• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Moderated Obama birth certificate CT / SSN CT / Birther discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
Robert Prey said:
Two copies -- each signed in pen and ink by doctor and nurse. Now which is the original? One or both?????
Click to expand...


One, or neither.

One of them could be the original, they could both be copies of the original, but they can't both be the original.
 
Robert Prey said:
Two copies -- each signed in pen and ink by doctor and nurse. Now which is the original? One or both?????
Click to expand...

The one deposited with the state registrar is the original.

It is not the pen-and-ink signature that makes it legal proof of your birth, but rather the seal of the state. The copy you have in hand may have legal value as a copy if it bears the imprinted, embossed, or affixed seal of the state. Otherwise it does not have any legal authority whatsoever.

The pen-and-ink signature does not make it the "original" for the purposes of legal document control. It makes it only a hand-made, hand-signed copy. That copy is valid only if it appears under seal. And unsigned copies are valid also if they appear under seal.

You may be confused by more common circumstances in which an original signature is required to constitute a valid document, as opposed to, say, a photocopied signature. For example, in my real estate business we sign the rental agreements as duplicate originals. Two identical copies of the printed rental agreement are produced, and I as the landlord sign both copies, and the tenants sign both copies and the witnesses witness both copies. I retain one copy and the tenants retains the other. For some purposes under Utah landlord-tenant law, the tenant must substantiate his claim to a lease by means of a pen-and-ink, witnessed landlord signature. For other purposes, such as residence verification for employment or pet allowances pursuant to adoption, photocopied signatures are considered acceptable.

But this is not the law that governs birth certificates or other vital records. Even though you think you bear a "duplicate original," that copy has no legal value unless sealed, and has no more legal value than any other sealed copy in whatever form. Vital records are not mere documents validated by original or witnessed signatures. They have other requirements for certification that, ironically, may be legally satisfied by laser-printed certificates from databases.
 
A slew of birther fails over the past few weeks:

-----
Van Irion and Dummet order to pay Attorneys Fees to the tune of $10,000 for their birther eligibility case in Tennessee:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/115517695...2-04-OrDER-Granting-in-Part-Motion-for-Attorn

-----


Orly is fined $4000 for trying to include Occidental into her crusade against Obama:
http://occidentalweekly.com/news/20...court-case-to-occidental-over-obamas-records/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/02/orly-taitz-obama-college-records_n_2229370.html


Orly says; NO I"M NOT SANCTIONED!
orlytaitzesq.com/?p=363919 (link intentionally broken - visit at your own risk)

but of course the minutes of the hearing say otherwise:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/112323226/CA-2012-11-01-TvO-ORDER-Denying-Discovery-and-Granting-Sanctions

-----


Birther in-fighting: this time Leah Lax calls out Orly for including her in cases she never approved of:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/115024444...tion-to-Remove-Lax-and-to-Sanction-Orly-Taitz


Orly calls Leah a liar:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/115168725/MS-Corrected-Opposition-to-Leah-Lax-With-Exhibits

-----

birth case score card:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/22707260/...-Pending-9-Total-194-Updated-November-30-2012

(0-194 cases and counting)

-----


Larry KKKlayman and Hugh McInnish eligibility lawsuit is denied in Alabama:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/115813417...de-v-Chapman-ORDER-Granting-Motion-to-Dismiss


and Larry has a mad:
http://obamaballotchallenge.com/al-mcinnish-goode-v-chapman-obama-ballot-challenge-dismissed

but, the idiot didn't EVEN APPEAR for his own case (judge even waited an HOUR for him to show up or even call in).


----

Fastest turn down by the Supreme Court of California for Orly's eligibility case (1 day):
Noonan v Bowen

Docketed: 12/05
Denied: 12/06
http://appellatecases.courtinfo.ca....tion.cfm?dist=0&doc_id=2031802&doc_no=S207078


Orly now says she will appeal to the US Supreme Court and hopes that unlike the 4 other birther cases that came before it (1 was hers), it will be heard:
orlytaitzesq.com/?p=364265 (link intentionally broken - visit at your own risk)
 
Another Birther case rears its ugly head:

U.S. District Court
Eastern District of California - Live System (Sacramento)

CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:12-at-01587


Grinols et al v. Electoral College et al
Assigned to:
Cause: 28:1331 Fed. Question

Date Filed: 12/12/2012
Jury Demand: Plaintiff
Nature of Suit: 441 Civil Rights: Voting
Jurisdiction: Federal Question

12/12/2012 1
CIVIL COVER SHEET by James Grinols, Keith Judd, Thomas Gregory MacLeran, Edward Noonan, Robert Odden (Taitz, Orly) (Entered: 12/12/2012)

12/12/2012 2 ( http://www.scribd.com/doc/116618401 )
COMPLAINT against Electoral College, Governor of California, Barack Hussein Obama, President of the Senate, Secretary of State of California, U.S. Congress by Edward Noonan, Robert Odden, James Grinols, Keith Judd, Thomas Gregory MacLeran. Attorney Taitz, Orly added. (Attachments: # 1Exhibits pp1-25, # 2 Exhibits pp26-50, # 3Exhibits pp51-75, # 4 Exhibits 76-100, # 5 Exhibits 101-108)(Taitz, Orly) Modified on 12/12/2012 (Meuleman, A). (Entered: 12/12/2012)
Click to expand...


Dr. Orly is on another one of her crusades of being the Worst Lawyer in the world by filing this today. Well, she only has till... Friday....to get this decided on.
 
Woohoo, Orly is on a roll (down hill):

orlytaitzesq.com/?p=364956 (visit at your own risk)

Breaking News! Commissioner of Social Security defaults in a RICO case involving Obama’s use of a stolen CT Social security number xxx-xx-xxxx

Michael Astrue, Commissioner of Social security defaulted in a RICO (Racketeering ) case Taitz et al v Democatic Party et al 12-cv-280 US District Court Southern District of MS case involving Obama’s use of a stolen/fraudulently obtained Connecticut Social security number xxx-xx-xxx and his use of forged IDs.
Attorney Taitz filed a notice of default, request of Default Jugment and asked Presiding Judge Hon. Henry Wingate to grant her motion to Compel production of SS-5, original application to CT SSN xxx-xx-xxxx, which Obama is fraudulently using according to E-Verify and SSNVS
As attorney Taitz is conducting this case pro bono and expenses are sizeable, the public is asked to donate to her efforts either through pay-pal or mail, more details on her site OrlyTaitzESQ.com
Click to expand...



Yes, Astrue is in default over your non-existent RICO Case..and the fact that you never effected proper service on anyone.
 
As if any further proof was needed that Orly Taitz is a judicial moron, she's filed a motion to default against Michael Astrue (Social Security Commissioner) in her Mississippi.

The problem of course, is that it's bleeding obvious that Astrue has yet to be properly served. The only evidence of Orly serving him with anything, that can be found on the case docket, shows that Orly served him with summons for her case in Indiana...

As per usual, the motion has been stuffed with various bizarre zibits.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/116584399/MS-2012-12-12-ECF-85-TvDPM-Taitz-Default-Motion-With-Exhibits
 
JayUtah said:
Good heavens, that's far worse than her typical cut-and-paste job.
Click to expand...
The typical ransom note cut from newspapers and magazines is far more orderly than that mess. Unfortunately, scribd does not offer a "remove flecks of spit" filter for such documents. But it's good to know that President Obama is currently running for re-election, although one would expect a lawyer to know what jury nullification actually means, or at least that the possessive pronoun is "its", not "it's".

Taitz and the rest of her insane clown posse should be issued matching coats with extra-long arms that fasten fashionably in the back, and placed in a padded room with subdued lighting and soothing colors. That is the right thing to do, although it would deprive the rest of us of the schadenfreude-y pleasure of pointing and laughing.
 
Love her non-redaction redaction of the President and his Wife's social security numbers in her zibits.
 
For those that followed the Cold Case Posse of Arizona (Sheriff "Pink Underwear" Arpaio's sham of an investigation that pretty much cribbed everything from World Nut Daily), Frank Arudini did an excellent paragraph by paragraph debunking/refutation of Lead "Investigator" Mike Zullo's most recent "affidavit":

http://www.scribd.com/doc/116752480/The-Annotated-Zullo

He does a fine job of showing how much of a joke the the Cold case posse really was, and that everything they did, was just nothing short of lying.
 
Particularly damaging is the scorecard at the end, which sums up just how little of it can justifiably be called "Personal knowledge" (from a legal standpoint).
 
Isn't all this birther nonsense beside the point now? What do these people hope to achieve?
 
I saw in one of the articles the jowly Arizona Birther with the old man KKK face was saying how he'd rather be right than popular. Dude, welcome to neither.
 
dafydd said:
Isn't all this birther nonsense beside the point now? What do these people hope to achieve?
Click to expand...

Get him ruled ineligible for office. And if he's ineligible, then that means that Mitt Romney got the most legitimate votes in every state, so Romney would be President with all 50 states and DC on his side. It's in the Constitution!!!!!!!
 
dafydd said:
Isn't all this birther nonsense beside the point now? What do these people hope to achieve?
Click to expand...
They hoping for some sort of magic reset button, which would see Obama thrownout of the White House, tried for something or other, and then executed.

Meanwhile, John McCain is retroactively made President for the past 4 years, and every piece of legislation and/or action approved by Obama is nullified :boggled:
 
Smearing the reputation of a democratically elected president. It's all they have.
 
IMST said:
Get him ruled ineligible for office. And if he's ineligible, then that means that Mitt Romney got the most legitimate votes in every state, so Romney would be President with all 50 states and DC on his side. It's in the Constitution!!!!!!!
Click to expand...

Something is in the Constitution, but not quite that.

The popular vote determines only which electors are certified from each state, and each state gets to determine how to translate a popular vote into electors. There is no provision for changing that based on the eligibility of the candidate for whom they are presumed to vote. Nor does that certification automatically devolve onto the next most popular candidate's electors by default.

The only vote that matters is the electoral vote, which took place two days ago. Each state has certified its electors and their votes. A number of these states have already affirmatively declared that Barack Obama is, according to them, eligible to President nothwithstanding claims otherwise. This makes it very difficult to dispute his eligibility in any venue.

The President-elect is created by the joint session of Congress in which the Electoral College's results are received, tallied, and (if necessary) debated. Challenges must issue against a vote on a state-by-state basis only -- there is no provision for an all-encompassing ruling. The objection must be endorsed in writing by a member of each House of Congress, debated separately in each House, and voted upon separately by each House. If both Houses vote to reject a state's electoral ballot, those votes are simply disregarded; they do not change to that of a different candidate or elector. If only one House votes to reject, the ballot stands as cast.

Hypothetically, if California's 55 electoral votes for Obama were to be challenged, a written objection would be presented over the signatures of a member of the House and a Senator. The joint session is suspended, and each House goes to its own chamber to deliberate the objection and vote upon it. If both Houses separately vote to reject California's electoral vote, the 55 votes are simply removed from consideration and the joint session resumes. The votes are not awarded to another candidate, nor are the electors themselves replaced nor some new vote certified from the state.

That same process would have to be repeated for each state. If, at the end of the day, the surviving votes are tallied and do not provide an absolute majority for any candidate, the House of Representatives goes immediately into its electoral session to elect the President. They must elect one of the three candidates who received the highest number of electoral votes. The only way Barack Obama would be ineligible by the House is if all his electoral votes were successfully removed from consideration. For the 2012 election, as long as he has even one electoral vote, the House may still vote for him.

But this is not a "declaration" of ineligibility. In deciding whether to accept electoral votes from any state, Congress may deliberate as they choose. They may weigh the probative value of any evidence introduced and reach their decision upon any criteria they deem fit. Those criteria may include allegations of ineligibility, suspicion of forgery, or even his skin color -- so long as they survive the vote of each House.

No court can simply declare the candidate ineligible. Courts are explicitly bound by Full Faith and Credit and must accept the birth certificate from Hawaii as if it were one issued by their own state. This includes federal courts and the Supreme Court. Birthers have long imagined that they will thunder into a courtroom and, under the ponderous weight of pixels and layers, emerge victorious with a judge's ruling declaring that Barack Obama is not a natural-born citizen. As long as they fail to grasp what Full Faith and Credit means, they will forever be estranged from that day.

Congress is not bound by Full Faith and Credit except when acting as an ad hoc judiciary (e.g., for impeachment). They may decide the validity of the electoral votes on any criteria, or in spite of any criteria such as the question of eligibility. Given the composition of the incoming Congress, and the general unwillingness of even GOP members to question Obama's eligibility, it is highly unlikely that an objection to any state's electoral vote will survive a vote from both Houses.

In the remote chance that the House elects Romney, due to successful challenges to Obama's electoral votes, the nasty side-effect of the electoral system is that Joe Biden will still likely be the Vice President. The electoral college elects the President and Vice President separately. There has been no challenge to his eligibility, and his right to hold the office of Vice President does not depend on his running-mate's eligibility to President. But again the same process holds for that office. Electoral votes may be challenged and voted upon, and the House may convene to elect a Vice President too if Biden fails to achieve a majority of electoral votes.

That's what holds true until Jan. 6. If Congress accepts Barack Obama as President-elect then, he is effectively the holder of that office regardless of what rumors and suspicions continue to circulate. Eligibility is moot at that point; he is the President. Removal of the President from office for any reason from that point onward must follow the process of impeachment. And if the President is removed by impeachment or any other means, the Vice President becomes President.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom