Saturday, August 23, 2008

A Conversation with Philip J. Berg, Esq.

Fairly late yesterday evening, I had the opportunity to speak with Philip Berg, the Philadelphia attorney who filed suit against Illinois senator Barack Obama in Federal Court in Philadelphia, questioning the constitutional eligibility of his candidacy for president.

I was fortunate enough to be in the right place at the right time to break the story, which only now is beginning to gain traction for a hopeful leap into the mainstream media. Berg, who served as Deputy Attorney General of Pennsylvania for eight years, ran twice for governor in 1990 and 1998 and once for the U.S. Senate in 1994, was former chair of the Democratic Party in Montgomery (PA) County and a former member of the Democratic State Committee, was more than happy to speak with me yesterday afternoon in the lobby of the courthouse following a hearing in the chambers of the Hon. R. Barclay Surrick.

Immediately, we established that we couldn't be more ideologically dissimilar. He believes that the United States government was behind the attacks of September 11, 2001; the very mention of such theories make me ill. He was an ardent supporter of Hillary Clinton's candidacy during the primaries; I sell tee shirts showing the former first lady and one of her quotes ("We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good," said in June 2004) juxtaposed under the words "RE-DEFEAT COMMUNISM."

Needless to say, Philip Berg and I are very different. I'm not sure that I completely buy into the various allegations made in the complaint filed late on Thursday afternoon, but I value more than anything other than my wife and child the United States Constitution and the ideas and ideals of those who wrote it here in Philadelphia so many years ago; for that reason, I firmly believe that Berg's action against Barack Obama must be given the full attention that it deserves, for the sake of America and everything for which She stands.

Philip Berg, from what I can tell, is not the stark-raving mad whack-job that people on the American political left are already portraying him to be. In our two discussions, he was rational, he was calm, he was congenial and showed a sense of humor -- something I thought inexistent in most liberals. I'm not afraid to say that I like the guy.

He found time to fit me in amidst an increasingly busy schedule. He had just completed a 20-minute live, drive-time radio interview with a San Diego, CA show, presumably Roger Hedgecock's show, but I don't know for sure. Earlier on Friday, he taped a 20-minute interview with Webster Tarpley, apparently an influential figure among those who, like Berg, feel that our federal government, incapable and cumbersome as it is, was able to organize and execute the 9/11 attacks and keep the conspiracy quiet afterwards. I didn't press on Tarpley; I'm like David Banner when I get angry, only with love handles. Berg also mentioned that he was to be on Coast To Coast AM early this morning from about 1:15 to 3:00 a.m., and on Monday was scheduled for another drive-time interview on a Mississippi radio station.

The mainstream press, once it does grab a hold of this story, will undoubtedly cast Philip Berg as either (1) a nutjob with a questionable past or (2) a low-level party operative retained by Hillary Clinton and her flunkies to do some dirty work in the days leading up to the nominating convention in Denver. I thought I'd tackle the latter issue first, perhaps to determine where his loyalties lie and how he feels about the candidates.


Being the natural skeptic that I am, Mr. Berg, I couldn't help but think that a relatively well-known and respectable local party operative such as yourself would be the perfect person to act as surrogate on behalf of Hillary Clinton and her campaign, only a matter of weeks after she somehow maneuvered her way into having her name included in the nomination. Care to comment?

I have had no direct or indirect contact with anyone on the Hillary Clinton campaign. Did I help her in the primaries? Yes. Was I in favor of her over Obama? Yes. What did I do? I contributed some money and made some phone calls to various states for her. Other than that, I attended one Montgomery County [PA] Democratic Committee dinner at which her daughter spoke, though for the record, Obama’s representative was also at the same function. So, am I closely involved with them? No.

And as I told you this afternoon, even among those who helped me prepare for this case, while I know they may be against Obama’s violation of the Constitution, I do not even know nor have I asked where they stand politically.

What was it that drew you to Hillary's candidacy in the first place?

I think that she is a remarkable woman. I think that over the years she has shown herself to be a leader. I was looking at everyone at the very beginning and I thought she really stood her ground. I think that we could use a woman in the White House, and I think she knows the issues, and the experience she had being First Lady helped, along with the experience gained in the Senate since then.

Throughout the past year, though, she and Barack Obama had shown themselves to be ideologically planting their flag on the same turf. Before you knew about all of this other stuff, before birth certificates, citizenship and eligibility, what was it that so turned you off to Obama?

Obama just never turned me on. There has always been something missing there, and as his various associations came out, the kind of people he was involved with, it really turned my stomach. I couldn’t believe it.

That, and he had an excuse for everything. His phony responses to the Rev. [Jeremiah] Wright issue turned me off. He said "I never knew what he was like." He was a member of that church for twenty years. Twenty years! When the story first broke, he went on all of the television and cable stations and claimed he was never in the pew when Rev. Wright made any of these remarks. By the time he made his speech in Philadelphia days later—a speech that the mainstream media agreed might have been the best in the history of the world—he did a complete turnabout and admitted that he was in the pew at the time of the remarks. At what point is enough, enough?

It should be noted that Oprah joined that church in 1984 and left in 1986 because she felt that the viewpoint of Rev. Wright and that church could be detrimental to her television career. [I suppose he meant THIS --Jeff] Obama was somehow there for twenty years and did not know what Rev. Wright was like? Nobody can believe that.

And then it went on, issue after issue, association after association, Bill Ayers and so on and so forth. And the media let him slide. They let him slide on doing drugs. Cocaine, marijuana – some other candidate saying this would be hammered by the media.

Everything was overlooked. Look at the issue he’s making now, about John McCain not knowing how many properties he owns.

