BY LINDA BENTLEY | MAY 26, 2010
Obama, Sovern, trustees of Columbia University found guilty
ATLAH court issues guilty verdicts on all 17 counts of sedition, conspiracy, fraud and obstruction of justice
ATLAH, N.Y. – Last week’s article, “The People v. Columbia and Obama trial convenes in Harlem church,” detailed the bullet points of my testimony, under oath on May 15, regarding Barack Hussein Obama’s fraudulent Selective Service System registration, which also inexplicably ties him to a Connecticut Social Security Number, in the 10th Amendment trial held by Pastor James David Manning in his ATLAH World Missionary Church in Harlem.
On Tuesday, May 18, the jury returned guilty verdicts against Obama, Michael Sovern, who was president of Columbia University during the period of time Obama supposedly attended, and the trustees of Columbia University, on all 17 counts of sedition, conspiracy, fraud and obstruction of justice.
Manning held a press conference on Friday, May 21, to formally announce the verdict and answer questions.
On Monday, May 24, Manning announced, “We the People spoke,” and said he was assembling a coalition to hand over the verdicts to the judiciary of the U.S. Senate, the U.S. Congress, the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the U.S. Attorney General.
Manning also noted, specifically for Sovern and Columbia University, he will be submitting to the New York State Bar, New York Attorney General, New York State Regents and Atlantic Schools Accreditation a demand that their license to operate an educational institution be revoked.
“Perhaps their first response will be to defend and reject. Thereupon, will be the most exciting part of this guilty victory, inasmuch as we will proceed to court testing the constitutionality of the 10th Amendment established by our Founding Fathers,” said Manning, adding, “I expect the courts to be careful in their decision not to injure the rights of ‘We the People.’”
Attorney John Hemenway, the attorney of record in Hollister v. Obama/Soetoro, which was dismissed by U.S. District Judge James Robertson for the District of Columbia, who called the case frivolous, claiming the issue of Obama’s constitutional eligibility had been “blogged” and “twittered,” made some observations after watching the video of Manning’s press conference.
He wrote, “What a superb presentation the Rev, James Manning made during his press conference on May 21, 2010! It was a superior gathering together of the evidence that establishes without doubt that Obama-cum-Soetoro is simply a congenital liar with the Chicago gangster-type skills to maneuver his criminal propensities into successful (and illegal) capture of the White House.”
Hemenway said he “listened carefully to every word” and offered a few comments he believed “may prove useful, in the end.”
He agreed with Manning, who said he would abide with the decision of the courts, if they heard the evidence against Obama and decided on balance that they would declare Obama to be in his claimed office, legitimately and constitutionally.
“But nowhere have we found a federal judge who will accept jurisdiction over the problem and make a final determination, after discovery of evidence and a due process trial,” said Hemenway. “Interestingly, only Justice Thomas has indicated the nature of the problem when he acknowledged that no Justice on the Supreme Court wanted to take up the case. (Presumably, except Justice Thomas!)”
He also agreed with Manning’s suggestion that it is a dangerous path to recognize the practices of foreign countries and values, while ignoring the literal implementation of our Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights.
Hemenway said the transcript of the Manning trial should be made available to the public, stating, “I would gladly pay for the production of a copy of the complaint and the guilty findings on the 17 counts. Anyone who is familiar with the facts does not doubt the reasonableness and fairness of the findings. Clearly, Obama-cum-Soetoro and his accomplices from Chicago gangster land have falsified documents, perjured themselves, committed wire fraud and mail fraud, and engaged in numerous racketeering activities in achieving their present position of power.”
Calling the final decision in the Manning Court “sound behind any reasonable doubt,” Hemenway acknowledged the “Obama-cum-Soetoro record is one of intense secrecy, with sealed records concealing even the most common personal records of a person in public service.”
And, like Rev. Manning, Hemenway has also heard enough about “Obama-cum-Soetoro’s lack of the Constitutional requirement necessary to qualify for the Presidency. Most citizens of America, when presented with the facts, will agree that the case has been fairly tried in public and the verdict is in.”
To make the decision effective, however, Hemenway believes the trial transcript along with the indictment and verdict should be made available to every trial attorney with a current case in the courts or with the intention to use these materials in a RICO (Racketeer-Influenced, Corrupt Organization) case, citing, “There is enough material here to occupy a hundred attorneys. Perhaps, even the not-so-neutral press corps eventually will sit up and take notice and start examining the real news.”
Meanwhile, on March 22, Dr. Orly Taitz, the Orange County dentist and attorney who represented numerous eligibility cases and is currently a candidate for California Secretary of State, filed an appeal with the Social Security Administration (SSA), demanding a hearing with regard to the SSA’s denial of requested information under the Freedom of Information Act regarding Social Security Number (SSN) 042-68-4425, “fraudulently obtained” and used by Obama.
Taitz noted in her appeal, according to affidavits provided by licensed investigators Meil Sankey and Susan Daniels, Obama has used multiple SSNs, which she says indicates Social Security fraud and identity theft.
“One does not have an expectation of privacy and right to privacy, when he uses the identity of others,” wrote Taitz, adding, “Moreover, such individual is subject to criminal prosecution for such crimes.”
In her appeal, addressed to Dawn S. Wiggins, SSA FOIA Information Officer, Taitz wrote, “If you, as a Social Security officer, upon receiving such information, are refusing to act and prosecute, you become complicit and subject to criminal liability for aiding and abetting of felonies, subornation of felonies and under RICO.”
Taits cites Obama’s Selective Service System registration confirms his use of the SSN issued in Connecticut between the years 1976-1977, while Obama was a resident of Hawaii.
Also, according to Sankey and Daniels, the Connecticut SSN was originally assigned to an individual born in 1890, who obtained the SSN late in life possibly to obtain Medicare or Medicaid benefits.
And, just like Manning and Hemenway, Taitz has been denigrated with terms such as “kook” and “birther” for bringing facts about Obama’s lack of constitutional eligibility into question. Taitz says she, her husband and three children have also been subjected to horrific intimidation, harassment and death threats, while her vehicle, PayPal account and website have all been tampered with.