Posted on 03/22/2010 5:01:53 PM PDT by Seizethecarp
The two-year anniversary of “Passportgate” was this past Monday, March 14. Passportgate was the covert “accessing” of passport records by three contractors at the State Department. Two of the contractors were fired. The contractor who was not fired, but only disciplined, worked for The Analysis Corporation. John O. Brennan is the president of The Analysis Corporation. He is also a former CIA official and is now Deputy National Security Adviser for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism.
The dates of access are January 9, February 21 and March 14, 2008. The initial reports indicated only a breach of Obama’s records. Later it was reported that Clinton and McCain’s records had been accessed. The names of the individuals, including the one still working at the State Department, have never been released. Officially, it was a simple matter of snooping; no criminal charges were filed and it was handled only with “disciplinary” action. For such a serious breach, the penalties were light.
So what is the relevance of Passportgate and March 14, 2008? One must go back two days to March 12, 2008 for the answer. This is because from all available information, background, verifiable data and facts, March 12, 2008 is the first verifiable history of the now infamous Obama internet COLB, exactly two days prior to the last passport break-in. Specifically, the first documentable record of the COLB starts at the hour of 22:41:37 on March 12, 2008. This is the date and time stamp from the digital photo that is shown on the FactCheck website dedicated to Obama’s COLB.
(Excerpt) Read more at thepostemail.com ...
Susan Blake said Ann sent her a post card and she thought it was from a ship...
That'd be the one.
That's a new one to me, and it makes as much sense as anything, I suppose. The only reason I would tend to discount that theory is because travel options in 1963 for a single woman, 8+ months pregnant, would be extremely limited.
I think it's more likely she traveled back to the mainland when she was 5-6 months pregnant, and things developed from there.
Very interesting theory, though!
Were you intentionally shooting your own argument in the foot?? You cited a story where the power of the AG to do what you claim was being disputed. Second, you ignored what I said about facing a political backlash. AGs are political entities and don’t generall lay themselves out for something when there’s not enough popular support for it. What these people would know from the newspaper coverage of the fraudulent certificate isn’t going to be enough for any particular one to chase after this issue ... and then you run into the problem of trying to go after a sitting president with criminal charges.
This nonsense about going on a ‘fishing expedition’ is exactly that. You don’t fish in private records. Getting the records from the DOH requires a court order. I don’t see it happening, when courts are showing that they’re afraid to touch this.
Exactly. Plus, we know there were at least two out-of-state births in Washington state registered to the state of Hawaii. If not born on the boat and registered as born in Hawaii, the baby could have been born out of state and still be registered by Granny Dunham.
SAD may not have traveled alone at that advanced stage of pregnancy, and there’s a chance the birth was filed with the state of Hawaii, but not completed until later. It’s not clear if a birth record has to be complete before the birth is listed in the newspapers.
`If that is true, how would CIA then be able to conduct Counter-Intelligence???
Before the election, we were many saying that Barry Soetoro would NEVER get through Secret Service Clearance to enter into the White House, but he passed and sailed through, no questions asked. I always wondered how that was possible, and then all his life's records are locked up in "Fort Knox". The Scooter Libby's CIA trial-case comes to mind, hmmm!!!
Bump!
Not a very good example!
My father-in-law was born in Maastricht Holland, speaks seven different languages fluently!!
One of them is French!!!
There's no clearance required for the president or vice president. If you get elected, you're in.
The FBI is (at least was at the time) exclusively responsible for counterespionage within the US. It was illegal for the CIA to conduct any operations in the US.
CIA agents are loyal US citizens who are tasked with recruiting foreign persons on foreign soil who are willing to betray their own countries.
The KGB was tasked to find US traitors and the FBI is tasked to uncover these efforts and create double agents if appropriate.
I was a classmate of Scooter Libby, as well as a CIA recruit up to the very last stage before my rejection and the Libby case really had nothing to do with what qualities a CIA agent would have, which would have excluded Obama.
Obama has never been subjected to a US security clearance. He was elected by 53% of the voters and gained a majority in the electoral college after the Dems certified that he was eligible and this was not successfully challenged in the courts. There was no security clearance there at all!
Not a very good example!
My father-in-law was born in Maastricht Holland, speaks seven different languages fluently!!
One of them is French!!!
No, I was not intentionally shooting myself in the foot. I was pointing out that some attorneys general have independent subpoena power.
Yes, there can always be political backlash to any bold move, no guts, no glory.
I just don’t see much hope for resolving this issue through civil lawsuits with ordinary citizens as plaintiffs because the courts have ruled over and over again that they don’t have standing. Thus far 74 civil suits have been attempted and none have succeeded.
