Yesterday, WorldNetDaily reported that Maricopa County, Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio “promised” to investigate Mr. Obama’s long-form birth certificate after it had been allegedly released by the White House on April 27 of this year:
Tea party leaders in Surprise, Ariz., met with Arpaio and WND senior reporter Jerome Corsi Thursday morning to express concern that a fake birth certificate would be used to document the president’s eligibility to run in Maricopa County, where Arpaio is the chief law enforcement officer.
Arpaio’s tough crackdown on illegal immigration has made him a national figure.
At a one-hour meeting in Arpaio’s office, the tea party leaders presented the sheriff with a petition that was drafted after a speech by Corsi the previous night. Corsi, author of a best-selling book challenging Obama’s eligibility, “Where’s the Birth Certificate?”, presented evidence from numerous computer-imaging specialists who believe the document presented by the White House April 27 is not authentic.
242 signatures were gathered on the petition — a call for the sheriff to investigate any improprieties regarding data submitted to the Secretary of State, the official responsible for placing qualified candidates on a ballot — during a Tea Party gathering on August 17, sponsored by the Surprise, AZ Tea Party and the Liberty Through Action organization.
Per WND, the petition states the following:
We the undersigned citizens are respectfully requesting that you initiate a criminal investigation under the authority of A.R.S. 13-2407 A-C, Into the alleged Certificate of Live Birth, File Number 151 61 10641, State of Hawaii, for Barack H. Obama II. The document was released on April 27, 2011, by the White House to the press and posted on the White House website and distributed and downloaded by computer throughout the nation, including within Maricopa County. Reportedly, several experts have declared the document to be a forgery. Reportedly, the file number may be out of sequence; “THE” appears to be misspelled as “TXE” in the State Registrar’s stamp; there appears to be a “smiley face” in the “A” in the Alvin T. Onaka, State Registrar stamp; reportedly the document has computer generated, multiple layers and is not a copy of a single layered document; font types appear to vary throughout the document, reportedly, not possible with a vintage 1961 mechanical typewriter. We urge you to continue to support the Rule of Law and to investigate and determine whether the alleged Certificate of Live Birth, for Barack H. Obama II, File Number 151 61 10641, is a forgery or an authentic document. A.R.S. 13-2407 A-C, declares that tampering with a public record is a class 6 felony.
13-2407. Tampering with a public record; classification
A. A person commits tampering with a public record if, with the intent to defraud or deceive, such person knowingly:
1. Makes or completes a written instrument, knowing that it has been falsely made, which purports to be a public record or true copy thereof or alters or makes a false entry in a written instrument which is a public record or a true copy of a public record; or
2. Presents or uses a written instrument which is or purports to be a public record or a copy of such public record, knowing that it has been falsely made, completed or altered or that a false entry has been made, with intent that it be taken as genuine; or
3. Records, registers or files or offers for recordation, registration or filing in a governmental office or agency a written statement which has been falsely made, completed or altered or in which a false entry has been made or which contains a false statement or false information; or
4. Destroys, mutilates, conceals, removes or otherwise impairs the availability of any public record; or
5. Refuses to deliver a public record in such person’s possession upon proper request of a public servant entitled to receive such record for examination or other purposes.
B. In this section “public record” means all official books, papers, written instruments or records created, issued, received or kept by any governmental office or agency or required by law to be kept by others for the information of the government.
C. Tampering with a public record is a class 6 felony.
All of the above notwithstanding, Sheriff Arpaio would have to be able to prove (beyond a reasonable doubt…?) that any such record submissions were submitted with the intent to defraud, and/or such documentation was legitimate to begin with. While there is a load of anecdotal evidence — up to and including the lack of evidence — to support these claims, no direct evidence has surfaced, to date, that conclusively proves any of these allegations.
I don’t know what the procedural rules are regarding Arizona sheriffs; Mr. Arpaio may or may not be able to force the Secretary of State’s office to do anything with the paperwork submitted for Mr. Obama’s candidacy, at least not for 2008.
However, we have entered the 2012 presidential campaign season, and any Court case, to date, have all essentially said that the time to question a candidate’s eligibility is during a campaign season.
We’ll see how it all goes down.
According to KTAR.com, Sheriff Arpaio never “promised” to do anything regarding any info or petition with respect to Obama’s eligibility, only to consider the presented evidence:
… “What I have agreed to do, contrary to some published media reports, is simply look at the evidence these people have assembled and examine whether it is within my jurisdiction to investigate the document’s authenticity,” Arpaio said in a written statement Friday. …
Arpaio said, while he will look at the evidence, “I indicated in this meeting that I will also consider whether there is a more appropriate Arzona agency to determine the document’s veracity and ultimately whether the President’s name can lawfully be entered onto the 2012 election ballot.”
For the record and in the interest of full disclosure, while the same-referenced WorldNetDaily site has referenced The Right Side of Life regarding eligibility cases in the past, this is not the first time that WND has editorialized its reports. Thankfully other media outlets make themselves available to cross-check reporting from time to time.
“Several of my constituents have raised the issue, ‘Where was Mr. Obama born? Was he born in Kenya, or was he born in Hawaii?’” Rappaport told WND. “I have two Kenyan birth certificates that I presented to Mr. Gardner, and he said he would ‘look into it.’”
“Regardless of where he was born, is he a natural born citizen as required by the Constitution? I don’t know the answer to that,” Rappaport said. “My understanding is that … a natural born citizen had to be someone with two American parents. If that’s true, his father was a Kenyan and therefore a British subject at the time. Then there’s the issue: If he was born out of the country, was his mother old enough at the time to confer citizenship?
“I expect somebody to come up with the legal answers to this,” Rappaport told WND, “and so far that hasn’t happened.”
“There’s been virtually nothing released regarding [Obama's] school records or his birth records, and the thing that bothers me is that I think as a citizen of the United States, we have the right to know that,” Rappaport said. “So far I haven’t gotten answers to any of those questions, and my constituents haven’t either. We feel we need to know this.”
Rappaport clarified that the Kenyan birth certificates he found online – one with a footprint, one without – aren’t necessarily reliable, as they haven’t been verified by experts, and Rappaport doesn’t claim to be an expert. He said he merely presented them to Gardner because online images are all the proof he has of Obama’s birth, whether in the U.S. or in Africa.
“Regardless of where this lands, I’m willing to accept the evidence as presented in a court,” Rappaport said, “but so far that hasn’t been done.” …
What Rappaport has found, however, is a flood of support. WND asked him what kind of response he has gotten since news of his meeting with Gardner was first circulated online last week:
“Oh my! Do you even have to ask?” he laughed. “I haven’t been off the phone for two or three days now, and I wouldn’t be surprised if I’ve gotten over 100 emails.”
WND asked him if had also gotten angry email from Obama supporters, as WND receives regularly.
“No, not one,” he said, “and that tells me something too.”
In some of the initial, widely circulated reports of Rappaport’s meeting with Gardner, it was reported that New Hampshire’s secretary of state agreed to open an “investigation,” but Rappaport told WND Gardner merely said he’d “look into it.”
“I hope that either there’s a formal investigation – though that would fall under the Attorney General – of potential fraud,” Rappaport said. “But I’m not coming down on either side; I just want the answer. I think we’re due the answer.”
WND contacted Gardner’s office for confirmation of the meeting or comment, but received no response. [emphasis mine]
As a number of commenters have pointed out in the original posting to this story (referenced above), it would appear that much of the language being used to suggest that the SOS was rather adamant about purusing this matter has simmered down to a cursory acknowledgement that the State Representative has a request.
Nevertheless, the saga continues.
Thursday, September 17, 2009 Update: Yes, the saga does continue. While commenter “Practical Kat” points out that the Concord Monitorfollowed up on this story and received a quote directly from the NH SoS, it’s too bad that the same article points out the following quote from the SPLC:
“It’s a completely bogus claim,” said Heidi Beirich, director of research at the Southern Poverty Law Center, a civil rights organization that tracks extremist groups. “It’s been disproven by every reputable news organization in the country.” …
“The birthers are so ludicrous that for their conspiracy to function, someone needed to plant a news item 40 years ago in anticipation of someone becoming president,” Beirich said. …
Originally, Beirich said, “it was being spread by right-wing nuts who are bizarre human beings.”
I guess someone should inform the editor of the Concord Monitor that Camille Paglia, for one, thinks these eligibility questions are legitimate.
See the following links regarding the eligibility saga:
Thanks to a heads-up from a commenter and as a follow up to a previous posting of mine from back in 2008, Cleveland/Akron, Ohio-based KYC.com broke the story that Mr. Obama’s aunt, Zeituni Onyango (who has been living illegally in Boston, MA) claims that Mr. Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawaii:
Onyango proudly remembers attending the swearing in ceremony with her mother, Sarah Obama, the President’s paternal grandmother in 2005, as Barack became a U.S. senator. Home video shows them both in full African dress at a celebration party shortly afterwards.
She talks about the current controversy over the President Obama’s citizenship.
“Barack was born in Honolulu, Hawaii. Ann (Obama’s mother) never stepped foot on Kenyan soil,” Onyango says defiantly.
CLEVELAND — President Barack Obama’s aunt says he was born in Hawaii and she can’t understand claims that he’s not a natural-born American citizen.
Zeituni Onyango (zay-TUH’-nee awn-YAHN’-goh) says in an interview with WKYC-TV in Cleveland the president’s late mother didn’t give birth in Kenya.
There are, of course, two problems with the above account.
First, there is absolutely no publicly-available record of exactly which doctor, nurse, mid-wife or other individual actually delivered Mr. Obama; to date, nobody — including Barbara Nelson, the President’s English teacher in Hawaii, the only person even remotely tied to the question — has come forward to confirm the event.
Secondly, I had reported back in November, 2008 that 101 WRIF out of Detroit, Michigan had an interview with Kenyan Ambassador Peter N.R.O. Ogego, in which the following exchange took place (courtesy WorldNetDaily):
Clark: “We want to congratulate you on Barack Obama, our new president, and you must be very proud.”
Ogego: “We are. We are. We are also proud of the U.S. for having made history as well.”
Fellhauer: “One more quick question, President-elect Obama’s birthplace over in Kenya, is that going to be a national spot to go visit, where he was born?”
Ogego: “It’s already an attraction. His paternal grandmother is still alive.”
Fellhauer: “His birthplace, they’ll put up a marker there?”
Ogego: “It would depend on the government. It’s already well known.”
The Ambassador’s assistant was quick to follow up regarding the above:
Ogego’s assistant insisted he was speaking about Barack Obama Sr., and not President-elect Obama.
WND asked, “Is Obama’s birthplace in Kenya?”
The woman replied firmly, “No.”
She said she could not say why Ogego responded the way he did, and she promised to have the ambassador call and explain his own comments. The ambassador never returned requests for comment.
The above begs the question: why would Kenya have “national spot to go visit” for the President’s father?
Dr. Orly Taitz, lawyer and eligibility activist who recently took me to task regarding a Florida Judge’s order on one of her cases, has hit a few snags regarding her own background and current California case.
The blog DefendOurFreedoms.net recently created a posting wherein the blog’s moderator referenced questions from a Salon.com commenter as well as their own dealings with Judge Roy Moore’s law firm:
I saw a fair question from a commenter named siusaidh at Salon.com.
There is no connection between Orly Taitz and Roy Moore’s Law Firm other than the recommendation given to her. I was the one that contacted the law firm for help. Despite what we now see of Orly Taitz, that was not apparent back in the Fall ’08. Her principle client was Ambassador Alan Keyes. She is a licensed attorney despite the questions we have now, those questions weren’t apparent then. And despite the fact that there isn’t hard evidence of everything Orly says, there is enough to give the claims questions. Let’s also not forget, Orly is not the one that came up with most of these claims. She is not the one that did much of the research for these claims. They were copied to Orly because we all actually thought there were resources being put in place to look into this information further, through the donations. Instead, they all got published and filed in raw condition.
That is how propaganda works. Enough truth for people without resources to find on their own, then enough mystery and questions where the average person doesn’t have the resources or means to trace the rest.
Ever wonder if maybe that is why Orly is getting all the coverage? Get her out in the media, make her the megaphone for all these statements, discredit her, then when she falls from light, she takes all the unanswered questions with her? We will never know the answers. [emphases original]
The OCRegister.com is reporting today that Dr. Taitz is having issues with some of the Plaintiffs she has been representing:
Orly Taitz, the Mission Viejo lawyer trying to get Barack Obama thrown out of office, says she’s had enough of two of her clients in the case and will continue without them.
Whoa, say the two.
“This is our case,” said Buena Park Pastor Wiley Drake, one of the two plaintiffs Taitz has unilaterally tried to have removed from the case.
The lawsuit challenges Obama’s birthplace and his legitimacy as president. The latest chapter in the drama started when Drake and Markham G. Robinson notified Taitz that they were replacing her as counsel. Taitz continues to represent 40 other plaintiffs in the federal case filed in Santa Ana.
Drake complained that Taitz’s paperwork errors have delayed proceedings.
“Orly is getting overwhelmed,” Drake said. “We all make mistakes, but she is in over her head.”
Taitz’s initial complaint was sent back to her by the court for being incomplete, as was a filing last week alleging the possession of a Kenyan birth registration for Obama – a document experts have dismissed as a forgery.
Among omissions in the more recent document was such basic information as Taitz’s bar number. In another recent filing by Taitz, her own name was misspelled as “Orley.”
“I rest my case,” Drake said.
Drake and Robinson are now being represented by Gary Kreep, who has previously worked for abortion foes and is counsel for the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps. Kreep said he is looking to make changes to Taitz’s filings.
“There were some problems with the initial complaint,” he said. “It needs to be amended to make the case stronger.”
By the way, if you’d like to get a certificate that looks like Obama’s alleged Kenyan birth registration, with your name and particulars, visit kenyanbirthcertificategenerator.com. Free and immediate download. [emphases original]
Kristy Watanabe, the public relations specialist for the hospital refused to confirm or deny the veracity of Obama’s letter claiming he was born at the hospital.
“Our comment to everyone who has been calling is that federal law does not permit us to provide any more details concerning information [about Obama's birth] without authorization from Mr. Obama,” Watanabe told WND.
She said the hospital had not contacted Obama for authorization.
When WND asked Watanabe why the hospital did not contact Obama to ask for authorization, especially given the number of phone calls the hospital was receiving with the request, Watanabe said: “This is our response, and we can’t say anything more than that.”
WND asked if a hypothetical elected official pretended to be born at the hospital, would federal law prevent her from disclosing that? If so, which federal law would that be?
“It’s just our policy that without permission we don’t ever answer questions about babies born in the hospital,” she said.
Many in the opposition to questioning this President’s eligibility will often challenge those of us sympathetic with questioning this politician by attempting to avert the debate and asking, “Why don’t you call so-and-so up and simply confirm the facts?” As examples such as this show, the process is not quite as simple and straightforward as simply picking up the phone or sending an email to an official — whether public or private.
One thing is for sure — this will be added as yet another piece of unsubstantiated, sealed documentation that is part of the President’s past (link below).
Update: Via TheObamaFile.com, an article published in the Rainbow Edition Newsletter, seems to indicate that Mr. Obama was actually born in Queen’s Medical Center:
Update: As WorldNetDaily continues to report, the exact location of Mr. Obama’s birthplace has become even more of a mystery. According to the following from their report, Snopes.com, UPI, MyBarackObama.com, the Honolulu Star-Bulletin, Honolulu Advertiser, Washington Post and the Encyclopedia Britannica bring further confusion to what the President originally said via a letter to the Kapi’olani Medical Center:
[A]ccording to Snopes, the popular online hoax-buster that many rely on as the final word on both important and frivolous stories, Obama was born at a different hospital in the Hawaiian capital.
This image is WND’s screen shot of the snopes.com entry before it was changed:
Currently, even snopes.com appears somewhat confused:
Their son, also named Barack Hussein Obama, was born on 4 August 1961 at the Kapiolani Medical Center in Honolulu, Hawaii. (News accounts have also previously placed his birth as having occurred at Queen’s Medical Center in Honolulu, Hawaii.)
Interestingly, in Snopes’ entry focusing on the natural-born citizenship controversy, no mention is made of the birth hospital.
But Snopes is not alone in asserting Obama was born at a hospital other than the one he personally claims.
A number of news articles published both in the U.S. and abroad name Queen’s Medical Center – not Kapi’olani – as the correct birthplace.
“Obama described his birth at Queen’s Medical Center in Hawaii Aug. 4, 1961, to a young white woman from Kansas and a father of Luo ethnicity from Nyanza Province in Kenya, as an ‘all-America’ story transcending orthodox racial stereotypes and experience.”
Update: Now the UPI has scrubbed their story (thanks, “MGB“)without any explicit notice of update via the following screen capture (confirmed via Google’s cache).
Update: The previous link for the Google cache of the below has similarly been changed. Below you will find a copy of the screen shot from WND:
The site documents Obama’s lineage back to his great-great-great grandparents, who lived in the mid-1800s.
It states: “Barack Hussein OBAMA was born on 4 August 1961 at the Queen’s Medical Center in Honolulu, Hawaii, to Barack Hussein OBAMA, Sr. of Nyangoma-Kogelo, Siaya District, Kenya, and Ann DUNHAM of Wichita, Kansas.”
“Among the top search terms paired with Barack Obama: biography, Israel, news, jokes, stimulus package, birth certificate (related to those persistent but unfounded rumors that Obama is not a natural-born citizen and thus ineligible to be president.),” the news organization stated.
Makana Shook, corporate communications coordinator for Queen’s, told WND, “The hospital is not allowed to give out any information to the public about patients without the patient’s permission, because of federal HIPAA law restrictions.”
Kapi’olani officials said they would release any documentation they may have about the president’s birth if the president gives his permission to make the documentation public.
The White House did not respond to a WND request for comment.
The question to the White House noted the multiple references to Queen’s. “Then, beginning sometime after the start of 2009, the president and various members of his family, including his sister Maya Soetoro, changed the story and gave interviews (or wrote letters as above) claiming President Obama was born at Kapi’olani Medical Center.
“Why did the president claim to be born at two different hospitals in Hawaii?” WND asked. “Which is the true hospital where the president was born?”
Snopes responded to a WND request for comment about the conflict between its report and Obama’s statement with an automated message that shed no light on the matter.
WND has reported that among the documentation – besides his birth certificate – not yet available for Obama includes his kindergarten records, his Punahou school records, his Occidental College records, his Columbia University records, his Columbia thesis, his Harvard Law School records, his Harvard Law Review articles, his scholarly articles from the University of Chicago, his passport, his medical records, his files from his years as an Illinois state senator, his Illinois State Bar Association records, any baptism records, and his adoption records.
“Upon receipt of a notice of intent to disclose presidential records, the attorney general (directly or through the assistant attorney general for the office of legal counsel) and the counsel to the president shall review as they deem appropriate the records covered by the notice and consult with each other, the archivist, and such other executive agencies as they deem appropriate concerning whether invocation of executive privilege is justified,” the order states.
“If either the attorney general or the counsel to the president believes that the circumstances justify invocation of executive privilege, the issue shall be presented to the president by the counsel to the president and the attorney general.”
The result is that the president ultimately would decide if those records can be released.
“After receiving such notice, the archivist shall not disclose the privileged records unless directed to do so by an incumbent president or by a final court order,” the order said.
See the following links regarding the eligibility saga:
Header of hate mail sent to American Patriot Foundation
Blogger and WorldNetDaily contributor Andrea Shea-King linked to a story from early January, 2011 wherein Margaret Hemenway, of the American Patriot Foundation (the group who has been supporting Army officer Terrence Lakin’s legal defense during his court martial proceedings regarding his stance on Obama’s eligibility), has been receiving direct threats and hate mail from those who oppose such questioning:
“I’ve been called a subversive and an enemy of the state, not to mention moron, insufferable little b-tch and a lot of other similar nasty comments,” APF’s Margaret Hemenway told WND. “I write a lot of them back to tell them that e-mail rage, like road rage, is neither healthy nor adult behavior and remind them it is the fundamental obligation of citizenship to support the U.S. Constitution.” …
Hemenway sent the following letter, postmarked in Columbus, Ohio, to the U.S.Post Officeauthorities to be investigated because it contained a direct threat:
“This is to inform you that LTC Larkin (sic) is a F—— COWARD who should be put in front of a firing squad and shot. If I see his a– on the streets of Washington I will save the government the expense of a trial, I’ll dip a bullet in s— and shoot him in the head. This f— off deserves to die on the streets of America.” …
Hemenway said a postal inspector told her the letter is “prosecutable,” but the inspector was not able to identify the sender during the investigation.
In parallel, the WND article goes on to correctly point out that the cross hairs used in the email communication was the same type of graphic used during the 2010 mid-term elections that some on the Left have to sought link the Right with Rep. Gabrielle Gifford’s shooting.
Personally, I have never condoned such behavior on the part of those who question Mr. Obama’s eligibility, and I think that those who promote such incivility should be brought to public shame over such remarks.
It shouldn’t matter whether or not someone is questioning the bona fides of an individual in authority; this used to be considered a good thing in America. We don’t have unquestioned authoritarians ruling over us; we have constitutional officers that govern at the will of the People.
If you happen to be one of those who don’t agree with this sentiment, perhaps you should find another country in which to dwell. That would certainly help quell some of the true incivility that is obviously occurring by those who don’t like questions.
WASHINGTON – Former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay pulled no punches on Chris Matthews “Hardball”show on MSNBC today when asked if he is a “birther.”
“Well, I’d like the president to produce his birth certificate,” said DeLay. “I can. Most illegal aliens here in America can. Why can’t the president of the United States produce his birth certificate? … Chris, will you do me a favor? Will you ask the president to show me his gift certificate — I mean, his birth certificate?”
DeLay’s outspokenness on the subject stands in stark contrast to any current member of Congress.
Implying Barack Obama is being unfairly singled out for questioning on the issue, Matthews asked DeLay whether anyone has asked him for proof of his birthplace, DeLay responded, “The Democrats sued me for being a resident of Texas. That’s just like asking me for my birth certificate.”
“Chris, the Constitution of the United States specifically says you have to be a natural born citizen,” DeLay said.
“I know,” Matthews responded. “But I’ve never asked you for yours.”
“Ask me!” DeLay responded. “I’ll give it to you!”
Matthews said seeing a birth announcement in the Honolulu newspapers was enough to convince him of Obama’s birth in Hawaii.
“Newspapers!” responded DeLay. “Is a newspaper article an official document?”
“No, it’s not,” conceded Matthews. “It’s just common sense that we’re talking about here. Common sense.”
“There isn’t anybody in America that’s been born in America that didn’t get a birth certificate at Obama’s age,” said DeLay. “Maybe at my age there are people born out in — “
In other eligibility news:
Attorney Leo Donofrio responds to a recent MSBNC piece on President Chester Arthur, showing where the late President issued an Executive Order requiring the military to salute the British flag; that MSNBC’s article could be an attempt to normalize the British citizenship issue; and promises to examine Mr. Obama’s current British citizenship status in an upcoming posting
TheBirthers.org takes on Michelle Malkin and Michael Medved’s assertion that the 14th Amendment can make anyone a natural born citizen and, subsequently, a constitutionally eligible natural born citizen
Ben Smith of the Politico reports that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is investigating the posthumous “baptism” of Stanley Ann Dunham as a “serious breach” of religious code
WorldNetDaily posits that Mr. Obama’s parents didn’t live at the newspaper address of 6085 Kalanianaole Highway, Honolulu, HI
WND Editor/CEO Joseph Farah tweets: “Unconfirmed reports at this moment say our Vegas billboard has been defaced or destroyed … more to come”
See the following links regarding the eligibility saga:
WND can reveal the text of the letter read by Abercrombie has significant differences from what is touted online as President Obama’s letter. In addition, the image online is not a picture of an actual paper letter, but is merely a computer-created likeness of a letter.
According to the video, Abercrombie explains “that this is the first message to be sent from the Oval Office from President Barack Obama anywhere in the country.”
He then proceeds to read the apparent text of the letter directly from a podium stand to the audience of more than 700 people, including children wearing T-shirts proclaiming, “Born at Kapi’olani.”
The video was edited by the hospital’s production company to include just a few snippets from the letter, but the portions which are included all contain different wording than the letter displayed online.
1. Abercrombie reads: “Hawaii has always been home to me, and I’m pleased to take part in the celebration, even at a distance.”
But the actual text allegedly from Obama reads: “Hawaii has always been a home to me, and I’m pleased to take part in your celebration.”
The most significant change here is Abercrombie’s mysterious addition of “even at a distance,” which appears nowhere in the letter. Ambercrombie also did not mention the article “a,” changing “Hawaii has always been a home to me” to just “Hawaii has always been home to me.” He also read “the celebration” instead of “your celebration.”
2. Abercrombie reads: “As a beneficiary of the excellence of Kapi’olani Medical Center – after all, the place of my birth – I am pleased to add my voice to the chorus of supporters.”
The actual text allegedly from Obama reads: “As a beneficiary of the excellence of Kapi’olani Medical Center – the place of my birth – I am pleased to add my voice to your chorus of supporters.”
Abercrombie added the phrase “after all” before the “the place of my birth,” and read “the chorus of supporters” instead of “your chorus of supporters.”
3. Abercrombie reads the conclusion as: “With great Aloha, President Barack Obama.”
The actual conclusion allegedly from Obama reads: “Sincerely, Barack Obama.”
Instead of “Sincerely,” Abercrombie stated “With great Aloha.” He also read the word “president” before Barack Obama’s name, when it’s not displayed in the letter.
“I have no doubt that Neil paraphrased and elaborated and digressed a little,” said Abercrombie spokesman Dave Helfert when asked about the large number of differences. He indicated he personally had not seen any letter from the president but presumes the congressman was just reading it on behalf of the hospital.
Helfert admits some people have contacted the office “in an insane and nonsensical rage” suggesting Obama “was born somewhere else and snuck into the United States.”
He says he can’t understand why the public is demanding such a level of proof of natural-born citizenship, and when asked why he thought Obama just doesn’t end the controversy by releasing his long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate displaying the name of the hospital and doctor, Helfert said he couldn’t speak for the president, but “if that were me, I’d tell people to stick it in their ear. It’s none of their business. The documents online have been certified to show he was born in the U.S.”
“If you had a picture of him in the hospital [delivery room] with a hospital sign behind him, there would be a lot of people who wouldn’t believe it, [thinking] that it was trick photography or something nefarious,” he added. “If the hand of God appeared in the sky to write the birth certificate, they wouldn’t believe it.”
In a local news report covering the Centennial Dinner, KHNL-TV anchor Diane Ako stated, “Even President Barack Obama was helped by the hospital. He was born there.” But she did not expound on that point with any evidence.
Regarding what is portrayed to be the letter itself, what is displayed online is not a photo or scanned image of an actual letter sent by regular mail.
It is a pieced-together likeness of a letter using HTML code that routinely builds websites.
Viewers can check this by several methods, including going to the original webpage, highlighting the “letter” there with a cursor, and noting the White House letterhead as well as Barack Obama’s signature are both individual images.
WND then goes on to show images of exactly what they mean. They finished the main part of this story with the following:
WND contacted both the White House and Kapi’olani Medical Center numerous times to authenticate the existence, authorship and contents of the letter and confirm the true birth hospital of the president, but neither responded.
To date, Obama has not revealed his original long-form, hospital-generated “Certificate of Live Birth” that includes details such as the name of the medical facility and the doctor who delivered him.
What fascinates me about the above is the question of why they would remove the letter. Could it be because of HIPAA rules (more on this below)? No, because the alleged letter purports to come from the President himself, not the hospital, and whatever the “former” recipient of health services chooses to reveal about his identity falls outside the confines of federal law. In fact, the point of privacy laws like HIPAA is to restrict such information to be revealed only by the patient.
Also, why would sites like UPI now change their story regarding the President’s alleged birth place? Upon what did they base their first claim? From whence did they get new information that convinced them to update the story?
“The confirmation that an individual was a patient or was not a patient is indeed covered by the statute,” said Helen Oscislawski, a Princeton, N.J., attorney who represents hospitals.
When presented with the question of denying that anyone, even Adolf Hitler, was ever born in American hospital, Oscislawski indicated medical facilities could keep their lips sealed.
“It’s splitting a hair that most hospitals will not take a chance with,” she told WND. “You have invasion of privacy issues other claims that can be brought against the individual releasing the information.”
Concerning Obama specifically, she said even a denial of his being at one hospital is “backdooring into that.”
“Hospitals are not going to take that risk,” she said. “They cannot confirm or deny because by process of elimination they would indeed be giving the answer.”
“We can’t confirm or deny it – even though all the information out there says he was born at Kapi’olani Hospital,” said hospital spokeswoman Claire Tong. “Our hands are tied.”
As far as what’s protected information, HIPAA law says, “The Privacy Rule protects all ‘individually identifiable health information’ held or transmitted by a covered entity or its business associate, in any form or media, whether electronic, paper, or oral.”
It goes on to specify: “Individually identifiable health information includes many common identifiers (e.g., name, address, birth date, Social Security Number).”
There are some exceptions, including statistics on communicable diseases being relayed to state health departments. Individual patients can also voluntarily opt out of the privacy rules if they wish.
Oscislawski says the protections remain in effect even after someone is deceased, so hospitals could remain silent about Obama’s mother, Ann Dunham.
It’s interesting to note that on the Honolulu Advertiser‘s article, the following picture can be found with rather definitive language despite the article’s tentative verbiage on birth location:
Caption: “Kapiolani Medical Center is where Barack Obama was born in 1961, according to his family. Photos by BRUCE ASATO | The Honolulu Advertiser”
Another HIPAA expert is not optimistic about hospitals answering even basic questions when it comes to government officials.
“You’re just beating around the bush and running in circles,” said Ronald Worst, a safety and security consultant based in Orlando, Fla. “You wont get any straight answers, trust me.”
He says federal restrictions have been increased over the years, since patients were seeing their personal records stolen and swapped.
“Decades ago before it was enforced, there were health-care facilities selling that cr–,” said Worst. “Because of the lack of protecting that information, it wound up getting in the hands of bad guys for all sorts of crimes including identity theft.”
There’s a schedule of penalties for violating HIPAA, with the most severe stating, “if the offense is committed with intent to sell, transfer, or use individually identifiable health information for commercial advantage, personal gain, or malicious harm, [the person shall] be fined not more than $250,000, imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both.”
So, if hospitals can neither confirm nor deny information about the background information of anyone who might have been a patient at their facility, then how does any reporter or Internet site know, for a fact, exactly where Obama was born? And if the President’s letter to Kapi’olani were legitimate, why was it pulled?
See the following links regarding the eligibility saga:
Due to the overwhelming response that this posting has produced, I have recently sent a follow-up communications with very specific questions to Mr. Adams regarding the below posting and associated comments by The Right Side of Life.com readers. If/when I get a response to those questions, I will be creating a follow-up posting as soon as is practical. Thank you.
Tim Adams, a former senior elections clerk for Honolulu, now teaches English at Western Kentucky University
As I am about to show, WorldNetDaily only got half of their story right (full disclosure: The Right Side of Life.com has been featured on WND in the past and I still “trust but verify” what they post, most of the time).
I decided to actually contact Mr. Tim Adams at the email address linked in the Western Kentucky University faculty page mentioned in the WND article to find out for myself (and for you, loyal TRSoL readers) why he chose to “come out” now regarding the alleged quotes that WND has posted.
However, before I get to the email I received back from him (and that I subsequently received explicit permission from Mr. Adams to reveal), here are key excerpts from the WND article:
“There is no birth certificate,” said Tim Adams, a graduate assistant who teaches English at Western Kentucky University in Bowling Green, Ky. “It’s like an open secret. There isn’t one. Everyone in the government there knows this.”
Adams, who says he’s a Hillary Clinton supporter who ended up voting for John McCain when Clinton lost the Democratic nomination to Obama, told WND, “I managed the absentee-ballot office. It was my job to verify the voters’ identity.”
He says during the 2008 campaign when the issue of Obama’s constitutional eligibility first arose, the elections office was inundated with requests to verify the birthplace of the U.S. senator from Illinois.
“I had direct access to the Social Security database, the national crime computer, state driver’s license information, international passport information, basically just about anything you can imagine to get someone’s identity,” Adams explained. “I could look up what bank your home mortgage was in. I was informed by my boss that we did not have a birth record [for Obama].” …
“They told us, ‘We don’t have a birth certificate for him,’” he said. “They told my supervisor, either by phone or by e-mail, neither one has a document that a doctor signed off on saying they were present at this man’s birth.” …
…”They may say, ‘We don’t have access to that.’ The regular workers don’t, the ones processing ballots; but the people in administration do. I was the one overseeing the work of the people doing the balloting.”
Adams stressed, “In my professional opinion, [Obama] definitely was not born in Hawaii. I can say without a shadow of a doubt that he was not born in Hawaii because there is no legal record of him being born there. If someone called and asked about it, I could not tell them that person was born in the state.” …
“Anyone can get that [COLB],” said Adams. “They are normally given if you give birth at home or while traveling overseas. We have a lot of Asian population [in Hawaii]. It’s quite common for people to come back and get that.” …
“Why would they say they’ve seen it and not produce it? I don’t know,” he said. “If they said they’ve seen the document, then why not produce the document? There’s no need to put themselves out like that. I can’t even begin to think why they did that except for some kind of political expediency. I’m too far down the totem pole [to know].”
While Adams, who noted he spent nearly 10 years in the islands and has a bachelor’s degree from the University of Hawaii, says he’s certain Obama was not born there, he also does think the president is indeed a U.S. citizen, since his mother, Stanley Ann Dunham was an American.
He says he merely would like to see the truth come out and have the controversy over natural-born citizenship and presidential eligibility resolved once and for all.
“It’s come to the point where it’s a monster, and it’s time to kill it,” Adams said. “Solve the problem so that everyone can get back to cooperating to improve the country. People have lost sight that we’re trying to make the country a better place.” …
Adams says he’s been telling other people his information for a long time, and he’s free to talk about it publicly since he no longer has any confidentiality restrictions from his former employer, the Honolulu government. People started to pay attention this week after he was briefly interviewed by James Edwards, host of a weekly radio show on WLRM Radio in Memphis, Tenn.
The rest of the article describes how WND claims to have confirmed by local authorities that he did work for HI elections as well as additional issues pertaining to the eligibility saga.
The problem that I originally had with this story (an issue that I’ve privately discussed with close followers of this blog and am only now posting about it) is that the original email forwards I received had links to a YouTube video by James Edwards in which a Stormfront.org graphic was displayed shortly into the video for several seconds. That same Stormfront.org graphic was also blatantly included in some of the email forwards I received.
Stormfront.org is a white-supremacist group, and if there are those who believe that white people (however that’s defined) are inherently superior to any other race, they can knock themselves out. That’s not how I roll. Nor will I post the YouTube video on my site for the same reason.
Naturally, this led me to question why it is that WND went with this story. After all, they didn’t post the same video on their site (most likely for the same reasons, but I can only speculate) but they went with the overall story anyway.
Why? Because they knew they could draw lots of insinuations from their readership.
Taking the above quotes on face value would make you think this story is explosive, wouldn’t it? It turns out that Mr. Adams isn’t quite the “birther” that WND had been making him out to be. In fact, he thinks Mr. Obama is eligible for the office (it’s an interesting admission — if we’re to follow WND’s story — as someone who is supposed to have worked with elections would otherwise know better, right? They have reasonable access to evidence right there, right?).
My email to Mr. Adams:
Good morning! My name is Phil, blogger at TheRightSideOfLife.com. I’ve been following the Obama eligibility issue since late 2008 and recently came across the following WorldNetDaily article:
I wanted to confirm that you are the same person as mentioned in the above WND article who is making the claims outlined in that article.
If the above is correct, then I have a question for you: Why is it that you have decided to reveal this information now?
Thanks for your time,
Being self-critical, in hindsight, I probably could have asked a number of other questions to more fully develop the story. But, it turns out that his response did it for me:
Thank you for the Email. Actually I believe God has a sense of humor, because I thought these notions were pretty well common and not very important. I was actually just in Nashville, observing a conservative political conference, I’m not a member of any kind of group, and too liberal for these guys, when James Edwards, the host of the Political Cesspool, heard about me from someone and asked if I would simply state what I had observed and been told while working in Hawaii. I believe Pres. Obama was born a United States citizen, and is eligible to hold office, I find the idea that because he was probably born outside of the U.S., he must be some kind of alien to be basically racist. I do think we should close this issue and pass legislation requiring office seekers to prove identity before running for elected office.
Thanks for the kind inquiry
So, there you have it, the story more developed, straight from the source. Personally, I don’t reach exactly the same conclusion as he does except for the fact that it would be wonderful to actually have legislation that required candidates to substantiate their eligibility as a part of their candidacy filings.
Once again, do I totally distrust WND in their reporting? No. But I do believe in making sure the entire truth of an issue is as fleshed out as possible in order that folks can make up their own minds.
After all, isn’t the point of debating eligibility to make sure that all the facts are known, in context?
For me, this is, has been and will always be about the Cosntitution, not the melanin.
Per the FReeper cross-post link, immediately below, there’s been some concern that somehow I’m doing something other than revealing WND’s obvious insinuation that, by extension, Mr. Adams was actually saying that Mr. Obama is, for a fact, ineligible for the presidency (despite the fact that there is no in-hand evidence either way — save the British citizenship angle — to know for sure).
To bolster this, when I asked Mr. Adams for his permission to publish the email, he responded thusly:
I am not ashamed of anything I write or say, you may use my words with my blessings, just please don’t twist them the way I have found some media outlets doing, you know how they are.
Aside from WND, I can only speculate who any other “media outlets” are that are “twist”ing his words.
Things that make you go, “Hmmm…”
Wow x 2. Of all the things I’ve ever posted on my blog, this posting has sure stirred up a hornet’s nest.
For further clarification, Mr. Adams has been quoted by other sources to specifically say that, in his view, Mr. Obama was not born in Honolulu.
OK, fine. A couple of things [that are really sure to stir the proverbial pudding]:
The underlying assumption is that Mr. Adams had, in fact, worked over at HI elections. I’ll take the facts of what WND posted in their article at face value on this point;
The lack of evidence does not mean the evidence of something; it merely means that we’re still lacking something. Some of us (that would be, yours truly) have been saying from the beginning that we have zero, zilch, nada evidence, in-hand, to confirm or deny Mr. Obama’s eligibility. We just don’t know for sure.
In my view, the insinuation that WND made must be changed.
And then there was this given to ObamaConspiracy.org — an eligibility “opposition” site — from the City Clerk’s office for the County of Honolulu:
Our records indicate that Mr. Adams was employed in a clerical position as an Elections Clerk. Our office does not have access to birth records. Birth records are handled by the State of Hawaii, Department of Health.
If all of the above is true, then lots of people — including WND — may be relying on bad/incorrect interpretations of the truth.
So, is it a typo or is it for real? WorldNetDaily picked up on the MySpace.com page for Mr. Obama stating that his age is … 52?:
If President Obama were indeed born in Hawaii, was it while the islands were a territory of the United States?
A new wrinkle in the dispute over his birth – and whether he is eligible to be president under the U.S. Constitution’s requirement that the president be a “natural born” citizen – appeared today when Obama’s official MySpace page declared his age is 52, thus placing his birth year at 1957 instead of 1961 as has been claimed.
That would mean he would have been born during the archipelago’s time as a territory of the U.S., the islands’ status from about 1900 until statehood in 1959.
The birth year also conflicts with campaign and other White House information that have discussed his 48th birthday this month.
Surely someone made a mistake on the popular social networking site, right?
As I had been reporting, Florida realtor Robert Quinn had filed a complaint with authorities in the State in an attempt to understand why they didn’t properly vet the President when he was a candidate. Recently, he followed up his complaint with the following:
On Aug. 14 I added an addendum via certified mail to my election fraud complaint and request for investigation received by Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum back on July 30…
I am aware a lawyer would not prepare this addendum as I have but keep in mind 2010 is an election year and our current AG will be running for governor and our current governor, Governor Crist, is running for US Senate. My goal is to encourage one of these guys to promulgate that presidential preference primary rule I recommended in my original complaint whereby the major political parties must submit their candidates verifying documents before the names are printed upon the primary ballot. Most people will agree this should be done and the governor already has the authority to do this now.
Since we taxpayers paid for a big piece of the DNC nominating convention, we own and are entitled to examine the documents which they assembled to comply with their constitutional vetting responsibility. Makes sense to me, and I think most others will politically agree.
On the other hand, if the DNC did not constitutionally vet Obama, as required by DNC rules, Nancy Pelosi has perpetrated an election fraud upon the voters of this country. If this is the case, maybe Pelosi will join us and demand Obama release his authentic birth records and redeem herself. She has the power.
One never knows just where that missing key is to be found.
Did you know that birth certificate fraud has been done before, and within the past few years? Consider the following that transpired in 2004:
How can an official certification of live birth be obtained if the person on the document wasn’t born in the state or even in the country the document was issued?
Actually, it’s been done before.
In 2004, following a long investigation by the FBI and Department of State, Jean Anderson, the former deputy registrar of the Hudson County, N.J., Office of Vital Statistics, pleaded guilty to taking money for falsifying county records.
According to a Department of Justice news release, Anderson was paid to insert phony birth records for illegal aliens into the files at her county office. The immigrants, in turn, approached county window clerks and requested copies of their birth certificates, after which the clerks looked to the files and, upon seeing the records Anderson had inserted, issued fraudulent birth certificates unknowingly.
Federal agents executed a search warrant of the HCOVS in February of 2004, resulting in the seizure of hundreds of suspect birth certificates listing birthplaces in Jersey City, N.J, when in fact, the individuals named were immigrants born outside the U.S.
The recipients of the phony birth certificates weren’t seeking to become president; they were merely seeking status as American citizens.
The New Jersey case, however, has been referenced in blogs since last year as reason for President Barack Obama to release his full, long-form Birth certificate, rather than insisting the nation trust only in his Hawaii Certification of Live Birth, or COLB, a document that merely refers to the presence of another, unreleased document in Hawaii’s files. …
“It is deadly serious in this day and age when we have people like Anderson and her co-conspirators making it possible for anyone to present themselves as lawful U.S. citizens when they are not,” said U.S. Attorney Christopher J. Christie in 2004. “The possibilities run from the benign to the horrific.”
Anderson’s case pointed to an extensive conspiracy of illegal immigration fraud that also resulted in guilty pleas from Nikhil Goswamy, who took money from immigrants seeking American citizenship, and Rajendra Bahadur, who supplied Anderson with the vital statistic information necessary to generate the phony birth records.
Federal agents also arrested Iftikhar Ali Bhutta, a Pakistani national who purchased from Goswamy false birth certificates for himself and his three foreign-born children. According to the DOJ press release, Bhutta and his children utilized the false birth certificates to obtain U.S. passports, which they used to travel internationally.
According to The Record, a newspaper in Hackensack, N.J., authorities raided the county’s Office of Vital Statistics, seizing 100 boxes of birth certificates dating back to 1902. The paper also reported that the State Department announced in 2004 that Hudson County birth certificates would not be accepted as proof of citizenship in passport applications.
WASHINGTON (AP) – A fifth State Department worker has been convicted of snooping into the passport files of famous Americans.
Kevin Young, a 22-year veteran of the State Department from Temple Hills, Md., pleaded guilty Monday to illegally accessing more than 125 confidential passport applications for celebrities, professional athletes and a politician.
As a sidebar comment, WND Editor and CEO Joseph Farah has apparently coined a new term:
White House has new term for those who agree with Sarah Palin that Obamacare includes a Death Panel – “Deathers”
With much speculation around the blogosphere concerning whether or not the President ever had Indonesian citizenship when he was a small boy, WorldNetDaily reports that Mr. Obama recently referred to Jakarta, Indonesia as his “old home town” based on a White House transcript:
“Oh, I need to come to Indonesia soon,” said Obama. “I expect to be traveling to Asia at some point within the next year, and I would be surprised if when I came to Asia I did not stop by my old home town of Jakarta.”
Obama was speaking during a briefing with a handful of Mideast and Asian reporters just after his major address from Cairo to the Islamic world in June. Obama was responding specifically to an Indonesian reporter who asked why the president didn’t deliver his speech from Indonesia, which has more Muslims than Egypt. …
He engaged in an exchange with the Indonesian reporter, who informed the president he lived 300 meters from the house Obama grew up in. …
“Is that right?” asked Obama
“Yes, Menteng Dalam,” replied the reporter.
“Except now it’s all paved,” said Obama.
“Yes, it’s all paved,” the reporter said.
“Yes, see, when I was there, it was all dirt, so when the rains came it would all be mud,” stated Obama. “And all the cars would get stuck.”
“And your school is much better now,” said the reporter, referring to an Indonesian school in which Obama was enrolled as a Muslim.
“It’s nicer now, yes. OK,” Obama replied.
Was young Obama an Indonesian citizen?
An Associated Press photograph of Obama’s school registration papers as a child in Indonesia showed the president listed as a “Muslim” with “Indonesian” citizenship.
An investigation into Indonesian citizenship law and a review of Obama’s biography and travels suggest the politician at one point may have been a citizen of Indonesia. That would not necessarily disqualify Obama to serve as president, but it could raise loyalty concerns.
A 2007 Associated Press photograph taken by Tatan Syuflana, an Indonesian AP reporter and photographer, surfaced last summer on the Daylife.com photographic website showing an image of Obama’s registration card at Indonesia’s Fransiskus Assisi school, a Catholic institution.
In the picture, Obama is registered under the name Barry Soetoro by his stepfather, Lolo Soetoro. The school card lists Barry Soetoro as a Indonesian citizen born Aug. 4, 1961, in Honolulu, Hawaii. His religion is listed as Muslim.
Jack Stokes, manager of media relations for the AP, confirmed to WND the picture is indeed an AP photo.
After attending the Assisi Primary School, Obama later was enrolled at SDN Menteng 1, an Indonesian public school.
The White House did not return repeated queries asking for a clarification regarding the school documentation listing the presidential candidate’s citizenship as Indonesian.
Obama spokesmen have stated the candidate is a natural-born citizen amid rumors he may have been born in his father’s home country of Kenya. Neither Obama nor his spokespeople ever addressed whether Obama became a citizen of Indonesia at any point.
Obama’s American mother, Ann Dunham, separated from her first husband, Barack Obama Sr., in 1963 when the president was 2 years old. Dunham and Obama Sr. are reported to have later divorced. Dunham married Lolo Soetoro, an Indonesian, and moved to Indonesia sometime between 1966 and 1967.
It was not clear whether Soetoro adopted Obama, either in Hawaii or in Indonesia, but there is strong circumstantial evidence that he did as far as Indonesian law was concerned.
In Indonesia, which was under tight rule in 1967, Obama clearly took on the last name of his stepfather in school registration documents. All Indonesian students were required to carrygovernment identity cards, or Karty Tanda Pendudaks, which needed to bear the student’s legal name, which should be matched in public school registration filings.
Following his enrollment at the private Assisi school, Obama attended public schooling in Indonesia until he returned to Hawaii at age 10. According to Indonesian legal experts, it was difficult to enroll non-Indonesian citizens in public schooling.
Obama arrived in Indonesia at about the age of 5 according to most accounts, although it was possible he arrived at the age of 6, according to a few sources. If Lolo Soetoro adopted Obama at age 5 or younger, then Obama would automatically have become an Indonesian citizen according to the country’s laws in the 1960s, which stipulated any child aged 5 or younger adopted by an Indonesian father is immediately granted Indonesian citizenship upon completion of the adoption process.
Lolo Soetoro could have adopted Obama in Hawaii, although such an adoption would not have necessarily been recognized by Indonesia.
Indonesian law at the time also did not recognize dual citizenship, meaning if Obama became Indonesian, then as far as that country was concerned, his U.S. citizenship was no longer recognized by Indonesia. But U.S. law would still recognize Obama as an American citizen.
In a revelation that raised a few eyebrows, Obama in April 2008 disclosed he traveled as a college student to Pakistan in 1981.
“I traveled to Pakistan when I was in college – I knew what Sunni and Shia was [sic] before I joined the Senate Foreign Relations Committee,” Obama reportedly stated at a fundraising event.
The senator had not previously discussed any trip to Pakistan, either in his books or in scores of policy talks regarding Pakistan.
Prompted by Obama’s statements, ABC News contacted Obama’s presidential campaign, which affirmed that in 1981 – the year Obama transferred from Occidental College to Columbia University – Obama visited his mother and sister Maya in Indonesia. Obama then went on to Pakistan with a friend from college whose family was from the country, the campaign said.
Obama was in Pakistan for about three weeks, said the campaign, staying with his friend’s family in Karachi and also visiting Hyderabad in southern India.
Pakistan in 1981 was under military rule. It was difficult for U.S. citizens to travel to the country without assistance. It would have been easier for someone to enter Pakistan on an Indonesian passport.
If Obama indeed possessed Indonesian citizenship as a child, it is unlikely he retains such citizenship. The country’s bylaws require any Indonesian citizen living abroad for more than five years to formally declare his intention to return, otherwise risk losing his citizenship. The law does not necessarily mean Indonesian citizenship would be immediately lost. The law can be overruled by ministerial order.
Obama’s registration in Indonesia under the name Barry Soetoro also raises questions as to whether he adopted that name in the U.S. at any time. According to Illinois state filings reviewed by WND, when Obama registered as an attorney in 1991, under the name Barack Obama, he stated he did not have any former names.
While the name “Barry Soetoro” clearly existed for Mr. Obama at one point in his life, it could be possible that this name now no longer exists as far as official government records are concerned. At the bottom of this posting on my site, I had repeated the commentary of a certain “Kalani” from the CitizenWells blog. While it is purely someone’s conjecture on what could have happened so many years ago, I’ll re-post it here as a comparison with the above story:
Old Salt — I am saying that Obama had a LEGAL name change — from Barry Dunham (illegitimate taking mother maiden name) to Barack Hussein Obama II in Dec 1970. I do not believe it was done by the same lawyer that handled the divorce in 1964 –who I believe still maintains an office in Honolulu — because he would see through the problem of perjury instantly. It was done by someone else who would look at the problem as simply correcting a “mistake” of two individuals who married and divorced without taking care of the paperwork of the illegitimate child through an oversight or whatever reason they offered.
I’m also saying that there are two worlds operating here: The one of Barry Soetoro valid passport holder from Indonesia with an S-2 visa granted by the Jakarta Embassy in 1970. This passport and visa would be renewed in 1975 through the consulate in Honolulu — which changes hands as it is an appointed position. In Indonesia, it only recognized ONE citizenship — as there was no dual citizenship allowed at the time.
In America, Obama was operating under Barry Obama/Barry Dunham as a dual citizen until he became Barack Hussein Obama by legal name change in 1970. The US recognized dual citizenship until Obama attained majority — 18 years in this case — at which time he would be ONLY a US citizen. As Barack Hussein Obama II, he was a US citizen by default even if he didn’t render any allegiance statement.
BOTH WORLDS DID NOT TALK TO EACH OTHER. Why should they? To Indonesia, there was only Barry Soetoro, Indonesian citizen by adoption, with a legal Indonesian passport. Barack Obama did NOT exist. His change of citizenship was NOT registered with the US embassy.
To the America, Barry Soetoro as a US citizen did NOT exist. They only showed Barry Dunham who had his name legally changed in 1970 to Barack Hussein Obama II. He was a dual citizen of the US and KENYA by virtue of his birth. Indonesia does NOT come into the equation.
What is the dual citizenship game? Obama tells the schools for tuition purposes he is Barry Soetoro with proof of a passport and eligible for foreign tuition assistance as a valid student on a S-2 visa. To the registrar’s office. he is a dual citizen and registered as Barack Hussein Obama. The schools have no reason to question this scam as all the paperwork is valid.
All I’m saying is that I may be 100 percent wrong. But in my mind, the pieces of the puzzle seem to fit. …
Old Salt — Reread your post and I see how we diverge into very different conclusions — but I once again say that at this point NOTHING is invalid. You’re just as right as me because we don’t have access to Obama’s birth certificate.
Without going into all the facts that I based my conclusions on, I believe that Barry Soetoro is DEAD. I believe that Obama retained his Indonesian citizenship until 1995 when he let it lapse. Under Indonesian law, if someone abroad does NOT renew their citizenship (ie. reissuance of the passport), they lose their citizenship automatically. I believe that Obama used the last Indonesian passport to journey with Michelle Obama to Bali, Indonesia in 1993 to purported finish his autobiography (that I don’t believe for a second that he wrote) and to Kenya in 1993. He allowed this passport to lapse in 1995 — and with it the identity of Barry Soetoro — as he was now entering into Illinois politics and becoming highly visible.
I believe if someone could just prove that the FIRST US passport he was issued in 2003 upon becoming a US Senator, it would end all discussion one way or another. But of course, we all know that his passport agency records have been sealed. They may have been cleansed by his advisor who was running the contract for the State Department, but I’m sure that the issuance documents would be spikes to nail Obama’s coffin.
But the bottom line is that I believe that the Soetoro logic trail to prove Obama is not a legal POTUS is a dead end.
I readily admit that Obama is a US citizen — but I am adamant that he is NOT a natural born citizen following the logic of Leo Donofrio et al. He was born a dual citizen — first US/British — and then in 1963, US/Kenyan. Regardless of him being a native citizen or naturalized citizen, he is NOT a natural born citizen as defined in the Constitution. Our problem though is getting the US Supreme Court — or any federal court to agree to that definition.
Again, we both agreeing to the problem. We just have different views on the solution.
See the following links regarding the eligibility saga: