Donald Trump to tap his wallet for probe of 'forged' document?

"My gut tells me a couple things," Trump explained. "Number 1, you know, it took a long time to produce this certificate, and when it came out, as you know, check the Internet, many people say it is not real, you know, that it's a forgery."

Read more: Donald Trump to tap his wallet for probe of 'forged' document? http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=376973#ixzz1huJ5ki4O

Arpaio gets death threats over Obama investigation

Warned he 'will be filled with thousand bullet holes'

Read more: Arpaio gets death threats over Obama investigation http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=375329#ixzz1huG2Kbod

Texas Secretary of State Addresses Question about Presidential Eligibility

Update: Texas Secretary of State Addresses Question about Presidential Eligibility

AND CITES THE U.S. CONSTITUTION!

by Sharon Rondeau

In 1836, Texas gained independence from Mexico, declaring itself a Republic. It sided with the Confederacy during the Civil War.

(Feb. 4, 2011) — A citizen contacted the Texas Secretary of State, Hope Andrade, whose responsibility it is to oversee the Elections Division.  According to its website, the Secretary of State “provides assistance and advice to election officials on the proper conduct of elections.”

From: Redacted

Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 12:54 PM
To: Elections Internet
Subject: Qualification to run for Office of The Presidency of The United States

Texas Board of Elections,

What are the qualifications to be President of The United States. It is not displayed on the Texas Board of Elections webpage.

My Request is that all Candidacy qualification remain throughout the year for educational purposes.

And the Elections Office responded:

From: Elizabeth Winn <EHanshawWinn@sos.state.tx.us>

Subject: FW: Qualification to run for Office of The Presidency of The United States – Maroney (EHW)
To: Redacted
Cc: “Kim Beal” <KBeal@sos.state.tx.us>
Date: Thursday, February 3, 2011, 3:48 PM

As you may know, the President of the United States is up for election every 4 years.  The next general election for this office will be in November 2012.  The requirements to run for President of the United States are outlined in Article 2, Section 1 of the United States Constitution.  A candidate for this office must be:

1.    A natural born Citizen of the United States ;

2.    At least 35 years old; and

3.    A resident within the United States for at least 14 years.

The Texas Legislature is currently in session, which is why there is an absence of information on our website.  Additionally, because of the federal MOVE Act (to help military and overseas voters vote), Texas has a challenge of revisiting it primary dates and filing deadlines to accommodate the 45 day deadline for mailing ballots to this group.  Therefore, we will likely see some changes in the candidate filing process before the session ends late May of 2011..

We hope that this information answers your questions. If you need additional assistance, please e-mail or contact the elections division toll-free at 1-800-252-8683 (VOTE).

Elections Division Staff

Texas Secretary of State

1-800-252-8683

Elections@sos.state.tx.us

Full contact information for Texas Elections Division personnel can be located here.  A Texas state representative, Leo Berman, introduced a bill in the legislature which would amend the state’s election code such that candidates for president and vice president would be required to submit their original birth certificates in order to have their names placed on the ballot.  If adopted, HB 295 would take effect on September 1, 2011.

Berman’s represents the 6th District which is detailed here.  In regard to Barack Hussein Obama, who has failed to reveal his original, long-form birth certificate as well as other documentation about his history, Berman stated:

This bill is necessary because we have a president whom the American people don’t know whether he was born in Kenya or some other place.” If you are running for president or vice president, you’ve got to show here in Texas that you were born in the United States and the birth certificate is your proof.

A retired Lt. Colonel in the U.S. Army, Berman won re-election in his district in 2010 by garnering 86.86% of the vote.  He is originally from New York City.

A follow-up letter was sent by the same citizen to the Texas Elections Office:

2/6/2011

To: Texas Election Division,Texas Secretary of State,

I was hoping that your response letter would answer my question for the qualification of the United States Presidency, however it did only in part.

I do understand the qualifications for the Presidency of Article 2 Section 1 when stated ” at least 35 years of age”.

I do understand the qualifications for the Presidency of Article 2 Section 1 when stated ” A resident within the United States for at least 14 years. “

But when it comes to the qualification of the President in Article 2 Section 1 when stated  ” No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President “; Your answer is still not clear and since you are in charge of the Elections in Texas you most certainly understand the qualifications to run for Office within Texas.

The Architect’s of the United States Constitution showed a distinct difference between a ” Citizen “ and a ” natural born Citizen ” that is stipulated in Article 2 Section 1.

To only be a Citizen and become President of the United States you would of had to of been ” alive at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution ” and still alive today. Since all those Citizens at the time of the Adoption of the Constitution are not alive today, now one must be a natural born Citizen.

The 14 Amendment defines ” citizen “ as born or naturalized in the United States. So what is the meaning of Article 2 Section 1 natural born Citizen since a Citizen and a natural born Citizen are not one and the same as you can see in Article 2?

Can a child of two Illegal Aliens that is born in Texas run for the Presidency of the United States since that child is a 14 Amendment citizen?

I might run for The Presidency of The United States of America and I need to know if I qualify. I need to know if I am an Article 2 natural born Citizen as intended by the founding fathers of this Great Country.

Sincerely,

Creg Maroney

The Post & Email will be reporting on any response which Mr. Maroney receives from the Texas Elections Office which might attempt to define the term “natural born Citizen.”

Update, February 8, 2011: The following response was received on February 7, 2011 from the Texas Elections Division:

Mr. Maroney,

The following Section 1401 of Title 8 of the United States Code defines “citizens of the United States at birth.”  Please note that our office has no authority to or expertise in interpreting United States law or the Constitution; therefore, we are providing this information simply to guide you further.  We recommend speaking to a federal official or legal counsel who is qualified to interpret provisions of the United States Constitution.

Sec. 1401. Nationals and citizens of United States at birth

The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:

(a) a person born in the United States , and subject to the jurisdiction thereof;

(b) a person born in the United States to a member of an Indian, Eskimo, Aleutian , or other aboriginal tribe: Provided, That the granting of citizenship under this subsection shall not in any manner impair or otherwise affect the right of such person to tribal or other property;

(c) a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents both of whom are citizens of the United

States and one of whom has had a residence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions, prior to the birth of such

(d) a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year prior to the birth of such person, and the other of whom is a national, but not a citizen of the United States ;

(e) a person born in an outlying possession of the United States of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year at any time prior to the birth of such person;

(f) a person of unknown parentage found in the United States while under the age of five years, until shown, prior to his attaining the age of twenty-one years, not to have been born in the United States;

(g) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than five years, at least two of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years: Provided, That any periods of honorable service in the Armed Forces of the United States, or periods of employment with the United States Government or with an international organization as that term is defined in section 288 of title 22 by such citizen parent, or any periods during which such citizen parent is physically present abroad as the dependent unmarried son or daughter and a member of the household of a person (A) honorably serving with the Armed Forces of the United States , or (B) employed by the United States Government or an international organization as defined in section 288 of title 22, may be included in order to satisfy the physical- presence requirement of this paragraph. This proviso shall be applicable to persons born on or after December 24, 1952, to the same extent as if it had become effective in its present form on that date; and

(h) a person born before noon (Eastern Standard Time) May 24, 1934, outside the limits and jurisdiction of the United States of an alien father and a mother who is a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, had resided in the United States.

Section 1401 of Title 8 of the United States Code may also be found here – http://uscode.house.gov/search/criteria.shtml

Mr. Maroney then sent another inquiry:

From: Creg MaroneySubject: Re: FW: FW: Qualification to run for Office of The Presidency of The United States – Maroney (EHW)
To: “Elizabeth Winn” <EHanshawWinn@sos..state.tx.us>
Date: Tuesday, February 8, 2011, 9:38 AM
To: Texas Election Division, Texas Secretary of State,

Section 1401 of Title 8 of the United States Code defines “citizens of the United States at birth.

My questions are quite simple for those in charge of elections throughout the State of Texas.

Are those citizens defined in Section 1401 of Title 8 United States Code eligible for the Ballot and will be placed on the Ballot in Texas to run for The Presidency and Vice President of The United States?

Are those citizens defined in Section 1401 of Title 8 United States Code  eligible for the candidacy on any Ballot in Texas ” except ” for The Presidential and Vice President?

Sincerely,

Creg Maroney

New Jersey Obama Ballot Challenge

New Jersey Citizen to File Obama Ballot Challenge

SUBJECT: REQUIRE BALLOT CHALLENGE INFORMATION

by Dwight Kehoe, from TPath.org

Date: December 5, 2011
From: Dwight Kehoe

New Jersey Lt. Governor Kim Guadagno was elected in 2009 with Gov. Chris Christie and has worked as an assistant U.S. attorney. She also serves as New Jersey Secretary of State.

To: Secretary of State/Lt. Governor Kim Guadagno

Dear Ms. Guadagno,

Please contact me at your earliest possible convenience with either the information I may need or a website where a form can be downloaded that will enable me to file a complaint concerning the Democratic Party ballot application for the upcoming Presidential New Jersey Primary elections.

It is my intent to challenge the application and submission of Barack Obama, which the Democratic Party has filed for him, in relation to the upcoming election referenced above.

No doubt there will be sufficient area on the complaint form for a detailed challenge, but in brief, the impetus and reasons for the intended challenge are as follows:

1. The framers of our Constitution intentionally included a very high level of allegiance to our country by stipulating a difference between being just a citizen and being a natural born citizen.  The first leader of the US Supreme Court, the Honorable John Jay requested that requirement and it was then included in Article 2, after approval in  the first Constitutional Convention in which George Washington presided as President.   The Democratic Party has petitioned for a candidate, Barack Obama, who does not qualify under that Article.

2. As of this date, no original birth certificate has been provided as evidence which would prove where Obama was born and who were his parents.  The computer manipulated birth certificate released by the White House in April of this year which purported to be a scan of the original on file in Hawaii has been proven, beyond any doubt, to be a forgery.  As of this date, the Officials in Hawaii have refused court orders and continue fighting the request for the original to be inspected and compared with what was released in April.  I do not know if what they are hiding will invalidate the Democratic Party’s nominee, but the point is, the State of New Jersey does not know either. As public officials, all sworn to support and defend both the NJ Constitution and that of our great country, your duty requires proof of any applicant’s identity.

3. Much has been made of the fact that Mr. Obama may be using a Social Security number issued to someone in Connecticut and that the Federal Government program, E-Verify, has rejected the number Obama is using.  Again, as a private citizen, I do not know if this is a problem but since a very liberal Federal judge has just recently refused to allow the Social Security Administration to release information relating to the SSN in question, there seems to be sufficient reason for the New Jersey Election Commission to require some answers before the petition for Obama is accepted as legal.

It will be my intent, at my own time and expense, to challenge the application of the Democratic Party, for Barack Obama and request that New Jersey do its charge of protecting the citizens and enforcing the law and our Constitutions.  The three items I have listed here may seem to be separate issues, but in reality they are all entwined and relate.  Each of them are or could be pieces of an ongoing effort to hide and evade the origins and identity of one, Barack Obama.  Election officials, from either party should be concerned and want to clear this up before they once again accept  an incomplete application.

Sincerely,
Mr. Dwight Kehoe

The Mystery of Barack Obama

The Mystery of Barack Obama Continues

 

By Steve Baldwin, Exclusive to Western Center for Journalism

Most Americans don’t realize we have elected a president whom we know very little about.

Pictured: Barack Obama’s Autobiography, Dreams from My Father.

Researchers have discovered that Obama’s autobiographical books are little more than PR stunts, as they have little to do with the actual events of his life. The fact is we know less about President Obama than perhaps any other president in American history and much of this is due to actual efforts to hide his record. This should concern all Americans.

A nation-wide network of researchers has sprung up to attempt to fill in the blanks, but at every opportunity Obama’s high-priced lawyers have built walls around various records or simply made them disappear. It is estimated that Obama’s legal team has now spent well over $1.4 million dollars blocking access to documents every American should have access to. The question is why would he spend so much money to do this?

The president who campaigned for a more “open government” and “full disclosure” will not unseal his medical records, his school records, his birth records or his passport records. He will not release his Harvard records, his Columbia College records, or his Occidental College records—he will not even release his Columbia College thesis. All his legislative records from the Illinois State Senate are missing and he claims his scheduling records during those State Senate years are lost as well. In addition, no one can find his school records for the elite K-12 college prep school, Punahou School, he attended in Hawaii.

What is he hiding? Well, for starters, some of these records will shed light on his citizenship and birth.

Pictured: “Scott & Barry, 3rd grade 1969” Punahou School in Hawaii.

For example, Obama’s application to Punahou School – now mysteriously missing – would likely contain a birth certificate. And, according to attorney Gary Kreep, “his Occidental College records are important as they may show he attended there as a foreign exchange student.” Indeed, Obama used his Indonesian name “Barry Soetoro” while attending Occidental. Kreep has filed lawsuits challenging Obama’s eligibility to be president and as part of his lawsuit he requested Obama’s records from Occidental. However, Obama’s lawyers quickly moved to stop Occidental from honoring this request.

Furthermore, now that at least three document authentication experts have declared the scanned “Certificate of Live Birth” Obama’s campaign team gave to a pro-Obama website to be an obvious phony; we know that he is hiding something here as well.

Over 49 separate law suits have been filed on the eligibility/birth certificate issue alone, with several of the suits making it all the way the United States Supreme Court, only to be denied a full hearing.

Pictured: Saudi Prince Al-Walid bin Talah

What’s more, there are questions about how he paid for his Harvard Law School education since, despite a claim by Michele Obama, no one has produced any evidence that he received student loans. The Obamas will not release any student loan details despite repeated requests from the Chicago Tribune. However, it appears that his Harvard education may have been paid for by a foreign source. Khalid Al-Mansour, an advisor to Saudi prince Al-Walid bin Talah, told Manhattan Borough president, Percy Sutton, that he was raising money for Obama’s Harvard tuition. Incidentally, Prince Tala is the largest donor to CAIR, a Muslim group declared by the U.S. Government in 2007 as an unindicted co-conspirator in a terrorist financing trial. At least three of CAIR’s leaders have been indicted for terrorist activities. Al-Mansour’s admission opens up speculation as to whether Muslim interests have assisted Obama’s career in the hope he would eventually be in a position someday to promote their interests.

More recently, it was discovered that Obama’s Selective Service card may have been doctored. Federal law requires all American males to register for the Selective Service (the draft) in case a major war broke out.  Blogger Debbie Schlussel has discovered solid evidence that Obama’s Selective Service registration form was submitted not when he was younger as required, but rather in 2008 and then altered to look older. Indeed, the forgers forgot to alter the “Document Location Number” which shows that it is clearly a 2008 form. This is fraud and it’s a felony and Schlussel allegations are backed up by Stephen Coffman, a former high-ranking Federal agent. Moreover, the document shows a September 4th, 1980 date and the location of the transaction as Hawaii, but at that time Obama was thousands of miles away attending Occidental College in Los Angeles.

The real reason why Obama probably did not submit this form as a teenager is that he assumed his Kenyan or Indonesian citizenship exempted him from this requirement. But clearly, as he grew older and entered politics, he saw that any documents revealing a foreign birth – Selective Service registration, birth certificate, school applications, etc – would be problematic if he ran for the presidency. Thus, it is not a coincidence that every document which contains information about his birth or citizenship is either missing, sealed, or has been altered.

Indeed, everywhere one looks into Obama’s background, we find sealed records, scrubbed websites, altered documents, deception and unanswered questions. Can anyone imagine for a second if John McCain or George Bush had blocked access to his school, medical, and birth records?  It would have been headlines but as with everything else concerning Obama, the media has given him a pass on this.

Of all these marvels, the latest mystery and probably most perplexing is that of Obama’s social security number. It appears that Obama has multiple identities in term of possessing numerous social security numbers. Orly Taitz, an attorney who has filed numerous suits against Obama regarding his eligibility to serve as president, appears to be the first to discover this. In her suit, representing a number of military officers who are refusing to serve under an ineligible commander in chief, she hired private investigator Neil Sankey to conduct research on Obama’s prior addresses and Social Society numbers. Using Intelius, Lexis Nexis, Choice Point and other public records, Sankey found around 25 Social Security numbers connected with Obama’s name.

However, it may not be as many as 25, since Sankey also searched using closely related names such as:  “Barak Obama,” “Batock Obama,” “Barok Obama,” and “Barrack Obama.” There may very well be some Kenyans living in America with the same last name and a similar first name. In any case, I will exclude these records for the purpose of this research and focus only on names spelled exactly like his name. Moreover, we can verify many of the Social Security numbers as valid since they’re connected to addresses at which we know Obama resided. Needless to say, there are also a slew of address and social security numbers connected to addresses in states that Obama has no known connection to.

In Obama’s home state, Illinois, Sankey tracked down 16 different addresses for a Barack Obama or a Barack H. Obama, of which all are addresses he was known to have lived at. Two Social Security numbers appear for these addresses, one beginning with 042 and one starting 364.

In California, where Obama attended Occidental College, there are six addresses listed for him, all within easy driving distance of the college. However, there are three Social Security numbers connected to these addresses, 537 and two others, each beginning with 999.

There are no addresses listed in New York where he attended Columbia University, but there is one listed for him in nearby Jackson, NJ, with a Social Security number beginning with 485.

Pictured: 713 Hart Senate Office Building.

In Massachusetts – where Obama attended Harvard Law School – we find three addresses, all using the 042 Social Security number. After Obama was elected to the United States Senate in 2005, he moved into an apartment at 300 Massachusetts Ave NW; the Social Security number attached to that address is the 042 one. Yet, three years later, Obama used a different Social Security number for an address listed as: 713 Hart Senate Office Building. This was the address of his United States Senate office.  This Social Security number began with 282 and was verified by the government in 2008.

This mystery grows even stranger as other addresses and Social Security numbers for Barack Obama appear in a dozen other states not known to be connected to him. Again, I am excluding those records names not spelled exactly like his name.

