We talked about this already. There was no news release statement from the health director that says that Obama was born in any hospital in Hawaii. The health director wrote in an e-mail that that she had consulted the Attorney General before making her statment to make sure she didn’t say anything wrong.
The publicly released statement says that Hawaii “has Sen. Obamas original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures”. In no where in that statement does the health director say where the birth certificate was from, so my guess is that the the governor has no real clue.
People asked the AG’s office for info related to the public release. The attorney’s office stated that this would violate client’s right to secrecy. However, when someone sued based on the fact that all information related to public statements must be made public per Hawaii law, the attorney’s office immediately denied having contact with the health director on this matter. Either the health director lied or the attorney’s office did.
We talked about this already. There was no news release statement from the health director that says that Obama was born in any hospital in Hawaii. The health director wrote in an e-mail that that she had consulted the Attorney General before making her statment to make sure she didnt say anything wrong.
The publicly released statement says that Hawaii has Sen. Obamas original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures. In no where in that statement does the health director say where the birth certificate was from, so my guess is that the the governor has no real clue.
People asked the AGs office for info related to the public release. The attorneys office stated that this would violate clients right to secrecy. However, when someone sued based on the fact that all information related to public statements must be made public per Hawaii law, the attorneys office immediately denied having contact with the health director on this matter. Either the health director lied or the attorneys office did.
As one federal judge said: A spurious claim questioning the Presidents constitutional legitimacy may be protected by the First Amendment, but a Courts placement of its imprimatur upon a claim that is so lacking in factual support that it is frivolous would undoubtedly
disserve the public interest.
CONCLUSION
For the reasons previously stated, Plaintiffs motion for a
temporary restraining order is denied and Plaintiffs complaint is dismissed in its entirety. Defendants shall recover their costs from Plaintiff.US Federal District Court Judge for the Middle District of Georgia Clay D. Land in dismissing Rhodes v MacDonald September 16, 2009