Skip to comments.Hawaii law bars release of Obama birth info
Posted on 01/22/2011 4:35:26 AM PST by markomalley
A privacy law that shields birth certificates has prompted Democratic Gov. Neil Abercrombie to abandon efforts to dispel claims that President Barack Obama was born outside Hawaii, his office says.
State Attorney General David Louie told the governor that privacy laws bar him from disclosing an individual's birth documentation without the person's consent, Abercrombie spokeswoman Donalyn Dela Cruz said Friday.
"There is nothing more that Gov. Abercrombie can do within the law to produce a document," said Dela Cruz. "Unfortunately, there are conspirators who will continue to question the citizenship of our president."
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
1. AT THIS JUNCTURE, I don't think it really matters. I CANNOT IMAGINE SCOTUS invalidating the 2008 election results in 2011. Even if prima facie evidence was produced proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that Barry was born in Kenya, Indonesia, or the planet Zorgon. Regardless of the merits, SCOTUS would not even issue a writ of certiorari on such a case. It would be too hot for them to handle.
2. WHAT WOULD BE FAR MORE PRACTICAL AT THIS JUNCTURE would be to lobby the 25 Republican-controlled legislatures to enact a reform in the election law that mandated that candidates for President and Vice President be forced to produce their "long form" birth certificate prior to being allowed to be placed on a ballot for that state. That is something that is perfectly constitutional and is perfectly doable. If even one state, like Texas or Arizona, was to actually get such a law passed, it would force the bastard to release it himself. And his refusal to do so or attempts to take it to court to have it ruled unconstitutional would generate a firestorm that even the MSM would not be able to cover up.
THEREFORE, my suggestion is, if you live in a state with a Republican controlled legislature and a Republican governor and Secretary of State, work on lobbying your legislators to enact that type of legislation. Spending your energies on that would be a whole lot more productive than anything else you could do.
So change the law.
Congress, if it had one testicle among them,
would issues a subpoena with duces tecum for the BC.
If he fails to deliver, or it is not valid,
impeachment of him, and arrest of the accomplices
would be appropriate.
This issue is not going to be ignored or buried, until barry anti’s up, which may be never, but it will be to his and the lefts disadvantage, because state governments are concerned, and the move is on to protect themselves from even the appearance of skulduggery.
What individual running for the highest office in the land would even consider not vetting him or herself? Hmmmmm? Only Barry Obama, god’s gift to mankind. There are blacks, and whites, and...
remaining comments self censored.
Remember that during his campaign for U.S. Senate that he claimed Kenyan birth, remember that news article that used to be posted frequently in the BC-threads?
I also wonder if Neil is close BFFs with either Bill or Hillary or both, and this incident is evidence of some collusion with them?
“impeachment of him, and arrest of the accomplices
would be appropriate.”
He can’t be impeached because he isn’t really President.
Maybe we should ask Frank Abagnale Jr for advice on what to do.
Come 2012, once we have secured the Senate and consolidated our midterm victories, I have a feeling this birth certificate issue is going to gain traction and it’s gonna be time to “go hunting” again.
“A privacy law that shields birth certificates has prompted Democratic Gov. Neil Abercrombie to abandon efforts to dispel claims that President Barack Obama was born outside Hawaii, his office says.”
So the Gov should call his good friend Obama and say, “Please authorize...”
Isn’t that easy?
Would this effect the 2012 election for Barry to run?
I think it is now almost irrelevant as to “removing” from office this President. But...what is key is the relentless drip, drip, drip of doubt about Obozo. For that alone the birther movement was effective.
He probably was born in the US, but what is there on that birth certificate that he doesn’t want us to see?
Boycott Hawaii 2011 should begin.
I saw some talk about this a while back and thought it would be a perfect way to stop this foolishness, and unload hillary at the same time.
It’s hard to imagine Abercrombie didn’t know this law existed.
If Øbama wanted the BC released, he would have done that back in 2008 or 2009. He is using it for political hay right now. I agree with Rush on this issue.
That is exactly why I am suggesting that somebody who lives in a "RED" state lobby the legislature to amend the election law...and to try to get it done this year. It would force the issue.
This is not a matter for Congress. It is a matter for each state, as the Presidential election is not a national election, but an election for each state's "electors."
The problem is that just because there is a plausible scenario by which Obama could have been recorded in Hawaii as being born there when he in fact was not born there, does not mean that that happened. Indeed, there is absolutely no extrinsic evidence (I am discarding the radio interview the grandmother as being recanted) that he was born anywhere other than in Hawaii. The fact that Obama has taken such pains to avoid producing an original longform birth certificate is not necessarily evidence that he was born outside of America. It alone is insufficient proof.
Any officer of the state of Hawaii examining the file would conclude that the longform birth certificate says he was born in Hawaii and there is no evidence to the contrary. Hence the two public announcements of the Hawaiian officials are plausibly consistent with a fraud which might have been committed by the mother or the grandparents but which is not the product of a conspiracy. Either the mother or one of the grandparents could have made a simple application to Hawaii registrar and secured a birth certificate with no documentary evidence other than an affidavit of birth at home and some sort of evidence, such as a drivers license which was held by Ann Dunham Obama, of residence in the state.
Here is a reply along those lines from some time ago:
I have seen the article posted some time ago here on Free Republic: Clearing the Smoke on Obamas Eligibility: An Intelligence Investigators June 10 Report ( http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2303258/posts) which makes it clear that his mother, or even his grandparents, could have secured a birth certificate merely on the filing of an affidavit or perhaps even only an application. Evidently, his mother could have presented a drivers license which she evidently had or even as little as a telephone bill to show proof of residency, simply averring that her son was born there in Hawaii, and she would have received a Hawaiian birth certificate. The article cited goes on to describe three other methods by which a fraudulent certificate for Barack Obama could have been obtained in 1961 in Hawaii.
More, the author continues to the effect that Stanley Ann Obama would have been motivated to do so because her son was not entitled to citizenship under the existing statute if he were born abroad with only one parent a citizen who had not lived five years after the age of 14 in America.
Therefore, it is possible that when Doctor Fukino examined the "vital records" she saw an application or affidavit that said that the baby was born in Hawaii and she saw the Birth Certificate that was issued as a result which would also show birth in Hawaii. She saw nothing indicating a foreign birth in the file and therefore she could quite properly say that the vital records show birth in Hawaii. Indeed, to say anything else would be to venture a fact which appeared nowhere in the record.
While I take issue with your well reasoned and articulate perspective on the motivations of Doctor Fukino-I come to exactly the opposite conclusions-I am compelled to agree that there is still plenty of room to maintain that, in the absence of the original birth certificate and supporting documents, if any, the matter remains open. That is not to say that the probabilities are for a foreign birth, merely that it is not illogical to maintain that a foreign birth is quite consistent with the facts as we know them, the Certification of Live Birth, the procedures and regulations in place in Hawaii in 1961, and two statements of Doctor Fukino.
I think we probably both can agree that we will find nothing in the file which shows foreign birth. We might also find nothing in the file apart from the Obama family's self serving declarations which show a domestic birth-and perhaps not even such declarations. That would leave the ball where it is but that is a defeat for us. We have the burden to move it across the goal line. Even if the original birth certificate were released and it was revealed that it was based on family affidavits, we lose. We need extrinsic evidence of foreign birth.
Once we see the discrepancies on the jug eared Kenyan's birth certificate there will be demands to see his college transcripts and other records he is not transparent about. Then that's the end of Obunghole
While a great many folks would tend to agree with you, markomalley, that is still NOT an acceptable reason to abandon the continued inquiry. To simply accept this travesty is an acceptance of the libtard tactic of selectively applying the Constitution.
The Constitution is very specific. Prior acts of omission in this regard do nothing to condone continuation of same.
I agree that some State election official, somewhere, should be able to demand the documentary evidence necessary to establish the eligibility of ANY person seeking to be placed on a ballot. Having run for elected office, myself, I recall having to present two forms of evidence of residency and one of citizenship in order to submit my nominating petitions.
Some of the strange details regarding this whole 0bama eligibility fiasco are quite puzzling... For instance, the difference between the eligibility confirmation sent to HI versus the other 49 (56?) states? Or, the notable lack of furor over 0bama’s eligibility after that raised over John McCain’s? Or, how about the mysterious lack of details regarding 0bama’s educational background?
There are far too many questions to simply let this drop. But, most importantly, we cannot abrogate our responsibility to support, protect, and defend the Constitution.
Another exercise in sophistry and evasion by leftist political hacks desperately trying to cover their tracks.
Mr 0bama surrendered any right to privacy, at least within the scope of the circumstances of his birth, when he chose to run for a political office which requires candidates to meet specific birth status conditions and restrictions. Clearly evident irregularities discovered in the both the vetting process and the supporting documents submitted on behalf of the 0bama candidacy completely justify further pursuit of this matter.
My recommendation - continue the barrage of lawsuits, press releases, etc. Even if the matter if stymied in the courts, you will win in the more important court of public opinion. It will destroy the left’s credibility, demoralize their cooperating hacks, and empty their party coffers.