Susan Daniels, P.I. is desperately seeking some more attention. Her ridiculous lawsuit alleging Obama was using a false social security number got bounced out of an Ohio court on Friday, September 7, 2012. For good measure she was assessed costs. (See pdf below in Note 2.) This was no big surprise. I did a post about her silly claims earlier. (See notes for link.)
But darned if she isn’t right back in there trying to start a criminal investigation on Obama by filing a moronic Affidavit. I think she has gotten addicted to all the fuss and bother and drama, and just plain doesn’t want to be out of the Birther spotlight, or headlines. The story is reported at ObamaReleaseYourRecords. Here is an excerpt:
Private Investigator Susan Daniels Files Affidavit SeekingCriminal Prosecution For Obama’s Connecticut Social Security Number
. . . I filed an Affidavit (EMBEDDED BELOW) yesterday in Geauga County Common Pleas Court. I am asking the court to issue a complaint that Barack Obama has committed a crime and should be prosecuted for identity fraud. Section “D” of ORC 2935.09 allows me the right to file. …
The court had never seen a filing like this before and to say they were upset would be an understatement. Two women kept insisting that nothing could be filed without a case number on it and I kept saying: read the statute. They were not happy and one woman said: “I’ve worked here twenty years and have never seen anything like this.” Oh well, now she has.
There is a scribd of the Affidavit at the link, and a pdf in the notes below in case scribd doesn’t work right. But here is a cut and paste job I did of the major allegations:
I bet she is right, and the people at the courthouse haven’t seen anything like this foolishness before. But do you notice that something is missing from the allegations??? Something kind of BIG and IMPORTANT??? How about like, who is the ANOTHER PERSON in sub-paragraph e??? How in the world can Daniels claim that the social security number is stolen, if she can not identify who Obama stole it from? Think about this for a minute.
She has no information from the Social Security Administration [SSA] which indicates it was stolen. Her only foundation for the claim is that the number has a Connecticut “area number”, without any backup for why it has that number. She provides no information about the inner clerical workings of the SSA. She can not discount the possibility that it was simply a typo on the zip code. In fact, the SSA clearly states that you can’t tie social security numbers into places of residence: (See original article for the link.)
Since 1972, when SSA began assigning SSNs and issuing cards centrally from Baltimore, the area number assigned has been based on the ZIP code in the mailing address provided on the application for the original Social Security card. The applicant’s mailing address does not have to be the same as their place of residence. Thus, the Area Number does not necessarily represent the State of residence of the applicant, either prior to 1972 or since.
She is supposed to be a private investigator, and here she is with a social security number that she can’t link to anybody except Obama. Having someone’s social security number is the easiest way to identify them and find out things about them. Has she run any skip tracing software on the number? Has she checked with the credit reporting agencies? Private Investigators usually have contacts on the police force and in government offices to run numbers like this for them. If she does, she obviously came up with NADA. All of which means she has absolutely no basis for claiming the number is either stolen or misused. I hate to be mean, but considering her initial investigatory work, the lawsuit and the affidavit, she comes across to me as being pretty stupid.
This affidavit is nothing but another instance of farcical Birther Legal Theatre, and Susan Daniels, P.I. is out there hamming it up on stage for a few more minutes of attention.
Note 1. The Image. This is a woman entertainer in a wooden egg costume known as The Human Roly Poly Dancing Dolly (1915).
Note 2. The Title. The title for this Article is based on the 1985 movie, Desperately Seeking Susan, starring Madonna, where:
Roberta (Rosanna Arquette) is an unfulfilled suburban housewife living in Fort Lee, New Jersey who is fascinated with a woman she only knows about by reading messages to and from her in the personals section of a New York City tabloid. This fascination reaches a peak when one such ad with the headline “Desperately Seeking Susan” proposes a rendezvous in Battery Park with the man who regularly seeks her. Roberta goes to Battery Park too, gets a glimpse of the woman (Madonna) and in a series of events involving mistaken identity, amnesia, and other farcical elements Roberta goes from voyeur to participant in an Alice in Wonderland-style plot, ostensibly motivated by the search for a pair of stolen Egyptian earrings.
For ESL’s, the term “egghead” in the caption, is a slangish term for:
A person who is highly academic or studious; an intellectual. A smart person, or brainiac.
The Riddle referred to in the Image Easter Egg is, “What is round on both ends and high in the middle??? Answer: Ohio. This is where she filed the lawsuit. The riddle also describes an egg. Apparently this riddle was used in a Broadway song:
Note 3. Pdf’s and Links. Here are pdf’s in case scribd doesn’t scroll well on your device:
Here is the link to the previous Internet Article about Susan Daniels, P.I.: