by Sharon Rondeau

(Dec. 23, 2015) — In an interview with NPR which was broadcast on Monday, reporter Steve Inskeep asked Barack Hussein Obama “if he’d come to understand” that some Americans “believe or fear” that Obama is “trying to change the country in some way that they cannot accept.”

Obama attempted to reframe the question, asking Inskeep if his question was, “Are there certain circumstances around being the first African-American president” as something “that might not have confronted a previous president” being a factor.  Obama then answered the hypothetical question with “Absolutely.”

Prior to the portion of the interview posted here and here, 2016 presidential candidate Donald Trump had been the subject of discussion.  Commentator Rush Limbaugh posted the entire 37-minute interview.

“I don’t know if that’s all of it,” Inskeep countered.  The two men talked over each other for a few moments, and then Obama said, “You’re asking a pretty broad question; I don’t know where to take it, so if you want to narrow it down, I can.”  Without allowing Inskeep a chance to respond, Obama continued, “If what you’re suggesting is is [sic] that somebody questioning whether I was born in the United States or not, how do I think about that, I would say that that’s something that is actively promoted and may gain traction because of my unique demographic.  I don’t think that that’s a big stretch, but maybe you’ve got something else in mind.”

During his response, Obama laughed or chuckled twice, with the camera showing Inskeep smiling with what might have been a puzzled look on his face as Obama concluded his statement.

Inskeep then provided an example to Obama of his “bitter clingers” comment made during the 2008 campaign, referring to those who allegedly “cling to their guns and religion.”

During Obama’s de facto presidency, he declared that he would not enforce the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which has effectively been nullified by a U.S. Supreme Court decision announced in June supported by Obama; government-run health care was imposed on all 50 states in one form or another; relations were “normalized” with Cuba without conditions; a “deal” has been struck with Iran, a known state sponsor of terrorism; federal judges have declared state marriage amendments and immigration laws unconstitutional; tens of thousands of criminal illegal aliens have been released from custody onto U.S. streets; illegals have been deported at record-low levels and allowed to cross the borders by the tens of thousands; the Middle East has erupted in war, Islamic terrorism and instability; and the forgery of documents purported to represent Obama’s history have been thrust on an unsuspecting public.

On April 27, 2011, in apparent response to Donald Trump’s public demands that Obama release his “long-form” birth certificate, presumably to prove his constitutional eligibility to serve as president and commander-in-chief, the White House posted on its website an image said to be a scan of a certified copy of the document obtained from the Hawaii Department of Health.

Within 48 hours, several computer experts went on the record to say that the image is a poor forgery.

In September of that year, Maricopa County Sheriff Joseph M. Arpaio commissioned an investigative team, the Cold Case Posse associated with his office, to launch a probe into the image’s authenticity in light of concerns expressed by a group of 250 of Arpaio’s constituents concerned that their votes in the 2012 presidential election would be disenfranchised if the image were proven fraudulent.

Following approximately six months of investigation, posse lead investigator Mike Zullo and Arpaio announced at a press conference that both the birth certificate image and Obama’s Selective Service registration form are “computer-generated forgeries.”

Neither the media nor Congress would investigate, even after more detailed information was presented by the two at a second press conference on July 17, 2012.

Although Trump has spoken little about the “birth certificate” issue since declaring himself a presidential candidate in June, in the past he has expressed the understanding which many Americans share that in order to serve as president, one must be born in the United States to satisfy the “natural born Citizen” requirement in Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution.

Some legal and constitutional scholars maintain that the citizenship of the parents, or at least the father, determines the citizenship of the child and his allegiance, not the place where he was born.  Some believe that “natural born Citizen” means “born in the United States to citizen parents.”

The U.S. Supreme Court has “evaded the issue” in regard to defining the meaning of “natural born Citizen,” although a a sizable number of lawsuits were filed at various levels since 2008 challenging Obama’s constitutional eligibility.

For the first time in U.S. history, a candidate known to have been born outside the country, Sen. Ted Cruz, is running for president without legal challenge thus far to his eligibility outside of a ballot challenge filed in New Hampshire which was overruled. Cruz was additionally not born to a U.S.-citizen father but claims “natural born citizenship” through his mother, who was born in Delaware.  Like Obama, Cruz has not released his college transcripts, medical records, or proof of U.S. citizenship, although Cruz’s Canadian birth certificate was published by The Dallas Morning News in August 2013.

The News did not say how it obtained Cruz’s birth certificate.  When The Post & Email attempted to obtain a copy from the health department in Alberta, Canada last March, officials there declined to issue it based on “privacy” laws.  U.S. government departments have released no personal information on Cruz other than his Selective Service registration information, reportedly obtained from his college financial aid applications.

A second criminal investigation launched by Arpaio in the fall of 2013 engaged a former CIA, NSA, and Pentagon contractor who claimed he possessed evidence that more than 150,000 Maricopa County residents’ bank accounts had been breached by an entity of the federal government.

According to testimony delivered in a civil case against Arpaio last month by Zullo, the confidential informant working for Arpaio, Dennis Montgomery, provided a certain amount of information on not only the bank breaches, but also Obama’s birth certificate.

Several months before Montgomery approached Arpaio with his claims in November 2013, former NSA and CIA contractor Edward Snowden left the country and provided classified documents to reporters from The Guardian, a UK-based newspaper which broke the story of the highly-sophisticated government surveillance programs which have been collecting virtually all telephone and email communications of American citizens, whether or not they were suspected of nefarious activity.

Montgomery’s current attorney, Larry Klayman, was able to secure immunity for his client with the FBI and has said that Montgomery possesses potentially more significant revelations than those which Snowden made.

Since 2007, inconsistencies about Obama’s purported background have been noted, including that he has claimed that his parents lived together in Hawaii when he was born, but his wife, Michelle, has said that her husband’s mother “was very young and very single when Barack was born.”

Michelle has additionally called Kenya her husband’s “home country.”

Obama’s original literary agent had written his biography to say that he was “born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia and Hawaii” until changing it to read that he was “born in Hawaii” 16 years later in 2007, just after Obama announced his presidential run.

Zullo has termed the birth certificate forgery “the foundational lie of this presidency,” saying that it was created “with the intent to deceive.”

In a later response to Inskeep’s question, Obama referenced his “background” as a possible factor in “certain strains in the Republican Party that suggest that somehow I’m different, I’m Muslim, disloyal to the country, etc., which, unfortunately, is pretty far out there and gets some traction…what I’d say there is that…that’s pretty specific to me and who I am and my background, and I may represent change that worries them.”

What is Obama’s background, and what kind of “change” is he talking about?

What does he mean by “my demographic?”

Leave a comment

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.