29839 Santa Margarita Parkway, STE 100

Rancho Santa Margarita CA 92688

Tel: (949) 683-5411; Fax (949) 766-7603 

E-Mail: dr_taitz@yahoo.com, orly.taitz@gmail.com

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE  DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Dr. ORLY TAITZ, ESQ, PRO SE                     §

                             Plaintiff,                        §

                                                                   §       

                   v.                                             §    EMERGENCY    

                                                                   §    MOTION FOR 

Michael Astrue, Commissioner of the         §    RECONSIDERATION

     Social Security Administration,          §     11-cv-00402

                                                                   §

                                                                        §

                                                                     §  Honorable Royce Lamberth    

                             Respondent                            § Chief Justice presiding

Request FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE FILED IN Conjunction with AN EERGENCY MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

Plaintiff Pro Se Dr. Orly Taitz (hereinafter “Taitz”) hereby requests that the Court take judicial notice of the following document attached as Exhibit 1.   SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION 

                                           Chief FOIA Officer Report for 2011

This request is made pursuant to Rule 201 (a), (b)1, (b)2, (c)2 of the Federal Rules of Evidence.

RULE 201. JUDICIAL NOTICE OF ADJUDICATIVE FACTS

(a) Scope. This rule governs judicial notice of an adjudicative fact only, not a legislative fact.

(b) Kinds of Facts That May Be Judicially Noticed. The court may judicially notice a fact that is not subject to reasonable dispute because it:

(1) is generally known within the trial court’s territorial jurisdiction; or

(2) can be accurately and readily determined from sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned.

(c) Taking Notice. The court:

(1) may take judicial notice on its own; or

(2) must take judicial notice if a party requests it and the court is supplied with the necessary information.

(d) Timing. The court may take judicial notice at any stage of the proceeding.

(e) Opportunity to Be Heard. On timely request, a party is entitled to be heard on the propriety of taking judicial notice and the nature of the fact to be noticed. If the court takes judicial notice before notifying a party, the party, on request, is still entitled to be heard.

Social security administration Chief FOIA Officer report is

(1) is generally known within the trial court’s territorial jurisdiction; or

(2) can be accurately and readily determined from sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned.

Aforementioned report is posted on the official web site of the Social Security administration   www.ssa.gov

and under 201 C (2) must take judicial notice if a party requests it and the court is supplied with the necessary information.

the report in question is relevant to the proceeding as Petitioner Taitz is seeking  reconsideration of the decision by the SSA to deny her release of the SS-5 for the Social Security number 042-68-4425 due to privacy considerations.  In her motion for reconsideration Taitz provides newly discovered evidence showing that the Social Security number in question was assigned to Harrison J. Bounel, an immigrant from Russia, born in 1890. Fed. R. Evid. Rule 201. Under Fed. R. Evid. Rule 201(f) judicial notice may be taken at any stage of the proceeding. Government of Canal Zone v Burjan, 596 F.2d 690, 694 (5th Circ. 1979).

SSA Chief Foia Officer report in question in Section I, (1) (c) states

• We have revisited longstanding decisions regarding the withholding of certain frequently requested data, to determine if our recommended guidance is still applicable and reflects the presumption of openness.   For instance, we issued new guidance for disclosing extremely aged individuals’ original Social Security Applications (SS-5) when our records do not indicate a date of death.  We developed a new policy that establishes a “120 year rule” and assumes that an individual is alive unless their birth date exceeds 120 years or we have proof of the individual’s death.  This new policy enabled us to release more information and potentially reduced requests on appeal.
• Since Harrison J. Bounel was born in 1890, he would be 123 years old and according to aforementioned 120 year rule SSA was obligated to release his SS0-5 under FOIA 5US 552.
• CONCLUSION  
  • This court should take the Judicial notice of the SSA Chief FOIA Officer report

Respectfully submitted

/s/ Dr. Orly Taitz ESQ

President of the Defend Our Freedoms Foundation

05.18.2013

cc Inspector General of the Social Security Administration

cc senator Chuck Grassley ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee

cc Congressman Bob Goodlatte Chair of the House Judiciary Committee

cc Daryl Issa, Chair of the House Oversight Committee

cc Inspector general of IRS

1 day ago

beforeitsnews.com/obama-birthplace-controversy/2013/05/do… - Cached

“2. Zullo and Arpaio have filed no criminal charges because it is not within their jurisdiction to do so. Taitz should know this. Any first year law student or police academy attendee knows this. The citizens of Maricopa County felt they had been defrauded in an election – they asked their Sheriff to investigate. He did through the CCP.  They discovered that a document connected with the President of the United States had been forged, fabricated, and was 100% fraudulent. Arpaio has no authority to march to the White House and make arrests of the perpetrators and accomplices. However, Congress, the Federal Courts, Federal prosecutors, and Federal law enforcement do have that authority and responsibility.”

This sounds even more egregious.

a. Actually, Arpaio has jurisdiction to file a criminal complaint and I will explain further on  why. But if Arpaio and Zullo believed that they have no jurisdiction, why didn’t they state so to the donors from day one? They collected reported 7 million dollars from the public, most of the money donated to Arpaio came from outside AZ because the public believed that Arpaio will file the criminal complaint against Obama,  they made multiple radio appearances claiming that they are conducting a criminal investigation and a criminal case.

I had 4 cases, where there were actual hearings in trial courts: in GA, MS, IN, CA, where I subpoenaed them to appear. They could testify in trial courts and they refused to comply with subpoenas. Moreover, my strongest witness in GA was a retired deportation officer John Sampson. after Sampson testified in GA Arpaio, Corsi and Zullo invited him to travel to AZ to the cold case posse meeting. They paid for his airfare to AZ.  There Arpaio deputized Sampson as a member of the Cold Case posse. Later on Peter Boyles show, on the air, on the record, John Sampson stated that they asked him not to testify in my cases, as he is now a part of a criminal investigation. Sampson stated on the air that he and Arpaio and Zullo made an agreement not to comply with the subpoenas in the court case in IN because of an ongoing criminal case. It means that they actually interfered with my witness in a case, claiming that his testimony would jeopardize the criminal investigation.

So who can file  a criminal complaint, which is the result of a criminal investigation that they claim to have been conducting for nearly three years and solicited donations for nearly 3 years?

Now they are saying that it is up to the U.S. Congress, however the U.S. Congress cannot file a criminal complaint. They can impeach, but they can’t file a criminal complaint.

Next, they are saying judges: yet again, the judges can only hear the complaint that was presented to them.

Who files a complaint with the judges, with the courts?

Well, if it is a state court, then the District Attorney and Attorney General file a criminal complaint.

If it is a federal court, than the U.S. attorney, the federal prosecutor will file the complaint.

Who submits the results of his investigation and the complaint to the prosecutors? the sheriff.

So, you see even a rookie officer or a first year law student know that what Arpaio and Zullo are saying now through their de facto spokesperson and chief fundraiser Carl Gallops is simply not true. For nearly three years they have been conducting a criminal investigation. They have a duty to submit the results of their investigation to the prosecutors. As the issue involves both federal and state officials, they have a duty to submit their complaint to both state and federal prosecutors.

b. As you can see, more pressure we are applying  more truth is coming out. Now Arpaio and Zullo are admitting that they are not planning to file a criminal complaint and that they solicited donations for nearly 3 years while knowing that they will never file a criminal complaint. In my opinion this behavior is even more egregious than the behavior of corrupt judges, corrupt prosecutors and corrupt congressmen. All of them have been kicking the can, passing the buck and refusing to take any action, but Arpaio and Zullo collected donations for nearly three years, stating that they are conducting a criminal investigation and now they are saying that they believe that they never had any jurisdiction.

This would be akin to a lawyer collecting fees from a client for nearly three years only to tell the client that he will not file the case because he is not licensed in this state. If a case like this would be in front of Arpaio, he would file a criminal complaint for fraud against such lawyer, for accepting money from a client under false pretenses.

c.  Moreover, during CPAC convention I talked to Carl Gallops and I specifically asked him, why didn’t he question Zullo, as to why the criminal complaint was not filed. Gallops told me that Zullo told him that the complaint was filed.  When Zullo joined us, I questioned Zullo: isn’t it true that you and Arpaio never filed a criminal complaint. Zullo responded: Arpaio went to talk to AG, but AG was not interested in filing this case. I responded that this is not a meeting between buddies, regardless of whether AG is interested or not, Arpaio has a duty to file the complaint. Zullo responded that they are still investigating and that the complaint will be filed in 3 months or so. So, actually until now I believed that they will file the criminal complaint, Gallops believed that they will file the criminal complaint, the public believed it, as Zullo kept saying so. Only now, when Zullo said that the document is 100% forged and nearly 3 years past and hardly any evidence was actually discovered by the cold case posse on top of what was given to them to begin with, the public started demanding answers, why  are they not filing the criminal complaint. So now, after nearly 3 years of PR, interviews, and fundraising suddenly Arpaio and Zullo changed their tune and started claiming that they do not have jurisdiction.

Please, keep up the pressure. Arpaio definitely has jurisdiction to file a criminal complaint. He obtained evidence of forgery, he claims that Obama’s birth certificate is 100% forged, his selective service certificate is  100% forged. He has evidence that Obama defrauded the citizens of Maricopa county AZ in placing his name on the ballot fraudulently and establishing the eligibility and identity based on forged IDs. He  has to file a criminal complaint with the state and federal prosecutors. You, members of the public, and particularly donors have a very serious case. You have to keep up the pressure until Arpaio and Zullo file a criminal complaint with the DA, AG and U.S attorney.

I agree 100% Dr. Taitz. We need men of courage to do the right thing for our nation. Not even for us, but for the future of our children and grandchildren.
I believe Mike Zullo has done some good work and he is sincere in his desire to find justice. I believe that Carl Gallups is a man of God and believes he is doing the right thing for our nation with his associations with Mike Zullo and Sheriff Arpiao. However, having said that it is very bizarre that charges have not been filed in Maricopa County Arizona. I have not heard a valid explanation why this is the case. I concur with Dr. Taitz. Until charges are filed or a full explanation is forthcoming regarding the reason for the delay, I can’t advise any Patriot to fund the Arpaio operation. I will not buy Mike Zullo’s book and will not provide money until we have real action from this team. Not words, not hints of more incriminating evidence, not promises of future action, not radio programs allaying the concerns of folks….ACTION…Criminal Charges in Maricopa County.

I wonder if Zullo is taking advantage of the elderly Sheriff Joe.

Call Arpaio (602) 876-1801 directly. Ask to speak to “Cookie” Sifuentes — she is Sheriff Joe’s personal assistant.

When I heard Zullo and Gallups call Orly an obot, I couldn’t believe what I was hearing. What is so obot about wanting the sheriff and cold case posse to file a criminal complaint against the usurper? Orly was working on this way longer than they were and is way far from being an obot. What obot would say that bo has fake documents and stolen ID? Obots are always trying to defend the usurper and call people who know the facts wing nuts, birthers, conspiracy theorists, etc. because they cannot refute the facts and have nothing but the usurper’s lies to go by to defend him.

Arpaio and his right hand cold case  investigator Mike Zullo spent 2 years doing PR, regurgitating information provided to them by me, by Chief investigator of the U.S. Coast guard Jeffrey Stephan Coffman, by Paul Irey, by  Douglas Vogt and others, held fund raisers and never filed a criminal complaint.

Just recently they were saying: wait 3 more month, 6 more month. Now they are saying that Arpaio has no jurisdiction to file a criminal complaint at all. Are you kidding me? They did 2 years of investigation without any jurisdiction? Really? This is insane.

Let’s take recent conviction of 3 Democratic party operatives in Indiana. They forged signatures of voters, a criminal complaint was filed against them, there was a criminal trial, they were convicted and they are going to prison. That is exactly what is supposed to be happening with Obama and his accomplices, Arpaio needs to file a criminal complaint. Every sheriff around the country needs to file the criminal complaint. Fraud and tender of forged IDs happened in his jurisdiction and in every jurisdiction. People donated to Arpaio because they believed that he, as a duly elected sheriff, will file a criminal complaint. He did not do this.

There is an interesting coincidence. In August of 2012 the feds dismissed their law suit against Arpaio, where they claimed that Arpaio violated civil rights of Hispanics. At the same time Arpaio lowered his visibility and never filed a criminal complaint. Since around the same time only his right hand Zullo is doing interviews, mostly with Carl Gallops.

It is a legitimate question to ask: was there a quid pro quo, was there an understanding that Obama drops his criminal complaint against Arpaio and Arpaio never files his criminal complaint against Obama, in spite of all the evidence???

As members of the public confronted Gallops and Zullo, and demanded answers, Zullo and Gallops tried to attack me, claiming that the fact that I demand that Arpaio file a criminal complaint based on evidence gathered, means that I am somehow helping Obama. Really? Telling the Sheriff to do his job and file a criminal complaint, when he says he has all the evidence of forgery, means that I am helping Obama? How does that work?

Moreover, as Zullo tried to attack me, he admitted that Arpaio will not file a criminal complaint as people expected. He stated at the interview  held yesterday that there will not be a complaint under the color of the Sheriff of Maricopa county, but Zullo will write and will tell all because it is his work product.

You say what?

When Zullo is saying that it will not be done under the color of Sheriff of Maricopa county, it means that Joseph Arpaio, Sheriff of Maricopa county, will not do his job as a sheriff and will not file a criminal complaint. When Zullo is saying that he will tell all, it means that it will be another book, tell all book, another moneymaker.

Don’t we have a ton of books already? When people were donating to Arpaio, did they do this so Mike Zullo will write a book and make money on a book, or did they donate so that Arpaio do his investigation and file a criminal complaint? You tell me, what is the answer?

Are people convicted based on writing a book or are they convicted based on a criminal complaint? And what did Zullo mean by work product? Did I and others forward to Arpaio all the evidence, so that Zullo will write a book? People provide evidence to the police and sheriff, so that the police and sheriff file a complaint, not write some tell all story. Evidence is presented for purposes of prosecution, not for profiteering by the investigators, this is a total misuse of the witness testimony, of evidence. It means that evidence was accepted under false pretenses, it means that donations were accepted under false pretenses. If Arpaio thought that he did not have jurisdiction to file a criminal complaint against Obama,  he needed to write to the witnesses and experts right away and state that he has no jurisdiction to file a complaint and he should have advised the witnesses, who has jurisdiction.

Arpaio and Zullo had to refund all of the donations given to Arpaio  and to the cold case posse and they were supposed to state right then and there, 2 years ago, that Sheriff Arpaio believes that he has no jurisdiction to file a criminal complaint. Otherwise, they mislead the public and they collected donations under false pretenses, giving members of the public an impression that Sheriff Arpaio has jurisdiction to file a criminal complaint. Moreover, while we are on a subject of donations, I personally talked of Joseph Farah of WND, he told me that he has a deal with Gary Kreep, where 50% of donations given by the public to Kreep to file legal actions, where paid by Kreep to Joseph Farah/ WND in exchange for advertising and promotion. Farah told me this as he was hoping for the same deal with me. It is a legitimate question for the public to ask: is there a similar deal between  Carl Gallops and Mike Zullo? Is there any arrangement, where Carl Gallops is receiving a part of donations given by the public to Arpaio and Zullo and Cold Case Posse in exchange of promotion of Zullo’s books and solicitation of donations and for personal ad hominem attacks on me? Similarly, did WND, Joseph Farah and Jerome Corsi on one side and Sheriff Arpaio, Mike Zullo and attorney they are working with on the other side, make a deal similar to Kreep’s? If there was such a deal, it will explain, why affidaivt of Mike Zullo was used, even though it is a hearsay, it would explain why this affidavit contained repeated references to Jerome Corsi, but no reference to any of actual investigators who submitted evidence to Arpaio, no mention of Chief Investigator Jeffrey Stephan Coffman, no mention of Paul Irey, Linda Bentley, Douglas Vogt and many others. This would explain, why from January 2012 WND and Carl Galllops were repeatedly reporting on a couple of cases where Larry Klayman was involved as an attorney, even though both cases in FL and AL were dismissed by the presiding judges immediately, and they are not reporting on some 10 cases brought by me and particularly they are not reporting on an ongoing case in MS, where a RICO (racketeering complaint against Obama and his accomplices was filed by me) and even the case in Ca, which was not formally dismissed yet.  It is a reasonable question to ask, as it relates to credibility of reporting: every member of the public should demand answers from Carl Gallops, Joseph Farah, Jerome Corsi: was their any payment made, was there any split of danataions given by the public to Sheriff Arpaio, cold Case Posse, Investigator Zullo, attorney Klayman to WND, Carl Gallops, Joseph Farah, Jerome Corsi, PPsimmons and other members of the media? If any split of donations was made, if any money changed hands, this is traceable. Since there is a history of such split between Kreep and WND, it is a reasonable question to ask and the public needs an answer. If payments were made, the public will make its own conclusions to the credibility of statements and reason for lopsided reporting.

Carl Gallops attacked me because I was sanctioned by a corrupt judge, who tried to intimidate and stop me from proceeding with actual legal actions, when a corrupt judge Clay D. Land claimed that it is frivolous to bring a legal action in regards to forged IDs of a Commander in Chief on behalf of the members of the military who are told to risk their lives and take lives based on orders of the criminal who is sitting in the position of the Commander in Chief with all forged IDs.

Yes, Carl Gallops, Mike Zullo and Sheriff Joe Arpaio were never sanctioned, abused, attacked and persecuted  by corrupt judges because they never filed a complaint. Where is the complaint from the former police officer Carl Gallops? Where is the complaint from Sheriff Arpaio? Where is the complaint from a former police officer and chief investigator of Maricopa County Cold Case Posse Mike Zullo? They do not exist.  When you do nothing, you risk nothing, you surely will not be attacked and persecuted. This is the difference between people who are on the front line, like myself,  and people who are just doing press conferences and fund raisers and announcing their upcoming books for early publicity.

Gallops and Zullo attacked me for not winning a case against Obama. Well there were 45 licensed attorneys and hundreds of pro se plaintiffs, who filed cases and did not win, none of the cases were heard on the merits, because as we see it vividly now, we live in a corrupt regime, similar to the Soviet Union. Not one single judge ever ruled against Stalin or Mao or Hitler. This happened not because of civil rights attorneys like myself who actually filed complaints, this happened because of corrupt and spineless sheriffs, governmental officials  and sheriffs who had all the evidence against Stalin and Mao and Hitler and never did their job and never filed their complaints.

It is interesting that Carl Gallops is a former police officer in FL and Mike Zullo is a former police officer in NJ. They actually know what to do. If Arpaio is refusing to do his job, they themselves can file a complaint and actually present all the evidence to the District Attorneys. I submitted all the evidence to the District Attorney of Orange County, CA, Tony Rackaucas and I actually posted a certified mail receipt. I, also, submitted a criminal complaint to the District Attorney of Los Angeles County , CA, providing evidence that CA Attorney Scott J. Tepper, personal attorney for Barack Obama and Dem party and a part time investigator with CA Bar, submitted to court in MSin my case  a forged birth certificate for Obama and sought to obtain a judicial notice that this birth certificate is authentic, when he had evidence that it is a forgery. I filed a similar complaint with the District Attorney  in Jackson, MS. Actually I ask all of my supporters to call the District Attorneys in Jackson MS, Los Angeles CA, Orange County CA and demand that those District Attorneys respond to the public, why didn’t they file a criminal case yet, what are they waiting for, how much damage should be done to the country by usurper Obama until they do their job and file a criminal complaint with the criminal court.

I did my job. Why aren’t Arpaio, Zullo and Gallops  submitting a criminal complaint to their DAs?  why aren’t they doing their job?  Additionally, District Attorney will not accept 56 pages of hearsay. A district Attorney will tell Mike Zullo and Carl Gallops: are you kidding me? You are submitting 56 pages of hearsay which is not admissible in court. You can’t say: our investigators found this.  I need the actual written sworn affidavits of those investigators and  experts.

District Attorney will demand from Zullo, Arpaio and Gallops something specific, something that I’ve already submitted time and again to court. For example: in his 56 page affidaivit Zullo is stating: our investigators found that Obama’s selective service certificate is a forgery. District Attorney or judge will state: where is the specifics, who is the investigator, I need his name, I need to know how did he reach this conclusion. That is exactly what I provided time and again:  I submitted to court an affidavit of a retired Chef Investigator Jeffrey Stephan Coffman, who stated:  I am a retired Chef Investigator of the Special Investigations unit of the U.S. Coast guard, I personally examined Obama’s Selective Service certificate, I found this evidence of forgery, I provided this information to the sheriff of Maricopa County Arizona, so that he will file a criminal complaint. Next, Paul Irey provided testimony for me in Indiana: it stated, I am Paul Irey, I have 60 year of experience in typesetting, I found this specific evidence of forgery in Obama’s birth certificate. His testimony was admitted by the judge in Indiana, Judge Reid in Indiana already qualified him as an expert.  That what was supposed to be done.

Next, Zullo’s claims that he will testify in the Supreme Court of Alabama. Zullo and Arpaio  and Gallops know full well that in 99% of the cases in the Supreme Court of any state there is no oral argument at all. If there is an oral argument, it is only about 15 minutes per side and only on the points of law by attorneys, not witnesses. They know that no witness testimony is allowed. So, when Zullo was confronted with this point, when he was questioned, why is he claiming that he will provide testimony in AL, when no testimony is allowed in higher courts, he responded: an attorney in the case in Alabama wants me in court in case there will be an oral argument, but I do not know for what purpose. Really? Zullo is a former police office. He might be a volunteer with this cold case posse, but he used to be a police officer, he knows that the Supreme Court does not allow witness testimony, particularly not a new witness, who did not testify in the lower court, so Zullo is really misleading the public by saying that he will present testimony, when he knows that no witness testimony is allowed in the Supreme Court.

Please, keep up the pressure. Tell Mike Zullo: we did not donate so that you will write a book, we donated so that justice is done. Arpaio has to file a criminal complaint. If Arpaio is not doing his job, you Mike Zullo, as the Chief Investigator of the Cold Case Posse need to file a criminal complaint with the District Attorney and Attorney General, and please, do not file 56 pages of hearsay, which is not an admissible evidence by any judge, please, provide the District Attorney with the actual sworn affidavits of officers and experts who personally examined the evidence. After the criminal complaint against Obama and accomplices is filed with the DA and AG by Arpaio or if he is not doing the job, by Zullo, we the  public, will follow up with the District Attorney and we will demand that the District Attorney  do his job and  file the criminal complaint with the Criminal Court.

Keep up the pressure, we do not need books and publicity, we need to see filed, signed, stamped criminal complaints!!! Don’t attack me, attack Obama and his accomplices with a properly filed criminal complaint!!!

I hope that ORYR (Obama release your records ) web site and PPSuimmons (aka Carl Gallops) and all the other web sites which published a vicious attack on me, show  honesty and integrity and  publish this rebuttal.