Discussion in 'Politics' started by GhostX, Dec 15, 2016.
Too little; to late...................the damage has already been done
The guy is absolutely correct if indeed the digital document is layered. A scanner won't do that. All a scanner does is make a picture, an image - everyone who owns one knows this. But, I would think that anyone doing this would have known this - I mean - if you are going to fake a birth certificate then I would think you would know how to do it unless...unless they did it years ago and never in a million years expected him to become the President and be totally scrutinized. I would like to know the file type that was sent and they investigated. Nevertheless, now what will happen? I am sure nothing will happen. Why? Because this will make the country, its leaders and its people in general look like complete fools in the history books. I would think that any document that he signed as President would also have to be treated as irrelevant and not legal, maybe not but...
Anyway, quite interesting...
EDIT: Wouldn't it be interesting if they indeed investigated this (which they won't) and he had to leave the country or become an illegal alien!! LOL! This would indeed be the ruin of the Democratic Party an the would have to disband and make a new party. HA!
It would be the shining example of how broken the party system is. I do hope it can be replaced but what would it be replaced with? Do we need new documents to be written or do we need existing documents to be torn up?
ok so I wasnt too convenced that this was legit untill they pulled the doc away from the back ground. My sceptisism is based on knowing you can clip things, layer them and then demo it like its an original. But pulling the background from the into and moving it. That is a whole other level of sophistication in making fake docs. Whoever released this was an idiot to not save the doc in a format that could not be manipulated. Makes me wonder if they wanted us to find out?
We are talking demonrats and lib-tards here, what part of "idiot" were you missing? Plus they really don't care if we find out, Hitlery, Obummer and the rest are above the law, or at least immune to/from it. As Hitlery said, "only little people go to prison." Which reminds me, ANOTHER politico from Ill is going to prison for graft, corruption, money laundering, the usual demonrat list of crimes.
I tried to recreate what they did in the video and couldn't. So I watched it again on full-screen to see what they were using. Adobe Illustrator.
I have since downloaded the trial of Illustrator and, unfortunately, been able to reproduce their experience exactly.
As a test, I pulled up a scan of one of the kids birth certificates (health insurance for new job) and opened it up. It too had multiple layers. Well, it had 2 layers. One blank background and one of the scan of the document.
I can see the let it go that @Tevin mentioned below, but if he is in fact illegally in office, or ever was, anything and everything he's touched is suspect and or completely illegal. It's not tin foil, I proved it (and anyone else can too, it takes 20 minutes to download the trial of Illustrator).
Don't know how I feel about knowing for sure now.
This topic should be in the tin foil hat section.
I did not watch the video. What's the point? Obama is leaving office in a month. Seriously, let it go already.
We moved it out of general discussion in the sincere hope that it'll die of it's own weight with the lessening of election and political crap after the inauguration. Yep, it's a dead issue since zero isn't going to be featured quite as often as in the past. We hope. In the meantime, the fringe will have fun masticating the whole deal for a few years of acrimonious mud slinging and finding more "facts" to support whichever side of the issue they want to believe. Personally, I do NOT give a rip (or anything else) at this point. The consequences of finding out he isn't or wasn't eligible for the presidency at this late date are not trivial, but will be swept under a rug somehow.
This is real old news, but is Obummer really being sued? Of course I'm real confused, because he didn't really have to produce his Birth Certificate, just like Trump doesn't have to produce his Tax Returns.
I keep saying that Obummer will release a best selling book titled, "How a half Black gay man and his Transvestite Wife became President and first Lady" whoops didn't Joan Rivers die from thinking along those same lines?
If this indeed is the case(personally I have thought so for a long time) his 8 yrs should be vacated along with every law he signed regardless. It will never happen, but...
Sheriff’s probe finds Obama birth certificate ‘fake’
It probably doesn't matter about the birth certificate or if BHO was born outside the US or if dad was Kenyan. There was no question that his mother was a US citizen having been born in Wichita, Kansas.
This puts him in the exact same scenario as Ted Cruz; born outside US to US citizen mother and Cuban father. And legal theory is he was eligible. Of course democrats would had sued if he had been nominee or won but we'd have the same situation we do with BHO just political parties reversed.
Eugene Volokh is an interesting legal mind, seems pretty sound with stuff I've read of his and have sporadically followed his commentary at his website volokh.com over the years. I think BT would like him. Seems he now publishes under Washington Post website. This issue is a never stopping no-go issue... kinda oxymoronic.
