Posted on 09/03/2012 7:39:43 PM PDT by tsowellfan
'For any party official to do so would be to perjure him or herself'
A former U.S. Justice Department attorney who founded the government watchdog Judicial Watch and later Freedom Watch has warned a key Barack Obama attorney that Democrat Party or state elections officials certifying Obama’s eligibility for the 2012 election could become the targets of election-fraud charges.
The letter from Larry Klayman explains that’s because those officials simply cannot know Obama’s eligibility for sure, and the law doesn’t allow them to make assumptions.
In his letter to Robert Bauer, general counsel to the Democratic National Committee, Klayman explained that the evidence shows no one knows for sure about Obama’s eligibility, so letters from the DNC to states about Obama’s 2012 candidacy may be problematic.
“There is therefore no longer any state or national official in the Democratic Party who can escape legal responsibility for ignoring the proof herein provided, and a plea of ignorance of the facts will no longer be possible...
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
It was “information” that was not on the document they were specifically asking about.
But the MDEC lawyer went out of his way to say in the filing for the judge that “information” means birth facts. Just one more subtle clue that they knew they needed to cover their rears in case a judge thought that a blank space in the “Evidence and affidavits filed in support of late filing or amendments” line counted as “information”.
The MDEC lawyers were the first people who confirmed for me that my understanding was correct. Their actions are very, very transparent. Deceptive to those who want to believe them, but transparent to anybody with open eyes.
After having the DEMOCRAT lawyers confirm my understanding, I spoke to other attorneys and asked them if my legal reasoning was correct. They all agreed that it was. So we’ve got the democrat lawyers and 3 other lawyers (including one whose own arguments rely on the information on the BC being correct) agreeing that Onaka confirmed Obama’s BC as non-valid. When you get the democrat lawyers, me, and 3 other attorneys all agreeing.... not only is that convincing, it’s Hell-freezes-over kind of stuff.
BENNETT asked whether the 2 matched - whether the White House BC was a “true and accurate representation of the original record on file”. Onaka would not say that it was, even though he was required to verify SPECIFICALLY WHAT WAS SUBMITTED FOR VERIFICATION.
The HDOH web page describing verifications says straight-out that they cannot verify something that was not submitted by the requestor. Onaka’s response to Bennett was totally out of line because he was never asked to verify that the information from the WH BC matched the original record. He WAS asked to verify that the WH BC was a “true and accurate representation of the original record on file” - and ONAKA WOULD NOT VERIFY THAT as required by law if that statement that Bennett submitted for verification was actually true.
IOW, Bennett confirmed that the WH BC image is NOT a “true and accurate representation of the original record on file”.
You have no excuse for continuing to repeat the lie, over and over and over again as if saying it more times will magically change what Onaka was asked and how he actually answered that specific request.
The ONLY time Onaka was asked whether the two records match each other was when Bennett asked Onaka to verify that the WH BC image is a “true and accurate representation of the original record on file”. It was a direct and clear request. And Onaka would not verify that.
The HDOH is required to verify the existence of a birth record if they’ve got one. That includes any record they’ve got. Nowhere does the statute say anything about verifying the existence of a “legally valid” record.
According to what you’re saying, if they issue a verification of the existence of a record, then they are verifying everything that the person submitted, because the very existence of a letter of verification verifies EVERYTHING.
Heck, if that was true, Bennett could have requested that they verify that Barack Hussein Obama II, female, was born on Mars to Mickey Mouse and Daisy Duck - and because Onaka would issue a letter of verification saying that they have a birth record on file for Barack Hussein Obama II, it would certify that the facts of his birth were as stated by Bennett because a verification (of the existence of a record) is verification that the event happened exactly as described by the requestor.
LOLOL.
Do you really believe what you’re saying?
The only thing that is verified is what Onaka actually says that he verifies. If he says “I verify that we have a birth record on file for Barack Hussein Obama’ it does NOT mean that he verifies they have a purple, orange, or valid BC for Obama. A verification only verifies the point it actually says it verifies.
The way to verify the facts is by saying, “I verify that Barack Hussein Obama, II, WAS born on Aug 4, 1961.... etc”. (Notice that is saying that it really happened in such-and-so way. THAT is a verification of birth facts - a certification that the event DID happen in such-and-so way).
Anything besides that means something else.
Name on Certificate: first, middle, last
Sex; male, female
DOB: month, day, year
Place of birth: City/town, island
Father's name: first, middle,last
Mother's name: first, middle, maiden
Assuming I meet the legal requirements to obtain a verification in lieu of a certified copy, if I send in only the form and the fee, what response will I get from the DOH?
