Remember back when the usurper couldn’t remember his birth date? His age was all over the place. It wasn’t until he started collecting BCs that his birthdate started to firm up. Simply amazing, huh.
And his COLB didn't have a number. Where did the number for the forgery come from?
Let’s say there were X number of births with the surname beginning with ‘O’ during the years 1960 -1964. That number would be part of the statistical information supplied to what-ever US Department ultimately ends up with data on total births from any region...in other words, those numbers are recorded and set in stone.
No one can then add or subtract a birth. If it’s 599 for example, no one can print out an index for public consumption that shows 598 or 600 births for that same period.
Because that would be a red flag - suggesting manipulations.
The numbers from One to 599 would be names of children who were live births and who were issued birth certificates.
I’m sure someone can come along and express this much better than I am capable of, but the fact remains, you can’t have a DUPLICATE baby.
That entry is either for a child named OBADO DUPLICATE MAE or it isn’t. And as there’s no MAE OBADO on that birth index, IT CAN’T BE A DUPLICATE.
But if you were able to add up the numbers on that list, and compare that total with the total births submitted to the authority who takes an interest in STATISTICS, I would expect to see that there were 599 live births reported for that period.
And the number 599 is hypothetical, so don’t give me a hard time over it.
That DUPLICATE ENTRY is HIDING a name imo. It’s hiding a name that was originally one of the 599 hypothetical names on that list.
OBADO DUPLICATE MAE looks like an over-ride. The name ODADO is there just to make the total numbers tally up.