Fun with Signatures

lolosignatures - Copy

Above are various signatures from the INS records that were released to Mr. Kenneth Allen, pursuant to an FOIA request.  Dates of the signatures by Lolo Soetoro are included in the snippets.  Click the image to enlarge it.  The earliest signature was from 1963, top left corner.  The bottom image is from the Soetoro/Dunham marriage record.  Oddly enough, signatures of some of the INS employees resemble Lolo Soetoro’s handwriting.

Mr. John O’Shea’s signature changes from time to time, too.

insemployees - Copy

Some facts deduced from the records:

Lolo Soetoro was in the USA between 9/18/1962 and 6/20/1964 under a grant, studying at the East-West Center of the U of Hawaii, Manoa.

Lolo Soetoro returned to Indonesia on 7/20/1966.  Subsequently, he and his then-wife Stanley Ann Dunham Soetoro attempted to obtain a waiver of a two-year non-residency requirement, so that he could return to the USA.  It was denied and sometime around August 1968, Stanley Ann Soetoro left the USA to join her husband in Indonesia.

Lolo Soetoro re-entered the USA on 10/6/1972 and appears to have remained in the country until 2/6/1974.

Lolo Soetoro was in Indonesia between 2/1974 until 5/1974.

Up until her marriage to Lolo Soetoro, Stanley Ann Dunham was supported by her parents.

Here’s a list of signatures for Stanley Ann Dunham Obama Soetoro, to which I added the one on the right:

sadsignatures - Copyh/t Fred Nerks at Free Republic for the other signatures.  More about SAD’s signatures here.

Here’s a mystery:  Within the INS records is a letter from Lolo Soetoro, wherein he presents his case for a waiver. For some reason, in mid-sentence (mid-word, actually), it appears that he either switched typewriters or switched the font, which was possible if he was using an IBM Selectric and switched font balls.  The only other possibility is that he used a then-60-year-old Blickensderfer and switched font cylinders.  Twice.

The letter was 3 pages.  If we’re to believe our eyes, he wrote page 1, switched fonts, wrote page 2, switched fonts again, and then wrote page 3.

soetoro5 - Copy

Above is the last switch, between pages 2 and 3, where fonts changed in mid-word. Explain it if you can.  Is it an illusion, resulting from scanning and copying? You be the judge.


190 responses to “Fun with Signatures

  1. Edit to ….no Nov 31st please………sheeesssshh

    • Fixed it. No problem.

      You’re right. If she was born in November herself, she should have noticed the wrong date on her affidavit. That’s a legal document. So there were at least two people who didn’t proofread a legal document before signing it. Three didn’t proofread it, if you count the typist, if that was another person.

  2. Show on Monday
    February 9, 2014

    Sharon Rondeau:

    “WE ARE IN A CRISIS: “Birther Report” Website Victim of “Ruthless Cutthroats” – WOBC’s Mike Volin: “We’ve Touched a Nerve””
    “Mike Volin interviews “The Birther Report””

    “Those of you who follow The Birther Report daily know that their blog site was down on Saturday, February 8th, 2014. In it’s place was a message from Google saying the site was taken down by Google because it harbored infectious malware. We now know that the site had been hacked. The Birther Report offers the following explanation:

    “This message is regarding the recent malware notifications that some of our publishers may have experienced. Just before noon today, our engineers discovered that one of our ad serving locations had been hacked.

    Since this attack was discovered, our engineering team worked diligently until 3:45pm EST to ensure that the appropriate action was taken to secure our ad server. Unfortunately during that time, this attack effected 7.8% of our publishers’ domains.”

    More about this event here:

    Tonight’s show will include an interview with the man behind The Birther Report and general discussion about efforts to stop the investigation into Barack Hussein Obama’s fraudulent citizenship documents. Listener participation is encouraged, as always.”

    • Gordo, what’s your educated opinion on whether or not this was a planned operation or just a matter of them hosting ads from unreliable sources? I’m not convinced that Google or anyone else did this deliberately to silence ORYR. Do you understand what they say happened?

      That’s not to say that obots weren’t involved. There are many ways unethical people can make someone’s life miserable, such as making false accusations of copyright infringements, bullying, hate speech, or hosting malware. The site has to go down while there’s an investigation, but when the site is cleared, the damage is done. Revenue lost (for those collecting revenue) but, more importantly, readership lost, momentum lost, message censored by attrition.

      Zenway, you asked about a backup plan–there’s just another reason we don’t need one for this particular type of event. We don’t accept advertisements or make money off the blog. We exist simply for educational purposes, for free speech purposes, and as a forum for people to vent their Constitutionally-protected opinions.

  3. I remember when this site just started, I think folk came together from the PUMA movement supporting Hillary’s run at that time for the nomination vs Mr. Obama, then various of us, including me, got kicked off Texas Darlin’s blog for not shutting up about that eligibility thing and then ITRP very
    helpfully started this site, and I still thank him very much for doing it.
    Seems a long time ago.
    I wonder if the PUMA women would support Hillary again this next time?
    I can’t think of a better site for amatuer sleuthing in the publicly available record than is found on this site.
    It is a joy to be here, even if we (and many others) have not made as much of a result as we were sure we could in those early days.

    • I, too, wonder if most of the “PUMA women” will support Hillary. I can’t imagine how any thinking person who opposes Obama and his policies could possibly support Hillary. They’re two peas in a pod. She joined his administration. We’re supposed to believe in this huge rift between them because of what Obama did to Hillary, even to the extent that McCaskill is now on Hillary’s “enemies list” for supporting Obama. Well, tit for tat. If so, then shouldn’t Hillary be on the PUMA enemies list for doing the same?

      While we grew out of TD’s blog when she shut down for the first time, we aren’t all philosophically in lockstep with TD or the PUMA’s. What united us, I think, was that we opposed Obama. Probably for different reasons. Some because they preferred Hillary to Obama, but not because they opposed his “progressive” agenda. Then there were others (like me) who opposed Obama because we immediately recognized the danger he and his policies represented to our nation, not to mention the fact that he had quite obvious character flaws, which so many did not see, much to our astonishment. These character flaws are the very ones that now confound so many who wonder (amazingly enough) why he believes as president he can do whatever he wants, as he told the French dude only yesterday. He believes he alone can decide which American citizens live and which die by drone strike, NO MATTER WHAT THE CONSTITUTION SAYS. What a surprise! Did we see this in his personality way back in 2007? You betcha. Why didn’t EVERYBODY see it? God only knows.

      dave m: Did you really get kicked off TD’s blog for talking about Barry’s ineligibility? I didn’t know that. I do know that I had to choose my words carefully, although TD was very open minded (for a Hillary supporter and a liberal, although I’m guessing and not particularly sure of how she would characterize her politics).

      Thanks for being here with us and thanks for the compliment. Maybe we all missed our calling and should have been real sleuths instead of amateurs. I think we have, however, and this includes all the blogs that address Obama’s lies about his background, HAVE made a difference, even though it didn’t stop him getting reelected (however that was accomplished).

      PEOPLE KNOW. They KNOW. TRUTH will out. It always does. Someday.

      Like The Dude, we ABIDE. It’s all we can do. Hang on.

  4. oh, I forgot,
    if you were trying to listen to the interview from sheriff joe
    and had trouble with a malware infected site,
    the complete interview is available on beforeitsnews dot com

    • Gordo linked it here, too:

      I’m only just now listening to the entire thing.

    • They have a very high bar to leap in order to reach “mind blowing” or “universe shattering” status, considering that not much of what’s come out about Barry’s illegal executive actions as POtuS, not to mention what the NSA does, has even passed the “ho hum” bar with the general public. (Most recent outrage: Unilaterally changing law to allow people who supported terrorists, but only in a “limited” way, into the USA. Major change to the Patriot Act, but who cares?!)

      The CCP is sure that the LFCOLB is fabricated. They may have two events

      (1) to prove beyond a doubt that the BC is fake (I see minutiae about Xerox machine inner workings) and

      (2) another related to the criminal investigation that grew out of looking into the BC. (No results to be given, from what I hear. Just some info about how it began and is continuing.)

      I begin to suspect that this is more involved with investigating obotic behavior rather than investigating the man himself and his lies and his background. While I would like to see people who broke laws to protect the fraud punished, it’s more important to see the Republic protected, which means that if they can prove he’s fraudulently in office, the number one priority is TO PROVE that, imho.

      Ladysforest analyzed this interview and she reported that it sounds more like they investigated the document’s provenance than what IT CLAIMS to be true. An important distinction. They’re not investigating BARRY. They’re investigating the digital image.

      Simmons says the birth certificate issue is “constitutional” and “perhaps criminal,” and goes to “who we are” as a country. The second issue came out of the BC investigation and is “deeply criminal”. So what can we assume from this?

      First, that they don’t consider the CONTENT of the birth certificate to be absolutely criminal but instead constitutional. (Sounds like that old bugaboo–the “political question”.)

      Second, as to criminality, it sounds more like they’re trying to find forgery or tampering with public records or mail fraud or conspiracy to interfere with law enforcement activities. That’s something cops get people on–mail fraud. We discussed before that perhaps the person went to pick up the document in order to avoid the postal service altogether. How far has the law been extended to apply “mail fraud” to modern electronic dissemination? Is it “mail fraud” to electronically transmit something that’s fraudulent and try to pass it off as legitimate?

      Gallups says “it might set better with the public” if this is two separate things. Well, well. Is that the nose of a political camel coming under the tent? (Leave the TRUTH of his background alone? Go after criminality but leave that first AA POtuS alone?)

      I’m sorry but this is just more of the same. Kicking the can down the road. Now the March date isn’t firm. Now there are two investigations. If you have something universe shattering, do you wait and stall? Waiting like Breitbart?

      Gallups says “birthers” who say “there’s something wrong with the birth certificate” have been “vindicated.” NOTE that he doesn’t say that “birthers” who doubt the TRUTH of what Barry claims on his birth certificate have been vindicated.

      Zullo says the issue has been concluded–the LFCOLB was “fraudulently created for the intent and purpose to defraud.” DUH. So is this the universe shattering information? How have they proved it? If it’s just more opinions from more “experts”, some of whom have dicey resumes and questionable activities in their own backgrounds, then …

      Gallups calls this “earth shattering”: trying to fool the American people. But Zullo says what comes out from the criminal investigation will be “universe shattering.”

      Conversation turns to the issue of the comment on Taitz’s website impersonating Gallups and asking her to “stand down” on behalf of the CCP. Gallups asked if this is panic on their part. Zullo says the obot goal is to cause infighting among “birthers”. CCP has no authority to pursue that issue. They’re not connected to Orly. The letter never happened (wasn’t sent by Gallups), nor did the conversation it purported to report ever happen. Orly is pursuing it herself to determine the perp.

      Obot operatives: Obots have interjected themselves; Gallups says to the point of interfering with the investigation. Does Zullo know who some of these obots are? Zullo says they have a “pretty good idea” who some of the anonymous ones are. One works in the field of artificial intelligence, on projects funded by DARPA. They’ve traced IP addresses back directly to the administration, based on “when log-ins happen and things are posted.” (I think that’s what he said.)

      Obots use psychological games to pull you into their minutiae. (Boy, don’t we know it?! Which is why they aren’t allowed through moderation. 🙂 )

      Gallups goes on to talk about the head fake (my word) of the Xerox machine issue, which we could have told them from the get go was only a head fake. The take away is that this alleged DARPA connection and WH connection involves obot disruption and attempts to discredit the CCP. Zullo’s advice is to ignore them (obots) but he says following up on that Xerox machine issue is “what got us where we are today.” Gallups is “glad they did it.” (Obots, he means. Whatever they did. I read a little of their distraction and deflection and it involves so-called unbiased, self-appointed experts, iirc, whom we’ve looked into before and found lacking and connected.)

      This Xerox issue is what branched into the “deep, deep stuff.” The deeply criminal stuff, is what I take from it. Zullo says they (the outed perps) will “deny, deny, deny” any connection to these agencies or the WH. (Of course.) But Zullo says he has firm proof of the connections. I hope so.

      We have ourselves traced obotic comments back to suspicious people and locations, but with this caveat: It’s possible to spoof IP#’s, as we all know. Does Zullo? I hope he does. Surely he does. (?) We know what the NSA can do. We investigate only when people blatantly violate the comment rules or in order to “vet” a new commenter to protect our blog. We can’t allow through moderation someone who might abuse the privilege and deliberately post something that violates the TOS of WordPress, so we get shut down.

      Our opinion (and what else could it be?): People, even obots, have free speech rights.

      But Zullo is within his legal authority to investigate if these people are trying to stymie a criminal investigation.

      Fuddy: Their (CCP, I assume) position is “it was an unfortunate accident.” Some things are “unsettling” but they have no jurisdiction and until “information surfaces” suggesting otherwise, it was just an “ungodly coincidence.”

      Zullo says you have to “slow down” and this is “how you damage credibility.” Which is exactly why I asked Gordo his opinion on whether or not ORYR was really taken down by obots or just by unbiased hackers.

      • We got a comment from a well-known self-described obot (see below). I’m not inclined to let out of moderation a person whose website calls us, on the front page, “bad”. For what it’s worth, here’s the commment, which is okay from a “following our comment rules” standpoint:

        “I enjoyed reading your comment. One thing I would point out is that the “Obots” were among the first to identify the ”Gallups stand down letter” to Orly Taitz as a fake. My own article on it opened: “I don’t believe it for a moment.”

        I don’t know who’s messing with Taitz, but I would bet that it stems from a personal dislike of her rather than any kind of strategy. It’s like an April Fool joke that you know will be found out in a short time. Obviously, all Gallups had to do was say “I didn’t write that” and the effect of the fake letter goes away.

        What puzzles me is what significance there might be for an anonymous vocal anti-birther to work for the White House. I don’t know of such a person, but if there were, so what? Lots of people get on the Internet from work, and I bet lots of folks in the White House don’t like birthers.”

        I wanted to respond to the “what significance there might be” angle. The significance, imho, is that if the IP traces back to a government-funded site, meaning that the person is AT WORK and may work FOR US, directly or indirectly (funded by a grant or contract) then it is at least arguably illegal to engage in political activities on the People’s dime. Many companies will fire someone who uses company resources to post personal (or political) messages on the Internet, especially while on the clock.

        In the case of government, and especially when a person is engaged in POLITICAL speech or dirty tricks, it’s a huge no-no or at least should be. Many are the politicians who are caught having public employees using public resources for campaign purposes (several governors in ILLINOIS, e.g.). Either the persons are employed by us and are shirking their duties and using public resouces paid for by ALL the taxpayers, or else they are on SOMEBODY else’s payroll and may be using taxpayer-funded resources illegally to provide political support for that person, or, worse, these people are being paid with taxpayer monies to work AGAINST political opponents, which I would think is most definitely illegal.

        An easy way to decide is to play the imagination game: Imagine that GWB were still in the Oval Office and somebody who works in his administration is playing April-Fool-like jokes (to put a gloss on it) to deliberately disrupt your blog, to lead you on a wild goose chase, or to impersonate one of your allies. You trace the IP# back to a government office or to a company that’s working under a government contract. Would that be fine with you? Would you then simply dismiss it as a joke?

        Would you think it’s only a person who doesn’t like somebody with your political point of view, so it’s fine? Nothing to see here, folks. MOVE ON.

        If they just don’t like you, then does that make it okay and would you be out of line to complain about it? Or would you RIGHTFULLY say that it’s something that deserves investigation and punishment, if it turns out to be true that somebody in the GWB administration is using public resources to engage in political gamesmanship and disruption?

  5. Dead BUTT’ did he get paid first? ya just …do-not-mess-up-ever!
    RIP Boris Avdeyev & all who knew U … so very disgusting

  6. Is this supposed to be a SAD signature also? From high school?

  7. Of no consequence, just having fun with signatures
    Barbara J. Hanchett

    • Prayer Area for Grace Episcopal Church
      By the Rev. Robert Walden
      Grace MolokaiGrace Church, Molokai, has decided to establish a prayer area in the back of the Church dedicated to the Episcopal Saints of Hawaii and specifically those of Moloka’i, Damien and Marianne, whose special day in Holy Women, Holy Men has been designated as April 15. We also felt that since we are the only Episcopal Church on Moloka’i, it is highly appropriate to have a special area designated to Father Damien and Mother Marianne. We have obtained pictures done by a local artist of Father Damien and Mother Marianne, and also have a picture of King Kamehameha and Queen Emma. We envision that the pictures are to be mounted and a prayer desk/bench/kneeler along with special lighting will be provided. The project is still very much a work in progress and will be funded by Richard Hanchett as a memorial for his recently deceased wife, Barbara.

      • That’s the church where Fuddy’s stepsister was pastor. RIP. She looked like a sweet lady. I wonder if Lolo and SAD married there? If so, then how did she come to be the witness? I wondered if she were simply someone handy. Maybe working at the church or something? Of course this wedding predated Fuddy’s sister. Wonder who was pastor then? More likely SAD knew her through their common interests: social work/anthropology. Ya think?

        • No, they married (according to the certificate) in the Home of the Officiant. I would think one of the signature boxes would be for the officiant but I can’t read what they say.

          • Good find. So could it have been his home? Also, is it possible that Charles Bennett is somehow related to that other Bennett, John (?), who was involved with Subud?

            “As Archdeacon of Maui, Hanchett was instrumental in helping the church people of that island to establish Camp Pecusa at Oluwalu and in assisting the people of Moloka’i to establish Grace Church, Ho’olehua. The church was located within sight of the Shingle Memorial Hospital, in whose chapel the Hanchett family was baptized, and where his parents both served.

            At St. George’s, Pearl Harbor for the year 1960-61, Fr. Hanchett was called to St. Peter’s, Honolulu in September 1961. As rector of St. Peter’s he not only served the parish, but also the diocese as: director of summer camps and youth conferences; member of the Board of Directors; Council of Advice; director of the Finance Committee; committee on Christian Social Relations; Chairman of the St. Andrew’s Priory Council; and alumni representative on the Iolani Board of Governors. He served the community at large as a member of: the advisory board of the Queen Liliuokalani Trust Estate; the Oahu Committee for Children and Youth; the Board of Directors of Hawaii Planned Parenthood; chairman of the committee for Institutional Chaplaincies of the Hawaii Council of Churches. E. Lani Hanchett became our suffragan bishop on 30 December 1967 in St. Andrew’s Cathedral, Honolulu, and later our diocesan bishop. He died in August ’75.

            The Hanchetts have four children: Stuart (Iolani 1966), Carolyn (Priory 1960), Suzanne (Priory 1963), and Tiare (Priory 1972). The church in Hawai’i may rejoice that by the grace of God a child of her own land and people was matured enough to be called to serve us as priest and bishop.”

            Doesn’t look as if he was at that church in ’65.

        • ^^ Good catch. I hadn’t seen that or made that out before. So they married at the officiant’s house or residence. If a minister, could it be a rectory or vicarage? Hmmm. So do we know Barbara’s maiden name? Forgive me if somebody’s posted that already. She was older than SAD would be.
          ~ ~
          I think its Spencer from things I was reading this morning. I was able to make out Residence of the Officiant, Ho’Olehua Molokai and went in search of the “residence” and found the Church to research.

          I am still looking into how a person’s race is Indonesian, also.

          • Spencer is a good possibility. I thought it was Sparrow or Spencer. There is a surname “FONES”, too. Can’t tell if that’s what it says or not.

          • Oh, do you mean for her maiden name? That’s possible. Brother Cecil Spencer. Hmmm.

          • Hope you don’t mind. Thanks to you, I found her in the census, I believe:
            “Name: Cecil Spencer
            Titles and Terms:
            Event Type: Census
            Event Date: 1940
            Event Place: Tract 1, Honolulu Judicial District, Representative District 5, Honolulu, Hawaii Territory, United States
            Gender: Male
            Age: 6
            Marital Status: Single
            Race (Original): Part Hawaiian
            Race: Part Hawaiian
            Relationship to Head of Household (Original): Son
            Relationship to Head of Household: Son
            Birthplace: Hawaii
            Birth Year (Estimated): 1934
            Last Place of Residence:
            District: 2-120
            Family Number: 461
            Sheet Number and Letter: 26A
            Line Number: 35
            Affiliate Publication Number: T627
            Affiliate Film Number: 4586
            Digital Folder Number: 005460009
            Image Number: 01085
            Household Gender Age Birthplace
            Head Abigail Spencer F 31 Hawaii [it said she was divorced]
            Daughter Barbara Spencer F 12 Hawaii [right age if born in 1927]
            Daughter Joyce Spencer F 10 Hawaii
            Daughter Audrey Spencer F 9 Hawaii
            Daughter Beverly Spencer F 7 Hawaii
            Son Cecil Spencer M 6 Hawaii [there’s her brother Cecil]
            Son Clayton Spencer M 1 Hawaii
            Mother Peter Kamalii F 56 Hawaii [now this is confusing, but it’s a transcription]
            Sister Carol Kamalii F 37 Hawaii [head of household’s sister? So Abigail’s sister?]
            Brother Clarence Kamalii M 19 Hawaii”

    • So, on the subject of signatures, is anyone able to make out the ones on the marriage certificate, besides Barbara Hanchett? My best guesses were Matthew Sparrow and Elwood Jones for the ones above and below hers, but I don’t get any likely hits on those names so I’m stumped. Also, does anyone have a blank or other Hawaii marriage cert. circa 1965ish? I can’t make out WHO

      those signatures are (that is, what was their role in the wedding, e.g. is one of them the officiant? are they all witnesses?).

      • I have been pouring over them. I thought the one was Edward Jones – either way, found nothing.

        Here’s Charles G. Bennett and some info on Vital Records.

        Click to access CHARLESBENNETT.pdf

        check out page 5 from 1961,

      • I can’t make those names out, either. Haven’t seen any other forms like that, either.

      • Could it be Edward B. (or O.) Fone or Tone? (Doesn’t look like a T; more like F.) Then there’s some little word above his last name that I can’t make out. Looks like Dep? Definitely looks like Matthew K. (?) Sp-something. A “d” on the end? It looks like Matthew was a witness. Barbara, too. Then it does say residence of the officiant, Ho’olehua, Moloka’i. Is the name on that line Mitchell something or other?

        • Could it possibly be Matthew K Spencer?

          Time for me to move on 🙂 to the next Mystery. lol!

          • Possibly THIS Matthew K Spencer?Matthew Kekumuokalani Spencer
            March 27, 2005
            Matthew Kekumuokalani Spencer, 93, of Hoolehua, Molokai, died in Molokai General Hospital. He was born in Honolulu. He is survived by son Wilfred, daughter Jeanette Scharenbroch, 10 grandchildren and 15 great-grandchildren. Services: 11 a.m. today at Hoolehua Congregational Church, Hoolehua. Call after 9 a.m. Burial to follow at Kanakaloloa Cemetery.

          • I think it could be,SEO Just thinking that for some reason they were at the residence and were asked to be witnesses — or maybe — that was part of their duties if they worked there.

        • I am still looking at that… tried to get away from it – the whole thing, but no, I’m obsessed. Okay so having some fun and now looking at the psychology of SAD’s signature.

          1. Do newly married women sign their marriage licenses/ certificates with their husband’s surname or do they sigh their name as it appears on the document?

          2. At first glance it would seem that SAD adds Lolo’s name above the Soetoro in her signature, but thinking it through, it appears she signed Lolo first and then squished Soetoro in as it based on the size of the capital S on the line. Why did she do that?

          3. In the block above the signatures it states “I certify” and then all the signatures… is that usual? Doesn’t the word I usually mean singular? Just wondering on that one.

          4. Next to the line of the Place “Residence of Officiant” there is a signature Mitchell or something something – would that be the line for the person who performed the ceremony? And if not, what is the purpose of that signature? And if not, because the officiant is below the Residence line, what is the purpose of the additional signature next the residence line? Would the officiant need to have a witness as well?

          5. Does Lolo’s age 30 appear to be typed and yet SAD’s handwritten?

          • 1. Good question. I found an example from 1911 and the wife signed her maiden name (for the last time, probably). Here’s another from 1914. (I love it; an Irish lass marrying an Italian fella.) I found some where the officiant or a clerk filled the whole thing out and nobody signed but the witnesses.

            2. Another good question. I can’t think of ANY reason why she’d put his first name or his last name on that line.

            3. Got me. It doesn’t make a lot of sense. I haven’t had any luck finding another 1965 Hawaiian marriage record online.

            4. I wish we could make out at least the captions for the boxes. I was going to ask you all which person you think was the officiant. Where is anything that says the ADDRESS of the ceremony? Is the town and island sufficient without giving a legal address? It’s almost as if somebody didn’t know.

            5. I didn’t notice that, but it sort of looks as if both are handwritten. As if somebody took the birth dates and calculated the age, maybe for keypunching purposes? So did they figure her age correctly? Does that say 21? 1965 – 1942 = 23 but she didn’t have her birthday yet so it should be 22, right? (I’m math challenged, so help me here.) If she truly was only 21, then the marriage date might really be 1964 and that means she’s a bigamist. But surely it’s just yet another “MISTAKE” on their official documents.

            Could the name below the line saying that marriage was at the residence be DAVID Fone? I thought that was an “E” but maybe it’s a sloppy “D” because the rest of the name looks like “avid”.

            Now check this out:
            We may have talked about this before, but WHY does that “paper” look like alligator skin (click to make it larger) and why is it greenish and why is that pen floating there? To try to make us think they had the actual newspaper?

          • I too deduced it read David, too. ~~ and like you, too, I think it reads 21 for her age; and wish I could make out the pre-printed captions. That Residence thing is what made look at the signatures. I started out with Hunnicutt for Hanchett.

            Your link with the files. — First time I ever saw the “Driver’s License” and he marriage certificate.

            6. Why does the certificate of marriage have an April 2008 time stamp?
            Who needs to get a print out copy of their marriage certificate?

            That’s a great link! The PEN says: thou doth protest too much.

            7. Would the State Department really release bogus documents under FOIA?

            8. Regardng the ‘Application to Amend Passport’ with the 6/29/1967 date and official signature on it – why is SAD requesting to have it amended to read her married name when it clearly states her Passport’s dated 7/19/1965? Was she not already Soetoro on 7/19/65? and – why did she fail to include the notorious Dunham as part of her name? – and why did she fail to date her signature? – and one more thing, why did she once again have to squish in the name Stanley in the block where she wanted her name changed?

            Was the application and EPIC FAIL and put into her file as such? Reading Lolo’s documents they were awfully busy those days with the Immigration Department breathing down their necks as Inspector Potter had been assigned to them.

            Pages 7 and 8

            Which reminds to mention that 7/19/65 date – the “date” of her passport: on pages 96 and 97 of Lolos documents they were being interviewed by their personal inspector — and finally, gave up the Obama divorce decree that had been an issue…

            • I don’t remember seeing that driver’s license info before, either. It expired in 2008? Did he originally get it in 1996?

              6. As for the Mooch marriage certificate. I don’t see any embossed seal. 🙂 They allegedly got all these documents together when he decided to run for POTUS.

              7. Who knows if they would release bogus documents or not? Hillary was running the State Dept. from 2009. Brennan’s peeps cauterized some records. It was an old DemoncRAT trick; remember Clinton’s Sandy Burglar in the National Archives? Isn’t there suspicion that rolls of microfilm were switched out, made missing, lost, misfiled somewhere nobody knows? Other records destroyed deliberately or by “mistake”? The cauterizers were engaged and hard at work, I suspect, as soon as all these documents were being rounded up. The Indonesian ones were taken care of by that Faleo-whatever-his-name is. So if the records were tampered with, then that’s all they have TO release and they may or may not know anything’s bogus. All those details in the passport and INS records–it’s a monumental task to “fix” them all, thus the discrepancies.

              8. Another good catch, Papoose. If she really was married to Soetoro in March 1965, then why didn’t she put her married name on the passport when she renewed it or got it for the first time in JULY 1965? That may be WHY the application for that 1965 passport is missing or destroyed. Conveniently.

              • I always wondered why one of her passport photos is the same one that the East-West Center had on some publication (50th anniversary?) that they put out RIGHT BEFORE the passport files were suddenly released. And why do the photos look photoshopped? Back in the day, you had to go to the passport office to get your photo taken. So how, then, does the East-West Center have a copy of her PASSPORT photo? Did Maya give them a copy off a passport she found in her mother’s effects? Or did the East-West Center supply the photo, somehow, at some time (in the seventies?) to the passport office?

          • ladysforest:

            “Ponder this: No one can access the Certification Of Live Birth (COLB) presented as proof of obama’s birth in HI. But they cannot restrict the public’s access to these microfilms.

            It is truly remarkable how these are morphing since first being discovered, allegedly, at the State Library in Honolulu HI, is it not?”

            “*After the first postings of the freshly discovered obama birth announcements, many noticed that the appearance of the obama announcements changed considerably over a short period of time. Much like the COLB did. …”


          • Thanks for bringing this wonderful research back to the forefront, GORDO.

            Went through all of ladysforest’s work last night… Wondering if you see the video where the woman was filmed getting a copy of a BC? I couldn’t pin it down.

            It just amazes me at this point in time, we are refreshing our collective memory instead of following live proceedings of a criminal trial.

          • Using the logics that the newspaper announcements prove his birth in HI than the lack of a marriage application listing proves no marriage between Sr and Mommy in HI. (the birth announcements are followed by marriage applications postings.

          • From >>> October 17, 2010

            “New Research: Note to Obots; Woman Ordering Long-Form Birth Certificate from the Hawaii Department of Health in 2010.”


            “Some Tropical Truth”


            At YouTube:

            Uploaded on October 14, 2010

            “This film was taken in the Dept. of Health, Honolulu HI in mid-July 2010. You may need to crank up your volume to hear the woman at the counter.”

          • Yes, I”m with you, Hoot.

            It all makes perfect nonsense.

    • Just having fun with signatures, Miri. 🙂

      My original thought this morning that the “witnesses” could have just been people present at the time of their arrival at the “residence” that day, No one they knew. You’d think friends would have accompanied them.

      That marriage certificate though – of course SAD had to play with her signature — adding stuff, smooshing in stuff, always some new rendition…

      ~ The article in the Syracuse Herald from May 4th, 1943… funny that the writer failed to mention why the baby girl had a man’s name. That is so weird.

  8. Looking for Barbara Jean again and found this:

    by Andrew Walden

    Lloyd Kimura, a Democrat donor, gambler, and brother of Hawaii County Prosecutor Jay Kimura, pled guilty December 28 in State Court to operating a multi-million dollar Ponzi scheme known as Maui Industrial Loan & Finance Co. or Maui Finance Co. (MFC). He could face up to 20 years in prison. (UPDATE: Jay Kimura, on Jan. 7, announced his resignation effective April 1. He plans to move to Maui.)

    But Kimura’s admission of guilt is just the beginning. In Hawaii Federal Bankruptcy Court, MFC Bankruptcy Trustee Dan S. Field is suing a former co-owner of Kimura’s Ponzi scheme, RNI-NV. RNI is a limited partnership controlled by Robert N Iwamoto Jr, the owner of Roberts Hawaii bus line. Iwamoto is a major DoE transportation contractor. Iwamoto’s son, Hawaii Board of Education member and attorney Mr. Kim Coco Iwamoto, is one of the nation’s highest ranking transsexual elected officials. RNI-NV had been a minority owner of the Ponzi scheme from 1999 until October 8, 2007. According to court documents, RNI-NV’s original “investment” was reportedly $1 million.

    I didn’y read the whole thing, but there is an estate involved going back to 1958…

    Long story but there is a Barbara Jean Spencer Hanchett listed as a defendant 2010.

    • Interesting. I’m just sayin’. I haven’t read it yet.

    • This person may be an attorney.

      Huge case though, wow, tons of defendants. Maybe someday we’ll see a case that will have pages of Defendants, as well. Names we all know.

    • one of the nation’s highest ranking transsexual elected officials.

      I almost missed that! Maybe he’s not THE highest ranking, though. How weird.

        • Yea, and now this article refers to him as Ms.

          What is it? a woman who was a guy or a guy that was a woman?
          I’m so confused. What is it??????

        • I read the article and it seems like the writer conveys that its nonsensical, even stating now they are making up Hawaiian terms out of thin air.

          Its exhausting.

          • I noticed that, too. Now those who don’t go along with their multiple genders are angry that some are corrupting the Hawaiian language by making up terms for this. It’s exhausting AND hilarious at the same time. The PC police hoist on their own petards.

      • Yeah, I caught that and so decided to include the paragraph in the intro to the link! Was Mr. Kim Coco Iwamoto a woman and that’s why they had to give him a title “Mr.” because son wasn’t emphatic enough?

        Now how does a woman become a man… like Chaz, for instance? I can’t wrap my head around it. Just like that Thomas guy that is on his fourth pregnancy. He’s a guy with a womb because he’s really a woman.
        sheeesh. He was married to a woman so does that make him straight? Now he has a girlfriend and she’s actually going to carry the Baby…. omg, I can’t stand it. And they want us to buy into this crap like we’re the abnormal ones.

        • I think they build them one and then use a pump. Not that I know for sure or even want to. I did seem to notice, while reading those articles, that the writers kept getting mixed up or maybe the titles and pronouns changed as s/he did.

          Did we talk about how Piers Morgan was put through the wringer recently by a transsexual that was on his show, because Piers (what kind of name is Piers, anyway?) dared to mention that the person was a boy until “she” had the operation? The person demanded an apology. I heard about this on the radio and it makes no sense AT ALL.

          So NOW it’s disrespectful and discriminatory even to mention that the person was once otherwise and, in this case, this person was HAWKING A BOOK in which s/he told all about his/her life as a BOY before getting re-gendered or whatever the proper name is for it.

          All I can think of is TURDI. Remember her? Is this the deep dark secret? Are Hawaiians like anthropologists claim some other tribes are: that they have “multiple genders”? Just a little cultural sensitivity is all that’s needed? Or are Indonesians included in those multiple gender societies, too?

          “… they want us to buy into this crap like we’re the abnormal ones.”

          Ain’t that the truth? I do feel compassion, but I’m not going to say that it’s NORMAL. By definition and all that’s holy, it’s NOT.

          Yeah. Sometimes something goes haywire and people get born with both sets of equipment or even no complete set. It happens and it’s a birth defect.

          Papoose, it’s going so nutty that now there’s such a thing as a deaf “community” and you’re not supposed to say a person born deaf is born with a defect or is in any way abnormal and people like Rush Limbaugh or deaf children who get cochlear implants are TRAITORS to the deaf “community” because they CHOOSE to avail themselves of modern technology so their deficit can be overcome. It’s INSANE.

          In that case, then nobody should wear eyeglasses. Right? Or get tooth implants. JUST GUM THAT DAMNED FOOD so you maintain solidarity with the TOOTHLESS COMMUNITY. Arghhhhhhhh!!!!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s