Main Menu

Berg v. Obama – Unsealed – Dismissed

I wrote last November about the sealed lawsuit brought against Barack Obama by Pennsylvania lawyer, Philip J. Berg. Phil Berg notified Obama Conspiracy Theories this afternoon that, the case has been unsealed and dismissed with prejudice. Berg wrote:

Since the case was ‘Dismissed with Prejudice’ it is now ‘Unsealed’ and the record is open for review. The case, Berg vs. Obama, U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, No. 08-cv-1933 and is available on Pacer or our website, obamacrimes.com. I, Phil Berg, will be Appealing this case !

I’ve had a copy of the complaint since it was misfiled the first time last year, but did not publish it out of respect for the court which eventually sealed it. The case is frivolously novel in it’s approach (claiming Obama collected his Senate salary while being ineligible to be a U. S. Senator), but the content of it is just the same old, same old case Berg filed and lost before (although this one is trimmed down considerably).

It is ironic that Berg brought the case under the False Claims Act while Berg’s claims in the complaint are all false! As we used to say when I was in school: “good riddance to bad rubbish!”

The docket has been updated with a link to the sealed (now unsealed) complaint.

, , , , , , , ,

101 Responses to Berg v. Obama – Unsealed – Dismissed

  1. avatar
    richCares June 13, 2009 at 12:29 am #

    Berg claims he will file an appeal, as it was dismissed with prejudice is an appeal even possible?

  2. avatar
    NBC June 13, 2009 at 1:32 am #

    dismissed w prejudice means that it cannot be refiled.

    Dismissal with prejudice is a final judgment and the case becomes res judicata on the claims that were or could have been brought in it.

    However

    Nicholson v. Nicholson, 685 S.W.2d 588, 589 (Mo. App. E.D. 1985), citing Rule 67.03 and Lipton Realty, Inc. v. St. Louis Housing Authority, 655 S.W.2d 792, 793 (Mo. App. E.D. 1983) (a dismissal with prejudice acts as a bar to any further litigation of the claims involved, assuming that all claims are adjudicated and all parties are accounted for. A dismissal with prejudice finally decides that litigation and is appealable).

    Strangely enough a dismissal without prejudice cannot be appealed, only refiled.

  3. avatar
    misha June 13, 2009 at 1:57 am #

    Berg will never give up. He’s a slow learner. That he won’t let go of it, and get on with the rest of his life speaks about his emotional state.

    Orly is another psych case.

  4. avatar
    kimba June 13, 2009 at 11:12 am #

    OT, but why is Next Event for Keyes v Obama Jul 13? Did the court accept Orly’s proof of service on Obama? Do we know if any of the other defendants were ever served?

  5. avatar
    Reality Check June 13, 2009 at 11:26 am #

    This is sweet because Berg loved mentioning this case in every interview as if the fact that it was sealed by the court gave it gravitas.

    I am sure Berg will appeal just to say he has “3 active cases” so he can continue to promote that donate button on The OC.

    Kimba,

    The court did not accept Orly’s proof of service to Obama. It gave her additional time to show that she met federal rules for proper service. The court has said she has not done this to date. It is unclear is she could now attempt to serve again and do it properly this time or whether the time to do that has passed.

  6. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy June 13, 2009 at 11:12 pm #

    My reading is she has been given more time to serve the defendants.

  7. avatar
    BlackLion June 14, 2009 at 1:05 am #

    It looks like things did not go well with Orly’s motion for appeal in the Keyes lawsuit…so she wants them to reconsider…I know a little bit about the law and her reasoning makes so little sense that my head was hurting after reading that crap…

    Which in reading some of her “followers” posts, they are thinking that the can have those deluisional grand juries go after anyone that they don’t like or doesn’t support their ridiculous claims in addition to President Obama…Directly from the Peroxide one’s website…

    NewEnglandPatriot says:
    “June 13, 2009 at 6:19 pm
    It sounds as if the judge didn’t grant the default when he should have. Can he be sued for not following the law? How about some citizens in the judge’s county conducting an investigation and forming their own grand jury? If there is evidence that the judge broke the law, he could be arrested.”

    Or my other favorite…

    Bob says:
    June 13, 2009 at 11:16 pm
    Al,

    “He won’t give you a default because he part of the problem. He, like possibly every judge out there, defies and defiles the Constitution on a daily basis and are among America’s worst criminals.”

    Plus he is another Clinton appointee.

