CNN Pledges “Facts First,” But What About the Birth Certificate?

CALLS FORGERY FINDINGS A “RATHER PREPOSTEROUS NOTION”

by Sharon Rondeau

(Oct. 23, 2017) — On Monday evening, CNN “Reliable Sources” host Brian Stelter tweeted what he said is the importance of “facts” in reporting the news.

Stelter is historically correct in that journalism once consisted of factual representations from the reporter to the public without a political or agenda-driven slant.

Founded in 1980 as the original 24-hour “cable news network,” CNN has for months, and perhaps years, been deplored by many as a purveyor of “fake news” as a result of its left-leaning bias and focus on trivia.

Donald Trump has been particularly critical of CNN, calling out in a tweet on Saturday CBS, NBC and ABC News for the same reason.

In a statement formatted like a poem, Stelter wrote, “Facts are facts.  They aren’t colored by emotion or bias.  They are indisputable…”

However, for years, CNN has denied the findings of a criminal investigation which found unequivocally that the “long-form” birth certificate image posted on the White House website bearing the name “Barack Hussein Obama II” is a “computer-generated forgery.”

Just prior to the White House’s release of the image on April 27, 2011, CNN presented a two-part series which attempted to convince readers and viewers that the “short-form” birth certificate circulated online in 2008 is authentic.

The second video report in the series gave the reader the impression that CNN had been provided with the microfilm of Obama’s original birth certificate when in fact, the microfilm shown was from someone else’s birth record.

CNN ultimately removed that section of the report and declined to address questions, at least to this writer, about its misrepresentation of the microfilm.

The caption to a 2015 interview between CNN’s Jake Tapper and then-Maricopa County, AZ Sheriff Joseph Arpaio, who commissioned the criminal probe into the birth certificate, erroneously tells the reader:

Sheriff Joe Arpaio says that he still believes that President Obama was not born in the United States.

Tapper opened the interview by contending that Arpaio had “trafficked” in the “rather preposterous notion that President Obama was not born in the United States and that he forged his birth certificate.”  However, from the beginning, Arpaio has stated that he did not “care where he came from” and that determining Obama’s birthplace was never a focus of the investigation.

Curiously, since 2007, major media has stressed that Obama was born in Hawaii despite preexisting reports from credible sources that he was born in Indonesia or Kenya.  Nevertheless, the media has characterized the investigation as a quest to discover Obama’s birthplace while avoiding the findings of forgery and fraud in both the long-form birth certificate and Obama’s purported Selective Service registration form.

At one point, Tapper opined that Arpaio had taken a considerable “risk” to his career by carrying out the investigation and suggested that it damaged his credibility.  “Is there anyone, any credible law enforcement person outside of you and your organization and your contractors, who has any agreement with you on this?” Tapper asked Arpaio, to which Arpaio responded that no other law enforcement entity in the nation had “looked at it.”

CNN has more recently attempted to discredit former Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore for having questioned the authenticity of Obama’s long-form birth certificate given the evidence presented by Arpaio’s Cold Case Posse during two 2012 press conferences.  Moore is seeking the U.S. Senate seat vacated by Jeff Sessions, now the U.S. Attorney General.

Last December, Arpaio’s “rather preposterous notion” was revealed in a third press conference as having been supported by the Italian forensic analysis company Forlab and by Hawaii’s Reed Hayes, a well-respected document and handwriting analyst who self-identified as a two-time Obama voter.

After receiving a pardon in late August for a conviction on misdemeanor criminal contempt of court in July, Arpaio was peppered with aggressive questions about the birth certificate investigation and its conclusions by a reporter for Valley Public Radio at an event in Fresno, CA.

Arpaio has indicated that he will continue to speak out on the matter, which he characterized as one of “national security” more than five years ago.

Neither CNN nor any other major media outlet performed its own investigation of the findings, but rather, have insisted that the forgery claim has been “debunked.”

The media is aware of the “fact” 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.”

“We start with the facts first,” Stelter is now claiming.

 

 

 

 

27 Responses to "CNN Pledges “Facts First,” But What About the Birth Certificate?"

  1. Mark Bellison   Friday, October 27, 2017 at 9:54 AM

    The only person qualified to determine who is “the appropriate official of those parties” is the chief election officer of Hawaii.

    Please provide proof that the DNC did not contact the chief election officer and asked who was the “appropriate official” the state party or the national party and the response they received was either.

  2. T.F. BOW   Friday, October 27, 2017 at 2:16 AM

    If the Democrat Party of Hawaii was indeed required to certify that was constitutionally eligible, it should be no problem to cite the statute requiring such certification.

  3. Mark Bellison   Friday, October 27, 2017 at 12:53 AM

    “The Democrat Party of Hawaii (DPH) was required to certify Obama eligible per the Constitution’s criteria”

    The law does not say the “The Democrat Party of Hawaii (DPH)” is required to certify eligibility only that “the appropriate official of those parties”. The word “state” is missing from the sentence.

    How they did it in 2000 and 2004 is immaterial for all we know in 1996 and 1992 only the national party certified Clinton.

  4. James Carter   Thursday, October 26, 2017 at 6:25 PM

    “So according to the Daily Pen authors, Obama was required to mail every citizen who wanted one a certified copy of his birth certificate.”

    That statement belies your intellectual honesty.

    The Democrat Party of Hawaii (DPH) was required to certify Obama eligible per the Constitution’s criteria — just like it did for Kerry in 2004 and Gore in 2000, and just the Republican Party of Hawaii did for McCain in 2008, Bush in 2004 and Bush in 2000. It did not. That’s not speculation but, rather, that’s factual. Your rebuttal to that factual statement is cordially invited.

  5. Mark Bellison   Thursday, October 26, 2017 at 12:43 PM

    ” …the Democrat Party of Hawaii’s (DPH) had REFUSED to certify him as being eligible to appear on the Hawaiian ballot for President of the United States.”

    Anyone got a link to a statement by the DPH that they “refused to certify him”? Otherwise describing their motives as fact is speculation.

    “The DPH’s DENIAL was due to Obama’s REFUSAL or INABILITY to provide CERTIFIED DOCUMENTS needed to confirm his eligibility.”

    Can anyone provide a link to a statement by anyone that Obama refused or was not able to provide certified documents? Can anyone provide proof that such documents were ever requested from Obama?

    Otherwise describing their motives as fact is speculation.

    “Hawaiian law required the provision that candidates be Constitutionally eligible: a fact the DPH knew was not true in the case of Obama.”

    Can anyone provide a link to a statement from the DPH that they knew Obama was not eligible.

    Otherwise describing what you believed their knowledge to be as if it were fact is speculation.

    Hawaii law did not require the DPH to certify eligibility only that either the state or national party certify him.

    “The FALSIFIED certification by the DNC’s meant Obama had provided NO documented evidence that he was eligible to be President.”

    This statement is more speculation as there is no proof that Obama was asked or required to provide documentation.

    “Since then, Obama has provided copies of copies of the alleged Hawaiian BC like the pdf on whitehouse.gov; but we never get to see the real McCoy. No one is allowed the see that one. Why? Because it is some sort of national treasure and something bad might happen to it? If it did, so what? He can always get another one from Hawaii for a few bucks. Or can he?”

    So according to the Daily Pen authors, Obama was required to mail every citizen who wanted one a certified copy of his birth certificate.

  6. James Carter   Thursday, October 26, 2017 at 8:53 AM

    @Mark Bellison:
    “Seems like an awful lot of speculation being presented as fact in the Daily Pen article.”

    Seems like your comment is awfully conspicuously and suspiciously absent any rebuttal to any of the facts presented in the Daily Pen article.

  7. John Gault   Thursday, October 26, 2017 at 8:17 AM

    Fact: Hussein’s birthplace has yet to be proven.
    Fact: Forged personal credentials have been proven

  8. Mark Bellison   Wednesday, October 25, 2017 at 10:32 PM

    Seems like an awful lot of speculation being presented as fact in the Daily Pen article.

  9. Fuzz T Was   Wednesday, October 25, 2017 at 12:53 PM

    In the Fall of 2008, there was a major political problem for then Senator Barack Obama. The problem was that the Democrat Party of Hawaii’s (DPH) had REFUSED to certify him as being eligible to appear on the Hawaiian ballot for President of the United States. The DPH is the Democrat Party’s organization in Hawaii charged with requesting, reviewing and verifying the credentials of Democratic National Committee (DNC) candidate’s to ensure their eligibility for placement on the Hawaiian ballot, in conformity with state and federal election laws.

    The DPH’s DENIAL was due to Obama’s REFUSAL or INABILITY to provide CERTIFIED DOCUMENTS needed to confirm his eligibility. This decision by the DPH was followed by a clandestine effort by the DNC, chaired by Nancy Pelosi, to affirm Obama as eligible by SUBMITTING two DIFFERENT, sworn Official Certifications of Nomination (OCON) for him, CONTAINING DIFFERENT LANGUAGE. Both versions of the OCON were sent to the Hawaiian Office of Elections but only one was sent to the other 49 states’ Election Offices.

    Hawaii’s version of the DNC’s OCON contained specific wording not included in the versions sent to ALL the other states, which contradicts the Democrat Party of Hawaii’s OCON. All the states’ Election Commissions, except Hawaii’s, were sent one Official Certification of Nomination with the following statement:

    “THIS IS TO CERTIFY that at the National Convention of the Democratic Party of the United States of America, held in Denver, Colorado on August 25 though 28, 2008, the following were duly nominated as candidates of said Party for President and Vice President of the United States respectively”.

    Notice, in this version of the DNC’s OCON, there is no mention of Obama’s Constitutional eligibility. However, in the version sent separately to Hawaii’s Election Commission, it states the following:

    “THIS IS TO CERTIFY that at the National Convention of the Democratic Party of the United States of America, held in Denver, Colorado on August 25 though 28, 2008, the following were duly nominated as candidates of said Party for President and Vice President of the United States respectively and that the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution:”

    Hawaiian law required the provision that candidates be Constitutionally eligible: a fact the DPH knew was not true in the case of Obama.

    The DNC’s DECEIT was meant to control possible political damage, keep Obama on the Hawaiian ballot and conceal the fact that the DPH had REFUSED to certify him eligible for the ballot from the public.

    The Official Certification of Nomination is a required document sent by each party’s state and national organization to all other state elections committee before each election. It gives the Chief Elections Officer in each state an assurance that candidates seeking to be on their state’s ballot are eligible to serve in the office they seek.

    The FALSIFIED certification by the DNC’s meant Obama had provided NO documented evidence that he was eligible to be President. The DNC just overrode the decision of the DPH and invented reasons to keep Obama on the Hawaiian presidential ballot. The national party just certified Obama as eligible, ignoring the decision of the DPH and his failure to provide the prerequisite evidence. This CORRUPT act by the National Democrat Party was shocking. ARTICLE II, Section 1 of the Constitution describes the requirements for President, but state authorities are in charge of validating candidates on their ballot.

    What were those document(s) Obama failed to provide? Well, we in the public aren’t allowed to know, but I’ll bet one was a certified copy of his Hawaiian Birth Certificate. That is the only document the DHP needed from him to prove his eligibility and Hawaii is the only place in the world that should have had it. What other explanation is there?

    Since then, Obama has provided copies of copies of the alleged Hawaiian BC like the pdf on whitehouse.gov; but we never get to see the real McCoy. No one is allowed the see that one. Why? Because it is some sort of national treasure and something bad might happen to it? If it did, so what? He can always get another one from Hawaii for a few bucks. Or can he?

    From an article by Pen Johannson-Editor, The Daily Pen
    and Canadian Free Press article by J. B. Williams

  10. JONATHAN DAVID MOOERS   Wednesday, October 25, 2017 at 12:29 PM

    T.F. BOW, the enigmatic “RAINMAKER” over this P&E site, has nothing to contribute, except dispute, me thinks.

    In the AP article offered by Sharon for T.F. BOW to respond to with facts, not farts, it states the previous trademark-narrative that SO2’s (Soetoro-Obama II) parents divorced when SO2 was age 2.

    1. Where, factually, T.F. BOW, is the narrative marriage license of Obama I and Ann Dunham?

    2. How, T.F. BOW, did the State of Hawaii allow Obama I to legally marry Ann Dunham when, in fact, Obama I had a wife and child in Kenya at that same time? When, factually, did the State of Hawaii ever knowingly allow bigamists to legally marry?

    3. What proof, not spoof, do you offer, T.F. BOW, that Obama I was not a one-night-stand sperm-donor who abandoned Obama II immediately after his historic narrative ejaculation (making Obama I, SO2’s “Father From My Dreams”); offer proof, T.F. BOW, that Obama I, in fact, lived with Ann Dunham all during those first narrative two years of SO2’s life?

    4. Regardless of SO2’s birthplace and parentage, what proof do you offer this P&E site, T.F. BOW, that SO2 would be approved by the Framers of 1789 to be America’s 44th Constitutional presIDent BASED SOLEY UPON SO2’s eight years of publically observed foreign-sympathies-thinking and SO2’s subsequent foreign-sympathies-behavior?

    Personally, I believe T.F. BOW is on this website as a “gentler, kindler” Obot intending to disgrace and ridicule P&E contributors as “whack-jobs” and “red-herring chasers”, BUT he intentionally and tactfully does this ridicule in a soft and suedo-intellectual manner so his endless disputes herein will feel like a light slap on the reader’s cheeks instead of an intended swift kick to the face.

    NO PROOF = ALL SPOOF

    BLACK LIES MATTER = SO2

    If T.F. BOW again does not factually respond to queries herein, if at all, I will skip over his forth-coming softened disputes as being mere “bow-wow”.

  11. Mark Bellison   Wednesday, October 25, 2017 at 10:35 AM

    I suspect the AP copied the information from an earlier Boston Globe article by Linda Matchan.

    http://archive.boston.com/news/politics/2008/articles/1990/02/15/a_law_review_breakthrough/?page=full

    “Obama’s background is a melange of different cultures. His late father, who was black, was born in the small Kenyan village of Alego, studied at Harvard and Oxford and became a senior economist for the Kenyan government. His mother, who is white, is a Kansas-born anthropologist who now works as a developmental consultant in Indonesia.”

    “His parents met and married in Hawaii and divorced when Obama was 2. His father then returned to Kenya, and Obama was raised, at least initially, by his mother. “To a large extent I roamed around a lot as a kid,” he said during an interview in a Harvard Square restaurant.”

    “From the ages of 6 to 10, he lived in Indonesia and attended an Indonesian- speaking school; he kept up his English studies, at his mother’s insistence, by waking at 5 a.m. each day to take correspondence courses.”

    “He says many of his friends were “street urchins,” and it was here, on the outskirts of Jakarta, that he says he became aware of the implications and realities of poverty, of “the gaps between the have’s and have-nots.” Although his family was comfortable financially, “we couldn’t afford the fancy American schools in Indonesia,” Obama said. When he reached fifth grade, his mother, concerned that he would not get an adequate education in Indonesia, sent him to live with his grandparents in Hawaii.”

    “Obama stayed in Hawaii through high school, and it was during this period that he began a regular correspondence with his father, whose heritage was to be a major influence on his life, ideals and priorities.”

    “He says one of his most valued possessions belonged to his Kenyan grandfather, who worked as a cook for the British before the country gained its independence. It was the passport he was required to carry at all times; it described his grandfather, at age 46, as “a boy” and a “good . . . cooperative” cook.”

    Perhaps Obama thought his father went to Oxford, or the reporter made an error. It was per-internet 1990. Meanwhile the Boston Globe and AP articles along with these 1990 articles all say born in Hawaii.

    http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/thedailymirror/2008/09/barack-obama-ha.html

    https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/3380980/screenshot_2015-02-06_10.02.32_720.0.png

    http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1990-02-07/news/9001110408_1_ann-dunham-chicago-housing-authority-barack-obama

    http://www.city-data.com/forum/politics-other-controversies/1569886-jet-magazine-1990-wrote-about-2nd.html

    This Vanity Fair article from 1990 says he grew up in Singapore. Could that be from a geography-deficient reporter?

  12. James Carter   Wednesday, October 25, 2017 at 8:49 AM

    The facts/truths have a way of eventually coming out…just like the “Uranium One” deal has now been proven to have been an illegal pay-to-play scheme between Obama’s administration and the Russian government.

  13. Sharon Rondeau   Wednesday, October 25, 2017 at 7:50 AM

    Why did the AP report in 1990 that Obama’s father attended Oxford U. in the UK when everyone else says he attended U. of Hawaii?

    https://www.thepostemail.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/May-3-1990.pdf

    The AP also reported that Obama the younger went to Indonesia at age 2, not age 6.

    Can you explain these discrepancies, since the AP will not?

  14. T.F. BOW   Wednesday, October 25, 2017 at 2:29 AM

    No hospital has ever admitted to being the current president’s nativity nor has any hospital staff member ever admitted to ‘being there’ when the current president was born. Are there any doubts about his citizenship?

    There is no indication Arpaio will ever take his information to a court or any other governmental entity.

    Obama’s records are no more sealed than any other person’s; the routine application of the United States’ privacy laws is unremarkable. Obama’s timeline is credible; there are no credible claims that are different. That there is contradictory gossip is unsurprising.

  15. Mark Bellison   Tuesday, October 24, 2017 at 9:56 PM

    Arpaio also said he had the evidence against

    Judge Donahoe
    Supervisor Rosemary Wilcox
    Supervisor Don Stapley
    Michael Lacey
    Jim Larkin

    Turns out there was no evidence, no investigation, just press conferences and press releases.

    Which is exactly the same pattern they followed with the birth certificate investigation.

    https://www.scribd.com/document/88738575/Thomas-Aubuchon-Alexander-opinion#fullscreen

  16. Three-Pound Sledge   Tuesday, October 24, 2017 at 9:39 PM

    No Hawaiian hospital has ever admitted to the usurper’s nativity nor has any Hawaiian hospital staff member ever admitted to ‘being there’ when the usurper was downloaded from his mother’s womb on the purported date of August 4, 1961.

    If Barry Soetoro is such a rock star, you would think someone over there on the lava rock employed by the hospitals would want Barry’s autograph with a narrative that they remembered him on his birth date.

  17. jeffrey Harrison   Tuesday, October 24, 2017 at 8:33 PM

    Facts and evidence can convict or acquit when applied fairly. With which the evidence from
    Arpaio and several other sources if applied to a proper court would have some troubling
    remarks and severe judgement for the fraud of USURPER Obama.

    Obamas life story and history is ghost like. Sealed all records, different claims to the same
    event, not a very clear timeline/creditable history. Indeed, spooky…

    My strong hunch is that it is possible and highly probable Team Arpaio haven’t played all their cards. What fool would believe that they have revealed all the evidence that they have?

    And I personally believe that they have several plans in place to handle the fraud of Obama.
    I tend to believe they will bag Obama and the team players behind him.

