But, as a non-lawyer, I think they are still open for charges of fraud, conspiracy, and possibly perjury despite all the legalistic shenanigans that they pulled. So Bennet can say he is happy and avoid further criticism that he is a “birther,” but Sheriff Joe, who has representatives on the ground in Hawaii as we speak, can make the HHDOH officials quite uncomfortable.
He has indicated that he will be taking a significant new step soon (end of May? end of June?). I would hope that this would involve criminal charges, though I see how it might involve a Grand Jury, also.
BTW, I have looked at all your material regarding why the certificate is amended, and still find the argument hard to follow. It seems that the gist of it is that if there are cash receipts involved, the certificate MUST be amended. When I read the HDOH statements, I wonder if they explicitly knew that they were confirming that there were receipts or whether they made a statement without consciously believing that they had indicated that the receipts existed.
Do you have any other independent confirmation that the BC is amended?
Miss Ticly specifically asked them to clarify which records they were denying access to and they said all of them.
She also asked Linden Joesting at the OIP to correct her if her interpretations were incorrect. Joesting initially responded by saying she was working on it, but then suddenly said she was too busy to address it. If they had been able to say that her interpretation was wrong they’d have done it in a heartbeat.
And a similar denial of access to supporting affidavits was given by both the HDOH AND CONFIRMED AS THE CORRECT RESPONSE by OIP Director Paul Tsukiyama, who actually literally wrote the book on how UIPA requests must be responded to.
I realize that the ins and outs of the bureaucratic stuff gets hazy. But that’s why stuff like the tampering with Virginia’s database record - and now this blatant evasion of having to verify the genuine lelgally-probative facts are so critical and interesting.
Just wrap your head around the fact that they wouldn’t verify that Obama’s posted long-form was a true and accurate REPRESENTATION of the record they have on file. They’d say that the info was the same on both but not that it was an accurate and true representation. That means there was additional information on what they have, that was not on what Obama posted. And that would have to be stamps and notations, because everything else that is required to be on that form was on what Obama posted.
This latest “verification” is a hugh and series expose’ of what’s REALLY going on, and it strongly supports Obama’s BC being amended and late.
I agree with you that they would still be open to charges of both fraud and misprision of fraud and forgery. They know Obama posted a forgery and passed it off as genuine, which is fraud. And if they have not reported it to law enforcement it is misprision of forgery and fraud, and by refusing to respond to a LEGITIMATE request form for verification of FACTS, they have acted specifically to defraud the American public.