    So if you don’t agree with the birthers, the reasons are you are either 1) not following the Constitution, 2) a Clinton appointee, 3)in the bag for Obama and part of the conspiracy so you need to be “indicted” also…Seriously you cannot make this stuff up…

  8. avatar
    kimba June 14, 2009 at 7:56 am #

    Interesting points this morning. Calls for the grown-ups in the Republican party to tell the fringe to simmah down. I like one commenter’s point that the birthers and Obama haters are like “Lord of the Flies”, they’re not going to listen to the grown-ups. So I’m pondering, which grown-up would be the most likely to reach them if he spoke out? McCain? O’Reilly? Don’t know, but I would have more regard for Shepard Smith if I thought he’d had voiced the same concerns to O’Reilly and Hannity that he did on air.

    http://firedoglake.com/2009/06/13/memo-to-the-right-wing-put-up-or-shut-up/

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/14/opinion/14rich.html?_r=1

    (Sorry Doc, I realize this belonged in the GM thread.)

  9. avatar
    SvenMagnussen June 14, 2009 at 12:47 pm #

    One quick way to end it would be for Obama to release his complete birth, college admission/housing, and passport records.

    George H.W. Bush released 400 pages of medical records. What’s Obama got to hide?

  10. avatar
    NBC June 14, 2009 at 1:21 pm #

    Nothing since he in fact did release his COLB which shows him born in the US. Nothing else matters for natural born status.

    Next..

    The quickest way for Obama to end all this is to let it die out in the courts. Seems like a winning strategy does it not?

  11. avatar
    richCares June 14, 2009 at 1:36 pm #

    but his nickanme at Occidental was “Barry”, to a Birther that proves he was Barry Soetoro even though Occidental says he was Barrack Obama. The Birthers even invented Barry Soetoro attending Punahou HS and Punahoa falsified his records and phoyos and year book. Sure, Punahuo, the highest rated and most ethical HS in Hawaii did that, sure that’s easy for an idiot to believe. Their fantasy is just as true as the tooth fairy.

  12. avatar
    NBC June 14, 2009 at 1:42 pm #

    Which is the reason why we should not expect President Obama to cater to the fantasies of a few who are unwilling to accept any evidence that does not support their hopes and dreams.

  13. avatar
    misha June 14, 2009 at 4:24 pm #

    My belief is simply to ignore the birthers.

    I would give them as much attention as those who try to prove the tooth fairy exists. I tried answering one birther on these forums, and realized it was akin to Sisyphus.

    If you argue with a fool, make sure you’re not doing the same thing.

  14. avatar
    John June 14, 2009 at 4:49 pm #

    You mean the Online COLB that Obama has posted which is invalid because is lacks a Certificate Number. And what happen to the COLB that Fact Check saw. Apparently, that COLB has disappeared and has never been seen again.

  15. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy June 14, 2009 at 4:54 pm #

    They are the same piece of paper, only one has the certificate number redacted.

    You say “disappeared and has never been seen again”, but I have no idea where you would have gotten such information.

  16. avatar
    NBC June 14, 2009 at 4:55 pm #

    You mean the Online COLB that Obama has posted which is invalid because is lacks a Certificate Number. And what happen to the COLB that Fact Check saw. Apparently, that COLB has disappeared and has never been seen again.

    It’s valid as the certificate number is merely blocked out in the scan. Other photographs of it exist which show the certificate number.

    And why do you need more than one COLB? The fact is that you were presented with the necessary evidence and you seem to be intent on ignoring it.

    Please explain why?

  17. avatar
    John June 14, 2009 at 4:56 pm #

    Remember Robert Gibbs has affirmed the posted COLB to be Obama’s Birth Certificate; the one that is invalid because it has no certificate number. Neither Gibbs nor the Obama administration has made any attempt to make Obama’s Vault Copy available or the Paper COLB that Fact Check saw. At the very least, we have a right to see the Paper COLB and to run forensic testing on the document to insure it has no been altered in any way.

  18. avatar
    John June 14, 2009 at 4:58 pm #

    The Posted COLB has been altered. No Certificate Number. As far I know the copy of Obama’s COLB that shows the Certificate number is the one from Fact Check. However, what Fact Check saw has never been seen again.

  19. avatar
    John June 14, 2009 at 5:15 pm #

    The birth certificate is a necessary but insufficent fact to establish Obama’s eligiblity to serve as POTUS. Obama must prove his father was not Kenyan and was a US citizen.

    This issue will not die. It will stoked, pressed and prodded from the next 4 years; 8 years if possible. Obama, Congress, and the MSM will pressed at every opportunity to discuss this issue.

    Obama could end much of the contraversy by simply releasing his Vault Copy Birth Certificate.

    The issue could finally be resolved by a SCOTUS ruling on what a NBC citizen is in terms of serving as POTUS.

    The Birther Movement is growing and will continue to grow.

  20. avatar
    richCares June 14, 2009 at 5:25 pm #

    The Posted COLB has been altered.
    who cares?

    what Fact Check saw has never been seen again.
    so what!

  21. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy June 14, 2009 at 5:29 pm #

    Where can I go look at Bush’s birth certificate?

  22. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy June 14, 2009 at 5:31 pm #

    I suggest folks go to the Media tab and view the video clip from Bill O’Reilly.

