If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my free Email alerts. Thanks for visiting!
CITIZEN JOURNALIST AND OBAMA FOE OUTS THE SCAM
by John Charlton
(Sept. 19, 200) — In a stunning series of events, the Federal Court in Columbus, GA has been the target of criminals engaging in fraud and forgery, in the matter of the so-called Letter of Connie Rhodes, asking Judge Land not to accept any motions in her favor, submitted by her counsel Dr. Orly Taitz.
The Post & Email held off on this story until the letter could be authenticated or reasonably disproven as a forgery.
Now Larry Sinclair, a long time foe of Barack Obama, has outed the scam at his blog.
His simple tools of investigation: the Internet, and picking up the phone.
What he discovered can be read at his blog in detail. Basically, Office Max denies that the fax was ever sent from the their store, which actually does have a fax with that number. Second, the signature on the alleged letter is not that of Captain Connie Rhodes, M.D., US Army, according to Sinclair.
To forge a false phone number on a fax is wire fraud. To submit a forgery to a Federal Court is a felony. To forge such a letter and sign it is the crime of fraud in all states. Since the letter is ostensibly defamatory, the crime of defamation also aggravates each charge.
The clerk of Judge Land’s court is going to look foolish now, esp. since the letter attributes to him giving counsel to the author of the letter. If the author was the forger, then the clerk unwittingly allowed himself to be manipulated, at the very least; esp. since the letter has been entered into the official docket of the case.
How this letter was entered into the docket by the clerk, without the signature of a notary attesting to Rhodes’ signature, seems inexplicable. It is a matter of court proceedure that without a notarized signature, no such letter can be accepted on face value. It also seems inexplicable that the clerk should believe a phone call from an anonymous person (presumably a woman) to be a plaintiff in such a high level case, and accept a letter from her for the docket, without verifying her identity.
The Post & Email will cover this story, in future reports, as it unfolds. It should be noted, however, that forgery implies someone else wrote and published the letter; such a forgery does not necessarily require that Rhodes did not ask this other to do this. This latter contention has yet to be proven: and Rhodes herself must publicly speak out to confirm this story or deny it.
UPDATE 9/22/2009: Sinclair has tweaked his investigation’s findings: he is indicating that a Mr. Parton, a (past?) boyfriend of Rhodes, contacted the assistant Clerk at the Federal Court and convinced the latter to allow him to submit the letter. It seems that the court won’t accept it as authentic without a confirmation by Rhodes; and that Parton may have faxed it from Office Max. — The letter is thus proven to contain a falsehood, to wit that Rhodes herself talked with the clerk; evidently the letter’s author felt justified in assuming the persona of Rhodes, when writing the letter. All of this puts the credibility of the Court in accepting and determining the authenticity of evidence in further doubt.
If readers of The Post & Email have any verifiable information linking Judge Clay D. Land to any politically associated group, which is “anti-birther”, please let us know.