New Lawsuit Reveals Information That Would Have Forced Barack Obama To Resign The Presidency

We came across a draft filing for a new lawsuit against Univision and Unimoda along with their political campaign crony Silicon Valley insiders. It is an interesting read but the best part is this section:

 

” A. Defendants were the financiers of the political campaigns of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton

 

 

B. In exchange for financing those political campaigns, Barack Obama’s White House staff gave Defendants lithium ion battery monopolies, solar panel monopolies, data processing government contract monopolies and media distribution exclusives worth trillions of dollars. This was an illegal quid-pro-quo arrangement.

C. Had these facts come to light during the Obama or Clinton Presidencies, Obama or Clinton, as the President of the United States, would have been forced to resign mid-term, in disgrace, in the same way that Richard Nixon was forced to resign when disgraced by the “Watergate” revelations. Plaintiffs were told by White House staff that they “held the key to Obama’s continued existence in the White House”.

 

 

D. Due to Defendants fears of the loss of up a trillion dollars of crony payola from the illegal abuse of taxpayer funds and Defendants warnings from White House staff that the crony scheme must “never come to light”, Defendants engaged in felonious gangster-like actions in order seek to terminate all witnesses, reporters and opposition government staff who attempted to expose these crimes.

E. Just as, over time, the Watergate crimes are now intimately documented and detailed; over time The Obama Crony Scandal has been detailed and exposed in numerous federal, news media and public investigations. Government officials had encouraged Plaintiffs to not terminate the Presidency of Barack Obama. Significant barriers to justice were illicitly placed in front of Plaintiffs.

 

 

F. Defendants organized and operated a series of malicious attacks and thefts against Plaintiffs as reprisals and competitive vendettas. Defendants report to the FBI, GAO, FTC, SEC, Congressional Ethics Committees, Trump Administration and other entities on a regular basis. Plaintiffs have received evidence from those entities as well as Wikileaks, Drudge Report, wearethenewmedia.com groups, private investigators and former employees of Defendants.

G. Defendants and their associates Elon Musk, Jon Doerr, Eric Schmidt, Larry Page, Steve Jurvetson, Vinod Khosla and other members of the “Silicon Mafia” are documented in tens of thousands of news reports, federal law enforcement reports and Congressional reports in their attempts to infiltrate and corrupt the U.S. Government in an attempt to route trillions of tax dollars to Defendants private accounts. Defendants perceived Plaintiffs as a threat to their crimes. Federal investigators, news investigators and whistle-blowers have reported to Plaintiffs that Defendants were the financiers and/or beneficiaries and/or command and control operatives for the crimes and corruption disclosed in the CBS NEWS 60 Minutes investigative reports entitled: “The Cleantech Crash”, “The Lobbyists Playbook” and “Congress Trading on Insider Information”; The Feature Film: “The Car and the Senator” Federal lawsuits with case numbers of: USCA Case #16-5279; and over 50 other cases including the ongoing “Solyndra” investigation and federal and Congressional investigations detailed at http://greencorruption.blogspot.com/ ; http://xyzcase.xyz ; https://theintercept.com/2016/04/22/googles-remarkably-close-relationship-with-the-obama-white-house-in-two-charts/and thousands of other documentation sites. Plaintiffs are charged with engaging in these crimes and corruptions against Plaintiffs and financing and ordering attacks on Plaintiffs.
Plaintiffs engaged in U.S. commerce and did everything properly and legally. Unlike Defendants, Plaintiffs did not steal technology. Unlike Defendants, Plaintiffs did not bribe elected officials in order to get market exclusives. Unlike Defendants, Plaintiffs did not poach Defendants staff. Unlike Defendants, Plaintiffs were the original inventors of their products. Unlike Defendants, Plaintiffs did not operate “AngelGate Collusion” schemes and “High Tech No Poaching Secret Agreements” and a Mafia-like Silicon Valley exclusionary Cartel. Unlike Defendants, Plaintiffs did not place their employees in the U.S. Government, The California Government, The U.S. Patent Office and The U.S. Department of Energy in order to control government contracts to Defendants exclusive advantage. Unlike Defendants, Plaintiffs did not place moles inside of competitors companies. Unlike Defendants, Plaintiffs did not hire Gawker Media and Think Progress to seek to kill Plaintiffs careers, lives and brands. Unlike Defendants, Plaintiffs did not rig the stock market with “pump-and-dump”, “Flash Boy” and “Google-stock/PR-pump” schemes.
Plaintiffs engaged in hard work every day of their lives for the time-frame in question under the belief that the good old American work ethic and just rewards for your creations was still in effect in the U.S.A., and that the thieves and criminals that attempted to interdict Plaintiffs would face Justice. In a number of circumstances Defendants took advantages of Plaintiffs hard work via come-ons; Defendants then made billions of dollars from Plainiffs work at Plaintiffs expense and attacked Plaintiffs in order to reduce Plaintiffs competitive and legal recovery options.

 

 

<

p class=”western” style=”margin-top:.07in;margin-bottom:.07in;background:#ffffff;line-height:200%;” align=”left”> H. Defendants compensated the White House staff with cash, stock warrants, illicit personal services, media control and a technology known as a “Streisand Effect Massive Server Array” which can control public impressions for, or against a person, party, ideology or issue. Defendants Streisand Effect internet system was used to destroy Plaintiffs in reprisal, retribution, and vendetta for Plaintiffs help with law enforcement efforts in the case and because Plaintiffs companies competed with Defendants companies with superior technologies….”

I. Defendants have used their Streisand Effect technology to build a character assassination ring of bloggers and hired shill “reporters” who engage in a process called a “Shiva”. This process is named after a Plaintiff in a similar case named: Shiva Ayyadurai, the husband of Actress Fran Drescher. Shiva Ayyadurai holds intellectual property rights to part of Defendants email technology. In fact, the people most threatened by the Shiva Ayyadurai patent right claims, ironically turn out to be Defendants and, in particular, Defendants associates Elon Musk, Jon Doerr, Eric Schmidt, Larry Page, Steve Jurvetson, Vinod Khosla and other members of the “Silicon Mafia” who own most of the main companies exploiting email technology. Were Shiva Ayyadurai to prevail in his claims, Defendants would owe him billions of dollars. “Running A Shiva” involves the production of a series of Defamation articles by bloggers who act as if they are independent from Defendants but are in fact, not. Defendants used “the Shiva” to attack and seek to destroy Donald Trump, Shiva Ayyadurai, Plaintiffs, and numerous political figures. Univision, Unimoda, Jalopnik, Gawker Media, Gizmodo and over a hundred stealth-ed, and overt, assets of Defendants have been using “The Shiva” network to attack Donald Trump, Shiva Ayyadurai, Plaintiffs, and numerous political figures as recently as this morning, thus, the time bar restarts every day. Plaintiffs have pleaded with Defendants to cease their attacks but Defendants have refused to comply. Even with Fran Drescher’s ongoing royalty payments from her popular television series, friends have reported that the attacks on the Ayyadurai family have been devastating and have caused massive damages and personal and emotional devastation.

J. . Defendants produced animated movies, attack articles, fake blog comments, DNS routes, “Shiva” Campaigns, and other attack media against Plaintiffs and expended over $30 million dollars in value, as quantified by Defendants partner: Google, in placing the attack material in front of 7.5 billion people on the planet for the rest of Plaintiffs lifetime. No person could survive such an attack and in the case of Plaintiffs, lives were destroyed and multiple companies invested into by Plaintiffs, which Defendants made over $50B off of the copies of, were destroyed because they competed with Defendants….”

 

Advertisements

Leave a News Story:

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s