Mike Zullo: “They’re Doing it for Money”

“THEY HAVE CHEAPENED THE INTEGRITY OF THE INVESTIGATION”

by Sharon Rondeau

(Feb. 21, 2020) — In our article published Tuesday titled, “Missing from Obama Birth-Certificate Chapter: ‘Mike Zullo,’” The Post & Email reported on a rift between Obama birth-certificate investigator Mike Zullo and “Freedom Friday” host and pastor Carl Gallups arising from a disagreement about a book chapter Gallups was writing about the probe.

The seven-year working relationship between Gallups and Zullo had featured Zullo in dozens of appearances on Gallups’s “Freedom Friday” broadcasts to provide updates on the Obama birth-certificate investigation, which he conducted virtually single-handedly between August 2011 and December 2016 under the authority of the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office (MCSO), then led by Sheriff Joseph Arpaio.

The 5+-year probe determined beyond the standard of probable cause that the image posted on the White House website on April 27, 2011 said to represent Barack Obama’s original birth certificate is a “computer-generated forgery.” Also found fraudulent was Obama’s purported Selective Service registration form.

At a third and final press conference on December 15, 2016, Zullo revealed that two forensic document experts, Reed Hayes of Hawaii and Forlab of Italy, reached very similar conclusions to his own following their own separate analyses of the birth-certificate image at his request.

Throughout the course of the investigation, the mainstream media largely ignored or pushed back against Zullo’s revelations, and the significance of the forensic analysts’ findings was either not reported or misrepresented.

In addition to providing a media outlet for Zullo, Gallups became a confidant, and the two appeared together on a number of other radio programs following the conclusion of the investigation in December 2016.

Contention between them arose last fall, Zullo told us, when Gallups and his book publisher, Dr. Tom Horn of Defender Publishing, decided to include in Horn’s upcoming book, “Shadowland,” a chapter Gallups would write about the birth-certificate investigation despite their earlier assurances to Zullo that they had decided against it.

“Shadowland” is officially available March 2 but can be downloaded on the Kindle app for $9.99 plus applicable tax, with Gallups’s work appearing as Chapter 3.

For a number of years, Zullo said and emails show, he and Gallups had maintained an agreement by which they would co-write a book on the birth-certificate investigation with likely publishing by Horn when Zullo decided the time was right.  Gallups departed from the agreement, used Zullo’s proposed book outline in the chapter, and completely omitted his name from the narrative, Zullo told us and the chapter itself demonstrates.

While Gallups told Zullo that he would exercise his name from the chapter, Zullo was never provided an opportunity to review the edited version before it went to print.

Neither Gallups nor Horn has responded to The Post & Email’s multiple requests for comment over the past two weeks, including to the release of Tuesday’s article and Horn’s incorporation of the chapter in a book featuring Hillary Clinton, Jeffrey Epstein, and “the Occult Elite.”

Gallups stated in a February 13, 2020 appearance on Horn’s “SkywatchTV” that he has not divulged anything Zullo told him in confidence, a claim Zullo affirmed.  However, Gallups’s claim to have “new forensic information,” as Horn put it, is inaccurate, Zullo said, and misleads Horn’s audience.

On his January 17, 2020 “Freedom Friday” show, just after the 9:00 mark, Gallups told his audience that he was asked to write about the birth-certificate investigation and his “involvement in it” and that he has conducted a years-long “back-channel investigation,” uncovering things that will “blow holes in the Deep-State lies.”  He also indicated that Zullo found the chapter “good,” that he said it contains “amazing” information, and that Zullo was “thrilled” with it.

On January 23, 2020 at 5:31 p.m., Zullo sent an email to Gallups expressing requesting a “full retraction” of Gallups’s January 17 commentary implying that Zullo “endorsed” the chapter.

From: Mike Zullo
Date: Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 5:31 PM
Subject: 1/17/20 Freedom Friday Broadcast
To: Carl Gallups

Carl

I received an email asking me about the chapter you included in Tom’s new book. I was informed that listeners of the  1/17/20 Freedom Friday webcast were given the impression I had read and endorsed the chapter per your representations, and it was stated that  I was “amazed” and “thrilled” about its content.

