Thread: Barack Obama's citizenship questioned

Brian T called "the communists and the media" aligned with them, "enemies of this country."

The American way of life has often been characterized by:

worshiping God on Sunday and spending the day with family, then getting to bed early to be able to work HARD the other six days of the week;

taking advantage of educational opportunities and studying to show one's self approved and capable of benefiting from greater educational opportunities;

aspiring to improve one's standard of living from that of one's parents;

keeping out of trouble and practicing Christian charity, diligence, and thrift;

providing a good quality of life for one's family by taking care of the precious gift of life and by living responsibly and uprightly so that God can justly bless those lives; and

honoring one's parents and ancestors by serving one's country, community, and church, specifically, serving in the armed forces to protect America from the enemies of freedom and those envious of prosperity, who are unable to attain to the liberty and well-being we enjoy in this country, and who want to steal from us the blessings of this life, or, out of jealousy, at least keep us from enjoying the same.

America has had many enemies besides atheistic, militant communism and Is|amist terrorist conquest, but these two have grown in violent force, evolved in nature and operations, and survived as menaces to this day. These component parts fitted together to become those powers:

1) the globalist anti-patriots of their day: the loyalists to the British Empire or to Europe, such as Alexander Hamilton, whose writings during the Revolutionary Period were conciliatory to the Crown, and the Tories, such as U.S. Supreme Court Assoc. Justice Gray in 1898, who derived the majority opinion for Wong Kim Ark from the Common Law and British court decisions and precedents, seemingly leading the wayward, errant Colonists back to the superior justice of Mother England, even though the Shot Heard Around the World was almost 123 years gone by.

2) the ACLU, organized in 1920, not long after the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia, with much the same agenda, and intending to remake the U.S. by changing her traditions, her Christian heritage, and her Constitution, one clause at a time.

3) the atheists and secularists, whom the pluralists attempted to include in American society by banishing all things Christian from the public square, which in turn excluded many witnessing Christians from that same American society.

4) the Socialist movement, e.g. the IWW union, "the Wobblies," and after WWII, the CPUSA, with many fellow travelers meeting under different banners but with similar goals and principles. Also, the Democratic Socialists, the liberals and the progressives, the left wing and the left overs after conservatives aligned their coalitions, the radicals and revolutionaries who have returned to the fold only because there was no other place for them to go except outside the Beltway, into forsaken flyover territory.

5) the morally deviant and the sexually nonconforming, including the pro-aborts, the homosexual community, and the radical feminazis, enemies of historically proven sexual morés and traditional marriage between a man and a woman until parted by death.

6) the criminal element, including the Chicago Way, banksters such as Goldman Sachs, the Open Borders Lobby, e.g. La Raza and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, ACORN and the SEIU, CAIR and other Mus|im advocacy groups that together make up "the Mus|im Mafia," the Black Panthers and the New BPP, Louis Farrakhan and the Nation of Is|am (as distinguished from Dar al'Is|am, the House of Is|am or Nation of Is|am in a global sense), and the Eric Holder Dept. of InJustice, obstructers of the U.S. Immigration Laws, authors of amnesty for illegal aliens, and initiators of Fast and Furious, which authorized the sale and delivery of about 2500 assault weapons to the Mexican drug cartels, which may fit into this crime syndicate in more ways than we know now.

7) the influence of Is|am, beginning with its attacks upon U.S. ally Israel in 1948, 1967, and 1973, against the Israeli Olympic team in Munich in 1972, against the U.S. in Tehran in 1979, in Beirut in 1983, in New York in 1993, in Riyadh in 1995, in Port Aden, Yemen, in 2000, in New York in 2001, and the coup d'état in Washington, D.C., on Nov. 4, 2008.

Blowback for Arpaio allies

Prosecutor who teamed with Arpaio targeted in 'witch hunt'Bar association order hits 3 who worked with controversial sheriff

Published: 5 hours agoBy Dave Tombers

A longtime prosecutor who worked in concert with Sheriff Joe Arpaio, whose Cold Case Posse found probable cause that Barack Obama’s birth certificate was forged, says he was caught in a “witch hunt” for trying to remove corruption in the county.


A disciplinary panel for the Arizona Bar Association recently ordered the revocation of two attorneys’ law licenses and suspended the license of a third in a case WND first reported last fall. William O’Neill, the state’s presiding disciplinary judge, announced the decision.

Former county prosecutor Andrew Thomas has a deadline Tuesday to say whether he will appeal the decision. An ethics panel found Thomas’ office wrongfully accused three officials of illegal conduct to embarrass them.

Thomas has defended the prosecutions as necessary for rooting out corruption in government.

The allegations included scandal, fraud, payoffs and lavish vacations by county officials.

Thomas told WND, “This has been a massive cover-up and, for me, genuinely a Dreyfus-like injustice.”

WND has learned that as many as 11 county employees have been terminated in recent months for allegedly accepting bribes in a court tower construction scandal – one of the Thomas investigations that was stymied.

WND has also learned that the FDIC recently announced the loss of millions of dollars. There also are allegations that some $5.5 million was linked to county official Don Stapley, the subject of another Thomas investigation that was thwarted.

The October WND report documented the early troubles between then-Maricopa County Attorney Thomas and County Supervisor Stapley.

In 2006, Stapley tried to rein in Thomas’ ability to hire outside counsel for the county, saying Thomas based his “appointments upon who was favorable to him, not necessarily who was best qualified to represent the county.”

According to the complaint, the county board, under Stapley, wanted to oversee attorney selection and even hire outside counsel for the board itself. Thomas let them know on numerous occasions that the actions were illegal.

The complaint quoted Thomas saying, “Board members are immune from suit when they rely in good faith upon opinions of the county attorney, but no such immunity would apply and they may be personally liable for actions on advice of other counsel.”

Thomas essentially was arguing that the citizens of Maricopa County elected him to be the county attorney, and Stapley’s actions gave the appearance of circumventing the wishes of the voters.

The Arizona Bar Association took Thomas’ admonition of the county board to be a conflict of interest.

In another instance, Thomas initiated an investigation of Stapley for criminal wrongdoing.

A grand jury brought more than 100 charges against Stapley, ranging from failing to file financial disclosures to accepting expensive gifts such as three-week Hawaiian vacations and expensive ski trips for him and his family.

Allegations also arose that Stapley raised political contributions to run for president of the National Association of Counties, even though he was running unopposed.
The cash he raised was alleged to have been used to pay for personal luxuries instead.

But several judges who handled various steps of the case threw out charges, even though outside investigators had cited the “merit” of the counts. And bar association officials said the one-year statute of limitations had expired on dozens of charges.
Ultimately, none of the counts went to trial, and Stapley testified before the bar that the investigation “ruined his life.”

In an email to WND Thomas said of the bar association results, “The findings are completely divorced from the actual facts and evidence presented at the hearing.
“While I was county attorney, I antagonized powerful people and special interests – particularly the judiciary, which rendered this decision – over crime control, illegal immigration and other issues. These forces targeted my law license for five years; at the end, they simply mobilized, ganged up and overwhelmed me, fabricating wrongdoing to achieve their desired end.”

Others targeted included former assistants Lisa Aubuchon and Rachel Alexander.
The bar association revoked Aubuchon’s license and suspended Alexander’s, which will force her to re-take the bar exam.

Referring to a recent national survey found at stateintegrity.org, Thomas said this week, “Arizona has some of the worst corruption in America.

“Today, corruption has won and justice has lost,” he continued. “I brought corruption cases in good faith involving powerful people, and the political and legal establishment blatantly covered it up and retaliated by targeting my law license.”

WND’s previously reported the maneuvers could have been politically motivated, with even some of Thomas’ political opponents saying the counts have “no merit.”

“Arizona after what happened yesterday has become Mexico,” Thomas said. “People in this community need to understand what happened yesterday when my law license was terminated.

“Powerful politicians twice indicted for corruption have gone free. Others who blocked investigations and prosecutions retaliated against law enforcement and demolished county government to protect themselves escaped justice. Insiders who knew how the system works and how to work the system have had a field day. Honest prosecutors have been unjustly smeared and punished.

“The rule of law is no more in this county,” he said.

“We will never know all the corruption cases that aren’t filed and the criminals that go free because of what’s happened. But the chilling effect on prosecutors is clear: Public safety and clean government inevitably will suffer. They already have.

“The political witch hunt that’s just ended makes things worse [regarding corruption in America] by sending a chilling message to prosecutors: ‘Those who take on the powerful will lose their livelihood,’” he said.

The bar association refers people to the disciplinary order and says, “The panel found that Thomas and Aubuchon used their positions as Maricopa County attorney and deputy county attorney to target political enemies.

“A 247-page order details how they ignored conflicts of interest and used their positions to burden and embarrass targeted individuals. The order also states they violated the Rules of Professional Conduct relating to perjury and violating court rules.
“Alexander, who also worked as a deputy county attorney, was found to have filed a lawsuit without completing a proper factual investigation.

“The case was tried over nine weeks before a hearing panel comprised of the presiding disciplinary judge and two volunteer panel members (one attorney and a member of the public). Forty-eight witnesses testified and nearly 6,200 pages of exhibits were admitted.”

The panel ruled, “This case is replete with intentionally orchestrated malignant actions.”

Bar spokesman Rick DeBruhl told WND that there was nothing further to comment on.
“The association doesn’t disbar attorneys,” he said. “We simply follow the orders of the independent panel.”

The order itself explains Thomas should have seen the clouds on his horizon.

“Attorneys must ever guard against the temptation to confuse what is legal with what is ethical or moral. Because an act is legal, according to the letter of the law, does not make it ethical. Because an act is ethical does not make it legal,” it said.

Then it added, “Speeding is illegal but isn’t always unethical. If one speeds because he believes it will save a life, the action may still be found to be illegal but not necessarily unethical. On the other hand, cheating on a spouse is ethically wrong, but may be legal.”

But the harsh judgment makes no mention of recent scandals, many stemming from the original corruption investigations Thomas and his colleagues began.

“Look at all the corruption scandals that have happened recently in Arizona while the rule of law has basically been repealed in Maricopa County,” said Thomas. “We had the U.S. attorney who resigned in disgrace. We had the criminal chief of the U.S. attorney’s office plead the Fifth Amendment before Congress.

“We have the firings after the court tower corruption scandal came out. We have the golf tournament scandal, which the Arizona Republic has reported. Now [Maricopa County Supervisor] Don Stapley is enmeshed in an FDIC lawsuit which involves some of the original counts we first filed against him.”

Thomas announced in his press conference his intentions to target corruption through a ballot measure and a forthcoming book.

“We now have a constitutional crisis, as prosecutors and members of the executive branch are being targeted by the judiciary and other branches for blowing the whistle on corruption and misconduct in the judiciary,” Thomas said. “That is essentially what has happened to me.

“As county attorney, I took on many powerful special interests and corrupt individuals who retaliated with a witch-hunt targeting my law license,” he said. “Unless we want Arizona to become as corrupt as Mexico, the people of Arizona must take back their government. At this point, only the people of Arizona can make things right.”

He said he would seek voter help for reforms to fight corruption.

“This fight now shifts to the court of public opinion, a fair court,” he said.

WND reported earlier on comments from even some of Thomas’ critics.

Said columnist Robert Robb, who has made no display of supporting Thomas, “I have written scathingly about the gross abuse of power by former County Attorney Andrew Thomas and Sheriff Joe Arpaio. Thomas and Arpaio proclaimed that there was a giant conspiracy involving the county board of supervisors, senior county management and several judges in which the judges agreed to protect county officials against criminal probes in exchange for the county constructing a new office building for the judges.”
Robb said there was no evidence to support the racketeering and criminal complaints, but he said the complaint brought by the Arizona Bar Association against Thomas includes “gross overcharging,” which he called a “serious disservice.”

Among the issues that originally attracted attention was the $347 million in taxpayer funds used for a court tower during an economic downturn, a building that featured plush quarters for judges and raised eyebrows as it was done at a time when county employees were being laid off.

Prosecutor who teamed with Arpaio targeted in ‘witch hunt’

To all who are invested in a 2012 Presidential election:

Please put no hope in any such election. There will not be a free, fair, and honest election for President in 2012. If you thought you saw election fraud by the Obama Campaign in 2008, with the Republicans in power, you ain't seen nothin' yet, with the Democratic Socialists in power, a communist dictator in the White House, and the AG Eric Holder DOJ in charge of federal law enforcement and civil rights violations.

I HAVE NOTHING MORE TO SAY TO ANYONE WHO IMAGINES:

THAT GOV. MITT ROMNEY CAN POSSIBLY OUTSPEND THE OBAMA CAMPAIGN, WHICH MAY HAVE A BILLION DOLLARS OF OPEC DINARS AND GIFT CARDS FROM DAR AL'IS|_AM (THINK T.A.R.P. $TRILLIONS), OR

THAT THE ROMNEY CAMPAIGN CAN WIN MORE VOTES THAN THE CHICAGO WAY CAN FABRICATE (THINK AL FRANKEN), OR

THAT HONEST, DECENT, LAW-ABIDING PEOPLE WILL BE ABLE TO THWART MARTIAL LAW AND MPs DISARMING WE THE PEOPLE, BEFORE MR. OBAMA AND AG HOLDER SUSPEND THE ELECTIONS BECAUSE OF THE IMPENDING RIOTS AND ANTICIPATED TERRORIST ATTACKS (THINK A PERFECT STORM OF KATRINA V. NEW ORLEANS AND ISRAEL V. IRAN).

The last chance to unseat Mr. Obama will be WELL BEFORE NOV. 6th. With Mr. Obama and AG Holder in charge, there will be NO chance on Nov. 6th: election day is a mirage. After Nov. 6th, the hammer will come down on any organized resistance, and the sickle will cut off any opposition at the knees. Oust the usurping communist dictator before Nov. 6th, or prepare to die by Satan's sword after Nov. 6th.

OUST THE UNLAWFUL USURPER! NO COMMUNIST DICTATOR HAS EVER ALLOWED AN ELECTION TO REMOVE HIM FROM POWER OR STAND IN HIS WAY. AFTER 80+ DISMISSALS, EVERYONE CAN SEE THAT EVERY JUDGE IS THREATENED OR COERCED. BOTH THE HOUSE AND THE SENATE SUFFER FROM CAPITOL PARALYSIS.

