Obama's Birth Certificate

originally posted by: EveStreet
a reply to: Edumakated

Why is this still relevant? Standing around like a bunch of cattle chewing the same old cud day after day. There's bigger things to be concerned about.

It couldn't matter much if it did turn out to be faked. You can't un-President him. You can't go back in time and wipe 8 years off of the timeline.

It is still relevant because as I demonstrated in the thread, no one has been able to put up a rebuttal to show that the claims in OP video are not true.

The Feds don't stop looking for bank robbers despite them maybe initially getting away.

I don't expect anything to come of it, but I have yet to hear anyone credibly disprove the claims in the OP which I found odd and leads me to believe there is some truth in the claims. All anyone has ever done is attack the credibility of Sheriff Joe. however, attacking someone's credibility is not disproving their claims.

originally posted by: EveStreet
a reply to: Edumakated

Why is this still relevant? Standing around like a bunch of cattle chewing the same old cud day after day. There's bigger things to be concerned about.

It couldn't matter much if it did turn out to be faked. You can't un-President him. You can't go back in time and wipe 8 years off of the timeline.

If paperwork was discovered proving that Ronald Reagan was an illegal alien, born outside the US to non-citizen parents... do you think it would possibly make the evening news?

I would bet on 'yes'.

And he is dead.

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
a reply to: EveStreet

It would mean all of the legislation he signed and executive orders he passed were fraudulent and thus null and void.

I really don't ever expect anything to ever come of this, or of any of the other countless items of wrongdoing by those in the upper levels of government, but damn it, people deserve to at least know the truth about them if they supposedly our representatives.

All of this. And I agree, nothing will come of it because exposing the fraud behind Obama's birth certificate is/was the responsibility of the media and Congress but they aided the fraud instead. It's hopeless without their checks and balances.

BUT, if Obama was not eligible (and I am not saying he wasn't), nothing he signed would have the effect of law.

For example, student loan forgiveness. Any borrower could apply for FULL student loan forgiveness (for their federal student loans), because the restrictions on student loan forgiveness, signed by Obama, would not have the force & effect of law. A borrower could not be denied the full federal benefit based on unlawfully enacted restrictions.

There are civil lawsuit implications that I don't think many people have considered.

That is, of course, if Obama was not eligible....and, again, I am not saying he isn't. I am saying the short form is demonstrably fraudulent, and the long form image the White House released -- which was reportedly requested and retrieved by his attorney (not Obama, himself, of course) -- doesn't appear to be legally certified. I would perhaps even speculate it, too, is demonstrably fraudulent -- but I am not a handwriting expert.

However, in my amateur opinion, Alvin Onaka's signature (on both the long and short forms) does not appear to be a match to other examples I found in books and within the Peter Kema murder criminal investigation records.

There are *matches* galore, though, on alleged birth certificates that were floated online since Obama released his alleged short form. None of them can be verified, however, and I have tried to get their *owners* to authorize the HDOH to verify them. They always refused. No birth certificate found online that can't be verified through the HDOH is evidence of jack squat concerning what an authentic certified copy of a vital record issued by the HDOH should look like.

So, it matters even if no legal action will ever be taken about it. There is a truthful historical record that matters...even if interested people will have to dig for it.



ETA: And how many people have poured thousands of dollars into the *required* health insurance under threat of being fined through the ACA? I think there could be a court case that is successful in compelling Obama to prove the facts of his birth...but agent provocateurs have thrown smoke in their faces with controlled-opposition court cases intended to fail from the get-go.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

What an unbelievably ridiculous discussion. How does anyone know they're a citizen? Because they have a birth certificate and their state of birth qualifies it. The end. By mere concurrence of the state, it is in fact true, and that's all anyone ever needs to know.


Some of you people are seriously out of hand with this nonsense.

originally posted by: alphabetaone
a reply to: MotherMayEye

What an unbelievably ridiculous discussion. How does anyone know they're a citizen? Because they have a birth certificate and their state of birth qualifies it. The end. By mere concurrence of the state, it is in fact true, and that's all anyone ever needs to know.


Some of you people are seriously out of hand with this nonsense.

For all the "nonsense", the Whitehouse produced a fake birth certificate.

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: alphabetaone
a reply to: MotherMayEye

What an unbelievably ridiculous discussion. How does anyone know they're a citizen? Because they have a birth certificate and their state of birth qualifies it. The end. By mere concurrence of the state, it is in fact true, and that's all anyone ever needs to know.


Some of you people are seriously out of hand with this nonsense.

For all the "nonsense", the Whitehouse produced a fake birth certificate.

And if alphabetaone actually sent a copy of Obama's long and/or short form birth certificate to the Hawaii Department of Health, and asked them to "concur"/verify the birth certificate is authentic, they would get the answer, "No, the record is private -- protected by law -- and the agency will not verify it is authentic."

Yet it is contrary to all logic that a record that has allegedly been made public is private, still, and protected by law.

So many stupid people out there that could be smart if they weren't such partisan dipsh*ts.

