I’ve not posted this anywhere, but I asked for the index data for birth certificate #151-61- (whatever the Factcheck number is) and the DOH said they couldn’t release that information to me because I had not shown I have a direct and tangible interest in President Obama’s birth certificate.
So I sent back and asked how President Obama came into it, since I had asked for a specific number and hadn’t mentioned any name with it. Were they sure that was the answer they meant to give, because it would only make sense if that cert# was for Obama’s birth certificate.
She pretty much just waffled around until I gave up on trying to get an answer out of her. They never did change their answer though so that could be taken as them affirming that the Factcheck cert# is Obama’s.
The thing about that is I gave her every out I could. All she had to do was say, “Oops. I goofed. I should have said that I can’t reveal information that’s actually on a birth certificate except through the disclosures authorized by our administrative rules or statutes.” I tried helping her along. But she wouldn’t be helped.
But in Hawaii there is a statute that says that if a person invites government officials carrying out their duties to rely upon a document that the person knows is a forgery they are themselves guilty of perjury. And I think what Okubo and Fukino have done rises to that level because Secretaries of State and Congress-critters deciding whether or not to contest the electoral vote were invited by Fukino and Okubo to rely upon the Factcheck forgery.
I think I read that on your blog too. Earlier her tactic was to tell people they had to give her a name before she could look up index data, which is outright nonsense. It was a ruse to make the requester say Obama and then she gives the information she had already given out (and that is now posted on the Obama FAQ page).
As addled as some of spokesbabe Okubo’s responses have been, I don’t think we have a clear admission that the cert number belongs to Obama from her response to you. If it was Obama’s cert number, she would have just given you the same Index Data that she has already release and posted online. She was intentionally trying to misdirect you and caught herself in an awkward misstatement.
As far as the perjury thing, I still think they’re covered because there’s no evidence they’ve looked at Obama’s certificate to know what the number is and to confirm whether or not it’s the same as the FactChock.com cert number.