THERE BEING NO DELIVERANCE FORTHCOMING FROM COURTS OR CONGRESS, HIS OUSTER MUST ARRIVE LEGITIMATELY FROM SOME OTHER QUARTER . . . BUT HE must BE OUSTED.

Justice Sotomayor: Tax Evasion, Perjury - What Did Obama Know And When

By Devvy Kidd
4-23-12
Back in early July 2009, political prostitutes on the Senate Judiciary Committee began confirmation hearings for a politically correct socialist, Sonia Sotomayor, to the U.S. Supreme Court. Having the correct female parts and ethnicity (Hispanic), she was a shoe-in regardless of how unqualified for the job. At that time, Dr. Richard Cordero contacted me. Dr. Cordero is an attorney who practices law in New York and was not only very familiar with Sotomayor, his research proves little Sonia concealed her assets and is guilty of tax evasion and perjury. I immediately began reading his evidence; it took a couple of days. Not speculation, but hundreds of pages of documents.

Gutless Republicans like Sen. Jeff Sessions refused to even contact Dr. Cordero. It's not as if he didn't know about Dr. Cordero's evidence, many of us made sure he did. Sessions and his colleagues brushed it off and proceeded with the sham confirmation hearings.

Back then I wrote two columns exposing this [1], [2], yet strangely, few people seemed interested or concerned. Certainly not the liars for hire in the "mainstream" media or even the mis-named "fair and balanced" FOX News. Not even some of the news web sites one would think would have jumped on this scandal. Nothing. Here is an individual who could have not only derailed Sotomayor's nomination, but force a criminal investigation into her activities as well as other judges in New York. Well, there was a bit of sniffing going on, but just like their refusal to fully investigate the impostor president back in 2007 & 2008, the NY Times, Washington Post and Politico, did not follow through on Sotomayor. Heaven forbid they would actually investigate such a politically correct nominee! Why, it might bring backlash from minority groups and we can't have that in America. Better to let the mobs take control.
Now to the meat of the issue from Dr. Richard Cordero who is a doctor of law with a Ph.D. from the University of Cambridge in England; a Master of Business Administration from the University of Michigan; and a law degree from La Sorbonne in Paris:

"Indeed, federal judges engage in wrongdoing because they are held by their peers, Congress, and the media unaccountable. As a result, their wrongdoing is riskless. This makes it irresistible for them to grab wrongfully personal material and judicial class benefits. The analysis of the official statistics shows it: In the 223 years since the creation of the Federal Judiciary in 1789, only 8 federal judges have been impeached and removed. The Judiciary has allowed its chief circuit judges to dismiss systematically 99.82% of the complaints filed against judges in the 1 oct 96-30 sep 08 12-year period. In that period, its judicial councils –the circuits all judge disciplinary bodies– denied up to 100% of the petitions to review those dismissals, as did the 2nd Circuit's council, of which then Judge Sotomayor was a member. Up to 9 of every 10 appeals are disposed of ad-hoc through no-reason summary orders or opinions so “perfunctory” that they are neither published nor precedential, mere fiats of raw judicial power.

"Judges abuse their means, unaccountable power, to pursue the most corruptive motive: money! Just in the bankruptcies filed by consumers in CY10, bankruptcy judges ruled on $373bl. Money is what drives the blatant concealment of assets in DeLano, a consumer bankruptcy appeal presided over by then Judge Sotomayor). She engaged in such concealment as part of a routine practice that has developed into a judge-run bankruptcy fraud scheme. In fact, even the liberal papers The New York Times, The Washington Post, and Politico suspected her of concealing assets of hers despite her duty to disclose, which pointed to evasion of taxes or concealment of the assets’ illicit source. Yet, the President nominated her as he had for cabinet positions other known tax cheats. While 1.5ml. bankruptcies are filed annually, only .23% are reviewed by district courts and fewer than .08% by circuit courts.

Their unreviewability provides the opportunity for riskless wrongdoing since nobody will hold judges accountable."

I removed the footnote numbers just for the sake of reproduction here. But, they're all in Dr. Cordero's 149 page presentation at the link above and they back up his statements. He initially discovered Sotomayor's participation in bankruptcy fraud schemes like the DeLano case and it snow balled from there. That distinguished gentleman has done comprehensive, massive research on one of the most critical and important issues that affects every one of us: judicial corruption. A subject I have written about many times; one of the greatest failures by the Outlaw Congress decade after decade to investigate because they are simply cowards or too busy raising buckets of cash for their next election.

Backtracking to 2009, Sotomayor absolutely concealed her assets:
"Dr. Cordero spent all last week calling every member of that committee, both Republicans and Democrats to confirm they received the documents. I called several offices (Sessions, Coburn, Franken) to confirm they had these documents. They do. And, yet, not a single question was asked of Sotomayor on any of the evidence presented by Dr. Cordero. Instead, all of them (Coburn, Sessions, Graham, et al) have remained silent.

"Why? That would be the $64,000 question. One which Dr. Cordero finds perplexing; his own words in an email to me:
"This puzzles me greatly, particularly since each of the three acts of wrongdoing that I discussed bears corroboration by either: (1) The Committee's questionnaire; (2) Judge Sotomayor's answers to it and her conduct; (3) The docket of the DeLano case, 06-4780-bk, CA2; and (4) statistics of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts on the denial by the 2nd Circuit Judicial Council, of which Judge Sotomayor is a member, of 100% of petitions for review of dismissed judicial misconduct complaints during the 1 Oct 96 - 30 Sep 08 - 12-year period."

"If you click here, it will take you to the 173 page questionnaire Sotomayor was required to answer and submit to the committee. She had to disclose ALL cases, see Heading: 13 - Judicial Office on page 87. The list is extensive, but no where will you find the DeLano case. A glaring omission that Sotomayor could not possibly have simply forgotten. She did not list it because to do so would expose her participation."[1]

The other million dollar question: What did Obama/Soetoro know and when did he know it? We know the FBI has a file on Sotomayor as part of the alleged vetting process. What's in it? Obama/Soetoro knows. THAT is what GOP presidential candidates, media and Americans should be demanding answers to instead of being distracted with nonsense deliberately injected into discussions on issues.

Which brings me around to addressing the current blitzkrieg on the Internet that "Obama is officially ineligible." I bring this up because it's important to stop this kind of junk:

"Lawyers representing the current sitting President of the United States of America have been forced, under penalty of perjury, to admit that the long-form birth certificate presented by the White House in April of 2011 is a total forgery. In a NJ ballot access eligibility case spawned by Tea Party activists, attorneys representing Obama had to admit the document presented to the American people by Obama himself is actually knowingly faked and was used to fool the American public into believing a complete fabrication."

What did Alexandra Hill, Barry Soetoro's attorney actually say at that hearing?

"After calling to the witness stand Mr. Moran and Mr. Purpura, who gave testimony as to why they brought the ballot challenge, and introducing documents showing there is a question as to Mr. Obama’s identity, I called Brian Wilcox to testify as an internet image expert. Mr. Wilcox was going to testify on how the Obama April 27, 2011, long-form birth certificate has been altered and manipulated either by computer software or by a human or both, producing a forged documents, and that since the image is not reliable, we need to see the original paper version. Obama’s lawyer objected to my proffered testimony.

