WheresObamasBirthCertificate to Host Gubernatorial Candidate on Obama’s Birth Certificate Forgery


by Sharon Rondeau

WheresObamasBirthCertificate will host a radio show with guest Michigan gubernatorial candidate Mark McFarlin on Friday evening at 8:00 p.m. EST

(Dec. 6, 2013) — Michael Volin, founder of WheresObamasBirthCertificate.com, will be hosting candidate for Michigan governor Mark McFarlin on Friday evening on BlogTalkRadio.

The show will run from 8:00 p.m. EST to 10:00 p.m. EST. The Post & Email will be appearing as a guest to pose several questions to McFarlin relating to the law enforcement investigation conducted by the Maricopa County, AZ Cold Case Posse which determined that the long-form birth certificate image posted on the White House website on April 27, 2011 is a “computer-generated forgery.”

Over the last several weeks, radio show host Carl Gallups has announced that new discoveries have been made by the posse which “go much deeper than the birth certificate.”

The posse also found that Obama’s Selective Service registration form is fraudulent.

Since 2008, when Obama’s short-form Certification of Live Birth first appeared on the web and was declared a forgery, the FBI and other law enforcement entities have failed to investigate.  Forgery of a government document is a federal felony offense.

On October 18, typesetting expert Douglas Vogt reported to a federal judge that he knew who had created the forgery and petitioned the judge, in accordance with federal law, to empanel a grand jury to review the evidence he presented in both public and sealed affidavits.  Vogt has identified the forger as a female and as having left clues as to her identity within the fraudulent image.

Whether by design or misunderstanding, the judge misinterpreted Vogt’s Notice of Commission, and Vogt appealed to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Last month, Volin and several other concerned citizens visited members of Congress, distributing approximately 200 copies of his “Sheriff’s Kit,” which contains a presentation by Cold Case Posse lead investigator Mike Zullo.

Zullo gave the presentation to the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers’ Association annual conference at the end of May following a visit to CPAC in March, where he and Gallups spoke to several members of Congress and other “VIPs” about the forgeries.

The mainstream media has refused to report on the alleged crimes, including in 2012 after the Cold Case Posse had given two formal press conferences declaring its findings.  However, Dana Millbank of The Washington Post has alluded to the claim of forgery at several times over the several weeks and cited his objections to the Obama regime’s prohibition on candid photographs by the news media.

Millbank’s editorial columns are widely circulated in mainstream news outlets.

On December 3, Millbank wrote that the House Judiciary Committee “met to consider the impeachment of Barack Hussein Obama” when it convened a hearing on presidential powers with four constitutional experts.

Contrary to Millbank’s contention that “The Republicans in the House know there is no chance of throwing this president from office,” recent surveys show that 52% of young people aged 18-24 “would vote to recall President Obama if that were an option.”  In his editorial, Millbank cites statements from members of Congress who suggest that Obama has committed “high crimes and misdemeanors.”

One of those testifying on Tuesday to the Judiciary Committee stated that if elections, the courts, and Congress itself cannot rein in an overreaching chief executive, the remaining option is “impeachment.”

Other public figures who have never addressed the issue of forgery have now stated that Obama routinely lies to the American people.

Presidential candidate Cody Robert Judy has told The Post & Email and written on his blog that “impeachment” hearings will be held beginning in January, although Millbank stated that they have already begun.

The question of whether or not Obama can be impeached if he is serving unconstitutionally has not yet been addressed by Congress, as no public announcement has yet been made that they are investigating the Cold Case Posse’s findings on the sparse documentation Obama has allegedly produced.

Approximately two months ago, a highly reliable source told The Post & Email that every member of Congress “knows that Obama is a fraud.”

McFarlin has publicly stated that he has doubts about the authenticity of Obama’s life story and is running for governor as a “conservative, pro-life” Democrat.  On Thursday, several outlets reported that while the White House had initially denied that Obama had ever met his illegal alien uncle, Oyango Obama, who was arrested on drunk driving charges in 2011, the regime is now conceding that Obama “did live with” Onyango Obama for three weeks while he was purportedly attending Harvard Law School.

Although Onyango’s visa expired in 1992, when he defied deportation.  The “Kenyan-born” uncle is now officially permitted to remain in the country and apply for citizenship.  Obama’s aunt Zeituni was also granted amnesty after illegally living in public housing in Boston for years.

Various African newspapers have reported that Barack Obama was also “Kenyan-born,” which raised questions about his eligibility to serve as President of the United States.  The mainstream media suppressed all debate about the matter as it related to Obama, although many columns have been written about whether or not Panamanian-born John McCain was eligible to run for president.

Barack Obama and his wife have also made conflicting statements about whether or not his mother was single when he was born.

Since 2008, Congress has generated form letters to constituents concerned that Obama does not meet the Article II, Section 1, clause 5 qualification of “natural born Citizen,” stating that Obama’s purported birth in Hawaii is enough to render him eligible.  Obama also claims a father who was never a citizen of the United States, and several constitutional scholars say that the citizenship of the parents is an equally important factor in determining “natural born” status as is the person’s place of birth.

An attorney for the Congressional Research Service has attempted to equate a birth in the United States with the higher standard of “natural born Citizen” by redacting language which clearly showed that the citizenship of the parents was considered in several U.S. Supreme Court cases over time.

Volin has promised that more information on the Obama fraud is coming that will make “eyes spin.”

6 Responses to "WheresObamasBirthCertificate to Host Gubernatorial Candidate on Obama’s Birth Certificate Forgery"

  1. gigclick   Friday, December 6, 2013 at 11:37 AM

    We had the Kenyan COB Long Form on line over 3 years ago from Coast Province Hospital from American Grand Jury. We now know radical Elizabeth Ann Newman was the mother and Malcolm X was the father in1960 through an affair with Malcolm outside his marriage. The mother brought her/ pregnancy to Kenya to birth Bark Malik Shabazz there. The created the DNC planned story for his eluding past and climb in the DNC to present. He was born of two citizen parents but his 8 year schooling at Jakarta’s Muslim boys prep school required him to become a citizen of Indonesia, making him illegal for POTUS as a “dual citizen” under Constitutional requirements. Pelosi and Bicentennial falsified the DNC papers in 2008 to push him through at any cost. Now we have a total train wreck brought on by DNC corruption, theft and Constitutional illegal obfuscation and judicial lockdown preventing any legal DISCOVERY to access prosecution.

    1. slcraig   Friday, December 6, 2013 at 1:08 PM

      Currently, under the U.S. Federal Law, there is NO uniformly acknowledge “legal”, (enforceable) definition of circumstances which constitutes being born as a (U.S.) natural born Citizen ….(…a term set out in the Constitution and construed under Federal Law…Tennessee Western Division in Case 2:12-cv-02143-STA)

      Therefore, in order to be judged ineligible as a “dual-Citizen” REQUIRES that the term (U.S.) natural born Citizen be determined under Federal Law in order to distinguish a (U.S.) natural born Citizen from any and all other forms of U.S.Citizenship that may exist.

      The “exclusionary prerequisite imperative requirement provision” of “..No person except ….. shall be eligible…(A2S1C5)” is SPECIFIC in intent and intent of application, therefore the SPECIFIC nature of the circumstances which produces such a person must be identifiable UNDER THE LAW in order to apply them uncontestably to any given individual in order to “exclude” them from the subject Office.

      Justice Waite did the subject a great dis service when he said on the one hand that “resort” must be made elsewhere, (i.e., outside the text of the Constitution), and then on the other hand, found V. Minor to be a “natural born Citizen” without noting he did so by looking at the Acts passed by the Congress.

      Determining the “0” to not being a (U.S.) natural born Citizen would invoke the Operation of Law principle which would REQUIRE REMOVAL, whereas, without THAT determination any Impeachment would devolve into a morass of legal-loop-holes supported by plausible deniability assertions leaving conviction doubtful and attaching a degree of legitimacy with an aquitle.

  2. slcraig   Friday, December 6, 2013 at 11:28 AM

    At the Founding of this New Nation among the Nations of the World ONLY men were its Citizens, women / wives assuming the Political character of their Fathers 1st and then, when married, took on the character of their husbands, whatever that may be, (up to The Cable Act of 1922 (ch. 411, 42 Stat. 1021, “Married Women’s Independent Nationality Act”);

    ergo; in 1790 all children born to a married (U.S.) Citizen father was born to TWO (2) U.S. Citizen parents and from March 1790 to January 1795 was then a (U.S.) natural born Citizen NO MATTER where in the world they might be born.

    In 1795 the 1790 “an Act to establish an uniform Rule of naturalization” was repealed in whole and replaced with ““An act to establish an uniform rule of Naturalization; and to repeal the act heretofore passed on that subject”

    That Act replaced the “foreign born natural born Citizen provision” of the 1790 Act, BUT it did NOT “repeal” by simple legislation the Article 2 “exclusionary prerequisite imperative requirement provision” that MANDATES (U.S.) natural born Citizens into existence nor did it change THE uniform Rule that recognized the children of Citizen fathers as being Citizens at birth no matter where in the world they might be born and (U.S.) natural born Citizens when born within the territorial limits of any of the several States.

    Blackstone admonished his students and readers of his commentaries on the English Common Law to 1st learn the Laws of their own Countries, in the same manner Cicero advised to those who would consider his advice and then use the principles of law he taught to bring light, equity and justice to THOSE Laws.

    1. slcraig   Friday, December 6, 2013 at 11:42 AM

      I’m replying to my own post because I forgot to ask the question that prompted the post;

      Why is it WE jump right to either the Foreign English common Law, the un-codified writings of political philosophical writers or Judicial Opinions that have NEVER litigated the specific question of the issue at hand, i.e., “who is and / or is not a (U.S.) natural born Citizen “,

      …..doing so WITHOUT looking to the STATUTORY history of U.S. Citizenship which DID establish the uniform Rule by the authority of A1S8C4 which provided for the MANDATED existence of (U.S.) natural born Citizens, ” … a term set out in the Constitution and construed under Federal Law …”

      {Judge Thomas Anderson of USDC for the Western District of Tennessee Western Division in Case 2:12-cv-02143-STA; found in a Ruling on Motions in a Case at Bar;

      “… ANALYSIS .. It is undisputed that the material fact at issue in this case is whether under the circumstances of President Obama’s birth, the President is a “natural born citizen,” a term set out in the United States Constitution and construed under federal law. “

      “…The federal issue presented is obviously contested in this case. Likewise, the Court holds that the federal issue is substantial. ..”[pg 6/7/8]

  3. ss442   Friday, December 6, 2013 at 11:12 AM

    Again, congress leaves every stone unturned when trying to find a reason to rein in Obama but cannot see the forest for the trees.

    I have written my congressman and told him and shown him all the primary research is done and have grounds to charge Obama with forgery, fraud, and treason—————if they would just listen to us and not decide what is best for us. Instead of listening to Mike Zullo they spin up committee hearing about what we already know and what congress appears unable to do a damned thing about.

  4. lizMN   Friday, December 6, 2013 at 11:05 AM

    Most of us know all the facts. What no one knows is what to do about it. Everyone feels frustrated, but no one wants violence. The consequences of Martial Law frightens all of us.

    What we lack is leaders. I think we need to ask for leadership from such retired military men as Army Generals Jerry Boykin and Paul Vallely and Air Force Brig. Gen. Charles Jones. They know how to organize large groups of people to follow a plan.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

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