The gist was, telling me that the documents are forgery is hearsay unless you witnessed the forgery or are an expert. Even then, its hearsay until examined in the proper jurisdiction.
And that’s ALL THE BIRTHER’S offer is hearsay, and then call Congress criminals and traitors because they don’t “look into it” (and I wouldn’t be surprised if as many as 75% had looked into it and decided the issue was a non-starter), and all the Judges are corrupt and in on the conspiracy because they believe they have no jurisdiction. (and they don’t — USCON Article 2 section 4)
As for your reply:
I was putting into simple terms what I found at law.cornell.edu.
When judges cite Miracle on 34th Street that’s a ten thousand gigawatt flashing red light that something is very wrong.
Is it hearsay when Alvin Onaka, upon being asked to verify that the White House image is a “true and accurate representation of the original record on file”, refuses to verify that even though required by law to verify whatever is submitted to him for verification if he can?
All the Congress-critters that I’ve gotten responses from - or seen responses from - rely on either Factcheck’s claims or on the claims of HDOH spokespeople (NOT Onaka, the person legally authorized to verify information from vital records).
But I can prove to you that Factcheck lied; the “seal” they claimed was on the COLB did not “bend” when the paper it was supposedly on bent.
And I can prove that the HDOH altered their 1960-64 birth index to include non-valid records. I can show you that the 2001 “memo” was not posted on the internet as required until the day Obama’s forged long-form was released - because that is the day the PDF of that memo was CREATED. And I can show you the email I got from the HDOH in 2010 denying the existence of any such document clarifying what is on a standard (versus abbreviated) birth certificate.
I can prove that the PDF of the HDOH Administrative Rules (which had previously been unlawfully hidden from the public view) was created on the day my UIPA request to the lieutenant governor was due, which was when it was finally posted to the internet for public view as required by law. I can show the email where the OIP claimed the rules were posted online because that is where they look to see the rules. So a different PDF was in existence that whole time but hidden from public view and a new PDF was created and posted publicly when the lt governor’s office had their back against the wall on a deadline crunch. Why create a new PDF rather than just make public the PDF that the OIP had been using all along? I suspect it had something to do with the sections in effect in 1961 which were so blacked out in the new PDF that they are nearly unreadable - the parts about documentation necessary when a birth is reported to a local registrar.
I can show you the email where the HDOH told me that there was no birth record for Virginia Sunahara, and others can show you the photo they took of the 1960-64 birth index with her name in it.
I could go on a very, very long time, talking about evidence.
The HDOH is criminally involved, and the members of Congress have been unwilling to hear any evidence of that fact. God knows I’ve tried to tell them.
>>The gist was, telling me that the documents are forgery is hearsay unless you witnessed the forgery or are an expert.<<
Not if you were the purported author of the documents and you testified that you didn’t author them.
I’m not sure where you’re trying to go with this. There are rules for admission of documents, and in general, government documents are admitted without “proving” them up. If there is a question about their authenticity, no it does not take an expert to prove that — all kinds of fact witnesses can testify to that.
For example, the following hypothetical individuals can say:
— “I have seen the original document and it is different...”
— “I am the custodian of those records and this is not part of that...”
— Another person can testify that the entire set of records are not authentic for whatever reason
I’m sure there are other scenarios.