Obama to Show Birth Certificate

[washamericom]

Can this nonsense still have legs? The erstwhile controversy over Barack Obama’s birth certificate was - from the beginning - a nonissue. The reason that President Obama has not produced his original birth certificate is because it is a record of vital statistics that is the property of the State of Hawaii, which under state privacy laws is subject to restricted access, and not available to the public. President Obama has disclosed a certified copy that has been authenticated by officials of the State of Hawaii; and which would be admissible under Rule 803(9) of the Federal Rules of Evidence in any action in which such issue was relevant. However, you don’t even get there because the federal courts lack subject matter jurisdiction for lack of standing of the plaintiffs (appellants) objecting to his eligibility to be President. The lawyers that filed those frivolous lawsuits (and appeals) well knew that they lacked standing to sue, and that such actions would be dismissed; and only did so to generate publicity (not to mention money) for themselves. What is interesting is the number of gullible people that have been taken in by this champerty.

ohhh... it's got legs baby !!! they're forged, but they're legs...

 

[Toro]

Which famous opponent of Cartesian dualism resists the reduction of the psychological phenomenon to a physical state, and insists there is no point of contact between the extended and the unextended?

 

[Nemo]

It’s got no legs. The claim is cut off at the knees because there is no person that would have standing to challenge President Obama’s eligibility, and that these actions only beg the question that standing exists independent of prudential rules that bar one from asserting the constitutional rights of others not before the court. Under the Constitution, the federal courts are prohibited from giving advisory opinions; there has to be an actual case or controversy involving a real party in interest with a justiciable claim ripe for adjudication, and not just some speculative, generalized interest of all citizens, even though the matter may touch on federal question or diversity jurisdiction. In this, standing is to be determined by the courts as an issue pertinent to subject matter jurisdiction. Congress has the authority to enact law conferring standing directly, subject to separation-of-powers limitations. See FEC v. Akins, 524 U.S. 11 (1998). Such was not the case in the legal challenges to President Obama’s eligibility. To put it simply: without a party with standing to sue, there is no case; and, consequently, the actions challenging President Obama’s citizenship were dismissed and the appeals denied.

In the final analysis, only Congress has the power to challenge Barack Obama’s eligibility to be President of the United States under the Constitution; and on January 8, 2009, the Congress, in joint session, certified his election by the Electoral College without objection. There is the end of the matter.

 

[washamericom]

Which famous opponent of Cartesian dualism resists the reduction of the psychological phenomenon to a physical state, and insists there is no point of contact between the extended and the unextended?

who are you now harper... bertrand russell ??.. what's goin on amigo ??

 

[washamericom]

It’s got no legs. The claim is cut off at the knees because there is no person that would have standing to challenge President Obama’s eligibility, and that these actions only beg the question that standing exists independent of prudential rules that bar one from asserting the constitutional rights of others not before the court. Under the Constitution, the federal courts are prohibited from giving advisory opinions; there has to be an actual case or controversy involving a real party in interest with a justiciable claim ripe for adjudication, and not just some speculative, generalized interest of all citizens, even though the matter may touch on federal question or diversity jurisdiction. In this, standing is to be determined by the courts as an issue pertinent to subject matter jurisdiction. Congress has the authority to enact law conferring standing directly, subject to separation-of-powers limitations. See FEC v. Akins, 524 U.S. 11 (1998). Such was not the case in the legal challenges to President Obama’s eligibility. To put it simply: without a party with standing to sue, there is no case; and, consequently, the actions challenging President Obama’s citizenship were dismissed and the appeals denied.

In the final analysis, only Congress has the power to challenge Barack Obama’s eligibility to be President of the United States under the Constitution; and on January 8, 2009, the Congress, in joint session, certified his election by the Electoral College without objection. There is the end of the matter.

tell me this captain.. did obama help himself politically by releasing, the second birth certificate, or would you rather he hadn't.
by the way any citizen in america can challenge the president about anything at all, i'm living proof of that. you guys can do anything but declair the topic resolved or uninteresting. people are still talking and bloging and researching this very important subject.

 

[Gadawg73]

i don't think it's over with obama and the birth certificate. the past couple of weeks have brought out some more experts. apparently a member of congress has been looking at the situation very closely. it's so weird the way the mainstream media seems to ingnore any developments. i don't think the release of the latest certificate helped the president to be more transparent. we'll see i guess.

Experts?
I have used forensic documents experts for 30 years in my business.
NO ONE in the private sector is an expert on birth documents.
ALL of those documents are certified by the Department of Health in the state you live in.
NO birth certificate can be authenticated by anyone else ever, anyplace, anywhere, in any state or in any court.
The State of Hawaii has certified Obama's birth certificate as valid and they hold the original, as it is done in almost all states, and they have certified copies.
I bet good $$$ that is the way it is done in YOUR state.
Are you claiming the state of Hawaii Health Department cooked all of this up when Obama was born?
The problem is most Americans love conspiracy theories and do not know the law and how documents are certified.
The birth certificate is authentic according to The State of Hawaii Health Department and they are the only one on earth that does that. All these so called "experts" are frauds.

just about every line in your post is a red flag to me... sorry

Not my fault you are ignorant.
Tell me specifically where I am wrong.
You can't.
Your apology offered because this is far above your pay grade is accepted.
If you do not know the law educate yourself. I live it daily.

 

[Gadawg73]

Can this nonsense still have legs? The erstwhile controversy over Barack Obama’s birth certificate was - from the beginning - a nonissue. The reason that President Obama has not produced his original birth certificate is because it is a record of vital statistics that is the property of the State of Hawaii, which under state privacy laws is subject to restricted access, and not available to the public. President Obama has disclosed a certified copy that has been authenticated by officials of the State of Hawaii; and which would be admissible under Rule 803(9) of the Federal Rules of Evidence in any action in which such issue was relevant. However, you don’t even get there because the federal courts lack subject matter jurisdiction for lack of standing of the plaintiffs (appellants) objecting to his eligibility to be President. The lawyers that filed those frivolous lawsuits (and appeals) well knew that they lacked standing to sue, and that such actions would be dismissed; and only did so to generate publicity (not to mention money) for themselves. What is interesting is the number of gullible people that have been taken in by this champerty.

ohhh... it's got legs baby !!! they're forged, but they're legs...

Forged?
Tell us oh wise one how does someone prove a document is forged when they are not the one that issues the document and certifies the document?
So evidence of supposed forgery of one your checks could be introduced into court by "experts" with you claiming the signature was not a forgery and your signature was valid.

 

[Nemo]

The argument is inapposite. The document was authenticated by the State of Hawaii; no other evidence is admissible. However, as I have explained previously, the spurious claims challenging the eligibility of President Obama cannot be heard for lack of standing to sue. In this regard, what standing means is that the plaintiff must be the owner (or holder) of a claim for an '"injury in fact——an invasion of a legally protected interest which is (a) concrete and particularized, . . . and (b) actual or imminent, not conjectural or hypothetical."' Goode v. City of Philadelphia, 539 F.3d 311(3d Cir. 2008), quoting Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 560 (1992). Without proper standing, the court does not have "subject matter" jurisdiction. For example, a prior case filed by a voter who sued Senator John McCain and the Republican National Committee alleging that Senator McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone and therefore ineligible to hold the office of President of the United States was dismissed for lack of standing. See Hollander v. McCain, 566 F.Supp.2d 63 (2008).

 

[washamericom]

Experts?
I have used forensic documents experts for 30 years in my business.
NO ONE in the private sector is an expert on birth documents.
ALL of those documents are certified by the Department of Health in the state you live in.
NO birth certificate can be authenticated by anyone else ever, anyplace, anywhere, in any state or in any court.
The State of Hawaii has certified Obama's birth certificate as valid and they hold the original, as it is done in almost all states, and they have certified copies.
I bet good $$$ that is the way it is done in YOUR state.
Are you claiming the state of Hawaii Health Department cooked all of this up when Obama was born?
The problem is most Americans love conspiracy theories and do not know the law and how documents are certified.
The birth certificate is authentic according to The State of Hawaii Health Department and they are the only one on earth that does that. All these so called "experts" are frauds.

just about every line in your post is a red flag to me... sorry

Not my fault you are ignorant.
Tell me specifically where I am wrong.
You can't.
Your apology offered because this is far above your pay grade is accepted.
If you do not know the law educate yourself. I live it daily.

i'm not even sure what that means.

 

[washamericom]

Experts?
I have used forensic documents experts for 30 years in my business.
NO ONE in the private sector is an expert on birth documents.
ALL of those documents are certified by the Department of Health in the state you live in.
NO birth certificate can be authenticated by anyone else ever, anyplace, anywhere, in any state or in any court.
The State of Hawaii has certified Obama's birth certificate as valid and they hold the original, as it is done in almost all states, and they have certified copies.
I bet good $$$ that is the way it is done in YOUR state.
Are you claiming the state of Hawaii Health Department cooked all of this up when Obama was born?
The problem is most Americans love conspiracy theories and do not know the law and how documents are certified.
The birth certificate is authentic according to The State of Hawaii Health Department and they are the only one on earth that does that. All these so called "experts" are frauds.

just about every line in your post is a red flag to me... sorry

Not my fault you are ignorant.
Tell me specifically where I am wrong.
You can't.
Your apology offered because this is far above your pay grade is accepted.
If you do not know the law educate yourself. I live it daily.

i am doing exactly that, so are lot's of other americans

 

[washamericom]

Experts?
I have used forensic documents experts for 30 years in my business.
NO ONE in the private sector is an expert on birth documents.
ALL of those documents are certified by the Department of Health in the state you live in.
NO birth certificate can be authenticated by anyone else ever, anyplace, anywhere, in any state or in any court.
The State of Hawaii has certified Obama's birth certificate as valid and they hold the original, as it is done in almost all states, and they have certified copies.
I bet good $$$ that is the way it is done in YOUR state.
Are you claiming the state of Hawaii Health Department cooked all of this up when Obama was born?
The problem is most Americans love conspiracy theories and do not know the law and how documents are certified.
The birth certificate is authentic according to The State of Hawaii Health Department and they are the only one on earth that does that. All these so called "experts" are frauds.

just about every line in your post is a red flag to me... sorry

Not my fault you are ignorant.
Tell me specifically where I am wrong.
You can't.
Your apology offered because this is far above your pay grade is accepted.
If you do not know the law educate yourself. I live it daily.

loving a conspiracy is not a problem.. and we've had some good ones in this country. you are right about most americans not being digital forensic experts. you are not accountable for my ignorance.

 

[washamericom]

The argument is inapposite. The document was authenticated by the State of Hawaii; no other evidence is admissible. However, as I have explained previously, the spurious claims challenging the eligibility of President Obama cannot be heard for lack of standing to sue. In this regard, what standing means is that the plaintiff must be the owner (or holder) of a claim for an '"injury in fact——an invasion of a legally protected interest which is (a) concrete and particularized, . . . and (b) actual or imminent, not conjectural or hypothetical."' Goode v. City of Philadelphia, 539 F.3d 311(3d Cir. 2008), quoting Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 560 (1992). Without proper standing, the court does not have "subject matter" jurisdiction. For example, a prior case filed by a voter who sued Senator John McCain and the Republican National Committee alleging that Senator McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone and therefore ineligible to hold the office of President of the United States was dismissed for lack of standing. See Hollander v. McCain, 566 F.Supp.2d 63 (2008).

so, do you think it was a good idea politcally for obama to release the second virtual birth certificate ??

This is not to demean the sincerity of Hollander’s challenge
to McCain’s eligibility for the presidency; as discussed supra
Part II, that challenge has yet to be definitively settled, and,
as a number of commentators have concluded, arguably cannot be
without a constitutional amendment.

 

[Gadawg73]

just about every line in your post is a red flag to me... sorry

Not my fault you are ignorant.
Tell me specifically where I am wrong.
You can't.
Your apology offered because this is far above your pay grade is accepted.
If you do not know the law educate yourself. I live it daily.

loving a conspiracy is not a problem.. and we've had some good ones in this country. you are right about most americans not being digital forensic experts.

