Posted on 10/26/2008 3:32:10 PM PDT by pissant
Phil Berg is going to have some very interesting challenges ahead when he exposes the chain of events regarding this ruling. The ruling itself appears as though it should be thrown out; it isn’t even file or date stamped. First, there’s - CONFLICT OF INTEREST.; Obama’s Birth Certificate Judge-Obama Linkage:
Barack and Michelle worked at Sidley Austin law when they met.
Also working with Michelle at Sidley at the same time was one Bernardine Dohrn, beloved wife of Bill Ayers.
Now it turns out a fellow named Christopher B. Seaman is the former law clerk for U.S. District Judge R. Barclay Surrick.
Christopher B. Seaman also works for a firm named Sidley Austin.
Gosh. It’s a small world after all.
The original faxed decision from the Clerk of the US District Court for the Eastern District of PA to attorney Philip J Berg appears to have been faxed to Judge Surrick for him to sign. But if this is the case, the questions becomes who wrote the decision and faxed it for the Judges signature?
(go to link to see fraudulent document)
DID SOMEONE TELL JUDGE R. BARCLAY SURRICK WHAT HIS RULING WOULD BE?
(Excerpt) Read more at caosblog.com ...
Your arguments DO make sense ...I have no idea about any of this but it all seems farfetched
Riiiiiiiiiiiiiight
If you read the decision, a moron wrote it.
Perhaps. Nonetheless, it is customary for a lower-court judge to simply sign decisions presented by the winning side.
H
It's more than a full time job, and Sisyphean in nature. I've adopted an approach of saying what's on my mind once or twice, replying to civil requests for clarification, and then moving on without responding to the same issue as it reappears.
Each poster is responsible for his or her remarks and self-education. That's as it should be.
I wasn't aware of the Hollander v. McCain suit (D. NH) until reading this Opinion. Guess I'll grab that one and add it to the collection.
But God I am sick of all this maneuvering to avoid the release of a man's birth certificate
We'd have had Joe the Plumbers birth certificate in a NY second
Yes, on matters of high crimes like potentially forging citizenship, I can see how a judge would let some Obama minion write such an asinine opinion for him.
The decision reads very strangely- but I’m not a lawyer- perhaps this is not uncommon.
Like everything with Barry, there’s a few details that are just wrong- rarely anything simple to point to and say, SEE, that’s IT! It’s just a steady drip, drip of odd, nonsensical, murky questions that are simply never answered and by themselves don’t seem significant. Put them together and the picture begins to form of a dark, ruthless and deceitful man.
Sensible advise.
Folks lets not start the troll accusations like we had the other night with the Ashley Todd nonsense. Maintaining HEALTHY SKEPTICISM can be a good thing!
We shouldn't fear the exchange of ideas and information. I do not detect any liberal bias from this poster.
If he had ruled the other way, the Plaintiff would’ve written the decision.
Ultimately, he ruled that Berg didn’t have standing to sue. McCain might have legal standing, as he can allege demonstrable legal harm — though few people, conservatives or liberals, are taking these rumors very seriously.
Personally, this looks like a desperation ploy to me. Many conservatives are simply so afraid of Obama winning that they’re willing to seize on ANY scandal, no matter how much of a longshot.
Now, you’re seizing on a non-scandal within a non-scandal and trying to destroy the career of a judge because he (1) employed a law clerk that works for Obama’s former (gigantic) law firm, (2) forgot to date stamp the ruling, and (3) has an unexplained 9-minute fax differential.
This is silly. We lost this case. We’ll appeal. We may lose again (Berg’s legal standing is a bit questionable). I’m simply tired of conservatives and liberals trying to destroy the career of people who disagree with us (Tom Delay, Trent Lott, this schmuck judge, etc).
H
I’m also a bit tired of electoral politics having to go through judges. There was a time when the winner won, the loser lost ... and the judges stayed home.
Its better if we don’t set the precedent of having judges “qualify” presidential candidates ... lest we have to defend ourselves before the 9th circuit circus because of random rumors.
H
Which one of the delegates will make the challenge - will THEY have standing in the court system, or does the EC itself make the ruling and be done with it? What if Barry is challenged and it goes no where? Is there POTUS recourse? Any examples in our history on this?
Will we see a law - regardless of this election outcome - to prequalify candidates?
It is not a trivial matter. IT is the constitution we are talking about, and a potential effort to subvert it.
It would be exceedingly easy for Obama, were he a US citizen, is to provide to the media a certified copy of his birth certificate, as John McCain did. Costs $20. Instead, he gives a uncertified COLB jpg to Daily KOS & his buddies at Factcheck.
IT is not a major inconvenience for Obama to prove natural born citizenship, and unlike the Obama lawyers’ claims, should not give his client “great embarrassment”. Hopefully, one of the other 8 lawsuits will find a judge who agrees.
I can certainly see your point about the law clerk. It could be he is influenced by some connection at Sidley, but I doubt it.
And the extra minutes? That doesn’t show anything. I am interested in that that fax may have been sent to him, or it may be nothing. I’m sorry to say that since you’re not agreeing with some here, or beefing up their arguments then you’re the new scarecrow they are going to tear apart.
>> It is not a trivial matter. IT is the constitution we are talking about, and a potential effort to subvert it.>>
I never said it was trivial. I said it was a longshot.
>> Hopefully, one of the other 8 lawsuits will find a judge who agrees.
Taking electoral politics into the courtroom is a lousy precedent to set. Judges already have a LOT of power ... do we really want them disqualifying candidates? Perhaps it would work better if we beat Obama on the issues (Ayers and Wright included), rather than wasting time fabricating a scandal.
Getting judges involved is a last ditch ploy used by Gore in 2000 ... and we TORE HIM APART for it.
H
>> I’m sorry to say that since you’re not agreeing with some here, or beefing up their arguments then you’re the new scarecrow they are going to tear apart.
Groupthink is prevalent on the left — but is apparently not quite extinct on the right.
H
Why would a judge “disqualify” Obama? Asking him to produce a simple copy of a certified, original birth certificate is not disqualifying him.
What would disqualify him is if he did not have proof of natural born citizenship.
The FEC won’t check. The DNC won’t. The GOP apparently won’t. SOMEONE has to.
I share a LOT with my friends, but I only share what I can prove. Even with that standard, it’s easy to find plenty against Obama.
The Act and the rules of the Federal Trade Commission require that any message sent to a fax machine must clearly mark on the first page or on each page of the message:
bullet the date and time the transmission is sent;
bullet the identity of the sender; and bullet the telephone number of the sender or of the sending fax machine.
All fax machines manufactured on or after December 20, 1992 and all facsimile modem boards manufactured on or after December 13, 1995 must have the capability to clearly mark such identifying information on the first page or on each page of the transmission.
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.