Here’s what’s going on, from a post I posted elsewhere, at http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2885601/posts?page=69#69 There are other comments on that thread that make clear what else the HDOH has done, and another comment that makes clear their predicament (and why they’re trying to stall on this) is at http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2885601/posts?page=54#54 (and I apologize in advance for the formatting not working. You can see it better at my blog if the formatting drives you nuts).
Anyway, here’s what’s going on with the HDOH’s particular claim about what Bennett has to prove:
Once again Hawaii is totally ignoring/misinterpreting their own laws, as Ken Bennett knows full well. This is what HRS 338-18 says about a letter of verification (found at http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol06_Ch0321-0344/HRS0338/HRS_0338-0018.htm ):
“(g) The department shall not issue a verification in lieu of a certified copy of any such record, or any part thereof, unless it is satisfied that the applicant requesting a verification is:
(1) A person who has a direct and tangible interest in the record but requests a verification in lieu of a certified copy;
(2) A governmental agency or organization who for a legitimate government purpose maintains and needs to update official lists of persons in the ordinary course of the agency’s or organization’s activities;
(3) A governmental, private, social, or educational agency or organization who seeks confirmation of a certified copy of any such record submitted in support of or information provided about a vital event relating to any such record and contained in an official application made in the ordinary course of the agency’s or organization’s activities by an individual seeking employment with, entrance to, or the services or products of the agency or organization;
(4) A private or government attorney who seeks to confirm information about a vital event relating to any such record which was acquired during the course of or for purposes of legal proceedings; or
(5) An individual employed, endorsed, or sponsored by a governmental, private, social, or educational agency or organization who seeks to confirm information about a vital event relating to any such record in preparation of reports or publications by the agency or organization for research or educational purposes. [L 1949, c 327, §22; RL 1955, §57-21; am L Sp 1959 2d, c 1, §19; am L 1967, c 30, §2; HRS §338-18; am L 1977, c 118, §1; am L 1991, c 190, §1; am L 1997, c 305, §5; am L 2001, c 246, §2]”
The HDOH is pretending that Bennett is asking for this under (2) above, but he is clearly asking for it under (3). It is the normal course of operations for the SOS’s office to receive an application for placement on the ballot, and AZ’s application process requires that the candidate be a “natural born US citizen”. Obama has applied to be on the ballot, and Bennett is seeking confirmation of “information provided about a vital event relating to any such record and contained in an official application”. Obama’s AZ application claims he is eligible to be President and that is related to what is actually contained on Obama’s birth record.
The HDOH is trying to stall again. I’ve been through this rat-race with them dozens of times. Unfortunately for them, Bennett has set the default at DENIAL of placement on the ballot. IOW, if the HDOH stalls they’re only making it certain that Obama will not be allowed on the ballot.
I can’t wait for the HDOH to declare Bennett a “vexatious requestor” who they thus don’t have to answer. lol. With any luck, the HDOH will thoroughly piss him off, just by being the jerks we all already know them to be. lol
Let me diagram that a bit, since the prepositions are confusing:
(3) A governmental, private, social, or educational agency or organization who seeks confirmation of
a certified copy of any such record submitted in support of
or information provided about a vital event relating to any such record and contained in
an official application made in the ordinary course of the agency’s or organization’s activities by an individual seeking employment with, entrance to, or the services or products of the agency or organization;
Obama submitted an application to be on the AZ ballot. That application has to contain the claim that he is eligible to be POTUS. So Obama’s application makes claims related to the vital record in question, since to be eligible he has to be old enough and a natural born US citizen - both of which are directly related to his birth record.
That application was made in the ordinary course of the SOS’s activities, by somebody seeking the services of the SOS (placement on the ballot).
Ken Bennett is clearly eligible to receive this verification.
What the HDOH doesn’t want to say is that they CAN’T verify any of the birth facts because Obama’s BC is both late and amended, and HRS 338-13 says that its probative value - if any - is to be determined when it is presented as evidence to a judicial or administrative person or body. This is a legally invalid record; Hawaii cannot “verify” anything from it because they don’t accept or vouch for the accuracy of anything on a late and/or amended BC. And Obama’s is both, as evidenced by the shenanigans they’ve had to pull with Virginia Sunahara’s BC in order to have a valid 1961 BC# and spot in the legally-valid records database.
See http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2885601/posts?page=72#72 for details on how we know they changed their database to put Virginia Sunahara’s record under somebody else’s name.
LoL.
A verification need not be a complicated document, but to supply a paper legal document with a raised seal that is a forgery would implicate/ensnare Onaka in the trap of having to vouch or not vouch for the letter of verification if the Arizona SOS challenges it.
The Political hands trying to “put the fix in” seem to be having kittens at the thought of the two men having legal contact.
That's just my take on it. Thanks for all your hard work in tracking this fraud down.
You do excellent work!
The thing that isn't mentioned is how pissed off all the people who are putting themselves on the line for obama must be, along with all the people who are just sick and tired of lies and disappointments obama has given them.
I don't care how magical one partner might be, at least at first, I've seen very few marriages last through what obama is dishing out to his faithful.
Love can be a fragile thing, especially when it turns out to be barely more than infatuation.
From what I read in an LA Times article, AZ SOS Bennett copied an application form off the internet and sent it in with $5. The HDOH responded by saying he needed to prove he was authorized to request/receive a verification. I would presume that Bennett responded by showing that he is the AZ SOS and has discretion to require canddates to convince him of their eligibility.
If he’s done that and it’s been more than 10 business days since he’s heard from them, they could be stalling (par for the course in my experience) and the OIP will have to be involved to force a response out of them. They have to either deny or comply with his request. If they deny his request they have to give a legal reason.
Thing is, if his BC was amended in 2006 as the HDOH admitted, and if there are supporting affidavits as OIP Director Tsukiyama admitted (which would only be necessary for amended and/or late BC’s), then the birth record they have for Obama is not probative/legally valid and HRS 338-13 says that the probative value must be determined when it is presented as evidence to a judicial or administrative person or body.
IOW, the State of HI on its own does not vouch for the accuracy of any of the claims on an altered or late BC. If Obama’s is late and/or amended (as is indicated by HDOH and OIP UIPA responses AND by their need to alter the 1960-64 birth index to include legally non-valid names in order to get both Obama’s and Virginia Sunhara’s names on the list at the same time) then Hawaii CANNOT verify any birth facts for Obama. Their law forbids it. The only way there can be any legally-recognized birth facts for Obama based on what is in HI is if Obama actually presents that BC (complete with “ALTERED” stamp on it and notes about what proof was submitted to support the amendment) to a judicial or administrative person or body, who then have to follow the rules of evidence according to legal protocols.
If the HDOH ever DOES verify birth facts for Obama, then they have made conflicting public statements regarding Obama’s records, and Bennett would have to figure out which statement was accurate. That could only be done through an audit of the records, as recommended by a HHS inspector general’s report anyway (see http://oig.hhs.gov/oei/reports/oei-07-99-00570.pdf ) That report says that a birth certificate alone should not be used to determine eligibility, especially when much is at stake – for instance, a passport (which was the example they used, contrasting documentation necessary for Little League versus getting a passport). And it says that if there are signs that there could be a forgery (such as a vague or too-light “seal” such as was the case on the photo that Savannah Guthrie posted online) other proofs should be requred and the records audited.
That poses a problem for Obama because EVERY “proof” known to exist for him shows signs of tampering:
1. Both the COLB and long-form show signs of forgery (the COLB has a “seal” that doesn’t bend with the fold of the page it’s supposedly on; the electronic file had authenticating marks that could be moved around on the page – clearly C&P’ed from a different document than the rest of the image was taken from; and Savannah Guthrie’s photo has just the kind of indistinct and light “seal” that the OIG report refers to as being too fishy) and conflict with what the HDOH has revealed through UIPA responses.
2. The draft registration is the only one from that post office at that time that lacks the first 2 digits of the 4-digt year stamp.
3. The SSN he used on his tax returns fails e-verify and was issued from Connecticut where Obama never lived.
4. His passport file has been breached 3 times, and sources close to the investigation told Newsmax that the purpose was to sanitize the record. And the one who oversaw the breaches was rewarded with a position as Chief of National Security.
ALL the records are suspect, and for any one of them to be used to determine eligility – according to the OIG recommendations – there would have to be a complete audit to figure out exactly how and when that record really originated.
No matter how you slice it, Bennett is going to have to demand an audit before he can be sure of anything. There will be immense pressure on him to just bypass that step. We need to pray for him.
Something that may make the HDOH a bit hesitant to illegally “verify” Obama’s birth facts is the realization that if Obama is defeated in the election, we may have an Attorney General who DOESN’T shield all the crooks from federal investigation and prosecution, and at that point an earnest US Attorney in AZ would have everything he needs to throw every complicit person in HI in jail for a very, very long time.
Anything we can do to make it apparent to the HDOH that Eric Holder will not be able to stall justice forever…. will help “convince” Loretta Fuddy to do the right thing, for once in her life. If she does, she will respond to Bennett by saying that she CANNOT verify Obama’s birth facts. At that point Bennett will have what he needs to keep Obama off the ballot.
What we can do right now to help Bennett is to pray for him and to pressure our Congress-critters to hold Eric Holder’s feet to the fire AND to impeach him. Because Eric Holder is the lynchpin for this whole lawless mess we’re in. He’s the placeholder making sure that the feds will protect the crooks rather than prosecute them. If he is taken out of his position the whole lawless dam bursts and the crooks will have to fight to be the first person to turn so they can plea bargain for immunity or a lower charge in return for the goods on everybody else.
For the last two days I have been getting so many hits on my blog for people searching for reports of the Keyes-Obama debate where Obama stated to Keyes that it did not matter that he was born overseas as he was only running for the senate.
(I have an article on it)
I’m curious as to why this is suddenly significant. Its like something is going on behind the scenes. Who is doing all the searching on this issue suddenly?
Curioser and curioser.
Yep, you know they will.
Got your ping late-
“It is the normal course of operations for the SOS’s office to receive an application for placement on the ballot”
WE all know that - Hawaii could give a crap. You and I both know that in the end, in a few days maybe, HI DOH will make nice and send Bennett a little vaguely worded email pointing to the old press releases where they supported obama’s claims to have a valid HI BC.
Bennett will graciously accept this email, and tell all the crazy birthers to go away. He has made it clear that he doesn’t want this in his lap, and that he is just “humoring” some TEA party people.
I hope HI tells him to stick it good. I hope he gets a loadful of what the “little people” have experienced in trying to simply have a straight and honest answer.
Uh, does the FEDERAL FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT apply to essential information about a FEDERAL OFFICIAL indeed force Hawaii to comply?
In the State of Arizona a Presidential Candidate (at least minor and independent parties and write in candidates) have to sign an oath that they are natural born and eligible to hold the office they are seeking. (A.R.S. § 16-242)
You are hereby notified that I, ___________________________________
am seeking nomination as a candidate for the office of President of the United States from the ________________________________________ Party, at the Presidential Preference Election to be held on the 28th day of February 2012. I am a natural born citizen of the United States, am at least thirty-five years of age, and have been a resident within the United States for at least fourteen years.
And A.R.S. § 16-311(D) requires that “A candidate must file an affidavit of qualification that includes facts sufficient to show that, other than the residency requirement, the candidate will be qualified at the time of election to hold the office sought.”
Secretary Bennett, I am sure, is charged with carrying out federal elections in a uniform manner. That means that if minor, independent and write-in presidential candidates have to swear an oath that they are natural born citizens and are eligible to assume the office, so do major political party candidates.
The Secretary accepts these oaths of eligibility based on a “presumption or assumption of truth” and does not verify the authenticity of the oaths. However, if an allegation of ineligibility is raised by an elector that assumption of truth is undermined.
That has occurred with candidate Obama. More than 1,000? Arizona electors have raised concerns to the Secretary about candidate Obama’s ineligibility. Concerns that were legitimized by one of his own law enforcement agencies, the Maricopa County Sheriff Department, when they made a Probable Cause finding that the document Obama is using to qualify for the presidential ballot in Arizona is a forgery.
When Obama posted that BC on the White House Website and held a press conference announcing it he effectively handed it over to every elector and SOS in the United States as “proof” of his citizenship status, a critical element of eligibility in Arizona.
Once Sheriff Arpaio made a Probable Cause Finding, concerning the forged BC of candidate Obama, the Secretary had an obligation to formally investigate. A six month law enforcement investigation, a Probable Cause Finding of Forgery and a continuing investigation is more than enough for the Secretary to authorize his legal department to go forward with an investigation in to the allegations which would qualify as a “legal proceeding’.
At this stage the Secretary can ask Hawaii for a ‘Letter of Verification’ under HRS 338-18 (b) (g,4) which states that if a Hawaii birth record is the subject of a lawsuit or introduced in a legal proceeding that the lawyer involved in the case can request a Letter of Verification in lieu of a certified copy.
HRS 338-18 (b) (g,4) also states that a Letter of Verification will verify the existence of a birth certificate on file with the Department of Health “and any other information that the applicant provides to be verified relating to the vital event.”
The request for a letter of Verification can not be a blanket request. It has to be specific to the document that was posted on the White House Website on April 27th, 2011. It has to ask for every word and marking on that document to be verified.