If Paul Zoss ever said insufficient fact and no arguable basis in the law to my face I’d beat the living daylights out of him. He did not mean that; he meant money. So, pay you to then murder us? Without any criminal trial? Ladies, big bad Paul Zoss says we are not being harmed and it’s not an emergency. Let’s ask Terry Schiavo’s mother and the Pope as Terry was Catholic and the Vatican might have to move on this:

 

1^st degree murderer, a man Versus Terry Schiavo, a woman: In the US medical doctors, those god-like paragons of mercy and compassion, said that it was morally reprehensible – it was not ethical - to push the plunger of a needle thus execute a 1st degree murderer, a man, but then that it was ethical to let an innocent person, a woman, starve to death. The male able-bodied murderer then lived if even for a day longer to cause who knows how much more harm while the innocent woman who was not going to be able to lift a finger against anyone so couldn’t cause harm was murdered. What’s wrong with that picture? I’ll tell you what: not only is it proof men are playing a game with our very lives but if those jailhouse doctors meant it then they would have run to Terry’s side to help her. A woman was forced agasint her will and when she could not defend herself to lay her life down for my own as I knew the federal court had zero power and authority to do this and that it is legal insanity to claim you can know when death is but not know when life is. You can and may kill anyone you please then. You could convince the public I have no soul so then it's okay to kill red heads by order of the court. If I sat back and let her or the fed, the people, do that? I'd deserve to be shot. Is America aware of what they did and are still doing? Not one person has lifted a finger to stop NY and nobody is willing to act. They say they are; when I say let's go? I hear excuses. "Next year" "it's too soon" "We do need to be violent" "I'm scared". What don't you get: The fed shot. They killed a person. The lawyers and others backed the fed agianst women and children. VIOLENCE IS ALREADY ONLY YOU'RE LETTING THEM KILL US. How many kids are dying in Iraq? How many of us have to die before a grown man with a weapon decides enough is enough? You tell us how many of us have to die and we'll force it to happen so then big, strong, grown men with guns won't be afraid. We'll shame you into acting. I can even ask a Holocaust survivor what it took to really get things rolling as why wait around when you know people aren't going to act until it's too late?  If that's it, it'll be too late once again, why be here for thre worst of it when you can provoke a federal agent now? At least my kids might get justice - if anybody ever bothers to find out why their mother was murdered. How many people read about my case with exacting details and then thought, "Gee, that's too bad. I feel sorry for her" and then did...nothing. Where are the protests for me? For saving my life? If what I have to do is be shot or what I have to do is shoot first, what difference does it make as I am dead already. If not one single person is ever going to act for me at all in any way but ot say it's too bad? I might have to ask myself if ther's any point in defdning people who will not, they refuse, to defend me or my children. So we have guns: Why, if you won't use them? So you can talk: Why if you won't act?

 

The courts, lawyers and politicans? They know. What more do you need than Woo memos, foreigners as president and Healthcare Bills:

 

 

1. I was born on December 30^th,1967.

 

2. Every single solitary right was violated until I was murdered.

 

3. I survived my death.

 

4. The crimes committed against my person and my children’s persons include attempted rape, robbery, assault, battery, child abuse, emotional abuse, starvation and the criminal denial of my right to vote. A VOTE, the founding cause.

 

5.      Every officer of this nation participated as did every citizen with the most heinous acts of all committed by the Judiciary of this nation. Do the fact checking yourself as my name is all over the record of this nation state and federal. Judges knew exact dates, names, times and places and then chose to participate or to aid and abet the perpetrators in order to protect personal, disgusting, selfish interests. I do not care what their reason is as nobody can ever claim they had any legal reason so anything that comes out of their mouth or their pen except exact truth is a federal crime that now escalates to treason as I am the one and only citizen to outwit the federal vampires by:

 

6. Authoring a Supreme Court petition, a case of constitutional authority and original jurisdiction that overturns another such case, Bush V Gore, as it is bad case and was entered and decided wrongly. MY petition is pro se unlike any other authority case thus it meets the strictest standard of all: HISTORY. No opinion, no suggestion, no doubt whatsoever. Police reports, hospital reports, court reports, Navy records, school records  - you name it  - with first person eyewitness testimony of the events. A living witness to back every report up, as that is then indisputable, incontrovertible, absolute proof. HISTORY. You know what else it contained? The Declaration and Constitution.

 

7. Susan Herbert then became the one and only American with the power and authority to kill a federal judge and then never spend a single day in jail as no criminal prosecution is possible as Susan had an idea: If I need to kill a federal judge in order to then secure justice, how do I do it in such a way that it constitutes self-defense and national defense thus a Revolution? I knew: Author a petition to SCOTUS as natural birth is our means to then wage war as we were born in war so that when SCOTUS directly acts upon it then is exactly what the Declaration is: It constitutes service; it dissolves the bonds thus I may now shoot and kill a federal judge.

 

8. Bad news Sioux City: not one judge objected. Not one. You had three chances and not one of you did anything. A Justice can’t lift a finger to help you. You know what a Justice has to do? Sit back and wait for me to shoot. You act upon the document thus making it real. All I had to was engage SCOTUS until SCOTUS acted w/o the US ever responding as that then is my permission to fire, as once SCOTUS does that? It has acknowledged the contract is breached and the federal judiciary did it when they had zero reason other than profit, whether it was money, comfort or flattery.
9. Here’s a fact to consider: You’re a Founder only it’s 2007 not 1776. There is utter lawlessness as a president committed perjury but was not convicted, a president was installed in violation of the law and a foreign man was installed to make the injury to women permanent, women have a right to die only and forever, but not to life as our vote has never had any legal power and will never as we were kept out of the offices of Chief Justice and Executive. We have a right to war against the institutions to abolish them, so how do I dissolve the bonds to then take out that first constitution as my judgment is it is dead, as dead as the institution?

