Some of the documentation which would help decide this is one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight:
The essence of the complaint is that the "Certification of Live Birth" that is used by FightTheSmears, the Annenberg Political FactCheck and others does not have the same information as an original birth certificate, including location of birth."Even the Hawaii Department of Home Lands does not accept a certified copy of a birth certificate as conclusive evidence for its homestead program. From its web site: ‘In order to process your application, DHHL utilizes information that is found only on the original Certificate of Live Birth, which is either black or green. This is a more complete record of your birth than the Certification of Live Birth (a computer-generated printout). Submitting the original Certificate of Live Birth will save you time and money since the computer-generated Certification requires additional verification by DHHL.'"
Surprisingly, Hawaii happens to issue birth certificates for babies born outside Hawaii. The Hawaiian law on that states:
"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."
In the comments section of a recent post, Ted Mathis stated:
3. BHO is therefore not a “natural born citizen” (irrespective of Hawaiian birth or whether he may be a 14th Amendment “citizen” of USA) — confirmed in the Senate’s own McCain qualification resolution (that both parents must be citizens of USA) co-authored by BHO.
4. Supreme Court has already docketed two upcoming conferences, 1/9/09 and 1/16/09 — between dates Congress counts electoral votes (1/8/09) and Presidential inauguration (1/20/09) — to address Berg Case and fashion relief on BHO’s eligibility to be President.
The 14th Amendment appears to scupper the Obama challenge until one returns to the material above. Hawaii issues certificates for births outside of Hawaii. My reading of this, to be fair, is that they may mean "in any other part of the United States" but they may also mean exactly what they say, with no futher stipulation. If Obama had been born in Kenya [grandmother and Kenyan Ambassador] or even in transit, then Hawaii would have been satisfied for their own purposes.
However, clearly, given link one above, he would be ineligible for natural born status, for the purposes of federal election. So there is a convoluted case here. SCOTUS accepts a Hawaiian assurance of his birth, as they have precedent in doing. Therefore he is natural born in their eyes and the case goes no further. However, to go back to the setting aside of Dred Scott [link four above], the differentiation between state and federal law was preserved, not overturned.
So there is a logical impossibility here. "Natural born" is not defined and depends on congressional statements or court interpretation and precedent. In federal law, if he was not born in a Hawaiian hospital but Hawaii accepted the "intent" of being Hawaiian, then he is natural born in terms of their acceptance of the Hawaiian statement to that effect but not natural born in terms of their own conditions.
At the very least, this requires a court case. However, private persons have been ruled to have no standing to bring a case against an elected federal official, e.g. Berg. Only congress has that standing and it is Democratic.
The clear answer to this is that Obama was born on Hawaiian soil.
But where? There is no Hawaiian hospital nor presiding doctor or nurse stated anywhere in the Obama camp reply. The name of the hospital has to be on the vault copy and Fact Check [an Obama camp website] says it has viewed it and yet it has not been stated. More than that, they are refusing to state it.
There is a case, with the grandmother and others, claiming he was born at Mombasa Coastal Hospital in Kenya. Records are now sealed in Kenya.
The official Obama camp claim is that he was born at Queens Medical Center in Honolulu. His sister Mary claimed he was born at Kapiolani Medical Center for Women and Children. There is no record of either the birth or the mother having attended those hospitals.
These hospitals were contacted by Republicans and none had records of Obama's birth.
Many reference materials say Obama was born at Kapiolani, including Wikipedia English version under the subject “Barack Obama.” But under the subject “Queens Hospital,” Wikipedia says Obama was born there. And Wikipedia Italian says this:
Add to this the AFI tape. AFI originally produced a transcript in which Michelle Obama states:
That one is easily solved. Did she say it or not? Produce the tapes where it was said and all is resolved. But this has not happened and it has gone into the same circular non-resolution in which all the other questions have now fallen.
This issue won't go away because it has not been resolved. Whatever is on that certificate is sufficiently important for the Obama camp to ignore a SCOTUS member demand that it be produced. At the very least, they are being secretive and it is no defence to say it is a private matter. To hell with that - this man is to become president.
This smells, it truly does. There is untruth by omission in here. It has to be resolved.
On a personal note, there's a very simple test of the intent of this blog on this and the Gaza matter, of whether this is a vendetta of mine. If you were to take out the name of Israel and Hamas and substitute Palestine and Irgun, would this blog's stance have been the same? Similarly, if it had been McCain in this situation and not Obama, would this have still been pursued as it has?However, clearly, given link one above, he would be ineligible for natural born status, for the purposes of federal election. So there is a convoluted case here. SCOTUS accepts a Hawaiian assurance of his birth, as they have precedent in doing. Therefore he is natural born in their eyes and the case goes no further. However, to go back to the setting aside of Dred Scott [link four above], the differentiation between state and federal law was preserved, not overturned.
So there is a logical impossibility here. "Natural born" is not defined and depends on congressional statements or court interpretation and precedent. In federal law, if he was not born in a Hawaiian hospital but Hawaii accepted the "intent" of being Hawaiian, then he is natural born in terms of their acceptance of the Hawaiian statement to that effect but not natural born in terms of their own conditions.
At the very least, this requires a court case. However, private persons have been ruled to have no standing to bring a case against an elected federal official, e.g. Berg. Only congress has that standing and it is Democratic.
The clear answer to this is that Obama was born on Hawaiian soil.
But where? There is no Hawaiian hospital nor presiding doctor or nurse stated anywhere in the Obama camp reply. The name of the hospital has to be on the vault copy and Fact Check [an Obama camp website] says it has viewed it and yet it has not been stated. More than that, they are refusing to state it.
There is a case, with the grandmother and others, claiming he was born at Mombasa Coastal Hospital in Kenya. Records are now sealed in Kenya.
The official Obama camp claim is that he was born at Queens Medical Center in Honolulu. His sister Mary claimed he was born at Kapiolani Medical Center for Women and Children. There is no record of either the birth or the mother having attended those hospitals.
These hospitals were contacted by Republicans and none had records of Obama's birth.
Many reference materials say Obama was born at Kapiolani, including Wikipedia English version under the subject “Barack Obama.” But under the subject “Queens Hospital,” Wikipedia says Obama was born there. And Wikipedia Italian says this:
Barack Obama nacque al Queen’s Medical Center di Honolulu da Barack Hussein Obama Sr….
Wikipedia Geneology says Queens too. And there’s this reference on Yahoo Answers:
Apparently, examination of the hospitals’ records in Hawaii have shown no birthing records for Ann Dunham Obama even though there is a registry of the birth in the public records office a week after his date of birth it does not show his place of birth.
Perhaps that Yahoo Answer explains Ann Dunham’s brief stop-over in Mercer Island with baby Barack when he was only a couple of weeks old. Is it possible that she was on her way back to Hawaii?
The State of Hawaii does provide for “late registration” births.
Does anyone know in which hospital Stanley Ann Dunham delivered Barack Obama?
UPDATE: A reader, Aragon, adds…
Alternatively, I ask, “Can anyone identify a written statement or interview or recorded statement wherein Obama, himself, identifies which hospital he was born in?” I’ve asked this question for a month now. No statement has been idenitified by anyone here or elsewhere. The inference to be drawn from this is obvious. He doesn’t identify a hospital because it is something that can be factually verified or debunked and this would compromise his aura of plausable deniability when it comes to issues of his true birth place.
Add to this the AFI tape. AFI originally produced a transcript in which Michelle Obama states:
My husband and I know that there is no law that will stop him from becoming the president, just because some American white racists are bringing up the issue of my husband's adoption by his stepfather.
That one is easily solved. Did she say it or not? Produce the tapes where it was said and all is resolved. But this has not happened and it has gone into the same circular non-resolution in which all the other questions have now fallen.
This issue won't go away because it has not been resolved. Whatever is on that certificate is sufficiently important for the Obama camp to ignore a SCOTUS member demand that it be produced. At the very least, they are being secretive and it is no defence to say it is a private matter. To hell with that - this man is to become president.
This smells, it truly does. There is untruth by omission in here. It has to be resolved.
The answer is an emphatic yes. Damned right. This blog has no affiliation one way or the other, except to the ideal called the truth. This is not to say that I am a moral person or a saint - merely that I want to know the truth on any issue.
CHALLENGE (with answer), CAN ANYONE PROVE THIS WRONG?:–
ReplyDelete1. Constitution Article II requires USA President to be “natural born citizen”.
2. BHO’s website admits his dad was Kenyan/British, not American, citizen when BHO was born.
3. BHO is therefore not a “natural born citizen” (irrespective of Hawaiian birth or whether he may be a 14th Amendment “citizen” of USA) — confirmed in the Senate’s own McCain qualification resolution (that both parents must be citizens of USA) co-authored by BHO.
4. Supreme Court has already docketed two upcoming conferences, 1/9/09 and 1/16/09 — between dates Congress counts electoral votes (1/8/09) and Presidential inauguration (1/20/09) — to address Berg Case and fashion relief on BHO’s eligibility to be President.
5. Since the fact of BHO’s dad being Kenyan/British not in dispute, Supreme Court rules on Summary Judgment to enjoin BHO’s inauguration as President.
6. Therefore, BHO is not inaugurated as President.
7. Vice President Elect Biden is inaugurated Acting President under the 20th Amendment to serve until new President is determined — the procedure for which determination to be set out by Congress and/or the Supreme Court so long as in conformance with the Constitution.
ANSWER TO ABOVE CHALLENGE
IF, when counting the electoral votes, Congress WERE TO find by 1/8/09 that Obama — not being an Article II “natural born citizen” (father Kenyan/British, not American) — fails to qualify as President, Biden would become the full fledged President under 3 USC 19 (free to pick his own VP such as Hillary) AND THERE WOULD BE NO NEED FOR DEFERRAL TO THE SUPREME COURT to enjoin Obama’s inauguration relegating Biden to being merely Acting President under the 20th Amendment until a new President were duly determined.
(The preferable choice, at least for the Democrats, would seem obvious.)
James, I know that you can't know for sure, but do you genuinely believe, as you say in the post, that:
ReplyDelete"The clear answer to this is that Obama was born on Hawaiian soil."
The more I read this stuff, the more I doubt he was. If you were him and you were born on Hawaiian soil, then surely you would have given proper evidence for that ages ago when (presumably) the Hillary camp unearthed this.
Interesting article-and good on you for NOT letting it drop, James-and comment above.
ReplyDeleteAlthough, I find Biden most unsavory the, bigger issue, I should think, would be the preservation of the U.S Constitution-otherwise clauses ,rights & protections can be set aside at whim.
The American people should be outraged at that idea, on that issue alone, not sweep it under the carpet because they like Obama's image.
Letting a non- American run the most powerful country in the world is setting a very dangerous precedent.
Ubermouth- noone is arguing that Barack Obama is not an American- they are arguing about a part of the constitution which says you have to be a naturally born American.
ReplyDeleteJames- you know I disagree with you and am not going to run through the arguments again here. But I'm interested in the way you use Wikipedia here- because in a sense, Wikipedia is not written neccessarily by people who know what they are talking about. Its a source I am always very cautious about using because I don't know who the author is- what's your opinion of it as a source?
James, a few months ago the Volokh Conspiracy had a good deabte about what "natural born" might mean. Have you seen it?
ReplyDeleteTed, I'm puzzled by your point 3. If O was born in Hawaii, why would he not be a natural born citizen?
ReplyDeleteHere's a right Volokhing.
ReplyDeletehttp://volokh.com/posts/1227910730.shtml
Two thoughts-
(i) There is a cover-up, but all that everyone is covering up is that the bloody thing has been lost.
(ii) Or, now we know why he appointed Clinton Secretary of State.
There is certainly something going on here and we haven't quite identified it yet. Perhaps the next post [now up] will help this.
ReplyDeleteSpecifically to Gracchi:
Tiberius, Hawaii accepts birth registrations out of state. That's been established.
Now if Obama had been born in Washington State, as seems likely in the next post [not Kenya], you'd get your way about him being natural born.
So why doesn't Obama pursue this line? For a very good reason. It puts his mother in with the Nation of Islam and raises doubts about the parentage.
Uni records show she attended in Hawaii in September, 1960. But UW records showed she was enrolled there in August 1961.
So did she leave the baby in Hawaii with her mother and Obama Snr to skip off to UW or did she leave Obama Snr before that and where was she those six months?
Where was she when she gave birth? This is where the Mercer Island stopover comes in. It appears she was there around the time of the birth, not in Hawaii.
The thing is that we're all having to do the work on this but Obama himself remains silent and points to two things only - his election and the computer copy of the certificate.
You see the problem?
Dearieme:
ReplyDeleteI've just read Volokh and it does not actually add terribly much. It still comes down to if Obama is born on US soil, he's natural and if overseas, he can be a citizen.
If he was born outside, then, under Hawaiian law, his parents can claim residency in Hawaii and he is registered there, even though he technically wasn't born there. It does not necessarily mean "natural", only a citizen.
There is no indication on the computer copy either way. However, there very much is an indication on the vault copy, which has been sealed and which he refuses to produce.
The legal problem is that Hawaiian law and federal are two different things. While SCOTUS generally accepts a state's assurance, its own law precludes a non-natural citizen. SCOTUS is caught in its own dilemma.
In the end, there are those missing six months to account for.
Of course, if he was born in Washington State, he'd be natural again. So why doesn't he clear it up?
You suggest possibly "certificate lost". I'd say it's more that, if not born in Kenya or on the plane, he was born in Washington State but that makes a liar of Hawaii, results in the vault copy being ordered and then the real parentage and place being known.
I'd suggest this would scupper the Obama presidency before January 20th and after it, would result in impeachment proceedings.
Faced with this, the only thing he can do is stay silent and point to his internet site computer copy.
James- if you are suggesting he was born in washington- why would that lead to his impeachment? What high crime and misdemeanour would he have committed?
ReplyDeleteOK, I'll stop teasing. My guess - for what little it is worth - is that there's something on his birth certificate that he finds terribly embarrassing. It must be bad - since his grandmother has died, it's not just something over which he wants to spare her feelings. He is now permanently exposed to blackmail over whatever it is by all those people in on the secret.
ReplyDeleteMaybe his father was a known black panther.
ReplyDeleteTiberius - I'm a bit surprised you'd ask that. He has lied to the American people. They all do it but not all are caught out. Nixon was and look what happened. The lie can even be a small one but if it is catalogued, then there is a case.
ReplyDeleteDearieme has it right that BHO would be open to blackmail but I suspect he is well down that path already and one more would not be a greatly added burden.
I think Obama was open to his main backers, as one is to one's attorneys and they said "Go for it," to him. They'd advise and protect him. Big stakes here, aren't there?