Ex E – Banks & Companies – Pay up Face Rig Value or Else Liability With Exhibits A-D (common law price right rules) in mind, this follows: Extortion is commonly practiced by organized bank crime groups. The actual obtainment of money or property is not required to commit the offense. .1 The first steps, bankwise, goes something like this: A) B) C) If you want a home you must prime rate tithe to me, for doing nothing; So We scrape up & come up with it, on top of your broker tithe fees; Then, if we can’t pay you off you exact us with credit reputation ruining:
“To Exact” in its formal definition means the infliction of something such as [financial or reputational] pain and suffering or to make somebody endure something unpleasant if they don’t pay up. Here, Ben’s pshycoligical credit ding fear tacting first employed! The second steps, bankwise, goes like this: D) Pay or else I, broker boy, will offensively move to have you removed from your roof, with my filings of papers in court & then my State Troops, called Sheriffs & Police!
Know that the “Making an overture of [illegal] lawsuit which refers to a requirement of a payment of money or property to halt future lawsuit. That alone is sufficient to commit the offense.”2 Extortion, outwresting, or exaction is a criminal offense triggered when a banker who either unlawfully obtains money, property or services from a person, entity, or institution through [illegal] coercion or intimidation or reputational harm unless he is paid money and/or property. Refraining from doing such harm is sometimes euphemistically called protection.3 “Extortion requires that the [Ben Bernanke] individual sent the message "willingly" and "knowingly" as elements of the crime. The message [a mortgage bill] only has to be sent (but does not have to reach the intended recipient) to commit the crime of extortion.” To protect my home from being invaded & property & stolen, via illegal court & troop tactics, Ben, for his worthless, lazy, foreign INS stock holders, forces me, like all others, to pay him, under colors of authority. Extortion is distinguished from blackmail. In blackmail, the blackmailer threatens to do something which would be legal or normally allowed.4
1 2 3
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extortion http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extortion http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extortion
4
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extortion
NOT EVEN CLOSE TO BLACKMAIL YOU FLIPPING CUMTWAUTS BUCK & JUAN Blackmail is the act of threatening to reveal information about a person, or even do something to destroy the threatened person, unless the blackmailed target fulfills certain demands. This information is usually of an embarrassing or socially damaging nature. In a broader sense, blackmail is an offer to refrain from some action which would be legal or normally allowed, and is thus distinguished from extortion, which carries the threat of unlawful and often violent action if demands are not met. The word is derived from the word for tribute paid by English and Scottish border dwellers to Border Reivers in return for immunity from raids. This tribute was paid in goods or labour (reditus nigri, or "blackmail"): the opposite is blanche firmes or reditus albi, or "white rent" (denoting payment by silver). BLACKMAIL ELEMENTS Under s21(1) of the Theft Act 1968 of English law, a person commits the offence: if, with a view to gain for himself or another or with intent to cause loss to another, he makes any unwarranted demand with menaces; and for this purpose a demand with menaces is unwarranted unless the person making it does so in the belief: (a) (b) that he has reasonable grounds for making the demand; and that the use of the menaces is a proper means of reinforcing the demand.
The Act uses the word "menaces" which is considered wider in scope than "threat" and involves a warning of any consequences known to be considered unpleasant by the intended victim. This covers the spectrum from actual or threatened violence to the victim or others, through damage to property, to the disclosure of information. Homosexuals have been frequently subjected to blackmail in the past, even though today homosexuality is no longer illegal.5 Lawful means Many debt collectors have been accused of blackmail, but those pursuing legal debts are generally able to justify their threats of repossession because, even though as it may be unpleasant to the victim, this is a legitimate use of lawful civil law remedies. By contrast, those chasing illegal debts (a bank, or a gambling debt, for example, which was not until recently enforceable under English law)[citation needed] who back up their demands with the threat of bodily injury cannot avail themselves of the same defence.6’ It’s like a Woodie N.Y, Law Stake in Wolves Heart
5 6
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackmail http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackmail
My Time, Good Fellas! My Computers, Wise Guys! I have been on the Clock, At 300 plus, 24/7, since April 5, 2001! I AM IMF TOO The Impossible Missions Force (IMF) is a[n] … independent espionage agency commonly employed by the U.S. government. It was introduced in the 1966-73 television series Mission: Impossible, and later in a revival series that ran from 1988 to 1990. Beginning in 1996, the IMF has been featured in three theatrical films starring Tom Cruise, Mission: Impossible, Mission: Impossible II, and Mission: Impossible III.7 BACKED LAW HAWK DOWN
EX LAW CODE SIMPLIFIED TURBO SYSTEMS
7
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impossible_Missions_Force
Bernanke Jew? Jew Bernanke?
We mean the replacement of one Jew - Alan Greenspan by another Jew - Ben Bernanke**. SHALOM Ben Shalom Bernanke is a jewish foreign banker on United Turf economist and current Chairman of the Board of Governors of the United States Federal Reserve. He was previously Chairman of the U.S. President's Council of Economic Advisers (CEA), and member of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. On October 24, 2005, President George W. Bush appointed Bernanke to succeed Alan Greenspan as Chairman of the Federal Reserve. Bernanke was sworn in on February 1, 2006 after the Senate's confirmation by a voice vote on January 31, 2006.8
8
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Bernanke
Sting Law It’s A law Sting A Legal Coo An A.G. Duty Too
So are you a Dolphin or Seal fan? Or are your lips sealed? I think your lips are sealed plus! Shifting, I present this (already submitted to my guardian brothers bit) that two Article 1 banned State trooper Bank men, named Le Berge & Dunkel, like the cowards they are, hide from, in breach: Ex State Troop Bank man Le Berge Stripped Lani’s Rights:
Indeed, unlike you, the single Republic that I pledged my allegiance to, meaning my supreme court, not yours, said, verbatim: "The integrity of an individual's person [on United Turf] is a cherished value of our society."9 Moreover, in Rochin, my friend, We reminded all of you State Troopers that unauthorized invasions of the body are viewed as, verbatim: "offensive to human dignity".10 The liberty We were bourne with, my friend, is outlined for you in the preamble I pledged my allegiance to, unlike you. One bit of commentary on what we call liberty, my friend, extends to the personal decisions about, verbatim: "how to best protect dignity".11
"The United States shall guarantee to every [person in this County] state in this union a republican form of government, and shall protect each of them against [Le Berge’s State Troop] invasion; and on application of the legislature, or of the executive (when the legislature cannot be convened) against domestic violence." Article IV, Section 4!12 This protection is for the people. The U. S. Supreme Court so held in Texas v. White (1868), saying it's the people who are guaranteed this protection. Here I mark one of your DV bits: Ex 12-30-07 You pervert, with zero cause & Miranda ordered “Lani lift her sweatshirt up”
9 10 11
Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757, 772 (1966) Rochin, 342 U.S. at 174 Washington v. Glucksberg, 521 U.S. 702, 716, 720 (1997); Cruzan v. Missouri Dep't of Health, 497 U.S. 261, 302, 305
12
http://www.domesticviolenceclause.org/
IN STING RE: Le Berge’s banned State Troops Entirely For Profit Establishment Operation
It is odd to me that a so called “Captain” law man spits on law, honor & duty, for money. It is odd to me that a mortal who claims to be able to read plain English chooses to contract, in restraint of trade, with extortionist bankers, extortionist Bert Boeckman & verified thief business men, like Juan Alonso. Instead of doing what he is supposedly paid to do, he gets his rocks off copping a look at a teenage girls body & getting paid for felony posting “eviction” notices to real Americans, under fraud colors of United Authority! Extortion, under colors of authority: My Ticket Tax Felony, for Le Berge Stock ers, charged by Nash! Ms. P’s Ticket Tax Felony charged, for stocker holders, by Le Berge! ALL CLASS RIPE FITS LIKE A GLOVE AN EASY COURT REMEDY IT IS FLAT ECONOMIC TREASON
editorialsupport@review.com,ecustomerservice@randomhouse.com,history@princeton.e du,ancient@Princeton.EDU,wxiong@princeton.edu,aaradill@princeton.edu,c6789@prin ceton.edu,mbattagl@princeton.edu,bernheim@princeton.edu,rbenabou@princeton.edu,eb ogan@princeton.edu,sbhatt@princeton.edu,smita@princeton.edu,markus@princeton.edu ,accase@princeton.edu,chassang@princeton.edu,deaton@princeton.edu,lchioda@princet on.edu,tje@princeton.edu,dixitak@princeton.edu,jqfan@princeton.edu,farber@princeton .edu,pennykg@princeton.edu,grossman@princeton.edu,honore@princeton.edu,hhong@p rinceton.edu,kiyotaki@princeton.edu,kahneman@princeton.edu,pkrugman@princeton.ed u amaton@cmht.com,vsmith@cmht.com,mwillis@cmht.com,dsigelman@cmht.com,rlewis @cmht.com,bsheppard@cmht.com,ahertzfeld@cmht.com,lawinfo@cmht.com,rgambhir @cmht.com,deborah@mediarelationsinc.com,afryszman@cmht.com This, We Think, is not necessary: Daniel A. Small Contact: dsmall@cmht.com Fraud Price Right or wrong Lit-Gator Dan Small, a Partner at Cohen Milstein, joined the Firm in 1988 and is a member of the Antitrust practice group.
Among the antitrust cases on which Mr. Small is currently working are: In re Microsoft Antitrust Litigation (D. Md.), in which he serves as chair of the experts committee and Rasmussen v. General Motors (Cir. Ct., Milwaukee Cty., Wisc.) (and related cases in eight other states), a state-wide class action alleging conspiracy among auto manufacturers and distributors to maintain dual price systems between the United States and Canada. He was co-lead counsel for the end-user plaintiffs in In re Buspirone Antitrust Litigation (S.D.N.Y.), a case alleging monopolization and market allocation claims against a brand name drug manufacturer for delaying generic entry to the market that settled for $90 million. Mr. Small also was lead counsel for the plaintiffs in Pease, et al. v. Jasper [the book of - Shalom] Wyman & Son, et al. (Super. Ct., Knox Cty., Me), a price-fixing class action brought on behalf of Maine wild blueberry growers. The case was tried in November 2003, and the jury returned an $18.68 million verdict for the Class, which after trebling and other additions, resulted in a $56 million judgment. Mr. Small’s substantial appellate experience includes briefing and arguing Free v. Abbott Laboratories in the United States Supreme Court. The case presented the issue of whether a supplemental jurisdiction statute overruled Zahn v. International Paper Co. The Court split 4-4, with Justice O'Connor recusing herself. Mr. Small successfully briefed and argued appeals before the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals in In re Brand Name Prescription Drug Antitrust Litigation (7th Cir. 1997) on the issue of whether the district court had subject matter jurisdiction, and in Paper Systems, Inc. v. Nippon Paper Industries Co., Ltd. (7th Cir. 2002) holding that the federal direct purchaser rule does not immunize a defendant from liability for the direct sales of its co-conspirators. Mr. Small also briefed and argued the appeal in Mack v. Bristol-Myers Squibb (Fla. 1st DCA 1996), the first opinion construing the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act to permit indirect purchasers to sue for damages for antitrust violations. He has been a speaker at events organized by the American Antitrust Institute, the Conference Board, the American Bar Association and the District of Columbia Bar, among others. Mr. Small is a 1981 graduate of Colgate University, receiving a B.A. (cum laude) in History. He graduated from the American University’s Washington College of Law in 1986 and joined Cohen Milstein after serving as Law Clerk to the Honorable Roger Vinson, U.S. District Judge for the Northern District of Florida (1986 to 1988). Mr. Small is admitted to practice in Maryland and the District of Columbia. Contact: dsmall@cmht.com Practice Area:
Antitrust