Part I of the investigation is in and Leo is holding nothing back:

Everything will now be turned upside down. ..(snip)… We’re putting some light on the Hawaii disclosure laws and I like what I see. I believe we will force the public disclosure of these documents and put this past us as we move towards the genuine legal issue of his British birth. Now that we know how to operate within the various statutes, they won’t be able to keep everything hidden.

INTRODUCTION

The entire Presidential eligibility movement has been ridiculed as a fringe “conspiracy theory” by main stream media, members of Congress and even Judges speaking directly from the bench.  This ridicule is largely due to public statements made by Hawaii Department of Health Director, Dr. Chiyome Fukino (see below) which testify that she has seen vital records maintained by her office which prove President Obama was born in Hawaii and that he has an original birth certificate on file there.

The ridicule has been broad, extending even to public investigators like myself who believe that President Obama was actually born in Hawaii.  But reliance on Director Fukino and her Communications Director Janice Okubo are sadly misplaced.  They are guilty of misdirecting the public away from vital records information made expressly available by statute where no privacy exceptions apply.

These accusations are not a matter of conjecture.  They are a matter of fact and shall be proved.  This, Part 1 of the full report, will illustrate multiple instances of misdirection.

Following reports in the days ahead will detail various information requests made by TerriK and their eventual resolution.  The resolution involves official responses which – according to statutory application – admit the existence of amendments and/or corrections to President Obama’s vital records despite the continuing pattern of misdirection.

BACKGROUND

The state of Hawaii enacted the Uniform Information Practices Act (UIPA) as a means by which the public may have free and open access to all information maintained by the Government.  While some information is obviously restricted to protect the privacy of individuals, the intent of the statute is clear; to help the public access government held information.

Page 9 of the UIPA Manual states:

Given this direction that the UIPA be interpreted to promote open government, any doubt regarding disclosure of a record should likely be resolved in favor of access.

continue here for the full report

Also, stay tuned throughout the next week as Leo has promised:

They can do what they like, but the beauty of this investigation here and now is that by their own statutes, Opinion Letters, AG letters, emails and case law, their responses to UIPA requests are mandated and each response triggers the statute as to what that response MUST contain… in the next part, which will be short and punchy, you are going to really learn something…