From Speaker.gov
Seems to be some differences to me, just sayin
Posted on 07/29/2009 10:42:06 PM PDT by MissTickly
This is in follow-up to my post on Tuesday: "The Day I asked a question and got the MOTHER of all answers"
The implications of the following account is that the President's REAL NAME did not appear on any ballot, in any state.
That's just one of MANY implications. Let me preface by saying an AMENDED birth record could indicate that the President was adopted by either Lolo Soetoro and/or His grandparents, the Dunhams.
My story:
I have serious reasons to believe that Janice Okubo and/or Director Fukino, Department of Health in Hawaii are under duress. Something is preventing Director Fukino from making statements that she has the statutory authority to make.
And my story coincides with the recent revelation that the President is a Natural Born Citizen and born in Hawaii, all along.
On Monday, on a whim I decided to try my hand at a question for Ms. Okubo, Communications Director for the Department that holds the President’s vital records.
In a nutshell, this is what I asked her:
–Ms. Okubo–
If the Director made this statement:
““Therefore, I as Director of Health for the State of Hawai‘i, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, have personally seen and verified that the Hawai‘i State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures… ”
…she has the statutory authority to answer this question:
“Is the Director of Health for the State of Hawai’i, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, able to state they have verified that the Hawai’i State Department of Health has President Barack Obama’s AMENDED original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures?”
Please reply with her answer.
–
You see, they have the same statutory authority over an Amended Original Birth Certificate that they have over an (unamended) Original Birth Certificate.
No one has to attest to an Amended Original Birth Certificate’s existence. By virtue of STATUTORY AUTHORITY she can make this statement, AND she clearly says so.
But, to my surprise, at 11:47 p.m. on Monday, July 27, 2009 I got the press release in answer to my question with the recent revelations and now the words ‘VITAL RECORDS’ are referenced.
Now, taken at face value, the press release seems to affirm the question I asked, but I wanted clarity. So I asked specifically if the Director could make a statement that she has the STATUTORY AUTHORITY TO MAKE:
“As Director of Health for the State of Hawai‘i, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, I have personally seen and verified that the Hawai‘i State Department of Health has President Barack Obama’s AMENDED original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures.”
But I got this in return: “The director has nothing further to add to her statements.”
More than once. I even asked if she can make the statement if she was compelled to. Nothing.
I let Ms. Okubo know that I fear something is preventing them from making statements they have the authority to make. And told her I was compelled to tell someone.
Not that anyone will care, but I have alerted the media in detail.
I have the emails to corroborate.
I am VERY concerned.
How’s this for irony?
~~~
“Women have the most to gain with Sen. Obama and the most to lose with Sen. McCain,” she said.
*snip*
There is a new national GOP TV add out this weekend criticizing Obama for picking Biden, a longtime Democratic senator from Delaware, as his vice presidential running mate, saying that Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., was overlooked and shunned by Obama.
Asked about that, and whether not picking Clinton could harm Obama with women voters, Pelosi said no.
“The Republicans will try say this is women against men,” or blacks against Latinos, or set religions against each other. “That is their playbook” of dividing Americans.
“But we will unify this country and this party,” she said.”
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4188/is_20080825/ai_n28040794/
~~~
NOT IF YOU’RE SEASONED WOMEN, married to seasoned men, on Social Security and Medicare, and you might need regular medical care. SOME UNITY .. SUCH BIG gains for women, Nancy!
Couple of sites have the text of the FIRST version of the DNC document that Pelosi signed. That kind of indicates it WAS out there in the public. Why was it changed afterward?
Or could the 2nd version be invalid ?
~~~~
Nancy Pelosi Certified Obama as Legally Qualified to Serve under the Provisions of the US Constitution
Dr Conspiracy reports that Pelosi certified Obama’s qualifications
THIS IS TO CERTIFY that at the National Convention of the Democratic Party of the United States of America, held in Denver, Colorado on August 25 though 28, 2008, the following were duly nominated as candidates of said Party for President and Vice President of the United States respectively and that the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution…
So much for the complaint that the DNC and Nancy Pelosi failed to properly certify Obama.
