Sunday, November 30, 2014


If Not the U.S. Media, 
Then Perhaps Canada?
“A TIME OF RECKONING”
by Sharon Rondeau


(Nov. 29, 2014) — In an editorial dated November 26, 2014, Calgary Sun columnist Marc Patrone wrote that “America is a mess and the world can barely tear its eyes away from the unfolding train wreck.”

The 11-point maple leaf flag was adopted as
the official flag of Canada on February 15, 1965
In his column Patrone asserts that “the media, to its eternal, traitorous disgrace, has gone full Benedict Arnold.  They have been a Democratic lapdog so long, they now act as if they have no choice but to continue protecting Obama.”

The day after the November 4 elections, Patrone criticized Barack Hussein Obama for ” the disdain, arrogance and contempt with which this president dismissed the results” in a reference to Obama’s statement that he “heard” the “the two-thirds of voters who chose not to participate in the process.”

Patrone lists a litany of complaints about the Obama regime, including the IRS targeting scandal, Obama’s apparent appeasement or even facilitation of relations with the rogue nation of Iran intent on achieving nuclear status, and “a shameless attempt to silence online critics” through his “net neutrality” advocacy.

Obama maintains that “net neutrality” must be “protected” by “a new set of rules” by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), which Obama describes as “an independent agency.”

The IRS is also expected to be “independent” of the White House, but the recent discovery of approximately 30,000 emails which the agency said were lost without backup said to contain 2,500 communications with White House staff may constitute an impeachable offense, according to political pundit Dick Morris and others.

On November 7, Patrone predicted that Obama would use the “nuclear option” of “amnesty for millions of illegals,” which Obama announced on November 20 after promising that he would “work with Republican lawmakers” on important issues going forward.

After insisting on 25 different occasions that he was not authorized to act alone in changing immigration policies, Obama announced on November 20 that through his “executive actions,” relatives of young people shielded from deportation proceedings by his 2012 DACA declaration would also receive relief from the same if they were not hardened criminals and paid fines.  On the same day, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) issued new policy directives stating that only the most serious criminals would be given top priority for removal from the country by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents.

Democrats have defended Obama’s actions by stating that previous presidents have issued executive orders on immigration matters, but many believe that Obama has usurped the authority to make law granted to Congress in Article I, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution.

Rep. Trey Gowdy, who for the last several months has led a special investigation into the deaths of four Americans in Benghazi, Libya in September 2012, told Fox News anchor Bill O’Reilly before Obama’s announcement that if Obama “wants a solution, he’ll wait” until the new Congress convenes in January.  Gowdy characterized Obama’s impending declaration as not a “fight with the Republicans,” but rather, “a fight with the people who founded this republic.”

When O’Reilly asked Gowdy about Fox News commentator Judge Andrew Napolitano’s claim that Obama’s “making a new law” is an impeachable offense, Gowdy responded, “Have you met Joe Biden?” and “Impeachment is a punishment; it’s not a remedy.”

Some disagree with Gowdy’s contention that impeachment is only a “punishment.” One writer whose essay was widely publicized stated that “The impeachment process was part of the carefully crafted system of checks and balances, separation of powers, and limited government with the consent of the governed, and other enlightened principles inherent to a constitutional republic.”

In Federalist #65, Founding Father Alexander Hamilton acknowledged that impeachments could be “political,” and Founding Father James Iredell stated that “Every government requires it [impeachment]. Every man ought to be amenable for his conduct.“

Three Democrat staffers to whom this writer spoke last week were unable to point to the constitutional authority Obama allegedly has to “change the law” on deportations, as Obama admitted to having done to an audience in Chicago on Tuesday.

Patrone also cited Obama for having “fanned the flames of grievance and hatred” in regard to the violent protests in Ferguson, MO which occurred after a grand jury failed to issue a “True Bill” of indictment against Officer Darren Wilson for killing Michael Brown on August 9.

Missouri’s lieutenant governor suspects that the Obama White House was involved in the absence of the state’s National Guard in Ferguson on the evening of the prosecutor’s announcement, when considerable destruction of businesses, police cars and personal property occurred at the hands of angry protesters.

On Saturday, The Post & Email responded to Patrone’s editorial.

Dear Mr. Patrone:

I have read your column of November 26 in which you wrote that “America must fight to survive the Obama debacle” and in which you revealed that you have received many emails from concerned citizens asking “What do we do now?”

Although I am primarily a writer of “hard” news and not an editorialist, let me first state that those of us here in the U.S. with the same concerns appreciate the fact that someone in the media, anywhere, is writing about the “debacle” which has worsened almost daily since the man known as “Barack Hussein Obama” began his occupation of the Oval Office in January 2009.

Since you are willing to unreservedly write about your observations of the impact Obama’s actions are having on the United States and the world, there is something you and others can do to put a stop to it:  expose the depths of deception to which the Obama regime went to catapult and maintain this man in the Oval Office for the last six years.

Beginning in late 2007, doubts began to surface about Obama’s constitutional eligibility to serve as president and commander-in-chief based on Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution, which states:
No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.
The “natural born Citizen” clause, though hotly debated and now watered down from its original meaning, involved the allegiance of the person’s parents as well as his birthplace.  Questions about Sen. John McCain’s eligibility were also raised given that he was born to two U.S.-citizen parents in Panama.  Early in 2008, NBC News reported that “many legal scholars and government lawyers say it’s a serious question with no clear answer.”

NBC further stated:
It seems clear only that the founders wanted to make certain that whoever was president would be loyal to the U.S. alone and not to some other country.  But the term “natural born citizen,” many scholars say, was not in common use at the time the Constitution was written.
The press never questioned Obama about his background, childhood, parentage or his exotic life story while claiming to be a “natural born Citizen.”

Similarly, Sen. Ted Cruz, born in your city of Calgary in December 1970, now is reportedly planning to run for president despite his foreign birthplace and foreign-citizen father at the time of his birth.  Following a FOIA request I made on October 21, the U.S. State Department has failed to confirm even the existence of a certificate that by law would have had to have been filed upon Cruz’s birth indicating that a U.S. birth “abroad” occurred.

The evisceration of the “natural born Citizen” clause has also led to speculation that Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, South Carolina Nikki Haley, and Florida Sen. Marco Rubio will run for president, all of whom were born in this country to parents who were, at the time, citizens of foreign countries and therefore possessing allegiance to those nations.

In December 2007, left-leaning MSNBC commentator Chris Matthews declared that Obama was “born in Indonesia” and asked his guest if she speculated that then-Democrat presidential primary contender Hillary Clinton would raise that issue to disqualify or cast doubt on Obama’s eligibility.  Some have reported, although a video clip cannot be found, that during an early primary debate, Clinton said to Obama, “You can’t run for president; you’re not a ‘natural born Citizen.’”

In 2012, a film producer told Dr. Jerome Corsi of WND that Bill Clinton had referred to Obama as “the non-citizen” and was convinced that he was “born in Kenya.”

Obama claims a father who was never a citizen of the United States, which alone, during the founding days of the Republic and later, would have disqualified him and should have disqualified him in 2008 for more reasons than we knew at the time.

But beyond a discussion of the meaning of the term of art used in the Constitution solely for the presidency, something lurks which is much more sinister:  the fact that the only “documents” proffered to the public bearing Obama’s name have been declared “computer-generated forgeries” by a three-year law enforcement investigation which the American media have refused to report.

On April 27, 2011, an image was posted on the White House website purported to be a scan of a certified copy of Obama’s “long-form” birth certificate from the Hawaii Department of Health (HDOH) in an apparent attempt to quell the rising doubts about Obama’s purported birth in Hawaii and subsequent constitutional eligibility to serve as president made public by businessman Donald Trump earlier that year.  Obama gave a press conference that morning asserting that the image represented his original birth certificate, then flew to Chicago to film an appearance with friend Oprah Winfrey.

Within 24 hours, the image was denounced as a poor forgery by numerous experts, with no expert coming forward to declare it authentic.

Concerned that their votes would be disenfranchised by the presence of an ineligible candidate on the state ballot, a group of 250 Surprise, AZ Tea Party members approached their sheriff, Joe Arpaio, requesting that an investigation be launched.  Arpaio acceded to their request by delegating his Cold Case Posse, which works at no expense to taxpayers, to begin probing the origins of the image.

To their surprise, the five-member team found that the image could not have emanated from a real, paper document.

Nearly three years ago, the first of two press conferences was held by Cold Case Posse lead investigator Michael Zullo and Arpaio in which they stated that they had found probable cause to believe that both Obama’s long-form birth certificate and Selective Service registration form are “computer-generated forgeries.”  The media took no action other than issuing reports on the internet which often denigrated Arpaio’s statements and the investigation in general.  Media efforts to discredit Zullo and Arpaio continue to this day despite Arpaio’s recent and more frequent interviews with alternative media willing to report the posse’s findings on the internet in print or audio-visually.

A second press conference held on July 17, 2012, further affirmed the posse’s findings and called upon Congress to launch its own investigation into the fraudulent birth certificate image.

Since that time, Zullo has revealed that Obama operatives employed by a division of the Department of Defense, DARPA, have been involved in trolling the internet to quell discussion of Obama’s fake credentials and questionable eligibility and background.  It is likely that the operatives have hacked websites and email accounts in addition to issuing death threats against those investigating Obama’s background in the early years of his usurpation.

I have been the target of all of the aforementioned types of harassment, reported it to the authorities, and observed that no action was taken.

During an interview in May of last year, Zullo described the fraudulent birth certificate as created and published “with the intent to deceive.”  With a “lapdog media,” as you note; pressure from the White House, of which Zullo has written proof in the form of sworn affidavits; and an American public largely catatonic when it comes to politics and the U.S. Constitution, Obama has remained in office.

It is completely in keeping with recent revelations made by Judicial Watch by its release of thousands of pages of documents obtained by court order from the Department of Justice showing that the former CBS reporter you mentioned, Sharyl Attkisson, was targeted for silencing regarding the “Fast & Furious” gunrunning operation that all of the mainstream media was threatened in some way if they were to report on Obama’s questionable eligibility, and later, on the fraudulent birth certificate and Selective Service form.

Attkisson’s computers were reportedly turned on and off remotely and classified documents placed on her hard drive with the possible intent of implicating her in a manufactured crime.

However, even Attkisson, who has bravely spoken out about the breach of her computers by a government agency and the marginalization she underwent which led to her separation from CBS after two decades, has not written about the forgery of Obama’s only identification documents.

Articles of Impeachment written by the North American Law Center (NALC) state in Article I that Obama has committed “criminal identity fraud.”

America is actually in much worse shape than even observant citizens of other countries such as you know, as Congress has failed to investigate the most basic claims Obama makes to eligibility and legitimacy:  three fraudulent documents, the creator of which is reportedly now known to Zullo and Arpaio.  In an unguarded moment, a congressional staffer admitted to one of my readers, “We know the birth certificate is a fake,” yet Congress continues fighting Obama on policy rather than addressing the true nature of the problem.

In his May 2013 interview with me, Zullo stated, “Had Congress looked at this before…Benghazi might never have happened.”

But Congress does not wish to probe whether or not Obama lied about his identity, committed fraud against every American and the world, and has usurped the presidency as a poseur commander-in-chief.  Congress does not appear to be concerned that a possible foreigner commands our nuclear arsenal, U.S. troops worldwide, and who appears, at least to one congressman, not to have had “an American experience” while growing up.

In short, Congress has betrayed us as well; therefore, the elections which were a strong rebuke of Obama’s socialist agenda will bring in only feckless politicians rather than true public servants.

The impact of Obama’s faux presidency on this country may never be forgotten or undone.  As you vividly detailed, illegal aliens have been given status by executive diktat while sniveling members of his party justify it on false premises.  But Republicans who should have stood up years ago and demanded Obama release his real records have remained silent for seven years while millions of constituents implored them for help and suffered the consequences of their inaction.

Obama’s former press secretary, Robert Gibbs, lied to the press, stating that he had “posted it on the internet” in reference to a short-form Certificate of Live Birth released in multiple formats and also declared a forgery.

There had to have been a reason that the White House and Selective Service System released forgeries instead of authentic documents to the public.  If then-governor of Hawaii Neil Abercrombie was unable to find Obama’s original birth certificate in January 2011, how did it suddenly become available in April, just three months later?

Why on April 8, 2011 did Trump predict that a forgery would be released in the near future?  Why did he say just weeks ago that Obama’s real name is “Barry Soetoro,” unquestioned by a dumbfounded mainstream media trio?

Why is the federal government harassing Sheriff Arpaio with continual lawsuits and a government-appointed “monitor” to his office?  Why has Arpaio begun to speak out about the investigation, which actually became two investigations? Why did the work involved “turn very dark” at one point?

The Post & Email has reported on the Obama eligibility/identity question from the beginning and intends to pursue it to the end, which we “hope” results in a “change” in course for Congress and all elected officials who have ignored the cries of the people to enforce the Constitution.  Obama’s disdain for our founding documents appears to be rooted in something much deeper than only his socialist leanings, which Congress is loathe to discover because it will prove that its members, too, are implicated in the biggest political crime ever perpetrated in the United States of America.

Will you join me in overcoming the mainstream media blackout on this vital issue?  If not you, is there an investigative journalist in Canada interested in why Obama’s plan for America is so dark and foreign?

As you stated, “the implications for Canada and the rest of the beleaguered free world are monumental.”  But if he ascended to the office by fraud and deceit, not only is there “time to fight back,” but also a time of reckoning in which the truth about what has happened to our country and who was behind it are finally exposed for all to see.

Thank you.

Very truly yours,

Sharon Rondeau, Editor
The Post & Email
P.O. Box 195
Stafford Springs, CT  06076
editor@thepostemail.com
203-987-7948

Source link. © 2014, The Post & Email. All rights reserved.