Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more ➡
Standard view
Full view
of .
Add note
Save to My Library
Sync to mobile
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
BARNETT|KEYES v OBAMA (NINTH CIRCUIT) - 47 - 3rd non party form letter re: express mandates - TransportRoom.47.0

BARNETT|KEYES v OBAMA (NINTH CIRCUIT) - 47 - 3rd non party form letter re: express mandates - TransportRoom.47.0

Ratings: (0)|Views: 543|Likes:
Published by Jack Ryan
05/10/2011 47 Received letter dated 04/30/2011 re: 3rd non party form letter re: express mandates. CASEFILE . [7747226] [09-56827, 10-55084] (CW)
05/10/2011 47 Received letter dated 04/30/2011 re: 3rd non party form letter re: express mandates. CASEFILE . [7747226] [09-56827, 10-55084] (CW)

More info:

categoriesTypes, Research, Law
Published by: Jack Ryan on May 10, 2011
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See More
See less





R E f, R ï >: E D
MAt 1 2 2211
To: Cathy A. Catterson, Circuit & Court of Appeals Executive
Omce of the Circuit Executive SILED
S. CourLs for the Ninth Circuit Molly Dwyer, Clerk of Court DATE lslyiAuP.O. Box 193939 Omce of the ClerkSan Francisco, CA 94119-3939 U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
(415) 355-8800 fax: (415) 3554901 P.O. Box 193939
San Francisco, CA 94119-3939
Alex Kozinski, Chief Judge (415) 355-8000 fax: (415) 3554551
Omce of the Circuit Executive' Omce 9* Circuit Court of Appeals
S. Coults for the Ninth Circuit Clerk s ,
P.O. Box 193939 125 South Grand AvenueSan Francisco, CA 94119-3939 P%adenw CA 91 105
(415) 355-8800 fax: (415) 355-8901 (626) 229-7250 fax: (626) 229-7462
Cc: Dr. Orly Taitz and Mr. Gary Kreep, Attorneys for the PlaintiFs;
Mr. David Delute and Mr. Roger Westr Attorneys for the Defendants;Other interested citizens, Foups, and entities, both public and private.Re: Express mandates of the United States Code *recuire* a forced conclusion in this cnqeDear Omcials, Judges, and StaFof the Ninth Circuit:
We, ms American citizens, know jou will duly provide complete notice of the cont ' erein tj
the panel of jqdges who were asslgned to hear the oral arguments on May 2nd in P adena within
the constitutional-crisls case of Wilev Drake. et al v. Barack Obama. et a1. Docket o. 09-56:27.
Because mandates of express federal law *absolutely require* the PlaintiFs to win th ' '
objective (regardless of any arguments l'aised), your panel's sole remaining duties ax: to rule in
their favor accordingly; and to grant a1l relief that is necessarily essential and subsequent thereto.If the panel's ruling does not comply with these mandates of law, then you could % called into
constitutional ethics questions, for failing, iroring, or otherwise neglecting to relay these same
commanding authorities to yotlr own fellow employees, within such an historic judiciary issue asthis one - wherein several federal judges have already revealed their keasonous contempt and
utter disdain for ottr Constitution, and for the People's clear right to assure a lawful Presidency.
So, then, the following are smongst the absolutely mandatory requirements of law in play herein:Title 44, Chapter 22, of the United States Code, entitled as Rpresidential Records'', clarities and
mandates, inter alia, that: I11 each of the sought records 9om Mr. Obama aka Soetoro having
probative value as evidence to determine his constitutional eligibility, or not.., to the Omce of
President is declared by express federal law as a Hpresidential record''; I21 alI such timesidential
records'' are now entirely and wholly owned by the United States, and not by Mr. Obama nkn
Spetoro anmore; I31 no such tçpresidçntial records'' may ever be concealed under any form of
privacy whatsoever; and I41 the >me records are requiredto be freely available, public domain.
Case: 10-55084 05/10/2011 Page: 1 of 5 ID: 7747226 DktEntry: 47
nis is because the repeated stamtory key phrase - L*the clrryfar out l
fc/axç/ffebzl-, statutom,
or other omcial or ceremoniql #affe.s of the 'reW#ea/'' - obviously includes the duty of Mr.
Obnma aka Soetoro to qualify himself AS the ostensibly-eligible Presldent. lndeed, it is actually
a mandated legal duty of Mr. Obama aka Soetoro, AS tçpresidenf', to personallv make s'ure that
his real birth certifkate, and other such constitutional eligibility documentation, were put into thegeely available public domain upon his ver
pWrl./ day in assuming the Omce of the Presidency.
Rephrasing the question against Mr. Obama aka Soetoro, it is mere child's play to Nint out the
obvious statutory mandates of the United States Code itl control of the entire matter, e.g.: (1) that
al1 of Bnmck's Ksme such records of constitutional-eligibility importance are expressly not
protected to any privacy, whatsoever, 44 U.S.C. j 2204(c); further, that (2) Bnmck does not even
own those records, anmore, because, as lpresident', they are now owned solely by the United
States, 44 U.S.C. 9 2202; and even further, that (3) Bnmck's duty under law, m=dateds has
always been to ensure those same records are made public domain and geely available for the
daily reviewing by any citizen, see 44 U.S.C. jj 2203(a) and 2204(c), then 5 U.S.C. j 552.
Ironically also, by the very operation and direct eFect of these stamtes, Mr. Obama aka Soetoro
therefore necencily has gq legal bases or claims or interests or rights, whatsoeven to continue
concealing Gtpresidential records'' which now belong only to fWe ne Peoyle', undl he would
ftrst prove his own authentic U.S. citizenship of any level, thertby establishlng a citizen portion
of legal ownership to such records - byfrst revealing the same records as proof o/citizensbip...
This is a claqsic tçCatch-22'', of course, but in fact the entire worldwide topic of *where* Mr.
Obama aka Soetoro was born becomes instantly and legally irrelevant and moot in the face of the
indisputable fact that he simply can never be constitutionally eligible as a valid çtmesident'' under
the çtnatural born'' clause, because one parent (his daddy) never had U.S. citizenship of any level.
To act as a federal judge with enough legal knowledge to obtain one of the higher positions upon
any Circuit Court of Appeals, yet behave as fwithout understanding rejarding the tnatural born'
clause as it relates to requiring two (2) citizen jarents, is to also concluslvely reveal far too much
incompetence and disdaln for the law, to remmn in such an important position of the public trust.
The three (3) diflkrent levels of U.S. citizenship are established. They include itnntllral bonf',ççnative bonf', and tGnaturalized'' citizens. For example, Stanley Annte) Dunham/soetoro, the
mother of Mr. Obama aka Soetoro, wœs origihally a full 4tnatural born'' citizen, hersem being
conceived by two existing U.S. citizens (her parents) who were also both still U.S. citizens at her
birth. ln full conkast the father of Mr. Obama aka Soetoro, Barack Sr., was never a U.S. citizen
of any level, whatsoever, as the world uows. As a direct consequence, Mr. Obama nk'n Soetoro,
himseltl i.e., the currentlpsitting <epresidenf', can never be Eenatural born'' as is constimtionally
required for Presidency, but only Gnative born'' or ççnaturalized'' as second or third %st levels ofU.S. citizenship. ne secondary level, Oative bonp', is what the birth ceYfkate issue is all
about œs fborn in Jl'elff, Obama would be at least Oative born'' on U.S. soil (if mommy had
been back on U.S. soil for at le%t 6 months prior to birth, which she apparently had not been..),
but still never ççnatural bonf', again, because daddy wis not *also* a U.S. citizen before Barry'sbirth, and never was, as is admitted by evermne. Even ûtnative bonp', Mr. Obama nkn Soetoro
would have still automatically lost his any (doubtful) citizenship with the U.S.. when his
Case: 10-55084 05/10/2011 Page: 2 of 5 ID: 7747226 DktEntry: 47
mommy took him to foreign lands that were on otlr State Depsrtment's no-no lists, and enrolled
little Barry ms a new *citizen* there in order to attend their schools, such as when they lived in
lndonesia. Retuming to the U.S. later, his mommy *might* have tried to get them botll
Gnaturalized'' as immigrants or retnrning ex-citizens obtaining/re-obtaining their U.S- citizenship,but did she do that each time they leR for foreir lands and later came back? nis is problematic
at bes't. Furthermore, later in life as a young adult Mr. Obama aka Soetoro himself took up Ms
own residencies in the ssme manner, against olzr State Depareent's rules in effect at the time,
Iike when he lived in Pnkistan, etc. Once again, having automatically had his any existing
(doubtful) citizenship cancelled each times any return back to living in the United States again
would necessitate re-initializing the Hnaturalization'' or tçre-naturalization'' level of citizenship,
because his any true unative bom'' level of U.S. citizenship (the tlllawaii birth or nof issue) was
long gone lost, anmay, when Barry and mommy kept moving back and forth around the world
to bad places. It is seriously doubtful that Mr. Obsma aka Soetoro has any *valid* naturalization
status, which is the ONLY possible citizenship level he COULD have lnow (the 3rd level),
since his any native born (2nd level) is automaticalh long gone lost and - to the simplest point -
he never even had the required 1st level of citizenshlp, <çnatural bonf', to be 16w#1 President in
the first place, because daddy was never *also* a U.S. citizeh, and also a U.S. citizen before littleBarry was born... wherever Obama was bom. Mr. Obama aka Soetoro is *not* a lawful U.S.President and never was. nere is absolutely no possible way ht ever couldbe legally valid.
ne law on this critical subject is far too well established, for literally hundreds of years now,
and in multiple formats a11 applylnj directly to the ultimate and inevitable conclusion - without
having both of his parents as U.S. cltizens (of any citizenship level), and that as prior to his birthn
Mr. Obama aka Soetoro simply is not and never was, lawfully eligible for the U.S- Presidency,
and must be removed from Omce, as expediently as possible by at le%t one of the legal methods
available under the Constitution, dnd replaced wlth the most properlpeligible person under law.
Heck, even your own online Ninth Circuit website ttvacancy Announcements'' for employment
of court personnel include these standard conditions ofall employment roles (emphmsis added):
Must be a U.S. citixen or a citizen of a country with a defense treaty withthe U.S. who is eligible to work in the U.S. Positions with the U-S. Courtsare excepted service appointments. Excepted service appointments are atwill and can b. te--q'nated with or without cause by the Court. Employeeswill be hired provisionally pending the results of a baekground
investigation and fingerprinting, and are subject to a probationary period.
Direct deposit of pay required.
It doesn't matter that çTresident'' Chester A. Arthur got away with this exact samekaud over a
hundred years ago, when his own father was still not a U.S. cltizen at the time of Chester's birth.
(Chester's father jot Gtnaturalized'' aqer Chester's birth, and Chester also allowed and/or helped
his own tçbirther'' lssue to distrad âom the tnle issue - lack of ççnatural bom'' status-) The only
matter of importance relevant to that prior experience, now, is that, obviously, the entire Federal
Govemment has miserably failed the American people again, and should probably be held liable.Moreover, uowledgeable American citizens are tired of the tremsonous gaud being committed
by the U.S. Department of Justice attomeys defending Mr. Obama aka Soetoro in all lese cases.
Case: 10-55084 05/10/2011 Page: 3 of 5 ID: 7747226 DktEntry: 47

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->