Have Judge, Media Jumped To Conclusions In Sheriff Arpaio’s Investigation

PE5-Judge-G.-Murray-Snow1

Have Judge, Media Jumped to
Conclusions in Arpaio’s Investigation?
FOCUS OF PROBE MAY NOT BE AS SPECULATED
by Sharon Rondeau

(Jun. 8, 2015) —Hearings in the civil contempt trial of Maricopa County, AZ Sheriff Joseph M. Arpaio have been temporarily suspended as U.S. District Court Judge G. Murray Snow decides whether or not to recuse himself from the case.

The lawsuit, Melendres, et al v. Arpaio, et al, was filed in December 2007 and claimed that Maricopa County Sherriff’s Office (MCSO) employees had engaged in racial profiling by targeting Latinos in neighborhood sweeps and traffic stops without reasonable suspicion of a crime.

Snow claimed the alleged practice violated the Fourth Amendment, which protects against “unreasonable searches and seizures.”

In an injunction in the Melendres case issued in December 2011, Snow opined that an individual’s presence in the country illegally did not constitute a crime prosecutable by state and local authorities, although previously, the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency had authorized and trained MCSO employees and others in the process of apprehending and turning over individuals found to be in the country illegally under the 287(g) program.

Snow’s injunction imposed the cessation of Arpaio’s enforcement of “federal immigration law.”

Arpaio is serving his sixth consecutive term as sheriff and is known for his strong stance against illegal aliens in the county. Within hours of Obama’s November 20, 2014 declared executive actions allowing for millions of illegals to be granted a stay from deportation under certain conditions, Arpaio filed a lawsuit, claiming that if implemented, the actions would cost the county’s taxpayers millions more in expenses.

At the time, CBS News reported that nationally, “The number of immigrants who lack legal status has remained the same since 2009 at 11.2 million.” However, the correct figure may be 20 million or more.

While Arpaio’s lawsuit was dismissed at the U.S. District Court level by an Obama appointee, an appeal is pending. Another lawsuit filed by 26 states challenging the executive actions has been upheld by a U.S. District Court judge in Texas and the majority of a three-judge panel at the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans.

In May 2013, Snow ruled in favor of the plaintiffs in Melendres, who are defended by attorneys from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). Snow also appointed a monitor to ensure that the MCSO complied with Snow’s order to cease racial profiling. Arpaio appealed the ruling to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which upheld the majority of Snow’s ruling but opined that the monitor’s role “must only be related to the constitutional violations.”

In March, Arpaio and his chief deputy, Gerard (Jerry) Sheridan admitted to having failed to follow Snow’s orders and offered a settlement of $100,000 to be paid to the plaintiff class by Arpaio personally. Snow refused the offer, and hearings in the civil contempt matter were held on April 21-24.

Arpaio testified on April 23 and Sheridan on April 24.

Arpaio 4-23-15 Evidentiary Hearing Day 3

Arpaio 4-24-15 Evidentiary Hearing Day 4

During both days of testimony, Snow launched a pointed line of questioning which appeared to emanate from an article dated June 4, 2014 in The Phoenix New Times referencing a confidential informant, Dennis Montgomery. The publication has had an adversarial relationship with Arpaio since at least 2004. Its co-founders, Jim Larkin and Mike Lacey, have stated that they launched the newspaper in 1970 “in reaction to the war in Vietnam.”

In October 2007, the Larkin and Lacey were arrested in the middle of the night after publishing Arpaio’s home address and the contents of subpoenas they received on their website. After spending the night in jail, they filed suit against the MCSO.

In an article dated October 18, 2007, Larkin and Lacey stated that their attorneys reviewed grand jury subpoenas described in a subsequent report as “invalid” by Arizona Superior Court Judge Anna Baca. Baca’s order of November 14, 2007 and an AP article dated October 24, 2007 indicated that the subpoenas did not appear to have come from the grand jury. Then-County Attorney Andrew Thomas quickly dropped the charges against Larkin and Lacey and fired the prosecutor who had reportedly issued the subpoenas on his own authority.

Maricopa County, AZ Sheriff
Joseph M. Arpaio is planning on running
for re-election in 2016 for a seventh term
It is unclear whether or not Arpaio was involved in the arrests.

At the time, Larkin and Lacey asked, “Where in America do you arrest journalists for what they write?”

On August 6, 2013, the home of former Vail Daily and then-Washington Times journalist Audrey Hudson was raided by the Maryland State Police, “federal agents” and a member of the U.S. Coast Guard, who “made a pre-dawn raid of her family home Aug. 6 and took her private notes and government documents that she had obtained under the Freedom of Information Act.” The intrusion was made on the pretext of “a warrant to search for unregistered firearms and a ‘potato gun’ suspected of belonging to her husband.”

Hudson had been reporting on the claims made to her by U.S. Air Marshals that the percentage of flights on which they traveled was lower than that which was reported to the public in the wake of the 9/11 attacks.

Lacey and Larkin established a foundation whose website reposts The Phoenix New Times’ work and supports causes to which the two pledged financial support after winning $3.75 million from the lawsuit. The Lacey and Larkin Frontera Fund states on its home page that its founders “have dedicated the settlement money arising out of their arrest by Sheriff Joe Arpaio to fund migrant rights organizations throughout Arizona.”

A $2 million endowment was given to the Walter Cronkite School of Journalism at Arizona State University with the purpose of “training journalism students in the particulars of local Hispanic issues for both print and broadcast coverage.” The fund also supports the Arizona DREAM Act Coalition.

The Phoenix New Times includes opinion and derogatory terms in its articles. Regarding Arpaio’s April 23 testimony, PNT reported that Arpaio “admitted there had been an investigation into Snow’s wife, concerning comments she allegedly made at a restaurant” after Snow handed a copy of the June 4, 2014 article to Arpaio by way of the court clerk.

