RELATED
How Ted Cruz killed the birther movement
10/24/2013 5:55pm by John Aravosis
http://americablog.com/2013/10/ted-c...orn-obama.html
Printable View
RELATED
How Ted Cruz killed the birther movement
10/24/2013 5:55pm by John Aravosis
http://americablog.com/2013/10/ted-c...orn-obama.html
Friday, November 8, 2013
BREAKING! EXCLUSIVE!
MONUMENTAL BREAKTHROUGH
in Birth Certificate Case!
INVESTIGATION TAKES ASTOUNDING NEW TWIST!
Carl Gallups (founder of PPSIMMONS News and Ministry Network and host of Freedom Friday With Carl Gallups on 1330 WEBY - Gulf Coast Talk Radio) has just released the following statement concerning the White House birth certificate investigation and the ongoing investigation by the [Maricopa Co., Arizona,] Cold Case Posse.
“Many of you have been asking by email, telephone, FB, YT, tweets, and blog posts – “What’s going on with the birth certificate investigation? Why have you gone silent? Is it over? Did you hit a roadblock?”
"While I am not an official spokesperson for Mike Zullo and [Maricopa Co., Arizona,] Sheriff Arpaio - here is what I can tell you at this point: the investigation has never gone silent and it has never stopped. Mike Zullo and I have been telling you (for months) that this investigation took a deeper turn some time back. Well – it not only took a deeper turn – but it has now become much, much deeper! Deeper than you could ever imagine!
"Mike has been traveling around the country the last two weeks as a result of this new branch of investigation. The implications of what has been uncovered (with hard documentation and evidence) are absolutely astounding – it is beyond monumental. As a result - the investigation work has increased 100-fold in intensity. This is why Mike Zullo has made no recent comments. The necessity for absolute 100% confidentiality is too important. I would not expect a detailed comment from Mike Zullo or Sheriff Arpaio for awhile. This is simply too big to let even a hint out about what they now know.
"I can also tell you that – based upon what I know – the birth certificate issue has been 100% settled. I am not at liberty to tell you how we know, but we now know without any argument or even the slightest shade of doubt – the birth certificate posted on the White House website is a 100% fabrication.
"All the talk about the Xerox machine and reproducing certain anomalies found on the White House birth certificate has now been completely, forensically, and in 100% evidentiary fashion – debunked. The entire [portfolio of Obot minutiae] has been completely eviscerated. Their smokescreen has been obliterated. To all of those who have had deep concerns about the matter of the authenticity of the birth certificate – you have been vindicated. You were right! This will eventually come to light. Be patient.
"Again – this entire affair is now much bigger than the birth certificate. As soon as I am at liberty to say more, I will. Until then, America will simply have to be patient, pray, and trust.
"Sheriff Arpaio, Mike Zullo, et al, have not lied to you or misled you in the past. They will not in the future, either. They are working tirelessly as I speak. You will see the results one day in the future – and then you will know.
"Let me add – this is the first time that Mike Zullo hasn’t told me everything that he knows. There is simply too much and it now goes too deep. I know enough to tell you with confidence what I have just told you. Trust me – this is huge… it is so monumentally huge.”
Note: For those of you who are concerned about the safety of those of us who "know" this information - no worries. Every precaution has been taken to completely secure the information and how it can be released. No one person or group of persons becoming the subject of "harm" will stop the release of this history-changing information.
ppsimmons.blogspot.com/2013/11/breaking-exclusive-monumental.html
Mia Marie Pope knew Barry Soetoro in prep school as a homosexual, druggie, foreign student
Posted on November 8, 2013 by Dr. Eowyn
http://fellowshipofminds.files.wordp...pg?w=500&h=346
Mia Marie Pope knew Obama at their high school in Honolulu, Hawaii, during the late 1970s. She knew him then by the name of Barry Soetoro.
In this interview on October 31, 2013, with the Reverend Dr. James David Manning, the pastor of Atlah World Missionary [Church] in Harlem, New York, Pope says Barry “always portrayed himself as a foreign student” and “very much was within the gay community.” It was “common knowledge” that Barry “wasn’t interested in girls” but “was strictly into men.”
“One of his attributes even then,” as he is now, was that Barry “was a pathological liar even then” of the “self-aggrandizing” sort. He would lie about the most mundane things.
Barry also exploited people, bumming cigarettes off others, then drop them as soon as he got what he wanted.
Barry also bragged about smoking the expensive powder form of cocaine. “He would get with older white guys. That’s how he procured the cocaine, by having sex with these older rich white guys.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uy2K5SIuK2E
If the video doesn’t work, go to:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uy2K5SIuK2E&list=TL3MXxdVsZeo9OchqeSbY-onH5YL-icS5X
Thank you, Ms. Pope, for having the courage to speak the truth.
May God bless you, and send His mighty angels to spread their wings of protection over you and keep you safe from this evil impostor in the White House.
~Eowyn
Dr. Eowyn is the Editor of Fellowship of the Minds.
[ED.: the following two articles are reposts.]
Why the GOP won’t challenge vote fraud
[It can't.]
Posted on November 15, 2012 by Dr. Eowyn
Friends and Patriots,
It’s major duct tape time ’cause you’ll need it to keep your head from exploding.
Are you ready for this?
Here we go….
There is now compelling and undeniable evidence that MAJOR vote fraud had been perpetrated in the November 2012 Election. See FOTM’s posts chronicling the extensive pervasive fraud by going to our “2012 Election” page below our FOTM masthead, and click on those post links colored dark green.
But our screaming and hollering are to no avail. No one is listening to us. Not even the Republican Party.
Here’s why….
The Republican Party made an agreement 30 years ago with the Democrat Party NOT to ensure voting integrity and NOT to pursue suspected vote fraud.
Yes. You read it correctly.
In fact, legally the GOP cannot ensure voting integrity, nor can it prevent vote fraud.
Here’s the astounding reason, which is kept from the American people.
http://fellowshipofminds.files.wordp...-gop.jpg?w=500
PolitiJim writes for Gulag Bound, November 13, 2012, that during the weekly True the Vote webcast, Catherine Engelbrecht (see her photo below) related a meeting she had with Reince Priebus, the chairman of the Republican National Committee (RNC), asking what the GOP would do about voter integrity. The answer?
Nothing. They aren’t legally able to.
http://fellowshipofminds.files.wordp...echt.jpg?w=500True the Vote’s Catherine Engelbrecht (read more about her, here)
This all goes back to a lawsuit 31 years ago, in 1981. The following is compiled from an account on The Judicial View, a legal website specializing in court decision research and alerts, and from “Democratic National Committee v Republican National Committee,” Case No. 09-4615.
In 1981, during the gubernatorial election in New Jersey (NJ), a lawsuit was brought against the RNC, the NJ Republican State Committee (RSC), and three individuals (John A. Kelly, Ronald Kaufman, and Alex Hurtado), accusing them of violating the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 1971, 1973, and the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States.
The lawsuit was brought by the Democratic National Committee (DNC), the NJ Democratic State Committee (DSC), and two individuals (Virginia L. Peggins and Lynette Monroe).
The lawsuit alleged that:
- The RNC and RSC targeted minority voters in New Jersey in an effort to intimidate them.
- The RNC created a voter challenge list by mailing sample ballots to individuals in precincts with a high percentage of racial or ethnic minority registered voters. Then the RNC put the names of individuals whose postcards were returned as undeliverable on a list of voters to challenge at the polls.
- The RNC enlisted the help of off-duty sheriffs and police officers with “National Ballot Security Task Force” armbands, to intimidate voters by standing at polling places in minority precincts during voting. Some of the officers allegedly wore firearms in a visible manner.
To settle the lawsuit, in 1982 — while Ronald Reagan was President (1981-1989) — the RNC and RSC entered into an agreement or Consent Decree, which is national in scope, limiting the RNC’s ability to engage or assist in voter fraud prevention unless the RNC obtains the court’s approval in advance. The following is what the RNC and RSC, in the Consent Decree, agreed they would do:
[I]n the future, in all states and territories of the United States:
(a) comply with all applicable state and federal laws protecting the rights of duly qualified citizens to vote for the candidate(s) of their choice;
(b) in the event that they produce or place any signs which are part of ballot security activities, cause said signs to disclose that they are authorized or sponsored by the party committees and any other committees participating with the party committees;
(c) refrain from giving any directions to or permitting their agents or employees to remove or deface any lawfully printed and placed campaign materials or signs;
(d) refrain from giving any directions to or permitting their employees to campaign within restricted polling areas or to interrogate prospective voters as to their qualifications to vote prior to their entry to a polling place;
(e) refrain from undertaking any ballot security activities in polling places or election districts where the racial or ethnic composition of such districts is a factor in the decision to conduct, or the actual conduct of, such activities there and where a purpose or significant effect of such activities is to deter qualified voters from voting; and the conduct of such activities disproportionately in or directed toward districts that have a substantial proportion of racial or ethnic populations shall be considered relevant evidence of the existence of such a factor and purpose;
(f) refrain from having private personnel deputized as law enforcement personnel in connection with ballot security activities.
The RNC also agreed that the RNC, its agents, servants, and employees would be bound by the Decree, “whether acting directly or indirectly through other party committees.”
As modified in 1987, the Consent Decree defined “ballot security activities” to mean “ballot integrity, ballot security or other efforts to prevent or remedy vote fraud.”
Since 1982, that Consent Decree has been renewed every year by the original judge, Carter appointee District Judge Dickinson R. Debevoise, now 88 years old. Long retired, Debevoise comes back yearly for the sole purpose of renewing his 1982 order for another year.
http://fellowshipofminds.files.wordp...pg?w=225&h=300
U.S. District Judge Dickinson R. Debevoise
In 2010, the RNC unsuccessfully appealed “to vacate or modify” the Consent Decree in “Democratic National Committee v Republican National Committee,” Case No. 09-4615 (C.A. 3, Mar. 8, 2012). (I paid The Judicial Review $10 for the PDF of Case No. 09-4615 and uploaded the 59-page document to FOTM’s media library. To read Case No. 09-4615, click here!)
This is a summary of the appeals judge’s ruling, filed on March 8, 2012:
In 1982, the Republican National Committee (“RNC”) and the Democratic National Committee (“DNC”) entered into a consent decree (the “Decree” or “Consent Decree”), which is national in scope, limiting the RNC’s ability to engage or assist in voter fraud prevention unless the RNC obtains the court’s approval in advance. The RNC appeals from a judgment of the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey denying, in part, the RNC’s Motion to Vacate or Modify the Consent Decree. Although the District Court declined to vacate the Decree, it did make modifications to the Decree. The RNC argues that the District Court abused its discretion by modifying the Decree as it did and by declining to vacate the Decree. For the following reasons, we will affirm the District Court’s judgment.
Surprise! The judge who denied the RNC’s appeal to “vacate” the 1982 Consent Decree is an Obama appointee, Judge Joseph Greenaway, Jr., of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.
http://fellowshipofminds.files.wordp...away.jpg?w=500
Judge Joseph Greenaway, Jr.,
U.S. Court of Appeals, 3rd Circuit
Guy Benson of Townhall.com points out that in last Tuesday’s election, Obama only won by 406,348 votes in 4 states:
- Florida: 73,858
- Ohio: 103,481
- Virginia: 115,910
- Colorado: 113,099
Those four states, with a collective margin of 406,348 votes for Obama, add up to 69 electoral votes. Had Romney won 407,000 or so additional votes in the right proportion in those states, he would have 275 electoral votes.
All four states showed Romney ahead in the days leading up to the election. But on November 6, Romney lost all four states by a substantial margin, all of which have precincts that inexplicably went 99% for Obama, had voter registrations that exceeded their population, and had experienced problems with voting machines.
This election was stolen by the Democrats via vote fraud. Despite all the evidence of fraud, the Republican Party has been strangely silent about it.
Now you know why.
I’ll leave you with one last, even more disturbing thought:
The RNC and DNC made their Consent Decree 30 years ago, in 1982. The agreement in effect gives a carte blanche to the Democrat Party to commit vote fraud in every voting district across America that has, in the language of the Consent Decree, “a substantial proportion of racial or ethnic populations.” The term “substantial proportion” is not defined.
The Democrat Party knew this 30 years ago, more than enough time to put a plan in place to identify and groom their “perfect candidate” — in the words of Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) in 2008, a “light-skinned” black Democrat who has “no Negro dialect unless he wanted to have one.”
- Being a black Democrat, this perfect candidate would get the support of almost all black Americans (96% in 2008!) and other racial minorities (two-thirds of Hispanics in 2008).
- Being a “light-skinned” black with “no Negro dialect”, this perfect candidate would get the support of white Americans perpetually guilt-ridden about America’s original sin of slavery.
It doesn’t matter if this “perfect candidate” has dubious Constitutional eligibility to be president. They would see to it that his original birth certificate (if there is one) would never see the light of day. The same with his other documents — his passports, school and college records, draft registration, and medical records (so we’ll never know why Obama has that very long scar running from one side of his head, over the crown, to the other side).
Now, we understand the significance of the account Tom Fife wrote during the 2008 presidential campaign. Fife, a U.S. government contractor, claims that in 1992 while he was visiting Moscow, a woman with undying allegiance to Soviet Communism (the Soviet Union had recently collapsed, on December 31, 1991) told him that a black man named Barack, born of a white American woman and an African male, was being groomed by communists to be, and would be elected, President of the United States.
Now, we finally understand the cryptic remark made in May 2010, by Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan: “Obama was selected before he was elected.”
In 2008, this “perfect candidate” won the presidential election. And despite his many failures in his first term, he would be reelected in 2012 for a second term via massive vote fraud. But nothing would be done about the vote fraud, because of that Consent Decree signed by the RNC 30 years ago.
The Republican Party is dead — and with it, the U.S. two-party system as well — and the sooner we voters recognize that the better.
The question that remains is whether the American Republic is also dead.
UPDATE (Nov. 16, 2012):
Since I published this post yesterday, we’ve been asking each other: “What can I/we do about this?” Here are my suggestions:
1. If you are a registered Republican, QUIT! Switch your voter registration ID to non-partisan Independent.
2. Stop donating money, not even one penny, to the GOP. Tell them why.
3. Spread the word. Please send the URL of this post (fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/2012/11/15/why-the-gop-will-not-do-anything-about-vote-fraud/) to:
- EVERYONE on your email list.
- Media people for whom you have email addresses.
- Tea Party groups you know.
- Post the link on your Facebook page.
- Post the link as your comment on websites and blogs you visit.
4. Write your state’s attorney general and ask him/her to investigate vote fraud in your state. Click here!
UPDATE (Nov. 21, 2012):
5 days after I’d published this and 7 days after PolitiJim of GulagBound published his account, someone in the conservative establishment media is writing about this — WND’s Bob Unruh. Click here for his article, “GOP Legally Barred From Fighting Vote Fraud” [copied below]. But it’s still the sound of crickets from conservative talk radio, even though I’ve sent my post to Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck, and a reader had also sent it to Mark Levin.
Just so you know: It makes no monetary difference to us how many people read this post. Fellowship of the Minds (FOTM) is an ad-free blog. We don’t make even a penny in revenue because we deliberately don’t have ads. In fact, I paid WordPress a $99 annual fee so WordPress can’t insert ads on FOTM either. All of our writers work our b[ehind]s off, for no pay, as a labor of love for our country.
~Eowyn
fellowshipoftheminds.com/2012/11/15/why-the-gop-will-not-do-anything-about-vote-fraud/
__________________________________________________ __
WND EXCLUSIVE
GOP legally barred from fighting vote fraud
30 years later, consent decree violation claims still threaten
Published: 11/20/2012 at 8:01 PM
http://www.wnd.com/files/2011/10/runruh.jpg
Bob Unruh joined WND in 2006 after nearly three decades with the Associated Press, as well as several Upper Midwest newspapers, where he covered everything from legislative battles and sports to tornadoes and homicidal survivalists. He is also a photographer whose scenic work has been used commercially.
http://www.wnd.com/files/2012/11/oba...ed-340x161.jpg
Voting machines suspiciously defaulting to Barack Obama? Buses loaded with strangers appearing at polling stations? Even ballots turning out 100 percent for one candidate in precinct reports?
In short, suspicions of vote fraud?
That’s too bad, because a race-based consent decree negotiated by Democrats against the Republican National Committee a generation ago still has tied the RNC’s hands, and GOP officials could be cited for contempt – or worse – if they try to make sure American elections are clean.
