[BP2]

> Yes... it was in the FactCheck article that I saw the BC.

So you admit that the validity of Obama’s “birth certificate”
has been compromised. An unreliable paper trail.

And yet, you implicitly TRUST it ... interesting.

[EnderWiggins]

"So you admit that the validity of Obama’s “birth certificate” has been compromised. An unreliable paper trail."

Of course not, that would be dumb.

You seem to forget why documents are certified and sealed in the first place. That is to eliminate the need for any "paper trail" whatsoever. That's why (for example) when you go to the DMV to get a license for the first time, they accept it right from you and don't expect it to come in a sealed envelope from the state registrar. As long as it bears the certification and seal of the issuing authority, it requires (in the words of the Federal Rules of Evidence) "no extrinsic evidence of authenticity."

As to my trusting it, of course I trust it. Since I am not a Birther, I never fantasized that I would ever see anything better than an image of such a document (in a newspaper or on the Internet), and the independent report of a journalist that it was genuine. And that's exactly what we all got.

Now... if you have any genuine evidence whatsoever that challenges the authenticity of the COLB, then present it. Because without something to contradict it, that document alone is absolute legal proof of his citizenship status.

Of course, we all know that no such evidence exists. If it did, the Hawaii DOH would have faced criminal charges of complicity in fraud over a year ago rather than watching Birther lawyers dink around in (if Orly is to be believed) over a hundred civil cases that get bounced for standing.

Since no brilliant Birther lawyer has seen fit to file such a complaint... no such evidence must exist.