Obama subpoena revisited, PDF files revealing, Subpoena and WhiteHouse.gov birth certificate, Fraud and corruption revelations
“Why were portions of the motion to subpoena Obama by the Blagojevich defense team, damning to Obama, redacted?”…Citizen Wells
“Why did the Illinois Senate Health & Human Services Committee, with Obama as chairman, create and push Bill 1332, “Illinois Health Facilities Planning Act,” early in 2003, which reduced the number of members on the Board from 15 to 9, just prior to rigging by Tony Rezko and Rod Blagojevich?”…Citizen Wells
“I believe I’m more pristine on Rezko than him.”…Rod Blagojevich
Two PDF documents have appeared over the past several years that reveal fraud and corruption involving Barack Obama. In both cases, characteristics of the Adobe PDF files allowed for deceptions to come to light.
On April 22, 2010 a motion was filed by the Rod Blagojevich team to subpoena Barack Obama. The motion was presented to the public in PDF format with portions redacted (blacked out). However, someone failed to tag the document to not allow copying of the text. The complete unredacted motion was soon presented.
On April 27, 2011 an image was placed on WhiteHouse.gov purported to be Barack Obama’s long form birth certificate. Simple analysis using readily available software tools soon revealed the document as a fraud. A concocted image. It has always been the position of Citizen Wells that the wording “or abstract” at the bottom of the image automatically disqualified it as proof of being a copy of an original birth certificate.
In depth analysis of the WhiteHouse.gov image was performed by the cold case posse of Sheriff Joe Arpaio. Read more about that here.
Motion to subpoena Barack Obama.
From MSNBC April 22, 2010.
“Former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich asked a federal judge on Thursday to issue a subpoena for President Barack Obama to testify as a witness at his corruption trial.”
“The motion seeking Obama’s testimony contained several paragraphs that had been blacked out. This action is usually taken when the court has put information under seal.
The defense attorney said there was a conflict between comments made by Obama at a news conference and statements to federal prosecutors made by a labor union president and a candidate for the seat.
The specifics of the statements from the union president and the candidate were blacked out in the version of the motion that was filed publicly on the court docket.
“There are two conflicting stories and the defense has the right to admit evidence that contradicts the government’s claims,” the motion said.”
Motion to subpoena Obama redacted portions.
From Fox News April 23, 2010.
“The blacked-out portions of a subpoena request filed by lawyers for former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich — which were revealed through a simple computer trick — suggest President Obama may have played a role in finding his own Senate replacement.
On Thursday, Blagojevich’s lawyers asked a federal judge to subpoena the president to testify about questions surrounding the government’s allegation that Blagojevich was selling or trading Obama’s Senate seat after his election to the White House in November 2008.
“President Barack Obama has direct knowledge of the Senate seat allegation,” reads Blagojevich’s 11-page motion, filed with U.S. District Judge James B. Zagel.
The court erred when it posted the motion in a pdf file with redactions that could be revealed simply by copying and pasting the blacked-out portions to a plain text file.”
Motion to subpoena Obama redacted portions revealed.
Here is one of the more interesting revelations in the redacted portions.
“22. However, the defense has a good faith belief that Mr. Rezko, President Obama’s former friend, fund-raiser, and neighbor told the FBI and the United States Attorneys a different story about President Obama. In a recent in camera proceeding, the government tendered a three paragraph letter indicating that Rezko “has stated in interviews with the government that he engaged in election law violations by personally contributing a large sum of cash to the campaign of a public official who is not Rod Blagojevich. … Further, the public official denies being aware of cash contributions to his campaign by Rezko or others and denies having conversations with Rezko related to cash contributions. … Rezko has also stated in interviews with the government that he believed he transmitted a quid pro quo offer from a lobbyist to the public official, whereby the lobbyist would hold a fundraiser for the official in exchange for favorable official action, but that the public official rejected the offer. The public official denies any such
conversation. In addition, Rezko has stated to the government that he and the
public official had certain conversations about gaming legislation and
administration, which the public official denies having had.”10”
“10 The defense has a good faith belief that this public official is Barack Obama. See, “Obama on Rezko deal: It was a mistake”, Dave McKinney, Chris Fusco, and Mark Brown, Chicago Sun Times, November 5, 2006. Senator Barack Obama was asked: “Did Rezko or his companies ever solicit your support on any matter involving state or federal government? Did Al Johnson, who was trying to get a casino license along with Tony Rezko, or Rezko himself ever discuss casino matters with you?” Senator Obama answered: “No, I have never been asked to do anything to advance his business interest. In 1999, when I was a State Senator, I opposed legislation to bring a casino to Rosemont and allow casino gambling at docked riverboats which news reports said Al Johnson and Tony
Rezko were interested in being part of. I never discussed a casino license with either of them. I was a vocal opponent of the legislation.” Obama’s involvement with Tony Rezko and this legislation coincides with the three paragraph summary the government has provided to the defense referenced above.”
There’s that messy “quid pro quo” phrase again. It seems to be popping up with regularity in the same sentence with Obama.
This subpoena begs further scrutiny.