- Law Cases
by Sharon Rondeau
(May 25, 2010) — Last week, a new internet media tool was launched which measures the “engagement” of readers of WordPress, Typepad and Blogger websites. PostRank Analytics™ describes “engagement” as “the attention other people pay to your published content, like blog posts, news & articles. They see and read a post, and then because it’s interesting, inspiring, or controversial, they get ‘hooked’ and decide to take further action. Getting hooked and acting on it when you read something that makes you think, laugh, or get angry is engagement. The actions that people then take are called engagement events.”
The data reflects the ratings for the last three months and reflect the “score,” the blog’s author, and the general topic which the blog covers. Citizen Wells was the top-rated blog in the WordPress category.
Mr. Wells very graciously granted The Post & Email an exclusive interview after these results were published.
MRS. RONDEAU: Thank you so much for your time today, Mr. Wells, and congratulations on your top WordPress blog rating!
MR. WELLS: Well, thank you. I do want to say something to preface everything that follows, if I may. First of all, I want to congratulate you all on your great site, The Post & Email, and all the hard work that you guys do. It’s a great-looking site, and I wanted to say that first. Secondly, anything we say about Citizenwells, it’s a victory for the American people, citizen journalism, fighting all the misrepresentation and the hiding of information. Furthermore, the actual blog Citizenwells — it’s funny, how you look at your last name, “Wells,” and there’s no “i” in it. But the first two letters are “we,” and that really represents what Citizenwells is; it’s a group effort, and I mean a big group, including attorneys, everyday people who comment and provide information. I wanted to say that first. It has never been about me and never will be about me. So I wanted to get that out.
MRS. RONDEAU: We feel the same way at The Post & Email: that we’re not in this for ourselves; it’s not about Sharon Rondeau; it’s not about Mr. John Charlton. We all contribute, but it’s the cause, the fact that we don’t have real “big” media company that reports the truth.
MR. WELLS: No, we don’t; it’s sad.
MRS. RONDEAU: What day did you officially launch the site?
MR. WELLS: It was in January 2008. I would have to go back and check the exact date.
MRS. RONDEAU: I understand that you and Mr. Charlton are well-acquainted.
MR. WELLS: Yes, John used to spend time on my blog before he started his Post & Email.
MRS. RONDEAU: Why did you start your blog?
MR. WELLS: I started out with a strong math/science background and never had any inclination to write when I was younger. Then, over my business career, I got better at it, better at communicating. And I always loved literature but never felt any need to write. So over a period of time I felt as if, increasingly, I wanted to write something. That was one thing working in the background. But in January of 2008, in my day-to-day activities, just talking with my friends and watching what was going on, I knew that I wanted to be more involved in the election cycle. That was clear. I had more time; my kids were grown and I had fewer responsibilities. But then, the other part was that Obama was gaining in prominence and I knew almost nothing about him. So I decided, “This is a good opportunity.”
So I read a story which I thought was preposterous, and I thought, “I’m going to dig and do some research.” Within approximately two days of doing that research, I knew that we had a problem. And I’m talking about digging deep. I have a background in using the internet and researching, and I was so concerned within the first several weeks, it affected my sleep. And I’m talking about the whole big picture about Obama, his background, Chicago corruption, and right on down the line. And then very quickly, when I started asking questions on the internet, I got attacked for it. And I’m talking about something very benign such as “Where was Obama in November of 1999?” and I was amazed.
Then I started following the Larry Sinclair story, and I quickly realized, “Wait a minute. This is not just about his allegation; this is about attacks, death threats, internet scrubbing, misinformation. If you go back to my early articles, you’ll see that after giving him the benefit of the doubt early on, soon I began noticing that we were getting into a new age reminiscent of Nazi Germany and very much like “1984.” I have a hard copy of “1984″ which I have read and reread, and in my early articles, you will see, and others echoed my feelings, we are getting into the age of Big Brother quickly. Now we have firm evidence recently with Google modifying the search engine results which WorldNetDaily reported, and I reported…it is scary. So we are living in the age of Big Brother, I think.
MRS. RONDEAU: Do you think this started before the presidential primaries and Obama entered the picture?
MR. WELLS: Yes. Revisionist history: we all started noticing things. School textbooks, for example, and that’s one of the things that is dear to my heart: kids and textbooks. I actually taught at the community college level many years ago full-time, computer science. We all started watching this play out. It’s like the frog in the pot of water which we all talk about: you turn up the heat little by little. We kind-of noticed it, stopped and paid attention, but we weren’t too concerned about it, and it happened ever so slowly. So, yes, absolutely. But it escalated almost exponentially. I do pay attention, and one of the things I noticed was that these weren’t just overzealous supporters necessarily; there were different groups. I started referring to the Obama camp as the big circle: paid bloggers, right on down the line. Much of this was orchestrated; it was readily apparent, and this was confirmed later on by the Obama campaign.
MRS. RONDEAU: Have they admitted that they have paid people to disseminate their information and viewpoint?
MR. WELLS: Yes, hundreds – and that’s what we know about, and God only knows what is going on behind that and the puppeteers pulling the strings. So you’ve got me wound up now, and God help you!
MRS. RONDEAU: This gives us a good foundation as to why you started the site.
MR. WELLS: Well, I care about this country. I have family, and I do; I really care. I grew up in a time of “Leave it to Beaver,” where people were good people. There was always corruption; there were bad politicians, but you felt as if you were safe because most of the politicians and most of government was looking out for your best interests.
MRS. RONDEAU: And not necessarily looking to take over your life.
MR. WELLS: Bingo. Thank you.
MRS. RONDEAU: How is it looking now?
MR. WELLS: It is scary. Most people don’t have a clue. One of my recent concerns is specifically the Blagojevich trial, Chicago connections and connection to Obama.
MRS. RONDEAU: Have you researched the Blagojevich trial on your own, or have you reported the news that is already out there on it?
MR. WELLS: Since in theory, everything is on the internet, that’s really where most of us do our work. I’ve had some contacts in Chicago that have reported to me behind the scenes. And of course, as you know, I covered the Larry Sinclair story more than anyone else, and I did it for these reasons: I was a skeptic at first. I approached it objectively, but I asked the questions; I was seeking the truth, and over a period of time, through asking those questions and digging behind the scenes, I got to know Larry Sinclair. But as I mentioned, it’s a much, much bigger story which gets into the internet scrubbing, the personal attacks, the death threats…I’ve had death threats against me; some have been reported to the FBI. That’s even another story.
MRS. RONDEAU: So you’ve spoken to Larry Sinclair personally?
MR. WELLS: Yes. It started out by my asking questions, and then after a month or so, we had some phone conversations. I wanted to find out what was going on, because by that time, I knew there was more to the story than met the eye. I was intensely curious, because I was experiencing people attacking me, and I had done nothing wrong. I simply asked some questions. So actually, I became involved more than I had planned. Once we got into this and I saw what was happening, I was not about to let those thugs silence Sinclair and keep the story from the American public. That’s how committed I was to it, and that’s exactly what they were trying to do.
MRS. RONDEAU: Do you think they succeeded in silencing the story?
MRS. WELLS: No, they have not, and all you have to do is look at The Globe, National Enquirer, and so forth, and the fact that the stories are still out on the internet. Fewer people back then were inclined to believe the story, admittedly, but quite frankly, at this point in time, Sinclair has far more credibility with me than Obama does. I say that without any hesitation whatsoever.
MRS. RONDEAU: That was going to be my next question. Do you believe that Larry’s story is factual?
MR. WELLS: I’m as close to 100% convinced as I can be without having been there. I can give you a snippet of detail. His story actually works; if you go back in time to 2007 when he first started talking about it, almost no one knew that Obama spoke at Northwestern University the day after, which meant he was in Chicago. A lot of people aren’t really connecting the dots because the capital is in Springfield. What really caught my attention first when I started digging, after reading the interviews from Tim Russert, The Chicago Sun-Times, The Chicago Tribune, and so forth, they all had the same character to them: Obama was hiding something.
When they asked about his Illinois Senate records, they got these baseless, nonsense responses, and that was interesting. I then went directly to the Illinois Senate records for November 4, 1999, the opening day of the fall session, and Obama was not present. And I thought, “Well, isn’t that interesting?” It wasn’t a smoking gun, but it was darn interesting. So over several months, I knew that Obama was not at the state capital on November 4. He was in Chicago on the 9th, I think, and very few people knew about it. It was not publicized; in fact, it had to be dug out of the recesses of the internet, so the odds were dramatically against Sinclair knowing that such that he could place Obama in Chicago the next morning. And then you throw in other little details. I reported earlier on the connections to Rezko and Levine.
MRS. RONDEAU: Who is Levine?
MR. WELLS: Stuart Levine was the key witness in the Tony Rezko trial. If he is not brought in to the Blagojevich trial, we know that we really have a problem in this country. In simple terms, Levine did the dirty work and was the primary witness at the Rezko trial. Rezko was the brains behind the corruption. In the transcripts of the Rezko trial, it was well-documented that Levine was heavily into drugs. This is another piece of the puzzle.
I believe that Obama’s book was written in such a manner as to pre-emptively defuse certain aspects of his life, the drug use being one of them. We know he has used drugs, and there’s other evidence of his using drugs, even some strong rumors, while at the White House. So the fact that he used drugs in 1999 or could have used drugs in 1999 I think is highly probable. Sinclair alleges it.
Now Levine was an associate of Obama. The really well-documented ties are Obama and Rezko going back to Harvard: strong ties, including FBI mole John Thomas refuting Obama’s claims that Rezko was just someone he saw occasionally. FBI mole John Thomas said, “No, he was documented as going back and forth to Rezko’s office.”
MRS. RONDEAU: What role did John Thomas play in this?
MR. WELLS: It came out during the Rezko trial. He was an FBI mole, and as a matter of fact, his name has surfaced again in a recent article. If you go to my articles, you will see him referred to multiple times. So it is a clear repudiation and Obama getting caught lying again with a strong witness.
So what I’m doing now is showing that it’s just another example of the media’s failure to investigate. Fox, our last haven on television of any real news whatsoever, for whatever reason, has backed off of two things: they not only won’t touch — I’m not talking about Hannity right now, but let’s just mention Beck and O’Reilly, and O’Reilly is the worst…he’s a bloviator and a blowhard, and you can quote me any time you want to, and I’d say it to his face. A few months ago, he interviewed Blagojevich. The only thing he asked Blagojevich about was the alleged selling of the Senate seat. In step with what Blagojevich wants and what the rest of the media is reporting on; however, what I’ve been doing is trying to present the public the truth about this, a 113-page second, superseding indictment of Blagojevich which is loaded with longtime corruption. You’ll see Rezko’s name, Levine’s name, Weinstein, right on down the list. Another thing I’ve pointed out recently which I felt was important but is getting pushed under the rug is the criminal complaint from December 2008. The strongest tie to Obama is that Obama was chairman of the Health Services Committee in Illinois. That is documented. When he was chairman, they had a bill which changed the number of members of the Health Planning Facilities Board that Levine was on that was controlled by Rezko and Blagojevich from 15 to 9. Now this was alluded to in the criminal complaint because they mentioned at that time there were nine members. This is strong, because this goes right back to Obama and Obama getting campaign contributions from some of the Board members as well as being linked to Rezko and Levine. In the last indictment, the 113-page one, that was left out, which really concerns me and I’ve just written about it. To me, something smells. What also smells is the timing of the Blagojevich arrest after the election in 2008. It could have been months earlier and should have been. They talk out of one side of their mouth about protecting the citizens of the State of Illinois, yet they let this corrupt scumbag continue on when they had plenty on him.
MRS. RONDEAU: And if the connections to Obama could have been shown, that could have changed the outcome of the election.
MR. WELLS: Amen and hallelujah. That, along with The New York Times withholding that ACORN article. This is disgusting; really, in my mind, it’s criminal.
MRS. RONDEAU: And the Los Angeles Times withholding the video of the Rashid al-Khalidi dinner.
MR. WELLS: Yes, thank you. But I will give The Times credit for something that I picked up on and reported on I think better than anyone else on the internet, quite frankly. The Los Angeles Times broke a story in April 2008 about Obama’s connections to Robert Blackwell, the Chicago businessman and Killerspin and Obama writing the letter and then Killerspin getting the grant, but then if you dig a little deeper and if you look at many of my articles, you’ll see that Robert Blackwell is connected to Blagojevich.
I must have hit a sore spot. I started digging a little deeper after that LA Times story in April 2008, because The Times, and many times reporters are sloppy, lazy or whatever…Dan Shoman wasn’t just an Obama aide. Dan Shoman was Obama’s campaign manager early on, and they both worked together during a period of time when Blackwell got more state grants. There is a copy of the letter that Obama wrote on Illinois stationery requesting money for Killerspin, so Robert Blackwell emailed me right after I put up my articles about this. I knew that I was doing my job then. I had struck a nerve. He was trying to downplay it. So there are so many details. If this had been any other political person, he would have been out of the running or arrested a long time ago.
But going back to what I was saying a minute ago, this part about the indictment being modified, once again, Blagojevich should have been arrested earlier. I sent a fax of an article to the Chicago office of the Department of Justice indicating that Obama should be arrested and I gave the reasons. Coming right on the tail of Blagojevich, he should have been arrested earlier, and next should be Obama.
Then we have conjecture about Patrick Fitzgerald being let go, but that didn’t happen. Obama pulled him in and gave him a supervisory position. That smells as well.
MRS. RONDEAU: Do you think that that explains why Fitzgerald has done nothing about Obama?
MR. WELLS: Something just really smells about the whole deal. That’s why I questioned the U.S. Department of Justice in one of my recent articles about the number of members being 9 not being in the indictment. Something smells.
MRS. RONDEAU: Did you receive an answer?
MR. WELLS: Back in 2008? No, I did not. But I wanted to make sure that I put the article out there and recorded the fact that it was sent to them and was in front of their face and that we’re watching them. That, to me, is part of it, too, the fact that the media is giving them a free ride, but there are lots of citizens out there that are watching them.
MRS. RONDEAU: Would you say the majority of Americans at large, including those not on the internet, have any idea what is going on?
MR. WELLS: No, and that’s one reason why you at The Post & Email, me, and other citizen journalists are so important. There is a growing tide of people that have their eyes open about Obama. Recently I’ve been listening to the mainstream media, people like O’Reilly — and the Associated Press is guilty of sin; they keep putting out articles that are misleading. Anyway, I did my own informal study. I have some intelligent friends who try to be well-informed, but some of them have been brainwashed…with the mainstream media, we go right back to “1984″ again. It’s just like those TV screens in the houses in 1984; this is the truth. So I’ve been doing an informal study asking people who are otherwise quite intelligent, and my question is, “What is your impression of what Blagojevich is guilty of?” and they all say without a doubt, except for one, maybe: “Selling the Senate seat.” Once again, I look at The Tribune articles quoting the AP, and they all say the same thing: Blagojevich plead guilty to selling Obama’s Senate seat.
MRS. RONDEAU: And that Obama is not accused of wrongdoing?
MR. WELLS: Thank you. Exactly.
MRS. RONDEAU: I’ve read that many times.
MR. WELLS: What I point out is that during the Rezko trial, Blagojevich was not implicated. He was not brought in as a witness, and that is very important. Yet his name came up constantly. And that’s what I’m saying should happen during the Blagojevich trial. I went out on a limb the other day and predicted that he would plead guilty and the reasons. I’m looking at all the data and the fact that Obama controls the Justice Department; that’s the bottom line. When you get right down to it, he does. And you look at all the strange deaths, suicide, whatever…of course, they’re trying to delay the trial via the Supreme Court filing, and that’s just another delaying tactic so he can go on TV again and say he’s innocent and hang out with Donald Trump or whatever and try to downplay this. For my part, over my dead body.
I covered Rezko’s trial pretty extensively, and the Blagojevich trial is really a continuance of Rezko’s trial. I knew that was such a strong suit; it was there and it was not going to go away, and it bothered me. So the Rezko-Obama-Blagojevich saga has been very important to me.
The entertainment culture we live in where Blagojevich goes on Donald Trump’s show or some other show and gets to get up there a parade and say “I’m innocent; I haven’t done anything”…I just felt it was very important to counteract that BS.
MRS. RONDEAU: Do you think the Supreme Court will grant that delay?
MR. WELLS: I will tell you what I think they should do based upon a rational, just world: they should not. Judge James Zagel gave a proper reaction to that: that the trial should go on. The Supreme Court should deny the extension for the same reasons that Judge Zagel gave; there’s no reason why the trial cannot continue on, and quite frankly, there is enough substance in the indictment to go forward.
Now this gets really muddy and mysterious; take the latest indictment. The first count is 40-some pages, and that bothers me as well, because you get convicted on counts; that’s kind-of a scorecard. A lot of these deep-down corruption charges are in that first count. Really, the criminal complaint is a little better, in my mind. It includes the reference to the 9 members in it. They’ve had plenty of time to wordsmith because if you look at these other people, they’ve done superseding indictments in the past. They can reword those things and take out any part that’s nebulous or subject to a Supreme Court ruling. I’m wondering what’s going on behind the scenes: going back to Fitzgerald and the control of the Justice Department, and it does worry me.
MRS. RONDEAU: If Obama controls the Justice Department, does this mean that there is no justice anywhere in the country right now? Has the entire justice system been flipped on its head?
MR. WELLS: We’ve all been looking at this since 2008 with these court cases. I was one of the first entities to report the Philip Berg case. I got a heads-up on it and got it out there quickly. So many people are so frustrated with this whole thing of “standing” and who has standing. Some of it I understand. However, the tossing back and forth of responsibilities, passing the buck, as Truman would say, between the state governments, the election officials and the courts when, in fact, they all swear an oath to uphold the Constitution, has sickened me for some time. So I guess there’s always an issue with justice and politics.
MRS. RONDEAU: Unfortunately the two meet and they’re not really supposed to.
MR. WELLS: Politics has definitely been a factor going to an Ohio case which I’ve been following. It greatly concerns me, and that’s why I insist that we have to change Congress this November, because everything pivots on that, even the Supreme Court justices ultimately are impacted by Congress with the President selecting and right on down the line.
MRS. RONDEAU: Why do you think Obama was able to get in to the presidency without the public’s knowing anything about him?
MR. WELLS: There were several factors, I think. I was on the internet before the election started. I believe this was in the works. Going back to the great quotes from Nazi Germany, for instance: “If you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth,” Bush was lied about, and that set the stage. I’m not a huge Bush supporter, but I think he was OK. He made mistakes but did a lot of things right. But this was built up in a campaign not dissimilar from Nazi Germany.
If you go back to the supposedly intelligent people in Germany at that time, and how Hitler got in, it was the rhetoric, the change, people burying their heads in the sand, not wanting to see the truth. It was a lot of things. But the media obviously played a huge role because part of their function is to present the facts and report the truth to the public.
MRS. RONDEAU: Especially on matters of government.
MR. WELLS: Yes. So it was a lot of things. The mood at the time, that Bush was bad, and the squeaky wheel getting in there, the far left being active on the internet, a lot of things.
MRS. RONDEAU: Are we in a war or a battle now, or would you not liken it to either one?
MR. WELLS: It’s a war between good and evil. I’ve said that for quite some time. Obviously, not every aspect is as pure and “good and evil” or as clean as “good and evil,” but it does, in my mind, come down to that. When I speak of Obama, everything that comes out of his mouth comes out of two aspects of his character: narcissism and his propensity to lie. That explains just about everything. I’m not saying he’s a evil person; I think he has been around the wrong influences, but he certainly is a narcissist. That explains so much: me, me, me.
MRS. RONDEAU: Do you think that the birth certificate is the key to everything or that it’s the dual citizenship which disqualifies Obama, or do you ascribe to both of those theories?
MR. WELLS: Let me start at the top, at elevation 20,000, and I have done this on my blog. The left tries to get you into arguments and diversions and get you off-topic and into gray areas. They love grey areas, such as “George Bush did this,” etc. What I’ve done is to keep it very simple, and this is, I think, a great way to approach it. I’ve put the question this way, and I’ve sent it out to Glenn Beck and others: Why has Obama employed a legion of private and government attorneys to keep his birth certificate and college records hidden? That is the question of the millennium. Start the dialogue there, because most people don’t really know that he has done this. It’s important to start with that question because there’s no argument for it. They’ll say, “Has he?” and then you say, “Yes, here’s where you can go, to this federal site, and you can see who his attorneys are and how much has been spent. You can look at this lawsuit filed in the Supreme Court or District Court; here it is.” There’s no argument for it. Start with that.
Then going beyond that, I was asked to do some research, and it was supposed to be directed at Ron Paul before the election. Dean Haskins took that and produced a really good video from it, so I’ve done a lot of research. People are trying to get argumentative with this, and there’s a context to everything. When the Founders wrote the Constitution, they didn’t explain every word because certain things were understood within the context of common law, Vattel and the way they looked at things. So they worded it because they knew that some of them were not eligible, so they had to put the exception in for the people who were alive then.
MRS. RONDEAU: “…at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution…”?
MR. WELLS: Yes, that’s correct. So I believe based on that that you have to be born to two Citizen parents. Now the other part I guess I’ve already answered in a way, because obviously, Obama clearly has not presented a legitimate birth certificate. I have read extensively about this; I’ve read everything, and he has not. We have the other issue surrounding that of the COLB that was put up on the internet but we have no proof of where it came from. As a matter of fact, we’re not even sure who produced that.
MRS. RONDEAU: I just published an article on this recently at The Post & Email regarding Factcheck, which refuses to answer any questions about the COLB. I asked them where they obtained the document and where is the release form that Obama would have had to have signed to have it released from the State of Hawaii, which is a closed-records state.
MR. WELLS: The bottom line is that people who are straightforward such as John McCain, anyone else who has played Little League or done this or that, has no problem presenting a legitimate birth certificate, including me. I’ve done it multiple times. So he’s hiding something; that’s clear. That’s the bottom line, and what really concerns me also , aside from the narcissism, are the puppetmasters pulling the strings and who they are.
MRS. RONDEAU: Who do you think they are?
MR. WELLS: Is there a Middle East connection? I’m 99% sure there is. I think Pastor Manning is onto something. There was an article in the Greensborough, NC paper a few weeks ago about a gentleman who supposedly attended Occidental with Obama, and I have a mental note to try to look that up and find him. Of course, Occidental is not a big issue, anyway; it’s really Columbia and Harvard, although it’s really Columbia, I think. What about his records? In fact, Hillary Clinton asked him the same thing, and she got the same evasive nonsense. I was in business for myself, and I still have record books, daily records, going back into probably the ’80s. And I was not a U.S. Senator or state senator. So obviously, any rational, thinking person is going to question it. But once again, we’re fighting this Orwellian brainwashing that’s going on, and we just have to keep doing it.
MRS. RONDEAU: Is “1984″ now?
MR. WELLS: Yes, it is now, and we are living it.
MRS. RONDEAU: I wonder how many Americans have read that book? Can the Republic recover from what is happening?
MR. WELLS: I think we can. It is absolutely, completely crucial that we make a big impact on the Congress, because these are the people who are going to listen to us. I don’t care about either party, but we have to be careful not to shoot ourselves in the foot. I’m not against independent candidates; I want somebody in there who is going to vote for the American people and cut spending.
I was just writing about this this morning. I told someone with some money around me back in 2008, “If McCain wins, I think the markets will be OK.” But with Obama, sure enough, the markets started reacting. So I thank God that gasoline has not skyrocketed. Jobless claims came out yesterday, and they were at 25,000. We’re on the precipice, and I think Glenn Beck has done a good job talking about this the economy, our debt service; we’re in jeopardy of having our rating changed…we have to change Congress in a big way this November and then get them to cut spending, get rid of that tax-and-spend bill that’s called a “health care bill.” So the election is crucial. People are talking about wanting to do things now, and I’m all for that. But we have got to stay on point and make sure that we don’t shoot ourselves in the foot. If you want to elect an independent candidate, make sure they can win and get rid of these fools who are killing the country.
I don’t think we dug our grave completely yet, but if we don’t make a big impact on Congress, we’re in trouble.
MRS. RONDEAU: Speaking of Congress, how do you think they’re able to carry on their duties from day to day, knowing that there is most likely a usurper in the office of president?
MR. WELLS: That’s a good question, and it goes back to the journalists: how do they live with themselves, they have families…I’d like to be a fly on the wall somewhere. But I think the blessing of this is that they’ve awakened the sleeping giant, to quote the Japanese admiral, and more and more people are getting involved. We have to let them know now and going forward that we are watching them and we will not put up with this nonsense anymore. In a way, things have quieted down a little into a kind of lull between the tea parties, but I think there still are a lot of people who are upset, and I hope that we don’t lose this cutting edge that we have to change things. But it has to be ongoing. As I said about the frog in the kettle, this has been happening for many, many years.
MRS. RONDEAU: Do you think Americans have fundamentally changed? Are we still the people descended from Patrick Henry, James Madison, Samuel Adams and Benjamin Franklin?
MR. WELLS: Well, we have that part in our souls; my ancestors signed The Tryon Resolves in 1775, the year before the Declaration of Independence. I think there’s something in my genetic code; I know my dad hated injustice. But I think we have definitely become an entertainment culture, and you can see it…in fact, I have some intelligent friends with whom I meet at the coffee shop in the morning, and we were talking about this the other day: societal impact, priorities. We have an entertainment culture, an adulation of sports figures and entertainment figures instead of people such as teachers and other good people. So yes, we have changed and gotten worse in that regard. Of course, TV and the movies have played a part, but I think the overall breakdown of society, values, priorities, it all factors in.
I think at the core, there are still a lot of family people out there who obviously care about their kids, and I think more of them are waking up, attending tea parties and expressing their outrage at what’s going on. Because if it hits them, it hits their families. That is what we have to stay on.
My biggest problem with Glenn Beck is if you don’t want to cover stories, keep your mouth shut. I don’t know if you read my article, but I let him have it.
MRS. RONDEAU: I was going to ask you about Glenn Beck. Why is it that he covers “the Constitution” but he won’t talk about the eligibility question?
MR. WELLS: I know, and when he ran his mouth, I let him have it. I even did some YouTube videos with a Mickey Mouse red phone asking him to call me. I’ll go on TV and confront him! If you don’t want to cover it, that’s one thing, but keep your damn mouth shut and stay out of the way if you’re not going to help!
MRS. RONDEAU: Where will you go from here?
MR. WELLS: Let me give you the rest of the story. Ever since I was a child, I knew there was something I was supposed to do. Within a short while of doing this, I knew 100% that this was what I was supposed to do. I felt as if it was what I was put here for; otherwise, I might have given up on it. I’ve taken grief from lots of different parts of my life, so it certainly wasn’t done to gain any attention. I just did it because I believe I’m supposed to do it; I’ve been given the gifts to do it, and I really believe it’s why I was put here.
I’ve had the dot.com domain for two years, but I was getting traffic on WordPress. They kicked Larry Sinclair off of WordPress and I had to conduct myself in such a manner that I didn’t get knocked off WordPress. And I want to thank WordPress for allowing me to stay up and reach as many people as we have. I’m working on the dot.com now; in fact, I’m using more of an approach that you guys are using. I’ve tried to encourage people to submit more, and some of them have covered some stories. One lady out in Arizona covered a tea party and sent photos, which was great. So I guess the bottom line is we need to remain vigilant and cooperative and do what we can collectively to get the word out.
MRS. RONDEAU: About how many readers do you have each day?
MR. WELLS: It varies. I’ll give you my biggest day: it was over 36,000. I’ve had some peaks and valleys. I think what has kept my viewership up is the buildup of regular readers who link to us, because I noticed a dropoff when Google did its last stunt. It is real; I confirmed it twice, and did a knee-jerk reaction. It is absolutely real what they’ve done. And I was striking a nerve, I’m sure, with the Blagojevich trial articles and Obama’s connections.
MRS. RONDEAU: What did Google do recently?
MR. WELLS: Look in some of my very recent articles. WorldNetDaily came up with the story about Obama’s social security numbers. I watch my blogstats constantly, and that’s how I saw I got this #1 ranking. It was quite by accident; I looked in and said, “Well, that’s interesting.” And I actually was surprised to be #1 in that rating. I knew that I had good traffic and had the volume and the content, but I was a little surprised. It caught me off-guard.
This Google thing is real, though, because, as I said, a few days ago, I was so concerned about the Blagojevich trial and the misinformation that I felt as if I had some power to counteract it because I was getting Google first-page position consistently, and I was doing it with the Blagojevich trial. Well, all of a sudden, it wasn’t happening. And then I noticed concurrently that Bing was picking up that article and it wasn’t showing up on Google. In one case, I put in the explicit heading information that should go straight to my article because no other article fit that description, so I knew at that time somebody was manipulating it. So it’s real, it’s happening, and as I told Zach of ZachJonesIsHome, who is a friend of mine and has been a tremendous help to me and is a great blogger with a strong background…he has been so much help to me over the last two years, going back to the Sinclair story, and is someone you can depend on…we were talking about this the other day, and we will find a way – we’re not going to let them run over us, hide this information – we’ll figure out a way to get it to the public, no matter what you, me, Zach and others have to do. So I am committed to that.
And let me mention this: The Huffington Post is getting really great recognition. Obama mentions Huffington Post as the place to go and guess who has paid The Huffington Post a lot of money? The Obama campaign. It’s documented.
MRS. RONDEAU: Then they’re not journalism if they’re getting money from any political group.
MR. WELLS: It’s obvious; I knew way back that The Huffington Post was just an arm of the Obama camp. It’s clear from their articles, and Obama openly advises people, “If you want to get another viewpoint, read The Huffington Post.” He just said it again the other day.
MRS. RONDEAU: I’m sure your site will continue to flourish, Mr. Wells. Are your plans to continue the site as it is, or are you going to make any changes to it?
MR. WELLS: There’s a story there. I had every intention of changing the header in my blog early on, and after about a month, I looked at it and said, “I kind-of like it; it’s kinda cool,” so I kept it. I got so busy researching and writing, and after a while, people were coming to depend on the articles that I had to just crank out to keep up in such a fashion that the other blogs (The Huffington Post and so forth) didn’t put their misinformation in front of mine. So that was a big motivating factor. The blog is not as slick as it could be, but I’ve put that to the side. Now I’m back working on my dot.com, and that will take me a while, but it’s going to be more in line with what yours looks like. I’m going to keep the WordPress blog there, because that’s where the bulk of the information is, but what I’ll do is put articles on the dot.com and link to them.
MRS. RONDEAU: So you’ll actually have two sites that are active.
MR. WELLS: Yes.
MRS. RONDEAU: Many people have likened this to the Titanic headed for the iceberg and whether or not today, we can do something to avoid that iceberg.
MR. WELLS: We may have hit one already. In my mind, we’re trying to keep it from sinking. First we have to stabilize it and stop the sinking, then we can get fancy and work on more independence and all the things that we want.
MRS. RONDEAU: You mentioned the Manning trial in Harlem. What are your impressions of that thus far?
MR. WELLS: Further corroboration that no one saw Obama at Columbia. It collected and organized the information for me and put it out in front of the public. I think the more this gets in front of the public, you can see it in the congresspeople; you can see it in the people around you; more and more, people are receptive to questioning this guy who considered him the messiah before and untouchable. So that’s what it’s all about. So like anti-matter, it’s anti-apathy. Anything that’s anti-apathy is probably a good thing.
MRS. RONDEAU: It has been a pleasure speaking with you, Mr. Wells, and we at The Post & Email wish you the best in your future endeavors. Thank you very much.
MR. WELLS: You are most welcome, and glad to do it.
© 2010, The Post & Email. All rights reserved.
Tags: 1984, Big Brother, Bill O'Reilly, Blagojevich, Blogger, Citizen WElls, Dan Shoman, Department of Justice, Donald Trump, engagement events, FOX News, George Orwell, Hannity, James Zagel, John Thomas, Killerspin, Larry Sinclair, Nazi Germany, Northwestern University, Obama, Obama's eligibility, PostRank Analytics, Rashid al-Khalidi, Robert Blackwell, Stuart Levine, Supreme Court, The Associated Press, The Chicago Sun-Times, The Chicago Tribune, The Globe, The Huffington Post, The Los Angeles Times, The National Enquirer, The Post & Email, Tim Russert, Titanic, Tony Rezko, Typepad, Weinstein, Wordpress, WorldNetDaily