After fanning the flames of doubt that pressured Barack Obama to publicize a purported copy of his official birth certificate, Donald Trump’s latest statements suggest the White House-released document may be a fake.
“I don’t know exactly what he showed,” Trump told the Faith & Freedom Coalition annual conference in Washington, D.C., over the weekend, ” but you know, someday somebody’s gonna figure that one out.”
The famed businessman also intoned, “Nobody is protected like Barack Hussein Obama,” Politico reports. “I have never seen press that is so protective of a human being before.”
Though Trump’s true stance on the document remains muddied, WND reported Jerome Corsi, author of “Where’s the Birth Certificate? The Case That Barack Obama is Not Eligible to be President,” claims Trump was “pumping [him] for information” on the birth certificate.
Corsi reports a conference call with WND Editor and Chief Executive Officer Joseph Farah in which the building magnate said he is concerned about the validity of the document released April 27 by the Obama White House. Farah confirms Trump questioned the authenticity of the birth certificate and said others around him do as well.
Listen to Corsi’s account of the conversation with Trump:
The image has been challenged by a number of experts in the field, yet the original has not been publicly seen, much less analyzed.
The state of Hawaii said it inserted “safety paper” into a copy machine and copied onto the new paper the original image from its state records. However, state officials were unwilling to confirm to WND after the image was released that what was issued by the White House was, in fact, an accurate representation of their original records.
During their conversation, Trump told Corsi his own computer expert told him at the release that it was a computer-generated document.
That opinion has been repeated many times, and WND has reported on a few of the objections that have been raised by various experts:
- Ivan Zatkovich, of Tampa-based eComp Consultants, for example, analyzed the various layers in the PDF file released by the White House, and concluded: “The content clearly indicates that the document was knowingly and explicitly edited and modified before it was placed on the web.”
The image that was released, described by the White House as “proof positive” of Obama’s Hawaiian birth:
Image released by the White House April 27, 2011
Zatkovich, with 28 years experience in computer science and document management and for more than 10 years an expert witness providing testimony in federal court in both criminal and civil litigation, said the multiple PDF document layers are unusual.
“When a paper document is scanned on a scanner and saved as a PDF file it normally contains only a single layer of graphical information. The PDF that appears on the White House website however, contains multiple layers of graphic information. Multiple layers usually appear in a document like this when it is being edited or modified in some fashion.
“It is possible to take a single layer PDF and inadvertently create multiple layers, without changing the image in any fashion. But that does not appear to be the case here. The multiple layers in the PDF document are a result of changes made to the image,” his report said.
Among the various items that were separated into different layers include the main text, the mother’s occupation, the dates accepted, the stamp and signature of the state registrar and the time stamp of the state registrar:
The document is broken into layers.
The background layer – with all of the additional layers removed – essentially has the text removed except some random portions of signatures and a white border where the text appears on other layers:
The background, without layers of information added on top
Also, the main layer of text reveals most of the wording on the document, with strange exceptions such as the first part of Stanley Ann Dunham Obama’s signature. The main text layer has only “unham Obama.” Likewise, “Kenya” is spelled “enya” and “Barack” is spelled Ba ack.”
The layer with the main parts of the text
- Secondly, Karl Denninger, the former of CEO of MCSNet, a Chicago networking and Internet company, said the presence of “kerning” in the text confirms manipulation.
Denninger posted a series of reports online, including on YouTube, where he explains his concerns, which focus around the lettering as it appears on the document that reportedly is a photocopy on green “safety paper” of the original record in Hawaii
He explains that the type on the birth document show evidence of “kerning,” the squeezing of letters into a line so that they intrude into adjacent letter spaces. Kerning is routine since the advent of word processors and computers, but impossible with a typewriter.
“This process, of course, requires that you know what the next letter is. With a computer this is pretty easy, since the computer can retroactively go back and adjust, and it also can typeset the current letter with the knowledge of what the previous one was,” he reported. “A typewriter, on the other hand, is a mechanical device. It does not know what the next letter is that you will type, nor does it know what the last letter was that you typed. It thus has a typeface that always leaves physical space between the boundary of each character.”
His full explanation is on video:
“To refute this point you must come up with a typewriter that contains a flux capacitor and thus is capable of accurately predicting the future,” he said. “This document has been assembled by somebody on a computer.”
- Then there was a YouTube poster, who identified himself as orangegold1, and posted a video that claimed the White House either was ignorant in posting the document, or was submarined by someone inside the walls who wanted people to suspect the document.
Perhaps most significant unresolved issues is that two weeks before Obama finally released his “long-form birth certificate,” Hawaii’s former Health Department chief Chiyome Fukino – the one official who claimed to have examined Obama’s original birth document – was interviewed by NBC News’ national investigative correspondent Michael Isikoff, who reported that Fukino told him she had seen the original birth certificate and that it was “half typed and half handwritten.”
However, the document released by the White House was entirely typed. Only the signatures and two dates at the very bottom were “handwritten.” What Fukino described is apparently a different document from what Obama released to the public.
Among other questions that remain about the document:
- The objectivity of “experts” cited by the mainstream media to verify the birth certificate is suspect, including that of Fox News Channel’s Jean-Claude Tremblay, who assured America they “should not be suspicious” of the document, but who, WND discovered, had heralded Obama’s election victory in an online post.
- Obama’s posted birth certificate contains the same anomalies as a well-known forgery that claimed he was born in Kenya, suggesting the anomalous markings came from the same source. “How could Obama’s ‘real’ birth certificate share these unique characteristics with an obvious forgery?” asks Farah. “For the life of me, I can’t figure out an answer other than they were created by the same person or persons.”
- The birth certificate’s reported delivering physician, Dr. David Sinclair, differs from previously published reports and even the myth-busting Snopes.com’s original entry, which named Dr. Rodney T. West as the doctor of record.
- Obama’s purported birth certificate contains over a dozen differences in form from the verified, Hawaii copy of the birth certificate issued to the Nordyke twins, born the next day at the same reported hospital.
- The local registrar listed in the Nordyke twins’ birth certificate is notably different than the local registrar on the Obama birth certificate.
- Though Obama was born before the Nordyke twins, and though his birth was filed with the registrar three days before the twins’ birth, Obama’s purported birth certificate has a higher registration number.
- The age of Obama’s father, as listed on the document, conflicts with previously discovered documents about Barack Obama Sr.
- There are no notations on the document indicating Obama’s adoption by his Indonesian stepfather, Lolo Soetoro, as are often made – even replacing the name of the birth parents – when a child in the U.S. is adopted.
In addition, the SmokingGun.com website notes several irregularities with the Obama birth certificate that do not appear on the Nordyke twin’s birth certificates:
- In Box 3, “This Birth,” there are two “Xs” above “Twin” and “Triplet” – why are these “Xs” here and what do they signify?
- What is the meaning of the smudges in the Obama birth certificate in the box containing the name of the attending physician?
- What is the significance of the numbers, seen vertically, on the right side of the Obama birth certificate?
There are those Obama critics, too, who says that the document released by the White House, if authentic, actually proves Obama’s ineligibility. They cite the indication that Barack Obama Sr. was listed as the father, but he never was a U.S. citizen. They contend those who wrote the requirement for presidents to be a “natural born citizen” disqualified dual citizens at birth, such as Obama.
Obama Jr. himself even seemed to hold that position, suggesting in a resolution he co-sponsored to address Sen. John McCain’s status as a “natural born Citizen” that the status requires “American citizen” parents.
During much of April Trump made regular appearances on talk shows and news broadcasts, and almost every time either he or the interviewer raised questions about Obama’s eligibility. At the same time, he regularly was in conversation with Corsi and others who helped Corsi investigate the Obama eligibility dispute about the evidence that exists.
As a CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll demonstrated, by raising questions about Obama’s eligibility repeatedly, going as far as suggesting Obama’s tenure might be illegal, Trump rose in popularity among GOP voters.
In that poll, 19 percent of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents said they’d likely support Trump for the 2012 GOP nomination.
His support rose from only 10 percent just a month earlier.
WND has reported on Trump’s statements regarding Obama’s eligibility:
“There’s something fishy about the whole thing,” Trump has said of Obama’s background, birth story and constant refusal to release a wide range of documents that would reveal information about his heritage and upbringing.
Trump has also been skeptical regarding the oft-cited 1961 Honolulu newspaper notices.
“I see so much fraud in this world, an ad like that could have been staged. I see so many fraudulent things going on that would be like the least of it,” Trump said.
He suggested it was incredible that no doctor, nurse or other person has come forward to recall the birth of such a famous person.
Trump told Fox News host Bill O’Reilly the significance of the dispute isn’t clear to many people.
“If you are going to be the president of the United States you have to be born in the United States – and there is doubt [about Obama],” he said. “If he wasn’t born in this country, it’s one of the great scams.”
Trump also was on MSNBC, where he was asked whether it was a serious issue:
“There is certainly a chance that he was not born in this country. Now if he was not born in this country, that means he can’t be president. It’s very simple,” Trump explained.