Orly Taitz's argument is not the one that is flawed. Yours is flawed in various ways. The first being the Blackstone is not the authority but rather the Law of Nations, supported by the Magna Carta and then the Constitution which starts with the basic premise that the bloodline of the father is the controlling factor. The Constitution goes one step further proclaiming that both parents must be US citizens. Based on your analysis all these anchor babies are natural born citizens and that is plain ludicrous.

The whole problem with Lakin's defense is that the evidence he wants to submit is extenuation and mitigation. Unfortunately that only applies in the sentencing portion of the offense. Which means in short he has no defense as far as the elements of the offenses charged. Also keep in mind that this is only a grand jury and not the trial. The only evidence admissible is generally enough to see if there is enough evidence to go to trial. This investigating officer will not be the military judge in the case-in-chief and a different set of rules of evidence will apply when that occurs. I would also point out that the investigating officer and the future military judge will be hand picked by the Obama administration. That means he will be a progressive liberal.

Our biggest concern should not the DEMS but the Supreme Courts. The DEMS cannot enact all the left wing agenda legislature they want, that does not mean it meets the constitutional challenge. You cannot change the constitution by writing laws that are unconstitutional. They become overturned. You change the constitutional be passing constitutional amendments that require ratification by the states.

BP is a Britain company not a US company. It would be a little hard to nationalize them. While, they operate in the US they like Toyota, Honda, and the South Korean auto companies have to legal connection like GM. To be frank, that statement diminishes the credibility of the reporter.