Now some KOS Kook appears to be willing to "assume" Obama was not born in the US and the COLB may not be kosher. Granted every other Kos idiot jumps on the poster and calls him a McCain supporter and worse. They really do eat their own. Check it out here. So funny. Funnier still, when you consider KOS ran an admitted forgery.
There’s part of this story that doesn’t add up: This is FactCheck’s comment:
‘We asked the Obama campaign about the date stamp and the
blacked-out certificate number. The certificate is stamped June 2007,
because that’s when Hawaii officials produced it for the campaign,
which requested that document and “all the records we could get our
hands on” according to spokesperson Shauna Daly. The campaign didn’t
release its copy until 2008, after speculation began to appear on the
Internet questioning Obama’s citizenship. The campaign then rushed to
release the document, and the rush is responsible for the blacked-out
certificate number. Says Shauna: “[We] couldn’t get someone on the
phone in Hawaii to tell us whether the number represented some secret
information, and we erred on the side of blacking it out. Since then
we’ve found out it’s pretty irrelevant for the outside world.” The
document we looked at did have a certificate number; it is 151 1961 -
010641.’
Obama’s campaign is saying they ‘rushed’ to release the document and
couldn’t get help from the DOH on deciding what to do about the number.
Now this is from the Honolulu Advertiser:
‘Health officials contacted the Obama campaign a few months ago in
response to the persistent inquiries “to see if they could try and
resolve the issue with the people who were asking questions,” she said.’
A few months ago should have been BEFORE Obama’s campaign ‘rushed’
to post the document. We’re supposed to believe they couldn’t figure
out whether it was safe to use the number?? Further, Okubo says:
‘”The thing that’s redacted is just our file number,” she said.
“Potentially, if you have that number, you could break into the
system.”‘
So we have Obama’s peeps saying the number is no big deal and are
showing it at FactCheck, yet Okubo, only a week ago, says it might be a
big deal. Further, are we really to believe that the DOH wouldn’t
cooperate with Obama’s campaign in telling them what to do about the
number?? It’s time for these people to start telling the truth.”
A Conversation with Philip J. Berg, Esq. Jeffrey Schreiber
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.
[...] 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..
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.
[...]
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.
[...]
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.
[...]
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.
![Kurdistan](http://<a href="http://northerniraq.info" title="northern iraq"><img src="http://northerniraq.info/northlogo.gif" width="135px" height="68px" alt="northern iraq"><br>northern iraq </a>){kind=link}