Posted on 07/03/2008 4:35:19 PM PDT by SE Mom
Great .. you were able to post it.
Sorry, I should have pinged you...and thanks for the help.
FYI ~~ comment from Donofrio about Post & Email site
________________________________
John Charlton Says:
October 9, 2009 at 8:17 PM
Leo,
A concerned citizen just got this reply from the AG’s office in HI about the nbc issue:
http://thepostnemail.wordpress.com/2009/10/09/hi-attorney-generals-office-denies-policies-on-nbc/
Would beg your input on what this response means (something that I could quote you on, at the Post & Email).
*******
[ed. My input is that I do not have any faith in you - Mr. John Charlton - or your publication the Post and Email. I suspect your blog’s motivation for existing is directly opposite to the intention of my blog.
As of today, October 9, 2009 you are permanently banned from commenting at this blog. You have the sole honor of that ban to yourself. No other person or journal has earned this distinction. As far as I am concerned, you no longer even exist in the blogosphere.
I do not trust you and I find your attempt to jump from journalist to lawyer arrogant, suspicious and very sad. I will not grace your Seussian Hooplah with another glance. I encourage my readers to ignore your dangerously misleading legal analysis.
No future links to your blog will be posted here. All prior links will remain although this statement will be added as an update. I will not attempt to revise history and erase my prior - very mistaken - support of your blog.
Readers, there appears to be a very well coordinated attempt in the blogosphere to control damage which my recent reports and legal analysis have generated in opposition to the official Hawaii DoH story.
Rest assured, the Hawaii Attorney General’s office provided an opinion to the DoH which was recorded. Both I and another researcher received an official response from Hawaii Deputy Attorney General Jill T. Nagamine a few days ago which clearly denied access to the letter concerning the “natural born citizen” statement made by Fukino on July 27, 2009. It acknowledged the existence of this opinion while claiming attorney client privilege thereto. When the time is right, I will publish on this issue. For the time being, my research and evidence gathering continue.
The question discussed at Mr. Charlton’s blog which was allegedly sent to Nagamine contains one of the most horribly constructed queries one could ever dream up - a true work of Seussian Hooplah which conveniently allowed the “no records exist” answer she gave.
Here is the misleading question sent to the AG’s office:
“I am requesting...Final opinions, including concurring and dissenting opinions, as well as orders made in the adjudication of cases, except to the extent protected by section 92F-13(1), which contain any mention of “natural born citizen” issued by your department in the last 10 years...”
Since the AG will argue that the opinion her office provided to Director Fukino is subject to the protection of 92F-13(1), Nagamine responded that no records exist responsive to that request.
The question above left wiggle room the size of ten football fields for one to slip through. The question appears to have been devised for just that purpose. I can assure you that no serious inquisitor would ever issue a question so devoid of teeth as the one above. Rest assured, the question I asked and to which she responded left no wiggle room.
Do not be distracted. Seussian Hooplah is coming from enemies of the truth as well as those who purport to be in search of the truth. Be aware of it. Understand it. Expose it.
We have them cornered. I couldn’t be more encouraged. Rarely do you get to see the fruits of your labor confirmed in this way. Usually, the suspects keep their mouths shut. But when you place a rat in a corner, he has no choice but to attack. By attacking - they admit to having been placed in a corner.
I expect continuing deception on many levels, but I feel energized that this blog has struck fear in the hearts of those opposed to truth. They are now forced to expose themselves. People sell their souls so easily these days. Who knows how far the rot goes? But for anyone with a desire for truth, the truth will be crystal clear.
The awakening is upon us. But puss must first come to the surface for the infection to heal. Let it come. This is a cleansing process.
Getting the truth to you is my burden. What you do with that truth is yours.
Leo C. Donofrio, Citizen Attorney 10.09.2009 9:14 PM ET]
http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/2009/10/07/uipa-request-5-from-leo-c-donofrio/#comment-14255
Very curious, isn’t it. I, too, have puzzled
over the HI Demo party’s language .. meaning
and reason.