The way it was phrased in the television commercial, it looked to me to be an obvious reference to his age. Don't you think?

That’s right. Why can’t we ask Obama about the time he said he had visited 57 states? If Hillary Clinton had stated that, you’d still be hearing about it today. If McCain had said that, you’d still be hearing about it. But Barack Obama says it, and it just disappears.

Not to mention that, in the weeks and months leading up to the 2004 election, the folks in your party were up in arms about any reference to the considerable wealth of Teresa Heinz Kerry. Now that it is Cindy McCain and not Ms. Imperceptible Accent, family wealth is fair game. Why is that?

I don't know. Listen, she’s worth over $100 million dollars. They can have as many houses as they want. But I must give credit to McCain – he’s never taken an earmark during all his years in the Senate for the state of Arizona. Now, the guy has crossed the line on a number of bills and I cannot say that I’m rooting for McCain, but he certainly has more pluses than Obama.

Obama is an empty suit. He’s very good when he delivers a speech—I don’t know if he writes them himself or has a team of speechwriters—but when he’s off of the teleprompter, his oratory goes down the drain. That’s why he didn’t want to do all of these town meetings across the country with McCain, and the atrocious performance at Saddleback Church last week shows that Obama will likely falter in the three scheduled debates before the election.

I chalk much of his success up to the influence and agenda setting of the mainstream media. Speaking of which, are you happy with the coverage which the mainstream press has given your civil action?

Well, no. First of all, the mainstream media hasn’t covered it yet. I’m doing an interview with a journalist tomorrow morning at 10:00 who says he’ll be able to get it out into the mainstream media.

Well, once it bridges that gap for the first time, then it should spread just as the recent accounts of John Edwards' infidelity did. It took more than eight months for the story to reach a newspaper or television show of note.

Yes. I was talking to a producer from one of the Fox shows, and she said that until it appears in the mainstream press, we cannot cover it. The Times-Herald, out of Norristown here, they’re airing a story here either Saturday or Sunday, and I have a feeling that they’ll do a good job on it, seeing that they’re pretty much my hometown paper.

I’m encouraged by the response over the Internet. I’m discouraged by the people in the mainstream press but I think we’re going to crack it on this case. There are just so many people involved at this point … people are sending out stories all over the place … I’ve been involved in big cases over the years, and this is the single greatest initial response I’ve ever received in any case and I think it's because it's so significant – we’re talking about a serious constitutional issue which has never been dealt with before. If we’re right, which I believe we are, Obama really should be taken to task, because he knows that he violated the law. And I hope, if we’re right, that someone brings criminal charges against him.

Criminal charges?

I think it’s an absolute disgrace. If you go back to his record when he was running for the state senate, he threw off a competitor because he didn’t meet the requirements. So I think this guy has got a lot of nerve, I really do, and I believe we’re right, and I believe that action should be taken against him. He could cause, as I said to the judge today, irreparable harm to people in this country, and if it happens, there could be all sorts of bad stuff going on.

Is there any historical precedent for this? I'm not entirely positive, but I think that George Romney--Mitt's father--was deemed constitutionally eligible to run for president in 1968 even though he was born in Mexico.

I’m not sure about that, but if you remember [Thomas] Eagleton, he was forced out because of mental treatments--shock treatments--and was replaced with Sergeant Shriver who, along with McGovern, lost.

A change of this sort is always detrimental, and that’s why we believe the Republicans are aware of this, they’re waiting, and they will bring it out in September or October and, at that point, would destroy the Democratic Party. Because of the backlash and the people who will be so disgusted, it will lose the presidency, and it could lose the Senate, the House, the governor races and other races across this country. I really think that Obama owes it to everyone to produce, right now, a vault birth certificate and proof of the oath of allegiance he took upon his return to this country from Indonesia, which I don’t believe exists. If he has these documents, he owes it to everyone to bring them out right now.

I've written a lot over the past few months about race and politics, and back in February and March warned of the potential for Barack Obama and his supporters to counter substance with charges of racism and cries of racial intolerance. What do you say to those people who inevitably will, perhaps looking at the underlying African story, call you a racist?

Of course some people might look at me and assume I’m doing this because he’s black. I’m not. I’m Jewish, and I’m a life-long member of the NAACP, so people will be hard-pressed to confront me on any of those issues.

Rumors as to Barack Obama's citizenship have been swirling around the Internet for months. Why did you wait so long to file suit?

They asked me the same question when I was doing the radio interview for the San Diego station. I received a phone call about ten days ago, and someone said "you’ve got to do this." I explained that, before I went forth with it, I had to do due diligence, check all of the sources and check all of the information to find out if it was for real. And I believe it is for real.

Factcheck.org released a statement yesterday, including images showing an embossed seal and appropriate signatures, and maintained that after fondling the certificate they could attest to its authenticity. How satisfied are you with the independent forensic document experts cited in your complaint?

Well, I'm not familiar with that site [he asked me to spell it --Jeff] but I’ve seen documentation supporting our arguments just the same and I’m satisfied with that. Look, the truth comes down to this -- at this point in time, it’s time to fish or cut bait, time to stop pussy-footing around. At this point in time, Obama owes it to people to produce the documents. If I’m wrong, even if he doesn’t want to handle it himself and has the person in charge of his campaign communications come out and say, "here is the vault copy of the birth certificate, here is the certified copy of his oath of allegiance from when he came back from Indonesia, this issue should be put to bed and Mr. Berg should withdraw his suit immediately or we’ll sue him to high heaven," then I’m wrong. If they do not do that within the next day or so, then I know we’re right. If they let the case linger, then I believe we’re right. The challenge I’ve made to them is that, if they don’t produce these documents, then we know they’re wrong.

