It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by maria_stardust
I honestly don't see this as a problem for Obama. If there had been any issues, they would have been resolved before this point in time.
I sincerely doubt the Democratic Party would go through the trouble it has to support a candidate who is not viable on the most base level. This lawsuit is simply grasping at straws.
Originally posted by BlackOps719
My guess would be that they would do anything to get the Hildabeast back on that ticket, and that includes having him legally disqualified.
Originally posted by LLoyd45
It's very long, but worth the listen.
Originally posted by dgtempe
This lawsuit was started by a man whose sole purpose is discrediting people and has done so many time without any basis to do so.
Its frivolous at best and will be thrown out of court like ALL HIS PREVIOUS CASES.
This is nothing but caca. No offense meant to my dear friend, the OP.
Originally posted by TrueAmerican
reply to post by jamie83
lol, jamie we need to be clear that the OP started out talking about the sinclair suit. The Berg suit is different, but still just as troublesome for Obama. He's in deep caca now between the two suits dg, that much is pretty clear. Jamie you are commenting on dg's comments, using the Berg suit as your basis, but dg was commenting on the Sinclair suit. You might wanna push the reset button, or edit, or something.
Berg v. Obama, et al. Civil Case No. 08-cv-04083
Answers are due from the various parties to the lawsuite as follows:
Barrack Obama September 24, 2008;
DNC: September 24, 2008 and
FEC: October 21, 2008 (Federal and Government Employees and Entities have sixty (60) days)