Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Well your first problem is that what they received were not certifications. They were verifications. The original birth certificate is the certification. And Onaka's signature stamp is on the original.
Second, no, it is not Onaka's task. Legal authority attaches to the office, not the individual. It is the Office of the Registrar's task. It does not matter if they were hand signed by Onaka or stamped by his office with the initials of a subordinate. If they came from his office they are of identical legal weight... i.e. they are still absolute legal verification by the State of Hawaii.
Gong! There is no "misspelled" Registrar Stamp. This is proved by the higher resolution image released by the AP. And an employee's initials are just as legally binding as Onaka's personal signature. Your personal ignorance regarding the legal weight of signatures, initials, stamps, imprints or the authority of the Registrar's Office do not constitute a challenge deserving of serious attention.
It merely shows that you don't know much.
No lawyer, no judge, no court on the planet would agree with you. What the State of Hawaii commits to their web page is official government communication for which they are legally accountable and liable. Under the Federal Rules of Evidence it would also be considered expert testimony.
No "investigators" have asked. If you are referring to Mike Zullo and the Cold Case Posse, they are private citizens with no legal authority to conduct an investigation in the first place. As such, under Hawaiian law it would have been illegal for any Hawaiian authority to confirm anything whatsoever to them. They do not have "direct and tangible interest in the record."
In contrast, the two State Secretaries of State who asked for verifications do have a "direct and tangible interest in the record." And they got their official verifications.
Google "The Annotated Zullo" and discover what a pathetic fraud the entire Zullo investigation really is. Better yet, I'll just give you the link:
[scribd]116752480[/scribd]
The above quotes are HostoryDude rebuttals to my claim Onaka's verification of Obama COLB is invalid. I stick by that claim.
Onaka would not state the White House BC is a "true and accurate representation" only that is it "matched". He chose these words very carefully and used them in more than three verifications thus far. Just because it matches doesn't mean its a "true and accurate representation" which what Onaka was specifically asked. There's nothing under the statute to prevent him from doing this and yet Onaka refused to do this.[SIZE=3][/SIZE]
Why wouldn't Onaka or Hawaii AG Jill Nagamine refuse to confirm the published PDF handed Obama attorney Judith Corley of Perkins, Coie? Corley flew half way around the world to pick up a document that could have been sent registered mail? Could it be to avoid possible mail fraud charges, using telephone lines to transmit forged documents interstate? The OBOTS claim this was done to prohibit birther claims of the document being "intercecpted" and changed? Ha-ha. This statement is just laughable. Lets say a registered letter which incidentally carries cash and diamonds always under guard was, as these pillars of honesty state was "intercepted". It would be very easy to have a correct version resent by Hawaii. So that doesn't explain it. It just doesn't make sense that Onaka would state the certificate that is published on the White House server is a true and accurate representation of what I handed Judith Corley. But he won't do that! You figure out why.
Last edited by Nychuck; 08-10-2013 at 09:08 AM..
Reason: Incorrect size fonts
It is not important where Bam Bam was born. His father was a British subject. He is not a natural citizen and therefore is not eligible to be President.
It is not important where Bam Bam was born. His father was a British subject. He is not a natural citizen and therefore is not eligible to be President.
wrong.
this theory has been shot down in court multiple times. from ankeny v daniels:
"Based upon the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are "natural born Citizens" for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents."
If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen.
HD is the one having a hard time taking heat. He STILL cannot rebut the FACT thatU.S. Secretaries of State have determined that those born in the U.S. to non-permanently domiciled alien fathers are NOT U.S. citizens from birth.
you're still avoiding answering about the post in question.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Does not matter where he was born