“In my line of work, it doesn’t get much better than a federal judge’s handing your column to a public official, and getting the accused pol to confirm the column’s facts, one by one, under oath,” wrote Stephen Lemons.

The Post & Email has previously reported that the mainstream media largely mischaracterized the MCSO’s probe involving comments made by Snow’s wife. While both Arpaio and Sheridan testified that neither Snow nor his wife was “investigated,” an Arizona Republic editorial masquerading as journalism misrepresented that “Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio dug himself deeper into a hole on Thursday, admitting that he quietly had the wife of U.S. District Court Judge Murray Snow investigated.”

The Phoenix New Times characterized the inquiry into Snow’s wife’s statements as a “non-investigation investigation.” It also maintains that Arpaio is guilty of “abuse of power,” of which he was exonerated by the U.S. Department of Justice in August 2012.

However, in May 2012, the Department of Justice launched a civil rights lawsuit against Arpaio’s office, claiming that “since approximately 2006, MCSO and Sheriff Arpaio have intentionally and systematically discriminated against Latinos. They have accomplished this by stopping Latinos in their vehicles four to nine times more often than similarly situated non-Latino drivers. In addition, MCSO stops Latinos on the county’s roads without the required legal justification. Also, MCSO detains and searches Latinos on the roads, in their homes, and in their workplaces without legal justification for doing so. Further, MCSO mistreats Latino detainees with limited English proficiency by ignoring important requests if they are not made in English and punishing detainees if they fail to understand orders given in English. Finally, MCSO files baseless administrative actions, civil actions and criminal cases against its perceived critics in an attempt to chill free speech.”

Obama himself has been accused of “chilling free speech.”

This image appeared at whitehouse.gov on April 27, 2011 but
was quickly denounced as a forgery by experts. In September
of that year, the Maricopa County Cold Case Posse commenced a
criminal investigation into the image, confirming
earlier opinions that is is a “computer-generated forgery.”
The DOJ’s lawsuit was filed nine weeks after Arpaio and Mike Zullo, lead investigator of the MCSO’s affiliated Cold Case Posse, gave a formal press conference declaring that Barack Hussein Obama’s long-form birth certificate and Selective Service registration form are “computer-generated forgeries,” a claim that was expounded upon further in a second press conference on July 17 of that year.

As a result of Arpaio’s sanctioning of the probe into Obama’s only proffered documentation, Zullo announced in the fall of 2013 that a second criminal investigation had been launched unrelated to the “birth certificate” probe. The Phoenix New Times has characterized the Cold Case Posse’s investigation into Obama’s documents as “ludicrous,” and the mainstream media has failed to follow up with its own probe.

The Justice Department’s action is separate from the Melendres case, and Arpaio’s office has utilized different defense attorneys for each.

In his April 24, 2015 article, Lemons stated that during his testimony the day prior, Arpaio “admitted” that “he had been using a confidential informant in Seattle, Dennis Montgomery, and paying him from RICO and confidential-informant funds to do an investigation of a vaguely defined conspiracy theory involving the U.S. Department of Justice and various judges, including Snow himself.”

Lemons reported Sheridan as having asserted during his April 24 testimony that the information provided by Montgomery was presented to then-Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne. The exact quote from Sheridan’s testimony is, “We went to the Arizona Attorney General with this information” (p. 143).

On May 22, Arpaio’s defense attorneys filed a motion in which they wrote, “Defendant Arpaio and Chief Deputy Gerard Sheridan respectfully request the transfer of this case to a different judge, immediately, as provided by 28 U.S. Code § 144, and the disqualification or recusal of Judge Snow in further related proceedings concerning Defendant Arpaio and Chief Deputy Gerard Sheridan.”

On June 4 of last year, the PNT described the confidential informant hired by the MCSO, Dennis Montgomery, as a “scammer,” relying on a widely-disseminated December 22, 2009 Playboy article by Aram Roston which may be available only by subscription. [Editor’s Note: Embedded links in various articles based on Playboy’s appearing to reference the specific article consistently lead to Playboy’s home page. The Post & Email was, however, able to find the article linked from seattleweekly.com.]

Roston wrote that on December 21, 2003, law enforcement was deployed heavily in New York City in preparation for what could be a “spectacular attack,” according to The New York Times, following heightened terror-attack alerts issued by the Department of Homeland Security. Roston further reported:

But there were no real intercepts, no new informants, no increase in chatter. And the suspicious package turned out to contain a stuffed snowman. This was, instead, the beginning of a bizarre scam. Behind that terror alert, and a string of contracts and intrigue that continues to this date, there is one unlikely character.
The man’s name is Dennis Montgomery, a self-proclaimed scientist who said he could predict terrorist attacks. Operating with a small software development company, he apparently convinced the Bush White House, the CIA, the Air Force and other agencies that Al Jazeera—the Qatari-owned TV network—was unwittingly transmitting target data to Al Qaeda sleepers.

Roston also reported that Montgomery, whose business partner was Warren Trepp of eTreppid, was given a “top-secret clearance from the Defense Industrial Security Clearance Office” in 2004. After Trepp and Montgomery parted ways in early 2006, each filed a lawsuit against the other. According to Roston:

Trepp obviously believed Montgomery’s technology was real because he pursued the lawsuit with a vengeance. Montgomery, on the other hand, accused Trepp of trying to steal his inventions. Montgomery claimed he needed to bring the U.S. intelligence establishment into the case. He went so far as to name the Department of Defense as a defendant.
Eventually Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte weighed in. What secrets—what embarrassments—could be exposed if Montgomery and Trepp were to depose intelligence and military officials? Negroponte issued a declaration that warned of “serious, and in some cases exceptionally grave, damage to the national security of the United States.” He invoked the state secrets privilege. The judge in the case issued a protective order; the secrets of eTreppid’s government business would remain untold.

