Posted on 06/07/2011 6:45:09 PM PDT by conservativegramma
I knew this certificate was fake the minute he announced it otherwise he would have produced it in the beginning instead of spending millions to defend it.
The only reason they produced anything was because Trump was getting traction on this story. Obama’s crew knew that Republicans didn’t have the stomach to look any further. Not any different than how the weeny Republicans approach most of the tough issues, without fortitude.
With the old fashioned typewriters ~ still in use in many places right on through the 1980s and 1990s ~ you didn't just pick a type ball, or highlight a font in the menu!
Remember the forgers you are up against handled every possible permutation and combination and MADE this document exactly like its contemporaries in every meaningful way ~ right down to making it look like the typewriters used to prepare it look like they'd been repaired at some time or the other!
Did you imagine the professionals at Langley make mistakes?
They are so good they've even fooled the KGB and American Bank Note Company!
The Executive had different spacing for different letters. The M took the most space. My memory is faulty tho, I don’t recall the particulars, I’ve been using word processing far too long now.
So what is the difference between kerning and proportional spacing?
Yeah, I don’t know. My Mom was using one when she worked for Civil Service in the 1970s, but I don’t know if earlier. And that is Federal and not State govt, they might spend more money. Ours was one I think she bought when they replaced older machines tho, and that would have been in the mid 1970s.
Congress debates and frames the law.
The courts interprets it (explains the meaning of) based on the intent.
The framer (Bingham)was clear and explicit.
Or there are people of clear conscience who can see the writing on the wall and would prefer FR not make itself look a bit silly by suggesting everything barry the zero and his handlers do is just wrong.
To further pursue this line just makes us look nucking futz.
The “birther” thing is over. To go back to bizarre and tortured retro-interpretations of extra-legal opinions does NOT help Conservatives. To suggest that the released form is some sort of TANG thing accomplishes nothing.
Do you think I like the flak I take on this? I haven’t insulted anyone but look at what I have taken.
I do this for my love of Conservatism and my very real care for FR. Now, of all times, we can NOT look like wing-nuts. We need to look like iron-eyed people who have solid Conservative principles that won’t let peripheral issue distract us from what we need to do — get a REAL Conservative President elected (even if you don’t agree it is Mr. Cain) AND get the Congress on board with Tea Party values And NOT squander it this time.
Good analysis as far as it goes. Next check known era Birth Certificates and see if he can detect which letters came from each cert and where...
>>There is no other interpretation than mine. Either you defend the constitution or you abandon it. There is no middle ground in ignoring consitutional qualifications for POTUS. Either you uphold it, and fight to defend it, or you abandon it. Claiming it is ‘not a viable political option’ is pure abandonment. I know it sucks for you to have to face the truth here, but it is what it is.<<
Assertions are not arguments. There have been a lot of cases upholding the clear meaning of the 14th Amendment. None support your position.
>>Sorry, but the faulty ‘interpretation’ belongs to you alone. Therefore not only is MY interpretation the correct one, but the non seqitur is yours. Not surprising you can’t grasp this since you can’t seem to grasp the word ‘parents’ in Bingham’s statements on the floor of congress either. Another freeper called you dense, I’ll leave it at that.<<
Again, assertion isn’t argumentation. And I can’t help you in seeing how your “one thing does not follow from the other” assertion isn’t quite what you think it is.
>>And no I have not misapplied Res Ipsa Loquitur either. Your actions definitely do speak for itself, like it or not.<<
You sorta did. The fact you disagree with my statements doesn’t make them prima facie incorrect. It just means you disagree.
I think having a Latin dictionary at hand is a great idea — Latin is a great language and one I wish I could speak fluently. But understanding the context might be even a better idea.
You're right. Whenever a birth certificate thread is posted, at least one person shows up to start a fight over the meaning 'Natural Born Citizen'. It's intentional and it's designed to keep people busy arguing rather than discussing the birth certificate. The best strategy is just to ignore them.
The only reason they produced anything was because Trump was getting traction on this story.
///
good points. but i think it was also timed to deflate the Corsi book. ...even if you ignore the “Kenya” stuff, there is still a lot of good info in it, that raises questions.
...and it also distracts from the issue i want investigated the most:
how did a Hawaii teenager get a Connecticut SSN ?!?
no one has given a plausible answer to that.
and, a fraudulent SSN would tie a lot of other loose ends...
like his legal adoption by Soetoro
(supported by the Indonesian school requirments, and from which, he never legally changed his name back),
and coverups like the missiong page 11 of the divorce papers, the missing kindergarden records, the missing early years of SAD’s passport file, etc.
likely, he got a Hawaiian SSN in 1977 when he started working in the ice cream store. but apparently he didn’t get the CT one, until around 1981, when his forged Selective Service form is dated (and used the CT SSN...)
but how did a Hawaii teenager get a Connecticut SSN ...
And yeah Hawaii being off the mainstream isn't going to have a brand spanking new top of the line just introduced in July of '61 IBM selectric for typing forms in August of '61. Nope, correct. They're going to have older, out of date typewriters, may not even more than ONE. Therefore, you're NOT going to get different typeface within the filled/typed out information ADDED to the form. Thanks for making my point for me.
With the old fashioned typewriters ~ still in use in many places right on through the 1980s and 1990s ~ you didn't just pick a type ball, or highlight a font in the menu!
Exactly, which is what I've been stating and so as the expert in typeface. When you have personally earned 50 years of experience in this field (typeface) then you can criticize him. Until then, stop trying to prove to everyone how superior you are, and go back and re-read the article!
You never answered me before when I asked you to give details of exactly how the BC forms were handled from start to finish. You claim the form was taken out of typewriters and more typed in a different typewriter later..please explain which lines (by number) you think this applies to and why and where it was typed at a different time. If you are responsible for many govt forms, I have little confidence in your ability...many forms were difficult to use in real life. Line spacibg too small, not enough space to reply to question etc etc.
>>So if I dug up Bingham brought him back to life and had him
repeat it to you verbatim and the nation you would
still lick those nation destroying 0 boots? <<
Can I dig up Thomas Jefferson to argue my point?
Please don’t let the closeness of the immediate case get in the way of the larger principle here.
And my kids can’t be President despite 100+ years of legal opinions?
Bookmark to read later
To say it was great was to say the least. That machine could pack letters like nobody's business. ABA Journal article said there was a 40% reduction in space needed for any given article.
For kerning (as I recall) you selected a FONT with kerning or a FONT without kerning. It was pretty locked in so you couldn't take just any old font and turn it on and off like you can with Microsoft Word.
Another feature it had was compressing rows.
I see no sign whatsoever that anything approaching the power of a Wang photocomposition machine was used to produce the document in question. Folks who imagine the forgers (if they exist) sitting down at a common WP and doing the job are simply unaware of how utterly adanced photocomposition was 33 years ago.
That's smallscale stuff. You get into your major linetype machines using hot lead, all things were possible ~ but I really don't get the feeling the document in question was produced by hot lead.
We are getting spoiled by our computers. We think of what they can do and imagine it couldn't have been by other means. At the same time we look at an ancient product and say "hey, they couldn't do that", but they did do that.
BTW, I think the Wang machine was the first photocomposition device to use an extended memory cache of some kind in an off-line mode. It wasn't hooked up to an IBM main frame system as a dumb terminal ~
Good plan. I’m betting that is in the works as we speak.
The "people" investigators, for the most part have done a pretty thorough job. A few have put their names and careers on the line, so why won't the MSM touch it? They don't have to say it's forged or fraudulent, just lay it out there. I've not come straight out and said it's a forgery, just that it is very, very bizarre. And I give latitude for some of it, just there is too much accumulated indicating something.
There has to be a reason MSM and most talk radio won't touch it. Why the almost across-the-board conspiracy of silence?
I guess what hacks me off is what Weiner did was wrong imo but not like what others higher up "seem" to be getting away with.
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.