Posted on 07/25/2009 3:21:35 AM PDT by Thaddeus Stevens
I'm not normally given to posting at Free Republic because my politics generally lie elsewhere, but I think the latest "story" about Obama's birth certificate from CNN really shows that the end is near for the lies on this issue. According to reports:
TVNewser has learned CNN/U.S. president Jon Klein sent an email to a handful of "Lou Dobbs Tonight" staffers last night regarding the coverage of the so-called birthers and the validity of Pres. Obama's birth in the U.S.
In part, Klein writes, "It seems this story is dead- because anyone who still is not convinced doesn't really have a legitimate beef." Klein asked CNN researchers to dig into the question of why Obama couldn't produce the original birth certificate. The researchers contacted the Hawaii Health Dept. and confirmed that paper documents were discarded in 2001 when the department went paperless. That reportedly includes Pres. Obama's original birth certificate.
http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/...
This is a really important statement, if true. Number one, it directly refutes the statements being made by everyone from Robert Gibbs to Chris Matthews that Obama has already released his birth certificate. It also directly contradicts a statement made by the State of Hawaii Director of Health in 2008:
"Therefore, I as Director of Health for the State of Hawai‘i, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, have personally seen and verified that the Hawai‘i State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures," Fukino said.
http://www.kitv.com/politics/1786089...
Finally, there's simply no way that the State of Hawaii discarded all of their original vital records without first scanning them onto tapes, discs, whatever. The actual image of the original birth certificate would still be there, available for public viewing, even if the actual paper document has been destroyed.
Okay, then there is no proof she was a citizen. All we know is she attended school in the US. There are no documents stating she was born here or took the citizenship test. Just obama’s word.
Since the Secretary of State is local (to the state), it will take the citizens of that state to find out what they are supposed to do in that position and then find out if they did it. And furthermore, if something *more* should be done then that’s something for those citizens in that state to look into and perhaps get legislation that requires certain documentation to be produced.
I think this is a state-by-state issue at this point... so “get on it” citizens... :-)
If an investigation for possible fraud leads to a formal charge of fraud, it becomes criminal, and very public, matter. Oh they could still conceal any irrelevant information, such as the race of the father shown on the certificate, or the usual residence of the mother, etc. Even the father's name, unless they are elements of the fraud.
I'm sure that if such a fraud case occurred, all or virtually all states would pass your "show your birth certificate" law so fast it would make all our heads spin.
All the ones I've seen are signed by Nancy Pelosi, certifying that he was the candidate of the Democrat Party, duly nominated at their convention. Some of those also certify that he was qualified under the Constitution. I have yet to see one where *he* so certified. I would appreciate a link to such a document.
Funny—nobody here thinks that’s a solution.
I think everyone here thinks that anything is better than leaving Obama in office... LOL...
There's a bit more than that. Her history is actually better docuemented that his, and not just through him. People who knew the Dunhams back in Kansas, people who served with her father at Fort Leavenworth were she was born. I was reading one article gushing about when they lived in Ponca City Oklahoma, shortly after the war.
But you are correct, no real proof of her citizenship, although the long form birth certificate does show the mother's place of birth, so that should come out as well.
I never provided that to Free Republic, other Freepers did and I saw it in the threads... so I don’t have the link...
Anyone who has been following the talk on Obama and his birth certificate issue would have seen it in the past.
If someone wanted to find it, I would suggest going to one’s own state’s Secretary of State and getting a photocopy of it, as it’s public information. Every state is going to have that form on record.
All the ones I've seen are signed by Nancy Pelosi, certifying that he was the candidate of the Democrat Party, duly nominated at their convention. Some of those also certify that he was qualified under the Constitution. I have yet to see one where *he* so certified. I would appreciate a link to such a document.
Here it is (also posted on another thread):
http://www.therightsideoflife.com/?p=1703
Well, so far three states put forth bills like that, and one in Congress. I don’t think the one in Congress has a good chance of succeeding. But, in Oklahoma, I would hope that we’ll do better next time around as this bill failed at the end. I’m sure it will the bill will be put up again, at least if we are all still as fervent to get the birth certificate as at the present.
True enough.
And that sentiment is not limited to this forum—let’s see how much more it will spread as we push for all records to be made public.
Thanks, David.
Ping to #72
.
It is possible that the reason he has the problem is that she was under pressure when she did it and made a mistake that betrays where he was really born. And, it is also possible that as Polerik argues, no filing was ever really made.
++++++++++++++++
Then that means Hawaii officials are lying?
I find your constant defense of Barack Obama disturbing.
___________
Most everyone finds star travelers defense of her sweet little boy king wannabe, disturbing... but a better way to put it is annoying and dumb. Watch her posts. How big they are, how spaced to take up the maximum amount of space on each page. troll
Lotta people going very, very, very, far outa their way to commit treason,,,knowningly.
No thanks, I’ll pass. I don’t room with trolls like ST
“Most everyone finds star travelers defense of her sweet little boy king wannabe, disturbing... but a better way to put it is annoying and dumb. Watch her posts. How big they are, how spaced to take up the maximum amount of space on each page. troll”
I have a simple solution. I no longer bother to wade through them because I know they’re not worth it. I just scroll past her posts.
Here's the problem with InfoWars. Alex Jones and his cohort have a HUGE amount of facts but unfortunately they take a lot of them out of context.
Take this, for example, this EO 13489 that the Bamster signed. The primary purpose of this executive order was to change how presidential records are released. Essentially, this Executive Order removes a lot of the protections that Dubya afforded former Presidents and returned the process to that which Reagan set up just before he left office.
In essence, the original procedure was that a current president could, after consultation with his legal advisers, declare documents to be privileged. Once he did so, the Archivist of the US would not release them unless a final court order told him to do so. An incumbent president would consult with a former president on records generated during that former president's term, but would maintain the final decision-making power on whether something would be released. The EO 13233, signed by Bush, did three things: it allowed a former President to have the final say on records generated during his term in office (vice the incumbent President); it changed the standard for court ordered release from just any court order to a "nonappealable" court order; and it separately provided for protection of Vice-Presidential records. EO 13489, signed by the Bamster, essentially returned the procedure to the one set up by Reagan. Links to the actual documents are below, so you can verify what I'm saying for yourselves.
I think that this EO was signed to make it easier for moonbats to get access to internal Bush records (that's the only reason I can imagine for why a president would voluntarily reduce executive powers), but it doesn't do anything to lock up the Bamster's birth records.
How can I say that? Well, maybe we should figure out what a Presidential Record is:
44 USC §2201 subparagraph 2 defines a Presidential Record:
(2) The term “Presidential records” means documentary materials, or any reasonably segregable portion thereof, created or received by the President, his immediate staff, or a unit or individual of the Executive Office of the President whose function is to advise and assist the President, in the course of conducting activities which relate to or have an effect upon the carrying out of the constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties of the President.Clearly, a birth certificate is not part of that. (Well, a fraudulent birth certificate generated by the Bamster's staff after he was inaugurated might be included, but the document allegedly locked up in the Governor of Hawaii's personal safe would not be that document)
So you don't take my word for it, the actual text of the three EOs in question can be found here: EO 12667, signed by Reagan on 18 Jan 89. EO 12333 (PDF File), signed on 1 Nov 2001, by Dubya, and EO 13489 (PDF File), signed on 21 Jan 2009 by the Bamster.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.