U.S. Supreme Court denies Injunction request by Berg

Obamacrimes.com ^ | January 26, 2009 | Philip Berg

[Calpernia]

Advisory from Philip J. Berg, Esquire:

Re: Obama - "not" natural born - "not" qualified to be President

Attached is Press Release detailing:

U.S. Supreme Court denies Injunction request by Berg, case still alive in 3rd Circuit; GLOBE Magazine of 2/2/09 highlights Obama not being "qualified;" and Berg states he has 3 open cases and will continue to prove Obama ineligible.

Berg vs. Obama, Third Circuit Court of Appeals No. 08 – 4340 Berg filed Brief on 1/20/09

Berg vs. Obama, U.S. District Court for the ______________ Case filed under seal on 11/07/08 – cannot be discussed

Hollister vs. Soetoro a/k/a Obama, U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, No. 08-cv-0225 Response to Hollister Complaint due 1/26/09 by Soetoro/Obama and Biden

Call (610) 662-3005 to schedule interviews or Fax to (610) 834-7659 or E-mail to philjberg@gmail.com

[BP2]

Mr. Berg filed his False Claim Act Lawsuit on 11/7/08. Mr. Obama was a private citizen on 11/7/08. Election was over but he was not president elect until 1/8/2009. Furthermore, he had resigned from his post as US senator. The time of filing, 11/7/08, may have been by design.

Did you catch this? Is this the sealed case?

Hmmm, it may well be. I believe I remember reading on an ObamaCrimes thread a couple of weeks that the case was to have been UNsealed on Jan 7, 60 days later -- coincidentally, one day BEFORE the Electoral Count in the Senate. That may have been by design, for good or bad.

In reviewing some more recent Election court cases, I thing I have an idea of the “STANDING” issues of the cases -- and how to get around them if Berg's cases fail and the others aren't resurrected. I've forwarded those case reviews to the lead attorneys and the initial response is very favorable.

[BrerLion]

I have to admit that the sealing of the Berg case occured without my noticing it at the time.  I haven't learned much about the case beyond what was on the yestodemocracy site.  But during my quest I was reminded of the following:

One of the interesting news stories in late 10/2008 to mid 11/2008 (just before the unsealed Berg case, and until about the time it became sealed) was the "illegal foreign contributions" story (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2119311/posts for instance) which then became the "FEC unlikely to investigate" story (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2130130/posts for instance).  

Strange that these stories aren't getting more attention (or maybe they are, and I should crawl out from under my rock more often).

[hoosiermama]

Look at these posts by Cold December, # 255

[hoosiermama]

Follow the links at 255 and consider whether a whistle blowing suit could be filed agains the FEC for NOT investigating the subject.

[little jeremiah]

I remember that one about the “FEC unlikely to investigate” and I was sick. Wrongdoing is getting a pass over and over again. It’s as though laws and rules mean nothing if the perp is a Dem.

[little jeremiah]

That’s very good news.

[BP2]

Oooo, now that is VERY interesting.... some thoughts...

If Berg filed a False Claim Act as the sealed case on Nov 7... it would give a shield for Federal Employees to act as whistleblowers to provide information without fear of being punished by the new administration. Information could leak included information like passport records, overseas campaign contribution records, birth records, etc.

Obama was still an Elected official (Senator) until he resigned on Nov 15. An important note is Nov 15 to Jan 8, Obama was "just Mr. Obama."

During the next 7 weeks, we had Thanksgiving and Christmas holidays, including a changing of the guard in Congress. If an investigation was churning, it would have had limitations of Federal Holidays. Definitely bogged down... but probably still ongoing...

Obama became President-Elect on Jan 8. However, because of the compressed timeline, there was probably not enough time to complete an investigation by Jan. 7...

So, as it's been speculated, Bush's final Executive Order was an attempt to give more time for the system to work, to conduct investigations. It would also explain why Obama's tried to block the investigation portion of Bush's last EO, but may not be successful in end in overriding it...

I also think, with Alito's background as a criminal prosecutor, he was/is put on standby for the sealed case or any other case -- to remain impartial and eschew complete recusal of the highest court in the land. This would also explain his non-participation in the SCOTUS-POTUS meeting and Inauguration.

Yes, very interesting indeed...

[FreeManN]

List of US Attorneys Offices for information regarding crimes committed during the 2008 Election;

http://defendourfreedoms.org/usattorneys.html

http://drorly.blogspot.com/2009/01/us-attorneys-offices-for-you-to-visit.html

[whatisthetruth]

BERG ON NOW!

[FreeManN]

Berg on Radio now:

http://www.bondinfo.org/media/radio/radio_show.php

[FreeManN]

Berg on Radio now:

http://www.bondinfo.org/media/radio/radio_show.php

[luv2ndamend]

Obama suit dismissed as moot, SCOTUS denies another application

Posted on January 29th, 2009 by David-Crockett A Natural Born Citizen…Orly? reports: By Linda Bentley OLYMPIA, WASH. – During the first week in December, Stephen Pidgeon filed a complaint in the Washington Supreme Court on behalf of James Broe and 11 other registered voters requesting Washington Secretary of State Sam Reed set aside the votes cast for Barack Hussein Obama. According to Pidgeon, “Reed failed to establish that Obama was even an American citizen running under his own name at the time of the election, let alone a ‘natural born citizen’ as required by the U.S. Constitution. Unlike other cases that have been dismissed for lack of standing, these plaintiffs have standing under a unique Washington statute that allows any registered voter to challenge the election of someone who, at the time of the election, was ineligible to hold the office.”

Read the rest here: http://www.oilforimmigration.org/facts/?p=902

[Hang'emAll]

Thank you for the link. I managed to listen to the last 15 minutes.

Berg gave a brief update to his 3 current cases. He mentioned that he hopes the seal will soon be lifted off the sealed “whistleblower” case.

He said if Obama provides the long form BC and other documentation proving NB Citizen he will drop all cases.

He also mentioned that he is filing yet another action soon. I did not get the type but apparently a couple of others have been done already. This is great but what it implies to me is that he does not feel that he is really making headway on the other cases.

It also implies that he has not gotten his hands on the original birth certificate yet through any of the legal work so far.

I had hoped he would have been further by this point.

[BrerLion]

implies that he has not gotten his hands on the original birth certificate yet through any of the legal work so far

Agreed. I also got the sense that he characterized the sealed case as an eligibility case, without providing any additional characterization.

[Hang'emAll]

The eligibility case he refers to (see post 200) is false claims action. He is saying that Senator Obama received government funds as Senator but was not eligible because he is not a NB Citizen as is required for US Senator also.

However something is fishy there because I think Senators are exempt by the US Code

http://quitamguide.org/federal-false-claims-act-title-31#3729e

“(2) (A) No court shall have jurisdiction over an action brought under subsection (b) against a Member of Congress, a member of the judiciary, or a senior executive branch official if the action is based on evidence or information known to the Government when the action was brought.”

This is all above my pay grade but this could have been dismissed by now if it is not valid. Maybe they are hanging on to it to keep it from going public.

[BrerLion]

I’m out of my comfort zone on the legal stuff. Actually, it was the fact that the sealed case is a false claims action (which appear to be long-term procedures) that made me wonder why he would be talking about movement or unsealing on the sealed case. I just couldn’t (can’t) connect the dots.

[Hang'emAll]

Unsealing the case can happen in as soon as 60 days or 2-3 years. It is up to the Govt people.

I forget the actual details but the link to the false claims act has the details, I believe.

[Hang'emAll]

Here is the section relating to the unsealing. Apparently Obama has not been served yet and the court has not decided if the case is good or not per this:

(2) A copy of the complaint and written disclosure of substantially all material evidence and information the person possesses shall be served on the Government pursuant to Rule 4(d)(4) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The complaint shall be filed in camera, shall remain under seal for at least 60 days, and shall not be served on the defendant until the court so orders. The Government may elect to intervene and proceed with the action within 60 days after it receives both the complaint and the material evidence and information.

(3) The Government may, for good cause shown, move the court for extensions of the time during which the complaint remains under seal under paragraph (2). Any such motions may be supported by affidavits or other submissions in camera. The defendant shall not be required to respond to any complaint filed under this section until 20 days after the complaint is unsealed and served upon the defendant pursuant to Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

(4) Before the expiration of the 60-day period or any extensions obtained under paragraph (3), the Government shall—

(A) proceed with the action, in which case the action shall be conducted by the Government; or

(B) notify the court that it declines to take over the action, in which case the person bringing the action shall have the right to conduct the action.

(5) When a person brings an action under this subsection, no person other than the Government may intervene or bring a related action based on the facts underlying the pending action.

[BrerLion]

Much appreciated.  Here is another portion for general awareness:

§ 3733. Civil investigative demands

(a) In General.—

(1) Issuance and service.— Whenever the Attorney General has reason to believe that any person may be in possession, custody, or control of any documentary material or information relevant to a false claims law investigation, the Attorney General may, before commencing a civil proceeding under section 3730 or other false claims law, issue in writing and cause to be served upon such person, a civil investigative demand requiring such person—

(A) to produce such documentary material for inspection and copying,

(B) to answer in writing written interrogatories with respect to such documentary material or information,

(C) to give oral testimony concerning such documentary material or information, or

(D) to furnish any combination of such material, answers, or testimony.

The Attorney General may not delegate the authority to issue civil investigative demands under this subsection. Whenever a civil investigative demand is an express demand for any product of discovery, the Attorney General, the Deputy Attorney General, or an Assistant Attorney General shall cause to be served, in any manner authorized by this section, a copy of such demand upon the person from whom the discovery was obtained and shall notify the person to whom such demand is issued of the date on which such copy was served.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/31/usc_sec_31_00003733----000-.html

[BP2]

However something is fishy there because I think Senators are exempt by the US Code: http://quitamguide.org/federal-false-claims-act-title-31#3729e

“(2) (A) No court shall have jurisdiction over an action brought under subsection (b) against a Member of Congress, a member of the judiciary, or a senior executive branch official if the action is based on evidence or information known to the Government when the action was brought.”

See my post above:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2172366/posts?page=267#267

Obama was still an Elected official (Senator) until he resigned on Nov 15. An important note is Nov 15 to Jan 8, Obama was "just Mr. Obama." Obama became President-Elect on Jan 8, recognized by the 20th Amendment. However, because of the compressed timeline, there was probably not enough time to complete an investigation by Jan. 7...

So, as it's been speculated, Bush's final Executive Order was an attempt to give more time for the system to work, to conduct investigations. It would also explain why Obama's tried to block the investigation portion of Bush's last EO, but may not be successful in end in overriding it...