Birtherism Is Disproven.

I can publicly state at this time that I consider the two big claims of “birtherism” — first, that Barack Obama was born somewhere other than Hawaii, and secondly, that it takes two citizen parents to make a “natural born citizen” — to be disproven.

For a detailed summary of my conclusions regarding these and related issues, see my “Bottom Line Conclusions” Post.

That post also contains references to a variety of other resources. The book that this site was created to support, to my own understanding, is almost comprehensive in demonstrating that there’s nothing to the forgery theories. My comments at this page over at “Squeeky Fromm’s” blog address a couple of other points brought up by Arpaio’s posse which they claim prove their points. They do not.

I also commend Mr. Frank Arduini’s work, and “NBC”s work, on the forgery claims issue.

The second issue is the false claim that two citizen parents are required to make a natural born citizen. Quite a bit about that — not all that I know, but quite a bit — can be found in this public debate with Mario Apuzzo.

Mr. Apuzzo did not fare well in this debate.

There is additional information on the meaning of “natural born citizen” in other posts here at my own blog.

Kevin Davidson’s blog,, is always a good source for the latest factual debunking of nonsense from the propagandists. I’ve stated before, and will state here again, that I while I don’t see eye to eye with Mr. Davidson’s politics, I have never yet, even once, found him to make a statement that was untruthful or unjustified. In fact, over time I’ve found a few of his criticisms of birther theories to be milder that I myself would put them! As a person, I have a good deal of respect for Mr. Davidson, as I do for certain other individuals I have encountered in this issue.

Last night I sent an email to most of the apparent “leaders” of the “birther movement,” advising them of the conclusions that I’ve reached after nearly a year of honestly investigating the theories. Again, those conclusions are available for anybody to read at my “bottom line conclusions” post.

These people that I emailed included Orly Taitz, Dean Haskins, Charles Kerchner, Mario Apuzzo, Sharon Rondeau, Lawrence Sellin, Sam Sewell, Carl Swensson, David Farrar, Helen Tansey, Paul Irey and a bunch of other people. I included not just “leaders,” but also quite a few other folks who I thought were likely interested in the issue. I have also separately corresponded with Mark Gillar a bit on the issue.

What the “birthers” do with the facts, I will leave up to them. I am not particularly optimistic that they will pay any attention whatsoever to the facts. They haven’t so far, with the exception, at least, of Mr. Paul Irey. Mr. Irey continues his quest to prove that there is forgery in the fonts. I cannot agree with him, but he has been a cordial correspondent, and I wish him well. Mr. Irey has had the integrity to admit when he was wrong, and I respect him for that. While Mr. Irey may be mistaken, that’s not the mark of a propagandist.

What I expect of many of Mr. Irey’s fellow birthers that many of them will continue to push false propaganda. Some of them are undoubtedly well aware that it’s all nonsense. Some will extract some personal benefit from the fraud that they are perpetrating on the public.

They will succeed in convincing a few other gullible, eager to believe folks. And to some small extent, they will likely succeed in corrupting and damaging our Republic. To some small extent, they will succeed in corrupting the truth, trampling on our Constitution, and dishonoring the Founding Fathers that they profess to respect.

As for myself, I am at a crossroads. I could continue to publish the truth and debunk new lies as they arise (as they surely will). That is what I would prefer to do.

I dislike the fact that falsehoods are being spread across America in the name of the “truth.”

I dislike the fact that public understanding of our Constitution is being corrupted in the name of “upholding” that same Constitution.

I dislike the fact that some who call themselves “Patriots” (usually with a capital “P”) are twisting the words of our Founding Fathers and past historical leaders, including great men (such as John Bingham and Lyman Trumbull) who stood at the forefront of controversy to rid our land of the evil of slavery.

In spite of what they may call themselves, I do not consider these people to be “patriots.” If they were, they would not publicly misrepresent the words of our Founding Fathers. If they had any interest in the truth, they would diligently search history to make sure that what they were presenting to the public was the truth, before ever presenting it.

While some may be acting in ignorance, I have no doubt that many of these people are not “patriots” at all. They are instead self-serving liars. Their falsehoods are apparent to anybody who bothers to research their claims in any depth.

Unfortunately, the group of people who research claims in depth does not include most of their gullible audience.

While I would prefer to continue to write on this subject — and even to speak on it — I have my family, my wife and six children, to think of. Being involved in this issue has proven costly to us, due to the many hours I have spent over the past year.

In spite of allegations to the contrary, I don’t get paid for my publication of the truth; except for book sales, which are not at all what they would likely be if I were instead publishing sensationalist untruths.

I’ve thought of actually going out and attempting to raise funds to allow for further participation. The birthers have recently announced a fund-raising drive to raise $10,000 to pay Herb Titus alone a “consultation fee” for his endorsement.

Incidentally, I also emailed Herb Titus a few days ago, mentioning the debate with Mario Apuzzo and advising him of the historical and legal falsity of the two-citizen-parent claims. He has not returned my email. We’ll see what Mr. Titus does with that information, given that someone’s proposing to pay him $10,000 to promote the bogus claims.

Obviously, there’s some real money in birtherism. To put it bluntly, there are quite a few suckers out there who obviously don’t mind being fleeced to keep spreading the sensational falsehoods.

If there are any wealthy donors out there who would like to contribute to publication of the actual truth, please contact me. I have thought of doing a video on the meaning of “natural born citizen.” I’ve thought of writing a book on the subject. But such projects involve spending much more of my time on the issue; and it is time that I can no longer afford to donate.

By the way, a word to any potential such donors: a fairly sizable donation to any Presidential campaign this year isn’t going to actually get you much in the way of overall impact. The loser in the 2008 Presidential campaign, who spent about half as much as the winner, raised around $384,000,000.

So even if you were to contribute a whopping $50,000 to a Presidential campaign this season (which you could only do somehow indirectly), your contribution would only be around one one hundredth of one percent.

Man, what I could do on clarifying the truth in this particular issue with even a portion of that.

If there are therefore any wealthy donors interested in this issue, do let me know. I thought of trying to raise some funds myself, and even started writing a post to that effect, but based on my past experience, I don’t know that there’s much financial support for promotion of the truth. Do feel free to prove me wrong.

Aside from all of that, I didn’t get into this particular issue to become a fund-raiser.

All of that being the case, I am now proposing to invest the bulk of my time into other ventures. I consider my best work on this issue to be complete.

I did what I understood many people, last year, were wanting somebody to do: I conducted a careful, thorough and honest investigation of the forgery claims and published the results. And over the past few months, I have also done a thorough enough review of the natural born citizen claims to be able (along with ehancock, a reader of this blog) to debate its major remaining proponent, Mario Apuzzo.

As a result of that debate, Mr. Apuzzo was driven by the facts presented back to the comfort and safety of his blog.

I am told that Sheriff Arpaio had another public event today. I’ve checked for news on it, but haven’t found any details. In that sense, now might not be the best time to step away from the birther arena. I am sure that Arpaio will have announced something “new,” whether it really is or not. It would be nice to stick around for the almost certain debunking of that. However, if past history is any guide, any new allegations are likely to be debunked within days; and there are others who are also capable of doing that. Kevin Davidson seems particularly adept at separating truth from hooey. I compliment him on his skill in that regard.

I am also sure that some idiot will step forward to say that I must have been afraid of what Arpaio would announce. That’s simply not true. The plain fact is, my wife asked me this evening if I would stop spending so much time on the issue. I had been thinking about doing so for some time, but I wanted to wrap things up properly. By posting my overall conclusions, demonstrating that Mario Apuzzo couldn’t stand up in a real debate, and presenting my conclusions to the birthers, I consider that I’ve pretty well done what I wanted to do.

I really don’t doubt that there will always be new allegations, new lies to debunk.

None of these are at all likely to change the statement I made at the beginning of this post: Birtherism, as far as I am concerned, is disproven.

I would like to thank those who have been so kind and appreciative of my efforts on this issue. And I would like to thank others who are promoting the truth. People in particular who come to mind that I have not mentioned so far include “Reality Check,” “Squeeky Fromm,” and ehancock.

I would like to wish all of you the best.


John Woodman

[Note, just in case anybody is wondering: Despite the date, this is absolutely not an “April Fool’s” post. Its appearance for readers at the end of March/ beginning of April is simply coincidental. It’s just when I happened to write it.

In fact, I originally hit the “post” button on the evening of March 31st; but I’ve made a few further late-night revisions that took me past midnight into April 1. Because of the date, I decided to “unpublish” it until the 2nd; but then a pingback that posted at made it available to some readers who might run across it there. Because of that, I’ve decided to go ahead and leave it as officially published.]

This entry was posted in Conclusions, Natural Born Citizen. Bookmark the permalink.

16 Responses to Birtherism Is Disproven.

  1. Pingback: Horace Binney Directly Refutes the Mario Apuzzo/ Leo Donofrio Lie that it Takes Two Citizen Parents to Make a Natural Born Citizen | Investigating the Obama Birth Certificate Mystery

    • John Woodman says:

      Scott, you get my best wishes as the person on the other side of the issue with whom I’ve had the most interaction, and (most of the time, at least) corresponded with among the most cordially.

      Also cordial on your side of the issue has been Mr. Paul Irey.

      Oh, and if you show up in Springfield — with a bit of advance notice so that we can arrange a definite appointment — I’ll buy you a beer.

      How’s that?

  2. sounds great amigo… best of luck, we’ll keep in touch… cheers.

  3. Arthur B. says:

    John —

    I’ve been an admirer of your work for some time. But I hadn’t till now read your debate with Mario.

    I must say, it’s masterful. While he’s never admit it, you clearly pummeled him into gravel. You showed patience, erudition, and a remarkable willingness to put an inestimable amount of time into researching and writing your responses.

    I’m grateful, John. But I’m afraid I can also see your wife’s point of view.

    All the best to you!

    • John Woodman says:


      Thanks very much for the kind words! Believe me, they’re appreciated. All the best to you too —


  4. Pingback: The US Supreme Court Established a Binding Precedent as to Who Is a Natural Born Citizen in United States v. Wong Kim Ark | Investigating the Obama Birth Certificate Mystery

  5. Thomas Brown says:

    “What I expect of many of Mr. Irey’s fellow birthers that many of them will continue to push false propaganda. Some of them are undoubtedly well aware that it’s all nonsense. Some will extract some personal benefit from the fraud that they are perpetrating on the public. They will succeed in convincing a few other gullible, eager to believe folks…”

    In last week’s RCRadio show I called in to discuss my work on what could be called a taxonomy of birthers. Your comments above reminded me of it, and I hadn’t published it anywhere yet, so I may as well do it here.

    Many commenters have had to spend extra verbiage stating which kind of Birthers they wanted to say something about. And as you point out above, they are different, and shouldn’t be painted with the same brush. So here is my suggestion for shorthand terminology for the different Birther species: (others may disagree with my examples, and I welcome discussion of which public figures fall into given categories)

    1) Truth-Negative Birthers: These are people who are utterly fooled by the propagandists. They really don’t understand why everybody doesn’t agree with them; they are generally more perplexed than belligerent. It is easy to feel sympathy for them.
    e.g.: Orly Taitz is either Truth-Negative or a great actress (which would put her in category 2 or 4). Commenter TraderJack may be honestly Truth-Negative. Terry Lakin also.

    2) Truth-in-the-Pocket Birthers: These are people who know darn well that BHO is eligible, but spout Birtherist ideas anyway, for selfish reasons. Being hypocrites, they are the least honorable. e.g.: Donald Trump; I don’t believe he’s serious for a second. I suspect Jerome Corsi is another. Naked propaganda, nothing less.

    3) Truth-Neutral Birthers: (suggested by Doc C.) People who don’t care whether BHO is eligible or not. True cynics, and attention whores. Some Birther commenters just do Birfing when they’re not talking about the faked moon landings or UFOs or free energy machines or the Wrath of the Lamb. Any topic they can blather about in public. They often seem vague about the eligibility issue and connect it to another personal agenda or philosophy. e.g.: Geir Smith may be a Truth-Neutral type. Not certain.

    4) Impacted-Truth Birthers: The most interesting type. They are often the most aggressive and hateful commenters on the blogs, but I think it may be because somewhere deep down they know what the truth is. But they want so desperately for BHO to be illegitimate, they can’t acknowledge their error. The cognitive dissonance seems to be eating them alive. Dead giveaway: RC and I have offered cash wagers that nothing would ever come of the “Forgerygate” nonsense to a couple Birthers who not only didn’t take the bets, but vanished without responding.
    e.g.: David Farrar. The more he soldiers on, the more loopy he has gotten. I think it’s because he has the facts walled off under psychic scar tissue. MichaelN, Adrien Nash, RamboIke, Sam Sewell, and John may be of this type; their vitriol suggests it.

    5) Truth-Blind Birthers: These folks sense that they may be totally off-base, but take great care not to expose themselves to any factual sources that might disprove their ideas. They may be instinctively trying to avoid becoming Impacted-Truth types (above). If they show up in discussions on these pages, they usually go away quickly. Generally not prominent Birthers, but camp-followers.

    I think that covers all the major types. If you think of a category I’ve missed, I’d be interested to hear it.

    • John Woodman says:

      The taxonomy makes sense, but some of the names are too hard for me to remember. I’d probably call them something along the lines of Sheep, Wolves, Peacocks, Hyenas, and Ostriches. 😀

      That’s just off the top of my head. Different animals might work better for a couple of those.

      • Thomas Brown says:

        I like it.

      • I agree with John that the names hard to remember. I wouldn’t have that many categories either. It is always tricky trying to put complex creatures like humans into tidy categories but since that is the topic I suggest three categories:

        1. True Believer: This is your hard core Birther who has been at a long time and spends loads of time reading everything served up at WND and the other Birther sites. They are thoroughly convinced that this conspiracy includes hundreds of people and is international in scope. People in this group know the difference between embossed and debossed and really believe it matters. They honestly believe the President will be removed from office some day “when this all comes out”.

        2. Birther Con Artist: Rather give a long definition – Jerome Corsi. They so long ago sold their soul for a buck that fact and fiction do not exist in their world. I add Orly Taitz to this group but some may disagree.

        3. Birther of Convenience or Casual Birther: Actually, this is the largest group. They just don’t like Obama so if someone words a poll correctly they will be counted as Birthers because they know there is something different and wrong about Obama so his origin must be suspect too. This group also believes Al Gore said he invented the Internet, the government cannot create jobs, and that Congress does not pay Social Security taxes. They actually read chain emails. They think Fox News really is “Fair and Balanced”.

        • John Woodman says:

          Those are good categories as well.

          True Believers. Con Artists — or maybe Grifters. Casual Birthers.

      • John Woodman says:

        Okay, so I was thinking about the whole taxonomy thing while going from point A to point B.

        I think if one wanted a really specific taxonomy, one would attempt to classify three things. And these classifications could apply to any promoters of any meritless conspiracy theories whatsoever.

        A) Motivation. What’s the motivation?

        You could have things like Patriots (whose motivation is the good of the country), Messiahs (who are trying to save society), Divas (motivated by attention), Grifters (in it for money), etc.

        B) Level of involvement. Casual, Hobbyist, Professional, for example. Or Casual, Active, Intense.

        C) Level of awareness that they are promoting untrue things. Perhaps White, Grey, Black. Whites are sincerely convinced that the theory is true. You could also have Light Grey, Dark Grey.

        And some folks would be a combination, with one primary motivation (listed first), and perhaps a secondary motivation.

        You guys might be able to improve on this, but you see where I’m going.

  6. ric says:

    to all the bama tards that refuse to believe this is a fake document please read
    #1) line number 1 alone gives it away as a fake he is listed as barack hussein obama II but everyone knows he was named barry soetoro at birth so why would he have to go through the court procedure and expense to change it to the current if he already had a document naming him as such ?
    #2)there is no state seal anywhere on the document all birth certificates have one take a look of yours
    #3)the hospital where he was supposedly born in didn’t exist until 1978
    #4)his father is listed as an “african american” and a” kenyan”, first of all the term “african american” wasn’t used until the late 1980’s,it would have read “negro” at the time of his birth if it were real,and second the country of kenya didn’t exist until 1963 and remember obama was supposedly born in 1961
    so it was impossible for obamas father to be from there,or obama for that matter but he surely isn’t from hawaii.
    #5)the “ones” or “1”s on the document are made by a modern pc using a windows program and not a 1950’s or 60’s or even earlier typewriter how did that happen when windows wasn’t invented yet let alone any p.c. in a hospital, and impossible for any non existing hospital to have used in 1961?

    • John Woodman says:

      I love posts like this, where a birther appears, instantly accuses all who disagree with him of being “bama tards,” and then proceeds to make five of the most frankly uninformed, ignorant, flat-out idiotic statements possible.

      In a row.

      #1) line number 1 alone gives it away as a fake he is listed as barack hussein obama II but everyone knows he was named barry soetoro at birth…

      The Soetoro name came from Lolo Soetoro, whom Ann Dunham Obama got together with after splitting with Obama’s dad Barack Obama Sr. It looks like she met Soetoro when her son was about 2 years old.

      It’s hard to imagine a more idiotic statement — that Barack Obama was supposedly born with the last name not of his father, and his wife’s husband at the time he was born, but with the last name of someone she would meet two years later.

      #2)there is no state seal anywhere on the document

      Demonstrably false statement covered in the book I wrote.

      #3)the hospital where he was supposedly born in didn’t exist until 1978

      Demonstrably false statement covered in the book I wrote.

      #4)his father is listed as an “african american” and a” kenyan”, first of all the term “african american” wasn’t used until the late 1980′s,it would have read “negro” at the time of his birth if it were real,and second the country of kenya didn’t exist until 1963 and remember obama was supposedly born in 1961

      Demonstrably false statement covered in the book I wrote. And Kenya was indeed known as Kenya in 1961.

      #5)the “ones” or “1″s on the document are made by a modern pc using a windows program and not a 1950′s or 60′s or even earlier typewriter how did that happen when windows wasn’t invented yet let alone any p.c. in a hospital, and impossible for any non existing hospital to have used in 1961?

      Also debunked, rather thoroughly, in the book that I wrote.

Comments are closed.