Posted on 11/29/2017 5:32:11 PM PST by Seizethecarp
President Donald Trump questioned the politics of his decision to finally acknowledge former President Barack Obama was born in the US, which he did late during the campaign in 2016, according to a source close to the White House.
The source said that shortly after he made the statement, Trump told aides that he would have done better in the polls had he continued to stand his ground on the birth certificate issue.
Trump has continued to question the legitimacy of Obama's birth certificate during private conversations in recent months, The New York Times reported Tuesday, citing advisers who discussed Trump's statements.
Trump still questioning Obama's birthplace is just one of several instances The Times pointed to as examples of the President's reliance on "manufactured facts," as the newspaper reported Tuesday.
One sitting US senator quoted by the Times, "who listened as the President revived his doubts" about the issue, "chuckled" when speaking about what was said. Trump "has had a hard time letting go of his claim that Mr. Obama was not born in the United States," the senator, who "asked not to be named to discuss private conversations," told The New York Times.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
What’s your theory on why all Obama’s college records are sealed?
FERPA
https://www2.ed.gov/policy/gen/guid/fpco/ferpa/index.html
Everyone’s college records are sealed.
How does FERPA explain the fact that Bush’s, Kerry’s and Gore’s college records are readily available?
Bush’s were leaked to the New Yorker.
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/1999/11/08/dept-of-aptitude-walexandra-robbins
Kerry’s were included in his US Navy record obtained by the Boston Globe
It isn’t completely clear how the Washington Post obtained Gore’s without his permission.
‘Most presidents’ academic records are made public by the time they reach the highest office in the land, either with their consent or by someone else digging them up.
“There’s no reason why people shouldn’t know,” said Stephen Hess, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution who focuses on the presidency. “At this point, it’s pretty moot — perhaps amusing if it turned out that he didn’t do very well.”’
So what’s your theory as to why Obama refused to release his college records? Why shouldn’t voters know if a person running for the highest office did well in college or choomed like a smokestack?
https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/may/28/obama-ducks-calls-to-release-his-collegiate-transc/
This is stupid. Why would you think Obama is a Fulbright scholar? When did he say he was a Fulbright scholar? You might as well claim he’s a Chinese jet pilot—it makes just as much sense.
Where did I say I think Obama is a Fulbright Scholar?
Quote, please.
I wonder if every country that participates in the Fulbright Scholarship program had the same rules in 1979 as they have today? I would think the rules of eligibility could change over time.
Iow, does the fact that Indonesia restricts Fulbright Scholarship participation *today* necessarily mean they applied the same restriction 38 years ago.
Dino: still not saying I believe it. Just posing the question.
My guess is for the same reason no other president, vice-president, presidential or vice-presidential candidates have released their college records - there is little political upside.
Personally I think every presidential candidates should release their college records and at least ten years of tax returns.
That might though require a Constitutional amendment to make it mandatory.
We agree that all candidates for POTUS should release their college records. But with political corruption endemic in both parties, no one should hold their breath.
Speaking of upsides, or Obama there would definitely have been a one IF he hadn’t been a lousy student, or if he hadn’t done anything shady to get into the various schools. This is because Obama uniquely, of all major party nominees, had no resume. He is the least accomplished person ever to win the Democrat or Republican nomination.
Obama’s lack of accomplishments is not just an opinion; it’s a fact. What had he done? He went to college. He worked briefly at a low level job that he and Ayers lied like Hillary about. [Practically the only accurate detail they included in Dreams was the name of the co.] He was a community organizer. He attained public office via dirty, illegal means and held each one only long enough to set himself up for his next campaign. He voted ‘present,’ relentlessly, and had no legislative accomplishments.
Take his stint at community organizing. What did he accomplish in that capacity?
Nothing. The donut. I’ve seen the photos. Obama and his cronies pocketed the $ and left the community worse than they found it.
How about the Annenberg Foundation? What did Obama accomplish there?
He actually had a negative accomplishment with the Annenberg Challenge. He spent an S-load of $, failed to raise the students’ scores a single point, BUT, he succeeded in radicalizing them. You can observe the bloodbath-hellhole Chicago has become, and know that Obama contributed to it.
One more thing about the community organizing. In all the time of Obama’s campaigning and holding office, think about the one thing you never saw. Namely, you never saw anyone from the community Obama ‘organized,’ standing up to give a testimony about it. No one ever spoke out on Obama’s behalf, and described the positive impact his organizing had either on the community at large or on them personally. It’s really quite remarkable. You’d think with a community teeming with Democrats of color, someone would have wanted to testify to Obama’s benefit. But no one ever did.
With his life’s achievement a big zero, the least the voters deserved was to know what kind of a student Obama was. Intelligent voters would have demanded that information, anyway.
But the Democrats rely on a constituency too dumbed down to know how to assess a candidate. If the guy can read, ‘Hope and change,’ off a teleprompter, that’s good enough.
The Democrats once had integrity. But as time went by, they decided that power at any price trumped all else. (Bill Clinton was the game-changer toward this outlook.) It’s very sad. [Though hardly sadder than the GOP. They too threw integrity under the bus, but for them it was a mere expedient toward the goal of becoming the craven Uniparty. At least the Democrats understand and value power. The GOP is just as content to be a doormat, as long as the big donors are happy and the gravy train keeps rolling.]
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.