Factcheck.org = completely worthless

August 25, 2009

Birth certificate posts
Fight the Smears = completely worthless
Factcheck.org = directly related to barry

Red/blue make clear Factcheck’s intentional deception — that a CertificaTION of Live Birth is the same as a birth certifiCATE.

June 16, 2008 version of Factcheck.org‘s “fact checking” of barry’s “birth certificate” from BROOKS JACKSON:

Q: Has Obama’s birth certificate been disclosed? Is Barack Obama a “natural-born citizen”? It is hard to believe he could get this far in the electoral process and not have a sufficient answer to this question, I admit, but has his birth certificate been disclosed?

JACKSON: Yes.

Lie. barry released an unvouched for CertificaTION of Live Birth, which is not a birth certificate (aka CertifiCATE of Birth).

Factcheck is vouching for a “document” they cannot even name properly. Therefore, by definition, nothing that follows can be considered true.

JACKSON: His campaign made a copy public after speculation by conservative bloggers that he might not be a “natural-born citizen.”

Lie. barry released an unvouched for CertificaTION of Live Birth, which is not a birth certificate.

And barry did not “make it public”. He gave it to Factcheck, which has a direct link to barry, and is in no way impartial.

JACKSON: We asked for and received a copy from the Obama campaign.

So what did Factcheck receive – a copy of the birth certificate?

If so, they lied about their fact check by presenting the CertificaTION of Live Birth.

And if they were given a copy of the CertificaTION of Live Birth – then they lied about it being the birth certificate.

A lie either way.

JACKSON: It is too large to display full size on this page, but you may click on this link to see a copy of the document just as we received it. It indicates Obama was born at 7:24 p.m. Aug. 4, 1961, in Honolulu. That should be no surprise, as it merely documents what Obama and his biographers have always said. But the document should put to rest  groundless speculation raised on some conservative Web sites that Obama might not have been born in the U.S. and therefore might not qualify under the Constitution as a “natural-born citizen” to be president.

It is not a “document” – it is a digital image. And if the “document” had been a copy of barry’s actual birth certificate – then yes it should have put to rest. But Factcheck and others misrepresented from the start that it was a birth certificate when it is not – nor will ever be.

It is a CertifiCATION of Live Birth that has never been connected to barry’s original birth certificate “original vital recordS” Dr Fukino vouched for.

JACKSON: The speculation was not based on any evidence. Bloggers raised questions based on the absence of evidence, specifically the lack of a publicly available copy of a birth certificate and the supposed “secrecy” surrounding it. For example, the conservative World Net Daily posted a June 10 article with the headline, “Is Obama’s candidacy constitutional?; Secrecy over birth certificate, demand for ‘natural-born’ citizenship cited.” Soon after, some of our readers began asking us the same thing.

barry has still NOT made publicly available a copy of his birth certificate – just digital images of an unvouched for CertifiCATION of Live Birth. And the continued “secrecy” is made even more conspicuous by his continued fight to prevent it from being released.

JACKSON: The “secrecy” ended when Tommy Vietor at the Obama campaign sent a message to us and other reporters saying, ‘I know there have been some rumors spreading about Obama’s citizenship, so I wanted to make sure you all had a copy of his birth certificate.’

A digital image was attached.

What other reporters received a “copy” of his birth certificate? He should have specifically named them. The only other place I am aware of that received a copy was Politifact who got it from “their friends” at Factcheck.

TOMMY VIETER, from barry’s campaign, released a digital image of an unvouched for CertifiCATION of Live Birth.

J ACKSON: Hawaii state law forbids the release of birth or marriage certificates to anyone but the persons named in the documents or their immediate relatives. This copy carries a date stamp of “Jun 6 – 2007” (which has bled through from the reverse side), and is, therefore, probably a copy obtained by Obama himself at that time.

Lie. barry can get a copy of his original birth certificate original vital recordS at any time. Which means barry could have “disclosed” an actual copy of his actual birth certificate at any time. No “therefore”.

There is absolutely no connection between the unvouched for digital image of the CertificaTION of Live Birth and barry’s original birth certificate however mightily Jackson tries to mislead.

JACKSON: Incidentally, John McCain has been the subject of similar speculation based on the fact that he was born in the Panama Canal Zone. But as we explained in an earlier Ask FactCheck, he’s also a U.S. citizen under laws going back to 1790, even though he wasn’t born in the country.

Very different between Sen McCain and barry – but that’s a different post. Why did Sen McCain’s citizenship/eligiibilty issue require a senate hearing before the general election (April 2008) and barry’ s not officially addressed until after 16 months in office (July 2009) via a non-legally binding House Resolution?

Inconsistency 1 – Name of COLB

JACKSON: We asked for and received a copy from the Obama campaign.

barry released an unvouched for CertificaTION of Live Birth, which is not a birth certificate. Can’t properly name the document – all subsequent  statements/conclusions made are worthless.

Inconsistency 2 – Nature of COLB

JACKSON: A digital image was attached.

JACKSON: But the document should put to rest…

It is not a document – it is a digital image of an unvocuhed for CertificaTION of Live Birth attached to an email.

No original “document” has ever been released – just the photos Factcheck took, which do not show the entire seal or the entire back page of the unvouched for COLB. Making it, by definiton, an uncertified copy =  completely worhtless even if it had been confirmed to have been sent by Hawaii DOH.

Inconsistency 2 – Origin of COLB

JACKSON: His campaign made a copy public

JACKSON: We asked for

JACKSON: Tommy Vietor at the Obama campaign sent a message to us and other reporters saying, “I know there have been some rumors spreading about Obama’s citizenship, so I wanted to make sure you all had a copy of his birth certificate.”

Jackson says he asked for it and then says Tommy Vieter sent it unsolicited via email. Dave Kos was the one who posted the first copy of the unvouched for and soon to be morphed CertifiCATION of Live Birth on his website. Gibbs has also claimed that he put the “birth certificate” aka CertifiCATION of Live Birth on the internet.

Inconsistency 3 – Authenticity of COLB

JACKSON: This copy carries a date stamp of “Jun 6 – 2007” (which has bled through from the reverse side), and is, therefore, probably a copy obtained by Obama himself at that time.

Factcheck does not know the provenance of the digital image and did not examine an independently obtained image of a CertifiCATION of Live Birth for comparison. If they don’t know where it came from, or what an authentic one looks like, they can’t vouch for its authenticity.

More significantly, the man responsible for certifying authentic Hawaii COLBs – DOH registrar Alvin Onaka – said he couldn’t say what that alleged CertifiCATION of Live Birth was after examining a “copy” of it.

Inconsistency 4 – COLB vs birth certificate

JACKSON: Hawaii state law forbids the release of birth or marriage certificates to anyone but the persons named in the documents or their immediate relatives.

Lie – as confirmed by the Hawaii governor’s office. HERE. barry can authorize anyone, including Orly Taitz, to obtain a copy of his orignal birth recordS. No “fact check” is complete if the gold standard, in this case barry’s original birth cerificate, is available for comparison.

Inconsistency 5 – COLB ≠ birth certificate

Q: Has Obama’s birth certificate been disclosed?

JACKSON: Yes.

barry’s birth certificate has never been released – as admitted to by Dr Fukino. Meaning the only birth certificate that could have posasibly been disclosed was the birth certificate barry said he was in possession of in his book. And no mention of that has ever been made by barry people.

Summary:

  • Does not makes clear a CertifiCATION of Live Birth is not a birth certificate.
  • Does not make clear  Factcheck “fact checked” a CertifiCATION of Live Birth not a birth certificate.
  • Does not make clear there is no “document” – just digital images of an alleged CertifiCATION of Live Birth.
  • Does not make clear the digital images of the CertifiCATION of Live Birth have never been vouched for by Hawaii DOH.
  • Does not make clear the digital images prove the unvouched for CertifiCATION of Live Birth is not a certified copy of anything.
  • Does not make clear Factcheck never obtained a certified copy of a vouched for Hawaii CertifiCATION of Live Birth to check for authenticity.
  • Does not make clear Factcheck never obtained a certified copy of a vouched for Hawai original birth certificate to check for authenticity.
  • Conflicting statements on how Factcheck came to get the digital image.

CONCLUSION:

Zero evidence of scientific ‘factchecking” of the unvouched for digital images that they could not even correctly name.

Factcheck.org = completely worthless.

The repitition of the wrong name and clear attempt to connect it to the Hawaii birth certificate was intentionally meant to defraud The American People into believing barry actually released his birth certificate.

And it worked. But it is not the truth. And when the truth is exposed, Factcheck’s intentional deception will result in a very long prison sentence for the Factcheck photographers and will completely nullify every “fact check” Factcheck has ever done.

But by then, barry will have already destroyed the US [p with Factcheck just one of his many accomplices.


One Response to “Factcheck.org = completely worthless”

  1. mattie Says:

    Not sure what your point is Dew.

    You must be new to the BC issue because what you quoted are the NEW DOH guidelines – instituted AFTER the issue of barry’s COLB came to light.

    Here’s what it used to read before they changed it some time in June 09:

    In order to process your application, DHHL utilizes information that is found only on the original Certificate of Live Birth, which is either black or green. This is a more complete record of your birth than the Certification of Live Birth (a computer-generated printout).

    Submitting the original Certificate of Live Birth will save you time and money since the computer-generated Certification requires additional verification by DHHL.

    Meaning that COLB wasn’t even good enough for their own records.

    When requesting a certified copy of your birth certificate from the Records Section of DOH, let the clerk know you are requesting it “ForDHHL Purposes,” and that you need a copy of the original Certificate of Live Birth and not the computer-generated Certification. If mailing in your request form, please fill in “For DHHL Purposes” in the “Reason for Requesting a Certified Copy” section.

    Link to original language.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s