Fed Judge Throws Out Berg v. Obama Lawsuit? Or did he?

reply to post by Anchan64


Oh come on, it is silly to think that anyone would have ever done a background check or that the other candidates would not have looked heavily into this. Of course it all lands on this very very important lawyer that no one has ever heard of.

John McCain was not born in the Panama Canal "Zone". Dig a little
deeper and you will see. He has his own citizenship issues.


forums.hannity.com...

dallasmorningviewsblog.dallasnews.com...

www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnmccain.com...

[edit on 26-10-2008 by Lokki]

reply to post by TheRooster


I believe the answer to that is that there are various grounds that a case might be dismissed or thrown out, and that the request to dismiss (made by the dems) was turned down, but upon review of the claim, the Judge threw the case out, not in response to the request by the Dems, but because, upon review by the judge, the case was found to be frivolous. I don't think that this was a matter of the Judge trying to hide, rather, it was a matter of the judge being thorough.

Hello ATSNN members,

Was the judge simply following orders?

Was he so ordered by one or more of the shadow governments under the Illuminati (eg. The Council on Foreign Relations, THE Trilateral Commission, THE Bilderbergs)?

Or, was he influenced by Jimmy Carter?

Why didn't Hillary "shut him down," early on in the primary campaigning?

The truth is it's baseless.

www.factcheck.org...

Happy voting!

Originally posted by BO XIAN
reply to post by davion

 

That's wholesale inaccurate.

BTW, FR outted Mapes forgery re W.

RE Obama and his book, FR's thread documented his own slippery comments about the book as well as quite logical evidence that his pedophile buddy wrote it.

Didn't have anything to do with a black not using great English.

Oh a pedophile buddy, gotcha.

Originally posted by nfotech
The online documents are not the signed copies and I'm fairly certain Obama was ordered to comply with the plaintiff's motion. I know for a fact he was served to appear in court and blew that off. The first motion to dismiss was denied not upheld. Does the cult of Obama have a rule against reading factual sources?

It was a blog which "verified" the digital copy. Real world experts in document forgery were responsible for pronouncing it as fake. I must have missed the part where I said a blogger called it fake......

And to those who continue to spout this crap about how he's legal because of his mother after 12 pages of discussion: NO that is not a "natural born" citizen as the Constitution requires.

If you're fairly certain then lets see some proof, instead of just speculation on your part.

I'd like to see where these blogs "mentioned that it was proved a fake by experts" as well, I know that for about a month bloggers were dissecting the JPG of his birth certificate, never heard any experts take on it.

Also, the United States uses both jus soli and jus sanguinis for citizenship.

Jus soli - If you're born in the United States you're a natural born citizen.

Jus sanguinis - If you're born to someone that is a citizen of the United States you're natural born citizen.

Conveniently, people have excuses for both of those:

Jus soli - He wasn't born in America!

Jus sanguinis - His Mom wasn't old enough!

reply to post by Lokki


well technically, he was born at a naval air station hospital at the Coco Solo submarine base...technically American soil abroad. But i guess there could be controversy there. Also, by no means do i agree with all of this *Obama is not a natural-born citizen thus barring him from running for POTUS* nonsense, but there's no need for shady comments on McCain's citizenship...

Someone born from a U.S. citizen has duel citizenship until they turn of age (18 years old). At that time they must declare citizenship in they country of their choice. I have a friend that was in the Army and has a son that is in this situation right now. The child is a citizen of both Germany and the U.S. until he turns 18 when he will have to choose.

I happen to be a lawyer. 28 years. I will try to explain although by being brief, there will be things I will have to skip. It could take 50 or more pages to explain this fully.

What you have seen is a Proposed Order drafted by Berg. It is his "wish list".

As to the "standing issue", this is tricky and hard for the public to understand. Standing goes to the question whether this is the right person to bring the suit. Judge Surrick is a District Court judge. He is bound by decisions of the courts above him, namely, the Appeals and Supreme Courts. The Supreme Court has ruled that individuals may not bring claims of this kind. The judge had to dismiss. He had no choice.

The court commented that Berg's claims seemed to be based on nothing more than rumor and circumstantial evidence. Citing Wikipedia is ludicrous.

If Berg wants the documents examined, he could call some responsible Republican in Hawaii who can go to where the records are kept and examine the document. In general, if a record is public, the person does not have to produce it since the demander can do so. Suits are not intended to shift to the opponent the costs of doing what one can do oneself.

There were questions assuming Obama is hiding something. These questions are misdirected. Berg had no legal right to demand the documents. He could have had someone get them for him. Thus, the suit is frivolous on that ground also. It is not about hiding anything. Berg can get these documents himself. Berg and those who support him seem to think Berg can run around with frivolous claims and require Obama to jump each time Berg tells him to. Sorry, but none of us would stand for that.

reply to post by davion


Obama is a U.S. citizen because his mother was a citizen (jus sanguinis), which is true, but for the presidency, the constitution specifies not just nationality, but a "natural born citizen" so my understanding is that jus sanguinis does not apply to that specific requirement, only jus soli. One has to be born in the United States to be president, and technically, Obama wasn't.

Prior to 1986, someone born abroad was a U.S. citizen only if both parents were U.S. citizens at the time of the child's birth. Since Obama's father was not a U.S. citizen (he was Kenyan), he actually cannot claim citizenship by jus sanguinis, only by jus soli with Hawaii considered a state. Again, I still don't think this will have any actual effect on his eligibility, since the U.S. considers Hawaii a state, but in fact if you follow the legal argument that Hawaii is an occupied country and the U.S. has never legally acquired Hawaii, the logical consequence is that Obama is not a natural-born citizen by either place or parentage, and is not actually eligible for the presidency.

www.digitalhistory.uh.edu...ay.cfm... HHID=189

www.msnbc.msn.com...

Moderator-Note: Post removed due to T&C Violation.

[edit on 26-10-2008 by Skyfloating]

reply to post by Anonymous ATS


Excellent post, too bad you are anonymous....

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
reply to post by davion

 

Obama is a U.S. citizen because his mother was a citizen (jus sanguinis), which is true, but for the presidency, the constitution specifies not just nationality, but a "natural born citizen" so my understanding is that jus sanguinis does not apply to that specific requirement, only jus soli. One has to be born in the United States to be president, and technically, Obama wasn't.

Prior to 1986, someone born abroad was a U.S. citizen only if both parents were U.S. citizens at the time of the child's birth. Since Obama's father was not a U.S. citizen (he was Kenyan), he actually cannot claim citizenship by jus sanguinis, only by jus soli with Hawaii considered a state. Again, I still don't think this will have any actual effect on his eligibility, since the U.S. considers Hawaii a state, but in fact if you follow the legal argument that Hawaii is an occupied country and the U.S. has never legally acquired Hawaii, the logical consequence is that Obama is not a natural-born citizen by either place or parentage, and is not actually eligible for the presidency.

www.digitalhistory.uh.edu...ay.cfm... HHID=189

www.msnbc.msn.com...

not sure why that url is getting cut off here it is again piece them together

http - www.
digitalhistory.uh.edu/database/article_display.cfm?HHID=189

bottom line of this history of Hawaii is
In 1993, a joined Congressional resolution, signed by President Bill Clinton, apologized for the U.S. role in the overthrow. The House approved the resolution by voice vote. The Senate passed it 65 to 34 votes.
www.digitalhistory.uh.edu...

reply to post by Anonymous ATS


Though this may be true, are the benefits Hawai'i shares with other states as a result of US statehood coextensive?

If Hawai'i was never legally acquired, that is an issue, no doubt about it, especially for native Hawai'ians. But Hawai'i is formally recognized as a state. Those born in Hawai'i bear US citizenship, whether or not they appreciate it, but if they wanted to run for POTUS, they could. In addition to deriving other benefits of being US citizens.

Though, I must admit, the benefits that US citizens enjoy have been steadily diminishing over the last decade.

Also, I'm not saying that I agree with the situation of Hawai'i having been overthrown. I'm only questioning what the aspects of statehood and citizenship means for Hawai'i within the context of the United States.

[edit on 26-10-2008 by Areal51]

reply to post by Areal51



If you read the url at digitalhistory most of your questions would have been answered but I'll give it a shot.

1. are the benefits Hawai'i shares with other states as a result of US statehood coextensive?
Yes and no Hawai did have a good trade relationship with other countries before the overthrow so it would be rather hard to tell where they might be today if they were left sovereign.

2. questioning what the aspects of statehood and citizenship means for Hawai'i within the context of the United States.
To the natives (pure blood) it would seem to me they are not happy at all, as for those who are not native I belive it means everything to them.

Here's another url that tells the story through native eyes
www.opihi.com... sovereig.txt


www.opihi.com...
/sovereignty...ty/ sovereig.txt

reply to post by DOHC


At the time I was making the post, the link "Anonymous" posted didn't work. So I read your link after posting.

Anyway, I gathered what you explained

Well, it's time to throw another iron on the fire. All the furor and general hub-bub over the Obama citizenship is justified and should be explored to its complete resolution, but we also cannot let another simmering deception go unexplored and that is the matter of Sarah Palin being the actual birth mother of little Trig.

* No birth certficate
* No witnesses
* No record of birth on April 18 at the hospital in Wasilla
* The Palin family physician, Dr Cathy Baldwin-Johnson is missing

These are just some of the primary facts regarding this "miraculous" birth and there are many other questions regarding the status of daughter Bristol at that time, but again, no official record and nobody is talking. This speaks to the most basic character of the woman - how can she adhere to the McCain tenet of "Country First"? If Obama is pulling fast ones over the American peoples eyes at every turn, it is her duty, her obligation to the country to be forthcoming and rise above the fray with the truth - if she's a better American, a more honest American, than Obama.

Deception has many faces...

go to: www.palindeception.com

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
I happen to be a lawyer. 28 years.

If Berg wants the documents examined, he could call some responsible Republican in Hawaii who can go to where the records are kept and examine the document.
Berg can get these documents himself.

What type of law do you practice????

Birth, death and medical records are private. Only the person they are for or a spouse in case of death, can get copies.

Berg as a citizen who will be affected by who gets elected has every dam right to request tese records!

Please, stick to chasing ambulances.