I saw something yesterday that led me to a YouTube video, a pretty crappy production allegedly recording of encounters with Randy Foreman from The Blaze with Congressmen, and editing in Congressman Bobby Rush speaking on the floor of the House.
What demonstrates the complete lack of morality (or in the alternative a complete lack of competence) on the part of the video maker is the statement that “the President’s own document examiner, Reed Hayes with Perkins Coie….” I don’t believe the video clip of Bobby Rush has anything to do with Obama’s birth certificate. Here is a similar video clip of Rush, but not the exact one.
Hayes, of course, worked on an unspecified project for an attorney who previously workede for Perkins Coie, a very large national law firm that also represents Obama for America. He is in no way the President’s document examiner.
The obvious question is: if Congress is supposed to be responding to criticisms of the President’s birth certificate based on the conclusions of Reed Hayes, why isn’t the Reed Hayes report being shown to members of Congress?
Read more about birthers correspondent and cab driver Randy Foreman.
My guess is that Congress will be shown Hayes report at the proper time of when Congress decides to investigate the birth certificate scandal. Frankly, I don’t think that is going to ever happen. The CCP should just release the report and everything else along with it.
Doc, IIRC, the attorney in question USED to work at Perkins Coie some considerable number of years ago.
I think this video exchange makes it very clear that Congress is simply not going to investigate the birth certificate issue. Mike Violin can continue to try but there is simply not enough birthers out there to really make any headway. The effect of a few dozen birthers or even a few hundred inquirying on Congressmen has been negitable. In order, to get Congress to act, you would have to have a movement of momumental proportions like millions and millions of birthers inquirying. That movement simply does not exist. The CCP should just release what they have on birth certificate and let people see Obama for who he really is.
Dr. C……
“….why isn’t the Reed Hayes report being shown to members of Congress?”
And what about good old Sheriff Joe Arpaio? Has Zullo allowed Arpaio to read the report? If Arpaio has read the Zullo copyright affixed Reed Hayes’ report, where’s the Arpaio press conference to inform all the people who have supplied donations? Don’t hold your breath.
His name is Thomas Kellenberg and he is to be found on Reed Hayes website among dozens (and dozens) of names on the “Partial Client List” on Reed’s CV:
http://reedwrite.com/?s=perkins&searchButton=Search
Now……here it comes: Today Mr. Kellenberg is the Executive Director of International Human Rights Advocates:
http://ihradvocates.org/about-us/
And where, pray tell, is International Human Rights Advocates located? Well……its offices are barely a mile…..a mile, I tell you…..north of the White House!!
http://tinyurl.com/kc4864c
Coincidence? Hah!!
If Obots want to crow about Hayes invovlement in Perkins Coie, how come no Obots has tried to contact him. It is my understanding that Haye’s contact information is easily accessiable. Here is another instance where Doc C, RC, and Frank Ardini’s super obot resourcefulness fails to deliver.
Yep! Thomas Kellenberg is contactable. Super Obot RC and Frank Ardini need to contact him.
IIRC, that is correct.
Thomas Kellenberg
Here is an article from 1997 about him.
“Peri Arnold, professor of government and international studies at Notre Dame, and Thomas More Kellenberg, a 1980 alumnus of the University, have been appointed director and executive director, respectively, of the new Notre Dame Semester in Washington Program. Arnold will direct the program from Notre Dame and Kellenberg will be responsible for on-site operations.”
http://news.nd.edu/news/7113-arnold-and-kellenberg-appointed-director-and-executive-director-of-semester-in-washington-program/
And a short bio:
“Tom has worked in private practice as an associate with the law firm of Perkins Coie, and as of counsel with Kirkland & Ellis LLP. Together with Kirkland & Ellis, Tom helped organize post-conviction representation for Virginia death row inmate Robin Lovitt, who was ultimately granted clemency.”
http://ihradvocates.org/about-us/
And from a 2005 article about him and the Robert Lovitt case.
“Five years ago, Kellenberg brought the case to Kirkland & Ellis, a D.C. law firm headed by double Domer Tom Yannucci.”
Looks like his Perkins Coie days were in the mid-1990s.
Hey International Human Rights Activists……isn’t that what Mad Ole Orly keeps naming herself when she sends her Melange De Merde out cc’ed to the UN etc..?
I found his name in two or three case citations….all from the mid-1990’s. In all of them he was listed as an associate of the firm.
He graduated from Harvard in 1980, from what I can tell.
A natural born citizen legally entitled to be President? Good idea, john.
The Cold Case Posse doesn’t have “custody” of the Hayes report. Zullo has copyrighted it personally. Have you asked him why he doesn’t just release it and settle the matter?
He’s a 1980 graduate of Notre Dame.
Dear Mr. Kxxxxx,
I did in fact perform work for Mr. Zullo with respect to the Obama Certificate of Live Birth. However, the results are strictly confidential, to be released only by Mr. Zullo and/or the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office Cold Case Posse, the legal owners of my report. Please contact Mr. Zullo directly for answers to your questions.
Sincerely,
Reed Hayes
Reed Hayes, CDE
http://nativeborncitizen.wordpress.com/2013/06/04/reed-hayer-email-2/
As I recall, john, several people have contacted Mr. Hayes and got either a “no comment” or “contact Mike Zullo” out of him.
Maybe Doc should send the OCT Posse to Hawaii to track him down and make him talk!!
Yes….he got his JD from Harvard….in 1985?
John – did you ever hear back from Rep. Yoho?
Poster “Barry Soetoro” at BR is suggesting that members of Congress who don’t respond positively to the information should be hanged.
http://www.birtherreport.com/2014/05/full-report-must-see-tv-congressmen.html#IDComment825748414
Is that something you support?
Did you take a look at the photo Mike Volin posted of himself standing outside a congressman’s office?
Wow. What a hot mess.
If that suken-eyed, pot-bellied little Hobbit showed up in front of my office, I’d tell him to saddle his pony and book it back to the Shire.
I just looked at the pictures. Wow! Does the man ever smile?
Between their Quixotic tour of Capitol Hill and the bizarre stuff on BR it’s a miracle more of them aren’t institutionalized.
I know RC did.
and
ergo
The Reed Hayes report will never be shown to Congress. Is that what you’re saying?
john is obviously applying quantum logic to the birtherverse in which he lives, i.e.:
Hayes Report + (Congress Shown and/or Congress Not Shown) = BENGHAZI!
Zullo has 100% disappeared since his last appearance on Fact-Free Friday in early February. Even then, his phone call to Gallups sounded pre-recorded. I’m wondering if Gallups murdered him and is forging checks to clean out the CCCP bank account. Or maybe Zullo fled to Botswana to avoid prosecution for being a neo-maxie-zoom-dweebie, or maybe he was arrested in Tijuana in a $3 flophouse with a 9 yr. old boy. Could any of these be true?
Anyway, something awful happened to him, or at least people are wondering and asking QUESTIONS.
Either that, or a single birther with a single piece of convincing evidence.
If people are asking questions, there is a CONTROVERSY. It would be irresponsible not to speculate.
Hayes wrote his report last spring (before May when it was first mentioned in Zullo’s affidavit to the Alabama Supreme Court). In light of June’s Xerox announcement, has anyone heard from him and does he still support his original findings?
John, there is no evidence that you have ever thought. About anything.
If you had actually put two brain cells together, you would ask why not a single member of Congress raised the eligibility issue when given the opportunity at the time of counting electoral votes. Those people actually thought. You don’t, you can’t and you refuse to try.
I read somewhere (can’t remember where) that Zullo may have been arrested in Tijuana with a young boy; has this been denied?
It’s equally clear that Congress is simply not going to investigate the flat earth issue, or the chemtrails issue, or the Loch Ness issue, or the free energy magnetic motor issue….
Probably for the exact same reasons…
Because the Lizard People forbid it?
Reed Hayes has been bought off by Zullo and is sworn to secrecy, or at least he claims that he is sworn to secrecy. Hayes made himself some easy money and my guess is that he wants nothing more to do with this, especially since it has now been established that there is no evidence the that birth certificate is a forgery.
I exchanged emails with Mr. Hayes. He said he was unable to share the content of his “report” because it belonged to his client. However, I do know that he was unaware of the official State of Hawaii verifications that the President’s LFBC is accurate and authentic at the time he wrote his “report.” He is now.
I heard he was shacked up in the DR with He, Lucas S.
Funny you should mention that, but I remember a news item about this. I’ve been trying to find it, but I believe it’s been scrubbed by black ops who work in the MCSO.
You’re way behind on this several have contacted Hayes and he is being mum since Zullo copyrighted the report.
Gallups (who is a signatory to the CCCP joint checking account) got LS to take him to go to the DR. They got into an argument over a 9 year old and LS killed Z. Z is buried somewhere out in nowhere, DR. LS is trying to grow a moustache so he can use Z’s passport to get back to the US without being noticed by the CBP.
No, the CCP should just release what they have on the birth certificate and let people see the CCP’s sham, so-called “investigation” of Obama, for what it really is!
Oh wait, that’s why they haven’t released it for going on two years isn’t it? Their irrefutable “proving evidence” of the “biggest crime in the history of the United States of America” can’t survive the question, “What evidence of what chargeable crime?”
And what would you expect someone to ask Mr. Kallenberg, john?
You do understand that he can’t talk about prior clients and what he did for them……don’t you?
Don’t be ridiculous. They all got their orders from Soros. Sheesh.
Did he explain exactly who the client was…..Zullo or the Cold Case Posse?
Why are people still discussing this issue. Barack Obama ended it last night at the White House Correspondents Dinner.
President Obama congratulated runner Meb Keflezighi for winning the Boston Marathon, noting that he was the first American to win the Boston Marathon in 31 years.
“It’s only fair since a Kenyan has been president for the last six,” Obama said.
Later in his speech, after giving Fox News a hard time, Obama said the network would be sorry to see him leave office.
“You’ll miss me when I’m gone,” Obama said. “It’ll be harder to convince the American people that Hillary was born in Kenya.”
Wait, are you suggesting Hillary WASN’T born in Kenya?
Well, some things are privileged, but some are not. E.g., if he hired Hayes to authenticate a will, the report saying “Yes, Mr. Hayes says the signature is genuine, and your uncle really did leave his entire estate to the Daisy Hill Puppy Farm” would be out-of-bounds. But, if Hayes were hired to testify in court, the lawyer should be free to discuss whether he testified as a handwriting expert, a digital document expert, or a finder of kidnapped puppies.
Okay, how about something like this: “Mr. Hayes appeared to be able to walk and chew gum at the same time but beyond that I can’t say anything about the case or cases…..if there were any….ever.”
I’m suggesting that Hillary wasn’t born at all.
http://www.freewebs.com/reptoids/
I, for one, welcome our new reptoid overlords. I’d like to remind them that as a trusted Internet commenter, I can be helpful in rounding up others to toil in their underground insect hatcheries.
Well, no wonder she started the birther movement, then. It’s all starting to add up!
In addition to the “Presidrent’s document examiner”, there was this one, when Tom Marino (R-PA) said “You need tangible evidence”:
And
It appears that Marino cut him off and went on to work before he could bring up The Muslim Wedding Ring™
Meet Randy: Reporter, Cabby, Birther
Perhaps he could use one of those old Cuban mini-subs?
His response referred to Zullo and not the CCP. However, that would not mean that the CCP wasn’t technically his client.
What might be interesting (and fun) would be to independently retain Mr. Hayes to re-evaluate the pdf of the President’s LFBC with the benefit of additional information relating to the official verifications and Xerox work process information. While he would likely beg off, asserting a conflict, the formal introduction of new information might be just the excuse he needs to take this subject up again and restore his reputation. Also, he may need the money 🙂
Why would a copyright limit what Hayes could say about the report? If there is a NDA, that’s something help, but copyright? Does someone copyrighting a book prevent a reader from commenting on it? I think not.
“It’s irrefutable!”
“Oh. Can I see it?”
“Are you INSANE? it’s COPYRIGHTED!”
“If I can’t see it, how can I refute it?”
“AHA! You admit it’s irrefutable! Birfer win! Now we get discovery!”
“Is that poop in your hair?”
“OBOTS ARE PANICKING!!!”
cat $COMMENT |sed -e ‘s.help.else.’
If Zullo made Hayes sign a work-made-for-hire agreement BEFOREHAND (afterward, it might be deemed invalid), then Zullo is (under US law) the author and sole owner of the intellectual property (ie the report) and Hayes would not have the right to disclose or disseminate it in any way without Zullo’s prior consent.
My educated guess, of course.
Of course, the report as such may belong to Zullo, but facts are in the public domain and Hayes could find ways of answering questions about it withoit violating his wfh agreement, unless of course it also includes a confidentiality clause.
Then Zullo is solely responsible for the contents of the “report” and for all its use and misuse. No wonder he wants to keep it quiet.
What are the odds that a competent attorney drew up this agreement, if one exists?
I would think Hayes has a standard agreement that he uses for all his “work for hire” jobs. I’ve signed agreements like this with web designers.
Which leaves the question unanswered: What is Zullo’s end game?
Once the “report” is published in a book (e-book) he won’t be able to control what people say about it. And, if in some universe far, far away, it were to be introduced in a court of law then all bets are off for him.
So……what’s the plan Mr. Zullo?
If Hayes were clever and had some honor to lose, he would declare in public that his published remarks – in the light of later findings – do no longer reflect his opinion on the forgery matter.
He could do this without any fear of copyright infringement.
But a lot of people have no honor.
Winner!
This thread is hilarious. I especially like the touches submitted by Gullible John.
Yeah, you can always tell its a bleak day in Birtherstan, when john comes along to whine, and offer yet another flawed scheme on to somehow turn things around. Any day now, john. Any day now.
The anguish infused in john’s every reply is delicious. His heart just isn’t in it any more, poor thing.
He’s just going through the motions at this point. I think deep down, he knows Zullo has nothing.
Zullo has had nothing for the last TWO YEARS! Either Zullo is going to need to come out of his bunker and give them some fresh meat, or he’s going to need to stock it for 2 years and hide from them.
On the other hand, I think Zullo’s probably been given his walking papers by the Sheriff after Arpaio found that birthing has become more trouble than it’s worth. He could always bring it back if he needs to for an election.
Well, I’ve noticed that Zullo hasn’t actually mentioned Shurfjoe in many moons. One could come to the conclusion that Joe was like “Okay, keep up the charade if you want, but keep me out of out it!”
MMMmmmm. Birfer Tears. What a vintage whine ‘john’ makes!
Not only is Zullo not releasing the Reed Hayes report, I don’t think he’s even talking about it. At one time I thought Zullo was keeping it under wraps so he could publish it and make some money, but the value of that property has to be depreciating rapidly.
All I can figure out is that the Reed Hayes report is crap–so much so that even Zullo won’t use it.
Zullo has standards?
And they say there’s nothing new in Birferstan!
I think you’ve figured it out.
Now…..what does he do?
Someone help poor Sef. He appears to have suffered a stroke.
I’d be totally in on this. Seriously, I would help pony up to make this happen.
Were Hayes asked to testify, and if Zullo/CCP were legit, Hayes would have either already been supplied any additional information since his initial report OR when asked if he knew X, Y, Z he’d have to say “no” and then admit he would need to evaluate the “new information” and that it may alter his opinion, whatever his opinion is.
Hell, he admitted to not even knowing about the HI verifications prior to releasing his so-called report.
Another possibility is that Hayes has privately communicated to Zullo that he will not stand behind the conclusions of the report. I suspect Hayes didn’t know what he was stepping in and figured he would make a quick buck or two and move on. It didn’t work out as planned.
If I were going to spend the money, I would want a credible forensic scientist with specialization in electronic documents.
No credible expert would hire out to “the other side”. We can argue the credibility of his results, but I don’t believe even Hayes would do such a thing.
If it ever came up, better to question his expertise, methodologies, results at the proper time.
My guess it’s a report filled with expert weasel words. Pretty standard fare. He doesn’t have the ability to discredit the document, so he takes the opposite approach of saying it is impossible to positively authentica everything about the document. Can’t confirm that the signatures are authentic, and thus impossible to say that the document is unquestionably authentic and not the product of fraud.
How could a credible electronic document expert say that the birth certificate was a forgery in the face of Hawaii’s certification?
I’m retained often as an expert. In litigation matters, I’m retained first as a consultant to the attorneys. I provide my opinion. If they don’t like it, we both move on. If they like my opinion, and the case is to be tried, I get designated as a testifying expert. While our fees are paid by the client, my communications are all with the attorneys to preserve privilege.
On occasion, our firm is consulted by more than one side to a dispute. (In a significant matter, there may be 10 or 12 sides or folks with an economic interest.) Once we have signed up with one party, we decline other requests. Until designated to testify, we would never disclose who did hire us, although sometimes it is easy to guess.
I think the copyright angle is unusual, but Mr. Hayes has pretty much behaved as I would expect of an expert. He provided an opinion, and until the client intends to disclose it, he is not going to discuss it. If the opinion is not what Mr. Zullo wanted, it may never see the light of day.
My opinion, when I give it, is always as of the time I speak. If, after writing a report, other information is developed, by our firm or others, my opinion may change. When I testify, my opinion is as of the date of my testimony. So it is possible that, upon reflection, or upon receipt of new information, Mr. Hayes changed his mind. If I was asked my opinion on the birth certificate and was not told to check with Hawaii, I would not do so. Of course, when I testify and opposing counsel asks if there are things I would have liked to do, I would say, “I would have liked to check with Hawaii, but it was outside the scope of my assignment.”
Now we try to negotiate assignments that give us broad latitude. But sometimes it is important to the client that we are just asked, “Why did this part or system fail?” without letting us do a thorough investigation. They may be checking the work of others, or they may want an opinion not clouded by what we might find by simply going on Google.
Rather, how would he say that in the face of the fact that he can, at most, say that the PDF he examined was “fabricated”?
(A document expert would not rely on extrinsic evidence, after all it’s not impossible – though of course totally crazy – that there *is* a conspiracy the person certifying the document is partaking in. That would be like telling an expert who is tasked with examining whether a painting is the real Mona Lisa to state “it’s real” because the Louvre said it’s real.)
The question is whether the White House PDF is the scan of a paper document, or something built in Photoshop. It’s a silly question in the light of multiple Hawaiian certifications, but it is a question that could be answered in isolation.
I asked Dr. Neal Krawetz whether a PDF file (the Sun Yat-sen Hawaiian birth certificate) was a scan of a paper document or something made fabricated in a graphics program. He gave me some solid reasons to believe it was a scan.
Yes, that of course makes much more sense.
After I posted that, I also thought, “Would I really want to throw more money Reed Hayes’ way?” And given some of his prior work, the answer would, upon reflection, be, “Nope.”
Silly Doc. You might’s well say you’d want a unicorn. If there were really such things as credible forensic scientists with specialization in electronic documents, don’t you think an intrepid lawman like Mike Zullo would have found one by now?
Last I heard, he found 212.
His problem was finding one who’d join his Fools’ Parade.
There really are such people and Zullo could have found them if he tried, and perhaps he did find them. Maybe they didn’t want to work on his project, and maybe they did. Maybe Zullo wasn’t willing to pay their fee, or maybe he didn’t like their conclusions.