~~~~~
Pelosi swears: Obama is Eligible
Posted on Monday, February 23, 2009 in Lounge
Nancy Pelosi
Nancy Pelosi
In a sworn statement Nancy Pelosi, Chairman of the Democratic National Committee Convention, certified the Barack Obama was eligible to be president. She said:
THIS IS TO CERTIFY that at the National Convention of the Democratic Party of the United States of America, held in Denver, Colorado on August 25 though 28, 2008, the following were duly nominated as candidates of said Party for President and Vice President of the United States respectively and that the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution…
Also swearing was Alice Germond, Secretary of the DNC.
It is not known to me upon what basis this statement was made. These two affiants may have inspected specific documentation or relied on publicly known facts.
This is “old news” but I think that is important to note that that someone has taken responsibility for determining the eligibility of a candidate for President.
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2009/02/pelosi-swears-obama-is-eligible/
Gosh, OBOZO had his “Birth Certificate” obviously when William Ayers wrote that paragraph along with the rest of “DREAMS” for the incompetent alleged writing Protege’, the one and only OBOZO! Do you think OBOZO just carelessly lost his “BIRTH CERTIFICATE” sice then, or do you think he is intentionally destroying ‘Evidence?”
You’ve seen this discussed .. meaning different
states get different versions of this certification
purposely ?
From Speaker.gov
Seems to be some differences to me, just sayin
This really deserves it’s own thread! You have found another chink in the armour. We should be getting the democrats ‘on record’ in regards to this stuff because they were responsible for vetting their candidate.
You done good!
That may be the only reason she is still the Speaker.
I’m getting dizzy.
“....some SOS require the eligibility clause and some didn’t...anyway why not just have one for all ?”
What Starwise found came from one state though..Colorado.
One is stamped and certified and the other isn’t.
Only the stamped one is official.
Who knows what that wench would say if confronted with the two documents.
Where there’s smoke, there’s fire.
MOO.
What do you mean?
They both have the stamp of the notary.
The notary signed both documents on the same day.
The notary did nothing wrong unless she didn’t obtain ID from the signers.
It’s just really bizaare why there are two documents with different language notarized on the same day by the same person.
And I have a headache .. LOL.
Getting flat for a few .. ;)
What recent revelation? Fukina's? Is Fukina some sort of deity? Here you are in your own vanity piece talking about Fukina being "under duress". But if she is "under duress", how can you believe anything she may state at all? People under duress are not known for telling the truth.
Specifically, why do you believe Fukina's statement to the effect that his "original vital records" confirm that he was born in Hawaii, when you indicated that she could be referring to an "amended original document" (whatever the heck that is - sounds like an oxymoron to me)? Could not the original document have been amended to change the place of birth just as easily, if not more so, as it could have been amended to change the name. You speculate on the latter, yet you unequivocally deny any possibility of the former!
BTW, what expertise does Fukina have to be an authority on the meaning of the "natural born citizen" clause in the Constitution?
I know that it's tough for a devout Clintonista to be logical in thought, but maybe you can explain this.
Yes we do and we know Obama signed 50 (or was it 57) of them and Madam Pelosi signed a number of them herself.
Some of the election certificates do state that the person is acknowledging that they are eligible under the constitution.
Here’s the catch, we can’t go against Obama or Pelosi for fraud until it’s proven Obama was and knew he was ineligible.
Given the obvious fact that no judge in this country has the cajones to force this case to discovery or to even allow it to fester in the court system, we’re in a catch-22.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2130641/posts?page=20#20
THE ‘SHORT TEXT’ VERSION:
20 posted on Wednesday, November 12, 2008 11:46:07 PM by bert
I’ve yet to find a single state that lays down in law just how a Secretary of State is supposed to verify the eligibility of a person running for election.
This is where Obama was able to sneak in, yea the requirement is there but the backbone for it is missing. All states simply accept the signature of someone running for office.
It’s some sort of faith system, after all we know politicians would never, ever lie.
If you know of a state that does have lawful requirements written into their code on the means and manner to verify eligibility, I’d love to see it. If there is one we may be able to find a citizen of that state, and a lawyer willing to put everything on the line, to go after their secretary of elections for malfeasance of office.
You are correct, NBC has never had it’s sole definition codified into law.
That is where we have the greatest weapon against Hawaii. How the h*ll can they verify a person is a NBC when we have no USSC ruling explicitly stating what exactly a NBC is.
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.
