Let me assure you if you wait on an answer, it's not because I don't have it. It's because you are way down my priority list. As for the COLB, I have not skipped it - I have doubts about that issue - but have no way of sorting it out. Thus, I focus on the NBC issue not as a dodge - but simply it's an issue where we don't have to rely on an investigative reporter to flesh out. Meanwhile, I am open to the NBC issue if someone can show me anyone who is still alive and of merit who agrees with you. I really am open to it. But notice that unlike you, I don't sit around tapping my foot with a smart ass "HMMMMM" assuming you don't have the answer.
“Let me assure you if you wait on an answer, it’s not because I don’t have it. It’s because you are way down my priority list.”
“But notice that unlike you, I don’t sit around tapping my foot with a smart ass “HMMMMM” assuming you don’t have the answer.”
Do American Thinker and Rush Limbaugh, with both of whom you claim to have a connection, know you run around FR insulting people? Or do you, like Christoforo (of Ocean Marketing) just have a really warped concept of PR?
You're not able to analyze this issue on your own?? All you're doing is creating an excuse not to be fully honest.
I’m not assuming you don’t have an answer, and I understand the whole issue of priorities. You’ve presented a reasonable stance and I can respect that. I do hope you realize that the SCOTUS justices have given clues that something is not right in all this:
For instance, Alito’s refusal to have an ex parte meeting with Obama.
Roberts’ invitation for what he knew would be an ex parte meeting (issued right after SCOTUS dismissed Donofrio’s case but before that fact was publicly known - precisely the time when it would most have seemed a glaring ethics violation), as well as botching up the oath of office so that there was never a public video of him administering a Constitutional oath of office.
Scalia’s comments to Taitz implying that they he was unaware of the arguments in the eligibility cases - especially when coupled with the filing issues with SCOTUS stay clerk, Danny Bickel.
Thomas’ comment that Sotomayor does best being a SCOTUS justice because there’s not a requirement that she be born in the US, and follow-up “joke” that they’ve been evading the issue of whether a President has to be born in the US.
There are other issues with the eligibility judges as well. Judge DAvid Carter is one of the most blatant ones - hiring a clerk from the firm defending Obama right before totally reversing both his opinion and his public attitude/demeanor on Obama’s eligibility issue. He HAD to know that would give the “appearance of impropriety” (because it WAS an ethics breach), and it leads me to wonder if that was precisely why he did it.
Kind of like Roberts giving the absolute worst-appearing timing for his unprecedented invitation to meet with Obama, who would have many pending eligibility cases appearing before SCOTUS at the time. That just seems too deliberate and too blatant to be an accident.
So though the SCOTUS justices haven’t said whether they agree with the de Vattel definition of NBC, they have given clues that something stinks on the whole Obama eligibility issue. And Sotomayor and Kagan’s refusal to recuse themselves from the decision on whether to hear the Hollister case strongly suggests that there are enough justices who would like to take the case that Sotomayor and Kagan would be needed to keep this issue under the rug. Apparently one of the conservative justices is the one wavering on this issue. I would really, really like to know why.
Regarding Obama’s documentation, I hope you’re aware that the seal on the COLB had to have been photoshopped onto the scan of the photograph, and that the supposed long-form is not legally certified according to the Administrative Rules governing vital records. So we know - at the very least - that Obama has allowed to believe that forged records were genuine. That is a felony - the same felony that Blogejevich was initially sitting in jail for: violating the federal general false statement act. For Obama to commit a felony in order to not show his BC says to me that there is something even more serious than a felony at stake his real BC that he’s been using all these years - wherever it’s from. Abercrombie told Mike Evans HI doesn’t have one for him, and reportedly implied the same thing to a columnist for the Star-Advertiser.