If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my free Email alerts. Thanks for visiting!
by Sharon Rondeau
(Jul. 23, 2015) — In an interview on Thursday with CNN’s Jake Tapper, Maricopa County Sheriff Joseph M. Arpaio told Tapper that regardless of where Barack Hussein Obama was born, a “fraudulent, forged government document” bearing Obama’s name created and posted on the White House website is the focus of a nearly-four-year investigation conducted under his authority.
In response, Tapper asked Arpaio to confirm that he was contending that Obama’s birth certificate is “fraudulent.” “That’s right,” Arpaio said. “I’m not talking about where he came from; I don’t care where he came from,” Arpaio stated. When Arpaio further said that “nobody” has investigated the matter, Tapper responded, “Because the president was born in Hawaii.”
No hospital in Hawaii has claimed to be the place of Obama’s birth. The posse found during the course of its investigation that in 1961, Hawaii permitted the issuance of a birth certificate to a child for whom a single relative claimed a birth within the state without any corroborating evidence.
In September 2011, at the request of approximately 250 constituents, Arpaio delegated his Cold Case Posse to examine the long-form birth certificate image posted at whitehouse.gov on April 27 of that year in response to expert analyses concuding that the image was fraudulent.
After six months of investigation, Arpaio and Cold Case Posse lead investigator Mike Zullo gave the first of two press conferences in which they revealed that the birth certificate image was fraudulent. During the same time frame, the posse also examined the purported Selective Service registration form bearing Obama’s name and declared it, too, to be a “computer-generated forgery.”
On July 17, 2012, Zullo and Arpaio presented further findings to the public on the investigation, contending that the standard of probable cause of forgery regarding the birth certificate image had been surpassed.
The mainstream media ridiculed and chastised Arpaio and Zullo for their claims but failed to launch its own investigation or broadcast the findings to the American people.
Since Obama took office, Arpaio has been under fire from the U.S. Department of Justice, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), and various pro-immigrant groups alleging that his office racially profiles individuals during traffic stops and detentions.
Before Obama took office, a lawsuit was filed by Manuel de Jesus Juan Ortega Melendres and other Latino plaintiffs against Arpaio, several of his deputies, and Maricopa County. The civil lawsuit has proceeded from a judgment against Arpaio rendered by U.S. District Court Judge G. Murray Snow in December 2013 to a civil contempt trial in which denigrating comments about Arpaio alleged to have been made by Snow’s wife made were spun by the media as having led to Arpaio’s “investigation” of Mrs. Snow.
Also during hearings in April, Snow demanded investigatory materials collected by confidential informant Dennis Montgomery, who was working for the MCSO, be turned over to him as well as Snow’s appointed MCSO monitor, Robert Warshaw, even though the investigation reportedly did not involve the Melendres case. On Monday, the U.S. Department of Justice filed a second Motion to Intervene in the case while at the same time referencing its own lawsuit filed against Arpaio on May 10, 2012 for alleged civil rights violations against Spanish-speaking detainees in Arpaio’s county jails.
A previous criminal probe of Arpaio by Justice was quietly closed in August 2012 after insufficient evidence of “abuse of power” was found.
Emails exchanged between Zullo and Montgomery as well as two hard drives Montgomery had provided to the MCSO were some of the documentation handed over to Snow and the monitor. The Justice Department had requested the hard drives, but as of this writing it is unclear if Snow approved the request.
While questioning Arpaio and his chief deputy, Gerard Sheridan, Snow asked if Montgomery had found any evidence that Snow and the Department of Justice were involved in “collusion.” Arpaio responded that Montgomery had provided evidence that thousands of Maricopa County residents’ bank accounts had been breached by a government entity, and Sheridan testified that Snow was not the object of any investigation.
Arpaio has been an outspoken opponent of illegal immigration over his six-term career as sheriff of Maricopa County, but particularly over the last several years as the problem has intensified at the U.S.-Mexico border. Mainstream news reports issued on Thursday indicate that up to 87% of illegal aliens residing in the United States will be allowed to remain in the country “under new immigration enforcement programs” declared by the White House but not passed by Congress.
After Obama announced executive actions last November to change immigration policy such that many illegal aliens would not face deportation under certain conditions, Arpaio filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the planned changes, claiming that Maricopa County would suffer financial harm and threats to its security if the actions were implemented. While Arpaio’s lawsuit received an unfavorable decision from a U.S. District Court judge appointed by Obama, it remains on appeal.
A second lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the executive actions filed by a conglomerate of 26 states was decided by both a U.S. District Court judge and a three-judge panel of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in favor of the plaintiffs.
The Obama regime has recently issued new “guidance” changing the oath of allegiance taken by new American citizens.
As a state senator and US senator, Obama favored immigration policies which would have allowed illegal aliens to pay fines, back taxes, fees, learning English, and assimilate into American society rather than face deportation. As de facto president, Obama’s policies have released tens of thousands of criminal illegal aliens onto American streets, with many Americans invoking the word “treason” to describe the policies allowing it.
With his only public “documents” declared fraudulent, The Post & Email has asked if Obama is “the original DREAMer,” meaning an undocumented illegal alien.
Questions about Obama’s constitutional eligibility and birthplace arose in 2008 following statements made on air by MSNBC’s Chris Matthews that Obama was “born in Indonesia” and possessed “an Islamic background.” Other online reports stated that he was born in Kenya.
The Obama campaign’s failure to release any documentation on Obama’s education, medical history, childhood, or college associations appeared to many to be unusual. However, Congress failed to vet him, and promises made by individual congressmen to investigate and/or expose the forgeries following the two 2012 press conferences were never fulfilled.
Carl Gallups, who has hosted Zullo on his “Freedom Friday” radio show on numerous occasions, has predicted that when the truth emerges, Obama will be found to have been ineligible to serve as president and commander-in-chief in accordance with Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution, which requires him to be a “natural born Citizen.”
Approximately 20 months ago, Zullo told Gallups on air that “universe-shattering” information would be released to the public, most likely in March 2014, but new information which came to light delayed that expectation. Arpaio then launched a criminal investigation outside of the posse’s work on the birth certificate and Selective Service registration form.