“Malcolm X’s Missing Eyeglasses”
Another Cold Case File, Closed:
“HE DOESN’T EVEN NEED THEM WHEN HE’S AWAKE”
by Martha Trowbridge, ©2011, blogging at Terrible Truth. Research Copyright © 2011 Martha Trowbridge and Erik Rush. All Rights Reserved.
Editor's Note: Re-posted with permission of The Post & Email.
http://www.thepostemail.com/2011/10/29/another-cold-case-file-closed-%e2%80%9cmalcolm-x%e2%80%99s-missing-eyeglasses%e2%80%9d/
(Oct. 29, 2011) — Mystery meets [Medical] History today, as a cold case is solved.
First, the historical medical marvel.
Barack Obama, who according to official medical reports has 20/20 vision, apparently needs eyeglasses.
Not just any eyeglasses, mind you. And certainly not when he’s in public.
He doesn’t even need them when he’s awake.
Obama needs these eyeglasses when he’s sleeping!
White House Photo
Oh dear, what have we here?
Could it be?
Could Obama be wearing Malcolm X’s eyeglasses - broken left arm and all?
Must be that Obama’s channeling dreams. Channeling Dreams From His Father.
Which leads us to the mystery:
How on earth could Obama get his hands on Malcolm’s eyeglasses?
Hmmm.
Maybe, just maybe, mama Stanley Ann got her hands on them, shortly after Malcolm was shot – and eventually passed them on to their son.
For, Truth Be Told, when Malcolm was shot at the Audubon Ballroom, 21 February 1965, as usual, he was wearing his eyeglasses.
Yet when he was wheeled out, his eyeglasses were off.
Then -
No eyeglasses on Malcolm’s body at the wake.
No eyeglasses at the funeral.
Whatever happened to Malcolm X’s eyeglasses?
Now that we have the White House photo, above, it may not be a mystery after all.
Picture the scene of the crime. The audience has fled. Malcolm has just been taken out by the medical emergency crew. His wife and children have been whisked away. And where is Stanley Ann, his long-time lover? Stanley Ann, teenage lover, sitting in that front row to the right. Stanley Ann, jumping up in shock and horror. Stanley Ann, watching the attempts to save Malcolm, watching as the medics work on him, watching as he is wheeled forever away.
What is she feeling?
In her great grief and shock, what is she thinking?
Study the assassination crime scene photo, taken much later, below.
No eyeglasses.
February 1965 Audubon Ballroom Crime Scene Photo by Stanley Wolfson
Think.
Malcolm has been wheeled away. Teenage lover Stanley Ann is unable to follow Malcolm to the hospital – what with his wife Betty and the press heading over there. Distraught, she stays behind. How can she bear it? She looks to the stage. Her lover’s jacket lies folded atop the drum riser. His shirt lies on the floor. The chair against which he fell when shot, is tipped on its back.
And there, amidst the hideous chaos, are his eyeglasses. His precious, signature, tragically broken eyeglasses.
Perhaps they too lie on the floor, tossed aside, the left arm snapped as it was torn off by the medics – or inadvertently crushed, in the chaos.
Or perhaps someone has reverently placed them – frame plus broken arm – on the drum riser, next to his jacket.
Most everyone is gone. The stage is deserted.
Stricken with pain, and anger, and grief, Stanley Ann steps up onto the stage. Quickly, she fetches the eyeglasses, along with their broken arm. Hiding them in a pocket or handbag, she hurries away.
Malcolm X’s Missing Eyeglasses Cold Case: solved.
Attorney Mario Apuzzo, when viewing this photo of Obama sleeping on the White House sofa, made a brilliant observation. These eyeglasses could have Malcolm’s DNA.
So you see, it’s all very simple. A quick swab of a Q-tip on the roof of Obama’s mouth … paternity controversy over.
Sunday, October 30, 2011
Thursday, October 27, 2011
Saps, Stool Pigeons And Stanley Ann’s Hair
by Martha Trowbridge, blogging at Terrible Truth Research Copyright © 2011 Martha Trowbridge & Erik Rush. All Rights Reserved.
Editor's Note: Re-posted with permission of The Post & Email.
Original post with graphics: http://www.thepostemail.com/2011/10/23/saps-stool-pigeons-and-stanley-ann%e2%80%99s-hair/
(Oct. 23, 2011) — If David Brooks at The New York Times feels he was taken for a ‘sap’ by Barack Obama, we shudder to think how everyday Americans will feel, once they find out the Truth.
Obama’s Mother And Son photo was falsified to deceive us.
Courtesy, The Obama Campaign
Recognize it? Yes, that’s the same photo as was used on the cover of Janny Scott’s A Singular Woman, her biography of Stanley Ann Dunham, Obama’s mother.
It’s the same photo Obama used in his Obamacare television ad.
So what’s the big deal? In a moment, we’ll tell you. For now, all you need to understand is this:
The photo was falsified to deceive us.
Truth is, mama Stanley Ann didn’t have long hair when Barack was young. Until, of course, with photoshop-type tampering, The Obama Campaign made sure we’d think that she did.
Here’s a peek into Truth. All that darkness, making us think we’re seeing long hair, is nothing but graphics illusion:
Another reality-check:
As if the deceit with her hair weren’t insulting enough, in the view below, note the futzing with the corner of her mouth, in order to widen it. See the [pink] added tooth. Look closely, you’ll see her original top lip line, curving down to the last white tooth – and the fake new lip lines, extending past the fake, pointy, pink tooth … And while you’re looking, don’t miss the fake ‘closed’ eyelid applied to her open eye.
Her nose, we’ll leave for another discussion.
Hey, David Brooks: you’re in sap good company.
Now, you may be wondering: why does it matter, whether mama’s hair was short or long? Whether her mouth was narrow or wide? Or why her eyes seem always half-closed, and hidden?
Here’s why: Obama was worried you’d find her in places, at key strategic times, with people he couldn’t let you know about.
People like Malcolm X. Times like the early and mid-1960′s. Places like New York City.
For instance – what if you saw this image? The image of his mother, Stanley Ann, in February 1965, at the wake / funeral of militant black leader, Malcolm X?
What if you recognized her?
Obama sure as heck wouldn’t want you to view the video in which her image resides:
“Eyewitness To The Assassination”
(Please refer to original blog posting for video)
Why not? Because though he claims his mother was thousands of miles away in Hawaii, the fact is, there Stanley Ann was in New York City, February 1965, there, right there, at Malcolm X’s wake and funeral.
So it just may be that Barack Obama’s father isn’t Barack Obama “Sr”, after all.
The Truth lies in the long and short of it. Of Stanley Ann’s Hair, that is.
Take a moment to view the video again. As you do, note Stanley Ann’s “habit of tilting her head to one side” as documented in The Telegraph article: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/8534532/Barack-Obamas-mother-the-hidden-influence-on-the-American-president.html
While you’re watching, see if you can’t recognize Stanley Ann’s boyish-looking appearance, and her weight struggle, as noted by Tribune national correspondent Tim Jones: [http://www.courant.com/technology/chi-0703270151mar27-archive,0,6704277.story ] “Boyish-looking, Stanley Ann … didn’t like her nose, she worried about her weight”.
If you need extra confirmation, take a few moments and study these two youthful photos of Stanley Ann, also released by The Obama Campaign.
In the first image, though her eyelids have also been altered [pulled down, with the skin above them highlighted], her lips extended, and her chin sharpened into a point, take note of the basic shape of her face, her nose and her ears. And don’t miss those eyes, those big, dark, penetrating eyes – which, by the way, also have been altered.
Courtesy, The Obama Campaign
The next photo depicts her mouth more accurately – once you get beyond the tampering that’s been done to her lips [and to her eyes, and big-time to her nose]:
Courtesy, The Obama Campaign
Honestly, have you ever seen a girl with two such mismatched eyes?!
Try as The Obama Campaign did to occlude it, Truth will out, won’t it? From the “Eyewitness To The Assassination” video: witness Stanley Ann’s grin:
From the Campaign’s own photo, posted above, excusing the efforts to widen her mouth, here’s that same grin:
Hmmm.
Did you ever wonder why The Obama Campaign never issued video footage of his mother? The eyewitness video tells it all: Obama’s mother’s mannerisms and facial tics, as well as the way she moves her mouth, are distinctive, easily recognizable in this Malcolm X funeral footage.
Oh dear. There’s only so much a Campaign can control.
If you’re not yet fed up, and can stand it, study mama’s hairline in official photos. The ‘widow’s peak’ dip on her forehead, to the right of her nose. The idiosyncratic ‘quarter moon’ curve demonstrated in her hairline profile – which by the way can be verified by The Obama Campaign’s official Mother And Son photo, above.
At first, you may not recognize Stanley Ann, with her hair cropped close. Not to worry. After all, The Obama Campaign has spent more than four years convincing us that she had long hair.
Don’t let the image-changers’ drooping her eyelids, or layering false hair, or reshaping her nose and mouth and chin, or casting false shadows or light fool you. The Truth is in her false hair. And in her eyes – her big, dark, penetrating eyes.
Hey, Time magazine: Are “We All Saps” yet?
In closing, think about this: in the “Eyewitness To The Assassination” video, Stanley Ann, standing beside the speaker, is traumatized. Why?
Because her lover, her idol, the father of her son Barack – Malcolm X – had just been assassinated.
Still don’t believe it’s she? You don’t have to take our word for it.
Malcolm X scholar Manning Marable, in his April 2011 biography, states that Malcolm’s “teenage lover” was seated in the front row at the time of the shooting. The eyewitness in the video states that he was in the front row. In this footage, mama Stanley Ann stands comfortably at this man’s side.
To make the story steamier: Marable further states that Malcolm’s “teenage lover” had been having an affair with one of his entourage [guards, assistants, etc.] This speaker could be the man to whom Marable refers.
America is starved for answers, ravenous for Truth. America, where the media is more afraid of printing Truth than they are of printing lies.
Why?
And why would Obama hide his origins?
Because having a biological father like Malcolm X – a radical black nationalist – would have impeded Obama’s chance for election.
Still not convinced that’s Stanley Ann at Malcolm’s wake? Then answer this: in family photos for a Presidential Campaign, why would a candidate release tampered images of his mother?
Can you give us one solid reason?
And oh, all ye defenders of darkness – in case you’re thinking of flaunting the Riverhead Books version of the Mother And Son photo – the one with the background tastefully tinted grass-green behind her neck, to hide the Truth about her hair – you needn’t bother. We know all about it.
——————————
Editor’s Note: When we asked the writer, Martha Trowbridge, how she knew that the photo of the woman with very short hair and straight nose was Stanley Ann Dunham, she replied:
The photo is a frame from the video that is embedded. It was filmed during the wake ‘ funeral period of Malcolm X.
ALL the photos of Stanley Ann Dunham have been falsified via a Photoshop-type graphics program. It appears that a prototype of her was created, though when I analyzed photos from various years, the consistency was not maintained.
I’m happy to send you samples of this additional analysis. Not only has false long hair been applied to her ‘image’, her eyes have been reduced in size, and her nose, chin and mouth changed.
So of course, the question is – why?
The answer: Obama knows there are images of his mother ‘out there’ in the presence of Malcolm X. So, if he consistently put out an image that disguised her actual appearance, most people would not recognize her.And it’s worked until recently. When you have the time and energy to read through that first post,you will find links to articles describing her actual physical appearance and mannerisms – validating that indeed the girl in the video – and the frame – matches the text describing her. One fact reported was how much she hated her nose!
Even the Obots, reading the Saps post, acknowledged that the photos of her were photoshopped! The only counter they immediately had was: it’s a boy.
And it seems they haven’t had much to say since.
Last week an Obot posted something oppositional to my data. In it s/he referred to the difference in distance between eyes, from nose to mouth, etc. in the images presented by The Obama Campaign, and the video image. I responded, stating that it was interesting that the poster knew EXACTLY what changes had been made to her actual appearance.
And guess what? End of discussion by the Obot.
by Martha Trowbridge, blogging at Terrible Truth Research Copyright © 2011 Martha Trowbridge & Erik Rush. All Rights Reserved.
Editor's Note: Re-posted with permission of The Post & Email.
Original post with graphics: http://www.thepostemail.com/2011/10/23/saps-stool-pigeons-and-stanley-ann%e2%80%99s-hair/
(Oct. 23, 2011) — If David Brooks at The New York Times feels he was taken for a ‘sap’ by Barack Obama, we shudder to think how everyday Americans will feel, once they find out the Truth.
Obama’s Mother And Son photo was falsified to deceive us.
Courtesy, The Obama Campaign
Recognize it? Yes, that’s the same photo as was used on the cover of Janny Scott’s A Singular Woman, her biography of Stanley Ann Dunham, Obama’s mother.
It’s the same photo Obama used in his Obamacare television ad.
So what’s the big deal? In a moment, we’ll tell you. For now, all you need to understand is this:
The photo was falsified to deceive us.
Truth is, mama Stanley Ann didn’t have long hair when Barack was young. Until, of course, with photoshop-type tampering, The Obama Campaign made sure we’d think that she did.
Here’s a peek into Truth. All that darkness, making us think we’re seeing long hair, is nothing but graphics illusion:
Another reality-check:
As if the deceit with her hair weren’t insulting enough, in the view below, note the futzing with the corner of her mouth, in order to widen it. See the [pink] added tooth. Look closely, you’ll see her original top lip line, curving down to the last white tooth – and the fake new lip lines, extending past the fake, pointy, pink tooth … And while you’re looking, don’t miss the fake ‘closed’ eyelid applied to her open eye.
Her nose, we’ll leave for another discussion.
Hey, David Brooks: you’re in sap good company.
Now, you may be wondering: why does it matter, whether mama’s hair was short or long? Whether her mouth was narrow or wide? Or why her eyes seem always half-closed, and hidden?
Here’s why: Obama was worried you’d find her in places, at key strategic times, with people he couldn’t let you know about.
People like Malcolm X. Times like the early and mid-1960′s. Places like New York City.
For instance – what if you saw this image? The image of his mother, Stanley Ann, in February 1965, at the wake / funeral of militant black leader, Malcolm X?
What if you recognized her?
Obama sure as heck wouldn’t want you to view the video in which her image resides:
“Eyewitness To The Assassination”
(Please refer to original blog posting for video)
Why not? Because though he claims his mother was thousands of miles away in Hawaii, the fact is, there Stanley Ann was in New York City, February 1965, there, right there, at Malcolm X’s wake and funeral.
So it just may be that Barack Obama’s father isn’t Barack Obama “Sr”, after all.
The Truth lies in the long and short of it. Of Stanley Ann’s Hair, that is.
Take a moment to view the video again. As you do, note Stanley Ann’s “habit of tilting her head to one side” as documented in The Telegraph article: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/8534532/Barack-Obamas-mother-the-hidden-influence-on-the-American-president.html
While you’re watching, see if you can’t recognize Stanley Ann’s boyish-looking appearance, and her weight struggle, as noted by Tribune national correspondent Tim Jones: [http://www.courant.com/technology/chi-0703270151mar27-archive,0,6704277.story ] “Boyish-looking, Stanley Ann … didn’t like her nose, she worried about her weight”.
If you need extra confirmation, take a few moments and study these two youthful photos of Stanley Ann, also released by The Obama Campaign.
In the first image, though her eyelids have also been altered [pulled down, with the skin above them highlighted], her lips extended, and her chin sharpened into a point, take note of the basic shape of her face, her nose and her ears. And don’t miss those eyes, those big, dark, penetrating eyes – which, by the way, also have been altered.
Courtesy, The Obama Campaign
The next photo depicts her mouth more accurately – once you get beyond the tampering that’s been done to her lips [and to her eyes, and big-time to her nose]:
Courtesy, The Obama Campaign
Honestly, have you ever seen a girl with two such mismatched eyes?!
Try as The Obama Campaign did to occlude it, Truth will out, won’t it? From the “Eyewitness To The Assassination” video: witness Stanley Ann’s grin:
From the Campaign’s own photo, posted above, excusing the efforts to widen her mouth, here’s that same grin:
Hmmm.
Did you ever wonder why The Obama Campaign never issued video footage of his mother? The eyewitness video tells it all: Obama’s mother’s mannerisms and facial tics, as well as the way she moves her mouth, are distinctive, easily recognizable in this Malcolm X funeral footage.
Oh dear. There’s only so much a Campaign can control.
If you’re not yet fed up, and can stand it, study mama’s hairline in official photos. The ‘widow’s peak’ dip on her forehead, to the right of her nose. The idiosyncratic ‘quarter moon’ curve demonstrated in her hairline profile – which by the way can be verified by The Obama Campaign’s official Mother And Son photo, above.
At first, you may not recognize Stanley Ann, with her hair cropped close. Not to worry. After all, The Obama Campaign has spent more than four years convincing us that she had long hair.
Don’t let the image-changers’ drooping her eyelids, or layering false hair, or reshaping her nose and mouth and chin, or casting false shadows or light fool you. The Truth is in her false hair. And in her eyes – her big, dark, penetrating eyes.
Hey, Time magazine: Are “We All Saps” yet?
In closing, think about this: in the “Eyewitness To The Assassination” video, Stanley Ann, standing beside the speaker, is traumatized. Why?
Because her lover, her idol, the father of her son Barack – Malcolm X – had just been assassinated.
Still don’t believe it’s she? You don’t have to take our word for it.
Malcolm X scholar Manning Marable, in his April 2011 biography, states that Malcolm’s “teenage lover” was seated in the front row at the time of the shooting. The eyewitness in the video states that he was in the front row. In this footage, mama Stanley Ann stands comfortably at this man’s side.
To make the story steamier: Marable further states that Malcolm’s “teenage lover” had been having an affair with one of his entourage [guards, assistants, etc.] This speaker could be the man to whom Marable refers.
America is starved for answers, ravenous for Truth. America, where the media is more afraid of printing Truth than they are of printing lies.
Why?
And why would Obama hide his origins?
Because having a biological father like Malcolm X – a radical black nationalist – would have impeded Obama’s chance for election.
Still not convinced that’s Stanley Ann at Malcolm’s wake? Then answer this: in family photos for a Presidential Campaign, why would a candidate release tampered images of his mother?
Can you give us one solid reason?
And oh, all ye defenders of darkness – in case you’re thinking of flaunting the Riverhead Books version of the Mother And Son photo – the one with the background tastefully tinted grass-green behind her neck, to hide the Truth about her hair – you needn’t bother. We know all about it.
——————————
Editor’s Note: When we asked the writer, Martha Trowbridge, how she knew that the photo of the woman with very short hair and straight nose was Stanley Ann Dunham, she replied:
The photo is a frame from the video that is embedded. It was filmed during the wake ‘ funeral period of Malcolm X.
ALL the photos of Stanley Ann Dunham have been falsified via a Photoshop-type graphics program. It appears that a prototype of her was created, though when I analyzed photos from various years, the consistency was not maintained.
I’m happy to send you samples of this additional analysis. Not only has false long hair been applied to her ‘image’, her eyes have been reduced in size, and her nose, chin and mouth changed.
So of course, the question is – why?
The answer: Obama knows there are images of his mother ‘out there’ in the presence of Malcolm X. So, if he consistently put out an image that disguised her actual appearance, most people would not recognize her.And it’s worked until recently. When you have the time and energy to read through that first post,you will find links to articles describing her actual physical appearance and mannerisms – validating that indeed the girl in the video – and the frame – matches the text describing her. One fact reported was how much she hated her nose!
Even the Obots, reading the Saps post, acknowledged that the photos of her were photoshopped! The only counter they immediately had was: it’s a boy.
And it seems they haven’t had much to say since.
Last week an Obot posted something oppositional to my data. In it s/he referred to the difference in distance between eyes, from nose to mouth, etc. in the images presented by The Obama Campaign, and the video image. I responded, stating that it was interesting that the poster knew EXACTLY what changes had been made to her actual appearance.
And guess what? End of discussion by the Obot.
Saturday, October 22, 2011
JustiaGate
WHO SCRUBBED MATERIAL DEFINING “NATURAL BORN CITIZEN” DURING THE 2008 CAMPAIGN?
by Dianna Cotter, reporting at The Examiner
(Oct. 22, 2011) — Someone was incredibly busy in June 2008 working on an illegal front invisible to the public; searching and altering Supreme Court Cases published at Justia.com which cite the only case in American history – Minor v. Happersett (1875) – to directly construe Article 2 Section 1′s natural-born citizen clause in determining a citizenship issue as part of its holding and precedent. In this unanimous decision, the Supreme Court defined a “native or natural-born citizen” as a person born in the US to parents who were citizens; a definition which excludes from eligibility both Barack Obama and John McCain.
In June 2008 no one was discussing Minor v. Happersett 88 US 162 (1875) with regard to Obama. In fact, those who were discussing the then Senator’s citizenship status had focused instead on his birth in Hawaii in a attempt to prove the future president was not born in the United States despite publication of the Senator’s short form computer generated Birth Certificate. It would not be until October of 2008 that Barack Hussein Obama’s eligibility would be questioned as to his status as a dual citizen at the time of his birth.
The Supreme Court of the United States
Meanwhile, at the “Supreme Court Center” of the influential legal research website Justia.com, efforts were underway corrupting at least 25 Supreme Court cases by erasing references to the words “Minor V. Happersett” along with references to other relevant cases on the issue along with the insertion of misleading numerical citations. And In two documented cases actual text was removed.
Clearly this was done in these specific cases in order to prevent their being found by internet researchers long before anyone had even begun to look for them, even before Obama would win the Democratic Nomination at the DNC Convention in Denver, Colorado in August ’08. This is premeditation and intent to deceive.
So far, 25 corrupted SCOTUS have been identified, and this number may continue to rise as the scope of the tampering becomes apparent. These cases all relied upon Minor, some specifically referencing its definition of Natural Born Citizen – a definition which makes Obama ineligible to be President as that definition is part of the holding and continuing precedent, issued from the highest court in our nation making it the law of the land, even now.
The most extreme sabotage so far discovered appears to have been done to the landmark decision United States v. Wong Kim Ark which was sabotaged to remove “Minor v. Happersett” three times, along with one reference to “Scott v Sandford”, another to the Slaughterhouse Cases and some accompanying text relevant to the issue. These surgical alterations would alter and shape the national dialogue; leaving a persistent and incorrect interpretation of the meaning of the ‘natural born citizen’ clause. There is no doubt whatsoever that this was the specific intent of those responsible for this illegal editing of American history and law.
As previously mentioned, the specific distinction between Citizen and Natural Born Citizen made in Minor v. Happersett is in the holding of the case, the section which creates the Law, and it is this Law which has been repeatedly cited over the decades since. In order to minimize the importance of Minor, someone at Justia deliberately decided to make these supporting citations as difficult as possible to find.
This has had the desired effect, diluting the importance of Minor v. Happersett in the national dialogue across the blogosphere’s political spectrum ever since. The end result: the one case which defines Natural Born Citizen was reduced to seeming irrelevance, and thus the conversation never got past doorkeepers already in Obama’s camp in the mainstream media.
Of course, a lawyer going into Court would never rely upon anything but an official source for Supreme Court law, but 99.9% of the population have no access to dusty law texts, or expensive legal research services such as Lexis and Westlaw. Those who committed these crimes were well aware of this, and used it to their advantage.
The manipulation at Justia.com diluted the importance of Minor by killing the citations in Supreme Court cases spanning over 100 years. Since Google most often returns Justia.com’s version of the case being searched for as the first or second hit, Justia’s version of Supreme Court opinions are most influential in the blogosphere’s forums and comments. Erasing those citations and text on the internet literally erases the importance of Minor and its precedents to millions of Americans otherwise unlikely to ever step into physical Law Library.
This is nothing short of appalling. Justia swapped their tampered versions of the cases for the actual Supreme Court opinions and then pawned them off as if the tampered versions contained the “Full Text” of the Supreme Court’s opinions. Yet Justia CEO Tim Stanley claims that making case law available to the public for free is the mission of Justia. In reality, Justia has been re-inventing our legal history and passing it off as genuine.
Attorney Donofrio’s Full report “Justia.com Surgically Removed “Minor v Happersett” from 25 Supreme Court Opinions in run up to ’08 Election”, published today explains that exposure to criminal punishment is a direct result of not just the tampering, but more specifically, as a result of placing text on every tampered page which states, “Full text of case”:
Regardless of who you supported in 2008, or whether you agree with the assertion of Minor’s relevance, every American should be outraged that 25 Supreme Court cases were surgically sabotaged and then passed off to the public as if the tampered versions contained the “Full Text of Case”. This is the very definition of “Orwellian” fascism. It’s propaganda. And there is no place for it in the United States. The sacrifices for truth and justice which created and have sustained this nation are wantonly debased by the subversive deception emanating from Justia.com servers. – Leo Donofrio Esq.
Clearly, the corruption of Supreme Court Cases was systemic and surgically targeted within Justia.com, one of the largest and best known legal research sites on the internet. Justia is nothing if not efficient in driving traffic to its site; this is after all their business. Today they partner with Google and have Google Analytics within their site which does two things; it increases Justia’s visibility on Google searches, and it pushes their website to the top of those searches done on legal issues. When specific search terms are erased out of a document, naturally that document will not appear on a search. Anyone searching for the case name “Minor v. Happersett” and “citizenship” would never see the dozens of cases manipulated by Justia.com.
Justia founder Tim Stanley has for years prided himself and his companies on principles of ‘freedom of information’. On June 19th, 2008, Stanley addressed the Legislative Council Committee at the Oregon State Legislature with the following statements:
“Our goal is to provide academic researchers, government officials, attorneys, and the public with advanced features, including full‐text search, annotations by legal professionals, and comparison tools to visualize the differences in the law between the individual states…”
And
“In the end, we both recognize the importance of providing the public with online access to our nation’s laws because such actions promote understanding, participation in and respect for our democratic institutions and legal system.”
To describe these comments, made at roughly the same time Supreme Court Cases were being scrubbed and deliberately altered at his site as ironic, is an understatement of gross proportions.
Only a person thoroughly educated in the law would know precisely which cases to look for in order to direct the changes to be made to those cases. Furthermore, only someone with access to Justia.com’s database could physically make these changes from inside the website. This artificially created a near empty result set and the cases which did turn up led those inexperienced in the law, nowhere.
This appears to violate every principle Tim Stanley and Justia.com have built their business upon.
The manipulations at Justia.com were initially discovered by Attorney Leo Donofrio on July 1, 2011, when he published his initial report, “Justia.com Caught Red Handed Hiding References to Minor v. Happersett In Published US Supreme Court Decisions,”. Upon publication of his original discovery documenting the sabotage of Boyd v. Nebraska, and Pope v. Williams, two Supreme Court cases which cite to Minor v. Happersett as precedent on citizenship, two things happened almost immediately: First, the altered pages were returned to their original versions at Justia within an hour or so of Donofrio’s publication. Second, despite Justia CEO Tim Stanley’s cries for freedom of legal information (and law suits compelling the same), robots have now been placed on the Justia URL’s for the Boyd and Pope cases at InternetArchive.org, also known as the Waybackmachine. These robots make it impossible to see the tampering as it unfolded in mid-2008… with those cases.
So much for freedom of information.
One can, however, still see the tampering from screenshots taken by Donofrio and are attached to that original report on July 1, 2011 at his blog, Natural Born Citizen, which has been singularly focused on the issue of Presidential eligibility since late 2008.
As Donofrio documents in his article today, when he discovered a third tampered case, instead of rushing to publish it, he contacted a number of other bloggers and reporters to help document the evidence before Justia dispersed their robots to block it. While Donofrio originally only discovered two cases of tampering, somebody at Justia knew where the bones were buried and went about reinstating “Minor v. Happersett” in the at least 25 cases which it had earlier sabotaged. It appears that whoever knew about these additional despoiled cases, must have believed by fixing them before the corruption was exposed no one would ever suspect they too had been altered.
What tipped Donofrio off last week to the extent of Justia’s tampering was the case “Luria v. United States”. This case also firmly supports Minor on citizenship, and he double checked the text to see if it included references to Minor. It did… something he had not noticed upon previous readings of the case at Justia.com.
With his new insight into SCOTUS case tampering, he plugged the URL into the Waybackmachine to see if it had been altered in the past. Bingo. It had. Furthermore there was nothing blocking his ability to see those snapshotted pages, and how they had been altered compared to the original text. The gun wasn’t just smoking, the bullet was still flying.
A brief explanation of the how the Waybackmachine works. It takes snapshots of internet pages. It may not record the day a given webpage changed, but it documents the changes when it does hit that page. Thus a date on the Waybackmachine of April 13, 2004 means this was the date the snapshot was taken, not when the changes were necessarily made. There is no way of knowing precisely when the change occurred as the waybackmachine does not record the precise instant the change is made, it is only sometime later when the Internet archive records it.
The evidence he discovered there, at the time of publication of this article, is still available and shows the same exact same pattern of behavior – deception – that Justia exhibited with the Boyd and Pope cases Donofrio published back in July.
If Justia hasn’t blocked access to the WaybackMachine for their publication of Luria v. US, 231 U.S. 9 (1913) by the time you read this, then it continues to be evident and accessible that on Nov. 4, 2006 the Waybackmachine recorded Justia published the true original opinion issued by the Supreme Court with no tampering evident. Minor v. Happersett is cited on page 22 directly referencing Presidential eligibility as follows:
“Citizenship is membership in a political society, and implies a duty of allegiance on the part of the member and a duty of protection on the part of the society. These are reciprocal obligations, one being a compensation for the other. Under our Constitution, a naturalized citizen stands on an equal footing with the native citizen in all respects, save that of eligibility to the Presidency. Minor v. Happersett, 21 Wall. 162, 165, 22 L. ed. 627; Elk v. Wilkins, 112 U.S. 94, 101, 28 S. L. ed. 643, 645, 5 Sup. Ct. Rep. 41; Osborn v. Bank of United States, 9 Wheat. 738, 827, 6 L. ed. 204, 225.”
The July 6, 2008 Waybackmachine snapshot of Luria v. US is the first snapshot that shows the tampering:
“Citizenship is membership in a political society, and implies a duty of allegiance on the part of the member and a duty of protection on the part of the society. These are reciprocal obligations, one being a compensation for the other. Under our Constitution, a naturalized citizen stands on an equal footing with the native citizen in all respects save that of eligibility to the Presidency. 88 U. S. 165; Elk v. Wilkins, 112 U. S. 94, 112 U. S. 101; 22 U. S. 827.”
Notice that “Minor v. Happersett” has been removed along with the reference to “Osborn v. United States”, another case which causes trouble for Obama (and McCain). All of the WaybackMachine snapshots between July 6, 2008, and April 13, 2010 for this case, show the same tampering. The current, live Justia page for Luria v. US has been un-scrubbed and shows the original Supreme Court text. It is only with an archival resource such as the Waybackmachine that the alterations can be seen.
At publication, insertion of the URL into the Waybackmachine for this page at Justia still reveals the changes made to this page over time. Repeat this entire process with 25 Supreme Court cases and the extent of the tampering becomes evident.
This is disturbing enough, yet there was another subtle and insidious layer of deception. In every single instance of tampering, the numerical citation attached to Minor V. Happersett, has also been altered. (See Donofrio’s blog for a complete break down of this.) Changing these numbers is yet another layer of deception practiced at Justia.
While Donofrio documents in detail what the finer points of law in both versions mean in his article, this Examiner.com publication documents what this reporter has personally witnessed – the tampering of Supreme Court Cases online in the guise of “Full Text of Case”. This article is not the legal opinion of an attorney; it is witness to an event.
It’s important to note that the only way Justia could block all access to previous versions of their publication of cases would require .txt robots to be placed on their entire domain records at the Waybackmachine. If Tim Stanley were to secure Justia.com from the honest and forthright archiving of the WaybackMachine, he would be an instant pariah in the freedom of information scene of which he is a leader.
Furthermore, if Stanley were to place robots on only the 25 (or more) cases which cite Minor v. Happersett, it would be a de-facto admission of guilt.
It appears that whoever tampered with these cases went back and “fixed” all of them, including 23 Donofrio wasn’t aware of until this week when he conclusively established the sabotage by Justia. For all 25, the pattern is precisely the same. In 2006, the cases at Justia are pristine in the Waybackmachine; word for word from official Supreme Court cases. Then at various points in 2008, the cases are corrupted by removal of the case name “Minor v, Happersett” ( as well as some other case names and text.)
The cases remained corrupted, according to the snapshots of the Waybackmachine in most cases, until late 2010.
Today however, all 25 cases have been painstakingly returned to their official Supreme Court versions; all references to Minor are back, the case and page numbers have been restored, as well as all missing text and references to other cases. Still, the pattern is clearly visible to anyone who takes the time to look at the evidence made available by the Waybackmachine. The sophistication and surgical elegance used to sabotage these cases is astounding, and has been personally witnessed by this reporter.
Every case which has been found to date by Mr. Donofrio has been documented with great attention to all these details. This has been accomplished by downloading the full code of the original un-tainted pages and the corrupted revisions from the Waybackmachine’s date stamped archive, along with screenshots of the pages as they appeared in browsers such as Mozilla Firefox before and after the tampering occurred, and the restored pages.
The volume of data is significant and Mr. Donofrio is in the process of making the entire archive available to the public. The article he has published today contains what he refers to as a “document dump“. It is in reality evidence. The reader is strongly encouraged to view the images which document Justia’s actions. Upon doing so, every member of congress should be notified of the existence of this information. Such usurpation of American history and law cannot be allowed.
Screenshots and links have been sent to several specific media contacts which include the Washington Times, Accuracy In Media, and Free Republic. In the interest of putting this information in front of as many eyes as possible before publication, it has been made freely available since Friday October 18, 2011 in the form of screenshots and saved page code. Should the information presented here be altered on the internet following publication, there will be a significant number of media outlets with knowledge and proof of any further alterations to internet archives.
The penalty associated with violating the “False Writings Statute”, 18 U.S.C. 1018 is jail and a fine for each count. With at least 25 counts if not more, this could mean upwards of 25 years in prison. The manipulation of Supreme Court cases is an offense against all Americans, and the Court itself. If like Fast and Furious this scandal reaches directly to the White House, the ramifications are both dire and catastrophic.
Minor v. Happersett defined the one specific term which Barack Obama could not overcome with “Hope and Change” though he could ‘hope’ someone would ‘change’ the cases which help define the term “Natural Born Citizen.” This case, if it had been sufficiently known to the public and media, and sufficiently documented by supporting citations, might have eliminated the possibility of Obama’s nomination and/or election. Either Obama got lucky in this regard, or the “constitutional law professor” and former editor of the Harvard Law Review had some hand in directing the efforts to erase the very citations in law which define him as a citizen, and at the same time rule him out as a constitutional candidate for President of the United States.
Just as certainly as the corruption at Justia.com has been documented and archived, more will be revealed. Stay tuned, it is expected that this information will generate some significant updates. They will be reported here as they happen.
WHO SCRUBBED MATERIAL DEFINING “NATURAL BORN CITIZEN” DURING THE 2008 CAMPAIGN?
by Dianna Cotter, reporting at The Examiner
(Oct. 22, 2011) — Someone was incredibly busy in June 2008 working on an illegal front invisible to the public; searching and altering Supreme Court Cases published at Justia.com which cite the only case in American history – Minor v. Happersett (1875) – to directly construe Article 2 Section 1′s natural-born citizen clause in determining a citizenship issue as part of its holding and precedent. In this unanimous decision, the Supreme Court defined a “native or natural-born citizen” as a person born in the US to parents who were citizens; a definition which excludes from eligibility both Barack Obama and John McCain.
In June 2008 no one was discussing Minor v. Happersett 88 US 162 (1875) with regard to Obama. In fact, those who were discussing the then Senator’s citizenship status had focused instead on his birth in Hawaii in a attempt to prove the future president was not born in the United States despite publication of the Senator’s short form computer generated Birth Certificate. It would not be until October of 2008 that Barack Hussein Obama’s eligibility would be questioned as to his status as a dual citizen at the time of his birth.
The Supreme Court of the United States
Meanwhile, at the “Supreme Court Center” of the influential legal research website Justia.com, efforts were underway corrupting at least 25 Supreme Court cases by erasing references to the words “Minor V. Happersett” along with references to other relevant cases on the issue along with the insertion of misleading numerical citations. And In two documented cases actual text was removed.
Clearly this was done in these specific cases in order to prevent their being found by internet researchers long before anyone had even begun to look for them, even before Obama would win the Democratic Nomination at the DNC Convention in Denver, Colorado in August ’08. This is premeditation and intent to deceive.
So far, 25 corrupted SCOTUS have been identified, and this number may continue to rise as the scope of the tampering becomes apparent. These cases all relied upon Minor, some specifically referencing its definition of Natural Born Citizen – a definition which makes Obama ineligible to be President as that definition is part of the holding and continuing precedent, issued from the highest court in our nation making it the law of the land, even now.
The most extreme sabotage so far discovered appears to have been done to the landmark decision United States v. Wong Kim Ark which was sabotaged to remove “Minor v. Happersett” three times, along with one reference to “Scott v Sandford”, another to the Slaughterhouse Cases and some accompanying text relevant to the issue. These surgical alterations would alter and shape the national dialogue; leaving a persistent and incorrect interpretation of the meaning of the ‘natural born citizen’ clause. There is no doubt whatsoever that this was the specific intent of those responsible for this illegal editing of American history and law.
As previously mentioned, the specific distinction between Citizen and Natural Born Citizen made in Minor v. Happersett is in the holding of the case, the section which creates the Law, and it is this Law which has been repeatedly cited over the decades since. In order to minimize the importance of Minor, someone at Justia deliberately decided to make these supporting citations as difficult as possible to find.
This has had the desired effect, diluting the importance of Minor v. Happersett in the national dialogue across the blogosphere’s political spectrum ever since. The end result: the one case which defines Natural Born Citizen was reduced to seeming irrelevance, and thus the conversation never got past doorkeepers already in Obama’s camp in the mainstream media.
Of course, a lawyer going into Court would never rely upon anything but an official source for Supreme Court law, but 99.9% of the population have no access to dusty law texts, or expensive legal research services such as Lexis and Westlaw. Those who committed these crimes were well aware of this, and used it to their advantage.
The manipulation at Justia.com diluted the importance of Minor by killing the citations in Supreme Court cases spanning over 100 years. Since Google most often returns Justia.com’s version of the case being searched for as the first or second hit, Justia’s version of Supreme Court opinions are most influential in the blogosphere’s forums and comments. Erasing those citations and text on the internet literally erases the importance of Minor and its precedents to millions of Americans otherwise unlikely to ever step into physical Law Library.
This is nothing short of appalling. Justia swapped their tampered versions of the cases for the actual Supreme Court opinions and then pawned them off as if the tampered versions contained the “Full Text” of the Supreme Court’s opinions. Yet Justia CEO Tim Stanley claims that making case law available to the public for free is the mission of Justia. In reality, Justia has been re-inventing our legal history and passing it off as genuine.
Attorney Donofrio’s Full report “Justia.com Surgically Removed “Minor v Happersett” from 25 Supreme Court Opinions in run up to ’08 Election”, published today explains that exposure to criminal punishment is a direct result of not just the tampering, but more specifically, as a result of placing text on every tampered page which states, “Full text of case”:
Regardless of who you supported in 2008, or whether you agree with the assertion of Minor’s relevance, every American should be outraged that 25 Supreme Court cases were surgically sabotaged and then passed off to the public as if the tampered versions contained the “Full Text of Case”. This is the very definition of “Orwellian” fascism. It’s propaganda. And there is no place for it in the United States. The sacrifices for truth and justice which created and have sustained this nation are wantonly debased by the subversive deception emanating from Justia.com servers. – Leo Donofrio Esq.
Clearly, the corruption of Supreme Court Cases was systemic and surgically targeted within Justia.com, one of the largest and best known legal research sites on the internet. Justia is nothing if not efficient in driving traffic to its site; this is after all their business. Today they partner with Google and have Google Analytics within their site which does two things; it increases Justia’s visibility on Google searches, and it pushes their website to the top of those searches done on legal issues. When specific search terms are erased out of a document, naturally that document will not appear on a search. Anyone searching for the case name “Minor v. Happersett” and “citizenship” would never see the dozens of cases manipulated by Justia.com.
Justia founder Tim Stanley has for years prided himself and his companies on principles of ‘freedom of information’. On June 19th, 2008, Stanley addressed the Legislative Council Committee at the Oregon State Legislature with the following statements:
“Our goal is to provide academic researchers, government officials, attorneys, and the public with advanced features, including full‐text search, annotations by legal professionals, and comparison tools to visualize the differences in the law between the individual states…”
And
“In the end, we both recognize the importance of providing the public with online access to our nation’s laws because such actions promote understanding, participation in and respect for our democratic institutions and legal system.”
To describe these comments, made at roughly the same time Supreme Court Cases were being scrubbed and deliberately altered at his site as ironic, is an understatement of gross proportions.
Only a person thoroughly educated in the law would know precisely which cases to look for in order to direct the changes to be made to those cases. Furthermore, only someone with access to Justia.com’s database could physically make these changes from inside the website. This artificially created a near empty result set and the cases which did turn up led those inexperienced in the law, nowhere.
This appears to violate every principle Tim Stanley and Justia.com have built their business upon.
The manipulations at Justia.com were initially discovered by Attorney Leo Donofrio on July 1, 2011, when he published his initial report, “Justia.com Caught Red Handed Hiding References to Minor v. Happersett In Published US Supreme Court Decisions,”. Upon publication of his original discovery documenting the sabotage of Boyd v. Nebraska, and Pope v. Williams, two Supreme Court cases which cite to Minor v. Happersett as precedent on citizenship, two things happened almost immediately: First, the altered pages were returned to their original versions at Justia within an hour or so of Donofrio’s publication. Second, despite Justia CEO Tim Stanley’s cries for freedom of legal information (and law suits compelling the same), robots have now been placed on the Justia URL’s for the Boyd and Pope cases at InternetArchive.org, also known as the Waybackmachine. These robots make it impossible to see the tampering as it unfolded in mid-2008… with those cases.
So much for freedom of information.
One can, however, still see the tampering from screenshots taken by Donofrio and are attached to that original report on July 1, 2011 at his blog, Natural Born Citizen, which has been singularly focused on the issue of Presidential eligibility since late 2008.
As Donofrio documents in his article today, when he discovered a third tampered case, instead of rushing to publish it, he contacted a number of other bloggers and reporters to help document the evidence before Justia dispersed their robots to block it. While Donofrio originally only discovered two cases of tampering, somebody at Justia knew where the bones were buried and went about reinstating “Minor v. Happersett” in the at least 25 cases which it had earlier sabotaged. It appears that whoever knew about these additional despoiled cases, must have believed by fixing them before the corruption was exposed no one would ever suspect they too had been altered.
What tipped Donofrio off last week to the extent of Justia’s tampering was the case “Luria v. United States”. This case also firmly supports Minor on citizenship, and he double checked the text to see if it included references to Minor. It did… something he had not noticed upon previous readings of the case at Justia.com.
With his new insight into SCOTUS case tampering, he plugged the URL into the Waybackmachine to see if it had been altered in the past. Bingo. It had. Furthermore there was nothing blocking his ability to see those snapshotted pages, and how they had been altered compared to the original text. The gun wasn’t just smoking, the bullet was still flying.
A brief explanation of the how the Waybackmachine works. It takes snapshots of internet pages. It may not record the day a given webpage changed, but it documents the changes when it does hit that page. Thus a date on the Waybackmachine of April 13, 2004 means this was the date the snapshot was taken, not when the changes were necessarily made. There is no way of knowing precisely when the change occurred as the waybackmachine does not record the precise instant the change is made, it is only sometime later when the Internet archive records it.
The evidence he discovered there, at the time of publication of this article, is still available and shows the same exact same pattern of behavior – deception – that Justia exhibited with the Boyd and Pope cases Donofrio published back in July.
If Justia hasn’t blocked access to the WaybackMachine for their publication of Luria v. US, 231 U.S. 9 (1913) by the time you read this, then it continues to be evident and accessible that on Nov. 4, 2006 the Waybackmachine recorded Justia published the true original opinion issued by the Supreme Court with no tampering evident. Minor v. Happersett is cited on page 22 directly referencing Presidential eligibility as follows:
“Citizenship is membership in a political society, and implies a duty of allegiance on the part of the member and a duty of protection on the part of the society. These are reciprocal obligations, one being a compensation for the other. Under our Constitution, a naturalized citizen stands on an equal footing with the native citizen in all respects, save that of eligibility to the Presidency. Minor v. Happersett, 21 Wall. 162, 165, 22 L. ed. 627; Elk v. Wilkins, 112 U.S. 94, 101, 28 S. L. ed. 643, 645, 5 Sup. Ct. Rep. 41; Osborn v. Bank of United States, 9 Wheat. 738, 827, 6 L. ed. 204, 225.”
The July 6, 2008 Waybackmachine snapshot of Luria v. US is the first snapshot that shows the tampering:
“Citizenship is membership in a political society, and implies a duty of allegiance on the part of the member and a duty of protection on the part of the society. These are reciprocal obligations, one being a compensation for the other. Under our Constitution, a naturalized citizen stands on an equal footing with the native citizen in all respects save that of eligibility to the Presidency. 88 U. S. 165; Elk v. Wilkins, 112 U. S. 94, 112 U. S. 101; 22 U. S. 827.”
Notice that “Minor v. Happersett” has been removed along with the reference to “Osborn v. United States”, another case which causes trouble for Obama (and McCain). All of the WaybackMachine snapshots between July 6, 2008, and April 13, 2010 for this case, show the same tampering. The current, live Justia page for Luria v. US has been un-scrubbed and shows the original Supreme Court text. It is only with an archival resource such as the Waybackmachine that the alterations can be seen.
At publication, insertion of the URL into the Waybackmachine for this page at Justia still reveals the changes made to this page over time. Repeat this entire process with 25 Supreme Court cases and the extent of the tampering becomes evident.
This is disturbing enough, yet there was another subtle and insidious layer of deception. In every single instance of tampering, the numerical citation attached to Minor V. Happersett, has also been altered. (See Donofrio’s blog for a complete break down of this.) Changing these numbers is yet another layer of deception practiced at Justia.
While Donofrio documents in detail what the finer points of law in both versions mean in his article, this Examiner.com publication documents what this reporter has personally witnessed – the tampering of Supreme Court Cases online in the guise of “Full Text of Case”. This article is not the legal opinion of an attorney; it is witness to an event.
It’s important to note that the only way Justia could block all access to previous versions of their publication of cases would require .txt robots to be placed on their entire domain records at the Waybackmachine. If Tim Stanley were to secure Justia.com from the honest and forthright archiving of the WaybackMachine, he would be an instant pariah in the freedom of information scene of which he is a leader.
Furthermore, if Stanley were to place robots on only the 25 (or more) cases which cite Minor v. Happersett, it would be a de-facto admission of guilt.
It appears that whoever tampered with these cases went back and “fixed” all of them, including 23 Donofrio wasn’t aware of until this week when he conclusively established the sabotage by Justia. For all 25, the pattern is precisely the same. In 2006, the cases at Justia are pristine in the Waybackmachine; word for word from official Supreme Court cases. Then at various points in 2008, the cases are corrupted by removal of the case name “Minor v, Happersett” ( as well as some other case names and text.)
The cases remained corrupted, according to the snapshots of the Waybackmachine in most cases, until late 2010.
Today however, all 25 cases have been painstakingly returned to their official Supreme Court versions; all references to Minor are back, the case and page numbers have been restored, as well as all missing text and references to other cases. Still, the pattern is clearly visible to anyone who takes the time to look at the evidence made available by the Waybackmachine. The sophistication and surgical elegance used to sabotage these cases is astounding, and has been personally witnessed by this reporter.
Every case which has been found to date by Mr. Donofrio has been documented with great attention to all these details. This has been accomplished by downloading the full code of the original un-tainted pages and the corrupted revisions from the Waybackmachine’s date stamped archive, along with screenshots of the pages as they appeared in browsers such as Mozilla Firefox before and after the tampering occurred, and the restored pages.
The volume of data is significant and Mr. Donofrio is in the process of making the entire archive available to the public. The article he has published today contains what he refers to as a “document dump“. It is in reality evidence. The reader is strongly encouraged to view the images which document Justia’s actions. Upon doing so, every member of congress should be notified of the existence of this information. Such usurpation of American history and law cannot be allowed.
Screenshots and links have been sent to several specific media contacts which include the Washington Times, Accuracy In Media, and Free Republic. In the interest of putting this information in front of as many eyes as possible before publication, it has been made freely available since Friday October 18, 2011 in the form of screenshots and saved page code. Should the information presented here be altered on the internet following publication, there will be a significant number of media outlets with knowledge and proof of any further alterations to internet archives.
The penalty associated with violating the “False Writings Statute”, 18 U.S.C. 1018 is jail and a fine for each count. With at least 25 counts if not more, this could mean upwards of 25 years in prison. The manipulation of Supreme Court cases is an offense against all Americans, and the Court itself. If like Fast and Furious this scandal reaches directly to the White House, the ramifications are both dire and catastrophic.
Minor v. Happersett defined the one specific term which Barack Obama could not overcome with “Hope and Change” though he could ‘hope’ someone would ‘change’ the cases which help define the term “Natural Born Citizen.” This case, if it had been sufficiently known to the public and media, and sufficiently documented by supporting citations, might have eliminated the possibility of Obama’s nomination and/or election. Either Obama got lucky in this regard, or the “constitutional law professor” and former editor of the Harvard Law Review had some hand in directing the efforts to erase the very citations in law which define him as a citizen, and at the same time rule him out as a constitutional candidate for President of the United States.
Just as certainly as the corruption at Justia.com has been documented and archived, more will be revealed. Stay tuned, it is expected that this information will generate some significant updates. They will be reported here as they happen.
Friday, October 21, 2011
Orly Taitz Reports on Hawaii’s Continued Stealth About Obama’s Birth Record
“MULTIPLE APPEALS” TO BE FILED
by Sharon Rondeau
Editor's Note: Re-posted with permission of The Post & Email.
Dr. and Atty. Orly Taitz of California has filed multiple state and federal actions to discover if Obama is using a fraudulent social security number and forged birth certificate
(Oct. 21, 2011) — On October 12, 2011, Dr. Orly Taitz and Hawaii Assistant Attorney General Jill Nagamine appeared before Judge Rhonda Nishimura in Honolulu Circuit Court following Taitz’s request to inspect the original birth record of Barack Hussein Obama, who is serving as president but may not be constitutionally qualified by Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution and has been accused of social security fraud.
Taitz wished to compare the image Obama had released on April 27, 2011 to the records on file with the Hawaii Department of Health, if they exist, to see if they match.
Nagamine represented Health Director Loretta Fuddy, who had refused to comply with two subpoenas issued for disclosure of the birth record. Taitz stated on her website that she believed there has been a conflict of interest in Nagamine representing the Hawaii Department of Health because Nagamine’s husband had represented Obama’s half-sister in a divorce.
Fox Channel KHON-2 covered the court hearing.
Taitz has stated that a total of 135 newspapers across the country have now published articles touching on the Obama eligibility question.
In the past, Nagamine has refused to corroborate that Obama is a “natural-born American citizen,” a statement made by then-Health Department Director Dr. Chiyome Fukino. Earlier this year, Fukino stated in an interview with MSNBC that Obama’s original birth record was half-typed and half-handwritten, but the appearance of the image Obama released on April 27, 2011 does not match that description.
As an attorney, Taitz had issued a subpoena to Fuddy to produce the document last summer, followed up by a subpoena issued by the U.S. District Court in Honolulu. On the deadline date of August 8, 2011, surrogates for Fuddy presented a letter to Taitz stating that Obama’s original record could not be disclosed due to privacy concerns.
Taitz has argued that Obama has already waived his right to privacy because of his release of an image purported to be a certified copy of his original birth record on April 27, 2011.
Nishimura dismissed the case at the request of the attorney general’s office as shown in a brief video clip (courtesy ObamaReleaseYourRecords), but Taitz stated that the judge’s decision defies a Hawaii statute regarding government documents. Taitz also maintained that numerous experts have deemed the document Obama released in April a forgery. Taitz claimed that the judge’s decision was “totally biased and dumb.”
Taitz had filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Washington, DC, alleging that the social security number which Obama is using was never assigned to him and therefore wished to inspect the Department’s birth records for Obama to determine if identity fraud has been committed. Last month she met with congressional staffers and legal counsel regarding the social security matter, on which The Post & Email reported here.
Obama has two relatives, both found to be illegal aliens in this country, who appear to have been using stolen social security numbers. Judge Royce Lamberth of the U.S. District Court in Washington, DC has stated that the public would not be served by discovering whether or not Obama is using a number fraudulently despite affidavits and statements from private investigators stating that he is.
The U.S. Congress, federal judges, and executive branch have all refused to investigate allegations that the purported long-form birth certificate released by the White House is a forgery. WorldNetDaily has published several reports from various document specialists stating that the document is a fraud, including a two-part series based on the work of Dr. Ron Polland, whom The Post & Email had interviewed regarding his initial evaluation of the April 27, 2011 White House release.
Taitz had requested production of the original document through a subpoena which she issued as an attorney, and later, by a subpoena issued by the U.S. District Court in Honolulu. Director of Health Loretta Fuddy had refused to comply with the subpoenas and was defended by Nagamine.
Dr. Taitz described the events of October 12 as follows:
I filed a case in Hawaii against the Director of Health, Loretta Fuddy, and their registrar, Dr. Alvin Onaka, and I was seeking the original birth certificate for expert inspection in light of the fact that it was provided to the public and in court by the U.S. attorneys. According to experts, it is a forgery. The Department of Health refused to comply. I filed a Freedom of information request according to their state statutes, and when they refused to comply, I filed a case in their circuit court.
We had a hearing on October 12, and what the state was arguing that I could not have access to the original document due to the consideration of privacy. It was very clear that the judge had marching orders to dismiss the case on the same basis. The hearing lasted about an hour, and Fox News Hawaii, Channel 2, was there and positioned a camera at the jury box and recorded the proceeding in full. Channel 8 was there as well. The judge had said only one camera could be in the courtroom.
The state argued “privacy.” When I came to my rebuttal, I stated to the judge, “Mr. Obama has waived his right to privacy because he released the document and privacy is no longer an excuse.”
I arose very early that day, and the first thing I did when I arrived in Hawaii was go to the court to verify the time and place of the hearing. I also went to the law library and made copies of their administrative statutes which are the same as everywhere else in the country. There is a statute under Title 8, Administrative Proceedings, Section 91-10, subsection 2, which states, “Documentary evidence may be received in the form of copies or excerpts if the original is not readily available, provided that upon request, parties should be given an opportunity to compare the copy with the original.” It’s clear. The judge clearly violated the rule pertaining to public proceedings.
The Deputy Attorney General’s husband handled Obama’s sister’s divorce, and there is a conflict of interest right there. Her husband is a private attorney for the Obama family. I wrote to Jill Nagamine previously asking her to confirm those facts and if true, recuse herself.
At that point, Nagamine was grasping at straws and came up with a new excuse, which was just unthinkable. Without citing any specific statutes, she stated that in the state of Hawaii, the rules are such that any verification necessary is answered by a “yes” or “no.”
Taitz stated that judges around the country have become “criminally complicit” in “covering up” for Obama’s ineligibility, “forgery,” and social security fraud. When The Post & Email asked her if she believed that “We the People” can do anything about it, she responded:
Absolutely. We see the Tea Party movement, Occupy Wall Street…I think it’s time to occupy the courts, the Congress, the White House. The people need to demand the removal from the bench of corrupt judges and removal from the Congress of corrupt congressmen. First and foremost, we need to clean up our completely corrupted election system. A foreign company, Dominion, which purchased most of our hardware and software as well as Diebold and Sequoia, controls our elections. We need to go back to elections being managed state by state, within the states, not by a foreign corporation, because there is so much evidence of corruption of the voting software and hardware. We need to go back to paper ballots as they did in Germany. We need people at the precincts counting those ballots. We need people verifying that voter registrations are valid. We have an unprecedented level of corruption in our election system, in our judiciary and our Congress. That’s how we have a complete fraud and a criminal sitting in the White House for the past three years.
We have to stand up to this.
Taitz reported that she plans to file “multiple appeals” in Hawaii and in Washington, DC. She is seeking donations for the “thousands and thousands of dollars” which the actions will necessitate. People so inclined may donate at her website.
“MULTIPLE APPEALS” TO BE FILED
by Sharon Rondeau
Editor's Note: Re-posted with permission of The Post & Email.
Dr. and Atty. Orly Taitz of California has filed multiple state and federal actions to discover if Obama is using a fraudulent social security number and forged birth certificate
(Oct. 21, 2011) — On October 12, 2011, Dr. Orly Taitz and Hawaii Assistant Attorney General Jill Nagamine appeared before Judge Rhonda Nishimura in Honolulu Circuit Court following Taitz’s request to inspect the original birth record of Barack Hussein Obama, who is serving as president but may not be constitutionally qualified by Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution and has been accused of social security fraud.
Taitz wished to compare the image Obama had released on April 27, 2011 to the records on file with the Hawaii Department of Health, if they exist, to see if they match.
Nagamine represented Health Director Loretta Fuddy, who had refused to comply with two subpoenas issued for disclosure of the birth record. Taitz stated on her website that she believed there has been a conflict of interest in Nagamine representing the Hawaii Department of Health because Nagamine’s husband had represented Obama’s half-sister in a divorce.
Fox Channel KHON-2 covered the court hearing.
Taitz has stated that a total of 135 newspapers across the country have now published articles touching on the Obama eligibility question.
In the past, Nagamine has refused to corroborate that Obama is a “natural-born American citizen,” a statement made by then-Health Department Director Dr. Chiyome Fukino. Earlier this year, Fukino stated in an interview with MSNBC that Obama’s original birth record was half-typed and half-handwritten, but the appearance of the image Obama released on April 27, 2011 does not match that description.
As an attorney, Taitz had issued a subpoena to Fuddy to produce the document last summer, followed up by a subpoena issued by the U.S. District Court in Honolulu. On the deadline date of August 8, 2011, surrogates for Fuddy presented a letter to Taitz stating that Obama’s original record could not be disclosed due to privacy concerns.
Taitz has argued that Obama has already waived his right to privacy because of his release of an image purported to be a certified copy of his original birth record on April 27, 2011.
Nishimura dismissed the case at the request of the attorney general’s office as shown in a brief video clip (courtesy ObamaReleaseYourRecords), but Taitz stated that the judge’s decision defies a Hawaii statute regarding government documents. Taitz also maintained that numerous experts have deemed the document Obama released in April a forgery. Taitz claimed that the judge’s decision was “totally biased and dumb.”
Taitz had filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Washington, DC, alleging that the social security number which Obama is using was never assigned to him and therefore wished to inspect the Department’s birth records for Obama to determine if identity fraud has been committed. Last month she met with congressional staffers and legal counsel regarding the social security matter, on which The Post & Email reported here.
Obama has two relatives, both found to be illegal aliens in this country, who appear to have been using stolen social security numbers. Judge Royce Lamberth of the U.S. District Court in Washington, DC has stated that the public would not be served by discovering whether or not Obama is using a number fraudulently despite affidavits and statements from private investigators stating that he is.
The U.S. Congress, federal judges, and executive branch have all refused to investigate allegations that the purported long-form birth certificate released by the White House is a forgery. WorldNetDaily has published several reports from various document specialists stating that the document is a fraud, including a two-part series based on the work of Dr. Ron Polland, whom The Post & Email had interviewed regarding his initial evaluation of the April 27, 2011 White House release.
Taitz had requested production of the original document through a subpoena which she issued as an attorney, and later, by a subpoena issued by the U.S. District Court in Honolulu. Director of Health Loretta Fuddy had refused to comply with the subpoenas and was defended by Nagamine.
Dr. Taitz described the events of October 12 as follows:
I filed a case in Hawaii against the Director of Health, Loretta Fuddy, and their registrar, Dr. Alvin Onaka, and I was seeking the original birth certificate for expert inspection in light of the fact that it was provided to the public and in court by the U.S. attorneys. According to experts, it is a forgery. The Department of Health refused to comply. I filed a Freedom of information request according to their state statutes, and when they refused to comply, I filed a case in their circuit court.
We had a hearing on October 12, and what the state was arguing that I could not have access to the original document due to the consideration of privacy. It was very clear that the judge had marching orders to dismiss the case on the same basis. The hearing lasted about an hour, and Fox News Hawaii, Channel 2, was there and positioned a camera at the jury box and recorded the proceeding in full. Channel 8 was there as well. The judge had said only one camera could be in the courtroom.
The state argued “privacy.” When I came to my rebuttal, I stated to the judge, “Mr. Obama has waived his right to privacy because he released the document and privacy is no longer an excuse.”
I arose very early that day, and the first thing I did when I arrived in Hawaii was go to the court to verify the time and place of the hearing. I also went to the law library and made copies of their administrative statutes which are the same as everywhere else in the country. There is a statute under Title 8, Administrative Proceedings, Section 91-10, subsection 2, which states, “Documentary evidence may be received in the form of copies or excerpts if the original is not readily available, provided that upon request, parties should be given an opportunity to compare the copy with the original.” It’s clear. The judge clearly violated the rule pertaining to public proceedings.
The Deputy Attorney General’s husband handled Obama’s sister’s divorce, and there is a conflict of interest right there. Her husband is a private attorney for the Obama family. I wrote to Jill Nagamine previously asking her to confirm those facts and if true, recuse herself.
At that point, Nagamine was grasping at straws and came up with a new excuse, which was just unthinkable. Without citing any specific statutes, she stated that in the state of Hawaii, the rules are such that any verification necessary is answered by a “yes” or “no.”
Taitz stated that judges around the country have become “criminally complicit” in “covering up” for Obama’s ineligibility, “forgery,” and social security fraud. When The Post & Email asked her if she believed that “We the People” can do anything about it, she responded:
Absolutely. We see the Tea Party movement, Occupy Wall Street…I think it’s time to occupy the courts, the Congress, the White House. The people need to demand the removal from the bench of corrupt judges and removal from the Congress of corrupt congressmen. First and foremost, we need to clean up our completely corrupted election system. A foreign company, Dominion, which purchased most of our hardware and software as well as Diebold and Sequoia, controls our elections. We need to go back to elections being managed state by state, within the states, not by a foreign corporation, because there is so much evidence of corruption of the voting software and hardware. We need to go back to paper ballots as they did in Germany. We need people at the precincts counting those ballots. We need people verifying that voter registrations are valid. We have an unprecedented level of corruption in our election system, in our judiciary and our Congress. That’s how we have a complete fraud and a criminal sitting in the White House for the past three years.
We have to stand up to this.
Taitz reported that she plans to file “multiple appeals” in Hawaii and in Washington, DC. She is seeking donations for the “thousands and thousands of dollars” which the actions will necessitate. People so inclined may donate at her website.
Thursday, October 20, 2011
Presidential Candidate: The Others Won’t Touch Obama’s Eligibility Question
REPUBLICAN CANDIDATES HAVE “A.D.D.”
by Cody Robert Judy, ©2011
Editor's Note: Re-posted with permission of the Post & Email.
(Oct. 20, 2011) — Dear Fellow Citizen:
The Media spotlight of the GOP Debates and Republican Campaigns for President are sizzling with excitement.
The pendulum key of our National Security and Economy that is given to the President by order of our U.S. Constitution’s demand for a natural born citizen has been forsaken by all of these spotlighted Candidates and their Campaigns except for one.
The Political arena has succumbed to the richness and the feverish pitch which provides the attention and hype the 2012 candidates for President have craved and worked for.
With so much attention going to Obama the past couple of years, the debates have provided the balm for the attention deficit disorder; however, they have also provided you with the clear picture upon which the candidates for President in the GOP stand on Obama’s eligibility.
The Cody Robert Judy for President 2012 U.S.C. Eligibility Campaign has accomplished just the opposite; and we’d like to inform you of the political paradigm that makes this campaign the most important one when it comes to our current Constitutional Crisis and the A.D.D. of all the Republican Candidates.
Instead of sweeping Obama’s U.S.C. eligibility demand under the carpet in order to bask in the Media’s attention, the very name of Cody’s Presidential Campaign brings to your attention the Constitution and effectively Obama’s eligibility.
Cody is calling now for 1,000 Patriots to contribute $100 dollars to his 2012 U.S.C. Eligibility Campaign who will receive a signed and numbered commemoration plaque supporting the eligibility Birther Movement; a noble treasure for your families honor in United States history. Donate: www.codyjudy.us
To understand the work and courage behind Cody’s Eligibility Clarion Call would fill a volume that will be shared by our future generations as pivotal in United States history, however, we don’t have time here, so let’s break it down to bare bones, which you can grasp in a few bullet points.
As candidly and transparently as possible let’s shock you with a revelation; the GOP Candidates cannot legally defend the Constitution’s eligibility requirement from Obama without committing what is termed a hate crime.
In crime and law, hate crimes (also known as bias-motivated crimes) occur when a perpetrator targets a victim because of his or her perceived membership in a certain social group, usually defined by racial group, religion, sexual orientation, disability, class, ethnicity, nationality, age, gender, gender identity, social status or political affiliation. Here’s how Obama has used this to silence the GOP Candidates.
The Republican Nominee Sen. John McCain was born in Panama, which is a foreign nation. He was not born in a military base hospital but in a Panama’s hospital and his citizenship was granted to him 11 months after his birth by an Act of Congress specifically for the Panama Canal Zone in a process we call naturalization, or in other words adopted as a citizen the same as any other immigrant applying from Panama or any other foreign country would be.
In 2008 all of the Republican U.S. Senators, accept Sen. McCain, voted for non-binding U.S. Senate Resolution 511 which announced to the world Sen. John McCain was a ‘natural born citizen’. This was co-sponsored in a Democrat controlled U.S. Senate by then Sen. Hillary Clinton and Sen. Barack Obama.
Cody Robert Judy was the only Presidential Candidate in the 2008 Class of Presidential Candidates to oppose this legally in the Federal District Court in Nevada prior to Sen. McCain being made the Republican nominee; that law suit also objected to Sen. Barack Obama’s Eligibility as Kenyan Born and to a father who was not a U.S. Citizen and a mother not old enough by law to confer U.S. citizenship.
Cody is calling now for 1,000 Patriots to contribute $100 dollars to his 2012 U.S.C. Eligibility Campaign who will receive a signed and numbered commemoration plaque supporting the eligibility Birther Movement; a noble treasure for your families honor in United States history. Donate: www.codyjudy.us
There is no Presidential Candidate no matter how popular or politically experienced that can survive the legal rationale of racism. The media, amenable to slander, aired such claims with ABC’s Whoopi Goldberg, NBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell, and CBS News host Bob Schieffer against Donald Trump capable of suing them in court for slander, who also incidentally received a new 65 million dollar contract after bailing out of his toe-dip Presidential run, providing the stage for Barack Obama to release his long form fabrication i.e., birth certificate.
For a Racism or Hate Crime to be justified on a third party, one must first have 2 opposing parties with which to discriminate. In the 2008 Presidential Field, we had Sen. McCain and Sen. Obama both constitutionally unqualified. By giving McCain a pass for being a natural born citizen, albeit unconstitutional, and his being a foreign born naturalized citizen by not 1 but 2 Acts of Congress, the legal assumption would be if you didn’t give Obama the same pass he would have a claim of being treated differently under the exact same laws, justifying a legally abusive verbal ‘hate crime’.
That is right; Cody Robert Judy stands alone on being legally able to bring Obama’s Eligibility up as a grievance to Congress and in his campaign, made possible by his Constitutional Stand against both McCain and Obama. Do you see any reason to support Cody’s Campaign yet?
Now you understand why 3 major media outlets are afraid to let Cody’s Cat out of the bag so-to-speak and why it is so very important for you to support Cody’s U.S.C. Eligibility Campaign for President.
Will you please join Cody Robert Judy’s defense for the Constitution regardless of your party affiliation?
That is our question to you because as American’s we all have the Constitution in common regardless of party affiliation; you can do it with one candidate who has the law on his side, a record to withstand the racist charge, and at the same time is preserving and protecting the United States Constitution as a President should be.
Cody is calling now for 1,000 Patriots to contribute $100 dollars to his 2012 U.S.C. Eligibility Campaign who will receive a signed and numbered commemoration plaque supporting the eligibility Birther Movement; a noble treasure for your families honor in United States history. Donate: www.codyjudy.us
While some have used Cody’s not being elected to any office in the past as a claim of his not being qualified, we recall Cody is more Constitutionally qualified than the present occupant of the White House, and Obama’s voting ‘present’ as a Senator certainly didn’t act to qualify him, and by no means is any Governor running prepared either for the vast differences of any particular state compared to the Nation as a whole, but Cody has the record of preserving and protecting the United States Constitution that we want in a President.
We all know that when called upon any one of the candidates with the GOP would likely be honored to serve in Cody’s Cabinet just as Gov. Jon Huntsman served in Obama’s after all we are all concerned about our Country, but to honor our Constitution that unites all of 50 States, don’t you think rewarding a man whose defended the Constitution’s key to our National Defense and Economy makes common sense and more importantly will put Washington, DC on notice that We The People are in fact in charge?
Cody Robert Judy is blowing the Constitution’s Trumpet unlike any other presidential candidate in 2012 and we’re asking you to join him. He is serving you now as you would want a President to be serving the Constitution. Let’s not “hope” for a candidate to serve the Constitution when they get there; let’s elect one who is serving the Constitution now. Please go to www.codyjudy.us and make a donation now.
Cody is calling now for 1,000 Patriots to contribute $100 dollars to his 2012 U.S.C. Eligibility Campaign who will receive a signed and numbered commemoration plaque supporting the eligibility Birther Movement; a noble treasure for your families honor in United States history. Donate: www.codyjudy.us
————————-
Editor’s Note: The Post & Email does not endorse candidates for any office. Here, we have reproduced Mr. Judy’s address to fellow Americans because of its focus on the Obama eligibility question, which The Post & Email has covered from its inception in late 2009. The solicitation for donations is Mr. Judy’s alone.
REPUBLICAN CANDIDATES HAVE “A.D.D.”
by Cody Robert Judy, ©2011
Editor's Note: Re-posted with permission of the Post & Email.
(Oct. 20, 2011) — Dear Fellow Citizen:
The Media spotlight of the GOP Debates and Republican Campaigns for President are sizzling with excitement.
The pendulum key of our National Security and Economy that is given to the President by order of our U.S. Constitution’s demand for a natural born citizen has been forsaken by all of these spotlighted Candidates and their Campaigns except for one.
The Political arena has succumbed to the richness and the feverish pitch which provides the attention and hype the 2012 candidates for President have craved and worked for.
With so much attention going to Obama the past couple of years, the debates have provided the balm for the attention deficit disorder; however, they have also provided you with the clear picture upon which the candidates for President in the GOP stand on Obama’s eligibility.
The Cody Robert Judy for President 2012 U.S.C. Eligibility Campaign has accomplished just the opposite; and we’d like to inform you of the political paradigm that makes this campaign the most important one when it comes to our current Constitutional Crisis and the A.D.D. of all the Republican Candidates.
Instead of sweeping Obama’s U.S.C. eligibility demand under the carpet in order to bask in the Media’s attention, the very name of Cody’s Presidential Campaign brings to your attention the Constitution and effectively Obama’s eligibility.
Cody is calling now for 1,000 Patriots to contribute $100 dollars to his 2012 U.S.C. Eligibility Campaign who will receive a signed and numbered commemoration plaque supporting the eligibility Birther Movement; a noble treasure for your families honor in United States history. Donate: www.codyjudy.us
To understand the work and courage behind Cody’s Eligibility Clarion Call would fill a volume that will be shared by our future generations as pivotal in United States history, however, we don’t have time here, so let’s break it down to bare bones, which you can grasp in a few bullet points.
As candidly and transparently as possible let’s shock you with a revelation; the GOP Candidates cannot legally defend the Constitution’s eligibility requirement from Obama without committing what is termed a hate crime.
In crime and law, hate crimes (also known as bias-motivated crimes) occur when a perpetrator targets a victim because of his or her perceived membership in a certain social group, usually defined by racial group, religion, sexual orientation, disability, class, ethnicity, nationality, age, gender, gender identity, social status or political affiliation. Here’s how Obama has used this to silence the GOP Candidates.
The Republican Nominee Sen. John McCain was born in Panama, which is a foreign nation. He was not born in a military base hospital but in a Panama’s hospital and his citizenship was granted to him 11 months after his birth by an Act of Congress specifically for the Panama Canal Zone in a process we call naturalization, or in other words adopted as a citizen the same as any other immigrant applying from Panama or any other foreign country would be.
In 2008 all of the Republican U.S. Senators, accept Sen. McCain, voted for non-binding U.S. Senate Resolution 511 which announced to the world Sen. John McCain was a ‘natural born citizen’. This was co-sponsored in a Democrat controlled U.S. Senate by then Sen. Hillary Clinton and Sen. Barack Obama.
Cody Robert Judy was the only Presidential Candidate in the 2008 Class of Presidential Candidates to oppose this legally in the Federal District Court in Nevada prior to Sen. McCain being made the Republican nominee; that law suit also objected to Sen. Barack Obama’s Eligibility as Kenyan Born and to a father who was not a U.S. Citizen and a mother not old enough by law to confer U.S. citizenship.
Cody is calling now for 1,000 Patriots to contribute $100 dollars to his 2012 U.S.C. Eligibility Campaign who will receive a signed and numbered commemoration plaque supporting the eligibility Birther Movement; a noble treasure for your families honor in United States history. Donate: www.codyjudy.us
There is no Presidential Candidate no matter how popular or politically experienced that can survive the legal rationale of racism. The media, amenable to slander, aired such claims with ABC’s Whoopi Goldberg, NBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell, and CBS News host Bob Schieffer against Donald Trump capable of suing them in court for slander, who also incidentally received a new 65 million dollar contract after bailing out of his toe-dip Presidential run, providing the stage for Barack Obama to release his long form fabrication i.e., birth certificate.
For a Racism or Hate Crime to be justified on a third party, one must first have 2 opposing parties with which to discriminate. In the 2008 Presidential Field, we had Sen. McCain and Sen. Obama both constitutionally unqualified. By giving McCain a pass for being a natural born citizen, albeit unconstitutional, and his being a foreign born naturalized citizen by not 1 but 2 Acts of Congress, the legal assumption would be if you didn’t give Obama the same pass he would have a claim of being treated differently under the exact same laws, justifying a legally abusive verbal ‘hate crime’.
That is right; Cody Robert Judy stands alone on being legally able to bring Obama’s Eligibility up as a grievance to Congress and in his campaign, made possible by his Constitutional Stand against both McCain and Obama. Do you see any reason to support Cody’s Campaign yet?
Now you understand why 3 major media outlets are afraid to let Cody’s Cat out of the bag so-to-speak and why it is so very important for you to support Cody’s U.S.C. Eligibility Campaign for President.
Will you please join Cody Robert Judy’s defense for the Constitution regardless of your party affiliation?
That is our question to you because as American’s we all have the Constitution in common regardless of party affiliation; you can do it with one candidate who has the law on his side, a record to withstand the racist charge, and at the same time is preserving and protecting the United States Constitution as a President should be.
Cody is calling now for 1,000 Patriots to contribute $100 dollars to his 2012 U.S.C. Eligibility Campaign who will receive a signed and numbered commemoration plaque supporting the eligibility Birther Movement; a noble treasure for your families honor in United States history. Donate: www.codyjudy.us
While some have used Cody’s not being elected to any office in the past as a claim of his not being qualified, we recall Cody is more Constitutionally qualified than the present occupant of the White House, and Obama’s voting ‘present’ as a Senator certainly didn’t act to qualify him, and by no means is any Governor running prepared either for the vast differences of any particular state compared to the Nation as a whole, but Cody has the record of preserving and protecting the United States Constitution that we want in a President.
We all know that when called upon any one of the candidates with the GOP would likely be honored to serve in Cody’s Cabinet just as Gov. Jon Huntsman served in Obama’s after all we are all concerned about our Country, but to honor our Constitution that unites all of 50 States, don’t you think rewarding a man whose defended the Constitution’s key to our National Defense and Economy makes common sense and more importantly will put Washington, DC on notice that We The People are in fact in charge?
Cody Robert Judy is blowing the Constitution’s Trumpet unlike any other presidential candidate in 2012 and we’re asking you to join him. He is serving you now as you would want a President to be serving the Constitution. Let’s not “hope” for a candidate to serve the Constitution when they get there; let’s elect one who is serving the Constitution now. Please go to www.codyjudy.us and make a donation now.
Cody is calling now for 1,000 Patriots to contribute $100 dollars to his 2012 U.S.C. Eligibility Campaign who will receive a signed and numbered commemoration plaque supporting the eligibility Birther Movement; a noble treasure for your families honor in United States history. Donate: www.codyjudy.us
————————-
Editor’s Note: The Post & Email does not endorse candidates for any office. Here, we have reproduced Mr. Judy’s address to fellow Americans because of its focus on the Obama eligibility question, which The Post & Email has covered from its inception in late 2009. The solicitation for donations is Mr. Judy’s alone.
Are All of the Obamas Illegal Aliens?
“MASTERS AT GAMING THE SYSTEM”
Editor's Note: Re-posted with permission of The Post & Email.
October 20, 2011
The Social Security Administration refuses to release information about the Connecticut social security number Obama is using which many have claimed is fraudulent
Dear fellow American,
There is substantial evidence that practically the entire Obama Family are masters at gaming the system, milking it for whatever it is worth, and engaging in FRAUD whenever necessary. This is a VERY SERIOUS CHARGE. Perhaps you are aware that several lawsuits are currently under way, trying – under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) – to force the Social Security Administration to produce the “original” Application Form, where Barack Obama supposedly applied for the Social Security Number listed on his latest Federal Income Tax Form 1040. These lawsuits are getting nowhere because corrupt Federal Judges are inexplicably refusing to exercise their sworn duty to fairly administer the laws. WHY???
Nearly every member of the US Congress (all 535 members), all 9 members of the US Supreme Court, all members of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff have been notified by Registered US Mail – of compelling evidence – that Obama is a FRAUD - with a nebulous background. Private Investigators have determined the frightening reality that almost 40 Social Security Numbers have been traced to Barack Obama!!! Why would a person need that many SSNs, unless for fraud and corruption – like laundering bribes and payoffs. Why won’t our elected officials at least publicly investigate these serious matters ???
Numerous Complaints of Fraud and Treason have been filed with the FBI and the Justice Department. Why will they not at least Publicly Declare that these numerous charges have been investigated and found Baseless???
The “link” below will take you to the story behind Barack’s “Uncle Roy.” The latest family scandal – Uncle-Gate … which follows Auntie-Gate. He too is an illegal alien in this country from Kenya. He was recently arrested for DUI, after nearly hitting a police car. Turns out he has 2 SSNs, has been Ordered Deported before, but is an “abscounder” – who refuses to leave. The colored words in the Article below are “hot links” to other Sources which back up the accusations.
WHY IS D.C. TERRIFIED TO FACE THE TRUTH??? It looks like we need to replace EVERYBODY there – and Start All Over, again!!! Remember in November 2012.
http://www.thepostemail.com/2011/10/06/omar-onyangos-felonies-examined-in-unclegate/
“MASTERS AT GAMING THE SYSTEM”
Editor's Note: Re-posted with permission of The Post & Email.
October 20, 2011
The Social Security Administration refuses to release information about the Connecticut social security number Obama is using which many have claimed is fraudulent
Dear fellow American,
There is substantial evidence that practically the entire Obama Family are masters at gaming the system, milking it for whatever it is worth, and engaging in FRAUD whenever necessary. This is a VERY SERIOUS CHARGE. Perhaps you are aware that several lawsuits are currently under way, trying – under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) – to force the Social Security Administration to produce the “original” Application Form, where Barack Obama supposedly applied for the Social Security Number listed on his latest Federal Income Tax Form 1040. These lawsuits are getting nowhere because corrupt Federal Judges are inexplicably refusing to exercise their sworn duty to fairly administer the laws. WHY???
Nearly every member of the US Congress (all 535 members), all 9 members of the US Supreme Court, all members of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff have been notified by Registered US Mail – of compelling evidence – that Obama is a FRAUD - with a nebulous background. Private Investigators have determined the frightening reality that almost 40 Social Security Numbers have been traced to Barack Obama!!! Why would a person need that many SSNs, unless for fraud and corruption – like laundering bribes and payoffs. Why won’t our elected officials at least publicly investigate these serious matters ???
Numerous Complaints of Fraud and Treason have been filed with the FBI and the Justice Department. Why will they not at least Publicly Declare that these numerous charges have been investigated and found Baseless???
The “link” below will take you to the story behind Barack’s “Uncle Roy.” The latest family scandal – Uncle-Gate … which follows Auntie-Gate. He too is an illegal alien in this country from Kenya. He was recently arrested for DUI, after nearly hitting a police car. Turns out he has 2 SSNs, has been Ordered Deported before, but is an “abscounder” – who refuses to leave. The colored words in the Article below are “hot links” to other Sources which back up the accusations.
WHY IS D.C. TERRIFIED TO FACE THE TRUTH??? It looks like we need to replace EVERYBODY there – and Start All Over, again!!! Remember in November 2012.
http://www.thepostemail.com/2011/10/06/omar-onyangos-felonies-examined-in-unclegate/
Wednesday, October 19, 2011
Republican Leaders are Helping Obama Destroy America
KNOWINGLY CREATING A DICTATORSHIP
by Lawrence Sellin, ©2011
Editor's Note: Re-posted with permission of The Post & Email.
Theodore Roosevelt was the 26th President of the United States as well as an historian, particularly in naval affairs
(Oct. 18, 2011) — “Political parties exist to secure responsible government and to execute the will of the people. From these great tasks both of the old parties have turned aside. Instead of instruments to promote the general welfare they have become the tools of corrupt interests, which use them impartially to serve their selfish purposes. Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people. To destroy this invisible government, to dissolve the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics, is the first task of the statesmanship of the day.”
President Theodore Roosevelt spoke those words in August 1912. They could have easily been spoken today.
Under Barack Obama, the Democrat Party has been transformed into an anti-American and anti-democratic movement funded from international sources, sustained by the ideology of anti-neocolonialism and executed through socialist and dictatorial policies.
Obama indeed embraced the “Dreams from his Father.” In a 1965 paper “Problems Facing Our Socialism” published in the East Africa Journal, his Muslim father, Barack Obama Sr., proposed expanding government control, wealth seizure by the state and the confiscation of foreign owned land, all policies closely resembling those eventually implemented by President Robert Mugabe of totalitarian and moribund country of Zimbabwe.
As Dinesh D’Souza wrote and the Obama-supported Occupy Wall Street mobs are now violently expressing throughout the country:
“From a very young age and through his formative years, Obama learned to see America as a force for global domination and destruction. He came to view America’s military as an instrument of neocolonial occupation. He adopted his father’s position that capitalism and free markets are code words for economic plunder. Obama grew to perceive the rich as an oppressive class, a kind of neocolonial power within America. In his worldview, profits are a measure of how effectively you have ripped off the rest of society, and America’s power in the world is a measure of how selfishly it consumes the globe’s resources and how ruthlessly it bullies and dominates the rest of the planet.”
The rich, according to the “Occupy Wall Street” protesters, Obama and the Democrat Party, aren’t paying their “fair share.” This by itself seems odd given that the top 1% of Americans pay 40% of all federal income taxes; the next 9% of income earners pay another 30%. So the top 10% pays 70% of the taxes.
As D’Souza notes, Obama’s anti-neocolonialism explains his support for the U.S. Export-Import Bank offer of $2 billion in loans and guarantees to Brazil’s state-owned oil company Petrobras to finance exploration in the Santos Basin near Rio de Janeiro–not so the oil ends up in the U.S., but so that the oil can stay in Brazil.
Coincidentally, George Soros invested nearly $1 billion in Petrobras shares for his hedge fund right before the Export-Import Bank announced the loan.
Obama’s philosophy also explains why he supports a $100 million mosque near the site where terrorists in the name of Islam brought down the World Trade Center and his directive to the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to improve relations with the Muslim world by finding “a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science and math and engineering.”
It has never been clear who paid for Obama’s Harvard education, but it is possible, if not likely, that the money came from Saudi Arabia.
It was Obama’s friendship with Khalid Abdullah Tariq al-Mansour and his sponsorship of Obama as a prospective Harvard law student, however, that probably helped merge Obama’s innate anti-colonialist views with those of an Islamic and black nationalist.
Formerly known as Donald Warden, al-Mansour, an American, was a mentor of Black Panther founders Huey Newton and Bobby Seale in the early 1960s. He changed his name after studying Islam and learning Arabic. He is well known within the black community as a lawyer, an orthodox Muslim, a black nationalist, an author, an international deal-maker, an educator, and an outspoken enemy of Israel. His writings and books are packed with anti-American rhetoric reminiscent of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Obama’s disgraced former pastor. Al-Mansour has close ties to Saudi Arabia and is a personal advisor to Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, the world’s 19th wealthiest person.
Obama’s and the goals of his anti-American fellow travelers can best be achieved by assaulting the Constitution, fostering alternative legal structures like sharia law, economically weakening America to the point of global impotence and fragmenting America into a politically-correct and multicultural society.
Those goals have been incorporated into the policies of the Democrat Party, a process which continues without any significant opposition from the Republican Party, both of whose members have become the tools of corrupt interests, which use them impartially to serve their selfish purposes.
For over three years the United States has faced its gravest Constitutional crisis since the Civil War and the greatest fraud ever perpetrated on the American people.
Yet not a single Republican at the national level has honored his or her oath of office to support and defend the Constitution by calling for an investigation of Obama’s ineligibility for the Presidency or his crimes committed both before and after occupying the Oval Office.
Obama is an illegal President who violates the Constitution and openly flouts the rule of law by forging his birth documents and Selective Service registration and uses a Social Security number not issued to him.
The evidence is overwhelming that Obama released a forged Certificate of Live Birth on April 27, 2011. A digital document expert has now created a forged duplicate of that long-form birth certificate describing the methodology used to deconstruct the White House document for the purpose of reconstructing the forged version and has made deductions about the alleged forger.
Starting in 2008 and continuing today, Obama and the main stream media successfully intimidated the cowardly Republicans by threatening to call them names like “racist” or “birther.”
Now the Republicans are complicit in a cover-up of Obama’s crimes.
Instead of doing the right thing and working to shatter the unholy alliance perpetuating permanent political corruption, the Republican leadership has decided to do what is politically expedient, perform the role of useful idiots and help Barack Obama further damage the United States.
Ambrose Bierce accurately described Washington, D.C. politics in “The Devil’s Dictionary” (1911): as a strife of interests masquerading as a contest of principles; the conduct of public affairs for private advantage.
The Democrats are hopelessly corrupt, anti-American and beyond salvation. The Republicans have chosen lust for power and greed over love of country.
Short of revolution against the corrupt politicians, ordinary Americans still have one remaining potent weapon; withhold their votes for Republican candidates who refuse to support and defend the Constitution by not speaking out against Obama’s ineligibility and crimes.
Whether with or without Obama in 2012, if the political leadership continues to subvert the Constitution and disregard the rule of law, national chaos will ensue and armed defense by a citizenry being robbed of its life and liberty by an invisible government will be inevitable.
——————————
Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D. is a retired colonel with 29 years of service in the US Army Reserve and a veteran of Afghanistan and Iraq. He receives hate mail at lawrence.sellin@gmail.com
KNOWINGLY CREATING A DICTATORSHIP
by Lawrence Sellin, ©2011
Editor's Note: Re-posted with permission of The Post & Email.
Theodore Roosevelt was the 26th President of the United States as well as an historian, particularly in naval affairs
(Oct. 18, 2011) — “Political parties exist to secure responsible government and to execute the will of the people. From these great tasks both of the old parties have turned aside. Instead of instruments to promote the general welfare they have become the tools of corrupt interests, which use them impartially to serve their selfish purposes. Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people. To destroy this invisible government, to dissolve the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics, is the first task of the statesmanship of the day.”
President Theodore Roosevelt spoke those words in August 1912. They could have easily been spoken today.
Under Barack Obama, the Democrat Party has been transformed into an anti-American and anti-democratic movement funded from international sources, sustained by the ideology of anti-neocolonialism and executed through socialist and dictatorial policies.
Obama indeed embraced the “Dreams from his Father.” In a 1965 paper “Problems Facing Our Socialism” published in the East Africa Journal, his Muslim father, Barack Obama Sr., proposed expanding government control, wealth seizure by the state and the confiscation of foreign owned land, all policies closely resembling those eventually implemented by President Robert Mugabe of totalitarian and moribund country of Zimbabwe.
As Dinesh D’Souza wrote and the Obama-supported Occupy Wall Street mobs are now violently expressing throughout the country:
“From a very young age and through his formative years, Obama learned to see America as a force for global domination and destruction. He came to view America’s military as an instrument of neocolonial occupation. He adopted his father’s position that capitalism and free markets are code words for economic plunder. Obama grew to perceive the rich as an oppressive class, a kind of neocolonial power within America. In his worldview, profits are a measure of how effectively you have ripped off the rest of society, and America’s power in the world is a measure of how selfishly it consumes the globe’s resources and how ruthlessly it bullies and dominates the rest of the planet.”
The rich, according to the “Occupy Wall Street” protesters, Obama and the Democrat Party, aren’t paying their “fair share.” This by itself seems odd given that the top 1% of Americans pay 40% of all federal income taxes; the next 9% of income earners pay another 30%. So the top 10% pays 70% of the taxes.
As D’Souza notes, Obama’s anti-neocolonialism explains his support for the U.S. Export-Import Bank offer of $2 billion in loans and guarantees to Brazil’s state-owned oil company Petrobras to finance exploration in the Santos Basin near Rio de Janeiro–not so the oil ends up in the U.S., but so that the oil can stay in Brazil.
Coincidentally, George Soros invested nearly $1 billion in Petrobras shares for his hedge fund right before the Export-Import Bank announced the loan.
Obama’s philosophy also explains why he supports a $100 million mosque near the site where terrorists in the name of Islam brought down the World Trade Center and his directive to the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to improve relations with the Muslim world by finding “a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science and math and engineering.”
It has never been clear who paid for Obama’s Harvard education, but it is possible, if not likely, that the money came from Saudi Arabia.
It was Obama’s friendship with Khalid Abdullah Tariq al-Mansour and his sponsorship of Obama as a prospective Harvard law student, however, that probably helped merge Obama’s innate anti-colonialist views with those of an Islamic and black nationalist.
Formerly known as Donald Warden, al-Mansour, an American, was a mentor of Black Panther founders Huey Newton and Bobby Seale in the early 1960s. He changed his name after studying Islam and learning Arabic. He is well known within the black community as a lawyer, an orthodox Muslim, a black nationalist, an author, an international deal-maker, an educator, and an outspoken enemy of Israel. His writings and books are packed with anti-American rhetoric reminiscent of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Obama’s disgraced former pastor. Al-Mansour has close ties to Saudi Arabia and is a personal advisor to Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, the world’s 19th wealthiest person.
Obama’s and the goals of his anti-American fellow travelers can best be achieved by assaulting the Constitution, fostering alternative legal structures like sharia law, economically weakening America to the point of global impotence and fragmenting America into a politically-correct and multicultural society.
Those goals have been incorporated into the policies of the Democrat Party, a process which continues without any significant opposition from the Republican Party, both of whose members have become the tools of corrupt interests, which use them impartially to serve their selfish purposes.
For over three years the United States has faced its gravest Constitutional crisis since the Civil War and the greatest fraud ever perpetrated on the American people.
Yet not a single Republican at the national level has honored his or her oath of office to support and defend the Constitution by calling for an investigation of Obama’s ineligibility for the Presidency or his crimes committed both before and after occupying the Oval Office.
Obama is an illegal President who violates the Constitution and openly flouts the rule of law by forging his birth documents and Selective Service registration and uses a Social Security number not issued to him.
The evidence is overwhelming that Obama released a forged Certificate of Live Birth on April 27, 2011. A digital document expert has now created a forged duplicate of that long-form birth certificate describing the methodology used to deconstruct the White House document for the purpose of reconstructing the forged version and has made deductions about the alleged forger.
Starting in 2008 and continuing today, Obama and the main stream media successfully intimidated the cowardly Republicans by threatening to call them names like “racist” or “birther.”
Now the Republicans are complicit in a cover-up of Obama’s crimes.
Instead of doing the right thing and working to shatter the unholy alliance perpetuating permanent political corruption, the Republican leadership has decided to do what is politically expedient, perform the role of useful idiots and help Barack Obama further damage the United States.
Ambrose Bierce accurately described Washington, D.C. politics in “The Devil’s Dictionary” (1911): as a strife of interests masquerading as a contest of principles; the conduct of public affairs for private advantage.
The Democrats are hopelessly corrupt, anti-American and beyond salvation. The Republicans have chosen lust for power and greed over love of country.
Short of revolution against the corrupt politicians, ordinary Americans still have one remaining potent weapon; withhold their votes for Republican candidates who refuse to support and defend the Constitution by not speaking out against Obama’s ineligibility and crimes.
Whether with or without Obama in 2012, if the political leadership continues to subvert the Constitution and disregard the rule of law, national chaos will ensue and armed defense by a citizenry being robbed of its life and liberty by an invisible government will be inevitable.
——————————
Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D. is a retired colonel with 29 years of service in the US Army Reserve and a veteran of Afghanistan and Iraq. He receives hate mail at lawrence.sellin@gmail.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)