Replies

I stand corrected. There are no dates in the HI index, just the bride and groom.

The date in the 1961 INS notes corroborates the date of marriage in the divorce filing in 1964.

So we have multiple INS FOIA documents recounting a US citizen wife of BHO Sr. whom he married on Feb 2, 1961 with the wife living with her parents and a baby named Barack Obama II and that was born on Aug 4, 1961 and that wife was curiously intending to enroll in a WA university in Sept. 1961...and also he recently divorced that wife as of April 1964. BHO Sr. did name his wife as Ann S., IIRC, not S. Ann but he might just have been embarrassed by her masculine first name and she went by Ann later in life.

All of these recorded facts about BHO Sr’s wife in the INS FOIS docs align perfectly with the corroborated documentary evidence concerning Stanley Ann Dunham...and these facts destroy the Dreams narrative of the little happy family in Hawaii for two years before BHO Sr. left for Harvard.

I have yet to see evidence admissible in federal court that Barry is "native born" because his only 1961 LFBC image is forged, IMO.

...BHO Sr. did name his wife as Ann S., IIRC, not S. Ann but he might just have been embarrassed by her masculine first name and she went by Ann later in life.

More WORDS! In fact, her name (who-ever she was) is reflected in one of the layers of the forgery, where we see Ann D......to which 'unham' has obviously been added to create Ann Dunham Obama, and the name 'Stanley' has been created from an unknown entry in brackets, the original of which was shorter than the name 'Stanley' - so the bracket was removed and placed further along...

WATCH THE VIDEO

I WROTE: ...he remains what he maintains to be, a native born citizen of the US...which is quite acceptable to the electorate and the judiciary.

YOU WROTE: I have yet to see evidence admissible in federal court that Barry is "native born" because his only 1961 LFBC image is forged, IMO.

I DON'T GIVE A HOOT WHAT EVIDENCE YOU MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE SEEN OR ANY BLAH BLAH BLAH ABOUT FEDERAL COURT...YOU ARE TWISTING WORDS AGAIN. I MADE IT QUITE CLEAR, HE REMAINS WHAT HE CLAIMS TO BE...AS LONG AS STANLEY ANN DUNHAM REMAINS THE MOTHER-MYTH.

He doesn't give a d*mn about the Constitution or how you interpret 'natural born' - and neither does the majority of the electorate, and as for the judiciary, SCOTUS is 'evading the issue' - remember?

Stanley Ann Dunham is the only thing that provides him with what he claims to be...or the Frank Marshall Davis/father monstrosity. Take your pick.