How can any court make a ruling as to law without having any legally-determined birth facts for Obama? Onaka’s disclosure puts egg all over the faces of any judge who has “ruled” anything about Obama’s eligibility. There are no legally-determined birth facts so we have no idea where, when, or to whom this guy was born. All of which are critical to eligibility. Onaka’s disclosure shows that the burden of proof is on Obama, not on those who challenge the Hawaii birth claims. That turns all the judicial opining upside-down and shows the judges to be gullible morons.
Article Four, Section 1 of the Constitution: “Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, RECORDS, and judicial proceedings of every other state. And the Congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved, and the effect thereof.”
Hawaii Department of Health’s Loretta Fuddy and Alvin Onaka are the sole determiners of Obama’s birthplace unless and until someone presents probative evidence to the contrary. Over six years, no one has presented probative evidence to the contrary.
Has any court ever ruled that the Obama birth record is invalid? No.
Has any law enforcement investigation concluding in a criminal complaint being filed ever determined that the Obama birth record is invalid? No.
Has a grand jury investigation ever concluded that the Obama birth record is invalid? No.
Has Congress ever held a hearing which determined that the Obama birth record is invalid? No.
Has any state’s chief election officer or state legislative body ever ruled that the Obama birth record is invalid? No.
Has any state’s elections commission ever ruled that the Obama birth record is invalid? No.
Has any state’s Governor or Attorney General ever stated that the Obama birth record is invalid? No.