Monday, August 9, 2010

DUNHAM/OBAMA/SOETORO FOIA UPDATE: This is in regards to the recent FOIA partial-dump of Stanley Ann Dunham/Obama/Soetoro's passport records.  As previously reported here, all pre-1965 passport records for Stanley Ann Dunham(Obama's Mama) were said to be destroyed even though they are required to maintain passport records for 100 years.  The State Department website states the Passport Services maintain passport records for passports issued from 1925 to present.

Christopher Strunk whom obtained the said Dunham records just submitted his 'Declaration in Opposition to Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment to Dismiss'[Strunk v Department of State et al. DCD 08-cv-2234 (RJL)] in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The first ten pages from the declaration posted below and the full declaration embedded below that.  The first ten sections pretty much sum the treason up.  I encourage all to read the entire declaration and exhibits .  It is very clear many people are involved in the biggest scam perpetrated against the American people in our history. 

 Via Christopher Strunk Declaration; Plaintiff opposes Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment on the grounds that Defendants’ agents:

a. have not made a good faith effort to search for and disclose records within the purview of their fiduciary responsibility and duty to safeguard and disclose under 5 USC §552 and related law;

b. have spoliated records associated with the commission of high crimes and misdemeanors perpetrated by John O. Brennan, Barack Hussein Obama (a.k.a. Soebarkah “Barry” Soetoro), Michelle Obama, Eric Holder, Sovereign Military Order of Malta members Hillary Clinton, Robert Mueller, Janet Napolitano, Leon Panetta, Zbigniew Brzezinski and others as yet named in violation of the U.S. Constitution, National Security Act of 1947 and related law including the Foreign Affairs and other laws too numerous to list herein for the purposes of this declaration;

c. have spoliated records associated with the egregious violation of Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5 in regard to a cover-up involving Soebarkah “Barry” Soetoro and Barack Hussein Obama (BHO);

d. that by spoliation and concealment have maliciously aided and abetted BHO to conceal Soebarkah Soetoro’s acts of treason (1) having taken the

1 ACTS OF TREASON, inter alia, by Aiding and Abetting: (a) nations, organizations, entities and persons who support and promote terrorism and the overthrow of the USA;

oath of office to uphold the U.S. Constitution and protect the united States of America and the People against all enemies foreign or domestic his real name is (plaintiff does not know) and who at birth has a multiple allegiances simultaneously to Great Britain and Kenya through his natural father, notwithstanding where Soebarkah Soetoro may have been born is immaterial in the matter of multiple allegiances under the requirement of the U.S. Constitution Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5, and that based upon the facts associated with the documents released to date Soebarkah Soetoro is an Indonesian Citizen from six years of age till the present by the BHO adoption by Lolo S. Soetoro Mangunharjo, an Indonesian colonel in General Suharto's Armed Forces;

e. that by spoliation intended to conceal that Soebarkah Soetoro never renounced the allegiance to Great Britain, Kenya and Indonesia, with citizenship there that when he attained majority he failed to take an oath

(b) willful failure to protect the USA borders for the purpose of unjust enrichment in commission of crimes by enemies of the People of the USA; (c) the Chinese Red Army in acquisition of preferred stockownership in British Petroleum control of Alaska Petroleum Production; (d) destruction of the California San Joaquin Valley Agricultural sector by maliciously withholding water with intent of Chinese Red Army ownership and control over food production to starve of the People of California and the USA; (e) creation of a private army dedicated only to his service without allegiance to the US Constitution; (f) Personal enrichment since 2005 in direct ownership in the pharmaceutical company that as a US Senator he advanced legislation for to produce a deadly virus and antidote; (g) as a US Senator supported and promoted the Election of Odinga whose acts of genocide were carried out against Christians in Africa by Muslims; (h) the Chinese Red Army partnership in the Lippo Group of Indonesia, James Riady and others in the usurpation of strategic minerals vital to the National Security of the People of the USA; (i) violation of the Logan Act and related Foreign Affairs Laws.

of allegiance to the USA and renounce all other allegiances, and that even upon his marriage to natural Born Citizen Michelle Robinson failed to take an oath of naturalization required under the Immigration and Naturalization Act and related law (INA), BHO falsified his application for admission to the Illinois Bar, and when he affirmed his oath(s) as a Senator for the Illinois State Senate, U.S. Senate from Illinois, and POTUS challenged by Declarant, who duly fired him on January 23, 2009 in the matter of BHO multi allegiances.

f. have aided and abetted a conspiracy to deny Plaintiff substantive due process and equal treatment with 5 USC §552 along with those similarly situated to maintain a republican form of government and thereby violate Plaintiff’s 1st, 5th, 9th and 10th Amendment right to protection associated with life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness associated to the right to own property including but not limited to the right to contract and expectation of honest services associated with the oath of office of each member of the Executive Branch including Defendants’ Counsel;

3. That Plaintiff has employed the expert services of the retired Senior Border Patrol Agent of the Immigration & Naturalization Service, U.S. Department of Justice. Philip Hans Jacobsen. who also served as the leader of the Association of Border Patrol Agents, to make an affidavit in regard to his applied experience and similar application for passport documents filed before 1968 along with his analysis supporting Plaintiff's above summarized contention of Defendants’ bad faith herein, see Exhibit 1 with Sub-exhibits A through F annexed thereto (the Jacobsen Affidavit).

4. In the Jacobsen Affidavit the set of circumstances in his own FOIA of his own mother that coincide with passport and related documents are dated from May 26, 1953 through October 28, 1985 that generally coincide with the same time frame of Plaintiffs FOIA requested of Stanley Ann Dunham with Barack Hussein Obama also named on those documents too.

5. The DOS / CBP response to Mr. Jacobsen is dated January 25, 2010 by Marionette Pleasant Team Leader, Law Enforcement Liaison Division Off of Legal Affairs Passport Services shown as Exhibit 1 Sub-exhibit B, provides a detailed listing of all resultant documents provided during the same time frame requested without any document missing from the period 1953 through 1985.

6. That Mr. Jacobsen affirms in the Affidavit facts as to his own FOIA request that support Plaintiffs challenge to the Defendants response allegations and facts related to his own FOIA request at Exhibit 1 paragraphs 8 through 12, and as such Plaintiff realleges each and every allegation contained in the Jacobsen Affidavit paragraphs 8 through 12 shown in Exhibit 1 with the same force and effect as though herein set forth at length omits it for brevity.

7. That Plaintiff challenges the July 29, 2010 letter of Jonathan M. Rolbin, Director of the Office of Legal and Law Enforcement Liaison Bureau of Consular Affairs Passport Services in the matter with Case Control Number 200807238 with twelve pages of documents attached shown as Exhibit 1 Sub-exhibit A that says:

“We have completed a search for your records responsive to your request. The search resulted in the retrieval of six documents that are responsive to your request. After careful review of the documents, we have determined that all six documents may be released in full.”

Further says

“We did not locate a I965 passport application referenced in an application for amendment of passport that is included in the released documents. Many, passport applications and other non-vital records from that period were destroyed during the 1980s in accordance with guidance from the General Services Administration.”

8. That Mr. Jacobsen’s applied research in his expert capacity is at paragraphs 15 through 21 on pages 4 through 7 shown as Exhibit 1 and the basis for Plaintiff to challenge the veracity of Defendants’ agents to meet the requirements of 5 USC §552 and the Court herein, and that Plaintiff contends have committed a fraud upon the court.

9. That the Jacobsen Affidavit affirms his own FOIA request for passports records that the DOS provided within the same time frame prior to 1967 (1953 through 1985) and that type of records requested conflicts with the Defendants’ allegations and partial provision of records to Plaintiff.

10. That there is a matter of denial of substantive due process and equal treatment under the law injuring Plaintiff when the July 29, 2010 letter of Jonathan M. Rolbin fails to provide: (a) any legal controlling authority for the alleged destruction; (b) any chain of custody of any of the documents to be provided and or alleged destroyed; (c) any record of security standard operating procedures in use in order to track the whereabouts and custody to audit the records; (d) any kind of Index of documents; (e) any administrative records related to the documents in question; (f) any confirmation of actual destruction; (g) any current administrative records within the October 2008 through present discussing the records requested; and (h) any records and or work product referencing the records after the alleged destruction between the 1980s until the Present.

11. That with regard to Defendants’ supporting declarations of Alex Galovich Acting Director of the Office of Information and Programs and Services of the DOS and Dorothy Pullo Director of the Freedom of Information Division, Office of international Trade, U.S. Customs and CBP based upon the above contentions Defendants have failed to proved sufficient facts to which Plaintiff may respond without a more definite statement provided and accordingly reserves the right to amend and extend Plaintiff’s response at the appropriate time or before trial is had.... ...so much more included in the declaration below.

...Jump to End; 31. Wherefore Plaintiff wishes an order of the Court denying Defendants’ motion for summary judgment to dismiss subject to a more definite statement of facts by order of Defendants and their agent to provide:

(a) any legal controlling authority for the alleged destruction;

(b) any chain of custody of any of the documents to be provided and or alleged destroyed;

(c) any record of security standard operating procedures in use in order to track the whereabouts and custody to audit the records;

(d) any kind of Index of documents;

(e) any administrative records related to the documents in question;

(f) any confirmation of actual destruction;

(g) any current administrative records within the October 2008 through present discussing the records requested; and

(h) any records and work product referencing the records after the alleged destruction between the 1980s until the Present;

(i) assignment of a U.S. Marshal at the DOS Archives to safeguard the records fro9m further tampering until all the additional records are provided or accounted for; and

(j) further and different relief deemed necessary by the Court for justice to be done herein. Dated: August 8th , 2010
- Full Declaration embedded below.
Strunk Declaration and MOL of Plaintiff in Opposition to Summary Judgment DCD 08 Cv 2234 - 8/9/2010

14 comments:

  1. Arrest them all then throw the book at them

    ReplyDelete
  2. Great posting ORYR. This is good news. Mr. Strunk has "counter attacked" regarding the lame FOIA release with the missing paper work for Stanley Ann Dunham's passport records prior to 1968, which we know from the records released there were passport application papers in the file prior to 1968 that are not there now. As I read it, it seems Mr. Strunk cleverly had some one else file, or knew of someone else who had filed, for information via a FOIA request for the time period of 1953 to 1985 for another person and in that FOIA release not a single piece of paper or expected record was missing for that time period, which overlaps the Stanley Ann Dunham FOIA request time period. This conclusively proves to anyone with common sense that the passport records and papers prior to 1968 where not routinely ordered destroyed as the passport services office alleged in their cover letter to Mr. Strunk. It is now obvious that someone has sanitized Stanley Ann Dunham's passport records file and removed all pre-1968 paper work covering the mentioned and known 1965 passport application and likely prior passport applications ... either before the 2008 election, during the 2008 election, or now to cover up for Obama. Possibly the missing paper work has something to do with the passport system records break-in during the primary campaign in the spring of 2008 which ended up in the key witness being found shot dead a few weeks later. And that crime was never properly investigated or solved.

    Our entire system of government and law enforcement is being corrupted to protect one man ... a man whose life is a life of lies and a fraud. The man in the Oval Office is a con-man and a criminal. This usurpation of the office of the Presidency and command of our military cannot be allowed to stand. Mr. Strunk is doing his part. Mr. Strunk, a true patriot, is standing tall and fighting back.

    Bravo Zulu Mr. Strunk!

    CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret)
    http://www.protectourliberty.org
    http://puzo1.blogspot.com
    ####

    ReplyDelete
  3. Day by day

    CHINK!

    ReplyDelete
  4. drip drip drip they can only stick so many fingers in the dam.

    go read here: http://wtpotus.wordpress.com/2010/08/07/liaobamas-adopted-sister-died-suddenly/

    ou haven’t heard of Lia? Neither had we. The unknown, until now, adopted sister of Barack Hussein Obama died unexpectedly February 26, 2010. The USA media didn’t cover the story of this woman nor was her name found until the last few days. A competent WTPOTUS sleuth, Leza, and other researchers uncovered an article about an adopted “brother” in Indonesia, named Lia or Lee. Following up on a tidbit of information and other clues, more information was uncovered. Lia was an adopted sister, not a brother. Two Indonesian obituaries were just found. These tell the final tale of this woman nicknamed Lia.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Only if a judge would act upon the findings.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Birther/Dualer/Doubter from CAAugust 10, 2010 at 12:57 AM

    With all these stunts by the usurper's administration, it's no wonder that union reps recently delivered a resounding 259-0 vote of no confidence against ICE Director John Morton. It's time to kick the treasonous clowns out!

    ReplyDelete
  7. I consider Mr. Strunk a modern day hero who has shown what one person can accomplish by taking on Obama and his goons. Woodward and Bernstein of the Washington Post had a mole at the FBI to remove Nixon while Mr. Strunk is standing as a one man army in his battle. Speaking of standing the courts gave it to Mr. Strunk!!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Can anyone here expound on what they believe occured in the application where bho (soebarkah) name is crossed out. I believe that some think this was done because he needed to come back into the usa on an indonesian passport. Is this one interpretation? Another is that his name was already on the previous passport application and did not have to be repeated. Does anyone have any experience with these applications to shed some light on why his name was crossed out? Also, in reading the correspondence there is a letter that states that the child in question appears to be a US citizen (wording mine). Does this mean that a colb was presented at that time? Can anyone provide a theory as to what was presented at that time to prove citizenship?

    ReplyDelete
  9. As we all know, he will not have standing to file the suit.

    ReplyDelete
  10. The suit was filed long ago, the court ordered the DOS to release the records.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I see no way out for Obama and the government beyond continuing to break the law. Mr. Strunk requested documents under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). The federal government stalled and refused to provide them. Strunk then filed suit. The judge ordered the feds to provide the documents, I believe by June 30, 2010. Strunk was finally given some of the documents at the end of July 2010. Some of the documents he was given were redacted (portions blacked out).

    No judge cannot say Strunk does not have standing because he has already been given a portion of the documents. The feds are clearly in violation of FOIA.

    If he follows the law, the judge must now rule in Strunk's favor. The feds cannot say they are not hiding anything because in their own letter they tell him they have provided only some of the documents and state that some portions of the released documents were redacted.

    There is no justification for hiding or redacting documents under FOIA unless the information relates to national security. But where Stanley Ann Dunham and her son traveled on her/their passport(s) before 1965 should have nothing to do with national security.

    I do not see how the judge can rule against Strunk. The feds have to be ordered to release the documents. If the feds then refuse to release them, claiming national security issues, then it will be obvious to everyone what they are hiding: information proving that Obama has lied about his past.

    Of course, the judge could be pressured and swayed before he issues his ruling - as Judge Carter did in Barnett v. Obama. Or the feds will provide some sort of bogus "proof" that some Dunham/Obama/Soetoro documents were destroyed by accident, he judge will be pressured to accept the lie, and the media will ignore the story.

    I am doing my best to keep all these facts straight in The Obama Timeline. Part I is in book form; Part II is at www.colony14.net. If anyone has any information I have missed in my assembly of facts about the thug-in-chief, please do not hesitate to send it my way.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I'm sure Mr. Spradley is looking down and smiling Chris. We are in the fight for our lives and you are taking the lead so God bless and God speed.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Very nice filing.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Only a matter of time before the house of cards come crashing down.

    ReplyDelete

“As long as I am an American citizen and American blood runs in these veins I shall hold myself at liberty to speak, to write, and to publish whatever I please on any subject.” - Elijah Parish Lovejoy(1802-1837)

Comments posted here do not necessarily reflect the views of BirtherReport.com. Readers are solely responsible for the content of the comments they post on this web site.