Yes, but in a constitutional issue such as this one, wouldn't you carry the burden of proof, Mr. Berg?

Yes, it is on me, but what I am saying here is that I’ve created an issue which I’m sure will be all over the convention next week, whether the reporters want to deal with it or not. It should be brought up with the delegates, someone should bring it up and confront them with it. I’d like to go to Denver, and if I have the chance to speak in front of Obama delegates, I would explain that "if I’m wrong, I’m out of here – but it is incumbent upon you to ask your candidate to confirm that he is a citizen and produce the necessary documentation, and if he doesn’t do it, then this party is going to go down the drain."

Switching gears now, the mainstream media has proven to be very protective of Barack Obama up to this point. I've even suggested that sitting on the John Edwards story in the weeks prior to the Iowa caucus was done not so much to protect Edwards, but to protect Obama from Hillary Clinton, who stood to benefit from Edwards' votes should he have dropped out early. Do you worry that you will be discredited as a result of bringing attention to the various issues, inconsistencies and unanswered questions surrounding the mainstream media's chosen candidate?

No. I’m not worried about that. I can handle myself in front of the media. If the media wants to confront me, I’ll confront them. I’ll ask them why I need to do this, why they didn’t do this months ago. With the resources at their disposal, with the access and the ability to travel, it is incumbent upon them to have properly vetted Obama, and the fact that they have not done so is a disgrace.

A couple of years ago, in 2005, you were subject to sanctions and fines for reported ethics violations. A few years before that, there were the Federal Racketeering actions filed against President Bush and others suggesting prior knowledge and a coverup of the September 11 attacks. And, of course, in the wake of the 2000 election, you called for the resignation of three Supreme Court Justices. You and I discussed, this afternoon, the effect of credibility on the authentication of rumor -- how do you transcend such issues with regard to this action?

The sanction and fines are on appeal.

The RICO action was withdrawn because we wanted to put together a more detailed RICO complaint, and that’s why, when I represented Ellen Mariani she subsequently did not want to pursue the action. I got a second plaintiff named William Rodriguez, and things were moving along in the case, when he decided to withdraw for personal reasons. The case has put me into personal bankruptcy, but I plan to come back out a proceed with the case.

And yes, I asked three Supreme Court Justices to resign because of their involvement with the 2000 election. I think what they did was improper. I spent three weeks down in Florida and, on the Saturday in question, I was sent out to a county in the panhandle and discovered, personally, white-out painted on ballots. Serving as a volunteer sent to check on things, I confronted the judge for that single county—I forget the name of the county at the moment—and some people say I was lucky to have survived, and only did so because an NBC affiliate was there filming and a reporter was there taking pictures which ended up running on the front page of the paper in that area. Other people said, "you know, you were ten miles from the Alabama border, and if those news media people hadn’t been there, you might never have been heard from again."

See, I’m not afraid to come forth with issues which need to be exposed. Am I perfect? Of course not. In this case, however, I feel 99 percent that we’re right on this particular case.

In terms of credibility, my very successful record in big cases shows some of that. I’m the only attorney in the country to defeat "cell phone" legislation in Hilltown Township, Bucks County, PA, meant to ban the use of hand-held cell phones while behind the wheel of a car, and did that pro bono. I have also represented PAWS—Performing Animal Welfare Society—in California, pro bono, protecting the rights of abused circus elephants, and was extremely successful in that case. My record, over the years, is such that I can stand on my own two feet in front of anyone.

This is also my 27th year as a member in the Barren Hill Volunteer Fire Company/Fire Police, where I have served as lieutenant, as sergeant, and just as a member. I average over 100 calls per year.

Regardless of credibility, how do you get past the circumstantial nature of the evidence cited in your complaint -- for instance, the account of Barack Obama's mother staying in Kenya and not flying back to Hawaii until after Barack's birth, all based on a custom at the time which prevented late-stage pregnant women from boarding airplanes?

Well, that’s going to be tough, but the way around it is the grandmother—I’m not sure if she is still living—or the sister and brother who, according to reports, stated that they were at the Mombasa, Kenya hospital when Barack Obama was born. By subpoenaing records from that hospital, by subpoenaing the family members, we can obtain the evidence we need.

I think that, in this type of case, the burden of proof shifts. I think that Sen. Obama owes it to his party and to the citizens of this country to show that I am wrong. If I am, if he produces the documentation, the case will go away, I’ll go away, and he can go forth and do what he can in the election. But if he ignores this topic, I believe it shows guilt on his part.

Now that Judge Surrick denied the temporary restraining order, where do you go from here?

We plan to wait until the various parties are served, and then I’ll make the appropriate motion to the court for expedited discovery. At that point, we’ll probably have a conference call with the judge to see where and when we will be proceeding, but this case, because of the nature of it and because the judge said he will make an effort to keep the case moving along, it needs an expedited track to overcome the normal time frame of six months to one year and beyond. This case cannot take that long.

This has to be brought to the forefront. That’s why, again, Sen. Obama really owes it to everyone to confront this. He should threaten me. “Berg,” he should say, “here are the documents and, if you do not withdraw the suit, I will sue you.” Right now, he has no basis to sue me. If he does have the documents, he should show them, and I’ll walk away. I’ll withdraw the case. But, again, he must show me a certified vault copy of his birth certificate and must show me a certified copy of the oath of allegiance taken between the time he was 19 to 21 at a Consulate, U.S. Embassy or the like.

If those documents can be presented, again, I’m out of here. But I don’t think he can, I don’t think he will, and I think it is a total disgrace on his part.

