Birthers believe things that aren’t true. I saw that over at ObamaReleaseYourRecords today, where a commenter addressed me saying:
You’re not keeping up with current events. The specific issue of the legitimacy of the lfbc proffered by the White House has not been adjudicated by a court. So neither you nor I know whether there are facts sufficient to prove a forgery.
That’s not true. The authenticity of Obama’s long form birth certificate was adjudicated in 2011.
In the case of Farrar v. Obama Orly Taitz presented witnesses, among them Douglas Vogt and Felicito Papa, who testified to the alleged forgery of the LFBC. She also presented exhibits including the analysis of Paul Irey. Judge Malihi, in his order, stated that he had decided the case “on the merits of their arguments and evidence.” In regard to the allegations of forgery, Judge Malihi said: “The Court finds the testimony of the witnesses, as well as the exhibits tendered, to be of little, if any, probative value, and thus wholly insufficient to support Plaintiffs’ allegations.”
One may say that this loss was not due to a lack of evidence, but to the ineptitude of Orly Taitz in presenting it (and she certainly had no clue about how to present expert testimony), but administrative law judges in Georgia such as Michael Malihi have wide latitude in considering evidence, including unqualified testimony that wouldn’t be admissible in superior court. Malihi said: “None of the testifying witnesses provided persuasive testimony.”
Malihi also rejected arguments that Obama was ineligible because of his non-citizen father.
In conclusion, Judge Malihi ruled: “President Barack Obama is eligible as a candidate for the presidential primary election under O.C.G.A. § 21-2-5(b).”
Whatever criticism one may raise against that trial, still the authenticity of Obama’s Long Form birth certificate WAS litigated ON THE MERITS and Obama was found eligible.
My memory may be wrong, but in Orly’s case in IN all her “expert” testimony was stricken. Cheetos was deemed not and eggspert and Irey, as I recall, “might” be an expert in typesetting.
They also were testifying about the “forgery”.
Judge Malihi said a lot of things but never gave any reasons or logic behind his decision. We know from Wonderland – “Saying something doesn’t make it true.” In addition, if you read the hearing transcript, Judge Malihi actually prevented Orly from allowing her evidence and witnesses to be properly proffered to the court. Its literally impossible for any lawyer to correctly proffer evidence or a witness in court in just matter of minutes, which what Orly was just given.
That was Indiana, IIRC
realist:
judge bent’s words in the DISMISSED Indiana Ballot Challenge
(emphasis mine)
19. NO WITNESS presented by Plaintiffs was QUALIFIED as an EXPERT in the field of document authentication.
20. NO WITNESS presented by Plaintiffs was QUALIFIED to provide an EXPERT OPINION as to whether what was purportedly downloaded from the White House web-site is a FORGERY.
All EVIDENCE produced on October 22, 2012 is STRICKEN.
Some excellent work refuting birther claims in the comments at ORYR, Doc. While it’s doubtful you’ll change of the minds of any of the regulars, less dogmatic readers will find it persuasive.
I went over to ORYR, and now I am washing my hands to get the weird smell from some of the commenters off…what a strange bunch of factually challenged bloviators we have over there. But…ANY DAY NOW The One Honest Judge will prove them all right…
The decision of FARRAR v. OBAMA was in a lower Georgia court so the decision is not posted on Lexis or WestLaw nor published in the usual printed reports. However it can be read here:
__
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B_KEK8-LWmzhNWQ4MmI2ZGUtZDMwYi00ZGU4LTkxZTUtZjNkNjNhOGY2YWQ4/edit
Having been there, I didn’t find that Taitz was given a “matter of minutes.” We’d have to go to the video to time it. But that’s irrelevant. In expert testimony, the expert write an opinion which is provided to the court. His testimony on the stand is to establish his credentials and answer questions from the defense. The transcript ran 46 pages, and Orly Taitz presented 208 pages of exhibits on top of her 21 page first amended complaint and a 22-page proposed findings.
And with all that, Orly lost to an empty chair.
I hope to cast doubt in some minds that they don’t already know it all. I’m not trying to change minds, but to free them to think for themselves.
Also, they have more readers than I do.
I think we have a language problem. When birthers claim they just want their cases heard on the merits, what they really mean is that the judge must frogmarch the President out of their White House in chains. Anything less than that and the case was never really heard and quite likely someone got to the Judge’s family. or bribed the state of Georgia with a pair of nuclear reactors.
And in the way the bithers mean it, the cases will never be heard on the merits. Legally speaking or for that matter, in terms of common sense they have been heard on the merits every time.
Hektor: When birthers claim they just want their cases heard on the merits, what they really mean is that the judge must frogmarch the President out of their White House in chains
from taitz’s website (emphasis mine)
DVD of the historic TRIAL in GA and DVD of a historic TESTIMONY in NH, where EVIDENCE WAS PROVIDED showing Obama using a forged birth certificate and a stolen social security number.
she omits that she LOST both cases and that NH told her to get lost and to not return
That surprises me. What’s the basis for that?
No; clearly reading the transcript and watching the hearing, Orly was clearly not given enough time to present her case properly.
In fact Judge Land did pretty much the same thing. In sanctioning Orly $20,000.00 there is no question Orly was denied due process.
Although due process required allowing a hearing for Orly why she shouldn’t be sanctioned, the hearing essentially never occurred.
Judge Land allowed Orly to show up and it is clear from the transcript, Judge Land forbid Orly from presenting her case or even speaking.
That was the denial of due process.
As far the appeals court goes, Judge Land did give the hearing, so the appeals court didn’t care. In addition, appeal courts usually protect their own and will very rarely go after their fellow judges.
During the GA hearing, Orly made a note that there was very little time and that it was clear she was RUSHED by Judge Malihi. Orly simply didn’t have the time to properly proffer her evidence and witnesses to the court. I guess Judge Malihi saw to that.
How does ignorance of a non-occurrence indicate ignorance of current events, particularly when the expected non-occurrence would be prompted by an imaginary need?
It’s pretty hard to be aware of everything that doesn’t exist.
“The Court finds the testimony of the witnesses, as well as the exhibits tendered, to be of little, if any, probative value, and thus wholly insufficient to support Plaintiffs’ allegations.”
An allegation never explained and simply unsupported by the record. The case was dismissed at the appeals on standing grounds, so we really never got appeals uphold on Judge Mahili’s finding.
I agree that Orly was rushed; however, she wasn’t limited in her written submissions.
That said, if defense counsel had showed up, none of her witnesses would have been able to testify because they weren’t qualified except Sampson, and he really didn’t have any first hand knowledge of any of the facts of the case. All he said, and all he could say was, “it ought to be investigated more.”
I agree that the trial was a mess, Orly was a mess, the Judge wanted to get that mess out of the courtroom. Nevertheless, the birthers did lose one on the merits.
Alexa.com.
Like in Alice in Wonderland, when a judge says it, it is so. Deciding is what judges do. They don’t have to explain why something is unpersuasive. They are either persuaded, or they are not.
what’s john gomna say about Orly after tomorrows hearing?
does an Orly fail get john excited?
Maybe because none of her so-called “evidence” was really not evidence but just a lot of conjecture by people who don’t know what they’re talking about? John, if the testimony being given to the Judge has absolutely no bearing on the case (like the selective service application) or the witnesses cannot testify to the authenticity of the underlying document that was posted on the web, why would he waste his time listening to the BS?
I also read the transcripts, and it is completely untrue that Orly wasn’t give a chance to speak. She spoke at great length; the problem was that she refused to observe the rules or to follow the judge’s directions. Rather than comport herself as a lawyer in a court of law, she acted like a speaker at a press conference, and treated the judge as a hostile journalist. The judge was correct to admonish and fine her.
Yes, Doc that’s probably true. That’s why most judge are corrupt. Many believe that judges need to be held accountable because they simply are given too much authority and power.
Orly may have *said* that, but that doesn’t make it true.
Judge Malihi asked Orly how much time she would need. She said two hours, and Judge Malihi gave her two hours.
She then presented her arguments and witnesses for an hour and fifteen minutes, and *chose* to rest that that time, when she could have gone on for another 45 minutes. She can’t tell the judge how much time she’ll need, get it, then end EARLY and still complain that she didn’t have enough time.
“I also read the transcripts, and it is completely untrue that Orly wasn’t give a chance to speak. She spoke at great length; the problem was that she refused to observe the rules or to follow the judge’s directions. Rather than comport herself as a lawyer in a court of law, she acted like a speaker at a press conference, and treated the judge as a hostile journalist. The judge was correct to admonish and fine her.”
I read the transcript too. Orly was clearly forbidden to speak or present her case or even answer Judge Land’s questions. Every time Orly would attempt to speak (Answer Land’s question), Judge Land would cut her off before she even get out 1 or 2 words. Judge Land would ask another question. After complete confusing Orly and not allowing her to answer his questions, Land concluded the hearing and sanctioned Orly.
ORYR may have more “readers” than here. However, you have to take into account that many anti-birthers visit the website to read the next OMG news report.
any. day. now.
Doc,
Alexa is barely one step removed from outright malware (and has been labelled as such before). No one in their right minds installs it due to the egregious and multiple exposures of personal data privacy it performs.
As such the average user doesn’t install it, idiots do and we know exactly which bucket Birfoons fall in…..
As such I would not trust the Alexa numbers as having any degree of accuracy in actual site visits by a representative sample of real users.
I might add that there are a substantial number of sock puppets over at ORYR, as an example “Falcon”, one of the classics idiots has at least 4 other ID’s that I am aware of.
orly was already told that she has 20 minutes tomorrow
After 4 years of “working” on this “issue,” Orly should be able to present her case cogently in 20 minutes but as we saw in Georgia she can’t do it. She should have a 20 minute presentation ready, a 5 minute presentation ready, an hour long presentation ready, a two hour long presentation ready but she doesn’t. She’s not a good public speaker, she can’t focus, she spends time fumbling through notes and exhibits, she’s bad at what she does.
She cannot even begin to communicate what she wants to say (not that it would help her case if she could).
That’s a good point. I didn’t take into consideration that I would need to have the Alexa tool bar installed for my visits to be counted as would every other obot.
John has forgotten that Orly’s “Trial on the merits” was also heard in the Fulton County Superior Court which upheld Judge Malihi. David Farrar then appealed his lawsuit to the Georgia Supreme Court who refused to hear it. Orly Taitz then appealed Farrar v Obama to the U.S. Supreme Court and the High Court denied the Petition for a Writ of Certiorari.
So the “trial on the merits” ran the gamut of the American legal system and the Republican Secretary of State of Georgia, Brian Kemp still had correctly approved Barack Obama for the Georgia ballot as a natural born citizen.
Even for the case tomorrow, instead of preparing and practicing she is busy blogging away and Googling herself. She is supposedly bringing a witness and has not prepped him? Even if she had good evidence, which she does not, she likely lose.
Nonsense. Every lawyer who appears in court for any reason is faced with less time than they would like to present their case. They plan their presentations carefully and they focus on the most important points. It’s part of the skill set required to be an effective lawyer, which is why Taitz sucks at it. She a moron, a lunatic, and an incompetent lawyer.
She was given two hours. Normally it takes a few minutes to qualify a real expert. Orly’s problems were two-fold:
1. None of her “experts” were qualified forensic document examiners
2. Even they had been qualified experts, Orly doesn’t know how to qualify them for court
Orly either doesn’t bother to learn or she doesn’t understand the rules of civil procedure. Real experts are typically qualified to testify very quickly, because their credentials speak for themselves. The reality is that there is not a single certified document examiner anywhere in the world who is prepared to testify that the pdf of Obama’s birth certificate is a forgery.
If a so-called expert is not qualified his or her testimony is worthless, and Judge Malihi properly disregarded the testimony of Orly’s “experts.”
Rickey: The reality is that there is not a single certified document examiner anywhere in the world who is prepared to testify that the pdf of Obama’s birth certificate is a forgery.
just as there has not been a single RESPECTED attorney to take on the would be biggest case of fraud in the history of the world
arpaio is a big shot in front of a microphone yet not even he has been willing to testify under oath as to his supposed findings
“Cynde. kind, race, natural”. A concise dictionary of Middle English from A.D. 1150 to 1580 (1888)
indly natural: belonging to the kind or race from father to son for several generations Chambers’s 20th Century Dictionary1908
kindred Old English cyn race, family, kin; kind from Old English gecynde, natural, native Academic Dictionaries n Encyclopedias
OE gecynde Kind: orig. = ‘natural, native. Webster’s 1828 Dictionary
“Kind’less” Shakespeare meant unnatural
When someone says, “that was very kind(natural) of you,” what they mean, “you are treating me like we were born of the same family.”
1926 Bouvier’s Law Dictionary..Americans are defined..descendants from Europeans who were born in the US, 53 Conn 493
Kind 1. Race genus 2. Sort; manner character. AS. cynde, gecynde, natural “An American dictionary of the English language” (1868)
The Middle English unkind often signifies unnatural,” Specimens of early English 1922
people, nation, tribe, family, offspring, progeny;—kind, nature, quality. cynde, natural, innate (1885) Handy Poetical Anglo Saxon Dictionary
‘Cunde heritage, territory, country, kind, natural, race native; men native to the soil ‘Handbook of Anglo Saxon and early English 1887
Gecynde, race, natural, family generation cynn,natural native.” Anglo Saxon Dictionary”. Toller 1921
un gecynde, not belonging by race or kind, un-natural, gecynde, adj. natural, native, “Two of the Saxon chronicles” Charles Plummer 1892
“KInd” True to the spirit of their race. A.S. cynn (kin), natural > a tribe. Kind originally meant Natural.” Professor Brainerd Kellogg 1911
ge-cynde, adj., [kind] natural, race, cynn,, “Beowulf” by Alfred John Wyatt.
So that’s kept her from improving her case in the months that have since passed?
What the birthers never seem to get through their heads is that it because the state officials in charge of the original records on file have certified – via affadavit – that the information on the website matches the information in those records, wouldn’t matter if someone had sat down with Photoshop and created the LFBC on the website from scratch. So even if they were to somehow find a particularly incompetent judge, all they’d prove is that the file on the website was created with Photoshop, but not that the information presented was false. 🙄
Norbrook:
TRUE
the LFBC could have been handwritten with crayons on toilet paper
it’s the CONTENT that’s been verified
That wasn’t an allegation, John. That was a finding.
Administrative law judges in Georgia can weigh the testimony of unqualified witnesses. They typically deal with citizen complaints against state agencies made by people without attorneys or the means to obtain qualified expert testimony. They sort things out. This is part of the reason Orly got as far as she did. Malihi not only said that the witnesses were unqualified, but that they were not persuasive.
Judge Masin made that distinction about administrative law hearings, wherever they may be, fairly plain when he had to deal with Mario trying to Arpaio him.
Wrong, Bucko. Due process guarantees the right to be heard, but not necessarily in an oral hearing. Orly was afforded due process in the right to file a written response to the Order to Show Cause. She fucked up her due process opportunity by doubling down on her attack on the court.
Now, if you disbelieve that due process can be satisfied by allowing a written response, please provide a proper legal citation. Make it a citation to Georgia state law, by the way.
That’s because she refused to respond to the questions that Land was asking, and would begin to go on about her own issues.
Through how many filters? The most precious commodity in a court, for the judge even more so than the attorneys, is time. Only a poor judge allows it to be wasted. All Taitz is good at is wasting it. Thus, a very predictable conflict plays out in hearing after hearing … and teh same conclusion is always reached …. “LET ME FEEEEEE-Neeeeeesh!”
Here is the transcript from RHODES v MacDONALD
http://www.scribd.com/doc/24915700/RHODES-v-MacDONALD-OFFICIAL-TRANSCRIPT-9-14-09-Hearing
People can read for themselves and decide whether Orly was being unjustly silenced.
Here’s an example of the kind of back-and-forth between Judge Land and Orly Taitz:
TAITZ: Your Honor, if you will give me a minute to explain, I will. But you are not giving me —
THE COURT: Because whenever I give you a minute, you want to go off on these talking points about something else. I want to focus directly in on what you have done, under the Federal Rules of Evidence to authenticate this document.
“What do we want?”
“A cure for A.D.D.!”
“When do we want it?”
” . . . SQUIRREL!!”
By “many believe” you mean your statistically irrelevant coterie of Birthers.
Bitter losers cry foul and claim judges are “corrupt” because in your infantile spoiled little entitled mind, ANY decision that is NOT what you want is deemed “corrupt”.
Face it, you suffer from being unable to deal with or accept a reality that disagrees with your petty emotional desires…and THAT is really all there is too it.
You can’t handle NO for an answer, no matter how valid that NO is, regardless of how official the source is. Instead, you throw a childish tantrum and stick your fingers in your ears in denial…
At what point in your life are you going to grow up, John? I mean seriously, why do you expect the rest of us to put up with someone of your advanced age, when you continue to display the emotional maturity of a toddler?
Must be banned commenter reunion week. How’s the weather there on the other side of the world?
Bingo!!
And like Donna said, it could be crayons on toilet paper, and it wouldn’t matter.
They could have even asked He, Lying Lucas Smith, to forge a US BC instead of a goofy looking Kenya BC, and it wouldn’t matter.
The copy of the BC is meaningless.
And the brain power of a broken clock!
Not only was Orly completely incapable of putting to a judicious use her two hours in Judge Malihi’s court, she at times wasn’t even coherently aware if she was an attorney or a witness.
Q: What kind of attorney declines a judge’s pre-trial offer of a default judgement against their adversary?
A: Three birther attorneys in the same room.
That is a good one, jt!
I am still amazed Mark Hatfield was part of that clown show in Atlanta. He was a state representative for doG’s sake.
You folks are right about John. He just cannot accept the reality that there is and never has been any truth to any Birther story about Barack Obama. Sad really.
Do you understand what DR’s point even was? I don’t get it.
He’s been around for awhile (also goes by name e.vattel). His spiel is that a line from a Shakespeare play (forget which one) proves that NBCs can only be white males of European decent, whose ancestors fought in the Revolutionary War.
I’m sorry, but the fact remains that the appropriate appeal court for Malihi’s administrative “court” ruled that there was no case to begin with.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/83539865/GA-2012-03-02-ORDER-Dismissing-Farrar-Swensson-Powell-And-Welden-Complaints
In other words, Malihi may have ruled on the merits concerning Obama’s birth certificate, but his decision is not worth the paper it is written on. Legally, Malihi’s decision and the entire proceeding he presided over are void.
Which means Orly’s use in other court proceedings of the DVD of the proceedings in Georgia is an obvious attempt at defrauding the court.
But then she is also using the DVD with Judge Reid, so …
I’ve seen this before, and it’s part of some neo-racist argument based on the definition of “kind” only in place of race, it’s ethnicity.
I reference Alexa because that’s the only choice. Birther web sites don’t publish detailed site statistics like I do.
Certainly the bias argument is there, but I probably get birthers, and ORYR gets Obots.
Isn’t that the idea peddled by h2ooflife?
Looks like white supremacist word games to me, attempting to use etymology to ‘prove’ that only European descendants can be Americans.
Setting aside the Constitution and the entire history or Anglo-American political thought, I see 2 problems with DR’s murky assertion (well, only 2 I care to list at the moment LOL!):
1. Mixed genealogies. Are we to set up a Racial Purity office and go to a new pan-racial one-drop rule? GTFO.
2. Languages constantly evolve. Words are tools used to communicate our internal thoughts to the outside world. Our thoughts are not defined by dictionaries. Thoughts are not limited to words. Words express thoughts. Words are not chained to their original meaning. Using the modern version of an ancient Saxon lexeme is not an attempt to channel Beowulf.
Lolz.
It appears ORYR is now systematically deleting all anti-Birther posts. At least on the most current topic ComBox.
I was surprised by Dr. C’s statement that ORYR gets more readers, because of my impression that there are a lot more comments left here. But of course ORYR does seem to delete a lot of comments, and ban a lot of posters, so that would depress the number of comments. And besides, readers and commenters are two different things.
It is my impression that ORYR likes to ban anti-birthers except Dr. C. Perhaps because he’s more polite than the rest of us — though they don’t strike me as fans of politeness over there.
ORYR has just posted a “Special Announcement” that they will delete all anti-birther comments. Sort of as if this is a new policy, though of course it isn’t.
ORYR
To whom it may concern,
If you voted for or support Obama your comments are no longer welcome here. Since I will be forced to purchase something against my free will and my tax dollars will continue to be used to murder innocent babies. I choose to abort any and all pro-Obama comments posted here that I come across. Don’t like it? Tuff shit! Oh, and masking your IP won’t work in the long run.
murder? why aren’t the baby makers in prison?
and for aiding and abetting, the sperm donor, medical facility, medical professionals, equipment manufacturers, etc?
why am I MANDATED to pay for the uninsured, wars, 100 year old oil subsidies, etc
definition of “baby”: Noun A very young child, esp. one newly or recently born.
It’s courteous for these weak-minded and bigoted birther simpletons to announce their support of anti-American fascism.
Their fear and hatred based indoctrination program is too precious to be tainted by facts and the truth.
Here’s another bit of the obvious that never occurs to these bigoted simpletons. When you show up in a court not knowing the elementary rules of procedure, how to properly frame a legal question, or even the rules of evidence, you tend to get cut off and directed a lot. The courts are not obliged to suffer fools, and any courtesy a judge extends to Orly is certainly more than she will ever extend back.
