ForgeryGate: Larry Klayman’s Historic Letter To DNC Legal Counsel

Tom Ballantyne Jr. SC 1024x680 ForgeryGate: Larry Klayman’s Historic Letter to DNC Legal Counsel

By now, many of you will probably have read Bob Unruh’s excellent article published at WND on September 3, 2012.   The article begins by reporting that “A former U.S. Justice Department attorney who founded the government watchdog Judicial Watch and later Freedom Watch has warned a key Barack Obama attorney that Democratic Party or state elections officials certifying Obama’s eligibility for the 2012 election could be charged with election fraud.”  As many of you know, the “key Barack Obama attorney,” Robert Bauer, of Perkins Coie, was the President’s chief legal counsel, working in the White House, until June 2, 2011, exactly five weeks after the President “released” (posted an alleged digital image thereof on-line) his Long Form Birth Certificate.  He hasn’t “gone away,” however, as he continues to be the legal counsel to both the Obama Campaign and the DNC.

The thrust of Larry Klayman’s letter to Attorney Bauer and the DNC is that as chief legal counsel, he cannot recommend that they place candidate Obama’s name on the Official Certificates of Nomination, or OCON’s, which they are required to submit to election officials in all fifty states. The bottom line, according to Attorney Klayman, is that given the refusal of Hawaii Registrar for Vital Statistics, Alvin Onaka, to verify the key facts of Obama’s birth as well as the validity of the birth certificate itself (posted at whitehouse.gov), when requested to do so by Arizona Secretary of State Ken Bennett, back on March 30th, there is no legally-allowable basis for any official to accept the document as proof of identity. It simply can’t be done legally! 

And this means that no one can legally affirm that Barack Obama is even old enough to be President, much less that he is a natural-born citizen, as it is not legally knowable where he is born.  For those who sneer at this notion, I would simply ask:  On what basis can anyone know – save someone who was physically present at the birth and themselves made a record (determined to be legitimate through forensic examination) – either where or when he (or anyone else) was born?  The short and obvious answer is that absent a provably-reliable birth certificate, he can’t!  And how would a birth certificate be proven to be reliable?  Again, first and foremost through the age-old practice of examining a certified hard copy!

And according to the Federal Rules of Evidence, Article IX, Rule 901 – Authenticating or Identifying Evidence, we find:

(a) In General. To satisfy the requirement of authenticating or identifying an item of evidence, the proponent must produce evidence sufficient to support a finding that the item is what the proponent claims it is.

So the person submitting the evidence (its “proponent”) must effectively demonstrate (via further “evidence”) that the item (in this case, an alleged birth certificate – a digital image of an alleged birth certificate, in fact”is what the proponent claims it is.”

[As an aside, may I just say how preposterous this entire discussion is – or the need thereof – when the idea that any ordinary citizen would even attempt to argue before a prospective employer or public official the legitimacy of a digital image of his or her key identifying document (a legally-certified birth document) while steadfastly refusing to present an easily-obtainable hard copy (one costs $10 in the State of Hawaii – including postage) is patently absurd! And the man who has dragged the country through this outrageous exercise – at the literal cost of millions of dollars - for over four years now has the audacity to proclaim this a “sideshow” and call those who have demanded the truth “carnival barkers”!]

Next we find this in Rule 901 of Article IX:

(b) Examples. The following are examples only — not a complete list — of evidence that satisfies the requirement:

(3) Comparison by an Expert Witness or the Trier of Fact. A comparison with an authenticated specimen by an expert witness or the trier of fact. [While this refers to a handwriting specimen, by extension, a licensed forensic examiner is clearly “an expert witness” or a “trier of fact,” and “Public Records” are clearly included immediately hereafter.]

(4) Distinctive Characteristics and the Like. The appearance, contents, substance, internal patterns, or other distinctive characteristics of the item, taken together with all the circumstances. [While this is supposed to corroborate the legitimacy of evidence presented, exculpatory “characteristics” (of what appears to be a digitally-created document) can also, by extension, when “taken together with all the circumstances,” be used to demonstrate an apparent lack of legitimacy or “authentication.”]

And finally, the specific requirements for “Public Records” and “Ancient Documents”:

 (7) Evidence About Public Records. Evidence that:

(A) a document was recorded or filed in a public office as authorized by law; or

(B) a purported public record or statement is from the office where items of this kind are kept.

(8) Evidence About Ancient Documents or Data Compilations. For a document or data compilation, evidence that it:

(A) is in a condition that creates no suspicion about its authenticity;

(B) was in a place where, if authentic, it would likely be; and

(C) is at least 20 years old when offered.

[Given that Attorney Klayman’s letter to Mr. Bauer suggests that what Mr. Onaka’s official “verification” actually proves is that candidate Obama’s birth certificate is what is known as “Late” or “Altered,” this requirement has particular relevance as what should now be a fifty-one year old document is not in all probability “20 years old” – if it ever is “offered”!]

In conclusion, I will simply reiterate that under Rule 901, Article IX of these universally-accepted (throughout the country, at least) Rules of Evidence, candidate Obama, as the “proponent” of the evidence of his birth place and time (both absolutely essential to the determination of his Constitutional eligibility) ”must produce [further] evidence sufficient to support a finding that the item [his birth certificate] is what [he, as] the proponent claims it [to be].” 

I say “further” evidence because according to Mr. Klayman and his thorough legal analysis of the official Alvin Onaka (legal) “verification,” the digital image posted by candidate Obama at whitehouse.gov “cannot legally be considered to have probative value.  In other words, as prima facie evidence, it cannot stand alone without further corroboration, as required by an ‘administrative body or official.’” And given the requirements of Rule 901, along with the preponderance of exculpatory evidence surrounding the digital document – not to mention the extraordinary anomaly of his refusal to present the universally-required certified hard copy – the “proponent,” Mr. Obama, ”must produce” further corroborating evidence; and, at the very least, must be compelled to allow forensic examination by a number of court-approved, licensed forensic examiners, of the certificate which Mr. Onaka has certified to be in their files.

As a footnote, I will add the following from Mr. Klayman’s ground-breaking legal analysis:

A certification is a solemn oath that a person KNOWS their statement to be true. Until the above-described procedure is followed, and it is definitively determined by the authorized government officials, that the Hawaii birth record is legally probative, NO ONE can legally swear that Mr. Obama is Constitutionally-eligible to be President; and because the DNC by-laws require the Democratic Presidential candidate to be Constitutionally-eligible, there is also, therefore, NO PARTY OFFICIAL who can legally swear that Mr. Obama is the ‘legally-qualified candidate’ of the Democratic Party, under its own by-laws.

The word “certify” comes from the Latin certus, plus the root facere, meaning “to make,” or “do.”  Hence the meaning “to make certain.”  In the legal sense, this is not a frivolous matter and therefore cannot be taken lightly or be ignored without legal consequence.  Thus, Klayman continues:

For any party official to do so at this point would be to perjure him or herself.  In addition, any attorney, Mr. Bauer, who would counsel any party official to swear to either of those things (candidate Obama’s Constitutional eligibility or his fitness as the Democratic Candidate in accordance with their own DNC by-laws) suborns perjury.  Furthermore, anyone who submits (or any attorney who either advises or fails to advise anyone to submit) an Official Certification of Nomination containing a perjurious oath, to a state elections official, would be guilty of committing federal and state election fraud.

While Democrats across the country are exulting in the re-nomination of their charismatic champion to a hoped-for second term, the world will be watching both Mr. Bauer and the Democratic National Committee for whom he provides legal counsel (as well as the State Democratic Committees, Secretaries of State, and Attorneys General in all fifty states) to see if they will once again ignore their own by-laws, the Rules of Evidence, and the statutes of both the State of Hawaii and their own states in apparently proclaiming their candidate to be “Constitutionally-eligible,” when the Official Verification of Alvin Onaka and the State of Hawaii clearly demonstrates otherwise!

 

Tom Ballantyne is the author of three books:  The Secret of Life Series, Uncommon Sense…Apparently! and Oh Really, O’Reilly! – an expose on the Establishment Media (Left and “Right”) and their collusion in the biggest fraud in American History!

 

Related posts:

  1. ForgeryGate: An Open Letter To My Republican Senator, Jon Kyl (AZ) (Fourth Most “Conservative” Member of the U.S. Senate) From An…
  2. Forgerygate: An Open Letter To The Staff Of Andrew Breitbart, Part 2 Following is a continuation of the now-infamous interview of Ben…

"Loophole" from Obama's IRS: Protect your IRA or 401(k) with gold and silver... click here to get a NO-COST Info Guide >

Comments

  1. He is positively a FRAUD.

  2. Those who certified Obama's eligibility in the last election cycle are also guilty of election fraud (Pelosi, Reid, etc.) and prosecution to the full extent of the law is the ony remedy to this circus of fraud should the evidence bear out our suspicions.

  3. I hope this isn't to late. I also blame McCain for not persuing the elegibilty issue when he had the chance. Sarah Palin wanted to look further into it. If this was nipped in the bud right from the start, we would not be still sorying about it. Judge David Carter of California a couple of years back, said the elegibility case had merit and was going to proceed with it. Two days before the hearing he dismissed it. He also just hired a new law clerk from Perkins-Coie. I think the law clerk came with an early Christmas present for the Judge. All the others Judges were probably bought off also. Mr. Klayman should send this same notice to those Judges who didn't even look at any evidence and concluded to dismiss it. Really, we are supposed to trust the Judicial System, I don't think so.

    • You mean Juan McCain. It's hard to believe how stupid and worse cowardly the GOP really is. They expect the tea parties and the Larry Clayman's to do their work. We need a bare knuckle's conservative party who will get right in the face of the parasite-extortionist-pigs at the trough democrats. This needs to happen fast. At present I have no faith at all in the RINO GOP bastards. Their Romney adds are just plain weak. They should be countering the krats each day with facts followed by hard insults.

      What idiots.

      • Edwardkoziol says:

        Amen brother Craig we have these RINOs and they have no balls to go after dems they just kneel and kiss the ring around Obumas ass.McQuack McCain was a nice guy and the turd lost.If it wasn't for Sarah he would have lost in a landslide.

    • Edwardkoziol says:

      Mary your right the judges today don't go by law they go by party.Today Obunghole owns the judges and they snap to attention when he speaks.hell even John Roberts was bought off.I wonder how many pieces of silver it took to buy off Roberts.I use to respect him now I think he's a turncoat like Arlen Spectre.

    • Again, I agree, but why do We The People not rise up physically to Protest these So Obvious Attacks upon the US Constitution and We The People?

      Does anyopne really think this will all be settled by the same people involved in this TREASON?

  4. We surely hope this goes farther than past inquiries. We want proof of his unaltered selective service papers as well as an unaltered BC. Elections are meaningless without the rule of constitutional law and elections by a majority should not be upheld if not legally binding. Another thing that upsets me is the executive order he signed barring any future criminal charges against him , can't be legal ! Executive order # 13603 is another problem. These executive orders should be posted for the public within 24 hours of being written

  5. It doesn't matter if he was born in my grandmother's kitchen in Irivng, Texas; HE IS A COMMUNIST and is trying to destroy my country. He does not deserve to be re-elected; and IF these facts show he was ineligible from the git-go, as we all suspected; he should be tried for treason and sent to prison for the rest of his miserable life, taking the other liars down with him. Go get them!

  6. I hope they nail the BAS#$RD!!

  7. Gloria Ervin says:

    I sure hope and pray that everything comes to light!! Obama should never ever have been running for President or anything else in this country. I pray it isn't to late to take care of this. Our country cannot take any more from Obama….and I don't see any improvement from the justice system….

  8. Pam Therrien says:

    This "President" has a social security card from Conneticutt , a place he has never lived and the number belongs to a man from 1860 and they know it is this not identy theft? Fraud….and High Treason to the American Nation! so why has no one done anything!!!!

    • Corrupt judges keep throwing out the cases stating "Lack of Standing" in most cases. Which means they know he's a fraud but are afraid to take the case cause they might end up like Bill Gwatney, or Andrew Breitbart.

  9. What difference does the birth certificate make if Obama is not a "natural-born citizen. You must be a "natural-born citizen, NOT "native-born". Current U.S. statutes define various categories of individuals born overseas as citizens at birth i.e. natural born, including (for example) all persons "born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents both of whom are citizens of the United States and one of whom has had a residence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions, prior to the birth of such person[s]." I do not believe his father was a citizen of the United States. His father, married to three women at the same time, is certainly a Marxist . . . if not a Communist. Also, Obama was born in Hawaii prior to it becoming a state.

    Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Can_you_be_president_of

  10. This is the most fraudulent and corrupt administration ever. At least Jimmy Carter was not a fraud.

  11. The only decent people in this government is Ron Paul and Allen West, all the rest of these people in government have been brought and paid for. (bunch of crooks) We the people know that this president is a fraud and he needs to be tried for treason and jailed along with holder and everyone that is protecting him

  12. Treason and High Crimes against the People of The United States of America, Death, BY HANGING BY THE NECK, UNTIL DEAD! There is no other justifiable punishment that could say what needs said, that to commit TREASON AND HIGH CRIMES AGAINST WE, THE PEOPLE, THERE CAN BE ONLY ONE PUNISHMENT AND THAT IS AT THE END OF A ROPE! A “necktie party” perhaps? That would be one Party I’d love to attend! To see this Destructive, Enemy of the United States dance at the end of a rope would suit me just fine, thank you very much! Not nice you say? Well, the CRIMES he has commited against us as a people, and against our nation isn’t NICE EITHER! In fact, it is just about as CRIMINAL AS IT GETS AND IT IS AN AUTOMATIC DEATH SENTENCE TO COMMIT TREASON AGAINST YOUR NATION AND HER PEOPLE! Especially if you pose as “president”! That is the WORST OF ALL! No, hanging is in order!

  13. Cyrus N Moreno says:

    I would vote to impeach Barack Obama for felonious disregard of the provisions of the Constitution of the USA in regards to his ability to serve as our president, and for his uttering of falsified documents in that regard.

    • I totally agree. Had I been a congressman, I would have started legal action the day after the republicans took control.

  14. If the purported "birth certificate" released by the WH is authentic, then there is no claim that it is "private" information and there is absolutely NO reason the original record can't be released, because we already know what's in it. The only reasons for not releasing the original are either that there is no such thing in Hawaii's birth records or that the released version differs from the original. Either way, anyone who defends keeping the original secret obviously has no leg to stand on. I'm still waiting for any logical explanation for his spending megabucks to hide most of his records- unless there is something very damning to hide (his own words). I'm waiting… c'mon obots, where are you? (deafening silence!)

  15. The statements above finalise the bottom line of the US Constitution whereby the US has been destroyed over the past (4) years by Obama (Not his legal name) a Confirmed Marxist Fascist determined to destroy the US because of his belief, and hatred of white people. However; he will use white people to benefit his agenda by illegally attacking as many countries as possible, although he has never received the APPROVAL of Congress for these illegal invasions, and the murder of millions of civilians under the pretense of collateral damage?

Speak Your Mind

*