Okay, in twenty seconds or less, why is it so important that these proceedings move forward?

It is important for these proceedings to go forward at this time because the later it goes on, the more disheveled the Democratic Party will look. If it is proven later on, or if it is otherwise not acknowledged until after he is elected, then procedural steps will have to be taken whether the news comes before or after January 20. Either way, we’re looking at the destruction of the Democratic Party.

It is a disservice to every citizen of this country, especially those who donated hundreds of millions of dollars to his campaign. It is a disservice to the entire voting public, and indeed to the system as a whole.



RELATED ITEMS:

The America's Right story which started it all: Obama Sued in Philadelphia Federal Court on Grounds he is Constitutionally Ineligible for the Presidency

America's Right commentaries: Eligibility Goes Beyond Citizenship and Is this For Real, and Why Hasn't the Mainstream Media Covered it Yet?

See periodic updates at America's Right.com (Click HERE)


38 comments:

n4m347yp3 said...

As a 26 year old new reader at 8pm PST tonight, I found myself hitting F5, and saving your "Americasright.com" link until your latest post, where I counter with a big >>>> LETS GET TO THE BOTTOM OF THIS<<<<<

I guess I am your typical male from the seattle area. I feel I am up with election subjects, and I even ended up at a Hillary Convention in Vegas in Early Jan. Since I have never visited your site, I found humor just as I was getting close to jumping on the Obama band wagon. This document sent me for another mind warp.

Who could pick a side today, DEM or REP ? Both sides have proven they can act like the other on any matter, and do nothing.

It's silly how much marketing has played into politics. I feel mislead by the main-stream media, specificly on this subject matter, and would like to get the facts on this case. (and many more...but lets just start small...)

When each party is trying to win new-voters over, the messages are becoming more "reaction" campaigns than "proactive promotions" for new policies and changes.

This year researching facts about the offical "practices" and not promisses will deciede where our country heads. The internet is only as good as you use it. Speaking for our youth, I doubt many are on here at 1:13 PST AM reachearing politics. Being my 3rd election (I must be a pro) I have to say, I voted BUSH, and BUSH. I'll say it. Boy, thats why I get for voting off a lack of information. This election year has been hard to keep the facts straight, but personally, I wanted to say THANK YOU for reaching out and offering another great networking/researching source, as a true US citizen would do.

I do agree, this wing-nut VP looks to be what Obama needs to make a serious run vs. McLame, if he can produce the documents for this trial.....(if so.... GO OBAMA!)

I like this Berg guy....

bortog said...

I'd like Berg's lawsuit to challenge Obama regarding whether or not he registered for the draft when he was 19 as he should have. It is required in order to work in the U.S. executive branch and a failure to do so cannot be rectified at a later time.

Anonymous said...

"Factcheck.org released a statement yesterday, including images showing an embossed seal and appropriate signatures, and maintained that after fondling the certificate they could attest to its authenticity."

It is at least a bit curious that factcheck.org is owned the the Annenberg Foundation.

RodCrosby said...

For those looney-tunes who were asserting elsewhere, especially on Wikipedia, that this case is not happening, or that sites like Obamacrimes or this blog are not "valid sources", here is the PACER docket.
http://dockets.justia.com/docket/court-paedce/case_no-2:2008cv04083/case_id-281573/

Wikipedians are doing everything they can to prevent this news from
being revealed. I've been blocked for 48 hours for daring to try to edit Obama's wiki page.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama

Koyaan said...

I'd like Berg's lawsuit to challenge Obama regarding whether or not he registered for the draft when he was 19 as he should have. It is required in order to work in the U.S. executive branch and a failure to do so cannot be rectified at a later time.

No need for that.

Obama did indeed register for Selective Service. Bob Owens wrote about this here.

And just to make sure, I telephoned Selective Service headquarters in Arlington, VA last Monday and spoke to Daniel Amon who confirmed the information he'd provided to Bob Owens.

k

Koyaan said...

It is at least a bit curious that factcheck.org is owned the the Annenberg Foundation.

What I find curious is that people will bring this up in lieu of the substance of the article.

k

Anonymous said...

Mr. Berg,

1) You should have had proof before filing something of this magnitude. You don't.
2) Obama was a young child when schooled abroad. It is completely absurd to expect him to present a "certified copy of his oath of allegiance from when he came back from Indonesia".

Obama is a Senator of the United State of America and you and your interviewer are whack jobs.

Oli Smythe said...

Well, I am doing my part as I have "blockquoted" you on our local (Mississippi) blogosphere, YallPolitics.com, who posted the links to this lawsuit.

Thank you for letting "us" know that Berg will be featured on Supertalk radio, which I presume the drive time show will be with Paul Gallo.

I also sent Drudge links for him to "examine"...as I couldn't believe he would not already have it posted. This truly caused me to ponder if he has not become one of the "mainstream media" that hides facts that we Americans have the right to know.

I am amazed that we have come to this...sugar-coated fluff. Who cares if he (Berg) was a Clinton supporter? The truth needs to be out there. The fact that Obama's relationship with Rezco was diminished against how many houses McCain has, irks me.

Factcheck is a joke, just like other ill-based orgs.

Why have Americans become so complacent and blinded by the "marketing" of socialism? Are we racing headlong into the 4th Reich? And no, I haven't read the book, as I think I see it encompassed all around me.

I believe anyone with a curiosity should email family, friends and anyone who would find this interesting.

Hey the Enquirer found facts on John Edwards love child, why hasn't anyone bothered to make this case known? Oh, that's right, money talks and BS walks...plus, "Its not what you see that's real, it's what you don't see!"

Thanks again for your information on Berg v. Obama?, Soetero?, Dunham? and others...

