Trump: I Have Investigators in Hawaii...'They Cannot Believe What They're Finding'

[paperview]

And just to top it off, this is how Kenyans reported their race in their own country in the 1960s:

Race.- Write European, Arab, Somali, or African, etc. Asians must write Indian or Pakistan.
​

Proof: Instructions for the 1962 Population Census of Kenya

Now, do you really think it's so wild a Kenyan would have identified himself as African?

Are you saying there were no whites in Kenya in the 60's? Or blacks in Eroupe wo also lived in Kenya?

What the fuck?

Are you really this dense (stupid question, I know...)

I'm with del: do you need post it notes to remember to breathe?

 

[idb]

And just to top it off, this is how Kenyans reported their race in their own country in the 1960s:

Race.- Write European, Arab, Somali, or African, etc. Asians must write Indian or Pakistan.
​

Proof: Instructions for the 1962 Population Census of Kenya

Now, do you really think it's so wild a Kenyan would have identified himself as African?

Are you saying there were no whites in Kenya in the 60's? Or blacks in Eroupe wo also lived in Kenya?

If you read the quote from paperview it says "Write European, Arab, Somali, or African etc..." suggesting that you can choose whatever you want - presumably you could write 'White Kenyan' or 'Black European' or whatever but 'African' is clearly also acceptable.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Free or slave as a racial identifier

 

[bigrebnc1775]

And just to top it off, this is how Kenyans reported their race in their own country in the 1960s:

Race.- Write European, Arab, Somali, or African, etc. Asians must write Indian or Pakistan.
​

Proof: Instructions for the 1962 Population Census of Kenya

Now, do you really think it's so wild a Kenyan would have identified himself as African?

Are you saying there were no whites in Kenya in the 60's? Or blacks in Eroupe wo also lived in Kenya?

What the fuck?

Are you really this dense (stupid question, I know...)

I'm with del: do you need post it notes to remember to breathe?

Can't answer?

 

[idb]

Free or slave as a racial identifier

They aren't races!

 

[bigrebnc1775]

And just to top it off, this is how Kenyans reported their race in their own country in the 1960s:

Race.- Write European, Arab, Somali, or African, etc. Asians must write Indian or Pakistan.
​

Proof: Instructions for the 1962 Population Census of Kenya

Now, do you really think it's so wild a Kenyan would have identified himself as African?

Are you saying there were no whites in Kenya in the 60's? Or blacks in Eroupe wo also lived in Kenya?

If you read the quote from paperview it says "Write European, Arab, Somali, or African etc..." suggesting that you can choose whatever you want - presumably you could write 'White Kenyan' or 'Black European' or whatever but 'African' is clearly also acceptable.

Acceptable in Kenya, fine but not in America in the 60's. The paper work would never make it past the application steps. It would never get past the government employee.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Free or slave as a racial identifier

They aren't races!

It was used in the 1860 census.

 

[idb]

Are you saying there were no whites in Kenya in the 60's? Or blacks in Eroupe wo also lived in Kenya?

If you read the quote from paperview it says "Write European, Arab, Somali, or African etc..." suggesting that you can choose whatever you want - presumably you could write 'White Kenyan' or 'Black European' or whatever but 'African' is clearly also acceptable.

Acceptable in Kenya, fine but not in America in the 60's. The paper work would never make it past the application steps. It would never get past the government employee.

I hope they were sacked for such a heinous display of incompetence then!

 

[bigrebnc1775]

If you read the quote from paperview it says "Write European, Arab, Somali, or African etc..." suggesting that you can choose whatever you want - presumably you could write 'White Kenyan' or 'Black European' or whatever but 'African' is clearly also acceptable.

Acceptable in Kenya, fine but not in America in the 60's. The paper work would never make it past the application steps. It would never get past the government employee.

I hope they were sacked for such a heinous display of incompetence then!

It was the 60's. Can't change it now.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Acceptable in Kenya, fine but not in America in the 60's. The paper work would never make it past the application steps. It would never get past the government employee.

Some people never learn to never say never, especially when it comes to government employees.

Some people never learn.





>>>>

 

[idb]

Free or slave as a racial identifier

They aren't races!

It was used in the 1860 census.

Hmmm...I can't see any signatures, no embossing and the paper looks different to other documents I've seen from the period.
It's clearly fake.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Free or slave as a racial identifier

So since you are now citing the Census, is it fair to assume you are now again talking about the federal government (you know the ones that do the Census) and we are no longer talking about a local hospital and an African filling out a blank form while his wife is in labor?


Or do you just get to dance around and switch up as you are backed into a corner?


