Diane Keaton On Tantric Sex - She Thinks It Is As Ridiculous As I Do - MacLean's Magazine (A Leonard Cohen Promoting Canadian Rag With Adoring Fan) Thinks Greenberg - Charged With Fraud By The SEC - Engages In Tantric Sex?

http://www.vulture.com/2013/04/drunk-diane-keaton-explains-tantric-sex.html

Someone Is Searching My Blog Re. Cohen's Penis Size - Which He Exposed To Me (Ordinarily Viewed As Sexual Harassment But Not With The Los Angeles City Attorney's Office ... They Evidently Think That's Normal)

1 Entry Page Time: 27 Apr 2013 21:43:00 Browser: Chrome 23.0 OS: Win7 Resolution: 1366x768

Total Visits: 1 Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States IP Address: Comcast Cable (75.72.228.5) [Label IP Address] Search Referral:  www.google.com — leonard cohen penis size #3 Visit Page:  riverdeepbook.blogspot.com/2013/03/the-prosecuto

SEXUAL HARASSMENT Streeter:  And is there an S. Cooley -- is an S. Cooley one of the recipients? Cohen:  Yes, S. Cooley is a recipient. Streeter:  What is the subject, Mr. Cohen, of that email?  RT 259 Cohen:  And, yes -- oh, subject.  Re:  And, yes, Leonard Cohen does have a small, if non-existent penis … Streeter:  The first sentence in the email. Cohen:  Glen [Glenn Greenwald/Guardian UK], Michael asked the crucial -- the crucial question his week.  Does Cohen, who would have me read business legal documents while he was in the bubble bath, have a small penis?  RT 260 Streeter:  Was the IRS one of the recipients? Cohen:  I’m sorry? Streeter:  IRS. Cohen:  Yes, the IRS is a recipient.  RT 261 MISLEADING - COHEN’S BEING ANNOYED IS NOT AN ELEMENT OF THE CRIME.  JURY INSTRUCTIONS DID NOT ACCURATELY ADDRESS THE ELEMENTS OF INTENT TO ANNOY. Streeter:  Were you annoyed by that email? Cohen:  Both by the volume and the content.  RT 262 Streeter:  Were you annoyed by the voice mail messages? Cohen:  Annoyed and alarmed by the voice mail messages.  RT 262 Kelley Lynch Cross: Streeter:  And the subject about that email is Mr. Cohen’s penis. Lynch:  … My gay friend, Michael, asked me, what size Mr. Cohen’s penis was, and felt that perhaps he’d like to discuss that.  RT 506   Streeter: Are the people correct in understanding that you don’t see that as annoying to send out a mass email about a gentleman’s penis size? Lynch:  I have no idea.  Mr. Cohen didn’t mind looking at people defecating on one another in front of me.   Streeter:  Do you consider that annoying, Ms. Lynch. Lynch:  I have no idea.  I would consider it annoying to have to ask for tax information for six years.  RT 508

The Certifiable 14th Sheepdog Speaks For Mick Brown/UK Telegraph, IRS, FBI, Etc. - This Is The Type Of Lunatic Cohen Has As His Operatives

From: Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2010@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 12:53 PM
Subject: Fwd: Phil Spector
To: Mick Brown <mick.brown@telegraph.co.uk>, Washington Field <washington.field@ic.fbi.gov>, ASKDOJ <ASKDOJ@usdoj.gov>, "*irs. commissioner" <*IRS.Commissioner@irs.gov>, "Kelly.Sopko" <Kelly.Sopko@tigta.treas.gov>, "Doug.Davis" <Doug.Davis@ftb.ca.gov>, Dennis <Dennis@riordan-horgan.com>, rbyucaipa <rbyucaipa@yahoo.com>, Robert MacMillan <robert.macmillan@gmail.com>, moseszzz <moseszzz@mztv.com>, a <anderson.cooper@cnn.com>, wennermedia <wennermedia@gmail.com>, "Hoffman, Rand" <rand.hoffman@umusic.com>, woodwardb <woodwardb@washpost.com>, "glenn.greenwald" <glenn.greenwald@guardiannews.com>, lrohter <lrohter@nytimes.com>

Hi Mick,

The man impersonating the 14th Sheepdog is writing me that I'm certifiable.  He is clearly aligned with Leonard Cohen and this is how Cohen functions. 

