After months of investigation by officials in Arizona into claims that Obama’s birth certificate is fraudulent, lead investigator Mike Zullo recently made a public presentation of the evidence found to the annual convention of the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association annual convention in St. Charles, MO. According to reports, those present were stunned, shocked, and outraged by the evidence presented showing that Obama’s “birth certificate” released by the White House was obviously a fraud created by computer graphics.
Zullo also met recently with members of Congress concerned about the evidence the investigation has uncovered and were equally shocked by the findings. According to the WND article, “Several constitutional officers, public officials, attorneys, elected officials and others are now pledging full and personal support for moving the issue to a congressional investigation.” Evidence from this investigation was also included in “a legal case pending before the Alabama Supreme Court,” and Zullo entered the information investigators found in an affidavit to the court.
Some years ago during Obama’s first term, after bragging he would end the controversy once and for all, the governor of Hawaii was unexplainably unable to produce Obama’s birth certificate from the state’s official records. Obama’s people also released a Selective Service card for him, but that also appeared to be fraudulent. As pressure mounted on Obama before the last election to show documentation, the White House released the “birth certificate” online where analysis easily showed it to be a computer generated document and not genuine. (See stories below for details.) Mainstream media ignored all of this for the most part, and several of those at the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association annual convention were alarmed to see such evidence had been routinely dismissed if not ridiculed by the press.
Other documents which other presidents and those in Congress and the federal government usually release regarding their past Obama has steadfastly refused to release, including: Obama’s adoption records, official documents of his and his mother’s repatriation as U.S. citizens on return from Indonesia, his official name change from Barry Sotero (his name in Indonesia) to Barack Obama after returning to the U. S., his Occidental College records, his Harvard Law School records, his Columbia College senior thesis, his Columbia College records, his record with Illinois State Bar Association, his passport records (especially explaining his trip to Pakistan in the 1970s when U.S. citizens were not allowed to go there). This list is by no means complete and Obama continues to refuse to let anyone see his records. Some he has taken legal action to hide from the American public.
It had appeared that this scandal and cover up was going to have to wait for historians to sort is out, but this sudden interest in the claims of fraud from law enforcement officials and the Alabama Supreme Court may drive the truth forward sooner than expected.
I honesty thought that this blog would be over on election day 2012 when Obama would be voted out of office, not because of his ineligibility as should have happened years ago, but because of his dismal record. However, the issue of his Constitutional ineligibility is once again in play since his re-election, and now mathematical expert Christopher Monckton of Brenchley, former advisor to British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, has released a sworn affidavit that the “birth certificate” released by the White House for Obama is definitely a forgery.
Lord Monckton, educated at Cambridge University, using probability analysis, explains in his affidavit in simple language how the chance of the numerous anamolies found in Obama’s “birth certificate” by forensic experts being accidental is astronomically high — on the order of 1 in 75 sextillion. In other words, impossible; the document is without a doubt a forgery. (See the affidavit, link below.)
Lord Monckton gave his affidavit at the request of the attorney for the plaintiff in one of the many cases that have been brought forth challenging Obama’s eligibility under the Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, to be president. Every House member and every Senator in Congress have also been approached and asked to bring up this issue. So far all have refused or have not responded. However, the article says that the issue and the affidavit are going forward. It is still a question if any court will have the courage to look into the issue and allow evidence to be brought forth. None have to date.
Well, it appears that Obama has gotten away with an incredible fraud. After dozens of lawsuits, and over $2 million later, he has managed to hold on to his presidency, in spite of passing off fraudulent documents as legitimate, such as his selective service card and his “birth certificate,” both of which came under scrutiny by computer document experts and failed to prove genuine.
Though several anomalies exist in the documents, a few noticeable ones are that the “birth certificate” comes apart in layers which a scanned document would not, the certificate number has been manipulated, the certificate has numerous typefaces which a document from a circa 1961 typewriter would not, and Obama’s father is listed as “African” instead of Negro which would not be found on a document of that era.
So far only a sheriff in Arizona has had the courage to proceed, but now it is too late; Obama’s term is almost over. The process to vet a candidate’s eligibility to be president under the Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, was a total failure by both the Congress and the mainstream media. Now that they and the courts have let the country down, it is up to historians to bring out the truth, and history is likely to be harsh in judging these failures, and right it should be.
How long this may take is hard to tell, but whether a few years or several eventually the truth will come out. Perhaps in his trademark arrogance, since he was successful, he will during his lifetime release the records he has used court orders to hide from the public and keep secret, such as his school records, his college records, passport records, birth certificate, etc., though it is more likely it could be after as Obama cannot tolerate criticism of any kind.
However, the shadow this affair has thrown over the presidency may require legislation that candidates provide proof that they are eligible under the Constitution to run for the office of President of the United States, which Obama failed to do. It may also require clarification by the Supreme Court on what a “natural born” citizen is, as required by Article 1, Section 2, though the Court has previously indicated that a “natural born” citizen is one whose parents are both American citizens, which Obama’s were not since his father was a British subject from Kenya.
It would also be appropriate that those in power who were complicit in allowing an arguably ineligible fraud to assume the highest office in the land be prosecuted, starting with Nancy Pelosi and the head of the DNC in 2008 as both signed documents attesting to his eligibility to be president, though once again this may have to wait for the judgment of history.
Hopefully, such a shameful debacle will not happened again. It sends a disturbing message that we will allow our highest laws to be skirted if it suits the purposes of those in power, like some third world country. Worse it sends the wrong message to our children and their children that we failed on our watch to uphold principles that were established in founding our nation and refused to right a grievous wrong for political expediency and political correctness. In America no one is supposed to be above the law, no one, yet we seemingly allowed an obvious, outright fraud to be perpetrated at the highest level of our government, and those who should have at least investigated it looked the other way. Obama deserves the judgment of history, but now, so do we.
In a stunning article published on the Israeli national science website, an analysis of Obama’s long-form “birth certificate” released online by the White House last year has been determined to be a forgery. The website mentions that it should be of some concern that the man holding the most powerful postion in the world has a blatantly fake birth certificate.
Among other anomolies, the scientists discovered that the last digit of the birth certificate number is in a different font and under extreme magnification disappears, indicating it was altered by graphics software. Further analysis showed that the document is composed of two different groups of visual information sandwiched together to create the overall image, which would be impossible if it were a photocopied document as the White House claims. Other analyses are cited, including typogaphical and laying out of elements, all of which point directly to a forged docuement. The inescapable conclusion is that the “birth certificate” is an out and out forgery. (See earlier articles on this site for more detailed analyses.)
Mainstream American media refuse to examine or vet Obama and his documents, all of which have had their authenticity called into question, including his Social Security Card and his draft registration. So far analysis of these documents have only increased suspections that they are not genuine. All court challenges regarding Obama’s documents have been dismissed to date. No court wants to take on the explosive lawsuits filed and have to rule against a sitting President. Virtually all of them have been dismissed on legal technicalities. If the courts continue to refuse, it may be up to historians to publish the truth of Obama and his forged documents.
A Florida judge has scheduled a hearing for Obama’s lawyers to explain why “natural born citizen” does not mean the child of two American citizens. Judge Terry Lewis made critical rulings during the Bush-Gore presidential election in 2000 that were eventually decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. Attorney Larry Klayman has brought forward a suit from a registered Democrat challenging Obama’s eligibility to be President under the Constitution’s requirement under Article 2, Section 1, that the president be a “natural born” citizen of the United States of America.
As the Constitution does not explain the term “natural born” citizen, Klayman’s case cites the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Minor v. Happersett from 1875 in which the Court said that a “natural born” citizen is the offspring of parents who are both citizens of the United States. This is not the same as a “citizen” or a “native born” citizen, in which case citizenship can be conferred simply by being born in the United States. The Constitution makes a special requirement for the Office of President; both parents must be U.S. citizens.
Since it is known Obama’s father was a British subject from Kenya, there have been dozens of lawsuits filed since before he was elected challenging his eligibility to hold the office of President of the United States, but none of the lawsuits have had a full hearing; all have been dismissed on technicalities or put aside. This hearing is significant because it is the first time a hearing will be held on the legal definition of “natural born” citizen. If the judge holds by the decision of the Supreme Court in Minor v. Happersett, it could bring serious reappraisal to Obama’s claim to be eligible to be President.
So far courts and judges have run from having to make a ruling on Obama’s eligibility for office. However, if Judge Lewis is not satisfied with Obama’s lawyers’ explanations and finds that Obama does not meet the requirements under the U.S. Constitution, the challenge to his eligibility may finally be heard and will undoubtably end up in the U.S. Supreme Court.
A 1991 promotional booklet from Obama’s literary agent clearly states that Obama was “born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia and Hawaii.” The agency was promoting what was to be Obama’s first book, Journeys in Black and White, a effort he later abandoned. The booklet came from Acton & Dystel who was representing him at that time.
Acton and Dystel have gone their separate ways, but Dystel still lists Obama among her client list and claimed Obama was born in Kenya until 2007 when he announced his run for president. It was then changed to read “born in Hawaii.” Acton spoke with Brietbart News and confirmed the details of the listing for Obama. Dystel refused to respond to inquires about the booklet and the statements published.
Though intriguing, and yet another piece in the puzzle that is Obama, the mainstream media’s and Congress’ refusual to investigate Obama’s background and birthplace continue to create a potentially diasterous constitutional crisis. If it is true that Obama was born in Kenya, as the African media has long acknowledged, then he is not and never has been eligibe to be President of the United States. That would mean that everything he has done and signed while acting as President is illegal and fraudulent.
It is amazing that these questions have gone on this long without being resolved. The citizens of the United States deserve to know whether or not Obama is constitutionally eligible for office or not, but he has steadfastly refused to release his personal and college information, and the “birth certificate” that was released was a poorly photoshopped creation. After this long, the consequences could be severe for America as he has relentlessly pushed his agenda on the nation. This issue needs to be settled once and for all.