Biased Media Belittled Obama Inquiry

As WND reported, an investigative “Cold Case Posse” launched six months ago by Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio concluded there is probable cause that the document released by the White House last year as Obama’s birth certificate and alleged proof of eligibility is a computer-generated forgery.

And even though the posse – which was comprised of former law-enforcement officers and lawyers with law-enforcement experience who interviewed dozens of witnesses and examined hundreds of documents – released its findings at a public news conference, Arpaio claims the press on hand were deaf to the evidence in a biased attempt to dismiss the posse’s conclusions.

In a column published in the Arizona Republic, Arpaio says of the reporters on hand, “Their pre-determined desire to discredit me and my office would not even allow them to consider listening to what was presented in an unbiased manner.”

“During our news conference, my investigators and I laid out a large array of technical information, demonstrations and evidence that no other law-enforcement agency in the country has even considered looking into,” Arpaio writes. “We have produced experts in the creation of electronic documents who will attest that the document in question is a forgery, evidence that the president’s Selective Service registration card is highly suspect and looked far different from any other card we examined from the same exact post office in the same exact month in which his was filed.

“And we uncovered information from the National Archives that is mysteriously missing one week of flight information into Hawaii out of a 10-year span requested by my investigators,” he continues. “It just so happened to be the week of the president’s birth.”

But even after laying out the facts the posse used to come to its conclusion, Arpaio writes, “Not one reporter ever asked about the evidence or the case itself.”

Still, Arpaio says, he hopes the investigation will resurrect earnest discussion over the need for more thoroughly vetting presidential candidates.

“Who in his right mind would disagree that would be a good thing?” he asks.

More here