Oh .. so you DO think it was an implicit confirmation ?
Whoa ..
“Oh .. so you DO think it was an implicit confirmation ?”
Now that I understand UIPA, I realize that I asked about index data for a vital event.
One of my own theories is that some proof of an amendment was submitted and an index number was generated, recorded and the vital record was filed for reference with his ‘marked-up’ amended original birth certificate. Therefore, there are “vital records” on file in accordance with policy, etc...
I feel I got an affirmative answer hidden in a statement that was meant to distract us from that answer by including the NBC and ‘born in Hawaii’ stuff.
That statement, now that it’s public, is the key to leveraging the law in the public’s favor. They were sloppy. It was a knee jerk reaction as Leo point’s out.
Watch for Part III. Sounds like it will be tomorrow.