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


by Sharon Rondeau

Did Obama achieve the presidency under false pretenses?

(Jan. 22, 2012) — On January 26, 2012, an administrative hearing will be held at 9:00 a.m. in Atlanta, GA, regarding the constitutional eligibility of one “Barack Hussein Obama” and whether or not his name should be placed on that state’s ballot for the 2012 presidential election.

But is identity fraud, rather than ineligibility, the actual crime?

Recently Atty. Orly Taitz, one of three attorneys bringing ballot challenges on the 26th, has been informed in an email that the courtroom has been changed in order to provide “better multimedia equipment for your convenience.”  The mainstream media has begun to cover the upcoming hearing challenging Obama’s eligibility, and a citizen video urges concerned citizens to attend.

What will be the consequences if Obama does not appear? Atty. Mario Apuzzo responded to the question:

…The subpoena issued to Obama comes from an administrative court rather than a law court. A court-issued subpoena has the authority of a court order whether it comes from a law court or an administrative one.

Obama just happens to be the President now and would have to take time out of his official schedule to honor the subpoena. Nevertheless, Obama is subpoened as a private individual, not as the President.

Does Obama have to honor the subpoena? The only way to get out of honoring a subpoena is to have it quashed on a motion to quash. Obama tried that and it has so far failed. He can attempt to file a motion for reconsideration. But until the court changes its mind, he must honor the subpoena and here is why.

“It is beyond dispute that there is in fact, a public obligation to provide evidence, see United States v. Bryan, 339 U. S. 323, 339 U. S. 331; Blackmer v. United States, 284 U. S. 421, 284 U. S. 438, and that this obligation persists no matter how financially burdensome it may be. Footnote 10″

“Footnote 10 [I]t may be a sacrifice of time and labor, and thus of ease, of profits, of livelihood. This contribution is not to be regarded as a gratuity, or a courtesy, or an ill-required favor. It is a duty not to be grudged or evaded. Whoever is impelled to evade or to resent it should retire from the society of organized and civilized communities, and become a hermit. He who will live by society must let society live by him, when it requires to. 8 J. Wigmore, Evidence § 2192, p. 72 (J. McNaughton rev.1961).”

Hurtado v. United States, 410 U.S. 578, 589 (1973). This is one case among the many on this issue.

Indeed, Obama, as a member of legally constitutued society, as a “public obligation” to provide evidence to a court, whether that court is a law court or an administrative one. His obligation is even greater given that the subpoena touches upon his right to eventually hold a public office should he win the election. Even Congress, which is not a law court, issues subpoenas which must be obeyed at the risk of suffering severe sanctions, including incarceration.

The only way that Obama could avoid the subpoena is to show that he has some privilege that protects him from giving the requested evidence. Again, Obama has been subpoened as a private person, a candidate for public office, not as the President of the United States. From the Georgia court’s ruling on Obama’s motion to quash, we can see that Obama failed to make such a showing that convinced the court that he in fact has such a privilege.

If Obama does not honor the subpoena, the court, applying Georgia law and precedents from federal law, can issue an order to show cause to him ordering him to show cause why he should not be held in contempt. If he still does not comply, then he would be held in contempt of court. The court in such a case will issue sanctions to him, which can include a monetary penalty, an adverse ruling against him in the case itself, or even incarceration. Since he is the currently putative sitting President, the court would probably just opt for an adverse ruling rather than jail. That would be the best option since it gets to the heart of the matter. That adverse ruling would be that Obama has not met his burden of proof to show that he is an Article II “natural born Citizen.” Hence, the court could recommend to the Georgia Secretary of State that Obama’s not be allowed to be placed on the primary ballot. In the end, the Secretary of State will make the ultimate decision.

Additionally, the current sitting President of the United States not honoring a court-issued and properly served subpoena related to whether the President is constitutionally eligible for that very office could also be deemed a “high Crime[] or Misdemeanor[]” under Article II, Section 4, the article dealing with impeachment of the President. Congress could declare such conduct a high crime or misdemeanor and inititate and prosecute impeachment proceedings against Obama and they should.

For more than three years, Obama has declined to release any information about his medical history, school records and Harvard Law School compositions. One newspaper stated that Obama’s alleged attendance at Columbia University in New York City is “a mystery.”  Why can Columbia produce nothing on the time he allegedly spent there?  Why would they not wish to do so?

The state of Hawaii has refused to produce the original birth certificate allegedly on file with their Health Department, even after receiving a subpoena from the U.S. District Court in Honolulu and a second subpoena from the Georgia administrative court which will hold the hearing on the 26th.

On April 27, 2011, the White House released what it claimed was a certified copy of the original long-form birth certificate held by the Hawaii Department of Health.  Almost immediately, bloggers and document analysts declared it a forgery.

Exactly one year before, The Washington Post placed a photo of Malcolm X with the caption “Obama touts wind energy in Iowa.”  Did the editor not catch that error before publication?

The short-form Certification of Live Birth released in June 2008 following public pressure has also been labeled a forgery.

If true, why would Obama have presented forged documents to the public?  Recent research claims that “Barack Obama II” is a synthetic identity.

On November 30, 2007, Obama signed a notarized statement for the state of Arizona asserting that he was constitutionally eligible for the office of the President, the requirements for which are:

1. being a “natural born Citizen”

2. having resided 14 years within the country, and

3. being 35 years of age or older.

Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, AZ, has launched an investigation into Obama’s eligibility and stated that a report will be issued next month containing information that could be a “shock.”

Is it possible that Obama was born in the United States to two U.S.-citizen parents but that his identity was changed at some point?  If so, why?

At least two researchers have stated that Obama is the son of Malcolm X, a civil rights leader who converted to Islam while in prison and was assassinated on February 22, 1965 in Harlem.  Israel Insider has also presented the possibility based on Martha Trowbridge’s post dated November 2, 2011.

Malcolm X had frequented The Apollo Theater located in Harlem, where on January 19, despite his busy schedule, Obama appeared and sang part of a song with a reference to the “Reverend Al Green.”  Obama’s Georgia attorney, in his Motion to Quash Taitz’s subpoena for Obama to appear with the reqested proof of eligibility, claimed that it was “unreasonable” for Obama to attend because of his presidential “duties,” but he had time to embrace a woman inappropriately during a “campaign stop” in Florida last week while the mainstream media attempted to mitigate the story revealed by the photo.

There have been many inconsistencies in the life story provided to the public about Obama, including the life of his purported mother. It has been reported that Bill Ayers is the author of Obama’s book, Dreams From My Father. If Barack Obama Sr. is not Obama’s father, did Ayers write a work of fiction to convince a gullible American public of something which never occurred?

Are the photos of Obama’s purported relatives “photoshopped?” Was a history created for him, including using the birth certificate number of a child who lived for only one day, born on August 4, 1961?  Was that number conveniently assigned to Obama to help create a new identity for him in the belief that no one would ever ask for tiny Virginia‘s original birth record?  Is that why Obama claims he was born on August 4 when it is alleged that his real birthday is October 28, 1959?

Is it possible that information released by the State Department in regard to the travel records of Stanley Ann Dunham and Barack Obama Sr. is forged? Were the delays caused by the State Department in releasing the documents intentional to keep people focused on Stanley Ann and Obama Sr. when they were not his parents after all?

On January 16, 2012, in recognition of the holiday ascribed to the birthday of the late Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Obama painted on a wall the words, “The time is always right to do what is right.”

Malcolm X was noted for his persuasive public speaking ability and his leadership qualities.  Obama enjoyed a meteoric rise beginning with his speech at the 2004 Democratic National Convention.

Malcolm had decried America as being racist, and during the 2008 campaign, both Obama and the media invoked racism.

On January 21, 2012, it was reported that a “former Obama staffer” was arrested “in a scheme to impersonate Iowa Secretary of State Matt Schultz.”  Bill Ayers reportedly committed identity fraud while on the run from the authorities in the 1970s.

Researcher Martha Trowbridge believes that radical political activist Fred Newman, Ph.D. is Barack Obama’s “Uncle Fred.”

Do Bill Ayers and Fred Newman have anything in common?

Has “Obama” impersonated someone or used a stolen identity? Is that why he is using a social security number from the state of Connecticut, where he never lived or worked?

Why was the criminal record of Bari M. Shabazz altered after his alleged death, which was never proven?  Malcolm X changed his name to “El-Hajj Malik al-Shabazz.”  His wife and daughters used the same surname.

Did Obama achieve the presidency in 2008 “by any means necessary?”  If so, is the crime of identity fraud worse than being constitutionally ineligible?

Who knows the truth, and for how long have they known it?


Editor’s Note:  The link under the words “identity fraud” in our article here in regard to Bill Ayers no longer works.



Join the Conversation


Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  1. I realize that many are speaking negatively about Ms. Taitz…however, after thoroughly researching all of Martha Trowbridge writings from “the Terrible Truth” and even viewing Rev. Phil Valentine’s videos of the likelihood that Obama is the illegitimate son of Malcolm X, this video showing Orly asking the Press to do their jobs and investigate these questionable topics, it is VERY SUSPICIOUS that Obama’s mother has a SS# that ties her to NYC!! Hmmmmm….she was supposedly in Kansas, Hawaii, Indonesia and yet this number ties her to NY….the exact place that Malcolm X lived!! Has ANYBODY found a B/C for a Bari Shabazz? I know that there is a “death” listed for this man, but I’ve NEVER read on Postemail or TTT blog anything about a birth of the so called baby Bari Shabazz. Shouldn’t there be one…somewhere, or have the CORRUPT officials already disposed of it? Isn’t there anyway to check this? Inquiring minds want to know. Thank you…and thanks for your AWESOME website Sharon!! KUDOS to You!! here’s the link:

  2. Yes, outstanding article Sharon. As for Ms. Trowbridge being an Obot, Sir, I think an apology would be in order. I have been working with Ms. Trowbridge throughout a large part of her investigation and I can assure you that she is a real person, of the highest character and moral regard. What we are finding, on a daily basis is quite amazing. I think we all need to step back and realize where the World was in the fifties / sixties, it was a very different place and very strange things happened on a regular, almost daily basis. Some of those events we are only now learning about and beginning to understand the full cause and effect. Not that it makes any difference, Obama must be removed from an Office which he has no right to hold, if that proves to be the case, and Fraud is Fraud, however you choose to say it. These are uncharted waters for all of us, and very treacherous!.

  3. The judge’s ruling in Georgia will send a firestorm either way. If it is ruled that Obama can’t be on their election ballot__how will this affect other states? Will other states rush to challenge Obama’s eligibility as well? If the judge’s ruling is in favor of Obama__can this be appealed and how would this affect the deadline date of any candidate’s eligibility to be on the election ballot?

  4. Thinkwell says:

    “Ms. Trowbridge, there are two things about the admittedly intriguing Obama-life-story that you are postulating that raise yellow flags of caution for me:
    1) your theories seem to be based far more on speculation than factual evidence”

    While my presentation may appear ‘speculative’, please be assured it is far from that.

    “2) your theories seem to open the door to a scenario that, although would likely lead to Obama’s removal, they also might allow for his signings and appointments to stand – specifically and most importantly, his appointments of anti-American radicals to the Supreme Court. This is something we must maintain constant vigilance against and let no such scenario gain false legitimacy.”

    It is my understanding that if the election were conducted under false pretenses [via his presented bio and identity fraud] and additionally, Obama committed perjury by being sworn in under an alias, his Presidency is null and void. Hence his signings and appointments are not valid.

    Attorneys, please expound upon this.

  5. 1. Obama has never been the President regardless of who he really is because he obtained the office fraudulently.Usurpation of the Presidency is a felony and espionage under the Uniform Code of Military Justice:

    To Paraphrase partly “ANY PERSON who lingers during a time of war ” in a place in which the conduct of athe War is conducted and is not authorized to do so IS a SPY

    The SCOTUS ruling in Clintom v. Jones states that :
    ” A sitting President is NOT immune from prosecution for acts committed before having taken the Oath of Office” (Which BYW,Obama flubbed,if you recall).

    Did he take a proper oath? That is one of many other procedural issues that have been brought out such as Cheney NOT asking for Electoral College vote Objections because Pelosi created a diversion at the precise time at which Cheney was obliged to do so.

    Onama X? Most likely says the Israeli press:

  6. If this plays out as true, it implicates the entire DNC, as it certified the qualification of Obama for the 08 elections. If Obama signed the AZ certification that he was eligible to be elected, then Pelosi signed certifications for almost every other state, as a DNC representative. Her duty would oblige her to have personal knowledge that those documents were factual, when in fact they were fraudulent.

    This rises to the level of organized criminal activity in its frequency and intent. Is it also time to RICO Act the DNC for its participation in the usurpation of public office.

  7. Nobody has proven that Obama, Sr. and Stanley Ann Dunham are Obama’s parents and that he was born August 4, 1961. Social Security records indicate that the mother was born November 29, 1942. As her birth state, Kansas, has a school attendance cutoff date of August 31st, she would have been high school Class of 1961. The conception time of the Obama alleged birthdate is November 1960. However, the claimed mother was in a Washington state high school at that time.

    Anyone looking at a current Obama photo knows he is not age 50 but more like age 60. The Obama Story is a fable.

    1. No….if he “is” the illegitimate son of Malcom X, and was born in October of 1959, that would make him 53. He DOES NOT look 60!! Have you viewed the videos of Rev. Phil Valentine showing the compelling evidence to a black…YES BLACK audience that Obama is the blood of their beloved assassinated leader? I will post the links. It is AWESOME watching and listening to them and all their “OOOHs and Ahhhhs” while he proves his points and has the SAME questions that to this day are unanswered and that we all want to know. I IMPLORE you to watch these and share…they are quite telling and NOT by any “white” racists!!! LOL!!



  8. ……Did Obama achieve the presidency in 2008 “by any means necessary?” If so, is the crime of identity fraud worse than being constitutionally ineligible?…..

    I would guess that it would not be an “either or” thing. My guess would be that, if he’s found to have committed ID fraud….that would still make him constitutionally ineligible — for the simple reason that he would not be who he claimed to be. Perhaps this is what the article says/implies in that statement.


  9. Someone knows. The question remains, who vets the Presidential candidates if not the People and the State Secretary of States? We relied on the media and they screwed the country over because they thought they were making history. Well, in a sense they were. Our Mainstream media have participated in perhaps the greatest Political fraud this nation has ever known.

    On the one hand 1) Obama is a NBC but has lied about who is father is. Unacceptable.

    2) Obama did not lie about his father in his book Dreams From My Father, and is not a Natural born citizen. Also UN-acceptable.

    The MSM no longer has any credibility and anyone who views information from the MSM as trustworthy is setting themselves up for a nasty surprise.

  10. After all that Mario Apuzzo has said in the past, it puzzles me that he now says that “Obama just happens to be the President now…” There is another attorney and Constitutional law expert, Dr. Edwin Vieira, who said, “First, if Obama is not “a natural born Citizen” or has renounced such citizenship, he is simply not eligible for “the Office of President” (Article II, Section 1, Clause 4). That being so, he cannot be “elected” by the voters, by the Electoral College, or by the House of Representatives (see Amendment XII). Second, if Obama dares to take the Presidential “Oath or Affirmation” of office, knowing that he is not “a natural born Citizen,” he will commit the crime of perjury or false swearing (see Article II, Section 1, Clause 7). For, being ineligible for “the Office of President, he cannot “faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States,” or even execute it at all, to any degree. Thus, his very act of taking the “Oath or Affirmation” will be a violation thereof!” Vieira says that if Obama is not a natural born citizen he is nothing but an usurper acting in the guise of “the President.” http://www.newswithviews.com/Vieira/edwin84.htm

    Mr. Apuzzo has also addressed the issue of usurper Obama’s identity, whatever that may be. Skip down in the article below to the comments to where Puzo1 writes a comment to Paraleaglenm, I of II : The civil and criminal law is interested in who is the biological father of a child if someone were attempting to gain some benefit or do some harm by way of fraud as to who that person really is……. Consequently, regardless of whether Obama or Malcolm X is Obama’s father, he was legitimately born to a British citizen father and a U.S. and British citizen mother. He therefore is not an Article II “natural born Citizen” who at the time of birth must be born within the sole and complete allegiance and jurisdiction of the United States. ”


    I think that the Martha Trowbridge stories are just a scam by the Obots to create an identity who is a natural born citizen and then say that is the real identity of the usurper Obama/Soetoro/Soebarkah or whatever his name is. Article 2 problem solved. But I say, where is the proof? See more here:


    1. Obviously you have not extended your thinking to its logical conclusion. How can such a “scam” by Obots solve Obama’s problem, if it opens him up to charges of massive election fraud, and, as President, subsequent cover-up of his crimes?

      Think about that.

      And think about the consequences for “Obama”.

      As for my position re: prayer and compassion, I am a devout Roman Catholic who believes in Divine Mercy. As such, I am called to bear witness. It is my hope that this man turn to God and do the right thing by acknowledging his crime. How, sir, does this make me an Obot?

      I respectfully suggest that you ponder all this, before you go around accusing me of subterfuge, and thereby maligning me.

      1. Obama is such a pathological liar that, when it comes to his life story, he may no longer be able to pluck the complete truth from the tangled web of lies he has woven throughout the years. But no matter how he tries to spin it, he will be trapped in his own web of deceit. Either, for all legal intents and purposes, his father was Obama, Sr. and thus Obama cannot be a natural born Citizen, or Obama has committed massive identity/election fraud by knowingly misrepresenting his identity (remember, he claimed in one of “his” books to have seen his true birth certificate as a teenager).

        Spin as he may, either way Obama is NOT a legitimate president. He is a puppet fraud who, with the full backing of the morally bankrupt regime-stream media, has guilted and hoodwinked a majority of the American people into electing a criminal usurper to the highest office in the land. As his lies are finally beginning to be swept away, we must continue to press ever harder for true justice[1] and never back off from the conclusion that Obama has defrauded the American people, that he is a completely illegitimate premeditated usurper, and, most importantly, that all of his appointments or other acts as putative president must be undone as if they had never been done at all.

        Ms. Trowbridge, there are two things about the admittedly intriguing Obama-life-story that you are postulating that raise yellow flags of caution for me:

        1) your theories seem to be based far more on speculation than factual evidence;

        2) your theories seem to open the door to a scenario that, although would likely lead to Obama’s removal, they also might allow for his signings and appointments to stand – specifically and most importantly, his appointments of anti-American radicals to the Supreme Court. This is something we must maintain constant vigilance against and let no such scenario gain false legitimacy.

        So, Ms. Trowbridge, for my sake, that of the readers of The Post & Email and the country at large, please fully and squarely address these two troubling concerns.

        Thank you.

        [1] Personally, I believe Obama is likely guilty of High Treason and should, if the course of justice and the rule of law so find, be made to pay the maximum penalty, i.e., death. To pardon him at any point in the process would be a travesty of justice and would send the wrong message to rest of the politicians and fail to tightly shut the door on any future anti-American usurper wannabes.

        As President Thomas Jefferson famously said, “When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.”

    2. I disagree, JustThinking and here’s why. The genetic makeup and similarity of MalcolmX and Obama are too uncanny and can’t be coincidence!! His stature, chin, hairline, upper lip and the SMILE…that SMILE is identical. Pictures don’t lie! Watch the Rev. Phil Valentine videos which I posted here below (or perhaps above, not sure) but even this man shows the compelling evidence to an astonished and gasping black audience. Isn’t it ODD that a boy named Bari Shabazz is born and then Obama is called Barry the entire first part of his life!! What did it for me is the police report on the accident in Hawaii!!! The FACT that Obama has these definitive scars on his head and the man (Bari M. Shabazz) just “happens” to be in Hawaii and then admits he has a NY driver’s license, but never shows up for court! THEN….YEARS LATER, RIGHT BEFORE OBAMA’s IL senate race or about that time…SOMEBODY goes in to alter the court documents or records for this accident…20 years later!! And then once again that there is NO OUTSTANDING fines owed?!!! ARE YOU KIDDING ME?? This was where I said WHOA…this is just too much. Circumstantial…perhaps, but OH SO COMPELLING and very suspicious indeed!!

      PLS…watch the Dr. Valentine videos for all the proof you need about Martha’s speculative “evidence”! There are 3 video links!