Why Trump Must Be Marginalized for Birth Certificate Inquiry
By Jerry A. Kane
It looks like the vicious attacks on the Donald by White House aides and leftist columnists has prodded at least one gatekeeper publication to ask why the Ruler’s minions are out attacking him with such force and vengeance for asking to see the Ruler’s original birth certificate.
When Investor’s Business Daily columnist Douglas Mackinnon asked a high-level Democrat in Washington, DC, why there was an all-out assault on Trump, he was told that the Donald had “touched the third rail of Obama’s mysterious birth certificate and the White House and those who advocate for the president in the media are petrified that Trump’s very name, stature and ability to generate headlines is going to give the subject a whole new life. Therefore, they have “to belittle him and marginalize him as quickly as possible before more voters start to pay attention and ask questions.”
“As Trump elevates the platform holding these questions, it’s fairly obvious why at least politically, the White House and its unethical defenders in the mainstream media would try to eviscerate him. Of course, by doing so, they themselves are now bringing renewed attention to the subject of Barack Obama’s birthplace, his missing-in-action original birth certificate and the qualifications to be president as spelled out in our Constitution.”—Douglas Mackinnon
Trump knows that he could end up king or kingmaker if he succeeds in exposing the biggest fraud ever perpetuated on the people of the United States. And what is the Donald if he’s not thinking big and kicking ass to make the big deal?
Federal Election Commission records show that the Ruler has paid the Perkins Coie law firm $2.3 million since he first announced his campaign for presidency in January 2007 to thwart lawsuits challenging his eligibility to be president. DC lawyer Robert Bauer of Perkins Coie has been fighting in the courts to keep the Ruler from having to produce his original birth certificate, which would verify his eligibility.
Besides his original birth certificate, the Ruler has concealed his passport, medical records, baptism records, adoption records, Illinois State Bar Association records, client list from his private practice, files from his tenure as an Illinois state senator, kindergarten records, Punahou School records, Occidental College records, Columbia University records, Columbia thesis, Harvard Law School records, Harvard Law Review articles, and University of Chicago scholarly articles.
“If only we had some honest and unbiased investigative reporters who could actually look into the subject and put it to rest once and for all. I guess that’s just too much to ask.”—Douglas Mackinnon
The Ruler’s stonewalling brings to mind the scandal surrounding the 18-and-a-half missing minutes from the conversation between President Richard Nixon and chief of staff H.R. Haldeman following the 1972 break-in at the Democratic National Committee’s offices at the Watergate Hotel in Washington, DC.
I.M. Kane
For more on the story, see Why Are They So Bothered By The Donald?
In the 9:48 video below, the Donald holds CNN’s Candy Crowley at bay while he explains the importance of the birth certificate issue.
Inquiring minds want to know why Ann Coulter and the gatekeepers at the American Spectator, National Review, and Human Events refuse to believe that the Ruler has a duty to prove his eligibility knowing that his hat is in the ring again for 2012 and that the birth certificate issue is creating even greater divides among the people and damaging the nation’s welfare?
I’m inquisitive … I’m waiting …
I.M. Kane
Donald Trump, The Attention Whore, Pushes On Obama’s Birth Certificate (CNN) 9:48 Video
Here are the facts:
Here is a photocopy of Obama’s official birth certificate. Notice the seal on the back. Yes, it is on Factcheck’s site, but the idea that they could forge such a detailed document and the seal is laughable.
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html
Here is confirmation that it is the official and only birth certificate that Hawaii issues
(http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204619004574320190095246658.html)
Here is the first of the confirmations by the officials in Hawaii.
http://www.kitv.com/r/17860890/detail.html
Notice where it says that there is an original birth certificate filed. Well, in 1961 foreign birth certificates, even those from other states, could not be filed in Hawaii. So the birth certificate in Obama’s files must be a Hawaii birth certificate.
Here is the second of the confirmations by the officials in Hawaii.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2009-07-27-obama-hawaii_N.htm
Notice where it says that the document in the files VERIFIES that Obama was born in Hawaii. So, not only is there an official Hawaiian birth certificate in the files, but it says right on it that Obama was born in Hawaii. Hawaii has never allowed the Department of Health to issue a birth document of any kind that says on it that anyone was born in Hawaii unless there was proof that the child was born in Hawaii, and that is what the officials in Hawaii have confirmed twice.
And here is the confirmation by the former governor of Hawaii, Linda Lingle, a Republican, that says that Obama was born in Hawaii, in Kapiolani Hospital
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/right-now/2010/05/hawaii_gov_lingle_answers_the.html
And here is the statement of a witness who recalls being told of Obama’s birth in Hawaii, in Kapiolani Hospital, in 1961:
http://www.buffalonews.com/incoming/article137495.ece
Here again we have a troll talking out his ass, passing flatulence for fact. The actual facts are that the Ruler put out a Certification, and not a Certificate of Live Birth. Even though both documents are accepted as “birth certificates” in Hawaii, only the Certificate of Live Birth, which the Ruler has not produced, is considered an “original birth certificate.” (See the Department of Hawaii Homelands website at http://hawaii.gov/dhhl/applicants/appforms/applyhhl.)
According to Hawaii’s Department of Health website at http://hawaii.gov/health/vital-records/vital-records/newbirthcert.html, “a person born in a foreign country who has been legally adopted in the State of Hawaii” will be issued an amended birth certificate “upon receipt of a certified copy of the adoption decree or the certificate of adoption, and payment of fees.”
Even though the Certificate of Live Birth, the one the Ruler has not produced, is preferred for its greater detail, Hawaii’s Department of Health (DOH) no longer issues them. DOH issues a “Certification of Live Birth (COLB),” the one the Ruler has produced, when requests are made for a copy of a birth certificate. (See the Department of Hawaii Homelands website at http://hawaii.gov/dhhl/applicants/appforms/applyhhl.)
Trump has confused the issue by saying that the Ruler has produced the Certificate of Live Birth when in fact he produced the Certification of Live Birth.
The case for the Ruler’s Hawaiian birth is built around his Certification of Live Birth, the 1961 birth notices in two Honolulu newspapers, and the testimony of the state’s DOH Director, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, who said that she’s seen the Ruler’s Certificate of Live Birth on file at DOH.
When questions about the Ruler’s eligibility began to surface in June 2008, the Ruler’s campaign sent out his Certification of Live Birth to the Los Angeles Times, several other newspapers, and the leftist Daily Kos website.
According to the Western Center for Journalism report “The Mystery of Barack Obama Continues” (found at http://www.westernjournalism.com/exclusive-investigative-reports/the-mystery-of-barack-obama-continues/) there were at least three ways to obtain a COLB in 1961:
• any person “having knowledge of the birth” could submit a form by mail and obtain a COLB in place of a standard birth certificate;
• a parent or knowledgeable adult could file in person for a “delayed certificate” up to a year after the birth and receive a COLB;
• or children for whom no delayed certificate was requested within a year of birth could later obtain a document called a Certificate of Hawaiian Birth.
Hawaii routinely issues COLBs to families of children born in other countries; therefore, the Ruler’s COLB does not prove his birth place. Only a genuine, long-form, hospital-generated 1961 Certificate of Live Birth proves whether or not the Ruler was born in Hawaii.
Regarding the birth notices in the two Hawaiian newspapers, keep in mind the Ruler has eight half-brothers and sisters by four other marriages or relationships between his parents. In addition, the website of the Honolulu Star-Bulletin, one of the two newspapers, says that the birth announcements it prints comes from DOH, which includes the COLBs issued to foreigners.
DOH creates a Certificate of Live Birth based on information provided by a hospital or medical professional within a few days following the child’s birth. DOH creates COLBs based on information taken from the Certificate of Live Birth. However, when no hospital is involved in the birth and no standard birth certificate is generated, DOH will create a COLB to serve as the principal birth document based on information provided by family members or adults who have knowledge of the birth.
As for the Director who claims she’s seen the Ruler’s Certificate of Live Birth on file at DOH, it’s not a matter of whether or not someone’s seen the Ruler’s actual long-form document, it’s a matter of the detailed information and signatures on the document. Millions of dollars in legal fees have been spent to suppress the information surrounding the Ruler’s certificate, and it’s a matter of wanting to know what it is he’s hiding.
Because of the disinformation and propaganda put out by trolls like rrichardson, most Americans failed to realize how little they knew about the Ruler who was elected in 2008; and people like me are attempting to provide them with the truth about the Ruler’s birth certificate so that they can make an informed decision when they vote in 2012.
I.M. Kane
For more on the Ruler’s birth certificate, see the Important Difference Between a Certificate – vs. Certification – of Live Birth at http://yossigestetner.com/2011/04/12/important-difference-between-a-certificate-vs-certification-of-live-birth/ and the PDF Report: Obama Eligibility Primer at http://www.wnd.com/files/pdf/Obama_Eligibility_Primer_FORWARD6.pdf .
Obama has shown the official birth certificate of Hawaii, the only one that Hawaii issues or sends out anymore. Hawaii has not sent ANYONE copies of their long-form birth certificate since the Certification of Live Birth became the official birth certificate in 2001. Not even people born before 2001 can get their long-form birth certificates.
Re the alleged expenditure. Since it only costs about $300 bucks to file a motion to get a case thrown out, and since that is what Obama did successfully in every case, the legal expenditure figure is obviously not just for birth certificate cases. Law firms do have to spend time, hence money, checking other things, like whether contracts for election offices were in order.
The KEY point is that there was NEVER a lawsuit against Obama JUST for his birth certificate. If there were, and if he had fought it, then you could say that he was fighting to hide his birth certificate. The reason that birthers did not file a lawsuit against Obama just for his birth certificate was precisely this reason: If they did, and Obama delivered to the court the physical copy of the Certification of Live Birth, which he has, and the court accepted it (which is likely because it is the official birth certificate), then the birthers would be out of business.
Obama has shown the official birth certificate of Hawaii, the only one that Hawaii issues, the one that thousands of people use in Hawaii to prove their birth in the USA every year. Three Republican officials in Hawaii have repeatedly confirmed the facts on it. There were notices of Obama’s birth in the Hawaii newspapers, and they were not ads (Hawaii newspapers did not take birth notice ads in those days). They were only notices from the Hawaii government, which did not send them out for births outside of Hawaii, and which could not be fooled by claims of birth at home — because in such cases it insisted on witness statements.
You are a lying troll. Anyone who examines the issue with an open mind will find that out. I don’t have the time to address all of your lies, but I hope someone who has studied the issue extensively will expose each one that you’ve written in your comment.
I.M. Kane