Skip to comments.Arpaio press conference: Evidence of fraud. No refute from the Obama White House.
Posted on 07/17/2012 11:06:27 PM PDT by dragnet2
A Sheriff of a major county in the United States conducted a thorough and formal investigation regarding President Obama's birth record.
They provided substantial evidence today in a public news conference saying the birth record is fraudulent.
Yet not a word from the White House.
In fact in the news conference Sheriff Arpaio stated: "President Barack Obama's birth certificate is definitely fraudulent", which they then provided detailed evidence.
How is it possible, with all the resources available to the White House, including an army of attorneys, advisers, researchers and spokespersons, not a single word refuting the evidence laid out today?
These are extremely serious allegations, backed up by evidence, broadcasted in an open public news conference today.
If the evidence Arpaio and his investigators provided were false, misleading or inaccurate, would it not be very easy for the White House with all their available resources, to deny or refute the evidence?
Why the silence?
Can we expect President Obama and his administration to publicly refute or disprove this evidence?
If not, why not?
D) BHO is a bastard, his mommy and daddy were not married, ever.
E) Frank Marshall Davis is his real dad.
ping to ad guy post
Declared dead by whom, based on what evidence?
Arpaio and his investigators provided substantial evidence, yesterday, which has not been refuted or proven inaccurate.
How is it possible, they could continue to simply ignore the evidence?
This really begs the question:
Why would the Republicans in Congress not run with the evidence and demand answers to very legitimate and credible questions?
Of course they have no comment. They’ll simply ignore it and soon it will go away because something else in the 24-hour-news-cycle will displace it.
Someone made a stand alone thread for that article last night. It was a good summary.
Why would the Republicans in Congress not run with the evidence and demand answers to very legitimate and credible evidence?
If you are posting here and have not yet posted a demand with your House Rep. and Senators demanding that they investigate Arpaio’s evidence and enforce the Constitution’s Presidential eligibility requirements - HANG UP AND DRIVE!
What is known about the obama staffer who died last week...the 29 year old fellow....what was his expertise in layering, graphics, etc?
Do you feel you need to beg them to preform their duty?
If you are posting here and have not yet posted a demand with your House Rep. and Senators demanding that they investigate Arpaios evidence and enforce the Constitution
Ya see that's the whole problem. No one needs to make demands from me, in order for me to perform my job.
Why do overpaid government officials and your non-representative representatives need to be begged and demanded upon, to perform their Constitutional duties?
How come these questions go unanswered?
Citizens better be on this. This isn’t political, its the rule of law.
I think we should all visit our local sheriffs and demand they support their own in this matter.
Because the Repubs in Congress are either RINOs, spineless or a combination of the two.
Exactly! Only one problem: John Boehner
I believe the GOP establishment wants this issue ignored because of Marco Rubio not having citizen parents. Their assumption seems to be that if they don't pursue the eligibility angle against Obama, the Dems won't dare use it against Rubio.
It isn’t old news that Hawaii has an illegal birth certificate factory going on , is it?
Hi, I think you have this a bit wrong and I hope you don't mind me making some clarifications. Layered documents can only be modified on the layers to any expert degree with programs such as Photoshop, Illustrator, InDesign. I'm expert level in all of these applications. When I create a document starting with these programs, I can output the file as a PDF for review or as a final printer's document, and so on. If I didn't merge or flatten the layers before outputting to PDF, then the document might be able to be opened in one of these original software programs so that further editing on the layers could take place if needed. Not all PDFs are importable into those programs, and some conversion will take place, especially if versions or platforms differ. Usually I can open anyone's PDF in Photoshop or InDesign, but those files don't always all behave the same.
Anyway, in my experience, it is not standard practice to send a PDF to an end user for making more modifications on that file. I don't want anyone to be making a version outside of my control anyway, especially in a separate software application (unless I didn't care to be the master holder of the most recent version of the document). In fact, it's very clunky to make changes to any PDF using Acrobat and that is what most end users have (and then it's typically only the free Reader, not the full program). If I wanted the recipient to be able to modify my original file, I would send the native file. Why would we go back and forth with PDFs, only to have them have to be reconverted in another program? (I admit I am only familiar with Adobe products, perhaps you use another PDF software editor?)
IIRC, what investigators discovered with the BC PDF was that after they opened the file in Illustrator, the layers were visible. I agree that the receiving party, not knowing anything about layers, approved it and ran with it! Which begs the question, did the forger intentionally leave the layers in the PDF unmerged because they wanted them to be discovered? Because it's a stretch for me to think that the forger would be using these programs to create layers and then not merge them before outputting to a final PDF. But they might have been rather rushed or just forgetful. The mystery continues...
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.