Fred have you seen this picture before? It’s very stange. We know that 0 returned to Hawaii in 1971 when he was 10 but the caption with the photo says: Scott & Barry 3rd Grade 1969 Punahou School Hawaii. I thought I’d pass it along to you to add to your collection.
http://www.westernjournalism.com/?page_id=3255
I have learned that captions to any images to do with obama must be treated with a huge dose of salt; is it possible the above image originates from the Indonesian period when he attended a Christian school, before his attendance at the muslim school?
Assisi Primary
The “An American Expat in Southeast Asia” blog reports that Obama’s Indonesian schooling began when he was entered into the Roman Catholic, Franciscus Assisi Primary School, in Jakarta, Indonesia, on January 1, 1968 and sat in class 1B.
He was registered under the name of Barry Soetoro, serial number 203. The school registration document identifies Barry Soetoro as an Indonesian citizen and his religion was identified as Islam.
This registration document, made available on Jan. 24, 2007, by the Fransiscus Assisi school in Jakarta, Indonesia, shows the registration of Barack Obama under the name Barry Soetoro into the Catholic school made by his step-father, Lolo Soetoro. The document lists Barry Soetoro as a Indonesian citizen, born on August 4, 1961 in Honolulu, and shows his Muslim step-father listed the boy’s religion as Islam...
http://www.theobamafile.com/ObamaEducation.htm
Document image and more detail at link.
Considering the Christmas artwork in the background it wouldn’t be the muslim school. However did he go to the 3rd grade in the Catholic school or was it 2 years in each one? He sure was a big kid for his age (if he actually is his age) compared to all the other kids he went to school with in the pictures that are available. Then when he went to college it seems like he’s about the same size as the others with the exception of the Harvard Review picture where he looks like he’s been photoshopped in.
Note Christmas tree drawings on the bulletin board.
Hawaii Attorney General Invokes Attorney Client Privilege Concerning DoH “Natural-Born Citizen” Press Release of July 27, 2009.
###
On October 5, 2009 I sent the following letter to Jill T. Nagamine at the the office of Hawaii Attorney General Mark Bennett:
Subject: Request for AG Opinion letter
Date: Monday, October 5, 2009 8:34 PM
From:”Leo Donofrio” [email redacted]
To: Jill.T.Nagamine@hawaii.gov
Dear Ms. Nagamine,
The following request for Government records is made pursuant to the UIPA.
I request a copy (or access to a copy) of the Attorney General Opinion Letter the Attorney General provided to Department of Health Director Fukino which reviewed and approved her July 27, 2009 statement/press release about President Barack Obama wherein it was stated that he is a “natural-born American citizen.”
I request the opinion letter referenced above whether it was prepared as a formal Opinion Letter under Haw. Rev. Stat. 28-3 (and/or any other authority) or as an informal letter if prepared under Haw. Rev. Stat. 28-4 (and/or any other authority).
Please have your response conform to the OIP administrative rules.
***
Just a few hours later, I received the following official response from Jill Nagamine:
Subject: Re Request for Ag Opinion letter
From: “Jill.T.Nagamine@hawaii.gov”
To: “Leo Donofrio” [email redacted]
Dear Mr. Donofrio:
No formal attorney general opinion was generated relating to the July 27, 2009 public statement made by Chiyome L. Fukino, M.D. Any other legal advice rendered to our clients is privileged communication. We have nothing to release based on your request.
Very truly yours,
Jill T. Nagamine
Deputy Attorney General
State of Hawaii
***
LEGAL ANALYSIS
Whether an attorney general opinion is formal or informal is a question of law. Under Haw. Rev. Stat. 28-3, if the opinion of the Attorney General was related to a question of law submitted to him by the head of an agency, then that opinion must be made available to the public according to the statute which says:
§28-3 Gives opinions. The attorney general shall, when requested, give opinions upon questions of law submitted by the governor, the legislature, or its members, or the head of any department. The attorney general shall file a copy of each opinion with the lieutenant governor, the public archives, the supreme court library, and the legislative reference bureau within three days of the date it is issued. Opinions on file with the lieutenant governor, the public archives, and the supreme court library shall be available for public inspection.
As I have previously discussed, 28-3 requires that formal AG opinion letters be disclosed to the public. It is not a matter of discretion. The statute uses the word “shall”. The Hawaii courts have interpreted the statute as requiring mandatory public disclosure thereto.