Yep. Well said.
Well said. I can just imagine the conversation between a birther quarterback and a referee:
B.Q.: I tried to throw the ball and you blew your whistle!
Ref: That’s because you threw it after crossing the scrimmage line.
B.Q.: Well, that guy was chasing me!
Ref: That’s his job. The point is, you broke a rule.
B.Q.: But he chased me past the scrimmage line! How was I supposed to–
Ref: You broke a rule, I flagged you!
B.Q.: That’s unfair.
Ref: That’s football.
B.Q. But that’s not–
Ref: Shut up and get on with the game.
B.Q.: How can I explain if you won’t–
Ref: There’s nothing to explain–
B.Q. LET ME FEENISH!
I’ve been dabbling a bit at ORYR only for a few weeks. But noted while there’s but a few people who make comments (and precious few who offer a semblance of anything beyond inane ranting blather), there was a lot of “thumbs down” activity until the site eliminated that feature.
Now that dissenting opinion is squelched, suddenly I notice a flurry of posters I’d never seen crawling out of the woodwork. It’s so much easier when one doesn’t risk being challenged.
Weak-minded, indeed.
These sad, little birther bigots depend on shelter for their hate drenched fantasies to keep the angry voices in their heads appeased. They know they are a dying breed.
Exactly. …And considering their average age…in more ways than one…
Fear drives bigotry.
Yes, yes it does. So does gullible ignorance. The two go hand in hand.
“Whatever criticism one may raise against that trial, still the authenticity of Obama’s Long Form birth certificate WAS litigated ON THE MERITS and Obama was found eligible. “”
“White House birth certificate: not identical to original”
Does anybody see anything wrong with these two statements?
No. But I support your right to ask questions. Happy Saturday–only eight more days to President Obama’s second inauguration!
Yep. Your disingenuous presentation, selective wording of the second.
Don’t you mean Mr. C’s disingenuous and selective wording of both?
You didn’t notice the quotes? Obots are blind as bats.
Now that is funny.
Nope. But thanks for checking 😀
Quoth the raving.
Nope. Because the judge in question was not interested in irrelevancies. The fact that a copy or printout is not identical to the original is irrelevant and an obvious nonstarter. That was the point of Dr. C’s very dry satire there in that second quote/article you mention. What was in evidence was the actually important *content,* submitted by the plaintiffs themselves, and that is the point of the first quote you mention.
Nope.
I subscribe to a weekly publication which comes in a print version, but the publisher also puts a PDF copy online for subscribers to download. The print version and the online version have the exact same content, but if I print out the online version it is not identical the the print version. The print edition is printed on different paper, it is a different size, and it has a mailing label.
By your standards, the PDF version must be a counterfeit because it is not identical to the print edition. But in reality it is just a faithful copy of the print edition.
It’s the same with the PDF of Obama’s LFBC. It’s not identical to the certified copy, but it contains the same information. Indeed, the certified copies which Obama received from Hawaii are not “identical” to the original certificate which is in Hawaii’s vault, but it is just as valid.
Well played, sir.
Obama can end his ongoing fraud by presenting his two certified copies of his original birth certificate to any court of competent jurisdiction. Under Hawaii law there is no other way for him to establish his eligibility because his original birth certificate is either altered or delayed. Consequently any verifications of his birth facts provided by the HDOH officials have no evidentiary value.
How do you imagine that this is correct? I’m verging on a rhetorical question, but really, how? What do you imagine you are actually saying, for that matter? You suggest he should submit his certified copies, but that the original documents those certified copies are based on are “altered” or “delayed” (whatever you mean by delayed) and are without evidentiary value. So, the original documentation is valueless but the *copies* are the important thing?!!
That’s just horseshit.
There is nothing in the Constitution that says the president must have Judicial Branch approval, before he can lead the Executive Branch. In fact, there’s a little thingy called “separation of powers” that strictly forbids this kind of arbitrary meddling from judges.
All in due time Paper — First things first. If Obama is forced to produce his two certified copies it will determine whether or no he requested and received two certified copies of his original hospital generated birth certificate as he claimed on Apr 27, 2011. He has stipulated to a Federal District court that he did so. Because the two copies are purported to be certified copies they should be duplicate copies of his original birth certificate. Since the original certificate is altered or delayed then the two certified copies could not be identical to any of the LFCOLB PDF images that have been published at Obama’s direction. It would follow that these PDF images would necessarily be forgeries.
Herms has rebooted again. This is his final fallback position, to insist that Obama’s BC is late/altered/delayed, and that he has sekrit proof of such. Usually he throws in that the birth certificates presented by Obama were forged to conceal the truth of his late/altered/delayed real certificate.
I think his repetitive insistence that Obama submit the 2 certified copies is his way of insinuating they don’t exist or are themselves forgeries. He wants Obama to, as he like to challenge anyone not buying into his crap, “put up of shut up!”
Since the State of Hawaii has certified multiple times over that Obama’s original birth certificate is neither altered nor delayed, clearly they’re “in the tank” for Obama, because, you know… well, actually, I can’t remember what your position is for why they’d stick their necks out in this way for him. But I’m sure there’s a good reason!
…Anyhoo, since they’re in the tank for him, and have already committed multiple major felonies, why would you trust anything Obama submitted from them? It’s going to be turtles all the way down.
No; clearly the Great Fraud will continue forever, the Great Fraudster will carry out his second term, and you’ll just have to grit your teeth and deal with it for the rest of your life. It’s just too big for one man, one dentist and one combover to overcome.
But this is last things last, or more realistically, when perhaps someday you visit his Presidential library.
First things first is Hawaii has verified his birth multiple times. So your first order of business is to prove that Hawaii has committed fraud. You have no basis for your allegations except making stuff up. That is your first things first. You need to provide evidence that your assertions have merit. Until you provide evidence of fraud by Hawaii, all your conjectures are nonstarters.
What evidence do you have that Hawaii has committed fraud?
Last time I checked I don’t have Obama’s two certified copies. He does.
There ain’t no absolutes in birferland. Except one.
But there is Article II Section 1 Clause 5 which requires that the President to be a Natural Born Citizen. In this country the standard way that we prove to the U.S. Government that we were born in the U.S. is by presenting our certified birth certificate.
It’s all spelled out in the Federal laws passed in 2004 after 911. When a citizen presents his birth certificate to any Federal Agency, it must be a certified copy printed on thick security paper with the State seal and Registrar’s signature. Obama has never presented either of his two certified copies to any court or election official. But he has stipulated to a Federal Court that he requested and received two certified copies from Loretta Fuddy on Apr 25, 2011. And on top of that he also produced two different LFCOLB PDF images to the same Federal court and thus represented these as certified copies.
In the case of an altered or late birth certificate, Hawaii law requires that only a court of competent jurisdiction can establish the evidentiary value of Obama’s Original birth records.
Exactly, and this is Herms version of that absolute!
The Australian heat wave is getting some coverage here. I hope you’re surviving OK.
There has never been a ruling of the Supreme Court as to the meaning of “Natural Born Citizen” in the context of a presidential election. Such a case would have to be a candidate eligibility case. SCOTUS has the duty to rule on Obama’s eligibility because some future SCOTUS might do so for a future ineligible candidate. Such a case is now before the SCOTUS.
Which orifice did you pull that one from? Never mind, it’s fairly obvious.
If you have evidence that Obama’s original birth certificate is altered or delayed, present it. But we all know that all you have is wild conjecture fueled by your hatred of Obama.
Aiiiiihhh! The stupid! It burns!!!
That is false. Either the birth certificate Obama presented at the White House press conference in April of 2011 is authentic, or it is not.
If the birth certificate is authentic, then no fraud has been committed and therefore the fraud cannot be “ended” by him presenting the same thing.
If the birth certificate is NOT authentic, then he cannot end the fraud by showing it.
Now what you might have meant was that the controversy could be ended in this way, but that is just as silly, as anyone who knows the birthers knows.
Your personal delusions are not evidence. The very fact that you can’t even assert whether it is altered or delayed demonstrates that you don’t know anything, but are working backwards from your conclusions.
And yet Hawaii twice since then has verified the information, and that he was born in Hawaii. This fact, central among many other such facts, makes your personal lack of seeing the physically certified copies irrelevant.
There is no requirement that he do so. Just like all the other Presidents, who managed just fine without doing such. You know this, certainly? So why do you make a point about it?
When there is a potentially or actually ineligible President or President-elect, then this may start to mean something (though in the end, it would fall perhaps only to Congress to resolve). In the meantime, until you get your act together and start showing everyone exactly how Hawaii is committing fraud, nothing, nada, will happen. The case you mention is also nothing. They obviously need your input on what the actually fraud is, which elsewhere you have indicated is so easy to see. Well, get on the phone, let them know; otherwise, they might finally find that “one honest judge” and they won’t be able to prove fraud.
Why aren’t you letting anyone know? Aren’t you hindering the very goal you desire?
According to federal judge Gibney, the question of the eligibility of the US-born citizens of non-citizens (except ambassadors) is well settled. If the Supreme Court justices feel that the question is well-settled, one would not expect them to hear a case for the purpose of resolving a question that is already resolved.
Also, the Supreme Court can’t hear a case where the plaintiffs have no standing. I don’t know what case is before the Supreme Court that it could hear even if it wanted to.
The federal courts resolve actual controversies. Future candidates do not constitute an actual controversy.
That is not the standard or requirement for demonstrating NBC status for a President, as no other President has done so. In addition, while standard in normal affairs, it is not an absolute requirement, even for getting a passport.
See this list of Secondary Evidence of Citizenship that may be used to get a passport if you can’t supply primary evidence (such as a birth certificate).
They list various options to be combined in certain ways depending on each person’s circumstances: early public records, a delayed birth certificate (well, look at that!), letter of no record, birth affidavit, foreign birth documentation + parent(s) citizenship evidence.
Take a gander.
http://travel.state.gov/passport/get/secondary_evidence/secondary_evidence_4315.html
Surely you are not suggesting that a federal law can add or remove an eligibility requirement for the President.
It seems to me that everything you say, whether it is a technical statement about documents, a statement about Hawaiian Law, or the US Constitution is nothing more than a translation of your personal desire to keep Obama out of office. It’s rather transparent.
That’s simple. Since Obama is ineligible (according to Hermitian) Hawaii must have committed fraud. It’s all very simple with that initial assumption.
A delayed certificate can be ruled out. Hawaii has verified the information on the LFBC, which would include the date it was accepted. That alone proves it was not delayed.
I agree with you. Obama should present a certified birth certificate to the Bureau of Presidential Eligibility (BPE), just like all the other Presidents did.
Actually Obama did. As prescribed by the Presidential Eligibility Act of 2008, Obama presented two certified copies (that’s why he got two) to the Bureau on January 10. It was on C-Span.
Wrong again.
