Announcement

**bsteadman** · 10-28-2013, 02:15 PM

Full Affidavit: Request For Grand Jury Review Of Obama Forgery Evidence

Birther Report
10/28/2013

Excerpt:

Request for Grand Jury Review of Evidence of Obama Birth Certificate Forgery Filed in Washington State
“JOHN” AND “JANE DOES” LISTED AS PERPETRATORS OF CRIMES TO DECEIVE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE
By Sharon Rondeau | The Post & Email

(Oct. 27,, 2013) — Typesetting expert Douglas Vogt has filed affidavits and a request to present evidence to a specially-empaneled federal grand jury for its review.

The Post & Email has interviewed Vogt on two occasions wherein he mentioned the “plausible deniability” he believed Obama would invoke regarding the forgery of his purported long-form birth certificate and subsequent posting of the image on the White House website on April 27, 2011. In his filing, Vogt states that both the short-form and long-form birth certificates appearing on the internet at different times are “indisputable forgeries” (page 2).

The Daily KOS, where the short-form Certification of Live Birth was first made public, has called the filing a “wingnut lawsuit.”

Vogt claims that the birth certificates were created because Barack Hussein Obama is “a communist agent” placed into the presidency “to destroy the nation from within.” He also states that Obama is not a U.S. citizen.

The filing identifies a female (Jane Doe) as having created the forgery of both birth certificates and others as having promulgated propaganda. It claims that a perpetrator provided money to carry out a plan “to place a foreign alien/agent in as President of the United States,” and identifies media executives as having arranged for a reporter to claim that she had seen and touched the raised seal on the long-form birth certificate the day it was posted. Vogt claims that there was no raised seal on the document.

The U.S. Constitution requires the president to be a “natural born Citizen,” but anyone questioning Obama’s origins, background and allegiance has been ridiculed, defamed, marginalized, hacked, and surveilled.

Vogt included a sealed affidavit with the filing which contains the name of the person he believes created the forgery of the long-form birth certificate. At the conclusion of the document, Vogt states that the Department of Justice and FBI, which reports to Justice, have been “prevented” from launching an investigation into the forgeries, hence the need for a grand jury review.

The Fifth Amendment in the Bill of Rights states that “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury…”

The Post & Email has reported extensively on the erosion of the grand jury as a buffer between citizens and the government as well as an independent body which historically operated villages and directed its own investigations without input from a lawyer, prosecutor or judge.

The Post & Email has received a copy of Vogt’s filing directly from a highly reliable source along with another document and will be issuing another report on Monday.

Source link. © 2013, The Post & Email. All rights reserved.

View the complete Birther Report presentation at:

http://www.birtherreport.com/2013/10...a-forgery.html

**bsteadman** · 10-29-2013, 08:15 PM

Legal Adviser For Federal Birth Certificate Forgery Notice Speaks

Birther Report
10/29/2013

Excerpts:

Legal Adviser for Federal Birth Certificate Forgery Notice Speaks with The Post & Email
WILL THE GRAND JURY REGAIN ITS RIGHTFUL PLACE IN THE AMERICAN JUSTICE SYSTEM?
By Sharon Rondeau | The Post & Email

(Oct. 28, 2013) — On Monday, The Post & Email interviewed a former attorney who played a part in the filing of a Notice in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington relating to probable cause of the forgery of the birth certificates of Barack Hussein Obama.
...........................................

The filer of the Notice, Douglas Vogt, has a background in typesetting and scanning and asserts “20 points of forgery” of the long-form birth certificate image as well as charges of conspiracy, fraud and other crimes on the part of several “John Does” and “Jane Does.”

The Notice is 106 pages, and an accompanying memorandum is six pages.

Notice Doug Vogt 10-18-13

Memo Doug Vogt 10-18-13

The memo asserts that “the public interest” requires the court to summon one or more grand juries to investigate Vogt’s claims, citing historical instances wherein grand juries conducted their own investigations independent of a judge, attorney or prosecutor and issued presentments for prosecution. The Fifth Amendment is the only place in America’s founding documents where the grand jury and its role are invoked.

.................................................. ....

We asked Mr. Sibley if he wrote the Notice, to which he responded, “I’m not the author, but let’s say I provided some material assistance to Doug to get it into the system.”

THE POST & EMAIL: When did the idea to file the document in a federal court and ask for a federal grand jury review of the evidence arise?

MR. SIBLEY: For me, it came up about six months ago when the Supreme Court refused to review a DC Circuit Court opinion in a lawsuit I filed in which I asked the court to enforce my statutory right to contact the grand jury with evidence of criminal behavior. I sued, saying that I had asked Eric Holder to present evidence of criminal behavior to a grand jury under a specific federal statute. He was refusing to do it; I asked the court to force him to do it the way other courts have forced U.S. attorneys to present evidence to grand juries. The DC court said, “No, we’re not going to enforce the statute, and, by the way, we don’t think the statute is constitutional, so you have no right to get your evidence to the grand jury.

So that said, I had to find another way to get to the grand jury, and that’s when my path crossed with Doug Vogt.

THE POST & EMAIL: It used to be that grand juries ran themselves without prosecutors acting as gatekeepers.

MR. SIBLEY: There’s been a concentration of power in this country into fewer and fewer hands, starting in the 1890s to the 1920. In the 1940s, they got rid of the idea that you could even have a presentment, which is a constitutional right in the Fifth Amendment.

THE POST & EMAIL: Walter Fitzpatrick has asked numerous times to present evidence to a grand jury and has been ignored or told “no.”

To your knowledge, has Mr. Vogt received a response to the Notice?

MR. SIBLEY: I checked PACER on Friday and the court hasn’t ruled yet. I don’t expect the court to rule any time soon, quite frankly.

THE POST & EMAIL: It shouldn’t be up to the court, should it?

MR. SIBLEY: Apparently, the people no longer can get to the grand jury. The only people who can get to the grand jury are the U.S. attorney, who has an obvious conflict in presenting evidence of his own criminal behavior to a grand jury, and our 625 federal judges. By statute, a federal judge can convene and present evidence to a grand jury, and in fact, under the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, they’re obligated to present that evidence when it’s in the “public interest.” So the actual question is, “Is there evidence of a forged birth certificate of the president of the United States in the public interest to explore?” I don’t know how you can come up with any other evidence than that there is and that the grand jury must have the opportunity to investigate that.

THE POST & EMAIL: Some might say that there is no more compelling reason to present something to a grand jury than that someone has produced forged documentation for the de facto President of the United States who may not even be a U.S. citizen.

MR. SIBLEY: That’s the concern. With the quality of Doug Vogt’s analytical, forensic, expert opinion, I think you’re at the grand jury. Could Doug be 100% wrong? Let’s entertain that possibility, but that’s not the question. The question is, “Is there probable cause to believe he may be right?” I don’t know how you can read the public affidavit and think otherwise. The judge has seen the sealed affidavit now, and that is more than icing on the cake to show that lock, stock and barrel, you’ve got a real problem that only a grand jury can resolve.

THE POST & EMAIL: Did Mr. Vogt present evidence he gathered himself, or did he work with someone?

MR. SIBLEY: I know he and Paul Irey consulted on this, but Doug came up with his own conclusions that you saw. The evidence he presented is really forensic evidence. It isn’t “I saw somebody do something;” it’s “Look at this document; look at that document,” and there’s only one conclusion you can draw from the evidence he objectively presents.

THE POST & EMAIL: Why do you think the court will not act swiftly?

MR. SIBLEY: The way courts work generally, and the implications of this…and if they’ve already referred it to the grand jury, no one is going to know about it because they’re not going to publicize that fact. So we may not know anything one way or the other.

Doug asked the court to give him release of liability under the misprision statute that he cited saying, “You’ve discharged your duties, so you can’t be charged. Whether the judge will give him that courtesy or not, I don’t know. There are two federal statutes that say if you have knowledge of a felony, you have to tell a federal judge or law enforcement officer. That’s called “misprision,” and there’s misprision of felony and misprision of treason. Under that statute, Doug went in and said, “I have knowledge of a felony, and it’s the felony of the forgery of the president’s birth certificate and the other crimes associated with that. Therefore, I’m discharging my legal obligation to give the hue and cry from common law, which is the misprision statute, and say, “Here’s the felony. Now I’ve discharged my obligation; please acknowledge that you’ve received this so that I’ve proved that I’ve done so.”

When we call 911, it’s proven that we called because it’s recorded.

When we file with the clerk, we don’t know whether or not the federal judge has seen it or not, so there’s an obligation with the judge to acknowledge that he’s seen it. The next step would be John Does and Jane Does and other people getting target letters from a federal grand jury, and then we’ll know what the judge has done.

THE POST & EMAIL: Please explain what “target letters” are.

MR. SIBLEY: Briefly, if I’m a federal prosecutor and I have proof against someone to present to a federal grand jury, I’m obligated to send a letter to the person so that he has the right to come in and give his side of the story to the grand jury, but he is now a target of the investigation. So the nest step is really going to be whether or not people start receiving target letters from a grand jury and whether the court appoints a special prosecutor to pursue it.

THE POST & EMAIL: Would Mr. Vogt receive a letter asking him to appear before the grand jury to present the evidence if all the way you would hope it would?

MR. SIBLEY: Yes, he’ll be contacted by the special prosecutor; he would be issued a subpoena to come in and testify, to tell what he knows, and to explain the affidavit in more detail.

THE POST & EMAIL: Do you think the grand jury would be given the freedom that they used to have, before prosecutors directed them? Could it be made to understand that they have a lot more power than they think?

MR. SIBLEY: I have a wonderful little pamphlet I’ve written about “Your Rights as a Grand Juror” which I’m certain will find a way to get to the grand jury when the time is appropriate.

THE POST & EMAIL: Many people are unaware of the function of a grand jury and the fact that they used to hold public officials to account.

