Sheriff's investigation finds Obama birth certificate 'fake'

World Net Daily ^ | 15 December 2016 | Bob Unruh

[Nero Germanicus]

The original discovery of the birth notices was done at the Hawaii State Library by a Hillary Clinton supporter named Lori Starfelt, a documentary film maker, and then the notices were confirmed at the University of California, Berkeley Library by John Charlton, a supporter of the Obama is ineligible movement.
“Obama’s Birth Announcement in 1961, confirmed”
http://www.thepostemail.com/2009/12/11/obamas-birth-announcement-in-1961-confirmed/

In a Nov. 9, 2008 story in the Advertiser, the Star-Bulletin’s former managing editor Dave Shapiro discussed the paper’s policy for accepting birth announcements.
From an article in the Honolulu Advertiser on Nov. 9, 2008: “Advertiser columnist and former Star-Bulletin managing editor Dave Shapiro was not at either paper in 1961, but he remembers how the birth notices process worked years later when both papers were jointly operated by the Hawaii Newspaper Agency — which no longer exists. “Those were listings that came over from the state Department of Health,” he said. “They would send the same thing to both papers.”

[Nero Germanicus]

There is no such thing as standing in criminal court.

[Fantasywriter]

A statement is not a ‘trace,’ or a ‘clue.’ ‘Traces’ and ‘clues’ are words used to denote ‘evidence.’ The fact that Anderson made a statement unsupported by a shred of evidence does not magically transform that statement itself into evidence. If Anderson had revealed a source or sources for that info, then you’d be onto something. As it is, all you’re doing is revealing A, your desperation, and B, your stunning inability to comprehend the definition of ‘evidence.’

Hmm...let’s see. Do I want to believe a statement Anderson made with ZERO evidence to support it, or do I want to believe him when he backed his statement with not one but TWO firsthand sources/witnesses.

Hmm....

Oh come on, wjd, nobody’s that clueless.

[Nero Germanicus]

“The operative word here is “can”. In a rational society, the word would be “shall”, but we have once again been blessed by the courts with another example of their inherent stupidity when they ruled that State officials don’t have to do their job. They can if they want to, but they cannot be compelled to do their job if they don’t want to do so.”

---

There is no law in any state nor is there a federal law that requires a candidate to prove their identity and citizenship status via a birth certificate. Under federal law, primary evidence of citizenship and identity is best confirmed via a passport. Passports have better security features than fifty five year old birth certificates.

The reason that no criminal court procedure has gone forward regarding Barack Obama’s birth certificate is because the original, hard copy, vault edition has never been seen publicly. People have reacted to a third or fourth generation image that was scanned to pdf. That is an image, not a vital record of birth. The original remains in the office safe of the Hawaii Registrar where it has resided since 2011. The original can be made available for inspection via court order.

[DiogenesLamp]

There is no such thing as standing in criminal court.

It is not a criminal offense for state officials to create fake birth certificates. Now this makes the third time today that I have informed you State officials in all 50 states make about 100,000 fake birth certificates every year.

I believe Obama's document is a state produced fake birth certificate, and is therefore not evidence of a criminal act.

[DiogenesLamp]

There is no law in any state nor is there a federal law that requires a candidate to prove their identity and citizenship status via a birth certificate.

The mechanism of proving eligibility need not be a birth certificate, but that is the normal method nowadays for doing such. So far as there is a law, it's Federal, and explicitly mandated by the body of the US Constitution, so it is higher than just ordinary statutory law such as something Congress would create.

The original can be made available for inspection via court order.

Except the public has no standing to bring a case, and those who did have standing, had no interest in bringing a case.

[DiogenesLamp]

It is well known that about 100,000 birth certificates are issued each year containing false information.

The things one learns on Free Republic.

That number was actually on the low side. Here is the citation to back up the claim.

A normal and routine aspect of adoption law is the creation of a replacement birth certificate normally listing the adopted parents as the parents at birth. These documents are factually untrue, but they are never the less valid legal documents for most intents and purposes.

There is evidence to indicate Obama was adopted in 1965 by Lolo Soetoro, and if this is in fact true, whatever he had in the way of a real Hawaiian birth certificate would have been sealed by court order and a replacement birth certificate would have been issued to him naming Lolo Soetoro as his father.

There is evidence that this court proceeding was overturned or modified in 1971 when both Barack Obama Senior and Stanley Ann Soetoro happened to both be in Hawaii at the same time. (Christmas 1971)

For a multitude of reasons, it is not unreasonable to believe that what Barack Obama is currently touting as his birth certificate is in fact a later day created replacement birth certificate issued by the State of Hawaii, and one not necessarily containing accurate information.

[Fantasywriter]

Smh. Sorry I gave you too much credit. I tried to respect your intelligence—and discovered my error too late.

Of course I believe Anderson’s double-sourced info over his zero-sourced info. How that is difficult to comprehend is simply amazing.

Then again, I discovered many years ago that Obama’s staunchest defenders really and truly cannot fathom the nature of ‘evidence.’ In the real world, it’s facts, witnesses, and similar independent corroboration. For Obots, it’s, ‘If I or someone else can imagine it, and it supports Obama, it’s evidence.’

Smh.

[4Zoltan]

“There is evidence to indicate Obama was adopted in 1965 by Lolo Soetoro”

What evidence?

Why is Obama still referred to as the step-child and Soetoro as the step-father in 1967?

Why is there no mention of an adoption when Soetoro was petitioning to get back into the US in 1967?

[Nero Germanicus]

Many average citizens had standing in state and federal court to challenge Obama’s eligibility (see Purpura v Obama in New Jersey, Powell, et al v Obama in Georgia, Taitz v MS. Dem Party, Obama, Pelosi, et al in Mississippi) The defense has to raise standing on a pre-trial motion for the judge to consider it.

There are no issues of standing for a congressional investigation or for a city, county, district, state or federal criminal investigation.

From a county attorney to a member of the public:
Dear Mr. Reilly,

Thank you for taking the time to write and for the concerns you have expressed. There are a couple of points of analysis, though, in determining whether a criminal charge can be filed, regardless of the charge or who the suspect might be. The first is whether I have jurisdiction over the case. That requires that some conduct had to have occurred in Maricopa County for me to have jurisdiction. From the Sheriff’s Office investigation into suspect documents produced by the White House to date, that investigation has not revealed any evidence that conduct occurred in Maricopa County. I have discussed this with the Sheriff. As for any issues regarding qualifications or information provided regarding the Presidential Election itself, that is a statewide election. Under Arizona law, the Secretary of State and the Attorney General have jurisdiction over statewide elections. I do not.

I will share with you, as well, that the criminal statute you cited in your message requires additional evidence that the MCSO investigation to date has not uncovered. Specifically, we would need evidence to affirmatively prove that Mr. Obama is not a US citizen. To date, there has been evidence presented leading to speculation that documents have been forged and other documents do not exist. That alone, though, is not sufficient evidence to present to a grand jury and actually have a reasonable likelihood of conviction. I cannot speak for other prosecutors at the state level around the rest of the country or for prosecutors at the federal level but Arizona’s ethics rules do not permit prosecutors to file a charge they can only hope to be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt at a later stage.

I stand ready and willing, however, to review any case submitted for charges and, if the evidence is there, I will prosecute regardless of who the suspect/defendant may be.

Sincerely,

Bill Montgomery
Maricopa County Attorney

[Fantasywriter]

Andersen said two independent Chicago-based friends of the Obamas told him the same story: that after Obama burned through first a six figure, and then a five figure, advance to write his memoir—in neither case producing even the opening chapter—Michelle gathered up all the notes—a “trunk full”—and dumped them on Ayers.

You can accuse Andersen of wholesale lying, but on what motivation? He was and remains a huge Obama fan. Why would he create brazen lies to discredit a man he sincerely admires?

[Nero Germanicus]

So you think that the state of Hawaii in 1961 created a fake birth certificate.
That would make state officials culpable, not Barack Obama.

[Fantasywriter]

Do you think Andersen made it all up to hurt Obama?

If so, why?

Btw, BOL over the fact that Andersen couldn’t even find unnamed sources for his Stanley Ann/Obama Sr tall tale. I WONDER WHY NOT??? (I dont.)