ContrarianCommentary.com - the Internet Powerhouse

Barack Obama is ineligible to be president: Andy Martin explains why in simple, understandable terms

BULLETIN: Andy Martin’s schedule is running late. His news conference will be at 4:00 P.M., not 2:00 P.M. as originally scheduled. Same location: Third Avenue

 

Legal scholar and Obama author/film producer Andy Martin today presented the U. S. Army with a simple and direct explanation of why Barack Obama is ineligible to serve as President, and why Lt. Col. Terry Lakin lacks criminal intent in challenging Obama’s authority as Commander in Chief.

 

Martin’s letter to General George Casey provides unique insight into earlier unsuccessful lawsuits challenging Obama’s eligibility, and explains why the current military court martial of Lakin is based on a different legal foundation: Lakin is in the direct chain of command and has the right to question Obama’s legitimacy as a commander in chief. Martin’s views were delivered at a New York City news conference. Martin called Obama the type of “drive-by president” that the founders wished to preclude from holding the office.

 

CONTRARIANCOMMENTARY.COM

Independent Worldwide News and Opinion

New York-London-Washington-Chicago-San Francisco-Palm Beach

 

 

 

"The Internet Powerhouse"

 

 

Headquarters mail:

Post Office Box 1851

New York, NY 10150-1851

Tel. (866) 706-2639

Fax (866) 707-2639

Web: ContrarianCommentary.com

E-mail: [email protected]

 

 

 

 

Anthony R. Martin, J. D.

Executive Editor

 

 

 

 

May 26, 2010

 

 

General George W. Casey, Jr.

Chief of Staff

United States Army

1400 Defense Pentagon

Washington, DC 20301-1400

 

 

 

Re: Lt. Col. Terry Lakin

 

 

Dear General Casey:

 

As the person whom left-wing media call the “King of the Birthers,” and as the writer who originally raised questions about President Barack Obama’s missing birth certificate and legal status, I would like to provide some independent information concerning the potential court martial of Lt. Col. Terry Lakin.

 

I am completely independent and impartial in so far as the Lakin matter is concerned. So far as I am aware I have not had any contact with anyone involved in Lakin’s specific case. I am the author of the Obama book “Obama: The Man Behind The Mask” which first raised questions about Obama’s citizenship.

 

The concepts which follow are complex. This letter is a summary or distillation of the issues and questions raised, and should not be considered an exhaustive discussion.

 

1. What is a “birther?”

 

The left-wing media have grouped together everyone who questions the circumstances concerning Barack Obama’s birth and citizenship as a “birther.” Obama’s original 1961 birth certificate is missing; Obama has refused to release it. I have a lawsuit pending in Hawai’i to open the state’s records. That’s why I am called the original or “King” birther.

 

Hawai’i officials are hiding something but I don’t quite know what.

 

Thus, because I believe Obama was actually born in Hawai’i, strictly speaking I am not a “birther.” Despite some criticism because I accept the birther term created by Obama’s media mujahideen, I think it is fair to say I triggered and created doubts about Obama’s birth and citizenship. As a form of shorthand I am a birther. Birther is a convenient way of expressing an uneasiness that concerns tens of millions of Americans.

 

In the absence of Obama’s real documentation, a large universe of fanciful argumentation has been created by some of Obama’s critics (not including me). There are persistent claims Obama was born in Kenya (fostered in part by Michelle Obama). I am constantly bombarded by persons who believe there is “evidence” for this assertion. I have seen no credible evidence Obama was born in Kenya.

 

2. Why you should proceed cautiously

 

You might be tempted to consider the “birther” controversy a diversion. As commander of the Army, you should not do so. Birther sentiments are concentrated in the states and communities where the Army receives most of its volunteers. In other words, you don't find a lot of Army people from Manhattan who are birthers, but then you don’t get a lot of soldiers from Manhattan either.

 

But birther sentiments are extremely strong across the south and west, where the bulk of the Army comes from. Thus, I would tread cautiously in wading into the birther brouhaha generated by Colonel Lakin. Making fun of the beliefs of families who provide the bulk of your soldiers is not a good idea.

 

3. Is Obama’s birth certificate really germane to Lakin’s claim?

 

While Obama’s 1961 birth certificate is of immense historical importance, that document is only peripherally necessary to a determination of Col. Lakin’s claim that the Commander in Chief needs to establish his legitimacy. (Obama’s document could potentially reflect a Kenyan or other foreign birth that was merely “certified” in Hawai’i. We don’t know.)

 

Nevertheless, by his own admission, President Obama is not eligible to hold the office of president.

 

While Obama did receive more votes than John McCain, Americans were slow to realize that Obama simply lacked the constitutional qualifications to serve as president. Please allow me to explain.

 

4. Why Obama is ineligible/the “natural born citizen” issue

 

A. Who is eligible to serve as president?

 

The Constitution has one additional and specific term

among the qualifications to serve as president. A president must be a “natural born citizen.” The term “natural born citizen” (“NBC”) is not defined in the Constitution itself, or anywhere else in contemporaneous American law at the time Constitution was adopted.

 

There seems to be agreement among legal scholars where the NBC term originated. John Jay sent George Washington a letter asking that a future commander in chief (“CIC”) be an NBC. That’s as far as scholarly agreement extends. It is important to note that no federal court has ever squarely confronted or clearly defined what NBC means. As one federal judge has stated, “the question is not completely free from doubt.” It is also a truism that most of the commentary on the NBC issue has come from “liberal,” not conservative, scholars and so we have not really had a full-throated debate on what NBC really means.

 

B. Does the term “NBC” have independent meaning?

 

While the term NBC did not have independent American meaning at the time of the Constitution itself, there was significant existing European literature that discussed and refined the term. Jay was a scholar and was probably aware of that writing. Thus, the founders can reasonably be presumed to have been aware of the significance of NBC term Jay requested be placed in the Constitution.  That is why the “legislative history” is so sparse. They knew what they were talking about.

 

In a sort-of “search and avoid” mission we knew in Viet-Nam, liberal scholars recently have sought to “search” for the NBC term’s origins but “avert” their eyes from use of the term NBC in European literature during the second half of the eighteenth century. I believe they are “avoiding” European writings because these writing explain the term NBC in a way that liberal scholars do not want to concede.

 

The term NBC meant, and still means, someone who was not only born in a country but someone who had both of his parents as citizens of the country at the time of his or her birth. In other words, someone could not just come to this country and have a baby and have that person “grow up to be president” unless both of the parents of the future president were also citizens at the time of his or her birth. This heightened “test” explains why the special NBC words were inserted in the Constitution.

 

C. What were they afraid of?

 

There is scholarly agreement that at the time the Constitution was adopted, the founders were afraid of potential future Anglo-Germanic usurpation. In other words, they had a real fear which motivated them to ensure that the CIC met a much higher standard of qualification than mere citizenship. They wanted a CIC to have greater ties to this nation than mere presence on the land.    

 

D. Why is Obama ineligible?

 

Obama is a U. S. Citizen and became one at birth. He is not and could not become an NBC. Why? What is the distinction? For over  hundred years, U. S. Supreme Court precedent has accepted that anyone physically born in the United States is a citizen. But remember that the NBC requirement was obviously more than “mere citizenship,” because the term was inserted in the qualifications for only one office (president) while lesser offices (Senator and Representative) required only “citizenship.”

 

It is axiomatic that in using a specific and special term for the president, the founders meant to imbue the office with a greater test for qualification to serve.

 

Obama is ineligible by his own admission. He claims his father was Barack Hussein Obama (“BHO”) from Kenya. Ironically, Obama’s case illustrates exactly what the founders were trying to prevent: a drive-by president.

BHO had no ties to this country. He came here presumably on a student visa and very likely never even became a permanent resident. He left behind a Kenyan wife and children, and returned to them. Today we would call our president a “non-martial” offspring of BHO in preference to a harsher term in use at the time of Obama’s birth.

 

BHO had no ties to this country, yet through some process he deposited a “president” on our soil. That is exactly the type of tenuous connection to America that the founders thought should not permit someone to become president. They wanted to require a multi-generational presence as eligibility to serve as president.

 

So, by his own admission that his father was someone with no ties and no citizenship claims to this nation, Obama is ineligible to serve as president. He is the example that proves the rule and proves precisely what the founders were trying to prevent. BHO created the very “drive-by president” that the founders feared in adopting the NBC clause.