Impossible?
No. Fact.
The case is the Democratic National Committee vs. the Republican National Committee, originally from 1982.
Democrats alleged Republicans were trying intimidate minority voters in New Jersey and brought the legal action. The RNC, inexplicably, decided to agree to a consent decree before a Democrat-appointed judge rather than fight the claims.
The judge, Dickinson Debevoise, appointed by Jimmy Carter, later retired but decided he would continue to control the case. The decision requires the RNC – but not the DNC – to “refrain from undertaking any ballot security activities in polling places or election districts where the racial or ethnic composition of such districts is a factor in the decision to conduct, or the actual conduct of, such activities there and where a purpose or significant effect of such activities is to deter qualified voters from voting; and the conduct of such activities disproportionately in or directed toward districts that have a substantial proportion of racial or ethnic populations shall be considered relevant evidence of the existence of such a factor and purpose.”
The rest of the agreement essentially requires the RNC to follow applicable state and federal election laws.
But the section cited above has been used for decades to warn off Republicans from any challenge to evidence of voter fraud in districts with “racial or ethnic populations.”
The law has remained, even though the RNC recently challenged it at the appellate level only to be turned down by Judges Joseph Greenaway Jr., appointed by Bill Clinton; Dolores Sloviter, appointed by Carter; and Walter Stapleton, appointed by Ronald Reagan, in the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
It now is pending before the U.S. Supreme Court.
But two election veterans both told WND it still is hurting the fight against voter fraud in the United States.
Attorney James Bopp of the James Madison Center said the threat that the RNC has faced is that someone will allege a violation of the decree, and party officials will be standing in a courtroom on Election Day.
Bopp’s organization was founded to protect the First Amendment right of all citizens of free expression and “to support litigation and public education activities in order to defend the rights of political expression and association by citizens and citizen groups as guaranteed by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.”
Bopp himself has taken part in more than 60 election-related cases, including recounts, redistricting and constitutional law challenges to state and federal election laws.
He said the agreement even today, amid reports of fraud across the country, prevents the RNC from doing any anti-voter fraud activity on Election Day.
“It is way too restrictive,” he said. “It prevents the RNC from working with state parties in conducting voter integrity activities. It has been used by the DNC to harass the leadership of the RNC with false allegations of violations of the consent decree.”
He said the reason why the RNC originally agreed to the decree, rather than fight the allegations, was unclear. But he said he investigated the issue.
“It was very troubling that the RNC’s effort to ensure the integrity of the vote would be undermined,” he told WND.
While there have been periods in U.S. history in which there have been concerns about minority voting, the restrictions today, he said, are “completely unjustified.”
“It’s become absurd,” he said, noting that the GOP has had a black chairman.
Voters, he said, would be best served to have both political parties watching for vote fraud.
Also responding to questions about the issue was Cleta Mitchell of the Washington firm of Foley & Lardner.
Mitchell is on the firm’s political law practice team and has 30 years of experience in law, politics and public policy, advising candidates, campaigns and others on state and federal campaign finance law, election law and compliance issues. She practices before the Federal Election Commission.
“The RNC has been completely prohibited from doing anything in ballot security since 1982,” she told WND. “The Democrats repeatedly over the years have gotten the RNC officers into court on the weekend before the election.
“What it means is that for 30 years there has been no way to institutionalize, to help train state parties, to work with candidates [on vote fraud prevention issues],” she said.
Problems can be caused by malfunctioning equipment, programming errors, or “sheer incompetence” of local elections officials, she said. And sometimes by vote fraud.
“The problem is there’s nothing that the RNC can do in that regard because of that consent degree,” Mitchell said. “A lot of things need to be done to improve state laws. … Democrats are able to be [as] involved as they want to be.”
Republicans have tried to change the decree since 2009, after Obama took office. But Debevoise has ruled that they failed to show that conditions in the U.S. had changed since 1982.
Debevoise said that since most minority voters support Democrats, the RNC still has an incentive to suppress minority votes.
He dismissed the idea of voter fraud and extended his own supervision of the case until 2017.
In March, the 3rd Circuit issued its affirmation of Debevoise’s decision.
WND recently has reported on allegations of voter fraud, including a claim by a poll watcher in Pennsylvania who said votes reverted to Obama by default, no matter who the voter selected.
The incident took place in the state where officials claimed Obama received a total of 19,605 votes in 59 voting divisions to zero for Mitt Romney and not far from the 100 precincts in Ohio in which Obama got 99 percent of the vote.
With evidence mounting that the vote tabulation did not reflect the true choices of voters, talk-radio icon Rush Limbaugh declared: “Third-world, tin-horn dictators don’t get [these percentages]. I mean, the last guy that got this percentage of the vote was Saddam Hussein, and the people that didn’t vote for him got shot. This just doesn’t happen. Even Hugo Chavez [of Venezuela] doesn’t get 100 percent or 99 percent of the vote.”
It was in Upper Macungie Township, near Allentown, Pa., where an auditor, Robert Ashcroft, was dispatched by Republicans to monitor the vote on Election Day. He said the software he observed would “change the selection back to default – to Obama.”
He said that happened in about 5 percent to 10 percent of the votes.
See the BIG LIST of vote fraud reports coming out of the 2012 election.
WND’s newest forum is your opportunity to report voter fraud
Stand up to fight against voter fraud right now!
Here’s the blueprint Obama used to steal the 2012 election.
Sound off on GOP being legally barred from preventing vote fraud.
www.wnd.com/2012/11/gop-legally-barred-from-fighting-vote-fraud/
https://scontent-a-iad.xx.fbcdn.net/...07582382_n.jpg
Video: Obama Birth Certificate: New Hard Document Evidence ‘It’s Gotten Deeper, Darker than You Can Imagine’
[ Listen: http://goo.gl/B3Rkeh]
BARACK OBAMA: THE GHOST OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY – By Wayne Allyn Root
http://freepatriot.org/wp-content/up...a-columbia.jpg
I just returned from New York, where I attended my 30th Columbia University reunion. I celebrated with my esteemed classmates. Everyone except Barack Obama. As usual- he wasn’t there. Not even a video greeting. Not a personalized letter to his classmates. Nothing. But worse, no one at our 30th reunion ever met him. The President of the United States is the ghost of Columbia University.
I’m certainly no “Johnny come lately.” For five years now (since 2007 when it became clear Barack Obama was running for President), I’ve been quoted in the media as saying that no one I’ve ever met at Columbia can remember ever meeting, or even seeing, our college classmate Barack Obama. Don’t you think the media should be asking questions? Isn’t this a very strange story?
I am a graduate of Columbia University, Class of 1983. That’s the same class Barack Obama claims to have graduated from. We shared the same exact major- Political Science. We were both Pre Law. It was a small class- about 700 students. The Political Science department was even smaller and closer-knit (maybe 150 students). I thought I knew, or met at least once, (or certainly saw in classes) every fellow Poly Sci classmate in my four years at Columbia.
But not Obama. No one ever met him. Even worse, no one even remembers seeing that unique memorable face. Think about this for a minute. Our classmate is President of the United States. Shouldn’t someone remember him? Or at least claim to remember him?
One of the speakers at the 30th reunion should have reminisced about “my days with the future President.” But no one did. You’d think Obama might have sent a video to tell us all how much he enjoyed his time at Columbia. You’d think he’d have sent at least a letter to be read aloud from one of his former college buddies. Right? But he didn’t. Because Obama has no former college buddies. No one that ever met Obama, let alone befriended him, was in attendence at our 30th class reunion.
Now you might argue this is all strange, but it’s possible. Afterall Columbia says he graduated. And I take my college’s word for it. Would one of the world’s greatest Ivy League institutions participate in a coverup, thereby risking their billion dollar reputation? And there is one single article written for the Columbia newspaper with Obama’s name on it. A single photo also exists of Obama in his Manhattan apartment with the man he claims was his college roommate- a Pakistani foreign student. And one single radical leftist Columbia professor who hates Israel also claims he remembers Obama.
That’s the sum total of Obama’s existence at Columbia University, Class of ’83.
So I asked every classmate I met at our 30th reunion, many of them Political Science majors, if they ever met, or saw, or heard of Obama. The answer was a resounding NO from every one of them. I asked if they found this strange, or worried how this was possible? They all answered YES. I asked if they thought it was possible to be a Political Science major and never meet a fellow major in our small classes? They all gave me a very strange look and answered NO. So I asked, “How could this be possible? Can you explain this?” No one had an answer.
Keep in mind these people I spoke to are all- to a man and woman- dedicated liberal Democrats who voted for Obama. I’m guessing 90% are major Democrat contributors. My Columbia classmates are the crème of the crop of American society. Lawyers, doctors, billionaire hedge fund members, stars of the media. They adore Obama. But they all admit they never met him in their four years at Columbia. I am proud of my classmates for their honesty and integrity.
One classmate told me he was present when one of the most honored professors in Columbia University history gave a speech to alumni a couple of years ago. The speech was followed by Q&A. This beloved professor was asked about Obama at Columbia. He said, “I have my doubts about the story.” The crowd was stunned. He immediately went onto the next question and never elaborated. So obviously I’m not the only one with doubts.
So here’s my take on this great mystery. I’ve never said Obama was not registered at Columbia. I’m sure he was. I’ve never said he didn’t graduate. If Columbia says he did, then I’m sure he did. But I’ve always said there is something wrong with the story. It’s rancid. It’s unbelievable. It’s impossible. It’s the story of a Manchurian candidate.
The question isn’t was he ever registered, or did he graduate. And it’s interesting that one photo, one professor, and one newspaper article exists- just enough to provide a thin cover. But the serious question the media should be asking is…What did Obama do for two full years in-between registration and graduation? Did he ever attend a class? Did he ever have a single friend other than a Pakistani national? Why is the only professor to ever come forward and claim he remembers him a radical leftist who hates Israel? What exactly was he doing when no one met him, saw him, or heard of him? Why are his college records sealed? What has he got to hide?
But my educated guess is he can’t, or won’t ever release those records. Because what we’d find would be shocking.
Now I know somewhere in America is an Obama defender that will accuse me of lying. But are all those classmates at our 30th reunion lying too? And if I wanted to lie, wouldn’t I better off saying I knew the future President well? If I wanted to malign the President, shouldn’t I be saying he was my close buddy and I witnessed all kinds of terrible things? But I can’t say that. Because I never witnessed anything. Neither did any of my classmates. We didn’t know him. Never met him. Never saw him. My story is simply the truth- and it’s the same consistent story I’ve told since 2007.
There is something wrong with Obama’s story- that much I know. He is either the ghost of Columbia, or the perfect Manchurian candidate. But something smells rotten at Columbia.
Courtesy of Wayne Allyn Root: Author’s Website
http://freepatriot.org/2013/06/04/ba...duating-class/
Wayne Allan Root, CU '83, claims that Barack Obama II did not attend Columbia Univ., and that no one at the 30th reunion of the class of '83 remembers ever meeting Barack Obama. The Rev. James David Manning, who graduated with the class of '83 from Union Theological Seminary in Harlem, across the street from Columbia Univ., maintains that only a handful of African-American students attended either institution then, and that he would have been acquainted with Barack Obama II had Mr. Obama actually been attending Columbia at the same time.
Most people are agreed that Barack Hussein Obama II was indeed awarded a diploma and accredited as graduating from Columbia with the class of '83, as documented in the Columbia College commencement program from May, 1983, and the Columbia University record of 1983 graduates.http://htmlimg3.scribdassets.com/97p...ea08ad93ae.jpg
htmlimg3.scribdassets.com/97pr2suyyo1r9uwc/images/7-ea08ad93ae.jpg
http://cdn.breitbart.com/mediaserver...a-Colombia.jpg
cdn.breitbart.com/mediaserver/Breitbart/Big-Government/2012/05/18/Obama-Colombia.jpg
Whether Barack Obama II attended Columbia Univ. for two full years (or at all), or whether he then actually was serving the United States (for college credit) as an Arabic-speaking CIA liason in support of the mujahideen in the Hindu Kush, is a U.S. House investigation question for Dr. Zbigniew Brzezinski, who was a professor at Columbia at the time.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...inski_1977.jpg
Zbigniew Brzezinski
Zbigniew Brzezinski, a Harvard Ph.D. on Lenin, Stalin, and the 1917 Soviet Revolution, headed the Institute on Communist Affairs at Columbia University, where he was a professor from 1960 to 1989. A Council on Foreign Relations member and co-founder of the Trilateral Commission with David Rockefeller, he was also the National Security Adviser to Pres. Jimmy Carter until Jan. 20, 1981.
The CIA provided the Afghani mujahideen with cash, weapons, and logistics, amounting to BILLIONS of dollars of covert assistance, through Pakistani channels, without any direct contact to guarantee that it was getting to its intended destination? I'm not buying it, and neither are you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wikipedia
"Civilian personnel from the U.S. Department of State and the CIA frequently visited the Afghanistan-Pakistan border area during this time," or,
"No Americans trained or had direct contact with the mujahideen." Which was it?
How about one specific Indonesian or Kenyan CIA operative, Dr. Brzezinski?
PLEASE HELP US TODAY! WE NEED EVERYONE TO PICK UP THE PHONE AND TAKE ACTION!
TARGETS
Rep. Gary Miller (R-CA) 202-225-3201
Rep. Buck McKeon (R-CA) 202-225-1956
Rep. Robert Aderholt (R-AL) 202-225-4876
Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) 202-225-2331
Rep. Lou Barletta (R-PA) 202-225-6511
Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX) 202-225-2002
Rep. Gus Bilirakis (R-FL) 202-225-5755
Rep. Rob Bishop (R-UT) 202-225-0453
Rep. Diane Black (R-TN) 202-225-4231
Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) 202-225-2811
http://www.alipac.us/f8/3-day-blitz-...ivists-292326/
ED.: Not about Mr. Obama's Constitutional ineligibility to the Presidency, but his Constitutional misconduct is related:
Quote:
Originally Posted by MuslimLuvChrist, commenting at WesternJournalism.com (edited for grammar)
[ED.: to enslave We the People, DOJ anti-Constitution "lawlessness creep" returns to the bogus "lack of standing" argument the DOJ used to gain dismissal of constitutional ineligibility lawsuits against Mr. Obama. Now, with that bogus "lack of standing" argument ppularized, We the People, the legitimate government of the United States, "have no right to challenge" the Obama Usurpation, the unconstitutional and NOT-legitimate rogue "government" of the U.S.. Give the devil an inch and he'll be your ruler.
Extranjeros, si. Yanquis, non.]
DoJ Lawyers: ["Ordinary"] Americans Have No Right to Challenge NSA Spy Programs
Saturday, Nov. 23, 2013
US District Court Judge William H. Pauley is at the center of the debate over whether or not Americans can request that the National Security Agency (NSA) halt their surveillance programs.
Lawyers for the government stated to Pauley that “ordinary Americans cannot legally challenge it." [So, if - just if - the NSA, the federal government, is conducting unreasonable and unlawful searches without warrants of anyone and everyone accessing U.S. phone networks,,in country or not, and not just suspected tεrrσrists, then the victims of such fishing expeditions have no standing to seek court injunctions and cannot even request that the NSA halt surveiling them? Such actions by the NSA belong in secret police organizations such as the Gestapo and the Stasi, the KGB and the FSB, China's MSS and N. Korea's MSD, Milosevic and Stanisic's DB Secret Police and Ceausescu's Securitate, Idi Amin's SRB and Mugabe's CIO, Saddam's Mukhabarat and Assad's Mukhabarat (4 directorates), the Shah's SAVAT and the Is|amic Republic's MOIS, the Pakistani ISI, the Yemeni SSC, and the Saudi Mabahith.]
Stuart Delery, attorney for the Department of Justice (DoJ) explained that based on Smith v. Maryland (SvM), “ordinary Americans have no standing to challenge the collection of their call records. Americans have no reasonable expectation of privacy for those records, and that only phone companies can challenge their collection.”
http://cdn.freedomoutpost.com/wp-con...ms-300x167.jpg
Because of this [purported lack of] legal standing, government attorneys are moving for a dismissal of the case.
Delery told the court that the NSA surveillance program was “carefully calibrated to the purpose for which it is being used.”
House Representative James Sensenbrenner, author of the Patriot Act of 2001, wrote an amicus curiae brief to the court.
Sensenbrenner said that he never expected for the federal government to use his legislation for such over-reaching Big Brother surveillance state activities.
Delery suggested that Pauley consult “national security experts” and step down from deciding on whether or not the NSA should continue their spying operations.
The DoJ argued that phone metadata is covered as searchable as stated in the Patriot Act and asserted that access to phone records of customers and siphoning the information “is not a search” and therefore not a violation of the 4th Amendment. [ED.: So calling it "siphoning" makes it "not a search?" If anyone else did it, plundering phone records would be a search, and without a warrant, on non-tεrrσrists, it would be an unlawful invasion of privacy too.]
Jameel Jaffer, deputy director and lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) who initiated the legal battle, commented : “If Pauley were to let the policy — revealed earlier this year by leaker extraordinaire Edward Snowden — remain in place, it could open the door for more intrusive actions by the government. If you accept the government’s theory here, you are creating a dramatic expansion of the government’s investigative power.”
In 2007, the ACLU filed a suit against the NSA that resulted in the decision that the ACLU did not have standing to bring the suit against the NSA, because they could not present evidence that they were the targets of the Terrorist Surveillance Program (TSP).
The DoJ argued that the suit be dismissed due to state secrets privilege (SSP) compounded with the plaintiff’s lack of legal standing. [ED.: The "lack of standing" argument worked for Mr. Obama; why not expand it to the whole rogue Executive Branch? / SARC]
The TSP collected information from intercepted international phone conversations and internet communications without warrants. Targets were considered suspected terrorists and therefore outside of the jurisdiction of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA).
[Continued at freedomoutpost.com/2013/11/doj-lawyers-americans-right-challenge-nsa-spy-programs/]
[ED.: Conservative Christians are "tεrrσrists";
Tea Party members are "tεrrσrists";
I'm a "tεrrorist", you're a "tεrrσrist", everybody's a "tεrrσrist".
Everyone except the Tεrrσrist-in-chief, Al Qaεda and
the Mus|im Brσthεrhoσd's man in the White House.]
Judge Lamberth orders Postmaster General and Inspector General
of the USPS to file an answer within 30 days regarding Obama’s use
of a fabricated postal stamp on a fabricated Selective Service
registration, [but] ignores the fact that they [already] did not file an
answer for 4 months. [So he] gives Obama, Postmaster and DOJ
a free pass on a lack of answer for 4 months.
https://docs.google.com/gview?url=ht...number=1&w=322
Other documents at www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=441296 .
General: Obama purposely weakening U.S. military
Former Pacific Command leader warns against
giving global enemies combat advantage
Published: Tuesday, November 26, 2013
http://www.wnd.com/files/2012/12/F.-...oof_avatar.jpg F. Michael Maloof About Email Archive
F. Michael Maloof, staff writer for WND and
G2Bulletin, is a former senior security policy
analyst in the office of the secretary of defense.
http://www.wnd.com/files/2013/11/obama_binoculars1.jpg
WASHINGTON – A former deputy commanding general of the U.S. Pacific Command says President Obama seeks to “seize control over national security” and, bypassing Congress, singlehandedly weaken the U.S. military.
Army Maj. Gen. Paul E. Vallely, retired, charges in a 21-page position statement made available to WND, titled “The Obama Military – Evolution and Legacy,” that Obama already has begun working with Russia to reduce nuclear weapons without a treaty, which would require Senate ratification.
“This would allow Obama and the executive branch to unilaterally cut our military capability and nuclear weaponry and ignore the treaty clause of the Constitution,” said Vallely, who has also served as a senior military analyst for Fox News Channel. Vallely has also charged, along with several other top generals, that Obama is purging the military by firing top-level commanders and that his ultimate goal is to “destroy U.S. military superiority” to the “advantage of our global enemies.”
In his capacity as chairman of the organization Stand Up America, Vallely previously called for the resignations of Obama, Vice President Joe Biden and certain congressional leaders, issuing a “national call to action” aimed at bringing about those resignations.
Vallely is far from the only one worried about a plunge in military capabilities under Obama’s administration.
Frank Gaffney, former acting assistant secretary of defense during the Reagan administration, has asserted that placing women in combat is just the latest example of a “deliberate and systematic wrecking operation” the administration has conducted against the U.S. armed forces since 2009.
In addition, the Obama administration has directed measures to reduce the Pentagon budget by $1.3 trillion over the next 10 years, said Gaffney, currently president of the Washington-based Center for Security Policy.
In turn, this is bringing about the elimination or slowing of virtually all modernization programs, reduction in maintenance of worn-out weapons systems and other equipment and diminished training and cutting back in benefits, such as the plan the Pentagon has ordered to cut out commissary privileges at all of the military’s 178 U.S. and 70 foreign bases.
Further, Obama’s social agenda now includes changes in the law to allow open homosexuality in the ranks of the American armed forces.
Response? Increased foreign aggression
The undermining of the U.S. military hasn’t been lost on other countries like China, Russia, Iran and North Korea, all of whom have become more militarily aggressive during the Obama administration.
Robert Fisher, a Chinese military affairs specialist, says the Chinese leadership is “not impressed” with the administration’s decisions regarding next-generation stealth aircraft and its retirement of more than half of the Navy’s warships.
At the same time, Beijing has deployed its “carrier killer” missile, the Dong Feng-21D, that can be fired from a mobile launcher as Beijing begins to show greater military assertiveness in the East and South China Seas.
Retired Navy Capt. Joseph John tells WND the “bigger picture” is that “the U.S. armed forces have been under relentless attack by the occupant of the Oval Office for five years.”
A Naval Academy graduate, John had three tours of duty in Vietnam, served as an al-Qaida expert for the FBI, and was a commanding officer with SEALs embedded on special operations. As chairman of Combat Veterans For Congress PAC (Political Action Committee), he has helped elect 20 combat veterans to Congress.
“I believe there are more than 137 officers who have been forced out or given bad evaluation reports so they will never make flag [officer], because of their failure to comply to certain views,” John told WND.
“The truly sad story is that many of the brightest graduates of the three major service academies witnessing what the social experiment on diversity … is doing to the U.S. military, are leaving the service after five years,” he said. “We are being left with an officer corps that can be made to be more compliant, that is, exactly what Obama needs to effect his long range goals for the U.S. military.”
In an email to WND, John outlined what he termed “a very few of the most egregious” aspects of Obama’s “attack” on the military over the past five years.
He referred specifically to the Rules of Engagement in combat that were put in place after Obama took office, claiming the changes resulted in very high casualty rates in Afghanistan, including the loss of 17 members of SEAL Team 6 in one incident.
“The Rules of Engagement precluded the use of suppression fire at a landing zone,” John noted.
Endangering safety
Retired Air Force pilot Lt. Col. Robert “Buzz” Patterson, who was a senior military aide to President Bill Clinton, also asserts that Obama’s national security policies are weakening the military and endangering the country’s safety.
Author of the recent book, “Conduct Unbecoming – How Barack Obama is Destroying the Military and Endangering our Security,” Patterson said Obama is underfunding and misusing the military, making America more vulnerable.
Retired Army Maj. Gen. Patrick Brady, recipient of the U.S. military’s highest decoration, the Medal of Honor, as well as other top retired officers, say Obama’s agenda is decimating the morale of the U.S. ranks to the point members no longer feel prepared to fight or have the desire to win.
“There is no doubt he [Obama] is intent on emasculating the military and will fire anyone who disagrees with him” over such issues as “homosexuals, women in foxholes, the Obama sequester,” Brady told WND.
Brady, a legendary “Dust Off” air ambulance pilot in Vietnam who described his experiences in “Dead Men Flying: Victory in Viet Nam,” said, “The problem is military people will seldom, while on duty, go on the record over such issues, and many will not ever, no matter how true.
“I hear from many off the record who are upset with the current military leadership and some are leaving and have left in the past,” he said.
Brady, who has served as president of the Congressional Medal of Honor Society, referred to additional problems in today’s military including “girly-men leadership [and] medals for not shooting and operating a computer. This president will never fight if there is any reason to avoid it and with a helpless military he can just point to our weakness and shrug his shoulders.”
Retired Army Lt. Gen. William G. “Jerry” Boykin, who was a founding member of Delta Force and later deputy undersecretary of defense for intelligence under President George W. Bush, tells WND it is worrying that four-star generals are being retired at the rate that has occurred under Obama.
“Over the past three years, it is unprecedented for the number of four-star generals to be relieved of duty, and not necessarily relieved for cause,” Boykin said. “I believe there is a purging of the military. The problem is worse than we have ever seen.”
‘Demand resignation’
Vallely said the current crop of political leadership at the federal level must be forced to resign by the “demand resignation” process which he explained requires massive grassroots protests and social networking. As an example, he cited the public and media pressure that led to the resignation of President Richard Nixon.
Vallely also has announced the formation of a “provisional leadership council” – a citizens’ commission – to scrutinize Obama administration actions on national security and economic issues.
To begin the process of “reclaiming America,” Vallely envisions an “American Leadership Council” to be comprised of 12 people who would hold “America’s interests first, not their own,” and be people from “proven leadership,” not “talking heads” and “community organizers.”
“These must be people who have led large businesses and/or held military positions of consequence,” Vallely said. “These must be people who hold loyalty, fealty and love for this country first, and most of all, they must be trustworthy.”
He told WND that he intends to announce their names shortly.
“Under the Obama administration, the military has not been appropriately used to improve diplomatic relations, largely because the military is not viewed as a mechanism to achieve diplomatic success,” Vallely said. “Instead, Obama employs it as a ‘nation-building’ tool, a function quite anathema to its very definition.”
“Now, it’s not even fighting, just assassinating individuals. Retreat is now known as ‘drawdown’ and victory is now known as ‘nation-building’ or ‘transitioning,’” he said.
Vallely said that while conservatives see the military as a “crucial component” of diplomacy, Obama views it as a “hindrance.”
“Changing diplomacy,” he said, “therefore is being carried out in a number of ways by the Obama administration: diminishing the military role and leadership in diplomacy; manipulating the rules of engagement; and making the U.S. military irrelevant elsewhere.”
www.wnd.com/2013/11/general-obama-purposely-weakening-u-s-military/
Military Purge of High Officers — Terrifying
November 21st, 2013
Look up the service records of some of these guys. MOST have perfect LONG services, highly decorated.
Military Suicides Drop; Unclear Why (2013)
“Last year the number of suicides in the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines spiked to 349 for the full 12-month period, the highest since the Pentagon began closely tracking the numbers in 2001, d up from the 2011 total of 301. There were 295 Americans killed in Afghanistan [war] last year, by the AP’s count.” There are more dying by suicide than in war. Why????
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/apnewsbreak-military-suicides-drop-unclear-20855176
“In 2005 alone, there were 6,256 suicides nationally among those who served in the armed forces — about 120 deaths per week.”
http://seattletimes.com/html/localne...iciacol17.html
What the ---- are they doing to the military???
I believe only 2 Generals were fired under Bush’s 2 terms total. There are currently 48 4-Star Generals. [link to en.wikipedia.org]
Many of these below have spotless records, 25 and up years service, many medals and honors such as Brig. Gen Bryan W. Wampler and Command Sgt. Major Don B. Jordan.
Commanding Generals fired:
General John R. Allen-U.S. Marines Commander International Security Assistance Force [ISAF] (Nov 2012)
Major General Ralph Baker (2 Star)-U.S. Army Commander of the Combined Joint Task Force Horn in Africa (April 2013)
Major General Michael Carey (2 Star)-U.S. Air Force Commander of the 20th US Air Force in charge of 9,600 people and 450 Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (Oct 2013)
Colonel James Christmas-U.S. Marines Commander 22nd Marine Expeditionary Unit & Commander Special-Purpose Marine Air-Ground Task Force Crisis Response Unit (July 2013)
Major General Peter Fuller-U.S. Army Commander in Afghanistan (May 2011)
Major General Charles M.M. Gurganus-U.S. Marine Corps Regional Commander of SW and I Marine Expeditionary Force in Afghanistan (Oct 2013)
General Carter F. Ham-U.S. Army African Command (Oct 2013)
Lieutenant General David H. Huntoon (3 Star), Jr.-U.S. Army 58th Superintendent of the US Military Academy at West Point, NY (2013)
Command Sergeant Major Don B Jordan-U.S. Army 143rd Expeditionary Sustainment Command (suspended Oct 2013)
General James Mattis-U.S. Marines Chief of CentCom (May 2013)
Colonel Daren Margolin-U.S. Marine in charge of Quantico’s Security Battalion (Oct 2013)
General Stanley McChrystal-U.S. Army Commander Afghanistan (June 2010)
General David D. McKiernan-U.S. Army Commander Afghanistan (2009)
General David Petraeus-Director of CIA from September 2011 to November 2012 & U.S. Army Commander International Security Assistance Force [ISAF] and Commander U.S. Forces Afghanistan [USFOR-A] (Nov 2012)
Brigadier General Bryan Roberts-U.S. Army Commander 2nd Brigade (May 2013)
Major General Gregg A. Sturdevant-U.S. Marine Corps Director of Strategic Planning and Policy for the U.S. Pacific Command & Commander of Aviation Wing at Camp Bastion, Afghanistan (Sept 2013)
Colonel Eric Tilley-U.S. Army Commander of Garrison Japan (Nov 2013)
Brigadier General Bryan Wampler-U.S. Army Commanding General of 143rd Expeditionary Sustainment Command of the 1st Theater Sustainment Command [TSC] (suspended Oct 2013)
Commanding Admirals fired:
Rear Admiral Charles Gaouette-U.S. Navy Commander John C. Stennis Carrier Strike Group Three (Oct 2012)
Vice Admiral Tim Giardina-(3 Star, demoted to 2 Star)-U.S. Navy Deputy Commander of the US Strategic Command, Commander of the Submarine Group Trident, Submarine Group 9 and Submarine Group 10 (Oct 2013)
Naval Officers fired: (All in 2011)
Captain David Geisler-U.S. Navy Commander Task Force 53 in Bahrain (Oct 2011)
Commander Laredo Bell-U.S. Navy Commander Naval Support Activity Saratoga Springs, NY (Aug 2011)
Lieutenant Commander Kurt Boenisch-Executive Officer amphibious transport dock Ponce (Apr 2011)
Commander Nathan Borchers-U.S. Navy Commander destroyer Stout (Mar 2011)
Commander Robert Brown-U.S. Navy Commander Beachmaster Unit 2 Fort Story, VA (Aug 2011)
Commander Andrew Crowe-Executive Officer Navy Region Center Singapore (Apr 2011)
Captain Robert Gamberg-Executive Officer carrier Dwight D. Eisenhower (Jun 2011)
Captain Rex Guinn-U.S. Navy Commander Navy Legal Service office Japan (Feb 2011)
Commander Kevin Harms- U.S. Navy Commander Strike Fighter Squadron 137 aboard the aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln (Mar 2011)
Lieutenant Commander Martin Holguin-U.S. Navy Commander mine countermeasures Fearless (Oct 2011)
Captain Owen Honors-U.S. Navy Commander aircraft carrier USS Enterprise (Jan 2011)
Captain Donald Hornbeck-U.S. Navy Commander Destroyer Squadron 1 San Diego (Apr 2011)
Rear Admiral Ron Horton-U.S. Navy Commander Logistics Group, Western Pacific (Mar 2011)
Commander Etta Jones-U.S. Navy Commander amphibious transport dock Ponce (Apr 2011)
Commander Ralph Jones-Executive Officer amphibious transport dock Green Bay (Jul 2011)
Commander Jonathan Jackson-U.S. Navy Commander Electronic Attack Squadron 134, deployed aboard carrier Carl Vinson (Dec 2011)
Captain Eric Merrill-U.S. Navy Commander submarine Emory S. Land (Jul 2011)
Captain William Mosk-U.S. Navy Commander Naval Station Rota, U.S. Navy Commander Naval Activities Spain (Apr 2011)
Commander Timothy Murphy-U.S. Navy Commander Electronic Attack Squadron 129 at Naval Air Station Whidbey Island, WA (Apr 2011)
Commander Joseph Nosse-U.S. Navy Commander ballistic-missile submarine Kentucky (Oct 2011)
Commander Mark Olson-U.S. Navy Commander destroyer The Sullivans FL (Sep 2011)
Commander John Pethel-Executive Officer amphibious transport dock New York (Dec 2011)
Commander Karl Pugh-U.S. Navy Commander Electronic Attack Squadron 141 Whidbey Island, WA (Jul 2011)
Commander Jason Strength-U.S. Navy Commander of Navy Recruiting District Nashville, TN (Jul 2011)
Captain Greg Thomas-U.S. Navy Commander Norfolk Naval Shipyard (May 2011)
Commander Mike Varney-U.S. Navy Commander attack submarine Connecticut (Jun 2011)
Commander Jay Wylie-U.S. Navy Commander destroyer Momsen (Apr 2011)
Naval Officers fired: (All in 2012)
Commander Alan C. Aber-Executive Officer Helicopter Maritime Strike Squadron 71 (July 2012)
Commander Derick Armstrong- U.S. Navy Commander missile destroyer USS The Sullivans (May 2012)
Commander Martin Arriola- U.S. Navy Commander destroyer USS Porter (Aug 2012)
Captain Antonio Cardoso- U.S. Navy Commander Training Support Center San Diego (Sep 2012)
Captain James CoBell- U.S. Navy Commander Oceana Naval Air Station’s Fleet Readiness Center Mid-Atlantic (Sep 2012)
Captain Joseph E. Darlak- U.S. Navy Commander frigate USS Vandegrift (Nov 2012)
Captain Daniel Dusek-U.S. Navy Commander USS Bonhomme
Commander David Faught-Executive Officer destroyer Chung-Hoon (Sep 2012)
Commander Franklin Fernandez- U.S. Navy Commander Naval Mobile Construction Battalion 24 (Aug 2012)
Commander Ray Hartman- U.S. Navy Commander Amphibious dock-landing ship Fort McHenry (Nov 2012)
Commander Shelly Hakspiel-Executive Officer Navy Drug Screening Lab San Diego (May 2012)
Commander Jon Haydel- U.S. Navy Commander USS San Diego (Mar 2012)
Commander Diego Hernandez- U.S. Navy Commander ballistic-missile submarine USS Wyoming (Feb 2012)
Commander Lee Hoey- U.S. Navy Commander Drug Screening Laboratory, San Diego (May 2012)
Commander Ivan Jimenez-Executive Officer frigate Vandegrift (Nov 2012)
Commander Dennis Klein- U.S. Navy Commander submarine USS Columbia (May 2012)
Captain Chuck Litchfield- U.S. Navy Commander assault ship USS Essex (Jun 2012)
Captain Marcia Kim Lyons- U.S. Navy Commander Naval Health Clinic New England (Apr 2012)
Captain Robert Marin- U.S. Navy Commander cruiser USS Cowpens (Feb 2012)
Captain Sean McDonell- U.S. Navy Commander Seabee reserve unit Naval Mobile Construction Battalion 14 FL (Nov 2012)
Commander Corrine Parker- U.S. Navy Commander Fleet Logistics Support Squadron 1 (Apr 2012)
Captain Liza Raimondo- U.S. Navy Commander Naval Health Clinic Patuxent River, MD (Jun 2012)
Captain Jeffrey Riedel- Program manager, Littoral Combat Ship program (Jan 2012)
Commander Sara Santoski- U.S. Navy Commander Helicopter Mine Countermeasures Squadron 15 (Sep 2012)
Commander Kyle G. Strudthoff-Executive Officer Helicopter Sea Combat Squadron 25 (Sep 2012)
Commander Sheryl Tannahill- U.S. Navy Commander Navy Operational Support Center [NOSC] Nashville, TN (Sep 2012)
Commander Michael Ward- U.S. Navy Commander submarine USS Pittsburgh (Aug 2012)
Captain Michael Wiegand- U.S. Navy Commander Southwest Regional Maintenance Center (Nov 2012)
Captain Ted Williams- U.S. Navy Commander amphibious command ship Mount Whitney (Nov 2012)
Commander Jeffrey Wissel- U.S. Navy Commander of Fleet Air Reconnaissance Squadron 1 (Feb 2012)
Naval Officers fired: (All in 2013)
Lieutenant Commander Lauren Allen-Executive Officer submarine Jacksonville (Feb 2013)
Reserve Captain Jay Bowman-U.S. Navy Commander Navy Operational Support Center [NOSC] Fort Dix, NJ (Mar 2013)
Captain William Cogar-U.S. Navy Commander hospital ship Mercy’s medical treatment facility (Sept 2013)
Commander Steve Fuller-Executive Officer frigate Kauffman (Mar 2013)
Captain Shawn Hendricks-Program Manager for naval enterprise IT networks (June 2013)
Captain David Hunter-U.S. Navy Commander of Maritime Expeditionary Security Squadron 12 & Coastal Riverine Group 2 (Feb 2013)
Captain Eric Johnson-U.S. Navy Chief of Military Entrance Processing Command at Great Lakes Naval Training Center, IL (2013)
Captain Devon Jones-U.S. Navy Commander Naval Air Facility El Centro, CA (July 2013)
Captain Kevin Knoop-U.S. Navy Commander hospital ship Comfort’s medical treatment facility (Aug 2013)
Lieutenant Commander Jack O’Neill-U.S. Navy Commander Operational Support Center Rock Island, IL (Mar 2013)
Commander Allen Maestas-Executive Officer Beachmaster Unit 1 (May 2013)
Commander Luis Molina-U.S. Navy Commander submarine Pasadena (Jan 2013)
Commander James Pickens-Executive Officer frigate Gary (Feb 2013)
Lieutenant Commander Mark Rice-U.S. Navy Commander Mine Countermeasures ship Guardian (Apr 2013)
Commander Michael Runkle-U.S. Navy Commander of Mobile Diving and Salvage Unit 2 (May 2013)
Commander Jason Stapleton-Executive Office Patrol Squadron 4 in Hawaii (Mar 2013)
Commander Nathan Sukols-U.S. Navy Commander submarine Jacksonville (Feb 2013)
Lieutenant Daniel Tyler-Executive Officer Mine Countermeasures ship Guardian (Apr 2013)
Commander Edward White-U.S. Navy Commander Strike Fighter Squadron 106 (Aug 2013)
Captain Jeffrey Winter-U.S. Navy Commander of Carrier Air Wing 17 (Sept 2013)
Commander Thomas Winter-U.S. Navy Commander submarine Montpelier (Jan 2013)
Commander Corey Wofford- U.S. Navy Commander frigate Kauffman (Feb 2013)
investmentwatchblog.com/list-of-names-military-purge-high-officers-terrifying/#eHhj3FSSL2m8P0Qu.99
[ED.: Try as I will, I cannot find the name of the Commander-in-Chief in this list of involuntary military "retirees".]
Thank you, Newmexican, for reminding us of this act of election fraud by the DNC, issuing two different Official Certificates of Nomination. The OCN issued to Hawaii included the wording,The text was included for Hawaii because the DNC Chairwoman, the Hon. Rep. Nancy Pelosi, could not prevail upon the Democrat Party of Hawaii chairman, Brian Schatz, to certify qualification. Schatz was unwilling to perjure himself to vouch for Mr. Obama's Constitutional eligibility to the Presidency. As the attorney who handled Stanley Ann Dunham Obama's divorce from Barrack Hussain Obama, Sr., he KNEW that there was no Hawaii birth certificate for the offspring of that union, Barack Hussein Obama II. Because there was no such birth document, he had been unable to file a record of that birth with the divorce decree, which must have been a hassle for him.Quote:
and 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:
The DNC issued to the other 49 states an OCN without the quoted fraudulent text, which allowed DNC Chairwoman Nancy Pelosi and DNC Secretary Alice Travis Germond to confine to the one document for Hawaii their exposure to future perjury charges. The DNC could pressure the Democratic State Committee officials - how could they refuse? - to certify qualification after the DNC failed to do so. The Governor, Sec. of State (or Lt. Governor), Atty. General, and the Federal Electors for each of the 50 states, along with the 535 members of the U.S. Congress and Pres. of the Senate Dick Cheney, were each and every one informed of the fraud with documentation then available, by way of certified letters with return receipts. Of the 1200+ persons notified, not one honored his or her oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States by offering an objection. Each of those 1200+ felons chose to perjure himself or herself rather than disturb the pretense of peace through political correctness. But there was no peace by PC, and there has been no peace ever since.
[ED.: The following strategy is a redirected rewrite of "Shredding the Constitution: The Port Arthur Phenomenon" by Edward Paltzik, published in American Thinker on Jan. 21, 2013, the date of Mr. Obama's second, albeit fraudulent, inauguration.]
__________________________________________________ ____________
[Constitution nullification] proponents in the media and in Washington have capitalized on [four] noteworthy national conditions during the past [five and a half years]:
- first, the utter apathy of many moderate conservatives, centrists, and even the occasional open-minded liberal, as well as the enormous pool of individuals who simply don't care about anything other than celebrities, reality television, video games [and visual entertainment];
- second, the fact that millions of adults in the increasingly [non-native] American population don't know anything about [American ways and mores, much less the Constitution of the U.S.;
- third, the acquired phobia and abhorrence of being smeared as a racist, no matter how overused and worn out the race card has become; and
- fourth, the widespread moral descent into lawlessness, the converse of which is Christians' powerlessness with God ("If My people... then I will..." - 2 Chr 7:14).]
This dangerous combination of apathy, ignorance[, civic cowardice, lawlessness and spiritual weakness] allows politicians and journalists to get away with intellectually dishonest arguments, to repeatedly parrot inflammatory slogans such as ["racist bigotry" and "right-wing extremism"], and to peddle outright lies that stoke the flames of mass hysteria [against conservative and Christian "terrorists"].
There is still time to write a happy ending to this sad story. Fight the apathy on a neighborhood and local level[, one heart at a time]. Engage your persuadable or undecided family, friends, neighbors, and co-workers in a respectful discussion about [Constitutional] issues, and firmly explain what is at stake:
- [losing Constitutional protections against subjugation,
- forfeiting freedom and self-determination to totalitarian tyrants,
- irrevocably surrendering U.S. sovereignty to foreign masters,
- being harvested, mined, and taxed as a colony for foreign owners,
- our young men being culled as mercenary soldiers
and our young women being trafficked as courtesans,- until, with our resources exhausted and our gene pool drained,
our land and our people are laid waste and desolate, shackled with debt beyond paying.]
Educate them about [constitutional restraints upon government power and authority and about guarantees of God-given personal rights.]
Inundate your local, state, and national politicians with an avalanche of letters.
Organize counter-protests.
You may feel that your individual efforts are as futile as Professor de Breeze's [Jivvanese] language lessons [for Irish ducks, in the Dr. Suess books], but never give up. If enough concerned citizens act with urgency, we may yet get results that would be the envy of the good Professor.
WND EXCLUSIVEQuote:
'Universe-shattering' twist in Obama birth probe
"This is beyond the pale of anything you can imagine."
Fasten your seat belts all you so-called "birthers," because the long strange trip involving Barack Obama's birth certificate is heading in a STUNNING new direction.
And guess who's smack dab in the middle of it all …
'UNIVERSE-SHATTERING' TWIST IN OBAMA BIRTH PROBE
Arpaio investigator: 'This is beyond the pale of anything you can imagine'
Published: 8 hours ago
BOB UNRUH
4 Videos at the Page Link:
The lead investigator in Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s Cold Case Posse investigation of President Obama’s birth certificate says the case has taken a startling turn, and sheriff’s investigators now are assisting the Cold Case volunteers.
Video at the Page Link:
“When this information is finally exposed to the public, it will be universe-shattering,” Mike Zullo told WND. “This is beyond the pale of anything you can imagine.”
Zullo explained that because it’s an active investigation that could produce criminal charges, he’s unable to reveal details at the moment.
But the allegations, he said, which go far beyond a fraudulent birth certificate, could be public as early as March.
The issue arose once again because of the death Wednesday in Hawaii of state Health Department chief Loretta Fuddy in a plane crash. She was the official who waived state prohibitions and provided to the White House a copy of a document that Obama presented to the public as his birth certificate.
It’s the document that Arpaio’s investigators have concluded is fraudulent.
Amid conspiracy theories circulating the Internet, Zullo told WND Friday that Fuddy’s death – she was the only fatality among nine people aboard a small airplane that crashed off the coast of Molokai – appears to be a tragic accident, not foul play.
He said his investigation does not depend on any information from Fuddy.
In an interview today with author and talk-radio host Carl Gallups of PPSimmons News and Ministry Network and the author of “The Magic Man in the Sky,” and the new “The Rabbi who Found Messiah,” Zullo said his investigation of the Obama fraud case “does not hinge on Ms. Fuddy.”
“While her death certainly is a tragedy, it in no way hampers our investigation in this matter,” he said. “If people truly believe that her untimely demise was somehow related to an attempt to silence her for ‘what she may or may not know,’ then there are several more people in Hawaii who should be very, very concerned.
“Again, I want to emphasize,” Zullo said, “Sheriff Arpaio and I do not, at this time, believe her death was connected to any nefarious circumstances.”
The birth certificate dispute dates back to before the 2008 election. Critics, including Hillary Clinton, raised the issue about Obama’s status as a “natural-born citizen.” Not defined in the Constitution, it probably was thought at the time of the writing of the Constitution to be someone born of two citizen parents.
Obama fails that test because his father was a Kenyan student visiting the U.S.
Arpaio assigned his Cold Case Posse to look into the issue before the 2012 election, when constituents approached him and asked him to check whether Obama would be an ineligible candidate on the presidential election ballot.
In a recent radio interview with Gallups, Zullo affirmed the investigation had been expanded to the county sheriff’s office and was “moving in a direction that was not anticipated by us.”
“The whole [issue] is more nefarious than you can imagine,” Zullo said, crediting Arpaio for ordering the investigation and sticking with it.
“He knows in his gut that something is wrong,” Zullo said.
Dozens of lawsuits have been filed without success. One case is pending before the Alabama Supreme Court for which Zullo provided evidence.
Read all the arguments in the birth certificate controversy, in “Where’s the Birth Certificate?” and check out the special reports, banners and bumper stickers on the subject.
See a report of Fuddy’s death:
Video at the Page Link:
Still a live issue
Zullo has testified that the White House computer image of Obama’s birth certificate contains anomalies that are unexplainable unless the document had been fabricated piecemeal by human intervention, rather than being copied from a genuine paper document.
“Mr. Obama has, in fact, not offered any verifiable authoritative document of any legal significance or possessing any evidentiary value as to the origins of his purported birth narrative or location of the birth event,” he explained. “One of our most serious concerns is that the White House document appears to have been fabricated piecemeal on a computer, constructed by drawing together digitized data from several unknown sources.”
Zullo also has noted that the governor of Hawaii was unable to produce an original birth document for Obama, and it should have been easy to find.
See some of Zullo’s evidence:
Video at the Page Link:
More recently, Grace Vuoto of the World Tribune reported that among the experts challenging the birth certificate is certified document analyst Reed Hayes, who has served as an expert for Perkins Coie, the law firm that has been defending Obama in eligibility cases.
“We have obtained an affidavit from a certified document analyzer, Reed Hayes, that states the document is a 100 percent forgery, no doubt about it,” Zullo told the World Tribune.
“Mr. Obama’s operatives cannot discredit [Hayes],” the investigator told the news outlet. “Mr. Hayes has been used as the firm’s reliable expert. The very firm the president is using to defend him on the birth certificate case has used Mr. Hayes in their cases.”
The Tribune reported Hayes agreed to take a look at the documentation and called almost immediately.
“There is something wrong with this,” Hayes said.
Hayes produced a 40-page report in which he says “based on my observations and findings, it is clear that the Certificate of Live Birth I examined is not a scan of an original paper birth certificate, but a digitally manufactured document created by utilizing material from various sources.”
“In over 20 years of examining documentation of various types, I have never seen a document that is so seriously questionable in so many respects. In my opinion, the birth certificate is entirely fabricated,” he says in the report.
Investigator Douglas J. Hagmann of the Northeast Intelligence Network reported this month that in October an affidavit was filed in a court case, under seal, that purportedly identifies the creator of the Obama birth certificate.
He said Douglas Vogt, an author and the owner and operator of a scanning business who also has an accounting background, invested over two years in an investigation of the authenticity of document.
Vogt, along with veteran typesetter Paul Ivey, conducted “exhaustive research of the document provided to the White House Press Corps on April 27, 2011 – not the online PDF, a critical distinction that must be understood,” Hagmann said.
“Using their combined experience of 80 years in this realm, they conducted extensive examinations of the ‘copy’ that was used as the basis for the PDF document. They acquired the same type of equipment that was used back in the late 1950s and early 1960s in an attempt to recreate the document presented as an ‘authenticated copy’ proving the legitimacy of Barack Obama. Instead, they found 20 points of forgery on that document and detail each point of forgery in the affidavit,” wrote Hagmann.
“Even more interesting, Mr. Vogt claims to have identified the ‘signature’ of the perpetrator, or the woman who created the forged document, hidden within the document itself. Her identity, in addition to the identity of other conspirators and their precise methods are contained in a sealed document supplementing the public affidavit.”
Grounds for impeachment
Last month, WND columnist Christopher Monckton wrote that the controversy he calls “Hawaiigate” should be “the central ground of impeachment.”
“First, the dishonesty is shameless and in your face. Mr Obama’s advisers, once they realized the ‘birth certificate’ was as bogus as a $3 bill, knew that if they simply went on pretending that $3 bills are legal tender the hard-left-dominated news media would carefully and continuously look the other way, pausing occasionally to sneer at anyone who pointed out that, in this constitutionally crucial respect, the ‘president’ has no clothes,” Monckton wrote.
“Secondly, not one of the numerous agencies of state, as well as federal government, whose duty was and is to investigate the Mickey-Mouse ‘birth certificate’ has bothered even to respond to the thousands of requests for investigation put forward by U.S. citizens.”
He said that in Hawaii last year, he watched “as a senior former state senator called the police and, when they came, handed over to them compelling evidence that the ‘birth certificate’ had been forged.”
“The police, correctly, passed the file to the state’s attorney general, a ‘Democrat,’ who did nothing about it,” he said.
“In Washington, D.C., I watched as a concerned citizen from Texas telephoned the FBI and reported the ‘birth certificate’ as being a forgery. They said they would send two agents to see him within the hour. No one came.”
‘You tell me about eligibility’
One of the highest profile skeptics has been billionaire Donald Trump.
Video at the Page Link:
Trump said he can’t be certain that Obama is eligible to be president, and he pointedly noted that a reporter who was poking fun at the issue admitted he can’t, either.
Trump repeatedly has insisted Obama has not documented his eligibility. At one point, he offered $5 million to the charity or charities of Obama’s choice if he would release his passport records and authorize the colleges he attended to release his applications and other records.
Trump argues that those documents would show whether or not Obama ever accepted scholarship or other aid as a foreign student, which could preclude him from being a “natural-born citizen.”
Trump’s conversation with ABC’s Jonathan Karl started with Karl noting that Trump took on the “not serious” issue of eligibility.
“Why does that make me not serious?” Trump demanded. “I think that resonated with a lot of people.”
Karl replied: “You don’t still question he was born in the United States, do you?”
“I have no idea,” Trump said. “I don’t know. Was there a birth certificate? You tell me. You know some people say that was not his birth certificate. I’m saying I don’t know. Nobody knows, and you don’t know either. Jonathan you’re a smart guy, and you don’t know.”
When Karl admitted he was “pretty sure,” Trump jumped on the statement.
“You just said you’re pretty sure … you have to be 100 percent sure,” he said. “Jonathan, you said you’re pretty convinced, so let’s just see what happens over time.”
Read all the arguments in the birth certificate controversy, in “Where’s the Birth Certificate?” and check out the special reports, banners and bumper stickers on the subject.
Among the many records the Obama camp has refused to release are the marriage license of his father (Barack Sr.) and mother (Stanley Ann Dunham), name change records (Barry Soetero to Barack Hussein Obama), adoption records, records of his and his mother’s repatriation as U.S. citizens from Indonesia, baptism records, Noelani Elementary School (Hawaii) records, Punahou School financial aid or school records, Occidental College financial aid records, Harvard Law School records, Columbia senior thesis, Columbia College records, record with Illinois State Bar Association, files from his terms as an Illinois state senator, his law client list, medical records and passport records.
Monckton, citing Zullo’s sworn affidavit in a court case, published a sworn mathematical analysis demonstrating the near-zero probability that the White House “birth certificate” is genuine.
http://www.wnd.com/files/2012/01/bar...ertificate.jpg
Join in support of the critical investigation.
http://www.wnd.com/2013/12/universe-...a-birth-probe/
SHARE THE HELL OUT OF IT! ~D-DOG Extremely Pissed off RIGHT Wingers 2
https://scontent-a-pao.xx.fbcdn.net/...26165671_n.jpg
1,182
This about sums it up!!!!
Extremely Pissed off RIGHT Wingers 2
SHARE THIS! UNBELIEVABLE! ~D-DOG Extremely Pissed off RIGHT Wingers 2
https://scontent-b-pao.xx.fbcdn.net/...38481399_n.jpg
And why would he not? That seems to be his chosen MOS, or M.O..Quote:
Originally Posted by kathyet2
21 years before 9/11, an Arabic-speaking, Sunni Is|am-practicing Indonesian, Barry Soetoro, a.k.a. Barack Obama II, functioned as a CIA operative and liaison to the Taliban in the Hindu Kush. In support of their resistance against Soviet invaders in Afghanistan, Soetoro passed money, weapons, and logistics from the CIA to
http://www.malcolmmacgregor.com/medi...mujihadeen.jpg
the Pashtun mujahideen who would later become al Qaeda.
Quote:
Why the House Can't Impeach Obama
Obama's behavior indicates that, far from acting against his will, he has willingly accepted his role as a puppet under the control of the Council on Foreign Relations' puppeteers. Obama's real job consists in parroting the instructions coming from his CFR masters, and he is fully cognizant of it. Further evidence that Obama is......
http://www.newswithviews.com/Gonzale...ez_com_hdr.gif
WHY THE HOUSE CAN'T IMPEACH OBAMA
By Servando Gonzalez
December 10, 2013
NewsWithViews.com
Obama's behavior indicates that, far from acting against his will, he has willingly accepted his role as a puppet under the control of the Council on Foreign Relations' puppeteers. Obama's real job consists in parroting the instructions coming from his CFR masters, and he is fully cognizant of it.
Further evidence that Obama is fully conscious of his treasonous role is that, in order to avoid future criminal charges, he has never lied about his place of birth and he did not take the Oath of Office in the manner required by the Constitution.
In the first place, not only did Obama himself mention that he was born in Kenya, but also his Kenyan grandmother confirmed it. Moreover, during a speech in Denver, Colorado, in 2008, Michelle Obama referred to Kenya as Obama's "home country." Also, a 2008 NPR report described then senator Barack Obama as "Kenyan born" and a "son of Africa." Furthermore, Obama has never publicly said that he was born in the U.S. Consequently, he would never be successfully impeached for lying about his country of origin.
Secondly, during his short political life, Obama has never properly recited the Pledge of Allegiance, nor has he shown any reverence to the U.S. flag. Adding insult to outrage, some photos show that, during the playing of the National Anthem at a campaign meeting he attended in September 2007 at Indianola, Iowa, with New Mexico's Governor Bill Richardson and Senator Hillary Clinton, instead of placing his hand on his heart, as required by Title 36, Chapter 10 of the U.S. Code (a.k.a. the "Flag Code"), Obama placed his hands over his crotch.[1]
Finally, there is no factual evidence that Obama took the presidential Oath of Office in the way prescribed by the Constitution. As witnessed by millions of Americans, Mr. Obama failed to repeat faithfully, as required by law, the wording of the oath. After ignoring the issue for a whole day, and faced with growing concerns over whether the President had been sworn properly according to the law, he decided to try it for a second time. And here comes the strangest thing.
Despite his promises of transparency, Mr. Obama allegedly took the oath for a second time at the White House's Map Room, at 7:35 p.m. And I said allegedly, because the ceremony not only was not announced until it was completed, but also no sound or film record of it exists. And there is no record because the President and his staff, on purpose, left the accredited White House press and impartial witnesses out.[2]
The only official record made public is a still photo of the ceremony that allegedly took place, taken by the White House's official photographer. But it is obvious that a still photo cannot be used in a court of law as factual evidence to prove the occurrence of an event of which, for lack of appropriate impartial witnesses, only a sound recording, or, even better, a film or video recording, can fully certify.
So, while about two million people in Washington, D.C., watched the first swearing-in, which was invalid because it violated the rules clearly established by the Constitution, the second one, which was supposed to be the real thing, was hidden from the American people following direct orders from the Transparency Man in the White House.
Four years later he repeated the charade when he faked taking the oath of office for a fourth time when he allegedly had taken it officially the previous day — again, with no witnesses present.[3]
Therefore, we have to take as legal proof the word of a politician — the Alleged President — who, like all politicians, is as a professional liar, and the word of the other people present, all of them employees or close relatives of the Alleged President and, therefore, whose word cannot be taken for granted because of an obvious conflict of interests.
So, there is strong evidence pointing to the fact that this man who calls himself Barack Hussein Obama is actually an impostor.
Therefore, he could never be impeached, because impeachment is a fundamental constitutional power belonging to Congress for removing Presidents, judges, and other federal officers who commit "Treason, Bribery, or other High Crimes and Misdemeanors." Given the fact, however, that Mr. Obama is not the legal President of the United States, he cannot be impeached.
He can be, though, criminally charged and prosecuted.
Now, if he is an impostor, he can't be impeached but he can be prosecuted for willingly impersonating the highest official in this nation, can't he? Well, he can't, and this is why he was so careful in never legally taking the oath of office as specified in the Constitution.
The bottom line is that we cannot blame Obama for this dangerous travesty. He is a criminal and behaves accordingly. We can blame the Congress, the Supreme Court, the Department of Justice and the sycophantic mainstream press for having relinquished their obligations to uphold the Constitution and address the legitimacy of the man currently residing in the White House. The true guilty parties, however, are the ones controlling their puppet Obama from behind the curtains: Wall Street bankers, oil magnates and the corporations who control the U.S. government and the Press.
Anyway, even if we manage to impeach Obama, or prosecute him —which I highly doubt—, or even overthrow him, it will be an exercise in frustration because another CFR puppet will assume his traitorous role. Actually, the President we need to overthrow is not the puppet Obama, but the puppeteer David Rockefeller, who has been the de facto President of the United States since 1949 when he appointed himself CFR Director. Doing otherwise is a waste of time and effort.
© 2013 Servando Gonzalez - All Rights Reserved
Footnotes:
1. See, rumors of Obama salute
2. Jeff Zeleny, "I Really Do Swear, Faithfully: Obama and Roberts Try Again," The New York Times, Jan. 22, 209, p. 1.
3. Robert Kessler, "Barack Obama Takes the Oath of Office for His Second Term," Gawker.com, Jan. 20, 2013
Servando Gonzalez, is a Cuban-born American writer, historian, semiologist and intelligence analyst. He has written books, essays and articles on Latin American history, intelligence, espionage, and semiotics. Servando is the author of Historia herética de la revolución fidelista, Observando, The Secret Fidel Castro: Deconstructing the Symbol, The Nuclear Deception: Nikita Khrushchev and the Cuban Missile Crisis and La madre de todas las conspiraciones: Una novela de ideas subversivas, all available at Amazon.com.
He also hosted the documentaries Treason in America: The Council on Foreign Relations and Partners in Treason: The CFR-CIA-Castro Connection, produced by Xzault Media Group of San Leandro, California, both available at the author's Website.
His book, Psychological Warfare and the New World Order: The Secret War Against the American People is available at Amazon.com. Or download a pdf copy of the book you can read on your computer, iPad, Nook, Kindle or any other tablet. His book, OBAMANIA: The New Puppet and His Masters, is available at Amazon.com. Servando's book (in Spanish) La CIA, Fidel Castro, el Bogotazo y el Nuevo Orden Mundial, appeared last year, and is available at Amazon.com and other bookstores online.
His most recent book, I Dare Call It treason: The Council on Foreign Relations and the Betrayal of the America, juste appeared and is available at Amazon.com and other bookstores online.
Website: www.servandogonzalez.org
E-Mail: comments@gmail.com
http://www.newswithviews.com/Gonzalez/servando103.htm
[ED.: A partial quote of the Forbes editorial demanding Mr. Obama's impeachment]
Obama's Disdain For The Constitution
Means We Risk Losing Our Republic
By M. Northrop Buechner, for Forbes
11/19/2013
Since President Obama signed the Affordable Care Act into law, he has changed it five times. Most notably, he suspended the employer mandate last summer. This is widely known, but almost no one seems to have grasped its significance.
The Constitution authorizes the President to propose and veto legislation. It does not authorize him to change existing laws. The changes Mr. Obama ordered in Obamacare, therefore, are unconstitutional. This means that he does not accept some of the limitations that the Constitution places on his actions. We cannot know at this point what limitations, if any, he does accept…
The main responsibility the Constitution assigns to the President is to faithfully execute the Laws.
Surely, rejection of the Constitution is grounds for impeachment and charges should be filed. In addition, there are many other actions that Congressmen can and should take—actions that will tell Mr. Obama that we have seen where he is going and we will not let our country go without a fight.
At the close of the Constitutional Convention of 1787, Benjamin Franklin was asked what form of government had been created. “A republic,” he replied, “if you can keep it.”
We are losing it. If Mr. Obama’s reach for unprecedented power is not stopped, that will be the end.
www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2013/11/19/obamas-disdain-for-the-constitution-means-we-risk-losing-our-republic/
WAKE UP, AMERICA! THIS CANNOT
BODE WELL FOR THE REPUBLIC!
Act of Real Heroism
Call to Rafael and Ted Cruz
“NOT A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN”
By JB Williams, ©2013 | The Post & Email
(Dec. 17, 2013) — Junior Texas Senator Ted Cruz has captured the imagination of many American conservatives hungry for a “real deal” statesman willing to stand up for American principles and values. His fiery pro-American tone is undoubtedly inherited from his very fiery father, Rev. Rafael Cruz.
Rev. Rafael Cruz has become somewhat of a folk hero to many Americans as a result of his polished public delivery of the American Dream, often delivered best by one who was himself delivered from foreign government tyranny by the grace of American freedom and liberty.
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-iVRqx9ptGx....-Ted-Cruz.jpg Sen. Ted Cruz has voiced strong objections
to Obamacare but not to Obama’s eligibility
to hold the office of president in keeping
with Art. ii, § 1, ¶ 5 of the U.S. Constitution.
Immigrant Americans from Cuba via Canada, the Cruz family most likely does hold a special reverence toward American freedom as a result of their own life experiences. Often, immigrant Americans have a deeper sense of American exceptionalism in the world than Natural Born Americans do, those who more often than not take such great blessings for granted today.
The Cruz family message is hard to misinterpret, and it often sets opponents of American freedom, liberty and exceptionalism into fits of blind rage, while inspiring many others who yearn for new pro-American national leadership.
Rev. Cruz has been quoted as saying that he believes his son Ted is “ordained by God, to change the course of history in America.” I pray that Rev. Cruz is right about that, because his son Ted is in the highly unique position to do exactly that…
Today, I write to call upon Ted and his father Rafael to stand together upon their stated convictions, as only they can do. These two men are indeed in a unique position to alter the course of history in America and save freedom and liberty for many generations to come.
Leaving all political rhetoric and aspirations aside, Senator Ted Cruz can single-handedly end the ongoing systematic destruction of the United States of America and with the help of his father, Rev. Rafael Cruz, I have every reason to believe he will.
What Senator Cruz can do is very simple, though it will not be easy. It will require that both Ted and his father set aside their own ambitions in a selfless act of true heroism, for the greater good of America. It will require brave and bold actions that only Ted is in the position to take. It is simple, but not easy, because it requires the Senator to stand up before the world and make the following proclamation…
“I am honored that so many Americans want me to run for the office of President. However, my moral convictions require that I state clearly for the record that I am not eligible for the office of president or vice president according to Article II – Section I – Clause V of the U.S. Constitution, which requires that only a Natural Born Citizen of the United States, born of an American Citizen Father, seek or hold these offices. As I was born the son of a Cuban Citizen living in Canada at the time, I am not a Natural Born Citizen of the United States. On this Constitutional ground, I hereby state that Barack Hussein Obama, the son of a Kenyan Citizen Father, is also not a Natural Born Citizen of the United States…I hereby call for the immediate investigation and resignation of Barack Hussein Obama and all who were involved in the greatest fraud ever perpetrated on the world, as well as all who have engaged in the greatest political cover-up in the history of politics.”
Accepting on faith that Ted and his father Rafael are both Christian men, who do understand and believe that they find themselves in this unique position at the historical moment, I call upon the Cruz family to act upon their stated moral convictions and save America from this massive fraud known as Obama.
Now, a close personal friend worked on Ted’s senate campaign in Texas. He shared with me a conversation he had with Ted during the early days of the campaign. In that conversation, he asked Ted – “what is your understanding of the term Natural Born Citizen?” – to which Ted answered, “someone born on soil to Citizen parents…”
…
“Is Barack Obama a Natural Born Citizen of the United States? – to which Ted correctly answered, “NO!”
Then the most important question was asked… “If we get you elected to the Senate, will you do something about our illegal occupant of the White House?” – to which Ted answered…. “I think repealing ObamaCare is more important…” The witness is willing to go on record if need be.
In the end, Senator Ted Cruz has a monumental opportunity to write himself into history as the man who righted the most egregious political wrong in American history. He has only a few weeks to do it, immediately following the holiday, before Obama, Reid and Boehner can ram through amnesty for millions of illegal aliens and pass massive gun control laws against legal American citizens.
If Rev. Rafael Cruz and his son want to be true American heroes, they can be. If they choose not to be, then the Americans who hold such great hopes for Ted will have lost just another hopeful hero who says many of the right things, but refuses to do the most important right things.
Join me in calling upon Rev. Rafael Cruz and his son Ted to stand up, do the right thing…
jb.uspu@gmail.com
Source link. © 2013, The Post & Email. All rights reserved.
FACTS ABOUT NBC: http://www.birtherreport.com/search?...l+Born+Citizen
[ED.: On Dec. 11, 2013, Loretta Fuddy, 65, died while floating in the water after surviving an emergency water landing, ½ mile offshore from the island of Molokai, Hawaii. On April 27, 2011, as Director of the State of Hawaii Dept. of Health, Fuddy attested to and released the forged, counterfeit "long form State of Hawaii Certificate of Live Birth of Barack Obama II."
Articles here are in reverse chronological order, with the most recent first.]
Loretta Fuddy Narrative Falls Apart
Posted By Dean Garrison on Dec 17, 2013
http://cdn.freedomoutpost.com/wp-con...etta-fuddy.jpg
In the irony to end all ironies, the L.A. Times published an article entitled, "Hawaii plane crash fuels Obama ‘birther’ theories," on December 12th, and within the context of that article may have spilled the beans on why “birthers” should be questioning this story.
On the 13th I reported that Loretta Fuddy was the woman who was responsible for the release of Barack Obama’s long-form Hawaii birth certificate. Of the 9 [or more likely 11] people on the Cessna that crash landed in open water, she was the only one who died. Is it coincidence?
The L.A. Times reports:
Why is this paragraph important?
Fuddy, 65, was among nine people in a Cessna that crashed into the ocean Wednesday, shortly after leaving Kalaupapa Airport on the island of Molokai about 3:15 p.m. The eight others on the plane, including the pilot, were rescued, but Fuddy “remained in the fuselage of the plane,” Honolulu Fire Capt. Terry Seelig told KHON-TV. “It’s always a difficult situation when you’re not able to get everybody out.”
Simply because it contradicts everything that we have been told.
We were told two things specifically that Terry Seelig has proclaimed to be incorrect.
- We were told that Fuddy held hands with her deputy Keith Yamamoto in her final moments. We even have a priest on record who corroborates that account.
- We were led to believe that due to a variety of circumstances that this plane may never be recovered.
Both of the above accounts come from an Associated Press contributed article. Here are the key quotes that directly contradict the report of Fire Captain Terry Seelig as quoted in the Los Angeles Times.Look for Fire Captain Terry Seelig to change his story in the near future. If he doesn’t then it would surely look like there was foul play involved and we certainly wouldn’t want to give “birthers” a reason to talk.
In the final moments of her life, Hawaii Health Director Loretta Fuddy clung to the hand of her deputy after a small plane taking them back to Honolulu crashed in the ocean off the island of Molokai.
Fuddy, who gained notoriety in 2011 for her role in making President Barack Obama’s birth certificate public, was one of nine people onboard the flight that went down Wednesday. She was the only one who died.
In the water, Fuddy held hands with deputy director Keith Yamamoto as he tried to help her relax, said the Rev. Patrick Killilea, who consoled Yamamoto after the ordeal.
“He recounted how he said he helped Loretta into her life jacket and he held her hand for some time,” the priest said. “They were all floating together and she let go and there was no response from her.”
…
Schuman said he did not yet know why the engine failed because he has not been able to see the plane. The aircraft had no previous problems, he said.
Federal Aviation Administration spokesman Ian Gregor said investigators planned to speak with the pilot, whose name was not released, and some passengers about the crash as they seek more details.
However, the location of the wreckage, combined with wind and wave conditions, likely means it won’t be recovered, said NTSB spokesman Eric Weiss.
_______________________________________
Press release: Molokai General office responds to autopsy results request
Posted on | 5:42 pm, December 17, 2013 | 2 Comments
Mr. Tiatz,
Press Release
Attorney Taitz requested results of the autopsy of Loretta Fuddy. According to media reports the autopsy was performed by the coroner of the Molokai General hospital. Taitz received a response from the hospital official Randy Lite. Lite is the official who provided prior updates to the media and public. Lite claims that the Molokai General Hospital does not have information that Taitz requested, meaning they did not have any results of the autopsy, medical examiner’s report or toxicology lab report.
Taitz continues pressing for expeditious release of information from different state and federal agencies. One positive outcome was a recent turnabout by NTSB. Originally NTSB spokesman, Eric Weiss, claimed that they will not recover the plane, however after Taitz and others have shown that the plane crashed in relatively shallow waters and similar recoveries were done repeatedly and are routine, NTSB suddenly changed its position and announced that they will recover the plane and will do it as early as Thursday or Friday of this week.
__________________________________________
LITE, RANDYhttps://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/images/cleardot.gif
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/images/cleardot.gif
Molokai General Hospital is not in possession of the information you are requesting.
Randy Lite
____________________________________________
From: Orly Taitz [mailto:orly.taitz@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2013 1:03 PM
To: LITE, RANDY
Subject: Re: Request for autopsy report on Loretta Fuddy under HI Unified Information practices act
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/images/cleardot.gifDR. ORLY TAITZ ESQ
29839 SANTA MARGARITA STE 100
RANCHO SANTA MARGARITA, CA 92688
PH. 949-683-5411 FAX 949-766-7603
REQUEST FOR INSPECTION OF RECORDS
UNDER UNIFIED INFORMATION PRACTICES ACT
STATUTE 92F, STATE OF HAWAII
Att. Medical Examiner/ Coroner
280 Homeolu Place. Kaunakakai, HI 96748.
Phone (808 ) 553-5331. Fax (808 ) 553-3140.
Molokai, General Hospital
Molokai Hawaii
12.16.2013
Dear Medical Examiner/Coroner,
Per Unified Information Practices Act of the state of Hawaii, Statute 92F, I am hereby requesting a certified copy of the Autopsy and Medical Examiner/ Coroner’s report of the deceased Loretta Fuddy. Reportedly autopsy took place on 12.12.2013-12.13.2013.
This report is a matter of public concern and should be released, as Ms. Fuddy was a Health Director of the State of Hawaii and in the center of controversy. Controversy stems from Ms. Fuddy’s release of an alleged copy of an alleged long form birth certificate for Barack Obama, which was found by a number of experts to be a flagrant computer generated forgery. See exhibits 1-3.
Until her death Ms.Fuddy was a defendant in a legal action Taitz et al v Democratic Party, Obama, Fuddy et al in the USDC 3:12-cv- 280, Judge Wingate. Exhibit 4.
Ms. Fuddy was reported to die an untimely death after the water landing of the [single-engine] Turbo Cessna Caravan plane which was to transport her and her deputy, Keith Yamamoto, to Oahu. There are conflicting reports in regards to her death, which only add to the controversy. According to the report by the Fire Rescue her body was found in the fuselage of the plane. According to survivors, C. Philip Holstein and her deputy, Keith Yamamoto, Ms. Fuddy got out of the plane with all the other passengers and was alive and wearing her life vest when she suddenly let go of the hand of Mr. Yamamoto and suddenly died. Further, some reports place the total number of passenger at 8 and a total number of individuals on the plane at 9; however, reports of the Coast Guard rescue team state that they found 9 individuals floating in the water, which does not include Mr. Holstein and the pilot, Mr. Kawasaki, who reportedly swam to shore. [A]s such the total number of individuals on that flight was 11 and not 9 as reported, and it is not clear, whether the person who passed away and was examined by the Coroner’s office at Molokai, was indeed Ms. Fuddy.
Considering her verification of the forged ID for Mr. Obama, Ms. Fuddy could have been a target and her death could have been the result of some foul play. As such it is in the public interest to release the autopsy results and coroner’s report disclosing the cause of death.
Based on all of the above and per Unified Information Practices Act 92F I am requesting herein aforementioned Coroner’s/ Medical Examiner’s report and results of the autopsy of deceased Loretta Deliana Fuddy, date of death 12.11.2013, date of autopsy 12.12.2013-12.13.2013.
Respectfully,
Dr. Orly Taitz ESQ
29839 Santa Margarita, ate 100
Rancho Santa Margarita, CA 92688
______________________________________
Comments
2 Responses to “Press release: Molokai General office responds to autopsy results request”
- Rod Riddle
December 17th, 2013 @ 9:38 pm Ok I’m confused here. If the autopsy was performed there at the hospital, then how can it not be on record there???- dr_taitz@yahoo.com
December 17th, 2013 @ 9:40 pm that is my question as well
_____________________________________________
Lawyer Files Request For Fuddy Autopsy
December 17, 2013 by B. Christopher Agee
http://www.westernjournalism.com/wp-...12/Capture.jpg
The continuing saga surrounding Barack Obama’s birth certificate once again moved to the forefront when the woman responsible for authenticating the document died in a plane crash off of Hawaii’s coast recently. She was the only passenger – out of a reported nine total people on board – to die in the crash.
Dr. Orly Taitz, an attorney who has filed numerous lawsuits related to the birth certificate issue, is behind an effort to obtain a copy of Fuddy’s autopsy. In an exclusive interview with the Western Center for Journalism, she cited several pieces of anecdotal evidence she believes refute official reports.
“I have a file with all of the media reports on this accident,” she said, “and there are contradictions.”
Taitz is not alone in speculating that there might be more to Fuddy’s death than has been reported; however, she alleges several eyewitness accounts cast aspersion on official accounts of the crash. For instance, she said there is some debate regarding whether the plane’s pilot made a mayday call prior to the incident. Initial reports, she explained, indicate that no such call was sent.
“A supporter of mine reached Richard Schuman, the owner of Makani Kai Air that owns the plane,” she said. “He stated there was a mayday call.”
She also questions accounts that show rescue crews did not reach the scene until well after the plane crashed, indicating that the site’s proximity to the coast would have made the event obvious.
“They were very close to shore,” she contended. “In this instance, the crash could have been seen by shore. Why did it take a reported hour-and-a-half to rescue them?”
Finally, she questions the accuracy of reports stating that nine individuals were on board the doomed flight.
While fire and rescue crews reported that “when helicopters arrived they saw nine floating passengers,” Taitz alleges that “by the time they arrived … two of the individuals already swam to shore.”
The investigation continues into Fuddy’s death; and Taitz – along with others skeptical of the event – will rely on subsequent information in their effort to find the truth. At this point, the only unquestionable fact is that a prominent figure in Obama’s birth certificate debate is no longer able to shed any further light on the issue.
–B. Christopher Agee
Activist Post
Untold numbers of people across the world are waking up to official lies, cover stories, and conspiracies. The question is, do they stay there once they’ve crossed over, or do they try to retreat back to their former positions? It’s quite a trick to a) maintain the status of “normal person” while b) seeing through the enormous ruse. In fact, in the long run, it’s impossible.
http://www.activistpost.com/2013/12/...ay-season.html
https://scontent-b-sjc.xx.fbcdn.net/...27243132_n.png
Nation In Distress
He's been a Lie since 1961!!! LIKE and SHARE ~Ace
https://scontent-b-sjc.xx.fbcdn.net/...60459668_n.jpg
Overpasses for Obama's Impeachment
Overpasses protest in Georgia.
IMPEACH OBAMA!
JOIN US TODAY!...See More
https://scontent-b-sjc.xx.fbcdn.net/...33573373_n.jpg
[ED.: From Butterdezillion's Blog at butterdezillion.wordpress.com/:]
The Putting-it-All-Together Series:
Part 1: HDOH Red Flags
butterdezillion.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/hdoh-red-flags.pdf
Virginia Sunahara’s death certificate shows us not only that the HDOH is fabricating vital records, but that the subordinates ordered to do it are resisting by raising red flags in the forgeries they create. This is one of the central pieces to finishing this puzzle.
Part 2: Clue Number Two
butterdezillion.wordpress.com/2013/03/24/clue-2-obama-apparently-given-stig-waidelichs-bc/
Four August 1961 BC#’s were changed by the HDOH, based on the BC numbering system documented by CDC records. Obama was given the BC# that originally belonged to the 3rd Honolulu birth after Gretchen Nordyke – almost certainly Stig Waidelich.
Part 3: The Law Enforcement Provision
butterdezillion.wordpress.com/2013/03/28/part-three-the-law-enforcement-provision/
The alteration of 4 out of the 6 disclosed August 1961 BC#’s (including one deceased infant) makes it almost certain that the HDOH shifted BC#’s in order to give Obama a new BC# on a BC created at the request of law enforcement and claiming whatever law enforcement said it should say. There is a BC in Hawaii that has the BC# 10641 and whatever law enforcement ordered it to say, for Obama’s safety. There is also the record that Obama originally had, which has a different BC# and reveals something so drastically different that law enforcement claimed that real record would put Obama’s life at risk. Either that, or the HDOH falsified at least 4 August 1961 BC#’s without even trying to legally justify it.
Part 4: Three Bizarre Events
butterdezillion.wordpress.com/2013/04/05/part-four-three-bizarre-events/
[The following] three events are bizarre unless you realize what was going on:
1. Abercrombie claimed an investigation of Obama’s birth record found something actually written down in the State Archives.
2. Mike Evans claimed Abercrombie told him he had gone to the hospitals with a search warrant, and there is no birth certificate or other evidence that Obama was born in Hawaii.
3. When the story of Evans’ claims went viral Abercrombie and AG Louie forced HDOH Director Palafox to resign and lied about it while anonymously threatening to investigate him for medical billing fraud. Three days later Palafox forced them to tell the truth about firing him by saying he didn’t know why he resigned.
I believe Palafox was the snag in the plan to create a new BC for Obama based on law enforcement saying it was necessary to protect Obama from those “crazy Arizona birthers”. Palafox wouldn’t create a new BC for Obama because the only record they had for Obama was non-valid and couldn’t legally be presumed as true, and the law only allows a new BC to be created for someone who was born in Hawaii. So Gov. Abercrombie and AG Louie got rid of Palafox and replaced him with Loretta Fuddy who (as we will see) proceeded to execute the plan – including (among other things) the unlawful shuffling of 4 August 1961 BC#’s in order to land Obama with a BC that claimed a Kapiolani Hospital birth and had the BC# that had been used on the forgery to sanitize Obama’s passport file 3 years earlier: Stig Waidelich’s.
Part Five: Fuddy Illegally Executes the Plan
butterdezillion.wordpress.com/2013/04/08/part-five-fuddy-illegally-executes-the-plan/
ATTENTION:
9-19-12 Secretaries of State, look at
butterdezillion.wordpress.com/2012/09/21/birth-index-list-does-not-indicate-legally-valid-record/
for proof that Obama’s name on the birth index list proves nothing about his birth certificate’s legal validity and thus doesn’t contradict Onaka’s confirmation to AZ SOS Ken Bennett that the record is non-valid. See
butterdezillion.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/complete-klayman-letter-to-bauer.pdf
for a reminder of what you received via certified mail from Attorney Larry Klayman a couple weeks ago (the proof of receipt will be posted here soon). See
butterdezillion.wordpress.com/2012/09/21/kansas-never-asked-if-record-was-valid/
to see that the verification Kansas received is legally worthless. To understand the difference between the AZ verification and the legally-worthless verifications requested by both MDEC and KS SOS Kris Kobach, see
butterdezillion.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/wheel-of-fortune-v-family-feud-final.pdf
9-13-12 The current BC#’s the HDOH claims for Barack Obama, Stig Waidelich, Johanna Ah Nee, and Virginia Sunahara could not have been on their original 1961 BC’s if either Okubo’s or Verna Lee’s numbering methods were used. If Lee’s was used, then the trail of BC#-swapping isn’t hard to follow at all… See
butterdezillion.wordpress.com/2012/09/13/the-hdoh-has-juggled-bcs-for-at-least-4-1961-bcs/
9-3-12 I’ve confirmed the legal reasoning with 3 different attorneys: Onaka confirmed that Obama’s HI BC is not legally valid:
butterdezillion.wordpress.com/2012/09/02/onaka-confirms-obamas-bc-is-non-valid/
You will be hearing more about this.
5-30-12 AZ SOS Bennett did NOT withdraw his form request; the verification’s response was to not verify that birthdate (and other information) because those facts CANNOT be verified. This is indirect confirmation that Obama’s birth record is not legally valid.
butterdezillion.wordpress.com/2012/05/30/verification-verifies-if-anything-that-obamas-record-is-legally-non-valid/
5-25-12 CRITICAL – WHAT THE HDOH “VERIFIED” FOR THE AZ SOS ACTUALLY STRONGLY SUPPORTS OBAMA’S BC BEING LATE AND AMENDED, AND THUS NOT LEGALLY VALID: butterdezillion.wordpress.com/2012/05/24/hawaiis-non-verification/
5-21-12 Important updates at
butterdezillion.wordpress.com/2012/05/21/important-updates/
NEW: HDOH Funny Business Regarding Virginia Sunahara
This one is critical. The HDOH says they can’t find any birth record under Virginia Sunahara’s name even though she is listed in their 1960-64 birth index. Much more.
NEW: 1960-64 Birth Index Includes Legally Invalid Records.
This one is also critical. The 1960-64 birth index includes the birth names of at least 2 adopted children. Those records are required to be sealed, and their inclusion in the public list indicates that the list has been manipulated by the HDOH. At this point we have no way of knowing whether any name listed in the birth index represents a legally-valid record.
NEW: HDOH Has Two Different Versions of 1960-64 Birth Index.
The HDOH sent me copies of the exact same page from the 1960-64 Birth Index Book, 2 months apart. But one has the date range heading and the other doesn’t. Either there are 2 versions of the 1960-64 birth index, or they are altering pages from it at will.
NEW: If the COLB Seal Is Nickel-Sized…
The seal on Obama’s COLB is a significantly different size than the seal on Obama’s long-form. Companion to “Obama BC Seal Contradicts Factcheck“
New: Did Factcheck Help Forge the COLB?
Just like some of the items on the long-form forgery, the seal on the Factcheck COLB doesn’t distort properly for the bend of the paper it’s on. That seal could not have been on the COLB when Factcheck photographed it.
NEW: “Obama BC Seal Contradicts Factcheck“
I was wrong. A photo by Savanna Guthrie shows there WAS a very light, indistinct seal on the long-form BC. Unfortunately for Obama, it can’t be the same seal as was on the Factcheck COLB.
NEW: “White Copy” Not Directly From Certified Birth Certificate
The copy distributed to the press was taken from a print-out, not from the certified BC. This specifically enabled manipulation.
NEW: Long-Form Forgery for Dummies
How we know the long-form Obama presented is a forgery –
NO COMPUTER KNOWLEDGE NECESSARY TO UNDERSTAND =)
Updated by “Obama BC Seal Contradicts Factcheck”
and further clarified by If the COLB Seal Is Nickel-Sized…
butterdezillion.wordpress.com/
[ED.: From Butterdezillion's Blog at
butterdezillion.wordpress.com/2011/05/04/long-form-forgery-for-dummies/:]
Longform Forgery for Dummies
This has to be as a PDF so you can magnify the images.
The only non-manipulable image of Obama’s long-form that would have to show the certifying seal is an alleged photograph of the certified long-form. Unlike scans or black and white photocopies, actual photos always show evidence of a seal, as I document here through photographs of my own daughter’s death certificate.
But the alleged photo of Obama’s certified long-form shows no sign of a seal.
That proves that what he showed reporters was NOT the certified copy he received from the HDOH. It had no seal, and the reporters totally spaced off what any one of us who researches this stuff would have immediately checked, since it is the only part that gives the paper any legal value.
Obama had certified copies from the HDOH and he chose to present to the entire world something else, while CLAIMING it was what the HDOH sent him. Presumably it was a print-out of the manipulated PDF. If no manipulation had been necessary Obama could have simply shown the media the actual certified copy, as he CLAIMED to do. The absence of the seal gives it all away. [Ed.: Shortly after this was written, Mr. Obama's minions added to the image at whitehouse.gov a reasonably valid-looking seal. But it appears to be not exactly the correct size. ]
UPDATE 1: Somebody said there is a seal that can be seen if you adjust the contrast and brightness. I set both these images for the highest contrast, set them both at -20 for brightness, and lined them up so the cross-hatches are the same size. Compare for yourself.
Word Image With Contrast
For those who get a hassle with a Word document, here’s the file as a PDF:
PDF image with-contrast
I left this in Word because that’s the program I have where I can adjust contrast. I am not technologically sophisticated – and in a world where stuff can be manipulated digitally I think it does some good to look at what is actually in front of our eyeballs. If we have to magnify to this degree to see even a HINT of a tiny squiggle somewhere then you can bet your bottom dollar that no reporter looked at this with their naked eyes and saw a seal. A seal that requires this kind of manipulation defeats the whole purpose of a physical raised seal – which is to have an immediately visible sign that the paper in front of you is the same paper that the HDOH sent from their office.
I am a housewife with four kids and a husband to tend to and no computer expertise. In 5 minutes or less I could take a photo of the whole death certificate and post it on my blog with varying angles, close-ups of the seal, etc to give a convincing proof that the document I have is authentic. But with all the resources and personnel at Obama’s disposal this is the best he can come up with? Come ON, people. There is no excuse for this ____.
UPDATE 2: For those who say the photo isn’t really a photo but is just a jpg version of the same scan used in the PDF, here is a comparison of the PDF with the jpg of the “photo”.
Comparison of Degrading Quality
Because the quality degrades, it is a good bet that whether this claimed “photo” is a photo or a scan, it is a photo or scan OF THE MANIPULATED PDF. And we’re still left with no PHOTO of an ACTUAL CERTIFIED COPY.
This whole thing is so senseless [hokey, even]. The HDOH sent a paper document with a seal. If you want to convince people that you’ve got a paper document with a seal the best way is to let them see, hold, photograph, and videotape it. Refusing to do that and instead making scans of it in a format where the content of it can be manipulated is the worst thing they could do, if they wanted to make their case for authenticity. It’s the perfect thing to do if they want to increase suspicions while thumbing their nose at people for having questions in the first place.
There is not one media person who saw a real certified birth certificate, and the only things they or we have been given are manipulable images. The media is ridiculing US because they were too stupid to know how to verify the authenticity of a birth certificate. Incredible. Absolutely incredible.
butterdezillion.wordpress.com/2011/05/04/long-form-forgery-for-dummies/
The Obama Hustle
The Rediscovered Truth About Barack H Obama
BREAKING NEWS – [Ellen L. Hollander, U.S. District Judge for the U.S. District of Maryland.] gives Attorney Orly Taitz 21 days to file a second amended complaint and add allegations in regards to an improper withholding by the Social Security Administration of records of Harry Bounel, whose Social security number is being illegally used by Barack Obama.
By AL HENDERSHOT - Editor: The Obama Hustle 12/16/2013
The soon to be six year-long investigation into the case against Barack H Obama and his use of a stolen social security number which belongs to a 120 year old deceased individual by the name of Harry Bounel has taken a new course today. The information obtained was on a Mr. Harry Bounel who was born in Russia in 1890 and living in the Bronx, NY as of the 1940 Census.
http://theobamahustle.files.wordpres...pg?w=300&h=223
1940 Census listing Mr. Harry Bounel on line 48.
A November 16, 2012, FOIA [request] noted below clearly proves that the Social Security number, 042-68-4425, [stolen] by Obama does not belong to him but in fact belongs to Mr. Harry Bounel.
http://theobamahustle.files.wordpres...pg?w=217&h=300
November 16, 2012, SSA reply to
FOIA request for info about Harry
Bounel, DOB 1890, using Social
Security number 042-68-4425.
When the FOIA was requested, it was done using the “SS-5” request form and using the 120 year old rule, which excludes privacy concerns for information requested for information on a deceased individual’s “SS-5” documentation, who would be over 120 years of age at time of request. It was completed using the name of Harry Bounel, SSN 042-68-4425, and the DOB – 1890.
My previous article, “http://theobamahustle.wordpress.com/?s=three+strikes” goes into great detail on how the evidence has mounted against Obama and his fraudulent activities concerning his stolen social security number.
The following excerpt is from www.orlytaitzesq.com
“Judge Hollander in Maryland gives Attorney Orly Taitz 21 days to file a second amended complaint and add allegations in regards to an improper withholding by the Social Security Administration of records of Harry Bounel, whose Social security number is being illegally used by Barack Obama. When Taitz filed the complaint, SSA did not respond at all.
"After the law suit was filed, SSA responded by fraudulently claiming that the records were not found. Taitz responded that this is a fraudulent assertion, since the records were found before and denied to another petitioner due to privacy concerns; however, Social Security has no right to claim privacy, as according to their own 120 year rule they have a duty to release the records.
"The judge stated that the plaintiff Taitz might be correct, however at this time she cannot rule in her favor as her original complaint was filed before SSA responded, so the judge gave Taitz an opportunity to re-file a second amended complaint and add new allegations, stating the SSA responded but improperly hidden the records.
"This is a great development. This all but assures that the judge will order the SSA to release the SS-5, Social Security application of resident of CT, Harrison (Harry) Bounel, whose [issued-in-CT) SSN, 042-68-4425, was stolen by Obama and used in Obama’s 2009 tax returns, which initially were posted on WhiteHouse.gov without proper redaction, without flattening the file.”
http://theobamahustle.files.wordpres...pg?w=300&h=277
Each and every one of Obama’s relatives have
all had social security numbers of their own
even though they have all been documented
as being in the United States illegally.
theobamahustle.wordpress.com/2013/12/16/breaking-news-judge-hollander-in-maryland-gives-attorney-orly-taitz-21-days-to-file-a-second-amended-complaint-and-add-allegations-in-regards-to-an-improper-withholding-by-the-social-security-admini/
Subject: Fwd: A Peek Into Obama's Records
>
> I am not a "birther", but it does seem curious to me that there could be so many inconsistencies with his documentation. Especially since his and Michelle's records are not available from college, etc. Me thinks someone has something to hide....
> Let me know if you can figure this out?
>
> 4 Simple questions from a reputable attorney...............
>
> This really should get your "gray matter" to churning, even if you are an Obama fan. I wouldn't want my hero to be made out to be a liar, would you?
>
> For all you "anti-Fox News" folks, none of this information came from Fox. All of it can be verified from legitimate sources (Wikipedia, the Kapiolani hospital website itself, and a good history book, as noted herein). It is very easy for someone to check out.
>
> 4 Simple Questions:
>
> 1. Back in 1961 people of color were called 'Negroes.' So how can the Obama 'birth certificate' state he is "African-American" when the term wasn't even used at that time ?
>
> 2. The birth certificate that the White House released lists Obama's birth as August 4, 1961 & Lists Barack Hussein Obama as his father. No big deal, Right ? At the time of Obama's birth, it also shows that his father is aged 25 years old, and that Obama's father was born in "Kenya , East Africa ".
>
> This wouldn't seem like anything of concern, except the fact that Kenya did not even exist until 1963, two whole years after Obama's birth, and 27 years after his father's birth. How could Obama's father have been born in a country that did not yet Exist? Up and until Kenya was formed in 1963, it was known as the "British East Africa Protectorate". (check it below)
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenya_> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenya_
>
>
> 3. On the Birth Certificate released by the White House, the listed place of birth is "Kapi'olani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital". This cannot be, because the hospital(s) in question in 1961 were called "KauiKeolani Children's Hospital" and "Kapi'olani Maternity Home", Respectively. The name did not change to Kapi'olani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital until 1978, when these two hospitals merged. How can this particular name of the hospital be on a birth certificate dated 1961 if this name had not yet been applied to it until 1978 ?
> (CHECK IT BELOW)
> ( <http://www.kapiolani.org/women-and-c...s/default.aspx> http://www.kapiolani.org/women-and-c...s/default.aspx)
>
> 4. Perhaps a clue comes from Obama's book on his father. He stateshow proud he is of his father fighting in WW II. I'm not a math genius, so I may need some help from you. Barack Obama's "birth certificate" says his father was 25 years old in 1961 when Obama was born. That should have put his father's date of birth approximately 1936-if my math holds (Honest! I did That without a calculator!!!) Now we need a non-revised history book-one that hasn't been altered to satisfy the author's goals-to verify that WW II was basically between 1939 and 1945. Just how many 3 year olds fight in Wars? Even in the latest stages of WW II his father wouldn't have been more than 9 years old.
> Does that mean that Mr. Obama is a liar, or simply chooses to alter the facts to satisfy his imagination or political purposes ?
>
> Why hasn't this been discussed in the major media ?
>
> Very truly yours,
> Rich
> RICHARD R. SILVERLIEB
> Attorney at Law
> 354 Eisenhower Parkway
> Livingston , NJ 07039
>
> "A pen in the hand of this president is far more dangerous than a gun in the hands of 200 million law-abiding citizens."
>
Overpasses for Obama's Impeachment
Have you ever....
Said the Pledge of Allegiance?
Have you ever...
Given serious thought to what it actually meant?
The first line alone should give you serious consideration.
The colors of the flag have MEANING. Do you know what the meaning is?
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America.
Red is a symbol of valor and bravery
White symbolizes purity and innocence
Blue signifies vigilance, perseverance, and justice
You pledged allegiance to the flag, which means you pledged to protect and honor the meaning of the flags colors.
Do you act with valor and bravery?
Do you protect purity and innocence?
Do you act with vigilance, perservere in the face of daunting enemies, and always seek justice?
And to the Republic for which it stands..
Have you done anything to preserve and restore the Republic for which those colors have meaning?
One nation under God,
Whether or not you believe in God or not, you can still be a good American. As for me, I BELIEVE!
Indivisible,
Have you brought patriots together to unite this nation to restore the Republic?
With Liberty and Justice for ALL.
Have you done your part to ensure liberty and justice in America?
Have you have done what you can to preserve our nation, to protect it, and to save it from the tyranny that lurks within?
JOIN Overpasses for Obama's Impeachment and honor your Pledge of Allegiance!
America is the greatest nation in the history of the world, with freedoms unfathomable to the vast majority of humanity.
If we fall into darkness, the whole world does..
Join us today, and help WAKE UP AMERICA!
https://scontent-a-sjc.xx.fbcdn.net/...27325669_n.jpg
Figures. Obama Tried to Sign Up for Obamacare But “System Couldn’t Verify His Identity” (Video)
Posted on December 24, 2013 by john
Posted by Jim Hoft, Gateway Pundit: According to the White House, President Obama tried to symbolically sign up for Obamacare but the system didn’t recognize him.
Ed Henry at FOX News reported: “We learned today from the White House. Initially, they said he signed up for what they called a bronze plan, paying about four hundred dollars a month in premiums. But, then they came back to us and said – Wait, he didn’t actually enroll. They said his staff did it and that’s because of his unique circumstance as Commander in Chief. That his personal information is not in particular government data bases. So healthcare.gov could not actually verify his identity, oddly enough… So his staff did it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7HE2p2YLiTw
http://www.thenattyconservative.com/...3/12/conan.jpg
I sure hope they tried
‘Barry Soetoro, Kenya’
before they gave up…
http://www.thenattyconservative.com/...dentity-video/
WND EXCLUSIVEQuote:
BREAKING: Why couldn't Healthcare.gov verify Obama's I.D.?
Has the scandal of the century just been re-ignited?
Barack Obama tries to sign up for his Obamacare, and Healthcare.gov cannot validate his own identity!
Here are the details the rest of the media are afraid to even utter ...
Why couldn't Healthcare.gov validate Obama's identity?
Bombshell in attempt to sign up president for insurance plan
http://www.wnd.com/files/2012/01/Jer...atar-96x96.jpg Jerome R. Corsi
Published: 2 hours ago
Video at the Page Link:
http://www.wnd.com/files/2013/04/obamafrowns.jpg
NEW YORK – The White House appears to have dropped a bombshell when it explained to the press why White House staff in Washington enrolled President Obama in Obamacare instead of Obama himself.
Officials said it was because HealthCare.gov could not verify Obama’s identity.
Here is what Ed Henry, Fox News White House correspondent, reported on air:
“Somebody who’s not waiting in line to enroll is the president of the United States. We learned today from the White House. Initially, they said he signed up for what they called a bronze plan, paying about four hundred dollars a month in premiums. But, then they came back to us and said – ‘Well, wait. He didn’t actually enroll. They said his staff did it and that’s because of his unique circumstance obviously, as commander-in-chief, that his personal information is not in various government databases, so Healthcare.gov could not actually verify his identity, oddly enough. So, he had to do it in person this weekend, so he was signing up for the D.C. exchange, but his staff did it.”
A CBS report in Washington, likewise, explained White House staff had to go to an “in-person” Obamacare site to sign up Obama for coverage.
The Fox News report, noted by the Gateway Pundit, set off a round of speculation on the Internet.
What information was so sensitive for Obama that it had to be excluded from government databases?
Clearly, the information was not his Social Security Number or his birth records, because the White House has claimed to have made public both.
On May 5, 2010, WND published a report documenting that WND researchers were able to find, through an ordinary search of the Social Security database online, the Social Security Number Obama has been using.
In the same article, WND also reported Obama was using a Social Security Number set aside by the Social Security Administration for applicants with addresses in Connecticut. Public records, meanwhile, provide no evidence Obama ever had an address in the state.
On April 27, 2011, the White House released a form the White House claimed was Obama’s long-form birth certificate, making public Obama’s date and place of birth.
The White House also releases annually on a timely basis the income tax returns for Obama and Vice President Joe Biden, with the Social Security Numbers missing. Yet for the purpose of filing the IRS return, there appears to be no exception allowing the president or the vice president to omit their Social Security Numbers.
The Healthcare.gov website says the only information required for applying for health-care coverage on the government exchange is a Social Security Number, employer and income verification, and the policy numbers of any current health-insurance plans.
http://www.wnd.com/files/2013/12/HEA...ec-34-2013.jpg
Source: HealthCare.gov
As indicated above, WND reported after Obama took the oath of office that the Social Security Number he currently is using could be found through a public search on the Social Security website.
None of the other information required, as seen on the above Healthcare.gov “Marketplace Application Checklist,” appears to be information that would be included in a government database for any U.S. citizen prior to applying for health insurance.
While the policy numbers of existing health-insurance plans covering members of the household would be protected for all citizens under various state and federal privacy statutes, the information does not appear to reach the threshold where national-security concerns would require keeping the information secret for the commander in chief under a national-security classification.
E-Verify ‘flagged’ Obama SSN
On Sept. 12, 2011, WND reported the Social Security Number being used by Obama did not pass a check with E-Verify, the electronic system the U.S. Citizenship and Immigrations Services of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security created to verify whether or not prospective employees have the required authorization to work legally in the United States.
In that article, WND published the “Self-Check” page from E-Verify that clearly listed a “Notice of Mismatch with Social Security Administration (SSA) Records.”
As seen below, Obama’s Social Security Number produced a mismatch that warranted a visit to the Social Security Administration to investigate the discrepancy.
http://www.wnd.com/files/2013/12/EVE...H-redacted.jpg
E-Verify notification of “mismatch” in Obama Social Security number self check
The checked reason for the mismatch notice was: “SSA record does not verify. Other reason. SSA found a discrepancy in the record.”
The graphic below shows a Social Security Administration website page that indicates the response “SSA record does not verify, other reason” is to be interpreted as “Special indicator present,” with the reference to three E-Verify sections.
http://www.wnd.com/files/2013/12/EVE...MATCH-PAGE.jpg
Social Security page explaining response "SSA record does not verify, other reason."
Further research revealed that the SSA adds “Special Indicator codes” to identify Social Security numbers that individuals obtained fraudulently.
According to an audit report authored by the Office of the Inspector General, Social Security Administration, titled “Effectiveness of Special Indicator Codes on the Social Security Administrations Numident File,” dated August 2008, there were nine special indicator codes as of November 2008:
- False Identity
- Noncitizen Not in Status
- Multiple SSNs with Different Identities
- Scrambled Earnings with New SSN Assigned
- SSN Obtained Using Fraudulent Documentation
- SSN Assignment Based on Harassment/Abuse/Life Endangerment
- Fictitious Identity
- Fraud – OIG Investigated
- Fraud SSN Misuse
WND obtained a copy of an affidavit from Linda Jordan, a private citizen who entered Obama’s Social Security Number into the “Self Check” section of the E-Verify website and found it to be flagged as likely being fraudulent.
“Eight of the Special Indicators have to do with fraud of some kind,” Jordan said. “It looks to me like the SSN Obama is using has been flagged with a Special Indicator suggesting fraud.”
WND’s request for comment in September 2011 to the media office of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigrations Services of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security went unanswered.
Whose Social Security Number is Obama using?
As seen below, U.S. Air Force Col. Gregory Hollister, retired, obtained from the Social Security Administration verification that the Social Security Number currently being used by Obama is a number that was never issued to him.
http://www.wnd.com/files/2013/12/EVE...D-TO-OBAMA.jpg
SSA verification that the Obama's Social Security number (redacted above) was not issued to Obama
Yet, WND has independently verified that Obama is using the Social Security Number in question.
As seen below, WND confirmed in an article published Feb. 2, 2011, that Obama’s Social Security Number links to Obama in the online records maintained by the Selective Service system. Inserting Obama’s Social Security Number into the online Selective Service search engine produces a valid Selective Service Number identified with Obama.
http://www.wnd.com/files/2013/12/EVE...pt-12-2011.jpg Selective Service online search engine links Obama's Social Security Number to his Selective Service Number
On Nov. 30, 2010, WND reported that the Social Security Administration has decided to randomize all future Social Security Numbers issued, beginning on or about June 25, 2011, in a move that will eliminate state-specific assignment of the Social Security Numbers.
http://www.wnd.com/2013/12/why-could...amas-identity/
Atty. Orly Taitz received a tip that to sign up for Obamacare on 12/23/13, Mr. Obama may have used a new SSN beginning with 212, issued to him by the Virginia SSA. She asks readers with any info on a deceased military person (or civilian) with a 212 SSN to contact her at orly.taitz at hushmail.com .
SSNs beginning with 212 were for Maryland return addresses, until they began to be randomized in 2011.
U.S. law forbids anyone to have a reissued (used) SSN or a second (new) SSN. I'm sure that exceptions are made for persons in the U.S. Federal Witness Protection Program (WITSEC), but otherwise, it's one SSN per person for life, even for identity theft victims - the opposite of Mr. Obama's frauds.
[ED.: New to Mr. Obama's SSN fraud? Read Dr. Jerome Corsi for the basics.]
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND
ORLY TAITZ,
Plaintiff,
v.
CAROLYN COLVIN,
Commissioner,
Social Security Administration,
et al.,
Defendants
.
Civil Action No. ELH - 13 - 1878
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This case arises under the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”), 5 U.S.C. § 552. On April 26, 2013, Dr. Orly Taitz, plaintiff,(1) sent a FOIA request to the Social Security Administration (the “SSA”) office in Baltimore, requesting copies of the Social Security applications (“SS - 5s”) of three individuals: Mr. Harrison (“Harry”) J. Bounel, Mr. Tamerlan Tsarnaev, and Ms. Stanley Ann Dunham. See April 26 letter, ECF 7 - 2 at ¶¶1–3.
Plaintiff had not yet received a FOIA response when, on June 25, 2013, [after 60 days without a response from the SSA,] she filed suit in this Court requesting, inter alia, an order compelling defendant to respond to her FOIA request for Mr. Bounel’s SS - 5. ECF 1 at 3.(2) On July 8, 2013, [after ten weeks without a response from the SSA,] plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint (ECF 3), which was substantively identical to the original complaint. Plaintiff served her Amended Complaint on defendant on July 10, 2013. See ECF 6. In her suit, plaintiff alleged
_______________________
1 Plaintiff apparently is a licensed attorney in California. See ECF 2 at 1 and n.1. She appears here as a self-represented litigant.
2 Plaintiff filed the original complaint on behalf of Defend Our Freedoms Foundation, a corporation or association of California, of which she is or was president. However, Dr. Taitz is the sole plaintiff in the Amended Complaint.
_______________________
that Mr. Bounel was born in 1890,(3) and therefore, under the “‘120 Year Rule’ implemented by the SSA in 2010,” pertaining to “‘extremely aged individuals,’” Bounel’s “Social Security applications have to be released under FOIA without proof of [his] death....” ECF 6 ¶ 12.
On July 29, 2013, Dawn S. Wiggins, a Freedom of Information Officer, replied to plaintiff’s letter of April 26. Wiggins acknowledged receipt of plaintiff’s letter and stated, id. at 2 – 3:
I have enclosed a copy of the SS - 5s for Mr. Tsarnaev and Ms. Dunham..
We were unable to find any information for Mr. Bounel based on the information you provided to us. Mr. Bounel may not have applied for a Social Security number (SSN)[, the SSN beginning with "042" as provided by the plaintiff notwithstanding,] or may have given different information on the application for a number.
“The Freedom of Information Act was enacted to facilitate public access to Government documents,” U.S. Dept of State v. Ray, 502 U.S. 164, 173 (1991) (citation omitted), and to vindicate the public’s right to know “what their government is up to.” U.S. Dep’t of Justice v Reporters Comm. for Freedom of Press, 489 U.S. 749, 773 (1989) (quotation marks omitted). Consistent with this objective, FOIA requires that “each [federal] agency, upon any request for records which (i) reasonably describes such records and (ii) is made in accordance with published rules stating the time, place, fees (if any) and procedures to be followed, shall make the records promptly available to any person.” 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(3)(A).(4)
________________________
3 Plaintiff’s claim that Mr. Bounel was born in 1890 is based on a United States Census record which, according to plaintiff, states that Mr. Bounel was 50 years old in 1940. See ECF 13-7. I note parenthetically that an individual who was 50 years old in 1940 could have been born in either 1889 or 1890.
4 If the agency uncovers responsive documents, its disclosure obligations are not unlimited. [ED.: If the agency uncovers NO responsive documents, it is equally obligated to make that known.] “While the FOIA generally authorizes disclosure of information contained in public records, it also expressly recognizes that the public interest is not always served by disclosure.” [ED.: And what part of "shall make the records promptly available to any person” does the SSA not understand? ]
_______________________
In a lawsuit seeking the release of documents under the FOIA, “[o]nce the records are produced the substance of the controversy disappears and becomes moot since the disclosure which the suit seeks has already been made.’” Jacobs v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, 725 F. Supp.2d 85, 89 (D.D.C. 2010) (quoting Crooker v. U.S. State Dep’t, 628 F.2d 9, 10 (D.C.Cir.1980)); see also Perry v. Block, 684 F.2d 121, 125 (D.C. Cir. 1982). [ED.: Inversely, but similarly, "until the records are produced, the substance of the controversy probably has neither disappeared nor become moot, since the disclosure which the suit seeks still has not been made.”] Accordingly, on August 14, 2013, defendant filed a Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, for Summary Judgment (“Motion,” ECF 7), supported by a Memorandum of Law and exhibits. Defendant argues that the SSA has “produced all responsive documents that are not exempt from release under FOIA,”(5) and therefore, plaintiff’s claim for relief is moot. [ED.: This is more specious reasoning from the attorneys for the SSA. Inasmuch as the SSA has not produced any responsive documents whatsoever about Harrison J. Bounel, its production of nothing and acknowledgement of nothing proves nothing about the plaintiff's claim for relief being moot.]
Plaintiff filed a combined Opposition and Motion for Summary Judgment on August 21, 2013. (“Opposition” or “Opp.”, ECF 9). However, she did not address defendant’s argument regarding mootness. [ED.: Such a specious argument could have been recognized as void and invalid, even without dignifying it with a rational and reasoned response.] Rather, [based upon the Declaration of Dawn S. Wiggins - ED.,] she claimed that the SSA did not conduct an adequately thorough search for responsive documents and, alternatively, that the SSA possesses Mr. Bounel’s Social Security application but improperly withheld it. E.g., Opp. at 1–2.
In regard to the adequacy of the search, plaintiff’s arguments that the SSA has failed to meet its obligations under the FOIA may have merit. When the adequacy of a search is challenged, an agency may demonstrate the adequacy of its search by submitting an affidavit that is “reasonably detailed, setting forth the search terms and the type of search performed, and
____________________________
5 U.S. Dep’t of Health & Human Servs. v. Fed. Labor Relations Auth., 833 F.2d 1129, 1134 (4th Cir. 1987). Thus, an agency may withhold information where a record falls within one of FOIA’s nine specific statutory exemptions. See 5 U.S.C. § 552(b) (listing exemptions); U.S. Dep’t of Defense v. Fed. Labor Relations Auth., 510 U.S. 487, 494 (1994) (noting that FOIA incorporates “a general philosophy of full agency disclosure unless information is exempted under clearly delineated statutory language” (quoting Dep’t of the Air Force v. Rose, 425 U.S. 352, 360–61 (1976))).
____________________________
averring that all files likely to contain responsive materials (if such records exist) were searched so as to give the requesting party an opportunity to challenge the adequacy of the search.” Ethyl Corp. v. U.S. E.P.A., 25 F.3d 1241, 1246-47 (4th Cir. 1994) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). Here, defendant has offered the Declaration of Dawn S. Wiggins, who avers, ECF 12-2 ¶ 6: “SSA conducted a search of the Numident for a record that matched the information provided by Plaintiff but could not locate a record for Mr. Bounel [no record found, whether exempt from release under FOIA or not - ED.].” Wiggins did not explain the manner in which the search was conducted, whether multiple searches were conducted using different combinations of the information provided by plaintiff (to ensure that a minor discrepancy in the information submitted by plaintiff did not sabotage the search), or any other details related to the thoroughness of her search.
However, any deficiencies in Wiggins’s affidavit may have been the result of the fact that the suit is not framed as a challenge to the adequacy of the search. Put another way, plaintiff’s contention on this point, and the factual allegations underlying them, do not appear in the Amended Complaint. [Nevertheless, the SSA's failure to respond does not require any further details from the plaintiff, only that a judge with competent jurisdiction orders the defendant to make the required response. - ED.] The Amended Complaint is premised only on the SSA’s failure to respond to plaintiff’s FOIA request, for which Dr. Taitz sought an Order requiring a response. Plaintiff first raised the issue of inadequacy in her Opposition.
A party cannot alter his or her claim through briefs. Instead, “the proper procedure for plaintiff[s] to assert a new claim is to amend the complaint in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P.15(a).” Gilmour v. Gates, McDonald & Co., 382 F.3d 1312, 1315 (11th Cir. 2004). To be sure, when a party is a pro se litigant, the Court must construe her pleadings liberally. See Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 93 (2007). Nevertheless, the Court cannot add factual allegations to a complaint or otherwise advocate for a pro se litigant. See Weller v. Department of Social Services, 901 F.2d 387, 391 (4th Cir. 1990).
CONCLUSION
Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint was filed before the SSA responded to her FOIA request [but only after a ten week delay - ED.], and has been rendered moot by the SSA’s response to her FOIA request [but only after a ten week delay - ED.]. If plaintiff takes issue with the adequacy of the SSA’s response, she must amend her complaint to add allegations that the SSA’s response was deficient. [ED.: SSA's response, even if it were not deficient, was certainly not rendered promptly, but only after a ten week delay.] Accordingly, I will dismiss plaintiff’s Amended Complaint, without prejudice [though not without bias - ED.], and with leave to amend within 21 days of the docketing of the accompanying Order, so that plaintiff may properly allege the claims she raised in her Opposition. I will also deny plaintiff’s cross-motion for summary judgment (ECF 9), without prejudice [though not without bias - ED.]. An Order follows.
Date: December 13, 2013
/s/
Ellen Lipton Hollander
United States District Judge
www.orlytaitzesq.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Taitz-v-Colvin-order-to-file-an-amended-complaint1.pdf