Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: MestaMachine

In order to have a valid HI birth certificate the facts of Obama’s birth had to be filed with HI within a year of his birth, or he had to file for a HI BC sometime after 1982, showing that his parent was a resident of Hawaii for the year preceding his birth (which I don’t believe is true of Stanley Ann dunham). If either of those things had happened, there would be a valid BC on file in Hawaii (one which is prima facie - “on its face” - evidence and is to be taken at face value unless somebody has evidence to prove the claims false) and Alvin Onaka would legally HAVE to verify to Ken Bennett any fact submitted to him which was included on that valid BC.

If neither of those things happened, and the filing of the birth information was late or else there were major changes made to the birth information, Hawaii law says that the probative (evidentiary) value is determined when the record is presented as evidence to a judicial or administrative person or body. All other birth certificates are declared in Hawaii law to be prima facia evidence, but NOT late and altered BC’s. Those have NO LEGAL VALUE WHATSOEVER until a judge can look at all the evidence, apply the Federal Rules of Evidence, and determine whether there is enough evidence for those birth facts to be legally-established.

So if the BC is late or altered, Onaka can’t verify any of the facts on it. If the BC is valid, the facts are legally presumed to be true because the record is prima facia evidence, and Onaka HAS to verify ALL the facts on it if a requestor submits those facts for verification.

Bennett submitted the following facts: male, Aug 4, 1961, Honolulu, Oahu, Stanley Ann Dunham, and Barack Hussein Obama. Onaka could not verify any of those facts, even though he verified that those are the claims on the record they have. This means that Hawaii does not have a valid birth certificate for Obama.

Obama may well have requested a COLB in the past, but any BC he got back from Hawaii would have included either LATE or ALTERED stamps (since those are the things that invalidate a BC). That’s why he had to forge both the short-form and long-form images that have been posted online. And there is forensic evidence that they were both forged. Arpaio’s posse has documented the evidence for the long-form. I have done experiments trying to duplicate the non-distortion on the seal from the Factcheck photos of the short-form and there is no way that seal was on that paper before it was photographed. Onaka’s verification legally confirms what the forensics have told us for a while.

Obama did perjure himself in Arizona. He twice swore that he was eligible to be President. He knew he had no legally-established birth facts and that nobody in this country can LAWFULLY claim he is qualified. He also perjured himself twice in West Virginia and in North Carolina for doing the same thing. The current legal interpretation of federal law is that a sitting President cannot be subject to arrest or criminal trial without first being impeached. I think that’s hogwash (precisely because of the statute of limitations, which would mean that Presidents have a license to commit crimes as long as they can stay in office beyond the statute of limitations). But it doesn’t matter what I think. The secret service guys would never let anybody arrest Obama because that is the current legal understanding. Sheriff Joe cannot arrest Obama until after Obama is convicted in an impeachment OR until Obama is found to not be the President. I’m working on #2.

And we have the ammunition to be successful on #2, if we can convince somebody with standing (I’m thinking either Congress or somebody like Hobby Lobby) to file a lawsuit challenging Obama’s eligibility on the basis of Onaka’s verification that his HI BC is non-valid and he thus has no legally-established birth facts. Because there have been challenges that made it to SCOTUS that were not heard because Sotomayor and Kagan refused to recuse themselves, I suggest that the lawsuit actually directly challenge Sotomayor and Kagan’s positions on SCOTUS, which would REQUIRE them to recuse themselves.

Does this help explain what’s going on here?


95 posted on 01/04/2013 5:54:59 AM PST by butterdezillion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies ]


To: LucyT

Can you please ping to my response to what MestaMachine said?


97 posted on 01/04/2013 5:57:59 AM PST by butterdezillion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies ]

To: butterdezillion

The entire thing is a CRIMINAL MATTER. It won’t be solved by bringing civil suits. Someone needs to issue a VALID WARRANT and no one has done that. It’s the only way anyone will pry those records out of HDOH.
I admire your tenacity and I know you have worked long and hard to see this through, but you are going to hit a dead end unless there is a criminal complaint followed by a warrant...and no one, including Arpaio has even come close. In fact when Arpaio started this Cold Case Posse, he made very clear that it was NOT obama he was investigating or accusing. Go back and you will see for yourself that he reiterated that on more than one occasion.
If he was serious about getting to the bottom of this, as a Sheriff, he has the power to issue a warrant which he never did.


101 posted on 01/04/2013 6:23:18 AM PST by MestaMachine (It's the !!!!TREASON!!!!, stupid!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson