PILOT SPIN
Spin Zone => Spin Zone => Topic started by: Lucifer on September 29, 2017, 08:06:22 AM
-
https://theintercept.com/2017/09/28/yet-another-major-russia-story-falls-apart-is-skepticism-permissible-yet/
They were one small step away from demanding that the election results be nullified, indulging the sentiment expressed by #Resistance icon Carl Reiner the other day: “Is there anything more exciting that [sic] the possibility of Trump’s election being invalidated & Hillary rightfully installed as our President?”
So what was wrong with this story? Just one small thing: it was false. The story began to fall apart yesterday when Associated Press reported that Wisconsin – one of the states included in the original report that, for obvious reasons, caused the most excitement – did not, in fact, have its election systems targeted by Russian hackers:
-
The can't stand losing, and can't get over their loss, and continuing losses. They will find a way to keep the discussion of replacing Trump for the eight years he is President. They will not him allow to be legitimate, and are not allowing the will of the country to matter. They keep referencing the popular vote like our country should be run solely by the mass population centers of NYC, and L.A. metro areas.
If they succeed, we will have another civil war in this country, and I never in my lifetime thought I would ever think, nor utter that.
-
This is their version of birthers - long after the election, Republicans kept on about Obama's birth certificate and his qualification to be president, even after he was inaugurated. What's the right term for this? Desperados? Election Deniers?
-
This is their version of birthers - long after the election, Republicans kept on about Obama's birth certificate and his qualification to be president, even after he was inaugurated. What's the right term for this? Desperados? Election Deniers?
I don't think your example is appropriate. Obama could have squashed the birther question at any time merely by releasing his full, original birth certificate. What can Trump possibly do to disprove a negative (that he conspired with the Russians).
To be honest, I don't know if there was any Trump-Russian conspiracy. It is up to those making the charge to prove it existed. As for Obama, it was up to him (IHMO) to prove he was a legitimate citizen. I still don't know why it took him so long.
-
I don't think your example is appropriate. Obama could have squashed the birther question at any time merely by releasing his full, original birth certificate. What can Trump possibly do to disprove a negative (that he conspired with the Russians).
To be honest, I don't know if there was any Trump-Russian conspiracy. It is up to those making the charge to prove it existed. As for Obama, it was up to him (IHMO) to prove he was a legitimate citizen. I still don't know why it took him so long.
Come on. Yes you do.
The delay was to allow birthers to look like unhinged, wild-eyed lunatics, not just people who wished to follow the Constitution. The press also could have done their job in a New York minute if they weren't busy being presidential fellators, but they also willingly allowed it to become an issue with which they could implicate any conservative who was against Obama.
-
I don't think your example is appropriate. Obama could have squashed the birther question at any time merely by releasing his full, original birth certificate. What can Trump possibly do to disprove a negative (that he conspired with the Russians).
Sweet mother of Jesus Lord above almighty...
-
Sweet mother of Jesus Lord above almighty...
Since you don't believe in the Lord Jesus, I have no idea what you mean?
Do you deny that Obama could have quashed the birther movement if he had provided a legitimate copy of his birth certificate when first asked? After all, citizenship is a requirement for the office. And before someone brings it up, tax returns aren't.
-
Since this has successfully been diverted from the Russian influence story(where there was no influence of the RNC anyway) to the BO birth certificate I have a few things to add.
The birth certificate was a legitimate interest. There was enough background data to indicate some speculation on where BO was actually born. What particularly troubled me was the errant SSN assignment. How his and only his SSN assignment came from the region he didn't apply for his number is one of those things that made me go 'hmmmmm'. Anyway, it is a requirement that the prez be a natural born American, and questions regarding that are legitimate.
The fact that the birth certificate was not immediately presented also gave me pause. Because I don't like him, and because I consider his refusal to be part of a process of thumbing his hose at the citizens WHOM HE WORKED FOR. I would call it effrontery.
Once he did release his birth certificate, there were still more questions about the document. Some folks who know a lot more about layering and PDF form generation still consider it a fake. What's more, since the Hawaii comptroller of records refused to help resolve this, I personally still have questions. So, label me a birther. But - won't it be strange when 3 or 5, or 12 years from now we get definitive proof that he was not born in the US. Hmmmm.
As for the Russian influence story, another nothing-burger. It always was, and always will be.
-
http://thefederalist.com/2017/09/29/democratic-line-facebook-russia-crazy/
-
I don't think your example is appropriate. Obama could have squashed the birther question at any time merely by releasing his full, original birth certificate. What can Trump possibly do to disprove a negative (that he conspired with the Russians).
To be honest, I don't know if there was any Trump-Russian conspiracy. It is up to those making the charge to prove it existed. As for Obama, it was up to him (IHMO) to prove he was a legitimate citizen. I still don't know why it took him so long.
Certainly it is a different situation, but that does not mean there is no correlation. Even after Obama released a copy of his birth certificate and state officials from Hawaii confirmed it, there are still people who choose to disbelieve it.
With Trump, the Left chooses to believe that he is illegitimate and no amount of evidence showing there was no collusion will be acceptable. If you presented them with a diary which detailed every minute of every day and recorded every conversation that had occurred, there would still be people who would choose to believe that he worked with Russia.
The bar for proving a negative means that conclusive proof will never be obtained. But that merely means more people will believe in his illegitimacy. The point that they are like birthers remains. They choose to believe something negative despite evidence that actually happened. Because they are partisan morons.
-
I've always wondered how they did this? The right hand edge lines up so well with the pattern, the left hand side not so much.
-
I've always wondered how they did this? The right hand edge lines up so well with the pattern, the left hand side not so much.
If you really must know, the image is a modern photocopy printed onto the green paper. If you carefully examine the watermark pattern on the left side, you'll see that it is consistent and wasn't part of the original image.
More interesting to me...and it is only mildly interesting.... is that if Obama was born on Aug 4, his conception date was probably in early November the year before. His mother was only 17 when that happened. His father committed statutory rape. But I'm from the south and people are always counting backwards 9 months to figure these things out.
-
Since you don't believe in the Lord Jesus, I have no idea what you mean?
I'm agnostic, not atheist. Plus, Jesus is a historical figure, if nothing else.
Do you deny that Obama could have quashed the birther movement if he had provided a legitimate copy of his birth certificate when first asked? After all, citizenship is a requirement for the office. And before someone brings it up, tax returns aren't.
Of course I deny it. No amount of proof will satiate the birthers, who inevitably BEGIN from a point of assumption that Obama is illegitimate.
-
I'm agnostic, not atheist. Plus, Jesus is a historical figure, if nothing else.
Of course I deny it. No amount of proof will satiate the birthers, who inevitably BEGIN from a point of assumption that Obama is illegitimate.
That is somewhat true that most birthers will never be satisfied. It is not true that they/we begin from a point of assumption that Obama was illegitimate. We developed the FACT of his illegitimacy from the discovery that his mother was pregnant with a philanderer, liar, and adulterous married man and she was unmarried to BOs farther. BTW, the state of Hawii at the time did not recognize multiple wives. I don't know if it supports that now, but really all that matters is that it did not support polygamy at the time she thought she was married. Ergo - illegitimate.
Notwithstanding I don't care about his legal parental status, I had concerns that he was actually born in Kenya when he stated as such on his application for college support. Also when his SS number appears to be from a state where he never was a resident. If nothing else, these facts and a few others led many to conclude he was hiding something, if not the location of his birth.
-
That is somewhat true that most birthers will never be satisfied. It is not true that they/we begin from a point of assumption that Obama was illegitimate. We developed the FACT of his illegitimacy from the discovery that his mother was pregnant with a philanderer, liar, and adulterous married man and she was unmarried to BOs farther. BTW, the state of Hawii at the time did not recognize multiple wives. I don't know if it supports that now, but really all that matters is that it did not support polygamy at the time she thought she was married. Ergo - illegitimate.
