RetrieverTraining.Net - the RTF banner

Obama Lawsuit GDG

7K views 52 replies 18 participants last post by  K.Bullock 
#1 · (Edited)
Anyone else tracking this lawsuit challenging Obama's noncitizenship?


UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

PHILIP J. BERG, ESQUIRE,
Plaintiff

vs.

BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA, a/k/a
BARRY SOETORO, a/k/a
BARRY OBAMA, a/k/a JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
BARACK DUNHAM, a/k/a
BARRY DUNHAM, THE
DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL
COMMITTEE, THE FEDERAL
ELECTION COMMISSION AND
DOES 1-50 INCLUSIVE,
Defendants

CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:08-cv-04083-RBS

ORDER

AND NOW this 9th day of October, 2008, upon consideration of Defendants, Barack H. Obama and the Democratic National Committee’s Motion for a Protective
Order and Stay pending the Decision on Defendants Dispositive Motion and Plaintiff’s Response in Opposition thereto, it is hereby ORDERED and DECREED as follows:

1. Defendants Motion for Protective Order Staying Discovery pending the Court’s Decision on Defendants dispositive Motion is DENIED in part and GRANTED in part;

2. Pending the Decision on the Defendants, Barack H. Obama and the Democratic National Committee’s Motion to Dismiss, discovery is stayed except for the following:

Defendants, Barack H. Obama and the Democratic National Committee are ORDERED to turn over the following documents by October 15, 2008:

1. A certified copy of Obama’s “vault” (original long version) birth certificate;

2. Certified copies of all reissued and sealed birth certificates of Obama in the names referred to in the caption of this lawsuit;

3. A certified copy of Obama’s Certification of Citizenship;

4. A certified copy of Obama’s Oath of Allegiance taken upon age of majority;

5. Certified copies of Obama’s Application and Admission forms for Occidental College, Columbia University and Harvard Law School; and

6. Certified copies of any Court Orders or legal documents changing Obama’s name from Barry Soetoro to Barack Hussein Obama.

Defendant, Barack Hussein Obama is ORDERED to serve upon Plaintiff Answers to the following Request for Admissions by October 15, 2008:


Admissions, Request No. 1. Admit you were born in Kenya.

Admissions, Request No. 2. Admit you are a Kenya “natural born” citizen.

Admissions, Request No. 3. Admit your foreign birth was registered in the State of Hawaii.

Admissions, Request No. 4. Admit your name was legally changed to Barry Soetoro and citizenship status was changed to “natural citizen” of Indonesia.

Admissions, Request No. 5. Admit you were adopted by Lolo Soetoro, M.A. a citizen of Indonesia.

Admissions, Request No. 6. Admit Lolo Soetoro, M.A. a citizen of Indonesia. Signed a Government Acknowledgement” form legally acknowledging you as his son.

Admissions, Request No. 7. Admit you are an Indonesian citizen.

Admissions, Request No. 8. Admit you are currently not a “natural born” United States citizen.

Admissions, Request No. 9. Admit you are not eligible to serve as the President of the United States pursuant to Article II, Section I of the United States Constitution.

Admission, Request No. 10. Admit you are unable to prove your citizenship status.

Defendant, the Democratic National Committee is ORDERED to serve upon Plaintiff Answers to the following
Request for Admissions by October 15, 2008:

Admissions, Request No. 1. Admit you have not verified Barrack Hussein Obama’s eligibility to serve as President of the United States.

Admissions, Request No. 2. Admit Barrack Hussein Obama was born in Kenya.

Admissions, Request No. 3. Admit Barack Hussein Obama’s citizenship status was changed to a “natural” citizen of Indonesia when his stepfather, Lolo Soetoro, M.A. legally “acknowledged” Obama as his son.

Admissions, Request No. 4. Admit Barack Hussein Obama’s name was legally changed to Barry Soetoro, an
Indonesian citizen.

Admissions, Request No. 5. Admit Barrack Hussein Obama is not a “natural born” United States citizen.

Admissions, Request No. 6: Admit you have not inquired into Barrack Hussein Obama’s citizenship status.

Admissions, Request No. 7. Admit the United States
Constitution does not allow for a Person to hold the Office of President of the United States unless that person is a “natural born” United States citizen.

Admissions, Request No. 8. Admit you collected donations on behalf of Barack Hussein Obama for his Presidential campaign.

Admissions, Request No. 9. Admit the DNC has promised Plaintiff and all American citizens that the DNC will ensure Open and Honest Government and uphold the United
States Constitution to protect the United States citizens.

Admissions, Request No. 10. Admit Barack Hussein Obama is not a legal citizen of the United States.

IT IS SO ORDERED

BY THE COURT:
R. Barclay Surrick, J.
Case 2:08-cv-04083-RBS Document 18 Filed 10/09/2008 Page 5 of 22
[.....]
 
See less See more
#2 · (Edited)
#7 ·
The devil's in the details. It is unfortunate that with all of the misinformation floating around, more time is spent debunking myths about the candidates than actually getting to know the issues they are running on. ]

It makes it kind of easy on the candidates IMO. Because they get to go around defending cream puff attacks and don't have to explain their platforms. I would rather make them work for it.
 
#5 ·
The Republicans have a weak presidential candidate and an incompetent vice-presidential candidate. So, to overcome a total lack of qualification and vision, the Rove-like negative attacks continue. Obama's taking the high road in this election that's why he's up by so much in the polls. Americans are beginning to see through McCain and Palin.
 
#9 · (Edited)
Besides age, the only other Constitutional requirement for POTUS is to be a natural born American citizen. If, in fact Hussein is prevaracating, the American people have a right to know, BEFORE THE ELECTION.

Factcheck is as reliable for truth as PMSNBC or Keith Olberdork.
 
#10 ·
Fact check is so obviously swaying far west as I gaze out at the North star Its so easy to tell its what is said between the lines the reveals its falibilityand bias.
Thats why I don't believe most of these links posted. They are so oviously left or right views.
There are so few people that can look at a matter for what it is. What you need is a profiler who only investigates historical facts and leaves interviewing cronies for the vultures,,,
There are some good ones out there and when you listen to them speak they are truely not on anyones side. You won't find them on a news channel.
Pete
 
#11 ·
There are a lot more organizations other than Annenberg (Fact Check) that have vetted this. I was going to post them, but then I thought why waste my time? Don't you think that this has been checked and re-checked and re-checked? Don't you think there are a lot more important questions that ought to be asked of both candidates? The sophomoric pettiness of the American electorate (on both sides) astounds me.
 
#12 ·
It's my understanding that the FEC requested and received a birth certificate. Under Hawaiian law certificates are not publicly available so the media cannot obtain their own copies. The FEC and the FBI are in a position to verify his birth certificate and I suspect that both have done so.

By the way, how outraged was everyone by the fact that Cheney was a Texas resident until he was nominated as Vice President and then changed his residency to Wyoming to avoid the Constitutional prohibition on having a President and Vice President from the same state?

It's also interesting that few mention that McCain was not actually born in the U.S. but in Panama. A law passed after his birth gave him the status equivalent to a "natural born" citizen. However, the Supreme Court has never issued any opinions on what the term "natural born" actually means. Should we have a law suit challenging his qualification?

Does anyone actually believe that either Obama or McCain is trying to masquerade as a citizen? Why not discuss actual issues instead of ridiculous drivel?
 
#13 ·
I
By the way, how outraged was everyone by the fact that Cheney was a Texas resident until he was nominated as Vice President and then changed his residency to Wyoming to avoid the Constitutional prohibition on having a President and Vice President from the same state?

It's also interesting that few mention that McCain was not actually born in the U.S. but in Panama. A law passed after his birth gave him the status equivalent to a "natural born" citizen. However, the Supreme Court has never issued any opinions on what the term "natural born" actually means. Should we have a law suit challenging his qualification?

Does anyone actually believe that either Obama or McCain is trying to masquerade as a citizen? Why not discuss actual issues instead of ridiculous drivel?
:lol: Do you think that opens the door for a Terminator /Palin ticket in 2012?
 
#14 ·
McCain's birth in Panama is not an issue. His father was and his mother is a US citizen ergo Ius Sanquinis or law of the blood is the relevent issue. Since his father was in the US military at the time of his birth Senator McCain is according to international law a US citizen.
 
#15 ·
As I understand it -- and I may well be wrong -- the issue is not citizenship but place of birth. Thus, a child born to American parents stationed at a military based overseas would be a citizen by blood as you state but would not be eligible to be President by virtue of being born outside the U.S. The law that covers McCain seems to be one that extended the definition of the United States to include territories of the U.S. Obama was actually born after Hawaii became a state or he would presumably also be affected by the same law. For a natural born citizen -- that is one born in the U.S. -- the citizenship of parents is irrelevant. By Supreme Court ruling, there is only one distinction between citizens that are natural born, born to American citizens outside of the country, or born as non-citizens but subsequently naturalized. That difference is that only those born in the U.S. may serve as President and, by extension, Vice President.
 
#19 ·
The language of the relevant Federal law reads as follows:

7 FAM 1111.2 Citizenship
(TL:CON-64; 11-30-95)
a. U.S. citizenship may be acquired either at birth or through naturalization.
b. U.S. laws governing the acquisition of citizenship at birth embody two legal
principles:
(1) Jus soli (the law of the soil), a rule of common law under which the place of a
person’s birth determines citizenship. In addition to common law, this principle is embodied
in the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and the various U.S. citizenship and
nationality statutes.
(2) Jus sanguinis (the law of the bloodline ), a concept of Roman or civil law under
which a person’s citizenship is determined by the citizenship of one or both parents. This
rule, frequently called “citizenship by descent” or “derivative citizenship”, is not embodied in
the U.S. Constitution, but such citizenship is granted through statute. As laws have
changed, the requirements for conferring and retaining derivative citizenship have also
changed.
c. Naturalization is “the conferring of nationality of a state upon a person after birth, by
any means whatsoever” (Section 101(a)(23) INA) or conferring of citizenship upon a
person (Sections 310 and 311 INA). Naturalization can be granted automatically or
pursuant to an application. Under U.S. law, foreign naturalization acquired automatically is
not an expatriating act [see chapter 7 FAM 1200 ]
The doctrine of jus soli, the law of the land, is that normally associated with the term "natural born" citizen as distinct from "naturalized citizen" which is someone that had citizenship elsewhere before becoming a US citizen. The state department has issued opinions (not the Supreme Court as Iindicted before) that US military basis do not qualify is US soil for purposes of defining citizenship, raising the question of whether a person born outside the US on a US military base could be considered to be a "natural born" citizen.
 
#20 ·
The language of the relevant Federal law reads as follows:



The doctrine of jus soli, the law of the land, is that normally associated with the term "natural born" citizen as distinct from "naturalized citizen" which is someone that had citizenship elsewhere before becoming a US citizen. The state department has issued opinions (not the Supreme Court as Iindicted before) that US military basis do not qualify is US soil for purposes of defining citizenship, raising the question of whether a person born outside the US on a US military base could be considered to be a "natural born" citizen.
I think you are reading way to much into this which in truth is not there.

I believe that defining the stipulation for requirement of citizenship before being eligible for the presidency has to do with being "born" a citizen versus naturalization.

WRL
 
#21 ·
"No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States."
 
#24 · (Edited)
[
QUOTE=YardleyLabs;345522] (My son in law went through this and selected British citizenship at the request of his father. He subsequently went through naturalization to become a US citizen again when he married my daughter.)
And we are supposed to take your word for .. a man with admitted ties to Monarchists? :rolleyes::) (just kidding BTW)
Does Berg just like the publicity he gets in these cases?
heh yeah it sure looks like it.

Still some interesting things were mentioned that have yet to be discussed. For instance why will they not provide the court with with his birth certificate and be done with it? And yes he also investigated Cheney some say rightly so, if you remember Cheney changed his state of residence just prior to the the election. Almost as distasteful as Obama jumping ship from his church after it became an election issue.
And what about this link between Annenberg and fact check.org? That is a little disturbing since many are stating as gospel truth anything posted on fact check .org.

This link doesn't make much issue about Annenberg and fact check. But the connections here are disturbing.

http://news.bostonherald.com/news/o...bg?articleid=1125136&srvc=home&position=rated

Next time I will write "Jeff whatever you do don't click this link." lol:D
 
#25 ·
[
...

Still some interesting things were mentioned that have yet to be discussed. For instance why will they not provide the court with with his birth certificate and be done with it? And yes he also investigated Cheney some say rightly so, if you remember Cheney changed his state of residence just prior to the the election. Almost as distasteful as Obama jumping ship from his church after it became an election issue.
And what about this link between Annenberg and fact check.org? That is a little disturbing since many are stating as gospel truth anything posted on fact check .org.

This link doesn't make much issue about Annenberg and fact check. But the connections here are disturbing.

http://news.bostonherald.com/news/o...bg?articleid=1125136&srvc=home&position=rated

Next time I will write "Jeff whatever you do don't click this link." lol:D
Berg talks about the "Annenberg Foundation of Chicago" as being involved with FactCheck.org and Obama. The Annenberg Foundation is actually located in Pennsylvania and controlled by Mrs. Annenberg, a McCain supporter. They fund factcheck.org which, when you review the articles, posts about as many stories exposing Democrat misrepresentations as Republican ones. The connection to Chicago and Ayers dates back to the late 1990's when the Foundation committed almost $400 million to experimental programs to try to improve urban education. Proposals were received from all over the ocuntry and William Ayers was one of three people authoring a proposal from Chicago that was awarded a grant of $40+ million over a five year period. In accordance with the terms of the grant, an independent Board of Directors was appointed and Obama was the first Chairman. He resigned after a couple of years to run for office. At the time of his appointment, Obama served on the boards of two other organizations involved with community and educational programs. His appointment to the "Annenberg Community Challenge" was the basis of his "relationship" to Ayers, the original proposal author. The grant ended and the program was closed down at the end of the five year period in 2001.

With respect to Ayers -- aka the terrorist -- the public record is pretty clear. He was directly involved in the weatherman, an organization which undertook "direct action" against the Vietnam War and the draft and was linked to various bombings. He was arrested for these but all charges were dropped -- allegedly because of the mistaken destruction/loss of evidence. He is, as I understand it, a respected professor who remains very liberal and is very active in philanthropic activities in Chicago where his past is well known but treated as something that happened 40 years ago.

Our wounds, as a country, from the Vietnam War will probably not be healed until all of us who lived through that period are dead and gone. Among the best things that McCain has done were his actions to help normalize relations with Vietnam.
 
#30 ·
I believe what you are referring to is a requirement where a child is born outside of the U.S. and one parent is a citizen while the other is not. If the child is born from about 1952 - 1986, the citizen parent must have lived at least 10 years in the U.S. including 5 years after the age of 14. For children born more recently the requirement if 5 years residence in the U.S. of which at least 2 are after the age of 14. Obama's mother lived her whole life in the U.S. until she moved to Indonesia with her second husband. However, she was only 18 at the time of Obama's birth. Right wing sites and Philip Berg are promoting the argument that Obama was actually born in Kenya in which case he would not qualify as a citizen unless subsequently naturalized. In that case he would also not meet the Constitutional test for becoming President. You can see a story about the whole citizenship issue at http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gcwFmRs78Gz6-31o50qhACm-Y24AD93NRJE00.
 
#29 ·
Obama was born to an American citizen in the United States. The law to which you refer went off the books January 13, 1941, more than twenty years before Obama's birth. In fact, before his mother was born!

I had to search a little to find this information (on something other than a blog) and finally found it in the Consular Services section of the US State Dept. in regards to children born to an American mother and a non-American father. Children born out of wedlock to an American father and a non-American mother (think Vietnam) can also be considered U.S. citizens, but the bar is a little higher to cross.
 
#34 ·
But if it goes to a jury, they will have to go by the definitions in the dictionaries. It can get interesting going by the "letter of the law" rather than the spirit of the law.
 
#40 ·
The situation with ACORN is interesting. By law, organizations that help people to register to vote must turn in every signed form regardless of whether they believe it is accurate or fraudulent. That became an issue in my area a couple of years ago when a Republican sponsored registration program was found to have destroyed all applications where the would be registrant indicated that they were Democrats rather than Republicans.

The mission of ACORN is to register poor and minority voters. As such, it is an organization feared by Republicans since newly registered voters vote more frequently than would otherwise be expected and poor and minority voters vote for Democrats more often than Republicans. The contrast, of course, is that Republicans are very aggressive at running registration efforts that set up at county fairs, suburban shopping malls, etc.

ACORN itself has an interesting take on its procedures at http://acorn.org/index.php?id=12439&tx_ttnews[tt_news]=22383&tx_ttnews[backPid]=12340&cHash=ef14f35f55.

Given that ACORN registered 1.3 million new voters, I would expect that every effort will be made to inspect and prevent those registrants from being approved. However, in my election district if you walk in to vote you must prove your identity if you are not already known to the judges of elections and anyone whose name and address does not match their registration will be excluded from voting. When a district in Ohio, which engaged in systematic efforts to exclude voters in the last election, sets aside thousands of registrations without even checking them for accuracy, I question the motives of those involved.
 
#41 ·
Given that ACORN registered 1.3 million new voters, I would expect that every effort will be made to inspect and prevent those registrants from being approved. However, in my election district if you walk in to vote you must prove your identity if you are not already known to the judges of elections and anyone whose name and address does not match their registration will be excluded from voting. When a district in Ohio, which engaged in systematic efforts to exclude voters in the last election, sets aside thousands of registrations without even checking them for accuracy, I question the motives of those involved.


Well this only works as good as the people checking the ID. My grandparents went to vote early the other day, they live in a minority area of the city, the minority who was to be checking ID, was not checking the ID of anyone!
 
#42 · (Edited)
Getting info from Acorns site isn't very convincing. They are under investigation is several states and have had troubles since their inception. Other groups who advocate for disadvantaged voters call them an embarrassment. Groups that manage to stay out of trouble BTW.

This from the Columbus Dispatch:

Brunner loses lawsuit to GOP
Let county boards check new voters' names, judge says
Friday, October 10, 2008 3:17 AM
By Darrel Rowland and Mark Niquette
THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH
DispatchPolitics


Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner is breaking federal law by not giving county elections boards the chance to determine whether new voter registrations are fraudulent, a federal judge ruled last night.

"It is hard to imagine a public interest more compelling than safeguarding the legitimacy of the election of the president of the United States," said Judge George C. Smith of U.S. District Court in Columbus in upholding the Ohio Republican Party's request for a court order.

Brunner's office said she is filing an immediate appeal with the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Smith, appointed by President Reagan, said the Help America Vote Act requires states not only to verify the addresses and other identifying information provided by newly registered voters with the state Bureau of Motor Vehicles and the federal Social Security Administration, but also to provide counties with the names of new voters whose records did not match.

Brunner's office had been doing the computerized verification, but the GOP argued that Brunner had not made the names available to county elections boards. The judge gave her a week to comply.

The rest is here at this link.

http://www.dispatchpolitics.com/liv...-10-08_B1_19BII72.html?adsec=politics&sid=101
 
#43 ·
COLLIER COUNTY: Voter registration fraud has been detected in one Florida county and now Republicans are pointing their finger at one organization designed to get minorities to vote.

The accusations are against the "Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now," or ACORN.

The Republican National Committee accuses ACORN of creating fraudulent voter registration cards in an effort to benefit democrats.

ACORN admits that they had a case of voter fraud happen this week in Seminole County, but say they have since fired that employee and the faulty registration has been thrown out.

Well that's that they caught the one individual in ACORN that was commiting voter fraud...I will rest easy now.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top