Kos posts copy of Obama’s birth certificate; Update: Certification, not certificate
posted at 12:13 pm on June 12, 2008 by Allahpundit
Send to a Friend |
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
No word of how he got it — Team Barry isn’t actually leaking to dKos, is it? — and naturally he misunderstands Jim Geraghty’s point about Obama’s place of birth, which would have been relevant not with respect to his “Americanness” but whether he was constitutionally qualified to run as a natural-born citizen. But here it is.
Update: Not that it matters for purposes of addressing Geraghty’s concerns, but Flip notes that the posted document is a certification of birth, which is slightly different from a birth certificate.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: [1] 2 3 »
Good. Now let’s all shut up about this foolhardy line of attack before CBS tries to make their own karma.
MadisonConservative on June 12, 2008 at 12:15 PM
No place of birth? Is the hospital not usually named?
Kasper Hauser on June 12, 2008 at 12:17 PM
Oh, krykee doodle!
You’re actually gonna make us go over to that sewer??
I want my $$ back……
locomotivebreath1901 on June 12, 2008 at 12:17 PM
Oh, the savior was born. There goes the spore theory.
HotJavaJack on June 12, 2008 at 12:18 PM
Seems legit. OK.
Dr.Cwac.Cwac on June 12, 2008 at 12:19 PM
I’m not the smartest apple in the orchard but does it show a revision date of 11/01 at the bottom left corner?
186k on June 12, 2008 at 12:19 PM
There’s a reverse stamp that looks like June 6 2007 in the lower right quadrant. I’m not sure if we’re supposed to debunk this or what…
Its a stupid line of attack anyway.
jimmy the notable on June 12, 2008 at 12:19 PM
Isn’t there usually a doctor’s signature?
Dr.Cwac.Cwac on June 12, 2008 at 12:19 PM
It’s not an original.
JiangxiDad on June 12, 2008 at 12:21 PM
The dates are not a problem. This is not an original, but an official certificate produced by the state in response to a request. This is what is officially in the state records–assuming it is in fact a real certificate.
Kasper Hauser on June 12, 2008 at 12:22 PM
Yes, but my official certificate does not contain as much info. as my original.
JiangxiDad on June 12, 2008 at 12:23 PM
That’s as fake as the day is long folks. The roots never cease to amaze me with their ignorance. It is mighty tidy though.
Griz on June 12, 2008 at 12:23 PM
Yes, it is not an original. The form has a revision date of Nov. 2001 on the bottom left.
SPCOlympics on June 12, 2008 at 12:24 PM
Ummm…
No signatures…
Date of revisions are wrong…
No hospital of birth…
Fathers race “African” (I don’t think they used those terms during that time… african is NOT a Legaly defined Race).
I call BS. Anyone have access to a REAL Birth Certificate from Hawaii at that time?
Romeo13 on June 12, 2008 at 12:25 PM
What about it makes it look fake? Dunno much about production of bc’s.
inviolet on June 12, 2008 at 12:25 PM
This debunks nothing. It’s not an original birth certificate. It’s just data reprinted on a laser printer, which any operative could do on an office printer. It’s also printed on paycheck style paper which I highly doubt existed in 1961. Also, where’s the notary stamp? Yes, it’s stamped on the back Jan or Jun 6 2007, so it appears in reverse. What could this possibly prove aside from the fact that it raises more questions about why there’s an effort to show us anything but an original document? Also, where’s the nicotine stains on the paper?
I think DumbKos is just printing up their own t.p.
Western_Civ on June 12, 2008 at 12:25 PM
That’s good to hear, because I’m no font expert, but it looks like its written in Helvetica, a font that didn’t exist in the 60s. I watched a documentary about the invention of Helvetica…
jimmy the notable on June 12, 2008 at 12:25 PM
Reluctantly, there was no known address of the manger he was born. Currently trying to locate three Wise Men who were actually at the scene.
trs on June 12, 2008 at 12:25 PM
No.. doc signatures are not usually on them… especially those that are requested AFTER years after the birth.
But what bothers me is that is doesn’t list a hospital or a place for home birth (if that is the case). Hell even my BC has a hospital on it….
upinak on June 12, 2008 at 12:26 PM
On mine, it is.
And the black text on this wide open field of the background, is awfully sharp and crisp for being a copy.
wise_man on June 12, 2008 at 12:27 PM
OK, I see the cross posts. Well I suppose the bloggers will sort this one out. Not waitin’ on the MSM…
inviolet on June 12, 2008 at 12:27 PM
I’m not interested in his “original” name or middle name or religion. I am interested & concerned about his socialist policies.
rbj on June 12, 2008 at 12:28 PM
Barack Hussein Obama is “illegitimate,” as his mother was never married to his father according to US law. By definition you cannot “marry” someone if you are already married to someone else. That is bigamy.
Before he came to America to study, Obama Sr. (aged 18) married his first wife Kezia in what is often described as a “tribal” marriage. (1)
They had four children, two before he went to Hawaii, and two after he returned to Kenya from the United States.
He never divorced Kezia, who now lives in Bracknell, Berkshire, England.
Therefore he was still married to his first Kenyan wife when he went through a bigamous American “marriage” with Barack’s mother, Ann Dunham.
So, shouldn’t the Senator be called Barack Dunham?
Also… you might ask, if Barack Jr’s father renounced his Muslim faith, as the Senator has claimed, how did he manage to rack up three wives concurrently? That would be a Muslim only practice in Kenya.
Just sayin!!
MARRIAGE LAW BACKGROUND/US and KENYA
(1.)
I have seen Barack Obama Sr.’s first marriage being described as “tribal” as if to say it doesn’t count. That is incorrect.
Kenyan Law under both British colonial rule and under the 1963 constitution recognizes FOUR marriage systems: Christian or Civil, Mohammedan, Traditional African, and Hindu.
Now even if it was claimed that Obama’s first marriage was a common law marriage and not subject to an official divorce to terminate, think again.
Here’s the basis for Common law or Informal marriage regarding immigrants in the USA.
Certain places allow a marriage to be made by two people without formal registry, without witnesses or family, and sometimes without a civil or religious official present to sanctify or ratify the marriage. In the US these are often called common law marriages because they originated in the English common law tradition but they may be called “informal” “customary” “tribal” or by another name. Are these recognized as valid marriages for immigration purposes?
The general rule is that if the place where the marriage took place recognizes the marriage as valid, then it should be considered valid everywhere and valid for immigration purposes.
It is required that any previous marriages be shown to be lawfully terminated. This is usually shown by a death certificate or a divorce or annulment decree but there may be other ways. Also, a valid traditional or common law marriage must be terminated in an acceptable way…they do not end with a change of mind…
Jack Bauer on June 12, 2008 at 12:28 PM
It is a reproduction.
If you lose or something with your BC and get a replacement, they do look like that to a point. I had to get a new one due to Passport.
But what bothers me is no “place” of birth.. i.e. hospital. Very Odd.
upinak on June 12, 2008 at 12:28 PM
Looks as phony as Obama himself.
Father’s race “African“?
B.S. bells going off!
profitsbeard on June 12, 2008 at 12:29 PM
Let me be the first to call BS and keep the conspiracy going. :-) Looks like a photo shop. The certificate background around the font is fuzzy.
What’s with the laser, Ariel font? He’s my and my wife’s age, and, well, mine is typed, you can see the indents in the paper. My wife is from Mindanao PI and hers is hand written with an actual postage like “Stamp” from the official in her village.
Alden Pyle on June 12, 2008 at 12:29 PM
Heh, his mom’s name was “Stanley”. I didn’t know that.
Whoops. Sorry, guess that’s a smeeeeear.
Rhinoboy on June 12, 2008 at 12:29 PM
When someone requests a validated copy of their birth certificate, they don’t get a photocopy of the original. They get a fresh certificate with a seal showing that it came from the official registrar, in most states. They keep the info in a computer and produced validated copies on request.
This is a validated copy of the birth certificate, with which Obama could get a passport, register to vote, etc etc. It’s perfectly acceptable.
Ed Morrissey on June 12, 2008 at 12:30 PM
I think it is a fake. Back then it would have been type in, and would not cover up the green background with the wording of the names. Also notice on the lower right hand corner, it says backwards, “JUN -6 2007″. Sounds kind of fishy to me.
ConservativePartyNow on June 12, 2008 at 12:30 PM
No doctor’s name, no hospital named…no occupation listed for the parents. No normal birth certificate stuff.
Pulchritudinous Patriot on June 12, 2008 at 12:30 PM
I got married in Hawaii and that is the exact same background paper as on my marriage certificate, and mine was generated in 2003; this is obviously not an original. AND, there was a lot more information on my cert than seems to be present on his birth certificate. There is no big blank space as we see there; I’m not buying it.
BigAnge on June 12, 2008 at 12:32 PM
This copy of a birth certificate was issued in Jun 6 2007. I think it’s a fake.
p0s3r on June 12, 2008 at 12:32 PM
But Ed, those who have gotten BC’s recently show a hospital or where ever they were born on the cert, unless the child was born in a home residence and at times that is also stated.
Not saying this is a conspiracy though… just odd.
upinak on June 12, 2008 at 12:33 PM
I’d be curious to see another birth certificate from the same hospital that year and do a “Charles Johnson” (throbbing .gif) to see if the fields and type are the same. Just sayin’
fudgypup on June 12, 2008 at 12:33 PM
Ahhh!! Stop the conspiracy mongering!! But I learned something new about Obama — he’s named after his father and is actually Barack Hussein Obama II (why not “Obama, Jr.” is beyond me). Never knew that.
As far as Obama’s father’s race being identified as “African,” can we get a historian or geneaologist in here to comment as to whether Hawaii would have referred to Obama, Sr. as an “African” in 1961?
Outlander on June 12, 2008 at 12:33 PM
Geez — haven’t any of you requested a birth certificate from your state recently? This is obviously not the original and likely the result of a request from last spring (hence the Jun 07 stamp). It’s A birth certificate, not THE birth certificate.
Cuffy Meigs on June 12, 2008 at 12:33 PM
It appears to be a valid birth certificate issued by the state, but not an original one. I’d prefer to see a certified copy. I’d like someone with knowledge of Hawaiian birth certificates to speak up about it.
Assuming this isn’t a forgery, I am grateful to Mr Moulitsas for posting this. It saves us a lot of time here. Thank you, Kos.
I retract all my earlier speculations based on this birth certificate story.
Astrologers and New Age fanatics take note: BHO’s time and day of birth is August 4, 1961 at 7:24 PM. Should be fascinating.
There is still the issue of medical records. McCain let reporters go through all of his. They found nothing unexpected.
BHO Jr has never let reporters see his medical records. BHO could be hiding drug rehab, or perhaps a communicable disease. It’s time to let the reporters see his records. We have a right to know what’s in there.
indythinker on June 12, 2008 at 12:34 PM
Who cares about this crap, yes it is not a very good fabrication and kind of stupid but so what? There are plenty of other reasons why I’m not voting for Obama.
saltydogg14 on June 12, 2008 at 12:34 PM
Me thinks this is not the original BC, rather a reprint that is given when a request is made for a lost certificate. They basically print up this new version from the laser printer with the data contained in the database. Many states no longer give copies of the archived original. It is on the original document that you would find the hospital name and doctor’s details, etc.
The reverse stamp is most likely the date stamped on the back of the document of the day this was printed. Much like a postmark. So this certificate was printed in June 2007 using the Rev 11/1 version of the certificate form.
AverageJoe on June 12, 2008 at 12:34 PM
Guys, if you go down this road, it will collapse miserably. This is identical to the Bush National Guard situation, except you’re in the position of CBS. It’s low politics, and it’s a powder keg.
MadisonConservative on June 12, 2008 at 12:35 PM
It’s not the original. It represents the current official state record. That’s all.
It’s missing any record of changes made over time. For myself, I have both the official state record (like this one,) and a copy of my original birth certificate. The original gives the hospital data and shows that my parents decided they didn’t like the first name they gave me, and they changed it about a week later. My official state record shows no hospital information or any changes. Only the final result.
RBMN on June 12, 2008 at 12:37 PM
Outlander on June 12, 2008 at 12:33 PM
What I said is a fact.
Barack’s father eneterd into a bigamous marriage with Ann Dunham, and was therefore never married to her.
He never divorced his first wife of the three he had by the Muslim tradition of polygamy. That is contrary to United Stets law which does not recognize polygamy.
Ann Dunham was NEVER married to Brack Obama Sr according to US law.
What is it about the word bigamy you don’t understand?
Jack Bauer on June 12, 2008 at 12:38 PM
As others have pointed out, font analysis and all that stuff is worthless here, because this is just a copy, and not even a “copy” in the sense of “replica of the original,” but more like an edition of the record.
boko fittleworth on June 12, 2008 at 12:40 PM
Jack Bauer,
I agree that it appears BHO II was born illegitimate as BHO I was already married when he “married” BHO II’s mother. The marriage of BHO I and Stanley Ann Dunham was always void as bigamy.
I think they legally could give their baby any name they wanted to at birth, and therefore it was OK to name him BHO II and not BHO Jr or give him the last name of Dunham.
In America, of course, we don’t penalize people for being born illegitimate. The stigma is on BHO II’s parents for not being married when he was born.
indythinker on June 12, 2008 at 12:40 PM
Don’t know about Hawai’i, but my CA birth certificate (I have a copy) has a stamp on its front certifying that the copy came from the county registrar/recorder’s office.
And it does seem pretty short of information compared to the few I’ve seen. Maybe bureaucracy is more relaxed on the islands?
MrScribbler on June 12, 2008 at 12:41 PM
Im staring at a copy of my daughters birth cert… which I got from California last year…
It has place of birth (hospital), and Witnesses to the birth listed on it (Doctor and such).
Romeo13 on June 12, 2008 at 12:41 PM
Why not a source cited for this “scan”?
It just appeared on kos’s desk?
garry on June 12, 2008 at 12:41 PM
Phonier than a $3 Bill -
Doesn’t look like any Birth Cert I have ever seen -
BS!!!!
iam7545 on June 12, 2008 at 12:41 PM
As a child of a polygamist, there is now a question of how seriously BHO II would crack down on polygamy if God forbid he actually became president.
indythinker on June 12, 2008 at 12:42 PM
This is not an original birth certificate. It will not list all of the information an original certificate from the 60s would. I don’t see anything here to question its authenticity. If you request your own birth certificate from any state in the Union, it will be similar to this one. I know the ones from Texas are almost identical. This one still lists time of birth. The one I saw yesterday from an 8 year old that was a certified copy, didn’t even do that much.
I would venture to say that this is an official document.
Sue on June 12, 2008 at 12:42 PM
Obviously a fraud.
Everyone knows the Messiah was born on December 25th!
Corky on June 12, 2008 at 12:44 PM
I’m starting to see the seeds of Obama Derangement Syndrome which is a shame because there is a lot wrong with Candidate Obama that does not have to do with conspiracy theories. Here a couple of bullet points to get things rolling:
* Obama is complete lightweight with the majority of experience is politics involving campaigning for office.
* Obama sells himself as a partisan figure while his limited voting records puts him to the left of Ted Kennedy.
* Obama is calling for a trillion dollars in new government programs
* Rezko and his shady chicago political ties
Shtetl G on June 12, 2008 at 12:45 PM
In America, of course, we don’t penalize people for being born illegitimate.
And quite rightly too.
But Barack’s father must have remained a practising Muslim because by Kenyan LAW, only Mohammedans can practise polygamy.
Which conflicts with the oft quoted “”fact” that Obama Sr, renounced his Muslim faith.
Jack Bauer on June 12, 2008 at 12:45 PM
so he’s older than me by decades and his birth certificate looks brand new?
fake…
Kaptain Amerika on June 12, 2008 at 12:46 PM
Much as you’d expect a Messiah’s birth certificate to look.
saint kansas on June 12, 2008 at 12:46 PM
Are you sure that’s a ‘2007′?
Looks like ‘2006′, as in June 6, 2006, or ‘666′
/immitation of left wing kook–tin foil hat off
cntrlfrk on June 12, 2008 at 12:46 PM
If you enlarge the birth certificate, you will see a backwards date stamped in blue, I think it says JUN - 6, 2007. So whoever had this birth certificate has had it for a while.
Sue on June 12, 2008 at 12:46 PM
I don’t think anyone really cares about Obama and what this birth certificate means. But if we can use this to prove Kos to be more of an idiot, then bring it on.
BohicaTwentyTwo on June 12, 2008 at 12:46 PM
I adopted my wife’s two sons and we received birth certificates for them nearly identical to this one. It listed me as the father just like I was there at the birth.
I think it is an official document, although I don’t know whether this scan has been tampered with.
txsurveyor on June 12, 2008 at 12:47 PM
In fact, the copy of a birth certificate I’m looking at from Texas doesn’t even list the race of the parents. The original would have.
Sue on June 12, 2008 at 12:47 PM
Nein. I call BS… no hospital, African not race, as noted above for both) also, I thought Barry’s Dad was named something else?
max1 on June 12, 2008 at 12:48 PM
This copy is a year old. There’s nothing on it that should concern the Obama campaign. So why have they been so coy about releasing it?
infidel65 on June 12, 2008 at 12:48 PM
Could someone who was born in Hawaii please do the following?
Request a certified copy of your birth record. Go to this web site:
http://hawaii.gov/health/vital-records/vital-records/vital_records.html and follow the instructions. You can apply in person or by mail.
Once you get it, could you black out the info and post it?
I want to know: (A) did anyone sign your certified copy of the birth record (B) was there a notary seal or anything on it, and (C) was the hospital listed.
Thank you. This could be very important to our country’s future.
indythinker on June 12, 2008 at 12:48 PM
Someone was learning how to use photoshop?
txsurveyor on June 12, 2008 at 12:49 PM
I don’t know if the document has been tampered with, but I do know that there is nothing obvious about the one on Kos to claim it is fake. Any court in the country would accept it as official.
Sue on June 12, 2008 at 12:49 PM
The seal looks correct. What concerns me is that it might be “registered” birth.
Another thing………….birth certificates are issued by the Department of Health, Office of Health Status Monitoring, Vital Statistics Division. There is nothing on there except “Department of Health”.
It could be possible that the birth certificate was a “late” registration.
Dr.Cwac.Cwac on June 12, 2008 at 12:49 PM
Why is the stamped date of something like Nov 3, 2007(3) backwards on the document??
Weebork on June 12, 2008 at 12:49 PM
States issue these abbreviated versions because the originals sometimes have parent’s address, birth height, birth weight, religion, and other information that’s unnecessary when you’re just proving when and where you were born.
RBMN on June 12, 2008 at 12:50 PM
Fathers Race
AFRICAN????
As far as I know that is not a legaly permisable racial category. On other birth certs is says either Race, or country of origin…. African is neither.
And its interesting that Mom is listed as Caucasian, a very precise legal term.
Romeo13 on June 12, 2008 at 12:50 PM
My mother does a lot of genealogy. This is NOT an original birth certificate, this is an extract. If the birth certificate were updated/changed it would not be reflected in this document.
While this is a silly avenue to pursue (it was silly about McCain too), this is NOT proof of his name or anything else. While an official document, it isn’t anything but a computerized copy of the extract.
Skeptic on June 12, 2008 at 12:50 PM
I really couldn’t care one whit about this line of attack, but I do despise Kos and like it when he’s discredited, so here’s what I notice about the scan (aside from the “curious” nature of it’s sudden appearance):
Having worked for Kinko’s for nine years, you see lots of forgeries.
When official docs such as this are copied, the background pattern, exactly like this one, are made to say “Copy” when scanned or copied. This one doesn’t have it.
I hope it’s forgery, not because I think it’s a valid line of attack, but simply to humiliate Kos.
SouthernDem on June 12, 2008 at 12:50 PM
It was stamped on the back. I would assume the official seal is back there too. Which is why you can’t see it on the front of the document. People need to back off this unless and until someone can prove and I say PROVE, the document shown was tampered with.
Sue on June 12, 2008 at 12:51 PM
So what was the big deal with not releasing it?
its vintage duh on June 12, 2008 at 12:51 PM
That’s true, but would the “copy” show if you just took a digital picture of it rather than scanning?
txsurveyor on June 12, 2008 at 12:52 PM
That is an astute point. I hadn’t even thought of that. Is there some kind of a conserative Wiki that tabulates all this info that we are gathering?
BHO II is a tireless liar. We need to get the facts together on him.
indythinker on June 12, 2008 at 12:52 PM
kos debunked nothing. This isn’t how certificates were done in 1961 and as many commentors pointed out, the lack of information on it is suspect. I just used mine last week and my birth was 1964..I actually had 2 certificates to choose from(we thought my Mom had lost the original so I got a newer copy) and both had the hospital, time of birth, etc on them.
Pam on June 12, 2008 at 12:53 PM
Hmm, wasn’t the word “negro” used to describe the race of AA’s in those days before PC? And while we are on that, why is it that the NAACP is not PC enough to change the name to NAAAA (National Association for Advancement of African-Americans)? I thought that the term “colored people” was offensive.
carbon_footprint on June 12, 2008 at 12:53 PM
Dan Rather?
geckomon on June 12, 2008 at 12:55 PM
I agree, in the grand scheme of things, this line of inquiry is silly and not worth the distraction in the greater war of ideas.
