SO HERE AND NOW

Conservative Political Views

WND POLITICS

WND EXCLUSIVE

Hollywood producer heard Bill Clinton say Obama ineligible

Insider in Hillary’s 2008 campaign points to ‘original birthers’

Published: 04/01/2012 at 9:12 PM

author-image by Jerome R. Corsi

Jerome R. Corsi, a Harvard Ph.D., is a WND senior staff reporter. He has authored many books, including No. 1 N.Y. Times best-sellers “The Obama Nation” and “Unfit for Command.” Corsi’s latest book is “Where’s the REAL Birth Certificate?”More ↓
rss feed Subscribe to author feed

A successful Hollywood producer who had an insider’s view of Hillary Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign claims she heard Bill Clinton say that Barack Obama is not eligible to be president.

Bettina Viviano – who started her own film production company in 1990 after serving as vice president of production for Steven Spielberg’s Amblin Entertainment – told WND that it was common knowledge among delegates committed to Hillary that the Clintons believed Obama was constitutionally ineligible and that Bill Clinton would eventually disclose his belief to the public.

 The Clintons were the original “birthers,” Viviano told WND in an interview in Los Angeles.

“Everybody who has called this a conspiracy from the Republicans or the tea party, they need to know who started it – the Democrats,” she said.

“It was Hillary and Bill, and it percolated up from there,” said Viviano, who had access to the campaign through a documentary she produced on the claims of delegates that Obama and the Democratic National Committee were stealing the nomination from Hillary.

As WND reported, Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio and his team investigating Obama’s eligibility believe there is probable cause that the documents released by the White House as Obama’s long-form birth certificate and Selective Service registration form are forgeries.

Help Sheriff Joe blow the lid off Obama’s fraud. Join the Cold Case Posse right now!

Viviano said that she was on a conference phone call during the primary season in the spring of 2008 in which she heard Bill Clinton refer to Obama as ineligible for the presidency.

In the course of the phone conversation with Hillary delegates, she recalled, Bill Clinton spoke of Obama as “the non-citizen.”

“In the world we were in, with [Hillary’s] super-delegates and delegates, it just was, ‘He’s not legit – that’s the end of it, period, end of story.’ It wasn’t up for discussion,” Viviano said.

Michele Thomas, a Hillary campaigner from Los Angeles, confirmed to WND that she learned from “many people who were close to Hillary” that Obama “was not eligible to be president.”

Thomas led a nationwide petition drive among delegates to force a vote on Hillary’s nomination at the convention after then-DNC Chairman Howard Dean announced her name would not be put into nomination and Obama would be declared the winner by unanimous acclamation.

Viviano said that it was understood that Bill Clinton would eventually go public with his contention that Obama was ineligible for the presidency.

“He, I believe, was frothing at the mouth to tell the truth about Obama,” she said.

In the meantime, she recalled, the former president would make ironic references in public in which he “teetered” on revealing he position.

“He would go on camera,” Viviano said, “and jokingly make comments about, you know, ‘Is Obama qualified to be president? Well, if he’s 35 and a wink, wink, United States citizen, I guess he’s qualified.’”

She claimed, however, that Bill Clinton’s intention to unequivocally state to the public that Obama was ineligible was stopped in its tracks by the murder of a close friend of the Clintons, Arkansas Democratic Party Chairman Bill Gwatney, just two weeks before the Democratic National Convention in Denver.

Gwatney was killed Aug. 13, 2008, when a 50-year-old man entered Democratic Party headquarters in Little Rock and shot him three times. Police killed the murderer after a chase, and investigators found no motive.

The Clintons said in a statement that they were “stunned and shaken” by the killing of their “cherished friend and confidante.”

Viviano said a campaign staffer who was close to Hillary, whose name she requested be withheld for security reasons, told her Gwatney’s murder was a message to Bill Clinton.

“I was told by this person that that was ‘Shut up, Bill, or you’re next,’” she said.

The campaign adviser, according to Viviano, said that despite the intimidation and threats, Bill Clinton was prepared to speak out about Obama’s eligibility

“And then,” Viviano said, paraphrasing the staffer, “they went in and said, ‘OK, it’s your daughter, now, we’ll go after.’

“And then Bill never said anything.”

Others in the campaign who believe Gwatney’s murder was a message to the Clintons think it had to do with the fact that Gwatney was resisting an effort by the Obama campaign and the party to intimidate Hillary delegates into voting for Obama.

But Viviano argues that California delegates also were rebelling, and she says her source told her the same story two years later.

Since the 2008 campaign, Clinton has insisted publicly that Obama is eligible for the White House.

He weighed in on the issue in an April 2011 interview with ABC’s “Good Morning America,” when Donald Trump was urging Obama to release his long-form birth certificate to the public.

“If I were them, I’d be really careful riding that birther horse too much,” Clinton said. “Everyone knows it’s ludicrous.”

‘I had never voted in my life’

When Viviano headed production for Spielberg, her credits included the second and third “Back to the Future” films, “Cape Fear,” “Land Before Time,” “Schindler’s List,” “Always,” “Roger Rabbit” and the third “Indiana Jones” film.

She launched her own production and management company, Viviano Entertainment, in 1990. Her movies include “Three to Tango” and “Jack and Jill,” starring Adam Sandler.

Viviano was plunged into the world of campaign politics in 2008 as an admitted neophyte when Hollywood screenwriter and director Gigi Gaston asked her to produce a documentary called “We Will Not Be Silenced” on allegations of voter fraud against Hillary Clinton by the Obama campaign and the Democratic National Committee.

“I had never voted in my life. I wasn’t a Democrat, I wasn’t a Republican. I wasn’t anything,” Viviano said. “I didn’t know anything about any of this.”

Viviano said that when she and her co-workers informed Hillary campaigners that they were making a film about voter fraud, “the floodgates opened.”

“I mean, everybody had a story to tell about death threats, threats, intimidation, document falsifying, vandalism, property theft,” she said. “It was the most horrible thing I’ve ever heard in my life.”

Viviano said that in research for the film, allegations and evidence that Obama was not eligible “came up immediately.”

“We were getting hit with so many things about Obama,” she said. “This is when (Bill) Ayers and (Rashid) Khalidi were in the news, and then, all of a sudden, ‘Oh, and he’s not eligible to be president.’”

Viviano insisted to WND that her reason for speaking out now was not related to the fact that Obama beat Hillary.

“It’s not about Hillary,” she said. “It’s about No. 1, I’m American, I live in a country where there is a Constitution and a set of laws. I also have somebody in the White House who has lied, obfuscated, provided what we all know to be forged documents about who he is.”

She acknowledges that she could jeopardize her Hollywood career.

“What can you do?” she said. “It’s my country. My dad fought for this country in World War II in the 82nd Airborne.”

Her late father, she noted, was shot down twice during the war and was awarded two Purple Hearts.

“I think, would he rather have me sitting in the corner cowering, and afraid of people, or would he rather have me tell the truth and what I saw?”

Read the preliminary findings of Sheriff Arpaio’s Cold Case Posse investigation after six months investigating Obama’s constitutional eligibility to serve as president in “A Question of Eligibility,” co-authored by Jerome Corsi and Mike Zullo.

Follow all the future developments in this story – sign up for WND’s email news alerts right now!

August 13, 2012 - Posted by | Here And Now | , , , , , , ,

13 Comments »

  1. Usually I don’t learn post on blogs, however I would like to say that this write-up very pressured me to try and do so! Your writing style has been amazed me. Thank you, very great post.

    Like

    Comment by Neva | November 26, 2012

  2. […] Wnd Politics (sohereandnow.wordpress.com) […]

    Like

    Pingback by WND EXCLUSIVE (WELL, WELL, WELL WHAT DO WE HAVE HERE JM) « How Did We Get Here | September 30, 2012

  3. I owe you an apology for not posting your comments. It was not intentional, and I thought I had approved and placed them on the page as they come in. It wasn’t until just recently that it was brought to my attention they had been left off the site. It is my policy not to censure anyone for comments that disagree with mine. On the contrary, that is not what this nation is about, nor am I. I’m still not sure how this happened, and in the future, if you and anybody else wants to comment, please feel free to do so. I insist, however, that name-calling and demeaning commentary will be purposely left unposted. It is not only disrespectful and mean, it muddies the waters of an otherwise clear and specific debate. Had I intentionally disregarded your comments, I would not post this apology to you. Just Me

    Like

    Comment by duckyack | August 29, 2012

  4. This is for EH
    I don’t know if you are just plain naive or simply so far up the Left’s rear end, that you cannot see you are still arguing from a presumption that Obama’s documents are, in fact, legitimate. I know very well what a natural born citizen is. I also know that according to the US Constitution, this nation’s government has consistently betrayed that document, that the citizens of this country have no clue what’s in that document or what it means, and that Presidents and judges overstep their power when, respectively, the former bypasses Congress to get his way and when the latter states an opinion–get it–o-p-i-n-i-o-n–based upon everything other than our Constitution!

    And I will try again to get this through your tunnel-visioned head that I don’t have any faith in sheriff Joe! As to John McCain, he is nothing more to me than another career, and mouthy politician. I do not trust him either! I do not support or believe any leader unless and until that individual proves to me a strong sense of honesty and integrity. That ain’t gonna happen with this president and may not happen with Romney–we’ll have to wait and see. This nation is in the shape it is in today because of the huge number of people like you, who have the gift of vote but use it with so little intelligence and reason. Your very premises are presumptive and have no solid foundation on which to stand. You believe opinion is fact and when one agrees with you, that’s your proof. You have shown that you can research, but you have conveniently left out citations that expose your errors. That everything you say makes sense to you, reinforces my desire to test voters on American history prior to stabbing at a ballot!

    I won’t display any further comments from you unless you agree to stop name-calling!
    Just Me

    Like

    Comment by duckyack | August 18, 2012

  5. It has now been more than four weeks since the Sheriff’s press conference, and nothing has happened.

    No member of Congress (and there are 535 of them) has called for an investigation. Not even Rush Limbaugh wants to discuss it.

    John McCain, who is one of the Senators of Arizona (Sheriff Joe’s home state), as well as being the former Republican candidate for president, has recently called the Sheriff crazy.

    The CONSERVATIVE secretary of state of Arizona, who did his own investigation into Obama’s place of birth, has accepted Hawaii’s confirmation that Obama was born there, and he has not changed his mind following Sheriff Joe’s press conference.

    Could the explanation be that the whole world is part of the plot? Or, more likely, is it that they believe the birth certificate, and the officials in Hawaii, and the Index Data, and the birth notices in the Health Bureau Statistics section of the newspapers——and they do not believe the sheriff.

    Actually, they have very good reasons NOT to believe the sheriff:

    http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2012/07/indicting-the-sheriff-joe-and-the-cold-case-posse/

    http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/292780/conspiracy-again-editors

    Like

    Comment by EllenHancock | August 18, 2012

  6. The meaning of Natural Born Citizen comes from the common law and refers to the place of birth. It does not come from Vattel, who is not even mentioned once in the Federalist Papers, while the common law is referred to about twenty times.

    “Natural born citizen. Persons who are born within the jurisdiction of a national government, i.e. in its territorial limits, or those born of citizens temporarily residing abroad.” — Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition

    “What is a natural born citizen? Clearly, someone born within the United States or one of its territories is a natural born citizen.” (Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on OCTOBER 5, 2004)–Senator Orrin G. Hatch (R-UT).

    “Under the longstanding English common-law principle of jus soli, persons born within the territory of the sovereign (other than children of enemy aliens or foreign diplomats) are citizens from birth. Thus, those persons born within the United States are “natural born citizens” and eligible to be President. Much less certain, however, is whether children born abroad of United States citizens are “natural born citizens” eligible to serve as President …”—- Edwin Meese, et al, THE HERITAGE GUIDE TO THE CONSTITUTION (2005) [Edwin Meese was Ronald Reagan’s attorney general, and the Heritage Foundation is a well-known Conservative organization.]

    And that is what five state courts and one federal court have ruled specifically on Obama. And one, Hollister vs McCain, ruled the same on John McCain.

    All seven courts ruled that the meaning of Natural Born Citizen was defined by the Wong Kim Ark case, which held that the meaning of Natural Born comes from the common law (hence not from Vattel), and that it refers to the place of birth, not to parents. And that is why, when birthers and two-fers had a letter-writing campaign to the 600 or so members of the US Electoral College asking the members to change their votes to vote against Obama, not one elector changed her or his vote.

    For further research:

    ttp://tesibria.typepad.com/whats_your_evidence/scotus-natural-born-citizen-a-compendium.html

    And:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_born_citizen

    And:

    http://www.redstate.com/ironchapman/2012/05/24/english-common-law-and-american-law-a-digression/

    And:

    http://naturalborncitizenshipresearch.blogspot.com/

    And:

    http://www.obamabirthbook.com/http:/www.obamabirthbook.com/2012/05/early-use-of-the-term-natural-born-citizen/

    And, for those who think that this is only recent conclusions and hence revisionist, there is this from 1829:

    “Therefore every person born within the United States, its territories or districts, whether the parents are citizens or aliens, is a natural born citizen in the sense of the Constitution, and entitled to all the rights and privileges appertaining to that capacity.”—William Rawle, A VIEW OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. 2d ed. (1829)

    Like

    Comment by EllenHancock | August 18, 2012

  7. By the way, along with having to be right, you only hear what you want to hear. Where, in my response to you, do you see that I call the sheriff’s information ‘evidence,’ and where did I say I didn’t like Obama or that sheriff Joe can be relied upon? Why is it that you used the phrase, “hatreds towards(sic) Obama?” It appears that one cannot even bring into the conversation legitimate questions without you having decided there is hatred involved. Also, you have shown that you cannot answer my “other points,” and that’s it?–case closed? The confidence you express in the ‘truth’ of Obama’s birth is based on what–the term “Natural Born Citizen” and your understanding of the definition, which is “(since the term comes from the common law and refers to the PLACE of birth)”? Really? That remark is so far removed from logical thought and so relative to your degree of ignorance regarding the contents of the US Constitution, that to debate with you further is a waste of my time. You believe in Obama because you “know” the truth from fiction–that I hate because I have questions–and that people, you will never meet in your lifetime, are telling the truth about a specific constitutional issue, of which you know very little, if anything at all. You don’t even realize that all laws originally stem from common law. How does that support your belief in Obama’s eligibility? Being right is your own self-righteousness overriding your ability to reason and has nothing to do with actual evidence. I am honesty open to reasonable answers to my relevant questions, and I’d hoped you could do that. I am disappointed.

    Like

    Comment by duckyack | August 17, 2012

  8. You are a ‘right’ fighter, which means that you will be correct regardless of anything to the contrary. ‘Knowing’ that Obama is a natural born citizen is the same kind of ‘knowing’ that’s used in religion–blind faith.

    Like

    Comment by duckyack | August 17, 2012

  9. And what Sheriff Joe showed was “evidence?” And Sheriff Joe is a person who can be relied upon without any hatreds towards Obama? Well, YOU may think that he is a fine person and his evidence is reliable, but I have pointed out a lot of other people who DON’T.

    As for your other points, well if you do not like Obama you have the right to vote against him. But you cannot change the facts, which are that Obama really was born in Hawaii, and really is a Natural Born Citizen (since the term comes from the common law and refers to the PLACE of birth), and hence he is eligible, and always has been.

    Like

    Comment by EllenHancock | August 15, 2012

  10. I am neither a Democrat or a Republican–a liberal or a conservative–I am who I am, and I follow my sense of right and wrong. That said, I think we can agree that sheriff Joe lacks credibility, but I don’t base that upon claims of others who honestly believe the birth certificate documents are genuine. In other words, I don’t question sheriff Joe’s integrity because a conservative Secretary of State’s believes this or that. No one should form an opinion based on the above “evidence,” because it’s not evidence–even with the article thrown in. It’s still not a slam dunk. It’s all opinion and no facts.
    Although we might agree on Joe, we may never agree that this President and his Administration, is shrouded in mystery and loaded down with lies. What that implies is that there is a reason, or two, for the secrecy. What about the continuous fight to keep pertinent documents under seal, the refusal to answer legitimate questions, and his associations and affiliations with questionable individuals and organizations such as Eric Holder, Elana Kagan, ACORN, Saul Alinsky and the Alinsky Model, the Apollo Alliance, Cass Sunstien, Van Jones, Bill Ayers and the Weather Underground, Black Liberation Theology, Reverend Jeremiah Wright, Hugo Chavez, The Fairness Doctrine, SOLYNDRA, what the COLB actually proves and what it does not prove, CAP, Social Justice, Sustein’s “Constitution in 2020,” the disrespect for the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights, Trumpet magazine, the SDS, John Podesta, Andy Stern and the SEIU, George Soros, John Sullivan, the opt-outs of Obamacare. Furthermore, I still want to know why Obama has not been fully vetted–why he wasn’t prior to his candidacy, and why not after his election; also, why the ‘vetting’ of Elana Kagan did not keep her off the Supreme Court. Remember both Dems and Reps passed her.

    Another thing that disturbs me to no end is the continual name-calling, ridiculing, and accusations flung at those who have legitimate questions–they must be conspiracy theorists! That stuff will not help the message survive regardless of which side it comes from. I would be more likely to hear opposing viewpoints within the boundaries of a legitimate debate rather than a foaming-at-the-mouth, argument. All of this troubles me a great deal. I have committed the last four years researching all of the above issues and much more–eight to 12 hours a day, and often on weekends. I get extremely focused when trying to get as much information as I can relative to the state of our Union. I am a true patriot and want my country the way it was before our Constitution was disregarded. I am of an age that I remember when we all had personal liberties that have now been taken away. I am truly concerned for my children and grandchildren and what their futures will be in terms of freedom. Other than the actual players in these political fiascoes, I am much more informed than most, and that’s how I came to the conclusion that it’s a waste of time, and it proves nothing when conversations become overly heated and bombarded with name-calling, accusations of stupidity, and sarcasm.

    Like

    Comment by duckyack | August 15, 2012

  11. Since Obama showed the short form birth certificate in June 2008, and the short form birth certificate is the OFFICIAL birth certificate of Hawaii (just as the short form is the official birth certificate of Michigan, and that is what Romney showed), then it was not “so long” to show it. Obama showed the official birth certificate, and then when Trump alleged that that was not sufficient (which is wrong), Obama then showed the long-form birth certificate too, and he has shown both the images of them both on the Web and the actual physical copies (with the seal on the back, where it is supposed to be), to the press. And the officials of both parties in Hawaii have repeatedly confirmed the facts on the birth certificate, and the Arizona secretary of state accepted their confirmation as evidence and ruled that Obama will be on the ballot.

    Re sheriff Joe. The citation that I showed above shows that he used the wrong book as the basis for many of his claims, saying that the number “9” meant that the space was blank, but the citation shows that the number “9” did NOT mean that the space was blank. It meant “other nonwhite,” and that is the correct way to code the entry “African” —which by the way Obamas’ father had the right to enter and was the term that African exchange students used to describe their race in the 1960s.

    Further to Sheriff Joe. This is what the National Review says about him:

    http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/292780/conspiracy-again-editors

    Add that to the fact that the CONSERVATIVE Secretary of State of Sheriff Joe’s own state does not believe Sheriff Joe but instead believes the officials in Hawaii.

    Like

    Comment by EllenHancock | August 15, 2012

  12. A lot of things don’t make sense, least of all your theory that after all this time, and after all the controversy everyone who counts (the left) believes the only believable story of Obama’s eligibility. I wish you would tell me why sheriff Joe is not credible, but even with that information, I’ve never been willing to put all my eggs in his basket. What I do want to know is why, in the first place, the birth certificate was hidden for so long, and why, in the second place, does Obama continue to spend millions fighting to keep his other pertinent documents sealed. Do you know?

    Like

    Comment by duckyack | August 14, 2012

  13. Sure, we believe the claims of the “Hollywood producer.” Sure we do.

    Re, Sheriff Joe:

    It has been more than three weeks since Sheriff Joe’s press conference, and nothing has happened. NOTHING.

    No member of Congress (and there are 535 of them) has called for an investigation. Not even Rush Limbaugh wants to discuss it.

    John McCain, who is one of the Senators of Arizona as well as being the former Republican candidate for president, has recently called the Sheriff crazy.

    The CONSERVATIVE secretary of state of Arizona, who did his own investigation into Obama’s place of birth, has accepted Hawaii’s confirmation that Obama was born there, and he has not changed his mind following Sheriff Joe’s press conference. In fact, he has repeated that he has made up his mind based on the Hawaii confirmation and that Obama will be on the ballot.

    Could the explanation be that the whole world is part of the plot? Or, more likely, is it that they believe the birth certificate, and the officials in Hawaii, and the Index Data, and the birth notices in the Health Bureau Statistics section of the newspapers——and they do not believe the sheriff.

    AND, actually there is good reason NOT to believe the sheriff:

    http://www.obamaconspiracy.org

    Like

    Comment by EllenHancock | August 14, 2012


Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

Political Vel Craft

Veil Of Politics

Political Film Blog

money, power, injustice, sex, violence, propaganda, anti-fascism...

@AMeansstotheend

Fighting Against Government Harassment

Constitutional Clayton

Politics surrounding the Constitution

mike884

Smile! You’re at the best WordPress.com site ever

John Groves Art Stuff

Art from johngrovesart

swissdefenceleague

Swiss Defence League

the seaton post

A little bit of this and a little bit of that

Jericho777's Blog

Correcting Misinformation!

%d bloggers like this: