The Birfer State Law Tracking Thread

[Ravi]

Laughing at the law?

No at you and your constant and perhaps willful ignorance.

Why did you edit my post?

I didn't...I quoted it. You must have edited yourself before the cut off time.

Makes no difference though...the rule or law you've referenced has absolutely nothing to do with Obama's birth certificate or the birth announcement.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Notes of Advisory Committee on Rules.

The rule is the familiar one requiring production of the original of a document to prove its contents, expanded to include writings, recordings, and photographs, as defined in Rule 1001(1) and (2), supra.



Application of the rule requires a resolution of the question whether contents are sought to be proved. Thus an event may be proved by nondocumentary evidence, even though a written record of it was made. If, however, the event is sought to be proved by the written record, the rule applies. For example, payment may be proved without producing the written receipt which was given. Earnings may be proved without producing books of account in which they are entered. McCormick § 198; 4 Wigmore § 1245. Nor does the rule apply to testimony that books or records have been examined and found not to contain any reference to a designated matter.
Federal Rules of Evidence - Notes to Rule 1002
ARTICLE IX. AUTHENTICATION AND IDENTIFICATION
(a) General provision.

The requirement of authentication or identification as a condition precedent to admissibility is satisfied by evidence sufficient to support a finding that the matter in question is what its proponent claims.


Federal Rules of Evidence (LII 2010 ed.)

 

[bigrebnc1775]

No at you and your constant and perhaps willful ignorance.

Why did you edit my post?

I didn't...I quoted it. You must have edited yourself before the cut off time.

Makes no difference though...the rule or law you've referenced has absolutely nothing to do with Obama's birth certificate or the birth announcement.

Here it is. EXPLAIN?

Has anyone seen the original newsprint copy of the birth notices? If not they do not exist.
Federal Rules of Evidence
NOTES TO RULE 1002


The rule is the familiar one requiring production of the original of a document to prove its contents, expanded to include writings, recordings, and photographs, as defined in Rule 1001(1) and (2), supra.

And would also apply to the document obama uses as a birth certificate.

Federal Rules of Evidence - Notes to Rule 1002

Laughing at federal rule?

 

[Toro]

Bigreb

you are demonstrating why it is pointless for Obama, or anyone, to release his BC. No matter what evidence is released you won't believe it.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Bigreb

you are demonstrating why it is pointless for Obama, or anyone, to release his BC. No matter what evidence is released you won't believe it.

No I'm not you keep repeating the same old worn out shit. He has not produced one item that is valid. You are proof that you will believe anything the governmnt tells you to believe.

 

[Toro]

You are being unreasonable. Asking for the original newspaper is not a reasonable request. It demonstrates your mindset. You won't believe no matter what. The SoS of AZ says he thinks the birfer bill is unconstitutional in a video and you respond that you don't think he really means it. You, like most birfers, have closed your mind so there is no reason to release it because you have demonstrated that you are not willing to believe anything that contradicts your narrative.

 

[Ravi]

Did I stutter the first time?

 

[Montrovant]

Bigreb

you are demonstrating why it is pointless for Obama, or anyone, to release his BC. No matter what evidence is released you won't believe it.

No I'm not you keep repeating the same old worn out shit. He has not produced one item that is valid. You are proof that you will believe anything the governmnt tells you to believe.

I don't know if I've ever read a statement that better qualifies as the pot calling the kettle black.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Bigreb

you are demonstrating why it is pointless for Obama, or anyone, to release his BC. No matter what evidence is released you won't believe it.

No I'm not you keep repeating the same old worn out shit. He has not produced one item that is valid. You are proof that you will believe anything the governmnt tells you to believe.

I don't know if I've ever read a statement that better qualifies as the pot calling the kettle black.

Nothing I mentioned is worn out because, it's not listen to it's not been addressed without an insult. Just because you don't want to hear it does not make it worn out.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

You are being unreasonable. Asking for the original newspaper is not a reasonable request. It demonstrates your mindset. You won't believe no matter what. The SoS of AZ says he thinks the birfer bill is unconstitutional in a video and you respond that you don't think he really means it. You, like most birfers, have closed your mind so there is no reason to release it because you have demonstrated that you are not willing to believe anything that contradicts your narrative.

You are being unreasonable. Asking for the original newspaper is not a reasonable request.

