Proof of a DNC Conspiracy to Elect an Ineligible Obama

page: 3
137
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 10:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by TrueAmerican


But operating for a minute under that hypothesis, then WHO are they planning on taking over? Pelosi? Clinton? Biden?



Biden would be ineligible, and Clinton is down the line to replace the President. It would be President Pelosi, until a new election was set up. That's scarier than the other two! That woman scares the bejeebus out of me. Her plastic surgery is not aging well, she looks like a damn raccoon.




posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 10:23 AM
link   
what is the "typo" i read it through twice, the second time more carefully, and missed it? what is it? and why is it important?



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 10:24 AM
link   
Lets not forget that these letters can be made on your computer and printed off and the stamp and be bought from your local Staples store. Copying signatures is not that hard to do for someone artistically inclined.



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 10:26 AM
link   
reply to post by Grayelf2009
 


No. It was not done behind "closed doors". Is this how conspiracies are started? LOL. One person makes a quick, unsubstantiated statement, then a person on another forum picks it up and makes a thread and before you know it, it's gone viral.

Here's a great read. Please take a second or two to review it. You might notice at the end of the article it states that two other presidents have done the same thing. To our knowledge both of them were natural-born citizens.



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 10:27 AM
link   
reply to post by KnoxMSP
 


I do not believe that is how that would work as any decision Obama made as a fraudulent President would be null and void, meaning anyone he put into a cabinet position would have to be removed as well.



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 10:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by AKARonco
what is the "typo" i read it through twice, the second time more carefully, and missed it? what is it? and why is it important?


Read "through" it again carefully.



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 10:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Shadowflux
 


That's great but what does this prove? That one letter is different suggests forged documents? What about the other letters? The name "Nancy" looks similar across ALL the documents you cite.

Can handwriting analysis be performed just on one letter? And the 'P' on both documents listed in the OP are similar.



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 10:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Southern Guardian
 


It does not matter if Congress affirms a candidates presidency if said candidate was never eligible to be affirmed in the first place. Someone did not study Constitutional Law very well.



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 10:32 AM
link   
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 


And

reply to post by Freenrgy2
 


I'm just looking for the truth, in a sense the article controls all the evidence you're given so I ran a quick google search for Pelosi's signature to see for my self.

The "P" is just what I focused on and was the first thing that stuck out to me.

Also, I looked through the website the article is posted on and I'd be a little suspicious of their impartiality, if you know what I mean.

Apparently, "RightSidedNews.com has a heavily conservative and rather strongly Christian staff with fake pictures of terrorists that link to a story named "The Evils of Islam Ideology", which isn't even correct, it should be "Islamic Ideology" or "The Ideology of Islam".

Sorry, it's nothing personal, I just think the source is suspicious.


[edit on 11-9-2009 by Shadowflux]



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 10:33 AM
link   
I have personally never felt he was eligible to be our president. This does not surprise me nor does it surprise me that the democrats would stoop to any level to get a person of choice elected.



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 10:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Shadowflux
 


I have an R in my name and I happen to write them two different ways and they both happen to be just like that P was written.



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 10:35 AM
link   
reply to post by Shadowflux
 


That's all I want is the truth. And it would be rather unfortunate is this were another hoax. But, something doesn't sit right with me just by the way Obama has gone our of his way to stiffle attempt to look at his records. His Presidential library is going to be thin if he doesn't allow access to this.



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 10:37 AM
link   
I am not seeing this typo

Edit: Nevermind, I found it.

I hate that my brain skims through things lol

[edit on 9/11/2009 by Lemon.Fresh]



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 10:38 AM
link   
My signatures would rarely "match-up" if a regular Joe were to compare them. It's basically a structured scribble. However, to the trained eye, there are certain points of reference - certain strokes I make with every signature that could identify whether I'd actually signed or not. It could be as simple as a serif, but it's there every time. Though if you looked at the entire signature, a regular person might not be able to gather the same name from both.

Sometimes it's how I hold the pen. Sometimes it's how large of a signature line I have to work with. Many times the "letters" appear completely different from signature to signature, but if you know the strokes to look for, it's easy to identify my mark.

[edit on 11-9-2009 by tyranny22]



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 10:40 AM
link   
reply to post by WalterRatlos
 


Oh, alright I didn't read more about it than what I posted, apoligies for the misinformation.



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 10:42 AM
link   
Here is a comparison of the lower case "o" in Pelosi, I won't even add a comment about it:





posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 10:46 AM
link   
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 


Great thread! thanks for posting. To think, I thought today would just be another boring news day. I just tuned in and I have got some reading to do. Good work!



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 10:48 AM
link   
If this is evidence of a greater conspiracy which ends with Clinton becoming president and the PTB in ultimate control of both parties, ,then that would certainly explain why both the Clinton camp and the Mccain camp did not touch the Obama eligibility issue.

This is of course a giant leap from a simple question of Obama's eligibility to a great "plot" of removal, creating riots and ultimately martial law.
(I still don't get what purpose martial law would serve)

Anyway, it is fun/interesting to speculate. Much like the speculation of Aliens being here. Hey maybe Aliens are actually the PTB.

But seriously there is quite obviously something amiss with regard to Obama.



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 11:01 AM
link   
The only thing I find odd about the omission is why would they need to omit it any way? I mean, if he's not eligible and they knew it, but were willing to lie to get him through why not leave the that last clause on the document.

Just seems that if they are going to hide his birthright, use a false BC, get false SS#'s for him they wouldn't give a crap about taking out a statement that attests to his Constitutional eligibility.

I am very interested though. I've not really had much of an opinion one way or another about his birthright. The only reason it doesn't matter to me is because if he is eligible, there's nothing to worry about and he still stinks as president.

If he isn't then they will do everything possible to keep that fact hidden and we'll all just argue about his entire term and probably for years to come. And he still stinks as president.

Not to say that I don't think he should get the boot if he isn't eligible. It's just that I don't know if we'll ever get to the bottom of it..

--Edit to delete an inconsequential statement

[edit on 11-9-2009 by nunya13]



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 11:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Shadowflux
Apparently, "RightSidedNews.com has a heavily conservative and rather strongly Christian staff with fake pictures of terrorists that link to a story named "The Evils of Islam Ideology", which isn't even correct, it should be "Islamic Ideology" or "The Ideology of Islam".

Sorry, it's nothing personal, I just think the source is suspicious.


Well if you wanted THE REAL SOURCE, why instead didn't you go to the author's own website, instead of a right wing paper that grabbed one of his stories that fit with their agenda, because in this case, the story just happened to be about Obama? :shk:

Here:

www.jb-williams.com...


If you are looking for regurgitated Republican or Democrat rhetoric, you are in the wrong place. I write what I think, based on what I know, supported by facts I can prove, and stated in simple common sense terms anyone should be able to comprehend. I am a Christian, a husband, a father, a son and a brother, a conservative, an entrepreneur and a writer, in that order. I don’t vote for (R)’s or (D)’s, but instead for individuals. Not on the basis of what they promise to do for me, but on the basis of who I believe will protect real American values worth protecting.


Yeah, a real whacko this guy is.
NOT!

I happen to rather like that paragraph I quoted from his site. So, you found two different Pelosi sigs. I would appreciate it if you linked to any others you have found. I bet you we will find others over time that will look even closer to the ones on these particular docs in the OP.





top topics
 
137
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join