Lt. Scott Easterling has entered a novel fight while serving in Iraq: he is suing President Barack Obama. Easterling is calling the President an “impostor” and challenging his right to issue commands while his birth status is in question. It is one of a series of lawsuit challenging the right of the President to serve on the basis of his birth status. It appears that he could be joined by Senator Richard Shelby in the litigation. Shelby has refused to accept Obama citizenship until he sees a birth certificate.
Easterling is supporting challenges filed by California attorney Orly Taitz and her Defend Our Freedom Foundation. He issued a statement: “As an active-duty officer in the United States Army, I have grave concerns about the constitutional eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama to hold the office of president of the United States,” wrote Scott Easterling in a “to-whom-it-may-concern” letter.
The statement will raise an interesting question for an active soldier. It appears that Lt. Easterling is still following orders and he does have a right to file a lawsuit. However, calling the Commander-in-Chief an “impostor” in an out-of-court statement could be the grounds for discipline under the military code. Here is the statement that he released to the public:
To Any and All Interested Parties,
As an active-duty Officer in the United States Army, I have grave concerns about the constitutional eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama to hold the Office of President of The United States. He has absolutely refused to provide to the American public his original birth certificate, as well as other documents which may prove or disprove his eligibility. In fact, he has fought every attempt made by concerned citizens in their effort to force him to do so.
Until Mr. Obama releases a “vault copy” of his original birth certificate for public review, I will consider him neither my Commander in Chief nor my President, but rather, a usurper to the Office – an impostor.
My conviction is such that I am compelled to join Dr. Orly Taitz’s lawsuit, as a plaintiff, against Mr. Obama. As a citizen, it pains me to do this, but as an Offficer, my sworn oath to support and defend our Constitution requires this action.
I joined the Army at age 40, after working in Iraq as a contractor with KBR in ‘05/’06. I chose to work with KBR to support my troops and then left that lucrative position when the Army raised it’s maximum enlistment age to 40. Upon completion of Basic Training, I entered Officer Candidate School and commissioned as a 2LT in August 2007. After completing the subsequent Basic Officer Leadership courses, I was assigned to Ft. Knox and shortly therafter deployed to Balad, Iraq. I was promoted to 1LT on Feb. 2, 2009 and I have approximately five months remaining of our fifteen month deployment.
I implore all Service-members and citizens to contact their Senators and Representatives and demand that they require Mr. Obama prove his eligibility. Our Constitution and our great nation must not be allowed to be disgraced.
Scott R. Easterling
United States Army
[Update: Now a second soldier has reportedly joined Easterling in his challenge to the President’s legitimacy.
The case may follow the same course as the court martial of Lt. Ehren Watada for his public comments against the Iraq war. His case led to some novel appeals and a mistrial.
253 thoughts on “Active Duty Soldier Joins Lawsuit Challenging Obama’s Right to Serve as President”
I’ve been reviewing shadow’s postings, finding a moving target.
First he said “I do defend the Constitutional requirement however that the President must be 35, lived here 14 years, and be born in the United States as a natural born citizen.”
March 1, 2009 at 4:21 pm
Then he said “You need two citizens as parents to be naturally born if not born in the United States.”
March 1, 2009 at 6:53 pm
Then it was “Immigration law at the time of Barack Obama’s birth (Aug 4 1961) was that a child born to only one American parent needed to live in the United States for 5 years past the age of 14 to transmit this status. S.A. Dunham was not 19 when she had Obama, she was 18. This law is the applicable law in this case.”
March 1, 2009 at 8:39 pm
“Also, Vince, read the immigration law. I’m astounded you still don’t get it. IT IS IMMIGRATION LAW –> did you read that? IMMIGRATION LAW. Go read it. You can’t transmit automatic (natural born status) to progeny in 1961 as a single parent whose father is not also American — UNLESS you have lived 5 years in the US after age 14. Clear cut. Definitive.”
March 2, 2009 at 10:58 am
As everyone can see, he first said a President had to be born in the U.S. Then he dropped back, and said two citizen parents were needed if the President was not born in the U.S. Then he said if one parent was a citizen, she had to live five years past age 14.
I have searched this out and found that there is one unstated assumption in the last two postings. There was an immigration law in effect in 1961, but it was only applicable to births outside the U.S., not to births inside the U.S., as implied in the above quotes. That law required five years of physical presence in the U.S. after age 14 by the American citizen parent of a foreign birth. So the statements about five years past age 14 apply only to births outside the country, and have no application at all to births within the United States.
There is a lot of discussion about this at the web. There are numerous emails and postings (including the one wrongly attributed to Sowell) that claim that Obama cannot be natural born, even if he was born in the U.S., because of this law or other laws similar to it. Check the Volokh Conspiracy for Law Professor Eugene Volokh’s take on this.
Shadow’s quoted postings did not mention births outside the United States, and thus implied that the rule applied even to births inside the country when only on parent was a citizen. It has taken some time to wade through this confusion.
In section 301 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of June 27, 1952 (66 Stat. 163, 235, 8 U.S. Code Section 1401 (b)), the statute provided:
Section 301. (a) The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:
(1) a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof;
(7) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States, who prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than ten years, at least five of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years.
Since this is a legal site, I have inflicted the full statutory language and the full citation on all of you, whether you like it or not, and here are the links:
Full text of 301 of 1952
This is my effort to make some sense of the incoherent postings above.
None of this is applicable to Obama. It is purely hypothetical. He was born in Hawaii, the 50th State of the United States, and was subject to the jurisdiction of the United States at that time. He therefore was a national and citizen of the United States at birth under the laws that applied then and now.
The conspiracy theorists seem to think that his mother traveled to Kenya, gave birth there, and then jetted back to Hawaii, where she or her relatives falsely claimed the baby had been born in Honolulu. They faked a birth announcement in the local paper (even though it appears that the papers in those days took their information only from hospitals, not from individuals). But theorists have offered only speculation, and not a shred of credible evidence, for such inherently implausible activities by a pair of impoverished college students in 1961. Theorists have also claimed that a woman said she saw Barack Obama born in Kenya, but it appears that she was confused by the question and was talking through an interpreter about his father, Barack Sr.
You are so right. Many years ago after my first infarction I lay in the hospital, a depressed/scared 37 year old. On my cassette recorder I constantly played his “Jesus Is On The Mainline…Tell Him What You Want” and while I wasn’t converted his voice and guitar licks brought me great cheer and helped me visualize healing.
Ry Cooder can play anything. ANYTHING. From bolero to ballad to heavy metal. When you look up “versatile guitarist” in the Wiki, it should have his picture.
My apologies for getting too heavy and pontifical. Part of the reason is I love The West, having traveled it extensively in my Hippie/On The Road days. There I was in jeans with metal stars down the sides, Mexican Wedding Shirts open almost to my navel, dirty blond hair down to my shoulders and a full parti-colored beard. In the West, including Utah, no one ever treated me with anything but courtesy and friendliness. I was even stopped one for speeding at 3am on a North Dakota highway by a trooper. My speedometer was broken so he showed me the radar reading in his car, which was 96. Scared the hell out of me but he was a complete gentleman, didn’t bother to search my car and let me drive on with a $15 ticket the payment to be mailed in.
Other times in a bar in a small farming town in Wyoming where the local KFC was the only other restaurant. I walked in alone amidst local farmers in baseball caps and overalls. All was very cool, we wound up arguing about football and baseball in a decidedly friendly way and bought each other drinks. We were all just people.
Now in truth, having seen Easy Rider, I avoided the South, Texas and Oklahoma. It might not have been as friendly in small towns. Since then though I live in the South and have traveled it. People are just people everywhere.
I know it well and its’ one of my Dead favorites, which include Sugar Magnolia, Ripple, Box of Rain and He’s Gone. The last being the best eulogy for a person I know of.
You’re in the ballpark as we all are. The society of the time saw us as outlaws and the identification with the Western myth was a natural outgrowth.
Thank you so much for the link. Currently I’m listening to the Ry Cooder version, having gone through The Weavers, Jerry Lee Lewis and Willie Nelson versions. It is such a wonderful song. Across the country should mean nothing to us all. We are for better or worse all part of a culture that is a blend of the best and worst of us. The more we can concentrate on the stuff we can share the healthier we’ll be as a nation.
I may mock faux conservatives for their hypocrisy, but as a 60’s Hippie type involved with the left I also found just as many hypocrites and knaves there. In the end it can never be the politics, but the good will among people. Our media culture has emphasized debate as two intractable sides yelling at each other. Perhaps debate, as on this site, can actually be a give and take discussions that can lead to mutual growth.
As a example I remember in another comment you saying that you are for the death penalty as long as guilt is completely proven. My objection to the death penalty is based on the belief that if one innocent person dies it is invalidated. If someone, with no doubt of their identity, murders someone on camera and in front of witnesses I don’t have qualms about the guilty person being put to death. Perhaps that’s because I, as a non violent law abiding citizen, would probably do grievous harm to anyone who physically hurt my wife, kids or grand kids, despite the price I might have to pay.
We are all just people, with different cultural values to be appreciated and celebrated, but the same emotions simmer beneath the surface. This is not just feel good pablum, but a necessity if the human race is to progress. Sadly it won’t happen in our lifetimes, but we all can take small steps.
Tex Ritter’s theme for High Noon had me too.
But here’s another acronym you may already know:
Mike and Bob,
The closest thing to country music that this old “hippie” listened to was Country Joe and the Fish and maybe Canned Heat. Of course, those are the only ones that I can remember from those days!
Mike, here are the very young Weavers singing their classic Goodnight Irene circa 1949. As a kid, I had a crush on that pretty songstress Ronnie Gilbert.
You and I grew up on the opposite sides of the country but music bridged many gaps.
You are correct sir about Allman’s and the Fillmore, also Creedence there too. I became a Deadhead in ’69 and also saw Kinky Friedman and the Texas Jewboy’s at Max’s Kansas City. In ’73 adding to the mix I saw The New Riders of the Purple Sage at The Academy of Music, but bought their albums earlier. I also saw Dickie Betts somewhere in NYC when he split off. Remember too, The Band played country and I saw them open for Dylan at MSG. You are so right though we Hippy’s loved us some country and your comment brought back most pleasant, but seldom visited memories.
Truth be told though, Tex Ritter singing the theme song from High Noon in 1951 as I watched the movie with my Dad had me from the jump. There’s also a vague memory of the Weavers singing Goodnight Irene on the car radio, as I laid in the back seat coming home late from a family party in Brooklyn.
“As a son of the West tell me how a long-haired(once when I had it), New-Age, hippy-type pinko Jewboy from Brooklyn counts country/western/bluegrass as the type that moves him the most.”
Did it all start with the Allman Brothers at the Fillmore East and thence expand as the Allmans joined the Grateful Dead on stage at RFK on 6/10/73 while Dicky Betts split off for a while to make “Highway Call” and Jerry Garcia continued his pedal steel guitar work into the mid 1970’s?
mespo et al,
To be clear, last night I was offering ‘Bar Nuts’, as a ‘bar’ treat ‘on the house’, since the BHO debate apparently was not closed with Shadow’s pronouncement, ‘End of Story’ – two days ago.
‘In a nutshell’, I have nothing whatsoever to do with any self-described ‘Barr’ nuts, either!
~from New England
You clearly don’t understand the concept of best evidence. Among other things.
Bob, Esq.: I’ve been gone for several days and just saw your post on my comments to T.Jefferson. This is probably stale by now, but I disagree that my argument was influenced by outcome determinism. First, the Best Evidence Rule is not in play in this case. A copy of an official document certified by the custodial agency is self-authenticating and is admissible to establish the truth of its contents. It is for that reason that the burden of proof shifts to the opponent of the document. To date I have not read or heard any arguments accusing Hawaiian officials of intentional misconduct or engaging in a conspiracy to hide the truth about the president’s birth. If people truly believe that a governmental cover-up has occurred, there are ways to explore that through discovery.
My second point is that there are those who will never be satisfied, despite the evidence. That is simply an observation from our common experience. The law does not concern itself with that type of individual because a line has to be drawn somewhere. That is all the “reasonable man” doctrine means, and it is admittedly deemed arbitrary by the dissatisfied.
Third, the Galileo case is not analogous because its outcome was in fact determined in advance, at a time when scientific observation was subordinate to religious doctrine. In other words, it was not “admissible evidence,” if you will, when offered for the purpose of contradicting doctrinal truths.
Finally, your reminder that “law is not a search for truth, but for process” supports my position. We develop and refine process because we recognize the need for a structural framework in which to conduct the search. What we hope to arrive at is not the truth, but its cousins, the most probable and the most likely. That will never be sufficient for the birth certificate litigants.
Well you had me wondering until the Barr vote. Here’s a little insight into your candidate from Wiki:
“In 1999, during Clinton’s impeachment trial, Hustler publisher Larry Flynt offered money to anyone who could provide evidence that a prominent Republican had engaged in an extramarital affair. According to the American Journalism Review, investigators for Flynt said that Barr was “guilty of king-size hypocrisy”; according to a sworn affidavit by Barr’s ex-wife Gail, Bob Barr — a longtime outspoken abortion foe had acquiesced in his then-wife having an abortion in 1983 and has indeed paid for it. In accordance with his public offer, Flynt subsequently paid a sum of money to Gail Barr after she had made her sworn affidavit. Barr never publicly disputed the contents of his ex-wife’s affidavit. Investigators also reported that Barr invoked a legal privilege during his 1985 divorce proceeding, so he could refuse to answer questions on whether he’d cheated on his second wife with the woman who is now his third.”
