Posted on 09/11/2012 2:17:44 PM PDT by Eagles6
NEW YORK, NY – After a Maricopa County law enforcement agency conducted a six-month forensic examination which determined that the image of Obama’s alleged 1961 Certificate of Livej Birth posted to a government website in April, 2011 is a digital fabrication and that it did not originate from a genuine paper document, arguments from an Obama eligibility lawyer during a recent New Jersey ballot challenge hearing reveals the image was not only a fabrication, but that it was likely part of a contrived plot by counterfeiters to endow Obama with mere political support while simultaneously making the image intentionally appear absurd and, therefore, invalid as evidence toward proving Obama’s ineligibility in a court of law.
(Excerpt) Read more at teapartytribune.com ...
"After calling to the witness stand Mr. Moran and Mr. Purpura, who gave testimony as to why they brought the ballot challenge, and introducing documents showing there is a question as to Mr. Obama’s identity, I called Brian Wilcox to testify as an internet image expert. Mr. Wilcox was going to testify on how the Obama April 27, 2011, long-form birth certificate has been altered and manipulated either by computer software or by a human or both, producing a forged documents, and that since the image is not reliable, we need to see the original paper version. Obama’s lawyer objected to my proffered testimony. I then offered that I would not need to have Mr. Wilcox testify, provided that Obama stipulated that the internet image of his birth certificate could not be used as evidence by either Judge Masin or the New Jersey Secretary of States and that he presented to the court or the Secretary of State no other evidence of his identity or place of birth. Judge Masin also asked Obama’s attorney whether she would so stipulate. She did so stipulate, agreeing that both the court and the Secretary of State cannot rely on the internet birth certificate as evidence of Obama’s place of birth and that Obama has produced no other evidence to the court regarding his place of birth."
From the plaintiff's attorney's website.
That same thought has crossed my mind too.. but I usually sit on the sidelines to see how it all unfolds :p
"After calling to the witness stand Mr. Moran and Mr. Purpura, who gave testimony as to why they brought the ballot challenge, and introducing documents showing there is a question as to Mr. Obama’s identity, I called Brian Wilcox to testify as an internet image expert. Mr. Wilcox was going to testify on how the Obama April 27, 2011, long-form birth certificate has been altered and manipulated either by computer software or by a human or both, producing a forged documents, and that since the image is not reliable, we need to see the original paper version. Obama’s lawyer objected to my proffered testimony. I then offered that I would not need to have Mr. Wilcox testify, provided that Obama stipulated that the internet image of his birth certificate could not be used as evidence by either Judge Masin or the New Jersey Secretary of States and that he presented to the court or the Secretary of State no other evidence of his identity or place of birth. Judge Masin also asked Obama’s attorney whether she would so stipulate. She did so stipulate, agreeing that both the court and the Secretary of State cannot rely on the internet birth certificate as evidence of Obama’s place of birth and that Obama has produced no other evidence to the court regarding his place of birth."
From the plaintiff's attorney's website.
“All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent.”
I used to get severely flamed for saying that. Now days, not so much.
In response to this rather astounding evidence, the legal world has replied with a resounding "So what?"
State AG's review their state codes and find no laws requiring candidates to present a Birth Certificate to prove qualification for office. Thus, State AGs MAY use a BC as part of their own due diligence, but are NOT REQUIRED to do so by statute. IOW, they are constitutionally empowered to do pretty much whatever the heck they wish to do to certify a candidate's eligibility to seek an office.
In essence, Obama's case is that he was duly elected, and the certification of that election is an ipso facto certification of his eligibility as a candidate. Apparently, the court agreed.
"...... If the law supposes that, then the law is a ass, a idiot!" Charles Dickens.
Didn’t a judge say that?
Someone Please Help!
We need someone to copy the portions of the video to reflect only the incriminating comments of the Obama legal counsel (Ms. Hill) with regard to the forgery and eligibility. A short, concise video will go viral much more than these long, drawn-out legal procedings.
The video should incorporate the comments reflected in the source article, shown below:
“Taking an audacious and shocking angle against the constitutional eligibility mandate, Obama’s lawyer, Alexandra Hill, admitted that the image of Obama’s birth certificate was a forgery and made the absurd claim that, therefore, it cannot be used as evidence to confirm his lack of natural born citizenship status. Therefore, she argued, it is “irrelevant to his placement on the ballot”.
“However, Hill is also essentially admitting that Obama is not a legitimate president and that Obama believes that his illegitimacy does not matter to his legal ability to hold the office. Obama holds to a political tenet, not a legal one with respect to his views on his eligibility. That’s what corrupt, criminal politicians do. When the law convicts them, they run to public favorability for shelter with the hope that their supporters will apply pressure to disregard law in their case.”
Someone help please!!!
Thanks for your feedback regarding my question.
High court justice: Obama birth certificate fishySays evidence raises 'serious questions about authenticity' Published: 03/30/2012 at 10:06 PM
An Alabama State Supreme Court justice earlier this week agreed that findings suggesting Barack Obama presented a forged birth certificate to the nation “would raise serious questions about the [document's] authenticity” if presented as evidence in court.
Though the Alabama court denied a a petition filed by Hugh McInnish seeking to require an original copy of Obama’s birth certificate before the sitting president would be allowed on the state’s ballot in November, Justice Tom Parker filed a special, unpublished concurrence in the case arguing that McInnish’s charges of “forgery” were legitimate cause for concern.
Parker writes, “Mclnnish has attached certain documentation to his mandamus petition, which, if presented to the appropriate forum as part of a proper evidentiary presentation, would raise serious questions about the authenticity of both the ‘short form’ and the ‘long form’ birth certificates of President Barack Hussein Obama that have been made public.”
The “certain documentation” Parker refers to is the findings of an investigation conducted by Maricopa County, Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio.
http://www.wnd.com/2012/03/high-court-justice-obama-birth-certificate-fishy/
Essentially, a state Supreme Court Justice wrote that the CCP findings need to find their way into a "proper" lawsuit/venue.
The Republicans have been bribed and/or threatened into silence.
You know, threaten to kill a couple of them, and the rest fall right into line.
No one is willing to risk their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor anymore. Especially the “fortunes.”
That's easy to determine. Just have a SOS formally request verification of his date of birth from the Hawaii DOH and they will surely respond with it ... oh wait /sarc
The law is Article II of the Constitution. Turning a blind eye to evidence that Obama does not fit constitutional requirements is not only a travesty, it is treasonous and contrary to the oath of office of any public servant who refusues to examine the facts, in order to execute their duties.
Thanks for the ping!
We are playing Checkers, and Team Obama has been playing Chess. As any fool can surmise, the man is ineligible under the traditional interpretation of Article II. As anyone with a computer can conclude, the BC released by the WH is not what the HIDOH released to the WH, and is therefore a forgery. Any man with a SS Card and who registered for Selective Service can see that the provenance of that documentation for Obama is false.
The legal remedies have failed at every level. Our Republic has finally faced the very same situation that EVERY Republic to the South of us in this hemisphere has faced at one time or another in its history. That is, a leader ( whether of the "Right," or of the "Left") has acted in defiance of the constitution of the republic to take over that republic's government to run it as he and some oligarchy, domestic or foreign, sees fit. The Left is now in ascendancy. Castro,Chavez,Morales, Lula, Zelaya, Kirschner ... and now Obama.
We are ahead of the game in one respect in that he has at least had to, at this stage in our history, submit himself to an election. Considering the very real possibility that he could win by some means, fair or foul, I suggest that we review the various remedies taken in the other Republics with which we share the hemisphere.
It was a long time coming to this country, but we have lived through an anti-constitutional coup for which there is no constitutional remedy. We can vote him out and begin to repair the damage. But we would be foolish to ignore that other steps may well become necessary as they have become from time to time in the other republics of America.
We can vote him out and begin to repair the damage. But we would be foolish to ignore that other steps may well become necessary as they have become from time to time in the other republics of America. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
That is correct. The People can and have enforced the Constitution in the past.
A coupe has indeed ocurred, but its interesting that no one cares. Wait until Obvama and his liberal fascists start applying their tender mercies to the People. Things will change very quickly IMHO.
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.