If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my free Email alerts. Thanks for visiting!
30-DAY RESPONSE TIME HAS ELAPSED WITH NO ANSWER
by Sharon Rondeau
(May 18, 2011) — On May 13, 2011, Atty. Orly Taitz posted on her website that she had filed a request for a default judgment by the United States District Court in Washington, DC in her case against the Social Security Administration and its commissioner, Michael Astrue, regarding the SSA’s failure to release information. The request was made after a 30-day response period had elapsed without comment from the Social Security Administration.
Having begun serving in 2007, Astrue now “reports directly to…Obama.” The “Message from the Commissioner” link on the Social Security Administration’s website yields a “File not Found” error message, as does the “Inspector General Statement.” In fact, The Post & Email could not activate any of the links under the subpage “SSA’s Performance and Accountability Reports.”
Taitz’s complaint states that Obama’s use of the social security number 042-68-4425 is fraudulent because it had belonged to a resident of Connecticut born in 1890. Taitz contended that Obama began using the number between 1980 and 1981.
The Social Security Administration states that an individual must show a “U.S. birth certificate” when applying for a social security number as “proof of U.S. citizenship.” What did Obama use to obtain the number he is currently using when all he released to the public until April 27, 2011, was a short-form “Certification of Live Birth” which did not prove his citizenship?
Did he show the “required evidence” to obtain the social security number from a state where he never lived nor worked? The Social Security Administration states that “Notarized copies or photocopies which have not been certified by the custodian of the record are not acceptable.”
How did Obama obtain the number?
The image which the White House and Obama claimed was a certified copy of his original birth certificate from Hawaii has been labeled a forgery by numerous graphics analysts.
Taitz had originally requested a copy of Obama’s social security number application under the Freedom of Information Act and was denied access to the document. In March 2010, she filed an appeal which was denied exactly one year ago, on May 18, 2010.
She then appealed to the U.S. District Court in Washington, DC, where Chief Judge Royce Lamberth denied her appeal based on what he claimed was a timing issue. Taitz filed several other FOIA requests in October 2010 for which she stated she received no response from the Social Security Administration.
Taitz then filed the lawsuit on February 6, 2011, stating that she was entitled to the information she had requested under the Freedom of Information Act.
Private Investigator Susan Daniels found that the number Obama is using was issued in 1977 and that he started using it around 1986. Taitz confirmed in her complaint that she consulted with Daniels as well as another private investigator about Obama’s social security number and that Obama’s alleged birth date of August 4, 1961 was expressed in both American and European formats.
Daniels described Obama’s Selective Service registration as “phony,” and the Selective Service Administration refused to answer pointed questions which The Post & Email posed last year about Obama’s purported registration in 1980.
Daniels’s affidavit regarding her discovery of Obama’s use of the Connecticut social security number was included in Taitz’s lawsuit against Astrue and the Social Security Administration. An affidavit from licensed investigator Neil Sankey appears on page 17.
On March 31, 2011, Susan Daniels wrote a letter to Commissioner Astrue detailing her findings on Obama’s social security number as well as his multiple addresses across the country.
Page 5 of 97 of the filing shows multiple addresses for Michelle Obama. Pages 6-14 show dozens of addresses for Barack Obama.
Taitz’s complaint mentions other social security numbers which she claims Obama has used, one of which she stated belonged to a woman named Lucille Ballantyne, who passed away in 1998. A reader of The Post & Email contacted us some time ago stating that he had located family members of Ballantyne and had spoken with one of them.
Atty. Taitz told The Post & Email that normally the clerks of the court post a request for default judgment such as the one she made on the docket, but that nothing has appeared so far. The telephone numbers where the clerks can be reached are 202-354-3080 and 202-354-3190.
Of the current state of the U.S. government, Taitz said, “We have an oligarchy. You actually have to be a criminal in this country in order to get ahead today. We have a criminal enterprise which has taken over the nation…Obama has committed multiple felonies.”
Taitz stated that in the near future she will have bumper stickers and T-shirts available for sale publicizing the issue of the social security number being used by Obama. She said that proceeds from sales will assist in offsetting the costs of the Astrue lawsuit.
Taitz also commented:
All kinds of things are being done to keep this convenient, illegitimate puppet in power. It’s convenient for our oligarchy because, thanks to this puppet, trillions of dollars are flowing out of the U.S. Treasury, out of the pockets of U.S. citizens, and going in all kinds of directions. For this kind of money, for trillions of dollars, they can harass anybody; they can intimidate anybody; a lot of things can be done. That’s why it’s so dangerous.
There is massive obstruction of justice by so many. People are harassed; I’m being harassed. People are criminals.
We have to deal with the issue of election fraud. What worries me is that the establishment wants this puppet for eight years, and we have rigged elections. We have a foreign corporation counting our ballots which can easily rig the elections any way they want. I have no doubt that the intent and the plan is to rig elections in favor of puppets. During the primary, someone such as Romney or Huckabee, and in the final election, Obama.
We need to bring legal action between us and them. If elections are not cleaned up, we’ll continue having dirty, corrupt politicians everywhere. That’s one of the reasons why they’re not standing up, because the only people who are announced as winners of elections are corrupt politicians.
When you look at Nevada, I have no doubt that Sharron Angle won that election. We’ve seen a pattern of what’s called “vote slipping.” The way it works is that you see a person trailing in all the polling by 7% or so, but it’s set up for the person to win. The spread will be the same, but it’s going to be in favor of the wrong candidate. We’ve seen it in Nevada, where Angle was leading by about 4-5% leading up to the election, in all the exit polls during the preliminary voting according to all the polling organizations. On the morning of the day of the election, she was leading by about 5%, and then they announced that the spread was 5% in favor of Harry Reid and not Sharron Angle. It was a classical “slip” of the vote.
The same thing happened in Venezuela during the referendum when it was reported that Hugo Chavez was losing by 20%, and then on the date of the election, it was announced that he won by 20%, with 60% of the votes for him and 40% for his opponent. It is interesting that the same company, the same person, was counting the ballots: Antonio Mugika, who is the president of Smartmatic, which bought Sequoia Voting Systems. There’s another company named Vista, 40% of which is owned by the government of Venezuela, and this is the company that was counting votes in Venezuela and the same guy is counting our ballots. Think about it: if Hugo Chavez received the intellectual rights to Sequoia and this communist thug still has access to all of our information: our social security numbers, our drivers’ licenses, our addresses, our voting records, everything – this is a major breach of national security, the second-largest after Obama getting into office.
We need to trumpet this all over so that it catches people’s attention and they can do something when it comes to primaries. We need to demand to see the actual ballots and the software to make sure that the election is run correctly. I tried to get in touch Meg Whitman, who ran for governor in California. The woman wasted $160,000,000 running in that election. It was complete idiocy. If she had spent a fraction of that money on cleaning up election fraud, she would have surely won.