Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

On Birth Issue 'The Donald' Trumps Other Republicans
The American Thinker Blog ^ | March 24, 2011 | Jack Cashill

Posted on 03/24/2011 1:36:48 AM PDT by Scanian

If Donald Trump's goal is to differentiate himself from those jelly-kneed Republican candidates too timid to ask even the most basic questions about President Barack Obama's origins, he is doing a bang-up job of it.

[video]

Wednesday morning on The View, Trump refused to buckle under the hectoring protests of the View panelists and even Whoopi Goldberg's shameless race baiting. "I want [Obama] to show his birth certificate!" said Trump defiantly, adding with a knowing edge, "There's something on that birth certificate that he doesn't like."

Here, Trump made precisely the right point. It is not that Obama was born in Kenya, but rather that there may very well be something on that certificate that does not square with the official Obama origins story, the one on which Obama based his political ascendancy.

In researching my book Deconstructing Obama, I found much that did match the accepted nativity story, most dramatically the fact that the storied Obama family never lived together. Indeed, there never was an Obama family save in the pages of Obama's often apocryphal memoir, Dreams from My Father.

When asked whether he could defeat Obama in 2012, Trump answered, "I think if I run and win and get the nomination, I definitely think I could beat Obama." If he sticks to his guns, he just might.


TOPICS: Politics; TV/Movies
KEYWORDS: birthcertificate; certifigate; naturalborncitizen; obama; theview; whoopigoldberg
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-113 next last
To: 70th Division

He makes me laugh. He has the guts to just come out and say it instead of twiddling around the issue.

That is the kind of guts we need speaking out. You can’t deal with the left by being shy.

I don’t think he is a conservative, but on this issue he rocks.


51 posted on 03/24/2011 4:41:57 AM PDT by dforest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Scanian

you know what would bust Whoopi’s gut?

Make her wear a typical Shiite hejab-the veil,aka “chador”-
(not necessarily the ones worn in Afghanistan)under penalty of incarceration in a dank prison in Iran known as EVIN Prison.

She’d be crying all day long ‘cause she can’t go w/o it on the streets of Teheran.


52 posted on 03/24/2011 4:44:03 AM PDT by MissDairyGoodnessVT (I am keeping the faith, I have not finished my course and I am fighting for the good)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: MissDairyGoodnessVT

Anything that would cover that woman’s ugliness would be fine by me.


53 posted on 03/24/2011 4:52:08 AM PDT by Scanian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: snowsislander

That’s right, the same stuff that any applicant would be expected to produce for a position of responsibility.


54 posted on 03/24/2011 4:53:45 AM PDT by Scanian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: cricket

If his parents were not citizens when he was born in Miami, he is not a NBC since his folks retained allegiance to Cuba.

He would clearly be a US citizen, just not a natural born citizen.

The Castro regime has tried to muddy the waters by saying that no Cuban can renounce his citizenship, nor can the children of a Cuban. Even as strict as I am about constitutionality, I refuse to accept the reasoning of a brutal communist dictatorship.

I supported Marco for the Senate starting in early ‘09 but the NBC issue played no role in the Senate position. When people started talking him up for the presidency, I tried to establish whether his folks had received citizenship by 5/71 and I haven’t been able to find out one way or another.

All Marco has to do is produce the citizenship records.

SCOTUS really needs to clarify this NBC issue. It never has and it is about time. If they don’t, the issue will result in endless debate with no resolution.


55 posted on 03/24/2011 5:04:07 AM PDT by Scanian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Scanian

she’s a wacko dresser that’s for shure!! nobody ain’t gonna’ tell dat Mamma’ what to wear.... haven’t seen the boob belt in a while :D


56 posted on 03/24/2011 5:08:28 AM PDT by MissDairyGoodnessVT (I am keeping the faith, I have not finished my course and I am fighting for the good)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Spaulding

“I know you know this history Scanian, but the majority appears not to”

I believe that is because they find ambiguity on the issue to be politically expedient for them.

Yes, I read all the history and congressional deliberations on the subject back in ‘08. I’d like to see a SCOTUS clarification but many here would object to that as well, saying that no modern court can be trusted to uphold the Constitution, etc.


57 posted on 03/24/2011 5:10:54 AM PDT by Scanian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: DrC
"Kudos for being the first to report on Barry’s early Indonesian years. But what exactly would be the motivation for spending great gobs of money on hiding the fact that his original BC was modified to make Soetoro his father?"

