There has been a lawsuit filed in Ohio, claiming that Obama does not qualify for the presidential election ballot in 2012. Before you groan and say something about birthers - his birth has nothing to do with it. As a matter of fact, a lot of the evidence used to prove that Obama was born in Hawaii actually helps the case filed against him.
According to the complaint filed in Geauga County Ohio, Obama has been using a Social Security number that could not have possibly been legitimately issued to him. The SSN 042-68-4425 was issued in the State of Connecticut between 1977-1979 (specifically March of 1977). During this time Obama was never in Connecticut. There is a mountain of evidence that shows the number was issued there during that time. This is the same number used by Obama on his 2009 tax return.
Using this fraudulent number is enough to disqualify him from being on the ballot under Ohio Law.
I have no idea the merits of the case, or how it will be handled. But people should be asking how a kid in Hawaii gets issued a Social Security number from Connecticut without being there.
Stay Safe!
Um, thanks anonymous - I didn't post everything in the complaint, which is many pages long. One of the key points in the complaint is that Obama's SSN was issued in Connecticut. Saying there are similar zip codes or what-have-you has nothing to do with the fact that the SSN was issued in CT and not HI.
ReplyDeleteI know there are errors in SSN's and I am sure the complainant knows that too. The point is that there is more than ample evidence that an investigation should be done by the Secretary of State in Ohio, which would include obtaining a copy of the SS-5 used to obtain the SSN. That would likely settle the issue, but a private citizen cannot obtain that form.
Re: "SSN was issued in Connecticut. Saying there are similar zip codes or what-have-you has nothing to do with the fact that the SSN was issued in CT and not HI. "
ReplyDeleteBut the SSN number was generated by entering the zip code, and if it was misread or a digit was entered wrongly, the wrong SSN number would be generated. There are members of Congress who are in charge in the Social Security Administration, but not one of them has said a thing about the allegation that Obama's SSN is false because it was allegedly from Connecticut.
And, guess what, a SSN is not required to prove eligibility. People who are not even US citizens get SSNs legally when they have green cards. So the idea that it has anything to do with him being on the ballot is laughable.
IF it were in fact an illegal SSN, it would have to be prosecuted for that (and it would be a federal crime, and only a federal crime), but the Secretary of State of Ohio is going to laugh at the idea that the SSN has anything to do with being on the ballot.
The issue isn't whether or not there was a mistake on entering a zipcode or generating the SSN. According to the complaint, the SSN and card were issued in Connecticut.
ReplyDeleteLike I said before, there is ample evidence that an investigation should take place, including verifying the SS-5. That would answer all the questions. It is like people are afraid of having said investigation.
You are making straw man arguments - bringing up Congressmen and the like - that has nothing to do with the complaint or what happened. So what is the harm of an investigation or verifying the SS-5?
I have no idea about election laws in Ohio, but if SSN is used in some way on the application to be on the ballot - it would be an issue.
I am not saying he is or isn't eligible - I only pointed out the of the legal complaint filed in the court. It may just depend upon what happens in court.
Re: "there is ample evidence that an investigation should take place, including verifying the SS-5. That would answer all the questions. It is like people are afraid of having said investigation."
ReplyDeleteThat is a matter of opinion. The fact that a Connecticut SSN number could have been generated by entering a Honolulu zip code makes it questionable that it was a crime.
However, you have the right to write your congressman and your senators and to demand an investigation. They are likely to laugh at you, but you do have that right.
Re: "if SSN is used in some way on the application to be on the ballot - it would be an issue."
It is not likely, not likely at all that candidates have to show their SSNs to run for office. In most states you do not have to show anything.
Re: "I am not saying he is or isn't eligible - I only pointed out the of the legal complaint filed in the court. It may just depend upon what happens in court."
Of course, and you are welcome to hold your breath or cross your fingers. BUT prepare yourself for the judge saying something like: "Who told you that filing a SSN--accurate or not--has anything to do with being on the ballot in Ohio."
So much for eligibility. IF the SSN was indeed stolen, then that is a crime, but it is only a federal crime, not a state crime. So that is why you have to write to your congressman and Senators, and, BTW, you should demand a special prosecutor. That is your right, and I support it, but unless there is evidence that it is a crime and not a mistake, who would take the case?
Anonymous - You seem to have some misguided Idea that I am calling for an investigation. If I were, senators and congressmen are the last place I would turn for an investigation - they pretty much suck at that. I would leave that up to professionals. The fact is, a professional investigator has already investigated, and is asking the Ohio Secretary of State to do so - hence the complaint filed in court.
ReplyDeleteYou also are ignorant of state laws - misusing a SSN as an identifier is against the law in Ohio (as quoted in the complaint) and is in Texas (as I know the Texas Penal Code 32.51. FRAUDULENT USE OR POSSESSION OF IDENTIFYING INFORMATION)it is a felony - it is not just a Federal issue. Before you try to sound like you know what you are talking about, you should try a little fact - checking.
Again, I am not asking for an investigation - you seem to be overly defensive about this issue, and you seem to be afraid to find out the truth. I have just pointed out that there there is plenty of evidence to justify said investigation.
You have seemed to misunderstood me and the purposes of this post. You make out like I am the one calling for the investigation, or that I filed the complaint in court. I have done neither.
I just found the whole incident fascinating.
Re: "asking the Ohio Secretary of State to do so - hence the complaint filed in court.'
ReplyDeleteOnce again, this is an eligibility lawsuit, and Social Security numbers have nothing to do with eligibility. And, I checked, they are not required to be filed under Ohio election laws.
Sure misusing a Social Security number can be a crime in Ohio, but the guy would have had to have used it in Ohio.
Okay, so don't write your congressman and senators and ask for an investigation. Leave it to "the professionals," and nothing is going to happen. However, you can still dream.
Re: "you seem to be afraid to find out the truth. "
The truth is that Obama's Connecticut SS number was generated by misreading or mis-entering the Honolulu zip code which generated a SS number for Danbury CT, of which the zip codes are similar except for one digit.
smrstrauss - I don't know what it is I should be dreaming about - you seem to be misunderstanding me as much as anonymous.
ReplyDeleteIt is funny that you seem to have decided (without any evidence) what the truth is based on someone's "debunking" that has since been pretty much debunked itself, based upon what "could have happened." There has been absolutely no evidence that said SSN was issued in Hawaii, only mere speculation that possibly maybe it could have been.
Whatever the case in Ohio, no investigator would clear Obama on a background check for any company or job based upon the evidence and facts concerning his SSN. The finding would be "likely fraudulent use of a SSN" Those are the facts. So tell me who is the one dreaming here.
Please let me know when you have some evidence or facts to the contrary. Something besides theories and speculation.
The truth can easily be determined by a valid SS-5.
You have alleged that Obama committed an illegal act. The burden of proof is on you. There is no evidence that he did, but you claim that he did. You can rave that a Connecticut SS number must prove that he committed an illegal act, but the fact is that it does not prove any such thing since it could be caused by an error.
ReplyDeleteThere is absolutely no evidence that said SSN was issued in Connecticut.
First of all, I did not allege that Obama committed an illegal act. All I did was refer to a case that was filed. My responses about fraudulent use of a SSN was in response to someone saying it was not illegal under state law to do so (in a general sense)- which it is illegal under state law.
ReplyDeleteAs I have stated before, I found this case to be fascinating. I have not said the case has merits, other than I do think the Attorney general should at least investigate the matter, but that really isn't commenting on the court case itself - which is a CIVIL complaint - not a criminal one.
I have done no raving. All I have done is respond to commenters here.
As far as "burden of proof" - you are the one claiming to know the truth - so that burden is upon you. I just stated what the facts and evidence show, and noted that you have not referred to any facts or evidence, but merely referred to theories and what may have happened.
I have simply been referring to facts and evidence. If you are happy "knowing the truth" without any facts and evidence, that is fine, but I am not the one dreaming in this case.
There is evidence that the SSN was issued in Connecticut as presented in the complaint filed in Ohio. Including documents that state that the SSN was issued in Connecticut which were filed with the court. What there is no evidence of so far, is that the number and card were issued anywhere outside of Connecticut.
Once again - fact checking is your friend.
You said:
ReplyDelete"There is evidence that the SSN was issued in Connecticut as presented in the complaint filed in Ohio. Including documents that state that the SSN was issued in Connecticut which were filed with the court. What there is no evidence of so far, is that the number and card were issued anywhere outside of Connecticut."
That is a CLAIM. It is not proof. It is not evidence.
I have shown that there are errors in SS files, millions of them. That means that the situation that is referred to in the complaint could have been caused by data entry errors. There would have to be actual proof to the contrary to show that they were caused by fraud.
No, there is evidence in the case that is filed. That isn't a claim - that is a fact. You seem to not grasp what a fact or evidence is.
ReplyDeleteFrom point #23 in the complaint: "... along with information that the social security number had been issued in Connecticut between 1977-1979."..."(See attched highlighted exhibit 8.)"
In Item #26 of the complaint - it also states that the "Plaintiff ran the social security numbers of 042-68-4415 thru 042-68-4435. Barack Obam's number is in the middle of them...All of those numbers returned 'Issued 1977-1979 in CT.' (See exhibit 10.)
These are facts in the case - I am not "CLAIMING" anything here I am stating facts.
You are alleging claims (and I suppose you are also anonymous by your claims) that somehow because there are errors in SS files that that is the only possible explanation of Obama being issued a SSN that was, based upon real life evidence, issued in Connecticut and that somehow the error is the explanation that I should take on faith and nothing else.
The facts you have presented are: Errors exist
The facts I have presented (from the case filed are: The number was issued in Connecticut 1977-1979
Your argument against the facts is that I am "claiming" something therefore you can void facts and evidence.
I am not making a claim about this - I am quoting evidence as filed in a court of law.
Re: "The facts I have presented (from the case filed are: The number was issued in Connecticut 1977-1979."
ReplyDeleteNo. You have to listen. It may be a fact that the case filed claims that the number was issued in Connecticut. But that is not a fact. It is simply a claim. It could be, but it also might not be. And the investigator has not actually presented proof. She simply said that that was a Connecticut number. Proof would be, say, a witness "I issued that number in CT." But there is no proof of that kind.
The claim is that it is a CT number because it falls into a category of CT numbers, but that is not the same thing as being issued in CT. And, since it could have been caused by an error, there is certainly no proof of it.
In other words, it is not "evidence." What you are quoting is a CLAIM.
smrstrauss - Again - you do not understand what evidence is. It is evidence in the case that is filed. The facts are that there are documents stating the number was issued in Connecticut. Those are the facts and they are evidence in the case. It really is that straight forward.
ReplyDeleteI already said that the SS-5 is the way to prove it. We don't have that, and that it can be obtained by the Ohio Secretary of State.
I am not claiming anything - and by definition the exhibits filed in the court case are evidence. The facts are that there are documents that say the number was issued in Connecticut.
Saying otherwise is just an outright lie, but spin it how you wish.
I see. You have presented what one side called "evidence," and you also call it "evidence."
ReplyDeleteWell, you can use the words that way, but it certainly is not conclusive evidence.
Getting back to the case. You will be disappointed. The Ohio Secretary of State will not do anything that he does not HAVE to do, and he does not have to determine whether or not Obama's SS number was forged because of an eligibility case in which the SS number is not required (and presenting an SS number is not required in any Ohio election law.
But, you are welcome to hope that that is not the case.
Yep - you decided to spin it.
ReplyDeleteFor the umpteenth time - I don't have a dog in this fight. I cannot be disappointed.