Main Menu

The occasional open thread: HAARP edition

Put your Obama conspiracy comments, regardless of altitude, that don’t relate to the current articles here. This thread will close in two weeks.

57 Responses to The occasional open thread: HAARP edition

  1. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 22, 2016 at 8:43 pm #

    “Ted Cruz outdoes Trump — adds Muslim-hating ‘birther’ conspiracy theorist to his foreign policy team”

    https://www.rawstory.com/2016/03/ted-cruz-outdoes-trump-adds-muslim-hating-birther-conspiracy-theorist-to-his-foreign-policy-team/

    Refers to Frank Gaffney

  2. avatar
    justlw March 22, 2016 at 10:02 pm #

    Dave Levinthal relays the opener for a Shurf Joe fundraising pitch:

    https://twitter.com/davelevinthal/status/712113418111721472

    “Sheriff Joe Arpaio Personal Email – May Contain Privileged Communication”

  3. avatar
    Dave B. March 22, 2016 at 10:55 pm #

    I’ve been having a bit of a back-and-forth with Gerry Nance– the wonders of the internet, right? I couldn’t imagine doing that in person, having to be within speaking distance long enough to do that. Anyway, he directed my attention to one of the most spectacular displays of the Dunning-Kruger effect I’ve come across, his very own

    OPENL ETTER TO TED C RUZ:

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/304261746/Open-Letter-to-Ted-Cruz

    https://disqus.com/home/discussion/sltrib/new_poll_shows_ted_cruz_with_a_big_lead_in_utah/#comment-2582197898

  4. avatar
    Thrifty March 23, 2016 at 7:37 am #

    That horrid Twitter plugin has a tweet I keep seeing that says “obama admitted to the fbi he naturalized in 1983 on aug. 18, 2014 …”

    Anyone know what this rumor came from?

  5. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 23, 2016 at 7:49 am #

    Nance wrote: “Yes they do [have to jump through hoops]. They need to enter the US. Look, a child (1431) need not go through the naturalization process, but an adult (1433) does, but both must enter the US to naturalize.”

    He’s saying that a child of citizens born overseas is not a citizen at birth until he enters the US. Reminds me of Schrödinger’s cat.

    Dave B.: I’ve been having a bit of a back-and-forth with Gerry Nance

  6. avatar
    W. Kevin Vicklund March 23, 2016 at 7:55 am #

    Thrifty:
    That horrid Twitter plugin has a tweet I keep seeing that says “obama admitted to the fbi he naturalized in 1983 on aug. 18, 2014 …”

    Anyone know what this rumor came from?

    A guy that used to post here as SvenMagnussen (who appears to be the guy with the twitter account in question) made that up. He claims that Obama naturalized in the same ceremony as The Governator. He hasn’t provided a lick of evidence for this, of course, and I’ve never seen anyone else pick it up.

  7. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 23, 2016 at 7:57 am #

    It may have come from Sven Magnussen. He wrote at Orly’s web site on August 11, 2015:

    “Obama was interviewed by the FBI in the White House on Aug. 18, 2014. Obama admitted to the FBI he was ineligible to be POTUS after naturalizing as a US citizen on Sept. 16, 1983.”

    http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/oral-argument-in-obama-forgery-case-is-scheduled-for-october-20th-9th-circuit-court-of-appeals-san-francisco

    It is alleged that the Twitter poster Alex Hamilton is Sven.

    Thrifty: Anyone know what this rumor came from?

  8. avatar
    Thrifty March 23, 2016 at 8:31 am #

    Oh okay. So it is made up out of whole cloth, when Sven or this Twitter guy says it (assuming they are the same person).

    At least if another birther says it, they are referencing someone else’s lie instead of making up their own.

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    It may have come from Sven Magnussen. He wrote at Orly’s web site on August 11, 2015:

    “Obama was interviewed by the FBI in the White House on Aug. 18, 2014. Obama admitted to the FBI he was ineligible to be POTUS after naturalizing as a US citizen on Sept. 16, 1983.”

    http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/oral-argument-in-obama-forgery-case-is-scheduled-for-october-20th-9th-circuit-court-of-appeals-san-francisco

    It is alleged that the Twitter poster Alex Hamilton is Sven.

  9. avatar
    Thrifty March 23, 2016 at 12:04 pm #

    Ok another question, of the “refresh my memory” type.

    I remember some Obama Derangement Syndrome sufferers making a big deal of a military man holding up an umbrella for President Obama after some speech on the White House lawn on a rainy day. I remember it did (and still does) strike me as not only incredibly petty, but also hypocritical because Republican presidents have had umbrellas held for them as well.

    My question is, what was the event at which this happened? I remember it was a speech over something big. Either the debt ceiling or maybe the Supreme Court ruling on the Affordable Care Act. But it’s been bugging me lately and I’m hard pressed to figure out what search terms to Google on for the answer.

  10. avatar
    W. Kevin Vicklund March 23, 2016 at 12:22 pm #

    Joint press conference with the Turkish Prime Minister, May 16, 2013.

  11. avatar
    Rickey March 23, 2016 at 12:25 pm #

    Thrifty:
    Ok another question, of the “refresh my memory” type.

    I remember some Obama Derangement Syndrome sufferers making a big deal of a military man holding up an umbrella for President Obama after some speech on the White House lawn on a rainy day.I remember it did (and still does) strike me as not only incredibly petty, but also hypocritical because Republican presidents have had umbrellas held for them as well.

    My question is, what was the event at which this happened?I remember it was a speech over something big.Either the debt ceiling or maybe the Supreme Court ruling on the Affordable Care Act.But it’s been bugging me lately and I’m hard pressed to figure out what search terms to Google on for the answer.

    Actually it was a routine press conference with the Prime Minister of Turkey.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-puts-marines-on-umbrella-duty-irking-conservatives/2013/05/17/cad75a5a-bf0f-11e2-97d4-a479289a31f9_story.html

  12. avatar
    Rickey March 23, 2016 at 12:33 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy:

    It is alleged that the Twitter poster Alex Hamilton is Sven.

    “Alex Hamilton” either is Sven or someone who has appropriated all of Sven’s delusions.

  13. avatar
    Thrifty March 23, 2016 at 12:45 pm #

    Oh. I guess my memory of the umbrella thing was worse than I thought and it was a fairly mundane foreign affairs thing.

    Thanks all.

  14. avatar
    Scientist March 23, 2016 at 2:49 pm #

    Thrifty: Oh. I guess my memory of the umbrella thing was worse than I thought and it was a fairly mundane foreign affairs thing.

    Thanks all.

    Yep. Criticize Obama for being polite to a guest, for the showing the kindness any of us would want to teach our children to do.

    Can anyone imagine President Trump welcoming foreign leaders to the White House? Nope, I can’t either.

  15. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 23, 2016 at 3:43 pm #

    I must admit that I find 8 USC 1431 just a bit confusing; however, in the case of Ted Cruz, it is wholly inapplicable because prior to the Child Citizenship Act of 2001, the statute only applied to naturalized citizen parents.

    Dave B.: I’ve been having a bit of a back-and-forth with Gerry Nance

  16. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 23, 2016 at 3:55 pm #

    Quora.com answers to the question: What is the craziest accusation made against President Obama?

    https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-craziest-accusation-made-against-President-Obama

  17. avatar
    Dave B. March 23, 2016 at 6:44 pm #

    Basically, the statute provides (among other things) a remedy for cases where a child didn’t acquire US citizenship at birth in spite of having a US citizen parent.

    Generally speaking, under Sec.’s 320 and 321 of the INA as originally enacted, a child who was not born a US citizen would automatically become a US citizen if, while the child was under sixteen years of age, both parents became US citizens and the child was residing in the United States. This applied when one parent was a citizen who had been unable to transmit citizenship and the other an alien who naturalized (Sec. 320); or when both parents were aliens who naturalized, or the sole surviving or custodial parent naturalized (Sec. 321). Those sections were codified as 8 US Code Sec. 1431 and 1432.

    The current INA Sec. 320 (8 US Code Sec. 1431) replaces both those sections, requiring only one US citizen parent in order for the child to be automatically naturalized when, generally speaking, residing in the US, and changing the age limit to eighteen years. That can be either a US citizen parent (who hadn’t satisfied the statutory requirements for transmission of citizenship when the child was born) or a parent naturalized after the child was born. It no longer matters if the other parent isn’t a US citizen.

    Current INA Sec. 320 also replaces part of former Sec. 322, which provided for expeditious naturalization (in which the child would be naturalized immediately, without having to satisfy the residence and physical presence requirements for naturalization under Sec. 316) upon application by a US citizen parent. Where the parent formerly had to petition for the child’s naturalization, now the child automatically becomes a US citizen.

    There were some crazy inequities in the previous law. For example, a child who had TWO US citizen parents who had never resided in the United States before the child’s birth couldn’t automatically become a US citizen under Sec. 320, but could only be naturalized under Sec. 322. And while a child whose sole surviving or custodial parent naturalized would automatically become a citizen under Sec. 321, a child whose sole surviving or custodial parent was a citizen could only be naturalized under Sec. 322.

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    I must admit that I find 8 USC 1431 just a bit confusing; however, in the case of Ted Cruz, it is wholly inapplicable because prior to the Child Citizenship Act of 2001, the statute only applied to naturalized citizen parents.

  18. avatar
    gorefan March 23, 2016 at 7:07 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy: I must admit that I find 8 USC 1431 just a bit confusing;

    The legislative history of 8 USC §1431 shows it was based on Section 320 of the 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act . The confusion is that it appears to conflict with Section 301 (a) (7) now 8 U.S. Code §1401 (g).

    There are three Sections of the 1952 Act (Sections 301, 320 and 321) that apply to children born abroad to one US citizen parent.

    Section 301 (a) (7) A person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such a person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than ten years, at least five of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years; Provided, that any periods of honorable service in the Armed Forces of the United States by such a citizen parent may be included in computing the physical presence requirements in this paragraph.

    Section 320 (a) A child born outside of the United States, one of whose parents at the time of the child’s birth was an alien and the other of whose parents then was and never thereafter ceased to be a citizen of the United States, shall, if such alien parent is naturalized, become a citizen of the United States, when –
    (1) such naturalization takes place while such child is under the age of sixteen; and
    (2) such child is residing in the United States pursuant to a lawful admission for permanent residence at the time of the naturalization or thereafter and begins to reside permanently in the United States while under the age of sixteen years.
    (b) Subsection (a) of this section shall not apply to an adopted child.

    Section 321 does not apply to Cruz.

    Section 301 is in Title III Chapter I – Nationality at Birth and by Collective Naturalization.

    Sections 320 and 321 are in Title II Chapter 2 – Nationality Through Naturalization.

    The 1952 Act was apparently written to cover all situations for a child born abroad.

    Section 301 (a) (7) for the case with one citizen parent who meets the residence requirement (like Cruz’s mother).

    Section 320 (a) for the case with one citizen parent who did not meet the residence requirement and did not subsequently lose their US citizenship.

    Section 321 (a) for the case with one citizen parent who did not meet the residence requirement and who subsequently lost their US citizenship.

    IMO – 8 USC §1431 does not apply to Ted Cruz.

  19. avatar
    Crustacean March 24, 2016 at 12:18 pm #

    Oh, brother! I almost fell out of my chair laughing when I saw the photo of Michelle Obama in the football uniform. I thought football helmets had facemasks in the 80’s…

    Dr. Conspiracy: Quora.com answers to the question: What is the craziest accusation made against President Obama?

  20. avatar
    Thrifty March 24, 2016 at 1:26 pm #

    So I don’t know if this was posted before, but here is a humorous blend of Obama conspiracy theories and feminism

    This Proves That All Bodies Are Beautiful And The Government Lied About How They Killed Bin Laden

  21. avatar
    Thrifty March 24, 2016 at 2:43 pm #

    Ok I just noticed something from the Twitter plugin.

    Is this “Alex Hamilton” birfoon seriously citing The National Enquirer as a source?

  22. avatar
    justlw March 24, 2016 at 2:51 pm #

    Thrifty: Is this “Alex Hamilton” birfoon seriously citing The National Enquirer as a source?

    To be fair: of all the checkout-line rags, the Enquirer is the least likely to just make crap up; they’ve actually broken legit stories in the past. Given that, I’d put them ahead of, say, WND in journalistic credibility. A low bar to clear, to be sure.

  23. avatar
    Crustacean March 24, 2016 at 3:52 pm #

    Just today I was reading about how F. Lee Bailey once proposed a deal with the Enquirer to restore O.J. Simpson’s good name sometime after the “trial(s) of the century.”

    The proposal was to have the Enquirer hire a polygraph examiner of their choosing to administer a test to Simpson. They would have exclusive rights to report on the results, with the agreement that if he passed they would put up a $2M reward for information leading to the identification of the real killers. (Apparently, the Enquirer ran a nasty story about one of Simpson’s kids, and he called the whole thing off).

    I have to admit, the “OJ didn’t do it” (alone, at least) conspiracy theory is one that I can actually get behind. What makes it really confusing is that there’s evidence of more than one conspiracy related to that saga.

    justlw: To be fair: of all the checkout-line rags, the Enquirer is the least likely to just make crap up; they’ve actually broken legit stories in the past.

  24. avatar
    Dave March 24, 2016 at 5:08 pm #

    In Trump news today, Ted Cruz had this to say: “Donald, you’re a sniveling coward.”

    One thing that Trump has contributed to politics is the complete demise of Reagan’s Eleventh Commandment.

  25. avatar
    gorefan March 24, 2016 at 5:42 pm #

    This might just be the quote of the century from PPSimmons Facebook

    “MIKE ZULLO will be on FREEDOM FRIDAY tomorrow to talk about this issue of eligibility. He is one of the nation’s foremost experts in the matter!

    https://www.facebook.com/ppsimmons

  26. avatar
    gorefan March 24, 2016 at 6:23 pm #

    Bob over at the Fogbow pointed out this Post & Fail article about Hawaii’s US Senator Mazie Hirono

    http://www.thepostemail.com/2016/03/24/if-sen-mazie-hirono-is-a-naturalized-citizen-how-is-ted-cruz-natural-born/

    Senator Hirono was born in 1947 in Japan to a Japanese father and a Japanese-American mother (US citizen). She and her mother moved to Hawaii in 1955 and Mazie naturalized in 1959.

    Rondeau asks how can Ted Cruz be a citizen but Mazie Hirono had to naturalize?

    Short answer is Senator Hirono’s mother didn’t meet the residence requirement,

  27. avatar
    Notorial Dissent March 25, 2016 at 2:44 am #

    At 12 years of age????? Doesn’t work that way last I checked.

  28. avatar
    Dave B. March 25, 2016 at 2:57 am #

    That would have been under former INA Sec. 322.

    Notorial Dissent:
    At 12 years of age?????Doesn’t work that way last I checked.

  29. avatar
    Notorial Dissent March 25, 2016 at 6:56 am #

    Depends on what the law was in 1959, but current law, 320, would tend to indicate citizenship is automatically acquired no naturalization.

  30. avatar
    gorefan March 25, 2016 at 10:36 am #

    Notorial Dissent:
    At 12 years of age?????Doesn’t work that way last I checked.

    Her mother did not pass citizenship to her at birth. When she and her mother moved to Hawaii from Japan, Senator Hinoro was only a Japanese citizen. Under Section 322 of the 1952 Immigration and Naturalization she could be naturalized on petition of her citizen parent.

    Section 322. (a) A child born outside of the United States, one or both of whose parents is at the time of petitioning for the naturalization of the child, a citizen of the United States, either by birth or naturalization, may be naturalized if under the age of eighteen years and not otherwise disqualified from becoming a citizen by reason of section 313, 314, 315, or 318 of this Act, and if residing permanently in the United States, with the citizen parent, pursuant to a lawful admission for permanent residence, on petition of such citizen parent, upon compliance with all provisions of this title, except that no particular period of residence or physical presence in the United States shall be required. If the child is of tender years he may be presumed to be of good moral character, attached to the principles of the Constitution, and well disposed to the good order and happiness of the United States.

  31. avatar
    Dave B. March 25, 2016 at 12:18 pm #

    Notorial Dissent:
    Depends on what the law was in 1959, but current law, 320, would tend to indicate citizenship is automatically acquired no naturalization.

    Dave B.: Current INA Sec. 320 also replaces part of former Sec. 322, which provided for expeditious naturalization (in which the child would be naturalized immediately, without having to satisfy the residence and physical presence requirements for naturalization under Sec. 316) upon application by a US citizen parent. Where the parent formerly had to petition for the child’s naturalization, now the child automatically becomes a US citizen.

  32. avatar
    justlw March 25, 2016 at 2:06 pm #

    Since the Cruz story came up earlier, I thought I’d point out that as always, the most interesting part of the story isn’t going to be the transgression(s), but the coverup.

    Back in July, it was reported that a pro-Cruz super PAC gave $500,000 to a pro-Fiorina super PAC, categorized as “OTHER DISBURSEMENT”. WashPo noted at the time, “That is…unusual, to say the least.”

    One of the photos of “the five” from the Enquirer story has been identified as Fiorina’s campaign manager.

  33. avatar
    Thrifty March 26, 2016 at 8:26 pm #

    I hate this election. I hate that it drags on for so…. damn… long. At least a year. It gets really insufferable around the time primary season starts. I just want to live my life and forget about it but I can’t. I don’t want to think about that asshole Trump but I just can’t get away from it.

    I avoid the news. Some people would criticize me for being uninformed but I just can’t handle it.

    But it’s not enough. My work situation is weird. I’m not exactly working but I’m not exactly unemployed. I spend my weekdays at a combination training/staffing company in Northern Virginia. After spending December/January training in Java software development, I get set up with interviews, sort of like how a Hollywood agent sets an actor up on auditions, but I still have to convince the companies to hire me. In the meantime, I have to spend all day in a classroom in the office doing self paced study (I could goof off; a lot of the guys do but I like to spend time learning). They keep bringing up the topic of the election in loud, concentration breaking conversations. It bothers and distresses me but I can’t stop it.

    It’s everywhere. I go to my favorite restaurant and it’s on the TV. I went to take an OCA certification test two weeks ago, and for some reason there’s a TV in one of the hallways at the testing center playing CNN. I’m tired of seeing this fascist racist maniac looming as a threat. This kind of man is not what my country is about. Most of the time, I disagree with Republican candidates but at least I respect them. John McCain and Mitt Romney at least ran honorable campaigns. George W. Bush never threatened to ban all Muslims from the country. This doesn’t happen in America. I want this to be over. I want to stop worrying about this so I can get back to my life. Or at least I want to STOP BEING REMINDED OF IT EVERY DAMN DAY.

    I just can’t bear the thought of a Trump presidency. Not because of myself. I am of the thought that I can’t really control who our leaders are and I need to be the mast of my destiny so that I can live a life regardless of who’s in charge. I have a say in the matter of course. But I’m only one voter. From a state with only 3 electoral votes (although I will probably be living in a different one by the time of the election). But Trump as our president would be a national embarrassment. I was never ashamed of my country before, even when George W. Bush damaged our reputation. Like I said, I disagreed with GWB but I still kinda liked him as a person.

    Sorry I just had to get it off my chest. This election is sort of like some combination of an annoying guy who won’t stop talking about his favorite band and the plot of that movie Forgetting Sarah Marshall (a guy is dumped and is heartbroken, but his girlfriend is a big movie star so he is constantly reminded of her).

  34. avatar
    Thrifty March 26, 2016 at 8:40 pm #

    Someone here mentioned previously that although Trump seems to be making huge wins, it’s not entirely accurate because he’s just getting a plurality in a lot of states. I had been wondering exactly what Trump’s numbers were in terms of pure votes.

    Found this interesting article on Politico:

    http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/03/donald-trump-republican-convention-213770

    Here are the hard facts: As of today, 32 states have cast votes in the Republican presidential race through primaries, caucuses or conventions. In every single one of them, the anti-Trump forces have won a majority. In 22 of those states, more than 60 percent of Republican voters have rejected the Donald; in nine of those states, more than 70 percent rejected Trump. In all, according to the New York Times, 21,027,107 votes have been cast so far in the Republican nominating contests; and the anti-Trump vote has trounced the self-proclaimed avatar of greatness, 12,944,945 to 8,082,148. With the campaign essentially all about him, Trump or non-Trump, he is losing by nearly five million votes.

    It’s a weird thing that the front runner, with more delegates, can still be BEHIND by 5 million votes. At least when Bush won the electoral vote but lost the popular vote, he was only behind by about 500,000. Trump is behind by 10 times that much.

  35. avatar
    Keith March 27, 2016 at 12:49 am #

    Thrifty: It’s a weird thing that the front runner, with more delegates, can still be BEHIND by 5 million votes.

    And that’s just the Republicans.

  36. avatar
    dunstvangeet March 27, 2016 at 2:00 pm #

    It’s a weird thing that the front runner, with more delegates, can still be BEHIND by 5 million votes. At least when Bush won the electoral vote but lost the popular vote, he was only behind by about 500,000. Trump is behind by 10 times that much.

    Bush was actually behind, the way that they counted it, by 4,493,096. You’ve got to remember, They’re counting from a pure majority, not a plurality.

    So, there were 105,405,100 votes cast in the 2000 Presidential Election.

    Bush recieved 50,456,002. The way that they’re counting it is that means that there are 54,949,098 anti-bush votes. That puts Bush behind by 4,493,096 votes.

  37. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 27, 2016 at 6:36 pm #

    So I was sitting around musing about the Dunning-Kruger effect, and it came to mind that the effect might just be a statistical artifact rather than an insight into human nature. I used Google to see if someone else had though the same thing, and came across an interesting article on Dunning-Kruger that not only describes the work, but covers the artifact theory. See the part on “regression towards the mean.”

  38. avatar
    Rickey March 28, 2016 at 3:40 am #

    Thrifty:

    It’s a weird thing that the front runner, with more delegates, can still be BEHIND by 5 million votes.At least when Bush won the electoral vote but lost the popular vote, he was only behind by about 500,000.Trump is behind by 10 times that much.

    That’s interesting, but the great unknown is how many of the anti-Trump voters would have named him as their second choice. It’s difficult to achieve a majority when you have multiple opponents.

    That said, the key will be the “winner take all states,” where a candidate can win all of the state’s delegates with just a plurality of the vote. Right now Trump has about 49% of the delegates who have been selected to date.

  39. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 28, 2016 at 9:27 am #

    Article: “International law cannot say who our president should be.” Obama? Cruz? Vattel?

    No. It’s about Grace Poe in the Philippines.

    http://www.bworldonline.com/content.php?section=Opinion&title=international-law-cannot-say-who-our-president-should-be&id=124725

  40. avatar
    Crustacean March 29, 2016 at 1:58 pm #

    Looks like this year’s Republican National Convention is shaping up to be a real blast!

    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/03/26/1506259/-Wizard-level-trolling-on-display-with-Guns-at-the-RNC-petition?detail=email&can_id=641b00079a7882fa0e96c776a594096d&source=email-npr-despite-the-math-bernie-sanders-has-already-won-3&email_referrer=npr-despite-the-math-bernie-sanders-has-already-won-3___52941&email_subject=omg-nyt-commenter-rips-the-gop-and-their-hero-ronald-reagan-apart-in-spectacular-fashion&link_id=8

    (to the tune of “San Francisco” by Scott McKenzie)

    If you’re going to be in Cleveland
    Be sure your magazine’s loaded for bear
    If you’re going to be in Cleveland
    You’re gonna meet some of Drumpf’s people there

    For those who make the trek to Cleveland
    Summertime will be a gunnin’ there
    In streets of the Forest City
    Angry folks will wave rifles in the air

    All across the nation
    Strange confabulation
    Of self-promotion
    And impotent frustration
    With a trigger fixation
    An Arctic Ocean
    Of melting emotion

    For those who make the trek to Cleveland
    Be sure your bandolier’s loaded for bear
    If you come to good ol’ C-Town
    Summertime will be a gunnin’ there

  41. avatar
    Curious George March 29, 2016 at 9:17 pm #

    The Birther Princess, Miki Booth, writes on Facebook:

    “Five years ago, on April 27, 2011, obama released a digitally manufactured Hawaiian Birth Certificate. Experts immediately recognized it as a fake and forensic testing and analysis has shown over and over that a fraud was committed. Donald Trump had been alerting the general public that obama was using fraudulent ID documents, a short form Hawai’i DOH computer print out of a birth record, forged selective service record, stolen social security number, and that all his records were sealed. April 27th is a day we will show the world that we will not be surpressed. Birthers shall rule the airwaves on April 27th by blitz posting any and all proof of obama crimes and ineligibility especially his phony birth narrative. Please join me, the Birther Princess and all Birthers everywhere including the King of the Birthers, Donald J. Trump who kept this travesty in the news and continues to bring light to the ineligibility of ted cruz, marco rubio, bobby jindal, nikki haley and all candidates born to foreign parents and/or born in a foreign country.”

    Absolute, total hogwash Miki. If you’re relying on the country’s foremost eligibility “expert”, volunteer Mike Zullo, according to Special Deputy / Pastor Carl Gallups, your faith has been misplaced. You’ve been hoodwinked. I say, double hogwash, Miki! Oh, and weren’t you the alleged prime suspect involved in making the so-called forgery?

  42. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy April 1, 2016 at 6:22 pm #

    Power problems at my web host caused some down time this afternoon. Back up now.

  43. avatar
    CRJ April 2, 2016 at 2:17 am #

    Bet you guys, and that Looneytune Pennsylvania District Court Judge, and the Commi PA SC are looking forward to Prince Hashim of Jordans’ Candidacy for President too, just as soon as you can wreck the residency ✔?

    https://twitter.com/CodyRobertJudy/status/715805173063557121

    It’s a real Sh*tShack Show.. Clowns and everything.- PEACE OUT Bro.
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3519583/Peace-fools-Obama-plays-clown-flashing-peace-sign-nuclear-security-summit-team-photo-gets-unimpressed-looks-bemused-world-leaders.html

  44. avatar
    Andy April 2, 2016 at 1:10 pm #

    CRJ: Everyone has sex except me!

    Good to know, Judy. Good to know.

  45. avatar
    Dave B. April 2, 2016 at 4:31 pm #

    Carmon Elliott’s going for that sixteenth minute, and trying to raise some cash:

    http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/2016/04/cruz-birther-seeks-crowdfunding-for-scotus-challenge-against-cruz.html/

  46. avatar
    bob April 2, 2016 at 6:30 pm #

    CRJ:
    Bet you guys, and that Looneytune Pennsylvania District Court Judge, and the Commi PA SC are looking forward to Prince Hashim of Jordans’ Candidacy for President too

    Judy (who is just parroting others’ talking points) again proves he’s no constitutional scholar: Prince Hashim bin Hussein is not a U.S. citizen due to one of the two exceptions listed in Wong Kim Ark.

  47. avatar
    Dave B. April 2, 2016 at 6:43 pm #

    Trump born-in-Scotland story that makes way more sense than any Obama born-in-Kenya scenario ever did:

    http://www.newscorpse.com/ncWP/?p=31298

    And it’s got a better baby picture than any born-in-Kenya baby picture, and a better edited Trump video than any Obamasnippets video.

  48. avatar
    Rickey April 3, 2016 at 6:52 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    NY Court of Appeals refuses to hear Cruz case.

    It may have taken to Court of Appeals five minutes to reach that decision. The plaintiffs clearly failed to file their challenge on time.

  49. avatar
    bob April 3, 2016 at 9:33 pm #

    Rickey: It may have taken to Court of Appeals five minutes to reach that decision. The plaintiffs clearly failed to file their challenge on time.

    Birthers love to say that we need to be a nation of laws, but they would be happy to ignore any law if it resulted in a case declaring Obama ineligible.

  50. avatar
    Notorial Dissent April 4, 2016 at 7:21 am #

    They say they want a nation of laws until that law rules against them, they mean.

    bob: Birthers love to say that we need to be a nation of laws, but they would be happy to ignore any law if it resulted in a case declaring Obama ineligible.

  51. avatar
    Thrifty April 4, 2016 at 1:47 pm #

    Recent article on Orly’s site entitled John Anderson, Independent candidate, polled at 22% at the top of his campaign, Perot got 19% in 1992 and Teddy Roosevelt got 27% in 1912. Trump can win a 3 way race if the GOP ruling mafia steals the nomination from him

    Gonna ignore the idiotic insinuation that Trump could only lose the nomination if it were “stolen”. Or maybe by typing that last sentence I already didn’t ignore it.

    More to the point, I find it very amusing that Orly puts hope on Trump winning as a 3rd party candidate if he doesn’t get the nomination, based on the above facts. Because as Birthers often do, even when they get facts correct, they draw really dumb conclusions. Orly did not seem to notice that although all three of those men mounted presidential campaigns that got some percentage of the popular vote, all three of them lost. Roosevelt 1912 did the best of all, at least getting some Electoral votes. Perot got about 19% as she stated, but didn’t win a single state and really just seemed to split the vote against George Bush, yet in the end did not win a single electoral vote. Anderson did worse than either of those two.

    How does someone look at such facts and draw some poor conclusions?

  52. avatar
    Northland10 April 4, 2016 at 7:56 pm #

    Thrifty: How does someone look at such facts and draw some poor conclusions?

    It’s a gift.

    I am still amazed at her obsession with polling numbers as if they were somehow legally binding.

  53. avatar
    Nancy Ruth Owens April 5, 2016 at 1:52 pm #

    Real father (biological): Thomas Beauchamp Owens, Sr.