I had not listened to the show prior to this contact;  therefore, I had no idea what this was all about. Subsequently, I  did listen to the replay of the broadcast and to my astonishment, I discovered that my name and seeming approval were invoked by you as an endorsement of the validity of your work.  Your monolog without question did convey this impression. The problem is, this simply is just not true.

I have not read the rework of this chapter (as indicated in your email),  and I have no direct knowledge of what is in it. All I am aware of is that it has been highly edited and all references to me have been omitted.  Yet you claim I found it to be “amazing and that I was”thrilled” and that I sent you an email saying as much was depicted in your contrived representation.

Your last communication with me back in October of 2019.You wrote in part:    ( Although,  it is difficult to rely on any representation based on the continued flip flop. (I’m in , I’m out,  I won’t , I will, I would never…I just did it.. .)

You wrote;

“I will include some information and narrative about the birth certificate saga just as a general feature of the connection to all the lying that goes on in the Deep state. I have removed your name and any quotes from you”.

end..

I made an attempt to locate the email you referenced on your show  but I was unable to locate any email as you describe. If you have that email I certainly would love to see it.

However, I did retrieve text messages on the topic and they read as follows.

This is hardly a ringing endorsement. “It’s good”,  and I didn’t know about some “ Crap”. This is a far cry from ‘amazing’ or being “thrilled”!

Think about it Carl, would I truly be “Amazed” by something you wrote when 98% of  the information you have to write about was cultivated by me, and revealed publicly by me  on your show? I don’t think so.

To be absolutely clear,  I have in no way endorsed this chapter, your work or this book. As a matter of fact you are acutely aware of my disapproval and disdain of the entire situation.

To another observation,  in your sales pitch you refer to me as your “friend”.  You invoked my friendship in an attempt to bolster you and your chapters credibility.  You are well aware this is not true, either, as this friendship has been estranged since last October.  It is apparent that you and I have different definitions and expectations of what a friend truly is.

As a result of your efforts to drive sales  I am now being asked about this, and it has put me in a difficult position. You know I have never conducted myself in any other way than professional,  honest, free from spin, hype, or wayward speculation.

(However, that certainly can not be said about the Sky Watch interviews you did which are filled with inaccuracies and mischaracterizes, and in Tom’s Secret Files promo’s using my image ineptly blurred out. (You did precisely what I asked not to be done).

You are also aware I did not invest 15,000  uncompensated hours of my time and effort so it could be cherry picked by  you or anyone else for financial reward. I highly resent my name being associated with any work designed to garner a profit from my efforts or incapable of telling the entire story.  Specifically, given the fact that 95 percent of what you can write about was unearthed as a result of my direct efforts and work product.

Therefore, I do not want my name associated with this type of behavior or any work product that did not come from my hand  or is absent of my prior approval.

After  you informed me in writing that you went to task to remove all references to my name and  quotes from the prior work, what gives you the right to make such an utterly false representation to the public?  I certainly do not want my name used to promote or endorse something I have never read and never consented to.

I truly hope you have not put me in a position to refute you and this chapter when released. As you know the Deep State entanglement and the BC connection came from me as I shared them with you. But from what I heard it seems this chapter is all about you and some purported highly questionable  back channel claim. The problem is there isn’t a lot about you that can be said as you did not contribute much to the actual investigation. Apparently you have conflated your role as a media outlet with that of a commissioned investigator.  This problem had been brewing for some time.

For the sake of transparency, the Lord has planted me and my family in a truly blessed church and  I have sought Godly counsel with both my Senior Pastors. They have been apprised of the entire scope and detail of the situation.

Sheriff Arpaio has also been advised.

I am requesting a full public retraction of your statements on your next live broadcast and set the record straight. I have neither read nor endorsed this chapter, book or the body of work on any level. Please do not put me in the position to have to make a public statement.