The transcript of a December 19, 2009 interview Roston conducted with NPR titled “The Man Who Conned the Pentagon” is still available.

Montgomery has sued New York Times journalist and author James Risen over several chapters in his book, “Pay Any Price: Greed, Power and Endless War” published in October of last year, which allege that Montgomery defrauded the federal government with his proffered docoding technologies. The lawsuit states that “Plaintiff Montgomery is illegally used as a whipping boy by Defendants in this regard to sensationalize and sell more books for a great profit.”

A New York Times review of the book by Thomas E. Ricks stated:

Dennis Montgomery was just another overweight gambler in the casinos of Reno, Nev., until he claimed to have developed a technology that could decode secret messages embedded in the videotapes of Osama bin Laden that were broadcast on the Al Jazeera news network. On the basis of that claim, he won millions of dollars in government contracts. Mr. Risen says that around Christmas of 2003, Mr. Montgomery influenced the Bush administration to seriously consider shooting down civilian airliners. After French government investigators concluded that Mr. Montgomery’s operation was a hoax, Mr. Risen reports, the C.I.A. quietly dropped him. Mr. Montgomery then moved on to the United States Special Operations Command, which paid his company $9.6 million for a facial recognition technology that supposedly could identify terrorists observed by cameras attached to drones. Mr. Montgomery’s company eventually collapsed in a welter of debts and legal claims.

Risen, who reported on “the Bush administration’s illegal warrantless wiretapping,” was himself a target of the U.S. Department of Justice. In an August 2014 editorial published at The New York Times, columnist Maureen Dowd wrote:

The Justice Department is trying to scuttle the reporters’ privilege — ignoring the chilling effect that is having on truth emerging in a jittery post-9/11 world prone to egregious government excesses.
Attorney General Eric Holder wants to force Risen to testify and reveal the identity of his confidential source on a story he had in his 2006 book concerning a bungled C.I.A. operation during the Clinton administration in which agents might have inadvertently helped Iran develop its nuclear weapon program. The tale made the C.I.A. look silly, which may have been more of a sore point than a threat to national security.

Former Attorney General Eric Holder collected
journalists’ phone records and named Fox News
reporter James Rosen as an “unindicted co-conspirator”
in a case brought against a State Department employee
for leaking classified information. Holder
says he now regrets his action against Rosen.
A young reporter writing on Risen’s plight decried the Obama regime’s “attempting to make journalism illegal.” Last summer, The Columbia Journalism Review reported:

Ten months after the Committee to Protect Journalists issued its scathing report “The Obama Administration and the Press,” journalists and potential whistleblowers continue to face unprecedented surveillance and legal jeopardy. The report, authored by Leonard Downie Jr., former executive editor of The Washington Post, remains grimly up to date as it describes “the fearful atmosphere surrounding contacts between American journalists and government sources.

The US Department of Justice seems determined to intensify that fearful atmosphere—in part by threatening to jail New York Times reporter James Risen, who refuses to name any source for the disclosure in his 2006 book State of War that the CIA bungled a dumb and dangerous operation with nuclear weapons blueprints in Iran.

Risen’s Wikipedia page reports that he is himself a victim of CIA surveillance. In January, The New York Times reported that Risen’s subpoena to testify at the trial of a former CIA agent had been quashed. Before Attorney General Eric Holder left office, he reportedly recommended “revisions to Justice Department’s guidelines that offer journalists more protections when prosecutors want to review their phone records, emails or notes.”

An article published on June 3 in The Phoenix New Times claimed that Montgomery’s work “was an attempt to influence the court, to compromise it, to conflict it,” which is contradicted by Sheridan and Arpaio’s testimony referring to alleged breaches of Maricopa County residents’ bank accounts and the email accounts of federal judges, to include Snow.

18 USC § 4 states:

Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

While being characterized by the PNT as “a criminal enterprise,” it took action to report evidence of illegal activity to the authorities. Sheridan testified that in addition to Horne, the information from Montgomery had been presented to “a member of the FISA court in Washington, D.C.” who “confirmed that these were typical wiretap numbers.” Sheridan included in his testiomony that “the sheriff and I were concerned about the CIA wiretapping our phones.”

According to Roston, Montgomery worked with the CIA, which forwarded the information Montgomery provided to the George W. Bush White House.

On March 20, 2007, a Gannett newspaper reported, in part:

A federal judge ruled Monday that the FBI raid of a former eTreppid software developer’s home in search of valuable source codes was unconstitutional and that the judge who granted the search warrant was “misled” by an agent, allowing the FBI to become involved in a case that should remain in civil court.
The codes, critical for software used by the U.S. military in the war on terror, are worth millions and are at the heart of a battle between developer Dennis Montgomery, eTreppid owner Warren Trepp and his friendship with Gov. Jim Gibbons…
U.S. District Judge Philip Pro’s order affirmed U.S. Magistrate Valerie Cooke’s November ruling that Reno FBI special agent Michael West violated Montgomery’s constitutional rights by giving the court inaccurate information to obtain a warrant to search his house in March 2006.
Pro told the U.S. attorney’s staff to return the hard drives taken in the March 1, 2006, raid at Montgomery’s south Reno home…
When Montgomery refused to turn over the source codes to eTreppid, Flynn said in court documents that Gibbons and Trepp directed FBI officials in Reno to raid Montgomery’s home to get them back…

The MCSO has not revealed further details as to the exact focus of Montgomery’s work on its behalf. On April 23, Snow suggested that activity by “the DOJ” was part of Montgomery’s probe, while Arpaio rejoined that information Montgomery provided “seemed to indicate that someone was penetrating in the e-mails of our local attorneys and others, judges, that type of thing, which we can’t prove.”

