More Dunham passport documents (Dr. Conspiracy goes birther? "I suspect misconduct")

Obama Conspiracy Theories (blog) ^ | September 27, 2011 | Dr. Conspiracy

[LucyT]

. . . . Back to the thread; see latest from 0rly's website at # 99.

Then check out # 96 , 98 , 100.

[Thanks.]

[tutstar]

Can you break it down ? I don’t understand the meaning of the setting up facts for litigation subject to appeals. They’re supposed to present facts right? I’m confused.

[Bikkuri]

Thank you... you again show that you are always on the ball ;)

And sorry about that.. sometimes the fingers get ahead of the brain :p

[Seizethecarp]

IMO, what Dr. Conspiracy is betraying is his own suspicion that Obama lacks a legitimate HI BC, i.e. he suspects that the pdf is forged and he has correctly observed that Obama has never actually “released” a physical certified copy any long or short form to any court under the Federal Rules of Evidence.

Dr. Conspiracy has already inferred that the State Dept. is withholding evidence on Stanley Ann's passport records...implying that he suspects she might not have been in HI when Barry was born.

Therefore from a legal tactical standpoint, Dr. Conspiracy is intimating, IMO, that it would be disastrous for the Obama legal team to actually attempt to place into evidence the forged LFBC...and make an evidentiary test of that forged BC a matter of discovery and appeal...which would go straight up to SCOTUS...who are the only ones who could declare Obama to never have been president and then removed without impeachment.

[mojitojoe]

BINGO! SO where did she travel to before and when?

[mojitojoe]

If you want to kick his a$$, you are going to have to stand in line. :P

[3D-JOY]

Thanks, HM needed this reference.
OMA: This is what I was referring to yesterday.

[Mr. K]

ok I get it now..

And now the morong claims to be a software enigneer

[Hotlanta Mike]

your welcome

[Hotlanta Mike]

Obama argues against appearing at eligibility hearing

http://www.wnd.com/2012/01/obama-argues-against-appearing-at-eligibility-hearing/

[Doc Conspiracy]

I don’t remember calling you (or thinking you were) a racist, but if I left that impression, I apologize.

Over the past few months, my appreciation for your writing has increased. I think you’re quite creative, and I saw that in your various writing contest entries at Obama Conspiracy Theories.

So you are definitely welcome at at OCT and there is no threat of a ban.

[Doc Conspiracy]

I talked to Chris Strunk in Atlanta on the 26th and he seemed to have given up on his Dunham passport FOIA, being totally disgusted with the whole thing and the dark forces behind the State Department.

I’ve given up on mine since the last letter from the appeals officer saying they have no reason to believe that all they have has been released. However, I have made a new FOIA request, more narrowly drawn, that I hope (in a couple of years) will return a more definitive answer to when Stanley Ann Dunham had US passports.

[Doc Conspiracy]

I don’t have an editorial board to review everything I write to make sure bias hasn’t slipped in, but I try to be fair.

There are times when I am simply dismissive of people, like Corsi, based on a few very egregious examples of false statements and bad logic. After all, there is just one of me and millions of birthers. I can’t be expected to refute every word every one of them writes individually.

And frankly outside the specialized area of vital records information technology, I’m no more qualified than others. You should be able to debunk Corsi for yourself.

[Seizethecarp]

“However, I have made a new FOIA request, more narrowly drawn, that I hope (in a couple of years) will return a more definitive answer to when Stanley Ann Dunham had US passports.”

Thanks for taking the time to drop me this note.

Unless Sheriff Arpaio’s posse gets some discovery going (unlike Ms Taitz, Arpaio knows how to swear in witnesses and get expert testimony on the record) it will be after Obama leaves the White House that FOIA requests will have a better chance of being honored.

Your latest blog post will be interesting to some FReepers who will agree with you and your reasons that Ms Taitz needs to stand down (I don't agree). I think I will put it up as an FR article (and endure the brickbats).

http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2012/02/its-time-for-birthers-to-throw-orly-under-the-bus/

On balance I believe that Taitz has advanced public interest in getting people to do their own research into what Article II eligibility means, even if she is ineffective in the courtroom.

[Seizethecarp]

On second thought, while I appreciate the intellectual stimulation of your Taitz blog post, your language is rather harsh for FReeper constitutionalists that are more thin-skinned than I am...so I will not put your article up.

While I agree that Taitz failed to comply with what I understand to be the Daubert Standard of expert witness and scientific evidence qualification, your conclusion that a competent attorney couldn't have gotten at least some of her experts and evidence of a pdf forgery past the Daubert Standard has yet to be tested...by a competent attorney.

[Squeeky]

No problemo. It was a long time ago. Thank you for your kind comments. Some of the people here thought I was just a Obot, and did not realize I was a Common Sense Suspicious Birther up until April 27 when Obama finally coughed up his long form.

I am back off Birther vacay, and have a ton of stuff to write. Oh, and I did you a haiku earlier tonite to your comment at The Birther Think Tank about the Georgia decision:

Warm, the Winter winds
Termites wake in empty chairs
Choking on shellac