Will the Birth Certificate Investigation “Neutralize” the Mainstream Media?

“THIS IS GOING TO IMPLICATE A LOT OF FOLKS”

by Sharon Rondeau

(Jan. 16, 2017) — On New Year’s Day, “Freedom Friday” radio host and co-founder of PNN News and Ministry Network Carl Gallups released a video taking aim at the U.S. media for failing to report to the public the conclusions reached by criminal investigators and professional forensics analysts of the forgery of Barack Hussein Obama’s long-form birth certificate residing as an electronic image on the White House website.

Gallups, who has followed the five-year investigation closely and provided updates through both outlets, called the media “complicit” in keeping the findings from the American people in what he termed an “eight-year cover-up,” referring to Obama’s time in the White House.

The investigation was commissioned in August 2011 by then-Maricopa County Sheriff Joseph Arpaio at the request of more than 200 of his constituents concerned that the reports of forgery of the birth certificate image would neutralize their votes in the upcoming 2012 presidential election.

Last March, Gallups was deputized by Arpaio in regard to the ongoing investigation. In 2013, Gallups accompanied lead investigator Mike Zullo to the CPAC conference in Washington, DC to reveal some of the evidence collected by the investigative team to current and former members of Congress, none of whom ultimately agreed to take action on the matter.

“I can promise you it’s not going to go away,” Gallups said in the video of what he posited was the media’s “hope” based on its unwillingness to reveal that which investigators have discovered and disclosed to the public since an initial press conference on March 1, 2012.

“They can’t report it,” he said, indicating that the media does not wish to implicate itself in the cover-up despite its central role in it.

The image, released by the White House on April 27, 2011 in response to now-President-Elect Donald Trump’s strident demands for Obama to prove he was constitutionally eligible to hold the office of President, was immediately labeled as fraudulent by several graphics and computer experts.  Nevertheless, every mainstream media outlet presented the image as proof positive of Obama’s claimed birth in Hawaii and consequently, his presumed eligibility to serve.

In a separate development, on June 15 of that year, WND reported that Maj. Gen. Paul E. Vallely (Ret.) related to one of its columnists that he had been told by three retired CIA agents “and some of their analytical associates” that the long-form birth certificate image was a forgery.

Given that revelation, Vallely raised the question as to whether or not Obama met the U.S. Constitution’s qualifications for president and pointed to a cowardly Congress, derelict FBI and a “corrupt” judiciary for refusing to investigate the matter further.

Even at that time, Vallely reported that the phenomenon of the “layering” of the image belied its authenticity, an item which arose over the five-year investigation commissioned by Arpaio’s office.

The March 1, 2012 press conference released evidence demonstrating that probable cause existed to believe that the electronic birth certificate mage could not have originated with a real, paper document.  In addition to the forgery of the long-form birth certificate image, investigators found that the document purported to be Obama’s Selective Service registration form is fraudulent.

With rare exceptions, the media conducted a blackout of developments in the Maricopa County probe which took investigators to Hawaii twice and to the nation’s capital on at least three occasions as well as many points in between.

Because of the inconsistent life narrative of the man who has called himself President of the United States for the last eight years, many Americans have sought to know whether or not Obama meets the Article II, Section 1, clause 5 criterion of “natural born Citizen.”

During the third and last presser held by the Maricopa County team on December 15, Zullo revealed that two well-respected forensics analysts in different parts of the world concluded, from different perspectives, that the long-form image is inauthentic based on nine points of forgery which were apparently lifted from the long-form birth certificate of a woman born in the same hospital Obama has claimed as “the place of my birth.”  Johanna Ah’Nee was born on August 20, 1961, and the nine items duplicated from her birth document appear at precisely the same angle and relative positions on the Obama image, a statistical impossibility, according to both forensics analysts.

“They can’t report it,” Gallups said of the media, which he said stemmed from their silence over the last 5+ years since the investigation was launched.

“The media wasn’t prepared for this,” he said, adding, that there are “VIPs who now get it,” perhaps a reference to Zullo’s recent revelation that certain members of Congress have expressed an interest in the issue.

“This is going to implicate a lot of folks,” Gallups concluded his presentation.