 

10. Go ahead, try me, as you know as fact that The People have a right to war against the government if it is unjust. John Marshall said that day was here when redress for the violation of a fully vested right was made impossible. Maybe you’re not smart enough to do it and maybe you’re not courageous enough to do it and maybe you’re not wiling even if you could but I am. I actually wrote: ‘I want and need justice so I will kill a federal judge.’ I wrote a lot of things. I made certain SCOTUS knew this is it. If federal judges are the reason, the single reason that justice is no more? You restore justice by going to a Justice, telling him or her you’re taking out a judge and then when you do? Justice is again. Get it? You enter SCOTUS directly, direct action is taken, you leave w/o remedy and relief so then you claim it your self by acting upon your declaration: You act to kill a federal judge. Your action then is proof. Revolution as when they try to haul you into court? The justices had to read what I wrote as only a Justice can address an emergency application and as mine was acted upon by John Roberts? John Roberts said, “Susan is correct.” He’s got to deny it as I have to do it not him. He can’t grant or award me your death; to be a legal act of war upon the government, abolishment and dissolution, I write the petition up and I act upon it once Roberts signs it as we will hang separately or together. His action is his signature. Petition 08-6622, 11/20/08, the day the death warrant was signed. All that matters is it is directly entered and acted upon and then I’m liberated to do it.

 

11. If he granted anything it then is paper and that’s no good. The Founders served Britain. Then what? The King did not accord them any paper. The Declaration was it. It’s signed; it’s delivered; now they act upon it. As I do not have any king then WHO do I serve? John Roberts. Roberts says: The die is cast; Susan must submit or triumph. No matter how it came to be all I had to do was prove the Republic fell and then force SCOTUS via emergency application to address the breach of contract.

 

12. When SCOTUS denied 07-9804 I had them: “You violated Marbury thus I have you as you just reasoned yourself out of existence.” Those clerks promised to “sink” the case thus suppressing the fact of what they did to me and my kids. They told me my life was worth nothing. Now I had them. I then entered 08-6622 directly as you can’t and may not violate Marbury; it’s claiming no woman can ever, ever secure redress and/or actual justice and then claiming no person can ever act pro se w/o a law license thus it violates several dozen prior SCOTUS rulings. Proof: Carhart, Castlerock and Schiavo: No justice and Carhart and Schiavo ruled wrongly not in error.  No justice for women even if you do secure redress as they NEED to hear me in person as only I can do that. I’m the case. no other person ever will have the case for women no matter how hard you look. You’ll get ruling after ruling and never secure justice as you’ll never have the correct application for every point at once. You have to cover at least 25 applications, all equal protection and due process.

 

13. 08-6622 enters directly with zero lower court activity. Upon denial? I inform the clerks: “If you did this you might fry as you just signed your own death warrant. Violate Marbury and still offer no relief? You plead guilty once you placed it on the cae conference list as you MUST have merit to get there and so one Justice was supposed to read it. Did they? It matters not. The Justices at fault if the clerks are wrecking people’s lives and even killing them. If you’re summarizing these cases and so bad cases and even noncases are entering? Where the hell are the Justices and why do they not know this? I know why: I happen to be the smartest person on the planet right now. Go ahead: Give me anything you got and you still won’t beat me.”

 

14. NY State interfered – they illegally heard a family court action filed while 08-6622 was being heard – in order to hide what the county and appellate court did. Those involved thought they could injure me in such a way they’d incapacitate me. I used NY instead. I managed to get Linda Griffin to certify me “forever pro se” after NY couldn’t find a lawyer as every lawyer that touched it knew something criminal and sinister went on in my case. Griffin went so far as to phone a lawyer and convince her I was GUILTY – there’s no such thing in family court  - and then try to assign her to me. The lawyer ‘fessed up when I pointed something out to her: “Someone convinced you that I’m guilty as what you are saying never happened. If I did what you keep claiming why wasn’t I arrested? You keep saying I did it. Yes, I did, but if the REASON is that reason why wasn’t I arrested? My REASON was not that reason. Now, can you defend a person whom you truly believe is guilty and when guilt is not an issue in family court?” She fell out. You can and may do something that MIGHT be illegal depending upon your reason. So her told her that reason, which is not written down anywhere? The judge phoned her. Gotcha!

 

15. So in 08-6622’s ‘rehearing’  I informed SCOTUS: I am now “forever pro se”, a first ever legal designation. That means NY decided that for all eternity I will be my own lawyer as not one person ever will be able to represent me. Correct, as only I was there for all events being discussed in court filings. No other person, as they are third parties, was there for it all and no attorney was. That solves a problem. Every state would ignore or deny all fact and then even all law as MY ATTORNEY entered it not me. The third parties entered zero evidence, zero proof and no case law and won over my airtight, rock solid case, as judges played games and took money. Now it’s all history, first person eyewitness testimony. You deny anything happened? You ignore any fact? You the clerks and judges are now guilty. Go and do it: Deny my kds are not with me; deny the Revolution happened; deny that Obama was elected or that he’s a lawyer, he signed 511 or he’s a foreigner. As you refuse to believe I am smarter than you are then you will get a rude awakening. .” And they did! The clerks tok up and Article 3 argument to avoid having to do what they must, they ar compelled under our law.

