Supreme Court Asked to Cooperate With FBI

The Supreme court files have been hacked: The question is, by whom.

By de Andréa

Who is the only one; that would have motive???

A lawyer investigating the eligibility of Barack Obama to be president under the U.S. Constitution's requirement that the office be occupy ed only by a "natural born" citizen is asking the U.S. Supreme Court to cooperate with an FBI investigation into alleged cyber crimes in the Supremes Courts own files.

In a letter addressed this week to Chief Justice John Roberts, the associate justices, the Secret Service and others, California lawyer Orly Taitz, who is working on a number of Obama eligibility cases through the Defend Our Freedoms Foundation, wrote, "I hope that the Supreme Court will show proper cooperation in investigation by the FBI and other agencies of such crimes and I request a letter of cooperation to that extent."

Taitz is just one of many attorneys across the country whose clients are raising more and more questions about Obama's eligibility, and who have brought emergency motions to the U.S. Supreme Court over the cases, only to have them dropped without a hearing.

While her effort was pending at the Supreme Court, its references suddenly were scrubbed from the Courts public website just two days before a conference among justices on the case was to be heard. Someone had hacked the Supreme Court files as well as her own. The briefs were just gone…

She filed a complaint with the FBI, which promised a review, but the investigative agency noted that in this situation, technically the Supreme Court was the "victim" of having its website hacked, and officials there would need to cooperate for the effort to move forward.

That circumstance generated Taitz' letter requesting cooperation.
"This is particularly important in light of the fact that there is a common denominator in a number of cyber crimes committed," Taitz wrote. She cited a hacking into her PayPal account where donations to her foundation were diverted, sabotage on her website and the creation of an "imposter site" for one of the plaintiffs in one of her cases. "All of these cyber crimes, including the hacking of the Court files together with all the other crimes that are handled separately, have one common denominator – a concerted effort to put Obama in the White House and keep him there by virtue of fraud and concealment of all of his records. By each relator's constitutional oath of office, and interest above other citizens and taxpayers, relators submit that they have standing," Taitz wrote.

"In arguendo of Respondent Obama's burden of proof, motions are submitted requesting a writ of mandamus on Hawaii Gov. Linda Lingle for evidence, and on Sec. State Hillary Rodham Clinton for evidence and to request evidence from Britain and the Republics of Kenya, Indonesia and Pakistan," Taitz said.

"Quo Warranto" essentially means an explanation is being demanded for what authority Obama is using to act as president. An online constitutional resource says ‘Quo Warranto for a writ of mandamus’, "affords the only judicial remedy for violations of the Constitution by public officials and agents.” It simply forces them to do their job.

John Eidsmoe, an expert on the U.S. Constitution now working with the Foundation on Moral Law, said the demand is a legitimate course of action. "She basically is asking, 'by what authority' is Obama president," he said "In other words, I want you to tell me by what authority should he hold that office.”

Eidsmoe said “it's clear that Obama has something in the documentation of his history, including his birth certificate, college records, and other documents, that he does not want the public to know. What else could be the reason for his hiring law firms across the nation to fight any request for information as basic as his Occidental College records from the early 1980s,” he asked.

THE BOTTOM LINE: The main reason doubts continue to persist regarding Obama's birth certificate is this question: If an original Hawaii-doctor-generated and Hawaii-hospital-released Obama birth certificate exists, why then wouldn't the senator and his campaign simply order the document released and end the controversy? I find it interesting at the very least that the Dem’s in Congress investigated the eligibility of all of the ‘Republican Candidates’, but not Obama’s.

That Obama has ordered Hawaii officials not to release the document leaves little doubt as to whether an authentic Hawaii birth certificate actually exists for Obama.

Obama officials repeatedly have declined comment, relenting only one time to call such allegations "garbage."

Congressmen Bill Posey R-Fla. has been inundated with criticism for even suggesting that the issue be avoided in the future by having presidential candidates supply their birth certificate as a matter of course.

So much for the Constitution, it has obviously been thrown out with the rest of the “garbage”…

de Andréa