Eligibility Update: Fox News Poses Certificate Question, Dr. Polarik Speaks Out on Fox’s Coverage, Mario Apuzzo on COLB
As WorldNetDaily reports, the Fox News Nation site has introduced the discussion question, “Should Obama Release Birth Certificate? Or Is This Old News?” in response to White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs’ recent response to a question on the President’s birth certificate. As of the end of the day today (5/29), the posting has garnered nearly 1,700 comments, making it one of the top issues being discussed:
One contributor to the page had this to say: “Not old news, just a burning question that needs an answer, and while your at it, get some of that other hidden, sealed information uncovered like, his passport to Indonesia, his college records, etc. There are so many unanswered questions, and frankly you all dropped the ball before the election.”
The visibility of the Obama birth certificate issue has also been raised by a new national billboard campaign initiated by Joseph Farah, editor and chief executive officer of WND. Launched just over a week ago, the campaign has raised about $55,000 and begun erecting billboards that ask the question, “Where’s the birth certificate?”
The site OfByFor.US.com and their “Flush the COLB” toilet paper initiative is also contributing to the WND billboard campaign as well as helping sponsor The Right Side of Life by allowing people to send a roll to a federal representative or as a novelty item signifying what the certification is really worth in determining eligibility.
In response to Fox News’ coverage of Mr. Gibbs’ response concerning the online certification of live birth, Dr. Ron Polarik, one of two individuals who have gone on record via affidavit in the case Keyes v. Lingle attesting to the lack of authenticity of the certification, wrote the following email to Fox anchor Bret Baier (h/t TheObamaFile)…
Dear Bret:
Congratulations to you and FOXNEWS for being the first news agency to bring Obama’s birth certificate controversy into the mainstream.
This controversy, however, goes far beyond the question of Obama’s citizenship status — it also raises the specter of President Obama’s involvement in document fraud.
What the Obama campaign actually posted on its website on June 12, 2008, is a forged document image and not a real copy of Obama’s birth certificate. I spent five months conducting intensive research on the document images alleged to have been made from Obama’s “original birth certificate.” My research proves that the document image posted on Obama’s website and on other pro-Obama websites, was fabricated using Photoshop, and that no such document actually exists.
My final research report and executive summary can be found here: http://polarik.blogtownhall.com
Obama’s campaign manufactured this bogus birth certificate to deceive the American public into believing that Obama was born in Hawaii, and was therefore eligible to be President. This forgery was also used to derail attempts to see his actual original birth certificate which undoubtedly contains birth information that differs from what his fabricated birth certificate image shows. The reason why Obama still refuses to release his original birth certificate is because it would confirm that he is not eligible to be President, that he lied about his history and citizenship status, and that he engaged in document fraud to hide these facts from the American public.
To help cover up this scam, Obama’s campaign called upon patently partisan, pro-Obama “fact checking sites” like Factcheck and Politifact to proffer, protect, and promote this fabricated image as being a real copy of Obama’s actual birth certificate, and to engage in slander and public ridicule of anyone having the audacity to question its validity.
In every news conference that he’s had up until now, Obama and his Press Secretary have side-stepped all of the questions raised about his birth certificate, including the use of intimidation of reporters to do so. When Press Secretary Gibbs said that “The state of Hawaii provided a copy, with a seal, of the president’s birth,” it was a bald-faced lie. Hawaii never produced a Certification of Live Birth document for Obama, with a date-stamp of June 12, 2007.
Furthermore, Hawaii denied that Obama, a family member, or someone Obama personally authorized, ever requested and received a copy of this alleged Certification of Live Birth (COLB) in June 2007 or in any other month of that year.
Not one governmental official, in Hawaii or in any other place in the nation, has ever seen this COLB document in person, let alone validate it as genuine.
The reason is simple: this document does not exist and never did. Hawaii announced that it has Obama’s original birth record, but has refused to reveal what’s on that record. Hawaii never confirmed where Obama was born, and if he had been born in Honolulu as Obama claims, Hawaii would not have any reason to withhold that information.
What has unfolded is a genuine conspiracy to commit document fraud. This bogus birth certificate constitutes a false identification document, and is a violation of federal forgery laws punishable by five years in prison (for each count) and up to a $250,000 fine. Not only were federal forgery laws violated, but also Hawaiian forgery laws, as well.
That, Bret, is the untold story here. Why would a President risk committing document fraud just to prevent his original birth certificate from ever being seen?
The answer must be that the information it contains would spell the end of his Presidency and his charade as well. He would be exposed as a fraud and a usurper, and the political landscape would be forever changed, along with how the media shapes public policy.
People say that Obama released a genuine copy of his actual Certification of Live Birth.
- He never did, and they are mistaken, misinformed, or misleading others if they do.
People say that Hawaii confirmed this copy to be Obama’s actual Certification of Live Birth.
- Hawaii never confirmed a request for, nor the printing of, this Certification of Live Birth.
People say that Factcheck verified this image as Obama’s actual Certification of Live Birth.
- Factcheck was complicit in falsifying this image and passing it off as a genuine scan.
Obama also knows that this image is fake and doesn’t contain his actual birth information.
That’s why Obama and his staff refuse to answer any questions about his birth certificate.
Mario Apuzzo, attorney for Plaintiffs in Kerchner v. Obama, expressed a similar sentiment as that of Dr. Polarik’s in a recent posting (excerpted):
According to Obama and Gibbs, this digital document alone is supposed to allow Obama to qualify to be President of the United States and Commander in Chief of the Military. According to them, this electronic image alone is sufficient to prove that Obama is a U.S. citizen and therefore qualified to have the full power of the executive vested in him. It is unbelievable that Obama would expect the American people to grant him such license over their lives based simply upon an electronic image on a computer screen. It is even more unbelievable that the Electoral College, our Congress, political institutions, security forces, and media would allow him to get away with it. This document, which in its paper form is undoubtedly a legal document, has no probative value given that it was posted by some unknown person on the internet as a digital image without following any prescribed electronic media security protocols. We know that digital images can be easily manipulated through computer technology. See http://technology.findlaw.com/articles/01102/010555.html for an explanation of the need to follow defined federal and state standards when it comes to electronic/digital information transmittal of legal documents. If Obama expects this digital image of a COLB to have such unprecedented value which allows him to be President of the United States, then he should at least show that the electronic image he posted meets electronic/digital security standards.
While not officially confirmed, the authenticity of the COLB computer image has been questioned by at least two digital image experts who have concluded that the COLB image is a forgery.
Obama says he was born in a hospital. A birth certificate provides the name of the hospital where the birth occurred and the name of the doctor delivering the baby. The COLB does not have this vital corroborating information.
When Obama was born in 1961, Hawaii had in effect the Certificate of Hawaiian Birth Program which it established in 1911 and which it terminated in 1972. Someone could under Act 96 get a certificate claiming a Hawaiian birth even if he was physically born in Kenya by an adult or parent falsely claiming to the director of health that he was born in Hawaii when in fact he was born in Kenya. Hence, because of the contradictory evidence that exists regarding where he was born, plaintiffs are entitled to pierce the alleged COLB and examine the file that is in the possession of the Hawaiian Secretary of State which may contain a sworn application/petition in which some party set forth circumstantially all the facts upon which the application rested and supporting sworn affidavits of witnesses. The file could also contain the results of the Secretary or his designee examinations under oath of the applicant or other person who may have been cognizant of the alleged facts regarding the application/petition along with other documentary evidence that they may have obtained as a result of issuing subpoenas for books and other papers. …
Not eve the Hawaii Department of Home Lands accepts a certification of live birth (COLB) as conclusive evidence of being a native of Hawaii for its Homeland program. From its web site: “In order to process your application, DHHL utilizes information that is found only on the original Certificate of Live Birth, which is either black or green. This is a more complete record of your birth than the Certification of Live Birth (a computer-generated printout). Submitting the original Certificate of Live Birth will save you time and money since the computer-generated Certification requires additional verification by DHHL.”
Despite the numerous and more-to-come law suits that have been and will be filed against Obama, he continues to refuse to release his original birth certificate and has opted rather to spend large sums of money using lawyers to defend himself and to cause the courts and litigants to expend large amounts of time and resources pursuing litigation against him and other third parties. He relies on procedural and other threshold arguments such as jurisdiction, justiciability, standing, political question, separation of powers, mootness, and ripeness rather than simply produce his original birth certificate and make a motion for summary judgment with prejudice as to the merits so that no other future cases can be brought against him and others which would then put an end not only to the ongoing drain of money, time, and other resources but also to the great public outrage that continues to be brew regarding his constitutional eligibility.
For some unknown reason and relying on state privacy laws, Obama has refused to publicly release his original Certificate of Live Birth (BC) even though in his book, Dreams from My Father, he stated that he has it.
Obama and his half-sister have each stated that he was born in different hospitals in Hawaii. In November 2004, in an interview with the Rainbow Newsletter, Maya told reporters her half-brother Sen. Barack Obama, was born on Aug. 4, 1961, at Queens Medical Center in Honolulu. But Obama has said he was born at Kapi’olani Medical Center for Women & Children. Changing her story, in February 2008 Maya then told reporters for the Honolulu Star-Bulletin that Obama was born at the Kapi’olani Medical Center for Women and Children.
On February 5, 2008, Madelyn Dunham was still alive, but the Obama campaign did not make her available for interviews with the media. Obama’s maternal grandmother surely would have known where her grandson was born but Obama refused the media access to her. http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2004164387_brodeur05m.html.
Neither of the two or any other hospital in Hawaii or anywhere in the world has been willing to come forward and claim its place in history as being the hospital where the first African-American President was born. There is no Hawaiian hospital that has confirmed that Obama and/or his mother were present in any such hospital at the time of Obama’s alleged birth in Honolulu. Not a single person has come forward, not a doctor, nurse, hospital administrator, nor any one else to confirm Obama’s birth in Hawaii.
Nor has the American public heard from any other person who could confirm Obama’s birth in Hawaii. …
Other than the COLB and the two newspaper announcements whose basis for information is the same single source, there does not exist one known corroborating medical or other document of any kind which shows that Obama was born in Hawaii. Obama’s birth notices appeared in both Honolulu Sunday newspapers on August 13, 1961. The information for those birth notices comes straight from the state Health Department’s Vital Records Division. Hence, the birth announcements, not having their source of information in some other place, do not add any corroboration to the COLB. Other secondary evidence may include baptismal or circumcision certificates, hospital birth records, or affidavits of persons having personal knowledge about the facts of birth. Other documentary evidence can be early census, school, or family bible records, newspaper files, or insurance papers. No such documents have been produced for the American public.
No public official in Hawaii has publicly confirmed that Obama was born in Hawaii. Director of Hawaiian Department of Heath, Fukino, said she has “personally seen and verified that the Hawaii State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures,” but she failed to say that the certificate shows that Obama was born in Hawaii.
We have not heard from one international, federal, state, or local police or security agency that Obama’s birth place has been officially confirmed. …
Obama has refused all effort to have him release the following documents, relying on sealing of records and/or privacy laws: Punahou High School records, Occidental College records, Columbia College records, Columbia Thesis paper, Harvard College records, Selective Service Registration, medical records, Illinois State Senate records, Illinois State Senate schedule, Law practice client list, Certified Copy of original Birth Certificate, Harvard Law Review articles that were published, University of Chicago scholarly articles, exit and entry immigration records covering all of Obama’s travels out of the United States; passports; and record of baptism, if any.
Fightthesmears.com and factcheck.org have since maintained silence on the birth place issue after the questionable COLB was posted on the internet.
Obama has remained silent and has not declared publicly after his COLB and place of birth were questioned that he was born in Hawaii.
No member of the media, political party, the Executive Branch of Government, Congress, other political institution, Judiciary, or law enforcement entity, nor has Speaker Nancy Pelosi stated that she, has publicly stated that he or she has independently confirmed that Obama was born in Hawaii.
This Himalayan Mountain of contradictory evidence is sufficient to cause the prima facie presumption of the COLB to fall. Obama therefore now has the burden to come forward with competent evidence to conclusively prove that he was born in Hawaii. To date, he has failed to come forward with such evidence. Hence, under these circumstances, how can the American people in good faith conclude that Obama was born in Hawaii? How did Obama in good conscious twice take the oath to be President on January 20th when so many Americans have put forward all this contradictory evidence regarding where he was born and he refuses to come forward with any other convincing evidence (like a certified copy of his original birth certificate) showing that he was born in Hawaii?
We cannot place any trust in what Mr. Gibbbs said. He and Mr. Obama have to do a much better job than Mr. Gibbs’ feeble and floundering effort at answering Mr. Kinsolving’s simple question. Obama should just do the right and simple thing for everyone’s sake and produce the real evidence of where he was born rather than have his political cronies dodge the question for him.
The above is only a portion of Mr. Apuzzo’s posting; he has much more available to peruse on his site.
For those who oppose questioning this President’s eligibility or, worse, think the time is past to do such questioning (as if there’s a statute of limitations of some sort to the eligibility question), it has been repeated many times the “mountain of evidence” that is available to substantiate this President’s background. The issue is whether or not it is to be released. And while it is proper for their to be privacy laws in place to protect the illegitimate dissemination of such documentation, I would argue that the People’s right to know about the background qualifications of their President is more than established in Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution.
If the President is a public figure, then we, the People, have a right to know about his background. After all, we need to be able to know who, exactly, it is that’s in charge of protecting the nation.
A current listing of citizen grand jury updates and eligibility lawsuits can be found here.
-Phil
[...] in his book. Without proving that he is American-born, he is disqualified from the Presidency. Fox News poses the certificate question and author Devvy Kidd discusses the [...]
hey Henry Ann Dunham lived there for almost her due date and the law says it’s live in the usa 5 years “AFTER” not prior to turnining 16.does anyone listen or comprehend the words wrtten in the contitution ,if not read it and listen to the words comming out of your mouth?if you know so little about this man you say is a citizen have him prove it? show us his records ? that’s all it will take PROOF?
well I can see some more light needs to be shed on Obama?finally starting to the emperor has no clothes or in this case papers.Henry Ann Dunham meet and married Obama’s father(Obams admits in his book he didn’t know if his mother was actually married he took “her word for it”)When they were married in1961 they went to lve in kenya with MOMMA Obama.Momma obamma didn’t like for one minute that her son married this “White gril” it(1961)it was tabou a muslim drunken or not has his weakness,but to marry one she couldn’t face the embarassment of her village,so Henry A. Dunham/Obama,his momma.Realizing this marriage wasn’t going to work out with a Muslim Mommas boy she wants her son to be borned in the USA,but being she was so close to her due date she is refused a ticket ,because no airline would allow a pregant woman that close to her due date to ride in an airplane with out a personal physican? she had been living there and when she goes.So she has to goe the the closest hospital from the villagewhich was Pronical Coast Hospital,Mommabass,Kenyathers attending was none other than Obammas momma’s Momma?LOLThe eye wittiness testomony that she admitted that she was present at his brith.Then Henry Ann Dunham catches the frist flight to Hawaii to register his brith,but she,but says he was borned in hawaii and states the His true brith day as AUGust 4th,!961,but waits 4 days before she dates the record of brith on AUgust 8,1961.She supposely gets her divorce from Obama’s father(NO DOUCMENTS)and meets and marries Obama’s step father”Lolo Soetoro a student of his goverment to be educated from a foriegn schools.He is called back to his home land and goes to work for him apply his trade(Topography) and puts his “adopted son Barry Obama (aka) Barry Soetoro he attends school right away without any papers(ONLY INDONESIAN CITIZENS/OR CHILDREN OF SAID CITIZEN CAN ATTEND SCHOOL)He attended schoolunder the Name of Barry Soetoro>all the way to the schools he atteneded in the USA.He learns the ways of a dedicated little muslim trying to fit in and he does well as a adopted kid of a govt. employee.He,he’s so good they send him to a graduate school where only the most dedicated students will be taught.and learns the Koran and speaks Arabic flawless(which he told with perfect accent?have you tried to speak it that well when you claim you only know a few lines from the Koran?)After so many years of this Henry Ann Soetoro wants a DIVORCE so she moves back to Hawaii dumps her son on his Grand mother and is forced to Raise him because he doesn’t want to leavehe rebells gets heavy into drugs(He had started getting high with grand pa Dunham and Henry Ann Dunhams frist sexual partner(she was just 13 at the time,she would have sex with Frank,Davis(Ped-O-file and his Black wife,he attends to at the best scools on the Island and doesn’t do well because of his drug habits(his mother would abandon him to his grandparents more than once.He graduates and returns to his mother who returned to Indonesia to continue her thing,Then when he turns 20 he get a Indonesian Passport to travel to “Pakistan” a place that was forbidden travel to “ANY AMERICAN” because we had no relations with this country)Then he gets friends like Al-mansour(aks)Don Warden(aks) mentor for the top 3 people who created the terriost group “TheBlack Panthers” (which was seen at a polling place walking right in front of the doors of said polling place were Black american wear black leather sporting batons as they walked)Al_ mansour is at present the “Invesyment Brokers for the 19th richest Arab in the “WORLD”thats why he bows so low to their king i thought he was going to further gays rights right then and thereLOL?