Thank you for your kind comments.

I'm not sure of the motivation - I can however speculate

Amending the BC to have Lolo as the father enabled a young Obama to attend public school in Indonesia - otherwise the young Obama would have to attend a private school there - you might also note that Obama entered Occidental as Barry Soetoro

58 posted on 03/24/2011 5:13:52 AM PDT by expatguy (Support "An American Expat in Southeast Asia" - DONATE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: 4rcane
No one is going to care about Obama’s history. Lets focus on his record as president. Run against him on that

FRAUD is something that nearly everyone understands even if they think socialism might be made to work. If Cashill were a reporter writing in the NY Times, Obama would have already been shamed into resignation.

ML/NJ

59 posted on 03/24/2011 5:16:13 AM PDT by ml/nj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Williams

I know....you are right.

I just had a “brain fart” this morning, mixing up the 2000 election with 2004.

It created some curiosity about dirty tricks by Kerry in 2004 to match the DUI smear in 2000 by Gore’s people.

I think it was Rathergate and questioning of W’s military service that I had mixed up with the DUI business from the previous election.

No biggie. Kerry is still a pig. I’m still amazed that he received the number of votes that he did.


60 posted on 03/24/2011 5:16:19 AM PDT by Scanian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: indylindy

In a way, I say “Good for him”

But why go on that garbage show? How can any good come of it? Any publicity derived from it is going to be negative after the media gets through with it.


61 posted on 03/24/2011 5:18:42 AM PDT by Scanian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: missnry; DrC
What you are describing was quite common in the 60's and 70's - I'm not sure if it is done today though.

This is what happened with Obama and why he refuses to release his BC - it will have no mention of Barack Obama Sr. or Barack Obama Jr. - It lists Lolo Soetoro as the father and Barry Soetoro as the child.

There is no marks or indications that the BC was amended in any way

An American Expat in Southeast Asia

62 posted on 03/24/2011 5:20:23 AM PDT by expatguy (Support "An American Expat in Southeast Asia" - DONATE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Scanian

I don’t know why anyone would want to sit with those nincompoops, but I think they do it to show people they can handle the screeching loonies.

It gets media attention. Trump gets plenty of that without them though.


63 posted on 03/24/2011 5:25:08 AM PDT by dforest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Mister Da

“So you saying the GOP would promote a candidate for POTUS that they are not sure is eligible. I will NOT support an ineligible candidate - they are ineligible. And I don’t care if they are Superman or one of the Disciples.”

I SUSPECT that they would do that and that is why they have given Hussein a pass on it. (we all know that party politics is a rough business)

Marco needs to find out the real story about his folks. He IS a politician of some experience and was Speaker in Tallahassee, so I don’t kid myself into thinking that he is as pure as the driven snow.

I think he’ll be a very good Senator and has started off well, IMHO. But if he has further aspirations, he needs to be honest about them.

I’d hate to see the son of refugees from communism held back but that’s just the way the cookie crumbles. The law needs to be applied equally to everyone, Obama first and foremost but the pubbies too.


64 posted on 03/24/2011 5:27:39 AM PDT by Scanian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: DrC
How does having Soetoro appear as his father pose a threat?

I believe he has sworn under penalty of perjury that he has never used a name other than Barack Hussein Obama. Perjury doesn't seem to be much of a problem for Dim Presidents, but who knows?

ML/NJ

65 posted on 03/24/2011 5:28:57 AM PDT by ml/nj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: missnry

You may well be right, good insight, thank you!


66 posted on 03/24/2011 5:31:52 AM PDT by carcraft (Pray for our Country)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: cricket

Were his parentS citizens at the time of his birth? If yes, he is a natural born citizen and eligible. If no, he is not. Pretty simple, really.


67 posted on 03/24/2011 5:31:56 AM PDT by Josephat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: expatguy
you might also note that Obama entered Occidental as Barry Soetoro

Do you have any documentation to support this assertion?

ML/NJ

68 posted on 03/24/2011 5:33:53 AM PDT by ml/nj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: Scanian

I saw the clip on IMUS this am. The most encouraging aspect was that the audience applauded that Obama should just release the BC.
Obvisously, this would be a VERY left leaning audience on the VIEW. If they want to see it, then everyone wants to see it.


69 posted on 03/24/2011 5:34:26 AM PDT by woodbutcher1963
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: expatguy
This is what happened with Obama and why he refuses to release his BC - it will have no mention of Barack Obama Sr. or Barack Obama Jr. - It lists Lolo Soetoro as the father and Barry Soetoro as the child.

Out of the one million posts on the birth issue here on FR... this may be the top reason why he has spent millions to stop the release of it!

In a word, he is a FRAUD.

70 posted on 03/24/2011 5:35:38 AM PDT by missnry (The truth will set you free ... and drive liberals Crazy!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Nooseman

... his father being foreign.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Without the birth certificate we don’t know who his father is. There is also the issue of being adopted. Was he and by whom? Only certified long form birth certificates can definitively answer these questions.

As for Trump’s comments on the “The View”, consider the audience that watches this program. They are either barely capable of reading “The Globe” or they are completely illiterate. The subtleties of having two citizen parents is likely beyond them.

Trump brought the issue to the dumbest masses. Even they are aware of the problem now. Good for him!


71 posted on 03/24/2011 5:35:49 AM PDT by wintertime
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Spaulding
I think a more effective way to get the real (and complete) issue in front of the public (and ensure that it is discussed and not ignored) would be billboards that just simply say in large black letters on a white background:

...of parentS who were its citizens

This would be a better use of the $$$ than the current "Where's the birth certificate" posters.

72 posted on 03/24/2011 5:39:56 AM PDT by zzeeman ("We can evade reality, but we cannot evade the consequences of evading reality.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: woodbutcher1963

I just caught brief clips on Greta, I think it was.

Do you think the appearance benefitted Trump?

It’s good to know that airhead audience mainly agreed with him.


73 posted on 03/24/2011 5:41:34 AM PDT by Scanian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: indylindy

I still don’t know whether to take him seriously or not. But if he is willing to put up with those old biddies, maybe he does mean business.

If he gets rid of that dead animal on his head, we’ll know for sure.


74 posted on 03/24/2011 5:44:24 AM PDT by Scanian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: indylindy

I think he would be exactly what this Nation needs after the Obama mess. He has the guts and confidence to get the job done. Maybe a Trump/Romney ticket?


75 posted on 03/24/2011 5:45:36 AM PDT by jerseyrocks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Scanian

Trump needs to shave that awful combover and get a new look.

Hair can be a plus. In his case, less is best.


76 posted on 03/24/2011 5:47:49 AM PDT by dforest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: indylindy
Trump needs to shave that awful combover and get a new look.

When I saw the letters "BC" in an earlier reply, I actually thought that meant "bad combover".

77 posted on 03/24/2011 5:59:15 AM PDT by NewMexLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: ml/nj

“I believe he has sworn under penalty of perjury that he has never used a name other than Barack Hussein Obama.”

But we already have proof-positive that isn’t true. He attended school in Indonesia as Barry Soetoro. I don’t believe anyone has challenged the authenticity of this record:
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.printable&pageId=72667

I’m not a legal-eagle, but assume that the question asked for his law license relates to names used as an ADULT. Thus, unless he kept using Barry Soetoro after he turned 18, he would not have been perjuring himself. Offhand, I don’t see why he would. Once he returned to Hawaii and enrolled in school, I believe he was known as Barry or Barack Obama, not Soetoro. Obviously, if he used the Soetoro name to improve his odds of getting into Occidental or Columbia or even Harvard, that would be problematic. But that would require its own independent proof. That is, the mere fact that Lolo showed up as his father on his BC wouldn’t prove that since, as I’ve indicated above, we ALREADY KNOW he’s used the name Barry Soetoro in his youth.

So I still haven’t heard a good reason why Barry would fight so hard to hide his BC if all that’s being hidden is the appearance of Lolo’s name on it.


78 posted on 03/24/2011 6:00:33 AM PDT by DrC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Scanian

“Do you think the appearance benefitted Trump?”

Not sure and I do not care.
I just like the fact that somebody has the stones to say it on national TV. Trump is doing the job the the “press”
should be doing. The more the BC issue is brought into the mainsteam the better. Eventually it becomes the elephant in the room that you can’t ignore. It is no longer a fringe issue that the MSM wants to keep it. Then maybe we could see his transcripts and other records.


79 posted on 03/24/2011 6:01:31 AM PDT by woodbutcher1963
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: NewMexLurker

ROTFL! My first laugh of the day.


80 posted on 03/24/2011 6:03:01 AM PDT by dforest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: expatguy

If that was the case, then the Hawaii DOH has been lying to us about the records they have. And it wouldn’t explain Obama’s secrecy. Being adopted by Lolo is neither disgraceful nor impacts his presidential eligibility. It actually fits his official narrative far better than anything else he’s claimed. I don’t see what his motive would be to hide that.

