I am not commenting on Leo himself, and the political or religious stance of a person doesn’t tell me whether or not their evidence or argument is valid. At this point I have no way of knowing which of the researchers and/or lawyers are genuine and which are disinformation agents throwing out false stuff just to throw a monkey wrench in the works for those who are genuine. All I can go by is the actual evidence.
Donofrio was immediately accused of forging a screenshot, and anybody who didn’t believe Donofrio had forged the screenshot was immediately accused of not using logic or being interested in evidence or practicing due diligence. That’s not cool with me. I have seen no evidence thus far that Donofrio forged that screenshot, and I HAVE found evidence that what he said the “current” page was is in a Google-cached page for June 21, 2011. The person who accused Donofrio of forging a screenshot has presented no evidence to support that claim and has not apologized for making a false accusation (based sheerly on speculation that it COULD HAVE been forged) either.
Philman 63 has said he/she can’t see the latest date that the page was revised. Somebody else said they could see it but didn’t say what the date was.
So now the story switches to trying to show that it’s not unusual that the text that was entered correctly in 2006 and altered in early 2008 to get rid of the reference was now changed back to accurate the day after Donofrio posted about the manipulation, because it isn’t the only instance where that happened.
Kleon says he’s seen a Way Back Machine page showing that it happened elsewhere. He’s even posted a direct link that is supposed to take me to that page. But my computer won’t go to it. Apparently all this “evidence” is like the mythical unicorn that only appears to true believers. lol. And that in itself is something that is so common for me that it’s ho-hum already. I’ve been dealing with not being allowed to see stuff for a long, long time. But it’s not supposed to be this way. I’ve even had people tell me I must be crazy because I simply note the “difficulties” and/or anomalies I constantly battle on my computer. Stuff like e-mails that I watch my computer receive - watch the blue bars show the progress on receiving it - but then after it’s been received it doesn’t show up anywhere in my mail folders. Or the e-mails I receive from people referring to prior e-mails they had sent but I never received.
Donofrio has pointed out what he believes is a manipulation. I have seen so many manipulations that nothing would surprise me. I have seen people reported as dead who are not dead, dates listed for published obituaries that were never published - claims which show up right at the time I was discussing those people in “secure” places online. I have seen materials pop in and out of availability on Way BAck Machine. I have seen intelius reports on people who don’t exist. I’ve seen the HDOH lie on a regular basis. I watched them hide the Administrative Rules that are required to be posted publicly at all times, and only post it as required after the Lt Gov was specifically asked if that is his responsibility to see that the agencies comply with that law. I’ve seen SCOTUS dockets disappear without explanation. I’ve seen Google pop information in and out of visibility.
I’ve also seen things I thought were manipulations that turned out to be misunderstandings.
The whole situation forces a person to have a “wait and see” approach. Which is precisely what Obama needs people to be forced to have, since people who aren’t sure of anything aren’t willing to stick their neck out for anything. It’s the ultimate post-modern existence; nobody can know anything so everybody lives in permanent limbo. While we’re all debating what the meaning of “is” is, Obama is tearing the country’s foundations limb from limb.
Disgusting.
As I said before, that's not going to tell you anything, because the content on the right (links to facebook profiles, etc) is always being updated. No matter when you click it, it will say it was updated just minutes ago.
butterdezillion opined: “At this point I have no way of knowing which of the researchers and/or lawyers are genuine and which are disinformation agents throwing out false stuff just to throw a monkey wrench in the works for those who are genuine.”
There are ways. For example, look at what people were saying *before* the particular individual was at issue. Which of the “researchers and/or lawyers” from whom we now here were, before 2008, arguing that for a native-born citizen to eligible for the presidency, both of his or her parents had to be citizens? Near as I can tell, the answer is zero.
Edition after edition of Blacks Law Dictionary defined “natural-born citizen” as one born in the jurisdiction of a national government. The sixth edition included, “i.e. in its territorial limits, or those born of citizens temporarily residing abroad.” Who said that was wrong, and said so before they needed reasons to deny that Obama can be president?
Could this have been from o-bot disinformation agents: “It is clear enough that native-born citizens are eligible and that naturalized citizens are not.” [Who Can Be President of the United States: The Unresolved Enigma, 28 Md. L. Rev. 1, 19 (1968).] Barack Obama would have been seven years old at the time.
Obama was a college undergrad when the United States Court of Appeals for Seventh Circuit considered illegal alien Sebastian Diaz-Salazar’s petition to stay deportation, and wrote: “The petitioner has a wife and two children under the age of three in Chicago; the children are natural-born citizens of the United States.” [Diaz-Salazar v. INS, 700 F.2d 1156 (7th Cir. 1983) http://openjurist.org/700/f2d/1156/diaz-salazar-v-immigration-and-naturalization-service ]
How about: “It is well settled that ‘native-born’ citizens, those born in the United States, qualify as natural born.” [Jill Pryor, ‘The Natural-Born Citizen Clause and Presidential Eligibility’, 97 Yale Law Journal 881-889 (1988).] Obama was still unknown, as he first made news when elected president of the Harvard Law Review in 1990.
Plus, who considered Leo Donofrio and Mario Apuzzo to be legal scholars before this Obama eligibility stuff? If they were not such before, how could they be now? They’ve gotten nothing through peer review and in court they’ve face-planted every time.
Hey Butter!
I have a comment on something you said:
“Kleon says he’s seen a Way Back Machine page showing that it happened elsewhere. He’s even posted a direct link that is supposed to take me to that page. But my computer won’t go to it. Apparently all this “evidence” is like the mythical unicorn that only appears to true believers. lol.”
I watched this whole thing develop. I literally watched these cases which Leo documents on his site be found, I saw them myself. Leo stated very clearly that it would disappear off the net the same way the first two cases in July did. So he screenshotted everything. I did a number myself, and I included in my article that the wayback machine would stop showing these pages as soon as the .txt robots from Justia could be written for them. We had hoped that Justia would come clean, and thie was their opportunity, Instead, they covered up again by trying to sweep it under the rug.
We knew that the Obots and others would go and say... oh this is a forgery. No. It isn’t. It is a deliberate tactic being used by Justia to try and make this go away.
It isn’t working. There is too much evidence. thus, obots etc are forced to attack the images, because the information IN the images is so complete and so dakmming they have no defense. If you can’t kill the message, kill the messenger right?
Well, I am a witness to all of it. That is why I wrote in Examiner the way I did. I KNOW what I saw and have complete confidance in what I saw.