I wrote a while back about an account of Barack Obama finding his original hospital keepsake birth certificate from Kapi’olani hospital, as described by Mark Halperin and John Heilemann in their book Double Down: Game Change 2012. Since then I have been enjoying the rest of the book, a riveting story of the 2012 presidential election campaign.
Obviously, if Kapi’olani Hospital issued Obama a hospital souvenir with his little infant footprints on it, a certain other document purportedly reporting his birth on the same day at the Coast General Hospital in Mombasa, Kenya, also with Obama’s name and infant footprints, just can’t be real. And indeed, I and others have spent some time debunking that second document, which is sometime called the POSFKBC (President Obama’s Second Fake Kenyan Birth Certificate, or something else.) One Lucas Daniel Smith is the immediate source of the POSFKBC, claiming that he got it at the Kenyan hospital after paying a bribe.
Smith launched a web site in support of the POSFKBC and his claims about Obama, and I announced that event in a 2011 article “Unrepentant Smith doubles down on fake birth certificate.” Smith’s web site includes some rather creepy material invading my personal life and family. I get mentioned again now in a supporting role in a new article, which if not creepy, is certainly strange.
Smith’s latest embeds a draft lawsuit where Smith is the plaintiff, and Double Down authors Halperin and Heilemann (Barack Obama, Penguin Books, etc. ) are defendants. In the article Smith alleges that a distinguished law professor, Michael C. Dorf (who based on what I know so far is an innocent bystander who knows nothing about any of this), was negotiating with Smith to purchase the POSFKBC for $3,000,000. Then along came the Double Down book and nixed the deal. (My supporting role is that Dorf, who allegedly reads this web site “daily” found out about the book from my article.) Smith, of course, claims that the story of Obama’s certificate in Double Down is bogus, and that is the basis of the suit. The draft lawsuit discusses purported communications between Smith and Dorf at some length and I will not summarize those here as they are in the draft lawsuit at Scribd. Smith also chronicles his prior attempts to sell the POSFKBC on eBay.
One addition to Smith lore in the document is a “digital scan” image of the footprint on the POSFKBC. Let’s back up to the POSFKBC itself. Following is an image extracted from the POSFKBC image in the complaint PDF.
You can see that the image is monochrome and of very poor quality. However, the actual scan is at 200 dpi, not that low a quality. The scan is also not monochrome because a stamp on the POSFKBC upper left is in color. Therefore, the original paper POSFKBC has an extremely low-quality footprint on it, which is monochromatic.
And below is what Smith alleges is as a digital scan of the footprint from Obama’s original Kenyan birth certificate (a document which has not been shown to even exist). This image is at a resolution of 122 PPI, and appears to be a shrunk and rotated version of another image that’s included on page 60 of the draft complaint.
One is invited to ask why, if the second image (at 122 dpi) is as good as it it, why the original is so crummy. Since Smith claimed to have obtained his POSFKBC at the hospital where the original was kept, he can’t claim it was faxed, and what photocopy machine would make so crummy an image? Was it microfilmed? I printed out the second footprint and made a black and white copy of it looked much better than the POSFKBC version, and mine was only a copy of a copy of a copy.
Links to original images extracted from the Smith PDF with Adobe Acrobat:
- POSFKBC PDF Page 41
- Medium resolution footprint (featured in article) PDF Page 19
- High resolution footprint PDF Page 60
The larger image on page 60 of the PDF differs from the the other footprint images in that it preserves metadata from its scanning.
| File | |
| File Type | JPEG |
| MIME Type | image/jpeg |
| Image Width | 398 |
| Image Height | 784 |
| Encoding Process | Baseline DCT, Huffman coding |
| Bits Per Sample | 8 |
| Color Components | 3 |
| Y Cb Cr Sub Sampling | YCbCr4:4:4 (1 1) |
| JFIF | |
| JFIF Version | 1.02 |
| Resolution Unit | inches |
| X Resolution | 56 |
| Y Resolution | 56 |
| ICC_Profile | |
| Profile CMM Type | Lino |
| Profile Version | 2.1.0 |
| Profile Class | Display Device Profile |
| Color Space Data | RGB |
| Profile Connection Space | XYZ |
| Profile Date Time | 1998:02:09 06:49:00 |
| Profile File Signature | acsp |
| Primary Platform | Microsoft Corporation |
| CMM Flags | Not Embedded, Independent |
| Device Manufacturer | IEC |
| Device Model | sRGB |
| Device Attributes | Reflective, Glossy, Positive, Color |
| Rendering Intent | Perceptual |
| Connection Space Illuminant | 0.9642 1 0.82491 |
| Profile Creator | HP |
| Profile ID | 0 |
| Profile Copyright | Copyright (c) 1998 Hewlett-Packard Company |
| Profile Description | sRGB IEC61966-2.1 |
| Media White Point | 0.95045 1 1.08905 |
| Media Black Point | 0 0 0 |
| Red Matrix Column | 0.43607 0.22249 0.01392 |
| Green Matrix Column | 0.38515 0.71687 0.09708 |
| Blue Matrix Column | 0.14307 0.06061 0.7141 |
| Device Mfg Desc | IEC http://www.iec.ch |
| Device Model Desc | IEC 61966-2.1 Default RGB colour space – sRGB |
| Viewing Cond Desc | Reference Viewing Condition in IEC61966-2.1 |
| Viewing Cond Illuminant | 19.6445 20.3718 16.8089 |
| Viewing Cond Surround | 3.92889 4.07439 3.36179 |
| Viewing Cond Illuminant Type | D50 |
| Luminance | 76.03647 80 87.12462 |
| Measurement Observer | CIE 1931 |
| Measurement Backing | 0 0 0 |
| Measurement Geometry | Unknown (0) |
| Measurement Flare | 0.999% |
| Measurement Illuminant | D65 |
| Technology | Cathode Ray Tube Display |
| Red Tone Reproduction Curve | (Binary data 2060 bytes) |
| Green Tone Reproduction Curve | (Binary data 2060 bytes) |
| Blue Tone Reproduction Curve | (Binary data 2060 bytes) |
| APP14 | |
| DCT Encode Version | 100 |
| APP14 Flags 0 | Encoded with Blend=1 downsampling |
| APP14 Flags 1 | (none) |
| Color Transform | YCbCr |
| Composite | |
| Image Size | 398×784 |
He, L*c*s Sm*th, miserable scumbag that he is, is trying to sink to a new low. Apparently he’s talking about filing a lawsuit against President Obama, Doc C, and others for scaring off a buyer for his POSFKBC.
http://www.thefogbow.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=2289&p=566059#p566058
So what’s the Penguin connection? Just imitating David Irving?
Why would anyone, let alone Michael C Dorf be willing to spend $3M dollars on the document?
What am I missing?
Parents who suffered from congenital stupidity?
I believe that they published Double Down: Game Change 2012 and, by doing so, scared off the mark that was interested in the POSFKBC.