You'll have to explain to me why, even if this is true, it makes him illegitimate to be president.
Notwithstanding I don't care about his legal parental status, I had concerns that he was actually born in Kenya when he stated as such on his application for college support. Also when his SS number appears to be from a state where he never was a resident. If nothing else, these facts and a few others led many to conclude he was hiding something, if not the location of his birth.
You appear to be proving my point. I know of no evidence that Obama marked himself as born in Kenya when applying for college support. You are welcome to produce that evidence, if you'd like. Though it's been 9 years since he was inaugurated and I'm skeptical your research chops are that much better than all the other birthers that have been up in arms since day one.
The SSN area number is mildly curious, but evidence of nothing.
-
You'll have to explain to me why, even if this is true, it makes him illegitimate to be president.
You appear to be proving my point. I know of no evidence that Obama marked himself as born in Kenya when applying for college support. You are welcome to produce that evidence, if you'd like. Though it's been 9 years since he was inaugurated and I'm skeptical your research chops are that much better than all the other birthers that have been up in arms since day one.
The SSN area number is mildly curious, but evidence of nothing.
His marital legitimacy has no bearing on his LEGALITY to become president. And I did not say that it did. You brought up his legitimacy, and I showed that he is illegitimate. Just because you don't know about other evidence, doesn't mean it didn't exist. I have no duty or obligation to do research for you. Like most progs, you would prefer to remain clueless about any question to his authority. The MSM did a great job confusing, and obfuscating anything having to do with the concerns about his birth, as it might lead to unfounded speculation by voters. IMNSO - it would have been better to 'come clean' and explain why he registered as a foreign student, and why his SSN is from a state he never lived in, and the other evidence concerning his dubious early years. but he chose to have an 'fu' attitude and tell his detractors to pound sand. Which makes it all the more sweet when unfounded allegations about Trump surface and he tells his detractors to go fornicate with a torus shaped mobile fried pastry.
-
I'm agnostic, not atheist. Plus, Jesus is a historical figure, if nothing else.
What I said was that I don't think you believe in "the Lord Jesus". Sure, he is an incontrovertible historical figure. Not believing in him would be like not believing the climate is changing. But it is the word "LORD" before his name that I don't think you accept.
Of course I deny it. No amount of proof will satiate the birthers, who inevitably BEGIN from a point of assumption that Obama is illegitimate.
Birthers didn't begin with that assumption. They began with the knowledge that natural citizenship is practically the sole requirement for the job, thus asking him about it was inevitable. It was only when he refused to provide proof that the theories firmed up. It was sort of like when I asked prospective employees if they had a felony record. If they refused to answer, then I got suspicious.
-
The question of legitimacy has no interest to any progressive.
The only thing that matters is the progressive agenda, and asking legitimate questions about eh many and varied inconsistencies in Obama’s citizenship, collegiate record, SSI, parentage, or citizenship was put off limits be progressives because there are too many of them and once people begin to look at his supposed background the option to dismiss everything as made up is too great.
To avoid this the progressives made every question abort Obama a racism issue and completely avoided any serious examination nation of the scam that was an dis obama.
Asechest is playing that game here. Rather than. Enter to an intelligent discourse,e he is playing the liberal game of making it off limits. I don’t blame him because there is very little about obama that is authentic, IMO.
-
His marital legitimacy has no bearing on his LEGALITY to become president. And I did not say that it did. You brought up his legitimacy, and I showed that he is illegitimate.
I assume you're aware that birtherism, which is the topic I am commenting on, involves Obama's legitimacy for the position of president, and not whether his parents were married at the time of his conception. I couldn't care less whether he was born out of wedlock, nor do I care whether you believe so, either.
