MSNBC’s Savannah Guthrie joins Chris "leg-tingle" Matthews in becoming the network's second confirmed ‘birther’ as the leftist media conglomerate continues its spiral into obliviousness about Obama’s biography.
A Daily Pen editorial
by Daniel Crosby
When the truth is against you, impending judgment ultimately forces you to surrender and repent, or else, perish with your crumbling lies. The longer Obama’s defenders try to fill the vast, empty chasms of his covert biography with sermons of fawning, dishonest propaganda, the more they unravel into an incoherent psychosis under the crushing weight of the impending, cataclysmic reality.
Some at MSNBC are repenting.
MSNBC commentators, Savannah Guthrie and Chuck Todd, co-host "The Daily Rundown", a typically left-leaning program which attempts to focus on the top political stories of the day and is presented in a liberal-friendly format with reports and analysis from the Washington D.C. bureau of NBC News. The show airs at 9:00 a.m, Monday thru Friday.
During the April 4, 2011 broadcast of the show, the two pundits conducted an interview with Politifact.com founder, Bill Adair, as another post-mortem twitch of the network's dead coverage of Obama's eligibility story.
Regarding Obama’s covert Hawaiian birth records, Guthrie asked Adair, “…so what they (Hawaiian Department of Health) release is the ‘short-form’, but presumably, is there a long-form somewhere in the bowels of some bureaucratic building in Hawaii, and if so, why don’t they pull it out?”
Invoking the Chris Matthews ‘Devil’s Advocate to Birtherism’ technique, Savannah Guthrie became a birther!
In asking the question, Guthrie touched the essence of Obama's horrific problem. On the day this man was born, someone witnessed the birth and at least one of those witnesses attested official documentation recording the metrics and information about that birth. Those individuals are assumed to be at least an attending physician, and other hospital personnel or family members. That document was filed with the municipal authority and the medical facility bearing responsibility for such vital records in the location of the birth. As of today, this documentation has never been seen by anyone outside of a covertly protected group of government agents and pro-Obama municipal employees.
Moreover, Obama has paid in excess of a million dollars to his lawyers at Perkins Coie to defend against more than 30 lawsuits seeking his orignal documented eligibility to be President.
For Guthrie, the next step in the deductive process typically used by intelligent people is to consider the actual possible reasons why 'they don’t pull it out'. The foremost reason to consider is that it would expose Barack Obama as the most prolific liar and criminal in American political history while, possibly, sending America into social, legal and international chaos.
However, to date, NBC's pathetic overbending for Obama proves they and their viewers are viscerally terrified of what Obama has hidden from them. They invested too much in him. The rest of us in real America are not afraid of it because we only care if there is a criminal in the White House...regardless of his skin color or political party.
The 2012 pre-campaign media blast included a previous interview on ‘Rundown’ with Donald Trump last week during which Trump said that he wants Obama to produce a real birth certificate and that the reason Obama refuses to disclose his original natal documentation is because it might show that he is ineligible to be president.
Trump, unlike many in government today, appears to understand the importance of upholding Constitutional sovereignty through our President without respect for the political welfare of the individual holding the office.
Adair was brought on the show to rebut “The Donald”. Unfortunately, as we have become accustomed to seeing when this network attempts “journalism”, the conversation between these three devolved into a confusing back-and-forth replete with utter disinformation, outright dishonesty and laughable ignorance as they fumbled through Obama’s undocumented Hawaiian natal history.
Upon introducing Adair's Politifact.com with a reference to the Pulitzer prize, Chuck Todd asked, "We have heard from the Trump organization quite a bit about this segment, so, Bill, let's start with Trumps claim, he says the 'certificate of birth', but its actually a 'certificate of live birth', which is what Hawaii had versus a birth certificate. Please help clear this up."
Todd's incoherence is astonishing. First, his references to the document titles in association with Obama are wrong. Obama's inauspiciously posted, digitally imaged, altered documentation has a header title of 'Certification of Live Birth', not 'Certificate of Birth', as stated by Trump and which is a legitimate title of original birth documentation in some states, but not in Hawaii, and it is not a 'Certificate of Live Birth', as Todd claims, which is the NVSD template form of the standard federal document prescribed as the official medical verification of birth used by the hospital and is available through the U.S. Department of Health in 1961. The state of Hawaii did utilize this document in 1961 but it has never been shown to have been utilized to record Obama's birth.
“This is something we have done alot of research on at Politifact. We have talked to Hawaiian officials about it and there is, obviously, and I think many people know, the 'birth certificate' was posted on the web by the Obama campaign in the fall of 2008,” replied Adair.
Adair is already wrong and he's only been talking for five seconds. The image of a 'Certification of Live Birth' found suspiciously posted on the internet in October2008 is not a medically verified 'birth certificate' provided by a hospital and attested by a licensed professional. In fact, until 2009, many of Hawaii's very own municipal agencies refused to accept the 'Certification of Live Birth' document as a primary form of identification. The Obama campaign, nor anyone else, has ever posted an official, original birth certificate on the internet for Obama.
Adair continued, "Hawaiian officials have said that is real."
Aside from Adair’s genius in recognizing its existential qualities, he misidentifies the ‘CertificaTION of Live Birth’ as a “birth certificate", which is a generic term used by people who are ignorant about the difference between the available types of birth documentation in Hawaii. There is a big difference as it pertains to Obama, as we all know.
Recap, again. A Hawaiian ‘Certification of Live Birth’ is an independently published cover document created by a remote municipality way out in the Pacific Ocean, 40 years after Obama was born. It is not an original birth record created at the time of the birth. It is not endorsed or otherwise supported as an original medically verified U.S. 'Certificate of Live Birth' produced from template form and issued to municipal health departments who then provide the blank form to hospitals. This form is available and used in all 50 states per requirements outlined by the federal authority of the U.S. Department of Health, National Vital Statistics Division (NVSD 1961 Vital Statistics Report of the U.S., pp 229-244, Technical Appendix.)
When a birth occurs in a hospital, as we have been told Obama's did, the attending physician or administrator is required to consult with the parents who provide the appropriate information required on the form about them. The doctor then provides the medical information about the birth on the form. The form is then signed by a minimum of three different witnesses including the doctor, a hospital administrator and a witness or informant. The form will be attested and authenticated with he doctor's professional registration number and the date of its expiration. The form is then copied, either by photostatic method, or, currently, by digital scanning and is stored in the records of the medical facility. The original is then tranfered to the local Department of Health where the birth is registered and the original form is filed.
Unfortunately for Obama and his 'Obots', the Office of the President is a federal office, not an office held in the state of Hawaii…thank God...but, we digress.
It is apparent that Mr. Adair may not have researched as extensively as he claims. Most importantly, however, the ‘extensive researcher’, Adair, also fails to include that the “Certification of Live Birth” is deficient in allowing for the determination of natural-born qualifications of a presidential candidate.
In Obama’s case, the unconfirmed Hawaiian document only indicates the location of the registration of a birth by the department of Health, not the actual location of the occurrence of a medically verified “Live” birth in a Hospital or other facility with professional medical personnel or eyewitnesses who are qualified to attest documents certifying a vital event in the United States. Obama may very well have been born in Hawaii, but this document is not the original one created at the time of his birth which shows this. This is just a fact that can never be changed no matter how many want to deny it.
If the Hawaiian 'Certification of Live Birth' were authentic like the original, 1961 'Certificate of Live Birth', it would contain the identity and signatures of the attending physicians, the identity and signatures of the informant, the identity and signatures of the hospital administrator and the name of the hospital. Obama’s does not. Moreover, Obama’s ‘Certification of Live Birth’ does not indicate the citizenship status or birthplace of his parents, nor does it indicate whether the birth subject was adopted or whether the birth was, in anyway, originally documented through administrative processes which would possibly indicate a plural natal identity which, if shown to be true, would disqualify a presidential candidate.
These vital pieces of information are required to determine the natural-born status of the birth subject. Adair’s response reveals the long-standing flaw in Obama's supporters in that they lust to endow exclusive authority in determining Obama’s ‘natural-born’ status exclusively to the Hawaiian Department of Health. They seem to do this because this is the only entity on the planet willing to construct the information in an ambiguously misleading manner which supports Obama’s desire to conceal the authentic, original documents created in 1961.
Between its nonsensical records laws and its subversively liberal state legislature; Its administrative rules which allow everything from cover documents-in-lieu-of-authentic-originals, it has become clear the state of Hawaii is the foremost suspect in the abetment of Obama’s criminal presidency.
For someone claiming to have ‘researched this extensively’, Adair was shockingly unintelligible about the facts surrounding Obama’s Hawaiian origins, but the contaminated interview continued.
“There is another piece of evidence which is, as I understand, is contemporaneous…a birth announcement in the local paper in 1961?” asked Guthrie.
“Correct,” replied Adair, “and this to me is even more persuasive in many ways, because it’s published in the paper…for it to be put there in two papers…in the two Honolulu newspapers it was placed by the department of health…”
“They do it! Not the families!” Todd interrupted, pointing to a copy of the birth announcements.
“This is county produced! The same way…because right next to it are marriage applications! Which we have up here. Marriage applications which also it’s not as if…people filed with the county…and death notices…the same thing, whenever the county recorded a death certificate, correct?”
Okay, Chuck…since you mention it. Let’s talk about the marriage announcements.
While you are exalting the DOH with authority to initiate newspaper announcements declaring Obama as an eligible, ‘natural-born’ candidate for the most power office in the world, please tell us why Obama parents’ marriage announcements have never been found in the same papers as the birth announcements. They were allegedly married in Hawaii in February, 1961. Maybe the Department of Health or the newspapers were closed that day.
Todd’s implication that Obama was born in some fictional maternity ward at the offices of the Department of Health in Hawaii is a new low for Obama’s blind supporters.
Like so many other shills for Obama, he is so one dimensional in is pro-Obama thought structure that he never considers that the most important fact concerning the birth announcements is not whether members of Obama’s family provided information directly to the newspapers, but rather, that the information for the announcements was most importantly, not provided to the newspapers directly by the alleged medical facility in which Obama claimed he was born! Todd completely ignores this fact because he wants to endow the Hawaiian Department of Health with the authority to validate Obama as an eyewitness to the facts, exclusively.
Essentially, there have evolved four entities in this conversation. The Department of Health, the Obama/Dunham Family, an unconfirmed hospital and the Honolulu newspapers.
Of these four, only the hospital is the preeminent authority qualified to demonstrate that Obama is natural-born. We haven't heard from any hospital about Obama's birth. In determining natural born status, the Department of Health does not have a maternity ward nor does its personnel attend births. The family cannot be held accountable due to their personal interests, and the newspapers print whatever the Department of Health tells them to - regardless of the original sources used to create the information for birth announcements in the first place.
No, Obama was not born at the offices of the Hawaiian Department of Health in 2007! He was not born at the newspapers’ offices on August 11 when the announcements were published. We don't know if he was born at his family's home or at a hospital.
Therefore, the DOH officials whom these pundits so excruciatingly exalt as authorities in determining Obama’s constitutional eligibility are merely municipal tools used in a chain of command to process information provided to them by the initial authority – the medically qualified individual or individuals in the hospital where the birth is first verified.
Adair continued, “And, it says there (in the announcement), ‘a son born to Mr. and Mrs. Barack Obama…so for there to be any sort of conspiracy you had to have a lot of groups working together here.”
“You mean in other words, the department of Health had to be in on the conspiracy fifty years ago…” said Guthrie.
“Exactly,” replied Adair. “And, so, I think this is corroborating evidence that the birth certificate is authentic.” added Adair.
Notice the assumptions made by Adair about the connections between unrelated pieces of evidence. He states that the presence of the birth announcements created by two newspapers from information provided by the DOH in 1961 automatically indicates, without exception, that a Certification of Live Birth provided by the DOH in 2001 is a real document which, therefore, means that Barack Obama is a natural-born citizen. A quantum leap which Guthrie's burgeoning instincts cause her to take issue with.
“Well, just to be totally clear,” interrupted Guthrie, "when the Honolulu advertiser and the other paper has a birth announcement like this, the presumption is that this is a birth that has taken place in Hawaii, because it does not say ‘born in Honolulu.”
“Correct,” replied Adair.
Guthrie's use of the word 'presumption' is the problem. She finally hits one of the essential key pieces of information oriented against Obama's eligibility. The fact is that the appearance of a birth announcement in a Hawaiian newspaper in 1961 did not indicate a Hawaiian birth, as has been proven. Thousands of children born outside of Hawaii from the early 1900's until today have had their births registered and announced in Hawaii as a native birth. The state of Hawaii, and the territory prior, has maintained laws and policies for 100 years which afford its municipal authority with tremendous latitude in registering and 'nativizing' foreign-born children. A review of the history of Hawaii's plural culture and remote location explains the evolution of Hawaii's permeable migrational history.
“But, it (the newspaper) only reports births which happen in Hawaii,” continued Savannah.
“Exactly,” replied Adair, “…and the birth certificate says that the birth was in Honolulu.”
Adair and Guthrie have gone down the rabbit hole at this point, making an incredibly ignorant assumption. The fact is that the Hawaiian Department of Health has registered foreign births in Hawaii as native births and that the newspapers do not care whether the birth occurs in Hawaii or not. The newspapers simply print from a list of birth registrations which only indicate the address of the registrant, not the location of the birth. Adair becomes less of an expert the more he talks.
Then, appearing to shift accountability from Obama to the Republican party, Todd said, “You know, Bill, the cynical side of what I’ve heard from republicans on this is ‘okay, we don’t dispute that he was born in Hawaii’, but they are trying to smoke out the real birth certificate because they think there will be something else on the birth certificate, perhaps his religious denomination…did Hawaii even have that on their birth certificate in 1961?”
In Adair’s shockingly ignorant reply, he said, “Well, I am not sure about the religious faith but I would doubt it. Hawaiian officials have said that what is in their files, a certificate of Live birth, contains the same information as the one produced online…”
At this time it became apparent that Adair had no idea what he was talking about. Just as was expected. If an individual who claims to have researched the issue of Obama’s undocumented eligibility extensively does not know whether or not the religion of a baby is shown the 1961 Certificate of Live Birth, he is not qualified to have this conversation.
“Whatever was on the original one is what they produce now!” interjected Todd, incorrectly.
If the DOH produced a Certification of Live Birth with ‘whatever was on the original’, Todd would know that it would contain, among other things, the identity of the doctor or witness to the birth and the name of the hospital in which the original document was issued. It would also indicate the usual residence of the mother, the birthplace of both parents, the age of the mother, and 30 other pieces of critical information which do not appear on Hawaii’s fallow document.
Then, Guthrie seemed to crack under the weight of the truth as she began to think outside the Obama box.
“Okay,” she added, “…so what they release is the ‘short-form’, but presumably, is there a long-form somewhere in the bowels of some bureaucratic building in Hawaii, and if so, why don’t they pull it out?”
Adair replied, “We asked the health officials about that, and they said for all intents and purposes, they are the same document and what is on that computer generated document are the same things that are on the long-form and that the words ‘long-form’ are really not good terminology.”
Adair did not venture to ask, if the two documents are so much alike, then why doesn’t Obama just produce the original certificate created in 1961 for public review? Since they are exactly the same, then he should just produce both of them and end this controversy, once and for all.
Adair went on to say that, recently, Donald Trump had claimed that no one remembers Obama from school and that Trump was wrong because there is plenty of people who went to school with Barack Obama who remember him at all levels, they have been very public about it.
Adair could not name even one of them however.