‘Anna Obama’ is listed in the Polk Directory 1961/62.
‘Obama. Stanley Ann Dunham’ is on the University course attendance card.
‘Ms Stanley Ann Dunham’ is the name on the letter received through FOI - from the University with dates of ‘attendance’ - where-as the card shows ‘extension courses’
Each one contradicts the other to a certain extent.
Why?
Why is it that everything to do with her, is such a mess?
Might it be that she NEEDED to make it appear she was living at a certain address to someone or some people who KNEW of her as Anna Obama?
Might it be that she enrolled as Stanley Ann Dunham because she had to identify herself when she enrolled?
Might it be that the OBAMA was added to the enrollment AFTER SHE TOOK THE NAME?
Might it be that she was NOT on the mainland?
Might it be that someone helpful, who understood her need to be SHOWN as living on the mainland, whilst she was elsewhere...collected the course work for her, mailed it to her...and if necessary, handed it in when completed?
All I am trying to do is show how it’s possible to LOOK as if you are in one place whilst NOT even being in the COUNTRY!
I wonder which ID she used to do so -- it surely would have been her old Washington state ID, with her unmarried name before she left for Hawaii.
I've long said that IF she was in Hawaii for LESS than 12 months, as Hawaii state law requires, it would have caused problems with residency requirements in Hawaii.
It's rather amazing that all of the "gates" are just BARELY met for his legitimacy, such as: Ann's initial 12 months in Hawaii; Obama's time in Indonesia less than the 5 year period of automatic citizenship for minors; there TWO divorces but no marriage certificates present or found; no adoption papers; no official name changes; etc.
It's almost as if attorneys looked at the events in his life, figured out the pinch-points, and had Obama "reconstruct" the facts to keep him "legal" or leave room for doubt ... just crazy, huh?