Just because you don't know about other evidence, doesn't mean it didn't exist. I have no duty or obligation to do research for you. Like most progs, you would prefer to remain clueless about any question to his authority. The MSM did a great job confusing, and obfuscating anything having to do with the concerns about his birth, as it might lead to unfounded speculation by voters. IMNSO - it would have been better to 'come clean' and explain why he registered as a foreign student, and why his SSN is from a state he never lived in, and the other evidence concerning his dubious early years. but he chose to have an 'fu' attitude and tell his detractors to pound sand. Which makes it all the more sweet when unfounded allegations about Trump surface and he tells his detractors to go fornicate with a torus shaped mobile fried pastry.
And just because you have a memory of something in your mind, which arises out of a fake news (hah) story released on April Fools Day in 2009, doesn't mean that real evidence for it exists. And further, your demand that he "come clean" for something that never happened, and for which there is no evidence except in your own head, is comically similar to the "prove a negative" that Little Joe is complaining about in this very thread. Thus, we come full circle.
Your suggestion that Obama told folks to pound sand is ridiculous. His campaign set up a friggin' website just to respond to the deluge of birther BS. Oh and he also allowed a reporter to actually hold his certificate of live birth. Oh and then he got Hawaii to certify they had seen the original birth certificate on file. Oh and then they filed for a waiver on Hawaii's prohibition against releasing the long form birth certificate. Oh and then they sent someone to pick up a certified copy and released it to the world.
So in closing, I am deeply sympathetic that you were unable to witness the actual live birth of Mr. Barack Obama. But then again, for some people, even that may not have been enough.
-
Never forget who started the whole birth certificate fiasco in the first place. It came right out of the HRC campaign.
-
What I said was that I don't think you believe in "the Lord Jesus". Sure, he is an incontrovertible historical figure. Not believing in him would be like not believing the climate is changing. But it is the word "LORD" before his name that I don't think you accept.
I neither confirm nor deny it. That's what being an Agnostic is all about.
Birthers didn't begin with that assumption. They began with the knowledge that natural citizenship is practically the sole requirement for the job, thus asking him about it was inevitable. It was only when he refused to provide proof that the theories firmed up. It was sort of like when I asked prospective employees if they had a felony record. If they refused to answer, then I got suspicious.
There has never beenr a more opportune time to use this phrase: Asked and answered! I think you're misremembering the timeline. Obama released his official birth certificate in June 2008, more than half a year before he was elected. There is no reality in which that is a refusal to provide proof.
-
Never forget who started the whole birth certificate fiasco in the first place. It came right out of the HRC campaign.
Reason number four billion that I didn't vote for her!
-
That is somewhat true that most birthers will never be satisfied. It is not true that they/we begin from a point of assumption that Obama was illegitimate. We developed the FACT of his illegitimacy from the discovery that his mother was pregnant with a philanderer, liar, and adulterous married man and she was unmarried to BOs farther. BTW, the state of Hawii at the time did not recognize multiple wives. I don't know if it supports that now, but really all that matters is that it did not support polygamy at the time she thought she was married. Ergo - illegitimate.
Notwithstanding I don't care about his legal parental status, I had concerns that he was actually born in Kenya when he stated as such on his application for college support. Also when his SS number appears to be from a state where he never was a resident. If nothing else, these facts and a few others led many to conclude he was hiding something, if not the location of his birth.
No question he's hiding things. How did he get admitted to Harvard Law with mediocre grades?
He may have used the foreign-born thing to get admission/aide.
-
I assume you're aware that birtherism, which is the topic I am commenting on, involves Obama's legitimacy for the position of president, and not whether his parents were married at the time of his conception. I couldn't care less whether he was born out of wedlock, nor do I care whether you believe so, either.
And just because you have a memory of something in your mind, which arises out of a fake news (hah) story released on April Fools Day in 2009, doesn't mean that real evidence for it exists. And further, your demand that he "come clean" for something that never happened, and for which there is no evidence except in your own head, is comically similar to the "prove a negative" that Little Joe is complaining about in this very thread. Thus, we come full circle.
Your suggestion that Obama told folks to pound sand is ridiculous. His campaign set up a friggin' website just to respond to the deluge of birther BS. Oh and he also allowed a reporter to actually hold his certificate of live birth. Oh and then he got Hawaii to certify they had seen the original birth certificate on file. Oh and then they filed for a waiver on Hawaii's prohibition against releasing the long form birth certificate. Oh and then they sent someone to pick up a certified copy and released it to the world.
So in closing, I am deeply sympathetic that you were unable to witness the actual live birth of Mr. Barack Obama. But then again, for some people, even that may not have been enough.
ok.
'set up a website' = 'source of disinformation'. I recall now going to visit that site. Most of it was; 'here is where to send money to help expand hope and change.' I could never find any info on the many and varied special accommodations from his past. As for his 'come clean' I didn't care for his attitude about the whole thing. Which of course was followed up with 'the republicans can come along, but they have to sit in the back of the bus'. 'If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor'. And variations on a theme; 'you mean, like with a cloth or something?' in keeping with the contempt for citizens concerns from the progs.
Being obtuse is not a winning characteristic. Sort of like your illegitimate topic. No one with common English would use that to discuss the legality of a candidate for public office. However, they would disingenuously use it to obfuscate the issue so that one could conveniently misrepresent the central topic, and then declare victory. To wit: "Trump was never WIRETAPPED"; is indeed a true statement. However, we now have clear evidence that he, and his campaign were surveilled by the opposing party, and that from the surveillance data was mined, unmasked, and given to BO/Clinton to make up the 'Russian collusion' nothing-burger, which brings us full circle.
edit; How could I forget Hillary calling half the electorate 'basket of deplorables!'? Talk about your hubris. Man, she's got some solid steel balls on her.
-
ok.
'set up a website' = 'source of disinformation'. I recall now going to visit that site. Most of it was; 'here is where to send money to help expand hope and change.' I could never find any info on the many and varied special accommodations from his past. As for his 'come clean' I didn't care for his attitude about the whole thing. Which of course was followed up with 'the republicans can come along, but they have to sit in the back of the bus'. 'If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor'. And variations on a theme; 'you mean, like with a cloth or something?' in keeping with the contempt for citizens concerns from the progs.
I get it, you don't like the man. Totally fine with that.
Being obtuse is not a winning characteristic. Sort of like your illegitimate topic. No one with common English would use that to discuss the legality of a candidate for public office. However, they would disingenuously use it to obfuscate the issue so that one could conveniently misrepresent the central topic, and then declare victory.
Izzat so? Let us consult the Great Google:
(https://i.imgur.com/aqUUi2h.jpg)
If not legitimate, then ILLegitimate. But maybe Google is also not "with common English". ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
To wit: "Trump was never WIRETAPPED"; is indeed a true statement. However, we now have clear evidence that he, and his campaign were surveilled by the opposing party, and that from the surveillance data was mined, unmasked, and given to BO/Clinton to make up the 'Russian collusion' nothing-burger, which brings us full circle.
So what you're saying is that people made shit up and then asked Trump to defend against it? Kinda' like Obama being born in Kenya, or having applied to Occidental as a foreign student? Let's be consistent, now. Either it's bullshit for both, or it's bullshit for neither.
-
No question he's hiding things. How did he get admitted to Harvard Law with mediocre grades?
He may have used the foreign-born thing to get admission/aide.
I don't consider a 3.7 GPA to be mediocre.
But now that you ask, how did Trump get into the Wharton Business School, why won't he release his transcripts, and what is he hiding?
-
I don't consider a 3.7 GPA to be mediocre.
But now that you ask, how did Trump get into the Wharton Business School, why won't he release his transcripts, and what is he hiding?
So you, and the liberal media, believe Obama had a 3.7 GPA from Columbia, because . . .
Obama said he did, in his book. And nobody in the media challenged him.
Do you think for one second, if Trump made a similar claim, he wouldn't be investigated nine ways to Sunday? And even if it was found out that he did indeed have the GPA he claimed, the media would not have found some excuse to make the claim invalid.
-
Man, you had to carefully parse that one!
I prefer Merriam Webster to google-foo
adjective il·le·git·i·mate \ ˌi-li-ˈji-tə-mət \
Popularity: Top 40% of words
Definition of illegitimate
1 :not recognized as lawful offspring; specifically :born of parents not married to each other
2 :not rightly deduced or inferred :illogical
3 :departing from the regular :erratic
4 a :not sanctioned by law :illegal
b :not authorized by good usage
c of a taxon :published but not in accordance with the rules of the relevant international code
— illegitimately adverb
Take note - if you don't mind that even MW identifies it as related to birth, and that 'illegal' requires a rather twisted taxonomy as an adverb. i.e. one can use it only in context to modify the verb. Where there is no taxonomic equivalence; "The illegitimate son of Dunham was elevated to the office of president, despite it being illegal for him to occupy the post." Cannot be rewritten such that: "The illegal son of Dunham was elevated to the office of president, despite it being illegitimate for him to occupy the post".
But - go with your 'birther' diversion. We can see where it's going. 8)
-
I don't consider a 3.7 GPA to be mediocre.
But now that you ask, how did Trump get into the Wharton Business School, why won't he release his transcripts, and what is he hiding?
For admittance to Hahvahd 3.7GPA would put him at the bottom of the bottom of the 90th percentile. Unless he was - a minority, which would put him in the top 20th percentile. Then, all he would need were some influential big name political sway. Cuz - he sure didn't get there on merit.
Wonder how many better qualified, and better educated white applicants were passed over so half-black BO could attend?
-
Man, you had to carefully parse that one!
I prefer Merriam Webster to google-foo
adjective il·le·git·i·mate \ ˌi-li-ˈji-tə-mət \
Popularity: Top 40% of words
Definition of illegitimate
1 :not recognized as lawful offspring; specifically :born of parents not married to each other
2 :not rightly deduced or inferred :illogical
3 :departing from the regular :erratic
4 a :not sanctioned by law :illegal
b :not authorized by good usage
c of a taxon :published but not in accordance with the rules of the relevant international code
— illegitimately adverb
Take note - if you don't mind that even MW identifies it as related to birth, and that 'illegal' requires a rather twisted taxonomy as an adverb. i.e. one can use it only in context to modify the verb. Where there is no taxonomic equivalence; "The illegitimate son of Dunham was elevated to the office of president, despite it being illegal for him to occupy the post." Cannot be rewritten such that: "The illegal son of Dunham was elevated to the office of president, despite it being illegitimate for him to occupy the post".
But - go with your 'birther' diversion. We can see where it's going. 8)
Truly you have a dizzying intellect (name the movie without Googling?)! No interest in continuing, thanks. Happy to let you continue discussing with someone else Obama's parents and their marital status as of his conception.
-
For admittance to Hahvahd 3.7GPA would put him at the bottom of the bottom of the 90th percentile. Unless he was - a minority, which would put him in the top 20th percentile. Then, all he would need were some influential big name political sway. Cuz - he sure didn't get there on merit.
Wonder how many better qualified, and better educated white applicants were passed over so half-black BO could attend?
I'm not sure how you know that, since 509 reports aren't available prior to 2011. But anyway, here is the current 509 report:
http://hls.harvard.edu/content/uploads/2016/12/2016-Standard-509-Information-Report.pdf
Doesn't look like 3.7 would be at the bottom of the bottom 90th percentile to me, but maybe I just suck at statistics. Then of course there is the fact that it's not currently the year 1988.
-
So you, and the liberal media, believe Obama had a 3.7 GPA from Columbia, because . . .
Obama said he did, in his book. And nobody in the media challenged him.
Do you think for one second, if Trump made a similar claim, he wouldn't be investigated nine ways to Sunday? And even if it was found out that he did indeed have the GPA he claimed, the media would not have found some excuse to make the claim invalid.
If you walked up to me and told me that you weren't born in Kenya and had a college GPA of 3.7, I'd likely believe you. I figure that you know where you were born, and 3.7GPA ain't all that amazing. I gave Obama the same courtesy, in absence of evidence otherwise.
-
If you walked up to me and told me that you weren't born in Kenya and had a college GPA of 3.7, I'd likely believe you. I figure that you know where you were born, and 3.7GPA ain't all that amazing. I gave Obama the same courtesy, in absence of evidence otherwise.
I guess we have something in common then. I give my guy the courtesy of believing him in the absence of contrary evidence too. But of course, he wouldn't be "my guy" if I didn't' trust him at some level. At one point, I actually felt like I could trust Obama. I liked his '04 speech at the DNC. But then, before the '08 election, I read his book. ugh.
-
But then, before the '08 election, I read his book. ugh.
No, you read the book that was ghost written for him. His buddy Bill Ayers, the terrorist, wrote it for him.
-
I'm not sure how you know that, since 509 reports aren't available prior to 2011. But anyway, here is the current 509 report:
http://hls.harvard.edu/content/uploads/2016/12/2016-Standard-509-Information-Report.pdf
Doesn't look like 3.7 would be at the bottom of the bottom 90th percentile to me, but maybe I just suck at statistics. Then of course there is the fact that it's not currently the year 1988.
A. That's only from the law school. Many colleges at Hahvahd.
B. If you can decipher how many students with a 3.76GPA were admitted, I'd like to know. It's not a statistics thang, it's just I don't know how to read their crappy chart. it's one of those chinese puzzle boxes.
-
That is somewhat true that most birthers will never be satisfied. It is not true that they/we begin from a point of assumption that Obama was illegitimate. We developed the FACT of his illegitimacy from the discovery that his mother was pregnant with a philanderer, liar, and adulterous married man and she was unmarried to BOs farther. BTW, the state of Hawii at the time did not recognize multiple wives. I don't know if it supports that now, but really all that matters is that it did not support polygamy at the time she thought she was married. Ergo - illegitimate.
Notwithstanding I don't care about his legal parental status, I had concerns that he was actually born in Kenya when he stated as such on his application for college support. Also when his SS number appears to be from a state where he never was a resident. If nothing else, these facts and a few others led many to conclude he was hiding something, if not the location of his birth.
The application for college support is what gives me pause, although he might have lied on that. But then there is Michelle talking about his "home country of Kenya" and the step grandmother's being taped as saying she was present at the birth which could have been a translation misunderstanding (or the old lady might have been making stuff up as old ladies are wont to do). I listened to the tape myself and it's a mess. But there is a sworn affidavit by the Kenyan Anabaptist minister that he confirmed Obama's birth with the local registrar in Mombasa, Kenya, and that it has since been covered up (apparently by bribes or threats). But of course he could be lying under oath.
I've no idea myself what the truth is. I'm not a "birther" convinced he was born in Kenya nor am I convinced by the questionable Hawaiian birth certificate. Michelle's "home country" comment is very suspicious; normally people do not refer to the country of their father's birth as their home country, only the place where you yourself are born, but I suppose that's not always true.
-
The application for college support is what gives me pause, although he might have lied on that. But then there is Michelle talking about his "home country of Kenya" and the step grandmother's being taped as saying she was present at the birth which could have been a translation misunderstanding (or the old lady might have been making stuff up as old ladies are wont to do). I listened to the tape myself and it's a mess. But there is a sworn affidavit by the Kenyan Anabaptist minister that he confirmed Obama's birth with the local registrar in Mombasa, Kenya, and that it has since been covered up (apparently by bribes or threats). But of course he could be lying under oath.
I've no idea myself what the truth is. I'm not a "birther" convinced he was born in Kenya nor am I convinced by the questionable Hawaiian birth certificate. Michelle's "home country" comment is very suspicious; normally people do not refer to the country of their father's birth as their home country, only the place where you yourself are born, but I suppose that's not always true.
So much about BHO's life is shrouded in secrecy and lies it's hard to tell, and the list is so long we could go on and on for days. Never in ther history of Presidents has this country had a president with such a peculiar, if not mysterious past. There is a lot that BHO and his handlers do not want the public to know about.
After watching 8 years of his constant lies and his obfuscating the truth, needless to say I can't believe anything that comes from him.
-
I never dwelled upon, nor cared where Obama was born. He was elected, and I sucked it up for eight years. What bothered me was his anti American rhetoric, "Fundamental Transformation", his politics, and Marxist/elitist policies. His wife is no better. She is a racist, like he is, and just as anti American. These people know only one thing, IDENTITY POLITICS. Everything is unfair because of race, or other issue to divide us.
http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/10/03/michelle-obama-people-dont-trust-politics-gop-men-white/
-
I never dwelled upon, nor cared where Obama was born. He was elected, and I sucked it up for eight years. What bothered me was his anti American rhetoric, "Fundamental Transformation", his politics, and Marxist/elitist policies. His wife is no better. She is a racist, like he is, and just as anti American. These people know only one thing, IDENTITY POLITICS. Everything is unfair because of race, or other issue to divide us.
http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/10/03/michelle-obama-people-dont-trust-politics-gop-men-white/
And don't forget, this great "community organizer" who wanted income redistribution and talked about all the ways we could uplift the poor never accomplished any of that, it was all lip service. He put more people into poverty than any other president, had more people on welfare than any other president and had more people on food stamps than any other president.
And today what is he doing to promote his community organizing and outreach to the poor? Oh, sorry, he's too busy buying multi million dollar real estate, signing multi million dollar book deals, hanging out on Wall Street giving $peeche$ and hobnobbing with the wealthy progressive elitist at their private resorts and yachts.
He is such a phony as well as his wookie.
-
The application for college support is what gives me pause, although he might have lied on that. But then there is Michelle talking about his "home country of Kenya" and the step grandmother's being taped as saying she was present at the birth which could have been a translation misunderstanding (or the old lady might have been making stuff up as old ladies are wont to do). I listened to the tape myself and it's a mess. But there is a sworn affidavit by the Kenyan Anabaptist minister that he confirmed Obama's birth with the local registrar in Mombasa, Kenya, and that it has since been covered up (apparently by bribes or threats). But of course he could be lying under oath.
There is no application for college support that shows he applied as a foreign student. That was an April Fools fake news story.
I've no idea myself what the truth is. I'm not a "birther" convinced he was born in Kenya nor am I convinced by the questionable Hawaiian birth certificate. Michelle's "home country" comment is very suspicious; normally people do not refer to the country of their father's birth as their home country, only the place where you yourself are born, but I suppose that's not always true.
If you find the birth certificate "questionable", you are a Birther.
-
If you find the birth certificate "questionable", you are a Birther.
I prefer to think of my self as agnostic on the subject. Given the time and resources, he surely could have manufactured a very realistic copy. But had he released it immediately, I would have been much more inclined to believe him. Sort of like Saddam Hussein and his WMDs. We surely gave him enough time to hide the evidence and kill the witnesses.
-
I prefer to think of my self as agnostic on the subject. Given the time and resources, he surely could have manufactured a very realistic copy. But had he released it immediately, I would have been much more inclined to believe him. Sort of like Saddam Hussein and his WMDs. We surely gave him enough time to hide the evidence and kill the witnesses.
I'm sorry that releasing the Hawaii-standard and valid certificate 7 months before the election wasn't soon enough for you. And how did he "manufacture" three Hawaii officials, including the Republican governor, verifying the original certificate in their files?
Seriously. This is conspiracy-theory level stuff, at least as it relates to the birth certificate. And I'm sorry to argue with you, but the dude is no longer president and we still have people talking about it and how it's questionable and might have been faked and oh did you read about how they analyzed the scan and there are too many layers? ::) So your suggestion that him releasing "it" some arbitrary period of time earlier would quell the BS does not appear to match reality.
At some point, you stop feeding the crazies. And sometimes you question whether you should start feeding them in the first place. Obama opted to feed them for a while, and look where that got him.