Trump campaign admits Obama born in the USA.

a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

You don't actually know that though.

Actually, I do know that. The Obama / Keyes debates are, in fact freely available on YouTube (in spite of your claim that they have been scrubbed), and that encounter never takes place.

You just say it because you are "fighting for your hero Obama"

Incorrect. I just say it to correct foolish disinformation being spread on the Internet. You know the motto: "Deny Ignorance".

Your claim is patently absurd.

Well, the media are now not even denying that Clinton's campaign started it.
Chuck Todd, believe it or not, could only retort 'who cares' when it came to Hillary's campaign involvement in 2008 and 'what difference does it make'.

So the message has landed. Hillary started this and it's now out in the open.

a reply to: UKTruth

The media? Who in the main stream media has claimed Hillary started it? You still haven't put any sources forward. Politifact, WaPo, among others have proven that the claim Hillary started it is false.

I love it how birthers who were very loud about Obama not being eligible are now running away from the conspiracy like a bunch of wimps because it's political poison.

The very first recorded post questioning Obama's birthplace originated from a rightwing, anti democrat website called 'The Free Republic' dated March 1st 2008:

Here's the post:

Obama’s mother gave birth to him overseas and then immediately flew into Hawaii and registered his birth as having taken place in Hawaii.

www.freerepublic.com...

It's true that Clinton supporters like Phil Burg jumped on the bandwagon later on during the primaries but the origins of the conspiracy come from anti-liberal anti-democrat sources.

a reply to: UKTruth

Well, the media are now not even denying that Clinton's campaign started it.

Are you interpreting that to mean that they admit it? What can Chuck Todd actually admit to?

originally posted by: Southern Guardian
a reply to: UKTruth

The media? Who in the main stream media has claimed Hillary started it? You still haven't put any sources forward. Politifact, WaPo, among others have proven that the claim Hillary started it is false.

I love it how birthers who were very loud about Obama not being eligible are now running away from the conspiracy like a bunch of wimps because it's political poison.

The very first recorded post questioning Obama's birthplace originated from a rightwing, anti democrat website called 'The Free Republic' dated March 1st 2008:

Here's the post:

Obama’s mother gave birth to him overseas and then immediately flew into Hawaii and registered his birth as having taken place in Hawaii.

www.freerepublic.com...

It's true that Clinton supporters like Phil Burg jumped on the bandwagon later on during the primaries but the origins of the conspiracy come from anti-liberal anti-democrat sources.

I have plenty of sources already posted.
The denials are now drying up as it's clear that Clinton's campaign did indeed bring the issue to the mainstream in 2008.
Not even Chuck Todd had the fight left in him to argue against it.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: UKTruth

Well, the media are now not even denying that Clinton's campaign started it.

Are you interpreting that to mean that they admit it?

They have given up denying it.
Kelly Anne Conway put forward the very sources I have and did a brilliant job of closing down Chuck Todd. He couldn't argue it, rather reverted to 'what difference does it make' and 'who cares'.

a reply to: UKTruth
Chuck Todd?
A talking head? Who cares?

a reply to: UKTruth

I have plenty of sources already posted.

Rightwing sources? Or unbiased sources?

I just posted to you the oldest recorded birther thread on the net. Do you have any sources debunking that post from March 2008?

Do you have any earlier posts from pro-Hillary sources? I very much doubt you have anything to show UK. If you do, I'll certainly eat my sock.

The denials are now drying up as it's clear that Clinton's campaign did indeed bring the issue to the mainstream

Clear from what again? You haven't shown anything to date. Posting a rightwing article claiming 'Oh hillary started it' with nothing of substance is not evidence.

The loudest birthers from 2008 were the likes of Orly Taitz, Corsi and Farah from WND, Alex Jones to name afew. Hardly pro-Hillary supporters I assure you.

Which Hillary supporter started it? Do you have any unbiased sources yourself?

Again I post this:

March 1st 2008:

Here's the post:

Obama’s mother gave birth to him overseas and then immediately flew into Hawaii and registered his birth as having taken place in Hawaii.

www.freerepublic.com...

Do you think ignoring this is going to make it go away?

Hmm.

originally posted by: Southern Guardian
The very first recorded post questioning Obama's birthplace originated from a rightwing, anti democrat website called 'The Free Republic' dated March 1st 2008:

Here's the post:

Obama’s mother gave birth to him overseas and then immediately flew into Hawaii and registered his birth as having taken place in Hawaii.

www.freerepublic.com...

It's true that Clinton supporters like Phil Burg jumped on the bandwagon later on during the primaries but the origins of the conspiracy come from anti-liberal anti-democrat sources.

Wait...you skipped the ORIGINAL-original posting of that comment -- at the Volokh Conspiracy blog -- in the wee hours of February 29, 2008. Link

They are described as "generally libertarian, conservative, centrist, or some mixture of these." Link

And certainly, Hillary was considered 'centrist' by comparison to Obama, back then. (Still laughable). It actually makes perfect sense that a multi-party blog was the originator.

Also, FreeRepublic did take up the issue, pretty quick. However, until Obama had the nomination in the bag, the issue gained steam largely on pro-Hillary blogs. Also, Hillary supporters were often freely discussing it on FreeRepublic (despite it being a conservative blog), and pro-Hillary blogs were often cited at FreeRepublic, on this issue.

'Polarik' -- the original disinfo agent claiming to be a document/digital image expert -- spent as much time (if not more) at TexasDarlin's blog (pro-Hillary) as he did at FreeRepublic.

originally posted by: Southern Guardian
a reply to: UKTruth

I have plenty of sources already posted.

Rightwing sources? Or unbiased sources?

I just posted to you the oldest recorded birther thread on the net. Do you have any sources debunking that post from March 2008?

Do you have any earlier posts from pro-Hillary sources? I very much doubt you have anything to show UK. If you do, I'll certainly eat my sock.

The denials are now drying up as it's clear that Clinton's campaign did indeed bring the issue to the mainstream

Clear from what again? You haven't shown anything to date. Posting a rightwing article claiming 'Oh hillary started it' with nothing of substance is not evidence.

The loudest birthers from 2008 were the likes of Orly Taitz, Corsi and Farah from WND, Alex Jones to name afew. Hardly pro-Hillary supporters I assure you.

Which Hillary supporter started it? Do you have any unbiased sources yourself?

Again I post this:

March 1st 2008:

Here's the post:

Obama’s mother gave birth to him overseas and then immediately flew into Hawaii and registered his birth as having taken place in Hawaii.

www.freerepublic.com...

Do you think ignoring this is going to make it go away?

Hmm.

Perhaps you should read the various threads on this subject.
When you have done so, you'll realise you are arguing against a point I haven't made and then I will engage further with you. However, I won't cover old ground.

a reply to: UKTruth

Perhaps you should read the various threads on this subject.

Perhaps you need to stop stalling and hoping somebody will help you here and actually start posting substantiated sources proving 'Hillary started it'. All you've done so far is insist she has, insist this has been proven so already, and you haven't provided anything further.

If you don't wish to 'engage' any further that's all fine by me. I'll take it you have nothing.

a reply to: Southern Guardian

Also, Bill Clinton fed into the controversy -- which was admittedly already circulating widely on pro-Hillary blogs -- when he said, on August 4, 2008:

"I never was mad at Sen. Obama," the former president said. "I think everybody's got a right to run for president who qualifies under the Constitution. "

It's little wonder Hillary supporters seized on this comment...and they did. Everyone knew he wasn't talking about Obama being too young to qualify.

Bill knew what he was doing when he said that. He knew he was fanning the flames. And people thought that if anyone was in a position to have info that might indicate Obama was not eligible...it was Bill Clinton.

It seems to me that if anyone -- with a vast platform from which to speak and be heard- - was the original birther...it was Bill Clinton. He was on it three years before Trump. His comment certainly riled up Hillary supporters.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

Wait...you skipped the ORIGINAL-original posting of that comment -- at the Volokh Conspiracy blog -- in the wee hours of February 29, 2008.

They are described as "generally libertarian, conservative, centrist, or some mixture of these."

Oh now you're grasping for straws. All of a sudden Hillary is a centrist now, there for this blog proclaiming itself centrist (among coversative and libertarian) must mean it's a pro-Hillary blog right? What a jump you made there MotherMayEye.

Do you know who runs the Volokh conspriacy website? Eugene Volkh who is a conservative. He supported GOP presidential candidate Fred Thompson in 2008,

www.slate.com...
(5th paragraph just to help you there).

Also, FreeRepublic did take up the issue, pretty quick. However, until Obama had the nomination in the bag, the issue gained steam largely on pro-Hillary blogs.

No, the issue gained steam by popular rightwing advocates like Orly Taitzs (Pro-Trump), Corsi and Farah (Pro Trump), Alex Jones (Pro Trump) and of course Trump himself afew years following the 08 elections.

The only high profile Hillary advocate who took the issue to light was Phil Berg but he came in after the others above (excluding Donnie who jumped on the birther bandwagon 2010 on wards).

There were many Hillary supporters than jumped on the birther bandwagon. This has never been denied. But the argument they started it is completely without merit. You yourself cannot seen to link that post back in March 2008 to any pro-Hillary sources. You're proving my point.

originally posted by: Southern Guardian
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Oh now you're grasping for straws. All of a sudden Hillary is a centrist now, there for this blog proclaiming itself centrist (among coversative and libertarian) must mean it's a pro-Hillary blog right? What a jump you made there MotherMayEye.

Well, I was a Hillary supporter, back then, and liked Hillary for her centrist stance. Many of her supporters felt the same way and still do. Eugene Volkh didn't leave the comment, 'Dave N' did. And he was followed shortly with this comment:

"Clayton E. Cramer:

Who cares where McCain was born? It's when he was born that makes him unqualified and should make him ineligible to hold any Federal office. Of course, the Constitution's flat-backwards and has age minimums instead of age caps... "

Link

So clearly, it wasn't solely a conservative blog. AND, btw, the discussion in that thread began with whether or not McCain was eligible.

You're grasping here...not me.

You also said:

No, the issue gained steam by popular rightwing advocates like Orly Taitzs (Pro-Trump), Corsi and Farah (Pro Trump), Alex Jones (Pro Trump) and of course Trump himself afew years following the 08 elections.

No, these guys didn't come on until late in the Summer of 2008. Before then, most of the discussion took place at TexasDarlin & NoQuater (both pro-Hillary), and FreeRepublic (particularly after Obama had the nomination.)

Phil Berg and Leo Donofrio were both in the forefront on the legal end of the controversy. Berg is a democrat...and Leo Donofrio had a blog dedicated to implicating Bush, Plame, and Joe Wilson in orchestrating the CIA-outing leak that ensnared Scooter Libby.

The birther controversy gained traction in the beginning because of pro-Hillary people. It was taken up by conservatives after Obama had the nomination. And that makes sense. Conservatives didn't know who they were battling until Obama had the nomination in late July 2008. Hillary supporters knew they were battling him for more than a year, before that, in the primary.

ETA: Obama supporters hated us Hillary supporters, back then. They called us racists for questioning Obama's birthplace and/or his birth certificate. They called Bill and Hillary racist for challenging and criticizing Obama. Now they want to pretend it never happened. Please. I said then I would not forget how my own party treated me. I haven't forgotten even though you want to rewrite history.


ETA 2: BTW, TexasDarlin's blog is closed and cannot be brought up on the WayBack Machine. But her blog was a hotbed for discussing this issue and she was pro-Hillary. Whether evidence can be resurrected or not on the internet is not proof of how this controversy got its' start. I remember her discussing whether Obama was hiding a possible adoption well before the initial crappy jpeg of his short form appeared one morning on DailyKos, in June 2008.

Hillary blaming someone in the campaign, just like -

1. She landed "Under Sniper Fire" in Bosnia?

2. Her and Bill "were dead broke" after leaving the White House?

3. She has "allergies"?

etc. etc.

Sorry but with her history I find this hard to believe...

a reply to: MotherMayEye

So clearly, it wasn't solely a conservative blog.

clearly from what? And What part of that website is pro-Hillary?

I've also demonstrated rather clearly this conspiracy began to be circulated by rightwing websites like the Free Republic (hence the post form March 1st 2008). Hillary supporters jumped on the wagon later down the track. This is why you can't seem to post any sources or records pointing to any pro-hillary websites pushing this conspiracy earlier than Free Republic did.

No, these guys didn't come on until late in the Summer of 2008.

No, these guys were the most vocal and were the first to push the conspiracy into the mainstream media.

