Posted on 12/10/2017 5:08:23 PM PST by Elderberry
That was a summary from 2009 when we still believed Stanley Ann Dunham was his mother. The woman who wasn’t meant to be found, was Anna Obama. Charlette Le Fevre found the listing in the directory at the library, while looking for addresses of the deceased rich and famous, for her walking tours, saw the family name of the baby-sitter at 13th Avenue, and tracked Mary the down in Alaska.
Mary, who had been interviewed a short period before about some stolen signs, and never mentioned what it was that would ultimately make her famous, thanks to Charlette.
Sounds like Mary said, ‘I babysat for Anna’ and Charlette printed the story that she had found the address in Seattle of the little baby potus.
Charlette added 18 months, the age of her daughter, to the daughter’s birthdate and said it was in January/February 1962.
Do the math. July 59 plus 18 months is January 1961. Pity the fake birthdate chosen for zero was August 4...and the ‘Seattle Period’ never got a mention in ‘Dreams’.
Are you beginning to see that the ‘adoption’ memo from the INS file, which alludes to a discussion in April, was most likely connected to the child born in January, and the mother was the same Anna listed in the directory?
http://blog.seattlepi.com/capitolhill/2016/09/16/obama-lived-in-seattle-his-first-year/
She’s still at it, as recently as September last year...deftly spinning Anna into Ann and Stanley Ann, and now she’s a bi-racial victim, not a liar.
Think about it. All she ever found was a directory listing for Anna Obama, student.
freeper Sven Magnussen made an excellent case in regard to the SS number. It had to do with the status of the child that was returned to Hawaii alone, and the Dunhams claimed to be his relatives. The child came under the control of immigration, and it was immigration which issued him with an SS number. He was apparently released into the care of Stanley Armour and Madelyn.
I’ll try to find Sven’s postings on the subject.
Sorry, couldn’t find Sven Magnussen on the freeper database.
link to an FR post by Sven:
http://svenmagnussen.blogspot.com.au/2013/01/36-percent-obama-is-hiding-biographical.html
Although that article doesn’t touch on the subject of the Social Security number...that I could see.
In brief, his contention was that ANY minors who came under the jurisdiction of the INS were issued with Connecticut SS numbers. Vaguely recall, this was the period during which part of the boy’s name (Soebarkah) was deleted from Stanley Ann Dunham’s passport and he was sent to Hawaii alone.
Sven Magnussen has a blog. I do not have the time nor the patience now to go through it...
I think Sven was credible, he certainly provided much detail and it looks like he was banished.
http://svenmagnussen.blogspot.com.au/2013/02/complete-index-of-articles-by-sven.html
Complete Index of Articles by Sven Magnussen
That should keep the obots out of our hair for a while.
here it is:
http://svenmagnussen.blogspot.com.au/2013/01/barack-hussein-obama-ii-aka-barry.html
Unaccompanied minors with foreign nationality arriving at a Port of Entry in the United States do not clear customs because of Immigration and Customs Enforcement policy on Human Trafficking. In 1971, Catholic Social Services of Connecticut was one of two contractors with HHS to take temporary custody of abandoned child refugees.
What makes me more suspicious is before Obama became POTUS, we could look up his Selective Service card. No more. Obama’s Official Certificate of Nomination from the DNC is available, or was. I haven’t looked for it lately. And now people will say there’s a chain of custody issue, to hell with the facts.
It appears that the BHO name was run through a database for the state of IL.
Names associated with BHO in Illinois turned up only Michelle and the house is valued at about one million dollars.
BHO is associated with or has been receiving mail at that same Chicago home address for someone with the exact same name and age who resides in Equatorial Guinea. Or BHO once resided in Equatorial Guinea.
Guinea? Pig
It’s a complete mystery.
Mary claims she babysat the potus candidate, but doesn’t tell anyone about this until Charlette contacts her in Alaska?
Therefore, Mary is either (A) forgetful of dates and babysat a newborn potus along with her 3 month old (B) lying about the whole story (C) babysat Anna’s baby who is not Stanley Ann’s baby or (D) babysat potus candidate and his birthdate was altered at some point later.
The more Charlette writes, the less credible the story appears. Did the campaign surrogates or WH spokespersons ever offer any acknowledgement of the their man spending his infancy in Seattle?
According to Charlette’s article, she rented the place from August ‘61- June ‘62
Charlette states, in this article dated September 2016:
IMAGE
Where POTUS Obama filled his first briefs. Obama’s first Seattle residence at 516 13th Ave. N (now a vacant lot) between Mercer and Republican on Capitol Hill. (Washington State Archives, 1961)
http://blog.seattlepi.com/capitolhill/2016/09/16/obama-lived-in-seattle-his-first-year/
The address of that house was actually Number 516, 13th Avenue E. Captitol Hill Seattle. It was NOT a vacant lot, the property was demolished some time after 1975 and replaced by what is now an apartment block called THE EDGE.
What is of passing interest however, is that the Salvation Army apparently owned the building, a residential home, on the corner of 13th Avenue E and Republican. We have not been able to establish just when the Salvation Army bought/sold the property. That has also recently been replaced by an apartment block.
Charlette, as a Seattle resident, plays pretty lose with her ‘facts’.
No, there has been no official recognition of the Seattle period. NOT. A. WORD.
It wasn’t mentioned in Dreams.
If none of you want to give your own explanation of Obama’s personal claim to Selma, that’s understandable. Presumably even Obots have limits when it comes to looking idiotic.
Otoh, I’m genuinely curious. Surely Obama’s leftist apologists have offered some theory account for his psychotic remarks. There has never, after all, been any shortage of leftists who are willing to look moronic on Obama’s behalf.
This being so, surely one of you trusty Obots can give us the official line. How did Obama’s enablers attempt to justify the craziness at the time? You have the president of the United States claiming that an event in ‘65 precipitated his birth four years earlier. On its face, that’s certifiably insane.
So how did Obama’s handlers account for it? What line did they feed the knee-pad press? You must know. Why not share?
Note: Obama made the claim that the ‘65 march in Selma led to his birth in 2007. All the better. He should have been called out on his stupidity, his ignorance, and/or dishonesty before he cheated Hillary out of the nomination. Psychologically speaking, it was a disqualifier.
The Left is so accustomed to excusing any idiotic or dishonest thing a favorite leftist minority might say or do, they’ve lost all perspective. They no longer recognize psychological red flags in any context. They see them when they’re nonexistent (as in Trump’s case) and miss them when they’re flashing like 100 foot neon signs.
The Democrats have become the party of the insane. Literally.
I think you’ve frightened them away...you are bringing up stuff that isn’t on their script, they need to update their instructions.
As Rush would say, they’ve headed for the tall grass. Really, who can blame them? It is so weird for *anyone* to still be shilling for Obama. Even DU split over it. Well, ostensibly they split over Hillary vs Sanders. But Obama was backing Hillary, and I’ve seen the Jack Pine Radicals—Sanders’ crew—say some truly appalling things about Obama. They’ve got his number, and a head of steam to go with it.
To put it in perspective, the Jack Pine Radicals are further to the left than DU. But they despise Obama. They grasp that he put his own interests above all else, and left the Democrat party in shambles. (They also see that Hillary is a chip off the old block where dishonesty is concerned. Even many leftists are fed up with the Obama-Hillary lie-athon.)
Yet here we are, saddled with our perennial Obots who still haven’t picked up on the fraud. Are they slow off the mark or what? In a few years Obama’s name will be synonymous with ‘deceitful, fraudulent failure,’—and STILL our Obot holdouts will be defending him.
What a dismal life. Idk how they manage to keep going.
Nope. I think they are making a career of it. On a payroll with benefits.
If they’re on the payroll they’re not earning it.
Come on, Obots—shake a leg! Get creative and explain how an event in ‘65 caused a birth in ‘61. We could use the laugh
Bol.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.