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 ...
Bring it on. It is far past Time!
It’s takes more than just being willing to invesigate. Who do you think should take the lead??
Feel free to write letters to them to recommend filing charges.
The story says they didn’t have the EXIF data for all the photos. Not sure how they’d have one or two, but not the whole set. I know FactLack scrubbed the data.
Here’s a breakdown
photo No. 1 taken 3/12/2008 10:40 p.m.
photo No. 2 taken 3/12/2008 10:41 p.m.
photo No. 3 taken 3/12/2008 10:41 p.m.
photo No. 4 taken 3/12/2008 10:42 p.m.
photo No. 5 taken 3/12/2008 10:42 p.m.
photo No. 6 taken 3/12/2008 10:42 p.m.
photo No. 7 taken 3/12/2008 10:42 p.m.
photo No. 8 taken 3/12/2008 10:44 p.m.
photo No. 9 taken 3/12/2008 10:47 p.m.
The way these photos was taken was very odd. Picture No. 3 looks like the guy is holding it up for a second photographer to the right of whoever took the Factlack picture. None of the pictures of the back of the document show the entire back of the document. You don’t see the entire seal. If it did show the whole seal, you should see if there’s a fold going through the same spot where it is supposedly at on the front. You also can’t see the items from the front bleed through to the back so you can confirm the back of the document is actually the back of Obama’s alleged document and not somebody else’s.
The real kicker is that the date stamp, JUN 6, 2007 doesn’t match the stamp as it is shown to bleed through on the scanned COLBs posted at Kaos, Politifact and Fight the Smears. The 6 and the 7 are shaped differently than the stamp in the photos.
I tend to think he was actually born in Vancouver in late August, not Kenya or Hawaii in early August. Transoceanic air travel for a VERY pregnant Stanley Ann or a newborn Barry would have been quite problematic -- thus leaving me with the thought that Mom went back to Seattle, her pre-Hawaii home, earlier in her pregnancy and ended up (for whatever reason) having the baby in Vancouver. Grandma then realized that her child wouldn't have an American birth certificate and filed for the COLB in Hawaii.
The other piece that seems to fit with the late August Canadian birth is the well-documented interview with Stanley Ann's friend (can't remember the name) who said that in late August/early September (again, I can't remember off the top of my head, but it's been documented) that Stanley Ann had a new baby and basically didn't know how to change his diaper. What single mom wouldn't have diapering figured out by the time their baby is a month old? They'd have changed dozens by then.
.
He has said himself that he was born in Mombassa.
.
Feel free to write letters to them to recommend filing charges.
He's not exactly the paragon of truthfulness, though.
.
LOL!
.
bump
Bullet to the back of the head in his car. No witnesses. No leads.
*********
Who did it?
Unsolved.
It is also unknown who withdrew $500B from the financial markets on 9/18/08.
Did they include the subcontractors and Brennan by any chance, link will not open on my PDA.
Sorry, j, but this is plain nonsense. You make it sound like it's the easiest thing, but you're failing to acknowledge that a judge would need to be involved at some point in order to sign off on a subpoena. The same thing holding back judges in civil lawsuits would come into play, only moreso, for any criminal complaint: potential lack of jurisdiction and fear of political backlash. You need a new strawman. This one doesn't have much straw left in it.
Don’t know about that, but he is a rabid Romney supporter.
The friend’s name is Susan Blake.
Personally, I believe the baby was born in transit (possibly in Kenya or on the way back). General procedure is to list the arrival point as the place of birth, but the birth certificate is supposed to be marked as to whether the birth occurred on a ship or an airplane. If that note is on the original birth certificate, but wasn’t required on the COLB, it explains perfectly why Obama doesn’t want the original to be seen, and why the director of the DOH would cite vital records (plural) as the source of her allegation that Obama was born in Hawaii.
We also have strong reason to believe the certificate was amended, in particular, the date of birth. Let’s say the baby crossed the international time line ... the date of birth might have needed to be changed or confirmed with an airfare ticket, boat pass or perhaps an affadavit from a ship’s captain. It’s even possible, that such an affadavit didn’t show up until 40 years or so later.
See discussion in comments...
Sorry, j, but this is plain nonsense. You make it sound like it’s the easiest thing, but you’re failing to acknowledge that a judge would need to be involved at some point in order to sign off on a subpoena. The same thing holding back judges in civil lawsuits would come into play, only moreso, for any criminal complaint: potential lack of jurisdiction and fear of political backlash. You need a new strawman. This one doesn’t have much straw left in it.
Do you really think that there are NO anti-Obama judges in the entire nation who would issue a subpoena for his birth records if a prosecutor brought them evidence of just cause, like a legitimate suspicion of fraud or forgery?
What we are talking about here is an INVESTIGATION, not an indictment.
Prosecutors go on legal “fishing expeditions” quite frequently, just to see if every thing is on the up and up. If everything about Obama’s birth records is kosher, then “no harm, no foul.” The investigation is terminated. But if there was some evidence of forgery or fraud..........
You sound as if you really don’t believe that there is anything amiss with Obama’s records and that an investigation is destined to fail. Your defeatist attitude is kind of sad.
No.
The last we know of Ann’s location is Feb. ‘61 when she supposedly married Sr. Before that was Dec. ‘60 the end of the fall semester at UH. Her friend Susan B. said she saw her the end of Aug. ‘61 with the diaper thing but we don’t know that for sure. I feel fairly confident she was in Seattle in March ‘62 for start of classes at UW. The fall and winter semester classes at UW in ‘61 were correspondence classes so she could have been anywhere. There is just a big gap right at the most inopportune time.
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.