AnitaMaria started a diary at the Daily KOS web site titled: “Wingnut Lawsuit Names NBC’s Savannah Guthrie as Accomplice in Birther Conspiracy.” It’s about Doug Vogt’s strange federal court filing in Seattle. I wrote an article on it too.
Commenters here noted that birther radio host Mark Gillar left a couple of comments on the Daily KOS diary in reply to my own comments there, but when I went to look at them, they had been removed and Gillar banned. Today, I found some of the comment copied at The Fogbow, and I’ll reproduce it here:
[Dr Conspiracy,] you know full well that Guthrie was the only reporter allowed to handle the LFBC PDF and photograph it and see it up close. J. Scott Applewhite only photographed the photocopy given to the press. He didn’t photograph the certified copy. Holding up the document and letting people see it from a distance is hardly the same as letting each member of the press examine it.
As for your comment on moving on to the next point, it kind of reminds me of the time Obots were stating incorrectly that all of the anomalies were caused by optical character recognition software. You were quickly and easily proved wrong and you just moved on without admitting you were wrong.
… Finally, the Xerox 7655 has been a gift. Giving the CCP the ability to determine exactly which anomalies were and were not produced by the Xerox 7655 has been a blessing. Surely you understand that explaining some of the anomalies or stating that “well that kind of looks like the LFBC PDF” doesn’t cut it.
The 7655 was undoubtedly used to create a number of anomalies in hopes that all anomalies in the pdf, including the ones caused by the forgery itself, would incorrectly be attributed to the machine. It’s not going to work.
There is absolutely nothing in the record that supports Gillar’s remark, “you know full well that Guthrie was the only reporter allowed to handle the LFBC.” Birthers know things because they need them to be true, not because they have good reason. I require sources, and there is no source for such a claim. All we know is that the certificate was held up for everybody to see and Guthrie felt it, photographed it and Tweeted about it. I can see no reasonable argument that in a room full of people, somehow Guthrie was the only person to get close.
No one, to my knowledge, ever claimed that “all of the anomalies” in the White House PDF were caused by OCR, or that any of them were was caused by OCR. All of my old articles are here, and I never said that. Gillar is attacking a straw man (and Zullo spent a lot of time attacking the same straw man back in March or 2012 with Gillar doing the narration). What many correctly observed was that turning on OCR in Adobe Acrobat caused the creation of layers, thereby proving that birthers who claimed that “any layers were a mark of forgery” didn’t know what they were talking about. We also observed that the “Optimize scanned PDF” feature in Acrobat created layers without invoking OCR, but everybody understood that Adobe Acrobat didn’t create the long form in the first place only that it disproved birther claims that layers were signs of forgery. Birthers said that only manual tampering creates layers in a PDF, and this was proved false by a counterexample, what happens in Adobe Acrobat when OCR is turned on. Yet more than 2 years later, birthers are still arguing that layers indicate forgery, in the face of overwhelming proof to the contrary. (Paleo-birthers still think that any layers indicate forgery, Neo-birthers believe that a a number of layers less than 30 indicates forgery—following the March 2012 Zullo presentations, and modern birthers hold that multiple one-bit layers are impossible following Garrett Papit’s report for the Posse.)
Let’s give Gillar a history lesson. This is what Douglas Vogt was saying in 2011:
My qualifications on OCR programs are considerable. … The text file and matrix files would never be seen as separate layers and there is certainly no nine layers. The three files would be in a PDF “wrapper” and that’s all. All OCR programs work on the same principle.
And I replied in May of 2011, only a month after the Long Form PDF was released:
Does Vogt not even know that there is no OCR data in the Obama long form PDF?
When I published my own article on layers: “The Doc Got Layers” July 9, 2011, describing a procedure for generating layers in PDFs with Adobe Acrobat, there was nothing about OCR. I said:
I’ve already mentioned a few times, I scanned my own birth certificate using Adobe Acrobat and an HP scanner, and I got layers. Of course President Obama’s long form birth certificate PDF wasn’t scanned using Adobe software, but the similarity in the results are striking.
There is nothing about OCR in that article. I checked the revision control. No changes have been made to that article since the day it was published. Nevertheless, even though I had documented in May of 2011 that there is no OCR data in the White House PDF, Mike Zullo in his first press conference raised the same straw man, saying:
Over the last 10 months with all the controversy, there have been those that tried to explain away these anomalies, and they tried to explain them away by offering up excuses of OCR software or optimization.
