Skip to comments.Phil Berg: "Urgent – Write Letters to Supreme Court Justices"...
Posted on 01/04/2009 9:23:32 AM PST by MelSmith
Case of Berg vs. Obama, U.S.S.C. Case No. 08-570, in the U.S. Supreme Court has been scheduled for two  Conferences [January 9th and 16th, 2009].
The Justices of the Supreme Court will read letters sent to them. Let them know how important it is for them to hear our case; how standing is important on the issue of Obamas qualifications; how we are headed for a Constitutional crisis if Obamas qualifications are not resolved; how important it is to follow our Constitution; and how Obamas records: his original vault birth certificate, immigration records when he as Barry Soetoro [adopted in Indonesia] returned to Hawaii in 1971, if any, and any change of name Court records are necessary as Obama might be an illegal alien, not only not qualified to be President, but a fraud as U.S. Senator from Illinois.
Write one  letter to the nine Justices of the United States Supreme Court (names are listed below), make nine  copies and put them in nine  separate envelopes, addressed to each Justice, and then place them into one  manila envelope and mail to:
See ObamaCrimes.com for instructions.
(Excerpt) Read more at obamacrimes.com ...
This is a non-story...the media has largely ignored it, and it looks like the SCOTUS will too.
Too bad...because the guy’s going to be a disaster as POTUS.
I snail mailed no fewer than 8 letters about this to Thomas and Souter in December. Impassioned letters, asking them to uphold The Constitution.
I have no faith at all that the SCOTUS will make sure Zero is not Kenyan. None at all.
I say we all give the same regard to laws and rules that the next “president” has shown. He scoffs at The Constitution. I shall continue to revere The Constitution, but I will no longer take seriously that We The People must live by a higher set of laws than the elected elites abide by.
I shall have no president until possibly Jan.20, 2013. If “he” is re-elected, I will have no “president” until Jan.20,2017 - should the Good Lord allow me to live that long.
Even if it did to go to SCOTUS it would come back 5 to 4 in favor of NOBAMA. They don’t have the cahones to stand up to the Libs Constitution or no Consitution. And wait till you see the new Judges. I wonder if there will be any room on the next Space shot.
Berg is a 9/11 conspiracy theorist. Waste of time.
Our country has gone from having the most powerful person in the world lead us, to the least powerful and the least respected person in the world. Great, just great!
‘Philip J. Berg, Esquire stated in a letter to the nations throughout the world:’
‘It is time for the nations of the world to come forth and take the leadership because of the failure of the United States Government and the States where crimes were committed on 09/11/01, where no thorough investigation and indictments occurred, to investigate, arrest and prosecute the people responsible for the murders on 9/11/01, specifically including George W. Bush and Richard Cheney.’
Berg continued there is overwhelming evidence that:
Bush and his cronies made 9/11 happen or let it happen. And, if they let it happen, then they made it happen. Either way, they are responsible; and more important, they have completely and unequivocally covered-it-up!
I will have nothing to do with this nutter...he is a disgrace. No conservative should mail any letter on behalf of this person.
I expect they meet to discuss how to get rid of these lawsuits...no evidence they have ever taken this seriously. With Berg’s record, they shouldn’t.
Here's a sample in case anyone want to use it as a jumping off point:
Supreme Court Justice
United States Supreme Court
1 First Street NE Washington DC 20543
November 14, 2008
Our Forefathers in their wisdom established our government in three parts to check and balance each other. They specifically stated the requirements for the office of the president. You have sworn to uphold the Constitution of the United States. Unfortunately they did not establish who would vet each candidate to determine eligibility.
Nor did they establish standing if such a case were ever to be presented.. Standing , a arbitrary term established for the smooth working of the judiciary system, is not a condition established by the Constitution
Currently there are two different cases waiting your review: 08A407 and 08-4340. There are at least seventeen more in the lower courts hoping to establish verification or establish who is responsible to qualify/disqualify candidates for the office of President. We The People are about to be in crisis if you chose to ignore these cases. We the People all have standing.
The SCOTUS must put this crisis to rest. I am begging you , The Supreme Court of the United States MUST hear all the evidence presented in the case(s). and establish that a precedence for establishing qualification is achieved. A rule of Law one way or the other must be decided. The Constitution must remain intact, only qualified persons shall hold the office of the Presidency.
Honestly, I don’t like the idea of a Supreme Court that allows letters to influence their decisions. They need to make the decisions based on the facts and the law. If the people don’t like the law, they need to work to have it changed. A judiciary that is influenced by public opinion is no different than the activist judges we always complain about.
Additionally, the Berg case uses some of the weakest arguments against Obama’s that are eligibility out there. By pushing this specific case we have actually buried the stronger arguments.
Names and address to Cut and paste
United States Supreme Court
1 First Street NE Washington DC 20543
The Supreme Court Justices are as follows:
Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts
Supreme Court Justice John Stevens
Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia
Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy
Supreme Court Justice David Souter
Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas
Supreme Court Justice Ruth Ginsburg
Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer
Supreme Court Justice Samual Alito
obama operative, eh?
I never said to do nothing. I actually said we, and the judges, should follow the law and the constitution. Novel concept, huh?
People who think judges should base judgments on public opinion are no better than those who scream when they feel a judge ignores the law. Don’t forget that the majority of Americans voted for Gore. If the Supreme Court based their verdict on what the public wanted Gore would have been President.
My father is a lawyer and says this is one of several correct salutations...You may also check it out in back of the LARGE dictionary....”Your honor” is always appropriate for a judge in person or on paper.
John Jay (December 12, 1745 May 17, 1829), American revolutionary, and the first Chief Justice of the United States
was so concerned about "natural born" being a PREREQUISITE to being POTUS, that he wrote to
Gen. Washington and underlined this in his letter (see below).
"[T]he people are the sovereign of this country, and consequently that
fellow citizens and joint sovereigns cannot be degraded by appearing
with each other in their own courts to have their controversies determined.
The people have reason to prize and rejoice in such valuable privileges,
and they ought not to forget that nothing but the free course
of constitutional law and government can ensure the continuance
and enjoyment of them."
[John Jay, Chisholm v. Georgia]
Today, SCOTUS 2008 so far regards John Jay and the American public as 'de minimus'.
Apparently at least six of them lied when they swore that they would protect and defend the Constitution.
Humm I have always heard that Supremes even at the State level were called Justice. But hey if a lawyer says so I will go with it. I have seen Kalifornia Supremes addressed as Your Honor and Rose Bird would get a funny look on her face but she was weird anyway!!
I strongly doubt the justices give these letters more than a cursory glance. I doubt they even read them at all.
Wow! You don't know about the Electoral College, do you? You should read our Constitution.
Anyway, this is not about what the people want, as you mischaracterize it, it's about BO concealing his birth documenation so that we don't find out he was born in Kenya. Once he discloses all his birth documenation, this matter can be resolved.
Berg has nothing to do with a birth certificate...this is the natural born nonsense. I still say SCOTUS is looking to kill this permanently.
You are 100% wrong. Berg's case is largely built on the assertion that BO was born in Kenya, and that BO does not, in fact, have a birth certificate showing he was born in HI (and therefore is not a "natural born citizen").
Please advise: are you misinformed or misinforming?
Yeah sure, everyone who refuses to follow this 911 conspiracy theorist in his quest to have his case heard for the 4th time is an Obama operative. Do some research on this guy and his case. He is an embarrassment to everyone who is associated with him. His case is a joke, which isn’t supported by evidence.
I am almost convinced he is working for the Dems by trying to get Republicans to look like complete idiots by following his cases. Keeps the enemy occupied while they give away trillions of taxpayer money. Just to save you the trouble, I am not an Obama operative, I just have an affinity for logic and evidence.
So, ga medic, in your quest for "logic and evidence" you oppose the people's right to examine BO's birth documentation. Please explain how that is logical.
The avialable evidence is that he was born in Kenya.
How many Obama trolls are here trying to propagandize against seeing BO's birth documentation?
I will send my nine letters. I feel I have to at least try to do something. Obama is hiding many parts of his little life. He has been aided and abetted by many in his journey to the Presidency.
Unfortunately, I’m afraid that the SCOTUS will follow the path of least resistance and avoid all controversy by looking the other way while a Kenyan usurper takes the office of POTUS.
The Berg case is not about Obama concealing his birth records. Read the facts on his case. His claims are weak as are his arguments. By supporting the weakest of the cases against Obama the right has prevented the real cases with legitimate claims from seeing the light of day. The facts and legal arguments made by Berg do not hold water, and they are not based on the reasons most posters on this thread feel Obama is ineligible. There are compelling arguments, but none of those are the basis of the Berg case.
As for you personal attack, you intentionally twist what I said and ignore the truth behind my statement.
I say again that the Supreme Court should not be basing decisions on the volume of letters they get on an issue. Had they done so with the 2000 election they would have found in Gore’s favor. What people are asking for here is exactly what Gore wanted in 2000. That is for the Supreme Court to ignore the law.
Has it occurred to you that the reason the Berg case (a case brought by a leftist) has been pushed to the forefront is to completely discredit all those who question Obama’s eligibility? Berg is a 9/11 truther who we suddenly embrace? I don’t think so.
Perhaps, so what are you going to do about it Wring your hands??I wrote letters to SCOTUS and copied my Congresmen.? Go to ObamaCrimes.com for instructions.
I certainly hope they don’t. There is a reason the Founding Fathers did not subject the Supreme Court to election by the public. Their job should be to base decisions on the law. That often means making decisions the majority of the public will dislike.
In the future, please note:
1). The Activism sidebar is reserved for News/Activism of the FR chapters.
2). Content from this website belongs in Bloggers.
In any case, the objective is simple: force a disclosure of Obama's birth documentation -- everything else is a smokescreen created by the Obama cultists.
So, if the plantiff in Berg v. Obama issues an urgent call to action for letters to the Supreme Court Justices, that is *not* activism? Then indeed I did not understand.
Read his filing. The guy cites freaking Wikipedia! The filing is pathetic and would be laughed out of almost any court. He doesn’t even provide evidence for any of his claims. The whole filing is basicially “I read on the Internet...” (kind of like his 9/11 filings). And his few legal arguments have been made in other cases over the years and already found to be incorrect.
It’s a rope-a-dope to keep the real issues from seeing the light of day, and Republicans are falling for it.
Believe me, I'm the LAST person that would "wring my hands" about it.
I seriously doubt that SCOTUS reads correspondence sent to them, but Congressmen had better read and react to continuous public pressure. I do think that continuing to question 0bama's qualifications through continuous lawsuits and legal actions to the SCOTUS might eventually yield results.
Disregard these following posters:
Known and longtime trolls who simply try to confuse the issues and do their best to get under us “truthers” skin. Their posts are meaningless and harmless, just read over them and disregard them. Take them for what they are - obama trolls still drinking the koolaid (or still on the payroll).
Anyone who disagrees with you is a troll who should be disregarded.
Read my posts. I actually do think there are legitimate reasons to challenge Obama’s eligibility. But I have also read Berg’s filings, as well as numerous opinions of those filings, and they are remarkably weak. I would much prefer someone, for example, get a copy of the alleged Kenyan birth certificate and/or hospital records and actually base an argument on that. Instead Berg just says some reporter says he found them, but doesn’t actually supply the evidence.
Maybe some of us are tired of watching Republicans shooting themselves in the foot by embracing any kook that we think might help us out. It’s much like the Coleman fiasco. If Minnesota Republicans hadn’t embraced the man who chaired Clinton’s 1996 state campaign we probably wouldn’t be facing the reality of Senator Franken.
That eliminates you, b-boy.
Yes it does. I will not have anything to do with someone who thinks Bush/Cheney should be indicted because they allowed or planned 9/11. I think this makes me smart as well as conservative.
I have seen a copy of BOs birth certificate. It is the copy on factcheck.org. Please don’t tell me that it has been proven a fake (I need more “proof” than an anonymous blogger’s opinion) Please don’t tell me Hawaii issues birth certificates to foreign born children (they don’t unless they are adopted and they never have) Please don’t tell me he was born in Kenya (there is zero evidence that this is true, only a recording of a woman saying she is his grandmother)
I am not opposing your right to see his birth certificate. He has provided it, and if there was any real doubt that he was born in Hawaii, Rush, Hannity, Anne Coulter, and Laura Ingraham would have been all over it. There is simply nothing to this story. I wish that he wasn’t going to be the president of the US. I truly do. But all the whining and complaining and conspiracy theories aren’t going to keep him from taking office. It just makes those who keep repeating them look crazy. When your conspiracy theory requires you to believe that all the media, including Fox, and the conservative commentators, and every single US Supreme Court Justice are in the tank for Obama, it is time to rethink things. When you start following a crazy, 911 conspiracy theorist like Berg, who has no credibility, it is time to look into psych meds.
This case was dismissed...the new one has to do with natural born...I would never stoop to support Berg in any capacity. He called for the arrest of Pres. Bush and Vice Pres. Cheney. He’s a nutter.
Being a natural born citizen is one of the few requirements needed to be President. Why is one considered a conspiracy theorist for simply asking for proof that he meets the requirements? It should be standard operating procedure. We all have to produce our birth certificates at one time or another to prove we are who we claim to be. At this point, I have less respect for the Supreme Court for not upholding the Constitution than I do for Obama. He’s a scammer used to getting over. And boy did he get over this time...... in a big way.
One has nothing to do with the other. Doesn’t change the raw facts.
I don’t care about the 911 crap, I don’t care about Berg, other than the fact that he is helping throw light on this criminal coverup.
I do care about the Obama travesty getting ready to take place.
You are trying to undermine this effort to expose Obama by way of shifting the attention to Berg. Unfortunately for you—that doesn’t change the evidence increasingly showing up against Obama.
You are an Obama operative and you’re way on the wrong side of this one.
Hillary would've crushed him with it in the primaries. It is that simple. To maintain that the Clinton campaign machine negligently overlooked Obama's eligibility or that Hillary was somehow bribed into secrecy with a Secretary of State appointment is downright delusional.
There are many reasons for this to be formally resolved.
The most important one, for me, is to set a precedent requiring ALL future Presidents Elect to confirm PUBLICLY that he/she meet the Constitutional requirements for the office.
Key word, PUBLICLY.
Suppose Obama did this behind closed doors, months if not years ago, just like every other Presidential candidate did, and his status was deemed as “natural born” as all the other candidates’. It would not have been at all newsworthy!
In fact, the MSM would only be interested if the candidate FAILED such a verification and turned out to be an illegal.
I’ve been wondering why so few people in Washington or in the GOP would discuss this issue, even 6 months ago when this would’ve been rather crucial to their own political interests. I can only assume that the Clinton, Palin and McCain campaign teams looked into it in some detail, ALL of them realised that there actually is no story there whatsoever, and ALL of them concluded that Obama can debunk it with no effort at all.
Had that been the situation, any PR man worth his salt would recognise it as career suicide to accuse a Presidential candidate of not being a natural born American if everyone else in all the different camps already knew he could prove that he was natural born.
So, if this is the case why do I think it’s important to have Obama produce it?
Well, no President (as far as I know) has been compelled to prove, in public, that he or she was elegible to run for office AFTER he’s got it!
In my opinion, a check this basic ought to be carried out BEFORE the candidates stood for nomination. In all probability that check does happen and is so routine nobody in the MSM reports on it.
But there’s no reason why you can’t make it part of the ceremony of the Inauguration, to require the incoming President to put his BC down on the desk, have it independently verified there and then, and finally have the incoming President swear under oath in front of millions, that he fulfils the Constitutional obligations for the Office. Preferably with suitable wording to the effect that, if he’s found to be lying, he should be hung from the White House flagpole.
I sent in a letter.... BTW, I believe that they will “Conference” over 3 Obama non-citizenship cases on those 2 dates.
go back to DU
Go back to DU
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.