Posted on 05/12/2011 10:27:35 AM PDT by howardl
Why does BHO's official biography state: "His mother, Ann Dunham, was born and raised in small-town Kansas. After her family moved to the Hawaiian Islands, she met Barack Obama Sr., a Kenyan scholarship student enrolled at the University of Hawaii. The two married in 1959, and on August 4, 1961 ...."
Wikipedia says that Stanley Ann graduated from highschool in Washington state in 1960, and moved to Hawaii and started college that fall, where she met BHO senior. "Dunham and Obama Sr. were married on the Hawaiian island of Maui on February 2, 1961, despite parental opposition from both families. Dunham was three months pregnant at the time of her marriage."
“The best evidence of a marriage would be a marriage license, or better yet, a state-issued marriage certificate.”
That is true, of course.
But if, as you agree, the divorce pleadings contain “the ONLY evidence of a marriage”, then that filing is the best (and certainly here the most persuasive) evidence, isn’t it?
IMO, what is of importance, other than the two assertions the parties were married, is to determine the motivation of the actors behind the two different dates. If either of the dates is accurate, the other deserves examination.
Probably because of BHO Sr.'s polygamy problem.
You are, of course, right but the divorce papers do provide prima facie evidence of a marriage.
Also I’ve been through a divorce and know other people who have and in every single case it was mandatory to produce a marriage certficate, etc, to start the ball rolling.
Maybe Hawaii is different.
Obama Senior was already married.
You didn’t know that bigamy is against the law in all 50 states of this country?
BHO, Sr, told his university he had divorced Kezia in 1959, before he left Kenya. In 1964/5 he married Ruth Nidesand in Kenya. The marriage was statutory, ie monogamy.
Bigamy has been a crime in Kenya since 1902.
He wasn’t arrested for bigamy and Ruth didn’t cite bigamy as grounds when she divorced him. She cited cruelty.
His family say he divorced Kezia in 1959.
Looks like he might have been telling the truth, for once.
Anyway the INS couldn’t prove bigamy either, and they tried. The British wouldn’t confirm he’d ever been married at all.
If the British said he wasn’t married US law had to presume he wasn’t. So, the marriage was legal.
The big question would have been whether his marriage to Stanley Ann Dunham was bogus. IMHO it was. If the British had asked the INS for details and decided it was they’d have revoked his passport and he’d have been deported ASAP. The INS probably wanted to do just that.
Please read my answer to Menehune56.
All of that is in Obama, Sr’s, INS file, and various articles in the British papers, if you read between the lines.
Take a look at the Kenyan court records for the divorce papers. Or, take a look at the “Daily Mail” and “Daily Telegraph” archives.
He certainly didn’t get arrested for bigamy.
That isn’t nonsense.
As for when Ruth knew about Kezia, I couldn’t tell you, for sure, because she apparently won’t talk about him. Maybe her son, Mark’s, book will say something. She certainly knew about Stanley Ann and found out about Kezia. As to whether she saw Kezia as a wife, or a girlfriend/mistress, I don’t know. She knew about Jael too. The other women in the USA, who knows?
Since she remarried while he was alive and since bigamy is a crime in Kenya I’d say we can presume a divorce there.
You do know Ruth is Jewish, yeah?
Please prove I’m wrong. I could be about Ruth’s second marriage. Her marriage to Obama, Sr, was statutory though.
Having a child by someone doesn’t prove a marriage and neither does a continuing relationship with someone other than your spouse. If it did half the population of France would be polygamists, which is a crime.
Obama, Sr’s, family say that the other children aren’t his and they can’t legally prove they are.
Look, he was an immoral, rotten, mean, drunk. I wouldn’t wish him on anyone as a husband. Morally he was a bigamist but morals aren’t law.
Even if he had been a bigamist under US law the marriage to Stanley Ann Dunham would have held up for legitimacy purposes. As long as she didn’t know about Kezia and he claimed he really believed he was divorced when he married Stanley Ann. She claimed she didn’t know about Kezia for some years and she didn’t cite him for bigamy either.
I don’t like anything I’ve read about the man but you can’t legislate morals.
BTW, I was talking about Ruth’s second marriage, not any “marriages” of Barack Obama, Sr.
Let’s just agree to disagree, because so far as you are concerned I’m talking nonsense and as far as I’m concerned you are.
Neither of us is going to change the other’s opinion.
Therefore, even IF BHO Sr. and SAD contrived to get a marriage license from Maui County (for which there is no evidence), they were not able to contract a legal marriage under the laws of Hawaii or the United States.
There are many facts about this matter that will never be known, because all the persons who knew them are dead.
But it is beyond dispute that BHO Sr. and SAD were never married to each other.
I don’t really care what some newb’s asinine opinion is. I only care about the facts which have already been posted at FR and which you want to ignore.
Ok, there’s the problem, right there.
There is no direct proof British or Kenyan law recognized the marriage to Kezia. In fact, the INS file makes it pretty clear the British would not confirm any marriage existed.
What happened after BHO, Sr’s, death seems to show that too. Only Ruth’s children were recognized as heirs at law.
If the British woould not confirm to the US Embassy in London that he was married the USINS and the US courts could not act.
The man was a total moral vacuum and a pathological liar.
BTW, in 1961 both the INS and the British Foreign Office would have loved to prove his marriage to Stanley Ann Dunham was bogus because the USA could have deported him and the British could have put him in the same jail they shoved his father into in 1949.
But to do that they needed to prove beyond reasonable doubt in a Kenyan court that he was either a bigamist or trying to obtain US citizenship for himself or CUKC status for his “wife and child”.
Looks like they couldn’t.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.