Update on federal lawsuit re Obama...

[SusanConstant]

I had to wait for the 11th Circuit to violate the law once again and it did - on December 30th, my very birthday. I have been asking the natural birth question since April of 2007 and the federal court has refused to acknowledge reality – history – by denying what is happening and by calling me every name in the book as they expect you not to know the difference between the legal definition versus the medical or common definition of words. That’s perfectly okay by me as once any one of you repeated those words as if they are a fact of me? I had the 11th Circuit where I wanted it: Guilty of what now rises to a criminal act and which is, for a fact, personal in nature as none of this is accident. This very bench has had my birth certificate since day one: April 4th, 2007. The Chief Judge of the Jacksonville Division bench knows what he did outside of the courtroom, as he is unaware that I know the rule of law regarding sensitive or confidential information as in how it has to be conveyed, by secure means. He took information meant to be a part of the record and acted upon it which then caused me to have a broken bone but assumed it was personal as he assumed I was dumb only as I am a woman and only as I have no law license and am poor – by choice. The evidence supports another judge had knowledge of this and cooperated with him. I chose to never get a license and I chose to refuse to pay unjust taxes thus impoverishing me. He assumed this would never, ever come back to him. It will as this universe is just and I know how this one universe works.

I went to the FBI as early as December of 2006 as in my case a NY family court was bought and another acted upon unwritten, unjust policy that targets women only and then me alone, as it caused my legal nightmare to blow up as it later did. It was me exactly besides woman as I told the court I knew the law. They then had to get rid of me by acting in violation of the law or else it was a case of liability. Basically every authority washed their hands of me as if that then made them “not guilty”. Wrong! That did not work for Pontius Pilate so why would it work only as you are a federal or state authority? It will not work as long as I keep acting. Like Pilate, who took a vote but did not actually take a vote as the decision had already been made and as women had no actual legal power to decide anything so men murdered Jesus not Jews, it appeared as if a vote had been taken and that it was co-ed when it had not and was not, washing your hands of me will not work Unclean hands are always unclean unless you make a different decision and take different action. Authorities failing me thus all of us is also due to all offices being unchecked as a direct result of Bush V Gore.

You guys deny your own reality and rationalize and justify everything. STOP: If none of this is reality how did I ever name “Hawaii” exactly to the FBI in 2006? I made a prediction based upon my knowledge of the historical record of Earth and this nation then US law using the state of my own life as a reference point as I had every enumerated right violated and I knew Bush V Gore to be an unresolved tie. FACT, not theory, conjecture or hypothesis or else Barack Obama never would have happened. I was born in NY; people use NY state to carpet bag into the Oval Office…knowing what is going on is actually a conspiracy of the unethical acting against the ethical, unethical lawyers arguing to overthrow on government and law only for money and favor – perceived forms of power, I paid close attention to Bloomberg and Swarzeneggar. My mistake? I did not know Obama was claiming he was born in Hawaii. When I saw Bloomberg and Swarzeneggar grinning like Cheshire cats on the cover of TIME and then heard Bloomberg was having meetings as to the cost of buying the Oval Office, I swung into action, as I knew I could wait no longer. I was forced to wait until February as outside conditions prevented me from acting before then and as on the last day of that month in 2007 my life was then violated absolutely and wholly thus it was humanly possible for me to sue and it was also now legal. That day the US Supreme Court first announced it was harming me only as I was a woman w/o a law license and told me its exacting policy: No woman would ever be allowed to argue her own case on her own as would no non-lawyer. PERIOD, as they had already reasoned the hypothetical case. Or so an exact clerk claiming to be named “Will” told me. Direct entry based upon this policy ever occurred to them until later. “Will” said if I ever managed to achieve filing then he would see to it my case was sunk as would other clerks. “SINK” was his exact word as in “[We] will sink your case if we ever see it.” When I told him I was now going to sue over this unconstitutional policy as policy and rule is not law even if the label “SUPREME COURT OF THE US” is in front of it and that I I knew how to do so and proved I knew how by citing a case of original jurisdiction named Bush V Gore? Will hung up on me; he was angry, angry, angry. He slammed that phone down. Lol! I’m a big girl; I’m not going to cry as I’m going to sue you. Suing the Supreme Court itself may be frivolous as in “manifestly futile”. I guess we’ll find out if we have a corrupted and/or criminal Supreme Court, won’t we? US law is US law no matter what this court rules as this court does not make law as it does not have that power and it is often wrong in its reasoning and application. YOU gave it power over you it does not have over you according to US law.

In November of 2006 NY State admitted it did have unconstitutional policy against women and children and NY admitted it ordered its social workers to act upon this policy in violation of state code and US law. NY State ordered its employees to deny women and children their liberty rights in order to save money. The officer who told me this? She also told me she knew it to be unconstitutional as did everyone but that in fear of losing her job went ahead and did what NY was telling her to do. That is she knew as did all others that this statewide policy was illegal and in violation of the law. In my unique case? It caused me and my children irreparable injury that then propelled me into US Supreme Court. No other person could or would argue against it as I can and may and will and later did. Accidentally by design, in my unique case, NY State mistakenly documented this policy for me and the fact that it owns the knowledge of what it is doing to women. NY did not meant to give me this proof; it thought it hornswoggled me and my ethical attorney. It almost did except I had knowledge my attorney did not. When I read the documents NY sent her? I fell over. I was screaming YES! As I knew it was proof of this policy so that several factors all converged to harm me but the one constant? Unethical people acting illegally and in direct violation of the law and/or their licenses to avoid liability. What is the discrimination of women became direct and personal injury to me – crimes personal in nature only as I knew the law and so they had no choice, harm me or admit liability. Basically we were all sold for exacting dollar amounts.

