Its seems logical to me that posting facts instead of fallacies might induce nausea, but thanks for reminding me: I forgot to add that Obama’s attorneys submitted copies of his birth certificate to judges/justices in the Georgia, Mississippi and Alabama eligibility challenges.
Administrative Law Judge Michael Mahili (and Secretary of State Brian Kemp) received copies of the birth certificate in Georgia; U.S. District Court Judge Henry T. Wingate received a copy of the birth certificate in Mississippi and all nine Justices of the Alabama Supreme Court received copies in that state. The Mississippi and Alabama birth certficate exhibits came with Certified Letters of Verification from the Hawaii state Registrar.
Irrelevant facts, when you even bother with them.
I forgot to add that Obama’s attorneys submitted copies of his birth certificate to judges/justices in the Georgia, Mississippi and Alabama eligibility challenges.
Like that one. What is wrong with this fact and why is it irrelevant? Because the document says right on it that it may not be accurate.
You keep trying to use this "bait and switch" tactic to get around the fact that nothing which proves anything has been submitted. You keep ignoring that "Or an Abstract thereof" statement which renders the document invalid in the eyes of any sane and intelligent individual who comprehends what those words mean.
And then you keep pounding the same irrelevant facts as if you think they prove something. You NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER address the valid point in rebuttal to your ad nauseum recitation of irrelevant facts.
Hawaii is an extreme Liberal state with very loose rules to their birth documents, they give birth certificates to people not actually born there, and they won't certify anything with finality. It always has some sort of "Might not be true" or "So say our records over which we have total subjective control", comment slapped on it somewhere.