Posted on 09/21/2012 7:45:43 AM PDT by butterdezillion
Yes, I agree with what you’ve said.
The trouble with people being afraid to touch this issue because it’s “political” is that by refusing to simply apply the normal law enforcement standards and procedures they are MAKING it political. Could you imagine if everybody had let the Duke lacrosse team rot in jail because it would seem too “political” to point out Mike Nifong’s criminal actions? WEll... that’s where we’re at right now. In the interest of not APPEARING political, the entire system has BECOME political. And that means that we have no rule of law. At all.
That is a heckuva lot scarier than riots.
And at this point I think the only people willing to riot for Obama are the people who would use ANY excuse to riot - the communists and the Islamists. The only question for people who care about America is whether the good guys are strong enough to win the battle when the bad guys choose to initiate it. And THAT is the question these people need to be asking themselves, because all this appeasement is only strengthening the evil and weakening the good.
I have pleaded with Kobach to do the right thing, and pledged all my support if he makes the good stand. I’ve told him some of what my family has been dealing with as a result of my own stand on this and explained that I understood the hesitancy but that he would not be alone. If you know him personally and have any influence, could you please let him know that there is still time to do the right thing?
The treasonous media can be silenced by the simple truth - and by prosecution if they knowingly report false information and/or libel somebody by reporting false information. They’re playing chicken with us, and if we let them win on something this blatant and important it will embolden them - just like the appeasement, bowing, and apologizing has emboldened the Islamists all over the world. If we’re going to stand, now is the time to do it. Please tell Kobach that, if you can. I want to work WITH Kobach, not against him.
What do you make of the fact that SoS Kobach told the media that the information “matches”? He used Dr. Onaka’s language not his language. He doesn’t seem to be drawing a distinction between “identical” and “matches”.
Maybe the SOS and AG don’t agree with the legal argument made by Klayman.
“Identical” v. “matches” is not the argument made by Klayman.
His argument is available here: http://www.wnd.com/files/2012/09/BauerLetter.pdf
What I meant was that the SoS and AG don’t agree with the legal argument that the verification is legally worthless.
It appears to me that they are accepting the verification at face value as proof Obama was born in Hawaii. For them and eligiblity purposes that is all that matters as Kobash said during the hearing he didn’t buy the two citizen parent theory.
The law is clear. There’s really no argument to be made. MDEC understood Onaka loud and clear also. And if Kobach didn’t buy the argument then why would he ask for verification from Onaka anyway? Why not just say Obama’s birth facts were already verified to Arizona and MDEC?
The wording in Onaka’s verification to Kobach was WORD FOR WORD copied from Kobach’s request, except for changing “is identical to” to “matches”. Any lawyer worth his salt would notice that difference. It was a deliberate change that required effort. And they would notice that it was not Onaka’s initials by the signature stamp AND that the document had no raised seal - all in comparison with MDEC’s verification, which Kobach had said he needed to find out about.
Onaka is doing a good job of signaling to us when something is wrong - like a wink at just certain times. If even I can see this, any lawyer should immediately see this. Kobach is not stupid. He knows exactly what is going on. He thought he was only asking for a verification that Onaka could give, even with a non-valid BC. But Onaka had to balk at even the words “identical to”.
That tells us with even more detail what is going on - that there is “information” missing from the White House image that is contained on the original record. That’s why “matches” can be used but “identical to” can’t. The only 2 items that were left blank on Obama’s White House long-form image were Items 7f (mother’s mailing address) and Item 23 (”Evidence for Delayed Filing or Alteration”).
MDEC was very careful to point out to the judge (when they submitted their verification in court) that “information” only means BIRTH FACTS - just to be sure that they couldn’t be found guilty of trying to claim that the one “item” that refers to the filing status was identical on the WH BC and on the record on file, since it could be shown that they already had reason to know that the record was late and/or altered because Onaka had already confirmed to Bennett that the record was non-valid, by the time MDEC made their request.
Nowhere on that verification did Onaka say that the record was legally-valid, and nowhere did he say that any of the claimed facts were true. There is no way that the verification received by ANY of these people (Bennett, MDEC, or Kobach) can prove that there is legal evidence that Obama was born in Honolulu on Aug 4, 1961 to Stanley Ann Dunham and Barack Hussein Obama. For all we know from what Onaka has disclosed, the record that the WH BC information “matches” could be written on toilet paper in crayon 45 years after the birth.
And for it to be legally non-valid even in Hawaii with its loopholes, it would actually have to be something pretty similar to that...
“There is no way that the verification received by ANY of these people (Bennett, MDEC, or Kobach) can prove that there is legal evidence that Obama was born in Honolulu “
How do you explain that he settled for a verification that is word for word the same as the one sent to the MDEC (except for item 2 which the MDEC did not ask to be verified), if he knew that the MDEC’s was worthless? Why did he not only certify Obama for the ballot but also came out and made strong statements to the press that the matter was settled and Obama was eligible?
To me that only means one of two things:
1) Kobash knew he could be charged with perjury and election fraud and said screw it.
or,
2) He thinks Klayman’s letter is wrong in its legal argument and he can not be charged with a crime. And if he doesn’t accept Klayman’s arguments then to him the BC is legally valid per the verifications.
Is there a third option?
Third option: He knew that the media was going to lie about whatever came up and preferred his chances with an AG (who was also on the Objection Board and wouldn’t even show up for the follow-up meeting) to his chances against a treasonous media. He knows I can’t arrest him, and he’s buddies with the people who can. At least for now.
The strong statement he made that I’ve seen quoted is that he said he was convinced that the information matches. I’m convinced the information matches also. But it’s all non-valid. A headline seemed to claim that he said he had “no doubts that Obama was born in Hawaii”. I have no doubts that Obama was born in Kenya, but that doesn’t mean I can legally say that is the case. My opinion doesn’t matter; what matters is the legal documentation, and if Kobach has any kind of law degree he knows the difference.
Kobach wanted the same thing that Ken Bennett wanted: a fig leaf to cover his unpresentable parts. He didn’t get it, and the unpresentable parts that are now exposed are NOT big brass balls.
Also - getting a verification that is word for word the same as what somebody got when they asked for something different is a huge red flag. It says “This is a recording. Do not expect me to respond as if I really heard what you said.”
In fact, Kobach’s request was brilliant, for determining whether Onaka had really meant that the two documents (the WH BC and the record on file) are identical when he said that they “matched”. Kobach’s request exposed that the media is reading Onaka’s response to MDEC and Bennett all wrong.
If Kobach would have said, “Now I know that what Klayman said was true: Onaka has confirmed that the White House BC is a forgery” the form of his request could have been justified. But that’s not what he was after. He was after a fig leaf. As I just said, he didn’t get it.
I think you have it nailed, but what we need is an example of a verification that is normal. There must be some standard process that they are clearly avoiding.
Also, I remember you had some report with Obamas name, a computer listing with some characters next to name, from HDOH. What characters were next to his name?
For the last 3 years they have been refusing to do any letters of verification because if they did any for somebody else it would reveal that they wouldn’t do one for Obama. When I asked Janice Okubo for a copy of the form they use for verifications she said there weren’t any records responsive to my request because they don’t do verifications; when somebody sends in for a verification the HDOH sends them a certified COLB.
Liar. But that’s what we’re dealing with. They change their “procedures” according to whatever Obama needs to cover his a$$, with no regard to the laws, and when they can’t obfuscate for months and months at a time they lie. And they treat each person differently, with a special fear and hatred of haoles; procedures are designed to make it difficult for anybody who is not in Hawaii.
And that needs to bite them in the butt. Their own website says that a request for a letter of verification has to be requested the same way as a certified copy, and they will not allow requests for certified copies to be made by phone, fax, or email. How did that request letter get from Kansas to Hawaii the same day as it was created, with the response to it coming in the very same day? They broke their own rules.
Ken Bennett made the request the legal way and waited 8 weeks to get what he got. If I had made the same request, without media coverage to create pressure, I would have had the same response as my colleague got: you qualify for the verification but your request has been sent to the AG’s office so they can figure out an excuse to not give you a verification so nobody will realize that we will never issue a verification for Obama. (And why is that? Because you CAN’T!)
I’m looking at all three verification letters here. AZ, MISS, KS.
The only one where an embossed stamp is visible (starkly and clearly visible) is the one for Mississippi.
That letter only states only two things.
1) They have an original record for Obastard.
2) The information MATCHES the fake PDF website image.
All three letters have been initialed by somebody other than Onaka. gk, BP, ALO (or AZO)
Once they start to get into details, the embossed seal stamp does not appear to be used. Why?
The only difference that I can see between the Mississippi letter and the Kansas letter is that the Kansas letter mentions the birth certificate number 151 61 10641.
If there really is no embossed seal on the two letters that ask for details (as it appears), that seems significant to me because as if we suspect that birth certificate number belongs to somebody else the certification process seems to
take a dive here. No embossed seal, no certification.
It’s also strange that the letters use the phrase “reviewed by me” and then Onaka has to have somebody initial the stamp. I realize he has secretarial staff but with all the hullabaloo about the birth certificate you’d think he could certify these few letters all by himself.
Yep. Liars.
From their own current website:
http://hawaii.gov/health/vital-records/vital-records/vital_records.html
Letters of Verification
Letters of verification may be issued in lieu of certified copies (HRS §338-14.3). This document verifies the existence of a birth/death/civil union/marriage/divorce certificate on file with the Department of Health and any other information that the applicant provides to be verified relating to the vital event. (For example, that a certain named individual was born on a certain date at a certain place.) The verification process will not, however, disclose information about the vital event contained within the certificate that is unknown to and not provided by the applicant in the request.
Letters of verification are requested in similar fashion and using the same request forms as for certified copies.
The fee for a letter of verification is $5 per letter.
ATO would be Alvin T Onaka. That’s the one on the MDEC verification, IIRC.
The MDEC verification is probably the closest we’ll come to a standard certified verification, but the request was never made on a standard verification application form so the content on it is totally different than a response to a standard verification application.
I think what’s going on here is that there are 2 different BC’s for Obama. The only way they could claim that 151-61-10641 was on a record for Obama is if he was given somebody else’s BC#, according to the 2 mutually-exclusive numbering methods described by past or present HDOH officials as having been in use then. And the only place where they are authorized to create a new BC with a different BC# is in HRS 338-17.7, where they are allowed to make a new BC saying whatever law enforcement tells them to put on it, in order to protect the registrant.
But that procedure is only allowed if the registrant was born in Hawaii (which can’t be known from Obama’s original non-valid record), and it doesn’t give them the right to steal somebody else’s BC# (who would then have to be assigned a different number even though they were not in danger and there was therefore no lawful authorization for their number to be changed).
So that 2nd BC that was created, under the guise of protecting Obama from us “violent birthers”, is not lawful, since Obama’s BC is non-valid. So Onaka’s got a mess on his hands.
“ATO would be Alvin T Onaka.”
Ahhh...of course. Duh.
Well that makes sense then. The only letter that doesn’t get into specific details (like the BC#) is the only one personally signed and embossed by Onaka.
Look again at that description:
“This document verifies the existence of a birth/death/civil union/marriage/divorce certificate on file with the Department of Health and any other information that the applicant provides to be verified relating to the vital event. (For example, that a certain named individual was born on a certain date at a certain place.)”
When somebody provides information to be verified they are requesting that Onaka verify, for example, “that a certain named individual was born on a certain date at a certain place”.
How would Onaka verify that? By saying he verifies that a certain named individual WAS born on a certain date at a certain place.
Not by saying “this information about birth date matches the information on our record”...
Neither MDEC nor Kobach asked for any BIRTH FACT to be verified (for instance, that Obama WAS born on Aug 4, 1961 in Honolulu, HI). Bennett did, and the response to that request regarding particulars was nothing. Onaka did not verify that a certain named individual WAS born on a certain date at a certain place. Onaka has NEVER verified that Obama was born on Aug 4, 1961 in Honolulu, HI - even though he was required to do so if he could certify that as the way the event actually happened.
And of course, I know you know that. This is just so clear I can’t imagine anybody not seeing it.
There is well-founded suspicion that what Team Obama released to the world is most emphatically NOT what they received from the HIDOH. No amount of parsing can get around it.
It is not therefore the duty of state officials to seek the documentation. Clearly, their duty is to remove the suspicious candidate from the ballot. It is the prospective candidate's duty to provide the documentation.
There is no obligation on the part of the HIDOH to provide Kansas authorities with anything. There are no civil proceedings underway.
We have a prima donna who has skated through life, skipping requirements yet again.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.