"I then offered that I would not need to have Mr. Wilcox testify, provided that Obama stipulated that the internet image of his birth certificate could not be used as evidence by either Judge Masin or the New Jersey Secretary of States and that he presented to the court or the Secretary of State no other evidence of his identity or place of birth. Judge Masin also asked Obama’s attorney whether she would so stipulate. She did so stipulate, agreeing that both the court and the Secretary of State cannot rely on the internet birth certificate as evidence of Obama’s place of birth and that Obama has produced no other evidence to the court regarding his place of birth."

Who wrote that? Mario Apuzzo. The attorney who argued the case for The Objectors.

Where does it say Soetoro's attorney "forced, under penalty of perjury, to admit that the long-form birth certificates is a total forgery"? No where. Soetoro's attorney agreed to stipulate the internet image of the usurper's birth certificate could not be used as evidence because it was not reliable. Yes, the inference is there, but to write what you see above from the link cited is grossly misleading. "Officially" my foot.

I do encourage you to read all of Mario's explanation as to what actually took place at the hearing. It contains an update with the judge's decision.

There's no question the birth certificate released by Barry Soetoro is a forgery, but to present, as dozens and dozens of people have written in columns that counsel for Soetoro admitted that document is a "total forgery", is just more yellow journalism to grab headlines. It looks like Soetoro's attorneys are going to take legal action to suppress the video of that hearing. The ALJ (Administrative Law Judge) in that case soiled his robes and proved he left his manhood at the door when he issued his decision. You can watch the entire NJ hearing at the link below:

Obama Lawyers Want the Video of the NJ Obama Ballot Access Challenge Public Hearing Pulled and Suppressed

One other thing. In 2009, two outstanding attorneys, Leo Donofrio and Stephen Pidgeon became legal counsel for 76 Chrysler dealerships knocked dead over the illegal bail outs; illegal because no where in Art. 1, Sec. 8, in the U.S. Constitution does it give the Outlaw Congress any authority to steal your hard earned wages to bail out banks, auto manufacturers or any other private business. The bankruptcy judge in Leo and Stephen's case was one Arthur J. Gonzalez of the Second District in New York. Sotomayor was also a judge in the Southern District of New York at the time of her nomination and handled bankrupcy cases.

I encourage you to take the time to read this post by Leo Donofrio dated February 8, 2010: Judge Gonzalez Now Guilty Of Intentional Fraud In Chrysler Case. When I read what went on in that bankruptcy case the first thing that popped into my head was Sonia Sotomayor. It's quite clear Gonzalez 'fixed' that bankruptcy case. The question is did he profit from it?

Obama/Soetoro is vulnerable in several areas. The number one issue being he is ineligible to run for president, the same as he was ineligible in 2008. Second, posters by the millions should be plastered all across this country with former Lt. Col. Terry Lakin's photo on it. Lakin is Obama's Willie Horton.[3]

A poster with the photo which reads:
This highly decorated member of the military was court martialed for simply requesting Barack Obama release his birth certificate. Lt. Col. Lakin spent six months in Ft. Leavenworth prison. Only then did Obama release his birth certificate. Obama willingly and knowingly sacrificed a man's freedom and military career to hide his birth certificate until forced by mounting pressure to release it. Why?

Provide a web site to Lakin's story. Make sure a few hundred thousand get distributed to veteran's organizations, VFW chapters, conventions and meetings.

Sotomayor's criminal activities can create such a scandal, Obama/Soetoro won't have a chance. Not that corrupt U.S. Attorney General, Eric Holder, will do anything about it. But, we the people and the alternative media can. You want Obama/Soetoro gone? Then make this a top issue: "What did the President and the justices and judges know about J. Sotomayor’s concealment of assets and consequent tax evasion and other judges’ wrongdoing and when did they know it?" (Dr. Cordero)

Dr. Cordero has put together a document addressed to the GOP presidential candidates. It it now up to supporters of those candidates to bring this issue to their attention as quickly as possible. Why wouldn't Romney, Paul or Gingrich jump on this like a june bug? As Dr. Cordero points out in his opening:
Dear Republican Presidential Nominee Candidates: "You have courageously criticized federal judges for being “activist” or Then-Judge, Now-Justice Sotomayor, P. Obama’s first justiceship nominee, for being “liberal.” Those are subjecttive notions describing matters of opinion; as such, they resonate only with some voters; their use can even indispose you with a block of them, e.g., Hispanics. This is a proposal, supported by my professional research on, and litigation experience in, the Federal Judiciary for you to base your criticism of federal judges, including J. Sotomayor, on their wrongdoing, which is a matter of objective evidence of their disregard of their duties and infraction of the law."

Dr. Cordero has sent a massive amount of his research to the Santorum, Ron Paul (and Rand Paul) and Romney camps. Why are they silent? Have their trusted aides even mentioned this to the candidates and Rand Paul?

All the candidates have the resources to have attorneys and forensic experts evaluate Dr. Cordero's evidence. They all have the means to invite him to a sit down and go over his evidence. Will they do it and go for the jugular?

Justice Sotomayor: tax evasion, perjury - what did Obama know and when?

Film: President's father not Barack Obama

2 years of research, rare photos spport compelling case

Published: 1 hour agoby Jerome R. CorsiEmail | Archive

Jerome R. Corsi, a Harvard Ph.D., is a WND senior staff reporter. He has authored many books, including No. 1 N.Y. Times best-sellers "The Obama Nation" and "Unfit for Command." Corsi's latest book is "Where's the REAL Birth Certificate?"More ↓Less ↑


“Who’s your real Daddy?” is a question that remarkably continues to dog Barack Obama, even as he proceeds into his fourth year as president.

With the release this July of Joel Gilbert’s full-length documentary, “Dreams from My Real Father: A Story of Reds and Deception,” the mystery deepens regarding who Obama really is.



“The film provides the first cohesive understanding of Obama’s deep-rooted life journey in socialism, from his childhood to his presidency,” Gilbert told WND.

Gilbert rejects the official story that the Kenyan-born Barack Obama was the president’s father.

Instead, he argues, Frank Marshall Davis, the radical poet and journalist who was a card-carrying member of the Communist Party USA, was the real, biological and ideological father of Barack Obama.

“I decided to investigate Frank Marshall Davis. His close physical resemblance to Obama was shocking, while Obama little resembled the Kenyan Obama,” Gilbert said. “How could this be?”

Get “Dreams from My Real Father: A Story of Reds and Deception” from WND’s Superstore.

Gilbert launched into what became two years of research during which he conducted interviews and discovered rare film footage and photos.

“I unearthed two film archives of Frank Marshall Davis, one from 1973, the other from 1987, as well as Davis’ photo collection,” he explained. “I then acquired 500 copies of the Honolulu Record, the communist-run newspaper where Davis wrote a weekly political column for eight years.”

Gilbert’s research turned shocking when he obtained seven indecent photos of Ann Dunham, Obama’s mother, at Frank Marshall Davis’ house, suggesting an intimate connection between Dunham and Davis.

