Posted on 10/03/2009 9:15:02 PM PDT by MissTickly
bookmark for later reading...
I am listening to a replay of Leo on Ken Dunbar talking about your find that once HI made comments about his BC or status it has to be made public.
So you are now saying he was born in HI? Did they send you the records? I am confused?
By the way - Thank you for all your hard work.
DEAD LINK - why are you spamming us?
why is the link broken? Post says to see link for more info, what’s up wiff dat?
Worked for me.
But he was certified as elected according to the standards of the US Congress on 1/8/2009 so whatever standards Hawaii has are irrelevant under the provisions of the US Constitution. Anybody who does not like the situation would be better served to call for legislation to establish clear and unambiguous objective standards and procedures applying to FUTURE elections.
Ping
OK - this one http://misstickly.wordpress.com/2009/10/
Gets to some content - but the one above does not.
Fast forward - has anyone read this to see if there is something new here or is it a rehash of what we have heard from Orly, et al? Or worse, just more speculation?
I have not read it all.
I usually post without reading.
Seriously.
OK .. here’s the direct link I found from
the October archives. The link at the top
takes you to the front page, not the article.
http://misstickly.wordpress.com/2009/10/
Best of success!!
bookmark
Interesting angle. Since the State addressed the issue it now becomes public information that must be fully disclosed by law.
“legal veracity” Not sure what that means, but I read somewhere here that the COLB was scanned by 0’s campaign committee and sent via e-mail as an attachment to someone at Slate or DU. And they then immediately held it up as something they had discovered on Mt. Sinai, if they believed in such things.
There are legitimate questions as to the COLB’s “veracity,” (or truthfulness/genuineness/authenticity) as we have seen the putative president obfuscate, prevaricate and equivocate—when he wasn’t actually lying like a bear rug if it suited his purposes—over-and-over these last several months.
As far as its “legality,” it hasn’t satisfied any chain-of-custody verification; it is an e-copy so authenticity and the `best evidence’ evidentiary rules remain to be satisfied; and if it were being used at, say, an impeachment trial to prove the truth of the matter stated, it would be excluded on those grounds upon objection by a competent 2nd year law student, congressman/womyn or page with a pulse.
There are a number of other evidentiary objections that I would include but for my sudden realization that it’s bedtime for this conservative birther.
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.