Obama Goes After Sheriff Joe Arpaio


The Obama administration on Tuesday said it was preparing to sue Arizona county sheriff Joe Arpaio and his department for violating civil rights laws by improperly targeting Latinos in a bid to crack down on illegal immigrants.

The sheriff’s high-profile crackdown on illegal immigrants has helped thrust the issue onto the national political stage with some states passing tough new laws aimed at pushing out those in the country illegally.

The administration’s Justice Department and the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office have been in settlement talks for months over allegations that officers regularly made unlawful stops and arrests of Latinos, used excessive force against them and failed to adequately protect the Hispanic community.

Those negotiations have broken down because of a fight over the Justice Department’s demand that an independent monitor be appointed by a federal court to oversee compliance with the settlement, which has now reached 128 pages in draft form, according to the Obama administration.

“We believe that you are wasting time and not negotiating in good faith,” Roy Austin, deputy assistant attorney general in the Justice Department’s civil rights division, said in a letter to the lawyer for Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office (MCSO).

Austin said in the letter that Arpaio’s team demanded that a meeting slated for Wednesday include for the first time negotiations over the monitor and previously had demanded that the Justice Department provide more details about its findings.

“MCSO’s refusal to engage in good faith negotiations requires us to prepare for civil (court) action,” Austin said. He added that the Justice Department has recently discovered more information about the “failure to reasonably investigate sex crimes” by Arpaio’s office.

The Justice Department in a December report outlined numerous alleged civil rights violations, including that Latino drivers were four to nine times more likely to be stopped than non-Latinos by Arpaio’s force.

The sheriff has steadfastly denied any wrongdoing and lashed out at the Obama administration for targeting his department and failing to deal with the problem of illegal immigration with some 11.5 million believed to be in the United States.

In a strongly worded statement on Tuesday, Arpaio said the appointment of a monitor would force him to abdicate responsibility for his police force, including decisions about policies, operations, jail programs and enforcement.

“To the Obama administration, who is attempting to strong arm me into submission only for its political gain, I say: This will not happen, not on my watch!” Arpaio said in the statement.

Arpaio’s force has been under investigation by federal authorities since 2008 during the Bush administration. Obama’s Justice Department spent months fighting for access to documents and to some of his deputies. Arpaio was interviewed twice during the probe.

Occupying the White House: Who is the U.S. President?


A straight answer to this questions is no one but Barack Obama himself knows who he is. His Certificate of Life Birth is fake and so is his Selective Service registration card. The White House invested over $1.7 million to deny investigators access to his college records and portions of his background information were suspiciously lost or are missing from record keeping offices. Not even the governor of Hawaii, Neil Abercrombie was able to produce the original paper document known as the Long Form Birth Certificate.

In recent weeks, independent investigators and former law enforcement officials worked together to determine if the document that the White House presented as Barack Obama’s birth certificate was indeed a forgery, as it was shown by several alternative media outlets just a half an hour after the PDF file was made public on the White House website. After the forgery was confirmed by forensic investigators, members of a Cold Case Posse working under the direction of Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio also concluded that Obama’s Selective Service registration card had also been tampered with before being shown in public.

In the case of the certificate, investigators determined that several parts of the PDF document had been individually placed on a white computer screen page to mimic what a real birth certificate would show. After placing all of the items on a computer file, the forgers placed an image of the green background that all birth certificates are printed on in the United States. When analyzed, the computer file was determined to be a forgery by experts who discovered the placement of the individual items as well as the “white shadow” left by those items once they removed the fake green background or after cutting out the text layers. The file resembling Barack Obama’s birth certificate is just that, a computer file. According to investigators such as former police officer Mike Zullo, the supposed birth certificate does not exist in paper form, because it was created on a computer, and the only time it left the computer it was made on, was when it was placed on the White House website as a PDF file.

Hawaiian governor Neil Abercrombie manifested his intention to clear U.S. president Obama of any wrong doing or fault and to publicly show his birth certificate, which he believed was archived in the state of Hawaii. But when Abercrombie got into office and initiated proceedings to obtain the paper form of Obama’s certificate, he was not able to find it. It was missing. Later on, the White House conducted a press conference to show an image of what they claimed to be Obama’s official birth certificate. After being analyzed by many graphic design experts, the PDF document was deemed to be fake. Since then, the White House never officially responded to accusations that the file shown during the press conference was fraudulent.

Six months ago, a group of citizens in the state of Arizona approached Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s office in Maricopa County and talked to him about their concern regarding the voting process and how their votes could lose all validity due to the fact that no rules were officially established to certify that a presidential candidate in the United States was who he said he was. As it stands now, anyone can claim to be anyone, fill out a card with his name, sign it and then run for president. Mr. Arpaio called a group of investigators composed by former law enforcement officials, lawyers and digital forensic investigators who were asked to take a look at the citizens’ concerns. Sheriff Arpaio also asked investigators to look into the possibility that the documents presented as Barack Obama’s birth certificate and then his Selective Service registration card were not real documents, but perhaps forgeries. Those investigators who worked in the case did not receive taxpayer funds or payments to carry out their investigation. After concluding the analysis, they presented their findings during a press conference. The conclusions were that both documents; Obama’s birth certificate file and his Selective Service registration card provided by the White House as legitimate, were indeed fake.

Their conclusion along with citizens concerns about possible fraud during an election year, prompted Arizona senators to write and present a bill which would require anyone running for president to prove they were American citizens, born in the United States, before their names could be be placed on the state’s ballot. The bill was widely accepted by Arizona’s congress, approved, but was vetoed by the state’s governor Janice K. Brewer. Currently, the bill is going through congressional proceedings again, but its passage is being blocked by senator Nancy Bartow. State representatives like Carl Seel, who introduced the bill, and State Senator Lori Klein, are now being asked by Mrs. Bartow to collect the signatures from all members of the Arizonan Congress who have verbally given their support to the bill. This requirement is not part of the rules established by the congress to allow passage of a bill from one committee to another. The bill is right now being held at the Health Committee, which is chaired by Senator Bartow.

Other independent researchers like Jerome Corsi, who also joined Sheriff Arpaio’s investigation, discovered that records corresponding to the week of Barack Obama supposed birth, called by Corsi as the Pacific Records, were also missing. “The records pertaining to the week that Obama was born are missing. I cannot find any document about Obama’s past that is legitimate or not forged,” says Corsi. According to him, now that the investigation has concluded that Obama’s documents are fake, an official investigation will begin and that will allow the public to realize that “Obama is lying about who he is.” Mr. Corsi warns that the key facts about Barack Obama’s life in the United States are either hidden by the White House, as in the case of the college documents, or are missing, as it happened with the INS cards that correspond to the week Obama was born. He says that the National Archives has confirmed that those documents are missing from its records. In recent weeks, Mr. Corsi unveiled information from his interview with postman Allen Hulton, who for many years delivered mail to the residence of Tom and Mary Ayers, the parents of U.S. terrorist Bill Ayers. The Ayers are thought to have paid for Barack Obama’s college education in Chicago in the 1980s and early 1990s. The Ayers family publicly admitted that they were paying for a foreign student’s education bills. This student, according to Mr. Hulton, was the man people know today as Barack Hussein Obama.

“The Sheriff made clear to me that he wanted an unbiased, non-political investigation,” says Mike Zullo, the lead investigator of Sheriff Arpaio’s Cold Case Posse. “He said in numerous times that he wanted to clear the president, to have this issue go away and have the country move on.” But for Zullo’s and the rest of the posse’s surprise, the matter was far from going away. As investigators began to look at the April 27, 2011 document presented by the White House as Barack Obama’s legitimate certificate of birth in its electronic or digital form, they found out that the file could be separated into different layers, much as it is done with graphic creations or illustrations. After further analysis, forensic experts realized that several components of the so-called long form birth certificate had been added to the file at different times and had then been “sealed” through a clipping mask. Layers had been cut out and new ones had been added in. “It became apparent to us and apparent to them, that the document had been put together in layers. But had been put together in a way that could only follow human logic, not something that could happen by itself, in a software kind of setting,” said Mr. Zullo during an interview with Infowars.com.

The suspicions that the birth certificate was fraudulent were confirmed after completing another test. “We took the long form certificate and digitally removed the green background. Then we printed a copy with only the written content and put it on a blank screen. We later printed the file onto a green birth certificate background and scanned it. After concluding this process, we weren’t able to alter any of its parts; there were no layers, nothing to be moved at all,” said Zullo. This procedure demonstrated that the supposed Obama’s certificate of birth had been clearly made up by someone with computer software. Another OCR and compression tests conducted by the Cold Case Posse resulted in them finding that the document had anywhere between 45 and 250 layers. Additionally, the registrars and date stamps were found to have been imported into the document, rotated 90 degrees and then placed as if they were original to it. “The document had been 100 percent manufactured, manipulated, but worse than that, the registrar’s stamp and date stamp have lo legal authority certifying this document to be anything,” concluded Zullo.

The case of the Selective Service card does not get any easier for the Obama White House. According to investigators from the Cold Case Posse, the document has a post office date stamp that is different to the ones used back in the day when Barack Obama supposedly appeared at a US Postal Service venue to validate his identity and fill out the card. Back in 1980, the law required people to go to a postal service office, show a valid form of identification, fill out the card and register for selective service. Barack Obama’s Selective Service card was obtained through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request filed by a former Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer. When the former officer received the card, the date stamp read July 29, 80, as supposed to July 29, 1980. That is 07/29/80, instead of 07/29/1980. After filing a new Freedom of Information Act request, more Selective Service cards from other individuals that filled out their cards around the same days as Barack Obama did confirmed that the date stamp had to be as mandated by United States Postal Service protocols, which was a date with a four digit year. Obama’s Selective Service card’s date stamp was not aligned like the other ones that investigators requested and obtained. The date stamp was offset to the right and low to the right of the stamp.

For investigators, it was clear that whoever forged Obama’s Selective service card could have not obtained a 1980 date stamp from a postal office. According to Mike Zullo, what the forger must have done was to cut a 2008 date stamp in half, rotated it so the printing would read 80 and not 08, placed it on to a handle and stamped it onto what it has been claimed is Obama’s Selective Service card. “What the person did not realize is that if the stamp wasn’t cut straight, it would push against the handle’s compartment and offset the numbers to the right, as it appears to have happened with Obama’s card.” Mr. Zullo says he replicated the effect by cutting a 2008 stamp in an angle and reproduced the offset date stamp just as the forger did on Obama’s Selective Service card. “our contention is that it is another manufactured document.”

Along with the forged Long Form Certificate of Birth and the fake Selective Service card, investigators have found opposition from the government when trying to run Barack Obama’s supposed social security number through federal law enforcement records. They have once and again been blocked from running his number, which many independent investigators believe is also fake.

Along with Mr. Zullo, other police officers, lawyers and forensic experts have begun an official full force investigation to get to the bottom of who and why falsified Barack Obama’s documents, why did the White House presented the documents as legitimate even though they were not, and ultimately to find out who in reality is the individual who calls himself Barack Hussein Obama. When questioned as to how long would the investigation take, or if it could come to a conclusion anytime soon, officer Zullo said: “Sheriff Arpaio has given us full authority to continue this investigation and I don’t see it stopping anytime soon.”

You may share our original content as long as you respect our copyright policy as shown on our website footer. Please don’t cut articles from The Real Agenda to redistribute by email or post to the web if you don’t follow our policies.

No More ‘Miraculous’ Obama

The Holy President highlights his petty list of achievement that is way short than the one he filled with empty promises four years ago. The American dream has gone from owning a home to renting

By Erica Werner
Associated Press
February 21, 2012

This time around, President Barack Obama’s message can sound decidedly down-to-earth.

Four years after winning the White House, Obama is dealing with a different economic and political reality as he seeks re-election. He’s focused less on a lofty vision for overcoming divisions and remaking Washington, and more on the most basic building blocks of middle-class economic security: a job, a house, a college education for the kids, health care, money for retirement.

What Obama describes as the American Dream can seem a spare, fundamental aspiration, tailored for a campaign that looks to be fought over who is best equipped to safeguard the interests of middle-class Americans.

The question is whether it will convince, even as Mitt Romney and the other GOP presidential hopefuls mount a counter-argument that the president has made the American Dream harder, not easier, to achieve. And Obama must overcome the grinding realities many voters confront daily, even with the economy showing signs of life: no jobs, mortgages they can’t pay, dwindling retirement funds and college savings.

The president is betting that if he shows voters he understands their yearning for economic stability and security, they’ll reward him over Republicans he’s casting as just watching out for the rich – even though he hasn’t succeeded in fully reviving the economy so far.

“If you’re willing to put in the work, the idea is that you should be able to raise a family and own a home; not go bankrupt because you got sick, because you’ve got some health insurance that helps you deal with those difficult times; that you can send your kids to college; that you can put some money away for retirement,” Obama said recently in Cedar Rapids, Iowa.

“That’s all most people want,” he said. “Folks don’t have unrealistic ambitions. They do believe that if they work hard they should be able to achieve that small measure of an American Dream.”

The goals can seem almost humdrum in comparison with some of the rhetoric from Obama’s 2008 White House campaign. But the message sounds made for the times, with the country emerging haltingly from recession, the income gap widening and unemployment stuck above 8 percent.

“He can’t run on change because he’s the incumbent, and he can’t paint too rosy a scenario because things aren’t that rosy,” said John Geer, professor of political science at Vanderbilt University. “He’s got to come up with a theme that appeals to voters, especially middle-class voters, alleviates their fears and gives them reason to believe the future will be better.”

The message also creates an implicit contrast with the portrait Democrats are trying to create of front-runner Romney as preoccupied with the concerns of the rich. But Romney is answering Obama’s message head-on, seeking a careful balance between sounding optimistic about the nation’s future and accusing Obama of destroying the American Dream.

Read Full Article…

US Ramps Up Global War Agenda

by Finian Cunningham
November 21, 2011

Like a schoolyard bully, President Barack Obama is flexing American military muscle as he currently sweeps through the Asia-Pacific region. The nominal impetus for the tour was the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit held in Hawaii last week. But rather than discussing “economics” (the E in APEC), the salient focus for Obama and his entourage appears to be “war” – and in particular laying down battle lines to China.

Testy relations with China is nothing new for Washington given recent months of US haranguing over trade and finance, but what Obama’s bombast signals is a sinister ramping up of the militarist agenda towards Beijing.

As if bouncing underlings and lackeys into his gang, the American president has moved on from Honolulu with stopovers in Australia, Indonesia and elsewhere. Given the primary economic power of China in the hemisphere, it might be thought appropriate for Obama to make a cordial visit to Beijing to discuss partnerships and policies to revive the global economy. But no. The omission of China on this major US tour seems to be a deliberate snub to Beijing and a message to the region: that China is to be isolated and ringfenced. This is the stuff of warmongering writ large.

The blatant aggression is naturally smoothed over and made palatable by the Western mainstream media. Reporting on Obama’s unilateral belligerence at the APEC, the Washington Post bemoans: “Try as he might to focus Asian and Pacific leaders on forging new economic partnerships during a regional summit here, President Obama has spent much of his time in private meetings with his counterparts discussing another pressing concern: national security [that is, US military power].”

The Financial Times reports breathlessly: “Barack Obama will not set foot in China during his swing through the Asia-Pacific region… yet the country’s rapid economic ascent and military advances will provide the backdrop for almost everything he does on the trip.”

Note the assertion that it is China’s “military advances” that are prompting US concerns, not the more reasonable and realistic observation that Washington is the one beating the war drums.

The FT goes on to say: “The Pentagon is quietly working on a new strategy dubbed the AirSea Battle concept, which is designed to find ways to counter Chinese military plans to deny access to US forces in the seas surrounding China.”

In “seas surrounding China” it may be thought by some as entirely acceptable for Beijing to “deny access to US forces”. But not, it seems, for the scribes at the FT and other Western mainstream media, who transform US offence/Chinese defence into Chinese offence/US defence. One can only imagine how that same media would report it if China announced that it was intending to patrol nuclear warships off California.

As previously noted by Michel Chossudovsky at Global Research, the South China Sea’s untapped reserves of oil and other minerals are a major driver in US maneouvring. China stands to have natural territorial rights to these deposits and has much more valid claim to the wealth than the US, whose counter-claims on the matter seem at best arrogant and at worst provocative. Again, one can imagine the US and mainstream media reaction if China was eyeing oil and gas fields off Alaska.

But there is a bigger geopolitical agenda here, as Global Research has consistently analysed. The increasing US militarism in Asia-Pacific is apiece with the globalization of war by the US/NATO and its allies. The shift in policy is, as the Washington Post lamely tells us, “the US reasserting itself as a leader in the Asia-Pacific after years of focusing on [illegal] wars in the Middle East.”

However, this is not a dynamic that should be viewed as somehow normal and acceptable. This is, as we have stated, an escalation of global aggression by powers that are “addicted to war” as a matter of policy.

Top of the US hit list is China. Washington’s criminal wars in Iraq and Libya have in particular been aimed at cutting China out of legitimate energy investments in the Middle and East and North Africa (and Africa generally). That in itself must be seen by Beijing as a flagrant assault on its overseas’ assets. Not content, it seems, with achieving that dispossession of vital Chinese energy interests, Washington is now pushing its insatiable appetite all the way into China’s domain. But such unprecedented aggression is made to appear by the US government and the dutiful mainstream media as a natural entitlement where refusal by the other party is perversely presented as “military plans to deny access”.

Obama’s visit to Australia this week is undoubtedly aimed at further twisting the threat to China. In Darwin, the US president is overseeing the opening of a base that will see for the first time US Marines being able to conduct war games on Australian soil. Thousands of kilometers from China, this development may at first seem inconsequential. But then we are told that the move is designed to station US military “out of the reach of Chinese ballistic missiles”. The insinuation is unmistakable and menacing: China is an imminent threat. Somehow, without issuing any such aggressive moves, Beijing is suddenly made to look as if it is prepared to launch ballistic missiles at US installations.

It is tempting to call this US-led dynamic of global war “dysfunctional”. But, disturbingly, it is not merely dysfunctional. The global war dynamic is a function of the collapse of capitalism and democracy in the US and Europe (the brutal police crackdown on Occupy protesters across the US is evidence of the latter). War on the world is the logical outcome of this failed system, as history has already shown us with the horrors of World War One and Two.

Karl Marx once noted: “History repeats itself, first as tragedy, then as farce”. To avert another “farce” in which the horrors of history are repeated, we need to once and for all challenge the root cause: capitalism.

Obama Administration wants License to Lie Op/Ed

The Examiner
October 31, 2011

It’s not often that the liberal American Civil Liberties Union and conservative Judicial Watch agree on anything, but the Obama administration’s lack of transparency has brought the two together. Obama’s Justice Department has proposed a regulatory change that would weaken the Freedom of Information Act. Under the new rules, the government could falsely respond to those who file FOIA requests that a document does not exist if it pertains to an ongoing criminal investigation, concerns a terrorist organization, or a counterintelligence operation involving a foreign nation.

There are two problems with the Obama proposal to allow federal officials to affirmatively assert that a requested document doesn’t exist when it does. First, by not citing a specific exemption allowed under the FOIA as grounds for denying a request, the proposal would cut off a requestor from appealing to the courts. By thus creating an area of federal activity that is completely exempt from judicial review, the proposal undercuts due process and other constitutional protections. Second, by creating a justification for government lying to FOIA requestors in one area, a legal precedent is created that sooner or later will be asserted by the government in other areas as well.

Under FOIA’s current national security exemption, bureaucrats can already deny access to documents without acknowledging their existence. This was noted by the ACLU (joined by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington and OpentheGovernment.com) in a comment on the proposal. In instances where there is a legitimate grounds for not confirming a document’s existence, “the agency should simply respond that ‘we interpret all or part of your request as a request for records which, if they exist, would not be subject to the disclosure requirements of FOIA pursuant to section 552(c), and we therefore will not process that portion of your request.’ This response requires no change to the current FOIA regulation.” Such a response would preserve a requestor’s right to appeal to a federal court.

Chris Farrell, director of investigations and research for Judicial Watch, may have the answer for why the Obama administration wants the new liar’s rule. Judicial Watch has been fighting the White House over a FOIA request for copies of its visitor logs. The White House insists, absurdly, that the documents are theirs, not the property of the Secret Service, and therefore withholdable. “Every day,” Farrell notes, “the Obama administration misrepresents and conceals the true, complete record of who is going in and out of the White House — all the while proclaiming themselves champions of transparency. It’s truly Orwellian.” The proposed new rule could add a patina of legality to the refusal to acknowledge the existence of the visitors logs as White House documents. Despite its flaws, FOIA is one of the few checks on excessive executive branch power. It should not be weakened by Obama’s proposed “license to lie.”


Related Links:









Partner Links