Disclaimer: Although I share numerous resources with you, as a means of supporting my concerns, it does not necessarily mean that I support and/or agree with the contents of all of them, word-by-word, but find them thought provoking because, they provide me with other views besides my own and, thereby, help me make my case.

As a retired Marine Corps Veteran Officer (Mustang), I pride myself with loving my God, family, friends and my country. Those Military and/or Veteran Comrades, that I am honored to call friends, know that I would never intentionally say or do anything that would hurt or demean anyone, to include my God and Country.

I have always preached to my own family and follow the rule of “filtering everything that comes from my brain through my heart before it comes out of my mouth” and this rule has done me well for almost 62 years of my life and would highly recommend it to anyone that dares to share their own views with others, knowing that they may not have the same views, but are able and willing to accept that and not take it personal. 

I also consider the sharing of these concerns to be given me under our “FREEDOM OF SPEECH RIGHTS”, which I consider as one of the corner stones of our “Constitution’s 1st Amendment,” and, as an American Citizen, I believe that it is my "God Given Duty" to stand up for and defend this or any other rights given me under our Constitution, as other God and Country loving Americans in uniform have done in the past and continue to this date.

Note: As a military Veteran, I've always prided myself as being intelligent, level headed and normally don't listen to conspiracies, but my gut tells me that something reeks here.

With that being said, this eye-opening blog provides us with information on a new RICO Case that has been recently filed, which reveals extensive and damaging evidence against President Obama and other individuals and/or organizations, that was recently posted on and published by Defend Our Freedoms-You Decide:

“DEFENDOURFREEDOMS.NET published a new entry entitled “DefendOurFreedoms.US - New RICO Case” on 4/21/2009 9:21:26 AM, written by Defend Our Freedoms.

DefendOurFreedoms.US - New RICO Case

DefendOurFreedoms.US??Appellant, alleges as follows:

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12 (d) If on a motion under Rule 12 (b)(6) or 12 (c), matters outside the pleadings are presented to and not excluded by the court, the motion must be treated as one for summary judgment under Rule 56. 

The District Court ignored Rule 12 (d) in order to avoid the requested Partial Summary Judgment and erroneously granted appellee’s motion to dismiss.

The Federal Election Commission submitted to the United States District Court’s jurisdiction and venue when appellee raised a defense by providing material to the District Court containing matter outside the pleadings.

JURISDICTION:

Jurisdiction and venue are proper due to Common and Federal Law the Federal Election Commission is an independent administrative agency vested with exclusive jurisdiction over civil enforcement of the Federal Election Campaign Act. The Federal Election Commission’s exclusive jurisdiction includes the authority to litigate in the Court without the prior approval of the Solicitor General.

This Court’s jurisdiction is based upon 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1332; and 18 U.S.C. § 1964 (a) (c).

Federal Communications Commission Rules Title 47 Code of Federal Regulations §73.1940 Legally qualified candidates for public office addressed in Exhibit A, Case No. 1:08-CV-01538 presented to the district court in October 2008 in this matter seeking review.

NATURE OF THE ACTION:

1. This action arises out of a scheme to defraud citizens of the United States out of life, liberty and the economic pursuit of happiness, through the use of wire fraud, mail fraud, threats, libel, slander, and in particular fraud by a federally licensed class of conspirators who agreed among themselves to induce, and who did induce, the public to invest in their conspiratorial fraud.

2. In furtherance of the conspiratorial fraud defendant FEC issued a direct threat to appellant with the intention to ultimately intimidate or further publicly smear a legally qualified candidate from seeking to announce his candidacy through the purchase of legitimate press releases. While delaying necessary governmental action regarding matters filed in FEC Complaint Exhibit A.

3. In reliance upon fraudulent omissions, misrepresentations and commissions the voting public was persuaded to accept at that time a Federal Election for electors. The coconspirators then did through malfeasance of law further systematically ignore, misappropriate, convert, and ultimately transfer the fraudulent scheme and its conspiratorial network to the TOP administrative post of the federal government.

4. From the very start, the coconspirators were engaged in an outright fraud scheme they agreed to promote each and every lie to the furtherance of their massive deception for their agreed upon benefit. While they were committed to themselves in an agreement to ignore and continued to ignore regardless of the cost to their credibility, reputation or legally mandated duty. They (conspirators) never intended to provide a statement of fact or to provide a Good Faith honest context of fact, but in fact, did hide for the purpose of furthering their scheme their legal responsibility to announce their commercial advertiser’s true identity. Along with their fraudulent scheme they did and continue to rhetorically practice the art of pro-actively degrading the truth.

5. With this conspiratorial depravity leading the way, the Federal Election Commission and the Office of Solicitor General are engaged in the protection and promotion of unlawful conduct that is the cause of this action. Our nation can expect to continue suffering from the massive devaluation of the purchasing power of hard cash because of the recent printing and reported misplacement of over 10.8 Trillion dollars to the central bankers, who are holding these assets until the coconspirators domestic policies produce more strife and economic consolidation opportunities.

6. Through the conduct, as detailed below, Federal Election  Commission participated, directly or indirectly, in the affairs of an international enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity, and/or conspired to do so, in violation of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”), 18 U.S.C. § 1961 et seq.

7.  FEC Officials and the Solicitor General breached their duties and Oath to uphold the Constitution and relevant U.S.C.

8. Through their conduct, defendants committed common-law fraud in connection with offering advertising over the regulated broadcast channels knowing it to be fraudulent.

 PARTIES:

9. We the people at all relevant times have been a multi person group to act and build upon the trust established under GOD, so is, appellant.

10. On information and belief defendants Federal Elections Commission and Office of Solicitor General represent Federal Government authority and regulatory order.

11. At all relevant times in the acts alleged herein, the federal government agencies failed to act within their scope of authority and acted with the actual or apparent authority in furtherance of the scheme to enrich the co-conspirators. FEC further acted through employees and agents, including telephone threats to appellant from staff employee October 8, 2008 originating from the office of the FEC.

12. Federal Government is the principal overseer of information throughout the scheme to defraud the people who have placed their trust in government. Elected and appointed government officials, agency bureaucrats all worked as a group of co-conspirators and served as agents, as well as conspirators.

FACTUAL BASIS FOR CLAIMS

The Beginning of Fraudulent Scheme

13. At the time Federal Communication Commission Direct Broadcast Satellite “DBS” license holders Direct TV and Dish Network first began transmitting paid advertising on behalf of Candidates seeking public office. They were obligated to inform the public of the true identity of the advertiser. Title 47 C.F.R. §73.1212 FCC Sponsorship identification 2 (e) fully and fairly disclose the true identity of the person. All broadcast stations licensed through FCC have the same contracted obligation including and not limited to Walt Disney Company, News Corporation, Viacom, Time Warner and all other legally bound broadcast stations that received money for transmitting an advertisement message.

14. When called in early January to come before the Supreme Court of the United States in Berg v. Obama No.08-570 to defend the Rule of Law the Federal Elections Commission nor the Solicitor General provided a legal comment or attempted to show any concern for the spirit of the statutory code, whatsoever.

15. Upon information and belief the FEC was and is even now active in concealing campaign wire fraud, mail fraud and money laundering to protect co-conspirators.

16. There is as yet no agency of government cleared from the harm that has been caused by this fraud placed before the public and the government’s failure to actively address access issues regarding advertising on commercial broadcast services. The Solicitor General represents the Federal Communications Commission and it is the responsibility of the commercial broadcast stations by law to verify candidate qualifications, which during the 2008 election cycle did not happen. Federal Communications Commission Rules Title 47 Code of Federal Regulations §73.1940 Legally qualified candidates for public office addressed in Exhibit A, Case No. 1:08-CV-01538 presented to the district court in October 2008 on this matter seeking review.

17.§ 25.701 of Title 47 Code of Federal Regulations Public interest obligations. (b) Political broadcasting requirements (4) (iv) Burden of proof. A candidate requesting equal opportunities of DBS providers or complaining of noncompliance to the Commission shall have the burden of proving that he or she and his or her opponent are legally qualified candidates for the same public office.

18. AKA/Obama could never under any set of here to fore known circumstances be proven to be a legally qualified candidate for the office of President of the United States because he is an Illegal Alien. He would need a mother at the time of his birth that was of legal age, he would need a different father and if he could some how change all that he would need a different set of adult travel records.

19. No hand that is placed on any of these documents can point to one piece of evidence supported by signature or affirmation given under the penalty of perjury to refute the claim that on January 20, 2009 The Chief Justice of the United States stood before the assembled host to swear or affirm into office an AKA/illegal alien. If not for the collective failure of the federal government that the People have put their trust into this action would not be needed. This cause is now of the utmost concern and requires immediate determination in this Court. 

20. Further more, TITLE 18 > PART I > § 2

§2. Principals (a) Whoever commits an offense against the United States or aids, abets, counsels, commands, or induces or procures its commission, is punishable as a principal. (b) Whoever willfully causes an act to be done which if directly performed by him or another would be an offense against the United States, is punishable as a principal.

TITLE 18 > PART 1 > CHAPTER 96 > §1962

§1962 Prohibited activities (a) It shall be unlawful for any person who has received any income derived, directly or indirectly, from a pattern of racketeering activity.

TITLE 18 > PART 1 > CHAPTER 96 > §1964

§1964. Civil remedies (a) The district court of the United States shall have jurisdiction to prevent and restrain violations of section 1962 of this chapter by issuing appropriate orders, (c) Any person injured in his business or property by reason of a violation of section 1962 of this chapter may sue therefore in any appropriate United States district court and shall recover three fold the damages he sustains and the cost of the suit.

Appellant’s message was not on the FCC regulated wire services because appellant’s message conflicted with the full implementation of the totalitarian bureaucratic agenda. Only anti-American programs are worthy to stir the perpetual revolution. What matters most too totalitarian bureaucrats is destroying how people make a living and piling an even greater cost of living upon them.

FACTUAL BASIS FOR CLAIM

Conspirators knew that they were using the goodwill and legitimacy associated with a valuable government commodity (the right to broadcast media content) to induce the furtherance of their Conspiracy. Each fraudulent omission or commission helped to bring about their agreed upon goal to outright deceive the public. The failure of government to regulate DBS License Holders and their contracted media counter parts who knowingly approved and maintained their vast fraudulent alliance thereby did jointly conceal their separate and independent responsibilities to make known the material fact “that of” the AKA/Illegal Alien broadcaster’s identity.

The Federal Election Commission’s action to threaten appellant was to benefit coconspirators and was necessary to their desired outcome. Threatening Appellant and ignoring Complaint [Exhibit-A] is part of the FEC operational method. Where is information concerning: Beverly v. FEC publicly posted on federal government website? The FEC is responsible for giving public notice of all court matters and posting all civil actions for the public to see.

Federal Election Commission failure to act based upon information and belief covering AKA/Obama’s: Millions of wire fraud, and mail fraud transactions, his abuse of power, intentionally collecting multi millions of dollars in campaign contributions from un-track-able international sources, multi millions in undocumented small money sources and foreign government aid.

As co-defendants in Berg v. Obama, the Federal Election Commission, and the Solicitor General further promoted the illegal alien usurper when each decided it was better for them to hide the DBS stations legal obligations that were then and now being publicly ignored by station broadcasters to further the ongoing conspiracy. Therefore, each government agency continued to follow through in their chosen position to in fact condone the obliteration of statutory law and to further in fact obliterate the Constitution of the United States.

Where has AKA/Obama carried out other crimes to invoke the RICO Act?

First: Before a Grand Jury would read: AKA/Obama set upon a course with David Axelrod to commit fraud in a conspiracy with Whitehouse.org to smear one, Lawrence Sinclair, with a false polygraph test to cover up Mr. Obama’s homosexual relationship with Mr. Sinclair.

