• Text smaller
  • Text bigger
U.S. President Barack Obama speaks during the Clinton Global Initiative in New York September 23, 2010. REUTERS/Lucas Jackson (UNITED STATES - Tags: POLITICS)

It long has been documented that when Barack Obama was picked by the Democratic Party to be its 2008 presidential candidate, only one state – Hawaii – was sent a document from Nancy Pelosi certifying that he was qualified under the requirements of the U.S. Constitution.

Now a series of blog reports is heating up the issue again, this time revealing documents that showed it apparently was Hawaii’s local Democratic Party that refused to include that certification on its paperwork naming Obama as its candidate.

Even today, the Hawaii Democratic Party was staying mum, declining attempts by WND to obtain a comment on why it handled the 2008 presidential race paperwork as it did.

The original report came from a commentator at Canada Free Press who revealed the Democrats failed to certify their candidate’s eligibility in 49 of the 50 states.

See the movie Obama does not want you to see: Own the DVD that probes this unprecedented presidential eligibility mystery.

“In most states,” writer J.B. Williams said at the time last year, “it appears that the DNC never certified constitutional eligibility for Barack Hussein Obama, despite their many claims of proper vetting and certification, all of which we now know to be false.”

As WND reported, Williams released copies of two documents apparently prepared by Democrats to certify  Obama as their nominee for president. One contains language affirming his constitutional eligibility, filed in Hawaii where state law requires the specific language, and another omits the language, filed in the remaining 49 states.

Now a series of reports, including those from blogger JBJD, the butterdezillion blog, Obama Release Your Records blog and the Fellowshipofminds blog, are revealing the local state party’s stance in 2008.

The issue also has been addressed on a YouTube video already:

The blog reports cite each other, as well as apparent Democratic Party documents posted online from the 2000, 2004 and 2008 elections.

The images reveal the change in wording that Hawaii Democrats adopted when Obama was their candidate.

In choosing Al Gore and Joe Lieberman in 2000, this was their statement:

“THIS IS TO CERTIFY that the following candidates for President and Vice-President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution and are the duly chosen candidates of both the state and the national Democratic Parties by balloting at the Presidential Preference Poll and Caucus held March 7, 2000 in the State of Hawaii and by acclamation at the National Democratic Convention held August 14–17, 2000 in Los Angeles, California.”


Hawaii state Dem certification in 2000

The wording was almost identical on behalf of John Kerry and John Edwards in 2004:

 


Hawaii state Dem certification in 2004

But in 2008, the words missing include “the provisions of the United States Constitution.” It states, “THIS IS TO CERTIFY that the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the national Democratic Parties balloting at the Presidential Preference Poll and Caucus held on February 19th, 2008, in the State of Hawaii and by acclamation at the National Democratic Convention held August 27, 2008 in Denver, Colorado.”


Hawaii state Dem certification in 2008

At “Fellowship,” the blogger explained that each state party must certify that their candidate is constitutionally eligible to be president.

“What the Democratic Party of Hawaii’s 2008 Certification of Nomination left out are these words: ‘of the United States Constitution and are the duly chosen candidates of both the state and,’” the blogger wrote.

“In other words, by omitting the above words, the Democractic Party of Hawaii (DPH) was signaling the following: 1. DPH is merely certifying that Obama is legally qualified to serve as president by virtue of the ballots of the Democratic Parties of the 50 states. The DPH is not certifying that Obama is legally qualified to serve as president under the provisions of the U.S. Constitution! 2. The DPH is also saying that Obama and Biden are NOT the chosen candidates of the state of Hawaii,” he concluded.

The butterdezillion blog noted, “the Hawaii Democratic Party actually ignored their protocols in 2008 in order to specifically NOT certify Obama’s eligibility as they had done for candidates in the past.”

It was Williams who earlier released copies of two documents apparently prepared by national Democrats to certify Obama as their nominee for president.

The first includes a verification that Obama and Joe Biden, then–candidate for vice president, “are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution.”


One image of the certification for Barack Obama’s nomination, including the affirmation Obama and Joe Biden “are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution”

The second form obtained by Williams appears identical. They both have the same typographical error in “though,” but in this one, the verification of eligibility under the requirements of the U.S. Constitution is gone.


Another image of a certification, on which the certification of eligibility has been removed

Williams reported that Republicans use a document universally that affirms their candidate’s eligibility and that Democrats have used the form that omits the certification language in previous elections. But he nonetheless questions why the DNC certified Obama’s eligibility only in Hawaii.

Democratic National Committee officials have declined to comment on the issue of the multiple images. Pelosi and the White House also have declined to respond.

WND has reported on dozens of legal challenges to Obama’s status as a “natural born citizen.” The Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, states, “No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President.”

Some of the lawsuits over the dispute question whether he was actually born in Hawaii, as he insists. If he was born out of the country, Obama’s American mother, the suits contend, was too young at the time of his birth to confer American citizenship to her son under the law at the time.

Other challenges have focused on Obama’s citizenship through his father, a Kenyan subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of his birth, thus making him a dual citizen. The cases contend the framers of the Constitution excluded dual citizens from qualifying as natural born.

Complicating the situation is Obama’s decision to spend sums estimated over $1 million to avoid releasing a state birth certificate that would put to rest the questions.

WND has reported that among the documentation not yet available for Obama includes his kindergarten records, Punahou school records, Occidental College records, Columbia University records, Columbia thesis, Harvard Law School records, Harvard Law Review articles, scholarly articles from the University of Chicago, passport, medical records, files from his years as an Illinois state senator, his Illinois State Bar Association records, any baptism records, and his adoption records.

Note: The information contained in this report has now been made into a YouTube video.



  • Text smaller
  • Text bigger
Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.