Posted on 11/11/2008 11:05:45 AM PST by AndrewWalden
PHILADELPHIA LAWYER PHILIP J. BERG SAYS HE IS AN OPPONENT OF BARACK OBAMA; IS HE?
BERG'S PROFESSIONAL MISCONDUCT RAISES QUESTIONS ABOUT HIS MOTIVES AND COMPETENCE.
(NEW YORK)(November 11, 2008) Some time in mid-August I began to get phone calls from a lawyer's office in Philadelphia. The lawyer was Philip J. Berg.
I eventually spoke with Mr. Berg. He explained that he was preparing to file a lawsuit against Barack Obama and a number of other parties. Berg asked if I would review the case before it was filed, and I agreed.
I carefully read Berg's initial complaint. (Some of the confirming e-mails are in the hands of Patriot Brigade Talk Radio Network.) I advised Berg's office that his lawsuit would not fly in federal court. His joinder of the Federal Election Commission was utter nonsense. Naming the Democratic Party was questionable. Seeking to enjoin the Party's convention was silliness. For an ordinary voter to sue Obama was a lost cause; I explained that already this year two judges had ruled individuals lacked legal standing to file such a claim. Berg sent me a revised version of his lawsuit that was equally deficient.
Berg has tried to pretend that his lack of "standing" is a technicality. On the contrary, in federal courts standing is a threshold jurisdictional issue. State courts have broad "general" jurisdiction. Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction. I explained to Berg how he could file a meritorious lawsuit in state court but he was frantic. "I want to file before the Democratic Convention so I can apply for an injunction," he said. At that point I decided Berg was a loon and had no further contact.
Mr. Berg did file his loony case, and it began to attract a lot of attention. My initial reaction was sadness at the gullibility of the public. People obviously had no idea that the form and forum of Berg's lawsuit were totally deficient.
I did not become concerned until a New York radio talk show host who is a friend called me and said "Andy, what about the order for Obama to produce his birth certificate?" I explained to my friend that there was no such order. Berg and his supporters were spreading disinformation or allowing it to be disseminated.
I began receiving more calls and e-mails about Berg's lawsuit. Berg was escalating the idiocy of his behavior to attract frustrated voters. "Obama admitted he was born in Kenya," screamed one Berg release. Obama had admitted nothing of the sort. The more irresponsible Berg became, the more e-mail he generated from desperate voters.
Berg's lawsuit was promptly dismissed, as I had anticipated before it was even filed. Berg was ready with an explanation: there was a conspiracy to deprive him of justice. No such conspiracy existed.
Last month my staff and I discussed whether we should do a column about Berg's harmful behavior. We decided to ignore him and hope he would go away. Mr. Berg is not going away. He keeps manufacturing false claims to stay in the news and to keep soliciting money.
After Berg lost in the district court, he filed an appeal to the U. S. Court of Appeals. But there was no "juice" in a mere appeal. Berg was soon asking the U.S. Supreme Court to stop the national election-on the basis of his crackpot lawsuit. Once again Berg was denied relief. And once again Berg was ready with a new round of disinformation.
I started to get e-mails telling me the Supreme Court had ordered Obama to produce a birth certificate. No such order existed. The Rules of the Supreme Court allow thirty days to respond; Berg converted that into an "order" from the Court compelling his opponents to respond. Sheer disinformation. There was no "order."
The false claims about the Supreme Court are what convinced me to reverse my earlier view and write a column questioning Berg's behavior.
Enough, Mr. Berg.
What's next from him? What ridiculous claim will he concoct to continue attracting attention?
During this entire period of idiotic behavior Berg was going on talk radio and soliciting funds for his doomed mission.
What should all of this teach us? I have several thoughts for the reader to consider.
First, no one is more opposed to Barack Obama and his hard left warriors than I am. Obama's minions were not attacking Berg during the campaign; they were attacking me. I was the first one to focus attention on Obama's evasiveness and deception, four years ago. But while I have attacked Obama, I have also worked hard to anchor all of my claims in evidence, interviews and traditional forms of legal research. That's what really scares Obama.
When I asked Berg in August how he was going to prove Obama was born in Kenya, he said "I saw it on the Internet." Not good enough for a federal judge.
Second, Berg likes to identify himself as a "supporter" of Hillary Clinton. That's garbage. He's smearing Clinton. Clinton must cringe every time Berg does some new stunt and misuses her name. Berg has no connection with Clinton. More misuse.
Third, is Berg's motive to collect money from frustrated voters? I don't know. He does ask for cash, so that may be the explanation. To be sure, my Committee also receives donations, but we have funded two trips to Hawai'i for Obama research and investigation, and a birth certificate lawsuit scheduled for a hearing on November 18th in Honolulu.
Fourth, could Berg be professionally incompetent? Berg has been criticized by judges: www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1122023117263 systocracy.com/Bergmalpracticetwo www.paed.uscourts.gov/documents/opinions/05D0679P.pdf www.paed.uscourts.gov/documents/opinions/05d0521p.pdf
Finally, is Berg really an Obama operative? Berg's behavior is so far outside the normal confines of legal practice that his conduct is aberrant as well as abhorrent. To date, only Obama has benefited from Berg's misbehavior. When an Obama opponent acts crazy, Obama's people say "See."
There are very legitimate questions about Obama's birth certificate and family history. By filing frivolous cases (a case filed in the wrong court seeking the wrong relief against the wrong defendants is frivolous) and misusing legitimate issues, Berg obscures the seriousness of the underlying questions about Obama's past. And, inevitably, journalists link Berg and others (such as myself) together, despite the fact that we have absolutely no connection. I, for one, do not enjoy being joined to Berg in any form, even a news story. www.thebulletin.us/site/index.cfm?newsid=20193200&BRD=2737&PAG=4 ..
Likewise, Berg's use of Clinton's name benefits Obama by discrediting Clinton as a possible behind-the-scenes Berg supporter, when nothing could be further from the truth. Dirty tricks? Obama and Axelrod are masters of smears by association and deception. Although I am not an enthusiastic believer of the Berg-for-Obama explanation for Berg's behavior, it still makes a lot of sense.
Certainly no competent attorney who regularly practices in federal court would engage in Berg's hijinks. At some point Berg could face sanctions for his misconduct and abusive behavior.
So we are left with no clear explanation for why Berg is acting out: (1) is he "crazy" or ill? (2) is he an Obama saboteur? (3) is he a financial flim flam artist using false claims to collect money? (4) is he an incompetent attorney? I can't say for sure which of those apply. I leave it to the good reader's common sense to reflect on Berg's behavior and to decide for him or herself just what Berg's motivation is.
Helping the anti-Obama movement is not Berg's mission. Quite the opposite. Berg has helped Obama by discrediting Obama's opponents. So what is Berg's game? Let me know what you think.
To Andy Martin: You may be right, but you’d do a lot better if you cut out the ridiculous self-promotion of yourself as “internet powerhouse Andy Martin”.
He might have. There were people who would say it to anyone that would listen. I said it the first time I read about this. In fact, if you want to do the digging, you can go back a month or two to my posts on this subject where I was saying the same thing.
A second year law student would have known that Berg didn't have standing. It's not like anyone was playing hide the ball.
I dont know what to think of all this. But, here’s what I do know.
It would have been the DNC’s responsibility to properly vet him. Are you confident that was done? Bho refuses to provide b.c., college records, medical records, senate records etc. This guy operates under a cloak of secrecy. Do you think that sounds fishy? More thorough vetting would have been done if federal campaign funds were accepted. Is that his reason for regecting that idea? Despite numerous lawsuits, bho cannot or will not produce a birth certificate. Instead, he choses to spend thousands to fight the charges. Again, do you think that sounds fishy?
Where the hell is our government? Do we know if, since the election, he has been properly vetted by the feds (i.e. secret service)? Does anyone care?
what does API think of Andy Martins article about Philip Berg?
What I saw published in the Chicago Tribune (http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/10/obama_mccain_us_citizens.html) as Obama's birth certificate appears to be a computer generated abstrect of the original certificate (or a later amendment). I don't see any evidence of a forgery, and my theory is that everything in that abstract is true, but that there may be some additional information in the original or some amendment(s) which would be embarrasing to Obama (e.g. maybe someone else was originally listed as the father and/or maybe his given name was different originally), and that is why he hasn't released a copy of the original.
>>>It would have been the DNC’s responsibility to properly vet him. Are you confident that was done?
Berg’s filing included the DNC and I thought it made a good case showing it was their responsibility and showed the didn’t. But I don’t understand why Martin disagrees. Then again, I no speako the legalo.
Obama was born in Atlantis..
Fine. Please post a jpg of Obama's original, certified Hawaiian birth certificate here. I'll wait...
One of my biggest problems is that bho could’nt even qualify for security clearance to join the CIA or Secret Service and yet he’s going to be our commander-in-chief of our armed forces. Bill Clinton was the same way. He never served,like bho, but he sure will be glad to command them.
Didn’t Berg file with a September 31st date as well?
Seems to me that there are several people who want to have their names in the history books as the “One who took ‘The One” down.
Why don't you just go around the internet finding blogs posted by kindergartners and repost them on FR, because that is what you have done here.
The petition for writ of certiorari is before the SC and Obaman has until 1 Dec to file brief in opposition to the issuance of the writ.
The facts are clear, and this nonsense is just high volume noise that provides no enlightenment to anyone.
I’m hoping the opinion is more of emotion than fact.
“Actually, it costs $20. Alot cheaper than the army of lawyers Obama is paying to fight all attempts to release his birth certificate”
That’s why I found this quote from one of the documents Andy cited above very interesting:
“Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 establishes that the
signature of an attorney or party on a document filed with the court constitutes a certification that the signer has read the document, that the signer has conducted “reasonable inquiry” to ensure that the document is well grounded in fact and warranted by existing law (or a good faith argument for the modification of such law), and that the document is not being filed for any improper purpose, “such as to harass or to cause unnecessary delay or needless increase in the cost of litigation.” Fed. R.
Civ. P. 11(b). If a court finds that Rule 11 has been violated, the imposition of sanctions is mandatory. See Ross v. Jolly, 151 F.R.D. 562, 567 (E.D. Pa. 1993) (citing Project 74 Allentown, Inc. v. Frost, 143 F.R.D. 77, 83 (E.D. Pa. 1992), aff’d w/out opinion, 998 F.2d 1004 (3rd Cir. 1993)).
http://www.paed.uscourts.gov/documents/opinions/05D0679P.pdf
Isn’t fighting the request rather than simply providing the requested document a pretty clear case of “needless increase in the cost of litigation”? If Obama’s lawyers ever actually appear before a judge, how do they explain/rationalize their behavior? Obama’s a millionaire, so maybe he doesn’t care—especially if campaign funds are being used—but doesn’t every single filing and court document/ruling ultimately cost taxpayers real money? The courts shouldn’t be used to play kindergarten games (”You can’t catch me, nanny nanny boo boo”)
Well, what I think is that we still have to get Obama’s real birth certificate on the record. The only reason why I can see that Obama won’t release it is either it shows he was born in another country, or it shows he’s got a different daddy (than what he says...)...
All of his documents are sealed. School docs are sealed and they probably show country of birth is Kenya.
O used his goons and the Tribune newspaper to unsealed the divorce of Paul Ryan to smear him. The ex-Mrs. Ryan asked the court to keep the documents sealed. He knows this game.
Please don’t change the subject. This has nothing to do with me.
I am very much aware of all the good that Andy Martin has done over the years, and you note that I stayed well clear of ANY criticism of Andy except for his Hawaii foray.
If you wish to offer a relevant comment, I would always be receptive.
I do not know why AndrewWalden wrote what he wrote in the subject line, but it is true that Andy Martin believes that BHO was born in Hawaii.
The reason Martin questions "Obama's birth certificate and family history" is that he says BHO's father was not Barack Hussein Sr. but was Frank Marshall Davis.
See:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2112695/posts
Part Three: Barack Obama Is Not Barack Obama
Contrarian Commentary ^ | October 22, 2008 | Andy Martin
Berg's work is "competition" to Martin's pet theory.
I don’t know the answer to that, but given this clown’s other conduct, I wouldn’t be shocked.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.