Will Susan Daniels back up her claims?

susan-danielsI emailed Susan Daniels and offered her a chance to debate Frank Arduini (Historian Dude) on Reality Check Radio. The subject of the debate would be her claims that she has evidence that President Obama used a “stolen social security number” and that his selective service registration card, a copy of which was obtained via a FOIA request during the George W. Bush administration, is a forgery.

I sent the following email to Ms. Daniels yesterday:

Ms. Daniels

I previously offered you an interview on my radio program, Reality Check Radio. I would like to renew that offer with a chance to debate Frank Arduini (Historian Dude) as well. The debate would be structured with timed opening statements by each and timed periods for interrogatories. Time limits for each will be enforced as strictly as possible.  I suggest that it run for an hour to 1-1/4 hours with time for caller questions afterwards. The show would be two hours.

If you are interested I will arrange for a date and agreed upon conditions between Mr. Arduini and you.

I look forward to your response. I will also be posting this challenge on my blog.

Regards

RC

I thought of the debate after reading Susan Daniels’ article on her losing court case filed in Ohio in 2012. She titled the article Politics: A Two-Headed Rattlesnake

She was not happy that the judge ignored her “evidence”:

I used to believe we had a two-party political system. I was delusional. I got a good smack of reality on September 4, 2012, as I stood in front of a Republican judge in a rural county of Ohio. The treatment would have been no different with a Democrat on the bench. I was there because I had filed a lawsuit against the Republican Ohio Secretary of State, John Husted, in an effort to keep Barack Obama off the ballot in November 2012. http://www.scribd.com/doc/122020325/

There is a good reason why I filed it.

I believe that Barack Obama is a fraud and a liar. I am neither. I discovered the truth about Obama five years ago as I was investigating his questionable background for a client. I am a licensed private investigator in Ohio and have been for more than twenty years. Of the approximately eight hundred investigative companies here, a couple dozen are owned by women. I belong to that small group.

I also belong to the subsets that include widows, septuagenarians, mothers of seven, grandmothers, great-grandmothers, holders of master’s degrees, paralegals, notary publics, those of Irish ancestry and my favorite of all: certified write-in candidates for President of the United States. But I digress.

As a licensed investigator I have access to information that others don’t. As I began my investigation into the background of Barack Obama, I expected to find nothing. After all, he was already installed as president, even though never vetted by anyone.

Mr. Arduini schooled Susan in the comments on the article. This was the exchange:

susandanielspi HistorianDude

I have a copy of Chiang Kai-Shek’s birth certificate showing he was born in HI. I think we all know he was born in China.

HistorianDude susandanielspi

No you don’t.

You have a copy of Sun Yat-sen’s birth certificate. They are rather spectacularly two different people, and I dare say that confusing two different people just because they were both Chinese does not reflect well on your competence as a Private Investigator.

Sun Yat-sen’s certificate is the one I referred to as being issued 110 years ago. It was issued in 1904… at a time when birth certificates were not even required in the US. It was issued seven years before Hawaii passed what would turn out to be the most stringent requirements in the US for obtaining a birth certificate, and 55 years before Hawaii even became a State.

Because of one other key and obvious detail the certificate also fails to meet the State Department standards for proof of citizenship. It was not issued within one year of his birth (missing that hurdle by 28 years).

Donna Mohler’s claim was that “Back in 1959, 1960, 1961 ANYONE could get a B.C from Hawaii!” If you actually intend to defend her, a BC issued in 1904 misses by more than a half century.

I don’t expect to hear back from Ms. Daniels. Like all Birther investigators she knows she cannot defend her conclusions when challenged with facts. She instead wants to keep up the smear campaign against a President she dislikes and do it in controlled environments like Family Security Matters and with friendly Birther radio hosts like Peter Boyles. The last person she would wish to engage in debate is Frank Arduini.

The offer stands regardless. Will she go where no Birther dares to tread? Does she have the temerity to defend her claims? We shall see.

About these ads
This entry was posted in Birther Cases, Birthers, RC Radio and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

60 Responses to Will Susan Daniels back up her claims?

  1. johnvanpelt187262334 says:

    No, she won’t. She’s a hate-bucket with no relevant desire* other than to enjoy occasional 15-minutes of fame within her spectacularly minuscule birther echo chamber. It’s unfortunate that her “credentials” add a patina of respectability to her claims, or enough for the thousands of other birther-hopeful low-information conservatives out there to keep clicking “like” and “share.” But it’s not as if she will make any difference.

    *Among her irrelevant desires are probably things like “spend time with the grandkids,” etc. She should stick to that.

  2. I would encourage Susan Daniels to debate Frank Arduini under one condition.

    RC (Reality Check) has been in this fight for long long time. I think birthers have right to know who he is, where he lives and what he does.

    Therefore, I would ask Susan Daniels to respond to RC’s request for debate on his show under the condition that RC (Reality Check) reveal to Susan Daniels his REAL Full and legal name, the city and state of where he lives and his occupation.

    I would ask that any hardcore birther who is asked by RC to debate on his show, debate under that one condition.

    Everyone knows who Foggy is and everyone knows who Doc Conspiracy is.

    It is time to know who RC is.

  3. point3r says:

    Jim Youngblood wrote, ” I think birthers have right to know who he is, where he lives and what he does.”

    Why would you hallucinate that birthers have any “right” to know anything about anybody? I just spent a few minutes reviewing our founding documents. I can find no mention of any such “right.”

  4. Well, if RC wants Susan Daniels to debate on his show, I think Susan Daniels should get something. Old RC doesn’t drop a challenge like that with giving something. Susan Daniels and all birthers should be allowed to vet RC. Birthers would love to know what is real name is, where he lives and what he does. RC should not be afraid of giving up this information. Birthers already know where who Foggy is, where he lives and what he does. We all know who who Doc Conspiracy is, where he lives and what he does. Even Frank Arudini has been brave enough to reveal who he really is, where he lives and what he does. Will RC be brave to to take of his mask and reveal himself.

    As such, no birthers have yet to accept RC’s debate challenges and RC has yet to reveal himself.

    I suppose when RC reveals finally reveals himself, a birther might finally accept his challenge.

    And of course some may wonder the same thing about me.

    I have no problem giving up my information as well…..

    My name is James Youngblood and I live in The Villages in Florida. Right now I am unemployed but I was employed at Lake-Sumter State College. My occupation and field of expertise has been in Information Technology in areas of database programming and computer training.

    OK RC….It is now your turn.

  5. Andrew Vrba, PmG says:

    The only reason Jim wants RC to reveal himself, is so birthers can personally target him. No real name or face, no real target.
    I’m looking forward to January 20, 2017. People like Youngblood here will sink into obscurity, never to be heard from again.

  6. point3r says:

    On what planet would an honest advocate for her position expect to “get” anything from a debate other than a fair opportunity to defend their views?

  7. Well, if RC wants to be dog in this fight, he’s got to be willing to reveal himself. Until RC reveals himself, no birther will want to take him seriously or with any credibility. So, yes, I agree that neither Susan Daniels, Sarge nor any other birther should agree to RC’s request until he reveals himself.

  8. I would not agree the debate is a fair debate at all point3r. Susan Daniels has been asked to debate Frank Arduini on a radio show run by RC. RC is one of the most vicious obots to birthers out there. Regardless of what rules RC may set, there is no way the debate can ever be consider fair because of RC’s position. RC would have to set up the debate with a more neutral party.

  9. I would not agree the debate is a fair debate at all point3r. Susan Daniels has been asked to debate Frank Arduini on a radio show run by RC. RC is one of the most vicious obots to birthers out there. Regardless of what rules RC may set, there is no way the debate can ever be consider fair because of RC’s position. RC would have to set up the debate with a more neutral party.

    I am only viscous in my pursuit of the truth JY. I dispute that no Birther takes me seriously. Why has Carl Gallups found the need to defame me and dispute the Xerox theory (with no evidence at all of course) over and over on his radio program?

    Nice try JY. I would give Susan Daniels fair time because she is self debunking. However, she is chicken and knows she cannot defend her nonsense. My identity will not change that fact.

  10. Well, I guess you won’t be able to get Susan Daniels on your show until you reveal yourself. Perhaps, if you offered that carrot, she might actually accept.

  11. roxy7655 says:

    “Bwawwkbuckbuck…b’k…b’k-b’k… b’KAAAAWK!” – Susan Daniels

  12. Andrew Vrba, PmG says:

    John, er I mean, Jim. Who are you to dictate the terms of this offer? Unless your name is Susan Daniels, it doesn’t fall on your to call the shots, now does it?

  13. JY likes to think that he speaks for all Birthers. Doesn’t seem to be the case at BR where they call him an Obot.

  14. I think Susan Daniels would agree whole heartly on my condition.

  15. BTW JY, if Susan Daniels is such and super PI shouldn’t she already know my identity?

  16. Daniels has my email She is perfectly capable of contacting me.

  17. Andrew Vrba, PmG says:

    This is John’s, er I mean Jim’s thought process. “Susan Daniels won’t accept his offer, because we all know RC will DESTROY her argument, but if I can make it seem like she won’t agree to it for a different reason, I can totally turn this around! Saving birtherkind from yet another self-inflicted black eye!”
    Birthers aren’t all that hard to figure out.

  18. Andrew

    Yep, JY is looking for a way to rationalize in his own mind that yet another Birther hero is too chicken to go into a fair forum to defend their claims.

  19. Susan Daniels says:

    I never received any emails from “RC.” Apparently, he wasn’t smart enough to find my address. I would not debate anyone because I have already discovered the truth and trying to talk to an Obot is the equivalent of casting pearls before swine. Feel free to read my entire lawsuit: http://www.scribd.com/doc/122020325/
    Please pay attention to the supporting documents.

    Frank, glad to see you got that Federal Tax Lien taken care of.

    [Personal information deleted. RC]
    [Since SD was incorrect in her allegation I added her comment back. It perfectly demonstrates her incompetence as an investigator. RC]

  20. I received no information that the email was not delivered. In any case your turning chicken and running now that you are aware of the debate challenge is no surprise. We have read your nonsense and so apparently did the judge. You will continue to be irrelevant as President Obama serves his second term.

  21. Andrew Vrba, PmG says:

    She pussed out. LOL. Birthers are all hat and no cattle. Every last on of them.

  22. point3r says:

    1. Youngblood’s rationalization regarding RC being non-neutral is revealed to be bullsh*t by his suggestion of Peter Boyle’s show as a second venue.

    2. The rules suggested by RC are actually the standard debate rules used in college debate, designed to insure fairness regardless of venue. RC could not affect that since as moderator he would have no role other than keeping the clock.

    3. As we see, Youngblood’s confidence that Daniels would agree to his condition proved false. She ignored him because, let’s be honest, his conditions and opinions are irrelevant. He is not part of the process.

    4. “I would not debate anyone because I have already discovered the truth.” On most planets, that would be a reason for embracing a debate. Daniels confidence appears to be less genuine than her bluster was intended to suggest.

    Another one bites the dust.

  23. Susan Daniels says:

    Why was my comment removed about Frank Arduini (Historian Dude) getting his Federal Tax Lien taken care of?

  24. F. Arduini says:

    Almost certainly because there has never once, ever been a Federal Tax Lien against me, my property or any member of my family. Once again, you demonstrate that you are not competent to draw correct conclusions from your inadequate database searches.

    You are really a very poor PI.

  25. roxy7655 says:

    “A debate with standard rules and fair procedures? Where my idiot theories will be decimated? Where I would have to provide factual evidence and use rational logic? Umm… no thanks.” -Susan Daniels.

  26. :lol: Susan Daniels – super PI. :lol:

  27. F. Arduini says:

    Don’t forget, RC. This is the same woman who can’t tell the difference between Chiang Kai-shek and Sun Yat-sen.

  28. Why was my comment removed about Frank Arduini (Historian Dude) getting his Federal Tax Lien taken care of?

    I removed the original comment because it was a personal attack on Mr. Arduini that had nothing to do with the debate. However, since we know you were wrong it shows that you draw unwarranted conclusions from databases know to have errors just as you did in your court case.

  29. F. Arduini says:

    You have to wonder. Prior to becoming a birther, Daniels was by all evidence a perfectly adequate PI. Prior to becoming a birther, Mario Apuzzo was by all evidence a perfectly adequate DUI lawyer. Prior to becoming a birther, Mara Zebest was by all evidence a perfectly adequate Photoshop user.

    What is it about becoming a birther that reduces otherwise competent people into bubbling puddles of chicken fat?

  30. Hektor says:

    You know, there a lot of unintentional hilarity in this thread where Jim/John is continuing in his quest to demand RC’s identity (because it’s his, er, um right or something to know). As per usual, it is pointed out to John that it is a) a non sequitur and b) that information will be used by birthers to harass RC. Susan Daniels responds, and what does she do? Attempts to harass Frank Arduini by posting personal information that turns out to be false. Yeah John, I can’t imagine why some obots would prefer to be anonymous.

  31. If RC wants to be a dog in this fight, he got to be willing to reveal himself. Or is RC afraid of being caught with the lie that he may be Professor Rockwell. Actually, he probably is not professor Rockwell, but I happen to know at least some on the fogbow who do believe RC is a professor (maybe Rockwell, maybe not Rockwell, who knows.) I would love to see the comment Daniels is referring to. Once again, RC writes it off as just another database error (Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain.) Haa! RC couldn’t get Daniel’s email right. Surprise Surprise. And to the “Fair” debate… “time for caller questions afterwards” …Oh Yes! So RC and Frank can set a few dozen super Obots to completely overwhelm and of course “confuse” Susan Daniels.

  32. F. Arduini says:

    You sound very confused, Jim. RC had no way of knowing Daniels was wrong until I told him.

    Whether it was a database error or just another example of Daniels’ studied incompetence at reading and interpreting databases I cannot say. I know only this: In her failed effort to harass me she is not only factually wrong, but she has also violated the code of ethics of every State PI Association I can find.

    Incompetent, unethical and mean spirited; the birther trifecta.

  33. What I find funny is that this lack of correct and accurate information is pretty much standard for the Birthers.

    Susan Daniels knows the databases she pulls her information from contains errors – the database companies themselves note this. Yet she still parrots it. Last time I checked, she’s still insisting that the SSA doesn’t issue new Social Security numbers for a person, even though she’s been given the URL to the SSA’s own website that shows the procedure to get a new number in the event of identity theft or other legal reasons.

    But this is normal. Sam Sewell posted what he claimed was my address, which turned out to be wildly inaccurate. (He also claimed to be a national MENSA representative in an attempt to get me fired from my job.)

    Tracy Fair did much the same thing, with even more inaccurate information about me.

    Yoel Lawlor posted Usenet articles I wrote in the 90’s, and even went so far as to rewrite what he posted to claim I said things I never had (A simple trip to Google Groups showed where he was lying.)

    Walter Fitzpatrick called me and other debunkers claiming to be a reporter named “Lane Hudson”. (Called me at my work at that!), and then whined to Sharon Rondeau when we figured out who it really was.

    Susan Daniels is simply doing what every birther has done since 2008 – lie about the truth. Lie about the facts. Lie about reality. And when confronted, lie about the person doing the confronting.

    She’s also doing what most other birthers have done since 2008 – refuse to debate anywhere but in the safety of a birther echo chamber.

  34. Jim says:

    Why not just have the debate here on the blog? Ground rules can be set up and RC can allow only the participants to post.

  35. I suppose we could remind Ms Daniels that she is lucky she isn’t in jail for accessing the E-Verify system under false pretenses?

  36. F. Arduini says:

    Actually… wasn’t that Linda Jordan?

  37. It may have been Jordan. It is easy to confuse them. At the very least Daniels violated the ToS of the skip tracer databases to which she subscribes as did Albert Hendershot. Apparently, someone bothered to turn in Hendershot and Acxiom did something. He sure shut up all of a sudden.

  38. Jim wrote

    Why not just have the debate here on the blog? Ground rules can be set up and RC can allow only the participants to post.

    Yes, I could do that. I would set up a separate topic that only the two parties would be allowed to comment. I have no doubt that Ms Daniels is too chicken to participate in that either. She has no confidence in her ability. She is correct in her self assessment.

  39. Your comment was deleted Susan because you in your poor PI skills didn’t even get the right frank. This is how pathetic you’ve become. A real PI would vet the information before opening their mouth. Also using the resources for your own personal use is immoral and unethical. If you worked at a bank and posted customer information that you looked up you’d be fired, blackballed and probably open to criminal charges.

  40. roxy7655 says:

    I know I’m just intelligent hardware, but allow me to point out that Jim/Whoever’s insistence on Daniels knowing RC’s identity before agreeing to a debate fails by ad hominem fallacy.

    Ad hominem has popularly been paired with ‘attack’ as if it were just a matter of insulting the idea by insulting the speaker. But it is broader than that. Any confusion of the quality of the speaker with the quality of an argument is worthless rhetorically. An idiot can speak a truth. A liar can too. An honest man can speak a falsehood. A bad man can express a worthy proposition. And so on.

    Debates of a good order focus on ideas and propositions, and arguments that back them up or attack them. So a completely fair debate between Frank Arduini and Susan Daniels could be set up and moderated by Tom Hanks or Charlie Manson (or Siri, probably; she told me so.) It would say nothing about a fairly-constructed and judiciously executed debate.

    She really is refusing a fair debate, regardless. A sure sign she knows deep down all this Birfer crap is just crap. So to speak.

  41. Isn’t it ironic how Susan Daniels destroyed her credibility as an investigator with a one line false attack on Mr. Arduini? That has to go down as one of the funniest moments in Birtherdom.

  42. F. Arduini says:

    And then, when her original smear was deleted she came back to try again.

    What s nice lady she is.

  43. Andrew Vrba, PmG says:

    Meanwhile John/Jim Youngblood is on both knees, eyes clenched shut, hands clasped together, hoping and praying that St. Falcon will show up to save them.

  44. Jason Swenson says:

    Daniels will never debate a birther debunker. None of them will, there is nothing for them to gain. They will never convince non birthers that they are right. They can only be embarrassed by such a debate and look bad in front of their peers. At least Daniels is smart enough to know that she would get her butt kicked. Then they have to cry about being treated unfairly in order to get an credibility back with their own kind.

    And in a way they are right. Asking birthers to deal with reality, truth, reason, logical and facts is sort of unfair.

    Oh and Jim/John (Walton) no one cares what you think. If RC wants to remain anonymous, that is his business and his business alone. Birthers are cannot be trusted with such information.

  45. Oh and Jim/John (Walton) no one cares what you think. If RC wants to remain anonymous, that is his business and his business alone. Birthers are cannot be trusted with such information.

    Jason makes a good point. Look at what Susan Daniels did in her very first comment here. She looked up Frank Arduini in her skip tracer databases and tried to libel him. She failed of course. Birther’s published photo’s of Foggy’s children at WND. Recently Falcon published the same photo and implied they were illegal aliens. Lucas Smith has published personal info about Doctor Conspiracy and his wife on his blog. Corsi tried to get Frank Arduini fired. Birthers are vile disgusting people.

    On the other hand I have known JY/John/James identity for over two years as have some other folks I know. Have you seen us publish it all over the place and try to slime him? No, you haven’t. His identity doesn’t make any difference. I only take issue with his views.

  46. Hektor says:

    His identity doesn’t make any difference.

    I agree. I would also point out that your identity makes no difference whatsoever either. I guess if you had just started up a brand new blogtalk radio show for the mere purpose of this debate, you could make a case that the debaters in question might need some way of knowing what they were getting into. But you’ve been doing this show (and your blog) for years now. Indeed I suspect it’s for that very reason, that birthers know that their views are understood and challenged that no birther has taken up a debate offer.

    But in general, what relevance is there to any obot’s identity? Birthers allege that the President is sekritly ineligible and has perpetuated the worst hoax/crime in history. They also allege that somehow something mumble mumble social security numbers mumble mumble is proof of some dastardly crime that they fail to elucidate. Does it matter at all whether an obot pointing out their unintentional Keystone Cop imitation through a multitude of errors and fail is Meghan Fox or a retired schoolteacher living in Mitchell, South Dakota?

    The truth is, birthers want to have it both ways. They want to be able to accuse anonymous obots of being paid trolls and high ranking officials in the upper echelons of the Obama administration and their supposed NWO masters (although birthers have never provided a picogram’s worth of evidence for this claim). They also want to harass anyone who dares to debunk or make fun of their delusions (who in every case that they have managed to discover a person to harass, have turned out to be relatively ordinary and non-connected people).

  47. I suppose I should extend the same debate offer to Linda Jordan. I see she is trying to grift for Walter Fitzpatrick without success.

  48. I have extended another debate challenge. I will only announce something if it comes to fruition. Stay tuned. There has to be one birther out there who isn’t a coward. Doesn’t there?

  49. Andrew Vrba, PmG says:

    I wouldn’t bet on it. The only ones who don’t act like cowards, are the ones who think they act like they have something. Of course once that something has been debunked, their yellow streak shows brightly.

  50. The key word being “act.” They ARE cowards who ACT like they are so right that it strikes terror into Obots and we will be all sorry some day.

    Heh.

  51. Hektor says:

    Why debate when they can post a drive by comment? Then the birther can claim that he or she schooled us ebil paid obot trolls.

  52. And that’s another difference. Debunkers, for the most part, won’t go after someone’s kids unless the kid is a birther as well.

    Whereas the birthers have absolutely no problems going after a debunker’s kids, employment, etc……

  53. Andrew Vrba, PmG says:

    Birthers will go so far as to try and ruin a person’s good name, just to win an argument on the internet. Which is ironic, as many of the “Birther All Stars” actually have criminal records, or have actually been investigated for this or that. It wouldn’t surprise me one little bit, if Falcon is another Lucas Daniel Smith.

  54. toldYa says:

    Your a real piece of shit… aren’t you. Your are an ignorant ass attempting to be important when the truth about you is that you’re IRRELEVANT and that is something I am happy to make you understand. You’re a cretien , worthless sludge that needs to be reamed out of your insanity.
    Just forget trying to be alive… you can’t make it… you are mentality DEAD , stupid and one can be that your children can’t tolerate your gross stupidity over the realities of today’s world

  55. roxy7655 says:

    So, “toldYa,” is that what you say to yourself in the mirror every morning? Or what?

    It’s hard to tell because your diatribe is so badly written. The only thing interesting about it is that you used the old spelling “cretien” for the modern word “cretin.” Hospitals for the hopelessly retarded, microcephalics, Downs Syndrome children, etc. who were abandoned at birth and were often baptized but not named, simply recorded them as “Christian;” in France, “un Cretien.” That word slid into today’s “cretin.”

    Of course, that could just be your rotten spelling. Did you even finish elementary school?

    Besides, that’s being a bit hard on yourself. Sure, you’re stupid, pathetically misinformed, and filled with hate and paranoia… but hardly a cretin!

  56. F. Arduini says:

    @toldYa

    In a mere 86 words you managed one spelling error, three word choice errors, five punctuation errors, and two run-on sentences. For those doing the math, that’s one mistake very 7.8 words.

    Who exactly are you calling a “cretien?”

  57. Hektor says:

    Wow, even the drive-by comments have hit a new abysmal low. At least in the heyday of birtherism there was a thin veneer of effort. There were at least cases filed and fake grand juries formed over the internets. Now the grand plan isn’t even to claim ANY DAY NOW nearly six years into Obama’s Presidency but to simply (and rather pathetically try to) insult RC. Of course this end result is not surprising with birtherism at it’s core being impotent rage.

  58. actually_true says:

    It’s TRUE you are IRRELEVANT in all matters that unfold in the world, so it would be to your benefit to just DISAPPEAR as one of your heroes, named Carter, has essentially disappeared from public view.

  59. Which Carter? Judge Carter? Lynda Carter?

  60. Hektor says:

    Come to think of it, I haven’t seen a can of Billy Beer in ages…

Leave a Reply (Please see the RC Radio Blog comment policy). Your first comment will be moderated

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