Do We Know Who “Unknown” Is?

SPEAKING IN RIDDLES, OR SPEAKING THE TRUTH?

by Sharon Rondeau

(Apr. 10, 2012) — In response to Atty. Mario Apuzzo’s account of the ballot challenge in which he represented two New Jersey plaintiffs today, an individual with the screen name “Unknown” has left the following comment:

While I can repair some things on my old Volvo I do need an expert mechanic now and then. At one point in my life I thought an attorney would be like an auto mechanic. Yes, some are not honest–but they know what is wrong with the car nonetheless and could repair it properly the first time. But in recent years I have had to take a new look at judges and attorneys and even law professors at good law schools. Are these men and women really ignorant? While it is hard to believe a law professor would be, still it looks a lot like that. Still it hard to believe. Is this some wide spread attitude towards the Constitution showing itself?
I know you are correct. I have been studying this material for several years. It is really quite obvious. I could not teach a law school course if I were a law professor unless I was telling the students the truth! I know some legal decisions are tough and maybe there is complication and ambiguity–but this qualification is not in that category.
And then there is all the fraud with documents. Given recent Obama legal pronouncements I wonder who did his studies and tests and so on at Harvard. Did he just show up per-programmed by professors who had been told by the dean to pass him? He is in my opinion not even a particularly good actor. And getting worse. Thanks for your work and may God guide the judge in his decision!

Why does “Unknown” refer heavily to to “an attorney,” “law professors,” and to Obama being an “actor?”

“Unknown” previously referred to “hundreds of pages” detailing Obama’s alleged crimes at Atty. Apuzzo’s website, two of which have been identified by the Maricopa County Cold Case Posse as forgery of both his long-form birth certificate and Selective Service registration card, respectively.

“Unknown” had been known to take both sides of an issue, but since our first report on his comments at Apuzzo’s blog, he seems to have changed his demeanor to that of an Apuzzo supporter, referring to him as a “real scholar.” He appears to ascribe to the theory that the citizenship of the parents is vital to defining their offspring as a “natural born Citizen,” to which Apuzzo responds, “Excellent find on your part.  Here is more follow up…”

Unknown also lauds Atty. Leo Donofrio’s research.  He has posted at The Daily Pen, who also uses the name “Penbrook One.”  In a March 23, 2012 posting regarding the location of an alleged “implicative discovery” of an image of a “U.S. CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO ONE EAST AFRICAN-BORN CHILD OF U.S. CITIZEN IN 1961,” Unknown makes several comments but finally comments, seemingly exasperated:

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA…you BERFERS are suckers…

Do you know WHY a document like this is issued?

No.

Chuckles…

Fools…ask an immigration lawyer who got this kind of document as it was issued to a specific *group*.

This is out of character for Unknown, who seems to regain his equilibrium farther down in the post.

The Post & Email had asked who Pen Johannson and Dan Crosby were, and he seems to answer the questions in his comment here:

Moreover, what is most interesting about the newspaper announcement saga is that an announcement for a marriage license for the Obama’s alleged marriage in February appears nowhere in any paper.

The Model State Vital Statistics Act and Hawaii Revised Statutes clearly mandate such an application and that the Department of Health must post them in a public site. Notice the other marriage applications during the same time around Obama’s DOH birth announcements.

Also, since Bill O’Reilly has proven himself the biggest idiot apologist for obots in this matter by insisting the appearance of announcements in a newspaper automatically means the child is born in the same location, he must also, therefore believe that the absence of marriage announcement also means the Obama’s were never married! Right? “That’s impossible!” Right Billo?

The stupidity and ignorance of the trollabytes in the MSM continues to entertain and lavish with propaganda for the most prolific liar in American history.

D-croz

The reader might glean from the above that “Pen Johannson,” “Penbrook One,” and “Dan Crosby” are one and the same person.  Is he an “actor?”

Does “Unknown” want us to “know” who he is, or is he trying to keep us guessing?

Are there fewer Obots than we think?

2 Responses to "Do We Know Who “Unknown” Is?"

  1. AnAmericanStory   Thursday, April 12, 2012 at 8:15 AM

    I hope you’re right Veritas, about AKA Obama not being on the ballot. But so far the judges are playing right into their script. When the courts are apparently corrupted beyond all measure, where are the Citizens supposed to turn for redress of grievance?

  2. Veritas   Wednesday, April 11, 2012 at 9:54 PM

    Dear Sharon: So many know the horrible Constitutional crisis we are in. Hillary will not go to the Convention. Barbra Streisand will not sing at Soebarkah’s fundraiser. Drudge tells us that Obama is “wasting away,” while the Globe Magazine, much maligned, but right on the mark with Arpaio reporting, states that the Obama marriage is being strained terribly with talk of forgery, fraud, usurpation, and false identity.

    Those who follow only the mainstream press will not yet see it, but Obama will not be on the ballot. Hillary knows it, your readers know it, and the Constitution will prove it!

    God bless your work!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

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