Announcement

**bsteadman** · 01-28-2013, 03:33 PM

Free Republic is running a thread titled, 'Team Arpaio: New Evidence Will Convince Greatest Skeptic Document Is 100% Forgery', which was started 1/27/2013 by 'Seizethecarp'

The thread references the 1/27/2013 Birther Report article (unattributed/Mike Zullo) - http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogs...-evidence.html

View the complete Free Republic thread at:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-.../2982344/posts

The following is an excerpt from COMMENT #18, by 'Seizethecarp', in the thread:

In my opinion as a (retired) Certified Fraud Examiner (CFE) Zullo made the case before the election “beyond a reasonable” doubt that the crime of forgery had been committed (sufficient for a grand jury indictment).

Arpaio has been very conservative with his claims.

First he claimed “probable cause” of forgery.

Second he claimed “beyond a reasonable doubt” there is forgery.

Third (currently being set up by Zullo using Carl Gallups to create media buzz for an impending revelation) Arpaio is now claiming “beyond ALL doubt” there was forgery.

As a true LEO channeling his inner “Joe Friday” Apaio has stuck to “just the facts, Ma’am” and NEVER claimed that Obama himself personally constructed the forged BC. Arpaio has never claimed evidence of that although the implications for Barry are obvious.

So even though is SEEMS like this new claim is just another in a long series of equally failed duds, I view each of the three above claims (assuming the third new claim is as conclusive as claimed) to have been proper and sequentially significant.

The problem has always been with the MSM and GOP-e and Congress and SCOTUS hiding under the covers from the political chaos domestically and internationally should Barry be revealed to have personally forged his ID documents regardless what he was hiding with that forgery (birth location?...paternity?)

The following is an excerpt from COMMENT #27, by 'Godebert' in the thread. (links given in the thread)

The Law of Nations or the Principles of Natural Law (1758) -

The Biggest Cover-up in American History -

Supreme Court cases that cite “natural born Citizen” as one born on U.S. soil to citizen parents:

The Venus, 12 U.S. 8 Cranch 253 253 (1814)

Vattel, who, though not very full to this point, is more explicit and more satisfactory on it than any other whose work has fallen into my hands, says: “The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives or indigenes are those born in the country of parents who are citizens. Society not being able to subsist and to perpetuate itself but by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights.

Shanks v. Dupont, 28 U.S. 3 Pet. 242 242 (1830)

Ann Scott was born in South Carolina before the American revolution, and her father adhered to the American cause and remained and was at his death a citizen of South Carolina. There is no dispute that his daughter Ann, at the time of the Revolution and afterwards, remained in South Carolina until December, 1782. Whether she was of age during this time does not appear. If she was, then her birth and residence might be deemed to constitute her by election a citizen of South Carolina. If she was not of age, then she might well be deemed under the circumstances of this case to hold the citizenship of her father, for children born in a country, continuing while under age in the family of the father, partake of his national character as a citizen of that country. Her citizenship, then, being prima facie established, and indeed this is admitted in the pleadings, has it ever been lost, or was it lost before the death of her father, so that the estate in question was, upon the descent cast, incapable of vesting in her? Upon the facts stated, it appears to us that it was not lost and that she was capable of taking it at the time of the descent cast.

Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (1857)

The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As society cannot perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their parents, and succeed to all their rights.' Again: 'I say, to be of the country, it is necessary to be born of a person who is a citizen; for if he be born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country. . . .

Minor v. Happersett , 88 U.S. 162 (1875)

The Constitution does not in words say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first.

United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898)

At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children, born in a country of parents who were its citizens, became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.

Perkins v. Elg, 307 U.S. 325 (1939),

Was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States that a child born in the United States to naturalized parents on U.S. soil is a natural born citizen and that the child's natural born citizenship is not lost if the child is taken to and raised in the country of the parents' origin, provided that upon attaining the age of majority, the child elects to retain U.S. citizenship "and to return to the United States to assume its duties." Not only did the court rule that she did not lose her native born Citizenship but it upheld the lower courts decision that she is a "natural born Citizen of the United States" because she was born in the USA to two naturalized U.S. Citizens.

But the Secretary of State, according to the allegation of the bill of complaint, had refused to issue a passport to Miss Elg 'solely on the ground that she had lost her native born American citizenship.' The court below, properly recognizing the existence of an actual controversy with the defendants [307 U.S. 325, 350] (Aetna Life Ins. Co. v. Haworth, 300 U.S. 227 , 57 S.Ct. 461, 108 A.L.R. 1000), declared Miss Elg 'to be a natural born citizen of the United States' (99 F.2d 414) and we think that the decree should include the Secretary of State as well as the other defendants. The decree in that sense would in no way interfere with the exercise of the Secretary's discretion with respect to the issue of a passport but would simply preclude the denial of a passport on the sole ground that Miss Elg had lost her American citizenship."

The Supreme Court of the United States has never applied the term “natural born citizen” to any other category than “those born in the country of parents who are citizens thereof”.

The Biggest Cover-up in American History -

The following is an excerpt from COMMENT #42, by 'Seizethecarp' in the thread:

On the taped interview at about 9 minutes Carl Gallups asks Mike Zullo to validate Gallups previous dramatic pre-Christmas announcement that something big would imminently be revealed...but got derailed at the last minute and Zullo confirms that. IIRC a significant public official in a position to do something constitutionally was supposed to go public. It seems obvious that the public official backed out.

At around 14 minutes Zullo explains a possible reason for that public official clamming up and also Gen Powell’s sudden interest in denouncing GOP birthers as racists when he says he believes that the NSA is bugging his phone calls (Gallups basically says “Do ya think???).

Zullo explains his suspicion in so many words that NSA or some other agency (FBI/SS/DOH all regarding POTUS true identity as a matter of national security) are bugging him and that the “hugh and series” new evidence that the posse has now uncovered is so damaging that Powell has been enlisted to get in front of any impending revelations.

I posted this exact explanation for Powell’s behavior on FR at the time, i.e. Powell betrays an extreme fear in Barry’s camp on the issue and an attempt at preemption of a known threat. Sunday talk show time is priceless and everything Powell said was doubtless cleared with and prompted by Barry’s national security team.

Powell’s precious personally invested racial triumph of Barry’s election would be destroyed and Powell’s own betrayal of the Constitution would be revealed to be feckless and traitorous if Arpaio and Zullo succeeded in getting the MSM to seriously examine new evidence.

Rather than go with a big media event, like the one right before Breitbart died, or right before before “Where’s the BC” was released and the forgery revealed and OBL killed as a distraction, Arpaio and Zullo are keeping public announcement of the actual evidence quiet.
...................................... .

**bsteadman** · 01-28-2013, 04:08 PM

- From one of the links giving in COMMENT #27, by 'Godebert', in the thread:

The Biggest Cover-up in American History

Amil Imani Journal
Our Archive - By: Amil Imani with James H. Hyde
29 Apr 2012

Excerpt:

In our previous article, “Exonerating President Obama”, we noted that the only Supreme Court precedent for the meaning of the term “natural born Citizen” in Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution appears to be the Judge Harlan dissent in the United States v. Wong Kim Ark case. In collaboration with a constitutional attorney, we have examined the subject matter further.

We believe that to understand the complexity of this issue it will be essential to have an understanding of the place that the concepts of “Natural Law” and the book titled Law of Nations had obtained in the run up to the War of Independence with Great Britain. These concepts of natural law were commonly used throughout the colonies to explain, defend and justify the colonists’ contentions in our dispute with Great Britain. Our investigation leaves no doubt that the Founding Fathers of our nation clearly understood the meaning of the term “natural born Citizen” and its relation to Natural Law and Law of Nations. When you have finished studying our research you will also understand that these terms were used in the Declaration of Independence as well as in our Constitution and in the constitutions of a large number of states written at the same time as the Constitutional Convention was in session.

This background understanding will clarify why the delegates to the 1787 Constitutional Convention elected to include “natural born Citizen” in the eligibility requirements for the Office of the President of our nation and what it truly means.

In this article we will prove beyond all doubt that Barack Hussein Obama is not a natural born Citizen and is thus ineligible to be President of the United States.

Citations following the textual part of this article are not simply to provide you the references that support our assertions. They also provide you citations to reading material that will help you understand the 1770 period in our History. To understand our reasoning, it is important that the reader understands the Colonial people, and especially the Founders with their educational backgrounds, their political fears and the nation’s interrelationship with other nations at the time leading up to the War of Independence. In this short article we could not provide all those dimensions, but we hope the reader will study the references to fully understand the time period during which these things took place. Unfortunately there are citations to books which are not available to download online, so to get the whole picture, the reader will need to find a library to borrow the needed materials.

1. In the time frame of 1740—1790, “Natural Law” had grown from the 17th century studies of the early enlightenment philosophers (Grotius, Pufendorf, Rousseau, Locke, de Wolf) into a reason-based concept that was based on the fact that all humans have inherent animal qualities that contribute to laws worldwide that are essentially the same.

2. Emer de Vattel, a Swiss scholar, published a now world famous work titled Law of Nations in French in 1758. The Vattel work built upon the earlier philosophy of Natural Law, especially that of de Wolf. But what made Vattel’s work so famous was his adoption of a more modern and easier-to-understand format, which was written like a scientific thesis. It started out with definitions that were worked into the initial textual material in a manner very different from the heavy, incomprehensible writing style of the earlier philosophers. His work is written like a modern do-it-yourself project where he captured the entire history and essence of Natural Law but mixed it into a means to build a new nation based on a new type of constitution or a way of establishing an acceptable set of rules for running a nation in a common sense manner based on the experience of political science as it developed over the centuries.
..........................................

View the complete post at:

http://amilimani.com/2012/04/the-big...rican-history/

**bsteadman** · 01-28-2013, 04:39 PM

The following is an excerpt from COMMENT #63, by 'butterdezillion', in the thread:

............................................

I think some people are waking up and realizing that having a foreign enemy combatant in our White House is not a joke.

I explained some of why I haven’t given up, at http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/ne...s?page=113#113 *

I think Obama’s downright scary moves are catching the attention of people who formerly thought people like me were crazy. All along we’ve been saying this stuff was coming. And now they see that it is. Now that they’ve seen what Obama is doing to the military, to the 2nd amendment, to the border, to the “War on Terror”, etc.... it’s not so crazy when people like me say that the guy is a foreign enemy combatant who was put in place by Soros’ communist-Islamist alliance to destroy America. These days it seems more like a statement of what everybody can see.

IOW, Obama himself is providing the evidence that lots of people were never willing to accept from me. Now that he’s shown them who he is, they may not resist so much when I or others like me point out the evidence we’ve known all along.

... * I’ve been fighting on in the hopes that I’m wrong. And because I believe that miracles can happen.

But I think that as economists are saying that an economic collapse is inevitable, Soros’ threat becomes less potent. And Soros and all the big guys are buying up gold and land like crazy. They know it’s coming. So preparing for an economic collapse is reality even without the stuff I’ve said.

But the reality that an economic collapse is inevitable - together with the extreme moves that Obama is making right now that show his real goal is to destroy the US and our Constitution - might be enough to convince people like Rand Paul that they cannot prevent an economic collapse from coming even if they appease Soros, and that it is actually in our best interests for the economic collapse to come sooner rather than later, when Obama has disarmed the US citizenry and gotten rid of all the military and law enforcement folks who still believe in the Constitution. If economic collapse is inevitable, it would be better for it to happen now than 4 years from now.

It would have been a lot easier to resist Hitler BEFORE the Night of the Long Knives than after. And the Night of the Long Knives is in process right now. So now is the time to act, if America is to have any chance of surviving the inevitable economic collapse.

This is all scary stuff. My husband hates hearing about all this.

There’s more too. Eric Holder has been holding the door open for Hamas and Hezbollah operatives that were flown into Venezuela on direct unchecked flights from Iran. We have no idea what those people might have brought with them from Iran and smuggled into the US, but Saddam Hussein, Bashar Assad, and Iran had an agreement that if any one of them’s WMD’s were in danger of being discovered/confiscated by foreign invaders, they were to be shipped to the most secure of those countries. Shortly before we invaded Iraq Saddam’s WMD’s were shipped to Syria. Now that Assad is in Obama’s sights (to be taken over by extreme Islamists instead), those chemical and biological WMD’s - both Saddam’s and Assad’s - may well have been shipped to Iran, where they would be available to the Hamas and Hezbollah operatives that were direct-flighted to Venezuela.

See, Chavez is an ally of Ahmadinejad. It’s that communist-Islamist alliance that I’ve been talking about. Chavez has agreed to let Iran launch missiles from Venezuela, which gives Iran the capability of hitting the US with an EMP (which is the altitude that Iran’s test missiles have been aiming for, if I understand correctly), and Chavez has also allowed these Iranian flights to come in unchecked - basically provided a beachhead to this continent from which Iranian operatives can travel into the US with their WMD’s. Because Eric Holder has been arming the drug cartels that have been smuggling in terrorists, as well as suing Arizona to make sure that illegals can’t be either detected or deported, we have no idea what WMD’s may have been smuggled in and positioned in every state capital in the country, waiting for a signal for the (most probably) biological WMD attacks. Which guns can’t fight.

While the media has kept us all busy piddling around over an election that Obama was going to steal anyway, the Soros alliance has been going for the jugular, which is the first phase of an actual communist coup. The election stuff is lingering demoralization, but the real systems that have to be captured in a coup - economy, defense, and foreign relations - have been systematically infiltrated and set up for the final coup while people were distracted. Obama’s treachery is far larger than ANYBODY is willing to say, for fear of being called a crazy person.

So we also need to be prepared for an EMP attack and/or biological warfare.

Again, though, we don’t know whether or how much of this has happened, and the sooner we oust Obama the greater chance that SOMETHING of America can survive it. And that’s what our leaders need to know. They need to know that they only hurt us by waiting this out. Soros’ threat to collapse the US economy could be the way to have this stuff happen on OUR timetable rather than when Obama/Soros know that everything is all set and America can’t win. The longer Obama is allowed to rot the system and stack up America’s enemies against us, the less strength we will have to fight. It is better for the doo-doo to hit the fan before Obama does more damage and gains more strength. Our hope is that Obama has bared his teeth too soon, and the coup has gone too slowly so that people have this time window where they can wake up and fight back before Obama has us totally surrounded.

I don’t want to scare people, but it seems like that’s the only thing that creates the urgency that we need right now. The people who need this urgency are the leaders. But the only voices they hear are the MSM, which would call somebody like me a crazy that no politician should ever listen to. That’s how Obama/Soros has effectively disabled the alarm system that would keep our leaders awake. Only a massive outcry from the people will be loud enough for them to hear us, and that’s what we need. Hopefully the attempted gun grab has woken some people up and they will seriously consider the critical situation we are in as a result of a foreign enemy combatant in our White HOuse.

And we need to remember to pray. If America survives this, it will almost certainly be because of divine intervention. Another reason they are attacking religious liberty.

**bsteadman** · 01-28-2013, 05:00 PM

The following is COMMENT #67, by 'butterdezillion', in the thread:

Zullo hasn’t gotten a dime from this, and has spent plenty on it. His motivation is justice and truth.

The time to present the evidence is when there is a place to put it. The evidence released thus far - from all of us - is to show people there is definitely reason to initiate an investigation. The investigation that can COMPEL production of the records that would settle this thing once for all has to be a federal investigation. It can’t be Eric Holder. A pretty good case can be made that Eric Holder (or one of his underlings, or Janet Napolitano) actually MADE the HDOH create a totally fabricated long-form for Obama (based on 4 different Aug 1961 BC#’s from the HDOH not working with either of the 2 contradictory numbering methods described by past and current spokesmen for the HDOh). Three of those BC’s with altered BC#’s come from HDOH documents with blatant signs of forgery done by somebody at the HDOH.

IOW, if this is going to go anywhere we need Congress to appoint an independent investigator/prosecutor.

The calculations regarding when to release evidence are necessarily tied in with how it will impact the ability to get Congress to appoint an independent federal investigator. That tension is always there, between needing to keep evidence quiet for on-going leads and needing to get attention to the issue so Cognress or other authorities) will act. I’ve lost friendships because of differences in opinion on where that fine line is.

I understand the weariness and skepticism. Bear in mind that Obama has agents of disinformation planting stuff out there too - including the HDOH itself, as I’ve shown on my blog - and this stuff is messy to figure out. If the big players in this issue (including the conservative media) had not been threatened into silence, we’d have had an open-and-closed conclusion to this already. Nobody had to go over the ins and outs of Al Capone’s tax evasion. Nobody had to check all the numbers against each other and get into all the minutiae - because the system did it like they were supposed to. In this case, though, the system has been taken hostage. The books are being changed even as we look at them. This is a whole ‘nother ballgame that makes Al Capone look like a fairy princess serving teacakes. It’s frustrating for us all, but if we realize the variables being dealt with it will help us get through it.

The following is an excerpt from COMMENT #86, by 'Seizethecarp', in the thread:

Zullo claims to have new even more damning evidence, evidence that may not have been investigated to the satisfaction of Arpaio prior to the election.

I read events prior to the election as indicating that Arpaio and also Trump were told by the GOP-e to stand down before the election because the GOP-e thought they were going to win and that the public could not be so stupid as to reelect Barry.

The following is COMMENT #125, by 'bluecat6', in the thread:

Lets be sure to cite this fact.

The state of Hawaii has never, repeat never, directly released any record in this matter. Never.

The 2008 COLB magically appeared as a key feature in the ‘Fight The Smears’ blog in June 2008. It was also release simultaneously by multiple politically operative blogs.

Even a representative from Hawaii said of the image and physical paper presented by Fact Check in August of 2008 that ‘we may never know what this an image of.’

So Hawaii has never made a claim of authenticity of that document. Ironically, when the WH released the LFBC image in April of 2011 they also posted a black and white image of the infamous COLB. That image was apparently a browser print of the document from the SNOPES website. The footer information at the bottom of the document shows that. If the 2008 COLB was authentic and in safe keeping why was in not re-presented in some manner? Does that specific ‘state-issued’ document still exist? It seems it would have been kept in safe keeping. So for that document it is simple - just present the ORIGINAL ACTUAL document and have officials from Hawaii authenticate it as authentic along with any type of backup that it was actually issued in 2007. A very simple task. Yet never done.

Fast forward to April 2011. The LFBC posted on the WH website is an Adobe pdf electronic file. It was not released by the state of Hawaii. The director of the Health Department did apparently create a cover letter indicating that something was provided - to attorneys from the White House. Assuming the letter is authentic and factually correct what was given to the WH attorneys has not been confirmed. In fact, Hawaii officials have gone out their way in responses to states in 2012 to avoid confirming the Adobe electronic file is a replication of an actual, authentic state-issued document.

So the first fact is - nothing has ever, ever been released with the unqualified and full support of the state of Hawaii.

No actual state-issued document has ever been presented to a court. Never.

Confirming a document as authentic from a digital image is, as properly noted, imppossible. YOU MUST HAVE THE PHYSICAL ACTUAL DOCUMENT TO VALIDATE IS AUTHENTICITY. But is possible to show that a digital image is not a reproduction of any authentic document. This is not difficult. And it has been done for both the COLB and LFBC. Both are clearly not images of official Hawaii documents.

The anti-fraud mechanisms in most state-issue documents are made to hinder the easy reproduction of copy of ACTUAL DOCUMENT. Features that good state document should have include: a) ‘secure-void’ that show the word ‘void’ when a document is photocopied in a standard copier (btw, no present on Hawaii documents apparently), b) micro lettering to include words in what appears as lines (also not used by Hawaii), c) Detailed borders with very intricate designs that do not reproduce well (used by Hawaii at one time as evidenced by the PeterBoy COLB, but not used now), d) watermarks that do not show via photocopying or scanning (also not used by Hawaii now) and e) embossed seals that - by design - do NOT show up or barely show up when photocopied or scanned (the ‘raised seal’ on Hawaii document is an easy to copy de-embossed pin die.), and f)security paper that has a multi-color, unique background (Hawaii uses cheap, easily available paper with a common background.). For an example of a document that does include some of the features simply see Bobby Jindals BC document. The differences are very apparent.

The Hawaii documents are almost designed for enabling fraud. They simple in their construct and simple to manipulate after they are digitized.

But without the actual document one can not say anything presented is authentic. One MUST have the document. And an actual physical document is never come forward.

**bsteadman** · 02-01-2013, 01:50 PM

The following is COMMENT #194, by 'Seizethecarp' in the thread:

I sent $$ to Taitz until there were claims that I found to be credible that she had asked two witnesses to give false testimony and also she went off on a federal judge in an extremely foolish and legally suicidal manner.

Although I am not an attorney, I spent 5 years in civil court in Texas contesting custody and I picked up enough law to realize that, in fact, Taitz does NOT understand our Constitution or the difference between civil and criminal law.

The fact that the CA Bar has not disbarred her is proof of the corruption and crony-oriented protection of that bar.

Yes, at times simply on the matter of explaining the original meaning of NBC, Taitz has articulated the issue well on TV, but her manic persona and incompetent legal filings pushing the wrong claims in the wrong court with the wrong plaintiff undermines the credibility of “birthers” (constitutionalists) and has invited nationwide derision of same.

Also, nearly every time another activist gets in front of a judge anywhere in the country, Taitz zooms in and tries to grab the microphone and spotlight almost always with a half-baked court filing as well.

Bottom line: Taitz is not helping true patriots use the courts given to we the people in our Constitution, she is undermining use of the courts.

