Berg’s Ingenuous Offer

According to WorldNetDaily, “[Attorney Philip J.] Berg has since challenged Obama publicly that if the candidate will simply produce authorized proof of citizenship, he’ll drop the suit.”

Having no success in the courts, and getting no publicity in the mainstream media, Berg is asking for a change of venue. He want’s to move his case to the “court of public opinion”. Whether he would gain any sympathy there I can’t say, but he would certainly get some publicity.

Berg makes so many allegations in his lawsuit and demands so many documents (some of which probably never existed), that one wonders exactly what (according to Berg) “authorized proof of citizenship” is? Given that Obama published sufficient proof of the facts of his birth for any court in the USA back in June, it would be naive to think that all Berg is asking for is a photocopy instead of a computer printout of the facts of Obama’s birth. “Authorized proof of citizenship” for me would be a US Passport

This offer is just a publicity stunt to goad Obama into making the mistake of taking his case to the Internet where there are no standards of evidence and no referee.

About Kevin

Just an old guy with opinions that I like to bounce off other people.

This entry was posted in Obama Citizenship Denial. Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to Berg’s Ingenuous Offer

  1. Truth says:

    That story looks like swiss cheese.

    Rot-Roo. Somebody isn’t being completely honest again. (below link) Silly Chicago politicians.

    http://www.myfoxchicago.com/myfox/pages/Home/Detail;jsessionid=15FE80D5DF88681C80B506FF4E0DE056?contentId=8054792&version=1&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=VSTY&pageId=1.1.1&sflg=1

  2. Kevin says:

    Truth, if you’re saying the WorldNetDaily report looks like swiss cheese, I wouldn’t argue with you. WorldNetDaily (for whom Jerome “Obama Nation” Corsi) is a staff writer is not known for its objectivity. It has a very strong right-leaning anti-Obama stance, and is practically the only news outlet that pays any attention to these fruit-cake claims. I find their coverage of the citizenship controversy inaccurate and biased. Nevertheless, if one wants to know what Berg is saying, you have to go to “anti” web sites as it’s about the only place you can find him.

  3. Jasper says:

    Congress will rubber stamp the election – because no congressperson has the nerve to say “Where is this man’s birth certificate?” or even “Who validated this man’s eligibilty”. The murky issues surrounding Obama’s citizenship need to be clarified. His BC vs COLB is not clear, his actual birth location is not clear (if his COLB is simply a registration of Birth), his actual citizenship is not clear (if his U.S. Citizenship was given up), his legal name is not clear (if he was legally adopted or if his Mother was never really married to Obama Sr.). And the issue of the meaning of NBC is not really clear and the issue definitely applies to Obama since his father was not a Citizen. The people have a right to know. Article X of the constitution says “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” It seems to me the authority to determine the eligibility of the presidential candidate’s has not been delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor is it prohibited by it to the states, therefore it is reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. This seems to me to be sufficient authority for people of the United States to investigate and to determine the eligibility of a candidate for the presidency.

  4. Kevin says:

    Jasper, the Certification of Live Birth is absolutely clear that Barack Obama was born in the United States; there is no other interpretation. There is no reasonable doubt, to borrow a legal phrase, that Obama is a native-born American.

    If the conventional wisdom on the meaning of natural born citizen is to be changed, it will require the action of the Supreme Court or preferably a Constitutional amendment. A blogger riot is not how we make law in the United States. The absolute worst time to rethink the time-honored traditional understanding of natural born citizen is between the election and the inauguration of a new president–changing the rules in the middle of the game.

  5. TRUTH says:

    AMEN to that. It should not be going on right now, it should not have taken this long, it should’ve been figured out LONG ago by anyone in the chain of vetting. However everyone was to busy drooling and fainting over the great orator to much to take the time to do a proper, unquestionable vetting.

    You make me laugh how you praise that COLB Kevin, as if it is some divine document. If I typed on a sheet of 8 1/2 x 11 lined paper OBAMA WAS BORN IN HAWAII, that would also qualify for your statement “is absolutely clear that BO was born in the United States”, because Hawaii is In the U.S. and it is absolutely CLEAR by what I typed. The damn COLB “IS” the Problem, get off the High Horse and realize that. If your boy B.O. is Legal than just say “I think he is Legal and should reveal his authentic B.C. to prove so”. Any other answer and your simply avoiding the possible risk of something wrong coming from looking at it even. [and NO i dont mean for YOU to get it or ME to see it, that is a comment of generality]

    JASPER. Your are CORRECT. Congress will rubber stamp B.O. into office. He will run by the seat of his pants, and NOTHING will ever be made clear. Not as long as the crooked politicians allow American Citizens to be ignored and their questions to go unanswered. SIMPLE Questions. We are not asking for him to climb a mountain, just SIMPLE questions that require SIMPLE actions.

