She meant exactly what she said: that she had seen the original vital records (plural) which claim on oath that Obama was born in Hawaii.
She didn’t mean what she DIDN’T say: that she had seen the original vital records AND verifies that Obama was born in Hawaii.
What she said is what the records claim. What she didn’t say is what she (or the State of Hawaii) claims - because HRS 338-17 doesn’t allow them to claim anything for an amended BC.
And don’t you dare call this “parsing words” because I went through big hassles with a long, drawn-out series of communications through which the HDOH claimed that the legal status of a birth certificate has to be kept secret. IOW, they CAN’T SAY WHETHER THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE THEY HAVE FOR SOMEBODY IS A PIECE OF LEGAL DOO-DOO OR ACTUALLY LEGALLY VALID. They can’t (themselves) verify the accuracy of what is on a BC because that would indicate the legal status, and that has to be kept secret.
Does it make sense with anything? Heck no. Nothing they say makes sense with anything else they say or with the laws. It’s all just a bunch of mumbo-jumbo.
So this isn’t legal parsing; it is taking the HDOH at their own word. They SAY they can’t verify the legal status of a BC, so that obviously can’t be what Fukino did in her statement. Unless you consider the HDOH responses to me to be lies or mistaken - in which case, why believe anything they say?
She meant exactly what she said: that she had seen the original vital records (plural) which claim on oath that Obama was born in Hawaii.
She didn’t mean what she DIDN’T say: that she had seen the original vital records AND verifies that Obama was born in Hawaii.
What she said is what the records claim. What she didn’t say is what she (or the State of Hawaii) claims - because HRS 338-17 doesn’t allow them to claim anything for an amended BC.
And don’t you dare call this “parsing words” because I went through big hassles with a long, drawn-out series of communications through which the HDOH claimed that the legal status of a birth certificate has to be kept secret. IOW, they CAN’T SAY WHETHER THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE THEY HAVE FOR SOMEBODY IS A PIECE OF LEGAL DOO-DOO OR ACTUALLY LEGALLY VALID. They can’t (themselves) verify the accuracy of what is on a BC because that would indicate the legal status, and that has to be kept secret.
Does it make sense with anything? Heck no. Nothing they say makes sense with anything else they say or with the laws. It’s all just a bunch of mumbo-jumbo.
So this isn’t legal parsing; it is taking the HDOH at their own word. They SAY they can’t verify the legal status of a BC, so that obviously can’t be what Fukino did in her statement. Unless you consider the HDOH responses to me to be lies or mistaken - in which case, why believe anything they say?
As I said, there is no judge or justice in the United States who wouldn’t accept as definitive Dr. Fukino’s statement which is still available on the Hawaii Department of Health’s website in a section entitled “Responses to frequently asked questions related to all records and documents maintained by the Hawaii State Department of Health (DOH) related to the vital records of President Barack Hussein Obama II.”
I fully understand that YOU don’t accept the Hawaii Department of Health’s statement as an official verification but Courts will and have most definitely seen it that way.
That’s one reason why in 73 adjudicated attempts or appeals, no Court has found Obama to be ineligible.