04/22/11 - U.S. Supreme Court Filing (President Obama-StorAll Matter)
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

04/22/11 - U.S. Supreme Court Filing (President Obama-StorAll Matter)

on

  • 3,554 views

04/22/11 - U.S. Supreme Court Filing (President Obama-StorAll Matter)

04/22/11 - U.S. Supreme Court Filing (President Obama-StorAll Matter)
"Response To March 17, 2011 Supreme Court of the United States' Letter."

Statistics

Views

Total Views
3,554
Views on SlideShare
3,537
Embed Views
17

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0

1 Embed 17

http://vogeldenisenewsome.net 17

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

04/22/11 - U.S. Supreme Court Filing (President Obama-StorAll Matter) 04/22/11 - U.S. Supreme Court Filing (President Obama-StorAll Matter) Document Transcript

  • No. _____________________________________ IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES VOGEL DENISE NEWSOME PETITIONER V. STOR-ALL ALFRED, LLC; JUDGE JOHN ANDREW WEST/ HAMILTON COUNTY (OHIO) COURT OF COMMON PLEAS; AND DOES 1 THROUGH 250 RESPONDENT(S) IN RE VOGEL DENISE NEWSOME ON PETITION FOR EXTRAORDINARY WRIT TO THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO RESPONSE TO MARCH 17, 2011 SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES’ LETTER1 COMES NOW Petitioner, Vogel Denise Newsome – a/k/a Denise V. Newsome (― Newsome‖and/or ― Petitioner Newsome‖) – WITHOUT WAIVING HER RIGHTS and ARGUMENTS/ISSUESand DEFENSES raised and/or set forth in the October 9, 2010 “Emergency Motion to Stay;Emergency Motion for Enlargement of Time and Other Relief The United States Supreme CourtDeems Appropriate To Correct The Legal Wrongs/Injustices Reported Herein” (― EM/ORS‖),subsequent pleadings (i.e. which includes Petition for Extraordinary Writ [― PFEW‖]) submitted forfiling with the Supreme Court of the United States and provides this her Response To March 17,2011 Supreme Court of the United States‘ Letter (― RT031711SCL‖). This instant filing in responseto March 17, 2011 letter is submitted in that the information contained herein supports the 1 BOLDFACE, ITALICS, UNDERLINE, etc. added for emphasis. Page 1 of 96
  • EXTRAORDINARY, EXCEPTIONAL and CRITICAL/EXIGENT circumstances involved. SaidMarch 17, 2011 letter which states in part: "The above-entitled petition for an extraordinary writ seeking unspecified relief was received on March 17, 2011. Please inform this office by letter, as soon as possible, what type of extraordinary writ you are seeking to file, i.e. extraordinary writ of mandamus, mandamus/prohibition, habeas corpus. This office will retain all of the copies of the petition."See EXHIBIT “1” – March 17, 2011 Letter attached hereto and incorporated by reference as if setforth in full herein. In further support thereof, Newsome states the following: 1. This instant pleading is submitted in good faith and is not submitted for purposes of delay, harassment, hindering proceedings, embarrassment, obstructing the administration of justice, vexatious litigation, increasing the cost of litigation, etc. and is hereby filed to protect the rights of the Petitioner/Newsome and to provide the Supreme Court of the United States with a response to its March 17, 2011 letter. 2. This instant pleading and legal action has been timely brought in accordance with the Rules and statutes/laws governing said matters and in accordance with this Court‘s March 17, 2011 letter executed by Ruth Jones in the Clerk‘s Office on behalf of this Court and/or William K. Suter. 3. While this Court requested that Newsome provide a “letter” she believes the submittal of a response in form of pleading is appropriate and applicable out of concerns of the DILATORY tactics as well as further unlawful/illegal practices by members in this Court‘s Clerk‘s Office to attempt to USURP authority – i.e. little “Indians” wanting to be Chief and perform the role of the Justices of this Court; moreover, the DESPARATE attempts that may have been made by this Court in efforts to AID and ABET in the COVER-UP of the CRIMINAL and CIVIL WRONGS of its employees in efforts to shield/mask the ILLEGAL ANIMUS of President Barack Obama, his Administration and others leveled against Newsome. While it appears this Court may have been attempting to avoid being provided sufficient information to aid in the handling of this matter and advising Newsome that ―M otion for Leave‖ would now not be required, this instant RT031711SCL is hereto provided for purposes of clarifying and aiding this Court in the handling of this matter – i.e. providing information pertinent to March 17, 2011 request and reiterating pertinent information in the Motion for Leave Newsome previously provided this Court. 4. This instant RT031711SCL is also filed because Newsome believes it is of PUBLIC/WORLDWIDE interest for citizens as well as Foreign Leaders/Nations to see just what she has had to endure in seeking justice for the legal wrongs complained of in the Petition for Extraordinary Writ (― PFEW‖) and EM/ORS. Moreover, concerns that the Courts and United States Government may Page 2 of 96
  • have moved to COVER-UP the criminal acts/civil violations leveled againstNewsome and/or citizen(s) of the United States in RETALIATION of havingEXPOSED the CORRUPTION in the United States Government/GovernmentOfficials. 5. THE UNITED STATES CITIZENS, PUBLIC/WORLD NEEDS TOKNOW WHAT IS REALLY GOING ON AND WHAT TERRORIST/SUPREMACIST/RACIST GROUP(S) APPEAR TO BE IN CONTROL OF THE UNITED STATESGOVERNMENT – It is time for the Barack Obama Regime to GO – STEP DOWN!!As President Barack Obama has recently requested Foreign Leaders – i.e. forinstance, Egypt’s President Hosni Mubarak and Lybia’s Colonel Muammar el-Qaddafi. See EXHIBITS “2” and “3” respectively– Articles regarding PresidentObama‘s request that Foreign Leaders step down attached hereto and incorporated byreference as if set forth in full herein. Scheidler v. National Organization for Women, Inc., 123 S.Ct. 1057 (U.S.,2003) - Crime of “coercion” is separate from extortion and involves the use of force or threat of force to restrict anothers freedom of action. TERRORISM: The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments often for ideological or political reasons.2 DOMESTIC TERRORISM: Terrorism that occurs primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States. [18 USCA § 2331(5)] Terrorism that is carried out against one‘s own government or fellow citizens.3 INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM: Terrorism that occurs primarily outside the territorial jurisdiction of the United States, or that transcends national boundaries by the means in which it is carried out, the people it is intended to intimidate, or the place where the perpetrators operate to seek asylum.4 TERRORIST: a) One who engage in acts or an act of terrorism. 5 b) Somebody who uses violence or the threat of violence, especially bombing, kidnapping, and assassination, to intimidate, often for political purposes.6 TERRORIZE: a) To fill or overpower, with terror; terrify. b) Coerce by intimidation or fear.7 c) Motivate somebody by violence to intimidate or coerce somebody with violence or the threat of violence.8 d) Make somebody very fearful to fill somebody with feelings of intense fear over a period of time.2 The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language (4th Edition).3 Black‘s Law Dictionary (8th Edition).4 Id.5 The American Heritage. . .6 Encarta World English Dictionary (1999).7 The American Heritage. . .8 Encarta World. . . Page 3 of 96
  • TERRORIST - a radical who employs terror as a political weapon; usually organizes with other terrorists in small cells; often uses religion as a cover for terrorist activities. (EMPHASIS ADDED). ACT OF TERRORISM, TERRORISM, TERRORIST ACT - the calculated use of violence (or the threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature; this is done through intimidation or coercion or instilling fear. RADICAL CELL, TERRORIST CELL - a cell of terrorists (usually 3 to 5 members); "to insure operational security the members of adjacent terrorist cells usually dont know each other or the identity of their leadership." SUPREMACIST: 1) A person who believes in or advocates the supremacy of a particular group, esp. a racial group.9 2) One who believes that a certain group is or should be supreme. 10 3) Somebody who holds the view that a particular group is innately superior to others and therefore, is entitled to dominate them.11 SUPREMACY: A position of superiority or authority over all others.12/13 6. Foreign Leaders are NOT going to be deceived. They are aware of such SUPREMACIST and TERRORIST groups that are running the United States Government. For example, see the Interview Transcript with Iran President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad wherein said knowledge is made known - http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39210911/ns/world_news-mideast/n_africa.14 Knowledge confirming statements in Newsome‘s July 13, 2010 Email. 9 Random House Webster‘s Unabridged Dictionary (2nd Edition). 10 The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language (4th Edition). 11 Encarta World English Dictionary (1999). 12 Encarta World. . . 13 This can be said of this instant lawsuit. If it had not been for Newsome‘s patience, diligence, research, etc. the UnitedStates Supreme Court as well as United States citizens would not be aware of the TERRORISTIC acts and CONSPIRACY that hasbeen orchestrated and carried out under the Leadership/Direction of Baker Donelson, its client (Liberty Mutual) and others againstAfrican-Americans and/or people of color; as well as smaller countries/nations. Why? Because this instant action will EXPOSE justhow subtle/elusive such SUPREMACIST/TERRORIST in not wanting to be detected and their intelligence/experience/expertise incovering up their RACIST/DISCRMINATORY/ PREJUDICIAL motives/agenda – i.e. exchanging the white hoods for business suitsand judicial robes, etc. to AVOID detection. See EXHIBIT “I” – DAVID DUKE/KU KLUX KLAN attached hereto and incorporatedby reference as if set forth in full herein. 14 Transcript: U.S. has hostility against our people, Ahmadinejad says . . .And-- all-- these years, they-- stood against our people. They continued hostilities, and they cooperated with all of ourenemies. President Obama said, "We are going to make it-- to make it up." And we welcomed that idea and position. I sent a messagefor him after his election. Of course, I received no answer. He just gave a general response. And that is not considered a response to mymessage. We think maybe President Obama wants to do something, but there are pressures-- pressure groups in the United States who donot allow him to do so. Even if he wants to do something, apparently there are certain groups who do not allow him to do it. Andrea Mitchell: Youre suggesting that President Obama— President Ahmadinejad: We think they are – Andrea Mitchell: --doesnt have-- doesnt have-- the-- as Commander in Chief and leader of the United States does not havethe decision-making power over what he does? President Ahmadinejad: Do you really think President Obama can do anything he wishes to? Page 4 of 96
  • Foreign Leaders/Countries are aware that the 7. United States Citizens DO NOT elect the President/Vice President of the United States – Electoral Colleges do. President Barack Obama was placed in the United States White House for DECEPTIVE purposes and all is ― COMING OUT IN THE WASH!!‖ 8. FOREIGN LEADERS/CITIZENS are NOT DECEIVED. They have been made aware of the WILLIE LYNCH practices and realize that the United States DOES NOT have the likes of Martin Luther King Jr., Malcolm X or Medgar Evers in the White House. NEITHER is that the likes of a NELSON MANDELA in the United States White House – i.e. Blacks WILLING/DETERMINED to put their lives on the line to assure FREEDOM and EQUALITY for ALL. Instead, products of the WILLIE LYNCH practices – United States President Barack Obama, United States Attorney General Eric Holder and President of the NAACP Benjamin Jealous - have been placed on DISPLAY as the NEW FACES of the African- American/Black male. See EXHIBIT “4” – Excerpt from the October PowerPoint Presentation entitled, “Clean Out Congress 2010 – Americans Take BACK Your Country/Government – Come November 2010 Vote OUT The Incumbents Career Politicians” attached hereto and incorporated by reference as if set forth in full herein. 9. It is of PUBLIC/WORLDWIDE interest for citizens and Foreign Nations/Leaders to see DEMOCRACY at work and see FIRST-HAND how the JUDICIAL system works in one of the MOST POWER COUNTRIES in the world. Moreover, how the Respondents and United States Government has resorted to CRIMINAL acts for purposes of OPPRESSION, THREATS, HARASSMENT, BLACKMAIL, EXTORTION, etc. against Newsome and/or citizens who engage in protected activities – i.e. file complaints EXPOSING Human/Civil Rights violations, Discrimination, Retaliation, Terrorism/Supremacist/Racism, etc. Thank God, NATIONS – such as China and others - are coming out to address the HUMAN RIGHTS and CORRUPTION in the United States Government. Stands as Newsome requested in her October 2010 PowerPoint Presentation. See EXHIBIT “5” – 04/11/11 Article ― China Report Criticizes U.S. Human Rights Record‖ attached hereto and incorporated by reference as if set forth in full Andrea Mitchell: Within-- within the— President Ahmadinejad: He does not— Andrea Mitchell: --the constructs of the United States Constitution. But what would you like to hear from President Obama?And what would you like to say to him? President Ahmadinejad: The Constitution is already on the [unintel]. What about the political scene? The reality on theground? Is he able to do everything he wishes to? Personally, its not true. There are different political group, there are a lo—different lobbyist pressure groups, and more important, there are Zionists there. We say, if he wants to do something, there arecertain groups who do not allow him to do so. Page 5 of 96
  • herein. See EXHIBIT “6” October 2010 PowerPoint Presentation entitled, “Clean Out Congress 2010 – Americans Take BACK Your Country/Government – Come November 2010 Vote OUT The Incumbents Career Politicians” attached hereto and incorporated by reference as if set forth in full herein. It is about time for Foreign Countries/Leaders and their citizens let the United States know that they have had enough of its CORRUPTION and INTERFERENCE. See EXHIBIT “7” – Meetings with Foreign Leaders attached hereto and incorporated by reference as if set forth in full herein. 10. United States President Barack Obama came out PUBLICLY andrequested that Foreign Leaders – such as for instance Egypt‘s President HosniMubarak and Libya‘s Colonel Muammar Gaddafi - STEP DOWN. See EXHIBITS“2” and “3” respectively attached hereto and incorporated by reference as if set forthin full herein. Now that Newsome has brought this legal action ADDRESSING THECORRUPTION, CONSPIRACIES and COVER-UP along with supporting evidenceas well as provided Exhibits/Appendices to sustain the EM/ORS and PFEW, ― WILLPRESIDENT OBAMA and HIS ADMINISTRATION STEP DOWN? 11. The United States has a President (Barack Obama) who has recentlycome under question regarding his CITIZENSHIP. Even under such SCRUTINY,President Obama CANNOT and or WILL NOT produce his ― Birth Certificate.‖Instead, information regarding a ― Certificate of LIVE Birth‖ NOT ― BIRTHCertificate‖ is released to the PUBLIC. Furthermore, it appears that President Obamais relying upon his Lawyers/Advisors (i.e. such as Baker, Donelson, Bearman,Caldwell & Berkowitz, PC (― Baker Donelson‖)) who have been shown to beCORRUPT!! See EXHIBIT “8” – regarding Birther issue attached hereto andincorporated by reference as if set forth in full herein. Information which isPERTINENT and RELEVANT because it goes to the United States President BarackObama‘s and his Administration‘s CREDIBILITY!!! Which isCRUCIAL and of PUBLIC/WORLDWIDE interest! Newsome believes it is also IMPORTANT for the PUBLIC/WORLD to see how Lawyers/Advisors for the United States President handle such issues. Newsome‘s experience with the likes of Baker Donelson and/or Respondents in this matter is that they NEVER produce ANY evidence to REBUT that is presented. ALL Respondents ever do is provide MERE ― WORDS‖ by way of rebuttal and ATTEMPT to MISLEAD the FACTFINDER away from the TRUTH!! See for instance EXHIBIT “9” – Obama‘s Response to Birther Issue attached hereto and incorporated by reference as if set forth in full herein. JUST WORDS – Surely if his Administration was willing to provide the Page 6 of 96
  • ―Certificate of Live Birth,‖ President Obama should have a Birth Certificate. It is the BIRTH CERTIFICATE that the CITIZENS of the United States want to see. 12. It is an INSULT and EMBARASSMENT that the United States Government has allowed such firms as Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, PC (― Baker Donelson‖) to assume KEY and CRITICAL positions for purposes of CREATING a CORRUPT and TERRORIST/SUPREMACIST government to INFLICT pain and suffering on its citizens and upon Foreign Nations WITHOUT just cause to do so. Baker Donelson acknowledging their people in PROMINENT positions as: Chief of Staff to the President of the United States; United States Secretary of State; United States Senate Majority Leader; Members of the United States Senate; Members of the United States House of Representatives; Director of the Office of Foreign Assets Control for United States; Department of Treasury; Director of the Administrative Office of the United States; Chief Counsel, Acting Director, and Acting Deputy Director of United States Citizenship & Immigration Services within the United States Department of Homeland Security; Majority and Minority Staff Director of the Senate Committee on Appropriations; Member of United States President‘s Domestic Policy Council; Counselor to the Deputy Secretary for the United States Department of HHS; Chief of Staff of the Supreme Court of the United States; Administrative Assistant to the Chief Justice of the United States; Deputy under Secretary of International Trade for the United States Department of Commerce; Ambassador to Japan; Ambassador to Turkey; Ambassador to Saudi Arabia; Ambassador to the Sultanate of Oman; Governor of Tennessee; Governor of Mississippi; Deputy Governor and Chief of Staff for the Governor of Tennessee; Commissioner of Finance & Administration (Chief Operating Officer) - State of Tennessee; Special Counselor to the Governor of Virginia; United States Circuit Court of Appeals Judge; United States District Court Judges; United States Attorneys; Presidents of State and Local Bar AssociationsHowever, upon Newsome‘s going PUBLIC and WORLDWIDE, Baker Donelson hashad this information SCRUBBED from the Internet. However, NOT before Newsomecould RETRIEVE such information to sustain its DOMINENCE and CONTROL inHIGH POSITIONS – See EXHIBIT “10” attached hereto and incorporated byreference as if set forth in full herein.Baker Donelson being a law firm which has opposed and REPEATEDLY engaged incriminal/civil wrongs leveled against Newsome for purposes of destroying her life aswell as other citizens. Furthermore, it is an EMBARASSMENT and INSULT tothe United States when it has been shown to the PUBLIC and WORLD thatsuch a CORRUPT law firm as Baker Donelson, its client (LIBERTYMUTUAL INSURANCE) and those who conspire with them areREPEATEDLY giving a SHELLACKING and BEAT DOWN in lawsuitsinvolving Newsome that they have to RESORT to criminal acts – i.e.KIDNAPPING, BRIBERY, BLACKMAIL, EMBEZZLEMENT,EXTORTION, etc. in efforts of obtaining an UNDUE/UNLAWFUL/ILLEGAL advantage for itself and those they represent and/or conspirewith. Page 7 of 96
  • IMPORTANT TO NOTE Citizens may want to know why the United States is LOSING the Wars/Battlesin IRAN, IRAQ, AFGHANISTAN – Look at the law firm (i.e. Baker Donelson)Government Officials may receive counsel from. A Law Firm thatPROMOTES/INCORPORATES and SUPPORTS and IMPOSES Terrorist/Supremacist/Racist behavior on those they want to CONTROL and OPPOSES orSPEAK OUT AGAINST THEM such as Newsome. Recently a mother (Mary Tillman) of the late Football great (Pat Tillman) came out blasting the Obama Administration for retaining retired General Stanley McChrystal for Co-Chair of the ― Joining Forces‖ Program. See EXHIBIT “11” – Article regarding Mary Tillman attached hereto and incorporated by reference as if set forth in full herein. What this mother may not know, is that this is not ONLY President Barack Obama but his Lawyers/Advisors (i.e. Baker Donelson) at work. They throw out people and/or just merely move them to another post; however, the PERPETRATORS/CONSPIRATORS and CRIMINALS are ALWAYS basically the same regardless which ADMINISTRATION (Republican or Democrat) is in the White House. Baker Donelson and their COHORTS are ROOTED DEEPLY in the Government, Government Corruption, and the COVER-UP by the Government. So when CITIZENS/PUBLIC hear for instance that there is ― Change‖ in the Obama Administration, it is merely President Obama, Baker Donelson, etc. merely PROJECTING information for DECEPTIVE purposes; however, the CRIMINAL/ TERRORIST/SUPREMACIST/RACIST Regime players are still in office. See for instance EXHIBIT “12” – Change in Administration attached hereto and incorporated by reference as if set forth in full herein. However, in doing research you may find that ALL if not the MAJORITY are ASSOCIATED with Baker Donelson. Citizens may want to know why the ECONOMY of the United States is so bad –Yes, look at who is sitting in the TOP/HEAD seat – BAKER DONELSON!!Moreover, who may ACTUALLY be running the United States Government, Banks,Real Estate, etc. See EXHIBIT “13” – The Hands Behind Government Operationsattached hereto and incorporated by reference as if set forth in full herein. Now thislaw firm has SCRUBBED information from the INTERNET as it attempts to TUCK-TAIL and HIDE!! Well Newsome has News - - BUSTED. . . BUSTED. . . BUSTED.Just as such law firms as Baker Donelson and those they have CONSPIRED with havefelt at LIBERTY to have information POSTED on the INTERNET regarding Newsomeknown to be false, obtained and provided for CRIMINAL INTENT, MALICIOUSNESSand DAMAGING; Newsome has taken the LIBERTY to GO PUBLIC and EXPOSE Page 8 of 96
  • such CORRUPTION in the United States Government to the PUBLIC/WORLD/MEDIA at large. Milkovich v. Lorain Journal Co., 110 S.Ct. 2695 (1990) - Where statement of ―opinion‖ on matter of public concern reasonably implies false and defamatory facts involving private figure, plaintiff must show that false implications were made with some level of fault to support recovery. U.S.C.A. Const.Amend. 1. Paul proclaimed his innocence to . . . leaders. When is it wise to make a public response to false accusations, and when should we just let them go? In the case of Paul, the gospel would have been discredited if he had not spoken up. His circumstances made him look like a criminal, and he had no history with these leaders to expect them to assume otherwise without a proper defense. If we have been publicly slandered by credible sources, we should probably make a public response. Otherwise our own witness will be compromised. . . Jesus warned us that some people will say all manner of evil against us falsely, so we should not be surprised when it happens. But we do need to exercise wisdom when we become aware of it.15 13. United States President Abraham Lincoln issued and executed an EXECUTIVE ORDER known as the EMANCIPATION PROCLAMATION on or about January 1, 1863 – approximately 148 YEARS Ago – which ORDERED the FREEDOM of Slaves. Nevertheless, 148 years later, the United States still have the likes of Respondents and those who conspire with them DETERMINED to take Newsome and members of her class BACK into SLAVERY!!! However, as recent NEWS has shown and FOREIGN NATIONS have PROVEN, the ERA of OPPRESSION by such TERRORIST/SUPREMACIST Regimes (i.e. as the United States) is OVER!!! - - SAY, “NO MORE!!” Foreign Nations/Citizens making it KNOWN they do NOT want OUTSIDE interference from the United States – THANK GOD!!!!! How can a HYPOCRITICAL country like the United States minister to the needs of those who have been OPPRESSED, ENSLAVED and in BONDAGE, when the United States itself engage in such CRIMINAL and CORRUPTION against its citizens. FREE AT LAST, FREE AT LAST – THANK GOD ALMIGHTY WE ARE FREE AT LAST!!! 15 Upheld By God‖ - 2009-2010 Standard Lesson Commentary (King James Version) - August 29, 2010 Lesson Entitled: ― Let’s Talk It Over.‖Subtitle: ― Page 9 of 96
  • See how ELATED citizens in the Middle East are to be FREE and out ofBONDAGE, that many were willing to DIE (i.e. sacrifice their lives) rather thanremain ENSLAVED to a Terrorist/Supremacist regime. See EXHIBIT ―14 – ‖Photos of Citizens in the Middle East Celebrating their VICTORY attached heretoand incorporated by reference as if set forth in full herein. It may have only takenseeing the SUCCESS on November 2, 2010 in the United States and theencouragement from a Computer Website Executive, to take up the MANTLE andLEAD/ORGANIZE the TAKE OVER!!! 14. Great SACRIFICES have been made by people such as―Whistleblower‖ Army Spc. Bradley Manning - See EXHIBIT “15” attached heretoand incorporated by reference as if set forth in full herein - who has risked his life toREPORT and EXPOSE the CORRUPTION and CRIMINAL/CIVIL violations of theUnited States because he want the PUBLIC to know the TRUTH! COURAGEOUSacts by a citizen it appears who could NOT look the other way and allowINJUSTICES, CORRUPTION and CRIMES to continue WITHOUT making the CHINA is correct in SPEAKING out andPUBLIC AWARE!SHINING THE LIGHT on the United States and itsHYPROCRISY!! 15. Great SACRIFICES have been made by people as WIKILEAKS‘Julian Assange - See EXHIBIT “16” attached hereto and incorporated by referenceas if set forth in full herein - who has come under attacks for releasing suchCRITICAL, DAMAGING and PERTINENT information to the PUBLIC/WORLDregarding the United States CORRUPTION and COVER-UP of CRIMINAL/CIVILWRONGS. 16. There are approximately TWO United States President (i.e. AbrahamLincoln and John F. Kennedy) who were ASSASSINATED because of the likes ofRespondents, Obama Administration, etc. and others who did not want to moveFORWARD and INSISTED on keeping a RACE of people OPPRESSED and inBONDAGE! 17. PROMINATE Civil Rights Leaders (i.e. Medgar Evers, Malcolm X,Martin Luther King Jr.) were ASSASSINATED because of the likes of Respondents,Obama Administration, etc. and others who did not want to move FORWARD andINSISTED on keeping a RACE of people OPPRESSED and in BONDAGE! 18. As with Newsome, there are other African American women whohave come under attack for speaking out and/or exercising Rights secured under theConstitution and/or laws of the United States. For instance:a. In July 2010, Shirley Sherrod (― Sherrod‖) was UNLAWFULLY/ILLEGALLY removed from her job – i.e. Obama Administration requesting that she RESIGN. See EXHIBIT “17” attached hereto and incorporated by reference as if set forth in full herein. It does NOT look good to the PUBLIC/WORLD when Page 10 of 96
  • such attacks on Sherrod comes approximately 6 days AFTER Newsome‘s July 13, 2010 email entitled, ― .S. PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: The ―U Downfall/Doom of the Obama Administration – Corruption/Conspiracy/Cover- Up/Criminal Acts Made Public‖ - which was received by United States President Barack Obama and those in his Administration (i.e. like Shirley Sherrod‘s boss – Secretary of Agriculture Thomas Vilsack) – See EXHIBIT “18” – Excerpt of the July 13, 2010 email evidencing Thomas Vilsack as a RECIPIENT. Sherrod who is an ACTIVIST and a product of an HBCU (Historical Black College and University) – Albany State University. Newsome being an ACTIVIST and product of HBCU – Florida A&M University. b. In November 2010, Velma Hart was FIRED/TERMINATED/LAID OFF from her job as Chief Financial Officer for American Veterans AFTER being TELEVISED questioning President Obama stating for instance: ―Quite frankly, I’m exhausted. Exhausted of defending you, defending your administration, defending the man for change I voted for, and deeply disappointed with where we are right now. I‘ve been told that I voted for a man who said he was going to change things in a meaningful way for the middle class. I‘m one of those people and I‘m waiting, sir, I‘m waiting. I don‘t feel it yet . . .‖ See EXHIBIT “19” attached hereto and incorporated by reference as if set forth in full herein. Newsome knew that based upon the MEDIA coverage, that Hart’s employment days were NUMBERED. Sure enough ― acting TRUE to form‖ Hart may have been FIRED/TERMINATED/LAID OFF as a direct and proximate result of exercising her First Amendment Rights. c. Clearly under the Willie Lynch Practices one can see the concerns such OPPRESSORS had regarding the African-American/Black Woman. Such Oppressors thought that Malcolm X and Martin Luther King Jr. was a problem/threat so the United States Government was pleased with such Civil Rights Leaders’ assassinations. Now they are finding out that Newsome and a number of other African-American/Black women are NOT remaining silent and giving into the WILLIE LYNCH practices. 19. Newsome uses not only her own PERSONAL experiences but those of citizens such as ― Carl Brandon‖ and ― Omar Thornton‖ who were targeted and subjected to DISCRIMINATORY practices and CONSPIRACIES for purposes of forcing and driving them to commit criminal acts – See EXHIBITS “20” (Carl Brandon) and “21” (Omar Thornton)16 attached hereto and incorporated by reference 16 http://www.omaha.com/article/20100803/NEWS/708039865/1031; http://www.examiner.com/x-48240-NY-Public-Policy-Examiner~y2010m8d8-Possibility-that-Omar-Thornton-did-not-act-alone Using the following excerpts: Page 11 of 96
  • Some people don‘t want to discuss racism as being a form of violence because it would reveal that they themselves are in factextremely violent and in denial about it. Omar Thornton‘s incident has a host of websites spewing hate talk toward African-Americans. Hartford Distributors mayhave used racism and gradually managed to kill Omar Thornton mentally and emotionally before the killing spree via attrition. JessicaAnne Brocuglio, an ex-girlfriend of Omar Thornton, comes forward with character evidence: He always felt like he was being discriminated (against) because he was black[.]‖ ― Basically they wouldn’t give him payraises. He never felt like they accepted him as a hard working person.‖ This statement corroborates with what Kristi Hannah, Omar Thornton‘s fiancée before his death, had been telling theManchester Police Department about Hartford Distributors treating him like a persona non grata. Plus, a fellow co-worker who was employed with Omar Thornton at Hartford Distributors has come forward stating that hehad seen the racist taunts: ― Stuff on walls. Racist comments. I saw with my own eyes.‖ More importantly, the fellow co-worker saidMr. Thornton was hired as a truck driver; yet, he was assigned to loading boxes in the warehouse. Mr. Thornton had to fight to getbehind the wheel. The co-worker then states that Hartford Distributors are lying and the evidence is in Omar‘s cell phone. Thesestatements are serious and they are not based upon speculation. This places the co-worker in a position to be called as a key witness toracism within Hartford Distributors. Although the co-worker is no longer under the employ of Hartford Distributors, he has witnessedthese incidents first-hand. These statements make it appear as if Hartford Distributors is deliberately being obtuse to shield themselvesfrom potential liability. As Marcellus said in William Shakespeare‘s play ― Hamlet,‖ ― [s]omething is rotten in the state of Denmark.‖Thus far, the answers provided by Hartford Distributors just rubs me the wrong way. http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jBNP73m9cp2g6qFtWxCbJH6IAD3gD9HEV71O0 But underneath, Thornton seethed with a sense of racial injustice for years that culminated in a shooting rampage Tuesday inwhich the Connecticut man killed eight and wounded two others at his job at Hartford Distributors in Manchester before killing himself. "I know what pushed him over the edge was all the racial stuff that was happening at work," said his girlfriend, KristiHannah. Thornton, a black man, said as much in a chilling, four-minute 911 call. "You probably want to know the reason why I shot this place up," Thornton said in a recording released Thursday. "Thisplace is a racist place. Theyre treating me bad over here. And treat all other black employees bad over here, too. So I took it to myown hands and handled the problem. I wish I could have got more of the people." . . . One time Thornton had a confrontation with a white co-worker who used a racial slur against him, she said. Thornton changedjobs a few times because he was not getting raises, Brocuglio said. "Im sick of having to quit jobs and get another job because they cant accept me," she said he told her. . . . Brocuglios sister, Toni, said Thornton would come home and say co-workers called him racial slurs. He was also upset bycomments made by passers-by about the interracial couple, she said. "He just didnt understand why people had so much hatred in their lives," Toni Brocuglio said. . . . But Hannah said he showed her cell phone photos of racist graffiti in the bathroom at the beer company and overheard acompany official using a racial epithet in reference to him, but a union representative did not return his phone calls. Police said theyrecovered the phone and forensics experts would examine it. and Port Gibson Shooter (Carl Brandon) complained of: http://workplaceviolence.blogspot.com/2006_04_01_archive.html Apparently, the deadly shooting rampage was the culmination of years of anger and frustration over what the shooter believedto be false accusations of sexual harassment. "I dont know how you can consider me a danger. I was made a criminal through thesystem. . . http://www.topix.com/forum/city/port-gibson-ms/T0RUM1ECTB788O4HN ― would put Carl Brandon as a model from my town. I think he was one of the more intellegent and well manners persons in Ithe class. i cannot imagine this guy walking up one morning to decide that he want to destroy his life and others.‖ – Sarah Kelly(Chicago, IL) ―Some time a person try to walk away from a problem, but there are people in this world that want let them do that. Thisman had left his job and move on, but that was not good enough. They had to call his job and tell them what happened 9 years ago,and got this man fired. I hate that he let the devil take over him at the time, but I do understand . . . I hope we can learn something fromthis tragedy.‖ – Shelly Jones (Nashville, TN) ― had lost his job because someone said he had harassed them. He lost his reputation and the respect of some. When he Hetried to move on some vindictive, vicious persons went to his next job and scandalized him. He fought through every legal avenueavailable to him and found no justice.‖ – Cassandra Cook Butler (AOL) Page 12 of 96
  • as if set forth in full herein. Newsome having gone PUBLIC and WORLDWIDE in showing how the ― WILLIE LYNCH‖17 practices are implemented by the likes of Respondents for purposes of breaking down Newsome and those of her Race for purposes of keeping them OPPRESSED, ENSLAVED and in BONDAGE! Moreover, to drive CITIZENS into committing criminal acts as a direct and proximate result of CONSPIRACIES involving racially motivated violations of the laws. See EXHIBIT “22” – Willie Lynch document attached hereto and incorporated by reference as if set forth in full herein. So NO foreign citizens in the MIDDLE EAST can clearly see from documentation and EVIDENCE provided them that the “Obama Administration” is a SHAM – i.e. CORRUPT as well as the United States JUDICIAL SYSTEM. Clearly the United States can be NO role model in that it engages in CORRUPTION and the COVER-UP of discriminatory practices, human/civil rights violations, obstruction of justice, and other criminal/civil wrongs leveled against African-Americans and/or people of color. 20. It was IMPORTANT to Newsome that the PUBLIC/WORLD saw just how the First ALLEDGED African-American President (Barack Obama) ABANDONED his Pastor Jeremiah Wright when EXCERPTS of his sermons (i.e. SIMILAR practice as that used on Shirley Sherrod) were taken OUT-OF- CONTEXT to makeWright appear as CRAZY, LUNATIC, and HOSTILE. Moreover, how the WHITE candidates (i.e. Hilary Clinton – now Secretary of State and Sarah Palin who was the Vice Presidential Candidate for Republican Party) wanted to paint Wright as a TERRORIST!! IMPORTANT TO NOTE: It was a good thing that Army Spc. Bradley Manning released information regarding the United States Government‘s CORRUPTION and COVER-UP of crimes. Moreover, WikiLeaks sharing information with the WORLD – then the coming of a release of ―U.S.: 1940s STD an Article on or about October 1, 2010, entitled, Experiments ―Clearly Unethical‖ SUPPORTING the United States Government‘s role in UNETHICAL practices – i.e. as that of the Tuskegee Test which were INFLICTED on African-American men. See EXHIBIT “23” - “U.S.: 1940s STD Experiments “Clearly Unethical” attached hereto and incorporated by reference as if set forth in full herein. So while the United States was trying to portray the preacher (Jeremiah Wright) as being CRAZY, TERRORIST, etc. and taking EXCERPTS from sermons to DECEIVE the Nation – LOOK WHAT HAPPENED!!! The TRUTH is 17 ― my bag here, I have a foolproof [sic] method of controlling your black slaves. I guarantee every one of you that if Ininstalled correctly it will control the slaves for at least 300 years. . . Any member of your family or your overseer can use it. . . I use fear,distrust and envy for control. . . The Breaking Process of the African Woman Take the female and run a series of tests on her to see if she will submit to your desires willingly. TEST her in every way,because she is the most important factor for good economics. If she shows any sign of resistance in submitting completely to your will,do not hesitate to use the bull whip on her to extract the last bit of resistance out of her. Take care not to kill her, for in doing so, youspoil good economic. . . .‖ Page 13 of 96
  • surfacing and being released to the PUBLIC/WORLD as with that provided byWikiLeaks. 21. While President Obama and his Administration are attempting tomake it APPEAR that they were for the citizens of Egypt and other Foreign Nationstaking back their Government, they were NOT. President Obama and hisAdministration CLEARLY are in FEAR now because they realize that the NEWForeign Governments being established by those who have been OPPRESSED,ENSLAVED and in BONDAGE for DECADES (i.e. some over 40 Years) will NOTallow the United States to DICTATE and continue to use their POWER toTERRORIZE them as they have done to Newsome and others that SPEAK OUT andEXPOSE CORRUPTION, INJUSTICES, RACISM, DISCRIMINATION, etc.Newsome believes it is President Obama‘s time to take his OWN advice: STEP DOWN FROM OFFICE – i.e. in that he has known of the CORRUPTION and COVER-UP of crimes and civil wrongs leveled not only against Newsome but those of other citizens of the United States that were TIMELY, PROPERLY and ADEQUATELY brought to his attention; however, made a CONSCIOUS and WILLING decision to look the other way. Leaving to question as with IMPEACHED President Nixon – WHAT did President Barack Obama know and WHEN did he know it? Newsome believesit is time for President Obama and his TERRORIST/SUPREMACIST/RACIST Regime to LEAVE the White House. Therefore, Newsome has INITIATED the appropriate legal action(s) – Petition for EXTRAORDINARY WRIT with the Supreme Court of the United States for the CORRECTION and EXPOSURE of practices OUTLAWED HUNDREDS of Years Ago. 22. President Obama‘s/United States Government‘s RECENTLY comingout and speaking out as though they were for the citizens in Egypt, Tunisia, Yemen,Syria, Libya, etc. and other Foreign citizens taking ON/BACK their government is aFARCE and the Foreign Citizens/Leaders know it. ForeignLeaders/Media/Citizens may be aware of the attacks on Newsome because she hasreleased information to be shared as to the OPPRESSIVE and ENSLAVEMENTpractices of the United States Government, employers and those who have conspiredwith them to destroy her life. For instance leaders in EGYPT knew thatplacing President Obama in the White House was a FRONT and merelyDECEPTIVE acts to mislead Foreign Countries, their Leaders andCitizens: Muhammad Habib, first deputy to the general guide of the Muslim Brotherhood, said: He said ― US Administration employs all cards to serve its own interests.” the that the speech that Obama intends to deliver in Egypt is “of no value.‖ He added: ― Statements and speeches must be associated with, or preceded by Page 14 of 96
  • real change in policy on the ground, because policy is judged by deeds, not words.‖ See EXHIBIT “24”“EGYPT‘S Opposition Leaders Sound Off On - Upcoming Obama Visit” attached hereto and incorporated by reference as if set forth in full herein. As well as the following information at: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2009/06/03/v-print/69398/obama-to-lay- out-vision-of-muslim.html . . . Bin Laden said that Obamas approach to the Muslim world was no different from that of Bush18, whose policies — from the invasion of Iraq to the use of some interrogation methods widely considered torture — convinced many Muslims that the United States had launched a war on Islam. . . However, Gamal Eid, the head of the Arabic Network for Human Rights Information, said he planned to decline the invitation. The Israeli ambassador to he didnt want to be in the same Egypt also is invited, and Eid said room as a representative of what he called a "criminal" government. See EXHIBIT “25” – “Obama to Lay Out Vision of Muslim’s World’s Future” Article attached hereto and incorporated by reference. 23. This Court has retained copies of the PFEW in this action as well as the $300 Filing Fee submitted. Newsome being a paying litigant in that it appeared to her that this Court may have attempted to try and get her to come before it in the “In Forma Pauperis” (― IFP‖) status to avoid having to address the issues presented therein – i.e. in that IFP pleadings/filings do NOT appear to be subject to the same standard of review as that of PAYING litigants. In re McDonald, 489 U.S. 180, 109 S.Ct. 993 (1989) Jessie McDonald may well have abused his right to file petitions in this Court without payment of the docketing fee; the Courts order documents that fact. I do not agree, however, that he poses such a threat to the orderly administration of justice that we should embark on the unprecedented and dangerous course the Court charts today. . . . I am most concerned, however, that if, as I fear, we continue on the course we chart today, we will end by closing our doors to a litigant with a meritorious claim. It is rare, but it does happen on occasion that we grant review and even decide in favor of a litigant who previously had presented multiple unsuccessful*188 petitions on the same issue. See, e.g., Chessman v. Teets, 354 18 PUBLIC/WORLD needs to know because President Obama may be relying upon the advice of the same counsel and/oradvisors used by President Bush. Page 15 of 96
  • U.S. 156, 77 S.Ct. 1127, 1 L.Ed.2d 1253 (1957); see id., at 173-177, 77 S.Ct. at 1136-1138 (Douglas, J., dissenting). "Petitioner is no stranger to us. Since 1971, he has made 73 separate filings with the Court, not including this petition, which is his eighth so far this Term. These include 4 appeals, 33 petitions for certiorari, 99 petitions for extraordinary writs, 7 applications for stay and other injunctive relief, and 10 petitions for rehearing." Id. pp. 994- 995. "But paupers filing pro se petitions are not subject to the financial considerations - filing fees and attorneys fees - that deter other litigants from filing frivolous petitions." Id. p. 996. The Supreme Court (even after all of McDonalds filings) did not close the door to McDonald. A litigant who is identified as filing 73 separate filings in a one-year period; however, ruled, "Petitioner remains free under the present order to file in forma pauperis requests for relief other than an extraordinary writ, if he qualifies under the Courts Rule 46 and does not similarly abuse that privilege." Id. p. 996. 24. The EMERGENCY relief sought through EM/ORS and PFEW is thatwhich is required to deter and mitigate damages sustained by Newsome. Moreover,is relief that should have been sought by the appropriate Government Agency(s) towhich matters were brought; however, failed to perform ministerial duties owedNewsome in RETALIATION of her having brought legal action and/or knowledge ofher engagement in protected activities – i.e. active role in conspiracy(s) leveledagainst Newsome. 25. Newsome would be prejudiced by this action should this Court denyher EQUAL protection of the laws, EQUAL privileges and immunities of the lawsand DUE PROCESS of laws in the handling of this instant RT031711SCL to whichit supports the PFEW and EM/ORS submitted to the attention of this Court for filing.Therefore, this instant RT031711SCL is being filed to preserve the rights, argumentsand defenses asserted by Newsome under the statutes/laws governing said matters. 26. For the sake from having to reargue issues/arguments/defenses andlegal conclusions, Newsome incorporates by reference ― PFEW‖ and ― EM/ORS‖ aswell as their supporting Appendices/Exhibits submitted to the Supreme Court of theUnited States for filing. 27. Newsome believes that the facts, evidence and legal conclusionsprovided herein as well as in ― PFEW‖ and ― EM/ORS‖ will sustain that the SupremeCourt of the United States MUST take jurisdiction in this matter; CANNOT pass it bybecause it may be doubtful; MUST decide the issues/questions presented before thisCourt; and CANNOT decline the exercise of jurisdiction to which Newsome isentitled: Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123, 165, 28 S.Ct. 441, 52 L.Ed. 714 (1908) - [HN1] The United States Supreme Court will not take jurisdiction if it should not; but it is equally true that it MUST take jurisdiction if it should. The judiciary CANNOT, as the legislature may, avoid a measure because it approaches the confines of the Constitution. The court CANNOT pass it by because it is doubtful. With whatever doubts, with Page 16 of 96
  • whatever difficulties, a case may be attended, the court MUST decide it, if it is brought before it. The court has NO more right to decline the exercise of jurisdiction, which is given, than to usurp that which is not given. The one or the other would be TREASON to the Constitution. Questions may occur which the court would gladly avoid, but the court CANNOT avoid them. All the court can do is to exercise its best judgment, and conscientiously perform its duty. for to do so would be TREASON to the Constitution. Therefore, Newsome seeks this Court‘s addressing issues/questions presented it and to perform the duties owed her as well as the citizens of the United States. I. ALL WRITS ACT Newsome hopes that the Supreme Court of the United States understands that due to theEXTRAORDINARY, EXCEPTIONAL and CRITICAL/EXIGENT circumstances involved in thiscase, this instant RT031711SCL is necessary in response its March 17, 2011 letter to her. Newsomehopes that there is sufficient and adequate information contained herein as well as in EM/ORS,PFEW and their supporting Exhibits/Appendices to end concerns of what she believes may beDILATORY practices by this Court in light of the DAMAGING information contained herein whichactually has LED back to its DOORSTEPS due to its FAILURE to act when Newsome first begancoming to this Court to address such HIDEOUS criminal behavior and civil violations. Due to theextenuating factors involved and the impact such crimes/civil wrongs have had not only on Newsomebut the PUBLIC/WORLD at large, she request that her Petition for Extraordinary Writ be filed andthis Court issue the required legal process on Respondents. Newsome believes that there is sufficientRespondent information – i.e. names, addresses, etc. - available in this EM/ORS, PFEW and theirsupporting Exhibits/Appendices to move forward. Even if not, this Court has the proper legal toolsand resources to retain information to avoid any further delays in the PROSECUTION andADMINISTRATION of justice. 28 USC § 1651 Writs: (a) The Supreme Court and all courts established by Act of Congress may issue ALL writs necessary or appropriate in aid of their respective jurisdictions and agreeable to the usages and principles of law. Page 17 of 96
  • Section 376 provided: ―. . The Supreme Court. . . shall have power to issue ALL writs NOT . specifically provided for by statute, which may be NECESSARY for the exercise of their respective jurisdictions, and agreeable to the usages and principles of law.‖ Ex parte Fahey, 67 S.Ct. 1558 (1947) - United States Supreme Court has power to issue extraordinary writs . . .but such remedies should be resorted to only where appeal is clearly inadequate, and they are reserved for really extraordinary causes. Black’s Law Dictionary (8th Edition): All Writs Act – A federal statute that gives the U.S. Supreme Court and all courts established by Congress the power to issue writs in aid of their jurisdiction and in conformity with the usages and principles of law. Black’s Law Dictionary – Second Pocket Edition: Writ: A court‘s written order, in the name of a state or other competent legal authority, commanding the addressee to do or refrain from doing some specified act. Extraordinary Writ: A writ issued by a court exercising unusual or discretionary power. Original Writ: A writ commencing an action and directing the defendant to appear and answer. U.S. v. Denedo, 129 S.Ct. 2213 (U.S.,2009) - Under the All Writs Act, a courts power to issue any form of relief, extraordinary or otherwise, is contingent on that courts subject-matter jurisdiction over the case or controversy. 28 U.S.C.A. § 1651(a). Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc. v. Federal Election Comn, 125 S.Ct. 2 (U.S.,2004) - Authority granted to courts under the All Writs Act is to be used sparingly and only in the most critical and exigent circumstances. (Per Chief Justice Rehnquist, sitting as single Justice.) 28 U.S.C.A. § 1651(a). Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc. v. Federal Election Comn, 125 S.Ct. 2 (U.S.,2004) - Authority granted to courts under the All Writs Act is appropriately exercised only: (1) when necessary or appropriate in aid of courts jurisdiction; and (2) when legal rights at issue are indisputably clear. (Per Chief Justice Rehnquist, sitting as single Justice.) 28 U.S.C.A. § 1651(a). PLEASE TAKE NOTICE, that in compliance with the March 17, 2011 Letter issued by thisCourt, and in furtherance of claims addressed in EM/ORS, PFEW and subsequent filings to saidpleadings, Newsome states: 28. Her concerns as to what she believes to be this Court‘s attempt to MISLEAD her and/or MISGUIDE her into thinking that the ONLY type of Page 18 of 96
  • Extraordinary Writs this Court will address are: extraordinary writ of mandamus,mandamus/prohibition, habeas corpus – when it IS NOT!! 29. Newsome believes that a reasonable mind may conclude that theEM/ORS, PFEW and their supporting Exhibits/Appendices clearly supports andprovides this Court with ADEQUATE and SUFFICIENT information that it couldhave concluded that Newsome seeks to bring legal actions under the ― ALL WRITSACT‖ and/or applicable statutes/laws governing claims addressed in EM/ORS andPFEW. Furthermore, based upon the facts, evidence and legal conclusions, thisCourt having the DUTY and OBLIGATION to correct any/all miscarriage of justicereported through this action and/or known to it. 30. Based upon the facts, evidence and legal conclusion provided inNewsome‘s EM/ORS and PFEW, she seeks legal relief under the All Writs Act andany/all applicable statutes/laws to correct legal wrongs addressed and/or known tothis Court which may include the following (i.e. however, is not limited to saidlisting): a. Original Writ b. Writ of Conspiracy c. Writ of Course d. Writ of Detinue e. Writ of Entry f. Writ of Exigi Facias g. Writ of Formedon h. Writ of Injunction i. Writ of Mandamus j. Writ of Possession k. Writ of Praecipe l. Writ of Protection m. Writ of Recaption n. Writ of Prohibition o. Writ of Review p. Writ of Supersedeas Page 19 of 96
  • q. Writ of SUPERVISORY CONTROL r. Writ of Securitate Pacis s. Extraterritorial Writs 31. Newsome believes based upon the facts, evidence and legalconclusions, that the record evidence will sustain that CRITICAL and EXIGENTcircumstances exist to support her EM/ORS and PFEW; moreover, relief under the― Writs Act.‖ Furthermore, Newsome‘s EM/ORS and PFEW sets forth evidence Alland facts that authority under the ― Writs Act‖ is warranted to aid in this Court‘s AllJurisdiction and that the Legal Rights at ISSUE are INDISPUTABLY clear. Wisconsin Right to Life v. Federal Election Com’n, 125 S.Ct. 2, 542 U.S. 1305, 159 L.Ed.2d 805 (2004) – Authority granted to courts under the All Writs Act is to be used sparingly and only in the most CRITICAL and EXIGENT circumstances (Per Chief Justice Rehnquist). Authority granted under the All Rights Act is appropriately exercised only: (1) when necessary or appropriate to aid in court‘s jurisdiction; and (2) when legal rights at ISSUE are INDISPUTABLY clear. (Per Chief Justice Rehnquist). Id. 32. Newsome believes that the facts, evidence and legal conclusionsprovided in EM/ORS and PFEW and their supporting Exhibits/Appendices willsustain that the Writs sought as well as other applicable relief KNOWN to this Courtto correct the legal wrongs reported will sustain LEGISLATIVELY approved sourcesof PROCEDURAL INSTRUMENTS designed to achieve RATIONAL ends of lawand may be used by this Court in ISSUING the APPROPRIATE Orders to assist it inconducting FACTUAL INQUIRIES/INVESTIGATIONS into the Issues/Claims setforth in EM/ORS, PFEW and their supporting Exhibits/Appendices. Harris v. Nelson, 89 S.Ct. 1082, 394 U.S. 286, 22 L.Ed.2d 281, rehearing denied 89 S.Ct. 1623, 394 U.S. 1025, 23 L.Ed. 50 (1969) – All Writs Act serves as LEGISLATIVELY approved source of procedural instruments designed to achieve rational ends of law and may be relied on by courts in issuing order appropriate to ASSIST them in CONDUCTING FACTUAL INQUIRIES. 33. The Supreme Court of the United States have statutory authority aswell as inherent power to execute the applicable Orders that are necessary toCORRECT the legal wrongs/injustices and prevent interference/obstruction of justiceto the implementation of said Orders sought. U.S. v. Wallace, 218 F.Supp. 290 (1963) – The courts of the United States have statutory authority as well as inherent power to enter such orders as may be necessary to effectuate their lawful decrees and to prevent interference with, and obstruction to, their implementation. Page 20 of 96
  • 34. Newsome believes that the facts, evidence and legal conclusionprovided in the EM/ORS and PFEW and their supporting Exhibits/Appendices willsustain that this matter is of ― PUBLIC IMPORTANCE‖ and is ofPUBLIC/NATIONAL security in that it supports the COVER-UP of Respondents,President Barack Obama, his Administration and the United States Government ofCORRUPTION, CRIMINAL/CIVIL VIOLATIONS and TERRORIST/RACIST/SUPREMACIST practices. Furthermore, the record evidence will SUPPORT aWILLFUL disregard of legislative policy, rules of the Supreme Court of the UnitedStates, which are a DIRECT and PROXIMATE RESULT of the SERIOUSHARDSHIP and LEGAL INJUSTICES leveled against Newsome, members of herclass and/or citizens of the United States. This instant action has been brought seeking the filing of ORIGINALACTION and issuance of EXTRAORDINARY WRITS because of the extraordinarycircumstances sustained by the facts, evidence and legal conclusions provided in theEM/ORS and PFEW and their supporting Exhibits/Appendices – for purposes ofconfining the inferior courts and Administrative Agency(s) addressed, to the lawfulexercise of their prescribed jurisdiction and to compel them to exercise authorityMANDATORILY required and GOVERNED by statutes/laws. Morrow v. District of Columbia, 417 F.Ed 728, 135 U.S. App.Dc. 160 on remand 259 A.2d 592 (1969) – Among the factors to be considered in determining whether prerogative writs should issue are whether the matter is of ― PUBLIC IMPORTANCE,” whether the policy against piecemeal appeals would be frustrated, whether there has been a WILLFUL disregard of legislative policy, or of rules of the higher court, and whether refusal to issue the writ may work a serious hardship on the parties. Platt v. Minnesota Min. & Mfg. Co., 84 S.Ct. 769, 376 U.S. 240, 11 L.Ed.2d 674 (1964) – Extraordinary writs are reserved for really extraordinary causes, and then only to confine an inferior court to a lawful exercise of its prescribed jurisdiction or compel it to exercise its authority when it is duty to do so. 35. Newsome seeks any and all applicable relief KNOWN to the SupremeCourt of the United States to correct the injustices/miscarriages of justice addressedherein as well as in EM/ORS, PFEW and their supporting Exhibits/Appendices.Newsome believes that the record evidence will further support Orders entered byjudges with KNOWLEDGE that they lacked jurisdiction to act in legalaction/lawsuit. Anderson v. McLaughlin, 263 F.2d 723 (1959) – (n.2) Authority conferred by statute authorizing courts to issue ALL writs necessary is NOT confined to issuance of writs in aid of jurisdiction already acquired by appeal but extends to those cases which are within court‘s appellate jurisdiction although NO appeal has yet been perfected. 28 U.S.C.A. § 1651. Roche v. Evaporated Milk Ass’n, 319 U.S.21, 25, 63 S.Ct. 938, 941, 87 L.Ed. 1185. (n. 3) Extraordinary writs authorized to be issued by courts established by Act of Congress should be issued only under unique and compelling circumstances. Page 21 of 96
  • De Beers Consol. Mines v. U.S., 65 S.Ct. 1130, 325 U.S. 212, 89 L.Ed. 1566 (1945) - . . . petitioners applied to this court for certiorari under § 262. That section provides in part: “The Supreme Court. . . shall have power to issue all writs not specifically provided for by statute, which may be necessary for the exercise of their respective jurisdictions, and agreeable to the usages and principles of law.” . . . When Congress withholds interlocutory reviews, § 262 can, of course be availed to correct a mere error in the exercise of conceded judicial power. But when a court has no judicial power to do what it purports to do – when its action is not mere error or usurpation of power – the situation falls precisely within the allowable use of § 262. We proceed, therefore, to inquire whether the . . . Court is empowered to enter the order under attack. Also see, 80th Congress House Report No. 308. 36. Newsome believes it is of PUBLIC/WORLDWIDE interest forcitizens to see just how the courts in the United States operate and COVER-UP theCORRUPTION of the United States Government/Government Officials, BIGcorporations, BIG law firms, BIG insurance companies, SPECIAL INTERESTgroups, their lobbyists, etc. who engage in criminal/civil wrongs leveled againstcitizens such as Newsome who OPPOSE such unlawful/illegal/unethical practices asthat raised and addressed in EM/ORS, PFEW and supporting Exhibits/Appendices.In fact, it is IMPORTANT for the PUBLIC/WORLD to see just how far the UnitedStates Government, WHITE employers, their lawyers, their insurance companies, etc.will go to POST FALSE, MALICIOUS and MISLEADING information known to bereceived through criminal acts on the INTERNET for purposes of destroyingcitizens‘ (i.e. such as Newsome) lives. See EXHIBIT “26” – Google Informationregarding Newsome attached hereto and incorporated by reference as if set forth infull herein. Furthermore, how the Government and WHITE employers engage incriminal/civil wrongs against citizens (i.e. such as Newsome) to see that the ― DOORSOF THE COURTS‖ are closed to citizens who have VALID and MERITABLEclaims. Either engaging and/or condoning the criminal acts of judges/justices whoAID and ABET in the COVER-UP of CORRUPTION and CRIMINAL behavior. InNewsome case, the United States Government and White employers CONSPIRED toplace information on the INTERNET they knew to be FALSE, MALICIOUS andMISLEADING for purposes of having Newsome BLACKLISTED/BLACKBALLED and creating situation to see that Newsome is NEVER employablein EFFORTS of keeping the CRIMINAL/TERRORIST/ RACIST/SUPREMACISTpractices of WHITE employers OUT of the eyes/knowledge of CITIZENS and/orPUBLIC/WORLD. Weber v. Henderson, 275 F.Supp.2d 616 (2003) – Postal employee who filed fifteen lawsuits in nine years against United States Postal Service (USPS), stemming from his removal from full-service carrier duty, failed to raise claims in any action relating to events at issue that were neither meritless nor frivolous, and thus any further pro se pleadings submitted by employee on same basis would be PROPERLY reviewed under ALL WRITS ACT . . . Page 22 of 96
  • In re McDonald, 489 U.S. 180, 109 S.Ct. 993 (1989) Jessie McDonald may well have abused his right to file petitions in this Court without payment of the docketing fee; the Courts order documents that fact. I do not agree, however, that he poses such a threat to the orderly administration of justice that we should embark on the unprecedented and dangerous course the Court charts today. . . . I am most concerned, however, that if, as I fear, we continue on the course we chart today, we will end by closing our doors to a litigant with a meritorious claim. It is rare, but it does happen on occasion that we grant review and even decide in favor of a litigant who previously had presented multiple unsuccessful*188 petitions on the same issue. See, e.g., Chessman v. Teets, 354 U.S. 156, 77 S.Ct. 1127, 1 L.Ed.2d 1253 (1957); see id., at 173-177, 77 S.Ct. at 1136-1138 (Douglas, J., dissenting). "Petitioner is no stranger to us. Since 1971, he has made 73 separate filings with the Court, not including this petition, which is his eighth so far this Term. These include 4 appeals, 33 petitions for certiorari, 99 petitions for extraordinary writs, 7 applications for stay and other injunctive relief, and 10 petitions for rehearing." Id. pp. 994- 995. "But paupers filing pro se petitions are not subject to the financial considerations - filing fees and attorneys fees - that deter other litigants from filing frivolous petitions." Id. p. 996. The Supreme Court (even after all of McDonalds filings) did not close the door to McDonald. A litigant who is identified as filing 73 separate filings in a one-year period; however, ruled, "Petitioner remains free under the present order to file in forma pauperis requests for relief other than an extraordinary writ, if he qualifies under the Courts Rule 46 and does not similarly abuse that privilege." Id. p. 996.Newsome believes that a reasonable mind may conclude, that based upon the facts,evidenced and legal conclusions provided in EM/ORS, PFEW, and their supportingExhibits/Appendices, that the role the Respondents, United States Government,courts, WHITE employers, etc. played in the posting of PROTECTED ACTIVITIESinvolving Newsome on the INTERNET – see EXHIBIT “26” – Internet informationregarding PROTECTED ACTIVITIES involving Newsome which was posted forunlawful/illegal/unethical/malicious/willful intent attached hereto and incorporatedby reference as if set forth in full herein. 37. Newsome believes that the record will sustain that the facts, evidenceand legal conclusions set forth in EM/ORS and PFEW and their supportingExhibits/Appendices will sustain that RELIEF under the ― Writs Act‖ will sustain Allthat there ― persons/parties, though not parties to original action‖ - such as: (a) areUnited States President Barack Obama and members of his Administration, lawyers,advisors, etc.; (b) Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, PC (― BakerDonelson‖) their client (LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY); (c) andothers that may be identified through FACTUAL inquiries/INVESTIGATIONS thatengaged in CONSPIRACIES and criminal/civil wrongs leveled against Newsome –that RELY upon their DOMINENT/PROMINENT positions to INFLUENCE andFRUSTRATE the implementation of the laws, OBSTRUCT the administration ofjustice, and implementation of Orders issued by this Court. Page 23 of 96
  • Sable v. General Motors Corp., 90 F.3d 171 (1996) – Power conferred by All Writs Act extends, under appropriate circumstances, to persons who, though not parties to original action . . . are in position to frustrate implementation of court order or proper administration of justice. U.S. v. New York Tel. Co., 98 S.Ct. 364, 434 U.S. 159, 54 L.Ed.2d 376 – Power conferred by this section extends, under appropriate circumstances, to persons who though not parties to original action . . . are in position to frustrate implementation of court order or proper administration of justice and encompasses even those who have not taken any affirmative action to hinder justice. U.S. v. International Broth. Of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America, AFL-CIO, 911 F.Supp. 743 (1996) – Important feature of All Writs Act is its grant of authority to enjoin and bind nonparties to action when needed to preserve court‘s ability to reach or enforce its decision in case over which it has proper jurisdiction. Mongelli v. Mongelli, 849 F.Supp. 215 (1994) - Under All Writs Act, federal courts has authority to issue commands as necessary to effectuate orders it has previously issued and extends to persons who were not parties to original action but are in position to frustrate implementation of court order.Moreover, it is of PUBLIC IMPORTANCE for the CITIZENS/WORLD to see theTerrorist/Supremacist/Racist Regime that may be running the United StatesGovernment – Baker Donelson - and the positions it holds/held in the Governmentfor purposes of exposing how ONE law firm has been ALLOWED to infiltrate theUnited States Government for PROMOTING its RACIST/DISCRIMINATORY/SUPREMACIST ideas over their victims such as Newsome, other citizens andForeign Countries/Leaders: Chief of Staff to the President of the United States United States Secretary of State United States Senate Majority Leader Members of the United States Senate Members of the United States House of Representatives Director of the Office of Foreign Assets Control for United States Department of Treasury Director of the Administrative Office of the United States Chief Counsel, Acting Director, and Acting Deputy Director of United States Citizenship & Immigration Services within the United States Department of Homeland Security Page 24 of 96
  • Majority and Minority Staff Director of the Senate Committee on Appropriations Member of United States President‘s Domestic Policy Council Counselor to the Deputy Secretary for the United States Department of HHS Chief of Staff of the Supreme Court of the United States Administrative Assistant to the Chief Justice of the United States Deputy under Secretary of International Trade for the United States Department of Commerce Ambassador to Japan Ambassador to Turkey Ambassador to Saudi Arabia Ambassador to the Sultanate of Oman Governor of Tennessee Governor of Mississippi Deputy Governor and Chief of Staff for the Governor of Tennessee Commissioner of Finance & Administration (Chief Operating Officer) - State of Tennessee Special Counselor to the Governor of Virginia United States Circuit Court of Appeals Judge United States District Court Judges United States Attorneys Presidents of State and Local Bar AssociationsEMPHASIS ADDED in that this information is pertinent to establish - ― though notparties to original action . . .are in position to frustrate implementation of courtorder or proper administration of justice‖ - the CONSPIRACY and PATTERN-OF-CRIMINAL/CIVIL wrongs leveled against Newsome out of which this instant reliefis sought. This information was originally located at: http://www.martindale.com/Baker-Donelson-Bearman-Caldwell/law-firm- 307399.htmsee attached at EXHIBIT “10” attached hereto and incorporated by reference as ifset forth in full herein. It is such information which had been posted for severalyears. See APPENDIX “27” listing pulled approximately September 11, 2004.However, when Newsome went PUBLIC and released this information, BakerDonelson moved SWIFTLY for DAMAGE-CONTROL purposes and SCRUBBEDthis information from the Internet. It is a GOOD THING NEWSOME RETAINEDHARD COPIES so that the PUBLIC/WORLD can see COVER-UP andCOWARDLY tactics of one of the most Powerful Leaders (BarackObama)/Countries (United States) attempting to HIDE/MASK their CRIMES/CIVIL Page 25 of 96
  • WRONGS leveled against Newsome, members of her class and/or citizens of theUnited States. 38. Newsome believes that the facts, evidence and legal conclusionsprovided in EM/ORS, PFEW and their supporting Exhibits/Appendices will furthersustain that prior to bringing this matter before the Supreme Court of the UnitedStates, that Newsome first sought administrative and/or judicial relief first. To NOavail. Furthermore, that based upon the EXTRAORDINARY, EXCEPTIONAL andCRITICAL/EXIGENT circumstances involved that any such claims and/or defensessuch as ― other remedies available‖ to Newsome will further prove FRUITLESSand/or FRIVOLOUS because of the KEY/HIGH positions that Respondents hold andtheir use of said positions to INFLUENCE the outcome of legal matters. Therefore,in efforts to seek justice for the PATTERN-OF-MISCARRIAGE-OF-JUSTICE,PATTERN-OF-PRACTICE, PATTERN-OF-CRIMINAL-BEHAVIOR, etc. leveledagainst Newsome, she knew it was IMPERATIVE to submit her EM/ORS to put onDISPLAY and PRESENT/EXPOSE to the PUBLIC/WORLD how the judicialprocess works AGAINST citizens (i.e. such as Newsome) who in GOOD FAITHbring legal actions through proper legal recourse and is REJECTED andSUBJECTED to criminal/civil wrongs in RETALIATION for exercising rightssecured/guaranteed under the Constitution, Civil/Human Rights Act, and otherlaws of the United States. Harris v. Nelson, 89 S.Ct. 1082 (1969) - All Writs Act serves as legislatively approved source of procedural instruments designed to achieve rational ends of law and may be relied on by courts in issuing orders appropriate to assist them in conducting factual inquiries. 28 U.S.C.A. § 1651. All Writs Act serves as legislatively approved source of procedural instruments designed to achieve rational ends of law and may be relied on by courts in issuing orders appropriate to assist them in conducting factual inquiries. Id. 39. The facts, evidence and legal conclusions set forth in Newsome‘sEM/ORS, PFEW and their supporting Exhibits/Appendices will further sustain thatbased upon the FACTS, EVIDENCE and RULES of this Court that some of theRespondents involved in this matter may include STATES, COUNTIES,MUNICIPALITIES, etc. which warrants this Court‘s ORIGINAL jurisdiction. U.S. v. Hayman, 72 S.Ct. 263 (1952) - In determining what auxiliary writs are "agreeable to usages and principles of law within purview of judicial code provision authorizing federal court to issue all writs necessary or appropriate in aid of their respective jurisdictions and agreeable to usages and principles of law, court must look first to common law. 40. Newsome further believes that given the facts, evidence and legalconclusions presented to this Court in her EM/ORS, PFEW, their supportingExhibits/Appendices, MALICIOUS and CRIMINAL acts in placing PROTECTEDinformation on the INTERNET, and what may be DILATORY practices of this Courtin the handling of this matter thus far, that a reasonable mind may conclude that theremay have been SUFFICIENT and ADEQUATE information provided this Court Page 26 of 96
  • already to aid in its jurisdiction and handling of this matter; rather than rely upon what may be seen as dilatory tactics to AID and ABET Respondents (i.e. who based on established relationships have engaged in CONSPIRACIES and the COVER-UP of same) in the FURTHERANCE of their criminal/civil violations leveled against Newsome. As a matter of law the Supreme Court of the United States has a DUTY to correct the miscarriage of justices made known to it through any/all legal means known to it. Newsome need NOT be specific because this Court has VAST legal resources and KNOWLEDGE and/or the TOOLS TO OBTAIN SUCH KNOWLEDGE in how to handle the EXTRAORDINRY, EXCEPTION and CRITICAL/EXIGENT circumstances brought to its attention by Newsome. Adams v. U.S. ex rel. McCann, 63 S.Ct. 236 (1942) - Unless appropriately confined by Congress, a federal court may avail itself of all auxiliary writs as aids in performance of its duties, when the use of such historic aids is calculated in its sound judgment to achieve the ends of justice entrusted to it. Ex parte Milwaukee R. Co., 72 U.S. 188 (1866) - Where a case is properly in the Supreme Court . . ., the Supreme Court has a right under Judiciary Act § 14, 28 U.S.C.A. § 1651, to issue any writ which may be necessary to render their . . . jurisdiction effectual. Platt v. Minnesota Min. & Mfg. Co., 84 S.Ct. 769 (1964) - Extraordinary writs are reserved for really extraordinary causes, and then only to confine an inferior court to a lawful exercise of its prescribed jurisdiction or to compel it to exercise its authority when it is its duty to do so. 28 U.S.C.A. § 1651(a). See also 42 USC § 1986: Action for neglect to prevent.19 41. Newsome believes that there is sufficient evidence to further sustain that those among Respondents may be the United States, States, Counties, Municipalities, etc.; moreover their state/government officials in which ORDERS/JUDGMENTS deterring/prohibiting/precluding/preventing present and future unlawful/illegal/unethical behavior Riggs v. Johnson County, 73 U.S. 166 (1867) - Under section 14 of the judiciary act, authorizing the issue of ― other writs not specially provided for by statute, which may be necessary for the exercise of their respective jurisdiction,‖ . . . courts may issue a mandamus to a state officer. 42. Newsome is CONFIDENT that the facts, evidence and legal conclusions provided in her EM/ORS, PFEW and their supporting Exhibits/Appendices will sustain that this legal matter that she has brought before the Supreme Court of the United States is one of EXTRAORDINARY, EXCEPTIONAL and CRITICAL/EXIGENT circumstances. Furthermore, will sustain a CLEAR 19 Every person who, having knowledge that any of the wrongs conspired to be done, and mentioned in section 1985 of thistitle, are about to be committed, and having power to prevent or aid in preventing the commission of the same, neglects or refuses so todo, if such wrongful act be committed, shall be liable to the party injured, or his legal representatives, for all damages caused by suchwrongful act, which such person by reasonable diligence could have prevented; and such damages may be recovered in an action on thecase; and any number of persons guilty of such wrongful neglect or refusal may be joined as defendants in the action; . . . Page 27 of 96
  • ABUSE OF DISCRETION, USURPATION OF JUDICIAL POWER/AUTHORITY, LACK OF JURISDICTION in lower court actions to act, etc. Moreover, a REPEAT Pattern-Of-Such-Abuses/Usurpation because Respondents PLACED THEMSELVES ABOVE THE STATUTES and LAWS of the United States and thought they were INVINCIBLE!!! However, like the MAJORITY of career criminals (i.e. as Respondents) they commit way too many crimes and through their ARROGANCE and PRIDE they eventually commit one crime to many and slip up which eventually leads to their DEMISE as in this instant legal action. Bankers Life & Cas. Co. v. Holland, 74 S.Ct. 145(1953) - The supplementary review power conferred on courts by Congress in the All Writs Act is meant to be used only in the exceptional case where there is a clear abuse of discretion or usurpation of judicial power. 28 U.S.C.A. s 1651(a). II. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF FACT/CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Newsome believes that the facts, evidence and legal conclusions provided in the EM/ORS,PFEW and their Exhibits/Appendices will sustain that, as a matter of law, Newsome is entitled toFindings of Fact/Conclusion of Law that Courts and/or Administrative Agencies relied upon to reachtheir rulings/decisions. Furthermore, that Newsome TIMELY, PROPERLY and ADEQUATELYprovided her demands for Findings of Fact/Conclusion of Laws in WRITING and through theapplicable legal processes – to NO avail. Therefore, sustaining the relief sought through this instantlegal action before the Supreme Court of the United States. 43. Newsome is CONFIDENT that the facts, evidence and legal conclusions in the lower courts‘ and administrative agencies‘ records will SUSTAIN timely requests for Findings of Fact/Conclusion of Laws for any decisions Respondents may alleged was rendered. However, to date, Newsome has NOT received Findings of Fact/Conclusion of Laws requested. Thus, clearly SUPPORTING courts and/or administrative agencies depriving Newsome EQUAL protection of the laws, EQUAL privileges and immunities and DUE PROCESS of laws secured/guaranteed to her under the Constitution and other laws of the United States. Ben David v. Travisono, 495 F.2d 562 (1974) – Whether proceeding under this section or not, . . .court has NO license to ignore REQUIREMENT that it LET PARTIES and appellate court KNOW WHY IT ACTS, and on what FACTUAL BASIS. (n.1) . . . The latter incorporate the common sense rule that a court should let the parties and . . . court know why it acts, and on what factual basis. United States v. Merz, 376 U.S. 192, 84 S.Ct. 639, 11 L.Ed.2d 629 (1964). Whether proceeding under the All Writs Act or Page 28 of 96
  • not, . . . court has NO license to ignore that requirement. Golden State Bottling Co. v. NLRB, 414 U.S. 168, 177 n.4, 94 S.Ct. 414, 422 n.4, 38 L.Ed. 388 (1973). (n.4) Those enjoined are ENTITLED to be TOLD PRECISELY what conduct is outlawed. Schmidt v. Lessard, 414 U.S. 473, 94 S.Ct. 713, 715, 35 L.Ed.2d 661 (1974). 44. Newsome is confident that the Supreme Court of the United States‘ inquires and/or investigations into the Judicial and Administrative proceedings brought by Newsome will support that NEITHER organization will have facts, evidence or legal conclusions to REBUT Newsome‘s claims, evidence and case laws provided and there is NOTHING to sustain organizations‘ decisions. Though Newsome requested Findings of Fact/Conclusion of Laws to sustain courts‘/administrations‘ actions, ALL FAILED to produce Newsome with Findings of Fact and the Conclusion of Laws relied upon to reach their decision. American Propeller & Manufacturing Co. v. U.S., 57 S.Ct. 521 (U.S.,1937) - Findings should be examined in light of pleadings to determine scope of findings. 45. Newsome further believes that while she was laughed and mocked at for being so thorough, detailed and presented pleadings considered voluminous, she in GOOD FAITH prepared pleadings for purposes of PRESERVING the claims and issues presented for review by this Court. Furthermore, Newsome knew that Respondents‘ INABILITY to defend against her claims/legal actions were also the reason they did their best to STEER CLEAR of addressing the claims and issues raised. Nevertheless, Newsome remained focused and did not embark and engage in the RAMBLINGS of such criminals and responded with the applicable pleadings to PRESERVE and SUPPORT claims/issues raised and the TIMELY, PROPERLY and ADEQUATE submission thereof for review. Town of Hallie v. City of Eau Claire, 105 S.Ct. 1713 (1985) - Claim not raised below was bound to fail on review. III. ORIGINAL WRIT Newsome believes that the facts, evidence and legal conclusions provided in her EM/ORS,PFEW and supporting Exhibits/Appendices will further support that prior to bringing this legal actionbefore the Supreme Court of the United States, Newsome in GOOD FAITH and DILIGENTLYsought relief through the applicable process – to NO avail. Newsome‘s efforts proving to be fruitlessbased upon the CORRUPTION and Extraordinary, Exceptional and Critical/Exigent circumstancesof the KEY/BIG MONEY interest groups (i.e. United States President Barack Obama, hisAdministration, Baker Donelson, Libert Mutual, etc.) involved and their ties to POWER POSITIONS Page 29 of 96
  • (i.e. for instance President of the United States) in the United States Government. Therefore,Newsome‘s request for Original Writ is submitted in good faith to commence legal action and directthe applicable parties to appear before this Court and answer for the criminal/civil wrongs leveledagainst Newsome, members of her class and/or other citizens as the Supreme Court of the UnitedStates deems necessary to correct the legal wrongs and injustices complained of in this legal action. Original Writ: A writ commencing an action and directing the defendant to appear and answer. 46. Newsome believes that EM/ORS, PFEW and their supporting Exhibits/Appendices will be in aid of the U.S. Supreme Court‘s appellate jurisdiction – 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a) provides that the ― Supreme Court and all courts established by Act of Congress may issue all writs necessary or appropriate in aid of their respective jurisdictions and agreeable to the usages and principles of law.‖ The statute does not purport to restrict this Court to issuing writs sole in the aid of its appellate jurisdiction. This Court has chosen to limit the application of its Rule 20 to situations in which the writs are in aid to the Court‘s appellate jurisdiction, and thereby has left the matter of the extraordinary writs in aid of the Court‘s original jurisdiction unregulated so far as this Court‘s Rules are concerned. Thus, the U.S. Supreme Court has a continuing power to issue extraordinary writs in aid of either its original jurisdiction20 including as a part of jurisdiction(s) the exercise of general supervisory control over the court system – state or federal: 21 Cotler v. Inter-County Orthopedic Ass’n, 530 F.2d 536 (3rd Cir. 1976) – When court . . . exercises . . . jurisdiction in aid of its appellate jurisdiction, its authority to do so is conferred by this section, and such jurisdiction is exercised as an ORIGINAL action at law. Digital Data Systems, Inc. v. Carpenter, 387 F.2d 529, 156 U.S.P.Q. 225 (5th Cir. 1967) – Where petition was intended as an original proceeding in court . . . under this section, that is, an application for writ . . . it was necessary, to get such ORIGINAL proceeding at issue, for answer to be filed. 20 See Ex parte Hung Hang, 108 U.S. 552, 553, 2 S.Ct. 863, 27 L.Ed. 811 (1883) (Court has authority to issue writ);Pennsylvania v. Wheeling Belmont Bridge Co., 59 U.S. 421, 431, 15 L.Ed. 435 (1885) (― of congress cannot have the effect and actoperation to annul the decision of the court already rendered); Ex parte Siebold, 100 U.S. 371, 374, 25 L.Ed. 717 (1879) (― Having thisgeneral power to issue the writ, the court may issue it in the exercise of original jurisdiction where it has original jurisdiction. . . ― see );also Wagner, Original Jurisdiction of National Supreme Courts, 33 St. John‘s L. Rev. 217 (1959); cf. Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (1Cranch) 137, 147, 2 L.Ed. 60 (1803) (― term ‗appellate jurisdiction‘ is to be taken in its larger sense, and implies in its nature the Theright of superintending the inferior tribunals.‖). 21 See e.g., Connor v. Coleman, 440 U.S. 612, 624, 99 S.Ct. 1523, 59 L.Ed. 2d 619 (1979) (― When a lower. . .court refuses togive effect to, or misconstrues our mandate, its actions are controlled by this Court. . .‖); MCullough v. Cosgrave, 309 U.S. 634, 635, 60S.Ct. 703, 84 L.Ed. 992 (1940) (Court directed . . . Court judge to vacate order and retry cases expediently); Ex parte United States, 242U.S. 27, 52, 37 S.Ct. 72, 61 L.Ed. 129 (1916) (mandamus proper remedy for enforcing . . . when. . . Court that passed it has defeated itsexecution). - - Vol. 23 Moore‘s Federal Practice, § 520.02[2] (Matthew Bender 3d ed.). Page 30 of 96
  • Anderson v. McLaughlin, 263 F.2d 723 (9th Cir. 1959) – Extraordinary writs authorized to be issued by courts established by Act of Congress should be issued only under unique and compelling circumstances. Because of the EXTRAORDINARY and CRITICAL/EXIGENT circumstances involved and the growing list of Respondents may INCLUDE States – i.e. their counties, cities, municipalities and officials thereof – Newsome seeks the Supreme Court of the United States ORIGINAL jurisdiction through any/all means permissible by statutes/laws to provide it with original jurisdiction over the parties and/or subject-matter jurisdiction. IV. WRIT OF INJUNCTION Newsome believes that the facts, evidence and legal conclusions provided in her EM/ORS,PFEW and supporting Exhibits/Appendices will sustain her entitlement to the EMERGENCY reliefTIMELY, PROPERLY and ADEQUATELY brought before this Court. Moreover, that theINJUNCTIVE and other applicable relief sought in this legal action is indisputable and clearlywarranted in that Respondents, WITHOUT this Court‘s intervention, will CONTINUE to engage inCORRUPTION to COVER-UP criminal/civil wrongs leveled against Newsome as well as othermembers of her class and/or other citizens of the United States. Furthermore, that Newsome hasGOOD FAITH exhausted applicable avenues in pursuit of justice – to NO avail, thus warranting theSupreme Court of the United States‘ intervention/supervisory and original jurisdiction in this matter.There is NO plain, adequate and complete remedy at law to Newsome and the record evidence willsustain IRREPARABLE injury/harm she has sustained and will continue to subjected to unless therelief sought is granted. Writ of Injunction: A court order commanding or preventing an action. - - To get an injunction, the complainant MUST show that there is no plain, adequate, and complete remedy at law and that an IRREPARABLE injury will result unless the relief is granted. U.S. v. Oregon State Medical Soc., 72 S.Ct. 690 (1952) - Notwithstanding that injunctive relief is MANDATORY in form, such relief is to undo existing conditions, because otherwise they are likely to continue. Porter v. Lee, 66 S.Ct. 1096 (U.S.Ky.,1946) - Where a defendant with notice in an injunction proceeding contemplates the acts sought to be enjoined, the court may by MANATORY injunction restore the status quo. Page 31 of 96
  • ― a general sense, EVERY order of a court In which commands or forbids is an INJUNCTION; but in its accepted legal sense, an injunction is a JUDICIAL process or MANDATE operating in personam by which, upon certain established principles of equity, a party is required to DO or REFRAIN from doing a particular thing. An INJUNCTION has also been defined as a writ FRAMED according to CIRCUMSTANCES of the case, COMMANDING an act which the court REGARDS as ESSENTIAL TO JUSTICE, or RESTRAINING an act which it ESTEEMS CONTRARY to EQUITY and GOOD CONSCIENCE; as a remedial writ which courts issue for the purpose of ENFORCING their equity jurisdiction; and as a writ issuing by the ORDER and UNDER THE SEAL of a court of equity. 1 Howard C. Joyce, A Treatise of the Law Relating to Injunctions § 1, at 2-3 (1909)‖ Brown v. Gilmore, 122 S.Ct. 1 (U.S.,2001) - Injunctive relief under the All Writs Act is to be used sparingly and only in the most critical and exigent circumstances. (Per Chief Justice Rehnquist, as Circuit Justice). 28 U.S.C.A. § 1651(a). Injunctive relief under the All Writs Act is appropriate only if the legal rights at issue are indisputably clear. (Per Chief Justice Rehnquist, as Circuit Justice). Id. Thorogood v. Sears, Roebuck and Co., 627 F.3d 289 (7th Cir. 2010) - The All Writs Act permits courts to issue injunctive relief to protect and effectuate their own judgments, so that winning parties will not be forced to litigate a defense of collateral estoppel or seek mandamus orders in every subsequent forum in which they are harassed with the same legal claim until they cry ―Unle!.‖ 28 U.S.C.A. § 1651. c Hawaii Housing Authority v. Midkiff, 104 S.Ct. 7 (1983) - Court retains power to grant injunctive relief to party to preserve status quo during pendency of appeal, even to Supreme Court. (Per Justice Rehnquist, as Circuit Justice.) Moore v. Sims, 99 S.Ct. 2371 (1979) - Younger doctrine, which counsels federal court abstention when there is pending state proceeding, reflects strong policy against federal intervention in state judicial processes in absence of great and immediate, irreparable injury to federal plaintiff. The record evidence will further sustain that Newsome is in GREAT and IMMEDIATEdanger, irreparable injury and threats on her life and property as state and federal officials Page 32 of 96
  • CONTINUE to engage in CORRUPTION /CONSPIRACIES to commit unlawful/illegal acts againstNewsome in RETALIATION and in DISCRIMINATION of her engagement in PROTECTEDACTIVITIES. 47. Newsome has REPEATEDLY been a victim of THREATS and CRIMINAL/CIVIL wrongs being carried out against her which has threatened her life and INFRINGED upon her persons and property. 48. Newsome has REPEATEDLY been a victim of THREATS and CRIMINAL/CIVIL wrongs being carried out to deprive her of Constitutional Rights, Civil Rights, Human Rights and other rights sustained under the laws of the United States. Criminal/Unlawful/Illegal wrongs which resulted in the UNLAWFUL/ILLEGAL seizure of Newsome‘s property and possession by Respondents. 49. The record evidence will further sustain that Newsome, TIMELY, PROPERLY and ADEQUATELY presented the facts, evidence and legal conclusions through the October 9, 2010 “Emergency Motion to Stay; Emergency Motion for Enlargement of Time and Other Relief The United States Supreme Court Deems Appropriate To Correct The Legal Wrongs/Injustices Reported Herein” (―EM/ORS‖) submitted for filing with the Supreme Court of the United States – See EXHIBIT “28” – United States Postal Service (― USPS‖) Mailing Receipt/Proof of Mailing/Receipt attached hereto and incorporated by reference as if set forth in full herein. Through EM/ORS, Newsome provided this Court with the IMMEDIATE and EMERGENCY relief to which she is ENTITLED pending resolution of matter. Ohio Citizens for Responsible Energy, Inc. v. Nuclear Regulatory Com’n, 107 S.Ct. 682, 479 U.S. 1312, 93 L.Ed.2d 692 (1986) – . . . justice‘s issuance of ORIGINAL writ of injunction, pursuant to All Writs Act and Supreme Court Rule, does not simply suspend judicial alteration of status quo but grants judicial intervention that has been withheld by lower courts and, thus, demands significantly higher justification than that required for stays of final judgments or decrees of any court to enable party aggrieved to obtain writ . . . from Supreme Court. (Per Justice Scalia, Circuit Justice) 50. The MANDATORY injunctive relief Newsome seeks through this legal process further request that this Court exercise its supervisory powers and direct the conduct of the Respondents with the backing of its full coercive powers. Furthermore, to DETER further/future criminal/civil wrongs the Respondents have CONSPIRED and are DETERMINED to level against Newsome, members of her class and/or citizens that EXPOSE their engagement in the COVER-UP of CORRUPTION and criminal/civil wrongs. Nken v. Holder, 129 S.Ct. 1749 (2009) - When a court employs the extraordinary remedy of injunction, it directs the conduct of a party, and does so with the backing of its full coercive powers. Page 33 of 96
  • Rondeau v. Mosinee Paper Corp., 95 S.Ct. 2069 (1975) - Injunctive relief is historically designed to deter, not to punish. Dombrowski v. Pfister, 85 S.Ct. 1116 (1965) - Injunctive relief looks to the future. Douglas v. City of Jeannette (Pennsylvania), 63 S.Ct. 877Newsome further seeks the Supreme Court of the United States for injunctive reliefbecause of the EXTRAORDINARY, EXCEPTIONAL and CRITICAL/EXIGENTcircumstances warrant it. Without this Court‘s intervention to supervise and directthe implementation/enforcement injunctions, Respondents will CONTINUE on aCRIMINAL and DESTRUCTIVE course to cause Newsome - members of her class,and/or citizens who oppose such injustices and EXPOSE the government‘s role inCORRUPTION and the COVER-UP of same - IRREPARABLE injury/harm forpurposes of Terrorizing, Oppressing, Harassing, Threatening, Discriminating,Obstructing Justice, Depriving citizens of Protected Rights, Blackmail, Coercion,Intimidation, etc. 51. Newsome believes that the facts, evidence and legal conclusionsprovided in EM/ORS, PFEW and their supporting Exhibits/Appendices will sustainthat while the relief sought under the ALL WRITS ACT provide remedies that areDRASTIC and EXTRAORDINARY, she believes a reasonable mind (given the factsand circumstances underlying this case) may conclude that this legal action involvesEXCEPTIONAL/EXTRAORDINARY as well as CRITICAL/EXIGENTcircumstances governing and sustain the use of remedies/relief sought. Banker Life & Cas. Co. v. Holland, 74 S.Ct. 145, 346 U.S. 379, 98 L.Ed. 106 (1953) – United States Supreme Court has power, in a proper case, to issue writs of mandamus, prohibition, injunction against judges, but such remedies are DRASTIC and EXTRAORDINARY, and as such are reserved for really EXTRAORDINARY cases, and should be RESORTED to ONLY where appeal is a clearly INADEQUATE remedy. 52. Newsome believes that the facts, evidence and legal conclusionsprovided in EM/ORS, PFEW and their supporting Exhibits/Appendices will sustainshe is entitled to the injunctive relief sought depends on the equitable principles,nature of rights to which she is entitled that have been invaded and the adequacy ofthe remedy at law. Moreover, the Supreme Court of the United States interventionand exercise of SUPERVISORY powers to correct any/all MISCARRIAGES ofjustices and LEGAL WRONGS made known to it. Sterling v. Constantin, 53 S.Ct. 190 (1932) - Whether injured party is entitled to injunction depends on equitable principles, on nature of right invaded, and adequacy of remedy at law. 53. The EM/ORS, PFEW and supporting Exhibits/Appendices willfurther sustain that the INJUNCTIVE relief sought to prevent future violations ofRespondents leveled against Newsome, members of her class and citizens that engagein EXPOSING the COVER-UP and CORRUPTION in the United States Governmentand those it conspire with to deprive citizens of EQUAL protection of the laws, Page 34 of 96
  • EQUAL privileges and immunities and DUE PROCESS of laws. Evidence furthersustaining that the relief sought by Newsome is needed and MANDATORY as amatter of statutes/laws governing said matters. U.S. v. W. T. Grant Co., 73 S.Ct. 894 (1953) - Purpose of injunction is to prevent future violations and it can be utilized even without a showing of past wrongs, but moving party must satisfy court that relief is needed.It is a good thing Newsome provided the Supreme Court of the United States withher EM/ORS as well as the lower courts‘ and federal agencies‘ records will sustaina PATTERN-OF-PRACTICE, PATTERN-OF-ABUSE, PATTERN-OF-CRIMINAL/CIVIL violations, etc. leveled against Newsome to establish theinjunctive relief and other applicable relief requested as a matter of law to correctthe injustices complained of. 54. The facts, evidence and legal conclusion provided in EM/ORS,PFEW and their supporting Exhibits/Appendices will sustain that a REAL THREATof FUTURE violation or CONTEMPORARY violation of nature is INEVITABLE –i.e. as established by the PATTERN-OF-PRACTICE of Respondents – and MOSTLIKELY than not will CONTINUE/RECUR. Furthermore, it matters NOT about thecalendar of years (i.e. CRIMINAL stalking of Newsome and CONSPIRACIESleveled against her spanning for decade(s)) that has lapsed, JUSTICE is LONGOVERDUE and it is time to get CRIMINAL Respondents off the street, out of thecourts and out of the government. The MANDATORY injunctive relief sought isneeded to UNDUE existing conditions as well as FUTURE acts that Respondentshave contemplated and/or presently CONSPIRING to carry out against Newsome andother citizens. U.S. v. Oregon State Medical Soc., 72 S.Ct. 690 (1952) - Real threat of future violation or contemporary violation of nature likely to continue or recur is sufficient to make cause of action for relief by injunction, and once established, it adds nothing that calendar of years gone by might have been filled with transgressions. Notwithstanding that injunctive relief is mandatory in form, such relief is to undo existing conditions, because otherwise they are likely to continue. Id. 55. The facts, evidence and legal conclusions provided in EM/ORS,PFEW and supporting Exhibits/Appendices, as well as lower courts and governmentagencies‘ records will sustain that Newsome filed/submitted the applicablecomplaints to PRESERVE her claims and/or issues raised. To no avail. Therefore,resulting in the bringing of this instant action before the Supreme Court of the UnitedStates due to the EXTRAORDINRY, EXCEPTIONAL and CRITICAL/EXIGENTcircumstances involved; moreover, the PERPETRATORS (i.e. States/Counties/Cities, Judges/Justices, Attorneys, President of the United States and hisAdministration, Law Firms, Insurance Companies, etc.). Moreover, calling for thisCourt‘s intervention and the restoration of cases as permitted by the statutes/lawsgoverning said matters. Page 35 of 96
  • Porter v. Lee, 66 S.Ct. 1096 (U.S.Ky.,1946) - Where a defendant with notice in an injunction proceeding contemplates the acts sought to be enjoined, the court may by mandatory injunction restore the status quo. 56. MANDATORY injunctive relief is sought to remedy the legal injustices leveled against Newsome, members of her class and/or citizens who oppose the COVER-UP of CORRUPTION in the United States Government and other criminal/civil wrongs. Morrison v. Work, 45 S.Ct. 149 (1925) - Mandatory injunction issued to remedy and not to promote wrong. 57. Newsome believes that because of the EXTRAORDINARY circumstances and PERPETRATORS/CONSPIRATORS involved, AFFIRMATIVE and DECISIVE action is needed by the Supreme Court of the United States – demanding the exercise of its full powers to deter and prevent the criminal/civil wrongs reported - 42 USC § 1986: Action for neglect to prevent22 Ex parte Lennon, 17 S.Ct. 658 (U.S.Ohio,1897) - A court of equity is not limited to the restraint of threatened action, but may require affirmative action where the circumstances demand it. 58. Because of the EXTRAORDINARY, EXCEPTIONAL and CRITICAL/EXIGENT circumstances and the ties/key relationships Respondents have to KEY/PROMINENT government agencies/officials, Newsome (as in this instant matter before this Court) requested to be advised of any ― CONFLICT OF INTEREST.‖ Therefore, the MANDATORY injunctive relief is sought to direct and supervise the enforcement and adherence to order(s) issued by the Supreme Court of the United States. GTE Sylvania, Inc. v. Consumers Union of U. S., Inc., 100 S.Ct. 1194 (1980) - Persons subject to an injunctive order issued by a court with jurisdiction are expected to obey that decree until it is modified or reversed, even if they have proper grounds to object to the order. 59. Newsome believes that the facts, evidence and legal conclusions set forth in EM/ORS, PFEW and supporting Exhibits/Appendices will sustain that she took the necessary steps/precautions to assure that TOP/KEY Government Department Heads/Judges/Justices, etc. were TIMELY, PROPERLY and ADEQUATELY advised as to what crimes/civil wrongs were being committed and/or PLACED on NOTICE of the CONSPIRACY(S) they were engaged in. To no avail. ALL proceeded with KNOWLEDGE to fulfill their ROLES in conspiracies leveled against Newsome. Moreover, were aware of the CRIMINAL/CIVIL wrongs being carried out UNDER THEIR WATCH. 22 Every person who, having knowledge that any of the wrongs conspired to be done, and mentioned in section 1985 of thistitle, are about to be committed, and having power to prevent or aid in preventing the commission of the same, neglects or refuses so todo, if such wrongful act be committed, shall be liable to the party injured, or his legal representatives, for all damages caused by suchwrongful act, which such person by reasonable diligence could have prevented; and such damages may be recovered in an action on thecase; and any number of persons guilty of such wrongful neglect or refusal may be joined as defendants in the action; . . . Page 36 of 96
  • Jones v. Securities and Exchange Commission, 56 S.Ct. 654 (1936) - Where suit is brought to enjoin certain acts or activities, of which suit defendant has notice, hands of defendant are effectually tied pending hearing and determination, notwithstanding no restraining order or preliminary injunction be issued. After defendant has been notified of pendency of suit seeking injunction against him, notwithstanding temporary injunction is not granted, he acts at his peril and subject to power of court to restore status, wholly irrespective of merits as they may be ultimately decided. Id. The facts and evidence will sustain just how PERSISTENT and DETERMINED Respondents were in engaging in criminal/civil wrongs for purposes of Destroying evidence, Terrorizing, Oppressing, Harassing, Threatening, Discriminating, Obstructing Justice, Depriving citizens of Protected Rights, Blackmail, Coercion, Intimidation, etc. Respondents engaging in criminal/civil wrongs with KNOWLEDGE their ― hands were tied‖ because Newsome had advised of appealing and/or advised of taking matter out of their hands through the applicable and/or appropriate legal process. Even in the lawsuit that initiated the bringing of this matter before the Supreme Court of the United States, the facts, evidence and legal conclusions will sustain how far Respondents went even with KNOWLEDGE and NOTIFICATION that Newsome would take to the High Court. In fact, going as far as to ENGAGE the MAJORITY of the Ohio Supreme Court Justices to FULFILL their ROLES in CONSPIRACY and engage in COVER-UP of CORRUPTION and criminal/civil wrongs leveled against Newsome. Upon Newsome‘s RESEARCH and INVESTIGATION into the handling of her matters, she discovered that that MAJORITY of the Supreme Court of OHIO appears to be PURCHASED by KEY/HIGH POWER MONEY INTEREST GROUPS – i.e. with ties to the President of the United States, Judges/Justices, United States Senators, United States Representatives, Judiciary, etc. – such as Baker Donelson, their clients (i.e. LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE), etc. V. WRIT OF CONSPIRACY23 Newsome believes that the facts, evidence and legal conclusions contained herein will sustaina PATTERN-OF-PRACTICE in the CONSPIRACIES leveled against Newsome by Respondents andtheir Conspirators/Co-Conspirators. Furthermore, that this Court was TIMELY, PROPERLY andADEQUATELY placed on notice of the CRIMINAL/CIVIL wrongs of judges assigned mattersinvolving Newsome. To NO avail. This Court also being one that engaged in CONSPIRACIES 23 Respondent (conspirator) becomes the agent of the other conspirator (s), and any act done by one of the combination isregarded under the law as the act of both or all. In other words, what one does, if there is this combination, becomes the act of both orall of them, no matter which individual may have done it. This is true as to each member of the conspiracy, even those whoseinvolvement was limited to a minor role in the unlawful transaction, and it makes no difference whether or not such individual sharedin the profits of the actions. (Am. Jur. Pleading and Practice Forms, Conspiracy § 9). Page 37 of 96
