Hawaii's New Governor Takes Up the Fight Against Birthers

[Airstrip One]

thats really presidential, especially after you claim to want to clear the issue up....way to be open and transparent

Being presidential is about being better than everyone else. So, yes, it is what I would do 100%, and its what Obama should do.

BTW, the matter will never be cleared, just as the lunar landing of 41 years ago will never be cleared.

 

[Bonestorm]

i am pretty sure we have been down this road before and iirc you start putting your tail between your legs after i explain to you what best evidence means under the law and then you start whimpering that we aren't in a court of law

next

Or you could simply answer the question. Best evidence of what?

 

[Lowaicue]

oh, he is an immature five year old not fit to be president....he obviously wanted to quash the issue, that is why he released an electronic copy....

Whereas you are a mature five year old?Obama is the first president you have had, in your short lifetime (I am assuming you are no more than 10 yewars old), who genuinely has the interests of your country at heart. He is the first in your short lifetime who has gained the respect of your trading partners and has not been the butt of jokes outside America.
Why do you wish to destroy him? Are you the type of child who would rather break one of your toys than let anyone else play?
Have you NOTHING in your sad little life to occupy you save for this nonsense?

 

[Beefy]

how is the no drinking and 20 kids coming....

I'm not a model Mormon by any means. I'm only mormon for purposes associated with this thread.

 

[Airstrip One]

Beefy's like a Jack Mormon, except he's actually a Thread Mormon.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

I'm not a model Mormon by any means. I'm only mormon for purposes associated with this thread.

o i c, so you're not actually a mormon just like i am not actually a birther

thanks for clearing that up beefy!

 

[Airstrip One]

So you are merely gestating?

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

Or you could simply answer the question. Best evidence of what?

i can't believe we have to go down this road again....

best evidence of his documented birth in hawaii...and that would be a copy of the original

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

Being presidential is about being better than everyone else. So, yes, it is what I would do 100%, and its what Obama should do.

BTW, the matter will never be cleared, just as the lunar landing of 41 years ago will never be cleared.

since most of the people (prob 99%) have an issue because of his refusal to not release a copy of the original, your statement makes no sense and is not logical in any way

you can't argue with a copy of the original and if you do, you're truly a lunar nutbar

 

[Onceler]

i can't believe we have to go down this road again....

best evidence of his documented birth in hawaii...and that would be a copy of the original

Yeah - no worries. You sound nothing at all like a birther here.

 

[Airstrip One]

99% do not have a problem - only the birthers have a problem.

The birthers are all lunar charged, and will continue to protest Obama's qualifications for office long after such documentation is provided.

 

[Bonestorm]

i can't believe we have to go down this road again....

best evidence of his documented birth in hawaii...and that would be a copy of the original

First, I don't believe we've been down this road before. From an evidentiary standpoint, what's wrong with the certified copy that was released? My understanding is that under the Federal Rules of Evidence, there is nothing at all wrong with a certified copy of the type produced, bearing the seal of the proper state authority.

Second, I think your understanding of the best evidence rule is flawed in several respects.

 

[Bonestorm]

since most of the people (prob 99%) have an issue because of his refusal to not release a copy of the original, your statement makes no sense and is not logical in any way

you can't argue with a copy of the original and if you do, you're truly a lunar nutbar

You can't argue with the certified document that was released either, but here we are.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

You can't argue with the certified document that was released either, but here we are.

yes you can, it is only prima facie evidence...IOW, it is only presumed valid evidence, not like the original

that is why i don't understand why he didn't release the best evidence, he is a lawyer...he knows better

 

[Bonestorm]

yes you can, it is only prima facie evidence...IOW, it is only presumed valid evidence, not like the original

that is why i don't understand why he didn't release the best evidence, he is a lawyer...he knows better

No, the certified copy produced is just as good as a certified copy of the original, at least under the Federal Rules of Evidence as I understand them. The only evidence that would actually satisfy the best evidence rule is the original document itself. Obviously, Obama giving every birther a shot at personally inspecting his original birth certificate isn't practicable.

And really, if the issue is "was Obama born in Hawaii?" as opposed to "what does Obama's birth certificate say?," the best evidence rule is simply not applicable to the controversy.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

First, I don't believe we've been down this road before. From an evidentiary standpoint, what's wrong with the certified copy that was released? My understanding is that under the Federal Rules of Evidence, there is nothing at all wrong with a certified copy of the type produced, bearing the seal of the proper state authority.

Second, I think your understanding of the best evidence rule is flawed in several respects.

lmao...how is it flawed? just because you're ignorant on the matter doesn't mean my understanding is flawed...

Rule 1004. Admissibility of Other Evidence of Contents

The original is not required, and other evidence of the contents of a writing, recording, or photograph is admissible if--

(1) Originals lost or destroyed. All originals are lost or have been destroyed, unless the proponent lost or destroyed them in bad faith; or

(2) Original not obtainable. No original can be obtained by any available judicial process or procedure; or

(3) Original in possession of opponent. At a time when an original was under the control of the party against whom offered, that party was put on notice, by the pleadings or otherwise, that the contents would be a subject of proof at the hearing, and that party does not produce the original at the hearing; or

(4) Collateral matters. The writing, recording, or photograph is not closely related to a controlling issue.

since neither exception exists in this matter....the original is the best evidence and should be used

pretty stupid mistake nigel

 

[Bonestorm]

lmao...how is it flawed? just because you're ignorant on the matter doesn't mean my understanding is flawed...



since neither exception exists in this matter....the original is the best evidence and should be used

pretty stupid mistake nigel

What does Rule 1005 say?

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

No, the certified copy produced is just as good as a certified copy of the original, at least under the Federal Rules of Evidence as I understand them. The only evidence that would actually satisfy the best evidence rule is the original document itself. Obviously, Obama giving every birther a shot at personally inspecting his original birth certificate isn't practicable.

And really, if the issue is "was Obama born in Hawaii?" as opposed to "what does Obama's birth certificate say?," the best evidence rule is simply not applicable to the controversy.

i suggest you get some education on the matter and stop this humiliation

Rule 1002. Requirement of Original

To prove the content of a writing, recording, or photograph, the original writing, recording, or photograph is required, except as otherwise provided in these rules or by Act of Congress.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rules.htm


since the original exists, a copy of that is obtainable and is not more burdensome than producing the electronic copy.....so, if this was ineed a court of law, he would be required to produce the orginal (copy)

thanks for playing though, its occasionally fun to school idiots like yourself who think they know everything

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

What does Rule 1005 say?

that you can produce a copy of the original

why is it you continually ignore the fact that right on the electronic version it states PRIMA FACIE EVIDENCE

 

[Bonestorm]

i suggest you get some education on the matter and stop this humiliation



http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rules.htm


since the original exists, a copy of that is obtainable and is not more burdensome than producing the electronic copy.....so, if this was ineed a court of law, he would be required to produce the orginal

thanks for playing though, its occasionally fun to school idiots like yourself who think they know everything

What does Rule 1005 say?

And, like I said, if the issue is "was Obama born in Hawaii?" as opposed to "what does Obama's birth certificate say?," then the best evidence rule simply isn't applicable. My understanding is that the debate is about the former, not the latter so I'm not sure why the best evidence rule even applies.