>>>>

 

[mudwhistle]

I'm not sure it makes a difference to his citizenship, since wherever he was born, his mother was still a US citizen at the time. I think it might spark some changes in how states go about letting someone put their name on the ballot. At the moment, my understanding is that they simply take the person's word for it that they're eligible, unless and until someone with standing challenges it.

I'm not entirely sure why members of the voting population themselves aren't seen as having standing. If anyone has a right to protest a legally-unqualified candidate, wouldn't you think it would be the voters?

His citizenship is not the issue. The issue would be that his presidency would then be illegal. Therefore, every law, every order, every piece of paper signed by Obama would be invalid. If he obtained the office dishonestly, he would not only have to leave office, but everything he's done over the past two years would have to be scrapped. You do see that, right?

What the voters think is immaterial. If he was ineligible to run, then everything he's done is also.

How would his Presidency be illegal if his citizenship isn't an issue?

I agree that, if he were ineligible to be President, then he would certainly have to leave office immediately. I don't even know how the government would go about untangling that mess, since there's no precedent for it. I doubt they would be willing to simply void everything he did the entire time, but I can see where if they didn't, it would be a feeding frenzy of lawsuits and court challenges.

I think what the voters think is VERY material. Right now, apparently, they aren't viewed by the courts as having standing to challenge a candidate's eligibility to run for office; only his opponents, apparently, are viewed as having standing. That seems ridiculous to me, since any voter in the US would qualify as an "involved party" in MY book.

Personally I think you should have to undergo a full Top Secret Clearance investigation going back to your childhood (and the results released to the public) to see if you have any ties to enemies of the state. Also ties with groups that want to overthrow the government should be considered and used as a disqualification. The constitution is too vague and this loop-hole allows placing the power of the White House in the hands of a plant funded by foreign groups. The havoc he or she could and has caused is unbelievable.

His birth certificate is a minor problem because I believe both of his parents were U.S. citizens. However there seems to be a problem with who his real father is. I believe this possibility is a source of embarrassment for him and is why he's hiding his original certificate. If he had a different father then the one listed on his phony replacement cert. I don't think that it would disqualify him, it would just be a minor issue that his supporters would simply rally behind.

Take for example that his real father is a Communist with a penchant for pole-smoking, who got high one night and inadvertently had a one-night-stand with his mother after a communist rally, I seriously doubt that Democrat voters would reject him. It's not his fault who his father was.

The fact that he's lying about it shows a weakness of character, but that has already been firmly established anyway through his conduct while in office. Democrat voters don't seem to shun candidates with weak character traits, they embrace them.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

They aren't races!

It was used in the 1860 census.

Hmmm...I can't see any signatures, no embossing and the paper looks different to other documents I've seen from the period.
It's clearly fake.

It's not a fake.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Free or slave as a racial identifier

So since you are now citing the Census, is it fair to assume you are now again talking about the federal government (you know the ones that do the Census) and we are no longer talking about a local hospital and an African filling out a blank form while his wife is in labor?


Or do you just get to dance around and switch up as you are backed into a corner?


>>>>

Nope what I talking about is the terms of the times and using the Census as an example. Up until 1865 Blacks were call Freemen slaves negros or black.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

His citizenship is not the issue. The issue would be that his presidency would then be illegal. Therefore, every law, every order, every piece of paper signed by Obama would be invalid. If he obtained the office dishonestly, he would not only have to leave office, but everything he's done over the past two years would have to be scrapped. You do see that, right?

What the voters think is immaterial. If he was ineligible to run, then everything he's done is also.

How would his Presidency be illegal if his citizenship isn't an issue?

I agree that, if he were ineligible to be President, then he would certainly have to leave office immediately. I don't even know how the government would go about untangling that mess, since there's no precedent for it. I doubt they would be willing to simply void everything he did the entire time, but I can see where if they didn't, it would be a feeding frenzy of lawsuits and court challenges.

I think what the voters think is VERY material. Right now, apparently, they aren't viewed by the courts as having standing to challenge a candidate's eligibility to run for office; only his opponents, apparently, are viewed as having standing. That seems ridiculous to me, since any voter in the US would qualify as an "involved party" in MY book.

Personally I think you should have to undergo a full Top Secret Clearance investigation going back to your childhood (and the results released to the public) to see if you have any ties to enemies of the state. Also ties with groups that want to overthrow the government should be considered and used as a disqualification. The constitution is too vague and this loop-hole allows placing the power of the White House in the hands of a plant funded by foreign groups. The havoc he or she could and has caused is unbelievable.