If the HDOH was accurate when they confirmed that Obama’s BC was amended in 2006, it wouldn’t have been possible for him to change the paternity where either Lolo or Obama Sr were involved because both men were already dead. Same thing holds true for Frank Marshall Davis, Malcolm X, and Stanley Armour Dunham.


81 posted on 03/24/2011 6:03:30 AM PDT by butterdezillion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: expatguy

“Amending the BC to have Lolo as the father enabled a young Obama to attend public school in Indonesia - otherwise the young Obama would have to attend a private school there - you might also note that Obama entered Occidental as Barry Soetoro”

I understand the various motivations that might have led to filing an amended BC. As I indicated in my post above, however, I still don’t understand his motivation for HIDING the alleged fact that Lolo is shown on an amended BC even if, as you speculate, there is no indication that it is amended. Given his physical attributes, I can’t imagine anyone doubting Obama if he firmly denied that Lolo was his biological father and then explained the circumstances that led to Lolo nevertheless appearing as his father on his BC. I myself would be blown away if it turned out Lolo was his biological dad, wouldn’t you?


82 posted on 03/24/2011 6:05:51 AM PDT by DrC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: indylindy

“Hair can be a plus. In his case, less is best.”

You nailed it. I’m astonished someone of his wealth hasn’t figured out an alternative approach to fixing his hair. Likewise, for someone supposedly so intelligent, I’m astonished he thinks that mop looks good. He literally looks ridiculous and it’s hard to take seriously a person who voluntarily elects to look like that.


83 posted on 03/24/2011 6:11:59 AM PDT by DrC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: DrC

I agree, the guy needs a makeover. He needs to fire his hairdresser and his mirror that tells him he looks good.


84 posted on 03/24/2011 6:14:55 AM PDT by dforest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: woodbutcher1963
The more the BC issue is brought into the mainsteam the better.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Why would the producers and directors of “The View’ invite Trump on to the show when Trump has already very publicly spoken out about the birth certificate earlier this week?

I conclude that the liberal/Marxists in the media want Obama out of the White House.

85 posted on 03/24/2011 6:25:54 AM PDT by wintertime
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: DrC
Actually, someone did challenge me about the Indonesian School Registration thing on a comment thread at Amazon where Cashill's book is being discussed. (I think I successfully beat back the challenge, but that really is for others to decide.)

I'm not sure about whether the law license thing only refers to aliases used as an adult. I think Obama just pretended it wasn't an issue, and continues to do so.

As for using the the Soetoro name as an adult, someone earlier on this thread asserted that he used it at Occidental, and I replied with a requested for support for this assertion. We'll see if it is forthcoming.

ML/NJ

86 posted on 03/24/2011 6:27:36 AM PDT by ml/nj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: DrC

According to Hawaii law a new birth certificate is created in certain instances where embarrassment could be involved - including adoption. The original certificate is not altered; in fact, if an unadoption occurs the original BC is reinstated, which wouldn’t be possible if the original had been altered. So when there is an adoption a person has 2 birth certificates that are totally independent of each other, and the legal status of the adoption determines which one is the BC in effect; the other is sealed.

The applicable law can be seen at http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol06_Ch0321-0344/HRS0338/HRS_0338-0017_0007.htm

The only instance where it talks about the original birth certificate being amended is in the instance of legitimation or paternity being established where it had previously been unknown. In the other cases, there is separate documentation kept as to why a new BC was created - things such as an adoption decree, legal name change order (which the lt gov says there isn’t one for Obama, Soetoro, or Sutoro), etc


87 posted on 03/24/2011 6:40:22 AM PDT by butterdezillion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Scanian

That’s one of the points I made at Nebraska’s legislative committee hearing regarding out eligibility bill. One of the senators asked if I was aware that Alexander Hamilton wouldn’t be eligible to be POTUS under the proposed bill. I responded that I really don’t care where the chips fall for any particular individual. I don’t care whether McCain OR Obama were disqualified, because I want the Constitution followed without regard to who I personally like. I pointed out that we’ve got Rubio, Jindal, Rommey, Schwartznegger, etc coming up who have citizenship variations and the issue is not just going to go away. We need an answer to these questions BEFORE we’re in the thick of an election where the issue becomes about this or that person.