I don't think I need to give people motive, Mick.  They clearly have motive and are threatening me again.  Motive to do their jobs?  What is that - protecting a man who has stolen millions from me, committed tax fraud, perjured himself excessively, and feel it's acceptable to waste taxpayer dollars on this.  I reviewed some of the so-called testimony with someone this morning and they said it sounds like the prosecutor and Cohen are in high school. 

In any event, the 14th Sheepdog is writing me about what you think.  What a stark raving lunatic.

All the best,
Kelley

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: The-14th Sheepdog <thexivthsheepdog@gmail.com>

Date: Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 11:47 AM
Subject: Re: Phil Spector
To: Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2010@gmail.com>

Cc: Mick Brown <mick.brown@telegraph.co.uk>

Kelley - you have been, and remain, your own worst enemy.
 

It is generally not in one's self interest to give people an extra motavation to do their jobs if that could entail violating your probation and nicking you (again).

Really?  Extra motive?  How fascinating.  Well, people are talking about the lunatics in Southern California wasting taxpayer dollars and aiding and abetting Leonard Cohen who has stolen from me, committed tax fraud, lied about the IRS, and it just goes on and on.

And Mick Brown knows as well as anyone that you are certifiable.

Leonard Cohen's Fan - Susanne Walsh - And Her Occasional Visits To My Blog; Then There Were Her Attempts To Target My Family Including My Then Minor Son ... All Documented Evidence As I've Discussed With My Attorney

Page Views: 23 (2 this visit) Entry Page Time: 28 Apr 2013 04:26:03 Visit Length: 7 mins 37 secs Browser: IE 9.0 OS: Win7 Resolution: 1280x800

Total Visits: 105 Location: Esbjerg, Syddanmark, Denmark IP Address: Tdc Kabel Tv (80.198.104.36) [Label IP Address] Referring URL:  riverdeepbook.blogspot.dk/ Entry Page:  riverdeepbook.blogspot.dk/search?updated-max=2013-04-26T08:44:00-07:00&max-results=7 Exit Page:  riverdeepbook.blogspot.dk/

Protection Details? Don't Make Me Laugh. Is The 14th Sheepdog Referring To Captain Jack Horvath Who LIED To LA Superior Court In Writing?

From: Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2010@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 11:33 AM
Subject: Re: Phil Spector
To: The-14th Sheepdog <thexivthsheepdog@gmail.com>, STEPHEN GIANELLI <stephengianelli@gmail.com>, Mick Brown <mick.brown@telegraph.co.uk>, Washington Field <washington.field@ic.fbi.gov>, "*irs. commissioner" <*IRS.Commissioner@irs.gov>, ASKDOJ <ASKDOJ@usdoj.gov>, "Kelly.Sopko" <Kelly.Sopko@tigta.treas.gov>, "Doug.Davis" <Doug.Davis@ftb.ca.gov>, Dennis <Dennis@riordan-horgan.com>, rbyucaipa <rbyucaipa@yahoo.com>, Robert MacMillan <robert.macmillan@gmail.com>, moseszzz <moseszzz@mztv.com>, a <anderson.cooper@cnn.com>, wennermedia <wennermedia@gmail.com>, "Hoffman, Rand" <rand.hoffman@umusic.com>, woodwardb <woodwardb@washpost.com>, "glenn.greenwald" <glenn.greenwald@guardiannews.com>, lrohter <lrohter@nytimes.com>

Mick,

I have a lunatic demeaning the 14th Sharmapa writing and lying to me.  You personally are well aware that we have communicated recently.  The IRS and FBI have not blocked my emails and this man doesn't represent them.  He appears to represent Leonard Cohen.

What is your address, Mick?  I have a letter Phil Spector wrote me not too long ago that I would like to send you.  It's quite telling and I think Phil Spector knows who he is writing when he writes to Kelley Lynch. 

Protective details?  A bunch of lunatic, lying investigators in desperate need of a brain.  I see.  Susanne Walsh, Cohen's fan, is obsessed with me - as is Gianelli.

All the best,
Kelley

On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 10:45 AM, The-14th Sheepdog <thexivthsheepdog@gmail.com> wrote:

Gianelli blocked your emails two weeks ago and now resides abroad.

Everyone else on your spam list, including the IRS, the FBI, and others in the media, the recording industry, as well as everyone associated with Phil Spector (who all avoid you like the pariah you are) ALL BLOCKED YOU YEARS AGO.

"Insanity" is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. That is you to a "T" - for the last seven years.
NO ONE IS LISTENING except (occasionally) Susanne Walsh and those doing so as a part of their assigned professions (various protective details).

Why Did The City Attorney Of Los Angeles, Leonard Cohen, And His Lawyers Conceal This 2008 Motion To Quash Cohen's Fraudulent Request For A TRO In Boulder?

MOTION TO QUASH EXCERPTS:

Defendant Kelley Lynch moves the Court to quash Plaintiff's fraudulent yet Permanent Civil Protection Order issued pursuant to Section 13-14-102 C.R.S. on the grounds that Plaintiff committed perjury in his fraudulent and falsified Declaration submitted to the Court and because Defendant was not properly served the Verified Complaint/Motion for Civil Protection Order and the Temporary Protection Order.

After recently reviewing the Court records, Defendant learned that process server, Karl Scharck, filed a Return of Service on August 26, 2008 stating he served the Verified Complaint/Motion for Civil Protection Order and the Temporary Protection Order by leaving it with Defendant who refused service. This is an outright lie. The process server entered private property, without permission, and did not attempt to contact Defendant. He pounded on the door and shoved the document under the door. Defendant had a witness present. Due to the fraudulent proof of service Defendant maintains that the Court does not at this time have jurisdiction. She has attempted to ask Springer and Steinberg if they would like to serve her properly or reschedule a new hearing but has heard nothing back.

The Declaration of Leonard N. Cohen marked as Exhibit A in the Court records appears to be an entirely falsified and fraudulent document and proves that Cohen is actually monitoring Defendant. This is an Internal Revenue Service matter because Defendant went to the Internal Revenue Service after her lawyers and accountant confirmed that Cohen and his advisers committed civil criminal tax fraud. Since being told that she was exposed to criminal tax fraud and used as an unwitting pawn, Plaintiff’s attempts to crush, destroy, silence, and terrorize her have been relentless. He has also targeted her children and parents. These are my responses to the fraudulent statements in Cohen's Declaration:

3. Defendant was not terminated for cause and no termination was ever discussed. After receiving a tax notice relating to Defendant’s 2001 return, changing accountants, hiring lawyers, and being advised that she had been dragged into tax fraud, Defendant refused to meet with Leonard Norman Cohen and his tax lawyer (Richard Westin) in order to unravel certain entities. Defendant also refused to bring the corporate books, records, assignments, stock certificates, etc. to any meeting and this seemed to pave the way for the abusive and malicious tactics that have been used against her and her family – presumably to prevent her from going to the Internal Revenue Service and other agencies, to undermine my credibility, and prevent Defendant from testifying against Cohen and his advisers. This is precisely what Defendant intends to do. The emails to the IRS Commissioner's Staff and others have documented what Defendant and her family and friends have gone through since Defendant was advised that she was used as an unwitting pawn and exposed to Cohen's criminal tax fraud. These emails and Ann Diamond’s article posted on her public website lead to the fraudulent restraining order and nothing else whatsoever. Defendant had no idea that Cohen was even in the country and does not believe making a good faith attempt to determine what has happened and where her assets have gone, etc., can possibly be construed as harassment. Exhibit A - Ann Diamond’s Draft Article.

Defendant has repeatedly asked for a complete and proper forensic accounting, and other documentation and explanations, from Cohen and his advisers. The "ledger" attached to Cohen's fraudulent suit against Defendant in Los Angeles Superior Court is incomplete and missing a tremendous amount of back-up documentation and conveniently omits assets owned by Defendant. Exhibit B – Dale Burgess' Fax to Dianne DiMascio & Kelley Lynch dated February 3, 2003.

Defendant was never a partner on the entity known as LC Investments, LLC and there are no corporate documents proving otherwise. The Internal Revenue Service advised Defendant that K1s had been issued to her for the years 2004 and 2005 by LC Investments, LLC. There was also a K1 issued to her in the State of Kentucky by this entity. Defendant maintains that these were illegally issued as she was never a partner. Nevertheless, Defendant intends to claim 99.5% of LC Investments, LLC as her rightful property due to the actions of Cohen and his advisers. Exhibit E - K1s issued by LC Investments, LLC to Cohen and Lynch and Westin Letter to State of Kentucky dated October 6, 2004.

After being victimized by Cohen's utterly malicious tactics, Defendant believes his allegation that she has referred to him in highly offensive pejorative terms is ludicrous. Defendant maintains that he is "deranged," a "criminal" who has defrauded the United States government and perjured himself in a number of courts in the United States, a fraud who has possibly perjured himself in Phil Spector's "secret grand jury," and has advised Cohen and others that His Holiness Kusum Lingpa believes he is an "asshole who is going to hell." Defendant has disclosed facts that she was privy to regarding Cohen and was advised, by Norman Posel of Boies Schiller and others, that Cohen was going to destroy her if she told the truth about him. Defendant mailed the email sent her by Boies Schiller – stating that they were going to destroy her - to the FBI in Denver. The truth is the defense to slander. Cohen himself told Lynch that Freda Guttman advised Ann Diamond that Lorca Cohen had made comments at Concordia University alleging that her father had molested her. Lynch was asked by Cohen to speak to her brother-in-law, Van Penick, about Cohen’s concerns that he slept with a 15-year old nanny and statutes of limitations; residence and tax issues that concerned him in Canada; U.S. tax credits for donating his body of work to the University of Toronto; and the fact that Ann Diamond repeated Freda Guttman’s remarks to her on a public website. Ann Diamond was threatened by Kory Law Firm around the time Cohen flew into Boulder to take out a fraudulent restraining order. Defendant views this as a desperate act – solely meant to silence her and to prevent her from addressing various issues with Robert Kory and Michelle Rice. Defendant is representing herself and believes she has a right to determine where her assets have gone and precisely how much she is owed by Plaintiff. Boies Schiller, after reviewing a tremendous amount of evidence, advised Defendant that Plaintiff owed her millions. Given the fact that neither Cohen nor his advisers will address these issues, Defendant has taken the position that any monies advanced her, distributed to her or anyone from Traditional Holdings, LLC, paid to her in accordance with corporate books and records, given to her without supplying her with a requested 1099, etc., are gifts. Defendant believes Plaintiff should now pay the gift taxes. Defendant further maintains that Cohen owes the taxes, penalties, and interest in connection with his advisers work relative to all entities and Lynch's involvement with said entities for his sole benefit and with his full knowledge and awareness. Defendant also maintains that she is entitled to $240,000/year, $20,000/year, and possibly other distributions, etc., in connection with Traditional Holdings, LLC – as stated clearly in the corporate books and records. If there is an accounting issue with respect to Blue Mist Touring Company, Inc., Defendant believes Cohen should take full responsibility for that and notes that his former CPA, Ken Cleveland, and her former CPA, Dale Burgess, both feel the assets allegedly sold by Traditional Holdings, LLC are still in Blue Mist Touring Company, Inc.

Defendant reported Cohen's illegal use of her social security number on the illegally issued K1s from LC Investments, LLC to the Social Security Administration. She then provided the Internal Revenue Service and others this information. Defendant believes this is what Plaintiff is referring to when he states that she made his social security number public. Defendant does not know if Cohen also committed tax evasion but his advisers repeatedly refer to this.

Exhibit F_- King Drew Falsified File on Kelly Lynch and Los Angeles District Attorney’s Internal Memorandum on King Drew dated April 8, 2005.

Defendant has no idea how many emails she has sent documenting the destruction of her life but given the fact that the IRS Commissioner's Staff has been copied in on most, if not all, of them she feels they can have the final say. Defendant said Cohen used prescription meth. This is a story that Cohen himself loved to tell. Cohen also has told the press over the years that he did drugs so she does not understand why he is now complaining about this. Defendant believes Cohen has committed egregious perjury and fraud.

Defendant maintains that Plaintiff and his advisers have used Nazi-esque tactics against her – and her parents and children. Defendant does not know what Plaintiff is attempting to prove here but feels he is merely trying to gain the sympathy of the FBI in Denver. Defendant feels that the FBI in Denver is aware that the Aryan Nation exists and they have connections to meth labs. Defendant brought this up for personal reasons that she has brought to the attention of the IRS Commissioner's Staff, the Department of Justice, and others because she felt certain information endangered her life. Having said this, Defendant was amused to note that there is an Aryan Nation dating website. Defendant has no idea if the FBI in Denver lies because she doesn't know them. What Defendant does know is that she and a Duty Agent at the Denver FBI do not necessarily see eye to eye on why Officer Storbeck rolled into Deneuve Construction with the Police Chief's secretary. The Duty Agent did not seem to feel that LAPD was behind this but Defendant feels they were involved.

With respect to the firing squad comment, Defendant does not believe she could assemble one and places an emphasis on the word "should." This is not a threat but rather addresses Cohen's own desire – as he advised Defendant – to be killed by a firing squad. This is how Plaintiff told Defendant he would like to die. Defendant maintains that her response was tempered and is temperate – given the facts of what has occurred including Cohen and his advisers targeting her children.

Defendant believes Cohen hunted her down in Boulder, Colorado, and finds that deeply disturbing. Defendant has no interest, whatsoever, in Cohen, his concerts, or his lies. Defendant's attempts to truthfully address what has gone on with respect to her, Leonard Norman Cohen, Phil Spector, her parents, her children, and others, is not going to abate. Defendant did not move from California to evade the jurisdiction of California law enforcement but would like to determine why she has become well-known to them when she rarely even had a parking ticket prior to having Cohen's tax fraud confirmed to her and being told that she could not make any type of deal. In fact, Defendant was told that her only options were to amend the tax returns and/or go to the Internal Revenue Service. Defendant did not trust anyone to amend the tax returns, has no idea what has actually been done in her name, and brought the allegations of civil and criminal tax fraud to Agent Bill Betzer of the Internal Revenue Service, the Internal Revenue Service via it's website, the State of Kentucky, the California State Franchise Tax Board, and has provided evidence to the IRS Commissioner's Staff via their email address *IRS.Commissioner@irs.gov. Defendant met with agents from the U.S. Treasury Department and advised them that she believes her son's custody matter arose from her discovery of Cohen's tax fraud. Robert Kory's Declaration is evidence of this. Agent Sopko provided Defendant with the name of the head of fraud for the IRS in Los Angeles. Defendant then contacted him and provided him with information she felt might be relevant. Exhibit G - Agent Kelly Sopko's email to Kelley Lynch dated March 6, 2007.

Defendant maintains that Cohen's sole motivation for filing a fraudulent lawsuit against her is the fact that she brought the allegations of tax fraud to the attention of the IRS Commissioner's Staff, Mr. John Maunts – State of Kentucky, and others. Defendant maintains that Cohen is disturbed that his attempts to silence, terrify, crush, and destroy her did not work. This is evidence, to Defendant, of what this man is capable of – including attempting to have Defendant and Phil Spector take the fall for him. Defendant believes Cohen made a deal with the Los Angeles District Attorney that relates to Defendant and Mr. Spector and may somehow involve his lawyer, former District Attorney Ira Reiner, who was apparently guiding Cohen's attempt to have illegal mediations and was communicating with Lynch’s lawyers. Defendant has mailed evidence that Cohen and Kory advised Norman Posel, Boies Schiller, and possibly others, that they were going to destroy her and her children to the IRS Commissioner’s Staff, the Department of Justice, Agent Kelly Sopko – Treasury Department, the Denver FBI, and others. Defendant was told by Greenberg's lawyer, Dan Scheid, that the witness and evidence tampering the Denver FBI Duty Agent told her would be considered criminal, relates to Leonard Norman Cohen, Robert Kory, and possibly Steven Clark Lindsey, Betsy Superfon, and others. Defendant has asked the IRS Commissioner's Staff, the Department of Justice, Agent Kelly Sopko – Treasury Department, Phil Spector, Bruce Cutler, Doron Weinberg, and others, to investigate these allegations.

Defendant has repeatedly made it clear to Cohen, his advisers, and others that she plans to address all of this in a legal manner. She refuses to stoop to rotten, shabby, malicious legal tactics. Defendant and others believe this particular matter, and the fact that Cohen was so desperate that he flew into Boulder, is evidence that he is insane, unstable, desperate, and volatile. His lawyers are merely liars, from what Defendant has experienced, who are willing to lie in court and in documents filed with the court, and who should be investigated and disbarred – and probably charged with aiding and abetting an attempted cover up of criminal tax fraud and arrested. In fact, a former attorney for Leonard Norman Cohen (Ed Dean) told Lynch this: If the IRS Commissioner believes there is fraud and not negligence he will come in after the lawyers and accountants as well. Defendant believes the IRS should investigate the roles Cohen's various advisers played in his various tax planning schemes.

Given the fact that Kory "himself" has written Defendant that the IRS will demand to review certain matters going back many years, Defendant wonders why Cohen did not go to the IRS with her – particularly if he believes he was defrauded by his advisers. Defendant also wonders why – after alleging that Neal Greenberg had committed securities violations – Cohen did not go to the SEC as she did. All of this leads Defendant to believe that Cohen, Greenberg, Westin, and others, conspired with one another and planned the lawsuits in LA Superior Court and the U.S. District Court in Denver. It certainly gives the appearance that they have acted in collusion. The result of these suits appears to have been to discredit Defendant while protecting one another and attempting to cover up the fact that all these parties were involved in creating and structuring these entities and in the creation of this complicated tax scheme - for the sole benefit of Leonard Norman Cohen. In fact, Neal Greenberg is attempting to take cover behind Defendant. He has been advised not to use any documents or information she permitted Boies Schiller to review in an attempt to defend himself. Defendant was egregiously used by his lawyer, Norman Posel, when he worked for Boies Schiller – after he was asked by His Holiness Kusum Lingpa to protect her.

http://www.myspace.com/253306120/blog/485409792#!

What's The Los Angeles City Attorney's Point? That They Will Waste Taxpayer Dollars Arguing The Wrong Subdivision? Whose Problem Is That - My Appellate Attorney's? NO.

From: Kelley Lynch <kelley.lynch.2010@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 10:27 AM
Subject: California 653m
To: Dennis <Dennis@riordan-horgan.com>, "*irs. commissioner" <*IRS.Commissioner@irs.gov>, ASKDOJ <ASKDOJ@usdoj.gov>, Washington Field <washington.field@ic.fbi.gov>, "Kelly.Sopko" <Kelly.Sopko@tigta.treas.gov>, "Doug.Davis" <Doug.Davis@ftb.ca.gov>, rbyucaipa <rbyucaipa@yahoo.com>, Robert MacMillan <robert.macmillan@gmail.com>, moseszzz <moseszzz@mztv.com>, a <anderson.cooper@cnn.com>, wennermedia <wennermedia@gmail.com>, "Hoffman, Rand" <rand.hoffman@umusic.com>, Mick Brown <mick.brown@telegraph.co.uk>, woodwardb <woodwardb@washpost.com>, "glenn.greenwald" <glenn.greenwald@guardiannews.com>, lrohter <lrohter@nytimes.com>, "Francisco.A.Suarez" <Francisco.A.Suarez@verizon.net>

Hi Mr. Riordan,

I suppose the City Attorney is arguing that Streeter doesn't know what she's talking about.  I want to sue the City Attorney of Los Angeles for an accounting over this insanity.

Love,
Kelley

The prosecution’s theory of the legal issues in the case, stated during trial proceedings and announced in opening and closing statements, was straightforward:  “One, whether or not there was a valid and lawfully issued restraining order and whether over approximately a 14-month period on several occasions Ms. Lynch violated that validly and lawful issued restraining order.  Two, whether or not over a one-year period Ms. Lynch either via email or phone calls made annoying and harassing phone calls that included obscene language or threats for no good reason, not in good faith.”  (RT 562)

Respondent’s Brief:  To the extent appellant is attacking the statute on its face, her argument must also be rejected.  Citing authorities interpreting “the statute prohibiting obscene electronic communications made with the intent to annoy, appellant seems to claim 653m(b) requires certain words be used to prove a violation.  Specifically, appellant defines “obscene,” then states:  “In the instant case, Ms. Lynch did not use any such words that would violate the statute.”  (AOB)  However, appellant’s claim is without merit; no particular words are required to support a conviction under 653m(b), nor is there any requirement that the communications be obscene.  Appellant may be referring to Penal Code 653m(a) which prohibits obscene telephonic or electronic communication made with intent to annoy.  

California Penal Code Section 653m

653m.  (a) Every person who, with intent to annoy, telephones or
makes contact by means of an electronic communication device with
another and addresses to or about the other person any obscene
language or addresses to the other person any threat to inflict
injury to the person or property of the person addressed or any
member of his or her family, is guilty of a misdemeanor. Nothing in
this subdivision shall apply to telephone calls or electronic
contacts made in good faith.

(b) Every person who, with intent to annoy or harass, makes
repeated telephone calls or makes repeated contact by means of an
electronic communication device, or makes any combination of calls or
contact, to another person is, whether or not conversation ensues
from making the telephone call or contact by means of an electronic
communication device, guilty of a misdemeanor. Nothing in this
subdivision shall apply to telephone calls or electronic contacts
made in good faith or during the ordinary course and scope of
business.