Replies

I think plausible deniability is why they’ve waffled around about Obama’s records, their procedures, etc. They give the APPEARANCE of affirming what Obama has posted but there’s always waffle room. They always leave waffle room.

Even looking at what Nagamine argued against Taitz on Friday, they claim that even if a subpoena applied to them, HRS 338-18 won’t allow them to obey a subpoena because it only allows release to individuals who (among other things) are declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to have a legal right to access the record. Sounds to me like they would claim that a judge ordering the disclosure of the record would not be enough; the judge would first have to declare himself as having a legal right to access the record.

That kind of parsing words is what they do. Waffle room. It allows plausible deniability. I’ve been wrestling for over 2 1/2 years with that kind of waffling from them.

Dead men tell no tales, but the HDOH is gonna have a hard time justifying their refusal to give Duncan Sunahara a photocopy of Virginia’s long-form when that disclosure is REQUIRED by UIPA. Not a hard time justifying it to the judge. The Hawaii judge will wink at the corruption; I’m convinced there is no rule of law whatsoever in Hawaii government. But they will have a hard time justifying it to the public, which is the only real trial any of the Hawaii bureaucrats face - which is why they want to shut us down through the “vexatious requestor” law and their obfuscations.

All in all, though, neither Obama nor the HDOH have anything to worry about in regards to presenting a halfway decent forgery to Malihi unless he requires other documentation too.

What I really wonder, though, is who can force the HDOH to produce their transaction logs and original microfilms, give depositions, etc. And in what type of setting (i.e. criminal or civil trial, etc). I’m doing too much talking and not enough listening. I really want to understand how that works.

Dead men tell no tales, but the HDOH is gonna have a hard time justifying their refusal to give Duncan Sunahara a photocopy of Virginia’s long-form when that disclosure is REQUIRED by UIPA.

Actually, I think it's also required under the normal disclosure statutes where they have to release any part of any certificate to an eligible requester.

And yes, you're absolutely right about all their parsing. It would be comical if it wasn't so incriminating. The only way I see Hawaii really breaking down and releasing the things you mention is if someone internal blows the whistle on 'em.