Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio announced at a press conference earlier today, that his investigation into the validity of Obama’s birth certificate had come to the conclusion that the document presented to the American public in April 2011 is undoubtedly fraudulent. HI officials would not confirm to investigators whether or not the BC Released by the WH was an exact copy of the one they have on file.
According to Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office Cold Case Posse Lead Investigator Mike Zullo, the findings were partially based on an interview with a person whose signature appears on Obama’s birth certificate. That person, Verna K. Lee, 95, said she was a local registrar at the time of Obama’s birth.
A press release from MCSO said the rest of the case was based around several factors.
The first factor is a coding discrepancy on Obama’s birth certificate when compared to other Hawaiian documents.
Information given by Lee, including the in-question vital codes and their meanings, contrasted the president’s claims.
Investigators were not permitted to compare the White House’s version of Obama’s birth certificate to that held by Hawaii. Officials refused to allow MCSO investigators to make the comparison and also would not confirm if a PDF of the birth certificate, released by the White House, was an exact copy of the document released to Obama’s attorneys.
It should be noted that other document experts have disputed the Cold Case Posse’s March findings as reported in Snopes…
WND has much more on this story, as you can imagine: Arpaio Obama probe finds ‘national security threat’
Arpaio told WND he intends to move the investigation and the new information to a higher authority within the federal government because of what he calls an imminent threat to national security and U.S. immigration laws. The threat is posed by a flaw in Hawaii’s law discovered by his investigators that allows a foreigner to obtain a Hawaii birth certificate.
“Although I am having a difficult time deciding who to forward this information to given the fact that the obvious choices report directly to the president, I cannot stand by and hold on to information that threatens to weaken national security,” Arpaio said.
Arpaio said he intends on keeping a case file open if more information surfaces or if federal authorities decide to ignore the case.
Zullo explained that along with new information discovered regarding the birth certificate since the posse’s March 1 press conference, his team has discovered Hawaii provides easy access to a birth certificate, even if the child wasn’t born in the state.
Under Hawaii Revised Statute 338-17.8, a person only has to be an established resident of Hawaii, not necessarily a U.S. citizen, and pay taxes there for one year to be able to register an out-of-state or foreign-born person with an official Hawaii birth certificate.
Mara Zebest, The American Thinker: New Obama Birth Certificate Forgery Proof in the Layers:
My newly released report examines the metadata and object code of Obama’s long-form birth certificate PDF file and explains how this information corroborates the claim that Obama’s PDF file never originated as a paper document, but rather was born in cyberspace or was — to put it another way — digitallymanufactured. The only time Obama’s long-form birth certificate image exists as a paper document is when a computer user selects Print from the Filemenu. Obama’s PDF file, like everything else from this administration, is a composite, a lie, an illusion — even down to the deceptive colors presented in the file.***
The layers have been the most damning and problematic evidence of file-manipulation, and the defenders of Obama are quick to respond with a plethora of explanations to justify the presence of layers. The excuses range from OCR (Optical Character Recognition) software to the more predominant excuse of optimization — both of which have been debunked in my previous report for the Cold Case Posse press conference.
Many Obama defenders have conceded that OCR is not a factor and admit that OCR was never applied to the PDF file. However, arguments for optimization still persist. Optimization refers to a file-saving process in which the goal is to reduce the file size while maintaining (or optimizing) the quality of the image (as best as possible depending on the settings applied).
Those who insist on the optimization argument either do not understand what attributes need to be present for this argument to hold water — or they are hoping the general public does not understand. It’s probably a little of both. The defenders certainly count on the ignorance of the average citizen when it comes to understanding the differences in layers produced from an automated process (such as optimization) compared to a manual choice to manipulate the file. One goal of the report is to offer a deeper understanding for recognizing the two patterns of layering (and to avoid being deceived or bamboozled). The report adds additional proof along the way that the optimization excuse fails miserably and can be completely ruled out as a justification for layers.