U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 07-02-2013, 04:22 PM
 
74,762 posts, read 34,917,887 times
Reputation: 10588

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
They implicitly stated that Barack Obama is a natural-born US citizen. It's implicit when you tell the court that the assertion that Barack Obama is not a natural-born citizen is untrue.
Still doesn't make it a fact. If denying an allegation is all it takes to establish a fact, defense attorneys would merely just deny any and all allegations and no one would ever be convicted of any crime or lose a civil suit.
Rate this post positively

 
Old 07-02-2013, 04:23 PM
 
74,762 posts, read 34,917,887 times
Reputation: 10588
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
What does where Obama was born have to do with it?
The divorce filing specifically states that the Obamas lived together as husband and wife in Honolulu.
Rate this post positively
 
Old 07-02-2013, 04:25 PM
 
42,492 posts, read 26,522,515 times
Reputation: 14117
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
Still doesn't make it a fact. If denying an allegation is all it takes to establish a fact, defense attorneys would merely just deny any and all allegations and no one would ever be convicted of any crime or lose a civil suit.
The FACT is that the State Department, an agency you repeatedly cite to support your arguments, has implicitly stated that President Obama is a natural-born citizen. By saying that assertions that he is not a natural-born citizen are wrong.
Rate this post positively
 
Old 07-02-2013, 04:26 PM
 
42,492 posts, read 26,522,515 times
Reputation: 14117
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
The divorce filing specifically states that the Obamas lived together as husband and wife in Honolulu.
In February 1961? That doesn't mean that the Obamas were still living together in August of 1961.
Rate this post positively
 
Old 07-02-2013, 05:03 PM
 
Location: Littleton, CO
20,893 posts, read 14,583,093 times
Reputation: 3952
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
Was Obama not born in Honolulu? Is that your assertion now?
Don't be stupid.

Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent
Denying an allegation is not the same as explicitly stating a fact.
Gong!

Since you are unclear in the concept, let me help you out.

1. The signed response from the Department of State is a statement under oath, made not just under penalty of perjury, but as the signatory is an officer of the court under penalty of sanction up to and including disbarment.

2. There are only 4 legally acceptable responses in a defendant's answer to a complaint.
A. If the allegation contains a legal conclusion that is the ultimate responsibility of the court it requires no response.

B. If the allegation is a statement of fact, the defendant must (and remember again this is under penalty of perjury) either 1) deny the allegation as false, 2) admit the allegation as true, or 3) assert that they are "without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth" of the allegation.

Of these three responses to factual allegations, two of them (a denial or an admission) are absolutely explicit statements of fact.
QED: The State Department's denial (under oath and under penalty of perjury) of the allegation that Obama is not a natural born US citizen is absolutely and explicitly the factual declaration that he is. There is (after all) no third option.

Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent
If it were, there would never be any trials. Defense attorneys would merely just deny any and all allegations and no one would ever be convicted of any crime or lose a civil suit.
You are again unclear on the concept. In a US courtroom there are triers of fact (either a judge or jury) and triers of law (judges exclusively). Triers of fact have the responsibility of sorting though the evidence and testimony and coming to a determination regarding what did or did not happen. So sorry to disappoint you, even if defense attorneys did what you suggest, there would still be a trial to determine what actually did or did not happen.

Of curse, that has nothing to do with what I asserted and proved and that you are now frantically trying to somehow run away from: The State Department has still, explicitly and under penalty of perjury testified that Barack Obama is a natural born US citizen.

And yes, this is the same State Department from which you grasp ancient and obsolete straws in the absence of real evidence to support your position.

So again... you appear to be laboring under a misconception that has been cleared up for pretty much everybody else since 1898.
Rate this post positively
 
Old 07-02-2013, 05:07 PM
 
Location: Littleton, CO
20,893 posts, read 14,583,093 times
Reputation: 3952
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
Still doesn't make it a fact.
No... what makes it a fact is the 23 courts that have declared him to be a natural born US citizen. This is just the State Department's testimony. Testimony that (by the way) would be considered expert on the subject.

Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent
If denying an allegation is all it takes to establish a fact, defense attorneys would merely just deny any and all allegations and no one would ever be convicted of any crime or lose a civil suit.
It doesn't establish a fact. It testifies to a fact.

And the reality here is that the same State Department you have asserted denies citizenship to children of alien fathers has testified in court, under oath that Barack Obama (whom they know full well is the child of an alien father) is a not just a citizen, but a natural born US citizen at that.

So again... you appear to be laboring under a misconception that was cleared up for everybody else 115 years ago.
Rate this post positively
 
Old 07-02-2013, 05:08 PM
 
Location: Littleton, CO
20,893 posts, read 14,583,093 times
Reputation: 3952
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
The divorce filing specifically states that the Obamas lived together as husband and wife in Honolulu.
Not in August of 1961 it doesn't.
Rate this post positively
 
Old 07-02-2013, 05:32 PM
 
74,762 posts, read 34,917,887 times
Reputation: 10588
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
The FACT is that the State Department, an agency you repeatedly cite to support your arguments, has implicitly stated that President Obama is a natural-born citizen.
It's a denial of an allegation, not a statement of fact. If denying an allegation is all it takes to establish a fact, defense attorneys would merely just deny any and all allegations and no one would ever be convicted of any crime or lose a civil suit.

Need I remind you that we simply CANNOT trust everything the government says?
National Intelligence Director Clapper Apologizes For 'Clearly Erroneous' Congressional Testimony On NSA Surveillance
Rate this post positively
 
Old 07-02-2013, 05:36 PM
 
74,762 posts, read 34,917,887 times
Reputation: 10588
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
In February 1961? That doesn't mean that the Obamas were still living together in August of 1961.
The divorce filing only states that they are NOW not living together. NOW being in 1964 when the documents were filed. The FACT remains that Obama was born to a MARRIED mom, NOT a single mom.

Obama lied. Just like he lied about the 1965 Selma march inspiring his 1961 birth.

Why can't you all just admit you were foolishly conned by a narcissistic, serial, pathological LIAR?
Rate this post positively
 
Old 07-02-2013, 05:38 PM
 
Location: Littleton, CO
20,893 posts, read 14,583,093 times
Reputation: 3952
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
It's a denial of an allegation, not a statement of fact.
Unless it is a factual allegation being denied. In that case, yes. It is a statement of fact.

Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent
Need I remind you that we simply CANNOT trust everything the government says?
So we should expect never again to see you post ancient State Department declarations from a century and a half ago? Because if you don't trust them now, it would be deeply hypocritical of you to trust them then.
Rate this post positively
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.



All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2021, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top