“I was not happy to include these racy photos in the film but found it necessary to substantiate the intimate relationship between the two,” he said. “Those photos ended up in a men’s mail-order catalog of nude women, likely sold to them by Davis. I placed black bars on parts of the photos to be respectful.”

To establish the foundation for the photos



Later in life, Davis also penned a scurrilous, autobiographical sex novel, titled “Sex Rebel: Black,” in which he detailed an illicit sexual relationship with an underage woman named “Anne.” Gilbert believes the name was a thin disguise for Obama’s mother, Stanley Ann Dunham.

Gilbert reconstructs Obama’s autobiography, “Dreams from My Father,” and concludes that the tale of the goat-herding father from Kenya is a cover story, concocted to mask an inconvenient pregnancy.

The truth, Gilbert argues, is that Barack Obama II was born from the illicit sexual relationship that rebellious teenager Ann Dunham began with Davis after her parents forced her to move to Hawaii.

Gilbert believes that when Dunham first arrived in Hawaii after graduating from high school, she used the sexual relationship with Davis to act out her frustration that her parents would not permit her to fulfill her wish to attend the University of Washington in Seattle with her Mercer Island High School friends.

In 2010, Gilbert wrote and directed a film titled “Atomic Jihad: Ahmadinejad’s Coming War and Obama’s Politics of Defeat.” “Dreams from My Real Father” will be released this summer, with screenings in theaters across the country currently in the planning process.

Communist roots
The FBI had Davis under surveillance for 19 years, monitoring his support of the Communist Party both in Chicago and in Hawaii.

Gilbert portrays Obama as a “Red Diaper Baby,” a phenomenon among the radical left, referred to as “hand-me-down Marxism,” in which children of radical parents grow up to be radicals. Such was the case with much of the leadership of Students for a Democratic Society and the Weather Underground, including Obama senior political adviser David Axelrod, who was born to a mother who wrote for a communist newspaper in New York City.



Barack Obama Sr., Barack Obama II and Frank Marshall Davis

“Obama sold himself to America as the multi-cultural ideal, a man who stood above politics. His father was a goat herder from Kenya, he would bring people together, so it went,” Gilbert explained. “While voters will overlook some fudging by politicians, promoting a false family background to hide an agenda irreconcilable with American values is a totally unacceptable manipulation of the electorate.”

What Gilbert presents is a direct challenge to the official narrative, arguing it is more likely President Obama has a deeply disturbing family background and a hidden Marxist agenda.

“Unfortunately, Obama’s style is to minimize, misdirect, and outright lie about damaging information about his past,” Gilbert said. “I hope the media will now demand that he come clean about his family background, his political foundations and fully reveal his agenda for transforming America.”

In writing his autobiography, Obama masked his relationship with Davis, naming him only as “Frank,” a friend of his grandfather who “lived in a dilapidated house in a run-down section of Waikiki.”

Gerald Horne, a contributing editor to “Public Affairs,” an openly Marxist political review, made the first positive identification of “Frank” as Frank Marshall Davis.

In March 2007, Horne gave a speech at New York University on the occasion of the Communist Party USA archive being placed at an NYU library.

In that speech, Horne discussed Davis, noting that Davis, who was born in Kansas and lived much of his adult life in Chicago, had moved to Honolulu in 1948 at the suggestion of his good friend, actor Paul Robeson. In the 1940s, Robeson was an outspoken critic of segregation and racial discrimination in the U.S., a strong advocate of the Soviet Union and a member of the Communist Party USA.

Horne also documented Davis’s friendship with the Dunham family in Hawaii.

“Eventually, [Davis] befriended another family – a Euro-American family – that had migrated to Honolulu from Kansas, and a young woman from this family eventually had a child with a young student from Kenya East Africa who goes by the name of Barack Obama, who, retracing the steps of Davis, eventually decamped to Chicago.”

Lorne further stated Davis was “a decisive influence in helping [Obama] to find his present identity as an African-American, a people who have been the least anti-communist and the most left-leaning of any constituency in this nation.”

After Horne’s speech, the identity of “Frank” was never in doubt, nor his importance in the development of the young Barack Obama.

On Dec. 5, 1956, Davis appeared in executive session before the U.S. Senate Subcommittee investigating “the scope of Soviet activity in the United States,” one of the McCarthy-era panels seeking to expose communists considered to be a security threat.

Invoking his Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination, Davis refused to answer a direct question asking if he was then a communist.

A year earlier, in 1955, a Commission on Subversive Activities organized by the government of the Territory of Hawaii identified Davis as a member of the Communist Party USA. The committee singled out for criticism several articles Davis published in the “Communist Honolulu Record” that were critical of the commission.

May 19th Communist Organization
Gilbert documents Obama’s association at Columbia University with what was known as the May 19th Communist Organization, an above-ground support group for the Weather Underground based in New York City from 1978 to 1985.

“May 19th” carried out raucous anti-Apartheid and anti-Klan protests and operated a host of front organizations.

At the time, Weather Underground co-founder William Ayers – Obama’s Chicago neighbor and colleague in education reform – wrote that May 19th provided “a sea for the guerrillas to swim in.”

Some May 19th members committed acts of violence and terrorism, such as the 1981 Nanuet Brinks robbery and murders, the bombing of South African offices in 1981 and the U.S. Capitol bombing in 1983.

“I spoke with a former FBI informant who told me the May 19th Communist Organization had a weapons training camp in the Catskill Mountains, run by former Black Panthers,” Gilbert told WND. “In addition, some May 19th members were sent to Cuba for several weeks each year with the Venceremos Brigade, a continuation of the SDS/Weather Underground program begun in the ’60s, for explosives training from Cuban intelligence, DGI.”

Obama’s election was not a sudden political phenomenon, Gilbert maintains.

“It was the culmination of an American socialist movement that Frank Marshall Davis nurtured in Chicago and Hawaii and has been quietly infiltrating the U.S. economy, universities and media for decades,” he explained. “To understand Obama’s plans for America, look no further than communist Frank Marshall Davis.”

Film: President’s father not Barack Obama

It has been several months since we here at ALIPAC last discussed a possible alternate father, but maybe it bears another mention.

Originally Posted by MinutemanCDC_SC on 10-28-2009 at 01:40 PM

Stanley Ann D. Obama subscribed and swore to the fact that she and Barack Obama Snr. married at Wailuku, Maui, on Feb. 2, 1961. The Hawaii Circuit Judge acted upon that uncontested statement and incorporated it into the divorce decree as the event which was precedent to the divorce.

All parties involved are dead. The court's ruling stands, and has stood for 45 years. I can't imagine any way to get a review of that ruling, much less overturn it; can you? Whether their marriage was fictional or factual in the sight of God, in the sight of the judiciary, it is an established fact. And it is the judiciary with which we have to do here. Conjecture all you like, but for all intents and purposes, that case is closed.

IMHO, unless Barack Obama's mother stated otherwise on the BC application, for birth certificate purposes his parentage depends - in the eyes of the state, at least - upon the record of that marriage held by the state of Hawaii. His ancestry in fact, whether legitimate or bigamous, whether by Malcolm X or Frank Marshall Davis or even Barack Hussein Obama, Snr., does not overrule the marriage record held by the state.

