The more important issue for me is the language “Date filed by Registrar” vs. “Date accepted by Registrar” on some of the certificates that have come to light. Plus the one which showed up on Obama’s campaign web site is either a copy of one that originally showed up on the Daily Kos web site or, at the very least, is a lately reissued copy.
I wish someone with national legal or research credentials would look deeply into this mess and publish a book on the topic. Vincent Bugliosi comes to mind but I think he is a big liberal.
I wish somebody in law enforcement would look deeply into it.
Janice Okubo has confirmed that the “Date filed” is the date the certificate was given a number. She says after they switched to having hospitals file electronically they rolled the “Date accepted” and “Date filed” into just the “Date filed” field since submission, acceptance, and filing happened at the same time. (Looking at the US standard birth certificate information, the software is supposed to have built-in checks that will not allow a record to be sent until everything required is completed.)
And it had been happening at the same time before also, except on the outlying islands where there was delivery time for the certificates involved. The local registrar collected certificates for a week (as the rules at the time said) and then signed and delivered them on the same day to the state registrar who then gave them a number and filed them.
If Obama’s was given a number on Tuesday, Aug 8, he was not born at Kapiolani. And there’s no way his number was given on Tuesday and 3 days later the Nordykes were given earlier numbers than his. We know that either the number or the filing date or both are forged. I suspect that it is the number.