That he, L*c*s Sm*th is a liar, a grifter, and a birther. This is his holy grail: it has a big theoretical payday (over $3 million), the slimebag believes that this will give him standing to sue and to get discovery on President Obama’s “footie” BC referenced in the book, and it provides a new birther “great white hope” that he can use to grift the birfer bux from the masses. I think the odds are pretty good that Mr. Dorf is a part of the scam (or made up out of whole cloth) rather than a person stupid enough to consider paying a known forger $3 million for anything.
I wonder if Orly knows what he’s up to yet…
In the thingy – it seems to be saying or implying that the buyer is Michael C. Dorf the lawyer –
http://www.dorfonlaw.org/
Maybe the con artist is getting conned? Who knows or cares.
That pretty much sums it up…
I have been wrong every time I have said something like this in the past, but I’ll say it again anyway. I think I’m right this time. 🙂
I don’t think that even birthers are stupid enough to fall for another L@c@s Sm@th scam.
I look forward to seeing this one get laughed out of court.
I doubt that it will ever get into court, but at least Smith may have standing, which is more than the average birther has.
What I don’t believe is that Dorf was going to pay Smith $3,000,000.
Looks like Professor Dorf forgot the cardinal rule of dealing with crazy and dishonest convicted felon birthers. He touched the poop. He talked to Lucas Daniel Smith.
Also, this article makes me hungry for KFC…man I could go for some tater wedges!
And its a poop smell that don’t wash off!
Of course he wasn’t.
I grateful to Dr. C. for spelling out the POSFKBC acronym (President Obama’s Second Fake Kenyan Birth Certificate). All this time I thought it stood for Piece of Sh*t Fake Kenyan Birth Certificate.
Has anyone contacted Mr. Dorf to inquire if, in fact, he was dealing with Mr. Smith?
He, LS, describes a crime that he has committed – trying to sell fake documents on ebay. Where is the DA to take him from the streets for that ?
I suspect that Lucas was being punked, either by Professor Dorf or someone pretending to be him.
I sent Professor Dorf an e-mail with links to this thread and Scribd and invited him to comment.
That makes 2 of us. At least.
Reading his bio at Cornell I find it hard to believe but…….anything is possible.
make that 4
Yes.
Read the Glossary, guys.
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/glossary/
Another good fantasy ruined by over checking.
I figured so but I just had to ask.
Professor Dorf responds:
“I won’t comment on my blog because I don’t think there’s any point to giving greater exposure to this person, but someone else pointed this out to me and I’ll tell you what I told him: Prior to today I had never heard of nor had any contact of any sort with Lucas Daniel Smith. His allegations concerning me are either fabrications or delusions.”
This article has been updated with more baby footprints.
Or both.
does this look like a guy capable of stealing $3 million dollars?
I must have caught Professor Dorf on his lunch hour because I wrote to him at 12:56 p.m and he responded 22 minutes later.
I think that pretty much puts to rest any possibility that this lawsuit will ever see a court docket.
I think I have been punked into writing an article about Smith on the blog. Sigh. 😳
Check your e-mail. There may be more to this.
Rickey, you contacted the Michael C. Dorf at Cornell Law school, right? Not the one in Chicago?
Hold on, hold on! Do you mean this Smith fellow, who, if I’m not mistaken, is a convicted forger and ex-con, lied AGAIN?! I tell you, I’m shocked. SHOCKED! What will this do to the good reputation of birtherdom? Quick, someone . . . contact Birther Report and let them know about this before they make a terrible mistake!
But… but… the earliest I’ve found for POSFKBC is September 4, 2009, as the Piece of S*** Kenya Birth Certificate. http://www.thefogbow.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=50&t=4906&p=64370&hilit=POSFKBC#p64370
Count me in on the latter definition, too. It’s also more appropriate when dealing with Smith.
Yes. His e-mail address is on the Cornell website.
http://www.lawschool.cornell.edu/faculty/bio_michael_dorf.cfm
Not to pile on or anything, me too.
I suspect the Doc of trying to clean up the environment with his Lennon-McCartney imitation.
I think everyone can see through it. 😉
Hmmm. Will have to ask RC; he was the first one to comment on it here.
doc’s just trying to run a family-friendly ship in a bucket of mud.
That’s kind of you to say. Perhaps I am just too nice a guy to make the obvious alternate interpretation. The Glossary has been somewhat updated.
In fairness, would Dr. Conspiracy or Rickey mind posting a screenshot or scan of that email from Dorf?
Thanks
is it possible that you were communicating with some other Michael C. Dorf than the one at Cornell?
I note that while there are quite a number of exhibits in your draft complaint, and claims that Dorf was negotiating with you, there are no copies of any of that correspondence there, correspondence that is essential to proving your case. I find that puzzling given the volume of material that is not even relevant to proving your case.
I have not claimed that I have received any emails from Dorf, but in any case emails are trivial to fake and screen shots of them do not add much to the credibility of the one who presents them as true.
How about you sending Doc the e-mail in which Dorf agrees to pay you for the POSFKBC?
This is developing into a HILARIOUS thread; Smith’s going to be tap-dancing like Gregory Hines on a particularly energetic day.
I think we should at least go through the exercise of verifying that Smith claims to be communicating with the same person Rickey is communicating with.
Absolutely!
And, of course, if he has real, original e-mails he should be able to forward those to you in a matter of minutes.
Fairness….
Agreed. In his “Complaint” Smith goes to great lengths to identify Professor Dorf as the law professor at Cornell. The law professor at Cornell is most assuredly the Michael C. Dort with whom I corresponded.
I wrote to Dorf at his Cornell e-mail address but he wrote back to me (20 minutes later) using his personal e-mail address. I presume that he did not want to discuss this using his Cornell account.
If you exchanged multiple e-mails with him, you should know his personal e-mail address. I won’t ask you for his entire e-mail address, as publishing it would violate one of the rules here, but you should be able to tell me his user name for his personal e-mail account. Just tell me his user name and leave off the domain. The possibilities are endless, but you have one shot at getting it right.
Knowing your propensity for filing frivolous lawsuits, I will not provide you with a screenshot of his e-mail to me. However, if you prove that you know his user name, I will provide you with the full text of his e-mail.
In fairness.
Because Mr. Smith is in moderation, I’ll see his reply before it is published. We can work out the details of any verification. I should point out that obtaining Dorf’s personal email address shouldn’t be that difficult, and is not an indicator that Smith had been exchanging emails with him.
Just curious: Has anyone contacted the gentleman in Chicago to see if, by chance, he heard from Mr. Smith?
Dorf answered the email in 22 minutes?
Distinguished Cornell professor of Law responds to email chock full of talk about a ‘forger’ and ‘convicted criminal’, from some (suposedly) unknown (to him) John-Doe-OCT-Fogbow member he’s never heard of, and the distinguished Cornell professor of Law takes time out of his day to respond in 22 minutes?
I don’t doubt (although I have no way of verifying) that Dorf sent that email reply. But why would he?