(fyi) Obama said he payed for his schooling from student loans Al_Mansour(aka)Don Warden says he was the one that helped him pay for his schooling.Him and Percy Sutton(fyi) The attorney for the Black panthers? got him into harvard with below admittance scores,from Clomubis U.,but we are lead to believe.Hey 8 years on the law board and he wites nutting .His buddy david axlerod says he never worte a thing ,then they find this one paper than was written(obivously by some one else).he graduates as Magna Cum Laide( a title not given to “LAW STUDENTS” he is a Contitutional lwayer(getting the picture now)He draws Leahy to vest him,he claims hes a US Sentor He must be American?So nutting is down to Vett this man,but he thinks that McCain would not qualify either ,since he slipped through he put the hounds on McCain trail to rerail him.(FYI) thats how he won his frist election by disqaulifing his oppents).but when Mcain passed muster by having “BOTH parents being Americans and station on a base that is consifered us soil in defense of said country it blew that,and a little later ask someone out loud who Vetted Obama?so now the fury of the Mob or brithers we are called went searching and found eye witiness testomoney from His own grand mother mouth!started the empeor colthes fading away. Now he has spent above the million dollr mark to hide destroy any paper proof that will reveal the truth?He is Know for going back on his word,like the time when he started this campaign he would accept limits on their campaign.Bt good old david Ael rod figured out how to make Billions on this .He had the banks fore go their securiy checks and didn’t want to have anyone monitoring their cash cow and said they refused the service,this allowed every body and their Illegall Aunt”Cough” able to donate as much and as often as she liked?by keeping it as a low amount she was able to donate $260 dollars.Which she being a foreginerand under a depotion order since 2004 she justgot her a job and free housing(Boston Public Housing) and it is illegall to accept campign funds this is a voter fraud,voliation( to date I have never seen a check made out to her.She has since been busted and has her an other attorney to fight a depotation order from 2004?Thats why hes for amensty,he’s an immgrant himself.I hope they publish this ,because this is just one mans story that has been changed to protect the innocent,and defraud the people to bail out banks who really didn’t need it (GOLDman/Sachs look at their shares and see whos dropped and whose didn’t?)Fyi Obama has a Prime Minister of kenya for a cousin?google that and see what you find out?fact while visiting in his homeland he took part in the campaign of this cousin Odinga and while there he took part in a political oath that allowed his menbership of that foriegin Poticical party? He took the “LOU TRIBAL LOYALITY OATH”This makes him a duel citizen of Kenya under african controls a forigen alliegence to a political party as like this one who when he lost the election he goes on a rampage burning villages and maiming people peace OUT?
[...] time to read a statement by Dr. Ron Polarik, a forensics document examiner. An expert in his field. Click here to his letter to FOX News (Dear Bret). “Obama’s campaign manufactured this bogus birth certificate to deceive the [...]
The eligibility issue goes further than lack of a BC., Document forgery has been proven on 2 documents. Federal and State(HAWAII)5yrs. prison + $250,000 fine for each count. Add the selective service fraudulent doc. and that is 10 yrs. prison so far. Now include the USURPER charge, Life in prison. Moving along to the other charges, massive tax evasion includes his angry, militant, USA hater of a wife, dozens of social security numbers, assassination of Lt. quarles Harris Jr. possessing incriminating evidence against soetoro concerning his passport.(if this one is new to anyone it happen in early 2008 research it) The Fulbright award he received at Occidential. Because he is a foreigner, he would have no idea that ALL AMERICAN males must reg. for selective service prior to their 18th birthday, remember guys? Also, just as an example, the state of Hawaii DOES NOT accept a COLB as proof of being a NATIVE HAWAIIAN in order to take advantage of benifits or homestead properties exclusive to native hawaiians.Native Hawaiians NEED to provide an actual BC. All the evidence needed is there, what is not is justice. The gov. coup perpetrated by all demoncrats and I am sure a number of RINO’s will continue to ignore the constitution and the rule of law. The latest example would be the illegal firing of IG Walpin. The corrupt administration is digging its’ own grave soon to be filled with the bodies of most of the administration and a large percentage of legislators and lawmakers. Any lemmings that wish to debate these facts, good luck to you,and realize that the law firm handling all of the eligibility cases have no recourse other than to continue filing for “more time”. They LEGALLY have only 90days to respond, but that has been illegally pushed back to 120days. I can only image what soetoro’s lawyers will do next, file for more time. I am sure that the lemmings have no idea that it is joe (TOOL) biden’s son’s lawfirm that is handling some of the lawsuits. God helps those who help themselves. Start locally and remove all officials who do not live by the OATH as I have done and all I have served with. I deal with facts , so please if you wish to debate , you better have something worth listening to.
I want to know who asked Obama to prove he is a natural born citizen? John McCain was asked and provide the proof. Obama must have been asked. Who was the individual that asked him? What documents did they review? If this wasn’t done then I would like to know why? This is simple to prove and unless you have something to hide there is no reason to speend in access of $900,000 to keep these record sealed. The people of the United States as per the U.S. constitution have a legal right to make absolutly sure whoever is to become President of the United States is eligible. If the responsible party did not ask Obama for proof then Obama needs to provide proof and the responsible party needs to removed from governemnt. If Obama refuses to prove his eligibility then he needs to be removed from office. No one is above the law including Obama!
HistorianDude is conveying the impression that he is more conversant with the Federal Rules of Evidence than is really the case (or, if he is that conversant, then HistorianDude is guilty of misleading readers).
a Under FRE Rule 301 “the preponderance of the evidence” (50.1% plus) is emphatically NOT the standard required to rebut Obama’s COLB (if it exists). The applicable legal standard is: ANY evidence LESS THAN a preponderance which provides some reasonable basis for differing logical conclusions.
b There are still more applicable Rules of Evidence, conspicuous by their absence in HistorianDude remarks, which undermine the prima facie status of Obama’s COLB (if it exists). In HistorianDude’s imagination Obama’s COLB is unassailable: this is so untrue it’ll make you laugh.
Visit this page http://www.therightsideoflife.com/?p=6240&cpage=1#comment-15261 for a detailed discussion.
c “I know for a fact and from personal experience…that they [COLBs] are absolute legal proof of citizenship,” says HistorianDude. This logical fallacy is known as the “black swan problem”, where it only takes one instance of a black swan to invalidate the claim that “all swans are white”. Black swans were discovered by Englishman John Latham in Australia in 1790, and numerous instances of COLBs being insufficient for passport, security, and other purposes (eg the federal Hawaii Homelands program) have been recorded.
Historiandude- Another would be that the GOP understood that Obama is a natural born citizen.
Natual born of Hawaii? Even that is a laugh.
Let’s see if you can find the intelligence is this statement:
Found this comment in Indiana about Obama:
“live birth certificate or not =he’s a citizen. and his mother DID live here 5 years prior -they weren’t in Kenya that long -her citizenship was always United States -just because she was visiting kenya does not mean she didn’t live in the united States – They granted the certificate based on that -she can’t help where she had the baby -and they don’t take U.S. citizenship away from the baby because mom was somewhere else when she had him -it was done within the given period of time you have to file for the birth certificate in those cases where the mom happens to give birth outside her own country -it’s based on mom -not dad -mom gives birth –
Obama supporters and the GOP for that matter need to get their story straight, obviously he was born in Kenya, and parent was granted a certificate based on the residency requirement. He needs to tell the truth and so do you.
brygenon,
Please see my current Headliner, per the time stamp of this comment, for a more complete context of this issue.
It’s not quite as you would have it spun.
-Phil
Frances says:
Because Hawaii now exclusively uses the short form, as a story in today’s Honolulu Star Bulletin explains: http://www.starbulletin.com/columnists/kokualine/20090606_kokua_line.html
You bear false witness. http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html
Dallas:
Actually, it is exactly the same as far as the law is concerned, as far as the Federal Rules of Evidence are concerned, and as far as any practical consideration of its probative value on the planet Earth is concerned.
It has been more than a years since this rumor first appeared. It is officially a dead fish.
I’m sorry, Dallas, but I cannot characterize that statement as anything other than excruciatingly dumb. What possible reason would Obama have had to “remember” to say that in a speech where it was completely irrelevant?
That is one possibility. It is not exclusive.
Another would be that the GOP understood that Obama is a natural born citizen.
Link to: Obama’s Speech 06/05/09
As the Holy Quran tells us, Be conscious of God and speak always the truth. That is what I will try to do – to speak the truth as best I can….
Part of this conviction is rooted in my own experience. I am a Christian, but my father came from a Kenyan family that includes generations of Muslims
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/world/full-text-of-obamas-speech-at-cairo-20090605-bxmt.html
HistorianDude says:
I need not point out that no such certificate ever materialized, and no effort by the GOP was ever made to challenge Obama’s eligibility.
– no such certificate “ever materialized”, is not the same as never existed. Therefore you must know that the Kenyan Birth certificate is in existence but has not appeared formally in the public eye,yet.
Another set of “choice words” from Obama 06/05/09-
“Part of this conviction is rooted in my own experience. I am a Christian, but my father came from a Kenyan family that includes generations of Muslims.”
– Oops! He forgot to say ‘I was born in America (Hawaii)and I am a Christian’. The conveinience and ease of stating his father’s truthful birthplace and religion, and the restricted speech about himself is very revealing.
– no effort by the GOP was ever made to challenge- if this is true the GOP did an injustice to it’s supporters and the entire system is corrupt. No, I’m afraid they, the elected Democrats and elected Republicans, are fully aware that Obama is Art. 2 Cl. 5 Constitutionally unqualified but are willing to bypass the Constitution for political gains.
Revealing the truthful Long Form where ever he was born, puts
only the birthplace matter to rest. It does not resolve the NBC, citizenship or adoption/name change issues.
Why does Obama continue to refuse to produce his long form BC? The COLB is a fake – not even a good fake. Why did he provide the fake COLB?
HistorianDude,
And the presidential eligibility clause makes no mention of what constitutes natural born citizenship substantiation.
-Phil
KevinJ:
1. The COLB. I have been my family’s historian for more than 30 years, and have in my files hundreds of birth certificates from several states and foreign countries. I know for a fact and from personal experience (i.e. getting two passports for my parents using COLBs just like Obama’s, though from Pennsylvania) that COLBs are birth certificates, and that they are absolute legal proof of citizenship.
2. The regulations of the United States Department of State that explicitly declare a COLB such as Obama’s to be proof of citizenship at birth.
3. The fact that over a year of intense effort by Birthers has been unable to come up with a single piece of evidence that contradicts the COLB. As such, Obama has not merely met the State Department’s burden of proof, he has also met the civil legal standard of “preponderance of evidence.’
As to the doctor and witnesses, I do not know and I do not care. The eligibility requirements found in Article II make no mention of a requirement for witnesses of birth.
Too late.
The certificate remains factually unchallenged. For a real challenge, you need evidence in your favor. you have none.
Challenge whatever you want. Without evidence to contradict the certificate, you have no basis from which to make anyone take your challenge seriously.
Dallas:
Technically, Dallas, this is not “old news,” because it is not news at all. It has always been nothing more than another unsubstantiated Internet rumor. I need not point out that no such certificate ever materialized, and no effort by the GOP was ever made to challenge Obama’s eligibility.
I will continue to answer this question the same way every time it is asked.
1. It would put nothing to rest.
2. Its precedent would establish a de facto judicial filibuster which would be disastrous to the governance of our contry.
[...] better, as it provides another general summation of known evidence to date (my original coverage here): According to Obama and Gibbs, this digital document alone [the certification of live birth] is [...]
This is old news but in case Historian Dude hasn’t see this:
“WMR’s intelligence sources in Africa are reporting that amid the post-election turmoil wracking Kenya, a three-person team (including a possible Korean-American woman)
this same team traveled to Mombasa and dug up a certificate registering the birth of Barack Obama, Jr., to his father, a Kenyan citizen, and mother, an American citizen. The GOP hopes to make the claim that Senator Obama is not eligible to become President of the United States because he was born in a foreign country,….
http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_3349.shtml
Why not put the matter to rest and show the Long Form BC from where ever he was born?
HistorianDude,
Oh, please. My readers are smart enough to realize that I’m being exceptionally sarcastic at my own expense.
Please don’t play into the stereotype that liberals have no sense of humor.
-Phil
earl,
While you are entitled to your opinion, in the case of Ms. Lines’ affidavit, the above comment snippet from you is entirely irrelevant.
-Phil
HistorianDude,
Since you are so certain of an Obama Jr. birth in Hawaii, can you please tell this group what basis you have for coming to this conclusion? Also, what is the name of the delivering/attending physician/midwife? And, who are the witnesses for said birth?
If the only “facts” you can repeat are based on those found on a widely known digital image or based on hearsay from a widely known analysis of a digital image then spare us your contempt. That “document”, even if we had it in our hands is not sufficient if challenged; it says so right at the very bottom. We respectfully would like to challenge that “document” because it is so-o-o easy to forge such a document, especially a digital copy of said “document”.
Phil:
How’s that you ask? You mean besides a total lie aggravated by being put into quotation marks to deceive your readers into believing that is something I said?
No, no, no Phil. That particular mendacious dog will not hunt.
This is what I said:
“We know that your prejudice renders you credulous to a fault, so gullible that you even occasionally post explicit satire and baseless rumor as “news.” We know that you have a deep double standard regarding how you “moderate” your blog, something you have yourself admitted. We know that you proudly embrace the title “right wing extremist” and are unwilling to take a stand against the violent overthrow of the government. And we know that you are angry to a fault. We know lots about you, Phil. You give us all so many opportunities to learn who you are, even if we do not know your name.”
If you are going to quote me, do so honestly and actually quote me. I know that might be asking too much.
Phil:
Phil says:
“Perhaps you would similarly benefit from learning how a lawsuit proceeds. Any expert who is promulgating allegations would likely be asked to verify their credentials for promoting such allegations; I don’t think anyone is denying that this would happen in a given lawsuit.”
Correct. An anonymous affidavit would be tossed well before any evidence is presented to a jury. If they wanted Polarik’s info to be included in the cause of action, Polarik have to attach his real name to it and be willing to be questioned in open court.
Ms. Lines’ expertise is authenticating documents. She can authenticate the COLB without having to see the original. It is the seal, the signature and the date that make it authentic. If the seal, the signature and the date are genuine, then the data on the COLB matches the original. That’s what stamping it, signing it and dating signifies. The reason it is stamped, signed and dated is to confirm the data matches the original. It is the issuing authority’s way of communicating: This is Real. Lines doesn’t need to see the original and she knows it, just like the clerk at the DMV looks at the seal, the signature and the date and knows it is the same as the original. Lines suggesting needing to check if the data on the original matches the COLB was a disingenuous statement for an authenticator of documents.
HistorianDude,
In reality, I haven’t corrected anything; I’ve simply used different words to express my thoughts. The bottom line is that Ms. Lines and Dr. Polarik have both gone on the record to say that since the COLB cannot be relied upon as genuine, one cannot possibly lead on from there to say that it conclusively establishes eligibility, especially since there is no controlling legal authority for such a determination to be made.
See? The conclusion is still the same, regardless of how you would like to see it (or would like me to see it).
-Phil
HistorianDude,
Here, I’ll help you out: “Phil, you’re nothing more than a right-wing, Nazi-like, evil, uncouth pitiful excuse for an individual, extremist who thinks that it’s OK to question our wonderful and sacred President Barack Obama!”
How’s that?
-Phil
Phil:
Thank you for finally correcting your repeated earlier false statements about what Ms. Lines said. You have finally stopped claiming that she said anything about the ACTUAL COLB’s sufficiency for demonstrating Obama’s citizenship.
All she said (as you admit here) as that the ONLINE IMAGE is insufficient to prove its authenticity.
The Phil can be taught!!!
Bravo.
I have only one additional clarification (they are always necessary because of your intense inability to avoid spin).
Not only did she not explicitly agree with “Dr. Polarik” that the online image is a forgery, she directly contradicted his claim that such a conclusion can ever be drawn at all.
Phil:
Come on, Phil. Think for a moment. Have you honestly sacrificed even the pretense of critical thinking skills? “Polarik” has given us a vast amount of material from which to confidently make these judgments.
You judge a person’s competence by a single measure: the quality of his work. I do not need to know a single personal fact about “Dr. Polarik” to know that he is incompetent, because I have examined his work.
As to “fraud,” that would normally be a more subjective judgment except for the fact that “Dr. Polarik” has been prolix in his self aggrandizement and thus provided us with several convincing demonstrations that he is actually a fraud. The first is that he can’t keep his story straight regarding what field his alleged PhD is in, something no real owner of a doctorate would ever do. The second is that he repeatedly has tried to take credit for the work of others, and plagiarism of that sort is fraud by definition. The last is that he has demonstrated explicit ignorance in fields he claims to have vast experience in, giving any serious investigator cause to label those claims fraudulent.
You keep trying very hard to change the subject to his anonymity, and pretend that this is the only basis we have for dismissing him wholesale. But we don’t point out his anonymity to judge him. We point out his anonymity to judge you.
You are so obsequiously credulous that you actively promote an anonymous internet blogger as a “forensic expert” entirely out of a severe case of P.T. Barnum Syndrome.
I did that a few days ago. You censored the post. Why should I anticipate anything different this time?
earl,
While you’re certainly entitled to your opinion, all that either one of us can do at this point is merely speculate on what could have happened.
Perhaps you would similarly benefit from learning how a lawsuit proceeds. Any expert who is promulgating allegations would likely be asked to verify their credentials for promoting such allegations; I don’t think anyone is denying that this would happen in a given lawsuit. Obviously, since we’re dealing with humans, we’re dealing with individuals who are not 100% objective in their world views, hence the reason why an analysis of the person would likely be proper.
-Phil
“Frankly, earl, I don’t think you nor I are qualified enough to judge Ms. Lines’ qualifications. And, again, this would have been the point of cross-examination in absence of yet another expert coming along and allegedly debunking even what Dr. Polarik and Ms. Lines have promulgated.”
What you don’t seem to undertand is that what Polarik and Lines have promulgated(?) would probably never make it to cross-examination. You would benefit from learning how a lawsuit proceeds. Presenting evidence at trial and cross-examination are pretty far into the process. It is unlikely that Polarik and Lines’ promulgations would withstand the test of admissibility. That would happen long before things moved into a courtroom before a jury. What I’m saying is, a jury would probably never hear their promulgations.
I didn’t question Ms Lines’ qualifications. I said she was biased. A documents expert knows the reason documents have a seal, a signature and are dated is to confirm they are authentic. As a document expert, she knows she doesn’t have to check the COLB against the information on the birth certificate. She just needs to confirm the seal and signature are consistent with Hawaii June 2007: to be literal…she could confirm by calling, faxing, visiting Hawaii and asking, Is this your seal? Is the signature the signature of the person who would have been signing COLB’s in June 2007? If they are indeed, then the COLB and the information on it are authentic, and match the original. Since as a documents expert she knows that, suggesting it is necessary to check the original is disingenuous and exposes her bias. Why did she not effort to examine the COLB in Chicago? Someone should have bothered to do that before filing suits against Obama.
bystander,
I will give you the benefit of the doubt in thinking that you may not have seen my comments regarding the points you’ve brought up. So, I’ll repeat, in brief:
1. I maintain that, just as with my site, one should analyze what Dr. Polarik has produced in order to determine whether or not the product is legitimate (it would obviously be helpful to know more about the promoter of such intellectual property, but in light of that, we go with what he have in hand);
2. Dr. Polarik’s affidavit, while filed with the Court, would likely have had to survive cross-examination, and/or — as you’ve correctly pointed out — he would have been subpoenaed to testify as to his credentials supporting his claims;
3. It is my opinion that I do not diminish anyone’s right to hold an opinion simply because they’re not perfectly presentable across the Internet or that they may have had some questionable theories in the past (as in, Philip J. Berg having represented 9/11 “truthers,” as some call them, who believe that 9/11 was an inside job by the US government).
As I’ve already gone over, most notably with HistorianDude, I know no more about Dr. Polarik than I do about you or any other commenter, as I’ve never met any folks on here in person or have had a chance to directly confirm anyone’s validity with respect to whatever they claim. However, I also know that many in the opposition refuse to consider what Dr. Polarik have analyzed and instead have substituted character assassination as a way to diminish his right to an opinion.
Regarding Hawaiian State officials, I again have gone over this rather profusely, and will simply say the following:
1. They have never publicly shown any transaction that confirms who requested the COLB;
2. They have never publicly said that Mr. Obama is eligible for the presidency (nor is it in their authority to do so);
3. They have never publicly categorically claimed that Mr. Obama was born in Hawaii.
-Phil
earl,
I don’t see where we disagree on this point. In fact, I think I already made this case even more clearly, specifically suggesting (once again) that one Dr. Polarik could very well have been asked to come into the Court to verify his credentials, et al.
Frankly, earl, I don’t think you nor I are qualified enough to judge Ms. Lines’ qualifications. And, again, this would have been the point of cross-examination in absence of yet another expert coming along and allegedly debunking even what Dr. Polarik and Ms. Lines have promulgated.
Talk about moving goal posts!
-Phil
Phil,
You are surely aware that certain rules apply to expert witnesses, and if a witness’s bona fides are questionable, a hearing is held to satisfy the court that they are competent to testify. Leaving aside Polarik’s anonymity and lack of qualifications, he would in any case be ineligible to testify because his posting history all over the birther websites – with it’s trail of demonstrable untruths, stunning lack of knowledge in supposed area of expertise (Ducky anyone?), mistakes, angry rants, unsubstantiated claims and contradictions – would be used against him.
It is interesting that none of Polarik’s many inadequacies give you any pause, and you prefer to accept his word over that of the Hawaiian state officials. No court would make the same mistake.
Actualy Phil, I’m a Photoshop expert and I can verfy that Polarik’s ‘analysis’ is rampant [Bleep!] from go to whoa.
Phil says:
June 1, 2009 at 8:14 pm
I’m not sure where you’re coming up with the charge that they “are not accepted in Court,” as this affidavit was clearly filed with the Court. You should have also noticed that I similarly said that both of these affidavits would have to survive cross-examination.”
There is a significant difference between including an affidavit in a complaint and having it accepted into evidence. An anonymous affidavit would not be admitted as evidence, thus would not make it to cross-examination.
Ms Line is an examiner of documents, not a qualified judger of genuineness of the data included therein. Ms Lines exposed her bias. The seal, signature and date, on the COLB confirm the data is genuine. You could confirm that’s true by calling the vital statistics or birth certificate issuing authority of the county in which you live. Go on, check it yourself.
HistorianDude,
Whoa, just a moment there, HD. Since you can no more disprove who Dr. Polarik is any more than I can prove his identity, exactly how do you determine that he is “incompetent” and a “fraud,” outside of a general dislike of people who question this President’s eligibility (or on reference of others who may not like what he’s produced)?
Let’s not make this personal, my dear commenter. This has to do with issues at hand, not personalities.
In fact, let’s do this: since you know no more about Dr. Polarik than you do me, tell me why I’m not competent or I’m not a fraud for promoting the same allegations of presidential eligibility that Dr. Polarik promotes. I’d like to see the results of such an exercise on your part.
-Phil
HistorianDude,
Here is what she actually said:
While she may not have explicitly agreed with Dr. Polarik that the online image is a forgery, she certainly didn’t disagree with the synonymous sentiment that it cannot be relied upon as genuine.
-Phil
earl,
I’m not sure where you’re coming up with the charge that they “are not accepted in Court,” as this affidavit was clearly filed with the Court. You should have also noticed that I similarly said that both of these affidavits would have to survive cross-examination, and since the case never got to that point, we’ll likely never know one way or the other what, exactly would have happened.
In fact, it is just as likely that Dr. Polarik would have been subpoenaed to show up as it would be as likely that his affidavit would have been stricken from the record.
Again, Ms. Lines has already spoken to the genuineness of the document (even if commenting only on the electronic image thereof), and has subsequently referenced going back to the original vault birth certificate to confirm genuineness of the data.
-Phil
Civis Naturaliter Natus:
Like Phil, you seem to be willfully ignoring that actual arguments.
“Dr. Polarik” should be discounted because he is 1) incompetent and 2) a fraud, not because he is anonymous.
Ramjet767:
Neither has any U.S. president in history even been allowed to serve if they were a twin. Or Chinese. Or born in Alaska.
Would you also argue that twins, Chinese or Alaskan natives are not eligible to be president?
Phil:
1) “Dr. Polarik” is anonymous. Therefore, by definition, he has never gone on the record.
2) Sandra Lines has not not declared the COLB a forgery. She has said that such a conclusion cannot be made from an Internet image. That pretty much contradict’s “Dr. Polarik.
Nobody has asked.
Democrat21 says:
June 1, 2009 at 3:52 am
You guys lost.
Your only chance was in January 2009 at the Electors’ Confirmation Hearing by the joint session of Congress. You should have objected. Cheney did not even asked the constitutionally required question (Is there any objection?). That was your only chance.
McCain was history at that point. The GOP would have lost nothing and possibly gain a lot. A perfect political opportunity. You guys blew it. You did not object. That would have been the only way to force SCOTUS to rule on merit. Basically the GOP sided with us democrats to put us in charge. Thank you GOP.
We now control the media, not only through the reporters and editors but through the owners as well. The Constitution is a living document, not a frozen outdated piece of paper, and with the new Supreme Court appointment we will be even more in charge to make sure that some ridiculous parts of it become unenforceable.
Some predictions:
Rush, Hennity and colleagues are already silenced through the owners of their radio station and they will continued to be silenced as they deserve for using their hateful language.
We will be dominating SCOTUS, so none your lawsuits will be heard on merit, because you will never get the minimum 4 votes necessary. They will be all thrown out based on the Standing Doctrine.
The GOP will be non-existent in a few years.
A third party will emerge and we Democrats will crush them.
Give up friends, and join us, promoting the wonderful change that is transforming our country.
*************************************************************************************
Not a chance….I am a Christian woman and I would never get in bed with a DemoCRAP…especially when your leader is the DEVIL….I wouldn’t want to be you when you meet your maker…..that is if you believe you weren’t a monkey first!!The Lord is in control here…NOT YOU!!! It is come to Jesus time…Wake UP!! LOL:)
“Fear God… For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil.” Ecc. 12:13,14
Phil says:
June 1, 2009 at 1:42 pm
“Actually, these two individuals have already stepped forward on the record (just because you refuse to acknowledge the existence of affidavits does not diminish their being part of the Court record).”
Anonymous affidavits are not accepted in court. Therefore Polarik’s affidavit as “XXXXXXXXX” is not part of any Court record.Polarik never said he is a forensic documents expert, he claims to know something about internet images.
“An even better question is, why will no well-regarded forensic document expert step forward to show the COLB is genuine and can subsequently be used to conclude eligibility?”
It’s completely unnecessary. The document authenticates itself. It has a seal, a signature and a date. No document expert is required to authenticate it with those three features. Clerks at the DMV do it every day. It is not Obama’s fault that Polarik didn’t accept the invitation to look at the real document in Chicago.
jinks,
Try TheFoxNation.com.
-Phil
earl,
Actually, these two individuals have already stepped forward on the record (just because you refuse to acknowledge the existence of affidavits does not diminish their being part of the Court record).
An even better question is, why will no well-regarded forensic document expert step forward to show the COLB is genuine and can subsequently be used to conclude eligibility?
-Phil
brygenon,
I’ve already been over this numerous times, and the answer is quite obviously in this posting. If you refuse to accept that, then there’s not enough hot air in the universe with which I could use to convince you otherwise.
-Phil