 

16. “Booyah! You just cited Article 3. Okay: The legal conundrum no person could ever get around to address the Judiciary is Article 3. You had to be able to equal yourself to the Chief Justice and President with one vote i.e. Executive order. You obeyed my Executive Order thus acknowledged it as legal and binding in both 07-9804 & 08-6622. Now you said that you CAN’T act due to Article 3. You found me in violation of article 3. Nope. You can and may act; you’re not going to as you have always used this excuse and it always worked as no pother person could ever overturn a case of o.j. As you know the one and only thing you may not do is fail to act? You’re guilty not me. What I did to you was level the filed by equating you to me as a VOTER a lone citizen. You keep saying, “I’m a clerk not a voter.” And that my friend is a violation of EP&DP. We’re both voters; we both have one vote. You keep saying, “No I’m a clerk. I have more than one vote thus do not have to do this only as I’m a clerk.” Why and how are you different than me? As you’re a man? A clerk? The law is zero favor and zero special privileges. The minute those clerks or the Justices denied me they then came tumbling down. They became citizens only as I came to be around or outside of Article 3. If I have to do it, it’s an absolute duty,  then you have to do it. As they actually sent me a letter citing Article 3 to then avoid it as they knew it was as fact w/o question criminal? I am golden.

 

17. IF THE CONSTITUTION DOES NOT PROTECT ME THEN IT DOES NOT FIND ME.  You CAN’T cite Article 3. You CAN’T deny any motions. Oh, you can try. You can write it down. But then I’ll keep a list and when the commission is finally adjudicated? You’ll fry for treason. I’ll act to make the commission real - I’ll shoot -  and so you’ll try to criminally charge me. You won’t be able to; it’ll go all the way back to SCOTUS. You will have to admit “she told us all of this and we did this” or “We refused to believe that she could outsmart us”. You decided to deny me and my kids any and all protection of the law. You then colluded and conspired to harm us, and then all women and children, together or alone.

 

18.  A copy of an actual letter I sent to SCOTUS, to the clerks and Roberts: “The Justices and clerks of the Supreme Court may not cite Article 3 of the Constitution as a reason to commit what is a crime. No law, US case law, precedent, code, rule, or legal policy exists to protect the employees of the Supreme Court and/or grant them blanket immunity nor does the Supreme Court have a fully vested interest or right to invoke the law as weapon in its defense. By its very nature if the Supreme Court of the United States is now in a position whereby it must use the Constitution to defend itself it is admitting it has committed criminal acts as there is no other reason this Court would ever need to invoke Article 3. It is being invoked to avoid what is a duty and to avoid accepting responsibility for past actions; it is being invoked against me and so against the law and not in support of the law or it’s spirit. Three times the Supreme Court had an opportunity to obey the law and to preserve it; all three times the Supreme Court instead chose to do the one thing John Marshall said the Supreme Court could never, ever do or else this nation would then be an unjust, lawless and dead nation: Deny a living person redress.

 

SCOTUS may cite Article 3 in any other case save my own as I am unique and have received unique treatment not in accordance with any legal action undertaken in the US since our founding. SCOTUS treated me uniquely and there is zero reason for it other than what is false, manufactured, discriminatory, sexist, prejudiced and meant to protect employees of SCOTUS at the expense of this nation. It is now creating a brand new impossible standard: In order for a person who is not qualified to hold the office of Executive to be of the ability to then purchase the office of the Executive money and favor had to trade hands over and over from the lone citizens up to the Executive thus all offices under it are already sold. If a lower court existed in accordance with federal law the breach would not have occurred, as it would not be possible. I cannot go to a court that does not exist. You do recall SCOTUS did not exist for any woman arguing her own case or injury, nonlawyer, ethical citizen or my one person until I my own self created it by suing for breach?

This Court may be of the mistaken belief that John Marshall’s application of US law is that it may act upon the knowledge contained in an emergency application that is a breach of contract suit for liability but then not file the suit itself. This Court, by acting on 11/20/08 to circumvent the Solicitor General aka the people and so enter the suit directly but never file it then: 1, Admitted the emergency exists; 2, Acknowledged the litigant made her case; 3; Committed what is coup; 4, Acted against the person who is the legal authority while protecting those in violation of the law, or, chose personal interest that our not our law; 5, Did nothing to stop crimes already in progress. The Supreme Court acted as if the law did not apply to its own persons nor did Marbury V Madison, that is, it acted as if in the case of Susan Herbert alone, it could ignore the Declaration, Constitution, Marbury and the rules. If it does apply to Susan than it does apply to SCOTUS; if it does not apply to Susan it does not apply to SCOTUS. It’s RECIPROCAL not arbitrary. If you want to be able to cite the Constitution you cannot violate it.

John Marshall clearly said: If the day ever dawns whereby a litigant who is a voter or natural born citizen makes it to the office of Chief Justice seeking redress for the violation of fully vested protected rights but is denied entry in person the US has become a nation of unjust men and not a nation of law.

Unless treason and overthrow has already occurred under no other conditions would the Supreme Court be invoking Article 3 against any citizen who has a pro se case of constitutional authority in which the sitting but not legal President and Chief Justice is named so then the Supreme Court is acting to stand down this authority and strip all legal power and moral authority from this person in a treasonous manner. TREASONOUS as: all clerks owned the knowledge since early 2007 .

