Posted on 10/11/2009 1:32:18 PM PDT by Elderberry
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Notice of Electronic Filing The following transaction was entered by Taitz, Orly on 10/11/2009 at 12:57 PM PDT and filed on 10/11/2009
Come now the Plaintiffs with this Request for Judicial Notice that Individual Damages are not required in public sector mail & wire fraud relating to political corruption under 18 U.S.C. §1346, together with notice of filing expanded report by Susan Daniels.
During this Court’s hearing on October 5, 2009, the Court searchingly examined counsel for the Plaintiffs and Defendants regarding the sole threshold question of “standing.” Plaintiffs’ provided arguments of Flast v. Cohen taxpayer standing or else 9th Amendment reserved rights to Petition for Redress of Grievances concerning a clear violation of the Constitution’s clearly demarcated qualifications for the Presidency, as well as Oath taker standing per Allen v Board of Education and USA v Clark . l
Plaintiffs have, in the course of their investigations during the past year, accumulated a substantial amount of evidence concerning the Mr. Obama’s fraudulent manipulation of his own identity, and the legal identity of others. To this end Plaintiffs have previously submitted the Affidavit and Independent Investigative Report of Former Scotland Yard Inspector Neal Sankey and now submit the expanded Report of Ohio Private Investigator Susan Daniels.
These two private investigation reports, although slightly duplicative, show beyond reasonable doubt a pattern of manipulation of Barack Hussein Obama’s identity, employment, and residence information. The use of a multitude of social security numbers alone is indicative that Mr. Obama appears to have committed a substantial number of felony violations, including but not limited to violations of 42 U.S.C. §408(a)(7)(B). which shows dishonest political advantage during 2008 election.
Plaintiffs submit again that “the American People Reserve the Right to know”. Furthermore, the examination and decipherment of the trail of deception so casually left by this successful candidate will (1) lead ultimately to discovery of the truth about his origins and citizenship, (2) reveal the nature of the scheme to defraud by which this Mr. Barack Hussein Obama became President, and (3) show the degree and nature of the collusion of other people and parties in the scheme of defraud leading to his election, including but not limited to the other Defendants.
The Plaintiffs have repeatedly alleged that the election of 2008 was procured by fraud. Acquisition of high public office by and through implementation of a scheme to defraud regarding material facts regarding a candidate’s qualifications and identity is a species of public sector fraud. Such a scheme to defraud is actionable by private parties under 18 U.S.C. §1346, in that each instance of the use of interstate wires or mail delivery facilities counts as an individual predicate act under Civil R.I.C.O., 18 U.S.C. §§1961, 1962(a)-(d), and 1964(c).
Plaintiffs request the Court to take note that the United States Congress’ express purpose in enacting 18 U.S.C. §1346 was to ensure that corruption by both (even paired) public and private sector defendants (such as Defendants Barack and Michelle Obama were from the Illinois Senatorial Election 2004-up-through January 20, 2009 individualized damages were not required to obtain convictions under 18 U.S.C. §1346.
It logically follows that Civil RICO actions relating to public and private sector corruption which would utilize predicate acts of criminal violations of 18 U.S.C. §1346 could likewise be brought without proof of individualized damages or “standing” in the civil sense.
Plaintiffs accordingly submit that the principles of prosecutions of public corruption based on 18 U.S.C. §1346 be applied to evaluate the standing of the Plaintiffs in the present above-entitled-and-numbered case Barnett v. Obama.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs request that this Honorable Court take Judicial Notice of the doctrine of the people’s intangible right to honest services based on 18 U.S.C. §1346, and consider the significance for the standing of the people to bring suit under Civil RICO (18 U.S.C. §1964(c)), that the criminal predicate acts for RICO which may be substantiated under this title do not require specific personalized injury to business or property interests.
Accordingly, the people of the United States may sue for Civil RICO for the fraudulent denial of their intangible right to honest services without showing individualized specific injury, and this case should be allowed to go forward, albeit with Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint allowed to be filed, and considered as a fundamental (complementary) element of citizen standing. Respectfully submitted, Sunday, October 11, 2009
Of course. No doubt AG Holder brought some of his goons with him and roughed the judge up a bit, slapped him around until he agreed to dismiss. </sarcasm>
And you admit to being suck-up-in-chief as well. Nice to see you being honest about something for a change.
One would expect that they should have a chance to respond. Which is why I doubt that the Judge will look at it.
By rights, the judge can take any knowledge of the law that he has into consideration, whether or not the lawyers raised it. For example a friend of the court filing.
True. But not after the deadline for such submissions has long passed.
All I can say is, it's obvious you don't know me in real life.
BTW, I wrote the script. :-)
No more than any other of Orly's zany filings. She does produce some knee-slappers, that's for sure.
Go chase a mouse.
Translation: Red Steel hasn't a clue either.
bfl
...Which is garbage? Good question. That’s why investigators investigate. They don’t just compile a list, voice some suspicions, and then throw the thing into court for someone else to figure out......
Obama has blocked many of his records, and invetigators can only investigate so far without court order for discovery. SS employment records are not available without permission or court order. An employer cannot release a SS# used by employee without fear of lawsuit. What SS did Obie give the govt for his I-9 as President or Senator? Has anyone from the govt checked it? (lol) At some point there is sufficient suspicion to get into court with and open up discovery. What would you have them do? And what about my point about his Hawaii SS#? someone is not telling all the truth. What SS# did he use in Hawaii? If the person who had the SS was still alive, an Investigator could contact that person and ask them to check their own SS earnings statement for places of employment they didn’t work at and then file a complaint with SSA, unfortunately it appears the numbers used by Obie belong to a least one dead person, how convenient. I would like to see how the other numbers check out and if they are in the SS Death index.
...Although the store is just a few blocks from Obama’s old high school, Punahou, I was also taken aback to find out the presidential candidate received his first W-2 from this address, as it was my first place of employment as well. However, we probably donned the famous pink shirts about 15 years apart, and while it gave him a life-long distaste for ice cream, I still have a healthy appetite for the 31 flavors.
Last April, Obama told a crowd in Malvern, Pa., that working at the ice cream chain “was actually kind of embarrassing because you had to wear, like, a brown cap and stuff [like] the apron,” he explained. “Girls would come in and you’d be trying to talk to them, and they wouldn’t give you the time of day, because you were wearing this cap.” ...
http://fieldnotes.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/10/27/1597165.aspx
By Pass The Trolls....folks...these guys are getting paid to disrupt our threads...IGNORE THEM.
The birther issue has them freaked outm hence the action of so many leftists here early on the birther threads. And almost always the same group of nut jobs.
They are freaking out.
They denied it. LoL!
DoJ are blogging Twits and playing Mugbook and who knows what else.
From the DoJ website: "The Department of Justice launches Justice.gov today in an effort to increase openness and transparency in government. Utilizing a variety of online tools, we will be able to share news and information, not just on our own web site, but through popular social networks Twitter, YouTube and MySpace and Facebook. The Justice presence on these social networks will allow Americans to interact with the Department in entirely new ways. "
Translation yes I do.
I ain’t got a boss no more. I’m single. One day you will thank me, non, odh, d66, mlo, etc. Without us keeping you birthers straight there’s no telling what you would fall for.
parsy, who is saving you from the foul clutches of Orly
They haven’t shut it down; they’re just trying to. Ignore them. Like mosquitoes buzzing, or the dog 5 houses down barking.
Of course, the people you are talking about aren't posting meaningless off-topic posts. We're posting very much on topic. You just don't like what we say.
That's right. Don't let them spoil a good delusion.
Do you realize that you are obsessing about some kid working at an ice cream shop 30 years ago? I’m telling you guys, this birther stuff is making you crazy. I guess FR will have to have a recovery center thread for ya’ll when it finally sinks in there is nothing to it all.
parsy, who will be there for you brother freeper
Well then somebody owes me a friggin check!!! mlo, did you get mine???? If so, just donate it to FR.
parsy, who is apparently owed money
What? I missed the part about getting paid! I want to get paid! Where do I sign up for that?
And yes remove him from office by any means. You don’t object that he made it into office by any means.
Quote of the week at least, maybe of the month.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.