In questioning Sheridan, Snow continued to invoke the U.S. Department of Justice (page 185 of transcript):

You know, with all due respect, we did hear the sheriff say yesterday that he — some pretty critical comments about the Department of Justice. Do you remember those?
Maybe I misremember. I’ll scratch that.
Let me ask you this: If in fact the sheriff thought there might have been some improper collusion between me and the Department of Justice, can you blame him if he wanted to investigate that further?

Has Judge G. Murray Snow made assumptions
about the Montgomery/MCSO investigation?
Neither Arpaio nor Sheridan implicated the Department of Justice in his testimony in regard to any “collusion.” On April 23, Snow and Arpaio exchanged the following (pp. 141-143):

Q. Who else was named by Mr. Montgomery as being targets of this DOJ investigation?
A. I believe the — our local law firm, the attorneys working for us on the Department of Justice lawsuit.
Q. Who else?
A. You mean other judges around — I don’t remember.
Q. Anybody that Mr. Montgomery said that — that the DOJ was bugging their phones, or otherwise intruding into their private communications.
A. Well, I know I was.
Q. You were one. Your law firm was one.
A. Jerry Sheridan, I believe. And there’s other local officials.
Q. And I was?
A. You — yes.
Q. Did you keep any of the materials that Mr. Montgomery has provided you?
A. I don’t have them.
Q. Who does?
A. I believe Zullo does.
Q. And is he subject to your control –
A. Yes.
Q. — as a member of your posse?
A. Yes.
Q. I’m going to direct you that you tell Mr. Zullo that he keep all those documents. All right?
A. He what?
Q. He keep and maintain all of those documents.
A. Yes.
Q. I’m going to direct you that nothing pertaining to any of this investigation be destroyed, including confidential informant numbers. Do you understand that direction?
A. Yes.
Q. Who else was aware of these investigations within the MCSO?
A. I’m not sure. Because of the sensitivity, we were trying to keep it quiet.
Q. Now, I think in addition to the investigation that may have involved me and my phone or any contact or tapping by the Department of Justice, you indicated that there were investigations made into members of my family. Did you indicate that?
A. That had nothing to do with Montgomery.
Q. What did it have to do with?
A. I believe there was a, as I say, e-mail that came to me.
Q. And do you still have that e-mail?
A. We may have it, yes.
Q. I’m going to direct you to keep that e-mail. What did the e-mail say, to the best of your recollection?

Snow then ordered that all of the materials provided by Montgomery be given to the monitor, Robert Warshaw, whose several companies garner millions from “policing” police departments, predominantly in larger cities such as Oakland, CA; Detroit, MI; and Niagara Falls, NY.

The media has not raised the issue of whether or not the Fourth Amendment rights of account-holders, judges, the MCSO and their attorneys, whose bank accounts, phone lines and email accounts were reportedly breached by a government entity, were violated. – © 2015, The Post & Email. All rights reserved. Source link.

Read more at http://www.birtherreport.com/2015/06/must-read-report-have-judge-media.html#EMOyLZ2hakj3GZcz.99

Courtesy Of Thepostemail.com

The Betrayal Papers

Betrayal Papers: Part I – Under Obama The US Captured by the Muslim Brotherhood

Betrayal Papers: Part II – In Plain Sight – A National Security “Smoking Gun”

Betrayal Papers: Part III – Obama’s Scandals and Assaults on Freedoms Explained

Betrayal Papers: Part IV – A New Genocide

Betrayal Papers: Part V – Who is Barack Hussein Obama?

Betrayal Papers: Part VI – The Chicago Connection

Malik Obama Interviewed by Director Joel Gilbert

Malik Obama Interviewed by Director Joel Gilbert (Dreams from My Real Father)

  In this “tell all” interview with Director Joel Gilbert, Malik Obama, the “half-brother” of President Obama, reveals his pain and confusion over Barack’s shunning of his Kenyan family after becoming President. Malik provides a stunning take on the film, Dreams from My Real Father, stating “Frank Marshall Davis and Barack look alike” and adds that Barack does not look like his father. Malik says he would like a DNA test so the truth can come come out. Malik also states that Barack is “deceptive” and “has not been an honest man.” In the interview, Malik displays an early manuscript he helped edit of Barack’s book Dreams from My Father with a different title. Malik Obama, also known as Abon’go (Roy) Obama, was born in 1958. He is the first child from the marriage of Barack Hussein Obama and Kezia Obama. Malik and Barack first met in 1985 when Barack flew from Chicago to Washington DC to visit Malik. Malik later hosted Barack in Kenya and they served as the best men at each other’s weddings. Barack wrote of his lifelong relationship with Malik (Roy) in Dreams from My Father.

Joel Gilbert Filmmaker Discuss His Recent Interview With Malik Obama on WOBC’s BlogTalkRadio Program.
BlogTalkRadioPlay

You be the Judge, Who looks like Obama’s Father?obamasdaddy

To All Americans: Obama Has Phony Identity Papers; Obama 100% Certifiable Fraud

                       
 
                        AN OPEN LETTER TO ALL AMERICANS –
                    OPEN YOUR EYES, USE YOUR COMMON SENSE, 
              EXAMINE THE FACTS, AND APPLY SOME INTELLECTUAL HONESTY
                                          By Anonymous

Somehow, some way, I would hope that this article would be disseminated throughout the land and read by allAmericans. No doubt read enthusiastically by those patriots who fully understand the frightful course our country is taking, this essay will nevertheless be ignored by the vast majority of citizens who blissfully go about their lives unaware that their country has been hijacked and that their freedom and liberties are being stolen by the very people that have been entrusted to preserve and protect them. Many of these unenlightened can be characterized quite simply as stupid and ignorant; constituting the vast majority of the Democratic/Socialist/Communist Party’s voting base here in America. They are the clueless who go to the polls and negate the votes cast by the informed voter. They are the brain-washed or brain-dead; the “me first” voters.

Then there are the haters; those who will simply deride and demean this message. These are the spiteful, malevolent Marxist/Communists types, the “give me more” entitlement voters, the social justice aficionados, the intolerant anti-life, anti  Christian crowd, the self-professed victims, the global warming fanatics and the myriad of progressive social engineering freaks and miscreants who are waging a vicious and un-relenting war against traditional American Christian and family values . Theirs  is a nasty “win at all costs” campaign driven by intolerance and hate, deceit, lies, insults and intimidation.

This despicable and ungrateful lot is readily discerned. They are all around you. Simply put they are the Obama androids. They are the herd that refuses to look at the truth, refuses to be intellectually honest, ignores common sense and will never allow facts to illuminate or fertilize their feeble minds lest it interfere or defeat their “at all costs” agenda. These are the true haters of America; they despise the Constitution and the foundational principles upon which this country was founded and they despise you  and any other person who dares get in their way. They are the Obots and they are led by America’s number one enemy: Barack Hussein Obama, purported 44th president of the United States and the principle conspirator and perpetrator of the greatest crime ever committed against theAmerican people.

In the media some of the more notable bootlickers are Chris Mathews, Eugene Robinson, David Corn, Juan Williams, Andrea Mitchell, Donna Brazile, Chris Hayes, Candy Crowley, Savannah Guthrie, George Stephanopoulos, Barbara Walters, Ed Schultz, Keith Olbermann , Anderson Cooper, Al Sharpton, Lawrence O’Donnell , Arianna Huffington, Oprah Winfrey and Melissa Harris Perry; for that matter  anyone and everyone at MSNBC. Actually there are literally hundreds if not thousands of these media frauds. They lack a personal sense of ethics and moral responsibility. They are incapable of maintaining any allegiance and loyalty to the citizens; they are incapable of accuracy and truthfulness. They are hypocrites of the highest order, blinded by skin color and their socialist/new world order agenda; they are undoubtedly the biggest reason why the truth about Obama’s identity has not been widely reported  in the mainstream media. There are others who are culpable in this massive cover-up but the mainstream media outlets and these so called journalists have done a masterful job of hiding the truth from the American masses. Shame on them. And then there are the Mark Levin and Bill O’Reilly types who posture and pontificate as they too in their own way provide cover for the illegitimate Obama.

More on the media in a following essay.

The sad reality is that Mr. Obama is a 100% certifiable fraud. He is not who he says he is and he is undoubtedly not constitutionally qualified to be POTUS. The hard truth is that he has usurped the presidency and created a national security crisis of unfathomable proportions. Obama’s crimes and overt anti-American policies threaten America’s very existence and increasingly embolden our enemies and endanger the safety and welfare of all her citizens.

Lt. Cdr Walter Fitzpatrick eloquently and accurately characterized Obama’s ascension to power in a 2009 complaintconveniently ignored by the courts and by Obama himself:

“you [Mr. Obama] have broken in and entered the White House by force of contrivance, concealment, conceit, dissembling, and deceit. Posing as an imposter president and commander in chief, you have stripped civilian  command and control over the military establishment. Known military criminal actors – command racketeers – are now free in the exercise of military government intent upon destruction of America’s constitutional government.”

Fitzpatrick continued: We come now to this reckoning. I accuse you [Obama] and your military-political criminal assistants of TREASON. I name you and your military criminal associates as traitors. Your criminal ascension manifests a clear and present danger. You fundamentally changed our form of government. The Constitution no longer works.

But what is even more dismaying is the fact that everyone in Congress; every single congressperson and senator knows full well that Obama is a phony. I know that because the concerned, law-abiding, freedom-loving Americancitizens have actually provided irrefutable evidence of Obama identity fraud and his violations of the law to their so-called representatives time and time again; via letters, faxes and town-hall confrontations. Yes, every member of Congress has been put on notice by their constituents and yet these so-called “servants of the people” have done nothing! They refuse to address the issue. They refuse to uphold their sworn duty to uphold the Constitution. In fact they have tried to deflect or marginalize the issue with disinformation and outright lies; some have literally hid and run from constituents and many have actually scoffed and insulted citizens when confronted face to face with the people they are supposed to be working for. The audacity of these politicians is breathtaking. These incidents are frequent and well documented. These politicians are a disgrace and they are not fit to serve the American people.

Now for those who do not know the Obama fraud issue thoroughly and sadly there are many millions who do not (thanks to the lap dog media), let’s apply some common sense, some intellectual honesty and some hard facts as we lay out the truth. Please note that everything stated here can be substantiated by you the reader. If you should have any doubts, I implore you to fact check and  research yourself. The information is out there; do not take my word. Trust but verify.

The indisputable, irrefutable fact is that the putative president of the United States, the man known as Barack Hussein Obama, is a FRAUD. He is not who he says is and his agenda is patently un-American, anti-American, anti-Christian, anti-life, divisive, dishonest and intended to do destroy the founding principles that are the underpinning of a free and prosperous society. If you disagree, then you have not been paying attention. It’s going on every day; right in front of your very nose. For those who actually have paid attention it is both obvious and horrifying. Meantime the Congress and the media ignore as  our country is being systematically destroyed.

OBAMA IDENTITY FRAUD – THE THREE “BIGGIES” ANYONE SHOULD BE ABLE TO UNDERSTAND

Simply put, there is a trinity of obvious identity crimes that provide the basic foundation and clearest understanding of Barack Hussein Obama’s serial identity fraud and phony life narrative:

  1.  Obama’s birth “certificates” both short form and the long form released by Obama on April 27, 2011 and currently posted on whitehouse.gov are obvious and easily provable forgeries;
  2.  Obama’s purported selective service registration card (a requirement for Obama’s employment in the federal government) is an obvious and easily provable forgery, manufactured in 2008;
  3. . Obama’s SSN used on his recent tax returns does not belong to him. It was issued to a man born in 1890. Furthermore there are dozens of other SSN numbers associated with his name.

