“There are several reasons to believe he was adopted, not the least of which is that his sister Maya said so.”
No she didn’t. You’re construing her denial of an allegation to be an admission of that allegation.
“If not under Hawaiian law, then certainly under Indonesian law.”
Way to keep your options open. In developing a conspiracy theory, it’s pretty standard to have contingent arguments. (”Even if JFK wasn’t assassinated by Suspect A, then certainly he was assassinated by Suspect B.”)
“There is also evidence to indicate that by 1970 his mother let her Parents adopt him.”
No there’s not.
“Notwithstanding the fact he was LIVING with them, she no longer claimed him on her 1973 tax return. They would at the very least have had to have some sort of guardianship document.”
No, that’s not true either. The IRS has four qualifications to claim a dependent. Residence, age, support, and relationship. Relationship includes, and this is a quote from the IRS, “the taxpayer’s child or stepchild...or a descendant of one of these.”
Do you seriously think that every grandparent raising a grandchild in the US has to adopt the grandkid to claim the kid as a dependent? Or are you so desperate to justify your adoption theory that you’re willing to just make up tax law without even bothering to check if it’s accurate?
You annoying person. You are going to make me look this up again. I find it strange that you would even know about it. One who thinks the subject is nonsense ought not to have bothered finding out all the "refuting points." Here is what she said:
Maya Soetoro Ng: You mentioned the adoption laws of Indonesia that you saw as related to my brother's legitimacy (you were suggesting that because my father, his stepfather, had adopted him, that my brother was no longer American) and I said that I had no idea about Indonesian adoption law."
You are arguing that she is simply repeating the accusation. I am arguing that she is repeating the accusation and not denying it which she likely would have were it not true. I read it as her tacitly acknowledging that he was adopted. But that is not the only piece of evidence that supports an Indonesian adoption. Since you know about this one, How about you tell us of the OTHER pieces of evidence you know about that support the Indonesian adoption theory?
“If not under Hawaiian law, then certainly under Indonesian law.”
Way to keep your options open. In developing a conspiracy theory, it’s pretty standard to have contingent arguments. (”Even if JFK wasn’t assassinated by Suspect A, then certainly he was assassinated by Suspect B.”)
We aren't talking about a "Conspiracy" and we aren't talking about JFK. Only a dishonest debater introduces CRAP into the discussion to obfuscate. Adoptions are LEGAL and they are NOT a conspiracy. They DO result in fake birth certificate which are passed off as genuine. I have one of those.
“There is also evidence to indicate that by 1970 his mother let her Parents adopt him.”
No there’s not.
Yes there is Smart @ss. Since you know what Maya said, please tell the class what evidence *I* am referring to, or admit you are ignorant about the subject you are discussing.
“Notwithstanding the fact he was LIVING with them, she no longer claimed him on her 1973 tax return. They would at the very least have had to have some sort of guardianship document.”
No, that’s not true either. The IRS has four qualifications to claim a dependent. Residence, age, support, and relationship. Relationship includes, and this is a quote from the IRS, “the taxpayer’s child or stepchild...or a descendant of one of these.”
Yeah, we aren't debating IRS policy, we are pointing out the fact that as far as Ann was concerned, he was no longer her dependent. Whose dependent was he? Her mom and dad's. Tell me, How does a Grand parent take legal responsibility for a child for several years without a document which grants them custody? Madelyn Dunham was a bank Vice President. She was not an idiot. She knew how to do things properly. If you think she didn't get guardianship papers of some sort, then you are daft.
Do you seriously think that every grandparent raising a grandchild in the US has to adopt the grandkid to claim the kid as a dependent? Or are you so desperate to justify your adoption theory that you’re willing to just make up tax law without even bothering to check if it’s accurate?
It isn't the tax law we are discussing. That is tangential. Do you know anything about Bank loans? Do you know anything about ordinary legal procedures? Hawaii may have been laid back and indulgent of relaxed rules and laws, but at some point in the next 8 years of Obama's life living with his grandparents, someone was going to demand proof of guardianship. Should he have gone to a Hospital or Doctor for a medical procedure, their assertion's of him as their grandchild would not have been sufficient. Again, Madelyn Dunham was a Bank Vice President. She KNEW the correct way to do things, and I have little doubt she did them that way.
I can't wait to see a freedom of information act request for Stanley Armour and Madelyn Dunham's tax records for that period. It ought to establish the truth one way or the other.