An internet image of an alleged certificate isn't valid in a court as an official record, unless the proceeding is in regard to the internet image. This is not the case, the matter at hand is the orgiginal document itself. The rest is all red herrings and confusion. Secondly the image was not presented to the court by Obama or attorneys acting on his behalf. It was published on Daily KOS and on Obama's website, however there were little controls on who published what on that site. Obama's campaign website was run with fewer controls than wikipedia.
People may claim all that pleases them and state that images from websites are official documents, however I would like them to walk in to any court in the land and supply an internet image of any document and request it be added to the record. Thirdly before a document can be added to a court record it faces a challenges which will require an expert to testify that the document is legitimate. All the internet nonsense and flap by people reluctant to require proof or statements that proof has been produced or accepted by the courts is simply rubbish.
There are so many possible explanations regarding what a real certificate may reveal or if in fact a real certificate even exists. However, one thing is grossly remarkable of all the varied arguments and that is that no certificate was ever presented to a court by Obama, his counsel or any legal representative.
The fact that the submission of such a document or opening of the files in Hawaii is all that is necessary to resolve the issue, it defies common reasoning not to have done so, unless of course a problem does exist.
No manner of , for the lack of a better word, bullshit can change the fact that an official certificate has not yet been presented to a court.
Here is a simple task for anyone. Copy a image of your birth certificate and attempt to get a drivers license with it. The demeaning of what they term "birthers" is not sufficient. Calling people crazy and subjecting them to ridicule for even requesting such documents is perplexing when everyone in the nation is subject to such tasks for all manner of things in their personal and professional lives.
The issue will not go away and eventually the record will be ordered by subpoena by a court of jurisdiction or government body and the mystery behind this unnecessary debacle will be revealed.
People who suggest it isn't necessary to provide such documentation are simply useful idiots to whomever wishes to hide something. Privacy? ;^) Oh, please, who else has such privacy that they never have to reveal records the common man must reveal on a routine basis? How is it, I wonder that such an argument hasn't been settled by the mere submission of the truth?
The matter is very simple , although it has been confused by many a convoluted argument. Simple submission of the document. It is that simple. There simply is no legitimate argument for not supplying the document or opening the record to put this matter to bed. |