    MONEY TALKS.. U.S. Citizens walk.

  6. Kevin says:

    Truth, one clarification.

    I consider the IMAGE of the COLB essentially worthless. The document itself is evidence.

    This article, http://www.acandidworld.net/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/83BUL53.pdf argues for a constitutional amendment and pointed out the problem of vetting 3 years ago.

  7. Jasper says:

    I really cannot imagine a 17 year old white girl in 1961 jumping on a plane while pregnant and flying back to Kenya to have a baby! That said, I have doubts that she even Married Obama Sr. There is no Marriage License or Divorce Records (yet). So perhaps that is the embarrassing thing the Obama doesn’t want surfaced. Based on Obama Sr’s treatment of Obama and his mother I suspect this was just a fling or worse a one-night stand for Obama Sr. He probably did not even want his name on the BC. His wife in Kenya may not have liked that idea very much (I don’t think Ann was a Mormon either). Is a marriage legal if you are already married? Also what would Obama’s legal name be if his mother was not really married? Also what would his legal name be if he was legally adopted by his step -father? It looks like he may have optionally used a lot of different names, so you got to wonder about that issue. Maybe thats why he is hiding all his documents. I don’t think anyone really properly vetted Obama. How could they? All his documents have been sealed, preventing a proper vetting. This makes me feel that this election was fraudulent!

    Another bizarre twist – Hawaii is not a legal state of the United States! See the following: http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/HAWAII/hawaii.html In 1999, the United Nations confirmed that the plebiscite vote that led to Hawaii’s statehood was in violation of article 73 of the United Nations’ charter. The Hawaii statehood vote, under treaty then in effect, was illegal and non-binding. So basically even if Obama was born in Hawaii – he was not born in a legal U.S. State and is not a NBC.

  8. Jasper says:

    Belief is at the core of the issues regarding the NBC of Obama. Some people “Believe” that Obama is a NBC – because of the 14th Amendment and that a “Citizen at Birth” and a “Natural Born Citizen” are the same thing. This belief is not held by all people. But it is just a belief unless there is a court ruling saying that it is so. And even then – it will be the belief of the current court. The firsrt Amendmant included the phrase “natural Born Citizen” and the phrase “Citizen”. The phrase “Citizen” was not the same as “natural Born Citizen” so what is a “Citizen” as opposed to a “natural Born Citizen”? If they are the same thing – as many would have us believe – then the first amendmant doesn’t make any sense. The Framers of the constitution did not consider themselves natural born Citizens – but they may well have been born in America. Belief is not at the core of my arguments – which are that there is no court ruling that says a NBC is a CAB. That is a fact. Another fact is that the COLB may not really reflect the true location of where Obama was born. If his birth was registered without any witness then we cannot be sure where he was born. The BC would shed light on this possibility, but if there was no Hospital or Doctor listed then we be still in the dark as to where Obama was born. I think if his BC indicates a registered birth that would add fuel to fire that he was not born in the U.S. (but would not really prove anything). The Father’s Race being “African” on the COLB seems odd. His father was educated and a proud man. His mother also educated and from a liberal family. I call myself an “American”, but I know that is not my race. I think Obama’s father and mother would both know that “African” is not a Race, so it makes me wonder about this issue. I can think of only one reason someone in 1960 might write “African” instead of “Black”. Embarrassment. But Ann was probably still in love – so she would have been proud to married to a Black Man or Negro – she would not hide his race with the term “African”. And Obama Sr. would be proud of being a Black man. So perhaps someone else wrote this down, someone with something to hide, like a parent embarrassed by their child’s choices. So if the parents wrote this information on to the birth registration – why? I realize this is sheer speculation but I suspect the parents created the registration of birth. The birth announcement in the local newspaper does not prove a thing since it simply followed from the fact that the birth of Barack was registered by the parents.

Comments are closed.