Powered by TypePad

« We Hear From The Innumerate, or, Who's Laffing Now? | Main | The Battle Of The One Percenters »

January 25, 2012



Before getting too hepped up about the CT ssn, has anyone checked whether Obama's SSN was issued at the embassy in Indonesia? Who knows what the rule was about what block of numbers THAT would come out of.

In the 60's nobody got a SSN at birth like now. My brother and I got ours in 1969 (I was 6 he was 9) when we opened savings accounts, and we got them at the bank.

Tangled web.

Googling a little more, it's not quite so certain it's been debunked. There is some evidence that Ludwig had two numbers issued to him, one of them now Obama's. That one was apparently issued to him in 1976 or 1977.

Also, not clear whether Ludwig died in California or Hawaii. There is a death certificate from California.


Man, these websites are craaaaazy...very hard to wade through to get sane info.

Here's an update from one of the attorneys:
...a very brief synopsis of what happened today. Before the hearing started, the judge called the attorneys into his chambers and explained that he was going to enter a default judgment in their favor. Attorneys Hatfield and Irion requested to be able to present abbreviated versions of their arguments so that they would be on the record...

Perhaps, perhaps not.

Yep, sane info at a premium. I saw one commenter allege that Obama Sr had never resided in the US.

But Snopes.com makes a mistake. In attempting to debunk his mother's motivation for stealing a SS number they assert that he is a natural born citizen, so why would his mother bother? They seem to forget that she may have wondered about his citizenship at that tender age, especially if he did have some sort of Indonesian citizenship at the time.

So, I'm not convinced it's debunked. There is also hokiness in his draft registration.

All in all, plenty of investigating to do. Will it happen?

Danube of Thought

I assume this guy Jablonski is a DoJ lawyer--right?

I can't imagine what he was thinking.


I assume it is another "poor little Barry" setup. In Georgia no less. Where is Gingrich from?


A you tube interview:



A local Tea Party guy just put up the following link:


ONe can read the words in the URL to see where this is going.

Self Employed Health Insurance

Great work! This is the type of information that should be shared around the net.


According to Martindale.com, he seems to be a sole practitioner.

Michael K. Jablonski
260 Brighton Road N.E.
Atlanta, Georgia 30309

Civil Litigation
Election Campaign & Political Law

And according to this, that address is not a government office, but a residence, ha.

Nov 19, 2011 – 3 bed, 3.5 bath, 4538 sq. ft. house located at 260 Brighton Rd NE, Atlanta, GA 30309. View sales history, tax history, home value estimates, and ...

Maybe he was retained to act locally for Obama's personal attys, the Perkins Coie firm? You know, the firm that obtained the "birth certificate" from Hawaii, ha ha.


There's also the matter of the out-of-sequence number on Obama's HI "birth certificate." Possibly the number of a dead infant, Virginia Sunahara. LUN.

"Susan Nordyke, the twin born first, received birth certificate number 10637; Gretchen Nordyke, the second, received number 10638.

Barack Obama’s birth certificate was issued the number 10641, even though it was registered three days before the Nordykes’ certificates.

However, if the birth certificate number 10641 was first assigned to Virginia Sunahara, the apparent conflict could be explained.

Is it possible that if Obama’s birth records were forged, the perpetrator used Virginia Sunahara’s birth certificate number, knowing the girl was long dead and the family was unlikely to know or complain?"

If the surviving parent will just obtain a copy of their deceased infant daughter's bc, the number could be seen, whether it's 10641 or not and whether the Obama bc is an alteration of that one, inserted now in its place in the HI records.


Oh, and wasn't that Perkins Coie firm also linked to Justiagate as well as the placing of one of their associates as a clerk to a judge ruling on a bc matter?


Perkins and Coie, the law firm of Rovert Bauer, WH Counsel, husband of Mao loving
Anita Dunn,


Other relevant details;

Perkins Coie also serves as counsel of record for the Democratic Party and its candidates; its political law group was for many years headed by top campaign lawyer Bob Bauer, and is now chaired by Marc Elias. Perkins Coie represented John Kerry's presidential campaign and the Presidential campaign of Barack Obama, and continues to represent President Obama. The firm represented Christine Gregoire in the prolonged litigation surrounding her 2004 Washington gubernatorial election, and a team of Perkins lawyers headed by Marc Elias successfully represented Al Franken in his legal battle over the 2008 Senatorial election in Minnesota. The firm also represents the Democratic Leadership Council, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.

In 2006, Perkins Coie made headlines when, led by partner Harry Schneider, it represented Salim Ahmed Hamdan, the alleged driver and bodyguard of Osama Bin Laden. The case made its way to the U.S. Supreme Court, where the Bush Administration's Military Commissions were held unconstitutional.


Another good summary with links to the buildup:


No date for a ruling has been set. Briefs need to be filed by Feb. 5th.


Oh, that's interesting, narciso! So, they had experience with the fake CBS docs during the Kerry campaign. There was a report from "The Prowler" during the early days after the 60 Minutes show that those docs either originated or circulated via the Kerry campaign offices. To this day, it has not been established whether Lukasiak was a Dem staffer or anyone brought to justice for it.


"...appropriately simple language:

Clause A = “Only a natural born Citizen may be President.”

Clause B = “Anyone born in the United States is a Citizen.”

(While these two clauses reflect Article 2, Section 1, and the 14th Amendment, I shall refer to them as “Clause A” and “Clause B” for now.)

The code of statutory construction is learned by every student in law school, and every practicing attorney has confronted it. Every judge is required to apply the rule equally to all statutes, and the Constitution. There is no wiggle room at all. The rule states that when a court examines two clauses, unless Congress has made it clear that one clause repeals the other, the court must observe a separate legal effect for each. More specifically, regardless of the chronology of enactment, the general clause can never govern the specific.

Clause B is a general rule of citizenship, which states that all persons born in the country are members of the nation.

Clause A is a specific clause that says only those members of the nation who are “natural born” may be President.

According to the rule of statutory construction, the court must determine that Clause A requires something more than Clause B.

It’s truly that simple. This is not some crazy conspiracy theory. It’s not controversial. This is not rocket science. Every single attorney reading this right now knows, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that I have accurately explained the rule of statutory construction to you. Any attorney who denies this rule, is lying. The rule cannot be denied. And its simplicity cannot be ignored."


DoT, please read the link. Did Leo err in his analysis?

Deep criminality.  er, High.

That looks pretty tight to me, TK. Perhaps the single most suspicious thing to me was the memory hole at Justia.com for Supreme Court references to M v H.

Does he know?

That should disturb DoT, too.

Danube of Thought

I'm very familiar with that analysis, TK. It doesn't disturb me a bit, because the claim that Obama is a natural-born citizen is not dependent on the 14th Amendment alone. If it were, the game would be over. All the 14th does for my side is establish that Obama was unquestionably a citizen at birth.

You should note, however, that the rules of statutory construction would make birthright citizenship a slam dunk under the 14th; no limiting language at all about whether the parents were lawfully here.


--"You should note, however, that the rules of statutory construction would make birthright citizenship a slam dunk under the 14th; no limiting language at all about whether the parents were lawfully here."--

Except this limit: "...subject to the jurisdiction thereof..."

The comments to this entry are closed.