Obama's Social Security Number challenged

WND ^ | July 5, 2012 | Jack Cashill

[Smokeyblue]

If Barack Obama has an immediate eligibility problem, it is more likely to derive from the Social Security Number he has been using for the last 25 years than from his birth certificate.

Ohio private investigator Susan Daniels has seen to that. On Monday, July 2, she filed suit in Geauga County (Ohio) Common Pleas Court demanding that Jon Husted, Ohio secretary of state, remove Obama’s name from the ballot until Obama can prove the validity of his Social Security Number.

Daniels, who has vetted thousands of Social Security Numbers for numerous other clients, has done her homework. In her filing, she thoroughly documents her contention “that Barack Obama has repeatedly, consistently, and with intent misrepresented himself by using a fraudulently obtained Social Security Number.”

To acquire appropriate standing in court, Daniels has gone to the trouble of establishing herself as a valid write-in candidate for president. Before she is through, this 70-something mother of seven, who has been a licensed Ohio PI since 1995, may cause Obama more trouble than the Romney campaign.

Daniels started her investigation in August 2009. Given her profession, she has been able to access a variety of proprietary databases. What she learned without much trouble is that Obama has been using a Social Security Number with the prefix “042″ since 1986.

As she discovered, the “042″ number is reserved for the exclusive use of individuals who register in Connecticut. When she ran 10 sequential numbers before and after Obama’s, all returned with the documentation “issued 1977-1979 in CT.”

When Daniels ran the numbers immediately flanking Obama’s, she came to the firm conviction that Obama’s number was issued in March 1977 in Connecticut.

[hoosiermama]

Items found: Catholic Social Service helped young girls who wanted to place their child up for adoption. (guess that would include abandoned children too)

ALSO found in 1971 Dept of Human Service helped place children from HI in homes on mainland when homes were not available in the state.

So apparently they did work together in some instances.

Several children looking for biological parent...Sad.

[hoosiermama]

Forgot to ping you to above post.

[LucyT]

[Exmil_UK]

The last line of a US address contains the two letter state abbreviation and a 5 digit ZIP code.

The two letter USPO code for Connecticut is CT and the two letter code for Hawaii is HI.

So for a Social Security clerk to give a Hawaii applicant a SSN prefix from Connecticut they have to make the following mistakes:

1/Ignore the previous lines of the address that contain geographical names that are based on the Native Hawaiian language and are totally distinctive to Hawaii and sound nothing like the plain State of Connecticut, New England.

2/Ignore the HI two letter code which looks nothing like the Connecticut two letter code of CT.

3/Misread the initial typed 9 of the Hawaii ZIP as a 0, or less likely misread a hand written 9 as a 0.

Now if this was just an mail order firm processing an order for some kind of cheap good I could understand that firm just sorting everything by ZIP and ignoring the rest of the address.

However, this is a Social Security number, something that could be life changing and for all 3 mistakes to be made does not pass muster.

[SuzyQueIN]

You seriously don't see what difference this would make?

Then ask yourself, who needs to steal a social security number?

[Flotsam_Jetsome]

I realize that this thread have may have already played itself out for the most part (what can I say? I was gone all day playing golf instead of working), but since no one else seems to have weighed in on what I consider a gaping hole in your argument, here goes:

"I think it far more likely the plaintiff believes it should make a candidate ineligible, and I might even agree with her.

Why, because he would be a probable felon? Not until convicted, but that overlooks an even more salient point:

"But I really doubt the US Constitution has anything at all to say about SS#s with regard to eligibility."

This is where you're fantabulously, utterly, discombobulatedly

If if can be legally established/challenged that Dude is using a fraudulent identity, then it means that we don't know who this guy really is. And if it is determined legally that we don't know who this guy really is, then that would set wheels in motion to get to the bottom of just who exactly this guy really is.

THAT's why the SS# issue is important. Perhaps it will turn out that the guy is a Natural Born Citizen somehow but a fraud and felon. Perhaps it will be discovered that he was actually born abroad to a mother too young to confer any kind of US citizenship at all and we have our first Illegal Alien pResident. Aren't illegal aliens known for being prone to identity theft? I seem to recall the "Obama" clan having issues with that sort of thing. . .

One way or another though, if the guy is found to be an identity thief, then the real truth about his birth and life narrative will come out.

M' Kay?

Thanks to Smokeyblue for the post, and to BD for the Ping.

[Fresh Wind]

OK, I agree that the SSN issue, if it demonstrates that he is not a US citizen, let alone an NBC, then becomes a constitutional issue.

But generally speaking, crimes committed by a presidential candidate do not automatically render him ineligible, according to the Constitution.

The bottom line is that every single aspect of this guy’s fraudulent existence need to be investigated as far a humanly possible, and NOTHING should be taken off the table, in spite of all the parrots who say “nothing will come of it, so let’s just move on and focus on the economy”.

Wrong. We have to focus on everything.

[hoosiermama]

Yelp! You betcha! Yes! Concur!

[Kenny Bunk]

What is unconstitutional? What is not? What difference does it make? The constitutional is only binding if it does NOT infringe on the happiness and security of any of the sovereign states. That’s why “healthcare” being constitutional or NOT is irrelevant. Sovereign states are not required to accept any ruling from a so called supreme court if they don’t want to.

As far as Barack Obama is concerned, any state can refuse to put him on their ballot just because they feel like it - they don’t need a reason. So far, you’ve got one Sheriff in Phoenix that has balls - that’s it. Any state governor can and should refuse to put the probable illegal immigrant on the ballot just because there’s a suspicion that he MAY not be eligible that’s ALL it takes. And if you happen to be a citizen of a state that chooses not to have a Marxist running for president, and you are a supporter- MOVE to a state where you can cast a vote for him.

We need to quit this crap of chasing smoke. Just refuse to put him on the ballot and give no explanation.

That is called leadership.

That was my pick for post of the day. Also Sven Magnussen shed a great deal of light on this weird Connecticut Catholic Social Services thing. (Of course, I cannot quite wrap myself around the strange thought that a half-African bastard adopted by an Indonesian and living in Honolulu would be the ward of a Connecticut Catholic Social Services Organization, Connecticut obviously having enough bastards of its own.) If Obama were legit, he might have told us about this himself. He could not, because it leads to some damaging evidence of ineligibility.

Let's face it, we are living through an almost 100% successful anti-constitutional coup. The future of the Republic as we have come to know it hangs on that "almost."

[Flotsam_Jetsome]

We're on the same sheet of music; agreed as to the Constitution being silent on eligibility vis a vis being a felon.

As to the rest, my posit stands. Identity theft = unknown identity = investigation + exposure = SHTF.

[Kenny Bunk]

Very happy all of you folks survived the fireworks!

This has been a learning-experience thread. Now we in the choir must leave the church and go out amongst the heathen. If we cannot convert them, perhaps we could distract them on Election Day with a huge Lindsey Lohan Concert ... free tattoos ... Free English Lessons ... anything we can do to cut into Obama's IMHO insurmountable lead amongst the stupid/and/or unpatriotic in the major states, of whom there may be enough to doom the republic.

and PING!.

[Flotsam_Jetsome]

I love seeing your tenacious and cogent commentary on this crucial, explosive and yet notoriously ignored subject. I've only been studying it for about a year and change (go figure; check my signup date) and I weary sometimes, doing battle with even fellow FReepers on an issue that should be a slam-dunk, stink-wise.

My virtual hat's off to you for your persistence. Warm FRegards.

[Dustbunny]

There is absolutely nothing real about Obama. Everything about him is a story. Written like a play, a story full of lies, to play on the stage for the naive American voter.

In other words, he is a total phony.

Hopefully he will not win the next election

[STARWISE]

.. Ping!

And

July 5, 2012
Why Did Barack Obama Let Terry Lakin Go to Jail?
By Jack Cashill

Last pars.

Terry Lakin, now freed from prison and military obligations, has finally gotten his chance to set the record straight. His memoir, Officer’s Oath, on which I collaborated, is available for purchase.

In this memoir, unlike Dreams, there are no composite characters, no fabrications, no deceptions. I am hoping that the psychologist who assessed Terry will read it. If he does, he will no longer ask why Lt. Col. Lakin did what he did, but rather why others who had sworn to defend the Constitution — Congress included — did not do the same.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/07/why_did_barack_obama_let_terry_lakin_go_to_jail.html#ixzz1zrZOq27S

Officer’s Oath
http://officersoath.com/

[Faith]

Re: 206

Well done!

[Norseman]

>>I don’t believe for a nanosecond that anything bothers you about Obama. I seriously believe that you a paid by the post to troll. That’s my personal conclusion after reading a few of your posts.<<

I guess that’s easier than thinking. Just call everyone who disagrees with you on any particular issue a troll. Oh, and try reading more than the last half dozen posts I’ve written on this subject before you conclude that nothing bothers me about Obama. But that would require some work...easier to just spout off the “troll” meme, I guess.

>>A rational person and REAL natural born citizen would have IMMEDIATELY cleared a failure to e-verify. Obama hasn’t done that.<<

I have no idea what you’re talking about, but then I don’t spend all day cruising conspiracy threads either. I suppose I could check Snopes....*s*

[wintertime]

I have no idea what you’re talking about,....
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Obama’s social security number fails e-verify.

A **real** natural born American citizen would get this cleared up immediately. Obama hasn't. ( But...I believe you know this.)

Do a Google search.

And...Yes, I believe you are a troll. Perhaps, in time, you will convince me otherwise. I doubt it, though.

[Greenperson]

It’s grasping at straws to make up an imaginary “typo”. Especially because the numbers meant something, they would be double checked and verified before being sent out. SNOPES has no credibility. They’ve been wrong in their “fact checking” far too many times.

[Greenperson]

Might have been that transgendered nanny. Nuns would consider that child abuse. Maybe Turdi dressed him in drag.

[ROCKLOBSTER]

If he was removed from the home due to abuse or other circumstances

Well, his *bleep*-anything-that-walks mother, his tranny-nanny, and his dog-eating stepfather certainly don't dissuade any notion that his homelife was anything less than pure debauchery.