MR. SIBLEY: The greatest fear of elected officials is a grand jury because they have no control over it. Once that door closes and those 23 citizens start doing what they want to do and issuing subpoenas and obligating you to testify whether you want to or not… Remember, there is no Fifth Amendment privilege in the grand jury. That is why the scope of the grand jury has become so circumscribed. Mr. Vogt gave that quote: instead of a bulwark against tyranny, it’s now a tool of the Executive Branch.

THE POST & EMAIL: Is there anything you’d like to add in closing?

MR. SIBLEY: Only that this isn’t the last effort. There’s another round that’s coming in a week or ten days.

The Post & Email interviewed Sibley and researcher Martha Trowbridge last week on the WheresObamasBirthCertificate radio show founded and hosted by Michael Volin.

Source link. © 2013, The Post & Email. All rights reserved.

View the compete Birther Report presentation at:

http://www.birtherreport.com/2013/10...ral-birth.html

**bsteadman1** · 11-08-2013, 07:47 PM

Obama Constitutional Eligibility: The First Volley In The Final Battle is Fired

Birther Report
11/8/2013

Excerpt:

The First Volley in the Final Battle is Fired
Amos Probos: Montgomery Blair Sibley

My numerous attempts to have a judicial branch determination of the eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama, II, to be President have met with a unanimous refusal by the Courts to address the merits of that significant and reasonable question. Instead in my cases – as in every other case filed nationwide – the Courts have stated that I don’t have “standing” to raise that question. Of course, by saying so, the Courts are holding that yes, Mr. Obama may not be eligible, but you are only a Citizen and thus have no basis to demand that the Government be administered according to law. Only the government’s officials can raise that issue. Absurd.

Yet I am not deterred. There is one last venue that retains the Constitutional authority to investigate and lay before the public its determination of Obama’s eligibility through Indictment or – secured by the Fifth Amendment – Presentment. I speak of course of the Grand Jury which in 1895, Supreme Court Justice Brewer in Frisbie v. United States described: “(I)n this country the common practice is for the Grand Jury to investigate any alleged crime, no matter how or by whom suggested to them, and after determining that the evidence is sufficient to justify putting the party suspected on trial, to direct the preparation of the formal charge or indictment.”

So it is to the Grand Jury to which I wish to repair and “suggest” that they consider the two Certificates of Live Birth that Obama has foisted on the public to quell any questions about his legitimacy. Yet I am blocked from making such a “suggesion” for to do so is a felony under 18 U.S.C.§1504. Obviously, asking Obama’s Department of Justice to present the matter to the Grand Jury is not an option: I, and others, have tried without getting the courtesy of a response.

Thus there remains only 625 people – the judges of the federal district courts – that have the authority to call a Grand Jury to hear the allegations of Obama’s ineligibility. The first to receive that plea or – poetically, volley – in this, the last legal battle to be waged over Obama’s eligibility is Judge James L. Robart of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington.

What he received was two affidavits – one 95 page public and one 75 page sealed – from Douglas Vogt who, pursuant to his duty under the misprision of felony and misprision of treason statutes, duly reported the crimes his expert forensic analysis of the two Certificates of Live Birth (COLBs) that Obama has presented to the public to establish that he is eligible to be President are dispositively proved to be forgeries.

I challenge anyone to read the public affidavit and not come away convinced that the COLBs are forgeries. If you could read the sealed affidavit, you would know who the forger was and see the direct line to Obama and his April 27, 2011, Press Conference when he made the following statement about his COLB: “As many of you have been briefed, we provided additional information today about the site of my birth . . .” [...]

Cont. @ Amos Probos.

View the complete Birther Report presentation at:

http://www.birtherreport.com/2013/11...ity-first.html

**bsteadman** · 11-14-2013, 02:56 PM

Document Expert Files Response To Order To Show Cause In Obama Fraud Notice

Birther Report
11/13/2013

Excerpt:

Document Expert Doug Vogt Files Response To Order To Show Cause In Obama ID Fraud Notice...

Doug Vogt v. Barack Obama
Case No.: C13-1880 (JLR)

RESPONSE OF DOUGLAS VOGT TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE REGARDING SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION

Excerpt:

Accordingly, this Court is asking the wrong question in its Order to Show Cause. As detailed below, the question is not whether this Court has subject matter jurisdiction - it clearly does - but what duties does this Court now have based upon the evidence that Vogt has proffered to this Court. As such, the "Complaint" should not be dismissed but instead the Docket in this matter corrected to reflect that which was filed: Vogt's Notice of Commission.

III. VOGT Is DUE TO BE RECOGNIZED BY THIS COURT FOR HAVING DISCHARGED
HIS MISPRISION OBLIGATION

"Misprision . . . of a felony . . . is a criminal neglect, either to prevent it from being committed, or to bring to justice the offender after its commission .... "Joel Prentiss Bishop, A Treatise on Criminal Law, §717 (9th ed. 1923).3 Under English law, a conviction for misprision of felony required no affirmative act of concealment; a person could be guilty of the offense for a "mere failure or refusal to disclose" the existence of a felony. Carl Wilson Mullis III, Misprision of Felony: A Reappraisal, 23 Emory L.J. 1095, 1114 (1974).

There has been a federal statutory crime of misprision of felony since 1790. Now codified at 18 U.S.C. §4, it currently reads: "Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined not more than $500 or imprisoned not more than three years, or both." (Emphasis added).

Likewise, 18 U.S.C. § 2382 - Misprision of Treason states: "Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States and having knowledge of the commission of any treason against them, conceals and does not, as soon as may be, disclose and make known the same ... to some judge of the United States ... is guilty of misprision of treason and shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned not more than seven years, or both."

These statutes codify the long-standing common law tradition to raise the "hue and cry". In Roberts v. United States, 445 U.S. 552, 558 (1980) the Supreme Court stated that "gross indifference to the duty to report known criminal behavior remains a badge of irresponsible citizenship." Notably, as detailed in Vogt's public affidavit, Vogt's attempted to "make known" the felonies identified in his Notice of Commission to "other persons in civil or military authority" - i.e., the U.S. Attorney- but had failed to elicit any response from the U.S. Attorney.

Thus, Vogt had no proof that he had discharged his misprision duty if subsequently prosecuted for failure to so report. Thus, Vogt "made known" to a judge of the United States the commission of felonies and treasons as he is obligated to do under pain of criminal sanction. Yet, where it the proof of his required action for indeed, only the Clerk was served with the pleadings which sought to discharge Vogt's misprision obligation.
As such, it is incumbent upon this Court to acknowledge that it has received that which Vogt has filed. Otherwise, the allegations may be lost to the electronic morass of the Clerk's PACER system and never be actually received- and reviewed - by this Court. Vogt deserves such a formal acknowledgment from this Court.4

IV. THIS COURT IS OBLIGATED TO REFER VOGT'S AFFIDAVITS TO THE GRAND
JURY

RESPONSE CONTINUED ... HERE: http://www.scribd.com/doc/183988734

View the complete Birther Report presentation at:

http://www.birtherreport.com/2013/11...-to-order.html

**bsteadman** · 11-15-2013, 03:14 PM

20 Points Of Forgery: Reporting Allegations Of Obama Birth Certificate Forgery

Birther Report
11/14/2013

Excerpt:

Exclusive: Citizen Reporting Allegations of Obama Birth Certificate Forgery Responds to U.S. District Court, Part 1
“HE REALLY DOESN’T HAVE A CHOICE”
By Sharon Rondeau | The Post & Email

(Nov. 14, 2013) — On October 18, 2013, Douglas Vogt submitted a Notice of Commission to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington to report two federal crimes, misprision of felony and misprision of treason, against the United States relating to the birth certificate image posted on the White House website in April 2011 purported to be that of Barack Hussein Obama.

Since 2007, questions about Obama’s birthplace, background, and constitutional eligibility to hold the office of president have been raised, but Congress and the U.S. Supreme Court have “evaded the issue.”

Vogt is not challenging Obama’s eligibility, having filed the affidavits in keeping with 18 U.S.C. §4 and 18 U.S.C. §2382, which address misprision of felony and misprision of treason, respectively. The statutes mandate that anyone with knowledge of either type of crime having taken place who does not report same to “some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States” faces a fine and a prison sentence. In his submission, Vogt asked the judge to convene a special federal grand jury to examine his evidence, which consisted of a public affidavit and a sealed affidavit with more details of the alleged crimes.

Former attorney Montgomery Blair Sibley provided assistance to Vogt in preparing the Notice of Commission.

On October 29, The Post & Email interviewed Vogt about the crimes he alleged were committed in regard to the forgery of the birth certificate. On a page of his main website, Vogt lists the 20 points of forgery identified in his public affidavit.

Vogt and typesetting expert Paul Irey are working on a book about the birth certificate forgery entitled From Forgery to Treason.

On November 5, Judge James L. Robart issued a response to Vogt which claimed that his court did not have “subject matter jurisdiction” over the matter, citing previous civil lawsuits challenging Obama’s eligibility for the office over the last five years.

A week later, Vogt submitted his response to the court, within which he reveals that the court clerk changed the title of his original submission from “Notice of Commission” to “Vogt v. Obama” in the style of a lawsuit. Vogt explains that he did not seek the Court’s assistance in settling a “case or controversy,” citing language from Article III, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution detailing the function of federal courts, but rather, is adhering to federal statutes governing knowledge of the commission of a crime and requesting necessary statutory action on the part of the judge to summon a grand jury.

The following is our exclusive interview with Vogt following the submission of his response.

THE POST & EMAIL: Did Mr. Sibley assist you with your reply to the court?

MR. VOGT: Yes; in fact, he used this case for his own case in Washington, DC. We did it together, but he did most of it. My impression is that because of his cases in the past, he’s spent a lot of time on the Article III issue. I would say that the court is trying to label this as a different case than what it is. This is merely reporting a crime stated by a law passed by the first Congress, second session, and it’s by obligation. The problem is that the court clerks have only two things they can file: either a criminal case of a civil case. There isn’t anything in between.

You can read the filing on obamaforgerybook.com. It’s on the left-hand-column. The first item is the judge’s reply to me, and the second is our reply to the judge.

