An interesting objection by retired federal agent Stephen Coffman to Barack Obama’s Selective Service registration was cited by Debbie Schlussel back in 2008: Obama could not have registered for the draft in Hawaii because he was attending classes at Occidental College at the time:
On the previous FOIA response, they stated that it was filed on September 4, 1980. In my second request I mentioned that Obama could not have filed it in Hawaii on September 4, 1980 as he was attending Occidental College in California, the classes of which commenced August 24, 1980.
That’s certainly a serious objection—if it were true. Obot research has obtained documents previously unavailable on the Internet showing that Fall Term activities at Occidental College actually started on September 21, 1980, not August 24.
I do not know where Mr. Coffman got his August 24 date from. Perhaps he got it from a class schedule for later years. Indeed it would have been incredibly difficult for retired federal agent Coffman to have found out the exact dates from 1980; he would have had to contact the registrar and ask, and that would have risked him being proven wrong. On the other hand Coffman may have learned better, because this objection did not appear in his 2013 affidavit for Orly Taitz.
This is a great example of how birther claims fall apart under scrutiny.
Occidental College Academic Calendar for 1980-81 School Year by Reality Check 1776 on Scribd
H/t to RC for the information.
Coffman was way off in any event, Obama didn’t register with Selective Service on September 4, 1980. He registered on July 29, 1980 or July 30, 1980, depending upon whether he wrote down the wrong date or the date on the Post Office stamp was a day behind. September 4, 1980 is the date when his registration was entered into the Selective Service computer system.
I suspect that Selective Service registrations were batched over the course of several weeks and then mailed to Washington for entry into the system. This theory is supported by the Selective Service number of Bruce Henderson. He registered three or four days after Obama, yet he has a lower number.
sorry, could you point me to an example just like obama’s draft reg, i haven’t been able to find it.
You can find what you are looking for in “A Question of Eligibility: A Law Enforcement Investigation into Barack Obama’s Birth Certificate and His Eligibility to be President”, by Jerome Corsi in Michael Zullo. Paperless Publishing LLC (2012). Chapter 3. It is interesting to note that in one of the examples that Zullo describes as an “authentic Selective Service Registration card” the “No ID” check box is also checked. Further, as best I can tell, Zullo calls these examples “authentic” because they were obtained “from the federal government.”
So where exactly is his birth certificate?
“I do not know where Mr. Coffman got his August 24 date from. Perhaps he got it from a class schedule for later years.”
I’d say that’s incredibly likely. From that 1981 schedule, Occidental operated on a Quarter System at the time, so they had a fall quarter that started in mid-September and ended in early December, and winter and spring quarters that took place after the New Year.
Whereas Occidental *today* operates on the Semester System, so they just have a fall semester and a spring semester, and the fall one begins in late August and ends in mid-December.
So Occidental made the switch to semesters sometime after 1981, but Coffman didn’t know that.
Henderson, Darrel Oniwa, and President Obama’s cards were processed on the same date September 4th, 1980. Their cards are all stamped with different dates 7/29, 7/31 and 8/2.
“According to Flahavan, the September 4 date which appears on the computer print-out is simply the date that Obama’s registration record was added to the Selective Service database. The term “Transaction Date” used to describe this date on the computer print-out does NOT mean the date Obama registered but, again, it is the date when the information from the registration form was added to the data base. And yes, that can often be over a month later.”
http://theobamafile.com/_exhibits/DraftNewResearch.htm
Hawaii.
Though maybe he keeps a copy among his personal records in the White House.
His original birth record has been reported by the appropriate Hawaiian officials to be at the Department of Health in Honolulu.
There are at least three documents (the COLB and the two copies of the LFBC) that are properly referred to as birth certificates. As far as I know, the COLB was last reported as having been shown to FactCheck representatives “at the Obama headquarters in Chicago” some time in the summer of 2008. At least one copy of the LFBC was shown at the White House on April 27, 2011.
I am not aware of more recent sightings of any of those documents.
It seems that Selective Service registrations were handled much the way that Hawaii handled birth certificates. Which makes sense – in the absence of a draft, and with no deferments, there was no urgency about getting the registrations into the database. It made more sense to save up a batch and then send them to Washington instead of sending them as they were received at the Post Office.
Where exactly is your birth certificate?
My original long-form birth certificate is in the archives of the New York State Department of Health. At least, I assume it is. I’ve never seen it.
I have several of my short-form birth certificates, which I have occasionally needed over the years for reasons such as applying for a passport. Those birth certificates actually contain less information than the COLB which Obama produced in 2008, but they were good enough.
Also they would have received a slug of cards for men who like President Obama’s were born in 1961 and had to register “on any of the six days beginning Monday, July 28, 1980.”
Did you forget the fourth quarter of the year?
the problem is that we do not know what his attendance record is at Occidental
Absolutely accurate, but they all may be different from the birth record filed in the files. Actual birth records may be sealed and not available for issuance as a birth certificate.
Wrong, as the handling of birth records is tightly controlled and protected from disclosure to the public.
SSS registration is open, filings are not highly controlled, and common sense handling does not apply to USPS handling of the documents.
At the time, according to SSS. filings were face to face as they could no be mailed in. Which, of course, does not mean that some were not mailed in.
I believe at the time they were sent to Chicago not DC not that it makes a big difference, although the 11 digit number at the bottom of report seems more important than the other stuff.
Unless , you did not read the Geller report.
Can you come up with any scenario, consistent with known facts and the documents issued by the Hawaii Department of Health, in which a sealed record could exist which makes Barack Obama ineligible to be President? Please be specific. You can use your imagination, but the scenario has to be specific.
Nor does anyone actually give a flying fork.
Nor do we know the “attendance records” of any other president. Most colleges and universities don’t keep attendance records.
Any sealed record can be unsealed by court order or it can be viewed “in camera” without exposing it to public scrutiny.
The Hawaii Registrar has verified that the data on the original and the data on the released certified copies is identical.
In 2011, Fox News Channel tracked down the precise location of the original birth certificate. It is in the office safe of the Hawaii Registrar of Vital Statistics, Dr. Alvin T. Onaka at the Hawaii Department of Health.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/04/27/obama-birth-certificate-moved-secure-location-months-ago.html
Your theory is that, even though there are 2 birth certificates that say Barack Obama was born in Hawaii, there MIGHT be a third one that says otherwise? Even though there is no evidence to suggest this?
Many colleges and universities do not call summer a “quarter” its often called “summer session.”
However the Occidental web site says “Occidental College does not have a formal summer program. However, the College does offer current Occidental students the opportunity to engage in independent studies and internships during the summer. ”
You really are dense.
It is obvious to everyone except you that I was referring to the mailing of the signed and stamped registration from Hawaii to Selective Service for entry into the computer database.
I was not referring to individual registrants mailing their registrations to Selective Service.
Obama’s long form birth certificate was signed by David Sinclair, M.D., the physician who delivered him.
Are you suggesting that Dr. Sinclair signed a legal document which he knew contained incorrect information? Why would he do that?
Three certified letters of verification say that the information on the White House PDF matches the information on the original record stored at the DOH.
And yet three men who registered at the post office in Honolulu in July/August 1980 all have the same “effective date” of September 4th, 1980 and were processed at the same keying center (089).
Not sure what “trader jack” believes could have happened. Maybe he thinks that e.g. the regulations of cases of adoptions require the delivering physician to sign a “fake” BC that refers to the adoptive parents as the biological parents? Birthers have claimed stranger things.
He’s going to jump to claiming that because the birth certificate could be changed and modified for law enforcement purposes then we can’t trust Hawaii or any birth certificate they issue
So you ask me to comment on this request, and then when I do you delete them?
How strange!
[I have never deleted such a thing. Doc]
for you who do not know the difference between a birth certificate and a birth record, I enlighten you
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&ved=0ahUKEwjWzKS2ivbNAhUBXWMKHVx_CqIQFgg7MAQ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.in.gov%2Fisdh%2Ffiles%2FIndianaBirthWorksheet.pdf&usg=AFQjCNHJEcn-BRRm8kRZFM7ZhZVYfXtxgQ&sig2=8YLOYnc_CRd0wVzSFHy2Zw
”
Birth certificate to be filed for foundling child.
When an infant is found for whom no known certificate of birth is on file and for whom no other identification is known, the finder shall notify the police authorities having jurisdiction within the area of finding.
The police authorities, within 48 hours, shall have the local health officer determine or cause to be determined the approximate date of birth of the child.
The health officer, within 72 hours of notification shall complete a certificate of live birth on a standard Washington certificate of live birth form designating the place of finding as the place of birth and place of residence, the approximate date of birth, sex, and assign a given name. He shall write across the face of the certificate in the sections provided for parental information the words, “foundling child,” sign, and date the certificate and cause the same to be filed with the local registrar of the area in which the finding occurred.”
So much for the absolute accuracy of birth records, right?
Wrong.
Ignoring the straw man in the room–
Do you want to explain what is “inaccurate” in a foundling certificate?
Here is Hawaii’s foundling law:
§338-7 Registration of foundlings; foundling report. (a) Whoever assumes the custody of a living child of unknown parentage shall immediately report, on a form to be approved by the department of health, to the local agent of the department the following:
(1) Date and place of finding or assumption of custody;
(2) Sex;
(3) Color or race;
(4) Approximate age of child;
(5) Name and address of the person or institution with whom the child has been placed for care;
(6) Name given to the child by the finder or custodian.
(b) The place where the child was found or custody assumed shall be known as the place of birth, and the date of birth shall be determined by approximation.
(c) The foundling report shall constitute the certificate of birth.
(d) If a foundling child is identified and a regular certificate of birth is found or obtained, the report shall be sealed and filed and may be opened only upon order of a court of competent jurisdiction. [L 1949, c 327, §11; RL 1955, §57-10; am L Sp 1959 2d, c 1, §19; HRS §338-7]
Note the foundling report has limited information and that under §338-7 (6) (c) the foundling report becomes the certificate of birth. If later the child’s parents are identified then a “regular certificate of birth” can be obtained.
FYI this is the law as it existed in 1961.
Poor, pathetic Trader Jack.
You desperately want to call into question the accuracy of Obama’s birth certificate, and the best that you can come up with is a foundling’s birth certificate.
What you fail to comprehend is that a foundling’s birther certificate contains incomplete information, but it does not contain inaccurate information. There is a difference.
For example, Idaho’s birth certificate for a foundling does not identify the parents and lists only an approximate date of birth.
http://healthandwelfare.idaho.gov/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=TLEqUVB262I%3d&tabid=1506&portalid=0&mid=6882
Are you sincere in your statements? They are foundlings as the parents are missing and unavailable for information to fill out the birth record.
they make up a name for the child, write in what they think about the child, and some may be true and some may be false, and then the birth record is sealed, but the world thinks all of the information is true and accurate because the department certifies the birth certificate. It may be entirely true, or entirely false.
And they do not know where the child was born , only where it was found.
Sure , the date, place, time of birth, parents names as those are not known at the time of finding of the child.
Unless you are assuming that the data filled out by the officer or finder is accurate , because he filled it out to the best of his knowledge.
Occidental was specific in calling all of the 4 sessions “terms” in the information for 1980
Written like an attorney, LOL
Obama may have had three citizenships, Kenyan, USA, Indonesia.
Indonesian from when Soetoro adopted his stepson, which meant that his others may have been voided by the court action in Indonesia
Stanley Dunham removed Jr. from passport due to Indonesian citizenship for son.
Obama may have returned to Hawaii alone, with his Indonesian passport
Parents, or grandparents, may have taken court action to void Indonesian citizenship,
Courts , under adoption law, may have demanded return of USA citizenship when court ruled in favor, New birth certificate created to show re-adoption by Barry Sr, sealed records as adoption records are not available to public.
Ergo, Obama now back to birth status and returned to dual citizenship instead of triple citizenship, as far as USA considered.
h
Shows why details of children not shown on Soetoro divorce records.
Right or wrong, I don’t know, but it could be possible.
Far-fetched, sure, but perhaps nothing is true, unless it is believed by someone to be true
Several objections make your scenario impossible.
1. Under both US and Indonesian law Obama, even if adopted, Obama would not have lost his US citizenship.
2. No US court has jurisdiction to remove foreign citizenship.
3. Citizenship isn’t on a birth record, nothing to amend.
4. A foreign adoption wouldn’t result in s US court order changing a birth certificate.
5. When a birth record is amended, the certificate is replaced, but Obama’s certificate is dated August 1961, and must be the LATEST one.
Unknown is not the same as inaccurate.
The foundling certificate ACCURATELY states where the child was found, and the “foundling” indica tells the reader what it means.
I found another source which called it the trimester system at Oxy. It was used in David Maraniss’ book and was also the term the Registrar’s office used in describing the schedule in the email they sent me with the academic calendar for 1980. I think it is effectively the same as the quarter system at other schools. Yes, Oxy has since switched to the two semester system with a starting date of late August.
I wrote Mr. Coffman to ask him where he got the date and he hasn’t relied.
Birthers like Rambo Ike accept Zullo’s examples as authentic even though they have missing parts in the postal stamp and came from the same source. The only difference is that the Obama registration has been doubly confirmed by the Selective Service by letter to Sheriff Arpaio. Zullo’s forms are all second hand I believe and provided by others.
I don’t doubt the authenticity of the other forms but when it comes to provenance the Obama registration is the most well documented from the original source. We have two independent FOIA requests from different people at different times and copies of the documentation. There is also an additional independent verification to public official.
Could someone please point me tho the law that says a postal cancellation stamp must be clearly legible and have a four digit year to be valid? I cannot find it.
@Loren
Yes I think that is exactly what happened. I think I found a comment at FR where a Birther made the same assumption.
Which of course is impossible.
More likely scenario is so he could return to Hawaii on his own US passport. As he stated in his book.
Dr. Onaka has specifically verified that his mother was born in Witchita, Kansas and his father was born in Kenya, East Africa. Since his parents were known by definition he could not be a foundling. Dr. Onaka also specifically verified that the original 1961 vital record was accepted by the state registrar on August 8th, 1961. Any adoption scenario must incorporate those facts.
Can you back that up with proof from an Occidental source?
The 1981 Occidental schedule Doc posted above calls them terms. Summer term consisted of two 5-week terms or one 10-week term. They ran June 22 to July 24th and July 27 to August 28th.
Thanks!
Yes, the 1980-81 calendar calls them terms.
Oh, for heaven’s sake, read the original posting showing the Occidental information.
Sheesh!
Of course, a foreign government can remove citizenship from an American, by the simple process of enlisting the American citizen in the military of the government, appointing the citizen as a governmental official, or other such actions that require the citizen to swear an oath to the foreign government.
“According to the policy statement, the presumption that a person intends to retain U.S. citizenship is not applicable when the individual:
1.formally renounces U.S. citizenship before a consular officer;
2.takes a policy level position in a foreign state;
3.is convicted of treason; or
4.performs an act made potentially expatriating by statute accompanied by conduct which is so inconsistent with retention of U.S. citizenship that it compels a conclusion that the individual intended to relinquish U.S. citizenship.
But, hey, American law can change anything that is against the law if the person is a VIP
there is no evidence that a 10 year old in Indonesia ever applied for, or was granted, an American Passport. Not if that 10 year old was Obama, ll.
Of course you can not find a statute that says that, It is a simple rule of the USPS, or USPO that is followed at the time of ordering new hand stamps.
“wanting a specific date must have their items presented at the Post Office on or before the date of service.
236.21 Postmark Design
Postmasters and station and branch managers are responsible for purchasing both the artwork and hand-stamp devices for their local postmark. They should work with local artists/designers to develop a design that fits within the following guidelines:
a. The rubber composition hand-stamp postmark should feature a graphic design.
b. The overall size of the device cannot exceed 2″ in height by 4″ in width.
c. The postmark should consist of a changeable round-dater with month, day, and year insert plugs, and should include the city, state, and ZIP Code.
d. Postmarks with proprietary designs need written permission from property owners for the use of the design.”
Now if you think properly you will find that the month, day , and year would require a 4 digit numbers as the 2 digit number would not define the year at all.
Jokingly, I will advise you that Onaka’s mother was not born in Wichita, Kansas. That is one of the problems of English grammar rules that causes so many problems in wording of documents.
And Onaka could only verify that the birth record showed she was born in Wichita, as I doubt that he had personal knowledge of Stanley Ann Dunham vital statistics.
And, it is interesting, that the doctor signed it on the 8th, the local registrar signed it on the 8th, and it was accepted by the registrar on the 8th, which kind of blows the theory of group submission of birth records to the registrar from the local registrar or hospital.
]But, hey, no problem, it is just a theory anyway. Nothing could be wrong with the records, could it?
and , another point, adoption records are not available for the public to review, and are sealed by court order.
Again, you should never consider that a document filed by a person for the record in a governmental agency, is true, and accurate.
Anything filed is filed by clerks and there is no independent review of accuracy of information in the filed documents.
Which is why they will not authenticate the contents of the document, unless it was created by the agency and filed under authority of the agency.
A driver’s license is created by the state, and the information is put into the document by the state, so it is different than a document created by an individual.
The foundling certificates states where the police says the finder said the child was found. It is a statement made to the officer ,and not verifiable.
First, Obama doesn’t have a foundling certificate, so any discussion of such a document is irrelevant here, nor does anything you might say about a foundling certificate have any impact on the validity and accuracy of some other type of certificate.
Second, it is a straw man to argue that birth certificates are not “absolutely accuracte” since no one here claims or has ever claimed such a thing.
Third, nothing in human experience (except maybe metaphysics) meets the standard of metaphysical certitude. You can waste an endless amount of time demanding “absolute” certainty. And if that is your standard, you should go into a room and talk to yourself.
—
Is there a point to this?
Birth certificates and drivers licenses are both created by the state based on the testimony of individuals. In the case of birth certificates, it is the testimony of doctors and physicians (and in rare cases others). In the case of drivers licenses it is the testimony of the person who administers the driving test, and the person who looks at identity documents.
I note that nothing in your citation mentions “clearly legible” and of course anyone with more than a passing interest in stamp collecting knows that the impressions are frequently illegible.
See my article:
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2012/04/canceling-the-cold-case-posse/
You cannot say that there is no evidence. You could say that you haven’t seen such evidence. The best evidence would be the Department of State passport record (or the passport itself) but that’s not something you can get by FOIA.
But, since Obama II came back to the US, he must have has SOME passport, and there are only two possibilities: a US passport or a Kenyan passport. Indonesian law would have prevented him from getting an Indonesian passport.
See: http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2009/02/hollister-v-indonesian-citizenship-law/
No, a foreign government cannot remove citizenship by doing these things. Only the voluntary renunciation by the individual can remove US citizenship (in your examples by choosing to swear the oath). A coerced oath is not valid for renunciation of citizenship.
You are much too rigid in your thinking. It causes you to read things wrong.
Obfuscation, I assume, or perhaps poisoning the well.
Did 10 year old Barack Obama do any of those things while in Indonesia?
And you are incorrect about being in a foreign military. Only if that country were engaged in hostilities against the US would it put one’s US citizenship in jeopardy.
You are also incorrect about swearing an oath to a foreign government. That would not necessarily cause one to lose US citizenship, especially if it were a government friendly to the US.
So the idea that Obama ever lost US citizenship as a child is simply ludicrous. He was born in the US and lived here from then until he was around 7 and has lived in the US continuously since he’s 10. He’s an American. If you don’t like him, don’t vote for him this time….
The “80” on the stamp for Obama’s registration could not be 1880 nor 2080, could it?
It has always been my contention that applying birther criteria to all candidates would result in a permanent vacancy in the office of President. Perhaps that is their goal.
Under Hawaiian law the birth certificates were required to be submitted by the hospital to the Department of Health within 10 days of the birth. The DOH would stamp them as accepted/filed. It was the Department of Health which than collected, sorted and processed (added certification numbers) them on a monthly basis. Which is what Verna Lee told Mike Zullo. But then I am sure she is in on the conspiracy.
Per the Supreme Court a citizen can only lose their citizenship by voluntary renunciation:
“We hold that the Fourteenth Amendment was designed to, and does, protect every citizen of this Nation against a congressional forcible destruction of his citizenship, whatever his creed, color, or race. Our holding does no more than to give to this citizen that which is his own, a constitutional right to remain a citizen in a free country unless he voluntarily relinquishes that citizenship.” Afroyim v. Rusk (No. 456) 387 U.S. 253, May, 1967.
So no, Indonesia cannot relinquishes someone’s US citizenship.
Look at these postal stamps do they all list “month, day, and year insert plugs, and should include the city, state, and ZIP Code”.
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-q0hVzi4eho4/TfPcqOI23ZI/AAAAAAAADA8/DnzIvIcwtVw/s1600/%25211_SS+%25282%2529-vertA2.jpg
And where do you think that the government gets the information that it puts into a driver’s license? From an individual, of course.
When I applied for my driver’s license, I showed DMV my birth certificate to prove my age. But if the information on my birth certificate can’t be trusted as accurate, how can the information on my driver’s license be trusted as accurate?
Oh, obfuscation is not my intent.
My intent is to show that a public record, even as designated as being certified, and accepted in all courts, can be in error.
DMV drivers licenses are as secure as they can be when made, but, they still run into fake driver’s license that were created in the DMV by clerks , or managers, at times.
And they are created by the score in Los Angeles by criminals.
Even certified birth certificates should be looked at in detail to try to determine if they are fraudulent, as says the federal government.
”
The OIG investigation determined that the Corporation Trust does not have the appropriate resources to verify eligibility status. The OIG interviewed Trust personnel and reviewed the process and learned the process was no different than the grantees process with no additional verification. The approval relied on a Corporation employee making a determination based on the authenticity of scanned documents”
“US Passport Services routinely denies passports to US born citizens who were born in hospitals, have a variety of ethnic backgrounds, and whose early lives have been thoroughly documented. Their “crime”? They were adopted and state law prohibits access to their original birth certificates and adoption files. Their amended birth certificates (showing their adoptive names and listing their adoptive parents) were filed when their adoptions were finalized – generally “more than one year after the date of birth” which makes them “invalid as proof of US citizenship” according to US Passport Services. Never mind that the original was filed in a timely manner or that documentation, several inches thick, of their birth and subsequent adoption is sitting in some courthouse archive – those files are sealed and cannot be obtained without an almost-impossible-to-get court order. Most adoptees don’t even try to get that court order. It’s easier to get a passport by getting help from your congressional representative”v
http://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/article/Born-in-the-USA-When-a-birth-certificate-isn-t-6644984.php
Oh, for heaven’s sake, A foreign government can take possession of an American Citizen if he is a dual national citizens. and put them in the military or kill them for crimes in their country..
That is the problem with dual citizenship.
America can not stop a foreign country from mishandling a citizen of their country
In effect the American citizen is only protected by the USA laws and treaties.
Curious comment that has nothing whatever with the argument you were failing to make about loss of citizenship. Try to stay on topic.
In that case you were wasting your time and the time of everybody reading what you wrote, since everybody already knew that. Duh.
That said, in order for a government record to be in error, there has to be a mechanism for it to be in error. Can you give a detailed scenario that explains Obama’s long form birth certificate being in error? Or will you retreat back to a modern forgery?
Let’s not jump to conclusions. President Obama could be a Highlander Immortal, so it could be 1880. Or maybe 1780. We just don’t know for sure until we see him suffer a mortal wound and the effects that might have.
They had problems with poor impressions in 1880 too:
And check out this 1980 cover from Maricopa, Arizona.
http://images-01.delcampe-static.net/img_large/auction/000/275/957/442_001.jpg
And this one is a hoot:
Actually, it’s almost as much fun as watching the Black Knight in Monty Python and the Holy Grail.
see: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2eMkth8FWno
Doctor certified that President Obama was born on the day and at the hour stated on the birth certificate (August 4th, 1961). Mother signed certificate August 7th, 1961. Doctor signed birth certificate August 8th, 1961.
So according to you an adoption occurred in less then three days over the weekend.
And of course President Obama’s birth certificate is not amended as Hawaii law requires an amended birth certificate to be stamped amended. His isn’t.
No, I state that it could have happened in Hawaii in December of 1971 when all of the family were in Honolulu for some occasion.
Perhaps you misunderstand that I was referring to the birth record and not the certified copy of a birth certificate, which was produced on a computer with the opportunity to amend and delete information before printing.
If an adoption had to be nullified for some reason, then the original birth record would be filed and the adoption information sealed from the public view.
Which is why the children are not shown in the divorce papers of Soetoro from Ann
I’m not sure what your point is, really.
Many people are born with the POTENTIAL of becoming dual citizens later in life. But if they don’t actually apply for a foreign citizenship, they’re not actual dual citizens.
Obama may have been born with the POTENTIAL of becoming a UK citizen, but since he never applied for a UK passport, he is not and never was a UK (or dual) citizen.
You yourself have the POTENTIAL of becoming a murderer, but unless you ACTUALLY commit a murder, and are convicted for it, you’re not a murderer. Got it?
On another level, as repeated here as nauseam, James Madison agreed to become a French Citizen, after having his acceptance letter vetted by then-President Jefferson, BEFORE he became a US President.
Based on this solid precedent, there is therefore nothing that might make a dual citizen ineligible for the presidency.
Any American Citizen, dual national or not, can be jailed or even executed in a foreign country if they break the law. If you don’t believe me, you ought to watch the movie “Midnight Express” about an American kid who thought smuggling drugs from Turkey would be a good idea, His name was Billy Hayes, and as you might guess from his name, he had absolutely no claim to Turkish nationality. That didn’t keep him out of a Turkish prison.
That’s true, but in 1880 or 1780 Hawaii wasn’t part of the US, so he would have been registering for the Hawaiian forces.
So how would a presidential candidate satisfy you as to their eligibility? Can you name one that has provided sufficient documentation? If the answer is no, then I must assume you have never voted for anyone for President or else you are applying the standard only to Obama, in which case you are a hypocrite.
What adoption? There is no evidence of an adoption. Further, where did this adoption take place? If it took place overseas, then it is a foreign legal proceeding and it would not appear in a US court resulting in an order for a birth certificate amendment.
You do not understand what you are talking about. You’re just raising spurious theories.
The fact of the matter is that illegible and missing parts of postal cancellations are extremely common. This is not a violation of the rules, and there is no evidence whatever that Obama’s SSS date cancellation is unique. When you say “only for this one document” you are stating a claim without evidence, making you a liar.
Bullshit. It says “1” child under 18 and “1” over 18.
http://decalogosintl.org/documents/Soetoro_Divorce.pdf
Using the quote function is so easy…. you just click the link that says “Quote” at the top of the post. I don’t know how you manage to screw it up.
Have you ever used a rubber stamp? Here’s how they work.
1) Press the stamp into a sponge soaked in ink. This puts a certain amount of ink on the stamp in the raised portions representing the image to be stamped.
2) Press the inky stamp onto a piece of paper. This transfers ink onto the paper, using the same principle as fingerprinting, pens, or spreading mud stains all over the carpet because it’s pouring rain outside and you didn’t wipe your feet on the doormat or take off your filthy boots.
In step one, if you don’t press down hard enough, you don’t quite get enough ink on the stamp so part of the image can be faded or incomplete. Which means that in step two, you don’t have a really good image to press down onto the paper.
Seems pretty simple to me.
It’s likely that a faded stamp showing only “80” would be on multiple selective service registrations, but this is the only one we really have. Doc shows some OTHER documents with faded stamps.
What’s your theory? That some forger knew enough about 1980 selective service registrations to forge almost all of it, but decided to leave off the “19” in one for no good reason?
Another point I know Doc has made is that all of the registration card images from this era are at best second generation copies. They have been micro-filmed and then scanned in black and white. If the “19” on the original card on the Obama SSS1 form were poorly inked and faint it could easily disappear in that process. Black and white means what it says. Depending on the contrast settings something faint can literally fade to nothing.
A good example of this effect is what happened to the basket weave pattern on the black and white copy of the Obama LFBC handed out at the press conference. It completely disappeared in the process as can be seen from the J. Scott Applewhite photo.
The government archives millions or even billions of documents. They are not in the business of making forensic quality images.
As is the case with the birth certificate and Hawaii if the Selective Service System say that Barack Obama registered then he registered. They are the final authority not Mike Zullo and his Clown Case Posse.
There is zero evidence that an adoption that needed to be nullified ever took place. In Lolo Soetoro’s immigration file President Obama is always referred to as the child from a previous marriage or as the step-child. Never as the adopted child of Soetoro, even though that would have helped his hardship plead.
In October, 1967 when she and her son moved to Indonesia, she had to get two visas, one for her and one for Barack. If Barack was an Indonesian citizen he would not need a visa.
Here is one example from October, 1967:
“The applicant’s United states citizen wife resides at 2234 University Avenue, Honolulu, Hawaii with her 6-year-old United States citizen son by a previous marriage. The applicant, who returned to Indonesia and has been residing there for over 14 months …His wife has remained with his stepchild in the United states and earns about $400 per month. She has made application for a visa for herself and her son to travel to Indonesia …she will therefore be without adequate income to support herself and her minor son of a previous marriage who will be required to accompany her.”
“Satisfactory evidence of Mr. Soetoro’s marriage on March 15, 1965, to a United States citizen and evidence of the legal termination of his spouse’s prior marriage have been submitted. There are no adverse factors in this case.”
The certified copy Dr. Onaka verified is a xerox copy of the original record not a computer printout. Dr. Onaka certified he used the original vital record to verify the facts of the vital event (birth in Hawaii).
What day was this letter stamped?
http://jsa.viewimage.net/jsa/web/Lists/Iceland/Covers/Military/US/apo-610-hand_1944-11-30_127213_r_m.jpg
President Obama’s SSS card PO stamp meets the rules you posted earlier. It has the month, day and year listed.
—–
No one has ever disputed that. So you have no real point.
I fixed one of his where the end blockquote tag was mistyped. Trader Jack is an old guy, and I know how typing declines with age.
All of the family? There is no evidence that Lolo was in Honolulu in December of 1971. Obama’s father was there, and his mother was there, but no Lolo. As the purported adoptive father, Lolo would have been an indispensable party to an adoption proceeding.
Not that it matters. An adoption by Lolo Soetoro would have had no effect upon Obama’s U.S. citizenship.
Obama’s long-form birth certificate was not produced on a computer. It was photocopied.
So, you agree that there were two children of Ann and Lolo involved in the divorce , but you deny that Lolo was the father who adopted Barack?
Otherwise why would Barack be considered a child of his?
Oh, for heavens sake, it was not photocopied, as it shows the signs of being produced on a Xerox, does it not.
A photograph copy shows no pixels, or dpil
And the computer is laptop with hover on the cursor, which screws things up when using the touchpad.
Yep 93 years old, thanks for the assistance.
Of course they have, they swear that the certified copy is true and accurate and will be fully accepted as true and accurate in court,
if, Jr. had never been to Indonesia before, he would not have an Indonesian passport as he was not an Indonesian citizen.
After he was enrolled in Indonesian school he was, apparently, adopted by LOLO, and became an Indonesian citizen by adoption, according to Indonesian law.
And, it doesn’t matter what USA laws say about him , when he is in Indonesia as he is bound by Indonesian law.
And ;there is no evidence that he had a USA passport, which would have been issued in Indonesia for return to the USA, so he could have been using a different passport
Makes no difference except for the interesting fact that it could all have been resolved by allowing the public to see his previous history with the traveling he took before he graduated from Law school
Hey Jack, we now have this new-fangled invention called “digital photography.” It’s really cool.
military post offices never show location, or date, for security reasons., as that would show evidence of the location of the military units, and where they were on a specific date.
No, that’s not what Indonesian law says. Sorry, but birthers aren’t telling the truth on this topic. See:
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2009/02/hollister-v-indonesian-citizenship-law/
Trader jack is living proof Birthers have learned nothing in 8 years.
I agree, but I am sorry to say, that it still goes through a computer to be printed, which makes it subject to alteration.
But , perhaps, your camera will not allow such a thing.
HDOH states that their bc’s are computer generated from the digital information, although it is not known to me when HDOH abandoned microfilm or fiche.
He arrived in Indonesia in October, 1967 when he was six years old. Under Indonesian law he could only become a citizen in one of three ways.
1) Adoption before the age of five.
2) Petition the Indonesian courts within one year of his 18th birthday.
3) Through the naturalization process after the age of 21.
Here is Indonesia’s citizenship law regarding adoption:
“(1) A foreign child of less than 5 years age who is adopted by a citizen of the Republic of Indonesia acquires the citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia, if such an adoption is declared legal by the Pengadilan Negeri at the residence of the person adopting the child.”
Digital photographs and film photographs are both subject to alteration. There are infamous photos of Stalin with certain individuals who fell out of favor and were deleted from the image. Manipulation of images has been around as long as there have been images.
The Obama long form shown to the press was a photocopy of an original paper record (not microfilm). The image on the Internet is a Xerox scan of that photocopy. Obama’s long form has been verified the Department of Health as to all the information it contains (verified meaning that it matches the paper record in their office). So either the HDOH is part of a cover up, or the original paper document in their files is a historical fraud. I find both of those wildly implausible.
The Hawaii Department of Health stopped the regular issue of photocopy certificates in 2001. During one period, they produced certificates by typing them onto bank note certificate forms. At other times they printed images from microfilm.
You obviously didn’t look at the link since the date is on the stamp. The month and year are visible but only the very bottom of the date is visible. It is either 03, 06, 08, 09 or 30.
The paper copy used to make the PDF is what Rickey was talking about. According to the DOH, they took the original 1961 birth certificate, placed it on a special copier in the DOH and copied it onto green security paper.
It was this paper copy that was shown to the press and that Savanah Guthrie photographed. It was also scanned and used to make the PDF.
The divorce decree says:
“The parties have … “1” child(ren) above 18…”
That language does not imply that both persons have these children or that either was adopted by anyone. For example, a decree might say that the parties have two residences, but that doesn’t mean that they are both owners on the deed.
Further, both the Department of State, and Barack Obama have in court filings denied the assertion that he was adopted by Soetoro. There is no evidence to the contrary except a school registration form that lists Soetoro’s surname for Obama (which makes sense as both his stepfather and mother were using that name). That form was filled out almost immediately after Obama arrived in Indonesia, making adoption even less on the table as an explanation. The school reported that using the parents’ surname was common practice.
But even if Obama had been adopted, it would have made no difference in his citizenship. It is legally impossible for him to have become an Indonesian citizen.
Who is the patron saint of lost causes?
Hey, don’t make it bad!
…but I see your point: Cody is getting Jude-y.
I’m talking about the original certified copies which were given to Obama’s attorney. They were photocopied from the bound book in the vault at Hawaii DOH which contains the original document.
You are now talking about the pdf which was scanned from one of the original certified copies.
Hawaii DOH subsequently confirmed that the information contained in the pdf matches the information which appears on the original document. Nothing was altered.
Also, it is a “fill in the blanks” Complaint. There is no space to clarify that the child who was over the age of 18 was from a prior marriage.
It’s like the sign at the country club pool which says “Only children whose parents are members can use the pool.” That doesn’t mean that children of single-parent members cannot use the pool.
You’re wrong yet again.
Military postmarks for mobile units do not show locations because they are assigned FPO or APO zip codes, and those zip codes remain that same regardless of location. When my ship was in San Diego I had the same mailing address as when the ship was in the South China Sea.
However, military postmarks do show dates. I have letters which I mailed from off the coast of Vietnam in 1969 and 1970 and each envelope is postmarked with the date that I mailed it.
Ironically, you can’t prove your age because your birth certificate is inherently unreliable.
The image that is available on the White House web site does indeed show the signs of being produced on a Xerox brand photocopier machine, probably in the White House Offices. It is a photocopy of the physical paper Birth Certificate document that was provided by the Hawai’i DOH to the President’s attorney as per the President’s request.
The physical paper ‘Long Form’ Birth Certificate document was also, perforce, created on a photocopier machine of unknown brand in the offices of the Hawai’i DOH and certified as an accurate copy.
The physical paper ‘Short Form’ Birth Certificate document was printed on a laser printer (probably) of unknown brand in the offices of the Hawai’i DOH. I am not aware that anyone has traced the brand of the machine that produced the PDF of this document that is available on a number of web sites.
Nobody has, at any time, disputed that a public record can be inaccurate. Nobody is swearing that every public document in every public archive is accurate.
The Hawai’i Department of Public Health is certifying that the documents they have provided to President Obama are “true and accurate” copies (or, in fact, abstracts) of the original documents held in their archives. Furthermore, this certification applies to the INFORMATION that is on those documents, not necessarily the layout of the underlying format – meaning that the information on the short form is true and accurate, even though it is not all the information that is available on the original document. It is the information on the document that is relevant, not the format it is displayed in.
It is trivially true that the DOH wasn’t in the hospital to verify that information; and any public document suffers from this very sophomoric ‘issue’. They are, of course, relying on the veracity of the reporters of that information. Just as the DOH is certifying that the information is a true and accurate copy of the original document, so the Mother, the Doctor, the Nurses, the Registrar, whoever, has certified that the actual information itself is accurate in the original.
Stanley Ann Obama and her doctors are swearing, under penalty of perjury, that the information on that document is accurate. That is the long and short of it; sworn testimony is presumed to be accurate unless it is reliably impeached. Anybody, at any time, at any venue, can lie under oath. Impeaching that sworn testimony takes a lot more that just ‘he might have lied’. You need credible counter evidence, not airy-fairy metaphysical anything-is-possible conspiracy theories.
In fact, Indonesian law absolutely forbids any such adoption. The future President was too old for a start.
Even if the law didn’t make it impossible, taking on Indonesian citizenship could not, by US law, have any effect on the future President’s American Natural Born Citizenship status. None. Zero. Nada. None.
Would they have a copy of the Occidental College 1979/1980 freshman Lookbook? It would have an entry for President Obama. Not Barry Soetoro.
I don’t think it has been published online before. At least not that I’ve seen.
I looked at a collection of military covers and they all had dates.
Also, most states require that absentee ballots have postmarks to prove that they were mailed by election day. Trader Jack’s “no date” rule would effectively disenfranchise many members of the armed forces who are stationed overseas.
If you would like to ask the email address is registrar@oxy.edu.
Actually, although you will probably not believe it, they only confirm that the birth occurred , and not the information on the parents, or other information
If you will think about it, you will probably realize that if the bc confirmed the actual facts about the parents, site, time, and other stuff, there would never be a successful suit for false information filing on the birth record.
And you know that happens when you look for court cases for fraud on birth certificates such as naming the wrong father, etc.
Would you certify the information on a document that you read and filed with the government, without knowing that the information could be wrong.
For instance, an adopted child bc would be filed with non birth parents names, addresses, etc. but the time and date of birth must always be the same as on a true original birth record. Everything else can be changed
You could be wrong, you know, because I was born in a Military Hospital, and military records would confirm that.
And because of my age my name is available in the Census records of 1930
also, I entered the Navy in November 1940
I don’t think he was eligible for President at that time as he was not 35 years old. LOL
I
I don’t think that there were absentee votes for the early 20th century
Absentee voting existed in some states but became common in World War II
http://i1.wp.com/patcosta.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Soldiers-Voting-in-WWII.jpg
http://www.criticalpast.com/video/65675065577_American-soldiers_officer-explaining_soldier-cast-votes_notice-on-board
http://www.criticalpast.com/video/65675076660_United-States-soldiers_writing-results_distributing-ballots_soldiers-on-front
H/T http://patcosta.com/2014/10/voting-world-war-ii/
I don’t get it.
Why don’t you check and see if your military hospital birth records are still available, and then get back to us.
You’re saying that the information on a birth certificate is unreliable, but the information in the census is reliable? Census takers don’t require proof of age. They accept whatever they are told.
There are many stories about men in those days who lied about their age in order to enlist in the armed forces.
I don’t doubt that you are 93, but you would have a tough time proving it if you applied the same standards of proof t0 yourself that you apply to President Obama.
And when that happens the new birth certificate is marked as an amended birth certificate.
http://blog.vitalchek.com/birth-certificates/adoption-birth-certificatesrecords/
he’s been claiming he’s 93 on amazon for a few years now
From the source you referred to:
“Adoption records are typically sealed after the adoption is finalized, but can be accessed if the proper steps are taken. Obtaining a birth certificate after an adoption isn’t hard unless you are looking for the original copy. Upon a final adoption, a birth certificate is changed or amended to change the name of the biological parents to the names of the adoptive parents. An amended birth certificate is given to the family after the adoption is final.”
Do you see anything in that quote, or on that site, that states that the birth certificate is a MARKED as being amended?
It says the amended bc is given to the family after the adoption is final.
And to look at the record you have to be a member of the family.
Are you an honest man, or woman? Must not be, as I have never claimed I was 93 when I was 92! But I have always claimed that my birth date is Nov 11, 1922, but perhaps math is not your good feature.
Oh, I would accept BHO’s place of birth in the 1970 census, would you?
When was he first shown in a census taking?
Jack is right on this one. Specifically in Hawaii new certificates in case of adoptions, paternity changes and gender transfer are not in any way marked as amended. In other cases amendments and alterations are noted on the certificate. See:
http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol06_Ch0321-0344/HRS0338/HRS_0338-0017_0007.htm
“When a new certificate of birth is established under this section, it shall be substituted for the original certificate of birth. The new certificate shall not be marked as amended and shall in no way reveal the original language changed by any amendment.”
Off hand, I would say 1980. He wasn’t born in 1960 and was in Indonesia in 1970. I won’t live long enough to be sure,
That language is new. It was not part of the law in 2009, and it certainly wasn’t part of the law in the 1960s.
“When a new certificate of birth is established under this section, it shall be substituted for the original certificate of birth. Thereafter, the original certificate and the evidence supporting the preparation of the new certificate shall be sealed and filed. Such sealed document shall be opened only by an order of a court of record.”
http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrs2009/Vol06_Ch0321-0344/HRS0338/HRS_0338-0017_0007.htm
Yes, we have to wait until 2052 for access to the 1980 census. Jack will have to live to be 129 to see the records, so I hope that he is taking care of himself.
That makes absolutely no sense.
A census listing is simply what the person interviewed tells the census taker, with no verification whatsoever. In essence, you are saying you would accept Barack Obama’s word (or his mother’s) as to his place of birth, but not a birth certificate..
Barack Obama has said he was born in Hawaii countless times. Looks like you accept that and only have trouble with the birth certificate. OK. Whatever.
Oh, I know he has said he was born in Hawaii, and also said he was a prince of some country or the other, and said he knew his father well because they were together for two years before his mother divorced his father, but , those, may or may not be true.
my basic problems is that the LFBC is not sufficient for me , as , to me, it does not look like it is true and accurate.
I have difficulty believing that if a DOH issue a document claim it is a true and accurate copy of the birth LDS tgat shows he was born in Kenya, because you believe it was forged by him, and you have no evidence HE forged it.
The similarity is that Obama says: this is my birth certificate, and LDS says that is his birth certificate. On, one against one.
The difference is that the Honolulu newspapers have Obama’s birth certificate, and so far as anyone knows, the Mombasa newspapers do not. The state of Hawaii says Obama was born there, and the vital statistics agency of Kenya does not.
Obama’s certificate was signed by Verna K. Lee, who we later discovered signed many other certificates. The LDS certificate was signed with the name of a person was not in the position listed on the certificate on the date shown on the certificate. The more Obama’s certificate is studied, the more it is confirmed. The more birther objections are examined, the more they are shown bogus.
You may say that Obama’s birth certificate is not sufficient for you. That’s your prerogative. It’s sufficient for me, and birthers are not offering much to get me to change my mind. What they have offered so far has fallen apart under scrutiny (and that includes the LDS certificate).
The law in the 1960’s is here:
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Hi-Rev-Laws-Chapter-57.pdf
It doesn’t say one way or another that the new certificate is marked “amended”; however, I doubt that it is.
According to Hawaii Public Health Regulations Chapter 8B amendments that are either “judicial amendments” or “major administrative amendments” are marked “altered” unless otherwise provided by law.
3.1 Amendments After Official Acceptance of Certificate
… All certificates on which judicial or major administrative changes are made 90 days or more from the date of the event shall be marked “altered” unless otherwise provided by law or regulations
And new certificates issued due to adoption cannot have anything on their face which indicates the reason for the change.
3.9 Method of Making Amendments to Vital Records
B. A new birth certificate prepared following adoption, legitimation, or paternity determination shall contain the same date and place of birth, name of attendant, birth number and filing date as on the original certificate. Nothing shall be entered on the face of the certificate which designates the basis for issuing the new certificate. Such information may be enterd on the back of the certificate.
http://health.hawaii.gov/opppd/files/2015/06/11-117.pdf
Now, back to the registration
What are the important points of the registration
name , address, signature, date, and date received by post office, and verification of identity. social security number
7 items, Name, correct, address correct, date of signature after stamped received, date of acceptance, indefinite because of damaged postal hand stamp, no verification of identity even though head of selective service said at the time they were all face to face registrations,
7 significant points four of which are questionable and you don’t think it is significant?
No, I do not think it in the least significant. The very fact that there was a check box to indicate “no ID” means that it was allowed, and we find it on other registrations. The date is not in question because ALL of the date necessary to determine when it was is clear.
So what are you claiming? That someone impersonating Barack Obama registered for the draft on his behalf? That’s ludicrous. Well birtherism is ludicrous on everything else.
This is all totally ridiculous. The long form was released showing BO’s actual parents and birth information, which moots all of Trader Jerk’s fantasizing. It has the hospital affidavit from the mother, and the doctor as well as the local registrar who received it from the hospital. It was attested to three times before it was received and processed by DOH.
If there had been an adoption they still wouldn’t have changed the place of birth on the amended cert, so that fantasm goes right out the window as well.
You have claimed 93 for several years. But you’ve already admitted everywhere that you’re not an honest man and instead a troll.
So any proof he was born with a different name and adopted by Barack Obama Senior? How does that change his place of birth or birthdate?
So as has been asked of you many times and unanswered by you everytime; what should be used instead of a birth certificate?
Those are your arbitrary “important points”.
You conveniently left off the Document Locator Number (DLN) which is added by the Selective Service System Administration. President Obama’s DLN is proof that he registered in 1980 as his number could only have been issued in 1980.
The only date that is important is the “effective date of registration” which according to the SSS is the date the card is processed. For President Obama and other men who registered at the same time, at the same post office, that date is September 4th, 1980.
Mike Zullo in his latest interview with Carl Gallups said that they reviewed other cards with the “no ID” box checked. So that is clearly not an “important point”.
Your basic problem is that you are a stubborn old goat.
It doesn’t matter who forged the supposed Kenya birth certificate, because it is an obvious forgery. On the other hand, Lucas has multiple convictions for forgery and he is always short of money, so which is more likely – he did the forgery himself, or he paid someone to do it?
More importantly, it is sufficient for any court or other government body in the United States.
In the real world, President Obama’s birth certificate is authentic. And trader jack’s fantasy world is uninteresting.
Similarly, the Selective Service System has said that President Obama is duly registered. It is trader jack’s prerogative to not believe the authority entrusted with registration, but the courts or any other government body does accept its statement as determinative.
It’s unclear, this much is certain.
However, I suspect that the motivation for the new language is the fact that the statute now specifically mentions transgendered people, which it did not in 2009. That leads me to believe that it was concern over the privacy of transgendered people which led to the “shall not be marked as amended” language.
But that is just supposition on my part.
No, I am not claiming that someone was impersonating Obama. I am saying, and you are disagreeing, that the information on the document, without even considering the name of the registrant, is sufficient to make a determination that the evidence may be improperly completed.
No one in the common sense mind , would believe that a clerk in the post office would accept a document that was signed the day after it was received, no clerk in the post office would use a date stamp so disfigured that was not in compliance with the postal regulations.
And people who want it to true, tend to try to explain why it must be true, without consideration of any possibility it might not be true
But that is human nature.
Does anyone really believe that the year dating on the hand stamp was not modified by someone who removed two digits from the year dating, on a hand stamp that uses plug in year dating in the hand stamp.
And all seem to accept the fact that the government stopped the public viewing of sss registration after the problem arose with the registration
The State of Hawaii has never confirmed that he was born there! The State of Hawaii HDOH has issued a certified copy of the birth record on file.
The position of the anti-birthers is that the copy of the birth record must be true and that is the only thing that they rely on.
My position is that it may be true, and it may be inaccurate, and that is based upon the belief that the certified copy is too irregular to be accurate in all aspects.
And the anti-birthers position is that all of the irregularities are computer generated by some computer programs , either in the scanner, computer, or printer and there- fore can be ignored as the document is prima facie true in all regards.
But , as it must be in the best interest of the subject concerned, the release of anything else will be never happen unless there is a regime change somewhere.
As to getting verification from Kenya it appears to be unlikely no matter who asks
There is no postal regulation I’ve ever seen that requires the impression of the cancellation to be complete.
I won’t belabor the point, but to normal English speakers, they have.
Someone doesn’t quite understand what “certified” means.
Followed immediately by:
Oh, the irony.
When did he say he was “a prince of some country’?
Where did he say that? He certainly said no such thing in “Dreams From My Father”
You don’t accept birth certificates so all that you have then is the person’s word. One or the other.
1. If he didn’t register, how did he get in the database?
2. How did he get federal student loans when the FAFSA is cross-checked with the registration database?
It seems to me the only possible conclusion is that he did indeed register, whether the form pleases you or not.
The statement above by Trader Jack is wrong. In July of 2009 the state of Hawaii confirmed that Barack Obama was born there. The exact words of the state Director of Health were: “I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of the Hawai‛i State Department of Health, have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawai‘i State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawai‘i and is a natural-born American citizen. I have nothing further to add to this statement or my original statement issued in October 2008 over eight months ago.”
http://health.hawaii.gov/vitalrecords/files/2013/05/09-063.pdf
Yes Trader Jack, in America we use vital records to confirm information such as place of birth.
The public was never able to view the SSS registration. You can confirm it at the SSS website or you can file a FOIA request and get a copy of it. But you cannot go to the SSS data center and see the actual microfilm of the registration. The paper copies are destroyed after the information is transferred to computer and the microfilm copies are made. And that’s been the policy for the last thirty years at least.
And, did you forget, or not believe that there are two different numbers on the document. a 10 digit number , and an 11 digit number on the verification.
So which do you think is correct All you have to do is google them.
One of the few numbers that google can not find is the 10 digit number
Which is not what I stated. No clerk in the USPS would use a deformed hand stamp that had the wrong year on it, but perhaps a governmental official did not know that it required a 4 digit use stamp in process post office documents.
Unless you think they do not require 4 digit dates on hand stamps.
some one does not understand that a certified copy does not mean that the original is true or false. It simply means that it is a copy However even that is not enough for the LFBC as it says it is a copy or abstract, which means , or may mean, that some information was not on the document
Your opinion about what a postal clerk would or would not do carries no weight in the discussion. The fact that many cancellations (reported here and easily found with Google image searches) lack parts of the impression prove it to be false.
No, it means that is a true copy. In general birth records contain more than appears on the issued certificate. This is true of Obama’s certificate since you can see in the gutter part of another certificate where the information boxes are of a different arrangement. I have detailed this in articles in the past. So yes, there are things on Obama’s original birth certificate (and every other certificate of that era) that do not appear on the issued certificate; however, they are medical in nature and have no legal significance. There is no gold coin in your bucket of mud.
I have various documents with my checking account on them. Some start 000 + non-zero digits, and some 0 + non-zero digits. The objections that were raised early on about the SSS number were completely addressed at the time. See:
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/DebunkerWiki-Selective-Service.pdf
Someone does not understand that all the points they are raising were answered in 2009.
You’re wrong again.
The LFBC is not an abstract. It is a ‘true copy” of the original document which is on file with the Hawaii Department of Health.
Obama’s Certification of Live Birth is an abstract.
You can’t get verification of something which doesn’t exist. Kenya has no record of Obama’s birth because he wasn’t born there.
The date on the post office stamp had to be changed manually.
The likely explanation is that Obama arrived at the Post Office in the morning on July 30, 1980 (a Tuesday) and handed in his registration. The postal clerk then stamped with a postmark stamp which still had the previous day’s date on it.
That is what a common sense mind concludes.
I think trader jack is Rambo Ike. There can’t be two people that stupid in the world. (OK, I know almost every Birther is that stupid).
Yes, they added an 11th digit to everybody’s 10 digit DLN. Not just President Obama’s. But the core DLN has not changed. They just added an 11th digit to the existing DLN.
Bruce Henderson’s 1980 10 digit DLN is now 11 digits. Darrel Oniwa’s 1980 10 digit DLN is now 11 digits.
jack is asking for a “Certificate of Non-Birth”. Perhaps places should start issuing them to everybody who wasn’t born there,
Actually, IIRC, Kenya has officially stated on at least one occasion that BO WAS NOT born there and that there is NO such record.
But those Kenyan officials are corrupt. What matters is the “honest” Kenyan official who supposedly took cash illegally from LDS (who has never established he ever set foot on the African continent) to provide him a fake BC.
You just don’t get it, do you?
https://www.google.com/search?q=obama+birth+certificate&rls=com.microsoft:en-US:MIE-Address&rlz=1I7RVEA_enUS698&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjioLaA2IfOAhVV6GMKHWcaDIQQ_AUICSgC&biw=911&bih=427#imgrc=dUdL3tII1fo4aM%3A
it says right in there that is an abstract, or copy, it does not say what it is, does it?
You are right, you can not get verification of something that does not exist, but that does not mean that a copy of the document does not exist, because you are unable to get something from the agency.
You can not get a verification of someone’s death unless it has been reported, such as the original holder of Obama’s social security number.. lOL
1. It’ll be the 1980 Census that will be the first that he’ll be in. During 1970, he was living in Indonesia, from the age of about 6 until 10. That cooresponds to the years of 1967-1971. That means he will not be in the 1970 Census, which would have been completed during the time that Obama was living in Indonesia. So, that goes to the 1980 Census being the first that Obama will appear in the Census.
Then you only have another 34 years to wait (the 1980 Census will be released in 2050, per law that requires us to wait 70 years before Census data is released). Doc, if you’re still alive when this happens, I’m expecting an article!
Mark it down on your calendar.
However, Census data is self-reported. So, I really doubt that you would accept it as proof. There is no double-checking. It’s just asking the person what state they were born in. So, if you won’t accept the official word of the Hawaii Department of Health about information that has way more checks against the data (including the signature of the doctor), why would you accept the Census Data, when it’s just self-reported data?
If you really believe that the birth certificate, which has been verified by the Hawaii Department of Health at least 3 times by official verification, and at least twice more by official statements by the Hawaii Department of Health, including to the Arizona Secretary of State, and filed in a court case in Mississippi, why would you believe something that it ultimately self-reported, without the checks there?
You’re reminding me of all the birthers who stated, “Well, if he’d just release his birth certificate this would all go away.” When that was released in June of 2008, the same document that the United States Government accepts as proof of citizenship, “It’s a forgery, it actually signifies nothing, and it doesn’t matter anyways since he was born to a foreigner.”
Then it was “Well, if he’d just release his long-form birth certificate, this would all go away. We’d believe his long-form birth certificate.” When that was released in 2011, all of a sudden it was: “It’s a forgery, it actually signifies nothing, and it doesn’t matter anyways, since he was born to a foreigner.”
Now, it’s “I’ll believe the census data from the 1980 census as proof.” When that is released, it’ll be “It’s a forgery, it actually signifies nothing, and it doesn’t matter anyways since he was born to a foreigner.” Yeah, I’ll believe that you’ll accept it in 34 more years when you come back here and apologize for ever believing that Obama was a foreigner.
Have I ever stated that he was born with a different name and adopted at birth by Obama Sr.?
I stated that it may have been possible that Obama ll, was adopted by Soetoro, and that a court case may have occurred that nullified the adoption , and to re-instate the birth certificate it was necessary to adopt Obama ll, to clear all records.
As that , perchance, would have also cleared the possibility of non-paternity action, should paternity ever come up in the future.
As the child did not resemble the putative father to any degree suggestive of paternity
It is apparent that the common mind needs education.
the date plug is always supposed to be 4 digit, and the one on the stamp on the document was a two digit.
Perhaps, you can find a way to use a 2 digit date stamp that will indicate the date something occurred.
Even if this was correct (it’s not), it would have no bearing on President Obama’s citizenship. According to U.S. Law (you know the law that actually determines who is and is not a U.S. Citizen), a minor cannot renounce their citizenship without going directly to the embassy, and convincing the Ambassador there that they know the full consequences of their actions of renouncing their citizenship. A parent cannot renounce the citizenship of a child. A 6-year-old would never be allowed to renounce his U.S. Citizenship. By the time Obama was 10, he moved back to the United States, where he’s lived ever since, fulfilling the requirements to continue his U.S. Citizenship.
So, even if Lolo Soetoro actually adopted Obama (he didn’t), it wouldn’t make a lick of a difference to his situation of U.S. Citizenship.
And that may well be true, but you can not find that eleven digit number on google, can you
As a solution to the fact that your statement might be in error, why not secure a copy of your registration to show you have an 11 digit number on your registration,
I can not show your my registration , because I went on active duty 3 days after my 18th birthday.
By the way, almost every pertinent thing on the birth record is self-reported also.
It is not self reported by the way, as the census taker can not get information from children, but , hey , you knew that didn’t you?
By the way, do you really not know why I made the statement about the census records for Obama?
Assume , arguendo, that Obama , at 10, is in Indonesia, and assume, Stanley Ann Soetoro, has deleted son from her US passport during passport renewal, and Obama now wants to go to Hawaii.
Indonesia requires a passport to leave the country, how does Obama get a passport to return to the USA. he has to apply for Indonesian passport.
And now Obama is a citizen of Indonesia with a Indonesian passport, and is a triple citizen
Ok, now he can select, when he is of majority which citizen of which country he wants to be.
Which ones did he renounce, or accept?
Is there a record of such action. or what might have happened
Actually, the State of Hawaii has confirmed that Obama was born in Hawaii at least 5 seperate times, including that they issued a certified copy of the birth record on file. In fact, the original document, the one that Obama released in June of 2008, is sufficient proof that Obama was born in Hawaii. You’ll have to have actual evidence that he wasn’t born in Hawaii in order to impeach it, and you’ve already admitted that you do not.
Actually, our position is that the birth certificate that was released in 2008 is the only document that needed to be released. It is the same document that the State Department uses all the time in order to verify the place of birth for millions of people. It’s the same document that I used to personally get my passport. It is also self-authenticating (which means that it needs no external authentication to be admitted into court). Couple that with the fact that the State of Hawaii has personally verified the information on the birth certificate no fewer than 3 times, and stated in another two times through public statements that Obama has a birth certificate on file, and directly links to the birth certificate from their website, his place of birth has been proven.
No, you’re position is that you don’t want to believe that it’s true, so you believe any wild rumor that comes off that actually casts the illusion of doubt on it. And it’s just that, it’s an illusion of doubt, peddled by people who have no actual expertise on the effort. There is not one shred of evidence that has come out that actually casts doubt on the birth certificate (and the official one is the one that was released and photographed in 2008). There’s just a bunch of people who don’t want to believe it, so they don’t. It has no actual basis in reality, but that’s just the way that it is.
No, our position is that the so-called anomolies are not actually anomolies at all. This has been confirmed by actual computer experts, and the fact that people have actually handled the document. There is not one shread of evidence that Obama was born anyplace other than Hawaii.
But , as it must be in the best interest of the subject concerned, the release of anything else will be never happen unless there is a regime change somewhere.
Verification has never mattered to you before. The Hawaii Department of Health has confirmed that Obama was born in Hawaii on at least 3 separate occasions officially (including to the Arizona Secretary of State). So, you believe that Obama might have been born in Kenya, despite the fact that there is not a shread of evidence that Obama was born in Kenya, and have never had any sort of verification that Obama was born in Kenya, yet you will not believe that Obama was born in Hawaii, despite the Hawaii Department of Health verifying it at least 3 separate times outside of the birth certificates themselves. You already have confirmation from the Hawaii Department of Health that Obama was born there. You will not believe them. It’s just that simple.
You are saying, which the common mind might misunderstand, that honest official took cash from a man to provide him with a fake bc.
The problem is that in 2009, or so, that corrupt official would have to create a 1961 fake document on official paper, get it signed and certified and do that in the couple of hours stated by LDS.
And do all of that on a computer using modern fonts, where-as it appears to be a photo-copy, or digitally scanned, and if not, it could not be done very quickly.
As to establishing presence in Africa, how would that convince you that the bc was true and correct.
You would not believe it no matter how it was proved.
Ah, yes. The document that was actually supplied by someone who’s previously been convicted of Forgery. The document signed by someone who misspelled his own name not only on the stamp, but also the signature, wasn’t the job that was claimed by the document, and other anomolies. But that’s absolute proof that Obama is lying, and calls into question everything! It doesn’t matter that there’s no coherent story why Stanley Ann Dunham would, after flying into Nairobi, go in the opposite direction from the town that she was supposedly there to visit to Mombasa! Never mind that there’s significant deficiencies on the face of the document itself! Never mind that this document was actually obtained by someone who’s been convicted of forgery, who (if you believe him) bribed the hospital official in order to release the document. Never mind that Hospitals usually do not actually keep the birth certificate, but the birth certificates are usually issued by the Government, not the Hospital! Never mind 50 other things that if they happened on a birth certificate that had “Hawaii” as the place of birth, the birthers would be exclaiming absolute proof of forgery!
