From Conception...To Election

"Preventing an individual with plural loyalties, whether by biological, political or geographic origins, which may present lawful or perceptable doubt as to his allegiances thereof, other than one with the fullmost sovereignty of advanced citizenry, which is that of one who remains Natural-born from conception to election, from assuming the great power of this fragile office, was, without tolerance or vulnerability, the exaction of purpose of our fathers to induce the mandate of presidential eligibility upon our blood-ransomed Constitution..." Pen Johannson ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.

Friday, April 20, 2012


WRONG QUESTION: Regardless of transient political ideologies, confidence in a presidential candidate’s eligibility must be upheld unanimously among all Americans as a preeminent requirement before any legitimate debate over that president’s policies can be possible.  Any doubt, perceived or material, which befalls the legal status of a candidate must be remedied by that candidate to a degree which makes it impossible to undermine that candidate’s identity, loyalty, eligibility and citizenship to hold that office, whatsoever.  Failure to secure this foundation undermines the rule of law for all Americans and makes all laws implemented under that president illegitimate while simultaneously breeding revolution against anyone who serves in government.  Barack Obama’s failure to demonstrate this most basic and elementary quality ranks him with history’s most ridiculous and heretical tricksters.  

By Penbrook Johannson

NEW YORK, NY – According to Nazi lie master, Joseph Goebbels, the ingredients required for a recipe of tyranny and violence are a political liar, an abettor and a compliant authority unwilling to stop both. 
Goebbels would have greatly admired what the mainstream American media and the Judiciary branch of government has become under the spell of Barack Obama today.  Somewhere in the recesses of hell, as Fox News, CNN, MSNBC, ABC and CBS all silently echo the disgraceful decisions by judges presiding in eligibility challenges against Obama, the former head of Nazi propaganda has a big smile on his face, celebrating a victory for the crimes he modeled for government and media more than 70 years ago. 
Beginning in 1933, Goebbels used the media to hide the truth about the Third Reich’s murderous ambitions by pushing the idea of ‘big government’ supremacy using a self-righteous vilification of those who challenged the legitimacy of Hitler’s rule.  Among them, just like those working at the aforementioned broadcast networks, were those who upheld the false legitimacy of a fraudulently appointed usurper by exploiting the subject of race and accusations of criminality as incitements against their political enemies, despite the fact that Hitler, too, was not a natural-born citizen of Germany.
In 2004, liberal propagandists in the American media solidified themselves as renowned counterfeiters when they conjured documents and used them as evidence during prime-time news reports to promote unflattering lies about then GOP incumbent candidate, George W. Bush.  Seven people lost their career, including veteran news anchor Dan Rather, while Bush was elected to a second term. 
However, the same liars returned with a vengeance in 2008 undeterred in their vanity to exalt a usurper.  Whereas the 2004 forgery was intended to slander an opponent, this most recent episode of fraud was intended to help the liberal establishment.
Certifi-gate began four years ago.  America was told by a bowing liberal consensus with the help of a fawning, pro-Obama media that it was the short-form rendition of Obama’s alleged birth record, referred to at that time as a “Certification of Live Birth”, which was the only available documentation of Obama’s “natural-born” citizenship and that we should all just accept it without asking any questions.

That version of Obama’s birth documentation was alleged to have been issued by the State of Hawaii in June 2008 yet was inexplicably stamped by the Hawaiian registrar’s office in 2007.  The image of that document posted to the internet was visibly altered (the certificate number was redacted), rendering it invalid.  Ignoring its lack of authenticity, (the document had printed upon it by the agency that any alteration, including redactions of the certificate number, renders it invalid), it was also propped by organizations claiming nonpartisan objectivity, including the Annenberg Foundation…which was revealed as a former employer of Obama.
Liberal hacks in the media like Chris “leg-tingle” Matthews and Keith “hate merchant” Olbermann then went on a three year propaganda binge flapping a printed copy of the fake short-form COLB, and their mouths, in front of the camera declaring the holy grail of Obama’s eligibility to be president.  Even Hawaii’s Health Director, Chiyome Fukino, violated her jurisdiction and issued two press releases declaring Obama’s natural-born status.  No law under any jurisdiction gives legal authority to a state Health Department to grant citizenship status, only the Immigration and Naturalization Service has the capacity to do this. 
The “Certification of Live Birth” was an experimental lie which failed.  Intended to be used to see how much Obama could get away with, it deceived ignorant people for three years.  As demands for Obama’s original documentation increased, Hawaii even tried to help Obama by discreetly changing the header title of the state’s computer template from “Certification of Live Birth” in 2010 to match the standard, 100-year-old U.S. Department of Health paper document’s header, “CertifiCATE of Live Birth”.  It was an obvious attempt to provide more document camouflage for Obama by causing confusion and obscuring the farcical deficiencies of the Hawaiian short-form document by equating it with federal authenticity. 
Obama’s defenders are sanctimonious, if not outright evil.  Fukino escaped to the state’s medical board, Olbermann has since been fired, twice…and Matthews, along with the remaining slew of defamatory media lechery, has less of “tingle” over Obama after they were forced to see their pathetic failure as journalists.
In April, 2011, they would all be forced to admit before the world that, actually, Obama had not yet provided authentic documentation of his alleged “natural-born” identity and that the short form image was a rank hoax. 
27 lawsuits later, just as Obama’s political image was being sufficiently damaged enough to warrant a new and improved lie, Obama’s attorney, Judith Corley, scurried off to Hawaii on April 25th, 2011, where she was allegedly pressed to sweet-talk an inconvenienced Hawaiian municipality into digging up what the American public was left to assume was the only digital copy of a 1961 birth certificate in American history, presumably created in Adobe format 30 years before the software even existed.

Then, Obama tried to make us feel guilty for having the audacity to protect the integrity of our Constitution…a Constitution which, by the way, he has expressed overt contempt for over the past 30 years.  We were told we were subjecting Hawaii to arduous pains in asking municipal employees to actually perform the duties of their tax-funded jobs.  The poor Hawaiian agency’s vexation over long-standing administrative rules, complex processes, limited resources…sweat and tears, to provide this record was almost more than they could muster, according to Obama.

We were told how unreasonable we were being in our request to ensure the protection of America’s constitutional sovereignty by having the audacity to actually demand that America’s first self-entitled president be eligible for the office he sought.  It was even implied that we should consider ourselves privileged to be blessed with this lone scrap of regal documentation and therefore should feel guilty about doubting its veracity. 
We learned soon after that Hawaii had recently produced the same long-form documents for other applicants during that same week without so much as a complaint. 
Like a virus, multiple copies were then reproduced on paper by the White House and used to infect the press, while Obama’s media organ, NBC, appointed an overbender for Obama, Savannah Guthrie, to physically inspect the allegedly certified-with-a-raised-seal paper version of the document.  Guthrie remains the only individual on the planet, outside of Obama’s government, to have witnessed this ghostly document. 

“If the posse’s mind-blowing findings are correct, what is it that Judith Corley couriered back to Washington? And what is it that Savannah Guthrie touched?” asks WND’s Diana West.

“I find such questions most intriguing – even if the rest of the media do not – particularly after last week’s court hearing into Obama’s eligibility to appear on the ballot in the New Jersey presidential primary. After literally dozens of such eligibility cases since 2008 (evidently, the media are waiting for a discernible story trend to emerge before they pounce), I can report, having watched a video of the New Jersey hearing online, that the president’s team is making progress. Only now it’s away from his long-form birth certificate.”

A digital image of the record was posted to the website on April 27 to worshipped by all.  It was endorsed as authentic by Obama and former White House counsel, Robert Bauer, at a formal press briefing…just before Bauer mysteriously resigned without explanation, perhaps as a result of his realization of the level of deception being wrought by Obama.

This is the same Internet image, along with an image of Obama’s alleged Selective Service registration card, discovered by a constitutionally empowered law enforcement investigation group to be forgeries.  At a press conference held on March 1, 2012, the Maricopa County Sheriff’s office explained that it believed the online image originated as a computer file and never even existed in original paper form before being fabricated from multiple sources and posted to the government website.

West goes on to write about the recent New Jersey ballot challenge hearing in which Mr. Obama’s attorney, Alexandra Hill, “couldn’t have been more adamant about not citing the online birth certificate as a means of proving the president’s identity in this recent challenge – and after everyone went to so much trouble to get it! Indeed, she called the Internet image “legally irrelevant,” arguing that New Jersey law doesn’t specifically call for a birth certificate to qualify a presidential candidate for the ballot.”

As indicated by online video of Hill’s arguments, she agreed with the plaintiffs “great arguments” that the image of Obama’s birth certificate was a forgery and made the absurd claim that, therefore, it cannot be used as evidence to confirm his lack of natural born citizenship status. Therefore, she argued, it is “irrelevant to his placement on the ballot”.

Hill went on to contort reasoning by implying that Obama needs only invoke his political popularity, not legal qualifications, in order to be a candidate.  During the hearing, Hill's bizarre argument was showcased by the following exchange:

Judge Masin asked Hill, “I understand you have a general objection before we get to the question of what is his (Obama’s) qualifications?”

“Yes, I have an objection as to relevance,” replied Hill, as to the plaintiffs’ witness testimony regarding the authenticity of the image of Obama’s alleged 1961 'Certificate of Live Birth'.

“The objectors carry the burden of proof to show that a candidate is not eligible under New Jersey statutes.  Photographs (of Obama’s alleged birth certificate) are not relevant as to the discussion of the law today,” said Hill.

Then, shockingly, Hill went on to agree with widely publicized suspicions that the image of Obama’s alleged Certificate of Live Birth is, indeed, a fabrication. She conceding that the plaintiffs’ arguments against the authenticity of Obama’s birth certificate were valid saying, “I understand that they have great arguments (that the internet image of Obama’s birth certificate is a forgery), but I don’t see how that is relevant in this case.”

Hill’s misunderstanding of administrative law reveals a strategy to defend Obama’s fraudulent election in which our legal system has reversed the legal assignment of burden of proof in order to equate eligibility with a legal definition of innocence of a crime for Obama.

Unfortunately for Obama, eligibility for political office does not fall under the precepts of criminalogical reasoning of "innocent until proven guilty", unless a charge is made that a crime has been committed, such as forgery or fraud, in order to deceive people about your identity or citizenship status. Obama's ineligibility, by itself, is not a crime...being fraudulently elected by deceiving voters is.

Simply put, Obama does not have a right to hold an office he is not eligible for and, therefore, he is not harmed by a lawful denial of an opportunity to hold the office he is not eligible for. Therefore, it is incumbent upon Obama to prove he is eligible in order to avoid harming others by his illegitimate election.  It is not the responsibility of those who are risk to show evidence that Obama is ineligible.

Hill incorrectly argued that Obama is automatically eligible until proven ineligible, yet she sought to suppress the very evidence which shows that Obama’s eligibility has never actually been proven to begin with.Hill then attempted to have the judge declare that Obama was preeminently eligible without any legal responsibility to prove with documentation that he was, in fact, qualified to hold the office of the presidency.
Absurdly, Obama’s position, as contorted by Hill, is that his appearance on New Jersey's presidential ballot is not related to his actual eligibility to be president.

West wrote, “Exactly how a presidential candidate demonstrates he is at least 35 years old and “natural born,” the constitutional requirement New Jersey upholds, Hill didn’t say, but Administrative Law Judge Jeff Masin found her arguments persuasive to the point of preventing an expert witness from offering testimony that the online image is a forgery.”

“Even though the Obama team entered no documentation of the president’s identity into the record – not even that “certified” birth document Obama’s personal lawyer traveled so far to retrieve – Judge Masin managed to find that the president was both born in Hawaii and “natural born.”

“Neat, huh? But note the shift in legal tactics. If, in New Jersey, the online birth certificate was “legally irrelevant,” in January’s Georgia eligibility hearing, the president’s lawyer, Michael Jablonski, considered it legally decisive. Jablonski cited “the documents evidencing the birth of President Obama” that are available online to try to quash a subpoena that “commanded” Obama to come to court and bring “any and all birth records” with him (among other documents).”

“A golden opportunity to show off that certified, hand-couriered birth doc from Hawaii, and be done with it, no? No. When Administrative Law Judge Michael Malihi refused to quash the subpoena, Jablonski and Obama ignored it. They just didn’t show up. Not to worry: Flouted subpoena and all, and without any evidence from the Obama team, Judge Malihi found that the president was both born in Hawaii and “natural born,” too.”

“Amazing how that works, and no matter what the president’s lawyers do – so long as they don’t enter tangible evidence of the president’s identity into the court record.”

“As for that new birth certificate that came online last April? Since government and media have abdicated their responsibility to help determine whether it’s the real McCoy or a forgery, what else is there to do but wish it a happy first birthday?”

In other words, when the liar tells his lie, use the national media to promote it as truth.  Then, when decent, honest citizens discover the lie and seek a redress of their greivances , just have the legal system ignore them. 

Before you know it, 10 million people will be murdered and your usurpation of power will have violated every inalienable right endowed by God upon humanity. 

The Nazis could not do it any better.

Wednesday, April 18, 2012


NO WANGO TANGO – Making time in their busy party schedule with prostitutes to cast stones, audacious agents from the secret service have suddenly reassigned their ball activities to discuss criminal behavior with Ted Nugent after the outspoken musician criticized Barack Obama. The only problem is that identifying the actual criminals in the meeting may be difficult.

Commentary by Dan Crosby,

NEW YORK, NY - When you allow an illegitimate candidate to be elected president, everything goes to hell.

Like the line from 'Tommy Boy', "That's when the whores come in." (1:22).

Between interrogation sessions following their own criminal solicitation of prostitutes, U.S. Secret Service agents have shuffled their busy lap-dance schedule to meet with Theodore Nugent after the rock musician used his first amendment privilege to criticize the illegitimate usurpation of power by Barack Obama, during the National Rifle Association convention last week.

Ironically, it is the very criminal behavior exhibited by the Secret Service in their salacious activities with sex workers in Colombia which Nugent was criticizing. Now, the same "Johns" assigned to protect Obama have been charged with not only the crime of solicitation but the duty of casting stones at Nugent for his accurate assessment of Obama’s immoral and illegitimate administration.

Prior to Nugent’s comments, three Secret Service agents implicated in the prostitution scandal in Colombia, including two supervisors, have been fired from the agency as federal investigators are ramping up an investigation into whether the criminal lapse led to any security breach.

Nugent, who accurately informed the NRA last week of the criminal behavior rampant throughout Obama’s illegal administration also said that he would be "dead or in jail" next year if Obama is fraudulently elected again in November. Citing references to the American Revolution, Nugent said that such criminality among government must be thrown off and the “king” overthrown.

At no point did Nugent ever directly threaten Obama only stating what might happen to himself.

Since the Secret Service is no moral position to serve as an example against criminality in the wake of the prostitution scandal, Nugent said he was not concerned about meeting with them.

"We actually heard from the Secret Service, and they have a duty, and I salute them. I support them and I'm looking forward to our meeting tomorrow," Nugent said on Glenn Beck's radio show.

"I'm sure it will be a fine gathering backstage in Oklahoma," Nugent said.

Nugent is schedule to give a concert in Ardmore, Oklahoma, on Thursday.

Facing criminal charges for their own bad behavior, the Secret Service declined to directly address whether the federal agency tasked with protecting the president would be meeting with Nugent.

"We are aware of the incident with Ted Nugent, and we are conducting appropriate follow-up," said spokesman Brian Leary in a statement. "We recognize an individual's right to freedom of speech but we also have a responsibility to determine and investigate intent."

Leary did not address his agency’s involvement with Colombian prostitutes or the possible breach of security.

Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney also made a high-profile appearance and speech at the NRA convention attended by Nugent, but did not comment on the charges of solicitation against the Secret Service.

However, Nugent's comments last week at the NRA convention were seized on by the Democratic National Committee, in a fundraising email on Monday in which lead Democrat hitwoman, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, chairwoman of the DNC, said at the time, "threatening violence, or whatever it is that Nugent's threatening, is clearly beyond the pale."

However, Schultz, a radical Obot, also remained silent on Obama’s Secret Services’ illegal sexcapades.

In other comments at the convention in St. Louis last week, Nugent took aim at other officials in Obama's administration.

“It isn’t the enemy that ruined America,” he said, affirming his support for Republican presidential front-runner Mitt Romney.

“It’s good people who bent over and let the enemy in. If the coyote’s in your living room pissing on your couch, it’s not the coyote’s fault. It’s your fault for not shooting him.”

"We need to ride into that battlefield and chop their heads off in November," Nugent said at the convention. But in his appearance on Beck's radio show, Nugent said he was not calling for violence.

"Every reference I made, whether it's a shot across the bow or targeting the enemy, it always ended the sentence with 'in November at the voter booth,'" Nugent said.

Having years of experience on musical concert tours with thousands of groupies and "willing" female fans, Nugent did not comment on whether he had ever had to pay for sex or whether he would offer his advice to the Secret Service on how to be more discreet.

Monday, April 16, 2012


NO HYPOCRISY: Until corrupt power brokers within the U.S. government are forced by the American people to engage the presidential eligibility question with maturity and responsibility to their sworn oath to protect the Constitution, more and more highly regarded candidates, like Marco Rubio, are going to find themselves embattled and undermined by doubts about their Constitutional legitimacy.

Commentary by Pen Johannson
Editor, The DAILY PEN

NEW YORK, NY - Marco Rubio, like Barack Obama, has been declared ineligible to hold the office of the U.S. Presidency or Vice President by the U.S. Constitution...and Senate Resolution 511.

In 2008, congress put itself in a no-win situation by inadequately defining "natural born" eligibility, for mere political expediency when, in an effort to distract attention away from Barack Obama's lack of eligibility, they haphazardly passed an eligibility resolution (SR 511) on behalf of John McCain, after reviewing historical documentation submitted by McCain, which declared him eligible for the 2008 Presidential election, despite his birth in Panama.

The resolution endowed McCain with non-legally binding, congressionally recognized, eligibility by virtue of his birth to two citizen parents while his father was serving in the U.S. military. A qualification which neither Rubio, nor Obama, currently meet.

Congress and the Judiciary have refused to address Obama's ineligibility in any way whatsoever.

Moreover, even more significant is that nearly 10 percent of the American people have said they will refuse to vote for any vice presidential candidate, and thus the presidential candidate, if that individual is not eligible by their definition of a natural born citizen. Fortunately for America, these constitutionalists are mostly conservative. Unfortunately for Republican politicians, this extrapolates to about 20% of the Republican party which will need those votes to oust the usurper Obama by an election process.

Without those critical votes, a Romney/Rubio GOP ticket will most certainly bring ALL republicans, not just the courageous, to suddenly care about the so-called "birther" movement and the legal process they have pursued in seeking a definitive declaration to the meaning of the term "natural born citizen". The risk of losing an election by default suddenly makes Obama's eligibility a matter for legal resolution, not political resolution.

Then again, the restoration of honor and truth begins with the honorable.

It's ironic how the threat of removing political power from politicians suddenly makes them scurry to the courts for a remedy. On the positive side, there will be millions of eligibility seekers ready to welcome them on the courthouse steps. Welcome to the party!

Republicans must understand that eligibility-conscious voters simply will not support Marco Rubio as a running mate, regardless of his popularity, unless change is made to the Constitution by a legal process. They will abstain from the next election as a matter of honor and principle to uphold the blood ransom paid for the Constitution. End of discussion.

Ergo, Barack Obama, already the unconstitutional incumbent, will be fraudulently elected again by default because his constituency has no honor for the Constitution anyway, causing what many political analysts have called an apocalyptic rebellion.

Regardless, those who have sworn to uphold the eligibility mandate for ALL presidential candidates will not participate in a fraudulent election wrought with deceivers, liars and ineligible candidates. They would rather take their chances in revolution than be served by an illegitimate government and shamed party affiliation.

Unable to endow Barack Obama with unanimous legitimacy over this same issue, the political species, and their American media letches, are being forced to understand that leadership eligibility, qualified by advanced human citizenship, can only be achieved when political candidates are measured equally by the same laws which apply to everyone under the Constitution.

Refusal to acknowledge this moral and legal deficit is breeding a contemptuous, but potently righteous, generation of extremely powerful and highly adept anti-governmental citizens. History has proven, time after time, that even the most powerful governments in the world have been defeated under the revolutionary power of vintage American heritage when they have strayed from the rule of law by the people, for the people.

As our current government continues to stray from its requisite purpose to uphold and protect the Constitution, it is drawing dangerously close to incitement of a meted resistance.

Whereas political interests and power lust will always push against the morality of our esteemed bureaucratic slew, forcing many of the inferior slag into criminality, the Constitution was brilliantly and purposely composed with divinely inspired language to be the inescapable silent authority which convicts their lawlessness.

The Constitution is forever correct...but amendable.

That being said, its time for someone to submit a multipartisan bill to amend the Constitution so exceptional leaders like Marco Rubio can run for president.

In the same unconstitutional posture by which Barack Obama was lauded by his misguided Democratic constituency, the willfully ignorant Republicans have their popularity contestant in Rubio. Rubio is one of the most well regarded members of Congress while Obama has served his liberal consensus as one of its most beloved radical change agents in American history.

Unfortunately, however, both men are currently constitutionally ineligible to hold the office of the president or vice president under Article II of the eligibility mandate.

Unfortunately for Obama, the Constitution was not revised on his behalf prior to his fraudulent election in 2008 rendering him America’s first unconstitutional president.

As reported by WND this week, the Florida Senator Rubio has been heavily favored as a potential Republican vice presidential candidate. However, a document recently found in the National Archives indicates that Rubio is actually constitutionally ineligible to serve as president or vice president.

It appears that Rubio’s father, Mario Rubio filed a Petition for Naturalization in September of 1975, confirming that Marco Rubio was around four years old when his parents became U.S. citizens.

Since Marco Rubio was born in Florida in 1971, four years prior to the filing of the Petition, this would mean that he was not born to two U.S. citizen parents as required under the legal definition of a “natural born citizen” to be eligible for the nation’s highest executive office.


In passing SR 511 for such despicable reasons as providing political cover for Obama, the Senate undermined the American electoral system and attempted to disregard the Constitution's requirement that a candidate must be born in the U.S. while acknowledging that it required birth to two U.S. citizen parents, a declaration which astonishingly and hypocritically disqualifies Barack Obama.

Therefore, declaring Rubio eligible by a similar resolution, like SR 511, would require Congress to undo its previous definition of eligibility by U.S. citizen parentage, as it applied for McCain, in order to endow place of birth on U.S. soil as the only eligibility requirement for Rubio, since his parents were not U.S. citizens at the time of his birth.

Such a despicable and blatently political hypocrisy would be the end game for an already highly unfavored congress whose disapproval rating is around 80 percent!

This same issue has undermined Barack Obama since before the 2008 election when his credentials and identity were first questioned by staunch Hillary Clinton PUMA supporters. Soon thereafter, multiple court challenges to Obama’s claims to presidential eligibility have ensued. Most have been unlawfully dismissed by a cowardice judicial system without consideration of the evidence because it is easier for foul purveyors in our legal system to ignore the greivances of the people than the violent usurpation of Constitutional power by the politically ambitious.

Obama claims to have been born in Hawaii in 1961, but the image of his alleged original Certificate of Live Birth which was posted on the White House in April 2011 has been determined by multiple document experts as well as a six-month law enforcement investigation to be a digitally fabricated counterfeit. The document shows multiple inconsistencies and anomalies, including extraneous graphic artifacts and misspellings which do not appear on any other Hawaiian vital record. Digital forensic analysis reveals a cut-and-paste composition from other document sources, as well.

Despite the forgery, however, if Obama could even document a Hawaii birth, he still would not qualify as a “natural born citizen” of the United States since he was not born of two U.S. citizen parents. Obama’s alleged father, as stated on the fake Certificate as well as documented worldwide in the press, was not a U.S. citizen at the time of Obama’s birth.

Compounding the controversy over modern interpretations over presidential eligibility is the fact that modern American society lacks the intellectual acuity to assign accurate meaning to the Constitutional term "natural born citizen" because most lack an understanding of our vintage American heritage and the blood ransom paid to obtain it.

The term "natural-born citizen" was such a common part of social and legal language of the 1700s it renders today's Americans ignorant to the fact that a clarification within the Constitution was seen by the more intellectually adept framers as unnecessary. For them, such a remedial explanation of the meaning of "natural born" would have been on par with demonstrating basic arithmetic to a mathematical genius.

A "naturally born" eligible presidential candidate is one who is born in a geographic location (U.S. soil) under the protection of the U.S. Constitution to TWO U.S. citizen parents without any interruption of their natural-born citizenship status occurring between birth and election.

Thursday, April 12, 2012


DAMAGE CONTROL: A recent ballot challenge hearing in New Jersey exposes a desperate strategy by Obama to distance himself from his forged certificate and induce the contrived value of his transient political popularity as the only “legitimate qualification” needed to hold the office of the presidency.

Commentary by Dan Crosby

Updated 04/17/12

NEW YORK, NY – After a Maricopa County law enforcement agency conducted a six-month forensic examination which determined that the image of Obama’s alleged 1961 Certificate of Live Birth posted to a government website in April, 2011 is a digital fabrication and that it did not originate from a genuine paper document, arguments from an Obama eligibility lawyer during a recent New Jersey ballot challenge hearing reveals the image was not only a fabrication, but that it was likely part of a contrived plot by counterfeiters to endow Obama with mere political support while simultaneously making the image intentionally appear absurd and, therefore, invalid as evidence toward proving Obama’s ineligibility in a court of law.

Obama’s lawyer, Alexandra Hill, agreed with arguments that the image of Obama’s birth certificate was a forgery and made the absurd claim that, therefore, it cannot be used as evidence to confirm his lack of natural born citizenship status. Therefore, she argued, it is “irrelevant to his placement on the ballot”.

Hill went on to contort reasoning by implying that Obama needs only invoke his political popularity, not legal qualifications, in order to be a candidate.

During the hearing, Hill's concession was showcased by the following exchange:

Judge Masin asked Hill, “I understand you have a general objection before we get to the question of what is his (Obama’s) qualifications?”

“Yes, I have an objection as to relevance,” replied Hill, as to the plaintiffs’ witness testimony regarding the authenticity of the image of Obama’s alleged 1961 'Certificate of Live Birth'.

Hill then attempted to have the judge declare that Obama was preeminently eligible without any legal responsibility to prove with documentation that he was, in fact, qualified to hold the office of the presidency.

“The objectors carry the burden of proof to show that a candidate is not eligible under New Jersey statutes,” Hill said.

Hill’s misunderstanding of administrative law reveals a strategy to defend Obama’s fraudulent election in which our legal system has reversed the legal assignment of burden of proof in order to equate eligibility with a legal definition of innocence of a crime for Obama.

Unfortunately for Obama, eligibility for political office does not fall under the precepts of criminalogical reasoning of "innocent until proven guilty", unless a charge is made that a crime has been committed, such as forgery or fraud, in order to deceive people about your identity or citizenship status. Obama's ineligibility, by itself, is not a crime...being fraudulently elected by deceiving voters is.

Simply put, Obama does not have a right to hold an office he is not eligible for and, therefore, he is not harmed by a lawful denial of an opportunity to hold the office he is not eligible for. Therefore, must prove he is eligible in order to avoid harming others by his illegitimate election.

Hill incorrectly argued that Obama is automatically eligible until proven ineligible, yet she sought to suppress the very evidence which shows that Obama’s eligibility has never actually been proven to begin with.

In doing so, Hill stated, “Photographs (of Obama’s alleged birth certificate) are not relevant as to the discussion of the law today.”

Then, shockingly, Hill went on to agree with widely publicized suspicions that the image of Obama’s alleged Certificate of Live Birth is, indeed, a fabrication. She conceding that the plaintiffs’ arguments against the authenticity of Obama’s birth certificate were valid saying, “I understand that they have great arguments (that the internet image of Obama’s birth certificate is a forgery), but I don’t see how that is relevant in this case.”

Absurdly, Obama’s position, as contorted by Hill, is that his appearance on New Jersey's presidential ballot is not related to his actual eligibility to be president.

At the hearing, attorney for the plaintiffs, Mario Apuzzo, correctly argued that Obama, under the Constitution, has to be a “natural born Citizen” and that he has not met his burden of showing that he is eligible to be on the New Jersey primary ballot by showing that he is indeed a “natural born Citizen.” He argued that Obama has shown no authenticate evidence to the New Jersey Secretary of State demonstrating who he is and that he was born in the United States. Apuzzo also argued that as a matter of law, Obama is not a “natural born Citizen” because he was born to a father who was not a U.S. citizen.

As Obama’s legal argument becomes more contorted, he is being forced to survive in an ever shrinking legal space, under an ever increasing weight, of his failure to meet constitutional eligibility requirements.

Hill, of Genova, Burn & Giantomasi Attorneys in Newark, made a desperate motion to dismiss the ballot objection arguing that Obama’s lack of natural-born citizenship status was not relevant to being placed on the New Jersey presidential ballot because no law exists in New Jersey which says that a candidate’s appearance on the ballot must be supported by evidence of natural born citizenship status. Only the U.S. constitution restricts eligibility to hold the office of president to natural born citizens.

Judge Masin denied the motion to dismiss and the case proceeded to trial.

“Sadly, regardless of her moral deficiency, Hill is legally justified,” says TDP Editor, Penbrook Johannson, “Obama's eligibility is a separate matter than the charges of forgery and fraud. Of course, we have evidence that he is not eligible. But, evidence of forgery by as yet unidentified counterfeiters working on behalf of Obama is not what legally excludes Obama from appearing on a ballot, by itself, until some authority is willing to consider this as evidence of forgery on its merit as an indication of actual ineligibility in a court of legal authority. Until some court of competent jurisdiction is willing to hear evidence of forgery and fraud, you can’t legally punish a political candidate for that crime which has not been proven that they committed. However, since Obama is not eligible because of a lack of authenticated evidence to the contrary, he could be held off the ballot for that reason.”

According to Johannson, there is an overwhelming level of moral certainty that Obama is a usurper, but until a court with jurisdiction considers this case, Obama’s status as a legitimate president is in limbo.

"He does not exist as a president except in the imagination of those who blindly support him. Whereas he is politically desired by a transient consensus, his legality is unresolved until a responsible court makes a determination. This is the essence of our crisis. Our nation exists in a state of non-authorized identity. Obama is just some guy calling himself a president and living in the White House without the confirmative authority to do so."

Obama’s document forgery and fraudulent presidency have now forced him to flee to a “strange twilight zone” between political popularity and legal legitimacy where poorly counterfeited records are apparently allowed to be published by Obama using government media resources for political purposes, yet those same records are held by the courts as irrelevant for determining Obama’s legal eligibility status because they are, according to judges, “so poorly forged” they are obviously meant to be satirical and not to be taken seriously as evidence.

Shockingly, parting from widespread public ignorance, Hill actually acknowledged two of the three necessary components of determining natural born citizenship as being place of birth and citizenship status of both parents. However, she argued that, “No law in New Jersey obligated him (Obama) to produce any such evidence in order to get on the primary ballot.”

The third component of natural born eligibility is maintenance of natural born citizenship status from birth to election without interruption, involuntarily or voluntarily, due to expatriation, extradition, renouncement or foreign adoption.

“Obama is mocking our constitution,” says Johannson, “His position is that he never claimed the image was an indication of his natural born status, just that it was information about his birth. Whether it is forged or authentic is irrelevant to Obama because plausible deniability affords him the security in knowing that no legal authority is willing to hang him with it.”

Of course, Johannson adds that it makes Obama look like a willing accomplice and a liar, but, he says, “…show me a politician who cares about being seen as a liar by the public. If people who support him want to vote for a person like that, it reveals more about the reprobate character of Obama supporters than competency of any legal determination about his lack of constitutional eligibility. Degenerates will vote for a degenerate while patriots will exhaust all civil means to remove him…until those civil means are exhausted. Then things get ugly for government.”

“However, Hill is also essentially admitting that Obama is not a legitimate president and that Obama believes that his illegitimacy does not matter to his legal ability to hold the office. Obama holds to a political tenet, not a legal one with respect to his views on his eligibility. That’s what corrupt, criminal politicians do. When the law convicts them, they run to public favorability for shelter with the hope that their supporters will apply pressure to disregard law in their case.”

Obama is now arguing that because he is politically popular, as he points to as being indicated by his so-called ‘election’, despite accusations of eligibility fraud and election fraud, the constitutional eligibility mandate is not relevant, in his view. Until a courageous authority is willing to disagree and hold Obama to an equally weighted legal standard, civil remedies for the Obama problem are limited.

Johannson adds that Obama is making the same argument on behalf of Obamacare.

“If he had the gall to actually tell the Supreme Court that they have no authority to determine the unconstitutionality of his illegitimate policies, what makes anyone think he believes they have the authority to disqualify him due to his lack of constitutional eligibility? Obama believes he holds preeminent power over all branches of government because of his delusions of political grandeur.”

He correctly points to a lifetime pattern of behavior and testimony by Obama which indicates a complete lack of regard for the U.S. Constitution when it restricts Obama’s political agenda and lust for power.

“This is a guy who illegally defaced public property when he scribed his aspirations to be ‘king’ in a concrete sidewalk at the age of ten, for God’s sake. Now, his ‘majesty’ wants to put his illegal ‘graffiti’ into American law books. However, his problem is that he has to face the fact that he is an abject failure in his capacity to meet any standard required by the 250-year-old U.S. Constitution, in everything he tries to do. The Constitution owns him and he can’t stand it. He hates it. Therefore, instead of admitting his lack of constitutionality, he simply breaks the rules and proceeds to illegally scribe his fake authority on everything until someone is willing to physically stop him. Obama is not just an illegitimate politician, he is a rogue outlaw without regard for the divine providence of American law.”

Apuzzo submitted that New Jersey law requires Obama to show evidence that he is qualified for the office he wishes to occupy and that includes showing that he is a “natural born Citizen,” which includes presenting evidence of who he is, where he was born, and that he was born to two U.S. citizen parents. Apuzzo added that the Secretary of State has a constitutional obligation not to place any ineligible candidates on the election ballot.

The account of the trial can be read at:

Wednesday, April 4, 2012


Commentary by Dan Crosby

New York, NY - Speaking of ludicrous conspiracy theories, here’s one defenders of the image of Obama’s alleged 1961 “Certificate of Live Birth” want you to believe.

In 1961, a 23-year-old graduate electrical engineering student at MIT named Ivan Edward Sutherland was toiling in the computer science labs where he invented the first electronically generated computer imaging application called “Sketchpad” (This is the true part of the story).

At the time, Sketchpad was an innovative computer program which influenced today’s graphic interaction with computers and served as the foundational technology for digital document production, graphic user interfaces and computer aided design applications.

Sketchpad utilized axial constraints, like “clipping masks”, and precision relationships among segments (straight lines) and arcs (curves and circles) to produce graphic images and alphanumeric characters from electrical currents conducted between nodes of microscopic computer circuitry. Operators could use Sketchpad to produce both horizontal and vertical lines and combine them into figures and shapes which could be stored in the form of personal signatures, typewriter font letters, block letters and official looking stamp templates, all of which could be viewed at a later time when converted to visual graphic format for human beings on a television-like monitor or screen.

Most importantly, as they relate to the case of Obama’s forged birth certificate image today, these digital images were designed by Sutherland to be copied, moved, rotated, reassembled or resized while retaining their basic properties as reusable elements. Sketchpad also had the first window-based drawing program and clipping algorithm which allowed users to replicate drawings as they would appear on paper when printed.

Now, this is where the Obotic horde gets a little sketchy.

Apparently, those desperate to defend Obama’s fraudulent presidency want us to believe that Sutherland, while working in his lab at MIT in 1961, was contacted by the Hawaiian Department of Health and asked by the government of Hawaii to produce a digital image of Obama’s birth certificate, apparently, the very first of its kind.

They contend that Sutherland, who was the only individual with the expertise to produce such a digital image record at the time, took time away from this graduate curriculum at the Institute to travel four thousand miles to Hawaii and create the image of Obama’s birth certificate which, as Sutherland was told, would be used to confirm Obama’s 1961 Hawaiian birth, three years into a highly suspect presidency, in the year 2011.

Sutherland created the image with very convincing elements representing official looking signatures, typewriter fonts, an official looking registrar’s stamp, complete with smiley face and a misspelled word which he forgot to correct after demonstrating Sketchpad’s sense of humor, bearing the name of a teenager named Alvin Onaka who was predestined to be installed as the state’s Registrar at the appropriate time in order to confirm Obama’s birth record.

Sutherland even created an attractive basket-weave patterned green safety background to make it look even more genuine and official, which the State of Hawaii would not actually use until the year 2000, but which looked “Feng Shui” so he included it on Obama’s record, which was the only certificate in Hawaiian history before 2000 to contain such a patterned image background.

Prior to his return to the east coast where he was simultaneously helping the Department of Defense develop new information security technology, he took time to construct a special secret computer, also the first of its kind, which was kept hidden in Hawaii for 50 years, upon which to store the digital image of Obama birth certificate.

Sutherland even had the wherewithal to make the image data compatible with a much more sophisticated computer and a graphics program, called Adobe, which would not be invented for another 40 years.

Then, 50 years after Sutherland created and stored the first digital birth certificate for any baby born on earth, which happened to be Obama, Obama called the Hawaii’s state Department of Health in April of 2011, right on schedule, with Mr. Onaka appropriately officious to match the stamp with the man, and asked them to retrieve the image file from said secret computer and send it to him.

Upon retrieval of the image from Sutherland’s secret computer, Onaka never bothered to ask, in more than 950,000 paper birth records created by the state of Hawaii between 1890 and 1961, why was Obama’s the only digital computer image with green safety pattern background on the entire planet and, more importantly, why was a digital stamp bearing his name placed on the document almost 40 years before he even became the state’s registrar.


Either Obama owes Sutherland a debt of gratitude, or some forger owes Sutherland an apology for hijacking his technology to commit the greatest hoax in American history.

Since we have learned that Sutherland was never contacted by the State of Hawaii in 1961, nor, is there any evidence supporting a relationship between Sutherland and Obama, we must conclude that the image of Obama alleged Certificate of Live Birth was produced by someone other than Sutherland for Obama at a later date.

Of course, Dr. Sutherland had nothing to do with the forgery of Obama's birth certificate. However, given the position of Obama's abettors in the media and the scarcity of information backing this absurd remnant, the "Sutherland Conspiracy" is as available as any explanation.

Even after an ongoing, six-month forensic investigation by a constitutionally empowered team of law enforcement professionals and technical experts, Obama continues to appeal to those he apparently realizes are too stupid to understand the difference between paper and computer imagery.

Unfortunately, some ideologically corrupt letches wrapped in their Obama delusion also willfully refuse to accept the fact that the lone scrap of information submitted by Barack Obama supporting his farcical presidential eligibility is nothing more than a fabricated digital rendering of an alleged record produced by unknown individuals within the virtual imagination of cyber space.

Meanwhile, Obama continues to milk a deception from those who lack the mental acuity to understand that when information is taken from physical form of media, such as paper, and transformed to an electrical form of media, such as a computer image, it can then be changed and, unfortunately, misrepresented through dishonest reproduction in order to exploit human ignorance and limited sensory capacity.

When information becomes electronically reproduced, at the very moment of its inception, it can be altered in ways which are difficult to detect by human senses without the aid of experts or other electronic technology.

Forgers counted on this when they fabricated Obama's fake Certificate of Live Birth. Sadly, among many idiots who swallowed it whole, there are a few innocent people who gagged on it in pieces as it went down because they simply could not conceive that their beloved goverment would be so blatantly evil and dishonest.

The rest of us rightly rejected it in its entirety for the following reason:

The modern form of paper we use today was first invented around the time of the birth of Christ. Ironically, computer imagery, on the other hand, was invented in the same alleged year of the birth of Barack Obama, in 1961, at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

For many, those two ironies end the case against Obama in perpetuity. For them, sentencing is long past due. For defenders of Obama, however, there remains an apparent market for a more thorough explanation of the difference between paper media and electronic media.

Aside from the lop-sided ramifications of an identity contest between Christ and Obama, the historical comparison between paper and computer imagery reveals an interesting disparity between those engaged in a rational pursuit of truth about Obama and their deranged obotic counterparts desperately seeking to defend the most prolific liar in American political history. This disparity is rooted in the latter’s lack of understanding of the difference between an authentic paper record of one’s birth and a counterfeit digital image of that same information and how these two forms of media lend value to one’s credibility as an eligible political leader.


In the beginning, the word “paper” was derived from the name of the reedy plant papyrus, which grows abundantly along the Nile River in Egypt. However, paper, as we know it today, is made of pulped cellulose wood fibers and is said to have been invented around 8 B.C.

Jesus may have a paper birth certificate somewhere…but, apparently, Obama does not.

Nearly 2000 years after Christ, logic dictates that, upon Obama’s emergence from his mother’s womb, someone wrote information about his birth on a paper birth certificate using permanent ink. The paper upon which this information was printed has its roots in trees, pun intended.

Here’s where Obama’s abettors become confused.

This document originated from a pulp substance derived from processed wood fiber acquired from trees which were most likely harvested by strong, burley, flannel-laden lumberjacks wielding axes and saws. We can be confident that the lumberjacks then were not informed of the plan to counterfeit Obama’s birth information 50 years later, so let’s not start hating loggers too. They simply cut the trees down, hauled them to a mill where they were reduced by machinery into little pieces (Note to Obama supporters: This illustration should not be confused with “bits”, which we will discuss forthwith) which would eventually become a fibrous pulp material.

In the latter stages of the fiber’s processing, the pulp was bleached, flattened and dried until it became a useful component of modern media which we call “paper”. In the wake of Obama’s birth certificate forgery case, it is important that we clarify the difference between paper pulp and silicon which is used to make computer circuitry or flat screen monitors. Apparently, the distinction becomes blurred when Obama's birth records are involved.

The paper was cut to the appropriate size and eventually imprinted, with permanent ink, entry spaces and a document title header which indicated to municipal and hospital employees that it was an official document which was to be used uniformly to record births registered in their facility. The paper did not specify that the birth recorded upon it had to occur in the same place as the paper, just that the paper was used by personnel to make some kind of record of a birth.


Professional investigators agree that the most authentic record possible of any event is created using the most permanent possible media at the time of the event by witness(s) present who are in agreement of the details of the event. The more people involved in the chain of interpretation since the occurrence of the event diminishes the authenticity of any account of it as time passes.

Given the passage of 50 years since his birth, along with the development of imagery technology, it is not difficult to understand how Obama was able to deceive so many.

Because of it's microscopic precision and complexity, today’s computer imaging technology has the widespread potential to be used to misrepresent mass media in order to promote a desired false conclusion. Microcircuitry, by its very nature, creates very small images which are undetectable by the human eye.

Without deeper analysis, this level of "microdeception" easily convinces people that a copy of an original record of an event is proof of the existence of that original record. The precision and microscopic detail produced by computer circuitry has the power to deceive in ways never before imagined.

This deception is achieved by an illusion which tricks the the minds of individuals into accepting it as authentic who are either unaware of secret information which counteracts the lie or who are not aware of the facts used to produce the image to begin with.

The Daily Pen demonstrated this phenomena last month in our story titled “Vital Records Indicate Obama Not Born in Hawaii Hospital, Part 2”, when we intentionally altered the content of one, single computer image for the experimental purpose of misleading those we identified as attentive to such practices under Obama’s spell. We were proven right when we used digital image editing software to remove one word from a footnote of a data table found in an image of a historical document published in 1945.

The image was erroneous and benign and did not affect the content of the report which was that the information shown in Obama’s alleged birth certificate is invalid with regard to vital records collection for proving natural born citizenship which, in turn, contradicts claims that he was not born in Hawaii. Removing this word shortened the footnote which referred to a quantity in an unrelated but easily confirmable table of data taken from the VSUS report. We did not alter the numeric data, just the reference to the scope which it applied for the purpose of determining just how vigorous our adversaries are in their repulsive defense of this larger crime. Then, we sat back and waited.

Sure enough, the response was a resounding success. Prior to this test, we sent emails to supportive readers informing them of the miniscule alteration before we made it. Since we were not offering explanations to Obama supporters, we sought to demonstrate how being deceived by a digital image affects an uninformed perspective about the character of those perpetuating the deception. In the case of Obama’s supporters, we discovered they are more psychologically motivated to sound the “gotcha” alarm about a minor alternation in a digital image of peripheral information unrelated to Obama, which is easily confirmed by anyone, than they are to actually consider the possibility of fraudulent images being created which directly benefit Obama’s legal qualifications, personal history and character.

Needless to say, our test produced all the confirmation we needed to confirm that we are right about Barack Obama and his abettors in America. Their perceptions are ideologically driven and fail, not only the standards of logic and reason but, most importantly, they fail the standards of morality and decency. This means they are more willing to excuse criminal behavior in someone who shares their beliefs even when that behavior is harmful to their own future, or to innocent people with no power to prevent the crime, than they are of unknown bloggers and private citizens working to expose the truth.

Our experiment revealed that the same morally corrupt individuals Obama relies upon to defend his altered digital birth certificate image and absence of biographical information also have the capacity to identify even the smallest “fraud” in digital image content when they apply their investigative ability, and when they are provided with the original paper media content to compare it with, yet they are willing to overlook the mountain of probative evidence mounting against them.

They are terrified of the psychological pain coming with the truth about Obama. They trusted Obama and now they have to face the fact that he lied about who he was in order to confiscate presidential power in order to implement a selfish agenda based on his remote ideas of reparative justice. They are afraid of the stored wrath which finds that Obama is truly a usurper and the most prolific deceiver in American political history because they know instinctually that his brand of justice does not apply to them favorably. Therefore, they are forced to seek mental sanctuary by fighting against those who are bringing the truth upon their poor minds.

They are desperate to not be forced to face the facts about Obama. They are delusional and mentally ill because they understand, deep inside, that Obama has actually set an ideological trap for them. They realize they have been ambushed and it is confirmed by a moral truth which is: The only reason for a man like Obama to hide information about himself is to draw them in like ideological prey, into his control and influence (i.e. Obamacare) on a message of “Hope and Change” for them, before slamming that trap of enslavement and, eventually, physical death on them.

Instinctually, they know Obama is a liar but because they have invested so much of themselves into the false truth they wanted to believe, they can’t face the actual truth. So, they seek sanctuary in resistance and willful dissonance which takes the form of ridiculing those who doubt Obama’s eligibility. If they can’t call them racists, they call them conspiracy theorists.

Meanwhile the growing chasm of evidence separating them from reality continues to metastasize into what will eventually become a fatal malignancy.

Sadly, our experiment revealed the tragic weakness of ideologically corrupt minds and an endemic incapacity to understand the difference between the standards of credibility necessary to verify the legitimacy of an individual seeking untold power and influence over millions, as opposed to the unnecessary credibility of private citizens in merely writing what will eventually be proven meaningless opinions through a temporary and faceless confluence. Apparently, according to the multitude of these liberal hacks, the content issued by unknown bloggers is worthy of more scrutiny than the illegitimate content issued by the most powerful liberal politician on the planet, for whom their fetish calls.

Unfortunately, it also revealed they would rather apply their investigative vigor against faceless opinioneers bearing no authority for validating government documents, while defending the illegitimate, unverified documentation of a corrupt global power. They find more wrong in randomly fabricated blog information than they do in official, government issued documents bearing the identity of four dead people unable to defend their attestation of the record. They ally themselves among a defiled chorus against the intentional and admitted alteration of a minor footnote rather than take arms against the exploitation of the blood-ransomed constitution and millions of innocent lives being deceived by a digital fabrication of information used to exalt a liar into political power.

Ironically, our experiment also revealed that even though Obama has never provided corroborating, original paper documentation of his birth, his horde of blind defenders still possess the conscientious ability to understand how easily the alteration of computer imagery can mislead when no original information is provided to corroborate it. They just refuse to exercise the same diligence against Obama. They understand how detection of such altered digital information warrants accusations of nefarious intent, reprobate character and dishonesty, yet they refuse to apply that same standard against Obama because he is the “god” of their psychotic favoritism.

The test also revealed that Obama’s most vigorous defenders are simply hypocrites willing to accept the absence of proof from demagogues when that absence of proof supports their selfish lusts for being seen as right by a transient majority. They are not stupid, they are just uninformed and unwilling to recognize the hierarchy of scrutiny against those with power as opposed to those without power.

Simply stated, when someone like Obama works as hard as he has to hide his real identity from the public, it means that his true identity is being hidden because it is harmful to millions of innocent human beings. It means that Obama understands that if the truth enters the domain of consciousness, it will bring destruction upon the false reality he has constructed in the minds of his followers. When private citizens demonstrate how easy it is to alter a computer image in order to show why the world should question Obama, they merely get called bad names by empty headed servants of Obama.

However, the positive effect of such a tactic is that they have used their adversaries as unwitting advertisers to introduce a previously unknown platform of information which can be used by those innocent people to look into the matter themselves.

It brings us a great sense of satisfaction knowing that so many have taken interest in this matter on Obama’s dime. Sure, we get verbally assaulted by mentally inferior liberal cowards and haters. Haters will hate anything, even the truth. They hate us not because we are wrong but because, well…they have to feed an unredeemable hate monster within themselves.

Using Obama letches to carry the heavy water of truth for those thirsty for it is a worthy cause. To others for whom we have failed to uphold an otherwise pristine standard on this occasion, we ask for your forgiveness and understanding. As we grow, we realize that you include us as one of many who need to be a trusted source of diligently sought, honest facts. We seek that status in your heart and mind for the future.