Obama's Online "Birth Certificate" is Not Evidenciary, Says Professional Forensic Document Examiner

Investigating Obama ^ | 12-29-2008 | Arlen Williams & Phil at the Right Side of Life

[unspun]

While addressing your attention to the featured article in The Right Side of Life, I.O. suggests one potential and essential reason that Barack Obama has spent approximately one million dollars to keep his actual Hawaiian birth certificate undisclosed:

Whatever it shows or fails to show, as to his place of birth, his Hawaiian birth certificate ostensibly demonstrates that Barack Hussein Obama I is his father. While not a new revelation, that would become compelling procedural evidence that he is not a natural born Citizen and is therefore not constitutionally permitted to be U.S. president.

On the other hand, Sandra Ramsey explains why Obama's "online COLB" is not evidence.

Keyes v. Lingle: Case Dismissed; Forensic Examiner Disproves Online COLB

Submitted by Phil on Mon, Dec 29, 2008

Another case that had been flying under the radar was Keyes v. Lingle, where the Constitution Party and Dr. Amb. Alan Keyes were petitioning against Hawaii Governor Linda Lingle, Chief Elections Officer Kevin B. Cronin, and various other Defendants as a means of holding an official accountable for determining Barack Hussein Obama’s eligibility.

Documentation:

• Dismissed on December 5 (HTML/PDF)
• Motion to Reconsider dismissed on December 12 (HTML/PDF)

You will notice that the case was dismissed on a technicality (according to the judge, the Plaintiffs referred to the wrong Hawaiian statute(s)), not on content.

However, the bigger story to this lawsuit is the fact that forensic document examiner Sandra Ramsey Lines (pictured) has documented in an associated affidavit (PDF) the following:

2. I have reviewed the attached affidavit posted on the internet from “Ron Polarik,” [PDF] who has declined to provide his name because of a number of death threats he has received. After my review and based on my years of experience, I can state with certainty that the COLB presented on the internet by the various groups, which include the “Daily Kos,” the Obama Campaign, “Factcheck.org” and others cannot be relied upon as genuine. Mr. Polarik raises issues concerning the COLB that I can affirm. Software such as Adobe Photoshop can produce complete images or alter images that appear to be genuine; therefore, any image offered on the internet cannot be relied upon as being a copy of the authentic document.

3. Upon a cursory inspection of the internet COLB, one aspect of the image that is clearly questionable is the obliteration of the Certificate No. That number is a tracking number that would allow anyone to ask the question, “Does this number refer to the Certification of Live Birth for the child Barack Hussein Obama II?” It would not reveal any further personal information; therefore, there would be no justifiable reason for oliterating it.

4. In my experience as a forensic document examiner, if an original of any document exists, that is the document that must be examined to obtain a definitive finding of genuineness or non-genuineness. In this case, examination of the vault birth certificate for President-Elect Obama would lay this issue to rest once and for all. [emphasis mine]

The above clearly illustrates that it is impossible to determine eligibility based on the widely-circulated certification of live birth and that the only way to determine Barack Hussein Obama’s natural born citizenship status is to retrieve the currently-sealed certificate of live birth.

It appears that we’re dealing with an individual who has so much to hide on so little a document.

Now, one cannot say this online COLB is evidence of absolutely nothing. That is because it is "natural" evidence of its own existence, also that it is purported to be about Obama's citizenship. It is "natural" evidence of this, because that is self-evidently true, even though the online COLB is not the evidence it is purported to be (of Obama being an American citizen of any kind). And that, by the way, may become criminal evidence of fraud.

Why did I even write that? I am writing that to explain what "natural" means, in law. It means self-evident. E.g., a person demonstrably born to American parents in America is a natural born Citizen of America, but a person born to a foreign father and who thusly takes on his father's citizenship in another nation is not a natural born Citizen of America. That is, his citizenship is not self-evident, rather unclear, in doubt, needs further work, adulterated, etc., since one may be a citizen of only one nation at a time and international law holds that this person is a citizen of his father's nation, by hereditary right. That is what the term, natural born Citizen means, in Article II of the United States Constitution.