Of course, the Lincoln Journal-Star reporter didn’t give any context and just quoted me as saying, “This issue isn’t going away” - as if I was saying I will never be satisfied about Obama, when that wasn’t what I was saying at all. They totally ignored the substance of my arguments. Left out that we need a ruling on what NBC even means - even though in my testimony I corrected what the LJS editorial had said on that matter. They had said that the Supreme Court had upheld lower court rulings that Obama was eligible.

Frustrating because I had personally explained to that reporter via e-mail conversation with him just how inaccurate the LJS editorial and reporting had been. He knew full well that he was deceiving and he did it anyway.


88 posted on 03/24/2011 6:50:59 AM PDT by butterdezillion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: expatguy

But if there is no Barack Obama in Hawaii’s records, then the HDOH has been lying and altering records, and somebody somewhere along the line accepted forged documents in order for him to get any other records with the name “Barack Obama”. Just to be able to use “Barack Obama” rather than “Barry Soetoro” Obama would commit forgery, perjury, and some form of bribery or extortion on government agencies?

And what would he have amended in 2006?


89 posted on 03/24/2011 6:58:53 AM PDT by butterdezillion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: butterdezillion

Journalism truly has become a gutter profession.

That reporter was probably more worried about how his peers back at the paper would react if he gave your story full exposure.

Probably a gang of liberals and he ddn’t want to rub them the wrong way.


90 posted on 03/24/2011 6:59:14 AM PDT by Scanian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: butterdezillion

Thanks again for your diligent work on this issue. The law you cite contains the language I vaguely recalled:

“When a new certificate of birth is established under this section, it shall be substituted for the original certificate of birth. Thereafter, the original certificate and the evidence supporting the preparation of the new certificate shall be sealed and filed. Such sealed document shall be opened only by an order of a court of record.”

So at least in Hawaii, the original BC is kept under seal, along with the evidence used to alter it. What I don’t entirely understand is if there is no indication on the new BC that such a sealed record exists, how would the BC’s owner find out about it once they reached the age of majority and were in a position to inquire about such matters? Since there are very legitimate reasons someone might need to know their true paternity (e.g., need for organ donation, issues related to inheritance), it seems odd to have a system in which such a material fact is literally buried, as opposed to having a “pointer” on the new BC indicating that other pertinent information is under seal.

Absent such a written amendment to the newly issued BC, it would seem that anyone requesting their birth records would need to somehow specify they wanted a copy of their on-file record, but also any other previous versions etc. Again, that just seems bureaucratically cumbersome. Not to say it’s impossible that’s how things are set up: it just seems odd to me.


91 posted on 03/24/2011 7:06:24 AM PDT by DrC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: Scanian

I’m not sure if it’s just that, or if there were threats made to newspaper companies as well as to TV and radio media companies.

The reason I say that is because the reporter for the World-Herald interviewed me after my testimony and listened very diligently to what I was saying. She asked for a copy of the booklet I gave the senators and later said that she had read it, and I believe her. She asked me what evidence I based my claims on and was interested to understand. She seemed genuinely grieved over what she was hearing and seemed to me to be a gentle person wanting to understand.

Her report still made the standard boilerplate claims and ignored a lot of what I said, although it did bring up that I had cited legal sources and court cases regarding the definition of “natural born citizen”, which was better than anybody else has done. So even though she had the information and seemed interested in getting it right, her report ended up being only a little bit better than the LJS guy who deliberately deceived. I don’t think she wanted to deceive anybody; I think she was told what she had to say and what she couldn’t say.

Whether that is because newspapers are in the libs’ pockets, or whether they were threatened, I don’t know. I do know that Wall Street Journal has been one of the jerkiest, most backwards newspapers anywhere for censoring me from posting information on their website. And Fox has been the worst at censoring me from posting on their pages. They’re owned by the same people so I’m thinking that the threats extended to radio and TV companies were probably extended also to the newspapers. I have no way of proving that, but it’s a gut feeling.


92 posted on 03/24/2011 7:12:50 AM PDT by butterdezillion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: Scanian

It is so refreshing to see a genius HAG like WOOPI look down her nose at white unacheiver like Trump.


93 posted on 03/24/2011 7:19:03 AM PDT by jetson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Scanian
I tried to establish whether his folks had received citizenship by 5/71 and I haven’t been able to find out one way or another.

Well, given that you have not been able to find this info; probably means, it is not favorable to Marco per NCB status.