However …
http://www.noveltyid.us/birth_certificates.htm
furytrader on June 12, 2008 at 12:55 PM
From Kos article …..
Idiots indeed.
fogw on June 12, 2008 at 12:55 PM
As far as I know, Seals and notarized docs HAVE to have the Seal on the FRONT of the document, to proove its legit.
Otherwise its too easy to copy somthing onto the BACK of the doc…
Romeo13 on June 12, 2008 at 12:55 PM
Good point, and my guess is probably not, but I can’t be sure.
But Kos says it’s a scan. It definitely shows on scans.
SouthernDem on June 12, 2008 at 12:56 PM
For the DoH Vital Records website
The Certificate of Hawaiian Birth program was cancelled in 1972.
Dr.Cwac.Cwac on June 12, 2008 at 12:56 PM
I wonder if Hawaii issued Bastard Warrants back in the 60s?
luckybogey on June 12, 2008 at 12:57 PM
Obama’s wikipedia profile says he was born August 4th.
What gives?
Pcoop on June 12, 2008 at 12:58 PM
Suppose Obama had legally changed his name as an adult. What would this new validated copy of the birth certificate show, his original name, or new name?
I don’t know if there’s anything to this, but this modern, new copy doesn’t necessarily provide the same information as the original.
JiangxiDad on June 12, 2008 at 12:59 PM
Why will he release this thing but not his birth certificate?
Buddahpundit on June 12, 2008 at 12:59 PM
The revision date is the date the form was revised by the state.
That aside, this document does not reflect any changes made to the official record of birth for Barack Hussein Obama II (name as shown on the referenced document). It is a certified copied, a copy used for legal purposes, of the birth record as it is presently on file with the state.
The only way to determine the original record of birth is to acquire a certified photocopy of the original birth certificate as provided by many other states for proof of birth based on original records.
This document here is of no real value.
Sunshein on June 12, 2008 at 1:00 PM
Precisely.
JiangxiDad on June 12, 2008 at 1:01 PM
This whole birth certificate thing is a red herring. Now what I demand to see is the certification of ‘immaculate conception’, being the Messiah and all.
mustng66 on June 12, 2008 at 1:02 PM
This is not a Birth Certificate. It is just Certifying a birth wherein someone said BHO was born on that date, in Hawaii, Mom white, Dad black.
All it proves is someone wanted to show BHO was born on a certain date in Hawaii. Since the term “African” was used as fathers race, I’m inclined to think the certificate was issued way after 1961.
More important is the verifying info that was given to HI public health to obtain the certificate, and when the certificate was requested. Falsifying info to obtain the Certificate is illegal.
Enlightened on June 12, 2008 at 1:06 PM
This is beyond addressing Geraghty’s concerns, which aren’t complete. Passportgate and why that was initiated by the Obama camp is what it should be about.
Sorry for this long post, but I strung together what I’d commented on topic the other day, when Geraghty raised the issue/s.
The certificate is just one part, and doesn’t answer the concerns. They must be demanded by the media and the blogs to be addressed, for someone applying for this job.
The media and the blogs need to demand vigorously the outcome of Passporgate, soon, ahead of the convention in Denver.
They have known this for at least a few months and some are diligently at work to resolve it, from both sides of the isle, incredibly.
It came fully to their attention when Passportgate broke. Please make a huge note of this - that’s where the kernel lies, to be sprouted.
To preempt whatever it is they’re concerned about, the Obama team (via the guy in charge of the contractors involved in Passportgate - he is a prominent former CIA analyst, who at the time was also Obama’s advisor, and was contracted to the State Department, along with his underlings who, by his direction) got the passport dossiers of Obama, Hillary and Mr. Cheney opened, not knowing that they’d be caught by corss-check systems at State - got busy trying to retrieve the records so as to never have to risk them seeing the light.
However, the three who did the dirty work were caught. The chief had no idea that the department had a backup and corss-check system in place, which caught them.
If you recall, two were fired immediately, and the third, who’s cooperating with the investigation, was retained by the State Dapartment until the investigation is over.
If you also recall, when Passportgate first broke, Obama yelled the ‘loudest’ on how carless the Bush Admin. is with the records. Please recall that by breaking into the dossiers they wanted to retrieve Obama’s, but got a hold also of Hillary’s and Mr. Cheney’s, I believe (I’m sure about Obama and Hillary, but there was a 3rd one, and I think it was Mr. Cheney’s).
Anyway, it was a cover on the part of Obama to yell so loud, because the break-in was done by his side. Immediately as they were trapped, Condoleezza Rice put the kabash/lid on it, and after that complete SILENCE.
Then there was the faux McCain citizenship rah, rah, and recall that no other than Obama expressed support for it first, and then co-authored the totally unnecessary bill in the Senate to “make McCain” legitimate. This was all hooey.
What the media, and us, need to vigorously pursue is the results of Passportgate, number one, not only getting a copy of the birthcertificate, but what the findings are of that breakin.
Also, there’s more to this story regarding a bunch of trips that Obama’s mother undertook from Hawaii to the Philippines when he was little, and why. It also has something to do with birth, citizenship, clarification of the entire record.
It is extremely surprising that Passportgate was silenced in no time flat, and then completely left alone, so far.
I wouldn’t be surprised if even C. Rice would keep Passportgate closed until after the election. However, the media and the blogs need to demand otherwise.
The questions are:
Why did those 3 contractors break into the dossiers at the State Department, on behalf of Obama, in what is now Passportgate?
What were they looking for?
What was the Obama camp trying to preempt or hide?
What did they want to know for sure?
Where did he travel with that passport?
And, when?
And, for what purpose?
Why did he yell the loudest about Passportgate, when they were his runners doing the dirty deed?
Why did he personally get so invested in the McCain citizenship non-issue, including co-signing the faux bill?
If you recall even Hillary ‘crowed’ at the time of Passportgate, but just a tiny bit, because her records were also looked at.
More needs to be produced, aside from the birth certificate
Passport/s, travel to where, when, for what purpose…
Then the story might be complete, to the requirement of the job.
Something important worries and prompted the Obama camp to initiate Passportgate. They were caught.
The request by many for the certificate, passport/s, travel itineraries, for what purpose, are a biproduct of what prompted it.
I can’t believe that Passportgate it’s not completed yet, and wonder why C. Rice hasn’t made it public yet.
She said at the time that it’s on-going, but not in the open. Why was she personally so invested in it?
The diddling with the dossiers was either to do damage control, or to prevent something.
The big question is WHAT is it?
Entelechy on June 12, 2008 at 1:07 PM
I would put nothing past these people to protect what only the state of Hawaii can verify but, is not releasing.
sheriff246 on June 12, 2008 at 1:07 PM
very good.
JiangxiDad on June 12, 2008 at 1:08 PM
Calling Kini.
Rick on June 12, 2008 at 1:09 PM
After repeated requests for Obama’s birth certificate, a copy shows up on the Daily Kos. This stinks to high heaven. The Obama campaign may have thought they’d put this issue to bed, but they have only succeeded in fuelling the suspicions.
For all we know, Kos got that document from Bill Burkett, who got it from “Lucy Ramirez.” I didn’t think this BC stuff was a big deal until today. Now I know it is.
infidel65 on June 12, 2008 at 1:10 PM
Another thing that an original birth certificate might indicate is, for example, if Barack’s mother had previously given birth to a child (given up for adoption?)
RBMN on June 12, 2008 at 1:11 PM
2. Certificate of Hawaiian Birth - These forms were issued to people who did not have a birth certificate recorded at the time of their birth. In order to get a Certificate of Hawaiian Birth a person had to take witnesses that could testify to the circumstances of their birth. Those testifying were usually family members or family friends. These records include information such as:
a. Name of parents
b. Race of parents
c. Death dates of parent
d. Names of brothers and sisters.
e. Remarriages of parents
f. Hanai family members.
g. A photo of the applicant (this photo can be ordered)
I’d like Kos to post the verifying info and witnesses to the Request for Certificate as supplemental evidence.
Yes, it is a rather foolish situation, but it just doesn’t pass the Obameter Smell test. As usual. And I agree with the above that just wants to humiliate the crap out of Screw ‘em Markkkos.
Enlightened on June 12, 2008 at 1:15 PM
Sorry for some of the convoluted sentences, in my above comment.
Entelechy on June 12, 2008 at 1:17 PM
Comment pages: [1] 2 3 »