Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I am not the one claiming that she is, I say the burden of proof is on you, not me.
I have no proof that Orly is his attorney. So if you think she is not Easterlings' attorney, then you win. However, after reading the post by Cali, my guess is that Easterlings would end up with a military attorney, not Orly. However, Orly could have established a partnership with this man, (as she will not be involved in any military court proceedings as attorney of record). The "stand" Easterlings is taking is keeping Orly's bogus issue alive, probably attracting more donations as we speak, and SHE benefits from that every day.
I have no proof that Orly is his attorney. So if you think she is not Easterlings' attorney, then you win. However, after reading the post by Cali, my guess is that Easterlings would end up with a military attorney, not Orly. However, Orly could have established a partnership with this man, (as she will not be involved in any military court proceedings as attorney of record). The "stand" Easterlings is taking is keeping Orly's bogus issue alive, probably attracting more donations as we speak, and SHE benefits from that every day.
When did that guy open that blog?
I believe that Obama is the one keeping this whole thing alive.
The oldest post I can find is from yesterday, so I guess he started it yesterday. They must have access to computers in the brig.
Austin, attacking this soldier changes the situation how? Right now he is in the brig because he has disobeyed orders, because he believes that Obama is not eligible, and the civilian courts will not hear the case. What have you said that changes any of this.
Again, Tg, as I've said to you so very many time, looking at a "witness" or messenger or protestor goes to motive and credibility. Pointing out that this man has posted something about wanting to write a book about the story of his life is not attacking him. It is simply pointing out alternative or additional motives for his actions. We now have several motives to consider. Maybe he doesn't want to be in the military anymore and sees this as an opportunity for a dishonorable discharge. Maybe he is really doing this whole thing as a "cause" he deeply believes in. And maybe he thinks that there will be lots of publicity and possibly he will write a book about his life and his experience "going against the POTUS" (delusions), becoming a hero to some in this country, and then best of all maybe he thinks there might be a movie and a TV movie about his life.
You know, when a judge gives jury instructions to a jury prior to the trial and before they go out to deliberate, they are instructed to consider the demeanor of the witnesses on the witness stand, and to compare the testimony of different witnesses, to determine the CREDIBILITY of the witnesses.........and they are instructed to not leave their everyday common sense at home! Yes, they are. So, for most of us, "messengers" and witnesses and "protestors" must be examined before we just take their "messages" at face value. Otherwise we would all be deceived by fools every day!
Again, Tg, as I've said to you so very many time, looking at a "witness" or messenger or protestor goes to motive and credibility. Pointing out that this man has posted something about wanting to write a book about the story of his life is not attacking him. It is simply pointing out alternative or additional motives for his actions. We now have several motives to consider. Maybe he doesn't want to be in the military anymore and sees this as an opportunity for a dishonorable discharge. Maybe he is really doing this whole thing as a "cause" he deeply believes in. And maybe he thinks that there will be lots of publicity and possibly he will write a book about his life and his experience "going against the POTUS" (delusions), becoming a hero to some in this country, and then best of all maybe he thinks there might be a movie and a TV movie about his life.
You know, when a judge gives jury instructions to a jury prior to the trial and before they go out to deliberate, they are instructed to consider the demeanor of the witnesses on the witness stand, and to compare the testimony of different witnesses, to determine the CREDIBILITY of the witnesses.........and they are instructed to not leave their everyday common sense at home! Yes, they are. So, for most of us, "messengers" and witnesses and "protestors" must be examined before we just take their "messages" at face value. Otherwise we would all be deceived by fools every day!
Charles E. Jones
Brigadier General US Air Force, Retired
Lifetime subject to recall for active duty
Recipient of the Distinguished Service Medal (AF)
02.04.09
"We the People of the United States of America" are entitled to know the legal qualifications of the President and Commander in Chief. For the better good and National Security of "We the People of the United States" and for Absolute Command of the Military Forces of the United States, I whole heartedly support the efforts of Dr. Orly Taitz, ESQ for taking legal action to determine whether or not Barack Hussein Obama, aka Barry Soetoro, Citizen of Indonesia and possibly citizen of Kenya, is eligible to become President of the United States and Commander in Chief of the United States Armed Forces.
It sure looks like the military has a big problem with Obama.
You may want to reread his signed statement joining Orly's lawsuit as a plaintiff, which makes her his lawyer. However, there is zero proof that any charges have been filed against him, that he's been assigned a JAG lawyer, or that he's had an Article 32 Hearing.
This just in: According to an Army spokesperson, no action has been taken but they are aware of the letter.
Quote:
An Army spokesman told Military.com today that officials are aware of Easterling's letter.
"We are taking a look at that ourselves right now," Lt. Col. Christopher Garver said. "We are always trying to balance our ... military requirements under the Uniform Code of Military Justice versus critical freedoms that all Americans enjoy."
Attorney Mathew B. Tully of the Washington, D.C.-based firm Tully Rinckey PLLC, cautioned "that nobody's actually heard directly from this ... lieutenant. We're getting this from a third party with an axe to grind."
It has happened in the past, he said, that stories emerging from the combat theater turn out to be wholly or partially false.
The Army's statement pretty much proves he's not in the Brig, not charged with anything, and no hearings have taken place. Either the blog is a hoax or he's a liar.
Quote:
If true, however, Easterling, as an Army officer, "is subject to ... [provisions] against using contemptuous language toward the president." There were such incidents in the 1990s, he said, when service members were disciplined for comments made against President Clinton. In one case brought under the provisions of Article 88 of the UCMJ a major general was forced to retire for comments he made, Tully said.
It wouldn't surprise me to learn that's the same retired major general who's joined Orly's suit.
As for your passive-aggressive personal attack, 1. This isn't your thread, 2. I was addressing a statement by Easterling, not you, and 3. I'll post facts to correct your misinformation wherever I desire.
I am beginning to like attorney Leo Donofrio, his latest blog entry is a must read as he tunes up(b**** slaps) Dr.Orly Taitz, World Nuts Daily and the Drudge Report for their sloppiness in reporting the Easterling case!
I am beginning to like attorney Leo Donofrio, his latest blog entry is a must read as he tunes up(b**** slaps) Dr.Orly Taitz, World Nuts Daily and the Drudge Report for their sloppiness in reporting the Easterling case!
thank you, thank you, thank you for that link. Bravo Leo for his clear description of Taitz!
He says at one point that (Dr. Esquire) aka Orly Taitz's actions regarding Easterling appear to have been "terribly reckless"...........he also mentions "publicity" as being a motive by Taitiz for putting "this officer" in serious jeopardy of facing charges. Additionally, he directly states that there is no lawsuit right now! No NEED whatsoever to release the officer's statements, his name, etc. to the public at this time, other than to gain publicity.
p.s.
Tg, now Leo is blasting the ever so unethical Dr. Taitz. Weren't you a big supporter of his lawsuit as well? Even this lawyer is saying that Taitz is recklessly using this officer.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Bravo Leo for his clear description of Taitz! 