The following is COMMENT #198, by 'Seizethecarp', in the thread:

The pattern of evasion by Onaka (substituting “matches” v. “identical”) is, IMO consistent with what Zullo and Arpaio have charged is a conspiracy in HI (DOH and Governors) to conceal the fact that prior to April 2011 that was no paper “original” Certificate of Live Birth in HI, as Abercrombie had said in January 2011.

I am suspecting that when no LFBC was found and the pressure from Corsi and Trump was mounting the conspirators allowed POTUS Obama to “find” a “copy” of his “original 1961 LFBC” most likely forged as a pdf in Chicago.

This 2011 forged pdf was then transported to HI DOH and placed in the vital records archive with a sworn statement from Obama that this was a “true and correct copy” of the BC that Ayers referred as being found with his immunization records to when he wrote Dreams for Barry.

Doesn’t HI law allow subsequent provision of “proof” of an HI birth if it is sworn to?

There could even be a secret “nunc pro tunc” (now for then) executive order signed by Governor Abercrombie directing that the 2011 pdf from Chicago be deemed an “original” that had been lost. The fake pdf would gain legal treatment as an original in the same way that a modified adoption certificate would be.

Given this hypothetical, Onaka could truthfully say that an original vital record is in the archive...originally created in 2011 in Chicago and deemed to be legally a 1961 document nunc pro tunc in April 2011.

Remember that Corsi’s PI in HI claimed that he had a mole in HI DOH who said that up until April 2011 there was no LFBC for Barry, but then suddenly one appeared in the archive. Then Barry’s personal lawyer flies out from DC to witness this magically appearing BC getting copied and certified (with a deniable Onaka signature stamp).

The Federal Rules of Evidence allow for cross-examination of the custodian of records, Onaka, as a challenge to prima facie acceptance if there is evidence that the record is not genuine, IIRC (IANAL). But any such cross-examination an only occur in a court and Barry has NEVER “produced” his HI LFBC in any court obviously to evade any testimony on the record as to the provenance of the WH pdf LFBC or the alleged “original” LFBC in possession of HI DOH or any comparison of the two.

State secretaries of state can only request certification from a co-equal state, they are not entitled to cross-examine of challenge the prima facie veracity of documents that another state certifies. Each is entitled to full faith and credit acceptance from other states, unlike federal courts. This convenient fact is, of course, known to Barry and his Chicago, HI and DNC co-conspirators.

Again, all of the above would be consistent with Zullo and Arpaio’s claim that HI officials are actively conspiring to defeat examination of the HI vital record in a court of law.

The following is COMMENT#208, by 'Seizethecarp', in the thread:

“They had the BC ready; I believe it was based on the same document that was inserted into the passport file in March of 2008. But the HDOH Director wouldn’t allow the deed to be done.”

- (quote from COMMENT #207, by 'butterdezillion)

Sounds about right!

The following is COMMENT #209, by 'Seizethecarp', in the thread:

“When Corley opened up the envelope and saw what she had they entered panic mode. They had to do the layers to get rid of the LATE and ALTERED stamps and had to paste in the certifying elements from what the HDOH had sent. In the process they failed to notice the TXE and smiley face, and they forgot to flatten the file.”

- (quote from COMMENT #207, by 'butterdezillion')

I like it!

The following is COMMENT #210, by 'Seizethecarp', in the thread:

“And now we have 2 legal documents confirming that the White House image is a forgery and one legal document which confirms that Obama’s HI BC is legally non-valid.” -

(quote from COMMENT #207, by 'butterdezillion)

My assessment as a retired CFE is that your entire scenario is consistent broadly with Zullo and Arpaio’s evidence to date and their claim that there is a criminal conspiracy in HI.

Unfortunately no “controlling authority” (court or congress) agrees so far with your characterization of the documents as actually confirming anything from an evidentiary standpoint. IMO, nothing can be confirmed regarding the originals without access to the actual originals. So far the collusion of Hawaii and Chicago has prevented that access.

As I have said all along, only conclusive additional proof such as proof that Barry was born in Kenya or a confession of the LFBC forger or an HI co-conspirator could break the protective ring around the HI DOH archive. - (bold and color emphasis added)

Zullo now claims to have such proof which could convince the greatest skeptic. I hope he is right, and I expect your analysis to be very close to the truth.

Announcement

Team Arpaio: New Evidence Will Convince Greatest Skeptic Document Is 100% Forgery

Team Arpaio: New Evidence Will Convince Greatest Skeptic Document Is 100% Forgery

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment