Posted on 05/12/2010 4:24:22 AM PDT by cycle of discernment
Investigators: Obama using Connecticut Soc. Sec. Number
9:57 pm Eastern
Two private investigators working independently are asking why President Obama is using a Social Security number set aside for applicants in Connecticut while there is no record he ever had a mailing address in the state.
The investigators believe Obama needs to explain why he is using a Social Security number reserved for Connecticut applicants that was issued at a date later than he is known to have held employment.
The Social Security website confirms the first three numbers in his ID are reserved for applicants with Connecticut addresses, 040-049.
"Since 1973, Social Security numbers have been issued by our central office," the Social Security website explains. "The first three (3) digits of a person's social security number are determined by the ZIP code of the mailing address shown on the application for a social security number."
Daniels and Sampson each used a different database showing Obama is using a Social Security number beginning with 042.
"There is obviously a case of fraud going on here," Daniels maintained. "In 15 years of having a private investigator's license in Ohio, I've never seen the Social Security Administration make a mistake of issuing a Connecticut Social Security number to a person who lived in Hawaii. There is no family connection that would appear to explain the anomaly."
Does the Social Security Administration ever re-issue Social Security numbers?
"Never," Daniels said. "It's against the law for a person to have a re-issued or second Social Security number issued."
Daniels said she is "staking my reputation on a conclusion that Obama's use of this Social Security number is fraudulent."
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
We know he ran with the “foreign” crowd in college. I’m sure they hooked him up. He is quite the scam artist.
To kids, in Hawaii, in the ‘70’s? They could have paid in surfboards and blow, then, especially to Obama.
Absolutely true. I remember going to the SS office with my father to get my card - age 16 - so I could get a part time job.
My first two kids, born 1980 and 1984, had to apply after Kemp-Roth in 1986 required SSNs for dependent exemptions. My other five kids had them issued at birth.
Issue at birth has been normal since 1990, at the latest.
There are an unbelievable amount of straw man raising their heads in this tread (I realize that you are being funny, so this response is not directed at you).
Birth Certificates were not issued at birth during the 70s.
Obama was not paid by check at Baskin Robbins.
Obama lied about working at Baskin Robbins.
Researchers are not competent.
It appears he has a SSN that was issued only in the state of CT for a time period before 1940. There is no reasonable explanation. Everything else is not germane to the topic at hand.
Where is everyone getting this idea that these numbers are “issued at birth?” I had to present my children’s birth certificates in order to obtain them, in a rather riduculous procedure. All of this was in the past ten years. What am I missing? Oh, wait, I am white, maybe that’s it?
That is not historically true. I remember getting my SSN in the 60's before getting a first teenage job. I had to apply for my kids' SSNs in the 80's. There was a change in tax law which said you couldn't claim dependents by name--they had to have a Social Security Number, so I applied for them.
I was born in 1953 in Baltimore, Md to 2 American citizens. I didn’t get my social security number until I was 17 and ready to go to work. Social Security numbers being issued at birth was not always the case.
However, if this number was issued past the date of his holding a job it sounds like some type of fraud to me.
“It’s against the law for a person to have a re-issued or second Social Security number issued.”
The 9-digit SSN allows for a maximum of 999,999,999 numbers. Given the current population is over 300,000,000, in the generations since the inception of SS we must have used over 600,000,000 SSNs, and a goodly proportion would have to begin with “000-”. Wonder how long it will be before we have to add some digits?
My grandpa always said his SSN was “1”.
Dunham/Soetero/Obama is a foreign agent.
Correct, I was born in 1957 and didn’t apply for a SS# until I was 16 and applying for an after school job.
When my son was born in 1987, we had to get a SS# before we could claim him on our income tax. I went down to the SS office to apply for both my kids.
SSN’s were not always issued at birth. Mine certainly wasn’t. I got mine when I was 17, so I could register for selective service. Obama is older than me, and it is very likely that he was not assigned one at birth.
I have read other stories that hinted that Obami’s mami played fast and loose with SSN’s...which wouldn’t surprise me a bit.
I never APPLIED for ssn...i just walked in and took the 1st one on the pad and my friend the next one....i was 14 this was in 1966...ks..... No one ever said I had to fill out any thing..we went to office @ lunch time from school....
Been using it ever since... maybe different procedures,
different parts of country?
Social Security issues about 5,500,000 new numbers a year. We are about half way there. It will be over 90 years or so before we have to worry about running out.
KHOW - Denver radio station.
aside from the fact that it’s a bit frightening that two private detectives were able to get hold of anybody’s Social Security number...let alone that of the POTUS...this is very interesting indeed!
I used to work in the child support enforcement agency of a certain blue state. I can confirm that the “code” indicating the state of residence when the SSN was issued was indeed used in the early 80’s. When/if that system changed I can’t tell you. I can confirm that assigning SSN’s changed from issuance when starting work to issuance at birth because both mothers & fathers, even though divorced, were claiming the same children on tax returns. The government decided the only way to stop that “double dipping” was to give SSN’s at birth.
That’s damn funny.You must have lived in the country because I had to deal with some federal employees and they were
not very kind.
Ugh - wrong.
dangus
Since Aug 5, 2003
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.