[EnderWiggins]

"The FFC, USCON, the State Dept and the FRE cover the "chain of evidence" of a COLB given BY partisan hacks TO partisan hack to verify the Eligibility of the POTUS??!"

Of course. You didn't know that?

"Do any of those references say anything about "reliable evidence"?"

Sure they do.

Let's start with the US State Department Regulations, shall we? Specifically 7 FAM 1119 PROOF OF CITIZENSHIP BY BIRTH IN THE UNITED STATES

In this regulation, we discover that:

a. To establish a claim to U.S. citizenship by birth in the United States:

A person born in the United States in a place where official records of birth were kept at the time of his birth shall submit with the application for a passport a birth certificate under the seal of the official custodian of records. [22 CFR 51.43.]

b. The birth certificate must:

(1) Show the applicant’s full name, and date and place of birth;
(2) Have a filing date within 1 year of the birth; and
(3) Bear the signature of the official custodian of birth records and the raised, impressed, or multicolored seal of the issuing office.

BP's First Epiphany: Barack Obama's COLB perfectly meets the State Department's requirements for proof of citizenship by birth. In actuality, since it also shows who his parents were, it is more than what is required as proof. There is no prohibition against the document being submitted by "partisan flack." It is proof regardless of who submits it.

Next, lets talk about the US Constitution and the "Full Faith and Credit" clause. It's Article IV, Section 1 and it reads:

"Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof."

BP's Second Epiphany: No state or court can reject the COLB as proof of Obama's citizenship, since Hawaii's "full faith and credit" is guaranteed by the Constitution. The State of Hawaii says, right there on the certificate, that it that "This copy serves as prima face evidence of the fact of birth in any court proceeding." Not "This copy except when provided by partisan hacks..." The copy itself, no matter who hands it to the court.

Finally, let's see what the Federal Rules of Evidence have to say about it. The FRE have a whole rule (Rule 902) that covers what documents are self authenticating (even when provided by partisan flacks) Here is the rule along with its very first section:

Rule 902. Self-authentication

Extrinsic evidence of authenticity as a condition precedent to admissibility is not required with respect to the following:

(1) Domestic public documents under seal. A document bearing a seal purporting to be that of the United States, or of any State, district, Commonwealth, territory, or insular possession thereof, or the Panama Canal Zone, or the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, or of a political subdivision, department, officer, or agency thereof, and a signature purporting to be an attestation or execution.

BP's Third Epiphany: Not only is the COLB reliable, it is so reliable that it requires absolutely no "extrinsic evidence of authenticity" whatsoever. The document itself, even if it were to have fallen from a clear blue sky or have been hand delivered by a partisan flack is completely self authenticating.

So... where does this leave you? After all, you don't care about any of these things, because you personally don't trust Obama's partisan flacks. Unfortunately, the courts do care. Law enforcement agencies care. The US Constitution cares. The COLB is in and of itself absolute legal proof that Obama was born in Hawaii on August 4, 1961... and unless you have something to contradict it, it is considered absolutely, completely, unassailable reliable.

So... what have you got to contradict it?

[Seizethecarp]

“Not only is the COLB reliable, it is so reliable that it requires absolutely no “extrinsic evidence of authenticity” whatsoever. The document itself, even if it were to have fallen from a clear blue sky or have been hand delivered by a partisan flack is completely self authenticating.”

Here is Apuzzo’s refutation of the COLB’s conditional self-authentication:

http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2010/02/court-grants-motion-for-leave-to-file.html

Apuzzo:

We also maintain that Obama has failed to conclusively prove that he was born in Hawaii by publicly presenting a copy of a contemporaneous birth certificate, a long-form birth certificate providing the name of the hospital in which he was born and other corroborating data which was generated when he was born in 1961 and not simply a digital image of computer generated Certification of Live Birth [COLB] allegedly obtained from the Hawaii Department of Health in 2007 which some unknown person posted on the internet in 2008, or other contemporaneous and objective documentation. At the bottom of Obama’s Certification of Live Birth (COLB), it states: “This copy serves as prima facie evidence of the fact of birth in any court proceeding.” Under the concept of prima facie evidence, the presumption that the fact exists fails when evidence contradicting that fact is presented and in such case the interested party needs to present other competent evidence to prove the existence of that alleged fact. If he fails to do so, the alleged fact is not proven, even if the opposing party produces no further evidence. There exists a considerable amount of evidence which puts serious doubt on Obama’s allegation that he was born in Hawaii. To date, Obama has presented no additional evidence other than the internet image of his Certification of Live Birth (COLB) and two unreliable newspaper announcements regarding where he was born. Hence, the prima facie validity of the Certification of Live Birth (COLB) must fail and Obama should be compelled to produce other objective, credible, and sufficient evidence of where he was born such as a contemporaneous birth certificate from 1961. Having failed to meet his constitutional burden of proof under Article II, Section 1, Clause 5, we cannot accept Obama as a “natural born Citizen.”

[BP2]

Wiggy,

Under the concept of prima facie evidence, the presumption that the fact exists FAILS when evidence contradicting that fact is presented, and in such case, the interested party needs to present other competent evidence to prove the existence of that alleged fact.

If the proponent of that "fact" fails to do so, the alleged fact is not proven, even if the opposing party produces no further evidence. There exists a considerable amount of evidence which puts serious doubt on Obama’s allegation that he was born in Hawaii.

EVEN BEYOND THE CONCEPT of WHERE Obama was born, to date, Obama has presented no additional evidence, other than the internet image of his Certification of Live Birth (COLB). NO Judge has seen it, nor has a member of Congress seen it. It's unknown if Pelosi has seen it, or the President of the Senate when confirming the Electoral Votes in January 2009.

Hence, the prima facie validity of Obama's Certification of Live Birth (COLB) FAILS and he is compelled to produce other objective, credible, and sufficient evidence of where he was born such as a contemporaneous birth certificate from 1961. Quo Warranto WILL eventually make him PUT UP or SHUT UP. At that point, the Constitutional argument defining the "original intent" meaning of "Natural Born Citizen" begins. That won't bode well for the son of a British Subject, or Barry Soetoro — take your pick.

Wiggy, I suggest you take a gander at A.C. Aukerman Co. v. R.L. Chaides Constr. Co., 960 F.2d 1020, 1037 (Fed. Cir. 1992). Pay particular attention to where it says a presumption applies to the presumed fact and "must be inferred, absent rebuttal evidence." In Obama's case, the Courts pass because of Legal Standing, Jurisdiction and Political Question.

Considering the UNRELIABLE and BIASED "chain of evidence" regarding Obama's "birth certificate," there's PLENTY of
"rebuttal evidence" that his COLB is questionable as a true and valid document.

A PHOTO of an "internet image" does NOT rise to the level of a true and valid document.

And NO AMOUNT of After-Birther spin can change that.