Why would Obama or his lawyer be allowed to DICTATE or even be allowed to give an OPINION about a supposed "legally-recreated" birth certificate?
The attorney may have looked at it and concluded it was exactly what he wanted and so sent word back that the document was acceptable. He then went to Hawaii, obtained two official stamped paper copies, and brought them back to Washington.
It was a she not a he. Obama’s personal attorney, Judith Corley.
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/03/gop-lawmaker-stokes-birther-drama/
Among the documents distributed last year by the White House were the president’s “long form” birth certificate and correspondence between the White House counsel and the state of Hawaii. Obama’s personal attorney, Judith Corley, flew to Hawaii to pick up the original certified copies and carry them back to the White House. The certificate of live birth includes the original, handwritten signatures of Obama’s mother Ann Dunham Obama, the attending doctor, and the local registrar. The verified document also reveals the location of Obama’s birth to be Kapiolani Maternity and Gynecological Hospital in Honolulu.
When Obama said he wanted to post the document on the White House Website, the attorney could have simply emailed the PDF to the White House staff without realizing that the details of how it was put together were contained in the file.
Again, the lawyer should ONLY have two hard copies. You are the one that is supposing Hawaii "legally" gave him a PDF file for his perusal and to offer critiques.
It was a blunder by someone trained primarily in law, not in the computer technology involved. (A Highly Plausible ignorance among most attorneys.) I dare say, MOST people are unaware that a PDF can contain information that people don't want known.
You sure are working overtime for your theory.
The fact is this. Somehow a PDF of his "official" long form birth certificate was created. It was either created by a scan which was "optimized" (the prevalent O-bot theory) or it was created by someone who copied and pasted the document together out of pieces.
Geez, have you even watched the Cold Case Posse press conference? It was NOT "optimized." That has been proven. It WAS created by someone who copied and pasted the document together out of pieces. It was never anything other than a CREATED DIGITAL IMAGE.
The hand-stamp text blocks would not have been included in the PDF file if it weren't an ILLEGAL FORGERY.
Which one do you think is more probable?
The latter. The imported hand-stamps in the PDF file proves it.
Sorry, at this point, you are so wedded to your "legal forgery" theory that you are myopic.
Not necessarily dictate, but check for mistakes or objectionable information. Apart from that, he *IS* the President, and I have little doubt they will grant him every consideration that is possible under Hawaiian law. If he is having one of his adoptions annulled, he can chose which one he wants to have annulled. (Either the Dunham or Soetoro adoptions.) He could have asked for a birth certificate under either name, but he chose to get a document which says "Barack Obama" is his legal father. How much and what kind of fiction the court will allow is anybody's guess, but if you believe they are completely constrained in their actions, I think you are mistaken.
It was a she not a he. Obama’s personal attorney, Judith Corley.
The Rules of English require that when the sex is unknown the pronoun "he" is acceptable. If he had his adoption annulled in Hawaii, there is no guarantee that he used this specific attorney and may well have used one of several. I would suggest whomever may have done such a thing would have to be a member of the Hawaiian bar. She may have been the courier, but that doesn't mean she did the legal work in Hawaii itself.
Again, the lawyer should ONLY have two hard copies. You are the one that is supposing Hawaii "legally" gave him a PDF file for his perusal and to offer critiques.
Which came first, the Chicken or the Egg? (PDF or Paper Document?) We are claiming the document is forged based on the Information in the PDF. Were the paper document created first, and the PDF created by scanning it, all basis for claiming it is a forgery is pretty much eliminated.
We must therefore conclude the PDF was created first, and the document was printed from it. That being the case, how came the PDF to be placed on the White House Web site? It must have come from the same source as the paper document, but arrived through a different route. I have offered what I consider a plausible scenario as to how the file could have ended up in the hands of the White House Web Staff. When you come up with a better explanation, we can throw mine out.
You sure are working overtime for your theory.
More like wasting my time in my attempts to get people to consider the idea. I don't mind my theory being wrong, I just wish people would quit putting out silly critiques of it (usually based on their lack of understanding about adoptions and birth certificates.) and point out a real flaw. (if one exists.)
Geez, have you even watched the Cold Case Posse press conference? It was NOT "optimized." That has been proven. It WAS created by someone who copied and pasted the document together out of pieces. It was never anything other than a CREATED DIGITAL IMAGE.
Thank you. That was EXACTLY what I was trying to get you to understand. The two paper copies from Hawaii were created from that PDF. The PDF demonstrates that it is a cut and paste. Are we clear so far?
The hand-stamp text blocks would not have been included in the PDF file if it weren't an ILLEGAL FORGERY.
Why do you say this? My printed birth certificate (Obtained back in 2000) is completely printed. It has no "hand stamps" upon it at all. It even says right on it:
Certified Copy must be Validated in Three Colors
This statement is just above a three color(bluegreen- magenta -brown) PRINTED SEAL and a PRINTED SIGNATURE.
You are too willing to believe that such and such MUST be a certain way because you THINK it is supposed to be that way. For all I know, Hawaii (like my state) PRINTS their "hand stamps" nowadays.
Sorry, at this point, you are so wedded to your "legal forgery" theory that you are myopic.
If I sound like I am "wedded" to my theory, it is because it is the only one of which I have heard that does not POSTULATE A MASSIVE AND RIDICULOUS CONSPIRACY AMONG NUMEROUS GOVERNMENTAL OFFICIALS AND ATTORNEYS ALL RISKING PRISON TO PULL IT OFF.
So yeah, since it seems to be the ONLY thing on the table that doesn't require a belief in the "protocols of the elders of zion", it's pretty much the only theory I currently see as even possible.
I can accept that Hawaiian officials will bend over backwards and perhaps even bend a few rules to help Barry, but to believe that all of them would risk their own freedom and careers by absolutely breaking the law is just too far of a stretch for me.
If a piece of evidence comes out which shows my theory to be wrong, you can be the first person in line to call me a fool.