Who is the “Crook” who Created the Birth Certificate Forgery?

AND WHO CLAIMED IT AS HIS OWN?

by Sharon Rondeau

(Aug. 24, 2018) — An editorial by Max Boot published Wednesday at The Washington Post contends, given that former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort was convicted on eight counts of tax evasion and other federal crimes Tuesday, followed by former Trump attorney Michael Cohen’s “guilty” plea to allegedly making illegal campaign contributions presumably at Trump’s request, that Trump is an “illegitimate president whose election is tainted by fraud.”

Boot refers to August 21 as “Terrible Tuesday” given that both figures associated with Trump were charged with federal crimes and either convicted or admitted to guilt.

Manafort’s charges stemmed from Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s probe, assumed from the FBI in May of last year, into whether or not anyone in the Trump campaign “colluded” with Kremlin operatives to tip the election in Trump’s favor. However, Russian “collusion” did not arise during the course of Manafort’s three-week trial and guilty verdict on eight of 18 counts announced on Tuesday.

Cohen’s charges arose after he testified privately last year to members of Congress in the midst of their investigation into alleged Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.  Cohen reportedly claimed at the time that neither Trump nor he knew in advance of a meeting between a Russian lawyer at Trump Tower with Donald Trump Jr. in June 2016.

Last month, however, Cohen changed his story to say that “Donald Trump knew and approved of a meeting at Trump Tower with a Russian lawyer,” according to USA Today.

Evidence of crimes on Cohen’s part reportedly unearthed by Mueller’s team was turned over to the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, who chose to prosecute. The bulk of Cohen’s guilty plea covers alleged crimes disassociated from the Trump campaign, the White House, or the Kremlin.

Cohen’s admission to making “illegal” campaign contributions has been said by several legal analysts on the political left and right to be a “non-crime,” leaving some asking why Cohen would have agreed to the admission and why his attorney, longtime Clinton acolyte Lanny Davis, would have advocated for it.

When asked during an interview recorded Wednesday and aired Thursday with Fox News’s Ainsley Earhardt why Cohen would have agreed to such an admission, Trump responded, “Because he makes a better deal when he uses me…This whole thing about flipping…everything’s wonderful, and then they get ten years in jail and they ‘flip’ on whoever the next highest one is or as high as you can go…But if somebody defrauded a bank and he’s going to get ten years in jail or 20 years in jail, but if you can say something bad about Donald Trump and you’ll go down to two years or three years, which is the deal he made, in all fairness to him, most people are going to do that.”

Trump said he has seen people “flip” for decades and believes “it almost ought to be illegal.”  He added that the money paid to two women apparently to buy their silence in the run-up to the 2016 election was rendered out of his personal funds, not campaign donations.

In his editorial, Boot opined that “If Manafort had been found not guilty, it would have been a massive blow to Mueller. Because he was found guilty, it is a blow to Trump.”  Manafort led the Trump campaign for approximately 100 days, while others such as Corey Lewandowski and Kellyanne Conway lasted much longer.

Thus far, Mueller’s investigators have announced no findings of “collusion” between Trump and/or any of his campaign aides, and Trump has insisted that the Mueller operation is nothing more than a “rigged witch hunt.” Boot naturally refuted that assertion.

Relying on statements made during Davis’s MSNBC interview on Wednesday, Boot went from Cohen’s guilty plea to Davis’s reported assertion that his client could provide information to Mueller that Trump had foreknowledge about unspecified “hacking” and “may be able provide the ‘smoking gun’ evidence showing that Trump himself gave the go-ahead to collusion with the Kremlin.” [sic]

And Cohen may only have begun implicating the president. Davis said on MSNBC that Cohen would be happy to share other incriminating information with the special counsel, including “knowledge about the computer crime of hacking and whether or not Mr. Trump knew ahead of time about that crime and even cheered it on.” This would seem to vindicate an earlier leak that Cohen may be able provide the “smoking gun” evidence showing that Trump himself gave the go-ahead to collusion with the Kremlin.

