Main Menu

What I don’t understand

A very large part of Obama conspiracy theories involves the observation of something, followed by  some phrase like “inexplicable” and then the claim: “fraudulent”.

Why does the letter “A” in Alvin Onaka’s signature look like a crude happy face? Why does the race of President Obama’s father say “African?” Why does the postal cancellation on Obama’s Selective Service registration say USPO when the appropriate name was USPS at the time? Why does the long-form birth certificate PDF file have layers?

The list seems endless sometimes. The things we’re dealing with are up to 50 years old and for which documentation is scarce. Birtherism breeds in the dark places of things not understood. Of course it is all a grand exercise in shifting the burden of proof. When someone alleges a crime, they have to prove it with evidence, not suspicions. Nevertheless, birther debunkers such as myself have spent countless hours answering birther suspicions with cold logic and evidence, whether they deserve answers or not and in every case I investigate what was “inexplicable” becomes “ordinary.”

This brings me to the subject of this article, which is yet another set of  information that a birther doesn’t understand, this time resulting in the conclusion that Obama committed real estate fraud in Chicago. A character identifying himself only as “The Obama Hustle” has a web site with massive amounts of documentation from public records. Supposedly the person is working with Jerome Corsi, so we may be seeing a WorldNetDaily article putting the worst possible spin on it all.

The gist of the claim seems to be that some parcels of land were combined but not reassessed, and Obama didn’t pay real estate taxes that he should. However, that very superficial summary of the claim is all I feel like doing. The Obama Hustle claims to have filed a “tax fraud report” with the state; it’s the Illinois Department of Revenue’s job to investigate tax fraud, not mine. One would think, however, that if there were anything to the story, that it would have already come out in the press long ago, if not then it would come out soon. Let’s wait and see.

, ,

13 Responses to What I don’t understand

  1. avatar
    El Diablo Negro August 16, 2011 at 11:39 pm #

    This is the assumption that “He has to be guilty of something” if someone really dislikes you. You are not honest in their eyes, you are up to something and they are going to figure it out.

    In the 90’s I worked (not for long) for a boss like that. He was convinced that I was stealing, But never confronted me. So one day he had one of the employees tell me I was fired. Months later they found out who the real thief was, and I never got an apology (not that I expected one). He also hired someone (sleuth?) to follow me for a couple of weeks. That shocked the hell out of me.

  2. avatar
    Joey August 17, 2011 at 12:52 am #

    Its the “O” that birthers say has a happy face and the registrar’s name is Onaka not Okana.

  3. avatar
    Obsolete August 17, 2011 at 1:23 am #

    NBC did a great job on his blog explaining this all to “the Obama Hustle” (who we can tell came to this without any preconceptions based on his name. Oh, wait.)
    TOH seemed satisfied that no crimes were committed. I’ll guess I’ll wait for NBC to come here and explain what changed.

  4. avatar
    Lupin August 17, 2011 at 2:32 am #

    Short version: black people are shifty, lazy and grifters. Typical racist clap trap.

  5. avatar
    Bob August 17, 2011 at 5:56 am #

    That whole lot assessment-thing was brought up during the election.

  6. avatar
    Scientist August 17, 2011 at 7:38 am #

    Obsolete: NBC did a great job on his blog explaining this all to “the Obama Hustle” (who we can tell came to this without any preconceptions based on his name. Oh, wait.)
    TOH seemed satisfied that no crimes were committed. I’ll guess I’ll wait for NBC to come here and explain what changed.

    Yes it was discussed at length. The bottom line is:

    1. It’s not clear that the property is mis-assessed at all. Even if it were, how to assess properties is up to the city/county Assessor, not the property owner. It’s not like land is hiding. It’s the Assessor’s job to ensure that every parcel of land within a jurisdiction is accounted for, not the taxpayer”s.
    2. The ownership appears to be in a grantor trust. This is a commonly-used estate planning tool that almost any estate planner would recommend to someone like the President, who has substantial assets and young children. It allows the property to pass to the heirs without probate. These trusts are disregarded entities for tax purposes, which means that Obama claims the mortgage and property tax deductions on his personal return, as he has done.
    3. The Secret Service protects the property because the President lived there when he was elected, maintains it as his personal residence (he continues to file Illinois taxes) and occasionally spends time there. It is immaterial whether he owns it in his name, owns it through a trust or even rents it. These are long-standing policies and decisions are made by the Secret Service, not the President.

    If Mr Hustle wants to come here, he should do so..

  7. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy August 17, 2011 at 9:16 am #

    I fixed the spelling of Onaka, but the happy face is in the A.

    Its the “O” that birthers say has a happy face and the registrar’s name is Onaka not Okana.

  8. avatar
    Joey August 17, 2011 at 11:13 am #

    You’re right Doc, it’s the “A” in Alvin that got the birthers’ panties all in a bunch. My mistake.
    Can you believe that we’re talking about such foolishness?

  9. avatar
    John__C August 17, 2011 at 6:56 pm #

    Fox Nation and Rush Limbaugh are pimping yet another new vicious line of attack: Obama seems to have hidden his ex-girlfriends!!


    There are only two forms of insinuation that this question serves Obama’s foes, as far as I can see:

    (1) Obama’s girlfriends may have incriminating evidence about him; or

    (2) Obama is a closet homosexual.

    Keep it classy, Fox. (The world has obviously given up on Limbaugh in that regard.)

  10. avatar
    GeorgetownJD August 17, 2011 at 11:47 pm #

    The home in Chicago is held in a special type of trust that is commonly referred to as an “Illinois Land Trust,” a vessel that is very common in Illinois and five other states and structured in accordance with legislation in each of those states. The State of Illinois Department of Professional & Financial Regulation – Division of Banking has a good nutshell explanation of the land trust. See

    The Illinois Land Trust is also recognized by the IRS, which describes it thus:

    “These trusts are designed to house real estate within a grantor trust and provide limited access to grantor or beneficiary information contained in the trust instrument or known to the trustee. Once a land trust is established, the ability to trace property transactions becomes limited as state law establishes the right of the trustee not to disclose the true owner of the property or those with a beneficial interest. The “land trust” has no special distinction in the Internal Revenue Code and would be a simple, complex, or grantor trust depending on the terms of the trust instrument. Filing requirements would depend on the type of trust.”

    In May NBC posted on his website a copy of the first page of the trust agreement — clearly designated a “Land Trust Agreement” — that was created by Barack and Michelle Obama on May 10, 2005. Northern Trust Company is named as the trustee. Recorded instruments in the Cook County land records verify that a few days later the Obamas transferred to the trust their interest in the purchase contract for the home on Greenwood Avenue.

    All of this was explained to Al “Obama Hustle” Hendershot in May. He politely thanked NBC for the information, indicated that he would study it, then proceeded to pimp this smear job to WND knowing full well that it is false.

  11. avatar
    John Reilly August 18, 2011 at 1:05 am #

    Perhaps my friends at Fox, which I watch, can assure us that no one employed at Fox has their home in a trust. Maybe that would be like Rush Limbaugh telling us he is opposed to drug addicts.

  12. avatar
    obsolete August 18, 2011 at 5:54 pm #

    What I don’t understand, is still the same question: What advantage did Obama gain by acquiring a “Connecticut” SS number (as a teenager, using some nefarious means) instead of the “Hawaiian” SS number that he was entitled to receive?

    What is the point? What went down? what scam was brought to fruition? What criminal statute was violated?

    When Obama opened the envelope, read the first three numbers on his new card, and realized they were “Connecticut” numbers, did he fist pump and shout “YES!!!“?
    If so, why?

    Birthers never answer my questions, leaving me sad and mopey.

  13. avatar
    JD Reed August 20, 2011 at 12:23 pm #

    Obsolete, you’ve been channeling my thoughts!