Posted on 03/09/2012 1:19:30 PM PST by usar91B
Arpaio on Obama's birth certificate
"Bill explains to a BillOReilly.com Premium Member why he hasn't bothered to report on Arizona Sheriff Arpaio's assertion that President Obama's birth certificate is allegedly a forgery in this excerpt from our Backstage Conversation webcast."
Transcript: Bill O'Reilly- "Erin, Bentonville, Arkansas: Why do you ignore Sheriff Arpaio's assertion that President Obama's birth certificate is a forgery? Well, Because Sheriff Arpaio has not presented any hard evidence to back up his assertion. Secondly, I am very busy. I looked into the birth certificate myself and found out there were two separate birth announcements made in Honolulu newspapers on the day Barack Obama was born. It would be impossible for that to happen unless somebody was 'conspiratorialising' the birth of a little mixed raced baby. If that were happening, then I guess you could have birth announcements planted. But, the odds of that Lil, uh umm Aaron, are about 29 Gazillion to one. Alright..?
What a supremely arrogant idiot O’Reilly is.
But nobody is watching him, right? Good; so it doesn’t matter.
O’Reilly....arrogant butt-head.
Are you positive about this, or..?
I’m curious, have you watched Sheriff Joe’s press conference?
On the day he was born?
I predict this is the last we hear of it from the Posse.
I am not so sure.
The BA only announces “A” birth, not if it was male or female, what hospital, what day and time, place of birth etc.....geesh!
The truth is....Jerome Corsi was told that all of the media were threatened with their jobs....what would you do? He is not going to give up all that he has for his country....I guess people like our founding fathers are few now days!
BS.
If you watched the Arpaio presser that you claim to know so much about, you heard Mike Zullo say that they have evidence that some of the births announced in the newspapers were for foreign-born children and children 3 years old.
There’s a bunch more I could say but I’ll just let that sink in first.
And it’s also not credible to believe that the HDOH submitted all the births to the newspapers either, given that there were far more August births listed in the CDC’s 1961 Natality Report than were listed in the newspapers (and the people like Virginia Sunahara, whose birth was not listed in EITHER paper) AND the fact that some names made it into one paper but not the other (such as the Nordyke girls, whose announcement was in the Advertiser but not the Star-Bulletin, or the child of Robert Nordyke, whose birth was announced in the Star-Bulletin but not the Advertiser. Even the births that were announced in both papers were sometimes days or weeks apart.
These things all combine with what Zullo said about foreign-born and older children being listed in the papers as if they were newborns born in Hawaii.
Beyond all that, it’s highly unlikely that Obama’s name was even in those papers in 1961; if it had been there would have been no need to tamper with the microfilms or to come up with the documented false stories about how the images of the birth announcements were acquired and posted online.
I have already given the posse the name of 2 potential “persons of interest” in the forging of the microfilms. I doubt they will pursue it, though, because as Zullo has said they already know that the birth announcements don’t prove either age or place of birth - and I would add that the evidence they’ve got strongly suggests those announcements thus didn’t even necessarily come from the HDOH. The announcements serve no legal purpose.
And it’s actually doubtful that Obama was ever in the papers in 1961, given the orchestrated “unveiling” of the images being done through documentably false stories and the fact that the microfilms have supposedly LOST scratches over time, are obviously not microfilmed by the microfilming companies claimed on the microfilm boxes, and/or the microfilms cannot be the original microfilms even when the forgers tried to make it appear that they were.
If what Dan Nakaso said is true, then why are 3-year-olds and foreign-born children reported in the newspapers as being newborns born in Hawaii, which involves reporting the WRONG BIRTHDATE for a child? Even in the case of an adoption the HDOH would not alter the birthdate of a child, so how would this phenomenon happen from the HDOH?
When Hawaii was being considered for statehood, there was a minimum population requirement (600K, as I recall).
Hawaii fell short of that total. But, in order, to create more population they passed what was called Territorial Law #57
It authorized the DOH to accept as Hawaiian-born citizens children who were actually born elsewhere.
This law was still in effect in 1961, after Hawaii became a state.
Hey Butterz, I hope you can answer a question for me. Where was the forged document presented for official use? Where was the forgery actually used in a crime (fraud)? I believe that COLB shown on the internet is indeed a forgery, but where was it actually used in a crime? I thought it was just presented on the internet as a lying coverstory, but not actually used in any official capacity. I did not watch the entire Sheriff Joe press conference, so I might have missed the answer.
Apologies. You already knew all of that.
Geesh why don’t the dems just throw BO in jail where he belongs and find someone else? Is BO the ONLY democrat in the world that can be their nominee? Seems like it would be alot easier for them if they would just get a regular American democrat instead of somone with a hidden past and all sorts of rumors that he won’t put to rest.
ACtually I didn’t realize that they had a problem meeting the population requirement. An interesting piece of the puzzle. Thank you for bringing it up.
The hard part about researching intensely is that you don’t have time to keep up with what everybody else is researching intensely. So there are probably TONS of things that you know that I don’t. And I’m always thankful to hear new stuff.
I can’t tell you how many times something somebody casually mentioned here or there ends up making a huge difference in my understanding, filling in critical missing pieces. I often can’t hunt it all down so it probably seems like I’m ignoring it, but it’s in the hard drive waiting for just the right cue to come to the forefront.
I don't believe there are any foreign-born children listed. Which specific names do you think belong to foreign-born children?
It was presented on the White House website and at a press conference as if it was genuine. I would imagine that since that represents the integrity/weight of the office he holds and not just something from Obama the candidate (for instance), it carries more legal weight - much like the whole question of whether Bush lied in this or that speech.
As I understand it, that’s also why it is a serious thing - basically perjury - for Obama to claim on WHITE HOUSE STATIONERY, using the SEAL OF THE PRESIDENT, that he was born at Kapiolani Hospital if that wasn’t true. It’s like the seal is sort of like swearing on the honor of the Office of the Presidency itself. And IIRC, WND spoke to somebody in the FBI who said it would be a serious crime if they could prove that Obama signed that letter to Kapiolani bearing the Presidential seal, if he wasn’t born at Kapiolani. (Unfortunately, the FBI person basically said they’d never check whether or not a crime had been committed.)
And I believe that Obama’s counsel did communicate to Judge Malihi, regarding a legal proceeding, that the genuine birth certificate had been posted online. That’s actually perjury on the part of the attorney if he knew it was fraudulent, or on Obama’s part if he did not tell the attorney that it was fraudulent. In addition, since those were in proceedings regarding a ballot, the use/reference to a forgery is election fraud.
Anybody who knew the BC and draft registration were forged had a duty to inform the public of that fact since it involves a matter under the jurisdiction of the federal government (such as the people who pay his salary, those who decide whether his appointees should be Constitutionally approved, etc), according to the Federal General False Statement Act.
Claiming in a press conference to the entire nation that this is a genuine birth certificate is election fraud on the people of Maricopa County, Arizona and everywhere, since states are deciding whether to allow him on the ballot based on that forgery.
I’m not a lawyer or law enforcement person so if I’m not understanding correctly I hope somebody will correct me. Or if there are things I’m missing (and I’m sure there are) I hope they’ll chime in.
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.