On his show the following evening, Gallups attempted to walk back his claim but also read part of a text-message exchange between Zullo and him from August 2019.  Beginning at 3:54, Gallups reminded listeners about the upcoming “Shadowland,” providing an approximate release date of between March 1 and 4.  “In that chapter, in those places where I speak of Arpaio’s and Zullo’s work, I quote from and tediously reference mainstream news sources that reported on the matter,” Gallups said. “No one corroborated with me on this chapter; I just want to be clear about that, and most importantly, nothing that Mike Zullo has ever shared with me in confidence…none of that is reported in this chapter, not one iota.  There are references to things that all the major players have said as this story moved along, including from Arpaio and Zullo and many others, but these references come from articles that are on the internet…”

At approximately the 7:00 mark, Gallups said he sought to “clarify and tighten up” his January 17 comments:

But if you heard that broadcast last week, you remember that I said that when I sent the first manuscript of that 45-page chapter to Zullo, remember I told you he reacted very positively to it. I told you that I did not have the exact correspondence in front of me and I think I said that I got it from an email, but that I told you I was going from memory but that the gist of his reaction was that he found that manuscript that he read to be – I said on the air last week, “amazing,” – and said that there was stuff in there that he didn’t know.  So basically he was thrilled with what I had written and the power of it. And I said that last week.

So because I’m a man of integrity and I want to be as accurate as possible when I make claims, especially as important as this, I dug around and I found that correspondence with Zullo, because I piqued my own interest when I was telling you that off the top of my head.  And so I did find it, and that correspondence was in a series of texts; it was not in an email, but it’s in texts, which I still have on my phone and I’ve archived them for future reference and I still have all of them, and here’s how that text conversation went.

So I wrote to Mike Zullo – this is August 17th of 2019 – and I said, “Hey, Mike, I just wanted to make sure that you knew that I sent that Obama birth certificate chapter to you in your email.” I got a response from him, just not too long after that that says,  “Yeah, I just finished reading it this morning.  It’s good.”  Then he says, “Too bad we can’t include a link to the press conference.”  Well, he’s talking about the 2016 one and then I referenced all the press conferences; there were three in total, and so I wrote him back and I said, “Well, the links are there.  The links are in the footnotes.” “Alright,” he said, “I didn’t remember seeing it.”  And then I wrote, “Pretty condemning stuff about – and then I, you know, reiterated the stuff that was in the chapter. You’re going to have to get the book and read the chapter to find out. But then I said, “Now most of America has no clue of those facts that are in that one little chapter I wrote.”  And Mike Zullo wrote back and said, “It sure is.  I didn’t know all of that crap.”  That’s his word, OK? – that came out of the text.

So that’s what I was trying to tell you last week. So I didn’t lie to you; I just wanted to make sure that you knew that, because, you know, I was just saying that off the top of my head and it sounded a little stupendous, but there’s the text, and he did read it.  Now just to be clear about several things:  that first manuscript, which is more than 98% the very same that’s in the book that Tom Horn wrote right now, Zullo’s response was, “That’s good.  I didn’t know that crap,” and that he wanted more in the chapter regarding the press conferences and so that people could go to them and look at them and watch them, which is, of course, I did that.  It’s all in my chapter.  So you’ll have access to all of that when you read the chapter.

Now I want to be clear:  Mike Zullo has not seen the manuscript that’s in Dr. Horn’s book, but like I said, it’s practically the very same as to what he saw.  Therefore, I want to make it clear: I’m not claiming nor did every claim or intended to claim that Mike Zullo has endorsed this chapter wholeheartedly because he hasn’t even seen it, the one that’s in print.  But here’s the bottom line:  the chapter will be mind-boggling, extremely revelatory – you heard Zullo’s response to the first manuscript – and if Arpaio and Zullo’s official investigation ever makes it to Washington, which I’m praying it does, the Congress or the DOJ, they’re not going to be referring to my chapter; they’re not going to call me to come to DC; I was not an official law-enforcement investigator in this case.  When I refer to my ‘investigations,’ I’m talking about my journalistic research investigations as an author; I’ve never claimed to be an official investigator in this matter in any way, shape, form or fashion. I’ve always made that clear right here on this show, over and over.  Every time I speak on the matter I make that clear.

The full text message Gallups and Zullo exchanged on August 17, the latter part of which Gallups omitted from his on-air reading, indicates Gallups’s understanding that he and Zullo would have “exclusive” ownership of any written material they might jointly produce for a book in the future.  “I have that in writing from Tom,” Gallups texted Zullo.

“Sharon, the text messages show that even my reply was taken out of context,” Zullo told The Post & Email. “If he had read the entire text on the radio it would be clear that my reply was, ‘It sure is’  was referring to the boatload of lies. And the ‘crap’ was all the Hillary Clinton nonsense. He tried to connect my reply to the last sentence he wrote about ‘most of America.’ Well, of course they would not know about this; no one knows that fact better than me. The media had a blackout around the entire investigation.

“This dated email is evidence he was reacting to the email on his January 24 show.  It’s disingenuous.  It’s also evidence that I’m not just going out and trashing him in the press because he removed my name; he knew how I felt about this.  There was no mistaking I was not against the publication of the chapter in and of itself.  Gallups telling his audience that something ‘piqued his interest‘ and took it upon himself to look up the text messages for the sake of his integrity is a stretch. The fact is my email brought it all to his attention; what he did was omit a portion of the factual progression of the chain of events. My email was the catalyst prompting his actions. By leaving the audience unaware of the email’s existence he creates an alternative version of the truth to put himself in the best possible light. So while it may be a factual truth that he wanted to check his facts, the omission of the email’s existence and date of delivery now changes the intentionality of his motive.  His actions were prompted only by the demand for retraction.  So there is no debate on whether or not he received the email. The retraction is the proof; he just did not bother to tell you that part. It paints a different picture.

“That is why when you take an oath to tell the whole truth it means no fact-truth is left out. Sharon, all investigators are taught that there are ‘truths.’ but there is only one ‘truth.’  Omission of Material facts are common in fraud cases and can cause factual truths to lead you to a wrong conclusion because all the facts are not presented to cause the truth to come to the surface. That is what happened here. Omission is a dangerous thing because of what it conceals.

“On the flip side, exaggeration (hype) is just as dangerous if facts can also lead one to a different conclusion.  Overstating an event or exaggerated statements can bolster one’s perception of involvement of actions and can lead others to conclude a high level of involvement that the truth will eventually not support. There is an old saying, ‘The truth needs no polishing.’  These are good words to live by.  Hype and omission had no part to play in this investigation.

“Gallups could have simply said that he ‘misspoke, I need to correct something,’…but he didn’t; he tied in a retraction while at the same time he spun it, propping himself up and still using my name and intimating I was happy with the chapter, so you should be happy with it, too. Humility is always absent in vindictiveness.

“Sharon, this type of behavior and over-exaggeration and omitting certain facts has been a developing problem over the last few years.  A case in point is his ‘Special Deputy Honorary Appointment.’ In 2016 Gallups hailed his honorary appointment by then-Sheriff Arpaio as a “Special Deputy” and has shouted this from the mountaintops ever since. I have heard him state that he was ‘sworn in,’ ‘flown in,’ ‘deputized,’ as he attributes this to his ten years’ involvement in law enforcement and his opening prayer at one of President Trump’s Florida campaign rallies. He said the Sheriff could see his connection to the president as one of the reasons. I don’t know where this stuff comes from. He has no direct connection to the president, but he pitches it that way. The Sheriff has a direct connection to President Trump. The Sheriff does; that’s being connected.  It is this kind of exaggerated self-importance and serial hype that is problematic.

“This whole Special Deputy thing has been represented by Gallups to hold much more significance than it actually does.  Gallups was counseled twice by me in 2016 at the Sheriff’s and was asked to refrain from making representation about this Honorary Appointment. In 2016 he hyped it at every opportunity, so much so that it was starting to give the impression he was actually  sworn in and the term ‘deputization‘ was used to create an illusion of authority and superiority on the topic. I called him and explained to him that this was not a sworn position, it carried no enforcement of authority or privilege, and that it is not recognized by statutory authority on any level.  It is honorary, a ‘thank-you’ for supporting the Office at some level from a civilian position. I asked him to stop per the Sheriff. He did it for about four weeks and then it started up all over again, so much so that the Sheriff himself contacted me later in 2016 and asked me to call him and tell him to stop. I did. He did, on his radio show, that is. In interviews he did outside of his show and my awareness, it was game on and carries on today. He just can’t stop giving in to this temptation of being recognized.

“In one interview he tried to make it sound as if he was flown into Phoenix at the summoning of the Sheriff because this appointment of him had to be made.  This is just not the case. He was in Phoenix in January 2016, and I happened to be going to the Sheriff’s personal office that day, I called the Sheriff, told him Carl was in town and I asked to bring him along. With the Sheriff’s approval I did. In his office I had reminded the Sheriff that Carl had supported the effort and made his radio show available to us since 2012 as an unofficial outlet.  I also made the Sheriff aware that Carl had been an outside confidant to me and that he was and has been trustworthy with information.

“You have to understand that the Sheriff and I were the only ones in the entire Sheriff’s Office willing to take on this birth-certificate fight. When the Sheriff commissioned me to conduct the investigation he gave an order that I was only to report directly to him and not to be interfered with by Office bureaucrats. The Sheriff knew there were forces in the Sheriff’s Office command that would have made it impossible for me to conduct this. Sheriff Arpaio and I would find ourselves standing shoulder-to-shoulder fighting to keep this investigation going, despite all kinds of internal opposition and outside pressure. Trust me, without Sheriff Joe Arpaio at the helm of this investigation we would have been shut down before it started. The Sheriff understood that I needed someone outside the office not only to disseminate information but someone who would act as a sounding board just to keep my own perception clear. That’s what made Carl Gallups a good match at the time. He was a pastor and a former Deputy Sheriff. So this entire Special Deputy thing was an impromptu appointment.  This was not planned. He was not called in to Phoenix for this. It was something the Sheriff just wanted to do out of appreciation. It did, however, come with a vow of secrecy which Carl agreed to. It was never intended to be used the way Gallups is using it today.  If you take away the limited information he may know from my confidential conversations with him, he knows nothing more than you do

“This type of self aggrandizement has no place in this investigation or the telling of it.

“I want people to understand something:  that this is not about a book deal. If I had wanted a book deal, I could have had it ten times over.  This is what I have been observing.  First of all, there is inside information I know, especially in my exchanges with the Sheriff, as to how the possibility of progression of this may occur.  Second, I’ve been watching.  I’ve watched everything that’s been going on in Congress; I see the lopsided Justice Department and its actions. I also know that there are so many Deep-State actors that at this point in time, without somebody with a strong backbone, this is not going to go forward and it will not go anywhere.  I have also watched as others have written books, and one comes to mind: “Clinton Cash” which talks about all the Clinton misdeeds.  While the book is good and the book is factual, it can’t move the needle.  This investigation, if there is going to be a book, it’s not going to be written for the purpose of recouping some expense; it’s going to be written for the purpose of moving the needle.  Until the players are in place, there’s just no point in putting it out there, because once you do, it truly goes into the dustbin of history.

“So this is not about the book; I couldn’t care less about the chapter. It is about reality and the truth.  Gallups inexplicably has left out one of the biggest parts in his mini book called a chapter:  the Selective Service card.  That card is very important.  I don’t know why; maybe he forgot. I can tell you what I do know he was doing; it’s the vindictive part:  ‘I’m going to erase you from this.’

“I think this is the biggest problem and insult to the intelligence of the people they’re marketing this to: eventually they’re going to look at a video, and then they’ll say, ‘Who’s this guy?’ Then they’re going to find out who ‘this guy’ is.  So it’s an omission of facts and a chain of events.  He spun it, for his own purpose in the book, puts himself one degree closer to the Sheriff and raises his level of importance by having me and my role out of the way.  This goes to mindset.”

In a follow-up interview on Thursday, Zullo told The Post & Email that he “wants to be very clear” in his objections to Gallups’s writing of the chapter.  “This is not about the chapter,” Zullo said. “It is not about a chapter written about public information. This is about the circumstance surrounding it. The first draft I read I actually had Carl remove a part because it contained information that should not have been made public. This is about a problem that has been brewing for some time and has finally surfaced. Self-promotion.  It is about notoriety, and positioning for something to capitalize on in the future. It is about money.  Gallups’s newfound wealth stream is writing books.  He had to take care of the hand that feeds him, regardless of the cost.

“There​ was a very lengthy exchange between Gallups and me back in September 2019 about this chapter,” Zullo said. “I am not going to release those emails because I don’t think it is the proper thing to do, as at that point in time we still were under our confidentiality agreement. However, Gallups broke that agreement with the reading of the text message, so from that point forward it is all fair game.  It should also be noted that in October 2019 Gallups also unilaterally terminated the book agreement and that if he decided to write anything it would be on his own; he would not divulge any confidential information; and that he and Tom Horn may use the original chapter that I did read at some point so he is now calling it ‘copyrighted.’  Vindictive? You be the judge. And in a very odd statement he claimed that Tom Horn has frequently asked him if I was ready to write a book. Sharon, I have never heard of this.  I don’t know if it is true, but if it is, Carl kept it from me; if it is untrue, then we all know what it is called.”

Further exploitation of Zullo’s work is the use of his blurred image and footage from the final presser in Horn’s promotional materials.  In September 2019 Zullo discovered advertisements for Skywatch TV promoting “Tom Horn’s Secret Files,” touting, among other items:

“THE VAULT DECLASSIFIED SECRET FILES Dr. Horn is giving away with the current 4-WEEK special investigative reports are difficult to put a price on and include a recent, never-before-seen, exclusive 2-hour interview (DEEMED TOO HOT FOR TV) with the deputized​ investigators whose​ forensic evidence from two world-renown laboratories is connected to the Mueller Report and damaging evidence that President Obama was involved in something much deeper and far more insidious than has yet been disclosed to the public. PREPARE YOURSELF TO BE THE FIRST TO SEE BEHIND THE VEIL AT THIS EXPLOSIVE, MIND-BENDING, HISTORY-CHANGING EXPOSÉ!”

The Post & Email notes that Zullo has never drawn a connection between the birth-certificate probe and the 22-month investigation conducted by former Special Counsel Robert Mueller into Russian interference in the 2016 election and alleged, but discovered to be unsubstantiated, coordination between the Trump campaign and Russian operatives.  Similarly, the “Mueller report” did not mention the birth-certificate investigation.

The full page of advertisements in which Zullo’s blurred image is utilized refers to “commissioned Obama investigators.”

https://t.e2ma.net/webview/a1v0kb/71c579cc3564ffbfe41ba17273c1fa71

“YOU’LL BE THE FIRST TO EXAMINE THIS GAME-CHANGING INFORMATION BEFORE IT COMES TO THE PUBLIC’S ATTENTION IN 2020!” Horn states in the advertisement.

As reported Tuesday, Zullo declined to participate in a “roundtable” discussion with Horn and Gallups on the birth-certificate investigation.  “The problem here is I knew this was not true,” Zullo said in response to the ad. “I was the only investigator commissioned by Sheriff Joe Arpaio to conduct the birth-certificate investigation. So if I turned down the interviews, who were they talking about?  So what were they talking about?  Then I got my answer:  Carl Gallups.”

Horn not only used Zullo’s blurred image for promotional reasons, but also labeled the investigation “Too Hot for TV!” and Gallups a “former police detective,” which he has never claimed to have been.

https://t.e2ma.net/webview/a1v0kb/71c579cc3564ffbfe41ba17273c1fa71
(Starts at the 14:00 mark)

“The problem for Carl Gallups is that he was not a commissioned investigator, nor was he deputized to conduct any investigation, nor was he a former ‘police detective’ to begin with,” Zullo told The Post & Email on Thursday. “So what was he doing? He was being me or trying to boost up his bona fides to at least be an equal.  And this persona was in the making for a long time. In an email Gallups was told of this; he acted very shocked and apologetic, claiming he can’t help what people write about him and he immediately emailed Horn to remove the ad. I was told that happened but as of this writing it is still there.

“I began to look for more information on this,” Zullo continued. “I came across some other disturbing information.  As this unfolded more emails were exchanged and I received notification from Gallups in September 2019 that he decided to have the chapter removed from the book and at the same time he declared he was done with the birth-certificate issue and would not write anything for anyone. I did not ask him to remove the chapter; he took that action on his own. I also received an email from Tom Horn, without my prompting, stating he was not going to use that chapter. I figured the publisher did not want to deal with it and it was over.”

On September 26, 2019, at 8:17 a.m., Zullo wrote to Horn:

Mr. Horn

As you are aware some issues have surfaced regarding representations concerning  the Birth Certificate Investigation. Thank you for your immediate response to the situation.

And Horn responded:

From: Tom Horn
Date: Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 10:15 AM
Subject: Re: Birth Certificate Investigation
To: Mike Zullo

Mike

I have decided not to use the chapter in my upcoming or any future books.

Tom

In September 2017, Gallups appeared on theDove TV & Radio with Perry Atkinson, when he referenced his “involvement” in an investigation “of the Obama years.”  Beginning at the 8:00 mark, Gallups said, “We all knew the Deep State, but we didn’t know how deep,” he said.  “Well, brother, please hear my humble heart…for years, because of my involvement in the Sheriff Arpaio/Mike Zullo Deep State criminal investigation of the Obama years…I was deputized by Sheriff Arpaio during those days. I’ve been working closely with all of that.  We’ve been telling the world for years about the Deep State; we knew that Donald Trump was being spied upon by government agencies before he ever ran for president; we had the hard-copy evidence of it given to us by CIA informants, whistleblowers, and the investigations that Sheriff Arpaio was involved in; we knew it, and we’ve been telling the media, we’ve been warning the media, we’ve been begging Congress — we couldn’t get a single congressman to look at it; we couldn’t get a single media source to report on it, mainstream media; everybody called us conspiracy freaks and tinfoil-hat-wearing nuts, and we were involved in the middle of a criminal investigation from the fourth-largest sheriff’s office in the nation, but we were summarily marginalized by the media and by Congress and by the courts.  They’re all complicit, brother; this thing called ‘Deep State’ is deeper than anyone imagines. I know the stuff that I know that I’m not allowed to talk about is ten times scarier than what you already know from the media, and it’s probably ten times scarier than what I know.  So, yes, brother, we are in the midst of prophetic times; it’s deeply demonic, and it is deeply Deep State. There is an agenda, and we’re in a war.  We’re in a spiritual war, Perry; it’s as simple as that…”

“Sharon, this interview puts it all out on display,” Zullo said. “If you were new to this, think about what you would come away with thinking. In that interview, he gives the impression that he was deputized — not just recognized as an honorary spokesperson, but actually deputized and receiving CIA information; the word ‘we’ is used to show inclusiveness.  The problem is none of this is true,” Zullo said.  “The fact of the matter was that he was 1,859 miles away from me when I was receiving all kinds of information under the authority of Sheriff Arpaio. Gallups paints a picture with his choice of words to give the impression of a much deeper involvement where no involvement even existed.  He has most likely pulled the same maneuver on Tom Horn and the roundtable he sits at, and now he’s going to have to explain the unexplainable.  He tries to throw my name out there to give legitimacy to what he’s saying.

He continued:

This chapter has no place in this book.  If he wasn’t going to respect me, he should have respected the investigation and not mixed this up with this type of book about Hillary Clinton and a lot of things that were never proven.

This investigation reaches a factual conclusion based on scientific analysis done by experts that confirm the findings vs. work which is conjecture, speculation and inference with no concrete evidence of the main theme of the book.

It is more indicative of the chapter as a placeholder in the event that something happens.

When I was first told about the book, it was supposed to be four or five different authors contributing chapters on the Deep State.  Had I ever known that it was going to be this, I would have demanded, with lawyers if necessary, that this chapter be pulled out.  I had no idea what this book was even going to be.  As far as I am concerned, they have cheapened the integrity of the investigation; and not only my hard work, but also the hard work of the experts, Reed Hayes and Forlab.  It should never have been thrown in with all this other stuff.

As reported in the previous article, in quoting from a public report Hayes issued on his website regarding his work on the birth-certificate image, Gallups substituted all instances of Zullo’s name with ellipses.

In addition to emails already released, The Post & Email has seen others between Zullo and Gallups in which Gallups exhibited hostility.  As noted in our earlier article, in late September Zullo requested that Gallups call him to discuss their differences over the chapter but is “still waiting” for the call.

“Sharon, in the chapter Gallups talks about the Dec 15, 2016 press conference.” Zullo said. “Let me tell you about that. Someone supportive of the investigation requested Gallups be present at the presser because we did not know if local media would even show up. This individual paid Gallups’s way. I picked him up at the airport, my son gave up his bedroom, he ate at my table, prayed with my family, attended a private meeting the evening before at the Sheriff’s Office, and was with me the entire day before the presser; he saw everything as it was happening in real time. He drove with me to the presser, attended the event, attended a gathering at my home the evening after the presser, where about 30 people attended, including Sheriff Joe and Terry Lakin. We did some radio interviews the following day and I drove him to the airport. But in his chapter he took an eraser to my name. This is not crying over being cut; it’s just an observation.

“A pastor once said, ‘When a man loses sight of who he is, he starts to eat from the wrong tree,’ and I think that’s what happened to Carl,” Zullo told us on Friday.