There is no case before SCOTUS which could result in SCOTUS ruling on Obama’s eligibility. Orly’s case (which in any event will be rejected by SCOTUS) is merely an application for a stay. She is asking SCOTUS to stay proceedings which will have already been completed by the time SCOTUS conferences the case, so her application is moot even if it had any merit (which it does not).
Hawaii Revised Statutes 338-17 can not apply to President Obama’s birth certificate as it only applies to a “late” or “altered” certificate. By the definition 338-16 a “late” certificate is one that is “registered one year or more after the date of birth” and an “altered” certificate is one that has “been altered after being filed with the Department of Health”. It is impossible for President Obama’s LFBC to meet those requirements.
Dr. Onaka in his certified verification to SoS Bennett specifically verified the date the BC was accepted by the DOH registrar (AUG – 8, 1961) and the date of the signature of the Attendant (8-8-61).
For President Obama’s LFBC to meet 338-16’s definition of “late” the DOB on the original BC in the DOH would have to be prior to August 4, 1960.
In signing the original BC, the Attendant has certified that “this child has been born alive at the date and hour as stated above”. Dr. Onaka verified (in all three verifications) that the DOB (August 4, 1961) on the White House pdf matches the DOB (August 4, 1961) on the original BC on file at the DOH. The Attendant could not have signed it on August 8, 1961 certifying that the child was born on August 4, 1961 if the child was born one year earlier.
For it to meet the requirements of 338-16’s definition of “altered” it would need to have been changed after the registrar accepted the BC on August 8, 1961 (date certified by Dr. Onaka’s verification). There is very limited information on the LFBC that could have been “altered” even less information that would impact Presidential elegiblity. The DOB could not be the “altered” info as the Attendant has certified that the DOB was August 4, 1961. The place of birth cannot have been altered as the Dr. Onaka has verified that President Obama was born at Kapiolani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital. There is only one anmed hospital in the world and that is in Honolulu, Hawaii. The parents’ names might have been altered after the DOH accepted the BC, but then you would have to find another 18 year old woman born in Wichita, Kansas to replace Stanley Ann Dunham Obama and another 25 year old man born in Kenya, East Africa to replace Barack Hussein Obama.
There is no scenario that explains an altered BC with the facts verified by Dr. Onaka.
I see what you did there.
Per her letter to Obama, Loretta Fuddy has stated that she witnessed the copying of Obama’s original Certificate of Live Birth. She indicated that two certified copies were produced. She does not specifically mention a seal impression or the registrar’s stamps. However she does attest the authenticity of the certified copies.
He letter follows here:
STATE OF HAWAII
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
P. 0. BOX 3316
HONOLULU, HI 963013373
Aprii 25, 2011
The Honorable Barack Obama
President of the United States
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20500
Dear President Obama:
l have reviewed your request for two certified copies of your original Certificate of Live Birth. As the Director of Health for the State of Hawaii, I have the legal authority to approve the process by which copies of such records are made. Through that authority, in recognition of your status as President of the United States, I am making an exception to current departmental policy which is to issue a computer-generated certified copy.
We hope that issuing you these copies of your original Certificate of Live Birth will end the
numerous inquiries received by the Hawaii Department of Health to produce this document. Such inquiries have been disruptive to staff operations and have strained State resources.
Enclosed please find two certified copies of your original Certificate of Live Birth. I have
witnessed the copying of the certificate and attest to the authenticity of these copies. A
receipt for the payment of these documents is attached for your files. Please let us know if
we can be of further assistance.
Sincerely,
Loretta J. Fuddy, A.C.S.W, M.P.H.
The certified copies would therefore be duplicate copies of Obama’s original birth record. These copies also should have the Hawaii certifying elements as well as the security features of the basket-weave safety paper. However, these copies would have probative value only if they are not marked as altered or delayed. These markings would prove that the WH LFCOLB is a forgery.
Oh, now I got it! After four years of reading your blog, I finally understand (and can handle) the truth. I’ve always failed at making that initial assumption, despite having my very own, personal tutor in remedial birthing. If birthers could just explain it that simply, I think they would win over everyone. Start with the conclusion! Voila!
That’s what I figured. I’ve also been assuming that since Onaka has certified the LFBC with a blank “Evidence for Delayed Filing or Alteration” field, that his BC has not been altered. And as gorefan said above, Onaka has explicitly verified the key data. Not to mention that Fukino has said explicitly that Obama is a natural born citizen. And that the state has previously released a certified document with all the relevant data as well.
Obama claims that he received two certified copies. These would therefore be duplicate copies of his original birth certificate and thus marked as delayed or altered.
Aes is back. You remember he’s that Obot who’s a self-made expert on all topics — but doesn’t seem to know any of the facts about Obama’s birth records. Like which Obama LFCOLB PDF image did Tepper attach to his letter to Fuddy? Did he attach the page 8 (WH LFCOLB + Case Label) PDF image or his Tepper page 4/11 LFCOLB PDF image?
“Dr. ConspiracyJanuary 13, 2013 at 7:31 pm (Quote)#
“That is false. Either the birth certificate Obama presented at the White House press conference in April of 2011 is authentic, or it is not.
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
It’s not authentic. And Obama has produced no evidence to the contrary.
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
“If the birth certificate is authentic, then no fraud has been committed and therefore the fraud cannot be “ended” by him presenting the same thing.”
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
So now the forged WH LFCOLB PDFimage is the same thing as a certified copy?
A fraud was propagated on the Federal District Court when The MDEC attorneys produced the forged WH LFCOLB PDF image to the court and associated this image with the letter correspondence between Obama and Fuddy which supported the request and acquisition of two certified copies from the HDOH. The MDEC attorneys could have produced the two certified copies that they stipulated that Omama had received from the HDOH on Apr. 25, 2011. Instead they withheld these certified copies and instead substituted the forged WH LFCOLB PDF image. They did so in spite of the fact that these two certified copies cost only $14.00 and Federal law requires any other citizen must produce certified copies to any Federal agency.
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
“If the birth certificate is NOT authentic, then he cannot end the fraud by showing it.”
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
So a counterfeiter cannot end his crime by producing his counterfeit $100 bill to the Secret Service investigators? What Obot nuance am I missing this time?
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
“Now what you might have meant was that the controversy could be ended in this way, but that is just as silly, as anyone who knows the birthers knows.”
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
So now forgery of an identity document is just a silly crime. Maybe why that’s why Obama now encourages and assists all newly arriving illegal aliens to apply for entitlements using their band spanking new forged identity documents. And then later some hard working American citizen who is paying the freight for these criminals learns these illegals just signed up for welfare and food stamps using his ID. This is called “spreading the wealth around”. The taxpayers also forked out $billions for in lieu of tax payments mailed to Mexican addresses last year. That is spreading the American wealth around Mexico.
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
“”Hermitian: Obama can end his ongoing fraud by presenting his two certified copies of his original birth certificate to any court of competent jurisdiction.””
Could you copy your link to Obama? He’s going to need to recreate all of his secondary evidence pretty soon. This may be mission impossible because the Obama minions have been scrubbing his background traces for over four years.
The “seal” is implicit in “certified copy.” Duh.
Unsupported nonsense like that puts you in the company of the most brain-dead of historical commenters here who confuse their pet notions with facts, and substitute belief for evidence. It reminds me of Sven’s refugee theory and rather grieves me to see a mind wasted in this way.
Wrong! You forgot about Sibley’s multi-front attacks.
Everybody should hold back his ace in the hole? Don’t you have one you need to share first?
hermit/martian
what is the definition of a “delayed” birth certificate? you OBVIOUSLY don’t know
Delayed Birth Certificate
If you were born in the United States and cannot present primary evidence of U.S. citizenship because your U.S. Birth Certificate was not filed within the first year of your birth, you may submit a Delayed U.S. Birth Certificate
these are mostly for people born at home and/or not in a hospital
What information dude? You mean:
1. The information on the two certified copies?
2. The information on the WH LFCOLB PDF image?
3. The information on the page 8 LFCOLB PDF image?
4. The information on the unredacted Tepper page 4/11 LFCOLB PDF image?
5. The information on the hidden redacted Tepper page 4/11 LFCOLB PDF image?
6. The information that can be selected by mouse and cursor on the Tepper page 4/11 LFCOLB PDF image?
7. The information on the HDOH request for vertification printed form that Arizona SOS Bennett filled out, signed and sent to the Hawaii AAG Nagmine?
8. The information on the flattened Black&White (and nearly unreadable) printed copy of the Tepper page 4/11 LFCOLB that the Mississippi Southern Federal District Court sent to Kansas SOS Kobach?
Just asking.
Cuz we already know that Onaka can’t verify that any of the above are true and authentic copies of an original Obama birth certificate.
Engineers are very good at asking.
I repeat: what’s your obsession with “producing both copies” if one would suffice? As I said, you must harbour the secret belief that somehow and for some reason, Hawaii produced two *non-identical* copies. If only to give you birthers an opportunity to say “Obama must also produce the other one” if he ever submitted one of the two copies to court. After all, you people are the best movers of goalposts in the world since U-Haul hired Joe Montana.
How would that “end” the crime? The crime would’ve been committed no matter what the counterfeiter did later.
How would an identical copy be “marked delayed/altered”? That would totally circumvent the sense of having a copy, i.e. to reproduce the original.
Your claim is even sillier than birthers claiming the COLB where the BC number was redacted in the JPG representation (!) was “invalidated” by this redaction because it says “any alterations invalidate this certificate”.
LOL! Attempting to turn me into a straw man, follow up with a misdirection, and hope no one notices you failed to respond to my description of your gambit. Herms, pinned again.
“Self-Made Expert on All Topics”, heh. I had no idea I had impressed you so.Noting all the obama-conspiracy-related topics I don’t comment on, I must disrespectfully decline this honorific.
“Dr. ConspiracyJanuary 13, 2013 at 7:54 pm (Quote)#
“According to federal judge Gibney, the question of the eligibility of the US-born citizens of non-citizens (except ambassadors) is well settled. If the Supreme Court justices feel that the question is well-settled, one would not expect them to hear a case for the purpose of resolving a question that is already resolved.”
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
We don’t want to hear an appeal on the eligibility of President Obama. We believe that a case that we heard back in the 1800’s about a Chinaman who was denied re-entry is close enough. Case closed.
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
“Also, the Supreme Court can’t hear a case where the plaintiffs have no standing. I don’t know what case is before the Supreme Court that it could hear even if it wanted to.”
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
The word “standing” appears no where in the U.S. Constitution. “Standing” is a concept that the courts invented just to control their work load.
Also the term “settled law” is also not in the Constitution. “Settled Law” is something that the courts invented when their bookshelves were overflowing with those thick law books.
Also “settled law” is what the courts invoke in lieu of the Constitution.
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
“The federal courts resolve actual controversies. Future candidates do not constitute an actual controversy.”
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
That’s why the SCOTUS must take up the Obama eligibility controversy now.
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
“”Hermitian: There has never been a ruling of the Supreme Court as to the meaning of “Natural Born Citizen” in the context of a presidential election. Such a case would have to be a candidate eligibility case. SCOTUS has the duty to rule on Obama’s eligibility because some future SCOTUS might do so for a future ineligible candidate. Such a case is now before the SCOTUS.””
A lot of birfers switch between PDF Madness and FauxVattelism to reinforce each other, so when they run into a dead end on one front, they can flip the switch and exclaim It doesn’t matter anyway!”
Herms has doubled down on his personal strain of PDF madness to the point that it resembles an onion. No wonder it isn’t catching on. Even other nuts can’t follow it. It’s easier just to exclaim “Nuh-uhh!”
Herms, for all the ludicrous assertions you’ve cantilevered off of ludicrous assumptions, all you have here is still just: “Nuh-uhh!” Ultimately, every claim you make has only one thought as a foundation: the assumption that Obama cannot possibly be eligible for the Presidency. Your starting point is your desired conclusion.
See, ‘inductive reasoning’, cross-reference, ‘epic fail’.
Which would mean that every single birth certificate ever for every single person in the United States is altered or delayed. Making the whole point of birth certificates a failure and a mess.
Because what you describe is how every single birth certificate in the U.S. is generated.
The presentation at the press conference was the production of evidence to the contrary. But what he himself has provided is even irrelevant at this point, because Hawaii has produced two verifications, plus a link to the PDF, plus earlier statements.
The fraud you imagine, “imagine” because you have provided no evidence of it actually existing, is not even fraud, “not even fraud” because the information is what matters and that information has been verified repeatedly by Hawaii.
If you must have fraud, and it seems you must, then you need to stick with Hawaii, and find out how Hawaii managed this great conspiracy and cover-up. Pursuing PDFs, and the whole copy of copy concern, is meritless on its face.
This is all a repeat of long established fact, but you want to rehash, and reportedly never want to budge, so where is *your* evidence? What do you have to offer that will ever be taken seriously in a court or anywhere outside of birtherdom?
No amount of facts or evidence will change his mind. He believes Obama is ineligible, end if story.
Care to prove me wrong, Hermie?
“Trying to have a conversation with you would be like arguing with a dining room table.”
—Barney Frank
“”gorefanJanuary 13, 2013 at 10:25 pm 1. (Quote)#
Comment
“”Hermitian: In the case of an altered or late birth certificate, Hawaii law requires that only a court of competent jurisdiction can establish the evidentiary value of Obama’s Original birth records.””
“Hawaii Revised Statutes 338-17 can not apply to President Obama’s birth certificate as it only applies to a “late” or “altered” certificate. By the definition 338-16 a “late” certificate is one that is “registered one year or more after the date of birth” and an “altered” certificate is one that has “been altered after being filed with the Department of Health”. It is impossible for President Obama’s LFBC to meet those requirements.
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
The HDOH is also bound by their own regulations. Most agencies, when there is conflict between there standing laws and regulations, quickly move to correct the conflict. Unfortunately, for their own convenience the HDOH has not done so. The most recent example is the 2001 memo that the HDOH purported to adopt in 2001 but did not enforce until the need to give Obama cover in 2011. This policy was illegally adopted by fiat without any public hearings. When pressed on this illegality in a Hawaii court, the AAG of Hawaii offered up the still standing regulations last revised in June 1976. These same regulations apply in the case of late or delayed birth certificates.
PUBLIC HEALTH REGULATIONS
Department of Health, State of Hawaii
Chapter 8A
DELAYED BIRTH REGISTRATION
Under and by virtue of Sections 338-2 and 338-41(a), Hawaii Revised Statutes,
and all other applicable laws, the rules and regulations of the Department of
Health of the State of Hawaii are hereby amended to include a chapter to be
numbered “Chapter 8A” and to read as follows:
Section A. DEFINITIONS L
1. “Late registration of birth” means the registration of a person’s non-
recorded birth more than 30. days but less than one year after birth.
2. “Delayed registration of birth” means the registration of a person’s non-
recorded birth on or after his first birthday.
3. “Hawaiian birth certificate” means a birth registered on a delayed basis
for persons one year of age or older prior to repeal of Section 338-41,
Hawaii Revised Statutes, by Act 66, Session Laws 1972.
And afterwards the legislature passed the SS338-17.8 for children born outside the state.
These definitions given in the regulations are in conflict with the definitions given in the laws that you cited but these are the standing regulations of the HDOH and laws of Hawaii. So take your pick.
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
“Dr. Onaka in his certified verification to SoS Bennett specifically verified the date the BC was accepted by the DOH registrar (AUG – 8, 1961) and the date of the signature of the Attendant (8-8-61).“
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
But Onaka did not verify the date of Obama’s birth for Bennett.
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
“For President Obama’s LFBC to meet 338-16’s definition of “late” the DOB on the original BC in the DOH would have to be prior to August 4, 1960. “
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
See above conflict between HDOH regulations and Hawaii laws. You’ll just have to ask Loretta Fuddy what a late or delayed birth certificate is. She is the one holding all the aces. She also decides what kind of a birth certificate is awarded under SS338-17.8 for children born out of the State or Territory of Hawaii.
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
“In signing the original BC, the Attendant has certified that “this child has been born alive at the date and hour as stated above”. Dr. Onaka verified (in all three verifications) that the DOB (August 4, 1961) on the White House pdf matches the DOB (August 4, 1961) on the original BC on file at the DOH.
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Wrong! Onaka failed to verify the President’s date of birth for Arizona SOS Bennett. He also refused to verify that “The information contained in the “Certificate of Live Birth” published at http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/birth-certificate-long+form.pdf and reviewed by you on the date of your verification, a copy of which is attached to this request, 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.”
So duh! It’s not a “true and accurate representation”.
In the case of Kansas SOS Kobach, Onaka refused to verify that “is identical to the information contained in the original Certificate of Live Birth for Barack Hussein Obama, II on file with the State of Hawaii Department of Health”.
So duh! It’s also “not identical to”.
Anybody want to guess what “matches” means in Hawaii? I don’t.
And then we don’t even know which LFCOLB PDF image that Onaka verified for the MDEC attorneys.
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
“The Attendant could not have signed it on August 8, 1961 certifying that the child was born on August 4, 1961 if the child was born one year earlier”.
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Wrong! Zullo has evidence of children who were awarded Hawaii Certificates of Live Births up to 2 years after they were born out of country.
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
“For it to meet the requirements of 338-16’s definition of “altered” it would need to have been changed after the registrar accepted the BC on August 8, 1961 (date certified by Dr. Onaka’s verification). There is very limited information on the LFBC that could have been “altered” even less information that would impact Presidential elegiblity. The DOB could not be the “altered” info as the Attendant has certified that the DOB was August 4, 1961. The place of birth cannot have been altered as the Dr. Onaka has verified that President Obama was born at Kapiolani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital. There is only one anmed hospital in the world and that is in Honolulu, Hawaii. The parents’ names might have been altered after the DOH accepted the BC, but then you would have to find another 18 year old woman born in Wichita, Kansas to replace Stanley Ann Dunham Obama and another 25 year old man born in Kenya, East Africa to replace Barack Hussein Obama.”
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
The HDOH regulations regarding altered birth certificates are in:
“PUBLIC HEALTH REGULATIONS
Department of Health, State of Hawaii
Chapter 8B
VITAL STATISTICS REGISTRATION AND RECORDS”
Maybe you ought to read them before bloviating all over the place.
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
“There is no scenario that explains an altered BC with the facts verified by Dr. Onaka.”
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
In other words “not true and accurate” or “identical to”. But the information “matches”.
Onaka’s verifications do not exclude information on the original that does not appear on the certificate that the attorney is requesting to be verified. Such as “altered” or “delayed”
It’s way past time for a court of competent jurisdiction to put a stop to this Hawaiin duplicity.
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Which means that I have the support and you don’t have a clue.
So you are going on the record here that the HDOH has never issued a certified copy of an altered or delayed birth certificate?
You obviously haven’t read my affidavit NL10.
I disagree completely.
If he/she must have fraud, and it seems he/she must, then he/she needs to stick to looking in the mirror.
Nor do you have any right or authority to see them… too bad.
Nor is there any law that requires them. So, despite your little demands for ponies, the real world can simply continue to ignore your irrational screeds and he will continue to serve as POTUS for the next 4 years. But hey, keep throwing a useless tantrum…
Simple: Obama has NOT been charged with any real crimes, so there is ZERO to investigate.
No criminal charges equals no need to provide any evidence. That’s how reality works there, Hermie.
But hey, you clowns like to play pretend fantasy grand juries and other imaginary games and think crying on the internet means something…so maybe you can get some unicorns and fairies together to pursue some charges against an invisible chair…
LOL! Exactly!
All Little Hermie does with his tantrum here is reveal how blatantly intimidated and outmatched he feels by you at every turn…
Hey, its not any of our fault that he chooses to constantly put his ignorance and foolishness on display… for the rest of us, it is like debating a first grader. It certainly doesn’t require much effort at all…
Yep. That now famous quote sums it up perfectly…
So Hermy is basically claiming any time you get a copy of your birth certificate it is considered altered or delayed. Well phenominal logic there.
Wait, wait, wait, waaaaaaaaaaait-a-minute.
Herms insists that Obama does have two certified copies in his possession? LMAO!
So, then, at the risk or re-re-rebooting the HHHHHH-unit, what’s this PDF Madness mess all about then?
Beats the heck out of me. Why don’t you ask Obama what it’s all about Alfie?
He’s published those PDF images that he purports are duplicates of his original hospital-generated birth certificate and therefore also duplicates of his two certified copies. Then he refuses to show the original or the certified copies to the public. So what’s he hiding?
Nope! I stated that there is absolute proof that Obama’s original birth certificate is either altered or delayed.
Is there an empty suit in your invisible chair?
You’ve heard of the common-noun slang usage “santorum”? (If you’re of delicate sensibilities, and don’t know what I’m referring to… for the love of God DON’T Google it.)
Ahem. In the same spirit, prithee allow me to propose a coinage:
Hermitian adj. Quality of being permanently (i.e. “hermetically” sealed, esp. as regards the discovery of one’s own error. syn. dense, thick, clueless. As in “Perhaps Orly Taitz would learn the naked rudiments of the practice of Law if only she were not so hermitian.”
Coming from you, such a statement is meaningless.
I suppose we could quote Hermitian the actual definition of a delayed or altered Hawaiian birth certificate but why bother? Anyone who would make such a ridiculous statement as he just did probably could not understand anyway.
I have concluded that you have nothing to say, and I have stopped reading your comments.
