Does The CIA Director Have Barack Obama’s Records That Prove He Is Ineligible To Be President?

FreedomOutpost.com ^ | 07-03-2013 | Leon Puissuger

[FreedomOutpost]

We know that John Brennan got the head job of the Central Intelligence Agency. However, as we stated in a previous article, by obtaining the records of Barack Obama he may well show that Obama is not eligible to be President.

Read more: http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/07/does-the-cia-director-have-barack-obamas-records-that-prove-he-is-ineligible-to-be-president/#ixzz2XzxgGS3K

[Jeff Winston]

If you pointed out anything previously, I did not notice it.

So bold-facing the point and pinging you to it in post 245 wasn't enough?

In fact, it's been clearly pointed out to you on previous occasions that your Roberts claims were false.

For example, I pointed that out, very clearly, on April 20, 2013. The post was addressed directly to you, in a thread in which you were very active.

I suppose bold-facing the point and making the text red wasn't enough to catch your attention then, either?

I pointed out again that the Roberts claims were false on May 30th - a post which you obviously read, as you replied to it.

So you clearly knew the Roberts claims were false, and have no rebuttal to the point, but you continue to post them anyway.

Jim, do we have to put up with a poster who keeps posting claims that are known to be false?

[DiogenesLamp]

Pretty much if it has your name attached, it’s unlikely to be taken seriously.

[JohnnyP]

“The example files were obtained by scanning in an imperfect printout of the Obama PDF (which has already lost some of its original information).

The resulting PDFs show the same stuff Obama’s PDF does.”

Same “stuff”? Epic fail.

[Jeff Winston]

Birthers (and their “experts”) claimed that since Obama’s PDF had layers, text on the different layers, a white halo around the letters, and so forth, that it couldn’t be anything other than a hand-created forgery.

They have never been able to come up with any hand-created file, in the history of computer graphics, that shows the same effects as Obama’s PDF.

Nor can they produce such a file and then explain why anyone would do it that way.

In spite of that, they claimed that unless other people showed how those effects were produced by a mechanical process, that meant the file was “forged.”

Now other people have shown how those exact effects are produced mechanically.

All you have to do is scan a paper document into a Xerox WorkCenter, and that’s what you get.

So yes, there’s an epic fail here.

I’m sorry it isn’t the one that you obviously want.

[Cold Case Posse Supporter]

Why are you siding with the Fogbow and Dr. Conspiracy forum posters who did this experiment? They have not been able to produce ANY professional credentials to back up their claims. Not one. That means they have absolutely no credibility and they would not be recognized by any court. On the other hand, Hawaii court recognized forensic and computer-generated document and handwriting expert Reed Hayes has provided his credentials. Obama’s document as confirmed by the authoritative law enforcement agency called the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office and Reed Hayes is a 100% forged document along with his Selective Service Registration card.

[Jeff Winston]

Why are you siding with the Fogbow and Dr. Conspiracy forum posters who did this experiment?

I'm not. I'm siding with the truth.

Conservatives are, or ought to be, intelligent and truthful. We have the truth on our side.

We don't need lies and false memes.

They have not been able to produce ANY professional credentials to back up their claims. Not one.

That's simply not true. One of the top experts in the world, who invented most of the technology that compressed the PDF, looked at it and said that's all it was.

His paper from 1999 also showed the Cold Case Posse "expert" was a complete quack.

Speaking of which, the Cold Case Posse is known and proven to have faked some of their top evidence.

This was exposed to the public by a FReeper.

If you have the truth, and you're competent, you don't fake your evidence.

Aside from that, you're moving the goal posts again. The person produced AN EXAMPLE OF A PDF WITH THE SAME CHARACTERISTICS AS OBAMA'S, just by scanning it into a Xerox WorkCenter.

Birthers said that the layers and the white halo were "absolute proof" of forgery. That's what they based the entire case on, in spite of the fact that there's not a single hand-created graphics file in the history of the world that has graphic letters spread out over multiple layers, and the white halo.

In spite of that, they said that unless others could produce those effects mechanically, they were "proof" of "forgery."

Now someone has. It's very simple. All you have to do is scan a birth certificate into a Xerox WorkCenter.

Hawaii court recognized forensic and computer-generated document and handwriting expert Reed Hayes has provided his credentials.

He's a handwriting guy. He doesn't seem to know much if anything about computer technology, and he CERTAINLY doesn't know anything about how PDFs are made.

Aside from which, the Cold Case Posse won't even publish his report. Why? Because every other "expert" report they've ever published has been promptly debunked. If it wasn't debunked before they even published it.

...along with his Selective Service Registration card.

The claim the Selective Service registration was a fake was based on the fact that the postmark didn't have the "19" in it. It was alleged this was "proof" of forgery, that someone had taken a 2008 postmark stamp, cut off the "20" and inverted the "08" to make "80."

This was completely disproved within a couple of DAYS by someone who noted the postmark said "USPO" instead of "USPS," which was impossible on a 2008 postal stamp.

So once again, we have nothing but complete bullsh*t that birthers are hanging their hats on.

[rxsid]

"Birthers." LOL. What is it with that term and folks like you who support and defend a Commander in Chief born with foreign alligence owed at birth? Birther. If I were in the 6th grade that might mean something to me. Geez.

John Bingham, "father of the 14th Amendment", the abolitionist congressman from Ohio who prosecuted Lincoln's assassins, reaffirmed the definition known to the framers, not once, but twice during Congressional discussions of Citizenship pertaining to the upcoming 14th Amendment and a 3rd time nearly 4 years after the 14th was adopted.

The House of Representatives definition for "natural born Citizen" was read into the Congressional Record during the Civil War, without contest

"All from other lands, who by the terms of [congressional] laws and a compliance with their provisions become naturalized, are adopted citizens of the United States; all other persons born within the Republic, of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty, are natural born citizens. Gentleman can find no exception to this statement touching natural-born citizens except what is said in the Constitution relating to Indians." (Cong. Globe, 37th, 2nd Sess., 1639 (1862)).

 

The House of Representatives definition for "natural born Citizen" was read into the Congressional Record after the Civil War, without contest.

“every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen.” (Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Sess., 1291 (1866))"

No other Representative ever took issue with these words on the floor of the House. If you read the Congressional Globe to study these debates, you will see that many of the underlying issues were hotly contested. However, Bingham’s definition of “natural born citizen” (born of citizen parents in the sovereign territory of the U.S.) was never challenged on the floor of the House. Without a challenge on the definition, it appears the ALL where in agreement.

 
Then, during a debate (see pg. 2791) on April 25, 1872 regarding a certain Dr. Houard, who had been incarcerated in Spain, the issue was raised on the floor of the House of Representatives as to whether the man was a US citizen (generally. they were not trying to decide if he was a NBC). Representative Bingham (of Ohio), stated on the floor:

“As to the question of citizenship I am willing to resolve all doubts in favor of a citizen of the United States. That Dr. Houard is a natural-born citizen of the United States there is not room for the shadow of a doubt. He was born of naturalized parents within the jurisdiction of the United States, and by the express words of the Constitution, as amended to-day, he is declared to all the world to be a citizen of the United States by birth.”

(The term “to-day”, as used by Bingham, means “to date”. Obviously, the Constitution had not been amended on April 25, 1872. And, since they knew he was, without a doubt, a natural born Citizen...he was, of course, considered a citizen of the U.S.)

The take away from this is that, while the debates and discussions went on for years in the people's house regarding "citizenship" and the 14th Amendment, not a single Congressman disagreed with the primary architect's multiple statements on who is a natural born Citizen per the Constitution. The United States House was in complete agreement at the time. NBC = born in sovereign U.S. territory, to 2 citizen parentS who owe allegiance to no other country.

[Jeff Winston]

There’s a lot that can be, and has been, said about Bingham.

One of these days I’m probably going to do a thorough write-up.

For the moment, I’m going to keep my comments very brief.

The entire birther case with Bingham rests on the assumption that when he said, “not subject to any foreign authority,” he included non-citizens living in America in that category. And from the wording, that would seem, on the surface, to be a reasonable assumption.

But NOWHERE does Bingham EVER state that he’s referring to anybody other than the traditional exceptions: foreign ambassadors, invading armies, and Indians in tribes.

And it is absolutely clear that the discussion in the Senate, at least, was referring ONLY to those people.

John Bingham himself later DROPPED the wording you refer to, substituting instead, “subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.” This phrase clearly meant “subject to the laws of the United States.”

This made it clear, in the 14th Amendment, that the children of non-citizens born here were US citizens at birth.

Which, BY THE WAY, is what Bingham says “natural born citizens” are - CITIZENS AT BIRTH.

Why did Bingham change the wording? Probably because the original wording gave a false impression that the US-born children of aliens weren’t citizens.

The fact that you’re even trying to make your case from John Bingham, rather than elsewhere - such as the Founding Fathers, and Framers and legal authorities of early America, is a sign of how thoroughly most of the birther claims have been debunked.

[JohnnyP]

One pdf is worth a thousand walls of text from you. :)

It's fake. And your experts can't duplicate it.

Thanks again to null and void for the html.

[Jeff Winston]

The United States House was in complete agreement at the time. NBC = born in sovereign U.S. territory, to 2 citizen parentS who owe allegiance to no other country.

That's simply not true.

On the floor of the House, James Falconer Wilson directly quoted William Rawle:

"Every person born within the United States, its Territories, or districts, whether the parents are citizens or aliens, is a natural-born citizen in the sense of the Constitution, and entitled to all the rights and privileges appertaining to that capacity." -- Rawle on the Constitution, p. 80.

So James Falconer Wilson explicitly stated on the floor of the House of Representatives that the children born in the United States of alien parents were themselves natural born citizens, and "entitled to all the rights and privileges appertaining to that capacity."

And where was Representative John Bingham (who elsewhere EQUATES "born a citizen" with "natural born citizen") at that moment? HE WAS RIGHT THERE IN THE CHAMBER WHEN WILSON MADE THE STATEMENT. We know this because he spoke just before Representative Wilson did.

And did he object, in the slightest?

NO, HE DID NOT.

And neither did any other member of the House of Representatives.

So your claim is not true.

Nor can you produce any quote, from ANY member of the House, during the entire months-long debate on citizenship, which ever stated that in general, two citizen parents were required for anybody to be a natural born citizen.

Because that quote does not exist.

[Jeff Winston]

I’ve already given you the PDF.

I’ve already pointed out that there’s not a single hand-created graphic file, in the history of graphics, that shows the effects of Obama’s PDF.

And I’m not talking about any specific little effect.

I’m talking about THAT TYPE OF EFFECT, IN GENERAL.

The PDF is easily reproducible by mechanical means.

It’s not reproducible at all by any graphic artist who can give any basis whatsoever for the weeks or months of work it would’ve taken to hand-imitate what a Xerox WorkCenter does in seconds.

[Jude in WV]

Do you have a job? If so, would you share with me what it is?
I am curious.

[Jeff Winston]

Here’s my position, rxsid.

Conservatives have the truth.

So let’s use the truth. Let’s abandon false memes, that are known to be false.

Because here’s what happens with a false meme, if it ever becomes popular.

It gets media coverage.

People who are “in the middle” pay attention to the media coverage.

If push comes to shove, people produce evidence, and the false meme is shown to be false. It is discredited.

To the extent that conservatives are associated with the false meme, conservatives are discredited. WE are discredited.

Given the liberal media, it’s hard enough for us to avoid being painted as backwater hicks who don’t know a damn thing.

