RC Radio Natural Born Citizen Debate Challenge

I would like to start off 2012 with a bang!

Who is a natural born citizen? Before late 2008 there was not much discussion of this question except in some obscure legal articles and talk about a few candidates not born on US soil like Mitt Romney's father (born in Mexico) and John McCain (born in the Canal Zone). Recently, many of those known as the "Birthers" started telling us that almost everything we learned about this term for 200 years is wrong. In 2008 during the run up to the election all the conversation was about "the birth certificate" but now the debate has moved to the claim that to be a natural born citizen requires both parents to be citizens at the time of birth. Even some politicians in New Hampshire and in Georgia have embraced the idea. What gives? I say let's get this settled.

I challenge proponents of both sides of the discussion on the definition of the term  "natural born citizen" in the United States Constitution under the requirements for president and vice president to a debate on Reality Check Radio on Wednesday, January 25, 2012.  I have arranged for up to three supporters of the traditional definition that a US citizen at birth is a natural born citizen to represent the "Obot" side of the debate. I challenge the "Birther" side to provide up to three proponents to take on the challenge.

The debate will be 90 minutes long and both sides will have equal time. Timing will be strictly enforced. Each side will be given equal time for opening and closing arguments. Each side will be able to ask the other side 4 questions of their choice and have time for rebuttal to the answers. The moderator (me) will ask 1 or 2 questions if issues appear to need further discussion. The remainder of the show will allow the listeners to call and ask questions.

I extend this challenge to Leo Donofrio, Mario Apuzzo, Charles Kerchner, Orly Taitz, Dean Haskins, Jerome Corsi, or any other proponent of the "two citizen parent" definition of natural born citizen. This is your chance to prove you are right. The first three who accept will be selected as participants  unless they wish to give up a spot to someone prior to the debate.

I will enforce a fair debate. If you are interested please contact me at realitycheck1776 at gmail period com or through the "Contact Me" link on rcradioshow.blogspot.com

Please feel free to link or copy this article to your blog or forum to get the word out. A refusal by either side to defend their position will be noted.

Paul Irey's Reply

Mr. Irey said he tried to post some of the following comments here on my blog but as it turned out he was replying to a website that linked to Doctor Conspiracy's comment on my article. Mr. Irey then sent me a couple of emails with comments. I told Mr. Irey that I would publish his comments here unedited. I will provide additional comments later.
___________________________________________________________________________________

  Obviously it is unfair for the moderator of "Reality Check Radio" to use my name but he won't use his own.  Who is the author of this article?  Why doesn't he release his name as I have?  The reason the WND story is not released yet is because ... first they decided to wait until after Christmas ... and second ... last week I learned that I would be in possession of a high resolution scan of a legitimate birth certificate from the Honolulu dept. of health from the era that will allow me to compare it to the problems I have found with Obama's BC.  This article should put a real dent in Woodman's prior findings that there is nothing wrong with Obama's BC.  Wait and see.  Then better evidence is still coming.  I have two more studies in progress and another researcher has even better proof.  I did not bet Mr. ??? $5,000 that officials at the health dept. would go to jail because ... even though they are guilty ... gov. has probably guaranteed them that no one would face charges in any case.

     Anyone who doesn't believe Larry Sinclair ... only has to look at what happened to Cain.  Here was another black candidate for president quickly hounded out of the running by media that started out only repeating rumors of the type they could have used with Larry Sinclair's claims ... but did not.  You also will not repeat our discussion of Mr. Sinclair being arrested at the National Press Club 2 blocks from the White House where he gave a news conference relating his story to the media ... that never reported anything about his presentation ... including the fact that he was arrested at that news conference in front of the press on a warrant issued by Beau Binden ... the son of Joe Biden ... on false charges ... two days before the Democratic National Convention that led to Joe Biden being nominated for Vice President.  Political favor?  The major media should have at least reported that false arrest.  But they were not allowed to ... and still are not allowed to.  So much for media honesty.

     If you believe that major media editors can print whatever they like ... ask Mr. ??? why they did not print any news or statements from that night at the National Press Club in Wash. D.C. ... but ran Cain out of office on far less information?  Government control is why.  There is no other answer.

     Also we learned later that it was the White House copier that created the distortions that would have deceived anyone. We notified the FBI that the White House might not always want copies coming from there to be so easily identified because of those peculiar distortions ... and there might have even been devices planted that would easily identify any document copied at the White House and given unintended intelligence to spy agencies in other countries.  Planting spy devices in copiers at important official locations is not new.  We did it to the Russian embassy in D.C. years ago.  Why didn't Mr. Woodman notify the White House himself immediately?  All the newspapers that received the handouts that morning on the 27th of April had those distortions because it was the White House copier that made them.  Because those handouts were far better in detail than the PDF released by the White House online ... is why I use them in the first place.  Had the major media printed my evidence when it first came out ... we might have found this out much sooner.  Doesn't anyone think it odd that major media refused to run the story about letters on the BC not matching each other ... but rumors of comments made by Herman Cain to a few women years ago were sufficient to slander the name of a black candidate for president?  It was shameless.

Paul Irey

[He also sent these followup comments:]

Mr. RC ???

     If you are contesting my statements ... then your name has as much bearing as mine.

     I attempted to "publish" the text in blue again at your website".

     If it does not publish this time ... you should publish it yourself along with this statement.  The supportive statements I had made to you during our conversation about the arrest of Larry Sinclair that still can not be mentioned in the major media ... even though it happened in front of 100 reporters at the National Press Club in 2008 ... during the time of the election process ... should be proof enough of the press censorship I mentioned. You also mention my contention that JFK was shot from the sewer drain but forgot to mention that I told you that I had seen the one time showing of the Marie Muchmore film on channel 5 in New York City that showed that the limo stopped at the moment of the fatal head shot.  That's an important part of my story. The Zapruder film does not show that stop and has painted in the appearance of an exit wound in the front of his face.  The attached poster shows that better.  Media will not publish that or ever refer to the fact that the government's own evidence clearly contradicts itself. The fact that media will still not publish my poster ... even though none of the supporters of the Oswald did it alone theory ... including Gary Mack himself ... who is the curator of the Texas Schoolbook Depository Museum ... have ever been able to give me any kind of answer as to this contradiction.  That's what I meant by a supportive statement ... and your not referring to what I said to support my claims was not "fairly representing our conversation".

   In addition ... I read your statement ....

"I had the opportunity to speak with Paul Irey on a Reality Check Radio program, hosted by RC. I found Irey to be sincere and honest, but at the same deeply influenced by his own biases about the President. Honesty won out, and in conversations with RC, Irey admitted he was wrong in some of his claims. This hasn’t stopped the Birthers from continuing to use Irey’s prior reports as evidence."

[Editorial comment: This is not my statement. See below.]

     I interpret that to mean that when you called me ... we were both being broadcast on your radio show and you did not mention that.  If we were being broadcast ... and I was led to believe that your call was a private conversation ... isn't that illegal?  Aren't you supposed to ask me if I want to be on your show?

     In addition Orly Taitz and Jerome Corsi were both informed of my feeling that part of the "different typeface" evidence may be flawed as a result of my understanding of Woodman's findings ... prior to your call.  Some of it is still correct ... but I informed them that I had lost complete confidence in the evidence and would not support it if required to testify ... but would rely on the new evidence that was already available to them at the time ... but not published by WND yet ... and I would give it to you now but I don't want to "scoop" mr. Corsi or WND.

     So in addition to the text in blue below this ... you should publish the entire text of what I have just said here ... and if possible publish the JFK poster attached.  I think that otherwise it is easy to assume that I am a kook for making my claims ... which I did not make to you without these supportive statements and they should be included at your website for your readers to consider.

Paul Irey

[Editorial comment:

Mr. Irey was confused by the following article which linked to a blog post by Doctor Conspiracy: Before It's News: Paul Irey Backtracks

The comment that Mr. Irey attributed to me was actually made by Doc C who referenced his call to RC Radio on my program on June 23, 2011. I neither recorded nor broadcast my call to Paul Irey in November that is the basis for the previous article on this blog.

I am also publishing the poster that Mr. Irey sent me on the Kennedy assassination. Warning: This content is very graphic.]