[unspun]

Nope. Only WHERE matters as any illegal alien knows.

You have been provided the documentation of what natural born Citizen means. Those who write should first read.

[MHGinTN]

Hawai’i is a liberal hell so any complicity with the affiramtive action candidate’s fraud is to be expected. Folks seem to think because Lingle is a Republican she will protect the law and Constitution. How was she eloected by such a liberal state if she is so conservative and lawfully inclined? The answewr is obvious, just like how Romeny was elected in liberal hell hole, Mass. They are not true conservatives. Lingle may also be compromised/blackmailable on issues of her sexual preferences. HI voters wouldn’t care about her sexual preferences, but blackmailers can use such things to great effect, like rpelacing simple documents witht he governor ‘looking the other way’.

[MHGinTN]

You caused me to scare my two old cats ... I burst out in such a loud guffaw they were startled!

To be more serious, if the exposure of this fraud is handled properly, it is black people who will be the most outraged at this lying perjuring defrauding prick who bilked them for millions to run his fraudulent campaign! Sadly, the media isn't likely to allow the full truth to come out in all the gory details and it will tear this nation apart for a short while. I only hope the media professional liars are destroyed along with buildings they infest.

[TheCipher]

The one thing the courts in Hawaii do not want is a cse where there is an allegation of the COLB being a forgery. The only way the other side can counteract it is to produce an actual certified copy of the long form to the court. They will do their best to keep that from ever happening.

[John Valentine]

“Conventional Wisdom” is NOT the law, as many, apparently including you, have yet to discover.

[John Valentine]

Folks like “plain talk” don’t care about learning. They only parrot what they think they know. You are wasting your time providing documentaton and analysis.

[unspun]

Then again, the worse the State SC’s behave, the more attention that tends to get from the SCOTUS (i.e., Bush v. Gore).

Donofrio knew this, but he may have played out early.

[rawcatslyentist]

>"His father could be Porky Pig and it doesn't matter. The key is WHERE he was born. "

So if his father was Stalin, or Hitler, just because he was squeezed on US soil makes him one of US? I disagree.

[Diogenesis]

[Vaduz]

Just shows the Hawaii courts,MSM,democrats,unwashed,idiots,ACORN are in the tank for Obama

[Polarik]

I've said this several times before, as have others, that the COLB cannot be used to prove natural-born status.

I've also reiterated the point (as I am doing again ) that the intent and subsequent outcomes from the creation and distribution of a false identification document is still an act of fraud that will continue to exist as a chargeable offense, regardless of what transpires in Congress or the Judicial System.

The law is very clear on what constitutes the creation and use of a false identification document, and it matters not that the fraudulent document is in an electronic medium, given that electronic copies of a document, like faxes, can suffice as valid alternatives, if not for the long term, then certainly for the short term where the paper originals will still need to be provided. Even in the latter case, electronic copies are acceptable, in most cases, to begin legal or governmental procedures, and it's only when the evidence goes to the court that originals are required. An example of this is when I faxed, and also emailed as a PDF file, my Affidavit.

Consider also that this bogus COLB has been used to obstruct legal proceedings, and to stifle governmental investigations into Obama's true origins.

[unspun]

Consider also that this bogus COLB has been used to obstruct legal proceedings, and to stifle governmental investigations into Obama's true origins.

Yes, exactly.

[little jeremiah]

Excellent point.

[Uncle Chip]

Thanks, excellent point. The laws are there but the bureaucrats and their courts just ignore them.

[cyberslave]

I haven't seen the original moving papers in this matter does anyone know if a pdf of them exist? Also any answering papers?

However, it looks like to me that all this case was, was an attempt to bar him from the ballot without attempting to get access to the vault copy of Obama's birth certificate.

In essence, this may have only been another Alan Keyes publicity stunt.

I'm beginning to believe that were being played for stupid.

Does Hawaii have a Freedom of Information Act? Why hasn't anyone made a request under it to the Hawaiian Department of Health for the vault copy? Such a decision would be reviewable by the courts if it is not granted?

Why hasn't anyone made a Freedom of Information Action (FOIA) request of the State Department for Barack Obama's passport file? That denial is certainly reviewable by the US District Court for DC or by the Federal District Court in which the citizen who made the request resides.

This is not going away after January 2009, come what may ever come.

[real_patriotic_american]

One of these Obama non-citizenship cases is going to hit!

http://www.rallycongress.com/constitutional-qualification/1244

[TheCipher]

Why hasn't anyone made a request under it to the Hawaiian Department of Health for the vault copy?

Numerous requests have been made. All denied. A lawsuit was filed with the state and was dismissed on the old standby "lack of standing ". There is a current lawsuit in Washington state that is trying to get the State of Washington to issue a subpoena to the State of Hawaii to release the records. So far the Sec of State of Washington is trying to block it.

Why hasn't anyone made a Freedom of Information Action (FOIA) request of the State Department for Barack Obama's passport file?

Berg did that in his initial filing of his case. The request was denied.

However, it looks like to me that all this case was, was an attempt to bar him from the ballot without attempting to get access to the vault copy of Obama's birth certificate.

No, this case was filed after the election. Under the statute he filed under, he would not have had standing until the election had taken place. He is currently in a case in California which is attempting to get access to the vault copy. This case would have been another way to get it. Since the state won't release it, if the court had accepted the case under the statute ( which they should have ), the allegation would have been the COLB he submitted online was a fraud. The only way the other side could defend that allegation would be to produce a certified vault copy of the BC to the court.

[1234]

“...This is not going away after January 2009, come what may ever come.”

Your statement is the one of the few certainties regarding this BO ‘thingy’.

[Polarik]

The DNC & MSM would say, “That’s good enough for us!”

And, then when I would have found them to be actually "breast imprints or Jugs JPGs," they would have challenged it, demanded that I show them my credentials to prove that I am both an "expert in azz prints and Jugs JPGs" while they bring out their own "expert" to knock my knockers analyses.

[Polarik]

No, this case was filed after the election.

You are correct in everything you said, except the one above. What will be reviewed by SCOTUS on Jan 9 and Jan 16 stems directly from the original suit against Obama and the DNC, filed by Berg on August 21, 2008. I have a complete timeline showing all of Berg's filings and the subsequent actions taken here:

Berg lawsuit timeline

You can best summarize the actions taken as follows:

• Berg files TRO and injunction to get DNC to take Obama off the ballot
• Berg amends this to include Expedited Discovery
• Obama and DNC file Motion to Dismiss for lack of standing
• Berg files opposition to the Motion to Dismiss, and still seeks Discovery
• Obama and DNC file Protective Order to prevent Discovery
• Berg files opposition to the Protective Order, requesting Obama and DNC to comply
• Obama and DNC fail to respond to the claims and fail to comply with Discovery request, thus "admitting" to all claims
• Obama and DNC are granted their Motion to Dismiss for lack of standing
• Berg files appeal to stay the election until Obama can prove his eligibility
• Berg files Writ of Certiori to US Supreme Court regarding failure of lower court to address questions in original complaint (still pending)
• Berg's appeal to stay the election is denied for lack of standing
• November election is held as scheduled and Obama chosen as President
• After the November election, Berg now has standing to file an injunction prohibiting Obama from being certified to serve as President
• Berg files a new injunction to stay (a) the appointment of Electors, (b) the Electors from voting, and (c) the House from approving their votes on Jan 8.
• Electors are appointed and cast their votes with Obama securing enough to become President.
• Supreme Court schedules conference for Berg's Writ (Jan 9) and a conference for Berg's current injunction (Jan 16).

As for what happens on or after Jan 8, I wrote about that in another post.