Monday, February 8, 2010

WILL THESE TWO DOCUMENTS THROW PELOSI AND TOP DEMOCRATS INTO FELONY PRISON? INSTEAD OF HIDING THEIR FRAUD UPON AMERICA?

Pelosi signed two Official Certifications of Nomination for Obama and Biden at the DNC Convention last August. Read the language carefully and note the difference between them:

FIRST ONE (referencing the Constitution)

SECOND ONE (WITHOUT ANY REFERENCE TO THE CONSTITUTION)

WHY WAS THE CONSTITUTIONAL REFERENCE REMOVED ? Commenter SAYS: "Just thinking out aloud here, see what you think": Every copy I have seen online of an Hawaii CoLB has shown the place of birth as Oahu, County Honolulu. Isn’t that a little odd?

Surely one or two should be from another island or another county? Makes me think that ALL Certifications of Live Birth, Accepted OR Filed, bear that same information. (Until someone shows something different, anyway). So, the original birth certificate for a child born in Hawaii shows the details relevant to the birth, and can be amended,(CHANGE OF NAME, ADOPTION ETC.,) with amendements shown only on the original. Or, a late Certification could be applied for, (up until 1972 IIRC) whereby an out-of-state birth could be registered, and FILED. Again, this information remains on the original document... When a ‘copy’, a Certification of Live Birth is requested, it’s by no means a ‘copy’ of the original birth certificate, it’s simply a standard form on which, as we know, the parents, the parents Race and the name of the child are shown. Are you with me? The Place of Birth OAHU and the County HONOLULU may simply relate to the location of the OFFICE where the document was issued. Therefor every CoLB shows the same, Place of Birth OAHU, County, HONOLULU. AND THAT MAKES EVERYONE WHO HAS A COLB A CITIZEN OF THE US??? The next question might be, just how many people does this apply to? Thousands?

ALSO INTERESTING FOOD FOR THOUGHT (2009)

With the approaching September 9th Federal Court hearing scheduled in Santa Ana, California, in the matter of Obama providing documentation to show PROOF OF ELIGIBILITY to be in the People's House, and has any basis in reality rather than smoke and mirrors and deception, the article below might be a precursor of some very uncomfortable truths emerging.

Not just for Obama, Nancy Pelosi (as shown above) and the Democratic National Committee but also for Hawaii.

Connecting The Dots In The "Sealed Lawsuit"; Obama Conspiracy To Defraud The System:

As the trail of life becomes the interstate highway of courtroom trials for our beloved leader, Barack Obama, it is perhaps time to weave the fabric of Barack's Muslim, Kenyan, Indonesian, Hawaiian serape to explain just what he is hiding by hiring his platoon of lawyers.

Lets connect the dots, so to speak from the information we already know. This might be what is behind the Berg "sealed" lawsuit. What is taking place is indeed conspiracy as in the sense of a violation of the RICO Act. This involves the state of Hawaii and Occidental College, if not Columbia of New York and Harvard. What requires explanation in this is a generation of crime in supplanting the United States for money. It is as simple as that in local government policy being fed huge sums of money at the behest of Ford Foundation incorporating globalist policy into American culture.

Barack Obama is simply the tip of this iceberg which he desperately must conceal, along with all these other benefactors - beyond embarrassment, people will go to prison. The first task in need of explanation is why would Hawaii aid a known illegal of British birth in illegally obtaining a fake birth certificate?

The answer is: in 1961 the American public had not yet been herded by Teddy Kennedy and socialists into providing welfare benefits to illegals. Hawaii had a large population of illegals who were slave labor, but were a huge burden to the system in poverty and crime. The Hawaiian answer, as it was a Democratic state and still is, was to start registering all those foreign kids by the thousands. The purpose being to tap into all those federal hundreds of millions then which would profit the state. All of those poverty programs flowed funds into the pockets of the retailers as the golden goose pipeline.

If one makes citizens out of illegals, then Hawaii converts a debt into their asset in obtaining more funds and growing the socialist system which empowers Democratic liberals. The fact is there are hundreds of thousands of "Barack Obamas" registered in Hawaii.

Do you think even a Republican governor sitting on this explosive mess wants any of this coming out? An entire state sold out the United States for filthy lucre, because they were importing Asian slave labor. That does not make a great headline, nor, did they probably ever expect a money train welfare illegal would somehow get himself installed as President which would expose the entire Hawaiian fraud, and you know very well that all of those records would have to be gone through and verified so an Obama repeat would not occur, in all 50 states. Talk about a nightmare huh? The nightmare would be the removal of Obama under Quo Warrantus which is being attempted now and 49 other states suing Hawaii for the money it would cost to check all of their records over the Hawaiian fraud. Hawaii has always been a corrupt enclave like Rhode Island. Hawaii was the conduit in the Clinton years to get Chinese communists a stake in the United States Stock Market, to which Hawaii had the first meltdown in this scheme in costing their investors a fortune and ruining their banks.

That is why Hawaii is in collusion with Barack Obama. They were involved in massive welfare fraud and do not want this coming out. With this kind of background, in families being "informed" of the opportunities involved in engaging in illegal citizenship, one Stanley Ann Dunham, hauled her little African eastern boy to Indonesia, until the jungle fever wore off, and then dumped him into the Hawaiian system again where Grandma Dunham was stuck with the kid. Grandma Madelyn Dunham did earn some money in BankHo, her bank in Hawaii, but I suspect that the prestigious school Barry got into, was the same game that brought Barack sr. to America on a free educational route.

Barry Obama Soetero was tapping into the welfare system of Hawaii, and in knowing what twisters the Dunhams were, this takes us into Occidental College. Amusingly Occidental College, basically means round eye college as occidentals are of the European origin who reside in North and South America. The place Obama chose to be dumped into by the Dunhams, was like many of the colleges in that 1979 period in tapping into government resources of free money to "educate" foreigners.

One has to understand colleges in America do not operate to educate children. They are generally conduits of establishing globalist brainwashing into children and as dry cleaning of billions of dollars in funds in "research". For example Wisconsin has a female professor who took huge amounts of cash for global warming, and one of her subjects was studying how the Great Lakes absorbing carbon gases affected warming!

One might as well studied your bathtub water for the effect for if you look at a map you see the Great Lakes are dots compared to the oceans. There are numerous studies linked to this gravy train of funds which flow into colleges and back into corporations whose equipment and services are purchased. It is the Warren Buffett money flowing into Walmart for his Chinese investments. Except in this case it is college money laundering. So the Dunhams were adept at illegal activities in scamming the American system, so it is a conclusion strengthened by what Barack Obama has been up to with his platoon of lawyers - that he is covering something up.

Remember it is public information that Barry Obama upon going into college became Barack Hussein Obama. Liberals have explained this away as, "Barack was more intellectual sounding". Not a chance, because what was going on is this: A college career recruiter shows up and says, "Barry come to Occidental as you will have fun". Barry goes home and tells Gram Dunham he wants to go have fun. Either money is tight or the Dunhams are basic welfare swindlers and being cheap as they are, Gramma and Mama, put their heads together and say, "Hey, we can get a free education if we dust off Barack sr. being a British subject."

They tell Occidental that and Occidental says, "Great, but we need documentation". "Crapper in the wrapper, "Stan and Mad say as all they got is a bogus Hawaiian birth certificate making him American. Then Stan and Mad remember that Barry was adopted by Indonesian Papa Soetero. They tell Occidental this and provide Barry Soetero school records from Indonesia and Occidental says, "Eureka, you have struck it rich pilgrims. There is golden grants in them Indonesian hills!"

So Barry becomes Barack and Occidental gets a big ole Obama grant to go with all their other foreign student federal grants they have been milking the system for at the behest of the globalists. The problem now is, Occidental never figured their scammer would produce a person in the White House.

See this system was designed to Americanize 3rd worlders with globalist nonsense and then bury them back into Indonesia, Russia and Kenya to ruin those peoples lives. Occidental now has a huge problem as it engaged in federal student loan fraud which gave them like many of these globalist programs huge bankrolls to profit off of in exchange for Rothschild plans. None of these geniuses ever suspected a scammer scamming the system would have a parent who would eventually tap into the Ford Foundation money and fellow traveler contacts which would start opening doors, including psychiatric research doors in reprogramming a Birdie dope head in Columbia to become Barack the communist organizer of Chicago.

Stanley Ann Dunham got greedy out of necessity. She tossed Barry away in abandoning him in trying to get rid of her reminder of jungle fever, but still had this reminder turning into an eyesore dope head. She took this loser, put him into a program to "fix him", laying Bill Ayers mindset onto him, all for the purpose of making her sexual mistake into something which would soothe her troubled breast. The problem is Stanley looks like she embezzled funds from Ford to give Barry a jump start at life in making her mistake into her glory. Barry was only supposed to be the new Jesse Jackson in bringing in the black vote at the beginning. He was transformed by his programming to take the lead of self fulfillment in being President when Hillary was forced to take a dive. Not for one moment though have the Rothschilds nor Rockefellers not known Barry Soetero is dripping wet with fraud. Bill Clinton constantly hinting at "Constitutional qualifications" means in the boardrooms where these people meet, they have discussed it, have the paper trail and have Obama by his testicles that Jesse Jackson wanted to cut off. Jackson pronounced the race was now complete and there was no more need for "black affirmation" as the race has now reached the mark. The globalists know all of this and are shedding the black vote for the hispanic vote with Obama as their judas goat in betraying blacks.

The globalists know full well how precarious of position Obama is in. They know if this comes out the country will be in chaos and they know if Obama stays in office the continued economic attack on America will simply provide their conduit in establishing their global order. These financiers win no matter what as they have set this out to play out this way. Strangely Orly Taitz, the lawyer who has the best option to bring all of this out and shine a light on the sordid money fraud situation betraying the United States is a factor the globalists hope for as the more turmoil created the better it is for the global order. At the very least is this, Barack Obama is guilty of federal money fraud. As Tom Daschle and Tim Geithner just said "Ooops sorry" and paid it back, it could end there for Obama in the foreign student loans IF he had not shown a pattern for the period from 1971 to at least 1982 in passing himself off as Barry Soetero, resident of Indonesia as an adopted son from British Kenya all to tap into the American money supply. A normal moral person would never have gotten themselves into this mess, but Obama because of his programming and what that did to his phobic compulsion disorder has been ploughing on in this, using the shield of the patricians who created him as they are powerful and connected people. Occidental College opens up the door to Barack Obama declaring in writing he is not American, but foreign. This progresses to Columbia in this fraud, Barrack concludes he is owed a little summer vacation with his Pakistani buddies. He goes into Pakistan once again on an Indonesian passport which signifies again Barack Obama is Indonesian as Americans could not get into Pakistan. Obama would have probably gotten away with the money fraud, if he had not been too cheap and decided he just had to flip the bird to the American system and get into Pakistan. Those records prove he is an affirmed triple citizen of British Kenya, Indonesia and America, if not Canada registration too. Any part of which disqualifies him for President of the United States. Barack Obama is like the crook who steals a million dollars, but has to go back and pick up the bank President's pen in greed and that is the 20 dollar item that gets him busted. There are federal records for these Obama applications for funding in the Department of Education. As of Barack Obama attempting to further smear George W. Bush in releasing Bush documents, to take the heat off of Barack, the Dunham, Obama, Soetero education files are now open to the Freedom of Information act as all papers associated with a President are, as Barack Obama made this a presidential issue when he hired attorneys to cover up what was being hidden at Occidental College. This is a matter for the Justice Department as it is money fraud of college funds and it is a matter for the Republican minority in Congress to demand and hold hearings investigating this. Those records all exist and if someone destroyed them and they are missing, that is a federal crime by which Barack Obama has benefited, so he is then a guilty co conspirator in another felony. If you get money from someone illegally, and someone else burns the papers protecting you, you are just as guilty as the person who lit the match. That is how all of this ties together from Hawaiian welfare fraud, Occidental College student finance fraud and Barack Obama currency fraud defrauding the American public of funds and places of education for it's own citizens. They are coming now for America and this all traces back to the Occidental Obama.

Posted by Alan Peters at 10:22 PM

Certified COPY of Obama Kenyan Birth Certificate

Lucas Smith Affidavit now filed with the US District Court - Obama Kenyan BC
September 4th, 2009

As of today, September 4, 2009, this Affidavit has been filed with the United States District Court in Southern California ~ represented by Orly Taitz.

This is a legal affidavit that declares Lucas Smith to be of sound mind and judgment. Lucas can go to jail if he lied on this affidavit.

The document (Certified COPY of Obama Kenyan Birth Certificate) you see here, once it is validated by the court, is pretty much the proverbial “smoking gun.”

lucas page 1

lucas page 2

lucas page 3
Posted by Bob Filed in Kenyan Birth Certificate, Press Release

Saturday, January 30, 2010

Bloomberg, Fox and the public take on big banks and the fed

See next posting below for Obama Orders to lock up the Fed

Fed Seeks to Block Release of Bank Bailout Secrets (Update1)
Share Business ExchangeTwitterFacebook| Email | Print | A A A

By Thom Weidlich and David Glovin

Jan. 12 (Bloomberg) -- The Federal Reserve asked a U.S. appeals court to block a ruling that for the first time would force the central bank to reveal the identities of financial firms that might have collapsed without the largest government bailout in U.S. history.

The U.S. Court of Appeals in Manhattan will decide whether the Fed must release records of lending programs that were instituted or expanded to help banks survive the longest recession since the Great Depression. In August, a federal judge ordered that the information be released, responding to a request by Bloomberg LP, the parent of Bloomberg News.

“This case is about the identity of the borrower,” said Matthew Collette, a lawyer for the government, in oral arguments yesterday. “This is the equivalent of saying ‘I want all the loan applications that were submitted.’”

Bloomberg argued that the public has the right to know basic information about the “unprecedented and highly controversial use” of public money. Banks and the Fed warn that bailed-out lenders may be hurt if the documents are made public, causing a run or a sell-off by investors. Disclosure may hamstring the Fed’s ability to deal with another crisis, they also argued. The lower court agreed with Bloomberg.

‘Right to Know’

“The question is at what point does the government get so involved in the life of the institution that the public has a right to know?” said Charles Davis, executive director of the National Freedom of Information Coalition at the University of Missouri in Columbia. Davis isn’t involved in the lawsuit.

The ruling by the three-judge appeals panel may not come for months and is unlikely to be the final word. The loser may seek a rehearing or appeal to the full appeals court and eventually petition the U.S. Supreme Court, said Anne Weismann, chief lawyer for Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics, a Washington advocacy group that supports Bloomberg’s lawsuit.

New York-based Bloomberg, majority-owned by Mayor Michael Bloomberg, sued in November 2008 after the Fed refused to name the firms it lent to or disclose the amounts or assets used as collateral under its lending programs. Most were put in place in response to the financial crisis.

“Bloomberg has been trying for almost two years to break down a brick wall of secrecy in order to vindicate the public’s right to learn basic information,” Thomas Golden, an attorney for the company with Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP, wrote in court filings. He said the Fed may be trying “to draw out the proceedings long enough so that the information Bloomberg seeks is no longer of interest.”

FOIA Case

The lawsuit, brought under the U.S. Freedom of Information Act, or FOIA, came as President Barack Obama criticized the previous administration’s handling of the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program passed by Congress in October 2008. Obama has said funds were spent by the administration of former President George W. Bush with little accountability or transparency.

FOIA requires federal agencies to make government documents available to the press and public.

In arguments yesterday, Golden disputed the Fed’s contention that it doesn’t have to reveal the information because it hasn’t since its inception.

“The rules changed since 1913 with FOIA’s enactment,” he said.

Much of the debate centered on the potential harm to banks if it was revealed that they borrowed from the Fed’s so-called discount window. Collette, the government lawyer, said banks don’t do that unless they have liquidity problems.

Discount Window

Yvonne Mizusawa, a lawyer for the Fed, said that if banks stopped using the discount window because of a perceived stigma, it may affect the Fed’s ability to set monetary policy.

“This would make it much more difficult to control short- term interest rates,” Mizusawa said, citing an expert for the central bank. “The stigma results from the fact that the Federal Reserve is a backup source of liquidity.”

Golden denied that revealing the loan information will hurt banks. He said that the central bank and the Clearing House Association LLC, an industry-owned group that joined the Fed in its bid to overturn the lower court order, came up with only two examples of meltdown-related bank runs: Citigroup Inc.’s offices in Asia and Northern Rock in the U.K.

‘Wasn’t a Run’

“It’s interesting that there wasn’t a run in the U.S.,” he said. “The board has the burden at all times to prove that that competitive injury would result.”

During yesterday’s hearing, the appeals court judges asked about the “staleness” of the information Bloomberg seeks. Golden said the information would concern banks that got help from the Fed from about November 2007 to May 2008.

“This court has nothing in the record to say whether this information is stale now or not,” said Robert J. Giuffra Jr., a lawyer for the Clearing House at Sullivan & Cromwell LLP in New York. “Banks will not use the discount window if they know the information will be available in, say, 20 days.”

The Fed’s balance sheet doubled after the failure of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. on Sept. 15, 2008. That year, the Fed began extending credit directly to companies that weren’t banks for the first time since the 1930s. The amount the Fed lent, spent or guaranteed peaked at more than $7.7 trillion in March, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

Loan Records

In her Aug. 24 ruling, U.S. District Judge Loretta Preska in New York said loan records are covered by FOIA and rejected the Fed’s claim that their disclosure might harm banks and shareholders. An exception to the statute that protects trade secrets and privileged or confidential financial data didn’t apply because there’s no proof banks would suffer, she said.

In its appeal, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System argued that disclosure of “highly sensitive” documents, including 231 pages of daily lending reports, threatens to stigmatize lenders and cause them “severe and irreparable competitive injury.”

