The State of Hawaii has gone on record as saying they've released the birth certificate, and that what Obama has shown is an accurate representation of it. I don't think Obama had gone on the record as claiming responsibility for any particular released picture of the Certification, nor to I recall the State of Hawaii officially acknowledging the existence or authenticity of such pictures. It is entirely plausible that they would stay mum if some anonymous person released pictures of documents falsely claiming to be Hawaii certifications. On the other hand, it is less plausible that they would stay mum if, after they publicly acknowledged giving a certificate to BHO, BHO published a certificate which differed from the one on file.
I think it is reasonable to believe that the scan Barack Obama presented is an accurate representation of the birth record on file, and I see no reason to doubt it. As to the circumstances under which the record came to be in the file, it will probably never be possible to say with absolute certainty, but at this point my belief is that BHO has something in his background he doesn't want investigated, and his refusal to supply his birth certificate was intended to be a distraction from his real disqualifications.
Janice Okubo has already said they HAVE to “stay mum”. When I asked her directly whether she would report a known forgery to law enforcement and refrain from speaking positively to the public about that forgery, she said they can’t reveal ANYTHING about a birth certificate.
The HDOH is as crooked as they come and has manipulated their records to cover for Obama, so at this point - after having observed them closely for the last 2 years - I would not trust a word from them at all. What I would trust are the unmanipulable computer transaction logs. Period.
But the HDOH has already stated publicly that they would NOT TELL US if somebody posted a forgery of one of their records. Given that fact, Obama would have no reason to NOT disclose a forgery - since no court will allow anybody but the HDOH to ever know whether his posting was genuine. We already know the system is set up to be totally safe for Obama to post whatever he darn well pleases. The courts and HDOH have publicly revealed that they “have his back”.
People really, really need to understand this. The supposed means of accountability have all already stated publicly that they will NOT hold Obama accountable if he posts a forgery. And INDIRECT (IOW, accidental) confirmations by the HDOH say that he’s done that twice now.
I don’t think the HDOH has ever said that either of his forgeries is an accurate representation of what they have. There was an article by Isikoff which had some Obama campaign person saying that Obama requested his BC in 2007 and that had Fukino saying they have a record for Obama, but the whole thing was very careful to never have Fukino say that they ever sent Obama anything or that what Obama posted was from them.
Lots and lots of wiggle room, and no direct quotes. When asked directly by Politifact, Okubo was quoted as saying that she could not say what the online image represents.
And that’s what we’ve had in everything: side-by-side claims intended to deceive people into believing that the HDOH has confirmed the online postings as genuine, when in reality it is a careful conglomeration of different sources - very few of them named and/or directly quoted.