  18. Mark Bellison   Tuesday, October 24, 2017 at 3:30 PM

    The state of Hawaii Department of Health released a public statement in April, 2011. The statement includes this passage:

    “In June 2008, President Obama released his Certification of Live Birth, which is sometimes referred to in the media as a “short form” birth certificate. Both documents are legally sufficient evidence of birth in the State of Hawai„i, and both provide the same fundamental information: President Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawai„i at 7:24 p.m. on August 4, 1961, to mother Stanley Ann Dunham and father Barack Hussein Obama.”

    They also say this on their website:

    “On April 27, 2011 President Barack Obama posted a certified copy of his original Certificate of Live Birth.”

    They then provide a link directly to the White House PDF.

  19. T.F. BOW   Tuesday, October 24, 2017 at 2:08 PM

    NPR since corrected its article about Obama’s birthplace, and Matthews has since repeatedly said that Obama was born in Hawaii. As those sources have made corrections, there is no credible evidence Obama was born anywhere else than Hawaii.

    On the other hand, Hawaii has repeatedly and expressly said that Obama was born there. And Hawaii verified Obama’s birth there to two Secretaries of State, who each accepted that verification.

    Hawaii not expressly certifying that Obama was constitutionally eligible is not the same as Hawaii certifying him as ineligible. That is basic logic.

    Hawaii not publicly releasing a receipt only shows that it honors its privacy laws, as the public does not have the right to that receipt. In any event, a receipt is not required to prove eligibility. For example, the current has not provided such a receipt. Nor has any hospital claimed to be the birthplace of the current president.

  20. JONATHAN DAVID MOOERS   Tuesday, October 24, 2017 at 11:10 AM

    http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/20/politics/kfile-foundation-for-moral-law-facebook-obama/index.html

    https://www.facebook.com/OfficialBritainFirst/videos/vb.300455573433044/713409212137676/?type=2&theater

    https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/04-05-02-0251

    While government-citizens have robbed/rob private-citizens of SO2’s (Soetoro-Obama II) full identification since 08-28-08, they also robbed/rob private-citizens of national security by allowing the government-protected pro-foreign-thinking brain of SO2 into the highest office of our land.

    What government-citizen, other than Constitutional criminal SO2 himself, has ever witnessed the original 17 government-sealed ID-documents in Item 207, A thru Q; anyone? T.F. BOW?: http://www.carlgallups.com/zullo-affidavit.pdf

    While concerned citizens may argue endlessly over the “birthplace” and “parents citizenship” intended within the U.S. Constitution’s “natural born Citizen” clause of 1789, all objective minds must agree that the PURPOSE of this clause was/is criminally violated the instant that the candIDacy of the foreign life-sensitized enemy-thinking brain of SO2 was unleashed by Nancy Pelosi to “fundamentally transform”, i.e., harm and humiliate America, beginning on 08-28-08.
    http://canadafreepress.com/2009/williams091209.htm
    http://northamericanlawcenter.org/house-republicans-must-impeach-now-send-this-to-your-rep/#.We9JNuRe5Ms

    The Framers of our nation’s foundational U.S. Constitution (1787- 1789) may have realized that the only thing humans control in this real world is our invisible thinking since everything else (the universe, planet Earth and our involuntarily-breathing bodies) was previously God-created without our conscious control. The Framers clearly intended that the only thing a president can control in this world, i.e., his accumulated life-sensitized invisible thinking, MUST BE ABSENT OF FOREIGN-SYMPATHIES AND BE AS PRO-AMERICA-THINKING AS POSSIBLE, thus, their incorporation of the “natural born Citizen” (NBC) check.

    Until SO2 is fully IDentified for some 323,000,000 presIDential-knowledge-robbed private American citizens, America remains a NBC-violated government-citizens-hijacked Constitutional Republic In Name Only (CRINO).

  21. Three-Poiund Sledge   Tuesday, October 24, 2017 at 10:47 AM

    No verifiable (certified as true) background documentation evidence exists as to Barry Soetoro’s (aka Barack HUSSEIN Obama’s) nativity. I can only conclude that this person is an undocumented alien in the country of the United States of America.

  22. James Carter   Tuesday, October 24, 2017 at 10:21 AM

    T.F. BOW posted: “There are no credible sources that indicate Obama born in Indonesia, Kenya, or anywhere else other than Hawaii.

    There is also no indication that Arpaio will ever publically release the reports that he claims were generated by forensic experts.”

    In 2008, one source, the Democrat Party of Hawaii, by not certifying Obama eligible to serve as president “under the provisions of the United States Constitution.” as required by Hawaii law, effectively certified him not eligible.

    The State of Hawaii has made no document(s) available to the general public proving that Obama’s 2008 campaign requested, paid for and was sent a certified copy of his “Certification Of Live Birth” (short-form birth certificate).

  23. Mark Bellison   Tuesday, October 24, 2017 at 8:26 AM

    One reason the MSM won’t report on Arpaio’s stuff is that he has a history of targeting his political enemies with fake charges of criminal activity. He would hold a press conference, describe evidence, announce charges and arrests. Later it would turn out there was no investigation, the evidence didn’t hold up, the cases would be dismissed and Maricopa County would pay millions of dollars to settle wrong arrest lawsuits. He did this to state judges, county supervisors and members of the Arizona news media. His refusal to release the evidence in the birth certificate investigation gives the appearance that this is just another in a long line of fake investigations.

    The county attorney Andrew Thomas was disbarred by the Arizona Supreme Court for his role in the fake investigations.

  24. Sharon Rondeau   Tuesday, October 24, 2017 at 7:33 AM

    NPR? http://www.wnd.com/2010/04/138293/

    Chris Matthews? http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Chris+Matthews+Obama+born+in+Indonesia&view=detail&mid=425CF4B38E7C7EA3B66F425CF4B38E7C7EA3B66F&FORM=VIRE

    If these “sources” cannot report accurately, perhaps they should not be on the air.

  25. T.F. BOW   Tuesday, October 24, 2017 at 2:26 AM

    There are no credible sources that indicate Obama born in Indonesia, Kenya, or anywhere else other than Hawaii.

    There is also no indication that Arpaio will ever publically release the reports that he claims were generated by forensic experts.

  26. JONATHAN DAVID MOOERS   Monday, October 23, 2017 at 10:28 PM

    http://www.dictionary.com/browse/fact

    http://www.dictionary.com/browse/truth?s=t

    Guilty-knowledged government-citizens instructed to NEVER-ID SOETORO-OBAMA II (SO2) since 08-28-08, thus, robbing the FULL INALIENABLE RIGHT-TO-KNOW presIDential intellectual property of some 323,000,000 fellow American citizens.

    Government-citizens robbing fellow private-citizens 08-28-08- TODAY.

    Only when KNOWLEDGE PATRIOTS UNITE in broadcasted “Town Meetings” and perform as Embattled Farmers planting certified-seed presIDential facts in the minds of all citizens about NEVER-presIDent SO2 can those citizens begin to remodel their presIDential-falsified frames of mind from believing-is-seeing to seeing-is-believing.

    Selfish government-citizens have failed their nation since Pelosi’s Day in Infamy on 08-28-08, so private-citizens must now unite themselves to identify and arrest SO2 “for the People”. Here is a start: http://americasurvival.org/2017/08/the-real-russia-gate-conspiracy-of-barack-hussein-obama.html#axzz4tduHGlEX

  27. Robert Laity   Monday, October 23, 2017 at 8:56 PM

    “Just the facts M’am”- Jack Webb as Joe Friday in a Stan Freberg work parodying Dragnet (He never actually said “Just the facts M’am” in any actual Dragnet episode. Source: Wikipedia

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

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