And here instead of fighting that image, we’re handing the media that image on a silver platter.

I say no. I say we don’t act like ignorant hicks. I say we stick with the truth, because we can win on the truth.

And we absolutely can not win on falsehood.

All of that is aside from the fact that the truth is sacred in its own right. It is right to speak the truth. It is wrong to repeat false propaganda as if it’s true.

It’s just wrong.

[Cold Case Posse Supporter]

No.......you ARE siding with known opposition Marxists only to obfuscate the true facts that expose Obama’s documents as 100% fraudulent. John Woodman pretending to be a conservative was exposed as working for the opposition, namely Dr. Conspiracy and several members of the Fogbow, which one has a internet radio program named RC Blog radio. On the Tea Party Power hour hosted by Mark Gillar, Woodman and his work was ripped to shreds in a debate with computer imaging and adobe expert Mara Zebest and Karl Denninger. Woodman’s incompetence was severely exposed. He was a amateur, especially when he tried to obfuscate the definition of what a true Natural Born Citizen was (which is born to TWO U.S. citizen parents to ensure total allegiance to America). The Fogbow posters have just come up with the flawed amateur Xerox Work Center experiment that can’t duplicate Obama’s PDF document. You have embraced it like Dr. Conspiracy and the Fogbow posters as absolute proof Obama’s document is authentic. You dismiss Reed Hayes as just a handwriting guy. That is farthest from the actual truth. His credentials confirm he is a specialist in forensic computer-generated document attestations. That right there proves you are trying to obfuscate true facts and dismiss him as not credible. You go on to say “the Cold Case Posse won’t even publish his report. Why?” Because if you had any ‘common sense’ and had knowledge of law enforcement investigations, you don’t expose your ‘nail in the coffin’ best evidence to the public or opposition in an ongoing investigation. That has always been rule number one. Zullo has a 300 page report compiled of evidence we are not even privy of. We have only seen maybe 25% out of a 100% of evidence accumulated that confirms Obama’s documents are forged as well as that his birth narrative is fraudulent. You Jeff Winston and your lack of credentials have been exposed as a member of the opposition.

[Constitution 123]

“”””Constitution, I’ve already tried to let you off the hook from this conversation.”””””

Thanks </:-)
Listen, I am done trying to convince you of the fallibility of your position. You have a unique thought system.... You are pathological in your dedication to this issue and convinced you are always correct. When engaged, you dismiss the opposing argument and do not budge an inch. Very few here ever agree with you. No offence but you are like an intellectual vampire sucking the energy out of us. I’v invited you to agree to disagree but you will have none of it. Why not start a new anti birther thread somewhere?.... Take Care and God Bless

[Cold Case Posse Supporter]

Your post is not credible. You are not credible.

[JohnnyP]

More hand waving from you.

Just scan someone’s BC number that exhibits the same effect as the fake one. Take your time. Scan as many times as it takes.

I won’t click on your links so don’t bother. Post the pdf.

[Cold Case Posse Supporter]

“I say we stick with the truth, because we can win on the truth.”

You can’t handle the truth!

[Jeff Winston]

Do you have a job? If so, would you share with me what it is?

I am not going to share anything further regarding my age, status of employment, or location.

I have been repeatedly threatened by birthers, including physically, for posting the truth. I will share no further information by which such people might be able to find me.

My posts and (more imporantly) the sources behind them speak for themselves. Anybody can study my posts and see whether they're true or not. Anyone can also question them, and I will generally answer. I do get tired of debunking the same tired BS that's been claimed and debunked 10 times before. But new objections are certainly welcome.

All i will tell you is this.

I am definitely a conservative.

I love the truth. That is practically in my genes.

I strongly support our Constitution, our nation, our Founding Fathers, our American history, and our nation's exceptional place as a moral leader in the world.

My understanding of our Constitution and laws is nothing exceptional. It is in complete harmony with that of every major conservative Constitutional foundation and legal expert.

To my knowledge, I have not made a single claim on this board that was not 100% true, unless by some honest and sincere error, in which case I have retracted or will retract it, if anyone can show I was wrong.

Aside from that, I believe that we conservatives win when we stick to the truth, and lose when we don't. In fact, dishonest behavior on our side of the aisle has the ability to harm us for years. Look at the behavior of President Nixon, for example.

Again, you can look up the sources for everything I've posted and verify that for yourself, and I invite you to do so.

[Jeff Winston]

No.......you ARE siding with known opposition Marxists only to obfuscate the true facts that expose Obama’s documents as 100% fraudulent. John Woodman pretending to be a conservative was exposed as working for the opposition, namely Dr. Conspiracy and several members of the Fogbow, which one has a internet radio program named RC Blog radio.

I am aware of no information to indicate that Woodman isn't a conservative. If you have proof that he belongs to some liberal organization or is a registered Democrat or has ever lobbied on behalf of any liberals, produce it. Otherwise, I think I can assume it's just more birther bullsh*t.

More important than that, anyone who wants to take the time can read through Woodman's book and try to debunk it. They can also read his blog. Everything I've seen has been very carefully done. And yes, I've read his book. Personally, I find the evidence on the Cold Case Posse fraud especially compelling and well documented. I recommend the book as well.

On the Tea Party Power hour hosted by Mark Gillar, Woodman and his work was ripped to shreds in a debate with computer imaging and adobe expert Mara Zebest and Karl Denninger. Woodman’s incompetence was severely exposed. He was a amateur, especially when he tried to obfuscate the definition of what a true Natural Born Citizen was (which is born to TWO U.S. citizen parents to ensure total allegiance to America).

Judging from his book and his blog, I would doubt that's true, although you can post the audio if you have a link and people can judge for themselves.

Unfortunately Woodman didn't publish his birth certificate investigation on the web, but put it into a book. I'm sure most people haven't read the book. It makes the Cold Case Posse look like fools.

The Fogbow posters have just come up with the flawed amateur Xerox Work Center experiment that can’t duplicate Obama’s PDF document.

The birther claim was that a mechanical process can't produce the things seen in Obama's birth certificate. This conclusively disproves that. And the PDF file produced is readily available. Anyone can click on the link, download it, open it in Illustrator and see for themselves that the file has the exact same effects birther "experts" said were "impossible" in the Obama PDF.

You dismiss Reed Hayes as just a handwriting guy. That is farthest from the actual truth. His credentials confirm he is a specialist in forensic computer-generated document attestations.

I looked at his credentials myself. I saw darn little that was applicable. Only a very small amount that was relevant to computer issues. And certainly nothing, absolutely NOTHING that would indicate he has the slightest idea of how an image is compressed or how a PDF is put together.

In fact, here's his resume.

Perhaps you would be so kind as to point out all of his expert qualifications in image compression and PDF construction.

In 23 screens of information, I see 1 paper, published nearly 20 years ago, on computer-generated handwriting.

Which has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with a scanned and compressed PDF document.

I see some unspecified "research," back in 1994-1995, on "Computer-Generated Handwriting and Documents." Whatever that means.

I don't even KNOW what that means.

But I can be damn sure what it DOES NOT mean. It does NOT mean MRC compression, because that was only invented by Ricardo de Queiroz and maybe some other people around 1999.

You go on to say “the Cold Case Posse won’t even publish his report. Why?” Because if you had any ‘common sense’ and had knowledge of law enforcement investigations, you don’t expose your ‘nail in the coffin’ best evidence to the public or opposition in an ongoing investigation. That has always been rule number one.

Then explain to me why they've done it on every single occasion until just recently. Hell, they've given PRESS CONFERENCES to announce their "evidence!"

It was only since they got burned by being exposed as frauds - by a FReeper, no less - that they have suddenly decided, "oh, we have all this SECRET evidence."