Moderated Obama birth certificate CT / SSN CT / Birther discussion

[fullflavormenthol]

Why indeed?

 

[Juniversal]

To wit:

The Maui Tea Party hates Obama and everything he stands for. Why don't they produce birth certificates that match what Birthers claim is readily available for the President? After all, would it not be damning if thousands (ha!) of patriotic folks with three corner hats walked up to the CNN offices with long form birth certificates that they ordered this week? Imagine the drama! The impact!

Why haven't they done so?

Why indeed?

You wont get an answer. There's no room for logic in CT's!!

 

[Grizzly Bear]

Indeed. I keep thinking back to the 1992 election and the way Bush the Elder fussed and tussled with Ross Perot to the point where Clinton got elected mostly because people were fed up with such nonsense. Especially when Bush was doing it all in the light of a quickly souring economy.

I'm not much amused at the party destroying itself with this conspiracy, but I'll be voting independent if a birther makes the nomination by some twisted bs...

 

[JudeBrando]

Strictly hypothetically, just so you understand, just for argument's sake, but assume that it is shown conclusively that Obama is not constitutionally qualified to be President of the United States and was deliberately fraudulent. Again, hypothetically, just for argument and discussion, what do you think should happen in such a situation?

 

[CptColumbo]

Strictly hypothetically, just so you understand, just for argument's sake, but assume that it is shown conclusively that Obama is not constitutionally qualified to be President of the United States and was deliberately fraudulent. Again, hypothetically, just for argument and discussion, what do you think should happen in such a situation?

Hypothetically, what would you and the rest of the "birthers" do if you ever actually read the Constitution and understood it.

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

BaC, one simple straight forward question.

If the document that has been put forward by Obama has been certified by the state of Hawaii as 100% accurate and truthful is not believed to be true, why would any other document from the same agency regardless of its content be believed?

It's the classic Sacred List. Even the evilest of evil dare not touch the Sacred List. They'll keep it hidden away, produce other evidence to support their claim, but will never, ever, ever alter or outright fake the Sacred List. It's just unconscionable.

Actually, the birthers' goal is not the revelation of any kind of truth; it is merely to maintain doubt or pile on doubt and suspicion to the point where the resolution they seek is forced, regardless of reality. It's all politics.

Strictly hypothetically, just so you understand, just for argument's sake, but assume that it is shown conclusively that Obama is not constitutionally qualified to be President of the United States and was deliberately fraudulent. Again, hypothetically, just for argument and discussion, what do you think should happen in such a situation?

What would one do if, suddenly, things began falling up? There are things that have such a low statistical probability that they are simply not worth considering. That you feel the likelihood of Obama being "not constitutionally qualified to be President of the United States" is high is nothing more that your failure to account for all the necessary variables in the equation.

There is such a thing as "empty calorie" information; it tastes great, but all it does is weigh you down.

 

[Unabogie]

Strictly hypothetically, just so you understand, just for argument's sake, but assume that it is shown conclusively that Obama is not constitutionally qualified to be President of the United States and was deliberately fraudulent. Again, hypothetically, just for argument and discussion, what do you think should happen in such a situation?

Wait, I thought we've moved on to the "legal, yet somehow containing devastatingly embarrassing extraneous info" scenario?

 

[patchbunny]

Boyntonstu: care to answer my question? The Maui Tea Party hates Obama and everything he stands for. Why don't they produce birth certificates that match what Birthers claim is readily available for the President? After all, would it not be damning if thousands (ha!) of patriotic folks with three corner hats walked up to the CNN offices with long form birth certificates that they ordered this week? Imagine the drama! The impact!

Why haven't they done so?

Why indeed?

Oh, I like that one.

 

[332nd]

Strictly hypothetically, just so you understand, just for argument's sake, but assume that it is shown conclusively that Obama is not constitutionally qualified to be President of the United States and was deliberately fraudulent. Again, hypothetically, just for argument and discussion, what do you think should happen in such a situation?

We abandon the well known US Constitution & adopt (fully) the lesser known (but way cooler) Secret Constitution, that was hidden by the Masons in the cornerstone of the White House. According to that document,

"Any man who manages to hold the office of President of the United States for 2 years while being ineligible under the Public Constitution will be allowed to chose either document as standing law of the United States.
To either document, he may add up to, but no more than, 5 amendments at his whim.