A Conversation with Paul Irey

Paul Irey

I called Paul Irey last week to invite him to appear on Reality Check Radio to debate  John Woodman on the authenticity of the Obama long from birth certificate. Irey has declared it to be a forgery beyond doubt. Mr. Irey’s claims are based on differences in typefaces and other anomalies among various letters in the document. In his book, Is Obama’s Birth Certificate a Fraud?: A Computer Guy Examines The Evidence For Forgery, John Woodman devoted an entire chapter to Mr. Irey’s claims and found them to be easily refuted. John Woodman has publicly challenged Paul Irey to debate him but Mr. Irey has refused. I thought I would offer a fair forum to them where a full two hours could be devoted to a debate but unfortunately Mr. Irey still refuses. Mr. Irey was kind enough to be a guest on my show earlier this year and I had hoped he would consider a return for what could be an interesting evening.

Mr. Irey and I touched on a number of topics and the conversation while civil did become heated at times. Irey concedes that John Woodman has found some major flaws in his original analysis. Namely, Woodman demonstrated that many of the letters that Irey chose to blow up for comparison are from a vertical section of the document where it appears that the copier or scanner caused a distortion. Irey concedes that Woodman is correct. Irey also said that he has sent an email to Orly Taitz, Jerome Corsi, Doug Vogt, and others advising them of the problems with his analysis and asking them not to use it. I was startled to hear this and told Mr. Irey I had never seen a single retraction printed anywhere. I told him that this hasn’t stopped Taitz from including it with her motions in several court cases and in her challenge presented to the Ballot Law Commission in New Hampshire last month. Irey offered two explanations why he was not that concerned to have his flawed analysis submitted as evidence. First he says he is still sure the birth certificate is forged because a source he will not name from the Secret Service told him in 2008 that Obama was not born in Hawaii. Second, he is working on a new analysis that will be published soon (one would assume in World Net Daily) that will be “irrefutable”.  He also said it didn’t matter because no judge had read them anyway. I suspect Irey is correct that no judge has ever really read his gobbledygook but no real expert would dare let work that he would not endorse be filed in any court.

I asked Mr. Irey if he was concerned that two administrations in Hawaii had vouched for the validity of both the 2008 COLB and the 2011 long form birth certificate and that Dr. Fukino, Loretta Fuddy, and Alvin Onaka had all staked their professional reputations on those documents. Irey replied that “Fuddy and Onaka would both be going to jail” for their complicity in the forgery. I told him that I would bet him $500 that neither of them would go to jail by a date one year from our conversation. Irey would not take the bet. (My offer still stands by the way.)

I then asked Irey how he could explain other additional evidence of that Barack Obama was born in Hawaii. These included the contemporary newspaper accounts, recollections by Obama’s teacher Barbara Nelson, and the passport records for Ann Dunham that showed that an official from the state department had investigated the Obama child’s place of birth. Irey was familiar with these but dismissed them all. He said Barbara Nelson was lying and that the newspaper announcements were the result of Obama’s grandmother filing for a birth certificate after the Obamas returned from Kenya. Irey said he remembered reading that there was a Hawaii law that allowed one to get a birth certificate that said the birth place was Hawaii even though the birth occurred elsewhere. He could not quote the statute. He said that was done for a Chinese communist but he could not remember the name. I am sure Irey was referring to the birth certificate issued by the Territory of Hawaii in 1904 for Sun Yat-sen.  Dr. Conspiracy and others have written about this fraudulent birth certificate oft cited by Birthers as proof that anyone can get birth certificate in Hawaii with merely a signature of a relative. No other certificate other than this one from 1904 has ever been produced although Orly Taitz and others have maintained it is easy to obtain a birth certificate that shows a Hawaiian birth with a mere signature of a relative.

Irey also buys into Larry Sinclair’s cockamamie stories. I will not delve into the details but let’s just say Irey is very familiar with all the details and believes Obama is bisexual and met male lovers at Rev. Wright’s church.  He had several of them killed according to Irey. He buys into other conspiracy theories too: Did you know that all the major news outlets have their news stories verified daily by the government? Mr. Irey says that this began in 1947 under the Truman administration and continues to this day. 

Paul Irey’s hobby of delving into conspiracy theories goes back a long way. If you talk to him for very long he will always get around to the Kennedy assassination. He believes the fatal shot was fired from a sewer in front of the limousine and that the famous autopsy photo showing little damage to Kennedy’s face cannot be reconciled with the Zapruder film. He believes the driver of the limousine slowed the vehicle intentionally at the right moment to allow the unknown assassin to take the fatal shot. I did not want to engage him on the Kennedy assassination details. We recently passed the 48 year anniversary of the assassination and I have seen every conspiracy on the assignation debunked to at least my satisfaction. I see no point at spending time on it. 

I am convinced that Paul Irey is sincere in his beliefs.  He might even be a pleasant guy to meet but he lives in a different world than most of us. He trusts no one and wakes up every day sure that unknown sinister forces are controlling every aspect of government and the media. Like most conspiracy theorists he always invokes the shadowy “they” to toss out mountains of evidence for which he has no explanation.  For that I pity him. However, that in no way excuses the fact that he has allowed his so-called “evidence” that he knows is flawed to be used by charlatans like Orly Taitz and Jerome Corsi to convince their gullible followers and readers that the President is a liar.

New Hampshire to Taitz: Take your nutiness back to La-La Land

Last week Orly Taitz finally got to put her stack of "zibits" and "dossies" before an honest to goodness official venue. On November 18 Taitz appeared for nearly a full hour before the New Hampshire Ballot Access Commission. The Commission held a hearing on four challenges to candidates for the January first in the nation presidential primary election. Taitz had filed her challenge against President Barack Obama based on her so called "evidence" of a forged Hawaiian birth certificate, social security fraud, and a wrong headed interpretation of the Constitutional definition of "natural born citizen". Taitz gave a 30 minute disjointed presentation and cross examined the single witness called by the commission, Assistant Secretary of State Ms. Karen Ladd. Taitz's challenge was scheduled to be heard last but as is the norm for Taitz she asked and received special treatment from the commission to accommodate her "busy schedule" and move her top the top of the list of challenges to be heard.

The bipartisan commission apparently was not swayed by Taitz and the testimony of several other supporters including one former and several current Republican state representatives. After a very short discussion they voted 5 - 0 to reject the challenge.

RC Radio again provided same day coverage of the hearing with a great account provided by The Fogbow Forum member, Whatever4. It may be downloaded here: RC Radio: The Nut's in New Hampshire Special Edition. A special thanks to W4 and to Sterngard who asked most of the questions during the interview.

A complete video of the hearing was posted by a Taitz supporter, Tim Carter:

One very telling moment came at the end of Taitz presentation when the Commission Chairman Bradford Cook (R) asked Taitz if she had any real evidence other that innuendo and opinion and Taitz said "No". What I found disturbing was the reaction to the defeat by supporters of Orly Tatiz. They accosted the counsel for the Secretary of State following the ruling. They accused the members of the Commission of committing treason. Some of these accusers include several current state representatives. Here is another video that documents the reactions of Susan Delemus and Harry Accornero both Republican members of the legislature.

A written transcript of Whatever4's recollection of the hearing is also available at Jack Ryan's SCRIBD page:

NEW HAMPSHIRE BALLOT CHALLENGE HEARING REPORT - 11-18-11 - As Reported by Whatever4 of The Fogbow

John Woodman, Springfield Computer Guy will Be on RC Radio 9/1

John Woodman, the author of the recently released book, Is Barack Obama's Birth Certificate a Fraud?, will be my guest tonight on RC Radio. John Woodman is a conservative who posted a series of videos on YouTube as Springfield Computer Guy who analyzed several claims that the Obama long form birth certificate was forged and found them to be not proof of a forgery at all. In the book Woodman takes on such "experts" as Karl Denninger, Douglas Vogt, and Paul Irey and finds all of their theories are full of holes.

Mike Dunford will also be on the show to update us on the latest action with Orly Taitz in Hawaii district court. 

To listen use this link: RC Radio  You can also call (347) 324-5546 to listen or ask a question.

RC Radio Covers Barnett v Obama Tonight

Orly Taitz - World's Worst Attorney

There will be a special edition of RC Radio at 9 PM EDT tonight to cover the oral arguments in the Ninth Circuit in Barnett v Obama. I hope to have reports from several attendees on the sights and sounds of the arguments presented by Gary Kreep, Orly Taitz, and the US Attorneys.

[Updated May 3, 2:06 PM]

Thanks to Ducktape, Sterngard, and Wavey Davey for calling with their observations and analysis of the hearing. This was the fourth hearing in this case that WD has attended. That is worthy of an as yet unnamed award for watching Orly in action w/o getting violently ill. Thanks to Kate520 for her live blogging on TFB both from the night before and during the hearing yesterday. The audio of the hearing should be up shortly so we can see how accurate our reporters were. I have no doubts they were spot on with the analysis.

You can download a podcast of the complete show here or listen using this player:


[Updated May 4, 2011]
The video of the hearing is up now:

Is Tim Adams Credible? A Reality Check

OK, I know some of you are laughing already; however, it is fair question to ask. After all, Adams is the only present or former Hawaiian government employee to my knowledge who has ever challenged the authenticity of the Obama COLB that almost every American (except for Tim Adams it seems) has seen on either FactCheck and/or Politifact.

Let's examine Adams' claims in order of importance. There have been some inconsistencies among his various interviews including the most recent one on RC Radio on March 31. However, I think I have distilled the meat of the claims that can be garnered from listening to his various interviews and reading his World Net Daily supplied "affidavit". Mr. Adams claims:

1. Barack Obama was not born in Hawaii. No "long form" Hawaiian birth certificate exists for Barack Obama. Adams claims he was told this by officials he will not name in the Department of Elections and that a search had been done and the records are not there. 
2. Unnamed Hawaiian officials asked him or his department to "vet" Obama because it was their job to vet candidates and questions were asked about Obama. 
3. Obama was born somewhere else in the US probably Washington or Kansas. He is therefore eligible to be president. 
4. Obama's COLB was not issued by the state of Hawaii and has no seal.
5. The short form certification of live birth was only issued for non hospital births or births outside of Hawaii.
6. Adams left the elections department in late August 2008 or September 2008 (various dates have been given in interviews) because of mismanagement, inappropriate access of data bases, and theft of election documents including 50 identity documents and absentee ballots from personnel stationed around the Pacific Rim. 

 Mr. Adams created a big stir in Birthistan in June of last year when he stopped by the the Council of Conservatives meeting in Nashville and appeared on James Edwards Political Cesspool radio show. Adams was introduced as the former Chief Elections Clerk in the Honolulu office. Adams repeated that title and despite what he claimed on RC Radio he never corrected the mistake until it was questioned on the Internet after the original interview. Strike one on Mr. Adams' credibility. This is no small error because that statement lent more credibility to his claims and made it seem he were the highest ranking election official in the office. This error still persists and is repeated on birther sites to this day.

Claim #1:  There is a mountain of evidence that this claim is false. The evidence includes the COLB itself, which would be accepted as proof of birth for any purpose by any state or the US government, the statements of Republican officials at the Department of Health and Governor Laura Lingle as to the existence of the documents and the validity of the COLB,  the contemporary newspaper announcements, the account from Kapi'olani hospital, the same day account of Barbara Nelson who knew Dr. Rodney West the head of maternity unit at Kapi'olani, and Obama's own account of his place of birth that was known long before he decided to run for president.  Yes, birthers have tried to pick at each of these with fake birth certificates from Kenya, fake document experts, manufactured stories of confusion on the hospital, and other bizarre explanations but the totality of the evidence that Obama was born on August 4, 1961 in Honolulu, Hawaii remains intact. Finally, we have the new statement that Dr. Fukino gave to NBC reporter Michael Isakoff this past weekend that I found while writing this very paragraph!

Claim #2: Frankly I am unclear on exactly who asked whom to vet anyone. Adams claims that "they" asked either him or his department to vet Obama because "people were asking questions".  If you think that is vague and doesn't make sense welcome to the world of trying to figure out Tim Adams. Foggy asked Adams if they were doing the same vetting process for Joe Biden. Great question! There was a very long pause and Adams said no one had asked about Biden. I wished I had asked about McCain and Palin too. Adams claimed that "they" called local hospitals and they had no records for Obama's birth. Let's think about that. Do hospitals keep records for 50 years? Were they available to someone without access under HIPAA even if they still existed? Why wouldn't a simple copy of the COLB have sufficed for proof of birth? What Hawaiian statute required this vetting and why would it have only been done for Obama? We also have the statement by Glen Takahashi who said "Our office does not have access to birth records,” Takahashi said. “That’s handled by the state of Hawaii Department of Health. Where he’s getting that, I don’t know. Put it this way: Barack Obama was not trying to register to vote in Hawaii. He is, as far as I know, not a registered voter here. So no one was looking that up.” and “To be honest, I fielded no questions about that,” Takahashi said. “Why would anyone ask us? We don’t have those records.” Adams claimed he has discredited Takahashi but offered no details. Adams made unsubstantiated charges that Takahashi was either aware of or participated in the use of criminal background check data that the department was not supposed to have.

Claim #3 The claim that Obama was born in Washington or Kansas is frankly preposterous. Adams pulled this one out of a deep dark place and offers no proof at all other than Stanley Dunham enrolled in the University of Washington in the fall 1961 (and we now know took correspondence courses). Even the craziest of birthers has ever suggested Obama was born in another US state.

Claim #4 If I sounded incredulous when Adams pulled out this one it is because I was. The Factcheck high resolution photos clearly show an embossed seal and signature. Even the initial low resolution Daily Kos/Fight the Smears scanned copy shows the seal when the contrast is enhanced. Adams said he would go look at the FactCheck photos and could disprove them in five minutes. We are still waiting. Just in case he missed the link it is http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html The good news is that Adams made one completely correct claim! Obama is eligible.

Claim #5 Now this was a completely new one. I could tell Doc C was guffawing silently when Adams made this claim. Adams again provided no proof at all. We know from the Nordyke 1965 copies of the original Hawaiian 1960's vintage birth certificates that the same form was designed for both hospital and non hospital births. Box 6c on the form says "name of hospital or institution (if not hospital or institution give street address)". This sounds like it would cover home births outside of a hospital or institution doesn't it? We have also seen copies of post 2001 birth certificates and they look exactly like Obama's COLB. No one other than Adams has ever claimed the COLB documents only certain a certain category of birth. 

Claim #6 This claim has nothing to do with Obama but it seems to be Adams' attempt to explain why he left his job and to cast doubt on the integrity of the elections department and the Hawaii government in general. I find it puzzling that Adams would attempt to discredit the same folks who are apparently the source for his information on the birth records but that is exactly what Adams is doing here. The imprecision of Adams wording makes it tough to evaluate the veracity of his claim. He appears to be claiming that 50 "identity documents" and absentee ballots were stolen in order for someone to figure out whether political appointees were voting for Obama. Since Hawaii had no presidential preference primary in 2008 (Hawaii was a caucus state) and the ballots for the general election had not been mailed by the time Adams left his position we can rule this claim as false.

Hawaii held a primary election on September 20, 2008 for races other than the presidential contest. Applications for absentee ballots were accepted beginning July 22, 2008 for both the primary and general elections. Some of the ballots for the primary election would have been received into the office before Adams left. The only information that might be obtained by pilfering through these ballots is whether a person voted the Republican, Democratic, or Independent section of the ballot. I believe most states use a two envelope system to maintain voter anonymity for mail in ballots. This brochure for the Hawaii 2008 elections has many of the key details and dates. Obviously the results of the September primary would need to be certified before the ballots for the November  general election could be printed.

I searched for articles that might have confirmed any of Adams' claims about corruption in the election department in Hawaii. I could not find any confirmation of missing ballots or identity documents. It seems that there was some controversy about a couple of actions by Kevin Cronin who was the Chief Election Officer for Hawaii in 2008. First he failed to register himself  to vote in a timely fashion as was required to hold the office. There was also a controversy over the acceptance of a late filing by a candidate for a state house position. These accusations even if true hardly seem to match the corruption allegations that Adams claims led to his departure in 2008. Cronin's actions would have had nothing to do with anything Adams might have been involved.

Mr. Adams  certainly seems to believe his claims. It is troubling that Adams will not name a single person with whom he worked who will verify a single claim he was made. Adams calls those those who have made contrary statements' including high ranking official Glen Takahashi, liars. If Adams' claims about Obama were "an open secret" as he said it seems incredible that some verification for those could not be obtained even 2 - 1/2 years later. So, after weighing the facts, the facts rule, and I must rule that Mr. Adams is not credible.

RC radio is now being rebroadcast three times per week on D Blog Radio. The times are Thursday at 1 PM ET and Saturday at 5 AM and 1 PM ET. They have some good progressive content including Norman Goldman, Democracy Now!, The Majority Report, and several shows from BTR.  Please give it a try and thank them for rebroadcasting RC  Radio.

RC Radio Asks WND to Comment on Troubling Revelation from Tim Adams

Joe Farah

RC Radio has asked Joe Farah, the editor of World Net Daily, to comment on the troubling revelation by Tim Adams on RC radio  that the affidavit that was published earlier this year was actually prepared at the behest of World Net Daily by their own attorney.

I sent the following email to Joe Farah and asked that either he or Jerome Corsi come on the show to answer questions about their questionable journalistic practices that were displayed in this incident.

Mr. Farah:

I do a weekly radio show on the Obama eligibility controversy. My guest last week was Timothy Adams of Bowling Green, Kentucky. As you are aware he was a former temporary election worker in the Honolulu office in 2008. He made the rather remarkable revelation on my show that the affidavit that was featured in an article in World Net Daily was actually prepared by an attorney paid by World Net Daily. Can you confirm that? Doesn't that go way beyond the bounds of ethical journalism? ... (copy of show transcript included)

I would like to have either you or Mr. Corsi as a guest on my show to explain your organization's involvement in the story and the production of the affidavit.

Regards,
RC

World Net Daily is also the source for many outright lies and deceptive articles on the "Birther" issue. Most notably, World Net Daily is the source of the common misconception that "Obama has spent millions to keep his records hidden". WND ran this article that tried to push the idea that the entire amount spent by the Obama campaign for legal work on the 2008 campaign was spent on "Birther" lawsuits. It appears the Adams affidavit written by WND continues their long traditions of ignoring ethics in journalism 101.

Is Mark Hatfield a Flip Flopper?

Georgia Representative Mark Hatfield appeared on RC Radio last night. He had some late breaking news that he had made some significant changes to the bill that included removing unconstitutional provisions such as the requirement that a candidate may have never held dual citizenship. He also said that to prove that the bill was not just an anti-Obama bill he was changing the effective date until after the 2012 election. Here is what he said:



OK, that sounded like a move in the right direction. However, today Hatfield has been quoted on a Birther web site, Obama Release Your Records, as saying that he now really wants to make sure this bill applies to Obama and would folks please call the Georgia legislature and support his bill:

"ObamaRelease YourRecords said...From: mhatfield@wayxcable.com

Reply-To: mhatfield@wayxcable.com
To: ########## Please understand that I am dealing with recalcitrant leadership which will not allow the bill to move through the committee process. We are trying to get the bill dislodged from subcommittee, and this proposal was made in an attempt to get the House leadership to allow the bill to be considered. The bill would not be required to stay in this form, but we have to try something to get the bill moving. If we don't get some movement right away, the bill will be dead for the year. You don't need to convince me that Obama needs to be subject to a law requiring proof of eligibility; I believe it wholeheartedly and have been actively advocating for it for years. Your efforts would be better spent contacting the leadership of the Georgia House and demanding that the bill be allowed to move. Nothing short of massive public outcry is going to get their attention it seems. I would appreciate your efforts and continued support of the bill.

Please pass this information on. I don't need people on my own side throwing me under the bus! Thanks!

Rep. Mark Hatfield

Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry"

and

"The bill would not be required to stay in this form, but we have to try something to get the bill moving. If we don't get some movement right away, the bill will be dead for the year."

and

"You don't need to convince me that Obama needs to be subject to a law requiring proof of eligibility; I believe it wholeheartedly and have been actively advocating for it for years."

So golly gee Mr. Hatfield, do you mean this really was all about Barack Obama after all?

By the way, Obama Release Your Records, you  included a copy of a clip from my show and added your Obama hate crap without any attribution. It hasn't gone unnoticed.