  23. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy June 14, 2009 at 5:33 pm #

    I think the judge was extremely generous to Orly for not tossing her case out for lack of service. Giving her another month was a surprise.

  24. avatar
    richCares June 14, 2009 at 5:34 pm #

    The Birther Movement is growing and will continue to grow.

    what there are 3 of you? Good luck with your delusions.

  25. avatar
    richCares June 14, 2009 at 5:43 pm #

    You say “disappeared and has never been seen again”, but I have no idea where you would have gotten such information.

    it is still in Obama’s Chicago office, why don’t you go there and see it.

  26. avatar
    nbc June 14, 2009 at 6:30 pm #

    That is incorrect. Natural born status does not rely on the nationality of the parents just the location of birth. Ignorance of these legal facts is one reason the birther movement is doomed. Over 40 lawsuits all dismissed and more to follow.

    Cheers!!

  27. avatar
    richCares June 14, 2009 at 7:07 pm #

    john, the BC issue is over, Obama has been president for about 6 months now with wide support and approval. If you don’t like that then find another candidate to support and vote for in 2012. Or continue to waste your time on this as a numbskull Birther, your choice.

  28. avatar
    Kevin Bellas June 14, 2009 at 7:23 pm #

    Who is “we”?

    There is no way any political president canidate in the future could or would walk to every U.S. citizen to show his or her (Long or Short) BC just to prove they were born in the U.S.

    The birthers really are at the breaking point of reality.

  29. avatar
    dunstvangeet June 14, 2009 at 10:16 pm #

    John, basically, what happened, is they scanned in the birth certificate. They called down to the Health Department, and couldn’t get anybody on the phone to tell them whether or not the number meant anything important. Rather than release something that could be used to steal identities, they decided to be safe, and put a big black bar over the certificate number, probably using Photoshop. None of those images by themselves are actual certified copies of his birth certificate, any more than you scanning in your birth certificate would be valid to anything.

    However, it’s a scanned image of an actual document that proves that he was born in the United States. It’s been verified by the media.

  30. avatar
    Joyce June 14, 2009 at 10:22 pm #

    “what Fact Check saw has never been seen again.
    so what!”

    It has not only been seen, it has been examined by none other than WND and found to be genuine.

  31. avatar
    Shrieking wombat June 14, 2009 at 10:59 pm #

    But you wouldn’t stop there would you Sven? It wouldn’t matter how many bits of paper Obama ‘released’, the birthers would still clamour for more.

    This idiocy seems to be predicated on the proposition that Obama personally visit every citizen of the US with boxes of documents to verify his status.

  32. avatar
    JeffSF June 15, 2009 at 1:06 pm #

    “The birth certificate is a necessary but insufficent fact to establish Obama’s eligiblity to serve as POTUS. Obama must prove his father was not Kenyan and was a US citizen.”

    Umm no. I would offer a logical argument, but if you are posting here, you have had lots of opportunities to read logical arguments about why both of your positions are incorrect, and refuse them all. So really not much point in repeating it all again.

    But one question you didn’t answer- who is the ‘we’ President Obama is supposed to be giving his Birth Certificate to?

  33. avatar
    Bob June 15, 2009 at 5:38 pm #

    A dismissal without prejudice usually means there’s a technical mistake in the pleadings, like you forgot the allege certain facts that would make the claim possible. Essentially a do-over, to allow you to fix a mistake.

    Dismissal with prejudice means no amount of tinkering is going to save it. So you must appeal, and see if the appellate court agrees with the district court judge’s ruling.

  34. avatar
    BenjiFranklin June 15, 2009 at 11:09 pm #

    Dear Doctor Conspiracy,

    I’d guess the judge’s clerk has choreographed the interaction to date, given Orly’s bizarre “case” the least priority, and consequently just tried to push it away procedurally. I think a judge reading her presentment would entertain his/her own spontaneous motion to dismiss this case as a legally incoherent insubstantiality.

    As you may recall, this is the case that Orly STILL apparently has not noticed has no basis in Law, since she “based” it on that routine Presidential executive order by G.W.Bush containing the phrase, “re-evaluation of persons in positions of public trust”. The order states that it is only for internal use by defined federal agencies to evaluate specifically designated categories of federal employees, which do not now, nor never have included Obama.

    Orly’s lawsuit uses something akin to Disney Movie Plot Logic to suggest that if the phrase “re-evaluation of persons in positions of public trust” appears in any statute or order, no matter how narrowly the statute or order limits the legal application of that phrase, she (Orly) can assert that her interpretation of that phrase, has the force of law in any legal context she chooses to bring her interpretation to bear upon.

    There is a difference between novel theories of how a statute may be used in court and bald-faced attempts to plead in court that the permitted applications of a clearly specified statute should be deliberately misconstrued just because, in the pleader’s view, “There oughta be a law!”