Sometimes wise people say (or write) unwise things. I can understand Dorf denying the $3,000,000 sale and communications with me but the part of his statement that that reads, “Prior to today I had never heard of…Lucas Daniel Smith” is reckless and in my opinion not a wise statement to make. The opposite can be proven because he posts, very often, on anti-birter websites
It’s possible, I suppose that Smith looked up Dorf, got the wrong person, and then inserted his bio into the draft complaint. I wouldn’t bother the guy, however, without some confirmation that there was mistake in Smith’s bio.
When have I filed a lawsuit(frivolous or not) in the past? I’m one of the only ‘birthers’ who has not filed not tried to sue the President or anyone or thing related to him.
The last time I filed anything that resembled a lawsuit was when I was 22 years old in prison…and I won the lawsuit and as part of the settlement I was discharged (no parole, no supervision) from prison on Christmas Day 2002 (almost 13 years ago). And I’ve never been back to prison.
When I filed this lawsuit in the Southern District of New York it will be my first.
One of the unfortunate things that happens at OCT and The Fogbow is that most, though not all, comments post recklessly and often recycle misinformation and disinformation or just flat out make up stories based on stereotypes.
Well, Smiff? Who was it? And will YOU be publishing screenshots of your imaginary correspondence?
In Fairness?
I agree. FYI…..I just found a third lawyer named Dorf.
Initials of it are L.L.
Great! All Smiff has to do is identify WHICH Dorf he corresponded with, and post a screenshot of that correspondence, an action he clearly believes to be acceptable.
In fairness.
I forwarded Dorf’s e-mail to you.
I didn’t spend a lot of time on this, but I googled for his e-mail address and only came up with the Cornell address. Spokeo doesn’t show an e-mail address for him. But we’ll see if Smith is able to come up with it.
So did I…
I’m not sure why my previous 3 or 4 comments are still in moderation but, aside from Michael C. Dorf’s regular comments (under a different name) on anti-birther websites, he also has discussed Natural Born Citizen on his some of his own websites (under his real name).
Michael C. Dorf on ‘Natural Born Citizen’ (2008):
However, if one is not burdened by the label of “originalist,” then this is a pretty easy question. The “natural born citizen” requirement manifests a distrust of the foreign-born that, in a nation of immigrants, can only be derided as repugnant. I both “reject” it and I “denounce” it! It’s still part of the Constitution, however, and therefore we need to try to figure out what it means. My frankly normative move would be to limit the damage by limiting the scope of “foreign-born.” There’s no plausible way to read the provision to permit Schwarzenegger and other naturalized citizens to become President. There is a ready (if not 100% clearly the original) way to read it to permit Americans born abroad to U.S. parents to become citizens. Too bad for John McCain he can’t in good conscience just say that. For though my position is straight talk, it’s not exactly originalism.
http://www.dorfonlaw.org/2008_02_01_archive.html
I’ve been watching episodes of Heroes on Netflix.
I got your email. For some reason your mail system has my IP addressed blocked (I think it may be fixed now).
OK. Rickey forwarded the email from Dorf, and it doesn’t have anything like L. L. in the email address. So we have a gen-u-ine mystery.
If I had to guess, I’d say you probably have been emailing SOMEBODY about the Birth Certificate, and it also seems pretty clear that whoever it was is not Michael C. Dorf at Cornell.
Why don’t you try to figure out who your correspondent is, and then rewrite the story and we can start over.
Wrong. You lose. I forwarded the e-mail to Doc C. so he can confirm that you are wrong.
Has it occurred to you that you may have been punked by someone?
It’s fixed, thanks.
What is the name? And how do you know it’s him?
Have you forwarded Doc the e-mails you received from Mr. Dorf so he can check out your claim?
For my purposes the POSFKBC is a convenient way to identify the second fake Kenyan birth certificate, the first being the Bomford certificate (an anti-birther punk). I also acknowledge that others understand the acronym differently, and that this alternate formulation may be the first and most widely used one.
I apologize for any confusion.
My mistake. I should have said that you wrote on Free Republic that you were going to file a lawsuit. Apparently you never followed through.
Posted by Lucas Smith Nov 16, 2009 9:00 PM:
InspectorSmith
Hello everyone. For some time now I’ve been looking for a new “in” to get my foot in the door of a courtroom to expose Obama for the native Kenyan that he is. I found an attorney that is willing to work with me, and on my terms. The attorney is originally from Iowa, as I am. We will not be filing Quo Warranto. We will not be filing anything similar to the civil / criminal actions that have been brought against Obama to date. Respectfully, Lucas Smith.
Brilliant…Michael C. Dorf only has two email address…his work email and the other one that he emailed you with?
Brilliant.
Well I get emails offering me millions of dollars every few days and have for decades (they came as faxes in the old days). The first fax I got, I dropped it off at the FBI office (which was at that time in the same building where I worked). It just didn’t make sense why someone would just give me a sack of money for nothing.
There are anti-birthers who get their jollies by punking birthers and I suppose that it is not beyond the realm of possibility that Lucas Smith was being strung along with the promise of big money by one of them. Realistically, who would pay $3 million for the POSFKBC?
I will just hasten to add that I have no knowledge of any such punking, but in general the punkers do not tell me such things in advance of the public denouement.
Where’s the logic? Michael C. Dorf has only has two emails? Or, is that he would absolutely email “Rickey” (whoever that is) with same email address he uses to set up a deal to buy a $3,000,000 birth certificate?
I don’t get your logic.
Lastly, I know, without doubt, that it’s Michael C. Dorf. He also makes comments at anti-birther websites like the Fogbow (no, his user name is not Michael C. Dorf).
Michael C. Dorf on “Natural Born Citizen” (May 2013):
Michael C. Dorf, constitutional law professor at Cornell University, said the term “natural born citizen” has not been clearly defined — and that’s good news for Mr. Cruz.
“This is all sort of framed on the fact that we do not have any case law and it is quite likely that the courts would stay out of it — even if someone brought a challenge,” Mr. Dorf said. “The place that this would be solved ultimately would be the Electoral College.”
…
Sen. John McCain also faced questions during his 2008 bid for president. The Arizona Republican was born in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936. Michigan Gov. George Romney faced similar questions during his 1968 president run. Mr. Romney was born in Mexico to American citizens living in a Mormon church colony.
“You do have the sort of acceptance by the political system of John McCain presidential run, and of the George Romney presidential run,” Cornell’s Mr. Dorf said. “So those suggest a more permissive approach to natural born citizenship.”
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/may/5/as-buzz-mounts-ted-cruzs-white-house-eligibility-a/?page=all
If he was being punked by someone pretending to be Michael C. Dorf at Cornell, it pretty much shoots to hell whatever merits his as-yet unfiled lawsuit may have. An affidavit from Professor Dorf that he never negotiated with Smith would pretty bury Smith’s claims – although I don’t know how he could prove tortious interference when the defendants had no knowledge of the alleged negotiations. IANAL, but my understanding is that tortious interference has to be an intentional act.
So, delusional, dishonest or patently gullible… which is it, Smiff?
(Hint: since your correspondent doesn’t seem to have been honest with you, you should have no compunction about posting a screenshot of his email(s), something you’ve already said you wanted Rickey and/or Doc to do. Clearly, you must believe this is something perfectly acceptable to do. You know… in fairness.)
Because he told me. For example, he likes posting at the Fogbow.
Ah….more innocent days! I got my first one the old fashioned way – in the mail. I called the Postal Inspectors and the fellow who answered the phone just chuckled.
After he explained the deal I asked him if if anyone ever fell for it. He said “You’d be surprised.”
I never called again.
I think we may have a new birther mantra.
“Any day now” is so…….well, yesterday.
It’s just such a ridiculous use of the phrase….
“Can you please post what you have, that I might adjust my story to fit the evidence? I mean, come on, give a birther a chance…”
Three or four years ago, birtherism offered the promise of the big payoff. Now, however, Birther Report has been stripped of its ad revenue, birther rallies can’t wrangle more than few dozen people, and petty grifters get played for fools. Oh, what a world . . .
Well, there are still the ‘wrinkles’ in the foot print. Of course, it’s interesting how suddenly a higher definition picture shows up. Was that the original?
It’s my understanding that Lucas Smith has analyzed and researched every point on the birth certificate he obtained and found everything to be completely valid. Most of his research is on his website. The validity of his birth certificate still remains to be seen.
There are three possibilities:
1) Michael C. Dorf at Cornell is lying
2) Lucas Smith is lying
3) Lucas Smith is mistaken in his identification of Dorf.
How shall we choose?
What would be logical?
You understand a great many things that just aren’t so, though, racist troll.
Smith is claiming that the POSFKBC image we’ve seen and the high-res footprint are both scans (of different quality) of the same paper birth certificate. Presumably the original was paper, so an improved scan of it is not in and of itself strange. What seems strange to me is the degree to which the quality improved, or perhaps how bad the original was.
Well that should have turned on the “punk alert” right there. But feel free to email me the purported Fogbow ID (if you know it) and copies of any of your correspondence, all of which will be held in confidence.
Your understanding is correct, john. Lucas found everything to be “completely valid.” Which is a bit like Bernie Madoff assuring his investors that his annual report was “completely valid.”
So, John, let me get this straight… A convicted forger came up with what he claims is a Kenyan BC for the President, and HE HIMSELF analyses it and claims it is legit, and you believe that?
I don’t know which of you is the bigger fool. But then again, humans baffle me with some regularity.
It would seem that there are two groups of birthers–the con men and the fools. Lucas is the bigger con man, and john the greater fool.
For the record, Smiff has never proved he’s ever set foot in Kenya, much less that anything was purchased there.
I’m sure that he, L*c*s Sm*th is very familiar with the POSFKBC*, but he has never been able to provide any corroboration for his story nor explain the many egregious defects with the document (date format, incorrect administrator’s name, measurements outside the human norm, difference from contemporary Kenyan BCs, etc.). Only a naive fool would believe that there is any chance that it is a valid document.
* I’m using it in the original meaning rather than Doc’s—I believe that it is more accurate.
Lucas Smith will e-mail that information to you, Doctor, the same day that he shows his airline ticket, etc. for his trip to Kenya to get this birf certificate of President Obama. Just saying….
Color depth; I don’t know anything about the POSKFBC, but from the images you posted above, the crap one was reduced to a 1-bit image by a 50% pass at some point, no matter what the color-depth of the final image was. The second is a color scan. Assuming the resolution was the same, and not changed in process (both very large assumptions!), the color difference alone is 8 orders of binary magnitude.
Conceptually, the second, “better” image could very well have been the source for the first; an ancestor that’s been subjected to less processing.
Say what? Why describe one month shy of 11 years as “almost 13 years”? Even if we cut such slack as to grant that 11 is almost 13, what’s so special about 13 years that it’s a noteworthy time to almost reach?
Maybe it was it just a typo. If so, still, why the need to attempt to explain how long ago 2002 was?
In his video from 2009 the color copy of the document has the less detailed footprint. The paper it is printed on is white but the Helton (sic) Maganga stamp is in blue.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BkWd2INPhL4
AFAIK, it is the only copy of the POSKFBC he has ever provided.
What name does he use on Fogbow?
Have you met him personally or has he just told you all this in e-mail messages?
How did you come up with $3-million for the document? How was he going to pay you…..if it hadn’t fallen through?
Have you met Michael C. Dorf of Cornell? If so…where, when? If not…..how can you be so sure the person you haven’t met is Michael C. Dorf of Cornell?
How do you know this?
And what “research” isn’t on his website?
You are absolutely correct. Michael C. Dorf could have many e-mail addresses. And, of course, anyone could use a phony e-mail address and say they were Michael C. Dorf of Cornell.
What did you do to determine that the one the person used with you did, in fact, belong to the Michael C. Dorf at Cornell?
And since he has written that you are not telling the truth have you been in touch with him to straighten things out?
Oh, that’s easy. It’s john. At least Mr. Smith has seen the damn thing.
It is obvious that Lucas Smith is lying through his teeth. Again. I find his email protestations utterly unconvincing.
Thanks, I needed the laugh. Really I did. No, what he did was offer what he considers plausable explainations for everything on the birth certificate. They’re not actually plausable explainations, but we’ll get for that later.
For instance, Heltan Mananga actually misspelling his own name in the stamp, and in his own signature? You don’t find that odd? Just wondering, how many people that you know with the education of Dr. Mananga would change the spelling of their name?
Or, how about the mother’s MM-DD-YYYY format, instead of the british ISO system of DD-MM-YYYY? His explaination is that they use both, which is redicilous. Because how would you know whether Obama was born on August 4, or on April 8? If they used both, then both the date formats 08-04-1961 would coorispond to two different dates, and therefore not have any validity in nailing down the date?
How about the mother’s birth date actually being a full DD-MM-YYYY format, but the father’s birthdate being only the year? Don’t you find that odd? Why would the father not know his own birthdate?
How about the document saying “Republic of Kenya”, despite it being in a time when there was no Republic of Kenya, and especially considering that Mombasa was part of the Protectorate of Zanzibar?
And futhermore, the entire story. Why would Obama’s mother spend 5 days travelling when she was hevily pregenant to get to Kenya, flying into Nairobi, and then travel in the complete opposite direction from where she was supposedly heading to get to Mombasa?