Thats an unreasonable? As I have posted before anyone can create a newspaper article on the internet. If that clipping is real there should be an original. Has anyone produced it?
As I have pointed out anyone can submit a birth notice to the news papers. It has never been the respondsibility of the hospital to do that.

 

[geauxtohell]

Bigreb

you are demonstrating why it is pointless for Obama, or anyone, to release his BC. No matter what evidence is released you won't believe it.

Bingo. Which is why we've said all along: This isn't about the birth certificate.

Obama is smart enough to know it.

 

[geauxtohell]

This isn't over yet.

It will never be over for you dumbasses.

It doesn't matter. The rule of law will prevail. You won't get your way simply by throwing a fit about the matter.

Dumb ass the veto can be over ridden

Good luck with that. It will still be struck down as unconstitutional.

Birthers = perpetual losers.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

It will never be over for you dumbasses.

It doesn't matter. The rule of law will prevail. You won't get your way simply by throwing a fit about the matter.

Dumb ass the veto can be over ridden

Good luck with that. It will still be struck down as unconstitutional.

Birthers = perpetual losers.

That is debateable

 

[Sheldon]

This isn't over yet.

It will never be over for you dumbasses.

It doesn't matter. The rule of law will prevail. You won't get your way simply by throwing a fit about the matter.

Dumb ass the veto can be over ridden

lol u mad

 

[bigrebnc1775]

It will never be over for you dumbasses.

It doesn't matter. The rule of law will prevail. You won't get your way simply by throwing a fit about the matter.

Dumb ass the veto can be over ridden

lol u mad

Yes I hate it when a Constitutional mandate is thrown to the side.

 

[Sheldon]

Dumb ass the veto can be over ridden

Good luck with that. It will still be struck down as unconstitutional.

Birthers = perpetual losers.

That is debateable

Zero for seventy-four. Ohfer, cracker, ohfer.

You chimps have suffered patriotic beat-downs on all fronts and both sides of governments all across this glorious nation. Sucks being such a loser, donut?

 

[Sheldon]

Dumb ass the veto can be over ridden

lol u mad

Yes I hate it when a Constitutional mandate is thrown to the side.

If you supported Arizona's bill, you hate the Constitution. Just admit it. I bet you wish the Confederacy had won, doncha?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

lol u mad

Yes I hate it when a Constitutional mandate is thrown to the side.

If you supported Arizona's bill, you hate the Constitution. Just admit it. I bet you wish the Confederacy had won, doncha?

citizenship is a mandate of the Constitution. We can't use word of mouth now the country is too big and Hawaii is to corrupt, the documewnt obama uses has too many holes and errors on it to accept it.

 

[Sheldon]

Yes I hate it when a Constitutional mandate is thrown to the side.

If you supported Arizona's bill, you hate the Constitution. Just admit it. I bet you wish the Confederacy had won, doncha?

citizenship is a mandate of the Constitution. We can't use word of mouth now the country is too big and Hawaii is to corrupt, the documewnt obama uses has too many holes and errors on it to accept it.

And there is the special-ed crux of your conspiracy. The state of Hawai'i is all in on it. A Republican governor could have knocked Obama out of the race, but didn't because...?

Your posts have too many holes and errors for me to accept them.

 

[Toro]

Governor Brewer's rightful veto of the clearly unconstitutional AZ birfer bill is unlikely to be over-riden by the legislature.

Gov. Jan Brewer on Wednesday shot down an effort by the Arizona Legislature to require presidential candidates to provide proof of citizenship in order to get on the state's ballot.

In her veto letter, Brewer said House Bill 2177 "creates significant new problems while failing to do anything constructive for Arizona."

The House and Senate could override the governor's veto with a two-thirds majority vote in each chamber, but on Monday, such a move appeared unlikely.

House Speaker Kirk Adams shook his head wearily when asked Monday evening if lawmakers would attempt to override the veto. "No," he said. He added that legislative researchers found that the last time a governor's veto was overridden was 50 years ago.

The bill's sponsor, Rep. Carl Seel, R-Phoenix, said pursuing an override would be as much about defying the governor as it would be supporting the bill's intent.

"Overrides are a real difficult monster," said Seel, who called the governor's decision to veto the measure "unfortunate."

Brewer vetoes 'birther' bill

Unsurprisingly, the birfers are now attempting to recall the governor.

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/recalljanbrewer/

Here is the governor's veto.

http://www.azcentral.com/ic/pdf/0418birther-bill-veto.pdf