Your argument is that experts have claimed the Obama birth certificate is forged.
I schooled you that THE ISSUER of the document has validated it and because of that prima facie evidence in ALL COURTS label that it is valid.
I further illustrated that is the same as an expert claiming your check that you wrote to WalMart was forged even though you have validated the signature on your check as valid and you signed it.
Both scenarios are the same and in both scenarios the "expert" has NO standing as an expert. Period.
Same thing Moe. End of story. The Department of Health State of Hawaii ISSUED THE DAMN OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE, signed it and have validated it as authentic.
Like your check, THAT IS THEIR DOCUMENT.
NO EXPERT TESTIMONY anywhere is considered as material fact ever because of that.
The same as you validating your own signature.
Did you learn anything or do you like keeping your head in the sand?

 

[washamericom]

Not my fault you are ignorant.
Tell me specifically where I am wrong.
You can't.
Your apology offered because this is far above your pay grade is accepted.
If you do not know the law educate yourself. I live it daily.

loving a conspiracy is not a problem.. and we've had some good ones in this country. you are right about most americans not being digital forensic experts.

Your argument is that experts have claimed the Obama birth certificate is forged.
I schooled you that THE ISSUER of the document has validated it and because of that prima facie evidence in ALL COURTS label that it is valid.
I further illustrated that is the same as an expert claiming your check that you wrote to WalMart was forged even though you have validated the signature on your check as valid and you signed it.
Both scenarios are the same and in both scenarios the "expert" has NO standing as an expert. Period.
Same thing Moe. End of story. The Department of Health State of Hawaii ISSUED THE DAMN OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE, signed it and have validated it as authentic.
Like your check, THAT IS THEIR DOCUMENT.
NO EXPERT TESTIMONY anywhere is considered as material fact ever because of that.
The same as you validating your own signature.
Did you learn anything or do you like keeping your head in the sand?[/QUOTE]

don't flatter yourself. my argument is that the american people won't put up with virtual birth certicate games much longer. there is no birth certificate, there never has been, if there were and it was released, we wouldn't be talking about this. we are no closer than we were before the election. i think you guys may be stuck in pre 4/27/11

 

[Gadawg73]

loving a conspiracy is not a problem.. and we've had some good ones in this country. you are right about most americans not being digital forensic experts.

Your argument is that experts have claimed the Obama birth certificate is forged.
I schooled you that THE ISSUER of the document has validated it and because of that prima facie evidence in ALL COURTS label that it is valid.
I further illustrated that is the same as an expert claiming your check that you wrote to WalMart was forged even though you have validated the signature on your check as valid and you signed it.
Both scenarios are the same and in both scenarios the "expert" has NO standing as an expert. Period.
Same thing Moe. End of story. The Department of Health State of Hawaii ISSUED THE DAMN OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE, signed it and have validated it as authentic.
Like your check, THAT IS THEIR DOCUMENT.
NO EXPERT TESTIMONY anywhere is considered as material fact ever because of that.
The same as you validating your own signature.
Did you learn anything or do you like keeping your head in the sand?

don't flatter yourself. my argument is that the american people won't put up with virtual birth certicate games much longer. there is no birth certificate, there never has been, if there were and it was released, we wouldn't be talking about this. we are no closer than we were before the election. i think you guys may be stuck in pre 4/27/11

You are a lost cause.
Americans are tired of BS arguments like yours.
That is how Obama got elected the last time. You are focused on this no brainer issue with your head in the sand instead of the real issues of the day.
That is why I show you how stupid your argument is.
End it now and focus on the real issues like the economy and how Obama has been a dismal failure there.
We can win on that one and make him a one hit wonder.

 

[washamericom]

Your argument is that experts have claimed the Obama birth certificate is forged.
I schooled you that THE ISSUER of the document has validated it and because of that prima facie evidence in ALL COURTS label that it is valid.
I further illustrated that is the same as an expert claiming your check that you wrote to WalMart was forged even though you have validated the signature on your check as valid and you signed it.
Both scenarios are the same and in both scenarios the "expert" has NO standing as an expert. Period.
Same thing Moe. End of story. The Department of Health State of Hawaii ISSUED THE DAMN OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE, signed it and have validated it as authentic.
Like your check, THAT IS THEIR DOCUMENT.
NO EXPERT TESTIMONY anywhere is considered as material fact ever because of that.
The same as you validating your own signature.
Did you learn anything or do you like keeping your head in the sand?

don't flatter yourself. my argument is that the american people won't put up with virtual birth certicate games much longer. there is no birth certificate, there never has been, if there were and it was released, we wouldn't be talking about this. we are no closer than we were before the election. i think you guys may be stuck in pre 4/27/11

You are a lost cause.
Americans are tired of BS arguments like yours.
That is how Obama got elected the last time. You are focused on this no brainer issue with your head in the sand instead of the real issues of the day.
That is why I show you how stupid your argument is.
End it now and focus on the real issues like the economy and how Obama has been a dismal failure there.
We can win on that one and make him a one hit wonder.

you have shown me nothing, and i'm quite sure that neither you nor the senator obama speak for all americans, otherwise, we wouldn't be here talking about this, three years after the case was "closed". i do admire your loyalty.

 

[Gadawg73]

don't flatter yourself. my argument is that the american people won't put up with virtual birth certicate games much longer. there is no birth certificate, there never has been, if there were and it was released, we wouldn't be talking about this. we are no closer than we were before the election. i think you guys may be stuck in pre 4/27/11

You are a lost cause.
Americans are tired of BS arguments like yours.
That is how Obama got elected the last time. You are focused on this no brainer issue with your head in the sand instead of the real issues of the day.
That is why I show you how stupid your argument is.
End it now and focus on the real issues like the economy and how Obama has been a dismal failure there.
We can win on that one and make him a one hit wonder.

you have shown me nothing, and i'm quite sure that neither you nor the senator obama speak for all americans, otherwise, we wouldn't be here talking about this, three years after the case was "closed". i do admire your loyalty.

So if you write a check and paid for a piece of property, closing the deal on a piece of property and then you owned the property.
Then someone else wanted that property and was willing to pay more and hired an expert to state your signature on your check was a forgery and the deal should be nullified.
You validated your own signature on your own check and stated you wrote the check.
And you claim that an expert's testimony should be considered anyway.
You are bat shit crazy.

 

[Nemo]

Expert testimony is not relevant. Once the document has been authenticated and certified by the state, that is conclusive. The argument that expert evidence should be admissible only begs the question that someone has standing to challenge its validity and President Obama’s eligibility. A citizen does not have standing to challenge a candidate’s eligibility because, under the Constitution, a person does not have the right to vote directly for a presidential candidate, but for "electors" for the President of the United States as provided under state law. U.S. Const., Art. II, Sec. 1; Bush v. Gore, 531 U.S. 98 (2000).

 

[washamericom]

You are a lost cause.
Americans are tired of BS arguments like yours.
That is how Obama got elected the last time. You are focused on this no brainer issue with your head in the sand instead of the real issues of the day.
That is why I show you how stupid your argument is.
End it now and focus on the real issues like the economy and how Obama has been a dismal failure there.
We can win on that one and make him a one hit wonder.

you have shown me nothing, and i'm quite sure that neither you nor the senator obama speak for all americans, otherwise, we wouldn't be here talking about this, three years after the case was "closed". i do admire your loyalty.

So if you write a check and paid for a piece of property, closing the deal on a piece of property and then you owned the property.
Then someone else wanted that property and was willing to pay more and hired an expert to state your signature on your check was a forgery and the deal should be nullified.
You validated your own signature on your own check and stated you wrote the check.
And you claim that an expert's testimony should be considered anyway.
You are bat shit crazy.

are you talking about the new york times eminent domain case when they legally drove generational residents and businesses out for their fancy corporate headquarters, for the betterment of the community ?

 

[washamericom]

Expert testimony is not relevant. Once the document has been authenticated and certified by the state, that is conclusive. The argument that expert evidence should be admissible only begs the question that someone has standing to challenge its validity and President Obama’s eligibility. A citizen does not have standing to challenge a candidate’s eligibility because, under the Constitution, a person does not have the right to vote directly for a presidential candidate, but for "electors" for the President of the United States as provided under state law. U.S. Const., Art. II, Sec. 1; Bush v. Gore, 531 U.S. 98 (2000).

but there are avenues..