On my way into federal court people kept rationalizing and justifying their behavior and the state of this nation. They’d say conspiracies are not reality and that if justice were actually being bought and sold e would have stopped it. ‘Conspiracies’ are real, as they develop via laziness at times as in YOU fail to preserve, protect and defend your rights and so allow snakey lawyers to usurp them. You act alone or in conjunction with others thus a ‘conspiracy’ develops only it is realized as endemic corruption not some plot to take out individuals or to commit a blatant crime. A coup is realized only you do not recognize it as you are it! In case you still do not get it: This is about YOU being the constitutional authority that rules your own life. It is about YOU taking accountability and responsibility for what you do instead of depending upon government to care for you or lawyers to protect your interests as that never works and never did in all of world history. YOU are the federal government so YOU caused this by not acting and by refusing to acknowledge reality aka the truth of your life or the state of this nation. Your vote is motivation and intent.

 

[SusanConstant]

I do not care who is offended as I am offended as I am the injured party. What happened to me and my kids is tragic and I am not the least bit responsible or guilty as I have been acting since I first knew - in the 90’s. As soon as I knew? I plead accountable by acting upon the knowledge of what was being realized by you: endemic domestic violence, the kind named in Article 4 section 4. YOU were and are forcing this upon me. I’m suffering because of you. So:

How in the world do you vote for and then accept 16 years of unable, incapable men in charge? Unjust men? How do you explain away this criminal Congress you keep voting for and how do you justify voting for Barack Obama or Nancy Pelosi? I’ll tell you how, as you fell for a snakey lawyer trick called bait and switch:

If the two party monopoly has engaged in the buying and selling of justice via buying and selling the offices of government, and then they sit down and plot how to injure us in a way that is irreparable, they need to do it so that you do not even realize it is happening to you. By the time your life is so badly f’ed up that you do? It is too late. Check the historical record of Rome. We are now at a tipping point as the people in the offices of power have engaged in killing or murdering the innocent w/o reason or cause aka invoking the power of God. You gave away your rights until you did not even have access to the court of constitutional authority – the Supreme Court. The people holding the purse strings? They offer you a sacrificial lamb – Obama – counting upon you citing black as a reason to violate US law when it is excuse. Then they count upon you not ever calling it what it is as you will be extra-sensitive to black. Of course Obama has to be willing to go along with it or it does not work. People in his camp began acting upon the idea of foreignizing the office of President as far back as 1996.

Murder innocent women and their children but never so much as swat at a black man as it is criminal to discriminate against blacks but not women as the citizens rationalize and justify the discrimination of women still. It is ‘legalized’ discrimination if only unethical women or unethical black persons can become elected today. It becomes legalized via default - you fail to act or you condone it. You pretend you do not know when you do know. Overthrow the law with black then install a private business interest like Bloomberg and Swarzeneggar. See, the two party monopoly is testing the water – YOU –with Obama. Will you take it? Why do you think both parties okayed Resolution 511? The parties are financed by private business interests. Can anyone say CA’s Walmart based PAC? Walmart has the largest PAC.

LOL! Walmart announced it would begin funding LOCAL elections. Guess what their definition of local is? Office of the CA governor as that was the first ‘local’ office they went after. When a private interest claims the office of Governor is ‘local’? They either already own the office of President or will soon. All that’s left is the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

It is possible to do this - corrupt the Supreme Court - but it has not happened yet; that is, Roberts is not a private business interest yet. He is discriminatory based upon past rulings of his. He was chosen because of this, his ideas about women, as it is obvious. His appointment is in violation of the law due to Bush V Gore as it was not arbitrary. Arbitrary would be old age and/or longest tenure. Do not believe unjust men meant to harm women, the poor and the ethical? STOP: What is the common denominator in all of this? WOMEN and the ETHICAL as that is who Walmart injures via unjust policy it lobbies for and acts upon. That is who is denied justice by being shut out of the office of President as no woman can buy this office due to the past effects of discrimination and no ethical person will buy it; that is who the US Supreme Court yet harms as it refuses to accord women justice and now cites possible consequences as reasoning to not hear the cases that will accord women justice. Roberts does not know something as he was taught something I was not as we are both Roman Catholic only he went to an all male boarding school unlike me. He learned or was taught something as fact that is not fact. He acts upon it. He can make his appointment legal by informing you by granting me oral argument thus he is checking himself by volunteering to learn what he does not know thus correcting his mistaken belief of women as less than and of the discrimination of women being not real when it is. Authority and consent is reciprocal review folks.

The Civil Rights Act allows you to refuse to cast a vote for a man or to appoint a man only as he is male as female is intrinsic to doing the job of according women justice. Why do you refuse to act upon your right? You could have stopped Congress; you could have wielded the vote via the write in blank. It is excuse to say that vote would not have then counted as if all people used it instead of justifying voting for unjust persons it then would be realized, wouldn’t it? And each one of you then could have sued if you did use it.

What don’t you get as NATURAL BIRTH is the equal rights case for women!!! MEN DO NOT GIVE NATURAL BIRTH, DO THEY??? I want to strangle women. They are sitting back and taking this, as are men. Harm your mother and you are then harmed. It comes back to bite you in the butt at some point, like NOW.

All I did was reason and decide in sixth and seventh grade that history is an exacting science, that one person can change, alter or steer the course of history and that one person could live out US law exactly as it is written thus wiled the power of one single vote – their own – as executive Order within US Supreme court via a unanimous decision. I believed another person would make the case for women; I did not ever believe I would have to overturn a tied decision of the court until it then happened to me. My point of law?

The individual citizen is their own constitutional authority. The citizen knows the law and as it is a contract may not then participate in what is illegal but then cry they are powerless to help themselves. WE, the people are the court of constitutional authority not the US Supreme Court. The terms of our law are never to be broken unless it is via due process – amending the law – but even then, if it is repugnant? It is void. My case PROVES all of you, if you are ethical and obeyed the law, are now being taxed without representation thus unjustly and it also proves the US defaulted upon the two governing contracts thus all bets are off. You can now defy authority anyway you please. But you will not as you are cowards and excuse makers thus I filed yet another application for an emergency stay because as of November 20th, 2008 I could name Roberts, the chief clerk and the other clerks as individuals and in their official capacities as now the US supreme court is invoking unconstitutional policy. In direct violation of US law and Marbury V Madison the US supreme court now claims it does not have to redress the violation of a fully vested protected right nor will it allow any citizen direct entry as Marbury says you may. No where in US law will you find the Supreme court of the US as it now exists named, nor will you find the power it has assumed for itself. It is not our law. Look at the docket for 08-6622; the entire injured class, the US, was circumvented as no response from the Solicitor General was ever made and as the clerks or Roberts acted upon the knowledge in an application for a stay that I entered but then they never filed it and held it from me so you would not know. They deliberately kept you ignorant. Hello! The Court would not have known the Solicitor failed unless I informed it. That’s how you know I entered a stay they never filed.

Now that the 11th circuit has openly violated the law by claiming my case is manifestly futile to pursue, as no official is willing to obey or enforce the law, I filed another application for a stay and have the petition fro a writ finished. The stay has been mailed; the petition in support of it is sitting on my floor all ready to go as I do not have the money to mail it in until Wednesday. Is the US Supreme Court out to kill this nation by killing our governing documents and all women thus killing both male and female children or humanity? Without the law we are not American; without women we will not exist. Law is not law if it exists only on paper but not in real life. What good is it, how is it real, if you do not live it out? It the Court now guilty of murder? We’ll find out as the Justice assigned to the 11th circuit is Thomas, and Thomas is considering Berg’s application even though Berg cannot make this case, Berg is political, Berg did not act before Obama as I did, Berg supported Clinton who singed 511 and Berg failed to meet the burden of proof standard. If my application is not filed again how do the clerks and Thomas explain this away? I’ll tell you how:

YOU, as it is up to you to act, even get violent and riot, if this ever happens in a constitutional nation or else we are no longer constitutional. From my application ( I do not think I’ve ever posted some of this):

 

[SusanConstant]

34. Marbury clearly states that: There are three ways a case can be heard in the Supreme Court: (1) filing directly in the Supreme Court; (2) filing in a lower federal court, such as a district court, and appealing all the way up to the Supreme Court; (3) filing in a state court, appealing all the way up through the state's highest courts, and then appealing to the Supreme Court on an issue of federal law. The first is an exercise of the Court's original jurisdiction; the second and third are exercises of the Supreme Court's appellate jurisdiction. The clerks have now referred to what is a case of original jurisdiction as a case of a Writ of Cert when it is no such thing, that if a Chief Justice injures you and you can prove it and that it may have been personal due to the contents of your petition that the law does not then exist to address this due to current conditions i.e. the endemic discrimination of women which then causes the mostly male agencies or other courts to refuse to act in direct violation of the law as they too discriminate and the clerks looked at and read their own docket, seeing that action had been taken upon my stay that was not ever returned and then still stated that what I did and is history was impossible. I cannot reason with those not wiling to reason that is to acknowledge what is real and did happen. For some unknown reason clerks and Justices and other judges seem to believe as fact w/o question that you may not enter this court directly for any reason. This is not fact and not our law. The woman who enters directly as I did? She must take steps to avoid Marbury's fate and I have as Marbury did not have the US Secret Service whom she can write to, issue a statement of fact, give them all of the evidence rising to proof, have it perceived as a threat when it is not, get arrested and then prove in a criminal court at trial that it was and is the Chief Justice and the US Supreme Court who caused her to have to act this way in self defense as they refused to obey US law or even the ruling that created their court as it is today. This court is now going against its own words to then force an unconstitutional policy and rule to be invoked as inviolate law when it is not law. Marbury did not act upon ownership of the law; I did and I also acted upon one other thing: Marbury itself as Marshall reasoned that here on out? To gain direct entry and be awarded your relief you must prove or establish direct injury by this very court that is personal so you must be pro se and constitutional authority and you must prove you acted upon Marbury as it exists this very second as I am creating it thus you must own more knowledge and act upon that also – before and after you enter US Supreme Court as In Re Susan Herbert or In Re Thomas Jefferson. Marshall told me that the conditions that would first have to exist to make this possible were inconceivable to him. I told him: That’s what you think; have you bothered to check the historical record? People are creatures of habit and predictability; thus governments are predictable. I predict: An oligarchy will result. He said, “Yes I have checked the record, which is why I will, from here on out, as long as it is humanly possible for me to do so, author almost all decisions of this court by my very own self thus accepting accountability and responsibility for Marbury as I act upon what I state are my true beliefs as I am not a coward and as there is more than one way to skin a cat. No other nation skinned a cat this way yet so we will discover if it works.”

35. As all citizens defaulted injury to my person is a matter of a personal not public trust. With only a few exceptions, mostly my immediate or extended family members, I do not care who did what to me or when. I am much better off dealing with clerks who are willing to be honest with me than ones who are not. A clerk can and may tell me that his personal belief is women are less than. That’s legal. It also allows me to then defend myself as he said it to me instead of hiding it. I’m a big girl; I can and will take care of myself. Our law in no way makes it unlawful to possess such personal beliefs. A Chief Justice appointed illegally? As we are all to get one opportunity he then gets one to make his own appointment legal as it is a Chief volunteering to recheck his office. When this happens you do not go around firing people or un-appointing people as first, all must get that lone opportunity and then you are much better off dealing with known quantities than unknown quantities. I do not care what this nation personally likes or dislikes about anything that was said or done, not even within US Supreme Court, as that is my judgment call. This nation did it to me first and did it to me relentlessly and this nation did not ever admit or confess to the truth unlike persons within this court. Once I own the truth? It is then up to me to flip it anyway I wish, as in making a certain November 20th action constitutional as I possess the best reasoning of all to act upon that application but not file it: 1, It preserves my standing forever and 2, The US Supreme Court finally was injured by their own policy and by the injury the citizens are perpetrating upon the Court in such a way we achieved equilibrium as the persons within this court, when the Solicitor failed as the Solicitor General’s office and I argued in the past and that office ignored the law over and over so their failure to respond was not accident, were then stuck in the same time and place as ANY action at all became a case of “Damned if I do or damned if I don’t but criminal only if I do nothing as the only thing I may not do is fail to act at all”. NOTHING any person did would then have resolved the situation or have been legal as in both according to the law and/or spirit of the law. The one and only action that then met both as much as possible? Exactly what is – circumventing the US by acting upon the knowledge in my application without any response by the Solicitor but not filing it exactly as I planned. I meant for this to happen which is why I kept making it seem as if I was blaming John Roberts! For a crime personal in nature! I can and may name you as offices and as individuals as I will not know as fact if it was or was not personal or even if it was an actual crime until I am standing inside the US Supreme Court and hear my own voice coming out of my mouth as actions prove innocence or guilt. Obviously if I am standing there in the flesh then the US Supreme Court has entirely removed itself from chain of causation thus it is immune or not guilty.

 

[SusanConstant]

You read #36..

37. As for litigants that came before this court after Bush v Gore and after Roberts appointment? They had an opportunity, didn’t they? Our law is what you knew, when you knew it and when you acted upon it. If you truly believed these people had power and authority over you than they did as you created that belief ? a mistaken belief? and then made it real by acting upon it. Those litigants do not get to return and argue the same points of law; they do not get to turn back the clock, as they did not argue what I am arguing when they could and should have done so. If they actually disagreed and felt as if they were denied justice? They had the opportunity to disobey and/or act against the decision they received as I myself went to these very people. They declined that opportunity. John Roberts is not their problem or their point of law – they themselves are their own legal issue, as those very litigants are the federal question and are the constitutional authority case now known as Susan V Obama and the US. A person only controls you if you allow it as you have to first give your power and authority away. WHO told you that you could not reason and apply law your own self or that a Justice could count but you could not? Our law exactly states you need to be 18 and human to enter a contract aka reason and apply the law to yourself. WHO told you that you could not? As if you lacked the human ability or that I lacked it? That it was impossible to disobey? All you have to do is serve those acting with notice thus all you have to do is get within US Supreme Court - on the docket - as it is then informed consent; you petitioned for redress and so now anything goes if you are failed. WHO told you that you cannot mail in a petition thus issue an executive order like anybody else as your one vote is the power of executive order? Our law exactly states that you must be 35, human and natural born. "Law school" is nowhere in sight as law school did not even exist as we know it when this was written and as the entire point of this nation is self-actualization aka rising in spite of the odds set against you. The citizens had access to a free public education and the free public library just as I did. If public school fails you the library has volunteers that will teach you how to read so you can then defend yourself aka act pro se. Law is law; personal perceptions or personal policies and personal beliefs are not supposed to be applied against my person as they are not law. A Justice does not always know more than you or for a fact what is best for you; was Dred Scott or Plessy good for you? Us? Thurgood Marshall had an issue with Plessy. He happened to be a licensed attorney but he did not need to be. As he is black thus subject to injustice he had the benefit of the experience of his own life as do I, as I began throwing myself into where and what I needed to learn thus get here when I was 13. How could I know what the exact issue would be? At 12 I had to act as the constitutional authority so then at 13 I reasoned and decided I had better do something about this issue: Life and death safety issues affecting women and their children. I went to school for over thirty years to reason it is a denial of liberty rights all protected and fully vested but unclaimed as any person can and may go to school from the cradle to the grave in America – for little or no actual monetary cost - and as every American citizen is then a lawyer as that is the very nature of American citizenship. You are born into the contract or later volunteer to then enter the contract thus you are a lawyer. Law school commences the day you hit the bricks; it is entirely up to you if you graduate and then enter the bar. WHO told you that you need a dead piece of paper known as a diploma or else you do not know what you know??? What you lived??? What you see, feel and hear??? You can and may read former Chief Justice Rehnquist’s ruling and realize it has Jungian psychology written all over it and that the only number you ever needed to count was one, as in one vote or one ruling, 9 as 1 or 1 alone not per curiam. You can and may reason Alan Dershowitz is stringy not Paul Stevens. You can and may reason Clinton broke the law by lying under oath even if Congress denied reality so Rehnquist could have legally stood him down so why not do it? It might constitute double jeopardy. It is castling as it is a move made in self-defense in Chess. You sacrifice your rook for your king, not the person but the idea of the office - that high appellation or brotherly love - thus your own self first. You volunteer to change or switch places. Sacrifice is not suffering as suffering is forced upon you while you choose sacrifice. You are counting upon another American to be aware and think, if anything ever happens to you, "Hey! You can't fall on your sword like that stuffed shirt Hamilton as that is not legal but it may be in my best interests as I know the result of Hamilton’s action and I know the law inside and out so can reason this thus overturn it if I ever need to do so." When two people collide like particles opportunity is created if both are ethical and willing. America is all about people colliding as that is what our founders did, that is what we now do and so that is what we are, the energy or echoes of diversity colliding and becoming something new and unique that is never static and is ever-changing and infinite. Rehnquist and I collided. As we are equals who owned the idea and acted there are ghost trails - probabilities or opportunities - everywhere. I recently had to break it to Stephen Hawking: he is the rarest of events, that naked singularity The Grand Architect clothed with a body as Hawking like me had no event horizon but was as the Supreme Being thought BE and so we are. God did not have to act as we do hence God had no event horizon. The founders did have to act upon the thought, as they are not the Godhead thus America or each American does have an event horizon: The vote. Claim the vote for yourselves and there is no going back but only forward. Once I knew as fact all American missed the event horizon as they are it so could not know it I then knew I had to overturn Bush v Gore as it is not possible to survive a black hole unless you are equal and due first and that was the cause of my legal nightmare. You are reconstituted upon exiting on the other side. In this case? We will be the first and only great government to survive our own success as success unchecked can become a black hole as you begin to forget who and what you are. We will be reconstituted as equal and due on the inside by correcting a mistaken belief about women and ourselves as Americans. As for Congress? They can and should send away to the Vatican for a book known as the Baltimore Catechism for it defines, reasons and even applies "high crimes and misdemeanors" as this is lost upon Congress or so Congress claims. The Vatican will give you an actual list. For free. It tells you everything and even exactly names the risks to your own constitution. "High crimes and misdemeanors"? Mortal sins and venal sins. Congress certainly acts as if it does not know sin, as it has become a sin.

 

[SusanConstant]

38. In order for any citizen to enter this court directly after I am granted oral argument? The actual reasoning I keep giving you more knowledge than you need and more and more information than you need? The actual reason I keep writing much more than necessary and keep adding all manner of what seems to be personal opinion, immaterial fact, personal notes or letters and keep naming specific things such as naming individual disciplines, people or exact skills or so it seems? I am deliberately creating a record or a burden of proof standard. Marshall ruled that authority means you must act upon ownership of the existence of the law - that the paper exists and that you own the knowledge contained on the paper, or, you own your commission thus you can and may act to claim it regardless of any court ruling in favor or against you. You know if you are innocent, accountable or guilty and if an action or order is unconstitutional so you can and may act. That is self-government or self-adjudication; it is self-actualization. This legal fight, both Marbury and my own, was not and is not small minded or petty and had little to do with personal relationships and feelings about others but only about your own self, a constitution. Are you equal or not? Are you a person or not? A human acts out what they truly believe no matter what they say or write. True beliefs are realized in the physical world no matter what you say or what that paper reads which reasons why we have still not achieved equal protection and why we still practice discrimination and injustice even though we have two governing documents that are elegant when forming a single government and law. It works upon a personal level and upon a national level. Ignorance and the refusal to live out what the paper reads or when you known different, or reasoning that you are the exception to the law, is a major world legal issue that causes suffering, as constitutional authority or actual liberation rests upon owning knowledge you are the equal of every person on Earth and are of God and that no person is the exception to this and then being willing to act upon this knowledge for ethical reasoning even if you must sacrifice your very life. You are equal to a king and a beggar; you have to hold yourself to both standards – you have to own the knowledge of both - or you cannot act justly on behalf of either or on behalf of yourself. It is about actual brotherly love. I realized, as it was instinct for me, that I would have to act upon ownership of the commissions known as the Declaration and Constitution but also Marbury as now I had Marbury V Madison so could act upon ownership of this knowledge. Marbury’s mistake is that he failed to act ex post facto. He could not act before as this is humanly impossible as he is it; he set the precedent and created the application of the law thus created this court. How could he act before it even existed? He could not but he could have acted after. This then required me to act before and after I entered and left this court denied justice, as I knew I would be denied justice when I first entered. The Court began invoking the rule that appearing is not a right and then the unconstitutional policy disallowing direct entry in order to prevent thousands and thousands of cases from being heard as a right and from entering directly as the government slowly became more and more unjust as people – the lone citizen - begin to act as if they are the exception to the rule and the law plus the citizens began to forget who they are as Americans and began to equate justice to money. One of the actions I took? Contacting attorneys who came before this court and lost and asking them if they wanted a second shot at securing justice for their client as the clerks are also law school graduates and so I needed a standard to hold them against to then know innocence or guilt as clerks are not in it for million dollar settlements. Attorneys always talk about the good fight so if the paid lawyers are as some of that pay is publicity and the clerks are as they receive a federal paycheck and perceived power as in privilege or favor how do you differentiate? You engage those people as in order to become a legalized institution the Supreme Court has to remove itself from the chain of causation at some point thus pleading accountable but not responsible or guilty as at one point this court was responsible. Were any of those attorneys actually seeking justice? Did they bring a case before this court they could not win, as they themselves did not truly believe what they were arguing? They claimed it is their true belief; is it? Well, do I have representation or not? That’s your answer as the rule is that one could act to protect my interests while I still argued my own case as the lawyer protects the interest of the class even if it is only one person. In this case it is all women and then all ethical and law abiding Americans – those who have actual true belief or faith in US law. Basically, the Supreme Court has been in direct violation of the law since soon after Marshall’s death. That’s why the Liberty Bell cracked tolling his funeral, so we would be clued in to what is going on. The universe gives us clues; it is known as self-evidence. It is as if the universe is saying, “The race is on! First one back to the bar wins!” The inscription on the Liberty Bell is not coincidence. I had to act upon more knowledge than Marbury to fully vest the right to enter this court and then to do so directly as I not only had Marbury but 200 years of federal court rulings and then all of history like new science and different conditions than what existed in 1803. I then began entering as much knowledge as possible in my petition and applications as any other citizen attempting to do this? They will have to act upon the knowledge within: The Declaration, The Constitution, Marbury, In Re Susan, In Re Thomas Jefferson and now, Susan V Obama and the US. They have to own more knowledge than I as they will be adding their own life experience which is partly the result of my own, as I of Marbury and as Marbury of the original founders, and the founders of all historical records of Earth – all people - known in 1776. I left Earth as I own the knowledge of outer space as I was born during the space age so any person after me has to go further than our known universe to do this same thing, lol. Time’s arrow always flies forward as in or more knowledge thus more awareness not less. You lose ignorance not gain it. con.t.

 

[Mr.Dysfunctional]

....

Umm... do you have an Editor ?!?! Could i possibly get the abridged version of the pages of text you just wrote??!?! maybe a syonpsis ?!?

Just curious.. I'm a lazy poster

 

[SusanConstant]

# 38 con.t.
...You do not want to know how many years it took me to acquire all of this knowledge and all of this skill. The only people then who have a shot actually and legally are children entering school now or not yet born as they will yet suffer from the past effects of the discrimination of women after I give oral argument BUT: By the time they turn 18, 21 or 35? The legal issue will have resolved itself as they are legal adults, they had at least three years after turning 18 and 17 years before becoming eligible via default as they are yet a warm body and did not complete the task by 35 and/or act at or before age 12 to preserve their standing which is the age upon which I first acted and then as equality is actually being realized at some point no person will be born into harm thus what possible claim, as then all humans would have protection and process, could possibly gain them direct entry or entry by right? A child might have a claim; could that child act pro se? Possibly but very, very unlikely as US law will have been proven elegant so that children will be acting to prevent the injury from ever occurring. If you are an adult and are injured in this way, the same way I am? Unclean hands so NO DIRECT ENTRY FOR YOU AND NO RIGHT BUT ONLY A DUTY AND A PRIVILEGE AS I HAD TO CREATE THE RIGHT FOR MY OWN SELF BY REASONING “THIS IS A SACRED DUTY I CAN NEVER VEER FROM UNTIL ACCOMPLISHED” AND THEN ACTING TO FULLY VEST IT AS MY RIGHT. In a Philadelphia courtroom in December of 2000 I deliberately choose 8 years of hell on Earth to then be able to do this and to then turn two years of needless, abject suffering into something else. All I could do was make the best of the only option available to me as I had no liberty but as I had faith at some future point the law would kick in and so work to protect me if I kept acting I made the choice everyone else was too afraid to make. From here on out? The lone citizen, as he or she now owns the knowledge, is accountable and responsible for his or her own happiness or misery as he or she is choosing it, at least partially. Nobody is forcing suffering upon you. Franklin said: “The Constitution gives you the right to pursue happiness. You have to catch it yourself.” I keep writing more and more and keep writing what no other litigant would ever include in a petition or application to make the standard to meet the burden of proof you must meet after I give oral argument as high and as difficult as possible as that is how America produces giants and that is how people become self-actualized. One of my mistakes was setting the bar too low for myself as I set it upon liberating only American humans as I mistakenly assumed then other humans would follow our lead. My goal was US Supreme Court; once I achieved direct entry upon November 20th I thought “Now what?” as even though I was denied justice the challenge for me was no longer there as I did it so it is history whether this nation ever acknowledges it or not. It’s a part of my person - forever. I had to think outside of America: Set the bar as high as you can first after proving it is possible via leading by example – making my own case - as I have to make people want to get in but at the same time make it nigh impossible to do so or I have lost my own cause. I have to make them want to vote or want to strive; to want to learn and then ‘obey’ or rather volunteer to live out what they know to be elegant: US law. The vote is motivation and intent. I need Americans to constitutionally cast a vote and I want other nations to ‘steal back’ and ‘readopt’ US law. That’s why I was so happy to finally meet the US Secret Service as I could then begin plotting my criminal trial which I could force the US to press against me as US law and prior federal rulings plus that November 20th action shield me from prosecution and/or assure my eventual victory. The citizens forced so much injustice and so much suffering upon me against my will that at least if I volunteer to go to jail – go to jail upon my own will not against it - then the conditions of my life improve. What is actual prison if you are already in a legal prison? Merely a change of scenery. I can vote myself into actual jail as long as there is an actual point of law to be made. I know exactly what a citizen would have to be and do besides arm themselves with all of the knowledge I named which is the entire historical record of Earth including my personal thoughts, feelings, ideas and beliefs to then gain direct entry or to invoke appearing as a fully vested right in this court. Am I going to tell the citizens? No, as like the Chief Justice I may not give legal advice to any one citizen title or not. I may not tell you what to do or how to do it but may only tell you what you may not do. You may not blame Susan Herbert and/or the US Supreme Court for the consequences of your own illegal and in violation of the law actions. Liberty – true choice – means that YOU own those consequences both good and bad as YOU acted aka YOU volunteered after reasoning it your own self thus YOU OWN IT and that is what makes you your own constitutional authority, an acting legal President and Commander or Chief Justice. My absolute fact is: YOU, the citizen, are failing to vote or voting this way willingly, knowingly and deliberately. YOU, the citizen, unjustly chose all of this while it is forced upon me. Justice Rehnquist concurs or so I believe.


39. The only thing that ever makes anyone whole is the truth. I need to be able to tell my truth and I need to know what Obama’s truth is. This nation needs to know the truth of my life, the recent election and Bush V Gore so they can then reason what they did – the how and why - so as to avoid it ever happening again. Justice is about the truth and learning to live truthfully no matter what that is for you alone and then we as a nation. When you avoid the truth? You never know if you are then denying yourself good consequences. You are. You deny yourself the Constitution thus you deny yourself you.

40. The only excuse named as reason by the 11th circuit this time around is money in a case of proven taxation w/o representation and after the US Supreme Court has already granted the poor person’s petition. Like the family court may not un-grant what the Supreme Court and our founders have granted my person neither can the lower federal court. You may not force poverty upon me but then cite poverty; you may not use money to then exclude me as poverty is a past effect of discrimination when US law is about eliminating class distinctions and discrimination. The only other excuse named? “Frivolous”, a word that came into legal usage around 1736 and means “manifestly futile” thus the 11th circuit is then claiming that it is manifestly futile – obviously or self-evidently not possible - for a woman to do what men have done as recently as yesterday and what exact men did in 1803 and then in 2000. This is stating that it is futile to end discrimination, futile to end the injury perpetrated upon women and children, futile to obey the law and futile to possess and act upon an ethic; it is stating that it is futile for the clerks and Justices to go to work everyday and futile for this court to exist. The 11th Circuit does not speak for me, as that is what taxation w/o representation is thus our existence is not futile no matter what this Division orders. The 11th Circuit’s unconstitutional, unethical and immoral order is evidence rising to proof beyond doubt: Marbury is the correct application of the law with one distinction and it is actually manifestly futile to secure liberty or justice from the 11th Circuit’s Jacksonville Division. It is my opinion this exact bench is actually frivolous.

 

[SusanConstant]

41. If John Roberts can make fun of Mike Hammer and write phrases like “tough as a $3 steak” in a decision then I can and may write down exact details of how I actually reasoned my points of law no matter what it sounds like to you as it worked didn’t it or I would not be here now on paper, would I? First I reasoned it intellectually and then I reasoned it emotionally as I can keep changing that story can’t I? I am the author, the author-ity, of my own life story; you can and may contribute but I have total editorial control over me. I create my history as I live it. As long as I am pro se I can keep changing me until I’m satisfied with me as long as I only change my own facts – my feelings, my beliefs, my ideas and/or my personal likes and dislikes - and not your facts and not the facts of our written law or math. It’s one thing to reason yourself out off existence; it’s entirely another to then will it into being. Or so I truly believe all of the above is true, correct and fact.

Conclusion

For 16 years which is almost half of my life we have been suffering and dying without reason or cause; for women this has always been the case as our nation came into being excluding women. Since 1998 chain of command has been interrupted due to perjury committed by the sitting President and Commander, a person who had no protected right to hold this office but only the privilege and who engaged in the purchase of this office and went so far as to do so with the assistance of a person who was not born in America and was not an American but a British born citizen who worked mostly as a prostitute in France (courtesan, if that makes it any easier to deal with) named Pamela Harriman, later given what is equivalent to a state funeral for no reason other than what is personal and when American women and other citizens are denied this, and this perjury was ignored by Congress and then the people as if it had never happened. One devastating effect on women who are girls? Children now engage in oral sex yet claim it is not sex and younger and younger girls are being deceived by this lie. One devastating effect on all women? Abuse of power is excused as the men engaging in it are also the men charged with the duty to address it thus what is abuse of power, and is men acting against women, is labeled something else and made to seem as if it is normal and legal. Chain of command is yet disrupted today due to Bush V Gore which has now escalated to all offices becoming unchecked which is why no authority would act for me or some acted against me. It is how I entered this court directly upon 11/20/08 – I rechecked this Court.

The office of the Executive is our protected birthright; women - either me alone or as a class - should not have this birthright stripped from their persons before it has ever even been accorded to them. This would be especially injurious as conditions exist today as just as the bald eagle went off the endangered species list women went on it as this nation denies it has and is engaged in an actual war against women and girls in spite of actual reality: Unchecked rapes, sexual abuse, child sexual abuse, the spread of sexually transmitted diseases like AIDS, domestic and other violence, death from drug addiction, one sitting Justice who is female in 2008 and only a handful of Senators, the unchecked and now accepted prevalence of what Justice Potter would know as being actual pornography and the sex industry being the industry which accords women the most pay.

I have been denied justice absolutely and wholly as the protected right is mine and as I acted upon ownership of the knowledge my right to appear in person in US Supreme Court fully vested as did my right to exert the power known as Executive Order also known as care, custody and constitutional authority or control over my own person and my children. I demand the opportunity be created for me to finally overturn the family court’s heinous, libelous, false and even criminal orders against my person, to end the victimization of all women, to legalize the existence of the US Supreme Court as it has been lived out and make its policy a rule of law and to become the President and Commander via official recognition of this court and the people in the form of this Writ of Certiorari granted and then an appearance in person within the Supreme Court to give oral argument thereby acknowledging the contribution of my one person, my sons and all women thus proving women do possess the ability and capability and that our law is elegant and was inspired by the exactly named Creator as our founders held themselves to the highest and most difficult standard of all: what is ethical, just and is history in spite of what they personally wanted or desired and in spite of what is popular.

As the vote feels one way and as Philadelphia another so does liberty denied. We as a nation were born in an act of self-defense by invoking our right of safety and liberty, as they are inalienable and as our founders felt it within their persons. Our vote is our right to life and so is our means of defending our persons. Our vote is actually paid for with our very blood as it is created and was then fully vested in war and childbirth. It is the Creator who ultimately reasons and decides which among us will be born under these skies and within this country and so be of the ability to wield that vote - the greatest weapon of mass creation man has ever wrought. What is of the Creator and which we are then born into no man can or may put asunder as he will have to go through a woman first – I, Susan – and this American refuses to negotiate as an actual American never negotiates her safety.

I will settle for nothing less than this nation’s unconditional surrender to the Declaration and Constitution, as those are the inviolate terms that absolutely and wholly define our humanity and so make us a living government and living law known around the world as We, the people – the Americans.

I wish to make a gift of my priceless intellectual property which is the direct result of their actions to all natural born citizens especially women, children and enlisted service members, or, to all Native Americans.

Respectfully submitted.
Susan Herbert, pro se
US Supreme Court Case #’s 07-9804 & 08-6622

BTW: I despise Bill Clinton and I have news for those who do not know: Barack Obama is now ‘re-inserting’ the persons who comprised the most unethical of all Presidential administrations back into office – Clintonites. A chain of causation is actually a chain of people. Clinton caused Bush Jr. Didn’t Obama promise to change things for the better? This is why you do not vote for people who break the law or skirt it before they are ever even elected – as they will only keep injuring you. It is a pattern of deceit and duplicity; it is deliberate. Clinton was impeached. “Impeachment” is the vote to then formally hold a trial. “Impeachment” is separate from “conviction” in our law thus you are impeached but not convicted. Clinton then was impeached but not convicted. Birds of a kind do flock together; you are delusional, actually delusional, if you ‘believe’ none of this injury and harm ever happened and is not being inflicted upon you now. If that were fact? If none of this were real? If I was wrong? If my application of the law were no good? I would not ever have entered US Supreme Court at all let alone directly and we would not now be engaged in an illegal war, actual but not ever legal. We’d have a female Chief Justice or female President as we’d have a unanimous ruling 9 as 1 for women by now. The promise of Brown would be realized. YOU wouldn’t be so angry and uncomfortable. I have some recourse left if I am failed once again as I can volunteer to force the US to prosecute me on criminal charges that will never stick or I can go on a hunger strike in front of the court. A hunger strike grants me more autonomy than jail and a trial by jury of my peers but it is much more difficult to do. While I wait on a response I’ll explore my options. If you have any ideas let me know as I can never, ever give up as my life is actually at stake no matter what I do so I have to act in my defense. You may be willing to wither on the vine or die quietly but I am not as that’s not constitutional. Physical injury and death? It is not in my best interests.

I have to post all of this as I have to inform you. It's the law, as I must make at least a single attempt.

 

[Mr.Dysfunctional]

AAAAAHHHHHHHHH SPAM!!!!

j/k hun.. no but really.. abridged version ?!?! maybe ?!?! please?!?!