Blogger admits Hawaii birth certificate forgery, subverting Obama claims (Uh-oh)

Israel Insider ^ | 3 July 2008 | Reuven Koret

[SE Mom]

Jay McKinnon, a self-described Department of Homeland Security-trained document specialist, has implicated himself in the production of fraudulent Hawaii birth certificate images similar to the one endorsed as genuine by the Barack Obama campaign, and appearing on the same blog entry where the supposedly authentic document appears.

The evidence of forgery and manipulation of images of official documents, triggered by Israel Insider's revelation of the collection of Hawaii birth certificate images on the Photobucket site and the detective work of independent investigative journalists and imaging professionals in the three weeks since the publication of the images, implicate the Daily Kos, an extreme left blog site, and the Obama campaign, in misleading the public with official-looking but manipulated document images of doubtful provenance.

The perceived unreliability of the image has provoked petitions and widespread demands for Obama to submit for objective inspection the paper versions of the "birth certificate" he claimed in his book Dreams from My Father was in his possession, as well as the paper version of the Certificate of Live Birth for which the image on the Daily Kos and the Obama "Fight the Smears" website was supposedly generated.

Without a valid birth certificate, Obama cannot prove he fulfills the "natural born citizen" requirement of the Constitution, throwing into doubt his eligibility to run for President.

McKinnon, who says he is 25-30 years old, operates a website called OpenDNA.com and uses the OpenDNA screen name on various web sites and blogs, including his comments and diary on The Daily Kos. In recent years he has divided his time between Long Beach, California and Vancouver, British Columbia. He is a Democratic political activist, frequent contributor to the left wing Daily Kos blog, and a fervent Barack Obama supporter.

[David]

While I agree about BHO Sr probably not being in Boston at that time, what what do you mean about available routes? I find it hard to believe that in '61-'62 time frame somebody wasn't flying from Hawaii to Seattle, or Vancouver which is pretty nearby and wouldn't change the numbers much, I was just responding to your comment about it being quite a detour. It's not. Airlines fly great circles because they are the shortest route between two spots.

When I took my wife to Hawaii in 1980 (from Seattle), either there was no direct Seattle to Hawaii flight or there was only one that got there too late to get to the outer islands. I am not a particular go to Hawaii fan but we have a number of friends who do; and a client who has a division of his business there; the routing people talk about is through San Francisco. In the early 1960's, it would not surprise me that San Francisco was the only route.

So yes, Seattle would be out of the way in airline routing to Boston. Plus which the Boston fairy tale has a problem with the fact that Obama Sr. wasn't there until a year later and it isn't likely he was there much earlier because he was also considering an alternative education grant that would have been sufficient to pay for taking his wife and son.

[Calpernia]

Hey, evolution is not for everyone. To heck with certificates, records, in door plumbing, families and paved roads. We should all leave our desks right now and weave baskets.

[David]

The location of the wedding was Honolulu Hawaii, where they both were students during that semester. Nothing happened in Kenya. She was never there.

You know she wasn't a student the winter semester--she dropped out of school at the end of the first semester. It isn't clear to me what happened to him. But that is certainly an issue to look at.

I haven't looked through all the posts since last night. But as to the Sec. 1409 issue, there is a clear record of the divorce, together with a recital of the pleadings of the grounds for divorce (a statutory version of the burdensome marriage). So there is a divorce case file somewhere and typically counsel recites the location of the marriage in the file. So we need to get the divorce file and read the papers there which may shed some light on the place of marriage.

Under the circumstances, they were not going to spend the money on hiring counsel to complete a divorce proceeding unless they were married.

I am told, but again have not researched the legal question, that a bigamous marriage is only voidable, not void--that is it takes a legal proceeding to dissolve it even if contracted illegally in the United States. So wherever they were married, Obama is not illegitimate offspring and does not appear to get under Sec. 1409.

Thus his citizenship still would need to come, either under Sec. 1401 which would require his citizen parent to have resided in the U S for five years prior to his birth and after such citizen parent reached age 14 or 16 which Ms. Dunham-Obama by definition did not, or because he was born in Hawaii of which as yet we have seen no real indication that he was.

[Gatún(CraigIsaMangoTreeLawyer)]

Good morning, null and void.

Thank you for that information. I appreciate it.

I trust what you telling me. Could you, though, direct me to that information so I can archive it?

It needs to be shared here in Panama and with the rest of the Canal Zonians living in the States.

Thank you for your time.

I will continue to research it in order to have that information at my reach.

My best regards.

[David]

If the wedding was in Hawaii, it was invalid, since Barak Senior was already married by all accounts, whether Stanley Ann knew it or not.

Any authority for that proposition? That seems to be contrary to what the divorce lawyers say.

[bvw]

Honolulu to Kenya route was Honolulu-San Fransisco-New York-London, then a once a day London to South Africa route via Rome and Khartoum, then Nairobi, leaving at 19.00 and not arriving until 9:15 the next day.

Where do you get that itinerary from?

[RubyR]

Here are the locations for the Sept 1971 reference -

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2138204/

http://www.peoplefinders.com/default.aspx?vw=people&input=name&fn=brodeurmary&mn=&ln=&city=kinston&state=NC&dobmm=&dobdd=&doby=&e=err&Codes=%3B%3B55%3B%3B

No results were found for MAYA SOETORO born 08/15/1970. The month and day and year were removed from the criteria you entered.

SOETORO, MAYA born 09/01/1971 returned 1 Match

For the US Public Records Index I used Ancestry.com - not sure if others will need a membership to access that part:

http://www.ancestry.com/search/db.aspx?dbid=8907

[David]

According to the Chicago Tribune, divorce of Obama Sr. and Stanley Ann occurred in 1964. Where and when—presumably Honolulu but I have not yet found that in the record; nor I have seen the actual date in 1964.

We need to identify the court where the divorce occurred; and get a copy of the complaint. In the normal divorce proceeding, counsel pleads the location of the marriage—likely if he did so here, that sheds some light on the facts; maybe if he does not plead where they were married, that suggests a purpose in not doing so.

[bvw]

Actionable libels, by the way, do not come with "if", or "as a speculation", or even the more assertive "in my opinion", or "I believe that". Why do such verbal flags protect against libel and slander? Because they indicate that the statement is not stated as a fact.

When I agreed that speculation can be slander, I meant that in public one can bring up an untoward subject about a person that casts them in a bad light unfairly. This is "false lights". In general one should assume the best about a person, and when questionable circumstance arises one should consider if one is a part of them in order to react to them or to act upon them. A lot of times, maybe most, we hear and see things about others that we have no duty to act upon, and even if we are come to read the situation in a negative way, because we are not directly part of it, nor by certainty able to remedy any harm, then we'd best keep mouth shut and mind otherwise occupied, and even in good time to make an attempt to find away to see a good in that person who was slighted in our own mind's image.

Yet there are times were we must publicly comment on and even extensively discuss a situation about a person where the discussion is likely to, or will indeed throw the person into a bad light. This is such a time.

[bvw]

As David has brought out in this thread, there is a somewhat cohesive narrative of events and testimony known that would put Obama’s birth a few days earlier than recorded.

[bvw]

That’s a reasonable question. I’d think she does not.

[gopheraj]

(not arguing here but wanting to learn)

So what you’re saying here is that there are only two ways to be a citizen (natural born/naturalized)? I thought one could be a citizen at birth but still not be eligible for the presidency. Just because he has a passport doesn’t mean he has met the requirements for presidency. Our son in law from Scotland) has a US passport. Unless we see obama’s passport no one knows where he was born. As far as the breach of security thing, the one who breached it was Obama’s “man”, wasn’t it? If he was doing the snooping to get something on McCain, then decided to snoop on obama so it’d not look so bad, then what? We don’t know exactly what he was told about his birth by his mother either - only what is told to the media about their conversation.

For myself, I could care less where he was born and not sure the COLB is fake or not BUT it seems that he is hiding something on his BC that he doesn’t want out.

[al_c]

Good link. But I noticed one thing that stood out to me as a graphic designer that I didn’t see covered in the info on that page. I’m wondering why there is a white outline on those letters on the certificate. Normally, if you print black ink on a paper, there’s just black ink. It appears to me that in an effort to make the type more readable, it was given a white outline. That seem suspicious to me.

[antiRepublicrat]

But it is an arguable question. I don't view the 1790 statute as having much bearing because it was passed long before we had possessions and territories outside the US

Everything here is definitely arguable, but the 1790 law was absolute -- if you have two American parents then you are a natural-born American citizen, no matter where you were born.

[Grampa Dave]

Thanks for the ping.

Is it time for Obama to throw his sister and brother under his bus?

[David]

David, the case I cited is 1998, well after the 1986 act and the 1988 act.

You didn’t read it did you ?

Otherwise someone with your legal background would not continue to deny the fact that the law regarding unwed mothers precedes 1952.

You think the SC got there history wrong on the statute?

Alright, let's address this with respect to Sec. 1409.

You haven't cited any Supreme Court case that I can find anywhere in your posts. You have a number of references to a Cornell Law School article regarding the dissent by a couple of Liberal Justices in Miller v. Albright which affirms a DC Circuit Opinion that reaches a result contrary to the extensive irrelevant material set forth in the dissent and the Cornell Law School article.

And the facts in Miller aren't your facts. There, the case involved a citizen father who had failed to comply precisely with the statutory acknowledgment of paternity; not a citizen mother case at all. So all you have is some dictum in a dissent from a bunch of Liberal Justices arguing what they think is a women's right's issue.

You have cited an opinion by Henry K. Chang which purports to set forth a statement of the law to the same effect as the dissent in Miller but Henry also is a little lacking in a precise statement of the statute on which he relies and how the effective date of that statute operates in the context of Sec. 1401.

Henry's opinion looks a little more like real legal work than some law student's view of dictum in a Supreme Court dissent and his statement of the law makes sense although I still intend to look at the real statutory authorities.

Observe that if this statement of the law is reality, there wasn't any reason to insert the "born after December . . . " language in Sec. 1409. And there is also a body of this secondary authority that refers to Sec. 1401(g) as an overlay on Sec. 1409(c) which would put the burden of the five and ten year rule on the mother even in an illegitimate child case. I don't find any authority for that either--and although the proposition that the 1986-1988 statutes didn't affect a change in the statute is also dictum, it may well be correct.

I can't reach the clear underlying statutes with my legal search engine here and the nearest law library is some distance. However I am inclined to suspect that your and Henry's version of the statute may be correct.

But I have difficulty wasting a lot of time on the issue because there is a pretty clear body of factual data here and elsewhere demonstrating that Stanley Ann and Obama Sr. were in fact married. If the marriage really took place in Kenya as I speculate that it did, validity is a non issue and even if it took place elsewhere, the divorce lawyers say the marriage is still valid to legitimize the children as long as it has not been dissolved by legal process (a divorce proceeding in the U S).

The fact that the campaign reacts in a harsh anti-free speech effort to shut this issue down leads you to think that in fact, they are vulnerable on the "natural born" issue and since they would not be vulnerable if they had some credible record of a Hawaii birth, I assume the facts will ultimately demonstrate that he was born in Kenya, particularly in the context of the other news reports that support that conclusion.

[bvw]

On the boy’s wrist wrist is a watch that could be the same as the watch shown in the date-disputed airport photo with Obama Senior in post #1994. That is the photo with which Calpernia has flash lighting concerns. She wonders if it was photoshopped.

[Calpernia]

>>>Is it time for Obama to throw his sister and brother under his bus?

::shrugs::

I’m just amazed at how many people in the Obama circle have such creative histories.

[Calpernia]

You are right. That does look like a similar watch. I wonder if that was a gift from his father at that Christmas tree picture.

[Political Junkie Too]

I stand by my comment. I feel that way about most teen-agers, regardless of getting pregnant at 17.

-PJ