PRESIDENTIAL FORGERY? Sheriff Joe Breaks Down Obama's Birth Certificate Legitimacy

We have some ATS fools that think they know Barry better then his friends he hung out with in highs school. I prefer the truth, what ever it is. And here it is. Coke for same sex. foreigner

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
This is ridiculous,

It certainly is, all the silly stories birthers have made up over the last 8 years!
Also remember silly birthers have lost every single court case they have attempted, over 200 of them. As all they have are lies.
tesibria.typepad.com...

He withheld his short form for months

So where is the short form BC for all previous Presidents? Where is Trumps?

Oh, it looks like Presidents do not have to show their BC's. Except Obama, what is so different about Obama?
Oh, the answer is obvious!

And Obama refused to produce his long form BC

So where is the long form BC for all previous Presidents? Where is Trumps?
Oh, again the answer to that is very obvious!

So there is no way to discern if it's even legally certified.

Apart from the State of Hawaii certifying it, you mean!

Once again birthers have shown that they have no clue at all, funny how they only demand documents from Obama, and ignore every other president, and Trump also gets a free run on not showing his documents.

But it is very obvious why that is!

a reply to: hellobruce

Bleh. You're not worth responding to. That much has actually been solidly proven and I don't question it, at all.

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: hellobruce

Obama’s supporters will tell everyone who will listen that Barack Obama produced his real birth certificate in 2011. A single reporter – Savannah Guthrie of NBC news — was allowed to see the “real” document, and then it was scanned as a PDF file and loaded into the internet for everyone to see. As far as the Obama crowd is concerned, that’s the end of the story.

So one NBC reporter actually saw it !!!!

And I wrote Savannah Guthrie a few times to ask if the seal was raised on the front or backside of the seal and she never answered me. God knows what she actually 'felt' when she claimed to feel a raised seal.

Not long after, she got her cushy job on the Today show.

It was always a bit odd that only one specific reporter was "allowed" to touch the thing.

And equally odd is they posted a pdf.

Had they simply published a jgp, they would have avoided some of the controversy.

But then again, we know most of the losing court cases were designed to be losers and were part of the controlled opposition onslaught to trigger the irresistible urge to automatically believe the BC was genuine.

The pdf helped them start the "Lenin Effect".

originally posted by: hellobruce

Apart from the State of Hawaii certifying it, you mean!

All politicians have their price.

originally posted by: xuenchen
But then again, we know most of the losing court cases were designed to be losers and were part of the controlled opposition onslaught to trigger the irresistible urge to automatically believe the BC was genuine.

The pdf helped them start the "Lenin Effect".

Absolutely. Look at how the stupid, programmable, gullible sheep have seized on those "200 failed birther cases."

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: hellobruce

Apart from the State of Hawaii certifying it, you mean!

All politicians have their price.

Well, actually the short form is not legally certified and the long form? Who knows? You cannot tell if the long form has the requisite raised seal embossment or not from the pdf.

And I am sure not taking Savannah Guthrie at her word if she cannot answer the simple question of whether the seal is raised on the front or the backside.

originally posted by: xuenchen
we know most of the losing court cases were designed to be losers

Well, as losers were the ones pushing the court cases of course they were designed to lose!

How do you expect birthers to win any court cases when all they have are lies and silly made up stories?

For anyone interested in the old Hawaiian laws in effect at the time, they were posted on the Hawaii State government website until they were scrubbed.

Waybackmachine has it however.

Not easy to get there, but here's how to:

1) goto waybackmachine ...........

step 1


2) copy and paste original link that is dead.........

dead link to Hawaii State

... use the quote for this post and copy the link.


3) paste the link into the waybackmachine search box and hit "browse history".


4) then click on the link dated "November 5, 2009" on the line "Saved 58 times between November 5, 2009 and August 20, 2014.".

you will then get the scrubbed pages in pdf format.

download the pdf if you want to save it.

very interesting.

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: xuenchen
we know most of the losing court cases were designed to be losers

Well, as losers were the ones pushing the court cases of course they were designed to lose!

How do you expect birthers to win any court cases when all they have are lies and silly made up stories?

Those cases were not designed to be "winners".

They were all controlled opposition.

"The Lenin Effect"

a reply to: xuenchen

They are still online. They just shuffled the download address...a few times, now.

Page 19. Plain as day. A "raised" seal is used to certify all copies of vital records.

Link to pdf

a reply to: xuenchen

I never asked to be represented by Orly Taitz or any of those a-holes.

I think HB just wants to assign me to someone else's thinking because he has a problem with women thinking for themselves.

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: xuenchen

I never asked to be represented by Orly Taitz or any of those a-holes.

I think HB just wants to assign me to someone else's thinking because he has a problem with women thinking for themselves.

Very true.

imo, Taitz and most of the "others" were/are being blackmailed.

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: xuenchen

They are still online. They just shuffled the download address...a few times, now.

Page 19. Plain as day. A "raised" seal is used to certify all copies of vital records.

Link to pdf

Ahhh good.

Clever they are.

a reply to: xuenchen

After working alongside a few of those 'lawyers' (read as: being bombarded by them), I would say they are willing controlled opposition.

Controlled none-the-less.

originally posted by: dragonridr
What an idiot hrs testing a scanned image and is surprised to find layering?? Does he think hrs looking at the original since as we all know they issued thumb drives in the 60s. Wow in order to post it obviously they would scan it this would create layers because surprise that's how scanners work

Not if it was scanned and formatted as a jpeg or another image file. And it would be a truer reflection of the genuine document if it was an image file, too.

In fact, the short form was photographed from multiple angles -- front and back -- and the photos were posted online in high resolution. It is those photos that prove the short form is not legally certified. Nothing like that was done with the long form for that very reason, IMO.

The pdf with layers caused letters and words to 'match' one another and it created those *gasp* suspicious layers.

And I still think the choice of a layered pdf was an intentional red herring because the short form had been finally proven to be fraudulent based on those high resolution photos. Also, the pdf did not HAVE TO be layered. That was a conscious choice.

The pdf of the long form is a red herring. A distraction. That's why the long form was finally released. The short form was finally proven to be fraudulent....and by a nobody, not a 'trusted' news source. The distraction was so effective against a nobody, like me.

People don't believe their own damn eyes unless the 'news' tells them they are allowed to -- even people who believe they are enlightened and immune to programming:

Obama's short form is not legally certified. BELIEVE YOUR OWN EYES OR NOT. But, I believe my own eyes.

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: AMPTAH

This is ridiculous, AMPTAH.

Obama did plenty to create speculation. He withheld his short form for months

Theres is no requirement for a President to publish his birth certificate for all to witness.

There are, however, officials of the Government who have "sworn" to uphold the constitution.

So, it's the the job of some officials to inspect the real birth certificate, but not our right to see it.

When you go to the DMV to get a driver's license, you have to show your Birth Certificate to the appropriate authorities. But, no cop can stop your car on the highway and demand to see your birth certificate.

The officials that are required to do the requisite background checks on individuals, are the ones that should check these things.

It's kind of an insult to the US Government to imply that nobody in the Government is doing their job, and only the Sheriff Arpaio is responsible enough to attempt to "uphold" the constitution.

With 17 intelligence agencies, wiretapping everyone's phone, eavesdropping on all your emails, and watching everything you do, from cradle to grave, how likely is it, that a man could sit in the oval office, without being vetted, at least to the degree the ordinary citizen is, when applying for a Driver's License?

See? It's all ridiculous.

It implies that its easier to attain the office of the presidency, than to get a simple driver's license.

What Obama did, to appease the deniers, is publish a document containing "the facts of his birth", produced by the official office in Hawaii, without handing over his actual private document, which is, as for all of us, private and not public.

originally posted by: AMPTAH
It's kind of an insult to the US Government to imply that nobody in the Government is doing their job, and only the Sheriff Arpaio is responsible enough to attempt to "uphold" the constitution.

Ha. As if the US Government is a victim. And Sheriff Joe does not speak for me or represent me.

I want to verify the birth certificate. Me. And I have as much right to verify it as any employer -- including a local, state, or government employer. It doesn't mean Obama has to show it at my request, because enough voters don't have the same standards. But, none-the-less, I have absolutely every right to ask to verify its authenticity.

He didn't allow anyone in the public to verify its authenticity with the Hawaii Department of Health, and I didn't vote for him either time and he didn't need my vote.

That's all there is and I don't deserve to be accused of being a racist for having my position. I was never accused of being a racist before Obama's birth certificate was an 'issue.' My life says I am not and I think you open yourself up to accusations of being oppressive and exploitative of the black experience, acting like 'racism' is a necessary factor in questioning of the authenticity of Obama's alleged birth certificates.

Do you deserve to be called 'racially oppressive' and 'exploitative' based on this isolated issue?

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
Do you deserve to be called 'racially oppressive' and 'exploitative' based on this isolated issue?

Well look, seriously. If a black man demands to see President Obama's birth certificate, nobody would claim that its a racist issue.

However, historically, racists are identified by the practice of holding different standards for people of different races.

Maybe the issue came up in the past, about some other Presidents, who were white men, but nobody seems to recall at time when the President was required to release his Birth Certificate to the public, so we could all inspect it, to see if the person whom "we employ" has the right to take the job.

I don't even think people generally ask to see their Police Chiefs or Sheriff's private documents, to prove the Chief is a legal resident, or citizen, of the locality he serves, even though he serves all the public in that locale. We presume, he has to show these things to some particular individuals, but not to all of us.

I think it would be funny, if a mexican looking american stopped Sheriff Arpaio on the street, and demanded to see his papers. Somehow, I don't think the Sheriff would appreciate the fact that the citizen was simply being concerned about the Sheriff's behavior, and thus seeking proof that the right person was in that job, given that although looking Mexican, this citizen is in fact the employer of the Sheriff and thus has the right to feel justified in "checking" things are ok. And I don't mean the Sheriff showing his badge, but the private documents that allow him to wear that badge.

See?

It's not too difficult to understand.

Different standards for people of different race, implies unjust discrimination.

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
But, none-the-less, I have absolutely every right to ask to verify its authenticity.

You can demand anything you like, but that does notmean you get what you want. A President does not even need a BC.... also funny how you o not demand to see Trumps, I wonder why that is? Actually, I do not wonder why at all!

He didn't allow anyone in the public to verify its authenticity

Which previous Presidents have? It is a private document, it is none of your business.