  • leveled against Newsome in the posting of false, misleading and malicious information on theINTERNET for purposes of destroying Newsome‘s life, depriving her EQUAL protection of thelaws, EQUAL privileges and immunities and DUE PROCESS of laws. In fact, anINVESTIGATION will sustain that approximately ALL (if not the MAJORITY) of judges/justicesassigned legal matters involving Newsome have ALL engaged in CONSPIRACIES to compromiselawsuits to provide opposing parties and their counsel with undue/unlawful/illegal advantages forpurposes of subjecting Newsome to criminal/civil wrongs in RETALIATION for her engagement inPROTECTED ACTIVITIES. For instance: a) Judge G. Thomas Porteous (i.e. in Louisiana matter) was just IMPEACHED and REMOVED from office on or about December 8, 2010. See EXHIBIT “40” – News Articles on Judge Porteous attached hereto and incorporated by reference as if set forth in full herein. Newsome having concerns about criminal/civil violations rendered by Judge Porteous and/or court and, therefore, filed a Complaint with the United States Department of Justice. See Exhibit “34” of EM/ORS herein incorporated by reference as if set forth in full herein. In this instant action, Newsome is seeking the Supreme Court of the United States‘ intervention, supervision and applicable powers to correct injustices/miscarriages of justice. b) Judge Bobby DeLaughter (i.e. in one of the Mississippi matters) was INDICTED and pled ― GUILTY‖ to criminal charges. See EXHIBIT “41” – News Articles on Judge DeLaughter attached hereto and incorporated by reference as if set forth in full herein. Newsome having concerns about criminal/civil violations rendered by Judge DeLaughter and/or court and, therefore, notified the appropriate Government agency of her concerns. To NO avail. In this instant action, Newsome is seeking the Supreme Court of the United States‘ intervention, supervision and applicable powers to correct injustices/miscarriages of justice. c) Judge Tom S. Lee (i.e. in two of the Mississippi matters) KNEW there was a ―Conflict of Interest‖ however, remained in the lawsuits for purposes of providing opposing parties/Respondents with an undue/unlawful/illegal advantage. This is also the matter where the Clerk of Courts (i.e. J.T. Noblin) may have had a ― Conflict of Interest‖ because his son was once employed with some of the Defendants‘ lawyers‘ firm. These are also the lawsuits in which the records may have been COMPROMISED for purposes of providing opposing parties/Respondents with and undue/unlawful/illegal advantage. Moreover, for purposes of influencing the outcome of lawsuit. Newsome requesting this court to advise whether there were any ― Conflict of Interest.‖ Moreover, record evidence will support Newsome‘s inquiries to determine Page 38 of 96
  • whether RECUSAL would be necessary. Newsome having concerns about criminal/civil violations rendered by Judge Lee, Magistrate Judge(s) and/or court and, therefore, filed a Complaint with the United States Congress/Legislature. See Exhibit “38” of EM/ORS herein incorporated by reference as if set forth in full herein. In this instant action, Newsome is seeking the Supreme Court of the United States‘ intervention, supervision and applicable powers to correct injustices/miscarriages of justice.d) Judge John Andrew West (i.e. in the Ohio matter) out of which this instant legal action has been brought has been requested to RECUSE himself from lawsuit; however, has REFUSED to do so. Newsome believes that Judge West has also engaged in criminal acts out of which resulted in her having to file a Criminal Complaint with the United States Department of Justice. See Exhibit “30” of EM/ORS herein incorporated by reference as if set forth in full herein. In this instant action, Newsome is seeking the Supreme Court of the United States‘ intervention, supervision and applicable powers to correct injustices/miscarriages of justice.e) Supreme Court of Ohio Justices out of which this instant legal action has been brought, according to research and record evidence, may have had a ― Conflict of Interest;‖ however, KNOWINGLY, WILLINGLY and with MALICIOUS intent withheld this information from Newsome and FAILED to recuse themselves although TIMELY, PROPERLY and ADEQUATELY notified of Newsome‘s concerns. Furthermore, Justices remained in the case and according to the record evidence engaged in criminal acts. As a direct and proximate result of the criminal/civil violations leveled against Newsome by the Supreme Court of Ohio Justices, she moved forward and filed a Criminal Complaint with the United States Department of Justice. See Exhibit “16” of EM/ORS herein incorporated by reference as if set forth in full herein. Said Justices remained in the case with KNOWLEDGE that they receive HUGH/SUBSTANIAL financial contributions from opposing party(s) and, therefore, to provide said contributor(s) with an undue/unlawful/illegal advantage in lawsuit, Justices engaged in criminal behavior for purposes of obstructing justice and other known criminal reasons. In this instant action, Newsome is seeking the Supreme Court of the United States‘ intervention, supervision and applicable powers to correct injustices/miscarriages of justice. Writ of Conspiracy: A writ against one who conspired to injure the plaintiff. . . Salinas v. U.S., 118 S.Ct. 469 (1997) - Conspiracy may exist and be punished is distinct evil, whether or not substantive crime ensues, for conspiracy dangerous to public, and so punishable in itself. It is possible for person to conspire for commission of crime by third person. U.S. v. Schaffer, 586 F.3d 414 (C.A.6.Ohio,2009) - Because the illegality of an agreement to commit an unlawful act, as the basis of a conspiracy charge, does Page 39 of 96
  • not depend upon the achievement of its ends, it is irrelevant that it may be objectively impossible for the conspirators to commit the substantive offense; indeed, it is the mutual understanding or agreement itself that is criminal, and whether the object of the scheme actually is, as the parties believe it to be, unlawful is irrelevant. 60. The facts, evidence and legal conclusions provided in EM/ORS,PFEW and supporting Exhibits/Appendices further sustain Respondents‘criminal/civil wrongs leveled against Newsome is racially motivated, done forpurposes of TERRORIST/SUPREMACIST/RACIST intent to keep her, and membersof her class in fear of their lives, enslaved, oppressed, in poverty and deprived ofEQUAL protection of the laws, EQUAL privileges and immunities and DUEPROCESS of laws, life, liberties and pursuit of happiness. Griffin v. Breckenridge, 91 S.Ct. 1790 (U.S.Miss.,1971) - Ku Klux Klan Act, affording civil remedy for conspiracy to deprive person or class of persons of equal protection of laws or equal privileges and immunities, covers private conspiracies. Ku Klux Klan Act language requiring intent to deprive of equal protection or equal privileges and immunities means that there must be some racial, or perhaps otherwise class-based, invidiously discriminatory animus behind conspirators action; conspiracy must aim at deprivation of equal enjoyment of rights secured by law to all. Id. That Ku Klux Klan Act reaches private conspiracies to deprive others of legal rights did not render it unconstitutional. Id. Ku Klux Klan Act is constitutional under Congress powers under Thirteenth Amendment to create statutory cause of action for Negro citizens who have been victims of conspiratorial, racially discriminatory private action aimed at depriving them of basic rights that law secures to all free men. Id. 61. Newsome believes that the facts and evidence will sustain, while it isNOT necessary to find an express agreement, that Respondents engaged in a concertof action contemplated to engage in criminal/civil wrongs leveled against Newsomeand deprive her rights secured/guaranteed under the Constitution and other laws ofthe United States. Each Respondent conforming to the arrangement. U.S. v. Paramount Pictures, 68 S.Ct. 915 (1948) - It is not necessary to find an express agreement in order to find a conspiracy, but it is sufficient that a concert of action is contemplated and that defendants conform to the arrangement. Interstate Circuit v. U.S., 59 S.Ct. 467 (1939) - An unlawful ―conspiracy‖ may be formed without simultaneous action or agreement on the part of the conspirators. 62. A PATTERN-OF-PRACTICE of Respondents/Conspirators leveledagainst Newsome as well as the NEXUS establishing connection and associationbeing in RETALIATION of Newsome‘s engagement in protected activities. Duplex Printing Press Co. v. Deering, 41 S.Ct. 172 (1921) - An unlawful ― conspiracy‖ is a combination between two or more persons Page 40 of 96
  • to do an unlawful or criminal act, or to do a lawful act by criminal or unlawful means. 63. Newsome through this instant legal action brought before this Court,believes that the facts, evidence and legal conclusions provided in EM/ORS, PFEWand their supporting Exhibits/Appendices will further sustain that theCONSPIRACIES leveled against Newsome by Respondents exists today and willcontinue without the intervention of the Supreme Court of the United States. U.S. v. Jimenez Recio, 123 S.Ct. 819 (U.S.,2003) - Conspiracy does not automatically terminate simply because the government, unbeknownst to some of the conspirators, has defeated the conspiracys object. 64. Newsome believes that the facts, evidence and legal conclusionsprovided in EM/ORS, PFEW and their supporting Exhibits/Appendices will furthersustain that it is of PUBLIC/WORLDWIDE interest to EXPOSE the CORRUPTIONand COVER-UP in the United States Government and its officials as well as WHITEemployers/businesses for GOOD FAITH purposes of protecting SOCIETY fromfurther dangers and criminal/civil wrongs of Respondents. Moreover, providingCRITICAL/CRUCIAL information to EXPOSE just how ELABORATE,ORGANIZED and DEEP-ROOTED Respondents are in Government positions toprovide them with the ability INFLUENCE the role the United StatesGovernment/Government Officials have played in CONSPIRACIES leveled not onlyagainst Newsome, but against other CITIZENS/FOREIGN COUNTRIES and theirLeaders/Citizens for purposes of destroying their lives. Furthermore, the record hasSUFFICIENT and SUSTAINABLE evidence that Respondents engaged inconspiracies which THREATENS and CONTINUES to threaten the social order.Thus, warranting the relief writs and criminal sanctions permissible by law of andagainst Respondents. U. S. v. Feola, 95 S.Ct. 1255 (1975) -Two independent values served by the law of conspiracy are the protection of society from the dangers of concerted criminal activity and the identification of an agreement to engage in crime as sufficiently threatening to the social order to warrant its being the subject of criminal sanctions regardless of whether the crime agreed upon is actually committed. 18 U.S.C.A. § 371. 65. Newsome believes that the laws of the United States are clear aboutthe NEED TO GO PUBLIC in the EXPOSURE of the CORRUPTION and COVER-UP by Respondents, United States Government/Government Officials because of theTERRORIST/SUPREMACIST/RACIST behavior that can be sustained by the facts,evidence and legal conclusions presented in the EM/ORS, PFEW and theirsupporting Exhibits/Appendices. Newsome seeing just how WICKED/EVIL theRespondents could be and the METHODS/MEANS relied upon to keep her andmembers of her class in FEAR of their lives, BONDAGE/SLAVERY/OPPRESSION,etc. knew that she would have to go to battle against a GIANT like the United Statesand the Respondents that engaged in CONSPIRACIES leveled against her, membersof her class, and foreign countries. Page 41 of 96
  • Salinas v. U.S., 118 S.Ct. 469 (1997) - Conspiracy may exist and be punished whether or is distinct evil, dangerous not substantive crime ensues, for conspiracy to public, and so punishable in itself. It is possible for person to conspire for commission of crime by third person. IMPORTANT TO NOTE It is of PUBLIC/WORLDWIDE interest to let it be known the role the United States Government may have played in the KATRINA disaster in New Orleans, Louisiana. This was a case where the Government KNEW and/or should have KNOWN of the breach/weakness in the Levees there. Clearly they KNEW that a direct hit of a Hurricane – which this was not – the Levees WOULD NOT hold up. Rather than repair these Levees, the Government allowed them to remain in bad condition. Why? Because BIG MONEY/SPECIAL INTEREST Groups were interested in the African-American/Blacks property and these citizens REFUSED to give up their lands to them. Therefore, the Government resorted to CRIMINAL behavior for in hopes of such DISASTER to force this race of people out of their homes and property. See for instance EXHIBIT “29” – Hurricane Katrina photos attached hereto and incorporated by reference as if set forth in full herein. This also answers the question that many CITIZENS and/or the PUBLIC/WORLD wanted to know – Why was the RESPONSE from the White House so slow? New Orleans is a one of the MAJOR cities that Baker Donelson has a BIG LAW FIRM SET UP IN!!! Ching. . . Ching. . . Ching – BIG MONEY/SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS AT WORK!! Information which is PERTINENT and RELEVANT as it goes to PATTERN-OF-CORRUPTION and PATTERN-OF- GOVERNMENT COVER-UPS, etc.Therefore, in OCTOBER 2010, Newsome prepared and distributed under rightssecured under the Constitution and laws of the United States her 97-Page PowerPointPresentation entitled, “Clean Out Congress 2010 – Americans Take BACK YourCountry/Government – Come November 2010 Vote OUT The Incumbents CareerPoliticians” – See EXHIBIT “6” attached hereto and incorporated by reference as ifset forth in full herein. With a TERRORIST/SUPREMACIST/RACIST Regime likethe President Obama, his Administration and Respondents, it was time to takePRECISIVE ACTION and go PUBLIC with the CONSPIRACIES not only leveledagainst Newsome, but members of her class and Foreign MIDDLE EASTCOUNTRIES/THEIR LEADERS/THEIR CITIZENS. Scales v. U.S., 81 S.Ct. 1469 (1961) - Legal concepts of conspiracy and complicity manifest general principle that society, having power to punish dangerous behavior, cannot be powerless against those who work to bring about that behavior. Page 42 of 96
  • While Newsome may not understood the responses received – i.e. for instance seeEXHIBIT “30” – Example of E-mail Responses attached hereto and incorporated asif set forth in full herein – what was important to her was knowing that herMESSAGE/INFORMATION may have reached FOREIGN COUNTRIES and theircitizens abroad. 66. Newsome believes that the facts, evidence and legal conclusionsprovided in EM/ORS, PFEW and their supporting Exhibits/Appendices will sustainthat the gist of Respondents‘ CONSPIRACIES was an agreement to commitcriminal/civil offenses against Newsome, members of her class and ForeignCountries/Leaders/Citizens for purposes of keeping them in FEAR/SLAVERY/BONDAGE and OPPRESSED. Moreover, CONSPIRING for purposes of takingtheir property and possessions for FILTHY LUCRE/GAIN! United States v. Falcone, 61 S.Ct. 204 (1940) - The gist of a ―conspiracy‖ is an agreement among conspirators to commit an offense, attended by an act of one or more of the conspirators to effect the object of the conspiracy. Cr.Code, § 37, 18 U.S.C.A. § 88.See for instance EXHIBITS “31” and “32” respectively – United States IndianReservations and the MODERN day African-American/Black Plantations/Reservations. Isolating such groups and subjecting them to the ― WILLIE LYNCH‖practices for purposes of getting such class of people to resort to criminal behavior;moreover, TARGETING the African-American/Black male for purposes ofdestroying the family structure and COVERING UP the INSECURITIES that theWhite male has had towards the African-American/Black male – i.e. as in slavery,removing the black male, then leaving the Big House to come down and rape theblack women, etc. In today‘s society, it is a matter of locking the African-American/Black male in PRISON for purposes of breaking him down and destroyinga culture/race of people. See EXHIBIT “33” – Prisoner Article attached hereto andincorporated by reference as if set forth in full herein. 67. Newsome believes that based upon the EXTRAORDINARY,EXCEPTIONAL and CRITICAL/EXIGENT circumstances addressed in this legalaction, the record evidence may further sustain that Respondents engaged in theCOVER-UP of CONSPIRACIES which involved criminal acts as that set out in theEM/ORS, PFEW and their supporting Exhibits/Appendices. Pettibone v. U.S., 13 S.Ct. 542 (1893) - A conspiracy is a combination of two or more persons by concerted action to accomplish a criminal or unlawful purpose, or some purpose not in itself criminal, by criminal or unlawful means.Then, for instance, in an effort to COVER-UP crimes, Respondents CREATED FALSECRIMINAL CHARGES against Newsome alleging for instance: (a) Resisting Arrest; and(b) Disorderly Conduct – Failure to Comply with Law Enforcement. See EXHIBIT “34” –Criminal Charges filed against Newsome which were dismissed See EXHIBIT “35”. Page 43 of 96
  • attached hereto and incorporated by reference as if set forth in full herein. Criminal Charges/Malicious Prosecution: i) Which lower court dismissed. ii) Which engaged the role of government officials (i.e. judge(s), constable(s), officers of the court, etc.). iii) Which is a WELL-ESTABLISHED manner of practice used by Respondents, Government/Government Officials against Newsome and/or members of her class for purposes of Terrorizing, Oppressing, Harassing, Threatening, Discriminating, Obstructing Justice, Depriving citizens of Protected Rights, Blackmail, Coercion, Intimidation, etc. – i.e. implemented to BREAK African-Americans/Blacks down. iv) Which is a part of a WELL-ESTABLISHED manner used by a CORRUPT Government and its Officials and those who conspire with it – in fact, in the matter involving President Barack Obama‘s former Professor (Louis Gates), the Police Officer (Crowley) in that matter ALSO COMPROMISED and filed a FALSE report to COVER-UP his criminal behavior. All that resulted of that appears to be a meeting at the White House with President Obama to have BEER!! VI. WRIT OF COURSE Newsome hereby request the Supreme Court of the United States‘ intervention and executionof the applicable Writ(s) as a matter of course or granted as a matter of right to correct and deter theinjustices/miscarriage of justice complained of. The facts, evidence and legal conclusions providedin EM/ORS, PFEW and their supporting Exhibits/Appendices will sustain the timely filing ofapplicable complaints/pleadings/documents to PRESERVE rights of Newsome secured/guaranteedunder the Constitution and other laws of the United States governing said matters. Writ of Course: A writ issued as a matter of course or granted as a matter of right. 68. Newsome believes that there is sufficient facts, evidence and legal conclusions to sustain the Supreme Court of the United States – being a court of equity – knows and/or should know that it has the power to issue the applicable writs of assistance or possession for the purposes of enforcing its Orders and Decrees to correct the legal wrongs and miscarriage of justices addressed herein and that of EM/ORS, PFEW and their supporting Exhibits/Appendices. Page 44 of 96
  • Gormley v. Clark, 10 S.Ct. 554 (1890) - A court of equity has power to issue writs of assistance or possession for the purpose of enforcing its orders and decrees. 69. Newsome believes that, as with the bringing of this instant legal action, there is SUFFICIENT evidence in the lower courts‘ records to SUSTAIN a PATTERN-OF-ABUSE and PATTERN-OF-JUDICIAL USURPATION OF POWER wherein courts knew and/or should have known that they were CLEARLY acting WITHOUT jurisdiction. Moreover, that Newsome TIMELY and PROPERLY filed the adequate pleadings and/or NOTICES advising of lack of JURISDICTION. To NO avail. Lower courts acted to their own peril/destruction/demise. While Respondents wanted to MOCK Newsome for the length of her pleadings, the evidence will sustain that such attacks were done with MALICIOUS intent and in efforts to OBSTRUCTING the administration of justice. Newsome PRESERVING her rights in a TIMELY manner by filing the applicable pleadings. In re Chicago, R.I. & P. Ry. Co., 41 S.Ct. 288 (U.S.Ohio,1921) - Prohibition will issue if the lower court is clearly without jurisdiction over petitioner, who, at the outset, objected to the jurisdiction, had preserved his rights by appropriate procedure, and had no other remedy. . . VII. WRIT OF DETINUE24 Newsome hereby request the Supreme Court of the United States‘ intervention and executionof the applicable Writ(s) to recover personal property wrongfully taken from her by Respondents andto correct and deter the injustices/miscarriage of justice complained of. The facts, evidence and legalconclusions provided in EM/ORS, PFEW and their supporting Exhibits/Appendices will sustain thetimely filing of applicable complaints/pleadings/documents to PRESERVE rights of Newsomesecured/guaranteed under the Constitution and other laws of the United States governing saidmatters. Writ of Detinue: A common law action to recover personal property wrongfully taken by another. ― claim in detinue lies at the suit of a person A who has an immediate right to possession of the 24 Defendant (conspirator) becomes the agent of the other conspirator (s), and any act done by one of the combination isregarded under the law as the act of both or all. In other words, what one does, if there is this combination, becomes the act of both orall of them, no matter which individual may have done it. This is true as to each member of the conspiracy, even those whoseinvolvement was limited to a minor role in the unlawful transaction, and it makes no difference whether or not such individual sharedin the profits of the actions. (Am. Jur. Pleading and Practice Forms, Conspiracy § 9). Page 45 of 96
  • goods against the person who is in actual possession of them, and who, upon proper demand, fails or refuses to deliver them, and who, upon proper demand, fails or refuses to deliver them up WITHOUT lawful excuse. Detinue at the present day has two main uses. In the FIRST place, the plaintiff may desire the SPECIFIC restitution of his chattels and NOT damages for their conversion. He will then sue in detinue, NOT in trover. In the SECOND place, the plaintiff will have to sue in detinue if the defendant sets up no claim of ownership and has not been guilty of trespass. . . 70. The facts, evidence and legal conclusions provided in EM/ORS,PFEW and supporting Exhibits/Appendices may further support that in ALL legalmatters where Newsome‘s property and possessions were taken, ALL were doneWITHOUT legal process and/or Court Order; moreover, ALL Respondentsinvolved FALSIFIED and/or TAMPERED with PROCESS for purposes ofOBSTRUCTING JUSTICE and fulfilling their ROLE in CONSPIRACIES. Thenwhen criminal charges were filed, ALL relied upon otherRespondents/Conspirators/Co-Conspirators to AID and ABET in the COVER-UPof criminal/civil wrongs. The legal action Newsome brings before the SupremeCourt of the United States entitles her to the RESTORATION and status in quo asit was when the right(s) to be vindicated were invaded. Poindexter v. Greenhow, 5 S.Ct. 903 (1885) - In cases of detinue the action is purely defensive on the part of the plaintiff. Its object is merely to resist an attempted wrong and to restore the status in quo as it was when the right to be vindicated was invaded. .. . . Ford Motor Credit Co. v. Howell Bros. Truck & Auto Repair Inc., 325 So.2d 562 (1975) - Where defendants possession of property is wrongful, a demand is not necessary to recover damages for detention. 71. Newsome believes that the facts, evidence and legal conclusionprovided in EM/ORS, PFEW and the supporting Exhibits/Appendices may alsosustain that Respondents REPEATEDLY ABUSED and/or FALSIFIED legalprocess and UNLAWFULLY/ILLEGALLY seized Newsome‘s property andpossessions WITHOUT legal process and/or WITHOUT COURT ORDER. Thenrelied upon the SPECIAL TIES/RELATIONSHIPS to judges/justices to AID andABET in the COVER-UP of CONSPIRACIES and criminal/civil wrongs leveledagainst Newsome. CONSPIRACIES in such matters which involve SEVERALstates in diverse jurisdictions. Therefore, the Supreme Court of the United Statesjurisdiction is hereby invoked and requested to correct legal wrongs and issue theapplicable INJUNCTIVE, DETINUE and other relief necessary to correct saidwrongs. Moreover, provide Newsome with IMMEDIATE relief asrequested/demanded until the rest of legal matters may be resolved. Page 46 of 96
  • Lowther v. Ohio Valley Oil & Gas Co., 108 S.E. 276 (1921) - It is not necessary in an action of detinue to make a formal demand for the delivery of property; but in order to convert a lawful possession into an unlawful detention a demand must be made, and from the date of the demand damages for the detention will begin to accrue. . . . Chappell v. Falkner, 66 So. 890 (1914) - No demand is necessary to maintain detinue for property wrongfully taken by defendants under a bona fide claim of ownership. 72. Newsome believes that the facts, evidence and legal conclusionsset forth herein as well as in EM/ORS, PFEW and their supportingExhibits/Appendices may sustain her ENTITLEMENT to the IMMEDIATE reliefsought as well as the RETURN/RESTORATION of her property and possessions.Therefore, the Supreme Court of the United States may issue the applicableOrder(s)/Ruling(s) to correct the injustices and miscarriages of justice complainedof herein. Hodges v. Kyle, 63 So. 761 (1913) - Failure to demand property before bringing suit held not to defeat recovery in detinue, where defendant acquired possession wrongfully. Marr v. Kubel, 4 Mackey 577 (1886) - In detinue, no demand is necessary, service of the writ being sufficient. Carraway v. McNeice, Walker 538 (Miss.,1832). Robinson v. Keith, 25 Iowa 321 (1868) - In detinue, if the taking of the property was wrongful, no demand is necessary before commencing suit. Gardner v. Boothe, 31 Ala. 186 (1857) - In detinue, plaintiff is entitled to recover damages for the unlawful detention, without proof of a demand. Vaughn v. Wood, 5 Ala. 304 (1843) - In detinue, the writ is a sufficient demand of the thing detained; and a previous demand is not otherwise necessary than to enable the plaintiff to recover damages for the detention before suit brought. Carraway v. McNeice, Walker 538 (Miss.,1832). Gentrys Admr v. McKehen, 5 Dana 34 (Ky.,1837). Page 47 of 96
  • VIII. WRIT OF ENTRY25 Newsome hereby request the Supreme Court of the United States‘ intervention and executionof the applicable Writ(s) to allow her to RETAKE property and possession of residences/propertyWRONGFULLY/ILLEGALLY/UNLAWFULLY taken from her to correct and deter theinjustices/miscarriage of justice complained of. The facts, evidence and legal conclusions providedin EM/ORS, PFEW and their supporting Exhibits/Appendices will sustain the timely filing ofapplicable complaints/pleadings/documents to PRESERVE rights of Newsome secured/guaranteedunder the Constitution and other laws of the United States governing said matters. Writ of Entry: A writ that allows a person WRONGFULLY disposed of real property to enter and RETAKE the property. 73. Newsome request, through this filing, that the Supreme Court of the United States grant any and all applicable relief to correct the injustices/miscarriages of justices complained of herein and/or KNOWN to it to remedy said wrongs. IX. WRIT OF EXIGI FACIAS/SCIRE FACIAS26 Newsome believes that the facts, evidence and legal conclusions provided in this instantfiling as well as the EM/ORS, PFEW and supporting Exhibits/Appendices will sustain that theSupreme Court of the United States has been provided with list (while not all) of those who may bedeemed or become deemed as Respondents in instant legal matters before this Court. Furthermore,because of the EXTRAORDINARY, EXCEPTIONAL and CRITICAL/EXIGENT circumstances 25 Defendant (conspirator) becomes the agent of the other conspirator (s), and any act done by one of the combination isregarded under the law as the act of both or all. In other words, what one does, if there is this combination, becomes the act of both orall of them, no matter which individual may have done it. This is true as to each member of the conspiracy, even those whoseinvolvement was limited to a minor role in the unlawful transaction, and it makes no difference whether or not such individual sharedin the profits of the actions. (Am. Jur. Pleading and Practice Forms, Conspiracy § 9). 26 Defendant (conspirator) becomes the agent of the other conspirator (s), and any act done by one of the combination isregarded under the law as the act of both or all. In other words, what one does, if there is this combination, becomes the act of both orall of them, no matter which individual may have done it. This is true as to each member of the conspiracy, even those whoseinvolvement was limited to a minor role in the unlawful transaction, and it makes no difference whether or not such individual sharedin the profits of the actions. (Am. Jur. Pleading and Practice Forms, Conspiracy § 9). Page 48 of 96
  • and the KEY/HIGH/POWERFUL players (i.e. President Barack Obama, Ohio Supreme CourtJustices, Baker Donelson, Liberty Mutual, etc.) involved, this Court may have to issue theappropriate documents requiring the appearances of Respondents to show cause why the reliefNewsome seeks of and against him/her should not be granted or why dormant judgment(s)/case(s) –if any – should not be revived. Writ of Exigi Facias: That you cause to be demanded. Exigent: Requiring IMMEDIATE action or aid; URGENT. Blacks Law Dictionary - Scire Facias: A writ requiring the person against whom it is issued to appear and show cause why some matter of record should not be annulled or vacated, or why a dormant judgment against that person should not be revived. 74. Newsome request, through this filing, that the Supreme Court of the United States grant any and all applicable relief to correct the injustices/miscarriages of justices complained of herein and/or KNOWN to it to remedy said wrongs. Wayman v. Southard, 23 U.S. 1 (U.S.Ky.,1825) - Under Judiciary Act . . . providing that court shall have power to issue writs of scire facias . . . and all other writs not specially provided by statute which may be necessary for the exercise of their jurisdiction, the general term ―w rits‖ is NOT restrained to original process or to process anterior to judgment. Waldens Lessee v. Craigs Heirs, 39 U.S. 147 (U.S.Ky.,1840) - Demurrers to writs of scire facias raise only questions of law on facts stated in writ. X. WRIT OF FORMEDON27 Newsome hereby request the Supreme Court of the United States‘ intervention and executionof the applicable Writ(s) for claiming entailed property/residences held by Respondent(s) to correctand deter the injustices/miscarriage of justice complained of. The facts, evidence and legalconclusions provided in EM/ORS, PFEW and their supporting Exhibits/Appendices will sustain the 27 Defendant (conspirator) becomes the agent of the other conspirator (s), and any act done by one of the combination isregarded under the law as the act of both or all. In other words, what one does, if there is this combination, becomes the act of both orall of them, no matter which individual may have done it. This is true as to each member of the conspiracy, even those whoseinvolvement was limited to a minor role in the unlawful transaction, and it makes no difference whether or not such individual sharedin the profits of the actions. (Am. Jur. Pleading and Practice Forms, Conspiracy § 9). Page 49 of 96
  • timely filing of applicable complaints/pleadings/documents to PRESERVE rights of Newsomesecured/guaranteed under the Constitution and other laws of the United States governing saidmatters. Writ of Formedon: A writ of right for claiming entailed property held by another. A writ of formedon was the highest remedy available to a tenant. 75. Newsome request, through this filing, that the Supreme Court of the United States grant any and all applicable relief to correct the injustices/miscarriages of justices complained of herein and/or KNOWN to it to remedy said wrongs. Monagas v. Vidal, 170 F.2d 99 (1948) - An action of ― revendication‖ is an action by which a man demands a thing of which he claims to be the owner, and action relates to immovables as well as movables, and to corporeal or incorporeal things. Public Service Co. of New Hampshire v. Voudoumas, 151 A. 81 (1930) - Writ of entry is essentially possessory in character. XI. WRIT OF MANDAMUS28 Newsome hereby request the Supreme Court of the United States‘ intervention and executionof the applicable Writ(s) to COMPEL lower courts and government agencies to performMANDATORY and MINISTERIAL duties owed her and to correct and deter theinjustices/miscarriage of justice complained of. The facts, evidence and legal conclusions providedin EM/ORS, PFEW and their supporting Exhibits/Appendices will sustain the timely filing ofapplicable complaints/pleadings/documents to PRESERVE rights of Newsome secured/guaranteedunder the Constitution and other laws of the United States governing said matters. Writ of Mandamus: A writ issued by a superior court to COMPEL a lower court or a government officer to PERFORM 28 Defendant (conspirator) becomes the agent of the other conspirator (s), and any act done by one of the combination isregarded under the law as the act of both or all. In other words, what one does, if there is this combination, becomes the act of both orall of them, no matter which individual may have done it. This is true as to each member of the conspiracy, even those whoseinvolvement was limited to a minor role in the unlawful transaction, and it makes no difference whether or not such individual sharedin the profits of the actions. (Am. Jur. Pleading and Practice Forms, Conspiracy § 9). Page 50 of 96
  • MANDATORY and purely MINISTERIAL duties CORRECTLY. ― Alternative Mandamus: A mandamus issued upon the FIRST application of relief, COMMANDING the defendant either to PERFORM the act DEMANDED or to APPEAR before the court at a specified time to SHOW CAUSE for not performing it.‖ ― Peremptory Mandamus: An ABSOLUTE and UNQUALIFIED command to the defendant to DO the act in question.‖ 76. Newsome believes based upon the facts, evidence and legalconclusions provided herein as well as EM/ORS, PFEW and their supportingExhibits/Appendices, that prior to her bringing this action before the SupremeCourt of the United States she in GOOD FAITH exhausted the applicableavenues. To NO avail. Moreover, that from the PATTERN-OF-PRACTICE,PATTERN-OF-ABUSE, CONSPIRACIES, etc. leveled against Newsome that thebringing of legal actions within this Court‘s ORIGINAL jurisdiction isappropriate in that criminal/civil wrongs by the Respondents, lower courts,government agencies, etc. will continue. Heckler v. Ringer, 104 S.Ct. 2013 (1984) - Common-law writ of mandamus is intended to provide a remedy for a plaintiff only if he has exhausted all of the avenues of relief and only if the defendant owes him a clear nondiscretionary duty. 28 U.S.C.A. § 1361. 77. The facts, evidence and legal conclusions provided herein as wellas in EM/ORS, PFEW and their supporting Exhibits/Appendices will sustain thatthat DUTIES Newsome requested to be performed were NOT discretionary butwere MANDATORY ministerial duties and those in which Respondents wererequired to perform as a matter of law. Newsome has been irreparablyharmed/injured by Respondents and without the Supreme Court of the UnitedStates‘ intervention and supervision powers owed Newsome to correct themiscarriages of justice/injustices leveled against her, Respondents will notperform MANDATORY ministerial duties LEGALLY/LAWFULLY owedNewsome. U.S. ex rel. McLennan v. Wilbur, 51 S.Ct. 502 (1931) - Writ of mandamus will issue only where duty to be performed is ministerial and obligation to act peremptory and plainly defined. Supervisors v. U.S., 85 U.S. 71 (1873) - The office of a writ of mandamus is not to create duties but to compel the discharge of those already existing. Page 51 of 96
  • Reeside v. Walker, 52 U.S. 272 (1850) - A mandamus is only to compel performance of some ministerial, as well as legal duty. Heckler v. Ringer, 104 S.Ct. 2013 (1984) - Common-law writ of mandamus is intended to provide a remedy for a plaintiff only if he has exhausted all of the avenues of relief and only if the defendant owes him a clear nondiscretionary duty. 28 U.S.C.A. § 1361. U.S. ex rel. McLennan v. Wilbur, 51 S.Ct. 502 (1931) - Writ of mandamus will issue only where duty to be performed is ministerial and obligation to act peremptory and plainly defined. Reeside v. Walker, 52 U.S. 272 (1850) - A mandamus is only to compel performance of some ministerial, as well as legal duty. 78. The record evidence will further support that in thePRESERVATION of her rights and for PURPOSES of showing GOOD FAITHand Department Head‘s KNOWLEDGE of criminal/civil wrongs leveled againsther, Newsome took the time to provide Government Heads/AdministrativeDepartment Heads, etc. with complaints as well as the applicable subsequentpleadings so that he/she was FULLY aware of what was taking place underhis/her WATCH/ADMINISTRATION/DEPARTMENT. Newsome taking whatshe believed to be the NECESSARY precautions so that IGNORANCE could notbe claimed by such Department Leaders/Administrative Heads. Furthermore,when served with legal process they have been TIMELY, PROPERLY andADEQUATELY informed of the legal wrongs complained of and the legalactions brought against them and/or their Agency/Business and them. Noble v. Union River Logging R. Co., 13 S.Ct. 271 (1893) - While the head of a governmental department is not subject to mandamus in matters involving the exercise of discretion, yet such writ may be issued against the Secretary of the Interior, where he attempts, without authority of law, to annul the action of his predecessor in office, . . . U.S. v. Boutwell, 84 U.S. 604 (1873) - A writ of mandamus directed to an officer to compel performance of an official duty is aimed exclusively against him as a person, and he only can be punished for disobedience. Pittston Coal Group v. Sebben, 109 S.Ct. 414 (1988) - Extraordinary remedy of mandamus will issue only to compel performance of clear nondiscretionary duty. 28 U.S.C.A. § 1361 Page 52 of 96
  • XII. WRIT OF POSSESSION29 Newsome hereby request the Supreme Court of the United States‘ intervention and executionof the applicable Writ(s) to RECOVER possession of property/residence from Respondent(s) tocorrect and deter the injustices/miscarriage of justice complained of. The facts, evidence and legalconclusions provided in EM/ORS, PFEW and their supporting Exhibits/Appendices will sustain thetimely filing of applicable complaints/pleadings/documents to PRESERVE rights of Newsomesecured/guaranteed under the Constitution and other laws of the United States governing saidmatters. Writ of Possession: A writ issued to RECOVER the possession of land. 79. Newsome believes that the facts, evidence and legal conclusion provided herein as well as EM/ORS, PFEW and their supporting Exhibits/Appendices will sustain her ENTITLEMENT to the relief sought. Moreover, Newsome being a party to action, her RESTORATION of property and possessions WRONGFULLY/ILLEGALLY taken from her without legal process or lawful court order. Lacassagne v. Chapuis, 12 S.Ct. 659 (1892) - Injunction, being merely a preventive remedy, will not lie for the purpose of restoring to possession one who claims to have been wrongfully evicted from lands under a writ of possession issued in a suit to which he was not a party. 80. The injunctive relief Newsome seeks is for purposes of deterring and preventing Respondents from engaging and continuing to engage in CONSPIRACIES and the COVER-UP of their criminal/civil wrongs leveled against Newsome. Newsome further believes that the established PATTERNS- of-PRACTICE will sustain Respondents WILL NOT cease from their criminal and/or unlawful/illegal behavior without the Supreme Court of the United States‘ intervention and the correction action is taken to remedy miscarriages of justices complained of. Hecht Co. v. Bowles, 64 S.Ct. 587 (1944) - The injunctive process is designed to deter, not to punish. 29 Defendant (conspirator) becomes the agent of the other conspirator (s), and any act done by one of the combination isregarded under the law as the act of both or all. In other words, what one does, if there is this combination, becomes the act of both orall of them, no matter which individual may have done it. This is true as to each member of the conspiracy, even those whoseinvolvement was limited to a minor role in the unlawful transaction, and it makes no difference whether or not such individual sharedin the profits of the actions. (Am. Jur. Pleading and Practice Forms, Conspiracy § 9). Page 53 of 96
  • XIII. WRIT OF PRAECIPE30 Newsome hereby request the Supreme Court of the United States‘ intervention and executionof the applicable Writ(s) ORDERING Respondent(s) to DO some act or EXPLAIN why in action isappropriate for purposes of correcting and deterring the injustices/miscarriage of justice complainedof. The facts, evidence and legal conclusions provided in EM/ORS, PFEW and their supportingExhibits/Appendices will sustain the timely filing of applicable complaints/pleadings/documents toPRESERVE rights of Newsome secured/guaranteed under the Constitution and other laws of theUnited States governing said matters. Writ of Praecipe: At common law, a writ ORDERING a defendant to DO some act or EXPLAIN why inaction is appropriate. ― Pracipe Quod Reddat – A writ directing the defendant to RETURN certain property – was the proper writ when the plaintiff‘s action was for a SPECIFIC thing; as for the RECOVERY of a debt certain, or for the RESTORATION of such a chattel, or for giving up such a house, or so much land . . .‖ 81. Newsome request, through this filing, that the Supreme Court of the United States grant any and all applicable relief to correct the injustices/miscarriages of justices complained of herein and/or KNOWN to it to remedy said wrongs. 30 Defendant (conspirator) becomes the agent of the other conspirator (s), and any act done by one of the combination isregarded under the law as the act of both or all. In other words, what one does, if there is this combination, becomes the act of both orall of them, no matter which individual may have done it. This is true as to each member of the conspiracy, even those whoseinvolvement was limited to a minor role in the unlawful transaction, and it makes no difference whether or not such individual sharedin the profits of the actions. (Am. Jur. Pleading and Practice Forms, Conspiracy § 9). Page 54 of 96
  • XIV. WRIT OF PROTECTION31 Newsome hereby request the Supreme Court of the United States‘ intervention and executionof the applicable Writ(s) to PROTECT Newsome from past and future threats and attacks on her lifeby Respondents and for purposes of correcting and deterring the injustices/miscarriage of justicecomplained of. The facts, evidence and legal conclusions provided in EM/ORS, PFEW and theirsupporting Exhibits/Appendices will sustain the timely filing of applicablecomplaints/pleadings/documents to PRESERVE rights of Newsome secured/guaranteed under theConstitution and other laws of the United States governing said matters. Writ of Protection: A writ to PROTECT a witness in a judicial proceeding who is threatened with arrest. Record evidence which will support the KIDNAPPING of Newsome which CountyOfficial(s) and/or Respondents attempted to MASK/SHIELD as an arrest – i.e. which if that waswhat it was, it too was UNLAWFUL/ILLEGAL and CRIMINAL in that there was NO legalauthority/power UNDER which such acts could be sustained. See Paragraphs iii-xii/pp. 71-80;i/pp. 100-102; vi/pp. 105-107; and 41/pp.132-133 and supporting Exhibits referenced therein ofEM/ORS. A TERRORIFYING and HORRIFIC ordeal Newsome in which Newsome wasSHACKLED and/or CHAINED as though she was a SLAVE. Newsome was NOT releasedfrom her KIDNAPPERS until her parents paid the RANSOM (i.e. that was MASKED as abond). IMPORTANT TO NOTE The United States Government/Government Officials have a LONGSTANDING HISTORY for carrying out TERRORIST/ SUPREMACIST/RACIST attacks on African-American/Blacks 31 Defendant (conspirator) becomes the agent of the other conspirator (s), and any act done by one of the combination isregarded under the law as the act of both or all. In other words, what one does, if there is this combination, becomes the act of both orall of them, no matter which individual may have done it. This is true as to each member of the conspiracy, even those whoseinvolvement was limited to a minor role in the unlawful transaction, and it makes no difference whether or not such individual sharedin the profits of the actions. (Am. Jur. Pleading and Practice Forms, Conspiracy § 9). Page 55 of 96
  • and/or Citizens who stand up or speak out about CIVIL/HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS. See for instance EXHIBIT “36” – Police Brutality in the United States attached hereto and incorporated by reference as if set forth in full herein.Criminal acts carried out by Respondents which caused Newsome IRREPARABLEinjuries/damages. Furthermore, record evidence will support/sustain the CONSPIRACIES ofRespondents to COVER-UP their criminal/civil wrongs leveled against Newsome. Recordevidence will support that Newsome, TIMELY, PROPERLY and ADEQUATELY reportedcrimes to United States Department of Justice, United States Congress, provided Court(s) withinformation of such criminal acts through her pleadings filed. All to NO avail. Newsome duringhear RESEARCH has come across information to see where BAKER DONELSON (i.e. theFOX GUARDING the Hen House) has their attorneys/people (i.e. such as Bradley S. Clanton,etc.) even in the UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE for purposes ofOBSTRUCTING JUSTICE and PROTECTING their and their CLIENTS‘ interest incriminal/legal matters that were brought by Newsome and/or other citizens of the United States.See EXHIBIT “37” – “Commission on Civil Rights Appointment;‖ information posted onBaker Donelson‘s website attached hereto and incorporated by reference as if set forth in fullherein. Information which provides in part: (Jackson, MS/May 10, 2007) Bradley S. Clanton, of the law firm of Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, PC, has been appointed by the United States Commission on Civil Rights (USCCR) to serve as Chairman of its Mississippi Advisory Committee. The Committee assists the USCCR with its fact-finding, investigative and information dissemination activities. The functions of the USCCR include investigating complaints alleging that citizens are being deprived of their right . . . studying and collecting information relating to discrimination or a denial of equal protection of the laws under the Constitution; appraising federal laws and policies with respect to discrimination or denial of equal protection of the laws because of race, color, . . . or in the administration of justice; serving as a national clearinghouse for information in respect to discrimination or denial of equal protection of the laws; submitting reports, findings and recommendations to the President and Congress; and issuing public service announcements to discourage discrimination or denial of equal protection of the laws. Mr. Clanton, a shareholder in Baker Donelsons Jackson and Washington, D.C. offices, concentrates his practice in government litigation, securities and other fraud investigations, and litigation, election law and appeals. His appellate practice has included matters before the U.S. Supreme Court, U.S. Courts of Appeals, the Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals, and various other state appellate courts. His internal investigations and government litigation practice has included matters related to Securities and Exchange Commission investigations, health care fraud investigations, federal campaign finance investigations, and state and federal securities fraud class action litigation and arbitration proceedings. Previously, Mr. Clanton served as Chief Counsel to the U.S. House Judiciary Committees Subcommittee on the Constitution, where his responsibilities included advising the Chairman and Republican Members of the Judiciary Committee on legislation and Congressional oversight implicating civil and constitutional rights, Congressional authority, separation of powers, proposed constitutional Page 56 of 96
  • amendments and oversight of the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice and the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.Information which was provided at Exhibit “59” of EM/ORS and Appendix “13” of PFEW.PERTINENT and RELEVANT information considering the LISTING of TOP/KEY positions BakerDonelson advertised on their website – See EXHIBITS “10” and “27” attached hereto andincorporated by reference. Listing that Baker Donelson moved SWIFTLY to have scrubbed onceNewsome made known to the PUBLIC/WORLD where such TERRORIST/SUPREMACIST/RACIST groups as Baker Donelson and/or Respondents were hiding and lurking awaiting for theNEXT OPPORTUNITY to attack on their next victim(s) as Newsome, members of her class as wellas Foreign Nations/Leaders/Citizens. 82. Newsome believes that the record evidence will support and/or sustain that she TIMELY, PROPERLY and ADEQUATELY preserved her rights in committal of criminal acts leveled against her. Newsome having filed CRIMINAL COMPLAINTS with the United States Department as well as civil action in a court of law to begin addressing said crimes. All to NO avail. Thus, leaving Newsome bring this legal action before the Supreme Court of the United States so that the PUBLIC/WORLD can see just how JUSTICE work in one of the MOST Powerful Countries in the World. Levy v. Wallis, 4 U.S. 167 (1799) - The lien of a levy on personal property is not lost, though the goods are left in the hands of the defendant; unless there be fraud. Furthermore, in the legal action out of which this matter comes, Respondents committed crimes through the abuse of process and then relied upon judicial officials to AID and ABET in their CONSPIRACIES and COVER-UP of criminal/civil wrongs leveled against Newsome. Criminal/Civil wrongs which has NOT ONLY impacted/affected Newsome‘s life, but also that of SOCIETY and/or the PUBLIC- AT-LARGE. Furthermore, those engaging in such criminal/civil wrongs leveled against Newsome are still free and at large WITHIN the general PUBLIC and some may still be holding judicial and government positions at which the PUBLIC is AT RISK and in DANGER!! The record evidence in this legal matter will support/sustain the unlawful seizure of Newsome‘s property and possession by Respondents as well as recent THREATS as recent as February 2011 LIEN against Newsome, from State/County and/or their Officials threatening all Newsome‘s real property, Levy against automobile or other personal property (See EXHIBIT “38” – Page 1 Only of January 2011: This Is A Billing – Bill is in APPENDIX of the Petition for Page 57 of 96
  • Extraordinary Writ that Supreme Court of United States acknowledges it is retaining as it awaits response from Newsome - attached hereto and incorporated by reference as if set forth in full herein) will be taken as CRIMES of THEFT, BURGULARY, TRASSPASSING, etc. Furthermore, CRIMINAL actions taken WITHOUT legal or lawful authority to do so – i.e. further supporting the IMMINENT DANGER and THREATS that have been made on Newsome by government agency(s)/official(s) in RETALIATION of her having engaged in PROTECTED activities and now seeking the RECOVERY for INJURIES/DAMAGES she sustained from criminal/civil violations. 83. Newsome believes that the record evidence will support and/or sustain that she has been DEPRIVED EQUAL protection of the laws, EQUAL privileges and immunities and DUE PROCESS of laws as secured/guaranteed under the Constitution and or laws of the United States. Moreover, that Newsome has been DENIED adequate opportunity to present her claims and defenses fairly before an UNBIAS tribunal and has been DEPRIVED her rights to have matter taken before a JURY. Instead, Newsome has been subjected to the CRIMINAL acts of TAINTED/CORRUPT/BIAS judges/justices who clearly have a PECUNIARY and PERSONAL interest in the OUTCOME of these legal matters. U. S. v. MacCollom, 96 S.Ct. 2086 (1976) - Neither equal protection clause of Fourteenth Amendment nor equal protection requirement embodied in Fifth Amendment guarantees absolute equality or precisely equal advantages but, in context of criminal proceeding, require only adequate opportunity to present ones claim fairly. (Per Mr. Justice Rehnquist with the Chief Justice and two Justices concurring and one Justice concurring in the judgment.) U.S.C.A.Const. Amends. 5, 14. XV. WRIT OF RECAPTION32 Newsome hereby request the Supreme Court of the United States‘ intervention and executionof the applicable Writ(s) allowing her to RECOVER goods and damages from Respondents whocontinue to engage in CRIMINAL/CIVIL wrongs leveled against her and CONTINUE to 32 Defendant (conspirator) becomes the agent of the other conspirator (s), and any act done by one of the combination isregarded under the law as the act of both or all. In other words, what one does, if there is this combination, becomes the act of both orall of them, no matter which individual may have done it. This is true as to each member of the conspiracy, even those whoseinvolvement was limited to a minor role in the unlawful transaction, and it makes no difference whether or not such individual sharedin the profits of the actions. (Am. Jur. Pleading and Practice Forms, Conspiracy § 9). Page 58 of 96
  • THREATEN to bring and/or ENGAGE in MALICIOUS PROSECUTION against her. Thus, theapplicable Writ(s) are EXTREMELY CRITICAL and IMPORTANT to correct and deter theinjustices/miscarriage of justice complained of. The facts, evidence and legal conclusions providedin EM/ORS, PFEW and their supporting Exhibits/Appendices will sustain the timely filing ofapplicable complaints/pleadings/documents to PRESERVE rights of Newsome secured/guaranteedunder the Constitution and other laws of the United States governing said matters. Writ of Recaption: A writ allowing a plaintiff to RECOVER goods and damages from a defendant who makes a second distress while a replevin action for a previous distress is pending. ―Replevin – A writ OBTAINED from a court AUTHORIZING the RETAKING of personal property wrongfully taken or detained. - - ‗The action of replevin lies, where specific PERSONAL property has been WRONGFULLY taken and is WRONGFULLY detained, to RECOVER possession of the property, TOGETHER with DAMAGES for its detention. To support the action it is NECESSARY: (a) That the property shall be personal. (b) That the Plaintiff at the time of suit, shall be entitled to the IMMEDIATE possession. (c) That (at common law) the defendant shall have WRONGFULLY taken the property (replevin in the cepit). But, by statute in most states, the action will now also lie where the property was WRONGFULLY detained, though it was lawfully obtained in the first instance (replevin in the detinet). (d) That the property shall be WRONGFULLY detained by the defendant at the time of suit. Benjamin J. Shipman, Handbook of Common-Law Pleading § 49, at 120 (Henry Winthorp Ballantine ed., 3d ed. 1923).‘‖ 84. Newsome believes that the record evidence will further support and sustain a PATTERN-OF-ABUSE, PATTERN-OF-CRIMINAL behavior, etc. to sustain that without the intervention of the Supreme Court of the United States Respondents will continue CONSPIRE to subject Newsome to distressful acts while this and/or legal proceedings are pending for purposes of OBSTRUCTING Page 59 of 96
  • JUSTICE, depriving Newsome of PROTECTED RIGHTS, and other criminal behavior known to them. 85. Newsome believes that the EM/ORS, PFEW and their supporting Exhibits/Appendices will sustain that relief Newsome seeks under the ― Writs All Act‖ and/or laws governing said matters. Moreover, Newsome‘s ENTITLEMENT to the RETAKING of her property and possessions UNLAWFULLY/WRONGFULLY taken and/or detained by Respondents. Property and personal possession WRONFULLY/ILLEGALLY taken from Newsome through CRIMINAL behavior/practices. Thus, supporting the IMMEDIATE relief Newsome has demanded, will demand and/or the Supreme Court of the United States is aware she is entitled to as a matter of law. See ―RELIEF SOUGHT‖ of EM/ORS at pages 279 thru 294. Furthermore the relief sought has been reiterated in PFEW at pages 30 thru 44 for such injuries/damages sustained. XVI. WRIT OF PROHIBITION33 Newsome believes that the facts, evidence and legal conclusions provided in EM/ORS,PFEW and their supporting Exhibits/Appendices will support and sustain the relief sought herein inthat there is a PATTERN-OF-PRACTICE, PATTERN-OF-JUDICIAL ABUSE/USURPATION OFAUTHORITY/POWER, etc. by lower courts that have REPEATEDLY usurped authority/power overmatters in which they KNEW – i.e. because Newsome TIMELY, PROPERLY and ADEQUATELYNOTIFIED of criminal/civil wrongs – they LACKED jurisdiction to act. Nevertheless, in proceedingto carry out their ROLE in CONSPIRACIES leveled against Newsome they ALL acted to their ownperil and/or demise. Thus, now being subject to PENALTIES and PROSECUTION for theircriminal/civil violations leveled against Newsome. Newsome believes from said PATTERN ofbehavior that Respondents and those with whom they conspire will CONTINUE to engage incriminal/civil wrongs which are unlawful/illegal against Newsome if the Supreme Court of the 33 Defendant (conspirator) becomes the agent of the other conspirator (s), and any act done by one of the combination isregarded under the law as the act of both or all. In other words, what one does, if there is this combination, becomes the act of both orall of them, no matter which individual may have done it. This is true as to each member of the conspiracy, even those whoseinvolvement was limited to a minor role in the unlawful transaction, and it makes no difference whether or not such individual sharedin the profits of the actions. (Am. Jur. Pleading and Practice Forms, Conspiracy § 9). Page 60 of 96
  • United States does not act to DETER and PREVENT crimes reported to it - See also 42 USC §1986: Action for neglect to prevent.34 Writ of Prohibition: (1) A law or order that FORBIDS a certain action. (2) An extraordinary writ issued by an appellate court to prevent a lower court from exceeding its jurisdiction or to prevent a nonjudicial officer or entity from exercising a power. ― Prohibition is a kind of common-law injunction to prevent an unlawful assumption of jurisdiction . . . It is a common-law injunction against governmental usurpation, as where one is called coram non judice (before a judge unauthorized to take cognizance of the affair), to answer in a tribunal that has no legal cognizance of the cause. It arrests the proceedings of any tribunal, board, or person exercising judicial functions in a manner or by means not within its jurisdiction or discretion. Benjamin J. Shipman, Handbook of Common- Law Pleading § 341, at 542 (Henry Winthorp Ballantine ed., 3d ed. 1923).‖PERTINENT and RELEVANT information as it goes to support the KEY/HIGH positionsRespondents may hold and/or RELATIONSHIP to said KEY/HIGH positions such as that LISTEDin EXHIBITS “10” and “27” respectively – Baker Donelson info attached hereto and incorporatedby reference as if set forth in full herein. Again, information in which Baker Donelson hadSCRUBBED in efforts of COVERING UP their ROLE and CONNECTION in the CONSPIRACIESand criminal/civil wrongs leveled against Newsome. Evidence which clearly supports and sustainsthat Baker Donelson may have had information posted for approximately a DECADE (if not longer)UNTIL Newsome went PUBLIC to let other CITIZENS and FOREIGN COUNTRIES/LEADERS,media, etc. know where such criminals have ROOTED themselves and how they haveINFILTRATED the Government for purposes of carrying out their 34 Every person who, having knowledge that any of the wrongs conspired to be done, and mentioned in section 1985 of thistitle, are about to be committed, and having power to prevent or aid in preventing the commission of the same, neglects or refuses so todo, if such wrongful act be committed, shall be liable to the party injured, or his legal representatives, for all damages caused by suchwrongful act, which such person by reasonable diligence could have prevented; and such damages may be recovered in an action on thecase; and any number of persons guilty of such wrongful neglect or refusal may be joined as defendants in the action; . . . Page 61 of 96
  • TERRORIST/SUPREMACIST/RACIST acts against Newsome as well as other citizens and ForeignCountries/Leaders/Citizens. 86. Newsome believes that the record evidence will sustain that without the Supreme Court of the United States intervention and exercise of supervisory powers, etc. Without this Court‘s intervention, Newsome will continue to suffer irreparable injury harm. Therefore, relief Newsome seeks will support that Respondents will continue to engage in CONSPIRACIES and criminal acts with KNOWLEDGE that jurisdiction is lacking and/or fail to PREVENT judicial/non-judicial officials from USURPING/ASSUMING jurisdiction with KNOWLEDGE they lack for purposes of fulfilling their ROLE in the ONGOING and PATTERN-OF-CRIMINAL behavior leveled against Newsome. U.S. v. Hoffman, 71 U.S. 158 (1866) - The ―w of prohibition‖ is one rit which commands person to whom it is directed not to do something which by relators suggestion, court is informed he is about to do; and if thing be already done, writ of prohibition could not undo it, for such would require affirmative act; and only effect of writ of prohibition is to suspend all action, and to prevent any further proceeding in prohibited direction. 87. Newsome believes that the facts, evidence and legal conclusions provided in EM/ORS, PFEW and their supporting Exhibits/Appendices further sustain that while the relief sought through the bringing of legal action(s), that EXTRAORDINARY, EXCEPTIONAL and CRITICAL/EXIGENT circumstances exist to sustain the drastic remedies sought. Moreover, is SOCIAL, ECONOMIC and PUBLIC/WORLDWIDE INTEREST. Ex parte Collett, 69 S.Ct. 944 (1949) - Mandamus, prohibition and injunction against judges are drastic and extraordinary remedies and as extraordinary remedies, they are reserved for really extraordinary cases. 88. Newsome believes that the record evidence will further support and/or sustain that relief sought is directed towards the UNWARRANTED assumption of jurisdiction, URSURPATION of jurisdiction and EXCESS of jurisdiction by Respondents who engage in CONSPIRACIES leveled against Newsome. Petition of U.S., 44 S.Ct. 130 (1923) - ― Prohibition‖ is a remedy of exigency, in exclusion of other process of relief, and is directed against unwarranted assumptions of jurisdiction or excesses of jurisdiction. Page 62 of 96
  • XVII. WRIT OF REVIEW35 Newsome believes that the fact, evidence and legal conclusions provided in EM/ORS, PFEWand their supporting Exhibits/Appendices may further sustain the need for the Supreme Court of theUnited States to bring up for REVIEW the records of the lower courts and government agencieswhich will evidence the CONSPIRACIES of government officials and those with whom theyconspired to COVER-UP the criminal/civil wrongs reported. Moreover, how the records of thecourts and government agencies may have been COMPROMISED to MASK/SHIELD an ILLEGALANIMUS. Record evidence which may support courts and government agencies deprivingNewsome EQUAL protection of the laws, EQUAL privileges and immunities and DUE PROCESSof laws; as well as other laws secured/guaranteed under the Constitution and/or laws of the UnitedStates. Writ of Review: A general form of process issuing from an appellate court to BRING UP FOR REVIEW the RECORD of the proceedings in the court below. 89. Newsome is CONFIDENT that the records of the courts and government agencies to which CRIMES were reported may have been COMPROMISED for purposes of ROLE played in CONSPIRACIES to COVER-UP criminal/civil wrongs leveled against Newsome. Thus, the relief Newsome seeks through this legal action is also for purposes of PRESERVING what most likely are DAMAGED and COMPROMISING of evidence in the record of courts and government agencies which will support her claims and defenses. Moreover, why the courts and government agencies have DEPRIVED Newsome of MANDATORY Ministerial duties owed her and are REFUSING to provide her with the Findings of Fact/Conclusions of Law that it has afforded to other citizens in the handling of their cases. However, when Newsome came with her legal actions, courts and government agencies took a FAR DEPARTURE from the laws for purposes of fulfilling their ROLES in CONSPIRACIES and COVER-UP of criminal/civil wrongs leveled against Newsome. Zuber v. Allen, 90 S.Ct. 314 (1969) - When action is taken on a record administrative department cannot then present testimony in court to 35 Defendant (conspirator) becomes the agent of the other conspirator (s), and any act done by one of the combination isregarded under the law as the act of both or all. In other words, what one does, if there is this combination, becomes the act of both orall of them, no matter which individual may have done it. This is true as to each member of the conspiracy, even those whoseinvolvement was limited to a minor role in the unlawful transaction, and it makes no difference whether or not such individual sharedin the profits of the actions. (Am. Jur. Pleading and Practice Forms, Conspiracy § 9). Page 63 of 96
  • remedy the gaps in the record, any more than arguments of counsel on review can substitute for an agencys failure to make findings or give reasons. 90. Newsome further believes that the facts, evidence and legalconclusions will sustain the relief sought may be governed under the ― Writs Act‖ Allas well as other statutes/laws KNOWN to the Supreme Court of the United States toDETER and PREVENT the legal wrongs complained of and the CONTINUANCE ofsuch crimes that have been leveled against Newsome. Therefore, based upon thefacts, evidence and legal conclusions provided in the EM/ORS, PFEW and theirsupporting Exhibits/Appendices this Court may conclude that this matter is to moveforward and because of the EXTRAORDINARY, EXCEPTIONAL andCRITICAL/EXIGENT circumstances that the relief sought by Newsome may bebrought under the ORIGINAL JURISDICTION of this Court and UNDER whicheverstatutes/laws are APPLICABLE to the crimes and civil wrongs complained of and/orKNOWN to this Court to have occurred or is about to occur. La Buy v. Howes Leather Company, 77 S.Ct. 309 (U.S.,1957) - Where subject concerns enforcement of rules which by law it is duty of Supreme Court to formulate and put in force, mandamus should issue to prevent such action thereunder as is so palpably improper as to place it beyond the scope of the rule invoked. 91. The record evidence will further support that Newsome TIMELY,PROPERLY and ADEQUATELY notified Respondents through the APPROPRIATEprocedure that they LACKED jurisdiction – to NO avail. Therefore, supporting fromthe OUTSET knowledge that Respondents knew they were acting WITHOUTjurisdiction; nevertheless, acted to their own peril/demise. Furthermore, thatregardless of what legal recourse Newsome to took to recover frominjuries/damages/harm sustained, Respondents because of their RELATIONSHIPS tocourts and government relied upon officials to AID and ABET in theCONSPIRIACIES and COVER-UP the criminal/civil wrong reported. Therefore, asmatters of law, any other remedies that Newsome may have had, have been PROVENwould be FRUITLESS because of the criminal behavior of Respondents and relianceupon SPECIAL RELATIONSHIP/FAVORS to INFLUENCE the outcome ofmatters. In re Chicago, R.I. & P. Ry. Co., 41 S.Ct. 288 (U.S.Ohio,1921) - Prohibition will issue if the lower court is clearly without jurisdiction over petitioner, who, at the outset, objected to the jurisdiction, had preserved his rights by appropriate procedure, and had no other remedy, but will ordinarily be denied, if the jurisdiction of the lower court is doubtful, depends on a finding of fact from evidence not in record, or if the petitioner has an adequate remedy by appeal or otherwise. 92. The record evidence will further evidence that NewsomeREPEATEDLY notified Respondents of their LACK of jurisdiction and the fact theywere engaging in CRIMINAL behavior. To NO avail. Respondents proceeded to Page 64 of 96
  • their own peril/demise. Therefore, warranting the Supreme Court of the United States intervention, exercise of supervisory power and jurisdiction. Morrow v. District of Columbia, 417 F.2d 728 (1969) - The clearer the lower courts lack of jurisdiction the more appropriate will be the issuance of a prerogative writ, but the writ will issue where the question of jurisdiction is undecided. XVIII. WRIT OF SUPERSEDEAS36 Newsome believes that the facts, evidence and legal conclusions provided in EM/ORS,PFEW and their supporting Exhibits/Appendices will sustain the issuance of the applicable writunder the ― Writs Act‖ is further warranted to SUSPEND judgments that have been obtained Allthrough CONSPIRACIES and/or CRIMINAL acts. Furthermore, that the judgments and/ordecisions that come into question through this legal proceeding was obtained withKNOWLEDGE of LACK of jurisdiction and/or that Judgments/Rulings are NULL/VOID andcould NOT be upheld as a matter of law. Furthermore, Newsome having filed theAPPLICABLE and APPROPRIATE pleadings to preserve her rights and stay proceedingspending and APPEAL and/or ORIGINAL action to be sought in the Supreme Court of theUnited States. Claims in which the record evidence have been brought in GOOD FAITH byNewsome and may support/sustain she is not subject to any bond(s) and is entitled to theIMMEDIATE relief to which the statutes/laws state she is to recover and/or be awarded. Writ of Supersedeas: A writ that SUSPENDS a judgment creditor‘s power to levy execution, usu. pending appeal. 93. The record evidence will support, for instance, how Respondent as recent as February 2011, served Newsome with “This Is A Billing” THREATENING her with additional injury/harm with KNOWLEDGE that she was bringing this matter before the Supreme Court of the United States and that 36 Defendant (conspirator) becomes the agent of the other conspirator (s), and any act done by one of the combination isregarded under the law as the act of both or all. In other words, what one does, if there is this combination, becomes the act of both orall of them, no matter which individual may have done it. This is true as to each member of the conspiracy, even those whoseinvolvement was limited to a minor role in the unlawful transaction, and it makes no difference whether or not such individual sharedin the profits of the actions. (Am. Jur. Pleading and Practice Forms, Conspiracy § 9). Page 65 of 96
  • Respondent was WITHOUT authority to act. Nevertheless, is determined to subject Newsome to FURTHER unlawful/illegal LEVY(s), SEIZURE(s), etc. XIX. WRIT OF SUPERVISORY CONTROL37 Writ of SUPERVISORY CONTROL: A writ issued to CORRECT an ERRONEOUS ruling made by a lower court EITHER when there is NO appeal or when an appeal CANNOT provide adequate relief and the ruling WILL RESULT in GROSS INJUSTICE. 94. Newsome believes that the statutes/laws may sustain that the facts, evidence and legal conclusions provided in EM/ORS, PFEW and their supporting Exhibits/Appendices requires the Supreme Court of the United States under the ― All Writs Act‖ to issue the applicable writ exercising its SUPERVISORY control over this matter. Furthermore, that legal action meets the pleading requirements to have matter brought before this Court in its ORIGINAL jurisdiction in that Respondent(s) involved include States, Counties, Municipalities and/or Cities and the government officials therein. Fisher v. District Court of Sixteenth Judicial Dist. of Montana, in and for Rosebud County, 96 S.Ct. 943 (1976) - Writ of supervisory control is available only in original proceeding in . . .Supreme Court and, although it may issue in broad range of circumstances, it is not equivalent to an appeal. 28 U.S.C.A. § 1257(3). 95. Newsome seeks the Supreme Court of the United States‘ intervention and supervisor powers which MANDATORY ministerial duties are required under the laws to TAKE CHARGE of third person and/or third-part Respondent(s) and control said party(s) to PREVENT he/she/it from causing further injury/harm/damages to Newsome as well as other citizens or the PUBLIC-AT- LARGE. U.S. v. Comstock, 130 S.Ct. 1949 (U.S.,2010) - At common law, one who takes charge of a third person is under a duty to exercise reasonable care to control that person to prevent him from causing reasonably foreseeable bodily harm to others. 96. The facts, evidence and legal conclusions provided in EM/ORS, PFEW and their supporting Exhibits/Appendices may further support that Newsome took the NECESSARY steps and PRECAUTIONARY measures to assure that the PROPER Respondents/Parties, courts and governments along with their officials/employees/representatives are brought before the Supreme Court of the 37 Defendant (conspirator) becomes the agent of the other conspirator (s), and any act done by one of the combination isregarded under the law as the act of both or all. In other words, what one does, if there is this combination, becomes the act of both orall of them, no matter which individual may have done it. This is true as to each member of the conspiracy, even those whoseinvolvement was limited to a minor role in the unlawful transaction, and it makes no difference whether or not such individual sharedin the profits of the actions. (Am. Jur. Pleading and Practice Forms, Conspiracy § 9). Page 66 of 96
  • United States in their PROPER capacity. Moreover, that Department Heads – i.e.such as President of the United States (Barack H. Obama), United States AttorneyGeneral (Eric H. Holder, Jr.), Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas Judge JohnAndrew West, etc.) – may be reached under the JURISDICTION over said personand the subject-matter. Newsome believes that the record facts, evidence andsupporting legal conclusions may sustain that Department Heads, Supervisors,Attorneys, etc. through his/her OWN actions violated the Constitution andKNOWINGLY/WILLINGLY with MALICIOUS intent engaged inCONSPIRACIES and COVER-UP of criminal/civil wrongs leveled againstNewsome, members of her class and/or other citizens who sought to EXPOSEcourts‘/agencies‘ unlawful/illegal/unethical practices. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S.Ct. 1937 (U.S.,2009) - Government officials may not be held liable, under Bivens or § 1983, for unconstitutional conduct of their subordinates under theory of respondeat superior; because vicarious liability is inapplicable, plaintiff must plead that each government official-defendant, through his or her own actions, has violated Constitution. 97. Newsome further believes that the facts, evidence and legalconclusions provided in EM/ORS, PFEW and their supporting Exhibits/Appendicesmay further sustain the existence of EXCEPTIONAL, EXTRAORDINARY andCRITICAL/EXIGENT circumstances amounting and PROVING usurpation of powerAND clear ABUSE of discretion warranting any and all relief sought under the ― AllWrits Act‖ as well as other statutes/laws governing said matters to correct themiscarriage of justice and/or wrongs complained in this legal action. Cheney v. U.S. Dist. Court for Dist. of Columbia, 124 S.Ct. 2576 (2004) - Only exceptional circumstances amounting to a judicial usurpation of power or a clear abuse of discretion will justify the invocation of writ of mandamus. 28 U.S.C.A. § 1651(a). 98. Clearly the facts, evidence and legal conclusions provided inNewsome‘s EM/ORS, PFEW and supporting Exhibits/Appendices may requiremandamus relief; however, as a matter of law, this is not the ONLY extraordinarywrit under which the relief Newsome seeks is to be granted. The Supreme Courtof the United States is to apply the laws which will correct, deter, prevent, etc. thelegal wrongs and miscarriages of justice that has been brought its attention. Schlagenhauf v. Holder, 85 S.Ct. 234 (1964) - The writ of mandamus is appropriately issued when there is usurpation of judicial power or a clear abuse of discretion. 99. The facts, evidence and legal conclusions provided in theEM/ORS, PFEW and their supporting Exhibits/Appendices may also sustain thatthe duties Newsome seeks from the lower courts and government agencies ARENOT discretionary but are MANDATORY MINISTERIAL duties owed herunder the Constitution and other statutes/laws of the United States. Page 67 of 96
  • Hudson v. Parker, 15 S.Ct. 450 (1895) - Though the discretion of a judge in a matter entrusted to his judicial discretion cannot be controlled by mandamus, yet, if he declines to exercise his discretion, or to act at all, mandamus will lie to compel him to act. 100. As the facts, evidence and legal conclusions provided herein and inthe EM/ORS, PFEW and their supporting Exhibits/Appendices may sustain, NOTALL of the legal wrongs rendered Newsome can be corrected through mandamusactions; therefore, the Supreme Court of the United States is to render justice underthe ― Writs Act‖ and other statutes/laws to correct the miscarriage of justice, Allunlawful/illegal/criminal acts of Respondents. Mandamus may not be available forthe NUMEROUS CONSPIRACIES and lower courts who acted WITHOUTjurisdiction. As a DIRECT and PROXIMATE result of CONSPIRACIES andRespondents‘ COVER-UP of criminal/civil wrongs leveled against Newsome, shehas SUFFERED irreparable/indisputable injuries/damages/harm. Ex parte Bradley, 74 U.S. 364 (1868) - As respects whether mandamus would lie, no amount of judicial discretion of a court can supply a defect or want of jurisdiction. 101. The facts, evidence and legal conclusions provided in Newsome‘sEM/ORS, PFEW and their supporting Exhibits/Appendices may also sustain theSupreme Court of the United States‘ exercising its superintending control in thatRespondents FAILED to perform clear MANDATORY ministerial duties as wellas CLEAR legal duties owed Newsome. Moreover, the list of Respondents mayinclude States, their Counties, Cities and employees thereof who engaged in theCONSPIRACIES and COVER-UP of criminal/civil wrongs leveled againstNewsome and because of the NEXUS and CONNECTION between the OVERTacts and the DIVERSITY JURISDICTION of Respondents - i.e. residing indifferent/various states – the Supreme Court of the United States is the ONLYcourt having jurisdiction OVER ALL Respondents, regardless of what state, city,etc. they live in; as well as subject-matter jurisdiction; wherein the lower courtsand or administrative agencies are LIMITED and REQUIRED to stay within theboundaries and jurisdiction wherein they reside – i.e. for instance Texas Courts donot have jurisdiction over residents in the State of Louisiana and vice versa,Louisiana Courts do not have jurisdiction over residents in the State ofMississippi and vice versa; and because there may be several STATES involvedas Respondents in this matter when the dust settle, it appears the ONLY adequatelegal remedy may be before the Supreme Court of the United States because of itsDIVERSITY and ability to retain JURISDICTION under the statutes/lawsgoverning said matters. Tindall v. Wayne County Friend of Court, by: Schewe, 269 F.3d 533 (2001) - . . . superintending control is an extraordinary power that may be exercised when a petitioner demonstrates both the respondents failure to perform a clear legal duty and the absence of an adequate legal remedy. Page 68 of 96
  • XX. WRIT OF SECURITATE PACIS38 Under the ― Writs Act‖ Newsome believes that the facts, evidence and legal Allconclusions in her EM/ORS, PFEW and their supporting Exhibits/Appendices may also sustainthat Respondents have REPEATEDLY made THREATS to Newsome and HAVEREPEATEDLY carried out threats which have caused Newsome bodily harm, mental/physicalharm and irreparable harm/damages in RETALIATION as well as for purposes ofDISCRIMINATING, TERRORIZING, OPPRESSING, HARASSING, THREATENING,OBSTRUCTING JUSTICE, DEPRIVING CITIZENS OF PROTECTED RIGHTS, BLACKMAIL,COERCION, INTIMIDATION, ETC. Furthermore, the evidence will sustain that NewsomeREPEATEDLY receives THREATS of violence against to get her to abandon rightssecured/guaranteed under the Constitution and other statutes/laws of the United States.Moreover, that Newsome has had to endure many HORRIFIC ordeals (i.e. such as herKIDNAPPING, being SHACKLED/CHAINED by her Kidnappers, etc.), RECENT threats toNewsome‘s person and property further warrants due to the EXTRAORINARY,EXCEPTIONAL and CRITICAL/EXIGENT circumstances the relief she seeks herein as well asin the EM/ORS, PFEW and their supporting Exhibits/Appendices. Writ of Securitate Pacis: A writ for someone FEARING bodily harm from another, as when the person has been THREATENED with VIOLENCE. XXI. EXTRATERRITORIAL WRITS Newsome believes that the facts, laws, and legal conclusions may support that it is ONLYthat Supreme Court of the United States that has JURISDICTION over ALL Respondents and the 38 Defendant (conspirator) becomes the agent of the other conspirator (s), and any act done by one of the combination isregarded under the law as the act of both or all. In other words, what one does, if there is this combination, becomes the act of both orall of them, no matter which individual may have done it. This is true as to each member of the conspiracy, even those whoseinvolvement was limited to a minor role in the unlawful transaction, and it makes no difference whether or not such individual sharedin the profits of the actions. (Am. Jur. Pleading and Practice Forms, Conspiracy § 9). Page 69 of 96
  • subject-matter in this legal action because of the DIVERSITY of jurisdiction and the residency ofNewsome and some Respondents reside in several other states – i.e. for instance, while Newsome is aresident of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, Respondents may be residents of the State of Ohio,Kentucky, Mississippi, Louisiana, Texas, District of Columbia, etc. Furthermore, some of theRespondents may be States, Counties, Municipalities, Cities, etc. in which Newsome does NOTreside. ALL within the reach and JURISDICTION of the Supreme Court of the United States. Corporation created by a state is citizen of that state within meaning of Constitution and United States statute investing Supreme Court with original jurisdiction of controversies between state and citizens of other states. Wisconsin v. Pelican Ins. Co., 127 US 265, 32 L Ed 239, 8 S Ct. 1370 (1888) (ovrld in part on other grounds by Milwaukee County v M.E. White Co. (1935) 296 US 268, 80 L Ed 220, 56 S. Ct. 229)). Extraterritorial Writs: Beyond the geographic limits of a particular jurisdiction. 102. The lower courts and government agencies addressed in Newsome‘s EM/ORS, PFEW and their supporting Exhibits/Appendices are established in various states (i.e. Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Kentucky and Ohio) and therefore CONFINED to their TERRITORIAL LIMITS in their respect states and their process CANNOT be executed beyond those limits. However, the Supreme Court of the United States is invested with power and jurisdiction that reaches all states within the United States boundaries/limits. Galpin v. Page, 85 U.S. 350 (1873) - Courts of a state however general may be their jurisdiction, are confined to the territorial limits of the state and their process cannot be executed beyond those limits. Ableman v. Booth, 62 U.S. 506 (1858) - A judicial process does not have any lawful authority outside of the limits of the jurisdiction of the court or judge by whom it is issued. XXII. OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE39 Newsome believes that inquiries/investigations into the merits of her claims as well as thefacts, evidence and legal conclusions provided in EM/ORS, PFEW and their supporting 39 Defendant (conspirator) becomes the agent of the other conspirator (s), and any act done by one of the combination isregarded under the law as the act of both or all. In other words, what one does, if there is this combination, becomes the act of both orall of them, no matter which individual may have done it. This is true as to each member of the conspiracy, even those whoseinvolvement was limited to a minor role in the unlawful transaction, and it makes no difference whether or not such individual sharedin the profits of the actions. (Am. Jur. Pleading and Practice Forms, Conspiracy § 9). Page 70 of 96
  • Exhibits/Appendices may sustain that Respondents did KNOWINGLY, WILLFULLY,MALICOUSLY corruptly persuade another person to destroy records, property, evidence, etc. to beused in official proceedings. Moreover, PRIOR to the committal of obstructing justice, Respondentswere TIMELY, PROPERLY and ADEQUATELY NOTIFIED of the criminal/civil wrongs theywere about to commit; nevertheless proceeded to their own peril/demise. For instance, in theKIDNAPPING of Newsome, Respondents DESTROYED, TAMPERED and WITHHELD evidencethat was known to be used in official proceedings. See Paragraphs iii-xii/pp. 71-80; i/pp. 100-102;vi/pp. 105-107; and 41/pp.132-133 and supporting Exhibits referenced therein of EM/ORSaddressing criminal/civil violations. Then rather than file a TIMELY Answer and/or ResponsivePleading to Newsome‘s Civil Lawsuit, Respondent(s) elected to file MALICIOUS, VICIOUS andFRIVOLOUS criminal charges against her which the lower court dismissed. Arthur Andersen LLP v. U.S., 125 S.Ct. 2129 (U.S.,2005) - Federal conviction for obstruction of justice based on defendants ―kowingly n ... corruptly persuad[ing] another person‖ to withhold testimony or destroy records to be used in official proceeding requires proof of consciousness of wrongdoing; term ― knowingly‖ modifies ― corruptly persuades,‖ and thus imposes mens rea requirement. 18 U.S.C.A. § 1512(b)(2)(A, B). Federal conviction for obstruction of justice based on defendants ―kowingly ... corruptly persuad[ing] another person‖ to n withhold testimony or destroy records to be used in official proceeding requires proof of nexus between corrupt persuasion and particular proceeding. Id.Respondents then relied upon corruptly persuading judge/magistrate to get involved inCONSPIRACIES and COVER-UP the criminal/civil wrongs leveled against Newsome. WhenNewsome filed the appropriate/applicable pleadings to determine whether a ― Conflict of Interest‖existed, judges/magistrates remained silent and the lower court proceeded to TAMPER andCOMPROMISE the court records for purposes of OBSTRUCTING the administration of justice thatthe records are now HEAVILY BREACHED and/or COMPROMISED that Newsome believes thatthe clerk of lower court CANNOT certify the record. Therefore, it was necessary for them to call onthe KEY/HIGH POWER CRIMINALS - i.e. like Baker Donelson – to AID in the COVER-UP of Page 71 of 96
  • criminal/civil wrongs leveled against Newsome as well as other citizens that may have surfacedduring an investigation. The record evidence will support, for instance, that Judge Tom S. Lee (― Judge Lee‖) andMagistrate Linda R. Anderson of the United States District Court (Southern District Mississippi –Jackson Division) KNEW there was a ― CONFLICT OF INTEREST‖ with this assignment;nevertheless, remained on the lawsuit although pleadings were filed by Newsome challenging and/oraddressing such concerns. See Exhibit “42” of EM/ORS – Docket Sheet incorporated by referenceas if set forth in full herein. Newsome believes that research, inquiries and investigation will yieldthat the Insurance Company involved being LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE which is a BIGCLIENT of Baker Donelson – i.e. which it appears may be legal counsel/advisor for United StatesPresident Barack Obama, his Administration and Members of Congress and who knows what otherLARGE SLIMY FISH are in their net. NEXUS and/or CONNECTION between Baker Donelson, Liberty Mutual and its insuredscan be established with the CONSPIRACIES and COVER-UP of criminal/civil wrongs leveledagainst Newsome. Moreover, Newsome provided evidence supporting how Judge Lee executed andfiled ― Recusal Orders‖ in legal actions because of his RELATIONSHIP with Baker Donelson (SeeAppendix “11” of PFEW) – EXHIBIT “39” of this instant filing attached hereto and incorporatedby reference as if set forth in full herein. However, when presented with Newsome‘s lawsuits took aFAR DEPARTURE from the statutes/laws governing said matters and CONSPIRED to keep the roleBaker Donelson, its insured, and others had in the unlawful/illegal/unethical practices in the handlingof lawsuit from Newsome by using a FRONTING law firm (DunbarMonroe) to keep Newsome offof their trail and Baker Donelson‘s INFLUENCE and role it had in the THREATS leveled againstNewsome‘s attorney (Wanda Abioto) and its role in the KIDNAPPING of Newsome, etc. Then when Newsome filed her Criminal Complaint with the United States Department ofJustice, Respondents relied upon their KEY ROLES/POSITIONS/RELATIONSHIPS within said Page 72 of 96
  • government agency to engage in CONSPIRACIES and COVER-UP the criminal/civil wrongsreported. In so doing, Newsome was deprived of EQUAL protection of the laws, EQUAL privilegesand immunities of the laws and DUE PROCESS of laws secured/guaranteed under the Constitutionand other laws of the United States. XXIII. RECUSAL Newsome believes that the facts, evidence and legal conclusions provided in EM/ORS,PFEW and their supporting Exhibits/Appendices may further support a PATTERN-OF-PRACTICE, PATTERN-OF-ABUSE, PATTERN-OF-USURPATION OF POWER, etc.Moreover, how lower courts‘ judges/justices REPEATEDLY failed to recuse themselves withKNOWLEDGE recusal was warranted and remained on the case to PROTECT theirPERSONAL, PECUNARY and SUBSTANTIAL interest and AID and ABET in the furtheranceof CONSPIRACIES and COVER-UP of criminal/civil wrongs leveled against Newsome,members of her class and/or other citizens that an investigation may reveal had been victimized. 103. Newsome believes that the facts, evidence and legal conclusions provided in EM/ORS, PFEW and their supporting Exhibits/Appendices may sustain that judges/justices in the lower court actions biases and interest in lawsuit was WAY TOO high to be CONSTITUTIONALLY tolerable. In fact, for instance: a) In Mississippi matter, judge, constable and others orchestrated the KIDNAPPING and other crimes against Newsome, and subjected her to hours of torture, threats, abuse, etc. until her parents paid the RANSOM that was demanded for her release. Said RANSOM was masked as a Bond and Newsome‘s KIDNAPPING masked/disguised as an arrest; however, there was no legal authority and/or legal right to arrest Newsome; therefore, as a matter of law, the crime being KIDNAPPING amongst other crimes she was subjected to. In said matter, legal process was FALSIFIED. Furthermore, lack of jurisdiction is evidenced. b) In Kentucky matter, judge, county officials, etc. who orchestrated and carried out the criminal/civil wrongs leveled against Newsome, had NO legal authority to act. Legal process was FALSIFIED, jurisdiction was lacking, Page 73 of 96
  • monies entrusted to the court EMBEZZLED amongst many other crimes committed.c) In Ohio matter you had the majority of the Supreme Court of Ohio Justices who engaged in such crimes as: i. Conspiracy (18 USC§ 371); ii. Conspiracy Against Rights (18 USC§ 241); iii. Conspiracy to Defraud (statutes provided) iv. Conspiracy to Interfere with Civil Rights (42 USC§ 1985); v. Public Corruption (provided information taken from FBI‘s vi. website); vii. Bribery (statutes cited); viii. Complicity (statutes cited); ix. Aiding and Abetting (statutes cited); x. Coercion (statutes cited); xi. Deprivation of Rights Under COLOR OF LAW (18 USC§ xii. 242); xiii. Conspiracy to Commit Offense to Defraud United States (18 xiv. USC§ 371); xv. Conspiracy to Impede (18 USC§ 372); xvi. Frauds and Swindles (18 USC§ 1341 and 1346); xvii. Obstruction of Court Orders (18 USC§ 1509); xviii. Tampering with a Witness (18 USC§ 1512); xix. Retaliating Against A Witness (18 USC§ 1513); xx. Destruction, Alteration, or Falsification of Records (18 USC§ xxi. 1519); xxii. Obstruction of Mail (18 USC§ 1701); xxiii. Obstruction of Correspondence (18 USC§ 1702); xxiv. Delay of Mail (18 USC§ 1703); xxv. Theft or Receipt of Stolen Mail (18 USC§ 1708); xxvi. Avoidance of Postage by Using Lower Class (18 USC§ xxvii. 1723); xxviii. Postage Collected Unlawfully (18 USC§ 1726); Page 74 of 96
  • xxix. Power/Failure to Prevent (42 USC§ 1986); xxx. Obstruction of Justicefor purposes of AIDING, ABETTING and COVERING UP the crimes of one oftheir BIG MONEY INTEREST GROUPS/DONORS – Liberty Mutual InsuranceCompany. Liberty Mutual Insurance‘s insured is Stor-All Alfred LLC.Therefore, Justices engaged in CRIMINAL acts and fulfilled their ROLE in theCONSPIRACIES leveled against Newsome.Given the facts, evidence and legal conclusions surrounding these criminal/civilwrongs leveled against Newsome, the OBSTRUCTION of Justice, etc., areasonable and/or average judge in the justices‘ position familiar with the lawsand the CONSEQUENCES of their actions would have engaged in such criminalbehavior as the Supreme Court of Ohio Justices did; because said criminal actsand biases are TOO HIGH to be CONSTITUTIONALLY TOLERABLE!! Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co., Inc., 129 S.Ct. 2252 (2009) - Even when judge does not have any direct, personal, substantial, pecuniary interest in case, of kind requiring his or her disqualification at common law, there are circumstances in which probability of actual bias on part of judge is too high to be constitutionally tolerable. In deciding whether probability of actual bias on part of judge is too high to be constitutionally tolerable, courts inquiry is objective one, that asks not whether judge is actually, subjectively biased, but whether average judge in judges position is likely to be neutral, or whether there is unconstitutional potential for bias. Id. 104. Newsome believes that given the facts, evidence and legalconclusions as well as the PATTERN-OF-CONSPIRACIES leveled against her andthe CONSPIRATORS/PERPETRATORS involved, that judges/justices in lowercourt matters are BIAS/PREJUDICE towards Newsome; moreover, that thestatutes/laws required RECUSAL; however judges/justices remained in legal actionsOVER Newsome‘s OBJECTIONS. Furthermore, judges (i.e. such as Judge Bobby DeLaughter) who have been INDICTED and pled guilty to crime(s) as well as Judge G. Thomas Porteous who was IMPEACHED and removed from the bench engaged in CRIMINAL/CIVIL wrongs to provide Respondents opposing Newsome with and UNDUE/ILLEGAL/UNLAWFUL advantage in lawsuit. The record evidence will SUPPORT that Newsome reported CRIMINAL/CIVIL wrongs to the United States Department of Justice and/or appropriate Government Agency. To NO avail. Because of the RELATIONSHIPS of Respondents and TIES to Government Agencies/Officials, CONSPIRACIES continued and CRIMES/CIVIL wrongs were COVERED UP. Cheney v. U.S. Dist. Court for Dist. of Columbia, 124 S.Ct. 1391 (2004) - The recusal inquiry for a judge based upon perceived lack of impartiality must be made from the perspective of a reasonable observer who is informed of all the surrounding facts and Page 75 of 96
  • circumstances . (Per Justice Scalia, as single Justice). 28 U.S.C.A. § 455(a). Sao Paulo State of Federative Republic of Brazil v. American Tobacco Co., Inc., 122 S.Ct. 1290 (U.S.,2002) - Statute requires judicial recusal if a reasonable person, knowing all the circumstances, would expect that the judge would have actual knowledge of his interest or bias in the case. 28 U.S.C.A. § 455(a). Harrison v. U.S., 88 S.Ct. 2008 (1968) - A defendants testimony at a former trial is admissible in evidence against him in later proceedings. 105. EXTRAORDINARY, EXCEPTIONAL and CRITICAL/EXIGENTcircumstances exists because the FACTS and EVIDENCE will support that if not inALL, the MAJORITY of lawsuits filed by Newsome, Baker Donelson‘s and its client– LIBERTY MUTUAL – were involved in some way or another in theCONSPIRACIES and COVER-UP of same and INFLUENCED the outcome ofmatters. Moreover, that Baker Donelson and/or Liberty Mutual had SPECIALRELATIONSHIPS to Judges/Magistrates assigned; however, failed to make thisinformation known to Newsome. Furthermore, in approximately a ONE-YEAR period THREE Judges and/or their aides (involved with legal matters and/or judges involving Newsome) have been involved in CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS in which they were ALL FOUND guilty: a) The INDICTMENT of Judge West‘s Bailiff (Damon Ridley) and a Jury finding Ridley “GUILTY” of ― Attempted Bribery;" b) The January 6, 2009 INDICTMENT of Judge Bobby B. GUILTY‖ to “LYING to FBI DeLaughter, to which he pled ― Agent. . ./OBSTRUCTION of Justice;” c) The recent IMPEACHMENT proceedings of Judge G. Thomas Porteous on or about December 8, 2010. Withrow v. Larkin, 95 S.Ct. 1456 (1975) - Among cases in which experience teaches that probability of actual bias on part of judge or decisionmaker is too high to be constitutionally tolerable are those in which adjudicator has pecuniary interest in outcome and in which he has been target of personal abuse or criticism from party before him. XXIV. ADDITIONAL AND PERTINENT INFORMATION RELEVANT TO PETITION FOR EXTRAORDINARY WRIT 106. Newsome believes this matter lies within this Supreme Court of theUnited States original jurisdiction for bringing her ―PFEW‖ pursuant to Rule 20 –Procedure on a Petition for an Extraordinary Writ – issuance by the Court of anextraordinary writ is authorized by 28 USC § 1651(a). Page 76 of 96
  • 107. Newsome believes that the jurisdiction of this Court can be invokedunder 28 U.S.C. § 1257(a). 108. Newsome believes that that the jurisdiction of this Court if furtherinvoked pursuant to Article III, § 2, United States Constitution - - Section 2: Thejudicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under thisConstitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall bemade, under their Authority . . .Newsome further relies upon legal resources as the following to sustain saidargument regarding jurisdiction: (a) Vol. 22 Moore‘s Federal Practice, § 400.03 Relationship of Supreme Court to State Courts: [1] STATE COURT MUST PROTECT FEDERAL RIGHTS: The state courts existed before Congress created the federal courts. Their existence was not disturbed by the adoption of the Constitution. State courts are required to protect federal, as well as state-created, rights. See Testa v. Katt, 330 U.S. 386, 390-394, 67 S.Ct. 810, 91 L.Ed. 967 (1947) (state court could not refuse to enforce federal claim). [2] SUPREME COURT MAY REVIEW DECISION OF HIGHEST STATE COURT IF SUBSTANTIAL FEDERAL QUESTION IS INVOLVED: If a party elects to litigate in state court, the Supreme Court may review a final judgment or decree of the highest state court in which a decision can be had if it turns on a substantial federal question. More specifically, the decision must: (1) raise a question as to the validity of the federal statute or treaty; (2) raise a question as to whether a state statute is repugnant to the Constitution, laws or treaties of the United States; or (3) address the contention that a title, right, privilege or immunity is ―se up or claimed t under the Constitution or the treaties or statutes of, or any commission held or authority exercised under, the United States.‖ (See 28 USC § 1257(a)). The constitutionality of this scheme was upheld early in the Court‘s history. (See Cohens v. Virginia, 19 U.S. (6 Wheat.) 264, 421, 5 L.Ed. 257 (1821) (Court has supervising power over judgments of state courts that conflict with Constitution of federal laws or treaties); Martin v. Hunter’s Lessee, 14 U.S. (1 Wheat.) 304, 342, 14 U.S. Page 77 of 96
  • 304, 4 L.Ed. 97(1816)(― appellate power the of the United States must . . .extend to state tribunals‖). The qualifying phrase ― highest court of a state in which a decision could be had‖ means the highest court in the state with appellate power over the judgment. See Flynt v. Ohio, 451 U.S. 619, 620, 101 S.Ct. 1958, 68 L.Ed 2d 489 (1981) (per curiam) (jurisdiction to review only final judgment of highest state court); Nash v. Florida Indus. Comm’n, 389 U.S. 235, 237 n.1, 88 S.Ct. 362, 19 L.Ed.2d 438 (1967) (decision of intermediate appellate court reviewed because Court was ― unable to say‖ that court was not highest one in which decision could be had). (b) Vol. 22 Moore‘s Federal Practice, § 400.04 Supervisory Authority of Supreme Court Over Inferior Federal Courts [1] SUPREME COURT HAS EXTENSIVE RULEMAKING POWER: The Supreme Court has powers beyond its duty to entertain cases within its original and appellate jurisdiction. The Court has extensive power to prescribe rules of practice and procedure for civil actions. . . The Supreme Court, of course, has the power to promulgate rules governing practice and procedure before itself, and has done so. 109. This lawsuit involves EXTRAORDINARY and EXCEPTIONALcircumstances warranting the intervention of the Supreme Court of the United States‘intervention and supervisory powers under its original jurisdiction. 110. Newsome is not aware whether or not the Supreme Court has dealtwith a case of such MAGNITUDE and levels of CONSPIRACIES andCORRUPTION. However, through time, dedication and determination, Newsomewas able to obtain the evidence to sustain the allegations made in EM/ORS, PFEWand their supporting Exhibits/Appendices. 111. The legal action Newsome seeks to bring before this Courtinvolves a sitting United States President (Barack H. Obama)/his Administrationand their SPECIAL Interest Groups who all have an interest (i.e.financial/personal) in the outcome of this legal action. This is a matter ofEXTRAORDINARY and EXCEPTIONAL circumstances in which Newsome is notaware whether the United States Supreme Court has ever seen anything like it. 112. United States President Barack Obama wanted his Administration tobe one of TRANSPARANCY and one in which the citizens/public could come.Well, the record evidence exposes the CRIMINAL/CIVIL violations of the ObamaAdministration to COVER-UP criminal/civil wrongs brought to him as well as hisAdministration‘s attention. Moreover, how President Obama and hisAdministration RETALIATED against Newsome for exercising her rights underthe Constitution and going PUBLIC in exposing legal wrongs and Page 78 of 96
  • CONSPIRACIES leveled against her regardless whether or not the culprits arefamous or anonymous: Rosenbloom v. Metromedia, Inc., 91 S.Ct. 1811(1971) - First Amendment protects all discussion and communication involving matters of public or general concern without regard to whether persons involved are famous or anonymous. (Per Mr. Justice Brennan with the Chief Justice and one Justice joining in the opinion and two Justices concurring in the judgment.) U.S.C.A.Const. Amend. 1. Kush v. Rutledge, 460 U.S. 719, 103 S.Ct. 1483 (1983) - Although § 2 contained only one long paragraph when it was originally enacted, that single paragraph outlawed five broad In general terms, § 2 classes of conspiratorial activity. proscribed conspiracies that interfere with (a) the performance of official duties by federal officers; (b) the administration of justice in federal courts; (c) the administration of justice in state courts; (d) the private enjoyment of “equal protection of the laws” and “equal privileges and **1487 immunities under the laws‖; and (e) the right to support candidates in federal elections. As now codified in § 1985, the long paragraph is divided into three subsections. One of the five classes of prohibited conspiracy is proscribed by § 1985(1), two by § 1985(2), and two by § 1985(3). The civil remedy for a violation of any of the subsections is found at the end of § 1985(3). The reclassification was not intended to change the substantive meaning of the 1871 Act. 113. Newsome believes the record evidence will support that this is aclassic example of “DAVID vs. GOLIATH” battle in which she (indigent litigant andmember of the African-American race) has been pitted against GIANT(S) of vastfinancial/legal resources as well as deep-rooted political/judicial ties for purposes ofproviding them with an undue/unlawful/illegal advantage over matters involvingNewsome: By including this provision in the bill, the committee emphasizes that the nature of . . . actions more often than not pits parties of unequal strength and resources against each other. The complainant, who is usually a member of the disadvantaged class, is opposed by an employer who . . . has at his Page 79 of 96
  • disposal a vast of resources and legal talent.H.R. Rep. No. 238, 92nd Cong., 2d Sess., reprinted in 1972 U.S.C.C.A.N. 2137,2148. Therefore, it is of PUBLIC/WORLDWIDE interest for citizens to see just howsophisticated and elaborate the United States Government is and the PRIVATEcorporations they CONSPIRE with to destroy citizens’ lives. Moreover, howPRIVATE corporate giants INFILTRATES the United States Government andretains positions/jobs for purposes of carrying out and committing Human/CivilRights violations, COVERING UP corruption and other criminal/civil wrongs ofwhite employers leveled against Newsome and/or citizens of the United States.Such CRIMINAL/CIVIL wrongs in which CHINA has PUBLICLY criticized theUnited States for. See EXHIBIT “5” attached hereto and incorporated by referenceas if set forth in full herein. 114. Newsome believes that the record evidence will support howattorneys that represent clients (i.e. such as Respondent Stor-All Alfred LLC) are notrequired to practice the laws; however, are allowed to rely upon SPECIALrelationships, FINANCIAL/PERSONAL interests and ties to GOVERNMENT andCOURT officials to obtain an undue/unlawful/illegal advantage in lawsuit(s). 115. Newsome believes that the record evidence, facts and legalconclusions will sustain the DISHONESTY in Respondents, United States PresidentObama/his Administration, Judicial Officials, Government Officials as well asopposing counsel and their clients’ along with their roles in the CONSPIRACIESleveled against Newsome and COVER-UP of the CORRUPTION and unlawful/illegalacts complained of. Therefore, in the interest of justice, they have NO place inPUBLIC life and should NOT be allowed to continue to abide in the generalpopulation. Newsome believes that the record evidence will sustain they are athreat to the PUBLIC-AT-LARGE: Teddy Roosevelt: "Unless a man is honest we have no right to keep him in public life, it matters not how brilliant his capacity, it hardly matters how great his power of doing good service on certain lines may be... No man who is corrupt, no man who condones corruption in others, can possibly do his duty by the community.As with President Richard Nixon – What did he know andwhen did he know it? – President Nixon was prosecuted (― Watergate‖matter) for his crimes. Therefore, if the evidence warrants it, PresidentBarack Obama is to be prosecuted and the fact that he is the firstalleged African-American President should have nothing to do withthe laws being EQUALLY applied to him and President Obama andothers involved and Conspiracies prosecuted. Page 80 of 96
  • 116. Newsome believes that the record evidence will support that she hasREPEATEDLY reported criminal/civil wrongs to the proper GovernmentAgencies/Officials of those she believed were acting in violation of the laws – i.e.reporting criminals regardless of the color of their skin. The recordevidence will support that Newsome has reported criminal/civil wrongs of Judges;however, Government Officials failed to notify her and/or prosecute matters on herbehalf. Moreover, WITHHELD information from Newsome that Judges/Justicesreported were being investigated, prosecuted and/or indicted. 117. Newsome believes that the record evidence will further supportthat United States President Barack Obama and/or Judge JohnAndrew West (i.e. other alleged African-Americans) will NOT be ableto launch a defense as the “RACE” card. For they are attorneys byPROFESSION and thus, persons schooled in the laws; however,elected to take a far departure from the laws to ― satisfy their OWNbellies.‖ It is important to note that the laws have no color and are to be equallyapplied. Therefore, those found in violations of the criminal/civil wrongs leveledagainst Newsome are to be prosecuted according to the laws of the United Statesregardless of their brilliancy, position, titles, political ties, etc. 118. Newsome believes that the facts, evidence and legal conclusionswill support that it is a LONGSTANDING fact that the laws are not EQUALLYapplied when African-Americans/Blacks are involved. Moreover, that whitecitizens are REPEATEDLY allowed to prevail (i.e. or receive lesser punishment– PURCHASE through bribery/extortion and/or other criminal acts rulings fromCORRUPT/TAINTED judges to obtain an undue/unlawful/illegal advantage)through the discriminatory application of the laws of the United States. 119. Newsome believes this legal action is IMPARATIVE and providesEXTRAORDINARY circumstances which address longstanding prejudices anddiscrimination leveled against her as well as members of her class. Moreover,how the United States Government engage in criminal/civil wrongs for purposesof destroying a person‘s life and for purposes of depriving them life, liberties andthe pursuit of happiness – i.e. as in Newsome‘s case: a) Mississippi State Champion in Track & Field; b) Who‘s Who Among American High School Students; c) All-American; and d) Olympic Trials Qualifier/Participant, etc.that with a ―S ROKE OF A PEN‖ [i.e. as the Jena-Six African-American young Tmen were threatened with by Government Official and in keeping withconspiracies to LOCK-UP the African-American male population] and throughthe POSTING of false and malicious information on the INTERNET a citizen’slife can be ruined/destroyed; moreover, CONSPIRACIES formed to deprive themEQUAL protection of the laws, EQUAL privileges and immunities and DUE Page 81 of 96
  • PROCESS of laws secured/guaranteed under the United States Constitution and other laws of the United States. Then when it is time to compensate African-Americans for the injuries/harms/injustices sustained, attempts are taken to deprive them of liabilities sustained from such unlawful/illegal acts – RACIAL INJUSTICES! Milkovich v. Lorain Journal Co., 110 S.Ct. 2695 (1990) - Where statement of ― opinion‖ on matter of public concern reasonably implies false and defamatory facts involving private figure, plaintiff must show that false implications were made with some level of fault to support recovery. U.S.C.A. Const.Amend. 1. Paul proclaimed his innocence to . . . leaders. When is it wise to make a public response to false accusations, and when should we just let them go? In the case of Paul, the gospel would have been discredited if he had not spoken up. His circumstances made him look like a criminal, and he had no history with these leaders to expect them to assume otherwise without a proper defense. If we have been publicly slandered by credible sources, we should probably make a public response. Otherwise our own witness will be compromised. . . Jesus warned us that some people will say all manner of evil against us falsely, so we should not be surprised when it happens. But we do need to exercise wisdom when we 40 become aware of it. 120. Newsome believes that in order for our Nation to heal, that these RACIAL Injustices (i.e. in employment, false imprisonment, etc.) leveled against her as well as members of her class is of PUBLIC/WORLDWIDE importance and, therefore, brings this matter to the HIGHEST and most SUPERIOR Court in the United States under which jurisdiction lies. 121. This legal action involve CONSPIRATORS and CO- CONSPIRATORS across the country/United States (i.e. in multiple states) - which is addressed in the ― EM/ORS‖ filed with this Court along with supporting facts, evidence and legal conclusions. Respondents which may include STATES, COUNTIES, MUNICIPALITIES, CITIES and/or their officials. 122. Newsome believes that the record evidence will support that the object of CONSPIRACIES leveled against her are RACIALLY motivated. Moreover, done to deprive her rights secured under the United States Constitution and other laws of the United States. 40 Upheld By God‖ - 2009-2010 Standard Lesson Commentary (King James Version) - August 29, 2010 Lesson Entitled: ― Let’s Talk It Over.‖Subtitle: ― Page 82 of 96
  • 123. This matter is of PUBLIC/WORLDWIDE importance and interest. Moreover, has an impact on the lives of not only Newsome but other citizens of the United States. 124. Newsome believes that this Court‘s intervention is IMPARATIVE in that this matter involves matters that affect the PUBLIC-AT-LARGE in that there are criminals who have been allowed to be a part of the GENERAL POPULATION and because they have not been stopped, continue to commit criminal/civil wrongs against other citizens – i.e. allowed to become CAREER CRIMINALS: U.S. v. Jimenez Recio, 123 S.Ct. 819 (2003) - Essence of a conspiracy is an agreement to commit an unlawful act. Agreement to commit an unlawful act, which constitutes the essence of a conspiracy, is a distinct evil that may exist and be punished whether or not the substantive crime ensues. Id. Conspiracy poses a threat to the public over and above the threat of the commission of the relevant substantive crime, both because the combination in crime makes more likely the commission of other crimes and because it decreases the probability that the individuals involved will depart from their path of criminality. Id. Criminals who may have been allowed to let their RACIST/DISCRIMINATORY/SUPREMACIST ideology to TARGET Middle East countries and destroy the lives of citizens in Foreign lands – i.e. through the USE and ABUSE of the United States Military and others who may OR may not have known of these CRIMINALS’ intent. 125. Newsome believes this legal action meets the prerequisites in that: (a) the writ will be in aid of the Court‘s appellate jurisdiction – [28 U.S.C. § 1651(a)] ― The U.S. Supreme Court has a continuing power to issue extraordinary writs in aid of either its original jurisdiction41 including as a part of jurisdiction(s) the exercise of general supervisory control over the court system – state or federal.‖42 41 See Ex parte Hung Hang, 108 U.S. 552, 553, 2 S.Ct. 863, 27 L.Ed. 811 (1883) (Court has authority to issue writ);Pennsylvania v. Wheeling Belmont Bridge Co., 59 U.S. 421, 431, 15 L.Ed. 435 (1885) (― of congress cannot have the effect and actoperation to annul the decision of the court already rendered); Ex parte Siebold, 100 U.S. 371, 374, 25 L.Ed. 717 (1879) (― Having thisgeneral power to issue the writ, the court may issue it in the exercise of original jurisdiction where it has original jurisdiction. . . ― see );also Wagner, Original Jurisdiction of National Supreme Courts, 33 St. John‘s L. Rev. 217 (1959); cf. Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (1Cranch) 137, 147, 2 L.Ed. 60 (1803) (― term ‗appellate jurisdiction‘ is to be taken in its larger sense, and implies in its nature the Theright of superintending the inferior tribunals.‖). 42 When a lower. . .court refuses to See e.g., Connor v. Coleman, 440 U.S. 612, 624, 99 S.Ct. 1523, 59 L.Ed. 2d 619 (1979) (―give effect to, or misconstrues our mandate, its actions are controlled by this Court. . .‖); MCullough v. Cosgrave, 309 U.S. 634, Page 83 of 96
  • (b) exceptional circumstances warrant the exercise of the Court‘s discretionary powers - While there need NOT be a laundry list of “exceptional circumstances,” the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly asserted that the peremptory writs are drastic and extraordinary remedies that must be reserved for only truly extraordinary cases (as the extraordinary circumstances in this instant lawsuit).43 (c) adequate relief cannot be had in any other form - Newsome seeks to bring, the writ sought in that it is permissible and warranted as a matter of law - Ex parte Harding, 219 U.S. 363, 374; 31 S.Ct. 324, 55 L.Ed. 252 (1911) (writ only applicable to exceptional cases) – and is sustained by facts, evidence and legal conclusions of the good-faith acts of Newsome to seek adequate relief through appropriate legal recourse – i.e. due to no avail because of the conspiracy(s) leveled against her. (d) adequate relief cannot be had in any other court below – the record evidence, facts and legal conclusions will support a PATTERN of unlawful/illegal acts leveled against Newsome (i.e. moreover, CONSPIRACIES). The record evidence will further support efforts by lower courts to ― CLOSE DOORS OF COURT(S) to Newsome.‖ Thus, warranting and supporting the relief Newsome seeks through bringing Extraordinary Writ. [Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123, 165, 28 S.Ct. 441, 52 L.Ed. 714 (1908) (remedies at law not inadequate) as well as for reasons known to this Court to deter/prevent the criminal/civil wrongs addressed herein and in ―PFEW‖ and ― EM/ORS.‖ 126. Neither this Court nor Respondents – i.e. Stor-All Alfred LLC (― Stor- All‖) and Judge John Andrew West/Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas635, 60 S.Ct. 703, 84 L.Ed. 992 (1940) (Court directed . . . Court judge to vacate order and retry cases expediently); Ex parte UnitedStates, 242 U.S. 27, 52, 37 S.Ct. 72, 61 L.Ed. 129 (1916) (mandamus proper remedy for enforcing . . . when. . . Court that passed it hasdefeated its execution). - - Vol. 23 Moore‘s Federal Practice, § 520.02[2] (Matthew Bender 3d ed.). 43 See Bagley v. Byrd, 534 U.S. 1301, 122 S.Ct. 419, 419-420, 151 L.Ed. 2d 370 (2001) (Stevens, J., in chambers) (Court willdeny applications for stay of lower-court proceedings pending Court‘s disposition of . . . petition unless application demonstrates thatdenial of stay will either cause irreparable harm or affect Supreme Court‘s jurisdiction to act on . . . petition); In re Michael Sindram,498 U.S. 177, 179, 111 S.Ct. 596, 112 L.Ed. 2d 599 (1991) (petitioner ― identifies no ‗drastic‘ circumstances to justify extraordinaryrelief‖ as required by Sup. Ct. R. 20.1); Will v. United States, 389 U.S. 90, 95, 88 S.Ct. 269, 19 L.Ed. 305 (1967) (― only exceptionalcircumstances amounting to a judicial ‗usurpation of power‘ will justify the invocation of this extraordinary remedy‖); Ex parteFahey, 332 U.S. 258, 260, 67 S.Ct. 1558, 91 L.Ed. 2041 (1947) (― These remedies should be resorted to only where appeal is a clearlyinadequate remedy.‖). Page 84 of 96
  • (― Judge West‖ and/or ― HCCCP‖ respectively) - have been prejudiced by PetitionerNewsome‘s PFEW. 127. In support of this instant RT031711SCL Newsome incorporates hereinby reference as if set forth in full herein the March 12, 2011, “Petition forExtraordinary Writ,” the facts, evidence and supporting legal conclusions providedtherein as well as the supporting APPENDICES (i.e. approximately 16 – Newsomeinadvertently left off Appendix “16” – which is copy of the January 6, 2011 CoverLetter which all parties to this action has and/or should have in their possession -however, reserves the right to make the necessary amendment, should the court deemnecessary). 128. In support of this instant RT031711SCL Newsome incorporates(because of voluminous pleading) herein by reference as if set forth in full herein theOctober 9, 2010 “Emergency Motion to Stay; Emergency Motion for Enlargement ofTime and Other Relief The United States Supreme Court Deems Appropriate ToCorrect The Legal Wrongs/Injustices Reported Herein,” the facts, evidence andsupporting legal conclusions provided therein as well as the supporting EXHIBITS(i.e. approximately 169 – ― thru ― 1‖ 169)). 129. Newsome further preserves the Arguments/Defenses raised in―EM/ORS‖ which include (i.e. however, this should not be taken as an exhaustive listin that the Supreme Court of the United States may deem it necessary to addressadditional arguments/defenses based upon the facts, evidence and legal conclusionaddressed herein and/or in its knowledge): I. AFFIDAVIT OF ISQUALIFICATION II. SUPREMACIST/TERRORIST/KU KLUX KLAN ACT III. IRREPARABLE INJURY/HARM IV. THREATS TO COUNSEL/ APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL V. UNFIT FOR OFFICE VI. FINDING OF FACT/CONCLUSION OF LAW VII. DUE PROCESS OF FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT TO U.S. CONSTITUTION VIII. EQUAL PROTECTION OF FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT TO U.S. CONSTITUTION IX. U.S. OFFICE OF PRESIDENT/ EXECUTIVE OFFICE; UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE/DEPARTMENT OF LABOR ROLE IN CONSPIRACY X. SELECTIVE PROSECUTION XI. ―SERIAL LITIGATOR‖ ISSUE XII. CONGRESSIONAL INVESTIGATION(S) XIII. PROHIBITION/MANDAMUS ACTION(S) XIV. PATTERN-OF-PRACTICE A. Entergy Services Inc./Entergy New Orleans Matter B. Other Former Employers Of Newsome Baria Fyke Hawkins & Stracener Page 85 of 96
  • Brunini Grantham Grower & Hewes Mitchell McNutt & Sams Page Kruger & Holland Wood & Lamping LLC XV. MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME XVI. RELIEF SOUGHT 130. Newsome believes that while the following ― Questions Presented ForReview: in PFEW‖ (1) Whether Newsome‘s “Emergency Motion to Stay; Emergency Motion for Enlargement of Time and Other Relief The United States Supreme Court Deems Appropriate To Correct The Legal Wrongs/Injustices Reported Herein” was a timely pleading in accordance with United States Supreme Court Rules 22, 23 and/or 33. Whether the Clerk of the United States Supreme Court forward Newsome‘s ― EM/ORS‖ to individual justice (Chief Justice John G. Roberts) to which it was addressed. Whether Newsome was deprived equal protection of the laws, equal privileges and immunities and due process of laws in the United States Supreme Court‘s handling of ― EM/ORS.‖ (2) Whether ― EM/ORS‖ is within the jurisdiction of the United States Supreme Court. Whether the United States Supreme Court is attempting to deprive Newsome rights secured under the Constitution, other laws of the United States, equal protection of the laws, equal privileges and immunities, and due process of laws in the handling of ―EM/ORS.‖ (3) Whether Newsome is entitled to the ― Emergency Relief‖ sought in ―EM/ORS‖ and pleadings filed with the United States Supreme Court. (4) Whether Newsome is entitled to IMMEDIATE temporary injunctive relief and emergency relief sought in ― EM/ORS‖ prior to disposition of PFEW – i.e. for instance as set forth in: Section 706(f)(2) of Title VII authorizes the Commission to seek temporary injunctive relief before final disposition of a charge when a preliminary investigation indicates that prompt judicial action is necessary to carry out the purposes of Title VII. Temporary or preliminary relief allows a court to stop retaliation before it occurs or continues. Such relief is appropriate if there is a substantial likelihood that the challenged action will be found to constitute unlawful retaliation, and if the charging party and/or EEOC will likely suffer irreparable harm because of retaliation. Although courts have ruled that financial hardships are not irreparable, other harms that accompany loss of a job may be irreparable. - - For example, in one case forced retirees showed irreparable harm and qualified for a preliminary injunction where they lost work and future prospects for work consequently suffering emotional distress, depression, a contracted social life, and other related harms. Page 86 of 96
  • (5) Whether the United States Supreme Court in handling of this lawsuit, is attempting to obstruct justice and provide Respondent(s) with an unlawful/illegal and undue advantage in lawsuit due to bias and prejudice towards Newsome.(6) Whether the laws of the United States are equally applied to African-Americans/Black as those similarly situated. Whether the United States has a “longstanding” history of knowingly discriminating against African-Americans/Blacks in the application of the laws. Whether Newsome has been discriminated against in the application of the laws of the United States.(7) Whether the United States Supreme Court Justices/Administration have bias, prejudices and/or discriminatory animus towards Newsome. Whether Newsome is required to know of any bias, prejudices or discriminatory animus that Judges/Justices may have against her.(8) Whether the United States Supreme Court Justices/Administration is attempting to COVER UP the criminal/civil wrongs leveled against Newsome. Whether a “Conflict of Interest” exist in the United States Supreme Court‘s handling of this matter. Whether the United States Supreme Court has advised Newsome and parties to this action of any potential “Conflict of Interest.”(9) What relationship (if any) the United States Supreme Court, its justices and/or employees have with the law firm of Baker Donelson Bearman Caldwell & Berkowitz, its employees and clients (i.e. such as Liberty Mutual Insurance Company).(10) What relationship (if any) the United States Government and/or Government Agencies and employees have with the law firm of Baker Donelson Bearman Caldwell & Berkowitz, its employees and clients (i.e. such as Liberty Mutual Insurance Company).(11) Whether the United States Supreme Court is engaging in “dilatory” practices for purposes of financially devastating Newsome for purposes of preventing her from litigating this matter and purposes of providing opposing parties with an undue/unlawful/illegal advantage in lawsuit.(12) Whether the United States Supreme Court has an obligation to correct the legal wrongs made known to it and/or that it has knowledge of. Whether the United States Supreme Court is required to report criminal/civil wrongs reported to it and/or made known through pleadings (i.e. as “PFEW”) filed with it.(13) Whether attorneys are governed by the Code of Professional Conduct and/or similar statutes/laws governing practice before the court(s) and representation of clients. Whether Judges/Justices have a duty to report and/or initiate the applicable proceedings against attorneys/lawyers who violate the Page 87 of 96
  • Code of Professional Conduct and/or similar statutes/laws governing the practice of law.(14) Whether Judges/Justices are governed by the Code of Judicial Conduct and/or similar statutes/laws governing practice of the laws. Whether Judges/Justices have a duty to report and/or initiate the applicable proceedings against judges/justices who violate the Code of Judicial Conduct and/or similar statutes/laws governing the practice of law.(15) Whether Judges/Justices have usurped authority and/or abused power in the handling of legal matters to which Newsome is a party.(16) Whether Judge(s) presiding over legal matters to which Newsome is a party have been INDICTED and/or IMPEACHED as a direct and proximate result of unlawful/illegal practices. Whether Newsome timely, properly and adequately addressed concerns of unlawful/illegal and unethical practices of judges/justices before the appropriate government entity (i.e. court(s) and/or agency).(17) Whether the INDICTMENT and/or IMPEACHMENT of judges/justices or attorneys/lawyers affect legal matters in which they are involved.(18) Whether judges/justices have subjected Newsome to discriminatory treatment in the handling of legal matters to which she is a party.(19) Whether Newsome is entitled to ― emergency‖ injunctive relief and/or emergency relief pending the resolution of Petition for Extraordinary Writ. Whether United States Supreme Court has a duty to mitigate damages and to protect Newsome from further irreparable injury/harm she has sustained.(20) Whether Newsome is entitled to have ― ISSUES‖ raised addressed upon request(s).(21) Whether Newsome is entitled to ― Findings of Fact‖ and ―Coclusion of Law‖ upon request(s). n(22) Whether lower courts‘ decisions are ― arbitrary‖ and/or ―capricious‖ – i.e. can be sustained by facts, evidence and legal conclusions. Moreover, contrary to laws governing said matters. Contrary to rulings of this Court on similar matters.(23) Whether Judge John Andrews West has jurisdiction/legal authority to preside over lower court action where “Affidavit of Disqualification” and Criminal “FBI Complaint” have been filed against him.(24) Whether Judge John Andrews West owe a specific duty to Newsome to recuse himself from Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas action. Page 88 of 96
  • (25) Whether Newsome is entitled to know of ― Conflict of Interest‖ that exist between factfinder(s)/judges/justices and/or opposing parties/counsel.(26) Whether Judges/Justices owe a specific duty to Newsome to recuse themselves when ― conflict of interest‖ exists. Whether Judges/Justices remained on the bench in legal actions where Newsome is a party with knowledge there was a ― conflict of interest‖ due to their relationship with opposing parties and/or their counsel/counsel‘s law firm.(27) Whether judges/justices assigned cases involving Newsome and having relationships to opposing parties (i.e. such as opposing law firms as Baker Donelson Bearman Caldwell & Berkowitz, their employees and/or clients) had a duty to recuse themselves from lawsuits – i.e. such as Judge Tom S. Lee [see APPENDIX “11” – Recusal Orders executed because of relationship to Baker Donelson Bearman Caldwell & Berkowitz - provided and incorporated herein by reference] – in which knowledge of CONFLICT OF INTEREST EXISTED. Whether judges/justices are allowed to discriminate in their compliance with laws governing recusal [see APPENDIX “12” – Docket Sheet (Newsome v. Entergy - wherein Baker Donelson Bearman Caldwell & Berkowitz appears as counsel of record - provided and incorporated herein by reference]. Whether judges/justices should be IMMEDIATELY removed from the bench and/or the applicable legal actions initiated against judges/justices for removal when record evidence supports judges/justices failure to recuse. How does said failure of judges/judges to recuse themselves affect the public and/or Constitutional rights of citizen(s).(28) Whether Newsome, as a matter of Constitutional right, is entitled to JURY trial(s) when requested. Whether Newsome has been deprived of Constitutional right to jury trial(s).(29) Whether lower courts are required to protect ―f ederal‖ rights of Newsome in the handling of lawsuit. Whether lower courts failed to protect Newsome‘s federally protected rights.(30) Whether the Supreme Court of Ohio entered a decision in conflict with the decision of another state supreme court on the same important matter; has decided in important federal question in a way that conflicts with a decision by a state court of last resort; and/or has so far departed from the accepted and usual course of judicial proceedings, or sanctioned such a departure by a lower court, as to call for an exercise of the United States Supreme Court‘s supervisory power and/or original jurisdiction.(31) Whether the Supreme Court of Ohio has decided an important federal question in a way that conflicts with the decision of another state court of last resort or of a United States court of appeals.(32) Whether Supreme Court of Ohio has decided an important question of federal law that has not been, but should be, settled Page 89 of 96
  • by this Court; and/or has decided an important federal question in a way that conflicts with relevant decisions of the United States Supreme Court.(33) Whether the lower courts entered a decision in conflict with the decision of another state supreme court on the same important matter; has decided in important federal question in a way that conflicts with a decision by a state court of last resort; and/or has so far departed from the accepted and usual course of judicial proceedings, or sanctioned such a departure, as to call for an exercise of the United States Supreme Court‘s supervisory power and/or original jurisdiction.(34) Whether the lower courts have decided an important federal question in a way that conflicts with the decision of another state court of last resort or of a United States court of appeals.(35) Whether lower court decision(s) raise question(s) as to the validity of the federal statute or treaty; raise a question statute statute/law relied upon is repugnant to the Constitution, laws or treaties of the United States; or address the contention that a right, privilege or immunity is ―setup or claimed under the Constitution or statutes of, or any commission held or authority exercised under, the United States.‖(36) Whether the United States Supreme Court‘s recent decision in Citizens United v Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. 50 (2010), have provide courts with a license and/or defense to engage in criminal acts – i.e. provide arbitrary/capricious decisions for purposes of covering up criminal/civil wrongs leveled against citizens/litigants – for purposes of protecting TOP/BIG/KEY Financial Campaign Contributors.(37) Whether Newsome has been deprived equal protection of the laws, equal privileges and immunities of the laws, and due process of laws secured under the United States Constitution.(38) Whether Newsome is a victim of ― Pattern-of-Practices,‖ ―Pttern-of-Abuse,‖ ― a Pattern-of-Injustices‖ and/or ―PATTERN‖ of unlawful/illegal practices as a direct and proximate result of her engagement in protected activities.(39) Whether Newsome is a victim of ―Cri minal Stalking.‖(40) Whether Newsome is a victim of Government ― BULLYING.‖ Whether the United States Government/Courts allow parties opposing Newsome in legal matters (judicial and administrative) to use their ― political‖ and ―financial wealth‖ for purposes of BULLYING Newsome. Whether said BULLYING is for purposes of intimidation, coercion, threats, bribery, blackmail, etc. to force Newsome to abandon protected rights and/or deprive Newsome equal protection of the laws, equal privileges and immunities of the laws and due process of laws.(41) Whether United States Government and Newsome‘s former employer(s) have engaged in criminal/civil wrongs leveled Page 90 of 96
  • against her for purposes of BLACKLISTING. Whether the United States Government/Courts have placed information on the INTERNET regarding Newsome that it knew and/or should have known was false, misleading and/or malicious.(42) Whether Government agencies, their employees and others have engaged in TERRORIST ACTS.(43) Whether the United States citizens/public and/or Foreign Nations, their leaders and citizens are entitled to know of the crimes and civil injustices of the United States Government, its officials/employees and co-conspirators leveled against African- Americans and/or people of color.(44) Whether extraordinary circumstances exist to warrant granting of Petition of Extraordinary Writ.(45) Whether conspiracy(s) leveled against Newsome exist. Whether United States Government‘s/Court(s)‘ failure and “neglect to prevent” has created a “threat to the public” in the allowing criminal(s) to remain at large in the general population.(46) Whether Newsome is being subjected to further criminal/civil violations by the United States Government and its subsidiaries (i.e. such as the Ohio Attorney General‘s – Richard Cordray‘s – Office) in RETALIATION for engagement in protected activities. Whether the United States Government and its subsidiaries are engaging in criminal acts of HARASSMENT, THREATS, COERCION, BLACKMAIL, INTIMIDATION, etc. in the providing of false/frivolous/sham legal process – i.e. such as 2005 Personal Income Tax claims wherein Newsome was NOT a resident of the State of Ohio in 2005 [see APPENDIX “10” – December 27, 2010 correspondence from Ohio Attorney General] – with knowledge that said actions are NOT applicable to Newsome and are PROHIBITED by law. Whether Government records reflect documentation to support/sustain timely, proper and adequate notification as to Newsome‘s defenses to claims asserted.(47) Whether Newsome is required to pay the fees alleged in the Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas‘ December 20, 2010, ―C ASE COST BILLING‖ [see APPENDIX “14” incorporated herein by reference]. Whether Newsome‘s submittal of ―EM/ORS‖ stays proceeding in the Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas. Whether Newsome‘s filing of “Opposition/Objection to November 8, 2010 Entry; Request for Findings of Fact, Conclusion of Law; and Vacating of Entry” and filing of this instant ―PEW‖ with the United States F Supreme Court stays and preserves the rights of Newsome – i.e. preclude the CRIMINAL/CIVIL violations of the Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas.(48) Whether Government Agencies (i.e. its employees) have violated Newsome‘s Constitutional rights and other rights secured under the laws of the United States. Whether the Government has engaged in criminal/civil violations in Page 91 of 96
  • demanding monies from citizens to which it is NOT entitled. Whether it is lawful for Government agency(s) to demand monetary relief from citizen(s) under certain time restraints when it, itself owes citizens monies. Whether Government is required to compensate citizen(s) for monies owed when citizen(s) make timely demands – i.e. it has knowledge that citizen(s) are owed monies.(49) Whether citizens of the United States have the right to exercise First Amendment Rights and Rights secured/guaranteed under the United States Constitution and/or Rights secured under the laws of the United States without fear of reprisal.(50) Whether Courts and Judges/Justices have legal authority to interfere in matters where Newsome has requested the United States Congress‘ and/or United States Legislature‘s intervention. Whether said interference deprives Newsome equal protection of the laws, equal privileges and immunities of the laws and due process of laws – rights secured under the United States Constitution and/or laws of the United States.(51) Whether United States Government Agencies and their Officials/Employees have the right to retaliate against Newsome for exercising rights protected and secured under the laws of the United States and United States Constitution.(52) Whether opposing parties‘, their insurance providers, special interest groups, lobbyists, and their representatives have legal authority to retaliate against Newsome for her engagement in protected activities. Whether opposing parties and their conspirators/co-conspirators are allowed to stalk Newsome from job-to-job/employer-to-employer and state-to-state for purposes of terminating her employment, blacklisting, etc. in retaliation for Newsome having exercised and/or or engaged in protected activities.(53) What role (if any) has the law firm Baker Donelson Bearman Caldwell & Berkowitz, its employees, clients and others have played in the criminal/civil wrongs and conspiracies leveled against Newsome?(54) What relationship (if any) does the law firm Baker Donelson Bearman Caldwell & Berkowitz, its employees and clients have to United States President Barack Obama and his Administration?(55) What relationship (if any) does the law firm Baker Donelson Bearman Caldwell & Berkowitz, its employees and clients have to past Presidents of the United States and their Administration?(56) What relationship (if any) does the law firm Baker Donelson Bearman Caldwell & Berkowitz, its employees and clients have to officials/employees in the United States Senate and United States House of Representatives? Page 92 of 96
  • (57) What relationship (if any) does the law firm Baker Donelson Bearman Caldwell & Berkowitz, its employees and clients have in the appointment of judges/justices to the courts?(58) What role (if any) did the law firm Baker Donelson Bearman Caldwell & Berkowitz, its employees and clients have in the handling of criminal/civil complaints Newsome filed with the United States Department of Justice – i.e. based on relationship and KEY position(s) held with the Commission on Civil Rights [Chairman, etc.] which serve as a national clearinghouse for information in respect to discrimination or denial of equal protection of the laws; submitting reports, findings and recommendations to the President and Congress; and issuing public service announcements to discourage discrimination or denial of equal protection of the laws . . . served as Chief Counsel to the U.S. House Judiciary Committees Subcommittee on the Constitution, which responsibilities included advising the Chairman and Republican Members of the Judiciary Committee on legislation and Congressional oversight implicating civil and constitutional rights, Congressional authority, separation of powers, proposed constitutional amendments and oversight of the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice and the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights [see for instance APPENDIX “13” – Baker Doneslon information regarding Bradley S. Clanton]?(59) What role (if any) did Baker Donelson Bearman Caldwell & Berkowitz, its employees, its clients and the United States Department of Justice play in the COVER-UP of criminal/civil violations leveled against Newsome reported on or about September 17, 2004 in “Petitioners Petition Seeking Intervention/Participation of the United States Department of Justice” - i.e. styled "VOGEL DENISE NEWSOME vs. ENTERGY SERVICES, INC." [see EXHIBIT “34” of ―EM/ORS‖] in which Newsome timely, properly and adequately reported the criminal/civil violations of Baker Donelson Bearman Caldwell & Berkowitz, Judge G. Thomas Porteous Jr. and others – to no avail.(60) Whether the recent IMPEACHMENT of Judge G. Thomas Porteous, Jr. (i.e. having role as presiding judge in lawsuit involving Newsome) on or about December 8, 2010 [see APPENDIX “15” of PFEW – Article ― Senate Removes Federal Judge in Impeachment Conviction‖ and EXHIBIT ―12‖ of ― EM/ORS‖ incorporated herein by reference], is pertinent/relevant to this instant lawsuit.(61) What role (if any) did Baker Donelson Bearman Caldwell & Berkowitz, its employees, its clients, others and the United States Department of Justice play in the COVER-UP of criminal/civil violations leveled against Newsome reported on or about September 24, 2004 in “Request for Department of Justices Intervention/Participation in this Case” - i.e. referencing "Newsome v. Mitchell McNutt & Sams P.A." [see EXHIBIT “169” of ― EM/ORS‖] in which Newsome timely, properly and Page 93 of 96
  • adequately reported the criminal/civil violations of Mitchell McNutt & Sams – to no avail. (62) Whether the INDICTMENT of Judge Bobby DeLaughter [i.e. having a role as presiding judge in lawsuit involving Newsome] on or about January 6, 2009, and his pleading GUILTY on or about July 30, 2009, is pertinent to this instant lawsuit. (63) Whether Baker Donelson Bearman Caldwell & Berkowitz, its employees and clients have an interest in the outcome of this lawsuit. If so, whether the United States Supreme Court is aware of said knowledge and/or information. (64) Whether lower court lawsuit in Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas was filed as a direct and proximate result of Respondent Stor-All‘s, its insurance provider‘s and/or representatives‘ knowledge of Newsome‘s engagement in protected activities. (65) Whether attorneys and their client(s) are allowed to engage in criminal and civil wrongs for purposes of obstructing the administration of justice. (66) Whether the EXTRAORDINARY and EXCEPTIONAL circumstances surrounding this lawsuit supports the establishment of special court(s) to litigate matters. Whether the SPECIAL relationships of Judges/Justices to opposing party(s) in litigation involving Newsome warrant the creation of special court(s) to afford Newsome rights secured and guaranteed under the United States Constitution and laws of the United States – i.e. equal protection of the laws, equal privileges and immunities of the laws and due process of laws. this Court is to apply any/all other laws known to it to deter/prevent the criminal and civil wrongs brought to its attention. Furthermore, the Supreme Court of the United States has a duty to enforce any and all statutes/laws known to it governing said matters to deter/prevent as well as correct the injustices complained of and/or brought to its attention. 131. Newsome believes that the record evidence, facts and legal conclusions willsupport efforts taken by Respondents to deprive Newsome life, liberties and the pursuit ofhappiness. Rights secured under the United States Constitution and other laws of theUnited States. 132. Newsome believes that the record evidence, facts and legal conclusions willsupport deprivation of equal protection of the laws, equal privileges and immunities ofthe laws and due process of laws. Rights secured/guaranteed under the United StatesConstitution and other laws of the United States. 133. Newsome believes that without the Supreme Court of the United States‘intervention and exercise of jurisdiction and supervisory powers that she will continue to Page 94 of 96
  • EXHIBIT “1”
  • BBC News - Egypt unrest: Obama increases pressure on Mubarak Page 1 of 3Egypt unrest: Obama increases pressure on Mubarak05 February 11 02:55 ETBarack Obama has urged Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak "to make the rightdecision" to end weeks of unrest, and reiterated a call for an orderly transition of power"that begins now".However the US president stopped short of telling Mr Mubarak to step down immediately.He spoke as huge crowds demonstrated across Egypt for an 11th day, demanding that MrMubarak resign.But PM Ahmed Shafiq said it would not be practical for the president to go.He told the BBC Mr Mubaraks declaration on Tuesday that he would not seek re-election inSeptember was tantamount to him standing down."In effect, the president has stepped down already," Mr Shafiq said. "We need him duringthese nine months."He separately told al-Arabiya TV that it was unlikely Mr Mubarak would hand over power to hisnew Vice-President, Omar Suleiman, because the president was needed "for legislativereasons".Meanwhile, there were suggestions that the protesters would reduce their presence in centralCairo, holding big demonstrations only on Fridays, with smaller numbers there at other times.On Saturday, there were also reports of a massive explosion at a pipeline that supplies gas toIsrael. The blast caused a fire near the town of el-Arish, Egyptian state television reported.World is watchingMore than 100,000 people - including large numbers of women and children - gathered inTahrir Square in the centre of Cairo on Friday for what was being called the "day of departure".At noon, thousands paused for Friday prayers with one cleric declaring: "We want the head ofthe regime removed."As the prayers finished, demonstrators renewed their chants of "Leave! Leave! Leave!",singing patriotic songs and waving flags.Some people left as darkness fell, but thousands remained the square.There were also demonstrations in Egypts second city, Alexandria, and in the towns of Suez,Port Said, Rafah, Ismailiya, Zagazig, al-Mahalla al-Kubra, Aswan and Asyut.In Washington Mr Obama told reporters: "The whole world is watching."He said he had been encouraged by the restraint shown by both the authorities and the EXHIBIT “2”http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/mobile/world-us-canada-12371479 4/16/2011
  • BBC News - Egypt unrest: Obama increases pressure on Mubarak Page 2 of 3protesters after two days of clashes which have left eight people dead and more than 800injured.The UN believes more than 300 have died across Egypt since the protests began on 25January, with about 4,000 hurt.Mr Obama did not insist that Mr Mubarak step down immediately, but repeated his call for a"transition period that begins now"."He needs to listen to what is voiced by the people and make a judgment about a pathwayforward that is orderly, that is meaningful and serious," he said."The key question he should be asking himself is: how do I leave a legacy behind in whichEgypt is able to get through this transformative period? My hope is he will end up making theright decision."BBC North America editor Mark Mardell says Mr Obama went further than before insuggesting that the Egyptian president should go, but could not quite bring himself - no doubtfor very good diplomatic reasons - to say the words.The Obama administration is relieved that Fridays huge protests did not turn nasty, becauseviolence is the biggest threat to the change it wants, our correspondent says.There were real nerves in Washington that the army would be forced to choose between theircommander-in-chief and the people, he adds. Instead they remained neutral, keeping the rivalgroups of demonstrators apart.Opposition talksEgyptian Finance Minister Samir Radwan told the BBC on Saturday there "certainly will be ameeting" between opposition groups and Vice-President Omar Suleiman, although he did notsay when or which opposition groups would attend.Mr Suleiman has invited the leading opposition group the Muslim Brotherhood, but it hasindicated it will talk only when Mr Mubarak has stepped down.A senior member of the Brotherhood, Issam al-Aryan, denied Mr Mubaraks assertions that themovement would exploit the chaos if he stood down to seize power, saying it would prefer theopposition to nominate a consensus candidate."We want a civil state, based on Islamic principles. A democratic state, with a parliamentarysystem, with freedom to form parties, press freedom, and an independent and fair judiciary,"he told the BBC.Opposition leader Mohamed ElBaradei also took issue with the presidents fear of theBrotherhood, saying such an attitude was "symptomatic of a dictatorship".One of the leaders of the protesters, George Ishaq of the Kifaya (Enough) movement, told theBBC they intend reduce their presence in Tahrir Square, holding big demonstrations onTuesdays and Fridays."Protesters will remain in Tahrir Square on all days of the week," he said on Friday. "But eachFriday, there will be a demonstration like today."Mr Ishaq said the new arrangement would remain in place until the president stepped down -he said it was time to let people go back to work and get on with their lives.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/mobile/world-us-canada-12371479 4/16/2011
  • Obama Administration Urges Mubarak to Step Down - US News and World Report Page 1 of 1 HOME OPINION WASHINGTON WHISPERS CONGRESS TRACKER WHITE HOUSE TRACKER Obama Administration Urges Mubarak to Step Down By U.S. News Staff Posted: February 4, 2011 The White House is working with the Egyptian government on several options to address the uprising that started in Cairo over a week ago. One of the options involves Mubarak stepping down immediately and relinquishing power to a transitional government. U.S Secretary of State Hillary Clinton urged the Egyptian government and "a broad and credible representation of Egypts opposition, civil society and political factions to begin immediately serious negotiations on a peaceful and orderly transition." Since the protests broke out in Cairo 10 day ago, the Obama administration has moved from embracing Mubarak to urging him to go. [See a slide show of 15 post-Cold War uprisings.] z See a roundup of editorial cartoons about the Egypt uprisings. z See photos of the Egypt protests. z See a slide show of 15 post-Cold War uprisings.http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2011/02/04/obama-administration-urges-mubarak-to... 4/16/2011
  • Obama suggests Mubarak should step down now Page 1 of 5You are here: Home » World»Services: E-learning Classified Local Search Insurance Books More »ArticleCommentsObama suggests Mubarak should step down nowAnthony Shadid, The New York Times, Updated: February 02, 2011 14:38 IST Ads by Google Cincinnati Coupons – 1 ridiculously huge coupon a day. Its like doing Cincy at 90% off! www.Groupon.com/CincinnatiCairo: Just hours after President Hosni Mubarak declared Tuesday night that he would step down in September as modern Egypts longest-serving leader,President Obama strongly suggested that Mr. Mubaraks concession was not enough, declaring that an "orderly transition must be meaningful, it must bepeaceful, and it must begin now."While the meaning of the last phrase was deliberately vague, it appeared to be a signal that Mr. Mubarak might not be able to delay the shift to a new leadership.In a 30-minute phone call to Mr. Mubarak just before his public remarks, Mr. Obama was more forceful in insisting on a rapid transition, according to officialsfamiliar with the discussion.Mr. Mubaraks 10-minute speech announcing he would step down came after his support from the powerful Egyptian military began to crumble and afterAmerican officials urged him not to run again for president. Rediff.com Twitter NDTV Social Live Messenger Gmail Buzz Print Recommend 13But Mr. Mubaraks offer fell short of the protestors demands for him to step down immediately and even face trial, and it could well inflame passions in anuprising that has rivaled some of the most epic moments in Egypts contemporary history. The protests have captivated a broader Arab world that has alreadyseen a leader fall in Tunisia this month and growing protests against other American-backed governments.Mr. Mubarak, 82, said he would remain in office until a presidential election in September and, in emotional terms, declared that he would never leave Egypt."The Hosni Mubarak who speaks to you today is proud of his achievements over the years in serving Egypt and its people," he said, wearing a dark suit andseeming vigorous in the speech broadcast on state television. "This is my country. This is where I lived, I fought and defended its land, sovereignty and interests,and I will die on its soil."In Tahrir Square, crowds waved flags as the speech was televised on a screen in the square. "Leave!" they chanted, in what has become a refrain of thedemonstrations."There is nothing now the president can do except step down and let go of power," said Mohammed el-Beltagui, a leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, Egyptsmost powerful opposition group, which has entered into the fray with Mr. Mubarak. Those sentiments were echoed by other voices of the opposition, includingMohamed ElBaradei, a Nobel laureate, and Ayman Nour, a longtime dissident.The speech and the demonstration, whose sheer numbers represented a scene rarely witnessed in the Arab world, illustrated the deep, perhaps unbridgeable,divide that exists between ruler and ruled in Egypt, the most populous Arab country and once the axis on which the Arab world revolved.The events here have reverberated across a region captivated by an uprising that in some ways has brought a new prestige to Egypt in an Arab world it oncehttp://www.ndtv.com/article/world/obama-suggests-mubarak-should-step-down-now-82967 4/16/2011
  • Obama suggests Mubarak should step down now Page 2 of 5dominated culturally and politically. King Abdullah II of Jordan fired his cabinet after protests there on Tuesday, and thePalestinian cabinet in the West Bank Sharesaid it would hold long-promised municipal elections "as soon as possible." Organizers in Yemen and Syria, countries with their own authoritarian rulers, havecalled for protests this week.In his speech, Mr. Mubarak was pugnacious, accusing protesters of sowing chaos and political forces here of adding "fuel to the fire." He fell back to the refrainthat has underlined his three decades in power -- security and stability -- and vowed that he would spend his remaining months restoring calm."The events of the past few days impose on us, both citizens and leadership, the choice between chaos and stability," he said. "I am now absolutely determined tofinish my work for the nation in a way that ensures its safekeeping."American officials were clearly disappointed by Mr. Mubaraks effort to stay in office for the next eight months, but Mr. Obama, saying, "It is not the role of anyother country to determine Egypts leaders," stopped short of demanding that Mr. Mubarak leave office immediately.But if Mr. Obama pushed Mr. Mubarak, he did not shove him, at least in his public remarks. He commended the Egyptian military for its "professionalism andpatriotism" in refusing to use force against the protesters, comments that clearly undercut Mr. Mubaraks efforts to maintain control. He praised the protesters fortheir peaceful action, and he reinforced that "the status quo is not sustainable."Mr. Obama was clearly hopeful that Mr. Mubarak would decide to leave office sooner. But he warned there would be "difficult days ahead," a clear signal thathe expected the transition period to be lengthy, and messy.The uprising, though, seems to have brought a new dynamic to political life here, on display in the scenes of jubilation and protest in Tahrir Square. Thegovernment suffered what could prove a fatal blow to its credibility as police authority collapsed Saturday and Mr. Mubaraks officials met the early protestswith half-hearted measures. On Monday, the army said it would not fire on protesters, calling their demands legitimate and leaving Mr. Mubarak with fewoptions.Protesters defied a curfew that has become a joke to residents and overcame attempts by the government to keep them at bay by suspending train service, closingroads and shutting down public transportation to Cairo. Peasants from the south joined Islamists from the Nile Delta, businessmen and street-smart youths fromgritty Bulaq to join in the bluntest of calls at the protest: that Mr. Mubarak leave immediately."Welcome to a free Egypt," went one cry."No one would have imagined a week before that this would happen in Egypt," said Basel Ramsis, 37, a film director who returned from Spain for the uprising."I had to be here. We all have to be here. The Egyptian people can change Egypt now."As the uprising has spread, thousands of foreigners have sought to flee the country in chaotic scenes at the Cairo airport. The United States ordered allnonemergency embassy staff members and other American government personnel to leave the country, fearing unrest as the protests build toward Friday, whenorganizers hope for even bigger crowds in what they portray as a last push.But most of Cairo slumbered, its streets free of chronic traffic jams and its shops shuttered out of anxiety or respect for a strike called to coincide with theprotest. Crowds walked miles to the rendezvous. Others woke up in the squares muddy patches, where they have slept for days.Ayman Ahmed ventured alone, carrying a cardboard placard with the lyrics of a song by Abdel Halim Hafez, an Egyptian icon."And we won when the army rose and revolted," it went, a song he knew by heart, "when we ignited a revolution and fire, when we fought corruption, when weliberated the country, when we realized independence, and we won, we won, we won."He passed slogans scrawled on bridges, lampposts and the statues of lions before the Kasr al-Nil Bridge. "Mubarak is a thief," one read. "Mubarak is a coward."But, perhaps most poignantly, one declared, "Egypt is mine."In the long years of Mr. Mubaraks rule, Egypt was spared the brutality of Saddam Husseins Iraq and the delusions of the Baath Party in Syria. But his brand ofdespotism produced an authoritarianism that suffocated his people, a bureaucracy that corrupted the most mundane transaction and a malaise that saw Egypt turninward."Ive always said that my age is 60, but I havent lived for 30 years," said Leila Abu Nasr, walking with her husband, Sharif. "We could have done so muchmore."Tens of thousands of people also took to the streets of Alexandria, Egypts second-largest city, and other protests gathered in the Nile Delta, in the south andalong the Suez Canal.In an ominous sign that the unrest had not ended, about 250 pro-Mubarak demonstrators attacked the crowd of several thousand in Alexandria with knives andsticks, witnesses said. A dozen people were injured in the melee that followed, medical officials on the scene said. The army fired warning shots to separate thegroups.The very desire for sweeping change on the part of the protesters may present the greatest challenge in the transition period Mr. Mubarak declared Tuesdaynight. Mr. Mubarak promised changes, but the Parliament responsible for them is completely dominated by his party.The opposition may similarly be at a disadvantage. Organized by young people and driven by the poor and dispossessed in the country of 80 million, the uprisinghas stunned even the most critical of his government. The Muslim Brotherhood has so far stayed in the background, and other opposition leaders, like Mr.ElBaradei and Mr. Nour, have struggled to cultivate support.Several activists said Mr. Mubaraks gesture might have been enough had it been made a week ago. But each day in the square, new cries have rung out -- a newconstitution, the removal of the ruling party and a trial of Mr. Mubarak and his cronies."Its not just about President Mubarak," said Mustafa Mohammed, 32, a laborer. "Of course, he has to go. But the whole regime has to go with him."The accumulated miseries of all his years in power seemed to underline the anger on Tuesday. Naser Muftah, a factory worker, said he had to go by the nameNader because bureaucrats fouled up his identity card, and he could not change it. Walid Kamel, a lawyer, said his clients were treated like dogs anytime theyentered a police station.http://www.ndtv.com/article/world/obama-suggests-mubarak-should-step-down-now-82967 4/16/2011
  • Obama suggests Mubarak should step down now Page 3 of 5 ShareEach seemed to bathe in the sense of empowerment represented by the square. From those kneeling in the mud for noon prayers and the couples walking by,with no fear of harassment, the message was the same: They would prove to the government that they were better than it had so long portrayed them."You see all these people, with no stealing, no girls being bothered, and no violence," said Omar Saleh. "Hes trying to tell us that without me, without theregime, you will fall into anarchy, but we have all told him, No. "For NDTV Updates, follow us on Twitter or join us on FacebookStory first published: February 02, 2011 14:21 ISThttp://www.ndtv.com/article/world/obama-suggests-mubarak-should-step-down-now-82967 4/16/2011
  • Obama demands Lybias Qaddafi step down now, instructs Pentagon to prepare for full ra... Page 1 of 1 Obama demands Lybias Qaddafi step down now, instructs Pentagon to prepare for full range of options Fri, 03/04/2011 - 10:21am — J. Noedel-Publisher Share 0 On Thursday, President Barack Obama publicly demanded that Lybian leader Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi "step down from power and leave" immediately. Obama said Qaddafi has "lost the legitimacy to lead." The president also disclosed that he has authorized the Pentagon to develop a full range of military options to respond to the Lybian crisis, particularly a potential military response if Qaddafi were to begin killing his own people in large numbers, as Qaddafi has threatened to do. However, many analysts and media pundits observe that the U.S. is highly unlikely to act alone against the embattled leader. Any U.S. military action greater than humanitarian efforts would apparently require the approval if not participation of other major nations, a possibly the U.N. Security Council (U.S., China, Russia, England and France). Said one analyst, "The U.S. does not want to own the Lybian problem." EXHIBIT “3”http://www.countynewslive.com/content/2011/mar/04/obama-demands-lybias-qaddafi-step... 4/16/2011
  • Obama calls for Gaddafi to leave Libya for first time since violence broke out | Mail Online Page 1 of 12Click here to printGaddafi MUST leave the country now: Obamacalls on Libyan leader to step down for thefirst time since violence broke outBy Daily Mail ReporterLast updated at 11:39 AM on 28th February 2011 z The President voiced his opinions to German Chancellor Angela Merkel in a telephone conversation today z UN Security Council currently debating an arms embargo and financial sanctions on the Libyan leader z Obama administration freezes all Libyan assets in the U.S. held by Colonel Gaddafi z U.S. embassy in Libya suspended as remaining staff airlifted out z U.S. urges citizens to get out now z Libyas UN ambassador, Abdurrahman Shalgham, turns against Gaddafi as he pleads with the U.N to please help Libya z But Gaddafi remains defiant as the country braces itself for more blood shedPresident Obama has called for Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi to step down for the first time sinceviolence broke out.In a private telephone conversation with Germany Chancellor Angela Merkel today he said ColonelGaddafi must leave the country now.The White House says President Obama told Merkel that when a leaders only means of holding power isto use violence against his people, then he has lost the legitimacy to rule and needs to do whats right forhis country by leaving now.http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1360940/Obama-calls-Gaddafi-leave-Libya-time-... 4/16/2011
  • Obama calls for Gaddafi to leave Libya for first time since violence broke out | Mail Online Page 2 of 12 Leave now: President Obama, right, is calling for Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi to step down for the first time since violence broke outhttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1360940/Obama-calls-Gaddafi-leave-Libya-time-... 4/16/2011
  • Obama calls for Gaddafi to leave Libya for first time since violence broke out | Mail Online Page 3 of 12The Presidents comments come as the UN Security Council was today locked in urgent talks concerningwhat sanctions to impose on Libyan leader Gaddafis regime.And last night the Obama administration froze all Libyan assets in the U.S. held by Gaddafi, hisgovernment and four of his children.But tonight the Libyan leader remained defiant and vowed a bloody fight to the end. Defiant: Gaddafis son Saif al-Islam Gaddafi took to Al-Arabiya television to once again blame foreigners for the unrest as his father said he would fight until the bloody endGaddafis son, Saif al-Islam Gaddafi, went on Al-Arabiya television earlier today to once again blameforeigners for the unrest.Now we are here, we are in a hotel in Tripoli, said Saif. Life is normal. Go out and see who is rulingthere. Thousands of people are doing their jobs to maintain security in the city. They are not securitypolice or armed forces.Libyan prime minister, Baghdadi Mahmudi, meanwhile, announced on state television that every familywould receive 500 Libyan dinars ($406) from the government in a bid to shore up support.http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1360940/Obama-calls-Gaddafi-leave-Libya-time-... 4/16/2011
  • Obama calls for Gaddafi to leave Libya for first time since violence broke out | Mail Online Page 4 of 12 Pro Regime: Gaddafi supporters chant at a rally of around 100 supporters in Green Square today as the leaders son says life is normal in TripoliIn New York the UN was discussing a sanctions proposal which includes an arms embargo, travel ban,financial sanctions and a request to the International Criminal Court (ICC) to indict Libyan leaders forcrimes against humanity.But not all countries are happy to vote in favour of the latter.Of course there are some nuances, said French ambassador Gerard Araud.http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1360940/Obama-calls-Gaddafi-leave-Libya-time-... 4/16/2011
  • Obama calls for Gaddafi to leave Libya for first time since violence broke out | Mail Online Page 5 of 12 Revolution: Libyan army paratroopers who defected and joined the popular uprising against Gaddafi celebrate in the eastern Libyan port city of Benghazi todayBut on the arms embargo no problem, on the sanctions no problem, the only question which is still on thetable is the way we are going to reference to the ICC, he told reporters.The formal negotiations come just a day after UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon warned a delay intaking concrete action would cost more lives in the North African nation.He cited reports from security forces shooting civilians at homes and inside hospitals in Tripoli. Humanrights groups and witnesses have also reported the shooting of peaceful demonstrators, torture of theopposition and use of foreign mercenaries, Ban said.http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1360940/Obama-calls-Gaddafi-leave-Libya-time-... 4/16/2011
  • Obama calls for Gaddafi to leave Libya for first time since violence broke out | Mail Online Page 6 of 12 Protest: Libyans demand the removal of Gaddafi following prayers yesterday. Residents were preparing for more bloodshed tonight as the Libyan leader vowed to stay in powerHe plans to meet President Obama on Monday.Meanwhile in a letter to congress the President stated the actions of the Libyan leader and his associatesconstituted an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the UnitedStates.The U.S. government took action to freeze assets after officials announced the U.S. embassy in Libyahad been suspended following the departure of the remaining diplomats who were safely airlifted out ofthe country via a chartered airliner yesterday.http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1360940/Obama-calls-Gaddafi-leave-Libya-time-... 4/16/2011
  • Obama calls for Gaddafi to leave Libya for first time since violence broke out | Mail Online Page 7 of 12 U-turn: Libyas United Nations ambassador, Abdurraham Mohamed Shalgam, second right, denounced Gaddafi and pleaded with the UN to please save LibyaHowever White House Press Secretary Jay Carney told CNN that relations between the two nations werenot broken.The flag is still flying. The embassy is not closed. Operations are suspended, said Under Secretary ofState for Management Patrick Kennedy.The U.S. Government all remaining citizens to get out of Libya now and have not ruled out the use ofmilitary force if Gaddafi does not cease the bloodshed of opposition protesters.http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1360940/Obama-calls-Gaddafi-leave-Libya-time-... 4/16/2011
  • Obama calls for Gaddafi to leave Libya for first time since violence broke out | Mail Online Page 8 of 12 Global support: A child holds up a poster as demonstrators in Malta stage a protest against the Libyan leaderBy any measure, Muammar Gaddafis government has violated international norms and commondecency and must be held accountable, President Obama said in a statement announcing the penalties.He said they were designed to target Gaddafis government and protect the assets of Libyas people frombeing looted.The actions struck directly at Gaddafis family, which is believed to have amassed great wealth during his42 years in control of the oil-rich nation.http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1360940/Obama-calls-Gaddafi-leave-Libya-time-... 4/16/2011
  • Obama calls for Gaddafi to leave Libya for first time since violence broke out | Mail Online Page 9 of 12http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1360940/Obama-calls-Gaddafi-leave-Libya-time-... 4/16/2011
  • Obama calls for Gaddafi to leave Libya for first time since violence broke out | Mail O... Page 10 of 12 Contrast: A protester waves a graphic image of Gaddafi outside the Libyan Embassy in London. It mirrored that of Obamas hope posters which became iconic during his election campaign but had one crucial differenceThe president condemned the Libyan governments continued violation of human rights, brutalisation ofits people and outrageous threats.The administration faced increasing pressure to join more forcefully in condemning Gaddafi, who isarming civilian supporters to set up checkpoints and roving patrols around the Libyan capital, Tripoliresidents said today.More than 1,000 people have been killed during the violence, the United Nations estimated.And tonight Tripolis Green Square - the scene of so many protests over the past days - was emptyaccording to reports as residents braced themselves for the possibility of more bloodshed.Libyas UN ambassador, Abdurrahman Shalgham, turned against the regime and pleaded yesterday forthe council to act against the atrocities being carried out by Gaddafi - a one-time childhood friend.In an emotional speech Shalgham said: Please, the United Nations, save Libya. Let there be nobloodshed, no killing of innocents. We want a decisive, rapid and courageous resolution from you.In Malta and London people took to the streets to protest against the Libyan leader.Outside the Libyan Embassy in London demonstrators waved graphic images of Gaddafi that mirroredthose of Barack Obamas hope posters during his election campaign.http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1360940/Obama-calls-Gaddafi-leave-Libya-time-... 4/16/2011
  • EXHIBIT “J”EXHIBIT “4”
  • Obama’s “CAMPAIGN WRITER’S” ll d hi “Infamouspulled OFF his 2008 “ fRACE Speech” - - QUIT riding offof the backs of those who werewilling to LOSE their LIVES forCivil Rights and EQUALITY - -Rights Obama and his Administrationwant to ABOLISH and DEPRIVE citizens!
  • EXPOSINGOPPRESSION
  • hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. TheSACRIFICE OfGREAT Leaders
  • I’m not called “JUDAS” fornothing – The GOVERNMENT’S paying me BIG – my OWN Coalition for you and CASH!
  • “Blank Slate” President of United States Barack Obama U.S. Attorney NAACP General President/CEOEric Holder Benjamin Jealous
  • President of United States http://www.itsabouttimebpp.com/BPP_Books/pdf/The_Willie_Lynch_Letter_The_Making_Of_A_Slave!.pdf ww.itsaboutt mebpp. om/B _ oks/pdf/The_W ie_Ly bouttim .co /BPP_ BP _Boo f/T _Will _ ynch_Letter_The_M king_Of_ W y Mak king_O _A_Obama U.S. Attorney GeneralHolder NAACP President/CEOJealous
  • http://www itsabouttimebpp com/BPP Books/pdhttp://www.itsabouttimebpp.com/BPP_Books/pdf/The_Willie_Lynch_Letter_The_Making_Of_A_Slave!.pdf PP P Book / df/The Willie Lyn h L tter The M ki k d he Wil ll lli L Let tt T tter Th Of A Slave! pdf ! d The NAACP receives GOVERNMENT Funding! Do you think it’s going to BITE the hands that FEED it?
  • China Report Criticizes U.S. Human Rights Record - FoxNews.com Page 1 of 1 Print Close China Report Criticizes U.S. Human Rights Record Published April 11, 2011 | Associated Press China accused the U.S. on Monday of pushing for Internet freedom around the world as a way to undermine other nations, while noting that Washingtons campaign against secret-spilling website WikiLeaks showed its own sensitivity to the free flow of information. The charges appeared in Chinas annual report on Washingtons human rights record, which lambasted the U.S. over issues ranging from homelessness and violent crime to the influence of money on politics and the negative effects of its foreign policy on civilians. The lengthy document published in official newspapers is a rebuttal to the U.S. State Departments annual assessment of human rights around the world that said China stepped up restrictions on critics and tightened control of civil society in 2010 by limiting freedom of speech and Internet access. ADVERTISEMENT The U.S. has also protested the detention of government critics including artist Ai Weiwei as part of a recent Chinese crackdown on dissent. "We hereby advise the U.S. government to take concrete actions to improve its human rights conditions, check and rectify its acts in the human rights field, and stop the hegemonistic deeds of using human rights issues to interfere in other countries internal affairs," the report said. WikiLeaks deeply angered U.S. officials by publishing tens of thousands of secret U.S. military documents on the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and secret U.S. diplomatic cables from around the world. The U.S. Army private suspected of supplying thousands of sensitive files to WikiLeaks, 23-year-old Bradley Manning, is being held in military detention in solitary confinement for all but an hour every day. He was charged with mishandling and leaking classified data, and in early March the Army filed 22 new charges against him, including aiding the enemy. The Chinese report said that action by U.S. government comes while it also calls for the free flow of electronic information elsewhere. It said Washington "wants to practice diplomacy by other means, including the Internet, particularly the social networks." The Chinese report cited figures showing high crime, child poverty and racial discrimination in the U.S., and accused Washington of causing "huge civilian casualties" in Iraq and Afghanistan. The report pointed to the huge amount of money poured into last years midterm congressional elections as a perversion of democracy, blasted Arizonas legislation on illegal immigration, and pointed to a womens bias lawsuit against Wal-Mart as evidence of continuing gender discrimination. EXHIBIT “5”http://www.foxnews.com/world/2011/04/11/china-issues-report-criticizing-human-rights/p... 4/16/2011
  • EXHIBIT “6”
  • Obampty Dumptysat on the wall,Obampty and hisAdministrationhad a GREATFALL. All of thePRESDIDENT’sSPECIAL InterestGroups/Advisorsand ALL theGovernment’s A HIGH Price tomen, COULD pay for LOWNOT put Standards ,Obampty’s GREED, PRIDEAdministration andtogether again! INCOMPETENCE
  • Obama’s SECRETDAMAGE CONTROL WEAPON!
  • I WON’T go silently or by MYSELF! 5HPHPEHU ZH¶UH MRLQHG DWWKH KLS ± :( JR2:1 WRJHWKHU
  • How do YOU feel President Obama is doing as President of the United States?
  • We think with your PLUNGING ratings in the polls, we want out NOW while we can get employment elsewhere. PETE ROUSE will pick up from where we’re leaving! 5HPHPEHU ZH¶UH MRLQHG DWWKH KLS ± :( JR2:1 WRJHWKHU
  • PRESIDENT BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA: THE PIMP YOU CAN BELIEVE IN!!A President Who Knows JustHow To PIMP The United States– CHANGE That Worksand BENEFITS HIM!!
  • Can the United States Afford Another SCANDAL In The White House?A Play Right Out Of :KDWHYHU RX GR (1< (1< (1< The CLINTON PLAYAbook!!
  • A Play Right Out Of The CLINTONPLAYAbook!!
  • Can the United StatesAfford Another SCANDALIn The White House? A Play Right Out Of The CLINTON PLAYAbook!!
  • A Play Right Out Of The CLINTON PLAYAbook!! Can theUnited States Afford AnotherSCANDAL In The White House?
  • THROUGH TheSCANDAL -Call on theCLOSERS! What do you mean – STAND BY YOUR MAN!
  • When United States Citizens Won’t?
  • BULLYING!
  • Was PLANNED and TRAINED for as fo under President “Bill CLINTON’s” derr CLINTON WATCH!EXECUTED under President“George W. BUSH’s” WATCH! What’s in STORE under President “Barack Obama’s” WATCH!
  • 9/11This is the BEST COVER- UP carried out!We DON’T care about TheBLOOD SHED. Justthink how RICH we will bewhen we go in after theresources – oil, gold,currency. . .!
  • A HIGH Price to PAY for GREED!
  • Just as long as it’s NOT OUR HUSBAND, WIFE, MOTHER, FATHER, SISTER, BROTHER orCHILD(ren) – Who CARES? We’ll be RICH when it’s all over!!
  • Just as long as it’s NOT OUR HUSBAND, WIFE,MOTHER, FATHER, SISTER, BROTHER or CHILD(ren) – Who CARES? We’ll be RICH when it’s all over!! This is NO Laughing Matter!!
  • Sounds GOOD. Let’s use this LIE!We’ll be “FILTHY RICH” before the American AmeriPeople and Foreign Citizens/Leaders knowwhat HIT them!
  • $QG ZH /$8*+( ZKHQ 6DGGDP +XVVHLQ ZDV SURVHFXWHG IRU &ULPHVAmerica, help bring these criminals to justice for their WAR CRIMES!
  • OBAMA is just an EXTENSION Of the BUSH Administration, PRACTICES and POLICIES!I got theWHOLEWorld eatingout of myhands!
  • The United States’ CITIZENS Can NEVER know the TRUEreasons behind the Iran, Iraq and Afghanistan WARs!
  • SHHHHH - - KEEPING the PROFITs All in the FAMILY! BLOOD is “Thicker” and BINDING!We can always get anothership – There’s enough for the BOTH of us!!
  • Have you told Barack Obama that he isBLOOD Related – our RELATIVE?Birthed, GROOMED andHANDPICKED for such aTIME as this – He’ll stickwith HERITAGE!
  • “Rouse will be there to leadthe operation forward.” Baker Donelson Bearman Caldwell & Berkowitz Replaces Rahm with Pete Rouse
  • SHUT UP and listen to me! I have toBAIL out now while I can still get ajob. Thanks for fronting me on theCHICAGO Mayor excuse – It’s beennice CALLING THE SHOTS andRUNNING the WHITE HOUSE!Hopefully, Baker Donelson can useme! Nah Nah Nah Nah Nah – I gotthe LAST LAUGH!!
  • Baker DonelsonBearman Caldwell & Berkowitz
  • GEITHNER DASCHLE
  • Baker DonelsonBearman Caldwell & Berkowitz’s and its STOOGES!
  • WHITE HOUSE and GOVERNMENT “For SALE”
  • Obama’s BIG $MONEY Interest GROUPS - WHITE HOUSE and GOVERNMENT “For SALE”
  • Obama’s BIG $MONEY Interest GROUPS - JUDGES and JUSTICES “For SALE”
  • LIBERTYMUTUAL’S AttorneysJUDGES and JUSTICES “For SALE” OHIO Supreme Court Justices
  • LIBERTY MUTUAL’S AttorneysOHIO Supreme Court Justices
  • LIBERTYMUTUAL’S AttorneysJUDGES and JUSTICES “For SALE” OHIO Supreme Court Justices
  • BAKER DONELSON’S Client (Liberty Mutual and its Attorneys) JUDGES and JUSTICES “For SALE” A SWEEP of the Ohio Supreme Court
  • Keeping CAREER CRIMINALSout of Prison - PROTECTING Special Interest Groups
  • FOXES “Guarding the Hen House” RECEPIENTS of July 14, 2008 Emergency Complaint andRequest for Legislature/Congress Intervention; Also Request for Investigations, Hearings and FindingsOriginal to Leahy and copies sent toObama, McCain, Conyers & Wasserman-Schultz on 08/02/08.
  • PROTECTING BIG MONEY and SpecialInterest Groups – What the FBIand White House/Governmentare HIDING from the PUBLIC – COVER UP OF ROLE INCORRUPTION, RACIAL INJUSTICES AND CRIMINAL ACTS!
  • PROTECTING 63(&,$/ ,17(5(67 *URXSV
  • Obama has SECURED h his SAFETY NET and ALIGN NED d ALIGNED himself with SPECIALINTEREST GROUPS who haveDEEP ROOTS on Wall Street!
  • GEITHNER
  • Using Documents to carry outcrimes AGAINST Citizens where Statute DOES NOT Apply! Taking ADVANTAGE Of the POOR! Obama engages in FRAUD (falsifying documents) and the EMBEZZLEMENT of monies from the POOR to protect his SPECIAL/BIG MONEY Interest Groups – Big Banks [JP Morgan Chase, Baker Donelson, Kentucky Department of Revenue etc.)
  • Using Documents to carry outcrimes AGAINST Citizens where Obama- What did you Statute DOES NOT Apply! know and WHEN did you KNOW it!
  • What they are WILLING to do for MONEY! SELL a NATION out for 7KH¶YH EHHQ *RRG WR PH their OWN Gain!OKAY, I’m a Chicago 7KLQN RI WKHTHUG/POLITICIAN – 021(<  What did youexpect?
  • See “Obama” for who he really is – A “WOLF”trying to pass himselfoff as a Sheep (Good)!
  • A PROFESSIONAL“CHAMELEON” at work!!
  • SUCKING theUnited States DRY!
  • He knows how to “Pull on the HEARTSTRING” of Americans – it’s his TALENT!!
  • SARAH PALIN - - Going For The KNOCKOUT!! Sarah when this is all over, maybe we can sit down and discuss this over BEER!! Palin as Obama’s running mate in 2012?
  • At least you knew when toABANDON the people . . .
  • It Appears The United StatesGot Sarah Palin For President Anyway!!
  • DO YOU REALLY KNOW WHATPRESIDENT OBAMA IS SMOKING? Clearly Obama’s views are DISTORTED and he is OUT OF TOUCH with REALITY!
  • I VOLUNTEERED tobe their “PAWN.”Now they want to “Throw MEUnder The Bus!”
  • THEINVINCIBLE OBAMA
  • To the DOWNFALL and L DOOM of the OBAMA Administration - THANKS for the MEMORIES!
  • Of the United States’ “BEYOND The GLASS CEILING “ Th CEILIN NG BARRIER” Award. REQUIREMENTS: Dysfunctional, Insecurity, Identity Separation and IdentityDenial – NEED for ACCEPTANCE, APPROVAL, to FIT IN and WILLINGNESS TO SELL OUT!
  • Know what YOUR Monies are FINANCING/SUPPORTING – i.e.Extramarital/Adulterous affairs, etc. by POLITICIANS and MINISTERS
  • 2010 Faces of African-Americans Vilsack OPPRESSORSSherrod U.S. Government TARGETING Civil Rights Activists!
  • Obama’s “CAMPAIGN WRITER’S” ll d hi “Infamouspulled OFF his 2008 “ fRACE Speech” - - QUIT riding offof the backs of those who werewilling to LOSE their LIVES forCivil Rights and EQUALITY - -Rights Obama and his Administrationwant to ABOLISH and DEPRIVE citizens!
  • EXPOSINGOPPRESSION
  • hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. TheSACRIFICE OfGREAT Leaders
  • I’m not called “JUDAS” fornothing – The GOVERNMENT’S paying me BIG – my OWN Coalition for you and CASH!
  • “Blank Slate” President of United States Barack Obama U.S. Attorney NAACP General President/CEOEric Holder Benjamin Jealous
  • President of United States http://www.itsabouttimebpp.com/BPP_Books/pdf/The_Willie_Lynch_Letter_The_Making_Of_A_Slave!.pdf ww.itsaboutt mebpp. om/B _ oks/pdf/The_W ie_Ly bouttim .co /BPP_ BP _Boo f/T _Will _ ynch_Letter_The_M king_Of_ W y Mak king_O _A_Obama U.S. Attorney GeneralHolder NAACP President/CEOJealous
  • http://www itsabouttimebpp com/BPP Books/pdhttp://www.itsabouttimebpp.com/BPP_Books/pdf/The_Willie_Lynch_Letter_The_Making_Of_A_Slave!.pdf PP P Book / df/The Willie Lyn h L tter The M ki k d he Wil ll lli L Let tt T tter Th Of A Slave! pdf ! d The NAACP receives GOVERNMENT Funding! Do you think it’s going to BITE the hands that FEED it?
  • http://www.itsabouttimebpp.com/BPP_Books/pdf/The_Willie_Lynch_Letter_The_Making_Of_A_Slave!.pdf
  • http://www.itsabouttimebpp.com/BPP_Books/pdf/The _Willie_Lynch_Letter_The_Making_Of_A_Slave!.pdf SNL Spoof of Hoda Kotb
  • http://www.itsabouttimebpp.com/BPP_Books/pdf/The_Willie _Lynch_Letter_The_Making_Of_A_Slave!.pdf
  • Far enough to paint citizens as 3$5$12, &5$=</81$7,&6 to mask/hide ,1+80$1( 3UDFWLFHV 7KDQNJRRGQHVV LQIRUPDWLRQ LV EHLQJ UHOHDVHGIRXQG DQG UHSRUWHG
  • Will itObama WON’T let Be ANYBODY get is HIS way! YOU?
  • FOREIGN COUNTRIES/LEADERSIT’S TIME TO GET IN THE UNITED STATES FACE AND SAY: “NO MORE CORRUPTION” “NO MORE BULLYING” . . . WE AE NOT AFRAID OF THE UNITED STATES!!! EXHIBIT “7”
  • TELL PRESIDENT OBAMA/THE UNITED STATES:“THERE IS NO TIME FOR FOOLISHNESS and YOUR LIES!!”
  • UNITED STATES CITIZENS WANT TO KNOW: HOW PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA AVOID THE “BIRTHER” QUESTION - - HAS BEEN ABLE TO JUST KEEP THROWING OUT WORDS WITHOUT PROOF. CORRUPT GOVERNMENT/CORRUPT LAWYERS/CORRUPT BIG MONEYWILL CONTINUE TO “DANCE AROUND QUESTIONS WITH WORDS – NOT EVIDENCE” THE MONKEY ON PRESIDENT OBAMA’S BACK PREYING ON UNITED STATES CITIZENS IGNORANCE – Obama is Willing to Produce a “CERTIFICATE OF LIVE BIRTH” but NOT a “BIRTH CERTIFICATE.” What’s WRONG With This Picture? THE CRAFTINESS (AVOID THE QUESTIONS and GIVE THEM MERE WORDS – NO Evidence) OF CORRUPT LAWYERS/POLITICIANS/GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS CLASSIC “COVER-UP!” This May Be The BIGGEST FRAUD EXHIBIT PULLED On United States Citizens Yet!! “8”
  • Page 1 of 1http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/photos/uncategorized/2008/06/13/bobirthcertificate.jpg 4/16/2011
  • Obama: I was born in Hawaii, lack horns - Political Hotsheet - CBS News Page 1 Political Hotsheet April 14, 2011 6:56 PMObama: I was born in Hawaii, lackhornsPosted by Brian MontopoliPresident Barack Obama speaks onfiscal policy at GeorgeWashington Universitys JackMorton Auditorium inWashington, DC.(Credit: MANDELNGAN/AFP/Getty Images)President Obama said Thursday that the decision by some Republicans to question whether hewas born in the United States is a problem for the GOP in the long term even if it is "politicallyexpedient in the short-term."It creates "a problem for them when they want to actually run in a general election where mostpeople feel pretty confident the President was born where he says he was, in Hawaii," Mr.Obama told ABC News. "He -- he doesnt have horns...were not really worrying aboutconspiracy theories or -- or birth certificates."Mr. Obama made the comments in response to a question about the presidential flirtation ofDonald Trump, who has been pushing false information and discredited theories about thepresidents birthplace. Trump was tied for first in one recent national poll of potential GOP EXHIBIT “9”http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20054090-503544.html 4/16/2011
  • Obama: I was born in Hawaii, lack horns - Political Hotsheet - CBS News Page 2presidential candidates.Mr. Obama told ABC News that he believes voters want a presidential candidate to focus onissues like the economy and deficit."And my suspicion is that anybody who is not addressing those questions...Is going to be introuble," he said. "I think they may get a quick pop in the news. They may get a lot of attention.But ultimately, the American people understand this is a serious, sober time."http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20054090-503544.html 4/16/2011
  • LexisNexis® Martindale-Hubbell® Page 1 Print Close Window Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, PC Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, PC Size of Organization: 550 Year Established: 1888 Main Office: Memphis, Tennessee Web Site: http://www.bakerdonelson.com Telephone: 901-526-2000 Telecopier: 901-577-2303 Send Email Law Firm Snapshot Martindale-Hubbell has augmented a firms provided information with third-party sourced data to present a more comprehensive overview of the firms expertise. Profile Visibility #42 in weekly profile views out of 233,261 total law firms Overall Bar Register Practice Areas Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, PC, is ranked by The National Law Journal as one of the 100 largest law firms in the country. Through strategic acquisitions and mergers over the past century, the Firm has grown to include more than 550 attorneys and public policy and international advisors. Baker Donelson has offices located in five states in the southern U.S. as well as Washington, D.C., plus a representative office in London, England. Current and former Baker Donelson attorneys and advisors include, among many other highly distinguished individuals, people who have served as: Chief of Staff to the President of the United States; U.S. Senate Majority Leader; U.S. Secretary of State; Members of the United States Senate; Members of the United States House of Representatives; Acting Administrator and Deputy Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration; Director of the Office of Foreign Assets Control for the U.S. Department of the Treasury; Director of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts; Chief Counsel, Acting Director, and Acting Deputy Director of U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Services within the United States Department of Homeland Security; Majority and Minority Staff Director of the Senate Committee on Appropriations; a member of Presidents Domestic Policy Council; Counselor to the Deputy Secretary for the United States Department of HHS; Chief of Staff of the Supreme Court of the United States; Administrative Assistant to the Chief Justice of the United States; Deputy Under Secretary for International Trade for the U.S. Department of Commerce; Ambassador to Japan; Ambassador to Turkey; Ambassador to Saudi Arabia; Ambassador to the Sultanate of Oman; Governor of Tennessee; Governor of Mississippi; Deputy Governor and Chief of Staff for the Governor of Tennessee; Commissioner of Finance & Administration (Chief Operating Officer), State of Tennessee; Special Counselor to the Governor of Virginia; United States Circuit Court of Appeals Judge; United EXHIBIT “10”http://www.martindale.com/print.aspx 3/26/2010
  • LexisNexis® Martindale-Hubbell® Page 2 States District Court Judges; United States Attorneys; and Presidents of State and Local Bar Associations. Baker Donelson represents local, regional, national and international clients. The Firm provides innovative, results-oriented solutions, placing the needs of the client first. Our state-of-the-art technologies seamlessly link all offices, provide instant information exchange, and support clients nationwide with secure access to our online document repository. Baker Donelson is a member of several of the largest legal networks that provide our attorneys quick access to legal expertise throughout the United States and around the world.http://www.martindale.com/print.aspx 3/26/2010
  • THE CASUALTIES OF UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT COVER-UPS KILLING CITIZENS AND THEN BLAMING THEIR DEATHS ON OPPOSITION GROUPS!!YES – PRESIDENT OBAMA KNOWS – BUT DOESN’T CARE!! EXHIBIT “11”
  • KTAR.com - Pat Tillmans mom blasts choice for military program Page 1 of 1 Pat Tillmans mom blasts choice for military program by ABC News (April 14th, 2011 @ 12:53pm) Policy >> Comments:21 Sign Up to see what your Recommend friends recommend WASHINGTON -- A White House effort to help military families, called "Joining Forces," is being criticized by a high-profile military mom. The participation of a certain general in the program, announced by President Barack Mary Tillman talks with Jake Tapper of ABC News. (Photo courtesy ABC News) Obama on Tuesday, is causing the controversy. Mary Tillman, mother of the late football player and Army Ranger Pat Tillman, calls the appointment of Retired Gen. Stanley McChrystal as co-chair of the program a "slap in the face" to all soldiers. In an exclusive interview with ABC News, she said, "Someone who has the heartfelt desire to help families would not have been involved in the coverup of a soldiers death," Mary Tillman said. "I was actually pretty shocked to hear it, I dont think its the appropriate choice." She said McCrystal knew her son Pat was killed by friendly fire in Afghanistan, but helped perpetuate the story that he had been killed by enemy fire. "Considering that we have plenty of evidence indicating that McChrystal was involved in the coverup of Pats death... hes not the right person for that kind of job," she told ABC News. The White House said McCrystal is the right choice for "Joining Forces." Tillman played football for Arizona State University and the Arizona Cardinals. He left the NFL team to join the Army after the 9/11 terrorist attacks. He was killed in Afghanistan in April 2004. Watch ABCs interview with Mary Tillman.http://ktar.com/category/local-news-articles/20110414/Pat-Tillmans-mom-blasts-choice-to... 4/16/2011
  • Pat Tillman’s mom calls on Obama to drop McChrystal from White House post | Raw Re... Page 1 of 1Pat Tillman’s mom calls on Obama to drop McChrystal fromWhite House post z Posted on 04.14.11 z By Stephen C. Webster z Categories: Featured, NationWhy is a general who helped cover up the friendly-fire killing of an American hero beingappointed to lead a presidential commission on military families?That’s what the mother of Pat Tillman wants to know, and she’s calling on President Obama toreverse the selection.“Considering that we have plenty of evidence indicating that McChrystal was involved in thecover-up of Pat’s death… he’s not the right person for that kind of a job,” she told ABC News inan exclusive interview with Jake Tapper.McChrystal resigned his post as one of America’s top military generals after a feature story byRolling Stone reporter Michael Hastings quoted him mocking the president and other civilianleaders.This video is from ABC News, broadcast Thursday, April 14, 2011.http://www.rawstory.com/rawreplay/2011/04/pat-tillmans-mom-calls-on-obama-to-drop-m... 4/16/2011
  • Changes ahead for Obamas national security team - CBS News Page 1 m o c . s w e N S B C April 7, 2011Changes ahead for Obamas nationalsecurity teamWashington Post: Planned retirements ahead mean president will havechance to remake team in 2011 (Washington Post) This story was written by Washington Post staff writers Scott Wilson and Greg Jaffe Key members of President Obamas national security team are preparing to leave their jobs beginning this summer, forcing the administration to fill several critical posts as it prepares to withdraw U.S. troopsDefense Secretary Robert Gates, left, and from Afghanistan and as turmoil continues in theJoint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm.Michael Mullen, testify on Capitol Hill Middle East.March 31, 2011, about U.S. militaryoperations in Libya. (AP) Among those who have announced the intention to leave or are due to rotate out of existing jobs include Robert M. Gates, the defense secretary; Adm. MikeMullen, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff; Gen. David H. Petraeus, commander ofinternational forces in Afghanistan; and Karl W. Eikenberry, the U.S. ambassador to Kabul. Insome cases, the officials will retire. In others, they will transfer to new roles."For a country at war to lose its entire chain of command at the same time, more or less, is anextraordinary and fraught development," said Michael E. OHanlon, a senior fellow at theBrookings Institution. "The good news is that we have some very able people willing to continuein one way or the other."The numerous vacancies will give Obama the opportunity to remake the top tier of his nationalsecurity team for the first time since taking office. How he chooses to do so, whether with bigthinkers or more technocratic managers, may signal his priorities as he heads into his campaignfor reelection. EXHIBIT “12”http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/04/07/politics/washingtonpost/main20051769.shtml... 4/11/2011
  • Changes ahead for Obamas national security team - CBS News Page 2Early on, Obama was praised for appearing to value competence above all else in hisappointments, notably in his choices of Gates, a vetýeran of Republican administrations, asdefense secretary, and Hillary Rodham Clinton, a political rival, as secretary of state. But withsome recent vacancies, he has chosen to elevate advisers with whom he feels most comfortable -- a pattern that disappoints some analysts hoping for an injection of new ideas.The new team will be coordinated by national security adviser Thomas E. Donilon, who hasbeen in his job for only six months. White House officials would not comment on the impendingchanges, but several other officials provided information about internal deliberations on thecondition that they not be identified.The impending departures of Gates and Mullen, both holdovers from the George W. Bushadministration, will open the top two defense positions and probably trigger other vacancies.Gates has declined to pinpoint a departure date. But Pentagon officials expect that he will leavearound July, when Obama is scheduled to begin withdrawing the 30,000 additional U.S. troopshe deployed to Afghanistan at the end of 2009."The secretary made it clear some months ago that he intends to leave the job in Washington in2011," said Geoffrey S. Morrell, the Pentagon spokesman. "Sometime this year, he will bowout."The leading candidate, according to Pentagon and other sources, is CIA Director Leon Panetta, avetýeran of Washington who would probably continue the procurement and budget reforms thatGates began.U.S. officials close to Panetta said he has not been approached, even informally, about thePentagon job, and stressed that he expected the CIA position to be his last high-level governmentpost. Even so, the officials would not rule out Panettas accepting the position. Panetta "isntseeking any other job and hasnt been asked by the president to take on a different role," CIAspokesman George Little said.Panetta was a surprise candidate to be CIA director and had to overcome early opposition fromsenior lawmakers who initially opposed his nomination because he had so little intelligenceexperience. But Panettas influence with the White House and Washington savvy have made hima popular figure at CIA headquarters. At 72, he would be the oldest person to take on theleadership of the Defense Department.http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/04/07/politics/washingtonpost/main20051769.shtml... 4/11/2011
  • Changes ahead for Obamas national security team - CBS News Page 3A Pentagon official close to the White House said Navy Secretary Ray Mabus, a formerMississippi governor and ambassador to Saudi Arabia, could be another choice. But Panettaappears to be the favorite.If he moves to the Pentagon, the CIA director job would open, a post some in the administrationsay Petraeus would strongly consider taking if asked. He is scheduled to leave his post ascommander of the roughly 100,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan and other international forces thisyear.As the regional commander in the Middle East and in Afghanistan, Petraeus has worked topromote cooperation between CIA and military strike teams, but the agencys critical analyses ofthe war have sometimes conflicted with Petraeuss more cautiously optimistic assertions of"fragile and reversible" progress."It would give him a chance to fix the problems at the CIA that he has been complaining aboutfor the last several years," said one person familiar with the White House deliberations.Petraeus has many supporters in Washington and in Kabul, many of whom are still hopeful thathe could succeed Mullen as chairman of the Joint Chiefs. The decision will ultimately beObamas to make.Petraeuss prominence in Washington and his close relationship with influential lawmakers fromboth parties have made some in the White House uneasy, particularly political advisers who seehim as a potential threat should he run for president, an ambition he has ruled out.Petraeus has informed the White House that he is willing to serve in his post through November,the end of fighting season in Afghanistan.Marine Lt. Gen. John R. Allen, deputy commander of the U.S. Central Command, appears to bethe favorite to succeed him. Allen is already assembling his staff in preparation for a commandtransfer that could come within months.Mullen is expected to retire when his term as chairman of the Joint Chiefs expires in September.Marine Gen. James E. Cartwright, the vice chairman, is seen by many Pentagon officials ashaving the inside track to the top job because of his close working relationship with Obama,forged during the 2009 review of Afghan war strategy.Maj. Cliff W. Gilmore, a spokesman for Cartwright, declined to comment on the generals futureexcept to say: "Hell continue to serve at the pleasure of the president."http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/04/07/politics/washingtonpost/main20051769.shtml... 4/11/2011
  • Changes ahead for Obamas national security team - CBS News Page 4Cartwrights term as vice chairman expires in August, and no clear favorite has emerged tosucceed him. But because he is a Marine aviator, the next vice chairman is likely to come fromthe ranks of ground forces officers, making Gen. Ray Odierno, former commander of U.S. forcesin Iraq, a strong candidate for the post.One indicator of Cartwrights standing is that his opponents inside the Pentagon have fueled awhisper campaign in recent months in a bid to derail his candidacy. In February, the Pentagonreleased documents showing that the Defense Departments inspector general had investigatedallegations that Cartwright had a sexual relationship with a subordinate in 2009.The inspector general found no evidence that Cartwright had any kind of romantic relationshipwith the female officer, but the general was criticized for failing to discipline the woman, whowas found to have behaved in an unprofessional manner after having too much to drink.Mabus, the Navy secretary, ultimately disregarded the inspector generals recommendation thatadministrative action be taken against Cartwright, concluding that he had not acted improperly.Staff writers Craig Whitlock, Rajiv Chandrasekaran, Greg Miller and Karen DeYoung, inWashington, and Craig Timberg, traveling with Gates, contributed to this report.http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/04/07/politics/washingtonpost/main20051769.shtml... 4/11/2011
  • UNITED STATES COUNSEL/ADVISORS HAVE THE MONEY AND THE POWER TO DO WHATEVER THEY WANT –AND HAVE BEEN GETTING AWAY WITH CORRUPTION and COVER-UPS FOR A VERY LONG TIME!! EXHIBIT “13”
  • PRESIDENT OBAMA’S/BUSH’S BEHIND CLOSED DOOR DEALS!! JUST ANOTHER PUPPET onKEY INTEREST GROUPS’ and BIG MONEY GROUPS’ LIST!!
  • CELEBRATION OF MIDDLE EAST CITIZENS’ VICTORY IN TAKING BACK THEIR COUNTRY IT CAME WITH A PRICE – PEOPLE WILLING TO DIE FOR FREEDOM - BUT THEY ARE FREE CONGRATULATIONS! EXHIBIT “14”
  • CONGRATULATIONS!
  • CONGRATULATIONS! CONGRATULATIONS! CONGRATULATIONS!
  • EXHIBIT “15”
  • EXHIBIT “16”
  • EXHIBIT “17”
  • Gmail - U.S. PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: THE DOWNFALL/DOOM OF THE O... Page 1 of 36U.S. PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: THEDOWNFALL/DOOM OF THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION –Corruption/Conspiracy/Cover-Up/Criminal Acts MadePublic1 message Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 6:04 PMTo: bhobama@who.eop.gov, contact@whitehouse.gov, contact@who.eop.gov, askdoj@usdoj.gov, @ pg , @ g , @ pg , j@contact@usdoj.gov, solis.hilda@dol.gov, clintonhr@state.gov, sf.nancy@mail.house.gov, @ jg , @ g , @ g g ,AmericanVoices@mail.house.gov, j @ g , jrbiden@who.eop.gov, vdnewsome@gmail.com, mrobama@who.eop.gov, @jtbiden@who.eop.gov, remanuel@who.eop.gov, eric.epstein@usdoj.gov, joel.roessner@usdoj.gov,ann.marie.paskalis@usdoj.gov, navin.jeff@dol.gov, greenfield.deborah@dol.gov, deleon.terry@dol.gov,montgomery.edward@dol.gov, maxwell.mary@dol.gov, debusk.tom@dol.gov, nelson.malcolm@dol.gov,pierre.karina@dol.gov, harris.seth@dol.gov, geale.nick@dol.gov, baker.melaule@dol.gov,johnson.esther@dol.gov, kerr.michael@dol.gov, walsh.maureen@dol.gov, hugler.edward@dol.gov, mccreless-kenneth@dol.gov, fernandez.noelia@dol.gov, deguzman.cesar@dol.gov, wear-terrance@dol.gov, rouse-robert@dol.gov, brito-claudette@dol.gov, stewart-milton@dol.gov, hunt-linda@dol.gov, saracco-john@dol.gov,nunley-karen@dol.gov, murphy.daniel@dol.gov, love.denise@dol.gov, pruitt-thomas@dol.gov,nicklas.nancy@dol.gov, christian-faye@dol.gov, flick.paul@dol.gov, clark-patricia@dol.gov,harper.douglas@dol.gov, strain-ruby@dol.gov, brevard-john@dol.gov, whitted.robert@dol.gov,veatch.valerie@dol.gov, Jenkins.carol@dol.gov, lopez.victor@dol.gov, waller.janice@dol.gov, noll.barry@dol.gov,clark.larry@dol.gov, huotari.mjohn@dol.gov, fernandez.ramon@dol.gov, tamakloe.julia@dol.gov,perez.naomi@dol.gov, winstead.lillian@dol.gov, johnson.dawn@dol.gov, kenyon.geoffrey@dol.gov, wichlin-mark@dol.gov, barker-susan@dol.gov, lopez-betty@dol.gov, green-kim@dol.gov, qualls-carol@dol.gov,burckman-andrea@dol.gov, bonner-jerome@dol.gov, parker-violet@dol.gov, sullivan-dennis@dol.gov, brewer-brooke@dol.gov, wiesner.thomas@dol.gov, fox-kathy@dol.gov, bordreaux.kimberly@dol.gov, king-yann@dol.gov, sullivan.peter@dol.gov, manning.tonya@dol.gov, lewis-richard@dol.gov, ouyachi.hamid@dol.gov,french.richard@dol.gov, frederickson.david@dol.gov, davis.mark@dol.gov, hall.keith@bls.gov,kerr.cheryl@bls.gov, rones_phillip@bls.gov, adams_susan@bls.gov, eltinge.john@bls.gov, lacey.daniel@bls.gov,berezdirin.janice@bls.gov, berrington.emily@bls.gov, kuss.lawrence@bls.gov, jenkins.alaina@bls.gov,spolarich.peter@bls.gov, rose.sydney@bls.gov, rust_stuart@bls.gov, kazanowksi.cathy@bls.gov,waitrowski.william@bls.gov, ferguson.gwyn@bls.gov, doyle.philip@bls.gov, simpson.hilary@bls.gov,harris.francis@bls.gov, ruser.john@bls.gov, shaffer.thomas@bls.gov, newman.katherine@bls.gov,galvin.john@bls.gov, homer.p@bls.gov, butani.shail@bls.gov, loewenstein@bls.gov, nardone.thomas@bls.gov,allard.d@bls.gov, brown.sharon@bls.gov, getz.patricia@bls.gov, clayton.richard@bls.gov, robertson_k@bls.gov,sommers.dixie@bls.gov, franklin.j@bls.gov, stamas.george@bls.gov, bartsch.k@bls.gov, kennedy-brian@dol.gov, daniels-joycelyn@dol.gov, burr-geoff@dol.gov, wheeler.joseph@dol.gov, fisher.tammy@dol.gov,stohler.thomas@dol.gov, carmichael.ann@dol.gov, snyder.eric@dol.gov, setterberg.andrew@dol.gov,herbison.ronald@dol.gov, czamecki-karen@dol.gov, sadowski.daniel@dol.gov, becker.jeff@dol.gov,boylan.lorelei@dol.gov, busi.stephanie@dol.gov, harris.russell@dol.gov, mckeon.john@dol.gov,ginley.michael@dol.gov, brennan.richard@dol.gov, kerschner.arthur@dol.gov, relerford.barbara@dol.gov,kessler.james@dol.gov, ziegler.mary@dol.gov, helm.timothy@dol.gov, diane.koplewski@dol.gov,hendrix.janice@dol.gov, kravitz.michael@dol.gov, smith.carl.p@dol.gov, brown.gail@dol.gov,devore.robert@dol.gov, mendley.kebo@dol.gov, gross.williams@dol.gov, ebbesen.shirley@dol.gov,hamlet.sandra@dol.gov, michaels.david@dol.gov, shalhoub.donald@dol.gov, sierra.gabriel@dol.gov,ferris.john@dol.gov, miller.matt@dol.gov, taylor.aaron@dol.gov, collins.jan@dol.gov, miller.amy@dol.gov,fortune.cathy@dol.gov, ashley.jennifer@dol.gov, fairfax.richard@dol.gov, galassi.thomas@dol.gov,butler.steve@dol.gov, buchanan.arthur@dol.gov, sands.melody@dol.gov, talek.nilgun@dol.gov,furia.karen@dol.gov, adams.angela@dol.gov, breitenbach.catherine@dol.gov, beyer.wayne@dol.gov,walker.juanetta@dol.gov, transue-oliver@dol.gov, dunlop-janet@dol.gov, vittone.john@dol.gov,colwell.william@dol.gov, purcell.stephen@dol.gov, chapman.linda@dol.gov, levin.stuart@dol.gov,miller.edward@dol.gov, solomon.daniel@dol.gov, stansell-gamm@dol.gov, tureck.jeffrey@dol.gov, EXHIBIT “18”https://mail.google.com/mail/h/17yipotmde9n2/?v=pt&s=q&q=Vilsack&th=129cdd63f05c... 7/29/2010
  • Gmail - U.S. PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: THE DOWNFALL/DOOM OF THE O... Page 2 of 36wood.pamela@dol.gov, soto.pj@dol.gov, dorsey.marygrace@dol.gov, harper.yolanda@dol.gov,thomas.andrea@dol.gov, soto.victor@dol.gov, washington.yvonne@dol.gov, dolder-nancy@dol.gov, davis-patricia@dol.gov, boggs-judith@dol.gov, hall-betty@dol.gov, mcgranery-regina@dol.gov, smith-roy@dol.gov,santacroce-loretta@dol.gov, jones-carolita@dol.gov, ulan-janie@dol.gov, ulmer-glenn@dol.gov,shortenhaus.scott@dol.gov, pelman.erica@dol.gov, fortin.kristin@dol.gov, ross.kimberlee@dol.gov,dougherty.dorothy@dol.gov, edens.amanda@dol.gov, perry.bill@dol.gov, janes.carol@dol.gov,ruskin.maureen@dol.gov, wallis.david@dol.gov, maddux.jim@dol.gov, pittenger.don@dol.gov,botwin.sharon@dol.gov, hinshaw.pat@dol.gov, manning.richard@dol.gov, hankin.stanley@dol.gov,kaplan.jennifer@dol.gov, hatchet.dolline@dol.gov, gendron.adriana@dol.gov, abrahamson.peggy@dol.gov,steinberg.gary@dol.gov, louviere.amy@dol.gov, sims.david@dol.gov, bohnert.suzy@dol.gov,biddle.mike@dol.gov, haywood-lynette@msha.gov, cooper-darrell@msha.gov, charboneau-thomas@msha.gov,mcgann-denise@msha.gov, rowlett.john@msha.gov, carson.carroll@atf.gov, ardry.stucko@atf.gov,charlayne.armentrout@atf.gov, william.kullman@atf.gov, joseph.riehl@atf.gov, gregory.plott@atf.gov,gilbert.bartosh@atf.gov, debra.satkowiak@atf.gov, kenneth.coffey@atf.gov, ray.rowley@atf.gov,gary.bangs@atf.gov, christine.dixon@atf.gov, david.brown@atf.gov, john.spencer@atf.gov,michael.oneil@atf.gov, benjamin.mendoza@atf.gov, christopher.reeves@atf.gov, patricia.power@atf.gov,kevin.boydston@atf.gov, robert.thomas@atf.gov, mark.curtin@atf.gov, orlando.blanco@atf.gov,davy.aguilera@atf.gov, robert.levingston@atf.gov, charles.houser@atf.gov, gilbert.salinas@atf.gov,david.johnson@atf.gov, brenda.bennett@atf.gov, ben.hayes@atf.gov, colemanc@state.gov, millsc@state.gov,sullivanj@state.gov, steinbergjb@state.gov, millettejl@state.gov, jacobssk@state.gov, hembreeel@state.gov,asmalis@state.gov, ledbetterth@state.gov, kaplansl@state.gov, smithdb@state.gov, slaughteram@state.gov,johnmr1@state.gov, smithgb@state.gov, caramanicajf@state.gov, cantonja@state.gov, kohhh@state.gov,harrisonjc@state.gov, kearneydp@state.gov, williamsvx@state.gov, donoghueje@state.gov, thessinh@state.gov,schwartzjb@state.gov, biniazsn@state.gov, gallagherdj@state.gov, malinmc@state.gov, browncw@state.gov,mcleodm@state.gov, kokenkn@state.gov, rvisek@state.gov, olsonpm@state.gov, harrisrk@state.gov,groshlj@state.gov, johnscm2@state.gov, wiegmannjb@state.gov, kimjj@state.gov, buchwaldtf@state.gov,richecr@state.gov, frechetteaa@state.gov, tauschereo@state.gov, nelsondj2@state.gov, ferraoje@state.gov,weigoldea@state.gov, mitchelllm@state.gov, posnermh@state.gov, mclarenaj@state.gov, stewartkb@state.gov,jacobsjl@state.gov, ruterboriesja@state.gov, faillacerj@state.gov, kirbymd@state.gov, kathrynca2@state.gov,vydmantasrj@state.gov, barbara.lucas@dot.gov, raymond.lahood@dot.gov, joan.deoer@dot.gov, g , @ g ,sandy.snyder@dot.gov, mark.bushing@dot.gov, suhail.khan@dot.gov, wilda.dear@dot.gov,paul.gretch@dot.gov, mary.street@dot.gov, thomas.vilsack@usda.gov, sally.cluthe@usda.gov, ,kathleen.merrigan@usda.gov, suzanne.palmieri@usda.gov, carole.jett@usda.gov, john.verge@usda.gov,sdcollins@fs.fed.us, bruce.bundick@usda.gov, maryann.swigart@usda.gov, ngozi.abolarin@usda.gov,robert.simpson@usda.gov, barbara.cephas@usda.gov, danita.stanton@usda.gov, jglauber@oce.usda.gov,sbrown@oce.usda.gov, salathe@oce.usda.gov, cgoodloe@oce.usda.gov, rconway@oce.usda.gov,gbange@oce.usda.gov, vbharrod@oce.usda.gov, dstallings@oce.usda.gov, chung.yeh@oce.usda.gov,sshagam@oce.usda.gov, rmotha@oce.usda.gov, larry.quinn@usda.gov, corinne.hirsh@usda.gov,heather.vaughn@usda.gov, cheryl.normille@usda.gov, david.black@usda.gov, anthony.bouldin@usda.gov,gary.crawford@usda.gov, susan.carter@usda.gov, rod.bain@usda.gov, bob.ellison@usda.gov,pat.oleary@usda.gov, mansy.pullen@usda.gov, angela.harless@usda.gov, andrew.vlasaty@usda.gov,kelly.porter@usda.gov, david.kelly@usda.gov, matt.allen@usda.gov, william.jenson@usda.gov,mike.stewart@usda.gov, stephen.reilly@usda.gov, gloria.derobertis@usda.gov, joe.leonard@usda.gov,renee.allen@usda.gov, mary.mcneil@usda.gov, larry.newell@usda.gov, lisa.wilusz@usda.gov,denise.banks@usda.gov, david.king@usda.gov, rhonda.davis@usda.gov, christopher.l.smith@usda.gov,kate.hickman@usda.gov, mary.s.heard@usda.gov, ray.sheehan@usda.gov, mikem.edwards@usda.gov,ed.peterman@usda.gov, julia.carr@usda.gov, ellen.pearson@usda.gov, tonya.willis@usda.gov,dawn.bolden@usda.gov, wilma.bradley@usda.gov, ruby.goodman@usda.gov, ericka.luna@usda.gov,andrea.zizack@usda.gov, jachea.westbrook@usda.gov, joseph.ware@usda.gov, belinda.ward@usda.gov,barbara.lacour@usda.gov, glocke@doc.gov, mgeraghty@doc.gov, emoran@doc.gov, jandberg@doc.gov,kgriffis@doc.gov, jconnor@doc.gov, squehl@doc.gov, jcharles@doc.gov, ffanning@doc.gov, delznic@doc.gov,jjessup@doc.gov, cfields@doc.gov, saramaki@doc.gov, rmack@doc.gov, kanderson@doc.gov,szanelotti@doc.gov, bworthy@doc.gov, jponce@doc.gov, sthomas@doc.gov, scoggs@doc.gov,mbelardo@doc.gov, ltronge@doc.gov, emccloud@mbda.gov, dhinson@mbda.gov, ctong@mbda.gov,pcox@mbda.gov, bgonzalez@mbda.gov, rmarin@mbda.gov, chiefcounsel@mbda.gov, ywhitley@mbda.gov,margot.rogers@ed.gov, matthew.yale@ed.gov, jo.anderson@ed.gov, marshall.smith@ed.gov,joann.ryan@ed.gov, philip.link@ed.gov, mark.schneider@ed.gov, phil.maestri@ed.gov, samuel.myers@ed.gov,melanie.muenzer@ed.gov, jen.waller@ed.gov, anthony.miller@ed.gov, angelica.annino@ed.gov,joshua.bendor@ed.gov, stephanie.fine@ed.gov, kevin.liao@ed.gov, hillary.liep@ed.gov,lauren.lowenstein@ed.gov, crystal.martinez@ed.gov, frankie.martinez@ed.gov, samuel.salk@ed.gov,rene.spellman@ed.gov, hallie.montoyatansey@ed.gov, maribel.duran@ed.gov, marisa.bold@ed.gov,https://mail.google.com/mail/h/17yipotmde9n2/?v=pt&s=q&q=Vilsack&th=129cdd63f05c... 7/29/2010
  • Gmail - U.S. PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: THE DOWNFALL/DOOM OF THE O... Page 3 of 36tia.borders@ed.gov, gregory.darnieder@ed.gov, jessica.goldstein@ed.gov, william.jawando@ed.gov,steve.robinson@ed.gov, eric.waldo@ed.gov, ann.whalen@ed.gov, joanne.weiss@ed.gov,jacqueline.jones@ed.gov, wendy.tada@ed.gov, marta.zaniewski@ed.gov, meredith.miller@ed.gov,Vincent.pickett@ed.gov, kristi.wilson@ed.gov, michael.roark@ed.gov, Thelma.melendezdesantaana@ed.gov,alexander.goniprow@ed.gov, catherine.freeman@ed.gov, stephanie.sprow@ed.gov, joseph.conaty@ed.gov,sylvia.lyles@ed.gov, brenda.goetz@ed.gov, james.butler@ed.gov, deborah.spitz@ed.gov,catherine.schagh@ed.gov, katrina.farmer@ed.gov, robin.robinson@ed.gov, marilyn.hall@ed.gov,cathie.carothers@ed.gov, lana.shaughnessy@ed.gov, bernard.garcia@ed.gov, juan.sepulveda@ed.gov,maryann.gomez@ed.gov, linda.bugg@ed.gov, sophia.stampley@ed.gov, virgie.barnes@ed.gov,glorimar.maldonadonosal@ed.gov, richard.smith@ed.gov, amanda.feliciano@ed.gov TO: UNITED NATION LEADERS/FOREIGN LEADERS CHRISTIANS/SAINTS This is an UPDATE to Newsome’s previous E-mails that you may have received from Newsome. Newsome is sharing information with you and others in that it of PUBLIC/NATIONAL importance for the human rights, equal rights, and wellbeing of the lives of many people/citizens. Newsome prays that you find this information “educational,” “helpful” “encouraging” and “uplifting.” PLEASE NOTE: Newsome apologize for the constant change in the Email addresses; however, she has come under attack and her e-mails are being DISABLED to prevent her from sharing important information as that contained in this e-mail and the attachments. Nevertheless, Newsome perseveres through such oppositions and attempts to further obstruct justice. This is information that the United States MEDIA/PRESS will not share with you although they are aware of what is going on. Nevertheless, apparently foreign leaders/foreign nations are taking such matters seriously!! No the United States Government thought that taking out Leaders such as Martin Luther King Jr., Malcolm X, Medgar Evers, and many more would silence African-Americans and keep them in CAPTIVITY. However, it is finding out that STRONGER SHOOTS are springing forth and what these Leaders were murdered for (to keep from public knowledge) is COMING TO THE LIGHT!!! The TRUTH for what these Leaders were murdered/killed for to keep from being told- is COMING TO LIGHT!! United States President Barack Obama, his Administration and those they rely upon for counsel/advice have ALL made a WILLFUL, CONSCIOUS, DELIBERATE and MALICIOUS decision to take on Newsome and destroy her life WITHOUT just cause. In so doing, they have wedge a battle against Newsome and have REFUSED to address and correct the CORRUPTION, CONSPIRACIES, RACIAL INJUSTICES/PREJUDICES/ DISCRIMINATION brought timely, properly and adequately to their attention. Proverbs 16:18:https://mail.google.com/mail/h/17yipotmde9n2/?v=pt&s=q&q=Vilsack&th=129cdd63f05c... 7/29/2010
  • EXHIBIT “19”
  • Man in custody after fatal shooting in Port Gibson - Topix Page 1 of 6 Local News: Port Gibson, MS | Sign Up | Sign In ZIP code or keyword 1 2 3 TED STEVENS Ted Stevens HOME FORUMS TOP STORIES POPULAR LOCAL GAY MARRIAGE US POLITICS WORLD SPORTS ENTERTAINMENT OFFBEAT OTHER PORT GIBSON News Man in custody after fatal fata Running for office in Port Gibson? Forums & Polls shooting in Port Gibson Advertise here! Man in custody after ... Full story: The S Herald Sun Real-Time News The attorney for the Claiborne County Board of Supervisors was gunned down Friday and at least one other person was wounded during a shooting spree by an apparent Crime disgruntled former county employee, officials ... Yellow Pages White Pages Read Share Entertainment 21 Comments Photos More Port Gibson Discussions » Shopping Coupons Email me Port Gibson news. Learn more Real Estate Dating Ads by Google Jobs Save $ Inmate Phone Calls - All Federal & State Prisons Call (888) 728-2726 to save today! www.ConsCallHome.com Weather 101°F | 73°F Software For Police - Locate Suspects, Criminals and More With Accurint®- Get A Free Demo! www.LexisNexis.com/Government Expunge Criminal Records - Clear Your Record of Misdemeanors, DUIs, Even Felonies! 3 Easy Steps. ClearMyRecord.com in Port Gibson Comments Showing posts 1 - 20 of 21 < prev page | next page > Go to last page | Jump to page: 1 Sarah Kelly Mar 20, 2006 #1 | Judge it! | Report Abuse | Reply » Elgin, IL What ever happened to "Love One Another"? I heard of the disaster / murder and it felt as if my heart was ripped from my body. Not that I dont hear of murders daily but because I cannot believe that my small home town has taken on the same problems as the Big Cities. I am extemeely sorry to know that my classmate was the person who did the shooting. As a young person growing up in that small town and not returning for decades, as I look back on how people in other parts of the country measure up to the people in Small Town Port Gibson, I would Put Carl Brandon as a model from my town. I think he was one of the more intellegent and well manners persons in the Powered by Krillion class. i cannot imagine this guy waking up one morning to decide that he want to destroy his life and others. I think that this is a tragedy and that fact cannot be denied, PORT GIBSON SHOPPING [ See all ] but the greater issue is that behind all of this there was a reason. For every action there is a reaction. Sometimes the reaction is hard to understand but it has to be caused by some action first. We can only pray that God will forgive because there are no winners in this situation. Everyone lost something. I am over 18 hundred miles Port Gibson, MS Jobs away and have not in that small town in years but I felt a lost. Integrated Master Scheduler , " May God Bless and dont forget to love ,embrace and forgive one another. Senior Consultant - Federal Practice , Have a Great Day !!!!! Healthcare Actuary Senior Consultant , Distressed Mar 20, 2006 #2 | Judge it! | Report Abuse | Reply » Chicago, IL Enterprise Data Management Life Sciences - Senior Consultant This story is so sad. , Business Intelligence/Data Warehousing - Senior Angel Mar 20, 2006 #3 | Judge it! | Report Abuse | Reply » Consultant Chicago, IL , Distressed wrote: Enterprise Data Management - Senior Consultant This story is so sad. , Yes, I heard about this and it is very very sad. My heart goes out to everyone involved in this tragedy. keywords location Go Shelly jones Mar 21, 2006 #4 | Judge it! | Report Abuse | Reply » Nashville, TN jobs by I was sad to hear what had happend in my home town, and shock to find out that it was Carl, that went off. Some time a person try to walk away from a problem, but there are people in this world that want let them do that. This man had left this job and move on, but that was not good enough. They had to call his job and tell them what happend MORTGAGES [ See current mortgage rates ] Amount: Loan Typ EXHIBIT “20”http://www.topix.com/forum/city/port-gibson-ms/T0RUM1ECTB788O4HN
  • Man in custody after fatal shooting in Port Gibson - Topix Page 2 of 6 200,000 30 Year Fixed Conforming 9 years ago, and got this man fired. I hate that he let the devil take over him at the time, but I do understand. My heart goes out to Carl and his family, and to Miller & . Search Burrell family as well. I hope that we can learn something from this tragedy. I will keep everyone in my Prayer. FEATURED SPONSOR See Your Free Joe Mar 21, 2006 #5 | Judge it! | Report Abuse | Reply » Albany, OR Credit Score Instantly! Wow. You understand why this coward shot another human being in the face with a 12 First Name: guage shotgun and your heart goes out first to him and his family. He set in his vehicle in ambush to kill another human being. He knew exactly what he was doing, the Last Name: snuffing out of a life as well as the trauma and devestation he was going to cause Michelle and the kids. What a despicable, cowardly act. My sympathy is with the victims families, and I dont mean the guy who had his house shot into and has to NEXT replace some windows. Brandon should face the full wrath of our Justice system ASAP! With enrollment in Triple Advantage.® Submit Query Shelly Jones Mar 21, 2006 #6 | Judge it! | Report Abuse | Reply » Nashville, TN Joe wrote: PORT GIBSON YELLOW PAGES [ See all ] Wow. You understand why this coward shot another human being in the face with a Port Gibson - Sunglasses 12 guage shotgun and your heart goes out first to him and his family. He set in his vehicle in ambush to kill another human being. He knew exactly what he was doing, Port Gibson - Pet Services the snuffing out of a life as well as the trauma and devestation he was going to Port Gibson - Dentists cause Michelle and the kids. What a despicable, cowardly act. My sympathy is with the victims families, and I dont mean the guy who had his house shot into and has Port Gibson - Car Repair to replace some windows. Brandon should face the full wrath of our Justice system Port Gibson - Real Estate Agents ASAP! Port Gibson - Florists Wow it is so sad that the person you can feel sorry for is the Burrell family. When there Port Gibson - Plastic Surgeons was a young lady shot and is fighting for her life and a young man home was shot up. Port Gibson - Real Estate Agents Everyone lost, the Burrell, Miller, Porter and the Brandon. They all have children, and Port Gibson - Cardiologists these kids are going to need some help. The damage have been done, now it is time to move ahead. I still pray for all the familys including the Brandon. Search Joe Mar 21, 2006 #7 | Judge it! | Report Abuse | Reply » Albany, OR PORT GIBSON DATING You are correct that I should have specifically stated that the lady that was shot is also a victim. From what I have read she is not "fighting for her life" but I very much count her as a victim in this and she will be traumatized by this cowards actions for some time to come. Any children involved are victims as well. However, in your previous post you seem to blame the victims for their actions that you have ZERO proof of. Ive read nothing about anyone else pursuing this matter and getting Brandon fired from his new job. If this did in fact take place Brandon would have ample legal recourse. My kim39069 TheDream1796 gutone123 objection was, and is, to your excusing this animals actions and blaming the victims 34 - Fayette, 26 - Natchez, 33 - Jackson, MS MS MS as you so obviously did in your initial post. You are so right that lots of people are going to need help in this situation. My objection is only to any notion that the blame Im a Seeking a Age should be anywhere but squarely on the shoulders of the man that pulled the trigger. Man Woman 25 to 45 In my opinion he should face the death penalty without delay. more search filters Angel Mar 21, 2006 #8 | Judge it! | Report Abuse | Reply » Find my Match Chicago, IL My dear God, this is a time for understanding and healing, not name-calling and a recommendation of more violence. PORT GIBSON PEOPLE SEARCH Addresses and phone numbers for FREE This story is very confounding because not much has been reported in the news but there is a lot of “he-said she-said ” surrounding the situation. Here is what I’d like to First Name know. Is it true that Mr. Burrell falsely accused Mr. Brandon of sexually harassing a child, which resulted in Mr. Brandon losing his county job about nine years ago?(I say Last Name “falsely accused Mr. Brandon” because it’s my understanding the charges were never City Port Gibson proven or even believed by anyone who knew Mr. Brandon). If this is true, we cant gloss over it. If its not true, may an end be put to the rumors. State Mississippi It also has been said that Mr. Burrell recently called Mr. Brandons latest employer and repeated those same unproven charges of sexual harassment about him, which prompted Mr. Brandons employer to terminate him. PORT GIBSON COUPONS [ See all Coupons ] Perhaps all the pertinent information involving this unfortunate incident will be revealed in court. So far, it’s all so sketchy. COUPON OF THE DAY DICKs Sporting Goods - $5 off Coupon It is particularly disturbing that even before this case has been to trial and Mr. Save $5 on any purchase of Brandon’s innocence or guilt has been proven, someone has suggested the death $75 or more from DICKs penalty. What if, and only if, the rumors are true that Mr. Burrell virtually stalked Mr. Sporting Goods. Brandon and robbed him of his livelihood and happy family life? If that is so, it’s Coupon Code: DSP5OFF75 possible that Mr. Brandon is already dead emotionally, spiritually and mentally at the hands of Mr. Burrell. It’s not so farfetched that we should be exploring a double FEATURED COUPONS homicide, one of the spirit and one of the flesh –both tragic. See coupons from Port Gibson, MS This is indeed a gloomy time for friends and family of Mr. Burrell, Mr. Brandon and Ms. Electronics • Womens Apparel • Toys & Games Porter and Mr. Miller. Importantly, it is a time for understanding, for example, Computers • Furniture • Flowers and more ... understanding that violence is not the best way, as Mr. Burrell’s death shows. It is time to understand the Golden Rule: do unto others as you would have them do unto you.http://www.topix.com/forum/city/port-gibson-ms/T0RUM1ECTB788O4HN 8/10/2010
  • Man in custody after fatal shooting in Port Gibson - Topix Page 5 of 6 escaped injury or murder. I grieve for my own family, Allens family, Lorethas family, and the human family. Gloria Mar 23, 2006 #16 | Judge it! | Report Abuse | Reply » Las Vegas, NV I was a classmate of Carl Brandom. We were very good friends growing up in Mississippi. It was very surprising to me that he would commit this crime. It grieves my heart for him and his family; also the lawyers and the other families that were invovled. It has affected the small town, and many of us who live in other cities. By the way, James Miller and I are cousins, and I hope that his wife Carolyn realizes that God spared she and her familys life. I give God praise for that. I am praying for them all. I pray that those involved can come to a place of forgiveness, because anger only wil produce more harm. (Gloria Williams), Las Vegas, NV Carolyn Miller Mar 23, 2006 #17 | Judge it! | Report Abuse | Reply » AOL Gloria wrote: I was a classmate of Carl Brandom. We were very good friends growing up in Mississippi. It was very surprising to me that he would commit this crime. It grieves my heart for him and his family; also the lawyers and the other families that were invovled. It has affected the small town, and many of us who live in other cities. By the way, James Miller and I are cousins, and I hope that his wife Carolyn realizes that God spared she and her familys life. I give God praise for that. I am praying for them all. I pray that those involved can come to a place of forgiveness, because anger only wil produce more harm. (Gloria Williams), Las Vegas, NV Gloria, I KNOW that God saved our family. Maybe you should be Christ like and call your cousin and express your empathy directly to him. CASSANDRA COOK Jul 11, 2007 #18 | Judge it! | Report Abuse | Reply » BUTLER AOL Joe wrote: Wow. You understand why this coward shot another human being in the face with a 12 guage shotgun and your heart goes out first to him and his family. He set in his vehicle in ambush to kill another human being. He knew exactly what he was doing, the snuffing out of a life as well as the trauma and devestation he was going to cause Michelle and the kids. What a despicable, cowardly act. My sympathy is with the victims families, and I dont mean the guy who had his house shot into and has to replace some windows. Brandon should face the full wrath of our Justice system ASAP! Carl Brandon was a victim also. He had lost his job because someone said he had harrassed them. He lost his reputation and the respect of some. When he tried to move on some vindictive, vicious persons went to his next job and scandalized him. He fought through every legal avenue available to him and found no justice. I am so sorry for him and the entire Brandon family. They are a proud old family who have made Port Gibson their home for over a century True lives were lost in this tragedy. True families were wounded and have to live with the irrevocable loss of their loved ones. But Carls life has been lost also. The rest of his life to be spent in a penal institution. His family also has suffered irrevocable loss. my sympathy goes out to all concerned. see Aug 17, 2007 #19 | Judge it! | Report Abuse | Reply » Chicago, IL What street did you live on in Port Gibson? Did you live near Vine street. Sarah Kelly wrote: What ever happened to "Love One Another"? I heard of the disaster / murder and it felt as if my heart was ripped from my body. Not that I dont hear of murders daily but because I cannot believe that my small home town has taken on the same problems as the Big Cities. I am extemeely sorry to know that my classmate was the person who did the shooting. As a young person growing up in that small town and not returning for decades, as I look back on how people in other parts of the country measure up to the people in Small Town Port Gibson, I would Put Carl Brandon as a model from my town. I think he was one of the more intellegent and well manners persons in the class. i cannot imagine this guy waking up one morning to decide that he want to destroy his life and others. I think that this is a tragedy and that fact cannot be denied, but the greater issue is that behind all of this there was a reason. For every action there is a reaction. Sometimes the reaction is hard to understand but it has to be caused by some action first. We can only pray that God will forgive because there are no winners in this situation. Everyone lost something. I am over 18 hundred miles away and have not in that small town in years but I felt a lost. " May God Bless and dont forget to love ,embrace and forgive one another. Have a Great Day !!!!! see Aug 17, 2007 #20 | Judge it! | Report Abuse | Reply » Chicago, IL What street did you live on in Port Gibson? Did you live near Vine street? Tell me when this thread is updated!http://www.topix.com/forum/city/port-gibson-ms/T0RUM1ECTB788O4HN 8/10/2010
  • Accused Port Gibson Shooter Arraigned, Denied Bond - Print This Story News Story - W... Page 1 of 2 WAPT.com Accused Port Gibson Shooter Arraigned, Denied Bond POSTED: 11:29 am CST March 20, 2006 UPDATED: 3:07 pm CST March 21, 2006 PORT GIBSON, Miss. -- Carl Brandon walked into his initial court appearance on Tuesday morning without an attorney. WAPT was not allowed to videotape the proceedings but Brandon certainly had plenty to say. County prosecutor Michael Keyton told the court Brandon should be denied bond because he’s a too dangerous. "I dont know how you can consider me a danger. I was made a criminal through the system … The sexual harassment charges made against me were trumped up, yet the system allowed the board of supervisors to take them and run with them,” Brandon said in court. Karl Devine, Brandon’s longtime friend, said Brandon never got over the fact that the courts upheld the board’s decision to fire him in 1997. Devine believes the years Brandon spent unsuccessfully trying to clear his name, caused him to finally snap. “Carl, would always talk about it he said ‘The one thing that I want, I just want them to clear my name. They dont have to pay me, they dont have to give me no job, just clear my name,” said name, Devine. Sheriff Frank Davis said he warned two of the victims of Brandons alleged shooting rampage, Allen Burell and James Miller, that they might be in danger. Davis said he even spoke to Brandon the day before the shootings and that Brandon appeared to be visibly upset about being fired. But Davis said he had no just cause to bring Brandon in and not enough means to keep under constant surveillance. “We cant stay with anybody 24 hours a day. We cant follow them around. Im limited on a budget, I’m limited from my board of supervisors as to how much money I have. I’m limited with manpower,” said Davis. Keyton said they would have enough evidence to prove that Brandon should spend the rest of his natural life behind bars. “We have the witnesses to prove each element of each crime and well just see how Mr. Brandonhttp://www.wapt.com/print/8141556/detail.html 8/10/2010
  • Accused Port Gibson Shooter Arraigned, Denied Bond - Print This Story News Story - W... Page 2 of 2 responds,” said Keyton. Copyright 2006 by TheJacksonChannel.com. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.http://www.wapt.com/print/8141556/detail.html 8/10/2010
  • Print Examiner Article Page 1 of 2Possibility that Omar Thornton did not act aloneAugust 8, 7:24 PM · Edward Nelson - NY Public Policy ExaminerUnfortunately, the Connecticut workplace shooting leaves more factsthat have not been considered. In college Psychology, I recallresearching the ABCs (an acronym for Antecedents, Behaviors, andConsequences) of Psychology. These principles provide tremendous g ppassistance in understanding what happened in Manchester, Connecticutthis p past Tuesday. Some people don’t want to discuss racism as being a y p p gform of violence because it would reveal that they themselves are in factextremely violent and in denial about it.Omar Thornton’s incident has a host of websites spewing hate talk p gtoward African-Americans. Hartford Distributors may have used racism y Courtesy of Getty Images by Douglas Healeyand gradually managed to kill Omar Thornton mentally and emotionally g y gbefore the killing spree via attrition. Jessica Anne Brocuglio, an ex-girlfriend of Omar Thornton, comes forward with character evidence: He always felt like he was being discriminated (against) because he was black[.]” “Basically they wouldn’t give him y g g pay raises. He never felt like they accepted him as a hard working person.”This statement corroborates with what Kristi Hannah, Omar Thornton’s fiancée before his death, had been telling the ManchesterPolice Department about Hartford Distributors treating him like a persona non grata.Plus, a fellow co-worker who was employed with Omar Thornton at Hartford Distributors has come forward stating that he had p y gseen the racist taunts: “Stuff on walls. Racist comments. I saw with my own eyes.” More importantly, the fellow co-worker said y y p y gMr. Thornton was hired as a truck driver; yet, he was assigned to loading boxes in the warehouse. Mr. Thornton had to fight toget behind the wheel. The co-worker then states that Hartford Distributors are lying and the evidence is in Omar’s cell phone. y p p p pThese statements are serious and they are not based upon speculation. This places the co-worker in a position to be called as akey witness to racism within Hartford Distributors. Although the co-worker is no longer under the employ of Hartford y g g p yDistributors, he has witnessed these incidents first-hand. These statements make it appear as if Hartford Distributors is pp y p p ydeliberately being obtuse to shield themselves from potential liability. As Marcellus said in William Shakespeare’s play “Hamlet,”“[s]omething is rotten in the state of Denmark.” Thus far, the answers provided by Hartford Distributors just rubs me the wrongway.If Hartford Distributors created an atmosphere of institutionalized racism within the workplace, then Omar Thornton’scontributing accomplice would be Hartford Distributors who subtly enraged Mr. Thornton to kill 9 employees. In no uncertainterms am I expressing that Omar Thornton was justified by what he did. However, I am expressing that if employers are allowedto continue with business as usual without being held accountable, the contributing employer accomplice will continue itsuncorrected racist practices with the result being identical to the facts currently before us. Albert Einstein defined insanity as“doing the same thing over and over again expecting different results.” Let’s not wait until something else happens before wecorrect this, let’s get it right . . . right now!If not, the subjective side of the alleged violence will continue without correction. Racist employers are in dire need help toredirect their violent tendencies in the workplace! If Mr. Thornton is correct, racism (his employer’s racism) motivated him to dowhat he did. A Latin term used in the legal community is ipse dixit (he himself said it). How is it that a fair minded person canincriminate Omar Thornton for what he did; yet, absolve the Hartford Distributors for their alleged racist conduct? If there wasno shooting spree, many have suggested that he could have used the administrative process to report the racism. What thatindicates is that many actually believe Omar had enough to file a complaint. Otherwise, why suggest filing a complaint when youdon’t believe anything happened? That would be a futile gesture. It also suggests that a large population of people believe Mr.Thornton was subjected to racism. Normally, it’s the employer that recommends that the employee receive help with a problemthat affects his/her job performance. In this case, it could be the employer who needs help with its entrenched racist practicestoward African-Americans. But who will direct the employer to enroll in training to correct the problem? I’d bet dollars todoughnuts that neither of the supervisors or managers have had training regarding racism as a form of violence in the workplace.According to Omar Thornton, racism directly contributed to his shooting spree.In a company that quickly identifies people by color, Hartford Distributors knew that its employees recognized which color was inthe minority and the majority. The 911 tape is replete with descriptions of Omar Thornton being Black and one caller adds that he EXHIBIT “21”http://www.examiner.com/blog/printexaminerarticles.cfm?section=examiners,examiners&.
  • Print Examiner Article Page 2 of 2is the only Black guy that works there. The racism herein may have been cloaked in secrecy and a higher mind and set of eyes arereviewing the evidence in this case to find it. The Manchester Police Department must be applauded for their diligent effort tofind the truth regarding this atrocity. When law enforcement acts professionally, the result is an important lesson being learnedin the community. As the facts unfold, you can guarantee that they will be reported here.Copyright 2010 Examiner.com. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast,rewritten or redistributed.Author Edward Nelson is an Examiner from New York. You can see Edwards articles at: "http://www.Examiner.com/x-48240-NY-Public-Policy-Examiner"http://www.examiner.com/blog/printexaminerarticles.cfm?section=examiners,examiners&... 8/10/2010
  • The Associated Press: Beer warehouse shooter long complained of racism Page 1 of 2 Beer warehouse shooter long complained of racism By JOHN CHRISTOFFERSEN (AP) – 2 days ago NEW HAVEN, Conn. — To those closest to him, Omar Thornton was caring, quiet and soft- spoken. He was excited to land a well-paying job at a beer delivery company a few years ago and his longtime girlfriend says they talked of marrying and having children. ut u de eat , o to seet ed t se se o ac a just ce o yea s t at cu ated But underneath, Thornton seethed with a sense of racial injustice for years that culminated in a s oot g a page uesday shooting rampage Tuesday in which t e Co ect cut man killed e g and wounded two others at c the Connecticut a ed eight his job at Hartford Distributors in Manchester before killing himself. "I know what pus ed him o o at pushed over the edge was all the racial stuff that was happening at work," said his girlfriend, Kristi Hannah. Thornton, a black man, said as much in a chilling, four-minute 911 call. "You probably want to know the reason why I shot this place up," Thornton sa d in a recording ou p obab y a t o t e easo y s ot t s p ace up, o to said eco d g e eased u sday s p ace s ac st p ace ey e t eat g e o e ee d released Thursday. "This place is a racist place. Theyre treating me bad over here. And treat all ot e b ac e p oyees other black employees bad o e here, too So I too it to my own hands and handled the over e e, too. took t problem. I wish I could have got more of the people." Thornton, 34, went on his killing spree moments after he was forced to resign when confronted with video evidence that he had been stealing and reselling beer. Hartford Distributors p es de Ross Hollander said there was no record to suppo c a s o a o d s bu o s president oss o a de sa d e e as o eco d o support claims of "racial insensitivity" made t oug t e co pa y s a t a ass e t po cy, t e u o g e ac a se s t ty ade through the companys anti-harassment policy, the union grievance process or state and federal agencies. Relatives of the victims also rejected the claims. Thornton, who grew up in the Hartford area, complained about racial troubles on the job long before he worked at Hartford Distributors. "He always felt like he was being discriminated (against) because he was black," said Jessica Anne Brocuglio, his former girlfriend. "Basically they wouldnt give him pay raises. He never felt like they accepted him as a hard working person." One time Thornton had a confrontation with a white co-worker who used a racial slur against him, she said. Thornton changed jobs a few times because he was not getting raises, Brocuglio said. sc "Im sick of having to quit jobs and get another job because they cant accept me," she said he told her. Brocuglio, who said she dated Thornton until eight years ago, said Thornton helped her become a certified nursing aide. She said he never drank or smoked and remained calm, even when she would yell or grab him. "He was such a caring person," said Brocuglio, who is white. "He showed me so much love. He was like a teddy bear." Brocuglios sister, Toni, said Thornton would come home and say co-workers called him racial slurs. He was also upset by comments made by passers-by about the interracial couple, she said. "He just didnt understand why people had so much hatred in their lives," Toni Brocuglio said. Brocuglio said Thornton put her family up in a hotel after a fire at her house and was "like a second dad" to her children. "Omar was the best man I ever met in my life," Brocuglio said. Thornton ran into his own troubles a decade ago when he filed for bankruptcy protection. His debts were discharged in 2001 and the case was closed. Around that time, Thornton was hired as a driver with Chemstation New England, a chemical company in South Windsor. But he was let go after 10 months, unable to master the mechanical skills involved handling the equipment, said Bruce LeFebvre, the owner. "He was a real nice kid when he was with us," LeFebvre said. "Certainly I would never have expected anything like this from him." LeFebvre said Thornton handled it well when he was let go. Thornton was hired for a warehouse job at Hartford Distributors about two years ago and was later promoted to driver. Drivers can make up to $60,000 and receive excellent benefits, said John Hollis, legislative liaison for the Teamsters who represent employees at the company. "He had this huge smile on his face" when he was hired, Hannah said. Thornton seemed happy outside of work, too, playing basketball and video games and occasionally shooting his gun at a local range with a friend. Thornton and his mother were especially excited when Barack Obama was elected the first African American president, Hannah said. He listed Obama and the gun range among hishttp://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jBNP73m9cp2g6qFtWxCbJH6IA... 8/10/2010
  • The Associated Press: Beer warehouse shooter long complained of racism Page 2 of 2 interests on his Facebook page. But Hannah said he s o ed her cell phone photos of racist g a t in t e bat oo at t e bee ut a a sa d e showed e ce p o e p otos o ac st graffiti the bathroom the beer co pa y and overheard company official using ac a epithet company a d o e ea d a co pa y o c a us g a racial ep t et in reference to him, but a u o e e e ce , union ep ese tat e d d ot etu representative did not return his phone calls. Police said they recovered the phone and forensics experts would examine it. "Nothing else bothered him e ot g e se bot e ed except these comments he would make about them doing the racial things to him," Hannah said. (This version CORRECTS spelling of former girlfriends last name to Brocuglio instead of Brocuglia in paragraphs 12-13.) Copyright © 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jBNP73m9cp2g6qFtWxCbJH6IA... 8/10/2010
  • Page 1 of 4 The Willie Lynch Letter: The Making Of A Slave!This speech was delivered by Willie Lynch on the bank of the James River in the colony of Virginia in 1712. Lynch was aBritish slave owner in the West Indies. He was invited to the colony of Virginia in 1712 to teach his methods to slaveowners there. The term "lynching" is derived from his last name.December 25, 1712Gentlemen:I greet you here on the bank of the James River in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and twelve. First, Ishall thank you, the gentlemen of the Colony of Virginia, for bringing me here. I am here to help you solve some of yourproblems with slaves. Your invitation reached me on my modest plantation in the West Indies, where I have experimentedwith some of the newest and still the oldest methods for control of slaves. Ancient Romes would envy us if my program isimplemented.As our boat sailed south on the James River, named for our illustrious King, whose version of the Bible we cherish, I sawenough to know that your problem is not unique. While Rome used cords of wood as crosses for standing human bodiesalong its highways in great numbers, you are here using the tree and the rope on occasions. I caught the whiff of a deadslave hanging from a tree, a couple miles back. You are not only losing valuable stock by hangings, you are havinguprisings, slaves are running away, your crops are sometimes left in the fields too long for maximum profit, You sufferoccasional fires, your animals are killed.Gentlemen, you know what your problems are; I do not need to elaborate. I am not here to enumerate your problems, Iam here to introduce you to a method of solving them. In my bag here, I have a foolproof method for controlling your blackslaves. I guarantee every one of you that if installed correctly it will control the slaves for at least 300 years [2012]. Mymethod is simple. Any member of your family or your overseer can use it. I have outlined a number of differences amongthe slaves and make the differences bigger. I use fear, distrust and envy for control.These methods have worked on my modest plantation in the West Indies and it will work throughout the South. Take thissimple little list of differences and think about them. On top of my list is "age" but its there only because it starts with an"A." The second is "COLOR" or shade, there is intelligence, size, sex, size of plantations and status on plantations,attitude of owners, whether the slaves live in the valley, on a hill, East, West, North, South, have fine hair, course hair, oris tall or short. Now that you have a list of differences, I shall give you an outline of action, but before that, I shall assureyou that distrust is stronger than trust and envy stronger than adulation, respect or admiration. The Black slaves afterreceiving this indoctrination shall carry on and will become self refueling and self generating for hundreds of years, maybethousands. Dont forget you must pitch the old black Male vs. the young black Male, and the young black Male against theold black male. You must use the dark skin slaves vs. the light skin slaves, and the light skin slaves vs. the dark skinslaves. You must use the female vs. the male. And the male vs. the female. You must also have you white servants andoverseers distrust all Blacks. It is necessary that your slaves trust and depend on us. They must love, respect and trustonly us. Gentlemen, these kits are your keys to control. Use them. Have your wives and children use them, never miss anopportunity. If used intensely for one year, the slaves themselves will remain perpetually distrustful of each other.Thank you gentlemenLets Make a SlaveIt was the interest and business of slave holders to study human nature, and the slave nature in particular, with a view topractical results. I and many of them attained astonishing proficiency in this direction. They had to deal not with earth,wood and stone, but with men and by every regard they had for their own safety and prosperity they needed to know thematerial on which they were to work. Conscious of the injustice and wrong they were every hour perpetuating andknowing what they themselves would do. Were they the victims of such wrongs? They were constantly looking for the firstsigns of the dreaded retribution. They watched, therefore with skilled and practiced eyes, and learned to read with greataccuracy, the state of mind and heart of the slave, through his sable face. Unusual sobriety, apparent abstractions,sullenness and indifference indeed, any mood out of the common was afforded ground for suspicion and inquiry.Let us make a slave. What do we need? First of all we need a black nigger man, a pregnant nigger woman and her babynigger boy. Second, we will use the same basic principle that we use in breaking a horse, combined with some moresustaining factors. What we do with horses is that we break them from one form of life to another that is we reduce themfrom their natural state in nature. Whereas nature provides them with the natural capacity to take care of their offspring,we break that natural string of independence from them and thereby create a dependency status, so that we may be able EXHIBIT “22”
  • Page 2 of 4to get from them useful production for our business and pleasureCardinal Principles for making a NegroFor fear that our future Generations may not understand the principles of breaking both of the beast together, the niggerand the horse. We understand that short range planning economics results in periodic economic chaos; so that to avoidturmoil in the economy, it requires us to have breath and depth in long range comprehensive planning, articulating bothskill sharp perceptions. We lay down the following principles for long range comprehensive economic planning. Bothhorse and niggers is no good to the economy in the wild or natural state. Both must be broken and tied together fororderly production. For orderly future, special and particular attention must be paid to the female and the youngestoffspring. Both must be crossbred to produce a variety and division of labor. Both must be taught to respond to a peculiarnew language. Psychological and physical instruction of containment must be created for both. We hold the six cardinalprinciples as truth to be self evident, based upon the following the discourse concerning the economics of breaking andtying the horse and the nigger together, all inclusive of the six principles laid down about. NOTE: Neither principle alonewill suffice for good economics. All principles must be employed for orderly good of the nation. Accordingly, both a wildhorse and a wild or nature nigger is dangerous even if captured, for they will have the tendency to seek their customaryfreedom, and in doing so, might kill you in your sleep. You cannot rest. They sleep while you are awake, and are awakewhile you are asleep. They are dangerous near the family house and it requires too much labor to watch them away fromthe house. Above all, you cannot get them to work in this natural state. Hence both the horse and the nigger must bebroken; that is breaking them from one form of mental life to another. Keep the body take the mind! In other words breakthe will to resist. Now the breaking process is the same for both the horse and the nigger, only slightly varying in degrees.But as we said before, there is an art in long range economic planning. You must keep your eye and thoughts on thefemale and the offspring of the horse and the nigger. A brief discourse in offspring development will shed light on the keyto sound economic principles. Pay little attention to the generation of original breaking, but concentrate on futuregenerations.Therefore, if you break the female mother, she will break the offspring in its early years of development and when theoffspring is old enough to work, she will deliver it up to you, for her normal female protective tendencies will have beenlost in the original breaking process. For example take the case of the wild stud horse, a female horse and an alreadyinfant horse and compare the breaking process with two captured nigger males in their natural state, a pregnant niggerwoman with her infant offspring. Take the stud horse, break him for limited containment.Completely break the female horse until she becomes very gentle, whereas you or anybody can ride her in her comfort.Breed the mare and the stud until you have the desired offspring. Then you can turn the stud to freedom until you needhim again. Train the female horse where by she will eat out of your hand, and she will in turn train the infant horse to eatout of your hand also. When it comes to breaking the uncivilized nigger, use the same process, but vary the degree andstep up the pressure, so as to do a complete reversal of the mind. Take the meanest and most restless nigger, strip him ofhis clothes in front of the remaining male niggers, the female, and the nigger infant, tar and feather him, tie each leg to adifferent horse faced in opposite directions, set him a fire and beat both horses to pull him apart in front of the remainingnigger. The next step is to take a bull whip and beat the remaining nigger male to the point of death, in front of the femaleand the infant. Dont kill him, but put the fear of God in him, for he can be useful for future breeding.The Breaking Process of the African WomanTake the female and run a series of tests on her to see if she will submit to your desires willingly. Test her in every way,because she is the most important factor for good economics. If she shows any sign of resistance in submittingcompletely to your will, do not hesitate to use the bull whip on her to extract that last bit of resistance out of her. Take carenot to kill her, for in doing so, you spoil good economic. When in complete submission, she will train her off springs in theearly years to submit to labor when the become of age. Understanding is the best thing. Therefore, we shall go deeperinto this area of the subject matter concerning what we have produced here in this breaking process of the female nigger.We have reversed the relationship in her natural uncivilized state she would have a strong dependency on the uncivilizednigger male, and she would have a limited protective tendency toward her independent male offspring and would raisemale off springs to be dependent like her. Nature had provided for this type of balance. We reversed nature by burningand pulling a civilized nigger apart and bull whipping the other to the point of death, all in her presence. By her being leftalone, unprotected, with the male image destroyed, the ordeal caused her to move from her psychological dependentstate to a frozen independent state. In this frozen psychological state of independence, she will raise her male and femaleoffspring in reversed roles.For fear of the young males life she will psychologically train him to be mentally weak and dependent, but physicallystrong. Because she has become psychologically independent, she will train her female off springs to be psychologicalindependent. What have you got? Youve got the nigger women out front and the nigger man behind and scared. This is aperfect situation of sound sleep and economic. Before the breaking process, we had to be alertly on guard at all times.
  • Page 3 of 4Now we can sleep soundly, for out of frozen fear his woman stands guard for us. He cannot get past her early slavemolding process. He is a good tool, now ready to be tied to the horse at a tender age. By the time a nigger boy reachesthe age of sixteen, he is soundly broken in and ready for a long life of sound and efficient work and the reproduction of aunit of good labor force. Continually through the breaking of uncivilized savage nigger, by throwing the nigger femalesavage into a frozen psychological state of independence, by killing of the protective male image, and by creating asubmissive dependent mind of the nigger male slave, we have created an orbiting cycle that turns on its own axis forever,unless a phenomenon occurs and re shifts the position of the male and female slaves. We show what we mean byexample. Take the case of the two economic slave units and examine them closely.The Nigger MarriageWe breed two nigger males with two nigger females. Then we take the nigger males away from them and keep themmoving and working. Say one nigger female bears a nigger female and the other bears a nigger male. Both niggerfemales being without influence of the nigger male image, frozen with an independent psychology, will raise their offspringinto reverse positions. The one with the female offspring will teach her to be like herself, independent and negotiable (wenegotiate with her, through her, by her, we negotiate her at will). The one with the nigger male offspring, she being frozenwith a subconscious fear for his life, will raise him to be mentally dependent and weak, but physically strong, in otherwords, body over mind. Now in a few years when these two offsprings become fertile for early reproduction we will mateand breed them and continue the cycle. That is good, sound, and long range comprehensive planning.Warning: Possible Interloping NegativesEarlier we talked about the non economic good of the horse and the nigger in their wild or natural state; we talked out theprinciple of breaking and tying them together for orderly production. Furthermore, we talked about paying particularattention to the female savage and her offspring for orderly future planning, then more recently we stated that, byreversing the positions of the male and female savages, we created an orbiting cycle that turns on its own axis foreverunless a phenomenon occurred and resift and positions of the male and female savages. Our experts warned us aboutthe possibility of this phenomenon occurring, for they say that the mind has a strong drive to correct and re-correct itselfover a period of time if I can touch some substantial original historical base, and they advised us that the best way to dealwith the phenomenon is to shave off the brutes mental history and create a multiplicity of phenomena of illusions, so thateach illusion will twirl in its own orbit, something similar to floating balls in a vacuum.This creation of multiplicity of phenomena of illusions entails the principle of crossbreeding the nigger and the horse as westated above, the purpose of which is to create a diversified division of labor thereby creating different levels of labor anddifferent values of illusion at each connecting level of labor. The results of which is the severance of the points of originalbeginnings for each sphere illusion. Since we feel that the subject matter may get more complicated as we proceed inlaying down our economic plan concerning the purpose, reason and effect of crossbreeding horses and nigger, we shalllay down the following definition terms for future generations.Orbiting cycle means a thing turning in a given path. Axis means upon which or around which a body turns. Phenomenonmeans something beyond ordinary conception and inspires awe and wonder. Multiplicity means a great number. Spheremeans a globe. Cross breeding a horse means taking a horse and breeding it with an ass and you get a dumb backwardass long headed mule that is not reproductive nor productive by itself.Crossbreeding niggers mean taking so many drops of good white blood and putting them into as many nigger women aspossible, varying the drops by the various tone that you want, and then letting them breed with each other untilanother cycle of color appears as you desire. What this means is this; Put the niggers and the horse in a breeding pot, mixsome assess and some good white blood and what do you get? You got a multiplicity of colors of ass backward, unusualniggers, running, tied to a backward ass long headed mule, the one productive of itself, the other sterile. (The oneconstant, the other dying, we keep the nigger constant for we may replace the mules for another tool) both mule andnigger tied to each other, neither knowing where the other came from and neither productive for itself, nor without eachother.Control the LanguageCrossbreeding completed, for further severance from their original beginning, we must completely annihilate the mothertongue of both the new nigger and the new mule and institute a new language that involves the new lifes work of both.You know language is a peculiar institution. It leads to the heart of a people. The more a foreigner knows about thelanguage of another country the more he is able to move through all levels of that society. Therefore, if the foreigner is anenemy of the country, to the extent that he knows the body of the language, to that extent is the country vulnerable toattack or invasion of a foreign culture. For example, if you take a slave, if you teach him all about your language, he willknow all your secrets, and he is then no more a slave, for you cant fool him any longer. For example, if you told a slave
  • Page 4 of 4that he must perform in getting out "our crops" and he knows the language well, he would know that "our crops" didntmean "our crops" and the slavery system would break down, for he would relate on the basis of what "our crops" reallymeant. So you have to be careful in setting up the new language for the slaves would soon be in your house, talking toyou "man to man" and that is death to our economic system. In addition, the definitions of words or terms are only aminute part of the process. Values are created and transported by communication through the body of the language. Atotal society has many interconnected value system. All the values in the society have bridges of language to connectthem for orderly working in the society. But for these language bridges, these many value systems would sharply clashand cause internal strife or civil war, the degree of the conflict being determined by the magnitude of the issues or relativeopposing strength in whatever form.For example, if you put a slave in a hog pen and train him to live there and incorporate in him to value it as a way of lifecompletely, the biggest problem you would have out of him is that he would worry you about provisions to keep the hogpen clean, or the same hog pen and make a slip and incorporate something in his language where by he comes to valuea house more than he does his hog pen, you got a problem. He will soon be in your house.
  • U.S.: 1940s STD Experiments "Clearly Unethical" - World Watch - CBS News Page 1 of 5 World Watch October 1, 2010 11:19 AMU.S.: 1940s STD Experiments "Clearly 94Unethical"Posted by David S Morgan(Credit: CBS/AP)The U.S. government has formally apologized for a secret study conducted in the 1940s in whichGuatemalan prisoners, service members and mental hospital patients were secretly infected withgonorrhea and syphilis without their knowledge or consent, calling the program "clearlyunethical."In a joint statement issued Friday by Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and Secretary ofHealth and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius, released in English and Spanish, the governmentapologized to Guatemala and to those involved in the study, conducted by the U.S. Public HealthService (PHS) between 1946 and 1948.The results of the Sexually Transmitted Disease Inoculation Study were uncovered by aWellesley College researcher, Susan Reverby.The story is uncomfortably similar to the "Tuskegee" Syphilis Study in the 1960s, in which thePHS monitored, but did not treat, hundreds of African American men suffering from syphilis. EXHIBIT “23”http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503543_162-20018272-503543.html?tag=cbsnewsLeadSto... 10/2/2010
  • U.S.: 1940s STD Experiments "Clearly Unethical" - World Watch - CBS News Page 2 of 5Unlike that case, however, subjects in the Guatemala study were intentionally infected withsexually transmitted diseases, and then given penicillin, to help determine the efficacy of thedrug to cure or even vaccinate against STDs.Reverby wrote that the Guatemala syphilis inoculation project was run by a PHS physician, Dr.John C. Cutler (who would later oversee the Tuskegee, Ala., study two decades later).The studys doctors chose as subjects men incarcerated at the Guatemala National Penitentiary,as well as army service members, and men and women confined in the National Mental HealthHospital. There was a total of 696 people in the study. Guatemalan authorities (and not theindividuals themselves) granted permission, in exchange for supplies.According to Reverby, who studied Cutlers records in the University of Pittsburgh archives,doctors used infected prostitutes to pass the disease on to prisoners (conjugal visits were allowedin Guatemalan jails). Direct inoculations of syphilis bacteria were made to other subjects.Treatment by penicillin was also administered, though not always successfully.Cutler seemed to recognize the delicate ethical quandaries their experiments posed, particularlyin the wake of the Nuremberg "Doctors Trials," and was concerned about secrecy. "As you canimagine," Cutler reported to his PHS overseer, "we are holding our breaths, and we areexplaining to the patients and others concerned with but a few key exceptions, that the treatmentis a new one utilizing serum followed by penicillin. This double talk keeps me hopping at time." time.Cutler also wrote that he feared "a few words to the wrong person here, or even at home, mightwreck it or parts of it ... "PHS physician R.C. Arnold, who supervised Cutler, was more troubled, confiding to Cutler, "Iam a bit, in fact more than a bit, leery of the experiment with the insane people. They can notgive consent, do not know what is going on, and if some goody organization got wind of thework, they would raise a lot of smoke. I think the soldiers would be best or the prisoners for theycan give consent."Apparently difficulties in transmission, as well as in replicating results, added to concerns overthe study, and it was dropped after two years.Cutler went on to participate in another Syphilis Study at Sing Sing Prison in Ossining, N.Y.(although in that case the subjects were informed about the nature of the inoculationsadministered to them).http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503543_162-20018272-503543.html?tag=cbsnewsLeadSto... 10/2/2010
  • U.S.: 1940s STD Experiments "Clearly Unethical" - World Watch - CBS News Page 3 of 5"Although these events occurred more than 64 years ago, we are outraged that suchreprehensible research could have occurred under the guise of public health," todays StateDept./DHS statement said. "We deeply regret that it happened, and we apologize to all theindividuals who were affected by such abhorrent research practices."The conduct exhibited during the study does not represent the values of the United States, orour commitment to human dignity and great respect for the people of Guatemala. The study is asad reminder that adequate human subject safeguards did not exist a half-century ago."The officials also announced an investigation into the specifics of the case from 1946, and willalso convene a meeting of international experts to devise methods that effectively ensure allhuman medical research meets rigorous ethical standards.http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503543_162-20018272-503543.html?tag=cbsnewsLeadSto... 10/2/2010
  • Print Page 1 of 3The AIDS Conspiracy HandbookJeremiah Wrights paranoia, in context. disinformation agent. By Juliet Lapidos Similarly, the aptly named Boyd E. Graves y p y y Posted Wednesday, March 19, 2008, at 5: ( (who calls himself a doctor although he g 51 PM ET has only a law degree) has postulated y g ) p that scientists in the employ of the U.S. p y Barack Obama rebuked his former pastor k rebuked p Special Virus Program modified Visna to p g the Rev. Jeremiah Wright on Tuesday for g y create HIV during the 1970s. The g giving sermons in which he blamed the g g g government, with help from p government for creating a racist state g g p pharmaceutical company Merck, added p y and "inventing the HIV virus as a means g the virus to an experimental hepatitis B p p of genocide against p p of color." W g g people vaccine, which was given to gay men and g g y right isnt the first to say that AIDS g y blacks in New York and San Francisco. originated in the White House. Others g have attributed the epidemic to a p And then theres Gary Glum, author of y , laboratory accident, malnutrition, or even y Full Disclosure, who fronts the theory y Gods divine will. Heres a field guide to H that scientists at the Cold Spring Harbor p g the most prevalent conspiracy theories: lab in New York engineered HIV, and that g the World Health Organization spread g p Government Involvement the virus under cover of the smallpox p The belief cited by Wright—that the y g eradication program. Glum believes the p g government invented HIV—seems to have g virus was created to wipe out, or at least originated during the early y g g y years of the epidemic. In 1986, crackpot East German b p p Advertisement iologist Jakob Segal p g g published "AIDS: USA Home-Made Evil." According to the g pamphlet, scientists at a Fort Detrick, p p Md., military lab manufactured the y disease by synthesizing HTLV-1 ( y y g (a retrovirus that causes T-cell leukemia) ) with Visna ( sheep virus). The scientists (a p ) administered their lethal concoction to prison inmates, who then introduced the p disease into the general population. In g p p case youre wondering, Segal has since y g g been accused of being a Soviet http://www.slate.com/toolbar.aspx?action=print&id=2186860 Print Powered Byhttp://www.slate.com/toolbar.aspx?action=print&id=2186860 10/2/2010
  • Print Page 2 of 3 The AIDS Conspiracy Handbook Its Not a Virus control, the black p p population. (According ( Among the most popular, and pernicious, to a study released in 2005 by the Rand y y conspiracy theories is that AIDS isnt c Corp., more than one-quarter of African- p q aused by a virus at all. Peter Duesberg, a Americans believe the disease was biology professor at University of engineered in a g g government lab, and 16 California-Berkeley, has argued that percent think it was created to control p drugs and promiscuity are the principal the black population.) causes of the disease in the United States. He attributes AIDS in Africa to Laboratory Accident malnutrition. Edward Hooper, a British journalist, argued in his 1999 book, The River, that South African President Thabo Mbeki has Dr. Hilary Koprowski of the Wistar voiced support for the so-called Research Institute unintentionally caused Duesberg hypothesis, and his health the AIDS epidemic by using chimp minister, Mantombazana Tshabalala- kidneys to produce an oral polio vaccine. Msimang, has recommended treating The chimps, says Hooper, were infected AIDS with foodstuffs, like garlic, rather with SIV (the simian precursor to AIDS). than pharmaceuticals. Then, via an experimental mass- vaccination program in the Belgian Gods Punishment Congo, SIV made the jump from monkey The Rev. Jerry Falwell famously argued to man. that AIDS is a plague sent by God to punish homosexuals and American Hoopers contaminated polio vaccine society for tolerating homosexuality. thesis sounds less wacky than most Advertisement conspiracy theories and has attracted support from a few notable academics— including late Oxford professor W.D. Hamilton. But its definitely wrong. Hooper says Koprowski got his kidney samples from chimps in the Congo. The problem is that the SIV strain endemic to chimps from that region is phylogenetically distinct from HIV. The offending chimps probably came from Cameroon. http://www.slate.com/toolbar.aspx?action=print&id=2186860 Print Powered Byhttp://www.slate.com/toolbar.aspx?action=print&id=2186860 10/2/2010
  • Print Page 3 of 3 The AIDS Conspiracy Handbook Jerry Thacker, the publisher of Todays Christian Teen and other Christian magazines, has also called AIDS a "gay plague" and referred to homosexuality as "the death style." In 2003, the Bush administration nominated Thacker to serve on the Presidential Advisory Council on HIV and AIDS. He withdrew his name under pressure from gay rights groups and Democrats. Got a question about todays news? Ask the Explainer. Explainer thanks Martin Delaney of Project Inform and Michael Worobey of the University of Arizona. Juliet Lapidos is a Slate associate editor. Advertisement http://www.slate.com/toolbar.aspx?action=print&id=2186860 Print Powered Byhttp://www.slate.com/toolbar.aspx?action=print&id=2186860 10/2/2010
  • Far enough to paint citizens as 3$5$12, &5$=</81$7,&6 to mask/hide ,1+80$1( 3UDFWLFHV 7KDQNJRRGQHVV LQIRUPDWLRQ LV EHLQJ UHOHDVHGIRXQG DQG UHSRUWHG
  • EXHIBIT “24”
  • EXHIBIT “25”
  • "vogel denise newsome" - Google Search Page 1 of 2 301 F.3d 227: Vogel Denise Newsome, Plaintiff- appellant, v. Equal ... Justia Free Databases of US Court of Appeals Cases 301 F.3d 227. law.justia.com › ... › US Courts of Appeals Cases › F.3d › Volume 301 - Cached VOGEL DENISE NEWSOME vs. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, ET VOGEL DENISE NEWSOME vs., U. S. Supreme Court - search free case law, search by court, citation and area of law for small law attorneys all found in ... webservices.lexisnexis.com/lx1/.../freecaselaw?...y... - Cached [PDF] *Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this ... File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - Quick View VOGEL DENISE NEWSOME,. Plaintiff-Appellant, versus. ENTERGY SERVICES, INC.,. Defendant-Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court ... ftp://opinions.ca5.uscourts.gov/unpub/00/00- 31299.0.wpd.pdf 301 F3d 227 Newsome v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ... Vogel Denise Newsome ("Newsome") appeals the district courts dismissal of her complaint against the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and three of ... openjurist.org/.../newsome-v-equal-employment-opportunity- commission - Cached Conspiracy Law Vogel Denise Newsome ("Newsome") appeals the district courts dismissal of her complaint against the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and three of ... www.morelaw.com/cases/conspiracy.asp?page=34 - Cached Vogel Denise Newsome v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ... Aug 6, 2002 ... Vogel Denise Newsome ("Newsome") appeals the district court ... www.morelaw.com/verdicts/case.asp?n=01- 30817&s=LA&d... - Cached Show more results from morelaw.com Fifth Circuit Court Cases - Case Law and Opinions from the 5th ... Vogel Denise Newsome ("Newsome") appeals the district courts dismissal of her complaint against the Equal Employment Oppo rtunity Commission and three of ... www.romingerlegal.com/fifthcircuit/.../01-30817.cv0.wpd.html - Cached CourtListener.com / Browse / Newsome v. EEOC, et al 02-30618 Conference Calendar VOGEL DENISE NEWSOME, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus EQUAL ... PER CURIAM:* Vogel Denise Newsome has appealed the district courts ... courtlistener.com/ca5/9Rm/newsome-v-eeoc-et-al/ - Cached EXHIBIT “26”http://www.google.com/ 4/17/2011
  • "vogel denise newsome" - Google Search Page 1 of 2 [PDF] OCTOBER TERM 2002 Reference Index Contents: File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat Vogel Denise Newsome, Petitioner v. Equal Employ- ment Opportunity Commission, et al. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied. ... www.supremecourt.gov/orders/journal/jnl02.pdf - Similar US Supreme Court: jnl02 Vogel Denise Newsome, Petitioner v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, et al. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied. ... www.scribd.com/doc/1055895/US-Supreme-Court-jnl02 - Similar newsome creek - docstoc 02-30618 Conference Calendar VOGEL DENISE NEWSOME, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus... ... ... More ». Tags: legal, federal, opinions, appellate, circuit . ... www.docstoc.com/search/newsome-creek - Cached newsome e dot-corbitt iii - docstoc 02-30618 Conference Calendar VOGEL DENISE NEWSOME, Plaintiff-Appellant ... www.docstoc.com/search/newsome-e-dot--corbitt-iii Show more results from docstoc.com Jennings vs. Dickerson, (5th Cir. 2003) - Federal Circuits ... us Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit - Vogel Denise Newsome, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission; Patricia T. Bivins; ... vlex.com/vid/jennings-vs-dickerson-18406689 Newsome vs. EEOC, (5th Cir. 2002) - Federal Circuits - Docket ... PER CURIAM:* Vogel Denise Newsome ("Newsome") appeals the district courts dismissal of her complaint against the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ... vlex.com/vid/newsome-vs-eeoc-19971824 119 F.3d 33 - Michael SMITH, Appellant, v. Gilbert F. CASELLAS ... 301 F.3d 227 - Vogel Denise NEWSOME, Plaintiff- Appellant, v. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION; Patricia T. Bivins; Marvin L. . ... www.case-law.us/119%20F.3d%2033 - Cached CourtListener.com / Browse / Newsome v. Entergy Services Inc 00-30521 Summary Calendar VOGEL DENISE NEWSOME, Plaintiff-Appellant, ... PER CURIAM:* Vogel Denise Newsome, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis (IFP), ... courtlistener.com/ca5/7hT/newsome-v-entergy-services-inc/ - Cached April, 2002 :: Fifth Circuit US Court of Appeals Cases :: Justia Vogel Denise Newsome, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission; Patricia T. Bivins; Marvin L. Hicks; ... law.justia.com › ... › US Courts of Appeals Cases › Fifth Circuit › 2002 - Cachedhttp://www.google.com/ 4/17/2011
  • "vogel denise newsome" - Google Search Page 1 of 2 Newsome vs. Entergy Services Inc, (5th Cir. 2000) - Federal ... 00-30521 Summary Calendar VOGEL DENISE NEWSOME, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus ENTERGY ... PER CURIAM: * Vogel Denise Newsome, proceeding pro se and in forma ... vlex.com/vid/newsome-vs-entergy-services-inc-18386452 301 F.3d US Court of Appeals Cases :: Justia Vogel Denise Newsome, Plaintiff-appellant, v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission; Patricia T. Bivins; Marvin L. Hicks; ... law.justia.com › ... › US Courts of Appeals Cases › F.3d - Cached 726 F.2d 350 - 33 Fair Empl.Prac.Cas. 1880, 33 Empl. Prac. Dec. P ... 301 F.3d 227 - Vogel Denise NEWSOME, Plaintiff- Appellant, v. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION; Patricia T. Bivins; Marvin L. . ... www.case-law.us/726%20F.2d%20350 - Cached Failure to respond to eeoc witness summons | peram Realty Vogel Denise Newsome, Plaintiff-appellant, v. Equal Employment ... Expert Witness Directory · Nolo Consumer & Business The EEOC sent a letter to CHM asking ... www.peramrealty.com/.../failure-respond-eeoc-witness- summons - Cached US Supreme Court: jnl01 Vogel Denise Newsome, Petitioner v. Entergy Services, Inc. Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ... www.scribd.com/doc/1055889/US-Supreme-Court-jnl01 - Similar US Supreme Court: jnl99 Vogel Denise Newsome, Petitioner v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ... www.scribd.com/doc/1055999/US-Supreme-Court-jnl99 - Similar Show more results from scribd.comhttp://www.google.com/ 4/17/2011
  • "vogel denise newsome" - Google Search Page 2 of 2 [PDF] OCTOBER TERM 1999 Reference Index Contents: File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat Vogel Denise Newsome, Petitioner v. Equal Employ- ment Opportunity Commission, et al. Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals ... www.supremecourt.gov/orders/journal/jnl99.pdf - Similar [PDF] OCTOBER TERM 2001 Reference Index Contents: File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat Vogel Denise Newsome, Petitioner v. Entergy Serv- ices, Inc. Petition for ... www.supremecourt.gov/orders/journal/jnl01.pdf - Similarhttp://www.google.com/ 4/17/2011
  • "vogel denise newsome" - Google Search Page 1 of 1 US Supreme Court: jnl99 Vogel Denise Newsome, Petitioner v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, et al. Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals ... www.scribd.com/doc/1055999/US-Supreme-Court-jnl99 - Similar [PDF] OCTOBER TERM 2001 Reference Index Contents: File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat Vogel Denise Newsome, Petitioner v. Entergy Serv- ices, Inc. Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of. Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ... www.supremecourt.gov/orders/journal/jnl01.pdf - Similar 10 - 2002 Cases :: Justia US Court of Appeals Cases and Opinions 301 F.3d 227, Apr 22, 2002, Fifth, Vogel Denise Newsome, Plaintiff-appellant, v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission; Patricia T. Bivins; ... cases.justia.com/us-court-of-appeals/year/2002/index2.html? page=10 2002 Cases :: Justia US Court of Appeals Cases and Opinions 301 F.3d 227, Apr 22, 2002, Fifth, Vogel Denise Newsome, Plaintiff-appellant ... cases.justia.com › Cases › US Court of Appeals - Cached Show more results from justia.comhttp://www.google.com/ 4/17/2011
  • "vogel newsome" - Google Search Page 1 of 2 Department of Labor: 04 082 FINAL DECISION AND ORDER BACKGROUND This case arises from a complaint filed by the Complainant, Vogel Newsome, against the Respondent, Mitchell, ... www.scribd.com/doc/1815544/Department-of-Labor-04-082 - Cached - Similar Newsome v. Crews et al :: Justia Dockets & Filings Sep 21, 2007 ... Plaintiff: Vogel Newsome. Defendants: Melody Crews, Spring Lake Apartments LLC, ... Plaintiff: Vogel Newsome. Represented By: Wanda Abioto ... dockets.justia.com › ... › Civil Rights › Housing/Accommodations - Cached Vogel D. Newsome, Petitioner v. Entergy New Orleans, Inc., et al. Vogel D. Newsome,, U. S. Supreme Court - search free case law, search by court, citation and area of law for small law attorneys all found in lexisone. webservices.lexisnexis.com/lx1/.../freecaselaw?...y... - Cachedhttp://www.google.com/ 4/17/2011
  • EXHIBIT “27”
  • 100910 – USPS MAILING RECEIPTS (OBAMA&ROBERTS) EXHIBIT “28”
  • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT’SUNDERCOVER CONSPIRACY METHODS OF TAKING FROM AFRICAN-AMERICANS/BLACKS WHO WOULD NOT GIVE UP THEIR PROPERTY TO BIG MONEY INTEREST GROUPS/ REAL ESTATE DEVELOPERS GOVERNMENT KNEW THE LEVIES WERE BAD EXHIBIT “29”
  • EXHIBIT “30”
  • UNITED STATESINDIAN RESERVATIONS EXHIBIT “31”
  • UNITED STATES BLACK/AFRICAN-AMERICANRESERVATIONS/PLANTATIONS EXHIBIT “32”
  • Black Prisoners Beaten, Deprived, Isolated, Denied Medical Care in Calif. Prisons | rollin... Page 1 of 5 Black Prisoners Beaten, Deprived, Isolated, Denied Medical Care in Calif. Prisons Friday, May 14, 2010 admin Like 0 1Share An investigation into the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation has uncovered horrific cases of deprivation and extreme brutality against black prisoners that include isolation, beatings, withholding medical treatment and routine use of racial slurs against black inmates at High Desert State Prison and other California prisons. The California Senate said they will investigate allegations revealed by the Sacramento Bee into what is happening in the largest prison system in America. “We are deeply concerned about the allegations of abuse and racist treatment of inmates at California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation behavior management units at several institutions covered in the recent Sacramento Bee series,” Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, and Public Safety Committee Chairman Mark Leno, D- San Francisco, wrote in a letter to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, The Sacramento Bee reported Wednesday. “We are even more troubled … by the accusations that investigations into these allegations were either ignored, or worse, covered up,” Steinberg and Leno wrote. Publicly, Schwarzenegger demands an immediate and comprehensive inventory of the processes and prosecution of those whom have operated outside of the law. Corrections researchers concur with the governor’s sentiments and want alleged abuses, which apparently were suppressed, exposed. “Prisons must be managed for the safety of staff and inmates and to rehabilitate offenders,” Schwarzenegger said Tuesday. “The (corrections) department has zero tolerance for abuse and we support their vigorous and comprehensive review of the matter.” –terry shropshire EXHIBIT “33”http://rollingout.com/news-politics/black-prisoners-beaten-deprived-isolated-denied-medic... 4/12/2011
  • EXHIBIT “34”
  • EXHIBIT “35”
  • UNITED STATESPOLICE BRUTALITY/BEATINGS EXHIBIT “36”
  • Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, PC | News & Events | News | May 10,... Page 1 of 1 News Contact: Johanna Burkett 901.577.2201Commission on Civil Rights AppointmentBradley S. Clanton Related PracticesMay 10, 2007 White Collar Crime and(Jackson, MS/May 10, 2007) Bradley S. Clanton, of the law firm of Baker, Donelson, Government InvestigationsBearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, PC, has been appointed by the United States Commissionon Civil Rights (USCCR) to serve as Chairman of its Mississippi Advisory Committee. Offices JacksonThe Committee assists the USCCR with its fact-finding, investigative and informationdissemination activities. The functions of the USCCR include investigating complaints allegingthat citizens are being deprived of their right to vote by reason of their race, color, religion,sex, age, disability or national origin, or by reason of fraudulent practices; studying andcollecting information relating to discrimination or a denial of equal protection of the lawsunder the Constitution; appraising federal laws and policies with respect to discrimination or bdenial of equal protection of the laws because of race, color, religion, sex, age, disability ornational origin, or in the administration of justice; serving as a national clearinghouse forinformation in respect to discrimination or denial of equal protection of the laws; submittingreports, findings and recommendations to the President and Congress; and issuing publicservice announcements to discourage discrimination or denial of equal protection of the laws.Mr. Clanton, a shareholder in Baker Donelsons Jackson and Washington, D.C. offices,concentrates his practice in government litigation, securities and other fraud investigations,and litigation, election law and appeals. His appellate practice has included matters before theU.S. Supreme Court, U.S. Courts of Appeals, the Mississippi Supreme Court and Court ofAppeals, and various other state appellate courts. His internal investigations and governmentlitigation practice has included matters related to Securities and Exchange Commissioninvestigations, health care fraud investigations, federal campaign finance investigations, andstate and federal securities fraud class action litigation and arbitration proceedings.Previously, Mr. Clanton served as Chief Counsel to the U.S. House Judiciary CommitteesSubcommittee on the Constitution, where his responsibilities included advising the Chairmanand Republican Members of the Judiciary Committee on legislation and Congressionaloversight implicating civil and constitutional rights, Congressional authority, separation ofpowers, proposed constitutional amendments and oversight of the Civil Rights Division of theDepartment of Justice and the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. © 2010 Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, PC EXHIBIT “37”http://www.bakerdonelson.com/commission-on-civil-rights-appointment-05-10-2007/ 9/5/2010
  • Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, PC | News & Events | News | May 10,... Page 1 of 1 News Contact: Johanna Burkett 901.577.2201Commission on Civil Rights AppointmentBradley S. Clanton Related PracticesMay 10, 2007 White Collar Crime and(Jackson, MS/May 10, 2007) Bradley S. Clanton, of the law firm of Baker, Donelson, Government InvestigationsBearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, PC, has been appointed by the United States Commissionon Civil Rights (USCCR) to serve as Chairman of its Mississippi Advisory Committee. Offices JacksonThe Committee assists the USCCR with its fact-finding, investigative and informationdissemination activities. The functions of the USCCR include investigating complaints allegingthat citizens are being deprived of their right to vote by reason of their race, color, religion,sex, age, disability or national origin, or by reason of fraudulent practices; studying andcollecting information relating to discrimination or a denial of equal protection of the lawsunder the Constitution; appraising federal laws and policies with respect to discrimination ordenial of equal protection of the laws because of race, color, religion, sex, age, disability ornational origin, or in the administration of justice; serving as a national clearinghouse forinformation in respect to discrimination or denial of equal protection of the laws; submittingreports, findings and recommendations to the President and Congress; and issuing publicservice announcements to discourage discrimination or denial of equal protection of the laws.Mr. Clanton, a shareholder in Baker Donelsons Jackson and Washington, D.C. offices,concentrates his practice in government litigation, securities and other fraud investigations,and litigation, election law and appeals. His appellate practice has included matters before theU.S. Supreme Court, U.S. Courts of Appeals, the Mississippi Supreme Court and Court ofAppeals, and various other state appellate courts. His internal investigations and governmentlitigation practice has included matters related to Securities and Exchange Commissioninvestigations, health care fraud investigations, federal campaign finance investigations, andstate and federal securities fraud class action litigation and arbitration proceedings.Previously, Mr. Clanton served as Chief Counsel to the U.S. House Judiciary CommitteesSubcommittee on the Constitution, where his responsibilities included advising the Chairmanand Republican Members of the Judiciary Committee on legislation and Congressionaloversight implicating civil and constitutional rights, Congressional authority, separation ofpowers, proposed constitutional amendments and oversight of the Civil Rights Division of theDepartment of Justice and the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. © 2010 Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, PChttp://www.bakerdonelson.com/commission-on-civil-rights-appointment-05-10-2007/ 9/5/2010
  • EXHIBIT “38”
  • EXHIBIT “39”
  • Senate removes federal judge in impeachment conviction - CNN.comSenate removes federal judge inimpeachment convictionBy the CNN Wire StaffDecember 8, 2010 12:46 p.m. ESTJudge G. Thomas Porteous is "forever disqualified to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust or profit underthe United States."(CNN) -- The U.S. Senate found Federal Judge G.Thomas Porteous of Louisiana guilty on fourarticles of impeachment on Wednesday, whichwill remove him from the federal bench.He had been accused of accepting kick-backsand lying to the Senate and FBI.The vote makes Porteous, 63, only the eighthfederal judge in the nations history to beimpeached and convicted.Porteous is also "forever disqualified to hold andenjoy any office of honor, trust or profit underthe United States," Sen. Daniel Inouye said duringWednesdays Senate hearing. EXHIBIT “40”http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/12/08/washington.impeach.judge/index.html 12/8/2010
  • Senate removes federal judge in impeachment conviction - CNN.comThe Senate adopted the motion barring Porteous from holding a future federal office by avote of 94 to 2.In March, the House of Representatives voted unanimously to impeach Porteous oncorruption charges."Our investigation found that Judge Porteous participated in a pattern of corrupt conduct foryears," U.S. Rep. Adam Schiff, D-California, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee TaskForce on Judicial Impeachment.In a statement at the time, Porteous lawyer, Richard W. Westling, said the Justice Departmenthad decided not to prosecute because it did not have credible evidence."Unfortunately, the House has decided to disregard the Justice Departments decision and tomove forward with impeachment," he said. "As a result, we will now turn to the Senate to seeka full and fair hearing of all of the evidence."Porteous, who turns 64 this year, was appointed to the federal bench in 1994. He has notworked as a judge since he was suspended with pay in the fall of 2008, Westling said.The most recent previous impeachment of a federal judge by the House was last year.Judge Samuel B. Kent of the U.S. District Court forthe Southern District of Texas resigned afterbeing impeached on charges of sexual assault,obstructing and impeding an official proceedingand making false and misleading statements,according to the website of the Federal JudicialCenter.Before then, Judge Walter L. Nixon of U.S. DistrictCourt for the Southern District of Mississippiwas impeached in 1989 on charges of perjurybefore a federal grand jury. The Senate convictedhim and removed him from office that year.Log in or sign up to comment cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/12/08/washington.impeach.judge/index.html 12/8/2010
  • CUT & PASTED AS OF 11/8/09 FROM:http://www2.wjtv.com/jtv/news/state_regional/article/hinds_co._judge_delaughter_pleads_guilty_to_federal_charge/16411/Feds Recommend 18 Month Sentence ForBobby DeLaughterJudge DeLaughter Pleads Guilty To Federal Charge...Associated Press and Staff ReportsPublished: July 30, 2009Updated: July 30, 2009Hinds County Circuit Judge Bobby DeLaughter has p g y g pleaded g y in court to a federal charge guiltyagainst him in Aberdeen. The government has dropped the other 4 counts against him. Thegovernment has recommended an 18 month sentence, however the charge carries a maximumsentence of 20 years. The judge won’t sentence him until a presenting report is completed inabout 5 weeks. Also this morning DeLaughter handed in his resignation from the court to Gov.Haley Barbour this morning. The charge DeLaughter pleaded guilty to was for lying to an FBI agent who was investigating g g p g y y g ga judicial corruption case involving former prominent lawyer Richard “Dickie” Scruggs. An indictment accused DeLaughter of attempting to obstruct, influence and impede an official g fproceeding while being interviewed. Prosecutors accused DeLaughter of ruling in favor ofp g g g f gScruggs, a once powerful Mississippi lawyer who is now in prison, in hopes that Scruggs would gg , p pp y p , puse his connections to help DeLaughter get appointed to a federal judgeship. EXHIBIT “41”
  • Judicial Transparency Now: Mississippi Judge Bobby DeLaughter Admits He Lied to FBI Page 1 of 4 Share Report Abuse Next Blog» Create Blog Sign In Judicial Transparency Now DEMONSTRATING WHY BEING A PROFESSIONAL CITIZEN IS AN IMPORTANT JOB. THURSDAY, JULY 30, 2009 Mississippi Judge Bobby DeLaughter Admits He Lied to FBI Mississippi judge Bobby DeLaughter pleads guilty to lying to FBI agent Miss. — Mississippi judge Bobby DeLaughter pleaded guilty to an Want to Join the obstruction of justice charge after lying to an FBI agent during an FBI? investigation into corruption. Degree Required. Study Criminal Justice Online. Free Info Kit. In return for DeLaughter admitting guilt, conspiracy and mail fraud www.Westwood.edu/FB charges were dropped by prosecutors. Previously, DeLaughter had been accused of giving an unfair HANDY INFORMATION, advantage to former attorney Richard Richard "Dickie" Scruggs; who PROVIDED DAILY won millions from asbestos lawsuits. EstablishedAttorneys.com - (Scruggs, father and son, are in prison.) Locating fine attorneys for your legal needs. Prosecutors recommended an 18-month prison sentence for FamilyLawCourts.com - Exposing Delaughter. the Divorce Industry - One County at a Time. To make a report on other judges, see USAJudges.com or, USAjudges.com - Public KillerJudges.com information useful during an election year. PO STED BY THE REAL NEWS AT 2:00 PM FBI College BLOG ARCHIVE Earn an intelligence degree & begin a career with the FBI. Start now. 2009 (9) www.APUS.edu Facing Bribery Charges? October (1) A Local Defense Attorney Can Help! Connect Now For A Free Consultation July (3) www.TotalCriminalDefense.com Jul 31 (1) Brocato & Byrne, LLP. Criminal Defense Attorneys Former Assistant Jul 30 (1) District Attorneys www.BrocatoandByrne.com Mississippi Judge Bobby Want to Join the FBI? DeLaughter Admits He Degree Required. Study Criminal Justice Online. Free Info Kit. Lied ... www.Westwood.edu/FBIhttp://judicialtransparencynow.blogspot.com/2009/07/mississippi-judge-bobby-delaughter.... 11/8/2009
  • 042211-USPS MAILING RECEIPTS (SupremeCourt, JusticeRoberts, PresidentObama, & SolicitorGeneral)