Posted on 11/16/2013 6:06:33 AM PST by iontheball
Several alternative news sites are now reporting that there are multiple copies of Barack Hussein Obama’s “real” birth certificate that have surfaced during the Alabama Supreme Court eligibility case. The multiple birth certificates appear to be a huge indicator of fraud.
The Alabama Democrat Party has submitted an amicus brief in the McInnish Goode v Chapman Appeal case. In that brief, the Alabama Democrat Party submitted a completely different birth certificate than the one that was posted at the White House website in 2011.
Larry Klayman, the plaintiff’s counsel submitted the now famous and proven forgery of Barack Hussein Obama’s birth certificate that was posted to www.whitehouse.gov on 4-27-2001. The Fogbow/Jack Ryan Obama BC supporter group produced yet another bogus one. And now, a third birth certificate has been submitted by Alabama Democrats to the Supreme Court.
Although the Alabama Supreme Court is being presided over by Chief Justice Roy Moore, another justice on the court, Tom Parker, will also hear the case. Parker has commented in a previous case: “McInnish has attached certain documentation to his mandamus petition, which, if presented to the appropriate forum as part of a proper evidentiary presentation, would raise serious questions about the authenticity of both the “short form” and the “long form” birth certificates of President Barack Hussein Obama that have been made public.”
(Excerpt) Read more at ppsimmons.blogspot.com ...
I said McLame was pimping for him during the campaign and caught all sorts of flak.
And there’s still no explanation for the snooping at their passports (Hillary, Obama, McCain) during the 2008 Primary season.
“As in ? send this to Congress to deal with it ?”
Congress had the chance during the SR 511 Committee discussion but ignored the important requirement facts in the final Bill. And intentionally ignored any vetting of the usurper.
Read this in its entirety: http://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/the-introduction-of-a-senate-resolution
There’s still no explanation for the deaths of the four Trinity Church guys.
I wrote that “void” does NOT mean or imply that the data is suspect. Void or a moire’ pattern means only that it is a copy and not an original, in order to prevent identity theft.
Both Romney’s and Obama’s scanned images of birth certificates were for demonstration purposes only, so that the public could see the data. If any judge or a congressional committee wanted to review a hard copy of the birth vital record, they can issue a court order or a congressional subpoena for a hard copy from the state of Hawaii or the state of Michigan.
No judge or congressional committee has felt the need to request a hard copy.
States also issue Certified Letters of a Verification for their vital records. Both judges and state Secretaries of State have received them for Obama’s birth record.
For example: http://www.azcentral.com/12news/Obama-Verification.pdf
Under federal law, a U.S. Passport is primary (preferred) evidence of citizenship and identity and a birth certificate is secondary evidence.
(42 CFR 435.407)—”Types of Acceptable Documentary Evidence of Citizenship”
http://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/42/435.407
I know.
And I wrote that it DOES mean or imply that the data is suspect.
Once the document is shown to not be the original, ALL data on it is suspect, hence its being voided. It's not sufficient to say that ONLY the document itself is not original, but that the data on it is still okay.
The document, AND the information on it, cannot be relied upon.
-PJ
Them, too.
34 dupes... How you do that??!
Say it once, say it twice; 34th time’s the charm.
Every person who has a birth certificate has a copy while the original is retained by the issuing authority. The certification stamp and the embossed or debossed Seal indicate that the issuing authority (state, county or city) stands by the copy as being authentic.
Article 4, Section 1 of the Constitution:
Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state. And the Congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved, and the effect thereof.
If a state says their vital record is authentic, every other state and the federal government will accept it as such. However any record’s authenticity can still be challenged in court.
-PJ
What is the current timeline in the Alabama Case? If anyone knows this could be helpful. Thanks.
I also wish to commend all those on Team Obama who have faithfully continued to crank out Birth Certificates for our sitting POTUS. It seems to me that with each iteration, they look better and better. The latest ones look really really good from about 6-7 feet away. Frankly, I was hoping they could help me with a missing boat title. I have plenty of data.
One way or another, Obama is quite over. Can we stop telling each other how bad this gay Muslim SOB marxist from Allah-knows-where is and concentrate on what's next?
This bad boy is quite capable of handing off to Hillary while we concentrate on tackling him.
And yet copies have been relied upon in multiple lawsuits that have been adjudicated and copies have been relied upon when state Secretaries of State have asked the state of Hawaii for verification.
Do you have an example of when a copy was ruled by a judge, a state’s chief elections official or by an act of Congress to be unreliable?
“However any record’s authenticity can still be challenged in court.”
Challege? Yes. Adjudicate? It is to laugh.
There is no timetable.
The Supreme Court in Alabama is not a Certiorari (discretionary review) court. What that means is that the court must, by law, entertain every appeal rather than ruling on only the most important and constitutionally relevant appeals (like the U.S. Supreme Court does).
The upside is that every appeal gets a reading (the Alabama Supreme Court almost never grants oral arguments, last year there were only 3 appeals that had oral arguments) and the downside is when the 9 Justices read and write opinions on every appeal, it can take a very long time to get to issuing a final ruling. The Alabama Supreme Court doesn’t have terms either, it meets all year round but if any Justices are vacationing, decisions must wait.
If a copy of an embossed document is used in a court case, doesn't anybody validate that an original embossed document exists, or do they just accept the single sided copy of the front-half of a document as being as good as the entire original document?
-PJ
I used a short form, paper, abstract birth certificate with an embossed Seal from my birth county to get my first passport. Then I just used my expiring passport for all subsequent renewals.
You can get a passport without having a birth certificate.
“How to apply for a passport without a birth certificate”
http://traveltips.usatoday.com/apply-passport-birth-certificate-13275.html
As for what courts will accept, it’s up to the judge. In most states a judge can issue a court order for the production of an original birth certificate and the state will provide it; however I have never heard of a judge who wouldn’t accept a Certified Letter of Verification in lieu of receiving a certified copy, from a state Registrar.
There is no chance. It's just a matter of time before the rest of the so called 'birthers' are cleaned out of Freerepublic.
“No one man can terrorize a whole nation unless we are all his accomplices.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.