But there are recorded oral statements to that effect from his Kenyan relatives in position to know, if he had been born in Kenya. Also the statement,also recorded, of the Kenyan Ambassador to the US. That was later disavowed, claiming he was "misquoted", but like I said, it was recorded oral statement, with no "quoting" required. But in disavowing it, he also verified that he was the one who made it, not some actor pretending to be him.
But one does not need "solid evidence" to request more evidence, only a "probable cause to believe"
And as has been pointed out before, that affidavit on the interview, which was filed with Berg's case, is riddled with errors. The person who claims to have conducted the interview says it was done in Swahili, a language Obama's grandmother doesn't speak. It was also supposed to have been conducted in her home village, but the person making the affidavit got the name of the village wrong. How do you take it seriously when they can't even get the language and location correct? I'd hate to see that evidence in court. Obama's people would have a field day.
Also the statement,also recorded, of the Kenyan Ambassador to the US. That was later disavowed, claiming he was "misquoted", but like I said, it was recorded oral statement, with no "quoting" required.
And nowhere in that recording does the ambassador specifically say that Obama was born there. He could just as easily been referring to Obama's ancestral home. Again, Obama's people could pick it to shreds.
But one does not need "solid evidence" to request more evidence, only a "probable cause to believe"
So where is it?