Second: In said conspiracy, David Plouffe, campaign manager for AKA/Obama, set out with Joe Biden, Beau Biden, Attorney General of Delaware, to silence Lawrence Sinclair when the Whitehouse.org action failed. A false arrest was issued under a sealed Grand Jury indictment for Mr. Sinclair out of Delaware, whereupon Mr. Sinclair was arrested and held as a captive kidnapped by DC police, deprived of his medications and his civil rights violated. This abuse of government power was maintained while keeping Mr. Sinclair intentionally lost in the system deprived of counsel, facing threats of high bail, under detention.

Third: Attorney General Beau Biden of Delaware for the AKA/Obama campaign issued false court papers to the Social Security Administration to have Lawrence Sinclair’s benefits denied.

Fourth: Chicago Social Security Administration where AKA/Obama resides and represents in Congress attempted on the forged Delaware information to threaten Lawrence Sinclair to repay all said Social Security benefits including medical benefits.

Fifth: In accomplishing the above terrorism of Lawrence Sinclair in violation of the Patriot Act, Sen. Joe Biden was given payment in the form of his parties Vice-Presidential nomination.

Sixth: Deputy Attorney General of Delaware, Susan Dwyer, threatened defendant, Lawrence Sinclair on behalf of the Biden political syndicate with life imprisonment for a misdemeanor crime when Mr. Sinclair had been a law abiding citizen.

Seventh: Delaware Attorney General’s office illegally planted court information into Delaware press to defame Mr. Lawrence Sinclair.

Eight: AKA/Obama and Joe Biden upon receiving their party’s nomination seeking not to have their actions exposed in the press by a Lawrence Sinclair trial had Beau Biden’s Delaware Attorney General’s office drop all charges against Mr. Sinclair in a cover up.

In the financial dealings of AKA/Barack and Michelle Obama, a list of over 100 addresses for Barack Obama and 100 business addresses for Michelle Obama. These are addresses obtained from a private investigator and an intelligence service. Obama/Soetoro’s addresses are connected to numerous different social security numbers.

Michelle Obama’s addresses are from numerous media organizations that show her being employed by many major media outlets, including CBS, CNN, and some such as Gay News, Muslim World Today in CA, and the Federal Communications Commission. These media outlets refused along with other coconspirators to provide an honest account of Obama/Soetoro’s lack of eligibility for presidency.

The issue here isn’t guilt by association; it’s guilt by participation. As Chicago’s Annenbuerg Challenge chairman, Mr. AKA/Obama was lending moral and financial support to Mr. Ayers and his circle. That is a story even if Mr. Ayers had never planted a single bomb 40 years ago.”

Also included in the AKA/Obama mix is the Tides Foundation. A partial list of Tides grants: ACLU, ACORN, (ACORN and its affiliates have a multi-decade history of fraud and abuse of taxpayer funds) Center for American Progress, Center for Constitutional Rights (a communist front,) CAIR, Earth Justice, Institute for Policy Studies (KGB spy nest), National Lawyers Guild (oldest communist front in U.S.), People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), and practically every other anti-American group there is. ACORN’s Wade Rathke runs a Tides subsidiary, the Tides Center.

What makes AKA/Obama so Special?

His closest advisers are a dirty laundry list of individuals at the heart of the financial crisis: former Fannie Mae CEO Jim Johnson; Former Fannie Mae CEO and former Clinton Budget Director Frank Raines; and billionaire failed Superior Bank of Chicago Board Chair Penny Pritzker.

Most significantly, Penny Pritzker, was the Finance Chairperson of AKA/Obama’s presidential campaign helped develop the investment bundling of subprime securities at the heart of the meltdown. She did so in her position as shareholder and board chair of Superior Bank. The Bank failed in 2001, one of the largest in recent history, wiping out $50 million in uninsured life savings of approximately 1,400 customers. She was named in a class action law suit.

Everyone in the subprime business — from brokers to lenders to banks to investment houses absolved themselves of responsibility for ensuring the high-risk loans were good.

The mortgage lenders didn’t care, because they were going to sell the loans to other banks. The banks didn’t care, because they were going to repackage the loans as MBSs. The investors and traders didn’t care, because the MBSs were backed by Fannie and Freddie and their implicit government guarantees.

In other words, nobody up or down the line from the branch office on Main Street to the high-rise on Wall Street analyzed the risk of such ill-advised loans. But why should they? Everybody was doing what the lobbyist in Washington wanted them to do.

So everybody won until everybody lost. The narrative will be advanced by the “AKA/Obama-loving media” ... and by the passage of more giant financial bailouts at the expense of law abiding citizens.

There is nothing to stop this illegal alien “Manchurian Marxist” from total control of the American economy. Because there are no checks or balances, AKA/Obama policies, as they fail, will be compounded with more policies to rescue the failures.

Among the most disturbing wire fraud feature to come to light is the disregard by the AKA/Obama campaign of the most basic security protocols for identifying the actual source and amount of the contributions it received, collecting more money than any candidate has ever collected in history.

AKA/Obama is the first candidate to refuse public funding because of his ability to raise extraordinary funds from untraceable sources.

The federal campaign finance law requires campaigns to report the name, address, occupation and employer of every contributor who gives more than $200. Yet according to the Washington Post, National Journal and NewsMax, the AKA/Obama campaign took (or failed to take) steps to ensure it was not alerted to illegal donations.

Some of the acts and omissions are so cavalier, it’s impossible to believe they weren’t intentional. For example, the Post reported that the AKA/Obama campaign accepted prepaid credit cards that are untraceable, and National Journal reported that the campaign didn’t implement a verification procedure to even match the names of contributors using regular credit cards with the names and addresses of the credit card holders.

When asked about it, the AKA/campaign said such matching wasn’t “available in the credit card processing industry.” That is completely untrue such verification procedures are offered by companies that service credit-card transactions, as well as by banks and telecommunications companies (and was standard procedure for other campaigns).

In contrast the AKA/Obama campaign also refused to divulge the names of the millions of small donors who contributed (many repeatedly) under $200 to the campaign (totaling $218 million), saying it was “too difficult.” However, there are “few technical obstacles to sorting and identifying small-scale donors.”

Of course, disclosing that information would have revealed the many instances of fictitious donor names uncovered by the press (like “Doodad Pro”), which the campaign accepted. Media reports show that AKA/Obama campaign apparently lacked even basic software protocols to catch obviously fictitious addresses (like a donor’s state being listed as “NA” or “ZZ”) or employer names (like DFDFGDFG), or to track small donations made repeatedly by the same individual. If the campaign had done that, it would have had to refuse the contributions, return them when they went above the maximum of $2,300 per election, or identify donors once their contributions top $200,

Comparing AKA/Obama’s Campaign to Others.

To avoid the problems with foreign donors that plagued one presidential campaign, the candidate prudently required Americans living abroad to first fax a copy of their passport before accepting a contribution.

In contrast, the AKA/Obama campaign had no controls whatsoever to prevent illegal foreign contributions by non-citizens. An investigation by NewsMax estimated that anywhere from $13 million to $63 million may have been received by the AKA/Obama campaign from overseas credit cards or foreign currency purchases (a red flag for illegal contributions).

The Federal Election Commission itself flagged more than 16,639 potential foreign donations to AKA/Obama’s campaign long before the November 04, 2008 election. When confronted with this, the campaign started collecting passport numbers from foreign donors, a completely useless procedure since no effort was made to verify those numbers with the State Department to see if they were even valid.

AKA/Obama’s campaign has claimed that Federal Election Commission regulations didn’t prohibit taking prepaid credit cards or require it to verify credit cards. That may be true, but that doesn’t remove the campaign’s obligation to accurately report donor information and to verify that a contributor is really eligible to donate money. Given AKA/Obama’s unprecedented use of the Internet to raise funds, this is impossible unless one takes such precautions at the front end. Any reasonable campaign would know that such steps were necessary to actually comply with requirements on donor information and eligibility.

Running a campaign that reportedly failed to implement any controls whatsoever to prevent money laundering problems, if accounts of AKA/Obama’s campaign practices prove true, then it would seem that the decision was made to collect all of the money that came in, no matter what. Once the campaign was won, who would dare confront the usurper?

The Federal Election Commission allows elected officials to use their campaign funds to pay legal bills only if the action arises as a result of their tenure in office or campaigns. The source of all Constitutional matters calling for evidence to settle controversies arising against AKA/Obama predate the 2008 race for president of the United States even if AKA/Obama should argue the matter only came to light as a result of the campaign”.

********************************* 

Usurpers destroy the most important evidence of the legal government they replace and the memory of that government. Usurpers mingle small pieces of what was with what is! And when their domestic armies are formed, funded and in place they will command their victims to bow down on their knees.

The only question is whether the guilty parties can keep up the barricade now that AKA/Obama has received his public enrichment and has ripened as a RICO lead defendant? Broadcast Satellite “DBS” license holders and their contracted station counterparts have no defense. Each organization did make their separate facilities, staff, agents and operation membership available in this obvious fraud. Together each enterprise stood side by side in rank and file united in a spiritual as well as economic union to broker and further advance their association in this international crime syndication.     

The Attorney General as is designated by statute, both Attorney General Eric Holder and Jeffrey Taylor, US Attorney for the District of Columbia, may institute an action in Quo Warranto upon their own motion in the name of the United States. In fact, as per the relevant Supreme Court of The United States case law, while the decision to bring such an action is entirely in their discretion, both appear to have an ethical duty to bring such an action at this time.

Furthermore, should either official institute an action in Quo Warranto on their own behalf, they may do so without leave of the court. If they do institute such an action, the issue must be brought to a hearing and determined on the merits.  The statute grants the AG and US Attorney undeniable power and respect on this issue.

If AG Holder and US Attorney Taylor refuse to institute an action in Quo Warranto on their own motion, the same statute provides for all “third persons” (any citizen) to request, via verified petition, that either of those two officials institute an action in Quo Warranto on plaintiffs’ behalf, subject to leave of the District Court of DC.

If AG Holder and US Attorney Taylor refuse to bring the action on their own motion, appellant here and now makes a motion to the 9^th Circuit Court of Appeals to verify this petition and therefore request following settlement of all other issues expedited transfer of this verified petition to the District of Columbia to further petition officials on plaintiffs’ behalf.

If the officials refuse consent to bring the action “ex relator” on behalf of such “third persons”, then the statute provides that any “interested persons” (a subset of  “third persons”) may petition the court without the consent of the two officials.???Much more at DefendOurFreedoms.US”

Note: My recent blog provides you with other disturbing issues relating to President Obama's lack of transparency and shady background-You Decide:

Extensive Research Into Senator Obama’s Background Completed on November 10, 2008 (Part 2):

http://WeroInNM.blogtownhall.com/2009/04/20/extensive_research_into_senator_obama’s_background_completed_on_november_10,_2008_part_2.thtml

Question: This administration would have us believe that it was the Bush Administration that created our financial economic crisis, but was it or was it a “banking terrorist” tactic used by community organizers from the tools provided them under the federal Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), which were carried out by ACORN’s members, who used  Alinky’s Rules to bully banks into making bad loans, that likely contributed to the “mortgage meltdown” and triggered the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression?

Question: Is our “financial meltdown” more than just a financial crisis, but a moral crisis?

Question:  Did the automaker labor unions (UAW) contribute to the automaker’s systematic failure?

Question:  Have you wondered why the Ford Motor Company is the only automaker that is not “teetering on collapse”?

My recently updated blog will attempt to give you the answer to these questions-You Decide:

http://WeroInNM.blogtownhall.com/2009/04/06/acorn-the_community_reinvestment_act_cra-automaker_labor_unions_amended_42109.thtml

"Food For Thought"

"God Bless Our USA"

  Semper Fi!