Your tagline entries are irrelevant to the issue under discussion.
Here are some facts:
(1) Obama posted a Hawaii Certification of Live Birth on his web site back in early June, 2008.
(2) Obama’s C.O.L.B. says that he was born at 7:24 PM on Friday, August 4, 1961 in the City of Honolulu, in the County of Honolulu, on the Island of Oahu, in the state of Hawaii.
(3) Obama’s birth was registered with the state of Hawaii on August 8, 1961, four days after his birth.
(4) Every short form Certificate of Live Birth issued in Hawaii is guaranteed by the state to have the exact same information on it as the original long form, vault copy certification. It says that right on the Certification.
(5) The State of Hawaii law states that the short form Certification of Live Birth is “prima facie evidence of the fact of birth in any court proceding.”
(6) There is no law in any state, no law in the federal code and nothing in the US Constitution that differentiates between a short form Certification and a long form Certification as valid proof of where a person was born and when they were born.
(7) Obama’s birth notices appeared in both Honolulu Sunday newspapers on August 13, 1961. The information for those birth notices comes straight from the state Health Department’s Vital Records Division.
Therefore, the ONLY legitimate legal issue is whether or not Obama’s short form Certification of Live Birth is an official document of the state of Hawaii or whether it is a forgery.
There is no legal issue of delayed registration or out of state registration of Obama’s birth because the law allowing delayed registration of a birth that was out of Hawaii wasn’t passed until more than a decade after Obama was born.
To determine if it is a forgery, any of the thousands of local district attorneys in the US where Obama appeared on the ballot could subpoena the original long form, vault copy Certification of Live Birth persuant to a forgery investigation.
Also, any of the 50 state Attorneys General could also subpoena the original document and present it to a Grand Jury deliberating on a possible indictment for forgery.
Not one person with prosecutorial power in any local jurisdiction or any state has subpoenaed the original, long form document to examine it for forgery. This legal issue has been on the table for nearly a year now.
The Attorney General of the state of Hawaii, Mark J. Bennett, a Republican is the person with the most direct and local legal pull to subpoena the original, vault copy, long form Certification of Live Birth. He hasn’t exercised that option.
Now that the vote of the Electoral College has been certified by former Vice President Dick Cheney in his former role as President of the Senate and now that the Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court has administered the Oath of Office to Obama, the only legal recourse open in the event that his short form Certification of Live Birth is forged or fraudulent is impeachment by the House of Representatives and removal from office on a two-thirds vote of the US Senate with the the Chief Justice presiding.
Oh really?
I gather your mind was made up before a long list of well researched facts surfaced!
LOL.
Sigh.
Then why won’t he produce his verified documented birth certificate?
bump
At minimum it was an image that was altered, thus making it invalid, as stated on the document itself.
(2) Obama’s C.O.L.B. says that he was born at 7:24 PM on Friday, August 4, 1961 in the City of Honolulu, in the County of Honolulu, on the Island of Oahu, in the state of Hawaii.
The image we have been shown says that.
(3) Obama’s birth was registered with the state of Hawaii on August 8, 1961, four days after his birth.
Or so it says on the image posted.
(4) Every short form Certificate of Live Birth issued in Hawaii is guaranteed by the state to have the exact same information on it as the original long form, vault copy certification. It says that right on the Certification.
It does? I don't see that statement. Besides, there is information on the long form birth certificate that is not on the Certification, such as parents place of birth.
(5) The State of Hawaii law states that the short form Certification of Live Birth is “prima facie evidence of the fact of birth in any court proceding.”
But it can't certify was is not on it. And the document also says that any alterations invalid it, doesn't it?
(6) There is no law in any state, no law in the federal code and nothing in the US Constitution that differentiates between a short form Certification and a long form Certification as valid proof of where a person was born and when they were born
The US State Department will not accept a short form certificate from some states, or from any state if the time between the birth and the registration date is more than a year. In those cases they insist on the long form. Why? Because the short form is much more subject to being altered, and they want to check the reason for the late filing, because a late filing is also more apt to be fraudulent.
Perhaps it would help you to get a better grasp of the facts. These might help.
http://sites.google.com/site/obamabirth/Home
http://www.breakthematrix.com/content/Dear-Fellow-Americans
Be certain to read the 2nd half of this article that speaks of the consequences of an ineligible “usurper” (NOT president)in the White house.
If Obama was never legally president he cannot be impeached, he must be removed by the authorities.