This is the scandal of the decade, and yet no one in the mainstream media, nor, sadly, virtually anyone on the right, including the best of the conservative blogs, wants to touch it. (Go here for the story and the damning videos released by Sheriff Arpaio and his Cold Case Possee.)
Shame on them all. WND and the Washington Times are about the only media people with the guts to expose the Obama regime’s fraud.
Why? It’s not because the allegations are false. Anyone who reads Arpaio’s report and watches the videos can’t possibly deny that Obama’s long-form birth certificate is a forgery. It can only be due to fear of ridicule, and fear that to press the matter would somehow hurt the Republicans in the elections. The latter is a false assumption, but clearly one too many conservatives embrace.
This is not about “birtherism”. This is about blatant forgery and cover-up at the highest level, and about the media’s complicity in lying to the American people. If Barack Obama is re-elected, the entire conservative media will be partly to blame. They have the goods yet choose to look the other way. Obama’s obviosly fraudulent birth certificate has been out there for years, and conservatives chose to cower instead of standing up for the TRUTH. If the right is truly serious about “vetting” Obama, this story is a gift from heaven. Writing at the American Thinker on March 2nd, Cindy Simpson had this brow-arching tidbit:
“At the press conference, WND journalist Dr. Jerome Corsi reported that he had arranged on the evening prior, a private conference between the sheriff and conservative media champion Andrew Breitbart, and Corsi wondered whether it might have been Breitbart’s last interview. As we mourn Breitbart’s passing, we hope that his colleagues continue to pursue his inspiring legacy of boldness in uncovering and reporting the truth. At CPAC, Breitbart had assured attendees: “This election, we’re going to vet [Obama].”"
If this is so, then we should be asking, “What would Breitbart do?”
Here was Sheriff Arpaio’s entire press conference, which the media dutifully pretty much ignored. Here is the Arpaio report in pdf..
Washington Times – Is President Obama’s birth certificate a forgery? Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, Ariz., believes it is. He recently held a press conference in Phoenix to discuss the findings of a new 10-page report. Mr. Arpaio’s investigators have come to a stunning conclusion: The long-form birth certificate Mr. Obama released last year is a “computer-generated forgery.”
With the exception of The Washington Times, however, no major U.S. media outlet reported this bombshell story. The liberal press corps is desperately trying to suppress any discussion of Forgerygate — potentially one of the biggest scandals in American history. The media class is betraying its fundamental mission to pursue the truth.
“Based on all of the evidence presented and investigated, I cannot in good faith report to you that these documents are authentic,” Sheriff Arpaio said. “My investigators believe that the long-form birth certificate was manufactured electronically and that it did not originate in paper format as claimed by the White House.”
The Washington Times story, written by Stephen Dinan, points out that Mr. Arpaio has called for Congress to investigate the matter. Think about this: A high-profile sheriff orders a team of former law enforcement officials to examine whether the president is truly a natural born citizen and that he has the constitutional and legal right to occupy the White House. Their official report is that Mr. Obama’s documents are shoddy and he likely engaged in deliberate fraud. And yet, most of the American press corps doesn’t believe this is an important news story? The liberal media has become rotten to the core.
Ironically, the foreign press reported widely on the story. For example, Pravda — that’s right, the former official organ of the Soviet Communist Party — did an extensive analysis of Mr. Arpaio’s findings. The article by Dianna Cotter asks the obvious question: What are U.S. journalists afraid of?
The answer is that the issue strikes at the heart of Mr. Obama’s administration: If his presidency is illegal, then all of his accomplishments — the stimulus, Obamacare, the contraceptive mandate, the government takeover of the auto sector and appointments to the Supreme Court — are illegitimate as well. The scandal would trigger a constitutional crisis.
Following Mr. Obama’s surprise news conference last year, when he unveiled the long-form certificate, the media insisted that the controversy was settled once and for all. The “birthers” supposedly had been silenced. Mr. Arpaio’s report, however, changes that. The issue has been resuscitated — except in the eyes of the mainstream media.
A prominent sheriff says he has damning evidence that Mr. Obama probably lied to the public. The international media believes it’s a big deal; many Americans agree. They want to get to the bottom of it. Yet, the liberal hacks at the New York Times, the Washington Post, CNN and MSNBC can do nothing more than yawn.
Contrast this with their treatment of President George W. Bush. Throughout the Bush years it was open season: routine comparisons to Adolf Hitler, charges of being a war criminal, calls for impeachment, trumped-up scandals like the Valerie Plame affair, investigations into the partying habits of his teenage daughters, stories about Mr. Bush’s drinking as a younger man, his National Guard service and mediocre college grades — journalists left no stone unturned, no questions unanswered, no topic was beyond the pale.
