Obama Refuses to Answer Birth Certificate Lawsuit

DriftingByTheStorm

source

FuckCheck.Dork wrote:

Phillip J. Berg, former Deputy Attorney General of Pennsylvania and a Democrat, has filed a suit in U.S. District Court in August, alleging Obama is not a natural-born citizen. The suit claims that Mr. Obama, Democratic Presidential candidate was born in Mombosa, Kenya and not in Hawaii as his birth certificate claims. And if he is not a natural-born citizen of the United States, this would make Mr. Obama unqualified to serve as the President of the United States.
Meanwhile, where else in the mainstream media have we seen information regarding this law suit? At the same time, Democrat media are now resorting to name-calling referring to Mr. Berg as a “wingnut” and “crackpot” for filing the legal action. But could there be some truth to the lawsuit, (case number 08-CV-4083)?


Former Pennsylvania Deputy Attorney General and a member of the Democrat party, Phillip J. Berg has filed a legal action in U.S. District Court alleging that Democrat Presidential candidate Senator Barak Hussein Obama is not natural-born citizen of the United States. If true, this could mean that Sen. Obama is not illegible to serve as the President of the United States.

According to Berg’s website, http://www.obamacrimes.com, Sen. Obama has admitted to these allegations by his omission of a response to the allegations. Berg stated that he filed Requests for Admissions on September 15, 2008 with a response by way of answer or objection had to be served within thirty [30] days. No response to the Requests for Admissions was served by way of response or objection.

According to the suit, Mr. Berg alleges that Sen. Obama was actually born in Mombosa, Kenya and not in Hawaii as his Certificate of Live Birth would indicate. Reports are that as Obama’s mother was preparing to give birth to Obama, she was unable to get to Hawaii in time for his birth and was indeed born in Kenya. The suit further alleges that the Certificate of Live Birth was issued after Obama’s birth when the family was able to return to Hawaii. Searches of hospital records in Hawaii fail to confirm Obama’s birth in that state at or around the time of Sen. Obama’s birth.

Berg cites Rule 36 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which states that unless the accused party provides written answer or objection to charges within 30 days, the accused legally admits the matter. And this Sen. Obama failed to do within the allotted time frame.

A search of FactCheck.org revealed a response to the authenticity of a Certificate of Live Birth filed in Honolulu, Hawaii 2 days after the birth of Sen. Obama, though there have been questions raised about the impartiality of the organization on the matter due to the fact of Sen. Obama’s previous working relationship with the parent company of the site, Annenberg Political Factchecker.

If Sen. Obama was in-fact not a natural-born U.S. citizen, then he also would not be eligible to serve as the President if elected.

Additionally, if he were involved in a cover-up of that allegation, he could be found guilty of a criminal conspiracy.

The real questions still remain; “why has there been no news of this issue in the ‘mainstream press’?” “Why has there been no investigation brought to the attention of the American public to either confirm or deny the allegations?” “Will the full truth be revealed prior to the election?” “What happens if the allegations are true?” And lastly, “what else is being kept from the American public?”

If Obama can not prove that he is a natural born citizen he has by DEFAULT become ineligible for the presidency.

I DON'T care about 1 of 2 crappy candidates possibly being barred from the presidency,

what i DO care about is people like you who are so blind in their partisan support, that they aren't even willing to entertain the notion that something might be rotten in denmark.

I mean, you can't even admit that it is POSSIBLE that this might be legitimate.

And you won't be laughing at me if\when the judge rules, because i haven't claimed a side on this, other than to say that the onus is definately on OBAMA to answer the charges brought against him.

This is about the foundation of our system of law.
If someone can just decide to not follow the rules of our legal system, because they think a lawsuit is a joke, then we have big problems.

PS - you might want to fact check your own damn claim of frivolity, because it is absurd.
Mr. Berg is asking for something VERY simple ... proof of natural born citizenship.
Obama has NOT produced that proof in over TWO MONTHS.
How does that make Mr. Berg's case frivolous?
If anything it ads a lot of weight to his claim.
(and if he turns out to be wrong, it makes obama's staff seem VERY incompetent for prolonging the drama)

RolandTD20Kdrummer

DriftingByTheStorm wrote:

This Berg fella on the Savage show, yesterday.

And FYI for all you misinformed, Phil Berg is a DEMOCRAT.

Makes sense to me.
But then again, presidential candidates don't follow federal rules, right?

I couldn't get that link to work using Firefox, Opera, or Internet Exploder 7, but I found these:

Part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jvGtGitwMR0

Part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=57C9b-ZoNTo&feature=related

DriftingByTheStorm

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

I couldn't get that link to work using Firefox, Opera, or Internet Exploder 7, but I found these:

Part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jvGtGitwMR0

Part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=57C9b-ZoNTo&feature=related

http://www.talkradionetwork.com/premiumstream?dispid=304&headerDest=L3BnL2pzcC9tZWRpYS9mbGFzaHdlbGNvbWUuanNwP3BpZD0zNDI2JnBsYXlsaXN0PXRydWUmY2hhcnR0eXBlPWNoYXJ0JmNoYXJ0SUQ9MzA0JnBsYXlsaXN0U2l6ZT0xMA==

DriftingByTheStorm

fugawzi wrote:

The digital image of his birth certificate that I posted the link to is not from "Obama's website" it's from the bi-partisan factcheck.org and his authentic U.S. birth certificate is at his campaign HQ in Illinois I
believe.

FYI:

someone who knows better than me wrote:

Obama has presented a jpg of a Certification of Live Birth, not a Certificate of Live Birth (these are two separate documents as well) 3) A Certification of Live Birth is known as a short-form or an abstract of the birth record, and the birth certificate would be a long-form record.

The state of Hawaii makes a distinction between these documents and the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands has to have information provided by the longer form, not the short form.

Mr. Berg is asking Obama to produce his long-form "Birth Certificate", not his "Certification of Live Birth" which is an annotated form.

bootlegger10

fugawzi wrote:

Ok well I completely disagree with everything you said there. Especially that he's liable to be ineligible for the presidency. You do seem to care because you're posting a lot about it. It's a FRIVOLOUS lawsuit no question about it. Totally dead issue and not Obama's fault at all. The digital image of his birth certificate that I posted the link to is not from "Obama's website" it's from the bi-partisan factcheck.org and his authentic U.S. birth certificate is at his campaign HQ in Illinois I believe. But ok Drifting, like you said they will rule on it soon. And when they rule that it's a bullshit case I'll be here waiting to see what you have to say. Can't wait.

Can we stop referring to things as bi-partisan? There is no such thing anymore.

blackredyellow

bootlegger10 wrote:

Can we stop referring to things as bi-partisan? There is no such thing anymore.

Only someone EXTREMELY partisan would make a comment like that.

beachdweller

DriftingByTheStorm wrote:

Actually, it IS an issue, and it is OBAMA himself who is making it an issue.

It is an issue because it is IN COURT,
and because Obama's counsel is either completely incompetent (doubtful) or they are having some troubles with their case (seemingly?) ...

it is an issue up to and until the time Obama's counsel successfully answers the charges before the court, OR

more likely,
until someone blackmails this judge in to dismissing the case.

I don't really give a good goddamn where the fuck the man was born,
but his legal team is absolutely fucking retarded for not producing the requested documents, assuming they have them.

Like the OP article says, “There are lots of legal ways to stonewall [...] but failing to respond is not one of them.”

blackmail? you have no credibility with cracks like that. it's a non-issue, you can't say someone isn't a citizen because you don't believe in a photograph, the burden of proof is not on Obama, and saying his birth certificate isn't real doesn't make it true.

pjfan020

I'm still confused here...if this were true do people honestly believe that the republican party wouldn't be all over this..I mean if you can throw the guys priest on tv for a month i'm pretty sure they can get this all over fox if they wanted to. I'm a liberal and I really have entertained the idea of this being true. The biggest factor for me though is that the Rep. party hasn't done anything to get this story out there.

bootlegger10

blackredyellow wrote:

Only someone EXTREMELY partisan would make a comment like that.

This board is crazy. We have the most partisan political environment in history, with Fox News on the right, and MSNBC on the left. The DailyKos and MoveOn.org pushing their agenda, along with the right wing sites. Air America radio (which no one listens to), and the right-wing radio idealogues. Lobbyists rule Washington. Congress's approval rating is at a historical low due to the partisan bickering that halts any real legislation. A woman lied about being beaten by an Obama supporter. Palin is painted as the devil immediately by people who had never heard of her a day before. The list goes on and on and on.

Now, you expect me to believe that FactCheck.org is something I can believe in? There can't be any agenda behind that organization? Even when Obama has ties to it? Maybe they are taking something at face value because they got the "answer" they liked?

Anyway, your comment seems a little ridiculous in the political climate we live in. I'm not partisan for saying what I said, I'm realistic. Wake up. I guess we must trust whatever organization is favorable to Obama.

RolandTD20Kdrummer

DriftingByTheStorm wrote:

http://www.talkradionetwork.com/premiumstream?dispid=304&headerDest=L3BnL2pzcC9tZWRpYS9mbGFzaHdlbGNvbWUuanNwP3BpZD0zNDI2JnBsYXlsaXN0PXRydWUmY2hhcnR0eXBlPWNoYXJ0JmNoYXJ0SUQ9MzA0JnBsYXlsaXN0U2l6ZT0xMA==

Nice intro..."warning: may contain psychological nudity..."

ima check me out this Savage guy

RolandTD20Kdrummer

bootlegger10 wrote:

This board is crazy. We have the most partisan political environment in history, with Fox News on the right, and MSNBC on the left. The DailyKos and MoveOn.org pushing their agenda, along with the right wing sites. Air America radio (which no one listens to), and the right-wing radio idealogues. Lobbyists rule Washington. Congress's approval rating is at a historical low due to the partisan bickering that halts any real legislation. A woman lied about being beaten by an Obama supporter. Palin is painted as the devil immediately by people who had never heard of her a day before. The list goes on and on and on.

Now, you expect me to believe that FactCheck.org is something I can believe in? There can't be any agenda behind that organization? Even when Obama has ties to it? Maybe they are taking something at face value because they got the "answer" they liked?

Anyway, your comment seems a little ridiculous in the political climate we live in. I'm not partisan for saying what I said, I'm realistic. Wake up. I guess we must trust whatever organization is favorable to Obama.

I agree with you on everything except the Palin thing. Dude....uhm....WTF are you thinking!?!?

hehee

Anon

bootlegger10 wrote:

A woman lied about being beaten by an Obama supporter. Palin is painted as the devil immediately by people who had never heard of her a day before. The list goes on and on and on.

I'm not partisan for saying what I said, I'm realistic. Wake up. I guess we must trust whatever organization is favorable to Obama.

You do know that she has come out and admitted she lied right?

DriftingByTheStorm

beachdweller wrote:

it's a non-issue

actually, it IS an issue.
And to be specific,
it is "THE issue before the court".
It's cracks like this that give you no credibility.

beachdweller wrote:

you can't say someone isn't a citizen because you don't believe in a photograph

I can, and i DO say, sir.
Have you never seen a fake photograph on the internet before?
Seriously?
:cool:

beachdweller wrote:

the burden of proof is not on Obama

Okay, how about this:
Defined in the legal sense, the "burden of proof" IS placed on the plaintiff. However, given that the near entirety of the case now rests on the ability of Obama's legal team to produce requested proof of natural born citizenship, the burden in an actual sense has been shifted to Obama.

Further, according to federal civil case law (as above cited), it appears that Mr. Obama has actually legally admitted his ineligibility for presidential candidacy.

beachdweller wrote:

and saying his birth certificate isn't real doesn't make it true.

And saying it is real, doesn't make it real, right?

So what have we proved, other than the FACT that Obama's legal counsel is STILL in failure to produce VERY SIMPLE evidence requested of them. 24 Hours it what it should take him to produce his "Birth Certificate", not 2 months?

pjfan020

DriftingByTheStorm wrote:

So what have we proved, other than the FACT that Obama's legal counsel is STILL in failure to produce VERY SIMPLE evidence requested of them. 24 Hours it what it should take him to produce his "Birth Certificate", not 2 months?

then why hasn't the republican party done ANYTHING about this? If it were true they would be on this like white on rice.

DriftingByTheStorm

pjfan020 wrote:

then why hasn't the republican party done ANYTHING about this? If it were true they would be on this like white on rice.

And why hasn't the judge dismissed it then, if it is so obviously a false claim.
Seriously. People here are screaming at me like I am fucking mad for even giving this Berg guy a chance in court at something Obama's team is being VERY stupid about, and yet the judge in the case is not saying, "This is absurd. Case dismissed."

Anyhow.
The ENTIRE mainstream media is DEAD silent on this,
which is one reason that makes me suspicious that it IS legitimate.

Hey, yesterday Alex Jones released world exlclusive video footage of a long-accused JFK assassination participant (and a tried and jailed member of the Watergate "plumbers" squad) admitting that LBJ (a Democrat) was part of a conspiracy to kill Kennedy.

Why aren't the Republicans all over that, as well?

Answer:
Somethings transcend parties.
And somethings are just too far out of the purview of "politics" for the "media" to "report" on.
It is very clear that "people in very high places" (to copy a statement by Jack Ruby) either want Obama as president or at least want to use his candidacy for some purpose. If that is true, then you wouldn't expect the media -- largely owned by the very same "people in very high places" -- to be damaging their cause.

RolandTD20Kdrummer

Dude....Savage is blowing my mind. About a third of the way in on his Oct 24th show...

pjfan020

DriftingByTheStorm wrote:

And why hasn't the judge dismissed it then, if it is so obviously a false claim.
Seriously. People here are screaming at me like I am fucking mad for even giving this Berg guy a chance in court at something Obama's team is being VERY stupid about, and yet the judge in the case is not saying, "This is absurd. Case dismissed."

Anyhow.
The ENTIRE mainstream media is DEAD silent on this,
which is one reason that makes me suspicious that it IS legitimate.

Hey, yesterday Alex Jones released world exlclusive video footage of a long-accused JFK assassination participant (and a tried and jailed member of the Watergate "plumbers" squad) admitting that LBJ (a Democrat) was part of a conspiracy to kill Kennedy.

Why aren't the Republicans all over that, as well?

Answer:
Somethings transcend parties.
And somethings are just too far out of the purview of "politics" for the "media" to "report" on.
It is very clear that "people in very high places" (to copy a statement by Jack Ruby) either want Obama as president or at least want to use his candidacy for some purpose. If that is true, then you wouldn't expect the media -- largely owned by the very same "people in very high places" -- to be damaging their cause.

I'm not screaming..i'm just conversing. I respect your point of view and understand where you're coming from but i still have a problem with this issue not surfacing

kenny olav

I'm trying to figure why I need to bother figuring out if Obama really was born in America or if he lost his citizenship when his parents moved to Indonesia and lived there for a few years during his youth.

Does anyone think he hasn't lived in this country long enough to understand what it is to be an American? What's the point of exploring technicalities such as these? We need to live free of such things.

DriftingByTheStorm

pjfan020 wrote:

I'm not screaming..i'm just conversing. I respect your point of view and understand where you're coming from but i still have a problem with this issue not surfacing

Fair enough.

And from my point of view the ONLY weight i put on what the media reports is when they go in to blackout mode.

If the media is 100% in refusal to cover something, there MUST be some legitimacy to it.

Ron Paul was in near blackout in the media during the height of his candidacy.

The Bilderberg meeting this year in Virginia got absolutely ZERO coverage on mainstream media, and it is probably THE single most important "political" event of the year.

JFK get the blacklist, as noted by the deafening silence respecting E. Howard Hunt's video testimony as released by Alex Jones earlier this week.

i could probably come up with a half dozen more in recent memory, but i think you get the point.

DriftingByTheStorm

Kenny Olav wrote:

What's the point of exploring technicalities such as these? We need to live free of such things.

Because our founding fathers were smart enough to recognize that allowing foreign born persons to become president could lead to very unpleasant situations.

From a revolutionary perspective, this meant (at the worst) known members of the British government and other such clear "enemy sympathizers". At the very least, leaving the door to the presidency open to foreign born citizens allows those loyal to other nations to claim US citizenship and seek the presidency in order to alter US policy to benefit the interests of other nations.

If you can't guarantee that the leader of your country is in fact a loyal patriot of said country, then you can just get rid of the notion of sovereignty all together. Now, i know that the global government (er, governance, har har) enthusiasts just LOVE this notion (like Obama's favorite little Zbigniew), but i don't.