It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Proof of a DNC Conspiracy to Elect an Ineligible Obama

page: 8
137
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 08:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by whatukno
The flaw with this article is that Nancy Pelosi was never the DNC national chairperson.


Howard Dean (2005–2009) Vermont
Tim Kaine (2009–Present) Virginia


en.wikipedia.org...

Kinda shoots a big hole in this conspiracy when they name the wrong person as the DNC national chairperson.


See, I just love this. This is what we need. Tests, tests tests. But sorry bud no go.

en.wikipedia.org...

It says Chair, Democratic National CONVENTION. Hate to see you make that mistake, but nice try. Thought we were gonna bleed a bit more, but there is still a respirator attached.

And guess who it was for 2008? Yeppers. Pelosi.

[edit on Fri Sep 11th 2009 by TrueAmerican]




posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 08:27 PM
link   
reply to post by whatukno
 


howard dean = chair of the DNC [ democratic national COMMITTEE ] , 2005 to 2009

nancy pelosi = chair of the DNC [ democtratic national CONVENTION ] , 2008

at least thats how i read it


edit to point to the post above - doh - beaten to it


[edit on 11-9-2009 by ignorant_ape]



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 09:01 PM
link   
reply to post by ignorant_ape
 


Yep I caught my mistake.

Now I am off to research who must write to what person in what state who can be the candidate for president.

Because of course it's us the people that don't believe this theory that have to prove everything. Not the accusers apparently.



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 10:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by TrueAmerican

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Question. How does he know that this document (with the Constitutional Language) was never delivered? Especially since the Hawaii Response INCLUDES this document, which they claim to have received from the Democratic Party?


Now that's interesting. Because guess what's missing? The RECEIVED STAMP!

Nuh uh. Show me one with a received stamp please, just like doc2 in the OP.

I will say this though- if that is indeed the actual response from the State, I don't guess we have to argue about the validity of sigs anymore, eh?


There's a time and date stamp on the cover letter. Page 4/4
"Office of Elections 08 Sept-3 P1:30." Is the word "RECEIVED" mandatory or can it vary from state to state?



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 10:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pauligirl
There's a time and date stamp on the cover letter. Page 4/4
"Office of Elections 08 Sept-3 P1:30." Is the word "RECEIVED" mandatory or can it vary from state to state?


Answer: I really don't know. But I do know that in this case, Doc1 (which that is) could easily be inserted into the chain there without much further ado. I'm gonna need more than that.

For instance, BH has already called and they said there is no such letter with the constitution clause removed... So that's strike one. If we can indeed confirm from several other states that Doc1 was received, and not Doc2, then things will be looking pretty grim- and not for me- heck I'm just the messenger- but for JB Williams.



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 10:36 PM
link   
The dnc has ben in on it al along
Secind line



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 10:47 PM
link   
About the Received Stamp. I can go to Wal-Mart and get one of those. And if I was going to fake a document, I'd use one to make it seem like the authentic one.

Who put that stamp on there? Who received this document? Is it from one of the states? He (the blogger) just casually mentions that the original wasn't received by any states (How does he know this?) but that he just happens to have a copy of it... Why? Where did he get it? Where did he get the one with the received stamp? Don't you wonder these things?

[edit on 11-9-2009 by Benevolent Heretic]



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 11:21 PM
link   
reply to post by andrewh7
 


I have to laugh at the people who think its about race or party affiliation. I am insulted however by the government thinking they can keep pulling the wool over the eyes of the American people. Show my the long form B.C. and I'll believe. after you have proved its not a forgery of course. Do that and I'll never bring up the eligibility issue again.



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 11:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Manwin

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
Hey, all you blabbermouths out there that have nothing more to add to this thread than "this is crap," how about getting in there and doing some research on your own to prove or disprove this. There is a reason why BH is such a class act here. At least she gets down to doing the work, and when she comes back with something, I am very inclined to at least listen and consider her opinions.

You people on the other hand, add nothing substantial. No meat. No substance. Just blab. ATS is not about blab. We toss it up here, and dissect it until it bleeds. If it don't bleed, then life remains. Currently, blood is trickling with this, but not gushing just quite yet. And your meaningless posts do nothing to add to this. You know who you are. More substance, less blab please. Thank you.



Fake or not, it was GREAT research. This is what this board is about. You actually put something together. I respect that. Star and flag.

You have to tread lightly when it comes to criticizing Obama I've found. He has a cult following. You can get away with questioning the official story of 9/11 easier than you can questioning Lord Obama.


Again, thanks for the OP.



Only in America would a man who goes to a single obscure right-wing fringe website be complemented for "thorough research" after posting the text and pictures of the website verbatim.

Seriously, just say, "Thanks for contributing to my confirmatory bias. I knew I couldn't trust a black person and your shady documentation from an unreliable source confirms this. I will go get my sniper rifle now. White Power!"



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 11:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by calstorm
reply to post by andrewh7
 


I have to laugh at the people who think its about race or party affiliation. I am insulted however by the government thinking they can keep pulling the wool over the eyes of the American people. Show my the long form B.C. and I'll believe. after you have proved its not a forgery of course. Do that and I'll never bring up the eligibility issue again.


I'm still waiting for Glenn Beck to prove he didn't murder and rape those girls in 1990. What is he hiding? If he proves that he didn't brutally murder those innocent little girls in 1990, I'll never say another bad thing about him or mention the vicious rapes and murders he committed in 1990 again.

[edit on 12-9-2009 by andrewh7]



posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 12:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
About the Received Stamp. I can go to Wal-Mart and get one of those. And if I was going to fake a document, I'd use one to make it seem like the authentic one.

Who put that stamp on there? Who received this document? Is it from one of the states? He (the blogger) just casually mentions that the original wasn't received by any states (How does he know this?) but that he just happens to have a copy of it... Why? Where did he get it? Where did he get the one with the received stamp? Don't you wonder these things?

[edit on 11-9-2009 by Benevolent Heretic]


Shhhhhhhh!! Leave your liberal rationality at the door please. If you don't have a poorly veiled argument for a black man not being a "real" American, they're not interested. "His skin is darker than my skin. He must be a foreigner.... a communist....a Muslim....he wants to destroy America! Dick Cheney warned us about brown people with foreign-sounding names."



posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 01:55 AM
link   
Star and flag for the OP!

Very interesting. I have no trust in this government, and the pack of Jackals that lead it.



posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 04:05 AM
link   
well,,, this is starting to look like a hoax



go to this link,,,, it is the official form that was submitted in hawaii,,,, scroll down to page 3

it is the same as the first doc,, including the const. phrasing

moniquemonicat.files.wordpress.com...


theory is 1 down 49 to go



posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 06:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by shortywarn
well,,, this is starting to look like a hoax


That link has been posted several times here but it just doesn't feed the agenda of suspicion, so it's considered less valid than a document that does...

It's amazing to me to see otherwise rational people look at two documents and determine that the more suspicious one of the two must be valid... and, by doing so, the amount of credence they give to the theory that the entire Democratic party is involved in an illegal and HIGHLY visible and transparent conspiracy.

Occam is rolling in his grave!

It's all over the Internet:


Originally posted by TrueAmerican
The Theory is Now a Conspiracy And Facts Don't Lie.


What facts, man??? I'm sorry. This is a conspiracy theory. Nothing more. And a very, very weak one at that.



posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 07:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
About the Received Stamp. I can go to Wal-Mart and get one of those. And if I was going to fake a document, I'd use one to make it seem like the authentic one.


Yeah? Then maybe you can explain why the very attorney's office in your "proof" went to Wal-Mart to get a rubber stamp? So under your reasoning, the attorney's office is hip to rubber stamps for forgery too!


moniquemonicat.files.wordpress.com...

last page



posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 07:44 AM
link   
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 


I know it's date stamped. I'm simply saying that the stamp adds no validity to the document as your source suggests here...



In fact, this version is in Election Commission files of all fifty state Election Commission offices, state DNC headquarters, complete with date stamps, matching signatures, even the same Notary of Public authentication, and absent the constitutional text.


This guy says IN FACT, this version is in all 50 states. Where's the proof of that statement? How does he know? Did he travel to all 50 states? Did he call them? If so, why doesn't he say so? Once again, you take your source at his word, because it's what you want to believe.

Think critically! Have some curiosity. You're lapping up these "facts" like pablum.

And I'm still waiting for pictures of your assertion about the Notary stamp being at a slightly different angle and different place on the documents. Why not post your proof? Or are we just supposed to believe you?

And I'm also waiting for you to answer some of the questions I've asked... in this post, for example.



posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 08:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Electro38
This is much more an interesting study in psychology and sociology than anything political or conspiratorial.


Isn't it though? It fascinates me.....it's like looking into a working lab and watching all the little mice scurry around.



posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 08:25 AM
link   
Although the conspiracy side of me wants this Intelligibility issue to be true, when you look at the facts of the situation, the Official Version (OV) does hold up more than the conspiracy one.

1) We have been provided with a Certification of Live Birth (CLB) that has been authenticated by Hawaiian authorities as qualifying as proof that he was born there. Yes this is not the long form actual Birth Certificate (BC), but official Hawaiian authorities have confirmed that the information on this document qualifies him as a US citizen.

2) More than one Hawaiian newspaper advertises his birth taking place. These appear legitimate because the information confirms the details outlined on his CLB as being true. Such as his name being Barack H. Obama, and the names of his parents, the date it was published etc.

3) More than two documents have been proven to be a HOAX in claiming that Obama was born outside the USA. There also appear to be many, many versions of his "actual BC", which indicates there is an effort by some to create a false BC and have it passed off as being genuine.

4) There is no concrete proof that Barack Obama was born outside the USA. Yes, there is uncertainty about his past and speculation that he is hiding information from the public. Unfortunately, there is again no hard evidence, just doubt and speculation, that he was born outside the USA.

When considering these facts, I feel the OV holds up. I can only think of one possible explanation for this conspiracy actually being real: TPTB that helped get him elected knew about this and have hidden it as a way to deter him from going against their wishes. If he strays too far from their instructions, they can put out his real information and he will be impeached and stripped of the presidency.

But even that seems a bit of a long shot because they have taken a lot of unnecessary risks with Obama to ensure it all goes to plan.

Sorry guys, but when you step back and look at the situation objectively, it appears all the current facts support the Official Version.

[edit on 12/9/2009 by Dark Ghost]



posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 10:13 AM
link   
I emailed my state's election commission and they were more than happy to send the certifications. I've asked for the 2004 certifications so we can compare the 2008 ones to them (especially the DNC cert), however, I have not gotten those yet. It's taken a day for me to figure out how to post the email without my personal information so please excuse the delay. They were very fast with the 2008 cert.

This is the email:




This is what I received from them.

DNC certification:




RNC certification:



It seems that the RNC certification does have the legal language and that the DNC certification does not have the legal language. This in and of itself does not prove anything but is curious why the DNC doesn't certify constitutional eligibility like the RNC does. Anyway, I have requested the 2004 docs too, I just haven't received them yet.



posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 10:22 AM
link   
These are enlarged (that's why they are so grainy) and only show the language:






new topics

top topics



 
137
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join