The Vote You Cast – Was It One Of Millions Cast Aside?

November 13th, 2012

Every American who cast a vote for Mitt Romney is entitled to demand proof that the vote s/he cast was properly counted and reported.
Probable cause of massive voter fraud – and the highly fraudulent reports of votes cast - is already established: dramatically higher [statistically impossible] turnout than there are registered voters in precincts across America, all of which went for Obama; dramatic reported drop in Republican turnout; 5+ million ‘missing’ Republican votes; zero votes reported for Romney in precincts in multiple states; screens visibly flipping Romney votes to Obama; dramatic unpredicted ‘swing to Obama’ of Independents; dramatic drop of white votes reported [15 million]; 80-100% Obama results in many precincts; highly suspicious activity by elections personnel on Election Day; reported ‘loss’ of states predicted to go Romney; dramatic reduction in crowds at Obama events, from the Democratic National Convention, onward; need for Obama Campaign to flow ‘un-traceable’ overseas funds into campaign coffers as summer progressed into autumn; general consensus that Romney won the Debates; huge enthusiasm for Romney; refutation of historically reliable Presidential Election Outcome models; results that flew in the face of innumerable political experts; and more.
So. I ask you, Romney/Ryan voters: what happened to the vote that you, in good faith, fully protected by The United States Constitution, cast for the candidates of your choice?
Was it one of millions quietly, sneakily, ‘invisibly’ trashed in the digital system, callously coded to take your vote, and diabolically twist it into a vote for Obama?
Did the vote you cast wind up being illegally counted to ‘elect’ the very man you voted to defeat?
Only a Forensic Investigation of the voting machines, accompanied by a certified CPA Audit of voters / votes cast, will tell you what fate befell your vote.
Demand it.
Fake elections are the hallmark of petty dictators. They take away our right to have the government we choose, as guaranteed by The United States Constitution.
It’s not supposed to be this way in America.
It shouldn’t be this way in America.
Don’t let them get away with it.
Your life depends on insisting upon independent investigation of the 2012 Elections. For, if they did this, and get away with it, what will they do next?

Old Models Of Voter Fraud-Detection Ignore The Main Crime Scene

November 10th, 2012

Given the sophistication of techniques utilized by evil-doers to effect Election Theft, traditional methods of struggle against voter fraud overlook the main crime scene: the voting machine.
Not only does vote-theft occur largely ‘invisibly’; with digital recording and reporting, evil-doers have the ability to also fraudulently report party turnout.
Without the power of digital fraud, Election Theft would be far more difficult to accomplish. With digital fraud, it’s quite simple. Code is carefully calculated to produce whatever results it is told to produce.
Studying the reported 2012 Election Results, Obama’s words took on a whole new metaphor: “SPREAD THE THEFT AROUND”.
A Forensic Investigation of the voting machines, accompanied by a certified CPA Audit of voters / votes cast, will definitively prove that the reported 2012 Election Results are fraudulent through and through. They do not reflect what actually happened.
We must fight back with tools that detect and expose the major felony election crimes everywhere they occurred: not just in the registrations, or the votes cast, but in the caverns of the voting machines.

The Math Is Simple: 3% Fraud Means OBAMA LOST

November 10th, 2012

It’s really quite simple. With 120,223,236 votes reportedly cast in the 2012 Election, if 3% of those votes are disqualified as fraudulent, OBAMA LOST.
Obama’s reported margin is 3,202,936 votes.
3,606,697 or 3% of the reported votes cast is all we need to verify as fraudulent.
With reports of outrageously high votes cast – up to more than 140% of registered voters voting in many precincts, ticking off 3,606,697 as fraudulent Obama votes is a breeze.
My, my, what a little bit of voter / vote cast verification will do.



http://youtu.be/VhQD1IrrNrI

Is Putative President Barack Hussein Obama II Really Bari Shabazz, Fugitive from Justice For 21 Years Following An Auto Accident in Honolulu County, Hawaii on March 12, 1982?



By Mario Apuzzo
November 7, 2011

Editor's Note" Re-posted with permission of The Post & Email.

http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2011/11/is-putative-president-barack-hussein.html

On November 2, 2011, I published an article entitled and asking the question, “Is Barack Hussein Obama II Really Bâri′ M. Shabazz, Born October 28, 1959 in New York City? ”, accessed at
http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2011/11/is-barack-hussein-obama-ii-really-bari.html. The basis of the question that I asked came from a November 2, 2011 breaking story published by Martha Trowbridge entitled, “Bâri′, Barry, Barack, accessed at http://terribletruth.wordpress.com/2011/11/02/bari%e2%80%b2-barry-barack/. In her article, Ms. Trowbridge’s contends that putative President Barack Hussein Obama II’s real name is Bâri′ M. Shabazz and that his date of birth is October 28, 1959, and his social security number is 084-54-5926. She says he was born in New York City. She adds that he was born with the name Bâri′ M. Shabazz. She also says that to be able to enter the political world, Bâri′ M. Shabazz had to change his birth identity and take on a new one which became Barack Hussein Obama II.

Ms. Trowbridge says: “We know this: Bâri′ M. Shabazz was assigned social security number 084-54-5926, issued in New York, in 1974.”

Ms. Trowbridge has found that the Social Security Death Index shows: “SHABAZZ, B M 28 Oct 1959 Aug 1994 (V) 34 (PE) (none specified) New York 084-54-5926.” From this, one would think that Bâri′ died in August 1994. But no, Ms. Trowbridge informs that only his identity was made “dead.” The real person continued to live and that person became “Barack Hussein Obama II.” Note how she explains that the “death” of Bâri′ was only reported by someone (“V” or “Verified”) and that the person did not present any valid death certificate (“P” or “Proof).

What’s more Ms. Trowbridge explains that “[o]nce in the federal system, the [death] record was flagged as ‘PE’, meaning that an inconsistency exists between what was reported and what was recorded in the government’s files.”

Finally, and the most shocking part of her report is that Ms. Trowbridge contends that Bâri′ M. Shabazz is the biological son of Malcolm X. Hence, if Barack Hussein Obama II is the same person as Bâri′ M. Shabazz, that would make putative President Obama the biological son of Malcolm X.

On November 4, 2011, an anonymous source emailed me something very interesting. To substantiate the content of the email, the writer directed me to go to a web site of the Judiciary for the State of Hawaii and to do a search of cases that have been disposed of by that State’s traffic courts. The anonymous source had done just that and so the person provided me with the information which that traffic court shows on its web site.

I did go to the Hawaii traffic court’s web site which is called eCourt Kokua and I was eventually able to confirm the information that the anonymous source sent me. Access to the court’s web set may be gained by going to http://jimspss1.courts.state.hi.us:8080/eCourt/ECC/ECCDisclaimer.iface;jsessionid=FDFF513AA90109AC4375A7CBE7C8AF36. Once at the site, click “Agree” to the terms and conditions. Then click, “Search for case details by case ID or citation number.” Once there, enter at the prompt, Case ID or Citation Number(*): 1193041MO and hit Search.” The following report appears:







What do these reports say and what questions does they raise? The Case ID is 1193041 MO. The name of the case is State v. Bari Shabazz which was a non-jury case. The case is characterized as a “Traffic Crime,” with a “REPORT number W50100.” The offense occurred on March 12, 1982. The charging police officer is Duane Masayuki Espinueva. The event is characterized as an “Accident Major.” The charge was driving without a valid driver’s license. The case was first filed on Tuesday, March 16, 1982, in the First Circuit, located at Kane’Ohe Division. I checked and this court is located at
45-939 Pookela Street, Kaneohe, HI 96744
. The case was continued to April 5, 1982.

The record also shows that Bari Shabazz was supposed to be arraigned and enter a plea on April 5, 1982, at 8:30 a.m., in Kane’ohe Traffic Court, Courtroom B, at the Kane’ohe Division. The case was continued to May 5, 1982.

On May 5, 1982, at 8:00 a.m., Bari Shabazz was supposed to again be arraigned and enter his plea in the same court room. He apparently did not appear and so the court issued a bench warrant on May 5, 1982, bearing number “BWO 050582.” It appears as though the court set bail at $25.00. The record also shows the entry of “HONDA,” maybe meaning that Bari Shabazz was driving a Honda or that the prosecutor’s name was “HONDA.” The next entry is for May 5, 1982, at 8:30 a.m. The court ordered the “AP” (maybe meaning accused person) to show proof of “NEW YORK DRIVER’S LICENSE.”

The report then shows that the prosecutor on April 9, 2003, filed an ex parte motion to recall the bench warrant and announced on the record “nolle prosequi.” This is a Latin phrase which is formally entered into a court record which means that the prosecutor in a criminal case “will no further prosecute” the case. The motion was listed as “NP [nolle prosequi] 040903.” So, the charge was dismissed upon the prosecutor’s ex parte “Nolle Prosequi” motion made on April 9, 2003. “Ex parte” means that only one side made the application which in this case was the prosecutor.

The final entry was for October 30, 2005, at 8:00 a.m., when the court noted that a $-0- balance was owed, but said “Pls check.”

This information raises the following questions:

1. Is the Bari Shabazz named in this traffic court report the same person Ms. Trowbridge calls “Bâri′ M. Shabazz” in her report and who is listed as “B M Shabazz” in the Social Security Death Index? If it is the same person, then that puts New Yorker Bâri′ M. Shabazz in Honolulu County, Hawaii, on March 12, 1982. Using a date of birth of October 28, 1959, this would have made Bâri′ M. Shabazz 22 years old at the time that he had this major automobile accident in Honolulu County.

2. The accident is characterized as a major accident. Chances are that Bari Shabazz and/or any passenger was taken to a local hospital in Honolulu County due to his/their injuries. If Bari Shabazz suffered any major injuries or laceration, the physical signs of those injuries and/or lacerations could still be present somewhere on his body if he is still alive.

3. Bari Shabazz was charged with driving without a driver’s license. The court ordered him to show proof of his New York driver’s license. Hence, Bari Shabazz must have told the charging police officer or the court that he did have a driver’s license and that it was one issued by the State of New York. Hence, Bari Shabazz must have been a resident of the State of New York. Note that Ms. Trowbridge said that Bâri′ M. Shabazz was born in New York City. Also, what was Bari Shabazz doing driving in Hawaii with what should have been a New York driver’s license? Was he now living in Hawaii? Was he there on vacation? Was he there visiting family or friends? Was he going to school there?

4. On April 9, 2003, the prosecutor filed a motion to recall the bench warrant, to terminate prosecution, and close the case. Why would this case come to the attention of some local prosecutor 21 years following the initial violation of March 12, 1982? A local prosecutor does not just go looking for cases that are 21 years old and file motions to dismiss those cases. Someone must have asked that local prosecutor to dismiss the case so that the arrest warrant was cleared from the court’s and nation’s computer system.

5. Ms. Trowbridge shows that Bâri′ M. Shabazz, according to the Social Security Death Index, died in August 1994. If Bâri′ M. Shabazz is the same person as is listed in this Hawaii auto accident as Bari Shabazz, why would someone care to recall his arrest warrant on April 9, 2003 or almost 9 years after his death? Surely, it could not be Bâri′ M. Shabazz who was interested since he had been dead since 1994. On the other hand, if he was not dead he would be interested.

6. On October 30, 2005, or 23 years following the date of the accident of March 12, 1982, the court again re-visits the case of Bari Shabazz, noting that he did not owe the court any money but to “Pls. check.” Why would the court again concern itself with this case on that date, especially if Bari Shabazz was dead since 1994?

7. So, is the Bari Shabazz named in this Hawaii traffic court report the same person Ms. Trowbridge calls “Bâri′ M. Shabazz” in her report and who is listed as “B M Shabazz” in the Social Security Death Index? That question surely merits an investigation. If he is, then that puts the New-York-born Bâri′ M. Shabazz in Honolulu County, Hawaii, the alleged birth place and once place of residence of putative President, Barack Hussein Obama II. Given what Ms. Trowbridge has concluded in her report, that is a circumstantial piece of evidence that is surely worth investigating. What also supports Ms. Trowbridge’s position that Bâri′ M. Shabazz really did not die in August 1994 and that he is still alive as Barack Hussein Obama II is that the traffic court in Hawaii was still acting on the Bari Shabazz traffic case 9 and 11 years after the alleged death in August 1994 of Bâri′ M. Shabazz. What needs to be investigated is why the local prosecutor and court took those actions so many years after the traffic accident and at whose behest.

8. Finally, when there is an auto accident, the police do a detailed accident report. That report includes the name, addresses, date of birth, and social security number of the person involved in the accident who is charged for that accident. The driver’s license number is also included if that license is produced or otherwise verified. A physical description of the defendant is also included. The make of auto, including the year made and VIN number are also included, along with statements of witnesses. There could be a photograph of the defendant in the police record. A thorough investigation of this matter would surely include searching the police record in Honolulu County for this report so that this information may be examined and evaluated.

Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
November 7, 2011
http://puzo1.blogspot.com/
####

Copyright © 2011
Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
All Rights Reserved
Posted by Puzo1 at 10:07 PM