It’s easy to understand Bill O’Reilly’s defense of Hussein’s eligibility. O’Reilly set himself up as being tough on Hussein when, in truth, he is Hussein’s number one heinie-wipe. Hussein helped the charade along by pretending FOX and O’Reilly were his enemies. Should O’Reilly now report the findings of the Cold Case Posse in a “fair and balanced” way he would actually antagonize Hussein. Instead of keeping his mouth shut O’Reilly is going down the same road everybody who engages in a coverup travels. I’m not talking about covering up for Hussein, I’m talking about O’Reilly covering up for himself on the infamous birth announcements that appeared in two Honolulu newspapers. Here’s where he trips over his own tongue: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=I-U_G8Yad_k O’Reilly’s original defense of those birth announcements said that “birthers” claimed the folks who planted them did so in order to establish baby Hussein’s presidential eligibility. No one except O’Reilly ever said that. He then went on to point out how ridiculous eligibility-doubters were. Now, pause for a moment and examine how ridiculous O’Reilly was. Looking back, he knew he had to coverup his blunder; so he decided to weasel out with this: Somewhere between O’Reilly’s original defense of Hussein and his watered down “conspiratorializing” he fell into the coverup trap. Apparently, he still refuses to consider the possibility that those birth announcements had nothing to do with establishing Hussein’s presidential eligibility. The “I’m very busy . . .” excuse rivals “The dog ate my Homework.” O’Reilly would have the public believe that he is too busy to tell his staff “Prepare a segment on the Cold Case Posse.” Let’s face it, he could replace his constant self-promotion by doing two or three minutes on the Posse’s findings. Finally, this is a golden opportunity for the other networks to cutup O’Reilly the same way he attacks their people. Dan Rather could lead the charge. Alas, I know it will not happen because it involves Hussein’s birth certificate; nevertheless, the thought of the other networks taking a scalpel to O’Reilly is just too delicious to ignore. O'Reilly: I'm too busy to report on Obama eligibility Bill says Sheriff Joe found no 'hard evidence' to support suspicions Published: 11 hours ago by BOB UNRUH Responding to a viewer question about why he’s been silent on a just-completed six-month law enforcement investigation into Barack Obama’s constitutional eligibility, top Fox News anchorman Bill O’Reilly replied on video, saying: 1) there’s no hard evidence Obama isn’t eligible; 2) Hawaii newspaper ads proved Obama was born there; and 3) he’s just too busy to look into it anyway. The statements from O’Reilly came in a “Backstage Conversation” piece for premium members of his website posted on YouTube, producing a flood of venom directed at both O’Reilly and Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, Ariz. Arpaio’s volunteer “Cold Case Posse” of attorneys and retired police worked on the investigation, concluding that Obama’s birth certificate image released by the White House very likely is a forgery. O’Reilly had responded to a question from Erin, who asked, “Why did you ignore Sheriff Arpaio’s assertion that President Obama’s birth certificate is a forgery?” Said O’Reilly, “Well, because Sheriff Arpaio has not presented any hard evidence to back up his assertion. Secondly, I am very busy. I looked into the birth certificate myself and found out there were two separate birth announcements made in Honolulu newspapers on the day Barack Obama was born. It would be impossible for that to happen unless somebody was conspiratorializing the birth of a little mixed race baby. If that were happening, then, I guess you could have birth announcements planted. But the odds of that , Erin, are about, 29 gazillion to one.” It’s not the first time O’Reilly has address the birth certificate issue. It was about a year ago when he responded to a question about why Obama has a Social Security number that was assigned to someone with a Connecticut address when he never lived there. O’Reilly said that likely was the result of his father having “lived in Connecticut.” But when that statement proved to be filled with holes, the network scrubbed the audio from the website. “His father lived in Connecticut for several years,” O’Reilly had answered, adding that “babies sometimes get numbers based on addresses provided by their parents.” But no evidence has been found to indicate Obama’s father ever lived in the state. In reference to the points raised by O’Reilly, the investigation in Arizona by professional law enforcement officers and attorneys found that the newspaper listings for Obama’s birth, which actually came days later, were not reliable. The listing in which the Obama birth announcements were published included babies who were born overseas. Also, children as old as 3 were listed as newborns, the investigators documented. Consequently, the newspaper listings are “not credible” evidence of a birth in Hawaii, according to Mike Zullo, the lead investigator for Arpaio’s team. He told WND today that related evidence still is being compiled and is yet to be released. But he confirmed that “evidence” of an Obama birth in Hawaii because of a newspaper announcement is not reliable. At ObamaReleaseYourRecords, a blogger pointed out that “at the time of Obama’s birth and even still today, under Hawaii law, out of state children and even foreign-born children could/can easily obtain a Hawaiian [Certification of Live Birth.] That also would have triggered the newspaper announcements as they are produced from a list sent by the Hawaii [Department of Health], not the hospital or the parents/grandparents.” The blogger continued, “As for O’Reilly’s claim Sheriff Joe provided no evidence. That is an outright lie and anyone that watches the complete press conference can see that. Notice how O’Reilly fails to mention the forged Selective Service registration?” At the FreeRepublic.com site, readers seem to be stunned by O’Reilly’s response. “He’s very busy???” was all one poster had to say. “Maybe someone should ask him a different question … are you one of the media figures who have been threatened by the government? Arpaio’s chief investigator said that major media figures have told him they’ve been threatened with their FCC licenses being pulled, investigations by gov’t agencies, etc. if they utter one little peep about the bc issue,” added another. The information from Arpaio’s press conference, which remains available online, already is being turned into an ebook, Zullo told WND earlier, to ensure people have access. He said that sources during the investigation told him members of the media were threatened with federal investigations should they continue to report on the birth certificate issue. “During our investigation, we actually were told [that media] had been threatened with FTC investigations. Commentators [had been] threatened with their jobs,” Zullo said. The threats were so intimidating that some individuals quit their positions over safety concerns for their families, he said. The problem became getting the information to the American people, he said, in the face of an intentional media blackout. The ebook provides details from the investigation, the evidence accumulated and the issues that remain for Arpaio and his investigators to pursue. Readers were not pleased with O’Reilly, with “usar91B” stating, “Bill O’Reilly didn’t even watch the presser so he doesn’t know even the most basic facts, including the evidence that the posse presented and the response to questions about the birth announcements. … Anybody who claims they don’t have time to address the biggest scam in this nation’s history is either a liar or too stupid to know up from down. Or has been threatened.” Arpaio has confirmed the investigation will continue, but he could not say exactly where it will lead. He suggested a congressional investigation would be appropriate. The investigative team has asked Arpaio to elevate the investigation to a criminal probe that will make available the resources of his Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office. The posse says it has identified at least one person of interest in the alleged forgery of Obama’s birth certificate. In fact, Zullo reported, “We have identified the computer manufacture, [and] where that document resided 20 minutes before it was uploaded onto the White House website.” The issue of Obama’s birth certificate centers on his eligibility to be president, since the Constitution requires that a president be a “natural-born citizen.” The term is not defined in the Constitution, but at the time the document was written, many experts believe it referred to the offspring of two citizens of the country. Some critics say the place of birth is irrelevant, since Obama has written that Barack Obama Sr., his father, never was a U.S. citizen. http://www.wnd.com/2012/03/oreilly-im-too-busy-to-report-on-obama-eligibility/
'Bigger Than Watergate'... Arpaio sees media conspiracy against birthers Sunday, March 18, 2012 - Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio believes that a media conspiracy bigger than Watergate is purposefully downplaying his volunteer posses investigation of President Barack Obamas birth certificate.
took me a bit to realize you were talking about Obama. Do you habitually use peoples middle names to address them? or is that some form of 'society rejection of the facade of the almighty boogyman that sits in the white house?'
To Cubed: See #11 permalink in this thread: http://www.politicalforum.com/health-care/183223-what-happened-defunding-socialized-medicine.html
You mean like Biden's a (Dr) Pepper? LOL, O'Reilly's always claimed to be an Independent, but regardless, he's a political commentator who makes his living talking about his opinions. No surprise he doesn't get involved in the birther thing. Why should he risk his record of being #1 in his timeslot for the last 15 years by pissing a bunch of people off?
