CNN Investigation: Obama 'Birther' Claims Have No Merit [CNN Claims Case Closed]

Gary Tuchman ^ | April 25, 2011

[Steelfish]

CNN Investigation: Obama 'Birther' Claims Have No Merit See show times »

From Gary Tuchman, CNN April 25, 2011

A former Hawaii health officials tells CNN she has "no doubt" Obama was born in Honolulu Obama in 2008 produced a "certificate of live birth," which is legally accepted Various Obama family acquaintances remember the president's birth in 1961 Some critics of the president continue to express doubts about his country of birth

(CNN) -- Was Barack Obama really born in America? A new CNN investigation reveals what most analysts have been saying since the so-called "birther" controversy erupted during the 2008 presidential campaign: Obama was born in the state of Hawaii on August 4, 1961. Period.

Obama passes CNN birther investigation

While the president has made light of the controversy, the question remains political red meat for some of his critics. A recent CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll showed that nearly 75% of Americans believe Obama was definitely or probably born in the United States. More than four in 10 Republicans, however, believe he probably or definitely was not born in America.

The U.S. Constitution says only "natural born" citizens can become president -- a vague clause that some members of the birther movement contend disqualifies Obama because, they insist, he was born outside the United States. Skeptics contend, among other things, that Obama was born in his father's home country of Kenya. Potential GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump recently seized on the issue, saying he had doubts about Obama's background.

Dr. Chiyome Fukino, a former director of the Hawaii Department of Health and a Republican, told CNN in her most extensive comments to date that she has "no doubt" Obama was born in the state.

[Vaduz]

Obama spent two million to keep his records sealed wouldn’t
Dr. Chiyome Fukino be chareged with something?.
No word from CNN.

[Beckwith]

So why won’t Obama release the long-form and end the controversy?

[Golden Eagle]

We need to hammer that statute home, everywhere. It opens up the Pandora's box completely, by admitting that people who weren't actually born in Hawaii could obtain the same exact document Obama has. Which is of course why the MSM refuses to cover it, according to their supposed “reporting”, no such loophole exists. And from what I can tell, based on that active link I provided above, it not only existed then, it's still in effect today!

[Dubya-M-DeesWent2SyriaStupid!]

LINK

[Golden Eagle]

Just changed my tagline...

Hawaiian Statute 338-17.8: Granting US citizenship to people not even born there!

[dfwgator]

“The science is settled.”

[TennesseeGirl]

They’re (CNN) are also disputing how much Obama has paid out to keep school records, job records, etc. out of the public domain.

[TennesseeGirl]

Obama didn't attend US schools until 1971 (10 years of age). He may or may not have been adopted by Soetoro in 1967. IF he was adopted by a foreigner, would that have ended his US citizenship? Perhaps, a Delayed Birth Registration due to a Legal Change of Status is what would be found showing a name change of Barry from Obama to Soetoro for a passport to Jakarta when he was 6 yo. This would also explain why he may or may not have received scholarships as a foreigner.

Section B 5B states, "The existing certificate and the evidence upon which the new certificate was based shall be sealed and placed in a special file. Such file shall not be subject to inspection except upon order of a court of competent jurisdiction or by the director of health."

[Georgia Girl 2]

Well I guess that settles it. CNN has resolved the conflict. Lets just move on nothing more to be concerned about.

[Grampa Dave]

According to a poll just released today, President Obama’s approval rating is at an all-time low. He’s so unpopular right now, the people in Kenya are accusing him of being born in the United States .” — Jay Leno

[Hotlanta Mike]

The Full Story: CNN Caught Lying About Hawaii Law And The Release Of Obama’s Purported Records; Hawaii Law On The Side Of Birthers

http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2011/04/full-story-cnn-caught-lying-about.html

[PsiChi]

“CNN Claims Case is Closed”

You know what’s nice about this statement, at this stage of the game? All it rates is a knowing smile and a wry “Good luck with that!” Then we return to prying Barry’s bony fingers off the White House door jamb as BS tries with all his might to remain where he is not eligible to stay.

[Smokeyblue]

“In order to see what happens when someone born in Hawaii requests a birth certificate, CNN asked a current resident of the state — Stig Waidelich — if he could get a copy of the document.

Waidelich was born just hours after Obama in August 1961. Like Obama, Waidelich’s birth was announced at the time in the Honolulu Star Bulletin newspaper.

Waidelich, like Obama in 2008, was given a certification of live birth in response to his request.”

---

What is Stig Waidelich’s certificate number?

[butterdezillion]

Right. I can’t see the video and have to be at work all day today, and timing is really critical right now. Can you or somebody else tell me how they handled the part where they had Stig Waidelich order his BC, supposedly to prove that all you get is a COLB? They showed his COLB? Did they talk about the date filed and BC#? This was the only real bit of “investigating” they did, and the BC# was WAY out of sequence with either the Factcheck forgery or the Nordyke twins’. I know that Fukino’s interview with Isikoff was geared towards dealing with the BC# issue, because she said Obama’s BC was “properly numbered”. So this is on their minds.

It would be not even a blink for the CNN traitors to scheme with the HDOH as to how they could get a COLB out there with the number totally out of whack so they could claim the BC#’s were given randomly rather than sequentially.

But I can’t see how they framed that whole thing. Did they bring out the date filed and BC#? Did they make sure that could be clearly seen? How did they handle it?

[zeugma]

BFLV

[Danae]

The picture of the document being held in someone’s hands would make the seal really hard to see, let alone photograph. You can’t assume from this picture that the seal isn’t there. They are hard to see really.

[jcsjcm]

My question to you was: Did you receive a Certification or a Certificate? I showed both a Certification and a Certificate. The Certificate gave much more information such as the parents place of birth. The Certification does not show this information.

If I remember correctly yours did not have parents place of birth. Also, if I remember correctly? You were adopted? That was the question I wanted to ask. I’m not sure if I have my facts correct or not. Hopefully you understand where I am going with this!

A) A certification is issued to those that the parents are questionable or unknown or hidden? In other words sealed?

B) A certificate actually shows the parents of birth

Am I incorrect in this scenario?

[Danae]

I have both. They are referred to as the long and short forms.

The Long form has the State of Parents birth on it, and if they were born outside the USA, then the Country is supposed to go there.

The COLB (Short form) does not put parent’s place of birth on it. It does however list race.

on A) there is a mechanism which does take this into account, certainly in the cases of adoption, that is a possibility that has to be taken into account. Someone with sealed records, can still get a COLB, the sealing of those records does not affect the ability of the person whose record it is from getting copies (certified or not) of their own records.

B) Both certificates show parents of Birth.

[Enough is ENOUGH]

The guy is destroying our country, brick by brick, day by day and no one in Washington is pressing Obama and his social democrats in Congress about it. Instead, they let him and his cadre of Marxist czars get away with running the country into the ground through his regulations.

Put the damn bc aside for a while and focus on what we can prove about this sob to the voters. We’ve got plenty of proof on what this sob is doing to us and no one in their right mind will be able to call us a bunch of kooks once we demand our elected representatives take these issues to the people on a daily basis 24/7.

[Red Steel]

Can you or somebody else tell me how they handled the part where they had Stig Waidelich order his BC, supposedly to prove that all you get is a COLB? They showed his COLB?

Here's a still picture of the COLB from the CNN "investigation." It should be possible to enhance document number to make it out, or someone could captured the high def picture from another source. CNN appears to be hiding this segment from their website.

Did they talk about the date filed and BC#? This was the only real bit of “investigating” they did, and the BC# was WAY out of sequence with either the Factcheck forgery or the Nordyke twins’

The reporter said, "It was file August 8th, 1961" while showing the short form COLB, and said Stig was born 13 hour later on August 5th, 1961.

And he read the "Prima Facie evidence statement.