We all know this. So what?
The timing may be key. This report coincides with an outbreak of WH scandals & the slow but steady erosion of Obama’s poll #s. What may have been a ‘so what’ 2 or 3 mos ago might get traction now.
Part of the reason powerful special interests pooled their resources to put Obama in the WH was to get certain results. The less effective Obama is at achieving those goals, the more dissatisfied even his supporters become. Sooner or later the tipping point is reached.
“We all know this. So what?”
Yeah, kinda what I’m thinking. On another thread discussing Ted Cruz’s eligibility to be president many have stated that if one parent is a US citizen the new born is considered a natural born citizen whether born in the US or not. If this is correct for Cruz then being that Obama’s mother was a US citizen when he was born then isn’t he a natural born citizen, same as Cruz? Btw, not a Obama fan, just trying to sort this out....
“We all know this. So what?”
For the first timed a COURT CERTIFIED forensic document examiner who has met the extremely high standartd (Daubert Standard) as a federal expert witness has produced a report that, unless successfully challenged meets the Federal Rules of Evidence if a court orders a discovery hearing on the authenticity of the White House pdf:
“42. Taking it a step further, investigators sought an independent authority on forensic document examination that had no previous connection with our inquiry. Investigators commissioned a court certified handwriting analyst and forensic document examiner with over 20 years of experience providing document expertise to legal and law enforcement communities, corporations, financial institutions and private individuals for this task.”
IANAL, but I had to become familiar with the “Daubert standard” that my expert witnesses would be subjected to being challenged on during my jury trail for custody of my son. Here are the key points that came out of the SCOTUS Daubert case:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daubert_standard
“The Daubert standard provides a rule of evidence regarding the admissibility of expert witnesses’ testimony during United States federal legal proceedings.”
“In 2011, Rule 702 was again amended to make the language clearer. The rule now reads:
RULE 702. TESTIMONY BY EXPERT WITNESSES
“A witness who is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education may testify in the form of an opinion or otherwise if:
(a) The expert’s scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will help the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue;
(b) The testimony is based on sufficient facts or data;
(c) The testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods; and
(d) The expert has reliably applied the principles and methods to the facts of the case.”