Obama attorney affirms released birth certificate “not evidence” of identity, birthplace

Preface: See this for a contrary theory.

Multiple experts in graphics software have written and filmed their explanation of the evidence that President Obama’s released birth certificate is an obvious forgery (3-minute video, and here, here, among many).

An interesting update is the New Jersey legal challenge where Mr. Obama’s attorney asserted (and here) that the document is not evidence of either Mr. Obama’s identity or place of birth:

Judge Masin also asked Obama’s attorney whether she would so stipulate. She did so stipulate, agreeing that both the court and the Secretary of State cannot rely on the internet birth certificate as evidence of Obama’s place of birth and that Obama has produced no other evidence to the court regarding his place of birth.

What does this mean?

It means that Mr. Obama’s legal team decided the alleged birth certificate on the White House website cannot be defended from evidence it is a forgery.

Read that twice to let that sink-in.

This is consistent with the quote attributed to Gandhi that criminal oligarchs will ignore and laugh at you as for as long as possible to avoid the fight that factually crushes them.

This also means that exposing a lie this big helps the 99% with intellectual integrity and moral courage to expose the 1%’s crimes in money and war, arrest the obvious criminals, and begin policy for 100% of Earth’s inhabitants.

The documentation of the 1%’s crimes in war and money:

Why Occupy? A government/economics teacher explains

Occupy This: US History exposes the 1%’s crimes then and now 


Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.
  • Zachary Smith

    The pet grooming post had the virtue of being darned cute, but can’t say I see any merit at all with this one. From the VERY long “Barack Obama citizenship conspiracy theories” wiki:

    “Proponents of claims doubting Obama’s eligibility have been dubbed “birthers” by their critics, who have drawn a parallel with 9/11 conspiracy theorists or “truthers”. Leslie Savan of The Nation has compared the so-called “birthers” to other groups as well, including those who deny the moon landing, the Holocaust or global warming; “Teabaggers who refuse to believe they must pay taxes” and creationists who believe the earth is 6,000 years old.”

    Obama has lots and lots of really serious faults, but not being a proper citizen sure isn’t one of them. I’ve seen some thoughtful posts which say the whole issue is ‘dog whistle’ for him not having a white skin, and I’m inclined to agree with those viewpoints.

    • Carl Herman

      Gee, Zachary, let’s apply educational standards of over 300 years won from The Enlightenment: address the facts.

      You provide testimony that in no way addresses the facts.

      See the difference?

      • Zachary Smith

        I expect I’m wasting my time, but here goes:

        http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthers/ineligible.asp

        “Contrary to poor reporting like the Examiner article cited above (cribbed from the Tea Party Tribune), at no time during the hearings did Alexandra Hill or any other lawyer representing Barack Obama “admit that the long-form birth certificate presented by the White House is a total forgery.” Hill merely agreed to a stipulation that the image of Obama’s birth certificate posted on the White House web site would not be used as evidence in the case, as his campaign had never presented it to the state or the court as proof of his eligibility in the first place (because there was no requirement for them to do so)”

        • Carl Herman

          I’ll answer, Zachary. You attempt to distract from the main points:

          1. The evidence presented that the document is forged. You ignore this. We notice.
          2. The stipulation is different from what you cite: it was agreed that the document in question is not evidence of identity or birthplace. You lied about this, Zach, and we notice.
          3. If Mr. Obama’s attorney is at all interested in facts acting in the public benefit, why not hear and answer to the evidence the document is a forgery??? Hey Zach, why is this point somehow not important to you?

          But here’s the main lie of omission I’m so glad you provide opportunity to communicate: Public servants have an Oath to support and defend the United States Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. In this case, the obvious act to take is to support and defend the requirement that a US president qualify for office. When compelling evidence is right in front of you, Zach, and you choose to dismiss the US Constitution, just what are you supporting?

          We all notice that you’re a lying sack of spin to dismiss game-changing evidence, Zach.

          If the document is a forgery, this is a big deal.

          What, are you too stupid to recognize this, Zach???

          I don’t think so.

          I think you hope the public is stupid enough to take your spin over this fact that can, and should, be properly understood.

          I think you’re a propagandist, pal.

          I’m not an expert in software, but I’m smart enough to demand independent factual account of just what this document means. I think the 99% stand here with me.

          Choose who you work for carefully, Zach. If you’ve chosen the criminal 1% who kill in the millions, harm billions, and loot trillions of our dollars, I suggest a “Scrooge conversion” to reclaim your heart.

  • Stark

    I come to this blog for real news, not this birther crap. Washington, please don’t let this clown post here anymore.

    • Carl Herman

      Ok, Stark, you’re on! Engage in some real facts at a professional level: review the evidence from Illustrator and Photoshop analysis of the document in question, and address the facts.

      If you say that evidence is “crap,” then prove it through explanation and documentation of objective and independently verifiable facts.

      Facts are “real news,” pal. When all you bring is denial, ad hominem, and pretending Obama’s own attorney somehow didn’t say what she said, who’s the clown?

    • HSR47

      You see, there’s a difference between saying that Obama isn’t a citizen, and saying that the “evidence” he has put forward to validate his citizenship is a digitally manufactured forgery.

      The latter is what this blog post did; I see none of the former. Essentially, what the author of this post asserts is that Obama, and his cronies, are a bunch of liars and thieves, and he uses the manufactured birth certificate as one such example of the observable trend.

  • Since when does this blog post useless Birther garbage? I come here to hear real news, and I respect this site to be a source of that, not some speaker-box for conspiracy theories.

    This is am embarrassment; there are larger issues to address. The issue of his birth is a racist ploy that is brought up when individuals lack constructive criticism. Let’s discuss the concentration of wealth and corporate power and Obama’s relation to that, this article is a shame.

    • Carl Herman

      Anton and any others choosing to disregard academic and professional standards to address provided facts: either do so or I will work with Washington’s Blog to remove such comments. I am an academic professional. I’ll take a few distracting comments to contrast the difference between distraction and factual engagement, but only a few to show the difference. After that, such comments become a waste of time and attention.

      In this case, there are facts associated with expert testimony of what graphics programs reveal about the White House released document claiming to be Mr. Obama’s birth certificate. There is the fact of Mr. Obama’s attorney accepting without challenge that this document DOES NOT comprise evidence of either identity and birth; a curious legal position when it should be a simple matter to provide an authentic document of one’s birth.

      In contrast, Anton’s comment of “useless,” “garbage,” “speaker-box,” “conspiracy theories,” “embarrassment,” “racist ploy,” “shame,” never approaches any of the facts. Indeed, the characterizations of Anton can be defined to his own comment from rejecting any factual address.

  • Carl Herman

    Readers, please note: with blessings of Washington’s Blog, I’ve removed two further distracting comments that reject addressing the facts addressed in this post.

    My personal opinion from writing several years is that such “attention” is from Operation Mockingbird and Information Operation Roadmap assets (look those up as disclosed government disinformation programs) to discourage people from understanding key areas that reveal the 1%’s vulnerable areas.

  • Anonymous

    I would like to see an independent analysis of the posted birth certificate from a non-partisan expert, someone who is absolutely not aligned with the core birther movement. Someone with absolute bona fides, an unchallenged expert in forgeries. The opinion of the President’s attorneys appears disturbing, as does the lock down on commentary on its meaning from more mainstream sources. As in, no strenuous rebuttal or even passing ridicule of the supposed birthers / conspiracy theorists over their interpretation of the attorney’s position. Someone on either side of the controversy needs to produce a credible validation of the document, and ridiculing challengers is not validation.

    • Carl Herman

      Exactly! Expert witnesses can, and should, be able to walk any interested audience through the facts. The sources I cite have expert credentials, and yes, it is telling that corporate media is ignoring the story or using juvenile insults.

      • Anonymous

        Fine. Then for starters, how about challenging other credible alternative bloggers to weigh in – the folks we all know and love who regularly link your blog. For example:

        Yves Smith / Naked Capitalism
        Barry Ritholtz / The Big Picture
        Max Keiser
        Alex Jones
        Zero Hedge

        I’m sure there are many others…

        What you are promoting by posting the birth certificate fraud story is highly incendiary. I realize that others who find your work otherwise appealing might turn away for fearing of stepping on a third rail. But I understand your challenge – you’ve thrown down the gauntlet so to speak. Other credible people who have linked to your previous reporting need to weigh in or explain their silence. They owe you that for referencing your thinking in the past. This is not a time for holding back.

        I voted for Obama and don’t really care about his citizenship status. But I would be very unhappy to learn that the evidence he presented about his birth has been doctored. That would be a whole other matter.

        • Carl Herman

          Nah, what others do with their self-expression and investment of time and issues is up to them.

          And I’m not aware of really addressing non-incendiary topics; that is, topics that don’t reveal massive crimes (actually, a possible forged document is mild compared to obvious War Crimes and economic fraud in the trillions).

          I’m not an expert on these graphics programs; I really do mean just what I say here: people with expert credentials state that the document is forged, and Mr. Obama’s attorney in a case to allow him on the ballot conceded the White House birth certificate wasn’t evidence of identity or birthplace for Mr. Obama.

          I’ve been on the sidelines from my lack of expertise in software, but the attorney’s choice to not contest the witnesses’ explanation of forgery got my attention.

    • HSR47

      I know a gentleman who owns a printing business; About a week after the document in question went up on the Whitehouse site, I stood directly behind him, and WATCHED as he downloaded the file, and opened it in Adobe Illustrator. IMMEDIATELY and without any sort of in depth trickery he demonstrated that it comes apart in multiple layers EXACTLY as shown in the various videos available online, including the one in the OP.

      In short, the document IS a digitally manufactured forgery.

      The real question it leaves us with is the motivation for creating such an obvious forgery and releasing it so widely. Are they stupid? Are they lazy? Do they think we’re stupid and/or lazy? Are they trying to hide something?

      In short, the only obvious conclusion that can be drawn is that it is yet more evidence of a contempt for the average American Citizen from this administration.

  • jacques saisselin

    Thanks, Carl Herman, you are exactly right – critics can address the facts or else stfu! This is absolutely incredible. Why isn’t OWS picking this up? Is this really just an item for the Tea Party? We can agree with them out bankster bailouts, why not this? Is there some imaginary line that says protest Wall St greed, but not corruption of the Obama administration? As if they could be separated. If the Times ran a story accusing Kim Jung-Un of forging official documents, no one would blink. What exactly is the taboo that can’t be violated associated with this story?
    LONG OVERDUE.

  • Pam

    I too wish to thank you, Carl, and to echo Jacques’ question: Is this really just an item for the Tea Party? Personally, although I deplore most of what the TP do and stand for, I happen to agree with them on this issue. Obama’s refusal to release his birth certificate, draft card, and college transcripts has always been highly suspicious – in fact, inexplicable! And this new information – that Obama’s lawyer stipulated in a court of law that the long-certificate posted on the White House website is not proof of identity or place of birth – is tantamount to admitting forgery. Why are so-called progressives still silent?

    • jacques

      Pam, Pwogs are silent b/c most of them are still stuck in the binary logic of the 2 party paradigm, which is why we are galloping towards a techno fascism unlike anything that has ever existed. Gerald Celente nails them here, about 7:00, onward :
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SR_BMAbYQkY
      Chris Hedges has also properly written their obituary in his Death of the Liberal Class.

      • Carl Herman

        or not “stuck” but intentionally lying by omission and commission. The 2 party paradigm is not logic, but control in a system of obvious War Crimes and looting by the 1% of the 99%. Celente and Hedges are sharp to point to the facts and trends.

    • Carl Herman

      You’re welcome, Pam. The endgame I keep pointing to is for those with arrest authority to use it. This apparent forgery is window dressing to the War Crimes and looting. That’s the big picture Dems need to develop the sight to see.

  • April Gardner

    Mr. Obama’s lawyer told the court/Judge Masin that the birth certificate was “worthless”. What fact is more compelling than Mr. Obama’s lawyer telling the court/Judge Masin that the brth certificate is “worthless”. The decision by Judge Masin that the plaintiff’s did not provide enough evidence to prevent Mr. Obama from being placed on the ballot does not erase the lawyers admonition that the birth certificate is “worthless”. There is an appeal. If anyone wants facts read the transcript ASAP.

  • John

    You don’t have to be an expert in those software packages to see it was faked. A beginner could have made that document. The beginner that did make it could have at least flattened the layers before putting in on the internet.