Douglas Vogt, believing that Barack Obama and others are guilty of felony and treason, submitted an affidavit in federal court in Seattle, asking a judge to forward it to a grand jury for investigation. In this affidavit, Vogt lists 20 proofs that Obama’s birth documentation is faked. Previously, Points 1-4 were debunked in Part 1 of this series..
The fifth point of forgery is that the size of the COLB is wrong if it was truly a photocopy of the original;
Vogt alleges that the Obama long form birth certificate released by the White House is 6.125 inches wide, representing a 12.5% reduction in size which is “not a standard reduction from a copying machine.” Vogt sells copying machines for a living, so he should know what most copy machines do (he’s not a dealer for Xerox). He further says:
The Governor and the director Fuddy wrote that Mr. Obama’s COLB was a direct copy “of the original Certificate of Live Birth” and copied on a copying machine which had the green security paper in it.
I don’t think that Governor Abercrombie ever wrote that, but I don’t dispute the accuracy of the process as coming from Fuddy. So let’s look at the details:
I inspected the background layer of the PDF to determine its size. I am not an expert in image scaling, but I agree with Vogt that the form width in the White House PDF is about 6.125 inches. The argument Vogt makes assumes that the White House PDF document is the same size as the certified copy from Hawaii. In order to try to test that, I compared the security paper in the PDF with an actual sheet of security paper, believed to be the same that the Hawaii DOH uses. As best I can measure, the security paper pattern repeats about every 9 cm on the actual paper and the White House birth certificate PDF, suggesting that the White House PDF is not reduced significantly—it’s same size as the original certified copy within my ability to measure it.
To get the reduction percentage, one must compare the White House PDF image to an unquestioned image. That’s where we run into problems. Vogt writes:
Paul [Irey?] and I had figured out the exact line length of the 1961 COLB forms measured from the bold vertical line on the left hand side to the end of the line on the right side. The original line length was 7-inches (504 points).
What did he measure? He doesn’t say exactly, but he subsequently confirms the result by measuring a Hawaiian death certificate—not a birth certificate, but a death certificate!
So we can’t really say how Vogt got his number, but let’s examine his claim that a 12.5% reduction is non-standard for a copier. He’s saying that the copy is 87.5% the size of the original. I went to the Canon web site and randomly selected a multi-function machine (D560/D530) and looked at the operators manual (Page 37) and found:
So based on this example, copy machines can do scaling in 1% increments, and I don’t think Vogt’s measurements are accurate to 1/2%.
So this point remains somewhat open-ended. We can’t determine how Vogt got his numbers, but even if they are right, a copy machine could do that. Vogt hasn’t proven anything. Vogt claims elsewhere that his forger knew a great deal about authentic Hawaiian certificates, and I can think of no rational explanation for a forger carefully reproducing minute details in a document and then issuing it the wrong size.
The sixth point of forgery on the COLB is that the age of Barack Hussein Obama, Senior was wrong;
Obama’s birth certificate shows the age of his father as 25. Vogt says it should be 27. Vogt claims that an unnamed conspirator went to the Harvard University records, retrieved an erroneous age for Barack Obama Sr. and used it to fake the birth certificate. Vogt assumes that the Harvard date is wrong because he finds two other official documents with a birth date that would make him 27. Vogt’s research is rather thin including only 3 documents. When I researched this back in 2011 (see “When was Obama’s daddy born?”), I found twenty documents that included Obama Sr.’s birth date and 13 of them show him to have been born in 1934, which would make him aged 27 when his son was born, and 7 documents (8 counting the birth certificate) show him to have been born in 1936, making him 25 years old. Obama Sr.’s two known passports divide evenly, one from 1934 and one from 1936. Obama Sr.’s tombstone in Kenya also shows the 1936 date. I think the argument can be made equally well for one year of birth as for another. Since we really don’t know when Barack Obama Sr. was born, and we know that he used different dates on different documents, there is no reason to conclude that the age on the birth certificate is other than what Obama’s father provided (or Ann Dunham provided). Personally, I go with the tombstone as the most reliable date, since it comes from the family and is not tainted by the capricious date use of Obama Sr.
Vogt also adds in the nonsense about the Father’s Race block that contains the word “African.” The race of the parent is open-ended, whatever the parent considers themself to be. Black Kenyans in 1961 preferred the term “African” to describe their race. The code table that Vogt presents is for the race of the child, which is a classification based on the application of rules to the parent’s race. I have written extensively on this topic before and will include that by reference and not repeat it here: