Kansas Ethics Head Hazlett in Ethics Trouble Himself

by Mary Kay Culp, KFL Executive Director

Today's KFL blog (read it HERE) examines how the states' legal ethics head, Stan Hazlett, went after one attorney's license, allegedly breaking the rules and repeatedly lying! He now faces his own set of ethics charges. Interestingly, that attorney also had a connection to abortion. Because of his actions it was revealed in a story in the Topeka Capitol Journal that sexual abuse was going on at the women's correction center in Topeka, with abortion being used to hide it!

This strongly echoes the ongoing saga of former attorney General, Phill Kline who Hazlett is also going after. 

Three weeks ago, anti- Kline "tweets" were going on the internet against Phill Kline, at his ethics hearing in the Supreme Court. After complaining about the source of the derisive comments--an appellate court law clerk (who helps the justices write their rulings)--Kline's attorney issued a letter to Hazlett. The letter is HERE. Many substantive charges are made, and Hazlett is asked to release more materials.

Note: Donate to Kline's defense at https://www.lifeissues.org/amistad/donate/index.html

The question remains why Hazlett steadfastly dogged Kline after two investigative bodies and a Wichita judge supported his actions.

Is it because of the fact that Hazlett works for the Kansas Supreme Court, whose member, Justice Carol Beier, has a recognized dislike of Mr. Kline? That assertion is not wholly ours. A December 2008 Supreme Court ruling regarding Kline found he did nothing wrong and yet Beier, who wrote the opinion, devoted 18 pages to denigrate him. The entire ruling written by Beier was so out of the ordinary, that the chief justice at the time, Kay McFarland said this, as part of her separate comments:

" …It appears to me that the majority invokes our extraordinary inherent power to sanction simply to provide a platform from which it can denigrate Kline for actions that it cannot find to have been in violation of any law and to heap scorn upon him for his attitude and behavior that does not rise to the level of contempt. This is the very antithesis of "restraint and discretion" and is not an appropriate exercise of our inherent power.”

Adding:

“I believe it is inappropriate to set forth, as if to threaten [Kline] with, the various penalties that could be imposed if some past or future hypothetical misconduct should "come to light" at a later date….This vague statement seems to anticipate and encompass the discovery of additional past or future misconduct.”

It is difficult not to wonder if there was some tipoff to Beier or her staff (especially as more "bad tweets"have been uncovered) about a CD with work product from then-former KS AG Kline's staff that supposedly appeared "mysteriously" on the desks of abortion attorneys just weeks earlier and that it supposedly contained damning information.  It didn't although they have tried during Kline's ethics allegations journey to make something of it. The origin of the CD, and its transfer to abortion attorneys has never been determined, but certainly needs to be. 

There are other issues related to Kansas corruption that we are working on because they too demand further exploration and action, and we will be reporting on them soon--especially the destruction of evidence related to the Planned Parenthood charges that have all now been dropped by Johnson County DA Steve Howe. 

Again, read the KFL blog article (here) about another Kansas attorney who Hazlett pursued who is fighting back allegedly with facts that proved Hazlett is not above lying, and note the similarities to how Hazlett has treated and continues to treat Phill Kline! Also, again, please read the great letter Kline's attorney Condit has written to Hazlett HERE.  




Brennan Justice Center Financed By George Soros

by Judy Kent


Washington, DC - A new report from the National Center for Public Policy Research finds the Brennan Center for Justice - one of the country's loudest opponents of voter integrity measures - to have a history of bias-driven research.

The report also discloses that the Brennan Center has received millions in funding from George Soros.

The report is the latest entry in the National Center's GroupSnoop.org series.

"The Brennan Center is on a mission to undermine support for voter integrity measures, claiming that state-level voter ID provisions will disfranchise millions of voters and that voter fraud rarely occurs. However, some of its major reports concerning voter ID measures and voter fraud are wrought with bias and have been refuted by election scholars," said National Center General Counsel Justin Danhof.

GroupSnoop.org is an educational website launched by the National Center in 2011 to provide candid, documented analysis of influential public policy-oriented non-profits. In the national debate over voter integrity measures, the Brennan Center is a prominent opponent of efforts to curb voter fraud and protect voters against identity theft. This new GroupSnoop.org profile shines some much-needed light onto the inner workings, funding and motivations of the Brennan Center.

The profile shows that the Brennan Center has a history of cherry-picking data that aligns with pre-determined conclusions that voter integrity measures, such as requiring a photo ID to vote, are actually efforts to disfranchise specific voting blocs. The Brennan Center appears to ignore or severely downplay data that are inconvenient for its theses.

For example, in November 2006, the Brennan Center published a widely cited report, "Citizens Without Proof," in which it claimed that 21 million adult Americans lack a photo ID, including 25 percent of black Americans. Election scholars with the Heritage Foundation evaluated the report and concluded that "[b]y eschewing many of the traditional scientific methods of data collection and analysis, the authors of the Brennan Center study appear to have pursued results that advance a particular political agenda rather than the truth about voter identification."

The Brennan Center profile on GroupSnoop.org also exposes the advocacy group's close ties to George Soros, known for his prolific funding of explicitly left-wing organizations. Soros has a history of making contributions intended to influence American policymaking and elections. Soros reportedly spent an estimated $27.5 million during the 2004 election cycle in a failed effort to oust then-President George W. Bush.

"Further clouding the Brennan Center's reputation is that convicted felon George Soros' Open Society Foundations have funneled over seven million dollars to the Brennan Center since 2000," said Danhof. "It is no wonder the Brennan Center works so hard on a daily basis to provide intellectual ammunition to those fighting voter integrity measures."

Despite the Brennan Center's best effort to paint voter integrity measures as racially-charged barriers to voting, the American public strongly supports democratically-enacted voter ID laws at the state level to protect the value of their vote. In a recent Rasmussen poll, 73 percent of Americans supported voter ID laws.

As the Brennan Center continues its campaign against voter ID, a simple and effective way to protect against stolen votes, it is troubling that the media - which increasingly seeks to "fact-check" political speech - is not reporting that the Brennan Center is an advocacy organization. This need for scrutiny is increasingly important given that the Brennan Center is willing to say that lawmakers supporting ballot protection legislation do so out of racial animosity and political maneuvering.

This new GroupSnoop.org profile should change that narrative.

"Brennan Center work should be presented as opinion - if it is considered at all," said Danhof. "The Brennan Center is a George Soros-funded extreme advocacy group that appears willing to fight all meaningful efforts to combat voter fraud. It should be regarded as such."


How a Sebelius judge saved Planned Parenthood

by Jack Cashill {WND.com}


With her first appointment to the Kansas Supreme Court as governor in 2003, Democrat Kathleen Sebelius chose the proudly “third-wave” feminist, Carol Beier. It was a timely choice.  That same year, Republican Phill Kline took office as Kansas Attorney General.  From Beier’s perspective, Kline represented a serious threat to the “reproductive freedom” that she, Sebelius, and other third-wavers espoused.

As Kline sensed before taking office, the state’s two dominant abortion providers, Comprehensive Health of Planned Parenthood of Kansas and Mid-Missouri (CHPPKM) in suburban Kansas City and George Tiller’s Women’s Health Care clinic in Wichita, were ignoring state restrictions on late term abortion, Tiller flagrantly.  What Kline discovered only after a multi-year fight with Sebelius’s people to get access to relevant records was that both clinics were grossly ignoring mandatory reporting laws on child rape.

Of the 166 abortions performed on girls under-fifteen in the years 2002 and 2003, the clinics reported only three cases to the state department of Social and Rehabilitation Services. They should have reported all 166.

Kline was prepared to press charges against both Tiller and CHPPKM. For reasons of ideology and campaign finance, Sebelius could not let this happen.

To begin, Sebelius persuaded Paul Morrison, a popular Republican district attorney from Johnson County in suburban Kansas City, to change parties and run against Kline in 2006. The state abortion industry invested nearly $2 million to help the local media defeat Kline.

To the dismay of the abortion industry, however, Kline was elected to fulfill the remaining two years on Morrison’s term as Johnson County DA. From that position, he was able to continue the investigation into CHPPKM he had begun as attorney general.

In October 2007, Kline filed 107 counts, 23 of them felonies, against CHPPKM. District Court Judge James Vano found “probable cause” of crimes having been committed and allowed the case to proceed.

Planned Parenthood and new AG Morrison sued Kline to derail the prosecution.  When the case reached the Kansas Supreme Court, the justices grudgingly ruled in Kline’s favor and allowed his case against Planned Parenthood to go forward.  If the facts supported Kline, Judge Beier clearly did not. “His attitude and behavior are inexcusable,” she wrote for the majority , “particularly for someone who purports to be a professional prosecutor.”

Associated Press writer John Hanna uncritically described her summary as “a public tongue-lashing.” A Topeka reporter termed her opinion “a searing condemnation.” The Kansas City Star headlined its story, “Kansas Court Rebukes District Attorney Kline.” And remember, Kline won the case.

If the media were blind to what was happening, then Kansas Supreme Court Chief Justice, Kay McFarland, was not.  She called Beier’s opinion “ the very antithesis of ‘restraint and discretion’ and . . . not an appropriate exercise of our inherent power.”  McFarland scolded Beier and the majority for attempting “to denigrate Kline for actions that it cannot find to have been in violation of any law and to heap scorn upon him for his attitude and behavior that does not rise to the level of contempt.”


McFarland may have suspected that Beier’s hectoring of Kline was not spontaneous. Earlier that year, in fact, Beier co-authored a provocative paper that endorsed a strategy very much like the one used to defame Kline.  The paper was written for the Feminist Legal Theory and Feminisms (sic) Conference sponsored by the University of Baltimore School of Law and dealt with what is called third-wave feminism and its effect on parenting law.


The article’s closing quote by Gloria Steinem captures the spirit of this radical feminist incarnation. “We are talking about a society in which there will be no roles other than those chosen or those earned,” said the feminist icon and all-purpose leftist. “We are really talking about humanism.”  Understanding that tradition is not easily discarded in a state like Kansas, Beier and Walsh cite approvingly a strategy suggested by feminist law professor Bridget Crawford.

Write the authors, “Crawford posits that the third-wave’s reclamation of feminism through engagement with the media is powerful ‘cultural work’ that may be a necessary pre-condition to an evolution in the law.”

According to Crawford, “The media are tools to produce cultural infrastructure, without which even the best intentioned and artfully designed legal reforms are ineffective.”  Beier knew something about the media. Before going to law school, she worked several years for the Kansas City Times, the then sister publication of the Kansas City Star.

The Star proved to be the most useful of all media “tools” at Beier’s disposal. Indeed, the paper won Planned Parenthood’s top 2006 national editorial honor for its work defeating “anti-choice zealot” Kline and attacked him relentlessly thereafter.  So powerful was the media’s “cultural work” that in May 2007 Sebelius had no qualms about letting Planned Parenthood celebrate her birthday at a big Kansas City blow-out.

Leading the “conga line around the concert hall” was Peter Brownlie, the local CEO whose abortion clinic was then at the center of Kline’s investigation.  The partiers “sure know how to have fun!” enthused the Planned Parenthood newsletter.  With the cultural infrastructure so well established, Kline lost his re-election bid and was forced to leave the state to find employment.

Wanting to make an example of Kline lest some other prosecutor challenge Planned Parenthood in the future, the activists on the Supreme Court prompted an ethics investigation into Kline’s handling of the abortion cases.  Ironically, one of the charges was that Kline did not share the scope of his investigation with Sebelius. This was true. Kline feared her people would hamper the investigation and possibly destroy evidence.

As it turned out, they did both. Planned Parenthood will likely escape prosecution because Sebelius’s health department and her attorney general’s office separately destroyed key evidence.  Last week, as the decision in the ethics case neared, Kline filed a recusal motion showing that Beier’s 2008 opinion was “flagrantly dishonest in its presentation of facts.” After reading Kline’s motion, four other justices decided that they too had previously complained about Kline’s behavior and recused themselves, as did Beier.

In doing so, the justices gave Beier cover. A public airing of the Beier-led assault on Kline would have seriously damaged the court’s reputation and Sebelius’s.  Planned Parenthood stood to lose over $300 million in federal funding if CHPPKM had been successfully prosecuted. Sebelius protected Planned Parenthood’s interest in Kansas and now oversees its funding as Secretary of Health and Human Services.

The ladder goes up, Kathleen, but the circles go down.




Kansas Supreme Court Message: Don't enforce the law

by Jenn Giroux


Phill Kline's legal marathon to clear his good name and save his law license

On May 15, 2012 the legal team of former Kansas Attorney General Phill Kline filed a motion in the Kansas Supreme Court seeking the recusal of two justices who would otherwise sit in review of Kline's appeal of an ethics panels' recommendation that his law license be indefinitely suspended after he prevailed in successfully filing criminal charges against Planned Parenthood. The motion seeks to recuse both Justice Carol Beier for her bias and deception and Justice Lawton Nuss, who, himself, was the subject of an ethics complaint brought by Kline when he was Attorney General. The legal brief is nothing short of a white hot legal bombshell. The majority of the brief focuses on Justice Beier. The heavily footnoted motion exposes for anyone who reads it, Justice Beier's pattern of dishonest opinion writing, her bias against Kline, and her aggressive activism from the bench to protect the abortion industry from legitimate legal prosecution. The motion also reveals Beier's tactics to undercut and defeat legitimate enforcement of Kansas laws designed to protect children from sexual abuse.

As prosecutor of Johnson County, Kansas, Kline filed 107 criminal charges against Planned Parenthood of Kansas and Mid-Missouri in October, 2007. While civil suits have been filed against Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers in the past, Phill Kline's investigation was the first and only criminal case pursued against the abortion giant by a prosecutor in our nation's history. While in office, Kline was personally attacked and publicly maligned by the Kansas Supreme Court (and their friends in the media) for his willingness to investigate child rape and illegal abortions that were being performed by Planned Parenthood and late term abortionist George Tiller. Every single judge that reviewed Kline's evidence found probable cause that crimes had been committed. The detailed recusal motion reveals the deception of Justice Carol Beier, a lifetime appointee to the Kansas Supreme Court by then-Governor Kathleen Sebelius. Beier prevented Kline's prosecution of Planned Parenthood from ever reaching trial, and her not-so-subtle dishonesty came to light when she crafted a remedy in one case that required Kline to hand over all of his evidence to his successor, former Kansas Attorney General Paul Morrison, who made clear his intention of returning the evidence to Planned Parenthood. You read that right: while Planned Parenthood was fighting to derail Kline's investigations of abortion-related crimes, Justice Beier fashioned a factually dishonest opinion that required Kline to turn over the evidence gathered during his investigation to the target of the investigation.

Additionally, Mr. Kline's appeal brief dismantles the flawed reasoning of the Disciplinary Panel which conducted a kangaroo court-like hearing and has now recommended his suspension. The outcome was all too predictable despite the fact that there are no facts to support their findings and recommendations.

It is important to keep the following facts in mind:

1. While Kline has been constantly maligned with accusations that he was violating patient privacy, not a single patient name was ever revealed by him or his staff in two prosecutorial offices covering nearly six years of effort.

2. The evidence clearly shows hundreds of abortions on children. Under state and federal law these pregnancies are a result of child abuse/rape. Of over 400 abortions on children, only 16 were reported as potential abuse. To date, no one but Kline has seriously followed up on that evidence or these abused children.

3. Justice Carole Beier is a Sebelius appointee and an avid supporter of abortion. She formerly worked for the National Women's Law Center which represented interests supporting abortion providers such as Planned Parenthood. This presents a clear bias and conflict for her in this case.

4. None of the allegations against Phill Kline relate to the investigation that he initiated against the Planned Parenthood of Kansas and Mid-Missouri. They are created accusations which are completely false.

5. The evidence against Planned Parenthood has always been, and continues to be, strong and verifiable.

6. Every judge who has reviewed the evidence has found probable cause to believe that Planned Parenthood committed crimes.

7. Justice Beier, as revealed in the recusal motion, has written approvingly of using the media as a "tool" to shape public perception in order to bring about "legal reform" in support of "third-wave feminism." And that is exactly what she achieved with her anti-Kline opinions — turning Kline into a reviled figure in Kansas based in large part on non-existent evidence and lies about the actual evidence.

8. Kline consistently prevailed in moving the case forward while he was in office because the evidence was so strong. However, he lost in the public perception game because of Beier's deceptions and the deliberate media confusion created in Kansas, a state whose mainstream media feeds off the lies of one another. At the height of Kline's investigation the main newspaper, The Kansas City Star, ran a cartoon of Kline sitting on the bench next to a little girl with his hand up her dress. The script under the photo mocked the investigation of child rape with the theme: "he'll violate anyone's privacy to get what he wants." That same paper was awarded the "Maggie Award" by Planned Parenthood (in honor of founder, Margaret Sanger) for their editorial efforts to unseat Phill Kline.

Phill Kline lost his bid for re-election in 2008. It was a tragic turn of events when then Senator, now Governor of Kansas Sam Brownback betrayed the pro-life movement and longtime friend, Phill Kline, by endorsing RINO Steve Howe, who now serves as prosecutor over the remaining criminal case against Planned Parenthood. Unfortunately, Howe has chosen to drop the felony charges which could have led to the de-funding of Planned Parenthood nationwide. Many in the pro-life community (inside Kansas and across the country) have believed for some time that Howe lacks the will and the desire to aggressively prosecute the case against Planned Parenthood. Perhaps the most disappointing aspect of this is the fact that throughout Kline's ordeal of fighting unjust charges from political enemies, (i.e. friends of the abortion industry trying to remove Kline's law license), there has been only silence from Governor Brownback's office. He sat in the Governor's office just blocks away from where Phill Kline was put on trial by Beier's political hacks. It calls to mind the biblical verse: "I do not know the man" (Mathew 26: 72). This is no surprise coming from the same man who betrayed the entire country by refusing to invoke a long standing Senate tradition which allowed one Senator of a nominee's home state to pull the plug on their nomination. This would have stopped the appointment of Kathleen Sebelius as Obama's HHS Secretary. Brownback, in both scenarios, could have changed the course of events by simply stepping forward for the truth. He chose political self-preservation instead.

Many may ask: "Why are they still after Kline?"

The answer is simple. Planned Parenthood wants to make an example of Phill Kline to send this message to all prosecutors nationwide: if you pursue criminal investigations against the abortion industry, you will suffer....you will be sued, you will be unjustifiably charged with trumped-up ethical accusations, you will be sued again and again, you will be lied about in the media, you will be betrayed by political friends in high places, your ability to support your family will be targeted, and of course, you will be politically assassinated. The one thing they have continually underestimated is Kline's tenacity and willingness to stand up for the truth and the law in order to protect the legal rights of abused children and the unborn. The power of that truth can be found in the legal brief filed this week. This case against Phill Kline has far reaching effects if Justice Beier and her other abortion-minded friends on the bench succeed. Few people in my lifetime have endured what Phill Kline and his family have been put through. Kline's silent strength shines through in all of the suffering. It has been both inspiring and painful to watch. And it is a story that must be told. Truly they are a living example of this verse: "Blessed are ye when they shall revile you, and persecute you, and speak all that is evil against you, untruly, for my sake: Be glad and rejoice, for your reward is very great in heaven." (Mathew 5: 3-12)

The Kansas Supreme Court Mockery of Justice Continues

by Allen Williams


Kansas has a governing problem.  The rule of law has transcended into the 'rule of money' and is a strong testimony to the deep seated corruption nurtured in this state by planned parenthood.  The planned parenthood litany of corruption can be found here.  They helped elect some of the most corrupt successors to public office from Paul Morrison to Kathleen Sebelius.  The 14 member committee for picking judges made up of 7 lawyers and 7 members appointed by the governor ensures the 'status quo' is maintained in the judiciary.


The Kansas Supreme court ranks right up there with the truly nefarious gulags of the past.  Kangaroo court doesn't begin to do justice to this pack of jackals.  In fact, you were likely to get a fairer trial in Nazi germany or under Stalin than from these misfits.  It was justice Lawton Nuss who dictated to the worthless Kansas Legislature precisely how much money should be voted for education in deference to the teacher's union in the Montoy decision.  It was justice Carol Beir's antagonism towards anything threatening abortion that led to Kline's ethics trial despite having been exonerated twice before by the ethics committee.  It was the Kansas Supreme Court who gagged sitting judge Richard Anderson and prevented him from testifying that planned parenthood abortion records had been forged.  It was the Kansas Supreme Court who allowed then attorney general Paul Morrison to join planned parenthood's suit against Kline to get the evidence back.  However, Morrison got caught with his 'trousers around his ankles' and had to resign in a sex scandal, so it fell to Steve Six, appointed by governor Kathleen Sebelius, to destroy the fraudulent records resulting in 23 felonies dismissed by the district court.

Attorney General Phill Kline was punished by the state supreme court for daring to do the job he was elected to do.  The Secret Proceedings of The Supreme Court provides background on the court's constitutional abuses.  Here are key allegations excerpted from hKline's motion for recusal:


*Ordered that discovery be obtained from Mr. Kline and his staff in a manner that served well the shared goals of Morrison and Planned
Parenthood, but was detrimental to Mr. Kline’s investigation into the crimes of Planned Parenthood, including Planned Parenthood’s failure to report child sexual molestation;

* Entertained an unprecedented and merit less mandamus action filed by attorneys for the target of a criminal investigation (Planned Parenthood) seeking to have the evidence of serious crimes taken from the prosecuting attorney (Mr. Kline) and given back to the criminal target;

* Ordered that the entire CHPP v. Kline case be conducted under seal, including a secret trial hidden from public scrutiny in which the criminal target was able to utilize extraordinary discovery rights outside the parameters of the pending criminal case;

* Continued the tactic of publicly threatening Mr. Kline with ethical charges or contempt citations in a most injudicious way;


Endless opinions, half truths and scathing editorials from the Wichita Eagle to Sun Publications to the Kansas City Star reviled Phill Kline continuously during his tenure as both state attorney general and then as Johnson County prosecutor (replacing Paul Morrison).  It was no concern to the rat pack of journalism that Kline had evidence of coerced sex among underage girls.  The bastions of liberalism were under assault and must be protected no matter what the cost or who suffers.  Justice isn't blind..it's dead in Kansas.

Kansas truly reflects the culture of special interest corruption money that now rules the nation.

Obama's Conn. Social Security Number hits Rush Limbaugh..

by Joe Kovacs {World Net Daily}


Rush Limbaugh, the nation’s top-rated radio talk-show host, briefly brought up the issue of Barack Obama’s potentially criminal use of a Connecticut-based Social Security Number, since the president has never lived in the Constitution State. While speaking with a caller named Rob about Obama’s alleged deception of citizens, Limbaugh tossed out the question: “What are your thoughts on the fact Obama’s Social Security Number is from Connecticut and he’s never been there?” 

Rob responded, “That’s what you call a red flag. A red flag is also, ‘First of all, I don’t need to give you my birth certificate,’ and then finally, ‘I’ll give you a copy,’ Oh, that’s a modern copy … We don’t need copies, we need originals.”

Rob continued, “How about releasing all of your college papers and let’s see what you really thought about America when you were in college? He’s deceiving us.” 

“That’s true,” said Limbaugh. “They don’t want [us] to see what those term papers, doctoral theses and so forth actually were about, nor do they want us to see the grades. They don’t want us to see the grades.”  Rob had originally focused on Obama’s birth certificate, which Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio has investigated and believes is a likely forgery.

“He says he was born in the United States,” said Rob. “He has not shown a genuine, authentic, viable, verifiable – in order to authenticate any document, you need to have the original.”  “Now wait just a second,” said Limbaugh. “They did release a birth certificate. Even Donald Trump said he’s satisfied with it.”

“The original? But a copy of anything you can’t be satisfied. You have to actually examine the original. … In order to have an expert authenticate it, you can’t go by a copy. You actually have to go by the ink on the paper, as well as many other things.” 

Obama’s Social Security Number was not discussed again in today’s radio exchange, but its mention is notable because few members of the national media have treaded near that subject.

 As WND reported last August, Obama’s possibly criminal use of a Connecticut-based Social Security an important issue in his quest for re-election in 2012, said Alan  Keyes,  a former  presidential candidate and ambassador in Ronald Reagan’s administration.   The first three digits of Obama’s SSN are 042. That code falls within the range of numbers for Connecticut, which according to the Social Security Administration has been 040 through 049.  “I believe that when you are confronted with a situation that is filled with these kinds of – what shall we call them – anomalies, disparities,  it is reasonable common sense to want to try to get straight answers,” said Keyes.  

“If you’re trying to ascertain whether or not somebody ought to be sitting with, as they used to say, their finger on the button of nuclear weapons that can blow up the world, their power extending to decisions that can collapse our economy, their influence extending to areas that can destroy the standards and moral conscience of our people in the eyes of the world, I think you might want to know who they were. It might be a good idea!”  

Keyes’ comments came during an online interview with Stan Solomon, as he addressed an issue that has been avoided by the White House and almost completely ignored by national news agencies.  “Let’s say that you’re trying to establish someone’s identity for the purposes of an investigation and you come across a Social Security Number that has that person coming from a state that all the other records of their life indicate they’ve never been to,” Keyes explained.

“I think you would look at that as an anomaly that suggests, among other things, that you better probe a little harder to make sure that the identity that you’re dealing with is a real identity – that it’s not something that’s been in some sense fabricated for some particular purpose, because one of the things you want to do if you’re tracking somebody down is make sure you’re tracking them down, not following some phony figment down to dead ends. That’s common sense.”

Keyes thinks there are many Americans who are aware of this Social Security Number mystery and simply can’t understand why it’s not being addressed.

“Is it incompetence? Is it cowardice?” he asks rhetorically. “Is it just indifference and nonchalance of this elite in the courts and in politics, in the Congress and elsewhere?”

Steve Davis, police chief for Southport, Ind., was a co-host on the program, chiming in, “If anyone believes Barack Obama is gonna make an identity-theft commercial soon, forget it. It’s not gonna happen.”

Keyes then went on a scathing indictment of the current crop of political candidates and their apparent unwillingness to take on the issue.

“You know there’s hardly a one of them had the guts to stand forward and speak truly to the issues that are raised by these anomalies and to address the constitutional issues that are involved in [presidential] eligibility,” he said.

“And that, it seems to me, is a big strike against you because at the end of the day if you’re not willing to respect the requirements of integrity with regard to the most potently damaging office that it is in the gift of the American people to give, then I guess you’re willing to misinform and lie to them about just about anything. Because if you don’t care whether their vote for president – the most important vote they cast – can be cast with integrity, then you don’t care whether they’re represented or not.”

Keyes continued: “I know very few – I don’t care which party label they wear – who have had respect for the people, the respect for the Constitution, the respect for the requirements of real and true representation and choice in our elections to stand forward and deal with these matters forthrightly. They’ve allowed folks like myself and others who are outside the purview of government to kind of just twist in the wind. First they called us names and then they tried to tear us down, and as the facts and other things became evident and more and more people lined up, now they’re just silent and cowering in some dark corner, unable to voice their shame. And I think that’s where they belong, most of them.”

In June 2010, WND’s Washington correspondent, Les Kinsolving, asked former Obama Press Secretary Robert Gibbs specifically why Obama had a Connecticut-based SSN despite not having lived there, but Gibbs completely dodged the question and changed the subject, lamenting about inquiries over Obama’s birth certificate.

“There is obviously a case of fraud going on here,” said private investigator Susan Daniels. “In 15 years of having a private investigator’s license in Ohio, I’ve never seen the Social Security Administration make a mistake of issuing a Connecticut Social Security number to a person who lived in Hawaii. There is no family connection that would appear to explain the anomaly.”

Just this week, a California lawyer who has been leading the legal effort to probe Obama’s SSN made some progress in Hawaii.

As WND reported, attorney Orly Taitz secured an order from United States District Court Magistrate Judge Richard L. Puglisi demanding representatives of the Hawaii Department of Health appear in federal court Sept. 14 to show why Taitzshould be prevented from seeing whatever original 1961 documents theagency has on record regarding Barack Obama’s birth.  To date, most national media have refused to even mention the question of Obama’s possibly fraudulent Social Security Number.

On April 27, 2011, the day Obama released a scanned image of what he claims to be his long-form birth certificate from Hawaii, MSNBC host Lawrence O’Donnell angrily shouted down California attorney Orly Taitz to prevent her from exposing on national television what she claims is Obama’s Social Security crime.  Also in April of last year, some 11 months after WND began publicizing Obama’s Connecticut-based SSN, Bill O’Reilly of the Fox News Channel briefly addressed the issue while reading his viewer mail on the air.

Unfortunately for O’Reilly, the news anchor falsely asserted the president’s father lived in Connecticut.

In his viewer email segment April 13, 2011, O’Reilly was asked: “What about Obama having a Connecticut Social Security Number? He never lived there.” “His father lived in Connecticut for several years,” O’Reilly claimed, adding that “babies sometimes get numbers based on addresses provided by their parents.”  In reality, there is no evidence Barack Obama Sr. ever lived in Connecticut.  He left Hawaii in 1962 to study at Harvard in Massachusetts and then returned to his home country of Kenya.  When WND publicized O’Reilly’s major error,
the information vanished from the Fox News Channel’s website, as well as BillOReilly.com.

The BirtherReport.com website, responding to complaints by Fox podcast customers that O’Reilly’s Social Security claim, broadcast on Fox, had gone missing from the audio archive, trumpeted the headline: “Busted: Fox News scrubbed Bill O’Reilly’s 4/13 mailbag segment on Obama’s Social Security Number reserved for Connecticut applicants.” The site added, “Not only did Fox News scrub the podcast, they also left out the viewer email about Obama’s Social Security number at O’Reilly’s website. I report, you decide!” 



Joe Kovacs, author of the forthcoming book (out July 17), "The Divine Secret: The Awesome and Untold Truth About Your Phenomenal Destiny", as well as the No. 1 best-seller "Shocked by the Bible: The Most Astonishing Facts You've Never Been Told," is executive news editor for WND.

Find out all there is to know about Obama’s Connecticut Social Security Number in Jerome Corsi’s “Where’s the Birth Certificate,” both in hardcover and an additional ebook. And we also have the results of Sheriff Joe’s probe into Obama’s birth certificate!


Will Attorney General Holder Face Contempt charges?

by Mat Staver


Eric Holder, the United States Attorney General and head of the Obama Administration’s Department of Justice (DOJ) is about to be charged with “Contempt of Congress” by House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa.

Chairman Issa also declared that Holder and the Department of Justice “has blood on their hands” in the death of Agent Terry and an untold number of Mexican citizens after reviewing documents that indicated a DOJ cover-up in their knowledge of the Fast and Furious gun running scheme.  A 48 page “citation” is now being drafted charging that Holder and the DOJ have “obstructed and slowed” the Congressional investigation into the infamous “Fast and Furious” debacle.

Chairman Issa and his GOP colleagues on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee have long been demanding FULL disclosure over the role Holder and his Department of Justice (DOJ) cohorts played in the deadly Fast and Furious gun-walking operation.  

Congressman Issa is livid over the DOJ’s slowness and lack of response, deception, and potential cover-up activities during the investigation – and he doesn’t mince his words.

Issa has already labeled Eric Holder as a “hostile witness.”

Earlier this week, Chairman Issa called Obama’s White House “the most corrupt in government history.” 

Representative Elijah Cummings (D-MD), ranking member of the House Oversight and Reform Committee, has warned Committee Chairman Congressman Darrell Issa (R-CA) to “stop the witch hunt” against Attorney General Eric Holder.  Citing a letter from Cummings to Issa, Politico reports that Cummings told Issa…

Holding someone in contempt of Congress is one of the most serious and formal actions our Committee can take, and it should not be used as a political tool to generate press as part of an election-year witch hunt against the Obama Administration.”  A “witch hunt”?

Is it a “witch hunt” to hold a government official accountable for his unlawful and unconstitutional actions – or inactions as the case may be? 

The point is, we should be able to expect more of Eric Holder and the Department of Justice, as the nation’s top law enforcement officer and his team of officials, ALL of whom swore to uphold the Constitution and the laws of the land!

Eric Holder’s actions at the DOJ are truly a travesty of justice. I believe that Eric Holder’s tenure as Attorney General is one of the most corrupt and divisive periods in the history of the Department of Justice. 

But now, as is evidenced by Representative Cumming’s letter, obstructionists are pulling out all the stops to try and prevent Congressman Issa and the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee from formally charging Attorney General Eric Holder and his Department of Justice cohorts with “Contempt of Congress.”  This not a partisan issue!  It’s a JUSTICE issue.

From the day Eric Holder took his oath of office as Attorney General, his tenure as our nation's top law enforcement officer can only be described as one scandakous dereliction of duty after another.



The Secret Poceedings of the Kansas Supreme Court...

by Denis Boyles


Locking the courthouse door may seem like a lousy way to insure fair justice for all, but holding secret hearings on one of the state's most controversial issues is exactly what the Kansas Supreme Court is doing.

Most of us don't trust courts that operate in the dark. Americans, observed Justice Hugo Black 60 years ago, have a "historic distrust of secret proceedings, their inherent dangers to freedom, and the universal requirement of our federal and state governments that criminal trials be public."

Here's a short list of places where secret court proceedings are not unknown:

  • North Korea
  • Iran
  • China
  • Cuba
  • Syria
  • Zimbabwe
  • Kansas

All those secretive Syrians and enigmatic North Koreans probably would beg to differ, but, to paraphrase everybody's favorite Sunflower cliché, "what's up with Kansas?" How did it hop onto that short list of kangaroo judiciaries?

Back in June 2007, Planned Parenthood of Kansas and Mid-Missouri filed charges in the Kansas Supreme Court against former Attorney General and Johnson County District Attorney Phill Kline, all part of the ongoing battle by abortion clinics to prevent government enforcement of state laws regarding late-term abortions and child molestation.

Peter Brownlie, Planned Parenthood's CEO, confirmed the filing and that's the last we've heard, because Planned Parenthood requested a secret hearing, and the Kansas Supreme Court gave them one. That meant, according to David Klepper, blogging at the Kansas City Star, "the public couldn't see what the court case involved, couldn't read the filings, couldn't sit in on what surely must have been a fascinating hearing before the Supreme Court."

It's risky business when courts invite ridicule, but at the Kansas Supreme Court, the invitation's a standing one. Because of the eccentricities of state law, none of the supreme court's justices have ever been vetted by elected representatives. As many critics, including KU law professor Stephen J. Ware, have complained, "..there's no confirmation process at all" the governor appoints them and there they sit, sometimes dozing through cases that often seem to have already been decided by some backroom handshake.

Because Kansas has never had a conservative governor, there's not even much political diversity on the court. All the members are in general agreement on the way things ought to be in Kansas in fact, in 2005, they even started passing legislation of their own, deciding to the penny how much the state should spend on educating kids. Most of them have, at one time or other, made clear their impatience with wing-nuts and others who disagree with them.

You'd think conservatives would be pleased with a court that has moved so far back in time that its hearings resemble the Star Chamber trials that ended the reign and the life of Britain's Charles the First back in the 1600s.

But no. this afternoon, Rep. Lance Kinzer's House Judiciary Committee will hold hearings "public's invited, of course"on HB 2825, a crowbar bill that would pry open courtroom doors across the state by limiting the ability of judges to conduct secret trials and hearings or have their pleadings sealed.

The Planned Parenthood v Kline case triggered Kinzer's concern, but, as he wrote in an email, the bill is "more of an open [government] issue than a pro-life issue." In a statement released yesterday, Kinzer wrote, "The public has a fundamental interest in all cases that are submitted to a court for resolution. It is an unfortunate reality today that many of the most important public policy issues facing our State are being decided by courts. As such it is more important than ever that our judicial process is open and accessible."

An open court presided over by justices who have been through a public confirmation process? There's a wild and crazy idea, one that's never been tried in Teheran or in Topeka.


Denis Boyles, comments on the media and the Midwest for National Review Online, also writes the Monday, Monday column for Kansas Liberty. He's the author of Superior, Nebraska, an oddly-titled book mostly about Kansas.