His birth certificate is a minor problem because I believe both of his parents were U.S. citizens. However there seems to be a problem with who his real father is. I believe this possibility is a source of embarrassment for him and is why he's hiding his original certificate. If he had a different father then the one listed on his phony replacement cert. I don't think that it would disqualify him, it would just be a minor issue that his supporters would simply rally behind.

Take for example that his real father is a Communist with a penchant for pole-smoking, who got high one night and inadvertently had a one-night-stand with his mother after a communist rally, I seriously doubt that Democrat voters would reject him. It's not his fault who his father was.

The fact that he's lying about it shows a weakness of character, but that has already been firmly established anyway through his conduct while in office. Democrat voters don't seem to shun candidates with weak character traits, they embrace them.

Doesn't obama have a top secert clearance?

 

[idb]

His citizenship is not the issue. The issue would be that his presidency would then be illegal. Therefore, every law, every order, every piece of paper signed by Obama would be invalid. If he obtained the office dishonestly, he would not only have to leave office, but everything he's done over the past two years would have to be scrapped. You do see that, right?

What the voters think is immaterial. If he was ineligible to run, then everything he's done is also.

How would his Presidency be illegal if his citizenship isn't an issue?

I agree that, if he were ineligible to be President, then he would certainly have to leave office immediately. I don't even know how the government would go about untangling that mess, since there's no precedent for it. I doubt they would be willing to simply void everything he did the entire time, but I can see where if they didn't, it would be a feeding frenzy of lawsuits and court challenges.

I think what the voters think is VERY material. Right now, apparently, they aren't viewed by the courts as having standing to challenge a candidate's eligibility to run for office; only his opponents, apparently, are viewed as having standing. That seems ridiculous to me, since any voter in the US would qualify as an "involved party" in MY book.

Personally I think you should have to undergo a full Top Secret Clearance investigation going back to your childhood (and the results released to the public) to see if you have any ties to enemies of the state. Also ties with groups that want to overthrow the government should be considered and used as a disqualification. The constitution is too vague and this loop-hole allows placing the power of the White House in the hands of a plant funded by foreign groups. The havoc he or she could and has caused is unbelievable.

His birth certificate is a minor problem because I believe both of his parents were U.S. citizens. However there seems to be a problem with who his real father is. I believe this possibility is a source of embarrassment for him and is why he's hiding his original certificate. If he had a different father then the one listed on his phony replacement cert. I don't think that it would disqualify him, it would just be a minor issue that his supporters would simply rally behind.

Take for example that his real father is a Communist with a penchant for pole-smoking, who got high one night and inadvertently had a one-night-stand with his mother after a communist rally, I seriously doubt that Democrat voters would reject him. It's not his fault who his father was.

The fact that he's lying about it shows a weakness of character, but that has already been firmly established anyway through his conduct while in office. Democrat voters don't seem to shun candidates with weak character traits, they embrace them.

Perhaps this is why our government is so screwed up. Democrats tend to support candidates with flaws. Discovering that they have flaws only makes them support them even more.

Or...maybe he's just playing the 'Rope-a-dope' tactic, taking the punches and letting his opponents work themselves up into a frothy frenzy over his birth certificate and then suddenly, late into the next presidential campaign, he remembers that he has his long form certificate, a 16mm movie of his birth, a souvenir baby cup with "Congratulations Mr & Mrs Obama on the birth of your lovely son, Barack, in this very hospital - Kapi'olani Medical Centre, on August 4 1961" engraved on it, his wrist tag and a photograph of the whole delivery team posing with him and his parents with a television in the background with Walter Cronkite reporting on the Bay of Pigs invasion........in his sock drawer.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

How would his Presidency be illegal if his citizenship isn't an issue?

I agree that, if he were ineligible to be President, then he would certainly have to leave office immediately. I don't even know how the government would go about untangling that mess, since there's no precedent for it. I doubt they would be willing to simply void everything he did the entire time, but I can see where if they didn't, it would be a feeding frenzy of lawsuits and court challenges.

I think what the voters think is VERY material. Right now, apparently, they aren't viewed by the courts as having standing to challenge a candidate's eligibility to run for office; only his opponents, apparently, are viewed as having standing. That seems ridiculous to me, since any voter in the US would qualify as an "involved party" in MY book.

Personally I think you should have to undergo a full Top Secret Clearance investigation going back to your childhood (and the results released to the public) to see if you have any ties to enemies of the state. Also ties with groups that want to overthrow the government should be considered and used as a disqualification. The constitution is too vague and this loop-hole allows placing the power of the White House in the hands of a plant funded by foreign groups. The havoc he or she could and has caused is unbelievable.

His birth certificate is a minor problem because I believe both of his parents were U.S. citizens. However there seems to be a problem with who his real father is. I believe this possibility is a source of embarrassment for him and is why he's hiding his original certificate. If he had a different father then the one listed on his phony replacement cert. I don't think that it would disqualify him, it would just be a minor issue that his supporters would simply rally behind.

Take for example that his real father is a Communist with a penchant for pole-smoking, who got high one night and inadvertently had a one-night-stand with his mother after a communist rally, I seriously doubt that Democrat voters would reject him. It's not his fault who his father was.

The fact that he's lying about it shows a weakness of character, but that has already been firmly established anyway through his conduct while in office. Democrat voters don't seem to shun candidates with weak character traits, they embrace them.

Perhaps this is why our government is so screwed up. Democrats tend to support candidates with flaws. Discovering that they have flaws only makes them support them even more.

Or...maybe he's just playing the 'Rope-a-dope' tactic, taking the punches and letting his opponents work themselves up into a frothy frenzy over his birth certificate and then suddenly, late into the next presidential campaign, he remembers that he has his long form certificate, a 16mm movie of his birth, a souvenir baby cup with "Congratulations Mr & Mrs Obama on the birth of your lovely son, Barack, in this very hospital - Kapi'olani Medical Centre, on August 4 1961" engraved on it, his wrist tag and a photograph of the whole delivery team posing with him and his parents with a television in the background with Walter Cronkite reporting on the Bay of Pigs invasion........in his sock drawer.

And that would be great, but why would any sane person do that?

 

[idb]

Personally I think you should have to undergo a full Top Secret Clearance investigation going back to your childhood (and the results released to the public) to see if you have any ties to enemies of the state. Also ties with groups that want to overthrow the government should be considered and used as a disqualification. The constitution is too vague and this loop-hole allows placing the power of the White House in the hands of a plant funded by foreign groups. The havoc he or she could and has caused is unbelievable.

His birth certificate is a minor problem because I believe both of his parents were U.S. citizens. However there seems to be a problem with who his real father is. I believe this possibility is a source of embarrassment for him and is why he's hiding his original certificate. If he had a different father then the one listed on his phony replacement cert. I don't think that it would disqualify him, it would just be a minor issue that his supporters would simply rally behind.

Take for example that his real father is a Communist with a penchant for pole-smoking, who got high one night and inadvertently had a one-night-stand with his mother after a communist rally, I seriously doubt that Democrat voters would reject him. It's not his fault who his father was.

The fact that he's lying about it shows a weakness of character, but that has already been firmly established anyway through his conduct while in office. Democrat voters don't seem to shun candidates with weak character traits, they embrace them.

Perhaps this is why our government is so screwed up. Democrats tend to support candidates with flaws. Discovering that they have flaws only makes them support them even more.

Or...maybe he's just playing the 'Rope-a-dope' tactic, taking the punches and letting his opponents work themselves up into a frothy frenzy over his birth certificate and then suddenly, late into the next presidential campaign, he remembers that he has his long form certificate, a 16mm movie of his birth, a souvenir baby cup with "Congratulations Mr & Mrs Obama on the birth of your lovely son, Barack, in this very hospital - Kapi'olani Medical Centre, on August 4 1961" engraved on it, his wrist tag and a photograph of the whole delivery team posing with him and his parents with a television in the background with Walter Cronkite reporting on the Bay of Pigs invasion........in his sock drawer.

And that would be great, but why would any sane person do that?

To destroy his opponents' credibility.
They'd be left standing there with goggle eyes and their mouths flapping open and shut like dying fish.
Ooooh he's a smart fella your president.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Or...maybe he's just playing the 'Rope-a-dope' tactic, taking the punches and letting his opponents work themselves up into a frothy frenzy over his birth certificate and then suddenly, late into the next presidential campaign, he remembers that he has his long form certificate, a 16mm movie of his birth, a souvenir baby cup with "Congratulations Mr & Mrs Obama on the birth of your lovely son, Barack, in this very hospital - Kapi'olani Medical Centre, on August 4 1961" engraved on it, his wrist tag and a photograph of the whole delivery team posing with him and his parents with a television in the background with Walter Cronkite reporting on the Bay of Pigs invasion........in his sock drawer.

And that would be great, but why would any sane person do that?

To destroy his opponents' credibility.
They'd be left standing there with goggle eyes and their mouths flapping open and shut like dying fish.
Ooooh he's a smart fella your president.

Maybe so, I don't think anyone will disagree that is not a smart cold calculating person but.... oh well thats American poltics for you.