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: alphabetaone
a reply to: MotherMayEye

What an unbelievably ridiculous discussion. How does anyone know they're a citizen? Because they have a birth certificate and their state of birth qualifies it. The end. By mere concurrence of the state, it is in fact true, and that's all anyone ever needs to know.


Some of you people are seriously out of hand with this nonsense.

For all the "nonsense", the Whitehouse produced a fake birth certificate.

And if alphabetaone actually sent a copy of Obama's long and/or short form birth certificate to the Hawaii Department of Health, and asked them to "concur"/verify the birth certificate is authentic, they would get the answer, "No, the record is private -- protected by law -- and the agency will not verify it is authentic."

AS it SHOULD be. What is wrong with you?

Yet it is contrary to all logic that a record that has allegedly been made public is private, still, and protected by law.

Because it is none of your business to qualify someone elses birth records and it is their policy not to release private records to any Tom Dick and Harry that thinks they have the right to ask for it.

So many stupid people out there that could be smart if they weren't such partisan dipsh*ts.

Exactly what I was thinking.

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: alphabetaone
a reply to: MotherMayEye

What an unbelievably ridiculous discussion. How does anyone know they're a citizen? Because they have a birth certificate and their state of birth qualifies it. The end. By mere concurrence of the state, it is in fact true, and that's all anyone ever needs to know.


Some of you people are seriously out of hand with this nonsense.

For all the "nonsense", the Whitehouse produced a fake birth certificate.

And if alphabetaone actually sent a copy of Obama's long and/or short form birth certificate to the Hawaii Department of Health, and asked them to "concur"/verify the birth certificate is authentic, they would get the answer, "No, the record is private -- protected by law -- and the agency will not verify it is authentic."

AS it SHOULD be. What is wrong with you?

Yet it is contrary to all logic that a record that has allegedly been made public is private, still, and protected by law.

Because it is none of your business to qualify someone elses birth records and it is their policy not to release private records to any Tom Dick and Harry that thinks they have the right to ask for it.

So many stupid people out there that could be smart if they weren't such partisan dipsh*ts.

Exactly what I was thinking.

Yeah, but for all that, the Whitehouse produced a fake birth certificate.

originally posted by: alphabetaone
AS it SHOULD be. What is wrong with you?

Why should a record that was supposedly already made public be protected from being made public? How do you unsee what can supposedly be seen, right now, on the internet?

AND why "should it be" that way? Why should government be able to tell the public whatever they want -- lie even -- and the public be helpless in verifying the facts? It should NOT be that way. And it isn't that way. Government is supposed to be transparent.

Because it is none of your business to qualify someone elses birth records and it is their policy not to release private records to any Tom Dick and Harry that thinks they have the right to ask for it.

It's not a private record though...supposedly. The White House claims they made it public in April 2011.

Face it, whatever record the White House made public is NOT what the HDOH has on record. What they have on record is still private.

Logic. Try it sometime!

a reply to: UKTruth

Methinks someone is missing the point.

If the birth certificate that was 'authenticated' as genuine was legitimate, the HDOH would not have any problems verifying the document as it is already in the public domain and no longer covered under privacy laws.

To whit

Friedlander v. USPS, No. 84-0773, slip op. at 8 (D.D.C. Oct. 16, 1984); King, 471 F. Supp. at 181; cf. Sierra Pac. Indus. v. USDA, No. 11-1250, 2012 WL 245973, at *4 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 25, 2012) (finding that the Privacy Act did not require it to seal documents where “substance of the information . . . [was] already in the public record in one form or another”).

justice.gov

It is only if the documents being touted as the birth certificate are not what they purport to be, that privacy laws would apply.



It took me a while to post this, but MME has said essentially the same thing above.

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

Also, Hawaii's own open records law requires disclosure because supposedly the record was already made public.

See the OIP opinion on the Coach June S. Jones' contract with the University of Hawaii (03-16 08/14/03 Head Football Coach June Jones’ Contract). Link

We have no difficulty concluding that, as Coach Jones’ agent, Mr. Steinberg’s confirmation of the amount that Coach Jones earns and the breakdown of that amount was equivalent to Coach Jones disclosing those figures. The bell, therefore, has “rung” with respect to those terms, and the bell cannot be “unrung” by denying access to those same terms.

In other words, withholding the information previously made public serves no legitimate purpose because UH cannot force the public to forget or pretend to forget that information.

originally posted by: WUNK22

I'm just happy to be rid of that anti American community organizer!

Just thinking out-loud that description fits our current POTUS much better.

Except the community he has organized are neo-nazi's.

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: WUNK22

I'm just happy to be rid of that anti American community organizer!

Just thinking out-loud that description fits our current POTUS much better.

Except the community he has organized are neo-nazi's.

That's why Trump has Jewish family Members.

Now what?

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: WUNK22

I'm just happy to be rid of that anti American community organizer!

Just thinking out-loud that description fits our current POTUS much better.

Except the community he has organized are neo-nazi's.

That's why Trump has Jewish family Members.

Now what?

That's hilarious...I bet you have a black friend so you can't be racist right?

BTW - the Rabbi that gave Trump that excuse disagrees with your silliness...

Rabbi Who Oversaw Ivanka Trump’s Conversion To Judaism Slams President
link