Sheriff Arpaio revives birther controversy at Trump rally

you still seem confused. what evidence do you have to support any of the stupidity you posted in the previous post? What evidence do you have that shows a republican administration conspiring to elect a DEMOCRAT president?

 

We have been through this before, and you are either completely close minded or not smart enough to figure it out It's interesting that the Republican Huddy died in a mysterious plane crash which you have no explanation of. It's interesting that no objective document expert was allowed to examine the "original." Geeez!

 

I think that Citizen's United was a 'bad decision' but what both Wong Kim Ark and Citizen's United have in common is that they are valid Supreme Court rulings that are precedents.

You don't like what Wong Kim Ark says- well that is what Constitutional Amendments are for. Exactly as it is my recourse for Citizen's United.

 

You seem to have a reading comprehension problem ot are a revisionist.
The SCOTUS opinion was as follows.

[

The SCOTUS also said there was no further reason to go further on the citizenship issue because it was acknowledged that Minor was a natural born citizen because both of her parents were U.S. citizens.

The SCOTUS also said there were some (revisionist) who claimed just being born on U.S. soil makes one a U.S. citizen and there were "doubts" since common law states that both parents must be citizens to pass on natural born citizenship.

Then if you throw in Vattel's "Law of Nations" since you might be dealing with a parent who's a foreigner and not a citizen of the country he is in, "Son follows the condition of his father."

Even today the Mexican government considers Mexicans who are called "anchor babies" by the Constitutionalist in America to be Mexican citizens and must still hold their allegiance to Mexico and are even allowed to vote in Mexico's Presidential elections from America. When the constitionalist revisionist in America ignored the intent of the Fourteenth Amendment the Mexican government even changed their constitution recognizing dual citizenship.

It's my opinion that Barack Obama was born in Hawaii, at least 98% sure. But Obama's father was a British subject and under Natural Law, "Son follows the condition of his father." And that's the way it should be.

 

Birthers- so willing to embrace any Konspiracy theory- so unwilling to accept any facts.

There is no "Republican Huddy" that died in an airplane crash- you have muddled what your Birther overlords have fed you.

There have been three objective document experts who have examined Barack Obama's original birth certificate- the Director of Health of Hawaii, Dr. Chiyome Fukino- a Republican appointed by a Republican governor- who was also the state chair for McCain for President.

“I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of the Hawai
‛
i State Department of Health, have seen the original vital
records maintained on file by the Hawai‘i State D
epartment of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama
was born in Hawai‘i and is a natural-born American citiz
en. I have nothing further to add to this statement
or my original statement issued in October 2008 over eight months ago.”

Then his birth certificate was confirmed by the next Director of Health, Loretta Fuddy- a Democrat, appointed by a Democrat- she was the one who died of a heart attack after a small plane crash

http://health.hawaii.gov/vitalrecords/files/2013/05/News_Release_Birth_Certificate_042711.pdf

And finally Registrar of Records, Dr. Alvin Onaka- a civil servant- in charge of Hawaiian vital records.

To any rational person the issue is settled.

And the voters, the Electoral College, Congress and Chief Justice Roberts are rational.

Birthers are not.

 

Well you could throw in Vattel's "Law of Nation"- except of course Minor doesn't mention Vattel even once.
Note that Minor mentions 'common-law'- what common law? What countries common law? The only common-law the 'founders' were familiar with when the Constitution was written was British common-law.

The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their [p168] parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first. For the purposes of this case it is not necessary to solve these doubts. It is sufficient for everything we have now to consider that all children born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction are themselves citizens.


As Minor says- it does not resolve whether or not child born without citizen parents are natural born citizens or not.

That was left to Wong Kim Ark- in its analysis showing that citizenship in the United States followed British common-law.

 

You are no different, you failed to acknowledge that the SCOTUS used the word "doubt" of those who ignore the intent of the Fourteenth Amendment.

It's simple, "Son follows the condition of his father."

 

Well you are welcome to your opinion. It is a contrarian opinion- not supported by either precedent or the courts.

Nor by the voters, or the Electoral college, or Congress or Chief Justice Roberts.

The issue is settled- your contrarian views are no more relevant than those who argue that the 14th Amendment was never ratified.

 

There was no reason too, it was acknowledge that "both" of Minor's parents were U.S. citizens so Minor was a natural born citizen so there was no further reason to go any further on the citizenship issue.

 

LOL- 'quite likely' in Birtherspeak meaning "there isn't a chance in hell, we have no evidence he was- but we really, really, really want him to have been born in Kenya.....so he must have been born there'......

 

Hey he ignores the words "SHALL" and "ANY" in Hawaii law.

 

He's Hawaiian.

The Hawaiian natives hate American mainlanders. I went there and was kicked off a beach that I wanted to continue fourwheeling on with some of my battlebuddies because the locals wouldn't let us through. They also threw stuff at my girlfriend at S'yans bar and made fun of her for not being Hawaiian.

Why did we even make them a state anyway? Ungrateful losers. Let's take away their tourism and see how American they become.

Sorry, Hawaii hits a soft spot for me

 

View attachment Hawaii BC policy.pdf

Except of course the State of Hawaii disagrees with your interpretation.

As we keep showing you.

In 2001 the Hawai„i State Department of Health began computer
-generating vital statistics records. Since then, its longstanding policy and practice has been to issue and
provide only the computer-generated Certifications of Live Birth,
and to not produce
photocopies of actual records to
fulfill requests for certified copies of certificates.
Director Fuddy made an exception for President Obama
by issuing copies of the original birth certificate.

The departmental policy to issue only computer generated

Certifications of Live Birth remains in effect for all birth records that have been
computerized.Director Fuddy in her capacity as Health Director has the legal
authority to approve the process by which copies of birth records are made
“The exception made in this case to provide President Obama with a copy of his original
Certificate of Live Birth was done according to the letter of the law
,” Attorney General David Louie said.
Director Fuddy exercised her legal authority in a completely appropriate manner in this unique circumstance. We will continue to maintain the
strict confidentiality requirements afforded to vital statistics records, such as birth certificates.
These requirements help protect the integrity of the records, and
keep us all safe from crimes such as identity theft

 

There is No "Fourteenth Amendment"!

 

Quote the LAW that grants this exception, an employee in a minor department neither creates law nor interprets it.

Quote where I have argued Obama is not a NBC or that he was not born in Hawaii.

Still waiting for the law which supports your claim that birth documents are exempted from Hawaii law.

Then according to the law if someone request a copy of one pertaining to them Hawaii BY LAW without exception must provide it else show where the courts have said otherwise.

The law says otherwise the statement by a minor official does not trump the law.

Hawaii law, quote me the exception to the law.

Cite the law that grants the exeption.

Quote the law that makes the exception.

No he didn't, he did so after he made the same request anyone could make, a request the state cannot deny.

Yes inspite of the fact he is a NBC as opposed to the birthers who claim otherwise.

Except she was not the author, she was merely the editor and the claim Obama never saw it is incredulous and you have no proof of that, how would she know if he ever saw it during those 16 years or that he did not save a copy? She couldn't possibly know. I am not foolish enough to believe that an up and coming author just out of college getting his first break, having his picture and bio published in a promotional brochure along side some of the most well know authors and celebrities did not even bother to glance at it, did not keep a copy for his own future records and history and foremost did not as is SOP for such publications sign a release and acknowledgment of it's accuracy. Are you foolish enough to believe it?

 

LOL...that and a $5 Starbuck gift card will get you a cup of coffee.

 

Starbucks

Starbucks is for liberals who don't have a real job in the private sector who spend all their time drinking bitter coffee that needs to have a whole bunch of garbage added to it to make it potable and spend most of their lives on the internet.

Good coffee can be drank black without adding sweeteners or milk from the utters of a cow to it.

Only an idiot would pay $5 for a cup of bitter coffee.

 

You are foolish enough to believe what you have convinced yourself of, rather than the facts.

What are the actual facts that we know- rather than your innuendo?

In 1990, when Barack Obama first came to national attention, the fact that he was born in Hawaii was published in newspapers reaching millions of readers.

In 1993, there was a brochure printed, with Barack Obama's short bio among 20 or so other authors- no idea how many people ever saw that brochure. No evidence that Barack Obama ever read it. Just your supposition.

The only comment by anyone who actually has first hand knowledge was by Miriam Goderich

Miriam Goderich edited the text of the bio; she is now a partner at the Dystel & Goderich agency, which lists Obama as one of its current clients.

"You're undoubtedly aware of the brouhaha stirred up by Breitbart about the erroneous statement in a client list Acton & Dystel published in 1991 (for circulation within the publishing industry only) that Barack Obama was born in Kenya. This was nothing more than a fact checking error by me — an agency assistant at the time," Goderich wrote. "There was never any information given to us by Obama in any of his correspondence or other communications suggesting in any way that he was born in Kenya and not Hawaii. I hope you can communicate to your readers that this was a simple mistake and nothing more."



She says very clearly that a) the mistake was hers and b) that Barack Obama never said he was born in Kenya.

So those are the facts- the rest is your supposition. Speculation. Innuendo.

I asked you before- and I ask you again- since you are convinced that Barack Obama either intentionally showed Kenya as his birthplace in that brochure- or left the mistake there intentionally

What is your speculation as to any motivation that Barack Obama would do so?

- - - Updated - - -

Yeah- well only an idiot would think that Obama is not a natural born citizen or that the 14th Amendment is not in effect- so you can see why I would assume you would be an idiot enough to pay for Starbucks coffee.

 

so no evidence then, I didn't think so.

 

and the portion you birthers love to omit from the ruling is that they specifically state they are not ruling on NBC. Wong Kim Ark is the precedent.

why would we do that? it's as relevant to US law as the lord of the rings is.

how interesting. but Mexican law has no relevance inside the US.

and since there is no such thing as natural law, he is a NBC of the united states.

 

All that shows is that as a matter of a ROUTINE request for a birth certificate that is what they release. Hawaii LAW however requires that if you request a copy of the long form, or ANY other form or record that pertains to you, they SHALL release a copy to you. PERIOD, no wiggle room, they have no choice in the matter, they cannot deny you a copy of that form. How many times does the law have to be cited to you? A department policy does NOT trump the law where did you ever learn such a thing?

"The State’s public records law, the Uniform Information Practices Act (Modified) (“UIPA&#8221, found at chapter 92F, Hawaii Revised Statutes (“HRS&#8221 requires that all government records be open to public inspection unless access is restricted or closed by law. "
http://health.hawaii.gov/vitalrecords/faq-obama/

PART III. DISCLOSURE OF PERSONAL RECORDS

Note

Part heading amended by L 1989, c 192, §5.

[§92F-21] Individual’s access to own personal record. Each agency that maintains any accessible personal record shall make that record available to the individual to whom it pertains, in a reasonably prompt manner and in a reasonably intelligible form. Where necessary the agency shall provide a translation into common terms of any machine readable code or any code or abbreviation employed for internal agency use. [L 1988, c 262, pt of §1]

And that is what Obama did, he made the request to have THAT form with pertained to him be released, the state could not have denied that request under the law. Anyone else in born in Hawaii could make the same request and the state would have to comply if such a form exist.

Why do you keep denying Hawaii law?

 

That's what I'm trying to figure out, federal law says that a state must provide the original birth certificate to someone when requested.

Where's Hawaii coming from ? Were they just making (*)(*)(*)(*) up ?

Here in the liberal state of California, birth certificates that are registered with the County Register are public record.

 

the issue was never tried in court before. The Minor court specifically states they are not addressing NBC. That was resolved in Wong Kim Ark.

- - - Updated - - -

actually I showed you the state of Hawaii stating flat out they don't issue that document. but, being a birther, you seem to think you know better Hawaiian law than Hawaii does.

it's amusing

- - - Updated - - -

lol, conspiracy nuts are just sad

- - - Updated - - -

all of this has been thoroughly refuted, multiple times. Hawaii knows Hawaiian law better than an internet birther. obamas obscure bio was never seen by him. the author admitted her mistake and apologized.

 

I am pointing out what the State of Hawaii says- and what they said to Barack Obama when he made his special request for an exemption to Hawaiian policy requesting a certified copy of his original birth certificate- and which Hawaii specifically stated was granted as a special request.

Hawaiian policy for issuing certified birth certificates is very clear- and has been in effect since 2014. Anyone who believes that Hawaii is not following their own policy correctly- and who has standing- can of course challenge how Hawaii interprets their own law.

Meanwhile- Hawaii has now provided to Barack Obama two legally valid birth certificates.


And Birthers- like Trump and others- still are a Birthin.

 

and yet Hawaii states flat out that you are wrong. they will not issue the long form. a special exception was made for the president of the US.