Yes, Ted Cruz is a ‘natural born citizen’
Now back to prepping for me.
I don't feel that Teddy was legal to run either. Doesn't matter what kind of 'crat they are. If not born here, they shouldn't be able to run for POTUS. My opinion only.
I understand. Not going to argue. I just note that say we have a fine military officer or NCO who we mandate must be stationed in Germany or such place for 3 years. And while in service to our nation in a foreign land he and his wife have a baby. Is it right or in the best interest of our country for the child to be denied the opportunity to serve as commander-in-chief of the very same military that caused his out of country birth?
I wouldn't put a lot of faith in that pdf file unless you can download the official file and then open it in layers yourself - I could create what was shown in thevideo from a scan. All it takes is to create two separate images and work with any graphical editing tool that meets or exceeds the max resolution of the files, then merge them back together in Adobe as separate layers.
The only ways that would prove it was fake - if the text could be edited as text and not as a graphic and if the form used for the background was created after the certificate was dated. Government forms get minor updates quite frequently.
Prosecutions should be in order, for all those involved in this coverup and manufacture.
Let's create a "too little too late" section to the forum and put this in it.
Not trying to pick a fight and not trying to be disrespectful. We've had too much of that as of late and I'm not trying to add fuel to the fire.
I did download it from the whitehouse.gov website (President Obama's Long Form Birth Certificate). I did download Adobe Illustrator myself. I did open it up and look at the layers.
The fact that the text can't be edited does not rule out being a fake. It could very well be parts of multiple scans (signatures, dates from other forms, etc) put together to make a single document.
Scanned forms don't have layers (or if they do they have at most, 1. A background white layer and the image. Birth certificates, that have been scanned, don't have a background that is updated from time to time. A scan is a "snapshot" point in time. And it is clearly intended to be a scan of the document for PDF distribution because nobody, and I mean nobody uses messy, "typewriter" type fonts on official documents. That was done on a typewriter, signed and filed away (or would have been). If it were a "built" document that was being passed off as "created" in 2011, I could see what you are talking about, but it isn't supposed to be. The scan was certified in 2011, but the document is intended to imply it was created in 1961.
The point they made in the video was that (we assume), there was no break in the recording. Website search -> download -> Open -> View layers. The document they used in the video came from the whitehouse.gov website (again, I did this and you can too if you follow the link above). It IS a created document. A single scanned file will NOT behave that way, it just won't. It has to be manipulated like you mention above, scanned multiple times or opened multiple times with pieces pulled out and re-added. The thing is, if you take the 20 minutes it takes to download the Illustrator demo, you will see that things move around and do NOT behave as though they were all part of the same document originally unless a LOT of time was taken ahead of time because cleaning some of that stuff up is incredibly tedious.
If someone did in fact take a valid document and then doctor it so that it could be exposed as a fake...that's...I can't see the reason behind doing that, and that's what I get from your post. You could do the same thing...take a valid document, tear it apart, put it back together as layers and then present it. But why would you do that unless you were, say, changing something.
You describe a thought exercise or a proof of ability, but your proof of ability doesn't prove it's not a fake.
Now, to the more important part, I'm not looking to defend the document or not, just responding to what you threw out above. I really don't have any dog in the fight. It would be frustrating but like Airtime said, it ultimately doesn't matter because his mother WAS a US Citizen and as such he is natural born. As for the the position taken by Tully Mars, I see where you are coming from, but that isn't the law and if we're going to grouse about following the law, then what's good for the goose is good for the gander. We can't pick and choose which ones we want to follow and which ones we will ignore because they are inconvenient or don't mesh with our personal agenda or belief system. In this case it's mob/majority rule (or would be, let's not get into that here and now). Don't like it, let's get it changed. Until then, it's the law and it's the law via The Constitution and amendments which we keep saying we swore to protect, or we want to be back in force, or should be the supreme law of the land. Again, I would caution not to fall into the mindset that the parts you like are good and should be followed and the parts you don't shouldn't be.
I can be done now. I'm really not defending the document one way or another, but the technical bits were getting a little under my skin.
I missed the part in your post where you downloaded the official file, opened it up, and could see the layers. That absolutely proves it wasn't a scan. I am not doubting that you did what you said you did or in any disagreement with you on this.
Separate names with a comma.