Supported him as well, during his Candidacy. I was so hoping, as well; that he might be Prez one day. If he cannot qualify; he can sstill, of course; be an incredible presence and force for good; per for Conservative voices and 'for' America.

94 posted on 03/24/2011 7:19:29 AM PDT by cricket (Osama - NOT made in the USA. . . .and Obama, not made in the USA either.. .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: DrC

I’m not sure how they do it with open adoption; I think the birth and adoptive parents just let the child know all along that the adoption had occurred. But in standard adoptions the idea is to have it be as if an adoption had never occurred, as if that child was truly born to the adoptive couple. I think the way adopted children in such cases find out that they were adopted is by observing differences in appearance or by asking parents or relatives.

My daughter told me about a girl in her high school whose biology teacher dad had announced to her in class that their DNA didn’t match because she had been adopted.

One of the things we talked about regarding Nebraska’s eligibility bill was how a person who was adopted would be able to sign an affidavit saying that the BC they had access to was their “original birth certificate”. If they were adopted in a closed adoption neither they nor anybody but their parents or a judge/agency worker who remembered the case would have any way of knowing that an adoption had occurred. The candidate would definitely be able to say in good conscience that they had their original BC (even though their actual original BC would be sealed and inaccessible without a court order).

If they didn’t even know they were adopted it would be unlikely that they would have allegiance to the country of their birth parents.

If they knew they were adopted the situation would be different. In that case they would need to get a court order, which shouldn’t be difficult. Because the records are sealed nobody could get proof of the adoption to challenge eligibility without a judge’s order to unseal the records.

I asked to see the court order by which Fukino was able to access the “original birth certificate” and was told there was no court order. Whether she could have known about an “original birth certificate” based on index data is unclear. There could perhaps be a flag in the non-public part of the index data which would let them know about sealed records. I don’t know. The whole use of the words “original birth certificate” is puzzling - especially in view of Abercrombie’s statements indicating they don’t have a long-form BC for Obama in Hawaii at all. I think Fukino’s definition of “original birth certificate” must be broad enough to include a signed statement on a kleenex.

The only way we’re ever gonna know what really happened is when there is a criminal investigation complete with subpoena of all the computer and paper records from Hawaii, the Passport Office, Selective Service Administration, Kenya, Indonesia, and Canada, as well as the education and medical records, and depositions and lie detector tests for all the involved people. And that’s not because “birthers will never be convinced” but because there are so many instances of law-breaking and lying by government officials and Obama himself.

Why those people all lied and broke laws and what they were covering up are critical questions that America deserves answers for.


95 posted on 03/24/2011 7:33:26 AM PDT by butterdezillion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: cricket

He certainly can...and if he can come up with the proof, all the better.

I don’t claim to be any exhaustive researcher. It’s possible that he produced it and it escaped my notice.

But I don’t think so.


96 posted on 03/24/2011 7:43:58 AM PDT by Scanian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: butterdezillion

I’m sure the threats were there.

But I never discount the possibility of ulterior motives with any political party.

And Murdoch doesn’t want to deal with it-—possibly due to pressure from the Saudi Royal Family which owns stock in Newscorp.


97 posted on 03/24/2011 7:49:05 AM PDT by Scanian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: Scanian

Ghadafi referred to foreign Muslims making “lawful” campaign contributions to Obama (I would add “lawful” only because the Obama campaign disabled the security protocols which would have revealed the contributions to be unlawful).

That was a LOT of money. And Obama’s campaign says he’s going to get a billion dollars to campaign with for 2012. In this economy and with his negative poll numbers, there’s no way he would get that kind of money from Americans. Who would have that kind of money? Well.... the price of oil is going up... And the people who benefited from TARP are largely foreign, sharia-compliant banks who donated to the DNC and to ACORN - allies with George Soros who has joined teams with the Islamists in order to defeat America, who Soros considers to be the world’s great evil.

Methinks the blogs and places like Free Republic may be the last truly “free speech” we have in this world, because the rest of it is all dictated by the communist-Islamist alliance of George Soros. And until we have more money than they have, that’s the way it is going to be. That’s why Obama has to keep destroying the US economy; that economic vulnerability is what keeps Soros in control.


98 posted on 03/24/2011 8:03:32 AM PDT by butterdezillion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: Scanian

Ping


99 posted on 03/24/2011 8:53:51 AM PDT by Mortrey (Impeach President Soros)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Scanian

Jindal can not be the President(not natural born)


100 posted on 03/24/2011 5:56:39 PM PDT by omegadawn (qualified)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-113 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson