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


by Sharon Rondeau

(May 12, 2012) — A former White House reporter now working independently reported that Obama’s schedule for April 27, 2011 did not include the release of his purported long-form birth certificate.  In fact, Obama was scheduled to leave Washington, DC at 10:05 a.m. that day for Chicago to record an interview for the Oprah show.

Why did he change his schedule?  Or did he?

If Obama’s attorney, Judith Corley, traveled to Hawaii to obtain two certified copies of Obama’s long-form birth certificate on April 22, 2011, when did the White House plan on releasing them?  Reports from that time indicate that Corley’s trip was planned after she allegedly wrote a letter to Loretta Fuddy, Director of the Hawaii Department of Health, asking that an exception be made in the department’s policy of issuing only “short-form” birth certificates.

Corley is a partner at Perkins Coie, the same law firm which defended multiple challenges to Obama’s constitutional eligibility and which numerous judges repelled based on citizens’ lack of “standing.”

In her response to Obama’s request for two certified copies of his birth certificate, Fuddy stated that she would produce a “computer-generated certified copy.”

Prior to 2009, the policy had maintained that in order to establish Hawaiian ancestry for the Hawaiian Home Lands Program, the long-form birth certificate was required.  After questions arose about the absence of a detailed birth certificate for Obama, the program requirements changed.  While most other requests for the Certificate of Live Birth were denied, at least one was still granted.

A policy memo dated May 15, 2001 indicated that the policy had been changed at that time to issuing only “abstracts” of birth records, but it was not enforced, as Miki Booth and others she knew were able to obtain their long-form birth certificates.  However, Fuddy made an exception for the “unique circumstance” of Obama’s alleged request.

The brother of a tiny girl born in Hawaii who lived less than one day was denied access to his sister’s long-form certificate even though he qualified as having “a direct and tangible interest in the record” under HRS 338-18.

Prior to Fuddy’s appointment as Director of Health, Dr. Neal Palafox had been nominated by Gov. Neil Abercrombie but had withdrawn his name without explanation.  A Hawaii state senator believed that Palafox’s appointment was derailed for political reasons.  Abercrombie had been unable to find birth records for Obama in January 2011 but was quoted in Fuddy’s response to Obama that “State officials of both parties have verified that President Obama’s birth records show that he was born in Honolulu.”

Author David Maraniss said in 2008 during an interview that he had “his [Obama’s] birth certificate.”  Wouldn’t it have been less expensive and disruptive for him to simply have come forward with it prior to the election after Bill Clinton began to tell certain people that Obama was not eligible for the presidency?  Couldn’t it have been done prior to April 27, 2011?

The day before the release, mainstream media reports stated that there was “overwhelming evidence” that Obama was born in Hawaii and that Abercrombie had given “testimony” to that fact.  How long has the media been covering for Obama’s lack of documentation?  If the White House manipulates the media now, was it doing so prior to April 27 of last year?

A link in an article at The Post & Email to the image posted on the internet by the Obama White House under the word “image” now leads to an error.  In July 2010, The Globe had published a document which purported that Obama was born in Kenya, contending that “Obama’s presidency is illegal!”

But a law enforcement entity has stated that the “birth certificate” Obama presented on April 27, 2011 is a forgery.  So what does Maraniss have?  He has not addressed our question sent to him on May 8, 2012.

But the Cold Case Posse of Maricopa County, AZ has stated that what Obama actually received is a “computer-generated forgery.”  The same was stated of Obama’s purported Selective Service registration form, and The Washington Times, a mainstream media outlet both in print and online, has launched its own investigation following the Selective Service Administration’s contention that Obama’s records were destroyed.

Would Obama have changed his itinerary on April 27 because of the expected release of Dr. Jerome Corsi’s book, Where’s the Birth Certificate?  Was Media Matters correct in stating that “the birther issue has collapsed?”

Corsi wrote a previous book about Obama released in early 2010 entitled The Obama Nation.

The image purported to be a forgery by many experts is still posted online, including at the White House website.  The regime has offered no explanation for why the Cold Case Posse has found it to be a forgery.

Why did Obama choose April 27, 2011?  Why was there so much chatter about it in the mainstream media the day before?

Is Obama still joking about it as he was last year?


Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.

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