In the early 1990s, Barr was photographed at a fundraising event licking whipped cream off of a woman. According to the Washington Post “Two people who observed the act say it wasn’t exactly a bosom lick but more like a neckline lick, at the sort of event where business and civic leaders perform dares to raise money. ‘Not exactly Mr. Effusive’, says Matt Towery, the former chairman of Newt Gingrich’s political organization, who observed the brief and awkward licking. ‘You can hardly get the guy to smile'”.”
Given this conduct, I can see why the RepubliKlan made him House Manager for the Clinton impeachment. Probably the most upstanding guy they could find on their side of the aisle, or else they wanted somebody who thought like Clinton.
Either way you have earned a new moniker. I dub you “A Dupe.” Finally, lest you believe the Constitution is not a living, breathing document, I’ll have the cops burst into your room tonight to search you and your significant other for contraband birth control devices under a long forgotten 19th law, since we all know that is not prohibited by the Constitution’s “rules.” Oh that’s right, it is prohibited by a case interpreting the organic language of the document found in the 14th Amendment and in the context of the other protections. Sad you put your life on the line for something you know so little about.
Well over 2 Hundred posts, while exhausted, here it is in a nutshell:
No one is completely right, and cant be until SCOTUS defines Natural Born Citizen…
As far as the “Constitutional Law Professors, [Tribe and others] are concerned their opinions can be no greater than the federalists papers and those comments that are on record from those who wrote the 14th Amendment.
AS FOR THE BUDDA: The best evidence is always that which is known to exist, in this case as admitted by the Hawaii Department of Health officials is the original that is on file, which BO has yet to produce…
As for the McCain toss in,… HE IS NOT qualified for POTUS either, regardless of the Senate Resolution 511 that was sponsored by Democrats Claire, and Hillary and Obama, AND IF YOU READ THAT RESOLUTION, including that parts that were lined out, (that BO wanted but did not make it) it would appear that according to thos Senators who signed that non-binding piece of literature, that you STILL NEED TWO US PARENTS TO BE NATURAL BORN…
In any event I voted for Bob Barr, because I voted my concious, and I realize that both the dems and repub’s are playing the entire field for their own selfish purposes, and neither party gives a dammed about the country, or they would have never allowed Glass Stegall to be trashed and it was BOTH parties and the Wall Street banks jealous greed over the profits they wanted, that they thought Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were getting that cause this problem, and both the dems and the repub’s took that banker cash from the handles and next time you have a careless moment you might want to insist on term limits for the entire Congress , cause its thy who should have either DECLARED WAR, or passed on it, rather than granting any President the power that was given BUSH.
I am certainly right of center in my beliefs, AND I SERVED MY COUNTRY, but I think it was unconcionable to have used the Patriot Act to trash our constitutional rights or even worse to have allowed for any kind of torture of prisoners…that used to be the difference between us and the so called third world countries, clearly we who have tolerated this mess deseve what we get, and youwho are honest know what that is…the loss of your country as you know it.
The Constitution is not a living breathing document, its a principled set of rules, that we are to follow, and there is a way to change it if you dont like what it says, or if you want to tweak it, but that takes a specific procedure, and as long as we the people tolerate, wars without declarations from congress, and fiat money systems from private bankers, and a Secretary of State in direct violation of the clear language of that document, until we the people uphold this document, then we will surely curl up and die just as we have allowed that documents passages to be ignored.
THis sad depression we are in is not just financial, it is total, lets hope the pain of it all will wake up those who regret no standing up for what matters, and its no things!
I really like viognie lately. We tried one, maybe the same one, recently from Argentina for $9 or 10! It was quite pleasant…
Sounds groovy-I dig asparagus and soups and soy!
If you have never had the Silver Palate carrot ginger soup, give it a whirl. It’s a keeper.
I don’t know where JT is tonight, but with not further ado, this is/was my lead line…
‘Bar nuts…?’ 😉
p.s. mespo, for future reference, jujubes pair well with Prosecco or ‘champagne’, as does curry-parmesan popcorn… 😛
This recipe was inspired by several sweet/spicy nut recipes that I have tried over the years. This is my favorite because the combination of maple and brown sugar with the bite that comes from the ginger and cayenne makes them completely addictive.
