SCOTUS SUIT AGAINST OBAMA & ROBERTS TO BE CONFERENCED ON 11/06/09

There's a new SCOTUS suit you want and need to know about...case 09-6777. I'll win and when I do? YOU CAN SUE SITTING OFFICERS FOR LIABILITY THUS DISSOLVE THEM AS THE US DEFAULTED VIA FAILING TO RESPOND TO A PRIOR SCOTUS SUIT ON 11/05/08, the day after the election, lol. Actual default is the 2000 election and BVG; legal default occurred on 11/05/09. I then appealed to Roberts directly on 11/20/09 and forced direct action thus I won on paper. Now all I am doing is acting to collect my award: Hearing in person aka winning in person. You can and may enter SCOTUS as right no matter what SCOTUS claims as SCOTUS does not make law nor may they invoke rule as law. SCOTUS is organic to the living constitution, The People, and not the paper Constitution as it exist within Marbury only thus it answers to The People alone. So I engaged SCOTUS and won on paper four times and this culminated in SCOTUS entering me directly and acting directly but then NOT FILING MY PAPER DOCUMENTS as John Marshall said 'filing or delivery of the paper is not necessary as you all know what US law says...the only paper you need is the Declaration and Constitution and my own ruling, Marbury V Madison. Act upon ownership of this knolwedge when you leave this Court'. I did! Thus here I am again, entering having already won my case as the raest of all conditions were realized in the US and only I knew it.

The US defaulting is not as funny as the Solicitor General waiving every citizen's interest in the Constitution and every citizen's Constitutional rights on April 1st, 2008 when I first filed thus he later could not respond as the only response possible then is GUILTY! As ignorance is not an excuse how do you not know you have an acting, legal President of original jurisdiction, me, Susan? A constitutionally set President? Think people: In what kind of case is it impossible for the illegally sitting US government to respond and if it does fail to respond thus defaults may a Chief Justice then circumvent the US completely via acting to address the default w/o ever getting any response as he did on 11/20/08? If that happens - if a Chief Justice STANDS ASIDE a petitioner thus The People - you have a new President as that's the only way it can and may happen...as the case is a pro se case of constitutional authority and original jurisdiction. It's a citizen checking and balancing the Chief Justice and SCOTUS via invocation of chain of command! It makes the plaintiff or petitioner who is both victim and counsel THE constitutional authority, the legal President:

I support The People, the lawful, constitutionally set government of the US...it's foreign if it is not related to the Constitution our Founders authored and then lived out as real. You can be a foreign body of government but be born here as running around calling yourself American does not make it so any more than calling yourself natural born makes it so. As We The People ARE the government we are to take government in our hands but not the law. "Government" is the seats, the offices and institutions...if you know then you act with or without a court order as that is what a natural born American does. Marshall said you need not wait on any paper as you already have the only paper that counts – The Declaration, The Constitution and Marbury V Madison itself! Read on, as I'll attempt to reason SOVEREIGNTY for you but you really should read my "Motion to Reconsider Your Own Destiny And Fate" on the website listed or on SCRIBD as it clearly reasons the point of law:

Susan Herbert V Barack Obama, John Roberts, Frank Hull And The US has been filed and docketed within the Supreme Court; it is case number 09-6777 set for conferecne on 11/06/09. Frank Hull is the Federal Appellate judge who issued a ruling ordering the federal court clerks to unfile documents and return them to me unfiled which is evidence tampering, obstruction of justice and in this case treason. As Frank Hull then was ordering the clerk to unfile the Declaration and Constitution – the one our Founders wrote not the made up post 1871 Constitution – and remove it from the courthouse it then rises to treason. The federal clerks did not obey this criminal order.

This case is the case to restore our original government, the original documents and the original government the Founders authored and then lived out as reality...it restores the constitutionally set government known as We The People in lieu of all this post Civil War nonsense – dead paper such as the DC Organic Act of 1871, the IMF, Resolution 511 and exclusionary court rules that judges invoke against the pro se nonlawyer etc. etc. - that is all unconstitutional. It makes it possible to exercise your rights of liberty, dissolution and safety. It makes every citizen sovereign...it also does away with the Federal Reserve as it is wholly unconstitutional and it was nullified by a jury in 1968 and does away with Federal Income Tax as you may not tax what is a right and as We The People check SCOTUS.

In case you do not yet understand: SCOTUS is organic to the constitutionally set government known as We The People not the paper! It answers to The People only not to any other branch. In 1790 a violation of separation of power occurred that has never been addressed as SCOTUS’ jurisprudence has never been adjudicated so I’m doing it. At Marbury we secured a do-over with SCOTUS but not one nonlawyer was ever allowed entry to the bar until I was on 11/20/08...I entered directly and forced direct action and the Chief Justice obeyed an Executive Order I issued thus stood aside We The People. I needed and wanted him to create the only paper birth certificate that rises to proof that a citizen is natural born: The SCOTUS docket naming me as both victim and pro se counsel and with the word DENIED on it. If your legal argument is that We The People have been denied justice absolutely and that even SCOTUS came to violate the Constitution then SCOTUS must write DENIED thus concurring. If they write granted? You have no case! DENIED allowed me to go back and name John Roberts exactly thus leveling the playing filed as upon re-entry to SCOTUS the case then becomes all pro se litigants against those who are not: Susan and Roberts V Obama and the US, Corp US that is. John Roberts and I are equivalent legal authorities that now represent We The People meaning: Susan Herbert not Barack Obama is the acting, legal President and Commander of the US government, The People. The military already sided with me as about ten years ago the Joint Chiefs issued a statement that they would support the person who was able to restore the original jurisdiction government. They were contacted again; I highly doubt they will inform John Roberts and I that they are no longer wiling to enforce the Constitution.

As this is the case for YOU? The biggest thing you can do to help yourself is publicize that this case has been docketed in order to put pressure on the media and Congress...the reason the other branches do not want it heard is ALL OF THEM THEN WILL HAVE TO GO HOME AND/OR GO TO JAIL. The media keeps pretending that history did not happen, as privateers who will also be affected by the case own the media. They can’t ignore what The People do not ignore; if The People make a fuss they will have to get in line with me and Roberts thus the law.

So you know: I even went so far as to challenge Sotomayor’s recent unconstitutional appointment. She cannot rule in this case and may not sit after I am heard depending upon her actions. This then means one of two things: SCOTUS can tie it thus throwing the decision to you or Roberts can rule all alone a la Marshall thus supporting the Executive Order I issued against Obama.

Oh - as Obama sat and as he claimed to be an expert, a constitutional law professor? His actions are criminal as he expllited that expert knowledge but first and foremost he has to appear pro se as the oath of Office is I WILL not My Lawyer Will. He says he can so let's see if he can as I happen to know you can swear to do the impossible, what only The Creator can do, but it won't ever happen unless you actually are The Creator, lol. Some powers are reserved to the exactly named Creator alone as rights are inalieanable. I'm giving him an equal opportunity to prove or disprove himself...Roberts and I are equals acting pro se so he too must act pro se. If he does not he is entering a plea of no contest and as the US is in default and has been since 11/05/08? As the US failed to respond at all? He has to appear; you elected him to represent you not the Solicitor General. Plus: The Bill of Rights says I, Susan, do not need to convene a grand jury in his case!

From the actual petition, written for the nonlawyer citizen NOT a jduge who already knows the law thus I employed colloquial english not legal jargon and not formal standard English as upon conferencing I am then serving the entire nation notice of suit:

"I practice or live what I teach, US law: As further proof we are no longer a Constitutional Republic and are paying what is tribute Obama is now acting to investigate the CIA as he said his administration would be the most transparent but then he promptly acted to hide his facts by hiding his paper thus everyone but Obama is being made transparent or is subject to Obama’s arbitrary enforcement of the law. He is violating the equal protection clauses as if SCOTUS, the CIA and Susan must obey the letter and the spirit of the law so must he but he does not. He is arbitrarily picking and choosing what he will live out and what he will enforce. Proof is he first said he would not investigate the activities of the CIA but then acted to do it. That then is arbitrary, it is conditional, and as no other condition changed Obama then is the condition that changes and there is nothing lawful or equal and due about it. Obama changed his mind and upon what only he knows as our Constitution did not change nor did new case law arise nor do we have a new CIA director since he installed himself as the Executive and appointed one. The chief law enforcement officer enforces the law, period. He applies it to everyone including himself. Ideally he never violates it. But Obama has not once lived up to the letter or the spirit of our Constitution or so I truly believe and he falsely claims that he is an innocent victim of crime. Thus: I never need to see a single paper to then prove Obama is not the acting, legal constitutionally named or set President and Commander as I have what our Founders gave me: life. Plus the paper trail exists and I already entered it as Obama and CORP US hid the wrong paper. I previously stated that they failed to hide Resolution 511; I now state that they failed to hide the Declaration, Constitution and Marbury as well as Bush V Gore, the SCOTUS docket dated 11/05/08 & 11/20/08 with my name only upon it as both the victim and pro se counsel, several SCOTUS rulings that set federal precedent, the text of the missing 13th Amendment, the dates on the IMF/UN legislation, the UN Treaty, the Albany County Police report dated JUNE of 98, the Albany County Court record dated JULY of 98, the Philadelphia County Court record dated DECEMBER of 2000, the Middle District of FL court record dated APRIL 4, 2007, the Middle District of FL court RULING & ORDER dated JANUARY 20th & 21st, 2009 and the Federal Reserve as it is named on the paper being passed off as US dollars when they are not: Our money reads FEDERAL RESERVE, a private concern, and NOTE. I exactly entered a picture of a $500 NOTE as an attachment to my acted upon emergency application that has John Marshall on it; he would turn over in his grave if he knew he was pictured on a foreign note passed off as constitutional when it is not! I believe this was also entered to lower federal court. My fact is Obama and CORP US did not manage to hide one single piece of paper evidence that rises to proof. The paper they hid never rises to proof thus I never need to see it. Obama and his lawyer, Bob Bauer, can keep Obama’s birth certificate, passport and college records to themselves for all eternity as what he has to do is give birth to a record that he does not have the human ability to forge: He would have to change the exact words of our Declaration of Independence. The Constitution provides for no method of amending the Declaration. Neither does Marbury. Even the whole of SCOTUS, the Chief Justice himself and the President all working together and with every resource at their disposal cannot amend the Declaration as we won the Revolution or so I allege. This Writ needs to be granted so I can teach Americans what constitutes proof and what does not and so they learn that no piece of paper ever actually proves a thing about who and what you are or who and what we are as a nation. We The People serve – live - to be or become proof of the paper!"

"As other judges have begun blaming SCOTUS exactly for their actions? So have members of Congress only Congress has gone one further: Granting constitutional authority to make believe, fantasy officers. They are also stating as fact that they know what is said when SCOTUS meets to discuss cases as in how they voted. Also if you merely lived here for 14 years you are natural born. YES, if you lived here in 1763 or 1777 as you left off at the time the Constitution was adopted. That would make you natural born as you were actually present when the actual Constitution both paper and People was actually naturally born, when it sprang from the minds of our Founders one of which you then are: Thus you are natural born. From a letter authored by Anders Crenshaw, my Rep, in response to why he is not addressing Obama and why he did not address the candidates on the ballot: “According to Article II of the Constitution, the eligibility requirements for the Office of the President include: 1) natural born citizenship; 2) 35 years of age, and 3) 14 years of residency in the United States. Concerned citizens have questioned whether President-elect Obama meets these minimum qualifications, and some have brought legal challenges attempting to prevent him from assuming the office based on his place of birth. However, these legal challenges to the President's citizenship have been dismissed in several states, and the Supreme Court overwhelmingly decided that it would not issue a writ of certiorari to hear an appeal of each dismissal. In addition, Hawaii's Health Director and Head of Vital Statistics examined and certified the authenticity of President Obama's birth certificate following an investigation by his office. The document has also been reviewed and deemed authentic by experts at the University of Pennsylvania's Annenberg Public Policy Center.” Policy??? Not Law? I reasoned: ‘I have new evidence. A Rep wrote and said he knew as fact and law Obama is qualified as A COLLEGE TOLD HIM SO. Not the one Obama went to either. It’s actually a matter of policy, Crenshaw’s personal policy. He is convinced we will believe his fact is the Constitution does not apply to himself or to Obama or even to SCOTUS, lol. Since WHEN is the word of a college via it’s Policy Center then constitutional authority??? We do not ask colleges to reason our application of the law precisely as they are not the constitutional authority. Why pay the Justices if colleges will tell me for free what the Constitution DOES NOT SAY as no where is “Health Director”, “Head Of Vital Statistics”, "UNIVERSITY" or "PHILANTHROPIC THINK TANK ASSOCIATED WITH A COLLEGE, THE WEALTHY AND MAYBE A POLITICAL PARTY" named? As no where is “PAPER” or “Birth certificate” named? I got a birth certificate for ya: The SCOTUS docket with my name on it pro se proving direct action took place as I directly acted to create that. I gave natural birth to it as I moved the Court to then directly act with my fact and my reasoning or knowledge and my application of the law. I proved ownership. Why pay the Rep as the Constitution and US case law is published at no cost all over the place? You’d think a Rep would act as if he is a constitutional authority not ask someone else who is not named unlike him as “Representative” is exactly named. So are the concerned citizens as “The People” are exactly named as well. A Rep, my Rep, reasoned his violation of the Constitution by citing “SUPREME COURT” exactly as the cause or reason, he names that first, and then claiming he knows the vote, as it was exactly “overwhelmingly” against The “concerned” People, the actual equal authority who have an interest and a right. SCOTUS as it exists today is not exactly named as a constitutional authority as the actual first constitutional authority, Crenshaw’s actual first cause, The People, created it ex post facto via the named Constitutional process – redress in a court of law - thus LENT THEIR CONSCIOUS AWARENESS or AUTHORITY to SCOTUS. The People not the paper empowered SCOTUS and still do. SCOTUS never acts against the citizens as that then is acting against the Constitution! Against their own selves!!! Who does that??? Who harms their own self??? Who violates their own right of safety??? We negotiate a lot of things but not the Constitution!!! So WHO does negotiate it against our will? I can’t name one Justice who is nuts and/or power hungry. I’ve met these people on paper; we have a relationship, the Constitution, so as we are related I know. Like the judges in my case and in the cases of other nonlawyer pro se litigants SCOTUS is his named excuse; SCOTUS is now the default excuse of oligarchs.’ That’s what I reasoned but I wrote back: ‘SCOTUS is not the cause. That’s not why you refuse to obey the Constitution or abide by the oath you swore. I would know as I’m IN RE SUSAN HERBERT and I live in your district. The authority, the citizens, has made a simple mistake and one they would make as you are the cause of it: They asked to see Obama’s paper as if that paper is the authority or as if they do not trust SCOTUS thus they do not own the knowledge of the Constitution or US case law...John Marshall said your action is the proof that you own the knowledge or the truth of the Constitution thus delivery or filing of the paper need not occur. He ruled as we are a living government of people then PEOPLE ACTING IS THE PROOF NOT THE PAPER. This is for anyone who does not understand why SCOTUS is so hesitant to hear a case asking Obama to produce his paper. 1, Paper is never absolute proof in any actual Constitutional nation as people or life is proof. You can't trust paper especially if a crook is producing it! The crook has will and liberty but the paper does not thus you cannot ask the paper if it was forged as it can’t answer thus can’t be questioned – you can’t charge a piece of paper with fraud thus why would you ever suspect it? - and you can't trust whatever the crook tells you. Well, you can but you shouldn’t. Trust is an emotion. Trust is for people not paper. I trust myself, The Creator and the signers who embodied the law not the paper copy and not you, Crenshaw. My fact? I never yet met a Rep I do trust. 2, Obama then can refuse to obey a Justice as a Justice cannot mount an argument back or against him thus a citizen must. The citizens protect the Justices and so SCOTUS thus the Constitution. Usually they enforce SCOTUS rulings by living them out as real but a citizen might have to defend an employee of SCOTUS or the institution itself from you or another crook. What if Obama refuses to obey an order of SCOTUS aka The People but yet still sits? What if no named 'authority' charged with the duty acts to make Obama or Biden or any of these persons comply with the Constitution? Obama would not be refusing to obey SCOTUS but the Constitution aka The People. THE authority. That's dangerous as it sets a dangerous precedent for the crooks: it tells the crooks they can do whatever they wish w/o consequence. 3, If people acting is the proof? All you can and may do then is act pro se thus leveling the playing field as Obama then has to do the same thing - enter his legal argument pro se or in person w/o a hired gun as the oath of Office says I WILL. Thus you'll soon know who is or is not the constitutionally set President; you'll know who is or is not qualified to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution aka We The People. The proof, the actual President who is a natural born American citizen will rise and you can then compare that person to Obama and both to what the Constitution and US case law states; you weigh the evidence and assign greatest weight in light of the burden of proof standard thus you know. You own the knowledge or the truth of the Constitution thus your own self: are you acting as you wrote the letter and you voted constitutionally or unconstitutionally? Trust me, as you can and may: You’ll forever know what natural born is or is not. See ya in court!"

The whole petition is online as I asked SCOTUS to adjudicate one question and then let The People govern themselves. My audience is The People not judges and politicians. It’s not supposed to sound as if a lawyer wrote it. It sounds as it does for constitutional reasoning!

This suit is meant to end rule by egomaniacs, lawyers and businessmen and institute rule by scientists and philosophers - YOU - as if your nation is a living philosophy of politics then The People are the scientists conducting the experiment and evaluating the results and The People are the very philosophers James Madison said should decide the issues via a constitutional convention. Jefferson could never get Madison to understand this in their day, as back then Madison believed the elected persons were the philosophers who should decide the issues but Madison never had to deal with Incorporated US, did he? Jefferson truly believed all authority belonged to The People and so The People hold such a convention... I always knew the way to do that is via SCOTUS with a pro se constitutional authority case as then you are making your case directly to The People as SCOTUS is of us, for us and by us and not of any other branch, exactly like the military is an all volunteer civilian force commanded by a civilian. Besides: WHO wants to keep paying income tax???

Reason #50 to Grant this Writ: "Federal income taxes: Grant this Writ so they are then made just as even if we turn tribute back into just taxes how taxes are currently levied is not constitutional, as our Founders never intended People or a right to be taxed and as today the burden is placed almost exclusively on the middle income classes. The very poorest and wealthiest people do not pay taxes. Upper income classes do not pay anything close to their fair share. Harlan was correct in Pollack but he missed something. We are supposed to develop the means or the reasoning. For instance if SCOTUS rules the current income tax is not constitutional? The government or The People are then to develop a plan that is legal. We still have to run this thing...Grant this Writ so I can toss this idea into the ring: Income from property and/or stock is not a burden, at least not all of it. Stick with me: I own a rental property. Any income derived from rent was not earned DIRECTLY by the sweat of my brow. The renters DIRECTLY earned it and then I INDIRECTLY ‘earned’ it as profit. I subtract my salary as property manager, my employees salaries and expenses for maintenance then the rest is taxed. Salaries and expenses are not taxable; anything else is. Stock? The GE employees directly earn or cause profit; I indirectly earn it via stock ownership. I might only own a few shares thus it is all taxed but it should be as I’m not expending any sweat to then take in the profit. A guy who owns millions of shares? He’s using stockbrokers and secretaries and money managers. He should be able to subtract their salaries as they do burden it. And if I know whatever I pay my employees is not going to the fed? I’m going to pay them more only to keep it from the fed. I’ll be overly generous, lol, as I want The People to have the power not the federal institutions. In 1913 or 1916 we may not have had any means to keep track of who owns what and who is claiming what but today technology makes tax levied this way feasible as we can account for it. The problem before was tracking the money and then apportioning it as indirect taxes are apportioned geographically. We had no way to apportion it. Today we do. We now have the Social Security index too and that did not exist then. Besides, it is up to The People to make their fellow citizens account for their actions. The People are not to be depending upon the IRS to baby-sit the wealthy. If I say I am worth ten billion it might be true, maybe I can prove it, but if Oprah Winfrey says she is worth ten billion we know it is not the truth as she only takes in so much and her net worth is not anything close to ten billion dollars (or so the media reports). The IRS should want to get an up close and personal look at a person claiming they are worth ten billion dollars and/or worth more than they are taking in. I truly believe we can revisit the federal income tax. Also: This then frees up a whole lot of money. Money is a symbol; money represents the energy The People expend. There’s only so much energy in the US. Contrary to what Congress would have you believe they cannot create energy thus violate the law of this universe as that is a power reserved to The Creator thus all of this create money to cover the cost of legislation is unconstitutional. “Minting” is not “Printing at will”. We will have more money thus more energy circulating. The People can then pay off their debts, as nobody is to escape paying them as they chose to enter those contracts. You pay the debt off and never enter those contracts again. The People can spend what they do have. Congress can’t spend what does not exist in this universe and what is not constitutional for them to take from us if The People are informed as The People (or the President) check SCOTUS not Congress. A ruling isn’t supposed to leave SCOTUS and go straight to Committee but this one did in 1909 and so it was made ‘law’ in less than a year (See the 1911 & 12 rush to ratify to then circumvent The People and see Appendix S re the 16th’s questionable legal status and see the 1912 Presidential election as it seems to have been engineered; at the very least a massive conflict existed). Nobody checked Pollack as the power to tax is derived from Art 1 Sec 8. If The People do not know they check SCOTUS they can’t. I have zero proof the 16th is constitutional but tons of proof it is not. I, Susan, do not work for CORP US and 16 says only federal employees are subject to the federal income tax, a fact the IRS takes great pains to avoid naming in any of its literature. I engaged the IRS and they violated the law. FL, PA and VA never took 16 up. Granting this Writ then is an actual stimulus package."

Susan, the acting, legal President and Commander of original jurisdiction as I am, even if you do deny the reality known as the Constitution (and/or the SCOTUS docket). Actual law is not matter of your personal belief as it is! Your person, your living constitution, either embodies the law or not as all paper is dead. You, your own self, then ARE a body of belief, get it? Mine is purely and wholly constitutional.

SCOTUS dockets but does not conference cases that have no merit. All of you do not know US law, US case law nor basic founding principles. Go read your Constitution: where oh where in it do you find the Supreme Court as it came to exist? you don’t as it is not to be found in the paper thus as it’s of The People you must then sue the People in SCOTUS or rather exactly sue Roberts as BVG is a tied ruling as it is 9 as 5-4 as 2, or, 9 as 5 as 1 v 4 as 1 or 1 v 1, a tie, as ANY dissent then made it a tied ruling. No BVG then no Roberts and certainly no Obama. So sue Roberts as he too is sitting illegally to then gain entry in person as a fully veated right. It worked for me.

You were taken for a ride people! SCOTUS may only rule unanimously or 1 alone, the Chief Justice standing down the sitting President, in the case of a Presidential election and it may NEVER use per curiam as the math never adds up as it is about the difference between absolute and whole numbers. Any dissent at all is the Justices voting twice thus it then becomes an automatic tie.

So, how do you not know US law? This is exactly what we can’t have, maniacs running around lying like politicians and lawyers and claiming they do know the law when they do not. you can’t even count to two! In the cases of politicians and lawyers it is criminal; in my case? You’re all liable as the US officially defaulted on 11/05/08 in my case as it failed to respond. Are you criminal? That’s what SCOTUS and I will be discussing.

You are too easy to bait! Way too easy as SCOTUS has ruled several times that you may not judge a complaint based upon the appearance of the paper as that then is discrimination itself thus you must rule based upon substance. When you discriminate you judge a person based upon appearances thus in a pro se authority case of oj.? To judge the paper based upno appearance is to judge me based upon appearance as I am my case and my words are first person testimony or sworn truth. You are not to doubt or deny my words unless you can support your claims with evidence rising to proof and you can’t as that proof does not exist.

This case has been dumbed down to the enth degree; if you are dumber than even plain colloquial English I can’t help you as you wasted enough of my tax monies sleeping through school. It’s not possible to dumb this down anymore w/o killing its substance. I know you’re all sexist, racist and anticitizen or antiamerican as: Everything (99.9% of it anyway) you said violates US law and US case law. You even violated the thouhgts, feelings, ideas and belifs of the Founders themselves. You proved you are possessed of overly large egos and overly small brains as I do what no other nonlawyer citizen does and few lawyers do - enter SCOTUS at will - yet you still choose to live in blanket denial of actual reality known as US history. Ego prevents you from understanding a SOVEREIGNTY case thus we know as fact w/o question you do not practice US law in real life but only say you do. It’s not ignorance it’s you acting criminally as in this unique case alone? It rises to treason, sedition and subversive activities and you will never get to enter “I did not know” as your defense as we do not recognize that as a valid defense.

Here ya go guys: NATURAL BIRTH IS THE CASE FOR WOMEN AS ONLY WOMEN GIVE BIRTH TO BABIES, LIVING CONSTITUTIONS. SCOTUS IS ORGANIC TO THE LIVING CONSTITUION NOT THE PAPER. BIRTH WAS YOUR GIANT SIZED CLUE AS MEN WILL NEVER EVER DO THAT THUS THEIR TESTIMONY NEVER RISES TO PROOF IN THE CASE OF NATURAL BIRTH. MEN MAY NOT ENTER SCOTUS IN THIS CASE TO ARGUE NATURAL BIRTH! VIA DEFAULT OBAMA CAN BUT NO OTHER MAN MAY.

So you know: don’t feel too bad as physicists understand the argument as US law IS rocket science...it’s my fault for giving those of you who aren’t physicists credit for having a brain.

Math? It’s actual law of this universe exactly like US law.

A letter I sent to Roberts & Co. a day ago re US law and physics, as Godel and Einstein agree with me not you:

Regarding case 09-6777, Herbert V Obama, Roberts, Hull and the US not ex parte as I named Roberts thus the entire sitting judiciary (you’ll need to refer to my case to understand this and maybe case 07-9804 too):

I did not know who Godel the physicist was; as I said I had to reason everything on my own by myself from the creation of the universe due to mathematicians and physicists who change numbers and who do not account for all qualities and due to authorities in all fields lying outright. Godel proved there is no time; correct as I know all time now is then no time. The Cherokee refer to it as Time/Untime. Like me and like Einstein he understood there is no absolute point in time and you are wasting your life relying and depending upon hard numbers. Godel proved what I too proved: There is a crucial difference between truth and proof: “a mathematical proof is always a proof in, and relative to, a given formal system, whereas truth as such is absolute.” Mathematical proof is not reducible to formal or mechanical proof! Neither is legal proof! Paper is not absolute proof and actually proves nothing in a Constitutional Republic...see how it matches the physics and math?

Proof versus truth: It works this way with US law as an actual law is a law across the board. It applies to everything in the universe. Plus think: I once claimed “I am Thomas Jefferson”. I can and will meet the burden of proof in a court of law however – does that then make me Thomas Jefferson? Is the burden of proof then the truth in a court? Yes and no as you may meet and even exceed it on paper but that in no way then means it is absolute or true, fact and correct – a law aka actual reality. Interestingly Godel and Einstein often talked about this very thing in terms of math as they incorporated metaphysics into the world as they reasoned it to be.

While reading the book I took the attached excerpt from I nearly fell over myself as:

GODEL FOUND THE SAME INCONSISTENCY IN THE CONSTITUTION THAT I FOUND. The only difference is as I resolved Uniformity at long last what seems to be a paradox is not...I’m natural born so I know. Recall how I claimed US common law is derived from the Iroquois Confederacy but we accidentally then adopted the English system of writs as we had crown lawyers here for the most part as we were a brand new nation without institutions like law schools and they entered the SCOTUS bar first in 1790? The inconsistency Godel and I found has to do with an oligarchy or more exactly a military dictatorship arising...Godel applied what he knew to be law of this universe to the US government as I did...we both came to know the same thing but he missed what I did not as Godel is not natural born but naturalized. Ready? I tried to tell you, SCOTUS, several times and you did not believe me, lol, as you are denying your own reality:

As it is possible for a dictatorship to arise in the US according to our law as it is exactly written and I witnessed its birth and felt the ensuing genocide I knew as fact and law YOU DO NOT NEED TO ASK FOR A WRIT OF ANY KIND IN ONE TYPE OF CASE AS AMERICAN COMMON LAW PROVIDES FOR THE LONE CITIZEN TO DEFEAT JUST SUCH A DICTATORSHIP AS THE LONE NATURAL BORN CITIZEN CAN AND MAY ISSUE AN EXECUTIVE ORDER WHICH SCOTUS MUST THEN OBEY; IN A PRO SE CASE OF CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY AND ORIGINAL JURISDICTION YOU NEED NOT ASK FOR ANY WRIT AS YOUR ORDER THEN IS THE WRIT ITSELF! IT’S THE APPLICATION, RULING, ORDER & WRIT, GET IT? I AWARDED MY OWN SELF THE WRIT WHICH ANY NATURAL BORN AMERICAN MAY DO TO THEN DEFEAT FOREIGNIZATION OR OVERTHROW OF ANY KIND!!! You can and may secure hearing in person in SCOTUS as a right and you may not ever need to ask for any kind of writ at all as it is a matter of actual reality not your made up legal reality, lol! Some application of the law is NEVER then law of this universe as it’s theory I can disprove thus if a citizen sues SCOTUS itself? She is invoking what is purely and absolutely American law alone and has zero ties to Britain.

This makes American common law unique in all of the world; it resolves what seems to be a paradox and makes us the world’s only elegant government and law. This is directly lifted from the Iroquois Confederacy as their Constitution makes checks and balances extend into the nuclear family. The US merely took that idea and said it extends from the biological nuclear family all the way up to the national nuclear family...exactly as you are the power and authority of your own life as an individual you, your one vote, are then equal to the President and Commander, Executive Order, thus are the power and authority of the nation itself. From many one and from one many.

No naturalized citizen bringing suit against Obama (who in my case could be any person) would know this and it also makes any lawyer suing and any naturalized or enlisted military suing then lose any and all standing before: SCOTUS exactly. Those first bar admissions, the inability to issue an Executive Order and the inability to Command the nation while in uniform prevent you from appearing in one court alone: SCOTUS. SCOTUS may deny hearing to a lawyer, a naturalized citizen or an enlisted service member in this type of case...or to a man.

It’s partly why I named Roberts exactly for not filing the paper as that’s about the spirit of the law and as then to overcome the conflict, to make his own appointment legal, to obey the equal protection clauses and to subject the Court to peer review – review of The People - and to make adjudication in at least one court possible as no lower court can or may hear the case then this case has to be heard in person. Naming Roberts exactly accomplishes this. If it’s not heard in person then no American at all has justice; justice is then nonexistent. Roberts himself would have no justice. He couldn’t appear in his own court as a lawyer, a litigant or a Justice if injured.

I can actually answer questions no naturalized American can as it’s not possible if you were not raised here or if your parents were not...or if you were raised here but raised to truly believe in a system of government other than ours; look at Wilson as he truly believed in the Parliamentary system and it almost killed us. Wilson meets the letter of the law concerning natural born but not the spirit. It’s how and why I knew what Godel, a native Austrian, missed.

Anyway: To resolve Uniformity you had to actually unite it all and I did. Every time I hit upon what other people PERCEIVED to be an unsolvable paradox or an anomaly I knew it was not as my constant point of reference is my person or: The Declaration and Constitution. Where others failed I did not using those two documents as I own all of the knowledge contained within them and then US case law. So I pulled the following from a book on Godel and Einstein to demonstrate that others, some not lawyers, came very close to making this case...

If I completed the work of Godel and Einstein, or any unfinished work, then I can and will finish the job the Founders started. I can and will make this case. I did not pull anything I claimed out of a hat unless that hat belongs to the Creator and is the universe. Hopefully Godel’s take will help you see it better as he came to know this when being naturalized.

To summarize: Accidentally by design Marshall accounted for the inconsistency, the possibility of a dictatorship arising, when he authored Marbury V Madison as SCOTUS itself then and so The People or the lone natural born citizen may then address just such an inconsistency within SCOTUS as long as it exists as Marshall created it which means: You MUST allow a nonlawyer entry. I’m the lone citizen who not only recognized the dictatorship had been born but that Marbury V Madison was the means to defeat it as Marbury is itself actual law of this universe but only if SCOTUS remains of The People and not of The Lawyers and The Wealthy. Godel said: a country that depended entirely upon the formal letter of its laws (what is mechanical) might well find itself defenseless against a crisis that had not, and could not, have been foreseen in its legal code.

Susan says: Not if you have Marbury v Madison as Marshall did foresee this. We fought a Revolution that some called a military uprising, remember? It not only can happen but did, here, except the Founders then invoked the spirit of the law as authored by The Creator and so did not themselves become dictators. I too chose not to become an absolute ruler. Proof versus truth or people versus paper. Life versus death. It’s how I came to prove LIGHT BEHAVES AS BOTH A PARTICLE AND A WAVE AT THE SAME TIME.

On Godel being naturalized:

“A World Without Time: The Forgotten Legacy of Einstein and Godel” Pages 98-99, Amid The Demigods:

“...Whether or not Einstein’s second writing of his 1905 paper is more ambiguous than the original, it is certainly richer: an insurance company bought the new manuscript for $6.5 million.

It is a sign of both her (Godel’s wife) boredom and her skill as a seamstress that throughout the war years Adele is said to have contributed to the Austrian relief services a dress a day to be given to a young child, in recognition of which she received a bust of her late father from the Viennese authorities after the war. Godel is not known to have made any direct contribution to the Allies’ war effort. He told his friend Atle Selberg, however, that he volunteered after the war ended to serve as a civil defense aircraft spotter. He also proceeded to formalize his commitment to the United States, becoming a citizen of his adopted country in 1947. As witnesses for the ceremony he brought along Morgenstern and Einstein. He had already alarmed the former by confiding to him, in consternation, that he had discovered an “inconsistency” in the Constitution. Apprised by Morgenstern of the danger ahead, Einstein took it upon himself to distract his friend on the way to the swearing in, entertaining him with worn-out jokes and twice-told anecdotes. Einstein might have been even more concerned if he had known that for years the FBI had been intercepting and reading parts of Godel’s correspondence with his mother, who was living in Vienna.

The strategy proved unsuccessful. When judge Philip Forman, who only a few years earlier had ushered Einstein himself into the land of liberty, asked Godel casually, “Do you think a dictatorship like that in Germany could ever arise in the United States?” he received a spirited reply in the affirmative. Godel launched into an account of how the United States Constitution formally permitted just such a regime to arise. Shrewdly, however, the judge cut off the great logician before he could hit full stride, and the ceremony came to a peaceful conclusion, leaving Godel’s new homeland to fend for itself against the opening he had discerned in its founding principles. Years later, asked for a legal analogy for his incompleteness theorem, he would comment that a country that depended entirely upon the formal letter of its laws might well find itself defenseless against a crisis that had not, and could not, have been foreseen in its legal code. The analogue of his incompleteness theorem, applied to the law, would guarantee that for any legal code, even if intended to be fully explicit and complete, there would always be judgments “undecided” by the letter of the law. “

OBVIOUSLY!!! You do not need to be super genius logician to know this!!! Godel had no clue as to what the spirit of our law is; he never came to own Marbury V Madison or that we have vertical checks and balances as well as horizontal. He was not his own constitutional authority and power; he was not sovereign.

I can and will teach you to think in this way, as it is easier than you ever imagined. It has to do with neuropsychology the Sioux taught me as what you must overcome to think in wholes and absolutes or to use both sides of your brain at the same time is the physical injury discrimination causes. Discrimination actually shuts down a part of your very brain! It’s partially why you only use about 10% of it. It directly affects how you process language or: how you process thus experience the truth.

Susan.

Consider yourself served, members of Fake Republic.

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.