Forensic Profiler: Obama Confessing Election Fraud

In a previous post here at Talk Wisdom, a report from WND's forensic profiler, Dr. Hodges, revealed how BHO has been subconsciously revealing various confessions regarding his ineligibility to be POTUS, his lies, corruption, cover-ups and even now, how the election on November 6, 2012 was illegally stolen.

WND EXCLUSIVE Forensic profiler: Obama confessing election fraud Concludes 'in his secret fury he stole 2012 presidential' race

Excerpt:

In a new analysis for WND, Hodges explains that Obama not only confesses, but he suggests a solution for Americans.

“Obama’s deeper moral compass continues to provide guidance to America on how to combat his assaults. In his U.N. speech he repeatedly referred to courageous protesters. ‘They should give us hope… remind us that so long as we work for it justice will be done; that history is on our side; and that a rising tide of liberty will never be reversed.’ Repeatedly, he tells us ‘protest,’ ‘march for justice’ and we can become a rising tide. Citizens still have the power,” Hodges said.

That there are questions about the 2012 election has been reported numerous times by WND.

In Hodges’ assessment: “Following Obama’s presidential reelection impressive findings have emerged pointing to a fraudulent election. A brief summary reveals precincts in Ohio and Pennsylvania reported greater than 100 percent of registered voters turned out to vote. In 100 precincts in Ohio Obama got 99 percent of the votes. Pennsylvania illegally removed GOP poll inspectors from voting locations. Computer irregularities in Pennsylvania (and elsewhere) reverted to a default Obama vote no matter who the voter selected.”

He continued, “Florida prevented absentee ballots from being observed by neutral observers. Military ballots were systematically denied active-duty servicemen and women around the world.”

So he said all he had to do was sit back and wait for the confession.

“One thing is for certain – if Obama stole this election he would confess unconsciously. 

We now review that possibility from his own mind, listening for his all-seeing unconscious super intelligence to once more tell us how he truly sees himself deep down. As I described in my book, ‘The Obama Confession: Secret Fear, Secret Fury,’ Obama has repeatedly confessed to his misdeeds of his illegal presidency and sweeping attack on America for four years.”

He explains his observations:

“On election night after initial voting reports declared him the winner, Obama once more unconsciously pointed to a confession. Before his anxious and relieved supporters, Obama spoke of his pride in his daughters but commented, ‘But I will say this for now, one dog’s probably enough’ – on the surface referring back to promising his daughters a puppy after his 2008 victory,” Hodges said.

“But stay with his spontaneous right-brain image. Understand he could have chosen any matter on which to comment and any description but his brilliant unconscious mind which always speaks in a symbolic right-brain language – and carefully chooses its images – selected ‘one dog is enough.’

“Read his confession that America has just elected a dog of a president – and once was enough,” Hodges said.

“He suggests that he’s dogging it as president, faking it as an illegal president in a second way now with a stolen election. That he’s a real ‘dog’ for such deception. The image of a dog further suggests: a pet favored by the media and blind supporters who would not dare to explore his illegality by birth or unfair election; that he will dog or haunt America for another four years because a dog also bites especially a wounded one. (And Obama is deeply wounded beyond belief.) Once again Obama unconsciously points to his deceptive anger and indeed he has bitten/assaulted America in multiple ways, both covert and overt, and plans on more of the same.”

It was interesting, Hodges noted, that Time magazine also then referred to the “dog” image, using it extensively to declare, “It was a fitting end to a one-dog’s-enough sort of campaign.”

“The magazine writer suggests that he had picked up deep down on Obama’s unconscious confession,” Hodges said.

Further, during a Nov. 9 press conference, “Obama snapped at two senators who had criticized U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice for her erroneous declarations regarding the Benghazi attack. He challenged the senators to ‘come after me,’ not Rice,” Hodges said.

“This matches his hidden instructions in the U.N. speech that American citizens be prepared to protest unfair elections. In both his 2008 Fathers’ Day speech as a candidate and in his inaugural address he unconsciously instructed citizens to confront him as an illegal foreign-born candidate/ president,” Hodges said.

“Obama’s ideas continually reflect a preoccupation with unconscious guilt and a need to be caught and stopped. His behavior and decision-making around the Benghazi tragedy with obvious cover-up suggest more guilt – a need to be questioned, a secret confession of being a weak leader and a president who puts a U.S. ambassador’s life at risk,” said Hodges.

He said the newest messages shine new light on Obama’s July 13, 2012, statement that, “If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.”