You do know that LDS is a convicted forger, don’t you?
But also, other problems with the birth certificate from LDS. His entire story puts the authenticity of the birth certificate into doubt, including that he illegally bribed the Hospital in order to get a certified copy.
1. The birth certificate says “Dr. Helton Maganga”. According to his Linked in profile, his actual name is “Dr. Heltan Maganga“. How many people that you know would misspell their own name not only on the stamp, but also on the signature.
2. The birth certificate has a date of February 19, 2009 on it. Dr. Maganga didn’t actually become the Chief Administrator of the Hospital until June of 2009, therefore he could not have been the “chief administrator” at the time that LDS says that he obtained the birth certificate. The actual “chief administrator” of the hospital at the time was Jennifer Othigo. So, why did Dr. Maganga actually sign it and claim that he was the “chief administrator”, when Dr. Othigo was actually the chief administrator?
3. All dates on the birth certificate are on the month/day/year format. Kenya doesn’t use that date format on birth certificates. The Doc actually found evidence that the form that they used was actually day/year/month format on birth certificates (I would have personally figured it would be the British Day/Month/Year format, since it was a British colony. But I’m willing to modify my view with the available evidence). Lucas Daniel Smith’s response to this is that Kenya uses both MM/DD/YY and DD/MM/YY. However, this is an unreasonable explaination, since it would have no way of differentiating whether “8/4/61” was August 4, 1961, or April 8, 1961?
4. The birth certificate was issued by the hospital, not the government. Certified certificates are usually kept on file by the Government, and not on file by the Hospital. This centralizes the birth records, and doesn’t force people to track down their birth hospital to get a certified copy. It also provides a way for people born outside of a hospital to register a birth certificate.
5. WND actually said that they have a Kenyan Birth Certificate, and that it didn’t look anything like the certificate that LDS published.
6. The form is pre-printed with “Supervisor of Obstetrics” on it. This is a pre-printing, and not anything that would have been entered in post-production. Usually things like titles are actually left blank, because there are reasons why other people might sign it (such as there is no “Supervisor of Obstetrics”
7. Obama Sr’s birth date only shows a year of birth. Stanley Ann Dunham’s birthdate shows a full date of birth (again in a MM/DD/YY format). Why? Did Stanley Ann Dunham not know Obama Sr.’s birth date? Or could it be that LDS just didn’t know the birthdate of Obama Sr., and didn’t want to get it wrong?
These are just on the face of the document.
You would have never accepted any of these on an Hawaiian Birth Certificate. So, why do you accept these on a birth certificate provided by a convicted forger?
No Jack isn’t ike. He’s just a troll who hangs out with Hermitian Henry
No. I am not a troll that hangs out with hh as I have only read his posting on Amazon.
To cut to the chase,
The document shown to exist by LDS was , apparently, obtained from someone, somewhere, somehow.
The problem is, facially, that is a certified copy of Kenyan records
True , or false, It has to be accepted as being what it is, just as the HDOH certified copy is accepted.
Prima facie evidence acceptable for entry in to evidence, where it be accepted as to veracity by the trier of facts, and rebutted by appropriate challenges by the parties in court.
It is neither true or false until the challenges have been met and the information authenticated and tested as to veracity
Or do you deny that HDOH can , an will, issue certified copies of birth certificate that do not show the birth parents as parents of the child.
You should accept that as factual, until the courts have ruled on the document.
You might want to check, and I know that you won’t, as to whether the credit bureaus or public agencies deny credit or services based upon whether or not LDS committed forgery at some time in the past.
Present testimony as to those things is more truthful than claims that everything a person creates today is a direct forgery, all though they might be.
Do you dispute these statements?
Obama , Sr, was born in Kenya, and I do not know what the standard is for postal hand stamps in Kenya,
Do you?
What do you know about that? It use 4 digit dates on the hand stampsl
but. again, you might remember that senior Obama lied about his birth dates on documents.
Heck , even SADO couldn’t remember her marriage date! To Obama ,Sr. that is!
You can not have it both ways, although you appear to believe it
if he illegally bribed the Hospital then the copy must be good, right. Then there is no forgery by LDS.
Oh, there could be a forgery, but that would not be by LDS , would it. so your beliefs would be wrong.
And, no honest man would claim something was a forgery unless they can prove the document, not the facts on the document, but the document was was forged.
Would that wording include Smith making it himself as a fraudulent moneymaking scheme? He did, after all, try to sell it.
Obama Sr used one of two full dates (the same except for the year) on all known documents. The Smith certificate appeared before any of those documents were published. Obama’s short form was all that was available and it only had age on it. The fact that the year of birth could be calculated from the age (possibly off by one year) and that is all that appears on the Smith certificate, suggests strongly that Smith used only the year because that was all he knew.
Either Smith forged the certificate himself, or he told the truth that a corrupt government official provided it. So either way it came from a crook.
Facially, a Superman comic book is a narrative of an alien from the planet Krypton who can leap tall buildings in a single bound. Whether one believes the comic book is factual is usually based on the source. Generally when a state issues a birth certificate of live birth it is considered factual (or in the case of an adoption a factual representation of a court order) and when a convicted forger tries to sell a document that says things contrary to accepted fact, it is not believed without some provenance.
The Smith certificate DOES use modern fonts. Just looking at the document, it would appear that Smith printed the document on paper, and then applied a real seal that you could buy in any office supply store, and a real rubber stamp, He then photocopied it many times so as to degrade the image.
There’s nothing but the claim of Smith that it is anything else.
To be taken seriously, a Kenyan certificate would have to have things that the Smith certificate does not:
1) Historical consistency (name of the correct hospital director, nevermind the spelling)
2) Formal consistency (dates follow the government format–the errors on the Smith certificate cannot be explained by clerical or reproduction error)
3) Look like other certificates of the era. The Smith certificate looks nothing like any other (except another one from Smith).
4) Chain of custody
5) Support from some Kenyan official or hospital source
I don’t doubt that Smith was in Africa. I doubt that he was in Kenya. It is not an important but it highlights the fact that Smith cannot provide ANYTHING to back up his story,
The certified copy is not irregular in any respect.
His mother goes down to the US Embassy and applies for a passport. Duh.
He certainly couldn’t obtain an Indonesian passport because he is not an Indonesian citizen. That would be impossible under Indonesian law. I’ve given you links to that documentation.
You are an ignoramus.
Credit reports do not provide information about why credit may have been denied to an individual.
If you doubt that Smith has a long criminal history, here is a listing just from the State of Iowa:
02351 SMCR501345 STATE V LUCAS W SMITH SMITH, LUCAS DEFENDANT
05501 FECR007084 STATE V SMITH, LUCAS SMITH, LUCAS 01/04/1980 DEFENDANT
05501 FECR007896 STATE V. SMITH, LUCAS SMITH, LUCAS 01/04/1980 DEFENDANT
06521 FECR054329 STATE VS SMITH, LUCAS DANIEL SMITH, LUCAS DANIEL 01/04/1980 DEFENDANT
06521 SMSM054827 ST VS SMITH, LUCAS DANIEL SMITH, LUCAS DANIEL 01/04/1980 DEFENDANT
06571 AGCR053736 (OF)STATE VS SMITH, LUCAS DANIEL SMITH, LUCAS DANIEL 01/04/1980 DEFENDANT
06571 AGCR063008 (OF) STATE VS SMITH, LUCAS DANIEL SMITH, LUCAS DANIEL 01/04/1980 DEFENDANT
06571 FECR023705 (OF)STATE OF IOWA VS SMITH, LUCAS DANIEL SMITH, LUCAS DANIEL 01/04/1980 DEFENDANT
06571 FECR034823 (OF)STATE OF IOWA VS SMITH, LUCAS DANIEL SMITH, LUCAS DANIEL 01/04/1980 DEFENDANT
06571 FECR090875 STATE VS SMITH, LUCAS DANIEL SMITH, LUCAS DANIEL 01/04/1980 DEFENDANT
06571 SMSM025271 %STATE OF IOWA VS SMITH, LUCAS DANIEL SMITH, LUCAS DANIEL 01/04/1980 DEFENDANT
06571 SMSM026474 STATE OF IOWA VS SMITH, LUCAS SMITH, LUCAS DANIEL 01/04/1980 DEFENDANT
06571 SMSM049544 STATE VS SMITH, LUCAS SMITH, LUCAS DANIEL 01/04/1980 DEFENDANT
06571 SMSM050675 STATE VS SMITH, LUCAS SMITH, LUCAS DANIEL 01/04/1980 DEFENDANT
06571 SMSM051914 STATE VS SMITH, LUCAS SMITH, LUCAS DANIEL 01/04/1980 DEFENDANT
06571 SMSM052103 STATE VS SMITH, LUCAS D SMITH, LUCAS DANIEL 01/04/1980 DEFENDANT
06571 SMSM055767 STATE VS SMITH, LUCA DANIEL SMITH, LUCAS DANIEL 01/04/1980 DEFENDANT
06571 SMSM061318 STATE VS SMITH, LUCAS DANIEL SMITH, LUCAS DANIEL 01/04/1980 DEFENDANT
06571 SMSM061328 STATE VS SMITH, LUCAS SMITH, LUCAS DANIEL 01/04/1980 DEFENDANT
06571 SMSM077987 STATE VS SMITH, LUCAS DANIEL SMITH, LUCAS DANIEL 01/04/1980 DEFENDANT
06571 SRCR020593 (OF)STATE OF IOWA VS SMITH, LUCAS DANIEL SMITH, LUCAS DANIEL 01/04/1980 DEFENDANT
06571 SRCR027404 (OF)STATE OF IOWA VS SMITH, LUCAS DANIEL SMITH, LUCAS DANIEL 01/04/1980 DEFENDANT
06571 SRCR036855 STATE OF IOWA VS SMITH, LUCAS DANIEL SMITH, LUCAS DANIEL 01/04/1980 DEFENDANT
06571 SRCR037808 STATE OF IOWA VS SMITH, LUCAS DANIEL SMITH, LUCAS DANIEL 01/04/1980 DEFENDANT
06571 SRCR053425 (OF)STATE VS SMITH, LUCAS DANIEL SMITH, LUCAS DANIEL 01/04/1980 DEFENDANT
06571 SRCR062762 STATE VS SMITH, LUCAS DANIEL SMITH, LUCAS DANIEL 01/04/1980 DEFENDANT
06571CRSMSM079866 CEDAR RAPIDS VS SMITH, LUCAS DANIEL SMITH, LUCAS DANIEL 01/04/1980 DEFENDANT
Not really. The facts of birth (time and place) are not self-reported. The child’s name has to be accurate because the birth certificate is what assigns the name to the child. The father’s name and the mother’s address, and a few statistical details, are all that is self-reported.