There are plenty of states where Obama is extremely unpopular and it would be a political feather in the cap of a state Attorney General or a District Attorney to bring him low or to even attempt to resolve the citizenship issue. I would say that any state that would elect a Republican Attorney General is such a state. Hawaii does not elect its Attorney General. That position is an appointed position by the Governor and she’s a Republican.
The current Governor of Hawaii is a lame duck. She is term limited and out of office as of next January. It is likely that there will be a new Attorney General as well next year, so why not take a risk since you’re going to be out anyway?
Thus far a Republican Attorney General in Indiana was forced to be Obama’s legal defender because citizens of that state sued the Republican Governor for certifying Obama’s electoral votes. I would rather try to see if there is one state Attorney General, or even a local district attorney with enough intestinal fortitude to take this on.
Anyone from a strong conservative Republican state could do the job.
You have convinced me that you have no real interest in a resolution to this issue. You just like to whine about it.
A subpoena for Obama’s birth records is the quickest way to resolve at least the birthplace part of the issue.
I’ve explained very clearly why I think you’re wrong.
A - The average AG does not get the full story from the LMSM regarding the glaring inconsistencies and problems with Obama’s alleged COLB.
B - A judge needs to be involved because a court order would be required to gain access to Obama’s records.
C - Jurisdiction needs to be established for anyone to press charges. From what I can tell, the most direct legal violation is a FEDERAL law, not a state law. We know who controls the justice department.
D - There would be a huge political backlash from trollish Obots and politicos trying to demonize and marginalize any challenge against Barry Soetoro ... thus meaning you need not only a brave prosecutor, but a brave judge. Haven’t seen too many of either lately.
E - The governor of Hawaii doesn’t appear to want to be in the middle of any controversy (again ... political backlash). She may be a lame duck as far as being governor, but if she has other political ambitions, she probably doesn’t want to take any risks that could be used against her.
I love the way you keep making cheap personal taunts, because ultimately it exposes you as being insecure about this issue, and ultimately you know you’re wrong. Just admit it.
You have presented wonderful arguments as to why Obama will continue to win the presidential eligiblity debate. Congratulations.
Posting a fraudulent document on the internet is not a “federal” issue. Any jurisdiction where the document appeared can investigate.
If the same document or a similar document was used to verify being on a state’s ballot, that also makes the state a legitimate jurisdiction.
I’m not suggesting an “average” attorney general or district attorney get involved. It would need to be someone rather extraoridinary.
Let’s review, shall we? Here’s what civil suits have yielded in the way of results. “A definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.”
Presidential Eligibility Lawsuits against Barack Obama
Last Updated March 8, 2010.
Case Court Status
“Allen v. Soetoro” (Freedom of Information Act) Arizona District: Filed
“American Grand Jury” (Ellis) TN Middle: Dismissed
“American Grand Jury” (Laity, Campbell) NY West: Rejected
“Ankeny v. Daniels” (and McCain) Indiana State: Dismissed; Appeal Indiana Court of Appeals: Dismissal Affirmed
“Barnett v Obama, formerly Keyes v Obama et al” Fed CA Central Filed; 09-56827; Appeal by Robinson/Drake; 10-55084 Appeal filed by Taitz 9th Circuit: Pending The Court consolidated appeals 09-56827 and 10-55084 28-June-2010
“Berg v. Obama et al” Fed PA Eastern Dismissed, 08-4340 3rd Circuit Appeals Dismissed; SCOTUS Denied
Berg v. Obama Fed DC District: Dismissed; 09-5362 DC Circuit: Appealed
“Beverly v. FEC” CA Eastern District: Dismissed ; 09-15562 9th Circuit: Appeals Dismissed 09-794 SCOTUS
“Brockhausen v. Andrade” Texas State: Dismissed
“Broe v. Reed” Washington State Supreme: Dismissed
“The Church of Jesus Christ Christian/Aryan Nations of Missouri et al v. Obama et al”; 08-3405-CV-S-AFS Fed MO West Sealed: Dismissed
“Cohen v. Obama” DC District Federal Court: Dismissed
“Connerat v. Browning” Florida state: Dismissed
