Moderated Obama birth certificate CT / SSN CT / Birther discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
Robert Prey said:
Another ad hominem attack. Pathetic.
Click to expand...

No, the blatant incompetence of the Maricopa County Sheriff's department in the performance of their official investigative and law enforcement duties speak materially to the validity of their investigation purporting that Obama's birth certificate has been forged. Since all the evidence in question is expert testimony, thus relying upon expert judgment and reasonable absence of bias or malice, the disposition of the alleged experts and those who hired them is of utmost importance. If you believe that police misconduct in a case is not fodder for a successful legal defense, you probably haven't spent much time interacting with the American legal system.
 
Robert Prey said:
What the state of Hawaii believed is irrelevant to the truth of a forged document.
Click to expand...

This statement is meaningless. Under "full faith and credit," what the secretaries of state of Arizona and Hawaii believe is the only thing that matters.

Further, the "truth of a forged document" is simply you trying once again to bluster your way past arguments that have been raised, duly examined, and settled conclusively. There is no credible evidence that the birth certificate has been forged. That the original claimants thereto have declined to relinquish their point is comical and unfortunate, but has no basis in reality.

You have both the science and legal aspects entirely wrong. Entirely.
 
Robert Prey said:
None of the specific allegations have been "explained."
Click to expand...

What? Sheriff Joe's "investigator" has explained the specific allegations. They had a press conference & everything. Your problem is that all of those allegations have been debunked.
 
Robert Prey said:
A portrait of the ultimate straw man. None of this has anything to do with a forged birth certificate. Try to stay on point.
Click to expand...

When did this thread become ONLY about the birth certificate? The post adddresses the wider topic as described in your OP.
 
Robert Prey said:
What the state of Hawaii believed is irrelevant to the truth of a forged document.
Click to expand...

Why is the issuing authority irrelevant to the authenticity of a document?

Does this mean that a forged document that is convincing enough should be considered genuine even if it conflicts with, or is missing from, the records of an issuing authority, because their statement is irrelevant? The world must be filled with teenagers carrying fake ID to buy beer who are relieved to know this.
 
Ladewig said:
wouldn't Nathan have a moral obligation and duty to take up arms against the current federal government in an effort to defend the Constitution and everything it stands for?
Click to expand...

I too tend to ask this question to many CT'ers - if the situation is so utterly inviolation of the Constitution why isn't the claimer in armed revolt against it?

They usually try to side step the question and I usually follow it up with; so you won't got to armed insurrection on this issue, so what will cause you to go to rebellion?
 
Hans said:
I too tend to ask this question to many CT'ers - if the situation is so utterly inviolation of the Constitution why isn't the claimer in armed revolt against it?

They usually try to side step the question and I usually follow it up with; so you won't got to armed insurrection on this issue, so what will cause you to go to rebellion?
Click to expand...

What the Founders said is that such a revolt would only be justified after a long train of abuses.

"Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government."

That's how the Founders saw it. How do you see it?
 
Hans said:
I too tend to ask this question to many CT'ers - if the situation is so utterly inviolation of the Constitution why isn't the claimer in armed revolt against it?
Click to expand...

That's why we have elections as well as procedures for impeachment.
 
JayUtah said:
This statement is meaningless. Under "full faith and credit," what the secretaries of state of Arizona and Hawaii believe is the only thing that matters.

Further, the "truth of a forged document" is simply you trying once again to bluster your way past arguments that have been raised, duly examined, and settled conclusively. There is no credible evidence that the birth certificate has been forged. That the original claimants thereto have declined to relinquish their point is comical and unfortunate, but has no basis in reality.

You have both the science and legal aspects entirely wrong. Entirely.
Click to expand...

Baloney.
 
JayUtah said:
No, the blatant incompetence of the Maricopa County Sheriff's department in the performance of their official investigative and law enforcement duties speak materially to the validity of their investigation purporting that Obama's birth certificate has been forged. Since all the evidence in question is expert testimony, thus relying upon expert judgment and reasonable absence of bias or malice, the disposition of the alleged experts and those who hired them is of utmost importance. If you believe that police misconduct in a case is not fodder for a successful legal defense, you probably haven't spent much time interacting with the American legal system.
Click to expand...

Baloney.
 
Straw Man said:
I'd think what the state of Hawaii know is not irrelevant about what you say is a forged document issued by them. They are the ones that provided it, after Mr Obama asked them to. I'm sure that they would have been the first to call foul if what they sent didn't match up to what they released.
Click to expand...

Do you understand what it means to have a Constitutional Crisis???
 
JayUtah said:
It applies to a county sheriff purporting to act within the capacity of his office. He has no jurisdiction to investigate the validity of a birth certificate that has been certified by competent duly elected state authority. End of discussion.
Click to expand...

Baloney.
 
Robert Prey said:
What the Founders said is that such a revolt would only be justified after a long train of abuses.

"Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government."

That's how the Founders saw it. How do you see it?
Click to expand...

You should have been in rebellion many years ago - why are you hestiating?
 
Robert Prey said:
That's why we have elections as well as procedures for impeachment.
Click to expand...
Robert, if there was credible evidence Obama was ineligible to be POTUS, wouldn't the GOP controlled House have started impeachment proceedings long ago? Come on, these are the folks who impeached Clinton for lying about consentual sex!
Robert Prey said:
False.
Click to expand...
Robert Prey said:
Baloney.
Click to expand...
I submit that these two quotes of yours actually are descriptive of virtually every argument you've made about this subject.
 
Robert Prey said:
That's why we have elections as well as procedures for impeachment.

BazBear said:
Robert, if there was credible evidence Obama was ineligible to be POTUS, wouldn't the GOP controlled House have started impeachment proceedings long ago? Come on, these are the folks who impeached Clinton for lying about consentual sex!
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Good point. Perhaps congress is now in on the CT along with officials from Hawaii.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom