Congress, Constitutional Law, Media, Politics, Society

Obama Adopts Cheney Policy and Opposes Release of White House Logs

225px-official_portrait_of_barack_obama225px-richard_cheney_2005_official_portraitPresident Obama has already adopted or expanded many of the most controversial Bush policies on executive privilege, detainee treatment, termination of privacy lawsuit, and other matters. Now, he has adopted the identical position of Vice President Dick Cheney in seeking to withhold visitor logs to the White House.

While the Bush/Cheney fight to withhold the logs was denounced by liberals, there is relative quiet again over Obama’s position on the very same issue.

The Secret Service has denied msnbc.com’s request for the names of all White House visitors from Jan. 20 to the present as well as a request by the nonpartisan watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington.

There is again a sharp difference between President Obama’s rhetoric of transparency and civil liberties in government and his actual policies, here and here and here and here and here .

For the full story, click here.

179 thoughts on “Obama Adopts Cheney Policy and Opposes Release of White House Logs”

  1. Anyone happen to recall that the NSA is still permitted to ignore the 4th Amendment by order of the Executive?

  2. Byrne and AY. I have discussed the McCain issue before and posted the research by Larry Tribe and Ted Olson. In my opinion, McCain is a natural born citizen by virtue of his birth to American parents, not by naturalization.

    Obama is a natural born citizen by virtue of his birth in Hawaii, one of the United States. The Certification of Live Birth is valid and by law “shall be considered for all purposes the same as the original.” The officials in Hawaii have validated the Certification and the original records. It is the document that proves birth in Hawaii. It is the document that satisfies the proposed bill introduced by Posey. It is valid in all court proceedings.

    Nothing at this site is ever going to convince Byrne since he seems determined to be a doubter. So be it. These posting were written for all those who access the Turley site. Byrne can send his letters to his Representative in Congress recommending impeachment if he wishes. He may find they brush him off just as the McCain lawyers did. Most Members of Congress have taken steps to verify that Obama was a natural born citizen,

    The birthers come in many different flavors. Some claim the COLB was a forgery, by parties unknown. Others say it was in fact issued by the State of Hawaii, but that it falsely represents the original records. Still others concede that the records show truthfully that Obama was born in the United States, but that he is disqualified because his father was not a citizens. Yet another bunch claim he was born in Kenya, or Canada, or somewhere else and spirited to the United States, where newspaper announcements were caused to be printed and state birth records were created that showed he was born in Hawaii or Kenya or somewhere else. So they are at odds with each other, all over the lot. They do not command a lot of respect.

  3. Jim Byrne,

    I guess I missed the issue. If based upon your supposition, they they are both eligible to be president. Both had parents that were American and had not renounced their citizenship. A child’s residence and birth of origins is where the mother declares. So in McCain’s, it was in the Panama Zone at a place called the America Zone. It was not until years later it was finally given back to Noriega. Oh and how we repaid Noriega. He still sits rotting in an American Prison in Florida. Obama, on the other hand, so what if he was born in Uganda, Switzerland, Nova Scotia, Mongolia or where ever. The point is his Mother was American and he is by birth.

    If this is your point, I suggest you recheck where some ships were coming from and to check the registry of live births of some of our more affluent American presidents of the past. With your argument in place, no one other than than people from the original colony’s can be president. Why, because they were not in existence at the time?

    Now with that above. If we extend all the same Privileges to citizens of Puerto Rico, do you suppose we could ever have a president from PR?

  4. AY,

    “Does it really matter now if Obama was born not in the US?” –It does if you intend to follow a written constitution.

    I agree. McCain was not a natural-born citizen. While Congress has the power “to establish a uniform rule of naturalization” (Article I, Section 8), they were never granted the power to define natural-born. I don’t believe Congress has the power to declare John McCain to be a natural-born citizen. Naturalization is the process by which an alien may establish citizenship.

    I had dinner with one of McCain’s lawyers. He wanted to brush off the idea as bad as the other side wants people to stop asking questions about Obama’s birth certificate. :>)

  5. Vince,

    I didn’t post Okubo’s statement; you did. Is it not the burden of the claimant to provide their own support?

    You couldn’t provide citation of a Supreme Court case that would support the statement. -I searched “Certification of Live Birth” at http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/search/ with no results.

    You didn’t/wouldn’t admit that the document from Fukino validates nothing except that Hawaii does have the original available, and that she has seen it. She did not authenticate the FactCheck document nor the validate the information that it presents.

    And now you want to tell everyone to keep on walking; there’s nothing to see here.

    Just for giggles: From FactCheck:
    ” When we asked about the security borders, which look different from some other examples of Hawaii certifications of live birth, Kurt said “The borders are generated each time a certified copy is printed.”

    Oh really!! The printer prints the borders -each time a certified copy is printed? –I sincerely doubt it. It would take too long on a dot matrix printer, and it wouldn’t be cost effective.

  6. Does it really matter now if Obama was born not in the US. The fact is we are stuck with him for a minimum of 4 years, period. End of Story. We were stuck with Bush for 2, 4 year terms which were stolen both times. The first in Florida which cost Dan Rather his job and the second in Ohio. I could never have seen Ohio voting Republican as hard up economically after the first 4 years. Yet, they were able to steal the election again. No one suspected that this would happen. Uncounted ballot boxes were found after the election had been certified.

    The point is, you, I and we are stuck with Obama for the time being. Leave it alone and get a life. Move on, this is a non issue at this time. I may not like him and I did not vote for him. McCain was not American born either. So we would have either one, by all accounts not an American Citizen.

  7. The Certification of Live Birth is valid and by law “shall be considered for all purposes the same as the original” Obama was born in Hawaii in 1961, and is a natural born United States citizen. HE is the President of the United States of America.

    I can’t help Byrne with the Supreme Court case or speak for Janice Okubo. Her phone number is on the release. He will have to call her himself.

    He can ask Obama himself.

    Everyone, please reread my posts. It cannot be settled very easily, as Byrne laughingly claims. Many of the birthers already accept the Certification and the fact of Obama’s birth in the United States. They still dispute his eligibility. See Donofrio. Others will claim that any records in Hawaii that show his birth in the United States are also forgeries. The birthers have a very clear agenda, and they will not abandon their folly so easily.

    Please prove that Neil Armstrong walked on the Moon and that the Earth is not the center of the universe, and refute all the websites that argue to the contrary.

  8. Ooops!!

    Did I forget to say This could all be settled very easily?
    LOL

  9. Vince,

    You keep going back to a document, whose authenticity has been questioned, as your proof.

    1. The Certification of Live Birth is a pre-printed form, and a printer (likely dot matrix) puts the information on the form. -So; we know blank forms exist. (Even if it didn’t, we live in a digital age; creating a blank wouldn’t be too tough to do).

    2. I don’t see any embossed area on the Certification that is claimed to be held by Joe Miller. Do you?

    3. The close-up embossed seal and signature could have come from anywhere. Nothing would demonstrate that they are from the same certification.

    This could all be settled very easily.

    Have Barack Obama ask the Governor of Hawaii (or Hawai’i) to produce the original. I’m sure she would comply.

    What information contained in the original is worth $1 million dollars to keep out of the public’s view?

    And since I’m trying to impeach your witness (Okubo); where is the Supreme Court case that would accompany this statement?

    She added that the U.S. Supreme Court has recognized the state’s current certification of live birth “as an official birth certificate meeting all federal and other requirements.”

    This statement is either true or false. (Third time I have asked for it)

    This could all be settled very easily.

    Have Barack Obama send a letter to the Governor of Hawaii (or Hawai’i) asking her to produce the original. I’m sure she would comply.

    What information contained in the original is worth $1 million dollars to keep out of the public’s view?

  11. I just found that a poster named “se” said the same thing last November at a right wing site named Atlas Shrugged:

    The question was: “Therefore, the only way to verify the exact location of birth is to review a certified copy or the original vault Certificate of Live Birth…”

    His answer:

    A Certification of Live Birth is a certified copy of the original Certificate of Live Birth. And by Hawaiian law, is to be considered the same as the original.

    If you look at the bottom of any Hawaiian Certification of Live Birth, you’ll find the following:
    This copy is prima facie evidence of the fact of birth in any court proceeding. [HRS 338-13(b), 338-19]

    Here is section 338-13 in its entirety:

    §338-13 Certified copies. (a) Subject to the requirements of sections 338-16, 338-17, and 338-18, the department of health shall, upon request, furnish to any applicant a certified copy of any certificate, or the contents of any certificate, or any part thereof.

    (b) Copies of the contents of any certificate on file in the department, certified by the department shall be considered for all purposes the same as the original, subject to the requirements of sections 338-16, 338-17, and 338-18.

    (c) Copies may be made by photography, dry copy reproduction, typing, computer printout or other process approved by the director of health. [L 1949, c 327, §17; RL 1955, §57-16; am L Sp 1959 2d, c 1, §19; HRS §338-13; am L 1978, c 49, §1]

    Again, as I said, Keyes needs to get himself some REAL lawyers, and not the pretend lawyers who drafted this amateurish piece of garbage.
    se

    Posted by: se | Saturday, November 22, 2008 at 07:25 PM

    http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2008/11/a-not-so-minor.html

  15. Nitpicker. It was (sic) or so in the original, as anyone can see in the official statement.http://hawaii.gov/health/about/pr/2008/08-93.pdf QUOTE
    Etymology
    The Hawaiian language word Hawaiʻi derives from Proto-Polynesian *Sawaiki, with the reconstructed meaning “homeland”;[4] cognate words are found in other Polynesian languages, including Māori (Hawaiki), Rarotongan (ʻAvaiki), and Samoan (Savaiʻi). (See also Hawaiki).
    According to Pukui and Elbert,[5] “Elsewhere in Polynesia, Hawaiʻi or a cognate is the name of the underworld or of the ancestral home, but in Hawaiʻi the name has no meaning.”[6]

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawaii

  16. Vince,

    The statement by Fukino (see http://hawaii.gov/health/about/pr/2008/08-93.pdf)
    is not a declaration that the “Certification of Live Birth” as presented on a number of websites, is a representation of valid information. All Fukino has stated is that she has “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 they have have the original on file.

    Is Hawai’i even a state? Perhaps the 58th? [chuckle] I know we have one named Hawaii, but I am not aware of any named Hawai’i. idem sonans??

    Per §338-13 (b)Copies of the contents of any certificate on file in the department, certified by the department shall be considered for all purposes the same as the original, subject to the requirements of sections 338-16, 338-17, and 338-18.

    1. There are exceptions to the legal use of a Certification of Live Birth.
    2. Where is the certification? The stamp and signature certifying such.

    “It is not a forgery, because the state officials have vouched for it.” Please provide a link demonstrating that they have verified the information.

    “Both of the Department officials signed and certified the COLB.” Where does the Obama COLB show their signatures? Here’s what I have available to review. Are you looking at something different? Can you please provide a link to the one you’re viewing? -The one that has been “signed and certified”.

    Kepp walking…nothing to see here.

    What about the mysterious Supreme Court decision supporting the validity of Certifications of Live Birth? Does such a case exist?

  17. VT has a good, wry sense of humor, esp. with the “mall” descriptions.
    _________________________________

    “I did not personally see the defendant bite off the plaintiff’s ear. But I saw him spit it out.”
    ________________________________

    Well then, my client simply found the ear on the ground still a’wigglin’ and then decided to ‘secondarily masticate’ the ear, your honor, until the gristle became too tough and thereupon he expectorated said ear in the plaintiff’s witness’ presence.

  18. The Department of Health director Fukino said that she and the registrar of vital statistics, Alvin Onaka, have personally verified that the health department holds Obama’s original birth certificate. “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,” Fukino said. The full statement on Department letterhead is at:
    http://hawaii.gov/health/about/pr/2008/08-93.pdf

    The Certification itself says it serves as prima facie evidence of the fact of birth in any court proceeding, and cites Hawaii Revised Statutes section 338-13(b). Here is that law:
    QUOTE
    §338-13 Certified copies. (a) Subject to the requirements of sections 338-16, 338-17, and 338-18, the department of health shall, upon request, furnish to any applicant a certified copy of any certificate, or the contents of any certificate, or any part thereof.

    (b) Copies of the contents of any certificate on file in the department, certified by the department shall be considered for all purposes the same as the original, subject to the requirements of sections 338-16, 338-17, and 338-18.

    (c) Copies may be made by photography, dry copy reproduction, typing, computer printout or other process approved by the director of health. [L 1949, c 327, §17; RL 1955, §57-16; am L Sp 1959 2d, c 1, §19; HRS §338-13; am L 1978, c 49, §1]. UNQUOTE Source:
    http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol06_Ch0321-0344/HRS0338/HRS_0338-0013.htm

    So, persons who have asked for copies of their birth certificates since 2001 get COLBs. The responsible officials have seen and examined the original records in the files. Both of the Department officials signed and certified the COLB. The law says it must be “considered for all purposes the same as the original.”

    I have not taken anything out of context. I have reprinted or linked to the full text. The COLB is all over the web. It is not a forgery, because the state officials have vouched for it. They said they had seen and verified that the Department had the originals, and then issued a certificate that had to be the same as the original for all purposes under state law. They could not legally sign and issue a COLB if it did not agree with the underlying records. State law requires that official certifications agree with their records. The official would risk severe legal penalties for violating their duties. Remember, also, that two Hawaiian newspapers printed notices of his birth back in 1961, and the papers in those days took their information from the hospitals. I conclude that the original records show that Obama was born in Hawaii in 1961.

    As I have posted elsewhere, many birthers concede that the original records will show that Obama was in fact born in Hawaii, but will still contest him, either because they think the originals were faked back in 1961, or because his father was Kenyan. I have also discussed the Kenyan father issue on this site.

    “I did not personally see the defendant bite off the plaintiff’s ear. But I saw him spit it out.”

  19. “What does the State of Hawaii do if someone challenges the information contained on their own “Certification of Live Birth”? The original was not created electronically. Therefore, someone had to type in the data from the original. What if they made a mistake? Is there a verification process? “

    Persons can examine their own records: “The department shall not permit inspection of public health statistics records, or issue a certified copy of any such record or part thereof, unless it is satisfied that the applicant has a direct and tangible interest in the record,” including among others (1) The registrant, (2) The spouse of the registrant, (3) A parent of the registrant; 4) A descendant of the registrant

    http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol06_Ch0321-0344/HRS0338/HRS_0338-0018.htm

  20. She added that the U.S. Supreme Court has recognized the state’s current certification of live birth “as an official birth certificate meeting all federal and other requirements.”

    What Supreme Court decision was that?

    What does the State of Hawaii do if someone challenges the information contained on their own “Certification of Live Birth”?
    –The original was not created electronically. Therefore, someone had to type in the data from the original. What if they made a mistake? Is there a verification process?

    Is the original Certificate of Live Birth (you know; the one filled out by the hospital) available on Microfiche?

Comments are closed.