Diamond seems to be saying that I will get the following:
"The original Certificate of Live Birth for [request name], is on file with the Hawaii State Department of Health.”
Which is essentially saying that the DOH has a certificate that matches those listed items.
Butterdezillion seems to be saying that I should get the following response:
“The original Certificate of Live Birth for [request name], is on file with the Hawaii State Department of Health. And we verify the following:
1) Name
2) Sex
3) DOB
4) Place of birth
5) Father's name
6) Mother's name”
Is that essential your points of view?
Mostly, for my part. What I think you would get is a statement that says (basically), “I, Alvin Onaka, verify that we have a birth certificate on file for Barack Hussein Obama II and that Barack Hussein Obama II, male, was born on Aug 4, 1961 in Honolulu, HI on the island of Oahu, to mother Stanley Ann Dunham and father Barack Hussein Obama.”
That is, IF those were the facts claimed on a legally-valid record.
If those were not the facts on a legally-valid record you would get, “I, Alvin Onaka, verify that we have a birth certificate on file for Barack Hussein Obama II.”
Take out the responses to the extraneous stuff that Bennett asked for in addition to the application form, and that is the substance of what Onaka’s letter says: We have a birth certificate on file for Barack Hussein Obama II.
If one item was wrong that item would simply be left off. If Bennett had put Female for gender, for instance, then the response would be, “I, Alvin Onaka, verify that we have a birth certificate on file for Barack Hussein Obama II and that Barack Hussein Obama II was born on Aug 4, 1961 in Honolulu, HI on the island of Oahu, to mother Stanley Ann Dunham and father Barack Hussein Obama.”
If the gender and the date were wrong you’d get, “I, Alvin Onaka, verify that we have a birth certificate on file for Barack Hussein Obama II and that Barack Hussein Obama II was born in Honolulu, HI on the island of Oahu, to mother Stanley Ann Dunham and father Barack Hussein Obama.”
Etc.
Ok so if we assume the following vital statistics information:
1) Name: Joseph Larry Smith
2) Sex: Male
3) DOB: July 1st, 1967
4) Place of birth: Honolulu, Hawaii
5) Father’s name: David Steven Smith
6) Mother’s name: Ester Verna Davis
And I send in a request for a verification with only the following items listed:
1) Name: Joseph Larry Smith
The DOH checks and they have 15,000 vital records for Joseph Larry Smith.
Which of the following responses do you believe I will receive?
A) Yes, we have a vital record for Joseph Larry Smith.
B) No, we do not have a vital record for Joseph Larry Smith.
C) You have not provide enough information for us to issue a verification.
Then the boxes wouldn’t match. Onaka said that the information on the two certificates matched. He didn’t say that some of it matched.
Onaka is the State Registrar. He's responsible for the registry of vital records for Hawaii. Vital records are the legal records of births, deaths marriages etc. You seem to be saying that although Onaka confirms that they have a BC for Obama, it isn't legally valid. My question is why would a State keep a registry of invalid vital documents?
Yes he did.
“The information contained in the ‘Certificate of Live Birth’ published at [the Whitehouse website] and reviewed by me on the date of this verification, a copy of which is attached with your request, matches the information contained in the original Certificate of Live Birth (for BHO) on file with the State of Hawaii Department of Health.”
If there’s not enough information for them to know which one, they would probably say they need more information. in fact, there was an article from 2006(?) where Janice Okubo basically said that.
Link?
Until Obama releases his records THIS is who I think Obama is...
The Dallas Blog has just received an e-mail from a reliable source in Texas, who said he received an interesting e-mail from a U.S. Naval officer, who obtained a fascinating letter from an I.R.S. examiner who contends that Mr. Obama’s real name is Barry Soetoro, according to alleged Top-Secret tax records.
My reliable Texas source explained that he’s not certain if it’s true, but the letter also provides a link to Obama or Soetoro’s selective service registration information, which looks highly-suspicious. Well, let the fun start and see if these allegations are true. Here’s a copy-and-paste of the letter from the IRS examiner:
Trump is right, Barry Soetoro, AKA Obama is hiding what appears to be a criminal past.
Trump is correct, Barry Soetoro, AKA Obama is hiding something in his past that is very bad... and it may not be his citizenship. (Trump would not say this if he did not know something and he has the money to get the dirt...)
As an IRS tax examiner,one of many former federal jobs, I have seen what it appears Barry Soetoro has done, mostly by illegal aliens attempting to acquire a new identity in the U.S and/or criminals looking to acquire a new ID.