 

Ironically, I have advanced the theory that Obama’s real, or biological, father is Frank Marshall Davis. If my theory is correct, and only if my theory is correct, is Obama actually an NBC. Davis was indisputably an American citizen.

 

5. Prior litigation

 

There have been many lawsuits exploring the NBC issue. I predicted they would fail, and I was correct. I have over forty years of successful federal court litigation experience. But none of the cases involved a determination on the merits of the definition of NBC. Instead, judges dismissed lawsuits because the plaintiffs lacked “standing.” Standing is an artificial concept created by the judiciary to ensure that people litigate real claims instead of hypothetical disputes. Judges held that ordinary citizens could not challenge presidential election issues due to a lack of particularized injury, or standing.

 

However, Col. Lakin’s challenge to his commander in chief falls in an entirely different legal category, a fact hitherto ignored by both the media and the military. I think this is why you should proceed cautiously with Col. Lakin’s claims.

 

6. What makes Lakin’s claim unique, and substantial

 

Unlike a civilian court where an individual plaintiff may lack standing to challenge a government official’s eligibility to hold office, a military court martial is not a civilian court. Historically, a court martial is part of the military chain of command. Military discipline culminating in a court martial flows through the military system, not through an independent system of civil justice. Courts martial are the military.

 

Thus, while ordinary civilians may lack standing to challenge a commander’s qualifications, that is not true in the case of a military officer.

 

Col. Lakin is challenging the constitutional qualifications of his commanding officer. (Military law also allows an officer to challenge what may be invalid orders under the “Nuremberg" doctrine and similar modern concepts of military restraint and responsibility.) In my legal opinion, Lakin’s case lacks any indicia of criminal intent. In my legal opinion, Lakin clearly has standing to raise and proffer his concerns because unlike an ordinary civilian in a civil court, Lakin is an officer by Act of Congress. Lakin is in the direct chain of command with the president/commander.

 

Thus, while civilian judges could bar ordinary litigants, I don’t think that the military chain of command which culminates in President Obama can make a claim that an officer lacks standing to “stand up” to his commander.

 

In my legal opinion, the fact that Lakin is in the chain of command and is raising issues related to the legitimacy of the chain of command takes this case out of the prior legal cases that were unsuccessfully raised in the civil courts.

 

7. Where do we go from here?

 

A. Where do you go?

 

Because I am not part of the Lakin case I will refrain

from making specific recommendations. Nevertheless, because of the unique fact that Lakin's claim arises in the chain of command, his argument or demand cannot be dismissed as mere posturing. You have a real problem even if it is not the one which is framed by the media (the “missing birth certificate”).

 

Just as an aside, you might suggest to the president that he authorize me and other scholars to receive a copy of the 1961 Hawai'i birth certificate. That would help lift the cloud on his origins though not on his NBC status. Every little bit helps.

 

B. Where do we as a nation go?

 

The longer President Obama plays games with his origins and refuses to address the very serious questions that exist about his citizenship and eligibility, the greater will be the eventual reaction to his legerdemain.

 

The left-wing mainstream media have tried to make a joke of Obama’s missing birth certificate.

 

But the American public does not take the matter lightly.

 

There is a vast disconnect between media sentiment and public sentiment on this issue.

 

I will have more to say on how Obama can be removed in a future discussion. For now, I think it is essential that you adopt the public’s view, and not the media’s view, and treat Lakin’s issue of NBC status as a serious issue and not a joke for late-night comedians.

 

 

Respectfully submitted,

 

ANDY MARTIN

Executive Editor

 

AM:sp

 

Andy Martin: Barack Obama is not eligible to serve as president

In Part Three of his “Birther Chronicles” Andy Martin prepares to explain why Barack Obama is not constitutionally eligible to serve as president. Martin, who Obama operatives call “The King of the Birthers,” has performed exhaustive investigations both on the scene in Hawai’i and in legal literature. He will hold a news conference in New York May 26th to release his findings on Obama’s eligibility. Martin will tie the release of his legal opinion on Obama’s constitutional eligibility to the possible court martial case of Lt. Col. Terry Lakin who is demanding proof that Obama is constitutionally eligible to serve as Commander In Chief.

 

The Birther Chronicles Part Three: Internet Powerhouse Andy Martin will state that Barack Obama is not eligible to be president and comment on the case of Lt. Col. Terry Lakin

 

Martin says that his research team has canvassed the law and is prepared to issue a definitive analysis and opinion concerning Obama’s eligibility

 

ContrarianCommentary.com

 

“The Internet Powerhouse”

 

Andy Martin

Executive Editor

 

“Factually Correct, Not Politically Correct”

 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

 

ATTENTION DAYBOOK/ASSIGNMENT EDITORS

 

ANNOUNCEMENT OF NEW YORK NEWS CONFERENCE WEDNESDAY

 

ANDY MARTIN SAYS BARACK OBAMA’S PRESENCE IN THE WHITE HOUSE RAISES THE “+SPECTER OF AN ILLEGAL PRESIDENT”

 

MARTIN PROMISES A BLOCKBUSTER ANALYSIS THAT WILL “ROCK THE PENTAGON”

 

(NEW YORK)(May 25, 2010)  ContrarianCommentary.com’s Executive Editor, Andy Martin, will hold a New York City news conference Wednesday, May 26th to issue his legal opinion that Barack Obama is not eligible to serve as President due to the fact he is not a “natural born citizen” by Obama’s own admission.

 

“During the past six years that I have studied Barack Obama the ‘natural born citizen’ issue has risen to paramount importance. Previously I have not expressed a definitive opinion. On Wednesday I will do so.

 

“My legal opinion and conclusion will be communicated to the U. S. Army and will, I believe, have a blockbuster impact on the Pentagon. Lt. Col. Terry Lakin has refused to go to Afghanistan on the basis that Barack Obama is not eligible to be president. While I will be acting ‘in’ Colonel Lakin’s case, I am not involved with Lakin's defense and my opinions are completely independent of the advice given by his attorneys.

 

“Nevertheless, the issues Lakin raises present two separate and independent questions: [1] Is Obama constitutionally eligible to be president? [2] What if he is not eligible? What happens next? Where does that leave Col. Lakin?

 

“My conclusion is that Barack Obama is not constitutionally eligible, by his own admission, to serve as president.

 

“I have been working up to this conclusion for approximately a year. This why I believe Obama operatives stole the tapes from my April, 2009 First National Conference on Barack Obama’s Missing Birth Certificate held in Washington, DC.

 

“I sketched out substantially the same views in our Second National Conference in December and I have been somewhat tardy to get that tape on the Internet. It’s coming.

 

“There has been a lot of confusion about Obama’s ‘birthplace,’ which is not marked anywhere in Hawai’i. Nevertheless, I did not want to rush to judgment. There have been numerous lawsuits over Obama’s eligibility. I predicted in advance that all of these cases would be dismissed, and they were. But none of them were dismissed on their constitutional merits. I have not been a part of any of any prior ‘eligibility’ litigation. I was not ready to issue a formal opinion.

 

“I do not plan to file a lawsuit after I issue my opinion on Wednesday. The only 'Obama' lawsuits I have pending are in Hawai’i. One case seeks to force Hawai’i to release Obama’s original, typewritten 1961 birth certificate. The other lawsuit seeks to compel Governor Linda Lingle to comply with Hawaii’s Uniform Information Procedures Act. That’s it for me.

 

“Our research team kept at it while I was in Hawai’i earlier this month. We have carefully analyzed the opinions and conclusions of others, both pro and con, as well as the underlying constitutional principles concerning [1] Obama’s eligibility [2] removal from office if he is ineligible.

 

“I am sure we will manage to present arguments and conclusions that will leave everyone unsatisfied. But that’s the nature of independent research and legal conclusions.

 

“Although Obama’s operatives call me the ‘King of the Birthers,’ and I accept that title, I am not in fact a ‘birther’ as the term is commonly understood. I am a ‘doubter.’ I believe that Obama was born in Hawai’i. Nevertheless, those Americans who have relentlessly demanded that Obama release his original Hawai’i birth certificate have performed a valuable public service. We are entitled to draw an ‘adverse inference’ from Obama’s refusal to produce the document.

 

“For myself, after exhaustive research, I still have not seen any credible evidence that Obama was born anywhere else but Hawai’i. But that ‘birth’ is only part of the ‘natural born citizen’ requirement and inquiry.

 

“My movie ‘Obama: The Hawai’i Years’ is available to view on several of my web sites [see e.g. www.BoycottHawaii.com, www.StopObamaCoalition.com, www.CommitteeofOneMilliontoDefeatBarackObama.com] where we provide some explanation about Obama’s origins.”

 

NEWS CONFERENCE DETAILS:

 

WHO:  

 

ContrarianCommentary.com Executive Editor Andy Martin

 

WHAT:

 

Internet powerhouse Andy Martin enters the case of “Birther”   Colonel Terry Lakin and says Barack Obama is not constitutionally eligible to be president

 

WHERE:

 

909 Third Avenue, public sidewalk in front of FDR Station, New York (under the “909” canopy in case of rain)

   

WHEN:

 

Wednesday, May 26, 2:00 P. M.

 

MEDIA CONTACT:

 

GENERAL: (866) 706-2639 CELL (917) 664-9329;

 

-------------------------------------

ABOUT ANDY: Andy Martin is the Executive Editor and publisher of www.ContrarianCommentary.com. Andy is a legendary New York and Chicago-based muckraker, author, Internet columnist, radio talk show host, broadcaster and media critic. He has over forty years of radio and television background. He is a former adjunct professor of law at the City University of New York (LaGuardia CC, Bronx CC) and holds a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Illinois College of Law. Martin comments on regional, national and world events with more than four decades of experience.

 

UPDATES:

www.Twitter.com/AndyMartinUSA

www.Facebook.com/AndyMartin

 

His columns are also posted at ContrarianCommentary.blogspot.com; ContrarianCommentary.wordpress.com.

ContrarianCommentary.typepad.com

[NOTE: We try to make typographical corrections on our blogs, where you can find the latest edition of this column.]

 

MEDIA CONTACT: TEL. (866) 706-2639; CELL: (917) 664-9329; E-MAIL: [email protected]   

© Copyright by Andy Martin 2010

 

An Open Letter to Bogus Viet-Nam Veteran Richard Blumenthal

[Andy Martin, who went to Viet-Nam three times as a civilian, provides his own insight into why nations have always bestowed special honors on their combat soldiers and military dead. Martin also links Richard Blumenthal’s lies to Congressman Mark Kirk’s lies and exaggerations concerning Kirk’s “service” in Iraq and Afghanistan.]

 

 

 

CONTRARIANCOMMENTARY.COM

Independent Worldwide News and Opinion

New York-London-Washington-Chicago-San Francisco-Palm Beach

 

 

"The Internet Powerhouse"

 

 

Headquarters mail:

Post Office Box 1851

New York, NY 10150-1851

Tel. (866) 706-2639

Fax (866) 707-2639

Web: ContrarianCommentary.com

E-mail: [email protected]

 

 

Anthony R. Martin, J. D.

Executive Editor

 

 

May 21, 2010

 

 

Richard Blumenthal

U. S. Senate candidate

330 Main Street

Hartford, CT 06106

via fax (203) 560-1522

 

 

Dear Mr. Blumenthal:

 

I know you don’t want to step down as a candidate for U. S. Senator. But the shock waves from the taped evidence in which you exaggerated your military service will be a dagger pointed at Connecticut Democrats until November. I am a Republican. But this is not a partisan letter.

 

Rather, this letter is one from a co-generationist. I did go to Viet-Nam. And Laos, Cambodia and Thailand. But I went as a civilian. I probably saw more combat that many who were “in country.” But that does not entitle me to lie about my record any more than it entitles you to do the same.

 

I come from a family of spooks and soldiers on both sides. And so there was always an expectancy I would enter the family business. My father was a decorated officer. So were my grandfather, and a great-grandfather. And there’s more.

 

Major J. D. Falk, one of the regular officers at the University of Illinois had been a very brave fighter pilot in Korea. He wanted me in the cockpit in the worst possible way. I was classified 1-P, set for pilot training, and set for an eventual commission in the Air Force. But during the summer of 1965 I spent time alone in England and Scotland. I realized I brought very little to the cockpit. My talents lay in the collection and analysis of information, not holding a rudder and handling a throttle. And so I chose a different path.

 

The year 1967 found me in Viet-Nam, And 1968. And 1970. While someone actually gave me a pistol, and I learned how to break down the weapon and strip an M-16 I was always conscious of the separation between the men who did the shooting and the people who performed other tasks. I know that if we had been overrun out in the boondocks I would have picked up a rifle and killed. I had no moral compunctions about killing.

 

Because of my dad’s role, and my Uncle Bill’s, I had read every book on World War II in the Oxford (England) public Library. But until you experience war up front, in the face, you have no idea what you are about to see, hear, feel and ultimately retain within you.

 

I can vividly remember the first time I came under fire. I remember the day I went to Graves Registration with Captain Chuck (later Governor/Senator) Robb. A Lieutenant Hale had been killed the day before when Hale made a false step and triggered a mine. Lt. Hale was reduced to a few scraps of flesh and bone.

 

In Cambodia I remember seeing the bodies of “enemy” Cambodians that had been killed by government soldiers. They had been butchered and dumped on a truck like sides of beef.

 

And then there were the “Saigon Commandoes,” military troops stationed in Saigon who had mamasans and laundry misses and lived a life of luxury. They were “in Viet-Nam” but not “of Viet-Nam.” But I still afford and accord them the honor, because danger was never more than a footstep away. I lived at the Majestic Hotel in downtown Saigon, where Peter Kann, later publisher of the Wall Street Journal, was one of my neighbors. But I spent as much time as possible in I Corps.

 

I remember the coffin of a Vietnamese soldier draped with his flag, sitting on the runway at Dong Ha. His wife sat on the coffin and wailed uncontrollably. That weeping was in the days when many Americans still held to the racist belief that “Asians care less for life than we do.” In that moment I realized they didn’t. Her wails are still with me. I can still see her sitting there alone, crying on the coffin as darkness descended.

 

War, combat, firefights, shooting, bombing and killing of every sort changes us. Some men become addicted. Some break. Some go home with seemingly negligible aftereffects. But there is one common denominator. Few who have seen killing up front enjoy talking about it.

 

After decades of looking at the past I still can’t tell you which man (or woman) will break, and which one won’t. But men do break. I remember walking into a jungle crawling with North Vietnamese soldiers, and looking for them. One night that I will never forget the clouds closed in. It rained. Choppers were grounded. Perfect conditions to be overrun. We sat and waited for the inevitable attack, which didn’t come.

 

Later, during the worst night of my life, in Iran in 1979, I was arrested as a spy. When the komiteh, a sort of neighborhood vigilante, had his gunman turn an AK-47 on me I knew the end was close. But I managed to walk away the next day. I can still see the man with the rifle pointed in my direction. I know what he looks like. I could draw him. And yet I went back, back to Iran. Back to Afghanistan. Alone, and always afraid.

 

Iraq was more of the same. Friends blown up. Danger everywhere. I was lucky again. The only difference between Baghdad and Saigon was that there were no “Baghdad Commandoes.” In a great mistake, the U. S. Military segregated itself from the Iraqi people, and allowed the insurgency to take root in the vacuum.

 

Men who have been in combat as soldiers or Marines do not take lightly to stolen valor. I know why. There is a special bond among those who put their lives on the line, voluntarily or involuntarily (under the draft). To be sure, not everyone in Viet-Nam or Iraq was “in combat.” But they were always in danger.

 

And so now we come to your imaginary combat career as someone who “served in” and “returned” from Viet-Nam. You tried to steal a little bit of the valor earned by men who served. Former Congressman Chris Shays is a decent man, a conscientious objector, and he knows you well. He detailed how your exaggerations grew from decade to decade, as memories dimmed and the real veterans aged and died or became disabled:

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/19/nyregion/

19shays.html?scp=2&sq=%22Christopher%20shays%22&st=cse

 

I have followed your career from a distance for decades. You are a careerist on the left not unlike Congressman Mark Kirk on the “right” (or “somewhere”).

 

Like you, Mark Kirk was/”is” also in the military. And like you Mark Kirk is guilty of stolen valor. Kirk shamelessly exploits and exaggerates his military activity. And, like you, up until now Kirk has gotten away with his lies. The insipid and corrupt Illinois news media have covered up Kirk’s exaggerations which are similar to your own. And Kirk will pay the same price you are paying later in this election season.

 

Both of you have shamelessly and relentlessly polished your resumes, like buttons on a uniform, the same way Bill Clinton did. And, ironically, both you and Kirk are running for the senate this year.

 

So where do we go from here? There is no easy answer. Having pursued the brass ring all your life, you are loath to walk away from the prize. I think a real Marine would walk away.

 

Your “defense” of your lies was more of an “offense” than an apology. You need a lesson in humility. The type of humility you learn in real combat, under fire. Your belligerent defense will not sit well with veterans, notwithstanding your misuse of the VFW hall and a few Democratic Party military hacks that were rounded up to surround you at your news conference.

 

Finally, there is your son. What message will you send him, what legacy will you leave him if you claim that it is acceptable to lie and then take “full responsibility” for your lies? Won’t you also be stealing a little bit of him? Win or lose in November?

 

The ongoing reaction to your “misspeakings” will be long and slow and explosive. The issue is not going away.

 

Should you pull out? I think you should give the option serious thought. You could run again in two years and say you benefited from the gap in your career. You needed “time to be with yourself.”

 

I have never been a careerist, which, I suppose, is the real mark of a soldier or a spook. We know that a “career” can end in a split second, with one false step on a mine (in Viet-Nam) or an IAD in Iraq and Afghanistan. And I have never lied about being a soldier in Viet-Nam, which is why I can unhesitatingly relate some of my experiences there without a fear of being “found out” as an imposter.

 

I am what I am. For better or worse.

 

What, and who, are you? You need to find out. Today.

 

Best wishes,

 

ANDY MARTIN

 

AM:sp

CHICAGO SCANDAL: Andy Martin links Barack Obama to the growing “ShoreBank” scandal in Chicago

Andy Martin says $1 million Obama campaign contributor Goldman Sachs is trying to orchestrate a bailout of failed financial institution ShoreBank, which has close ties to Barack Obama’s old neighborhood. Martin says the “Chicago fix” is in. Martin will be asking the Department of Justice for appointment of an independent counsel to investigate influence peddling and Chicago corruption in the ShoreBank scam. ShoreBank may have financial interests in—no surprise—Barack Obama’s “home:” Kenya. Martin is demanding that the bank make full disclosure of all of its overseas interests and investments before any federal aid is approved.

 

Martin says Chicago news media are covering up the ShoreBank scam out of fear of Obama retaliation.

 

Internet Powerhouse Andy Martin says the ShoreBank bailout in Chicago is a growing Obama Administration/Clinton financial scandal

 

Martin says that ShoreBank investors are seeking a “disguised taxpayer bailout”

 

ContrarianCommentary.com

“The Internet Powerhouse”

Andy Martin

Executive Editor

 

“Factually Correct, Not Politically Correct”

 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

 

ATTENTION DAYBOOK/ASSIGNMENT EDITORS

 

ANNOUNCEMENT OF NEW YORK NEWS CONFERENCE THURSDAY

 

ANDY MARTIN SAYS THE PROPOSED TAXPAYER BAILOUT OF CHICAGO’S SHOREBANK IS NOTHING MORE THAN ANOTHER GOLDMAN SACHS FINANCIAL SCAM; GOLDMAN GAVE $1 MILLION TO THE OBAMA PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN

 

MARTIN PLANS TO ASK THE FDIC AND DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE TO OPEN INVESTIGATIONS INTO POLITICAL FAVORITISM AND INFLUENCE PEDDLING BY OBAMA ADMINISTRATION OPERATIVES

 

(NEW YORK)(May 20, 2010)  ContrarianCommentary.com’s Executive Editor, Andy Martin, will hold a New York City news conference Thursday, May 20th to attack a proposed federal bailout of Chicago’s ShoreBank. Martin calls the bailout “nothing more than a bailout of a bad investment by the very investors who are now trying to save their investment with taxpayer subsidies.” Martin says “Chicago clout” is behind efforts to rescue the bank.

 

“My readers are often astounded by the fact that I am linked to almost everything that has happened in Chicago over the past several decades. Well, here we go again. In 1973, I was one of the bidders for the old South Shore National Bank at 71st Street and Jeffrey Boulevard, which later morphed into ShoreBank. Although I had substantial resources to bid, I was outbid by the current owners who were backed by Pritzker Family money.

 

“A third of a century later, ShoreBank’s failed business strategy has imploded, and now ShoreBank investors are seeking a $75 million taxpayer bailout. Federal regulators should say no. The $75 million would not provide funds for future growth; it would merely reimburse investors for failed loans in the past. ShoreBank is dead in the water. It had a failed strategy, trying to mix ‘community’ banking with a massive international network of investments. What was a 'community bank' in Chicago doing involved in dozens of foreign countries?

 

“Barack Obama’s fingerprints are all over this bailout scam. ShoreBank has been linked to Bill Clinton, the Global Philanthropy Forum and the Chicago Global Donors Network which—no surprise—has links to Kenya (United Kenyans of Chicago).

 

“The entire concept of ShoreBank is defective. The essence of banking is to spread risk. ShoreBank’s business plan is to concentrate risks, in bad neighborhoods. The bank has yet to publish a 2008 annual report, let alone a 2009 one. Tens of millions of bad loans are being concealed as part of a financial scam to secure federal financial support. This is nothing more than a Barack Obama ‘fix.’

 

“Most of the so-called ‘rescue’ investors have existing links to ShoreBank. Goldman Sachs has had someone advising the bank (Suzanne Johnson). Now they are trying to 'invest.' If Goldman can raise $140 million to save the bank they should be able to raise $200 million and avoid use of any taxpayer cash. Bank of America is listed as a shareholder; now they want taxpayers to bail them out. What is America-owned Citibank doing investing in bad banks and failed financial strategies? Citibank is a failed bank itself. It all comes down to two words: Barack Obama.

 

“The FDIC has closed better-situated banks in Illinois. Why is it stalling and propping up a failed institution? Chicago Clout.

 

“What is interesting is the way the Chicago media have tried to hush up this scandal. Only recently has there been any press coverage. Well, we are blowing this scam wide open. Obama’s ‘game’ is up.”

 

NEWS CONFERENCE DETAILS:

 

WHO:  

 

ContrarianCommentary.com Executive Editor Andy Martin

 

WHAT:

 

Internet powerhouse Andy Martin opposes the ShoreBank bailout and calls the proposed rescue of the Chicago institution an “Obama fix”

 

WHERE:

 

909 Third Avenue, public sidewalk in front of FDR Station, New York (under the “909” canopy in case of rain)

   

WHEN:

 

Thursday, May 20, 3:00 P. M.

 

MEDIA CONTACT:

 

GENERAL: (866) 706-2639 CELL (917) 664-9329;

 

-------------------------------------

ABOUT ANDY: Andy Martin is the Executive Editor and publisher of www.ContrarianCommentary.com. Andy is a legendary New York and Chicago-based muckraker, author, Internet columnist, radio talk show host, broadcaster and media critic. He has over forty years of radio and television background. He is a former adjunct professor of law at the City University of New York (LaGuardia CC, Bronx CC) and holds a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Illinois College of Law. Martin comments on regional, national and world events with more than four decades of experience.

 

UPDATES:

www.Twitter.com/AndyMartinUSA

www.Facebook.com/AndyMartin

 

His columns are also posted at ContrarianCommentary.blogspot.com; ContrarianCommentary.wordpress.com.

ContrarianCommentary.typepad.com

[NOTE: We try to make typographical corrections on our blogs, where you can find the latest edition of this column.]

 

MEDIA CONTACT: CELL: (917) 664-9329; TEL. (866) 706-2639 E-MAIL: [email protected]   

© Copyright by Andy Martin 2010

 

CONNECTICUT NEWS CONFERENCE: Andy Martin says Richard Blumenthal should withdraw as U S Senate candidate

Andy Martin will seek to have the Connecticut Supreme Court discipline Richard Blumenthal for attorney misconduct for lying about his military credentials at a Viet-Nam veteran.

 

 

Internet Powerhouse Andy Martin says Richard Blumenthal should step down as a U. S. Senate candidate

 

Martin says that Blumenthal’s “stolen valor” is a disgrace to the Democratic Party and Connecticut Supreme Court

 

ContrarianCommentary.com

“The Internet Powerhouse”

Andy Martin

Executive Editor

 

“Factually Correct, Not Politically Correct”

 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

 

ATTENTION DAYBOOK/ASSIGNMENT EDITORS

 

ANNOUNCEMENT OF NEW YORK NEWS CONFERENCE WEDNESDAY

 

ANDY MARTIN SAYS BLUMENTHAL INTENTIONALLY DECEIVED THE PEOPLE OF CONNECTICUT

 

MARTIN SAYS AN ATTORNEY AND ATTORNEY GENERAL SHOULD BE HELD TO A MUCH HIGHER STANDARD OF BEHAVIOR THAN A DRUNKEN SAILOR

 

MARTIN PLANS TO ASK THE CONNECTICUT SUPREME COURT TO DISCIPLINE BLUMENTHAL

 

(NEW YORK)(May 19, 2010)  ContrarianCommentary.com’s Executive Editor, Andy Martin, will hold a New York City news conference Wednesday, May 19th to demand that Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal step down as a U. S. Senate candidate and resign as Connecticut Attorney General.

 

“Richard Blumenthal is a disgrace to the Democratic Party and the People of Connecticut,” Martin will charge.

 

Martin is a Connecticut native who was born in Middletown, Connecticut and is a graduate of Woodrow Wilson High School in Middletown (WWHS no longer exists). See www.AndyMartin.com

 

“Richard Blumenthal is a lawyer, and a law enforcement officer. He knows what a lie is. He knows the meaning of a lie. As U. S. Attorney he sent people to federal prison for doing exactly what he did, lying. Former New York Police Commissioner Bernie Kerik is in federal prison today for lying to the White House. “Blumenthal may not go to prison, but he should resign as Attorney General and withdraw as a U. S. Senate candidate

 

“Blumenthal is either delusional—i.e. he suffers from mental delusions that he ‘came home’ from Viet-Nam--or a habitual liar. Why would anyone want such a flawed character representing Connecticut? After the influence peddling team of father/son Tom/Chris Dodd, haven’t Connecticut voters suffered enough?

 

“Stolen valor is a sickness as well as a serious behavioral condition. Blumenthal knew exactly what he was saying when he claimed he was in Viet-Nam. He hoped no one would catch him in a lie. Personally, I am always careful to say I hold an Honorable Discharge from the USAFR, but I did not serve on active duty. I went to Viet-Nam as a civilian.

 

“If Blumenthal says he didn’t consciously and intentionally lie, then he must have a mental problem. He can't control his mouth. Lies just come out. So is he mentally ill, or a liar? Which is it Mr. Blumenthal?” Martin will demand.

 

“I will be asking the Connecticut Supreme Court to discipline Blumenthal for his effrontery. Blumenthal is disgracing the Connecticut Bar.

 

“Blumenthal’s sanctimonious defense that no one should ‘impugn’ his lie is evidence of a deranged political psyche. He has an attitude of arrogance and entitlement that is self-destructive. Blumenthal signed up for the reserves; good for him. Reserve service is not a license to lie about being a Viet-Nam veteran. The very belligerence of Blumenthal’s defense is proof positive of his arrogance and sent of entitlement.

 

”Blumenthal should now get a lifetime ‘deferment’ from service in the U. S. Senate.

 

“For shame.”

 

NEWS CONFERENCE DETAILS:

 

WHO:  

 

ContrarianCommentary.com Executive Editor Andy Martin

 

WHAT:

 

Internet powerhouse Andy Martin says Richard Blumenthal should resign as a U. S. Senate candidate and resign as Connecticut Attorney General

 

WHERE:

 

909 Third Avenue, public sidewalk in front of FDR Station, New York (under the “909” canopy in case of rain)

   

WHEN:

 

Wednesday, May 19, 3:00 P. M.

 

MEDIA CONTACT:

 

GENERAL: (866) 706-2639 CELL (917) 664-9329;

 

-------------------------------------

ABOUT ANDY: Andy Martin is the Executive Editor and publisher of www.ContrarianCommentary.com. Andy is a legendary New York and Chicago-based muckraker, author, Internet columnist, radio talk show host, broadcaster and media critic. He has over forty years of radio and television background. He is a former adjunct professor of law at the City University of New York (LaGuardia CC, Bronx CC) and holds a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Illinois College of Law. Martin comments on regional, national and world events with more than four decades of experience.

 

UPDATES:

www.Twitter.com/AndyMartinUSA

www.Facebook.com/AndyMartin

 

His columns are also posted at ContrarianCommentary.blogspot.com; ContrarianCommentary.wordpress.com.

ContrarianCommentary.typepad.com

[NOTE: We try to make typographical corrections on our blogs, where you can find the latest edition of this column.]

 

MEDIA CONTACT: CELL: (917) 664-9329; TEL. (866) 706-2639 E-MAIL: [email protected]   

© Copyright by Andy Martin 2010

 

 

NEW YORK NEWS CONFERENCE Saturday: Anti-Elena Kagan “War Room” will oppose Obama’s pro-Kagan White House War Room

Obama author and investigator Andy Martin will announce Saturday that he is activating an anti-Elena Kagan “War Room” to counter the pro-Kagan War Room being operated by the White House. “People are confused,” Martin says. “They need somewhere to go. We are ready. The denials that Kagan is a lesbian have raised more questions than they answer. The denials ‘drop off’ after Kagan’s college years. And they fail to account for the fact that both homosexual men and women go on ‘dates’ with members of the opposite sex as well as having ‘crushes’ and attractions. Same-sex identification is not something that excludes affection or companionship with the opposite sex. Many unmarried heterosexual women in New York, for example, have homosexual men as ‘best friends’ and companions. In Palm Beach, homosexual men are often ‘walkers’ for prominent females.”

 

Internet Powerhouse Andy Martin launches an anti-Elena Kagan “War Room” to counter Obama’s pro-Kagan White House war room

 

Martin says that denials Kagan is a lesbian raise more questions than they answer

 

ContrarianCommentary.com

“The Internet Powerhouse”

Andy Martin

Executive Editor

 

“Factually Correct, Not Politically Correct”

 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

 

ATTENTION DAYBOOK/ASSIGNMENT EDITORS

 

ANNOUNCEMENT OF NEW YORK NEWS CONFERENCE SATURDAY

 

ANDY MARTIN SAYS THE LACK OF ANY DENIALS KAGAN IS A LESBIAN WHICH ARE TIRED TO KAGAN’S CAMBRIDGE YEARS AS A LAW DEAN IS “DEVASTATING”

 

MARTIN SAYS REPUBLICAN “OLD BOYS” NETWORK SUPPORT FOR KAGAN IS SIMPLY CURRYING FAVOR FOR FUTURE RECIPROCITY

 

(NEW YORK)(May 15, 2010)  ContrarianCommentary.com’s Executive Editor, Andy Martin, will hold a New York City news conference Saturday, May 15th to announce that he has activated an anti-Elena Kagan “War Room” to counter the White House’s pro-Kagan war room.

 

“Obama is prepared to propagate his lies about Kagan,” Martin says. “We must be prepared to answer with the truth, and to keep seeking the truth about the mysterious Ms. Kagan. Who is Elena Kagan?

 

“The mainstream media have been flooded with denials that Kagan is a lesbian. The only problem: most of these denials are based on ‘college dorm’ experiences. No one has discussed who Kagan lives with in Cambridge, Massachusetts. That is why yesterday we launched investigations at the Harvard Law School and in Cambridge. Who had/has a key to Kagan’s home? Who lived at Kagan’s home?

 

“The claims she has had ‘crushes’ on boys in college are sheer nonsense. In New York and most urban areas, heterosexual women are often attached to homosexual men, and occasionally vice versa. Being a lesbian is not incompatible with ‘dating’ men or having close friends who are men, any more than the opposite is true for heterosexual women.

 

“No one has attested to Kagan’s sexual identity during the last couple of decades. They keep talking about the period when she lived in a college dorm. The lack of any denials concerning her recent or current years in Cambridge is devastating to Kagan.

 

“The attempt of Washington Post writers such as Ruth Marcus to claim Kagan is asexual because she is a successful woman are embarrassing and transparent sexist eyewash.

 

“The issue is simple: who had a key to her home in Cambridge? Now in Washington? Who lived/lives there besides Kagan? These questions need an answer. No one has yet provided it. Based on what we have learned and are learning, Kagan led a same-sex lifestyle in Cambridge during the years when she was a law school dean”

 

Martin will release an update 9n the Cambridge investigation on Sunday.

 

NEWS CONFERENCE DETAILS:

 

WHO:  

 

ContrarianCommentary.com Executive Editor Andy Martin

 

WHAT:

 

Internet powerhouse Andy Martin says denials about Elena Kagan’s sexual identity raise new questions; Martin launches an “anti-Kagan War Room” to counter Obama’s White House war room supporting Kagan

 

WHERE:

 

909 Third Avenue, public sidewalk in front of FDR Station, New York (under the “909” canopy in case of rain)

   

WHEN:

 

Saturday, May 15, 3:00 P. M.

 

MEDIA CONTACT:

 

CELL (917) 664-9329; General: (866) 706-2639

 

-------------------------------------

ABOUT ANDY: Andy Martin is the Executive Editor and publisher of www.ContrarianCommentary.com. Andy is a legendary New York and Chicago-based muckraker, author, Internet columnist, radio talk show host, broadcaster and media critic. He has over forty years of radio and television background. He is a former adjunct professor of law at the City University of New York (LaGuardia CC, Bronx CC) and holds a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Illinois College of Law. Martin comments on regional, national and world events with more than four decades of experience.

 

UPDATES:

www.Twitter.com/AndyMartinUSA

www.Facebook.com/AndyMartin

 

His columns are also posted at ContrarianCommentary.blogspot.com; ContrarianCommentary.wordpress.com.

ContrarianCommentary.typepad.com

[NOTE: We try to make typographical corrections on our blogs, where you can find the latest edition of this column.]

 

MEDIA CONTACT: CELL: (917) 664-9329; TEL. (866) 706-2639 E-MAIL: [email protected]   

© Copyright by Andy Martin 2010

 

 

Internet Powerhouse Andy Martin supports Phoenix and Arizona

Andy Martin is organizing a “solidarity” visit to Phoenix, Arizona by Americans who support Arizonans, and who are disgusted by the obscene “boycotts” from places such as California and Illinois. “We are all family,” Martin says. “Arizona is one of the last bastions of governmental sanity in America. All of us who support Arizona should try to visibly manifest our support. I am organizing a visit there to show up in person to express my support for Arizonans.”

 

CONTRARIANCOMMENTARY.COM

Independent Worldwide News and Opinion

New York-London-Washington-Chicago-San Francisco-Palm Beach

 

 

"The Internet Powerhouse"

 

 

Headquarters mail:

Post Office Box 1851

New York, NY 10150-1851

Tel. (866) 706-2639

Fax (866) 707-2639

Web: ContrarianCommentary.com

E-mail: [email protected]

 

 

 

 

Anthony R. Martin, J. D.

Executive Editor

 

 

 

 

 

 

May 14, 2010

 

 

 

 

Mr. Todd Sanders

President & CEO

Greater Phoenix Chamber of Commerce

201 N. Central Avenue

Phoenix, AZ 85004

via fax (602) 495-8913

 

 

Dear Mr. Sanders:

 

I am a conservative columnist with a national following arising out of my support for traditional American values. I have never been to Arizona, but I just got back from ten days of investigation and research in Hawai’i. They are turning out the lights in Honolulu. High taxes and wasteful government spending have bankrupted the state. On “Furlough Fridays” they literally close down state and local government.

 

I consider Arizona one of the last bastions of governmental sanity in America, along with Texas and Florida. As someone with close ties to Illinois I am utterly embarrassed by the so-called “Illinois boycott” by schoolchildren who are being manipulated through their adults in the liberal “North Shore” suburbs.

 

To be clear, while I have an extensive audience, my views are often conservative, controversial and provocative. You can see my blogs at www.ContrarianCommentary.blogspot.com, and sites such as www.BoycottHawaii.com. I have an extensive history of strong support for civil rights measures (see www.AndyMartin.com); I view the recent border statute as a civil rights measure protecting Arizonans and their right to security and safety in their homes and communities.

 

I would like to make solidarity trip to Phoenix sometime this month to show my solidarity with the people of Phoenix and Arizona.

 

I would be appreciative for any guidance, suggestions or other assistance any of your members could provide. I don’t know anyone in Arizona. But then I didn’t know anyone in Hawai’i when I went there to launch the first investigative campaign in 2008, and today I consider Hawai’i and all of my many friends there to be “family,” or as they say in Hawaiian, “ohana.”

 

I want you to know there are hundreds of millions of Americans who consider Arizona and Arizonans “family,” and I’d love to stage the first “family get-together” in the wake of the obscene attacks on your state by individuals who lack sufficient love or respect for our great nation and your great state.

 

Thank you for any guidance or suggestions you or any of your members can provide.

 

 

With all best wishes,

 

 

ANDY MARTIN

 

AM:

 

CCC:AM:sp

 

cc: Hon. Jan Brewer

 

NEW YORK NEWS CONFERENCE; Investigation begins into Elena Kagan’s private life in Massachusetts

Obama author and investigator Andy Martin will announce Friday that he is launching investigations into Elena Kagan’s private and professional life in Cambridge, Massachusetts and at Harvard Law School. “Since others are concentrating on Kagan’s ‘public’ record, what little there is, we will focus on her personal lifestyle, and specifically evidenced of same-sex relationships,” Martin says. “I note that the so-called ‘mainstream media’ are apparently doing no investigation in Cambridge. The pro-gay New York Times and others have adopted a ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ policy concerning Kagan’s alleged lesbian links. They are once again simply prostrating themselves before Obama and Kagan. The so-called ‘media’ are betraying the American people.” Martin is inviting persons with knowledge of Kagan’s personal lifestyle to contact his Internet newspaper.

 

Internet Powerhouse Andy Martin says that mainstream media are failing to look into Elena Kagan’s private life in Cambridge, Massachusetts

 

Martin says that in the absence of any public record, Kagan’s private life is even more critical to an understanding of how she would act as a judge

 

ContrarianCommentary.com

“The Internet Powerhouse”

Andy Martin

Executive Editor

 

“Factually Correct, Not Politically Correct”

 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

 

ATTENTION DAYBOOK/ASSIGNMENT EDITORS

 

ANNOUNCEMENT OF NEW YORK NEWS CONFERENCE FRIDAY

 

ANDY MARTIN SAYS HE WILL LEAD A “BACKGROUND INVESTIGATION” INTO KAGAN’S PRIVATE LIFE AT HARVARD LAW SCHOOL AND IN CAMBRIDGE

 

MARTIN INVITES PERSONS WITH KNOWLEDGE OR EVIDENCE CONCERNING KAGAN’S PERSONAL LIFE TO CONTACT HIM BY MAIL, E-MAIL OR PHONE

 

MARTIN SAYS JUDGES AND LAWYERS ARE ENGAGING IN A “CONSPIRACY OF SILENCE” CONCERNING KAGAN’S PRIVATE LIFE

 

(NEW YORK)(May 14, 2010)  ContrarianCommentary.com’s Executive Editor, Andy Martin, will hold a New York City news conference Friday, May 14th to announce that he will lead investigative teams to Cambridge, Massachusetts to investigative Elena Kagan’s private life and personal lifestyle. “Ms. Kagan’s supporters have said she is not a lesbian and has not lived in  same-sex relationships,” Martin says. “If so, we should come back empty-handed. But if we find evidence of same-sex relationships, and I have every expectation that we will, Ms. Kagan will be guilty of misleading the American people by proxy, and she will have to step down as a Supreme Court nominee. Deception by a nominee is completely unacceptable.

 

“Personally, I don’t care about Kagan’s private life. But as an investigative columnist I am interested in persons who engage in deception and denial, and who seek to defraud the American people. The cliché that the ‘cover-up is worse than the offense’ probably applies to Kagan’s sexuality. If she would simply own up to her private lifestyle that would probably end the matter. But her concealment is creating hydraulic pressure for more extensive inquiry into her past and present personal life.

 

“Given that Kagan has successfully concealed all of her own views over the past three decades, and comes before the American people as a cipher with no family of her own and no record of her own except holding staff and administrative jobs for others, we have a right to conduct a searching pre-employment background investigation into who and what she is.

 

“No one today would hire a mid-level corporate executive without a complete background investigation into both the proposed employee’s personal and professional lives. Yet the Senate is apparently adopting the Obama’ administration’s ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ approach to Kagan’s personal life. Why? Is a job on the U. S. Supreme Court less important than a mid-level corporate position? If the U. S. Senate is too silly or too skittish to search for the truth, we are not.

 

“It is a truism that our judicial systems are ruled by cronyism and concealment. In particular, lawyers fear retaliation from judges if an attorney stands up and tells the truth. That is why our courts are so corrupt and dysfunctional; they are ruled through a conspiracy of silence. Because I do not practice law, I am not afraid to tell the truth. Never have been, never will be.

 

“We are launching our investigations in Cambridge, and we will scour that city for sources of information and evidence concerning Kagan’s personal and professional life.

 

“In a Saturday news conference tomorrow we will offer our insight and analysis of Kagan’s efforts to deflect the ‘lesbian issue’ as well as detailing our own ‘hotline’ that will counter the White House’s own pro-Kagan hotline.

 

“Finally, there is the ‘hypocrisy’ issue,” Martin states. “Kagan made a moral issue of opposing ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.’ If the issue is 'moral' as she claims, then why is she afraid to stand up and openly profess her own personal solidarity with same-sex relationships? What is her personal morality? Did she hire lesbians to work at Harvard Law School? Did she promote ‘gay’ legal studies and seminars? Good points. But no one knows because the media are engaged in a cover-up and abdication of their responsibility.

 

“We invite any and every American with knowledge of Kagan’s private life or lifestyle, or years at Harvard Law School, to contact us, either anonymously or by identifying themselves, by e-mail, phone or regular mail. We will sift through the evidence and seek to separate the wheat from the chaff. As I have said in successfully investigating Barack Obama’s past in Hawai’i, we are simply trying to search for the truth and trying to find the facts. ‘Just the facts, ma’am.’”

 

NEWS CONFERENCE DETAILS:

 

WHO:  

 

ContrarianCommentary.com Executive Editor Andy Martin

 

WHAT:

 

Internet powerhouse Andy Martin launches investigations in Cambridge, Massachusetts and at Harvard Law School into Elena Kagan’s professional and private lifestyles

 

WHERE:

 

909 Third Avenue, public sidewalk in front of FDR Station, New York (under the “909” canopy in case of rain)

   

WHEN:

 

Friday, May 14, 2:00 P. M.

 

MEDIA CONTACT:

 

CELL (917) 664-9329; General: (866) 706-2639

 

-------------------------------------

ABOUT ANDY: Andy Martin is the Executive Editor and publisher of www.ContrarianCommentary.com. Andy is a legendary New York and Chicago-based muckraker, author, Internet columnist, radio talk show host, broadcaster and media critic. He has over forty years of radio and television background. He is a former adjunct professor of law at the City University of New York (LaGuardia CC, Bronx CC) and holds a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Illinois College of Law. Martin comments on regional, national and world events with more than four decades of experience.

 

UPDATES:

www.Twitter.com/AndyMartinUSA

www.Facebook.com/AndyMartin

 

His columns are also posted at ContrarianCommentary.blogspot.com; ContrarianCommentary.wordpress.com.

ContrarianCommentary.typepad.com

[NOTE: We try to make typographical corrections on our blogs, where you can find the latest edition of this column.]

 

MEDIA CONTACT: CELL: (917) 664-9329; TEL. (866) 706-2639 E-MAIL: [email protected]   

© Copyright by Andy Martin 2010

 

 

NEW YORK NEWS CONFERENCE THURSDAY: Andy Martin slams Goldman Sachs-Elena Kagan connection

Internet Powerhouse Andy Martin says Elena Kagan would be Goldman Sachs “Golden Girl” on the U. S. Supreme Court. Martin says Goldman Sachs paid Kagan $10,000 a day for her “advice,” to purchase potential influence peddling. “If she was for sale once,” Martin charges, “She will be for sale again. Kagan is Goldman’s Golden Girl on the U. S. Supreme Court. Goldman Sachs has been raping America using our own tax dollars. Now the U. S. Senate is going to put a Goldman agent of influence on our Supreme Court? This is insanity.”

 

 

Internet powerhouse Andy Martin says Goldman Sachs purchased Elena Kagan’s seat on the U. S. Supreme Court

 

Martin says Goldman probably hopes Kagan will provide “juice” as Goldman’s controversial appeals percolate up to the Supreme Court

 

ContrarianCommentary.com

 

“The Internet Powerhouse”

Andy Martin

Executive Editor

 

“Factually Correct, Not Politically Correct”

 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

 

ATTENTION DAYBOOK/ASSIGNMENT EDITORS

 

ANNOUNCEMENT OF NEW YORK NEWS CONFERENCE THURSDAY  

 

ANDY MARTIN SAYS ELENA KAGAN WOULD BE GOLDMAN SACHS’ “GOLDEN GIRL” ON THE U.S. SUPREME COURT

 

MARTIN LINKS GOLDMAN’S $1 MILLION CASH DONATION TO BARACK OBAMA AS THE PRICE GOLDMAN PAID TO PLACE KAGAN ON THE HIGH COURT

 

(NEW YORK)(May 13, 2010)  ContrarianCommentary.com’s Executive Editor, Andy Martin, will hold a New York City news conference Thursday, May 13th in front of the Goldman Sachs headquarters at 200 West Street to call on Americans to tell the U. S. Senate not to confirm former Goldman “adviser” Elena Kagan to the U. S. Supreme Court.

 

“After Goldman Sachs has raped every American and sucked the blood out of our economy, to pay massive ‘bonuses’ to its greedy and arrogant employees over the past five years, why would senators vote to give Goldman Sachs a seat on the U. S. Supreme Court through Elena Kagan?

 

“Leftist media have tried to minimize or ignore the fact that Kagan was paid $10,000 per day for her ‘advice.’ No one is asking why Kagan accepted an obviously disproportionate payment--$10,000 per day—for her ‘services’ over the past several years, until she became a federal employee in 2009.

 

“Kagan was obviously not being paid for her advice. She was being paid to be on call as part of the corrupt network of potential influence peddlers that Goldman kept at the ready to work its evil will throughout the government. One columnist has said Kagan ‘knows everyone.’ She was obviously being paid and kept on retainer as a potential influence operative. Kagan was accepting grossly disproportionate compensation, $10,000 per day, precisely because she was available to be an enormously influential influence peddler through her network of contacts in the legal and business community. Kagan was for sale at $10,000 a pop. The Dean of Harvard Law School was for sale for $10,000 a day. Didn’t Harvard pay enough? Was Kagan greedy and arrogant too? For shame.

 

“Have Americans learned nothing? Why are we placing a corporate servant on the Supreme Court at a time when corporate America has disgraced and embarrassed our nation and ravaged our economy?

 

“Ironically, Goldman Sachs purchased influence with Barack Obama by giving him $1 million in campaign cash. Obama has now named a Goldman ‘adviser’ as a judge to sit in judgment on the contentious cases that are going to arise as America seeks to recover from the corporate rape of the century. But why would any senator vote to reward the rapist by placing the rapist's influence peddler on the Supreme Court? There is something wrong with our society when someone who took $10,000 a day from Goldman Sachs is rewarded with a seat on the Supreme Court, where she can continue to do Goldman's bidding.

 

“But, maybe not. Maybe the system is operating the way it is supposed to. We have the finest congress money can buy. Pretty soon we may have the finest Supreme Court Goldman Sachs can buy,” Martin will charge.

 

Martin is leading popular opposition to Elena Kagan, but focusing primarily on her closeted lesbian lifestyle and her links to Goldman Sachs. Friday Martin will hold a New York news conference to announce a new 24-hour hotline to counter Barack Obama’s pro-Kagan hotline in the White House. “We must defeat this nomination,” Martin says. “Goldman Sachs should not be allowed to continuously crucify America by purchasing a seat on the U. S. Supreme Court.”

 

NEWS CONFERENCE DETAILS:

 

WHO:  

 

ContrarianCommentary.com Executive Editor Andy Martin

 

WHAT:

 

Internet powerhouse Andy Martin says that Goldman Sachs purchased Elena Kagan’s seat on the U. S. Supreme Court

 

WHERE:

 

Entrance to [anonymous] Goldman Sachs headquarters, 200 West Street, New York, NY 10282

   

WHEN:

 

Thursday, May 13, 2010; 2:00 P. M.

 

MEDIA CONTACT:

 

CELL (917) 664-9329; General: (866) 706-2639

 

-------------------------------------

ABOUT ANDY: Andy Martin is the Executive Editor and publisher of www.ContrarianCommentary.com. Andy is a legendary New York and Chicago-based muckraker, author, Internet columnist, radio talk show host, broadcaster and media critic. He has over forty years of radio and television background. He is a former adjunct professor of law at the City University of New York (LaGuardia CC, Bronx CC) and holds a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Illinois College of Law. Martin comments on regional, national and world events with more than four decades of experience.

 

UPDATES:

www.Twitter.com/AndyMartinUSA

www.Facebook.com/AndyMartin

 

His columns are also posted at ContrarianCommentary.blogspot.com; ContrarianCommentary.wordpress.com.

ContrarianCommentary.typepad.com

[NOTE: We try to make typographical corrections on our blogs, where you can find the latest edition of this column.]

 

MEDIA CONTACT: CELL: (917) 664-9329; TEL. (866) 706-2639 E-MAIL: [email protected]   

© Copyright by Andy Martin 2010

 

Internet Powerhouse Andy Martin triggers a “lesbian explosion” over Elena Kagan

Why Elena Kagan’s closeted sexuality matters to the U. S. Senate and the American people:

 

Monday, May 10th Internet Powerhouse Andy Martin launched a campaign in New York to defeat Elena Kagan based on her closeted sexual orientation as a Harvard/Cambridge lesbian. Two days later Martin’s accusations have triggered a massive mainstream media explosion. Martin, whose powerful internet columns rocked the 2008 presidential election and triggered still-growing national movements about Barack Obama’s religion and birth certificate, has now targeted Kanan for defeat. Martin plans a Friday news conference in New York to announce a new anti-Kagan “hotline” in opposition to Barack Obama’s pro-Kagan hotline in the White House.

 

Why Elena Kagan’s “secret” sex life should matter to the U. S. Senate

 

Internet powerhouse Andy Martin says that Kagan’s lack of any familial connections other than her brothers leaves a gap that should be answered: who is she? Who influences her at home?

 

Martin’s New York City news conference on May 10th trigged a firestorm of mainstream media and talk radio reaction concerning Kagan’s sexuality

 

ContrarianCommentary.com

“The Internet Powerhouse”

Andy Martin

Executive Editor

 

“Factually Correct, Not Politically Correct”

 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

 

 

ANDY MARTIN SAYS ELENA KAGAN’S “SECRET LIFE” MATTERS AS U.S. SENATORS EVALUATE HER FOR CONFIRMATION

 

MARTIN’S EFFORTS TO OPEN AN INQUIRY INTO KAGAN’S SEXUALITY HAS CREATED A MAINSTREAM MEDIA FIRESTORM AND TALK RADIO TEMPEST

 

MARTIN SAYS KAGAN’S LESBIAN LIFESTYLE “AT HOME” IS AN INSIGHT INTO HER PERSONALITY AND THE INTERNALIZED INFLUENCES ON HER

 

KAGAN’S LACK OF HER OWN FAMILY IS SIGNIFICANT, MARTIN SAYS

 

(NEW YORK)(May 13, 2010)  Who is Elena Kagan? No one knows. She appears to be a relentless, driven careerist with a single-minded determination to conceal herself from the public. Over the past three decades Kagan has worked in government without exposing either her policy or lifestyle views to anyone willing to comment. She is a cipher. Why? What was she afraid of?

 

Kagan’s lesbian lifestyle and sexual orientation may offer the answer. Because Kagan was a “closeted” lesbian, in a legal profession that was just beginning to accept women as attorneys, the bulk of Kagan’s personal life has been conducted and lived in virtual secrecy. Because she learned to live in secret as a lesbian she was forced to conduct virtually her entire professional life in secret as well.

 

ContrarianCommentary.com investigative activity has focused primarily on two issues: Kagan’s sexuality, and on her links to Goldman Sachs, where Kagan was paid $10,000 a day to be a “golden girl” adviser.

 

There is no doubt that Americans, and particularly politicians, are reluctant to talk about sexuality. But just in the past couple of years, sexuality and homosexuality have been at the center of numerous political/governmental scandals. Sexuality is not an insignificant factor. We have seen in recent years how a person’s inner life can influence and control that person's external actions. Politicians who are conducting surreptitious sexual lives invariably raise question about their public service as well.

 

The Washington Post has launched a major discussion of, and defense of, Kagan’s sexuality:

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/

brad_hirschfield/2010/05/kagans_sexuality_

irrelevant_as.html?hpid=sec-religion

 

Wednesday evening Fox News host Bill O’Reilly was almost reading from the script of my Monday news conference on Kagan. He said Kagan’s sexuality was a “legitimate question” and raised the issue of gay marriage that I focused on. O’Reilly chose Sally Quinn, the doyenne of the Washington Post, as his guest and commentator. When asked if people were talking about Kagan’s lesbian lifestyle in Washington, Quinn answered “Are you kidding?” Obviously, everyone is.  But why should we be concerned?

 

First of all, the canard that public officials are entitled to a “private” lifestyle is nonsense. Public officials trot out their privates when it suits their interests. What about when it suits our interests? Kagan is a blank slate to both the left and right.

 

Second, Kagan is not seeking a democratic mandate from the voters. She is seeking a confirmation by 100 individuals who will give her a lifetime appointment. This attenuated and indirect process cuts off any “public” campaign and any public inquiries through traditional political channels.

 

After the issue of Kagan’s sexuality was initially raised on a CBS news blog last month, ContrarianCommentary launched a preliminary investigation. As Kagan’s nomination approached we launched a more extensive inquiry from our temporary fighting camp in Honolulu. Since returning to New York and announcing at a news conference earlier this week our plans to concentrate on Kagan’s sexuality, we have been preparing to launch a major new investigation into Kagan’s past, all of which will be detailed on Friday, May 14th at a New York City news conference.

 

It is traditional that nominees for high government posts appear at confirmation hearings with their families: wives bring their husbands, and husbands their wives. Children are also produced. Kagan’s parents are dead; she has two brothers who work in New York, one of whom apparently became a socialist extremist. Will the brothers appear? Or will the nominee’s table be empty of any relatives or adult connections? Does Kagan share her life with anyone else? That is a reasonable question. Who?

 

Obviously we know and Kagan knows that Kagan is not “alone.” Why does Kagan treat her own personal life as though she is engaged in something “dirty” or immoral? If she is truly committed to the GLBT community, as she claimed to be when she threw military recruiters off her campus as a “moral” issue, why is she so afraid to produce her “partner” or “significant other” or whatever she calls the woman she shares her life with?

 

Kagan’s closeted lifestyle is not a conservative or liberal issue; it is not even a Republican or Democratic issue. It is an issue that provides an insight into her character, her attitudes towards social and familial issues, and her approach to the complex questions involving sexuality that are constantly before the courts. Liberals have as many questions about Kagan as conservatives. That is why ContrarianCommentary.com is pressing ahead with our extensive investigations.

 

That is why Elena Kagan’s closeted sexual orientation and lesbian lifestyle should matter to senators. Lacking any record of individual professional accomplishment except relentless self-advancement, lacking any visible family connections, we need to know who and what she is. Then, every senator can make an informed determination on whether to support or oppose her.

 

NEXT: Friday’s news conference will announce a counter to Barack Obama’s 24-house pro-Kagan White House “hotline,” as well as upcoming sexual investigations in Cambridge.

 

READER BULLETIN: Our previously scheduled Obama news conference and columns based on our Hawai’i research have been pushed back to next week. Due to the urgency of the Kagan matter, she is our immediate priority.

 

-------------------------------------

ABOUT ANDY: Andy Martin is the Executive Editor and publisher of www.ContrarianCommentary.com. Andy is a legendary New York and Chicago-based muckraker, author, Internet columnist, radio talk show host, broadcaster and media critic. He has over forty years of radio and television background. He is a former adjunct professor of law at the City University of New York (LaGuardia CC, Bronx CC) and holds a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Illinois College of Law. Martin comments on regional, national and world events with more than four decades of experience.

 

UPDATES:

www.Twitter.com/AndyMartinUSA

www.Facebook.com/AndyMartin

 

His columns are also posted at ContrarianCommentary.blogspot.com; ContrarianCommentary.wordpress.com.

ContrarianCommentary.typepad.com

[NOTE: We try to make typographical corrections on our blogs, where you can find the latest edition of this column.]

 

MEDIA CONTACT: CELL: (917) 664-9329; TEL. (866) 706-2639 E-MAIL: [email protected]   

© Copyright by Andy Martin 2010