Lt. Scott Easterling has entered a novel fight while serving in Iraq: he is suing President Barack Obama. Easterling is calling the President an “impostor” and challenging his right to issue commands while his birth status is in question. It is one of a series of lawsuit challenging the right of the President to serve on the basis of his birth status. It appears that he could be joined by Senator Richard Shelby in the litigation. Shelby has refused to accept Obama citizenship until he sees a birth certificate.
Easterling is supporting challenges filed by California attorney Orly Taitz and her Defend Our Freedom Foundation. He issued a statement: “As an active-duty officer in the United States Army, I have grave concerns about the constitutional eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama to hold the office of president of the United States,” wrote Scott Easterling in a “to-whom-it-may-concern” letter.
The statement will raise an interesting question for an active soldier. It appears that Lt. Easterling is still following orders and he does have a right to file a lawsuit. However, calling the Commander-in-Chief an “impostor” in an out-of-court statement could be the grounds for discipline under the military code. Here is the statement that he released to the public:
To Any and All Interested Parties,
As an active-duty Officer in the United States Army, I have grave concerns about the constitutional eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama to hold the Office of President of The United States. He has absolutely refused to provide to the American public his original birth certificate, as well as other documents which may prove or disprove his eligibility. In fact, he has fought every attempt made by concerned citizens in their effort to force him to do so.
Until Mr. Obama releases a “vault copy” of his original birth certificate for public review, I will consider him neither my Commander in Chief nor my President, but rather, a usurper to the Office – an impostor.
My conviction is such that I am compelled to join Dr. Orly Taitz’s lawsuit, as a plaintiff, against Mr. Obama. As a citizen, it pains me to do this, but as an Offficer, my sworn oath to support and defend our Constitution requires this action.
I joined the Army at age 40, after working in Iraq as a contractor with KBR in ‘05/’06. I chose to work with KBR to support my troops and then left that lucrative position when the Army raised it’s maximum enlistment age to 40. Upon completion of Basic Training, I entered Officer Candidate School and commissioned as a 2LT in August 2007. After completing the subsequent Basic Officer Leadership courses, I was assigned to Ft. Knox and shortly therafter deployed to Balad, Iraq. I was promoted to 1LT on Feb. 2, 2009 and I have approximately five months remaining of our fifteen month deployment.
I implore all Service-members and citizens to contact their Senators and Representatives and demand that they require Mr. Obama prove his eligibility. Our Constitution and our great nation must not be allowed to be disgraced.
Very Respectfull,
Scott R. Easterling
1LT OD/LG
United States Army
[Update: Now a second soldier has reportedly joined Easterling in his challenge to the President’s legitimacy.
The case may follow the same course as the court martial of Lt. Ehren Watada for his public comments against the Iraq war. His case led to some novel appeals and a mistrial. 
CCD,
I’m not sure if you know who Edmund Blackadder is, but since you do know Samuel Johnson, a present . . .
Ink & Incapability (in 3 parts)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UMhMCZ1AvXg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-24BC1BDyI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6st72zzJsO4
Enjoy!
“Michael,
I am not a former poster, this is the first time I’ve been to this site.I also have an open mind. I’m not a conspiracy theorist. I have followed the facts of the case. So for starters, Please state one good reason for Obama not to show his birth certificate. Obviously there is a little bit of doubt, at worst.”
Shady,
Vince Treacy has demolished every argument you’ve put forth and you’ve responded to him not with refutation/facts, but with further suppositions. Now you seem too intelligent not to know the difference between facts and supposition but you continue to blur the distinction, which is why most of us have you pegged as a partisan troll. In the interests of fairness though, I will try to answer your question above, even though Vince has already done it.
Obama has done more than enough to satisfy the legal requirements of the Constitution, as Vince and others have detailed. For him to further comply would only lend credence to the anti-Obama partisans position and not stifle debate because they would then parse the COLB. This is a technique that was successfully used against Bill Clinton, before Monica came on the scene. The process was to de-legitimize his Presidency from the beginning thus putting his administration on the defensive. Obama is aware of this and he won’t play in your guys playground. Incidentally, the technique being used was developed by a man named Goebbels in the 1920’s. He called it “The Big Lie” and it was his correct theory that if you repeat a lie often enough it gains credence.
“Furthermore, just understand where I am coming from. I am not your adversary. I want to find out the truth and I can’t find one good reason why he wouldn’t show the original, there is nothing to lose by doing it, unless you have something to lose. This is SUPER suspicious.”
It is not SUPER suspicious to me since I already pointed out to you in my prior post and above the very good reasons why Obama hasn’t done it. As for your searching for the truth your various comments belie it. I state that because you never refute the answers you were already given, but merely reiterate your suppositions without evidence to back those suppositions up. As I stated before and restated above there is every good reason for him not to respond to this disinformation/delegitimization campaign on the part of partisans who can’t accept they lost the election.
“It is incorrect that SCOTUS has said cases have no merit. They have said no one has “standing.”
As was shown by Vince or Buddha, the lower courts were the ones with the “no standing” rulings. SCOTUS refused to hear the case, which would mean it had no probative merit in their opinion.
“Did Fukino talk about the COLB? I don’t believe she did. There’s no good reason to believe that it is even real. No health official nor Fukino made any statement regarding that document. If they did, point me to it.”
Vince refuted this and you ignored his refutation.
“also, McCain released his birth certificate so EVERYONE could see it. Another place where Obama just either doesn’t do it the right way, or he’s hiding something — some website group sees the document, supposedly? He’s not even forthcoming about the NON-ORIGINAL!”
The McCain reference is a non-sequitur and actually the McCain campaign waffled quite a bit on the birth issue. Is Panama the continental US and if not does being born outside the continental US satisfy the Constitution? to someone like you that might be an interesting question if you didn’t like McCain. As for Obama doing it the right way, he can’t. Not because he hasn’t, which he has, but because partisans and perhaps dupes like you will never accept anything he does as the right way. The rest of your statement was refuted by other but you chose not to respond to that.
“He hasn’t spoken one word about this case. There are too many shady things not to be suspicious. And all he needs to do is show the original and I’ll shut up!”
The only shady thing about this is you and your confreres who cant’s get over losing. Don’t play innocent observer with me because I could go through every one of your comments and show you where your partisanship shines through, but frankly that is not worth my time. You are a dishonest debater and you ignore, rather than refute points made against your case.
That alone identifies you as the type of faux conservative, who spends time listening to Rush & Sean, who follows the Rovian/Norquist/Goebbels propaganda line.
“If I WERE partisan, why would I want Obama out? To get Biden or Pelosi? Ha! That’s insane. So that’s obviously not a good reason, even if we were to entertain it.”
Finally, you nail yourself on two points here, are you too dumb to realize it? You would want Obama out because you perceive him as a real threat to all you hold dear and because he is obviously effective in combating your agenda.
You are also obviously a partisan because thinking a Biden or Pelosi Presidency would be insane indicates your partisanship. One may disagree with their politics, but there is nothing in either history to suggest their unfitness for office, unless of course it was their politics.
I’m done with you after this though, because you’ve been thoroughly trounced and disposed of, more by others though you chose to confront me Jeffy. You’re just another troll with nothing interesting to say and a debate style taken out of the Rove/Norquist/Goebbels playbook and are either fully in their thrall, or too ignorant to know it. You are being roundly rejected here not for your political views, the spectrum of which I know Professor Turley and the rest of us welcome, but because you are fundamentally dishonest in discourse and are more interested in making vapid points than making sense.
Shadow, the official in Hawaii has said that he has “personally seen and verified that the Hawaii State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures.” Read these words. He has personally seen the original. He has issued a certificate based on it. The issued certificate says that the place of birth was Honolulu, Oahu, Hawaii. That is how an official says it and does it. That is how it is said legally. That is the evidence.
Now the alternative theory must be that he looked at the original, found that it said Obama was born in Kenya or somewhere else, and then issued a false certificate. Well, that is not impossible, since nearly nothing is impossible, but there is NO evidence to support that it did happen, and enormous evidence that it did not happen.
Please be aware of the vast number of bloggers who say that Obama is not natural born because he did not have two US citizen parents, and say he cannot be President even if he was born in Hawaii. Another bunch said originally that the certificate was a forgery. With no proof of that theory, they fell back on the official misconduct theory. That is why I suspected that they would charge that the “original” was also faked. Or they will argue that the official altered the original to match the certificate, and challenge that. And on and on.
There are no material differences between the posted certificates. The minor differences have been explained. One has a serial number blocked out, because they thought that was legally required, but that is not a material difference, and the serial number has been shown. The Certificate Number is 151-1961-010641. ALL copies show birth in Hawaii. http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html.
Everyone can see where this is going. No one can ever prove a negative. No one can ever prove that something was NOT faked.
You earlier said Hawaii could issue a certificate for a child born elsewhere. I do not see how the Obama Certificate could have been a birth certificate for a child born out of state under the law you linked to. I do not read the language of that law to authorize fictitious certificates. Here is the law for everyone to read:
[§338-17.8] Certificates for children born out of State. (a) Upon application of an adult or the legal parents of a minor child, the director of health shall issue a birth certificate for such adult or minor, provided that proof has been submitted to the director of health that the legal parents of such individual while living without the Territory or State of Hawaii had declared the Territory or State of Hawaii as their legal residence for at least one year immediately preceding the birth or adoption of such child.
Shadow:
“Once again, no one can give me one good reason for him not to show the original. Why?”
**************
I guess because he doesn’t have to answer to you or the flock of loons promulgating this ridiculous story. He answers to all of us every 4 years, and if you care to discuss it then, go right ahead. Until then, either stop the verbal madness, or file your frivolous lawsuit. Funny you were not so Constitutionally sensitive when Bush was trashing it for real, and in full view of us all.
“The Irish are a fair people- they never speak well of one another”
Samuel Johnson didn’t know what he was talking about.
FFLEO,
Clearly you see the implication that your statement had utility. 😀 But you are mixing classes of tools for certain. A torque wrench is a high utility tool as opposed to a propaganda wrench – a completely useless tool that combines a monkey wrench, a foam extruder and a sabat. And “why not” is indeed a valid question, however, to raise it beyond the academic exercise of asking it – especially going to great ends to do so in light of more than legally sufficient evidence – doesn’t pass the smell test. No slight to you was intended, my torque-ish friend.
Hey Buddha, thanks for calling me a tool! At least, I prefer the analogy of a torque wrench though.
Shadow, I think that you misread what Buddha said:
“As for the original, as FFLEO said, he should produce an original if available just to silence tools like yourself…”
Better acted and better written.
You were a lot better when Orson Welles was doing the part.
You can’t answer the simplest of questions, Buddha and until you answer, you look like the retard that you are in provoking people:
If he is born here, why not show?
You still can’t answer. NEXT
Good luck with telling me what to do, Propaganda Boy.
You cannot deny this all comes down to you wanting to decide the rules of evidence yourself. Pure and simple. The beauty of it is is that the harder you protest, the more you look like exactly I’m describing – a person who is intent on outcome, not evidence. In short, someone with an agenda – a propagandist.
You keep foaming. I’ll keep laughing. And that’d be at you in case you missed that part.
Mr. Treacy, thank you for answering me civilly.
Mr. Buddha is Laughing, please refrain from replying to me or answering at this point, because all you do is call people names. Not only me now but Leo, who you described as a “tool” in the previous post. So please stop. Thank you.
Mr. Treacy, allow me to address your points:
1)
You are reporting things that you aren’t verifying due to the fact that they can’t be verified. Officially, Fukino has only said this, and I quote:
“Therefore, I as Director of Health for the State of Hawai’i, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, have personally seen and verified that the Hawai’i State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures.”
AND
“There have been numerous requests for Sen. Barack Hussein Obama’s official birth certificate. State law (Hawai’i Revised Statutes §338-18) prohibits the release of a certified birth certificate to persons who do not have a tangible interest in the vital record.”
If you can find another official statement to substantiate your points, please post. But I’m quite sure you can’t, because I’ve searched everything they have gone on record as saying.
2)
One of the major reasons that skeptics have said that it was forged was because the first document released on Obama’s OWN WEBSITE DIFFERS FROM the image released by Factcheck.org later on.
I have seen both documents and they are in fact, different. Can you explain this?
You don’t seem to be able to explain or point me to any document that actually exists that says that someone is born out of country. The claim is that someone who was definitely born out of the country, Maya, his sister (in Indonesia) —and who has a COLB— is the background of the alleged forgery, testified to by several witnesses.
I personally am uncertain because I am not an expert. What I have seen is that the documents are different. Also, you state that Fukino and Anaka have said things officially that may implicate them. I’ve told you the ONLY things that they’ve said. If they’ve said other things, present them, let me know.
But with what they’ve said they are in no trouble, even if Obama’s real original BC says he was born in, let’s say, Kenya.
Finally, the only reason that it may be “developing a life of its own” is due to the fact that Barry Obama / Soetoro / etc. will not show his original birth certificate.
If he is legit, he has nothing to hide. However, he wouldn’t have dispatched lawyers at all corners — Occidental, Columbia, Harvard — if he had something to hide. Would he have?
Finally, and for the record:
If the original is released and it shows he is born in Hawaii, I will come back to this site [thread] and say I apologize for wasting people’s time.
I will not apologize for wanting someone who is supposedly “working for me” and my President enough to show me a reasonable Constitutional requirement. There are only 3 qualifications. And he is not honest enough to show what every other president in modern history has shown. I’m appalled at his shadiness when he alone can shut it down by offering the original. But then he would be shutting himself down, wouldn’t he? For any reasonable person, it’s the ONLY explanation.
I don’t have to speak to his motivation. It’s irrelevant. Personally if I’d met the standards sufficient to merit the Supremes not granting cert, I wouldn’t show the original just out of spite since you insist on acting like a child about it. As for the original, as FFLEO said, he should produce an original if available just to silence tools like yourself, but barring that all legal and evidentiary thresholds have been met according to the Supremes. None of this changes that your argument is based in a childish denial of the SCOTUS and their decision that the question you hinge your rants upon is insufficient to merit granting cert. But you go ahead and whine some more. You don’t like the Rules of Evidence, try to get them outlawed or amended so that YOU and ONLY YOU gets to decide what is valid evidence. That is the only thing that would salve your festering wound. Good luck with that, ego-boy. You’re only proving your partisanship and illustrating that you have no concern about evidence, only outcome. But please, keep foaming at the mouth. It’s funny and there’s nothing but crap on TV tonight, Tommy, er, Lamont.
Everyone,
During the campaign, Obama was asked for a birth certificate.
He asked Hawaii and they produced it in accordance with state law. It has been posted on the net ever since.
Dr. Fukino and Mr. Anaka have both stated they examined the original. The certificate is authentic.
This was not enough. The opponents then said it was forged. This has been refuted by independent examiners.
So the doubters ask us to assume the state officials risked their careers and criminal punishment by looking at documents showing Obama born in a foreign country, and then falsely issuing the certificate showing US birth, knowing that the original can be checked at any time. Not likely.
No matter what the Obama camp has done, the doubters will want more. Well, they have convinced me.
Shadow also asked:
“To prove to you that I have an open mind, Mr. Spindell or Mr. Treacy, please point me to a COLB or other such document similar that would be used for out of state people who get original birth certificates.”
Since you asked me by name, this question is unclear. I can’t tell what you want to know. The law I looked at says the state can issue a Hawaii birth certificate to children born out of state. That is all. It does not say they can issue a certificate saying that an out of state was born in Hawaii, does it? Are you saying the state can legally issue such a certificate to a child born overseas, but state falsely that the child was born in the US? I do not think they can do that.
Also, this is a legal site. We followed the Supreme Court decisions here. They were dismissed without comment. They said nothing about standing. Some of the lower courts discussed that issue. The Court looked at the cases in conference. I think they dismissed because there was no merit to the cases even if standing had been present.
Finally, this is developing a life of its own. It is at the point where no evidence will ever convince the faithful.
I firmly predict that even after the original or vault or whatever copy it is that they want is made public, the doubters will still raise new doubts, charge new forgeries, float more ill-founded legal theories, on to infinity. Since Mike and I post under our names, you can come back and look it up, Shadow.
Meanwhile, there is the global economy, the mideast peace process, the wars … .
“Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts…”
You can call me a troll or a partisan all you want, but that still won’t alter the questions I have or the answers you give, which may or may not be reasonable or sufficient.
If I WERE partisan, why would I want Obama out? To get Biden or Pelosi? Ha! That’s insane. So that’s obviously not a good reason, even if we were to entertain it.
You said, “2) ancillary non-governmental contemporaneous documentation in the form of the publicly published birth announcement. A contemporaneous notation that indeed confirms the OFFICIAL state documentation. But you INSIST on the ORIGINAL.”
First of all, if there is no doubt that the COLB is legit, then why has it been hidden from all people for the longest time, and only factcheck.org is allowed to see it? If they were worried about someone creating the idea that it was forged, they should have done it the right way, not withheld it for a long time, then ONLY show it to a WEBSITE that presumably stands for truth. That’s really good to quell any objections, good job, Obama group — they set themselves up by handling it poorly — or they don’t want people really to see it. Either way, they’ve chosen the shady route to go. Another time. How interesting.
As for the foolishness of your “ancillary documentation contemperanous documentation” quote — your eloquent words aren’t going to fool anyone.
Any straight thinker immediate realizes that, the birth announcement is insignificant. Why? It is done 9 days after the birth, first. Ok. Consider the only two options. A) Barack was born in the Hawaii. SA Dunham puts a notice in the paper. OR B) Barack is not born in Hawaii. Are you telling me one wouldn’t make an announcement, regardless? It’s not like it says what med center the boy was born at … I’ve seen the newspapers on microfiche. It says “Barack Sr. and SA Dunham had a boy”. If you just think about it, in EITHER situation the same thing would be done. In fact, it would be done more importantly in option B! precisely because a birth cert would have to be applied for and given under 338.17 and they knew it.
Done and done. If people think, then they don’t have to waste our time. Luckily, I do think.
Even if you don’t agree, you still wasted our time because you believed that this example meant something. Obviously, as I’ve just pointed out, it doesn’t.
Perhaps another non partisan thinker, someone other than Buddha, can chime in:
Let’s say I didn’t even have the evidence I do, which PROVES it is possible to get an original certificate of live birth from HI without being born there.
Even in that case, what’s so wrong with insisting that he show an original.
He’s PRESIDENT AND HE HAS ONE. But he won’t show. End of story.
Once again, no one can give me one good reason for him not to show the original. Why?
THERE ISN’T ONE.
Shadow,
If you read what I previously wrote above, you will see that I do not understand why Mr. Obama will not show his birth certificate. He micromanages, gives opinions on relatively minor issues, and speaks on every topic from Rush Limbaugh to many current events. That dichotomy alone raises some minor suspicions for me.
I voted from Mr. O. although the last item I was holding out for before my vote was the birth certificate issue. Mr. O pledged that he would be open and transparent and I think that he is somewhat hypocritical for not quashing this controversy.
If nothing else, I would prefer that Obama came completely clean if only to quieten people like you.
I have a COLB. It’s from the State of Louisiana. I have a copy of the original as filed and I have the a new one issued by the state only a few years ago. But I do not and cannot have the original as it was destroyed in a fire. However, these alternate papers provided by the state are adequate identification in a court of law. Even the rule of evidence accept substitute documents like my own in lieu of an unobtainable original. It’s called “best evidence” for a reason. That, however, is not the case for Obama. His documentation is of better quality than mine. His COLB, as Vince again pointed out, was documented in the legal manner required when he was born in Honolulu, Oahu, Hawaii. It is signed by a state official and all relevant parties. It has no formal deficiencies. There is no chain of custody issue caused by fire or other supervening factor. It has a raised seal. It is authentic, not a forgery.
So you have the best evidence provided to the SCOTUS in consideration of the application for a writ of certiorari. The evidence provided has 1) valid and seal certified state produced documents proving he was born in Hawaii compounded by 2) ancillary non-governmental contemporaneous documentation in the form of the publicly published birth announcement. A contemporaneous notation that indeed confirms the OFFICIAL state documentation. But you INSIST on the ORIGINAL. “I want my chocolate milk and I want it NOW, Mommy!”
Your insistence upon an original is childish and petty in addition to being evidentiary nonsense. What he has is accepted by law of being the equivalent of the original without question. If that’s a problem for you, again, take it up with the Supremes or build a time machine. They denied cert for a reason and that reason is this dog don’t hunt. It’s a total non-starter. You’re only proving the case that your agenda and the answer you desire is what you will work toward despite evidence of your stance’s futility.
But you keep on with that wishful thinking and attempts at revisionism. That’s why We the People HAVE Rules of Evidence – to limit abuses by those who would seek to reshape reality with distortion or lies by providing the best quality evidence to the court as possible. It’s what Neocon trolls do best – distortion and lies to further their fascist agenda. And don’t even try to deny your partisan status, Shady. You’re not that good a writer. Your mission stands out like a turd in a punch bowl just like your petulant and pedantic illogic.
Michael,
I am not a former poster, this is the first time I’ve been to this site.
I also have an open mind. I’m not a conspiracy theorist. I have followed the facts of the case. So for starters,
Please state one good reason for Obama not to show his birth certificate. Obviously there is a little bit of doubt, at worst. Why should he deal with this and not just show? In my view he has nothing to lose and everything to gain IF what he states is true. So please give me the one good reason.
To prove to you that I have an open mind, Mr. Spindell or Mr. Treacy, please point me to a COLB or other such document similar that would be used for out of state people who get original birth certificates.
Furthermore, just understand where I am coming from. I am not your adversary. I want to find out the truth and I can’t find one good reason why he wouldn’t show the original, there is nothing to lose by doing it, unless you have something to lose. This is SUPER suspicious.
It is incorrect that SCOTUS has said cases have no merit. They have said no one has “standing” — far different. If you are too lazy to look that up, I’ll tell you right now: it means they will only CHECK the MERITS if the person has standing first. So no, the merits of any case have not been determined.
Did Fukino talk about the COLB? I don’t believe she did. There’s no good reason to believe that it is even real. No health official nor Fukino made any statement regarding that document. If they did, point me to it.
Also, McCain released his birth certificate so EVERYONE could see it. Another place where Obama just either doesn’t do it the right way, or he’s hiding something — some website group sees the document, supposedly? He’s not even forthcoming about the NON-ORIGINAL!
He hasn’t spoken one word about this case. There are too many shady things not to be suspicious. And all he needs to do is show the original and I’ll shut up!
But he won’t and you are making excuses for him, none of which are good. I think it’s highly likely he won’t show because … haha we both know.
Anyone looking for “facts” can link to these sites, all independent of the Obama campaign:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2008/jun/27/obamas-birth-certificate-part-ii/
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthcertificate.asp and
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/citizen.asp
http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/has_obamas_birth_certificate_been_disclosed.html
A writer at Salon.com said the conspiracy would never die:
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/12/05/birth_certificate/
And it won’t. Even if they finally accept that he was born in Hawaii, they will fall back to Donofrio’s argument that he is not natural born because his father was Kenyan. This is also false, and has been dismissed by the Supreme Court, but it is still out there.
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html
Shadow,
since peculiarly you seem to have drawn my name out of the hat I feel I must respond.
First, my guess is that the reason you picked me out to respond to is because you’re probably T.Jefferson under another, and as Buddha pointed out more apt pseudonym. I was deservedly harsh with the Jeffyboy persona and your tiny ego, damaged as it is, picked me out to vent on.
Second, It would have been helpful coming so late to this thread if you had actually read the totality of the arguments and the link above provided by Vince. Then perhaps you might have actually responded to the points made by many.
“I am just here to present the facts of the case to you.
First off, if a birth certificate were to surface from Kenya, where [what you would call] the “kooky” plaintiffs allege, would you believe it?”
Third, while you present yourself as presenting facts your first point is a supposition and not a fact. Have YOU seen a Kenyan Birth Certificate? If this is your facts, then you are involved in something less than logical argument.
“What do we KNOW? Obama has an original birth certificate from the state of Hawaii. Dr. Fukino said this AND “it is in accordance with state policies and procedures” on Oct. 31 2008. That’s it.What is one of Hawaii’s state policies and procedures? None other than statute 338.17, which you can view right here:”
This is also not a fact. Yes I’ve read the statute you present as a smoking gun, but so what? What evidence do you have to show that his birth was out of State?
“Since he won’t offer up his original, which Fukino says exists, it seems to me it is unreasonable to think he is acting in any way reasonable to trust, hope, change, etc. what he has paraded as his true priorities.”
If you follow the link you set and hit the arrow for the next statute which is one on confidentiality it explains Hawaiian law on keeping these records confidential and defines who the part of interest might be that has the right to see them. You and Jeffy don’t qualify and since the SCOTUS has already seen no merit to the claim there is no reason for Obama to try to give you all more. There is actually plenty of reason for him not to. This whole charade is typical of the crap they put Bill Clinton through from his first day in office and every time he complied, people like you only kept on going anyway. These charges should not be dignified because although you stat otherwis you have no facts and from the evidence little ability to reason.
You and Jeffy