It’s pretty simple. What we’re trying to do is give citizens the right to collect evidence and give it to a federal judge to put it to a grand jury. The evidence could be against a bureaucrat or politician. It puts some of the control and justice back into the people’s hands, which is what the Founding Fathers originally intended. The judge has the right to put it into a grand jury. The law says “a court or an attorney of the United States.” So that is what we’re doing. It caught everybody flat-footed, including the Obots. They don’t know what to make of it. Many people did not know about this part of the law.

As an accountant, I looked at the law with a fresh eye. It’s something that Congress gives the court, and it’s by statute. An honest person is supposed to report a crime.

“Standing” means if you’ve suffered a loss of some sort: physical or monetary, and how it affects you. But it has no meaning when it comes to a criminal case. This is not either: this is reporting a crime; it’s as simple as that. By judicial rule 6, I’m told, if it’s in the public’s interest, and certainly, this is, the judge has to put it into a grand jury; he really doesn’t have a choice. So this poor judge is between a rock and a hard place. That’s why they answered me the way they did; they’re trying to make it appear to be a different kind of case than it is. You can tell by my response that we basically answered that question.

If the judge still does the same thing after this, it will be appealed. It’s very clear. I don’t see how an appellate court would rule anything different than, “He has the right to be released from liability for misprision of treason and felony.”

THE POST & EMAIL: And you want an acknowledgement of your report of the crimes?

MR. VOGT: We gave them the one page to sign off already. That’s all the judge has to do. Once he does that, he’s acknowledging that a crime or crimes have been committed against the United States, and he then really has to put it to a grand jury or he could be construed as being an accessory after the fact. That’s the law; it defines what an “accessory after the fact” is.

THE POST & EMAIL: So you’re using the statutes to get the judge to acknowledge the crimes and summon a grand jury, even if you can’t get an audience before one yourself.

MR. VOGT: Yes. He’s obligated, too, because it is in the public’s interest. I presented 20 points of forgery. It’s 17,000 or 18,000 words. The sealed document even says who created the forgery and the other ones who helped. They have the whole thing. They know it. Nobody is going into the evidence I presented; definitely not the Obots. They’re too scared, because it involves some of them; I’m sure they must realize that. Nothing like making them sweat, turning the tables on them. They just didn’t realize I was going to go for the throat. This is how you do it: you do it using your brains, not a lot of verbiage and cursing and Saul Alinsky tactics. I don’t have to.

THE POST & EMAIL: Propaganda…

MR. VOGT: Yes, the “big lie.” No, I’m going for the throat. I did it nice and quietly and just dumped it on them, and now they understand what I’ve done.

Source link. © 2013, The Post & Email. All rights reserved.

View the complete Birther Report presentation at:

http://www.birtherreport.com/2013/11...reporting.html

**bsteadman1** · 11-16-2013, 01:15 PM

Update: Document Expert Reporting Obama Birth Certificate Forgery Allegations

Birther Report
11/15/2013

Excerpts:

Exclusive: Citizen Reporting Allegations of Obama Birth Certificate Forgery Responds to U.S. District Court, Part 2
THE “BIRTHERS” WILL HAVE THE LAST LAUGH
By Sharon Rondeau | The Post & Email

(Nov. 15, 2013) — The following is Part 2 of The Post & Email’s interview with Douglas Vogt, who on October 18 filed a Notice of Commission of federal crimes at the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington.

The Notice contained a public affidavit and a sealed affidavit accompanied by a Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion to Seal Document in which Vogt alleged that he had knowledge of two federal statutes having been violated.

Vogt stated that the image posted on the White House website on April 27, 2011 purported to be Obama’s long-form birth certificate is a forgery and that he knows who committed the crime. Other document and graphics experts have also declared the image a forgery, including the Maricopa County, AZ Cold Case Posse, which has given two formal press conferences on its findings since March 2012.

The posse determined that the Selective Service registration form bearing Obama’s name and released to members of the public was also a “computer-generated forgery.”

On November 5, Judge James L. Robart replied to Vogt that his court did not have “subject matter jurisdiction” over a challenge to Obama’s constitutional eligibility, citing previous civil cases filed by Attys. Phil Berg, Orly Taitz and others. Robart also contended that Vogt did not have “standing” to bring the case. At that point, the filing was referred to as “Vogt v. Obama,” even though Vogt had submitted it as “Notice of Commission of (i) Felony Cognizable by a Court of the United States as required by…”

On November 12, Vogt responded to Robart by stating that he is not seeking for the court to settle a “case or controversy,” referring to the Article III of the U.S. Constitution regarding the federal courts. Rather, Vogt said, “Nonetheless, this Article III ‘inferior court’, bound by its duties imposed upon it by the Ninth and Tenth Amendments, Congress and the common law, is now duty bound to take two actions: First, to formally recognize that Vogt has discharged his duty under the Misprision statutes. Second, due to the ‘public interest’ in the allegations contained in Vogt’s public affidavit and presently-sealed affidavit, superintend those affidavits to the Grand Jury for its consideration.”

The image was said to be a scan of a certified copy issued by the Hawaii Department of Health several days prior to its uploading to the White House server. The Cold Case Posse said at a press conference on March 1, 2012 that it knew from which computer the image was uploaded, but not the specific individual who performed the action. Vogt has provided his expertise to the posse and reached conclusions about who the forger and her co-conspirators were in producing the fraudulent document and committing other crimes such as spreading propaganda and launching ridicule campaigns against anyone questioning Obama’s birthplace, background or constitutional eligibility to serve as president.

On his website, Vogt describes the birth certificate forgery as “the worst crime in American history.” He and typesetting expert Paul Irey are in the process of finalizing a book about their findings entitled From Forgery to Treason.

THE POST & EMAIL: Could every citizen in this country use what you wrote and submit it to a federal court?

MR. VOGT: They’d have to have the experience of Paul and me, which is collectively 82 years. We were uniquely qualified to do this, to drag out the evidence necessary to prove that Obama’s birth certificate was a forgery, and a bad one, too. But a citizen will be able to submit evidence on another case. It could be the EPA stealing somebody’s land or anything else with a bureaucrat or politician. That’s why the politicians feared it so much…it’s what they used to call a “runaway grand jury,” which could put them in prison.

THE POST & EMAIL: Atty. Roger Roots wrote an excellent essay entitled, “If it’s Not a Runaway, It’s Not a Grand Jury” about how the grand jury as an institution has been eviscerated.

MR. VOGT: To summarize, Montgomery Blair Sibley said that my case is the perfect storm because it is certainly of public interest that you have a foreign agent as President of the United States. This affects everybody. The other side cannot argue that this is not of public interest. The next will be getting to a grand jury. they have to by their own court rules. They have to. Once it gets there, it’s a total game-changer. There will be people in the administration who will be packing their bags and leaving the country.

I didn’t just include the forgery: it’s treason. People deliberately wanted a foreign agent to become President of the United States, and by Title 18, 6 and 3592, severe risk to national security. This is the worst; there is nothing worse than this. And his own behavior…it’s sinking him. Even the Saudis are trying to get the United States out of the Middle East totally. The Russians are going to be going in and replacing us in Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States. He’s doing everything he can to destroy the United States: our credibility and our bank account. It is Cloward & Piven all over again. He’s a Marxist, a Muslim and he’s going to destroy the big Satan.

THE POST & EMAIL: It does appear that he harbors animosity for this country.

MR. VOGT: Yes, he does. That’s why I got involved. The other reason I got involved is that I knew he was an anti-Semite and wanted to destroy Israel. That isn’t going to happen. The Obama care bill is working perfectly, exactly the way it’s supposed to: to destroy free enterprise, the middle class, and the country.

THE POST & EMAIL: And here everyone is going back and forth about a website that doesn’t work…

MR. VOGT: Where in the Constitution does it say that the government has the right to tell someone to buy a product from a company, and if you don’t buy it, you’ll be taxed by the IRS? The tax will eventually be up to $3,000. The only qualification for buying it is that you’re alive. So if you don’t buy it, you can go to prison for non-payment of the fine, just because you’re alive. The majority of the American people have been so dumbed-down by academia; that’s where the blame is.

The main issue with the court case is that if I succeed, and I suspect I will because it’s so clear-cut; they can’t wiggle out of this one. You don’t have t o have standing to report a crime. The way we answered the response was that it’s a non-sequitur; this is not the same subject. Any court will be able to see this. If I succeed, then it will be a landmark case. This will go down in history. I’ll be the first one in history to maybe resurrect the grand jury and maybe stop these Marxists from destroying the country.

THE POST & EMAIL: The grand jury used to keep our government officials accountable.

MR. VOGT: Yes. The purpose of this whole thing was that I had to find a way of approaching the court with the evidence that Paul and I have accumulated over the last two and a half years to try to bring these criminals to justice, and not just Obama. Obama is nothing more than an empty suit, anointed because he’s the illegitimate son of Frank Marshall Davis. That’s why he got a silver spoon in his mouth with all of those expensive schools: it’s because Frank Marshall Davis of the Communist Party paid for it all, from high school to Occidental to Columbia – although he probably was never there. The Saudis have bribed us…$20,000,000 will get you a degree from Harvard. He never wrote an article for The Harvard Law Review? Crazy. This is the first time in history. This is what money does. Totally corruptible.

THE POST & EMAIL: So you believe he never had to actually fulfill the requirements at the schools?

MR. VOGT: Absolutely nothing. Being an accountant, I learned three important things: follow the money trail; he who pays the piper plays the tune; and don’t take anybody’s word for anything. Investigate it and test it yourself.

The media is controlled because of Operation Mockingbird. They’re controlled, period. They’re bribed, paid for, or threatened, which is why we get only one type of news. NBC ran that story by those two authors: “How Obama Beat the Birthers,” but this subject was dead in the media. Why did they resurrect it after my affidavit was filed? Because they saw that I also included the executives from NBC, GE and Savannah Guthrie (page 26). They know I connected the dots, and it led right to them.

I know why: $345 billion. That’s the reason why.

................................................

Source link. © 2013, The Post & Email. All rights reserved.

View the complete Birther Report presentation at:

http://www.birtherreport.com/2013/11...ing-obama.html

**bsteadman** · 11-16-2013, 01:32 PM

WA: Judge James Robart Dismisses Without Prejudice Obama ID Fraud Notice

Birther Report
11/16/2013

Excerpt:

Doug Vogt v. Barack Obama
CASE NO. C13-1880JLR

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE

ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION

Before the court is Plaintiff Douglas Vogt’s complaint in which he alleges that the certificates of live birth from the State of Hawaii that President Barack Obama has publicly released are forgeries. (See Compl. (Dkt. #1) at 1-2.) He also alleges that President Obama “was not born in Hawaii and (i)s not a US citizen,” and that a treasonous conspiracy exists among the various defendants “to take over a political party and install a Communist agent in [sic] as President of the United States so as to destroy the nation from within.” (Id. at 5.) Accordingly, he asks the court “to bring to the attention of the grand jury the evidence of criminal behavior sworn to herein.” (Id. at 9 (internal quotation marks omitted).)

On November 5, 2013, the court ordered Plaintiff Douglas Vogt to show cause why his complaint should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. (OSC (Dkt. # 5).) On November 12, 2013, Mr. Vogt filed his response to the court’s order. (Resp. (Dkt. # 6).) The court now considers Mr. Vogt’s response and whether the court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action.

In his response, Mr. Vogt fails to provide a valid basis for this court’s exercise of subject matter jurisdiction over his action. He insists that the court “is asking the wrong question” (id. at 3), that the court “clearly” has subject matter jurisdiction (id.), and that he is simply seeking to “discharge his civic duty as required by 18 U.S.C. § 4 – Misprision of Felony and/or 18 U.S.C. § 2382 – Misprision of Treason” (id. at 2). He argues that 18 U.S.C. § 4 and 18 U.S.C. § 2382 provide the necessary basis for the court’s exercise of jurisdiction (Resp. at 2-3), and that the court is obligated to refer this matter to the grand jury (id. at 3-8).

Nevertheless, Mr. Vogt fails to address any of the case authority cited by the court in its order to show cause indicating that (1) there is no private right of action under either 18 U.S.C. § 4 or 18 U.S.C. § 2382, (2) private parties generally lack standing to institute a federal criminal prosecution, and (3) private citizens or voters, such as Mr. Vogt, lack standing to challenge President Obama’s qualifications to hold office through the use of misprision of felony or misprision of treason statutes, or otherwise, because they have suffered no particularized injury. (See generally OSC.) The court, therefore, concludes, consistent with the authorities cited in its prior order to show cause, that it lacks subject matter jurisdiction over Mr. Vogt’s action and DISMISSES this action in its entirety without prejudice. The court further DIRECTS the clerk to strike all pending motions from the calendar.

Dated this 14th day of November, 2013.

JAMES L. ROBART
United States District Judge

View the complete Birther Report presentation at:

http://www.birtherreport.com/2013/11...ud-notice.html

**bsteadman** · 11-16-2013, 11:12 PM

Document Expert: Forger Knew Obama As Kid; Obama Bought Off NBC / MSNBC

Birther Report
11/16/2013

Excerpt:

Document Expert: Obama Basically Bought Off NBC / MSNBC; Forger Knew Obama As Kid

FULL AUDIO:

( Full Audio via Blog Talk Radio. )

Part One: Obama Basically Bought Off NBC / MSNBC -

Part Two: Birth Certificate Forger Knew Obama As Kid -

Part Three: Murder To Protect Obama ID Fraud -

Law Signed by George Washington May Convict Obama Fraud Conspirators

Mark Gillar | Tea Party Power Hour

BTR AUDIO PODCAST:

www.TeaPartyPowerHour.com

Typesetting Expert Doug Vogt discusses his latest legal efforts to prove that Barack Obama's birth certifcate is a forged document.

Doug also discusses a little known bill signed into law by none other than President George Washington. Will this law land many of those who have conspired to help cover up Obama's fraudulent documents? Listen to the show and find out.

To learn more about Doug's efforts or to lend support, visit vectorpub.com and obamaforgerybook.com

View the complete Birther Report presentation at:

http://www.birtherreport.com/2013/11...ma-as-kid.html

**bsteadman** · 11-27-2013, 12:38 AM

Doc Expert Appeals: Seeks Grand Jury; Illegitimate Obama's Forgeries

Birther Report
11/25/2013

Excerpt:

Document Expert Appeals To Ninth Circuit: Obama Birth Certificates Indisputably Forgeries; Seeks Grand Jury

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT AT SEATTLE

Douglas Vogt
vs.
United States District Court, Western District of Washington at Seattle

PETITION FOR WRITS OF MANDAMUS

I. THE RELIEF SOUGHT

By this Petition, Vogt seeks issuance of three writs of mandamus directed to Judge James L. Robart directing him to: (i) correct the docket in the District Court to accurately reflect the proceedings below, (ii) acknowledge Vogt’s discharge of his obligations under the Misprision statutes, and (iii) in so much as the “public interest so requires”, summon a grand jury to hear Vogt’s forensic evidence which demonstrates that the Certificates of Live Birth (“COLBs”) proffered by Barack Hussein Obama, II (“Obama”) to prove his eligibility to be President are indisputably forgeries.

II. THE ISSUES PRESENTED

First, whether Judge Robart has violated his inherent duty to control his docket to preserve its integrity by permitting the Clerk to misrepresent the proceedings below and thereafter, though advised of the misrepresentation by Vogt, failing to correct the misrepresentation thereby undermining the Congressional purpose resident in 18 U.S.C. §2071(b) – “Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally”.

Second, whether Vogt is entitled to an acknowledgment from Judge Robart that Vogt has discharged his obligations arising from 18 U.S.C. §4 – Misprision of Felony and/or 18 U.S.C. §2382 – Misprision of Treason.

Last, whether Judge Robart must, due to his abdication of the judicial function imposed upon him by Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rule 6(a), be ordered to summon a grand jury given that the forgery of Obama’s COLBs is an issue “of great public importance”.

III. THE FACTS NECESSARY TO UNDERSTAND THE ISSUES PRESENTED

On October, 18, 2013, Vogt presented to the Clerk for filing as a Miscellaneous matter a document captioned “In Re: Douglas Vogt" and titled: "Notice of Commission of (i) a Felony Cognizable by a Court of the United States as required by 18 USC §4 -- Misprision of Felony and (ii) Treason against the United States as required by 18 USC § 2382 - Misprision of Treason and Motion to Seal Document” (“Notice of Commission” attached hereto as Exhibit “A”). Attached to the Notice of Commission was Vogt's publicly-available, 95-page affidavit in which he demonstrated forensically the existence of twenty (20) separate points of forgery in Obama’s COLBs. In addition to the 95 page affidavit, Vogt also filed under seal a 75-page affidavit in which he identified the person who forged Obama’s COLBs and traced those forgeries to Obama. The matter was docketed as Case No.: C13-1880 and assigned to Judge Robart.

In the Notice of Commission, Vogt sought three actions from a federal district court judge: First, an acknowledgment that Vogt had discharged his obligations under the Misprision statutes. Second, that given the obvious “public interest” in preserving the integrity of the Office of the President from a pretender, the district court summon a grand jury to consider the public and sealed affidavits of Vogt. Last, that Vogt’s sealed affidavit continue to be sealed from public view to prevent the spoilation of evidence that doubtlessly would occur if that affidavit were made public. However, the Clerk did not accurately record the Notice of Commission on the docket. Instead, the Clerk renamed the Notice of Commission as “COMPLAINT against defendant(s)”. Additionally, though Vogt had not sought to sue anyone, the Clerk listed on the Docket as defendants all those referenced in the Notice of Commission. See: Docket attached hereto as Exhibit “B”.

On November 5, 2013, Judge Robart issued his “Order to Show Cause Regarding Subject Matter Jurisdiction”. That Order required Vogt to “show cause within 20 days of the date of this order why his complaint should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.” Notably, Judge Robart commenced the Order by misstating: “Before the court is Plaintiff Douglas Vogt’s complaint in which he alleges that the certificates of live birth from the State of Hawaii that President Barack Obama has publicly released are forgeries.” (Emphasis added). See: Exhibit “C” attached hereto.

In response, on November 12, 2013, Vogt filed his “Response to Order to Show Cause” in which he explicitly stated: “Vogt sought not to: (i) file a complaint, (ii) invoke the jurisdiction of the Court under Article III to resolve a “case” or “controversy”, nor (iii) seek any relief against Barack Hussein Obama, II. . . . Moreover, while Vogt did not caption his Notice of Commission Vogt v. Obama, the Clerk – and now this Court – has done so. This misrepresentation of the record calls into question whether there has been a violation of 18 U.S.C. §2071(b) – Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally.” Finally, Vogt again prayed that Judge Robart: “formally recognize that Vogt has discharged his duty under the Misprision statutes” and “due to the ‘public interest’ in the allegations contained in Vogt’s public affidavit and presently-sealed affidavit, superintend those affidavits to the Grand Jury for their consideration.”

On November 14, 2013, Judge Robart entered his “Order Dismissing Complaint for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction”. A copy of the Order is attached hereto as Exhibit “D”. Judge Robart commenced his order by claiming: “Before the court is Plaintiff Douglas Vogt’s complaint in which he alleges that the certificates of live birth from the State of Hawaii that President Barack Obama has publicly released are forgeries.” (Emphasis added).

IV. THE REASONS WHY THE WRITS OF MANDAMUS SHOULD ISSUE [...]

PETITION CONTINUED BELOW OR HERE: http://www.scribd.com/doc/187132805

View the complete Birther Report presentation at:

http://www.birtherreport.com/2013/11...rand-jury.html

Announcement

Under Seal: Document Expert Identifies Obama BC Forger; Media Complicit

Under Seal: Document Expert Identifies Obama BC Forger; Media Complicit

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment