Reporter Insists “Birtherism” Claims “Not True”


by Sharon Rondeau, h/t GW

(Sep. 16, 2017) — At Friday’s White House press corps briefing, a reporter equated President Donald Trump’s criticism of ESPN’s handling of one of its reporters’ political comments to those Trump made beginning in 2011 termed by the media as “birtherism.”

Without mentioning the subject of Trump’s “birther” comments, Barack Hussein Obama, the reporter asked, “Does that mean that he’s willing to apologize for birtherism claims that he had, called on for years?”

White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders responded that ESPN should be “consistent” in its dealing with anchors who make political statements, citing the example of another reporter who had been fired resulting from a similar situation.

On Monday, ESPN “SportsCenter” co-anchor Jemele Hill tweeted that Trump is a “white supremacist” and that she finds him offensive.

On Wednesday, Sanders stated from the podium that Hill’s comments should constitute a “fireable offense” on ESPN’s part.

Hill, who is black, was invited to the White House in 2016, where she is pictured with the Obamas in a photo on her Twitter timeline.

After Hill issued her “white supremacist” tweet on Monday, controversy inevitably arose, prompting her to issue a statement in which she said that her “comments on Twitter expressed my personal beliefs.”

On Friday, Trump tweeted that ESPN is “paying a really big price for its politics (and bad programming)…”

The left-leaning Washington Post and New York Times have since found ways to defend Hill’s commentary, which arguably would not have been tolerated had they been made about Trump’s predecessor.

The reporter asking the question of Sanders added that Trump’s “birtherism” comments were “not true.”

No member of the mainstream media has acknowledged that after Trump began to publicly question Barack Obama’s presidential qualifications in 2011 and pressured the White House to release Obama’s “long-form” birth certificate, the image, once published, was found to be fraudulent by a five-year criminal investigation.

On April 27, 2011, the image, said to be a scan of a certified copy of Obama’s original Hawaii birth certificate, was posted at amid much media fanfare and Obama’s remarks at an unscheduled press conference wherein he claimed it represented “additional information about the site of my birth.”

The criminal probe was commissioned in August 2011 by then-Maricopa County Sheriff Joseph Arpaio at the request of 242 of his constituents.  On March 1, 2012, lead investigator Mike Zullo revealed that probable cause existed to believe that the image is a “computer-generated forgery.”

To Arpaio’s surprise, no media outlet expressed enough curiosity to launch its own investigation into those findings, but rather, chose to ridicule and vilify the messengers.

Unanswered are the questions which arose when members of the very same media claimed at various times that Obama was foreign-born in either Kenya or Indonesia.

Before Obama ran for president, his then-literary agent stated without equivocation that Obama was “born in Kenya” and not Hawaii, as Obama has claimed publicly.  NPR and the AP also reported him as “Kenyan-born,” although NPR later changed its article to state “born in Hawaii.”

Last September, NPR headlined an article with, “Trump Still Won’t Say He Believes Obama Born In U.S. Despite Campaign Claim He Does.”

The mainstream media is undoubtedly aware that Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution requires the president and commander-in-chief to be a “natural born Citizen,” the cornerstone of which is generally considered to be a birth in the United States.

Some constitutional attorneys, scholars and citizens believe that Obama’s claim to a parent who was never a U.S. citizen was enough to disqualify him.

When the Framers included the “natural born Citizen” clause in the Constitution, they provided no definition of the term.  However, the requirement for U.S. senators and U.S. representatives is stated simply as “a Citizen of the United States.”

During a third and final press conference last December, lead investigator Mike Zullo revealed that two well-known forensic analysts, conducting their own respective examinations of the long-form birth certificate image bearing Obama’s name, reached conclusions very similar to his own.

Arpaio stated at the conclusion of the presser that not all of the evidence investigators gathered had been released that day and that the evidence in its totality would be turned over to federal authorities.

To the public’s knowledge, neither Congress nor the FBI has investigated why the image, still available at the Obama White House archives online, was declared a forgery by not one investigation, but three.

While Trump has declined to comment on the “birther” issue for some time, members of the media or the pundit community continue to raise them.

40 Responses to "Reporter Insists “Birtherism” Claims “Not True”"

  1. Tim   Thursday, September 21, 2017 at 2:55 AM

    Sharon –
    Bless your heart for keeping this critical issue in the forefront. You are the only one keeping the dialogue alive. If the swamp ever gets drained, the truth may finally get recognition, and Americans will hopefully get true justice. The falsification of a government document remains a felony offense, and everyone complicit in it is equally guilty of perpetrating the crime. (That could effectively, and rightfully, empty every seat in the US Congress and Senate?)

  2. JONATHAN DAVID MOOERS   Wednesday, September 20, 2017 at 8:36 PM

    Treason Queen Pelosi forged the passport for The Pelosi-Soros’ Soetoros on 08-28-08

    (ANY OF ITEM 207, A thru Q >>> ? )



  3. Mark Bellison   Wednesday, September 20, 2017 at 12:59 PM

    Not just some guys who were lawyers bit who were lawyers at the time the Constitution was drafted, debated, signed and ratified.

    If your argument is that the Framers used the English Common Law definition in the Constitution but it was subsequently changed by Supreme Court decisions that is fine but still wrong.

    The only Court case that matters is Wong Kim Ark because it is the latest. Professor Titus in Rudy v Lee wrote that the Court would need to overturn Wong to declare Obama ineligible.

    Now in the your case in New York, if your interpretation is correct you may have an argument the Supreme Court would be willing to take on. In Indiana the precedent is Ankeny v Daniels and in Maryland it is Fair v Obama. Both ruled Obama is a natural born citizen. With your interpretation of the New York court’s decision you can argue there is a conflict between state courts over Federal law. Good luck with that.

  4. T.F. B0W   Wednesday, September 20, 2017 at 11:35 AM

    Zullo claims he hired two forensic experts to examine Obama’s birth certificate, but Zullo has not publically released the reports from these experts, and there is no indication that he ever will. There is also no indication that these experts ever looked at Obama’s selective service registration. In any event, Zullo is no longer associated the MCSO, and the MCSO has since closed this investigation.

    Laity may believe himself to be “a subject matter expert par excellence” (whatever that is), but his beliefs have been rejected in real cases decided in real courts by real judges, who have concluded that birth in the United States is sufficient to confer natural-born citizenship. Laity may believe his contrary conclusions have the force of law, but it is unsurprising that no one else does.

  5. Mark Bellison   Wednesday, September 20, 2017 at 9:28 AM

    Chuck – the FBI’s Question Document Unit (QDU). They are the main reason Congress refuses to act on Zullo’s evidence.

  6. Robert Laity   Wednesday, September 20, 2017 at 7:56 AM

    Mark Bellison, What matters is not that certain people who happened to have been lawyers disagreed with what an NBC was. What matters is what the law says. Right now, under current. standing “Good Law”, the US Supreme Court Precedents in “the Venus”, “Wong Kim Ark”, “Shanks v Dupont”, “Minor v Happersett” and “Laity v NY” control. An NBC is “one born in the United States to parents who were both US Citizens themselves”. Every President we ever had, except for the first (7) who were grandfathered in, Chester Arthur and Barack Obama had parents who were both US Citizens and were born in the US. If anything, it is a past practice of long standing. It is also the law.

  7. Robert Laity   Wednesday, September 20, 2017 at 7:45 AM

    TF Bow, You can make such a claim but you can’t support it. I know of what I speak. The US Supreme Court precedents that I cited make it clear that you don’t know of what you speak.
    It has been defined,affirmed ,reaffirmed and left undisturbed for the last 230 years. An NBC is one born in the United States IN ADDITION TO being born of parents who were BOTH US citizens themselves. Of this, I am a subject matter expert par excellence.

  8. Chuck   Wednesday, September 20, 2017 at 1:37 AM

    It makes no difference where he was born!

    His birth certificate ans Selective Service Registration Form are forgeries, as attested to by Maricopa County, AZ Sheriff’s Department who hired two certified forensic document examiners on two continents; each called them forgeries.

    If anyone has the name of a certified credential forensic examiner that will attest to the authenticity of either of these documents post there names. I would like to hire them.

    Don’t be fooled with time-wasting stuff. This guy pulled one of the the biggest hoaxes this country has ever seen.

  9. Mark Bellison   Tuesday, September 19, 2017 at 1:22 PM

    Gosh who to believe.

    James Hillhouse who fought in the Revolutionary war, was a lawyer, and a Federalist who served in both Houses of Congress along with James Madison

    And William Rawle whowas also a lawyer, personal friend to Benjamin Franklin and who was asked by President Washington to be the US Attorney for Pennsylvania


    People who have done none of those things and lost every case thry have brought to court on Presidential eligiblity.

  10. T.F. B0W   Tuesday, September 19, 2017 at 12:49 PM

    Regardless of Laity’s personal beliefs, real judges in real courts deciding real cases have ruled that birth in the United States is sufficient to confer natural-born citizenship. And no judge has ruled otherwise.

  11. JONATHAN DAVID MOOERS   Tuesday, September 19, 2017 at 12:35 PM

    LAW OF NATIONS: NEVER-presIDent SOETORO-OBAMA II is/was/will never be a “natural born Citizen” with a foreign-narrative abandoned-sperm Father From My Dreams

    LAW OF NATURE: NEVER-presIDent SOETORO-OBAMA II is/was/will never be a “natural brained Citizen” with his cocaine-stained-brain of childhood engrained-brain foreign sympathies usurping Constitutional allegiances and duties

    The family unit is the first government; an incubator for a growing child’s values and affections.

  12. Robert Laity   Tuesday, September 19, 2017 at 3:27 AM

    David L, In the NA of 1790 Congress mistakenly “considered” those born overseas to Citizen parents as NBC. Five years later, IN the NA or 1795 that very provision was REPEALED. It was unconstitutional since an NBC required birth IN the US to two citizen parents. See: Law of Nations and Article 1, Sec. 8 of the USConst.

  13. Robert Laity   Tuesday, September 19, 2017 at 3:19 AM

    Bernard Sussman, An NBC is “one born IN the US to parents who are both US Citizens Themselves” – Minor v Happersett, USSCt. (1874) Unanimous.

  14. Robert Laity   Tuesday, September 19, 2017 at 3:14 AM

    Frank B, I have been educating people like you for over (9) yrs. now. “The Court” [SCOTUS] has affirmed and reaffirmed the definition of an NBC in five cases. An NBC is “one born IN the United States to parents who are both US Citizens Themselves”- Minor v Happersett, USSCt. also see: The Venus., Wong Kim Ark., Shanks v Dupont and Laity v NY.

  15. Three-Pound Sledge   Monday, September 18, 2017 at 9:41 PM

    The legislators that established the first Naturalization law of 1790 did not publicly state that they messed up their assignment of a natural born citizenship to a person born overseas to citizen parent(s). They did not have the authority to assign natural born citizenship because a law is not required to confer natural born citizenship because it is a natural act and not dependent upon a law – but I repeat myself.

    Note that the Naturalization Act of 1795 took into consideration the fact that the first one was FUBAR in regards to individuals born out of the limits and JURISDICTION of the continental U.S. (SEC. 3). The legislators of 1795 recognized this fact and ‘fixed’ their mistake by repealing the Naturalization Act of 1790.

    Congressman Hillman is the Rodney Dangerfield of Congress. Everyone ignored him and he received no respect.

  16. David L   Monday, September 18, 2017 at 7:22 PM

    Annals of Congress, House of Representatives, 3rd Congress, 2nd Session, January 2nd, 1795, page 1046

  17. Sharon Rondeau   Monday, September 18, 2017 at 4:36 PM

    Do you have a link?

  18. David L   Monday, September 18, 2017 at 3:38 PM

    3lb sledge

    During the congressional debates over the 1795 naturalization act, Congressman Hillhouse of Connecticut said the children of an alien are natural born citizens.

    His statement is part of the congressional record.

  19. T.F. B0W   Monday, September 18, 2017 at 3:20 PM

    Since the United States exists only because of human law, there is no natural law to define who is a U.S. citizen (let alone natural-born citizen), and who is not.

  20. JONATHAN DAVID MOOERS   Monday, September 18, 2017 at 11:13 AM

    Which cloud clouds your brain with anger or ridicule or resentment whenever your brain hears spoken, or sees in print, these historic words:




    ANSWER: a 9 year-old cloud of BRAINWASH, HOGWASH OR WHITEWASH, me thinks!

    A brain that triggers its fingers to express “Crazy Joe Arpaio” might be clouded with BRAINWASH, don’t you think?

    Maybe Obama lovers need some MOUTHWASH before speaking because the mouth is a mirror to the mind, perhaps a clouded mind incarcerated in mind slavery.

    IT’S THE BRAIN, STUPID…only give legal American citizens a legal originalist “natural brained Citizen”!

    The original intention of the deliberate THOUGHTFUL debated restrictive “natural born Citizen” brain was the brain of a Commander-in-Chief that, ideally, ONLY HAD EXPERIENCES/SENSES/THOUGHTS/PARENTAGE of 100% “America First”, like me: born in Bangor, Maine in 1949, residing in USA all my 68 years, never arrested or sued, raised by American citizen parents who remained married together all their lives, served in the US Army on active duty, a descendant of an English carpenter who helped settle Newbury, MA in 1638, etc.

    My brain, and many (most?) more brain-pedigrees similar to mine throughout America, ONLY KNOWS America with my foremost thoughts structured around “America First”. If my brain-pedigree sounds vain or superior or exclusive et al to some, sorry, if I have trampled on anyone’s personal brain-sensitivities of “inclusiveness” or “diversity” or “white privilege” or “white supremist” or “racist” etc. etc. etc.

    SENSE-DECIDE-DO cycles with our brains all our lives, and walking back all the crimes, murders, lies, sedition, racist agitation, debt, national harm and humiliation executed by NEVER-presIDent SOETORO-OBAMA II 08-28-08- TODAY, to the sense-decide-do brain-cycles of Barry Soetoro, reveals to many (most?) objective minds that Barry Soetoro-Obama II always was, always is and always will be a lawless “Foreigners First” brain-thinker.

    Shame on the brain of shallow power-addicted Nancy Pelosi for foisting Barry’s ungrateful un-American foreign-thinking anti-“natural born Citizen” brain onto apple pie America 08-28-08- TODAY!.

    What’s in YOUR brain…Constitution or koran?

  21. Mark Bellison   Monday, September 18, 2017 at 9:46 AM

    You can contact Ms. Goldman through her cbs email.

  22. Three-Pound Sledge   Monday, September 18, 2017 at 9:22 AM

    The Second Amendment is simple in its wording length and to-the-point. Unfortunately, the term “Natural Born Citizen” is not that intuitive. One must probe the minds of the Founding Fathers during their final crafting of the U.S. Constitution and their reliance on the wisdom and direction of Emmerich de Vattel’s ‘Law of Nations’.

    Therefore, everyone has to do their homework, but beware of the watering-down of the term “Natural Born Citizen” as originally intended by our Founding Fathers to today’s insistence of accepting anyone for the Executive Office. Joseph Goebbels would be proud of the afterbirther crowd.

    Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 may be the only part of the U.S. Constitution that cites “Natural Born Citizen”. If another instance occurs within the U.S. Constitution, please correct me.

    Now for you defenders of the fraud, aka Barry Soetoro, please do your research and try to find any active statute, whether an immigration type or not, that cites the term “Natural Born Citizen”.

    Therein lies the difference. You are either a statutory U.S. Citizen or a Natural Born U.S. Citizen. A person is a Natural Born Citizen by no government statute, but by a natural act of being born on U.S. soil to two U.S. Citizen parents.

    No law exits that defines Natural Born Citizen because none is needed. If you have to depend on a law for your citizenship then you are certainly not a natural born Citizen. The 14th Amendment is working against the afterbirthers too, because “and subject to jurisdiction thereof” means no other jurisdiction.

  23. Bernard J Sussman   Monday, September 18, 2017 at 2:27 AM

    A natural born citizen is one born in the United States, without regard to the citizenship of either or both parents. For example, Chester A. Arthur, the 21st President, had an American mother but his father was a British subject. Charles Evans Hughes, the Republican nominee for President in 1916, was similarly born to a non-citizen father – it didn’t bother the Republicans back then, what do you suppose is the difference between Hughes and Obama??

    As for the Hawaiian birth certificate, it has been repeatedly verified by Hawaiian officials of both parties, and by independent witnesses. All of the amateur detectives who claim that its internet image gives anomalous readings on Photoshop or other software ignore the fact that it is printed on green basket-weave security paper (in compliance with a 2004 federal anti-terrorism law), intended to frustrate attempts at counterfeiting or alteration. And the security paper clearly works because its internet image causes machines to give anomalous readings. None of these birthers – not even the ones recruited by Crazy Joe Arpaio – ever bothered to go to the White House, where the original print with the Hawaiian impression seal was kept.

    I used to work for the US Passport Office and was specifically trained to detect any hankypanky with a birth certificate, and it’s obvious to me that the one shown by Obama is the real deal. Further, the fact that he previously, long before running for President, appeared on US Passports (his mother’s and then his own), shows that he had a bona fide birth certificate that established his US citizenship.

  24. T.F. B0W   Sunday, September 17, 2017 at 11:31 PM

    Around a dozen different courts have expressly said that birth in the United States is sufficient to confer natural-born citizenship. How is that wrong? Are the courts ignorant, moronic, or leftist deceit?

  25. David L   Sunday, September 17, 2017 at 10:46 PM

    Churchill was born to a British father and US citizen mother. However he was not a US citizen and admitted as much in a 1941 speech before the US Congress. In the 1960s he was granted honorary US citizenship.

  26. Gary Wilmott   Sunday, September 17, 2017 at 7:42 PM

    Frank B. your response above is classic ignorance and moronic on its face. Or perhaps is it just purposeful leftist deceit? Yeah I get it Frank, all the anchor babies are natural born citizens. And there is no doubt that terrorist An-war-al-awaki was a natural born citizen even though he was born to Yemeni citizen parents parents in New Mexico. Sure…makes a lot of sense. And of course using the the Lyin’ Ted Cruz standard, Winston Churchill born in the UK to an American father and British mother…he too could have run for president. As for you claim that the courts are absolutely clear and support your position you would be 100% wrong. Do your research and please stop spreading the anti-American, anti-Constitution propaganda.

  27. Gary Wilmott   Sunday, September 17, 2017 at 7:29 PM

    To Mark Bellison: Since you are so eager to “help”…perhaps we can cut to the chase and you can provide me all of Ms. Goldman’s contact information?

  28. David L   Sunday, September 17, 2017 at 1:03 PM

    Facts are lazy and facts are late
    Facts all come with points of view
    Facts don’t do what I want them to
    Facts just twist the truth around
    Facts are living turned inside out
    Facts are getting the best of them
    Facts are nothing on the face of things
    Facts don’t stain the furniture
    Facts go out and slam the door
    Facts are written all over your face
    Facts continue to change their shape

  29. Frank B   Sunday, September 17, 2017 at 12:49 PM

    “TF Bow, Be truthful now. Was Barack Obama, Senior EVER an American Citizen? That alone disqualifies Junior. An NBC must have parents who were BOTH US Citizens at the time of said NBC’s birth, IN the USA.”

    No, of course Barack Obama, Sr. was never an American citizen. We all know that but it doesn’t matter. Barack Obama was born in Hawaii and was not the child of a foreign ambassador or enemy combatant. He is therefore a natural born citizen. The courts are absolutely clear on that point.

  30. Robert Laity   Sunday, September 17, 2017 at 11:27 AM

    TF Bow, Be truthful now. Was Barack Obama, Senior EVER an American Citizen? That alone disqualifies Junior. An NBC must have parents who were BOTH US Citizens at the time of said NBC’s birth, IN the USA.

  31. Cort Wrotnowski   Sunday, September 17, 2017 at 11:20 AM

    Controlled opposition all

  32. Robert Laity   Sunday, September 17, 2017 at 11:18 AM

    There is absolutely NO wiggle room for Obama. He is not a “Natural Born Citizen” and there is absolutely nothing that he can do about changing his status or circumstance that can ever make him a “Natural Born Citizen”. He has never been the bona-fide President. These facts are not only true, they are incontrovertible. Congress established and The US Supreme Court affirmed, over 200 years ago, what a “Natural Born Citizen” is. SCOTUS has reaffirmed the definition over four times in the last 230 years as “One born IN the United States to parents who are both US Citizens themselves”. Water requires two Hydrogen molecules and one Oxygen molecule to become H2O. The Law of Nations and US Supreme Court precedents requires two US Citizen Parents and birth in the United States to be a “Natural Born Citizen”.
    Formulas must be precise or the end product is deficient.

  33. Stephen Hiller   Sunday, September 17, 2017 at 10:54 AM

    As long as Obama continues to run the Dept. of Justice, nothing will ever happen with the issue.

  34. JONAATHAN DAVID MOOERS   Sunday, September 17, 2017 at 8:48 AM

    NEVER-presIDent SOETORO-OBAMA II 08-28-08- TODAY

    Narrative Obama II may remain a president in many minds as long as he is NEVER ID’d.

    So, BRAINWASH, HOGWASH and WHITEWASH have been administered since TREASON DAY 08-28-08 to make absolutely certain that Obama II will never be unmasked as a masquerade-presIDent…BLACK LIES MATTER to Jemele Hill et al, so our national leaders must continue RELYING ON LYING and continue submitting to OBAMA II-KNOWS-HE-IS-A-USURPER BLACK MALE BLACKMAIL since 08-28-08 to NEVER-ID adopted Barry-narrative Barack.

    BRAINWASH from Brainwashington, DeCeit ensures that some 323,000,000 American citizen-minds will only see-hear-feel the joyous historic “America’s first African-American President” :

    “It’s an institutional culture in government,” he said. “We don’t want to go after our predecessors because we don’t want our successors to come after us.”

    HOGWASH from every single court in the land during all of The CRINO Period 08-28-08- TODAY (Constitutional Republic In Name Only)

    WHITEWASH from cowering citizens, such as the reporter in this P&E article, who are afraid of being labeled or inconvenienced or sued for being “racist’ or “hateful” or “bigoted” or “ignorant” and, instead, run away to never-never-ID-land whenever “birthers” utter such hearsay heresy, in their minds, as “Obama’s forged birth certificate” et al

    Do some citizens actually now think that it is PATRIOTIC, NOT ID-IOTIC, on behalf of domestic tranquility and national security, to ensure Obama II is never unmasked since that may ignite a civil war? Are we now seeing IGNORANCE PATRIOTS vs P&E KNOWLEDGE PATRIOTS underway today, each possessing the sincerest of intentions?

    Train your brain: Soetoro-Obama II NEVER WAS, NEVER IS and NEVER WILL BE AMERICA’S 44th CONSTITUTIONAL presIDent…how can he be?

    ANSWER: only IGNORANCE IS POWER ensures Obama II remains a Constitutional presIDent in one’s mind!


    * , Item 207 A thru Q

  35. Mark Bellison   Sunday, September 17, 2017 at 2:05 AM

    BTW, the AP reporter pictured is Ken Thomas (between Ms. Goldman and Ms. Bruce). Wouldn’t want to forget him.

  36. Mark Bellison   Sunday, September 17, 2017 at 12:29 AM

    The reporter is Julianna Goldman of CBS.

    The seating for the front row in the White House press room is (right to left):

    NBC – Hallie Jackson, pictured
    FOX – John Roberts, pictured
    CBS – Julianna Goldman, pictured
    Associated Press –
    ABC – Mary Bruce
    Reuters –
    CNN –

    FYI, I let Ms. Goldman know you would be contacting her.

  37. T.F. B0W   Saturday, September 16, 2017 at 10:14 PM

    The Montgomery/Klayman lawsuit plods along, but there are motions to dismiss pending. Of course, no one really knows what’s on those hard drives; there’s no evidence to independently verify Montgomery’s claims.

    Just like there’s no independent evidence about Zullo’s experts’ reports. The media probably ignored Zullo’s press conferences because Zullo provided no evidence to support his claims.

  38. jeffrey Harrison   Saturday, September 16, 2017 at 8:07 PM

    Elmo, your remarks are “right-on”.

    This so-called “Birther Issue” was “suppose” to have been a “dead issue” then why does
    the opposition keep bringing it up? As Rush Limbaugh has said, “… living in their head
    rent free”.

    Either they don’t truly know the truth, won’t look at the evidence, and are locked in to
    their disbelief no matter what. And the earth is flat too…

  39. Gary Wilmott   Saturday, September 16, 2017 at 6:31 PM

    Does anyone know the identity of this ignorant woman in blue who asked this question? I would like to contact her.

  40. ELmo   Saturday, September 16, 2017 at 3:39 PM

    Whatever happened to the Dennis Montgomery Evidence (Hard Drives) that went to the FBI? We haven’t heard from Larry Klayman in a while. The Obama DOJ was good at making evidence disappear or simply ignoring it. The Republican Congress didn’t do much to challenge Obama on the many Illegalities of his administration either.
    Disgusting !!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.