Statement Regarding Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s July 17, 2012 Press Conference: Part 1

Following Arpaio's Press Conference, I Was Interviewed by ABC-15 in Phoenix

Following Arpaio's Press Conference, I Was Interviewed by ABC-15 in Phoenix

On July 17, Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, Arizona presented a second press conference in which he reiterated earlier claims that President Barack Obama’s birth certificate is a forgery.

In his first press conference on the subject (March 1, 2012) Sheriff Arpaio and his posse brought to the American public the same claims that birthers had been making about Mr. Obama’s birth certificate for some time. Virtually all of the claims made by Arpaio and his posse, however, had been debunked in the book I wrote on the subject, which had been released some 6 months prior to the press conference. This was before Arpaio’s “investigation” even began.

Many were also debunked by other authors, such as Frank Arduini. Unlike myself, I understand that Mr. Arduini is an Obama supporter. I have just reread his paper on Mara Zebest’s birther claims, which are the same claims presented by Arpaio’s posse (in fact, by the same person!) Whatever Mr. Arduini’s political affiliation, his technical comments are accurate.

Another debunking of the Mara Zebest / Arpaio claims can be seen here. A briefer debunking is here. All of these debunkings publicly appeared before the Cold Case Posse even began their “investigation.”

Arpaio’s Posse Completely Failed to Recruit Viewpoints from Both Sides, and Ignored the Most Extensive Investigation that Had Been Conducted Regarding the Forgery Claims and the Birth Certificate.

As soon as Sheriff Arpaio announced he would be conducting an investigation (September of 2011) I wrote to the Maricopa County Sheriff’s office, as the only person to have already conducted a full, independent and impartial investigation — and to have authored a book on the forgery theories — and offered my assistance. My investigation was essentially full-time for some 3 months, or approximately 500 hours of very careful research which yielded, by my estimation, around 20 new interesting items of information that were largely, and in some cases completely, unknown.

Sheriff Arpaio’s office never replied.

Birther Conspiracy Theorist Jerome Corsi

Birther Conspiracy Theorist Jerome Corsi

Instead, they received literally days’ worth of “briefing” from birther conspiracy theorist Jerome Corsi, public backer of some 23 different conspiracy theory claims that had already — all – been factually debunked in my book. I had found no significant claim backed by Corsi that could stand up to scrutiny.

They followed up on this by making Corsi — a person with a direct and substantial financial interest in the existence of a “forgery” — a member of their investigative team.

To give you an idea of what we’re talking about here, Corsi at one point claimed to be on track for selling 100,000 copies of his book “Where’s the Birth Certificate? The Case that Barack Obama is not Eligible to be President.” These were generally selling, as near as I can determine, for around $20 each. You do the math on WorldNetDaily’s projected gross sales. WND has their own publishing arm, and a great many of these sales were via WND’s web site. This means they didn’t have to split the profits on those particular sales with anybody else (like Amazon.)

Of course most of these sales were prior to the Arpaio venture. But in addition to the book sales, WorldNetDaily has sold a variety of other “birther gear,” and solicited donations from the public for “independent investigations” and a “Where’s the REAL Birth Certificate?” billboard campaign. They are currently selling more than a dozen “eligibility products” and are still soliciting donations, at up to $5,000 a pop. Monthly, if you wish. They’ve also used the supposed “forgery” to drive traffic to their web site, where they make further profits through advertising (“Power Companies HATE This!”), sales of other WND products, etc.

And an ebook on the investigation itself, authored by Corsi and lead investigator Michael Zullo, went on sale the day before their March press conference, with profits split between Corsi and Zullo. (Mr. Zullo claims to have made less than $1500 from the ebook sales, which he says he gave to his church.)

Critics will be quick to point out that I have myself recently added “donate” buttons to this site and asked readers to consider making a contribution (and in fact, a monthly one if they are willing and able).

The problem is not in presenting an honest product to the public and making a profit by so doing. That’s called free enterprise, and it is a system I wholeheartedly support.

There are two places where there’s a problem. The first is when people profit by presenting invalid and false information and/or products to the public. As mentioned above, Corsi and WorldNetDaily have a long track record of presenting spectacular claims that do not stand up to scrutiny — as shown in the book that I wrote — and of using those dubious claims as a means to advertise and motivate people to buy their claim-related products.

The second problem is when a supposedly professional investigative team — an official law enforcement agency – conducts a high-profile “investigation,” makes a person with a known and substantial personal financial interest in the outcome of that investigation an integral part of their “investigative team,” and then has their lead investigator split the profits with him.

What kind of “investigation” was that?

Others besides myself who had written articles critical of the birther forgery claims, to my knowledge, were likewise not contacted by Arpaio’s posse. (I specifically confirmed this, for example, with Mr. Arduini.)

It is not as if I and these other authors are that difficult to find. A number of people have commented publicly and critically on the birther forgery claims. And Arpaio’s posse can’t credibly claim they didn’t know I existed. Aside from being easily findable through search engines, YouTube videos and the like — and the fact that I actually took the initiative to contact them — they actually mentioned my name during their first press conference.

I was not asked or informed that I would be mentioned, or given any chance whatsoever to rebut what they said.

What kind of “investigation” was that?

Arpaio claims (as he did in today’s press conference) “My initial intent was to clear the President of the United States.” In light of the completely one-sided way that his posse’s “investigation” has been conducted, the claim seems literally laughable.

Joseph Farah Was Sent the Evidence that Not One of the Corsi-Backed Claims Could Stand Up to Scrutiny. WorldNetDaily Never Uttered One Word About That Evidence. Instead, They Continued to Publicize the Debunked Birther Claims, with an Advertisement on Virtually Every Page.

Joseph Farah, CEO of WorldNetDaily -- Who Along With Jerome Corsi Has Stood to Profit from the Birther Claims

Joseph Farah, CEO of WorldNetDaily -- Who Along With Jerome Corsi Has Stood to Profit from the Birther Claims

Incidentally, Jerome Corsi’s editor Joseph Farah at WorldNetDaily was one of the first people in the world to be given a copy of my book. I sent an electronic copy to Mr. Farah via his personal assistant a day or two before the book was published, and my wife followed up a couple of weeks later with a complimentary physical copy addressed to Mr. Farah. This was basically at his personal assistant’s request.

Although a couple of weak attempts have been made by Corsi’s “experts,” to my knowledge not one single significant point in the 221-page book has ever been successfully debunked. The only thing that I have so far had to retract in the nearly 10 months since publication was my inadvertent erroneous use of the phrase “Democrat Party,” when “Democratic Party” is the proper name for that organization.

Neither Jerome Corsi (whom I actually debated on internet radio back in January) nor his boss Joseph Farah have the slightest excuse for not knowing that the masses of information they have been peddling to the public are absolute baloney. I have not followed WND’s articles since early this year, but from what I saw until that time, they continued to publish multiple birther articles weekly for months after they received a copy of my book, and every article that I saw advertised their birther wares. Usually, multiple times.

Corsi would later be dispatched by Arpaio’s posse to examine flight records from 1961, and (according to tonight’s press conference) to phone 95-year-old Verna Lee, the local Registrar of record listed on Obama’s birth certificate. Corsi was also a member of the official Arpaio press team at their first press conference in March; and birther activist Mara Zebest authored the Posse’s official report.

“Party Unity, My A**” — Arpaio’s Official Report Was Authored by Disgruntled Hillary Supporter With an Activist Anti-Obama Axe to Grind.

Anti-Obama, Birther Activist Mara Zebest -- Author of the Posse's Official Report

Anti-Obama, Birther Activist Mara Zebest -- Author of the Posse's Official Report

In an early interview, Mara Zebest sounded as if she was simply a random, uninvolved graphics expert who got a phone call one day and was shocked to examine the PDF file posted by the White House and discover that the President of the United States was attempting to foist a forgery off on the American public.

There’s a lot more to it than that, however.

Ms. Zebest is known to have been a dedicated anti-Obama activist from the 2008 primary season, when she publicly stated of Mr. Obama, “It’s what I live for – my goal to make him a mockery of the very crowd he seeks for adulation.

[See also post #503 in that thread where Ms. Zebest identifies herself by name.]

That site — pumapac — was a hub for “PUMAs,” disgruntled Hillary Clinton supporters who, when asked to unite behind presumptive nominee Obama, responded: “Party unity, my a**!” and continued to oppose Obama’s nomination.

Since When Does a Professional Investigative Team Repeat Long Debunked Claims?

We’ve already noted that virtually every claim made in Arpaio’s initial press conference had been shown to be invalid or false before they ever even began their “investigation.”

And as far as I can tell, every significant new claim made by Arpaio’s team in March was entirely debunked within days of the press conference. Most notable of these, in my opinion, was the claim that the postmark on Obama’s Secret Service registration from 1980 was proof of forgery regarding that document. Because the “19″ was missing from “1980,” Arpaio’s team claimed that somebody had fraudulently created the postmark from a recent postmark stamp, by removing (or otherwise not using) the “20″ and arranging other numerals to read “80.” Presumably, an insert for the year “2008″ might have been used, with that date cut in half and the “08″ inverted to make an “80.”

This claim was entirely debunked, literally the very next day, by Mr. Kevin Davidson of ObamaConspiracy.org, who noted that the stamp read “USPO” rather than “USPS.” The “United States Post Office” was replaced by the “United States Postal Service” (USPS) in July of 1971. Postmark stamps were replaced as they wore out, with the last known “USPO” stamp apparently surviving until 1987.

What kind of “investigative” operation is it, when one of your most important claims — in which you publicly accuse “someone” (Arpaio will never say who, but it’s supposedly not the President!) of having forged the Selective Service registration of the President of the United States — a serious crime — and your accusation is debunked by someone on the internet the next day?

What kind of “investigative” operation is it, when you actually then repeat that debunked accusation, in another press conference, 4-1/2 months later, as Arpaio did today? (“We also looked into the President’s Selective Service form, and we believe that that form is fraudulent.“)

The Arpaio Posse’s New Claims from the July 17, 2012 Press Conference

Today Arpaio’s posse presented several new claims.

At this time, I am going to go ahead and post this as “Part 1.” I intend to return later to comment on the claims that Arpaio’s posse made today.

Update: It turns out that Sheriff Joe’s Posse fabricated evidence and lied to the nation in their press conference last week. See here.

This entry was posted in Conclusions, New Information, What's Happening. Bookmark the permalink.

54 Responses to Statement Regarding Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s July 17, 2012 Press Conference: Part 1

  1. John Woodman says:

    I’m going to go ahead and open up the comments on the first part of this while I finish the article.

    I had officially retired from commenting on the birther issues on Tuesday, but I knew that if I didn’t respond to Arpaio’s latest press conference the birthers would say the date of my retirement was conveniently timed, so here we are.

    I don’t want Arpaio’s conference to take the focus too much off the bigger issue, though, which is the conclusion of all the historical research into the meaning of “natural born citizen.”

    • linda says:

      Excellent. You are dead on, as usual. Any and all nefarious inferences would be made regarding the timing of your retirement. I do appreciate that you have made an exception to respond to the Posse’s presser.

    • Hermitian says:

      You unloaded on Mara Zebest pretty good there Woodman. However, I believe that she has a challenge that you haven’t accepted yet.

      See:

      http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2012/08/article-ii-super-pac-urgent.html

      And:

      http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2012/07/new-evidence-obamas-digital-birth.html

      Surely all the self-proclaimed professional debunkers posting regularly on this site would have already accepted and debunked her challenge. But there doesn’t appear to be anyone who has done so to date.

      • John Woodman says:

        I’m afraid you’re wrong, Hermitian.

        I didn’t unload on Mara Zebest pretty good there.

        I unloaded on Mara Zebest pretty good here.

        And I’m sorry to have to say: She deserved it.

        As for taking up her “challenge” — maybe I’ll do that once she or any other birther “expert” takes up the challenge I issued THEM way back LAST AUGUST, ONE YEAR AGO:

        Hand-duplicate the birth certificate. Incorporate into your finished product every single known characteristic of the document.

        And then explain, in any terms that remotely make any sense whatsoever, exactly why you did things that way.

        It simply can’t be done.

        On the other hand, optimization and other innocent processes FULLY explain all of the “anomalies” in the PDF.

        That’s from the technical point of view. That’s from the rational point of view.

        If the straightforward, ONLY reasonable technical explanation is unacceptable to you, well, I’m sorry about that.

        I also have some more bad news for you: You’re not going to lose 50 pounds in 3 weeks on the McDonalds-milkshakes diet.

  2. Jim says:

    Thanks John…I just KNEW you’d be sucked back in! :D

    I think it would be hilarious to use their interpretation of Hawaii laws against them. What would they say if they found out that the laws of the states they were born in were pretty much the same as Hawaii at the time of each of their births. Wonder if they would call for an investigation of each of themselves by the DHS to make sure each of them isn’t an illegal alien!

  3. Montana says:

    Wow, what a surprise, he found exactly what he suspected. They are just repeating what other small minded fools have said before, so safe to say no evidence that would stand up in a court of law in the United States. Its upon you to prove to us that what you are saying is true. Take it to court you coward!

    Let me be clear none of these Birther dullards have taken there “Birther Documents of facts, more like lies” and none have won a case in the “U.S. Courts”, maybe in their simple minds (if they have any) but not in our “U.S. Courts”, so unless Birthers/ teabaggers, whatever you want to be called, win a court case, we will continue to see as dullards, liars or racist or maybe all three. Deal with the real truth baby!

    Hey maybe Republican Randi Shannon from Iowa can take Joe Arpaio and Willard Mitt Romney with her to her BS “Republic for the United States” what a real traitor.

  4. William McPherson says:

    Your claim that the evidence of forgery on Obama’s Selective Service card has been debunked comes across as dishonest. The posse did not claim a 2008 pica stamp was used. The 4 digit year insert for the pica stamp is in question not the stamp itself. That forgery has not been debunked. The “08″ remains upside down and off-center, and the “19″ remains lost. To say this theory has been debunked makes one question your “investigative” operation.

    • Scientist says:

      The “08″ is not upside down. It is off center as it would be if the “1980″ date was centered. I am not certain that the “19″ is missing, since we are looking at an electronic file made from a photocopy of the original.

      We don’t even know for certain where the document comes from. Some birther supposedly got it from Selective Service under an FOIA request. If you want to talk about forgery, how do we know the birther didn’t make it from whole cloth or modify it? But let’s say it really came from Selective Service. It arrived in September 2008, while Bush was still in office. How did someone insert the forgery into the records? And why? The statute of limitations on failing to register in 1980 were long past in 2008. The restrictions on federal employment for failing to register do not apply to elected officials. And Obama got federal student loans (folks at the record center in Iowa pled guilty to accessing his student loan records without authorization). Those are cross-checked with registration databases under the law.

      So, I will go with John as far as honesty goes.

    • Dr Kenneth Noisewater says:

      All one has to do is look at the 8 then look at even Corsi’s examples of stamps with 8s and its obvious by the bottom part of the 8 that the 8 is not upside down.

    • John Woodman says:

      Okay. My statement of their claim — that someone had used a 2008 stamp — was not entirely accurate. I have edited the article to more precisely state what I believe their claim to have been. If you have good evidence that the revised description is still not quite accurate, I’ll be happy to look at it.

      Regardless of that you state — “That forgery has not been debunked… To say this theory has been debunked makes one question your ‘investigative’ operation.”

      Okay. So let me get this straight. The theory NOW is that somebody (oh, but not the PRESIDENT, we don’t want to accuse HIM) — in order to conduct a forgery — went out and SOMEHOW, SOMEWHERE found a United States Post Office stamp — the very last one of which would have been manufactured in 1971, some 40 years ago, and the last known example of which was in 1987 — and then took that ancient stamp, and went out and got modern date inserts, and put an “8″ and a “0″ into it.

      And the proof of this is… that the “19″ is missing. And the fact that “19″ is missing is courtroom-quality “PROOF” of a forgery.

      Gee… how about this as a theory? By 1980, the date stamps made in 1971 were getting old. So were the date inserts for those stamps, which might or might not have been the same size as those in the stamps that replaced them. One wore out, or at least the “19″ part of it wore out.

      Now which scenario do you think is more credible?

      • Scientist says:

        Besides, John, any forgery woukd have had to be inserted into the SSS records while Bush was in office. I would be eager to hear from the CCP how that was done.

      • William McPherson says:

        The insert that goes into that stamp would have only been in use for 7 months. I don’t suggest there is courtroom proof of forgery with the SS card. However, it’s an anomaly compared to other cards of the time. It’s just plain difficult to explain how the “19″ is not present.

        • Scientist says:

          No, the “19″ could have been in use for years.

          Now, please, Mr McPherson, explain how the forgery got placed into the SSS files. I really like a good story at bedtime, so don’t disappoint me…

        • John Woodman says:

          1. Depending on the configuration of the stamp or set, the “19″ could indeed have been in use for many years, and could have worn out.

          2. Any forger even halfway worth his salt would’ve included a “19″ anyway. Rubber year stamps containing both a “1″ and a “9″ are easy to come by. In fact, standard sets appear to contain year stamps for a period of ten years, thus assuring a buyer of getting at least 1 “9″ in a single batch of date stamps, and the sets are only $14.95 each. I would think that a Presidential forger would probably be able to afford more than one set.

          3. In any event, the fact that the stamp itself says “USPO” and NOT “USPS” makes the claim that somebody took a recent date stamp and altered it just ludicrous.

          4. Did I mention that the claim that there is “proof of forgery” here is idiotic?

        • John Woodman says:

          Oh, and 5:

          Birther have now produced something MORE than SIXTY claims of “proof of forgery” or “Obama is ineligible” that have CLEARLY been shown to be either INVALID (best case scenario) or outright FALSE and/ or KNOWN SCAMS.

          Oh — but we have to FORGET about those. Hey, we’ve got some NEW theory. NOW Obama’s SELECTIVE SERVICE registration is a forgery, because the “19″ is missing from the postmark.

          It’s like this:

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Pause…

          Birthers: “WOLF! WOLF!!!! MY GOD, IT’S A WOLF!!!!”

          Rational people: “Look. It’s not a wolf. Here’s why (explanation).

          Now. Mr. McPherson. Would you please explain to us exactly WHY we should believe birthers when they cry, “Wolf?”

          • But, but now Frank Marshall Davis’s hand is mysteriously in a photo of young Obama (or it just might be a baseball mitt). Corsi is on top of it http://www.wnd.com/2012/07/another-doctored-image-deepens-obama-mystery/

            • Or as someone pointed out in at the Fogbow it is just a woman’s hand in a shadow. These morons are desperate and throwing stuff against the wall at this stage. It isn’t sticking too well.

            • John Woodman says:

              If I weren’t trying to wrap up my involvement in this, I would republish the above, or something very like it, as “A Brief History of the Birther Movement.”

          • Dave B. says:

            Here’s an interesting glimpse into a birther “mind”:
            http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Jim_Biggs/sheriff-joe-arpaio-cold-case-posse_n_1680191_170410957.html
            Jim insists that “the term natural born citizen has not been discussed in a court of law”. In the comment at the link there, he says ““wrong those are opinions on the cases not arguments on cases, and not even by the people involved in the cases

            the term natural born citizen has never been argued in a court of law”
            The opinions he’s referring to are the orders of the courts in Tisdale v. Obama, Ankeny v. Governor, and Farrar et al. v. Obama.

          • Hermitian says:

            Check your paragraph repeat key Woodman. It must be stuck.

            • nbc says:

              Look who’s back. Still no arguments.

            • John Woodman says:

              Actually… it’s birthers who are stuck.

              On repeatedly, again and again, coming up with claims that have no merit.

              And on insisting on coming up with more meritless claims, no matter how many of their previous claims have been shown to be entirely divorced from reality.

              It’s like: Throw as much stuff up against the wall, and see what sticks.

              The only problem is that they are in the desert. That being the case, the only things available to throw up against the wall are rocks, sticks, and cow skulls — none of which are even capable of sticking.

        • Dr Kenneth Noisewater says:

          Why is the O missing in Honolulu on Corsi’s stamp?

  5. Scientist says:

    Regarding the pencil-marked “9″ on the LFBC, I must be missing something. What is the evidence that “9″ is incorrect for Obama Sr? Depending which coding key you use it either means “Other non-white”, which he is, or “Unknown/refused to say”, and he might very well have refused to say (I routinely refuse to answer questions about race). So, the clerk, seeing he was from Africa (it clearly says he was from East Africa) put “African”. No law requires a parent to say what race he/she is.

    I simply don’t see how even the most favorable (to Zullo) reading of this says anything.

    • gsgs says:

      they claim 9=not given , but it was given, so it should have been 7
      (so the silly forger changed the 7 to a 9,
      because he incorrectly thought he was smarter than the registrar)
      or if 9 was correct, nothing was given and “African” was filled
      in later by the forger
      (“foolishly” filling the blank space so to let it
      look more correctly)

  6. Dave B. says:

    Mr. Woodman, I’d like to express my sincere appreciation for all the fine effort you’ve put into this business, and I’ve just put my money where my mouth is with a small donation and a purchase of your book, which I look forward to reading. It occurred to me that you might have an answer to a question that’s been on my mind ever since Grand Inquisitor Arpaio’s Chief Duck Weigher Mike Zullo appeared on the scene: is there a prior connection between the two Jersey boys, Zullo and Farah? I can’t figure out why such a cipher would be selected for the job, other than his obvious qualification of being able to lie without conscience.

    • John Woodman says:

      Thanks very much!

      I never found very much in the way of any real background info on Mr. Zullo. Is Farah from New Jersey? I know that Corsi lives here, as does Mario Apuzzo.

      • Dave B. says:

        Farah’s from the same neck of the woods as Zullo, and is a little bit older. New Jersey is a true hotbed of birther activity. They’ve got Corsi and Apuzzo, and Nicholas Purpura (not to mention Moran)– and who could forget Leo “the Parakeet” Donofrio? (Well, to be fair, I often do.) Why, I’d bet Arpaio was even conceived on a wild weekend in Atlantic City.
        I’ve seen the briefest of references to Zullo being a police officer in Demarest, New Jersey, and afterwards a private investigator in North Jersey, but that’s about it. He was more forthcoming yesterday than I’ve ever seen him on the subject of his past, which is certainly a great deal more mysterious than President Obama’s.
        I’ve just been wondering how many different threads make up the whole WorldNet Daily/Cold Case Posse web.

  7. Dr Kenneth Noisewater says:

    Another claim that Zullo made was about baby pictures saying there were no pictures of Obama’s first christmas then he made a comment about other pictures of Obama as a child being faked. He never came back to that or proved that claim. I was almost waiting for him to claim Obama Sr wasn’t his father and then talk about who they thought was.

  8. ehancock says:

    Dr Conspiracy has a great article on the meaning of the pencil code “9.” I assume you have seen it.

    http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2012/07/code-9-the-cold-case-posses-big-lie/

  9. gsgs says:

    it’s not only the posse.
    Also all the reporters on the press conference , the newspapers and broadcasts.
    Almost nobody mentioned the debunks. Bad preparation and research.
    Ongoing since at least the first posse.
    How can they succeed to ignore the debunks for so long in a country
    like USA ? That puzzles me.

    in your TV-spot , rather than – or better in addition to -
    showing the book I think they should have showed an URL to this thread.
    And they should have spared one question to Zullo _after_
    your phone call, what he has to say to that.

    —————————————

    Zullo claimed that the ebook money went to charity, at that Arizona TV
    spot just before your phone call was broadcasted.

    • Unless the checks were made out directly to the charity the $1500 that he received (and counting) will be counted as his income and reported by Amazon to the IRS on a form 1099. I can guarantee you that Amazon will not write a check without a tax ID, either a social security or EIN number for a business. (John can vouch for this). Zullo can claim a tax deduction if he gave the money to his church but how would we know he didn’t just count that against his pledged amount for the year? The bottom line is Zullo made income off the “book” and had to give someone his SS# beforehand. What he did with the money is his business.

      Zullo seemed quite unprepared for that question and actually lied in his answer before admitting the he made money – sort of. I bet we could even figure out about how many copies were sold from that $1500 amount.

      • I read the transcript of the press conference provided by folks at The Fogbow forum and what Mike Zullo said was that he received checks from the publisher. The book publisher was Paperless Publishing, LLC of New York so it appears that is who paid Zullo.

        It does not change the rules. If Zullo received money directly from the publisher it was income. He received personal benefit from the work of a tax exempt organization and we now learn that this was in violation of the code of conduct of the MCSO (that includes volunteers).

        Zullo’s reaction to the question was telling. At first when asked about whether he earned income the said “absolutely not” then he immediately reversed himself and admitted he had received money from the publisher. Then he tried to use the oft used excuse that “I gave it to my church” as if that absolved him of any wrong doing. Even if he gave money to the church there is no way of knowing whether that was money he had planned to give anyway.

    • Suranis says:

      Yep and Al Capone was unjustly jailed for tax evasion on money he technically never earned too.

  10. Adrien Nash says:

    Two things should be considered that are being overlooked. Regarding the number 2 in the birth certificate box for father’s place of birth; it lists three possibilities which are; island, state, foreign country. Kenya would not have been connected to the number 2. Most likely the number referred to the Hawaiian islands, with Oahu as # 1; the Big Island as # 2, etc.
    Whether that possibilities is correct or not isn’t important. What’s important is that there is no way in Hell that # 2 refers to Oahu, nor Africa, so if it actually relates to the several islands, with the Big Island being #2, then that connnection points to digital erasure and replacement. There’s no logical way to connect #2 to Africa so if it relates to an island, (which would be the default usage) then the birth certificate belonged to someone whose father was from Oahu and not Kenya.

    The next point is that everyone is foolishly referring to the Selective Service card image as if it were the actual card with a real ink-stamp image when in fact it is nothing more than a photocopy. No photocopy is proof of anything when it is surrounded with suspicions due to extremely high stakes. Neither side can point to it as definitive proof of anything because all digital images are highly subject to manipulation, alteration, and loss of some detail, although a two digit number can’t simply be missing due to loss of detail. The numbers had to have been missing to begin with. If any conclusions can be drawn, then they are centered not on what is visible but on what is missing. Why is it missing? Would a ruined, broken stamp really be used or simply discarded? Stamps were so expensive or hard to acquire that they could not be tossed out like any other form of trash.

    • gsgs says:

      it could be:
      1:same location as in 7a,7b,7c
      2: other

      (birthplace = place of occurrance or not)

      such settings are quite typical in these certificates

    • Scientist says:

      Here are some facts about Obama’s draft registration:

      1. He was in the database as having registered. Corsi found him there. He got student loans, which you are denied if you don’t register.
      2. The registration form came from SSS under Bush.

      Therefore, Obama DID register in 1980. Period. End of story. So why would anyone (except a birther) forge the registration document? Speaking of which, the source of the registration form was a birther who made a FOIA request. Therefore, the form could have been altered BY THE BIRTHER. This could be yet another BIRTHER SCAM. One of about 376, as John has pointed out.

    • gorefan says:

      There apears to be a letter “a” in the field for mother’s birthplace. Also on the Nordykes BCs the mother’s and father’s birthplaces appear to be the letter “a”.

      None of them were born on an island or in a foreign but they were born in a state (not Hawaii).

      On the this BC the parents’ birthplace appears to be a “1″. Maybe they were both born in Hawaii.

      http://www.wnd.com/2011/09/342937/

      • gsgs says:

        http://www.wnd.com/2011/09/342937/
        race of father : 3
        business : 3
        race of mother : 3

        federal code for 3 would be (American) “Indian”
        two Indian parents in Honolulu in Aug.1961 and WND found him ? looks unlikely
        maybe 3 is a different code ?!?

        • gorefan says:

          If you look at the back of that WND BC and save it to your hard drive, you can actually read some of the fields that have been bled through the paper.

          Mr Woodman wrote an article about it.

          http://www.obamabirthbook.com/http:/www.obamabirthbook.com/2011/09/i-catch-worldnetdaily-scrubbing-information-that-directly-contradicts-one-of-dr-jerome-corsis-most-important-fraud-theories/

          After it became know that you could read the certification number, WND altered the image to remove it.

          From the info that is still visible and from the August 24th newspaper announcements, it was possible to determine the last name of the girl born on August 23rd. Her last name starts with “A” and her certification number is (IIRC) 500 numbers below the President’s and the Nordyke’s. Also her father’s occupation included the word “Chief”

          That does not fit with the CCP’s recent analysis of the certification numbers. Is that why they didn’t mention it? Afterall, Corsi wrote the WND article about the 8/23/1961 BC.

          • gsgs says:

            I wasn’t following the issue so much at that time.
            Many posts in that thread !
            But besides the issue with the certificate numbers, do we agree that those are “3″ s
            in the race-fields ? That would be evidence,
            that Hawaii didn’t use the federal codes for race in 1961

            • gorefan says:

              You cannot make that assumption until you actually see race of the parents.

            • John Woodman says:

              That’s a good find. At this point, I would certainly have to agree with you.

              It appears that the codes are not federal at all. There may well be some overlap, but I think it’s simply unknown at the moment exactly what the codes mean.

            • gsgs says:

              Hawaii may have ordered the race-codes by Hawaiian frequency,
              which would have been for births in 1961:
              ~5400 white,~4900 (Part-)Hawaiian.~3800 Japanese,~800 Chinese,
              ~200 Negro, ~40 Indian
              and maybe Filipino,Aleuts,Pacific Islanders,others,not stated/unknown
              Maybe the frequencies were different when they developed the system (1959 ?).
              The feds had separate categories for Hawaiians and Part-Hawaiians
              in the death certificates, but zero were put into the Hawaiian category.
              It was probably different when the system was developed, else they would
              not have introduced the extra category.
              ———————————————-
              1961 death certificates had:
              white,01,1199
              japanese,05,1060
              hawaiian,09,0
              part-hawaiian,10,436
              filipino,08,396
              chinese,04,213
              black,02,16
              indian,03,4
              aleut,06,0
              eskimo,07,1
              all other races,11,115
              ——————————————–
              there were 17000 births in Hawaii in 1961 but only 3400 deaths.
              This is probably because of the military and the population movements
              after WW2. (and not BC-tourism as suggested by Zullo)
              However, we have 4900 Part-Hawaiian births and only 436 deaths.
              This could be due to the privileges that Hawaiians got ?
              ——————————————————
              Apparently death statistics was given priority over birth statistics
              so my guess would be
              1=white
              2=Japanese
              3=Hawaiian
              4=Part-Hawaiian
              5=Filipino
              6=Chinese
              9=others/unknown

              while their instructions to the employees probably also included
              Aleut,Eskimo,Indian,Negro , just because the feds have it.
              But it would make some sense, if even Negros were subsumed
              under “others” for Hawaiian statistics.

  11. peter grigore says:

    you can convince even obama that he was born in US. i hope you both go to jail, one for the fraud and the other one because he would stop at nothing to reach his goal.

    • Thomas Brown says:

      Fascinating. All the evidence confirms he was born here, and none… as in none whatsoever that is not a Birther fabrication… points to him being born elsewhere. And you think anyone’s going to jail?

      Used-car salesmen must just love you.

  12. i don’t know if all this helps the antibirthercause, but the donate button is fine. i guess you understand why i can’t help you out.
    anyway i wanted to let you know about antibirthers.com
    people are still scrutinizing the virtual.
    john, would you like to see the original in the book-in-the-vault if you had the chance ?

    • John Woodman says:

      Scott, good to see you again!

      As someone who has spent so much time on the issue, I certainly wouldn’t turn down the opportunity if it didn’t really cost me anything.

      And if I examined it and came away with questions or doubts, I would make those public.

      • i’m glad you’re still here too amigo. no need to retire, just do enough to keep it fun, you’re an expert now !

        think we’ll still be doing this when we’re in our nineties ??
        i still don’t believe it’s a dead or foregone issue.
        i’ll be back for some new discussions.

        all the best, catch some fish this summer ! cheers!

  13. Jane says:

    You know why the short joe arpaio will not take his so called evidence into a US court, even in Arizona, is because the judge would first laugh at it and throw him out on his behind.

  14. Charles says:

    So we are to take your word ( John Woodman ) over a legal law enforcement agency from Arizona ? Are you nuts? And I have a bridge in Brooklyn I want to sell you .

    • John Woodman says:

      If the law enforcement agency is putting out bogus information, yes. Of course.

      Look. Pretty much everything I’ve ever said is verifiable.

      Oh — by the way: Did you know that Arpaio’s posse falsified evidence and lied to YOU.

      This isn’t speculation. It’s been clearly demonstrated.

      They have no response because there’s nothing they can possibly say to defend their actions.

      Here ya go, Charles.

Comments are closed.