Before then, most of the discussion took place at TexasDarlin & NoQuater (both pro-Hillary),

I'm familiar with TexasDarlin and NoQuarter and as I demonstrated to you rather clearly, they weren't the first to post about birtherism. It's origins are tracked back to FreeRepublic who began circulating it. There were plenty of rightwing websites that were circulating the rumour before Clinton supporters caught on.

Phil Berg and Leo Donofrio were both in the forefront on the legal end of the controversy. Berg is a democrat...

I'm well aware Phil is a democrat. I mentioned Phil in my previous post if you didn't bother to read it.

Your post so far essentially is about Hillary Clinton supporters pushing the birther conspiracy. There's no debate Hillary supporters pushed the birther conspiracy. The argument here is whether they started the conspiracy which, to date, you haven't proven.

I'm well aware of Berg. His first case was in August 2008 against Obama but by then birtherism was alive and well. You can go back to this website yourself to see the numerous birther threads floating around by then.

The birther controversy gained traction in the beginning because of pro-Hillary people.

Change of tune there I see. It's no longer now about whether Hillary and her supporters started it. Its now about them 'gaining traction' for birtherism. So you're going to concede there's no evidence pointing to Hillary starting birtherism?

It was taken up by conservatives after Obama had the nomination.

It clearly wasnt MotherMayEye.

It's already been shown that FreeRepublic began circulating birtherism since March 2008. There were a number of posts even on here making it an issue prior to Obama's nomination. There were plenty of people making it an issue prior to Obama's nomination. Clinton supporters may have jumped on the bandwagon, but they didn't start birtherism, and they are certainly not solely responsible for pushing the conspiracy. What's more, Trump himself pushed its height in the 2010s. Nobody put a gun to his head and told him to do so, just like nobody forced you to post that birther thread about Obama's birth certificate.

Birtherism is yours to own.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

Just curious.. why aren't you a Hillary supporter any longer? Here positions haven't changed. So colour me curious.

originally posted by: Southern Guardian

Birtherism is yours to own.

Exactly. I was a Hillary supporter, in 2008, and a birther from the get-go. I own it. It started with Hillary supporters.

Thanks for conceding that point.

Also, TexasDarlin's blog is long-closed and cannot be resurrected on the WayBack Machine. So whether evidence exists or not on the web, as to the origin of the controversy, is NO PROOF of how it actually got its start.

Things disappear on the web. And TexasDarlin's blog is gone.

Also, you tried to say the original comment came from FreeRepublic, but it was only reposted there from the Volokh blog. You conveniently left that part out.

The Volokh blog is for legal discussions. No need to pigeon-hole it as any party/candidate's mouthpiece. Clearly many political views were up for debate.

originally posted by: Southern Guardian
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Just curious.. why aren't you a Hillary supporter any longer? Here positions haven't changed. So colour me curious.

Because I decided I was being disingenuous giving her a pass on every scandal associated with her when i refused to do that with Obama and Republicans.

And once I started digging in...I found merit to some of it. Especially with regard to Iran-Contra & the Mena Arkansas controversies, as well as the PROMIS/PRISM/money-laundering/bank spying controversies.

AND, when I found that Hillary and the Rose Law Firm represented Systematics Inc. during the PROMIS scandal years, AND that Obama's uncle, Cecil Goeldner, installed core banking systems for the same company, in Little Rock, for 16 years and during the same period of time, I did not feel good about supporting her anymore.

I stepped out of my comfort zone to genuinely consider the scandals that plagued the Clintons.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

Exactly. I was a Hillary supporter, in 2008, and a birther from the get-go.

But you're not anymore.

You along with other conservatives own the birther conspiracy. This isn't to do with the fact you were a Hillary supporter back then.

Also, TexasDarlin's blog is long-closed and cannot be resurrected on the WayBack Machine.

That's not my problem.

If you're going to claim Hillary and her supporters started birtherism from the get go you best get to pulling out those sources. Until then it's nobody's problem that you have no solid sources or old blogs to go back to.

Also, you tried to say the original comment came from FreeRepublic, but it was only reposted there from the Volokh blog.

I'll admit Volokh blog posted that comment prior to FreeRepublic. It's time for you to admit you have no evidence pointing to that website being pro-hillary in any shape or form.

It was already a desperate attempt by you to claim the website listing itself as politically 'centrist' somehow made it pro-Hillary. I admit I had a chuckle. Stretching the truth is a great understatement.

You have nothing.