Main Menu

Obama Conspiracy Theories Blog launches investigation into Sheriff Joe’s “Cold Case Posse”

A great many troubling questions (the number literally growing by the minute!) have arisen in the wake of the press conference today featuring Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, Cold Case Posse spokesman Mike Zullo and anti-Obama activist Jerome Corsi. A serious case of fraud on the part of the “Posse” has been alleged, and this blog will working during the coming months to identify what crimes if any may have been committed by the Posse, what financial arrangements may have been made between Arpaio and WorldNetDaily, and whether or not Jerome Corsi lied under oath.

Obama Conspiracy Theories is in possession of several affidavits alleging deals struck between Sheriff Arpaio and the right-wing conspiracy web site WorldNetDaily. OCT also has an expert in forensic voice stress analysis willing to testify to the stress patterns in Mike Zullo’s voice during his presentation and as to whether they indicate an intent to deceive.

Certainly full-disclosure by Sheriff Joe would help clear the air. Here are some of the unanswered questions:

  1. What are the names the credentials of the “computer graphics experts” who validated the Cold Case Posse’s (CCP) methodology. Have any of them ever testified in court about the authenticity of a document?  Why were these not disclosed at the press conference for reporters to interview?
  2. What are the names the credentials of the “forensic document examiners” who validated the Cold Case Posse’s methodology. Have any of them ever testified in court about the authenticity of a document? Why were these not disclosed at the press conference for reporters to interview?
  3. What computer software and settings were used for the optimization comparisons between the “control” document and the White House document? Was it the same software used by the White House, and if not why not? Why was this essential question glossed over in the lengthy presentation?
  4. Was Jerome Corsi deputized by Maricopa County, or did he sign an affidavit under oath and penalty of perjury as to his examination of files at the National Archives? If not, why not?
  5. Has WorldNetDaily agreed to sign Joe Arpaio on as a commentator for WND?
  6. Did WorldNetDaily, Jerome Corsi, or Joseph Farah contribute funds to the CCP?
  7. John Woodman, the author of a book analyzing claims about Obama birth certificate images, offered on two occasions to assist the CCP. Why was he ignored?
  8. What is the name, and what is the investigative report into the truthfulness of the person who claimed Obama was a foreign student playing in Bill Ayers yard?
  9. Why was Jerome Corsi, a nationally-known anti-Obama partisan, invited to speak at the Press Conference?
  10. Why did the CCP use a computer-generated birth certificate simulation as their “control” document rather than a real birth certificate on real security paper?
  11. Did the CCP contact the US Postal service regarding the date stamp on the Selective Service application? If so what was their response, and if not, why not?
  12. Did the CCP contact Selective Service regarding the Obama Selective Service application?If so what was their response, and if not, why not?
  13. Did the CCP contact the White House and request physical access to the President’s long-form birth certificate? If so what was their response, and if not, why not?
  14. Did the CCP consult with Arizona’s own Vital Records agency on matters of document generation? If so what was their response, and if not, why not?
  15. Why were the CCP results delayed until after the Arizona Primary, and why were they leaked to Republican Candidate Rick Santorum in advance unless they were politically motivated?
  16. What exactly was the role of Mara Zebest in the production of the CCP report?
  17. What exactly was the role of Jerome Corsi in the production of the CCP report?
  18. Why was Mark Gillar, a well-known anti-Obama partisan, chosen to narrate the six short videos that constituted most of the posse’s presentation? Why were the videos posted to Gillar’s “TeaPartyPowerHour” YouTube account, the links to which were included in the sheriff’s press release? And did Gillar help make the videos as well?
  19. Was CCP leader Mark Zullo one of the Surprise, Arizona Tea Party signers of the petition that started the investigation? Why was the page (linked to by WND) on the Surprise Tea Party web site describing the event scrubbed?
  20. Did all CCP members agree to the findings? Why were none of the others introduced at the Press Conference?

Sheriff Joe should make available all of the CCP files, all the affidavits supported to it, all of the computer files used for comparison purpose, the mode, serial numbers and maintenance records of all computer equipment used in the test, the manufacturer and version numbers of all computer software used in the test, a list of all experts consulted, a copy of all email messages exchanged, a full financial accounting of all funds received and spent, and sworn affidavits from all CCP members under penalty of perjury as to the authenticity and completeness of the documents provided.

This investigation is being undertaken to help Sheriff Joe out. I like the guy and I just want to clear the air.

329 Responses to Obama Conspiracy Theories Blog launches investigation into Sheriff Joe’s “Cold Case Posse”

  1. avatar
    richCares March 1, 2012 at 11:45 pm #

    Doc C, I love it, great idea!

  2. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 1, 2012 at 11:49 pm #

    The list of questions keeps growing faster than I can type and upload!

    richCares: Doc C, I love it, great idea!

  3. avatar
    Suranis March 1, 2012 at 11:52 pm #

    17 Due to Sheffif Joes repeated assertions that this investigation cost no money, can we be shown proof that the female employees of the Bouncing Bunny club were not asked to contribute their expertese to meetings of this investigation?

  4. avatar
    Foggy March 1, 2012 at 11:56 pm #

    The Fogbow will be more than happy to provide whatever assistance is possible toward this important investigation. Today’s press conference was a grievous offense against the American concept of “justice for all”.

    We simply cannot tolerate that level of deceptive dishonesty among those sworn to uphold the Constitution and the laws of this great nation.

    Let us never forget that the entire birther movement is seditious and subversive, being an attempt to overturn the results of a free and fair American election based on nothing but lies, hatred, fear and racism. Our cause is just; our vision is clear; our passion is enduring.

    Stop the madness!

  5. avatar
    raicha March 1, 2012 at 11:57 pm #

    The investigation did not cost the taxpayer’s money (maybe), but the report was certainly bought and paid for. How much did WND “donate” to the 501(c)(3) posse to produce this blatantly political circus? What would the IRS have to say about the tax exempt status of the posse, which is clearly under the control of Corsi and other partisan hacks?

  6. avatar
    Dixie Patriot March 2, 2012 at 12:04 am #

    Why don’t you take an open mind and look at the facts presented? Why are you against the RIGHTS of people to investigate, discuss and share their ideas? Why do you attack people instead of discussing the information presented.

    Your blind loyalty to, and dogmatic defense of, a corrupt political party is unbelievable. But, since you asked, go here for most of your answers (proof). >> http://commieblaster.com/ineligible/index.html

  7. avatar
    Bill DuBerger March 2, 2012 at 12:07 am #

    Go get ’em Doc.

  8. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 2, 2012 at 12:14 am #

    Actually I did discuss the information in another article. There are two basic issues:

    1) Why should we take the word of Sheriff Arpaio and Mike Zullo over the word of Two Directors of the Hawaii Department of Health and President Obama? That is, how do we know that anything we heard in the way of “information” is true in the first place. Arpaio’s office is in deep trouble with the Justice Department over racial profiling; he has an axe to grind.

    2) Everything put forward as to the birth certificate PDF file is total bunk, as conclusively shown in John Woodman’s exhaustive investigation of them in his book: Is Barack Obama’s Birth Certificate a Fraud? Remember that that selective service application is a contemporary document obtained from the Selective Service under the Freedom of Information Act. it’s not a White House document. Under what crackpot scenario could it be a fake later made? Which is more likely, a removable section of a very old hand stamp fell out, or there is a massive coverup at Selective Service?

    At no time have I questioned anybody’s right to investigate and ask questions. You’re the one attacking me for doing that.

    However, I do not grant anybody the right to present junk science under the guise of authority and not be called to account for it.

    Dixie Patriot: Why do you attack people instead of discussing the information presented.

  9. avatar
    JamesE777 March 2, 2012 at 12:27 am #

    I guess Dixie Patriot doesn’t believe in a multiparty democratic-republic. I’m betting that Dixie Patriot isn’t an American citizen.
    Here in America, we believe in having more than one political party and we’re ok with them fighting like dogs and cats but still respecting each other.

    Allow me to quote the current REPUBLICAN Party Majority Leader in the House of Representatives: “I don’t think it’s (the President’s status as a natural born citizen) an issue that we need to address at all. It is not an issue that even needs to be on the policy-making table right now whatsoever.”
    “I think the president is a citizen of the United States, I think this president wants what’s best for this country.” –Representative Eric Cantor, House of Representatives Majority Leader (R-VA).

  10. avatar
    BillTheCat March 2, 2012 at 12:31 am #

    @DixiePatriot

    The facts you say we should look at – you mean the ones that have been thoroughly debunked and disproven over and over again?

    And this corrupt political party you mention – I agree, the Republican party is pretty guilty in that sense, particularly corruption of discourse and reality.

  11. avatar
    Kenneth Olsen March 2, 2012 at 12:34 am #

    All the frantic questioning shows the clergy and congregation at Obama Conspiracy Theories is still in anger and denial. The grieving for shattered illusions will eventually give way to acceptance.

    The pretensident diligently hides records that cannot withstand objective scrutiny.

    I have an easy question: Is it true that Barry O breached the contract for delivery of his first book?

  12. avatar
    Thrifty March 2, 2012 at 12:41 am #

    What’s more, I know this guy who talked to Timothy McVeigh’s mom in 1992 and she said that Joe Arpaio was having trouble getting the blood from the prostitute he’d just murdered out of his favorite shirt. This guy is a courageous man and is ready to come forward.

  13. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 2, 2012 at 12:41 am #

    Why do you attack me instead of the information presented?

    Dixie Patriot: Why do you attack people instead of discussing the information presented.

  14. avatar
    CarlOrcas March 2, 2012 at 12:43 am #

    Another one for your list Doc:

    Who are the members of the “cold case posse” and what are their professional qualifications, history, etc.

    A quick search for a Mike or Michael Zullo in Arizona doesn’t produce much except for one Mike Zullo, age 50 or 51, in Scottsdale who appears to be involved in auto sales. Another Mike Zullo, in the same area, appears to have passed away recently at 83.

    We need to know who the other people involved in the investigation are and they need to be made available for questioning about the investigation and its methodology.

  15. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 2, 2012 at 12:43 am #

    These days, “Dixie” is a code word for racist. Our birther is definitely located in the heart of the South.

    JamesE777: I’m betting that Dixie Patriot isn’t an American citizen.

  16. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 2, 2012 at 12:46 am #

    Hey, I AM discussing the facts presented. I’m asking questions about those facts and the qualification of the people who gathered them, which is relevant to the evaluation of the facts.

    Do you have a problem with me asking questions? Is Sheriff Joe some sacred icon who is above questions? What’s your beef?

    Dixie Patriot: Why don’t you take an open mind and look at the facts presented?

  17. avatar
    Thomas Brown March 2, 2012 at 12:51 am #

    More: Why should anyone believe Corsi about ANYTHING after claiming he found the INS records “mysteriously” missing for August 1961, when in fact there are no such records after 1958? Why should we believe he even looked?

  18. avatar
    Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter March 2, 2012 at 1:04 am #

    I would like to know what other time periods may have been missing from the records examined by Jerome Corsi.

    I would like to see an index of the records examined by Jerome Corsi.

    I would like to see the Chain of Custody records on the records examined by Jerome Corsi.

    If there was no Chain of Custody control or form relating to the records examined by Jerome Corsi, I would like to know why, and if such is Standard Operating Procedure for either the National Archives or MCSO.

    I would like to know where Jerome Corsi reviewed the records.

    I would like to know the amount of time spent by Jerome Corsi examining the records, including the days, and the time of day when he began to examine and when he quit examining.

    I would like to know if anyone vetted Jerome Corsi’s work, and if so, their name.

    I would like to know if the MCSO typically allows those with financial conflicts of interest in the subject matter of investigations to participate in those investigations.

    Because letting Jerome Corsi help in the actual investigatory work involving third party records is kind of like letting a possum count the eggs in a hen house.

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

  19. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 2, 2012 at 1:22 am #

    Advice to birthers:
    Be nice to the people on the way up
    because you’ll meet those same people on the way down.

  20. avatar
    BillTheCat March 2, 2012 at 1:43 am #

    @Kenneth, Dixie & Our Birther Friends-

    Please feel free to peruse the following:

    http://www.thefogbow.com/arpaio-report/

    Enjoy 🙂

  21. avatar
    naturalizedcitizen March 2, 2012 at 1:44 am #

    Having a bad day, Doc?

  22. avatar
    G March 2, 2012 at 1:44 am #

    Ah, note the Concern Troll’s intentional use of Projection here:

    Birtherism, being a faith-based Cult, has to create a false-equivocation strawman for the rest of us. Therefore, he intentionally projects the terms of faith based thinking onto the real world.

    Sorry there Kenneth. You mistakingly think that this is a site for “Obama worship”… an imaginary concept that exists only within your own limited mind. We oppose Birthers because we oppose lies and myth-based thinking.

    We deal in facts. You deal in faith based propaganda.

    Kenneth Olsen: All the frantic questioning shows the clergy and congregation at Obama Conspiracy Theories is still in anger and denial. The grieving for shattered illusions will eventually give way to acceptance. The pretensident diligently hides records that cannot withstand objective scrutiny.I have an easy question: Is it true that Barry O breached the contract for delivery of his first book?

  23. avatar
    naturalizedcitizen March 2, 2012 at 1:47 am #

    An advice to Obama supporters – this is a perfect opportunity for Hawaii DoH and team Obama to come clean and release original documents for forensic examination.

    Why would anyone object to that?
    Perhaps you have doubts about Obama’s honesty?

  24. avatar
    sfjeff March 2, 2012 at 1:53 am #

    naturalizedcitizen: An advice to Obama supporters – this is a perfect opportunity for Hawaii DoH and team Obama to come clean and release original documents for forensic examination.Why would anyone object to that?Perhaps you have doubts about Obama’s honesty?

    Well Team Obama has no control whatsoever of the original documents. Team Birther consistantly seems to be ignorant of that little detail.

    And I would think that Team Hawaii(The State of Hawaii) might object to anyone telling them how they should violate their own state laws because a Sheriff in Arizona says they should.

    Why do you object to State’s rights? Perhaps you have doubts as to the honesty of Sheriff Joe and the Birthers?

    Everyone else does.

  25. avatar
    misha March 2, 2012 at 1:59 am #

    Kenneth Olsen: I have an easy question: Is it true that Barry O breached the contract for delivery of his first book?

    Is it true Glenn Beck raped and murdered a girl in 1990?
    http://newyorkleftist.blogspot.com/2010/11/glenn-beck-accidentally-not-put-down.html

  26. avatar
    G March 2, 2012 at 2:01 am #

    While Doc seems to be a bit miffed at the farce on display in AZ today, that certainly isn’t a concensus take-away.

    I consider March 1st to be a triple-play WIN:

    The shutdowns in the Birther cases in PA were short & sweet.

    Arpiao’s big press conference turned out to be mostly just a reissue of WND’s meaningless PDF arguments, all which were debunked early on last year. So all it did is play up to the BIrthers and tell them what they’ve already heard…and yet deliver NOTHING. No actions. No real promises. Just some non-committal and open-ended weasel-promises to consider further investigation or try to goad someone else into taking up the cause.

    The likelihood of that happening seems pretty slim. Outside of the insular chatrooms of devoted Birthers, Arpiao’s press conference has fallen FLAT. It has received very little mention, compared to the amount of coverage a national figure like him can usually garnish. And the responses have been overwhelmingly on the side of ridicule, disgust or disinterest.

    If WND’s attempt to use Arpiao here to gain publicity and steam fails here (which is how it seems to be headed), then it is just another EPIC FAIL in the end. Enough real media outlets showed up for today’s press conference, sure. But if their collective reaction is snickering and shrugged shoulders, then they aren’t going to keep coming back when he promises future “follow-up” press conferences.

    It is the classic children’s tales of “Chicken Little” and “The Boy Who Cried Wolf” playing out here – there is simply NO credibility to these Birther alarm bells and less and less people pay any attention to them, the more they are brought up.

    naturalizedcitizen: Having a bad day, Doc?

  27. avatar
    misha March 2, 2012 at 2:01 am #

    Dr. Conspiracy: These days, “Dixie” is a code word for racist.

    ‘Dixie’ is a dog whistle.

  28. avatar
    misha March 2, 2012 at 2:04 am #

    Thrifty:
    What’s more, I know this guy who talked to Timothy McVeigh’s mom in 1992 and she said that Joe Arpaio was having trouble getting the blood from the prostitute he’d just murdered out of his favorite shirt.This guy is a courageous man and is ready to come forward.

    I heard the same thing. Plus Andrew Brietbart told me just before he died.

  29. avatar
    G March 2, 2012 at 2:08 am #

    *yawn* Trotting out that tired old Concern Trolling tactic, I see.

    FAIL. He already did that – twice. That is what the COLB *and* the LFBC was. The state of HI has vouched for those documents and the info they contain as well as their creation and chain of custody.

    http://hawaii.gov/health/vital-records/obama.html

    This is a perfect opportunity for you to come clean and tell us when you stopped beating your spouse? What are you hiding?

    naturalizedcitizen: An advice to Obama supporters – this is a perfect opportunity for Hawaii DoH and team Obama to come clean and release original documents for forensic examination.Why would anyone object to that?Perhaps you have doubts about Obama’s honesty?

  30. avatar
    misha March 2, 2012 at 2:09 am #

    naturalizedcitizen: Perhaps you have doubts about Obama’s honesty?

    No, but I have doubts about Rush Limbaugh’s honesty.

    Limbaugh – ‘Drug abusers should be stripped of their citizenship and thrown out of the country.’ So when is he leaving?

  31. avatar
    Kenneth Olsen March 2, 2012 at 2:09 am #

    The Fogbow claims to expose the “lies” of the birther movement. That is certainly commendable. All lies should be exposed. I’m more interested in the larger segment of the birther and afterbirther population that is acting in good faith. With that in mind, why believe that Obama the Younger is actually the child of Obama the Elder? Many people on both sides of this bizarre issue are assuming facts not in evidence.

    Someday someone will expose why a humanitarian leader would let a decorated officer cool his jets in jail for asking for a LFBC, and then casually trot out an LFBC because he feels like it that week. If the LFBC is shown to be phony, does Terry Lakin deserve a full pardon and restoration of benefits?

    If no one knows I’ll check with caaflog.com !

  32. avatar
    naturalizedcitizen March 2, 2012 at 2:13 am #

    sfjeff: Well Team Obama has no control whatsoever of the original documents. Team Birther consistantly seems to be ignorant of that little detail.

    And I would think that Team Hawaii(The State of Hawaii) might object to anyone telling them how they should violate their own state laws because a Sheriff in Arizona says they should.

    Why do you object to State’s rights? Perhaps you have doubts as to the honesty of Sheriff Joe and the Birthers?

    Everyone else does.

    Team Hawaii DoH has proved time and again as willing to ignore the state law (UIPA) and cover for Obama. Recently they refused to issue copy of the original birth certificate to the family of Virginia Sunahara, girl born on August 4, 1961 in Hawaii (not in the Kapiolani Hospital). Before Obama’s eligibility question surfaced, Hawaii DoH used to issue these documents regularly – they were needed for another state agency as a proof of ancestry.

  33. avatar
    misha March 2, 2012 at 2:13 am #

    19. How many times did the Posse members interview employees of the Mustang Ranch, which is almost next door.

  34. avatar
    Expelliarmus March 2, 2012 at 2:14 am #

    Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter: I would like to know what other time periods may have been missing from the records examined by Jerome Corsi.

    I would like to see an index of the records examined by Jerome Corsi.

    That’s easy — it’s online. Records of immigrants arriving by ship & land are available for some areas up to the year 1959; the availability depends on location. For Honolulu, ship arrivals are available through 1953. See: http://www.archives.gov/research/immigration/passenger-arrival.html

    For passengers arriving by air, immigration records are available through the mid 1940’s, but only if they arrived in Florida or New Orleans. See:
    http://www.archives.gov/research/guide-fed-records/groups/085.html#85.3.2

    You know what this means, of course: Ron Paul is the only candidate that we can be absolutely certain did not arrive as an immigrant in infancy… the others were all born at times when National Archives records are mysteriously missing.

  35. avatar
    G March 2, 2012 at 2:16 am #

    *rolls eyes*

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnzHtm1jhL4

    Some delusions are just too stupid to dignify further response.

    Kenneth Olsen: The Fogbow claims to expose the “lies” of the birther movement. That is certainly commendable. All lies should be exposed. I’m more interested in the larger segment of the birther and afterbirther population that is acting in good faith. With that in mind, why believe that Obama the Younger is actually the child of Obama the Elder? Many people on both sides of this bizarre issue are assuming facts not in evidence.Someday someone will expose why a humanitarian leader would let a decorated officer cool his jets in jail for asking for a LFBC, and then casually trot out an LFBC because he feels like it that week. If the LFBC is shown to be phony, does Terry Lakin deserve a full pardon and restoration of benefits?If no one knows I’ll check with caaflog.com !

  36. avatar
    G March 2, 2012 at 2:19 am #

    Sunahara was provided with a copy of her official certified birth certificate by the state. So the family’s rights were met and satisfied under the letter of the law.

    They only owe that “official” copy. They don’t owe her any “original” on top of it. That case will get its day in court on March 8.

    naturalizedcitizen: Team Hawaii DoH has proved time and again as willing to ignore the state law (UIPA) and cover for Obama. Recently they refused to issue copy of the original birth certificate to the family of Virginia Sunahara, girl born on August 4, 1961 in Hawaii (not in the Kapiolani Hospital). Before Obama’s eligibility question surfaced, Hawaii DoH used to issue these documents regularly – they were needed for another state agency as a proof of ancestry.

  37. avatar
    naturalizedcitizen March 2, 2012 at 2:19 am #

    misha: No, but I have doubts about Rush Limbaugh’s honesty.

    Limbaugh – ‘Drug abusers should be stripped of their citizenship and thrown out of the country.’ So when is he leaving?

    Comrade Misha, switching the topic, nice!
    However, you brought this topic to a wrong person – I am not willing to carry water for anyone including Limbaugh. Hypocryts need to be exposed, including Obama.

  38. avatar
    misha March 2, 2012 at 2:21 am #

    naturalizedcitizen: Before Obama’s eligibility question surfaced, Hawaii DoH used to issue these documents regularly – they were needed for another state agency as a proof of ancestry.

    I want to know how Glenn Beck got away with a rape and murder, since 1990. Was Rush Limbaugh an accessory after the fact?
    http://didglennbeckrapeandmurderagirl.blogspot.com/

  39. avatar
    G March 2, 2012 at 2:26 am #

    And including yourself, right?

    Because I’m sure that you’ve held every other President and Presidential Candidate, including all the current ones running to the exact same standard of proof and evidence, right? If not, that would make you quite the hypocrite, wouldn’t it?…

    naturalizedcitizen: Hypocryts need to be exposed, including Obama.

  40. avatar
    naturalizedcitizen March 2, 2012 at 2:26 am #

    G:
    Sunahara was provided with a copy of her official certified birth certificate by the state.So the family’s rights were met and satisfied under the letter of the law.

    They only owe that “official” copy.They don’t owe her any “original” on top of it.That case will get its day in court on March 8.

    Why would Hawaii DoH refuse to issue a copy of the original document? It makes no sense. If Obama could get his copy from DoH (as we were told) then any other citizen in Hawaii deserves the same treatment under the law.

  41. avatar
    G March 2, 2012 at 2:31 am #

    Here, the HI DOH explains their position in this document:

    http://nativeborncitizen.wordpress.com/2012/01/25/sunahara-v-hi-doh-motion-to-dismiss/

    naturalizedcitizen: Why would Hawaii DoH refuse to issue a copy of the original document? It makes no sense. If Obama could get his copy from DoH (as we were told) then any other citizen in Hawaii deserves the same treatment under the law.

  42. avatar
    naturalizedcitizen March 2, 2012 at 2:36 am #

    G:
    And including yourself, right?

    Because I’m sure that you’ve held every other President and Presidential Candidate, including all the current ones running to the exact same standard of proof and evidence, right?If not, that would make you quite the hypocrite, wouldn’t it?…

    I would welcome the policy that each presidential candidate must submit copy of the original birth certificate as a condition to be placed on the ballot.

    Having said that, Obama’s case is special because his birthplace has been reported in Hawaii (two different hospitals) and in Kenya. I am not aware that similar claim/media report has been published for any other candidate.

  43. avatar
    misha March 2, 2012 at 2:39 am #

    naturalizedcitizen: I am not willing to carry water for anyone including Limbaugh.

    Would you carry water for someone who ties his dog to the roof of his car, for 12 hours? Would you carry water to the dog?

  44. avatar
    G March 2, 2012 at 2:41 am #

    No one provides an “original” birth certificate for anything, dummy. You provide an official certified copy. That is what a birth certificate is. *duh*.

    In HI, they call that a COLB. Accepted by all official agencies of all 50 states. FFAC. Read up about it.

    Obama’s case is *not* special, except in your imagination. ZERO credible and official sources have claimed his birthplace is anything other than Honolulu, HI. Just as both his COLB and LFBC say.

    naturalizedcitizen: I would welcome the policy that each presidential candidate must submit copy of the original birth certificate as a condition to be placed on the ballot. Having said that, Obama’s case is special because his birthplace has been reported in Hawaii (two different hospitals) and in Kenya. I am not aware that similar claim/media report has been published for any other candidate.

  45. avatar
    naturalizedcitizen March 2, 2012 at 2:46 am #

    G:
    Here, the HI DOH explains their position in this document:

    http://nativeborncitizen.wordpress.com/2012/01/25/sunahara-v-hi-doh-motion-to-dismiss/

    I understand that they are hiding behind the legal language. Why did they issue the same document to Obama and not to Sunahara family? The same law applies to all citizens. If a family wants a copy of the original BC just for the sake of compiling family tree records, what harm would be done issuing these documents? The state of Hawaii used to issue these documents regularly before Obama’s eligibility was questioned. You are surely aware that timing of this policy change appears suspicious.

  46. avatar
    naturalizedcitizen March 2, 2012 at 2:55 am #

    G:
    No one provides an “original” birth certificate for anything, dummy.You provide an official certified copy.That is what a birth certificate is.*duh*.

    In HI, they call that a COLB.Accepted by all official agencies of all 50 states.FFAC.Read up about it.

    Obama’s case is *not* special, except in your imagination.ZERO credible and official sources have claimed his birthplace is anything other than Honolulu, HI.Just as both his COLB and LFBC say.

    I don’t mind if a certified copy of COLB is used for such purpose – as long as there is a provision to have a procedure for chalenging its validity. If there is a suspicion that COLB is a forgery there should be process in place for document authentication including examination of original birth documents by qualified experts.

  47. avatar
    G March 2, 2012 at 3:02 am #

    What you call “hiding behind legal language” is called the law. If you can’t understand the rules, that is your problem.

    Obama was given the same COLB. If you read the materials and chain of custody of the LFBC, you will see that he had to request an extraordinary exception just to get that. Exceptions are allowed within discretion (per the very case I already gave you, which explains how that works), but that discretion requires justification. The whole Birther nonsense hoopla was deemed a sufficient justification to make such a unique exception to the normal rules. Without that, he wouldn’t have received a certified copy of what you call the “LFBC” either.

    Really, there is NO such thing as a short-form or long-form in the state of HI. They have ONLY ONE official form – the COLB. They stopped producing any other official forms as of May 15, 2001.

    Go to the HI DOH FAQ if you don’t understand any of this. You can easily google it. They explain all of it and provide links to the copies of the documents and the letter explaining justification and custody. I am not your parent. You should be capable of finding and reading these things on your own.

    naturalizedcitizen: I understand that they are hiding behind the legal language. Why did they issue the same document to Obama and not to Sunahara family? The same law applies to all citizens. If a family wants a copy of the original BC just for the sake of compiling family tree records, what harm would be done issuing these documents? The state of Hawaii used to issue these documents regularly before Obama’s eligibility was questioned. You are surely aware that timing of this policy change appears suspicious.

  48. avatar
    naturalizedcitizen March 2, 2012 at 3:03 am #

    misha: Would you carry water for someone who ties his dog to the roof of his car, for 12 hours? Would you carry water to the dog?

    Comrade Misha, all GOP presidential candidates are cowards when it comes to challenging Obama and his lies.

    I understand that you’d rather talk abougt anything else but Sheriff Arpaio’s claim that Obama’s LFBC is a forgery.

  49. avatar
    naturalizedcitizen March 2, 2012 at 3:10 am #

    G:
    What you call “hiding behind legal language” is called the law.If you can’t understand the rules, that is your problem.

    Obama was given the same COLB.If you read the materials and chain of custody of the LFBC, you will see that he had to request an extraordinary exception just to get that.Exceptions are allowed within discretion (per the very case I already gave you, which explains how that works), but that discretion requires justification.The whole Birther nonsense hoopla was deemed a sufficient justification to make such a unique exception to the normal rules.Without that, he wouldn’t have received a certified copy of what you call the “LFBC” either.

    Really, there is NO such thing as a short-form or long-form in the state of HI.They have ONLY ONE official form – the COLB.They stopped producing any other official forms as of May 15, 2001.

    Go to the HI DOH FAQ if you don’t understand any of this.You can easily google it.They explain all of it and provide links to the copies of the documents and the letter explaining justification and custody.I am not your parent.You should be capable of finding and reading these things on your own.

    LOL. They changed the policy a year ago to help cover Obama’s forgery. Before that time it was OK to issue copy of the original birth certificate to anyone who had tangible interest in it. It was even required by another state agency because COLB was not sufficient.

    What is so secretive about the original BC document that public cannot have access to it? Isn’t the purpose of the UIPA law to allow public access to government documents. This is 180 degrees opposite of the spirit of the UIPA law.

  50. avatar
    G March 2, 2012 at 3:16 am #

    *face palm*

    You don’t get it do you. You don’t understand how FFAC works and what an official issuing agency is and means…

    As others have tried to explain – it doesn’t matter HOW you write or try to “fake” your own signature – the very fact that YOU wrote it *makes* it your signature, no matter what it looks like at the moment.

    Same with any official agency with the authority of making any official type of document.

    For example – the federal reserve could decide tomorrow to print money on toilet paper or leaves if they chose. It becomes legal tender by mere virtue of them printing it, provided they have authorized doing so. The federal reserve cannot “counterfeit” itself.

    Same thing with birth certificates and their official authorities. In HI, that is the HI DOH that is the SOLE authority, guardian and provisioner of official Birth Certificates. If they issue and certify it – it IS official. If they issue, certify and vouch for it, by definition it cannot be “fake”.

    Look, one of the most important legal principals that is a key part of the underpinning of US law is that the burden of proof lies with the ACCUSER . You cannot simply have “doubts” or “suspicions”. You MUST have sufficient proof and evidence first. When faced with an “official” document, especially one that is state certified and therefore subject to FFAC (the Full Faith and Credit clause of the Constitution), then you must have sufficient proof that CONTRADICTS the certified document in order to challenge it. By definition, Full Faith and Credit means that the evidence MUST be accepted at face value.

    These are basic, simple tenants of our democracy and how our system has always worked. They are not that hard to grasp. Hence why folks show very little tolerance for birther questions – because your premises not only fly in the face of the very fundamental concepts of our established laws, but they come across as astoundingly ignorant. Stop and actually think through things for a moment instead of just reflexively reacting in such a mindless fashion.

    naturalizedcitizen: I don’t mind if a certified copy of COLB is used for such purpose – as long as there is a provision to have a procedure for chalenging its validity. If there is a suspicion that COLB is a forgery there should be process in place for document authentication including examination of original birth documents by qualified experts.

  51. avatar
    G March 2, 2012 at 3:17 am #

    No you dummy! As I already explained to you, this policy went into effect May 15, 2001. HINT: That is over a DECADE ago.

    http://hawaii.gov/health/vital-records/Policy_Memo_5_15_2001.PDF

    Moron.

    naturalizedcitizen: LOL. They changed the policy a year ago to help cover Obama’s forgery. Before that time it was OK to issue copy of the original birth certificate to anyone who had tangible interest in it. It was even required by another state agency because COLB was not sufficient.

  52. avatar
    G March 2, 2012 at 3:29 am #

    Yeah, keep telling yourself that. Despite them all being woefully inadequate candidates, they still retain enough political smarts to realize that the Birther issue is poison. Considering all the other areas in which most of them are willing to push lies and smears, that says A LOT.

    Misha has probably gone to bed for the night. As I plan to soon as well. Obviously, I don’t have any problem talking about Sheriff Arpaio’s big “non-event” today.

    Ask yourself this – If Arpaio had actually found “evidence of fraud” and if this issue was actually “important”, than WHY did he withhold providing this evidence to *ANY* of the Birther lawyers who had very big state Birther Ballot challenges over the past several months? Heck, many of these really big challenges happened within just the last few weeks alone. You can’t tell me that in the 6 months he’s been dragging his heels on this stunt (or as he calls it “investigating), that he didn’t have this already figured out.

    After all, his “findings” are nothing different than what WND had already claimed and reported last summer. Some of the insinuated rumors thrown out at the press conference go back much further than that.

    So, the JOKE is all on you. If anything, Arpaio and WND punked all of you. They just repackaged and spoon-fed you the same claims that WND couldn’t get to take hold in the past. You were sold a pep rally with no actual game or event to go with it. Just weasely allegations and NO charges and NO resolved action.

    Wake up. This is a Sheriff’s department after all. NO sheriff issues a “press conference” on these sorts of things, unless they are willing to press charges. How many press conferences have you seen where the law officials hold back and say they can’t tell anything because that would prejudice their case. No, this was a mere publicity stunt to give the appearance of having done something, yet delivering nothing at all. You’ve been had.

    naturalizedcitizen: Comrade Misha, all GOP presidential candidates are cowards when it comes to challenging Obama and his lies.
    I understand that you’d rather talk abougt anything else but Sheriff Arpaio’s claim that Obama’s LFBC is a forgery.

  53. avatar
    naturalizedcitizen March 2, 2012 at 3:36 am #

    G:
    No you dummy!As I already explained to you, this policy went into effect May 15, 2001.HINT:That is over a DECADE ago.

    http://hawaii.gov/health/vital-records/Policy_Memo_5_15_2001.PDF

    Moron.

    We are talking about two slighlty different issues. As a matter of DoH policy they normally issued only COLB when people asked for a copy of their birth certificate. I agree that this change took place in 2001.

    However, another Hawaii state agency (Department of Hawaiian Home Lands) required the LFBC explicitly because COLB did not have necessary information. After 2001, if an applicant requested LFBC explicitly, the DoH issued it.

    Only after Obama’s eligibility was questioned Hawaii DoH changed policy and stopped issuing LFBC.

  54. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 2, 2012 at 3:46 am #

    And you know this how?

    naturalizedcitizen: Only after Obama’s eligibility was questioned Hawaii DoH changed policy and stopped issuing LFBC.

  55. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 2, 2012 at 3:52 am #

    The policy changed in 2001. I read it. You’re a pathetic liar.

    Proof:

    http://hawaii.gov/health/vital-records/Policy_Memo_5_15_2001.PDF

    naturalizedcitizen: LOL. They changed the policy a year ago to help cover Obama’s forgery. Before that time it was OK to issue copy of the original birth certificate to anyone who had tangible interest in it. It was even required by another state agency because COLB was not sufficient.

  56. avatar
    G March 2, 2012 at 3:52 am #

    Do you understand what the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands is for?

    That is for those of NATIVE Hawaiian Ancestry only. It is no different than programs and policies for Native Americans found within other states.

    Barack Obama is NOT descended from indigenous Hawaiian natives. That is not part of his ancestry. Therefore that program has ZERO applicability to him.

    naturalizedcitizen: However, another Hawaii state agency (Department of Hawaiian Home Lands) required the LFBC explicitly because COLB did not have necessary information. After 2001, if an applicant requested LFBC explicitly, the DoH issued it.
    Only after Obama’s eligibility was questioned Hawaii DoH changed policy and stopped issuing LFBC.

  57. avatar
    naturalizedcitizen March 2, 2012 at 3:56 am #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    The policy changed in 2001. I read it. You’re a pathetic liar.

    Proof:

    http://hawaii.gov/health/vital-records/Policy_Memo_5_15_2001.PDF

    I answered that question in a previous post – read the thread.

  58. avatar
    G March 2, 2012 at 4:00 am #

    And I answered YOU on this. – read the thread.

    naturalizedcitizen: I answered that question in a previous post – read the thread.

  59. avatar
    naturalizedcitizen March 2, 2012 at 4:02 am #

    G:
    Do you understand what the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands is for?

    That is for those of NATIVE Hawaiian Ancestry only.It is no different than programs and policies for Native Americans found within other states.

    Barack Obama is NOT descended from indigenous Hawaiian natives.That is not part of his ancestry.Therefore that program has ZERO applicability to him.

    That is not the question. Important thing is that Department of Hawaiian Lands needed more information than it was provided in the COLB.
    That is why DoH issued LFBC to people who asked for it even after the change of their regular policy in 2001. If my memory is correct they changed the policy in 2009 after people claimed that Obama’s COLB was a forgery and asked for examination of LFBC.

    They changed the policy to provide cover for Obama – this is so obvious. There was absolutely no reason to change the DoH policy and force the Department of Hawaiian Lands to accept COLB.

  60. avatar
    G March 2, 2012 at 4:11 am #

    ONLY for people that QUALIFY UNDER THAT PROGRAM!!!

    There is a SPECIFIC reason for that. Same as why my wife could qualify as a Native American, even though she is only 1/8 Native American. Because those indiginous tribes allow for such ancient ancestral ties (sometimes 1/16th or even 1/32nd) to qualify for their programs. THEREFORE, in such cases, one must establish that FULL providence of ancestory.

    Obama does NOT qualify under that program. It is IRRELEVANT to his situation. No “white” person without Native Hawaiian ancestory has to meet those rules either. ONLY those that are trying to PROVE their Native Hawaiian ancestory and therefore be ELIGIBLE for that SPECIFIC program.

    Maybe because you are only a “naturalized citizen” and don’t really understand our laws and the UNIQUE status that the Native Americans have here, that you can’t grasp what their programs are all about and how they work.

    naturalizedcitizen: That is not the question. Important thing is that Department of Hawaiian Lands needed more information than it was provided in the COLB.

  61. avatar
    naturalizedcitizen March 2, 2012 at 4:12 am #

    G:
    And I answered YOU on this.– read the thread.

    The claim that DoH stopped issuing LFBC altogether in 2001 is false. They continued issuing this document to those applicants who EXPLICITLY ASKED for it. Happy?

    Therefore, claims in 2008 and first part of 2009 that Obama did not have access to LFBC were false. DoH had to change their policy in 2009 to provide cover for him.

    What logical reason can you provide for denying people access to a copy of their original birth certificate? If we can petition FBI for a copy of the file they may keep on us, we should be able to ask for the release of a copy of the original birth certificate. This is an ordinary administrative document – there is nothing secretive about its content.

  62. avatar
    LineInTheSand March 2, 2012 at 4:24 am #

    You people are clowns. Real cops produce real results and you clack away in futile efforts to hold back the tide of reason at your keyboards. Utter morons.

  63. avatar
    G March 2, 2012 at 4:33 am #

    NO! ONLY for the HI Homelands PROGRAM!!! NO ONE ELSE!!!

    How can you be so dense and not grasp that? Read the flipping memo again! Read the rules on that HI Homelands Program!

    It explains all of that.

    Obama does NOT qualify for the HI Homelands Program. Therefore the LFBC was NOT an option available to him, NOR to anyone else from HI who was NOT eligible for the HI Homelands Program either.

    Thanks to the Birthers bringing up the HI Homelands Program in 2008-2009, the HI folks got to revisit that obscure policy and decided that the LFBC wasn’t even needed for that anymore either, so that is why the 2009 change.

    Which still has NOTHING to do with Obama. Because he was NEVER eligible for the HI Homelands Program…and therefore NEVER fell under those rules or options PERIOD.

    Look, the WHOLE point of technology changes in forms, formats is that it quickly becomes VERY costly and confusing to have to maintain multiple formats and procedures. The whole point of STANDARDIZING is to streamline and have a more cost efficient and effective solution. Moving in those directions is a GOOD thing – that SAVES taxpayers money.

    Yet you seem to be so lost in your fantasy hate trip that you are blind to any reality and demanding some irrelavant wasteful process that is totally meaningless.

    The whole point still remains that Obama’s certified COLB is 100% sufficient and protected by FFAC for *ANY* official identification use in ANY state within the US for *ANY* purpose. No LFBC was ever necessary. Yet you crazy Birthers demanded it and he and the state of HI decided to eventually appease you by making one. That is another reason his certified LFBC is unique. They NO LONGER have any process for making one of those. They had to go out of their way to create and produce one just for him. ALL because of you stupid Birthers.

    And you idiots are STILL not satisfied. Which is why neither he nor any other official office should EVER pay attention to your extra-special demands again. They are all FALSE demands and you will NEVER be satisfied, so it is an utter waste of time and resources.

    naturalizedcitizen: The claim that DoH stopped issuing LFBC altogether in 2001 is false. They continued issuing this document to those applicants who EXPLICITLY ASKED for it. Happy?

    Therefore, claims in 2008 and first part of 2009 that Obama did not have access to LFBC were false. DoH had to change their policy in 2009 to provide cover for him.

  64. avatar
    LineInTheSand March 2, 2012 at 4:39 am #

    Do any of you obamabot armchair lawyers realize that official law enforcement investigation results of ‘probable cause’ can and, in this case, WILL lead to court ordered search warrants and/or document examination?

  65. avatar
    G March 2, 2012 at 4:42 am #

    You just contradicted yourself in your own statement.

    Learn to use consistent terminology, ok? There IS only ONE “original”.

    Nobody gets access to their original. They ONLY get copies made from it. Got it?

    The COLB *IS* a copy made from the original. As was Obama’s LFBC. The only difference is that the specially made LFBC included a few more fields of data. Fields that are NOT required under either HI state nor Federal standards. The COLB meets all Federal and State standards for reproducing information from the original.

    The data on these copies is ALWAYS the data from the original. Got it?

    The actual original ALSO contains even more info – private medical and statistical data that is the property of the State – NOT the individual. That is NOT put on any copy. Doc C can explain that more if you still can’t grasp that – he dealt with such things as part of his professional career.

    Anyways, the whole point of having the state PROTECT your records is that they are the guardians of them. In order to keep the original document safe, access MUST be restricted. If you allow the public to access these records, you open the door to theft, damage, abuse and violate privacy acts, because these records are stored together and people can improperly see info on OTHER peoples records.

    Simply handling documents or taking them out of whatever protective environment they are kept in will damage them over time. So repeatedly making copies from an original exposes the original to an increased rate of wear and degradation. Once an original is damaged, lost, stolen, etc. – that is it. If that happens, then there is NO original any more.
    And that would be very, very bad.

    Can you grasp this yet? *sheesh*

    naturalizedcitizen: What logical reason can you provide for denying people access to a copy of their original birth certificate? If we can petition FBI for a copy of the file they may keep on us, we should be able to ask for the release of a copy of the original birth certificate. This is an ordinary administrative document – there is nothing secretive about its content.

  66. avatar
    LineInTheSand March 2, 2012 at 4:47 am #

    Is that the best you can do, Doc, 18 questions, all completely speculative?

    I’d be much, much more interested in hearing your ‘evidence’ of ‘alleged fraud’.

    Methinks you doth protest too much.

  67. avatar
    naturalizedcitizen March 2, 2012 at 5:46 am #

    G:
    You just contradicted yourself in your own statement.

    Learn to use consistent terminology, ok?There IS only ONE “original”.

    Nobody gets access to their original.They ONLY get copies made from it.Got it?…
    ….

    Can you grasp this yet?*sheesh*

    The main reason why people asked for certified copy of LFBC is the fact that COLB presented on Daily Kos was a suspicious document. Within first few hours of being posted there people commented about numerous errors indicating a forgery.

    Once Nordyke documents were published people wanted to see Obama’s equivalent. This is the standard form of LFBC copy issued in the past. This is what I consider an LFBC.

    Ultimately this is the document Obama presented in April 2011. The trouble for him is the fact that file is not consistent with the claim it was created as a scan of an actual document. Why would Obama need a forgery if there is an original document on file with DoH? It does not make sense.

    What happened to the public access to the original birth index data? Name, registration number and registration date – it is such a big secret that cannot be publicly shared, LOL!

  68. avatar
    Paul Pieniezny March 2, 2012 at 5:58 am #

    Expelliarmus: You know what this means, of course: Ron Paul is the only candidate that we can be absolutely certain did not arrive as an immigrant in infancy… the others were all born at times when National Archives records are mysteriously missing.

    I do not believe it.Looking at a picture of Ron Paul and a picture of Breitbart, I am sure Ron Paul is much younger than he claims.

    Meaning that his son too, must be much younger and is not old enough to be a Senator.

    I further contend that Rand Paul is not a certified opthalmologist 9show us the certificate from the ABO, Rand!) and that to understand what No-Ze brotherhood means, you need to know the pronunciation in Russian (please contact Dr Orly Taitz Esq WBUH for that one)

    Of course, if Ron Paul is really as old as he claims to be, he is ineligible anyway, because when he was (supposedly) born the French had not yet abolished the Huguenot citizenship law, so Paul had French citizenship through his mother,

  69. avatar
    Greenfinches March 2, 2012 at 6:09 am #

    Arpaio’s little stunt made the UK news – check the BBC website. Alas.

    Without the background knowledge to ensure they know it is all [what is the euphemism of choice here?], people may think there is a real issue…. let’s hope any actual voters will check before November!

  70. avatar
    Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter March 2, 2012 at 6:11 am #

    DrC:

    Here is a document that may help you out. Jerome Corsi’s Application Letter to Sheriff Arpaio:

    http://birtherthinktank.wordpress.com/2012/03/02/exclusive-scoop-jerome-corsi-application-letter-to-sheriff-joe-arpaio/

    I don’t think anybody else has this document out yet.

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

  71. avatar
    Paul Pieniezny March 2, 2012 at 6:16 am #

    naturalizedcitizen: The main reason why people asked for certified copy of LFBC is the fact that COLB presented on Daily Kos was a suspicious document. Within first few hours of being posted there people commented about numerous errors indicating a forgery.

    No, the only “people” who were asking were stupid birfers, who believe that the birth announcements in the local newspapers are forgeries and that every library in the USA which has copies of them has been tampered with.

    There are no numerous errors indicating a forgery – all that has been debunked years ago. And stupid birfers resurrecting those every six months does not mean that they become numerous errors again. Only Bobby Ewing can imitate Jesus Christ, birfers have always fallen short.

    Once Nordyke documents were published people wanted to see Obama’s equivalent. This is the standard form of LFBC copy issued in the past. This is what I consider an LFBC.

    Again, not people, but stupid birfers who … (see above).
    What you consider does not have any traction with the courts, because in a court, only the law is considered.

    Ultimately this is the document Obama presented in April 2011. The trouble for him is the fact that file is not consistent with the claim it was created as a scan of an actual document. Why would Obama need a forgery if there is an original document on file with DoH? It does not make sense.

    It is not inconsistent. Debunked again. And again, no Bobby Ewing.
    The only way your assertion makes sense if you want every silly birfer to actually touch the real thing from 1961. Is not goin to happen, because Hawaii knows better than to entrust an actual historica document to people who would tear it up and claim that “see, that dog never had a valid birth certificate, anyway”.

    What happened to the public access to the original birth index data? Name, registration number and registration date – it is such a big secret that cannot be publicly shared, LOL!

    Funny, yes, I remember finding it on the net. If it is no longer available that way, maybe it is because Hawaii wants to charge stupid birfers money for it. And they are of course right to do so.

  72. avatar
    Lupin March 2, 2012 at 6:35 am #

    Greenfinches: Arpaio’s little stunt made the UK news – check the BBC website. Alas.

    Despite my inner yankee-bashing self, I have to say that I cry inside a little every time Newt, Santorum and now Arpaio make the international news and as a result make the US look every day a little worse.

  73. avatar
    Lupin March 2, 2012 at 6:38 am #

    G: you seem to be so lost in your fantasy hate trip that you are blind to any reality

    This is the absolutely perfectly worded summation of the whole embarrassing mess. Right there, you captured the essence of birtherdom.

  74. avatar
    Suranis March 2, 2012 at 6:58 am #

    naturalizedcitizen: That is not the question. Important thing is that Department of Hawaiian Lands needed more information than it was provided in the COLB.
    That is why DoH issued LFBC to people who asked for it even after the change of their regular policy in 2001. If my memory is correct they changed the policy in 2009 after people claimed that Obama’s COLB was a forgery and asked for examination of
    LFBC

    Actually no. Thats how freerepublics Danae Insed the Dept of hawaiin lands exeption to get a copy of her records. UNFORTUNALTLY FOR YOU it wasn;t a certificate. All she got was a photocopy, no seal no stamp nothing. And guess what also came in the envilobe? Thats right, the COLB, which she also needed for the DOHL, to confirm she was born in hawaii, which the Photocopy was useless for.

    You know what a photocopy without the stamp is? Its a photocopy, not a birth certificate. So your claim that people could get LFBCs using the DOHL program is false.

    So basicly all you would get from the DOHL exemption is a photocopy that would look exactly like the Certified copy presented by Obama. Which you would whine about becasue its not certified and call a forgery anyway.

    Kenneth Olsen: If the LFBC is shown to be phony, does Terry Lakin deserve a full pardon and restoration of benefits?

    If no one knows I’ll check with caaflog.com !

    Nope, the guy was found guilty of disobeying orders. He would still have been convicted even if Obama had send a copy of his vital records to the trial.

    Also he pled guilty to 8 of the 9 charges. And its not just saying “I’m guilty” he had to stand there for an hour solid talking in order to convince the court he was guilty. Thats military justice. And thats what they will tell you in caaflog if you troll over there.

    Frankly the blue falcon should still be in jail.

  75. avatar
    Scientist March 2, 2012 at 7:09 am #

    naturalizedcitizen: Once Nordyke documents were published people wanted to see Obama’s equivalent.

    The Founding Fathers never intended that one should show documents to “prove” one’s birth. They certainly never showed any. The Founders are weeping over the birthers and Sheriff Joe.

  76. avatar
    LineInTheSand March 2, 2012 at 7:46 am #

    Doc, the problem with throwing out a zillion questions is that both sides can ask them.

    I’m thinking the 17 states that have already questioned obamugabe’s eligibility will be asking a few more questions now based on Arpaio’s probable cause?

    Huh? Don’t ‘cha think???

    The obamabot headaches are only beginning….

  77. avatar
    The Magic M March 2, 2012 at 7:50 am #

    > Why was Jerome Corsi, a nationally-known anti-Obama partisan, invited to speak at the Press Conference

    I think this is the most troubling issue that even someone who hasn’t heard of the birfers at all would consider odd. If this really was an investigation that deserves its name, it wouldn’t touch known partisan hacks with a ten-feet pole.

    Can you imagine a Watergate investigator allowing a well-known anti-Nixon publisher to speak at a press conference where he was breaking the news to the press? Can you imagine a Watergate investigator allowing such a person to act as a co-investigator and relying on his “findings”?

    In an alternative universe analogy, could you imagine a Congress Special Investigator probing the Lybia attacks allowing Muammar Ghaddafi to speak at his press conference where he presents his findings that “the US President started an illegal war”?

  78. avatar
    Loren March 2, 2012 at 8:05 am #

    I have another question for you:

    Why was Mark Gillar, a well-known anti-Obama partisan, chosen to narrate the six short videos that constituted most of the posse’s presentation? Why were the videos posted to Gillar’s “TeaPartyPowerHour” YouTube account, the links to which were included in the sheriff’s press release? And did Gillar help make the videos as well?

  79. avatar
    Zachary Bravos March 2, 2012 at 8:30 am #

    Well, well, well. Very interesting day yesterday with Sheriff Arpaio. I was expecting him to dance around the issue so as to keep all potential voters within the zone of possibility of voting for him. Contrary to what I expected he must have decided that his better option was to go full birther. It is legitimate to ask that the investigators disclose their experts, their qualifications, the witnesses they considered, the witnesses they did not reach out to, etc. However to me, the most telling aspect of the investigation was the reliance upon Jerome Corsi to state that the passenger lists for the week of August 1 -7, 1961 are missing. It took literally a few hours to disprove that assertion by simple reference to the index of the records maintained by the National Archives. Since this was supposedly a 6 month investigation and they missed something so simple, it does not argue well for the validity of the rest of their conclusions. I think that it was a mistake for Arpaio to become a birther, but on the other hand he is nothing if not an astute manipulator of public opinion. Perhaps he is right that, given his political and professional problems with the federal government, his best option is to go into full attack mode. Time will tell but as to the quality of the “investigation” I would expect even more rapid and conclusive debunking of the findings than has already occurred and, here’s a hint: IT WON’T TAKE SIX MONTHS!

  80. avatar
    James M March 2, 2012 at 8:34 am #

    I believe that some of these questions should be asked in the form of a sworn deposition before the state legislature. I’m quite serious and I would like to help make that happen. My representative is Steve Farley of the 28th District. Please advise. Does anyone believe that the Maricopa Sheriff’s office has run afoul of any particular law or lawful order? Is there anything apparently inappropriate in the financing of this investigation?

  81. avatar
    donna March 2, 2012 at 9:01 am #

    index data: That information, called index data, shows a listing for “Obama II, Barack Hussein, Male,” according to the department’s website. The president was born Aug. 4, 1961.

    4/2011

    What Donald Trump’s Birther Investigators Will Find in Hawaii (IF they bothered to look)

    http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/04/what-donald-trumps-birther-investigators-will-find-in-hawaii/237198/

    state dept requirements for what a BC contains

    http://travel.state.gov/passport/passport_5401.html

    re: HI Homelands Program – this program is similar to the native american and alaska native progrma

    the requirement for more info is because “natives” (like todd palin/alaska native) are eligible for NUMEROUS “affirmative action” benefits like FREE health insurance – natives have to PROVE they are natives which is why more info is required for THEM than for other americans

    obama is NOT a “native hawaiian”

  82. avatar
    Paper March 2, 2012 at 9:11 am #

    Right. It does not make sense. Because it is NOT a forgery. That it does not make sense is a problem with your idea that it is a forgery, not with the birth certificate provided by Hawaii.

    You also are simply incorrect that the file is inconsistent with a scan of an actual document.

    naturalizedcitizen:

    Ultimately this is the document Obama presented in April 2011.The trouble for him is the fact that file is not consistent with the claim it was created as a scan of an actual document. Why would Obama need a forgery if there is an original document on file with DoH? It does not make sense.

  83. avatar
    Lupin March 2, 2012 at 9:26 am #

    I don’t have a crystal ball but it seems likely that Obama will be reelected, sooner than later sheriff Arpaio will be voted out of office, and will end up drunk and a pauper, if not in jail, and eventually dying from cirrhosis of the liver or something like that, unloved and an embarrassment to everyone. This press conference may be the only thing that will make it into his 6-line obit in the papers.

  84. avatar
    misha March 2, 2012 at 9:30 am #

    Lupin: I don’t have a crystal ball but it seems likely that Obama will be reelected

    Intrade has Obama at 59.9%. I’m enjoying watching the conservatives self-destruct.

  85. avatar
    Bill DuBerger March 2, 2012 at 9:43 am #

    BTW…An especially apropos “quote of the day”.

  86. avatar
    richCares March 2, 2012 at 9:51 am #

    “Why was Mark Gillar, a well-known anti-Obama partisan, chosen to narrate”
    .
    Mark Gillar, the one that hosted the debate with John Woodman, so he should have known better.
    .
    One more thing, please stop feeding the troll
    .

  87. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 2, 2012 at 10:01 am #

    That was exactly the point I was trying to make when I asked the questions.

    Pause and think about it.

    LineInTheSand: Doc, the problem with throwing out a zillion questions is that both sides can ask them.

  88. avatar
    Horus March 2, 2012 at 10:06 am #

    Dixie Patriot: Why don’t you take an open mind and look at the facts presented?

    Because FACTS do NOT concern you!
    You are willing to just forget about every fact presented to believe a fantasy.

  89. avatar
    Horus March 2, 2012 at 10:09 am #

    Lupin: sooner than later sheriff Arpaio will be voted out of office, and will end up drunk and a pauper, if not in jail,

    I would say that when Arpaio leaves, or is forced to leave office, he will be offered a Prison Warden job in one of the Private prisons that his buddies run.

  90. avatar
    Xyxox March 2, 2012 at 10:11 am #

    naturalizedcitizen: I don’t mind if a certified copy of COLB is used for such purpose – as long as there is a provision to have a procedure for chalenging its validity. If there is a suspicion that COLB is a forgery there should be process in place for document authentication including examination of original birth documents by qualified experts.

    That’s setting a new standard and is unconstitutional under the full faith and credit clause. The state of Hawaii declares the COLB to be prima facie evidence of birth in any court of law. All other states and the federal government must respect that and accept the COLB as presented. the burden of proof now falls upon those who doubt, and the standard is to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Hawaii has committed fraud. Doubt is not enough.

    To date, there has been precisely zero proof presented to prove the state of Hawaii committed fraud in producing Obama’s COLB. None. Nada. Absolutely nothing.

    Case closed.

  91. avatar
    Horus March 2, 2012 at 10:11 am #

    Kenneth Olsen: I have an easy question: Is it true that Barry O breached the contract for delivery of his first book?

    Who gives a shit?

  92. avatar
    richCares March 2, 2012 at 10:15 am #

    “precisely zero proof presented”
    actually none of Sheriff Joe’s evidence would be accepted in a court of law, most of this so called evidence was presented in Indiana and rejected. Fail, that’s what birthers do!

  93. avatar
    Horus March 2, 2012 at 10:17 am #

    Birthers point to the DOJ investigation as proof that Obama is afraid of what Arpaio knows.
    I think the opposite, I think Arpaio is accusing the president of not being legit BECAUSE he is being investigated, not the other way around.

  94. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 2, 2012 at 10:18 am #

    The evidence of fraud is in the Press Conference presentation itself, a faulty experimental design, so bad that anyone with minimal technical familiarity with graphics processing could see through it. So they either lied about consulting a forensic document examiner, or they lied that the examiner approved their work.

    I see that you are very uncomfortable about the questions I raised. You should.

    LineInTheSand: I’d be much, much more interested in hearing your evidence’ of alleged fraud’.

  95. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 2, 2012 at 10:20 am #

    Well be sure and drop by and let me know when that happens.

    Sheriff Joe is, by the way, currently under Grand Jury investigation himself.

    LineInTheSand: Do any of you obamabot armchair lawyers realize that official law enforcement investigation results of probable cause’ can and, in this case, WILL lead to court ordered search warrants and/or document examination?

  96. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 2, 2012 at 10:22 am #

    I expect that the Hawaii Homelands page was just obsolete and that hey brought it up to date with current policy once the birthers went ape over it. That explains the timing.

    G: Obama does NOT qualify for the HI Homelands Program. Therefore the LFBC was NOT an option available to him, NOR to anyone else from HI who was NOT eligible for the HI Homelands Program either.

  97. avatar
    Horus March 2, 2012 at 10:29 am #

    All Birfers need to take a lesson from the death of Breitbart.
    This is what happens to you when you are so consumed with HATE!
    Hate is a poison that will kill you just as assuredly as Cyanide.

  98. avatar
    Lupin March 2, 2012 at 10:30 am #

    Horus: I would say that when Arpaio leaves, or is forced to leave office, he will be offered a Prison Warden job in one of the Private prisons that his buddies run.

    You may well be right, but often rich buddies drop people like Arpaio like hot potatoes when they’re on their way down.

  99. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 2, 2012 at 10:42 am #

    I don’t see how this birther dog and pony show gets Arpaio off the hook, even in his own mind. I think this is a case of racism and personal animosity playing out in the life of someone who has had too much authority given him and insufficient accountability.

    He may dislike Obama so much that he falls into the confirmation bias trap like the rest of conspiracy theorists.

    When I said before “I think every criminal serving time in Arizona jails convicted as the result of an investigation by Joe Arpaio’s office now has grounds for an appeal,” I wasn’t completely joking. This incident shows some serious divergence from rational thought process.

    Horus: Birthers point to the DOJ investigation as proof that Obama is afraid of what Arpaio knows.
    I think the opposite, I think Arpaio is accusing the president of not being legit BECAUSE he is being investigated, not the other way around.

  100. avatar
    RUKiddingme March 2, 2012 at 10:45 am #

    Mike Zullo is not a “lead” investigator. He couldn’t even make the Police Department because he wasnt able to run the mile fast enough to qualify.
    The last I heard, he charges people a fee to negotiate car sales for them.
    You won’t find much work history on him he’s always been supported by his parents.
    I bet his mommy still does his laundry!

  101. avatar
    JoZeppy March 2, 2012 at 10:47 am #

    LineInTheSand: Do any of you obamabot armchair lawyers realize that official law enforcement investigation results of probable cause’ can and, in this case, WILL lead to court ordered search warrants and/or document examination?

    Actually, no it won’t. You still have to present the evidence to the judge. And here’s the kicker, it will have to be a judge that has jurisdiction over the area to be seached or where the documents are maintained. So that means Sheriif Joe is going to have to trek over to Hawaii, present his evidence before a prosecutor, or perhaps directly to a judge, and convince him that his evidence isn’t a fester pile of doggie do. Now he is also going to have to convince that judge that the full faith and credit clause needs to be disposed with, since the state of Hawaii has repeatedly gone on the record to state that President Obama was born in Hawaii. That also means Sheriff Joe is going to have to disclose all of his “expert” witness, and all those super secret people that provided affidavits.