Earth to Jack: Obama’s registration form has 10 digits, not 11.
Why do you say that the date stamp was only 2 digits, when it is more likely that it was just the impression from the stamp was light. I mean, letters from “Honolulu” were missing also. Are you suggesting a forger intentionally left those out too? Because USPO was on the stamp, we know it was over ten years old. Old stamp, wear?
You cannot back up your claim that the actual stamp had only 2 digits on it,
What court in what country on what date would you suggest to make this plausible, and who is adopting Obama the 2nd time? And under what statute is re-adoption necessary to reinstate a record?
That crap was debunked years ago.
I dispute those statements, as they are at odds with federal law.
According to Section (1) of Rule 902 of the Federal Rules of Evidence, you are correct about the DOH certificate — it is prima facie evidence, and is presumed valid until proven otherwise.
That is not true of the LDS document, as has been pointed out to you several times by me and by others. That document, since it purports to be a “Foreign Public Document” rather than a domestic one, would have to qualify under Section (3) of the rule:
“Foreign Public Documents … must be accompanied by a final certification …The certification may be made by a secretary of a United States embassy or legation; by a consul general, vice consul, or consular agent of the United States; or by a diplomatic or consular official of the foreign country assigned or accredited to the United States.”
Unless and until LDS comes up with the appropriate supporting documentation, his offering is, from a legal perspective, of no evidentiary value.
There’s no use in pretending that the DOH documents and the LDS document are in any sense comparable with regard to their legal status.
My point is that the only word that we have is Lucas Daniel Smith, an convicted forger (and he was convicted of forgery in another case, so it doesn’t matter whether or not this document is a forgery. LDS is a convicted forger whether or not he forged this document). So, he cannot be trusted in the first place. However, even if you do believe his story, then he got the document by bribing a hospital official to break the law. Which means that if LDS is telling the truth (highly unlikely), then the document came from a criminal, therefore calling into question the authenticity of it in the first place. LDS is literally a cross-examiner’s wet dream with the evidence. The Smith birth certificate won’t actually see the inside of a courtroom (other than if the other side doesn’t even show up), and even then the judge (who actually knows the rules of evidence) isn’t likely to put any weight on the document.
My belief is that LDS forged the document himself, and then lied about his excursion into Kenya and the bribery story in order to make the document appear mysterious. In order for it to be admitted into evidence as authentic, one of two things has to happen (read FRE 902(3) which covers authenticating foreign public documents).
1. The document would have to be submitted to either the U.S. State Department or the Kenyan Embassy, and there would need to be an attestation from either the U.S. State Department or the Kenyan Embassy as to it’s authenticity.
2. Lucas Daniel Smith would need to testify under oath on how he obtained the document and authenticate the document himself (since he had custody of the document).
If the second thing happened, I could easily impeach that document by just asking this question: “Mr. Smith, have you ever been convicted of Forgery?”
Ultimately it is a document from a convicted forger, who says that he bribed an governmental official in order to obtain it. There is absolutely no way that this document would actually be accepted as authentic in a court of law.
Your statements make no sense. One of the first things you do in authenticating a document is take a look at the facts on the document itself. You check to see if, for instance, the doctor was actually the Hospital Administrator at the time the document was there. You check to see if the signatures on the document are correct. An example would be to declare a Monet painting inauthentic because it contained things such as a man talking on a cell phone in the painting. I don’t need to go into a forensic analysis of the paper, or the paint and pigment used. I can impeach the document based upon information itself being inaccurate to what would have actually happened.
It’s like saying that you’d call a document that is supposedly from 1776, that is signed by President Lincoln (when President Lincoln wasn’t President until 1861) to not be a forgery, because there is no analysis of the paper and the ink. It’s completely insane!
it is in the ‘American way to try to make money and live well If you could sell it for $1,000,000 would you not do so?
Everyone pays money for goods that will benefit themselves well.
Supposition [is] the enemy of evidence, but it would appear as if the later bc from Kenya is an example it may have been common practice in Kenya to use 2 digit numbers for the birth certificate,
Hell, I don’t know if that is true or false
absolutely, but only provable in blogs discussions, not in court, although waterboarding might work.
I am not sure an embassy has the right to issue new passports for citizens of other countries, assuming, that is, that Obama ll was considered by Indonesia to be an Indonesian citizen
Actually, they may be self reported when the birth occurs in a conveyance, or at home, or on many other reasons.
Which is one of the reasons I would be wanting to see the ob/gyn doctor’s name some where in the documents.
there appears to be no difference between a bc for conveyance birth , and hospital birth.
No state has ever testified as to the facts on a vital statistics record , they all simply authentic that the document as issued reflects the recorded document.
He goes to the US embassy/consulate and gets a new passport. Just like any other American that loses their passport.
Besides which, we know he traveled back to Hawaii by himself the summer after third grade (and possibly for the Christmas of third grade, which was when he switched schools after Lolo got a new job). So you’ve failed to account for his need to have his own passport prior to when Ann renewed hers.
http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca8/13-2612/13-2612-2014-03-21.html
I wondered what eventually happened in this birth certificate case, which showed that the certified copies were not always true
Actually you can get a verification of someone’s death if you can find out where the person died. Then you can get a copy of the Death Certificate, even if the death was never reported to the Social Security Administration.
As for the original holder of Obama’s SSN, he is alive and well in Washington, D.C. There is not a shred of evidence that the SSN was ever issued to anyone else, and in fact Obama’s tax returns would have been rejected by the IRS if his SSN and name hadn’t matched Social Security’s records.
And please don’t bring up Harrison “Harry” Bounel. He never existed, except in the fevered imaginations of birthers such as Orly Taitz.
I fail to believe that a 10 year old child can go to the embassy and have them issue him a passport. Perhaps you can explain how a 10 year old child has the authority to take that action.
“Submission Method:
Passport applications for children under age 16, who have or have not had a passport in the past, must be submitted in person at a passport agency or authorized passport application acceptance facility. The child must be present. Both parents or guardians should appear with the child. If both parents/guardians cannot be present, see parental consent for additional document requirements.
Please note that you must provide your child’s Social Security Number in accordance with the FAST Act.”
No need for me to get my 10/11 digit DLN since I can get Obama’s, Oniwa’s and Henderson’s. They all registered in 1980 at the same post office in Honolulu.
IMO, the postal stamp used to stamp Obama’s is the same one used to stamp Oniwa’s. But on different days. Both are missing the first “O” in Honolulu.
Well duh, his mother went with him. The FAST Act was passed in 2015.
That’s not what the record shows. The “error” was admitting an affidavit as to the contents of the certificate rather than a certified copy, It was a rules of evidence thing, and didn’t involve an actual birth certificate.
And in the 1970s children typically didn’t get a Social Security Number until it was needed for employment.
Trader Jack really is dense. He conflates the past with the present and the present with the past.
The doctor’s signature is on Obama’s birth certificate: David A. Sinclair. According to the statistical report for 1961 births outside hospitals were rare in Honolulu and unassisted births were nonexistent,
It has been shown to you repeatedly that there is no legal avenue by which Obama could have become an Indonesian citizen. Why do you continue to raise a hypothetical that has been proven impossible?
It’s not a two-digit number. It is a single 4-digit year What\ we have on the Smith certificate is a 4-digit year for Obama Sr, and a full date in the wrong format for Stanley Ann.
That is easily explained:
1. Smith didn’t know Obama Sr’s date of birth because it hadn’t been published anywhere,.
2. Smith didn’t know that Kenya uses the dd/mm/yyyy date format because he had never been there.
Any explanation of these dates involving the Smith certificate being authentic involves huge complexity and extremely implausible assumptions. But you’re welcome to try.
OK, I concede that point. Smith could have gone to Kenya with the intent of procuring a birth certificate that he could sell; however, the certificate itself is fatally flawed in ways I have already detailed.
That said, forging an Obama certificate of the same quality as Smith’s (i.e. really crappy) is much easier than a highly speculative trip to Kenya. And if Smith really wanted to make money, why didn’t he sell it to the New York Times for big bucks rather than on eBay? I would answer my own question by saying that only a credulous person (like a birther on eBay) would be fooled by such a crude attempt. The Coast General Hospital refused to authenticate the record when contacted, by the way.
But you have claimed that the LDS document “has to be accepted as being what it is, just as the HDOH certified copy is accepted.”
When has any Kenyan official ever “authentic[ated] that the document as issued reflects the recorded document”? As I’ve demonstrated to you more than once by citing the appropriate law, the LDS document is inadmissible as evidence without a certification. Until you produce such documentary support, that piece of paper is of absolutely no evidentiary value.
They refused to authenticate it when contacted by WND back in 2009.
http://www.wnd.com/2009/08/108005/
What you think this case is about and what this case is actually about are two very different things.
The IRS didn’t start requiring SSNs for dependent deductions until 1987, the year that millions of US children disappeared.
Wow, I had forgotten about that. Has it been pointed out to trader jack before?
I mean, it’s a thorough debunking, titled “eBay birth certificate called fraud /
Hospital refuses to authenticate document” — and it’s by Jerome Corsi! Even Corsi has to admit it’s crap!
About once a month. You have to forgive him though. After being 93 years old for the past few years, his memory just isn’t what it used to be.
Would I sell a fraudulent document for $ 1,000,000? No. Why not? Because I am honest.
Yes, indeed. Bustamante didn’t have a California birth certificate. He had a California Delayed Registration of Birth, which he obtained after submitting a forged baptismal certificate.
And the “birth certificates” which the Court of Appeals ruled should not have been allowed into evidence were not birth certificates at all. They were transcriptions of information which apparently appeared on Bustamante’s birth certificate in the Philippines.
So the case has absolutely nothing to do with the reliability of Obama’s birth certificate, which was signed by his mother and his attending physician within days of his birth.