So at least this court has seen a valid BC. Case closed.
No, it hasn’t.
Hope you've got your asbestos jammies on....
The onus is on him to be transparent even if the court(s) shows disinterest or even bias.
All they saw and commented on was the COLB from 2007 - which is being held as pointing to an underlying document. Obama could show the underlying document, could be completely transparent, but has chosen not to - again, it’s just a logical question - WHY? The court is clearly sympathetic to the Obama storyline.
It was an original typewritten, 1961 COLB was confirmed by State of HI official Fukino (an MD and not a forensics document expert). The COLB posted by Obama on the Internet was falsely represented to be an “original.” (It was an ‘abstract’ of a laser-printed computer record having no physical connection to the typewritten 1961 original.)
I pullquoted this also and it makes perfect sense:
“In the litigation business, one quickly learns that if somebody has a document that will be good for them, they can’t wait to give it to you. And if somebody has a document that will hurt them, they’ll be tap dancing faster than Richard Gere in Chicago to keep you from getting it.”