Anonymous said...

"Obama is a Senator of the United State of America and you and your interviewer are whack jobs."

Ooooh, we're soooo scaaarrreeed! Didn't you learn anything from high school that Senators are public SERVANTS and they are supposed to serve us instead of we bowing to them like peasants in a feudal kingdom?

If your Messiah has nothing to hide, then he shouldn't be afraid of releasing those documents and proving Mr. Berg wrong, right? Or do you think he is so special that proving he meets all the eligibility requirements is totally beneath him?

Koyaan said...

Obama is a Senator of the United State of America and you and your interviewer are whack jobs.

I agree that Berg's a whack job. But I don't think it's fair to call Schreiber a whack job. At least not because of this piece.

I mean, he took the time to go interview Berg, posted the interview here, and has allowed others to comment on it.

What's the problem with that?

k

HOOSIERS FOR FAIR TAX said...

Obama is a Senator up to his eyeballs with Chicago politicians...who are KNOWN to cheat.

Anonymous said...

I don't know about the rest of the public, but everytime I apply for a job I have to provide proof of citizenship and identity. Why would the highest job in country not require the same?

jade said...

AMERICAN PEOPLE DESERVE THE KNOW! SUPPORTERS OF OBAMA--YOU SHOULD WANT TO KNOW FOR SURE. IF YOU WERE MARRIED TO SOMEONE WHO CHEATED, TOOK ALL YOUR MONEY AND LIED TO YOU, WON'T YOU WANT TO KNOW!

Berg vs. Obama Lawsuit.
Philip J. Berg, an attorney and self-professed Hillary Clinton supporter who has filed a lawsuit against Barack Obama, the Democratic National Committee, and several other parties. Berg contends that Sen. Obama is not a natural born U.S. citizen and, therefore, is not constitutionally eligible to run for the office of president.

According to Berg, Obama was born in Kenya and then a week later flown back to Hawaii where a certificate of live birth was filed (view certificate on website). Berg claims the birth record initially posted on the Obama campaign website is a forgery based on his half-sister's certificate. Berg also noted that Obama would have lost any American citizenship status he had when he moved to Indonesia with his mother and was adopted by his step-father.

Berg presented other arguments to support his case, but believes the Republican party has even more evidence and will use it to discredit Obama after he receives the Democratic nomination. Berg said journalist Wayne Madsen published an article about a GOP research team that was sent to Kenya and has located a certificate registering the birth of a boy named "Barack Obama, Jr." to his father, a Kenyan citizen and his mother, a U.S. citizen.

Philip J. Berg, Esq. Files Federal Lawsuit Requesting Obama Be Removed as a Candidate as he does not meet the Qualifications for President
Thursday, 21 August 2008 22:09 administrator For Immediate Release: - 08/21/08

Suit filed 08/21/08, No. 08-cv-4083
Contact information at the end of this press release. Documents filed with the court and a copy of this press release can be downloaded at the end of this press release.

(Lafayette Hill, Pennsylvania – 08/21/08) - Philip J. Berg, Esquire, [Berg is a former Deputy Attorney General of Pennsylvania; former candidate for Governor and U.S. Senate in Democratic Primaries; former Chair of the Democratic Party in Montgomery County; former member of Democratic State Committee; an attorney with offices in Montgomery County, PA and an active practice in Philadelphia, PA, filed a lawsuit in Federal Court today, Berg vs. Obama, Civil Action No. 08-cv-4083, seeking a Declaratory Judgment and an Injunction that Obama does not meet the qualifications to be President of the United States. Berg filed this suit for the best interests of the Democratic Party and the citizens of the United States.“Eighteen million Democratic Primary voters donated money, volunteered their time and energy, worked very hard and then not only supported Senator Clinton, but voted for her and often recruited other supporters as well. All the efforts of supporters of legitimate citizens were for nothing because this man lied and cheated his way into a
Philip J. Berg, Esquire stated in his lawsuit that Senator Obama:

1. Is not a natural-born citizen; and/or

2. Lost his citizenship when he was adopted in Indonesia; and/or

3. Has dual loyalties because of his citizenship with Kenya and Indonesia.

Berg stated: “I filed this action at this time to avoid the obvious problems that will occur when the Republican Party raises these issues after Obama is nominated.

There have been numerous questions raised about Obama’s background with no satisfactory answers. The questions that I have addressed include, but are not limited to:

1. Where was Obama born? Hawaii; an island off of Hawaii; Kenya; Canada; or ?

2. Was he a citizen of Kenya, Indonesia and/or Canada?

3. What was the early childhood of Obama in Hawaii; in Kenya; in Indonesia when he was adopted; and later, back to Hawaii?

4. An explanation as to the various names utilized by Obama that include: Barack Hussein Obama; Barry Soetoro; Barry Obama; Barack Dunham; and Barry Dunham.

5. Illinois Bar Application – Obama fails to acknowledge use of names other than Barack Hussein Obama, a blatant lie.

If Obama can prove U.S. citizenship, we still have the issue of muti-citizenship with responsibilities owed to and allegance to other countries.

Berg continued:

fraudulent candidacy and cheated legitimately eligible natural born citizens from competing in a fair process and the supporters of their citizen choice for the nomination.

Voters donated money, goods and services to elect a nominee and were defrauded by Senator Obama's lies and obfuscations. He clearly shows a conscience of guilt by his actions in using the forged birth certificate and the lies he's told to cover his loss of citizenship. We believe he does know, supported this belief by his actions in hiding his

secret, in that he failed to regain his citizenship and used documents to further his position as a natural born citizen. We would also show he proclaims himself a Constitutional scholar and lecturer, but did not learn he had no eligibility to become President except by means of lying, obfuscations and deceptions. His very acts proves he knew he was no longer a natural born citizen. We believe he knew he was defrauding the country or else why use the forged birth certificate of his half sister?

