Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Rock Slinger

Obama's birth certificate

308 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

ravergirl
And, what does this have to do with what we were discussing?

I get that a lot from people..."Oh yeah, well...he's not the pres any more...besides JFK did it too!" So? What difference does it make? He got away with a crime, so what? That makes it OK? Great come back, which by the way, means noting. It still leaves us with...

Clinton was a criminal, and he got away with it, and is still reaping the benefits of his crimes. He should have been removed from office for his behavior alone. And yes, I do expect MORE from the person who is in the Oval Office than from the guy that works at the 7-11 or the 18 year old soldier getting his *** shot at in the desert.

DON'T YOU!!??!!

It is the attitude of what is and isn't acceptable.

JFK doesn't get flack for being a womanizer (unless it is a pat on the back) and I can only assume it is because his chicks were too Hot to Trot and Billy boy's were fat.

Dare I bring up the fact that I feel that a President is usually incapable without a sufficient scandal. I expect more from a President also. (And I would have gotten further with the former Prez, because the guy a 7/11 is SO not givin it up. :P ) Seriously, I really do feel that a President works harder when trying to hide something. Apparantly it is true because Obama is kicking butt and he might be African and not African american.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ravergirl
Do you know? Who OFFICIALLY verifies the birth certificate? I would think it's up to whoever that is to lay any charges.

He is a young guy and we have a CIA. Hospital Records anyone?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AlexG
He is a young guy and we have a CIA. Hospital Records anyone?

Since the birth certificate is not going to be passed around for every voter to see, who is the official verifier?

Apparently, AROCES won't believe it unless he sees it himself. And then he'd deny it was real.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
questionmark
There is a sexual harassment lawsuit filed against him, he was asked to testify under oath.Meaning you have to tell the truth and if you lie you are commiting perjury.

That is what got him in trouble, not because of any sexual activity.

The impeachemnt is for Perjury, NOT BOINKING!

And after lengthy and televised deliberations they said he was not guilty...

But while we are at it... McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone...which is not the US either... and we know that as a fact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BiffSplitkins
He is a young guy and we have a CIA. Hospital Records anyone?

Hospital records are considered medical records and Obama isn't releasing those. Unfortunately these are not FOIL-able records thanks to HIPAA :tu:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
eqgumby
Do you have a source for the CIC being Active Duty Military? The point of the constitution is that the CIC is a civilian.

During the Paula Jones civil case, it was reported that Clinton wanted to invoke the Soldiers and Sailors act, since he was the CiC. That Act was created to protect service members from being sued civilly while serving and being unable to defend themselves. This kept members from being sued, and having judgments levied against them while they were serving overseas or involved in training which kept them from going to civil court in states they no longer lived in, etc.

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1996/news/9...nes/index.shtml

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1996/news/9...ndex.shtml.orig

http://www.usd.edu/~ghuckabe/scra_website_...ionersguide.htm

http://usmilitary.about.com/library/milinf...s/aa111201a.htm

Court Proceedings

A service member who is either the plaintiff or the defendant in a civil lawsuit may request a stay, postponement, of a court proceeding in which he/she is a party. A service member may request a stay at any point in the proceedings. However, courts are reluctant to grant stays at the pretrial phase of a lawsuit, such as discovery, depositions, etc. If a judgment is entered against a service member who is unavailable due to military orders, the service member may be able to have that judgment voided.

In order to apply for these protections the service member must actually be a party to the suit.

The provision only applies to civil lawsuits, suits for paternity, child custody suits, and bankruptcy debtor/creditor meetings.

The provision does not apply to:

administrative hearings

criminal proceedings

child support determination (administrative proceedings)

proceedings in which the service member is merely a material witness to the lawsuit, but not an actual party or

service member has leave available and has made no attempt to use his/her leave to attend the proceedings

A service member should have his/her commander write a letter to the court and the opposing party’s attorney stating that the service member is unable to attend the proceedings. The member should not have an attorney draft such a letter to the court. A letter by an attorney could be considered an appearance by the service member and could subject the service member to the jurisdiction of the court.

Do you have a source that says he didn't try to use the SSCRA, which was designed to protect ACTIVE DUTY MEMBERS from civil suits? I have legal documents. ;)

The point is, you CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS! But he did!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
explorer
Neither you nor anyone else.

He is a Democrat, so he is exempted with the protection of his followers.

The same people accusing Bush of breaking the law. :wacko:

Yet Bush is the most unjustifiably protected moron on the planet. Surely, by comparison, even our modern day memory of Nero has been vaulted a few notches.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AlexG
During the Paula Jones civil case, it was reported that Clinton wanted to invoke the Soldiers and Sailors act, since he was the CiC. That Act was created to protect service members from being sued civilly while serving and being unable to defend themselves. This kept members from being sued, and having judgments levied against them while they were serving overseas or involved in training which kept them from going to civil court in states they no longer lived in, etc.

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1996/news/9...nes/index.shtml

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1996/news/9...ndex.shtml.orig

http://www.usd.edu/~ghuckabe/scra_website_...ionersguide.htm

http://usmilitary.about.com/library/milinf...s/aa111201a.htm

Do you have a source that says he didn't try to use the SSCRA, which was designed to protect ACTIVE DUTY MEMBERS from civil suits? I have legal documents. ;)

The point is, you CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS! But he did!

The constitution says that the CIC is a civilian, and that trumps anything else. The President is not subject to the UCMJ.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AROCES
Yet Bush is the most unjustifiably protected moron on the planet. Surely, by comparison, even our modern day memory of Nero has been vaulted a few notches.

See what I mean? :yes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AlexG
See what I mean? :yes:

You still haven't answered, who is offically responsible for verification of a birth certificate?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
eqgumby
The constitution says that the CIC is a civilian, and that trumps anything else. The President is not subject to the UCMJ.

Then how can he use the SSCRA like he did, in LEGAL DOCUMENTS? How does that work?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AlexG
Then how can he use the SSCRA like he did, in LEGAL DOCUMENTS? How does that work?

The Law is convoluted and not amenable to 'common sense'.

How can Cheney claim he's not part of the executive branch of government?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ravergirl
Hospital records are considered medical records and Obama isn't releasing those. Unfortunately these are not FOIL-able records thanks to HIPAA :tu:

Thats all well and good. Social Security numbers are not Medical Records and you have to have a birth certificate from the good ol' US of A. in order to get one. so whats up with that? Every Job I have ever had has a copy of mine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AROCES
The Law is convoluted and not amenable to 'common sense'.

Meaning , depends if it's a Democrat or a Republican, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AlexG
Meaning , depends if it's a Democrat or a Republican, right?

You still haven't answered the question of who is offically responsible for verifying birth certificates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AlexG
Thats all well and good. Social Security numbers are not Medical Records and you have to have a birth certificate from the good ol' US of A. in order to get one. so whats up with that? Every Job I have ever had has a copy of mine.

So the fact that Obama has a SSN shows what?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
eqgumby
The constitution says that the CIC is a civilian, and that trumps anything else. The President is not subject to the UCMJ.

The President is not himself a member of the armed forces even in his capacity as commander in chief. To preserve the principle of civilian control of the military, it is a custom, adhered to by all candidates beginning with Washington, that a member of the armed forces will resign before running for President or taking the oath of office. Ulysses S. Grant, for example, did so in 1868, and Dwight Eisenhower did so in 1952.

http://www.answers.com/topic/commander-in-chief

He is not, but in Clinton's case, he argued that he was essentially. He USED a law for military members to excuse his own failings. He should have been told he could only have it ONE WAY, not BOTH!

He was a dirt-bag, and 90% of the military during his presidency would have kicked his **** personally given the chance. Because he embarrassed us. We were ashamed by his very existence. Our supreme leader, not even held to the same moral standards that we peons were adhering to every day. He was a liar and a coward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
eqgumby
The Law is convoluted and not amenable to 'common sense'.

How can Cheney claim he's not part of the executive branch of government?

Oh, I see, so...

It's OK that he was a liar and a cheat, because you are dis-satisfied with the current administration? Again, great come-back. :tu:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AlexG

Supreme Leader? Isn't that who Boris Badenov reported to?

linked-image

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AROCES
You still haven't answered the question of who is offically responsible for verifying birth certificates.

First, when you run for president and file for it, it's part of the process. So, there is the already the question mark there.

Second, a lawsuit has been filed because of the first loop hole. So you want an official verification, there you go.

T

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ravergirl
So the fact that Obama has a SSN shows what?

???I didn't say he had one??? I asked if he had one.

I read he was born in Jacarta.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AlexG
First, when you run for president and file for it, it's part of the process. So, there is the already the question mark there.

Second, a lawsuit has been filed because of the first loop hole. So you want an official verification, there you go.

T

That's not an answer. Who do you file your birth certificate with, and why isn't that offical the one who is protesting the supposed lack of one?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AlexG
???I didn't say he had one??? I asked if he had one.

Since he's been working in Chicago his adult life, it's a pretty fair bet he has a SSN.

I read he was born in Jacarta.

You read it where?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ravergirl

in an article.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AlexG
in an article.

Uh huh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.