Nothing grants the Supreme Court legal power other than their one vote, a vote the employees of this court willingly, knowingly and deliberately gave away as we know they all voted in this last election when it was being held against the law, when it constituted treason and after this Court refused to obey, uphold and enforce the law of the US and further not only violated Marbury but breached both governing contracts in order to deny a living person, me, redress of rights that had fully vested and are constitutionally protected. At the time I first pressed suit treason had not occurred. This court cannot now claim it did not know as I am pro se. My petitions or first person testimony is fact not allegation and not hearsay. I informed this court that a coup is papery or bloody and that it was acting to support this coup that was then underway. I informed this court if it allowed my unique and not legal treatment to continue w/o redress in person and then the 08 election to go forward then a situation would, as fact, develop that might become one that was beyond the control of myself or this Court; that is if what I knew to be happening was not checked the Supreme Court might find itself in a situation whereby it could do nothing other than to witness this nation implode.

Unfortunately for myself and for the citizens who did not participate in this atrocious, outrageous and unconscionable behavior the worst case scenario has arrived. I, at one time, told this Court that it may no longer cite any lesser authority than Marbury; I was being generous by allowing it to cite Marbury as I truly believed this court could not know something. My belief has changed as conditions have changed. I will make an attempt to reason with you but apparently SCOTUS is not willing as David Souter proves so that I now believe the court has no intention of ever obeying the law or Marbury in my case and that is a problem as my case is the Declaration and Constitution:

SCOTUS threw its own rules out in my case as I made my legal argument. They did exactly what I said they had to do: Start rejecting me or returning documents or injuring me based upon the Constitution as this a constitutional authority case. I’m the authority not you as all you cite is code, rule or policy that does not apply and never did in my case. This letter is SCOTUS saying: Argue this – Art. 3 – against Congress when you come back. I argue it and Congress will win. The Supreme Court MAY NOT COMPLAIN ABOUT OR ARGUE AGAINST ME FOR WHAT IT CAUSED: LAWLESSNESS.

Congress cited Resolution 511 as law by turning rule into law w/o anybody knowing. HOW? It sent 511 to the House Judiciary Committee who UPHELD IT AS LAW, AS LEGAL, MAKING OBAMA  PRESIDENT VIA A DIRECT ACT OF CONGRESS IN VIOLATION OF THE RIGHTS OF EVERY SINGLE ETHICAL CITIZEN ALIVE! It especially harms women and exactly me.  IT MADE A LAW THAT APPLIES TO MEMBERS OF CONGRESS ONLY AS IN ONLY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS MAY BREAK THE LAW AND ONLY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS MAY BECOME PRESIDENT. BUT IT MADE IT A LAW BY NOT TAKING A VOTE BUT INSTEAD SENDING IT TO THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE WHO MADE NO OBJECTION!!!! THUS IT NOW IS LAW VIA A DIRECT VOTE OF THE PEOPLE NOT A 3/4 VOTE OF CONGRESS. Now –

If Congress took that ¾ vote would any sane American give ALL POWER to CONGRESS and ZERO POWER TO THE PEOPLE, TO THE EXECUTIVE OR TO THE JUDICIARY??? Would women or any citizen vote for a law that effectively makes it IMPOSSIBLE for any person to become the President ever unless she is a member of Congress, a Democrat or a Republican, a crook and unless she waits for him to drop dead as she can only get to VP and no higher as CONGRESS is a male majority??? And now always will be??? Just as SCOTUS will be? SCOTUS has been effectively killed; it is now dead in the water. CONGRESS controls it. Nothing it now decides is actually SCOTUS acting independently but CONGRESS acting though SCOTUS. Obama’s first appointment is the stake in SCOTUS’ heart. Rulings out of SCOTUS are arbitrarily obeyed or ignored. Now? As Souter has perfect timing? Too perfect? Anytime Congress or any private interest wants to act it merely uses the House Judiciary Committee instead of the actual, legal process.

Congress glass ceiling’ed all of us even John Roberts with nasty lawyer tricks and I’m the only one who did not buy it. House committees have RULE not law. This effectively made a House Ruling a LAW.

This letter proves my claim: The law has been over thrown as it no longer exists as it no longer applies to MEN who are not members of Congress. MOB RULE IS NOW THE ‘LAW’ WITH THE MOB BEING CONGRESS.

SCOTUS could not adequately defend itself against Congress as the law no longer exists for them as men who are ethical as when the Solicitor General of the US waived the right of all citizens even the clerks and Justices of this court as no objection was made as that objection takes the form of setting that woman or possible

recipient’s case for oral argument.  I never asked for a purple heart but I got one, didn’t I? I sacrificed myself on the altar known as SCOTUS as you were supposed to get a clue: In the bible? The man never kills the woman or the baby; he stops at the last second as God is trying to get him over an emotional hurdle: to do God’s will not his own.  You kept on slaughtering us. Seriously, it is like being at Tenochtitlan in 1500. I’m waiting for the SCOTUS steps to turn red. I told you: Only God can kill the innocent as an act of God is just that and not an act of SCOTUS. Why am I being asked to repeat it? To die, survive, die and survive again? BECAUSE YOU MISTAKENLY BELIEVE I CANNOT. And now that I have? Another woman can steal my argument.

If there’s no process and no protection Marshall said: Come to SCOTUS directly. I believe you do not personally like it that a girl made it here first. ONLY A GIRL CAN MAKE THIS CASE! Not may but can. Did a single citizen ever tell a soldier: You are frivolous and delusional as we are not at war and never were here or abroad? Pay an unjust tax and/or tribute and violate the honor bond or else DENIED AND DISMISSED! No soldier and no Commander ever suffered that as that is insanity.

I’m not insane.

I can argue Article 3 but if I do? Congress wins and is rewarded for its unconscionable actions as Congress finally found a way around SCOTUS and it seems as if it is permanent. As SCOTUS is now aiding and abetting them, against its own self. Didn’t I ask you WHO harms his own self?

WHO does a clerk or Justice complain to if their rights are violated, a criminal act is committed against them or if it is made impossible for them to secure justice for their own person or a family member? There is only one person: The sitting President or the people. Congress eliminated those two options. The Justice Department can do nothing. The AG can do nothing. A US attorney can do nothing. The law or the US case law i.e. precedent would have to exist and it does not as of 11/20/08 nor does the vested interest or right as of April 2008. You refused to hear the case, remember? RECIPROCAL MEANS YOU PROTECT ME & I PROTECT YOU; YOU HARM ME & I’LL GET A PACK OF CITIZENS TO HARM YOU. They’ll volunteer as always to march on DC. People charged with the duty to uphold the law cannot by its very nature be in violation of it on their way into office. It causes actual mobs to form. I predict pitchforks, torches ’n all.

This would be WHY mob rule is bad and not good. A mob is a mob is a mob. You can call it Congress; i know a mob when I see, hear and feel one.

I have changed my mind: A Chief Justice may not act but refuse to file the paper and fail to hear the case orally or in person only as it contains details about him and other criminal activity afoot in the federal government. Why, that would make our chief a crook! John Marshall said if we ever got to the point where even one American citizen, a voter, was denied their right of redress at this level, Chief Justice, then we were a nation of unjust men and not of law. We now know the nation is run by unjust men. The only reason not to file that case? So that people would never know I went up against John Roberts and won. If you best the Chief Justice that makes you President. All that matters is me owning the knowledge and acting upon it. Other people will soon own it too. Or so I told NY.

I leveraged NY against PA as NY cannot enter a contract with PA unless PA informs it and gets consent. The judge refused to call NY. How can PA then make NY a party? I told NY: “To prove whom actually unselfishly loved these kids? And that the states are guilty as well as the individuals? When these third parties threatened to murder me and my children and told me that they would hound me until I dropped dead of old age if nothing else I invoked the wisdom of Solomon. I let them go. I told my PA attorney to tell their attorney that I wanted to cut my children in half. I said, “Ask them to keep legal action in PA but the kids in NY as we all know they never lived a day in PA after November of 1998. They left PA and went into NY; Cate Austin’s own father even said visits began around

December of 1998 and that’s in the court record so they lied to the NY state police and Albany County Court in MAY JUNE and JULY of 1999, a full five moths later. Ask to divide custody as in one state has legal custody but another has physical custody as that then is a federal case. What kind of judge pretends he can’t count to 12 and agrees to cut a living child in half and what mother goes along with it?” The Austins, PA & NY, that’s who. And they made it a contract that became an order of the PA court. Did NY agree or did PA order this without NY’s permission and w/o NY knowing? Did PA call NY and ask NY “Can we, PA, split custody two ways so you get the kids physically but we get them legally?” ? Can NY be made to enter a contract against its will and w/o knowing if CATE AND DAVID AUSTIN, CHARLES & DAPHNE HERBERT & A LAWYER NAMED ARNOLD WEINSTEIN WHO HOLDS A PA LICENSE DO THE NEGOTIATING ON NY’S BEHALF AND THEY DO NOT HAVE THAT POWER AS NOBODY ELECTED THEM, THREE OF THEM ARE NOT RESIDENTS OR NY VOTERS, NOBODY INVOLVED AT THAT TIME HOLDS A NY LICENSE AS CATE FAILED HER TEST TWICE AND IT IS NAMED NOWHERE IN NY’S CONSTITUTION OR IN THE US CONSTITUTION? Nope. Seems to me NY may have an ax to grind against PA and Linda Griffin as my attorney argued this contract as invalid, on the Austin’s part as it never occurred to her PA cannot make NY a party w/o informing NY and getting NY’s consent as in calling Albany County and asking Albany County for consent on NY’s behalf because Albany already said NY DOES NOT CONSENT. I asked the judge to call NY. He said No, he could read but FIVE judges then came and went in only a few months as Susan was on to them in PA. BTW: In Griffin’s own court they said that my kids moved to NY in MAY so in JULY of 1999 they lied under oath to the Albany Court and lied to state police who I sent to their home to prove my kids were living in NY not in PA. CAN THE THIRD DISTRICT APPELLATE COUNT TO 12? AS MAY ALWAYS COMES BEFORE JULY. HOW THEN IS IT TRUTH AND FACT TO TELL NY IN JULY THAT MY KIDS DO NOT LIVE IN NY BUT THEN TELL LINDA GRIFFIN THEY DID LIVE IN NY THEN, AS THEY CAME IN MAY? IF THEY DID NOT TELL THIS LIE WHY THEN DID THE STATE POLICE NOT REMOVE THEM? THEY TOLD THE STATE POLICE MY KIDS WERE VISITING NY BUT DID LIVE IN PA THUS JURISDICTION WAS PA NOT NY, THE SAME LIE THEY TOLD ALBANY COUNTY. So how then did NY come to be involved? PA made or forced NY to be a party; the third parties then committed crimes to enforce it. Hell, I would have told NY in October of 2005: NY, PA violated the Constitution, both yours and the US’ if somebody did not find Greg Rinckey and ask him or otherwise assign him to my case…Now, Is agreeing to cut a child in half no matter how you do it enough proof of injury, proof of harm and proof of death for the third district???”

It is a matter of time before this directly harms you, as I do not control that. THE GOD controls physics. I only define it for you. God or this universe is always on the side of truth and righteousness. A Court and its Chief not filing the case only as a girl beat them is not what God wants as an all male universe cannot exist at some future point. See what happened to an all male government? It imploded. I know you feel as if, you believe you control the universe, but you do not. The decsions you make each day? God is not suprised by any of them and can counter them. I told you: A sort of homeostasis goes on. The universe respires exactly like a person; it thinks. An intelligent designer can plan for you. These days I know when SCOTUS is up to no good in my case: Actual chains start rattling.

Then the mailman knocks.

Susan.

 

19. I pitted myself against the ENTIRE federal government, every citizen and officer. I won. I essentially then came to rest “outside” the law so it is myself against all of you but in a court? You within the law. You have all the protection you want and need; you have all of it and I have none. You have violated every separation of power, every clause, every word. You are not a Republic. You’re all criminals and I’m the only honest, ethical person left. So now anybody who sides with me IS Constitutional and can and may shoot but you? You’ll try to convict us but it will not work. The whole world will find out. See why John Woo and Cheney were cooking up “camps” to put citizens in? Upon invoking military action against them? When any just government falls then the officers refuse to apply the law until finally the citizens act and so then the government must begin locking them up w/o trial, locking them up w/o any charge and even killing them al a Germany. The US did it by refusing to accord women justice and then granting all of their rights to foreign born men like Kissenger, Delay, Swarzeneggar and Obama. I have zero rights and they have any right they make up? They can manufacture things like 511 to even say as I’m a woman I’m not natural born as a foreign born man is??? Even McCain did it – a veteran so now I have he most moral authority.

 

20. WE won the Revolution. The Declaration, Revolution and Constitution is all the jurisdiction and cause you need. It’s the arguable basis as women w/o any title or paper did not have legal power then and do not now. The Constitution trumps US code every time. That’s the authority; the paper authority is the law and the living authority is me not YOU. Paul Zoss has no clue so how can I reason with a person who has no idea what he is doing as he’s not smart enough to do it? He lacks the human ability? I took on SCOTUS alone and defeated it as all of them together aren’t smarter than me.  It’s not a choice to believe this or not as it is a fact of history:

 

21. I, Susan, am the smartest person alive on Earth now. That person lives somewhere. It could be a person in the rain forest. It could be a person in the Artic. What in the world makes you truly believe it is some egg headed man in a suit? What makes you think it is some rich, famous person? No, all they have is advantage and privilege I do not. Pretend the smartest person alive is in the Artic. What would they be doing? Whatever that society values or needs. They might never even set foot in any organized school. What if that person was black and living in Detroit? They might become a neurosurgeon or they might become a crackhead. A crackhead could be the smartest living person but we lost him as we couldn’t overcome racism, sexism and political corruption. What if the smartest living person is a woman who was subjected to horrific abuse and battery, incessant and unending? What if the Judiciary began participating, first as they had unjust policy, then as they took bribes and then as they REFUSED to accord her justice – no redress in person – as they would have to admit fault and even guilt?  She’d end up dead, end up on drugs, go insane (end stage torture or addiction) or fight back. I found out that there’s one other choice: She’d secure everlasting life for making the case thus be rewarded by the exactly named Creator. It never occurred to me that to make the case you’d have to prove God – prove death as that became the standard for women and enlisted service members  -  thus have to meet the Creator.

 

22.  The smartest person on the planet, if she is a woman and lives in the US, would do what that society values. Porn, prostitution and stripping. She’s smart not stupid. She’d be arguing government, science and theology, all male dominated and even all male fields as to secure justice she’d have to slaughter patriarchy now realized as criminally activity in the highest federal offices. She’d have to be the victim as she’d have to be the most victimized or she couldn’t know some answers; the correct application wouldn’t be hers. Then she’d have to take on SCOTUS all alone – as both victim and counsel – as that’s the only way to end the corruption and crime. A second Revolution.

 

23. She’d be smart enough to know that as physics, government and theology all came to a dead end that she needed to focus on the one thing they all missed. If law is law and so all three match then there’d be a law they must not know, maybe more than one, and then she could unite all three. Sounds like the missing or undefined law is within US law and that all three are then united in US law – if it’s elegant (all aw came into existence with the universe; US law came into existence with the universe; we had to turn it into written form so law is but we then have to define it and write it down).

 

24. And every man and title would fight her as it then meant no more unjust privilege or overly broad power for anyone. People do not want equality; they only say they do. No federal judge wants to be equal to a litigant. You all like the unjust power and control you abuse. You like the feeling it gives you and the money and material goods it accords you. Let me tell you something: In a courtroom? ANY courtroom? The judge and the lawyers all know more than the litigants. You all have different knowledge but some of you have more. Some of you have expert knowledge; some of you have exclusive knowledge. You are all there unequal; so who is at the biggest disadvantage? The woman litigant. Who has nothing but her vote as everything was taken from her. She had to become the best ever. And she did. And now you work double and triple time to keep her out or else she’ll blow the whistle on you and what you are doing.  Problem is: The People finally had enough with Obama. Black victims have become victimizers and next up? Rwanda; Nazi Germany. The US will have a race war only it will be the ethical, those not in office, versus the unethical, those in office, so Cheney and Co had a reason to fear the citizens. I’m not Timothy McVeigh as he did not exhaust the legal process. I’m the very first citizen to exhaust it thus we have no process or only undue process. If I blew up a federal building? I’d walk. LOL! I told the clerks and Justices in 09-677: We might be better off letting the military blow the building up with you in it. Did they call the Marshalls or Secret Service? No as they know I made my case; I won; they know I’m merely stating actual application of the law NOT making a threat.

 

25. All I’m doing now is making an attempt to then avoid violence as it’s not necessary IF a court will stop denying reality and hear us, The People, in person. You tell us: WHY or HOW do you inflict a person not qualified to hold the office on us in open and direct violation of the law as he can never get around or over signing 511? So federal judges then are forcing all The People who did not vote for Obama or McCain as they did not qualify or vote at all as they couldn’t to suffer him. How offensive can you be? How much cruel and unusual punishment can you dish out, especially to women? You deny me any and all rights, any and all protection whatsoever, and Obama then gets my right? A right not even his? Or if it was his a right he gave up when he committed a crime as he’s an expert and so he knew signing 511 is a crime? When he bought that seat via private money? Why can’t I buy it? I could as it’s for sale if you did not impoverish me to then keep me out.

 

26. The truth is: you do not want to now address the ugly mess you have created. You know as fact I made the case as you can all read the SCOTUS docket and so you are frightened. Too bad. I’m NOT a coward so why can’t I confront these people? Some of these people are my accusers. NY State said, “other [crimes] were committed” to justify a GUILTY verdict and the awarding of my kids to third parties. WHAT crimes? What acts? Name them. It refuses. Guilty? This is family court. There’s no such thing as guilty but NY did it. And now you let this go on and on, you let women be injured over and over and over by denying and ignoring the law applies to them until you created a mess so large it frightens you.

 

27. What the hell are you so afraid of? I’m the one volunteering to be shot not you. If I make this case I’m making myself the target. If you keep me out to avoid hearing me in person? Then you’re making yourself the target. And unfortunately for you: I’ve got the paperwork, the SCOTUS docket and SCOTUS action, that let’s me walk away, as nobody can find me guilty. If you don’t protect me then you don’t find me. If you don’t accord me my right of redress or any right then you can’t charge me when I shoot you. If you ask me to pay that fee? It’s you trying to find me with; Court rule. You’ve placed court rule above the Constitution. Above The People. You’re deliberately injuring The People with Court rule as if it’s the authority over them. Gross abuse of power. DICTATORSHIP. FOREIGNIZATION.

 

28. I’m going to teach Paul Zoss a lesson: A man once tried to convince me that he was smarter than me by citing his IQ was 185. LOL! I said, “My IQ is 250.” He said, “It CAN’T be. The test only gores up to 200.” LIAR! PROOF I, A MAN, AM SMARTER THAN YOU AS YOU DIDN’T EVEN KNOW WHAT AN IQ TEST GOES UP TO! So, he took my bait. “That’s interesting. I didn’t know that. Wow! I’m even smarter than the people who made up the IQ test.” Do you get this? Who can make up a test with a score going to 200 and then claim as absolute fact that you can’t be smarter, that you can’t have an IQ over that number? As people made up the test yes you can – if you’re smarter than all of them put together. PLUS: If you only use about 10% of your brain, if most people only use about that much, what if you used 20%? Or 30%? So me and twenty men all score a perfect 200. Who’s the smartest? I’ll tell you who: The person who passes the only actual IQ test around: The person who makes the case for equal protection as you must complete the base of human knowledge for this Earth age, find or define the missing law/s and then unite it all.  Then we evolve. It’s happening already: look at children. Autism is skyrocketing in boys as the injury is being inflicted before birth. Other children are born smarter and smarter, some with seemingly odd skills like extraordinary talents in one field. You’re seeing more prodigies but also kids with the ability to use their whole brain. The kids who escape the injury that is.   I willed myself to power; I accessed more of my brain. I always had it but the injury kept me from using it as I was tortured. Some neural pathways were shut down by the injury while others never lit up. I healed that and then opened other pathways up thus I use more brain that you do, literally. I could always score 200 on an IQ test; I just couldn’t use like I should have been able to and I noticed that. The way I use my brain now? LOL! Einstein couldn’t keep up and it’s too damn bad and if you don’t wanna believe it as you have the proof: The SCOTUS docket. A 1^st in history. What no man could do.

 

29. I’m the brain trust of this operation. Like Jefferson or like Adams The People can’t afford to lose me. Someday very soon a person will shoot a federal agent. I might have to do it. I'd run and do it right now if I could be sure another could take my place. the ONLY thing stopping me the fct that I'm currently irreplaceable. That may change. Federal agents like the Secret Service and federal Judges are criminally protecting Obama at our expense. Tribute. So a person will take out a federal agent exactly like we shot British soldiers. The Maasacre, then Lexington, then The Declaration, then the Revolution. You do it differently, another order,  when you seek to restore the law but it's the same. Lexington is when one of us finally shoots a federal agent. That person will be arrested. Upon arraignment? He’ll argue legal justification citing my SCOTUS action as first you dissolve the legal bonds and then you can abolish a dead institution – shoot an officer. That judge might place him in physical custody; he might not. Can and may you criminally find a person who has been denied any and all protection of the law even by SCOTUS, the Chief Justice, and the Executive? When all rights have been violated and not one authority would act to enforce the law? No matter how it turns out at some point the nation, THE PEOPLE, will be informed: The war is on; we can now shoot to kill as the crooks said they aren’t budging; they’ll harm us with impunity.

 

30. How are agents like the Secret Service, FBI or military ever going to reason their actions when they know what Marshall said: Disobey and then act to DEFY illegal orders. Like lumps on a log you aren't doing either. To disobey means to not do it. To defy means to act against. It's not enough to merely disobey. What, you as a federal judge can’t read 511? You do not know Obama is sitting in violation of the law? If I know and I told you and I supported everything I said with hardcore proof then how did Paul Zoss not know??? Paul Zoss? I gave him something only the DOJ has: A clerk in the Supreme Court who was worried as to how all of this would turn out as they get the point of law and wondered if any justice had ever seen the case or if the clerks were hiding it, as they knew if a Justice read it then a Justice would act, sent me a piece of proof. He took it from the court, mailed it to me and I have it. I copied it and gave it to you, the DOJ and the US military. As I truly believe the Justices, especially Roberts, never saw the case but only the summary the clerks made or maybe not at all? If I shot and killed Paul Zoss then guess who could plead ignorant? The Justices as it is actual obstruction of justice – by the SCOTUS clerks.  If you injure a Justice like this it is treason as you also injured the acting, legal President, me, and the nation, The People. You targeted women with deliberation. And didn’t the clerks say that they would and could do this? YES. As they had no idea what it would mean as they could not get over the fact that they are not as smart as they believe they are. I warned them and they kept it doing it. They told me they would never get caught. I said, YES YOU WILL – WHEN WE GO TO WAR HERE. Never happened, never will they said. They said no woman could – it’s not possible for a woman to do what a man can’t - so no woman would, as they wouldn’t let her NOT as she didn’t have the ability. I said, “You morons. It did happen once. You keep telling me it never happened. What’s “it”? Women’s equality? A pro se woman arguing in person? A nonlawyer arguing in person?  Right, all that never happened as you are deliberately keeping the case out. What you fuckers do not get is that it did happen once as if what we have to do is go to war against you thus fight another Revolution then we will as we HAVE to do so. If you say you’re not ever going to let us into the Supreme Court to secure protection of the law? Then we war. As long as only lawyers are allowed to argue then THE PEOPLE not just women can never, ever secure their rights as the office was foreignized. An actual foreign invasion happened so it is. Now WE, THE PEOPLE, can’t overcome it unless you allow us to appear in person in the Supreme Court but you said you will not allow the only person who can and will argue the case, Susan Herbert, entry. Why? Easy: The clerks assumed a risk – we can harm her and get away with it  - and lost. So it is now the authority who rose and the authority THE PEOPLE, LAWFUL VOTERS, chose over the foreign government: Obaam and all crooks. You say you have a constitution. no you do not as you do not abide by it at all as you shut The People out and favored Obama. We have the original documents. If you then say you have the 1871 version as your Constitution? You did until the officers defaulted on 11/05/08. Right now it is I, Susan, The acting, legal President and Commander, with the Justices and The People, versus Obama and all others. The Justices aren’t obeying Obama. You can’t know which side they will choose until they hear me in person. Which side are you on? The People who obey the original documents and the Founder’s instructions, The Federalist Papers, or Obama’s, rule by a cabal of criminal lawyers and privateers not him? I’ll give you a clue as to whose side the Justices will be on once they choose:   We know as absolute fact w/o question TWO Justices will choose I as the legal authority and The People as the constitutionally set government and not Obama: Scalia and Thomas are originalists.”

 

31. The clerks then have a good reason to be afraid of me. Every male clerk save one might be tried for treason and executed once my case is heard. I gave them an opportunity to secure immunity and they assumed more risk. Maybe you should fry or hang or be shot if you have proof you can’t defeat a litigant – she has beaten you every single time thus you have not been able to stop her and no federal agent is willing to arrest her when confronted – and you reason and decide: The People will never rise up against the institutions. We can do anything we went to them.” Never? You are aware we fought a Revolution, aren’t you?

 

32. Lawyers have been complaining about the clerks of SCOTUS for a while. Files go missing. Papers go missing. Cases aren’t filed. A clerk likes Obama? He plays games with a petition. Don’t like a case? Fudge what you write when you summarize it. In my case? As I sought to overturn a case of oj, an authority case, no clerk could touch it as only the Justices are qualified as it entered as an emergency application so no clerk ever summarized Bush V Gore. Clerks have zero power and authority to summarize such cases; only Justices may as the lawyer pressing it is equaling himself to the Chief Justice and Executive. If the clerk had the power and authority? If he had the human ability? He’d be pressing it! But we had a unique legal situation: Ask yourself: As a male clerk can never have a baby thus can never give testimony rising to proof of pregnancy, birth or woman, can he then summarize it? It’s humanly impossible for him to know it. As that is a male clerk claming he CAN and DID give birth to a baby! Or that he is a woman! I told these clerks that they would only prove what they did, commit treason, by interfering in the case but they thought they were tricky enough to outsmart me thus hide their actions from the public. Wrong.

 

33. The clerk claiming to be named Will said something interesting to me: When he told me the clerks would sink the case? He said he knew the elements to look for; he said it as if SOMEBODY ORDERED THEM TO ALWAYS SINK THE CASE FOR WOMEN IF THEY SAW IT. I’ve never been able to speak to a woman – ever. No woman touched my documents. I do not believe a Justice said this so WHO did? Where did that policy come from? Guess what? The Chief Clerk is named William. He’s ex military too. He would have reason to stop a woman from Commanding – he personally doesn’t like it. He’s about 70 years old. How long has he been there? What if the Justices have no idea this policy exists and male clerks know about it, have been acting on it and have been enforcing it for years? What if at some point this decision was made, by him or by a former employee, and it’s gone on w/o anyone ever knowing until I was able to argue case law until he lost thus screamed it and hung up on me? He’s said the clerks could and would sink it; he said as if they had a plan. What if he himself wanted it sunk as he knew he was caught violating the rights of all citizens  by me- no woman and no nonlawyers ever -  and then enforced his own order? His own policy? Or what if it is merely accepted as fact w/o question and nobody outside the office ever knew? All you can do is order Roberts to appear and find out. Obama and I prove natural birth and Roberts awards the commission. SIMPLE. NO BIG DEAL. NO MESSY CRIMINAL CASE. No Justices testifying.