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
She was named for her father digit.
Maybe the threads peter out when the overwhelming logic presented by the anti-birthers makes the birthers think...
parsy, who says all your logic are belong to us
That's ok parsi I'll try and bring it down to your speed/level...the fact that he is not using a number NOW that was issued in Hawaii was the point I was trying to make..did he ever have one? What number did he use and why doesn't he use it now?
Well Duh,.. But she sure could have used that fact to commit fraud.
You just hopeless, good night, I work for a living and get up early
I think today is the first time I have seen any list of names with numbers. Do you have copies of the documents attached to the affidavit about the Connecticut socsec number?
parsy
Go hungry, troll. I’m not feeding you.
I just skim over comments by the whole lot of them. Then they’ll just relate with each other, which is happening more and more. In fact, lately even 9 out of 10 comments are theirs. They’re transparently obvious. They don’t even have any shame. It’s hard to believe that they actually think they are fooling anyone, but they just want to stir everything and everyone up and make FR and the real discussion look stupid. If we ignore them that is the best that can happen, as all their “arugments” have been defeated a thousand times.
Hopefully a bugzapper thread will occur and they will face the exit door one of these days.
Sadly, there probably isn't a DA that will enforce the criminal statute but the civil cause of action can be brought by private citizens under RICO.
Looks more than suspicious. You just disregard the evidence.
"Name - DUNHAM, STANLEY A
Gender - Male
Street Address - 1617 S BERETANIA ST APT 100
City, State, Zip - HONOLULU HI 96826-1106
Probable Current Address - No
Telephone -
Telephone Accountholder -
Social Security - 514-03-xxxx
Age - 73
Date of Birth - Mar 23, 1918
Deceased - Yes
Date Record Verified - Jan 95 - Jan 96
*********************************************************************************************************
Name - DUNHAM, STANLEY A
Gender - Male
Street Address -
City, State, Zip - 96826
Probable Current Address - No
Telephone -
Telephone Accountholder -
Social Security - 514-03-xxxx
Age - 73
Date of Birth - Mar 23, 1918
Deceased - Yes
Date Record Verified - Feb 92
*********************************************************************************************************
Certainly looks like Ann Dunham was using SS numbers from deceased individuals from some fraudulent scheme.
"They are not any place. They are on the move everywhere. They are a snake moving in the desert. They hold no place in Iraq. This is an illusion." - Baghdad Bob
Or:
Stanley Armour Dunham
Stanley Dunham is the grandfather of Barack Obama. He was born in 1918 and served as a sergeant in the U.S. Army during World War II, enlisting just after the attacks on Pearl Harbor. Stanley and his wife Madelyn raised Obama in Honolulu, Hawaii. In addition to President Obama, Stanley is related to six US presidents: James Madison, Harry Truman, Lyndon Johnson, Jimmy Carter, George H. W. Bush and George W. Bush. [24][25] He died in Honolulu, Hawaii in 1992 and is buried at the Punchbowl National Cemetery.
Or, continued..you did not know her father was named “Stanley” and was born in 1918...
parsy, who says this one was easy
You got an answer for all the other suspicious SS and names posted in post#31?
Name: Stanley A. Dunham
SSN: 514-03-4824
Last Residence: 96826 Honolulu, Honolulu, Hawaii, United States of America
Born: 23 Mar 1918
Last Benefit: 96826 Honolulu, Honolulu, Hawaii, United States of America
Died: 8 Feb 1992
State (Year) SSN issued: Kansas (Before 1951)
Name: Stanley A[nne]. Dunham
SSN: 535-40-8522
Last Residence: 96826 Honolulu, Honolulu, Hawaii, United States of America
Born: 29 Nov 1942
Died: 7 Nov 1995
State (Year) SSN issued: Washington (1959-1960)
There are several other Stanley Dunhams in the SSDI:
Stanley Dunham 25 Jun 1903 Jul 1971 Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California
View Record
Stanley Dunham 15 Jan 1908 Apr 1966 Carmichaels, Greene, Pennsylvania
View Record
Stanley M. Dunham 29 Oct 1909 15 Jan 2000 Middleboro, Plymouth, Massachusetts
View Record
Stanley Dunham 25 Jun 1912 Apr 1968
View Record
Stanley Dunham 3 Jan 1915 Dec 1975
View Record
Stanley Dunham 25 Jun 1903 Jul 1971 Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California
View Record
Stanley Dunham 15 Jan 1908 Apr 1966 Carmichaels, Greene, Pennsylvania
View Record
Stanley M. Dunham 29 Oct 1909 15 Jan 2000 Middleboro, Plymouth, Massachusetts
View Record
Stanley Dunham 25 Jun 1912 Apr 1968
View Record
Stanley Dunham 3 Jan 1915 Dec 1975
View Record
Stanley A. Dunham 23 Mar 1918 8 Feb 1992 Honolulu, Honolulu, Hawaii
View Record
Stanley Dunham 7 Dec 1923 31 Dec 1989 Oxford, Butler, Ohio
View Record
Stanley Dunham 7 Mar 1931 15 Dec 1993 Brooklyn, Kings, New York
View Record
Stanley A. Dunham 29 Nov 1942 7 Nov 1995 Honolulu, Honolulu, Hawaii
View Record
Stanley K. Dunham 20 Mar 1949 19 Apr 2001 Smithfield, Fayette, Pennsylvania
View Record
Stanley L. Dunham 13 Aug 1957 10 Dec 2007 Auburn, King, Washington
These are all legit...if they are some of the 34 numbers mentioned they should be eliminated.
This is one of the aspects of their "conversation" that is the most maddening of all. I don't know how many times I've had to give up trying to make an argument for the umpteenth time, and just referred the squabbler to the FR vault of bc threads for their self-education.
Besides simply refusing to engage these disruptors, telling them to go back to the beginning and study everything that we have, is about the best that we can do.
I understand that there are a few "anti-birthers" here who really do not grasp the basic fundamentals of the entire controversy, and who persist in squabbling with those of us who do. I don't really have a problem with them, but they're like the innocent civilians that Al Qaeda terrorists blend in with. They're camouflage for the professional disruptors.
Street Address - 1617 S BERETANIA ST APT 100 City, State, Zip - HONOLULU HI 96826-1106
As it states this address was verified in Jan 1995 through Jan 1996.
He died in Honolulu, Hawaii in 1992 and is buried at the Punchbowl National Cemetery.
Oh the Hawaiian Punchbowl address is S. BERETANIA ST APT 100!! Grand Daddy Dunham must have had is Social Security checks sent to him as a ghost! /sarc
Nope, but pull some out and let’s see if we can figure them out together. BTW, these two “hits” should have been eliminated before they were ever put on on internet. This is why so many of us poke fun at Orly. If this had come in court, she would have been massacred.
There are four or five in Texas. I’m betting some name alike who moved four times.
parsy, who thinks the homework should be done
What’s your answer for post 156 Parsy?
My GUESS would be this came off a skip trace or credit bureau report. The phone bill could have stayed in his name, or if his wife outlived him, she could have drawn his social security or veteran pension or some other pension. Utility bills could have been left in his name. Wife probably inherited assets so there may been some other account she paid on.
Again, this is why a “Scotland Yard” investigator should have done more homework. Also stuff Orly should know about before spouting off to courts and press.
parsy, who says this appears to be SOP for Orly
Plausible but just too many other question marks remain about the other names, SS, and other addresses.
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.