The empty suit trumps four clowns every time.
Ah yes your imaginary absolute proof that is super sekrit and you can’t tell anyone.
From Wikipedia:
So ‘matches’ is the plural of that; i.e. more than one match.
And yet you’re still alive, with internet access.
Someone call George!
By *your* argument, no state in all of the country has ever issued an unaltered or unrelated birth certificate.
An altered certificate, for instance (and only one example), would be if someone changed their name. A delayed certificate is well-defined, and is about the original information being submitted a substantial amount of time past birth.
The two certified copies the President received are *original* birth *certificates,* in the same way as yours and mine. Birth certificates by their existence are copies (or printouts of information entered into a computer record) of primary documentation; they are original *certificates,* but copies of primary documentation. The primary documentation does not get released. You certainly know all this by now.
What the President received is as original as anyone gets. Unless you ever get around to providing actual evidence that Hawaii itself committed fraud, the primary documentation will remain right where it is, untroubled.
And, yet again, you let Orly Taitz wander into court without the benefit of your proof? You’re telling us that over 100 cases have been dismissed or lost simply because you haven’t shared your proof?
(Please let us know if your proof is in addition to your already mentioned observation here that the certificates are altered or delayed because you think original birth certificates are “duplicate copies.”)
That should have been “undelayed,” not “unrelated.”
Hey, its your invisible chair, so you can put whatever you want in it….after all, that is all you’ve been doing so far…
At least a fool putting lipstick on a pig …. has a pig! 😉
Apples and oranges. Because those children would not have “born in Hawaii” on their COLBs, let alone the name of a Hawaiian hospital as place of birth.
The “anyone can get a Hawaiian COLB” meme has always been intellectually dishonest from the start – because it omits the most important part “… stating their ACTUAL place of birth”.
That birthers claim Hawaii is, for some nefarious reason, issuing Hawaiian COLBs to people born out-of-state wrongly stating they were born in Hawaii is still just that – an unproven claim.
Tellingly, the only case of a foreign-born person with a Hawaiian COLB stating Hawaiian birth that birthers ever could find was from 1904, more than half a century before Hawaii became a state.
And of course, by that logic, no BC in the entire US would be credible anymore if you think one isolated case decades ago somehow taints the entire system of birth certificates.
You keep quoting HRS 338-18, so you should know that
(1) the law says Hawaii must confirm the data they are asked for; Bennett did not ask for the DOB (one may wonder why, but he didn’t).
The law simply doesn’t authorize Onaka to verify things he isn’t asked for.
(2) the law also says Hawaii must confirm the data they are asked for is as it appears on the vital record, in plain English: “it matches”. He does not have to confirm anything about “true and accurate copies” or “identical to” with regard to copies of copies of copies of something Hawaii once gave out.
You still have to explain how information can match, yet not be a “true and accurate copy” in your world.
You keep believing there is something on the BC that magically invalidates all the things Onaka confirmed (as a stupid example, a huge “VOID” stamp). But that is exactly why Hawaiian law does not tell Onaka to confirm “true and accurate copy” or “identical to”.
Let’s take The Donald’s BC as an example. It says “VOID” all over it. But not because it’s actually void, but because that’s a security feature that is supposed to stop someone from using a xerox copy as the original.
However his birth state could still confirm that all the data on this “void” copy matches exactly what is in their files.
They could not confirm it is “identical to” or a “true and accurate copy” because then they would effectively say that the original document also is stamped “VOID”, which it isn’t.
Do you understand this important difference?
I doubt Hermitian can. His oil doesn’t reach his dipstick.
The original is safely stored, untroubled. He does not refuse to show it. He doesn’t have it. The original documents do not even belong to him, just as your original and my original do not belong to us. They belong to the respective states.
He showed the actual certified copies in public. As has been pointed out to you, Savannah Guthrie touched one, photographed one. That is the definition of public.
Magic M, well put. I knew there was a reason I just went to sleep last night, instead of continuing. I couldn’t have put it as well as you did.
While you are fretting about Arizona not asking for Obama’s date of birth, Hermitian, please remember Mississippi’s receipt of verification from Hawaii, which has no such concern. See the very other post here that you currently are commenting upon, viz. Mississippi. Plus, there is Kansas; I haven’t reviewed Kansas myself yet, but there it is, another verification.
How do you think it is valuable to worry irrelevant details made moot by other overriding facts? Again, close to being a rhetorical question, but I think that actually the rhetorical questions are the ones I’d most like to hear you discuss. How do you get around such basic roadblocks to your assumptions?
Some engines are nothing but a dipstick.
Really? Zullo has evidence of children who were awarded COLBs 2 years after being born, where those COLBs were filed mere days after birth? Or were the birthdates recorded on the certificates as being 2 years after the real date of birth?
It’s called a straw man. The ID crowd uses the same when they think pointing out errors Darwin made 150 years ago (long since corrected) somehow gives them an argument against evolution as it is seen today (which is akin to claiming because the ancient Greeks didn’t understand infinitesimal mathematics, mathematics as a science today is bogus).
For the same reason, birthers obsess with other irrelevant anecdotal bits of information, like a single source mis-stating Obama’s birth hospital.
If you had “absolute proof” there would be no reason for you to use the words “either” and “or” in that sentence.
Tsk. Tsk. Logic is anathema to a birther bigot. As well as common sense and scary foreigners.
Savannah Guthrie is not an election official or judge. Obama substituted two different LFCOLB PDF images for his two certified copies in a Federal District Court. That is a clear violation of the Best Evidence Rule.
Throw out all of Aristotle’s teachings on physics, metaphysics, poetry, theater, music, logic, rhetoric, linguistics, politics, government, ethics, biology, and zoology because of his theory of spontaneous generation.
I have a friend who received an altered birth certificate from New York State when he decided to travel overseas and had to get a passport. His parents split up when he was an infant and his mother took him and his sister to Illinois, where she remarried and her second husband adopted him. His surname was changed to his adoptive father’s name, but he never got his birth certificate changed.
Of course (and this is the point which birthers never seem to get) the ONLY thing which was altered on the new copy of his birth certificate was his surname. His date of birth, place of birth, and the names of his parents remained the same.
Another reason for an altered birth certificate would be if paternity is unknown or disputed at the time of birth and is determined later.
Exactly!
Aw, c’mon; Herms is just keeping his cards close 😛
I have viewed his last-ditch “late/altered/delayed” position (the LAD offramp, heh) as the equivalent of an appeal to the divine. “Why? Because Herms—er, god says so, that’s why!”
Keep dancing around the altar, Herms ….
Really?Zullo has evidence of children who were awarded COLBs 2 years after being born, where those COLBs were filed mere days after birth?Or were the birthdates recorded on the certificates as being 2 years after the real date of birth?
Another Obot with the wrong facts! COLBs (or abbreviated certificates) are never filed and then subsequently issued. Moreover by HDOH regulation and Hawaii law they can only be created upon receipt by the HDOH of a request for a certified copy from a qualified requester. Additionally they can only be made as certified copies bearing the seal of Hawaii and the registrar’s date and signature stamps. COLBs are never original documents. You really shouldn’t just make this stuff up as you go along.
It’s all spelled out in the HDOH regulations on vital statistics. See:
8 8A B VR Admin Rules.pdf
The relevant part is:
“TITLE 11
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
CHAPTER 123
NAMES OF NATURAL PARENTS ON BIRTH CERTIFICATE OF ADOPTED PERSON”
This is the last section of Chapter 8 and was last revised in 1980.
Look it up!
Liar! Immediately before that, you said:
You are, in fact, guessing what “matches” means.
FIFY
😀
Another “see no evil” Obot who skips right over the quotation marks.
The first quote is from the verification request of Arizona SOS Bennett.
The second quote is from the verification request of Kansas SOS Kobach
Onaka refused to verify both requests.
That remark is birther speak for “Onaka said the same thing in different words.” Birthers lack the flexibility to understand meaning and context. It’s why they are birthers. And this is why most things birthers say are worthless to normal people.
I may have missed it, and I would appreciate being informed if I did, but I am not aware of Zullo presenting any evidence of this nature. If you are saying Zullo has evidence that he has not presented, then I would laugh in your face pointing out that Zullo is a credulous birther who has presented demonstrably false evidence before. His credibility is below zero.
I couldn’t make sense of your second paragraph, first sentence. Birth reports are filed and then birth certificates are subsequently issued. This is how it always is. The second sentence is correct. The third is somewhat confusing; a certified copy has a stamp and seal. The State of Hawaii has issued non-certified copies of birth certificates on occasion, sans stamp and seal.
Obama didn’t submit any birth certificate images to a Federal District Court. If you are confused about Mississippi, I note that the submissions in that case were made BEFORE the defense was representing the President. The Mississippi Democratic Party Executive committee presented two copies of the LFBC to a federal district court. The President did not.
Even so, it was Orly Taitz who first submitted a poor copy of the LFBC as evidence of forgery. The Defense who submitted a true copy of the LFBC was not offering it as evidence. Your “clear violation of the Best Evidence Rule” might apply to Orly Taitz, but it is laughably inept, stupid and willfully ignorant of the facts to say that Obama (not even represented at that time) or the MDP attorneys violated any rules providing a true and accurate copy. The issue of Obama’s eligibility is not even before the court, much less is the case in any evidentiary phase. The question before the court is whether to dismiss the case for any number of other reasons.
You are suggesting that they are issued before they are filled out?
And yet you persist.
( *BOOM* goes the meter. )
Spoken like a true birther crank who thinks himself a legal expert and smarter than the real judges. Standing is a concept derived from the cases and controversies language of the Constitution. Read the Wikipedia article or the Lujan decision, or just wallow in ignorance.
So why do we have an Air Force?
Hawaii COLBs are produced by printing digital data stored on a computer.
According to you, Zullo has found people where the date of birth is mere days before the filing date, but the filing date is two years after the date of birth. Please explain how this is possible.
Or, admit that you can’t read.
Or, admit that you introduced a non-sequitur.
As opposed to a case from earlier in the 1800s about a woman trying to vote?
The Constitution is not the entirety of the law The concept of standing is an ancient one, as old as the law itself. Think about this-your car and Doc’s car collide-can I sue? Of course I cannot, because I was not involved in the accident and neither my car nor my person was damaged. According to you, I should be able to sue over every car accident that happened within 100 miles of me.
And you have to wonder about a used-car salesman who took to forging rubber stamps like a duck takes to water.
“Just FYI, I don’t think anyone’s using ‘Chinamen’ any more.” — Al Madrigal
What has that got to do with what I was talking about? I was talking about a New York altered birth certificate, not a Hawaii altered birth certificate.
Still waiting for your ironclad evidence that Obama has either a delayed or altered birth certificate
Why limit it to 100 miles? LOL
Wow! Glad you finally realized that if a person born to non-citizen parents on the soil is eligible, than a person born to a citizen on the soil is in like Flynn.
Good for you, Herms!
Doc, I think you can increase your tally of ‘cured’ birfers to III. 😉
I hope that my irony meter repairman hasn’t closed for the day.
Your point was about the *public,* not the courts. Savannah Guthrie is one very public person. But as Dr. C notes here, Obama did not do what you say here, did not submit PDF images in lieu of certified copies in a federal court.
Why do you believe getting your facts wrong, and insisting upon them, helps your argument?
Certificat(e/ion) Of Live Birth = COLB
Original Hawai’ian birth certificate from that era have Certificate of Live Birth at the top. I am unaware of any reason why this can’t be abbreviated COLB. If there is any *official* reason, please let me know, with citation. Otherwise, I will regard it as a made-up distinction from early birther days.
The conflict in definitions is inconsequential. Especially as it applies to President Obama’s birth certificate.
Chapter 8A and 338-16 definitions for late/delayed certificates only apply to non-recorded births. Dr. Onaka has verified that President Obama’s was born at “Kapiolani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital” and it was recorded on August 8, 1961. There is no dispute about that.
The term “altered’ is applied to birth certificates amended after they have been submitted to the DOH (Chapter 8B and 338-16). But again there is little information that could have been altered that would impact Presidential eligiblity.
We know the place of birth and date of birth could not have been amended.
What part of “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?
On the LFCOLB submittted by SoS Bennett to Dr. Onaka, the entry in box 5a is “August 4, 1961”. What other date would match that? Would January 5, 1959 be a match? How about July 3, 1964?
That means nothing as he has not shown any such birth certificates.
In an interview with ABC15, Zullo made three erroneous statements in less than seven minutes. One of those statements contradicted what he said in the press conference the day before.
In his recent afffidavit, he mischaracterized Executive Order 13489.
BTW, do you know who Michael Nifong is?
Dr. ConspiracyJanuary 15, 2013 at 3:31 pm
Comment
“Obama didn’t submit any birth certificate images to a Federal District Court. If you are confused about Mississippi, I note that the submissions in that case were made BEFORE the defense was representing the President. The Mississippi Democratic Party Executive committee presented two copies of the LFBC to a federal district court. The President did not.”
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Obama was a named defendant in the plaintiff’s FAC which was filed on 04/24/12. He was also a named defendant in the SOS’s order of removal filed on that same date. The Page 8 LFCOLB (WH LFCOLB+Case Label) was filed on 05/04/2012. Just because Obama chose not to initially respond to the law suit does not mean that he wasn’t a defendant. Also who hired Tepper to join the defense team and who was paying Tepper for his services? Take up your beef with the court.
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
“Even so, it was Orly Taitz who first submitted a poor copy of the LFBC as evidence of forgery. The Defense who submitted a true copy of the LFBC was not offering it as evidence.”
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Taitz’s claim was that the WH LFCOLB PDF image was a forgery. It follows that the authenticity of the image was a controversy of the case. In the case of a motion for judgement on the pleadings, the court must accept the the plaintiffs initial complaints as fact. Consequently, for this case the operative date is Apr. 27, 2011 when Obama first published his LFCOLB PDF.
This case is no different than if an owner of a grocery store sued one of his customers for passing counterfeit bills to purchase his groceries. In this particular case, a considerable time had expired between the first time that a fake bill was passed until the owner discovered through his bank that multiple counterfeit bills had been discovered in a number of his daily deposits. It then took the grocer additional time to identify which of his customers was passing the counterfeit bills. Because this customer was a property owner and also had investment assets the grocer immediately brought suit in civil court to recover his losses from the counterfeiter. As evidence of his losses the owner of the grocery produced all of the counterfeit bills to the court as exhibits in his initial complaint. However after the grocer received notice from his bank and covered the bank’s losses he had learned that the same counterfeiter had also passed other counterfeit bills of the same denomination to other merchants in his area. Some of these incidents occurred well before the counterfeiter first passed his counterfeit bills in the plaintiff’s grocery. However, like his own case, these earlier incidents had not been initially detected and the losses were relatively small so all these other merchants chose not to attempt to identify the counterfeiter after the fact.
In his answer to the complaint the forger’s attorney chose the path of denying that the counterfeit bills were produced by his client. As an exhibit, the forger’s attorney produced a single, new improved bill of the same denomination that his client had just produced.
Was the forger’s new improved bill evidence?
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Your “clear violation of the Best Evidence Rule” might apply to Orly Taitz, but it is laughably inept, stupid and willfully ignorant of the facts to say that Obama (not even represented at that time) or the MDP attorneys violated any rules providing a true and accurate copy.
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Obama is an original defendant in a Rico case. Who says that the two LFCOLB PDF images are not evidence? I don’t remember any such ruling.
Do you recognize this title?
“White House birth certificate: not identical to original”
“By Dr. Conspiracy on January 5, 2013in Birth Certificate”
I believe that it is your contention that the WH LFCOLB PDF image was a scanned image of one of the two certified copies. But it is not identical because the PDF file was passed through an MRC optimizer. Consequently it has no evidentiary value because it is not a certified copy.
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
“The issue of Obama’s eligibility is not even before the court, much less is the case in any evidentiary phase. The question before the court is whether to dismiss the case for any number of other reasons.”
“The hopelessly confused Hermitian makes the worthless comment:: Obama substituted two different LFCOLB PDF images for his two certified copies in a Federal District Court. That is a clear violation of the Best Evidence Rule.”
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Then why is the Mississippi Secretary of State still a defendant when he is not a named defendant in the Rico case?
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
I didn’t use chinamen — I used chinaman. Still blind are you Al?
Usually COLB applies to the “Certification of Live Birth” which is the short form. To discriminate most people use LFCOLB for the original long-form hospital-generated “standard” birth certificate. It’s the latter which are kept on file.
Funny how you take Zullo at his word with absolutely no evidence to back up his claim. He has shown you nothing, yet you will use his claim as proof.
As it happens, maybe he does have evidence of children who were issued (awarded?) a Birth Certificate from Hawaii 2 years after their birth. What he has not said is whether said Birth Certificates state the children were born or Hawaii or born in a foreign country. Yes, some states will issue, under certain circumstances, a delayed birth certificate for a child born in a foreign country. These certificates, however, list the actual country where they were born and state “delayed” on the certificate.
Zullo may be telling the truth, but leaving out a rather important part. He did not say that he has evidence of birth certificates for child of a foreign birth that state they were born in Hawaii. You argue the smallest detail about what the President, his staff, or Hawaii have stated or provided, but accept Zullo’s statement without even a single question.
Northland: ” ………….. without even a single question”
nor without looking up hawaiian law themselves for “delayed” & “altered” birth certificates
what did doc say the other day? “This goes to support what Shermer said, that conspiracy theorists have brain anomalies that prevent them from distinguishing between plausible and utter nonsense, or put another way, they mistakenly recognize patterns in random noise.”
Indeed !
Yep!
So now you want us to extrapolate from your friend from New York to Obama in Hawaii?
What’s your point. If it doesn’t meet the regulations in Hawaii then how could it possibly apply to Obama?
Unless you a saying that Obama was born in New York.
The quote starts at 1:18 near the end of the first Arpaio/Posse Press briefing video. Zullo stated that he has proof of two children who received Hawaii birth certificates as newborns three years after their birth in a foreign country. He implied that they also have others.
Bennett and Kobach both asked Onaka to verify statements that they provided.
The law is perfectly clear.
338-14.3 Verification in lieu of a certified copy. (a) Subject to the requirements of section 338-18, the department of health, upon request, shall furnish to any applicant, in lieu of the issuance of a certified copy, a verification of the existence of a certificate and any other information that the applicant provides to be verified relating to the vital event that pertains to the certificate.
(b) A verification shall be considered for all purposes certification that the vital event did occur and that the facts of the event are as stated by the applicant.
(c) Verification may be made in written, electronic, or other form approved by the director of health.
(d) The fee for a verification in lieu of a certified copy shall be a maximum of one half of the fee established in section 338-14.5 for the first certified copy of a certificate issued.
(e) Fees received for verifications in lieu of certified copies shall be remitted, and one half of the fee shall be deposited to the credit of the vital statistics improvement special fund in section 338-14.6 and the remainder of the fee shall be deposited to the credit of the state general fund. [L 2001, c 246, 1; am L 2010, c 55, 1]
This statute requires that Onaka “shall furnish to any applicant, in lieu of the issuance of a certified copy, a verification of any other information that the applicant provides to be verified”
“shall furnish” is mandatory. He doesn’t get to rewrite their requests. A simple yes or no is required.
Only a fool would trust Mike Zullo.
Hmm just like they claimed to have a recording of Verna Lee. Just like Corsi claimed he had dozens of such certificates but never presented proof of such. Just like he claimed to have information from the US Ambassador asking Kenya if they had any birth records for Obama but then never presented it. Just as Zullo said they had the 1961 coding for the birth certificate when it was actually the 1969 coding. You’re a fool to keep trusting people who take you for being gullible.
And you don’t get to interpete Hawaiian statutes.
Where in the statute does it say his response must be verbatim? He must verify occurrence of event and information and nothing else. He did exactly what he is required by law.
Or did you miss this – “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.”
And he has produced none of them.
You can evade ’till the cows come home, but Tepper was not representing Obama at the time the Hawaii certifications were submitted to the court. Anybody can read the docket and see this. Further Obama was not a party to the case until he was served with the complaint, which the record in the case also shows he had not.
Depending on which brief you read, Orly Taitz made it clear that the SoS WAS a defendant in the suit, and that he was not a defendant in the suit.
As for who is paying Tepper, I am not at liberty to say. Muahahahahaha!
You know, this isn’t football, where a new coach can come in and turn a bad team into a good team.
This isn’t tennis, where the #1 player in the world can be shockingly upset by some unknown up-and-comer.
This isn’t bowling, where anyone can get lucky and knock all 10 pins down.
This is the New York Yankees against you when you were 6 years old. And you cannot win, ever. It’s truly impossible.
Yes, reality is cruel to those who don’t like it….
but it’s your own damn fault, for being a racist little turnip who can’t overcome his limitations and prejudices.
You will never be right. You will never win this stupid battle, because all you have is false truths and hatefulness. You will go nowhere.
And you deserve nothing but misery in life.
I like it – but do we want to honour this bore with an entry in the dictionary????
He said that foreign-born toddlers (3+ year old) rec’d were registered as newborns, born in Hawaii, by Hawaii? And issued BCs with place of birth listed as Hawaii? Back dated to actual date of birth, or … when? And Zullo knew this how? They have the original, foreign birth docs of various persons, with corresponding birth docs from Hawaii for each? How were these persons identified, how were their documents obtained? Do they have a support group for artifical Hawaiians? 😛
A very bold claim, and very vague. Also one I don’t recall Zullo making, not as you have put it here. I can’t believe you would misinterpret / misrepresent your hero, Herms (*cough*).
And you provide what as reference? A time marker without accompanying cite to a particular clip is meaningless. Are you fool enough to think there’s only one clip of WND’s various ‘happening’ online? Heh, yeah, you probably are. And you just hate being busted by your own sources, don’t you?
All that said …. takijng the word of a guy that strokes your birer buttons at face value? What? Different standards for different sources? Your bias is showing 😉
It is funny, but it does cloud the existing meaning of ‘Hermitian’. But that is a proper adjective. Let it be known that the lower case version is not to be confused with the capitalized form? Big mind vs small mind LOL!
Here is a transcript of the first press conference. I couldn’t find it but I didn’t read it thoroughly.
http://qx7.us/arpaio-presentation.pdf
Thanks … Hmmm. Only 1 use of the word ‘foreign’, and it wasn’t about foreign born children. 52 uses of certificate, all in reference to Obama’s.
Transcript does end before the Q&A. Yeah, that’s it, Herms claims was somewhere in the Q&A. Last I recall, the video of the whole schmiel was ~01:15:00. First couple minutes was introduction by a press functionary. Herms’ time reference (1:18 …. 01:18:00 or 00:1:18?) doesn’t make any sense. Surprise.
Who make a transcript of this silliness anyway?
Gee, you skipped right over the quotation marks. Ouch.
OK, I found it. Hermitian is talking about the TPPH video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_w0SVOwWGjw . In the Q&A, someone asks about the birth *announcements*, in the paper. Let’s join them at 1:17:47…
LWLWLWLWLWLWLWLWLWLWLWFNORDLWLWLWLWLWLWLWLW
[Reporter] What about his birth announcements in the Hawaii newspapers?
[Pornstache – sotto voce] I can answer those, I can answer this one.
[Shurf – sotto voce] Answer that one.
[Shurf] Thanks for that question! *chuckle*
[Pornstache] I was hoping that one didn’t come up! The birth announcements and that uh, birth registry, which is just, uh, line items. We have informa — not information; we have evidence — and we can prove beyond a doubt that not only are foreign births registered in those birth announcements and the line item registrations, we also know and have informa– not information, let me correct myself, we also have documented evidence of two adopted individuals that were breathing three years prior were listed as newborn infants.
it’s not creditable because it doesn’t tell us anything. We know a birth took place, and and, oh, maybe a little homework to clear it up. In 2000… [unintelligible] Let me finish! That’s the newspapers; the way that happens, it happens with the newspapers! There’s no distinction as to where someone was born, there’s no distinction if they were adopted, they’re just listed. it’s not creditable information.
In 2000, the Inspector General issued a report about the rampant problem of birth certificate fraud. And within the opening paragraphs of his report, he states that a birth certificate’s intended purpose was only to register the event of a live birth, not anything else, and in and of itself is not creditable information to prove identification or citizenship. There has to be other documentation to be considered. That’s right from the government.
Er. Is it OK if it’s only a couple minutes of silliness?
Wow, thanks, justlw, sorry you had to go to anything gillar-related.
Talk about Poe’s law …. you provide a transcript that reads like you’re spoofing them LOL.
Anyway, quite a bit short of Herm’s insinuation! Zullo didn’t manage to say much of anything there.
He’s talking about birth announcements in the newspaper not birth certificates as Herm said.
That’s not what the transcript said. Zullo was talking about the birth announcements in the papers, and said that the two adopted individuals were listed IN THE NEWSPAPER as infants even though they were toddlers. http://www.scribd.com/doc/83474057/Arpaio-Transcript-1-MAR-12, page 45. Zullo didn’t say that they got Hawaii birth certificates that said they were newborns, or that the birth certificate says they were infants. He said you couldn’t tell from the birth announcements in the paper if the child was an infant or a toddler.
I bet that’s why Zullo has never shown even redacted birth certificates of these children — because the birth certificate shows a delayed filing, and that doesn’t fit his narrative.
Hermie will now, without comment, skip over his claim that Zullo said Birth Certificates were created (which Zullo never actually claimed). Instead, Hermie will now jump to the next claim in that same video. To save time, I will answer him in advance.
Hermie will quote (as many before have also done):
ah so Hermy lies again why am I not surprised? I know of the inspector general report mentioned in the quote Jack Osborne on amazon refers to it constantly while misconstruing what it actually says. Nowhere does it talk about fraud committed by the state registrar, nowhere does it claim Hawaii as states that have had problems with proper BCs.
See: http://www.mcsoccp.org/joomla/
Watch the last video. Zullo also has evidence of 1000 Japanese children who were born in Japan but were awarded a Hawaii Certificate of Live Birth after the fact.
Live with it or prove him wrong!
And you can swear that no order given by Obama caused Tepper to join the MDEC defense team?
Failure to respond to law suits is the same tactic that Obama used in Georgia. In that case, he bailed out on the only hearing allowed by Judge Mahili.
David Farrar loves that one, too, and gets it just as wrong. When Zullo says
“within the opening paragraphs of his report, he states that a birth certificate’s intended purpose was only to register the event of a live birth, not anything else, and in and of itself is not creditable information to prove identification or citizenship. There has to be other documentation to be considered.” (Good work, LW, I hate doing that myself!)
he doesn’t realize (because, I suppose, he’s a willful idiot) that an official verification from the authority responsible for the vital records would serve quite nicely as that “other documentation”, and overcomes the threat of forgery described in the report.
I bet he didn’t show them .. because he certainly didn’t have them. How would he? Just pop into HDOH and request BCs for names out of the paper? Or harrass those individuals too and drag them to HDOH? Heh.
Papers now have separate sections for adoption announcements. Did they in the early 60s? I don’t know. If he was pulling names from announcements labelled as adoptions, then this just gets dumber and dumber.
No wonder he said he “was hoping that one didn’t come up” LOL
[Herms continues to lurk quietly …. quietly seething he lurks 😉 ]
No, I didn’t forget about Sibley, a loser who has made a career of failed SCOTUS petitions. In case you missed it, his cert petition in his lawsuit against the D.C. Board of Elections was denied on January 7. He does have an active cert petition in his lawsuit against Obama (in which he couldn’t even spell the President’s name correctly), but Obama has waived his right to respond. When the petition gets scheduled for a conference without any of the justices calling for a response, it will mean that Sibley’s petition is doomed. You heard it here first.
No. 12-736
Title:
Montgomery Blair Sibley, Petitioner
v.
Barak H. Obama, President of the United States, et al.
Docketed: December 14, 2012
Lower Ct: United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
Case Nos.: (12-5198)
Decision Date: December 6, 2012
~~~Date~~~ ~~~~~~~Proceedings and Orders~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dec 12 2012 Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due January 14, 2013)
Dec 12 2012 Motion to expedite consideration of the petition for a writ of certiorari filed by petitioner.
Dec 19 2012 Motion DISTRIBUTED for Conference of January 11, 2013.
Jan 14 2013 Motion to expedite consideration filed by petitioner DENIED.
Jan 14 2013 Waiver of right of respondents Barak H. Obama, President of the United States, et al. to respond filed.
First of all, my comments weren’t directed at you.
Second, I never suggested that what I was saying about New York had anything to do with Obama’s birth certificate. I was just bringing up an example of a state issuing an altered birther certificate and the reason why it was done.
I don’t particularly care what Hawaii’s regulations are about altered birth certificates since there is not a shred of evidence that Obama’s birther certificate is altered.
All of it. The word “matches” is problematic in a court of law. What is left when you rule out “is identical to” and “is a true and accurate representation of the original record in your files.”
The Hawaii law does not permit Onaka to rewrite the information that the applicant seeks to verify.
What is clear is that the two LFCOLB PDF images filed by the MDEC attorneys are not duplicate copies.
Intellectually dishonest since to “prove identification or citizenship”, you use e.g. your passport, not your original long long long form vault BC.
Besides, didn’t birthers claim McCain had to show his BC to prove his eligibility? Then what “other documentation” did he show if his BC allegedly wasn’t enough?
People like Zullo are guilty of the same thing deluded birthers like Butterdezillion accuse Hawaii of – hiding important information behind what they don’t say.
As in saying “foreign-born people can get a Hawaiian COLB” and omitting “showing they were born abroad, not in Hawaii”.
I’m perfectly happy to wait and see. If Sibley is denied again it just means that SCOTUS has just dug their hole deeper. There will soon follow another petition. The truth always comes out sooner or later.
Maybe Jerome Corsi really is a top-notch researcher. He was on board for the first Hawaii trip.
Dave B.: When Zullo says
“within the opening paragraphs of his report, he states that a birth certificate’s intended purpose was only to register the event of a live birth, not anything else, and in and of itself is not creditable information to prove identification or citizenship. There has to be other documentation to be considered.”
Intellectually dishonest since to “prove identification or citizenship”, you use e.g. your passport, not your original long long long form vault BC.
Besides, didn’t birthers claim McCain had to show his BC to prove his eligibility? Then what “other documentation” did he show if his BC allegedly wasn’t enough?
People like Zullo are guilty of the same thing deluded birthers like Butterdezillion accuse Hawaii of – hiding important information behind what they don’t say.
As in saying “foreign-born people can get a Hawaiian COLB” and omitting “showing they were born abroad, not in Hawaii”.”
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
A original hospital-generated (standard) birth certificate or a certified copy of same are at best prima facie evidence. This type of evidence is the lowest standard of all. It is not backed up by any effort to verify the facts on the document’s face by the issuing agency.
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
My theory, that belongs to me, is as follows:
The CCP, team of cracked investigators that they are, found some paid announcements in the paper that were not from the Health Bureau Statistics listing given to the papers, as opposed to Obama’s announcement, which we know was derived from the Health Bureau Statistics listing given to the papers.
Until Zullo coughs up with more info (in other words, “for the foreseeable future”), this is certainly as likely as any other theory, and neither provable nor disprovable.
That is my theory, it is mine, and belongs to me, and I own it, and what it is too.
Obama was not named in the initial Mississippi lawsuit. When Orly added her RICO complaint she added Obama but she never obtained summons from the court and never even attempted to serve the President prior to the MDEC filing of the birth certificate. It’s not a matter of ignoring anything, since he had not been served.
This is very different from what happened in Georgia. There Obama was represented in the action by counsel (who did not show up for the hearing before Malihi, but did file briefs).
I am not at liberty to tell you what I can swear to or not swear to.
Name one.
You’re pathetic. Unfounded claims need proof, not disproof.
I spent a fair amount of effort trying to find a single newspaper report of vital records fraud in the State of Hawaii. Never found one. Have you?
Now, here’s a question for you? Did Zullo ever mention these Japanese kids in his affidavit? IF not, why not?