Is Joe Biden the President?

the original article does not at all support WND's claim he cannot find it, in fact, it says the opposite:

(Abercrombie said there is a recording of the birth in the State Archives and he wants to use that.)

It was actually written I am told, this is what our investigation is showing, it actually exists in the archives, written down ...

The WND article includes that quote and goes on to say

"Conceivably, the yet undisclosed birth record in the state archives that Abercrombie has discovered may have come from the grandparents registering Obama's birth, an event that would have triggered both the newspaper birth announcements and availability of a Certification of Live Birth, even if no long-form birth certificate existed."

Again, someone phoning the state to advise them of the birth, while it may have been written down on some form, does not serve as proof that the birth occurred in Hawaii. In my opinion, if a full fledged birth certificate cannot be produced, which appears to be the case, then the burden of proof is on Obama.

The burden of proof ALWAYS lies with the person(s) making the allegation. Basic law.
 
The story about Ambercrombies recent statements is in many of the major media outposts today, including ABC, U.S. News, New York Daily, Drudge Report. If they are talking about it I don't see why it is out of bounds. The governor says he will bring forth, in the near future, the evidence needed to allay questions about the President's birth. Once that happens that'll be the end of it, but one cannot help but wonder at the curious way the White House has handled the matter. If anything, it has fueled suspicion.
 
The story about Ambercrombies recent statements is in many of the major media outposts today, including ABC, U.S. News, New York Daily, Drudge Report. If they are talking about it I don't see why it is out of bounds. The governor says he will bring forth, in the near future, the evidence needed to allay questions about the President's birth. Once that happens that'll be the end of it, but one cannot help but wonder at the curious way the White House has handled the matter. If anything, it has fueled suspicion.

z22721426.jpg
 
All I know is Obama might be sleeping on the couch soon.When Michelle starts getting the calls from the girls in the hood that she married a "Poser"....Well you get the picture.
 
All I know is Obama might be sleeping on the couch soon.When Michelle starts getting the calls from the girls in the hood that she married a "Poser"....Well you get the picture.

Your avatar is so apropos. Which one do you aspire to be when you grow up?
 
the original article does not at all support WND's claim he cannot find it, in fact, it says the opposite:

The WND article includes that quote and goes on to say

"Conceivably, the yet undisclosed birth record in the state archives that Abercrombie has discovered may have come from the grandparents registering Obama's birth, an event that would have triggered both the newspaper birth announcements and availability of a Certification of Live Birth, even if no long-form birth certificate existed."

Again, someone phoning the state to advise them of the birth, while it may have been written down on some form, does not serve as proof that the birth occurred in Hawaii. In my opinion, if a full fledged birth certificate cannot be produced, which appears to be the case, then the burden of proof is on Obama.

The burden of proof ALWAYS lies with the person(s) making the allegation. Basic law.

In a courtroom, sure, but we're not talking about burden of proof here. Let's say you are a doctor working in a hospital and someone starts a rumor that you never actually graduated from medical school. Would you reply by saying 'prove it'. Wouldnt the simplist way to undermine your detractors be to show people your diploma? Would you let the scuttlebutt drag on for years or would you simply tack a framed copy of your diploma to your office wall and put an end to it?

Obama could have laid to rest these concerns by the simple act of showing that he is qualified to be President because he was born in Hawaii and has a valid birth certificate. The fact that he has not done that raises questions. I cannot think of any previous President who would not willingly have provided a copy of their birth certificate to the public if there was even the slightest question about it. The fact that Obama won't do it is quite odd, particularly given the strange circumstances surrounding his birth.
 
What if it is found that Barry Barak Sutero Hussein Obama violated Constitutional mandates? Would we have to go through the impeachment process or would he be kicked out of the White House?
 
The WND article includes that quote and goes on to say

"Conceivably, the yet undisclosed birth record in the state archives that Abercrombie has discovered may have come from the grandparents registering Obama's birth, an event that would have triggered both the newspaper birth announcements and availability of a Certification of Live Birth, even if no long-form birth certificate existed."

Again, someone phoning the state to advise them of the birth, while it may have been written down on some form, does not serve as proof that the birth occurred in Hawaii. In my opinion, if a full fledged birth certificate cannot be produced, which appears to be the case, then the burden of proof is on Obama.

The burden of proof ALWAYS lies with the person(s) making the allegation. Basic law.

In a courtroom, sure, but we're not talking about burden of proof here. Let's say you are a doctor working in a hospital and someone starts a rumor that you never actually graduated from medical school. Would you reply by saying 'prove it'. Wouldnt the simplist way to undermine your detractors be to show people your diploma? Would you let the scuttlebutt drag on for years or would you simply tack a framed copy of your diploma to your office wall and put an end to it?

Or, say for example you are on an internet political forum and someone does not believe that you are a doctor.

I would just say "Believe what you want. I don't really care. I don't need to prove anything to you."
 
The burden of proof ALWAYS lies with the person(s) making the allegation. Basic law.

In a courtroom, sure, but we're not talking about burden of proof here. Let's say you are a doctor working in a hospital and someone starts a rumor that you never actually graduated from medical school. Would you reply by saying 'prove it'. Wouldnt the simplist way to undermine your detractors be to show people your diploma? Would you let the scuttlebutt drag on for years or would you simply tack a framed copy of your diploma to your office wall and put an end to it?

Or, say for example you are on an internet political forum and someone does not believe that you are a doctor.

I would just say "Believe what you want. I don't really care. I don't need to prove anything to you."

Yup. And since the birth allegation has been brought to the US Supreme Court three times already and still no "proof" to back up the allegations, the question remains irrelevant.
 
The burden of proof ALWAYS lies with the person(s) making the allegation. Basic law.

In a courtroom, sure, but we're not talking about burden of proof here. Let's say you are a doctor working in a hospital and someone starts a rumor that you never actually graduated from medical school. Would you reply by saying 'prove it'. Wouldnt the simplist way to undermine your detractors be to show people your diploma? Would you let the scuttlebutt drag on for years or would you simply tack a framed copy of your diploma to your office wall and put an end to it?

Or, say for example you are on an internet political forum and someone does not believe that you are a doctor.

I would just say "Believe what you want. I don't really care. I don't need to prove anything to you."

How did this end up in Conspiracy? This is clearly a political discussion, and I started the thread on the Congress board.

Xotoxi, this is not simply an issue of reputation. The Texas governor has said that unless Obama provides a copy of his birth certificate then his name will not be allowed to appear on the Texas Presidential ballot in 2012. Other states are threatening to do the same. Also, 14% of the American people don't believe him when he says that he was born in Hawaii. He's doing damage to himself by not being upfront about his birth, and he must know it, so the question is why he doesnt simply do the right thing.

Okay, I can see people are uncomfortable with this topic so I am going to stf about it. This story will play out in the media one way or the other anyway. That's all.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top