Robert Moore Says Felonies Have Been Committed

Custom Search



These felonies are impeachable offenses.



help fight the media




Produced by Robert Moore and archived on June 25, 2011 . . .

Obama Fraudulent Certificate of Live Birth

It is no longer necessary to prove where President Obama was born.  The provable crime is now FORGERY of a government document used for identification, which is a FELONY.


Dear Fellow Americans,

First of all I want to say that it does not matter if you are a Republican, Democrat or Independent.  What Obama and company did was lie to all of us and was aided by companies in the media who looked the other way, in essence they covered up for him.  What I have presented is irrefutable proof that the Certificate of Live Birth (COLB) that Obama presented to the world on April 27, 2011 is a fraudulently created document put together using the Adobe Photoshop or Illustrator programs and the creation of this forgery of a public document constitutes a class B felony in Hawaii and multiple felonies under U.S. Code section Title 18, Part 1, Chapter 47, Sec.1028, and therefore an impeachable offense.  This whole affair is a serious national security issue and should not be construed as merely partisan politics or a racial issue.  When this comes to the publicís attention, it will be the greatest scandal in the countryís history -- nothing comes even close.  This will surpass all previous scandals including the Watergate scandal of the Nixon administration.

First of all I want to state that those of you who are "True Believers" of Obama and the left-wing of the Democratic party and wish to defend him and his COLB, you are stuck with defending what was stated during the April 27, 2011 Pre-news conference held at 8:48 a.m. (see below for the complete transcript), about an hour before Obama gave his news conference.  I have included the text from that news conference and have highlighted in red the important facts you are stuck having to defend.  That means you cannot bring up the alleged scan and OCR of the hard copy of the COLB because they never said that was done and presented to the public.  They later said the document was just scanned, nothing more.


To further prove that fact, the PDF file presented by the White House was NOT A SEARCHABLE PDF, got that -- so you can't explain away the nine layers found in the COLB PDF as a result of an OCR program.  You are stuck having to defend exactly what the White House spokesmen said during this news conference.


I will later put up a challenge to those who wish to disprove all nine items.  The reason you have to disprove ALL nine items is because if ONLY ONE remains, Obama's Certificate is a fraud and he is then guilty of FORGERY!  Also you should also realize that Obama does not deserve your support.  I will assume you are all honorable people, you have just been ill taught and think that socialism is the best form of economic policy and government, I for one wish not to be a serf to any bureaucracy.  I assume you would not perpetrate a forgery to deceive someone or a whole nation.  Ask yourself: Why should you support this behavior?  Doesnít the Democratic party have any honorable people that can run for President?


Links to download and read.

  1. The original Obama Certificate of Live Birth presented on April 28, 2011, a PDF file of 380k.
  2. Revised and Expanded Affidavit of Douglas Vogt, May 22, 2011 Total of 8 items now listed.
  3. Final Report 28-page long report of Douglas Vogt on the forgery of Obamaís Certificate of Live Birth-News Release written by Douglas Vogt.
  4. The 2009 Pentagon report on Economic Terrorism in 2008 entitled: Economic Warfare Risks and Responses by Kevin D. Freeman.
Summary of what is wrong with Obama's Certificate of Live Birth


1.  Curved and non-curved type on the left-hand edge.
2.  A white haloing around all the type on the form.
3.  The Obama Certificate is loaded with both binary and grayscale letters on the same form supposedly from one scan.
4.  The Sequential Number is a forgery.
5.  Two different colors in Form boxes 17a, 20 and 22 Date Accepted by Reg. General.
The official seal is not part of the Certificate of Live Birth and they used the wrong size impression of a seal.
7.  The hand stamped certification from the current registrar is a forged stamped notice.
8.  Forged signatures of the Mother and Registrar.
9.  Multiple layers in the PDF file from the White House.


Who Has Been Notified

A formal notice that multiple felonies had been committed under U.S. Code section Title 18, Part 1, Chapter 47, Section 1028.  I mailed the notice to Director Robert Mueller III at the FBI headquarters in Washington DC on May 25th and 26th (RE461679786US and EG410045020US).  A copy of that notice was also mailed to Special Agent in Charge Frank Montoya in Honolulu, HI (70103090000164047965 and 9410803699300019474252).  They were mailed there because that is where the crimes occurred.  I have mailed copies of the full report to Republican members of the Senate on the Homeland Security Committee and on the House side the Congressman on the Ethics and Homeland Security Committees.  I have also mailed it to additional Congressman.
What you can do is write to your congressman and ask them to have hearing on this very serious matter.  Write to Director Mueller of the FBI and ask him to please do an investigation and secure the evidence as soon as possible.  The country is in great danger because of the actions this administration has done.

