“THERE ARE REPERCUSSIONS FOR THE VIOLATION OF LAW”
by Sharon Rondeau
(Apr. 26, 2017) — Thursday marks the sixth anniversary of the publication of an image said to be a scan of a certified copy of Barack Hussein Obama’s “long-form” birth certificate.
Obama, who ultimately occupied the White House for eight years without any verifiable documentation as to his identity or citizenship, claims a birth in Honolulu, HI on August 4, 1961 to a U.S.-citizen mother and British-citizen father.
On his now-defunct 2008 “FighttheSmears” campaign website, Obama claimed to have been born a dual Kenyan-U.S. citizen, although Kenya was still a British colony until December 1963, when it declared its independence.
The media did not question whether or not a dual citizen met the presidential eligibility criterion of “natural born Citizen” contained in Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution. Obama’s claimed father never became a U.S. citizen, which raised further concern about his eligibility among many Americans.
In addition to these questions, credible reports existed of Obama’s foreign birth in both Indonesia and Kenya which were quietly altered to say he was born in Hawaii as his presidential campaign went forward.
In May 2012, Breitbart News discovered a promotional pamphlet published by Obama’s then-literary agent stating that he was “born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia and Hawaii.” In April 2007, just two months after he announced his candidacy for the White House, the wording was changed to say that he was born in Hawaii. Once confronted with the inconsistency which had remained in print for 16 years, literary agent Miriam Goderich claimed it to be the results of a “fact checking error.”
It is generally understood that literary agents do not research and write their clients’ biographies, but rather, that they rely on their clients to provide accurate biographical sketches.
Within hours after the birth certificate image was posted at whitehouse.gov, analysts began to report that it appeared to be contain multiple “layers” which a scan of a paper document would not produce. Several experts declared it definitely fraudulent on television, YouTube broadcasts and live demonstrations.
In August 2011, a petition signed by 242 constituents of Maricopa County Sheriff Joseph Arpaio asked that he launch an investigation into the origins of the image so as to protect the sanctity of their votes in the upcoming 2012 presidential election in which Obama would seek a second term. Arpaio agreed and commissioned his Cold Case Posse to perform an analysis with the expectation that its genuineness would be swiftly verified.
Several days later, lead investigator Mike Zullo informed Arpaio that the image presented numerous problems and could not be considered an authentic representation of a real, paper document. Consequently, Zullo continued the probe and presented his findings at two press conferences prior in 2012 prior to the election.
After first reporting on March 1, 2012 that probable cause was found to believe the image is a “computer-generated forgery,” on July 17, 2012 Zullo revealed that the standard of probable cause had been surmounted, presenting details to support his conclusions.
Surprisingly, neither Congress. the FBI or the media launched its own independent investigation to verify or disprove Zullo’s findings, which include that Obama’s purported Selective Service registration form is also fraudulent.
At a third and final presser held on December 15, 2016, Zullo revealed that two well-known, outside forensic analysts arrived at conclusions very similar to Zullo’s in regard to the forgery of the birth certificate image.
With his claimed father a foreign citizen, were it to be proved that Obama was born in a foreign country, his claim to “natural born” U.S. citizenship would be imperiled, an issue Congress obviously does not wish to contemplate.
“The media won’t even discuss the findings,” Zullo commented last week on a radio show. Some outlets have misled their reading audience as to the information released by Zullo and Arpaio, which is easily verified.
Members of Congress have since investigated items which have arisen in the young Trump administration, including whether or not Trump’s first national security advisor, Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, obtained “permission” from the appropriate government entities to give a speech in Russia and whether or not any inappropriate Trump-Russia connections existed to affect the outcome of the 2016 presidential election.
Remaining free of investigation is the forgery of two, and possibly more, government documents bearing the name of the putative President of the United States constituting federal-level felonies.
“You always like to know who did it,” Arpaio said more than two years ago.
The judiciary, too, has overlooked that crimes have likely been committed with the purpose of installing and maintaining Obama in office.
As to Flynn, House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz said, “There are repercussions for the violation of law.”