So you’ve drawn a conclusion that the Hawaii Democratic Party changed their procedures in 2008 and refused to certify Obama’s Constitutional eligibility based on what evidence?
Where is the evidence? I’ve read your article three times and still don’t see any evidence. You show the letter the HDP submitted but don’t provide letters from previous years to show that both the language of the letter and the procedure for producing it changed between 2000/2004 and 2008. If you can’t scan these previous letters, provide a verbatim transcipt of the language used in 2000/2004.
And you reach the conclusion that an attorney who represented the HDP in three previous lawsuits also advised the HDP not to certify Obama’s eligibility? I realize you think it’s likely, but where’s the evidence?
Ah the Doobie brothers must have slept in today-finally got the talking points?
I’m waiting for my husband to scan the others so I can upload them. They had been posted on Justin Riggs’ site but he took his blog down. What I have is the same as what Justin had, except that I also have a transmittal letter, which I will also post.
You will see that for 2000
DNC - standard cert with eligibility language added by typewriter
HDP - cert with eligibility language, filed a month after National Convention, received at HI Elections Office the day it was signed.
For 2004
DNC - standard cert no eligibility language
HDP - cert with eligibility language, signed a month after the National Convention
And of course we already know, for 2008
DNC - standard cert with eligibility language added by word processor
HDP - cert with eligibility language removed, received at the HI Elections Office by mail in an envelope with the DNC Cert and a transmittal letter by Joe Sandler