    I say go for it Sheriff Joe. If you have evidence of forgery, I fully expect him to take his case to a prosecutor immediately. I would have expected him to have done so even before his press conference. Afterall, that is how real law enforcement works. You do the investigation, forward it to a prosecutor, who files charges, and ONLY THEN have the press conference. Unless, of course, this is has nothing to do with law enforcement, and is just a publicity stunt so that he can deflect from the ongoing investigations of his abuse of power that will most likely result in indictments, and then he can cry it’s in retaliation to his Obama investigation.

    So why hasn’t Sheriff Joe asked for criminal prosecution yet?

  102. avatar
    CarlOrcas March 2, 2012 at 11:00 am #

    LineInTheSand: You people are clowns. Real cops produce real results and you clack away in futile efforts to hold back the tide of reason at your keyboards. Utter morons.

    No “real cops” were involved in what Arpaio presented yesterday. Posse members have no police powers, no authority, nothing. You do understand that, don’t you?

  103. avatar
    LineInTheSand March 2, 2012 at 11:04 am #

    JoZeppy, I’ll take that bet, Arpaio doesn’t have to follow up, though, there will be dozens of individual state legal beagles willing to travel to HI to do exactly what you said – and use Arpaio’s report as the springboard to push for further investigation into the Kenyan commie’s ballot eligibility.

    This has all just started again….bigger than ever before….

  104. avatar
    bovril March 2, 2012 at 11:07 am #

    From someone who has actually had to stand up in court and support the digital forensics my teams have run on suspect electonic documents, forged emails, scanned images etc.

    What methodologies did the CCP and their “experts” use to seize forensically sound originals of the images they “analyzed”

    Did they have access to the data storage device the file resides on or did they simply copy a file over the internet
    .
    If they did not have access to the originating storage media, what steps could they have undertaken to ensure the file they worked on is the file stored on the originating media.

    Where are the work books detailing the steps undertaken, tests performed, individuals performing them, test software and hardware used

    What methods were used to ensure inviolate copies of the seized originals

    What steps were taken to take forensically sound working images of the “frozen” images

    What steps were taken to ensure that the files being analyzed had a sound, inviolate chain of custody from start to finish

    Which hashing method, version and application did they use

    Where and how were the hash values stored and can they be demonstrated not to have been altered, amended or changed at any stage

    Since, by the very nature of electronic transfer of data via the Internet, data can and (unless sound methods are in place) will be changed during the transfer and recording process, what steps, policies, processes, procedures, applications and methodologies were used to ensure am inviolate and sound copy was transferred.

    What steps were undertaken to ensure that the file that was identified and copied was in point of fact originating from their supposed target. For example was any network traffic analysis undertaken to provide some surety that the believed target was the actual target.

    In addition what steps if any were taken to ensure that the data was not maliciously or inadvertently altered, amended, changed or corrupted in transit through multiple routers and routes.

    When the file was being worked on what assumptions were taken and worked on and where is the record in the report.

    When the file was initially analyzed was it noted and recorded that the file meta data indicated it was created using a Mac computer using an operating system specific and embedded process to create a PDF file via scanning.

    If so noted, where is it recorded in the working documents and where is the decision matrix explaining exactly which criteria were used to NOT replicate this and instead use Windows PC’s, a Windows operating system and a third party application to create a PDF.

    Where is it documented and recorded that the CCP and their analysts identified which model, make and manufacturer of scanner was used to create the file and where is it also noted that the CCP and their analysts used the same to create and work on their images.

    ==================================

    I could continue for about another couple of pages

  105. avatar
    LineInTheSand March 2, 2012 at 11:07 am #

    CarlOrcas, you have absolutely no idea who was on Arpaio’s posse. He’s potentially got law enforcement contacts across all 50 states and into Fed levels.

    If he’s worked with them or helped them or know them, they could be on his posse.

    What a croc of s t that they can’t be ‘cops’!!?? Where do you come up with this stuff??!!

  106. avatar
    Arthur March 2, 2012 at 11:11 am #

    JoZeppy: I say go for it Sheriff Joe. If you have evidence of forgery, I fully expect him to take his case to a prosecutor immediately. I would have expected him to have done so even before his press conference. Afterall, that is how real law enforcement works. You do the investigation, forward it to a prosecutor, who files charges, and ONLY THEN have the press conference. Unless, of course, this is has nothing to do with law enforcement, and is just a publicity stunt so that he can deflect from the ongoing investigations of his abuse of power that will most likely result in indictments, and then he can cry it’s in retaliation to his Obama investigation.

    I agree with you, JoZeppy: I liked to see Joe go to a prosecutor or judge. The fact that he chose to have a presser rather than go to a prosecutor, is just one of many factors that indicate Joe is politically motivated.

    Additionally, I would like to see the press ask Rick Santorum what Joe told him about this investigation and ask Santorum if he believes the sheriff’s allegations of fraud.

  107. avatar
    JoZeppy March 2, 2012 at 11:12 am #

    naturalizedcitizen: What happened to the public access to the original birth index data? Name, registration number and registration date – it is such a big secret that cannot be publicly shared, LOL!

    It’s available (well, the number is not part of the public index). President Obama data has been published on-line by the DOH, and if you trek your but to Hawaii, you can review the paper copy (I believe you can also purchase a complete copy as well).

  108. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 2, 2012 at 11:13 am #

    After having slept on this, I have a slightly different take.

    Remember that Sheriff Joe’s Cold Case Posse was comprised of volunteers. I think what happened was that a local birther, Mark Zullo, volunteered for the job. Naturally a birther would look to birthers for help, and so his graphics expert was birther Mara Zebest, and the narrator of his film was Mark Gillar (of the “Tea Party Poser Hour”) and of course his researcher at the National Archives was arch-birther Jerome Corsi.

    This is a perfect example of what happens when you put the fox in charge of the hen house.

    I think Sheriff Joe was predisposed to accept Zullo’s multimedia dog and pony show, and suffers from the same confirmation bias that plagues all conspiracy-minded people.

  109. avatar
    JoZeppy March 2, 2012 at 11:16 am #

    LineInTheSand: I’m thinking the 17 states that have already questioned obamugabe’s eligibility will be asking a few more questions now based on Arpaio’s probable cause?
    Huh? Don’t cha think???

    Actually, I don’t.

    First off, I don’t think you quite understand what the term “probable cause” means. Nothing in that little press conference amounts to probable cause.

    Secondly, the same garbage that Arpaio hoisted upon us yesterday has already been rejected by the states that actually looked at it as being nothing more than hearsay, statements of “expert witnesses” without established credentials, and innuendo.

    The only purpose this press conference served was to give Sheriff Joe something to spout off about when he is finally indicted.

  110. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 2, 2012 at 11:17 am #

    Yes, that is one of the things that troubles me.

    I know that one of the presentations was written by birther Mara Zebest.

    I know that the videos presented were narrated by birther Mark Gillar.

    I know that their investigator of INS records was by birther Jerome Corsi.

    For all we know Mark Zullo’s mother could have been a birtherette in college.

    THEY’RE ALL BIRTHERS ON THIS BUS!

    LineInTheSand: CarlOrcas, you have absolutely no idea who was on Arpaio’s posse.

  111. avatar
    JoZeppy March 2, 2012 at 11:21 am #

    LineInTheSand: CarlOrcas, you have absolutely no idea who was on Arpaio’s posse. He’s potentially got law enforcement contacts across all 50 states and into Fed levels. If he’s worked with them or helped them or know them, they could be on his posse. What a croc of s t that they can’t be cops’!!?? Where do you come up with this stuff??!!

    Actually, we do have a pretty good idea of who was on the posse. He’s said as much. A few former law enforcement individuals, and I believe a former attorney or two.

    More to the point, it doesn’t really matter, because none of those people have access to the original document in question. So all of his yammering on is fairly meaningless.

  112. avatar
    Arthur March 2, 2012 at 11:22 am #

    LineInTheSand: You people are clowns. Real cops produce real results and you clack away in futile efforts to hold back the tide of reason at your keyboards. Utter morons.

    Hi LineInTheSand:

    I’m all for the getting a real investigation underway. Let’s have Sheriff Joe and his posse move from making allegations (which anyone can do, regardless of the quality of one’s evidence or argument) and convince a prosecutor to mount an inquiry. For example, I’m interested to see what recognized experts, whose testimony and analysis would stand up in court, would say about Joe’s charges of fraud.

  113. avatar
    LineInTheSand March 2, 2012 at 11:24 am #

    JoZeppy, I’ve arrested more people than you probably are years old, you d-head, don’t you dare lecture me on what ‘probable cause’ means.

  114. avatar
    JoZeppy March 2, 2012 at 11:29 am #

    LineInTheSand: JoZeppy, I’ll take that bet, Arpaio doesn’t have to follow up, though, there will be dozens of individual state legal beagles willing to travel to HI to do exactly what you said – and use Arpaio’s report as the springboard to push for further investigation into the Kenyan commie’s ballot eligibility. This has all just started again….bigger than ever before….

    I won’t be holding my breath. We’ve seen your legal beagles travel to HI, and what outcome that had. Point is, no “legal beagle” has a right to access the documents. Only an actually prosecutor/law enforcement would. And that would only be after they gave a judge sufficient evidence. REAL evidence, that would give the judge reason to set aside the rules of evidence regarding government documents, and the full faith and credit clause of the Consitution. Arpaio has done nothing more than rehash already debunked birther claims that have been regularly shot down, and don’t stand a snowball’s chance in hell before a judge.

    You still have no more than you did on Feb 29. Arpaio is just another Trump. Trying to make a stir with nothing in hand.

  115. avatar
    richCares March 2, 2012 at 11:29 am #

    “I’m interested to see what recognized experts, whose testimony and analysis would stand up in court, would say about Joe’s charges of fraud.”
    .
    for example, what did they tell Orly about her evidence in Indiana (much of it the same as Joe’s), I think the word ridiculous comes to mind.

  116. avatar
    Paper March 2, 2012 at 11:30 am #

    I certainly would be sitting there, if I were in jail as a result of his actions, thinking, hey, maybe I’m not guilty after all! 😉

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    don’t see how this birther dog and pony show gets Arpaio off the hook, even in his own
    When I said before “I think every criminal serving time in Arizona jails convicted as the result of an investigation by Joe Arpaio’s office now has grounds for an appeal,” I wasn’t completely joking. This incident shows some serious divergence from rational thought process.

  117. avatar
    Arthur March 2, 2012 at 11:31 am #

    Dr. Conspiracy: I think Sheriff Joe was predisposed to accept Zullo’s multimedia dog and pony show, and suffers from the same confirmation bias that plagues all conspiracy-minded people.

    Hi Doc C.:

    I wonder if Sheriff Joe’s support for the material these people assembled has anything to do with a desire to get back at Obama for the Justice Department’s three-year investigation of his department? That would be conspiratorial thinking, I know, but given Joe’s cantankerous personality, I tend to believe there’s something to it.

  118. avatar
    Reality Check March 2, 2012 at 11:32 am #

    Did anyone else catch that Sheriff Joe said his employees “trained” the members of the Cold Case Corrupt Posse (CCCP)? Was that training done on his employees’ off time?

  119. avatar
    Tarrant March 2, 2012 at 11:34 am #

    JoZeppy: Actually, we do have a pretty good idea of who was on the posse.He’s said as much.A few former law enforcement individuals, and I believe a former attorney or two.

    More to the point, it doesn’t really matter, because none of those people have access to the original document in question.So all of his yammering on is fairly meaningless.

    The Arizona Republic had an article on Sheriff Joe’s report this morning, and they, being a responsible news organization, actually called up Hawaii and asked, hey, did anyone representing this Posse ever call you and ask about these records, or whether various documents were legitimate?

    The response from the State of Hawaii? No, never.

    Quite the thorough investigation. For any honest investigation, trying to get at the truth, you’d think the first thing they’d do is contact the State that may have issued the record. But no, they didn’t even consider doing that, because their mind was made up from the moment it started.

  120. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 2, 2012 at 11:39 am #

    I’m a mathematician, and I will lecture you on what “probable” means. It means more likely that not.

    Take the example of the date stamp on the Selective Service registration.

    A Freedom of Information Act request was presented to the Selective Service who released a copy of Obama’s registration form to the public.

    Option 1: The year slug from a hand date stamp over 10 years old fell out (or wore out) some time during its life and so the year is missing from the stamp on the form.

    Option 2: A faker at the Selective Service somehow gets a real date stamp from 2008, removes and turns upside the second part of the year slug, ignores the obvious fact that his fake date doesn’t look like the one he started with, ignores the fact that what he’s releasing doesn’t match the microfilm on file, breaks who knows how many laws and releases the fake through official channels.

    Which is more “probable?” Anyone who is not consumed with birtherism would find the second scenario wild improbable.

    LineInTheSand: JoZeppy, I’ve arrested more people than you probably are years old, you d-head, don’t you dare lecture me on what probable cause’ means.

  121. avatar
    Tarrant March 2, 2012 at 11:43 am #

    JoZeppy:

    I say go for it Sheriff Joe.If you have evidence of forgery, I fully expect him to take his case to a prosecutor immediately.I would have expected him to have done so even before his press conference.Afterall, that is how real law enforcement works.You do the investigation, forward it to a prosecutor, who files charges, and ONLY THEN have the press conference.Unless, of course, this is has nothing to do with law enforcement, and is just a publicity stunt so that he can deflect from the ongoing investigations of his abuse of power that will most likely result in indictments, and then he can cry it’s in retaliation to his Obama investigation.

    So why hasn’t Sheriff Joe asked for criminal prosecution yet?

    Indeed…consider this hilarity.

    Sheriff Joe said more than once at his press conference, that he DID NOT KNOW what to do with all this information. He blatantly and forthrightly accused the President of the United States of fraud and forgery (while simultaneously saying over and over “But I’m not actually accusing him of a crime”), then said he had no clue what to do with the evidence his Posse has put together.

    Mr. Arpaio, you’re a SHERIFF. If I had proof of a crime, or suspected one, I honestly wouldn’t know where to go. The police? The district attorney? The FBI? I don’t know. I’d assume the police. But you’re a SHERIFF. You do this ALL THE TIME. You perform investigations of people ALL THE TIME (just not for those hundreds of sex crimes you’re ignoring right now). Your office refers the matter and evidence to prosecutors ROUTINELY. Probably tens or hundreds of times a DAY.

    So to say that you, as a Sheriff for almost twenty years now, have no clue what to do with this evidence of, in your own (Corsi-puppet) words, one of the greatest frauds ever, is hogwash. You know exactly what to do when presented with evidence of a crime. You’re a POLICE OFFICER. THAT’S WHAT YOUR DEPARTMENT DOES. Even if it’s a crime that your department doesn’t have jurisdiction to prosecute, your department STILL knows EXACTLY what organization to forward it to, whether it be federal, local, state, or whatnot, because they do it day-in-day-out.

    What you’re really saying is that you know this “evidence” won’t stand up in court, just like it hasn’t stood up in courts and hearings in Hawaii, New Hampshire, Alabama, Georgia, Indiana, various federal courts all over the country, and soon Mississippi. Therefore, instead of referring it to prosecutors, he holds a gigantic press conference, showing all of his ‘evidence’ (and, were this a real investigation, likely making it nearly impossible to find an unbiased jury), and then drops it on the floor, saying “OK guys, there it is, I don’t know what to do now, YOU do something.”

  122. avatar
    Scientist March 2, 2012 at 11:45 am #

    LineInTheSand: JoZeppy, I’ve arrested more people than you probably are years old, you d-head, don’t you dare lecture me on what probable cause’ means

    Did you hold a presser before you made your arrests or after? Why hasn’t Joe made an arrest? He is useless!!

  123. avatar
    Arthur March 2, 2012 at 11:46 am #

    LineInTheSand: JoZeppy, I’ve arrested more people than you probably are years old, you d-head, don’t you dare lecture me on what probable cause’ means.

    Hi LineInTheSand:

    You know, when people use the tone and style found in your post above, it leads others to question the writer’s truthfulness. There’s just something about your writing that screams, “I’m desperately trying to make myself more important and authoritative than I really am.”

    Specifically, the phrase “don’t you dare lecture me,” comes off like something a weeping wife might say to her husband during an argument about an expensive new dress. Of course, maybe you are a woman . . . a police woman, even. If so, your choice of words is entirely apt.

  124. avatar
    Graham Shevlin March 2, 2012 at 11:54 am #

    LineInTheSand:
    JoZeppy, I’ve arrested more people than you probably are years old, you d-head, don’t you dare lecture me on what probable cause’ means.

    Stop being a bloviating fool. You’re simply acting all hurt while dancing around the fundamental reality that the current score for birther-related complaints and lawsuits stands at 0-95. Whatever “compelling evidence” and “probable cause” has been uncovered, it’s not convincing any legal or regulatory authorities. Furthermore, i see no decent lawyer (and by that I mean a lawyer with, you know, a proper track record of sustained success in litigation, not a grifter or a DIY bedroom studier) who has assisted or led any litigation or complaints of this type. That tells you a lot about the merits (or lack thereof) of the allegations being flung around.

  125. avatar
    Paper March 2, 2012 at 11:54 am #

    Fun times. But I must correct your math. Please don’t hate. 🙂

    I think you are leaving off the two highest probabilities and thus skewing your data.

    The real question, and I admit I do not have the answer, is which is more probable:

    1) that this mistake is a result of aliens fabricating a fake life for the president, and this making such a mistake, not knowing how they would be tripped up by crackerjack sheriffs, because they’ve never seen his like in any of the Westerns they researched before coming to our planet.

    Or

    2) that this mistake is a result of a possessed Rockefeller pawn of the NWO, whose original soul could only manage to slip this little tiny mistake past the master demon possessing him, and so reveal the whole master plot to the world.

    I think you can see how that changes the math.

    Dr. Conspiracy:

    Option 2: A faker at the Selective Service somehow gets a real date stamp from 2008, removes and turns upside the second part of the year slug, ignores the obvious fact that his fake date doesn’t look like the one he started with, ignores the fact that what he’s releasing doesn’t match the microfilm on file, breaks who knows how many laws and releases the fake through official channels.

    Which is more “probable?” Anyone who is not consumed with birtherism would find the second scenario wild improbable.

  126. avatar
    Arthur March 2, 2012 at 12:03 pm #

    Paper: 1) that this mistake is a result of aliens fabricating a fake life for the president, and this making such a mistake, not knowing how they would be tripped up by crackerjack sheriffs, because they’ve never seen his like in any of the Westerns they researched before coming to our planet.

    Paper:

    Your suggestion has the ring of truth, but shouldn’t it be, “a result of Jewish aliens”?

  127. avatar
    Paper March 2, 2012 at 12:03 pm #

    And I’ve dealt with more corrupt police officers in my life than the number of presidents you’ve arrested or brought to court or convinced anyone in authority to do anything about. What’s your point?

    LineInTheSand:
    JoZeppy, I’ve arrested more people than you probably are years old, you d-head, don’t you dare lecture me on what probable cause’ means.

  128. avatar
    nbc March 2, 2012 at 12:05 pm #

    LineInTheSand: Do any of you obamabot armchair lawyers realize that official law enforcement investigation results of probable cause’ can and, in this case, WILL lead to court ordered search warrants and/or document examination?

    Unlikely that in this case there will be any further investigation. No self respecting law enforcement agent wants to become the laughingstock of the nation, they will leave that to the Cold Case Posse. Just a prediction

  129. avatar
    nbc March 2, 2012 at 12:06 pm #

    I’m thinking the 17 states that have already questioned obamugabe’s eligibility will be asking a few more questions now based on Arpaio’s probable cause?

    Unlikely. Arpaio provided nothing new.

  130. avatar
    nbc March 2, 2012 at 12:08 pm #

    If anyone would do something it would be the AG of the State of Texas. None of the Courts or Hearing Commissions have any interest until these pure speculations have resulted in some real evidence.

  131. avatar
    JoZeppy March 2, 2012 at 12:10 pm #

    LineInTheSand: JoZeppy, I’ve arrested more people than you probably are years old, you d-head, don’t you dare lecture me on what probable cause’ means.

    As an attorney, I will lecture you, because if you think Sheriff Joe came anywhere near close to probable cause, quite clearly you still don’t grasp what is legally sufficient. But from the implication that you’re an officer of some sort, that doesn’t really suprise me (you do your thing, and the prosecutor is stuck arguing what it was reasonable). First off, what is considered probable cause for an arrest and issuing a warrant can be very different. In making an arrest on the spot, you get the benfit of “good faith” and the court look at the totality of the circumstances at the time of the arrest. So you get some breaks there. Now going before a court asking for a search warrant, you don’t quite get all those breaks. You have to explain why you actually think there was criminal activity. And he’s going to have to do it before a Hawaiian Judge. So let’s take a look at what we actually have to support your claim. A double hearsay statement an unknown witness. A supposed examiniation of a pdf document, with no attempt to review the original, or even contact the state government that has been on the record as supporting, and no motive for them to lie.

    Good luck with that one.

  132. avatar
    nbc March 2, 2012 at 12:16 pm #

    People don’t seem to take Arpaio very seriously so far, in Phoenix AZ

    “He’s beating a dead horse. I mean that’s old stuff. I’d find something else more productive,” said Mike Kilgore.

    “Personally, I feel that Sheriff Arpaio is doing a great job. So I support what he does except this,” said Gary Schincel, “It seems like he likes the publicity, and he kind of likes to stir the pot up a little.”

    “It’s not going to change my focus, and it’s not going to change anyone who’s behind the President. I mean, we are all Americans,” said Patti Williams.

    David Thompson said, “I’m sure there are a whole lot of other issues that he needs to be concerned with, like crime. We need to improve on our economy, we have homeless people, we need to be dealing with education.”

    ROTFL… So dead on arrival

  133. avatar
    nbc March 2, 2012 at 12:22 pm #

    JoZeppy: So let’s take a look at what we actually have to support your claim. A double hearsay statement an unknown witness. A supposed examiniation of a pdf document, with no attempt to review the original, or even contact the state government that has been on the record as supporting, and no motive for them to lie.

    Good luck with that one.

    Eggzactely… There is nothing there…

    Now can we all move on and get ready for the Mississippi Smackdown of Orly Taitz?

  134. avatar
    The Magic M March 2, 2012 at 12:25 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy: When I said before “I think every criminal serving time in Arizona jails convicted as the result of an investigation by Joe Arpaio’s office now has grounds for an appeal,” I wasn’t completely joking. This incident shows some serious divergence from rational thought process.

    Not just that. It shows obvious willingness to manufacture “evidence” and/or purposefully misrepresent facts, or ignoring proof of innocence. That’s a serious allegation against any type of law enforcement. It is the same level as the “planting evidence” allegation in the OJ trial.

    This would be impossible in my country where every law enforcement officer has a superior he has to justify his performance to. If our equivalent of a sheriff (who is not elected BTW) did the same thing Arpaio did, he’d be out of a job the next day.

  135. avatar
    Paper March 2, 2012 at 12:32 pm #

    I love Alex Wagner. She just spoke of these digital sleuths who rival Inspector Clouseau. You see, it’s not just the French who have their wacky inspectors who love pink.

  136. avatar
    Paper March 2, 2012 at 12:35 pm #

    Sheriff Arpaio: The Pink Panter Reborn

  137. avatar
    BillTheCat March 2, 2012 at 12:42 pm #

    @LineInTheSand

    HAHAHAHA you haven’t “arrested” anyone, give us a break troll. Sounds like you are a real “tough guy” like the Shurriff, eh?

    No, just another bitter, angry keyboard warrior who never got over the 2008 election. This November is going to be rough on you, hate to say.

  138. avatar
    richCares March 2, 2012 at 1:14 pm #

    “Sheriff Arpaio: The Pink Panter Reborn”
    .
    please no Pink Pather Stuff, I am a big fan of Inspector Clouseau and I don’t wish to relate sily birther stuff to classic comedy,

  139. avatar
    richCares March 2, 2012 at 1:17 pm #

    “you haven’t “arrested” anyone, give us a break troll.”
    .
    appeal to authority, common right wing BS
    The appeal to authority is a fallacy of irrelevance when the authority being cited is not really an authority

  140. avatar
    misha March 2, 2012 at 1:29 pm #

    Paper: Sheriff Arpaio: The Pink Panter Reborn

    – “I thought you said your dog doesn’t bite.”
    – “That’s not my dog.”

  141. avatar
    ellen March 2, 2012 at 1:33 pm #

    It has occurred to me, but I’d sure like the lawyers on this blog to comment, that what Sheriff Joe said yesterday is probably libelous to the officials in Hawaii, since they say that they saw the physical birth certificate and sent the physical birth certificate to Obama, and he says that that is a lie.

    I would also doubt that Sheriff Joe could use New York Times vs Sullivan in a libel defense, since he is not a publication. But perhaps he could use it, only it would be a political debacle for him. Why? Because to claim something like this and to use anything other than an attempt to prove the truth of the statement as a defense would be to admit that it was made up.

    Anyway, what about libel–and should we encourage the officials in Hawaii to sue for it? (And, if so, for how much?)

  142. avatar
    gorefan March 2, 2012 at 1:45 pm #

    From Ed Morrissey,

    “However, in the massive effort to investigate the birth certificate, Arpaio and his “cold case posse” overlooked one detail:

    The investigation relied on volunteers working with an electronic copy of the president’s birth certificate, which is available online, and pointing out inconsistencies with the electronic document. A representative with the Hawaii Attorney General’s Office said no one from the Sheriff’s Office ever requested to inspect or collect documents related to the authenticity of Obama’s birth certificate.

    I’m no Columbo, but wouldn’t the first step in investigating a potentially fraudulent birth certificate be to check with the issuing authority to see if it matches their records? “

    http://hotair.com/archives/2012/03/02/arpaio-obama-birth-certificate-is-a-fraud/comment-page-1/#comments

  143. avatar
    y_p_w March 2, 2012 at 2:15 pm #

    The Magic M: This would be impossible in my country where every law enforcement officer has a superior he has to justify his performance to. If our equivalent of a sheriff (who is not elected BTW) did the same thing Arpaio did, he’d be out of a job the next day.

    It all depends on the situation. In most US counties, the Sheriff is an elected position. At least in California, candidates for a county Sheriff’s position must be qualified as passing a California Peace Officers’ Standards and Training requirement via a police academy. In my state, a sheriff’s department typically serves as the primary local law enforcement in areas not served by a local police department. This is typically in unincorporated (non-city) areas, although some cities don’t have their own police departments for budgetary reasons and contact out police services from the sheriff’s dept. The Sheriff may also be the county Coroner, although this depends on the individual county.

    A sheriff’s department typically has other duties (varies by county), such as running the jails, serving as court bailiffs, and performing civil actions (serving court papers and/or evicitions or property seizure). In fact, the oldest law enforcement agency in the US is the New York City Sheriff’s Office. They’re actually pretty small, as they’re not a full-service law enforcement agency. They’re primary duties these days are evictions. The Sheriff of NYC is also appointed, which is different than in most cases.

    A county Sheriff in California doesn’t serve at the pleasure of any elected official or body. Since they are elected, they can be recalled via a recall election.

    San Francisco is an interesting case, as it is a single city/county government. The Sheriff’s Dept doesn’t have regular patrol areas. The city also elected a Sheriff who was recently charged with domestic battery (after the election) and is pretty much suspended until the case is done. There might be a recall election. The city’s police chief serves at the pleasure of the Mayor, and several Mayors have fired their chiefs and replaced them.

  144. avatar
    Graham Shevlin March 2, 2012 at 2:15 pm #


    I’m no Columbo, but wouldn’t the first step in investigating a potentially fraudulent birth certificate be to check with the issuing authority to see if it matches their records? “

    That is what I have heard referred to as “due diligence”, or “real work”. That won’t happen. The purpose of this whole process is not to force Obama off the ballot. The results show that course of action is doomed. It’s about smear, slur and innuendo, pure and simple. Due diligence in a situation like that is fatal, it might reveal what is really behind the curtain…

  145. avatar
    Paul Pieniezny March 2, 2012 at 2:24 pm #

    ellen: Anyway, what about libel–and should we encourage the officials in Hawaii to sue for it? (And, if so, for how much?)

    Libel (I think it is libel, and not slander because it was broadcast after all) is always difficult to prove in the USA, and there is no criminal defamation law in Arizona.

    However, the DOH people in Hawaii could perhaps try out defamation per se, which includes both “accusing someone of a crime” and interestingly, “adversely reflecting on a person’s fitness to conduct their business or trade” – no need to prove criminal intent or specific damages in defamation per se.

    They should have a good look at it.

  146. avatar
    jayHG March 2, 2012 at 2:25 pm #

    Dixie Patriot: Why don’t you take an open mind and look at the facts presented? Why are you against the RIGHTS of people to investigate, discuss and share their ideas? Why do you attack people instead of discussing the information presented.Your blind loyalty to, and dogmatic defense of, a corrupt political party is unbelievable. But, since you asked, go here for most of your answers (proof). >> http://commieblaster.com/ineligible/index.html

    The day a birther offers up an actual FACT (instead of conjecture, blatant lies, hopes and wishes, bs, wild conspiracy theories and demands for a pony), is the same day I will dance naked on the White House lawn singing Give My Regards to Broadway while twirling fire lit batons.

  147. avatar
    MBrown March 2, 2012 at 2:27 pm #

    Jerome Corsi just announced the release of his new book today – for sale at Barnes &Noble.

    http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/a-question-of-eligibility-jerome-r-corsi/1109231833?ean=2940013907225&itm=8&usri=corsi+jerome+r
    it is a report of the ‘preliminary’ findings presented by this so called Posse.

    When will birthers realize that they are being played with by grifters ?
    The ‘evidence’ that Zullo and Corsi and their ‘experts’ presented is not evidence that can stand up to scrutiny – it is weak already debunked lies, regurgitated. Any lawyer (except Taitz) could tear it to pieces in a matter of minutes in court It is absolutely Worthless as evidence. .

    This whole Posse and its ‘evidence’ and ‘findings’ is BAIT to get birthers to send their money to Corsi, and Sheriff Joe is getting a cut of the action.

  148. avatar
    Daniel March 2, 2012 at 2:33 pm #

    Tarrant: He blatantly and forthrightly accused the President of the United States of fraud and forgery (while simultaneously saying over and over “But I’m not actually accusing him of a crime”),

    I wonder if Maricopa County Sheriff Department has instituted that policy across the board, as in when dealing with ordinary folk stopped by police?

    “I’m saying this cocaine I found in your pocket is evidence that a crime has been committed. Now I’m not accusing YOU of committing this crime, I just want to get at the truth”

    Puh-leese

  149. avatar
    ellen March 2, 2012 at 2:35 pm #

    Re Defamation per se and “They should have a good look at it.”

