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


by Sharon Rondeau

A criminal investigation has traced certain activity into the “White House,” where Barack Hussein Obama and his family have lived for the past five years, perhaps in usurpation of the presidency and engaged in criminal activity

(Feb. 28, 2014) — On “Freedom Friday” this evening, host Carl Gallups revealed that “major media” are now participating in the criminal investigation launched by Maricopa County, AZ Sheriff Joe Arpaio as an adjunct to the probe launched by the Maricopa County Cold Case Posse into the long-form birth certificate image posted on the White House website nearly three years ago.

The posse declared that the image was a “computer-generated forgery” two years ago tomorrow, on March 1, 2012, along with Obama’s Selective Service registration form, which has been sent to those filing FOIA requests for it, including The Post & Email.

Several weeks ago, lead investigator Mike Zullo told Gallups on Freedom Friday that the internet activity of certain Obama sycophants called “Obots” has been traced to IP numbers emanating from the White House, with at least one employed by the federal government at DARPA, a division of the Department of Defense.  The revelation stems from the second investigation opened by Arpaio on which detectives are reportedly working full-time.

Gallups has been investigating Obama’s eligibility and identity since 2008 as a citizen investigator with a decade of law enforcement experience.  Zullo has worked unpaid for more than two and a half years probing the birth certificate image and possibly other connected matters.

In June 2008, a short-form Certification of Live Birth appeared at The Daily KOS from an unknown source and was said by then-White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs to have been the only “birth certificate” available for Obama.  However, after mounting pressure from Donald Trump and the public to release the “long-form,” the White House posted what it said was a certified copy from the Hawaii Department of Health on April 27, 2011.  However, the image was quickly declared a forgery by experts, and in September, 250 members of two Tea Party groups asked Arpaio to launch an investigation in order to protect the integrity of their votes in the upcoming 2012 election.

In 2007 and 2008, the media either refused or failed to investigate Obama’s background and life story.  Anyone attempting to mention on air Obama’s lack of documentation and later, the declared forgeries, was precluded from doing so.  CNN, MSNBC, NBC News, ABC News, and CBS News have all run notably positive coverage of the Obama regime and ridiculed anyone questioning Obama’s eligibility or integrity.

Now, of “major media,” Gallups said, “They’re coming to Arpaio and Zullo” and “making their promises” to report to the public Zullo and Arpaio’s discoveries.

Both Arpaio and Zullo have received death threats as a result of their work, as have bloggers and online reporters who continued to investigate Obama’s background.  Zullo has stated that he possesses statements from media employees who said they were threatened with their jobs or that they felt their “safety” was at risk because they had begun to probe the birth certificate issue.

Gallups and others have affirmed that the information Zullo is preparing to release is supported by “hard-copy documentation” and is “universe-shattering.”  According to Gallups, the information is tentatively scheduled for release in “late March,” although he said it could be later if developments and coordination with major media necessitates a delay.

Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution requires the president to be a “natural born Citizen.”  A video which surfaced on Wednesday of Barrister Michael Shrimpton appears to show the British attorney and intelligence expert stating that “Barack Hussein Obama was born in Kenya in 1960,” which contradicts Obama’s claim of a birth in Hawaii on August 4, 1961.

It is generally understood by most Americans that a “natural born Citizen” is one born in the United States.  Historically, the citizenship of the parents was at least equally important to the person’s birthplace to assign “natural born” status.  Zullo and Gallups have previously stated that the question regarding Obama is whether or not he is even a U.S. citizen at all.

Citizens who petitioned their elected representatives since 2007 to look into Obama’s credentials and eligibility were ignored or told that since Obama claimed he was born in Hawaii, he was eligible to serve as president.  Mike Volin of WheresObamasBirthCertificate.com has recently reported, however, that “members of Congress” are now cooperating with the investigators, although none has spoken publicly about the matter to date.

In July 2010, a researcher funded by The Post & Email and a private citizen traveled to the Hawaii Department of Health to gather information from the 1961-64 Birth Index, where Obama’s name and birth date were listed with an anomaly showing directly above it.  A researcher who made the same trip in 2009 stated in a sworn affidavit that at that time, Obama’s name did not appear in the Birth Index.

Mark Gillar of the Tea Party Power Hour, who has been close to Zullo’s investigation, stated in a video released in December that “prosecutions are coming” in regard to the birth certificate forgery.  Two days later, Hawaii Health Department Director Loretta Fuddy died as a result of a water landing of the small airplane in which she and eight others were traveling, with the cause of death ultimately having been declared as “cardiac arrhythmia.”  Her brother said she had no heart condition, and she was the only person to lose her life.

Gallups said he is privy to the information which will be made public in the near future.

Arpaio has been termed “America’s toughest sheriff.”


Join the Conversation


Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

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

  1. Hi Sharon, re Shrimpton’s comment about the year Obama was born…

    What he actually said was that Obama was born “about” 1960. See the video clip (between the 30 and 35 second mark) here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tOK_li8F5GA. Hopefully, I’ve typed it in correctly. If not, the video is available elsewhere.

    Since the Shrimpton video was made in 2008, I don’t think his reference to when Obama was born can be taken by itself to either contradict or confirm the claim that Obama was born on Aug. 4, 1961, a date which being spoken of nearly a half century later fits well within the parameters of “about 1960.” While there may be other information which throws suspicion on the official date of birth, and I believe there is, I don’t think anything Shrimpton said sheds any light on it either way.

    On the other hand, the facts he offered do eliminate any possibility of a Hawaiian birth on ANY date; as, well as Stanley Ann Dunham being Obama’s birth mother.

    Regardless of Obama’s actual date of birth, the fact that SAD did not give birth on August 4, 1961; and, was therefore not just getting over a pregnancy in the days and weeks immediately afterward makes some known facts easier to comprehend. For example, she appeared in Seattle, Washington WITH little Barry in tow within a few days to a couple of weeks after the claimed date of birth. Normally, especially in 1961, a new mother of 18 would not travel thousands of miles by air, WITH her newborn infant, but alone otherwise, that soon after giving birth. NOW we know, “having just given birth” was not the problem previously imagined because she was not the birth mother!

    During that trip to Seattle in August of 1961, SAD also visited Susan Blake, an old classmate from Mercer High School, from where SAD had just graduated in June of 1960. The new information from Michael Shrimpton also helps explain why Blake recalls SAD not even knowing how to change baby Barry’s diaper! It’s almost as if SAD simply found an infant in some back alley and immediately hopped a plane to Seattle! There was surely more to it, though…

    I don’t recall where at the moment; but, I once read that SAD had sort of bragged to a high school friend she didn’t need to get married in order to have a baby. Well, it appears she managed to prove that point! It’s a known fact that SAD and Obama, Sr. never lived together as man and wife and most likely never even got married. At any rate, Blake’s story makes it clear SAD was not accustomed to taking care of a baby; and, Shrimpton’s information leaves no doubt SAD was not the mother!

    What is not yet known is how SAD came to be in possession of a child that, according to Shrimpton, was likely born to a mistress of Barry’s father, who was likely to have been from Kenya herself!

    And what of the just weeks old speculation that Obama was fathered by Subud founder, Bapak Subuh… While Shrimpton decimated several portions of Obama’s official story, and threw doubt on others, there was apparently no room for doubt that Obama, Sr. was in fact the real father!

    Those are just a few examples of how this new information is going to affect how we view much of the known facts from those days.

    For those who may be unfamiliar with it, MOST of the information I mentioned above other than Shrimpton and Subuh can be found here: http://www.theobamafile.com/_family/anna.htm
    Mrs. Rondeau replies: I found it interesting that Shrimpton did not name either the father or mother. He said the father was a “gunrunner” for the Mau Muas, which could mean BO Sr. or a completely different man.

    1. Well, it is true that Shrimpton did not say, “Obama Senior was the father of the Barack Obama who is acting as president of the USA.”

      However, he did say, “Obama’s mother, we think, was one of Obama Senior’s many mistresses.” So, unless we are to believe Shrimpton intended to imply that said mistress was impregnated by some unnamed man who was little Barry’s father, rather than by Obama Senior, we must assume that Shrimpton meant Obama Senior himself impregnated the mistress of his whom is believed by British intelligence to be little Barry’s mother.

      Shrimpton did not appear to have any qualms about acknowledging that Stanley Ann Dunham was not Obama’s mother, that her parents had no DNA connection to Obama; nor, any of the other bombshells he threw out. So, why would we assume that he would not be just as forthcoming that Obama Senior was NOT Barry’s father, IF he had reason to believe that?

      As for the comment about gun running…

      1. During the Mau Mau Rebellion was almost certainly the only time such activities would have occurred.

      2. The Mau Mau Rebellion mostly took place between the early fifties and 1960. Obama Senior would have been 15 and 20 years old when that conflict began and about 26 when it ended. So, at least during the latter half of that rebellion, he was of an age that would have allowed him to run guns for the Mau Mau; and, since that would have been a “part time job,” it would have been possible for him to do that in addition to other things we know for sure he did during those years.

      Obama Senior’s father would have been between 55 and 65 when the Mau Mau rebellion was going on; and, we know he was involved with them. See # 3 below…

      3. Sarah, Barry’s “grandmother,” is on record saying HER husband, Hussein Onyango Obama, Barry’s grandfather, was an informer for the Mau Mau and was arrested and put in prison for passing information to the insurgents which he had gathered while working as a cook for a British military officer. So, we know Obama Senior’s father was heavily involved with the Rebellion.

      4. We also know from Obama Senior’s writings that he was in close agreement with HIS father’s political ideology; and, that he himself was arrested and jailed for a short period because of his connections with the Kenya African National Union (KANU). The KANU tried to stay away from tribal politics; but, like the Mau Mau, was distinctly pro-Kenyan independence and anti-British rule. So, it would not be uncommon for some Kenyans to be closely associated with both groups.

      Therefore, there is no real reason not to believe that Shrimpton was referring to Obama Senior instead of some unnamed other man despite the fact that Shrimpton did not offer a specific name.

      For the above reasons, it is my opinion that the man Shrimpton was referring to as a gun runner for the Mau Mau was most likely Obama Senior.

      Note: My source for the above information is various pages of theobamafile.com which deal specifically with Barry Obama’s father and grandfather, respectively.

  2. It is a sad day when America has become inept at stopping the corruption growing in its bowels. The job protection, entitlement secrecy, lies and theft have been out of control since 2008 with zero accountability for any crimes, and now we hang on the edge to see who gets to point fingers at anyone. Nothing has been done to arrest or prosecute any of the political criminals operating freely inside the DNC while America sinks into oblivion. Soon, near term’s end, we will see all the soothsaying and apologists coming from the whole DNC team. Treason, Perjury, Election Fraud, Identity Fraud, Murder, Misprision Of Felony still stands at the face of the Constitutional violations performed.

  3. Even over a year ago, Orly Taitz was interviewed extensively by FOX. This interview is “in the can,” which leads one to think that Major Media HAVE ALWAYS known there was something to “Birtherism,” “Obamagate,” or whatever the fraud will be known as. At the right moment, when all is revealed with no help from the bigwigs of media, that same media will be there to jump on it post facto. Why would FOX have a lengthy but hitherto never aired interview at their disposal? Eventually they will be “in front of the event” even while their own negligence helped to protract the suffering of the Nation.
    Mrs. Rondeau replies: Yes, I recall that a Fox News team followed Phil Berg to Washington, DC for an action he filed challenging Obama’s eligibility, but the footage was never aired. Perhaps Gallups is talking about other major media companies. We will have to wait and see.

    1. Thank you, Mrs Rondeau: Yes, that is correct about Mr Berg. Joy Behar interviewed Orly early on, as did CNN’s John King. This is an example of the media “dabbling” with a subject without giving it due credence. It seems Arpaio has media already prepped with guarantees they will follow up with coverage. That is uplifting. FOX, CNN, etc, will have other unaired footage ready to re-contextualize the very moment that Obama is publicly exposed. They can embed this is the coverage they will have to scramble to produce, but they ARE preparing. Thanks for keeping us up to date. All through the land one hears from others that we are “living in historical times” which will be immmortalized by those who chronicle these events.

  4. I certainly hope Gallops is correct in his belief that the MSM is truly interested in reporting the truth about Obama’s forged identity papers and the criminal supporters complicit in that whole endeavor. However, I fear they are more likely concerned only to see how much of their own complicity Zullo may have un-covered with provable documentation. God bless Sheriff Arpaio.

  5. If Obama was to be remove from Office by Arpaio, he will make history and forever be known as “America’s toughest Sheriff” and not the most powerful man in the world could not escape the long arm of the law of Sheriff Joe.