“Connerat v. Obama” FL Small Claims: Dismissed
“Cook v. Good et al” GA Middle Dismissed; 09-14698C 11th Circuit: Dismissed
“Cook v. Simtech” FL Middle: Dismissed
“Craig v. US”: CIV-09-0343-F OK West Judgment in favor of defendant: 09-6082 10 Circuit USCA Dismissal Affirmed: 08-10817 SCOTUS Writ Denied 29-Sep-2009
“Dawson v. Obama” California Eastern District: Dismissed
“Donofrio v Wells” NJ State: Dismissed: NJ Supreme Court: Denied: SCOTUS: Denied
“Ealey v. Obama” TX Houston Dismissed
“Essek v. Obama” KY Eastern Dismissed
“Gopalan v Obama II et. al” CA Southern: Dismissed
“Greenberg v. Brunner”: Ohio State Court Wood County: Dismissed
“Hamblin v Obama/McCain” Arizona District: Dismissed 09-17014 9th Circuit
Dismissed
“Herbert v. Obama et al” Fed FL Middle: Dismissed; 09-6777 SCOTUS: Dismissed
“Hollister v. Soetoro” Fed DC: Dismissed 09-5161 DC: Appealed
“Hunter v. Obama” TX Northern: Dismissed
“Judy v. McCain” Federal Court Nevada District: Dismissed
“Kerchner et al v. Obama et al” 1:09-cv-00253-JBS-JS Fed NJ Dismissed
09-4209 3rd Circuit: Pending
“Keyes v. Bowen” Superior Court of CA: Dismissed
“Keyes v. Lingle:” Dismissed: Reconsideration Denied
“Lightfoot v. Bowen” SCOTUS: Denied
“Marquis v. Reed” WA state: Dismissed
“Martin v Lingle” HI State: Dismissed; 29643 HI State Appeal: Dismissed
“Morrow v. Barak Humane Obama” Fed FL Miami: Dismissed
“Neal v. Brunner” Ohio State: Dismissed
“Neely v. Obama” MI Eastern: Dismissed
“Patriot Heart’s Network v Soetoro” Federal Court DC: Dismissed
“Rhodes v. Gates” TX West: Denied
“Rhodes v. MacDonald” GA Middle: Denied
“Roy v. Obama” Fed HI: Dismissed
“Schneller v. Cortes” PA Supreme Court: Denied; US Supreme Court: Dismissed
“Spuck v. Secretary of State” Ohio state: Dismissed
“Stamper v. US” Federal Court Ohio Northern District: Dismissed
“Strunk v. Patterson et al” NY State: Dismissed
“Strunk v. NY State Board of Elections” NY Eastern: Dismissed
“Strunk v U.S. Department of State” 1:2008cv02234 FOIA Fed District of Columbia Filed, Discovery staid; 09-5322 DC Circuit: Appealed
“Sullivan v. Marshall” NY State: Dismissed
“Super American Grand Jury” Federal DC District Court: Dismissed
“Taitz v Obama” Federal DC District Court: Filed
“Thomas v. Hosemann” Fed Dist Hawaii: Dismissed
“Terry v. Handel” GA state: Denied
“Welch v. Mukasey et al” NY Northern District: Dismissed
“Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz” CT State: Dismissed: 08A-469 SCOTUS: Denied
"Winning" because the courts are afraid to take on the issue isn't something to be proud of. Let's all celebrate cheating because it's justified by 'winning'!!
Posting a fraudulent document on the internet is not a “federal” issue. Any jurisdiction where the document appeared can investigate.
On what jurisdictional basis??
If the same document or a similar document was used to verify being on a state’s ballot, that also makes the state a legitimate jurisdiction.
So show me where ANY state cited this document to verify Barry Soetoro's eligibility prior to putting Obama's name on the ballot.
I’m not suggesting an “average” attorney general or district attorney get involved.
You said, "Any anti-Obama prosecutor in the nation." What part of "ANY" means "someone rather extraoridinary [sic]"??
Let’s review, shall we?
Feel free, although no one suggested that the courts were any braver in the civil lawsuits than they would be in a criminal matter.
Lieutenant Q. Harris. Lieutenant was his name, not his rank or title. Like "Major Harris" which are the names of a Heisman nominee from WV.U, and a famous R&B musician, or Major Garret, Fox news White House correspondent.
Lieutenant Q. Harris. Lieutenant was his name, not his rank or title. Like "Major Harris" which are the names of a Heisman nominee from WV.U, and a famous R&B musician, or Major Garret, Fox news White House correspondent.
Hewitt is a Romney guy. He also thinks the "Assault Weapons" ban restricted machine guns and has no problem with that.
In short, he is a really smart RINO.
They were extension courses, not correspondence. You can tell by the X prefix on the course numbers, which would be a "C" for correspondence courses.
Plus computerized transcript calls them Extention, rather than "independent study" or correspondence
Extension courses in those days were taught at night or on weekends. Often they would meet once a week for longer session.
The same is true of Senators and Congressmen. Not their staffs though.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.