    This is no reflection on Orly’s online alma mater. I assume no law school thinks it necessary to formally explain to it’s students that lawyers are not conveniently empowered to, BY ASSERTION ALONE, effectively draft, pass, and sign into law what are, in effect, new special purpose statutes for any legal purpose held dear.

    Her most recent arguments about the technicalities of proper service preposterously ignore the text of the order itself, where except for the categories of eployees within specified, it bars its own use for any purpose, against both the “any other person” that Obama was the second BEFORE he was inaugurated AND the “officer” Obama became the second AFTER he was inaugurated.

    No court is a stranger to attempts by social and political operatives to exploit our legal system as a tool for personal or political advantage. No judge would let discovery or proof by technical default proceed once the blatantly frivolousness of the “case” is realized.

    In puzzling over how Alan Keyes came to be led into this legal cesspool by a Constitutional Dentist, I have developed a haunting suspicion based on Doctor Orly’s frequently displayed inconsistent mastery of American idiomatic English, that she may have been misled into thinking that derailing Obama would be simple if Keyes responded to her initial naive inquiry by remarking that stopping Obama would be about as easy as pulling teeth.

    Thanks for all your fine work here!
    Benji Franklin

  35. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy June 16, 2009 at 8:23 am #

    Yes, the executive order Orly relies on itself excludes its use in this case at least 3 different ways (See http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2009/01/alan-keyes-needs-a-good-lawyer/ ).

    I have always viewed this lawsuit as a publicity vehicle and don’t think even Orly thinks it is valid.

  36. avatar
    Heavy June 16, 2009 at 12:02 pm #

    You only answered a PART of the question you arrogant ass! Answer the FULL question or shut the F*%$ UP!

  37. avatar
    misha June 16, 2009 at 12:27 pm #

    Does anyone hear a noise?

  38. avatar
    Heavy June 16, 2009 at 12:38 pm #

    Bush is not President, but I’m sure you can find it easliy. Unlike your messiah. Doc, this is becoming SOOOO boring.

  39. avatar
    NBC June 16, 2009 at 12:53 pm #

    And who or what is going to make me shut up?
    Silly Heavy… The stress of the facts seem to be getting to him.
    The facts speak for themselves and show Obama born on US soil and thus a natural born Citizen.

    Whadaya have to say about that my dear friend.

  40. avatar
    Bob June 16, 2009 at 12:54 pm #

    In papers filed with the court, Taitz has agreed to dismiss all other defendants but Obama, and argues service upon the unnmaed mail clerk was sufficient service on Obama.

    And dismissal at this stage is not a big deal; another lawsuit making the exact same (go-nowhere) allegations could be refiled and served.

  41. avatar
    NBC June 16, 2009 at 12:55 pm #

    Unless they get dismissed w. prejudice.

  42. avatar
    Heavy June 16, 2009 at 12:58 pm #

    As I said, either answer question or shut your mouth. Pretty simple, unless you are a lib. Libs are incapable of keeping quiet and devoid of thought.

    No, the facts are not “Getting to me” because you have not presented any. Get back to me when you have some. In the meantime, ZIP IT, PUNK!

  43. avatar
    NBC June 16, 2009 at 12:58 pm #

    Missing the point again Heavy? This is not rocket science you know.

    Did anyone listen to Obama’s speech on health care?

  44. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy June 16, 2009 at 12:59 pm #

    Heavy, let me recommend a virtue to you: patience. I was patient for 8 years and now Bush isn’t president any more.

  45. avatar
    NBC June 16, 2009 at 1:01 pm #

    Poor Heavy, yet another lawsuit down the drain and nothing much to look forward to but 4 years of President Obama 🙂

    Such are the facts.

  46. avatar
    Heavy June 16, 2009 at 1:06 pm #

    Thanks, doc. I’m very patient. And I evidently have a high tolerance of idiocy.

  47. avatar
    NBC June 16, 2009 at 1:07 pm #

    We all have to learn to live with ourselves I guess 😉

  48. avatar
    Heavy June 16, 2009 at 1:07 pm #

    Point? You have a point? You mean that thing on the top of your head?

  49. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy June 16, 2009 at 1:08 pm #

    I’m interested at the piggybacking I see almost everywhere. Most everyone would agree that Obama’s place of birth is the only question of fact that has any bearing on his eligibility to be president (other questions are ones of law), and I can understand (sort of) the demand for the original birth registration image. But now, one hardly ever sees a demand just for the birth certificate: it’s always the birth certificate AND the college records, or the medical records, or the law practice records, or the passport records.

    I guess this is so that if the birth certificate ever appears, they can continue the claim of a cover up without missing a beat. These extra demands are evidence showing that a significant part of Obama denialism is a smear campaign and not a legitimate constitutional concern.

  50. avatar
    NBC June 16, 2009 at 1:23 pm #

    I guess this is so that if the birth certificate ever appears, they can continue the claim of a cover up without missing a beat. These extra demands are evidence showing that a significant part of Obama denialism is a smear campaign and not a legitimate constitutional concern.

