The story wasn’t sourced. It is taken from my blog, from a letter that I faxed to every R member of Congress.
To understand this, you need to read the letter that Attorney Larry Klayman sent to DNC Counsel Bob Bauer, which can be seen at http://butterdezillion.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/complete-klayman-letter-to-bauer.pdf. That letter includes the documentation you need to see in order to understand this.
The short version is this: Bennett sent 2 pages in his request for a letter of verification. Everybody looks at the 2nd page and thinks Onaka verified everything. But what was on the first page was a request that Onaka verify that Barack Hussein Obama, II, male, was born on Aug 4, 1961, in Honolulu on the island of Oahu, to mother Stanley Ann Dunham and father Barack Hussein Obama. By law Onaka is required to verify every submitted fact that is claimed on a legally-valid BC.
Look at his letter of verification and you will not see male, Aug 4, 1961, Oahu, Stanley Ann Dunham, or Barack Hussein Obama. He did not verify those facts. He did verify that those things are CLAIMED on the record they have, and the only lawful reason left for him to not verify those facts is if the record itself is non-valid.
Hawaii does not vouch for the accuracy of claims on non-valid records (late and/or altered records). By law (HRS 338-17) the probative/evidentiary value of those BC’s can only be determined when the BC is presented as evidence to a judicial or administrative person or body. IOW, if the birth record is routine and there are no red flags with it, it is legally valid and it is presumed that the facts are true. If there are red flags (such as a late filing or major amendments that call into question how anybody could be confused on such big issues) HI takes down the information but marks the record as LATE or ALTERED, and by law that record has no legal evidentiary value until the whole sorry mess is sorted out by entities operating under the Federal Rules of Evidence.
And basically right now, the only way Obama can even have any legally-established birth facts is if that happens. The whole sorry mess has to be presented to a judicial or administrative person or body and sorted out according to the Federal Rules of Evidence. That’s what this letter is conveying to the R members of Congress.
Thank you for the short version of your argument. One question: how would Onaka verify the facts surrounding a 50-year-old birth other than verifying what’s on the birth record in their files? As I understand it, you want him to have done something more than check Bennett’s list and the enclosed copy of the BC against the original birth record. But what would that be?
Placemark - crawling back from bad flu.