It does not matter if you are a Democrat, Republican or Independent; Obama has deceived all of us and has lied his way to the top with the help of many leftists in and out of government.  This should be a nonpartisan issue and should be examined as a grave national security issue.

The Laws That Have Been Broken

I am not an attorney but was an accountant and worked for three CPA firms before I went into business for myself.  I have read and understood the Federal Tax code, so understanding Title 18 is no problem.  I have listed in Appendix D the entire section of the Federal Code that directly covers the seriousness of this fraud.

Under Hawaii State code ß708-851, it would be forgery in the first degree which is a Class B Felony (Appendix B).

The Federal charges are much more extensive because of the nature of the crime, and who did it and the ramifications to the country.  It would not surprise me that maximum prison sentences were given out but of course a judge and jury would have to determine that.  The Federal law is covered under Title 18-Crimes and Criminal Procedures; Part 1-Crimes, Chapter 47- Fraud and False Statements, Section-1028-Fraud and related activity in connection with identification documents, authentication features, and information is the main section that the forgery of a Certificate of Live Birth would be covered under.


1. Forgery of a public document; 2. Conspiracy to commit forgery, because Obama had to have paid someone to create the forgery and it is evident others were involved; 3. Obstruction of Justice if this went to trial; 4 and 5.  If the conspirators had bribed a County Clerk(s) to insert this PDF file into the countyís document imaging system, you would have bribery and tampering with government records.  All of these are felonies and are impeachable offenses.  The penalty for committing document forgery is up to 15 years in prison and for just forging the unique Certificate number is another 5 years.  At this point it does not matter if he was born in Kenya or Hawaii.  He is now facing forgery charges and much more.

If Congress does not hold a hearing on this forgery, the vast majority of Americans will lose faith in our countryís legal system and governmental institutions.  As it is, the public poll numbers for Congress are in the low two digits.  Congress and the ruling elite have to decide whether we are a country of laws or are the laws only enforced on the little people and those outside of the ruling political party.

My Credentials

I have a unique background that enables me to analyze this document in a competent, detailed, and extensive manner.  I owned a typesetting company (Nova Typesetting) for eleven years, and thus have extensive knowledge and experience in type and form design.  I have owned Archive Index Systems since 1993, a company that sells a wide selection of document scanners worldwide, and which also developed and sold document imaging software (TheRepository).  Additionally, I have an extensive knowledge of how scanners function and their capabilities.  I have also sold other document imaging programs, such as Laser Fiche, Liberty and Alchemy.  I have sold and installed document imaging systems in city and county governments, and thus have extensive knowledge of municipal and county document imaging programs and procedures, including the design and implementation of such programs.  Additionally, I have a good working knowledge of Adobe Photoshop and Illustrator.  These factors will be crucial in understanding what has occurred with Obamaís Certificate of Live Birth.

Robert Moore

The Lid Slams Shut Or The Miracle Of The Three Stamps -- Here Are The Sides Of The Box
1.  April 25th Judith Corley, by order of the PRESIDENT retrieves from Fuddy and Onaka TWO hand made indisputably authenticated for the PRESIDENT Documents.  We can call these Documents A & B.
2.  April 27th Prior to the hasty special PRESIDENT'S news conference on the morning of the 27th Attorney Savannah Guthrie, NBC News super star, legal analyst and soon to be host of the G.E. affiliated networkís Today Show and Obama approved document wizard, reviews and inspects, as the only human on the planet qualified, one of the TWO Documents.  It has no smiley face and she proclaims it's embossed.  No smiley face is: Document A.  I believe.
3.  April 27th. Obama guarantees and authenticates the process, procedure and officiates at the baptism of the authentic documents just handed out to the White House press Corps.  He asks for an end to this silliness.  He orders a posting on the White House Web page of a document: a simple scan to Adobe pdf. and a web publish.  No problemo.  It has to be Document A or B.

4.  This side is no problem.  We all have access.  Maybe we have a copy.  Itís the publishing of the White House pdf.  The official Obama approved, handled, ordered, Attorney retrieved and scanned and uploaded Document.  We see it matches the handout.  And as we see it doesnít match the Guthrie photo.  This document has a smiley face as does the handout.  The Guthrie photo does not.  Which document is this?  It has no smiley face.  It does match the handoutís smiley face.  The Guthrie photo has no smiley face and itís Document A.  Therefore itís Document B, the missing Document of TWO.  I believe.  And now so should you.
Let me tell you about the miracle of the three stamps.  It is completely impossible for a human being to place 2 pieces of paper side by side and strike them both in the same exact identical place with a rubber stamp.  Try it.  Get your bank deposit stamp, a date stamp, even your kidsí toy stamp kit that stamps a flower, ink it, stamp it once on a sheet of paper and strike it again on a piece of paper along side, one thatís the same size, try it on lined paper.  Place the 2 sheets afterwards in perfect alignment on top of each other, edge to edge, as one, and hold them up to the light.  Do you see one stamp?  Are they perfect overlapping mates?  Or did you miss the spot?  Now imagine that you have TWO documents that require three hand applied stamps.  Each one stamped for date.  Each one stamped for registrar.  Each one crimped and therefore embossed by hand or in an electric official embosser.  And they are for the PRESIDENT.  Thatís 6 stamps hand applied.  Try it, ask your notary to do this, and you will see itís impossible for a human to hand stamp 2 individual documents each in 3 places in the identical and perfect same place.  This can only occur in printing.  It can only be like matching labels or 2 aces of whatever from separate but alike decks of cards.  It cannot happen by hand.  I beg you to try, for the PRESIDENT.  This is the lid and it slams shut here.  The Guthrie photo when enlarged to the same exact size as the White House pdf. and both of them as I have pointed out are different: Document A is the Guthrie photo, no smiley face, Document B is the White House pdf with a smiley face, and while these are clearly TWO distinguishable documents A& B they happen to have 3 stamps in the exact same place and when they are overlapped or superimposed or measured by any means possible are like the labels of 2 mayonnaise jars or copies made at the same time.  This is a miracle or final proof of a forgery.  You canít have exactly mapped stamps times one let alone times three on TWO different documents.  But by Obamaís truth we have the miracle of the 3 stamps.  I believe and so should you.  Try it for yourself.  If you succeed you are a forger or Obama.


Now start thinking about what Douglas Vogt has to say.


The statutes mentioned in this news conference are included in my final report linked on this page.

Press Gaggle by Press Secretary Jay Carney, 4/27/2011, James S. Brady Press Briefing Room

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release
April 27, 2011

8:48 A.M. EDT


MR. CARNEY:  Good morning, everybody.  You can read the paperwork we just handed out in a minute.  Let me just get started.  Thank you for coming this morning.  I have with me today Dan Pfeiffer, the Presidentís Director of Communications, as well as Bob Bauer, the Presidentís White House Counsel, who will have a few things to say about the documents we handed to you today.  And then we'll take your questions.  I remind you this is off camera and only pen and pad, not for audio.  And I give you Dan Pfeiffer.


MR. PFEIFFER:  Thanks, Jay.  What you have in front of you now is a packet of papers that includes the Presidentís long-form birth certificate from the state of Hawaii, the original birth certificate that the President requested and we posted online in 2008, and then the correspondence between the Presidentís counsel and the Hawaii State Department of Health that led to the release of those documents.


If you would just give me a minute to -- indulge me a second to walk through a little of the history here, since all of you weren't around in 2008 when we originally released the Presidentís birth certificate, I will do that.  And then Bob Bauer will walk through the timeline of how we acquired these documents.


In 2008, in response to media inquiries, the Presidentís campaign requested his birth certificate from the state of Hawaii.  We received that document; we posted it on the website.  That document was then inspected by independent fact checkers (NOTE:  This is a lie.  These people are partisan Democrats -- see HERE), who came to the campaign headquarters and inspected the document -- independent fact checkers did, and declared that it was proof positive that the President was born in Hawaii.


To be clear, the document we presented on the Presidentís website in 2008 is his birth certificate.  It is the piece of paper that every Hawaiian receives when they contact the state to request a birth certificate.  It is the birth certificate they take to the Department of Motor Vehicles to get their driverís license and that they take to the federal government to get their passport.  It is the legally recognized document.


That essentially -- for those of you who followed the campaign closely know that solved the issue.  We didnít spend any time talking about this after that.  There may have been some very fringe discussion out there, but as a campaign issue it was settled and it was --


Q:   When you posted this did you post the other side of it where the signature is?


MR. PFEIFFER:  Yes. (NOTE:  This is a lie -- see HERE)


Q:  Because it is not here and that's been an issue.


MR. PFEIFFER:  We posted both sides and when it was looked at it was looked at by -- the fact checkers came to headquarters and actually examined the document we had.


That settled the issue.  In recent weeks, the issue has risen again as some folks have begun raising a question about the original -- about the long-form birth certificate you now have in front of you.  And Bob will explain why -- the extraordinary steps we had to take to receive that and the legal restraints that are in place there.


But it became an issue again.  And it went to -- essentially the discussion transcended from the nether regions of the Internet into mainstream political debate in this country.  It became something that when both Republicans and Democrats were talking to the media they were asked about.  It was a constant discussion on mainstream news organizations.  And the President believed that it was becoming a distraction from the major issues we're having in this country.


And he was particularly struck by the fact that right after the Republicans released their budget framework and the President released his, we were prepared to have a very important, very vigorous debate in this country about the future of the country, the direction weíre going to take, how weíre doing to deal with very important issues like education, Medicare, how weíre going to deal with taxes in this country.  And that should -- thatís the debate we should be having yet.


What was really dominating a lot of discussion was this fake controversy, essentially, a sideshow, that was distracting from this real issue.  And an example of that would be when major Democrats and Republicans went onto mainstream news organizations to talk about their budget plans -- including the President -- they were asked about this.  They were asked about what they thought about the controversy.  They were asked if they believed the President was born in the United States.  And it was really a distraction.


That really struck the President, led him to ask his counsel to look into whether we could ask the state of Hawaii to release the long-form certificate, which is not something they generally do.  And he did that despite the fact that it probably was not in his long-term -- it would have been in his -- probably in his long-term political interests to allow this Birther debate to dominate discussion in the Republican Party for months to come.  But he thought even though it might have been good politics, he thought it was bad for the country.  And so he asked counsel to look into this.


And now Iíll have Bob explain that, and then weíll take your questions.


MR. CARNEY:  I just want to -- sorry, I meant to mention at the top, as some of you may have seen, the President will be coming to the briefing room at 9:45 a.m., making a brief statement about this -- not taking questions, but just wanted to let you know.


MR. PFEIFFER:  And he will use this as an opportunity to make a larger point about what this debate says about our politics.  Go ahead, Bob.


MR. BAUER: Early last week the decision was made to review the legal basis for seeking a waiver from the longstanding prohibition in the state Department of Health on releasing the long-form birth certificate. And so we undertook a legal analysis and determined a waiver request could be made that we had the grounds upon which to make that request.


And by Thursday of last week, I spoke to private counsel to the President and asked her to contact the State Department of Health and to have a conversation about any requirements, further requirements, that they thought we had to satisfy to lodge that waiver request.  She had that conversation with the state Department of Health on Thursday -- counsel in question is Judy Corley at the law firm of Perkins Coie, and you have a copy of the letter she subsequently sent to the department with the Presidentís written request.


The department outlined the requirements for the President to make this request.  He signed a letter making that request on Friday afternoon upon returning from the West Coast.  And private counsel forwarded his written request -- written, signed request -- along with a letter from counsel, to the state Department of Health on Friday.


The department, as I understood it, after reviewing the law and reviewing the grounds asserted in the request, came to the conclusion that a waiver could be appropriately granted.  We were advised that the long-form birth certificate could be copied and made available to us as early as Monday, April 25th -- the day before yesterday.  And we made arrangements for counsel to travel to Honolulu to pick it up and it was returned to the White House yesterday afternoon.


Let me emphasize again, there is a specific statute that governs access to and inspection of vital records in the state of Hawaii.  The birth certificate that we posted online is, in fact, and always has been, and remains, the legal birth certificate of the President that would be used for all legal purposes that any resident of Hawaii would want to use a birth certificate for.


However, there is legal authority in the department to make exceptions to the general policy on not releasing the long-form birth certificate.  The policy in question, by the way, on non-release has been in effect since the mid-1980s, I understand.  So while I cannot tell you what the entire history of exceptions has been, it is a limited one.  This is one of very few that I understand have been granted for the reasons set out in private counselís letter.


MR. PFEIFFER:  We'll be happy to take some questions.


Q:  I guess I just want to make sure that weíre clear on this.  Even though this one says "Certificate Of Live Birth" on here, this is different than the other certificate of live birth that weíve seen?


MR. PFEIFFER:  Yes. The second page there is the one that was posted on the Internet.


Q:  Okay.


MR. PFEIFFER:  And that is a copy of the one that has been kept at the Hawaii Department of Health.


Q:  Okay. And this is the one that would be referred to -- that people have been asking for that is the birth certificate?


MR. PFEIFFER:  They are both -- the second one is the birth certificate.  The one on the top is what is referred to as the long-form birth certificate.  As you can see -- and Bob can walk you through it -- it contains some additional information that is not on the second page, which was the birth certificate which was released during the campaign.


If you could just explain the difference.


MR. BAUER:  Thereís a difference between a certificate and a certification.  The certification is simply a verification of certain information thatís in the original birth certificate.  The birth certificate, as you can see, has signatures at the bottom from the attending physician, the local registrar, who essentially oversees the maintenance of the records.  It contains some additional information also -- that is to say, the original birth certificate -- it contains some additional information like the ages of the parents, birthplaces, residence, street address, the name of the hospital.


The core information thatís required for legal purposes and that is put into the actual certification thatís a computer-generated document, which we posted in 2008, that information is abstracted, if you will, from the original birth certificate, put into the computerized short-form certification, and made available to Hawaiian residents at their request.


So the long form, which is a certificate, has more information, but the short form has the information thatís legally sufficient for all the relevant purposes.


Q:  This first one has never been released publicly, correct?


MR. BAUER: Thatís correct.  It is in a bound volume in the records at the state Department of Health in Hawaii.


Q:  Bob, can you explain why President Obama let this drag on for four years? Was it Donald Trump that prompted you to issue this?


MR. BAUER: Iíll let Dan --




Q:  I know you expected that question, right? (Laughter.)

MR. PFEIFFER:  He even said you would be the one who would ask it. (Laughter.)


I donít think this dragged on for four years because this was a resolved -- for those of you who remember the campaign, this issue was resolved in 2008. And it has not been an issue, none of you have asked about it, called about it, reported on it until the last few weeks.


And as I said earlier, it probably would have been -- a lot of the pundits out there have talked about the fact that this whole Birther debate has been really bad for the Republican Party and would probably be good for the president politically.  But despite that, the president, as I said, was struck by how this was crowding out the debate, particularly around the budget, on important issues, and was an example of the sort of sideshows that our politics focuses on instead of the real challenges that we have to confront as a country.


And so thatís why he made this decision now, because it became an issue that transcended sort of this -- it essentially was something that was talked about, as I said, from the nether regions of the Internet onto mainstream network newscasts.  In fact, Jay has been asked about this just yesterday in this room.


Q:  So I guess the implication is that you did get political advantage by having not released this until today, over the course of the last four years?


MR. PFEIFFER:  There has been -- no one that I can recall actually asked us to -- we were asked to release the presidentís birth certificate in 2008.  We did that.  And then no one -- it never -- up until a few weeks ago, there was never an issue about that that wasnít the birth certificate from any credible individual or media outlet.  And it hasnít been until -- I mean, Jay was asked about this yesterday --


Q:  When you say that, you mean certification -- you released the certification?


MR. PFEIFFER:  When any Hawaiian wants -- requests their birth certificate because they want to get a driverís license, they want to get a passport, they do exactly what the president did in 2008.  And thatís what that is.  And we released that.  And thatís what any Hawaiian would do to release their birth certificate.  And that was good enough for everyone until very recently this became a question again.  And so the president made this decision.  Heíll talk to you more about his thinking on that.


Q:  And this is going to sound -- I mean, you can just anticipate what people are going to -- remain unconvinced.  Theyíre going to say that this is just a photocopy of a piece of paper, you could have typed anything in there.  Will the actual certificate be on display or viewable at any -- (laughter.)


Q:  Will the President be holding it?


MR. PFEIFFER:  He will not, and I will not leave it here for him to do so.  But it will -- the State Department of Health in Hawaii will obviously attest that that is a -- what they have on file.  (Note:  But will they say it's a true copy of Obama's original long-form birth certificate -- No!) As Bob said, itís in a book in Hawaii. (But the governor couldn't find it?)


MR. BAUER: And youíll see the letter from the director of the Health Department that states that she oversaw the copy and is attesting to --


Q:  But do you understand that this could quiet the conspiracy theorists?


MR. PFEIFFER:  There will always be some selection of people who will believe something, and that's not the issue.  The issue is that this is not a discussion that is just happening among conspiracy theorists.  Itís happening here in this room; itís happening on all of the networks.  And itís something that, as I said, every major political figure of both parties whoís actually out trying to talk about real issues is asked about this by the media.  And so the president decided to release this.  And I'll leave it to others to decide whether thereís still -- there will be some who still have a different -- have a conspiracy about this.


Q:  Youíve got two certified copies, according to this study.  You have these physical --


MR. PFEIFFER:  Yes.  I showed you one.  Just one.


Q:  You showed us a photocopy of one.


MR. PFEIFFER:  No, I showed you --


Q:  Does that have a stamp?


MR. PFEIFFER:  It has a seal on it.


Q:  Why does this rise to the level of a presidential statement?


MR. PFEIFFER:  The president -- this in itself -- when you hear the president I think youíll understand the point heís making.  That will be in not too long.


Q:  Did the president change his own mind about this? In other words, was he advocating during the campaign letís just put it out there and get it over with, or was this an internal shift in thinking based -- in other words, was it the president who steadfastly during the campaign said this is ridiculous, I don't want to give this any more ground, and has now changed his mind?  Or is this the --


MR. PFEIFFER:  Letís be very clear.  You were there for the campaign.  There was never a question about the original birth certificate during the campaign.  It was a settled issue.  I was there for the original decision to release the birth certificate.  I was there when we posted it online.  I'm not sure I even knew there was an original one that was different than the one we posted online because it wasnít an issue.  So it wasnít like -- letís be very clear.  We were asked for the presidentís birth certificate in 2008; we released the presidentís birth certificate; and it was done.  That was it.


And so there hasnít been a discussion about this other document for years.  Itís only been in the last few weeks.  And so to your second question, the president decided to do this and he'll talk about this when he gets here -- decided to do it at the timeline that Bob laid out because it was a -- this was a sideshow that was distracting from the real challenges that we're facing.


Itís not just a sideshow for him; itís a sideshow for our entire politics that have become focused on this.


Q:  Not to give Donald Trump more publicity than he has, but is he the person who sort of -- sort of that bridge between what you're calling a fringe and the mainstream?  Do you think that heís the reason why this tripped the switch to a level where you now have to deal with something you thought was dealt with?


MR. PFEIFFER:  Itís not for me to say why mainstream media organizations began to cover this debate.  Theyíll have to answer that for themselves.


Q:  How concerned were you about running against Donald Trump in a general election?


MR. PFEIFFER:  I'd refer any questions on the election to the campaign.


Q:  Can you address the reports of Petraeus to the CIA and DOD --


MR. PFEIFFER:  You get points for that, Carol.  (Laughter.)

MR. CARNEY:  Yes.  I don't have -- but youíll be disappointed to learn that I don't have a personnel announcement for you.  The president will be addressing this -- questions about personnel tomorrow.


Q:  Dan, was there a debate about whether or not this deserved being discussed by the White House, whether or not -- and I'm going back to the birth certificate.  I lose points, I understand.  But was there debate about whether or not this was worthy of the White House?


MR. PFEIFFER:  The point I'd make is that we weren't the ones who -- we're not the first ones to bring this up in this room.  Jay has been asked questions about this; the president has been asked about it in media interviews.  And so that wasnít a decision that we made, and the president made the decision to do this and he made the decision to -- and when he comes down here this morning he'll talk to you about why he thinks thereís an important point to be made here.


Q:  Getting back to the personnel announcements, does the president understand that these announcements have been made and sourced satisfactorily for most news organizations before he speaks up and heís not letting his White House corroborate?


MR. CARNEY:  I don't have a comment on that for you, Bill.  (Laughter.)


Q:  I mean, this is such BS.  Itís all out there and you guys are -- okay, the president is going to talk about this tomorrow so we can't say anything.


MR. CARNEY:  Bill, you're free to make phone calls everywhere you can.  I'm just saying that we don't have a personnel announcement for you today.


Q:  And he'll tomorrow, he'll cover all the aforementioned switches?


MR. CARNEY:  We'll have a personnel announcement tomorrow.


Q:  Jay, yesterday you talked about failsafe triggers as sort of a positive alternative to spending cuts.  I'm wondering if the White House has any openness to including that, because itís a White House proposal, including that in any legislation that would raise the debt ceiling limit.


MR. CARNEY:  Well, what we've said very clearly, and I think Secretary Geithner said it eloquently yesterday, it is a dangerous, risky idea to hold hostage any other -- hold hostage, rather, raising the debt ceiling, a vote on raising the debt ceiling, to any other piece of legislation.  The commitment this president has to moving aggressively towards a comprehensive deficit reduction plan is clear.  It will be clear again when the vice president convenes a meeting, bipartisan, bicameral meeting, next week.  And he hopes that progress will be made on that very quickly.


In terms of negotiating what that would look like, I think the negotiators should do that, led by the vice president, Republicans and Democrats together.  But again, explicitly linking or holding hostage the absolute necessity of raising the debt ceiling to any other piece of legislation and declaring that we'll tank the U.S. economy and perhaps the global economy if we don't get this specific thing that we want, I think is a dangerous and unprecedented thing to do.


And we're confident, remain confident, that the leaders of both parties in Congress, as well as the president, will agree with the president, as I have said many times, that we do not have an alternative to raising the debt ceiling because, as many have said, outside observers, economists and businessmen and women, the impact of that would be calamitous at best.


Q:  So even though itís your own proposal that you guys endorsed you don't want to see it as part of the final package?


MR. CARNEY:  I'm not negotiating individual pieces of a package that we hope Republicans and Democrats can come together around from this podium. But again, we believe itís essential to -- the President believes -- that's one of the reasons why we're doing this right now -- we believe that these are big debates that need to be had. They can be contentious, argumentative, serious, comprehensive, detailed, because theyíre important; theyíre all about Americaís future. And theyíre about visions of this country and where we're going that need to be debated. And this debate was being crowded out in many ways by a sideshow.


And he looks forward to having a debate on the real issues that Americans want us to talk about -- long-term economic plans, deficit reduction, investments in the kinds of things that will help this economy grow and create jobs, dealing with our energy needs, a long-term energy plan.  These are all issues that have been sidetracked at least in the public debate by some of the issues that we're talking about this morning.


Q:  Is there a concern that more and more people were actually starting to believe its sideshow -- I mean, people have been asking about --


MR. CARNEY:  I will let the president speak for himself, but what Dan was saying and I think is important is that the issue here is that the president feels that this was bad for the country; that itís not healthy for our political debate, when we have so many important issues that Americans care about, that affect their lives, to be drawn into sideshows about fallacies that have been disproven with the full weight of a legal document for several years.


So, again, as Dan said, and a lot of political pundits have said, you could say that it would be good politics, smart politics, for the president to let this play out.  He cares more about whatís good for the country.  He wants the debate on the issues.  He wants the focus on the issues that Americans care about.


Q:  Jay, the president yesterday said that he had been talking to oil exporters about increasing output.  Who specifically has he been talking --


MR. CARNEY:  Well, I said -- I want to clarify. I said several times I believe from this podium when asked questions about our overall handling of the issue of high gas prices that we've had conversations with oil-producing states and allies and those conversations continue.  I don't have specific "the president spoke with this leader or other government officials spoke with others," but those are ongoing conversations that, of course, we would be having in a situation like this.


Q:  Do you guys have any comment on the NATO soldiers that were killed in Afghanistan and any confirmation on whether there were Americans?


MR. CARNEY: I don't have anything for you on that this morning.


Q:  Just quickly, back on the birth certificate, yesterday you said this was a settled issue.  So --


MR. CARNEY:  Well, as Dan said, again, it has been a settled issue.


MR. PFEIFFER:  From a factual point of view, itís absolutely a settled issue.  But the fact that it was a settled issue did not keep it from becoming a major part of the political discussion in this town for the last several weeks here.  So thereís absolutely no question that what the president released in 2008 was his birth certificate and answered that question, and many of your organizations have done excellent reporting which proved that to be the case.  But it continued; the president thought it was a sideshow and chose to take this step today for the reasons Bob laid out.


Q:  Aside from the policy distractions that was presented, did you have some concern because it was sort of reaching back into the mainstream news coverage that this could become a factor in the 2012 election with centrist voters?




Q:  Just to clarify what this document is --


MR. PFEIFFER:  This is the -- the letter first and the two certified copies -- this is one of those.  This is the same thing you have a copy of as the first page of your packet.


Q:  How did it get here?


MR. PFEIFFER:  As Bob said, it arrived by plane -- the presidentís personal counsel went to Hawaii and brought it back and we got it last night.