Historically, the type of government documents sought in the case has been protected from public disclosure because they might reveal competitive trade secrets, Davis said. Laws governing such disclosures may be due for a change, he said, following the far-reaching U.S. bailout.

“If you are in need of a bailout and turn to the federal government and say, ‘help,’ with that comes some requirements in terms of transparency,” Davis said.

Joined in Bid

In court papers, New York-based Clearing House, which processes payments between banks, assailed the judge’s decision for what it said were legal errors, such as applying the wrong standard in weighing the exception to FOIA.

The group includes ABN Amro Bank NV, a unit of Royal Bank of Scotland Plc, Bank of America Corp., The Bank of New York Mellon Corp., Citigroup Inc., Deutsche Bank AG, HSBC Holdings Plc, JPMorgan Chase & Co., US Bancorp and Wells Fargo & Co.

More than a dozen other groups or companies filed amicus, or friend-of-the-court, briefs, including the American Society of News Editors and individual news organizations.

The judge postponed the application of her ruling to allow the appeals court to consider the case.

Also yesterday, the same appeals panel heard arguments in a lawsuit brought by News Corp. unit Fox News Network seeking similar documents. U.S. District Judge Alvin Hellerstein in New York sided with the Fed in that case and refused to order the agency to release the documents.

‘Informed Decisions’

“The press is looking for facts so that the public can make informed decisions,” Steven Mintz, a lawyer for Fox at Mintz & Gold LLP in New York, told the panel.

Giuffra, the lawyer for the Clearing House, told the judges that he knows of no other central bank that discloses the information the media companies are seeking.

“Very few countries around the world have a Freedom of Information Act,” Dennis Jacobs, chief judge of the appeals court, responded.

The other two judges on the panel were Pierre Leval and Peter Hall.

The case is Bloomberg LP v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, 09-04083, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit (New York).

To contact the reporters on this story: Thom Weidlich in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in Manhattan at tweidlich@bloomberg.net and; David Glovin in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York at dglovin@bloomberg.net.

C Span.org 2nd circuit court of appeals, fox news v federal reserve board, regarding freedom of information act request for list of banks borrowing fr

http://cspan.org/Watch/C-SPAN.aspx Not yet listed but was replayed on cable 1-30-10

C Span.org 2nd circuit court of appeals, fox news v federal reserve board, regarding freedom of information act request for list of banks borrowing from the fed's discount window TARP funds. 01/11/2010

Listen to the testimony on cspan.org. very interesting how the fed tries to say all information is protected because the fed IS AN AGENCY of the Federal Government. Fox may end up doing what Audit The Fed legislation has failed to do. Exemption 4 states only harmful competitive information is exempt.

The workings of the fed are on trial and no one is talking about it. Former NY fed chair Timothy Franz Geithner may go to jail.

2nd Circuit Court Hears Bailout Secrecy Case
Today

The Second Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments on whether to force the Federal Reserve to reveal the identities of financial institutions that may have collapsed without funds from the TARP program. Fox News and Bloomberg are seeking the records through the Freedom of Information Act.

Heneghan: Federal Reserve Under Lock Down Conditions
Posted by: "Dean Clark" maintzger@yahoo. com maintzger
Mon Jan 25, 2010 2:19 am (PST)
Saturday, January 23, 2010
ALERT: Federal Reserve Under Lock Down Conditions
Category: News and Politics
...
Awakening Americans: Behind the scenes intelligence briefings ALL
Patriot Americans MUST know...the REAL facts and truth the
corporate-controlle d mainstream media covers up
Hot EXPLOSIVE Back Breaking News
* * * EMERGENCY ALERT * * *
FEDERAL RESERVE UNDER LOCK DOWN CONDITIONS
by Tom Heneghan
International Intelligence Expert
Friday January 22, 2010
UNITED STATES of America - It can now be reported that, after a morning
meeting with the U.S. Military Joint Chiefs of Staff, President Barack
Obama has ordered a lock down of the U.S. Federal Reserve.
This action coincides with the U.S. Treasury currently operating under
emergency conditions.
Paul Volcker and Barack Obama
Emmanuel Dunand /AFP/Getty Images
Obama ordered a lock down of the Fed after a morning meeting with one of
his current Economic Advisers, former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul
Volcker, in which Volcker presented Obama with an updated audit of the
U.S. Federal Reserve, which shows DIRECT Bush-Clinton Crime Family
Syndicate THEFT of the U.S. Treasury orchestrated and enabled by the
Federal Reserve itself.
TREASON AGAINST THE AMERICAN PEOPLE
Bernard Bernanke, Hank Paulson, Alan Greenspan, Timothy Geithner
George Herbert Walker Bush and Hillary Clinton
The updated audit fingers current Federal Reserve Chairman Bernard
Bernanke, former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, former
BushFRAUD U.S. Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson, current U.S. Treasury
Secretary Timothy Geithner, and former President George Herbert Walker
Bush, along with current dysfunctional U.S. Secretary of State, loser
Hillary Rodenhurst Clinton, as the major U.S. based culprits
participating in this massive THEFT of U.S. Treasury funds aka major
FINANCIAL TERRORISM AGAINST THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.
CO-CONSPIRATORS BushFRAUD and Queenie
The report also fingers current British monarch Queen Elizabeth II as a
co-conspirator in massive financial wire fraud,
which dealt with massive, illegal wire transfer of STOLEN U.S. Treasury
funds to the Coutts Bank of England.
Note: Queen Elizabeth II, as well as former illegal White House occupant
George W. BushFRAUD and former Iraq dictator, the late Saddam Hussein,
had a JOINT bank account at the Coutts Bank in the United Kingdom.
Queen Elizabeth II is currently under a Royal Commission investigation
in the United Kingdom aka a $4.5 TRILLION Ponzi Scheme
that the Queen engaged in with her German relative, former illegal White
House occupant George W. BushFRAUD.
There are a lot of funds missing from the British Treasury that the
Queen has yet to account for.
Question: Could this mean an end to the House of Windsor aka the GERMAN
House of Hanover that currently rules over Great Britain?
'SMOKING GUN' EVIDENCE
Tony Blair-NSA-NASA Directly Linked to Election 2000 Coup d'état aka
Electronic Voting Manipulation and Fraud
Reference: We can also divulge that President Obama's National Security
Adviser General James Jones presented President Obama with 'Smoking Gun'
evidence linking former British Prime Minister Tony Blair aka Dunblaine
pedophile directly to a criminal conspiracy of allowing the NSA-NASA
space agency testing of election stealing satellite technology and
software on British soil that was used to STEAL the year 2000
presidential election from then Vice President, now year 2000 duly
elected President Albert Gore Jr.
General Jones also presented President Obama with evidence linking the
Blair government to PRE-knowledge of the 9/11 'BLACK OP' attacks on the
United States, including the British government's role in attempting to
keep evidence of the 9/11 script from the U.S. Intelligence community.
HIGH Treason TRAITOR
Dysfunctional U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton
Note: Jones showed a previously classified British Intelligence
document, WD-199, to President Obama. This document was withheld from
President Obama by known Bush-Crime Family Syndicate business partner,
current U.S. Secretary of State, Hillary Rodenhurst Clinton.
Related:
Massive Ponzi Scheme Exposed - South Pole Tilt
by Tom Heneghan
UNITED STATES of America - It can now be reported that a secret U.S.
Treasury audit of the Federal Reserve has been completed. It is now in
the hands of President Barack Obama.
Obama received the report last night at the White House despite efforts
by current White House Chief of Staff and Israeli Mossad agent Rahm
Emanuel, along with current lame duck White House legal counsel "Skull
and Bonesman" Greg Craig, as well as elements of the Department of
Homeland Security, to keep it out of Obama's hands.
Note: Obama had dinner last night in the White House with his National
Security Advisor General James Jones, former Federal Reserve Chairman
Paul Volcker, former French Ambassador to the United States Jean-David
Levitte as well as former Vice President, now year 2000 duly elected
President Albert Gore Jr.
All parties at the dinner reviewed the audit with Obama.
The audit had been ordered by U.S. Military Flag Officers over one month
ago after evidence was presented to the Military Generals that dealt
with the massive LOOTING of the U.S. Treasury.
Note: Volcker, Gore, Johnson and Levitte have operated as liaison to the
U.S. Military Flag Officers that want to bring the Bush-Clinton- Alan
Greenspan-Federal Reserve Crime Family Syndicate to justice for the HIGH
crimes they have committed against the American People, including the
U.S. Treasury THEFT and the 9/11 BLACK OP.
Item: Gore, Levitte, Volcker and Johnson also presented new 'Smoking
Gun' evidence fingering former illegal White House occupant George W.
BushFRAUD for direct collusion with U.S. CIA asset and government
employee the late Tim Osman aka Osama bin Laden in orchestrating the
9/11 scripted BLACK OP attacks on the United States.
Note: Former Vice President Gore canceled his recent speech in
Copenhagen, Denmark in order to attend the emergency White House dinner
in which the new 'Smoking Gun' evidence of TREASON was presented to
Obama. MORE
http://blogs. myspace.com/ index.cfm? fuseaction= blog.view& friendId= 147509065& blogId=521199429
We can also report that President Obama has ordered a total crack down
on the U.S. NSA (National Security Agency), which has enabled British
Intelligence to conduct sonar technology attacks on American citizens
aka Patriotic Whistleblowers who are determined to liberate their
country from this current threat aka the out-of-control British
monarchy.
We also want to reveal that the Paul Volcker audit of the Federal
Reserve fingers Federal Reserve regulators that conducted a massive
cover up for Stephen Friedman's Federal Reserve Bank of New York and the
enabling of a massive money laundry tied to illegal derivative trading
and the Bernard Madoff Ponzi Scheme, along with the noted brokerage firm
Goldman Sachs and the state of Israel.
Final note: Do not be fooled, folks, by the latest British government
'FALSE FLAG' terrorist alert. This is obviously a diversion and disguise
to prevent the World Bank from freezing all British government assets.
The truth is, folks, that, as of this hour, the U.S., French and British
Militaries are on total nuclear alert given that a final massive
financial showdown is about to occur, which could actually lead to World
War III.
Note: The U.S. Military remains on Defcon 3 alert, which was originally
triggered when President Obama's National Security Adviser General James
Jones presented evidence to President Obama that the Israeli government
of Benyamin Netanyahu had allowed up to SEVEN (7) biological 'doomsday'
bombs to be smuggled onto American soil, to be used by the U.S. NSA to
blackmail the American government and its military aka further financial
revelations of Israeli misconduct tied to the U.S. Federal Reserve
System.
* * * EMERGENCY ALERT * * *
Plus Latest Wanta Article
http://blogs. myspace.com/ index.cfm? fuseaction= blog.view& friendId= 147509065& blogId=526382254
...
TOM HENEGHAN'S EXPLOSIVE INTELLIGENCE BRIEFINGS
International Intelligence Expert, Tom Heneghan, has hundreds of highly
credible sources inside American and European Intelligence Agencies and
INTERPOL--reporting what is REALLY going on behind the scenes of the
corporate-controlle d mainstream media cover up propaganda of on-going
massive deceptions and illusions.
Overlord at Yorktown remains relentless and victorious
EVER VIGILANT 24/7
http://blogs. myspace.com/ tom_heneghan_ intel
Back to top
Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post
Messages in this topic (1)
RECENT ACTIVITY
1
New Members
2
New Photos
Visit Your Group
Sitebuilder
Build a web site
quickly & easily
with Sitebuilder.
Y! Groups blog
The place to go
to stay informed
on Groups news!
Group Charity
California Pet
Rescue: Furry
Friends Rescue
Need to Reply?
Click one of the "Reply" links to respond to a specific message in the
Daily Digest.
Create New Topic | Visit Your Group on the Web
Messages | Files | Photos | Links | Database | Polls | Members |
Calendar
MARKETPLACE
Going Green: Your Yahoo! Groups resource for green living

Monday, January 25, 2010

THANKSGIVING 2009

Judge blasts bad bank, erases 525G debt

Judge KOs 525G mortgage to slap bank

By KIERAN CROWLEY, RICH WILNER and DAN MANGAN

Last Updated: 4:18 PM, November 25, 2009

Posted: 3:46 AM, November 25, 2009

A Long Island couple is home free after an outraged judge gave them an
amazing Thanksgiving present -- canceling their debt to ruthless bankers
trying to toss them out on the street.

Suffolk Judge Jeffrey Spinner wiped out $525,000 in mortgage payments
demanded by a California bank, blasting its "harsh, repugnant, shocking and
repulsive" acts.

The bombshell decision leaves Diane Yano-Horoski and her husband, Greg
Horoski, owing absolutely no money on their ranch house in East Patchogue.

Spinner pulled no punches as he smacked down the bankers at OneWest -- who
took an $814.2 million federal bailout but have a record of coldbloodedly
foreclosing on any homeowner owing money

<http://www.nypost.com/rw/nypost/2009/11/25/news/photos_stories/cropped/greg
_horoski--300x300.jpg>

YOU OWN IT: Greg Horoski won his battle to keep his Patchogue one-level
ranch home, as a judge called OneWest bank's foreclosure efforts against
Horoski and his wife "repulsive."

"The bank was so intransigent that he [the judge] decided to punish them,"
Greg Horoski, 55, said about Spinner's scathing ruling last Thursday against
OneWest and its IndyMac mortgage division.
<http://www.nypost.com/p/news/international/italian_escort_bares_secrets_in_
UdGQ7AgQdtY9Og1yCHExBN>

It erased up to $291,000 in principal and $235,000 in interest and
penalties.

The Horoskis -- who had been paying only interest on their mortgage -- had
no equity in the home.

Horoski, who had begged the bankers to let him restructure the loan, said,
"I think the judge felt it was almost a personal vendetta." Dealing with the
bank, he said, was "like dealing with organized crime."

OneWest said, "We respectfully disagree with the lower court's unprecedented
ruling and we expect that it will be overturned on appeal."

It claimed it "has been extremely active in working with consumers on home
loan modifications through the Obama administration' s Home Affordable
Modification Program and other loan modification initiatives.

The bank is owned by a private equity group that purchased the failed
IndyMac bank.

Yano-Horoski, a college professor of English and cognitive reason, and
Horoski, who sells collectible dolls online, bought their 3,400-square-
foot, one-level house 15 years ago for less than $200,000.

In 2004, court records show, they refinanced, paying off their original
mortgage with part of a $292,500 sub-prime loan from Deutsche Bank. They
used what was left for health care and for his business.

The loan carried an initial adjustable interest rate of 10.375 percent,
which soared to 12.375 percent.

It eventually ended up being either owned or serviced by IndyMac, and the
bank sued the couple in July 2005 when they began having trouble making
payments because of Horoski's health problems.

After a foreclosure was approved last January, Yano-Haroski successfully
asked for a court settlement conference.

Spinner excoriated OneWest for repeatedly refusing to work out a deal, for
misleading him about the dollar amounts at stake in the case, and for its
treatment of the couple over months of hearings.

OneWest's conduct was "inequitable, unconscionable, vexatious and
opprobrious, " Spinner wrote.

He canceled the debt because the bank "must be appropriately sanctioned so
as to deter it from imposing further mortifying abuse against [the couple]."

The bank is involved in a similar case in California, where it's trying to
foreclose on an 89-year-old woman, despite two court orders telling it to
stop.kieran.crowley@ nypost.com

Read more:
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/judge_kos_mortgage_to_slap_bank_28ZS1oW8Y
58z6gu1AQbWMI#ixzz3q4DAel4X

Trust does not hold the Notes, the Cash, or the Foreclosed Homes!!

I know that I just sent you this case, but I send it again with excerpts because it seems so profoundly relevant as an explanation of how banks cheat one another.

Debbie reports from the attached Deutsche Bank v BOA case that the investor banks have begun to discover the lies other banks told them. We have said this for years - the party foreclosing does not own the note. Now they learn that the trusts don’t own them either. In fact, the TRUST does not hold the Notes, the Cash, or the Foreclosed Homes!!

Excerpts from DEUTSCHE BANK, AG v. BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.

71. Moreover, between June 30, 2008 and August 4, 2009, BOA transferred over $1 billion to Colonial and other banks in numerous transfers of whole/round number amounts that bore no relation to any purchase of mortgages. Whole/round number transfers to purchase mortgages would be highly unusual because the aggregation of individual mortgages themselves would not typically be expected to result in whole/round number amounts.

72. Furthermore, the payments made by BOA to the Colonial IFA on a daily basis bore no relationship to the value of the mortgages being purchased. On average, BOA, on behalf of Ocala, would receive approximately $40-50 million of mortgages for purchase each day. In order to pay for those mortgages, BOA was required to pay an amount equal to the face value of the mortgages to the Colonial IFA.

73. On some days, BOA failed to transmit the funds to the Colonial IFA necessary to complete the purchase of those mortgages. For example, on February 27, 2009, BOA transmitted only $8.8 million to Colonial despite the fact that BOA’s records indicated that $54.5 million in mortgages were acquired from Colonial that day for the benefit of DB. By failing to transmit payment for the mortgages, BOA prevented Ocala from perfecting the security interests in those mortgages that was intended to serve as the primary collateral for DB’s investment. BOA nonetheless represented in daily reports to DB that the security interests had been perfected by accounting for the mortgages as collateral securing DB’s investment.

74. On other days, BOA transmitted far more money to the Colonial IFA than was warranted to purchase the mortgages that BOA’s records indicate were acquired by BOA for the benefit of Ocala. For example, on May 29, 2009, BOA transmitted the large sum of $690 million to the Colonial IFA, despite the fact that BOA’s own records indicate that only $36.7 million in mortgages were acquired from Colonial that day for the benefit of Ocala. By conducting such transfers, BOA permitted the funds invested by DB to be transferred out of Ocala without obtaining mortgages in return.

82. In connection with its duties under the Custodial Agreement, BOA agreed to provide DB with a daily report of all such mortgage loans (the “BOA Loan Reports”), and began transmitting these reports to DB in September 2008. The BOA Loan Reports listed each mortgage loan held by BOA for the benefit of DB, and noted whether the loan was either still in the physical possession of BOA or out to a prospective third party purchaser pursuant to a BOA Bailee Letter. Having assumed this additional daily reporting obligation, BOA was
required to perform it in a non-negligent manner.

83. In August 2009, after TBW collapsed, DB discovered that the BOA Loan Reports were false. For example, the August 12, 2009 BOA Loan Report showed that there was approximately $1,160,530,265 in mortgages securing DB’s investment. BOA’s own internal information, however, shows that at least $470 million of these mortgages already had been delivered and sold to Freddie Mac at least two weeks prior to the date of the BOA Loan Report and so could not have constituted collateral securing DB’s investment. Further, on information and belief, as of August 12, 2009, there were virtually no mortgages held by BOA to secure DB’s investment.

84. This false reporting of the state of the collateral securing DB’s investment began almost a year prior to TBW’s collapse. For example, on September 15, 2008, the date on which BOA delivered the first BOA Loan Report, BOA represented that the amount of mortgages securing DB’s investment was approximately $1,147,268,192. BOA’s own internal information, however, shows that only about half of these mortgages totaling about $538 million were either still on hand or had not been delivered and/or sold to Freddie Mac.

85. On information and belief, hundreds (and potentially all) of the BOA Loan Reports delivered by BOA to DB during the period between September 15, 2008 and August 4, 2009 were similarly false.

86. Had BOA properly reported the amount of mortgages securing DB’s investment, DB would have known of the under-collateralization of its investment, and could have prevented the loss of its investment.

88. In August 2009, however, after TBW and Colonial collapsed, DB discovered that BOA did not have ownership, possession, or control of virtually any of the mortgages that were listed on the BOA Loan Reports.

89. BOA has been unable to produce the mortgages that it represented to DB as being held by BOA on behalf of DB. Moreover, BOA has been unable to account for where the mortgages are or even to establish that the mortgages were ever purchased by Ocala.

90. BOA’s inability to produce or account for the mortgages that were supposed to be the collateral for DB’s investment stems from, among other things, BOA’s failure to keep records concerning the purchase and sale of mortgages on behalf of Ocala.

91. With respect to the purchase of mortgages, BOA failed to maintain the internal documentation necessary to establish Ocala’s ownership of purchased mortgages. BOA recently admitted to DB that it failed to maintain loan level detail with respect to the mortgages it purchased. As such, BOA has been unable to prove with specificity that it paid for any particular mortgage or that it was paid by third parties for particular mortgages.

92. BOA also failed to obtain documentation from third parties necessary to establish Ocala’s purchase and ownership of mortgages. BOA failed to obtain letters from Colonial confirming Colonial’s release of its security interest with respect to particular mortgages for which BOA transmitted payment to Colonial.

93. BOA’s failure to obtain such documentation was particularly egregious because BOA was fully aware that Colonial was TBW’s and/or Freddie Mac’s agent with respect to the sale of mortgages by Ocala to Freddie Mac. BOA, therefore, would have to transfer mortgages back to Colonial (as Freddie Mac’s agent) pursuant to a BOA Bailee Letter after having purchased the mortgages from Colonial (as TBW’s agent). The possibility existed that once BOA transferred the mortgages to Colonial, Colonial could assert ownership of the mortgages and refuse to either return the mortgages or remit payment received from Freddie Mac for the mortgages unless BOA could prove that Colonial’s security interest had been released. This made it even more critical that BOA document that it properly had taken the steps necessary to release Colonial’s security interest in the mortgages, and that Colonial had in fact released that interest.

94. On information and belief, Colonial, and/or the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) acting as receiver for Colonial, asserts that mortgages for which BOA claimed to have paid Colonial, and in which BOA claimed to hold a security interest on behalf of DB, in fact, belonged to Colonial. Colonial, and/or the FDIC acting as receiver for Colonial, contend that BOA never remitted payment to Colonial as required in the Colonial Bailee Letters pursuant to which the mortgages had initially been transferred by Colonial to BOA.
95. BOA also failed to maintain proper documentation and to track mortgages over which it had asserted control and that it subsequently released to prospective third-party purchasers.

96. Pursuant to Section 8 of the Custodial Agreement, BOA as Custodian was authorized to release mortgages to prospective third-party purchasers only if BOA accompanied delivery of the mortgage with a BOA Bailee Letter to be executed by the purchaser. BOA was further required to collect all transmittal letters executed by prospective third-party purchasers.

112. BOA has failed to provide DB with the vast majority of Borrowing Base Condition certificates. The few certificates that BOA provided are clearly and demonstrably false showing that DB’s investment was severely under-collateralized:
a. On May 20, 2009, BOA certified that it held mortgages worth $1,134,028,581 as DB Collateral. In reality, on May 20, 2009, BOA knew or should have known that it held or had a lien on approximately $547 million in mortgages as DB Collateral.

Liquidity Notes were adequately secured in accordance with the Ocala Agreements. If DB’s investment was not so secured, then the facility would be in violation of the Borrowing Base Condition, and this would trigger two important consequences: (1) the Secured Liquidity Notes would not be rolled over, but instead would become immediately due and payable, and/or (2) no new purchases of mortgages would be permitted, thus halting Ocala’s outlay of further cash, unless and until the Borrowing Base Condition was again satisfied.

112. BOA has failed to provide DB with the vast majority of Borrowing Base Condition certificates. The few certificates that BOA provided are clearly and demonstrably false showing that DB’s investment was severely under-collateralized:
a. On May 20, 2009, BOA certified that it held mortgages worth $1,134,028,581 as DB Collateral. In reality, on May 20, 2009, BOA knew or should have known that it held or had a lien on approximately $547 million in mortgages as DB Collateral.
b. On June 20, 2009, BOA certified that it held mortgages worth $1,208,009,892 as DB Collateral. In reality, on June 20, 2009, BOA knew or should have known that it held or had a lien on approximately $440 million in mortgages as DB Collateral.
c. On June 30, 2009, BOA certified that it held mortgages worth $1,226,886,314 as DB Collateral. In reality, on June 30, 2009, BOA knew or should have known that it held or had a lien on approximately $468 million in mortgages as DB Collateral.
d. On July 20, 2009, BOA certified that it held mortgages worth $1,216,398,908 as DB Collateral. In reality, on July 20, 2009, BOA knew or should have known that it held or had a lien on approximately $476 million in mortgages as DB Collateral.

126. On information and belief, on August 6, 2009, BOA requested that Colonial return all of the loans held by Colonial pursuant to the BOA Bailee Letters. The vast majority of these loans had been out to Colonial on BOA Bailee Letters for more than 60 days, grossly exceeding the fifteen-day limitation set forth in the BOA Bailee Letter.

127. On August 7, 2009, Colonial BancGroup disclosed that it was the target of a criminal investigation by the U.S. Department of Justice relating to its mortgage lending unit and related accounting irregularities, and that it might be placed under receivership.

128. On August 10, 2009, BOA as Indenture Trustee declared an indenture event of default stating that the notes were due and payable because of TBW’s loss of approved seller status.

129. On August 14, 2009, Colonial was closed by the Alabama State Banking Department, and the FDIC was named Receiver.

130. On August 20, 2009, the outstanding DB Secured Liquidity Notes in the amount of $1,201,785,714 held by DB became immediately due and payable. Ocala has failed to pay this amount.

131. On August 24, 2009, TBW filed for relief pursuant to Chapter 11 of the United State Bankruptcy Code in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Florida.

132. To date, BOA has failed to recover any DB Collateral and to pay the amounts due to DB under the DB Secured Liquidity Notes.

http://southdakotagov.wordpress.com/

jail for judges document shows judges true colors

www.bleap.blogspot.com

www.prokiev.us

http://www.aboutus.org/Jail4Judges.org

http://www.jail4judges000.org/11-extsites/sdjail4judges/

http://floridajail4judges.org/links.html

Options

Disable

Get Free Shots

southdakotagov.files.wordpress.com/20...

Southdakotagov's Weblog

Identity theft of children by Courts

Office of Professional Responsibility

South Dakota Judicial Qualifications Commission, 9 months later

with one comment

A letter from the Chairman of the South Dakota Judicial Qualifications Commission which raises a lot of questions as ‘only’ 9 months have passed.

First his letter then a letter to Senator Johnson on his concerns about the JQC and how they are going to cover it up. Everyone assumes the Courts are honest and not corrupt so this does not make sense to people that the courts are actually corrupt carrying out their own agenda ignoring the law as written.

The JQC letter from last winter are found here:

http://southdakotagov.wordpress.com/2009/12/18/senator-tim-johnson/

Dear Senator Johnson,

In reference to your last letter on the Judicial Qualifications Commission here in South Dakota, last week I heard back from them, since their letters from last winter, which I forwarded a copy to your office.

Enclosed is the letter I received, which to me sounds like they were not going to do anything but for reasons unknown they changed their mind to at least discuss it or Judge Wilber the secretary did not tell the members?

To reiterate Judge Gilbertson will not allow me to file anything with the courts without his approval. I sent the matter of Amy Lyngstad using our daughter’s identity, a federal and state crime, and he sent it back in the original envelope. Judge (ret) Anderson has copies of the sheriff’s report and credit report as does the S.D. Attorney General’s office and Yankton States Attorney. The U.S. Attorney General, and Inspector General as well as the FTC have copies too. It is a federal crime to use your child’s identity and ruin their credit with criminal acts. Except in this matter why?

The Judicial Qualifications Commission no doubt will find nothing wrong with Amy Lyngstad using our daughter’s identity while the Court looks the other way. The court is supposed to protect the children under law. You are an attorney and should know this. I do believe I sent you a copy of Judge Anderson’s Order there is nothing new about the matter. They would not allow me to get my motion file stamped on the matter of identity theft giving them plausible deniability. The Courts are not open and now they have egg on their face as what I said was true. The JQC will say it is up to the prosecutor and he has prosecutorial discretion. The Yankton States Attorney was at one time Amy Lyngstad’s Attorney. In addition I believe given the record the Court is suppressing a prosecution. Why else would you allow someone to steal their children’s identity and not be prosecuted, never mind the 1000s of bad checks and different fake and real social security numbers Amy Lyngstad has.

The JQC will blame someone else, as no one has heard of any Judge in South Dakota being disciplined. Even an internet search shows no Judge has been disciplined. Hardly believable but when the Courts are corrupt and answerable to no one that would be the end result. Judge Anderson is retired so there is little under law the JQC can do to him. The Justice Gilbertson has my motions returned so he can claim he never heard of it. 9 months later they are going to discuss the matter is absurd.

I realize this is confusing as people assume the Courts are honest and this does not happen. The Courts are to protect the children, not allow the custodial parent to ruin their credit before they even become adults and federal law is quite clear this is a federal crime which has gone unprosecuted.

The trial court has a duty to ensure the children are protected at every turn. Williams v. Williams, 425 N.W.2d 390, 393 (S.D. 1988); Jasper v. Jasper, 351 N.W.2d 114, 117 (S.D. 1984).

So why did the State Courts allow it and why is there no federal prosecution for identity theft?

Written by southdakotagov

January 2, 2010 at 5:55 pm

Senator Tim Johnson

with 2 comments

Sunday, January 17, 2010

HOME ~ SEARCH ~ GUEST BOOK ~ CONTACT ~ WHAT'S NEW ~ DISCLAIMER ~ SOURCE AREA

THE BEST KEPT SECRETS OF THE IRS

Introduction
In order to legally and safely beat the IRS it is necessary for you to adopt a certain frame of mind. You need to have a certain independence of mind. You need to be able to read the U.S. Constitution for yourself. You need to be able to recognize how the Supreme Court "judges" and other politicians routinely violate the Constitution. You need to realize that practically all lawyers and accountants are handmaidens of the "terrocrats" - terrorist bureaucrats or coercive government agents. If you cannot already think for yourself, you need to learn to do so. You need to be able to think and do what is contrary to the entrenched among your family and friends. You need to become the authority of your own life. These and related issues are covered in the many other reports.

The Best Kept Secrets of the IRS

The Sixteenth Amendment, supposedly giving Congress the power to collect income taxes, was never ratified. (For the compelling evidence, get the book The Law That Never Was from Common Sense Press, PO Box 1544, Billings, MT 59103.) Furthermore, the 16th Amendment, even if ratified, is just a smokescreen that doesn't grant any new taxing powers to Congress. The Supreme Court found in 1916 in the case Brushaber v. Union Pacific R.R. Co.; 240 U.S. 1, that the 16th Amendment didn't extend the taxing powers of Congress.
The Constitution does not empower Congress to delegate any function to the IRS.
The IRS is apparently a private corporation registered in Delaware.
The IRS is the Gestapo of the Federal Reserve bankers. The same sponsors pushed the Federal Reserve Act and the Sixteenth Amendment through Congress in 1913.
The purpose of the IRS is not to collect taxes but to control and terrorize people.
It is doubtful whether money collected by the IRS goes to the government. Checks received by the IRS seem to be deposited by the Federal Reserve bankers, with "FRB" (for "Federal Reserve Bank") stamped on returned checks.
Because of the limitations placed by the Constitution on the federal government, the IRS has no jurisdiction in the 50 states.
The Internal Revenue Code is not law.
The Internal Revenue Code defines the term "person" in such a way that it does not apply to most Americans.
For most Americans, the income tax is voluntary.
The federal income tax is an indirect or excise tax. The end-recipient of income cannot be liable for income tax.
The term "income" is so defined in the tax code that wages or salaries do not constitute "income."
Most corporations in America need not subject themselves to the IRS in any way.
Corporations may only withhold taxes from an employee's earnings if the employee specifically requests such withholding. No one can be legally forced to complete a W4 withholding form.
Employers who withhold part of the salaries or wages of employees against the will of the latter, commit theft.
The U.S. Constitution effectively defines "money" as gold and silver - Article I, Section 10: "No State shall make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts." The law agrees: "The terms 'lawful money' and "lawful money of the United States' shall be construed to mean gold or silver coin of the United States." (12 USC 152.) The Federal Reserve Note is not money; it is counterfeit currency. Hence receipts in Federal Reserve Notes, having no legal value, are not taxable.
It may be that most Americans can relinquish their "U.S. Citizenship" and declare themselves State Citizens, subject to neither Federal nor State income taxes.
There is a legal principle "void for vagueness." The tax code is in many parts so vague that nobody (including IRS terrocrats) can understand it. A 1991 Supreme Court case found that if someone sincerely believes that he or she doesn't have to file a tax return and pay income tax, then that person cannot be convicted of a crime. Several other courts have found accordingly.
Also in 1991, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that if someone claims they are not subject to the federal income tax, then the burden to prove the contrary is on the IRS. For most Americans the IRS can't prove this.
Filing a 1040 or other tax return involves the surrender of the Fifth Amendment right to not incriminate oneself. The Fifth Amendment of the Constitution says that no one can be forced to incriminate himself or herself.
All IRS liens and seizures are illegal.
The IRS in its totality is a violent, criminal extortion racket with no legal basis whatsover.
There are methods for protecting income and assets so that, no matter what the IRS terrocrats do, it becomes difficult for them to violate our unalienable rights to own property and the fruits of our labor. One way is to use Trusts.
In his book Tax Fraud & Evasion: The War Stories, Attorney Donald W. MacPherson exposes the IRS as a paper tiger. The probability that any individual will be prosecuted for not paying taxes to the IRS are about one in 70,000. The probability that any individual will go to jail for not paying taxes are about one in 146,000. I believe that if you follow the advice in Beat-The-IRS Manual and The Pure Trust Package, the probability of having trouble with the IRS drops close to zero.

A Call to Action
Practically everything the Federal Government does is evil, unconstitutional, criminal, and highly destructive. The IRS Gestapo plays a major role in keeping the criminal terrocrats in power. The IRS needs to be eliminated. In the words of Attorney Donald W. MacPherson, "The Beast must be destroyed." What Federal Government we need (if any) can be financed through voluntary exchange for valuable products and services produced, augmented by voluntary contributions.

Please do your patriotic duty. Finance yourself - and worthy causes and institutions of your choice. Are you going to stay in the cattle herd - or join the human race of free sovereign individuals?

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

1. Is it possible for Americans to legally stop paying income taxes?
It is possible for most Americans to legally stop paying both federal and state income taxes. This applies to most Americans who live and work in the 50 States. It does not necessarily apply to Americans working for the federal government, or those who work in federal military installations. The central issue here is federal jurisdiction which is covered under question #3. However, anyone who has entered into a contract with the IRS to pay them, has to fulfill that contract.

How the IRS tricks its victims into becoming "liable"
The IRS see it this way: By sending a 1040 tax return to the IRS, you voluntarily assess yourself, you acquiesce to IRS jurisdiction, and you become "liable" for federal income tax. Essentially, you enter into a contract with them.

Alternatively, when you open a bank account, on your signature card you sign something like, "Under penalty of perjury I certify that... The number shown on this form is my correct taxpayer identification number." The signature card (without your knowledge) may also commit you to adhere to all current and future IRS regulations. Simply by opening a bank account you condemn yourself to being a "taxpayer" and you swear that your "social security number" is your "correct taxpayer identification number."

By understanding this, you can learn how to undo it, because these supposed "contracts" with the IRS aren't valid - as explained in detail in other Tax Reports.