Tennessee, one address with a Social Security number beginning with 427

Colorado, one address, with a Social Security number beginning with 456.

Utah, two addresses, with two Social Security numbers beginning with 901 and 799.

Missouri has one address and one Social Security number beginning with 999.

Florida has two addresses listed for his him, three if you count one listed as “Barry Obama.” One is connected to a Social Security number beginning with 762.

In Georgia there are three addresses listed for him, all with different Social Security numbers:   579, 420, and 423.

In Texas there are four different addresses listed for him, one is connected to Social Security number 675.

There are two addresses listed for Barack Obama in Oregon and one address listed for him in

the states of Wisconsin, Michigan, South Carolina, and Pennsylvania.

All told, there are 49 addresses and 16 different Social Security numbers listed for a person whose name is spelled “Barack Obama.” In some cases, the middle initial “H” is listed. If you were to expand the search to include closely related names such as: “Barac,” “Barak,” and “Barrack” Obama, you would find more than a dozen additional addresses and Social Security numbers.

Finally, the one Social Security number Obama most frequently used, the one beginning with 042, is a number issued in Connecticut sometime during 1976-1977, yet there is no record of Obama ever living or working in Connecticut. Indeed, during this time period Obama would have been 15-16 years old and living in Hawaii at the time.

Pictured: Ann, Stanley and Madelyn Dunham

Nevertheless, all this mystery surrounding Obama appears to be a generational thing.  Researchers have discovered nearly a dozen aliases, at least two different Social Security numbers, and upwards of over 99 separate addresses for Ann Dunham, his mother. We do know she worked for the ultra liberal Ford Foundation but we also know she may have earned some income from pornographic poses, as evidenced by photos recently discovered by some researchers—how embarrassing. The only thing researchers are able to find out about Obama’s mother is the fact she made porn. I’m sure that’s a first for presidential mothers.

But we also know that Obama’s mother and grandparents associated with Communist Party  leaders such as Frank Marshall Davis, a man who, according to Obama’s book, Dreams from my Father, was his main mentor during much of his Hawaiian boyhood (although Obama tried to disguise his identity in his book). During the Cold War, Davis was named by congressional investigators as a key member of a secretive pro-Soviet networked that existed in Hawaii at that time.

Pictured: Communist Party leader, Frank Marshall Davis.

The lack of documents regarding Obama also extends to his mother and to his grandparents. Indeed, researchers have been unable to find marriage licenses for his mother’s two marriages, assuming she was ever legally married. Ditto goes for the marriage license for Ann’s parents. They cannot find birth certificates for her, her parents, or for even for her grandparents. Even more so, despite Obama’s boast of his grandfather’s military service, there’s no record of that either. For reasons no one knows, much of Obama’s life, his mother’s life and his grandparent’s life has been erased from the records as if they never existed.

But why would someone obtain so many Social Security numbers? According to investigators, those who create additional Social Society numbers are typically engaged in criminal activities such as Social Security fraud, tax fraud, real estate fraud, campaign contributions fraud, voter fraud and so on. While the private investigator who compiled this list says multiple social security numbers does not automatically prove there’s criminal activity involved, he states that “having said that, I have personally experienced many, many cases where such information has led to subsequent exposure of fraud, deception, money laundering and other crimes.“What is interesting to note is that Obama’s grandmother, Madelyn Dunham, was a volunteer at the Oahu Circuit Court probate department and had access to the Social Security numbers of deceased people.

Pictured: Barrack Obama and his Grandmother, Madelyn Dunham. “Madeline Dunham was a volunteer at the Oahu Circuit Court probate department and had access to the Social Security numbers of deceased people.”

It is clear that more research needs to be done on this issue.  The Western Center for Journalism

( http://www.westernjournalism.com) is inviting our readers to join the search for the truth. If you have any information about any of the addresses listed, we would love to hear from you. To find a complete list of all the addresses and Social Security numbers listed in the public record for Obama and family, please go to the Western Center for Journalism.

Obama’s ineligibility: When government declares war on the people

At Lexington and Concord, the American militia was able to stand their ground against oppression because they stockpiled weapons and ammunition, created an effective local intelligence network and had the support of the populace. Those are the fundamentals of a classical insurgency. In 1964, no one framed the choice better than Ronald Reagan:

“Whether we believe in our capacity for self-government or whether we abandon the American Revolution and confess that a little intellectual elite in a far-distant capital can plan our lives for us better than we can plan them ourselves.”

But that was another era. Sadly for our country, Reagan greatly underestimated the corruption, the inexhaustible greed and the endless lust for power of future politicians.
We have an occupant of the White House, who is ineligible to be President, who has likely forged or been complicit in the forgery of official documents and who may be using a stolen Social Security Number.
There is ever increasing evidence of widespread press self-censorship and the altering of online documents to misinform and manipulate the American people in order to protect Barack Obama.
We have a rogue and dangerous Executive Branch and members of Congress who have violated their oaths of office and abdicated their responsibility to support and defend the Constitution and uphold the rule of law.
They are now all co-conspirators attempting to achieve absolute power and corrupt the government absolutely, all of which will eventually lead to the destruction of our republic.
Michael Barone calls it “Gangster Government”, where, in the Chrysler bailout, the Obama administration forced bondholders to accept 33 cents on the dollar on secured debts while giving United Auto Worker (UAW) retirees 50 cents on the dollar on unsecured debts.
That was a clear violation of the ordinary bankruptcy rule that secured creditors are fully paid off before unsecured creditors get anything. The politically connected UAW got preference over politically unconnected bondholders.
Add to that travesty, the destruction of 789 small business, dealer franchises during the Chrysler bankruptcy hearing.
Was that yet another violation of bankruptcy law to benefit the UAW? Why does it seem that Obama and his allies always side with the fat cats over small businesses and ordinary investors?
In his superb exposé “Chrysler Bankruptcy Exposes Dirty Politics”, Declan McCullagh documents the immorality, the breakdown of the rule of law and strong-arm tactics used by some politicians.
He describes how Obama, his allies and Congressional Democrats interfered on behalf of unions (the junior creditors) and publicly upbraided the senior creditors who were asserting their contractual rights.
The UAW has donated $25.4 million to federal politicians over the last two decades, with 99 percent of that cash going to Democrats. Obama’s final 2008 campaign stop on Election Day was a UAW phone bank.
Clifford Asness, managing partner at a $20 billion hedge fund named AQR Capital Management, called it “toxic demagoguery” and says “the president’s attempted diktat takes money from bondholders and gives it to a labor union that delivers money and votes for him.”
The Constitution is being violated and the rule of law eroded to benefit a rich and powerful elite who care not for their country, but only for themselves.
Our elected representatives, our courts and our law enforcement agencies are ignoring our requests for the redress of grievances and investigations of likely law violations.
America no longer has a government beholden to the people.
The Declaration of Independence stated:

“In every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress in the most humble terms: our repeated petitions have been answered only by repeated injury.”

“Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security.”
It is the dishonest and ruthless people now controlling the reins of power, who are forcing the American people toward a second Lexington and Concord.
It is those politicians and their collaborators, who force us to stand our ground, not against our Constitution, but against their perversion of it and their suppression of our liberty.
In the last paragraph of his 1964 speech, Ronald Reagan also framed our current challenge:
“You and I have a rendezvous with destiny. We will preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on earth, or we will sentence them to take the first step into a thousand years of darkness. If we fail, at least let our children and our children’s children say of us we justified our brief moment here. We did all that could be done.”

Lawrence Sellin

Lawrence Sellin Most recent columns

© Canada Free Press 2011
Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D. is a recently retired colonel with 29 years of service in the US Army Reserve. He is a veteran of Afghanistan and Iraq.
Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D. receives hate mail at lawrence.sellin@gmail.com

Rep. Tom McClintock: Another Ineligibility Denier

IS “TOM” GUILTY OF MISPRISION OF FELONY?

July 16, 2011

Rep. Tom McClintock was elected in 2008 and represents California's Fourth Congressional District

Dear Editor:

Recently I sent an article from Canada Free Press to my congressman, Tom McClintock, and received the following response:

Dear Redacted:

Thank you for contacting me to express your concerns regarding President Barack Obama’s citizenship and his eligibility to serve as president.

The Constitution is the starting point for determining eligibility to serve as President. The Constitution requires that to be eligible to serve as President an individual must be a natural born citizen of the United States, be at least 35 years old, and have been a permanent resident in the United States for at least 14 years.

Currently, a candidate’s eligibility under these requirements is vetted by a number of sources, both inside the government and out.  First, candidates go through an intensive political vetting process in both the primary and general election – their histories are carefully examined by their political opponents who have a vested interest in uncovering the facts.  At the end of the campaigns, the voting public weighs in.  Then, when all the votes have been cast and counted, it is up to Congress to certify the results.  A final check-and-balance against eligibility irregularities lies with the courts, and ultimately the Supreme Court.

President Obama has passed each of these requirements.  Further, in President Obama’s case – in addition to his Hawaii birth certificate – there were two birth announcements in major Hawaii newspapers, the Honolulu Advertiser and the Star Bulletin.

Thanks again for contacting me, and I look forward to hearing from you again in the future.  Should you have any further questions regarding this or any other issue, please don’t hesitate to contact me via email or my Washington D.C. office at (202) 225-2511 or my district office in Granite Bay at (916) 786-5560.

Sincerely,

Tom

Californians to McClintock: What About the Two Citizen Parents McCain Had to Have?

6Share

0digg

WHEN WAS THE “VETTING” OF OBAMA DONE, AND BY WHOM?

by Sharon Rondeau

To which vetting process is Rep. Tom McClintock referring when he says that Obama's eligbility was determined before the election?

(Jul. 16, 2011) — In response to the letter received by Congressman Tom McClintock and published here, the congressman has received the following two letters:

Hi Tom:

As my former Congressman, I hold you in high esteem and also voted for you for Governor. I am a well-regarded retired businessman.

After reading the letter appearing below this one, purportedly from you, I offer the following thoughts. I’m writing to ask you to reconsider your position on the eligibility issue– please hear me out.

1. There was no vetting process. That has been confirmed at the federal level and for various states, including our own (please research the case against Debra Bowen, Secretary of State). Nancy Pelosi omitted the Constitutional eligibility statement in her 2008 “Obama” candidate certification in 49 states and apparently perjured herself in the 50th (Hawaii). The “media” glossed over the vetting of “Obama” and seemed strangely incurious, relying mostly upon the two somewhat fictional “autobiographies.” “Obama” offered almost no background and substantiation of his past. In fact, he has actively and aggressively covered it up, in an unprecedented manner. If you can point out how and who he was vetted by, we would like to help enlighten the benighted public, who question “Obama’s” legitimacy.

2. It is fairly clear, from the papers of the founding fathers and De Vattel’s Law of Nations, a primary reference used by them in the writing of the Constitution, that they thought of a natural born citizen as someone born in this country of two citizen parents at the time of that person’s birth. SR 511 appears to harbor similar assumptions. This has been repeatedly confirmed by Congress and the Supreme Court. However, CRS wrote a very misleading memo about eligibility, distorting both facts and case law, particularly Minor vs. Happersett. This has been documented in several articles, which we will forward upon request.

3. The withholding of “Obama’s” vital papers and expenditure of possibly up to $2MM to defend him in eligibility legal actions, plus an undetermined amount from DOJ funds, is an outrage. They should have been prosecuting, not defending him.

4. There is documented, indisputable evidence, compiled by multiple independent private investigators (Sankey, Daniels and others), that:
- “Obama” is linked at least 16 stolen Social Security numbers, including 042-68-4425, via name and addresses.
- This was uncovered via commercial databases and other research.
- That led to a finding that his Selective Service registration, linked to the aforementioned Social Security number, is also fraudulent and apparently forged circa 2008.
- At least one of his purported mother’s Social Security numbers appears to be stolen.
- We are told by investigators that this normally happens either when people cannot obtain such documentation legally, or are using it to break the law, usually for financial gain or other felony fraud.

5. There is no record of him ever legally changing his name from Barry Soetoro or Soebarkah to his current AKA. There is also evidence linking him to an alias of Harrison Bounel.

6. The so-called birth certificate was, after over three years of stalling. finally released in digital form by “Obama,” via the White House staff, on 4-27-11, with limited copies made from an undetermined source document. It has been declared a fraud by dozens of document experts, some of them very well-known and respected. In short, it opens up in Adobe Illustrator as a nine-layered document, displaying numerous symptoms known to experts as evidence of alteration.

7. John McCain was submitted to an extensive investigation and humiliating Senate hearing, on his eligibility for the Presidency, in spite of having a very well-documented history and two American citizen parents. His family has served with distinction as military officers for multiple generations. Even though he was born in Panama (NOT the at the time Canal Zone, a U.S. Possession, as many thought), he was declared eligible, because his father was serving his country as a military officer, a special case. No such hearing was ever held for his Democrat opponent, who had far more mysterious circumstances in his past and had already been served for eligibility suits. Some say this was some sort of quid pro quo. Whatever.

8. You didn’t raise the issue in your letter, but the so-called “birth announcements”:
- Are unvetted
- Are not legal documents
- Could have been triggered via relatives in a request, or Certification (NOT Certificate) of Live Birth, obtained with only an affidavit, under Hawaiian law.
- Do not state the name of the child
- Do not state the place of birth
- List a false address, where the parents never lived

Congress and courts have both failed to act on the issues, to date. The Courts claim it’s Congress’ responsibility and Congress vice- versa. You say it’s a non-issue. About half of the public at large surveyed think otherwise.

We do NOT intend to roll over and let this go away. The stakes are way too high. The founders established a high bar for eligibility, precisely to help avoid situations like we have now, with a chief executive whose priorities, loyalties, ideology and revered traditions clearly do not stand with We The People. This and his many impeachable offenses, are far worse than Watergate and Monicagate to the nth power.

We hope and pray that you will have the courage to act, to motivate the House of Reps to investigate this and act accordingly. I also ask you to help motivate the FBI to move on the multiple complaints submitted.

We do not think it is sufficient to wait until January 2013 to solve the problem, particularly because he has been so very dangerous and destructive in office and seems willing to commit massive fraud to get his way, with powerful forces enabling him to do so.

Regards,

G. Miller

———————————

Dear Rep. McLintock,

I read your letter to “redacted” on the Post and Email website and would like to share the following. You said that President Obama was thoroughly vetted and found clean. I don’t think so. You may have forgotten Senate Resolution 511 which vetted Sen. McCain on being a natural born citizen. He was cleared and his nomination accepted by Democrats. But here’s what you and so many others are missing. During one of the hearings on Res. 511 Sen. Patrick Leahy said, “Because he (McCain) was born to American citizens, there is no doubt in my mind that Senator McCain is a natural born citizen.” Obviously, “born to American citizens” means that both parents are U.S. citizens, which McCain’s parents were. But by this statement, Sen. Leahy admitted that President Obama is not a natural born citizen as required by Art. 2, Sect. 1, Clause 5 of the constitution. This appeared to be a thoughtless “oops” that went unnoticed. But according to the historical record and Surpeme Court rulings, Leahy is dead on. Obama is not eligible to be President of the United States because his father was Kenyan and never was a U.S. citizen. McCain must have known this, but why didn’t he bring it up? And why didn’t he and Republicans demand that Sen. Obama be vetted for natural born citizenship also? Those questions need to be answered, but try and get one. The real substance of natural born citizenship is citizen parents and Leahy nailed it. So you are wrong, sir, when you say that Barack Obama was thoroughly vetted. He has committed election fraud and is guilty of usurping the presidency, among other things. Check with Senator Leahy and see if he still believes a natural born citizen is born of parents who are BOTH “American citizens.”

Regards, J. Black

HAWAII CLAIMS “PRIVACY”

HAWAII CLAIMS “PRIVACY” PREVENTS RELEASE OF OBAMA’S ORIGINAL BIRTH CERTIFICATE; TAITZ DEMANDS IT AS PART OF DISCOVERY

by Sharon Rondeau

Judge Royce Lamberth is presiding over the lawsuit Taitz v. Astrue which seeks the disclosure of Obama's original social security number application

(Jul. 7, 2011) — Orly Taitz has filed and posted on her website a “Motion to Compel Subpoena” in regard to the lawsuit Taitz v. Astrue filed in February 2011 against the Social Security Administration to obtain a copy of Obama’s social security number application.  Taitz is requesting that the “vault” original allegedly on file with the Hawaii Department of Health be released as part of the discovery phase of her case.

The Hawaii Department of Health does not display the purported long-form birth certificate bearing the name of Barack Hussein Obama II on its website, but rather, states that only index data is available according to state law.  The “document” released to the public on April 27, 2011 after almost three years of stonewalling has been denounced by experts as a forgery.

Former Weather Underground domestic terrorist and co-worker with Obama at the Chicago Annenberg Challenge William Ayers has admitted to stealing and creating false identities, including names, social security numbers and birth certificates of deceased children.

DR. TAITZ: I have filed two subpoenas.  There are two types of subpoenas:  one that is issued by an attorney and one that is issued by the court.  The Hawaii Department of Health refused to comply with the first one which was signed by me as an attorney.  In response, I have filed a Motion to Compel.  Meanwhile, if they comply with the second subpoena signed by the clerk of the court, then I can withdraw the Motion to Compel.

If they don’t comply with the second subpoena as well, then I can file another supplemental brief saying, “Your Honor, the first subpoena was not complied with, and the second signed by the clerk of the court has also been refused.”  So I am trying to stay a few steps ahead and not waste time.

MRS. RONDEAU: Can someone fail to respond to a court-ordered supoena?

DR. TAITZ: They did respond.  There was a response to the first subpoena by the Hawaii Attorney General, which I posted on my website.  They stated that they are not complying with the first subpoena due to considerations of privacy.  So I issued the second subpoena which is signed by the clerk of the court.  Meanwhile, I can file a Motion to Compel to the first one, and a few things can happen:  the judge might decide to dismiss this case, and then the subpoena will be moot.  We had this happen before.  The judge might decide to grant a Motion to Compel.  The judge might say that the subpoena which was issued by the court should be answered, or he might decline to grant a Motion to Compel.  So we need to see what will happen.  I’m doing the maximum amount possible.

