Main Menu

Social-security number allegations undermined by Cold Case Posse investigator

Former police investigator Don Jeffrey, who investigated reports of Obama having multiple security-security numbers for Mike Zullo, finds that none of the multiple numbers reported by other birther investigators, tie back to President Obama personally, but to “addresses” where Obama once lived, and other people.

Listen to the show:

Orly Taitz explains this by calling Don Jeffrey part of the “controlled opposition.” [Link to Taitz web site]

, ,

20 Responses to Social-security number allegations undermined by Cold Case Posse investigator

  1. avatar
    nbc June 1, 2013 at 3:31 am #

    Orly is going to pop a vein for being thrown under the bus. Now if the investigators (sic) had applied the same diligence to their forgery accusation, they would be enjoying the company of their loved ones. Instead, they are out there peddling their wares, pretending to be representing Sheriff Arpaio.

    Quite an amusing sight. Zullo’s talk got cut from 30 minutes to 5. Still 6 minutes too long.

    I almost feel sorry for the few attending law enforcement officers.

  2. avatar
    ArthurWankspittle June 1, 2013 at 5:18 am #

    “…we have nothing on that at all…”

    BWAAHAAHAA
    You could hear the interviewer’s disappointment then the scrabbling around for an excuse.

  3. avatar
    BatGuano June 1, 2013 at 9:17 am #

    ArthurWankspittle:
    “…we have nothing on that at all…”

    BWAAHAAHAA
    You could hear the interviewer’s disappointment then the scrabbling around for an excuse.

    “there COULD be….. there MIGHT be….”

    bwahahahahahahaha!!!!!!

  4. avatar
    Sef June 1, 2013 at 9:33 am #

    ArthurWankspittle:
    “…we have nothing on that at all…”

    BWAAHAAHAA
    You could hear the interviewer’s disappointment then the scrabbling around for an excuse.

    Are you THE Arthur Wankspittle?

  5. avatar
    Benji Franklin June 1, 2013 at 9:44 am #

    I think the CCP should be hired to direct people to the bathrooms that will be in the Obama Presidential Library, but as a condition of continuing employment, they would have to do so using a script written by Larry Klayman. WE don’t want the CCP to just evaporate and go away, do we?

  6. avatar
    john June 1, 2013 at 10:22 am #

    The other shoe comes off. I thought the Obots said the CCP was not credible. If that’s so, then why should obots believe an ounce of what Don Jeffery says.

  7. avatar
    John Reilly June 1, 2013 at 1:38 pm #

    Dr. Taitz is now fully committed to the phony social security number story. All she ever had was one 1940 census record and one item in a credit database (which item is wholly inconsistent with the census record), but she has created a world more complex than “War and Peace.” She’s even filed a new motion for reconsideration with the District Court in Washington, and been pestering Judge Lambeth’s staff, with the false claim that she found evidence of the use of the social security number in “official” records.

    What next? Move on to another phony Kenyan birth certificate? Return to Vattel? Or spontaneously explode?

  8. avatar
    John Reilly June 1, 2013 at 4:57 pm #

    john:
    The other shoe comes off.I thought the Obots said the CCP was not credible.If that’s so, then why should obots believe an ounce of what Don Jeffery says.

    Because, John, it’s what the lawyers call an “admission.” The CCP says x, and then it hires someone who on its behalf says x is not so.

    I would have thought you could have figured that out by yourself.

  9. avatar
    Thinker June 1, 2013 at 5:03 pm #

    I can’t speak for anyone else, of course, but I don’t particularly care if what Mr. Jeffery said is right or wrong. What I like about this is that he is inflaming the inter-birfer wars between Orly Taitz, and Mike Zullo, Boy Detective. Anything that keeps birfers fighting each other is good for America.

    john:
    The other shoe comes off.I thought the Obots said the CCP was not credible.If that’s so, then why should obots believe an ounce of what Don Jeffery says.

  10. avatar
    gorefan June 1, 2013 at 5:17 pm #

    john:
    The other shoe comes off.I thought the Obots said the CCP was not credible.If that’s so, then why should obots believe an ounce of what Don Jeffery says.

    In a con game this would be known as “salting the mine”.

    Zullo knows there is nothing to the SSN stuff and it can easily be disproven, so he gives it up. He now appears to an honest investigator, just looking for the truth and not someone out to make a buck. Just like salting a mine with some real gold to make it look like the rest of the mine is authentic.

  11. avatar
    nbc June 1, 2013 at 6:35 pm #

    Indeed, the CCP has shown itself to not be very credible in its claims of fraud based on a highly compressed PDF document…

    Now if they could have taken the same amount of effort as Don Jeffrey. He shows some common sense that appears to be sorely missing in other parts of the ‘investigation’

    And where is Sheriff Arpaio? Or is Zullo there as a private citizen

  12. avatar
    donna June 1, 2013 at 6:54 pm #

    i would like their “experts” to prove counterfeit of a $20 bill using a PDF copy

    can you imagine the cross-examination at the hearing? i believe the governments’ experts would be the secret service

    “In fact, the entire reason the Secret Service was originally created was to handle counterfeiters. Only later did it take on the role of additionally protecting the president and other key government officials.”

  13. avatar
    CarlOrcas June 1, 2013 at 7:19 pm #

    nbc: Or is Zullo there as a private citizen

    Zullo is a private citizen! He has no official position. No authority. Nothing.

  14. avatar
    CarlOrcas June 1, 2013 at 7:20 pm #

    Thinker: Anything that keeps birfers fighting each other is good for America.

    And entertaining to watch.

  15. avatar
    US Citizen June 1, 2013 at 11:04 pm #

    john:
    The other shoe comes off.I thought the Obots said the CCP was not credible.

    The CCP is credible.
    It’s like when you’re very famous, you’re infamous.
    In this case, the CCP is incredible!

  16. avatar
    Rickey June 2, 2013 at 12:53 am #

    john:
    The other shoe comes off.I thought the Obots said the CCP was not credible.If that’s so, then why should obots believe an ounce of what Don Jeffery says.

    Well, John, it’s a well-known fact that even a broken clock is correct twice a day.

    I happen to be real private investigator, and I work with databases such as LexisNexis every day. I can tell you that there is nothing unusual about multiple Social Security Numbers showing up for an individual on databases, because those databases are aggregators of information from second-hand sources. The information is not verified for accuracy, and every LexisNexis report comes with this disclaimer:

    Important: The Public Records and commercially available data sources used on reports have errors. Data is sometimes entered poorly, processed incorrectly and
    is generally not free from defect. This system should not be relied upon as definitively accurate. Before relying on any data this system supplies, it should be independently verified.

    Have you ever heard the saying “Garbage in, garbage out?” That applies here.

    Your hero, Orly Taitz, has never independently verified any of the data which she received from Sankey, Daniels & Sampson. Instead of verifying the information, she took the raw data and assumed it was accurate because it fit with her preconceived notion that Obama is a fraud.

    The fact of the matter is that the birthers been unable to locate a single document on which Obama has listed a Social Security Number which is different than the one which Orly has plastered all over the Internet. They haven’t found a tax return, a credit application, a loan application, or a driver’s license which shows anything other than his real Social Security Number.

    If what Mr. Jeffrey said about his credentials is true – that he spent years conducting background investigations of people – he should have developed the expertise to separate the garbage from the accurate data. It appears that he has done precisely that.

    Even Orly must know that the database searches on which she has relied are not admissible in a court of law. That is why she has never tried to introduce the actual database reports into evidence. Can you imagine the hilarity which would ensue if she tried to put into evidence a document which says that it likely is full of errors? That is why she has always used affidavits from her investigators instead of the actual reports.

  17. avatar
    predicto June 3, 2013 at 4:02 am #

    The best part is reading the comments at youtube. None of the birthers even understand that the investigator has just eviscerated the “fake social security” claim. The comments are written as though the investigator found something bad about Obama, when he clearly says the exact opposite.

    I suspect that none of them even listened to the video.

  18. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy June 3, 2013 at 8:07 am #

    Confirmation bias. They hear what they expect to hear.

    But it’s not just birthers. I listened to the Mike Zullo clip quoted in the “Zullo tries to pull off a fast one” article here, and I came away thinking that he said things he didn’t say, and this because of confirmation bias (and probably intentional trickery on his part). Now, I didn’t believe what I thought he said, but I still thought he said it.

    I had to listen to the clip multiple times and write down the transcript, and then read it carefully word by word before I got exactly what he said in order to write this article.

    So I understand birthers listening to the Gallups interview and thinking that they heard proof in support of their position.

    predicto: The best part is reading the comments at youtube. None of the birthers even understand that the investigator has just eviscerated the “fake social security” claim. The comments are written as though the investigator found something bad about Obama, when he clearly says the exact opposite.

  19. avatar
    J.D. Sue June 3, 2013 at 1:38 pm #

    Rickey: Even Orly must know that the database searches on which she has relied are not admissible in a court of law. That is why she has never tried to introduce the actual database reports into evidence.

    —-
    Actually and incredibly, she presently is seeking judicial notice of the “Report of the Merlins Information systems acxiom.com/identity-solutions database”, in her current effort to get reconsideration in Taitz v. Astrue in the D.C. District Court. There is no limit to her idiocy.

  20. avatar
    nbc June 3, 2013 at 2:17 pm #

    Why Orly will face troubles getting the lower case to rehear: read here

    She filed for reconsideration in the Court of Appeals, which found that it cannot hear new evidence. The court cited a case in which it was ruled that the party could try t find for relief in the lower court but if it involved new evidence, it was time barred by one year after the ruling in the lower court.

    Orly does appeal to (6) of Rule 60(b) which is not time-barred but does not attempt to explain why it applies, when rule (2) for newly discovered evidence appears to be more appropriate, but of course is time barred.

    So Orly will find that the Court will deny relief as requested as it is time barred. But first it will have to rule on the filing of motions with unredacted SSN’s…

    So I predict

    1. Let it be denied. And an order to refile properly redacted or alternatively
    1a. An order to file under seal

    followed by

    2. An order dismissing the motion because of being time barred. Probably sua sponte. If not

    3. Order to show cause…

    Nothing new will happen here.

    Those are my predictions as a non-lawyer who can read the relevant rulings.