Sheriff's investigation finds Obama birth certificate 'fake'

World Net Daily ^ | 15 December 2016 | Bob Unruh

[Fractal Trader]

A years-long forensics investigation into the computer image of the long-form Hawaiian birth certificate image that Barack Obama released during a White House news conference during his first term and presented to the American people as an official government document reveals it is “fake.”

It also confirms those who were subjected to the derogatory “birther” label from many media outlets and Democrats for badgering Obama with lawsuits, petitions to the Supreme Court, and more, were right – at least in the dispute that the document was manufactured and the questions about Obama’s birth and legitimacy to be president under the Constitution’s requirements still are unanswered.

[Cletus.D.Yokel]

My ‘personal’ consideration is that he was birthed-at-home in Hawai’i and has no hospital issued birth-certificate.

If that is the case, why would he not just say, “I was birthed on my grandmothers couch”?

Things just don’t add up.

[LouisianaJoanof Arc]

I would love to know who this guy really is.

[MHGinTN]

You obamaroid/dnc kneepads are too tight ...

[Fantasywriter]

If the BC were legitimate, it would have listed as Stanley Ann’s residence the place where she was actually living. You, being an Obot, pretend to yourself that there’s no difference between an old, former residence and a current residence. This is because Obots will say and believe anything to avoid facing the issues that undermine Obama’s fraudulent birth narrative.

Multiple Obama-friendly biographers have beaten every bush in HI, seeking any trace of Stanley Ann’s presence there during her pregnancy. Not one has uncovered the slightest clue as to her whereabouts. This doesn’t bother you because the truth is the last thing you want. All you want is to blindly and invariably support Obama.

It’s pathetic.

[ImJustAnotherOkie]

Bad evidence is bad evidence is all I’m saying.

[The_Media_never_lie]

I don’t know where Obama was born. I have no idea, but as with many others, I too looked at his birth certificate and found quite a few issues.
It’s possible Obama was born in Hawaii and it’s possible his birth certificate is somehow real, but I doubt it. But let’s give the birth certificate the benefit of the doubt (against all logic).

So then, why does Obama have a social security number from Connecticut? Bill O’Reilly (Fox News) thought he figured it out but then pulled his story off the Fox web site. Why?

Why does Obama’s Selective Service card have 2 digits for the year when all others have 4 digits for the year? And why is the “8” in the year upside down?

Why did the DNC re-issue Obama’s eligibility form and remove this section: “and that the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution?”

I can see one person having one issue similar to the above. But for one person to have so many suspicious issues it really makes you wonder.

I really hope we can get to the bottom of it all someday.

IT IS ESSENTIAL WE GET TO THE BOTTOM OF THIS.

[MHGinTN]

One of the most profound comments ever posted at FreeRepublic! ... And frightening for what it has revealed about our Congress and the voting public.

[Scythian_Reborn]

What are you talking about? It was proven yesterday beyond a shadow of a doubt by the two best forensic labs in the world that the birth certificate is fake, there is no doubt, it is 100% a fake,

Why do you say it’s possible it’s real? It is not, he was not born here or there would be a real BC, it’s as simple as that.

[DiogenesLamp]

There is now no doubt that OZero was born in Kenya. I hope he’s prosecuted after Trump is sworn in.

He was not born in Kenya. Obama just claimed to have been born in Kenya because he thought it gave him a more exotic air. None of the provable facts support a birth in Kenya, the logistics of it simply do not work.

The provable evidence indicates Obama was either born in Hawaii, Washington state, or Canada. The available evidence contradicts any other possibility.

[DiogenesLamp]

If Stanley Ann is his mom, that would make him a natural born citizen and a Lying Commie Bastard.

No it wouldn't. In 1787, citizenship was descended from the Father only. Mother's couldn't convey citizenship unless the child was a bastard. In 1787, women automatically acquired the citizenship of the man to whom they were married, and therefore any child of marriage would acquire the Father's citizenship.

This business of allowing married females to transfer citizenship did not start until the 1920s.

[DiogenesLamp]

And here you are at least providing some useful information. :)

[little jeremiah]

I didn’t realize it was copyrighted, since I had seen it on FR many times. I didn’t offer it to people via freepmail so they could post it, just so they could see it for themselves. I realized once it was pulled, that it must have been a copyright issue, and that is why I offered it via freepmail, just so I could prove my point about it being photoshopped.

I was not trying to get it posted on FR again. Just to clear my motive.

[b4its2late]

Looks mighty convincing to me.

[DiogenesLamp]

No one ever claimed him. No ex-girlfriends. No high school running buddies. No neighbors. No former employers. No school nurse, or basketball coach. No one. It’s as though he moved through life, never leaving a wake.

I have seen articles written by a person or person's that attended Columbia at the same time Obama claims, and this person or person's say they never saw him. This person or person's also claim that the classes they were taking were the exact classes Obama would need to fulfill the requirements of his degree. (Political science classes, if I remember correctly.)

There is evidence that Obama was at Occidental and Columbia, but it is not clear whether or not he actually attended classes. As with much of his life, there appears to be some sort of funny business going on with his time at various Universities.

[DiogenesLamp]

Every lowlife scumbag ahole like “x” who has come on these threads to concern troll and swab Obama’s arse, should be zotted.

That is completely unfair. "x" has done yeoman work in demonstrating that according to the standards for "natural born citizen" in existence in 1787, Obama does not qualify as such. "x" is by no means an Obama supporter, he has merely pointed out an explanation as to how "African" may have gotten on the birth certificate.

He is not an Obama troll , and over the last 8 years, he has put forth much effort to demonstrate Obama's illegitimacy.

[DiogenesLamp]

Wow, a lot of Obama supporters here tonight. They had two professional forensic agencies look at this extensively, and you know more than they? What a loon

"x" is not an Obama supporter. He has done a lot of work over the last 8 years demonstrating that Obama is illegitimate. People should be more careful with their accusations.

[Fantasywriter]

Then there was the time x argued strenuously that Obama wrote Dreams From my Father. If Obama wrote one line in that book, I’m the Queen of England (when she was younger).

[Arthur McGowan]

It tells us why the PROOF of forgery will have no effect. All the people who will reject the proof have already known the document was fake for the past five years.

And that includes Hannity, Rush, Levin, etc.

[The_Media_never_lie]

No, sadly it has not been proved. It has not been proved in the court of public opinion. There is still a huge propaganda machine out there, the mainstream media. It has the power and will to dismiss you, or I as “birthers”.

You know it is fake. I sincerely know it is fake. DT believes it is fake. But, it is upheld as real by the mainstream media.

[DiogenesLamp]

The Framers assumed the people didn’t need them to define the meanings of plain English words.

Grab an 18th century dictionary, for crying out loud.

I've been studying this issue since 2008 and i've learned a lot of interesting things about it since then. One of the most significant things I have learned is that the word "Citizen" was not in common usage in 1776, and it did not mean at the time what it has come to be known to mean nowadays.

In English usage of the 1770s, the word "Citizen" meant "resident of a city." It was an amalgamation of the word "City" and "zen" as in "denizen." It literally meant "Denizen of a City."

The usage of the word to describe a member of a Country was not an English usage of the word. Blackstone and Shakespeare both use the word exclusively in the context of being a member of a specific City.

Usage of the word to describe membership of a nation was pretty much unknown to the English speaking people's of that time period. This usage of the word only occurred in one place in the world at that time; Switzerland.

This is understandable because Switzerland was the only country in the world at the time which was created from a collection of "city-states", of which there were incidentally thirteen of them. :)

The Swiss founding document "Charte des prêtres, Pfaffenbrief." (1370) is probably the first known usage of the word "Citizen" (Citoyen) to indicate membership in a Nation rather than membership of a city.

The point here is that the Founders were not originally familiar with the word in the manner that we use it today. It was a change to them when they adopted the Swiss usage of the word rather than the English usage of the word at that time.

And why would they adopt the Swiss usage of a word to replace the far more familiar English term "Subject"? Why indeed did they replace the word "Subject" at all? People would have us believe that we adopted the English Law methodology for creating subjects and then applied it to the word "Citizen", but if that's true, why didn't we just keep the word "Subject"?

It is clear the founders wanted to break from the word "Subject" both in meaning and in usage to describe the newly created members of the Republic, and so they adopted this Swiss word to convey this new relationship between the State and the Individual.

My point is that the word "Citizen" itself demonstrates that we followed Vattel's "Natural Law" , and not English common law. Had we intended to follow English common law, we would have kept using the word "Subject."