These are just a few of the problems with the POSFKBC.
something that the adherents to the kenya theory always seem to forget is dunhams return from kenya – with a child.
he wouldn’t have entered the u.s. as hand luggage, and would have had to have travel documentation
if he was put on dunham’s passport, the NBC issue would be settled, as there would not be any way of going through the naturalisation process at the u.s. consulate in nairobi..
for a british passport, certified documentation would have to be sent along with a valid BC to somerset house in london (where all u.k. passports are issued from) and the passport generated there. this takes at least a month now, and was normally 2-3 months back in the 1960’s – and dunham was in washington state in september.
this process was using the postal service, so you can add additional time on for sending documents and then receiving them back
an emergency passport would not be issue on the spot to the child of a u.s. citizen asking for a british passport for her child at the consulate.
Actually, the “3 million dollars” story is fraud 101.
Everyone who thinks about defrauding someone eventually comes up with a plan that goes roughly like “when a letter disappears or a seller has a delay in delivering what I bought, I’ll claim I had a buyer who was willing to pay big $$$ for the thing and KA-CHING”.
Even in birtherstan you’re not a celebrity. One can post for years on birther websites without ever encountering your name. Cope.
Not surprising either. When I’ve gone in Mike Vollin’s show they had no idea who Smith was nor people like Kenneth Allen.
The way I see it, Herr Smith got punked, but is in too deep to admit it. Pride always has been a bit of a stumbling block for birthers…well that and the whole “Being absolutely wrong about everything.” thing.
Myself, I think he’s lying, pure and simple. He never had any contact with Dorf. He just made up the whole thing.
If LS said the sky is blue, I’d rush to the eye doctor.
It appears that Michael C. Dorf has mentioned my name, specifically, on at least 32 occasions, at the Fogbow website.
I think that, after Lucas Daniel Smith v. PENGUIN GROUP (USA), PENGUIN PRESS, MARK HALPERIN, JOHN HEILEMAN, BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA II, JOHN DOE 1-100, JANE DOE 1-100. United States District Court, Southern District of New York. is officially filed, I should subpoena Dr. Conspiracy and “Rickey” for the email which they indicate that Michael C. Dorf has written that, “Prior to today [Nov. 25, 2013] I had never heard of…Lucas Daniel Smith.”
I don’t think that the emails are relevant to your cause of action, since they don’t in any way support your contention that he was negotiating with you. Better you should present your own emails that purportedly support your claims, and take a deposition from Dorf.
I think, however, that the only result of filing the suit will be your embarrassment.
You got anything to support this claim Lucas?
Links, please.
With some birthers it’s a real conundrum. I believe in the maxim, “Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity”. Birthers push the line. Could they really be that gullible?
He, Lucas Smith, chose his side of that line years ago. I assume Dr. C. was being funny, but seeing that this thread needed “POS” explained ad nauseum, I’lll point out that one of the three possibilities is like the Sun rising in the East.
The petty criminal wants to feel important.
When has that ever stopped him?
I note that LS has managed to shift from 1/ “I corresponded with Dorf who offered to buy my fraudulent BC…” to 2/ “Dorf may have mentioned my name a few times on the internet”
The lying liar somehow thinks that if he can prove 2, it means 1 is true.
Don’t you think it would be a good idea to include all those e-mails, along with the proof you have that they were written by Mr. Dorf, in your draft lawsuit now?
You are going to file it, right? Any day now?
When did you magically get subpoena power?
Lucas (magically) was awarded subpoena power when he disposed of his 100th Orc and terminated his 50th dark wizard with extreme prejudice after finding the platinum ring of Xerxes.
It’s a point. Birthers are gullible. He, Lucas Smith, tried to scam them, and failed.
What could possibly be more embarrassing than aiming that low and falling short?
In the spirit of the upcoming holidays, I feel it necessary to remind Lucas Smith that sometimes it’s not a good idea to file a birther-related lawsuit.
Brooklyn judge slams birther lawsuit as ‘fanciful, delusional and irrational’ and orders theorist to pay $177G
Judge Arthur Schack wrote that if the case brought by Christopher Earl Struck claiming President Barack Obama was not truly born in Hawaii were a movie script it would be entitled ‘The Manchurian Candidate Meets The Da VInci Code.’
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/brooklyn-judge-slams-birther-case-orders-theorist-pay-177g-article-1.1306268#ixzz2llzQI5VV
A little bird told me that Lucas was reading comments on a religion and politics site, and that Dorf was talking about the influence of the Mormon church. He was all, “the L.D.S. this, and L.D.S. that” and Lucas just naturally assumed that he was talking about him, the one and only L.D,S.
You think that’s going to stop Lucas? He still owes the courts thousands of dollars from his previous runins with the law
My favorite was his YouTube video from 2010 – the Help Prove my POSFKBC is Authentic Project wherein he asked for $30,000.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bEPYmpBwrCc&feature=c4-overview&list=UU6FZURuRRVhiYGWotRVrSDA
He only has two that I am aware of. That doesn’t rule out the possibility that he has more, of course, but you could help to clear this up by posting a screenshot of the e-mails which you believe came from him.
I am Rickey. I hope that clears things up for you.
We would you negotiate a $3 million deal by e-mail? I don’t conduct negotiations by e-mail. Nobody should.
Have at it, but first you have to figure out what my real name is and where I live. Good luck with that. I tell you what, though; I promise to save Dorf’s e-mail on my computer until your process server shows up at my door.
However, a word to the warning: the Federal Court does not suffer fools gladly.
Too bad that He, Lucas Smith, is judgment proof. A number of persons have an excellent cause of action against Him, Lucas Smith, for libel per se.
[This comment by Mr. Smith has been removed because it purports to disclose personal information about an anonymous Internet poster. The fact that I don’t think the information is true does not prevent my desire to discourage the practice in general. Doc.]
Don’t put words in mouth and don’t fabricate account (which you’ve done recently when you said I was guy who files lawsuits all the time).
When did I ever say that I negotiated anything via email?
Is he “jail proof” as well ? Isn’t it a crime to try to sell forgeries on ebay or elsewhere ?
….if you read before making comments you would have seen the “2014” (unless you count San Valentines Day as one of those holidays were judges slam birthers.
Other than Nigerians… who uses email to set up $3M deals at all?
Lucas should begin by telling out how his correspondence with “Dorf” began. Who initiated it? Did Lucas contact Dorf, or did Dorf contact Lucas? What e-mail address did Dorf use? How did Lucas confirm that he was corresponding with the Michael C. Dorf of Cornell University Law School?
In the real world of multiple million dollar deals that’s what “set up a deal” (your words) means.
That is a fact of which I am quite aware.
Your post makes no sense at all.
Under what name?
He should begin by showing us proof he ever actually went to Kenya.
Lets see how much deeper he digs this hole for himself, guys! I’m betting he’ll hit magma soon!
I’m trying to understand what point is being made with Exhibits D and E in Mr. Smith’s complaint:
Exhibit D (e-mail apparently from a fingerprint expert): “I’m afraid your footprint is of no use in a comparison examination with a known footprint.”
Exhibit E (letter from a certified latent print examiner): “Examination of the scanned footprint did not reveal the presence of friction-ridge characteristics that could be used in a comparison examination.”
Besides, as with the image of Obama’s BC that was released, how can you determine authenticity if you don’t have the original to compare it to? But who knows, maybe President Obama will plop his tootsies into some ink for Mr. Smith and settle this once and for all – though my understanding is that infant-to-adult print identification is unreliable. I’d be willing to wager, oh, I don’t know, say, THREE MILLION DOLLARS, that this will not occur.
If we are going to get technical, I said that you had a propensity to file friviolous lawsuits. I later corrected to say that you had merely threatened to file a frivolous lawsuit, and now you have threatened a second time to file a frivolous lawsuit.
If you weren’t negotiating, what were you doing? Exchanging pumpkin pie recipes?
Didn’t he try to pass off the streets of a Caribbean town as the streets of Mombasa? I doubt he ever was outside of the Western hemisphere.
So if the trend continues, he, Lucas Smith, will announce a price of three hundred million dollars sometime in 2015 or 2016. Then shortly before the next decade he’ll escalate to thirty billion. He’s younger than myself and Dr. C., and looks to be in good health, so he can probably keep talking bigger and bigger for decades.
I’m feeling a case of the holiday blues. I’m lonely and depressed. Only one or two people have followed up my comments. That hurts. Ah, but I know what to do. I’m considering suing a long list of you folk for a zillion dollars. That makes me really important. You’ll have to talk about me now.
Either Lucas made up the whole thing in a sad bid for attention, or he is more gullible than Orly Taitz. It’s good to have options.
Yep. Knowing his history, however, I think he knows most people would not have fallen for his Caribbean ruse but the audience he was aiming for would. Example.. see John.
Therein lies the problem. The POSFKBC cannot be a 1-bit reduction of an original document because part of it (the date stamp) is blue. If a 1-bit reduction happened, it must be on the paper original of the POSFKBC before it was scanned, and hence the color version of the footprint cannot be from the same source.
In order to assist those wanting to make an independent investigation, I have added links at the end of the article to the original documents extracted from the PDF, and excerpted in the story. The ones in the story are cropped screen captures.
Nice illustration of what can be determined from analysis of an image, Doc. I find it hilariously ironic that the birthers don’t have a clue as to how to go about discrediting President Obama’s birth certificate, but you have no problem coming up with a technical argument which casts doubt on the veracity of the POSFKBC (and, by extension, He, L*c*s Sm*th).
I have a feeling that the creator of the POSFKBC is going to be sorry about all the attention his work is receiving…
I’ll give you $3.00 for the POSFKBC, Mr. Smith.
This article has been revised with additional information and sharper argument about the footprints.
Mr. Smith has never appeared all that bothered by the debunking of his certificate. He just makes a show of defending it. Those that believe it will continue to do so, and those who don’t already know it’s a fake.
Debunking the POSFKBC is like doing a crossword puzzle, or doing a textbook math problem. The answer’s already known.
It’s going to become a collector’s item for those interested in historical conspiracy theories. The authentic forged, fake Kenyan birth certificate.
I know, I just think it’s an interesting (and ironic) technical problem: can you tell, from an image, that the POSFKBC is fake?
I just can’t manage to work up the least bit of interest in this Smith character. Kind of like eating crackers and trying to whistle. Guys like Adrien Nash, or David Farrar or 00Bob Gard may be eat up with it, but I figure they actually believe in the nonsense they spout. Somebody who’s just plain lying had better be pretty entertaining before I’ll sit and listen very long.
Nah, not necessarily, Doc. The image presented is obviously not 1-bit, the footprints itself now has noise. It was reduced to 1-bit, but apparently rescanned. It theoretically could be a photocopy or a fax (either would effectively be a 50% pass), that was then inkstamped, seal-embossed, and then scanned.
But, to answer Slartiblast, yes, it’s a fake, and yes, it’s apparent from the image itself. The main problem is the ham-handed, wavy rippling, meant to give the impression this was a physical document that had seen some handling. Paper does not deform in a smooth curvilinear fashion, much less hold such a shape without creasing. If it it were soaked in water and then dried, it would then be a 3D surface, which would be crushed/creased by copying, faxing or scanning. Further, the image is, overall, skewed. The box isn’t square, it’s a parallelogram. How does that happen to a supposedly physical document. If the ripples were real, this wouldn’t be a parallelogram, it would be a rhombus, pinched at the top.
And the light on the seal is directional, shining down from a 1 o’clock position; only possible if this is a photo, not a scan.
The smudges/shadows on the right edge make no sense; the shadow in the lower right corner indicates that the paper ends roughly .01″ (2px) from the bottom of the box outline. That’s …. odd.
Beyond the image, LDS is able to produce a better version of the footprint, but not the whole document? Why not? If his document is a photocopy, then it burned the hell out of that relatively lightly inked footprint … but didn’t similarly burn the rest of this supposedly warped document. Where are the shadows? The creases?
I’d be willing to wager 3 BAZILLION DOLLARS that, should such an event ever occur, birthers will immediately claim Obama had had plastic surgery on his feet to hide all connections to the footprint BC.
Uh, how about here:
If that last comment wasn’t claiming he set up the deal with you via email, then why mention the “same/different email address” at all?
If this was a court, you’d be in deep doo-doo now.
Doc,
You may be interested in the following reports:
Inside Africa: Near pristine image of Barack Obama’s 1961 baby footprint has surfaced in 2011. (Published October 17, 2011)
http://www.wasobamaborninkenya.com/blog/barrack-obama-eligibility/inside-africa-near-pristine-image-of-barack-obamas-1961-baby-footprint-has-surfaced-in-2011/
Inside Africa (part 2): Confirmation from Kenya? 1961 footprint of Barack Hussein Obama II? (Published November 2, 2011)
http://www.wasobamaborninkenya.com/blog/barrack-obama-eligibility/inside-africa-part-2-confirmation-from-kenya-1961-footprint-of-barack-hussein-obama-ii/
Where do these footprints lead? (Published February 27, 2013) (btw, in the comments section of this report you’ll that Great Kim aka Mik Taerg posted some examination images of her/his own)
http://www.wasobamaborninkenya.com/blog/lucas-daniel-smith/where-does-these-footprints-lead/
Ps- The “JPotter” guy who posts at here at OCT, does he work part time for the Zullo’s Cold Case Posse?
I found nothing probative in the reports.
Actually, that’s exactly what I think it is. But again the second footprint cannot have come from the thing that was scanned. You can’t make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear.
I posted the names and links to point out that you are two years (2 years) behind everyone else.
Of course, obviously, the second image is NOT from the certified copy (2009). The second image is from the original (1961).
So why, if the reports are not ‘probative’, are you working so hard to prove this when it was already reported (2 years ago) that the second image is NOT from the 2009 certified copy?
On behalf of the Mormon church I am suing this blog for repeated use of the holy LDS acronym, for the sum of 3 quadrillion quattaloos.
Dr. Stephen Dorf esq bbq ied abc squee.
You mean the bad guy from Blade?
