Defend Our Freedoms Foundation

http://defendourfreedoms.org/
http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/blog1/?cat=9

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.

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 9th 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.

Defend Our Freedoms Foundation

http://defendourfreedoms.org/
http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/blog1/?cat=9