Obama Lawyer Admits Forgery but disregards “image” as Indication of Obama’s Ineligibility Damage Control

I thought this was “important,” at least in the sense that it is legitimate material to discuss. And the source is from the Tea Party, which i consider a legitimate source. Some may disagree here. :rolleyes:


This is the gist of it in the article and is highlighted in the article itself:

Taking an audacious and shocking angle against the constitutional eligibility mandate, Obama’s lawyer, Alexandra Hill, admitted that the image of Obama’s birth certificate was a forgery and made the absurd claim that, therefore, it cannot be used as evidence to confirm his lack of natural born citizenship status. Therefore, she argued, it is “irrelevant to his placement on the ballot”.

This quote is also highlighted:

Hill went on to contort reasoning by implying that Obama needs only invoke his political popularity, not legal qualifications, in order to be a candidate.

You can draw whatever conclusions you want from the article itself-----I personally think there is evidence for this----but some many here may disagree, fo course. Just thought it is worthy of being put here for discussion.

If it somehow breaks any “banned topics” guidelines from CAF, I don’t know about it but the mods are free to remove it, by all means. Alos, if it falls within the “opinion” guideline, (although I personally doubt it) remove it as well. :thumbsup:

Read and discuss-----respectfully and charitably, please. Thank you. :D:p

:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:

Heading to google to search, is this a hoax or did other sources report as well, the alleged statements by Alexandra Hill?

Because if this is true, if it’s not a hoax, then this is

I find no point in speculating - unkless once has excess breath. When the court speaks, it is settled.

Yes, indeed. :(:shrug:

Which “court” are you referring to?


Just genuinely asking. :thumbsup::slight_smile:

I don’t know if Obama is really a Natural Born citizen. I will say there are some very odd things in Obama’s past, some things that he seems to be going to great lengths to hide, and I can’t figure out the man as far as his past goes. There are lots of things that shouldn’t be sealed, and frankly wouldn’t be sealed for most of us, but that Obama has sealed. We don’t really have college transcripts, we don’t know much about how he got into Harvard based on his grades. I can’t make sense out of why a man with a profession (and it would be true as a lawyer as well as as a politician) who trades on name recognition would change his name from Barry Sortero to Barack Obama. It just doesn’t seem to make a lot of sense. So I wouldn’t be shocked.

Me neither. :thumbsup:

You make very good points.

Indeed. :slight_smile:

I look forward to similar standards of proof being applied to scripture and, say, the first six centuries of Christian records.

Blog post, not a news article, does not link to a news article.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.