“You mean stuff like claims he was born in Kenya, that his certificate’s a fake, etc.? I agree. There is no reason to believe something on the Internet is factual. “
We seem to be on different sides of the BC issue, but we do agree on this. Sometimes I think the internet is the grownup version of “telephone” - something gets repeated, and repeated, and eventually it’s nothing like the original post.
For instance, people keep throwing around the term “Alinsky tactics”, and it’s clear that have no idea what it means; people are now saying that BO has spent millions defending himself in these cases; people say that his grandmother said he was born in Kenya; people say that he was adopted in Indonesia and gave up his American citizenship, etc.
I believe that all the hyperbole discredits a valid issue - but I don’t think that means it should all be dismissed. I wish people could determine the facts, and provide documentation (paperwork, laws, etc), so it could be settled. I especially wish the people bringing the lawsuits would do this before presenting their cases. So much of these cases is based on hypotheses.
I believe that BO is hiding his original BC, but these “lower-level” issues could conceivably be settled by the public. There must be some way to have another language expert (someone respected in the “translation field) listen to his grandmother’s tape, just as there must be some way to find out if he was truly adopted, and if so, what that would have meant for his citizenship.
Sometimes it feels like so many of the posts just go back and forth between people wanting to find out if BO is eligible, and people wanting to stop the issue. Both sides repeating the same things, again and again. It feels like we’re not moving forward (although, I realize that’s the definition of the mission of a bot).
I wish we could make a list of the hypotheses, and then groups of knowledgable people could search out and examine the evidence (attorneys for the legal stuff, etc). The stronger evidence we have, one way or the other, at the “lower levels”, the more firm can be our hypothesis about his eligibility (the “higher level” issue).