He wouldn't even have to do that. All he'd have to do is supply the certificate number of the supposedly-real one.
If some information other than the certificate number were redacted, there might be some plausible basis for withholding the certificate number (since somebody could, for a few bucks a pop, repeatedly guess at some of the redacted information until it was confirmed correct). But as it is, the only thing that withholding the certificate number does is prevent people from authenticating the information on the supposed document.
Good point. I find it interesting that the MSM lets this controversy go on and on with not one ‘journalist’ demanding an answer.
It boggles my mind that a man with so many weak points has gotten this close to the office of the POTUS. Says a lot about America in 2008.
That’s the part I don’t understand about it. If the problem was the information you could obtain from the certificate, it’s apparently all ok to see since nothing else was blacked out. It seems odd to black out that number since the only thing it would let someone know is how many children were born before him that year in Honolulu.