Posted on 02/23/2010 8:02:16 AM PST by butterdezillion
I’ve also added another post to my blog, at http://butterdezillion.wordpress.com/2010/02/25/corroboration-re-cert-numbers-assigned/
This one shows that the certificate numbers we know of also corroborate Okubo and the CDC’s claims that certificate numbers are assigned by the state registrar.
Thank you to those here who helped me on this by supplying the raw data in your possession. We’re all just one drop alone, but together we can make a flood.
Parsi, you didn’t need to post that. We already knew where your strange mind dwells.
Is the reliability of the "evidence" that got us to the
"conclusion" on Obama's Eligibility unimportant?
Look at number 848. I was merely passing along some of the Birther documentation. I can’t wait for Orly to use this in court, some day.
parsy, who thinks it fairly represents the Birther level of rhetorical skills
I hear what you’re saying. Right now I wouldn’t want to rest my fate on any court in this land. That’s really sad to say, but I think that’s where we’re at as a nation.
After seeing what the “Magnificent Seven” did to try to help Clinton’s political buddies - including bypassing the random assignment of cases.... there’s just way too much crap going on for me to trust the judiciary.
I think the judiciary will be a lot more honest if they know the entire nation knows there is criminal activity being covered up. All we have as a check to the power of the judiciary is our own awareness and our voices raised publicly.
That’s why I keep pimping my blog. I’m normally a person who quietly goes about my business and if people want me to shut up I do. I just don’t think I have that luxury any more. Not if I want to give my kids a future in this world.
All evidence has to be weighed by the fact finder. Either a judge or jury. So, yes the reliability is important as far as persuading the fact finder. It is not important as to whether it is admissible or not.
parsy, who says thats the short answer
All evidence has to be weighed by the fact finder. Either a judge or jury. So, yes the reliability is important as far as persuading the fact finder. It is not important as to whether it is admissible or not.
parsy, who says thats the short answer
lololol.
I’ve never been mooned by a troll before. Is that Ender’s ender? lolol.
No. BP2 sent me that. One of his more logical arguments.
parsy, the snide
I don't understand your problem. You were told yesterday that the DNC and RNC are responsible for vetting candidates. They send a document to every state that says the candidates are Constitutionally eligible. Those documents have been posted on this thread. Since Obama is not NBC, they and Pelosi are guilty of fraud.
Shut up, fool. I won’t be bothering with reply to or reading anything you dribble onto any thread.
Oh, and they’re paying you too much. You’re a really dumb troll.
I don't have to. The "Full Faith and Credit" clause of the US Constitution, US State Department regulations, and the Federal Rules of Evidence have already done that. WOW. 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??!
Do any of those references say anything about "reliable evidence"? PLEASE school me, Wiggy ... |
Yes. Absolutely, keep working on that. It can at least help for 2012. And the court cases might take until then.
HEck, it might be until then before the conservative talkers ever get the courage to stop bad-mouthing us and actually look at the evidence we’ve got.
Everybody has a role to play. Those who aren’t comfortable bringing up something that makes them appear like a loony, that’s OK. There are much tamer routes you can take. We need it all. All I ask of anybody is that they be as honest as they can in sorting it all out and don’t make fun of people if you haven’t checked out what they’re actually saying.
I went back to see exactly what you were talking about. The image of the COLB could only be entered into evidence as what it is, a photograph of a thing. If in court, the document itself would be presented into evidence. Some courts would want a certified copy. Some wouldn’t. But as evidence, oh yes the COLB could be easily introduced and accepted.
parsy, who went back
I’ve tried to stay quiet in your conversations but when a person can look at all the stuff posted here and point to a picture of a troll mooning somebody and call that alone “documentation”, we’ve officially entered the loony bin.
lol.
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.