There's another one from 1963 around somewhere too.
Posted on 01/31/2009 12:29:20 AM PST by Red Steel
If we allow Obama to get away with the BC crime of the century, Then it will happen again and again and again. Throw the fool out!
I think the difference is probably due to the fact the original BC for that one is from 1930, 29 years before Hawaii became a state.
Perhaps all the records from the Territory of Hawaii say "accepted" rather than "filed".
Thank you for posting that picture. It reminded that we need a new roll of toilet paper in the guest bathroom.
There's another one from 1963 around somewhere too.
All of the Hawaiian COLBs that I have seen say “Date Accepted By State Registrar”
xlnt
I like it :)
Except Obama's
So Obama’s birth was a late filing (”Date Filed By Registrar”) that was overlooked by the forger who only altered the date below it.
so what is this supposed to mean ? lol
I don’t know what it means exactly. The date is 4 days after the purported birthday. ‘Filed but not accepted’ is on the picture Rhino uploaded from factcheck above as well, in addition to the dailkos etc. images.
With hawaiian laws, maybe it could mean there’s been an alteration that hasn’t been resolved yet. I don’t know. I’m sure someone knows why Obamas’ says “filed” instead of “accepted”, at least in terms of modifications, and/or the type of documentation on file. Hope they speak up.
One of these cases will hit the right chords and then out of office goes ZERO!
Nope! Can’t add to that.
I kind of doubt it. The other day Obama/Biden filed a motion to dismiss. It wasn't very long, but in reading it I got the impression that the lawyers who filed it were quite skilled. In comparison most of the anti-Obama filings seem like amateur hour.
To really get a judge to issue a subpoena that will take effect on a sitting president, you would need high-power professional legal representation. A really high-quality lawyer has to take the case. But most lawyers are probably going to feel they will be risking their career. Perhaps if there is some big money paying for the case someone would take it. But there don't seem to be any very wealthy people who are bankrolling this either.
Another factor is that no one can state for certain that Obama's long-form BC is disqualifying. Without knowing in advance what it says, individuals are not going to risk a whole lot of their own money just to see a piece of paper.
A simple motion to dismiss is only the first step for the defense and citing the "factcheck".org address to a jpg document passed off as genuine is not skilled at all. Those "skilled" lawyers should present that Obama COLB to the court, now that might be impressive.
It is my understanding that the Hi officials has stated that they have a bc on file has anyone wrote the Hi officials and asked if there is a accepted bc on file ?
Interesting. I didn’t know about this before. I’ll have to check it out.
>>>>People who signed up after the election and haunt eligibilty threads when they say the issue is silly are extremely suspicious.
I don’t know about anyone else but I don’t seek out threads dealing with matters that I don’t take seriously. These guys show up on eligibilty threads as if somebody shot them out of a cannon.<<<<
Well said! You have a way with words.
There would be enough money for top notch legal services, and with 100,000 people in the suit, the BC issue might get some attention.
I think Donofrio and Berg were paying their way with donations. IIRC Hollister was asking for $43000 in legal costs and he hasn't even gone very far. So it probably will take really big money. I'm thinking something might happen after two or three years, when Obama may have PO'ed some really rich people.
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.