    Exactly, well said doc.

  51. avatar
    richCares June 16, 2009 at 1:26 pm #

    if you are referring on Obama’s speech to AMA, yes it was very good. What is amazing is the numerous cheers and applauding that took place for the usurper, should make birthers and our babbling friend heavy very sad. but he probably don’t know who the AMA is. (a babble a day keeps heavy’s mind at bay)

  52. avatar
    TRUTH June 16, 2009 at 1:29 pm #

    No Doc, Bush isn’t President, but don’t miss the opportunity to blame him for…oh…Whatever you possibly can, BHO does.

    Everytime the Messiah sees a hitch in his giddy he points the finger back in time “But don’t forget my people, when I took over the world was burning, everyone almost starved to death, and nobody had a job. I’m here to save you, no matter how much monopoly money I have to print. Now get in line. Now Serving # 257,460,191.”

    I have to take this opp. to say I love BHOs double talk. He SAID… “the ney-sayers want you to believe I want the government to run your health care, that is not true. I want you to have public health as an option”
    …HAHAHA!! what a chump. Public “IS” Government. And for the option, as soon as there is GOV health and businesses are paying extra taxes into it, they will drop their private health.

  53. avatar
    richCares June 16, 2009 at 1:31 pm #

    “Point? You have a point? You mean that thing on the top of your head?”

    wow, some more brilliant comments from the very bright guy whose words say nothing. keep it up heavy, always good for a laugh.

  54. avatar
    TRUTH June 16, 2009 at 1:33 pm #

    What is more amazing is you believe what you just typed richycareless.

  55. avatar
    TRUTH June 16, 2009 at 1:35 pm #

    Damn NBC, wipe your chin off

  56. avatar
    NBC June 16, 2009 at 1:35 pm #

    Truth misunderstands our President

    “the ney-sayers want you to believe I want the government to run your health care, that is not true. I want you to have public health as an option”
    …HAHAHA!! what a chump. Public “IS” Government.

    I am sure you do understand the difference between public health and public run healthcare.
    Yet some decide to play dumb. Yes, I am presuming that this is all a play on Truth’s part, the alternative seems too improbable.

  57. avatar
    NBC June 16, 2009 at 1:40 pm #

    Let’s see what the president said

    So when you hear the naysayers claim that I’m trying to bring about government-run health care, know this: They’re not telling the truth. (Applause.)

    What I am trying to do — and what a public option will help do — is put affordable health care within reach for millions of Americans. And to help ensure that everyone can afford the cost of a health care option in our exchange, we need to provide assistance to families who need it. That way, there will be no reason at all for anyone to remain uninsured. (Applause.)

  58. avatar
    NBC June 16, 2009 at 1:41 pm #

    I guess you agree with me then? Or is the ad hominem meant to hide your discomfort with the fact?

  59. avatar
    TRUTH June 16, 2009 at 1:49 pm #

    I find it interesting, all during this BC controversy the Pro-COLBers have whined that even if an Orig. BC were shown, it would be something else the Birthers wanted to see. Now DOC has gone so far as to Already blame Birthers for what they are GOING to do. What was the name of that Tom Cruise movie he would arrest people for crimes they were going to commit in the future? Oh Yeah, “Minority Report”…sequel..”Birther Report” You have one AMAZING Talent Doc. You should petition Obi-Wun for a CZar position.

    DOC “Czar of Future Theories” with his aides NoBody”Hide the BC”Cares and
    richy”JustYOURfacts not Mine”careless.

  60. avatar
    NBC June 16, 2009 at 1:50 pm #

    I find it interesting, all during this BC controversy the Pro-COLBers have whined that even if an Orig. BC were shown, it would be something else the Birthers wanted to see. Now DOC has gone so far as to Already blame Birthers for what they are GOING to do.

    It’s not what they are going to do, it is what they are already doing. Look at Berg for instance.
    The facts speak for themselves my dear friend.

  61. avatar
    Heavy June 16, 2009 at 1:51 pm #

    Where are these FACTS you keep talking about?

  62. avatar
    Heavy June 16, 2009 at 1:53 pm #

    More references to FACTS. Where are they?

  63. avatar
    NBC June 16, 2009 at 1:53 pm #

    I am not sure that you would recognize a fact if it were to hit you on your head.

    Fact:
    1. Obama’s COLB shows him born on US soil and was filed 4 days after his birth
    2. Obama’s birth was announced 9 days later in two newspapers

    This by themselves would make him a natural born citizen.

  64. avatar
    TRUTH June 16, 2009 at 1:56 pm #

    Does your kissing up discomfort me you ask? One Libertarian belief I have is, whatever you do behind closed doors is your business as long as I don’t have to see or hear of it. I was just recognizing the obvious.

