Skip to comments.Obama Lawyer claims birth certificate is fake
Posted on 04/17/2012 8:34:06 AM PDT by varmintman
All over the internet this morning, this is a link to a google search on 'obama lawyer birth certificate'.
“This is just more exaggerated conspiracy blather.”
Because he CARES about EACH AND EVERY ONE OF US!
Anyone who doesn’t agree is just spewing “more exaggerated conspiracy blather”!
Remember to TRUST ABCCBSCNNNBCFOX/AP — for the same reason!
It’s a serious twisting of what you’ll read here:
She stipulated that the internet image of the BC could not be used as evidence.
They stipulated that the Court was unable to rely upon the veracity of the electronic BC image, so that they wouldn’t have to withstand scrutiny of the image by an expert witness.
This story is a giant, steaming pile of dung. Obama's lawyer did not say the birth certificate is fake. The headline of this thread is absolute and complete nonsense. I expect to see trash like this on InfoWars, but am very disappointed this sort of thing shows up on a respectable website like FR. This is just exaggerated conspiracy mongering. Period.
A birth certificate is a standard document for identifying citizenship and a place of birth. It’s why the state department requires them when one applies for a passport. It’s why Obama voted for a law in 2005 that requires real citizens to submit birth certificates when applying for drivers licenses and ID cards. Certified public records, such as a legal birth certificates, are considered to be self-authenticating under the Federal Rules of Evidence. If Obama is claiming to be Constitutionally eligible for office as a natural-born citizen ... as would be required to get on the New Jersey ballot, then a birth certificate should be a no-brainer document to provide in court in order to prove the claim. The fact that the lawyer went to great lengths to avoid having this alleged document scrutinized in court is indeed a tacit admission that is legally insufficient.
forgery or not an image on the internet cannot be used as evidence.
[[They stipulated that the Court was unable to rely upon the veracity of the electronic BC image, so that they wouldnt have to withstand scrutiny of the image by an expert witness.]]
so if I’m understasnding you right- the court discussion whent somethign liek so?
Lawyer: Judge, since you the court can’t verify the authenticity of the electronic photo of the BC, then there’s no need to put hte evidence efore experts who might coudl teell it’s a fake, right?
Judge: Good point- Nope- there’ll be no expert scrutiny to see if the obama administration faked the BC
Does that abuot sum it up?
IF the BC was ligit, Why did the lawyer weasel her way around the law by arguing such assinine arguments? (which fortunately for her, the judge bought hook line and sinker for fear of losing his job apparently)
President Obamas birth certificate was likely part of a contrived plot by counterfeiters to endow Obama with mere political support while simultaneously making the image intentionally appear absurd and, therefore, invalid as evidence toward proving Obamas ineligibility in a court of law, the Tea Party Tribune quoted Hill as saying.It's hearsay until I see an actual court transcript. But if the quote is accurate, that sounds to me like an assumption of forgery.
Your “more” in front of “exaggerated conspiracy blather” led me to believe that you were defending the Fraud’s birth certificate, rather than just calling our attention to the article’s erroneous title.
BS. Some writer may quote her as saying it, but it’s bull. Obama and the DNC have very good lawyers on this, and there is absolutely no other record of her saying this.
Some writer may quote her as saying it, but it’s bull. Obama and the DNC have very good lawyers on this, and there is absolutely no other record of her saying this.
[[The fact that the lawyer went to great lengths to avoid having this alleged document scrutinized in court is indeed a tacit admission that is legally insufficient.]]
I fully agree with you- however your last statement is an assumption, not a fact that would hold up in court I don’t beleive- I agree the lawyer wentto great lengths to avoid havign hte document scrutinized- and htere almost certainly was a definate reason why she did- however provign why is what the right would have to prove ion court to get a conviction- or whetever-
The Judge shoudl have demanded that hte defense GET the original birth cirtificate and present it to him imediately! instead, thsi judge was apaprently too afraid of losing their job and didn’t require the actual document in question be presented for expert scrutiny-
Antoher travfesty of justice because noone dares stand up against a media supported black man in office-
AINT'T happening. So...my opinion has always been: Yes...he probably is ineligible...but given the above...and given I still only have 24 hours in the day and a MSM that will protect him...what is the most efficient use of time, energy and money?
And it certainly isn't the birther issue. The MSM has already sufficiently made that issue "a grassy knoll conspiracy"...regardless of the facts. Hats off to them...they did their work. But he's got a record and no amount of polishing that t*rd can turn it into gold...because people are living it.
At this point in the game, the birth certificate will NOT get him out before Jan 20th, 2013. All it will do is distract from his record...the recovery, Obamacare, executive orders, trashing the constitution...etc. And that is a gauranteed winner.
And she is totally legally correct.
By my lights, more like this:
Lawyer: “We want to call an expert witness to impeach the image of the birth certificate as forged.”
Opposing Counsel: “We object to the expert witness.”
Lawyer: “Okay, maybe we don’t need an expert witness to impeach the image, if you will stipulate that the Court cannot rely on the image as evidence.”
Opposing Counsel: “Yes, we will so stipulate, but we don’t need to show no steenking birth certificate anyway.”
You’re absolutely correct. Three plus years into his reign, and NO ONE has stood up in congress and even raised the question. Joe Smith R-SC called him a “liar”, which everyone knew to be true, and he was censured. Every court runs away from the issue as fast as they can. I don’t think there isn’t a clause in The Constitution that the 0bama regime hasn’t violated, and I’m beginning to wonder if Barry will go quietly if he is unsuccessful in stealing the election in November.
FWIW, the SC Rep that had the cojones to call ovomit a liar is named Joe Wilson.
YES! thanks - I knew he was an [above] average “Joe”.