“You can argue all you like that the jpeg image of his alleged COLB is “evidence” of his US citizenship, but it is only a short form abstract that doesn’t measure up to the legal requirements for hard evidence.”
1) It’s not a jpeg but a photograph of an actual paper document with state of hawaii stamp and raised seal.
http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/birth_certificate_3.jpg
2) The COLB DOES measure up to legal requirements for birth certification for passports, drivers licenses etc.
I dont know why birther repeat this junk baloney, people are using the COLB to get passports *every day*.
“First of all, if it’s so real and indisputable, he should have had it inspected by competent, expert document examiners from the moment he produced it.”
Fair enough. But why doesnt WND reporter ask Gibbs for the COLB? Then there is nothing for state of hawaii to do?
” Instead, what we have is the “word” of a select few individuals from a proven Obama ally organization who “swear” that what they inspected and photographed is the real thing.”
We dont have their word, we have photographs.
http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/birth_certificate_2.jpg
http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/birth_certificate_5.jpg
http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/birth_certificate_6.jpg
http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/birth_certificate_7.jpg
http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/birth_certificate_8.jpg
“If you accept that, then your standard for evidence is sub-standard. FactCheck.org is in no way qualified to make judgments on what they saw, and the photographs they took only add to the suspicion of fraud”
oh puleeeeze ... they took photographs, its bizarre to fall into that conspiracy mindset trap, where evidence you dont like is ‘fraud’.
” because they clearly don’t match the jpeg image of the COLB that is reported to be one and the same document.”
Not true.
“Everything presented by the anti-birther side thus far has failed to meet the legal standard of solid evidence”
Not true. Everything presented by the birther side thus far has failed to meet the legal standard of solid evidence.
heard not a shred of evidence for Obama being born anywhere else but Hawaii. Yet the COLB *would* hold up in a court of law unless you got a forensic expert to prove it was a forgery. The state of Hawaii officials statement would be admissible, she would be someone in a position to testify. And the Honolulu newspaper announcement would also be admissible evidence.
“Understand this. Whether you accept this sub-standard “evidence” or not”
Why the scare quotes. it’s evidence not ‘evidence’.
“, is immaterial to the controversy at large.”
Then why are you up in arms about it? Obama was born in Hawaii, that’s pretty clear. Why fight against the logical conclusion of multiple pieces of evidence if its not even determinative of anything?
” This thing is gaining traction and getting bigger and bigger because of everything I’ve told you.”
- It’s getting bigger because Obama and the liberal MSM wanted a distraction. Its not getting more traction.
“Whether you like it or not, a growing number of Americans will continue to demand that Obama put an end to this by releasing his personal documents.”
I am all for getting more documents out of Obama, but that doesnt mean he wasnt born in Hawaii. There is more evidence for Obama being born in Hawaii than ever before.
“He will eventually either come clean with the public, or he will resign because of the pressure against him to do so.”
That’s a crack-pipe-dream.
Accept what you will. Believe what you like, and whoever you like, if what you’ve seen and heard is good enough for you.
As for myself, and a great many others, there’s simply been no conclusive evidence put forth by Mr. Obama to prove his US citizenship, and a preponderance of probable cause to compel us to continue demanding the release of his root documents.
I know that you’re well satisfied that Obama is a US citizen, and I believe that you’ve had more than ample exposure to all of the arguments from the Birther side, yet remain tethered to the belief that he’s legitimate, so I’ll refrain from trying to change your mind about this issue at this point.
Feel free to give myself and others who do not share your viewpoint the same courtesy.
By your logic, I can take a document that purports to be my birth certificate, scan it into a computer, run it through Photoshop and make changes to the scan, as evidenced by any $2 Hex Editor, then save it as a .jpeg.
Having saved the above referenced file, I can then upload it to a website as a .jpeg image, download the picture back to my laptop and use it as legal, verifiable evidence of my identification.
By your reasoning I should be able to take my laptop into any government office and they will accept the download as certified proof of my identification, correct?