STOP right there. Doesn’t this give you pause to wonder why the POTUS has completely bogus identity documents? AKA Obama has a forged birth certificate and forged selective service registration card AND is using the SSN of someone else? This is criminal. The “common citizen” would be prosecuted and punished. Is it not reasonable and fair for people to ask why? How can this be? Is an investigation not warranted? Of course it is. It’s common sense. The Obots however are only blinded by skin color and ideology. Common sense and facts are something they cannot and will not address.

I’ll say it again. Obama has phony identity papers. Plain, pure and simple. If you’re honest with yourself, discerning and open minded you will come to the same conclusion. If you do not wish to stipulate to the truth of these contentions, I would urge you to get off your duff and do the research yourself. Prove the Birthers wrong . However, I warn you will be wasting your time. It cannot be done. And it is for that very simple reason that this issue continues to fester and will not go away.

Americans who care about the Constitution, the rule of law, fair elections, freedom and liberty, have seen the facts, know the truth and will not cower and slink away and watch America be destroyed by this illegitimate Communist cabal.

Because common sense and facts dictate it, more and more people are learning the truth about the contemptible fraud in the White House and his evil anti-American policies. As Samuel Adams said: It does not take a majority to prevail…but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.

Freedom-loving Americans who recognize what is at stake, who understand the truth and recognize that our government is one built now on lies and corruption, have lit the brushfire. Those flames of truth and freedom are now spreading rapidly. It is time to join the fight and continue to fan those flames. We cannot afford to allow Obama tyranny to quench the fires of freedom. The future of your children and grandchildren and in fact America’s very survival is at stake.

References:

1. www.birtherreport.com Daily news and updates re: Obama usurpation of the presidency and ongoing crimes against America.
2. MCSO Cold Case Posse Criminal Enforcement Special Services
www.mcsoccp.org/joomla www.mcsoccp.org/joomla/index.php?start=3
3. Mario Apuzzo, Esq., “Barack Obama: The De Facto President of the United States-Maybe a Born Citizen But Not a “Natural born Citizen,” puzo1.blogspot.com/2013… (1/21/2013)
4. Dr. Herb Titus, Esq., constitutional law professor, former dean of the Regent University
School of Law, “Born in HI Does Not Make Obama Natural Born Citizen,” http://youtu.be/esiZZ-1R7e8(5/9/2011)
5. Leo Donofrio, Esq., “Why Obama is ineligible – regardless of his birthplace,”http://www.wnd.com/2010/04/134881 … (4/01/2010)
6. Sheriff Arpaio, “Full Press Conference Sheriff Joe Arpaio Barack Obama Birth
Certificate,” http://youtu.be/alVzyfptF80 (July 17, 2012)

Obots Are Trained Agents Who Lie On Internet.

Following the latest “Mike volin radio show” with Geir Smith and Att. Philip Berg one has to Shine some light upon The thug-tactics used by the Shills who are paid posters So As to infest Internet.

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/wheresobamasbirthcertificate/2014/02/25/geir-smith-from-before-its-news-and-phillip-j-berg-guests

BUT WE KNOW WHO THEY ARE AND WHAT THEY DO AS THIS ARTICLE SHOWS:

———————

HOW COVERT AGENTS INFILTRATE THE INTERNET TO MANIPULATE, DECEIVE, AND DESTROY REPUTATIONS

By 

Featured photo - How Covert Agents Infiltrate the Internet to Manipulate, Deceive, and Destroy Reputations

A page from a GCHQ top secret document prepared by its secretive JTRIG unit

One of the many pressing stories that remains to be told from the Snowden archive is how western intelligence agencies are attempting to manipulate and control online discourse with extreme tactics of deception and reputation-destruction. It’s time to tell a chunk of that story, complete with the relevant documents.

Over the last several weeks, I worked with NBC News to publish a series of articles about “dirty trick” tactics used by GCHQ’s previously secret unit, JTRIG (Joint Threat Research Intelligence Group). These were based on four classified GCHQ documents presented to the NSA and the other three partners in the English-speaking “Five Eyes” alliance. Today, we at the Intercept are publishing another new JTRIG document, in full, entitled “The Art of Deception: Training for Online Covert Operations.”

By publishing these stories one by one, our NBC reporting highlighted some of the key, discrete revelations: the monitoring of YouTube and Blogger, the targeting of Anonymous with the very same DDoS attacks they accuse “hacktivists” of using, the use of “honey traps” (luring people into compromising situations using sex) and destructive viruses. But, here, I want to focus and elaborate on the overarching point revealed by all of these documents: namely, that these agencies are attempting to control, infiltrate, manipulate, and warp online discourse, and in doing so, are compromising the integrity of the internet itself.

Among the core self-identified purposes of JTRIG are two tactics: (1) to inject all sorts of false material onto the internet in order to destroy the reputation of its targets; and (2) to use social sciences and other techniques to manipulate online discourse and activism to generate outcomes it considers desirable. To see how extremist these programs are, just consider the tactics they boast of using to achieve those ends: “false flag operations” (posting material to the internet and falsely attributing it to someone else), fake victim blog posts (pretending to be a victim of the individual whose reputation they want to destroy), and posting “negative information” on various forums. Here is one illustrative list of tactics from the latest GCHQ document we’re publishing today:

 

 

Other tactics aimed at individuals are listed here, under the revealing title “discredit a target”:

 

 

Then there are the tactics used to destroy companies the agency targets:

 

 

GCHQ describes the purpose of JTRIG in starkly clear terms: “using online techniques to make something happen in the real or cyber world,” including “information ops (influence or disruption).”

 

Critically, the “targets” for this deceit and reputation-destruction extend far beyond the customary roster of normal spycraft: hostile nations and their leaders, military agencies, and intelligence services. In fact, the discussion of many of these techniques occurs in the context of using them in lieu of “traditional law enforcement” against people suspected (but not charged or convicted) of ordinary crimes or, more broadly still, “hacktivism”, meaning those who use online protest activity for political ends.

The title page of one of these documents reflects the agency’s own awareness that it is “pushing the boundaries” by using “cyber offensive” techniques against people who have nothing to do with terrorism or national security threats, and indeed, centrally involves law enforcement agents who investigate ordinary crimes:

 

 

No matter your views on Anonymous, “hacktivists” or garden-variety criminals, it is not difficult to see how dangerous it is to have secret government agencies being able to target any individuals they want – who have never been charged with, let alone convicted of, any crimes – with these sorts of online, deception-based tactics of reputation destruction and disruption. There is a strong argument to make, as Jay Leiderman demonstrated in the Guardianin the context of the Paypal 14 hacktivist persecution, that the “denial of service” tactics used by hacktivists result in (at most) trivial damage (far less than the cyber-warfare tactics favored by the US and UK) and are far more akin to the type of political protest protected by the First Amendment.

The broader point is that, far beyond hacktivists, these surveillance agencies have vested themselves with the power to deliberately ruin people’s reputations and disrupt their online political activity even though they’ve been charged with no crimes, and even though their actions have no conceivable connection to terrorism or even national security threats. As Anonymous expert Gabriella Coleman of McGill University told me, “targeting Anonymous and hacktivists amounts to targeting citizens for expressing their political beliefs, resulting in the stifling of legitimate dissent.” Pointing to this study she published, Professor Coleman vehemently contested the assertion that “there is anything terrorist/violent in their actions.”

Government plans to monitor and influence internet communications, and covertly infiltrate online communities in order to sow dissension and disseminate false information, have long been the source of speculation. Harvard Law Professor Cass Sunstein, a close Obama adviser and the White House’s former head of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, wrote a controversial paper in 2008 proposing that the US government employ teams of covert agents and pseudo-”independent” advocates to “cognitively infiltrate” online groups and websites, as well as other activist groups.

Sunstein also proposed sending covert agents into “chat rooms, online social networks, or even real-space groups” which spread what he views as false and damaging “conspiracy theories” about the government. Ironically, the very same Sunstein was recently named by Obama to serve as a member of the NSA review panel created by the White House, one that – while disputing key NSA claims – proceeded to propose many cosmetic reforms to the agency’s powers (most of which were ignored by the President who appointed them).

But these GCHQ documents are the first to prove that a major western government is using some of the most controversial techniques to disseminate deception online and harm the reputations of targets. Under the tactics they use, the state is deliberately spreading lies on the internet about whichever individuals it targets, including the use of what GCHQ itself calls “false flag operations” and emails to people’s families and friends. Who would possibly trust a government to exercise these powers at all, let alone do so in secret, with virtually no oversight, and outside of any cognizable legal framework?

Then there is the use of psychology and other social sciences to not only understand, but shape and control, how online activism and discourse unfolds. Today’s newly published document touts the work of GCHQ’s “Human Science Operations Cell,” devoted to “online human intelligence” and “strategic influence and disruption”:

 

 

 

 

Under the title “Online Covert Action”, the document details a variety of means to engage in “influence and info ops” as well as “disruption and computer net attack,” while dissecting how human beings can be manipulated using “leaders,” “trust,” “obedience” and “compliance”:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The documents lay out theories of how humans interact with one another, particularly online, and then attempt to identify ways to influence the outcomes – or “game” it:

 

 

 

 

 

 

We submitted numerous questions to GCHQ, including: (1) Does GCHQ in fact engage in “false flag operations” where material is posted to the Internet and falsely attributed to someone else?; (2) Does GCHQ engage in efforts to influence or manipulate political discourse online?; and (3) Does GCHQ’s mandate include targeting common criminals (such as boiler room operators), or only foreign threats?

As usual, they ignored those questions and opted instead to send their vague and nonresponsive boilerplate: “It is a longstanding policy that we do not comment on intelligence matters. Furthermore, all of GCHQ’s work is carried out in accordance with a strict legal and policy framework which ensures that our activities are authorised, necessary and proportionate, and that there is rigorous oversight, including from the Secretary of State, the Interception and Intelligence Services Commissioners and the Parliamentary Intelligence and Security Committee. All our operational processes rigorously support this position.”

These agencies’ refusal to “comment on intelligence matters” – meaning: talk at all about anything and everything they do – is precisely why whistleblowing is so urgent, the journalism that supports it so clearly in the public interest, and the increasingly unhinged attacks by these agencies so easy to understand. Claims that government agencies are infiltrating online communities and engaging in “false flag operations” to discredit targets are often dismissed as conspiracy theories, but these documents leave no doubt they are doing precisely that.

Whatever else is true, no government should be able to engage in these tactics: what justification is there for having government agencies target people – who have been charged with no crime – for reputation-destruction, infiltrate online political communities, and develop techniques for manipulating online discourse? But to allow those actions with no public knowledge or accountability is particularly unjustifiable.

https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/02/24/jtrig-manipulation/

Let’s Trust Things Will Work Out For Us The Birthers. Obama’s fans have crumbled in.

By Geir Smith from beforeitsnews.

We’re all anticipating the release of Joe Arpaio’s information about the Obama birth certificate in March. Everybody is sure the information will be out.

But the information won’t be released until the moment is right and the full information has been gathered. Information is streaming in daily, Zullo said in a very recent conversation.

We’re counting the days now. But we’re sure it’ll come out. It’s infallible.

Obama’s fate is sealed because his voters are turning massively against him. People are suffering in their pocketbooks. Obamacare is bankrupting the USA and the debt has been tripled under Obama, more than the total of all the presidents before him.

Obama’s support is finished, it’s crumbled away.

71% Of Obama Voters “Regret” His Re-Election.

Over 7 in 10 Obama voters, and 55% of Democrats, regret voting for President Obama’s reelection in 2012, according to a new Economist/YouGov.com poll. As The Washington Examiner reports, the poll was conducted to test the media hype about a comeback by 2012 Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney. While the poll found voters still uninspired by Romney, they are also deeply dissatisfied with Obama (though given the choice of Obama versus Romney, Obama supporters said they would stick with their guy, 79% to 10% for Romney) giving Obama, as The Examiner notesvery early lame duck status before the midterm elections.

Via The Washington Examiner,

The poll asked those who voted for Obama’s reelection a simple question: “Do you regret voting for Barack Obama?”

Overall, 71 percent said yes, 26 percent no.

80 percent of whites said yes, 61 percent of blacks said no and 100 percent of Hispanics said yes.

 

84 percent of women said yes, and just 61 percent of men agreed.

55 percent of Democrats said yes, as did 71 percent of independents.

 

Still, given the choice of Obama versus Romney, Obama supporters said they would stick with their guy, 79 percent to 10 percent for Romney.

But his voters seem to have moved on and are ready for the next election, giving Obama very early lame duck status before the midterm elections.

As for Romney, his favorable ratings have dropped, but he would edge Obama by about three million votes, probably because Americans are not wowed by Obama’s second term performance, not because they like Romney more.

 

———–

 

 

From: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-02-18/71-obama-voters-regret-his-re-election

Joe Arpaio’s press conference comes at a time when Americans are angry and “pissed” at the POTUS. Let’s gather and be strong because things are bad for Obama. The worse it is for him the better it is for us.

Be strong and win.

securedownload

RC Radio Attacks King Of Shambhala – Audio

By Geir Smith from beforeItsnews.

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/rcr/2014/02/19/rc-radio–02-18-2014-mitch-from-arizonaspolitics-blog

The part about me starts at 106:40….

RC Radio – 02-18-2014 Mitch from ArizonasPolitics Blog

Obot RC attacks me, King of Shambhala and announces my radio show with Mike Volin next Monday or Tuesday. He reiterates the smear that I claim to be the Second Coming of Jesus. If they’d just listen to what I say instead of listening to what they say themselves. They’re like children who speak to imaginary friends. They just listen to themselves talking. Liberals are not intelligent and very ugly people.
Obots are idiotic and ugly people.
The Obots at the radio show shy away from talking about me. They’ve been warned to avoid naming my name.
securedownload

When did the Birthers First Start Up?

By Geir Smith from beforeitsnews.com

When did you get onboard the birther battle? When did the lights go out for you?

Att. Philip J. Berg brought the first eligibility lawsuit against Obama already back in August 2008, before the election.

I was battling against Obama back in early 2008 when he drew ahead of Hillary. The reason? Because he registered at a school in Indonesia and stated his religion as Muslim. Knowing how horrendous and inhuman a faith Islam is, I didn’t want a Muslim in the White House.

My strategy for Internet posting was to search out the most well-travelled forum so as to get most exposure possible for what I had to say.

So, what I found to be most viewed on all Internet, was a video by Molotov Mitchell featuring Att. Philip Berg (40 000 comments to this day and 4 million views!!!!!)

Obama Citizenship: I Invented The Internet (Ep. 6: October Surprise)

I had been battling on Internet since February 2008, but Berg had filed a lawsuit in August and the video had come online in October.

That was the start of my “birther” life which has lasted till today. I commented that video through till election in Nov. and beyond that too.

Since then the birthers have come into action powerfully and new actors have entered the scene.

But it’s interesting to know that Berg was the first practically and that he was actually and insider of the Democratic Party and thus on the same side as Obama politically. Later the birthers have become a predominantly Republican and Tea Party hunting-ground.

Great News: I’ve gotten in contact with Philip Berg and he’s agreed to publish an update. It’ll be included here shortly or added to another article.

Geir Smith….

securedownload

Mike Zullo traces Obots To White House and they all disappear overnight.

by Geir Smith from beforeitsnews.com

Obama’s Obots have disappeared overnight. Where are they?

On Carl Gallup’s Freedom Friday radio show, Mike Zullo said they’ve traced the IP address of “RC” to DOD’s DARPA disinformation department.

The Obots have gone eerily silent ever since. Why?

Mike Zullo’s intent in revealing that information was not to silence the Obots but to tell the public that a concrete step had been made in the investigation and even more than that.

He said that a second criminal investigation surrounding Obama’s birth certificate has been started. That’s an explosive, hair-raising piece of news.

Maybe it was that, a concrete step to track the IP addresses of Obots and that had led them to the Army and DOD, which had set them fleeing for the exits.

I’ve met up with the same thing in my writing on Internet. I’m a long-time reporter at BeforeItsNews under the aliases of “Geir Smith” and now “King of Shambhala”. I’ve been a target for Obots since Day One, because I’m convinced Obama’s a great evil hiding under a sheep’s clothing. I think Obama’s got some horrid reality brewing which he wants to avoid us discovering.

Obots have trolled me since the beginning because I say things like that a “The Guardian” survey showed that one in eight think Obama’s the Antichrist and that 666 was drawn in Illinois’ Lottery, in Obama’s hometown in Chicago, on the day after his election.

Obots have been determined to troll me to stop me from speaking out. But recently Mike Volin of wheresobamasbirthcertificate.com booked me for a radio show and immediately when I announced it, I also saw the Obots go strangely silent.

They’re like night creatures. They fly for safety as soon as the light of day breaks. Likewise, the Obots flee in panic when the heavy hand of justice rams them.

Joe Arpaio is releasing all his investigation’s results in less than a month, during the month of March. The heavy hand of the law is clamping down on them and they just have a few days left till the curtain comes down for them.

The rats are scuttling for the exits. Or are they regrouping for a last stand?

The problem is that Mike Zullo’s got “proof, proof, proof” as he said on the radio show. Joe Arpaio’s got “stuff” on DOD and Obama.

securedownload