Barry, AKA Obama, was lawfully adopted by a foreign national, Lolo Soetoro, and Barry’s name was legally changed to “Barry Soetoro”. (Barry’s own admission) Barry Soetoro was also made an official legal Indonesian citizen. (again Barry’s own admission) The adoption would be noted in Barry’s vital statistics record in Hawaii on his original birth certificate... OR Lolo Soetoro may have always been Barry’s legal birth father. The public does not know for sure at this point who Barry’s father really was and Barry himself may not know.
Barry was raised as a Muslim in Indonesia and attended a Catholic funded school that permitted all faiths to attend.
Barry’s mother dropped him as a dependent for some reason, maybe even when Barry was adopted by Lolo Soetoro. His mother’s passport records dropped Barry as a dependent indicating Barry was no longer a legal dependent of his mothers. (The passport records of his mother have been produced showing Barry was no longer a dependent when Barry was permanently residing in Indonesia.) Barry went to Hawaii to live with his alleged grand parents after Lolo Soetoro and Barry’s mother divorced.
A “certificate of live birth” can have names changed on it including a child’s birth name, and birth parent’s names. Even a modified date of birth can be on a “certificate of live birth”. This occurs frequently for adopted children where the birth parent does not want the child to know who they are. The public has no idea who Barry’s real birth father is or who Barry’s real birth mother is. (Barry could have been adopted by his mother) The original birth certificate is the only legal vital statistics record of a person’s birth parents, birth location, birth date, etc… I can get a “certificate of live birth” for a dead person; I cannot get a birth certificate of a dead person without “Deceased” on it. (I’ve tried)
There is no evidence Barry Soetoro ever lawfully changed his name to “Barrack Hussein Obama”. There is no proof Barry Soetoro was born with the name “Barrack Hussein Obama”. I’m willing to bet the name “Barrack Hussein Obama” is not present on the real birth certificate as Barry’s birth name or as Barry’s birth father. I have pictures of me with my mother and Jimmy Buffet… that doesn’t make him my father even if I start using the name Jimmy Buffet.
The public knows Barry Soetoro finished high school in Hawaii as Barry Soetoro and attended Occidental as Barry Soetoro where he did drugs and flunked out of school. After dropping out of Occidental, Barry showed up in New York, homeless and on drugs. (Barry’s own admission) Barry then hooked up with a Pakistani to live with and traveled back to Indonesia on his new boyfriend’s dime to renew his Indonesian passport and traveled to Pakistan with him.
Ask any law enforcement officer in a large city or detective and they will tell you homeless young men on drugs in large cities usually end up as male prostitutes. Barry ended up as a world traveler with a degree… (Not likely)
Barry Soetoro returned to New York from Pakistan and began using the fictitious name “Obama” for some reason. (again Barry Soetoro’s own admission) One could only suspect that a person addicted to drugs returning from Pakistan to New York, the main route for Afghan heroin into the U.S., maybe Barry had a reason to start using a new name. There are literally over 1 million open warrants on file in New York… maybe Barry is one of them?....
After spending some time in New York allegedly working under the name “Obama”, It appears Barry used the fictitious name “Barrack Hussein Obama” for the first time to file his federal taxes in Connecticut at a Post Office Box for the purpose of evading paying taxes in New York and /or to establish a new identity. (This is a felony with no statute of limitation.)
When the IRS received Barry Soetoro’s federal tax filing, the IRS could not attach the name Barrack Hussein Obama to the SSI number provided or the address provided. So the IRS assigned the fictitious name “Barrack Hussein Obama” a tax ID number for a person from Connecticut (Where Barry unlawfully filed a federal tax form using a false name). Barry Soetoro began using the tax ID number as his SSI number when using the fictitious name Barrack Obama. This is why Barry Soetoro has a Connecticut SSI number. When I worked for the IRS, I saw this occur more than once and yes, it is a felony to knowingly file a fraudulent federal tax forms. Most of the politicians that cheat on their taxes claim it was an accident. That is how they get away with their tax cheat crimes. Using a fake name is no accident.
It appears Barry fled New York to Chicago using his new identity to get a job. He likely ordered a fake diploma to bolster his new identity as “Obama”. Fake Diploma’s were very big in the 80’s and diploma mills were even being used by federal workers to get promotions. There is evidence his alleged attendance at Columbia was faked (Barry never attended Columbia) and Barry lied his way into Harvard (he had no transcripts to get in)... Including telling the Saudi royal family he was fighting in Afghanistan with the Muslim Jihad against the Russians, so they would help him get into a law school. The Saudi’s apparently loved Barry’s story of Jihad in Pakistan/Afghanistan and paid for Barry to attend Harvard under the name “Obama”. The Saudi family has admitted to paying for Obama to attend Harvard and gave Harvard a gift of $20 million dollars. Harvard in turn made their special attendy President of the law review a person that never wrote a single law review.... I guess that is what $20 million buys at Harvard.
It is unlikely Barry was a Jihadist and was most likely a drug mule if anything, maybe even a CIA street hire to haul Afghan heroin back to New York, so the Afghans could buy U.S. made stinger missiles with U.S. dollars to shoot down Russian helicopters?... I hired people over seas to do work below my pay grade all the time, even foreign nationals... I think this is the story Barry told the Saudi’s, but he was most likely really just a drug mule/dealer and probably still wanted on an outstanding warrant in New York.
Barry’s selective service registration is not normal either… http://www.debbieschlussel.com/4428/exclusive-did-next-commander-in-chief-falsify-selective-service-registration-never-actually-register-obamas-draft-registration-raises-serious-questions/
After I looked at Barry’s selective service filing I noticed it was most likely fraudulent too based on the name he used. Barry did not start using the name “Obama” until he returned from Pakistan (long after he flunked out of school in California) His selective service record (maintained in Chicago coincidentally) shows he registered at a Hawaiian post office as “Obama” in Sept 1980... Problem, Barry was getting high in California at Occidental in Sept 1980 (Barry’s own admission) and was not using the fictitious name “Obama” at that time. Barry began using the fictitious name “Obama” only after he returned from Pakistan. The selective service filing is fraudulent.
Barry returned to Chicago and attend a semi-christian radical black church with his first female love Michelle. Barry admits keeping in touch with Phil Boener, who traveled to New York from Occidental to be with Barry and was most likely Barry’s first love.
Barry still could not get a real job, because he was still a fraud, even with his Harvard degree in hand he could lie and take the Bar exam, but he could not work as a lawyer for a major law firm without a back ground investigation and he would never pass one. So, Michelle got Barry a job at her law firm. Barry never filed a case alone and never filed a motion. He wrote lots of memos according to the law firm where Barry worked. (I think they know Barry is a fraud and don’t want to be sued by previous clients) Barry rescinded his law licenses, so as not to be disbarred for fraud. The Bar knows Barry lied on his application. Michelle also had to turn over her law license for her involvement in corruption with the Chicago mayors office.
With time on his hands Barry, a well spoken black man, was able to get elected to a state office, oddly because he looked for fraud in his opponents voter registrations and got his opponent disqualified from running. Barry a well versed liar was a natural in state politics. He used his political influence to get himself a position as a lecturer at Chicago’s law school. Barry embellished this position as a “professor of law” which everyone knows is completely false. Barry was not a professor or even a specialist at anything but lying.
On a whim Barry ran for United States Senate for the State of Illinois. Politicians do this all the time to make a name for themselves even if they can’t win. At the time the Republican Ryan was a shoe in for the Senate seat, so no real Democrat contenders entered the race, but Barry did. On a fluke after the primary Ryan’s wife Jeri Ryan (Seven of nine from Star Trek) went public that her husband was making her have sex with other people while he watched. Ryan dropped out and Alan Keys moved from Maryland to run against Barry Soetoro.
The election got all kinds of press because there was no blacks in the U.S. Senate and one of these black men was going to be a Senator. Alan Keys did his best to warn everyone Barry was not who he claimed to be, but the public saw him as a carpet bagger. Barry kept the lie going and presented himself as a clean black man that talked like a white man... Illinois elected Barry to U.S. Senate. The Democrats had already began scrubbing Barry’s back ground when Ryan dropped out.
Phil Barry’s boy friend from Occidental, was found working in California as a communications specialist (receptionist) for a dental hygienist school and given a diploma from Columbia and cover story. The rest of Barry’s drug friends were all given jobs or money by the Democrat machine to keep quiet.
Because Barry was such a news maker as the only Black in the Senate, and he could speak like a white man he was made key speaker for the Democrat convention. Barry then decided to run for President to keep the lie going. No one thought to question Barry’s back ground in the Democrat party... They helped cover up the ugly back ground. The only person jumping up and down warning Barry was not who he claimed to be was Alan Keys and he was discarded as just an angry loser.
Now we have a complete fraud sitting in the Office of the President. Clearly the most corrupt, inexperienced, and ignorant President in the history of the United States who’s only quality is that he can lie with a straight face.
Barry Soetoro is as much of a fraud as Bernie Madoff and his house of cards will soon fall down.
March 31, 2011
Yeah the information matches, that does not mean that it is complete.
I’m trying to understand Butter’s and Diamond’s understanding of the verification process.
For example, what would happen if I put the correct name but an incorrect DOB and as a result they got “no record match”? Would they still send me a verification saying yes they do have a birth certificate on record or would they say no they do not have a certificate on record?
As to the comma - the COLB is derived from information in a computer database, while the LFBC is an actual copy of a typed document from 1961. When the information from the typed document was entered into the computer database there may be 4 fields associated with Name (First, Middle, Last and Suffix) since the comma is not part of his name it would nat have been included in any of the name fields.
Bump
There is no question but that they keep non-valid records. Why have a void flag for their database if none of their records would ever need it? You think that as soon as somebody amends a record the HDOH tears that BC out of the book? Look in the laws or the retention schedules. The only time they are authorized to dispose of vital records is if there is an incomplete vital record that has not been pursued for a long time, and that doesn’t say that they SHALL destroy the records, only that they may come up with rules as to when they could dismiss that file.
If you look on the HDOh website and in the statues and rules it talks about converting a Certificate of Hawaiian Birth to a late birth certificate. A late birth certificate is not legally valid, yet they specifically describe how a person could convert their record at the HDOH to that non-valid record. So yes, they DEFINITELY have records there that are not valid.
Why? Because they are still evidence that might be needed somewhere down the line. In fact, HRS 338-17 talks about the probative value of late and altered BC’s and says that the probative value is determined when they are submitted as evidence to a judicial or administrative person or body. Hawaii assigns no probative value to that record, but that doesn’t mean that a judge couldn’t look at those records and say, “You know, there’s a good reason for this being late or altered, and given the other evidence that supports this, I think this record is credible.” In that event, the judge would determine that the BC is probative.
What the Hawaii law says, though, is that the State of Hawaii does not vouch for those claims being accurate. So nobody can legally say that Obama WAS born on Aug 4, 1961 in Honolulu, HI... etc at this point. If Obama wants somebody to be able to legally say that, he needs to submit the BC as evidence in a setting where evidentiary rules are in play and the whole picture needs to be looked at to decide whether that record has credibility or is a crock.
My suspicion is that there’s a good reason Obama has fought to keep that record from being analyzed for credibility, even though it is the ONLY WAY he can legally qualify to be President.
But in answer to what you’re saying, I am positive that they house non-valid records at the HDOH. Heck, they disclosed in their 1960-64 birth index the non-valid records for a couple of adopted boys. Those non-valid records are supposed to be sealed, even. But the HDOh had them right there on their list.
Please read posts 201, 214, and 216.
No, you’re still not getting it. He was asked whether the information on A matched the information on B. The information in question is what is on A. If there’s extra stuff on B it never even makes it into the question. If there’s no ALTERED stamp on A, then the ALTERED stamp doesn’t ever get asked about. The question only asks about what is on A.
If it was supposed to be a match both ways - to say that everything that is on A is on B and vice versa, the question would then be “Please verify that A is a true and accurate representation of B”.
That’s exactly what Ken Bennett asked, and Onaka would NOT verify that A was a true and accurate representation of B.
And the kicker of it all is the MDEC lawyers’ clarification to the judge that by “information” they meant BIRTH FACTS - lest somebody accuse them of knowing that the PROCESSING FACTS don’t match. They did not want it on record that they said in a legal procedure that the WHOLE THING matched the record on file, because they know it doesn’t. Onaka already told Ken Bennett that by refusing to verify that the WH BC is a “true and accurate representation of the original record on file”.
The MDEC lawyers pointed out EXACTLY what they knew based on Onaka’s verification to Bennett - by putting fig leaves in all the “indelicate” places. lol.
They knew that Onaka confirmed the record is non-valid; that’s why they wouldn’t ask for any birth facts.
They knew that the WH BC is NOT a “true and accurate representation of the original record on file” - which is why they made sure the judge knew they WEREN’T saying that the records matched in total, but only that the birth facts claimed matched.
IOW, their “fig leaves” show that they agreed with the legal assessment of me and the 3 attorneys I consulted with about this: Onaka confirmed that the record is not legally valid and that the WH BC is NOT a “true and accurate representation of the original record on file”.
That MDEC filing (where they submitted this verification that you keep pointing out) is very incriminating against those lawyers, when you understand what HRS 338-14.3 actually says. Fig leaves to cover the two “indelicate” areas.
Or it matches an “original” Certificate of Live Birth filed with the Hawaii Department of Health in April 2011, since no documents could be released in January 2011 when Gov. Abercrombie claims they found something “written down” in the archives. These people are massive liars.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.