Under Haw. Rev. Stat. 28-4, opinions given by the AG on other matters are not expressly required to be made public. But, according to OIP Opinion Letter 91-23, informal opinions must also be recorded and sometimes disclosed to the public when certain conditions are met:
[T]he Attorney General provides two separate and distinct recorded forms of legal advice: (1) “opinions” on questions of law submitted by certain public officers, and (2) “advice and counsel” to public officers in all matters connected to their public duties. Unlike section 28-3, Hawaii Revised Statutes, which expressly requires the public availability of certain specified “opinions,” section 28-4, Hawaii Revised Statutes, does not expressly require that the “advice and counsel” of the Attorney General either be filed with the Lieutenant Governor or be made available for public inspection.
However, according to OIP Opinion Letter 91-23, when the conclusions of an informal Attorney General opinion are made public by the agency/client, then the accompanying record of that opinion must also be disclosed to the public:
A client cannot voluntarily and selectively disclose those portions of a communication between the client and the client’s attorney without forfeiting the right to keep other portions of the communication on the same subject matter privileged…
The privilege may be said to be waived when the client relinquishes its protection. The waiver of this privilege follows as a consequence from any conduct by the client that would make it unfair for the client thereafter to assert the privilege. See generally, Marcus, The Perils of Privilege: Waiver and the Litigator, 84 Mich. L. Rev. 1065 (1986)…
Similarly, under Rule 510 of the Uniform Rules of Evidence, the holder of a privilege waives it if the privilege holder consents to the disclosure of “any significant part of the privileged matter.” (Emphasis added.)
Note that the OIP underlined “consents” in the passage above. This is important because the July 27, 2009 press release – wherein DoH Director Fukino stated that President Obama “was born in Hawaii” and that he is a “natural-born American citizen” - was reviewed and approved by the Hawaii Attorney General’s office. ( DoH Communications Director Janice Okubo previously revealed such reliance to researcher Justin Riggs.)
As stated above, whether an attorney general opinion is formal or informal is a question of law. The Attorney General is governed by law. If the letter is formal under 28-3 then the letter must be disclosed to the public. If the letter is informal under 28-4, then the letter must also be made available to the public when the client/agency voluntarily discloses the conclusions of the advice rendered by counsel.
On July 27, 2009 the DoH disclosed the conclusions of the Attorney General’s opinion. The DoH cannot make secret law. The controlling statutes, case law and OIP opinion letters make it quite clear that the Attorney General opinion rendered to the head of the DoH pertaining to her infamous July 27, 2009 press release must be made available to the public.
I am currently drafting an appeal to the OIP as well as the judiciary. According to the UIPA statute at 92F-15(f), judicial review will be expedited.
Leo C. Donofrio, Citizen Attorney
Leo has them by the short hairs.
GO LEO!!
“Note Christmas tree drawings on the bulletin board.”
The “An American Expat in Southeast Asia” blog reports that Obama’s Indonesian schooling began when he was entered into the Roman Catholic, Franciscus Assisi Primary School, in Jakarta, Indonesia, on January 1, 1968 and sat in class 1B.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2040486/posts?page=8488#8488
I believe that photograph was taken in Indonesia.
thanks...I had a copy of the top of the article saved - after a Freeper posted a jpg.
Aaaah ....
From Alan Keyes (I’m struggling a bit with his headline sentence structure)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Thursday, October 15, 2009
Does elite refuse to clear Obama eligibility doubts so as to exploit “affirmative action” resentment?
Excerpt:
Last night I posted as the ‘featured link’ on this site a link to what purports to be a 2004 article, from the online archives of a Kenyan newspaper, about the withdrawal of Obama’s original Republican opponent in the 2004 race for the U.S. Senate in Illinois.
What is of interest for present purposes is that both the headline and body of the article refer to Obama as Kenyan born.
Given the sophisticated possibilities for fabrication in both the virtual and real world these days, it would be foolish to assume that by itself this ‘proves’ anything about Obama’s birthplace. Even if the article is authentic, it would simply indicate that some people in Kenya thought (perhaps mistakenly) that he was born there.
Kenyan newspaper stories from 2004 (online or otherwise) are no more definitive proof of Obama’s birthplace than uninformative birth announcements in Hawaiian newspapers from 1961.
This episode simply illustrates the need for what I and many others have sought:
* a Constitutionally authoritative investigation of the facts;
* a similarly authoritative evaluation of its results;
* And, based on that evaluation, a Constitutionally authoritative judgment of law and fact as to whether Obama satisfies the Constitution’s clear eligibility requirements for the Office of President of the United States.
http://loyaltoliberty.blogspot.com/2009/10/does-elite-refuse-to-clear-obama.html
Thanks for the post. As always, Keyes makes excellent points. The headline is cumbersome. It would be more readable as: “Do elites refuse to clear Obama eligibility doubts in order to exploit . . .”
Mario Apuzzo and Charles Kerchner on Blog Talk Radio now.
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/mommaEradioRebels/2009/10/17/Momma-E-and-the-Radio-Rebels
From Donofrio today:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
President Obama Admitted He Was “Kenyan-Born”.
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/images/2008/01/11/obama_odinga.jpg
The 2004 article from Kenya’s oldest newspaper – The Standard – featured the headline which stated :
Kenyan-born Obama all set for US Senate
And the blogosphere went into hyper overdrive.
The first line of defense was that it was a fraud, and the second line of defense was to simply ignore the story. As of today – according to the Google news search engine – not one main stream newspaper is reporting this story other than blogger Don Surber at The Daily Mail in the UK in Charleston, West Virginia. And he has apparently debunked the first line of defense, stating:
~~~~
I checked.
Apparently that is a true image from the June 24, 2004, Standard, which is Kenya’s oldest newspaper.
~~~~
Then Surber goes on to argue that just because the report appeared in 2004, that doesn’t mean it’s true. However, what Surber and most of the blogosphere have failed to comprehend is that President Obama has admitted the headline is true.
It is undisputed that Obama was Kenyan-born by the blood of his father. That led to his Kenyan citizenship having been automatically granted in 1963 by the Kenya Independence Act.
JUS SANGUINIS
The legal concept by which it is undisputed that President Obama was “Kenyan-born” is “jus sanguinis“, which means “right of blood”.
Furthermore, President Obama admitted that, under the British Nationality Act of 1948 – at the time of his birth – he was a British citizen.
It has also been accurately reported by Factcheck.org that President Obama became a Kenyan citizen in 1963. (However, a separate key aspect of that report was false and eventually corrected by Factcheck who cited this blog’s report and analysis in their mea culpa. Please also note their second mea culpa to this blog.)
JUS SOLI
Unfortunately, the undisputed legal fact of Obama’s jus sanguinis foreign birth has been supplanted by the sensational conspiracy theory relating to the place of his birth. The headline from the 2004 Kenyan news report does not indicate whether “Kenyan-born” relates to Obama’s Kenyan bloodline or – in the alternative – to his place of birth.
Place of birth citizenship is conferred by a legal concept known as “jus soli“, meaning law of the soil.
Please don’t miss the forest for the trees. President Obama admits to having been a British citizen at birth by law and a son of Kenyan blood which led to automatic Kenyan citizenship in 1963. This alone should disqualify him from POTUS eligibility – regardless of where he was born – since he was a dual citizen at birth and at least until 1984.
Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5 of the US Constitution requires the President to be a natural born citizen.
This is an attribute only available at birth.
Whether a person (who admits having been) born subject to the laws of a foreign power can become Commander In Chief of the US armed forces is a genuine and necessary question of law, not a conspiracy theory.
*snip*
POTUS REQUIREMENTS ARE NATIONAL SECURITY MEASURES.
The Constitutional requirements to be POTUS are not rights, they are national security measures. Even natural born citizens who fail to meet the other requirements cannot be President. For example, a 33-year-old natural born citizen cannot be President. But 33-year-old men have no more rights than 35-year-old men. Understand? Requirements are not rights.
If Obama is eligible to be President then so are the sons of Osama Bin Laden, Kim Jong Il and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad if they impregnate an American woman who gives birth on US soil. The very notion is obscene. Such a person might be a US citizen under current policy, but their citizenship is not natural born and they cannot be President and Commander In Chief of the US armed forces.
http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/2009/10/16/president-obama-admitted-he-waskenyan-born/
About what I was saying a few days ago.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2356926/posts?page=1597#1597
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