“What deal did you cut?” MSNBC’s Chuck Todd asked Davis, to which Davis responded, “I have no idea.  He pled guilty. In a corroborative statement with the federal prosecutors, he admitted at the direction and coordination with his client, Donald Trump — not named, but that’s who is referred to — this is the wording that the prosecutors and Michael Cohen agreed he would say to the judge under oath, at the direction and coordination of the candidate…” at which time Todd cut him off with another question.

As with countless other “journalists” and editorialists at The Post, The New York Times, Fox News Channel, and other mainstream monoliths, Boot is ignoring the likely “illegitimacy” of Trump’s predecessor, Barack Hussein Obama, whose only publicly-proffered documentation, including a purported “long-form birth certificate,” has been found fraudulent by a 5+-year criminal investigation, evidence from which has been turned over to “federal authorities.”

When those findings were made public beginning with a March 1, 2012 presser, The Washington Post, The New York Times, USA Today, Fox News and other mainstream outlets were nowhere to be found.

On April 27, 2011, the Obama White House released what it said was a PDF scan of a certified copy of Obama’s “long-form” birth certificate from the Hawaii Department of Health. Obama claims a birth at the Kapiolani Women and Children’s Medical Center in Honolulu on August 4, 1961, a claim never corroborated by the hospital.

Originally, Obama was reported by UPI to have been born at the Queens Medical Center, after which it altered the text to say that Kapiolani was Obama’s birth hospital without explanation.

After a number of graphics experts declared the White House image to be a forgery, then-Maricopa County Sheriff Joseph Arpaio commissioned his “Cold Case Posse” to conduct a preliminary investigation, primarily to put his constituents at ease about Obama’s qualifications for the 2012 presidential election. However, after several days of analysis, CCP lead investigator and former detective Mike Zullo was forced to inform Arpaio that the image was problematic.

At the same time, Zullo announced that Obama’s purported Selective Service registration form, generated by the Selective Service System (SSS) to FOIA requesters since late 2008, is also fraudulent, terming it a “hard-copy forgery.”

Following the release of the purported birth certificate image, Obama gave a short press conference during which he claimed the image to provide “additional information about the site of my birth.”

At a second press conference on July 17, 2012, Zullo presented further evidence as to how the birth certificate forgery was created rather than obtained from a real, paper document. Arpaio concluded the presser by stating that the forgery of government documents purportedly belonging to a sitting president of the United States was an urgent matter of “national security,” to which the media again responded with a figurative and collective yawn.

On a radio show last Friday, Zullo revealed that two members of the U.S. intelligence community, over which the mainstream media generally fawns, informed him that it is an “open secret” that Obama could never satisfy the understood requirement that the president must be born in the United States as part of the Constitution’s Article II eligibility criteria.

Based on Zullo’s findings and those of two well-respected forensic analysts that the long-form birth certificate image is a forgery; Zullo’s recent revelation of the “open secret” of Obama’s foreign birth; the alleged involvement, or at a minimum, knowledge, of the CIA and others in the “intelligence community,” an ineligible individual apparently held the office of President of the United States, commanded the U.S. military, led foreign policy, and signed executive orders and congressional bills into “law.”

“It is illegal for an American campaign to accept, or solicit, anything of value from foreign nationals. The law aims to prevent foreign influence in U.S. elections,” touted USAToday on Wednesday.

“In short, there is growing evidence that the president is, to use the word favored by Richard Nixon, “a crook,” Boot crowed in his column.

The “crook” who created and uploaded the birth certificate forgery has not yet been identified, although on several radio shows over the summer, Zullo has stated that “all roads lead to [former CA Director ] John Brennan.”

Some would argue that there is “growing evidence” of a conspiracy to place a foreign national in the White House, apparently to “fundamentally transform the United States of America,” and, now that his successor is Donald Trump and not Hillary Clinton, an equally-strong conspiracy to remove him from office.

Some would argue, because Trump was the first public persona to raise the Obama “birth certificate” issue to the national level, that he poses an existential threat to the “crooks” who knew that Obama was “an immigrant,” as stated by former New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson in 2008, yet thwarted the truth from emerging with daily, purposeful intent.