I cannot find anything unique in the election laws listed in the Hawaii Revised Statutes that sets it apart from other states.

Kerry’s 2004 certification is here. Gore’s 2000 certification is here.

Neither contains the “legally qualified” language.

Why was the “legally qualified” language inserted into the DNC certification for Hawaii?

Is it possible that Hawaii specifically required an assurance from the DNC that Obama was eligible?

If so, why would Hawaii require such an assurance?

We need to know whether Fukino was relying on the DNC certification when she stated that Obama was a natural born citizen.

Since the 2000 and 2004 certifications do not appear to include the “legally qualified” language, investigators now need to focus their attention on why the “legally qualified” language was inserted in the DNC certification to Hawaii.

Perhaps we’ve been looking at the question backwards? We need to find out whether the DNC certifications sent to Hawaii in 2000 and 2004 contained the “legally qualified” language or whether Hawaii received the same DNC certification as the other states.

If Hawaii - prior to the 2008 election - received the same DNC certification as the other states then we will truly be onto something. If the “legally qualified” language was in the prior certifications given to Hawaii by the DNC in 2000 and 2004 then this is probably a non-issue.