Conversly, it would probably be prudent to refrain from making claims of knowledge of a felony if you have no intention of reporting it. The felony I refer to is a naturalized citizen's document fraud, among other crimes. (In other words, if you have seen a Certificate of Naturalization then what's that thing on the WH website? A fraud!)
You may wish to contact Mike Zullo of the Cold Case Posse and provide him with your information, perhaps as a confidential informant. I'm sure he can be reached via the sheriff's office MCSO.ORG. If readers have Zullo's direct contact info, please share.
If you have already reported I congratulate you! I sincerly hope you can tell us that you have.
If you have not and are concerned about a liability due to how you came view the Certificate - whether it was inadvertently viewed in the course of legitimate business, by an abuse of authority, by engaging in an activity in violation of law, or by some other means - and wish to have your identity protected, there are state and federal laws that protect confidential informants. It probably would be prudent to consult with legal counsel prior to agreeing to perform any activities as a confidential informant.
Or admit that your claim has been a fib.
Or continue to post unsubstaintiated claims and suffer diminished credibility.
The decision is yours.
However, if your claim is true it is of enormous importance. It's importance can not be overstated.
And by the way there is nothing threatening in anything I have posted nor is there any urging to criminal acts - so don't come back with that nonsense. To the contrary: I implore you to fulfill your duty and abide by law and report your information. In my opinion, to have the claimed information and to do nothing is accessory.
Do you really think the person(s) installing an ineligible person are going to let themselves be caught. What you claim is HUGE. Don't sit on it!!! For your own sake if not for country.
You read it on a public message board. It’s reported. My website, http://svenmagnussen.blogspot.com has received thousands of views. I’m provided cross-linking information in my website stats and see information from my website cross-posted on websites from a variety of sources.
How could you possibly believe the information has not been reported? Sheriff Arpaio and Lt. Zullo are singularly focused on Obama’s original long form birth certificate. I have repeatedly informed anyone willing to listen the original long form birth certificate was sealed and archived after the Soetoro adoption was finalized in Hawaii.
Governor Abercrombie (D-HI) has confirmed, after Tim Adams came forward and announced Obama’s original BC was not available for inspection to those who have authority to inspect it, the original was sealed and archived. This is important because a sealed document cannot be used in any Court or administrative hearing for any purpose. Yet, Arpaio and Zullo remained singularly focused on a document that cannot be presented or used in any Court or adminstrative hearing.
People who beleive Obama is not eligible should study the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Anyone who has read these rules will quickly surmize the original long form BC is a deadend after Gov. Abercrombie confirmed it was sealed and archived. Courts are not allowed to examine or opine on a sealed document for any reason.
Let me explain it to you in the vernacular you may be able to understand. YOU’RE BEING PUNKED BY ZULLO AND ARPAIO! The original long form BC is a misdirection play designed to look like someone is doing something when they know the BC was sealed and can’t be used in any Court for any reason.
Carefully read msg 131 of this thread.
Focusing on 1961 has long been a losing proposition.
There is certainly avoidance of 1971.
In December of 1971 something happened. What?
The path to 1961 through official records is certainly long and torturous. Between divorces, adoptions, nullified adoptions, etc. the records have been mangled - probably beyond repair.
The only fact that is worthwhile is that that documents (images) presented thus far are frauds or photos of printed frauds.
But 1971 is avoided. Why?