If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my free Email alerts. Thanks for visiting!
ANGRY AND SNIDE REPORTERS ATTACK SHERIFF JOE ARPAIO FOLLOWING RESULTS OF NEWS CONFERENCE
by Sharon Rondeau
(Mar. 2, 2012) — The Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office led by Sheriff Joe Arpaio gave a press conference at 1:00 p.m. MT/3:00 p.m. ET on Thursday regarding the findings of a “Cold Case Posse” assembled to examine the image presented to the public by the person known as Barack Hussein Obama II last April as a certified copy of his long-form birth certificate from Hawaii. The presser lasted one hour and twenty minutes, which was in keeping with the information provided to The Post & Email on February 28, 2012.
Arpaio and investigator Mike Zullo were the principal speakers. Dr. Jerome Corsi of WorldNetDaily spoke briefly, as did Arizona Rep. Carl Seel. Seel had introduced a bill in last year’s legislative session to deal with presidential candidates’ proof of eligibility in the wake of doubts which have arisen about Obama’s identity, constitutional eligibility, and even U.S. citizenship.
At issue today, however, was strictly whether or not the image posted on the White House website since April 27, 2011 when it was released, is authentic or a likely forgery. The Cold Case Posse aired a video which showed how they had conducted testing on the image and concluded that it could not have originated from a paper document. Investigator Zullo stated, “After what you’ve seen here, you have to conclude that the document is a forgery.”
Tim Adams, who had worked in the Elections Office in Honolulu during the 2008 presidential campaign cycle, had signed an affidavit swearing that his superiors had stated openly that “no long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate existed for Barack Obama Jr.” anywhere in Hawaii. At the time, Obama had produced only a short-form “Certification of Live Birth” which many had deemed a forgery.
The Cold Case Posse also investigated Obama’s alleged Selective Service registration card and declared it a forgery as well. The Post & Email had found differences in information sent to various requesters of Obama’s Selective Service records. A response letter signed by Daniel Amon dated May 13, 2010 was followed by another letter from us to him and a response which stated, ” We are unable to answer your remaining questions.”
If the Selective Service System has forged documents in its possession with Obama’s name on them, are its employees aware of it? Are the employees “just following orders,” or do they sense that there could be something wrong with the documents? Why was Amon not able to answer all of our questions?
Following the final remarks by Arpaio, members of the media began asking questions, but their tone was not customary for that of professional reporters. Factually, they were argumentative and brought up the matter of the U.S. Department of Justice, led by Eric Holder, accusing Arpaio’s office of racial profiling and failing to investigate allegations of certain crimes. Arpaio responded by saying that that was a topic not under discussion today and in December had resolved to refute the charges.
Some reporters accused Arpaio of accusing Obama of a crime. Arpaio refuted those claims by saying, “I didn’t say that.”
The reactions from news outlets varied from claiming that Arpaio was “pandering for votes” to engaging in “birtherism.” The White House evidently attempted to make light of the seriousness of the accusations of fraud and forgery leveled by the Cold Case Posse. Obama is still selling coffee mugs with the birth certificate image imprinted on them as part of his re-election campaign. But will he still be able to run?
The Examiner described reporters on site at the press conference as “defending Obama fervently.” Atty. Orly Taitz posted a video from CBS News containing a video clip with Arpaio speaking about the birth certificate and Selective Service registration card. Arpaio states that he “cannot, in good faith, report to you that these documents are authentic” and refuting White House claims that the birth certificate emanated from the Hawaii Department of Health.
The East Valley Tribune asserted that the birth certificate had been claimed by Obama as being proof that he was a “U.S. citizen” and that the White House “had no comment” following the presser.
Some news sources stated that despite Arpaio’s posse’s findings of forgery and fraud, the doubts about Obama’s alleged birth certificate had been “widely debunked.” However, the writers did not indicate by whom the “controversy” had been “debunked” or when. On February 21, 2012, The Huffington Post claimed that the forgery allegations had been “thoroughly debunked,” but also did not state how or when that had occurred.
UPI headlined that Arpaio is “still pushing Obama birth ‘fraud.'” Another unrelated news article about Obama’s eligibility reported that “Claims President Barack Obama was born outside teh [sic] United States refuse to die. A federal appeals court said Thursday so-called birthers can’t take President Obama to court over claims he wasn’t born in the United States.” However, a possible birth outside the country, which was mentioned on March 1 by Arpaio and Zullo, is not the only question in regard to Obama’s eligibility to serve as president. His claim of a non-U.S.-citizen father as well as numerous complaints of treason have yet to be addressed by any court, Congress, or a legal controlling authority.
An Associated Press article from Arizona reported the results of the press conference but colored them with anti-Arpaio sentiment without balance from anyone praising the efforts of the investigative team. The results were also politicized by mentioning “Democrat” and “Republican,” which have nothing to do with the serious allegations fraud and forgery.
An AP report stated that Arpaio’s press conference would discuss Obama’s “eligibility to be president,” although that was clearly not the focus of the investigation. An ABC News report contained the headline, “Obama Birth Certificate Maybe [sic] Forged, Arpaio Says” and incorrectly reported that Arpaio “said he doesn’t think the president forged the documents.” Rather, Arpaio denied making an accusation against Obama of committing the forgery but stated that he would like to find the perpetrator. Investigator Zullo had stated that the team had some idea of the computer used to upload the forged image to the White House server and the approximate time frame during which it occurred. “We would like to start with the person who pressed the upload button,” Zullo had declared.
Will anyone from the mainstream media seriously question Obama or anyone in his regime about the allegations of fraud and forgery? Will Obama be allowed to remain in office given the doubts which many have held about his life story and have now been raised by a law enforcement official?
Why were reporters who attended the press conference angry at Arpaio? Why did they accuse Arpaio of claiming that Obama “should not be president?” Was that the topic under discussion? Are the mainstream reporters able to be objective?
What kind of information has the media been feeding to the public? Is the media’s abrogation of its First Amendment responsibility the reason we have Obama in office today?
Is that why the reporters are shooting the messenger instead of asking Obama some tough questions?
Editor’s Note: Given the various ways in which the search for the truth has been obliterated by the major media companies, the public has a choice. People can “hope” that the mainstream media will “change” its ways and provide unbiased, accurate and probing reporting, or they can support bold, independent newspapers such as The Post & Email.
That is the reason for The Post & Email’s new subscription program. It requires many hours each day to produce the detailed reports found here with the information needed for people to make informed decisions. We now have implemented “budget” subscription programs to allow everyone access to our reporting, which we believe is found nowhere else on the web, in print, or on television news.
Many of you had stepped up and contributed whatever amount you could in order to keep this publication online through good times and bad. Unfortunately, of the many thousands of readers we have, only a very small percentage was supporting our efforts. We would have preferred to keep subscriptions voluntary, but not enough people participated at our suggested level of just $2.00/month.
The American people must take a stake in the struggle to uphold the U.S. Constitution, Bill of Rights, and the rule of law, which can be done only if the media seeks and reports the truth, regardless of where it leads. The Post & Email is not driven by an agenda or by obtrusive, nuisance-type or lewd advertisements. If the cable stations can glean millions from their advertisers every day, surely The Post & Email is worth $2.00/month. Freedom has its price, and we all must pay in one way or another to preserve it.
Please inform your friends so that they, too, can be informed as to what is really occurring in their nation and around the world.