The Newest Obama Mystery Question

Damocles

Accedo!
Staff member
Self-appointed historians of Obama's past have discovered a new mystery, and it isn't about Birth certificates.

Apparently, the President is using a Social Security Number that is reserved for Connecticut residents and was issued after he already had employment in Oahu, and people want to know why he is using that number.

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=165225

The investigators believe Obama needs to explain why he is using a Social Security number reserved for Connecticut applicants that was issued at a date later than he is known to have held employment.

Does anybody know if he ever had a Connecticut mailing address? Well, he must have...

:D
 
Crusading birther litigant Orly Taitz, DDS, Esq. has adopted the President’s Social Security number(s) as one of her major themes. This was repeated just last week in a filing with the DC federal court, as reported here at Obama Conspiracy Theories. So what’s her beef?

Taitz claims fraud on the part of Obama for (1) using multiple Social Security numbers, and (2) using the Social Security number of someone else.

39 Social Security numbers

In her most recent filing Taitz wrote:

I submitted an affidavit from a licensed investigator Neil Sankey, showing that according to most reputable National databases Lexis Nexis and Choice Point Barack Obama used as many as 39 different social security numbers, none of which were issued in the state of Hawaii, where he resided. (Submitted as an exhibit with the complaint)

I have looked at various filings available from the courts, and I have not personally seen the list of 39 Social Security numbers. What I have seen is various lists of names similar to Obama, mostly living at Obama’s former Chicago address and all having the same Social Security number. From where I sit, I have no documentation available to me that Taitz’s claim is true, and if it is, I would question the accuracy of these databases, which are essentially credit reporting databases aggregated from various sources usually without any verification. We do not know what matching criteria were used to say that these were our president Barack Obama. It all seems rather far fetched.

Born in 1890

Taitz continues:

The same affidavit contained information, showing that the social security number [Social Security Number redacted, Doc C.], that he used most often, was issued in the state of Connecticut to an individual born in 1890. Since Obama never resided in the state of Connecticut and was not born in 1890, it was a sign of clear violation of Title 42 US Code, section 408(a)(7)(B), misuse of a social security number, which is a federal felony punishable under Title 18 USC by fine or imprisonment of up to five years or both and an evidence of foreign birth and lack of proper citizenship status.

and

I submitted an affidavit from a licensed investigator Susan Daniels, showing that according to her research Obama used a stolen social security number [Social Security Number redacted, Doc C.], which was issued to another individual born in 1890 in the state of CT.

While it is not certain that the Social Security number “that he used most often” according to Taitz is really the President’s, I suspect that it probably is. Taitz is correct that the “042″ series of numbers was indeed assigned to Connecticut, and Connecticut is not Hawaii. As far as I know, President Obama never resided in Connecticut.

If there is any clear evidence of fraud, it is the 1890 date that Taitz flouts. First, if the SSN was really for a person born in 1890, that person would be dead. The Social Security death index doesn’t list this number, so we can presume that the 1890 date is bogus. However, there is more direct evidence that it’s wrong and Taitz knows it. In her own court filing in Barnett v. Obama (page 5) she shows where the 1890 date comes from. The document says:

Dates of Birth Associated with SSN:

1890
08/04/1961
04/08/1961

Obviously the third is a typographical error on the correct date (the second) and 1890 is just database garbage. Which is the more likely date of birth from the preceding list? If you are convinced that everything Obama does is a fraud, then the first entry is the one to pick. If you’re looking for the real answer, you pick the one that makes sense, the President’s actual date of birth.

While Taitz claims that the SSN Obama uses “was issued to another individual”, she never says who that individual is, and this is because the record for that SSN belongs to none other than Barack Obama himself, as we see from Orly’s own filing.

What about the Connecticut number series? It’s an interesting question, but there’s no law that says you have to get your SSN from a Social Security office in the state where you reside. Nowadays, they are all processed centrally and the assignment is based on the zip code of the return address. My guess (and that’s all it is) is that Obama got his SSN as a child living in Indonesia and the application was just processed in Connecticut. What it most certainly does not mean is Taitz’s surprising conclusion: “foreign birth and lack of proper citizenship status.” (Connecticut is not a foreign country either.)

http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2010/02/obamas-social-security-number/
 
Crusading birther litigant Orly Taitz, DDS, Esq. has adopted the President’s Social Security number(s) as one of her major themes. This was repeated just last week in a filing with the DC federal court, as reported here at Obama Conspiracy Theories. So what’s her beef?

Taitz claims fraud on the part of Obama for (1) using multiple Social Security numbers, and (2) using the Social Security number of someone else.

39 Social Security numbers

In her most recent filing Taitz wrote:

I submitted an affidavit from a licensed investigator Neil Sankey, showing that according to most reputable National databases Lexis Nexis and Choice Point Barack Obama used as many as 39 different social security numbers, none of which were issued in the state of Hawaii, where he resided. (Submitted as an exhibit with the complaint)

I have looked at various filings available from the courts, and I have not personally seen the list of 39 Social Security numbers. What I have seen is various lists of names similar to Obama, mostly living at Obama’s former Chicago address and all having the same Social Security number. From where I sit, I have no documentation available to me that Taitz’s claim is true, and if it is, I would question the accuracy of these databases, which are essentially credit reporting databases aggregated from various sources usually without any verification. We do not know what matching criteria were used to say that these were our president Barack Obama. It all seems rather far fetched.

Born in 1890

Taitz continues:

The same affidavit contained information, showing that the social security number [Social Security Number redacted, Doc C.], that he used most often, was issued in the state of Connecticut to an individual born in 1890. Since Obama never resided in the state of Connecticut and was not born in 1890, it was a sign of clear violation of Title 42 US Code, section 408(a)(7)(B), misuse of a social security number, which is a federal felony punishable under Title 18 USC by fine or imprisonment of up to five years or both and an evidence of foreign birth and lack of proper citizenship status.

and

I submitted an affidavit from a licensed investigator Susan Daniels, showing that according to her research Obama used a stolen social security number [Social Security Number redacted, Doc C.], which was issued to another individual born in 1890 in the state of CT.

While it is not certain that the Social Security number “that he used most often” according to Taitz is really the President’s, I suspect that it probably is. Taitz is correct that the “042″ series of numbers was indeed assigned to Connecticut, and Connecticut is not Hawaii. As far as I know, President Obama never resided in Connecticut.

If there is any clear evidence of fraud, it is the 1890 date that Taitz flouts. First, if the SSN was really for a person born in 1890, that person would be dead. The Social Security death index doesn’t list this number, so we can presume that the 1890 date is bogus. However, there is more direct evidence that it’s wrong and Taitz knows it. In her own court filing in Barnett v. Obama (page 5) she shows where the 1890 date comes from. The document says:

Dates of Birth Associated with SSN:

1890
08/04/1961
04/08/1961

Obviously the third is a typographical error on the correct date (the second) and 1890 is just database garbage. Which is the more likely date of birth from the preceding list? If you are convinced that everything Obama does is a fraud, then the first entry is the one to pick. If you’re looking for the real answer, you pick the one that makes sense, the President’s actual date of birth.

While Taitz claims that the SSN Obama uses “was issued to another individual”, she never says who that individual is, and this is because the record for that SSN belongs to none other than Barack Obama himself, as we see from Orly’s own filing.

What about the Connecticut number series? It’s an interesting question, but there’s no law that says you have to get your SSN from a Social Security office in the state where you reside. Nowadays, they are all processed centrally and the assignment is based on the zip code of the return address. My guess (and that’s all it is) is that Obama got his SSN as a child living in Indonesia and the application was just processed in Connecticut. What it most certainly does not mean is Taitz’s surprising conclusion: “foreign birth and lack of proper citizenship status.” (Connecticut is not a foreign country either.)

http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2010/02/obamas-social-security-number/
That theory is a bit off, the number was assigned 2 years after Obama's first employment at Baskin Robbins in Oahu. It's part of the "mystery"...

BTW - While I do find this stuff fascinating, other than wondering why he is using a Connecticut SSN, IMO this has no bearing on eligibility... I'm just interested, not a participant.
 
Your theory is a bit off, that number was assigned 2 years after Obama's first employment at Baskin Robbins in Oahu.

It's not my theory.

Why would I believe the word of a KGB sleeper cell like Taitz? :D

orly+kgb+card3.jpg
 
I am sure most people are aware, but SS#'s are assigned based on where you live when you apply... not where you were born. I was born in KC, but have a number assigned to Michigan, which is where we lived when my parents applied for it.

It is odd that he would have a CT prefix to his SS#. Not that I think there is much to this, as I am sure there is a valid reason behind it.... but this story does make me curious and thus if anyone sees a story addressing it... please post and let me know.

Thanks.
 
I am sure most people are aware, but SS#'s are assigned based on where you live when you apply... not where you were born. I was born in KC, but have a number assigned to Michigan, which is where we lived when my parents applied for it.

It is odd that he would have a CT prefix to his SS#. Not that I think there is much to this, as I am sure there is a valid reason behind it.... but this story does make me curious and thus if anyone sees a story addressing it... please post and let me know.

Thanks.


The odd thing is that anyone would actually take any of this nonsense seriously. I mean, Orly Taitz is batshit crazy. She has already been sanctioned by at least one court for her bullshit legal filings.

Why would anyone with a pulse take at face value the underlying claim that the SSN she claims Obama used is actually Obama's SSN? For those taking this story seriously, no need to answer the question. We all know why.
 
I'm surprised someone actually noticed the discrepancy. Why were they looking at Obama's SSN in the first place? That's some serious time and dedication...
 
The odd thing is that anyone would actually take any of this nonsense seriously. I mean, Orly Taitz is batshit crazy. She has already been sanctioned by at least one court for her bullshit legal filings.

Why would anyone with a pulse take at face value the underlying claim that the SSN she claims Obama used is actually Obama's SSN? For those taking this story seriously, no need to answer the question. We all know why.

I think the ODD thing is, how we elected this man we know so very little about. In comparison to most previous presidents, we know virtually nothing about Obama. Well, except for bad shit... He attended school in Indonesia, (where the only way you could attend was if you were Muslim and not a citizen of the US), no actual certificate of birth or name of a doctor who delivered him... Mom and Dad were both Communist... now, a bogus SS number... it just keeps getting curiouser and curiouser.
 

.3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333E
 
I'm surprised someone actually noticed the discrepancy. Why were they looking at Obama's SSN in the first place? That's some serious time and dedication...
Not really, tax documents of Presidents are usually given to news agencies for publication before redaction.
 
The odd thing is that anyone would actually take any of this nonsense seriously. I mean, Orly Taitz is batshit crazy. She has already been sanctioned by at least one court for her bullshit legal filings.

Why would anyone with a pulse take at face value the underlying claim that the SSN she claims Obama used is actually Obama's SSN? For those taking this story seriously, no need to answer the question. We all know why.

do you take the enquirer seriously? because they're batshit crazy, yet, they had the first scoop on john edwards' affair...

all you do is shoot the messenger, you never actually discuss the claim
 
do you take the enquirer seriously? because they're batshit crazy, yet, they had the first scoop on john edwards' affair...

all you do is shoot the messenger, you never actually discuss the claim


Here's a claim worth discussing: Yurt's an idiot.

Discuss.
 
Here's my theory. Obama was living is some third world country and happened to hear a Bush speech. Desiring a better life and concluding if Bush could be President so could he so he entered the country illegally, purchased a counterfeit SS number and eventually got the job.

Notice how Obama wants to find a way for illegal aliens, those who have jobs, to be able to stay in the country. He's covering his own backside.

In any case, the Anunnaki will arrive shortly after the 2012 election to straighten things out. :)
 
Here's my theory. Obama was living is some third world country and happened to hear a Bush speech. Desiring a better life and concluding if Bush could be President so could he so he entered the country illegally, purchased a counterfeit SS number and eventually got the job.

Notice how Obama wants to find a way for illegal aliens, those who have jobs, to be able to stay in the country. He's covering his own backside.

In any case, the Anunnaki will arrive shortly after the 2012 election to straighten things out. :)
Your theory has the following holes.

1. The number was issued, according to the SS office, in 1977 to 79, Obama had a job where he needed his SSN in 1975 when he worked at Baskin Robbins in Hawaii.
2. Obama was not living overseas in 1977 to 79.
3. There is nothing in any history of Obama that would put him out of the nation in 1977 to 79, or in Connecticut.
4. There are different numbers assigned to those living outside the US, depending on what continent they are from. They do not correspond to what "office" processes anything, that is just hopeful guessing based on an urge not to find out things...
5. The SSNs are assigned by where your mailing address is, not by what office "processes" the application.
 
Back
Top