  65. avatar
    Heavy June 16, 2009 at 1:56 pm #

    The COLB would if it were authentic. The newspaper announcement(s) carry no legal weight.

    So, please, present some FACTS!

  66. avatar
    NBC June 16, 2009 at 1:59 pm #

    As I predicted, Heavy fails to recognize the facts. Contrary to his claim the COLB is by all standards authentic, and as such legally admissible in Court, especially given the statements of the Hawaiian officials.
    In addition, the birth announcements are not only factual but also admissible in court as relevant evidence establishing Obama’s place of birth.

    Now if Heavy wants to argue that the COLB is not valid because of it being an ‘image’ on a computer then he has to abandon any and all logic and will, as I expected, never accept any evidence.

  67. avatar
    NBC June 16, 2009 at 2:01 pm #

    Does your kissing up discomfort me you ask? One Libertarian belief I have is, whatever you do behind closed doors is your business as long as I don’t have to see or hear of it. I was just recognizing the obvious.

    I see, agreeing with Dr C for telling the truth is ‘kissing up’. Fascinating logic you have.
    As to not having to see or hear it, you have the liberty to refrain from visiting this site, don’t you? Or do you have no choice here?

  68. avatar
    NBC June 16, 2009 at 2:02 pm #

    The facts are clear, the recipients may be unwilling to see them though. For that I compliment you.

  69. avatar
    Bob June 16, 2009 at 2:09 pm #

    Dismissial for failing to serve properly will be a dismissal without prejudice, unless you are trying to serve someone unservable, like the ghost of George Washington.

  70. avatar
    Bob June 16, 2009 at 2:15 pm #

    I liked the stories about how Obama was gathering 1960s-era printing presses and printing supplies, to print his own birth certificate.

    Pre-emptive claims of forgery. Clever!

  71. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy June 16, 2009 at 2:28 pm #

    They seem to be summoning the ghosts of Washington, Franklin and Madison.

  72. avatar
    Gordon June 16, 2009 at 2:56 pm #

    I see Heavy is having a bad day. If he doesn’t get a clue about this nonsense I predict more to follow.

  73. avatar
    NBC June 16, 2009 at 3:02 pm #

    Heavy and his “trustworthy” sidekick TRUTH (sic) do make for a lovely couple, don’t they 😉

  74. avatar
    Heavy June 16, 2009 at 3:18 pm #

    Actually, I’m having a GREAT day! I love watching you sickos try to justify this criminal.

    It gonna be FUN watching him get taken down and even more fun watching you sick freaks meltdown!

  75. avatar
    NBC June 16, 2009 at 3:24 pm #

    Actually, I’m having a GREAT day! I love watching you sickos try to justify this criminal.

    It gonna be FUN watching him get taken down and even more fun watching you sick freaks meltdown!

    How cute, is squeeks… How much fun are you having with the continued failures in court and the public realm?

  76. avatar
    richCares June 16, 2009 at 3:27 pm #

    link to AMA Speech Video including cheers and standing ovation

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/15/obama-ama-speech-full-tex_n_215699.html

  77. avatar
    NBC June 16, 2009 at 3:28 pm #

    Funny how TRUTH got so far thereof 😉

  78. avatar
    richCares June 16, 2009 at 3:31 pm #

    “It gonna be FUN watching him get taken down and even more fun watching you sick freaks meltdown!”

    sure deluded one, sure, now get back on your meds!

  79. avatar
    misha June 16, 2009 at 4:06 pm #

    “unless you are trying to serve someone unservable, like the ghost of George Washington.”

    Just wait, Orly or one of her compatriots will try.

  80. avatar
    jtx June 16, 2009 at 4:48 pm #

    Hey NBC …

    You don’t think the O-borter is trying to bring about government-run health care do you??

    We all know the O-borter never lies, don’t we???

    It will be interesting to see how all of the O-borter flacks respond to a court decision that the guy is not eligible. I’d predict you’d individually or collectively say something along the lines of “… it doesn’t matter; the Constitution is just something drafted by a bunch of dead white guys … and he was ELECTED (note the capitals and usually a quote of some bogus percentages) by a “majority” [har, har] – so who cares that he’s breaking the law???

    Right – laws don’t matter a whit!!!

  81. avatar
    jtx June 16, 2009 at 5:00 pm #

    Doc: (and BTW, kudos for the most part for the way you run your website)

    The BC is indeed ONE issue of fact, but hardly the only one. If born in HI (which he claims he was) there are other issues of fact that bear on eligibility. Those will come out in court under rules of evidence so it pointless to lay them out here where there there are approximately NO rules let alone rules of evidence.

    Your profligate prodigal has done little but indulge in supercilious solipsism ever since he was elected. That would be bad enough if he’d actually prove he were eligible – which he has not – but with the sizeable amount of information pointing to the fact that he is not eligible, such action is – at best – questionable if not downright criminal.

    Time will tell. And I really DO wonder what all of you O-borter flacks will do to justify his illegality once it is proven???

  82. avatar
    kimba June 16, 2009 at 5:17 pm #

    Here’s a new theory from an Orly follower:

    “Note that our contention is that Obama was leading TWO distinct lives that NEVER interfaced. Barry Soetoro as an Indonesian was to game the school tuition system, while Barack Obama was a US citizen. He had to file with the Selective Service as a US citizen. ”

    So while Barack Obama was attending Punahou school, he was also Barry doing something else and then Barry went to Occidental while Barack was on hold? or doing something too in LA? Fascinating. I don’t think I quite understand it. Maybe it’s like those airline pilots that have two marriages, two houses, two families thousands of miles apart. ( oh, no, that was a movie of the week in the 70s) But eventually, sadly, one had to go…poor Barry. Could there be an Occidental college student who remembers the last time he saw Barry Soetoro was finals 1981, Barry was talking about going to Pakistan…and he was never heard from again..

  83. avatar
    nbc June 16, 2009 at 5:58 pm #

    So far the evidence shows that Obama is not advocating government run health care. As to your hopes that in spite of 40+ rejections, some Court will rule the President ineligible, even though by all sources he is born on US soil is meaningless. You seem to be building many red herrings here.
    Get used to the fact that Obama is the de facto, and most like de jure President of the United States and that he will be in charge of the future of this country for at least the next 4 years.
    Such are the facts

  84. avatar
    nbc June 16, 2009 at 6:04 pm #

    The BC is indeed ONE issue of fact, but hardly the only one. If born in HI (which he claims he was) there are other issues of fact that bear on eligibility. Those will come out in court under rules of evidence so it pointless to lay them out here where there there are approximately NO rules let alone rules of evidence.

    Of course, since no court will hear the case, it seems that you have doomed your ‘arguments’ to be lost. I do understand your reluctance to address these arguments since most of them have likely been rebutted by the Doc.
    Under rules of evidence most of the Berg ‘evidence’ would be rejected as hearsay for instance.

    Born in the US is the only relevant issue. It’s that simple and if you disagree then please present your ‘case’

  85. avatar
    nbc June 16, 2009 at 6:05 pm #

    Oh boy, reality deficient…

  86. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy June 16, 2009 at 6:21 pm #

    jtx, I am so thankful I don’t share your world view. But as I told Sven, this isn’t an Obama booster web site: we look at conspiracy theories.

  87. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy June 16, 2009 at 6:24 pm #

    Apart from place of birth, I do not know of any evidence (real or unreal) that would be relevant to Obama’s historical presidential eligibility. There may be all sorts of arguments, but they don’t involve evidence. We already know, as a matter of US law, that the alleged Indonesian adoption cannot have changed Obama’s citizenship.

    “supercilious solipsism”, is that the same thing as “bully pulpit”?

  88. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy June 16, 2009 at 6:28 pm #

    I don’t see how any of that impacts presidential eligibility.

  89. avatar
    aarrgghh June 16, 2009 at 7:54 pm #

    is there some reason why the birthers the doc attracts sound like comic book villains … ?

  90. avatar
    aarrgghh June 16, 2009 at 8:00 pm #

    and don’t forget the kapi’olani medical center january centennial celebration:

    http://www.kapiolanigift.org/centennial.aspx?id=1728

    i know many birthers are still asking why no hospital will admit to having welcomed obama into the world …

  91. avatar
    richCares June 16, 2009 at 8:01 pm #

    That’s because their intellectual level is at comic book level. They think Spiderman is real, very deluded. But their hate suggests horror comics as there is no fun in their delusions just hate.

  92. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy June 16, 2009 at 10:02 pm #

    Actually, the folks we get here are a cut above the average birther. You should look at some of the other forums, especially non-specialist sites, and see what they put up with.

  93. avatar
    misha June 16, 2009 at 10:16 pm #

    Yeah, most of the posters at Orly’s site are semi-literate. At least the birthers here can spell.

    Some of Orly’s posts use poor grammar – on a fifth grade level.

  94. avatar
    thisoldhippie June 16, 2009 at 11:18 pm #

    Including Orly – and while I know English isn’t her first language I have to wonder how she passed law school and the bar.

  95. avatar
    misha June 17, 2009 at 4:31 am #

    “I have to wonder how she passed law school and the bar.”

    She’s not a good lawyer. She only excels at being a rabble rouser. The passing grade of the bar, if I am not mistaken, is 65. So if she mangaged that, she got a law license.

    I worked as a licensed optician in NY, and the passing grade was 65. Because Taft is not accredited, people taking their course have to take a baby bar, I believe after the first year, so she had some practice on what she would be facing.

    There’s a rumor on the ‘Net, that she paid someone to take it for her. What goes around, comes around.

  96. avatar
    Bob June 17, 2009 at 12:13 pm #

    Here’s the pass rate for the California bar. (The February scores are much lower because those tend to be repeat takers.)

    The pass rate for students from unaccredited schools is much lower.

    Taft has a fairly high pass rate for an unaccredited school.

  97. avatar
    NBC June 17, 2009 at 1:01 pm #

    I listened to Berg and what happened is much clearer to me

    The court stated that since the Federal Court of Appeals had ruled on a similar case, the judge’s hands were tied. Berg was then given the opportunity to convince the DOJ to proceed. If the DOJ asks for dismissal the Court would approve.

    I did some digging and found that the Court likely dismissed under Section 3730(c)(2)(A) which states that the Government may call for a dismissal as long as the plaintiff is given an opportunity to be heard.

    According to the panel majority, nothing in the language of Section 3730(c)(2)(A) requires the government to intervene in order to move to dismiss the suit. The majority also noted that the D.C. Circuit held in Swift v. United States, 318 F.3d 250, 251 (D.C. Cir.), cert denied, 539 U.S. 944 (2003), that the government was not required to intervene during the seal period before it moved to dismiss an action, based on the finding that intervention was required under Section 3730(b)(2) only in the event that the government proceeds with the action. The Tenth Circuit found that this interpretation applied to intervention after the seal period as well, and noted that other courts had applied this limitation to the intervention requirement. Ridenour, 2005 WL 300248 at *4 (citing Swift, 318 F.3d at 251).

    In other words, the Government can ask for the case to be dismissed under 3730(c)(2)(a). Of course according to Sequioa, there are some principles to guide the dismissal, however they appear to be relatively easy to meet.

    The case is “Ridenour v. Kaiser-Hill Co., No. 01-1510, 2005 WL 300248 (10th Cir. Feb. 9, 2005), and addresses two important issues regarding the government’s right to dismiss declined qui tam cases over a relator’s objection”

    In a side comment, Berg denies having spoken about the sekrit case and yet a journalist reported on November 2008

    Berg takes this in stride. His writ, he says, requires Obama and the Democratic National Council to respond by December 1. Also, he has another arrow in his quiver. He’s filed in the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., under the False Claims Act, which is often used in Medicaid fraud. “I am basing this on the fact that as a U.S. senator [Obama] is collecting money illegally because he is not a citizen of this country,” he says.

    On Chalice, Berg remarks

    If I had talked about the case, they could have dismissed it.

    Seems that the case, if it ever comes back to the lower court is ripe for dismissal on grounds of the plaintiff discussing the case in public during the time it was sealed. Berg is also claiming that the Court forgot to seal it but the rules seem clear that it is up to the plaintiff to make sure the case is sealed and to achieve this the case should be presented in camera.

    See Berg’s comment at nativeborncitizen blog

    Sequoia references the 9th Circuit ruling

    The court unanimously adopted the Ninth Circuit’s Sequoia Orange holding that the proper standard of review for a government motion to dismiss is the “rational relation” test. Under the “rational relation” test, the government is merely required to demonstrate: (1) a valid governmental purpose for the dismissal, and (2) a rational relation between dismissal and accomplishment of the governmental purpose. Once this showing has been made, “the burden switches to the relator to demonstrate that dismissal is fraudulent, arbitrary and capricious, or illegal.’” Id. at *7.

    The ball is back in Berg’s court, no pun intended.

    In his “on air” appearances, Berg also seems to suggest that getting to discovery is his true goal. Which may help explain why his ‘evidence’ is so poor.

  98. avatar
    TRUTH June 17, 2009 at 4:30 pm #

    DOc, you need to call Call up 1-800-Victrola and ask if they can fix that broken record of yours…NBC.

  99. avatar
    TRUTH June 17, 2009 at 4:37 pm #

    And NBC can’t see the Forest for the Trees. Sure, people have the option of keeping their Private Health Care Providers. OH THAT IS SO WONDERFUL! How GREAT of Mr. Obama to “allow” that. That is, until the Private business that is paying the employers insurance says “sorry Mr Employee, I can’t pay this big increase in insurance since the GOV has a mandated minimum payment, the Doctors have increased their prices which has reflected in my insurance payments, so you’ll just have to use Obamas Insurance.”…. END of Private Insurance.

    NO NBC, Me and the other Ney-Sayers are just Dumb. Your the Right One.

    wait a minute, I think I heard my number.. “Now Serving # 257,461,122”

  100. avatar
    nbc June 17, 2009 at 5:49 pm #

    Repeating facts never hurt my dear friend. Certainly when some seem to be willing to forget or ignore them.
    Such are the facts.

  101. avatar
    nbc June 17, 2009 at 5:52 pm #

    Seems TRUTH has admitted that he was wrong that the Government was going to run healthcare when Obama is talking about insurance.

    As to your ‘predictions’, how come that in Europe private health insurance has not gone extinct?

    Hmmmm. Perhaps you may want to focus on more accurately presenting your ‘facts’?