Tante Marie’s Spicy Nuts
4 tablespoons butter
3 tablespoons pure maple syrup
3 tablespoons dark brown sugar
3 thin slices fresh ginger
1 teaspoon ground ginger
1/2 teaspoon ground cardamom
1 teaspoon kosher salt
1/4 teaspoon Tabasco sauce, or to taste
1/4 teaspoon Cayenne pepper
1 pound shelled pecans, almonds or walnuts
To make the pecans, preheat the oven to 300 degrees. Line a baking sheet with foil or a Sil-Pat.
Combine the butter, syrup, brown sugar, ginger, ground ginger, cardamom, salt, Tabasco, and cayenne in a small saucepan and simmer over low heat for 2-3 minutes, stirring often until sugar is completely dissolved. Place the nuts in a large bowl and pour the glaze through a strainer into the bowl. Toss the nuts well to coat them evenly with the glaze. Spread the nuts in a single layer on the prepared baking sheet and bake 30-40 minutes, stirring at 15 minute intervals, until nuts are lightly browned and almost dry when you toss them. Slide the foil or Sil-Pat off the baking sheet and onto a rack to cool the nuts completely.
Nuts can be made ahead and stored in airtight containers at room temp. or in the freezer, for up to one month.
Total: 25 mins /Active: 5 mins/ Makes: 8 to 10 servings (5 cups)
Roasted Rosemary Walnuts
* 5 cups walnuts
* 1/4 cup olive oil
* 1/4 cup fresh rosemary, coarsely chopped
* 4 teaspoons kosher salt
* 1 tablespoon granulated sugar
* 2 teaspoons freshly ground black pepper
1. Heat the oven to 350°F and arrange a rack in the middle.
2. Place nuts on a baking sheet. Add remaining ingredients and mix with your hands to evenly coat.
3. Bake until nuts are browned and toasted, stirring occasionally, about 20 minutes. Let cool on the baking sheet, transfer to a bowl, and serve.
Roasted Rosemary Walnuts
Recipe #53121 | 30 min | 15 min prep
* 2 1/2 tablespoons olive oil
* 2 teaspoons dried rosemary
* 3/4-1 teaspoon sea salt, to taste
* 1/2 teaspoon cayenne pepper
* 2 cups walnut halves
Pre-heat oven to 350 degrees.
Line baking sheet with foil.
Heat olive oil with rosemary, salt and cayenne, stirring until mixed.
Put nuts on foil-lined sheet, pour oil mixture over them, spreading evenly.
Roast, stirring once or twice, 10- 15 min, until fragrant.
Let cool and eat, or wrap in foil to store
I’m off to the confectioner’s store tomorrow. Any excuse is a good one for the vino. That’s a great WE article. I’m sipping some Argentine Vina Las Perdices Viognie from Rick’s Wine Shop in Alexandria I picked up last month. It’s carries the princely price tag of $12.00, but it’s super.
You know I had some fine asparagus soup today. Here’s the recipe courtesy of my wife who grabbed it off the web:
2 Tablespoons olive oil
1 bay leaf
1 1/2 cups chopped onion
1 medium green pepper, chopped
1/2 to 1 cup diced potato
5 cups chopped asparagus (set aside some of the tips)
1 teaspoon salt, or to taste
2 1/2 cups water or stock
2 cups soy milk
pinch of allspice
freshly ground black pepper to taste
splash of tamari
1 teaspoon of thyme
chopped scallions, for garnish
Sauté the onions in the soup pot, along with the bay leaf, until the onions turn translucent. Add the chopped green bell pepper, diced potato, chopped asparagus (leaving out those tips you set aside), water or stock, and salt. Bring water to a boil, then lower to a simmer and cook about 10 minutes or until the potato is tender.
Remove the bay leave, and purée small batches of the soup in a blender along with batches of the soy milk. (Or, if you have one, purée the soup right in the pot with a submersible blender. We have one of those and it’s great.) Purée until the texture is totally smooth.
Return the soup to the simmering heat and add the seasonings to taste. Throw in the the aspargus tips you set aside and cook until they just turn tender. DO NOT let the soup boil, or the soy milk will separate out and get kind of clumpy. Watch the soup and stir constantly. Lower the heat the moment you notice the soy milk starts separating. You could also steam the asparagus tips in advance.
mespo727272 1, March 1, 2009 at 10:32 pm
I am thinking jaw breakers or salt-water taffy or maybe just biting down on a bullet! Jujubes make sense too as we while away the time listening to the crickets chirp.
mespo, posted some recipes, ‘awaiting moderation’, but while I’m still thinking of it, here’s the ‘candy jar’ wine list…
Comments are closed.