[mc5cents]

A question about DeCosta. The line “date accepted by state registrar”. The date is 1930. That is 29 years before Hawaii attained statehood. There would have been a territorial registar, but not a state registrar. Or does the computer program that produces these COLBs not differentiate pre and post statehood dates? Just asking and am open to explanations.

Very good question. NOT a state in 1930. What is going on?

[bunster]

My guess would be that DeCosta got this copy of her birth certificate at a later time - certainly after Hawaii became a state. Can anyone read the seal information for “date of issuance of this COLB?.”

[El Gato]

Very good question. NOT a state in 1930. What is going on?

It could just be a difference in the program at the time the COLB was generated. I think the DeCosta one was generated in 2002, whereas Obama's was allegedly generated in 2007.

IIRC, it's been determined that the entire document, save background, is printed at the time it's requested, not just the information "fields",but the whole form.

It would be useful to see another, or several other, 2007/2008 CoLBs to see what they say...

Polariks Final Report Shows several. The ones that come from 2007 and 2008 all seem to show "date filed by". Probably just a change in the wording sometime after 2002 but before 2007. What seems to count is not when the birth occurred but when the form was printed.

The forgery would have used one of the latter ones as it's "template".