Main Menu

Not worthy of belief

We’ve not seen many amicus briefs on the defense side in birther lawsuits, but the Alabama Democratic Party chose to submit one to the Alabama Supreme Court in the case of McInnish v. Chapman, now on appeal before that court. McInnish is being represented by noted birther attorney Larry Klayman. The ADP justifies its intervention because it asserts that it has the right to determine that qualifications of its nominees for office and that:

…the Alabama Democratic Party has an interest in ensuring that future Alabama Secretaries of State are not allowed to disqualify a party’s nominees based internet rumors and unfounded assertions regarding their qualifications.

The case is interesting because not only is WorldNetDaily writer and Terry Lakin sympathizer Judge Roy Moore now heading the court, but previously Alabama Supreme Court Justice Parker wrote, in an unpublished concurring opinion in a previous McInnish case:

McInnish has attached certain documentation to his mandamus petition, which, if presented to the appropriate forum as part of a proper evidentiary presentation, would raise serious questions about the authenticity of both the “short form” and the “long form” birth certificates of President Barack Hussein Obama that have been made public.]

It is perhaps these circumstances that led the Democrats to make sure that no stone was left unturned in defending against this appeal, already rejected by the Montgomery Circuit Court.

In addition to the usual arguments as to the inappropriateness of such a suit (with numerous citations and authorities) as that of McInnish, the ADP attacked the merits of the suit’s claims, calling the evidence proffered by McInnish “inadmissible and not worthy of belief” and adding:

A county sheriff from Arizona is not an “official source” of anything in Alabama.

Read the brief:

SCOAL 2013-04-24 McInnish|Goode v Chapman APPEAL – ADP Amicus Brief by Jack Ryan

, , , , ,

245 Responses to Not worthy of belief

  1. avatar
    Thinker April 25, 2013 at 11:27 am #

    Look at p. 33 of that document. The background of the LFBC has a diamond pattern. I wonder where that came from.

  2. avatar
    ScottRS April 25, 2013 at 11:37 am #

    That brief is going to leave a mark.

  3. avatar
    Greenfinches April 25, 2013 at 11:52 am #

    Go, Ragdale!!!!

  4. avatar
    john April 25, 2013 at 11:56 am #

    Does Klayman get to respond? He seems to have lot to work with in responding to so many lies supported in this brief.

  5. avatar
    gorefan April 25, 2013 at 12:00 pm #

    Thinker:
    Look at p. 33 of that document. The background of the LFBC has a diamond pattern. I wonder where that came from.

    OMG, a forged birth certificate!!!

    But what is going to really get birther “blood boiling in veins” is on page 17 of the SCRIBD document (page 13 of the brief),

    “Fourth, on at least two additional occasions since 2011, the State of Hawaii formally verified that the certified copy of the President’s birth certificate posted on the White House website is a true and correct copy of the original, paper birth certificate maintained by the State of Hawaii.”

    I can heard the screams of protest already – “Matches, they only said it matches”.

  6. avatar
    bamalaw April 25, 2013 at 12:01 pm #

    It is worth noting that Ragsdale’s co-counsel on the brief is recently retired Alabama Supreme Court Justice Tom Woodall. Woodall was elected twice to the Supreme Court as a Republican.

  7. avatar
    john April 25, 2013 at 12:02 pm #

    It’s interesting that they submit the Arizona SOS verification from Hawaii. In the Verification SOS Bennett doesn’t ask or it isn’t verified the BIRTH DATE of Obama. For the life of me, there can be no rational and plausible explanation on why SOS Bennett would “forget” to ask for the Date of birth or for Hawaii to “forget” or “refuse” the verify Obama’s Date of Birth. According to Butterzazillion, however, Hawaii could not verify Obama’s DATE OF BIRTH because Obama’s birth certificate has been classified and “legally nonvalid”.

  8. avatar
    Thinker April 25, 2013 at 12:09 pm #

    One thing very refreshing about this brief is that, as it dips into the fetid birfer waters, it does not debunk. It does not go into the silly minutiae of parsing words and looking for clipping masks. It just says that this whole conspiracy theory is ludicrous on it’s face and there is no merit to anything these loons are saying.

  9. avatar
    john April 25, 2013 at 12:11 pm #

    The Democratic Party cannot produce a copy of Obama’s birth certificate, except a copy from the White House PDF, which has been proven a forgery by a competant sheriff investigation. They also show Dr. Fukino’s 2nd statement which refers to Vital Records (PLURAL). But Obama only released a SINGLE vital record. Where and what are the other vital records. The birth announcements where investigated by the Cold Case Posse which concluded that the birth announcements were not credible or proof of anything regarding someone’s or Obama’s birth in Hawaii. Although the other side takes a lot of shots at Sheriff Apraio, they provide little or nothing to discredit Sheriff Apraio’s validity of his department other then just a bunch political bias nonsense.

  10. avatar
    john April 25, 2013 at 1:03 pm #

    Klayman should try to get an updated affidavitt from Zullo and Arpaio now that their investigation is basically completed as far the Birth Certificate is concerned. Further, Klayman can attempt to draw the inconsistent statements from Hawaii officials:

    1. Dr. Fukino told the media that the birth certificate was half written and half typed but what Obama produced doesn’t show that Characterist.

    2. Governor Abercrombie told the media he was going resolve the issue and conducted an investigation to that effect. However, Abercrombie’s investigation only revealed a state notation or archive (That should be made public if it is a state archive.) supporting Obama’s birth in Hawaii. Further, Abercrombie reportedly told His friend Mike Evans, there was no birth certificate on file. It should also be pointed out that Dr. Fukino, Alvin Onaka and Lorretta Fuddy were under Abercrombie when conducted his investigation.

  11. avatar
    Rickey April 25, 2013 at 1:18 pm #

    My only quibble is that the brief suggests that the birth announcements, LFBC, etc. are about 40 years old. It should say 50 years old. Some birther is going to jump on this and announce that the Democratic Party has admitted that Obama’s birth certificate was created when he was 10 or 11 years old.

  12. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy April 25, 2013 at 1:24 pm #

    OK, I’ll bite. How can they verify the location of birth if it’s “legally nonvalid” but not the date?

    🙄

    john: Hawaii could not verify Obama’s DATE OF BIRTH because Obama’s birth certificate has been classified and “legally nonvalid”.

  13. avatar
    Dr Kenneth Noisewater April 25, 2013 at 1:24 pm #

    john: Klayman should try to get an updated affidavitt from Zullo and Arpaio now that their investigation is basically completed as far the Birth Certificate is concerned. Further, Klayman can attempt to draw the inconsistent statements from Hawaii officials:

    What good is an affidavitt from a used car salesman going to do? Considering must of his original was plagiarized from Jerome Corsi. Arpaio has pretty much abandoned this since the election and Corsi has jumped ship as well.

    john: 1. Dr. Fukino told the media that the birth certificate was half written and half typed but what Obama produced doesn’t show that Characterist.

    The original file would contain handwritten information from the original doctor. No one outside of the DOH sees this information. Dr Fukino also said that Obama posted a scan of his birth certificate on his campaign website. She has been consistent

    john: 2. Governor Abercrombie told the media he was going resolve the issue and conducted an investigation to that effect. However, Abercrombie’s investigation only revealed a state notation or archive (That should be made public if it is a state archive.) supporting Obama’s birth in Hawaii. Further, Abercrombie reportedly told His friend Mike Evans, there was no birth certificate on file. It should also be pointed out that Dr. Fukino, Alvin Onaka and Lorretta Fuddy were under Abercrombie when conducted his investigation

    Mike Evans isn’t a friend of Abercrombie. Evans also didn’t believe in his claim enough to even put it on his own website at the time. Evans also admitted he never spoke to Abercrombie but his office and lied about the whole thing.

  14. avatar
    Dr Kenneth Noisewater April 25, 2013 at 1:26 pm #

    john: The Democratic Party cannot produce a copy of Obama’s birth certificate, except a copy from the White House PDF, which has been proven a forgery by a competant sheriff investigation. They also show Dr. Fukino’s 2nd statement which refers to Vital Records (PLURAL). But Obama only released a SINGLE vital record. Where and what are the other vital records. The birth announcements where investigated by the Cold Case Posse which concluded that the birth announcements were not credible or proof of anything regarding someone’s or Obama’s birth in Hawaii. Although the other side takes a lot of shots at Sheriff Apraio, they provide little or nothing to discredit Sheriff Apraio’s validity of his department other then just a bunch political bias nonsense.

    There was no “competent sheriff investigation” they never investigated. They took the word of only birthers and did no investigation. There is more in a person’s vital records than just a birth certificate most of the information you never see. Arpaio hasn’t presented any evidence to support his claims

  15. avatar
    gorefan April 25, 2013 at 1:29 pm #

    john: Dr. Fukino, Alvin Onaka and Lorretta Fuddy were under Abercrombie when conducted his investigation.

    Dr. Fukino was under Governor Lingle, she left the DOH in December, 2010 after the election of Governor Abercrombie, Dr. Onaka has been the registrar in Hawaii since the 1990s so he has been under several governors.

  16. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy April 25, 2013 at 1:30 pm #

    I might, by the way, have alternately titled this article: “The Fogbow: friends of the court” since the exhibits attached to the ADP brief had the “Friends of the Fogbow” watermark.

    ROFL.

  17. avatar
    Butterfly Bilderberg April 25, 2013 at 1:33 pm #

    John, please go back and read the rationale why NO affidavit by Zullo or Arpaio can ever be admissible. An “updated” affidavit is no more admissible than the affidavits that McInnish and Goode rely upon. Their affidavit is hearsay. All that the Clown Case Posse would be providing is Hearsay 2.0.

  18. avatar
    Serpico April 25, 2013 at 1:33 pm #

    Dr Kenneth Noisewater: There was no “competent sheriff investigation” they never investigated.They took the word of only birthers and did no investigation.There is more in a person’s vital records than just a birth certificate most of the information you never see.Arpaio hasn’t presented any evidence to support his claims

    Your post is wrong. It was a legitimate investigation backed by the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office, an authoritative law enforcement entity.

  19. avatar
    sfjeff April 25, 2013 at 1:35 pm #

    john: Further, Abercrombie reportedly told His friend Mike Evans, there was no birth certificate on file. It should also be pointed out that Dr. Fukino, Alvin Onaka and Lorretta Fuddy were under Abercrombie when conducted his investigation.

    John, your babbling is not usually worth responding to but these specific points inspire me to respond:
    a) Mike Evans made that statement once on a radio show- one of dozens of radio shows he did that day- and later Mike Evans apologized and said he had said that in error. While Birthers of course claim he was forced to change his story- you don’t even acknowledge that Evans said Abercrombie never said any such thing.
    b) And of course it is a flat out lie that Fukino ever reported to Abercrombie.

    How many Birthers does it take to tell a lie?

    Trick question- all Birthers lie.

  20. avatar
    john April 25, 2013 at 1:35 pm #

    That’s a good point Doc. The evidence could very well be thrown out because they are attempting to proffer nonofficial evidence gathered from a blog from the internet.

  21. avatar
    Serpico April 25, 2013 at 1:35 pm #

    Rickey:
    My only quibble is that the brief suggeststhat the birth announcements, LFBC, etc. are about 40 years old. It should say 50 years old. Some birther is going to jump on this and announce that the Democratic Party has admitted that Obama’s birth certificate was created when he was 10 or 11 years old.

    You must remember that the birth announcements don’t mean anything. They just show that a baby was born but not where.

  22. avatar
    gorefan April 25, 2013 at 1:37 pm #

    john: In the Verification SOS Bennett doesn’t ask or it isn’t verified the BIRTH DATE of Obama.

    This is not true. The application that SoS Bennett sent to the DOH includes the date of birth. The fact that a verification was issued is verification of the facts on the application since those facts are the ones used to locate the birth certificate in the DOH files. The Hawaii statute on verifications reads,

    “338-14.3 Verification in lieu of a certified copy. (a) …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.”

    SoS Bennett sent in an application that generated the “verification of the existence of a certificate” and Dr. Onaka also verified the “other information that the applicant provides to be verified “.

    The “other information” is the list of items SoS Bennett also sent to the DOH.

  23. avatar
    Serpico April 25, 2013 at 1:38 pm #

    sfjeff: John, your babbling is not usually worth responding to but these specific points inspire me to respond:
    a) Mike Evans made that statement once on a radio show- one of dozens of radio shows he did that day- and later Mike Evans apologized and said he had said that in error. While Birthers of course claim he was forced to change his story- you don’t even acknowledge that Evans said Abercrombie never said any such thing.
    b) And of course it is a flat out lie that Fukino ever reported to Abercrombie.

    How many Birthers does it take to tell a lie?

    Trick question- all Birthers lie.

    How could Gov. Linda Lingle know that Obama was born at Kapiolani when that information is protected by state privacy laws?

  24. avatar
    john April 25, 2013 at 1:39 pm #

    “Your post is wrong. It was a legitimate investigation backed by the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office, an authoritative law enforcement entity.”

    That is true. They are attempting to get the court to “ignore” or “reject” a valid investigation from official criminal investigation. Maricopa County is the largest county in AZ and Sheriff Joe Arpaio is a “legal” and a “real” Sheriff who did have the power to do what he did and the Cold Case Posse is a valid entity.

  25. avatar
    sfjeff April 25, 2013 at 1:40 pm #

    Serpico: There was no “competent sheriff investigation” they never investigated.

    Serpico- note- no ‘competant’ sheriff investigation- and no investigation.

    Exactly what type of investigation has the ‘lead investigator’ sign a book deal in advance of the investigation with an author who had written books with the same Birther conclusion?

    Finally Serpico- if this was a legitimate investigation- what DA or Grand Jury have they turned their finding over to?

  26. avatar
    nbc April 25, 2013 at 1:43 pm #

    john:
    Does Klayman get to respond?He seems to have lot to work with in responding to so many lies supported in this brief.

    As with Klayman, there are no lies identified by John, just suppositions and beliefs…

  27. avatar
    john April 25, 2013 at 1:44 pm #

    “This is not true. The application that SoS Bennett sent to the DOH includes the date of birth.”

    If that is true then it is even more compelling. Did Hawaii “FORGET” to verify the DATE OF BIRTH? (The MOST IMPORTANT element to be verified on the birth certificate.) I DON”T THINK SO! I believe the DATE OF BIRTH could not be verified because Obama’s birth certificate is “legally nonvalid”. This is most likely because is had been amended or changed in some way.

  28. avatar
    nbc April 25, 2013 at 1:45 pm #

    Serpico: Your post is wrong. It was a legitimate investigation backed by the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office, an authoritative law enforcement entity.

    Nope, it never was… And Arpaio so far has refused to hand the case over to his own law enforcement agency.

  29. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy April 25, 2013 at 1:45 pm #

    Actually, they have to be births in Hawaii, because the announcements come from the Department of Health, and they only registered births in Hawaii.

    Serpico: You must remember that the birth announcements don’t mean anything. They just show that a baby was born but not where.

  30. avatar
    nbc April 25, 2013 at 1:46 pm #

    Serpico: How could Gov. Linda Lingle know that Obama was born at Kapiolani when that information is protected by state privacy laws?

    Because it was attested to in the document. She may have violated state laws by disclosing it but who really cares.

  31. avatar
    sfjeff April 25, 2013 at 1:46 pm #

    Serpico: How could Gov. Linda Lingle know that Obama was born at Kapiolani when that information is protected by state privacy laws?

    Well off the top of my head I can think of two ways:
    a) Obama was a well known son of Hawaii- frankly I wouldn’t be surprised if this was common knowledge in Honolulul or
    b) Gov Lingle asked her Director of Health- Dr. Fukino- to confirm that Barack Obama’s BC was on file, and Dr. Fukino told her privately that yes he was, and that he was born there.
    c) Wasn’t there some function at the hospital that honored Barack Obama as being born there?

    Funny the things Birthers focus in on.

    Meanwhile- why do you think John lied about Fukino reporting to Abercrombie?

    Why do you think that Lingle- a Republican head of the McCain campaign- would be part of a massive cover up to get Barack Obama elected?

    Why do you think that Alvin Onaka- a career civil servant would risk his entire career to support this conspiracy?

    Finally- why do Birthers lie so much?

  32. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy April 25, 2013 at 1:48 pm #

    Good question. Generally if someone claims to know something, but there’s no reasonable way they could have know it (think Tim Adams), I tend to discount what they say.

    I personally think that Lingle got that from the Kapi’olani 100th anniversary celebration that she attended, where then Congressman Abercrombie read a letter from Barack Obama that says he was born there, to the cheers of the crowd.

    Serpico: How could Gov. Linda Lingle know that Obama was born at Kapiolani when that information is protected by state privacy laws?

  33. avatar
    nbc April 25, 2013 at 1:48 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy: Actually, they have to be births in Hawaii, because the announcements come from the Department of Health, and they only registered births in Hawaii.

    The announcement shows that a birth certificate was filed close to that date. We now know the content of said document. As to registration of foreign birth, there is no evidence of this as the location of birth mentions HI, and the law that allows for such registration was passed in 1981 IIRC

  34. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy April 25, 2013 at 1:50 pm #

    What would be their alternative?

    sfjeff: Finally- why do Birthers lie so much?

  35. avatar
    john April 25, 2013 at 1:51 pm #

    “How could Gov. Linda Lingle know that Obama was born at Kapiolani when that information is protected by state privacy laws?”

    Lingle mispoke in an interview about this. There no real proof Obama was Kapiolani. Obama apparently sent a letter to the hospital profressing his birth there and the letter was used for fundraising purposes. However, the letter has disappeared and no can see it anymore. Further, according to Mark Gillar, someone apparently threatened legal action against the hospital for using the letter claiming that it was fraud because the hospital had no proof Obama was born there. The letter disappeared and apparently is under lock and key from any scrunity. Interestingly enough, the Hawaii DOH does not use the letter to proof Obama’s birth in Hawaii.

  36. avatar
    nbc April 25, 2013 at 1:56 pm #

    Good reasoning Doc…

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    Good question. Generally if someone claims to know something, but there’s no reasonable way they could have know it (think Tim Adams), I tend to discount what they say.

    I personally think that Lingle got that from the Kapi’olani 100th anniversary celebration that she attended, where then Congressman Abercrombie read a letter from Barack Obama that says he was born there, to the cheers of the crowd.

  37. avatar
    nbc April 25, 2013 at 1:57 pm #

    john: I believe the DATE OF BIRTH could not be verified because Obama’s birth certificate is “legally nonvalid”.

    Your beliefs of course have no relevance as the document has no evidence of being legally nonvalid.

    Sigh, the despair is deafening….

  38. avatar
    gorefan April 25, 2013 at 1:58 pm #

    john: If that is true then it is even more compelling. Did Hawaii “FORGET” to verify the DATE OF BIRTH? (The MOST IMPORTANT element to be verified on the birth certificate.) I DON”T THINK SO! I believe the DATE OF BIRTH could not be verified because Obama’s birth certificate is “legally nonvalid”. This is most likely because is had been amended or changed in some way.

    No, you still don’t get it. The date of birth was verified by the issuance of the “Verification of Birth”. The items on the application are what generate the verification in the first place.

    But beyond that, there is also the verification by Dr. Onaka that the information on the “Certificate of Live Birth” sent by SoS Bennett to the DOH matches the information on the original certificate on file in the DOH. That can only mean that in Box 5a Birth Date on the original certificate on file in the DOH is the date “August 4, 1961”. There is no other way that it can match.

  39. avatar
    sfjeff April 25, 2013 at 2:02 pm #

    I want to point out one very suspicious thing:

    Alvin Onaka never specifically said that Obama was not born on Mars.

    Is it because Onaka was pressured by Martians to not say that? Or was it the illegal alien advocates which got to Onaka?

  40. avatar
    realist April 25, 2013 at 2:08 pm #

    Serpico: Your post is wrong. It was a legitimate investigation backed by the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office, an authoritative law enforcement entity.

    It may have been backed by MCSO, but it’s evident by Zullo’s “affidavit” that it was all cribbed from Corsi. There’s been no legitimate investigation. There’s been Corsi’s BS and pressers and “affidavits” from unqualified “experts”. Even Zullo’s “affidavit” is useless as an affidavit is swearing to personal knowledge, and with the exception of his name and a few personal paragraphs, Zullo has no personal knowledge of any of his crap.

    If it’s a legitimate investigation, and there’s 100% proof of a “forged” document, and a crime has been committed, then why does the Maricopa county attorney refuse to act, stating everything in the “investigation” is mere conjecture and speculation, nothing he can take to a grand jury nor expect a conviction based upon it.

    Why are they only holding pressers and pooping around CPAC with so-called VIPs rather than presenting their “evidence” to a prosecutor?

    They state 2 questions remain… who and why Obama presented it as his own.

    Well, if they don’t have a who there is no crime.

    The answer to the second one is self-evident… because it is.

    And they’ve still not stated one criminal code or statute that’s been violated. And none, not one bit, of the crap they’ve presented proves or even hints at criminal fraud or forgery.

    It’s nothing but a sham and a scam and an attempt to perpetuate a smear campaign. The only frauds involved is their BS and nonsense.

  41. avatar
    realist April 25, 2013 at 2:15 pm #

    john:
    “Your post is wrong. It was a legitimate investigation backed by the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office, an authoritative law enforcement entity.”

    That is true.They are attempting to get the court to “ignore” or “reject” a valid investigation from official criminal investigation.Maricopa County is the largest county in AZ and Sheriff Joe Arpaio is a “legal” and a “real” Sheriffwho did have the power to do what he did and the Cold Case Posse is a valid entity.

    The AZ so-called investigation is worthless in AL and has absolutely nothing to do with the legal issues involved in this frivolous case and appeal.

  42. avatar
    donna April 25, 2013 at 2:16 pm #

    Newt Gingrich gesturing to his wife beside him, said, “We both were with a taxi driver one day who showed us the hospital (where Obama was born)”

  43. avatar
    realist April 25, 2013 at 2:18 pm #

    john:
    That’s a good point Doc.The evidence could very well be thrown out because they are attempting to proffer nonofficial evidence gathered from a blog from the internet.

    You think the “FRIENDS OF THEFOGBOW.COM” overlay was on the documents submitted to the Court? Really? LOL

  44. avatar
    Dr Kenneth Noisewater April 25, 2013 at 2:23 pm #

    Serpico: Your post is wrong. It was a legitimate investigation backed by the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office, an authoritative law enforcement entity.

    No it is correct it was not a legitimate investigation as Sheriff Joe from the beginning said it was off the books and unofficial and they wouldn’t use county resources. One of the first steps should have been contacting Hawaii they didn’t bother to try doing this until after 2 press conferences.

  45. avatar
    Dr Kenneth Noisewater April 25, 2013 at 2:28 pm #

    john: “This is not true. The application that SoS Bennett sent to the DOH includes the date of birth.”If that is true then it is even more compelling. Did Hawaii “FORGET” to verify the DATE OF BIRTH? (The MOST IMPORTANT element to be verified on the birth certificate.) I DON”T THINK SO! I believe the DATE OF BIRTH could not be verified because Obama’s birth certificate is “legally nonvalid”. This is most likely because is had been amended or changed in some way.

    Your answer is no they didn’t forget to verify it. What part of “Additionally, I verify that the information in the copy of the Certificate of Live Birth for Mr. Obama that you attached with your request matches the original record in our files.” do you not understand?

  46. avatar
    gorefan April 25, 2013 at 2:32 pm #

    john:
    That’s a good point Doc.The evidence could very well be thrown out because they are attempting to proffer nonofficial evidence gathered from a blog from the internet.

    So you finally admit the Cold Case Posse took all their information “from a blog from the internet”.

  47. avatar
    nbc April 25, 2013 at 2:52 pm #

    gorefan: So you finally admit the Cold Case Posse took all their information “from a blog from the internet”.

    ROTFL…

    That must hurt… As must the term ‘sidekick’ used to describe Zullo 🙂

  48. avatar
    W. Kevin Vicklund April 25, 2013 at 2:52 pm #

    Talking Points Memo has the text of what Bennett sent to HDoH:

    Hawaii Department of Health
    Office of Health Status Monitoring
    Vital Records Issuance Section
    P.O. Box 3378
    Honolulu, HI 96801

    Ladies and gentlemen:

    Enclosed please find a request for a verification in lieu of a certified copy for the birth record of Barack Hussein Obama II. In addition to the items to be verified in the attached form, please verify the following items from the record of birth:

    Department of Health File #151 61 10641
    Time of birth: 7:24 p.m.
    Name of hospital: Kapiolani Maternity and Gynecological Hospital
    Age of father: 25
    Birthplace of Father: Kenya, East Africa
    Age of mother: 18
    Birthplace of mother: Wichita, Kansas
    Date of signature of parent: 8-7-1961
    Date of signature of attendant: 8-8-1961
    Date accepted by local registrar: August-8 1961

    Additionally, please verify that the attached copy of the Certificate of Live Birth for Mr. Obama is a true and accurate representation of the original record in your files.

    Thank you for your assistance in this matter.

    Sincerely,

    Ken Bennett
    Arizona Secretary of State

    So, it was Bennett who forgot to specifically ask about the date of birth (though the date on the certificate was verified). In fact, HDoH replied in the same fashion as the questions were asked.

  49. avatar
    The Magic M April 25, 2013 at 3:13 pm #

    john: Further, Klayman can attempt to draw the inconsistent statements from Hawaii officials

    “Inconsistent statements”, assuming arguendo that is correct, which it isn’t, aren’t enough to persuade a court.

    Besides, you still don’t get the point of the lawsuit. It seeks to (retroactively or for the future, doesn’t matter) compel the SOS to check certain records.
    Nothing the plaintiff can proffer, not even a notarized affidavit of Obama himself that his BC is a forgery, can make the court invent new law and new obligations where there are none.
    You seem to think this case is about proving Obama ineligible or getting a fishing expedition into his documents, but it’s only about whether the SOS had a duty to “verify” the candidates’ eligibility or not.
    Either he had the duty by law or he hadn’t, but no anecdotical “evidence” (loosely speaking) about an actual candidate’s alleged ineligibility will change the fact whether he had the duty by law or not.

    You still seem to think a court can go “hm, by law the SOS has no such duty, but since you proved to me Obama is ineligible, I will make up such a duty and grant your motions”. Courts don’t work that way.

    Poor john, even if all your assumptions and “evidence” were legit, you still wouldn’t win this case. But not because the Alabama SC, including Roy Moore, is “not honest”.

  50. avatar
    john April 25, 2013 at 3:30 pm #

    “So, it was Bennett who forgot to specifically ask about the date of birth (though the date on the certificate was verified). In fact, HDoH replied in the same fashion as the questions were asked.”

    So Bennett did “forget’ to ask for the DATE OF BIRTH. (Again, THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT ELEMENT TO BE VERIFIED ON THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE, but for some strange reason Bennett “forgot” to ask Hawaii to verify it.) Very Very strange.

    Further, Alvin Onaka is basically a suspect in this case, so his verifications are self-serving. Further, each verification by Onaka submitted contains strange initials beside his signature. Although birthers and obots can quibble about what those initials mean, the fact is they are there and Hawaii has never explained what they represent. In conclusion, such strange initials beside each signature nevertheless undermines Alvin Onaka’s credibility into to validity of the said document.

  51. avatar
    john April 25, 2013 at 3:34 pm #

    Is the birth certificate they enclose the White House PDF version? Didn’t Mario Apuzzo in his dismissed New Jersey case get the Obama representatives to acknowledge that the PDF birth certificate IN NO WAY represents any record of Obama’s birth in Hawaii?

  52. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy April 25, 2013 at 3:40 pm #

    And why is that the most important element? No one, even birthers, have ever proposed an alternate date for Obama’s birth, or claimed that he was less than 35 years old. The whole birther complaint is about the PLACE of birth, not the DATE.

    john: Again, THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT ELEMENT TO BE VERIFIED ON THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE

  53. avatar
    nbc April 25, 2013 at 3:40 pm #

    john: So Bennett did “forget’ to ask for the DATE OF BIRTH. (Again, THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT ELEMENT TO BE VERIFIED ON THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE, but for some strange reason Bennett “forgot” to ask Hawaii to verify it.) Very Very strange.

    Not really as the date of President Obama’s birth was never an issue. But even if he did forget, for reasons unknown, to ask explicitly for said data, the information on the document was still verified as accurate

  54. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy April 25, 2013 at 3:40 pm #

    No.

    john: Didn’t Mario Apuzzo in his dismissed New Jersey case get the Obama representatives to acknowledge that the PDF birth certificate IN NO WAY represents any record of Obama’s birth in Hawaii?

  55. avatar
    nbc April 25, 2013 at 3:41 pm #

    john: Further, Alvin Onaka is basically a suspect in this case, so his verifications are self-serving.

    There is no reason to consider Onaka to be a suspect in any case. Look, you cannot go around making such foolish accusations and the court would never accept your ‘beliefs’ as relevant.

  56. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy April 25, 2013 at 3:42 pm #

    However, Hawaii also verified the contents of the long form certificate, which included the date of birth. So actually the date of birth was asked to be verified and it was. It just wasn’t specifically called out.

    W. Kevin Vicklund: So, it was Bennett who forgot to specifically ask about the date of birth (though the date on the certificate was verified). In fact, HDoH replied in the same fashion as the questions were asked.

  57. avatar
    nbc April 25, 2013 at 3:45 pm #

    john:
    Is the birth certificate they enclose the White House PDF version? Didn’t Mario Apuzzo in his dismissed New Jersey case get the Obama representatives to acknowledge that the PDF birth certificate IN NO WAY represents any record of Obama’s birth in Hawaii?

    Sigh… missing the point again… And no, it cannot be the pdf version as it failed to properly copy the background…
    Some foolish people did conclude that Hill had claimed that the document was a forgery or other misinterpretations. She claimed that the document was irrelevant.

    Judge Masin responded:

    In this case, I don’t have a mug. There is no birth certificate that has been presented to me – good, bad, indifferent, real, forged, certified, anything. It’s not here. So a debate about what he put on the Internet, the birth certificate, whether that is a legitimate birth certificate is not relevant.

    Read the facts here

  58. avatar
    W. Kevin Vicklund April 25, 2013 at 3:46 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy: However, Hawaii also verified the contents of the long form certificate, which included the date of birth. So actually the date of birth was asked to be verified and it was. It just wasn’t specifically called out.

    Yep, that’s what I was saying in the parenthetical.

  59. avatar
    Dr Kenneth Noisewater April 25, 2013 at 3:48 pm #

    john: “So, it was Bennett who forgot to specifically ask about the date of birth (though the date on the certificate was verified). In fact, HDoH replied in the same fashion as the questions were asked.”So Bennett did “forget’ to ask for the DATE OF BIRTH. (Again, THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT ELEMENT TO BE VERIFIED ON THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE, but for some strange reason Bennett “forgot” to ask Hawaii to verify it.) Very Very strange.Further, Alvin Onaka is basically a suspect in this case, so his verifications are self-serving. Further, each verification by Onaka submitted contains strange initials beside his signature. Although birthers and obots can quibble about what those initials mean, the fact is they are there and Hawaii has never explained what they represent. In conclusion, such strange initials beside each signature nevertheless undermines Alvin Onaka’s credibility into to validity of the said document.

    Yes and Hawaii still hasn’t told us what kind of pen Onaka used was it a bic? Was it a montblanc? What kind of paper stock? Was it produced by Georgia Pacific or Hunter Douglas?

  60. avatar
    nbc April 25, 2013 at 3:48 pm #

    john: In conclusion, such strange initials beside each signature nevertheless undermines Alvin Onaka’s credibility into to validity of the said document.

    Not by any reasonable standard of evidence.

  61. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy April 25, 2013 at 3:54 pm #

    Face, meet palm.

    realist: You think the “FRIENDS OF THEFOGBOW.COM” overlay was on the documents submitted to the Court? Really? LOL

  62. avatar
    john April 25, 2013 at 3:55 pm #

    Klayman should point to Apuzzo’s case in New Jersey. In that case, lawyers stipulated in open court that the PDF Birth Certificate IN NO WAY establishes Obama’s birth in Hawaii for the record. The judge acknowledged the stipulation. Now you have Hawaii claiming that PDF is legit. Therefore, you now contrary evidence entered in the record; Obama lawyer’s stating the PDF proves nothing while the state of Hawaii says it’s valid. The PDF therefore should be tossed out of court as valid evidence. Therefore, the Hawaii verifications are underminded.

  63. avatar
    john April 25, 2013 at 3:59 pm #

    From SOS Bennett
    “Additionally, please verify that the attached copy of the Certificate of Live Birth for Mr. Obama is a true and accurate representation of the original record in your files.”

    Alvin Onaka didn’t state is was “true and accurate” representation, only that they matched. I would consider this to be different from what was asked again leading to the conclusion that Obama’s birth certificate is probably classified as “Legally Nonvalid”, basically meaning the BC as been amended or changed and therefore has no more “on its face” (Prima Facie) validity.

  64. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy April 25, 2013 at 4:00 pm #

    No one has submitted the PDF to a court as evidence beside birthers.

    Ye canst not cast out what hast not been cast in.

    (Doc. 4:P25)

    john: The PDF therefore should be tossed out of court as valid evidence.

  65. avatar
    john April 25, 2013 at 4:05 pm #

    The verifications refer to the PDF and information contained in it. If you throw out the PDF, you throw out the verified information.

  66. avatar
    Dr Kenneth Noisewater April 25, 2013 at 4:13 pm #

    john: From SOS Bennett“Additionally, please verify that the attached copy of the Certificate of Live Birth for Mr. Obama is a true and accurate representation of the original record in your files.”Alvin Onaka didn’t state is was “true and accurate” representation, only that they matched. I would consider this to be different from what was asked again leading to the conclusion that Obama’s birth certificate is probably classified as “Legally Nonvalid”, basically meaning the BC as been amended or changed and therefore has no more “on its face” (Prima Facie) validity.

    You are too stupid for words. Here is a dictionary, learn what the word verification means.
    http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/verification?s=t&path=/

  67. avatar
    JoZeppy April 25, 2013 at 4:17 pm #

    john: So Bennett did “forget’ to ask for the DATE OF BIRTH. (Again, THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT ELEMENT TO BE VERIFIED ON THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE, but for some strange reason Bennett “forgot” to ask Hawaii to verify it.) Very Very strange.

    Only if you’re claing President Obama isn’t 35 years old. Otherwise all that matter is that he was born in the State of Hawaii.

    john: Further, Alvin Onaka is basically a suspect in this case, so his verifications are self-serving.

    What case? There have never been any criminal charges, indictments, grand jury enpanelments, or even a serious investigation. One does’t become a “suspect” based on the mad ranting of a couple of nutters. And even if you’re discussing the civil suits in question (which doesn’t make a person a “suspect” in anything), you’re going to need a whole heck of a lot more than your baseless accusations for a judge to disregard the statements of the State of Hawaii on the contents of their official records. You know, perhaps actual evidence of wrong doing by someone?

    john: Further, each verification by Onaka submitted contains strange initials beside his signature. Although birthers and obots can quibble about what those initials mean, the fact is they are there and Hawaii has never explained what they represent. In conclusion, such strange initials beside each signature nevertheless undermines Alvin Onaka’s credibility into to validity of the said document.

    Your ignorance on a subject doesn’t hurt anyone’s credibility but your own. Here’s an idea…why don’t you figure out what they mean first, and then decide if it matters?

  68. avatar
    JoZeppy April 25, 2013 at 4:37 pm #

    john:
    From SOS Bennett
    “Additionally, please verify that the attached copy of the Certificate of Live Birth for Mr. Obama is a true and accurate representation of the original record in your files.”

    Alvin Onaka didn’t state is was “true and accurate” representation, only that they matched.I would consider this to be different from what was asked again leading to the conclusion that Obama’s birth certificate is probably classified as “Legally Nonvalid”, basically meaning the BC as been amended or changed and therefore has no more “on its face” (Prima Facie) validity.

    Good thing for the rest of the world, what you “consider … to be different” doesn’t amount to a puddle of spit.

  69. avatar
    Benji Franklin April 25, 2013 at 4:42 pm #

    john: Alvin Onaka didn’t state is was “true and accurate” representation, only that they matched. I would consider this to be different from what was asked again leading to the conclusion that Obama’s birth certificate is probably classified as “Legally Nonvalid”, basically meaning the BC as been amended or changed and therefore has no more “on its face” (Prima Facie) validity.

    GOD: “Okay, I’m sick to death of listening to this John imbecile incessantly making logically and legally incompetent evaluations of the circumstances surrounding challenges to Obama’s Presidential eligibility. I was a witness to all events connected with this nation’s founding, and believe me, Obama is Constitutionally eligible to the Presidency. Enough already!”

    John: “God is too much a slave to reality to be a believable witness in this matter. His statements as Creator of the Universe, are completely undermined by Tim Adam’s vague recollections about what “everybody knew” (no names are specified) about the existence of Obama’s birth certificate.”

    You are truly the Birthers’ John, John. Birther crap in and Birthers’ crap out!

  70. avatar
    Sef April 25, 2013 at 5:05 pm #

    john: Now you have Hawaii claiming that PDF is legit.

    Since the HDOH are the ones DEFINING what us legit, if they say the pdf is legit, then it is legit.

  71. avatar
    nbc April 25, 2013 at 5:35 pm #

    john: Klayman should point to Apuzzo’s case in New Jersey. In that case, lawyers stipulated in open court that the PDF Birth Certificate IN NO WAY establishes Obama’s birth in Hawaii for the record. The judge acknowledged the stipulation. Now you have Hawaii claiming that PDF is legit. Therefore, you now contrary evidence entered in the record; Obama lawyer’s stating the PDF proves nothing while the state of Hawaii says it’s valid. The PDF therefore should be tossed out of court as valid evidence. Therefore, the Hawaii verifications are underminded.

    The Obama lawyer stated that no document had been submitted to the SOS. Hawaii has established, in line with the rules of evidence, that the PDF is accurate.

    Soooo desperate… Poor John

  72. avatar
    Thomas Brown April 25, 2013 at 5:38 pm #

    John’s contortions of denial have finally strangled his last remaining brain cell.

  73. avatar
    CarlOrcas April 25, 2013 at 6:10 pm #

    Serpico: Your post is wrong. It was a legitimate investigation backed by the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office, an authoritative law enforcement entity.

    Who were the AZPost certified peace officers who did the investigation?

  74. avatar
    ASK Esq April 25, 2013 at 6:11 pm #

    john: Alvin Onaka didn’t state is was “true and accurate” representation, only that they matched.

    John, the State of Hawaii did not make the scan, so they couldn’t state it was a true and accurate copy. For all Onaka knew, the White House, in a moment of whimsy, decided to spend taxpayer dollars and have a skilled artist make an exact copy of the birth certificate by hand, and it was this copy that was scanned. However, since he did verify that all of the information matches what is on their files, that is all that matters. Unless you can show that the information doesn’t match, or is wrong, and do so with evidence you have available rather than going into the Hawaiian records (courts don’t allow fishing expeditions to try to prove your point), then every court in the country will accept Onaka’s verification and take it as proven that Obama was born in Hawaii.

  75. avatar
    CarlOrcas April 25, 2013 at 6:12 pm #

    john:
    “Your post is wrong. It was a legitimate investigation backed by the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office, an authoritative law enforcement entity.”

    That is true.They are attempting to get the court to “ignore” or “reject” a valid investigation from official criminal investigation.Maricopa County is the largest county in AZ and Sheriff Joe Arpaio is a “legal” and a “real” Sheriffwho did have the power to do what he did and the Cold Case Posse is a valid entity.

    The Cold Case Posse is a non-profit public service corporation. What authority does it, or its members, have to conduct a criminal investigation?

  76. avatar
    Deborah April 25, 2013 at 6:29 pm #

    This brief is emphasizing the difference between the state constitution and the federal constitution. (should state and federal constitution be in caps?)

    The birthers claims attempt to supercede both state and federal constitutions.

    I admit, I have neglected state constitution research, but I intend to look into it hereafter.

  77. avatar
    Northland10 April 25, 2013 at 6:33 pm #

    John, neither Obama nor anybody on his team submitted a PDF in Maricopa County, forged or otherwise. Onaka had not done did not submit any PDF in Maricopa County but only verified information requested by the SOS. The sheriff and Zullo have zero jurisdiction over any of them.

    In addition, there is no forgery. If there was any attempt at fraud, it was committed by Corsi and Zullo.

  78. avatar
    nbc April 25, 2013 at 6:45 pm #

    CarlOrcas: The Cold Case Posse is a non-profit public service corporation. What authority does it, or its members, have to conduct a criminal investigation?

    None, when it finds anything of interest, Arpaio could order a criminal investigation. Until then, it’s just a ‘knitting club’…

  79. avatar
    Rickey April 25, 2013 at 7:25 pm #

    Serpico: You must remember that the birth announcements don’t mean anything. They just show that a baby was born but not where.

    You must remember that the birth announcements were provided to the newspapers by what was then called the Hawaii Health Bureau. The headline of the announcements in the Hawaii Advertiser:

    Health Bureau Statistics
    Births, Marriages, Deaths

    So the announcement of Obama’s birth came directly from the Hawaii Health Bureau, which means that the birth took place in Hawaii.

  80. avatar
    US Citizen April 25, 2013 at 7:38 pm #

    Damn.. I go away for a day, come back and all the goal posts have been moved.

  81. avatar
    Paper April 25, 2013 at 7:53 pm #

    That would be a negatory, good buddy. You need to flip the script, man.

    The verification actually makes it *impossible* to throw out the PDF. The verification forces you to drop meaningless talk about forgery, and leaves you only with fraud as an option about which to grumble. Hawaii is saying the information they have in their archived records means Obama was born in Hawaii. So if you can’t accept the truth, you now only can freak out about someone defrauding Hawaii (supplying false information in 1961, or sneaking in and replacing the original records), or someone in Hawaii’s government doing something similar from the inside at some past time.

    You need to get to work on getting your hands on actual evidence of fraud. I had been told before the election by one of my birther contacts that there was a video showing someone changing the original archived document in the protected file. Where is that video, man? What are you guys waiting for? I really don’t understand why the birthers are waiting until some time after 2016 to merely embarrass Obama when he cuts the ribbon on his new presidential library.

    You shouldn’t be wasting your time on the Internet, dude. You should be spending your time digging up evidence. I mea, are you a patriot or not? Get to work already.

    john:
    The verifications refer to the PDF and information contained in it.If you throw out the PDF, you throw out the verified information.

  82. avatar
    Paper April 25, 2013 at 8:10 pm #

    Sorry, darling. Hawaii did not say the *PDF* is valid. They verified *information.* They could have been verifying the information written on toilet paper, for all that matters.

    Repeat this mantra until you achieve enlightenment, buster.

    “Information. Information. Information…”

    john:
    Now you have Hawaii claiming that PDF is legit.Therefore, you now contrary evidence entered in the record;Obama lawyer’s stating the PDF proves nothing while the state of Hawaii says it’s valid.

  83. avatar
    BrianH April 25, 2013 at 8:15 pm #

    Serpico: Your post is wrong. It was a legitimate investigation backed by the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office, an authoritative law enforcement entity.

    Under the Full Faith & Credit clause of the Constitution, a state is obligated to give credit to the “records” of another state. But nothing is said about a state having to recognize what some Sheriff in another state utters at some press conference.

    But, strangely, in your (the Birther) world, Alabama should give credence to the Posse’s dog-and-pony show, while disregarding the verification Hawaii has made about its records.

    Birthers exist in an Alice-in-Wonderland world.

  84. avatar
    Bamalaw April 25, 2013 at 9:00 pm #

    Going to be hard to fit all that in a reply brief AND respond to the actual legal arguments supporting dismissal.

  85. avatar
    Dave B. April 25, 2013 at 9:25 pm #

    gorefan: I can heard the screams of protest already – “Matches, they only said it matches”.

    john: Alvin Onaka didn’t state is was “true and accurate” representation, only that they matched.

    Well that was easy.

  86. avatar
    Dave B. April 25, 2013 at 9:27 pm #

    Is that even supposed to make sense?

    john:
    “How could Gov. Linda Lingle know that Obama was born at Kapiolani when that information is protected by state privacy laws?”

    Lingle mispoke in an interview about this.There no real proof Obama was Kapiolani.Obama apparently sent a letter to the hospital profressing his birth there and the letter was used for fundraising purposes.However, the letter has disappeared and no can see it anymore.Further, according to Mark Gillar, someone apparently threatened legal action against the hospital for using the letter claiming that it was fraud because the hospital had no proof Obama was born there.The letter disappeared and apparently is under lock and key from any scrunity.Interestingly enough, the Hawaii DOH does not use the letter to proof Obama’s birth in Hawaii.

  87. avatar
    gorefan April 25, 2013 at 9:31 pm #

    john: However, the letter has disappeared and no can see it anymore.

    Not true. WND showed this was false sometime ago.

    http://www.wnd.com/2009/07/104146/

    “We treasure the letter, and we’re delighted to share it with you,” said Keala Peters, director of marketing and communications for Hawaii Pacific Health, which runs the hospital.”

  88. avatar
    gorefan April 25, 2013 at 9:33 pm #

    Dave B.:
    Well that was easy.

    As I think of it, that must have been a deliberate “in your face” to the birthers by the President’s lawyers.

  89. avatar
    Butterfly Bilderberg April 25, 2013 at 10:01 pm #

    john:
    Is the birth certificate they enclose the White House PDF version? Didn’t Mario Apuzzo in his dismissed New Jersey case get the Obama representatives to acknowledge that the PDF birth certificate IN NO WAY represents any record of Obama’s birth in Hawaii?

    No, the legal counsel in the New Jersey case contended that the internet image is not the birth certificate. That’s because it is nothing more than an image. The birth certificate is the paper document that was scanned in order for its image to be posted.

    That you and your birther brethren don’t understand that distinction is why you will never gain traction with your stupid “layers” argument.

  90. avatar
    SluggoJD April 25, 2013 at 11:45 pm #

    Serpico: Your post is wrong. It was a legitimate investigation backed by the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office, an authoritative law enforcement entity.

    YOU LIE!

  91. avatar
    SluggoJD April 25, 2013 at 11:49 pm #

    john:
    “How could Gov. Linda Lingle know that Obama was born at Kapiolani when that information is protected by state privacy laws?”

    Lingle mispoke in an interview about this.There no real proof Obama was Kapiolani.Obama apparently sent a letter to the hospital profressing his birth there and the letter was used for fundraising purposes.However, the letter has disappeared and no can see it anymore.Further, according to Mark Gillar, someone apparently threatened legal action against the hospital for using the letter claiming that it was fraud because the hospital had no proof Obama was born there.The letter disappeared and apparently is under lock and key from any scrunity.Interestingly enough, the Hawaii DOH does not use the letter to proof Obama’s birth in Hawaii.

    You’re a fake.

  92. avatar
    SluggoJD April 25, 2013 at 11:53 pm #

    Benji Franklin: GOD: “Okay, I’m sick to death of listening to this John imbecile incessantly making logically and legally incompetent evaluations of the circumstances surrounding challenges to Obama’s Presidential eligibility. I was a witness to all events connected with this nation’s founding, and believe me, Obama is Constitutionally eligible to the Presidency. Enough already!”

    John: “God is too much a slave to reality to be a believable witness in this matter. His statements as Creator of the Universe, are completely undermined by Tim Adam’s vague recollections about what “everybody knew” (no names are specified) about the existence of Obama’s birth certificate.”

    You are truly the Birthers’ John, John.Birther crap in and Birthers’ crap out!

    Of course he is, he’s a fake, just someone pretending to be the perfect birther.

  93. avatar
    JD Reed April 26, 2013 at 12:10 am #

    john:
    It’s interesting that they submit the Arizona SOS verification from Hawaii.In the Verification SOS Bennett doesn’t ask or it isn’t verified the BIRTH DATE of Obama.For the life of me, there can be no rational and plausible explanation on why SOS Bennett would “forget” to ask for the Date of birth or for Hawaii to “forget” or “refuse” the verify Obama’s Date of Birth.According to Butterzazillion, however, Hawaii could not verify Obama’s DATE OF BIRTH because Obama’s birth certificate has been classified and “legally nonvalid”.

    John, you mean the sainted BZ’s fevered imagination? Did she give any evidence for her claim, or did she just hand this down as if carved in stone tablets?
    “According to Butterzazillion (sic)” does not make the words that follow more credible; indeed, among sensible peope, they make the ensuing words less credible.

  94. avatar
    JD Reed April 26, 2013 at 12:48 am #

    Let me see if I can get this right, John. You seem to be saying that Alvin Onaka verified for the Arizona SOS what you birthers claim is false — that is, the PLACE of birth of Mr. Obama — but refused to verify what even birthers accept as valid, the DATE of his birth, because to do so would be verifying a legally nonvalid document? In my late father’s terminology, this seems to be bass-ackwards. Logically, you’d verify the true info and refuse to verify the false.
    Also, Gillar’s hearsay about someone threatening legal action against the hospital reflects Gillar’s, and your as his trusting believer, sketchy knowledge about the legal system. Who on earth would have standing to sue the hospital based on its public statement that Obama was born there? It would be a fishing expedition, which courts universally loathe. And no one could prove any personal harm from the hospital’s claim that the president was born there, even if they could prove he wasn’t/ Which they couldn’t, of course.
    You birthers could get together and create a fascinating university course titled “Birther Jurisprudence.” It wouldn’t at all reflect how the real world’s legal system operates, but it might hold an attraction for those attracted to the bizarre and unusual.

  95. avatar
    US Citizen April 26, 2013 at 4:27 am #

    Birther Jurisprudence?

    You just gave me a great idea for a new board game!

    The game of ORLY!

    The house plays Orly.
    Their object is to let her finish.
    Additional players trap her with evidence, lack of standing, incorrect service, etc.
    When she makes it to a court, you must present a valid objection so she doesn’t finish.
    If the court dismisses her, she must choose a chance card that levies a sanction.
    If Orly runs out of money, you win.
    If Orly is not blocked, she moves up the court system.
    Try and stop Orly before she makes a plea to the supreme court!

  96. avatar
    DaveH April 26, 2013 at 8:33 am #

    After reading all of the back and forth between the logical thinkers and the birthers I have come to one conclusion and I realized this just a few minutes ago as I was outside watching my dog take a dump in the back yard.

    It would be easier for someone to reason with a pile of dog poop than it would be to reason with a birther. Yes. Birthers are dumber than dog excrement.

  97. avatar
    The Magic M April 26, 2013 at 8:41 am #

    I’d rather play Angry Birthers or Moldovan Roulette (where every chamber in the gun holds a bullet). 😉

  98. avatar
    Paper April 26, 2013 at 8:49 am #

    John, please see the Mississippi and Kansas verifications, as well.

    john:
    “So, it was Bennett who forgot to specifically ask about the date of birth (though the date on the certificate was verified). In fact, HDoH replied in the same fashion as the questions were asked.”

    So Bennett did “forget’ to ask for the DATE OF BIRTH. (Again, THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT ELEMENT TO BE VERIFIED ON THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE, but for some strange reason Bennett “forgot” to ask Hawaii to verify it.)Very Very strange.

  99. avatar
    Thomas Brown April 26, 2013 at 10:03 am #

    Paper: John, please see the Mississippi and Kansas verifications, as well.

    john:
    “So, it was Bennett who forgot to specifically ask about the date of birth (though the date on the certificate was verified). In fact, HDoH replied in the same fashion as the questions were asked.”

    So Bennett did “forget’ to ask for the DATE OF BIRTH. (Again, THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT ELEMENT TO BE VERIFIED ON THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE, but for some strange reason Bennett “forgot” to ask Hawaii to verify it.)Very Very strange.

    John can’t even grasp that when the verifications say that BHO’s original birth certificate is on file and matches the published copies, that means his birth date is correct. Holy Mike, how is it possible John is so far gone he can’t even understand that? He has rendered himself, to quote a memorable text, “window-licking retarded.”

  100. avatar
    Kiwiwriter April 26, 2013 at 1:56 pm #

    John, you have your right to your own “beliefs,” but not your own “facts.”

  101. avatar
    US Citizen April 26, 2013 at 2:42 pm #

    Kiwiwriter:
    John, you have your right to your own “beliefs,” but not your own “facts.”

    … and we’ll even accept things that “match” facts!

  102. avatar
    nbc April 26, 2013 at 3:10 pm #

    Butterfly Bilderberg: That you and your birther brethren don’t understand that distinction is why you will never gain traction with your stupid “layers” argument.

    Hear hear… On ORYR I have noticed many clueless people when it comes to issues of law, history, etc. So clueless and so willing to spread known falsehoods… Gullible is what comes to mind, driven by hatred and anger.

    Fascinating how people can be so foolish…

  103. avatar
    ellen April 26, 2013 at 4:56 pm #

    Re: “However, the letter has disappeared and no can see it anymore.”

    Baloney “it has disappeared.”

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/52083178/Kapiolani-Medical-Center-100-Years-1909-to-2009

  104. avatar
    Majority Will April 26, 2013 at 5:28 pm #

    ellen:
    Re: “However, the letter has disappeared and no can see it anymore.”

    Baloney “it has disappeared.”

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/52083178/Kapiolani-Medical-Center-100-Years-1909-to-2009

    To be fair, for a hardcore birther lying is as natural as breathing.

  105. avatar
    nbc April 26, 2013 at 9:01 pm #

    Poor John, and so the lies continue… What a sad sad person…

    gorefan: john: However, the letter has disappeared and no can see it anymore.

    Not true. WND showed this was false sometime ago.

    http://www.wnd.com/2009/07/104146/

    “We treasure the letter, and we’re delighted to share it with you,” said Keala Peters, director of marketing and communications for Hawaii Pacific Health, which runs the hospital.”

  106. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy April 26, 2013 at 9:37 pm #

    Kapi’olani keeps moving the document around, but this brochure shows the letter on page 6. This is the location as of today:

    http://www.kapiolanigift.org/document.doc?id=16

    gorefan: Not true.WND showed this was false sometime ago.

    http://www.wnd.com/2009/07/104146/

    “We treasure the letter, and we’re delighted to share it with you,” said Keala Peters, director of marketing and communications for Hawaii Pacific Health, which runs the hospital.”

  107. avatar
    Keith April 26, 2013 at 9:40 pm #

    ellen: Baloney “it has disappeared.”

    Well, to be fair. I can remember when I first heard about this letter that I went looking for it. It was very hard to find. I remember thinking it was very hard to find. It must have taken me at least five minutes of digging through Google find it. They had buried it inside the program for their anniversary event to which it referred. The nerve of those guys, to print this world shaking important letter in a banquet souvenir and then publish that brochure on the internet. I mean how is anybody supposed to find it there? And exactly how many layers are involved anyway?

  108. avatar
    saynomorejoe April 27, 2013 at 3:13 am #

    And, so it goes, back and forth, with no thinking to be acceptable.

    !.. If the original BC is fake, and note I stated that IF the original is fake, the HDOH would still issue a verification that the LFBC matched the information that was submitted for verifications.

    2. That means all of the comments about how the item was certified , or verified, are on no import, as they have to verify and certify that the documents that are recorded are , indeed, in the files , and that is all they do.

    3. A fake document can be certified and verified by the office of the Vital Records, and , in fact, they must do so, as they have no way to confirm the validity of a recorded document!

    Do none of you ever read about the fake deeds, the fake documents, marriage licenses, and mortgages, and you think that the recorded documents of those things are above suspicion?

    The world is full of fake documents and you should always be aware of the possiblity that that document you need might be fake, so investigate, before you invest, is still the best way to proceed.

  109. avatar
    gorefan April 27, 2013 at 3:35 am #

    saynomorejoe: you should always be aware of the possiblity that that document you need might be fake

    Possibility is one thing but probability is another. Given the large amount of information that says he was born in Hawaii, the probability that the BC is fake is very low.

  110. avatar
    Lupin April 27, 2013 at 5:42 am #

    saynomorejoe:
    And, so it goes, back and forth, with no thinking to be acceptable.

    !..If the original BC is fake,and note I stated that IF the original is fake, the HDOH would still issue a verification that the LFBC matched the information that was submitted for verifications.

    2. That means all of the comments about how the item was certified , or verified, are on no import, as they have to verify and certify that the documents that are recorded are , indeed, in the files , and that is all they do.

    3. A fake document can be certified and verified by the office of the Vital Records, and , in fact, they must do so, as they have no way to confirm the validity of a recorded document!

    Do none of you ever read about the fake deeds, the fake documents, marriagelicenses, and mortgages, and you think that the recorded documents of those things are above suspicion?

    The world is full of fake documents and you should always be aware of the possiblity that that document you need might be fake, so investigate, before you invest, is still the best way to proceed.

    If I understand what you’re saying, you’re floating the possibility that the original copy kept in that big bound book in Hawaii is THE fake, and therefore any verification or certication based on it by the local authorities is unreliable.

    This is totally fanciful notion that would have to rely on such a massive and contemporaneous conspiracy that it defies belief. It doesn’t even make a good argument for a moot debate, because you cannot outline a plausible scenario of how this might have happened.

    In other words, you just keep mentioning it as a possibility, but you can’t actually explain how it would work (or have worked).

    Whether or not you’re doing it it on purpose, you argument amounts to nothing more than trolling.

  111. avatar
    Scientist April 27, 2013 at 8:25 am #

    saynomorejoe: !.. If the original BC is fake, and note I stated that IF the original is fake, the HDOH would still issue a verification that the LFBC matched the information that was submitted for verifications.

    2. That means all of the comments about how the item was certified , or verified, are on no import, as they have to verify and certify that the documents that are recorded are , indeed, in the files , and that is all they do.

    3. A fake document can be certified and verified by the office of the Vital Records, and , in fact, they must do so, as they have no way to confirm the validity of a recorded document!

    So your argument then is that the birth was falsely registered in 1961. Now you need to explain why a doctor and other staff members at Kapi’olani Hospital, none of whom have ever even been suspected, let alone proven, of being part of a false document ring, would have, in the case of this one unimportant family of modest means, risked their careers and prison time to falsely register a hospital birth. And if you are going to tell us that they were richly paid for their efforts, you need to specify where the money came from-certainly not from the Dunhams, nor from the Obamas in Kenya, none of whom had any.

    Moreover, you need to provide a motive on the Obama/Dunham side. The law at the time provided that a US citizen mother, even if she did not transmit citizenship at birth to a child born abroad, could bring the child into the US, and, upon arrival, apply immediately for a Certificate of Citizenship. There was thus no motivation for fraud, since a Kenyan-born Barack Obama Jr. would have automatically been entitled to be a naturalized US citizen. Unless you wish to propose the preposterous notion that the Dunhams, upon seeing the infant, expected he would grow up to be President.

  112. avatar
    alg April 27, 2013 at 9:32 am #

    saynomorejoe:
    And, so it goes, back and forth, with no thinking to be acceptable.

    !..If the original BC is fake,and note I stated that IF the original is fake, the HDOH would still issue a verification that the LFBC matched the information that was submitted for verifications.

    2. That means all of the comments about how the item was certified , or verified, are on no import, as they have to verify and certify that the documents that are recorded are , indeed, in the files , and that is all they do.

    3. A fake document can be certified and verified by the office of the Vital Records, and , in fact, they must do so, as they have no way to confirm the validity of a recorded document!

    Do none of you ever read about the fake deeds, the fake documents, marriagelicenses, and mortgages, and you think that the recorded documents of those things are above suspicion?

    The world is full of fake documents and you should always be aware of the possiblity that that document you need might be fake, so investigate, before you invest, is still the best way to proceed.

    Do you realize just how silly that sounds? Using your “standard of proof,” no document provided by anyone anywhere can be trusted and relied upon, including your own documents.

    In this country, the burden of proof lies with the individual making a claim, not with others to disprove it. You’ve offered none, only a wistful belief about something you hope could be true. Simply put, there is no amount of facts or evidence that will satisfy that you Mr. Obama was born in Hawaii in August of 1961. Even if you could personally go back in time and witness his birth, you still wouldn’t believe your own eyes.

    Your desperate reach to grasp the flimsiest of straws possible only exposes your deeply rooted ignorance and bigotry.

  113. avatar
    JD Reed April 27, 2013 at 9:59 am #

    Scientist: So your argument then is that the birth was falsely registered in 1961.Now you need to explain why a doctor and other staff members at Kapi’olani Hospital, none of whom have ever even been suspected, let alone proven, of being part of a false document ring, would have, in the case of this one unimportant family of modest means, risked their careers and prison time to falsely register a hospital birth.And if you are going to tell us that they were richly paid for their efforts, you need to specify where the money came from-certainly not from the Dunhams, nor from the Obamas in Kenya,noneof whom had any.

    Moreover, you need to provide a motive on the Obama/Dunham side.The law at the time provided that a US citizen mother, even if she did not transmit citizenship at birth to a child born abroad, could bring the child into the US, and, upon arrival, apply immediately for a Certificate of Citizenship.There was thus no motivation for fraud, since a Kenyan-born Barack Obama Jr. would have automatically been entitled to be a naturalized US citizen.Unless you wish to propose the preposterous notion that the Dunhams, upon seeing the infant, expected he would grow up to be President.

    Isn’t it obvious? Soros is so vastly wealthy that he had a time machine secretly invented and made operational, and his minions traveled back in time to create the false documentation for this president!
    Makes as much sense as any other explanation of why a fake birth certificate would have been created back in 1961.

  114. avatar
    Keith April 27, 2013 at 11:21 am #

    Lupin: This is totally fanciful notion that would have to rely on such a massive and contemporaneous conspiracy that it defies belief. It doesn’t even make a good argument for a moot debate, because you cannot outline a plausible scenario of how this might have happened.

    Or perhaps even more importantly how such a fraud could possibly be detected at this date.

    How, for example, could you tell if a 10 dollar note, printed and distributed by the U.S. Mint was a counterfeit or not?

  115. avatar
    CarlOrcas April 27, 2013 at 11:23 am #

    saynomorejoe: Do none of you ever read about the fake deeds, the fake documents, marriage licenses, and mortgages, and you think that the recorded documents of those things are above suspicion?

    The world is full of fake documents and you should always be aware of the possiblity that that document you need might be fake, so investigate, before you invest, is still the best way to proceed.

    Wow! The world is “full of fake documents”, you say.

    How about some real world examples?

  116. avatar
    Dr Kenneth Noisewater April 27, 2013 at 11:39 am #

    Lupin: Whether or not you’re doing it it on purpose, you argument amounts to nothing more than trolling.

    Of course it’s trolling. Traderjack has been doing this for years on Amazon. He has no actual argument but instead plays word games because he feels pity for birthers and thinks we’re picking on them.

  117. avatar
    dunstvangeet April 27, 2013 at 12:25 pm #

    saynomorejoe: 1. If the original BC is fake,and note I stated that IF the original is fake, the HDOH would still issue a verification that the LFBC matched the information that was submitted for verifications.

    The constitutional Full Faith and Credit Clause requires you to show that this paticular document is faked. This means that you have to show that Barack Obama’s birth certificate is fake. Do you have any evidence to show that Barack Obama’s birth certificate is fake?

    2. That means all of the comments about how the item was certified, or verified, are on no import, as they have to verify and certify that the documents that are recorded are, indeed, in the files, and that is all they do.

    Actually, they’re not. You have to prove that they are false. The presumption is that they are true, and since they are self-authenticating documents, the certification on them is all that is required to show that they are “true copies or abstracts of the document on file in the Hawaii Department of Health”. They do not need to call Alvin Onaka. They do not need to call Cherome Fukino. They do not need to call anybody to testify to the correctness of the document. Now, it is your job to have actual evidence that the document is false. And your layers garbage is a bunch of hooey.

    3. A fake document can be certified and verified by the office of the Vital Records, and , in fact, they must do so, as they have no way to confirm the validity of a recorded document!

    And if they have no way to confirm the validity of a recorded document, then it also falls that you have no way of confirming the validity of the recorded document, therefore the presumption is that the document is valid. Your main argument seems to be “There can be birth certificate fraud, so we must discout what birth certificates have to say.” So, my question to you is what should replace birth certificates? And remember 70-year-olds must be able to prove their citizenship, and 7-year-olds must as well. So, what should replace them?

  118. avatar
    SluggoJD April 27, 2013 at 1:28 pm #

    saynomorejoe:
    And, so it goes, back and forth, with no thinking to be acceptable.

    !..If the original BC is fake,and note I stated that IF the original is fake, the HDOH would still issue a verification that the LFBC matched the information that was submitted for verifications.

    2. That means all of the comments about how the item was certified , or verified, are on no import, as they have to verify and certify that the documents that are recorded are , indeed, in the files , and that is all they do.

    3. A fake document can be certified and verified by the office of the Vital Records, and , in fact, they must do so, as they have no way to confirm the validity of a recorded document!

    Do none of you ever read about the fake deeds, the fake documents, marriagelicenses, and mortgages, and you think that the recorded documents of those things are above suspicion?

    The world is full of fake documents and you should always be aware of the possiblity that that document you need might be fake, so investigate, before you invest, is still the best way to proceed.

    Eat poop and choke.

  119. avatar
    Paper April 27, 2013 at 3:27 pm #

    And yet again, your IFs are irrelevant. You can think and hypothesize as much as you want, but it is meaningless until you provide specific evidence of fraud.

    The verification is of great import because it means there is no forgery. It means your only choice of (extremely remote) possibility in this instance is fraud. That is a big distinction.

    How many times do you need to be informed of how America works? Did you skip school as a kid or something? Do you not watch any cop or law shows on television? Never heard of innocent until proven guilty?

    Yes, yes, if fraud was committed, fraud was committed. Happy? Ready to move on and do some actual thinking, or is that not acceptable to you?

    saynomorejoe:
    And, so it goes, back and forth, with no thinking to be acceptable.

    !..If the original BC is fake,and note I stated that IF the original is fake, the HDOH would still issue a verification that the LFBC matched the information that was submitted for verifications.

    2. That means all of the comments about how the item was certified , or verified, are on no import, as they have to verify and certify that the documents that are recorded are , indeed, in the files , and that is all they do.

    3. A fake document can be certified and verified by the office of the Vital Records, and , in fact, they must do so, as they have no way to confirm the validity of a recorded document!

    Do none of you ever read about the fake deeds, the fake documents, marriagelicenses, and mortgages, and you think that the recorded documents of those things are above suspicion?

    The world is full of fake documents and you should always be aware of the possiblity that that document you need might be fake, so investigate, before you invest, is still the best way to proceed.

  120. avatar
    saynomorejoe April 27, 2013 at 4:14 pm #

    The failure to see the possiblities is for the purpose of not having to acceept the probablities.

    Why to you assume that it is a vast conspiracy? It may be a conspiracy, or it may be a legal decision based upon court rulings!

    At any time in the world of HDOH a petitioner may apply to have the birth certificate changed or amended, or altered, or a new birth certificate may be issued.

    It is at the discretion of the Director of Health Services to enable , or not enable, the changes to the vital records

    The Hawaiian Law allows the Director to issue new birth certificates requested by governmental authorities to protect the interests of the government or the public.

    This simply means that a New Birth Certificate is issued, the old one filed and sealed, and all that will be shown the public is the new one.

    That requires no big conspiracy, it simply requires one person with enough political influence , or Money, to get the Director to approve the request.

    Anyone who believes that public records are sacrosanct and immune from abuse is a young person who has not lived to see the corruption of the public servents from time to time.

    As to the “new” birth certificate in MS how could it not have the green safety paper of the whitehouse.org LFBC.

    I guess Polland has been at work!

    Oh, and by the way, I am 90 years old and have been called everthing in the world, so vulgaraties amuse me, more than insult me!

  121. avatar
    saynomorejoe April 27, 2013 at 4:24 pm #

    As to the prima facie validity of the document, no jury or jurist MUST believe the document, they must be convinced , in the face of extrinsic evidence to the the contary, that the evidence was not sufficient to over-ride the prima facie status of the document.

    No one in the world has to accept anything as absolute truth!

    A US $100 note is prima facie evidence that the US will accept the note in payments of debts, providing it is not counterfeit.
    The acceptor of fraudulent notes is the authority on the validity of the notes as they need not be accepted until proven , by the issuing authority, to be a valid note.

    I need not prove it is fake, I only have to claim it is fake , and make someone else prove it is not fake before I will accept it!

    My cashier at the bank hands me a note, I think it is fake, and I give it back to her and say it is fake , give me a different one!

  122. avatar
    Daniel April 27, 2013 at 4:31 pm #

    saynomorejoe is confused about the difference between possible and probable. It’s possible the world was created 5 mins ago, but the probablility is so low as to be irrelevant.

    However Joe would argue that if any possibility exists at all, he shouldn’t have to pay last months electric bill.

  123. avatar
    Daniel April 27, 2013 at 4:34 pm #

    saynomorejoe:

    I need not prove it is fake, I only have to claim it is fake , and make someone else prove it is not fake before I will accept it!

    The whole concept of burden of proof kind of eludes you, doesn’t it….

    But you are correct in that no one can force you to believe the blatantly obvious. On the other hand, no one is obligated to act based on your inability to believe the blatantly obvious.

    So please do continue to argue that no one, anyone, ever, has or had a valid Birth Certificate. The rest of us will continue to give your delusions all the consideration they deserve.

  124. avatar
    Dave B. April 27, 2013 at 4:46 pm #

    Joe, I have reason to believe that all the U.S. currency you have in your possession is fake. You’ll need to send it to me so I can have somebody prove it isn’t.

    saynomorejoe: I need not prove it is fake, I only have to claim it is fake , and make someone else prove it is not fake before I will accept it!

  125. avatar
    saynomorejoe April 27, 2013 at 4:47 pm #

    Daniel: The whole concept of burden of proof kind of eludes you, doesn’t it….But you are correct in that no one can force you to believe the blatantly obvious. On the other hand, no one is obligated to act based on your inability to believe the blatantly obvious.So please do continue to argue that no one, anyone, ever, has or had a valid Birth Certificate. The rest of us will continue to give your delusions all the consideration they deserve.

    Oh, fear not, fearless, one, for the right to be wrong exists on both sides of the discussion.

    Do you believe that the authorities will accept any birth certificate at all, or that they do not inspect birth certificates for validity?

    Simply refer to good old Google and google OIG birth certificate fraud, and see how many registrars said birth certificate fraud was done by their own employees in their offices.

    Or even check, should you wish, the reasons why Puerto Rico, voided all of their birth certificates before 2010!

    A law enacted by Puerto Rico in December mainly to combat identity theft invalidates as of July 1 all previously issued Puerto Rican birth certificates. That means more than a third of the 4.1 million people of Puerto Rican descent living in the 50 states must arrange to get new certificates.

    But, hey, that just means that they have to get new BC,s, doesn’t it, but, wait, what if their original was fake!

  126. avatar
    saynomorejoe April 27, 2013 at 4:51 pm #

    Dave B.: Joe, I have reason to believe that all the U.S. currency you have in your possession is fake. You’ll need to send it to me so I can have somebody prove it isn’t.

    Absolutely will do that. Please send me your name , address, date of birth, SSN, and bank account number with password, so I can have them all transferred to you for inspection. For this service you will receive a 10% reward appled to your bank account!

    Absolutely guaranteed profit for me!

  127. avatar
    Dave B. April 27, 2013 at 4:59 pm #

    But Joe, first I’ll require the reciprocal information from you. And that’s 10% of what?

    saynomorejoe: Absolutely will do that. Please send me your name , address, date of birth, SSN, and bank account number with password, so I can have them all transferred to you for inspection.For this service you will receive a 10% reward appled to your bank account!

    Absolutely guaranteed profit for me!

  128. avatar
    Daniel April 27, 2013 at 5:08 pm #

    saynomorejoe: Oh, fear not, fearless, one, for the right to be wrong exists on both sides of the discussion.

    Do you believe that the authorities will accept any birth certificate at all, or that they do not inspect birth certificates for validity?

    Simply refer to good old Google and google OIG birth certificate fraud, and see how many registrars said birth certificate fraud was done by their own employees in their offices.

    Or even check, should you wish, the reasons why Puerto Rico, voided all of their birth certificates before 2010!

    A law enacted by Puerto Rico in December mainly to combat identity theft invalidates as of July 1 all previously issued Puerto Rican birth certificates. That means more than a third of the 4.1 million people of Puerto Rican descent living in the 50 states must arrange to get new certificates.

    But, hey, that just means that they have to get new BC,s, doesn’t it, but, wait, what if their original was fake!

    You dance divinely.

    The fact remains that you are, from ignorance or from dishonesty, equating possibility with probability.

    You’re argument renders all BCs everywhere unusable. You simply can’t get around that. You can’t have your cake and eat it too.

    So no one can ever be elected President, ever, because by your premise, no one can ever prove their eligibility.

    That’s why your argument, as entertaining as it is, will never be taken seriously by anyone who can do anything about your “concerns”

  129. avatar
    Northland10 April 27, 2013 at 5:27 pm #

    saynomorejoe: Do you believe that the authorities will accept any birth certificate at all, or that they do not inspect birth certificates for validity?

    While you argue the absurd, there is a minor detail you are forgetting. As best as we can tell, the President has not, nor been required, to present his birth certificate to any authority to prove his eligibility for office. All he has done is place a picture on the WH website, of the Birth Certificate sent by Hawaii. All your contortions do nothing to change the fact that no fraud can occur as no authority had requested or required anything.

    You can claim it a forgery and demand a “not forged” one but, since you are no authority for anything, he can just say, too bad, so sad. Same goes for Zullo, Arpaio and Corsi.

  130. avatar
    saynomorejoe April 27, 2013 at 5:29 pm #

    Daniel: You dance divinely.The fact remains that you are, from ignorance or from dishonesty, equating possibility with probability.You’re argument renders all BCs everywhere unusable. You simply can’t get around that. You can’t have your cake and eat it too. So no one can ever be elected President, ever, because by your premise, no one can ever prove their eligibility.That’s why your argument, as entertaining as it is, will never be taken seriously by anyone who can do anything about your “concerns”

    OH, Daniel, no person needs to be concerned about the validity of their birth certificate until they try to use it to get some benefit or another, and someone questions them about it.

    Didn’t you hear the Congressional Hearing about all fo the Companies that now issue birth certificates and advertise on the web that they can get a new one in 3 days!

    And they use copies of the original forms, fill them out with your information, and then stamp them with the registrars signature and put a date on them.

    Where there is a possiblity of making money there is a probablitity that some crook will fake something for criminals to use!

    But live the sweet life and forget that criminals are faking stuff all of the time.

    I had two calls last week from people telling me that some one had given me a home security system and it was ready to be delivered free, All that I had to do was verify my identity by using my SSN and giving them the checking account number of my bank account.

    What a bargain, right?

  131. avatar
    nbc April 27, 2013 at 5:31 pm #

    saynomorejoe: Do you believe that the authorities will accept any birth certificate at all, or that they do not inspect birth certificates for validity?

    Well, the birth certificate is prima facie evidence and as such, if it has the required seal and signature, will indeed be accepted unless one can provide some compelling information that the information is somehow false.
    In case of President Obama, we know that the document is a copy of his long form birth certificate and has been certified and verified by the DOH of Hawaii and as such, those receiving the document have no choice but to accept it.
    Claiming that somehow there may have been fraud involved hardly has any relevance to the document…

    Which is why the courts continue to reject this foolishness…

  132. avatar
    alg April 27, 2013 at 5:32 pm #

    saynomorejoe:
    “The failure to see the possiblities is for the purpose of not having to acceept the probablities.”

    As to seeing the “possibilities,” I think it’s entirely possible that you are pedophile. Please provide proof that you are not. If you are unable to present verifiable, documented and irrefutable evidence that you are not a pedophile, you will branded here as such. In the meantime, I will seek to discover your identity so I can share that “possibility” all over the internet.

    And, you misspell as often and as badly as Orly Taitz….hmmmmm….are you really Orly Taitz and are you a pedophile? The possibilities are endless.

  133. avatar
    saynomorejoe April 27, 2013 at 5:35 pm #

    Northland10: While you argue the absurd, there is a minor detail you are forgetting. As best as we can tell, the President has not, nor been required, to present his birth certificate to any authority to prove his eligibility for office. All he has done is place a picture on the WH website, of the Birth Certificate sent by Hawaii. All your contortions do nothing to change the fact that no fraud can occur as no authority had requested or required anything.You can claim it a forgery and demand a “not forged” one but, since you are no authority for anything, he can just say, too bad, so sad. Same goes for Zullo, Arpaio and Corsi.

    You are absolutely rignt, and I don’t care about whether someone committed fraud as that is part of life today.

    What is bad is that people do not want to believe that that sort of crime exists.

    He is the president, and will be the president until he is not the President.

    And you will beliieve what ever he says until he says he is not a NBC and then you will not believe him!

    But, that is human nature. We adore the people we adore, and can not believe them to be mere mortals and fail to observe their humanity.

    Believe what you believe and if you are wrong, regret it, but don’t forget it!

    It is, after all, a learning experience for younsters.

  134. avatar
    Jim April 27, 2013 at 5:39 pm #

    saynomorejoe:
    And they use copies of the original forms, fill them out with your information, and then stamp them with the registrars signature and put a date on them.

    But, those fakes would NOT be backed up by the states and if further checked would come up as being fake. That’s where you’re whole conspiracy falls apart…again!!!

  135. avatar
    saynomorejoe April 27, 2013 at 5:45 pm #

    alg: As to seeing the “possibilities,” I think it’s entirely possible that you are pedophile. Please provide proof that you are not. If you are unable to present verifiable, documented and irrefutable evidence that you are not a pedophile, you will branded here as such. In the meantime, I will seek to discover your identity so I can share that “possibility” all over the internet.And, you misspell as often and as badly as Orly Taitz….hmmmmm….are you really Orly Taitz and are you a pedophile? The possibilities are endless.

    Do as you wish, young person, but, remember that the reverse is also true,

    What you propose to do , could be done to you!

    But, it is funny, as an old man, I never think of pedophiles and I often wonder about people who do think and post about it, are exposing hidden desires.

    Is that true?

  136. avatar
    Northland10 April 27, 2013 at 5:49 pm #

    saynomorejoe: It is, after all, a learning experience for younsters.

    If I called my grandmother, your elder, and told her your argument, she would likely say some unpleasant things about your ideas. Her sister’s opinion would even be harsher (you should hear her go on about John Ashcroft, in part due to some personal dealings with him).

  137. avatar
    saynomorejoe April 27, 2013 at 5:55 pm #

    the world is made up of people with different beliefs and we have to live with that!

    But beliefs are not always correct, neither your’s , mine, or anyone else’s beliefs are competely accurate.

    And I will admit that there is a possiblity that the LFBC is real, and there is a possiblity of it not being real

    The effects of it being real are minimal, but what if it is not real! Then the effects are enormous, and will affect everyone!

  138. avatar
    Jim April 27, 2013 at 6:17 pm #

    saynomorejoe:

    The effects of it being real are minimal, but what if it is not real! Then the effects are enormous, and will affect everyone!

    Here’s the affect…Obama will serve out his term in office and someone else will be elected. Both scenarios. And, in both, you’ll still be sitting there making up crazy theories that have no basis in fact or law.

  139. avatar
    CarlOrcas April 27, 2013 at 6:21 pm #

    saynomorejoe: The effects of it being real are minimal, but what if it is not real! Then the effects are enormous, and will affect everyone!

    How?

  140. avatar
    richCares April 27, 2013 at 6:54 pm #

    “…you’ll still be sitting there making up crazy theories”
    .
    he might well spend his life on one “what if” after another, poor guy!

  141. avatar
    Pip April 27, 2013 at 7:22 pm #

    Then your concerns are wasted. People do believe in such crimes. I grew up around criminals, and I have seen a forged birth certificate with my own eyes. A word to the wise for you, as you seem to think you have experience, simple crimes work best. Your excessive concern about imagined, hypothetical, impossibly byzantine crimes is unimpressive.

    saynomorejoe:

    What is bad is that people do not want to believe that that sort of crime exists….

    It is, after all, a learning experience for younsters.

  142. avatar
    gorefan April 27, 2013 at 7:30 pm #

    saynomorejoe: The Hawaiian Law allows the Director to issue new birth certificates requested by governmental authorities to protect the interests of the government or the public.

    What “governmental authorities” did this, when and what excuse did they use?

    Remember before answering that President Obama’s short form BC was released in June, 2008 before he was elected President and while Attorney General Holder was in private practice.

    You again seem to be confusing possibility with probability.

  143. avatar
    alg April 27, 2013 at 7:44 pm #

    saynomorejoe:
    “Do as you wish, young person, but, remember that the reverse is also true,

    What you propose to do , could be done to you!”

    Precisely my point and why it’s useless to make up speculative accusations without evidence. As it is possible that you are a pedophile, so too is it possible that Mr. Obama’s original birth certificate on file in the Hawaii DOH records is a fake. But then again, without evidence neither claim has merit. Neither deserves serious consideration.

  144. avatar
    nbc April 27, 2013 at 8:53 pm #

    gorefan: You again seem to be confusing possibility with probability.

    Yep… And thus the courts keep ignoring this foolishness….

  145. avatar
    nbc April 27, 2013 at 8:54 pm #

    saynomorejoe: The effects of it being real are minimal, but what if it is not real! Then the effects are enormous, and will affect everyone!

    Nonsense…

  146. avatar
    saynomorejoe April 27, 2013 at 9:08 pm #

    gorefan: What “governmental authorities” did this, when and what excuse did they use? Remember before answering that President Obama’s short form BC was released in June, 2008 before he was elected President and while Attorney General Holder was in private practice.You again seem to be confusing possibility with probability.

    Remember , if you can, that the 2008 COLB was produced by Polland and posted on the Daily Kos site and was never released by the White House.

    It also had a 2007 date on it!

    the Hawaiian Law permits the issuance of new birth certificates and if it allows it, it must be done, otherwise there is no reason for the law allowing it!

  147. avatar
    saynomorejoe April 27, 2013 at 9:14 pm #

    Now let us take a look at the new bc for fun. How come there is a different safety paper shown that the bc is printed on
    Or did you fail to take notice of that, for some reason

  148. avatar
    saynomorejoe April 27, 2013 at 9:25 pm #

    “the ADP attacked the merits of the suit’s claims, calling the evidence proffered by McInnish “inadmissible and not worthy of belief” and adding:”

    As comments are statements of opinion then it would appear that some only want their opinions to be voiced and would say all other opinions are “inadmissible and not worthy of belief” in the courts of our country!

    Is that the kind of courtrooms you want to be heard in when you need to be heard?

  149. avatar
    nbc April 27, 2013 at 9:29 pm #

    saynomorejoe:
    Now let us take a look at the new bc for fun. How come there is a different safety paper shown that the bc is printed on
    Or did you fail to take notice of that, for some reason

    On the contrary, it was raised immediately by various Fogbowers. It’s an interesting question of limited relevance really but my guess is that the copier and the basket weave paper contributed to the background. Of course, it may very well be that Ragsdale is toying with the minds (sic) of the birther.

    We are getting a bit desperate hear are we not 🙂

  150. avatar
    gorefan April 27, 2013 at 9:46 pm #

    saynomorejoe: Or did you fail to take notice of that, for some reason

    Look up thread at the very first comment posted.

    nbc: Of course, it may very well be that Ragsdale is toying with the minds (sic) of the birther.

    Another possibility:

    When the MDEC filed one of their motions in Mississippi case, it included a jpg of the LFBC (submitted because Orly filled a faded hard to read copy). Birthers immediately declared it a new forgery and Orly Taitz even got some idiot to file an affidavit that it was a new forgery. And she began claim the lawyers had committed a fraud on the court.

    Maybe the Alabama lawyers are simply making it so obvious that this is not the original certified copy so they don’t have to deal with more birther stupidity.

  151. avatar
    Pip April 27, 2013 at 10:06 pm #

    What kind of silliness are you about now?

    It has a 2007 date because that is when it was created! You have no idea how birth certificates work, do you? It’s so nice that you feel free to express worthless notions, and act so cocky about it too!

    Care to tell us which came first, the chicken or the egg? Those things that go above rivers, that cars drive over, what are those called? Do they use some kind of anti-gravity technology that keeps them up in the air? Any other big mysteries you can explain to us? Did you know that the stories in comic books are fiction? What am I saying, of course you do. Question for you, though. I haven’t figured this one out yet for sure, but I bet you know–is Santa real?

    We need you to explain these mysteries. I see it now.

    saynomorejoe

    It also had a 2007 date on it!

  152. avatar
    gorefan April 27, 2013 at 10:26 pm #

    saynomorejoe: Remember , if you can, that the 2008 COLB was produced by Polland and posted on the Daily Kos site and was never released by the White House.

    No, it wasn’t create by Polland. That was a claim he made until it was pointed out to him that his forged image didn’t match the COLB. Then he claimed that he had deliberately made them different to see if anyone would notice. Remember the photos of the actual document were photographed by factcheck.org.

    I find it interesting that you accept Polland’s word at face value without and verification, but you don’t accept the word of the agency that produced the birth certificate.

    Why do you think you buy into every internet rumor and huckster that comes along?

  153. avatar
    SluggoJD April 27, 2013 at 10:40 pm #

    saynomorejoe: Remember , if you can, that the 2008 COLB was produced by Polland and posted on the Daily Kos site and was never released by the White House.

    It also had a 2007 date on it!

    the Hawaiian Law permits the issuance of new birth certificates and if it allows it, it must be done, otherwise there is no reason for the law allowing it!

    Well, you ain’t so stupid about history after all – more proof you’re just another a$$hole, but you sure got it wrong – Daily Kos posted it BEFORE PooPooPolarikPoland did. And PooPoo didn’t “produce” it – he merely played around with it, and attempted sleigh-of-hand changes, hoping nobody would notice. Well some people did, and Loren blasted PooPoo into little pieces and unmasked him as well.

  154. avatar
    Pip April 27, 2013 at 10:55 pm #

    You might say that it is a bad thing that saynomorejoe doesn’t want to believe that that sort of huckster exists…

    gorefan:

    I find it interesting that you accept Polland’s word at face value without and verification, but you don’t accept the word of the agency that produced the birth certificate.

    Why do you think you buy into every internet rumor and huckster that comes along?

  155. avatar
    nbc April 27, 2013 at 11:07 pm #

    saynomorejoe: Remember , if you can, that the 2008 COLB was produced by Polland and posted on the Daily Kos site and was never released by the White House.

    You are soooo gullible…

  156. avatar
    JoZeppy April 27, 2013 at 11:45 pm #

    saynomorejoe:
    “the ADP attacked the merits of the suit’s claims, calling the evidence proffered by McInnish “inadmissible and not worthy of belief” and adding:”

    As comments are statements of opinion then it would appear that some only want their opinions to be voiced and would say all other opinions are “inadmissible and not worthy of belief” in the courts of our country!

    Is that the kind of courtrooms you want to be heard in when you need to be heard?

    Actually, yes. You see, the courts generally don’t care to hear anyone’s opinion. Just facts. When courts do permit opinions, they tend to be expert opinions, and there are very specific criteria as to when these expert opinions are permitted. The most basic one is that they be actual experts in the subject matter where they offer their opinions. And even then, they would have to be subject to cross examination.

  157. avatar
    US Citizen April 28, 2013 at 3:05 am #

    Joe, consider this scenario.
    Obama serves out his term.
    The week afterward he holds a press conference and says “Ha ha… my birth certificate was a fake.”
    You know what happens then?
    Nothing.
    Why? Because it’s STILL a certified state record.

  158. avatar
    bamalaw April 28, 2013 at 11:40 am #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    I might, by the way, have alternately titled this article: “The Fogbow: friends of the court” since the exhibits attached to the ADP brief had the “Friends of the Fogbow” watermark.

    ROFL.

    To clarify, the exhibits attached to the ADP amicus brief did not have the “FreiendsOf TheFogbow” watermark on them.

  159. avatar
    saynomorejoe April 28, 2013 at 9:45 pm #

    bamalaw: To clarify, the exhibits attached to the ADP amicus brief did not have the “FreiendsOf TheFogbow” watermark on them.

    Now , under which conceivable fact of law, can Friends of FogBow attach their watermark onto the whitehouse,gov document without reference on the document that it is a modified copy of an original posted on another site?

    Are they claiming to have produced the document and asserting copyright rights to the document?

    Or are the producers of the original document part of the FogBow team, and that therefore the rights to the document belong to FogBow?

  160. avatar
    saynomorejoe April 28, 2013 at 9:49 pm #

    US Citizen: Joe, consider this scenario.Obama serves out his term.The week afterward he holds a press conference and says “Ha ha… my birth certificate was a fake.”You know what happens then?Nothing.Why? Because it’s STILL a certified state record.

    There are no certified state documents as certification is not required for recording or filing of state documents.

    There are certified copies of filed documents, and uncertified copies of state documents, and you can get an uncertified copy of a birth certificate, which would assume to mean that the original is not certified when filed,.

  161. avatar
    nbc April 28, 2013 at 9:51 pm #

    A better question is: Under what fact of law is it illegal to attach a watermark to a document? The simple fact is that these documents cost money to download (10cents per page) and other sites have taken these documents and reproduced them as their own. To avoid the confusion, the Fogbow people are adding a watermark.

    But of course, some may foolishly believe that the producers of the original document part of the fogbow team. And while many contributors at the Fogbow are highly qualified people, Ragsdale needs no help.

    saynomorejoe: Now , under which conceivable fact of law, can Friends of FogBow attach their watermark onto the whitehouse,gov document without reference on the document that it is a modified copy of an original posted on another site?

    Are they claiming to have produced the document and asserting copyright rights to the document?

    Or are the producers of the original document part of the FogBow team, and that therefore the rights to the document belong to FogBow?

  162. avatar
    nbc April 28, 2013 at 9:52 pm #

    saynomorejoe: There are certified copies of filed documents, and uncertified copies of state documents, and you can get an uncertified copy of a birth certificate, which would assume to mean that the original is not certified when filed,.

    Huh?…

    Logic is not your strong point I presume?

    And how familiar are you with the federal rules of evidence?

  163. avatar
    saynomorejoe April 28, 2013 at 9:57 pm #

    nbc: A better question is: Under what fact of law is it illegal to attach a watermark to a document? The simple fact is that these documents cost money to download (10cents per page) and other sites have taken these documents and reproduced them as their own. To avoid the confusion, the Fogbow people are adding a watermark.But of course, some may foolishly believe that the producers of the original document part of the fogbow team. And while many contributors at the Fogbow are highly qualified people, Ragsdale needs no help.

    So, fogbow is using their watermark to claim ownership rights to the document?

    The document is available off the whitehouse site and fogbow want to stop people from copying it to present it to other readers on other sites

    Strange, I have never paid to download a document from a site!

  164. avatar
    saynomorejoe April 28, 2013 at 10:00 pm #

    nbc: Huh?…Logic is not your strong point I presume?And how familiar are you with the federal rules of evidence?

    Actually I have the rules of evidence bookmarked on my main computer!

    And I also use LexisNexus for california court cases

    \

  165. avatar
    Daniel April 28, 2013 at 10:06 pm #

    saynomorejoe: Actually I have the rules of evidence bookmarked on my main computer!

    Are you planning on reading them any time soon?

  166. avatar
    saynomorejoe April 28, 2013 at 10:10 pm #

    JoZeppy: Actually, yes. You see, the courts generally don’t care to hear anyone’s opinion. Just facts. When courts do permit opinions, they tend to be expert opinions, and there are very specific criteria as to when these expert opinions are permitted. The most basic one is that they be actual experts in the subject matter where they offer their opinions. And even then, they would have to be subject to cross examination.

    Actually, you see, it is a fact that a judge issues an opinion, which is accepted as fact, but actually just an opinion, which others may disagree with!

  167. avatar
    CarlOrcas April 28, 2013 at 10:31 pm #

    saynomorejoe: Strange, I have never paid to download a document from a site!

    Any site? How about PACER?

  168. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy April 28, 2013 at 10:34 pm #

    No.

    saynomorejoe: So, fogbow is using their watermark to claim ownership rights to the document?

  169. avatar
    nbc April 28, 2013 at 10:43 pm #

    CarlOrcas: Any site? How about PACER?

    I doubt that Joe is familiar with much of our legal system, including how to get hold of the documents on a docket.

  170. avatar
    CarlOrcas April 28, 2013 at 10:43 pm #

    saynomorejoe: There are no certified state documents as certification is not required for recording or filing of state documents.

    I’m going to regret asking this but…..in the state where you live how do they record changes in the ownership of things like automobiles, homes, etc.? How about recorded liens?

    Do the documents have to be certified before they can be filed or can anyone put their name on your car or a lien on your home?

  171. avatar
    nbc April 28, 2013 at 10:43 pm #

    saynomorejoe: Actually, you see, it is a fact that a judge issues an opinion, which is accepted as fact, but actually just an opinion, which others may disagree with!

    Missing the point a bit…

  172. avatar
    nbc April 28, 2013 at 10:46 pm #

    No the Fogbow is watermarking the legal document that was obtained from PACER.

    For goodness sake, have you no familiarity with how legal documents are typically acquired? The Fogbow does not mind sharing its documents, but it wants to get credit for having paid good money to obtain the document.

    For PACER the cost is $0.10 per page with a certain maximum but for Orly filings, it typically costs a small fortune to download her irrelevant attachments.

    For state courts the costs can be much higher.

    There are several people at the Fogbow who are willing to spend their own money to educate themselves and others.

    saynomorejoe: So, fogbow is using their watermark to claim ownership rights to the document?

    The document is available off the whitehouse site and fogbow want to stop people from copying it to present it to other readers on other sites

    Strange, I have never paid to download a document from a site!

  173. avatar
    nbc April 28, 2013 at 10:47 pm #

    CarlOrcas: I’m going to regret asking this but…..in the state where you live how do they record changes in the ownership of things like automobiles, homes, etc.? How about recorded liens?

    ROTFL…

    Trying to educate Joe is a painful endeavor indeed.

  174. avatar
    CarlOrcas April 28, 2013 at 10:48 pm #

    nbc: I doubt that Joe is familiar with much of our legal system, including how to get hold of the documents on a docket.

    But….but….he has the “rules of evidence” bookmarked on his “main computer”.

  175. avatar
    JD Reed April 28, 2013 at 10:49 pm #

    Daniel, superb reasoning! The world is not waiting with bated breath to hear that Saynomorejoe finally accepts the Obama BC as valid. If never in this life does he do so, it amounts to nothing. The issue is not to prove things to people who will never accept real facts that conflict with their prejudices, it’s to satisy the constitution. This has been done. It need not be ratified by saynomorejoe or any of his co-believers. What saynomorejoe hopes to accomplish by tossing out wildly unlikely scenarios utterly unsupported by evidence is beyond me.

  176. avatar
    CarlOrcas April 28, 2013 at 10:50 pm #

    saynomorejoe: And I also use LexisNexus for california court cases

    \

    If you’re having trouble accessing it you might try spelling it correctly: It’s LexisNexis.

  177. avatar
    nbc April 28, 2013 at 10:51 pm #

    CarlOrcas: But….but….he has the “rules of evidence” bookmarked on his “main computer”.

    Has he ever taken time to follow the link?

  178. avatar
    nbc April 28, 2013 at 10:54 pm #

    saynomorejoe: Actually I have the rules of evidence bookmarked on my main computer!

    And I also use LexisNexus for california court cases

    And yet you appear to be still so clueless… You do know that you have to actually follow a bookmarked link..

    As to using LexisNexus (sic), I thought you said you never paid to download documents?

    Now it is true that someone skilled in searching the internet can find much of the material available for free download but I am not sure if you fit into that category.

  179. avatar
    CarlOrcas April 28, 2013 at 11:22 pm #

    saynomorejoe: Actually, you see, it is a fact that a judge issues an opinion, which is accepted as fact, but actually just an opinion, which others may disagree with!

    Actually, Joe, judges are not opinion issuers, if you will, but “triers of fact” when two parties have a disagreement. In criminal cases it involves the state and someone it thinks has violated its laws. Same with civil cases though they don’t have to involve the government.

    The judge’s verdict is binding on the parties (and by precedence on others) but is subject to review by higher courts.

    That’s how things “actually” work……Joe.

  180. avatar
    US Citizen April 28, 2013 at 11:23 pm #

    Joe, what the hell drugs are you on?

    My statement was that even if Obama himself says his certified birth certificate is fake, his word doesn’t trump state certification.
    Just like you, you can’t demand your birth certificate be changed and have the state comply and issue a new one.
    So the point IS… even if Obama said he was a born in Kenya in 1984, nothing will change legally.

  181. avatar
    J.D. Sue April 29, 2013 at 2:28 pm #

    saynomorejoe: Actually, you see, it is a fact that a judge issues an opinion, which is accepted as fact, but actually just an opinion, which others may disagree with!

    —-
    A judge’s opinion is taken as law, not fact.

  182. avatar
    saynomorejoe April 29, 2013 at 2:35 pm #

    Actually, I had a Pacer Account but it expired after I did not use it for 6 months, and as to whether or not I knew about recording documents, I held a Real Estate Brokers license before I retired, and I was a FHA real estate appraiser!

    Documents filed are notarized, not certified.

    A certification is similar to a notarization , except that the notary certifies that the document was signed by the party.

    The Certification of the recorded document simply states that it is a true copy of a recorded document.

    In both cases the party making the assertion have no responsilbiity of the contents expressed in the document referred to.

    Which, of course , is why you have Title Companies and Attorneys reviewing all of the documents to make sure that the information on the documents is correct!

    As you apparently need instruction in these matters, I will demonstrate the facts.

    A claimed father goes to an attorney as says he was not the father of the child as he was away from his wife for 16 months prior to the birth. The attorney gets the certified bc and says we can not fight this as it says you are the father!

    And you believe the attorney would do , and say, that, or do you think that the attorney would challenge that in court?

  183. avatar
    saynomorejoe April 29, 2013 at 2:39 pm #

    J.D. Sue: —-A judge’s opinion is taken as law, not fact.

    Of course not! A judge can not make law, a judge interprets the law as it applies to the case before him.

    The Supreme Court can not make law! It can say whether a law it constiutional or not, but can not make laws.

    A Supreme Court can make laws non-enforceable, but the legislative body can change the law to make it enforceable

  184. avatar
    saynomorejoe April 29, 2013 at 2:42 pm #

    US Citizen: Joe, what the hell drugs are you on?My statement was that even if Obama himself says his certified birth certificate is fake, his word doesn’t trump state certification.Just like you, you can’t demand your birth certificate be changed and have the state comply and issue a new one.So the point IS… even if Obama said he was a born in Kenya in 1984, nothing will change legally.

    you are completely wrong, again. The claimant can go to court and force the Vital Records to issue a new BC is fhe original BC is fraudulent obtained.

  185. avatar
    saynomorejoe April 29, 2013 at 2:49 pm #

    Let us assume that you have been named as the father of a child by a female acquaintance on the birth certificate, and you have never been sexually active, and, in fact, are a homosexual man, and now are faced with child support payments for the next 18 years.

    Do you think you should be forced to accept that fate, simply because the female submits to the welfare agency a certified copy of a birth certificate that shows you as the father, as the mother is un-married?

    After all, the certified copy of the vital record is prima facie evidence of the facts of the birth, is it not?

  186. avatar
    J.D. Sue April 29, 2013 at 2:53 pm #

    saynomorejoe: the law as it applies to the case before him.
    The Supreme Court can not make law! It can say whether a law it constiutional or not, but can not make laws.
    A Supreme Court can make laws non-enforceable, but the legislative body can change the law to make it enforceable

    —-
    You are wrong. A court’s opinion serves as precedent precisely because it has made law.

    And by the way, the very definition of common law is judge-made law.

    You are right about one thing–an act of legislation can change judge-made law.

  187. avatar
    Reality Check April 29, 2013 at 3:00 pm #

    Jack Ryan began putting the Friends of Fogbow.com watermark on documents because people were paying a good sum of money to download court filings from PACER and posting them to SCRIBD. Birther sites, especially Birther Reports, were then downloading them for free and putting their own watermarks on the documents without giving proper attribution to Jack Ryan.

    What they were doing was not illegal because court documents are public records and not copyright protected but it was unethical.

    saynomorejoe: So, fogbow is using their watermark to claim ownership rights to the document?

    The document is available off the whitehouse site and fogbow want to stop people from copying it to present it to other readers on other sites

    Strange, I have never paid to download a document from a site!

  188. avatar
    saynomorejoe April 29, 2013 at 3:03 pm #

    laws are made by legislatures, judicial decision by made by the courts, Administrative decisions by made by the executive brance.

    As common law courts, U.S. courts have inherited the principle of stare decisis.[21] American judges, like common law judges elsewhere, not only apply the law, they also make the law, to the extent that their decisions in the cases before them become precedent for decisions in future cases

    Prededent setting is not law-making!

  189. avatar
    J.D. Sue April 29, 2013 at 3:15 pm #

    saynomorejoe: American judges, like common law judges elsewhere, not only apply the law, they also make the law, to the extent that their decisions in the cases before them become precedent for decisions in future cases
    Prededent setting is not law-making!

    —-

    Hmm, so common law judges “not only apply the law, they also make the law” but that is not law-making…

    Don’t get me wrong, Joe, I know how the system works–the role of the legislature etc. But it was you who wrongly said that Court opinions are accepted as fact, when indeed they are accepted as law.

  190. avatar
    Jim April 29, 2013 at 3:20 pm #

    saynomorejoe: “laws are made by legislatures, judicial decision by made by the courts, Administrative decisions by made by the executive branch.”

    Then tell me why all these pub congresspeople are complaining about Judges creating law?

    “In the common law system, judges have historically added, amended and altered the law through their decisions and the mechanism of precedent. This is called case law, and is the definitive aspect of the common law system. It is misleading if not incorrect to claim that the role of judges is limited to “interpretation of law”.”

    http://www.tim-richardson.net/M_Acct/Law511/LAW511%20assignment%201.html

    I’m hoping that using a law student’s paper will be easier for you to read and understand…since you don’t seem to be able to read and understand judicial opinions.

  191. avatar
    saynomorejoe April 29, 2013 at 3:22 pm #

    Reality Check: Jack Ryan began putting the Friends of Fogbow.com watermark on documents because people were paying a good sum of money to download court filings from PACER and posting them to SCRIBD. Birther sites, especially Birther Reports, were then downloading them for free and putting their own watermarks on the documents without giving proper attribution to Jack Ryan. What they were doing was not illegal because court documents are public records and not copyright protected but it was unethical.

    Why should they attribute them to Jack Ryan when they are the product of Pacer?

    Ther are not a work product of Jack Ryan, are they?

    Now to handle that problem, Jack Ryan should annotate the documents, and post them with the annotations and then he can claim work product and request recognition of his work!

  192. avatar
    saynomorejoe April 29, 2013 at 3:27 pm #

    Jim: saynomorejoe: “laws are made by legislatures, judicial decision by made by the courts, Administrative decisions by made by the executive branch.”Then tell me why all these pub congresspeople are complaining about Judges creating law? “In the common law system, judges have historically added, amended and altered the law through their decisions and the mechanism of precedent. This is called case law, and is the definitive aspect of the common law system. It is misleading if not incorrect to claim that the role of judges is limited to “interpretation of law”.”http://www.tim-richardson.net/M_Acct/Law511/LAW511%20assignment%201.htmlI’m hoping that using a law student’s paper will be easier for you to read and understand…since you don’t seem to be able to read and understand judicial opinions.

    You might ask yourself why the congresspeople are complaining about it , if it is a permissable action for the jurist to take?

    Could it be that they know the function of the legistalure is to create the laws , and it the function of the jurists to enforce the laws?

  193. avatar
    gorefan April 29, 2013 at 3:32 pm #

    saynomorejoe: Ther are not a work product of Jack Ryan, are they?

    Ever own a book and put your name in it so people would know you bought it and it belonged to you? Did you write the book? Was it a product of your work? Or did you just claim ownership because you paid for it?

  194. avatar
    saynomorejoe April 29, 2013 at 3:34 pm #

    J.D. Sue: —-Hmm, so common law judges “not only apply the law, they also make the law” but that is not law-making… Don’t get me wrong, Joe, I know how the system works–the role of the legislature etc. But it was you who wrongly said that Court opinions are accepted as fact, when indeed they are accepted as law.

    How odd, as they are not accepted as law in different jurisdictions.

    And the law remains on the books un-amended!

  195. avatar
    J.D. Sue April 29, 2013 at 3:45 pm #

    saynomorejoe: Why should they attribute them to Jack Ryan when they are the product of Pacer?Ther are not a work product of Jack Ryan, are they?Now to handle that problem, Jack Ryan should annotate the documents, and post them with the annotations and then he can claim work product and request recognition of his work!


    Where is the confusion? Why should Ryan “annotate” the documents?

    The cover page, and the signature page, properly identify the authors. And by the way, this was a state-court filing, not a Pacer filing.

  196. avatar
    Jim April 29, 2013 at 3:54 pm #

    saynomorejoe: How odd, as they are not accepted as law in different jurisdictions.

    And the law remains on the books un-amended!

    Really? I don’t remember any law being passed that makes abortion legal, and yet it is. Why is that Joe?

  197. avatar
    J.D. Sue April 29, 2013 at 4:02 pm #

    saynomorejoe: How odd, as they are not accepted as law in different jurisdictions.
    And the law remains on the books un-amended!

    —-

    Of course they are not accepted as law in different jurisdictions. No act of a legislature is accepted as law outside the legislature’s jurisdiction either.

    As for the law remaining “on the books”, what is your point and what books are you referring to? If the Supreme Court strikes a law as unconstitutional, that law loses all legal force regardless of whether it continues to exist in some books. Are court opinions not in books? What books are you talking about?

  198. avatar
    J.D. Sue April 29, 2013 at 4:06 pm #

    saynomorejoe: Could it be that they know the function of the legistalure is to create the laws , and it the function of the jurists to enforce the laws?


    Except if the Jurist upholds the Affordable Care Act…

  199. avatar
    CarlOrcas April 29, 2013 at 4:31 pm #

    saynomorejoe: And the law remains on the books un-amended!

    Is it your position that the law stays in force until it is amended by the legislature…..no matter what the Supreme Court says? Is that how it worked in Brown v. Board of Education?

    How about Miranda?

  200. avatar
    CarlOrcas April 29, 2013 at 4:33 pm #

    saynomorejoe: Could it be that they know the function of the legistalure is to create the laws , and it the function of the jurists to enforce the laws?

    Or…….could it be they never got around to reading Marbury v. Madison?

    How about you?

  201. avatar
    Rickey April 29, 2013 at 4:37 pm #

    saynomorejoe: Why should they attribute them to Jack Ryan when they are the product of Pacer?

    Ther are not a work product of Jack Ryan, are they?

    It is at times like this when I cannot figure out if you are an idiot or just pretending to be an idiot.

    They are not the product of either Jack Ryan or Pacer. They are the product of whoever first created them. Pacer merely collects them and makes them available on the Internet.

    Likewise with Jack Ryan. Every document which he puts on Scribd is a document which has has collected, all from various sources. He doesn’t create the documents, he collects them and makes them available at Scribd. Do you understand the difference?

  202. avatar
    CarlOrcas April 29, 2013 at 4:38 pm #

    saynomorejoe: ow to handle that problem, Jack Ryan should annotate the documents, and post them with the annotations and then he can claim work product and request recognition of his work!

    So…..in the days before online filings and computerized word processors is it your position that copied documents filed in cases were the original work product of IBM (the electric typewriter) or Xerox (the copying machine)?

  203. avatar
    Rickey April 29, 2013 at 4:48 pm #

    saynomorejoe:
    Let us assume that you have been named as the father of a child by a female acquaintance on the birth certificate, and you have never been sexually active, and, in fact, are a homosexual man, and now are faced with child support payments for the next 18 years.

    Do you think you should be forced to accept that fate, simply because the female submits to the welfare agency a certified copy of a birth certificate that shows you as the father, as the mother is un-married?

    After all, the certified copy of the vital record is prima facie evidence of the facts of the birth, is it not?

    Prima Facie evidence is rebuttable with admissible contrary evidence. If I were the man in your scenario, I would demand DNA testing, which would prove that I was not the father. End of case. Any defendant in a paternity action has the right to present scientific evidence to refute any presumption of parenthood.

    When a birth certificate is prepared, there is no way of knowing with absolute certainty that the man listed in the birth certificate is the real father. The mother is known, and the child is known, but the health authorities do not require DNA testing to confirm the identity of the father. And that is as it should be, because what is most important is the date and place of birth.

  204. avatar
    nbc April 29, 2013 at 5:55 pm #

    Rickey: saynomorejoe: Why should they attribute them to Jack Ryan when they are the product of Pacer?

    Ther are not a work product of Jack Ryan, are they?

    It is at times like this when I cannot figure out if you are an idiot or just pretending to be an idiot.

    Probably a combination of the two. The problem has been that Jack and others paid good money for transcripts or other documents, only to have them ‘ripped’ by others, pretending that they were theirs. The Fogbow is just adding a proper reference to those who obtained the documents and paid good money for them.

    Surely even you must understand?

  205. avatar
    nbc April 29, 2013 at 5:58 pm #

    saynomorejoe: How odd, as they are not accepted as law in different jurisdictions.

    And the law remains on the books un-amended!

    Totally unable to admit to being wrong again?… You’re such a piece of art… In fact, your postings serve as a fair warning against those who believe birthers can hold reasonable beliefs 🙂

  206. avatar
    Northland10 April 29, 2013 at 6:47 pm #

    nbc: Probably a combination of the two. The problem has been that Jack and others paid good money for transcripts or other documents, only to have them ‘ripped’ by others, pretending that they were theirs. The Fogbow is just adding a proper reference to those who obtained the documents and paid good money for them.

    Surely even you must understand?

    It was a rather smart move by Jack. There is not much worse for these guys than to admit they got help from the arch-enemy.

  207. avatar
    nbc April 29, 2013 at 9:26 pm #

    Northland10: It was a rather smart move by Jack. There is not much worse for these guys than to admit they got help from the arch-enemy.

    The Fogbow has been the provider of many relevant documents and even transcripts. The latter, adding much to the amusement of those who were not present at the hearing

  208. avatar
    Rickey April 29, 2013 at 10:41 pm #

    nbc: Probably a combination of the two. The problem has been that Jack and others paid good money for transcripts or other documents, only to have them ‘ripped’ by others, pretending that they were theirs. The Fogbow is just adding a proper reference to those who obtained the documents and paid good money for them.

    Surely even you must understand?

    Precisely. They are no more Jack’s or The Fogbow’s “work product” (as saynomorejoe puts it) than the books in my home are my work product. But if I loan one of my books to a friend, I expect to get it back.

  209. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy April 29, 2013 at 10:50 pm #

    Generally, these court documents are not free, and I know that considerable funds have been expended in obtaining them. The brunt of the expense has been born by “Jack Ryan” with contributions from the folks who contribute to the Fogbow and others, such as myself, who contribute directly.

    nbc: The Fogbow has been the provider of many relevant documents and even transcripts. The latter, adding much to the amusement of those who were not present at the hearing

  210. avatar
    nbc April 29, 2013 at 11:20 pm #

    I too have spent quite a small fortune (well, it’s all relative I guess), on acquiring court documents and have made them available. I love to read the actual documents and understand the issues. Well worth the money. In case of Jack Ryan, his extensive collection has cost him more than a small fortune..

    Close to 3600 documents…

    Jack deserves a medal and our support for his efforts

    Dr. Conspiracy: Generally, these court documents are not free, and I know that considerable funds have been expended in obtaining them. The brunt of the expense has been born by “Jack Ryan” with contributions from the folks who contribute to the Fogbow and others, such as myself, who contribute directly.

  211. avatar
    saynomorejoe April 30, 2013 at 1:41 am #

    Rickey: Prima Facie evidence is rebuttable with admissible contrary evidence. If I were the man in your scenario, I would demand DNA testing, which would prove that I was not the father. End of case. Any defendant in a paternity action has the right to present scientific evidence to refute any presumption of parenthood. When a birth certificate is prepared, there is no way of knowing with absolute certainty that the man listed in the birth certificate is the real father. The mother is known, and the child is known, but the health authorities do not require DNA testing to confirm the identity of the father. And that is as it should be, because what is most important is the date and place of birth.

    Ah, that is what people think , but some states have laws that you have to file a claim withing two years of the birth, and some courts have ruled that it does not make any difference if you can prove it or not, as you are the putative father.

    Oh, well, I have never been in that position!

  212. avatar
    saynomorejoe April 30, 2013 at 1:43 am #

    Rickey: Precisely. They are no more Jack’s or The Fogbow’s “work product” (as saynomorejoe puts it) than the books in my home are my work product. But if I loan one of my books to a friend, I expect to get it back.

    Not if you put it on the web for all to see and read!

  213. avatar
    saynomorejoe April 30, 2013 at 1:46 am #

    Dr. Conspiracy: Generally, these court documents are not free, and I know that considerable funds have been expended in obtaining them. The brunt of the expense has been born by “Jack Ryan” with contributions from the folks who contribute to the Fogbow and others, such as myself, who contribute directly.

    I must assume that “Jack Ryan” is an alias for someone who may, or may not, be a person who has to personally pay for the downloads, especially if he is in the government.

    As I assume that “Jack Ryan” status from the careful wording of Dr. C’s posting.

    Am I in error, in toto, or partially?

  214. avatar
    saynomorejoe April 30, 2013 at 1:54 am #

    CarlOrcas: So…..in the days before online filings and computerized word processors is it your position that copied documents filed in cases were the original work product of IBM (the electric typewriter) or Xerox (the copying machine)?

    Neither, those documents are the work product of the dictator of the sentences, and the typist to typed them.

    And they are entitled to be paid for their products.

    3600 documents are about a days wages now a days, or a hours wage of a top attorney.

    Assuming the state 10cents a page!

    But then again, you may be mis-stating documents , or the number of pages to a document.

    But , hey it goes on the credit card anyway, doesn’t it?

  215. avatar
    CarlOrcas April 30, 2013 at 2:53 am #

    saynomorejoe: Not if you put it on the web for all to see and read!

    Oh my! You don’t understand copyright law either.

  216. avatar
    CarlOrcas April 30, 2013 at 2:58 am #

    saynomorejoe: Neither, those documents are the work product of the dictator of the sentences, and the typist to typed them. And they are entitled to be paid for their products.

    Your messages late Monday evening are a little hard to follow. Are you saying the fees paid then (and now?) to acquire copies of court documents went to the people who prepared them and not to the court that provided the copies from its files?

  217. avatar
    The Magic M April 30, 2013 at 4:03 am #

    Why is this important anyway? Isn’t it just another attempt by “saynomorejoe” to depict a hero of the anti-birther movement as somehow “dishonest” or whatever?

    Joe, what do you say about ORYR/Birther Report slapping their logo on every video they show, even though they all were produced by other people?

  218. avatar
    nbc April 30, 2013 at 4:26 am #

    saynomorejoe: Not if you put it on the web for all to see and read!

    A poor understanding of copyright indeed.

  219. avatar
    nbc April 30, 2013 at 4:30 am #

    saynomorejoe: And they are entitled to be paid for their products.

    And they are

    3600 documents are about a days wages now a days, or a hours wage of a top attorney.

    Assuming the state 10cents a page!

    But then again, you may be mis-stating documents , or the number of pages to a document.

    Well, you can check the cost of the per page rate on Pacer which used to be 8 cents and is now 10 cents per page. Now imagine 20-30 pages per document and we are talking some real money here.

    But what is your point?

    Or do you have anything that can be argued in a reasoned and logical fashion?

    So far I have seen nothing more than you trying to understand, with limited success, the circumstances.

    You may give it a try though. Understanding…

  220. avatar
    nbc April 30, 2013 at 4:32 am #

    saynomorejoe: I must assume that “Jack Ryan” is an alias for someone who may, or may not, be a person who has to personally pay for the downloads, especially if he is in the government.

    As I assume that “Jack Ryan” status from the careful wording of Dr. C’s posting.

    Am I in error, in toto, or partially?

    That is correct, like you he may or may ont be a person who has to personally pay. But the Pacer site requires payment. Simple…

    What does it matter my dear friend.

    As is the case with so many of your ‘arguments’ you have nothing…

  221. avatar
    nbc April 30, 2013 at 4:35 am #

    The Magic M: Why is this important anyway? Isn’t it just another attempt by “saynomorejoe” to depict a hero of the anti-birther movement as somehow “dishonest” or whatever?

    Jack Ryan is no hero, he just provides an important service of providing those interested in learning the facts about these birther cases, with access to these documents. Calling him dishonest, without any reasoned argument, shows once again how shallow the birther arguments continue to be. Jack Ryan’s contributions are that he has exposed the failings by these countless birthers in courts all over the nation.

    For that he deserves our gratitude as ignorance should be fought at all stages.

  222. avatar
    Lani April 30, 2013 at 5:50 am #

    Just curious. Why is anyone responding to Joe? Looks like a waste of time to me.

  223. avatar
    Majority Will April 30, 2013 at 6:54 am #

    Lani:
    Just curious.Why is anyone responding to Joe?Looks like a waste of time to me.

    Hear, hear. A braying jack-ass deserves no audience.

  224. avatar
    Sef April 30, 2013 at 9:58 am #

    CarlOrcas: So…..in the days before online filings and computerized word processors is it your position that copied documents filed in cases were the original work product of IBM (the electric typewriter) or Xerox (the copying machine)?

    If so, Chester Carlson would have been a much, much richer person than he was.

  225. avatar
    Rickey April 30, 2013 at 2:18 pm #

    saynomorejoe: Ah, that is what people think , but some states have laws that you have to file a claim withing two years of the birth, and some courts have ruled that it does not make any difference if you can prove it or not, as you are the putative father.

    File a claim? Do you mean file with the putative father registry? That is for men who want to be listed as the father, not for men who are listed as the father against their will.

    It is ludicrous to suggest that a man can be held to be financially responsible for a child simply because the mother listed him as the father on the birth certificate. Everyone is entitled to due process. Pennsylvania’s law is typical:

    183.901. Putative father/voluntary child support—statement of policy.

    (a) A putative father does not have the legal status of being a father, and consequently is not under a legal obligation to support a minor dependent child until paternity is established.

  226. avatar
    Saynomorejoe May 1, 2013 at 5:52 pm #

    CarlOrcas: Your messages late Monday evening are a little hard to follow. Are you saying the fees paid then (and now?) to acquire copies of court documents went to the people who prepared them and not to the court that provided the copies from its files?

    Nope, the fees for producer where paid by the clients.

    The fee paid to Pacer is a fee for coping costs and not for the documents, which may be free to look at if you wish to look at them , but if you want a copy the fee is set at what the Court or Legislature sets at a fair cost of copying.

    Pacer, is , I believe, not the court that produces the document, but the recording systiems for the courts.

  227. avatar
    Saynomorejoe May 1, 2013 at 5:56 pm #

    The Magic M:
    Why is this important anyway? Isn’t it just another attempt by “saynomorejoe” to depict a hero of the anti-birther movement as somehow “dishonest” or whatever?

    Joe, what do you say about ORYR/Birther Report slapping their logo on every video they show, even though they all were produced by other people?

    I don’t give a damn what anyone does on their site, but it is not proper to claim they are your products.

    I label my pictures for copyright because I produce them but I don’t label them I use other people’s pictures.

  228. avatar
    Saynomorejoe May 1, 2013 at 6:01 pm #

    nbc: That is correct, like you he may or may ont be a person who has to personally pay. But the Pacer site requires payment. Simple…

    What does it matter my dear friend.

    As is the case with so many of your ‘arguments’ you have nothing…

    Well, an inquiring mind might think that an attorney, or clerk, working in a governmental office, might secure those documents from the Pacer site, and have the cost paid by the government, or private , office and post them on the website as needed.

    When people indicate that things cost money to produce , they are absolutely correct , but that does not indicate that the people who paste them , paid for them, does it?

  229. avatar
    misha marinsky May 1, 2013 at 6:27 pm #

    Saynomorejoe: The fee paid to Pacer

    Here is an illustration of the Pacer:

    http://www.time.com/time/specials/2007/article/0,28804,1658545_1658533_1658042,00.html

  230. avatar
    Saynomorejoe May 1, 2013 at 6:45 pm #

    Rickey: File a claim? Do you mean file with the putative father registry? That is for men who want to be listed as the father, not for men who are listed as the father against their will.

    It is ludicrous to suggest that a man can be held to be financially responsible for a child simply because the mother listed him as the father on the birth certificate. Everyone is entitled to due process. Pennsylvania’s law is typical:

    183.901. Putative father/voluntary child support—statement of policy.


    (a)A putative father does not have the legal status of being a father, and consequently is not under a legal obligation to support a minor dependent child until paternity is established.

    “Definition: A “putative father” is a man who may be a child’s father, but who is not married to the child’s mother on or before the date that the child is born, or who has not established paternity of the child in a court proceeding before the filing of an adoption petition for the child. “

  231. avatar
    CarlOrcas May 1, 2013 at 7:03 pm #

    Saynomorejoe: Nope, the fees for producer where paid by the clients.

    The fee paid to Pacer is a fee for coping costs and not for the documents, which may be free to look at if you wish to look at them , but if you want a copy the fee is set at what the Court or Legislature sets at a fair cost of copying.

    Pacer, is , I believe, not the court that produces the document, but the recording systiems for the courts.

    I thought you said you had a PACER account?

    You pay a fee at PACER no matter what you do…..view, print or download.

    There are limits but I forget what they are.

    And, most of the documents are uploaded by attorneys involved in the cases.

  232. avatar
    CarlOrcas May 1, 2013 at 7:05 pm #

    Saynomorejoe: When people indicate that things cost money to produce , they are absolutely correct , but that does not indicate that the people who paste them , paid for them, does it?

    Is that a trick question?

  233. avatar
    Northland10 May 1, 2013 at 7:50 pm #

    Saynomorejoe: “Definition: A “putative father” is a man who may be a child’s father, but who is not married to the child’s mother on or before the date that the child is born, or who has not established paternity of the child in a court proceeding before the filing of an adoption petition for the child. ”

    Sooooo Joe, strictly as a hypothetical, if Obama’s marriage were considered not legitimate because Obama, Sr. was already married (which he was), would that put the father in the “punitive” status? Being a punitive father, how would that affect the status of the President in terms of those who thing parentage affects citizenship?

  234. avatar
    Keith May 1, 2013 at 8:59 pm #

    Northland10: Being a punitive father, how would that affect the status of the President in terms of those who thing parentage affects citizenship?

    Uh, spell checker is your friend. Just sayin’…

    Edit. Oh. Not in this case it isn’t. Sorry. Silly me. Perhaps a proof reader?

  235. avatar
    Rickey May 1, 2013 at 10:32 pm #

    Saynomorejoe: “Definition: A “putative father” is a man who may be a child’s father, but who is not married to the child’s mother on or before the date that the child is born, or who has not established paternity of the child in a court proceeding before the filing of an adoption petition for the child. ”

    I don’t know where you got your definition, since you provide no source. However, the operative phrase is “may be a child’s father…”

    Contrary to what you have claimed, a “putative father” always has the right to submit evidence that he is not the father and he cannot be forced to support the child if he is not the father.

    What this has to do with Obama, I cannot imagine.

  236. avatar
    nbc May 1, 2013 at 11:16 pm #

    Saynomorejoe: The fee paid to Pacer is a fee for coping costs and not for the documents, which may be free to look at if you wish to look at them , but if you want a copy the fee is set at what the Court or Legislature sets at a fair cost of copying.

    This does not make sense. The documents are not freely available on Pacer. One can search and each search costs $0.10 per page. Pacer provides access to docketing information and also copies of the court documents. Although many courts are moving towards electronic filing, Pacer still receives their money.

    Documents downloaded from Pacer however become public domain which is how Recap (Pacer in reverse) works.

    You have not problems talking about issues with which you are totally unfamiliar?… Oh wait… What I am saying here. Your record speaks for itself

  237. avatar
    nbc May 1, 2013 at 11:19 pm #

    Saynomorejoe: I don’t give a damn what anyone does on their site, but it is not proper to claim they are your products.

    Not proper 🙂 Like claiming that our President is not natural born

    When people pay for something, they may label it appropriately. Ex Libris NBC

    You do understand the concept of ownership. When I label the things I buy, is this improper?

    Sigh… Logic is also not much of a strong suit of yours? What do you have to offer I wonder? Other than a bit of fun and distraction

  238. avatar
    nbc May 1, 2013 at 11:21 pm #

    Saynomorejoe: When people indicate that things cost money to produce , they are absolutely correct , but that does not indicate that the people who paste them , paid for them, does it?

    True. But again, you confuse possibility with relevance or plausibility.

    For all I know you may be sitting naked in front of your computer, paid for by some birther fund to make birthers look foolish

    Of course, possible but then again… Plausible?

    Poor Joe, you really should pay some attention to such issues as logic, reasoning, proof and evidence.
    It may make a big difference to your life.

  239. avatar
    nbc May 1, 2013 at 11:24 pm #

    Rickey: What this has to do with Obama, I cannot imagine.

    Not much of anything Joe has brought up appears to have any relevance to President Obama

  240. avatar
    saynomorejoe May 3, 2013 at 9:20 pm #

    Nothing anyone posts of this board has any relevance to Obama as not one of the poster here appear able to discover the truth of the matter!

    We all have opinions and opinions are just opinion

    I have had a lot of discussion with our City Attorney and he has told me to my face that he can not tell me the truth about a matter if it would harm his client, which is the City!

    He can not even tell the District Attorney the truth if it would open the City of litigation, or arrest!

    So that tells you how much you can trust attorneys in the real world!

    They are fine as long as they are not talking about the actions of their clients!

  241. avatar
    J.D. Sue May 3, 2013 at 11:39 pm #

    saynomorejoe: I have had a lot of discussion with our City Attorney and he has told me to my face that he can not tell me the truth about a matter if it would harm his client, which is the City!
    He can not even tell the District Attorney the truth if it would open the City of litigation, or arrest!
    So that tells you how much you can trust attorneys in the real world!
    They are fine as long as they are not talking about the actions of their clients!

    Your attorney has a duty to be your advocate and to keep your confidences.

    The City has its own attorney, with the same duties towards his/her client–the City.

    What is surprising about that?

  242. avatar
    Dave B. May 3, 2013 at 11:49 pm #

    Well, I guess somebody needs a nap.

    saynomorejoe:
    Nothing anyone posts of this board has any relevance to Obama as not oneof the poster here appear able to discover the truth of the matter!

    We all have opinions and opinions are just opinion

    I have had alot of discussion with our City Attorney and he has told me to my face that he can not tell me the truth about a matter if it would harm his client, which is the City!

    He can not even tell the District Attorney the truth if it would open the City of litigation, or arrest!

    So that tells you how much you can trust attorneys in the real world!

    They are fine as long as they are not talking about theactions of their clients!

  243. avatar
    Majority Will May 4, 2013 at 1:23 am #

    Dave B.:
    Well, I guess somebody needs a nap.

    If only that was the cure to this disease.

  244. avatar
    nbc May 4, 2013 at 2:38 am #

    saynomorejoe: Nothing anyone posts of this board has any relevance to Obama as not one of the poster here appear able to discover the truth of the matter!

    That does include you does it not.

    Fail…

  245. avatar
    Rickey May 4, 2013 at 12:13 pm #

    saynomorejoe:

    I have had alot of discussion with our City Attorney and he has told me to my face that he can not tell me the truth about a matter if it would harm his client, which is the City!

    He can not even tell the District Attorney the truth if it would open the City of litigation, or arrest!

    So that tells you how much you can trust attorneys in the real world!

    They are fine as long as they are not talking about the actions of their clients!

    Not answering your questions is not the same as lying. If you asked the attorney about pending litigation, it is entirely appropriate for him to refuse to talk to you about it.

    It’s called attorney-client privilege. Look it up. You might learn something.