In December, Abercrombie named Palafox to the position.
You can take this two ways. Palafox didn't need the head ache dealing with the issue of Obama's lack of a birth certificate. Or a more sinister view that Abercrommie wants a lackey to do his dirty work,...but we will see who takes the job.
A response from an Obot on You Tube when I posted the definition of NBC:
“Where did you learn this? You need to unlearn it pronto. You are embarrassingly wrong. But it is indeed clever how you added the reason “why they added the word natural.” Clever but wrong. By your definition, I wonder if you are a natural born citizen.”
The poster: http://www.youtube.com/user/coffacuppee?email=comment_reply_received
Exactly.
The thing that’s getting lost in all of this is the fact that Hawaii uses the “scintilla of public interest” standard for disclosure. If there is a “scintilla of public interest” in a record, it MUST be disclosed.
Lingle and/or Fukino could have released Obama’s documents at any time, and so can Abercrombie.
In addition, since Fukino made public disclosures about what is on Obama’s records, it is REQUIRED that the documents she based those disclosures on be made public.
Abercrombie said on Dec 24th that he was in contact with his “health secretary” (presumably the guy who just resigned) and AG’s office to find a way to disclose more information about Obama’s records. (See http://lunaticoutpost.com/Topic-Hawaii%E2%80%99s-Governor-Takes-On-%E2%80%98Birthers%E2%80%99 ) If the laws really forbade disclosure the AG could have told him that immediately.
Instead, Abercrombie had an “investigation” go snooping around in the hospitals, HDOH, & archives for 3 weeks - with nobody bothering to tell him that he can’t reveal any information anyway.
Clearly they knew he could disclose information and the documents - as also evidenced by the AG’s very careful statement on Jan 21st that they can’t release a CERTIFIED birth certificate, meaning one which is used for identification purposes. The HDOH has actually revealed in a public document a different person’s certified birth certificate but with marks to prevent the document from being used for fraud. See p 6 at http://hawaii.gov/dhs/quicklinks/peter_boy/pbkjr_vol5_p32.pdf ) So release of the information or document itself is allowable. As long as there is a scintilla of public interest.
Why didn’t the AG just tell Abercrombie right away that he couldn’t do anything? Because he knew that Abercrombie could release a birth certificate, if there was one. They were leaving the door open for him to come up with the forgery.
If there is a scintilla of public interest Abercrombie and the HDOH director can disclose anything they have.
That needs to be brought out to the public. The AG making that announcement implying that they can’t disclose anything is TOTALLY fig leaves. To cover what? That’s what the public needs to be asking.