to whether or not he knew, understood, and appreciated the illegality of his actions at the time that he undertook them. He stated, again under oath, that he knew he was committing crimes at the time he committed them. He stated under oath that he had sought counsel from military lawyers, who told him that his contemplated actions were criminal and would not get him the discovery he desired. He stated under oath, that he committed those crimes anyway.
    With respect to the last charge, for which he stood trial, he was found guilty by the panel of members. They did not believe his version of events regarding that charge. They believed the version put forth by the Trial Counsel.

  25. Justafly says:

    Dr. Lakin plead guilty to the second charge (first in order) of not attending a conference (multiple times [just to load up the charges]) with his commander.

    He was tried and found guilty on the first charge of missing movement to Ft. Campbell. The error in his tactic, IMO, was scheduling movement of troops within CONUS is not necessarily signed by POTUS. Troop movements to a theater of combat, is ordered by POTUS. There is where Dr. Lakin needed to take his stand and require Obama to finally provide proof of his eligibility.

    Dr. Lakin, correctly, questioned the lawfulness of the order as per his Oath he swore as an officer in the US military to “support and defend the U.S. Constitution”. Military officers are the last wall of defense against the supplantation of our Constitution.

    The whole event was a kangaroo-court martial. The defendant was denied his right under the Sixth Amendment to offer a defense, subpoena documents and call witnesses. Even liberals that loooove Obama would agree that Citizens should retain that God-given right.

  26. interested onlooker says:

    Dr. Lakin plead guilty to the second charge (first in order) of not attending a conference (multiple times [just to load up the charges]) with his commander.

    He disobeyed multiple orders, just to demonstrate the stupid.

    Dr. Lakin, correctly, questioned the lawfulness of the order

    Had he done it “correctly” he would not not be receiving mail as Terence Lakin, #89996 at Fort Leavenworth…

  27. Justafly says:

    I’d put his “stupid” up against yours any day.

  28. interested onlooker says:

    I’d put his “stupid” up against yours any day.

    Thus demonstrating that the stupid is strong in you, too.

  29. Justafly says:

    Thus demonstrating that the stupid is strong in you, too.

    WoW! You hurt my feelings. What are you 9 years old and an Obama supporter?

  30. Justafly says:

    Interesting article from an eyewitness at the kangaroo-court martial of Dr. Lakin.

    http://www.greeleygazette.com/press/?p=7814

  31. sg says:

    That article is almost as sad and pathetic as the birfers themselves.
    I’ll let you in on a not so little, not so secret–the dislike that people around here, almost all of whom are either career military or veterans, have for the birfers is that they want the military to ignore our oaths and engage in the very worst of all of the behaviors that the American military traditions have forbade for over two hundred years–engaging in partisan politics and disobeying the civilian leadership. The special animus that people around here have for Lakin is that he disgraced himself, his uniform, the Officer Corps, and the United States Army by engaging in that behavior.
    That you constantly attribute this disdain to partisan motivations only shows that you know nothing of the Warrior Ethos, or American military institutions or traditions.

  32. Justafly says:

    sg: You know NOTHING about what I know about the military institutions and the private opinions of the troops, officers and enlisted. But that elitist attitude is to be expected from the left.
    The Constitutionalists are those who believe it is important to protect and defend the Constitution against ALL enemies. To ignore the Constitution in favor of a (once) popular person is what tyranny is all about.

  33. sg says:

    I know enough about you from the drivel you have posted here to know that you do not understand the role of the military in a democracy, you do not understand the American military tradition that one’s private opinion is utterly irrelevant to one’s service except in the polling place and the retention decision. I know enough about you from your drivel to know that you understand the military justice system even less than I do, and as a career Infantry NCO, that’s saying something.
    And now, with your last paragraph, I know that you do not understand the constitution of the United States of America, because there’s nothing in there about the President’s legitimacy being affected by an opinion poll.

  34. Justafly says:

    I know enough about you from the drivel you have posted here to know that you do not understand the role of the military in a democracy, you do not understand the American military tradition that one’s private opinion is utterly irrelevant to one’s service except in the polling place and the retention decision.I know enough about you from your drivel to know that you understand the military justice system even less than I do, and as a career Infantry NCO, that’s saying something.
    And now, with your last paragraph, I know that you do not understand the constitution of the United States of America, because there’s nothing in there about the President’s legitimacy being affected by an opinion poll.

    Thanks for your service. But you may claim to know me from my drivel, but the fact is you know nothing about me yet you continue to insult me and draw an assumption. THAT, speaks volumes about your character.

    As far as the Constitution, I am no Constitutional lawyer, which likely ADDS to my understanding of the document and it’s history. Your childish insults are duly noted and I shall wait for your apology.

  35. sg says:

    I care not whether you respect my service or no. I didn’t do it for people like you. I did it for people whose patriotism is educated and non-conditional.
    I care not whether you believe you deserve an apology or no. With the exception of my being sorry that you are deluded as to the nature and role of the military, the contents and meaning of the US Constitution, and the value that you have added to the conversation, well you should get used to disappointment.

  36. JustaFly says:

    I care not whether you respect my service or no.I didn’t do it for people like you.I did it for people whose patriotism is educated and non-conditional.
    I care not whether you believe you deserve an apology or no.With the exception of my being sorry that you are deluded as to the nature and role of the military, the contents and meaning of the US Constitution, and the value that you have added to the conversation, well you should get used to disappointment.

    I rescind my thanks since it is obvious you are not now nor ever were an honorable member of the US Armed Forces. No service member I know of would ever make hos service conditional.

    We are finished.

  37. sg says:

    As I said, sorry and pathetic.

  38. Dwight Sullivan says:

    Jusafly wrote: “No service member I know of would ever make [his] service conditional.” Oh, you mean like a Soldier deploying to Afghanistan to provide medical care for injured service members only on the condition that the President shows him a copy of his original birth certificate first?

    [Sorry, I couldn’t resist.]

  39. Dave says:

    justafly sez:

    As far as the Constitution, I am no Constitutional lawyer, which likely ADDS to my understanding of the document and it’s history.

    You really should apply for a job as John Roberts’ clerk. I’m sure he’d be delighted to get someone whose understanding of the Constitution has been enhanced by a lack of education.

  40. JustaFly says:

    Jusafly wrote: “No service member I know of would ever make [his] service conditional.”Oh, you mean like a Soldier deploying to Afghanistan to provide medical care for injured service members only on the condition that the President shows him a copy of his original birth certificate first?[Sorry, I couldn’t resist.]

    Nice jab, but of course inaccurate. So the humor is lost due the the lack of factual foundation in the “joke”. (That is “intellectually dishonest”. (Sorry I couldn’t pass that one up.)

  41. JustaFly says:

    justafly sez:
    You really should apply for a job as John Roberts’ clerk. I’m sure he’d be delighted to get someone whose understanding of the Constitution has been enhanced by a lack of education.

    Maybe by comparison you may believe I am qualified to clerk for SCOTUS. I have read and heard from lawyers that tell me their Law School education does not focus on the US Constitution but for a perfunctory overview. (Your mileage may vary.)

  42. sg says:

    “Nice jab, but of course inaccurate.”
    I just can’t imagine why anybody would think you are delusional.

  43. Anonymous says:

    Now you guys are deleting posts…..that has not happened before. CAAFlog turns into just another bs blog.

  44. interested onlooker says:

    Now you guys are deleting posts…..that has not happened before. CAAFlog turns into just another bs blog.

    Do you have some proof of that charge? I get an email every time a message is posted to this thread (within seconds), and I don’t see anything missing on the web page, checking a dozen or so examples.

  45. sg says:

    Hasn’t happened. I’m subscribed to every comment thread in which I post a comment. It’s how I know when somebody replied to me. All of the comments that I got emails for are still present.

  46. interested onlooker says:

    Perhaps what has happened is someone clicked Preview but didn’t ever click Add your Reply.