If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my free Email alerts. Thanks for visiting!


by Sharon Rondeau

Dr. Orly Taitz has consulted with private investigators who have issued sworn statements that Obama's social security number could not have been assigned to him

(Sep. 13, 2011) — Atty. Orly Taitz is reporting that she received a phone call to schedule a meeting with “legal counsel” of “one of the top committee chairs in Congress.”

Taitz filed a lawsuit in February 2011 against Michael Astrue, the commissioner of the Social Security Administration, for refusing to release information through a Freedom of Information Act request she had made

The media has shown no interest in the evidence that Obama is using a fraudulent social security number and provided false information to the public about the issue.  Why would they not be investigating Taitz’s claims?

Taitz has stated that Obama is using a social security number issued in the state of Connecticut but that it had originally belonged to someone born in 1890.  Private investigator told The Post & Email that social security numbers are not reissued once used.

Dr. Jerome Corsi and others have reported that the social security number Obama is using “does not pass a check with E-Verify,” which is described as “an Internet-based system that allows businesses to determine the eligibility of their employees to work in the United States.”

E-Verify can also substantiate U.S. driver’s license numbers.

Judge Royce Lamberth of the U.S. District Court in Washington, DC had granted the defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment in Taitz v. Astrue on August 30, 2011, stating that “Unfortunately for plaintiff, today is not her lucky day.”  Lamberth has been a federal judge since 1987.  On September 9, Taitz filed a Motion for Reconsideration which was docketed on September 13, 2011.

Taitz was able to speak briefly with Texas Gov. Rick Perry and his wife recently about the issue of Obama’s apparent use of a fraudulent social security number and was optimistic that she had been taken seriously.

Two investigative reporters, Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein, played a significant role in exposing the corruption within the Nixon administration during the 1970s, which included Nixon’s knowledge of the burglary of the Democratic National Committee’s headquarters in the Watergate complex in Washington, DC.  Nixon had said in a public address that he had “never obstructed justice.”

Where are today’s investigative reporters?  Why are those trying to find the truth ridiculed, demonized, and had their websites attacked?

Obama had promised “hope and change” and still promises “transparency.”  Then why is he using a stolen social security number?  Why is he asking his civilian army to report “attacks” on him?

If there is “overwhelming” evidence of Obama’s eligibility for the presidency, why are his supporters so defensive about the issue?

Why will the Hawaii Department of Health not release his original birth record since Obama has already released certified copies of it himself?  Is it because there is none?  Doesn’t “transparency” outweigh “privacy?”

Is any media source willing to find out the truth about Obama’s questionable documentation?  Might a select committee in the U.S. House of Representatives?

Has the biggest scam in U.S. political history been perpetrated on the American people?

The Post & Email has placed a call to Orly Taitz and is awaiting her response.