Posted on 10/25/2008 1:48:50 AM PDT by Dajjal
A federal judge in Philadelphia last night threw out a complaint by a Montgomery County lawyer who claimed that Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama was not qualified to be president and that his name should be removed from the Nov. 4 ballot.
[snip]
In a 34-page memorandum and opinion, the judge said Berg's allegations of harm were "too vague and too attenuated" to confer standing on him or any other voters.
Surrick ruled that Berg's attempts to use certain laws to gain standing to pursue his claim that Obama was not a natural-born citizen were "frivolous and not worthy of discussion."
[snip
Berg could not be reached for comment last night.
[snip]
(Excerpt) Read more at philly.com ...
(HI) Andy Martin at email: AndyMart20@aol.com
(WA) Steve Marquis email: peoplesvoice@peoplespassions.org ; website: www.peoplespassion.org
(CA) David Archbold email darchbo1@gmail.com
(GA) Tom Terry email: kingdommatters@gmail.com
(PA) Philip Berg email: philjberg@obamacrimes.com ; website: www.obamacrimes.com
(NY) Dan Smith email: Dansmith1954@aol.com
(CT) Cort Wrotnowski email: Metaqubit@aol.com
You signed up yesterday to post that?
Hey All,
Please make sure you all read the reason for dismissal on www.americasright.com so you will understand when the democrats try to spin this.
Yes, as others said here the dismissal is based on ‘standing’. Our country is not set up really well right now to figure out WHO can raise the question of if a candidate meets the qualifications or not, so Berg filed a suit to ‘sue’, saying that (and I’m not a lawyer but just quoting americasright) that if Obama would be voted in not being qualified, that we, as voters, would be hurt. (Really paraphrased there by a non lawyer.) LOL
So, when the judge said there was not enough evidence, it appears to me from reading the information on americasright.com that he was saying Berg did not present enough evidence that HE OR THE VOTERS WOULD BE HURT.
I am sure this “not enough edidence” part will be used and used by Obama’s camp to pretend that there was no evidence... period. THAT IS NOT THE CASE!
The only evidence not supported in the judge’s mind (as I can see it) was that he was not satisfied with enough evidence that Berg had standing (a right) to sue.
Please correct me if I am wrong — those of you who are attorneys or in the legal field with more understanding.
I just want to make sure no one gets upset feeling the evidence ON OBAMA was flawed, because that is not the issue... that is not the evidence that made the difference in anything with this case.
As others mentioned, Berg knew this might happen and had already planned on appealing to higher courts. As it stands now, the judge in this case feels voters do not have any way in whether or not a presidential candidate is qualified or not (other than just voting) and additionally, this judge feels the determining way to handle this is to go through the congress to see what they would do about someone’s qualifications. (Oh, SURE....... )
Just make sure you know this is about standing... if someone has the right to challenge a presidential candidates qualifications, and the evidence to support Berg’s right to challenge in this manner was not accepted as enough by the judge, NOT the evidence of Obama’s citizenship.
Don’t let the misguiding spins throw you off!
Let me get this right: these are the questions we need to answer: Where is Obama’s original birth certificate and what does it say, and what was Obama’s citizenship status before, during and after his stay in Indonesia. Are there any others?
“...By extension, the theoretical constitutional harm experienced by voters does not change as the candidacy of an allegedly ineligible candidate progresses from the primaries to the general election.”
If I'm interpreting this correctly, Judge Surrick’s opinion is that if Obama is in fact constitutionally ineligible to hold office of POTUS, then “harm” to voters can only become a reality ONCE HE IS IN OFFICE.
Therefore, no harm exists at this time to voters.
That's almost analogous to stating that “attempted murder” is not a crime, because no one was actually murdered.
This is code for "Berg is absolutely right, but I don't want to apply the law." Federal Judges often use this language to simply ignore the constitution and the law.
This case will end up in the USSC.
I think there is going to be another revolution if Obama is elected and it is demonstrated he is not eligible.
Most of the questions about whether or not he is qualified to be POTUS (President of The United States) would be answered if he could present an authentic vaulted birth certificate which he must not be able to do or he would have done so already. All the questions you presented and more would be answered if he could do that.
Notice Howard Dean is not out there anywhere defending Obama is qualified. The best they can do is object that our country has no way of verifying or confirming someone does fit the standards of qualifying according to our constitution.
Unfortunately, no. I really don’t see what we can do, other than vote and hope for the best. I am very concerned about voter fraud and don’t think those in power will do anything about it.
Where is the decision printed up? - the Judge may have suggested the Congress could be prompted to take up the issue at the certification of the Electoral College Results, Jan 6th, 2009.
And I hope we don’t have to listen to those Obama people saying that factcheck checked out this bogus birth certificate Obama (or his camp) posted on Obama’s website. I have read that factcheck is disputed as being completely trustworthy. Did I hear someone from Obama’s ranks runs that... and that is just a start there to think about.....
Oh, and Brian, that is not a comment to you directly. I only commented to you since my first comment was to you and I forgot to mention this in that post....
And to your question - Judge Surrick states:
“If, through the political process, Congress determines that citizens, voters, or party members should police the Constitution’s eligibility requirements for the Presidency, then it is free to pass laws conferring standing on individuals like Plaintiff. Until that time, voters do not have standing to bring the sort of challenge that Plaintiff attempts to bring in the Amended Complaint.”
Apparently, Judge Surrick does not believe that there are any laws that exist to establish procedures that protect voters from impostor citizens for running for President.
If voters vote for a non-citizen for President and are not informed that this person is a non-citizen, then they are harmed because their votes are invalid. It seems that there is harm and it involves millions of people.
Surrick’s ruling seems just crazy to me.
In any case, this result is by no means the end of this issue. Obama, if he is hiding damaging information from his birth records, should be very nervous over the possibilities that remain in the claim regarding his eligibility. His, and the DNC lawyers are going to be very busy.
You quoted: “Surrick ruled that Berg’s attempts to use certain laws to gain standing to pursue his claim that Obama was not a natural-born citizen were “frivolous and not worthy of discussion.”
Then you mentioned it was a code that the judge thought Berg was right but that he wasn’t going to apply the law.
I disagree (just a little). :)
I believe it was a code that the judge thought Berg was right but that ..... he felt Berg’s CLAIM that he had a right to sue in that court was frivolous and not worthy of discussion.
I believe the judge was saying he felt Berg’s challenge here did not have standing, that he felt it was frivolous and not worthy of discussion THAT BERG COULD EVEN DO THIS IN THIS WAY.
Now, get me right here, I am very concerned we apparently do not have a way to check out a candidate’s qualifications, and I do not like it the judge threw this out. I believe Mr. Berg has taken on the best way he could find to challenge this, and I hope we all find a way to challenge Obama’s inability to qualify for the presidency of The US. I also wish Berg (and others) best wishes to find a way for our country to obtain legal protection of the office of our presidency (and not through this biased democrat, liberal congress we have right now who won’t do a thing except to help themselves and try to hurt the Republican party.)
Well, there’s a shocker.
Or any other Office for that matter. This could also clear the way for illegal aliens or felons to run for Representative and Senator, should the Party decide to let them.
Yes.
I have to agree. If the DNC puts an illegal alien on the ballet, and they accept his fake credentials, he could actually go on to win his party's nomination, and the Presidency.
That is why this case MUST be tried in the highest court of the land.
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.