Only a state court decision to annul the divorce record and to revoke the prima facie assumption of a legal marriage between BHO Snr. and Anna Dunham, based upon his existing marriage to Kezia, would overrule the existing marriage record. That hasn't happened, and good luck on making it happen, unless Mr. Obama decides that is in his best interest, which it may be (8 USC 12 §1409) .

Even if the marriage were annulled, in the divorce decree Stanley Ann Obama obviously claimed BHO Snr. as her child's father, which he never contested. Therefore, BHO Snr. would be the father of record on the BC, whether the marriage were legitimate or merely a fabrication for propriety's sake.

Or should we take at face value Michelle Obama's hearsay testimony of what her husband said about a wedding which did or didn't happen six months before he was born? Better that we let sleeping dogs lie, especially ones which could really hurt us.

http://www.alipac.us/f19/barack-obam.../index224.html

I'll not attempt to reconstruct the lengthy, detailed post that I spent four hours writing, then lost when I attempted to view it because the BBS token had expired. BAD BBS! BAD! BAD! BAD!

Suffice it to say that no one is going to exhume a body to compare its DNA with Mr. Obama's DNA which no one is going to sample.

All that matters before the law is that the father of record is Barack Hussein Obama, Sr., so any speculation about Frank Marshall Davis or Malcolm X being Mr. Obama's biological father matters naught.



By inspection of his fruits, Mr. Obama is of his father the devil, who is not a U.S. citizen. But you may find it amusing to compare Mr. Obama's face with FMD's face and Malcolm X's face.

[Comment posted at the above WorldNetDaily article by Jerome Corsi about Joel Gilbert's Dreams From My Real Father]

Before the law, all that matters is that the father of record, as identified by the mother, is Barack Hussein Obama, Sr..

www dot alipac dot us/f19/barack-obamas-citizenship-questioned-129743/index493 dot h t m l#post1275355

The father not being a U.S. citizen makes the child not a natural born Citizen of the U.S., according to U.S. Supreme Court interpretations in Minor v. Happersett (1875), The Venus (1814), Shanks v. DuPont (1830), and even Wong Kim Ark (1898 ) 169 U.S. 665 and 679-680 (where Justice Gray referred to a Mr. Binney and Minor v. Happersett). Elsewhere in WKA, Justice Gray relied upon the British Common Law principle of being a natural born subject by birthplace alone. He erroneously stated that the [U.S.] Immigration Act of 1795 used the same "natural-born citizen" wording which the Immigration Act of 1790 misapplied to U.S. citizens' children born outside the U.S.. In reality, the 1795 Act rectified the incorrect usage of "natural-born citizen" in the 1790 Act by changing that phrase to "citizen".

But Justice Gray could contradict himself with impunity, because his opposing opinions about nbC were dicta and not relevant to the decision of the Court that WONG WAS A CITIZEN - NOT A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN - by birthplace alone to permanent resident, legal aliens.

The major search engines have eliminated links to official government documents listing the text of the WKA decision, and the WKA decision is no longer documented at
supremecourt dot gov,
supcourt dot ntis dot gov,
fedworld dot gov,
justice dot gov, or
gpo dot gov (the U.S. Government Printing Office).

To read the Wong Kim Ark decision in full, one must use websites which lack the ".gov" suffix, making them slightly less legally authoritative and reliable in court:
supreme dot justia dot com/cases/federal/us/169/649/case.h t m l ,
laws dot lp dot findlaw dot com/getcase/us/169/649.h t m l , and
law dot cornell dot edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0169_0649_ZD.h t m l .

What a surprise. The uninitiated layman might discover that Justice Gray - after taking an extended vacation in the annals of British Court precedents and interpretations of the British Common Law - finally admitted that Minor v. Happersett was the relevant and applicable Supreme Court precedent regarding "natural born Citizen" within the United States. (See Wong Kim Ark 169 US 679-680 and 654-655.)

While we're discussing the unlikelihood of Barrack Hussain Obama, Sr., the father of record, being Barack Obama II's actual, biological father, here's an article from Nov. of 2011 that I don't recall seeing here before.

November 7, 2011
The Case Against Barack Obama, Sr.
By Don Wilkie

It is widely held that Barack Obama, Sr., goat herder from Kenya, is the father of President Obama. We now know that this contention is probably false.

In Obama's autobiography, Dreams From My Father, he identifies Barack Obama, Sr. as his father. This book has been the primary source of information for all who have written about him. Yet two strong supporters of the president -- David Remnick, author of The Bridge, a biography of Obama, and Janny Scott, author of A Singular Woman, a biography of Ann Dunham -- have expressed doubts about the factual basis of Dreams:

Remnick: "Obama's memoir is a mixture of verifiable fact, recollection, recreation, invention and artful shaping."

Scott: "He gives his account of his parents' fleeting coming together and breaking apart in language and cadences reminiscent of those of folk tales or myths."

Thanks to Jack Cashill, we now know that Dreams From My Father was in large part a creation of Obama's neighbor and unrepentant terrorist Bill Ayers, a man more interested in a "narrative" than in history. So, as a practical matter, when trying to determine the truth about Obama's origins, everything from Dreams must be considered suspect.

The Wedding That Wasn't

There is no record that Obama's mother, Ann Dunham, and Barack Obama, Sr. were ever married. There is no marriage license. There were no witnesses. But we do know from Ann's registration at the University of Washington that Ann did take Obama's name, so we must analyze what we know about their relationship.

Ann supposedly met Obama in a Russian language class, one of two classes that we know Ann took at the University of Hawaii in the fall semester of 1960. The meeting story, however, comes from Dreams and is therefore unreliable. Sally Jacobs, in her book, The Other Barack, makes reference to "Barack Obama's transcript from the University of Hawaii, Syracuse University, Frank C. Laubach Collection." The transcript would show us if Obama Sr. took the same Russian class that Ann did. When I requested the same records that Sally Jacobs had seen, Nicole Dittrich, the Reading Room supervisor, informed me that "...Obama Sr.'s Hawaii transcript[s are] currently missing from our collection."

For the sake of argument, we will assume, regardless of how or when they met, that Ann and Obama said they were married. We will also assume that they were in love. We would then logically assume that the pair lived and acted like lovers. They did not.

Heather Smathers, through a Freedom of Information Request (FOIA), posted on the internet Obama Sr.'s United States Immigration file. From the documents (55 pages in all) we learn that Obama Sr. and Ann Dunham lived separately.

On page 35, William Wood wrote, "Barack Obama II, child living with mother (she resides with her parents and subject [Obama Sr.] resides at 1482 Alencastre St.)." The memo was dated 8/31/1961, only 27 days after their child was supposedly born. Their respective residences were over 7 miles away from each other.

Compounding their geographical separation is the fact that there is no documentary evidence that Ann or Obama Sr. ever drove a car while in Hawaii. David Maraniss in "Into the Story" relates that "...she [Ann] never got a license and did not drive her entire life." Obama was so poor that it is hard to imagine that he could afford roller skates, let alone a car.

Even more peculiar is the fact that Ann Dunham left her parents' home with her putatively newborn baby and enrolled in classes at the University of Washington in late August 1961. This is confirmed by enrollment records from the University of Washington. The classes she took were night classes.

After Ann's departure to Seattle, the couple would not see each other for ten years. From an article by John Griffin of the Honolulu Advertiser, we learn that Obama Sr. left Hawaii for Harvard on 6/22/1962. Ann did not return to Hawaii until late fall 1962 or early winter 1963, where she again enrolled in classes at the University of Hawaii.

One might argue that when Obama and Ann first told of their marriage, they really were in love, but something happened that caused a separation. This contention is undermined by the immigration documents. On page 39, a 4/10/1961 memo from Lyle Dahlin mentions his suspicion that the marriage was not a real one. He wrote, "Recommend that Subject be closely questioned before another extention [sic] is granted - and denial be considered. If his USC [United States Citizen] wife tries to petition for him make sure an investigation is conducted as to the bona-fide of the marriage."

The earliest record we have of a marriage comes from this same memo: "Mrs. McCabe, University of Hawaii, Foreign Student advisor, called on 4/10/61 and reported that BARACK H OBAMA, a student at the University since 1959 was married on February 2, 1961 to Stanley Ann Dunham."

Page 42 is an "APPLICATION BY ALIEN STUDENT FOR PERMISSION TO ACCEPT EMPLOYMENT." It was filled out, by hand, by Obama Sr. on 3/3/1961, only one month after his supposed marriage. Section 24 asked, "Economic necessity (explain how financial circumstances have changed since admission or change of status to student)." Obama Sr. wrote, "This is because I did not come with enough for the entire period of my stay and thought would get some from scholarship and work." What is glaringly missing is any mention of a wife and soon-to-be child -- important information, one would think, for a foreign student seeking permission to work.

If anything had happened that ended their love for each other, it would have to have happened in the month of February 1961 for Obama not to mention his pregnant wife in March. Yet, in April, Mrs. McCabe reported that they were married. One must assume that it was either Obama or Ann who supplied that information, as there was no marriage record.

The next time Obama filled out this application was on August 31, 1961 (reminder: nn and baby are now in Seattle). On it, he stated that he was married, but he did something curious. He wrote down a name but crossed it out, then filled in "Ann S. Dunham." The crossed out name looks like it starts with a "K" like the "K" in Kenya just above it. His wife's name in Kenya was Kezia. Whether the scratched out name was Kezia or not, it's clear he wrote down another name before writing in Ann's. Also, he got Ann's name wrong. Stanley Ann Dunham, or S. Ann Dunham, is correct, but not Ann S. Dunham. He left the box for name and address of child blank.



While Ann Was Away

[Three paragraphs are omitted to fulfill Fair Use rules.]

Ann left Obama behind in August of 1961, yet Abercrombie would have us believe that Obama left Ann behind in June of 1962. Clearly, Abercrombie can't be believed. A "best friend" would know the facts, and Abercrombie obviously does not.

Finally, on May 29, 1962, Obama wrote his sponsor Tom Mboya: "You know my wife is in Nairobi there and I would really appreciate any help you may give her." Here Obama is talking about his wife Kezia, whom he left in Kenya. Thoughts of a wife and child in America seem never to have crossed his mind.

OK, so they weren't in love.

If the supposed marriage to Ann wasn't one of love, perhaps Obama Sr. was forced to marry her, shotgun-style. The few documents we have argue against this.

The documents make clear that Obama Sr. was given a "CERTIFICATE OF ELIGIBILITY." The previously mentioned memo from Lyle Dahlin noted that "[i]f he were convicted of bigamy we might get a deportation charge but not before." Obama, faced with a shotgun marriage, would only have had to claim he still had a wife in Kenya.

Perhaps Obama and Ann had a one-night fling and Obama consented to marry Ann for moral reasons, without coercion. In this scenario one would assume that Obama would take pride in and responsibility for raising his son. This assumption is again challenged by the documents we have.

The first mention of a son in the immigration documents is on August 17, 1962. Obama was apparently in Baltimore on his way to Harvard. But the son he mentions is Roy Obama, from his wife Kezia. Barack Obama II isn't listed as a son until April 21, 1964. This came as immigration officials were debating whether to ship Obama Sr. back to Kenya because, as M.F. McKeon of the Immigration Service wrote, "They were apparently having difficulty with his financial arrangements and couldn't seem to figure out how many wives he had." Obama Sr. listed the address of his son Barack as "C/O University of Hawaii, Honolulu Hawaii (page 14)." It appears Obama had no idea where his son was or how to contact him directly.

But the Birth Certificate Lists Obama Sr. as the Father

There are four anomalies in our president's recently released birth certificate regarding his father.

The father's race is listed as African. Obama Sr. had to know that there were both white and black "Africans," as both South Africa and Rhodesia were ruled by white minorities. Obama Sr. was quoted by John Griffin in the Honolulu Advertiser saying that it is "rather strange, even rather amusing to see Caucasians discriminated against here." It is difficult to imagine that the father would give his race as "African."

The father's birthplace is given as Kenya, East Africa. This is like saying United States, Central North America. On his "Alien Registration Fingerprint Chart" (page 52), his place of birth is listed as "Kisumu-Nyanza, Kenya." Obviously, Obama knew where he was born.

The baby's name is listed as "Barack Hussein Obama, II." But on page 14 of the immigration documents, Obama Sr. wrote the child's name as "Barack Obama 2nd."

Finally, Obama Sr.'s age is incorrect. The birth certificate states that he was 25, when in reality he was 27. For the entire time he was in Hawaii, he listed his birth date as 6/18/1934 on all of his immigration documents, making him 27 on August 4th 1961, the alleged birth date of his alleged son.

Listing his race as African, botching his place of birth, the ignorance of his son's official name, and, most significantly, reporting an incorrect age, leaves us with only one conclusion: Obama Sr. was nowhere around when the birth certificate was being filled out.

The Picture

There is a picture of Ann's father, Stanley Dunham, standing next to Obama Sr., with his arm around him. The picture has generated much discussion in the blogosphere.



A careful review reveals many details which prove that it is a going away picture -- probably taken on June 22, 1962, while Ann and baby were still in Seattle. Some have argued that because there are leis around Obama Sr.'s neck, it has to be an arrival picture. However, the website "Blooms of Hawaii" states that "[a] lei is bestowed on another for many reasons -- it can symbolize love, friendship, parting, a wish for safety, and many other messages of peace."

If you look carefully at the 21 people in the picture, you can see that they are composed of two distinct groups: friends of Obama and crew from the boat that is taking him to the mainland. The two men in the middle wearing sailor suits and the man kneeling in the front with a steward or cook's jacket on indicate crew, but some of Obama's East-West Center friends appear in the picture. (Note: "best friend" Abercrombie does not!) They all arrived in Hawaii after September 1961, making this likely a going away picture.



But there is more we can learn from this picture. Below is a cropped section focusing on Obama, the girl next to him, and Stanley Dunham.



You can see Stanley's arm around Obama. You can see Obama's left arm, the one next to Stanley, holding a briefcase. What you can't see is Obama's right arm, or the girl's left arm. It appears that their arms are around each other. Though this could be innocent, it could also show Obama with his girlfriend. How then, can we explain Stanley's smiling visage?

What makes sense?

None of the scenarios for marriage we have discussed so far -- love, or love with a separation, a shotgun marriage, or doing the "right thing" -- makes any sense with the facts we know. There is one scenario, however, that makes a lot of sense.

Let's assume that Ann was impregnated by someone unknown and was facing the stigma of becoming an unwed mother. Obama Sr., for a fee, agreed to "marry" Ann. Being a foreign national from Kenya, there would be no liability for him (child support, etc.), and it might have been a help for extending his stay in America.

Ann's taking Obama's name for the sake of being "respectable" would explain all of what we now know: why there was no love in the relationship, the separate living arrangements, Ann and Barry leaving Obama and moving to Seattle, the EWC friends knowing nothing about Ann and child, Obama's letter to Mboya mentioning his wife Kezia, all of the mistakes on the birth certificate, and the apparent friendship between Obama and Ann's father Stanley.

The immigration documents support this scenario, as they show just how broke Obama Sr. was. On 3/3/1961 Obama Sr. claimed $1,200 in income and $2,000 in annual expenses (page 42). This was just one month after he was supposedly married. He had a shortfall of $800. He was a man in serious need of funds. A pay for service arrangement is eminently believable, especially when the immigration documents show that he earned $5.00 a day as a dishwasher at the Ink Blot Coffee Shop (page 43) and worked for the Dole Corporation as an "ordinary summer worker" for $1.33 per hour (page 35).

But if they weren't married, why did Ann file for divorce?

Ann filed for divorce in January of 1964. Obama was notified while at Harvard; he signed an acknowledgement, and that was the extent of his involvement. My guess as to why Ann filed for a divorce, when there was no marriage, is that she was now in love with Lolo Soetoro. She wanted to make sure there was no legal reason, such as common-law marriage, that would potentially prevent their union. Ann and Lolo were married in March of 1965.

We won't be fooled again...

The evidence is clear: there is no license; there was no marriage. Ann took Obama's name, but there was no love, no estrangement, no coercion, no selfless gallantry in the "marriage." Obama was a financially desperate student who got a big break when the Dunhams found him and paid him to be a father in name only. Ann and son Barry went on with their lives, and Obama continued on with his studies.

Is it possible that our president doesn't know this? I find that hard to believe. I do know, though, that he used the compelling, but mythical, story of an African father and Midwestern mother to get elected. I also believe that whether or not Obama knew the truth about his parents' relationship, he didn't realize then that Obama Sr.'s Kenyan nationality would lead opponents to question his "natural born citizen" status.

In all likelihood, our President is a "natural born citizen" who was elected under false pretenses. Mr. President, in the next election, please run on your record and not a mythological past. History and your fellow citizens deserve this much.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/11/the_case_against_barack_obama_sr.html

I don't know how Mr. Wilkie could write all that and still come to the wrong conclusion.
Maybe that false statement was made under duress from his editor. Or maybe he just lied,
to disassociate himself from us "birthers" and to maintain his credibility with "centrists".

Obama Changed His Name In Canada?
Wednesday, April 25, 2012 10:03
Share
inShare3
134

Interview with attorney Stephen Pidgeon. Attorney Pidgeon claims he found a record for a name change from "Barak Mounir Ubayd" to "Barack Hussein Obama" on October 14th, 1982 in Skookumchuck, British Columbia. Attorney Pidgeon also discusses his new book titled "The Obama Error"




http://beforeitsnews.com/story/2073/...In_Canada.html

Breitbart's coroner poisoned to death?

Police probe mysterious demise of L.A. medical examiner

Joe Kovacs
WND
April 29, 2012



Andrew Breitbart

Medical examiners in Los Angeles are investigating the possible poisoning death of one of their own officials who may have worked on the case of Andrew Breitbart, the conservative firebrand who died March 1, the same day Sheriff Joe Arpaio announced probable cause for forgery in President Obama’s birth certificate.

Michael Cormier, a respected forensic technician for the Los Angeles County Coroner died under suspicious circumstances at his North Hollywood home April 20, the same day Breitbart’s cause of death was finally made public.

“There are mysterious circumstances surrounding his death,” said Elizabeth Espinosa, a news reporter for KTLA-TV. “We’re told detectives are looking into the possibility that he was poisoned by arsenic.”

Help Sheriff Joe blow the lid off Obama’s fraud. Join the Cold Case Posse right now!

Cormier, 61, had been rushed to Providence St. Joseph Medical Center in Burbank after complaining of pain and vomiting.

“He was transported there early in the morning, and passed away late at night,” Ed Winter, assistant chief of operations and Cormier’s colleague at the Los Angeles County Department of Coroner, told KTLA. “It affects everybody when you lose a co-worker, but we’ll proceed and do our job and try to figure out why Michael died.”

The hospital then notified Los Angeles Police about Cormier’s death.

“At this point we haven’t ruled out foul play,” police Lt. Alan Hamilton told the Los Angeles Times. “It is one of the things being considered. We are waiting for the coroner’s results.”

Toxicology results are not expected for five to six weeks.

Sources told the Times several hazardous materials experts and officers searched Cormier’s home in search of what may have caused his sudden demise.


Michael Cormier

“The sources, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said that finding the presence of poison does not necessarily mean the death was a homicide, because the substance could have accidentally entered his system,” the Times reported.

Hamilton also noted investigations are standard procedure when there’s a suggestion of anything other than natural causes in someone’s death.

It’s still unclear if Cormier personally worked on the probe into Breitbart’s death, and WND has left messages with the coroner’s office seeking comment.

On April 20, the same day Cormier died, the coroner’s office released its findings into the death of Breitbart, stating the 43-year-old conservative media powerhouse died of natural causes, listing cause of death as heart failure.

“No prescription or illicit drugs were detected.The blood alcohol was .04%,” the official report said. “No significant trauma was present and foul play is not suspected.”
Breitbart was founder of BigGovernment.com among other websites.

The night before Breitbart died, WND senior staff reporter Jerome Corsi arranged for Breitbart to interview Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio, who the very next day held a news conference to announce there was probable cause to believe President Obama’s birth certificate released on April 27, 2011, was a forgery, as well as Obama’s Selective Service Card.

“I have known Andrew for nearly 15 years and considered him a friend. His passion and energy for seeking the truth will be greatly missed by the nation. It’s almost incomprehensible that he left us so soon,” said Joseph Farah, founder and editor of WND.

In a column, Farah recalled meeting Breitbart years ago when he worked as a backup editor for the Drudge Report.

Matt Drudge paid tribute to his colleague and friend with a posting on the Drudge Report: “In the first decade of the DRUDGEREPORT Andrew Breitbart was a constant source of energy, passion and commitment. We shared a love of headlines, a love of the news, an excitement about what’s happening. I don’t think there was a single day during that time when we did not flash each other or laugh with each other, or challenge each other. I still see him in my mind’s eye in Venice Beach, the sunny day I met him. He was in his mid 20′s. It was all there. He had a wonderful, loving family and we all feel great sadness for them today.”

Rush Limbaugh called Breitbart an “indefatigable bulldog for the conservative cause.”

Sean Hannity told WND: “Andrew was a warrior, though a happy warrior, who relished political combat. He cared deeply for his friends, his family and his country. The movement has lost a passionate advocate. And I have lost a good friend. Andrew and his family are in our prayers.”

Breitbart’s coroner poisoned to death?