“The symbolic unconscious message (with a deeper context of a potential vote scam) is not difficult to discern: ‘If I stay in business as president, it won’t be because of me. I’m not really the one who will bring about my reelection – others are going to make sure it happens,’” Hodges said. “His headline-grabbing comment has all the earmarks that he was warning America – attempting to shock everyone into grasping – that a secret plan was taking shape to guarantee his reelection.”

Hodges also cited Obama’s Sept. 25 address to the U.N., saying Obama was “confessing to his illegal presidency and an unfair election in 2008. In retrospect – now that evidence points to the real possibility of a fraudulent election – Obama suggests his brilliant always truthful super-intel was also looking ahead and confessing that plans were underway to steal the election.”

On Hodges’ website, Steven A. Egger, associate professor of criminology at the University of Houston, Clear Lake, has written that Hodges’ technique is “becoming the cutting edge of forensic science.”
 

Also see:

Obama vote changing machines to be examined by FBI, Maryland state delegate Kathryn Afzali, Touchscreen machines suspect in other states, 100 percent Obama votes suspect.

Excerpt:

From WND November 26, 2012.

“FBI ASKED TO PROBE OBAMA ‘VOTE-CHANGING’ MACHINES”

“A state lawmaker in Maryland has asked the FBI to impound two voting machines used in the 2012 election to determine whether there was a malfunction or something nefarious going on.

“I just feel it is my duty to try to get to the bottom of this,” state Delegate Kathryn Afzali told WND today.“We’re not making any accusations. The Board of Elections are good people. They have checks and balances … but we want to make sure everything is fair.”

She said a number of people contacted her after the Nov. 6 election to report that they pressed a touch-screen button for GOP candidate Mitt Romney, but the vote registered for Barack Obama.

WND has reported a number of first-hand accounts of similar anomalies during the election. One touch-screen technician reported that voters in another state were getting error messages on their touch-screens when they tried to vote for Romney.

Also, suspiciously, a number of precincts reported a 100-percent vote for Obama, and some even reported beyond 100 percent.

“My request [to the FBI] is … I want them to take these machines. Let an FBI computer expert analyze them,” she said.

She said that among those who contacted her with concerns were two officials, including a state lawmaker who personally experienced a vote machine changing his vote three times to the party whose agenda he opposed.

The lawmaker told her that his computer background left him confident that the problem was beyond a technical glitch, and he insisted that the election judge take the machine out of service and lock it up.

Another concern was raised by Carroll County Commissioner Richard Rothschild. who said it’s critical that the machines be analyzed properly to determine what happened.

“We need to freeze them in their current state, not wipe out data,” he said.

He said his constituent reported the same scenario as has been reported: hitting the touch-screen button for Romney but finding that that it registered for Obama.

Rothschild said it’s a major problem that has to be addressed in order for Americans to continue trusting their election system.

He said the constituent noticed the vote changes on the summary screen.

“It showed Obama as being selected,” Rothschild told WND, even though his constituent reported voting for the GOP ticket.

“After talking with a few other people, this concern seems to be increasing,” Rothschild told WND. “There are just two possible answers. Either he made a mistake, or something caused that machine to switch the vote.”

He said given that his constituent has experience with computers, the contention that he didn’t know how to use the machine seems a stretch.

“I know how easy it would be to introduce a single spurious line of code,” Rothschild told WND, noting a programmer could easily instruct the machine to change the vote periodically, so a routine test wouldn’t reveal any problems.

He said he was told the county had no jurisdiction over the issue and that it would be up to the state, which is why he discussed the concerns with Afzali.

“It’s very scary,” Rothschild told WND. “It creates a sense of helplessness and hopelessness.”

That, in turn, he said, results in people feeling desperate about their failure to impact government.

“If American people feel they cannot trust their voting system, there’s the possibility of more desperate action,” he said. “There are a number of possibilities [for reaction] in nullifications, secession, including throwing off such governments.

“If people think their voting processes do not work, [if] they conclude they are not being afforded constitutional protections, they may conclude their only option is to throw off such government,” he said.

He said the forensics of voting machine examination would be very important, but a good investigatory review could provide a lot of answers.

“We have all seen little pieces of the problem,” he said.

But to determine what is a problem, he said some sort of overview perspective would be needed.

Not only do authorities need to do a review, future elections need to be done so that every voter is given a printed copy of his or her own vote. The copies could be compiled by clerks to provide a point of reference if questions arise, he said.

Afzali told WND that because she’s on the state elections committee, a number of people came directly to her with their complaints.

*******

Hat tips:




WND

Citizen Wells

*******