And then you have a HI COLB adjudicated post-1961 resulting in a Court order for the HDOH registrar to file a record of vital statistics for Barack Hussein Obama II which trumps all previous facts or anomalies with the birth record or lack thereof.
Date Accepted Aug 8, 1961 means the attestation of 3 people present at the birth event swear the information provided is correct.
Date Filed Aug 8, 1961 means a Court ordered the vital record filed and backdated to Aug 8, 1961. At some point in time after 1961 (my best guess is 1971 because I believe BHO Sr returned to Hawaii to contest the Soetoro adoption at that time), a Hawaii Court heard testimony and examined evidence on Barack Hussein Obama’s II live birth event. The Court decided he was born on Aug 4, 1961 in Honolulu, HI.
Any indiscretions, guesses, lies, manipulations and untruths made about Obama’s live birth event are wiped clean by the Court’s 1971 ruling on Obama’s birth event. The court is a trier of fact and determined the facts to be as they were published on Obama’s COLB backdated to Aug 8, 1961.
You’ll never overcome this hurdle because all witnesses to the Aug 4, 1961 live event are deceased. The Court’s 1971 ruling is the final word on the matter.
How do you know there was a court ruling in 1971? What’s your evidence of that?
If there was a court ruling in 1971 as you say, then why can’t Onaka verify any birth facts for Obama? If legal birth facts were determined in 1971 then the resulting BC would be legally valid and Onaka would have to verify those facts when requested. But he wouldn’t. Why not?
And why would they be changing BC#’s now?
IOW, the evidence we have now refutes the claim that there was a 1971 ruling, so you need to provide evidence that there was such a ruling. It should be in the court records if it was associated with the SAD/BHO divorce and BHO challenging a Soetoro adoption.
The divorce record for Norman Asing and his first wife, Charlotte, had as the last entry a pleading by Norman to stop child support because he had given his consent for the two boys (Norman Jr and Nathan) to be adopted by their stepdad. The judge said that child support would be stopped unless the adoption fell through. So the complete record concerning the divorce includes reference to adoption proceedings.
In the divorce record for Norman Asing and his 2nd wife, Connie, the adoptions of children associated with that marriage were disclosed.
So if BHO in 1971 challenged Lolo’s ability to adopt Obama, claim him as a dependent, etc, that should be included in the Ann-Lolo divorce. That information wouldn’t be sealed from the divorce record even though the adoption records themselves would be sealed.
Every HI birth record has a “date filed” and “date accepted”. Are you saying that every birth in Hawaii involved a court order?