A most troubling post has appeared on Orly’s blog, “the same CT SSN and address is linked to both Obama and Harry J Bounel.” Here’s what she said:
I’m sure Obama has people out attempting to scrub all info on Harrison J Brunel (sic).
Can anyone do an E-Verify on Harrison J Brunel (sic) ? Though I’m sure Obama has it set to come up as failed when checked.
Accessing E-Verify for improper purposes, and what Taitz is suggesting is an improper purpose, is a federal crime. She is asking for one of her readers to commit a crime and then provide her with a benefit. I’m not a lawyer, but if any of her readers takes a step to follow through on Orly’s request is this not essentially a criminal conspiracy, and is not Orly Taitz guilty of conspiracy?
The Employer acknowledges that the information which it receives from SSA is governed by the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a(i)(1) and (3)) and the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1306(a)), and that any person who obtains this information under false pretenses or uses it for any purpose other than as provided for in this MOU may be subject to criminal penalties.
What about Harrison J. Bounel? Orly seems to believe that all information about him is being scrubbed by the Chicago Mafia. What I can say is that no such person appears in the Social Security Death Index, making it somewhat unlikely that he was born in 1890 as Orly has always maintained. For all I know, the person does not exist.
The search for the elusive Connecticut person, born in 1910, who applied for a social-security card in 1977, the number allegedly stolen by Obama, has vexed birthers for some time. They found a fellow born in 1910 from Connecticut, Jean Paul Ludwig. Ludwig’s specific appeal is that he died in Hawaii. The problem with this find is that Ludwig is dead and his social-security number is public information and it’s not the one Obama used. It’s those pesky facts that the birthers have a problem with.
So now, we have the elusive Harrison J. Bounel, a name that only appeared in some unspecified public database in 2009. There was a Harry L. Bounel from Connecticut who lived in Chicago in 1910. The middle initial is wrong. Also he was born about 1860, according to census records which makes his application for Social Security in 1977 (at age 117) problematic to say the least. Stumped again by pesky facts.
Now there is another Harry Bounel who was born in 1890, but he was born in Russia and lived in New York. I couldn’t connect him with Connecticut.
These public databases contain unconfirmed information and there is no indication of where the data Orly relies on comes from. That’s why the whole thing is inadmissible in court.
While I wouldn’t normally recommend reading the Obama Release Your Records site, then have an article on this subject that is perhaps worth reading, so long as you read to the end, since the first part is in part debunked by the second part (this is a problem I have with ORYR failing to sort out contradictory material until the end).
Hendershot has been trying to get social-security records for the Harry Bounel born in Russia in 1890 and living in New York in 1940. Social Security isn’t going to release any records until they are convinced that the subject is deceased; they want a death certificate. Depending on the state, that might be easy or hard.
I went looking at Ancestry.com and I immediately located the 1940 record for Harry Bounel, age 50 in 1940, living in New York. This is the only census record I found; however, if I entered the alternate spelling “Bonnel” more were found: a 1930 census record for someone that could easily be “Bounel”
again born in Russia. His age was 36 and he was living in Baltimore, Maryland. His age, however, puts him being born about 1894. We find the same fellow (same wife Anna) in the 1920 census as well, in Baltimore, born about 1895 in Russia, with an immigration date of 1911, which means we won’t find him in an earlier census. We also note that his “mother tongue” is listed as Yiddish.
So we either have two Harry Bounel’s born about 5 years apart in Russia, or we have one with an error in the age who moved from Maryland to New York and became separated from his family. Alternate spelling possibilities make this one difficult.
If we take a third alternate spelling of “Bormel” there is actually a hit on the Social Security Death Index. That gives us some specific information, a date of birth: 6 Jan 1894, a date of death: Jan 1976 and a social-security number: 219-32-5101. (It’s a Maryland number issued 1952-53). I’ll bet this is our Russian from the 1920 and 1930 Census. It could be our New Yorker, or not.
With the “Harry Bonnell” alternate, we come up more SSDI hits, but none born in 1890 or having numbers issued in Connecticut.