Judge Abbott Would Order TDP Chair Richie To Declare Candidate Obama Is Ineligible For The Job

jbjd ^ | 04.07.10 | jbjd

[jbjd]

I may not be able to explain why Barack Obama attracted support for his crusade to the White House from tens of millions of citizens notwithstanding he refused to disclose to these same sovereigns documentary evidence he was Constitutionally eligible for the job.

But I can explain that by refusing to disclose to the citizens of Texas under the Texas Open Records Act the documentary basis for Certifying to state election officials Mr. Obama was the eligible Presidential candidate of the Texas Democratic Party; under Texas laws, TDP Chair Boyd Richie admitted he lied about the candidate’s eligibility for President leaving him with no other choice but to declare Barack Obama is ineligible for the job....

P.S. In what could perhaps be characterized as a case of cosmic justice, the Justice of the Supreme Court of Texas who signed the opinion in Bradford v. Vento finding silence equals misrepresentation was none other than The Honorable Greg Abbott, presently the Attorney General of Texas.

[jbjd]

Ah, jamese777, so off put by logic, you can no longer see straight. I am not going after Boyd Richie in court - by the way, no “t” in Richie - nor am I advising other citizens to do this. Ha, this would be ridiculous because 1) I am not a citizen of Texas; and 2) this law that underlies such a suit only applies to Chairs of political parties (and certain candidates for office). Get it? Rather, I am merely pointing out, if the RPT had wanted to remove Mr. Obama’s name from the ballot in 2008, under Texas law, they had standing in state court to do just that. And they knew how to do it because the TDP had done this to them. Or, they can file suit now to keep BO’s name off the 2012 ballot! You sound angry because I rejected your proffer of proof outright inasmuch as your ‘advice’ was contradicted by WH Counsel Bob Bauer.

I know this. The best piece of evidence Bob Bauer had in January 2009 to establish his client, Barack Obama, was a NBC; was the Certification of his Nomination signed by Nancy Pelosi, Chair of the 2008 DNC Convention, swearing he was Constitutionally eligible for the job, meaning, he is a NBC, delivered to election officials in HI to get his name printed on the ballot. Because every other item proffered by Mr. Bauer at best could only establish, his client was a “native.” (Note, Mr. Bauer only offered his client’s word such a HI birth document existed; he failed to submit such document to the court. LOL.) So, here was the choice: give the court your word your client produced a piece of paper showing he was born in HI; or produce the Certification of Nomination signed by the Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, 3rd in line of Presidential succession, with all of the gravitas that entails, swearing he is Constitutionally eligible for the job, and which Certification was used to get his name on the ballot in states whose laws only allowed the names of eligible candidates to be printed on the ballot. And Mr. Bauer withheld Ms. Pelosi’s Certification. Know why? Because he could not get one client - BO - out of a civil mess by producing a document that would expose another client - NP - to criminal liability.

Maybe that’s why NP (and DNC Secretary Alice Germond, who co-signed those Certifications) refused to respond to citizen requests for the documentary basis for those Certifications; except to say, the DNC is not a public agency and therefore, they do not have to provide this documentation.

But this ‘get out of jail free’ card does not work in Texas. Yee Haw!

[jamese777]

I’m getting out the popcorn and melting the butter to prepare myself for these big legal events that are in store for us all. I can’t wait!
I’m just sorry that none of this evidence was available for any of the 537 members of Congress for the Joint Session of Congress to certify the vote of the Electoral College. It only would have taken any one Representative and any one Senator to submit a written objection to Vice President Cheney’s certification of Obama’s electoral college votes. But alas, that didn’t happen. Oh well, better late than never I guess.

[edge919]

A “political affidavit,” “correspondance,” “email” or a “newspaper article” is NOT an “original Vital Record.” Hawaii laws explicitly spell out EXACTLY what are to be considered as vital records. The primary categories are birth records, death records, adoption records and marriage and divorce records.

Yet when requests were made for copies of e-mail requests and correspondence related to Obama's birth records and any subsequent amendments, the DOH replied that these documents were considered to be part of the vital records. IOW, they were saying that anything they wanted to consider sacred could be protected by calling it part of the vital records.

But, I agree wiht you that there are only birth, death, marriage and divorce records maintained by the DOH. When they changed their specificity from 'original birth record' in October 2008 to 'vital records' in the plural in July 2009, this was a direct admission by Fukino that the original birth record was insufficient by itself to prove the place of birth. Whether e-mails and newspaper articles are sufficient, I say, let's have full disclosure

Dr. Fukino is backed up in her verification by the further corroboration of Dr. Alvin T. Onaka, the Registrar of Vital Records for the state of Hawaii who also has reviewed the original Obama vital records. You may not like it, but that’s the way it is.

Alvin T. Onaka Ph.D. only helped verify that an original birth certificate was on file, nothing more. THAT ... is the way it is.

Dr. Fukino has already released the Index Data record for Barack Hussein Obama II. It verifies that the state of Hawaii has a BIRTH RECORD for a male child named Barack Hussein Obama II. You can see it for yourself here:

Yet this doesn't confirm a place of birth nor does it preclude that amendments have been made to Obama's birth record ... and most importantly it does nothing to confirm that the whole of Obama's alleged COLB is genuine. Incidentally, up until at least 1990 the Index Data included the certificate number. In other states, the certificate number is still part of the birth index. Yet when faced with a slam-dunk proposition of confirming that the certificate number in the factlack photos is genuine, the DOH has balked. Wonder why.

That information is further corroborated by the two birth announcements for a male child born to Mr. and Mrs. Barack H. Obama on August 4, 1961 which appeared in the Honolulu Star-Bulliten and the Honolulu Advertiser on August 13, 1961 and August 14, 1961.

Right, and those publication dates along with differing publication dates and lower numbers on the Nordyke twins' BCs helps corroborate that the certificate number on Obama's alleged COLB is fraudulent, but those same newspaper announcements do NOT corroborate a place of birth.

Those announcements came from the Health Department’s statistics and not from family or friends.

You're not telling the whole story. Without seeing an original birth certificate, we don't know who reported Obama's birth to the Health Department, so yes, that information, BY LAW, could have come from family or friends.

The point is that those trying to disqualify Obama at this late date have a very high legal mountain to climb. Obama is under no obligation to prove his eligibility, his opponents have to prove him to be ineligible: “presumption of innocence.” At the bottom of every Hawaii Certification of Live Birth it clearly states: “This copy serves as prima facie evidence of the fact of birth in any court proceeding.”

Great point. A quick way Obama could resolve any doubts would be by entering his alleged COLB in a court of law to see if it passes scrutiny. The Kenyan chicken refuses and has made the HI DOH pick up and cover for his lazy, fraudulent ass. What kind of scum does that?? Do you know??

[jbjd]

You poor dear! jamese777 is picking on everyone else because he got nowhere with me; I have too many facts at my disposal. Right on my blog.

For example, there never was a newspaper announcement. APFC said there was, on their site; well, actually, they admitted, they stole the image they posted of what looked like a newspaper birth announcement, which had no name of the publication, from a pro-Hillary blog! Indeed, you had to click on the image on the APFC site, to catch the original site was td! And, without any further investigation, they said, this proves, BO was born in HI. Then, in the Hollister case, WH Attorney Bob Bauer asked federal Judge Robertson to take judicial notice that APFC “noted” a contemporaneous newspaper birth announcement! Do you get this? Take notice an image only visible through a computer screen, unattributed, was “noted” by APFC? Can you spell HUBRIS? What do you suppose Mr. Bauer would have done with such notice that APFC said there was an image? Why, he could have turned that notice into the meme, there actually WAS a contemporaneous birth announcement. But there wasn’t. How do we know? Because APFC told us. And Bob Bauer told us, by not submitting an actual CONTEMPORANEOUS NEWSPAPER BIRTH ANNOUNCEMENT. (Just read one citizen complaint of election fraud to state A’sG in applicable states, in the sidebar on my blog. It’s all spelled out.) http://jbjd.wordpress.com

[jbjd]

When contacted by their constituents who were concerned that BO was not a NBC, several Congresspeople, responding in strikingly similar language as if they had conferred in advance, dismissed these concerns. http://jbjd.wordpress.com/2009/08/13/if-drowning-out-opposing-facts-is-un-american-then-ignoring-unpleasant-facts-must-be-un-american-too/ I cannot say whether they were ill informed or just motivated by other interests.

[jamese777]

When contacted by their constituents who were concerned that BO was not a NBC, several Congresspeople, responding in strikingly similar language as if they had conferred in advance, dismissed these concerns. http://jbjd.wordpress.com/2009/08/13/if-drowning-out-opposing-facts-is-un-american-then-ignoring-unpleasant-facts-must-be-un-american-too/ I cannot say whether they were ill informed or just motivated by other interests.

---

Let’s not forget that there were 219 REPUBLICANS sitting there at the Joint Session of Congress held to count and certify the votes of the Electoral College. All it would have taken is any TWO (one Representative and one Senator) of those Republicans to object to the certification of Obama’s Electoral Votes due to his alleged ineligibility and both Houses of Congress would have had to hold investigations into the reason for the objections.
Not only did Vice President Cheney, in his role as President of the Senate not ask for objections, none of the Republicans lodged a point of order to make sure that objections were called for.
You can’t blame it all on Pelosi.

[jbjd]

jamese777, who forgot? Haven’t you read the article that is the subject of this post? Who is letting anyone off the hook for not vetting this man as to Constitutional eligibility, even though no provision of any law, state or federal, including the Constitution requires such vetting? Read my blog. I maintain that the R’s are as culpable as the D’s in this situation. And that the R’s have the power in Texas to initiate a suit to prevent BO’s name from getting on the ballot in 2012; and have known since at least 2006 how to keep his name off the ballot in 2008.

[jbjd]

I absolutely agree.

[jamese777]

The Certification Of Live Birth IS the official birth certificate of the state of Hawaii since 2001 and Obama’s been available for the entire world to see since June, 2008.
The St. Petersburg Times newspaper got a copy of that document and sent it back to the state of Hawaii to confirm its authenticity. Here is what they said when that occurred:
“When the birth certificate arrived from the Obama campaign it confirmed his name as the other documents already showed it. Still, we took an extra step: We e-mailed it to the Hawaii Department of Health, which maintains such records, to ask if it was real.

‘It’s a valid Hawaii state birth certificate,’ spokesman Janice Okubo told us.”
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2008/jun/27/obamas-birth-certificate-part-ii/

If any one orders their “birth certificate” from Hawaii, they get the exact same short form COLB that Obama has and the US Federal government accepts that document as official proof of birth. Obama will never need to show any other document to anyone in order to prove where he was born.

If it was possible to order a long form certificate, someone, anyone would have ordered their long form by now and received it from the state to prove Obama wrong.
NO ONE HAS!!!

The state of Hawaii has gone on the public record saying that Obama was born there.

If anyone wants to see Obama’s long form, let them find a prosecuting attorney to subpoena it.
NO ONE HAS!!!

[edge919]

Spokesbabe Okubo used what must be an ‘official’ validation procedure. She said Obama’s alleged COLB looked just like her own. Later, when it was pointed out that no seal nor registrar’s signature could be found anywhere on the jpg, Okubo admitted she couldn’t tell if it was real or not. Like a lot of faithers, you glazed right past the part. Since that debacle, the HI DOH has never come back and said it’s real.

[jamese777]

You have confused and combined various internet web site reports.
Janice Okubo was referring specifically to the photoshopped image of Obama’s COLB that was on the Daily Kos and Fight the Smears web sites and she was NOT referring to the actual hard copies of Obama’s COLB that the Chicago Tribune, Factcheck.org and the St. Petersburg Times received for review. Okubo could not verify one side of a photoshopped image, however she COULD and DID verify hard copies of the Obama COLB.

You can read the St. Petersburg Times report in its entirety for yourself here (from June 27, 2008):
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2008/jun/27/obamas-birth-certificate-part-ii/

And OVER A YEAR LATER, here is what Janice Okubo had to say (From July 17, 2009): and I quote Ms. Okubo, “Its crazy, said Janice Okubo, director of communications for the Hawaii Department of Health. ‘I don’t think anything is ever going to satisfy them.’

Okubo, who said that she gets weekly questions from Obama ‘birthers’ that are ‘more like threats’ explained that the certificate of live birth reproduced by Obama’s campaign SHOULD HAVE DEBUNKED THE CONSPIRACY THEORIES. ‘If you were born in Bali, for example, Okubo explained, ‘you could get a certificate get a certificate from the state of Hawaii saying you were born in Bali. You could not get a certificate saying you were born in Honolulu. The state has to verify a fact like that for it to appear on the certificate. But it’s become very clear that it doesn’t matter what I say. The people who are questioning this bring up all these implausible scenarios. What if the physician lied? What if the state lied? It’s just become an urban legend at this point.’”
http://washingtonindependent.com/51489/birther-movement-picks-up-steam

Now does that sound like someone who is retracting her “valid Hawaii birth certificate” statement? I don’t think so.

[edge919]

Janice Okubo was referring specifically to the photoshopped image of Obama’s COLB that was on the Daily Kos and Fight the Smears web sites and she was NOT referring to the actual hard copies of Obama’s COLB that the Chicago Tribune, Factcheck.org and the St. Petersburg Times received for review.

You're getting the facts way wrong. Those sources didn't get hard copies of the alleged COLB. The only hard copy is the one that factlack claimed they saw by going to Obama headquarters ... and that wasn't produced until late July or Aug. 2008. Politifact, which was what we were discussing, only saw an e-mailed jpg. Spokesbabe Okubo saw it by e-mail and said it looked like hers, but when pressed had to admit that she couldn't confirm it was real. The hard copy photographed and posted on the factlack site has not been confirmed as real either. In fact, the DOH has gone out of its way to avoid confirming it, despite having statutory authority.

Now does that sound like someone who is retracting her “valid Hawaii birth certificate” statement? I don’t think so.

It sounds like someone is being extremely careful about what she's saying. She doesn't say the alleged COLB is real. She doesn't say the COLB proves that Obama was born in Hawaii. She doesn't say that the COLB is factually correct. I see a lot of whining that could have been prevented with full disclosure and a possible Freudian slip that Obama's COLB SHOULD say he was born in another country. And I see someone who is willing to accept double-talk as a substitute for the truth.

[jbjd]

Neither of these states - FL or OH - has the same ballot eligibility as TX. Even states with such laws - we have identified 6 (six) such states thus far (although there are more which citizens must identify before I can draft citizen complaints of election fraud to their A’sG), GA, HI, MD, SC, TX, and VA - do not have these same laws in TX statutes, concerning declaring candidates ineligible, or applying mandamus to party chairs. No; I think TX is the key to ‘outing’ the election (ballot) fraud that permeated the 2008 election cycle, and can prevent a repeat in 2012.