    Is there any way to get in touch with them to recommend it?

  150. avatar
    MBrown March 2, 2012 at 2:40 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy –
    – Are there any state or county statutes that preclude the use of county staff, asset, or facilities partisan political purposes ?
    This Posse has been a political hack job, using public property and assets. It has been orchestrated and conducted by a private entity WND which has a partisan political agenda.

    – Are there any statutes re: “Conduct unbecoming” or “Damage to Reputation” that may be applied to a county Sheriff who publicly makes serious accusations without any evidence, and who willfully spreads what are suspected to be blatant falsehoods, etc.

    – Which public official in MC or AZ would be tasked with investigating any possible violations, and/or filing charges ?

  151. avatar
    MBrown March 2, 2012 at 2:57 pm #

    Daniel: I wonder if Maricopa County Sheriff Department has instituted that policy across the board, as in when dealing with ordinary folk stopped by police?

    “I’m saying this cocaine I found in your pocket is evidence that a crime has beencommitted. Now I’m not accusing YOU of committing this crime, I just want to get at the truth”

    Puh-leese

    But – in this case, they did NOT search Obama and find forged documents, they insinuated that the presence of Layers when the performed their Very UNforensic, UNprofessional looksee at the images they downloaded – using software that NO Forensic tech would ever use – suggested they are forgeries. That conclusion is not valid, nor is it logical.
    They did NOT examine or make any effort to examine the original printed document, they did not contact the issuing agency in Hawaii – yet they announce that those are likely forged documents.
    That would be like your boss publicly accusing you of being a coke dealer because somebody said they saw you eat a sugar coated donut at a staff meeting.
    You’d be on your phone to a lawyer, with a smile on your face. Defamation dollars, here we come ! CaCHING !!!

  152. avatar
    jayHG March 2, 2012 at 3:08 pm #

    naturalizedcitizen: I would welcome the policy that each presidential candidate must submit copy of the original birth certificate as a condition to be placed on the ballot. Having said that, Obama’s case is special because his birthplace has been reported in Hawaii (two different hospitals) and in Kenya. I am not aware that similar claim/media report has been published for any other candidate.

    I’m reporting that I heard that Santorum was born in Italy and that at least one of his parents was not a citizen BEFORE his (Santorum the younger) was born. Now will you ask for his birth certificate? Adn if he gives it to you, will you accept it and say THANKS, we’re done here. You’re ok? Cause that’s what you birthers did when President Obama offered up his birther certificate, right? Oh wait…..

  153. avatar
    jayHG March 2, 2012 at 3:21 pm #

    LineInTheSand: Do any of you obamabot armchair lawyers realize that official law enforcement investigation results of probable cause’ can and, in this case, WILL lead to court ordered search warrants and/or document examination?

    What was that I said about dancing naked on the White lawn??? Won’t happen as a result of stupid birthers antics…….stupid ass birther……

  154. avatar
    jayHG March 2, 2012 at 3:44 pm #

    LineInTheSand: JoZeppy, I’ve arrested more people than you probably are years old, you d-head, don’t you dare lecture me on what probable cause’ means.

    You’re such a liar. On the internet, no one knows you’re a dog….

    Anyhow, if you ever arrested anyone, you bought a uniform online and are a criminal impersonating a REAL policeman with powers to arrest people. No way were you ever on anyone’s polcie force. From your posts here, you don’t even get “innocent until proven guilty” and you have no idea what probable cause means. In short, you’re a stupid birther who is telling lies on the internet.

    Someone needs to lecture you cause, after all, you’re a stupid birther.

  155. avatar
    MBrown March 2, 2012 at 4:06 pm #

    LineInTheSand: Do any of you obamabot armchair lawyers realize that official law enforcement investigation results of probable cause’ can and, in this case, WILL lead to court ordered search warrants and/or document examination?

    MBrown >>>Did you miss the part where they said about 23 times how this is NOT an official law enforcement investigation ?? It WILL result in absolutely nothing.

    What court does a county sheriff, running an unofficial Posse, with piss poor False evidence, and NO probable cause – go to to get a search warrant that will empower him to dig through Hawaii records or to search the White House ?
    You will be crying those salty birther tears, again. This will lead to nothing but Sheriff Joe getting into trouble. .

  156. avatar
    G March 2, 2012 at 4:08 pm #

    I agree. I’ve seen it in working with businesses to improve their processes or technology all the time. Such obsolete info builds up over time in any large organization and it can go unnoticed and unaddressed for years and years, until some reason or someone finally brings it to attention and realizes that it hasn’t been needed for a long time.

    It is similar to unopened boxes of unnecessary junk that sit forgotten in one’s attic.

    Dr. Conspiracy: I expect that the Hawaii Homelands page was just obsolete and that hey brought it up to date with current policy once the birthers went ape over it. That explains the timing.

  157. avatar
    G March 2, 2012 at 4:14 pm #

    That is inline with my take on this whole situation as well.

    Dr. Conspiracy: After having slept on this, I have a slightly different take.Remember that Sheriff Joe’s Cold Case Posse was comprised of volunteers. I think what happened was that a local birther, Mark Zullo, volunteered for the job. Naturally a birther would look to birthers for help, and so his graphics expert was birther Mara Zebest, and the narrator of his film was Mark Gillar (of the “Tea Party Poser Hour”) and of course his researcher at the National Archives was arch-birther Jerome Corsi.

    This is a perfect example of what happens when you put the fox in charge of the hen house.I think Sheriff Joe was predisposed to accept Zullo’s multimedia dog and pony show, and suffers from the same confirmation bias that plagues all conspiracy-minded people.

  158. avatar
    MBrown March 2, 2012 at 4:25 pm #

    Reality Check:
    Did anyone else catch that Sheriff Joe said his employees “trained” the members of the Cold Case Corrupt Posse (CCCP)? Was that training done on his employees’ off time?

    How “expert” could they have been if county employees gave them brief lessons in how to perform forensic examinations ? What kind of “experts” did the CCCP exams ? Uncertified, untrained amateurs with a predetermined outcome before they began.
    It a scripted grade school play, not an objective forensic exam done by competent techs. Total sham and fakery. .

  159. avatar
    G March 2, 2012 at 4:30 pm #

    Agreed. Yes, the very fact that they whole event was put on by BIrthers and that much of the “work” seems to have been done by BIrthers, demonstrates that the whole thing was a sham effort from the start.

    The only change that happened yesterday is that Arpaio officially and formally entered the Birther camp and now is forever tarnished by them.

    Until that point, he was able to (barely) pull off an air of “above the fray” mere flirtiness and pandering to Birthers.

    But now, even with all the areas of hard-core Birtherism that he still tried to steer clear from and “weasel” away from, he’s outed as a Birther and will be permanently pegged as such.

    The only real fallout that is happening from yesterday’s “press conference” is that Arpaio has killed what remaining credibility he had in the broader spectrum. He was a controversial character before, sure. He had numerous prior statements and actions that made his biases clear and made both his motives and his decision making capability questionable, sure. There are a lot of investigations surrounding him that make him a character of suspected disrepute and of questionable credibility, sure.

    But even with all that, his long held position of authority and national publicity still meant that people still took note and paid some attention to what he tried to say or do.

    So far, the sum total of media response and reaction I’ve seen has pretty much focused on only one thing – this put the final nail in his credibility coffin and he’s now becoming widely viewed as nothing but a discredited political hack and a senile joke.

    I suspect that will be the only long term effect that retains its hold from yesterday’s events – the end of Sheriff Joe as a credible figure. He is now just another well-known fringe kook.

    Dr. Conspiracy: Yes, that is one of the things that troubles me.
    I know that one of the presentations was written by birther Mara Zebest.
    I know that the videos presented were narrated by birther Mark Gillar.
    I know that their investigator of INS records was by birther Jerome Corsi.

  160. avatar
    G March 2, 2012 at 4:36 pm #

    THIS!!!

    Very well-written breakdown, kudos!

    This is EXACTLY the reasoning which shows that this whole “press conference” yesterday was nothing more than bluster and farce and why there is NO real investigation or threat of follow-up happening.

    Tarrant: Indeed…consider this hilarity.

    Sheriff Joe said more than once at his press conference, that he DID NOT KNOW what to do with all this information. He blatantly and forthrightly accused the President of the United States of fraud and forgery (while simultaneously saying over and over “But I’m not actually accusing him of a crime”), then said he had no clue what to do with the evidence his Posse has put together.

    Mr. Arpaio, you’re a SHERIFF. If I had proof of a crime, or suspected one, I honestly wouldn’t know where to go. The police? The district attorney? The FBI? I don’t know. I’d assume the police. But you’re a SHERIFF. You do this ALL THE TIME. You perform investigations of people ALL THE TIME (just not for those hundreds of sex crimes you’re ignoring right now). Your office refers the matter and evidence to prosecutors ROUTINELY. Probably tens or hundreds of times a DAY.

    So to say that you, as a Sheriff for almost twenty years now, have no clue what to do with this evidence of, in your own (Corsi-puppet) words, one of the greatest frauds ever, is hogwash. You know exactly what to do when presented with evidence of a crime. You’re a POLICE OFFICER. THAT’S WHAT YOUR DEPARTMENT DOES. Even if it’s a crime that your department doesn’t have jurisdiction to prosecute, your department STILL knows EXACTLY what organization to forward it to, whether it be federal, local, state, or whatnot, because they do it day-in-day-out.

    What you’re really saying is that you know this “evidence” won’t stand up in court, just like it hasn’t stood up in courts and hearings in Hawaii, New Hampshire, Alabama, Georgia, Indiana, various federal courts all over the country, and soon Mississippi. Therefore, instead of referring it to prosecutors, he holds a gigantic press conference, showing all of his evidence’ (and, were this a real investigation, likely making it nearly impossible to find an unbiased jury), and then drops it on the floor, saying “OK guys, there it is, I don’t know what to do now, YOU do something.”

  161. avatar
    Thrifty March 2, 2012 at 4:51 pm #

    No, I have no doubts about President Obama’s honesty in this matter.

    I do have doubts about the Birther’s honesty though. Since it’s pretty clear that forensic examination would be done by self proclaimed birther “experts” who would spew a brand new stream of bullshit about why it’s a forgery.

    And even if they didn’t, since the Birthers state that the Hawaii DOH is complicit in the conspiracy, the Birthers can easily just claim that the Hawaii DOH produced a forged original.

    Weren’t you idiots just a year ago saying “Barack Obama can make this all go away if he just releases the long form birth certificate!”?

    naturalizedcitizen:
    An advice to Obama supporters – this is a perfect opportunity for Hawaii DoH and team Obama to come clean and release original documents for forensic examination.

    Why would anyone object to that?
    Perhaps you have doubts about Obama’s honesty?

  162. avatar
    Judge Mental March 2, 2012 at 4:52 pm #

    Doc, regarding question number 19 on your list, I don’t know if anyone has already given you this info but it appears that the answer is that Mark Zullo was not one of the signers of the petition handed over to Arapaio in August.

    Here’s a link to the petition from which the 5 signatories can be seen…

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/62830702/Surprise-Tea-Party-Letter-to-Sheriff-Joe-Arpaio-Final-Aug-21-2011

  163. avatar
    thisoldhippie March 2, 2012 at 4:52 pm #

    Foggy: The Fogbow will be more than happy to provide whatever assistance is possible toward this important investigation. Today’s press conference was a grievous offense against the American concept of “justice for all”. We simply cannot tolerate that level of deceptive dishonesty among those sworn to uphold the Constitution and the laws of this great nation. Let us never forget that the entire birther movement is seditious and subversive, being an attempt to overturn the results of a free and fair American election based on nothing but lies, hatred, fear and racism. Our cause is just; our vision is clear; our passion is enduring.Stop the madness!

    This is an affront to “We the People!”

  164. avatar
    thisoldhippie March 2, 2012 at 4:55 pm #

    Dixie Patriot: Why don’t you take an open mind and look at the facts presented? Why are you against the RIGHTS of people to investigate, discuss and share their ideas? Why do you attack people instead of discussing the information presented.Your blind loyalty to, and dogmatic defense of, a corrupt political party is unbelievable. But, since you asked, go here for most of your answers (proof). >> http://commieblaster.com/ineligible/index.html

    Because no “facts” were presented, only the regurgitation of debunked BS. Joe A’s entire CCP and the circus surrounding it reminds me of the South Park episode where everyone starts crapping out of their mouths.

  165. avatar
    Thrifty March 2, 2012 at 5:16 pm #

    Hey guys, I found a video of LineInTheSand over on Youtube.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKhEw7nD9C4

    LineInTheSand:
    Doc, the problem with throwing out a zillion questions is that both sides can ask them.

    I’m thinking the 17 states that have already questioned obamugabe’s eligibility will be asking a few more questions now based on Arpaio’s probable cause?

    Huh?Don’t cha think???

    The obamabot headaches are only beginning….

  166. avatar
    Hawaiiborn March 2, 2012 at 6:21 pm #

    naturalizedcitizen: We are talking about two slighlty different issues. As a matter of DoH policy they normally issued only COLB when people asked for a copy of their birth certificate. I agree that this change took place in 2001.

    Yes, this is correct, and happened even before May 15, 2001. They’ve been issuing COLB’s since at least 1991, when I applied for a duplicate certified copy when I got my first job.

    The official “100%” went digital was in 2001. But for nearly a decade before, they were hand typing the COLB’s based on information they pulled up in a DB (They couldn’t print the COLB’s On dot matrix printers). With the advent of laser printers, the entire records department of teh HDOH is digitized. Even today, there is no such thing as a “paper document” for birth registration. It’s all done electronically at the hospital, and signed like like a digital credit card machine.

    However, another Hawaii state agency (Department of Hawaiian Home Lands) required the LFBC explicitly because COLB did not have necessary information. After 2001, if an applicant requested LFBC explicitly, the DoH issued it.

    Different department that requires more detailed information than a COLB may have contained (since then, they no accept the current Hawaii COLB). Since you have to prove that you are Hawaiian to qualify for the programs set aside for native Hawaiians, they Birth Certificates must state that the person is Hawaiian. Since there are so few native Hawaiians left in the world, they did require a bit more information than what the HDOH offered. But they didn’t get a LFCOLB. They got a validation record of what is stated what was on the COLB on file.

    I have to see with my friend, since he qualified for the program. His COLB is the same as mines, and he was able to get accepted.

    Only after Obama’s eligibility was questioned Hawaii DoH changed policy and stopped issuing LFBC.

    Again, no, they NEVER gave out the LFCOLB, at least since from 1991. There was special EXCEPTION form that the Homelands program participants could get from the HDOH, that allowed the COLB to show that they were Hawaiian. This was accepted by the Hawaiian Homelands program.

    When the HDOH changed their form in 2008, the Hawaiian Homelands page didn’t update to reflect that change. These things happen in govt. When policy in one department changes, but the other departments weren’t notified of the change.

    Today, however, the regular COLB as issued in Hawaii is accepted for the Hawaiian Homelands Program.

  167. avatar
    G March 2, 2012 at 6:50 pm #

    Thank you for that detailed explanation!!!

    I recommend that Doc C save this post and bookmark it somehow for easy reference info in the archives.

    Hawaiiborn: Yes, this is correct, and happened even before May 15, 2001. They’ve been issuing COLB’s since at least 1991, when I applied for a duplicate certified copy when I got my first job.The official “100%” went digital was in 2001. But for nearly a decade before, they were hand typing the COLB’s based on information they pulled up in a DB (They couldn’t print the COLB’s On dot matrix printers). With the advent of laser printers, the entire records department of teh HDOH is digitized. Even today, there is no such thing as a “paper document” for birth registration. It’s all done electronically at the hospital, and signed like like a digital credit card machine.Different department that requires more detailed information than a COLB may have contained (since then, they no accept the current Hawaii COLB). Since you have to prove that you are Hawaiian to qualify for the programs set aside for native Hawaiians, they Birth Certificates must state that the person is Hawaiian. Since there are so few native Hawaiians left in the world, they did require a bit more information than what the HDOH offered. But they didn’t get a LFCOLB. They got a validation record of what is stated what was on the COLB on file.I have to see with my friend, since he qualified for the program. His COLB is the same as mines, and he was able to get accepted.Again, no, they NEVER gave out the LFCOLB, at least since from 1991. There was special EXCEPTION form that the Homelands program participants could get from the HDOH, that allowed the COLB to show that they were Hawaiian. This was accepted by the Hawaiian Homelands program.When the HDOH changed their form in 2008, the Hawaiian Homelands page didn’t update to reflect that change. These things happen in govt. When policy in one department changes, but the other departments weren’t notified of the change.Today, however, the regular COLB as issued in Hawaii is accepted for the Hawaiian Homelands Program.

  168. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 2, 2012 at 7:01 pm #

    I agree. I have added a link to it under the Featured Comments page under the menu: Features | Comments.

    G: I recommend that Doc C save this post and bookmark it somehow for easy reference info in the archives.

  169. avatar
    CarlOrcas March 2, 2012 at 11:04 pm #

    LineInTheSand: CarlOrcas, you have absolutely no idea who was on Arpaio’s posse. He’s potentially got law enforcement contacts across all 50 states and into Fed levels.
    If he’s worked with them or helped them or know them, they could be on his posse.
    What a croc of s t that they can’t be cops’!!?? Where do you come up with this stuff??!!

    One at a time: You’re right, I don’t know who is on the posse. Do you?

    And, yes, he could have contacts with the Easter Bunny but the posse has no authority to deal with other local or federal agencies. And, no, they wouldn’t be on his posse.

    They can’t be “cops” because they are not certified by AZPOST as peace officers.

  170. avatar
    CarlOrcas March 2, 2012 at 11:08 pm #

    y_p_w: It all depends on the situation. In most US counties, the Sheriff is an elected position. At least in California, candidates for a county Sheriff’s position must be qualified as passing a California Peace Officers’ Standards and Training requirement via a police academy

    FYI……in Arizona the sheriff is a constitutional officer and exempt from being certified by AZPOST. That explains a lot.

  171. avatar
    JJ March 3, 2012 at 4:08 am #

    Dr. C asked:

    “15. Why were the CCP results delayed until after the Arizona Primary,”

    The AZ Democratic Party canceled their primary (after Arpaio announced he was going to release his findings before the primary, interestingly).

  172. avatar
    Obsolete March 3, 2012 at 5:00 am #

    JJ: The AZ Democratic Party canceled their primary (after Arpaio announced he was going to release his findings before the primary, interestingly).

    Was anyone besides Obama supposed to be on the primary ballet?

  173. avatar
    insomnia March 3, 2012 at 5:08 am #

    JJ:

    The AZ Democratic Party canceled their primary (after Arpaio announced he was going to release his findings before the primary, interestingly).

    The Primary was changed to a Caucus and rescheduled to save money. Not because of anything Arpaio might say.

    http://www.blogforarizona.com/blog/2011/12/arizona-democrats-to-hold-presidential-caucus-march-31-2012.html

  174. avatar
    naturalizedcitizen March 3, 2012 at 7:03 am #

    Thrifty: Weren’t you idiots just a year ago saying “Barack Obama can make this all go away if he just releases the long form birth certificate!

    Team Quisling missed a perfect opportunity to present the alleged birth certificate at Georgia hearing. What happened? Obot lawyer refused to show up. Afraid to submit the forgery in formal Court proceedings?

  175. avatar
    Obsolete March 3, 2012 at 8:22 am #

    I’m going to have to make a “Team Quisling” T-shirt…
    Or start a punk band.

  176. avatar
    G March 3, 2012 at 8:38 am #

    Oooh… I see our brain-addled foreign born visitor must have learned a new word in the past day! Yay for you, you can say “quisling”. LOL! Gee, you must be so proud of yourself, finally learning our language; since you’re taking every opportunity to sling that word around over and over again.

    Hey, maybe one day you’ll be able to learn what many of our other words mean, such as “may” and maybe our laws will one day make sense to you…. *golf clap*

    Still p*ssed off that you Birthers lost to an Empty Chair I see… That’s ok, get used to it. I’m sure there will be many more opportunities for you to FAIL, without the otherside having to lift a finger at all…

    naturalizedcitizen: Team Quisling missed a perfect opportunity to present the alleged birth certificate at Georgia hearing. What happened? Obot lawyer refused to show up. Afraid to submit the forgery in formal Court proceedings?

  177. avatar
    misha March 3, 2012 at 8:43 am #

    naturalizedcitizen: Team Quisling

    I agree with Obsolete. That’s a great name for a rock band.

  178. avatar
    RTM999 March 4, 2012 at 9:51 am #

    Paul Pieniezny: No, the only “people” who were asking were stupid birfers, who believe that the birth announcements in the local newspapers are forgeries and that every library in the USA which has copies of them has been tampered with.

    There are no numerous errors indicating a forgery – all that has been debunked years ago. And stupid birfers resurrecting those every six months does not mean that they become numerous errors again. Only Bobby Ewing can imitate Jesus Christ, birfers have always fallen short.

    Again, not people, but stupid birfers who … (see above).
    What you consider does not have any traction with the courts, because in a court, only the law is considered.

    It is not inconsistent. Debunked again. And again, no Bobby Ewing.
    The only way your assertion makes sense if you want every silly birfer to actually touch the real thing from 1961. Is not goin to happen, because Hawaii knows better than to entrust an actual historica document to people who would tear it up and claim that “see, that dog never had a valid birth certificate, anyway”.

    Funny, yes, I remember finding it on the net. If it is no longer available that way, maybe it is because Hawaii wants to charge stupid birfers money for it. And they are of course right to do so.

    I even question whether Dr. Conspiracy will allow my reply to appear on his site because in essence my reply debunks the reasoning for the whole Obama apologist meme despite the better than Obama apologist respect shown by the measured and mostly respectful tone of my reply…

    Even if it does appear ….

    It’s very likely that I am wasting keystrokes replying to that post because the Obama apologists minds are made up no matter what is posted in reply to their pompous as displayed by the usage of the word’ stupid”, etc. in the post above post, but here goes…

    There are more than just a few logical errors and straw man inconsistencies in the erroneous conclusions you reach from what you cite….

    FACT : The newspaper announcements do NOT state where the unnamed son was born…
    FACT : Those announcements did NOT have to ultimately originate from a hospital, physician or mid wife… IOWs … They prove NOTHING even when combined with the other unsubstantiated information the Barry apologists trot out in hopes of supporting their misconstrued perceptions on what has allegedly been revealed by the Obama campaign and the HDOH, etc..

    FACT : Images on websites should NEVER be trusted as credible especially those that by necessity being used to refute claims of a foreign birth.
    Even w/o the investigation declaring the image a forgery it’s illogical to believe that an image on a website is THE proof even when “backed up” by other unsubstantiated sources…
    A person doesn’t have to be a computer expert to rightfully recognize that images can be manufactured on computers.
    So the original document, the certification was rightly questioned by sane and grounded in logic people…
    AND verify but trust would be the best approach to vetting Obama rather than the character assassination that is the rule rather than the exception on Obama apologists blogs such as this one.
    So why the personal attacks on the skeptics?
    The gullible Barry apologists want so badly to believe anything and everything Obama claimed…. So when their stances are questioned … The Barry apologists feet threatened and lash out at those who questioned their unsubstantiated but fervent beliefs.

    Obama even co-sponsored SR511 in April 2008 even though Olsen and Tribe had stated in march of 2008 that McCain was a natural-born citizen and by the same measure McCain’s challenger was denied standing to challenge McCain as a natural-born citizen….

    Did the same Obama apologists lash out at Chin and Rogers with the same rhetoric for much the same reasoning used for Obama’s claims when Chin and Rogers bluntly stated McCain wasn’t a US citizen at all?

    Unfortunately those same Barry apologists should have and could have used a healthy dose of skepticism in regards to an Obama image on a website that has language displayed that stated:

    “This ( By default – Physical)copy serves as prima facie evidence of the fact of birth IN ANY COURT PROCEEDING ” ….

    and

    “ANY alteration invalidates this certificate. ” …

    So the initial obscuring of the number if one wants to believe the image legally represented the document ignores the fact that an alteration occurred from the very time it was posted. So the any alteration language round filed the images legal veracity if one wants to blindly believe an unsubstantiated image is Obama’s BC. Thus Fukino’s and then Fuddy’s public statements are worthless as well on several layers because of course Hawaiian statute 338:18, the same one that prevented skeptic access to his records all along also prevents the HDOH from making any type of disclosure, authentication, verification, etc. as shown below to anyone that lacks direct and tangible interest in the documents in the vaults.

    Since the Certification NEVER was entered into any COURT PROCEEDING as evidence…

    The image is NOT a document since an image can’t be a certified copy since the HDOH can’t affix a seal to your computer screen to attest to the authenticity of an image and thus the image can’t be considered actual evidence as fervently as the Obama apologists would like to believe in the value of an image on a website’s as “evidence”.

    http://hawaii.gov/health/vital-records/obama.html
    # Birth Certificate or Certificate of Live Birth
    State law prohibits the DOH for disclosing any information about a Hawaii vital record unless the requestor has a direct and tangible interest in the record. This includes verification of vital records and all the information contained in a record. Vital records disclosure laws protect all birth, death, marriage and divorce records held by the department and all amendments, changes, supporting records, and requests related to vital records.
    Direct and tangible interest is determined by HRS 338-18(b). This statute may be accessed on the state legislative website at:
    http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol06/Ch0321-0344/HRS0338/HRS 0338-0018.htm

    “ANY” and “ALL” would exclude any excuse the HDOH has tried to make about making an exception for Obama’s records in any way. The HDOH has confirmed nothing because they can confirm nothing to anyone that lacks direct and tangible interest.

    Of course Obama has direct and tangible interest but the general public does not….
    So the public statements by Fuddy and Fukino cannot legally and officially verify anything to the general public.

    Factcheck’s “visit” to the Certification also proves nothing since they lack the subpoena power to discover what the nature of the piece of paper actually was that they visited.

    Thus there is NO credible evidence that Obama is telling the truth about the image on the WH website.

    But oh well…

    It’s “crazy” and/or “stupid” and/or “hateful” and the skeptics have to believe in volunteered by Obama apologists’ “40+ year old conspiracy theories” to then have a healthy dose of skepticism in regards to an image on a website.

    Nope the Obama apologists on the other hand just can’t be gullible enough to have been suckered in by a con man that as a lawyer that by his legal training would know that none of what the Obama apologists blindly believe amounts to evidence of anything he claims…

    They just can’t be that gullible!

  179. avatar
    RTM999 March 4, 2012 at 10:09 am #

    G:
    Oooh… I see our brain-addled foreign born visitor must have learned a new word in the past day!Yay for you, you can say “quisling”.LOL!Gee, you must be so proud of yourself, finally learning our language; since you’re taking every opportunity to sling that word around over and over again.

    Hey, maybe one day you’ll be able to learn what many of our other words mean, such as “may” and maybe our laws will one day make sense to you…. *golf clap*

    Still p*ssed off that you Birthers lost to an Empty Chair I see…That’s ok, get used to it.I’m sure there will be many more opportunities for you to FAIL, without the otherside having to lift a finger at all…

    Illogical to the core.

    The Arkeny vs Daniel appeal dicta cited by the ALJ would still actually require proof that Obama was born in Hawaii….

    None has been provided despite the posturing done by the Obama apologists.

    NO judge in any eligibility case has authenticated any Obama document and verified that Obama was born in Hawaii… The HDOH is in fact prevented from disclosing, authenticating or verifying anything to anyone that lacks direct and tangible interest in the documents( IF they exist) in the HDOH vaults.

    The ALJ actually revealed that that hearing was NOT a court of competent jurisdiction.

    Factcheck lacks subpoena power, the announcements do not state WHERE the unnamed son was born and such announcements do not have to originate in a hospital, or by physician or mid wife.

    So exactly who can be cited that has legally and officially authenticated and verified Obama’s claims that doesn’t rely on an unsubstantiated image for their skewed and uninformed POV?

  180. avatar
    RTM999 March 4, 2012 at 10:21 am #

    thisoldhippie: Because no “facts” were presented, only the regurgitation of debunked BS. Joe A’s entire CCP and the circus surrounding it reminds me of the South Park episode where everyone starts crapping out of their mouths.

    Or not.

    Since not even the HDOH or Hawaii guv can verify anything for Barry that si contained in the HDOH vaults because of Hawaiian statute 338:18…

    That’s a whole lot of wasted Obama apologist posturing.

    The investigations findings could be debunked in a court of competent jurisdiction where
    the HDOH employees (Former) Fukino and Fuddy would be sworn in and the originals subpoenaed and authenticated and POB verified if possible.

    OR

    That same court could rule that the findings were correct…

    Let the legal chips fall where they may…

    So far all that has fallen is Obama apologist cow chips claimed to be irrefutable facts.

    Since the Obama apologists are soooo confident that Obama is telling the truth…
    Demand he pony up the originals he claims his lawyer picked up in Hawaii almost a year ago… No print outs of the image on the WH website allowed.
    Now is as good as time as any to actually have the facts discovered instead of allowing the Obama apologists to dominate the debate and character assassinate the skeptics with unsubstantiated nonsense and undeserved claims to being proven correct.

  181. avatar
    Greenfinches March 4, 2012 at 10:27 am #

    G: Gee, you must be so proud of yourself, finally learning our languag

    hey G that is actually from the original Mr Quisling – a Norwegian.

    does that mean that the naturalized citizen is pining for the fjords?

  182. avatar
    Scientist March 4, 2012 at 10:36 am #

    .

    RTM999: The image is NOT a document since an image can’t be a certified copy since the HDOH can’t affix a seal to your computer screen to attest to the authenticity of an image and thus the image can’t be considered actual evidence as fervently as the Obama apologists would like to believe in the value of an image on a website’s as “evidence”.

    You are simply wrong (some would say deliberately so), in stating that no one has seen the actual paper document. In fact, it was shown at the White House and photos have been taken.

    In November there will be a choice. One candidate has shown multiple electronic and paper evidence of his birth along with attestations by state officials. His likely opponents have provided zero, zip, nada. His most likely opponent claims to have been born in Detroit, Michigan, 5 minutes by bridge or tunnel from a foreign country. No documents other than a driver’s license were required to enter that country and re-enter the US prior to 2009. I ask you-was Mitt Rmoney born in Windsor, Ontario? Someone may be making investigations there as we speak and you won’t believe what they are finding.

    Have you discussed this blatant problem with the Rmoney campaign? Please let us know what they tell you.

    Sincerely,

  183. avatar
    Thrifty March 4, 2012 at 11:02 am #

    Scientist, don’t be a fool. Why would we need documents to prove Romney was born in the United States? He’s white. Don’t you know anything?

  184. avatar
    Whatever4 March 4, 2012 at 2:09 pm #

    RTM999: I even question whether Dr. Conspiracy will allow my reply to appear on his site because in essence my reply debunks the reasoning for the whole Obama apologist meme despite the better than Obama apologist respect shown by the measured and mostly respectful tone of my reply…

    Doc C only rejects spam, abuse, and the 45th repeat of the same nonsense from the same person.

    It’s very likely that I am wasting keystrokes replying to that post because the Obama apologists minds are made up no matter what is posted in reply to their pompous as displayed by the usage of the word’ stupid”, etc. in the post above post, but here goes…

    I prefer anti-birther or eligibility-denier debunkers as some of us are not supporters of Obama’s policies or actions, but hate what the birthers have done to a once-fine party. Many of us are also excessively civil.

    There are more than just a few logical errors and straw man inconsistencies in the erroneous conclusions you reach from what you cite….

    FACT : The newspaper announcements do NOT state where the unnamed son was born…
    FACT : Those announcements did NOT have to ultimately originate from a hospital, physician or mid wife… IOWs … They prove NOTHING even when combined with the other unsubstantiated information the Barry apologists trot out in hopes of supporting their misconstrued perceptions on what has allegedly been revealed by the Obama campaign and the HDOH, etc..

    They do prove that a birth was officially registered within a reasonable time-frame of the announcement. They serve as a contemporaneous datapoint that a birth occurred.

    FACT : Images on websites should NEVER be trusted as credible especially those that by necessity being used to refute claims of a foreign birth.
    Even w/o the investigation declaring the image a forgery it’s illogical to believe that an image on a website is THE proof even when “backed up” by other unsubstantiated sources…

    True, That’s why people such as Factcheck and the White House Press Corp are permitted to handle and photograph paper documents, and why officials in Hawaii issue press releases.

    A person doesn’t have to be a computer expert to rightfully recognize that images can be manufactured on computers.
    So the original document, the certification was rightly questioned by sane and grounded in logic people…
    AND verify but trust would be the best approach to vetting Obama rather than the character assassination that is the rule rather than the exception on Obama apologists blogs such as this one.

    True. (I would characterize this blog as “Obama eligibility apologist” rather than Obama apologist. Doc C doesn’t get into all aspects of Obama, just eligibility issues.) That’s what some of us research the heck out of rumors. That’s why John WWoodman, certainly no fan of Obama, spent so much of his time analyzing Mara Zebest’s report.

    So why the personal attacks on the skeptics?
    The gullible Barry apologists want so badly to believe anything and everything Obama claimed…. So when their stances are questioned … The Barry apologists feet threatened and lash out at those who questioned their unsubstantiated but fervent beliefs.

    Ever read PG Wodehouse? At a concert, Bertie Wooster sings “Sonny Boy” not realizing that 2 previous singers had also sung the overly sentimental tripe. The crowd applauds and passes rotton fruit around. Tuppy Glossup follows, and not realizing what anyone else sang, also sings “Sonny Boy.” The crowd grumbles. Finally, Cora the famous opera singer flounces in and launches into… Sonny Boy! The crowd riots and pelts her with fruit. You, unwittingly, are following Cora.

    Obama even co-sponsored SR511 in April 2008 even though Olsen and Tribe had stated in march of 2008 that McCain was a natural-born citizen and by the same measure McCain’s challenger was denied standing to challenge McCain as a natural-born citizen….

    Olson and Tribe wrote an opinion paper, it had no actual authority. SR511 may have been a non-binding resolution, but it was from a body that had the Constitutional authority to qualify a president-elect. It was a signal that the Senate, at least, had no problem with their colleague’s eligibility. (I started this as a McCain Eligibility apologist.)

    Did the same Obama apologists lash out at Chin and Rogers with the same rhetoric for much the same reasoning used for Obama’s claims when Chin and Rogers bluntly stated McCain wasn’t a US citizen at all?

    Rogers? Not familiar with that one. Chin is a professor at the Rogers School of Law, are you perhaps confused? Chin? Yes, I railed against his theory.

    Unfortunately those same Barry apologists should have and could have used a healthy dose of skepticism in regards to an Obama image on a website that has language displayed that stated:

    “This ( By default – Physical)copy serves as prima facie evidence of the fact of birth IN ANY COURT PROCEEDING ” ….

    and

    “ANY alteration invalidates this certificate. ” …

    So the initial obscuring of the number if one wants to believe the image legally represented the document ignores the fact that an alteration occurred from the very time it was posted. So the any alteration language round filed the images legal veracity if one wants to blindly believe an unsubstantiated image is Obama’s BC. Thus Fukino’s and then Fuddy’s public statements are worthless as well on several layers because of course Hawaiian statute 338:18, the same one that prevented skeptic access to his records all along also prevents the HDOH from making any type of disclosure, authentication, verification, etc. as shown below to anyone that lacks direct and tangible interest in the documents in the vaults.

    Now you are getting silly. The COLB itself wasn’t altered, the image was. Blocking the number on the image had no effect on the paper document. When Factcheck photographed the certified paper document, the number was there.

    Fukino and Fuddy’s statements were allowed as the index data can and is released, and everything they said was in the index data. “Index data consisting of name and sex of the registrant, type of vital event, and such other data as the director may authorize shall be made available to the public.” What did they say that was outside that?

    Since the Certification NEVER was entered into any COURT PROCEEDING as evidence…

    The image is NOT a document since an image can’t be a certified copy since the HDOH can’t affix a seal to your computer screen to attest to the authenticity of an image and thus the image can’t be considered actual evidence as fervently as the Obama apologists would like to believe in the value of an image on a website’s as “evidence”.

    But Factcheck photographed and handled the actual document. The scan allowed the information to be disseminated to anyone interested in the information, and officials in Hawaii verified that the document was legit (and never filed charges for fraudulent use of a Hawaiian vital record) and that Obama was born in Hawaii.

    State law prohibits the DOH for disclosing any information about a Hawaii vital record unless the requestor has a direct and tangible interest in the record.This includes verification of vital records and all the information contained in a record.Vital records disclosure laws protect all birth, death, marriage and divorce records held by the department and all amendments, changes, supporting records, and requests related to vital records.
    Direct and tangible interest is determined by HRS 338-18(b).This statute may be accessed on the state legislative website at:
    http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol06/Ch0321-0344/HRS0338/HRS 0338-0018.htm

    “ANY” and “ALL” would exclude any excuse the HDOH has tried to make about making an exception for Obama’s records in any way. The HDOH has confirmed nothing because they can confirm nothing to anyone that lacks direct and tangible interest.

    Of course Obama has direct and tangible interest but the general public does not….
    So the public statements by Fuddy and Fukino cannot legally and officially verify anything to the general public.

    No, they can verify that a child named Barack Hussein Obama II (name) was born in Hawaii (type of vital event). They can verify their procedures. That’s what they did.

    Factcheck’s “visit” to the Certification also proves nothing since they lack the subpoena power to discover what the nature of the piece of paper actually was that they visited.

    Not sure why they would need subpoena power. They held a document that appeared to be a Hawaii birth certificate. It had all the correct elements. It’s valid not just for court, but as proof of birth information for employment, passports, drivers licenses, and other uses. Once a birth certificate has been presented, the burdon of proving it’s valid shifts to the one claiming it’s not.

    Thus there is NO credible evidence that Obama is telling the truth about the image on the WH website.

    Is there evidence he’s not? Is there evidence that the Hawaii DOH is lying about Obama being born in Hawaii? Combine the contemporaneous birth announcements (not only from people who have seen the microfilm in their libraries, but the newspaper in Hawaii found the notices in their files), with the statements from the DOH, with the paper document handled and photographed, and absent any evidence to the contrary — Obama was born in Hawaii.

    But oh well…

    It’s “crazy” and/or “stupid” and/or “hateful” and the skeptics have to believe in volunteered by Obama apologists’ “40+ year old conspiracy theories” to then have a healthy dose of skepticism in regards to an image on a website.

    Nope the Obama apologists on the other hand just can’t be gullible enough to have been suckered in by a con man that as a lawyer that by his legal training would know that none of what the Obama apologists blindly believe amounts to evidence of anything he claims…

    They just can’t be that gullible!

    We’re not. We’ve come to this conclusion through meticulous research.

  185. avatar
    Whatever4 March 4, 2012 at 2:25 pm #

    RTM999: Illogical to the core.

    NO judge in any eligibility case has authenticated any Obama document and verified that Obama was born in Hawaii… The HDOH is in fact prevented from disclosing, authenticating or verifying anything to anyone that lacks direct and tangible interest in the documents( IF they exist) in the HDOH vaults.

    The ALJ actually revealed that that hearing was NOT a court of competent jurisdiction.

    If the ALJ or the SoS wanted to verify information, they could have. We don’t know that they didn’t.

    338-18 (g) The department shall not issue a verification in lieu of a certified copy of any such record, or any part thereof, unless it is satisfied that the applicant requesting a verification is:
    (1) A private or government attorney who seeks to confirm information about a vital event relating to any such record which was acquired during the course of or for purposes of legal proceedings;

    I believe that Obama’s lawyer sent a copy (may not have been certified) of a birth certificate to the GA SoS. The GA AG could have asked the DOH for confirmation of anything on the document he received.

  186. avatar
    Sef March 4, 2012 at 2:44 pm #

    RTM999: Images on websites should NEVER be trusted as credible

    While it is true that, in this case, we are talking about a paper document issued by the HI DOH with a seal and signature to verify its authenticity, it is not true that technology doesn’t exist to verify authenticity of electronic documents. If the HI DOH chose to use one of these approved technologies then an electronic BC could be iissued by them which would be accepted. The world is changing folks.

  187. avatar
    misha March 4, 2012 at 3:39 pm #

    Scientist: His most likely opponent claims to have been born in Detroit, Michigan, 5 minutes by bridge or tunnel from a foreign country. No documents other than a driver’s license were required to enter that country and re-enter the US prior to 2009. I ask you-was Mitt Rmoney born in Windsor, Ontario?

    Mitt Romney’s father was born in Mexico, purportedly to US citizens. Whas George Romney’s mother a US citizen, or a Mexican national? Was Mitt Romney’s father actually a US citizen?

  188. avatar
    misha March 4, 2012 at 3:42 pm #

    Scientist: Have you discussed this blatant problem with the Rmoney campaign?

    Also, have you discussed tying dogs to the roof of a car, for 12 hours, with the Romney campaign. Mike Huckabee’s son hung a dog from a tree. I think we should notify the SPCA about a pattern of abuse in the GOP.

  189. avatar
    Scientist March 4, 2012 at 4:51 pm #

    Thrifty: Scientist, don’t be a fool. Why would we need documents to prove Romney was born in the United States? He’s white. Don’t you know anything?

    I think if Mitt Rmoney wantts to be considered white I will need to see some proof.

  190. avatar
    G March 4, 2012 at 5:18 pm #

    Well your post obviously appeared, so there goes your first erroneous conclusion out the window right there. But yes, like all delusional Birthers, you are wasting keystrokes, because all you do is spout either irrelevance or nonsense and you provide nothing new that hasn’t already been addressed and fully debunked before. You should stick to your comfortable Birther enclaves, where you can continue to play pretend and ignore the reality around you.

    RTM999: I even question whether Dr. Conspiracy will allow my reply to appear on his site because in essence my reply debunks the reasoning for the whole Obama apologist meme despite the better than Obama apologist respect shown by the measured and mostly respectful tone of my reply…Even if it does appear ….It’s very likely that I am wasting keystrokes replying to that post because the Obama apologists minds are made up no matter what is posted in reply to their pompous as displayed by the usage of the word’ stupid”, etc. in the post above post, but here goes…

    Here you are just picking at irrelevant nits. This whole nonsense line of broken reasoning you are attempting has been fully addressed here before. Here is just one article that addresses it:

    http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2011/04/pen-spills-ink-makes-mess/
    It is up to you to read the whole article, which addresses your meaningless points. I will just recap the summary to get to the key point:

    As I said at the outset, newspaper ads are not primary evidence; they are secondary evidence. What they prove, as contemporary public testimony, is that the Hawaii Department of Health registered a birth for Barack Obama’s son in 1961 according to its rules and procedures. Since there was no provision for out of state registrations in 1961, one must conclude that that registration is for a birth in Hawaii. The primary evidence for us is the Certification of Live Birth, consistent with the newspaper announcements, that shows Barack Obama was born in Honolulu, Oahu, Hawaii on August 4, 1961.

    RTM999:
    There are more than just a few logical errors and straw man inconsistencies in the erroneous conclusions you reach from what you cite….FACT : The newspaper announcements do NOT state where the unnamed son was born…FACT : Those announcements did NOT have to ultimately originate from a hospital, physician or mid wife… IOWs … They prove NOTHING even when combined with the other unsubstantiated information the Barry apologists trot out in hopes of supporting their misconstrued perceptions on what has allegedly been revealed by the Obama campaign and the HDOH, etc..

    Again, you have nothing to offer but trying to escape into the comfort of arguing irrelevant points. The whole PDF nonsense is a meaningless argument from the start. You waste time attacking a scanned image when all that matters is the actual PAPER document, not a scan of it.

    The certified PAPER documents has been confirmed and fully attested to by the HI DOH. They have explained their creation, entire chain of custody and purpose. They are THE official authority in charge of creating and verifying such information, therefore that is the end of the story right there. The very fact that they link to the White House image is a testament that it accurately represents an image of the paper information they provided. They would not link to it otherwise.

    http://hawaii.gov/health/vital-records/obama.html

    You silly Birthers can simply not get around that undeniable chain of custody and testament. Hence why you do nothing but try to argue about irrelevant PDF issues and why very few people pay any attention to your meaningless squawking.

    RTM999:

    FACT : Images on websites should NEVER be trusted as credible especially those that by necessity being used to refute claims of a foreign birth.Even w/o the investigation declaring the image a forgery it’s illogical to believe that an image on a website is THE proof even when “backed up” by other unsubstantiated sources…A person doesn’t have to be a computer expert to rightfully recognize that images can be manufactured on computers.So the original document, the certification was rightly questioned by sane and grounded in logic people…AND verify but trust would be the best approach to vetting Obama rather than the character assassination that is the rule rather than the exception on Obama apologists blogs such as this one.

    Simply put, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. The Birthers make endless (and often pointless) claims, but they lack any real credible evidence to back them up. As ALL actual evidence has ALWAYS confirmed the EXACT SAME representation of events that Obama has been saying all along, there is NO controversy at all.

    So yeah, a bunch of angry cranks that spout nonsense and completely have to ignore the overwhelming mountain of consistent REAL evidence that contradicts their crank nonsense, you’re going to be treated like the pathetic delusional liars that you are.

    You are only a “threat” in your own desperate imagination. Other than a real concern about incitement of some deranged “lone wolf” and other irresponsible/reprehensible acts along those lines, there is ZERO threat that you nutballs present.

    No, you’re whining is not based in any real facts or basis of law. Therefore, there your whole movement has ZERO chance of success at removing a sitting president and even as propaganda, it only plays to an already converted audience of fellow ODS suffering saps. Beyond your echo chamber, it is nothing but a sad joke movement and political poison to be associated with such utter and obvious buffoonery. You are every bit of a failed joke movement as the PUMAs that “birthed” you.

    RTM999:

    So why the personal attacks on the skeptics?The gullible Barry apologists want so badly to believe anything and everything Obama claimed…. So when their stances are questioned … The Barry apologists feet threatened and lash out at those who questioned their unsubstantiated but fervent beliefs.

  191. avatar
    G March 4, 2012 at 5:21 pm #

    Simply put, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. The Birthers make endless (and often pointless) claims, but they lack any real credible evidence to back them up. As ALL actual evidence has ALWAYS confirmed the EXACT SAME representation of events that Obama has been saying all along, there is NO controversy at all.

    So yeah, a bunch of angry cranks that spout nonsense and completely have to ignore the overwhelming mountain of consistent REAL evidence that contradicts their crank nonsense, you’re going to be treated like the pathetic delusional liars that you are.

    You are only a “threat” in your own desperate imagination. Other than a real concern about incitement of some deranged “lone wolf” and other irresponsible/reprehensible acts along those lines, there is ZERO threat that you nutballs present.

    No, you’re whining is not based in any real facts or basis of law. Therefore, there your whole movement has ZERO chance of success at removing a sitting president and even as propaganda, it only plays to an already converted audience of fellow ODS suffering saps. Beyond your echo chamber, it is nothing but a sad joke movement and political poison to be associated with such utter and obvious buffoonery. You are every bit of a failed joke movement as the PUMAs that “birthed” you.

    RTM999:

    So why the personal attacks on the skeptics?The gullible Barry apologists want so badly to believe anything and everything Obama claimed…. So when their stances are questioned … The Barry apologists feet threatened and lash out at those who questioned their unsubstantiated but fervent beliefs.

  192. avatar
    misha March 4, 2012 at 5:24 pm #

    G: Other than a real concern about incitement of some deranged “lone wolf” and other irresponsible/reprehensible acts along those lines

    Carl Swensson – “Keep in mind that when the three of you consciously decided to discard your Oath of Office and change our laws for political or monetary gain, you relieved the Citizenry of our responsibility to do the same.”

    If anything happens to Obama, I will emmigrate. I’ve looked into France and the Netherlands.

  193. avatar
    G March 4, 2012 at 5:34 pm #

    Do you have any actual point here, or are you just rambling in the midst of a spittle-inflected tantrum? The only people who challenged McCain’s NBC status in court were ALL cranks from YOUR Birther side. No actual Democrats or sane people tried to deny McCain’s eligibility at all.

    RTM999:

    Obama even co-sponsored SR511 in April 2008 even though Olsen and Tribe had stated in march of 2008 that McCain was a natural-born citizen and by the same measure McCain’s challenger was denied standing to challenge McCain as a natural-born citizen….Did the same Obama apologists lash out at Chin and Rogers with the same rhetoric for much the same reasoning used for Obama’s claims when Chin and Rogers bluntly stated McCain wasn’t a US citizen at all?

    In your fevered rambling, you’ve already answered your own silly question. The certified PAPER document *is* prima facie evidence and must be accepted on its face by ALL states, due to FFAC.

    The rest of your nonsense is meaningless garbage – arguing irrelevant nonsense about images, because there is nothing you can do to impeach the ACTUAL document itself.

    Simply put, the HI DOH wouldn’t be consistently backing and vouching for the info we’ve seen online unless it clearly matched what the actual PAPER document displayed. *DUH*

    The rest of your rambling screed essentially amounts to nothing but a tantrum.

    Face it, there is a reason your side ALWAYS loses and even loses to Empty Tables – you have ZERO actual evidence or credible claims to put forth, period.

    As already mentioned, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. You Birthers can’t even meet the minimum threshold standards of actual evidence, let alone “extraordinary”.

    As the burden of proof lies with the ACCUSER, the defense doesn’t have to provide anything to win its case. You simply have always FAILED to make any real case at all in the first place.

    RTM999:

    Unfortunately those same Barry apologists should have and could have used a healthy dose of skepticism in regards to an Obama image on a website that has language displayed that stated:“This ( By default – Physical)copy serves as prima facie evidence of the fact of birth IN ANY COURT PROCEEDING ” ….and “ANY alteration invalidates this certificate. ” … So the initial obscuring of the number if one wants to believe the image legally represented the document ignores the fact that an alteration occurred from the very time it was posted. So the any alteration language round filed the images legal veracity if one wants to blindly believe an unsubstantiated image is Obama’s BC. Thus Fukino’s and then Fuddy’s public statements are worthless as well on several layers because of course Hawaiian statute 338:18, the same one that prevented skeptic access to his records all along also prevents the HDOH from making any type of disclosure, authentication, verification, etc. as shown below to anyone that lacks direct and tangible interest in the documents in the vaults.Since the Certification NEVER was entered into any COURT PROCEEDING as evidence…The image is NOT a document since an image can’t be a certified copy since the HDOH can’t affix a seal to your computer screen to attest to the authenticity of an image and thus the image can’t be considered actual evidence as fervently as the Obama apologists would like to believe in the value of an image on a website’s as “evidence”.http://hawaii.gov/health/vital-records/obama.html# Birth Certificate or Certificate of Live BirthState law prohibits the DOH for disclosing any information about a Hawaii vital record unless the requestor has a direct and tangible interest in the record. This includes verification of vital records and all the information contained in a record. Vital records disclosure laws protect all birth, death, marriage and divorce records held by the department and all amendments, changes, supporting records, and requests related to vital records.Direct and tangible interest is determined by HRS 338-18(b). This statute may be accessed on the state legislative website at:http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol06/Ch0321-0344/HRS0338/HRS 0338-0018.htm“ANY” and “ALL” would exclude any excuse the HDOH has tried to make about making an exception for Obama’s records in any way. The HDOH has confirmed nothing because they can confirm nothing to anyone that lacks direct and tangible interest.Of course Obama has direct and tangible interest but the general public does not….So the public statements by Fuddy and Fukino cannot legally and officially verify anything to the general public.Factcheck’s “visit” to the Certification also proves nothing since they lack the subpoena power to discover what the nature of the piece of paper actually was that they visited.Thus there is NO credible evidence that Obama is telling the truth about the image on the WH website. But oh well…It’s “crazy” and/or “stupid” and/or “hateful” and the skeptics have to believe in volunteered by Obama apologists’ “40+ year old conspiracy theories” to then have a healthy dose of skepticism in regards to an image on a website. Nope the Obama apologists on the other hand just can’t be gullible enough to have been suckered in by a con man that as a lawyer that by his legal training would know that none of what the Obama apologists blindly believe amounts to evidence of anything he claims…They just can’t be that gullible!

  194. avatar
    G March 4, 2012 at 5:46 pm #

    The answer I just gave you already addresses this. However, I’ll restate it for someone as obstinately in denial, as you:

    G: The rest of your rambling screed essentially amounts to nothing but a tantrum.
    Face it, there is a reason your side ALWAYS loses and even loses to Empty Tables – you have ZERO actual evidence or credible claims to put forth, period.
    As already mentioned, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. You Birthers can’t even meet the minimum threshold standards of actual evidence, let alone “extraordinary”.
    As the burden of proof lies with the ACCUSER, the defense doesn’t have to provide anything to win its case. You simply have always FAILED to make any real case at all in the first place.

    Over here, we’ve actually assumed that eventually there would be some case that met the real minimum thresholds necessary to go forward and therefore earn an actual response that required the defense to proffer a certified COLB. Doing so would be “case closed” right then and there.

    However, you Birthers so far have remained too crazy and too inept to even put forth anything credible at all that even warrants such a response.

    Simply put, you will continue to lose and even lose to Empty Tables, because you’re arguments are utterly frivolous and poorly made. The defense doesn’t have to provide or prove anything at all. The BURDEN of proof is COMPLETELY on YOUR side to make a credible case in the first place. The DEFAULT position is that the President is who he says he is and who the HI DOH has repeatedly confirmed he is. Until you clowns can come up with something credible that actually disputes that, no court or defense has to cater to presenting you with ANY proof whatsoever at all.

    RTM999:

    Illogical to the core.The Arkeny vs Daniel appeal dicta cited by the ALJ would still actually require proof that Obama was born in Hawaii….None has been provided despite the posturing done by the Obama apologists.NO judge in any eligibility case has authenticated any Obama document and verified that Obama was born in Hawaii… The HDOH is in fact prevented from disclosing, authenticating or verifying anything to anyone that lacks direct and tangible interest in the documents( IF they exist) in the HDOH vaults.The ALJ actually revealed that that hearing was NOT a court of competent jurisdiction.Factcheck lacks subpoena power, the announcements do not state WHERE the unnamed son was born and such announcements do not have to originate in a hospital, or by physician or mid wife.So exactly who can be cited that has legally and officially authenticated and verified Obama’s claims that doesn’t rely on an unsubstantiated image for their skewed and uninformed POV?

  195. avatar
    G March 4, 2012 at 5:49 pm #

    😀

    Greenfinches: hey G that is actually from the original Mr Quisling – a Norwegian.does that mean that the naturalized citizen is pining for the fjords?

  196. avatar
    nbc March 4, 2012 at 5:49 pm #

    RTM999: FACT : Images on websites should NEVER be trusted as credible especially those that by necessity being used to refute claims of a foreign birth.

    And yet the Cold Case Posse appears to have made exactly that mistake… Irony…

  197. avatar
    Keith March 4, 2012 at 6:21 pm #

    LineInTheSand: I’m thinking the 17 states that have already questioned obamugabe’s eligibility will be asking a few more questions now based on Arpaio’s probable cause?

    Hi all. I’m back from a week in Tasmania. I strongly recommend the Hazards Circuit Walk to Wineglass Bay on the Freycinet Penninsula for you light hikers out there (and Mt. Graham for the more serious) and the Museum of Old and New Art (MONA) in Hobart for the culturally inclined.

    I just want to say to Mr./Ms. LineInTheSand that ZERO states have questioned President Obama’s eligibility. Some individuals have filed ballot challenges in some states and some of those have been rejected already, the others will follow soon, and none will be accepted.

    The only ‘probable’ thing that Arpaio has established is that he is suffering from the early symptoms of the onset of Alzheimer’s.

  198. avatar
    Keith March 4, 2012 at 6:23 pm #

    Lupin:
    I don’t have a crystal ball but it seems likely that Obama will be reelected, sooner than later sheriff Arpaio will be voted out of office, and will end up drunk and a pauper, if not in jail, and eventually dying from cirrhosis of the liver or something like that, unloved and an embarrassment to everyone. This press conference may be the only thing that will make it into his 6-line obit in the papers.

    I suspect Joe will be stood down and face trial before his next election bid.

  199. avatar
    RTM999 March 4, 2012 at 6:41 pm #

    Scientist:
    .

    You are simply wrong (some would say deliberately so), in stating that no one has seen the actual paper document.In fact, it was shown at the White House and photos have been taken.

    In November there will be a choice.One candidate has shown multiple electronic and paper evidence of his birth along with attestations by state officials.His likely opponents have provided zero, zip, nada.His most likely opponent claims to have been born in Detroit, Michigan, 5 minutes by bridge or tunnel from a foreign country.No documents other than a driver’s license were required to enter that country and re-enter the USprior to 2009.I askyou-was Mitt Rmoney born in Windsor, Ontario? Someone may be making investigations there as we speak and you won’t believe what they are finding.

    Have you discussed this blatant problem with the Rmoney campaign?Please let us know what they tell you.

    Sincerely,

    I am not desperate at all…

    It is in fact the Obama apologists that are desperately trying to plug the public relations holes created by a team of investigators that proclaimed the image a on a computer generated forgery…

    Obama has always posted images to websites or allowed visits by people with zero legal authority to authenticate said “copy”, always avoided as best he could seriously answering questions about the issue , always called on his minions to fight the fight in the trenches of public opinion instead of ponying up the document he claims to have in his possession to authorities that could authenticate said document and actually legally verify his POB….

    So did I actually say or actually imply what you try to imply I said?

    I’m familiar enough with the story of the reporter that made the unsubstantiated claim…

    Big whoop!

    He/She (doesn’t matter) made a yet another w/o the ability to authenticate what he/she touched…

    No actually for any document to be authenticated the person must have direct and tangible interest….

    A judge in a court of competent jurisdiction can do so via subpoena…

    None so far have afforded their court that opportunity…

    One in particular made it clear that he relied on tewwets and blogs to come to the momentous opinion that Obama was born in Hawaii simply because internet sites such as Factcheck stated they allegedly visited the alleged “document” along with the new found announcements that do not state where the unnamed son was born…

    Wow I’m sure glad that judges like that depend on unsubstantiated fluff instead of established facts to come to decisions!

    Since the reporter that allegedly got to ascend to Obama apologist heaven and actually got to touch the “document” in truth that reporter contrary to your cite is actually no better in the eyes of the law than the average skeptic that has been denied access to the HDOH vaults because of Hawaiian statute 338:18…

    The alleged “visit” with the “document is no better than hearsay stated outside a court room because yes of course in fact it was hearsay outside of court room…

    Did the person shown what was alleged to be a copy of the LFBC have subpoena power to authenticate the “document he/she allegedly touched?

    A BIG LOL NOPE!

    Why the deflection to the Romney campaign?

    You make a big assumption that first that I am a Republican…

    2nd that I support Romney…

    And 3rd that by bringing up Romney that somehow makes the Obama problem
    being discussed by us here and now unimportant…

    For the here and now concerning what we are discussing…

    The 3rd point is the most important straw man point to dispense with for now…

    Perhaps IF Obama apologists could just focus on the debate at hand instead of deflecting to their whoosh they take a not important to what is being discussed
    segway away from what is actually being discussed…

    Obama’s actual problem could be addressed by the adults in the room by him actually presenting to a court of competent jurisdiction the “original(s)” he claims to have in his possession….

    Not only was it unnecessary for the legal authentication process for him to play that game…

    No matter where he was born he has wasted valuable resources and valuable time playing the game in the court of public opinion.

    Again no one with any power that can authenticate authenticate that image outside of a court of competent jurisdiction… Has done so.

    The other non-evidence the Obama apologists cite such as the reporter claiming she came to nirvana by getting to touch the seal still can’t be used as evidence outside of a court of competent jurisdiction either unless it is entered into evidence to see if it stands up to legal scrutiny.

  200. avatar
    Majority Will March 4, 2012 at 6:50 pm #

    RTM999: . . to what is being discussed segway away from what is actually being discussed…

    I want to hear more about how a two wheeled self-balancing personal transport can change the discussion.

    Fascinating.

  201. avatar
    Sef March 4, 2012 at 6:51 pm #

    Keith: Hi all. I’m back from a week in Tasmania.

    Did you make a stop at Bonorong Sanctuary? Great place.

  202. avatar
    nbc March 4, 2012 at 6:51 pm #

    RTM999: It is in fact the Obama apologists that are desperately trying to plug the public relations holes created by a team of investigators that proclaimed the image a on a computer generated forgery…

    ‘team of investigators’ who declared an image which was a copy to be possibly a forgery because of compression generated artifacts…

    That has been the story for several years now and nothing to support it. Why did they not look at Savannah Guthrie’s photograph of the original for instance?

    A bit incompetent.

    Well at least they are giving Obama another opportunity to use the ignorance of the birthers… When is the next comedy presentation?

  203. avatar
    Majority Will March 4, 2012 at 6:56 pm #

    RTM999: I am not desperate at all…

    That’s funny.

    For Immediate Release: July 27, 2009 09-063
    STATEMENT BY HEALTH DIRECTOR CHIYOME FUKINO, M.D.
    “I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of the Hawai’i State Department of Health, have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawaii State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawaii and is a natural-born American citizen. I have nothing further to add to this statement or my original statement issued in October 2008 over eight months ago.”

    “All of our Presidents have, to date, been born in the 50 states. Notably, President Obama was born in the state of Hawaii, and so is clearly a natural born citizen.”
    – retired Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor

    That’s good enough for me and millions of other sane, voting Americans.

  204. avatar
    Scientist March 4, 2012 at 7:13 pm #

    RTM999: I am not desperate at all

    Where did i say you are desperate? I said you were wring and deliberately so. Read much?

