‘”How and when the marriage occurred remains a bit murky, a bill of particulars that I have never quite had the courage to explore. There’s no record of a real wedding, a cake, a ring, a giving away of the bride. No families were in attendance; it’s not even clear that people back in Kansas were informed.”’
Micelle Obama, speaking to public school kids: ‘His own mother [Stanley Ann], she said at the beginning of her remarks, was “very young and very single when she had him.”’
Yes, I read that stuff the first time.
Looks like there are two sets of evidence:
1. Interpreting the words of two people (who weren’t present at the time) writing or talking 35+ years after the event. One of whom doesn’t say that the marriage didn’t happen, he actually says that the marriage did happen just the circumstances are murky - possibly not surprising given the possible shotgun nature of the event. The other who is well known for talking crap about pretty much everything.
2. A listing in the official Hawaii Marriage Index
A statement in the contemporaneous divorce papers about the marriage, the date (Feb ‘61 ) and the place (Hawaii).
A signed document by the judge who allowed the divorce which states that proof of that marriage had been presented to the court.
I imagine you’re going to go with the first. Fine. I think any rational observer of that evidence would consider the second to be more convincing or at least expect some serious explanation as to why that evidence is not credible. Each to his own I guess.