Replies

Concerning the missing pages from the divorce decree, Bergs assistant said this on the obamacrimes blog:

JBH
written by bergs a*sistant, January 03, 2009

Yes, the U.S. Supreme can ask for anything they wish. They can Order anything they wish. Folks, I want you all to remember something. Back in August when Phil used to appear on Ed Hale’s show, Ed Hale stated he had a connection who sent 3 original Kenyan birth certificates via DHL and he had the tracking number. He stated Phil received it from his connection. This was all a Lie. I even posted on Ed’s website that Ed’s statements were dishonest, he removed my post and blocked my IP address. Phil called Ed and demanded he refrain from his false statements to the public. Ed then went on his radio claiming Phil had dismissed his case because he had been threatened, again all a lie. We all hope things are true, but don’t get your hopes to high. We have had the Obama divorce decree for several months, there is NOTHING there. the D in Stanley’s name is for Dunham, and she went back to Dunham after the divorce. There are no missing pages. The numbers on the bottom are old numbers, all paperwork was filed together. The birth certificate and marriage certificate were never public records in Hawaii, those would be removed. There are other forms which are filed with cases, even back in the 60’s. There is NOTHING else in the Court file, we have everything which was in the file.
______________________________
What is in the missing pages? This was posted on the obamacrimes blog:

THE PAGES THAT ARE MISSING!!!!!!!!!!!!
written by MommaERadioRebels, January 03, 2009

The 4 pages that are missing are listed below:

A Civil Cover Sheet

Proof of Service

Notice of Motion with Exhibits (Exhibits are not Public Record as they are normally things like a Marriage License and/or Birth Certificate and they are returned to the Plaintiff)

Proposed Order.

Those are the only 4 pages that are missing and they were not in the Court File. we got everything that was in the file.
_________________________________
As far as the point of entry - I have no idea if it will lead to anything but my guess is it won’t. Berg was the first to bring this before the courts. He has the most time and effort vested in this as far as I can tell. A lot of folks have attacked his past in an attempt to deflect the focus onto him instead of the fact that what he says has merit. A typical tactic when fishing for a reason to discredit in hopes that the charge will stick before anyone has a chance to look into what is being said. I still think Berg has some aces up his sleeve.

I think that the dates scheduled for Berg’s case is significant. Maybe it’s just wishful thinking but the day after Congress certifies the EC vote means that he is now, despite phony podium signs claiming it, President Elect. Maybe Berg has standing on Jan 9th but didn’t before. The conference on the 16th becomes huge if the 9th goes the way I hope it will and should.

I guess we’ll find out on the 9th because I don’t think the 8th will show a set of balls the size of Berg’s.