WHEN WILL JUDGE ROYCE LAMBERTH WEIGH IN?
by Sharon Rondeau
(Jul. 11, 2011) — A Motion to Compel directed at the Hawaii Department of Health and its defense counsel, Hawaii Attorney General David M. Louie, was docketed this morning at the U.S. District Court in Washington, DC in her lawsuit, Taitz v. Astrue, which seeks the original social security application for Barack Hussein Obama. Taitz and others have stated that Obama is using a social security number issued in the state of Connecticut where he never worked, lived, nor attended school.
Fox News Commentator Bill O’Reilly had falsely stated that Obama’s father had applied for the number when he attended Harvard, which is in neighboring Massachusetts, without verifying his contention made on national television in April. When asked, Obama Sr. did not always acknowledge that he had a child and was himself asked to leave the country for having multiple wives and relationships apparently not befitting Harvard in the 1960s.
It has been reported, but The Post & Email has not confirmed, that Obama Sr. discussed the possibility with Obama’s mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, of having the baby adopted by another couple after its birth. Obama Sr. left the United States in July 1964 after having overstayed his student visa. There appears no evidence in his alien registration file that he and Dunham ever lived together as husband and wife.
Recently, Mr. Kenneth Allen told The Post & Email that he requested a copy of the marriage certificate of Obama Sr. and Dunham from the U.S. State Department. While other materials requested were released, including Dunham’s marriage certificate to Lolo Soetoro in 1965, no marriage certificate between Obama and Dunham was made available. In fact, Michelle Obama has herself stated that Dunham was not married when Obama II was born.
There is also a question as to the validity of Dunham’s social security number application.
The website for the Hawaii Attorney General appears to be down today.
Last week, a deputy clerk of the U.S. District Court in Honolulu, HI issued a subpoena for Obama’s original birth certificate to Director of Health Loretta J. Fuddy via a process server. Taitz has stated that if Obama has no official birth record, it might have been a reason for him to begin using a false social security number, and that procurement of the document, if it exists, is relevant to her lawsuit against the Social Security Administration for its refusal to disclose the information she originally sought through a Freedom of Information Act request.
Obama has reportedly been known by an alias, Barry Soetoro, which he has not explained to the public. During the presidential campaign, he ran under the name “Barack Obama” and his association with former domestic terrorist Bill Ayers had been obfuscated. In his book, Ayers admitted to committing identity theft with his wife, Bernardine Dohrn, in the 1970s when they were in hiding from the authorities for exploding bombs at public buildings and possibly murdering a police officer in San Francisco.
There is evidence that Obama was adopted by his Indonesian stepfather and declared a citizen of that country. His mother has provided two different marriage dates for herself and Soetoro, although documentation released recently to Mr. Ken Allen confirms that the correct date was March 15, 1965.
On April 27, 2011, Obama presented what he claimed was a certified copy of his original birth certificate to the public on the internet. However, it does not contain the certification wording present on his mother’s marriage certificate issued in Hawaii and has been reported to the FBI as a forgery.
Taitz has told The Post & Email that as of today, “the government did not file an opposition to any of my motions, which could be a good sign or a bad sign.”
She went on to explain that “It might be that the government knows that the judge will rule in their favor and decline to release the application for the social security number, so they might feel that there is no need for them to file any opposition” to her motions in the case. She said that could mean that “it’s ensured that they will get what they want. That’s one possibility for why they’re not filing any opposition.”
Taitz said that she is concerned that the judge has not yet ruled on her Vaughn Motion in which “the government is supposed to provide information as to which documents they have in their file.” She stated that the government would not have to show the documentation in their possession, “but they have to respond as to whether or not they have it.” She said she is hoping that the judge will grant the motion. “All I can do is my best; we will have to wait and see what Judge Lamberth does.”
Taitz stated that if Lamberth denies the motion, she plans to go to an appeals court as well as file an appeal in Hawaii. She said that she is working on another filing in the case which will be made by Friday of this week.