Zullo then raises his own false claim:
In looking at that video, you’ll see that on Mr. Obama’s birth certificate, there are approximately 8 or 9 links and layers. Links and layers are indicative of a document being built, like you would on those transparencies from years ago when you start laying them one on top of the other, and you start to build a picture. That’s what that’s indicative of. Running it through software for optimization or OCR, you get anywhere from 45 to 150 links and layers, all bits and pieces. Mr. Obama’s is down to about 8 or 9, give or take, on either side. That’s an indication of human logic was involved in putting that document together. A computer will not randomly do what it does on Mr. Obama’s certificate.
In the March 31 press conference, Zullo proves that he doesn’t even know what OCR is! Zullo explained to the assembled Tea Partiers:
Optical Character Recognition–really that’s a fancy way of saying you scan it into a computer and a software program picks up the characters, the fonts, the little letters and makes them sharper, makes them look better.
Gillar basically admits now that everything that Zullo said above is wrong. A Xerox WorkCentre 7655 will create 9 layers and it will isolate parts of the document and allow them to be moved around, what Gillar, narrating the Cold Case Posse video, called “troubling.” All of the anomalies resulting from painstaking birther analysis of the long form PDF are just the normal processing of the Xerox 7655. How is having your entire body of work destroyed a “gift?” Perhaps the license to use more technical mumbo jumbo to fool the unwashed birthers, and to settle on an argument that birthers could never follow is considered a gift. The only real “gift” that Obots have given the birthers, is the opportunity to start over from scratch, to throw all their “old nonsense” in the dumpster, to move the goal posts, and come up with even more nonsensical marks of forgery. However when they start over, they most abandon any claims that the birth certificate has ever been proved a forgery by anyone.
Just to be clear, our argument goes this way:
- Birther: This anomaly can only be the result of forgery
- Obot: Normal processing produces this anomaly, therefore the birther claim is false.
- Obot: Birthers have been proven dishonest and incompetent so many times that they no longer warrant consideration.
Birthers want to shift the burden of proof to the Obots to reproduce, bit for bit, the Long Form birth certificate, ignoring the fact that we do not have an original Obama birth certificate to scan, and any scanning process involves some variability. If you drop the same document in the document feeder twice, you get two different results, even a varying number of layers! We don’t have to prove anything. Obama is securely in the White House, and no one who matters will give birthers the time of day.
What we have shown is not how to perfectly duplicate Obama’s long form, but that the birthers don’t know what they are talking about.
Mark Gillar isn’t banned here, and is welcome to comment.
… and thereby demonstrating how the ‘forgery’ could have been done!
Be careful not to give them too much rope.
Regarding the OCR claim, there were some people who claimed it had been run through an OCR, myself among them, but I stupidly made the assertion without even looking at the document. i worked for the federal government for several years and my recollection from that experience was that all material on federal government web sites has be readable by text readers that assist sight-impaired users (known as 508 compliance). This may be outdated by now, but when I was doing the work, PDFs either had to be run through an OCR or its text had to be posted in html. Graphics had to have descriptive tags. This is a really big deal for anyone who creates and posts content on federal government web sites. It keeps a lot of good stuff off the web because it can be very expensive to make graphics-heavy material 508 compliant. I just assumed that the text on the birth certificate had been run through an OCR, but I was wrong.
This is the crux of the matter, that there is no burden on obots to perfectly duplicate the long form (I would also note that the birthers have never tried to perfectly duplicate the long form by a human forger), rather, each artifact the birthers identify is either evidence of a machine process or a human process and we’ve shown them all to be the former.
Acrobat Pro (full version) has a tools section containing an OCR tool. This tool works on PDF’s that have not been OCR’d. For those files already OCR’d, the OCR tool will return the following message:
“Acrobat could not perform recognition (OCR) on this page
beacuse this page contains renderable text.”
This message will not appear with any of the BC PDF’s as they were not OCR’d..
All of the BC PDF’s can be run through the OCR tool, which means they were not OCR’d. No one except the birthers claimed OCR’d, Gillar is rather dumb.
More than likely no birther has the Acobat Pro full verson so they probably don’t know about this feature, especially Zullo the Klown..
although banned, gillar’s comments are not lost but merely hidden. negative ratings by “trusted users” (those having attained a level of activity and seniority) will automatically hide a comment from the general public although it remains visible to trusted users:
so as a trusted user, i can show you both of mark’s comments in full:
H/T to Loren from Fogbow who stumbled across (his words) some other pics of other people holding/photographing the BC on 4/27, thus proving another of Gillar’s (and others) claims wrong…
http://twitpic.com/4q47pm
https://twitter.com/MarkWrightKING5/status/63232880930848768
http://twitpic.com/4q4lcm
Are those pictures of the long form or of the press kit copy? I ask because there’s barely any security paper on the first one, and no visible seal on the second. Guthrie’s photo is much sharper, clearly showing the security paper and with the seal visible.
Those BC’s are just copies. Only Savanna Guthrie got to examine and touch the copy that was actually obtained in Hawaii, so they say.
The first is very possibly the press kit photocopy. The second however absolutely must be the certified copy from Hawaii given the visibility of the security pattern. As far as I know, no one has suggested the possibility of a third version floating around the press conference.
Regarding the Chain of Custody of Obama’s BC, there is definitely more than meets the eye and Hawaii is definitely involved. its painfully obvious, neither Obama nor Hawaii have completely forthcoming on how the Hawaii Certificate was obtained. There are alot of holes that just don’t make sense which have never been answered. Its very suspcious on how Obama actually got his birth certificate. Like I said, neither Obama nor Hawaii has ever revealed all the facts.
So yeah they forged 3 different copies of the Long form for the press conference. You obots are sneaky.
HAH NOW YOU COME UP WITH NEW COPIES!! And you artificially added a long upload date and you added comments added a false comment date too! YOU OBOTS IS SNEAKY BUT WE BIRTHERS ARE NOT FOOLED!!!
Use as appropriate.
Would you care to explain any of this, are you just fantasizing?
I would tend to agree with you. The two photos are not of the same thing.
For over 3 years, the Hawaii DOH ahd been harassed by birthers trying to get ahold Of Obama’s birth certificate. They tried every method under the sun. Then, Suddenly, on April 22, 2011, Loretta Fuddy (Director of the Hawaii DOH) gets 2 very manila looking letters from President Obama and his lawyer. Lorretta Fuddy apparently made no effort to verify these letters and immediately approved the request for the birth certificates and made the copies. It is highly suspicious that Jill Nagamine was not informed or involved as Jill Nagamine had been neck deep into each and every action that birthers sought to get the birth certificate. In addition, Judith Corely even went to Hawaii under an ASSUMED premise that she would obtain the birth certificate. In fact, the letter written by Lorretta Fuddy was actually written before the fact which even more strange.
Why would Ms. Nagamine be involved in a simple request for a verified copy of Obama’s BC made by Obama? She doesn’t work for the HI DOH she works for the AG’s office. She has absolutely nothing to do with release of vital records unless there’s a case pending in which she’s involved. This involved no litigation matter.
The rest of your rant is just typical of you and other birthers. The provenance of the document is well set out.
You also have no idea what Fuddy verified or not.
Birthers already had Obama’s birth certificate back in 2008. The short form is the official birth certificate format that Hawaii currently uses. Birthers never had a right to the birth certificate. It would have always taken a waiver from the President. How does a letter look “very manila”? So now you’re claiming the waiver letter was fake? You birthers are unreal
Wrong. She’s just the only one who said she held it. The copy was shown to the entire press pool
What I’m saying is lot has been left out regarding the chain of custody of birth certificate from Hawaii to Obama. I would love to see the additional documentation. The current scenario just doesn’t add up. The letters look very poorly official especially Obama’s. Any person could written both letters to Fuddy and pretended to be Obama and Corley. Remember Hollister and Jordan? Jill Nagamine had been involved in the letters of verification. That was not legal litigation and the letters of verification needed to adhere to same rules under the law. It is also strange that Fuddy actually copied the BC’s before the fact. Meaning Corely went to Hawaii ASSUMING she would get the birth certificates and Fuddy apparently made the copies BEFORE she approved the request for them in the first place. What I’m saying is lot of communication is still missing that birthers would love to see.
More accurately, for over 3 years the Hawaii DOH was harassed by birthers trying to get them to violate state law and to provide access to a document that they were not entitled to. President Obama, however, was entitled to his own birth certificate and his attorney made a strong argument for a waiver of the department’s policy on the form of the certificate. You assume that no effort was made to verify the Obama request, but you have no facts to back that up, so there’s nothing to say about that.
Jill Nagamine works for the Attorney General, not the Department of Health. Whether she was consulted or not has no relevance. The DOH has issued other long forms under a waiver, so I see no reason for special consultation on this one.
Judith Corley talked with the DOH by phone on April 21 (Bob Bauer’s comment at the Press Gaggle), President Obama’s written request is dated April 22, his attorney’s letter is dated April 22, Fuddy’s letter is dated April 25, and the birth certificate was issued April 25. According to Bob Bauer, “We were advised that the long-form birth certificate could be copied and made available to us as early as Monday, April 25th — the day before yesterday. And we made arrangements for counsel to travel to Honolulu to pick it up and it was returned to the White House yesterday afternoon.” Clearly, the DOH told Corley that the certificate would be available on the 25th before the 25th, so there’s nothing out of sequence here.
If I can look this stuff up, so could you. Why don’t you?
Um…no. They have been. Robert Bauer discussed at length how the long-form was requested and obtained at the April 27, 2011 press gaggle:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/04/27/press-gaggle-press-secretary-jay-carney-4272011
And, of course, along with uploading a pdf of the long-form to the White House website that morning, they also uploaded pdfs of the correspondence from Obama, his counsel, AND the Hawaii Department of Health.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/birth-certificate-correspondence.pdf
Plus, the state of Hawaii posted their OWN scans of the letters on THEIR website:
http://hawaii.gov/health/vital-records/Birth_Certificate_Request.PDF
And the Hawaii’s governor’s office put out a news release that again laid out the sequence of events that Bauer described:
http://hawaii.gov/health/vital-records/News_Release_Birth_Certificate_042711.pdf
So what do you mean by “not forthcoming on how the Hawaii certificate was obtained”?
John, you’re pretty terrible a this whole lying thing. You might wanna think about finding a different hobby.
As I commented elsewhere, a detail time line was provided by Bob Bauer. It is eminently reasonable and consistent with all documentation. I mean, you were the one that originally pointed me to the transcript:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/04/27/press-gaggle-press-secretary-jay-carney-4272011
“So now you’re claiming the waiver letter was fake?’
Very Possible. Or to put more accurately, Obama did not write the letter himself or was even involved. Probably his lawyer or some else wrote the letter for him. You will recall that Obama was not allowed to touch his own birth certificate. They even pointed that out. And based on what we seen regarding these scandals, it is very likely that Obama had no role other than making his speech on April 27, 2011 about the birth certificate in obtaining his birth certificate. The entire effort was orcestrated by other persons in the administration.
According to transcript, yes there appears to additional documentation not released to the public regarding the acquistion of the birth certificate.
Hoisted by his own petard!
were these unpublished communications emails or phone calls. Where is the doucmentation?
“The DOH has issued other long forms under a waiver, so I see no reason for special consultation on this one.”
When did DOH do that?
You mean the letters that had a white house lawyer attached? Who would have been able to present official identification, unlike Mike Zullo?
But lets face it, your President, Obama, could end this controversy tomorrow if he simply presented a certified copy of his long form birth certificate.
Remember Danae?
http://www.wnd.com/2011/04/292053/
Phone calls. That’s now people normally conduct preliminary business. Duh.
“john: When did DOH do that?”
Gee, john, for a birther and expert on letters and all things Obama BC, you sure don’t seem to know much about it all.
Her birth certificate is different. Apparently she didn’t get waiver and somehow it fell through the cracks about her being able to get a long-from BC assuming its real.
Of course Obama didn’t write the letter himself, but he signed it.
Nobody said that Obama wasn’t allowed to touch his birth certificate. All they said was that he wouldn’t be holding it up at the press conference. Try to stick with the facts.
Wow. You mean a client may have directed his attorney to act on his behalf? Yeah, that would be highly suspect. 🙂
John, you use words like “possibly” and “probably” an awful lot, for someone who thinks they have all the facts.
It’s a long form from a different year. Of course she got a waiver. I had a personal email exchange with Danae. She talked with Onaka himself and explained why she needed it and he agreed to provide one. He asked her whether she need a plain paper copy or a certified copy.
WorldNetDaily’s Bob Unruh said it was authentic. http://www.wnd.com/2011/04/292053/
The key to getting a long form is a legitimate reason for needing it; Danae had one (which she explained to me, but I will keep private since it was in an email).
I don’t think the word “end” means what you think it does. 😉
I wonder why Onaka talked to Danae? According to everyone out there, Onaka won’t talk to the public especially birthers. If you are person asking for a long-form BC, your are a birther. Hawaii DOH can smell a birther a mile away. Addition, the waiver rule was something that Fuddy authorized not Onaka.
No.
(a) She got it because she was trying to get onto a program that carters for native Hawaiians, so she had to have documentation of her parentage from the DOH. The name of the program escapes me right now.
(b) It was a photocopy. it was not a certified copy like Obama’s. Nor was it stamped. Nor was it on security paper. To apply for the program she needed to present that photocopy AND her official birth certificate, the short form.
John, even you have to admit that Gillar is making a few admissions here.
Clearly, he is stating now that some of the anomalies that they had originally believed to be proof of forgery, they can now attribute to a WorkCentre 7655. That’s a pretty big admission to make considering it would make their previous claims false.
And his claim that the forger intentionally used a 7655 to hide his own work in the anomalies that the WorkCentre produces just smacks of desperation.
The copy shown at WND was a certified copy. Whether that was faked or not, I can’t say, but it’s still a long form.
For birthers ignorance is bliss.
I think there is a verb missing here. I suggest “debunked,” “shredded,” or perhaps “flushed.”
Danae didn’t approach Onaka as a birther, but as a Hawaiian needing a certified copy for a specific purpose. I presume she called the office and was referred to him because what she was asking was non-standard. The 2001 Policy said that if there were questions, refer them to Onaka.
Given that the DOH went paperless in 2001, it is hardly credible that they didn’t have a waiver policy before Fuddy. Why do you think there was none?
Who?
Touching a document has no legal relevance whatsoever. In 2007, in order to get his name placed on the state ballot, Barack Obama signed a notarized government document of the state of Arizona stating that he was a “natural born citizen of the United States.” In 2009, Barack Obama published a letter for the Kapi’olani Hospital Foundation’s Centennial Anniversary publication stating that Kapi’olani Hospital was” the place of my birth.” Touching or not touching a birth certificate is completely irrelevant. He ordered copies under his signature, he sent his attorney to retrieve ithe copies and he spoke to the data on the copies at the press gaggle.
And of course, ALL copies of the birth certificate, be they digital reproductions or hard copies are secondary evidence to the existence of the original, vault edition of the long form Certificate of Live Birth which resides in Dr. Onaka’s safe in the Records Division of the Hawaii Department of Health. The original vault edition can be released for inspection under court order from a court of competent jurisdiction in accordance with the provisions of Hawaii Revised Statutes 338-18(b){point 9}. Thus far no judge in America has felt the need or the desire to issue such a court order for inspection of the original vital record.
I thought she originally got a photocopy that might have been stamped, but not embossed by the HDOH. I’ll have to look it up at some point
From the aforelinked press gaggle:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/04/27/press-gaggle-press-secretary-jay-carney-4272011
“And by Thursday of last week, I spoke to private counsel to the President and asked her to contact the State Department of Health and to have a conversation about any requirements, further requirements, that they thought we had to satisfy to lodge that waiver request. She had that conversation with the state Department of Health on Thursday — counsel in question is Judy Corley at the law firm of Perkins Coie, and you have a copy of the letter she subsequently sent to the department with the President’s written request.”
So thus far: conversation between Bauer and Corley on April 21, conversation between Corley and DoH on April 21, and letter from Corley to DoH on April 22 that both the White House *and* the DoH posted online. Pretty straightforward.
“We were advised that the long-form birth certificate could be copied and made available to us as early as Monday, April 25th — the day before yesterday. And we made arrangements for counsel to travel to Honolulu to pick it up and it was returned to the White House yesterday afternoon.”
And here: ‘advised’ via unspecified method sometime before April 25, followed by physical travel to Hawaii, and then delivery to the White House on April 26.
Just to be clear, your position is that three letters (vouched for by both parties), a press conference from the recipient, a news release from the provider, and the production of the requested document itself is insufficient evidence to support a simple chain of custody for a single certified document?
We waste our life here.
Woah. You have a life to waste? What’s it like?
The only relevant legal requirement is that the President be a natural born citizen. The State of Hawaii has repeatedly said he was born in Hawaii. That’s how we determine things in this country. He is not required to even have a birth certificate; indeed, about half of our Presidents did not have one, and Pres. Eisenhower only got one AFTER he was President. The President is not required to write in his own hand, on a blackboard, “I request a certified copy of my birth certificate” 100 times before reasonable people are satisfied. He is not required to type his letters himself. He is not required to go to Hawaii and request his documents in person. There is no legal requirement of “chain of custody” for a certified document. There is no legal requirement that two reporters touch a document before it is determined to be genuine.
The President proved to my satisfaction that he was a natural born citizen. How did he do that? He said so. He is a good, honorable and decent man even though I’ve not voted for him. His word is good enough for me.
And in case anyone here forgot, John is a racist troll and a liar.
Boy that’s the truth. John, you are delusional. And BTW, who is the forger? Show us what kinda pull you have with Zullo. Is Zullo feeding you all of your misinformation for any particular purpose other than to make you look ridiculous? And BTW, who really is the alleged forger John?
Are we just about through with John’s comedy routine?
Gillar said:
The CCP owns a Xerox 7655? Really? Who paid for it? They are not cheap. Certified 1961 birth certificates? They were not printed on green security paper in 1961. I will be addressing the halos in my new series of articles “Driving the final nail into the Cold Case Posse “investigation”. Part I and Part II are already published.
Several documents scanned on Xerox WorkCentre’s posted on line have halos. I included two of them in Part II.
Gillar says the clipping mask caused by saving a document in Preview is not the same but he doesn’t say how. The only differences I have found is that the width of the mask is determined by the borders of the default printer.
The CCP is grasping at straws. I wonder if they looked for the “YCbCr” comment in the files? I doubt it.
John, I share your view of BHO as a good, honorable and decent man. There are some other Republicans – not enough – who say that in public as well. One of the finest moments of John McCain when he underlined that. And I know that this is necessary, but not enough to make a good president and that is (perhaps) why you did not vote for him.
That said, when it comes to someones birth, how can he know ? At his birth he was present, but did not witness it. (Not that there is any reasonable doubt about your Presidents’ birth in the state of Hawaii),
A very good life. You are jealous ?
According to Diana Cotter (Danae) from her posts on freerepublic.com, her father had died recently and the motivation for her seeking the long form was genealogical research. When she spoke to Dr. Onaka, he told her that she could get an uncertified copy immediately or she could wait for the preparation of a certified copy. She elected to have his office send her an uncertified copy immediately.
Actually, I think it is far more than this: No judge in America has the authority to issue such an order as it would violate the full faith and credit clause of the Constitution. A judge would be limited to asking the Hawai’i DoH for verification of the information—something they have already done numerous times.
There is nothing in “inspecting” or “receiving a certified copy” of a vital record that violates the full faith and credit clause.
Here’s what the Hawaii statute says:
338-18 Disclosure of records. (a) To protect the integrity of vital statistics records, to ensure their proper use, and to ensure the efficient and proper administration of the vital statistics system, it shall be unlawful for any person to permit inspection of, or to disclose information contained in vital statistics records, or to copy or issue a copy of all or part of any such record, except as authorized by this part or by rules adopted by the department of health.
(b) The department shall not permit inspection of public health statistics records, or issue a certified copy of any such record or part thereof, unless it is satisfied that the applicant has a direct and tangible interest in the record. The following persons shall be considered to have a direct and tangible interest in a public health statistics record:
(9) A person whose right to inspect or obtain a certified copy of the record is established by an order of a court of competent jurisdiction;
The FF&CC binds any judge to accept the official word of Hawai’i as to who was born there. How can a judge order any additional verification of something that he is Constitutionally bound to accept?
A court of competent jurisdiction could indeed order the production of a certified vital record (Obama BC) from HI DOH. Once that certified copy was received, a judge would then be bound by the Full Faith & Credit clause to accept its authenticity unless there was good cause (competent evidence) to believe it was not authentic. Since there is no competent evidence it is not authentic it would be accepted as a true and correct record and treated just as the original would be.
And since there’s no competent evidence that it’s not authentic in the first place, it would not be ordered. Obama’s certified copy of his COLB (short form) would more than suffice.
Suranis, look at it this way. What better way to spend your time than mocking Birthers? You are guaranteed to be satisfied because the Birthers always lose. They always provide such entertainment with their desperate antics. It is somewhat like watching the monkey exhibit at the zoo. They are always doing hilarious things.
Where else could you find motion for reconsideration to reconsider the denial of a motion for reconsideration? Now we have Mark Gillar flailing about trying to pretend that they are going to prove that a Xerox WorkCentre doesn’t produce halos, layers, etc. Doug Vogt is making a complete jackass of himself in a federal court in Washington. That is prime entertainment you cannot find anywhere else my friend.
The uncertified copy is presented in my article: Long form sighted?
Note that the file name was “SettleTheBet1.jpg” suggesting that this was the purpose of the image.
The genesis of the certified copy is a little fuzzier. (The image is a bit fuzzy as well.) Since there is no certification, there is no way to tell just from the document when it was issued. My article was dated October 21, 2010 and that’s the date in the file’s metadata when it was modified by “Paint.net” presumably to blank out the personal information.
The “certified copy” appeared later. I wrote about it in my article: 2011 Hawaii long form appears? on April 7, 2011, about 3 weeks before Obama’s long form appeared. The certification stamp is March 15, 2011.
It is theoretically possible for the first long form copy to have been obtained before the DOH went paperless in 2001. And it is possible that that document was subsequently pasted onto a Danae’s short form issued March 15. I suppose the birther could be faking evidence. However, I have no evidence that it’s a fake, and the poor quality of the image isn’t going to help.
What I find quaint is that birthers were arguing that the Danae image was authentic when I supported their demands that Obama cough up his long form, and they are now doubting it when when it supports their new theory that the Department of Health is up to something funny. It points out the fact that evidence is not a means of getting at the truth for birthers, but a way of proving what they already have decided.
Maybe Dr. Onaka sent her a certified copy at a later date.
Here are better copies of both her short form (Certification of Live Birth) and her Long form (scroll down to Post 11):
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2713796/posts
Thank you. That is extremely helpful for something else.
Thank you for putting that more clearly. My point was that no court could legally order the inspection of the original documents in the Hawai’i DoH vault. It is a pretty sad statement about birthers that what they seem to consider the gold standard of verification is really an unConstitutional overreach.
Could a Hawaiin court order inspections of it? I have long being curious that the ONE place they could legally challenge the BC, Hawaii itself, is one of the few places the Birthers dared not make a challenge to it.
They could.
Birthers have tried by several methods, including litigation in HI, to inspect/obtain the original.
I would guess they are about the only ones that could order it inspected. But so far the Hawaiian courts have not been very receptive to the idea.
Andy Martin took it all the way to the Hawaiian Supreme Court and failed.
Exactly. But I’m certain that you realize that judges like Alabama Supreme Court Justices Tom Parker and Roy Moore have been known to do some unusual things.
“A court of competent jurisdiction” in the Hawaii statute does not limit jurisdiction to only the courts of the state of Hawaii.
No, but Hawai’i is the only state without a “full faith and credit” problem. A Hawai’ian court could decide it needs to see the documents as a state matter without violating the Constitution.
“Exactly. But I’m certain that you realize that judges like Alabama Supreme Court Justices Tom Parker and Roy Moore have been known to do some unusual things.”
Indeed they have.
However, Obama is not a party to the SCOAL case before them. They have no authority to order him to do anything.
In addition, nothing related to his BC is before them. The only issue is whether the SoS of AL has a duty to “vet” candidates (for all offices). AL law (like most others, if not all) is clear she does not. There is also a jurisdiction-stripping statute in AL which is well-settled law.
If they ignore all that and reverse and remand (not likely) then the SoS will ask for documentation and will get it, though the election is long over and the issue is moot. If they do remand, under the prayer of the lawsuit, even Justice Moore would have to provide his proof as well. 🙂
And if they want to give AL’s electoral votes to Romney, oh well. He already has them, so… 🙂
I worry that SOCAL might give those Alabama Electoral votes to Mitt Romney! It keeps me up at night.
Correct me if I’m mistaken but you appear to me to be assuming that if a judge issued a court order for inspection of the Obama long form birth certificate under HRS 338-18, that the judge would rule that the vital record is flawed in some way. I am assuming just the opposite. A judge having her/his own hard copy and inspecting that hard copy just might put an end to legal questions about the validity of the Obama birth certificate.
A judge simply saying, the long form is perfectly legitimate, authentic and valid could drive a stake in the heart of the birther cult.
Yes, you are mistaken (as to what I’m saying). I’m saying if a judge from a state other than Hawai’i issued an order to examine the original documents held in the Hawai’i DoH’s vault (for the purposes of verifying President Obama’s birth in Hawai’i) that said order would be in violation of the Constitution (regardless of how the judge might rule were he allowed to ignore Hawai’i’s full faith and credit).
Nothing (except time) will end the birther cult—the only goalposts that they wont just move are the ones that cannot possibly be reached in the first place. I don’t doubt that they would find some way to rationalize even a SCOTUS ruling.
John is his incompetent self once again… He has shown no ability to do research and/or make logical deductions.
What a tool..
I fully agree. There is ZERO sincerity in the birther demands, as any demand that doesn’t 100% match up to their pre-conceived “guilty and remove the ursurper” fantasies will be immediately ignored and considered part of the “conspiracy” by them. Therefore, there is ZERO reason to entertain any of their nonsense or their concern trolling attempts to get info that they don’t deserve.
“What a tool..”
correction
“What a fool”
Hawaii says that the short form is the official state birth certificate and yet Hawaii made exceptions for birther Diana Cotter (“Danae”) and for President Obama. Hawaii’s vital records confidentiality statute says that a person with a valid court order can inspect a confidential vital record or possess a copy.
The whitehouse.gov image of the long form has been submitted as an exhibit to Judge Mahili in the Georgia ballot challenges, for Judge Wingate in Orly Taitz’s Mississippi ballot challenge and for the Alabama Supreme Court in an amicus brief submitted by the Alabama Democratic Party. Thus far only Judge Mahili has ruled and he ruled President Obama was born in Hawaii and that he was a natural born citizen qualified to be on the Georgia ballot.
I think Hawaii would even honor a congressional committee subpoena if the birthers were ever able to interest Congress in the President’s natural born citizenship status. However even the most rabid right wingers in Congress aren’t dumb enough to fall into the birther hole beyond giving lip service to keep the donations coming in and the primary challenges at bay.
Two manila looking letters? Were they letters which arrived in manila envelopes?
I assume that Arizona has a Freedom of Information law. I wonder if the CCP would be obliged to respond to a request for a list of the photocopiers which the CCP owns and/or leases.
Unlikely as the organization is privately incorporated…
Nagamine has been involved to deal with the foolish birthers who insist on getting access to records to which they have no rights. In this case, an attorney showed up with a duly signed request by our President for records to which he may have access.
It’s all very straightforward and nothing suspicious really… But your mind forces you to not accept the simple facts.
Now why didn’t you birthers think of that? You could have had Montgomery Sibley send a letter to Fuddy, pretending to be Obama’s attorney, and then had him fly to Honolulu to pick up the LFBC (Sibley would have little to lose if his ruse were to be be discovered, since he has already been disabarred). Then he could have hand-delivered it to Reed Hayes, and the usurper surely would have been frogmarched out of the White House by now.
I don’t believe that the Alabama Supreme Court can order Hawaii DOH to do anything. My reading of the Alabama pleadings is that the only relief which the plaintiffs can hope to get is a ruling that the Alabama SOS has a duty to vet the candidates. It would then be up to the SOS to decide what sort of verification should be requested.
The Alabama lawsuit has been a fool’s errand since the beginning. Even if Obama had carried Alabama, there is no precedent which would allow a state to change its electoral vote after the fact.
They are so desperate for is a gotcha moment…that’s all. To be 1-218 even if it doesn’t do a thing about the election.
Oh john, are you playing Catch-22 again? If Obama had been “allowed to touch” it, you would’ve claimed he (could’ve) switched the real one for the forgery when nobody was looking.
At least not after certification by Congress. Wouldn’t it be a hoot for birthers if blue states today retroactively changed their electoral votes for all previous elections when they were red states, and we would face the possibility a Republican President would suddenly become “voided”? 😉
@Rickey
If the Alabama court as a whole are rational then yes, they will never ask for anything from Hawai’i. However, as pointed out previously when both the Senior Judge and his protege, Tom Parker are in the mix…….
My W.A.G. is that the case is dismissed but either Moore or Parker write some weasely dissent and dog whistle to Birfoons
That strikes me as a possible outcome. BamaLaw at The Fogbow says that Moore and Parker are the only justices on the Alabama Supreme Court who would give the time of day to birthers.
John, the only thing I want to hear from you is an explanation for this:
“john October 16, 2013 at 2:08 pm #
I sent the following letter to the Arlington National Cemetery Administration:
Dear Administration,
When the government reopens, I am planning on taking a trip to Washington DC. I plan to visit Arlington National Cemetery. I am an avid treasure hunter and I am asking permission if I can metal detect on the grounds of Arlington National Cemetery. Millions of people visit the cemetery and I want to metal detect around some of the green and the graves. I would promise to fill any holes I made and the administration can even keep an eye on me to be sure I fill in the holes I make at some the graves. I know this is an unusual request by I understand the National Park Service with approval of the President placed barricades in front of the memorials including the WWII Memorial denying Vets access to them. It seems this was OK with National Park Service and President so I don’t see why there be would a problem to allow me to metal detect around the green and the graves of Arlington National Cemetery. Thank you for your time in this matter and I look forward to quick response.”
How did that request work out, and did you find the President’s birth certificate when you were digging up Medgar Evers’ grave? Neither of them have ever been photographed together, you know…….