Not with Mr. Obama. In fact, the opposite is true: Almost everything pertinent is not to be touched. He is the least-vetted president in modern memory. During the 2008 campaign, the liberal media deliberately propped up Mr. Obama. They suppressed vital information about his radical past and deep ties to virulent revolutionary leftists — the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Bill Ayers, Bernardine Dohrn, Derrick Bell, Saul Alinsky and Edward Said. For all of their differences, they share one value in common: hatred for traditional America.
To this day, Mr. Obama’s college transcripts, undergraduate thesis and health records remain sealed. We know little about his years in Indonesia as a young boy; his overseas trips to countries like Pakistan in the 1980s; his relationship with his mother and Muslim stepfather; and his time spent as a “community organizer” in Chicago. In short, the president’s past is clouded in mystery. This is not conspiracy-mongering, but objective fact. Americans have a right to know who their commander-in-chief really is. Instead, the media wants to bury any debate or inquiry into Mr. Obama’s background.
Whether you believe Mr. Obama’s long-form birth certificate is a forgery or not, Mr. Arpaio should be applauded. He has done our nation a huge service. He is asking the press corps to look into an issue of the highest importance: Has the president committed a monstrous hoax and fraud upon the American people? In particular, the sheriff’s team has identified a supposed “person of interest” who they believe played a pivotal role in Forgerygate. The media must follow up on the story. If it is false, then Mr. Arpaio will be rightly humiliated and publicly discredited. But if — and I stress if — it is true, then the press will have unearthed a scandal that will shake this country to its very foundations. Either way, it’s time the media did their job and stop acting like Mr. Obama’s poodles.
Jeffrey T. Kuhner is a columnist at The Washington Times and president of the Edmund Burke Institute.
Read the original article at Times247
Arpaio report pdf.
UPDATE:
WND – Sheriff Joe wants Obama’s original draft card
Asks feds: What steps will be taken to investigate possible forgery?
Following up on his investigative team’s finding of probable cause that Barack Obama’s Selective Service registration form is a forgery, Maricopa County, Ariz., Sheriff Joe Arpaio has asked Selective Service Director Lawrence Romo in a letter to produce original documentation.
A copy of Obama’s registration form indicates the registration took place at the Makaki Station Post Office in Honolulu on July 29, 1980. Arpaio wants court-approved, forensic experts selected by his office to examine the original for its authenticity, as well as any microfilm or computer copies that may exist. (more >>>)
Daily Caller – Lord Monckton: ‘I’m no birther,’ but Obama birth certificate ‘plainly a forgery’
On Dennis Miller’s radio show Thursday Lord Christopher Monckton, a former policy adviser to British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and an activist against global warming “alarmism,” went all-in on questioning President Barack Obama’s citizenship.
Monckton, the 3rd Viscount Monckton of Brenchley, hinted about his position on the issue in April 2010 at a tea party rally on the National Mall near the White House. But on Miller’s show, he said the birth certificate issue was far more important that combatting so-called anthropogenic global warming.
“I mean, hey you got a president who has a false birth certificate on the Internet, on the White House website,” Monckton said. “It’s not even clear where he was born. You’ve got a national debt which is rising into the stratosphere. You’ve got unemployment certainly here in California at 11 percent, 50 percent in the construction industry. These are real problems. You’ve got real environmental problems — overfishing, deforestation, pollution, not so much in the west but certainly in other countries. These are real problems which ought to be addressed. You’ve got poverty. You’ve got disease. These are again serious problems in Africa for instance, that we could be helping with. But no, we’re obsessed with making the rich even richer and making the absolute bankers richer still by going for global warming and cap-and-trade and other nonsenses of this kind.”
Miller protested by saying he disagreed with the suggestion that Obama has a fraudulent birth certificate. But Monckton dug in his heels.
“I don’t know whether he is Kenyan or not,” Monckton said. “The point is that if I were you, I would want to make absolutely sure that he was born here before allowing him to be elected. And the birth certificate that he put up on that website, I don’t know where he was born. But I do know that birth certificate isn’t genuine.”
Monckton firmly asserted that the birth certificate on the White House website wasn’t real, and claimed it could be dismantled with software.
“It appears in layers on the screen in such a way you can remove quite separately each of the individual dates,” Monckton said. “You use Adobe Illustrator and each of the individual dates is in its own separate layer. This thing has been fabricated. Sheriff [Joe] Arpaio of Arizona has had a team on this for six months. And he has now gone public and said there’s something very desperately wrong with this and of course nobody is saying anything because the entire electorate has been fooled.”
“I’m no birther, don’t get me wrong,” Monckton said. “I haven’t a clue where Obama was born and I wouldn’t want to entreat into the private grief behind investigating. But the point is, is what he has done on the White House website is he has put up a document which he is plainly a forgery and I would regard that as a very serious matter.”
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/292780/conspiracy-again-editors
With all due respect, it’s clear that either the editors at NRO did not watch the Arpaio press conference and view the documents and videos, or they chose to ignore the evidence. They do not even mention his findings, and certainly didn’t refute it.
The document was examined by the best experts in the field, but National Review could care less, obviously.
Secondly, Arpaio isn’t questioning where Obama was born, only the authenticity of the birth certificate, which is clearly, absolutely, positively forged. The NRO editors only prove my point that it is the fear of losing the 2012 election that motivates them, not the truth.
Where B.O. was born is not the question. The question is why bother forging the documents in the first place? If, God forbid, Obama goes on to win the election, it won’t be because of the so-called ‘birthers’; it will be because of lily-livered Republicans like those at NRO.
These “experts,” the ones that you said were “the best experts in the field,” who were they?
They were WND’s “experts”–who haven’t shown their expertise and who certainly have not shown that they were impartial. The birther document “experts” who testified in the case in Georgia were found by the judge to be simply not credible. He did not believe them and hence did not accept their testimony.
WND has included among its “experts” Paul Irey, who has insisted that Obama did not go to Columbia College (although Columbia says that he did) and Doug Vogt, who claims to have discovered the original arc of Abraham. There were others who were not so nutty, but none of them were members of the American Board of Forensic Document Examiners or the American Society of Questioned Document Experts or the Association of Forensic Document Examiners–which are the organizations of specialists in the field.
Re: “Secondly, Arpaio isn’t questioning where Obama was born, only the authenticity of the birth certificate, which is clearly, absolutely, positively forged.”
So tell us, oh master, why someone who was born in Hawaii would forge a birth certificate saying that he was born in Hawaii?
We know that he was born in Hawaii from the short and long form birth certificates themselves, the birth notices in the newspapers (which were sent to the papers by the DOH in those days, and the papers in Hawaii only took the DOH announcements, they did not accept birth notice advertising in that section, and the DOH only sent out birth notices for children who had been born in Hawaii).
So Obama was indeed born in Hawaii. So what is the point of forging a document that says that he was born in Hawaii?
Another point about the posse’s “investigation.”
Sheriff Joe’s posse has said that a physical copy of Obama’s long form birth certificate DOES NOT EXIST (despite the DOH of Hawaii having said that it sent it, and a reporter in Washington having stated that she held it and felt the seal). The posse claimed that the paper documents that Obama had handed around in the White House press room were not the actual official physical copies of the document itself but forgeries made from the software version of the long-form (apparently with a forged seal attached). That is what they claim.
Is there a way to determine whether or not this is true? Yes, there is.
It is to go to the White House, say that you are a law officer and ask to see the document that was passed around in the White House press room and examine it.
Obviously, the White House can refuse to show it to you. And in fact, if the physical document was in fact forged, they would do exactly that.
But, asking to see the document and getting turned down tells you something. It indicates that the White House might have something to hide.
So, a very important question to ask is why the posse did not ask to see the physical document that they claim is forged. The fact that the White House might turn down the request is not a valid explanation. The fact that if the White House indeed turned down the request would be suspicious in itself. So either the posse was too stupid to ask or did not know that asking to see a document that you claim is forged is standard practice in a forgery investigation. Or, it had a real reason for not asking.
What could the real reason be?
One answer could be that they want to keep on demanding the original birth certificate from Hawaii’s files. But, if so, that is just part of their ruse because they KNOW that the regulations in Hawaii do not permit the DOH to show copies of it to anyone other than those on the state’s list of eligible relatives and others, and the regulations do not allow the original in the files to be removed or shown to anyone outside of the Hawaii government (and probably not to all of them either). Focusing your demands on something that you cannot get keeps the story alive. Focusing attention on a document that you could get if you asked for it doesn’t keep the story alive. In fact, if they do give you the document, and you take it to really impartial document forensic specialists, the story ends right there.
So, the question still nags: Why didn’t they ask to see the physical copy that they say was forged? And the answer comes back: Because they are not being honest about really investigating. IF they were really investigating they would have asked to see the document that was passed around. Since they did not do this, they are not really investigating. And, if they are not really investigating, what are they doing?
Oh, and one more thing. Sheriff Joe’s posse neither sent anyone to Hawaii to investigate nor called the officials in Hawaii or the former officials to ask them to repeat their stories and to ask them whether the document that they saw differs in its facts from the short form and long form birth certificates that Obama published. They did not even ASK.
None of your strident defense contradicts the findings of the posted birth certificate. Repeat, the posted birth certificate. You didn’t watch the videos, it seems. What was posted on line was clearly a computer-generated forgery, bogus. Why would the White House do that? They didn’t have to.
When the short form birth certificate came out, we were told there was no long form. Then, magically, poof!, they found it. O…kay. Fine. A picture of it would be easy enough, but that was not what was produced. Instead they released a computer-generated document, which you would know if you had watched the videos. Also, had you watched the videos you would know that Obama’s ‘selective service registration card’ was also clearly bogus.
Arpaio is making some strong accusations. If you or those you represent are so certain that the Sheriff and his team are the real frauds, call him on it. Sue his ass. I seriously doubt that he didn’t consider that as a possibility. Go get him! You’ll be a hero!
I think all this just distracts attention away from Obama’s intended takeover of the country.
Say It Ain’t So, did not reply to this question:
So tell us, oh master, why someone who was born in Hawaii would forge a birth certificate saying that he was born in Hawaii?
Re: “What was posted on line was clearly a computer-generated forgery…”
Answer: No what was posted on line was what WND’s “experts” said was a forgery.
The following experts say that there is nothing wrong with Obama’s birth certificate, and the State of Hawaii, which is the real expert, certainly hasn’t.
Dr. Neil Krawetz, an imaging software analysis author and experienced examiner of questioned images, said: “The PDF released by the White House shows no sign of digital manipulation or alterations. I see nothing that appears to be suspicious.”
Nathan Goulding with The National Review: “We have received several e-mails today calling into question the validity of the PDF that the White House released, namely that there are embedded layers in the document. There are now several other people on the case. We looked into it and dismissed it. … I’ve confirmed that scanning an image, converting it to a PDF, optimizing that PDF, and then opening it up in Illustrator, does in fact create layers similar to what is seen in the birth certificate PDF. You can try it yourself at home.”
John Woodman, independent computer professional, said in a series of videos that the claims of fakery that he examined were unfounded.
Ivan Zatkovich, who has testified in court as a technology expert, and consultant to WorldNetDaily: “All of the modifications to the PDF document that can be identified are consistent with someone enhancing the legibility of the document.”
Moreover, we know that Obama had a birth certificate in 1961 due to the birth notices in the Hawaii newspapers which in those days were only issued by the DOH. And we also know that there was a long firm birth certificate because the method that is used in generating the short-form birth certificate requires the clerk to read the facts from the document in the file. And we further know that there was a document in the file due to the statements of the two Republican officials who confirmed it, and the Director of Health of Hawaii who stated that she had had it copied and that a copy was given to Obama’s lawyer.
So, we get back to the Posse claiming–using WND’s “experts” that the birth certificate was forged despite the fact that Obama was born in Hawaii and hence had no need for forge a birth certificate that says that he was born in Hawaii.
Once again: So tell us, oh master, why someone who was born in Hawaii would forge a birth certificate saying that he was born in Hawaii?
If all you say is so, and clearly the mainstream media agrees with you, then why not go after the sheriff? You claim that you and the media have all these “experts” who are far more expert and qualified than those in the Cold Case Possee, so it should be a slam dunk.
I see a Pulitzer in someone’s future. Maybe even yours! The media loves nothing better than destroying people’s reputations, especially, and in particular, those who disagree with their agendas. Sheriff Arpaio would be one heck of a trophy, as he has been a thorn in their sides for years.
The Arpaio team demonstrated with detailed video why they believe both the birth certificate and the ‘selective service registration card’ were computer generated forgeries, and rather crude ones at that. That’s the evidence. You and others offer only remarks and hearsay. Have they offered up their proof? I’m not aware of it.
Re: “Once again: So tell us why someone who was born in Hawaii would forge a birth certificate saying that he was born in Hawaii?”
Beats me. I don’t care where he was born. It’s not about Hawaii. It’s about computer-generated fraud from the highest office in the land.
So, answer my question: If it is so blatantly clear that Sheriff Arpaio and his hapless posse are the phonies and the frauds, why won’t Obama or any of his multifarious apparatchiks drag him into court? They have no problem investigating and suing everyone else who gets in their way, so why not him? According to you, proving Sheriff Arpaio is a flimflamming charlatan and kook is a piece of cake, so why not do so and pick up a Pulitzer while you’re at it?
Re; “Then why not go after the Sheriff?”
Because he is irrelevant to the country as a whole and because it is not news to show that an official who hates Obama is willing to lie about it.
Re: “I don’t care where he was born. It’s not about Hawaii. It’s about computer-generated fraud from the highest office in the land.”
Once again you say that the birth certificate was forged despite the fact that Obama was born in Hawaii. Once again, I ask, why would anyone forge a birth certificate saying that he was born in Hawaii when in fact he was born in Hawaii?
Remember, it is only the birther “experts” who have claimed that there is anything wrong with Obama’s birth certificate. There are a lot of other experts who say that there isn’t anything wrong with it, and, once again, why should someone forge a birth certificate from Hawaii when in fact he was born in Hawaii? The officials in Hawaii–and Hawaii is the expert on whether or not its birth certificates are forged–have not said that it was forged, or that there was anything wrong with it.
Other research done on this issue:
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2012/03/book-review-a-question-of-eligibility/#more-16786
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2012/03/obama-conspiracy-theories-blog-launches-investigation-into-sheriff-joes-cold-case-posse/
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2012/03/decoding-the-long-form-part-1/
http://www.thefogbow.com/arpaio-report/
http://www.obamabirthbook.com/http:/www.obamabirthbook.com/2012/03/on-the-release-of-report-from-sheriff-joe-arpaio-stating-barack-obamas-birth-certificate-is-a-forgery/
The DOH of Hawaii stated in a letter that she had seen the original birth certificate being copied onto security paper and that was the document that she gave to Obama’s lawyer. That physical copy was passed around in the White House press room and everyone there got a chance to hold it, and feel the seal. One reporter even photographed it.
>> Once again you say that the birth certificate was forged despite the fact that Obama was born in Hawaii.
For the last time, I didn’t say the birth certificate was forged. I repeated what Arpaio said, that the digital copy provided by the White House was a computer-generated forgery. If you can’t tell the difference, that’s not my problem.
>>Re “Then why not go after the Sheriff?”
>>>Re: Re: Because he is irrelevant to the country as a whole and because it is not news to show that an official who hates Obama is willing to lie about it.
O…kay, but if he’s so irrelevant, then why the fuss?
Anyway, don’t you worry, lady. Your precious Barack and his mysterious past is safe from crazy Joe. His story, along with hundreds of other stories and a dozen books related to Barack Obama’s bizarre and creepy past have been dutifully ignored or buried by the servile media, and only some future generation will ever know the truth.
So, smile and be glad, as everyone can now appreciate your brilliance. You’ve had your say, and I thank you. Readers can click on all your Democrat-generated, Obamabot links and join the party. Revel in your satisfaction and have a wonderful day.
Re: “For the last time, I didn’t say the birth certificate was forged. I repeated what Arpaio said, that the digital copy provided by the White House was a computer-generated forgery. If you can’t tell the difference, that’s not my problem.”
So you agree that Obama’s birth certificate WAS NOT FORGED.
Re: “Why the fuss?”
What fuss? Nobody is much concerned about what Sheriff Joe said. Have you noticed that his words were not praised by Ann Coulter or Bill O’Reilly, and Fox news laughed at him. The National Review made a fuss because it considers that the Sheriff’s lies embarrass the conservative movement. (http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/292780/conspiracy-again-editors)
As for myself, it is merely a hobby of mine to post the truth when birther claims are posted.
As for Democrat-generated. Perhaps you have forgotten but Obama’s election was confirmed by the US Congress UNANIMOUSLY.
Good grief, lady. Take a pill already.
Good grief, Say It Ain’t So. Why not discuss the facts?
Anyone that watches the video done by the Cold Case Posse will be convinced that it is a fake if they know anything about Adobe Illustrator and Photoshop. I work with Adobe’s programs all of the time and I know what you can and cannot do with a document that is supposedly scanned in from the vaults of the birth certificate archives. For others, I can see how they would still not be sure simply because they don’t have any computer training with regards to Adobe. Also, I think that is BS that Hawaii says you can’t show your real birth certificate to anybody but family and friends. This is a free country, you should have the right to show anybody anything that is yours including your own birth certificate. What are they trying to do? Promote abuse of false identification? I used to like Obama, but not anymore it’s just too controversial that his Birth Certificate, Selective Service Registration, and Social Security Number from Connecticut all have problems with validity.
Pingback: Say what?! – Breitbart uncovers 1991 promotional booklet touting Obama as “born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia and Hawaii” | Quite Normal
Pingback: Obama himself was the first “birther” | Quite Normal
Pingback: Diana West, Frank Gaffney question Obama’s eligibility | Quite Normal