The Betrayal

REMINDS HOLDER OF HER LETTER OF MARCH 1ST, DEMANDS EX-RELATOR STATUS IN LIEU OF NON-ACTION
by John Charlton

(Dec. 14, 2009) — Without a doubt the most important and significant legal action in the United States this week, is Dr. Orly Taitz’s Letter to Eric Holder, sent today, demanding that he institute Quo Warranto proceedings against Barack Hussein Obama in the District Court of Washington, D.C..

The importance of this letter is the fact that the quo warranto provisions of the District of Columbia Code provide that a 3rd party may institute a quo warranto action if the U.S. Attorney General fails to respond within 3 months to his request.

Dr. Orly Taitz wrote Holder on March 1st.  In her letter, published today at her website, she demands that either he take action himself, or that her plaintiffs be granted ex-relator status to proceed in the name of the United States of America, as the D.C. code allows.

Quo warranto is a legal action whereby a plaintiff formally demands proof that the holder of an office, holds it lawfully, and if he does not, is empowered by the court to remove him from it.  The Code of the Disctrict of Columbia contains provisions for quo warranto, in such cases as the usurpation of any federal office exercised within the district.  Quo warranto can be used against Barack Hussein Obama because he is not a natural born citizen, and thus does not enjoy the Constitutional immunities of that office.

Dr. Taitz’s letter reads in full:

Dear Mr. Holder,

On March 1^st on behalf of my clients I have submitted to you a request to file Quo Warranto against Mr. Barack Hussein Obama. The request was filed due to following troubling facts:

1. According to a number of licensed investigators National Databases show Mr. Obama using as many as 39 different Social Security numbers, which included the numbers of deceased individuals and numbers never assigned.
2. Number 042-68-4425 that Mr. Obama used for most of his life and is currently using while residing in the White House, is a number assigned to an individual born in 1890, who resided in the state of Connecticut and this Social Security number was issued in the state of Connecticut where Mr. Obama never resided.
3. One of the leading forensic experts in the country Ms. Sandra Ramsey Lines has prepared an affidavit, stating that Mr. Obama’s short version Certification of Life Birth cannot be treated as genuine without seeing the original on file in the Health Department in HI.
4. The state of Hawaii since 1911 had in its statutes a provision allowing Foreign born children of Hawaiian residents of get Hawaiian Birth Certificates(currently statute 338-17) and currently statute 338-5 allows one to get a birth certificate based on a statement of one relative only without any corroborating evidence from the hospital.
5. In spite of over 100 law suits filed around the country and 12 Citizen Grand Jury indictments Mr. Obama refused to sign a consent to unseal his original birth certificate currently sealed in the Health Department of the state of  Hawaii and all the other vital records.
6. Ms. Chiuomi Fukino, Director of the Health Department of the State of Hawaii has provided a statement that there is a document on file in Hawaii, however she refused to provide any information, as to what document is on file: whether it is a Birth Certificate given to a foreign born child of Hawaiian resident, whether it is an amended Birth certificate, obtained when Mr. Obama was adopted by his Indonesian stepfather. She refused to answer any questions as to whether his birth certificate was obtained based on a proper hospital birth certificate or based on a statement of one of his relatives only, which needs to be corroborated.
7. Regardless of place of birth of Mr. Obama, since birth and until now Mr. Obama had a split allegiance. He had British citizenship at birth, Kenyan since age 2 and Indonesian since age 5. Allegiance to other Nations goes as a clear violation of the Natural citizenship clause of the article 2 section 1 of the Constitution.

8. Under the Freedom of Information act 5 US 552, since no response was provided to numerous certified mail letters received by your office nine months ago, I demand a written response or Administrative hearing on the matter within 30 days. On behalf of my clients I demand an answer, as to when the Quo Warranto against Mr. Obama will be filed by the US Attorney General office, or in the alternative if the Attorney General office refuses to file Quo Warranto, I demand an ex-relator status for my clients to proceed with the Quo Warranto action against Mr. Obama in the DC court or the Supreme Court of the United States.

Signed,

Dr. Orly Taitz ESQ

Counsel to the plaintiffs-ex relators.

For more information about the issues raised in this report, click on the tags at the bottom of this article.

Tags: DR. ORLY TAITZ //