“IT NEEDS TO BE LOOKED AT”
by Sharon Rondeau
Sankey provided a sworn affidavit to Atty. Orly Taitz for use in multiple legal challenges she has filed in various courts to Obama’s constitutional eligibility and questions about his identity. He told The Post & Email that he has not amended the compilation since it was completed prior to the 2008 election.
The compilation of the results can be reviewed here, with the list of records found beginning on page 4. One of the addresses associated with the name “Barack Obama” is “123 Nowhere St.” in Valparaiso, IN. The results showed numerous Chicago addresses for a “Barack Obama,” including 5046 S. Greenwood Avenue, his known residence in the Hyde Park section of the city.
On pages 29 and 30 of 45 in the PDF, a record appears with the name “Barack Hussein Obama” and an address of “365 Broadway Apt B1, Somerville, MA 02145-2440” with a birth year of “1890.” Next to the field “Deceased,” it indicates “No,” but the age of the person is shown as “119.” The address is reportedly near Harvard University and allegedly pictured here. Several people interviewed prior to the 2008 election had not lived in the building long enough to have been there when Obama reportedly lived in the building, which is located in the “Winter Hill” section of Somerville.
Variations of the main name appeared, including “Barake Obama,” “Barrack Obama,” “Barry Obama,” “Barrak Obama,” “Bertrand H. Obama,” and “Barak Obama,” one of which for the latter indicated a birth date of February 12, 1991.
Several variants of “Barack Obama” have Connecticut addresses. At least two of the Social Security numbers associated with the name “Barak Obama” begin with “999” and indicate addresses in Los Angeles, CA.
One record for a “Barack Hussein Obama” shows an address of “P.O. Box 49798, Chicago, IL 60649,” a birth date of “August 04, 1961” and an age of “47.” The first five digits are “042-68,” which is the number appearing on Obama’s recent tax returns. Several other Chicago addresses include the same name and first five digits of the Social Security number.
We asked Mr. Sankey about his sources for the data he collected. “There really are only two or three information brokers in the whole country and probably in the world,” he responded. “The big ones, such as Lexis-Nexis, work on a subscription basis. They buy out the small companies and eventually combine all of the databases, then they sell to private investigators, businesses, attorneys, judges…everybody belongs to Lexis-Nexis who wants to find information.”
Sankey was not sure if the media can purchase subscriptions to such companies’ services.
MRS. RONDEAU: Do you remember in how many sources you looked to gather the information you submitted to Atty. Taitz?
MR. SANKEY: I went through a lot – all of the main ones – and I did subsidiaries as well because I was finding so much. I looked in everything that was available that particular night.
MRS. RONDEAU: Did you find his entire Social Security number right away?
MR. SANKEY: It was not difficult; anyone could have done it. Because of his election to the Senate, he already had on file certain financial information, and that financial information carries the Social Security number. So the Social Security number was a matter of public record. It is on his tax form and on his Selective Service registration form. So there was confirmation from two sources that that was the one he was using. I compiled a huge list. I had culled out a lot of the records because I ran his name in every possible variation I could think of in regard to spelling and pretty much regardless of first name. I figured the surname was rare enough that there would be plenty of them out there.
MRS. RONDEAU: Is there any chance that there could have been another person named “Barack Obama?”
MR. SANKEY: Absolutely, yes.
MRS. RONDEAU: How do you know if you have captured the information belonging to a different person, or do you not know?
MR. SANKEY: I don’t know. With regard to the list, once we pared it down to people who were reasonably certain to be connected with him or people who were meant to be with him — and probably ACORN people were using his name, which is the kind of thing these things would be used for — once I got to the master list, which is the one that Orly has been using as an exhibit in her case, I didn’t do any more. I felt that it was certainly the responsibility of the authorities to investigate this person, and all I did was throw out an anomaly which needed to be looked at by somebody. What it would take is to go all over the country and investigate all of the addresses.
MRS. RONDEAU: Would you actually go to them and ask people, go to town halls, to find out if a person by that name had lived there?
MR. SANKEY: Yes, that’s essentially it. We know that some of them are false addresses. But still, they exist for a reason — take the issue of voter fraud — and no one is really going to check in normal circumstances. It’s fair to say that if I were to look at anyone else’s record, there would be probably six or so aliases or different Social Security numbers listed next to the name. All that is is typing errors on the part of whomever put it in the index. I have a Social Security number which starts with X73-72, and for the first ten years of my life in the United States, I was confusing it with X72-73. You transpose a number in your head, or you write down a “7” and it looks like a “1” or a “2.” So most of us have these anomalies, and they’re explaining or not explainable, but there’s no criminal intent.
MRS. RONDEAU: Does what you found for Barack Obama exceed simple typographical errors, or could they all be simply that?
MR. SANKEY: What I would say is that from an investigative point of view, it needs to be looked at. That’s about as far as I’ve ever gone with it. The first thing I do if someone is alleged to have done something in a name I’ve never heard, is ask, “Who is this person?” And to do that, you pull up a comprehensive report from all the indexes and databases you can find. What you get back is a composite of that person’s life, really. A lot of that information can be thrown out because it’s not them or it’s wrongly entered or whatever, but essentially it’s a background report on someone. It certainly shows you if they’ve been to court, if there were any convictions; debts, property, cars, boats, licensing – it’s all in the public index in the public domain. So it comes back in a report which these companies get paid to put together.
MRS. RONDEAU: It sounds like a credit report.
MR. SANKEY: Yes.
MRS. RONDEAU: Did you find that the Connecticut Social Security number for Obama picked up at a certain time in his life but wasn’t there before that?
MR. SANKEY: One of the problems we’re up against is that the computers themselves didn’t really come into use until the 1980s, so most people’s records start before the computers. That was the case with people like Obama; he is just outside of where it would all be on computer. With anything prior to 1980-ish, you can say that it’s not there because he didn’t exist, or it’s not there because of his age. So you can’t really answer that question.
The three major credit companies, probably five, all told, work off of things they call “credit headers,” which is basically your name, age, birth date, Social Security number: your vital information. They all team up to provide the credit index. Some of those indexes which we searched are the credit header indexes but not the credit index itself. It’s like a road map: some indexes are better than others; some will contain information and others don’t; that’s why you have to do so many.
A lot of people change Social Security numbers to save themselves embarrassment. If you have bad credit and reverse a couple of numbers in your Social Security number to obtain credit, they’re not going to find that. You’ll get credit, but you’ll also have another Social Security number against your name that you didn’t have there before. It has legitimate reasons and illegitimate reasons. The big problem with Social Security numbers is that nobody polices it; it’s totally out of control. People scream about the secrecy regarding Social Security numbers, but anybody can do this stuff. It’s not brain surgery.
MRS. RONDEAU: What does “Date Verified” mean on all of the records in your printout?
MR. SANKEY: It’s hard to say; I don’t know.
MRS. RONDEAU: Obama has been found to be using a Connecticut Social Security number. Do you believe that any of the Connecticut addresses are real?
MR. SANKEY: I think there are eight Connecticut addresses, of which perhaps two are genuine. I couldn’t check 160 addresses, but since that time, I’ve looked at the more important ones. The intention originally was to produce the information so that investigators would look at it and say, “There’s something wrong here; we need to look at who this guy really is” and go do it. It wasn’t even supposed to be an accurate list. That sounds bad, but it is an indication, a tool from which you work. The best way of verifying his Social Security number, when all is said and done, is to go in and look at the Social Security file. As an individual, I don’t have that ability or the right to do that, but law enforcement does, and should. What’s the point of having it if we don’t enforce it?
MRS. RONDEAU: Orly Taitz has asked to see a certified copy of Obama’s original Social Security number application from Social Security Administration Commissioner Michael Astrue, but he refuses to produce anything.
MR. SANKEY: These people get carried away with their own importance when it comes to privacy. You have public servants employed to keep records, and having kept those records, they’re eventually usually given some kind of power as to who can look at them and who can’t. Then they become self-important and start making decisions on who they think should look at them, and that’s when it gets out of hand.
In the case of Obama, with such a long list of addresses, there are one or two things: his alleged mother was in micro-banking, and those kinds of things would produce that kind of effect. If somebody were dabbling in that field, you would use your own name because it’s the easiest name to put down at some made-up address somewhere, and you end up with a huge list of addresses under your name. Or, ACORN, with voter registration. There are a number of reasons why it would happen, but they all really need to be looked at. He’s trying to be president, after all…it’s not as if he’s dog-catcher.
Editor’s Note: It has been discovered recently that in 2008, an individual registered to vote in Butler County, PA using the name “Barack H. Obama.” Speaking with the Associated Press, a detective involved in an investigation into the incident said that although a typographical error was made when keying in the information, “whoever did it was clearly trying to register using President Barack Obama’s name.”