Hollister v. Soetoro (aka Obama) Update to Order to Show Cause

Obama Crimes.us ^ | Feb. 26, 2009 | Philip J. Berg, Esq.

[Michael Michael]

How about Sandra Ramsey Lines?

All Lines said is that you can't use a photograph or a scanned image of a paper document to authenticate the document itself. For that, you need to examine the actual paper document.

That's not the same as saying that the photographs or scanned image have been altered or manipulated.

[Non-Sequitur]

Wasn’t the question pinhead.

Then why did you ask, "Now, how do you suppose Maya, born in Jakarta and living in Jakarta, and the daughter of a Muslim Indonesian became a U. S. citizen?" Rhetorical question?

[Beckwith]

All Lines said is that you can't use a photograph or a scanned image of a paper document to authenticate the document itself. For that, you need to examine the actual paper document.

That's not the same as saying that the photographs or scanned image have been altered or manipulated.

No, that's not what she said. She said -- “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.”

And that is the issue at hand -- Obama's attorney's are using THAT EXACT scanned image as their evidence that Obama is eligible for the job.

Obama's attorney's even refer to it as a "birth certificate," which they know it's not.

Why do you think they are knowingly presenting false evidence to the court? Why do you think they are attempting to perpetrate a fraud on the court?

You have more opinions than most on this forum. Why do you think Obama is fighting the release of his bona fides with such vigor? What do you think he is hiding?

[Michael Michael]

No, that's not what she said. She said -- “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.”

I know what she said. And she's not saying anything more than what I have summarized her as having said. A photograph or scanned image of a document can't be used to authenticate the document itself. And again, that's not the same as saying that the photograph or scanned image is not a genuine photograph or scanned image of the document.

And that is the issue at hand -- Obama's attorney's are using THAT EXACT scanned image as their evidence that Obama is eligible for the job.

Actually they've only just mentioned it in passing, as their motions to dismiss have all been based on standing. And when the courts decide on issues of standing, they do so with the assumption that the plaintiff's claims are all true.

Obama's attorney's even refer to it as a "birth certificate," which they know it's not.

Why do you think they are knowingly presenting false evidence to the court? Why do you think they are attempting to perpetrate a fraud on the court?

Throughout Berg's initial lawsuit, he referred to it as Obama's "Certificate of Live Birth" even though it is a "Certification of Live Birth."

...a Hawaiian Certificate of Live Birth (COLB) was placed on Obama’s campaign website. However, as posted all over the internet, three (3) independent Document Forensic Experts performed extensive Forensic testing on the Certificate of Live Birth posted on Obama’s campaign website. The Forensic Expert findings were the Certificate of Live Birth (COLB) was in fact a forgery. It was further discovered that this original Certificate of Live Birth which had been altered and forged was issued to Maya Casandra Soetoro, born in 1970. Maya Kasandra Soetoro is Obama’s half sister who was born in Indonesia and her birth was later registered in Hawaii.

Why do you think Berg knowingly presented false evidence to the court? Why do you think Berg was attempting to perpetrate a fraud on the court?

You have more opinions than most on this forum. Why do you think Obama is fighting the release of his bona fides with such vigor? What do you think he is hiding?

How can any opinion of mine have any relevance as to why Obama is or isn't doing something? He's doing what he's doing or not doing for his own reasons and no opinion of mine can possibly determine what Obama's actual reasons are.

What exactly are you looking for? Are you looking for the real reason Obama is doing what he's doing or not, or are you just looking for something, anything, that you can fit conveniently into some preconceived belief?

My opinion is the latter. But does that opinion have anything to do with with what your actual reasons are?

[Beckwith]

You have more opinions than most on this forum. Why do you think Obama is fighting the release of his bona fides with such vigor? What do you think he is hiding?

What exactly are you looking for?

I'm looking for a straight answer to a straight question.

I haven't seen so much dancing since West Side Story.

[Michael Michael]

I'm looking for a straight answer to a straight question.

For what purpose? Again, what relevance could any opinion of mine have with regard to Obama's actual reasons for doing anything? If you want to know what Obama's reasons are, you should be asking Obama, not me.

[Polarik]

You might just as well be describing Polarik.

Only if I wanted to create a fraudulent birth certificate for a Presidential candidate and use it to fool brain-dead Democrats into thiinking that he has been EXCESSIVELY VETTED*

*That's what Obama's brain-dead lawyer said right after listing Factcheck as his sole reference.

[Polarik]

Again, what relevance could any opinion of mine have with regard to Obama's actual reasons for doing anything?

Exactly.

[little jeremiah]

Did Stanley Ann Dunham keep sole US citizenship, or was she a dual citizen of any other country (I would assume Indonesia, if any)?

[Michael Michael]

Did Stanley Ann Dunham keep sole US citizenship, or was she a dual citizen of any other country (I would assume Indonesia, if any)?

Wouldn't matter. She would still have been a US citizen, which would have conferred US citizenship on Maya under INA 1952's 301(a)(7).

[little jeremiah]

Just to let you know that I never read your steaming piles disguised as “comments”.

Carry on!

[Michael Michael]

Just to let you know that I never read your steaming piles disguised as “comments”.

And why exactly do you feel any particular need to tell me this?

Many moons ago I started what's still the largest political chat channel on IRC. Most IRC clients had an ignore feature, which when engaged for a certain person, would filter out all comments from that person.

Routinely two people would get into some argument which ended in one person telling the other in public, "I'm putting you on ignore!"

I always thought that was the most childish behavior. Why not simply ignore them and just move on? What's the purpose of making some public announcement of it? Never could quite figure that out, but it always made me feel like I was babysitting a bunch of five year olds.

[Beckwith]

I would have to guess.

Despite her antipathy towards the US, she kept her American roots and made sure her children did also.

[Beckwith]

Forget you.

[Michael Michael]

Hey Ron, why is Berg still clinging to the long debunked fraud, Techdude?

I just saw this posted by Linda Starr over on the Obama Crimes forum:

Also, Barry's sister's name is embedded underneath his in the lower layers.

She then mentions you a bit further down in the same paragraph:

Ron Polarik has written a detailed analysis for us which is posted on the website.

Makes it look like you're the one who made the claim about Maya's name appearing in Obama's COLB.

I thought you said a few months ago that you'd informed these people that Techdude was a fraud.

Here, go read Linda's post yourself:

Re: 02/28/2009 Daily Discussion Topics

[FreeManN]

Looks like an expert to me.

Don’t think the clowns working for bob the bo’s dumb lawyer have got comparable creditials, but, of course, nobody on bo’s team has got creds.

[Polarik]

So noted. Thanks for pointing that out for me.

I sent Linda a message regarding the statements she made in error.

I don't visit that blog very much. FR is time-consuming as it is.

[FreeManN]

Looks like bo’s best advocates have run out of clever arguments and they have sent in a bunch of B-teamers to re-hash the same old losing arguments.

[Michael Michael]

Looks like bo’s best advocates have run out of clever arguments and they have sent in a bunch of B-teamers to re-hash the same old losing arguments.

It would seem to me that all of the same old losing arguments are those that have been behind all the lawsuits which have been tossed out.

And of course all of the pending and any future lawsuits are moot anyway. Ever since he was sworn in, the only way he can be removed from office is by impeachment in the House and subsequent conviction in the Senate.

But then all those who have been yammering about the Constitution have never actually read it so I wouldn't expect them to be aware of such things.

[Michael Michael]

I sent Linda a message regarding the statements she made in error.

Hehehe. Good luck with that. Do you honestly think she cares?