Everything you said makes complete and total sense to me. That’s the way I’d handle it were I responsible for administering those records. They can’t risk having some lowly clerk bribed or sweet-talked into releasing information. So they escalate any requests for Obama to a higher authority. That’s not necessarily suspicious. It’s an acceptable business practice when the integrity of data and the risk of lawsuits is at stake.
I doubt a clerk printed the index data for those binders. I’d bet a DBA did it one time for a clerk and the printed results were assembled by a clerk into a binder to be kept on-hand for public access.
Of course they’re avoiding giving you information. You’re labled a vexatious requestor. Upper management wants to avoid having you spread stuff all over the Internet so they do what they can to interpret their laws in a way that prevents them from disclosing information to you or any other birther who wants information about the POTUS.
They have never officially labeled me a vexatious requester. And actually that part of the law never passed. Now it just says that they can ignore duplicate requests. This is not a duplicate request; in fact, they refuse to even show me ANY request that I made for the 1961 computer-generated birth index. lol. They’re denying a request they won’t admit I ever even made (even though they sent back the money I sent with the request) - denying it because I supposedly took too long to decide to make it. lol
BT, how could there conceivably be a successful lawsuit - even by Obama’s thugs - just because some clerk properly filled out a request for index data, which is a required disclosure?
How the heck can index data be cause for a lawsuit, when it is a required disclosure? The way they have treated index data - for crying out loud, INDEX DATA - reveals that this special treatment is not just about lawsuits, although I have no doubts that Obama’s people have scared the skitters out of that department with threats of lawsuits. Their protectiveness over mere index data reveals that they’re afraid of something besides lawsuits - something that would be revealed by INDEX DATA - the most basic public information regarding what records they have in that office!
And they treat EVERY request that way so it’s not about vexatious requests either.
Why are they treating requests for routine disclosures like index data - which they say is publicly available in their office any time - as if it’s something from Area 51 (or wherever that is. I haven’t been briefed on that. lol)?
Likely right. However as you said before, the clerks could have given access to limited query functions as in reports they could run to update their binders. The push the button report. As you said the clerks would not have access to change or add to the database using some query language.
Hawaii may also may be able to run a transaction history and have an audit trail that would show all changes to their databases. The audit trail would show which program, user, time and date of change, and what record was accessed or changed.