A Kauai Cover Up to Protect Police and Prosecutor Keeps a Killer Free. Update: 9-04-2015

Update 07-31-2016





Judge Michael Seabright

Judge Michael Seabright

Seabright’s clerks have communicated to those who inquire that a affidavit request sent to Judge Seabright in Decemer 2015 was  given to the sitting Federal Grand Jury. Albeit, the first and only written  communication from the Judge’s clerks did not include an official District of Hawaii letter head,  there has been no indication that an actual investigation has begun.  As of this date, none of the witnesses have been contacted by the Justice Department, FBI etc: In fact none of the victims have been contacted period.   Some of Codefore’s legal contacts have indicated suspicion as to whether or not there really is an ongoing investigation into Hawaii Corruption.

After reading the below information what do you think?   Is the Federal Judicial District of Hawaii involved in the alleged cover up?  Or do the wheels of Justice turn just slowly ?

UPDATE: 7-31-2016

The wheels of justice can sometimes turn slowly. Received an email from Judge Seabright’s head clerk in answer to questions from Codefore. We have been receiving inquiries about how to get additional complaints included in this Grand Jury investigation. Our question to the Court was, “What shall Codefore do with all this additional information.?”  The below email is their reply. So any and all additional complaints need not be addressed by Codefore. You can send them direct.  Make sure you indicate that your information is to be included in the Affidavit and complaint to the Judge Seabright on January 18th, 2016.  Good luck to you all.

Seabright clerk email

Seabright clerk email


Anonymous org. phone call to Judge Seabright’s office.

UPDATE 01-18-16

A phone voice message  from Federal Judge Seabright’s clerks.

UPDATE 01-09-16

Email to Hawaii District Court Judge Seabright. Full document

AOL screen shot email to Judge Seabright

UPDATE  12-29-2015

Phone conversation with the court clerk.  Why was the affidavit rejected?  A must hear!!


UPDATE 12-29-15

Seabright’s clerk rejects the Affidavit and threatens to destroy the document. Note that the letter is not on official District Court Stationary.United_States_District_Court (1) to judge no address

UPDATE 12-20-2015

An affidavit was shipped via DHL to the District of Hawaii Federal Court, asking Judge Seabright to forward the affidavit to the Sitting Grand Jury.



UPDATE: 9-4-15.  Ruff court records have been accessed and copied this week. Two days after the completion of the copied court records, In compliance with the Hawaii Freedom of Information Act, Codefore began to receive more Kauai PD reports from the Kauai Attorneys office. The information sent so far was earlier  denied by the PD.


Sometimes you must take the bad in order to get some good out of a horrible situation A good in this story is that an admitted child rapist was put  in prison in 1993 and very well may stay there for the rest of his life.

The bad in this story is that even though a suspect who admitted to the rape of 4 year old Alicia Woolsey Ruf in Kauai in 1993 was arrested, Lacy’s  murderer was not arrested. The  guy who says he is the murder is Todd Schonlau and he  was not considered a suspect in “93.

1993 Kauai Prosecutor Jay Kimura

1993 Kauai Prosecutor Jay Kimura

In 1993 during the initial investigation into the death of Alicia Ruff (Lacy), Todd Schonlau diverted suspicion away from himself by making a phone call to the police and turning in his brother, Aaron Schonlau for the murder.  “When a seasoned police investigator hears someone turning  in his brother for a murder, this person not the brother generally goes to the top of the suspect list. ”  Todd Schonlau is also the person who took the police to the location of the body. The body was in a  place that no one else knew about but Todd Schonlau. He told investigators that his brother told him where the body was located. The police apparently did not think that this was suspicious.

Investigators know that usually  the only reason people would turn  in their blood is to keep them free from arrest.  Unfortunately in 1993 there were no seasoned police investigators employed by Kauai PD .  In fact, according to others, there were no accredited or properly trained police on the force either.

Another bad thing about this investigation  is that Todd Schonlau most likely will not be sought out and prosecuted for the murder of 4 year old Alicia Ruf.  Why….

AAron Scholnau Hawaii sex offender booking pic

The investigation that led to the arrest of Aaron Schonalu, who admitted to Benish that he sexually assaulted “Lacey” Ruf, was so bad and  so unconstitutional  that today it is being  covered up to keep the 1993 cops, and possibly the prosecutors out of jail or at the very least from some kind of civil litigation.  It’s being covered up because it seems that everyone involved is either a relative of the legal culprits or is politically beholding to them or their heirs as is explained by Anthony Sommer in his book “KPD Blue.”

Another good thing is that fate, circumstances and alcohol opened the door of information and allowed an old worn out police investigator to enter and  have a look around.

One night in 2011 Todd Schonlau who is the older brother of Aaron Schonau got drunk in Oregon and admitted to his then girlfriend that it was he who drowned Lacy Ruf after his brother Aaron had raped her in Kauai in 1993.  He gave her a detailed account of his actions including the statement that  it took him two attempts at weighing her body so that it stayed submerged. This is a detail that will haunt Mr. Schonlau and may someday put him in prison. (Assuming the Kauai PD is ever capable of conducting an unbiased competent investigation)

Valerie Soto web size

The police arrived and arrested Tiffany Kaneko, and charged her with assault.  As they were putting her in handcuffs and leading her to a police car for her trip to jail,  Todd  heard the police ask her why she assaulted him.  The rest is a matter of Kaneko’s arrest record.  Much later the district attorney was  obligated to release Kaneko because their victim (Todd) did not appear in court.Tiffany immediately called her friend Valerie Soto from jail and told her what had happened.

Valerie, being of a sober suspicious mind, googled the name Todd Schonlau and up popped an internet hit.  The book “Closed Eyes” written by detective JD Benish.  Todd and Aaron Schonlau had a whole chapter devoted to them because they lived a few blocks from another child victim, Tracy Neef who was also sexually assaulted and murdered in 1984, 9 years earlier. Prior to his retirement in 1993 Benish had been interested in Aaron Schonlau  when doing a cold case investigation into the Neef murder.  He actually had the occasion to interview Todd Schonlau in 1993 after  his brfother Aaron had been arrested in Hawaii.  He was very suspicious of Todd’s involvement in the Hawaii murder when he heard Todd tell him how he turned in his brother. He was sufficiently suspicious that he called the Kauai Police department and conveyed his suspicions.  In 1993 during the time of the murder investigation they were not interested in what a detective from Colorado had to say about their homicide.  Their sentiment toward new information about this murder have not changed.

00107590-000 02/14/2012 16:41

In 2011 Benish, who had since  retired and was  living on a sailing vessel in San Diego received an email from Kaneko’s girlfriend (Soto) who told him what was going on in Oregon between Kaneko and Todd Schonlau.  He was keenly interested in what Soto had to say. Later after Tiffany Kaneko was released from jail Benish spoke with her on the telephone and via emails and she verified what Soto told him ,  what her arrest documents said and what Todd Schonlau had said to her.

Benish telephoned the Kauai police department again and was told they were not interested. He also emailed the Thornton Police Department about the information he had because the Tracy Neef case was their case and Benish was retired.  Todd Schonlau who was an admitted murderer and grew up in Thornton but he did not receive a response from the Thornton PD. After the blog was published Codefore began to receive comments.  Some of these comments were from relatives or friends of the 4 year old Alicia Ruf.

Codefore reported that Benish spent  months corresponding with Aaron Schonlau who is serving a life imprisonment term in a private penitentiary in Arizona.  The reason for communicating with Aaron was to get his take on his brother’s claim that it was he, not Aaron who actually killed little Alicia Woolsey Ruf.

Tiffany Kaneko

On February 11th, 2013 Codefore posted  a page about Tiffany Kaneko Val Soto, Aaron and Todd Schonalu.   You can read the whole blog at http://codeforeblog.com/?p=1307.

After the blog was written Codefore began to receive comments.  Some of these comments were from relatives or friends of the 4 year old Alicia Ruf.

Codefore reported that Benish spent  months corresponding with Aaron Schonlau who is serving a life imprisonment term in a private penitentiary in Arizona.  The reason for communicating with Aaron was to get his take on his brother’s claim that it was he, not Aaron who actually killed little Alicia Woolsey Ruf.

Benish said that the result of the extensive written conversations with Aaron Schonlau do not give cause to believe that Aaron’s brother Todd was lying when he claimed it was he that caused the drowning of Alicia Ruf.  Aaron said that had no idea how little Alicia Ruf ended up in 40 feet of Pacific Ocean water.

If that’s the case why, asked Benish, is Aaron in prison for this murder and not his brother Todd.

The answer to this question is in questions.

Benish contacted  witnesses who were at the crime scene at the time of the murder of Alicia Woolsey  Ruf.  He spoke  with little Alicia’s father, mother, step mother and the person who actually recovered the submerged body of poor Alicia Ruf.  The witness who said he was the diver that recovered the body said that the police never contacted him nor questioned him.  Benish said that it was difficult to believe what these witnesses told him about the police investigation.

In January 2015 Codefore Publishing requested a copy of the police report containing the investigation into the murder of Alicia Woolsey Ruf by filing a “Freedom of Information Request” with the Kauai Freedom of Information office.  The electronic files did not arrive until March of 2015. There were some emails back and forth between Benish and Kauai  about the lack of requested documents and the unreasonable redactions of the documents that were provided.  Although the police reports were not complete and heavily redacted, Benish says that the individual police reports presented a picture of one of the most inept, amateurish, incomplete and inaccurate reports that he has  ever had the misfortune to read.The whole issue then became a legal question. Benish said he does not understand how a conviction of Murder against Aaron Schonlau was possible based on the  investigation reports supplied to Codefore by the Kauai Freedom of Information office.   A partial copy of the transcribed interview with Aaron reveals the following information.  1. Aaron Schonlau requested an attorney numerous times.  Despite this, extensive questioning continued.  2. Aron Schonlau did not admit to drowning Alicia Woolsey Ruf.   The answer to the question as to how Aaron Schonlau was convicted lives in Aaron Schonlaus jail cell.

Kauai PD Chief Perry

Kauai PD Chief Perry

Aaron Schonlau says that he accepted a plea offer from the district attorney’s office and based upon the advice of his court appointed lawyer Arther K. Trask Jr. who has a history of professional suspensions.  Aaron agreed to plea to 2nd degree murder and in return the additional charges of rape and abduction would be dropped from the initial Murder charge  and his sentence would allow the possibility of  an eventual parole.  Aaron said he was scared and didn’t want the death penalty or spend the rest of his life in prison for something he did not do. He said he took the lesser of two evils. After 22 years he regrets this decision.  The Kauai PD and prosecutor’s office finished with a murder conviction under their belt.  Little did they know that many years later their incompetent accomplishment would be under scrutiny.

Soon after Codefore Publishing filed the freedom of information request JD Benish received a telephone call from a person who said he was a special investigator for the Kauai District Attorney’s office.  His name was John Burgess. Burgess said that he was instructed to look into the Alicia Murder file.  Burgess is a retired policeman from Everett Washington.  Everett is a small town north of Seattle.

Kauai Prosecuging Atty. Justin Kollar

Kauai Prosecuging Atty. Justin Kollar

Benish spoke with him and sent him most of the files and phone recorded conversations that he had been collecting since 2011.  Codefore has since learned that some of the Kauai witnesses contacted by JD Benish had been later contacted by Burgess.  Burgess apparently had not asked any investigative questions but instead  had been seeking out the witnesses and discrediting Benish  as an author who is trying to make money on the tragic murder and that he should not be taken seriously.   Specifically he contacted Timmy Woolsey, Alicia’s father.

According to Benish, “The  whole situation is indicative of some kind of a cover-up.”  The Kauai PD had done such a poor investigation that they put the wrong person in prison for the wrong crime and the person who in all likelihood committed the murder of Alicia Ruf is free from suspicion all these years and is  bragging about his accomplishment in Hawaii.

Benish said that what he saw was an incomplete compilation of severely redacted reports.  He said that even though they were redacted, there was enough information there to question the arrest of Aaron Schonlau and more than enough information to ask for a an investigation of Federal violations and later a cover up of the violations of Aaron Schonlau’s constitutional rights.  He argues that the Federal Constitutional violations would be difficult to miss by any competent District or prosecuting Attorney prior to criminal court action yet Aaron was offered a plea knowing that the case against him would most likely be thrown out of court. This brings the question of the culpability of the Judge that handled the case.

Mayor Bernard Carvalho.

Mayor Bernard Carvalho.

The Kauai District attorney and police are in a quandary because now, after the fact, to look for, arrest and seek prosecution of Todd Schonlau would expose  the incompetence,  illegal and unconstitutional actions of both agencies during the  1993 initial investigation and subsequent prosecution that put Aaron Schonlau in jail for the child’s murder and not the rape.

On April, 15,2015 Benish received a telephone call from Alicia’s father, Timmy Woolsey.  Mr. Woolsey said that the Kauai PD had been harassing him, and had recently arrested him.  He said that he thought that they were doing this because he had been communicating with Benish about the incompetence in the police department.  Benish said that Mr. Woolsey was upset.  On April 17th 2015 Mr. Woolsey reported that the State of Hawaii had dropped all charges against him.

Lacey with her daddy Timmy Woolsey

Lacey with her daddy Timmy Woolsey

Mr.  Woolsey and Benish are not the only people who believe that the Kauai PD is incompetent and even corrupt.  Anthony Sommer believes this too.  Mr. Sommer is a veteran of almost four decades as a reporter for major metropolitan daily newspapers and covered Kauai for the Honolulu Star-Bulletin.   In his book, “KPD Blue” he begins with “A Decade of Racism, Sexism and Political Corruption in (and all around) the Kauai Police Department.

Kauai mayor Bernard Carvalho did not respond to messages from Codefore.




UPDATE: 7-31-2016

The wheels of justice can sometimes turn slowly. Received an email from Judge Seabright’s head clerk in answer to questions from Codefore. We have been receiving inquiries about how to get additional complaints included in this Grand Jury investigation. Our question to the Court was, “What shall Codefore do with all this additional information.?”  The below email is their reply. So any and all additional complaints need not be addressed by Codefore. You can send them direct.  Make sure you indicate that your information is to be included in the Affidavit and complaint to the Judge Seabright on January 18th, 2016.  Good luck to you all.

Seabright clerk email

Seabright clerk email



Codefore Publishing applauds His Honor Judge Michael Seabright.  He is the chief Federal Judge, District of Hawaii and he accepted and read an affidavit from a private citizen requesting the activation of a Grand Jury.  There are those who might argue that a request for a Federal Grand Jury to a Federal Judge from a private citizen is not only improper it’s a violation of Federal Court Rules, but not only did he read it he passed it on to the Grand Jury for investigation.

This profound stellar act by a senior member of the Judicial Branch of the US Government is an act of responsible conscience. In these times of rampant loss of faith and trust in literally all branches of the US Government, Judge Seabright took the high road. He accepted his responsibility to enforce US Constitution, he stood up knowing that there would be criticism from colleagues  and others who have much to lose by his action and he has given us hope.  Judge Seabright has given us a spark of hope in our Government that has been ebbing for generations.  Judge Seabright we hold you and what you represent in esteem and believe that when you took your oath you made a pledge and you have not forgotten that pledge. There are those who desperately need to know that there are still people like you alive and well and representing the principals that this country was founded upon.

Judge Michael Seabright

Judge Michael Seabright

On January 18th, 2016 the aforementioned request was handed over by Judge Seabright to such a Federal Grand Jury for investigation into many criminal actions that violate and offend our Constitution. These actions are prominent because the some of the alleged violations of law were committed by pillars of the Hawaiian Community and even hold positions in the Judicial and law enforcement factions.

Codefore Publishing  and the victims of these crimes have been working on this project for years and the pinnacle for Codefore was the acceptance of the request for a Grand Jury by Judge Seabright , but any feeling of  accomplishment, or satisfaction will not be attained until the list of defendants have been confronted and if appropriate are indicted and  have charges brought against them and arrested for their actions.

Codefore Publishing and some of the victims will not cease placing the actions of these people in front of the public until there are indictments. We realize that although the list of defendants is long (about 100) not all of these people are culpable in the alleged crimes.  Some are on the list because of association, and in the RICO Act legal sense of the word association, they are possibly involved in organized crime. It will be up to the Grand Jury to make all determinations of probable cause however for now, these people are on the list until the Grand Jury removes them.

Grand Jury proceedings are in secret. We may never know all of the information about criminal activity that is discovered or discarded by the Grand Jury.  We trust that they, as did Judge Seabright, will diligently perform their duties.  We trust that they will support and adhere to our constitution.  We will support their decisions because we may not be aware of the totality of information that comes out of their inquiries.

However, in the interest of the public’s right to know who and why these allegations are made Codefore will list “allegedly” the most notable and culpable defendants and the reason they are on the list. Codefore Publishing has no reason to believe that this information is or has been sealed by Judge Seabright.

It is alleged that Todd Lee Schonlau murdered Hawaiian Princess Lacey Woolsey Ruff in 1993. Shonlau’s brother Aaron Schonlau is serving a life sentence in prison for the same murder and in a jail cell interview by mail admitted his culpability in the abduction and sexual assault  of little Ruff to Codefore’s editor JD Benish, however he denied actually Killing Lacey Ruff and said he had no idea how she was placed in the ocean.  In 2012 Todd Schonalu had been drinking with a girlfriend in Oregon and inadvertently admitted to this woman that it was he who murdered lacey Ruff by dragging her stone weighted body into the deep waters of the Pacific Ocean off the coast of Hawaii. This woman subsequently contacted JD Benish with this information. It should be noted that in 1993 when contacted by the Kauai Police it was Todd who was wearing the clothing seen by a witness dragging the body of Ruff into the ocean. It was Todd who was the only witness against his brother Aaron and it was Todd who actually turned in his brother Aaron to the police.  It was also Todd Schonlau who directed the Kauai Police to the location of where the  body was placed in the ocean. Todd was not arrested.

Lacey with her daddy Timmy Woolsey

Lacey with her daddy Timmy Woolsey


Todd Lee Schonlau.

KPD past Chief of Police Calvin Fujita

KPD Detective Adric

KPD Asst. Police Chief Adric

KPD past Capt Richard Rosa

KPD Norman Hold

KPD past Lt. Hurley

KPD Gordon Isoda

KPD past Lt. Patrick Lavuosa

KPD Hanzs Martine

KPD Paddy Ramson

KPD Mel Rapozo

KPD Alvin Yoshido

KPD Gilbert Asuncion

KPD Norman Hold

KPD past Mayor JoAnn Yukimura

Kauai Prosecutor Alfred Castillo

Kauai Prosecutor Rick Damerville

Kauai Prosecutor Kimura

Circuit Judge Maria Milks

It is alleged that the above members of the Kauai Police Department, Prosecutors office and Mayors office conspired to and did withhold evidence, and the culpability of Todd Lee Schonlau in the murder of Lacey Ruff when presenting the case against Aaron Schonlau to Judge Maria Milks in 1993. It is also alleged that Kauai Prosecutor Alfred Castillo ordered all evidence in this case to be destroyed.  It is alleged that Circuit Judge Maria Milks who has the responsibility as mandated by the US Constitution to insure that Aaron Schonlau who was arrested for the murder of Lacy Woolsey Ruff be appointed competent legal representation and that he be afforded a fair trial in this matter and in fact  Judge Milks  appointed an attorney (now deceased) who had a history of incompetence and censorships and other past indiscretions by the Hawaii Bar Association.  It is also alleged that Judge Maria Milks ignored Aaron Schonlau’s pleas for a different attorney to represent him and proceeded to accept a plea of “no contest” by Schonlau’s attorney. It is alleged that in doing so, Maria Milks was enabling the prosecution to “make a case” against Aaron Schonlau for Murder.

Kauai Mayor Bernard Carvalho

Kauai General Counsel Nick Courson

Kauai FOI Office Mary Daubert

Kauai Prosecutor Justin Kollar

Kauai FOI Office Sara Blane

KPD Norman Hold

KPD Chief of Police Darryl Perry

Kauai Prosecutor investigator John Burgess

KPD Lieutenant Ray Takekawa

KPD Records Eunice Apeles

It is alleged that the above listed persons participated in with-holding information from a journalist as it related to the Murder investigation of lacy Woolsey Ruff.  It is also alleged that this withholding of information as required by Hawaii law makes it a Federal Violation of the US Constitution.  It is also alleged that the joint conspiracy to withhold information to prevent the discovery of other Federal Violations constitutes a violation of the Federal organized crime Act (RICO) as well as other Federal Crimes against the United States.  In particular it is alleged that Kauai General Counsel Nick Courson refused to provide the specific names of other people who conspired  to commit the above violations of Hawaii and US Federal law stating that the names of these people were not included in the wording of the Hawaii Freedom of Information Law as “documents”. It is alleged that in refusing this information, Mr. Courson became culpable in the “cover up” of all of the above violations by protecting the identity of  those who may be guilty of Federal Crimes.

Honolulu PD K. Abraham

Hilo PD  Belio

Hilo PD Greg Esteban

Hawaii PD Loren Lee

Hilo PD Tom Poi

Hawaii General Counsel Asida

Hawaii Prosecutor Mitch Roth

Deputy Hawaii Attorney General  Michael Kagami

Deputy Hawaii Attorney General David Louie

Deputy Hawaii Attorney General

Deputy Hawaii Attorney General (securities) Carolyn Yu

Deputy Hawaii Attorney General Hugh Jones

Paul Sulla Jr. (Attorney)

Nancy Budd (Attorney)

Phillip Care (Attorney)

John Carrol (Attorney)

Gary Dubin (Attorney)

Joe Moss (Attorney)

Daniel O’Phelan (Attorney)

Steven Whittaker (Attorney)

Katherine Lloyd (Attorney)

Judge Greg Nakumura

Judge Glenn Hara

Judge Ronald Ibarra

Todd Schonlau- Murder

Elliot Augustuz

Gloria Emery

Jamie Wallace

Paul Joseph Sulla III

Jason Hester

Boston Kane

Gregory Gadd

Nani Gadd

Mary Jolin

Bradley Parries

Ronn Ritke

Herbert Ritke

Carol Silva

Robert Silverman

Michael Sakell

Lynette Stein

Llian Zedales

Enterprizes (Named pursuant to the RICO Act.)

Hawaii Community Foundation

San Diego Credit Union

County of Hawaii

Hale Opio Inc

Kauai FOI office

Hawaii Community Foundation

Hawaii United Way

Puueo Limited Partnership

The Office of the Overseer

Bil One LLC

Rainha Lemania Casa Holdings

Jaxa Holdings

Kachimauna Ventures LLC

Faithful Ventures Trust



Ekele Pud Ass.

BZ Development

Sky of Hawaii Church

Kaunamaro Farm LLC

Frana Services

Pyramid Process

Gospel of Believers Corp.

The Electic Center of Universal

Territorial Savings Bank

American Savings Bank

First Hawaiian Bank

Big Island land Co.

Stewart Title Co.

Island Title Co.

Hilo Police Department

Kauai Police Department

Hawaii Attorney Generals Office.

It is alleged that the above named individuals, Judges, Lawyers and Enterprises committed certain but not in total these crimes against the United States of America:

Title 18 U.S.C. Section 2248, 2251 Murder

US Constitution 5th Amendment

US Constitution 4th Amendment

US Constitution 6th Amendment

Title 18 USC 242, 342-45, 2071,241 and 14141

Federal Rules of Criminal Justice Rule 11

Title 18 USC Chapter 96 Racketeer influenced and Corrupt. (RICO)

Title 18 USC 1956 -57 Money Laundering.

In summary the above crimes relate to the murder of Lacey Woolsey Ruff and suspicious deaths of Jack Lee Stahley, and Stanley M. Zedalis that facilitated and enabled the fraudulent seizure by  a private attorney enterprise of estate funds and assets destined to go to the respective families of the deceased.  It is also alleged that these funds were then washed by legal , illegal and fraudulent  civil process , transferred to local banks and certain profit and nonprofit charity organizations.  It is alleged in one particular case that attorney Paul Sulla Jr. was also and is currently in the process of a fraudulent seizure of valuable Hawaiian property from Dr. Leonard Horowitz and that this case is pending in the foreclosure stage  before the aforementioned Judges.

The Murder of LaVoy Finicum Shooting by masked Police

SUNDAY POST 02/07/2016

(Updated 02/07/2016)


It is polished and shiny and looks so fine.
Once you earn it you have to tow the line.
The minute you wear it upon your chest
it becomes a symbol that you are the best.
It means honesty, integrity, and fairness to all.
Your life is never your own, but at the public’s call.
Night or day, any hour, it makes you a mark.
It doesn’t protect you from a shot in the dark.
Over the years the shine starts to fade,
but brighter still is the man its made.
It is often what sep
arates you from the crowd.
The Idaho Springs life for Nick 004It is a second family of which you are proud.
Author unknown

It’s another sad day for the family of badge keepers described in the above poem.  It’s also a sad day for the Finicum family.  A man has died at the hand(s) of the police in the small community of Burns Oregon.  A rancher cowboy named Lavoy Finicum was shot and killed reportedly by the Oregon State police. Arial  video of the  of the murder here

 LaVoy Finicum was a man who was representative of the old west. A proud rancher who traveled from his ranch in Arizona to Oregon to let all know that he represented Ranchers who only wanted to ranch in peace as their fathers, grandfathers, and great grandfathers had done. They wanted back the land that was cleared, maintained an utilized to graze cattle and  feed our country and that had been taken from them by the Federal Government. It was public land, it was not owned by the Federal Government or the State of Oregon.

LaVoy Finicum

LaVoy Finicum

Its always sad to lose a loved one, a  father, husband, son  or  other family member but this loss has special meaning and reason for all of us  to give thanks. I personally want to thank the family of this brave and  honorable man LaVoy Finicum.  He gave his life for what he believed in. He gave his life just as all the men who stepped up in the face of danger and went  to war and lost their lives in the name of the United States of America.  They did it  for the protection of us all and in the name of every single citizen who didn’t go and stand with them. These brave men died for our freedom without question. Mr. Finicum was one of these men.  He stood, unarmed and looked the grim reaper in the eye and declared that he was not afraid to die. He stood alone. The person or people who shot him were not alone and they were afraid to look LaVoy Finicum in the eye, face to face. They did not represent the Citizens of the United States of America.

As a retired Colorado police detective I take LaVoy Finicum’s death personally. The gunshots that took LaVoy’s life came from the guns of authority.  An authority granted  by rights of oath.  This oath is represented by a badge  that says the word “Police Officer”.  It is worn on the left chest so all that all who see it will know that the man who wears this badge stands for honor, bravery, and the protection of the innocent. It is a protection guaranteed to every single citizen of the United States of America. This badge is a symbol of trust.  The people who wear this badge are members of an elite brotherhood who have all taken the same oath. The police brotherhood is an informal membership granted by rite. The ritual is the first time the badge in pinned onto the chest. This is membership  bequeathed  and the acceptance of membership is not optional.

The people who killed LaVoy Finicum are allegedly members of my brotherhood. The same brotherhood that I belong to now and until I die, the same brotherhood that I represented for almost 20 years.

We the members of this brotherhood do not condone cowardice, or the breaking of the oath. In fact we loathe it. There have always been members of our brotherhood who should not have been members but we have no control over the hiring practices of our governments. Our members are unquestionably accepted in the belief that the oath was taken and witnessed by a solemn  swearing on the bible  The police brotherhood has no recorded numbers or even a spokesman. It is a brotherhood of spirit.

Fortunately the brotherhood places a few more requirements on these badge wearers than do the government authorities. These authorities do not like the brotherhoods demands on those who wear the badge because these demands may be contrary to some of the beliefs and motivations of the political entities that all police officers work for.  I said work for, not represent.  The keepers of the badge represent the badge of honor. The badge of honor represents the people of the United States of America and is authorized by the Constitution of the United States of America, not the FBI, nor the CIA, nor the BLM, nor the many States Counties and Cities of the Untied States. It is an honor and a privilege to serve our country wearing this badge.

Albeit, today we, the members of the Police Brotherhood shed tears. Our tears are not just for Mr. LaVoy Finicum but our tears are for those members of the brotherhood who broke their oath to the Citizens of the United States of America and our Constitution when they disregarded Mr. Finicum’s right to live and killed him.  The individual(s) who did this were not brave or honorable lawmen. When they set up a road block they were setting a trap of death. There was not going to be a killing in the name of the laws of the United States because that would require probable cause or a trial of piers. This killing  was going to be a killing based on the laws of the weak, the laws of dishonor and cowardice, not our Constitutional law.  But what laws specifically were created by these men that LaVoy Finicum broke where in the penalty was immediate death?  We have no such laws in this county.

The Finicum killing may have been in fear but I doubt it. But if these men were so petrified of Mr. Finicum that it was necessary to kill him, I suggest they are not qualified to wear the badge. These lawless men did not represent the badge, they did not represent the Citizens of the United States of America. they represented themselves, the Sheriff, the Governor and the State of Oregon.

The police brotherhood will remember the names of the people who took the life of LaVoy Finicum.  We will remember those supposed policemen  who claim such fear for their own safety as to shoot a man multiple times because he  might have had a gun in his pocket. We will remember those who shot a man who was protesting the actions of the Federal Government, a man who had not committed any violent crime that precipitated his killing. We will remember those who shot at Finicum’s van indiscriminately and not caring who or what they were shooting at. We will remember the shots that killed a  man standing with his hands in the air in submission.  We will remember those who set up a confrontational road block on a slippery snow covered road and when Mr. Finicum’s car careened into a snow bank, the brave police were afraid for their lives and wearing masks to conceal their identity didn’t give Mr. Finicum a chance and immediately began shooting at him. We will remember all that and we will hold them up as a shameful examples of what we, the brotherhood do not represent.  And should there be a time that these lawless people are deemed immune from judgment  before a tribunal of their peers, we will remember those who participated in this immunity and hold them accountable as if it were they too killed Finicum. And all this accountability can be accomplished without resorting to the same type of justice and adherence to our constitution that Mr. Finicum was subjected to.  There is a name for Mr. Finicum’s fate and those who participated in it. It is CORRUPTION. 


And so we shed a tear for the brotherhood, and for those despicable people who’s fingers pulled on a piece of steel knowing that they were taking a life they had no right to take in the name of the United States of America. These men and or women might think that they now have some sort of esteem within their ranks.  They might believe that their actions have exhibited bravery and fulfilled their need to be somehow admired by those who witnessed the confrontation.  They do not deserve any of that and if and when they ever become real men, they will live in disgust of themselves for the rest of their lives. Until then the bone-fide policemen within the brotherhood no longer recognize their passage of  membership. These poor examples of police officers should actually be held in the same classification as those in prison for murder. It matters not to the brotherhood how much they are exonerated by their employers. It matters not that the police heroes claim they committed no wrong doing because LaVoy Finicum committed “suicide by police”.   When LaVoy Finicum died with his hands in the air and presenting no threat to anyone so did any and all honor bravery or professionalism  claimed by the police who were present or supervised this incident.

Mr. Finicum not only succeeded in his quest, but was the only person that fateful day who exhibited bravery normally  seen on battlefields and in some dangerous situations by  honorable policemen and firemen and did it for all to see and admire.  The admiration was not of those in overwhelming numbers of badge wearing heroes, it was of LaVoy Finicum.

To the family of Mr. Finicum I say that the brotherhood is with you, not against you. The people who shot your loved one do not represent the spirit of the law nor the Constitution of the United States of America.  There are those of us who will step up to the plate when the time comes to seek justice and avenge the wrong doings of those who have sought to destroy us.  La Voy Finicum’s death is an unequaled example of patriotism, selflessness, honor and bravery. 

God Bless You..

James D. Benish

Codefore Publishing


THE SUNDAY POST 01/31/2016

The United States Constitution, protected by American citizens and public officials who have sworn to “ support, obey and defend” it, has been in effect for nearly 225 years; making it the oldest, and longest lasting, constitution or charter of any nation on earth today.

            We at Codefore are compelled to voice an opinion about the killing of LaVoy Finicum.  I am deeply concerned with the actions taken by those who are elected or employed to protect us as citizens but more importantly are sworn to uphold the US Constitution.

             As a retired police officer of many years I am well versed in the accepted and required rules that dictate an officer’s use of force to facilitate an arrest, or protect a person or property.  Specifically I will address the term “Lethal use of force.”

            There are two things we should consider when trying to understand when and what type of force a police officer has when exercising the authority to physically restrain a person or use lethal force.   The incidents in Oregon that resulted in the deaths of two people at the hands of the authorities is sketchy at best.   I have reviewed several of the posted videos taken from an aircraft. I applaud some of the internet users and their abilities to enhance, slow down and point out important items on these photos.   But there are questions that remain even after viewing these photos such as exactly who are these authorities? Are they sworn police officers? are they military? or are some of them neither?  This determination is necessary when evaluating not only authority but type and extent of use of force.

            In this article I am not going to address the political stances of either the Federal Government or the people who were occupying the buildings that were presumably on Federal land.  However the Federal land  part is somewhat important when establishing venue or jurisdiction.   Its obvious that there are high emotions on both sides of  this incident but Codefore will look at this from an impartial observer of the use of force and in particular the use of lethal force. BLM

            In the United States we have a Constitution that limits the authority of the Federal Government, State Governments and local governments.  Albeit, Codefore is concerned that the Federal and State government s may have overstepped their authority, and the local government possibly conspired to place authority in the hands of the Federal Government when not needed or not within the rules and laws as set forth by our Constitution and Congress.

            After researching the authority to intervene and negate the activities of the occupiers and not withstanding any lower court rulings, or local laws we offer the below Federal laws for your review and as support for our opinions .  We have highlighted the words and phrases that are of special interest as they relate to the particular incidents that resulted in the death of LaVoy  Finicum.  We are only concerned with Federal law at this point because the use of force by a person of authority to use force is established by our Constitution and the US Constitution is the ultimate authoritative document that all persons of legal authority in the United States must abide by.

LaVoy Finicum

LaVoy Finicum

            As a retired police officer the question as to when a police officer can use lethal force is somewhat unencumbered and simple. Albeit there are words that may be difficult to define like the word “fear” and may different for each person.  In the past the word “reasonable” comes into play. Basically the only time a police officer is unquestionably authorized to use lethal force is to protect the life of himself or another.  The law does not say he must use lethal force, but he/she is authorized to use lethal force .  The same authority to use of lethal force has also been bestowed on non law enforcement civilians in the United States and in fact is a part of some State Laws.

            When I first became a police officer and in training there was a state law that bestowed the use of lethal force in one other incident.  This law was referred to as the “Fleeing Felon” law. (4th Amendment to the Constitution)  This law gave the police officer authority to shoot a fleeing suspect, even shooting him in the back” if he was fleeing custody and it was known that a felony had been committed.  Many times police officers have relied on this type of law to justify police shootings.    The Federal Court of Appeals said: The use of deadly force against a subject is the most intrusive type of seizure possible, because it deprives the suspect of his life, and White held that the state failed to present evidence that its interest in shooting unarmed fleeing suspects outweighs the suspect’s interest in his own survival.”  The “Fleeing Felon” justification for killing is generally no longer acceptable.

            In the case of LaVoy Finicum we see the following probable violations of Federal law and the US Constitution.

  1.  Was LaVoy Finicum a threat to someone’s life, to include any of the police who tried to stop him?

              Some have said that Finicum attempted to run over an officer with his vehicle.  True or not this not relevant in this case. Finicum was out of his vehicle when killed.  He was not a threat to anyone using his vehicle at this particular time during the incident.  You cannot kill a suspect because of a previous threat. The threat to   take a life must be current and clearly present.

                Did LaVoy point a gun as if to shoot a policeman?  The aerial videos do not suggest that he did.  Some have  said that his right hand went for his trousers or waist band as if to grab a gun.  Whether or not he had a gun  in his possession has not been established but in the truest definition of the law, lethal force is only justi-fied if a gun is actually pointed at a policeman or someone else and thus is a threat to take a life.

               No gun pointed no threat. The law is specific there must be a threat and an assumption that a gun exists is  not in itself a threat to take a life. Placing a hand in a pocket to retrieve something is not a threat to take a         life.

            In the opinion of Codefore Publishing, unless there is proof that LaVoy Finicum actually pointed a gun at someone his killing was illegal whether  done by the police or anyone else.

            An additional concern in this incident is the possibility that there were other Federal police or military persons who were either present or participated in the actual shooting of LaVoy Finicum.  This is a question of jurisdiction.  Our Constitution was formulated and ratified with the idea that the Federal Government is not authorized to impose unjust laws and use of force upon the Citizens of the United States.  The fact that Finicum and others are occupying a building that is designated Federal land does not bestow on the United States Government the same policing and use of force authority as granted to a State or Local police officer.   According to the below laws the Federal Government is only mandated to “protect” Federal property and certainly protecting property cannot in any stretch of the imagination include killing a person.  It is unknown whether or not Finicum or the others were damaging the property. If not, It is questionable if the Federal Government presence was there to protect the property was lawful.

BLM Director Neil Dornze

BLM Director Neil Dornze

            One other possible reason for the presence of the Federal Government is to stop an insurrection at the request of the State of Oregon.  There is some indication that the Governor of Oregon requested the presence of the Federal Government.  We would ask why was this request made?  There is no known evidence that it was anything other than a peaceful protest.  There are many questions to be asked that do not  involve the use of lethal force but there are actions that facilitated and or enabled  the ultimate shooting of LaVoy Finicum. One important question is why was a roadblock set up to stop the Finicum vehicle. He was attempting to leave the Federal property.  Is that not what the Federal and State governments wanted them to do?  If he had violated some crime, why a road block?  What happened to obtaining an arrest warrant ,as required by the constitution, for any crimes committed?  There is a witnesses statement that when Finicum’s vehicle stopped, the police or whoever these people were, began to shoot at them. What law gave them the authority to do that?  Was LaVoy Finicum entitled to defend himself?  If we, as a country stand by without demanding justification for the actions of those who killed LaVoy Finicum then we do not deserve the freedoms that were granted us in our Constitution. If there has ever been the need for a Federal Grand Jury the Finicum killing is one of them.

The 14th Amendment Article XIV 

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of the law, nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

           In the case of the Military Use of Force against US Citizens The Constitution of the United States, laws, regulations, policies and other legal issues limit the use of Federal Military personnel in domestic support operations.  Any Army involvement in civil disturbance operations involves many legal issues requiring comprehensive legal reviews. However, Federal forces are authorized for use in civil disturbance operations under certain circumstances.  The Constitution of the United States provides two exceptions for which the Posse Comitatus Act

The Posse Comitatus Act, 18 U.S. Code, Section 1385, an original intent of which was to end the use of federal troops to police state elections in former Confederate states, proscribes the role of the Army and Air Force in executing civil laws and states: Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a Posse Comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.

             These exceptions are based upon the inherent right of the U.S. government to ensure the preservation of public order and to carry out governmental operations within its territorial limits by force if necessary. These two exceptions are:

            Emergency Authority:

            1. A sudden and unexpected civil disturbance, disaster, or calamity may seriously endanger life and property and disrupt normal governmental functions to such an extent that local authorities cannot control the situation. At such times, the Federal Government may use military force to prevent the loss of life or wanton destruction of property and to restore government functions and public order. In these circumstances Federal Military Commanders have the authority, in extraordinary emergency circumstances where prior authorization by the President is impossible and duly constituted local authorities are unable to control the situation, to engage temporarily in activities that are necessary to quell large-scale unexpected civil disturbances. (did President Obama authorize Federal involvement?)

  1. Protection of Federal Property and functions

            When the need for the protection of Federal Property or Federal  Functions exists, and duly constituted local authorities are unable to, or decline to provide adequate protection, federal action, including the use of military forces, is authorized.

            2-9 Laws passed y the U.S. congress include four exceptions to the Posse Comitatus Act. With the first three laws discussed below:

(10 USC 331-333) there is a prerequisite that the President must take personal action, including the  issuance of a proclamation calling upon insurgents to disperse and retire peaceably within a limited time. The four exceptions based on law are.

10 USC 331When a state is unable to control domestic violence and they have requested federal assistance, the use of militia or Armed Forces is authorized.  The Military’s use of force is as described in their individual “Rules of Engagement”.

Oregon Governor Kate Brown

Oregon Governor Kate Brown

10 USC 332 When ordinary enforcement means are unworkable due to unlawful obstructions or rebellion against the authority of the United States, use of the Militia or Armed Forces is authorized.

10 USC 333. When a state cannot or will not protect the constitutional rights of the citizens due to domestic violence or conspiracy to hinder execution of State or Federal law, the use of the militia or Armed Forces is authorized.

House Joint Resolution 1292  This resolution directs all departments of the U.S. government, upon request of the Secret Service, to assist in carrying out its statutory duties to protect government officials and major candidates from physical harm.

Cruz’s Mother Eleanor Darragh Birth Certificate in Question

SUNDAY POST 01/16/2016

We at Codefore were amused with the birth certificate posted by the  Breibart Blog.

Breibart  claims that the mother of Ted Cruz, Eleanor Darragh, was born in Wilmington Delaware and therefore Ted Cruz is a US Citizen.

Breibart says, (Darragh Ted Cruz’s mother) “ was born in Delaware on Nov. 23, 1934, establishing her citizenship by birth–and, according to U.S. law, that of her son, even though he was born in Calgary, Alberta, Canada, on Dec. 22, 1970.”

Not so Fast Breibart.

Cruz’s Mother Eleanor Darragh Birth Certificate in Question

In a  CNN interview with Candy Crowley, Cruz himself says “ My mother was born in Wilmington Delaware.”

The National  news media is assuming that since his mother was born in Delaware  and that makes her a US Citizen therefore Ted Cruz is a US Citizen. . No one that we could find  has checked out his mother, Mrs. Eleanor Darragh’s birth certificate in the State of Delaware. The claim is that on the Cruz birth certificate   Eleanor Wilson is named as his mother  and that she received the name Wilson due to a previous marriage.  Cruz claims  that his mother’s maiden name is Darragh.  For now we will assume that this is correct. But is the Darragh birth certificate credible?  The birth certificate posted by Breibart is the same as the one that Codefore received from the State of Delaware archives.

Birth cert 5 a

 We decided to take a look at the birth certificate. Briebart claims that Cruz’s birth certificate lists a woman named Eleanore Elizabeth Wilson (Cruz.s mother).  As you can see from the  birth document, the  name  of Cruz;s grandmother is Elizabeth Cekine and the father is Edward J Darragh.  They named their child Eleanor Darragh. For now Codefore will not take issue with the names on the Document. For PDF click HEREOrginal Eleanor Darragh Birth Cert.

As a disclaimer we remind the readers that the document we looked at was taken from the Breibart web site.  Breibart claims that it is a copy of an original document. Codefore verified Breibart’s claim and obtained this document from the State of Delaware. We at Codefore are not professional document examiners  and our opinions are based on visual computer inspection.  However JD Benish of Codeforeblog is a retired police  investigator and has had the opportunity to have seen many forged documents during his career.  Additionally we at Codefore have access to  people that know their way around Adobe Photo shop and other similar photo editing software. These people were invited to take a look at the document also.

We began by enhancing the photograph with filters to make the official looking stamps easier to read and to expose possible color difference.

Inhanced Eleanor Darragh Birth Cert. 4

There are several items on this document that indicate that the document has been created after the advent of photograph editing capabilities. There are also items on this document that indicate that one of the date stamps has been altered, and that both date stamps existed on the document before the document form was created  and the hand written information was added.

These items are as follows:

a.We will begin by assuming that the document form was pre-printed on or prior to November 23rd, 1934. We will also assume that some time after that the form was filled out and signed and the date stamps were put there to authenticate the date of birth. Based on these assumptions we assume that the vertical page border on the left side of the document was a part of the original pre-printed form.  A visual inspection indicates that there are several portions of the form wherein the form itself appears to overlap the date authentication stamps.

b.The words “PLACE OF BIRTH” slightly overlaps the stamp that says “Delaware, Jan 11 1935 Department” In particular the word “Department” is overlapped. We assume that the words “Place of Birth” were a part of the original printed document and if so, the date stamp should over lap the word “Department” not the opposite.

c.The same situation exists as indicated in the above “a”. The date stamp on the upper right corner of the document is clearly overlapped by the document heading word “BIRTH”.

 d.On the upper left corner of the document you will see a stamp that says “STATE BOARD OF HEALTH”. The page border on the left side of the document clearly overlaps the word “STATE” and is visible to the naked eye.

e.About one third down the left side of the document you will see the hand written word “female in the box labeled “sex”. The “f” over laps the vertical page border. Ordinarily you would expect to see this type of overlapping on a pre-printed form, but it has already been established that this page border was added after the date stamps were applied to the document because the date stamp is overlapped by the page border. If this is accurate, the hand written word “female” was added after the Page border and therefore sometime after the date stamp.

There are other suspicious inconsistencies that we see on this document.

  1. On the box labeled “VERIFICATION OF NAME BY PARENT” the number 31 is inconsistent with all other numerical texts. The number 31 font is several sizes larger than all of the other numbers. It is highly unlikely that in 1934, the font size for this box would have been changed to a larger font than the others  The number 31 is the same font size as the words “Verification of name etc:” and it is noted that this font size is the only place it is found on this document. Remember that in 1934 typewriters font size and type were all unique to the typewriter and that is assuming that this document was created using a typewriter. If the document was created by a printer the change in font sizes, in particular the number would be highly unlikely. If the document was created later on a computer, the number font size consistency with the words Verification….;would be an easy error to make.
  2. As previously stated, filters were used to enhance the coloring of the document in particular the red date stamps. This filtering also revealed another inconsistency. You can see what, appears to be, words that are on the back side of this form. This is not uncommon on birth certificates.  On box 22. “Birth place.”  The color of the document has changed and is lighter and the visible wording on the back side of the document is not visible in this particular box.  In fact the wording on the back side of the document is only not visible in two boxes on this document. Box number 22 and box number 13, Both these boxes indicate place of birth of the parents.  The non existence of the visible wording on only these two boxes is highly suspicious and may be an indication that these boxes have been changed. When altering a document such as this, it is very difficult  to match exactly the background color and if the background color is to be identical it necessitates changing the background color of the whole document to make all portions appear identical.
  3. On the bottom right corner we noted that the signature of the physician is missing the top of the “J” and is not similar as the  “J” on Jr. . This may be the result of improper stamp application but this signature does not appear to have the characteristics of a “signature stamp” however it  does have the characteristics of an actual signature. If this opinion is accurate, the signature on this document may have been “cut and pasted” on the document and the top of the “J” in the name James was not properly cut.You can also see a possible cut error at the top of the letter “B” in the Doctors signature.. PDF HERE.Eleanor Darragh Birth Cert. 4 with arrows.

In the opinion of Codefore, this copy of a birth certificate is not a copy of an original unchanged 1934 document.  It is a copy of a document that has been changed using modern photograph editing software. Additionally it appears that the changes were not made by a professional photograph software editor.

There is more. When it became probable that the document was fraudulent, we made further inquiries into the information contained in the document. We accessed the 1940 US Census to see if the Darragh’s actually lived at the address they reported on the birth Certificate. PDF HERE1940 Census Darragh

We specifically made an effort to validate the hand written addresses on the document indicated in boxes 10 and 19.  The addresses are different. Box 10 says 222 West 17th St. and Box 22 says 222 W. 7th St.  There are currently two such streets in Wilmington but 222 7th  St. did not  exist when the 1940 US Census was conducted.  This would be a possible assumption if and  when the original document was edited because today there is a 222 7th St. according to Google Maps. Codefore suggests that whoever made the changes to the document didn’t do enough 1934 research. An address that exists in 2015, didn’t necessarily exist in 1934.

The problem in verifying the residents in 1934 is that there was no  verification of residence for the particular year of 1934. However in  1940 when the  US Census was conducted the verification survey asks  the question of residence for the 5 previous years in the box labeled “Residence April 1st 1935.  This would be 97 days after Ted Cruz’s mother was born. It’s the closest date verification of the Darragh family we could get at this time to the exact birth date. (we are still working on this)

At  222 W. 17th St. Wilmington, the 1940 census indicates that  Mr. Edgar Welch, a fireman lived there. Welch told the census taker he had lived in this house on April 1st 1935 until present . The Census question as to the total length time  Mr. Welch lived there was not asked or required. He could have possibly lived there for 10 years or more. Mr. Welch reported the he, his wife, two children and a lodger who was a barbershop owner named “John”  age 32 lived there at the time the census was taken.

A 1940 name search on Darragh produced a Census document for the residence located at 1311 Loll or Toll Rd. unincorporated New Castle county known as Gordon Heights. The address could not be confirmed but the residents were Edward J. Darragh, his wife Elizabeth and children Eleanor and Caroline. Mr. Darragh claimed that all were US Citizens.  This research seems to validate, somewhat, the Eleanor birth certificate but does not explain the alterations.  At this time the only way to authenticate, or verify  the birth certificate of Eleanor Darragh is the St. Francis Hospital Archives or the Catholic Church birth records.

With all of this information taken into consideration, the question of birth certificates should be expanded to include Ted Cruz.s mother. If his mother’s birth certificate is fraudulent then she may not have been a US Citizen. If that is the case, Ted Cruz himself is not a US Citizen naturalized or not  and cannot posses a passport nor can he hold a seat in the Senate. We at Codefore are concerned that if Ted Cruz used the above Certificate of Birth to prove citizenship and or obtain a passport, who performed Cruz’s  background investigation??  Based on  our  opinion its apparent that whoever changed this document had co-operation from someone within the Delaware Government. Their Document   We also noted that included with the Birth Certificate obtained from the Delaware Archives was a transmittal sheet that indicated that it was for Eleanor E. Darragh.  Nowhere in any of the documents we researched was the middle initial “E.” used to support the birth of Eleanor.  This birth certificate states that Eleanor Darragh was born  1934. Was one of the changes made to the Birth Certificate erroneous?

Darragh birth cert 4a.

Codefore Publishing

Obama and Clinton pay their debt to Citibank- “Gun Control”

SUNDAY POST 01/10/2016

Its well known that that President Obama and Hillary Clinton  have an addenda to limit if not eliminate gun ownership in this country.  This has been attempted before and failed. In fact its an ongoing quest involving corporations who one would think have no vested interest in this endeavor.

Gun ownership has suffered the blame for just about any violence that has occurred in this country.  The primary political opposition to gun ownership comes from the political factions within the Democratic party.  This stance by the Democrats is in stark contrast to the facts.  Just as many Democrats own guns as Republicans and we don’t see Democrats lined up turning in their guns.

This week President Obama stood before the nation and declared his intent to circumvent failed gun control legislation on the Federal and State level with some sort of Executive Action.  Its not clear exactly what this action will be, but Obama was tearfully preparing the country for some kind of gun control change.

He called it, “common sense” gun control.Presidential tears

Wiping tears from his face, President Obama would have the nation believe that his plan to implement changes is in response to the lives lost in this country as a result of being shot with a gun.  In particular the lives of small children.  His drama was comparable to the character portrayed by the late Jimmy Stewart in the movie “Mr. Smith goes to Washington”  as Smith testifies before Congress. He too had tears of conscience.

Jimmy Stewart. Mr. Smith goes to CongressOf Course all of the Republican Presidential Candidates and the seemingly singular Democratic Hillary Clinton stepped up to the plate.  Clinton thanked the President on her twitter page saying, “Thank you, for taking a crucial step forward on gun violence. Our next president has to build on that progress—not rip it away. –H” and to make sure everyone knew she supports the 2nd Amendment, “We can protect the Second Amendment while protecting our families and communities from gun violence. And we have to.”Hillary Clinton

The Republican candidates were not as supportive as Hillary.  Trump said, “No one is going to take away your guns.”

Jeb Bush said, “Today is another reminder that we can’t afford to give the opportunity to expand on  gun-grabbing agenda”.

Not one single politician of any stripe stood up and told the truth.

The Codefore question is this.   What is in it for the supporters of gun control?  To find the answer we will heed a good police detective’s advice, “follow the money”.  In this generation as in many generations before, politicians rarely do and say things to the benefit of their constituents.  Politicians are singular sociopathic beings who’s motivations center around themselves.   Presidents included.  There is, however, one inclusion not mentioned in this assumption.  All known politicians are financially indebted to their financiers’.  No matter how they try to hide it, it exists and there are tracks that lead a trail straight to the source of funds.  So the answer as to what’s in it for President Obama and Hillary Clinton is MONEY.

In the interest of realism, we can usually assume that the Financiers of our political system are more sly, more sinister and clandestine than their employees the politicians.   The message from the “talking heads”  and that includes mainstream media, is that guns are the root of all violence in this country and for our own good we must eliminate them.  But this is a very weak argument.  Statistics on gun  violence in this country do not support the supposition that the elimination of legal guns in this country would have a positive effect, but do indicate that an increase in gun owner ship in the reported date span  equals a decrease in gun related crimes nationally.

The NRA  says that based on the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Firearm-related homicides declined 39 percent from 1993=2011. The NRA also sites other statistics that indicate the rate of decline in homicides has been and is still declining.

Factcheck. org says,

  • Louie Gohmert said that “every time … conceal-carry [gun laws] have been allowed the crime rate has gone down.” But that is far from a settled issue in academia.
  • Dan Gross, head of the Brady Campaign used the number of daily gun murders as proof that “gun violence rates are not” going down. But the rate of gun murder is at its lowest point since at least 1981: 3.6 per 100,000 people in 2010. The high point was 7 in 1993. However, non-fatal gun injuries from assaults increased last year for the third straight year, and that rate is the highest since 2008.
  • Federal data also show violent crimes committed with guns — including murders, aggravated assaults and robberies — have declined for three straight years.
  • Donna Edwards said that “since Columbine, there have been 181 of these school shootings.” That’s an inflated figure. She used a list of “major school shootings” supplied by the Brady Campaign that included incidents that were neither shootings nor at schools. By our count, the list shows 130 school shootings since Columbine that resulted in at least one student or school official being killed or injured — still unacceptably high, but about a quarter fewer than claimed.

According to Factcheck,we can hang our hats on this:

                                Gun Murders in 2010 11,078.= lowest rate since at least 1981

                                Nonfatal gun injures-assault 2011=55,544 highest rate since                                                                       2008

                                Gun aggravated assault 2011 = 138,336 Lowest rate since at                                                                     least 2004

                                Gun Robbery 2011 = 122,300  Lowest rate since at least 2004

                                Gun Ownership 2007 = 88.8 per 100 people

                                Gun Ownership 2001 = 84 per 100 people

A 2011 Gallup poll  (assuming Gallup is accurate) indicates:

 Since 2000, Gallup has asked respondents with guns in their households a  follow-up question to determine if the gun belongs to the respondent or to  someone else. On this basis, Gallup finds that 34% of all Americans   personally own a gun.   

 Forty-seven percent of American adults currently report that they have a gun  in their  home or elsewhere on their property. This is up from 41% a year ago and is the highest  Gallup has recorded since 1993, albeit marginally above the    4% and 45% highs seen during that period.

Surprisingly the Gallop polls also indicate that the percentages of gun ownership are not politically specific. In other words there is not a significant difference between the percent of gun ownership by Republicans or Democrats.

All this being said, its hard to believe that the constant political push to reduce or eliminate gun ownership in this country is for our own good, or in our own interest.  So why the push?

Another wise police detective said that,”If you do not have an obvious motive, one supported by fact, your common sense will prevail.”   In the case of President  Obama, the motive is clear. Since his motive for gun control  can not be  due to  statistics. it must because images Citibank, one of the largest financial institutions in the world and a bank who is anti gun to the point of refusing to process credit card gun purchases (link here)  gave him over $700,000 during his 2008 election effort. The same type of financial  obligation  is present in the Hillary Clinton camp.

The next question is, why is Citibank and others obsessed in eliminating guns in our country?  This is where common sense, as the President would call it, comes in.  Its not to protect us as he would have us believe, its to protect him and Citibank.  Our possession of weapons is all that protects  the citizens of this country from tyranny..  (we are dangerously close)

Thinking about a Living Trust or Will? Maybe Hawaii isnt the place to do it.

SUNDAY POST 12-27-2015


Why is the Charity business  booming in Hawaii?  


Paul Sulla Jr.

“The Charity Scam” or “Guess where your money went.” 

Creating a trust fund to hold and manage your money can be beneficial when done for the right reasons and by a competent honest lawyer. But there can be a down side to this carrot . The downside is that your lawyer must be trustworthy because once the lawyer moves your  money  from your bank or investment fund you may no longer have  absolute control of the funds and then  become vulnerable to theft. 

Its not easy to locate an honest attorney. Creating a trust can be beneficial but attorneys who do not reveal existing connections or associations with so called Charities, or non-profit charitable corporations are usually up to no good. Their associations are sometimes  a maze of closely woven non-profit corporations, banks and even people in the local government who scratch each others backs in the search for innocent victims and the later theft of your funds. Lawyers know how to convince and steal your money without leaving evidence that they did anything illegal except point you in the wrong direction.  That’s assuming you are still alive after the trust is in place.

The modus operandi of these lawyers is to contact wealthy people and sell them on the idea of protecting their money from the Federal Government Tax system. This in itself is not illegal but the non-profit or charity business is not always what it says it is. Just because they are legally designated as non-profit, or a religious corporation doesn’t mean they are not able and willing to steal.  These corporations are not regulated as they should be and all too often  the non- profit, non taxable Federal and State laws benefit and enable unscrupulous lawyers and their clients.

These laws make it possible to move millions of dollars from the gun sights of the IRS into the sights of Non-profit and or charitable corporations. The non profit  law in itself enables these lawyers to steal and hide your money. The common denominator of all of these scams are banks.  Stolen funds cannot be “washed” without the use of bank accounts.  Banks are the first step to change  the money from legal possession to illegal possession.  A victims money must be diverted from the victims bank into an account controlled directly by either the attorney, or an organization that is controlled or “friendly” with the attorney such as a living trust. Usually when this happens the transfer of the money is also the transfer of ownership.  The formattion of a living trust or regular trust can mean that a new owner (lawyer or trust) is now in control.  A competent lawless attorney would never have his/her name on the first bank account stepping stone (that would be illegal)  so instead your money is put in  the name of one corporation or even transferred to a second Trust or Corporation and possibly even a third entity before individual names surface out of the fog of corporations..

It is alleged that Hawaii Attorneys, Nancy Budd, Katherine Lloyd, Paul Sulla Jr., and Joe Moss are examples of Hawaiian Trust Attorneys who have personally benefited (at their direction) from the distribution of funds to non- profit charitable corporations and non-profit corporations or to other non-profit organizations who they are either directly or indirectly associated with.  

The alleged plan  for these funds is to eventually line their pockets in the form of cash, gratuities such as car rentals, exotic trips etc;  These are all percs  that may be rewarded to them for locating and eventually transferring money into the bank accounts controlled by their colleagues in the charity business. 

In the case of lawyer Paul Sulla it is alleged that client trust money was moved directly into “shell” companies owned or operated by him. He either was not  sophisticated enough to hide his direct receipt of other peoples funds or considered himself “untouchable”.  

Local banks who themselves may have investment legal departments available to their clients sometimes unwittingly or knowingly refer their customers to consulting lawyers who have obvious conflicts of interest and or a history of complaints, fraudulent activities and have colleagues who sit on the boards of directors of the banks used to hold the money.

In Kauai Here’s how it worked. Katherine Lloyd worked as legal counsel for the First Hawaiian Bank and so did Nancy Budd.  First Hawaiian Bank has their own numerous trust corporations  and when people deposit large amounts of money in this bank they are candidates for the formation of a trust to “Protect” the money in ways that the Bank legally cannot. Lloyd  may refer the actual creation of a bank customer’s living trust to her colleague Nancy Budd  or Nancy Budd may have been retained as an adviser for the client  and recommend the use of the First Hawaiian Bank .  Budd will draw up the Trust, name an executor to control the trust, name another attorney colleague as the executors adviser (on the trust payroll) and recommend  a Charity to hold an interest in the trust such as the Hawaii Community Fund.  Lloyd  also worked for Hawaii Community Fund, until a conflict of interest complaint was made, and she resigned.  To make things worse for the client and safe for  Lloyd her husband, Hugh Jones, is an investigator for the Hawaii Attorney General’s office, Trust and Charity Department. When a conflict of interest was made to the Hawaii Attorney Generals office by one of Lloyds victims,   Jones denied he had anything to do with the business of his wife Lloyd, except to say she is innocent of any wrong doing.

Once the trust is in place, in at least two cases investigated by Codefore, the trust contributor (retiree who possessed the original funds) unexpectedly died.  The assets were immediately liquidated and funds deposited into a  living trust where the  administrators  distributed the funds to themselves   other trusts or  charities.  In this case the first deposit of liquidated funds went  into the First Hawaiian Bank and the American Savings Bank.

(The CEO of the Hawaii Community Fund is on the Board of the American Savings Bank)  Surviving relatives either received a small fraction of the trust (inheritance) or received nothing.  Two of the survivors claimed that the Living Trust had been altered after the deceased death. The Kauai Police Department  had possession of a Trust that none of them had ever seen before. The Kauai PD claimed they took the “Living Trust” from the deceased home for “safe keeping”  In answer to the allegations, Ms. Budd stated ” I can tell you in no uncertain terms that there was nothing illegal or unethical done with respect to my representation of Mr. ……….. (or any client, for that matter).  His children’s inheritance was not “taken from them illegally,” and I want to be clear that any such suggestion they have made to you is false.”

In another case investigated by Codefore, attorney Paul Sulla Jr. represented a seller in the sale of valuable property in Hawaii. Unfortunately, in this case, it was the property seller who died  before the deed to the property could be transferred to the new owner.  It is alleged that Sulla impersonated the seller, who was on his death bed, at an Arizona  county registrar and filed a new deed to the property  but the deed  was not to the new purchasers but was  to a Trust created and controlled by Sulla days before the seller’s death.   Then Sulla claimed the property had never been paid for and tried to auction off the property.  All of this information came out in a civil court of law, in front of a Circuit Judge who apparently didn’t think that Sulla had violated any criminal laws.  The purchasers are still trying to either get their money back or the deed to the property. 

An example of a money laundering structure is indicated in the below schematic. This chart is the exact chart used for legal purposes to explain how trust funds  become invisible. (washed.) 

In some cases the elderly are led to believe that a trust will insure that their surviving  relatives will benefit after death by implementing  a so called “living trust”.  Little do they know that once the money is in the newly formed trust, or these attorney’s  “favorite” non-profit charity,  their money may be out of the grasp of the Federal Government but is now  the control of  non-profit organizations that that “wash” the money by moving it back and forth until there is no “paper trail” leading to the actual distribution.  The money is then distributed and is usually not distributed to the poor or to charities who do charitable business. The “SALON” news organization says this:

 “Another way the wealthy avoid paying taxes on their billions is to make charitable donations. If you donate property, you never have to pay income tax on that donation, whatever it costs you and how much it’s worth right now. Well you might say, at least someone benefits from the charity. Whether or not the charitable donation is a scam in whole or in part depends on the answer to that old question: qui bono? Aka, who benefits? That’s where the real scam takes place.”

“And there’s no legal requirement that a charity must spend its wealth. In fact, IRS rules require only that charities spend about 5 percent of their investment assets annually, and all or part of this amount can be spent on salaries and “expenses,” rather than devoted to the charitable purpose the charity purports to be serving. So, what happens with a charitable trust, set up by a billionaire, and controlled by one of the billionaire’s children? The child gets a job and a salary for life. Maybe a mansion to live in and entertain in as a fringe benefit. This is a great gig for the heir.”

Case in point is the “Hawaii United Way” a charitable non-profit corporation that  receives money from a central clearing house Charity known as the “Hawaii Community Foundation.”  A look at their “Annual Reports” Only list assets and contributions.

2015 Hawaii Community Foundation disbursements? ( not sure what these figures are since the report says that this is their “Position”

Donor Grants                 2.7 Million

Scholarships                  4.5 Million

Partner ships                 8.2 Million

Donor advised grants 12.5 Million

HCF initiatives ???      7.3 Million

Other Foundations:     7.3 Million

Other Grants:                4.1 Million.

  The The United Way might well be listed in “Other Foundation” or “Partnerships”  on the Hawaii Community Foundation  but they most certainly received cash from the Hawaii Community Fund as the HCF is listed as a contributor on the United Way web site along with a list of approximately 30 other charitable organizations that the United Way either received money from or donates money to and  each with a staff and Board of Directors etc: that presumably all receive money for their time.  The United Way tax returns can be viewed on the internet at:  https://www.auw.org/financial-information 


Codefore Admin.

Why People will Believe anything.

This is about reality.  What is real and what is not real.  It is also about why and how people believe what they hear no-matter how ridiculous it is even if it means herpes.

Normally when I blog and write I try to back it up with documents that support my post.  In doing this  I am usually not embarrassed by errors or misinterpretations etc; etc;   Credibility, to me, is everything.  Its very easy to write what you think, what makes sense, and ultimately what you believe to be real and accurate, but when it is not backed up by trustworthy information and credible documents  embarrassment  looms and raises its head when someone points out that what you believed to be true and accurate was only valid after the third shot of tequila.   Even if a post is just an opinion, I want my opinions to have a little mix.

All that being said, is credibility really that important anymore, or is it only important to me? More to the point, when is it important to me.   It seems that what is not real is all the rhetoric we read, hear and see that is generated by the politicians who think we take them seriously.

Actually (if accuracy matters) it is and has always been the unreal, and un-factual rhetoric that has directed human beliefs and actions since the beginning of mans ability to communicate and chew cactus.

The rhetoric we read and hear from mainstream news is not based  on facts, real actions  or even actual history.   So where is the credibility?  It seems  that credibility is not necessary to be in the plausibility  fraternity.

Today, at this time, at this moment I am confused as to what is real and what is not real in the world and how can I can know one from the other.   It usually requires research or getting sober.   Do we not need to know the truth, or what reality is so that we can be successful?  So that we can be productive? So that we can go to heaven?  Wrong!!!  Sanctity, righteousness, exactitude, precision and truth will not beget success in just about any endeavor.  It will not even get you a good cigar.

Reality is subjective.   Human beings do not live and die by the truth about anything and as far as I can tell never have.  They live and die by what is popular to live and die by.   They live and die by virtualism  ( a virtual word) Virtualism is the modern replacement for propaganda and propaganda  somewhere at some time in the past, replaced the word  lies. No matter what you call it, the result is a living delusion.   Any self respecting virtual game player will disagree with this. Once you turn on the Xbox and transport yourself to Viet Nam or Mars, you are virtually there fighting your advisory with no fear of death. The difference is that the life and death part of a television virtual reality is not permanent. It doesn’t affect our lives. The words and policies coming from the pipe smoking candidates for president can potentially affect us.

It appears that once you go virtual, anything is possible.  Humans, more intelligent than I, realized this back when the caveman existed.  One cave man told another caveman  that if they became friends with their neighboring clan (who were most likely their  relatives) the neighbors would eat all their mastodon meat, take all their clothing made from mastodon fur and most important , ravage their woman.   The clansmen were not too concerned with replacing the mastodon meat or his skin but the ravaging part was serious. And to make things worse their newly elected leader who was also their dealer claimed that the lightning that started the fire that burned down their camp the previous year was really caused by the same neighbors who lived in the cave at the end of the block..  This was the first example virtual reality and it created fear and unsettling in the clan.  Therefore (in a virtual world)  the neighboring clan had to go. But in a non virtual sense, how would killing the neighbors benefit anyone?  The benefit was  the leaders need for power over the clan and it kept the clan in a sense of virtual security and safety as long as they believed what their leader had to say.  Safe from what you ask?  From the neighbors who were vegetarian gay people and who (they were told) burned down their settlement the previous year. Everyone knew that it was the lightning and not their neighbors (now known as the unreligious mongrels)  who caused the fire. Peer pressure to believe what their little government told them, the effects of the cactus, and the thought of their women being ravaged by the cave residents down the block was just too much for them to accept  and is why they went along with the program.


Lets flash ahead of the cavemen a few thousand years after the neighboring clans (the ones who survived) created their own virtual realities. There was the crucifixion of Christ, the killing of the first born, the floods, the droughts, the locusts (grass hoppers) all blamed on anyone who challenged the  present authorities or their following group  (now known as a nations).  Oh by the way, by this time God entered the picture and of course the only people who had favor with their God (who may have  been a goat)  was the leadership.  It’s all duly documented in religious books and scrolls of all faiths.  Somewhere in our history, virtual reality is the firing pin that justifies numerous wars and the attempted extinction of groups of people.

We (the United States) participated in World War I in part because of the sinking of the American ship the “Lucitania” allegedly by a German U boat. On May 1, 1915, the ship departed New York City bound for Liverpool. The Lucitania was a passenger ship, one of the fastest of its day.   Unknown to her passengers but probably no secret to the Germans, almost all of her hidden cargo consisted of munitions and contraband destined for the British war effort.  The Germans even warned the US that they had classified the Lucitania as a war ship capable of carrying munitions. It seems that on the day the ship was torpedoed the Lucitania’s military escort didn’t show up and the marine tribunal later asked the captain why he simply didn’t outrun the U-boat. His answer was because there was a hole in the hull as big as my D….  In spite of all of the available precautions it happened anyway.  The path to virtual reality had been created.   The Captain of the Lucitania was innocent of and about everything but anatomy.


Holy crap, then the Germans sunk the innocent American ship  Lucitania.  It was the beginning of WWI for the US.  British  investigators issued a statement that there were no military  arms aboard the Lucitania. Now virtual reality was that  Germany not the US started the war. Later 17 million people  died during WWI of which 320, 500 + were Americans.

 In March 1941, Roosevelt moved further towards making the  US the ‘arsenal of democracy’ with the Lend-Lease Act, which  permitted the lending, leasing, selling, or bartering of arms,  ammunition and food to “any country whose defense, the  President deemed vital to the defense of the US.” (Wickipedia)   And so again the US was providing war materials to England  but it is unclear, (based on Truman’s Lend Lease Act) whether  the US was selling bullets or renting them to England. No  matter. There is no doubt about the evil of Adolph Hitler, but come on……Hitler was a Germany and Europe problem not a US problem.  Here in the US we had our own problems. Joseph Kennedy Sr. had his 23yr old daughter Rosemary lobotomized.

I have a big surprise for you my sweet.

I have a big surprise for you my sweet.

Hitler was a delusional virtual reality expert who convinced Germans and the Japanese they were on a mission from God. It has never been determined which God Hitler was referring to. The Japanese who also wanted to be included as a recipient of Gods will, concluded that since the US was supplying military goods to England again, and since Japan was Hitler’s Ally again, the US Fleet in Hawaii had to go.  However there is documentation that indicates that the FDR knew well in advance of Japan’s imminent attack and allowed it to happen without any avoidance.  The Japanese attack was the virtual reality needed to insure the participation of the United States in WWII. A serious investigation into the activities of those responsible for the security of the United States in 1941 may have destroyed the delusion and or virtual reality  that our own US Government had no culpability in the creation of our enemies and may have saved 1,076,225 American lives.

The Korean war was the first “proxy war”  A proxy war occurs when one or more opposing powers instigates a war and then uses third parties to fight on their behalf. Other examples of proxy wars include the Vietnam War and the War in Afghanistan (Wickipedia). The Korean War began because China wanted all of Korean territory  and so did the US. After WWII.  Harry Truman and Congress created a Virtual Reality fear of communism.  In Korea 128,650 Americans died.. Neither China nor the US won and  of course the Koreans lost.

The Virtual Reality for the full blown military presence in Viet Nam began on August 4, 1964 in the Gulf of Tonkin. Two US Navy destroyers claimed they were fired upon by  North Vietnamese “forces”.  This was a similar situation as occurred in Korea and most observers of the reported events in the Gulf who were actually on the vessel agree that the attack by the North Vietnamese never actually happened. A freedom of information request of records indicates that Robert S Mc Namara later received a message from the fleet that the North Vietnamese attack was actually a result of” freak weather effects” Id like to know how bad weather turned into a North Vietnamese attack. Lyndon Johnson  did not change the accusations  and once again created a virtual national fear of Communism.  In Viet Nam 211,454 Americans died before the US was chased out of the country by the North Vietnamese.

What do you mean it was a storm. You mean storm trooper dont you?

What do you mean it was a storm. You mean storm trooper dont you?

The military draft stopped in 1973 and military registration was no longer required in 1975. In 1968 Nixon campaigned to end the draft. The Virtual reality was to benefit the people who were being drafted into the military against their will  but in actuality Nixon desperately needed to  stop the constant anti war protesting so he could get on with the business of war. However a greater and more important veracity is that with no draft (no mandatory military obligation)  congress and their friends could commit this country to war and they themselves were not required to serve in the military and fight the wars they created.

These US wars were all based on a virtual reality of fear and these fears were based on fictitious  delusional or intentional incident deceptions  that we were told were acts of war against the United States.

It appears that our government is  becoming bolder by the minute.  Their boldness is empowered by us. People everywhere support them because they are buying into their virtual reality schemes and scenarios.  It’s become popular to live  in constant fear in the US. Its become the norm to be in a constant state of War.

Our government  no longer needs any kind of vote to commit our resources and American lives in the name of…..well  take your pick,  freedom, security or protection against terrorism?  It just doesn’t matter.    With a stroke of the pen, the United States (congress) declared war on an intangible  perpetual virtual enemy with an unknown army, that represents no nations and is denied by all legitimate religions. (ISIS would disagree with the religious part)   Without any kind of provocation our government is at liberty to declare who is and who is not the enemy of our nation and deserving of war actions such as murder or military attack.. Today it happens to be the Muslims.  Who is it going to be tomorrow?

If your one of the non independent thinkers who believes and supports our politicians simply because they are a Democrat or Republican you are not only not an independent thinker you are not using your common sense and need to change your drug preference. You are residing in a popular virtual world created by those who have no interest in your welfare or the welfare of this country,.    The evidence or credibility of what I have just written is observable by the popularity of the politicians who are leading in the presidential election polls and are becoming more popular as time goes by. .

Almost everything that comes out of the mouths of Donald Trump , Hiliary Clinton, Marko Rubio, or Ted Cruz defies reason.  The common denominator is WAR enabled by the public’s belief in the virtual reality of distortions, disinformation and fabrications created by all of those politicians and believed by way too many people. They all want another war.  Why?  Common sense tells us its not the few murders committed by obvious deranged people who we are told are actually ISIS commandos. . Follow the money and ye shall be enlightened.  Their mutual perpetual fear mongering is apparently working.  Or it’s the water we drink. They openly say that its necessary that we go to war for our security.

Wow, look what the US sent us.

Wow, look what the US sent us.












The audacious part is that there are many who actually believe and support the idea that ISIS has attacked this country using military commandos who get their weapons at Walmart and masquerade as nut jobs. Or is it the other way around?  This is the virtual reality.  The actual reality is that ISIS is supported by the US with weapons and even medical treatment . Why? Because Isreal wants territory and oil that’s in Iran. Our enemy is now Iran??   ISIS vs Iran is another “proxy war” put together by the US and Israel and maybe Britain.    But the fear at home must be kept active or someone might say, “WTF do we care what happens in Iran?”  Hence we have ISIS commandos.

So to assist those who live in fear of ISIS and their constant sneaking around  with their wives after work shooting people, you can easily identify them.  Check your neighbors garages.  If you see an olive drab wood box filled with hand grenades or M-16s and the words US GOVERNMENT painted on the side, ISIS or an escapee from a mental institution probably lives there.  If you see a cardboard box with Walmart on the side Gonzo  probably lives there.

America… just a nation of two hundred million used car salesmen with all the money we need to buy guns and no qualms about killing anybody else in the world who tries to make us uncomfortable” Hunter S Thompson










Banks Prevent US Citizens from Purchasing and Selling Guns.

This article was written and posted on Labor Day 2011. We have decided to re-post it.  Nothing has changed in 4 years. In fact it is worse.

I have never felt so disappointed in the my country as I did in the early 70’s when the United States pulled out of Viet Nam leaving the country to fend for itself. I did  not know then what our future had in store for us.  The actions or inaction’s of “we the people” and our politicians are disgracing the very people we are celebrating this week end.

I find it disgusting that our two major political parties have no more interest in honoring the working people in this country than the Chinese do.  In fact I think the Chinese might have a greater interest in protecting their investment in this country than the people who are running the country. After all the Chinese own a major portion of Citi Bank Stocks and as you will read below it looks like they own some of our lawmakers.

This brings up my question.  Who exactly is running this country? Who is making the decisions? What are the driving forces that dictate these decisions? How has our apathy empowered the people making decisions for us?APATHY

I was extremely disheartened this week when for the first time in over 200 years a United States President’s request for a speech  date was turned down by the opposing party. GOP speaker of the house John Boehner turned down President Obama’s request to speak on September 7th. 

I was equally distressed to hear on news radio the random interviews of citizens reaction to the possibility that President Obama would instead give his speech on the same day and time as Monday Night Football.  Several seemingly intelligent people said they would rather watch the football game than listen to what our President has to say.  MONDAY NIGHT FOOTBALL??

This is representative of the apathy I refer to.

As I have said in many of my articles, I am not affiliated with any political party and I would hope that what comes next in this article is taken in the spirit of that declaration.


I am  a native of Michigan. I spent many years walking the forests of Michigan and Colorado  hunting and fishing.  I’m older now and sort of lost my urge to hunt. I’d rather take pictures of the critters.  I decided that  I would sell the two hunting rifles I own.  I first went to a large firearm Internet auctioning site called Gun Broker.com.  Part of the process is that you have to register, give them your credit card number so they can collect their fees and verify your identity before posting your items for sale. For some reason I could not get past the credit card part of the registration. For some reason the screen just froze when entering the card information.

I supposed that it was the web site itself that had the problem so I went to a NRA gun auctioning site.  The same thing happened.  I finally called the NRA auctioning  help number and talked with a representative on the phone. We tried to get other numerous credit cards through their system with the same results. My only question to him was why.  His answer to that question sent a chill up my spine.

“ He said, “We get this all the time. Some of the credit card companies will not process the cards if the transaction is gun related”.   “Your kidding” I said. “This is the United States of America, I am a citizen of the United States of America. I can purchase whatever I legally want to, especially with a debit card”  “I’m sorry” he said “I will manually activate your account but if I were you I would use some other type of method of payment for the fees incurred when your guns sell”

I could not believe what I was hearing.  In fact anyone I told this story to could not believe the bank had anything to do with this issue.

We were wrong.

The next day I tried to use my debit card twice for unrelated purchases  and both times it came back “denied”  This was a US Bank Debit/Credit card.  You know, the same type most of you have in your own wallet or purse. By this time I was nervous.  Had I made some huge mistake in the balance of my account?  Had I been the victim of fraud?  I just didn’t know.  I hurried home, got on line and accessed my bank account.  A sigh of relief.

The bank account balance was what it was supposed to be.  “But what was up with my card”? I thought.  I called the card customer service number and spoke with a service young lady.  After giving her all the security information she asked the magic question. “How can I help you”?  “Why can’t I use my card?” I asked.  “Your card has been suspended and I must transfer you to card security” she said.

Soon another young lady was on the phone and verified that the card had been suspended.  Of course my question was “why”?  Her response was, “Are you trying to purchase a gun”?  I said “What business is that of yours”?  She answered, “Are you saying this is a fraud”?  This was not making much sense to me.  “What did fraud have to do with my desire to sell my hunting rifle” I thought. “No, I said, I’m trying to sell my guns”. I felt like she was just trying to make something out of this situation that was not true.

After more discussion about it she agreed to take  the suspension off of my card.  It didn’t matter that it was a debit card and that it was my money in question not the banks money. The card had still been suspended.

After thinking about this whole situation and what the gun auction guy had told me I became angry and had more questions about this.  How big was this credit card/gun purchase thing?  I went into my detective mode.

I Googled my way around the Internet and found that my suspicions were correct as were the statements made by the person I spoke to at  NRA sponsored Auction Arms. The information I found wasn’t about about US Bank though.

I found an article written by Larry Keane of FreePublic.com about Citi Bank.

“Once again Citibank has drawn the ire of the firearms community over its credit policies. This time it deals with not extending lines of credit to businesses even remotely related to the firearms industry. As many people remember back in January 2008, NSSF took Citi Merchant Services to task over its decision to stop processing credit card transactions involving the lawful sale of firearms by law-abiding, federally licensed, firearm distributors/retailers. Unfortunately, it became evident that the decision was not a mistake of a single employee, but was rather a corporate-wide policy”.

Although Mr. Keane did not specifically name the company he was talking about the firearm wholesaler he was referring to is CDNN Sports Inc. It seems that CDNN Sports Inc. who wholesales firearms and firearm related products was allowing firearm retailers to order their goods over the Internet using a credit card to process payment.

CDNN Sports had a contract with ‘Merchant Services’ to process these credit card payments no matter what bank card the purchaser used. When you purchase something with your credit/debit card at a store such as a grocery store or your local drug store there is a good chance its Merchant Services that is processing the payment and distributing the funds. Merchant Services is a subsidiary of Citi Bank.

It seems that Citi Bank pulled the plug on CDNN Sports and cancelled their contract with CDNN Sports which halted all Internet sales made by CDNN Sports to Retailers. A Large portion of the sales made by CDNN Sports are internet sales.

There was a lot of scuttlebutt on the Internet about a law suit between CDNN Sports and Citi Bank over this but I couldn’t find out what happened with it.

I decided to call the owner of CDNN Sports and inquire.  I spoke with Charlie Crawford who owns CDNN Sports. He told me that the issue was never resolved. He said initially he received a letter from First Data Corporation who operates Merchant Services and signed by June Rivera-Mantilla. The letter stated in part that the company’s (CDNN) bankcard processing services were cancelled, and that the Merchant Services was withholding $75,000 as a reserve for “potential charge backs” and it would be held for six months or longer.

Mr. Crawford said he telephoned Ms. Rivera-Mantilla to try to resolve the issue. He said that Rivera-Mantilla was rude, belligerent and insulting to him. He said that she told him that she knew what she was doing was illegal but that she thought the sales of guns was immoral  illegal and that was why the action was being taken.

Crawford said that his initial impression was that Rivera-Mantilla had some kind of mental issue and that he needed to take his problem to another level.

He hired an attorney.

Crawford said that although Rivera-Matilla’s verbal abuse was her own, the action taken against him by Citi Bank was not. It was initiated  by the banking giant itself. Crawford said the he and his attorney discussed their options including asking for a Federal investigation into the actions of Citi Bank under the RICO Act but eventually decided to do nothing. He no longer does business with Citi Bank.

According to Wikipedia:


Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act  

The RICO Act focuses specifically on racketeering, and it allows for the leaders of a syndicate to be tried for the crimes which they ordered others to do or assisted them, closing a perceived loophole that allowed someone who told a man to, for example, murder, to be exempt from the trial because they did not actually do it.

Pattern of racketeering activity requires at least two acts of racketeering activity, one of which occurred after the effective date of this chapter and the last of which occurred within ten years (excluding any period of imprisonment) after the commission of a prior act of racketeering activity. The U.S. Supreme Court has instructed federal courts to follow the continuity-plus-relationship test in order to determine whether the facts of a specific case give rise to an established pattern. Predicate acts are related if they “have the same or similar purposes, results, participants, victims, or methods of commission, or otherwise are interrelated by distinguishing characteristics and are not isolated events.” (H.J. Inc. v. Northwestern Bell Telephone Co.) Continuity is both a closed and open ended concept, referring to either a closed period of conduct, or to past conduct that by its nature projects into the future with a threat of repetition.

RICO laws were successfully cited in NOW v. Scheidler, 510 U.S. 249, 114 S. Ct. 798, 127 L.Ed. 2d 99 (1994), a suit in which certain parties, including the National Organization for Women, sought damages and an injunction against pro-life activists who physically block access to abortion clinics. The Court held that a RICO enterprise does not need an economic motive, and that the Pro-Life Action Network could therefore qualify as a RICO enterprise. The Court remanded for consideration of whether PLAN committed the requisite acts in a pattern of racketeering activity.

As a retired detective I think it might be a stretch to indict Citi Group and any other Bank who operates the same as Citi Bank under the RICO Act just based on their actions taken against Mr. Crawford and his company CDNN Sports In.

But wait…..there’s more.

Larry Kean of Freepublic.com also reports:

 “Fast forward to October 2010 when the Warne Scope Mounts Company of Oregon, manufacturers of scopes and components, decided to submit an application for a business line of credit to purchase materials from the Home Depot. The credit line was initially approved, only to be rescinded the next day by Home Depot Credit Services, Citibank (South Dakota), N.A., Creditor based upon the simple explanation that, “It’s because of the industry you are in.” The term industry simply meant that the company “makes parts for the gun industry.” A law-abiding manufacturer that wanted to purchase materials from the Home Depot NOT to be used in the making of their products was denied credit simply because of the association with the firearms industry. . “

An article by Jon E. Dougherty of World Net Daily;

Citibank forces gun withdrawal

Financial giant no longer serves ‘businesses that deal in weapons’

Posted: February 19, 2000
1:00 am Eastern

By Jon E. Dougherty
© 2011 WND

A new corporate policy at Citibank, one of the largest corporate banks in the world, prohibits “maintaining accounts for businesses that deal in weapons,” according to a letter sent from the Las Vegas branch of Citibank to a local pistol club owner.

The letter, dated Feb. 7, said the Nevada Pistol Academy would be forbidden from doing business at the Citibank branch as of Thursday, Feb. 17. The “Notice of Account Closure” said the bank was closing the academy’s checking account and instructed account holders to refrain from making further deposits or writing checks on the account.

After the closing date, “any additional funds remaining in your account on the date of closure will be sent to you in the form of an official bank check,” the letter said. Bank officials provided a customer service number for the account holders “if you have any questions regarding our decision to close your account.”

Chris Lorenzo, director of the academy, said he received the bank’s letter “within 3 or 4 days of opening my account.” He told WorldNetDaily that no one at the bank informed him of Citibank’s policy when he opened his account.

When he called to ask about the cancellation, “they gave me the runaround,” he said. WorldNetDaily placed several calls to Citibank officials with no response.

Lorenzo said that while he felt the “bank was entitled to its own opinion,” he just felt “other shooters might want to know this information.”

As a result, Lorenzo said he contacted the National Rifle Association who, he said, is looking into the legalities of the case. His NRA contact, Chris Oswald, was out of the office for the weekend when WorldNetDaily contacted the NRA late Friday afternoon.

Chris Stark, director of the Texas Gun Owners Alliance, called the action an “outrage,” and said it fell “under the category of unlawful restraint of trade.”

“For Citibank to operate in this manner is a violation of common and ethical business practices and is discriminatory,” he added.

Citi Bank. What do we know about Citi Bank?   What else can we learn?

According to the New York Times: In 2008 “Citigroup stayed afloat with three bailouts totaling $45 billion in federal funds. Lagging behind the rest of Wall Street, it returned to profitability in the first quarter of 2010, as its chief executive, Vikram S. Pandit, said he would move to break up the company, leaving behind a smaller but more prudent business. For the year, it earned $10.6 billion, its first annual profit since 2007.”

After reviewing the following its not hard to see why we have a congress, senate and President who cannot find it in themselves to agree on things that benefit this country but possibly they agree on the welfare of other countries.

The question is, who really is running this country and are these people or corporations slowly destroying our independence and freedom?  Are they all enabled by inaction?  If we have banks, owned by foreign countries or not, brazenly dictating to us what we can spend our money on and what we cant spend our money on. Are they also  dictating to our elected officials?

This is not necessarily about the issue of guns in this country. It just happens that the banks interference with the sale of guns has riled the gun industry and come to public attention.  This is about our freedom. Its the same freedom that our celebrated service people served to protect. Its the freedom to spend our money where and when we like without interference from the government or private enterprise.  If your a person who is not a gun enthusiast think of it this way.

What if you were to buy a car and you wrote a check to the dealer for a brand new Ford only later to find out that the check had bounced. You check with your banker and he/she tell you that they do not like Ford Motor Company and so they are not going to honor your check and in fact are going to cancel your account unless you buy a Toyota or something.

Is that a violation of some banking law?  Probably. Is it a violation of your constitutional right.  YES.  Is our government doing anything about it.  NO

Why would Citi Bank/Citi Groups that have a majority of their stock owned by the Chinese and Arabs  object to gun ownership in the United States?  The Chinese people are not allowed to own guns and the Arabs are using guns on each other.

Why would a prudent person not smell a rat in all of this?  Remember the TARP funds and who received them?

John Boehner 2010

Citigroup  $32,900

American Financial group $81,400

Credit Suisse Group $28,400

Bank of America  $27,750

Consumer Bankers Assn. $27400

Mit Romney

Goldman Sachs$235,275

Citigroup Inc$178,450

Merrill Lynch$176,125

Morgan Stanley$170,350

Lehman Brothers $154,800

UBS AG$125,150

JPMorgan Chase & Co $123,800

Bain & Co $121,475

Marriott International $121,150

Bain Capital $118,550

Kirkland & Ellis $111,700

Credit Suisse Group$104,900

Compuware Corp $103,550

Huron Consulting $102,050

The Villages $102,000

Pricewaterhouse Coopers $92,250

American Financial Group$87,550

Affiliated Managers Group $82,112

Cerberus Capital Management $79,450

Wachovia Corp$77,200

Obama Contributions

University of California $1,648,685

Goldman Sachs$1,013,091

Harvard University $864,654

Microsoft Corp$852,167

Google Inc $814,540

JPMorgan Chase & Co $808,799

Citigroup Inc$736,771

Time Warner $624,618

Sidley Austin LLP $600,

298Stanford University $595,716

National Amusements Inc $563,798

Wilmerhale Llp $550,168

Skadden, Arps et al$543,539

Columbia University $541,002

UBS AG $532,674IBM Corp $532,372

General Electric$529,855US Government $517,908

Morgan Stanley $512,232

Latham & Watkins $503,295

Skadden, Arps et al $360,409

McCain: 2008

Merrill Lynch$375,895

JPMorgan Chase & Co$343,505

Citigroup Inc  $338,202

Morgan Stanley$271,902

Goldman Sachs$240,295

US Government $202,929

AT&T Inc$201,938

Wachovia Corp$199,663

UBS AG$187,493

Credit Suisse Group$184,153


US Army $169,020

Bank of America $167,826

Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher $160,346

Blank Rome LLP $155,226

Greenberg Traurig LLP $147,437

US Dept of Defense $146,356

FedEx Corp$131,974

Lehman Brothers$126,557

Ernst & Young$114,506

Rick Perry

Mr. Perry’s financial picture is difficult to find presumably because he is relatively new to national politics. His campaign contributions available on the net are vague and lack detail however and from what I can determine he too has strong bank support.  Go to this Youtube link and hear a Bank of America representative approach Mr. Perry with an offer of help. Perry has received  $114,123,683 from 1997-2010. Of that amount $2,456,831 came from commercial banks and 11,189,103 from the Oil and Gas industry.


Michelle Bachman

Banking 2011-12   $57,450 from banking interests

Bachman is the lightweight of the group. She received  near the same amount as she did in years past. This may be because  her national political influence has not been validated.



Ron Paul

Mr. Paul is the only major candidate who has not reported taking funds from the Banking Industry however it is reported that he has some Banking Investments. His web site says he does not accept money from corporations.

Hillary Clinton has accepted over $600,000 from Citibank as well and similar amounts from other members of the banking community.   Donald Trump has a long history of doing business with Citibank and in fact Citibank holds 49% of the stock in one of Trump’s  casinos.


Wikipedia says:

Citigroup suffered huge losses during the global financial crisis of 2008 and was rescued in November 2008 in a massive stimulus package by the U.S. government.[9] Its largest shareholders include funds from the Middle East and Singapore.[10] According to the NY Times, on February 23, 2009, Citigroup announced that the United States government would take a 36% equity stake in the company by converting $25 billion in emergency aid into common shares with a US Treasury credit line of $45 billion to prevent the bankruptcy of the largest bank in the world at the time.

In the case of Citi Bank  it was a 45 billion dollar bail out.  Did Citi Bank orchestrate  this with their political friends?  Forty Five billion dollars is chump change when you think of the money that is held in Chinese and Arab banks.  Why didn’t they just bail themselves out?

I think the answer is in the long lists  of campaign contributions to political candidates . I learned a long time ago that when a crime is committed and you don’t have a culprit you follow the money. It will either lead you directly to the perp or close enough that you can see them.

Have a good Labor Day weekend.

Our next presidential and congressional elections my turn out to have make or break consequences for us all.  Voting party lines will not change anything.


Protect your children


Free Book Protectus Prol Password.

Protectus Prol 415x640

 This  book is offered as a contribution to the fight against child  predators.  The PDF is encrypted and cannot be printed or copied  without publisher authorization. The book is under copyright  protection.  If you want a hard copy you can order the book on  Amazon.  This book is used by family counselors  and police  departments as a resource to assist families in protecting their  children from molesters.   If you have not uploaded the book, click on  the links below.Thank you for visiting this site.  The PDF password to read  this book is  (colt45) lower case. You must have Adobe Acrobat 9 or  later to open the file.   Free Spanish Version   English Version