Alabama Democratic Party Submits Different Obama Birth Certificate In Ballot Challenge Appeal

McInnish-Goode-v-Chapman-Appeal-ADP-Amicus Brief ^

[Cold Case Posse Supporter]

In a unusual rare move, the Alabama Democratic Party has submitted a amicus brief in the McInnish Goode v Chapman Appeal case. The reason being is most likely because the Alabama Supreme Court has Chief Justice Roy Moore presiding over it. He supported Lt. Col. Terry Lakin during his court martial. Another worry for them is another justice named Tom Parker. He once opined in a prior McInnish case:

"McInnish has attached certain documentation to his mandamus petition, which, if presented to the appropriate forum as part of a proper evidentiary presentation, would raise serious questions about the authenticity of both the “short form” and the “long form” birth certificates of President Barack Hussein Obama that have been made public."

This has reasons for the Alabama Democratic Party to be alarmed. In the amicus brief, the Alabama Democratic Party attacked the merits of the appeal, calling the evidence submitted by McInnish “inadmissible and not worthy of belief” and stated:

"A county sheriff from Arizona is not an “official source” of anything in Alabama."

One thing that stands out in the amicus brief filed, specifically on page 33 is something new. It's a Barack Obama long form birth certificate that has a different backing, something not seen before. It's not the normal security paper backing that the Hawaii Dept. Of Health has been using. It is raising a lot of questions that even has Obama supporters baffled. Click on the link and scroll to page 33 of the brief to see the birth certificate.

[opentalk]

At one point public pressure, awareness was growing...Congress was getting calls...so wh released pdf file, but bigger news overshadowed any further public momentum to questioning it.

[MMaschin]

Of course not, that would have been incredibly stupid.

Had Hillary had evidence, and used it publically in 2008, she would have splintered off the black vote from the Democratic party, and as a result, she would have lost the election to McCain.

The idea that the evidence doesn't exit, because Hillary would have used it, is ludicrous. The fact that one of her supporters (Berg) started the talk of Obama not being eligible speaks volumes of whether or not Hillary's camp had the info. But since Obama wasn't going to go quietly, and was willing to destroy the Democratic party instead of stepping down, left Hillary with no option but to bury the info she had.

[Exmil_UK]

Interesting the security paper pattern shows in this version of the 2011 forgery.

Is someone in Obamaland walking back the Fuddy Whitehouse Website version's cover story as a scan of an original paper document with a raised seal? The next question is did the court receive a physical paper legal document with a raised seal or just more electronic file "stuff?"

[MMaschin]

That looks like a moiré pattern which safety paper was designed to produce when copied. It does that so one can distinguish a copy from the original.

Very logical. So.... Since a scanner uses the same technology to read a document, then why doesn't Obama's "scanned" BC on the WH website show the same security pattern?

[Exmil_UK]

Its ***another*** forgery, not even consistent with the Fuddy Fake.

[x]

Wouldn't you have to mount the challenge in a state Obama actually carried?

Even if you crossed him off the ballot in Alabama (months after the election) it wouldn't change anything.

[Exmil_UK]

Really this case is not about the election results. Its about Beth Chapman not doing the SOS job and checking the eligibility of a candidate when presented with doubts from an “official” source.

Obama isn't being sued, Chapman is. The remedy is that she do her job, according to a strict Mandamus, if the Judges defend the US constitution as they swore to do.

[MMaschin]

There is one major problem with your theory. Yes, many things can effect what parts of a stamp show up, or don't show up. And to the level of ink any particular place on the stamp. The fact that the century digits are not present does not show the stamp to fraudulent. The fact that the '80' on the stamp is in the wrong location does indicate that the stamp is fraudulent.

There is ZERO chance that parts of the stamp, such as the rings, and the post office show clearly, AND the year digits ('80') show clearly, and the year digits would be in a different location, relative to the other clear parts of the stamp, from other impressions made with the same stamp.

[Ray76]

Perhaps because it was not printed on security paper. The "security paper" is part of the image.

Something like this can get you started:
http://ep.yimg.com/ca/I/yhst-37067711489792_2260_5312874

[ObligedFriend]

“It is raising a lot of questions that even has Obama supporters baffled”

Oh really. Who might they be?

[Ray76]

The versions just keep on coming! It’s an “authentic document”, a “scan of the original” but it always looks different. AMAZING! IT’S MAGIC!

[noinfringers2]

I have no problem comparing/weighing theories about Obama. The fact that he had the votes for election only adds to the mystery of this enigma. Until matters are sorted out for a final judgement I will just continue to wear my skeptics hat in peace, hopefully.

[MMaschin]

That would fall under the category of 'mootness'. Like many of the trolls here state, Obama won the election, so there is nothing you can do. There is some truth to that. And if there is nothing the legal system can do, the courts will dismiss the case as being 'moot'.

BUT, a case can get around the 'mootness' by showing that the situation is repeatable. That is what they are doing here. They are telling the court, we need to continue with this case, so that in the future, when this happens again, a legal precedence is established. An example of this, and a case cited, is Roe v Wade. By the time the case reached the courts, Roe had already had her baby - so it was a 'moot' issue. The case continued, so the courts could decide on future situations.

[muawiyah]

Every post office has more than one dating device ~ even different dating devices from different design series.

A lack of perfect uniformity is not a sign that THEY DIDN'T DO IT.

I've told everybody through the years that it's a constant battle to standardize the postal system in every part all the time ~ to some degree it's a losing battle. I named the places we lost!

Outsiders frequently err in imagining that 'they wouldn't do that' ~

[Red Steel]

Hawaii Dept. Of Health has been using. It is raising a lot of questions that even has Obama supporters baffled. Click on the link and scroll to page 33 of the brief to see the birth certificate.

Whaa whaaa the Dems and Obama have been lying from get go. I would have never guessed. /sarc

[x]

Thanks for the info. A court wanted to decide Roe, though. I'm pretty sure the courts don't want to deal with this and would use "mootness" to avoid doing so.

[nascarnation]

If the Clintons’ couldn’t find anything,

Other FReepers have convinced me that the Chicago political mob blackmailed the Clintons over Arkancides and they were unable to attack Baraq on many issues.

[Exmil_UK]

Beth Chapman is toast if the Obama draft card forgery is produced in court.

That sort of evidence is completely devastating because it shows there is a pattern of Obama’s documents being “Fuddy’s.”

“Fuddyize”: verb, to badly forge an identity or vital document relating to a political candidate for election or re-election and pass said forgery over the Internet so as to avoid easy detection by low information voters.

“Fuddy”: noun, a badly forged identity or vital document relating to a political candidate for election or re-election. The “Fuddy” is presented over the Internet so as to avoid easy detection.

It is sometimes said that the letters “Fuddy” are actually an acronym in the form of:

(F)orged (U)seless (D)emocrat i(D)entity-papers (Y)eilding jailtime.

[MMaschin]

LOL

You are clearly now beyond the pale.

They have show multiple Selective Service registration cards from the same post office as Obama's, just days before, and after his, and all the others show the year digits in the same relative position to rest of the stamp - different than Obama's. I guess the clerk could have slammed the stamp down, on an angle, with 10 tonnes of force, twisting it at the exact moment of impact to make a clear impression on all of the stamp except the century digits. What you are saying is as nonsensical as this example.