The one thing that keeps coming back to me is the second modified certificate of candidacy issued by the DNC that omitted the language about eligibility. While many can ignore that , it still bugs me. What could possibly be the reason to omit that statement which has always been issued before?
What could possibly be the reason to omit that statement which has always been issued before?
_________________________________________________________________________________
Material fraud.
The members of the HDP are likely very knowledgeable of the facts. An attorney for HDP was also the attorney for Stanley Ann Dunham/Obama/Seotoro in her divorce from Seotoro. He knows the truth. And he advises HDP.
Brian Schatz submitted a worthless document to the CEO. It failed to document edibility AS REQUIRED BY LAW. So this document was legally worthless. Hence the reason the DNC had to step in. And in Hawaii law the CEO can take the slate of candidates from either organizations if they do not agree or one does not submit the slate.
Brian Schatz either tried to defraud the office of the CEO or did this dance knowing the DNC would make it right in the end. Either way, he did NOT certify Obama as eligible.
It is sort of like Tennessee not voting for AlGore. If your own state will not back you.....