    RTM999: Why the deflection to the Romney campaign?
    You make a big assumption that first that I am a Republican…
    2nd that I support Romney…
    And 3rd that by bringing up Romney that somehow makes the Obama problem
    being discussed by us here and now unimportant…

    There has to be 1 standard for all. If passengers have to show photo ID to get on a plane, then all do. If they asked you for yours and you saw me waltz through showing nothing, you would be mad and you would be right. So, either all candidates show a whole list of documents and have a court verify them or none do. Right now the law says none do. You don’t like the law? Too bad.

    There is no basis for any court to look at any of the President’s documents and none will. not now and i am willing to bet not ever. That’s how courts work-there has to be a legal basis for subpoenas and there is none here. You don’t like that? Tough.

  205. avatar
    RTM999 March 4, 2012 at 7:31 pm #

    G:
    Do you have any actual point here, or are you just rambling in the midst of a spittle-inflected tantrum?The only people who challenged McCain’s NBC status in court were ALL cranks from YOUR Birther side.No actual Democrats or sane people tried to deny McCain’s eligibility at all.

    In your fevered rambling, you’ve already answered your own silly question. The certified PAPER document *is* prima facie evidence and must be accepted on its face by ALL states, due to FFAC.

    The rest of your nonsense is meaningless garbage – arguing irrelevant nonsense about images, because there is nothing you can do to impeach the ACTUAL document itself.

    Simply put, the HI DOH wouldn’t be consistently backing and vouching for the info we’ve seen online unless it clearly matched what the actual PAPER document displayed.*DUH*

    The rest of your rambling screed essentially amounts to nothing but a tantrum.

    Face it, there is a reason your side ALWAYS loses and even loses to Empty Tables – you have ZERO actual evidence or credible claims to put forth, period.

    As already mentioned, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.You Birthers can’t even meet the minimum threshold standards of actual evidence, let alone “extraordinary”.

    As the burden of proof lies with the ACCUSER, the defense doesn’t have to provide anything to win its case.You simply have always FAILED to make any real case at all in the first place.

    Actually you confuse criminal law with civil law….

    In a civil trial the plaintiff only has 75% burden of proof…

    Unless of course you infer that Obama has committed a crime?

    Being ineligible to be on the ballots of many states is not in and of itself a crime.

    Some eligibility cases have cited crimes that Obama has committed but even in a civil venue the sole burden of proof is not on the plaintiff…

    Under Georgia election law the sole burden of proof rested on the challenged candidate…

    Obama never submitted proof that he was born in Hawaii …

    Arkeny vs Daniels cited birth in country as reasoning Obama might be a natural-born citizen because of course the initial case nor the appeal nor the ALJ authenticated Obama’s certification of live birth or LFBC…

    In truth Obama did not even prove he was born in Hawaii…

    So the empty table would have been devoid of a natural-born citizen whether Obama showed up or not.

    Do you have a point in relation to what I cited and you took out of context by putting it in bold?

    Failure to follow along and by posting something that isn’t actually backed up by the language cited does not make your point valid….

    The actual physical copy itself is what is being referred to by that language and by the language on the image only the actual physical document is only prima facie evidence IN A COURT PROCEEDING….

    An Image posted on a website being alleged to be a representation of said physical copy is NOT prima facie evidence at all…

    First because it has never even as an image been entered into evidence and of course 2nd because the language isn’t addressing an image posted on the internet at all…

    Because of course the language makes it clear that the document becomes prima facie evidence in a court proceeding…

    The language does not say or imply that the image is prima facie evidence.

    And of course even IF it could be illogically construed that the image was prima facie evidence…

    Said image initially appeared with the numbers obscured making the image an altered image and of course ANY alteration invalidates what you falsely claim is prima facie evidence anyways.

    No actually the temper tantrums complete with nonsense non-points are what the problem is with the way this issue has been handled from the beginning…

    Sadly even the Obama apologists are satisfied with courts that make decisions based on non-evidence because even the Arkeny vs Daniels case requires that Obama has to produce actual physical authenticated in a court room proof that he was born in Hawaii…

    By your own use of the “empty table” argument you have by default admitted that Obama has not produced anything to be authenticated in any venue that has the actual legal power to authenticate it…

    “Empty tables” are also empty of proof…

    The Georgia ALJ cited Arkeny which didn’t authenticate Obama’s POB at all…

    Neither did the Arkeny ve Daniels appeal dicta…

    Citing an empty table/empty headed rulings proves nothing because of course nothing was offered as proof in either case by any defense team as to where Obama was born …

    The judge more or less decided to play on the defense side and allowed unsubstantiated nonsense bias his decision which again was decided w/o proof as to where Obama was born…

    IOWs unsubstantiated conjecture replaced proof where in fact the case cited by Mailhi needs to substantiated facts rather than wishful thinking to make the ruling pertinent to the ruling made by Malihi.

    Both cases relied on hearsay because of course images on websites and un-sworn statements even by HDOH are not evidence of anything….

    338:18 prevents the HDOH from disclosing , authenticating, verifying, etc. anything to anyone that lacks direct and tangible interest…

    The announcements do not state where the unnamed son was born …

    Factcheck and the reporter that got to touch the seal lack subpoena power…

    A judge that never issues a subpoena to demand the production of the alleged documents in the vaults does NOT have direct and tangible interest because that judge never even made the attempt to establish it by subpoena.

    I’m not sorry that the Obama apologist claims can be shown that they are based on nothing but phantoms and wishful thinking…

    Unfortunately I am sad that judges that should know better are succumbing to the misguided public opinion pressure and ramblings based on phantoms and non-proof of the equally as misinformed as they are Obama apologists that believe images on websites are documents that have unrealistic claims to authenticity because of course images on websites are not evidence…

    The latest image on the WH website has even been declared a on a computer created forgery…

    Yup any American that wants the US Constitution upheld should be proud that our judiciary relies on nothing to support a non-natural-born citizen because of course first he has proven where he was born to deserve the bogus ruling that declares him as such w/o even so much as any actual proof that he was even born in Hawaii.

  206. avatar
    nbc March 4, 2012 at 7:34 pm #

    RTM999: Under Georgia election law the sole burden of proof rested on the challenged candidate…

    That is incorrect. Only for those who submitted a sworn affidavit. Check the ruling.

    The candidate was forced to show his eligibility as he had sworn to it. President Obama never submitted such a document.

    Sigh…

  207. avatar
    nbc March 4, 2012 at 7:35 pm #

    RTM999: In truth Obama did not even prove he was born in Hawaii…

    So the empty table would have been devoid of a natural-born citizen whether Obama showed up or not.

    He does not have to prove it, the objectors had to overcome the prima facie evidence submitted by themselves.

    Not too smart…

  208. avatar
    RTM999 March 4, 2012 at 7:36 pm #

    Majority Will: That’s funny.

    For Immediate Release: July 27, 200909-063
    STATEMENT BY HEALTH DIRECTOR CHIYOME FUKINO, M.D.
    “I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of the Hawai’i State Department of Health, have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawaii State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawaii and is a natural-born American citizen. I have nothing further to add to this statement or my original statement issued in October 2008 over eight months ago.”

    “All of our Presidents have, to date, been born in the 50 states. Notably, President Obama was born in the state of Hawaii, and so is clearly a natural born citizen.”
    – retired Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor

    That’s good enough for me and millions of other sane, voting Americans.

    Yawn!

    Covered by the words “any” and “all” below :

    # Birth Certificate or Certificate of Live Birth

    State law prohibits the DOH for disclosing any information about a Hawaii vital record unless the requestor has a direct and tangible interest in the record. This includes verification of vital records and all the information contained in a record. Vital records disclosure laws protect all birth, death, marriage and divorce records held by the department and all amendments, changes, supporting records, and requests related to vital records.

    Direct and tangible interest is determined by HRS 338-18(b). This statute may be accessed on the state legislative website at:
    http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol06/Ch0321-0344/HRS0338/HRS 0338-0018.htm

    The Obama apologists desperately trot out information in the form of HDOH public statements that can not officially verify squat for Barry. LOL

  209. avatar
    nbc March 4, 2012 at 7:37 pm #

    RTM999: An Image posted on a website being alleged to be a representation of said physical copy is NOT prima facie evidence at all…

    When confirmed by the DOH I would say that it surely rises to such evidence. At least more evidence that the follies presented by the objectors who failed to present any probative evidence or just claimed that the Court should take notice for a meritless two-parent citizen concept.

  210. avatar
    nbc March 4, 2012 at 7:38 pm #

    Is RTM999 a sock puppet of Al? The sound equally poorly informed.

  211. avatar
    Majority Will March 4, 2012 at 7:40 pm #

    RTM999: Actually

    Actually, you drone on a lot and make no sense.

    None. Zero. Zip. Nada. Zilch. Bupkis. Null set.

    I am sad that there are a handful of bigots who are pathological liars out there misrepresenting history, U.S. law and the truth.

  212. avatar
    RTM999 March 4, 2012 at 7:41 pm #

    nbc: That is incorrect. Only for those who submitted a sworn affidavit. Check the ruling.

    The candidate was forced to show his eligibility as he had sworn to it. President Obama never submitted such a document.

    Sigh…

    Nice dance …

    Sigh.

    Barry has yet to prove he was born in Hawaii and the Obama apologists go all Bill Clinton-esque and try and define the word “is” is…

    The stained blue dress defined what actually happened.

  213. avatar
    nbc March 4, 2012 at 7:41 pm #

    RTM999: The Obama apologists desperately trot out information in the form of HDOH public statements that can not officially verify squat for Barry. LOL

    Yes, that was a bit of a problem for Fukino who, in violation of state law, provided just that evidence.

    Of course, we now have similar statements that declare President Obama to be born on US soil and who have verified the long form.

    “We hope that issuing certified copies of the original Certificate of Live Birth to President Obama will end the numerous inquiries related to his birth in Hawai„i,” Hawai„i Health Director Loretta Fuddy said. “I have seen the original records filed at the Department of Health and attest to the authenticity of the certified copies the department provided to the President that further prove the fact that he was born in Hawai„i.”

    Bummer… Sue them for violating the law… Hi Al…

  214. avatar
    Majority Will March 4, 2012 at 7:43 pm #

    RTM999: Yawn!

    Is it past your bedtime?

    Does desperation mean winning 100 times in court and counting?

    LOL, indeed.

  215. avatar
    nbc March 4, 2012 at 7:43 pm #

    RTM999: Barry has yet to prove he was born in Hawaii and the Obama apologists go all Bill Clinton-esque and try and define the word “is” is…

    You claimed that he had to prove his eligibility in Georgia. I showed how you, once again, were totally wrong. It’s that ‘verification’ part which you appear to fail to comprehend.

    As to President Obama having proven that he is born in Hawaii

    “We hope that issuing certified copies of the original Certificate of Live Birth to President Obama will end the numerous inquiries related to his birth in Hawai„i,” Hawai„i Health Director Loretta Fuddy said. “I have seen the original records filed at the Department of Health and attest to the authenticity of the certified copies the department provided to the President that further prove the fact that he was born in Hawai„i.”

    Darn reality…

  216. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 4, 2012 at 7:44 pm #

    Or when the birthers, citing Minor v. Happersett, try to redefine what the word “define” means.

    RTM999: Barry has yet to prove he was born in Hawaii and the Obama apologists go all Bill Clinton-esque and try and define the word “is” is…

  217. avatar
    nbc March 4, 2012 at 7:45 pm #

    Oh and RTM/Al, did you read my posting on your confusion of Act 96?

    Cheers. Just trying to help you be less trusting and more involved in verification before you make your claims.

    Not easy I venture to guess?…

    Ah and Abercrombie

    In June 2008, President Obama released his Certification of Live Birth, which is sometimes referred to in the media as a “short form” birth certificate. Both documents are legally sufficient evidence of birth in the State of Hawai„i, and both provide the same fundamental information: President Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawai„i at 7:24 p.m. on August 4, 1961, to mother Stanley Ann Dunham and father Barack Hussein Obama.

    Geez, who are these people…

  218. avatar
    Majority Will March 4, 2012 at 7:45 pm #

    RTM999: The stained blue dress defined what actually happened.

    Is that your new goalpost?

    Explain desperation again. That was cute and funny.

  219. avatar
    Scientist March 4, 2012 at 7:45 pm #

    RTM999: Barry has yet to prove he was born in Hawaii

    By your standard (presenting documents in court) all 43 Presidents that have served to date are ineligible. And yet the country has survived and even prospered. This may come as a shock to you, but there is not now and never has been any requirement for any President to prove anything.. Too bad for you, but that is the law.

  220. avatar
    RTM999 March 4, 2012 at 7:45 pm #

    Majority Will: Actually, you drone on a lot and make no sense.

    None. Zero. Zip. Nada. Zilch. Bupkis. Null set.

    I am sad that there are a handful of bigots who are pathological liars out there misrepresenting history, U.S. law and the truth.

    No actually the droning is coming from the Obama apologists whose basic meme is reduced to none, nada, zilch zip etc.

    Why should any American brag about Obama escaping actually having to prove even where he was born?

    It just proves that the Obama apologists don’t want the truth…

    They’d rather defend a con man that prefers that they are left in the dark.

  221. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 4, 2012 at 7:46 pm #

    We O-BOTS are desperately trying to hold back the loss counter so that Orly Taitz can be number 100.

    Majority Will: Does desperation mean winning 100 times in court and counting?

  222. avatar
    Majority Will March 4, 2012 at 7:46 pm #

    RTM999: Why should any American

    Who here claimed you’re an American?

  223. avatar
    nbc March 4, 2012 at 7:46 pm #

    Come on RTM… Tell us more about your failures to verify your claims. Yesterday was quite fun… I understand why you changed your moniker though… Was quite embarrassing was it not…

  224. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 4, 2012 at 7:48 pm #

    He released a birth certificate. As for you, proof is impossible to a birther. It’s contrary to their very existence.

    RTM999: Why should any American brag about Obama escaping actually having to prove even where he was born?

  225. avatar
    RTM999 March 4, 2012 at 7:48 pm #

    Majority Will: Is that your new goalpost?

    Explain desperation again. That was cute and funny.

    Nope the goal post has always been the actual truth ….

    Not legal maneuvering to avoid actually providing the truth…

    Bill Clinton had even the support of his wife that knew he was a
    philanderer and blamed the vast RW conspiracy.

    The Obama apologists are not that dif from Hillary.

  226. avatar
    Scientist March 4, 2012 at 7:49 pm #

    According to RTM, there has never been a legitimate President of the US ever, because none have submitted their personal documents to courts (most didn’t even have birth certificates at all).

  227. avatar
    Majority Will March 4, 2012 at 7:49 pm #

    RTM999: Why should any American brag about Obama escaping actually having to prove even where he was born?

    So, you have demanded full documentation from every candidate?

    “When has a president ever been asked to prove his citizenship?”
    – Andrew Breitbart

  228. avatar
    nbc March 4, 2012 at 7:51 pm #

    RTM999: Nope the goal post has always been the actual truth ….

    Why then did you continue to fail to verify before you stated your best understanding of the ‘truth’?…

    The truth is that President Obama is born on US soil.

    Anything else is just… Well… irrelevant

  229. avatar
    Majority Will March 4, 2012 at 7:51 pm #

    RTM999: Nope the goal post has always been the actual truth ….

    Not legal maneuvering to avoid actually providing the truth…

    Bill Clinton had even the support of his wife that knew he was a
    philanderer and blamed the vast RW conspiracy.

    The Obama apologists are not that dif from Hillary.

    So, the simple concept of false equivalence escapes you?

  230. avatar
    Scientist March 4, 2012 at 7:51 pm #

    RTM999: Nope the goal post has always been the actual truth ….

    The truth is that Obama was born in Hawaii and is eligible. You don;’t like it? Too bad. you don;t like the law? Too bad. Whi cares what you like?

  231. avatar
    nbc March 4, 2012 at 7:53 pm #

    RTM999: Why should any American brag about Obama escaping actually having to prove even where he was born?

    Obama has proven his location of birth. It’s those foolish people who believe that despite this, he is not a US natural born citizen.

    Hard to accept the facts I guess. So why would any American insist his president is not eligible in spite of the facts?

  232. avatar
    nbc March 4, 2012 at 8:01 pm #

    RTM999, May I call you Al? Why did you claim that the candidate is obliged under Georgia law to establish his eligibility. Have you read the case in question?

    Or were you too trusting again?

  233. avatar
    justlw March 4, 2012 at 8:42 pm #

    RTM999: The stained blue dress

    Funny you should bring that up. Remember what the special prosecutor was tasked with investigating?

    …how the hell did we get from land deals (regarding which no impropriety was found) to stained blue dresses?

    This is the birther mentality. As I said during the presser, the goalposts have been fitted with JATOS.

  234. avatar
    nbc March 4, 2012 at 8:50 pm #

    Al? What happened?…

  235. avatar
    Northland10 March 4, 2012 at 9:34 pm #

    nbc: RTM999, May I call you Al?

    Please don’t…

  236. avatar
    Northland10 March 4, 2012 at 9:38 pm #

    RTM999: Nope the goal post has always been the actual truth ….

    Little did Peggy Sue realize when she sat in her seat on the fifty year line, that should would receive a football to the face, sent there from an extra point attempt, from a kicker who was confused on where the goalposts should be.

  237. avatar
    misha March 4, 2012 at 9:45 pm #

    nbc: May I call you Al?

    Just don’t call me Shirley.

  238. avatar
    Northland10 March 4, 2012 at 9:46 pm #

    misha: Just don’t call me Shirley.

    Are you a Frenchman?

  239. avatar
    misha March 4, 2012 at 9:50 pm #

    Northland10: Are you a Frenchman?

    Je suis un juif.

  240. avatar
    G March 4, 2012 at 11:32 pm #

    LOL! Yes, you *are* desperate and trying to cover your sour grapes and disappointment about Arpaio’s big DUD propaganda attempt by spinning madly.

    Simple fact: We don’t have to do anything at all. Not lift a single finger in this hoopla. Nada. You folks are the one’s desperately trying to change reality and failing miserably and laughably so at every turn.

    All we have to do is continue to sit back and watch the madness unfold, with popcorn and commentary at hand.

    RTM999: I am not desperate at all…
    It is in fact the Obama apologists that are desperately trying to plug the public relations holes created by a team of investigators that proclaimed the image a on a computer generated forgery…

  241. avatar
    G March 4, 2012 at 11:48 pm #

    Not to interrupt your endless whining, but I will…

    Let me put this simply and slowly, so maybe you can see the blunt point through your tantrums and tears. So here, try and follow the bouncing ball:

    The burden of proof REMAINS on the ACCUSER. Simple as that.

    What you keep failing to grasp is what these hearings are about – challengs to candidates who are ALREADY on the ballot.

    …Which means that they ALREADY went through whatever application process was required in order to be on that ballot in the first place.

    …Which means that the proper authorities in charge of vetting and approving applications already determined that they met whatever burde of proof was necessary in order to get on that ballot in the first place. That would include any identification confirmation, if required. The only people privy to seeing verification documents, if required, would be those folks with that official application vetting responsibility, during that application process. Not “Joe Q. Public”.

    …Therefore, such a Ballot Challenge by definition is challenging the DEFAULT position – the candidate is already on the ballot AND the challenger has the FULL burden of proof to make a convincing case as to why the ballot is wrong and the candidate should be removed.

    …Therefore, in such a situation, the defense doesn’t need to even bother showing up to defend itself, if it doesn’t feel such is needed. WHY you ask? …Because the DEFAULT position is already there – the candidate is already ON the ballot.

    Which is why Birthers always lose. They have ZERO credible claim to begin with and NEVER satisfy their own burden to state a viable claim and make a viable case for it at all.

    RTM999: Actually you confuse criminal law with civil law….
    In a civil trial the plaintiff only has 75% burden of proof…
    blah…blah…blah…

  242. avatar
    G March 4, 2012 at 11:53 pm #

    Nice analogy FAIL there.

    There is no equivalent of a “stained blue dress” here at all. That would be evidence. As was Clinton’s mistress as well.

    With Birtherism however, there is ZERO actual evidence behind their mud slinging myths whatsoever at all..

    RTM999: Nice dance …
    Sigh.
    Barry has yet to prove he was born in Hawaii and the Obama apologists go all Bill Clinton-esque and try and define the word “is” is…
    The stained blue dress defined what actually happened.

  243. avatar
    RTM999 March 5, 2012 at 8:40 am #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    He released a birth certificate. As for you, proof is impossible to a birther. It’s contrary to their very existence.

    Obama posted an image on a website that the HDOH can’t authenticate it’s existence nor verify information from….

    Fukino in her first press release stated in part:

    “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 Hawaii.”

    Which jives with what I highlighted from the HDOH website concerning 338:18 :

    “Covered by the words “any” and “all” below :

    # Birth Certificate or Certificate of Live Birth
    State law prohibits the DOH for disclosing any information about a Hawaii vital record unless the requestor has a direct and tangible interest in the record. This includes verification of vital records and all the information contained in a record. Vital records disclosure laws protect all birth, death, marriage and divorce records held by the department and all amendments, changes, supporting records, and requests related to vital records.
    Direct and tangible interest is determined by HRS 338-18(b). This statute may be accessed on the state legislative website at:
    http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol06/Ch0321-0344/HRS0338/HRS 0338-0018.htm

    The Obama apologists have always had NOTHING to go on.

    Sadly the blinded refuse to see the truth when it is placed before them.

  244. avatar
    G March 5, 2012 at 9:00 am #

    Wow, talk about being in utter denial. There are testaments and photos of the paper copies of BOTH the COLB and the LFBC. As to the online images of those paper documents, if they didn’t match the paper copies, then the HI DOH wouldn’t be consistently standing by them and even linking to them on their website. *DUH*

    http://hawaii.gov/health/vital-records/obama.html

    For any sane and rational person, that’s the end of the story right there.

    But hey, you delusional denialists can keep sticking your head in the sand and pretending all you want… no one else is buying into your schemes. Beyond your little Cult enclaves, Birtherism is dead and not going anywhere.

    RTM999: Obama posted an image on a website that the HDOH can’t authenticate it’s existence nor verify information from….

  245. avatar
    bovril March 5, 2012 at 9:05 am #

    Tut tut RTM

    The HDoH LINKS to the BC image stored at the White House web server and are satisfied that the information stated is identical to the records they hold

    http://hawaii.gov/health/vital-records/obama.html

    Not even a good FAIL, failing troll fails poorly

  246. avatar
    RTM999 March 5, 2012 at 9:07 am #

    G:
    Nice analogy FAIL there.

    There is no equivalent of a “stained blue dress” here at all.That would be evidence.As was Clinton’s mistress as well.

    With Birtherism however, there is ZERO actual evidence behind their mud slinging myths whatsoever at all..

    The mud slinging has always come from the Obama apologist camp…

    One needs only peruse just a few Obama apologists’ post to find more than just a few inferences to the skeptic being racist, insane, stupid, etc….

    I have been labeled as such for simply posting the facts that debunk the Obama apologists claims.

    So as such it’s best to not try to infer the skeptic is doing what the Obama apologists do as SOP to anyone that disagrees with their fervent belief.

    The finger pointing by the apologists is very Hillary Clinton like since the skeptics must be painted as racists, stupid, insane, etc. to falsely imply that disagreeing with the Obama campaign produced image and stating that Obama is ineligible and that he actually does need to produce his physical LFBC in a court of competent jurisdiction
    can only come as a result of racism, insanity, stupidity , etc. when the facts of course can demonstrate that NOTHING the Obama apologists have cited from the beginning as a basis for their posturing actually amounts to evidence…

    An image on a website especially one that contains language which denotes that the physical document itself is prima facie evidence in a COURT PROCEEDING cannot transform the image into prima facie evidence no matter how much wishful thinking goes into pointing at an image that was then acccompanied to nowheresville by Factcheck’s visit that lacked legal authroity to authenticate what they visited, HDOH employee statements that by law cannot authenticate anything to anyone that lacks direct and tangible interest which of course the general public lacks to the newspaper announcements that do not state where the unnamed son was born….

    The Obama apologists went all “connect the dots” with unsubstantiated nonsense and decided it was AOK to start the character assassination that is their trademark when for want of a better word”discussing” the issues involved.

    Since the Obama apologists can only engage in juvenile guffawing and character assassination the skeptics of the Obama POB, etc. myth are THE ONLY adults in the room when the actual facts involved are being discussed.

    I have for instance pointed out where Hawaiian statute debunks the Obama apologist produced myth….

    The Hawaiian statutes unbiased take on the law denote that the HDOH cannot authenticate or verify anyone’s records and not so ironically Fukino in her first press release when pointing out 338:18 states that she is not handling Obama’s records any differently than any other record in the HDOH’s possession.

    I doubt that you or any other Obama apologist that participates in the echo chamber that many think is a blog have even opened their eyes to notice even that fact!

  247. avatar
    Scientist March 5, 2012 at 9:20 am #

    RTM999: The finger pointing by the apologists is very Hillary Clinton like

    Bill Clinton was a highly-successful two term President who remains one of the most admired figures in the US and the world today. He generates enormous speaking fees and runs a charitable foundation that does important work all over the world. His lead opponent, Newt Gingrich, left office in disgrace and appears unable to even capture the runner-up spot for his party’s nomination. Clinton’s successor as President is a peripheral figure on the world scene whose public appearances are largely limited to Texas Rangers games. It doesn’t appear that contenders for the GOP nomination are particularly eager to gain his endorsement (though Rmoney appears to value his father’s).

    Barack Obama is following the Clinton track, heading towards re-election and a post-presidency role as a greatly admired elder statesman. His detractors will be lucky to do as well as Gingrich or W Bush.

  248. avatar
    RTM999 March 5, 2012 at 9:25 am #

    bovril:
    Tut tut RTM

    The HDoH LINKS to the BC image stored at the White House web server and are satisfied that the information stated is identical to the records they hold

    http://hawaii.gov/health/vital-records/obama.html

    Not even a good FAIL, failing troll fails poorly

    Nice image that’s not an actual document.

    Maybe they can trot on over to your computer screen and put an ink stamp on your very own computer screen to certify something that can’t have a stamp affixed to it to certify it! LOL

    Yup it’s extremely hard for the Obama apologists to be able to realize the actual facts
    when the are inundated with non-important unsubstantiated fluff since the it’s a no big deal that the HDOH can link to the image or not and it means nothing in the big picture real world …

    That link to the image of course doesn’t matter since the image can not be authenticated by the HDOH according to the way the law reads…

    “Any” and “all” in the English language still means “any” and “all”.

    Perhaps in Obama apologist-“ease” any and all can mean whatever the Obama apologists wish those words can mean?

    Hawaiian state law still prohibits “any” and “all” despite the Obama apolgist echo chamber denials:

    # Birth Certificate or Certificate of Live Birth
    State law prohibits the DOH for disclosing any information about a Hawaii vital record unless the requestor has a direct and tangible interest in the record. This includes verification of vital records and all the information contained in a record. Vital records disclosure laws protect all birth, death, marriage and divorce records held by the department and all amendments, changes, supporting records, and requests related to vital records.
    Direct and tangible interest is determined by HRS 338-18(b). This statute may be accessed on the state legislative website at:
    http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol06/Ch0321-0344/HRS0338/HRS 0338-0018.htm

    The general public?

    Nope!

    The HDOH cannot legally carve out an exception for Obama since Obama’s records are part of the any and all that the HDOH cannot go outside the law to authenticate or verify.

  249. avatar
    Scientist March 5, 2012 at 9:31 am #

    RTM999: The HDOH cannot legally carve out an exception for Obama since Obama’s records are part of the any and all that the HDOH cannot go outside the law to authenticate or verify

    That’s absurd. Obama gave them permission to verify his records. The fact is that they made the statements, whether you think they should have or not. Go sue Hawaii if you want. Good luck to you. Stop wasting your time here and get an a plane and go. We can’t help you.

  250. avatar
    y_p_w March 5, 2012 at 9:43 am #

    RTM999: The Hawaiian statutes unbiased take on the law denote that the HDOH cannot authenticate or verify anyone’s records and not so ironically Fukino in her first press release when pointing out 338:18 states that she is not handling Obama’s records any differently than any other record in the HDOH’s possession.

    Not true. 338-18 itself allows the HDOH to issue a letter of verification to verify a record in several cases. One of them is in the case of a certified copy of a vital record submitted for a benefit, such as an employment application. I could easily imagine a certified birth certificate submitted with an I-9 employment eligibility application would qualify.

    http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol06_Ch0321-0344/HRS0338/HRS_0338-0014_0003.htm
    http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol06_Ch0321-0344/HRS0338/HRS_0338-0018.htm

    (g) The department shall not issue a verification in lieu of a certified copy of any such record, or any part thereof, unless it is satisfied that the applicant requesting a verification is:

    (1) A person who has a direct and tangible interest in the record but requests a verification in lieu of a certified copy;

    (2) A governmental agency or organization who for a legitimate government purpose maintains and needs to update official lists of persons in the ordinary course of the agency’s or organization’s activities;

    (3) A governmental, private, social, or educational agency or organization who seeks confirmation of a certified copy of any such record submitted in support of or information provided about a vital event relating to any such record and contained in an official application made in the ordinary course of the agency’s or organization’s activities by an individual seeking employment with, entrance to, or the services or products of the agency or organization;

    (4) A private or government attorney who seeks to confirm information about a vital event relating to any such record which was acquired during the course of or for purposes of legal proceedings; or

    (5) An individual employed, endorsed, or sponsored by a governmental, private, social, or educational agency or organization who seeks to confirm information about a vital event relating to any such record in preparation of reports or publications by the agency or organization for research or educational purposes. [L 1949, c 327, 22; RL 1955, 57-21; am L Sp 1959 2d, c 1, 19; am L 1967, c 30, 2; HRS 338-18; am L 1977, c 118, 1; am L 1991, c 190, 1; am L 1997, c 305, 5; am L 2001, c 246, 2]

    I guess even the Cold Case Posse could qualify under category #5. However, they never bothered to contact the HDOH. If they did, they’d probably have to pay $5 though, which is probably not in their budget. I’m not sure what form they would receive, but I would ask for a letter complete with the HDOH seal. I have a couple of letters of verification of my college attendance. It works in lieu of a full transcript, and contains the seal of the registrar.

    You know – I’m just wondering why nobody else has bothered to ask for one of these letters. Even Orly could have probably received one for the Georgia proceeding, as she’d probably qualify under category #4.

  251. avatar
    Scientist March 5, 2012 at 9:54 am #

    y_p_w: You know – I’m just wondering why nobody else has bothered to ask for one of these letters

    The birthers are looking for questions, not answers.

  252. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 5, 2012 at 10:10 am #

    I tried to get one of those under (5) writing a report for educational purposes, but they never acknowledged receiving it.

    y_p_w: Not true. 338-18 itself allows the HDOH to issue a letter of verification to verify a record in several cases

  253. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 5, 2012 at 10:17 am #

    Yeah, it’s a mess with the birthers who keep inundating us with this “non-important unsubstantiated fluff”. Still, I think I have a pretty good idea on what the core facts are. The person responsible for vital records in the State of Hawaii said in a statement which resides to this day on the department’s web site that Barack Obama was born in Hawaii.

    And the fact is that you can go to the Department of Health today and ask to see the Birth Index covering 1961 and you can see Obama’s name there. (And no, they didn’t register out of state births in 1961.)

    You can fluff, and you can weasel, and you can use clever (but ultimately meaningless) words to try to make plain statements say something other than their obvious meaning, but it’s not going to impress me and more importantly, it doesn’t appear to be impressing any potential Obama voters, any courts, or the Congress who will be tasked with certifying the 2012 election.

    And by the way, you don’t seem to know the difference between an “Obama apologist” and an “anti-birther.”

    RTM999: Yup it’s extremely hard for the Obama apologists to be able to realize the actual facts
    when the are inundated with non-important unsubstantiated fluff

  254. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 5, 2012 at 10:20 am #

    Now you know that’s not true and I know that’s not true.

    Are you just trying to stir up an argument for fun? If I see you doing this again, you’re banned from this site. Do I make myself clear?

    RTM999: The mud slinging has always come from the Obama apologist camp

  255. avatar
    RTM999 March 5, 2012 at 11:30 am #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    Now you know that’s not true and I know that’s not true.

    Are you just trying to stir up an argument for fun? If I see you doing this again, you’re banned from this site. Do I make myself clear?

    Nope not my purpose for being here…

    I am presenting points backed up for example by the Hawaiian statute 338:18 and from
    Fukino’s first press release.

    Your article lists what you believe are inconsistencies or questions brought up by your analysis of the investigation and of the participants in the investigation and press conference….

    By an equal standard I analyze the basis for the belief that Obama has presented a document at all that can be legally and logically considered a certified LFBC..

    It’s not true and you know it’s not true”

    Isn’t it?

    Just read just a few of the comments in this thread directed towards the skeptics posting a contrary stance to the majority Obama apologist stance here:

    “Stop being a bloviating fool.”

    “No you “dummy”!”

    “For any sane and rational person”

    Is RTM999 a sock puppet of Al?

    I rest my case.

    I’m just here to present the facts as they can be shown to exist in the Hawaiian statutes.

    The Obama apologists here resort to name calling.

    If you ban me ” for stirring up an argument for fun” ….

    Which I haven’t done and never even expressed a desire to do so…

    To save your credibility ….

    You’d have to ban most to all of your Obama apologist regulars.

    Ban away if you can’t actually stand a differing view point being presented here…

    It’s not any skin off my nose.

    It’ll simply demonstrate how closed minded you and your contributors actually are and that you actually only want to operate an Obama apologist echo chamber instead of a fair and open minded forum discussing the facts.

  256. avatar
    JPotter March 5, 2012 at 1:47 pm #

    RTM999: The Obama apologists

    Please post examples of apologetics on Obama’s behalf appearing on this site? That is, what in your opinion, are examples of apologism?

  257. avatar
    Scientist March 5, 2012 at 2:06 pm #

    RTM999: By an equal standard I analyze the basis for the belief that Obama has presented a document at all that can be legally and logically considered a certified LFBC

    The document shown at the White House is absolutely a certified LFBC, both legally and logically. I am quite confident that it will be placed in the Obama Library after he leaves office in 2017. You can go to Chicago (I believe it will more likely be there than in Honolulu) and see it for yourself.

  258. avatar
    nbc March 5, 2012 at 2:10 pm #

    RTM999: By an equal standard I analyze the basis for the belief that Obama has presented a document at all that can be legally and logically considered a certified LFBC..

    It’s not true and you know it’s not true”

    But it is true. The document was available for inspection, and Savannah Guthrie took pictures. The document was certified by the DOH of Hawaii who admitted to its accuracy and authenticity and stated that President Obama was born on US soil.

    Why do you have so many problems with the pure and simple facts? In fact in 2008, President Obama presented his COLB, again a legally and logically considered certified birth certificate.

    Such follies…

  259. avatar
    nbc March 5, 2012 at 2:11 pm #

    RTM999: It’ll simply demonstrate how closed minded you and your contributors actually are and that you actually only want to operate an Obama apologist echo chamber instead of a fair and open minded forum discussing the facts.

    Do not project your own behavior onto others. Whenever we attempt to discuss, you appear to run…

    So let’s explore your position regarding the Georgia challenge:

    RTM999, May I call you Al? Why did you claim that the candidate is obliged under Georgia law to establish his eligibility. Have you read the case in question?

    Well…

  260. avatar
    RTM999 March 5, 2012 at 2:14 pm #

    Scientist: That’s absurd.Obama gave them permission to verify his records. The fact is that they made the statements, whether you think they should have or not.Go sue Hawaii if you want.Good luck to you.Stop wasting your time here and get an a plane and go.We can’t help you.

    No he gave his lawyer permission to pick up two copies.

    The alleged scan of one of those copies is what is being contested as a forgery…

    Since there actually is a written out prohibition for the HDOH to not disclose, authenticate, or verify anything to anyone that lacks direct and tangible interest….

    The good luck wish along with the advice to file a lawsuit is an indirect admission that I am correct.

    Thanks.

    The first statement by Fukino states that she was not doing anything different with Obama’s records than she was with any other record in the HDOH’s possession…

    So the portion from the HDOH website that I highlighted that deals with the “any” and
    “all” debunks the rest of what is claimed by the Obama apologists about the other HDOH statements.

    # Birth Certificate or Certificate of Live Birth
    State law prohibits the DOH for disclosing any information about a Hawaii vital record unless the requestor has a direct and tangible interest in the record. This includes verification of vital records and all the information contained in a record. Vital records disclosure laws protect all birth, death, marriage and divorce records held by the department and all amendments, changes, supporting records, and requests related to vital records.
    Direct and tangible interest is determined by HRS 338-18(b). This statute may be accessed on the state legislative website at:
    http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol06/Ch0321-0344/HRS0338/HRS 0338-0018.htm

  261. avatar
    nbc March 5, 2012 at 2:16 pm #

    I have quoted from the letter that accompanied the long form birth certificate, which was actually displayed during the press conference and photographed by Savannah Guthrie, a photograph the Cold Case Posse apparently overlooked in favor of a highly compressed document with expected artifacts.

    “We hope that issuing certified copies of the original Certificate of Live Birth to President Obama will end the numerous inquiries related to his birth in Hawai„i,” Hawai„i Health Director Loretta Fuddy said. “I have seen the original records filed at the Department of Health and attest to the authenticity of the certified copies the department provided to the President that further prove the fact that he was born in Hawai„i.”

    Ouch

    In June 2008, President Obama released his Certification of Live Birth, which is sometimes referred to in the media as a “short form” birth certificate. Both documents are legally sufficient evidence of birth in the State of Hawai„i, and both provide the same fundamental information: President Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawai„i at 7:24 p.m. on August 4, 1961, to mother Stanley Ann Dunham and father Barack Hussein Obama.

    Double ouch

  262. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 5, 2012 at 2:26 pm #

    Here’s a chance for some of you to learn a new word, in context.

    http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sophistry

    RTM999: No he gave his lawyer permission to pick up two copies.

    The alleged scan of one of those copies is what is being contested as a forgery…

    Since there actually is a written out prohibition for the HDOH to not disclose, authenticate, or verify anything to anyone that lacks direct and tangible interest….

    The good luck wish along with the advice to file a lawsuit is an indirect admission that I am correct.

    Thanks.

    The first statement by Fukino states that she was not doing anything different with Obama’s records than she was with any other record in the HDOH’s possession…

    So the portion from the HDOH website that I highlighted that deals with the “any” and
    “all” debunks the rest of what is claimed by the Obama apologists about the other HDOH statements.

    # Birth Certificate or Certificate of Live Birth
    State law prohibits the DOH for disclosing any information about a Hawaii vital record unless the requestor has a direct and tangible interest in the record. This includes verification of vital records and all the information contained in a record. Vital records disclosure laws protect all birth, death, marriage and divorce records held by the department and all amendments, changes, supporting records, and requests related to vital records.
    Direct and tangible interest is determined by HRS 338-18(b). This statute may be accessed on the state legislative website at:
    http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol06/Ch0321-0344/HRS0338/HRS 0338-0018.htm

  263. avatar
    Scientist March 5, 2012 at 2:40 pm #

    RTM999: So the portion from the HDOH website that I highlighted that deals with the “any” and
    “all” debunks the rest of what is claimed by the Obama apologists about the other HDOH statements.

    It debunks nothing. Your argument that Fukino had no right to write the letter that she wrote (which is incorrect) doesn’t change the fact that she DID write it. It’s like saying that all the Wikileaks documents are untrue because they were illegally leaked.

  264. avatar
    nbc March 5, 2012 at 2:45 pm #

    Have her arrested… But as the keeper of the documents, she is the one who would get to certify the document in a Court proceeding for instance, under the Rules of Evidence. RTM999 is objecting that, in his mind, the DOH of HI ‘broke the law’.

    Under the waiver, requested, however, the DOH of HI is well within its rights to help lay to rest the confusion by some surrounding President Obama’s birth…

    The fact that Obama was born in Hawaii, is of course self evident from the index data…. Which can be shared…

    No wonder RTM999 is not interested…

  265. avatar
    RTM999 March 5, 2012 at 2:45 pm #

    nbc: But it is true. The document was available for inspection, and Savannah Guthrie took pictures. The document was certified by the DOH of Hawaii who admitted to its accuracy and authenticity and stated that President Obama was born on US soil.

    Why do you have so many problems with the pure and simple facts? In fact in 2008, President Obama presented his COLB, again a legally and logically considered certified birth certificate.

    Such follies…

    Available for inspection?

    Much like Factcheck visited the Certification and took pictures…

    So what?

    No one that “inspected” that piece of paper would know whether that piece of paper
    was a LFBC or a fake because they lack the subpoena power to be able to ascertain what it was they were inspecting…

    Even document experts can be fooled by paper forgeries.

    So pointing to a reporter or twelve inspecting what they aren’t even trained to inspect is actually a non-point…

    While that may be convincing to the non-skeptic…

    It isn’t for anyone that takes the time and effort to analyze why that sort of thing doesn’t amount to a hill of beans for legal proof.

    Obama merely posted an image online…

    Oh and some reporters “inspected what they could only guess was Obama’s LFBC…

    Nothing changed from when the certification was touted as Obama’s “BC” ….

    An image is not a document in the sense of what can be authenticated and verified by the HDOH…

    I don’t have problems with the actual facts according to what the HDOH can and can’t do
    according to the Hawaiian statutes that apply to what is being debated and which is what Fukino related her first statement to in which at the end of her first statement she said that she was doing in nothing different in relation with Obama’s records… Which was to treat his records the same way the HDOH is supposed to treat every other record in their possession …

    Which is to not authenticate, disclose or verify anything to anyone that lacks direct and tangible interest….

    Goody more pictures and images that can’t establish the proof of what the Obama apologists claim….

    Good deal…

    No court proceeding has authenticated what it is that Guthrie took pictures of.

    The HDOH can not according to the language I quoted from the official website
    authenticate squat to anyone that lacks direct and tangible interest in the document in the HDOH vaults.

    So the pictures you cite mean nothing just as the images posted on the website mean nothing…

    The actual physical certified document must be presented as evidence in a court proceeding just as the language I highlighted from the Certification described….

    And of course ANY alteration invalidates the document if you want to try and claim the image is representative of a legal document….

    The obscured numbers on the Certification would by that standard invalidate the image/document the Obama apologists were first trying to claim proved Obama was born in Hawaii.

    Con men fool people with bait and switched money to wads of newspapers.

    Computers can make realistic looking documents that can even be printed out on security paper….Affix a seal…

    Forgers supplying illegals do it all of the time.

    Authenticate what he claims to have in a court proceeding…

    Enough with the cat and mouse games of images , print out of images, etc.
    passing as documents and HDOH employees making statements that of course can’t authenticate or verify anything to anyone that lacks direct and tangible interest….

    That is a reasonable and prudent way to legally confirm what needs to be concerned concerning Obama’s POB.

  266. avatar
    RTM999 March 5, 2012 at 2:58 pm #

    Scientist: It debunks nothing.Your argument that Fukino had no right to write the letter that she wrote (which is incorrect) doesn’t change the fact that she DID write it.It’s like saying that all the Wikileaks documents are untrue because they were illegally leaked.

    She had authority as she explained here in the first press release Fukino made:

    “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 Hawaii.”

    Which of course is in line with this statement concerning 338:18 :

    # Birth Certificate or Certificate of Live Birth
    State law prohibits the DOH for disclosing any information about a Hawaii vital record unless the requestor has a direct and tangible interest in the record. This includes verification of vital records and all the information contained in a record. Vital records disclosure laws protect all birth, death, marriage and divorce records held by the department and all amendments, changes, supporting records, and requests related to vital records.

    Direct and tangible interest is determined by HRS 338-18(b). This statute may be accessed on the state legislative website at:
    http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol06/Ch0321-0344/HRS0338/HRS 0338-0018.htm

    The Obama apologists concentrated on the wrong words in her press release.

    Fuddy can do nothing different.

  267. avatar
    Scientist March 5, 2012 at 2:58 pm #

    RTM999: Authenticate what he claims to have in a court proceeding…

    No court is interested. Under the law, there is no basis to do so. Your blather doesn’t create a legal basis.

    RTM999: That is a reasonable and prudent way to legally confirm what needs to be concerned concerning Obama’s POB.

    Let’s be real here. The President in in charge of the FBI, CIA, NSA and a dozen other agencies. There are hundereds of the world’s top document experts who work for him. If he wanted something forged they would do it so that NO ONE could possibly detect it. The very experts a court would rely on work for him. Your “battle” is over before it started.

    Tough luck, pal.

  268. avatar
    y_p_w March 5, 2012 at 3:02 pm #

    RTM999: The obscured numbers on the Certification would by that standard invalidate the image/document the Obama apologists were first trying to claim proved Obama was born in Hawaii.

    The numbers were obscured electronically in the image file. The original wasn’t altered in any way, and later the Factcheck.org photos show the full document in all its glory. That was also never submitted for any legal purposes, so I don’t know how anything would be invalidated for any legal purpose.

    I understand the details about “alteration”. However, they only apply to the source document. That the Obamas had the SSN on images of their tax returns doesn’t magically invalidate the original returns filed with the IRS.

  269. avatar
    RTM999 March 5, 2012 at 3:07 pm #

    Scientist: No court is interested.Under the law, there is no basis to do so.Your blather doesn’t create a legal basis.

    Let’s be real here.The President in in charge ofthe FBI, CIA, NSA and a dozen other agencies.There are hundereds of the world’s top document experts who work for him.If he wanted something forged they would do it so that NO ONE could possibly detect it.The very experts a court would rely on work for him.Your “battle” is over before it started.

    Tough luck, pal.

    Scientist: No court is interested.Under the law, there is no basis to do so.Your blather doesn’t create a legal basis.

    Let’s be real here.The President in in charge ofthe FBI, CIA, NSA and a dozen other agencies.There are hundereds of the world’s top document experts who work for him.If he wanted something forged they would do it so that NO ONE could possibly detect it.The very experts a court would rely on work for him.Your “battle” is over before it started.

    Tough luck, pal.

    The judges in our courts are bound by oath to be interested if they are following their oaths.

    Well it’s obvious that Obama’s folks weren’t the FBI, CIA, etc….

    Had they just printed out the image from the computer and scanned it w/o turning it into a PDF so that there were no layers, et al…

    There would be little to nothing to contest.

    Since there is ….

    It’s quite obvious the people that did the work to make the image were not thinking ahead.

    However thanks for acknowledging that Obama has at least some things available to post what was posted online…

    We are slowly but grudgingly making progress towards the fact that what is seen on the WH website should not be taken w/o a healthy dose of skepticism.

    No it’s tough luck America.

  270. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 5, 2012 at 3:08 pm #

    Of course this was beat to death back when Fukino made her original statement, with birthers yelling NO FAIR!

    Reading the statute, we see that the Director has some latitude to release information, particularly index information.

    The sophists would argue that since the Birth Index doesn’t list the place of birth, it doesn’t show that Obama was born in Hawaii, and therefore a health director who limits herself (and there is no such limitation) to what is in the birth index, could not say where Obama was born.

    This is a stupid objection, because in 1961 ALL births in the registry were for persons born in Hawaii. The very fact that the birth is listed means that it was in Hawaii.

    But the bigger point is that RTM999 is basically arguing that if someone isn’t allowed to say something, then it didn’t happen or if it did it meant nothing. This is sophistry, and the stuff of trolls, and why I’m deleting 2/3 of RTM999’s comments before they waste folks time responding to worthless diversions.

    RTM999: The Obama apologists concentrated on the wrong words in her press release.

    Fuddy can do nothing different.

  271. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 5, 2012 at 3:13 pm #

    Are you intentionally ignoring all the crap the birthers put out about the 2008 Birth Certificate which was a very high resolution JPEG file with no layers. How about all the birther crap about FactCheck.org’s photos?

    So which is it? Ignorance or disingenuousness?

    RTM999: Had they just printed out the image from the computer and scanned it w/o turning it into a PDF so that there were no layers, et al…

    There would be little to nothing to contest.

  272. avatar
    Scientist March 5, 2012 at 3:23 pm #

    RTM999: The judges in our courts are bound by oath to be interested if they are following their oaths

    No they aren’t. They are only bound to consider actual cases that come before them. There are no pending cases in which the birth certificate is relevant. None.

    RTM999: Well it’s obvious that Obama’s folks weren’t the FBI, CIA, etc….

    Of course they are. Those are all executive branch agencies. So are the Secret Service, Government Printing Office and a whole host of others. If the President were to need a document created, that is their job. On the other hand, actual Hawaiian documents come from Hawaii. So there are 2 choices and only 2-either the b.c. came from Hawaii or it was produced by world-class government experts who can make a document that will withstand scrutiny by experts who make Sheriff Joe’s look like the rank amateuurs they are.

    Tough luck, pal.

  273. avatar
    nbc March 5, 2012 at 3:26 pm #

    RTM999: The judges in our courts are bound by oath to be interested if they are following their oaths.

    On the contrary, their are bound by the Constitution and the precedential rulings. For instance, first of all they need to have jurisdiction, or they are, by our Constitution, unable to be ‘interested’. Secondly, those bringing the ‘charges’ need to have standing or in case of criminal charges, they need to be filed through the appropriate channels. This is to avoid that just anyone can make foolish criminal accusations. This is why our Constitution protects us from such follies.

    Then, when issues of jurisdiction and standing have been resolved, they have to decide if the complaint amount to anything they can do about. And finally when it gets to the actual trial, they are bound by the rules of evidence which precludes them from being ‘interested’ in just anything.

    Once you come to realize that there is a good Constitutional foundation for why the Courts have to be cautious before they show ‘interest’ then you have come to understand why so far the birthers have failed.

    First it was mostly because lack of standing, political question, and failure to state a claim. More recently, it has been failure to state a claim, lack of probative evidence, failure to properly certify one’s ‘expert witnesses’, failure to properly perfect service and a general lack of standing and jurisdiction just as in the 2008 cycle.

    Claims of fraud require a bit more than just unfounded assertions and accusations, which is why the SSN and the Birth Certificate fraud claims will not go anywhere.

    The documents were provided by the Department of Health of Hawaii, duly signed and with the required seal, and thus, prima facie evidence. The Department of Health of Hawaii has consistently confirmed to the fact that President Obama was born on US soil, and with the latest release of the long form birth certificate, we know the name of the hospital and the attending physician.

    The courts will continue to take notice of these simple facts and unless the objectors provide some probative evidence as required by their burden of proof, the Courts will continue to be not very interested in these musings.

    Such are the simple facts.

  274. avatar
    RTM999 March 5, 2012 at 3:30 pm #

    y_p_w: The numbers were obscured electronically in the image file.The original wasn’t altered in any way, and later the Factcheck.org photos show the full document in all its glory.That was also never submitted for any legal purposes, so I don’t know how anything would be invalidated for any legal purpose.

    I understand the details about “alteration”.However, they only apply to the source document.That the Obamas had the SSN on images of their tax returns doesn’t magically invalidate the original returns filed with the IRS.

    This is where the lines of reality in this issue get blurred….

    The document only can be taken to allegedly exist …

    NO court proceeding has actually had the alleged document entered in as evidence at all…

    The language in the image demands a court proceeding for the image to be considered prima facie evidence…

    Outside of a court proceeding the DOCUMENT would be just so much paper!

    An image on a website is even less so.

    How could Fukino possibly know what the image represents or not….

    She didn’t personally scan and post the image herself….

    How can she vouch for how that image got where it ended up when she didn’t personally put it on the scanner herself and upload it personally to the computer?

    All she could logically say is “That the image resembles what I gave Obama ” if one wants to make the claim that she gave Oabama the copy he posted online….

    Thus she can’t certify what’s online at all.

    Even if she could as the Obama apologists claim.. Verify the image….Fukino can’t authenticate or verify that a documents existed at all from an image being posted on a website ( Is that the a scan of the alleged actual document she allegedly gave Obama or did someone construct that image w/o Obama having knowledge of it being constructed and it merely looks like what she gave him but isn’t a scan at all of what she gave him? )
    that she had no part it posting said image online or even that the image was a true representation of what allegedly exists or not….

    What you opine really doesn’t matter to the point that was being argued against my point…

    The idea is that the image is prima facie evidence even though it may or may not be
    the document it allegedly represents can’t be a logical legal step for the HDOH to make even if they could what they claim…

    IF one also takes the line that the Certification is supposed to be prima facie evidence…

    AND the image was altered by obscuring the numbers…

    There was w/o a doubt an alteration that invalidates the image by your own admission because the numbers were obscurred…

    ANY alteration means any alteration and any alteration invalidates the image/document whatever one wants to opine it to be.

  275. avatar
    RTM999 March 5, 2012 at 3:39 pm #

    Scientist: No they aren’t.They are only bound to consider actual cases that come before them.There are no pending cases in which the birth certificate is relevant.None.

    Of course they are.Those are all executive branch agencies.So are the Secret Service, Government Printing Office and a whole host of others.If the President were to need a document created, that is their job.On the other hand, actual Hawaiian documents come from Hawaii.So there are 2 choices and only 2-either the b.c. came from Hawaii or it was produced by world-class government experts who can make a document that will withstand scrutiny by experts who make Sheriff Joe’s look like the rank amateuurs they are.

    Tough luck, pal.

    The cases cited need “birth in country” to operate w/in the ramifications of what the case rules is a necessary qualification…

    The Arkeny ve Daniels appeal dicta requires birth in country…

    Fine if one wants to believe that all that is necessary from the language of the ruling is birth in country… W/o the proof of birth in country the language in the ruling has no factual basis to be legally binding to the language…

    IF Obama was shown to be born on Mars…

    Arkeny vs Daniels could rule that birth in country was all that was necessary and it could apply to Obama because he didn’t fit the criteria of the ruling.

    So far despite the posturing…

    Obama has not provided physical proof that he was born in country inside a court of competent jurisdiction….

    Obama has come the closest to physically submitting something by giving the Illinois election board a copy that of course the Illinois election board can’t authenticate at all.

    Tough luck America.

  276. avatar
    G March 5, 2012 at 4:28 pm #

    When the shoe fits….

    HINT: It is not mudslinging to characterize someone based on how they come across in public.

    HINT 2: You need to look up what “facts” means. The speculative BS and complete mistatements you spew are anything but. When you are constantly wrong about things, you’re words don’t deserve any respect.

    So boo-hoo. If you don’t like ridicule, stop acting ridiculous.

    RTM999: One needs only peruse just a few Obama apologists’ post to find more than just a few inferences to the skeptic being racist, insane, stupid, etc….
    I have been labeled as such for simply posting the facts that debunk the Obama apologists claims.

  277. avatar
    Scientist March 5, 2012 at 4:42 pm #

    RTM999: All she could logically say is “That the image resembles what I gave Obama ” if one wants to make the claim that she gave Oabama the copy he posted online….
    Thus she can’t certify what’s online at all.

    This is a complete straw man. No one claims the “image” is certified. The PAPER DOCUMENT is certified. And Fuddy can look at the image and compare the actual information in the image (name, DOB, POB, etc) to the information on the paper document and see that they are the same. It really doesn’t matter if some letter acquired a halo in the course of image processing. The point is the INFORMATION on the 2 documents is THE SAME. This can also be seen on the photos Savannah Guthrie took (you don’t have to take her word for it).

    I’m trying to come up with an analogy, so I’ll try this. Let’s say I photocopy a passage from Hamlet and I move the book slightly, so that the copy is blurred, but still legible. Then Kenneth Branagh goes on stage and reads the passage. Is it not Shakespeare’s Hamlet because the text is a bit blurred? Hint: It is.

  278. avatar
    RTM999 March 5, 2012 at 4:43 pm #

    G:
    When the shoe fits….

    HINT: It is not mudslinging to characterize someone based on how they come across in public.

    HINT 2:You need to look up what “facts” means.The speculative BS and complete mistatements you spew are anything but.When you are constantly wrong about things, you’re words don’t deserve any respect.

    So boo-hoo.If you don’t like ridicule, stop acting ridiculous.

    LOL

    No need to look up facts…

    I know what facts are when I see ’em.

    Obama hasn’t presented any.

    I demonstrated why the COLB and LFBC images are just what they are images…

    The HDOH can’t authenticate anything to anyone that lacks direct and tangible interest…

    338:18 and the interpretation of it on the HDOH website explains that fact.

    Really?
    It is mudslinging to brand someone addled headed or stupid ( Which is just a couple of examples I cited ) when of course using such language is character assassination and is just a juvenile way and excuse to not debate the facts where the debate merely becomes a case of name calling instead of debating the issue because f some sort of misplaced superiority complex.

    Again…

    I just argue facts…

    The Obama apologists when all else fails resort to name calling.

    The ridiculous inane point shown for what it is back at ya.

  279. avatar
    Scientist March 5, 2012 at 4:48 pm #

    RTM999: Tough luck America.

    America is just fine. Only YOU have a problem. Don’t try to make your problem everybody else’s.

  280. avatar
    Whatever4 March 5, 2012 at 4:52 pm #

    RTM999: She had authority as she explained here in the first press release Fukino made:

    “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 Hawaii.”

    :::snipped:::

    The Obama apologists concentrated on the wrong words in her press release.

    Fuddy can do nothing different.

    Fukino’s first press release answered the rumor that Hawaii didn’t have an original BC, and that Obama had sealed his records. They do, he didn’t.

    Her second press release was legal as it only contained information available from index records: that Obama was born in Hawaii. http://hawaii.gov/health/about/pr/2009/09-063.pdf

    In the Governor’s press release of April 27, 2011, he says:

    In June 2008, President Obama released his Certification of Live Birth, which is
    sometimes referred to in the media as a “short form” birth certificate. Both documents
    are legally sufficient evidence of birth in the State of Hawai„i, and both provide the
    same fundamental information: President Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawai„i at 7:24
    p.m. on August 4, 1961, to mother Stanley Ann Dunham and father Barack Hussein
    Obama.

    In addition, in testimony before the HI Sentate, Fukino said:
    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 has posted a copy of the certificate on his former campaign website.

    http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/session2010/Testimony/SB2937_TESTIMONY_JGO_02-23-10_LATE.pdf

    I guess I’m missing your point.

  281. avatar
    Obsolete March 5, 2012 at 4:55 pm #

    Shorter RTM999:
    “How can anyone really know anything at all?”

  282. avatar
    justlw March 5, 2012 at 4:56 pm #

    RTM999: The document only can be taken to allegedly exist …

    Here: knock yourself out. It will blow your mind.

    This where your goalposts are heading, at warp speed.

  283. avatar
    RTM999 March 5, 2012 at 4:59 pm #

    Scientist: This is a complete straw man.No one claims the “image” is certified.The PAPER DOCUMENT is certified.And Fuddy can look at the image and comparethe actual information in the image (name, DOB, POB, etc) to the information on the paper document and see that they are the same. It really doesn’t matter if some letter acquired a halo in the course of image processing.The point is the INFORMATION on the 2 documents is THE SAME.This can also be seen on the photos Savannah Guthrie took (you don’t have to take her word for it).

    I’m trying to come up with an analogy, so I’ll try this.Let’s say I photocopy a passage from Hamlet and I move the book slightly, so that the copy is blurred, but still legible.Then Kenneth Branagh goes on stage and reads the passage.Is it not Shakespeare’s Hamlet because the text is a bit blurred?Hint:It is.

    Yup one can’t certify an image on a computer screen.

    The alleged document could be certified…

    But all that can be seen for sure by the general public is the image …

    So speaking of the image in not uncertain terms may work amongst the Obama
    apologists here but it is an illogical reach because the documents have not been
    legally proven to exist at all because of course no physical document ahs ever made it into a court of competent jurisdiction to be authenticated as such.

    When I spoke of the language on the image :

    “This copy serves as prima facie evidence in a court proceeding” and made it clear that the image wasn’t what was being spoken of…

    AND that the copy needed to be in a court proceeding …

    This reply was one of the results:

    “y_p_w: The numbers were obscured electronically in the image file.The original wasn’t altered in any way, and later the Factcheck.org photos show the full document in all its glory.That was also never submitted for any legal purposes, so I don’t know how anything would be invalidated for any legal purpose.”

    Not sorry…

    That is unsubstantiated hoopla.

    Because the document was never authenticated and the Obama apologist is arguing as if the document exists…

    The obscurred numbers can only be known to exist on the image and the document very existence remains unsubstantiated.

    The poster goes back and forth between posted images …

    One with alterations and later ones not, etc…

    The lines most definitely are obscured.

  284. avatar
    RTM999 March 5, 2012 at 5:02 pm #

    Obsolete:
    Shorter RTM999:
    “How can anyone really know anything at all?”

    By going beyond what the Obama apologists believe is evidence would be a great start.

    I’ve been arguing if you haven’t noticed for a court of competent jurisdiction to authenticate what Obama claims exists.

  285. avatar
    Whatever4 March 5, 2012 at 5:03 pm #

    RTM999: The good luck wish along with the advice to file a lawsuit is an indirect admission that I am correct.

    Uh… no. The statement is meant to say that we are correct, that you refuse to believe it, that your next step to try to change our contention that you are wrong is for you file a lawsuit and have an actual legal confirmation of your theory. If the poster was going to admit you were right, he/she would have said so.

  286. avatar
    Scientist March 5, 2012 at 5:05 pm #

    Scientist: America is just fine.

    By the way, America would be just fine with some future President born to a US citizen mother outside the US and brought into the country a few days after he was born. The Founding Fathers were not pettifoggers interested in legal nits. Said child wouldn’t remember his birth in a foreign land and would be as American as apple pie.

  287. avatar
    RTM999 March 5, 2012 at 5:07 pm #

    justlw: Here: knock yourself out. It will blow your mind.

    This where your goalposts are heading, at warp speed.

    Nope not going there at all.

    The images are not documents and nothing Obama claims has been substantiated in a court of competent jurisdiction…
    The HDOH according to 338:18 cannot authenticate anything to anyone that lacks direct and tangible interest…

    See where that nothing take the Obama apologist thought processes…

  288. avatar
    y_p_w March 5, 2012 at 5:08 pm #

    RTM999: The document only can be taken to allegedly exist …
    NO court proceeding has actually had the alleged document entered in as evidence at all…
    The language in the image demands a court proceeding for the image to be considered prima facie evidence…
    Outside of a court proceeding the DOCUMENT would be just so much paper!

    Just because the document itself notes that it “serves as prima facie evidence in any court proceeding” doesn’t mean that it wouldn’t serve as prima facie evidence outside of a court proceeding. That’s like the constain refrain from birthers that Minor v Happersett says that those born in the US to two US citizen parents is a natural born citizen, and therefore that’s the only way to be a natural born citizen.

    To the State Department Bureau of Consular Affairs, such a paper document would serve as prima facie evidence of US citizenship for the issuance of a passport. Any state or territorial department of motor vehicles would accept a Hawaii COLB as prima facie proof of age and status. An employer accepting an I-9 would accept one as prima facie evidence of US citizenship for employment purposes. Prima facie means far more than just court proceedings, although court proceedings are one place where they would be considered so. Most of the reasons that birth certificates are accepted as prima facie evidence of their information has nothing to do with court proceedings per se.

    One also wouldn’t necessarily have to have the original piece of paper to have the State of Hawaii verify the information. 338-18 allows for a verification letter in lieu of a certified vital record. One would need to provide all the information transcribed in a letter, and the HDOH may simply tick off one at a time what information they can verify as accurate. I’m not sure how willing they are to do this, as the wording doesn’t say that they must comply, only that they are allowed to comply with requests for verification letters.

  289. avatar
    RTM999 March 5, 2012 at 5:14 pm #

    Whatever4: Uh… no. The statement is meant to say that we are correct, that you refuse to believe it, that your next step to try to change our contention that you are wrong is for you file a lawsuit and have an actual legal confirmation of your theory. If the poster was going to admit you were right, he/she would have said so.

    It may have been meant to be that ….

    It just wasn’t that.

    What I stated is not part of what would be part of a filing anyways…

    I just use that to illustrate a point here…

    Whether I file or don’t file a case has no bearing on the fact that since all of the cases filed so far have sought what Obama claims to have …

    Nope no court has authenticated Obama’s claims….

    The statute illustrates that the HDOH can’t treat Obama’s records any differently than the other records that the HDOH holds…

    Fukino admitted as much in her first press release that she was treating Obama’s records just the same as the others…

    Nope no official HDOH verification either.

  290. avatar
    Whatever4 March 5, 2012 at 5:24 pm #

    RTM999: The language in the image demands a court proceeding for the image to be considered prima facie evidence…

    Outside of a court proceeding the DOCUMENT would be just so much paper!

    Really. So a court proceeding is necessary every time a DMV examines a BC for a license, every time the State Department examines one for a passport, every time an employer checks one for paperwork. Good to know.

    What HASN’T happened with regard to the President’s documentation? No official in Hawaii has questioned what has been displayed. No member of HI law enforcement has investigated. Even Arpaio’s posse never attempted to contact the White House or Hawaii to even try to determine if they could get a paper document to examine.

    If Fukino, Fuddy, or Onaka had any doubts about the images posted by the White House, they could have contacted the HI AG to investigate Vital Records fraud.

    The idea that a paper birth certificate is only so much paper outside a court proceeding is ridiculous.

  291. avatar
    RTM999 March 5, 2012 at 5:26 pm #

    y_p_w: Just because the document itself notes that it “serves as prima facie evidence in any court proceeding” doesn’t mean that it wouldn’t serve as prima facie evidence outside of a court proceeding.That’s like the constain refrain from birthers that Minor v Happersett says that those born in the US to two US citizen parents is a natural born citizen, and therefore that’s the only way to be a natural born citizen.

    To the State Department Bureau of Consular Affairs, such a paper document would serve as prima facie evidence of US citizenship for the issuance of a passport.Any state or territorial department of motor vehicles would accept a Hawaii COLB as prima facie proof of age and status.An employer accepting an I-9 would accept one as prima facie evidence of US citizenship for employment purposes.Prima facie means far more than just court proceedings, although court proceedings are one place where they would be considered so.Most of the reasons that birth certificates are accepted as prima facie evidence of their information has nothing to do with court proceedings per se.

    One also wouldn’t necessarily have to have the original piece of paper to have the State of Hawaii verify the information.338-18 allows for a verification letter in lieu of a certified vital record.One would need to provide all the information transcribed in a letter, and the HDOH may simply tick off one at a time what information they can verify as accurate.I’m not sure how willing they are to do this, as the wording doesn’t say that they must comply, only that they are allowed to comply with requests for verification letters.

    I wasn’t even addressing Minor vs Happersett.

    BCs weren’t in use in the USA until the early 1900s.

    Had they been …

    You might have a point trying to tie Minor with BCs.

    I could discuss why Minor’s “birth in country to parents who were it’s citizens” can be seen as the ONLY definition for natural-born citizen….

    I can also discuss why WKA is not actually based on English common law…

    But the debate is already all over the place as it is.

    Submitting a COLB to obtain a passport is a drawn out process which involves authenticating the document with the issuer… Prima facie means at first glance…
    That doesn’t mean that the document is w/o a doubt proof if contrary evidence surfaces that disputes what appears on the COLB.
    Much like the Hawaiian lands program allowed the applicant to submit a COLB …
    The LFBC was preferred because the Hawaiian lands program would just obtain the LFBC anyways to verify the applicant was eligible.

    The “Verification in Lieu of a Certification” is essentially a worthless piece of paper…

    The verification merely is evidence that documents exist in the files or vaults and the information on the face of the Verification in lieu of a certification is whatever the applicant wants to place on the application as information.

  292. avatar
    Whatever4 March 5, 2012 at 5:28 pm #

    RTM999: How could Fukino possibly know what the image represents or not….

    She didn’t personally scan and post the image herself….

    How can she vouch for how that image got where it ended up when she didn’t personally put it on the scanner herself and upload it personally to the computer?

    Fukino doesn’t care about the image, it’s about the data itself. Was Obama born in Hawaii? She says yes. Your verbal gymnastics don’t change that.

  293. avatar
    nbc March 5, 2012 at 5:31 pm #

    RTM999: I could discuss why Minor’s “birth in country to parents who were it’s citizens” can be seen as the ONLY definition for natural-born citizen….

    Sure and you would lose the discussion as courts have come to realize that the definition of natural born citizen is found in US v Wong Kim Ark. See for instance Ankeny v Daniels, Tisdale v Obama and Farrar v Obama (Judge Malihi)

  294. avatar
    nbc March 5, 2012 at 5:34 pm #

    RTM999: The “Verification in Lieu of a Certification” is essentially a worthless piece of paper…

    But the COLB and long form where proper certifications and came with further statements by the DOH of Hawaii that these documents were accurate and authentic and showed president Obama to be born on US soil.

    Why do you continue to deny these simple facts my friend..

    “We hope that issuing certified copies of the original Certificate of Live Birth to President Obama will end the numerous inquiries related to his birth in Hawai„i,” Hawai„i Health Director Loretta Fuddy said. “I have seen the original records filed at the Department of Health and attest to the authenticity of the certified copies the department provided to the President that further prove the fact that he was born in Hawai„i.”

    Ouch

    In June 2008, President Obama released his Certification of Live Birth, which is sometimes referred to in the media as a “short form” birth certificate. Both documents are legally sufficient evidence of birth in the State of Hawai„i, and both provide the same fundamental information: President Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawai„i at 7:24 p.m. on August 4, 1961, to mother Stanley Ann Dunham and father Barack Hussein Obama.

    Double ouch… Still hiding from the facts I gather?

  295. avatar
    Whatever4 March 5, 2012 at 5:36 pm #

    RTM999: Obama has not provided physical proof that he was born in country inside a court of competent jurisdiction….

    Obama has come the closest to physically submitting something by giving the Illinois election board a copy that of course the Illinois election board can’t authenticate at all.

    Tough luck America.

    Neither has any other candidate for President or VP ever in the history of the USA. Obama has done more to prove the details of his birth than any candidate ever has. If you have evidence that Obama was NOT born in the USA, then you’d be concentrating on that. Instead, you are focused on ridiculous arguments like parsing pixels and statements. It’s not working.

  296. avatar
    nbc March 5, 2012 at 5:37 pm #

    RTM999: I can also discuss why WKA is not actually based on English common law…

    ROTFL.. .When in fact the claim that the definition of Natural Born had to be found in common law and then show how English Common Law’s definition of birth on soil, regardless of the status of the parent, continued into the early days of the Republic.

    I doubt that you can discuss much in this area at least legally, or historically relevant.

  297. avatar
    Whatever4 March 5, 2012 at 5:45 pm #

    Interesting… RTM999 hasn’t directly responded to any of my posts. Is he/she ignoring me for some reason? Shirley** my posts contain valid points, don’t they? Could it be because I don’t insult people?

    ** a Frenchman

  298. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 5, 2012 at 5:45 pm #

    That remark seems to be particularly stupid. Are you sure you wouldn’t like me to delete it?

    Do you need another new word?

    http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/fatuous

    RTM999: The language in the image demands a court proceeding for the image to be considered prima facie evidence…

    Outside of a court proceeding the DOCUMENT would be just so much paper!

  299. avatar
    Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter March 5, 2012 at 5:48 pm #

    RTM=Regurgitate the manure??? 999 is 666 upside down??? I think for poopy-spewing demons you are supposed to like throw some salt around and stuff. I wonder if Mrs. Dash will work??? On some Tony Chachere’s???

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

  300. avatar
    G March 5, 2012 at 5:49 pm #

    Merely casting aspersions and idle speculation does not constitute contrary evidence. More importantly, the credence of official state documents is a high bar to contest.

    In reality, to impeach the COLB, which is consistently backed by the HI DOH, you would need to come up with a credible birth certificate that contradicts it. Not going to happen.

    Which is why all you Birthers do is resort to trying to dodge and change the issue to picking at irrelevant nits and hope nobody is smart enough to notice your shell game…

    RTM999: That doesn’t mean that the document is w/o a doubt proof if contrary evidence surfaces that disputes what appears on the COLB.

  301. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 5, 2012 at 5:50 pm #

    I think RTM999 is a troll, just trying to use clever language tied to fallacious reasoning to stir the pot. He won’t last much longer.

    DNFTT

    Whatever4: Interesting… RTM999 hasn’t directly responded to any of my posts.

  302. avatar
    y_p_w March 5, 2012 at 5:53 pm #

    RTM999: I wasn’t even addressing Minor vs Happersett.

    It was just an analogy about logical fallacies. Just because it says it serves as prima facie evidence in a court proceeding doesn’t mean that it only serves as prima facie evidence outside of a court proceeding.

    And what is this about “authenticating the document with the issuer”? You really think the Bureau of Consular Affairs authenticated my kid’s birth certificate with the California State Dept of Public Health before they issued a passport and passport card? I gave them a simple phone call, left a message, and they didn’t answer if for three weeks. In most cases they just look at it and at most compare it to examples they have in a database. Most new passport applications are handled regionally, so I’d expect that experienced adjudicators would have seen many of the common types. At least in California, it’s a pretty standard form and security paper, even if there are slight differences between vendors and where each vital records office has its own embossed seal.

    They’re almost never going back to the issuer to verify. There’s just too much volume to do that.

    As for a verification in lieu of certified copy, it is just that. It’s a verification of the facts presented. An applicant provides a list of information from a birth certificate, and the HDOH verifies that their records indicate those are true. Born in Honolulu? Check. Born on August 4, 1961. Check. Mother’s name? Check. Father was named George Washington? No. It doesn’t doesn’t rubber stamp a bunch of things that aren’t true.

    338-14.3 Verification in lieu of a certified copy. (a) Subject to the requirements of section 338-18, the department of health, upon request, shall furnish to any applicant, in lieu of the issuance of a certified copy, a verification of the existence of a certificate and any other information that the applicant provides to be verified relating to the vital event that pertains to the certificate.

    (b) A verification shall be considered for all purposes certification that the vital event did occur and that the facts of the event are as stated by the applicant.

  303. avatar
    Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter March 5, 2012 at 5:57 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    I think RTM999 is a troll, just trying to use clever language tied to fallacious reasoning to stir the pot. He won’t last much longer.

    DNFTT

    I think that you are wrong about this. My guess is that as the Birther’s make new converts, they send them out on missionary work to convert other people. Either that, or it is some sort of Birfer Initiation Rite where young Birthers have to go out and get kicked around some to show they can lose, get logically out-argued, get embarrassed, and make fools out of themselves without giving up the faith.

    In my human opinion.

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

  304. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 5, 2012 at 6:04 pm #

    With such sophistry you could just as well deny the moon landing.

    RTM999: I demonstrated why the COLB and LFBC images are just what they are images…

  305. avatar
    G March 5, 2012 at 6:08 pm #

    *yawn*

    What we see here is a desperate concerted effort at yet again, moving the goalposts back to trotting out long debunked and dead arguments that failed to catch traction the first time.

    We’ve got 3 Concern Trolls on 3 different posts who have all appeared over the past few days to pick at irrelevant nits at weave a “the birth certififcate is fake” meme, yet again.

    As this is all old news and well worn failed ground, the bigger picture here is really what this latest meme tells us: The Birther propagandists are in abject panick and their recent failures and therefore are simply again moving away from currently failing memes and trying to bait and switch the conversation to a different tactic.

    Their main meme for awhile now has been the “2 citizen parents” myths. However, those have been spectacularly thrashed in all the Ballot Challenges.

    Then WND tried to ressurect the PDF nonsense with Arpaio. That has been a spectacular DUD as well.

    So all of a sudden, there is a concerted effort in Birtheristan to re-trot out the even older failed themes of “the birth certificate is fake” and attempt to refocus and rebrand on that silly angle.

    The problem with their obvious “throwing sphaghetti against the wall and hoping something will stick” strategy is that they’ve been failing at this for so long that there is nothing NEW for them left in their bowl to throw against the wall.

    All they’ve got is picking up some moldy strands of sphaghetti from the floor and lamely trying to throw it at the wall again…

    That is what is really going on here in a nutshell.

    Dr. Conspiracy: I think RTM999 is a troll, just trying to use clever language tied to fallacious reasoning to stir the pot. He won’t last much longer.DNFTT

  306. avatar
    Scientist March 5, 2012 at 6:11 pm #

    RTM999: Whether I file or don’t file a case has no bearing on the fact that since all of the cases filed so far have sought what Obama claims to have …

    The courts decided they were irrelevant.

    RTM999: Nope no court has authenticated Obama’s claims….

    Where is it required that a court authenticate anything? If I claim gthe sun rises in the East, I don’t need a court to aurthenticate it, I have my eyes. In fact, if a court said the sun rises in the West, the court would be wrong and i would be right.

  307. avatar
    G March 5, 2012 at 6:18 pm #

    Squeeky, see my post above.

    I agree with you that the Trolls we see are nothing more than intentional propaganda “missionaries” for the Cult of Birtherism.

    My greatest skepticism towards your hypothesis is in assuming these are “new converts” and not just long standing Birthers.

    From observation of their movement since the beginning, I haven’t seen any signs of growth since the LFBC was released. In fact, I saw a major shrinking, with no recovery since then.

    While some of their posters may appear “new” to this particular site (or at least under “new” socks), it is overly presumptuous to assume that they are “new” Birthers overall. They could simply have been lurking for quite sometime.

    But I do think you are onto something in terms of there being some sort of limited coordination and instruction to “Birth” at certain places. The timing of appearances of new Trolls is usually too correlative to be mere coincidence. Even more telling is that the particular Trolling memes & tactics seem to follow a pattern that indicates intent and coordination as well…

    Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter: I think that you are wrong about this. My guess is that as the Birther’s make new converts, they send them out on missionary work to convert other people. Either that, or it is some sort of Birfer Initiation Rite where young Birthers have to go out and get kicked around some to show they can lose, get logically out-argued, get embarrassed, and make fools out of themselves without giving up the faith.In my human opinion.Squeeky FrommGirl Reporter

  308. avatar
    Obsolete March 5, 2012 at 6:27 pm #

    Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter: My guess is that as the Birther’s make new converts, they send them out on missionary work to convert other people

    Kind of like a gang initiation, or the movie “Fight Club” and the birthers have to pick a fight and get their asses kicked.

  309. avatar
    y_p_w March 5, 2012 at 8:32 pm #

    RTM999: Submitting a COLB to obtain a passport is a drawn out process which involves authenticating the document with the issuer… Prima facie means at first glance…
    That doesn’t mean that the document is w/o a doubt proof if contrary evidence surfaces that disputes what appears on the COLB.

    Again – prima facie has a legal meaning of “self-evident” – i.e. a prima facie document is self-authenticating.

    The State Dept doesn’t typically make new passport applications a terribly drawn out process. The adjudicator takes a look at the documents and generally judges them to be valid or not. Their training is primarily about detecting counterfeit documents. They have just way too much workload to send a document back to the issuer to verify that the document is genuine. If they did, then issuers would be swamped with requests all the time.

    As it stands, there are new electronic databases used to adjudicate passport renewals. However, I don’t know of any electronic systems that are used to tie new passport applications to birth certificate information.

  310. avatar
    dan cooper March 6, 2012 at 2:18 pm #

    In responce to second to last paragraph
    (Sheriff Joe should make available all of the CCP files, all the affidavits supported to it, all of the computer files used for comparison purpose, the mode, serial numbers and maintenance records of all computer equipment used in the test, the manufacturer and version numbers of all computer software used in the test, a list of all experts consulted, a copy of all email messages exchanged, a full financial accounting of all funds received and spent, and sworn affidavits from all CCP members under penalty of perjury as to the authenticity and completeness of the documents provided.)
    YES ALL THIS INFO SHOULD BE MADE PUBLIC ASAP.
    YES ALL INFORMATION REQUESTED BY SHERIFF JOE SHOULD BE MADE PUBLIC ASAP.

  311. avatar
    nbc March 6, 2012 at 2:38 pm #

    Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter:

    I think that you are wrong about this. My guess is that as the Birther’s make new converts, they send them out on missionary work to convert other people

    But why send them out so poorly prepared? Are they just to serve as collateral damage?

  312. avatar
    Keith March 6, 2012 at 6:31 pm #

    Scientist: In fact, if a court said the sun rises in the West, the court would be wrong and i would be right.

    Depends on what the definition of ‘West’ is.

    Since Natural Law as understood by the framers defined ‘West’ as ‘not Chinese’, we know that they would have considered it unpatriotic to believe that the sun is rising on the Chinese.

    Also, they were highly scientifically educated and understood that it is sometimes dark and sometimes light in places considered farther west than the Appalachians.

    There for it is obvious that the framers would have considered that the sun rises in the west.

  313. avatar
    Mary Adams March 6, 2012 at 6:38 pm #

    Hawaiiborn: When the HDOH changed their form in 2008, the Hawaiian Homelands page didn’t update to reflect that change. These things happen in govt. When policy in one department changes, but the other departments weren’t notified of the change.

    Hawaiian Homelands didn’t change their website to reflect the changes at HDOH because they had a lot of matching brochures and didn’t want the expense of printing new ones for such a minor detail.

    They changed their minds after the holocaust shooting as the shooter was a birther who had referenced the birther BS that “Hawaii won’t even accept a short form”.

  314. avatar
    RTM999 March 7, 2012 at 10:25 am #

    Scientist: It debunks nothing.Your argument that Fukino had no right to write the letter that she wrote (which is incorrect) doesn’t change the fact that she DID write it.It’s like saying that all the Wikileaks documents are untrue because they were illegally leaked.

    It debunks the whole of the Obama apologist rference to what she made in her statements….

    Fukino states that she is treating Obama’s records the same any other record under HDOH’s care in her first statement….

    ANY statement that follows must be viewed with that disclaimer in mind…

    I didn’t claim that what she did in conjunction with how she was treating Obama’s record become records was “illegal”….

    It’s just that the Obama apologist meme that she “verified” Obama’s image has a very big hole in the way what she says in the first statement actually jives with what I’ve said about “any” and “all” encompassing how the HDOH must treat any and all including Obama’s records according to the law and that statement of not treating Obama’s records any differently taints the view of the Obama apologists in that the way the subsequent statements must be viewed in the same light of how any and all including Obama’s records must be handled according to the law…. No authentication, disclosure or verification to anyone that lacks direct and tangible interest in the records in the VAULTS. BTW – The Obama apologists like to tout how the certification could be used to obtain a pssport but obviously the image’s ink bleed through makes it logically impossible for the image that is shown to be THE “document” by which Obama obtained his passport since the ink bleed through denotes a June 6th, 2007… The very earliest unsubstantiated date by the stopped by the wall because it isn’t evidence date Obama is by non-physical undocumented “documentation” claim to a Hawaiian birth is June 6th, 2007.

    Obama if he were attempting to obtain a license here by surrendering his “illinois driver’s license” could not now even obtain a driver’s license in my state with an image on a website… That requires a physical birth certificate being presented to the driver’s license bureau at the time of application for transfer.

    Now applicant’s just can’t present a driver’s license from another state and get a license from my state w/o a valid physical LFBC.

    Not sorry to make the Obama apologists have to call what she would have to do to verify Obama’s records “illegal” .

  315. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 7, 2012 at 10:47 am #

    That’s an interesting claim you make.

    Now if you happened to live in the state of WYOMING (let the discerning reader ponder my choice of states), the regulation I found on the Internet said:

    Applying for a Wyoming driver’s license or identification card: You must appear in person at your local driver exam station to apply for a first-time Wyoming license or identification card. You will be asked to surrender your out-of-state issued driver license and/or identification card when you apply for the Wyoming license, present a state-certified copy of your birth certificate (a valid US passport may be used in lieu of a birth certificate), present proof of your social security number, as well as present (2) forms of approved documents as proof of Wyoming residency.

    This is a new provision to comply with the the Real ID Act.

    Now if you lived in WYOMING, and let’s assume for the sake of argument that you do, why would you lie about the requirements for a birth certificate, when a Valid US Passport would suffice? And, pray tell, where is there anything about a “long form?” Or perhaps you didn’t lie but just didn’t know what you were talking about, being a sloppy researcher. I’m of course speaking hypothetically since I don’t disclose information about the IP ADDRESSES of our commenters.

    When I got my license in 1966 in Alabama I didn’t present a birth certificate. And I certainly didn’t submit a birth certificate when I surrendered my Alabama license when obtaining a South Carolina license in 1972.

    In fact, I didn’t even have a birth certificate until I applied for a US Passport in 1995, when I was 45 years old and had to order one.

    Things are a lot tighter now than they used to be since the Real ID act.

    RTM999: Obama if he were attempting to obtain a license here by surrendering his “illinois driver’s license” could not now even obtain a driver’s license in my state with an image on a website… That requires a physical birth certificate being presented to the driver’s license bureau at the time of application for transfer.

    Now applicant’s just can’t present a driver’s license from another state and get a license from my state w/o a valid physical LFBC.

  316. avatar
    Scientist March 7, 2012 at 11:03 am #

    RTM999: It’s just that the Obama apologist meme that she “verified” Obama’s image has a very big hole in the way what she says in the first statement actually jives with what I’ve said about “any” and “all” encompassing how the HDOH must treat any and all including Obama’s records according to the law and that statement of not treating

    Fukino’s statement is irrelevant now, as she was retired when the LFBC was issued. The simple fact is that the Hawaii DOH site links to the White House pdf and describes in detail how the paper document was made. It also notes that in issuing the LFBC, they did in fact make an exception for the President’s record.

    So you are just arguing old news….And not arguing it very well I might add….in fact, you are being ridiculous….

  317. avatar
    RTM999 March 7, 2012 at 11:16 am #

    [This comment by RTM has been deleted as will any future comments from him until he explains why he lied about the requirements for a drivers license in his state or he admits that he was speaking without knowledge and apologizes. Doc]

  318. avatar
    RTM999 March 7, 2012 at 2:09 pm #

    [RTM has posted a fair number of long comments, which I have deleted as soon as it was apparent that he had not explained the false statements he made about Wyoming Driver’s licenses. Until he admits to lying or sloppy research, nothing will be published. Doc]

  319. avatar
    Arthur March 7, 2012 at 2:50 pm #

    RTM999: [This comment by RTM has been deleted as will any future comments from him until he explains why he lied about the requirements for a drivers license in his state or he admits that he was speaking without knowledge and apologizes. Doc]

    RTM done got served !

  320. avatar
    y_p_w March 7, 2012 at 3:22 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy: Now if you lived in WYOMING, and let’s assume for the sake of argument that you do, why would you lie about the requirements for a birth certificate, when a Valid US Passport would suffice? And, pray tell, where is there anything about a “long form?” Or perhaps you didn’t lie but just didn’t know what you were talking about, being a sloppy researcher. I’m of course speaking hypothetically since I don’t disclose information about the IP ADDRESSES of our commenters.

    Well – the also have to account for people who weren’t born in the US. The passport of course suffices for naturalized citizens. They also list a Certificate of Birth Abroad, although I’m guessing the other documents of the same type (with different titles) will suffice. They mention the Certificate of Naturalization/Citizenship as a State Dept document, although those are USCIS (formerly INS) documents. They also list green cards and other proof of eligibility to live in the US as a legal alien.

    By the way, the Wyoming Dept of Health has a flyer mentioning that hospital birth certificates will likely not be accepted as identity documents.

    http://www.health.wyo.gov/Media.aspx?mediaId=11330

    They have an image of a sample Wyoming certified birth certificate from the Dept of Health. It’s on vital records stock, but is obviously a computer printout abstract.

  321. avatar
    B. Davis March 9, 2012 at 10:43 am #

    I, like most, thought this whole issue was put to rest last year? I have some uncertainty now; it seems some compelling evidence was presented and some serious questions raised. If the Sheriff presented fabricated evidence then I would think that would open him up to a host of charges… Fraud, slander, inciting civil unrest etc etc.. It seems the only response thus far has been to mock, slander and question his integrity. I have yet to hear the evidence soundly refuted though?. It’s a strange reaction at best if there is truly nothing amiss? If I were the President, I would unleash my legal team on this Sheriff and drag him into civil and criminal court. This would send a strong message to the nation that this is nonsense and I am confident I can defend my position and that I have been wronged by these allegations. If this doesn’t happen, I will really start taking notice as it would indicate to me that the administration may feel they could not adequately defend their position in an actual courtroom?

  322. avatar
    CarlOrcas March 9, 2012 at 10:57 am #

    B. Davis: I have some uncertainty now; it seems some compelling evidence was presented and some serious questions raised

    What “compelling evidence” do you see in the report?

    B. Davis: I have yet to hear the evidence soundly refuted though?. It’s a strange reaction at best if there is truly nothing amiss?

    Virtually every issue raised has been dealt with in numerous ways. I suggest you check the Debunkers Guide on this website.

    B. Davis: If this doesn’t happen, I will really start taking notice as it would indicate to me that the administration may feel they could not adequately defend their position in an actual courtroom?

    This matter has been before courts across the country around 100 times and, as of this moment, the President’s opponents have not prevailed once……not once.

  323. avatar
    James M March 9, 2012 at 10:59 am #

    B. Davis: ; it seems some compelling evidence was presented

    “Evidence” of what? Before you bring out evidence, it would be helpful to establish a premise. Are you suggesting that a crime has been committed? What crime, and by whom?

    I can’t seen any “allegations” being made except by inference. The inference I think I am supposed to be making is along these lines: President Obama failed to register for Selective Service when it was required in 1980. He never faced any consequences from this failure until 2008 when his Presidential bid began in earnest, so he used his power as a Senator and Chicago mob boss to place both a forged paper and electronic record of a Selective Service card into the federal records.

    I think I’m on very solid ground to call that assertion preposterous on its face.

    B. Davis: If I were the President, I would unleash my legal team on this Sheriff and drag him into civil and criminal court.

    It appears that the Sheriff of Maricopa County has not actually committed a crime, violated a lawful order, or caused a civil damage, so on what specific grounds would your initial motion to the court be based?

    I’ll go this far with you: I would like (and have asked) the Arizona Legislature to investigate this Posse to determine if any individual was improperly deputized or given de-facto deputy authority beyond what the MCSO internal rules and state law allow, and also whether any public money was used in the investigation. But I will stop well short of suggesting that Sheriff Arpaio has committed a crime.

  324. avatar
    Scientist March 9, 2012 at 11:01 am #

    B. Davis: If the Sheriff presented fabricated evidence then I would think that would open him up to a host of charges… Fraud, slander, inciting civil unrest etc etc..

    He told lies at a press conference-not a crime. If he were to swear to the facts to get an indictment, that might be different, which is one reason there will be no indictment. Slander is a civil matter. Political figures have basically zero chance of ever winning a slander case. Have you ever heard of a politician suing someone for making outrageous accusations against them? No, because the courts consider that political speech, protected under the 1st amendment

    B. Davis: If I were the President, I would unleash my legal team on this Sheriff and drag him into civil and criminal court.

    Surely you are aware that Arpaio has been under federal investigation for a long time? A grand jury is considering an indictment as we speak.

    Besides, your standard is odd. A President is guilty unless he uses the FBI and Justice Dept to go after his enemies? That is a novel argument, I must say.

  325. avatar
    Arthur March 9, 2012 at 11:25 am #

    B. Davis: I have some uncertainty now; it seems some compelling evidence was presented and some serious questions raised.

    It’s o.k. if you want to think that B. Davis, just don’t expect rational people to think like you do.

  326. avatar
    Greenfinches March 9, 2012 at 11:35 am #

    B. Davis: I have been wronged by these allegations.

    I would see such action as suggesting that Obama was worried.

    He was/is right, the country has important things to worry about and these carnival barkers should be ignored.

  327. avatar
    misha March 9, 2012 at 4:17 pm #

    B. Davis: If this doesn’t happen, I will really start taking notice as it would indicate to me that the administration may feel they could not adequately defend their position in an actual courtroom?

    I feel your pain. I’m curious about one thing: Why aren’t you and Obama equally concerned about towns, right here in the States, that elect a dog as mayor?

    Federal judge Richard Cebull found the time in his busy schedule to address that very issue. If he can find time, why can’t Obama, or even you?