Main Menu

Archive | Mario Apuzzo

Apuzzo wakes!

Apparently I wasn’t the only one to notice the Harvard Law Review Forum article by two former US Solicitor Generals who write, in agreement with Senator Bayard’s book on the Constitution from 1833, that “natural born citizens” are those who are born citizens, in contrast to those who are naturalized. Mario Apuzzo, vocal advocate for the “two-citizen parent born in the country” definition, has a new copyrighted article at Birther Report™ taking issue with Neal Katyal and Paul Clement.

The title of my article stems from the long period of silence at Apuzzo’s blog and reflects the fact that I didn’t know that he had written something last month regarding the eligibility of Ted Cruz, a person born a US citizen in Canada.

To quote Apuzzo as he criticizes Katyal and Clement:

The author’s argument suffers from the fallacy of bald assertion.

Apuzzo’s main criticism is that the authors don’t follow Apuzzo’s sources or agree with him on what is important. Since there is nothing new in Apuzzo’s argument in general, there is nothing new to say about it.

I think that because the subject article appeared at the Harvard Law Review Forum, it’s intended readers are expected to be able to fill in from their own knowledge parts of the argument necessarily skipped to keep the article from being too long. Apuzzo’s papers on the topic run many pages.

Canadian Conspiracy Show meets the Birthers

OK, I haven’t watched this video beyond the first minute where it says:

His presidency became mired in controversy when researchers and political opponents alleged that Obama was not eligible…

spoken over images of Mitt Romney, Donald Trump and John McCain, two of whom never in any way questioned Obama’s eligibility.

That was enough to tell me that, like the typical UFO cable TV documentary, this isn’t meant to present the facts accurately and in context. The video features three birthers and one “skeptic.” The birthers are Mario Apuzzo, Phil Berg and Karl Denninger (an early crank image analyst that I have mostly ignored). The skeptic is Allenna Leonard, billed as “Committee Chair of Democrats Abroad Canada.”

I have had some indecision about how to present the video. I could embed it from the Canadian site, but I don’t know if that is fair use. So here are two links:

  1. Web page with video embedded and discussion forum (video has advertising)
  2. Link to raw video

Reply to Mario Apuzzo on immoral birthers

Mario Apuzzo has raised an objection to my recent article titled, “The moral dimension of birtherism,” in which I say that birtherism is immoral. Apuzzo writes:

Dr. Conspiracy must be losing his mind, arguing that we Anti-Obots are immoral for arguing, as the unanimous U.S. Supreme Court explained in Minor v. Happersett (1875), that a natural born citizen is a child born in a country to parents who were its citizens at the time of the child’s birth.

In my article about the immorality of birthers, I focused on three specific immoral items:

  • Character assassination
  • Rumormongering
  • Fabrication of evil stories

When I wrote my article, those who promote a novel definition of “natural born citizen” were not what I had in mind. Apuzzo is the one who makes the association between my article and his statement about Minor v. Happersett. What Apuzzo doesn’t say, but we all know, is that persons who make that statement about Minor do so for the purpose of promoting a claim that somehow Barack Obama became president while ineligible to serve, yet avoiding the notice of most of the electorate, the Congress, the Chief Justice, and the legal academic community—a very remarkable claim when you think about it. So, yes, we do call those persons “birthers.” Are they immoral? I will address that question in two ways:

First, those who promote the two-citizen parent theory misrepresent the Minor Decision (as does Apuzzo above), using a basic logical fallacy of confusing necessary and sufficient conditions, one that any attorney must recognize, therefore making the fallacious argument by Apuzzo intentional. The judge in the Purpura case told Apuzzo that his position had “no legal merit.” To put such a theory forward without at least mentioning that rebuke from a judge (and the repudiation of the theory by 10 other judges in similar cases since 2008) is to misrepresent the view as something other than a fringe view, and someone is hardly “out of their mind” for knowing this. I consider using fallacies to persuade a form of lying, and have considered such things immoral since high school. So yes, I think that those who knowingly misrepresent Minor are acting immorally.

The second problem I have with Mr. Apuzzo’s remark is that I do not know who he is talking about. Who is this person who holds the two-citizen-parent theory but does not spread other evil stories about Barack Obama? We had a brief discussion about this in comments on this blog, and no one was able to name such a person–Mr. Apuzzo himself is not. Reviewing Apuzzo’s brief in Kerchner v. Obama’s second amended complaint, we find that the large majority of its numbered points deal with casting doubt about where Obama was born or his early life. If I had to characterize the Kerchner brief in one word, it would be “innuendo,” but there are a number of outright lies too such as:

…Hawaiian law that existed in 1961 when Obama was born (Chapter 338-178 Hawaiian Statues which applied for all births prior to 1972), which allowed parents to register their foreign born babies in Hawaii, was lax in terms of assuring the integrity of the documents and did not adequately safeguard against fraud in the process.

It also has the fake travel ban to Pakistan story. See my article: “Kerchner v. Obama and the WHOLE COUNTRY,” for more examples.

So Mr. Apuzzo has a history of character assassination and lying, and like Apuzzo, so do all others who support the two-citizen-parent theory that I know about. Even those who are victims of clever writers like Apuzzo, have the responsibility of double-checking stories before passing them on and themselves becoming guilty of rumormongering.

Brian Reilly answers commenter questions IV

Final Answers, Part IV

(Answers in bold italics.)

Dr. Conspiracy:

Shortly after you resigned from the CCP, they held their July 17, 2012, press conference at which they presented a fake race code table represented as from a 1961 vital statistics manual. Do you have any idea how the fake codes got from an obscure birther web site into the Posse’s “store of evidence”?

February 2013, letter to Sheriff Arpaio excerpts: “Since my resignation I have sent several emails to your attention and I have yet to receive a single reply from you or your office. I noticed that after I sent you the August 31, 2012, letter about what I believed to be erroneous conclusions regarding the numerical vital statistics data coding presented by Mike Zullo at the July 17, 2012, press conference, there has never been a mention of the coding again in press releases or affidavits by you or Mike Zullo. I have also noticed the absence from the investigation of Jerome Corsi. I would assume that Mr. Corsi provided the questionable data coding information…..The continued release of “teasing” remarks to the media that new information will soon be forthcoming is counter-productive….I humbly suggest that your investigation should be brought to a conclusion with a formal statement of findings….The investigation is quickly losing its credibility, which will ultimately have a negative impact on your base of supporters.”

As of March 18, 2014, I have never received a written reply by Sheriff Arpaio to any of my letters and emails since my resignation from the CCP on June 30, 2012.

In an appearance on the Tea Party Power Hour in mid June 2012, Zullo said that the Mafia regularly provided fake Hawaiian birth certificates to Japanese-born children. Were you aware of any evidence that Zullo had to support this claim, and that Hawaii was a hotbed of vital statistics fraud? Unknown He also said at an earlier time that he had examples of individuals born around the time of Obama whose births appeared in Honolulu newspaper birth announcements, but were not actually born in Hawaii. Did you see or know any evidence of this? Unknown

Did you hear the Verna K. Lee (Hawaii retired vital statistics clerk) interview recording? No Do you know for a fact that Zullo had heard it? Unknown

Did you have any involvement or knowledge of the testing of office machines to see if they could replicate the Obama birth certificate PDF? Involvement: No,

Knowledge: Only of the CCP copy machine testing DVD displayed to the public. you see or know about any actual Hawaiian birth certificates being used for testing? I didn’t see any Hawaiian birth certificate office machine testing take place while with the CCP.

What evidence?

RC, you took my quote out of context. The most important part of my quote that you omitted was:

“The more that people see that this “investigation” continues, in spite of Zullo’s and Gallup’s claimed evidence of a “100% forgery,” with NO action taken, the more people will hopefully wakeup to the political theater. In my opinion, the CCP has no legitimate “court ready” evidence other than the Verification of Birth from the Hawaii Department of Health, which they have apparently chosen to ignore since May of 2012.”
Again, it’s time to call the CCP’s bluff.


(Mr. Reilly, do you know who pays for the badges?)
Sheriff Arpaio swore me in and handed me the badge.

Dr. Conspiracy:
Oh, I don’t doubt that Zullo has evidence. He’s got his Verna K. Lee interview. He’s got his Reed Hayes report. His affidavit had 207 points on it. He’s got plenty of evidence, but so far it’s all crap, and a reasonable person might expect the rest of it to be crap. As long as has his evidence evades scrutiny, he can make it sound as great as he wants to the birthers.


This concludes my answers to your questions.  Thank you to all for the courtesy that you have shown me.  A special thank you to Mr. Davidson for allowing me to post openly about my opinions and my experiences. Many thanks to all.

Brian Reilly 

Afterword by Dr. Conspiracy

I want to thank Brian Reilly for the remarkable insights and personal story of his time inside the Cold Case Posse. I hope this provides some closure for him in this saga of good intentions gone wrong.

Even after all of this material, important facts from an evidentiary standpoint remain unanswered because Mike Zullo didn’t lay out the facts even to his own team. The Cold Case Posse has a remarkable lack of transparency and accountability.  And frankly, its claims to competence were pure BS.

I will add that I have also received some “off the record” material that I’m not going to talk about because it is private in nature, but it supports in some detail the date that Brian Reilly notified Zullo of his resignation.

I’m going to close comments on this final article, but feel free to leave comments on the prior ones. We don’t need the discussion fragmented any more than it is.

Here’s a photo of the Crown Vic courtesy of Brian.

Apuzzo submits SCOTUS appeal in Paige case

A document has surfaced on the Internet which appears to be a petition for writ of certiorari to the US Supreme Court in the case of H. Brooke Paige v. James Condos, Vermont Secretary of State. In this case Paige, with some assistance from Mr. Apuzzo, argued that US Presidents must have US citizen parents. The lower court rejected that view, saying:

While the court has no doubt at this point that Emmerich de Vattel’s treatise The Law of Nations was a work of significant value to the founding fathers, the court does not conclude that his phrase–”The natives, or natural born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens.”–has constitutional significance or that his use of “parents” in the plural has particular significance. This far, no judicial decision has adopted such logic in connection with this or any related issues. In fact, the most comprehensive decision on the topic, Ankeny v. Governor of Indiana, examines the historical basis of the use of the phrase, including the English common law in effect at the time of independence, and concludes that the expression “natural born Citizen” is not dependent on the nationality of the parents but reflects the status of a person born into citizenship instead of having citizenship subsequently bestowed. The distinction is eminently logical.

I wrote why the Supreme Court is unlikely to grant cert in my article: “Why the US Supreme Court will not hear the Paige case,” so I won’t repeat that discussion here.

At this point, a search of the Supreme Court docket does not show the case, nor is there a case number on the petition document uploaded 7 hours ago. Nothing at Apuzzo’s blog yet. Paige writes on his Constitutional Reset blog that the petition was filed yesterday (March 6).

Read more:


The Writ of Cert was docketed March 10, and denied by the Supreme Court in May and again (rehearing) in August of 2014.

Cropped by Doc

Mario ApuzzoI am sincerely bemused by this story. It started in November of 2009 when I wrote one of a series of quick birther bios on Mario Apuzzo. I wanted to illustrate those articles with photos of the subjects. I don’t know whether I found it myself, or someone sent it to me, but I ended up with a group photo including Apuzzo that  I cropped for my article. Ridiculing someone with a bad photo is not my usual style, and I thought the photo (right) looked rather distinguished. Apuzzo apparently thought so too because he started using the photo on his own web site. Hey, that’s fine with me.

Today, though, I was writing about the Orly Taitz campaign web site, and noticed the nice header graphic. Here’s some of it:

Photo of Orly Taitz, US Flag background

Does that photo look familiar? It’s cropped from a group photo of Taitz with National Republican Chairman Reince Prebius and co-chair of the Romney Campaign, Governor Tim Pawlenty taken during her 2012 Senate race. How do I know that? I cropped it myself. 1

Several anti-Taitz videos have appeared of late on YouTube. This character, DavidJamesManning has been uploading videos for 5 years now according to YouTube. I checked out one of them titled “You Can’t Make This Stuff Up”  just now and it has a series of images, including:

imageAnd where have we seen that image before? (And no, I had nothing to do with the videos.)

1OK, the image above is cropped a little tighter than mine, but I still think she got it from me.  The original Taitz image apparently came from a printed photograph that was scanned a bit crooked. I did some resizing and rotating for my version. When I overlay the image from the campaign site onto my own adjusted version of the original, it fits perfectly. It doesn’t quite fit as well to the original photo on the Taitz site. Readers here know about the reliability of amateur forensic photo analysts.