Posted on 06/07/2012 11:11:57 AM PDT by Red Steel
Network misrepresents microfilm birth record as Obama's
On the heels of Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s Cold Case Posse’s investigative trip to Hawaii, CNN pulled out old material – including microfilm misrepresented as Barack Obama’s birth certificate – to run a report called “Busting the Birther Conspiracy Theory.”
In the segment, broadcast May 30, reporter Gary Tuchman declared his intention to refute conclusively the contention Obama’s birth certificate is fraudulent.
Some careful observers, however, objected that the Tuchman report was a rebroadcast of material that CNN originally broadcast last year and possibly even earlier.
Moreover, CNN showed a microfilm copy of a birth certificate as if it were Obama’s original 1961 record. But it turned out to be someone else’s birth certificate.
At approximately the 1:22 mark of the segment, CNN displayed a microfilm copy of what viewers were led to believe was Obama’s birth certificate.
Close examination of a screen capture as seen in Exhibit 1 makes clear that the document is not Obama’s.
As seen in Exhibit 2, when the microfilm birth certificate is enlarged, the number appears to end with the digits “000,” while the computer-generated long-form birth certificate displayed on the White House website on April 27, 2011, bears the number “10641.”
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
Thank you for the comprehensive explanation. I figured as much. Is it significant that the Mississippi lawyers went out of their way to state that they’re not asking the court to take “judicial notice” of Obama’s April 27, 2011, long form?
Also, are you saying that when the Hawaiian Dept. of Health generates a certificate on a computer, they don’t actually emboss it with the seal? They print an image of a seal on it? Something that can’t be felt? I always thought that after printing the data on the form, they stamped the registrar’s signature and embossed it with the seal.
It seems to me that the lawyers also expect the court to accept the verification letter as proof that the long form birth certificate image isn’t forged, because they say that the information, using their word, is “true.” But Onaka didn’t say it was true. He said it matches. He admits that they didn’t do anything to confirm what he calls the facts of the vital event. He only used the information on the records they have to find the facts about the vital event. That’s not saying it’s true.
Thank you for the comprehensive explanation. I figured as much. Is it significant that the Mississippi lawyers went out of their way to state that they’re not asking the court to take “judicial notice” of Obama’s April 27, 2011, long form?
Also, are you saying that when the Hawaiian Dept. of Health generates a certificate on a computer, they don’t actually emboss it with the seal? They print an image of a seal on it? Something that can’t be felt? I always thought that after printing the data on the form, they stamped the registrar’s signature and embossed it with the seal.
It seems to me that the lawyers also expect the court to accept the verification letter as proof that the long form birth certificate image isn’t forged, because they say that the information, using their word, is “true.” But Onaka didn’t say it was true. He said it matches. He admits that they didn’t do anything to confirm what he calls the facts of the vital event. He only used the information on the records they have to find the facts about the vital event. That’s not saying it’s true.
Thank you for the comprehensive explanation. I figured as much. Is it significant that the Mississippi lawyers went out of their way to state that they’re not asking the court to take “judicial notice” of Obama’s April 27, 2011, long form?
Also, are you saying that when the Hawaiian Dept. of Health generates a certificate on a computer, they don’t actually emboss it with the seal? They print an image of a seal on it? Something that can’t be felt? I always thought that after printing the data on the form, they stamped the registrar’s signature and embossed it with the seal.
It seems to me that the lawyers also expect the court to accept the verification letter as proof that the long form birth certificate image isn’t forged, because they say that the information, using their word, is “true.” But Onaka didn’t say it was true. He said it matches. He admits that they didn’t do anything to confirm what he calls the facts of the vital event. He only used the information on the records they have to find the facts about the vital event. That’s not saying it’s true.
I apologize for the three posts! I don’t know how that happened.
Just reading through the motion, it seems to go on and on and on about how this letter of verification would allegedly be as compelling as presenting an actual certified copy of the birth certificate. It’s one of those “If you can’t dazzle them with your brilliance, baffle ‘em with BS.” And it’s not like Obama shouldn’t be able to provide a certified copy of a birth certificate instead of forcing them to rely on a subpar letter of verification. He supposedly has TWO certified copies of the long-form and the hard copy of the short form that was allegedly photographed by factlack dot org. Seems like it would be a slam dunk just to submit one of those copies in court ... if those copies are actually authentic and true.em with BS.
I couldn't read it. The only word I could make out was what I thought was "Wilfred". The info I posted came from the comment section of WND. Using that information I looked again and "Wilfred" could be Mildred. I could also see how "Kazue" might be true. In any event, the WND comment post would appear to be more accurate than CNN's report.
I stand corrected on a number of fronts, after looking further.
First off, I can’t remember how I had come up with the seals made of dashes being created by computer. I can’t see anything that allows a computer to raise the surface of a piece of paper. So that’s just wrong.
The seal used on the MDEC verification is not the registrar’s seal; the registrar’s seal is the seal with dashes, that’s seen on all the short-forms. What is on this verification is actually the official Department of Health seal, which is supposed to accompany THE DIRECTOR’s signature on official communications.
Two clear differences between the registrar’s seal and the Director/DOH’s official seal are:
1. the size (the DOH/Director’s seal has to be 2 1/4” in diameter, and that’s what this one is - as I saw when I C&P’ed the image into Word and stretched it diagonally until it was 8 1/2” wide like normal office paper, and then measured the diameter of the seal); and
2. the stars between “DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH” and “STATE OF HAWAII” (the registrar’s stamp has circles instead).
To be legally valid, the long-form that Obama received would have required the DOH/Director’s seal, according to the HDOH Administrative Rules - because a standard certificate is required to have either the seal of the State OR the official DOH seal. The short-forms have the printed seal of the State of Hawaii at the top, as do these verifications so they don’t have to have the official DOH seal; they can (and do) have the smaller registrar’s seal. Obama’s long-form was copied by a copier/scanner, so there wasn’t a computer to add the State of Hawaii seal to the top of the document. That means that the official 2 1/4” DOH seal was required to be used.
In the past (until at least May of 1979, based on images I have) they have certified long-forms by having the certifying statement (”true and correct copy of the original record on file” - this is the STANDARD language for verifying genuineness in Hawaii government) on the top of the certification area, the DOH Director’s signature stamp to the left and the state registrar’s signature stamp to the right, and the official, 2 1/4” DOH stamp in the middle overlapping both signatures. That meets the requirements of both the HDOH Administrative Rules (because it has the official DOH seal instead of the seal of the State of Hawaii) and Title 11-1 (because the seal is over the signature of the Director of Health).
That is how Obama’s long-form should be certified, in order to meet those legal requirements. And this verification shows clearly that they have an official DOH seal embosser so there was no reason for them to NOT certify Obama’s BC according to legal requirements.
The “seal” on Obama’s posted long-form is not the right size to be the same seal as this one. A 2 1/4” seal is a large seal. The embosser suppliers that I looked up have 2” seals as their largest seals. Somebody ordering a 2 1/4” embosser would stick out like a sore thumb - and garner attention. The approximately 1 7/8” seal that is used on Obama’s long-form would be easy and inconspicuous to order with a vague design in the middle that wouldn’t raise any suspicions of forgery intentions - and then pressed lightly enough to just show there’s a ring around the outside and something vague in the middle.
The placement of the seal on Obama’s long-form is also conspicuous. Embossers are like a stapler, where the paper can only go so far in so there’s a maximum distance from the edge that a seal can be. The registrar’s stamp is applied from the right side of the paper on all the short-forms. If you tried to apply it to the left side of the paper as on Obama’s long-form it would end up being upside-down. The official DOH seal is applied from the bottom of the paper, and I doubt even an extended-reach embosser would be able to get it up as high on the page as Obama’s forged “seal” is.
So why did they put the “seal” right there on the left-hand side, rather than on the right-hand side as short-forms have, or at the bottom as legitimate long-forms from the past have? They put that “seal” right over the place for notations of affidavits filed in support of late and amended filings. Putting the “seal” there could help cover up the editing they had to do to get rid of those statements, if they even used the document from the HDOH as the base document - that is, if somebody from the HDOH did the ABSTRACT for them (based on affidavits on file but remaining legal because the marks showing legal non-validity were still present) rather than simply supplying the base documents for the Obama people to create the forgery themselves.
In terms of this verification, my question would be why Loretta Fuddy didn’t sign this, since her signature is supposed to be there when the official DOH seal is used. OR why Onaka didn’t use the registrar’s seal instead of the official DOH seal.
I stand corrected on a number of fronts, after looking further.
First off, I can’t remember how I had come up with the seals made of dashes being created by computer. I can’t see anything that allows a computer to raise the surface of a piece of paper. So that’s just wrong.
The seal used on the MDEC verification is not the registrar’s seal; the registrar’s seal is the seal with dashes, that’s seen on all the short-forms. What is on this verification is actually the official Department of Health seal, which is supposed to accompany THE DIRECTOR’s signature on official communications.
Two clear differences between the registrar’s seal and the Director/DOH’s official seal are:
1. the size (the DOH/Director’s seal has to be 2 1/4” in diameter, and that’s what this one is - as I saw when I C&P’ed the image into Word and stretched it diagonally until it was 8 1/2” wide like normal office paper, and then measured the diameter of the seal); and
2. the stars between “DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH” and “STATE OF HAWAII” (the registrar’s stamp has circles instead).
To be legally valid, the long-form that Obama received would have required the DOH/Director’s seal, according to the HDOH Administrative Rules - because a standard certificate is required to have either the seal of the State OR the official DOH seal. The short-forms have the printed seal of the State of Hawaii at the top, as do these verifications so they don’t have to have the official DOH seal; they can (and do) have the smaller registrar’s seal. Obama’s long-form was copied by a copier/scanner, so there wasn’t a computer to add the State of Hawaii seal to the top of the document. That means that the official 2 1/4” DOH seal was required to be used.
In the past (until at least May of 1979, based on images I have) they have certified long-forms by having the certifying statement (”true and correct copy of the original record on file” - this is the STANDARD language for verifying genuineness in Hawaii government) on the top of the certification area, the DOH Director’s signature stamp to the left and the state registrar’s signature stamp to the right, and the official, 2 1/4” DOH stamp in the middle overlapping both signatures. That meets the requirements of both the HDOH Administrative Rules (because it has the official DOH seal instead of the seal of the State of Hawaii) and Title 11-1 (because the seal is over the signature of the Director of Health).
That is how Obama’s long-form should be certified, in order to meet those legal requirements. And this verification shows clearly that they have an official DOH seal embosser so there was no reason for them to NOT certify Obama’s BC according to legal requirements.
The “seal” on Obama’s posted long-form is not the right size to be the same seal as this one. A 2 1/4” seal is a large seal. The embosser suppliers that I looked up have 2” seals as their largest seals. Somebody ordering a 2 1/4” embosser would stick out like a sore thumb - and garner attention. The approximately 1 7/8” seal that is used on Obama’s long-form would be easy and inconspicuous to order with a vague design in the middle that wouldn’t raise any suspicions of forgery intentions - and then pressed lightly enough to just show there’s a ring around the outside and something vague in the middle.
The placement of the seal on Obama’s long-form is also conspicuous. Embossers are like a stapler, where the paper can only go so far in so there’s a maximum distance from the edge that a seal can be. The registrar’s stamp is applied from the right side of the paper on all the short-forms. If you tried to apply it to the left side of the paper as on Obama’s long-form it would end up being upside-down. The official DOH seal is applied from the bottom of the paper, and I doubt even an extended-reach embosser would be able to get it up as high on the page as Obama’s forged “seal” is.
So why did they put the “seal” right there on the left-hand side, rather than on the right-hand side as short-forms have, or at the bottom as legitimate long-forms from the past have? They put that “seal” right over the place for notations of affidavits filed in support of late and amended filings. Putting the “seal” there could help cover up the editing they had to do to get rid of those statements, if they even used the document from the HDOH as the base document - that is, if somebody from the HDOH did the ABSTRACT for them (based on affidavits on file but remaining legal because the marks showing legal non-validity were still present) rather than simply supplying the base documents for the Obama people to create the forgery themselves.
In terms of this verification, my question would be why Loretta Fuddy didn’t sign this, since her signature is supposed to be there when the official DOH seal is used. OR why Onaka didn’t use the registrar’s seal instead of the official DOH seal.
Now to answer your actual questions. lol
I do believe it is significant that the lawyers made sure to say they aren’t asking for “judicial notice” of Obama’s LF. That, together with their “convenient” wording that kept the legal validity of the actual record at the HDOH from being revealed, suggests to me that they know darn good and well that Obama’s record is legally non-valid. They saw the verification that AZ received, and they may well have seen what both Mike Zullo and myself (in a post I posted 2 days before these lawyers requested this verification) - as well as a bunch of others both here on FR and elsewhere - were saying about what the “wording” changes meant. If they knew there was a form submitted and that the HDOH would not verify ANY of the information from that form, they knew the BC could not be legally valid. So they “conveniently” worded things in a way so that HI would never be put on the spot actually verifying any legal facts (except the existence of a record of unspecified legal validity).
And their seeming knowledge of that suggests that they are trying to deceive the court, as you say. They technically only talk about the information, but their italicizing the statute saying that a verification is certification that the facts of the vital event occurred AS STATED BY THE APPLICANT misleads the court into thinking that the applicant actually DID state anything about the vital event. They didn’t. They only asked for verification that the vital facts about the birth that were claimed on Obama’s (forged) LFBC match the vital facts about the birth that are claimed on the (legally non-valid) BC at the HDOH.
Your questions about the seal caused me to look further, as I noted in my last post. And what I found is important. This is why it is so much better to work with others than to work alone. Your questions sparked a whole different avenue of investigation, that I would not have thought of myself. This has happened SO MANY times - from people who intend to help me AND from people who intend to debunk and derail me.
I’ve been accused in the past of not crediting the people who deserve credit for the information that I post about. Guilty as charged. There are way too many people whose comments, questions, and insights have contributed to what we know so far. I just hope and pray that you all know who you are and how UTTERLY VALUABLE your contributions are. This is really and truly a team effort, and I’m just thankful that I get to be a small part of it. I hope that someday we’ll get the usurper out of office, the truth becomes known, and all those who pitched in receive the thanks and recognition due them.
THANK YOU for your questions that gave me a nudge in the right direction so I could find out my mistake and learn new things.
It’s unfortunate Orly or another attorney hasn’t been able to articulate the consequence of a Court ordered birth certificate that has been ordered sealed and archived. A record ordered sealed and archived becomes legally void. Regardless of what is found or not found on Obama’s Original Long Form Birth Certificate, the document was ordered sealed by the Court when the Soetoro Adoption was finalized. It is now and forever considered a historical document void of any legal veracity and inadmissible in any state or Federal Court in the U.S.
Hawaii, and a few other states, have laws that allow adult adoptees to obtain copies of their Original Long Form Birth Certificate. The adoptee can only use the document for genealogy reference and cannot use the record in any legal matter for any reason. Imagine the chaos associated with an adult adoptee who suddenly decided they want to return to their original name with their birth parents after they had been known under their adoptee name for years. The only way the State of Hawaii could provide the Original Long Form BC to an adoptee is to void the document first.
I understand some of you are obsessed with the original BC, but it’s a deadend.
Yes, those initials will be his way out. It’s also interesting that he had two different people initial those letters as if spreading the blame dilutes it for those involved.
It’s not just that one is missing a seal but his generated signature is positioned lower on the left one and more centered on the right one. If it is an automatic computer generated signature then one would expect it to have been the same for all office computers. But it isn’t. So why is that?
Of course, Onaka is in dangerous territory. It’s obvious he’s tip toeing around on the wording. It’s almost funny how he and his now silent boss Ambercrombie can’t get their stories straight. Either he’s willing to fall on his sword for the usurper (which I doubt) or he’s being pressured/blackmailed (much more likely). Remember all it takes is one slip up in his past and they’ve got him over a barrel. It’s rare that anyone’s past is pristine. Even if it is, certain actions can be twisted (hello, msm) so that it’s no where near the truth.
If the Soetoro adoption was put aside then the original BC would be restored.
But what I suspect is that Obama had no complete BC in Hawaii until the birth registration by Madelyn Dunham was amended in 2006 to add a birth weight. If he was adopted by Soetoro I think it was done using the Kenyan BC, and was perhaps done in Indonesia without HI even being involved.
For him to have a discloseable record at the HDOH with the information the HDOH verified as being on their record, the Soetoro adoption had to either not be done/recognized in Hawaii, or else it was put aside. This would also mean that if the Dunhams adopted Barry, that adoption was set aside as well.
If Barry was not born to Ann Dunham and was instead adopted BY Ann Dunham and Barack Obama, then the original BC is sealed. The accurate facts of birth from the original BC is supposed to be transferred to the BC created after the adoption. This would be an alternate way for him to get a HI BC even if Madelyn Dunham had not registered any birth - but the BC would still give the accurate place of birth, if the rules were being followed.
What happens when I send to All?
Bgill, did you get pinged by this?
Why did Nancy Pelosi take the special effort to sign two different certificates of nomination, the second of which (below) specifically eliminated the clause "Qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution"?
The normal certificate of nomination looks like this:
I believe Hawaii was the only state that got a DNC OCON (Official Certification of Nomination)saying that Obama was Constitutionally eligible. The DNC was forced to make that OCON specially for Hawaii because Hawaii statute requires that SOMEBODY certify Constitutional eligibility (either the national or state party) and the Hawaii Democratic Party refused to certify that - specifically taking out that language from their standard Hawaii OCON by removing one physical line of print which left their HDP OCON without the required language that only the HDP could certify (the language that said Obama was specifically the candidate of the Hawaii Democratic Party.
The question that could/should be investigated is why Brian Schatz (who is now lt governor but was then the chairman of the Hawaii Democratic Party) refused to sign an oath that Obama is Constitutionally eligible. Schatz was a Punahou High School grad who went to Kenya for the year in which Barack Obama and his fiance’ Michelle Robinson visited Kenya. The usual attorney that the HDP used was William H Gilardy, Jr - who was the attorney for Ann Dunham in her divorce from Lolo Soetoro, which involved custody and thus may well have included Obama’s birth certificate.
I think there was still the sense in some quarters back then that people [i.e.: judges, some GOP pols, etc.] might care. Had it been known at that time how little interest Obama’s shady, unvetted and fiercely guarded past/records would evoke, she might not have taken the trouble.
Re: Obama’s birthplace. I have made this point before but I don’t mind making it again. Obama did not approach the big name literary agency and request a large advance to write a book. He, a man w ZERO literary credits to his name, was approached by them. It could be argued that it happened simply on the basis of his being the first president of the Harvard Law Review ‘of color’. I don’t buy that for one instant. He was approached because of his background as a mixed racial birth in Kenya. That detail added the color and intrigue to his bio the literary agency believed would make his book a good investment.
There is no other explanation for the agency’s actions. They gave $165,000 plus numerous perks to this man who, as I mentioned, neither approached them first nor had a single publication to his name. Their published bio of him is proof of how they planned to sell his work: as a Kenyan-born, mixed race man whose career launched w his selection as pres. of the Harvard Law Review.
It’s not reasonable to believe the agency made this type of investment based on ungrounded rumors. They knew. I.e.: they knew he was born in Kenya. That is why they made the rare move of offering him a contract out of the blue. He had a very fascinating origin/trajectory—one they believed they could parlay into book sales—and one in which the Kenyan birth was central/crucial.
This is the simplest and most obvious explanation for the publication that listed Obama as born in Kenya. Not that he told a lie, but that the agency knew the truth before they even approached him. The simplest and most obvious explanation generally turns out to be the correct one, and this case is no exception.
This explanation also explains one of the most telling and significant facts that has come to light so far: the missing wk in the National Archives of foreign arrivals to HI. A wk that *just happens* to correspond w the wk Obama claims he was born. Many of the most convoluted, least provable theories floating around ignore that missing wk. Why? Why postulate unprovable theories at the expense of actual facts? The missing/excised wk is a crucial fact/clue. Any theory that ignores it is just blowing smoke.
“If the Soetoro adoption was put aside then the original BC would be restored.”
It could be restored, but it was not. We know this because the short form COLB was “filed” after a Court ordered it to be filed.
The original long form BC was “accepted.” If the original long form BC had been restored and the abbreviated COLB would have “accepted” on it, like other abbreviated COLBs that do not have the original long form sealed and archived.
Most likely, Stanley Ann contested BHO Sr.’s paternity in 1971. After hearing testimony and examining evidence, the Court ruled BHO Sr. was the father and ordered the Soetoro adoption annulled without restoring the original because it contained Stanley Ann’s witness attestation BHO Sr. was the father in 1961. The abbreviated COLB with a date “filed” indicates no witness attestations have been accepted, but the record was filed due to a Court order.
Are you claiming that any COLB’s which have “Date filed” on them are indications of a court ordering it to be filed and/or adoption?
Virginia Sunahara’s COLB has a “Date filed” on it. Are you saying she was adopted or a court ordered her BC to be filed back in 1961? So does Danae’s, IIRC.
He would need to have kept his nose clean for forty years! Removed from the Iolani website, found on Wayback Machine:
http://web.archive.org/web/20100926085142/http://iolani.org/wn_alum_062708_cp5.htm
Alvin Onaka, ‘65 Wins Award
According to a Rod Ohira story in the June 24 Honolulu Advertiser, ‘Iolani graduate Alvin Onaka, a member of the class of 1965 recently won a presitigious award for his pioneering work in the field of vital statistics.
The Advertiser story recounts, “Onaka, the state registrar of vital statistics and chief of the Department of Health’s Office of Health Status Monitoring, was presented the 27th Halbert L. Dunn Award for his international, national and state level demographic and public health contributions in a 40-plus year career.”
Read the complete story here:
Honolulu Advertiser article link does not go to article.
Now let’s look at the STAR BULLETIN, I’ll cut and paste it here before it disappears:
http://archives.starbulletin.com/2008/07/14/news/story07.html
Stat reporting earns honor
Alvin Onaka guides state vital statistics
By Helen Altonn
haltonn@starbulletin.com
Cutting-edge ventures in vital statistics have taken Alvin Onaka to the heady reaches of Washington politics.
Most recently he has been at the forefront of the controversy over Barack Obama’s birth certificate.
To battle a spate of unsubstantiated rumors, including one that Obama is not a natural-born U.S. citizen, the Obama campaign launched a Web site called “Fight the Smears.” It shows a copy of his Hawaii birth certificate.
Onaka said he has had many calls asking him to confirm Obama’s birth certificate, but he cannot disclose such information: “Only Obama can consent to that.”
Onaka also cites Hillary Clinton as he explains how Hawaii became the first state to require a bride and groom to declare both their middle names and surnames after marriage.
He said there was confusion about what women could use as a middle name. At the time he looked into it, Clinton was in the White House.
Onaka was working with a colleague in Arkansas and learned there was no legal document indicating what her name is, he said. He called the White House and “was very impressed that the Office of First Lady returned my calls.”
Her marriage certificate said she was married to William Jefferson Clinton and that she used the name Hillary Rodham Clinton, Onaka said.
“I used that to convince the Legislature that it is important to declare the middle name. Hawaii was the first to document what legal names were after marriage,” he said, adding that other states are copying Hawaii.
That and other pioneering changes in vital statistics over the years under Onaka’s leadership led to a recent national award from the International Association for Public Health Statistics and Information Systems.
Onaka, chief of the state Health Department’s Office of Health Status Monitoring, received the Halbert L. Dunn Award for outstanding contributions to the field of vital and health statistics. He was recognized for a 40-year demographic and public health career at international, national and state levels. He has been at the DOH about 20 years.
State Health Director Chiyome Fukino said, “We are proud that Dr. Onaka has been recognized with this prestigious award and brought it home to Hawaii. Alvin is a national leader in the field of vital and health statistics, and the award is well deserved.”
Inspired by the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2005 contained a subsection called REAL ID to improve the U.S. system for issuing secure identification documents. Hawaii was already working on a process called Electronic Verification of Vital Event (EVVE), and it is piloting a national system, Onaka said.
“You can’t travel without a valid ID,” Onaka said, and a birth certificate must be used to verify a federally approved ID, driver’s license or passport. “There needs to be a system that allows this to occur, and Hawaii is piloting this.”
If a person goes to a Social Security office, for example, and presents a birth certificate from Hawaii, the office can input five pieces of information, access a secure database in Hawaii and get a “yes” or “no” answer on whether it is the same information, he said.
“I think we’re before our time, but the rest of the world will catch up with us,” Onaka said. “It’s going to be a reality. ID theft is the most prevalent crime, and others have to have something to combat it.”
Onaka said he is also working with passport offices and even the Little League Association on a system to verify birth certificates of the players to prove they are in the right age brackets.
BACK TO TOP
© Honolulu Star-Bulletin — http://archives.starbulletin.com
Good analysis and two important points. Thanks to all on this thread for the interesting read.
Still disgusted in the general lack of support for Sheriff Joe from the GOP and other leading RW opinion makers.
Sheriff Joe needs a lot more support.
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.