BACK BY POPULAR DEMAND...This one's for all those covering up at the FOX NEWS NETWORK...

f a friend or acquaintance posed the question: "Who uses someone else's Social Security number?" how would you answer them? (I was going to say who uses a phony Social Security number, but since Uncle Sam is now recycling Social Security numbers because they are close to running out of them, just about any combination of numbers you put together today will be someone's Social Security number.) Most likely the first thought that would come to your mind when asked that question would be: "An illegal alien." Second would be someone intent on committing identity fraud, since having access to a person's name and Social Security number is like getting the key to their assets. That's why identify theft is a class C felony. Class C felonies, depending on the State in which the crime is committed, carries prison sentences from 10 up to 40 years. In other words, using someone else's Social Security number in order to conceal your own identity or lack of standing as a citizen, is a serious crime although most illegal aliens who are caught using someone else's Social Security number are simply deported.

But what do you do if the guy living in the White House uses Social Security number 042-68-XXXX that was actually issued in the State of Connecticut between 1977 and 1979 to an individual who was born in 1890? Interestingly, the SSN does not appear in the Social Security death index and now has two dates of birth tied to it: Aug. 4, 1961 and the year 1890. As a US Senator, this man used an entirely different Social Security number—282-90-XXXX. It should have been pretty easy for the federal government's paymaster to flag this one since this is the best known person in America. The latter Social Security number was used by Sen. Barack Hussein Obama and the former one was used by Obama when he moved to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. No one in the federal government or, for that matter, in the Social Security Administration seemed to notice the slight discrepancy. A guy with the same name in the Oval Office and the Hart Office Building were using different SSN numbers? Is there a bureaucrat anywhere in Washington, DC who thinks there are two Barack Obama's running around Washington? Okay. It's possible. But, not in the US government—one in the Senate and one in the White House. If there was, everyone in the country would know that. But I guess it would be possible to have "name coincidence" in the District. But, how about 27 of them all named Barack Hussein Obama? That's not like being named John Smith where you have a couple dozen in every phone book in America.

Or that his wife, Michelle Obama, who is a natural born US citizen, has used at least four false SSNs? One of the four numbers she uses, is 282-88-XXXX. This is the SSN number she uses in the White House and it is likely her original SSN (even though she was using 350-60-XXXX when she lived at 5046 Greenwood Avenue in Chicago in Aug. of 2005, some three years or more before taking up residency in the White House). The earliest records found on the 350-SS number by Ohio private investigator Susan Elizabeth Daniels, who was hired by Dr. Orly Taitz, Esq. was dated 2005. Also hired by Taitz to ferret out the SSNs used by Obama was Mission Hills, CA private investigator Neil Sankey who formerly served as a detective for Scotland Yard before becoming a naturalized citizen of the United States. Taitz is challenging Barack Obama's constitutional right to reside at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. And while court after court has refused to force Obama to produce his original long form birth certificate to verify that he was born in the United States and is constitutionally qualifies to hold the office of President, in her lawsuit, Civil Action 10-151, filed on Mar. 22, 2010, Taitz is pushing the issue and is not likely to give up until Obama produces his birth certificate or admits he has none. Her current case, Civil Action 10-151 is being heard by Presiding Judge Royce Lamberth, US District Court for the District of Columbia. Taitz filed a motion to allow a Quo Warranto proceeding. Quo warranto is been suppressed at the federal level (and in most States) because it forces politicians to answer to the people for acts they commit while in office (by forcing the politician to show by what authority they acted as they did.) It is a "citizens' remedy" under the 9th Amendment. It allows the people to use the Constitution against the politician who has committed a breach of public trust. As I said, it is for that reason that few State courts allow its application as well—it simply empowers the people too much. That danged old Constitution just keeps getting in the way of those trying to govern. Must be why the social progressives are trying so hard to get rid of it.

In December, 1981, when Congress passed the Omnibus Reconciliation Act to restore minimum benefits under the Social Security Act of 1981, it added a provision that made it a federal felony for anyone to "...willfully, knowingly, and with intent to deceive the Commissioner of Social Security as to his true identity (or the true identity of any other person) [furnish] or cause to be furnished false information to the Commissioner of Social Security with respect to any information required by the Commissioner of Social Security in connection with the establishment and maintenance of records provided for in section 405(c)(2) of this title." In other words, when you appropriate, for personal use, someone else's Social Security number—even if the SSN-owner is now deceased, the wrongful use of that number is a felony.

In her lawsuit, Taitz also alleges "...a predicate act under RICO." In addition to the purported improper use of Social Security cards not assigned to him, Taitz alleges that her case, Lightfoot v Bowen, was erased from the docket of the Supreme Court, suggesting to her, "...aiding and abetting in commission of fraud and a corrupt organization with a common scheme to defraud the country." She continued that "...[on] Oct. 1, 2009 Sidharth Velamoor, attorney for Perkins Coie, Obama's defense firm, where Robert Bauer, White House Chief Counsel, is a partner, was hired as a clerk for Judge David O. Carter. Shortly after Valamoor was hired by Carter, Carter decided he no longer had jurisdiction to hear Barnett et al Obama et al, which dealt with Obama's illegitimacy to presidency. Those actions suggest improper influence on the federal judge in an effort to affect the outcome of the litigation. These facts suggest violation of the civil rights of Taitz, an attorney on the case, and her clients under 42 USC 1983, which constitutes a predicate act of RICO."

Taitz further argued that Obama "...has no right to privacy or expectation of privacy in his use of multiple Social Security numbers issued in other States, where he never resided, as well as numbers never assigned." Taitz is seeking a Writ of Mandamus to force the complete disclosure of the application for SSN 042-68-4425, the SSN Obama is currently using as chief executive of the nation. Did Obama simply appropriate its use, or did someone do him a political favor and actually assign the number to him? What makes me believe that someone in the Social Security Administration, or at least somewhere in the bureaucracy, helped him is that Obama is using a few Social Security numbers that have never been issued to anyone. Those numbers are worth a small fortune to someone needing a clean SSN that has never been used. When you have a Manchurian Candidate you are dressing up to play the role of the nation's chief executive, you have to make sure he has all the trappings he needs to fool the people. That's why there's such a brisk business at the US-Mexico border for green cards, social security cards and drivers' licenses. It's the paperwork trifecta every illegal needs to survive in the United States. When you want to work in the United States without bothering to apply for a work visa or citizenship, you do the next best thing—you find an ID vendor. And, you can't find this guy in the Yellow Pages.

When Obama arrived in Jackson, New Jersey, he used SSN 485-40-5154, which was issued in 1954-55, in Iowa, to Lucille Ballantyne. Ballantyne was born on Dec. 22, 1912 and died on Sept. 13, 1998. It appears that three people are using 350-60-2302. Daniels tied the card to Michelle Obama. Sankey linked it to Barack Obama. Both Obamas and whomever the original SSN holder's was are attached to that number. What is most interesting is that among the 39 social security cards that Sankey and Daniels discovered linked to the Obama family SSNs for Obama, his wife and his mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, none of them were issued in Hawaii, which in itself, according to Taitz, is evidence of Obama's foreign birth. Since all you need to get a social security card is a birth certificate and one other form of ID, one wonders why, since Obama claims he has his original, long form birth certificate, it appears he has gone through his entire life using Social Security cards which formerly belonged to someone else.

Obama's lawyers attempted to quash Taitz's Sua Sponte motion. On Thursday, April 15 Judge Lamberth denied the motion by Obama's lawyers to kill the lawsuit, and in particular, this section of her filing. Dr. Taitz, the president of the Defend Our Freedoms Foundation, is both a Doctor of Jurisprudence and a Doctor of Dental Surgery. She has fought constitutional and civil liberties violations of over 200 US citizens—the most pressing and demanding of which is the answer to a simple question: is Barack Hussein Obama constitutionally eligible to serve as the President of the United States. Taitz noted that, at this time, over 100 legal actions have been filed all over the United States by some 13 licensed attorneys and numerous pro se plaintiffs, and in spite of 12 grand jury presentments and indictments, Obama has refused to provide any vital records to prove his eligibility to serve as the President based on Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution.

From birth until today, Obama claims allegiance and citizenship to three nations—none of which are the United States. He can claim joint citizenship in Kenya and Indonesia. England claims he owes allegiance to Great Britain. (Obama appears to feel he owes allegiance to King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia whom former Manhattan borough president Percy Sutton claims footed the bill for Obama's Harvard education. Was this the reason for Obama's waist-deep bow to King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia when they met shortly after Obama's inauguration?)

In the first of the three parts of Civil Action 10-151, Taitz noted that as she attempted to represent her clients in her actions against Obama, she was subjected to vicious attacks from the media acting as regime official propaganda, from Obama supporters and from some members of the judiciary "...acting as tools to silence her and intimidate her into dropping her legal actions." She further noted that "...[s]he was subjected to numerous death threats, tampering with her car when a fumes emission hose was disconnected and hot, combustible fumes were going back to the engine as she was driving her three children in the car."

When her investigators produced evidence that Obama was, or had been, using multiple Social Security numbers, she filed a Freedom of Information Act request under 5 USC 552(b)(6). Her request was denied by Dawn S. Wiggins, Deputy Executive Director, Office of Privacy & Disclosure for the Social Security Administration. On the SSA website, Wiggins claims all applicants for a Social Security card must provide at least two documents to prove age, identity and US citizenship, or have a valid green card. I guess Obama thought the only two documents he needed were the birth announcements Obama's grandmother placed in two Honolulu newspapers claiming he was born in that city when Stanley Ann Dunham called from Mombassa, Kenya to let her know that her grandson was just born at the Coast Provincial Hospital. Wiggins denied Taitz's FOIA request because, she said, it would deny Obama his right to privacy. Taitz filed an appeal.

Taitz is seeking a Writ of Mandamus to force the Social Security Administration to produce Obama's application for the Social Security number 042-68-4425. If the US District Court grants her wish it 's very likely the Social Security Administration will appeal Lamberth's ruling to the appellate level in order to protect Obama's privacy. The question is, without evidence from the Social Security Administration that Obama did not apply for that number, or that the Social Security Administration did not assign that number or the other 27 social security numbers he has used to him, will that court find, based on the number of SSNs he has used, that he simply appropriated them for his own use? Or will they cover their eyes and plug their ears and conclude that the world's biggest SSN boondoggle in history had taken place?

Clearly, if the 28 Social Security numbers Obama uses, or has used during his lifetime, were appropriated by him for his personal use, a case can be made that he has committed multiple Class C felonies in order to conceal the fact that he does not possess a United States birth certificate. If that's true, and the only Hawaiian birth certificate he possesses is a "Certification of Live Birth" from Hawaii (which was issued as a personal favor to him by Hawaiian Gov. Linda Lingle) rather than a Certificate of Live Birth that is accompanied by "eye witness signatures" which are affidavits of his birth in Honolulu, Hawaii on Aug. 4, 1961 rather than in Mombassa, Kenya on the same day. Then, even without the elusive long form Hawaiian birth certificate that appears not to exist, Obama could be forced to resign or be impeached and removed from office. The question remains unanswered whether or not he would be prosecuted. While it is unlikely, if he was prosecuted, would evidence that contests the legitimacy of every piece of legislation he signed as head-of-state, and every political appointment he made, be presented and reverse the legislative edicts of the worst presidency since John Adams attempted to give himself the powers of a king? I think the Social Progressives will sacrifice Obama in order to keep their agenda secure.