Yes, but that is NOT what I am saying it is. It is a document created after an ANNULMENT (Probably in 2011) of a previous Adoption using information which was already in the file.
Do you acknowledge that? Do you acknowledge that if Obama was adopted in 1968, for instance, there would be a paper BC created in 1968 that had all the information on it? Do you acknowledge that that paper would be inserted into the HDOH file and from then on would be copied and copies certified just like any other and thus any scan of a copy actually made by the HDOH would thus act just like any other original or supplemental BC in their office?
Sure. But do you acknowledge that an Adopted child can petition the court to have their adoption annulled and to ask that a new birth certificate be created which contains information already in their file? Sure, they could ask that the ORIGINAL be unsealed, but if it serves there purpose better to get a new one created which is designed to look like an original, why would they not do such a thing?
If a paper BC was created whenever Obama was adopted and it was photocopied, stamped, and certified in 2011, and then somebody took a scan of that certified copy and posted it online, how and why would that scan act any different than a scan of any other certified BC put out by the HDOH?
It would look exactly the same. The Cold Case posse did exactly that, and their scan had something like 40 layers in it. They regarded this as evidence that the PDF was not produced by scanning a document because it had TOO FEW layers in it.
If you take a certified copy of your BC - which was created after an adoption - and scan it and post it online do you get a registrar’s stamp that you can move to different spots on the page? Can you do anything to that scanned document to get the registrar’s stamp to act that way?
I don't have any adobe software product with which to do this, but I can tell you the cold case posse DID in fact, do this, and it did NOT come out like Obama's PDF "birth certificate."
HI law provides that when an unadoption takes place the original BC takes the place of the supplemental BC. Either one would be a paper document.
Since a real scan of a paper document doesn’t act like Obama’s “scan”, what he showed is not from a paper document. It can’t be from either the original or the supplemental BC at the HDOH. And in fact, it can’t be from ANYTHING certified that Fuddy might have sent him - which to be certified has to be on paper.
There is no way that what Obama posted was a scan of what Fuddy sent him, and that means that Fuddy is deceiving the entire nation - which is misprision of forgery and/or fraud and is a federal felony.
So we already know that AT LEAST Fuddy is engaging in crime to cover for Obama.
And actually, because the fraud perpetrated by Obama was against the people of Maricopa County, Arizona, the misprision of that fraud was also against the people of Maricopa County, Arizona, and Sheriff Joe would presumably be within his jurisdiction to charge her with it...
I wonder how soon they could arrest her.