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001151/?ref_=nv_sr_1
We all do, Lucas. The conspiracy is so much bigger than you could ever imagine.
Perhaps not probative, but certainly inferential.
The set of three “articles” at least establish that the two different images of the footprint come from different proximate sources, and Smith conveniently appears to have nothing in his possession that displays the actual source document for the higher quality version. One can only ponder at the simultaneous competence and incompetence of Smith’s alleged African accomplices that they were on one hand able to get access to the “original birth certificate” and provide the new version of the footprint, yet apparently failed to also produce an equally high-quality version of any other part of the source document.
The article above is based on your draft complaint, which makes no reference to the source of the images, except that they were from scans of the birth certificate. A certified copy of a birth certificate is a birth certificate, and the complaint gives no one reason to suspect this alleged original document. The complaint doesn’t talk about any birth certificate other than the POSFKBC from 2009.
I don’t know about being behind “everybody else” as I assume that most people, myself included, don’t keep up with your blog.
The articles you referenced when I look at them just have big Scribd embedded images of the word “CONFIDENTIAL.” None of the articles has an image of the “new” footprint visible to me. In any case, nothing in the three articles leads me to believe that this alleged “original” birth certificate exists.
However, since you have made it clear that you aren’t claiming the new footprint isn’t based on your earlier alleged “copy”, I’ll remove the material proving the same thing.
Doc,
Smith says that there was a prior thread here five months ago in which we discussed Dorf’s theory that Bill Clinton is eligible to run for Vice-President. I can’t find that thread – can you provide a link to it?
Yes, although it was a very tiny item.
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2013/05/the-occasional-open-thread-kowabunga/#comment-265944
There is no question that Dorf has an interest in and has written about Presidential eligibility. The question is whether he has ever read this blog, commented at The Fogbow, or communicated with Lucas Smith and nothing in that earlier thread suggests that any of them is true. Dorf says he never heard of Smith. Foggy says he doesn’t know of any Fogbow user who could be Dorf. A person blogging under the name J. G. Wentworth at the Fogbow has said that he knows the Fogbow ID of someone he alleges is Dorf, and left some hints–hints that lead to a few individuals, none of whom could be Dorf. I have no indication whatever that Dorf visited this blog before.
It would be a violation of this site’s policy to publish an anonymous blogger’s identity. Mr. Smith can say who he thinks Dorf is at The Fogbow in a comment that I will see in moderation, but not publish.
So when is Smith going to file his Complaint? I am still trying to figure out what his claim is. He doesn’t establish that any of the defendants owed him a duty and he doesn’t identify a tort which they committed. It would seem that he is alleging tortious interference, but that requires an intentional act by the defendants and Smith doesn’t allege that his defendants had any knowledge of his dealings with whoever was pretending to be Michael C. Dorf.
It also seems to me that Smith may have opened himself up to a libel claim by Doc C. by publishing the Complaint before filing it. Beginning with paragraph 91 he makes obviously spurious claims that Doc hacked Smith’s computer and planted malware.
Reflecting on Smith’s established history, the event of his attempted eBay action marks the high point of his entire life, garnering him the attention of birther celebrities, the fellow travelers in con artistry at WND, and of course…. us. A vast amount of his time and effort over the subsequent years has been spent in the desperate effort to recapture that attention. We are the only folks who appear to regularly give him what he wants, and even that has produced diminishing returns requiring ever more outrageous “acting out” on his part to elicit a response.
Our continued acquiescence to his desperate pleas for attention is unhelpful. The sort of help Smith actually needs is outside our area of expertise.
This spurious claim has appeared on his blog before. It’s libel, but what of it?
While I will not speculate on the cause of Mr. Smith’s actions, I think ignoring him is the right approach.
John, the only thing I want to know from you is this:
john October 16, 2013 at 2:08 pm #
I sent the following letter to the Arlington National Cemetery Administration:
Dear Administration,
When the government reopens, I am planning on taking a trip to Washington DC. I plan to visit Arlington National Cemetery. I am an avid treasure hunter and I am asking permission if I can metal detect on the grounds of Arlington National Cemetery. Millions of people visit the cemetery and I want to metal detect around some of the green and the graves. I would promise to fill any holes I made and the administration can even keep an eye on me to be sure I fill in the holes I make at some the graves. I know this is an unusual request by I understand the National Park Service with approval of the President placed barricades in front of the memorials including the WWII Memorial denying Vets access to them. It seems this was OK with National Park Service and President so I don’t see why there be would a problem to allow me to metal detect around the green and the graves of Arlington National Cemetery. Thank you for your time in this matter and I look forward to quick response.
1. What was the response from Arlington?
2. How did the dig work out?
3. What was the point of that little exercise?
Did Smith ever admit he just copied the photos of Barack Obama, Sr.’s passport and U of H Manoa diploma from of a copy of the book Barack Obama Sr.: The Rise and Life of a True African Scholar? He tried to leave the impression he got them from some super secret source. (Loren at the Fogbow figured out where he found the photos.)
That thread mentions Dorf, but I don’t believe it is the thread which Smith is referring to. Here is what is in his Complaint:
106. Michael C. Dorf advised plaintiff LUCAS DANIEL SMITH he (plaintiff SMITH) was welcome to use the information contained with the said paper and write an article regarding defendant BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA being constitutionally eligible to serve a 3rd term as US President. Plaintiff wrote and published (May 27th, 2013) such an article and titled it, If Barack Obama were a natural born citizen it appears that the US Constitution would permit Barack Obama to serve a third (3rd) term as US President, and published it at http://www.wasobamaborninkenya.com/blog/barrack-obama-eligibility/if-barack-obama-were-a-natural-born-citizen-it-appears-that-the-us-constitution-would-permit-barack-obama-to-serve-a-third-3rd-term-as-us-president/
107. Michael C. Dorf informed plaintiff LUCAS DANIEL SMITH that he (Dorf) would (and did) get a kick out of Kevin Wayne Davidson are his (Davidson‘s) readers, among a number of other silent readers, dismissing the article written by the plaintiff LUCAS DANIEL SMITH as absolute nonsense when in, in fact, the information was true and correct and originally published by the distinguished Michael C. Dorf approximately 13 (thirteen) years earlier in the year 2000.
Apparently Smith is talking about a thread which discussed whether a person could be eligible to be Vice-President after serving two terms as President.
Obviously you are not going to sue him, but I was wondering about the potential implications of publishing a Complaint before it is filed.
Statements which are made in a legal pleading are not subject to libel claims, but it seems to me that it isn’t a pleading until it is actually filed.
Yes. Absolutely.
The POSFKBC purports to be a Kenyan Birth Certificate. It is not; it has errors in the information displayed that cannot be explained in any way other than ‘fake’. End of story.
Many Bothans died to bring us this information.
While I tend to agree, one must be careful to ensure that the any false presumptions in a logical ‘complex question’ are challenged.
It is no good ignoring someone who asks “Did you stop beating your wife”. You can’t answer yes or no without agreeing to the hidden presumption that you have, at some time in the past, beaten your wife. Even ignoring the question might leave the wrong impression in the logical ‘common ground’ amongst the audience.
You need to attack the false presumption: “I have never beaten my wife”.
This is, of course, a standard conspiracy theorist’s tactic, especially amongst birthers. “We’re just asking questions”. Questions so loaded with false presumptions that they poison any legitimate discussion.
Considering that an artist generally knows every brush stroke on his painting, I’d tend to agree with you. Not that I consider Mr. Smith an artist, of course.
That is, of course, laughable. Whether or not the sun will rise in the morning still remains to be seen. I think a pretty accurate guess can be made about it though.
There’s only one poster at Fogbow who meets that number… sorta… at least it’s close… and that poster is definitely not Dorf.
Dorf is not mentioned in comments on this blog except in the Open Thread that I already cited and this recent discussion of Smith’s draft complaint.
We’ve discussed eligibility many times, but not Dorf.
“Prufendorf” we have lots of, but not plain Dorf.
I think Smith high tailed it out of here. That or Doc rightly put him back in moderation.
I don’t speculate on Smith’s motives because i don’t know what they are. I’m not trying to act liberal.
He’s probably referring to:
If Barack Obama were a natural born citizen it appears that the US Constitution would permit Barack Obama to serve a third (3rd) term as US President.
http://www.wasobamaborninkenya.com/blog/barrack-obama-eligibility/if-barack-obama-were-a-natural-born-citizen-it-appears-that-the-us-constitution-would-permit-barack-obama-to-serve-a-third-3rd-term-as-us-president/#comments
Sure, but you claimed that we had a discussion about it here.
Since I don’t comment on your blog, no one would reasonably think that your reference was to your blog.
I said no such thing. You need to consider practicing a little control before just typing the first thing that comes to your mind.
The statement was:
“Michael C. Dorf informed plaintiff LUCAS DANIEL SMITH that he (Dorf) would (and did) get a kick out of Kevin Wayne Davidson are his (Davidson‘s) readers, among a number
of other silent readers, dismissing the article written by the plaintiff LUCAS DANIELSMITH as absolute nonsense when in, in fact, the information was true and correct and originally published by the distinguished Michael C. Dorf approximately 13 (thirteen) years earlier in the year 2000.”
Commentators such as Great Kim, Mik Tearg, Kurt Coleman, Rikker, Voice of Reason and Ehancock posted comments, at the article, attempting to discredit, belittle and ridicule the article.
The “litigation privilege” does extend to certain pre-filing statements. But not in this circumstance.
Your point being? While the argument is interesting and somewhat novel, it has little relevance to Obama’s eligibility.
How are you doing on determining who has been ‘negotiating’ with you. Come on Lucas, did you really believe that you were going to get 3M for that copy. That by itself would have been a big signal to anyone…
So were you pwned and pnked?
Oops
Those commentators are Doc’s readers? Only one of the names sounds even vaguely familiar to me, and I’ve been posting here for almost five years. When and where did Doc C. dismiss your article?
I naturally assumed that you were referring to dismissive comments posted here, because how else would you know that the people who posted those comments were Doc’s readers? Even if some of them used handles which people use here, how could you know that they were the same people?
Against my better judgment I read the comments about Smith’s article. I can’t identify a single comment which clearly was posted by someone who is one of Doc’s “readers.” If anyone else would like to chime in, please do so.
It’s like something out of Paper Moon, or The Sting, or Dirty Rotten Scoundrels; grifters swindling grifters, and no honor among thieves. Smiff is an endless fount of comedy.
I’m not familiar with any of those names. How did you determine that they are readers of Doc C.?
Rickey has a blog?
I’ve been known to do some slogging, but no blogging.
Nah, it’s not even that “real”. Subtle tones around the ‘seal’ … the rest of the supposed document is completely devoid of similar subtlety (excluding JPEG noise). It’s a poor digital composite. Why is the overall image low-res and crap quality? To hide a crappy compositing job. Anyone expecting to auction a document of any significance, based on that image, is an idiot.
Oh, and the seal in this image is a positive emboss. The copy ol’ LDS was waving around back in the day had a negatively-embossed seal. Weird.
The same kinda special that would believe anyone would be willing to pay $3M for a copy. You want that kinda scratch, you better pony up an original, bub!
Don’t be silly! Corsi’s Clown Car Parade has no expenses! I couldn’t possibly get by working part-time at $0/whatever.
I hafta work for them double-time to make ends meet 😉
I first thought you were merely implying that I was a front for your competition, being paid to discredit you. That must be frustrating, having multiple grifters all gunning for an ever-shrinking pool of birfer grift. Then I got it, you were comparing my critiques to the CCCP’s complaints re: the WH LFBC PDF.
Ow, zing! I stand totally refuted! That Piece’o’sh*t BC is totally un-IMPEACH-able! 😉
Well, c’mon, post add’l, higher quality images of your collector’s item. Shouldn’t be too hard.
What would you consider selling it for, Mr. Smith?
I know them primarily from The Fogbow. I don’t recognize anyone from that particular list who comments here under any name that I would know. I do know a fair number of Fogbow names and their equivalents names here, but these are not among the Smith list.
That must be it. I thought that I remembered seeing the name Rikker, but it must have been at The Fogbow.
I find it interesting that Smith now claims that Dorf gave him permission to use Dorf’s work, but Smith’s blog article does not mention Dorf. My conclusion is that Dorf never gave Smith permission to use it.
Doc, suddenly all of my posts are going into moderation.
When the external spam filter is not communicating with its host, every comment gets moderated. I saw an error message about the filter, so that is most likely the problem with your comments (and it wasn’t just you).
Worse, someone claiming to be Dorf may have done so… Interesting situation our poor friend has created for himself.
Yet the same Michael C. Dorf allegedly believed what this blog was saying about the POSFKBC? I don’t see how Smith would be able to argue that in court…
This isn’t going to court. If Smith thought there was half a chance he would have filed it rather than BE SCARY by telling everyone he was GOING to file it.
Maybe Smith is having us proofread it for him and give a legal critique first. 🙄
I did look at the noise levels, but I’m not experience enough to draw any conclusions.
I noted that all of the black and white text had about the same noise level (that which would be alleged to have come from the original birth certificate), the seal was distinct, and the two stamps and signature (upper left) had a higher noise level, consistent to having been added to to photocopy.
I though maybe that the printed document being more or less monochromatic (and so highly compressible) had a low noise level but the manual additions of stamps, Maganga signature and seal would be distinct and have a higher noise level.
At least if I were making a forgery that I actually wanted to fool someone with, I would try to make it harder to detect by using a real paper document, rather than try to hide digital artifacts. The Bomford fake (which I didn’t do) was a real paper document.
It would be a waste of time for him to file it as is, because he makes a number of allegations but even if the allegations happened to be true he doesn’t state a claim.