Q:  Last night?


MR. PFEIFFER: Last night.


Q:  What time?


MR. PFEIFFER:  Between 4:00 p.m. and 5:00 p.m.


Q:  When did you decide to do this gaggle?


MR. PFEIFFER:  Whatís that?


Q:  When was this gaggle put on -- when was this planned?


MR. PFEIFFER:  Whatever time you received your guidance suggesting that it would be "this time tomorrow morning."


Q:  Are these letters supposed to demonstrate the legal steps that were involved in releasing it to the White House counsel?


MR. BAUER:  The letters that you have, the personal request from the president, along with the accompanying letter from private counsel, is merely meant to document the legal path to getting the waiver of that policy so we could get the long-form certificate.


Q:  The waiver of Hawaii state government policy?


MR. BAUER:  Right.  The non-release of the long-form certificate, which has been in effect since the 1980s -- a natural question would have been, well, what did you do to obtain the waiver, and those letters represent the request.


Q:  Well, isnít it true that anybody who was born in Hawaii can write this letter? I mean, that's all there is to the waiver process?


MR. BAUER:  No.  Let me just explain once again because I also noticed, by the way, in one report already the wrong certificate was actually posted on the website.  The certificate with the signatures at the bottom -- and that's a key difference between the short form and the long form -- the long form has signatures at the bottom from the attending physician, the local registrar, and the mother, is the original birth certificate, which sits in a bound volume in the State Department of Health.


The short from is a computerized abstract, and that's the legal birth certificate we requested in 2008 and that Hawaiians are entitled to. Since the mid-1980s, the State Department of Health, for administrative reasons, only provides to people who request their birth certificate the short form. They do not provide the long form.


So in order for us to obtain the long form, we had to have a waiver.  We had to actually determine that there was a legal basis for providing it, and then ask them to exercise their authority to provide us with the long form.  The steps required to accomplish that were a letter from the person with the direct and vital interest -- the president -- so you have a letter from the president, and then there was an accompanying letter from counsel basically formalizing the request.  So the reason we included that is that those were legal steps we took to obtain the long form by way of this waiver.


Q:  Do we have the letter from the President --


MR. BAUER:  Itís in the packet.


Q:  And you went to Hawaii?


MR. BAUER:  I did not go to Hawaii.  The counsel, Judy Corley, who signed the -- the presidentís personal counsel at Perkins Coie, Judy Corley, whose letter -- signed letter of request is in your packet, traveled to Honolulu and picked up the birth certificate.


Q:  A question on the situation regarding the Defense of Marriage Act.  Yesterday Attorney General Eric Holder rejected attacks on Paul Clement, who is taking up defense of the statute on behalf of the U.S. House.  Paul Clement has taken a lot of heat from the LGBT community for volunteering to take up defense of DOMA.  Eric Holder said, "Paul Clement is a great lawyer and has done a lot of really great things for this nation.  In taking on the representation -- representing Congress in connection with DOMA, I think he is doing that which lawyers do when weíre at our best.  That criticism I think was very misplaced."  And Holder went on to compare the criticism of Clement to attacks on the Justice Department lawyers for their past for detainees at Guantanamo Bay.  Does the president share Eric Holderís views on this?


MR. CARNEY:  We do share Eric Holderís views on this.  We think -- as we said from the beginning when we talked about -- when I did from this podium -- about the decision no longer from the administration to defend the Defense of Marriage Act, that we would support efforts by Congress if they so chose to defend it.  And so I have nothing to add to the Attorney Generalís comments.


Q:   Following Mondayís Af-Pak Situation Room meeting, what is the presidentís assessment of the situation in Afghanistan and Pakistan?  And does he think that July drawdown is still on?


MR. CARNEY:  The presidentís policy, which included the beginning of a transition -- beginning of a drawdown of American troops, is absolutely still on track.  I donít have anything additionally from the meeting yesterday beyond what weíve said.  But the policy remains as it was.


MR. EARNEST:  Jay, we should wrap it up here.


MR. CARNEY:  Yes.  Last one, yes.


Q:  Given the comments of the Pakistani official quoted in the Wall Street Journal, is Pakistan still a U.S. ally, and to what extent?


MR. CARNEY:  Pakistan is still a U.S. ally.




END 9:18 A.M. EDT

Comments . . .

© Copyright  Beckwith  2011
All right reserved