<Meanwhile, S&P also revised Berkshire Hathaway's rating outlook to "negative" from "stable."
Incidentally, this comes after Warren Buffett said S&P's downgrade of the U.S. "doesn't make sense" . . . .>
Here is the legendary investor's 6-month chart:
So . . . do you believe S&P . . . or do you believe the 'Oracle of Omaha'?
>>Yes, now to figure out how deep Holder was into PatCon.<<
If he was into PatCon deep enough, I suspect Mike Vanderboegh will ferret him out. But as of now he hasn't mentioned it at his SStreet site.
We might have thunderstorms soon, so I'm going to fortify myself with some apple pie while copying your posts lest they evanesce, and then hightail it to the supermarket. My head has been bothering me since I woke up this morning. I hope running around will clear it.
>>The chances of it being a 'typo' [on LexisNexis] after all the other skullduggery is slim. Considering everything else that has been covered up or hidden in Obama's history it has been a massive and ongoing effort.<<
Massive and comprehensive. It's hard to find something Obama's 'team' didn't think of and 'take care of'.
I'm using this opportunity as a memory refresher in advance of more discussion of Holdergate. Because I read too much last night to fit in a post or two, and it will help if you remember this, which you already read.
>> . . . This minor “typo” has caused many a researcher on LexisNexis to miss a vital clue in uncovering the mystery of what exactly a Natural Born citizen is.><<
The chances of it being a 'typo' after all the other skullduggery is slim. Considering everything else that has been covered up or hidden in Obama's history it has been a massive and ongoing effort.
>>It's fun being a gangsta guru. :-)<<
:-) If it lands you in Gitmo, I'll bring you a Park Seed biodome with a dwarf shovel secreted under the seed flat. Or would you rather have peanut butter cookies and dig your way out with a peanut butter spoon?
This is the blog article that had linked me to Donna Cotter's comprehensive report on Leo Donofrio's research. After his intro, the blogger reproduced Donofrio's lengthy research report that you read at Donofrio's blog. I can see how you missed that LexisNexus was part of the coverup. I missed it, too, until this blog alerted me. The blogger wrote:
<This time, it’s even more damning in that the so-called “gold standard” of legal and journalistic research and documentation on the internet, LexisNexis, obfuscates the issue by altering a reference to Minor v. Happersett in LOCKWOOD, EX PARTE, 154 U.S. 116 (1894) to instead read “Miner” v. Happersett. This minor “typo” has caused many a researcher on LexisNexis to miss a vital clue in uncovering the mystery of what exactly a Natural Born citizen is.>
The culprit sentence as Donofrio wrote it (asterisks mine):
<And Minor is mis-spelled in Lockwood **as** Lexis/Nexis, but most cryptically, at Cornell’s Legal Information Institute the opinion is cut right after “Minor v.”, with neither “Happersett” nor the specific holding to be found thereafter.>
I believe Donofrio meant to write 'at' instead of 'as'.
The blogger's commentary and his repro of Donofrio's writeup:
>>Yes, and with all my knowledge it's so hard to remain pure.<<
LLLOL After I wrote that, I saw its double entendre potential, and I have to admit it was too much fun to try to clarify. :-)
>>I'm surprised it's illegal unless it's libelous. Remember though, they were clever in how they obfuscated the references, they didn't rewrite anything, they just stuck crucial pieces in wrong places so it looked like just a mistake.<<
They did more than that. When you continue reading the article you spectacled for later, you'll see what else they did. I learned so much from Cotter's article, and highlighted so much in red, that my archived copy looks like white gauze bandage with blood seeping through. And I learned something additional in the blog that led me to Cotter's article. But one thing at a time.
>>LOL, you're such an optimist.<<
LOL That's probably because I don't know as much as you do about how the corrupt world operates.
>> . . . But I know this wasn't in the American Thinker article and it is in Cotter's Examiner article [False writings statute, jail &fine] :<<
I'm surprised it's illegal unless it's libelous. Remember though, they were clever in how they obfuscated the references, they didn't rewrite anything, they just stuck crucial pieces in wrong places so it looked like just a mistake.
>>How would you like to see a population explosion in the Federal pens around the country?<<
LOL, you're such an optimist.