Americans lost money, goods and services donated in their support of a candidate who supposedly was a natural born citizen simply because the DNC officers and party leaders looked the other way and did not demand credentials to answer the questions and prove whether or not Senator Obama was a legitimately natural born citizen, even in light of recent information that has surfaced on websites on the Internet suggesting Senator Obama may not be eligible to become President and questioning his status of multiple citizenships and questionable loyalties! If the DNC officers and.or leaders had performed one ounce of due diligence we would not find ourselves in this emergency predicament, one week away from making a person the nominee who has lost their citizenship as a child and failed to even perform the basic steps of regaining citizenship through an oath of allegiance at age eighteen [18] as prescribed by Constitutional laws!

The injunctrive relief must be granted because failing to do so, this inaction defrauds everyone who voted in the Democratic Primary for a nominee that is a fair representation of the voters. Failure to grant injunctive relief would allow a corrupted, fraudulent nomination process to continue. It not only allows, but promotes an overwhelming degree of disrespect and creates such a lack of confidence in voters of the primary process itself, so that it would cement a prevailing belief that no potential candidate has to obey the laws of this country, respect our election process, follow the Constitution, or even suffer any consequence for lying and defrauding voters to get onto the ballot when they have no chance of serving if they fraudulently manage to get elected! It is unfair to the country for candidates of either party to become the nominee when there is any question of their ability to serve if elected.

All judges are lawyers and held to a higher standard of practice than a regular lawyer. It is this Judicial standard that demands injunctive relief prayed for here. This relief is predicated upon one of the most basic premises of practicing law which states no lawyer can allow themselves to be used in furthering a criminal enterprise. And by that gauge alone, failing to give injunctive relief to the 18 million supporters of the other candidate, a true natural born citizen eligible to serve if elected, this court must not allow itself to be used to further the criminal and fraudulent acts to continue and be rewarded by becoming the Democratic Nominee. Failure to give the injunctive relief prayed for will insure that a corrupted Presidential election process will only guarantee a show of unfair preference of one group of people over another group by not demanding the same rules be applied to all groups equally and fairly, especially in light of the fact that both candidates are each considered a minority.

Philip J. Berg, Esquire
555 Andorra Glen Court, Suite 12
Lafayette Hill, PA 19444-2531
Cell (610) 662-3005
(610) 825-3134
(800) 993-PHIL [7445]
Fax (610) 834-7659

elgreco said...

As a Chicago resident for many years I can attest to the fact that Chicago politics are as crooked as a snake and they are all on the take, from the cop on the beat, to the fat cats at city hall. Anyone bred by that system of politics cannot be trusted.

chris1066 said...

This idiot also filed a lawsuit to charge George Bush and Dick Cheney for their complicity in 9/11. Yup, he's a 9/11 Truther!

I can file a lawsuit claiming that Cheney is Satan in disguise. Will it be filed? SURE. Will I win? Probably not, but then, that's not the point with these lawsuits.

www.factcheck.org already put this citizenship issue to rest.

Is this is the best the Right-Wing attack machine can come with with??? So very sad! LMAO

Anonymous said...

Someone has been passing around a "birth certificate," claiming it's Obama's. That green document is not a birth certificate. It's a forgery. Where is his birth weight? Measurements? Hospital? City? This is a huge lie!!! Where is the REQUIRED signature of the delivery physician? I have never seen such a coverup in 26 years of journalism! Where is the handwritten or typed birth certificate made on the day of Barack Obama's birth?

Anonymous said...

Chris, Phil Berg is a life-long Democrat and NAACP member too. He is trying to get Obama to prove his citizenship BEFORE he is nominated. Because if he can't do it afterwards, the right-wing attack machine is going to have a field day to remember.

Factcheck.org didn't clear up anything - on the contrary! It's highly suspicious that this endorsement of BO's BC comes from his own sponsors, the Annenberg foundation.

I agree with the previous Anonymous commentator above, that we need to see a HOSPITAL RECORD. Because even if the short-form birth certificate is for real, it could be wrong. If Barack's Mom rushed back to the US after he was born in Kenya, Canada or wherever to register his birth so he would be a US citizen, and told the public health nurse the kid was born at home, they'd have to give him a birth certificate wouldn't they? But it wouldn't show a Honolulu maternity hospital on it... that's why we want to see the original. Because reportedly there IS a birth certificate for him in Kenya... and if there is, you can trust the GOP to bring it forward at their own convenience.

So if Obama is a US citizen, what's keeping him from coming forward with this conclusive proof?

As for conspiracy theories, well, if he isn't a citizen, and they go ahead and nominate him anyway, then maybe there is a conspiracy to destroy the Democratic party going on here.

W. W Woodward said...

A question comes to mind. Could Barrack Obama be "the Manchurian Candidate?

Anonymous said...

IF Obama could was born in Hawaii, it would be very easy to produce a birth record from that Hawaiian hospital.

However, that would still not answer the other questions raised about Indonesian citizenship.

Gus B said...

“The Obamanation”

Obamanation in a proclamation,
Says it’s time for something new.

We stand for a change, though it may seem strange,
So shut up while we brain wash you.

Obamanation’s new proclamation.
We intend to change your nation.

Your constitution is wrong, your existence too long
We will complete your socialization.

Obamanation in a proclamation,
States the world is tired of you.

You think you’re fighting for right, using all of your might
We will eliminate the pride in you.

Obamanation’s new proclamation.
It’s time we exploit the sheeple.

The nation must change while embracing the strange
While I betray all of it’s people.

A proclamation of the Obamanation
I’ll bring you to your knees.

Your economy’s too strong and that’s just wrong.
I require you bow me.

Next proclamation by the Obamanation
Iran should be our friend.

Israel has too much sway in what you say,
So this Jewish influence must end.

The Obamanation of proclamations
This world is meant for Islam

Other religions are hated, must be subjugated
So convert or we’ll use the bomb.

Anonymous said...

I know factually that you are of a questionable state of mind, approximating outright Psychosis. You must have chug-a-lugged the Koolaid sometime at a key developmental stage when you were young, because your train has left the rails and is running amuck.
Get your head out of your posterior and into the real World. We will investigate 9/11 and all the crimes that have occured on the Bu$h/Cheney watch and the guilty parties will be prosecuted, no matter how high into the Bu$h/Cheney Crime Family we have to reach. There is no place to escape Justice even after death!

Anonymous said...

Just like the Democrats... nominating an illegal alien for President...

Ian Thorpe said...

W.W. Woodward asked could Obama be the Manchurian Candidate?

I don't know, but if he was born in Kenya when it was still part of the Empire then he has British citizenship and so as his campaign starts to look sick he could be The English Patient.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said, "Someone has been passing around a "birth certificate," claiming it's Obama's. That green document is not a birth certificate. It's a forgery. Where is his birth weight? Measurements? Hospital? City? This is a huge lie!!! Where is the REQUIRED signature of the delivery physician? "

How many birth certificates have you gotten? From how many states? I have gotten three birth certificates from two states. None of them mentions the birth weight and measurements. Only one of them mentions where the person was born (home/name of hospital) and only one has the delivery person's signature (nurse midwife, not MD).

And Anonymous said, "we need to see a HOSPITAL RECORD. Because even if the short-form birth certificate is for real, it could be wrong."
Please keep in mind that not all people are born in hospitals--my daughter wasn't. How then can you demand a *hospital* record? We need to know the truth. But be careful about the kind of proof you demand.

And also said, "If Barack's Mom rushed back to the US after he was born in Kenya, Canada or wherever to register his birth so he would be a US citizen". This is an interesting comment. Makes you think that Obama's mom knew when he was born that he'd want to be president and wanted to make sure that he was considered a US citizen. Being a mom, I can almost guarantee you that probably the last thing on his mom's mind when nearing the time for labor and delivery was making sure that Obama would be considered a US citizen by birth.

I agree it is important to know the truth. But let's make sure we are looking for the right proof. Let's not go barking up the wrong tree.

Anonymous said...

At this point in our election process, I could care less about the tax question, war issue, and any other issue on the table. Is Obama eligible to be president as outlined in our constitution? If I do not get an adequate answer, I cannot vote for him!

Anonymous said...

Barack Hussein Obama...the "Islamian" candidate?

Anonymous said...

The real reason Obama COLB can't be found, I'm convinced, isn't that he wasn't in the US but that he was registered a Muslim and Marxist at birth. He had bi=oth Muslim and Marxist blood and back then they still knew that "blood will out"

Anonymous said...

fastrack.com???? Who are you kidding. Who sponsors fastrack.? It's a Annerberg foundation. Notice who chaired this fraud of an organization.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Annenberg_Challenge

Anonymous said...

Whether or not this is true, Obama is a dishonest, immoral politician, worse than many others. Why, he hasn't even been able to win his own election on his merits, but has resorted to really disgusting tactics to get to where he is. You have to wonder who actually Obama is, and who has "groomed" him and put him in this position? Check out this site: http://futurenewsblog.wordpress.com/2008/09/10/barack-obamas-election-history-hoisted-by-his-own-petard

Anonymous said...

I think it is fantastic and quite brave to take Obama to court over his birth certificate. If he is a citizen it would be easy for him to produce a real birth certificate...why he doesn't make him look guilty. Even if he doesn't win the election, he will try again or other illegals will if they think Obama got away with it. I am with you on this and so happy that you won't give up.

I was offered a Federal job last week but before I start, I must provide them with my birth certificate. So should any person in government, especially running for president.

Anonymous said...

http://www.secureputer.com/obamadeniedsecurityclearance/

Barack Obama Denied National Security Clearance

How can the President of the United States be denied a basic security clearance? How can the Commander and Chief of the most powerful military be denied access to classified information? Barack Obama would be denied the necessary security clearance for President if he was held to the same standard as everyone else. If you can’t pass a Secret level background investigation, which is required for many soldiers, you should not be eligible for the Presidency.

What is a Security Clearance?

Having served in the U.S. military, law enforcement, and as a civilian government contractor, I’ve had my fair share of background investigations. The United States government employs a multitier security clearance paradigm.

Confidential – Unauthorized disclosure could cause “damage to national security.”
Secret – Unauthorized disclosure could cause “serious damage to national security.”
Top Secret – Unauthorized disclosure could cause “exceptionally grave damage to national security.”

Read it all at the above website.

Miles Holmes said...

I can't believe you guys believe what nutcase Berg is saying. He has such a crush on Hillary he can't stand the fact she got beat. His lawsuit has zero chance of not being thrown out of court and the State Dept. has already approved and verified Obama's birth certificate.

Berg's the biggest gasbag in law. Here's a complete step-by-step analysis of his lawsuit and why it is bogus. Enjoy, suckers.

http://www.whatsyourevidence.com/

Anonymous said...

In the course of doing an internet search of Mr. Berg, I've come across your site and this article. That you think Mr. Berg actually has a legitimate argument is only because of your conservative bias, so any serious consideration of what he says is really only self-serving. As to Mr. Berg himself, self-serving is probably the best explanation of his erroneous jousting.

Fiscal conservatism is one thing; social conservatism has never been anything other than a mask for hate. From your list of 'liberal global warming' effects to your use of describing the United State of America as "She" [sic], I think you have quite a ways to go before you really earn the right to be taken seriously.

Mooseburger said...


If Obama was born in Hawaii, their should be proof of his mothers date of entry by air or sea before this date.

we may also find proof of fraud by searching for any entry data indicating she came with an infant
or entered at a time with someone else before or after her with an infant

Grant said...

So it appears Philip Burg is committing treason against the United States.....

- Read on -

The use of the title esquire could be considered downright treasonous. The U.S. Constitution forbids aristocratic titles. The Articles of Confederation state that: "nor shall the United States in Congress assembled, or any of them, grant any title of nobility."

Here is Philip J. Berg's - oh I'm sorry Philip J. Berg Esquire's full contact information as it appears at the bottom of http://www.obamacrimes.com/

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Philip J. Berg, Esquire
555 Andorra Glen Court, Suite 12
Lafayette Hill, PA 19444-2531
Cell (610) 662-3005
(610) 825-3134
(800) 993-PHIL [7445]
Fax (610) 834-7659
philjberg@obamacrimes.com

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Not sure about you, but last time I checked, our constitution was still in effect!

Anonymous said...

Commentary
Obama and Ahmadinejad
Amir Taheri 10.26.08, 1:33 PM ET


Is Barack Obama the "promised warrior" coming to help the Hidden Imam of Shiite Muslims conquer the world?

http://www.forbes.com/opinions/2008/10/26/obama-iran-ahmadinejad-oped-cx_at_1026taheri.html

ANYONE WITH A MIND NEED TO READ THIS

Anonymous said...

Dear Grant,

Please take a course on the English language and on the fundamental principals of logic. This would really help you better understand and extrapolate meaning out of what you read.

The section of the U.S. Constitution you quote prohibits any single member of Congress acting alone, a small number of congressional members acting as a group or the entire body of Congress, using their legislative authority while assembled, from granting any title of nobility. This prohibits Congress from bestowing upon someone the STATUS of and or any implied or expressly enumerated rights and or privileges associated with nobility. It doesn't prohibit someone from either claiming to be nobility or merely placing something next to their name, which may or may not actually be intended to mean that they are of noble descent.

Quick recap: This section prohibits Congress from granting the title of nobility upon a person. It DOES NOT command Congress to prohibit either the existence of nobility or prohibit someone from using a term of nobility in conjunction with his or her name.

Prohibition from granting does not a command to prohibit make. I’m sorry, what was I thinking.

A PROHIBITION FROM GRANTING ISN’T THE SAME AS A COMMAND TO PROHIBIT.

By the way, BOTH major parties and the puppet-heads they prop up to waive their respective platforms are worthless.

Both selectively blame congress for this and the president for that depending upon who it's convenient for them to tell people actually has power.

Both say that they are for civil liberties but selectively enforce which ones they have a personal preference for rather than universally rallying behind those enumerated in the Constitution.

Democrats knowingly lie, distort and withhold information proving otherwise regarding alleged man-made global warming. They also love to exalt themselves as the champions of psychology, except for when it comes time to applying this knowledge into the equation of understanding why socialism, communism, marxism, etc has never, doesn't currently, can't and never will work - i.e. acknowledging that the incentive for a person to do better or more work in lieu of doing less or worse work DOES NOT EXIST.

Republicans hypocritically & quietly embrace SOCIALISM with open arms by taking subsidies when it benefits them and like stupid, idiotic, stubborn little 3rd-graders refuse to even remotely apply the laws of SUPPLY & DEMAND they claim to embrace to the insanity of their miserably failing and immoral Prohibition-II drug war.

NEITHER McCain NOR Obama will EVER be my candidate of choice for ANY office. If EITHER of them has ignored the rule of law in order to fraudulently run for public office then they should be exposed as such as this is a practice that is HARMFUL to the citizens who pay taxes and vote to have a say in how to keep government off their back.

Please, Democrats, find factual data that makes McCain ineligible to run for office. It doesn't matter that the election is over. I'd happily post your info ALL OVER THE NET. It would make me happier than ever to see someone who was possibly about take even more of my dwindling liberties away (yes McCain) exposed as a fraud.

Meanwhile, if Obama has fraudulently obtained his nomination and the office of which he sought, then he as well should be exposed as the fraud he's alleged to be.

No one who supports freedom will oppose any inquiry into alleged election fraud.

Anonymous said...

If Berg, as a citizen of the United States and a student of our law, does not have the "standing" to question a presidential candidate’s qualification for the presidency, do I, as a member of the armed forces sworn to up support and defend the Constitution, have the standing?
As a Security Manager in the Middle East during the war I was responsible for handling SECRET and TOP SECRET Clearances for soldiers. Among the things sure to get a clearance denied were: A member of the immediate family is a foreign national, dual citizenship, close association with a known terrorist, political activism in the politics of a foreign nation, and association with or membership in an extremist group against the US Government. Just to name a few. We won’t get into the financial parts. Obama is about to be sworn in as the leader of this country and he will be privy to information that will require a clearance higher than TOP SECRET. This is not acceptable! This makes a mockery of all that my fellow soldiers and I have done to protect the security of this nation!
This man is a danger to this country, this county’s people, and the Constitution, all of which I have sworn to protect.
Berg must not desist in pursuing this suit!

Respectfully,
Concerned Vet