2. Do all Americans have to file 1040 returns? If not, which Americans have to file?
Not all Americans have to file. Americans living and working outside federal jurisdiction (basically in the 50 States) don't have to file. Those subject to federal jurisdiction (Washington DC, federal military installations, and U.S. territories like Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, and the Virgin Islands) probably have to file. Once any American has filed a 1040 return, he or she has to continue to file, unless he or she takes special measures to revoke the "election" to pay income taxes. See question #4.

3. What does the U.S. Constitution say about federal jurisdiction and how does this affect who is subject to federal income tax?
Two clauses in the Constitution define federal jurisdiction:
(a) Article I, Section 8, Clause 17: "The Congress shall have the power to exercise exclusive legislation, in all cases whatsoever, over such district (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the Government of the United States; and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the Legislature of the State in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, and other needful buildings..."
(b) Article IV, Section 3, Clause 2: "The Congress shall have the power to dispose of and make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory or other property belonging to the United States..."

I have news for you, folks: The territorial and legislative jurisdiction of the U.S. Congress extends to the ten square miles of Washington DC, military installations where States have explicitly ceded authority to the federal government, and U.S. Territories such as Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, and the Virgin Islands. In accordance, IRS income taxes apply (if they apply at all) to people who live and/or work in these areas, or who work for the federal government.

4. Does the Internal Revenue Code specifically tell you how to terminate or revoke your "election" to pay federal income tax?
Section 6013(g)(4) states the following: "TERMINATION OF ELECTION. - An election under this subsection shall terminate at the earliest of the following times: (A) REVOCATION BY TAXPAYERS. - If either taxpayer revokes the election, as of the first taxable year for which the last day prescribed by law for filing the return of tax under chapter 1 has not yet occurred."

ORIGINALLY, MY ANSWER TO QUESTION 4 IMPLIED "YES." HOWEVER, I WAS MISTAKEN. THE ABOVE IS REALLY AN "ELECTION" TO BE TREATED IN A DIFFERENT WAY BY THE IRS.

SO, THE CORRECT ANSWER TO QUESTION 4 IS "NO!"

5. Why, in its literature, does the IRS consistently say that the federal income tax is based on "self-assessment and voluntary compliance?"
IRS literature often uses the terms "self-assessment" and "voluntary compliance." The reason for this is that senior IRS personnel know that the law does not require most Americans to file income tax returns. The income tax does not apply to most Americans unless they voluntarily enter into a contract with the IRS. By filling out, signing, and filing an income tax return you voluntarily enter into a contract with the IRS. Once you have entered into such a contract it is not easy to get out of it. Tax abatement service companies provide the expert support to terminate the contract.

Like all government agencies, the IRS has a mission. Its mission as published in the Federal Register of March 25, 1974, includes: "The mission of the Service is to encourage and achieve the highest degree of voluntary compliance... " Do IRS Commissioners agree with the voluntary nature of federal income tax?

"Each year American taxpayers voluntarily file their tax returns and make a special effort to pay the taxes they owe." Johnnie M. Walker, IRS Commissioner, 1971, Internal Revenue 1040 Booklet.
"Our tax system is based on individual self assessment and voluntary compliance." Mortimer Caplin, IRS Commissioner, 1975 Internal Revenue Audit Manual.
"In fairness to the millions of taxpayers who voluntarily file, report all their income and pay the tax due... ." Jerome Kurtz, IRS Commissioner, 1979 Internal Revenue Annual Report.
"The IRS's primary task is to collect taxes under a voluntary compliance system." Jerome Kurtz, IRS Commissioner, 1980 Internal Revenue Annual Report.
According to Alan Stang (Taxscam: How The IRS Swindles You And What You Can Do About It), Robert J. Brann, Chief of Technical Services Branch, IRS, Washington, D.C., wrote to a "gentleman in New York" on March 11, 1981, "... In carrying out its responsibilities for administering the federal income tax laws, the Service encourages voluntary compliance by taxpayers. Voluntary compliance places on tax payers the initial responsibility for deciding whether under the law they are required to file returns, and the responsibility for paying any tax that may be due... "
"... Encourage and achieve the highest possible degree of voluntary compliance... " Harold M. Browning, IRS District Director, Hawaii, 1984.
"Let's not forget the delicate nature of the voluntary compliance tax system... " Lawrence Gibbs, IRS Commissioner, Las Vegas Review Journal, May 18, 1988.
"We don't want to lose voluntary compliance... We don't want to lose this gem of voluntary compliance." Fred Goldberg, IRS Commissioner, Money magazine, April, 1990.

During the Eighty-Third Congress in 1953, Dwight E. Avis, head of the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax Division, Bureau of Internal Revenue, testified before the Ways and Means Committee, "Let me point this out now: Your income tax is 100 percent voluntary tax, and your liquor tax is 100 percent enforced tax. Now, the situation is as different as night and day."

The tax return for a manufacturer of tobacco products says, "The information is mandatory by statute. (26 USC 5061, 5703)." All mandatory tax returns mention penalties for not filing, for example, the Alcoholic Beverage Tax Return states, "... punishable upon conviction by a fine of not more than $100,000.00... " Check your 1040 for the statute that says you must file, and the penalty for not filing - you won't find them.

Congress has a legal research branch called the Congressional Research Service. A letter, dated June 26, 1989, from the office of Senator Daniel K. Inouye in Hawaii to a tax consultant Fred Ortiz states, that based on the research performed by the Congressional Research Service, "there is no provision which specifically and unequivocally requires an individual to pay income taxes." [Emphasis added]

Let me cite three court cases that seem to support the notion that the federal income tax is voluntary:

"Our system of taxation is based upon voluntary assessment and payment, not upon distraint [seizure by distress]." Flora v. U.S., 362 U.S. 145, 176 (1959).
In case of any ambiguity of statutory construction, the doubt should be resolved in favor of the taxpayer, not the government. Greyhound Corp. v. U.S., 495 F. 2d 863 (1974).
"The taxpayer must be liable for the tax. Tax liability is a condition precedent to the demand. Merely demanding payment, even repeatedly, does not cause liability... For the condition precedent of liability to be met, there must be a lawful assessment, either a voluntary one by the taxpayer, or one procedurally proper, by the IRS. Because this country's income tax system is based on voluntary assessment, rather than distraint [seizure by distress], the Service may assess the tax only in certain circumstances and in conformity with proper procedures." Bothke v. Fluor Engineers & Construction, Inc., Ninth Circuit (1983).

The Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states, "No person shall... be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself." However, the Supreme Court has ruled:

The Fifth Amendment "applies alike to criminal and civil proceedings." McCarthy v. Anderson, 266 U.S. 34.
"There can be no question that one who files a return under oath is a witness within the meaning of the [Fifth] Amendment." Sullivan v. U.S., 15 F2nd 809.
"The information revealed in the preparation and filing of an income tax return is, for Fifth Amendment analysis, the testimony of a "witness" as that term is used herein." Garner v. U.S., 424 U.S. 648.

6. What is the significance of the 1991 Supreme Court case, Cheek vs. U.S.?
Cheek v. U.S. (No. 89-658; 1991 U.S. Lexis 348; 1991 WL 422 [U.S.]) This Supreme Court case represents a major turning point for those seeking to defend their rights against the IRS. Prior to this case, many courts applied the so-called "Cooley rule," which was effectively used to prevent people from entering evidence for their own defence in tax cases. Typically, prosecutors would file preliminary ("in limine") motions prohibiting defendants from entering evidence to defend themselves. Thus most tax prosecutions occurred in farcical kangaroo courts where the defendants were not allowed to defend themselves!

The Cheek decision changed that. Among other things it found:
(a) Defendants may enter evidence in their defense.
(b) Defendants can provide a "good faith" defense: if they sincerely believed (no matter how irrational the belief) that they didn't have to file and pay income tax, then they can't be guilty of a crime.

7. What is the significance of the 1991 Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals case, Ramon/Dolores Portillo vs. Internal Revenue?
Ramon and Dolores Portillo v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue. (932 F.2d 1128 [5th Cir., 1991]) The Cheek case was a severs blow to the IRS in criminal cases. The U.S. Court of Appeals of the Fifth Circuit likewise dealt a severe blow to the IRS in civil cases. The court effectively found that in the case of an IRS assessment of tax deficiency, the burden of proof shifts to the IRS. In other words, they have to prove that you owe them money.

8. Who are the people who have most to fear from the IRS?
Those who file tax returns are most at risk. Because of the ambiguities of the Internal Revenue Code it is impossible to file a tax return without the IRS being able to nail you for filing a false return or committing perjury.

High-profile people like Leona Helmsley, Willie Nelson, and the late Red Foxx, who can be nailed as examples - providing wide media exposure.

People who use IRS-handmaiden lawyers and/or accountants to assist them in their tax affairs.

Tax protestors who stop filing and/or paying without properly terminating their contracts with the IRS.

The people who have least to fear from the IRS are those who have never entered into a contract with the IRS, those who know the weaknesses of the IRS, those who have properly "untaxed" themselves under the guidance of a competent tax abatement service company, and those who have organized their personal affairs so they don't own any assets and don't have any bank accounts the IRS or other government looters can seize.

It is important that you appreciate that the Internal Revenue Code is so complex and convoluted that nobody can understand it. This means that whatever tax return you file can be "proved" by the IRS to constitute fraud and perjury.

"Well, it's a system so utterly complex and ultimately inexplicable that half the time the tax professionals themselves aren't sure what the rules are - a system that even Albert Einstein is said to have admitted he couldn't begin to fathom. You know, it's said that his hair didn't look that way until after he experienced his first tax form." - Ronald Reagan, 1985.

Every year since 1987 Money magazine has run a contest in which 50 tax preparers complete the federal income tax return for a hypothetical family. In 1988 there were ten correct returns, in 1989 two, in 1990 one, and in 1991 zero. For the 1991 tax year the "target tax" was $26,619 - the tax amount for a correct tax return. Not one of the professional tax preparers got it right. At the low extreme, one tax preparer calculated the tax due as $16,219. She spent 25 hours on the job and charged a fee of $750. At the high extreme, another professional tax preparer calculated the tax due as $46,564. It took him 40 hours and he charged $3,000.

The contestants presumably fancied themselves as expert tax preparers, and did their utmost to win first prize. They consisted mostly of professional CPAs and former IRS agents. If you take your papers and records to two "professional tax preparers," one might calculate your tax as $16,000, and the other as $46,000! Need I say any more?

Note that if you had hired any of these professionals to prepare your tax return, the result could have been prosecution for fraud and perjury. Not one of them got it right

9. Which 6 books should you read in order to understand the IRS and to safely beat it? (Where can you get them?)

Congressman George Hansen: To Harass Our People: The IRS and Government Abuse of Power (Positive Publications, Box 23560, Washington DC 20024).
Donald W. MacPherson: Tax Fraud & Evasion: The War Stories (phone 1-800-BEAT-IRS).
Mitch Modeleski: The Federal Zone: Cracking the Code of Internal Revenue (Account for Better Citizenship, c/o PO Box 6189, San Rafael, California Republic, PZ 94903-0189/TDC).
Irwin A. Schiff: The Biggest Con: How Government is Fleecing You (Freedom Books, 60 Skiff St #300, Hamden, CT 06517).
Irwin A. Schiff: The Federal Mafia: How It Illegally Imposes and Unlawfully Collects Income Taxes (Freedom Books, 60 Skiff St #300, Hamden, CT 06517).
Alan Stang: Tax Scam: How the IRS Swindles You and What You Can Do About It (Mount Sinai Press, Research Publications, PO Box 84902, Phoenix, AZ 84902).

10. Is it possible for an informed citizen to legally and safely run rings around the IRS?
Yes. The informed citizen can beat the pants off the IRS. The best strategy might be to simply "disappear" as far as the IRS is concerned - see Report #16C: U.S. Tax Abatement Services. For extra safety it is advisable to use Trusts to safeguard assets. You may also want to use alternative banking services, as they become more available and more practical.

"Your mind will muse on the terror: "Where is the one who counted? Where is the one who weighed the tribute? Where is the one who counted the towers?" No longer will you see the insolent people, the people of an obscure speech that you cannot comprehend, stammering in a language that you cannot understand."
- Isaiah 33, verses 18-19.
"To lay with one hand the power of government on the property of the citizen, and with the other to bestow it on favored individuals... is nonetheless robbery because it is done under the forms of law and is called taxation."
- U.S. Supreme Court - Loan Association v. Topeka (1874).
"In a recent conversation with an official at the Internal Revenue Service, I was amazed when he told me that, "If the taxpayers of this country discover that the IRS operates on 90% bluff, the entire system will collapse.""
- Senator Henry Bellmon, 1969.

HOME ~ SEARCH ~ GUEST BOOK ~ CONTACT ~ WHAT'S NEW ~ DISCLAIMER ~ SOURCE AREA

Downloaded from the Personal Empowerment Resources Web-Site: http://www.mind-trek.com/

Saturday, January 2, 2010

Tracking changes to the White House website

By Russ Kick at 7 March, 2009, 9:14 am

————————————————————-

ProPublica has set up a page, with a feed, that monitors any changes to whitehouse.gov, recovery.gov, and financialstability.gov.

Whenever there’s a change to any page on these sites, it’s noted in the feed. You can then view the old and new versions of the page side by side, with the changes highlighted.

Most of the changes are to be expected – a new press release goes up, a policy document is posted, etc. But already some interesting changes have been caught:

White House Site Un-Slams Bush on Katrina

Also, an article on Slate focuses on the White House’s recent changes to George W. Bush’s biography, but the real story is to another change discussed in the second half of the article:

Elsewhere on Obama’s Whitehouse.gov, when it comes to Iraq policy, change is always afoot. Refugees eager for the $2 billion promised in the earlier version? I wouldn’t count on it. That whole “preventing humanitarian crisis” thing is no more, replaced in part by a curious section on defusing Iranian nukes and securing peace for Israel.

Indeed, it’s grim for Iraq. The hopeful talk of creating a sort of shining beacon on a Mesopotamian hill—supporting reconciliation, reconstruction, development, compromises, lasting stability, and (of course) federalism—is all gone. Now, instead, is a rather stark warning: “Iraq’s future is now its own responsibility.”

It’s hard to send things down the memory hole when the people have tools like this.

Welcome to AltLaw

AltLaw is a free, full-text, searchable database of U.S. case law. Currently we provide cases from:

Supreme Court, since 1805
Circuit Appeals Courts, since 1950

For more information, see About This Site

News and Announcements

Thursday, May 28, 2009: Updates are happening! Take a look at the list of cases and you'll see opinions that were released earlier this week. We still have a back-log of updates from the past few months, those will be added to the database soon.
Monday, April 27, 2009: New! We've added "snippets" of text from each case in the search results! Check it out, and let us know what you think.
Wednesday, April 22, 2009: New feature - Linked citations in case texts! See an example.

Did you know? You can also link directly to a citation with a URL like http://www.altlaw.org/cite/101+U.S.+99 (just replace the spaces in the cite with + signs).
Monday, March 30, 2009: Having trouble finding the list of cases cited by / citing to each case? They're still there -- click on the "Citations to/from this" link to the right of a case, and you'll get a page like this.
Thursday, March 26, 2009: If you're interested in downloading the entire case law collection that AltLaw uses, check out bulk.altlaw.org.
Thursday, March 19, 2009: Just a note: the database of cases has not yet been updated with new cases from 2009. We are working on this as fast as we can! Daily updates will be back again ~~within two weeks.~~ soon!
Monday, March 16, 2009: The Advanced Search feature is back! Give it a spin, and let us know if you have any problems.

Unless otherwise noted, all cases and statutes on this site are in the public domain.

Sunday, December 27, 2009

Obama throws americans under the bus.

Did Obama give INTERPOL more power last week?

IF THIS IS NOT A COUP OF THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT BY OBAMA; NOTHING IS. LETS CALL A SPADE, SPADE....... ..OBAMA IS OPERATING A SILENT COUP OF THE UNTITED STATES CONSTITUTION AND WE THE PEOPLE

Posted by Rick

Published: December 21, 2009 - 12:13 PM
Pierre is asking the question:
What the hell is going on?
Executive Order 12425
EO: AMENDING EXECUTIVE ORDER 12425 DESIGNATING INTERPOL AS A PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including section 1 of the International Organizations Immunities Act (22 U.S.C. 288), and in order to extend the appropriate privileges, exemptions, and immunities to the International Criminal Police Organization (INTERPOL), it is hereby ordered that Executive Order 12425 of June 16, 1983, as amended, is further amended by deleting from the first sentence the words "except those provided by Section 2(c), Section 3, Section 4, Section 5, and Section 6 of that Act" and the semicolon that immediately precedes them.
Here's the text of 2(c), which this EO now has applying to INTERPOL:
(c) Property and assets of international.....

What the bleap? Bleap - Bleap - Bleap!!

Monday, February 8, 2010

Saturday, January 30, 2010

Monday, January 25, 2010

Sunday, January 17, 2010

THE BEST KEPT SECRETS OF THE IRS

Saturday, January 2, 2010

Recently Viewed

Welcome to AltLaw

News and Announcements

Information

Research

Get Involved

Sunday, December 27, 2009

Subscribe To

Freedom - or - ELSE

Blog Archive

Kosmic Logs

Behind The Big News: Propaganda and the CFR

Kosmic Earthin Investigations

Share Large Files

Let There Be Light

Dr. Ron Paul

Movies list

America, Freedom to Fascism

VIDEO

Video Bar

Elections and News links

Qwest news

clock

bloglines

Minnesota Stories: Daily Videoblog

Secrecy News

The Extremist

Cato Daily Dispatch

Harvard Law Review

Law.com - Newswire

Research Publications

All Rights Reserved 2007-2009