Also, if he be from a country not in the Americas, Europe, or Asia he shall become president for life.

Lastly, his free murder count goes from 12 to 17"

Secret Constitution, Amendment 22

 

[Arus808]

On Anderson Cooper 360, tonight, he once against tackles the Birther conspiracy theories.

It's a partial video of his segment (there is at least another 15 minutes of interview with Gary Tuchman and with Trump over the phone)
http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/04/25/birthers.obama.hawaii/index.html?hpt=C1

And for the first time, Chiyome Fukino is interviewed on tv.


Transcript of the video above:
http://www.livedash.com/transcript/anderson_cooper_360/49/CNN/Monday_April_25_2011/586968/


Most telling (from the transcript):

00:06:53 There's quite a bit of irony over this original birth certificate debate.
00:06:56 And that is the original documents are no longer even certified by the state.
00:07:01 The health department says president obama or any other hawaiian could still go through the process of getting one, but either way they're no longer supposed to be used for official purposes.
00:07:10 Only the computer-generated ones will do.
​

In the article linked (the video above):

Obama could file a Freedom of Information Act request to view his original birth certificate and make copies. But at this point, the White House maintains, nothing will satisfy the doubters.


Not in the transcript or the article, but in the full episode; Gary Tuchman further clarified on the FOIA -

1) A person could file for an FOIA request to see and get copies of the long form
2) it will take weeks to get those copies
3) ONLY 1 person has done that, since April 2010 - a self proclaimed "birther" filed an FOIA request, becaue he wanted to see what was on his COLB.
4) said copies will not be certified by the state .since they no longer certify the long form. ONLY the computer generated ones that are currently issued today


So all this requesting for the long form will actually do no good. Because it won't be certified by the STate of Hawaii, it would serve no purpose as to say that its a "genuine" copy. And birthers will just use the 'its not official cause Hawaii will not certify it" bull crap.

If the full episode (or at least the first half) is posted online, I'll try to link to it.

The interview with Trump over the phone is pretty hilarious.. Oh and Trump is a liar.

 

[fullflavormenthol]

Here is what would happen. President elect Obama would file a FOIA request and get the photocopy of the long form. Birther would ask, "Why didn't he provide it sooner. It must be a fake. The doctor (if he is still alive) can't provide exact information from memory as to if the mother was breast feeding when they left the hospital/De Vattel wrote that he wasn't a citizen/none of those people can legally be president and keep the argument going.

Whereas...I run for president when I turn 35 and no one blinks an eye, even though my COLB doesn't contain the information.

Oh...and there are three types of birther I have encountered. 1.)The ones who are just asking questions, and demand more than any other citizen has to require. 2.)The ones who believe that de Vattel is higher than the Constitution, and 3.)The ones that believe that anyone who wasn't a natural born citizen at the time of the Constitution being law can't run, which means that women and non-whites can't be President. So I have learned to generally laugh at these people.

 

[cwalner]

Strictly hypothetically, just so you understand, just for argument's sake, but assume that it is shown conclusively that Obama is not constitutionally qualified to be President of the United States and was deliberately fraudulent. Again, hypothetically, just for argument and discussion, what do you think should happen in such a situation?

well, in that hypothetical situation, according to the constitution, the only recourse would be for congress to begin impeachment hearings and remove Obama from office if they get enough votes. That is the only constitutional remedy to remove a sitting president, regardless of how he/she got there.

 

[cwalner]

3.)The ones that believe that anyone who wasn't a natural born citizen at the time of the Constitution being law can't run, which means that women and non-whites can't be President. So I have learned to generally laugh at these people.

wait, what?

according to that nobody alive today can be president because nobody alive today was yet born at the time of the Constitution becoming law.

Go, Anarchy!

 

[fezzic]

Strictly hypothetically, just so you understand, just for argument's sake, but assume that it is shown conclusively that Obama is not constitutionally qualified to be President of the United States and was deliberately fraudulent. Again, hypothetically, just for argument and discussion, what do you think should happen in such a situation?

IANAL.

The only legal way to remove a sitting President, as far as I know, other than his resigning his office is for Congress to impeach him. That he was not qualified for the office is not material, since he was sworn in, to his retaining the office if he chose not to resign so the only way to remove such a person would be by impeachment. There is no other Constitutional process available.

Presumably his not being meeting the Constitutional requirements would constitute a "crime" probably within the meaning of High Crimes and Misdemenor, but it would be up to the House to indict and the Senate (by 2/3 vote) to convict and remove such an individual. One can speculate about the probability that a Democratic Senate would choose to convict a President from their own party unless there was some extraneous event of some infamy or the general public really pushed on the issue.

It would definitely be a Constitutional crisis, more so if a method other than resignation or impeachment is tried, but since the chances of proving that the current President is not qualified to hold the office is virtually non-existent it is currently idle speculation and moot until something actually changes.

 

[catsmate]

In the UK that's still what you get, you only get the signature of the Clarke that fills it out and stamps it though. A Birth Certificate can't be taken as proof of identity without supporting documentation in the UK though.

Today all you get here is an A4 computer printed cer wit the signature of the clerk and a rubber stamp. The old ones were Ledger sized (or thereabouts), written by hand, and has signatures of the clerk, Registrar and whoever notarised, it with the seals of the Registry and the notary/commissioner.
Ah well, progress.

 

[KDLarsen]

You know, with all those investigators going to Hawaii and not finding anything, you'd have to wonder how hard they were even trying in the first place:

HONOLULU — Lost in the renewed scrutiny into President Barack Obama's birth records is the fact that anyone can walk into a Hawaii vital records office, wait in line behind couples getting marriage licenses and open a baby-blue government binder containing basic information about his birth.

Highlighted in yellow on page 1,218 of the thick binder is the computer-generated listing for a boy named Barack Hussein Obama II born in Hawaii, surrounded by the alphabetized last names of all other children born in-state between 1960 and 1964.

This is the only government birth information, called "index data," available to the public.

So far this month, only The Associated Press and one other person had looked at the binder, according to a sign-in sheet viewed Wednesday in the state Department of Health building. The sheet showed about 25 names of people who have seen the document since March 2010, when the sign-in sheet begins.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/nation/7534244.html

 

[headscratcher4]

Boyntonstu: care to answer my question? The Maui Tea Party hates Obama and everything he stands for. Why don't they produce birth certificates that match what Birthers claim is readily available for the President? After all, would it not be damning if thousands (ha!) of patriotic folks with three corner hats walked up to the CNN offices with long form birth certificates that they ordered this week? Imagine the drama! The impact!

Why haven't they done so?

Why indeed?

I think the answer is coincidence. It is a coincidence that thousands (ha!) of Hawaii tea party member have not up to the CNN offices with long form birth certificates that they ordered this week.

 

[A'isha]

1) A person could file for an FOIA request to see and get copies of the long form
2) it will take weeks to get those copies
3) ONLY 1 person has done that, since April 2010 - a self proclaimed "birther" filed an FOIA request, becaue he wanted to see what was on his COLB.

This means that the copy of the 1995 certificate supposedly obtained in March of this year by Miki Booth's "friend" is absolutely fake. And that the Danae copy is possibly fake as well, unless Danae was born male or the "within the last year" is from 2011 forward, not April 2010 forward.

 

[Go Down Moses]

I'm sorry if it has been already posted, but have you guys seen this article be the Associated Press?


http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=13442571

Lost in the renewed scrutiny into President Barack Obama's birth records is the fact that anyone can walk into a Hawaii vital records office, wait in line behind couples getting marriage licenses and open a baby-blue government binder containing basic information about his birth.

Highlighted in yellow on page 1,218 of the thick binder is the computer-generated listing for a boy named Barack Hussein Obama II born in Hawaii, surrounded by the alphabetized last names of all other children born in-state between 1960 and 1964. This is the only government birth information, called "index data," available to the public.

So far this month, only The Associated Press and one other person had looked at the binder, according to a sign-in sheet viewed Wednesday in the state Department of Health building. The sheet showed about 25 names of people who have seen the document since March 2010, when the sign-in sheet begins.

The image accompanying the article is pretty telling, in my opinion:

If Trump's boys have been investigating, it appears they've overlooked some very basic evidence.

 

[Taarkin]

"was born in Kenya" is written in yellow ink right next to his name, cunningly masked by the highlighting.