They have an attorney, the Attorney General of Hawaii, who represents the Department of Health, and he can file an Opposition to Subpoena.  If he files an Opposition to the first subpoena, I have sent the second one to him.  It is too soon to have heard from him yet on that.  He could file an Opposition or a Motion to Quash the subpoena.  Then I would need to respond by either a Motion to Compel or by an Opposition to their Motion to Quash the subpoena.

Sometimes people file frivolous subpoenas.  In our case, they have a right to oppose, and the judge would have to decide.  I have filed the Motion to Compel with the judge whom I have for my FOIA case, which was to obtain the application for the social security that Obama is using.  Typically, people who don’t have a valid birth certificate resort to using fraudulent social security numbers.  That’s why this is relevant, and that’s why I issued that subpoena to compel them.  There are a lot of things that can be done.  Keep in mind that there is a lot of pressure on this judge to dismiss the case.

What I feel is that I am providing more and more information, clear evidence of fraud regarding the birth certificate and his social security number.  I have also provided information from the Social Security Administration regarding his mother’s social security number application, which is clearly a fraudulent document.  I am getting such explosive information that the dam will have to break somewhere.  It is possible that the judge will allow the evidence of fraud and forgery in his court or he could dismiss it.  They know if this breaks and it becomes obvious that they had all of this evidence, they could be held liable; they could be prosecuted.  So I believe that the judges are worried today because of what has happened.

MRS. RONDEAU: Could a judge in Hawaii become involved?

DR. TAITZ: That’s another possibility.  I assure you that I will not leave a stone unturned.  Since the judge in Washington, DC has already found standing and we have discovery, I don’t want this opportunity to be lost.  I want to take full advantage of it.  But if the judge in DC says that it has to be resolved in Hawaii, then I will refile it in Hawaii.  I will have to wait, because we have to give the government time.  But right now, we have an ongoing case.  Two subpoenas have been issued, we have discovery, and now I have filed the Motion to Compel.  I want do the maximum I can with this case.

Obama’s Alleged Birth in Hawaii

Why Doesn’t Obama and the State of Hawaii Release Real Evidence of Obama’s Alleged Birth in Hawaii?

Why Doesn’t Obama and the State of Hawaii Release Real Evidence of Obama’s Alleged Birth in Hawaii?
 
      By: Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
                                                                May 21, 2011

We have seen many on-line presentations showing the American public that Obama’s recently released alleged long-form Certificate of Live Birth is a forgery. It is now time for Obama to release real evidence of his alleged birth in Hawaii. That real evidence is medical evidence.

Section 338-5 of the Hawaiian statute provides: “§338-5 Compulsory registration of births. Within the time prescribed by the department of health, a certificate of every birth shall be substantially completed and filed with the local agent of the department in the district in which the birth occurred, by the administrator or designated representative of the birthing facility, or physician, or midwife, or other legally authorized person in attendance at the birth; or if not so attended, by one of the parents. The birth facility shall make available to the department appropriate medical records for the purpose of monitoring compliance with the provisions of this chapter. [L 1949, c 327, §9; RL 1955, §57-8; am L Sp 1959 2d, c 1, §19; HRS §338-5; am L 1988, c 149, §1].”

Obama alleges he was born in Kapi’olani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital, now called Kapi’olani Medical Center for Women and Children. He has also recently released his alleged long-form Certificate of Live Birth which states that he was born there. Hence, let us see the hospital birth records which name Obama and his mother and father. Let us see other medical records which name Obama and the mother and father. Since Obama has released to the public the name of his alleged birth hospital, he should have no interest in keeping private any medical records which show that he was in fact born in that hospital. Also, he can redact any part of the medical record which he wants to keep private.

Additionally, under Section 338-5, Hawaii has the power and authority to obtain medical records from Kapi’olani Medical Center to confirm Obama’s alleged Hawaiian birth. At no time did Hawaii inform the American public that it in fact confirmed with that hospital that Obama was in fact born there which it can do under the cited statute. Hawaii has withheld this underlying evidence from the public. This withholding of evidence is a grave matter given that the recently released birth certificate has been adequately shown to be a forgery which creates such reasonable doubt as to whether Obama was in fact born in Hawaii.

Under Section 338-5, any birth certificate has to be completed and filed by some institution (hospital) or person (doctor, midwife, or parent). This statute also shows that Hawaii has the authority to confirm any reported birth by examining medical records. While Hawaii pretends to have come clean with the American public, it did not even provide such basic information or conduct such due diligence regarding extant medical evidence which would give the public that needed assurance that Obama’s birth record is genuine.

With the State of Hawaii having such authority under Section 338-5 to confirm through medical records that a birth in fact occurred in a Hawaiian hospital, why have we not heard that the Hawaii Health Department has any of this evidence in its files? We should also consider that Governor Abercrombie also did not confirm for the American people that the Obama birth file in Hawaii in fact shows that his birth event is corroborated with medical evidence from Kapi’olani Medical Center as is required by Section 338-5. Are we to reasonably believe that there exists no medical evidence confirming Obama’s birth in Hawaii that any one in Hawaii can share with the American people?

For a complete list of evidence of citizenship and identity identified by Medicaid, see http://www.ctelderlaw.org/HealthCare/Citizenship%20FactSheet%207%202%2007%20(2)%20(2).pdf. Out of all this evidence which can be used to prove citizenship and identity, what have we seen Obama and his enablers produce? The answer is a resounding “none.” If Obama wants to sell a lot of tee shirts proclaiming his birth in the U.S., let him put a copy of a Kapi’olani medical record on the tee shirts rather than the fake birth certificate.

Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
http://puzo1.blogspot.com/ 

Family of doctor who delivered Obama 'honored'

HONOLULU — The family of a Honolulu doctor whose signature appears on President Barack Obama's birth certificate woke up to the news that the late obstetrician had delivered Obama.
Relatives of Dr. David Sinclair told The Associated Press on Wednesday they were "blown away" and "honored" to hear the news that he delivered the nation's 44th president.

So-called "birthers" have questioned Obama's birthplace and his legitimacy to be president.
A signature on the certificate appears to read "David. A. Sinclair."
Karl Sinclair, of Kailua, says his father delivered babies all over the state when Obama was born in 1961.

The doctor died in 2003.

President Obama's Long Form Birth Certificate

Posted by Dan Pfeiffer on April 27, 2011 at 08:57 AM EDT

Ed. Note: Read the transcript of the President's remarks following this release or watch the video below:
In 2008, in response to media inquiries, the President’s campaign requested his birth certificate from the state of Hawaii. The state sent the campaign the President’s birth certificate, the same legal documentation provided to all Hawaiians as proof of birth in state, and the campaign immediately posted it on the internet. That birth certificate can be seen here (PDF).
When any citizen born in Hawaii requests their birth certificate, they receive exactly what the President received. In fact, the document posted on the campaign website is what Hawaiians use to get a driver’s license from the state and the document recognized by the Federal Government and the courts for all legal purposes. That’s because it is the birth certificate. This is not and should not be an open question.
The President believed the distraction over his birth certificate wasn’t good for the country. It may have been good politics and good TV, but it was bad for the American people and distracting from the many challenges we face as a country. Therefore, the President directed his counsel to review the legal authority for seeking access to the long form certificate and to request on that basis that the Hawaii State Department of Health make an exception to release a copy of his long form birth certificate. They granted that exception in part because of the tremendous volume of requests they had been getting. President Barack Obama's long form birth certificate can be seen here (PDF):



President Barack Obama laughs in the White House briefing room in Washington, Wednesday, April 27, 2011, as he speaks to reporters about the controversy over his birth certificate and true nationality.

Hawaii State Sen. Sam Slom New Birther

 100% of the Hawaii state senators Republicans are
Birthers.

 

Besides Obama's actual birth documentation, the president has refused to release his Punahou school records, Occidental College records, Columbia University records, Columbia thesis, Harvard Law School records, Harvard Law Review articles, scholarly articles from the University of Chicago, passport, medical records, files from his years as an Illinois state senator, Illinois State Bar Association records, baptism records and his adoption records.

The interview with Slom can be heard below, with his comments about Obama's father coming near the end, after the 10-minute mark: Hawaii State Sen. Sam Slom further told the host of "Aaron Klein Investigative Radio" on WABC 770 AM in New York City that so long as Obama refuses to be transparent about his past, questions about the president's birth remain "a legitimate issue." "My particular point of view – and why I haven't identified myself as a 'birther,' per se – is that [Obama] probably was born [in Hawaii] and that the real issue is not the birth certificate, but what's on the birth certificate," Slom told Klein. Asked what that could be, Slom said, "It could have to do with what his name is on the birth certificate, who is actually listed as his father, the citizenship of the father." He continued, "My belief is that there is a birth certificate, he was born here, but that there is information that for reasons known only to him he doesn't want released. If it were just the birth certificate, that would be one thing, but it's his school records, it's employment records. … 

Why would anybody, let alone the president of the United States, spend millions of dollars in legal fees to keep that hidden?" "As long as that goes on," he concluded, "I think it's a legitimate issue.

Slom told Klein that he knew the Obama family well. He said he lived in the same building as Obama near Honolulu's Kapiolani Medical Center – where many speculate Obama was born – when the future president was a teenager, worked with Obama's maternal grandmother and buried his father in the same cemetery where Obama's Grandfather Dunham was buried. Slom said one of his own sons was born in Kapiolani only a few years after Obama was born.

Hawaii Democratic Governor Abercrombie, close with the Obama's according to him, said once he was in office, he was going to end the ridiculous theory. However, this is what transpired recently:

Honolulu's Star-Advertiser: 'It actually exists in the archives, written down,' he said.

But it became apparent that what had been discovered was an unspecified listing or notation of Obama's birth that someone had made in the state archives and not a birth certificate.

Donald Trump on Bill Ayers “Momma said show me your friends I’ll show you your future”

During an interview aired Friday night on Sean Hannity's TV show, Donald Trump branched out beyond his simple commitment to birtherism as a political issue -- and also advocated vigorously for another conspiracy theory regarding President Obama, alleging that Bill Ayers was the true author of Obama's 1995 book, Dreams From My Father! Trump has previously talked about this particular conspiracy theory. But in this case, it was on the most high-profile platform yet, in the form of a featured extended interview on Fox News. The long discredited theory has also been propagated by the right-wing web site World Net Daily, whose founder Joseph Farah claims to have been talking with Trump "quite a bit." During the Hannity interview, Hannity and Trump speculated that Obama's real birth certificate might contain information he does not want the public to see, such as information stating that he was a Muslim. Trump then segued into questioning Obama's whole background. "Look, he was born 'Barry Soetero.' Somewhere along the line, he changed his name," said Trump -- referring to the surname of Obama's mother's second husband, Lolo Soetoro, whom she married four years after Obama was born. "I heard he had terrible marks, and he ends up in Harvard. He wrote a book that was better than Ernest Hemingway, but the second book was written by an average person." "You suspect Bill Ayers?" said Hannity. "I said, Bill Ayers wrote the book," Trump replied. Trump also added during the discussion: "He was best friends with Bill Ayers. Bill Ayers was a super-genius. And a lot of people have said he wrote the book. Well recently, as you know last week, Bill Ayers came out and said he did write the book." "Barack Obama wouldn't be president -- and, you know, I wrote many best sellers, and also, number one bestsellers including The Art of the Deal. So I know something about writing. And I want to tell you, the guy that wrote the first book didn't write the second book [The Audacity of Hope]. Obama made a big mistake when he wrote the second book. Because the second book was not Ernest Hemingway, it was about 37 classes below. So, the first book is Ernest Hemingway-plus. The second book was written by somebody that was much more average." Trump might be referring to how Ayers has responded multiple times to this conspiracy theory by joking that he did write the book -- and wants some royalties.