Posted on 10/21/2008 6:05:29 AM PDT by Calpernia
Original thread can be reviewed here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2109876/posts
So, why is it taking so long? What is the judge waiting for? (Berg vs Obama)
By NoobRep
Today's Update by WestCoastGal
Unless the Obama Campaign applies for a withdrawal of admission and shows GOOD CAUSE, as of today, October 21, 2008, the Obama Campaign has legally admitted that Barack Hussein Obama is ineligible to hold the office of Presidency. Full coverage of this court proceeding can be read here: http://www.americasright.com/
Below is today's legal admission!
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
Berg: Due to Procedure, Obama and DNC Admit all Allegations
According to Rule 36 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a party upon whom requests for admissions have been served must respond, within 30 days, or else the matters in the requests will be automatically deemed conclusively admitted for purposes of the pending action.
On September 15, as part of his federal lawsuit contending that the Illinois senator is ineligible, pursuant to the U.S. Constitution, to serve as president of the United States, Philadelphia attorney Philip Berg served Barack Obama and the Democratic National Committee with just such a request. Soon thereafter, on October 6, Barack Obama and the DNC acknowledged service in their motion for protective order, filed in an attempt to persuade the court to stay discovery. The Federal Rules require that a response to a request for admissions be served within the 30-day time limit, and Barack Obama and the DNC have not done so.
Therefore, this morning, amidst news reports that Barack Obama will be suspending his campaign for a few days so he can fly to Hawaii to visit his grandmother, who has suddenly fallen ill, Philip Berg will file two motions in district court in Philadelphia:
A motion requesting an immediate order deeming his request for admissions served upon Barack Obama and the DNC on September 15 admitted by default, and
A motion requesting an expedited ruling and/or hearing on Berg’s motion deeming the request for admissions served upon Obama and the DNC admitted.
Berg contends that the failure to respond and serve the response within the time limit is “damning,” and made two appearances overnight on Rollye James’ talk radio program, the second one coming shortly after midnight, during which he disclosed the meat of today’s filings and the legal and political ramifications of the defendants’ failure to respond.
“They did not file answers or objections or anything else to the request for admissions we served upon them on September 15,” Berg said to me shortly before midnight, noting that Obama and the DNC did in fact acknowledge service of the admission in their motion for protective order. “They knew the admissions were due. They knew they must object or answer specifically in 30 days. Here, they did nothing.”
Typically, requests can be used to ascertain three types of information: (1) the veracity of facts, (2) the authenticity of documents, or (3) the “application of law to fact.” Pretty much anything not privileged is fair game, and while the idea behind such a request is to obtain information, requests for admissions of facts and of the genuine nature of documents are generally not designed as a part of discovery, per se, but rather more of a mechanism used to whittle down proof later in the proceedings.
Unless permitted by the court or allowed pursuant to a written agreement between the parties, the party served with the request must serve a response within 30 days. How serious is a failure to respond? This, from PreTrial, by Thomas A. Mauet:
The automatic provision of Rule 36 makes it a formidable weapon because inertia or inattentiveness can have an automatic, and usually devastating, consequence. Hence, there is one cardinal rule for practice under this provision: Make sure you respond and serve the response within the 30-day period.
Given the “usually devastating” consequence of failure to respond in time to a request for admissions such as those served upon Obama and the DNC on September 15, just what were some of the admissions that Berg asserts Barack Obama and the DNC have, at least procedurally, admitted to?
Admit you were born in Kenya.
Admit you are a Kenya “natural born” citizen.
Admit your foreign birth was registered in the State of Hawaii.
Admit your father, Barrack Hussein Obama, Sr., admitted Paternity of you.
Admit your mother gave birth to you in Mombosa, Kenya.
Admit your mother’s maiden name is Stanley Ann Dunham a/k/a Ann Dunham.
Admit the COLB [Certification of Live Birth] posted on the website “Fightthesmears.com” is a forgery.
Admit you were adopted by a Foreign Citizen.
Admit you were adopted by Lolo Soetoro, M.A. a citizen of Indonesia.
Admit you were not born in Hawaii.
Admit you are a citizen of Indonesia.
Admit you never took the “Oath of Allegiance” to regain your U.S. Citizenship status.
Admit you are not a “natural born” United States citizen. Admit your senior campaign staff is aware you are not a “natural born” United States Citizen.
Admit the United States Constitution does not allow for a Person to hold the office of President of the United States unless that person is a “natural born” United States citizen.
Admit you are ineligible pursuant to the United States Constitution to serve as President and/or Vice President of the United States.
There are, however, several options for Barack Obama and the DNC at this point. The first, and most obvious, is the argument that pursuant to Rule 26(f), a request for admission may only be served after the conference for the purpose of planning discovery detailed under that rule, and therefore the 30-day time limit on Berg’s request has not yet begun. Here, though, Berg could feasibly argue either that the request for admissions is not a true discovery mechanism and is actually meant to streamline the future need for discovery, or that the defendants’ acknowledged service of the request in their October 6 motion for protective order and failed, at that time, to specifically object or answer. The second option for the defense, still easily foreseen, is that Obama and the DNC could file a motion to withdraw admissions which have been deemed admitted.
In order to file a motion to withdraw admissions deemed admitted by default, a party must show
(1) “good cause” regarding why there was no response and
(2) that such a motion to withdraw would not cause undue prejudice to the plaintiff. Here, Berg could contend that Obama and the DNC failed to meet those standards, that they cannot show “good cause” for failing to answer or object, and that withdrawing the admissions would cause undue prejudice.
Still, for Berg, the issue is clear. He simply wanted answers or objections, he said, and instead received nothing. Rule 36, according to Berg, is fairly cut-and-dry.
“It all comes down to the fact that there’s nothing from the other side,” Berg said. “The admissions are there. By not filing the answers or objections, the defense has admitted everything. He admits he was born in Kenya. He admits he was adopted in Indonesia. He admits that the documentation posted online is a phony. And he admits that he is constitutionally ineligible to serve as president of the United States.”
yeah thats gonna work
That’s a sure bet, imo
Thanks, but I already knew that.
Funny. I had a similar thought.
Berg moved for early discovery; I don't see where the court has granted it. The defendants have filed a cross motion seeking to defer discovery until the court has ruled on their motion to dismiss. Don't think the court has granted either the cross motion on discovery or the motion to dismiss.
But Berg doesn't even get the clock ticking on his Rule 36 Request until the court grants him early discovery.
All this is part of the price Berg pays for not having been organized and well thought out before he started his lawsuit.
If we're going to speculate, let's instead speculate that what happened was that whatever Stanley Ann knew or didn't know about other wives, Obama Sr. knew perfectly well that he had a second wife; and had picked up enough to know that a marriage in Hawaii would constitute the crime of Bigamy. So, during the term break at the university at the end of January,1961, they both go to Kenya (where multiple marriages are legal and the societal norm) where they get married on February 2, 1961.
Observe, if they aren't married, she doesn't spend a lot of money divorcing him.
She forms a relationship with Eliza (sp.?), Obama's first wife; and Sarah, one of his father's other wives; and having been kicked out by her parents, she stayed in Kenya. He returned to Hawaii to do the next school term. She was not in school at that time on the record.
She intended to return to Hawaii for the birth but got stuck in Kenya when BOAC would not permit her on the airplane because of her pregnancy (we have the testimony of the two missionaries). Obama is born in Coast Hospital in Kenya. She then returns to Honolulu.
BOAC schedules are posted on the main thread. The route home was from Nairobi to Glaskow to Vancouver BC and through Seattle to Hawaii. Going through Seattle, she stopped for the visit with Susan Blake on Mercer Island ("before she had learned to change diapers") per Ms. Blake's testimony in the You Tube video interview.
Thanks for the ping.......important information.
Amazing and not a word on Fox radio news.
Thank you for all your research and posting.
Ping to post #296..............
He couldn't even get a “Secret” or “Top Secret” clearance.
If he is elected President he would not qualify to be his own body guard.
Note: You can get a secret clearance even though your back round check shows that at the age of 12, you were picked by the police for selling $30 worth of firecrackers a couple of weeks before the 4th of July.
Don’t ask me how I know.
Give this compilation a read:
http://noiri.blogspot.com/2008/10/news-roundup-with-quick-reference.html
Therefore, this morning, amidst news reports that Barack Obama will be suspending his campaign for a few days so he can fly to Hawaii to visit his grandmother, who has suddenly fallen illCaligula did that when Tiberius fell ill...
If this is true, then the FBI should be doing a background check on 0bama. Higher security clearances normally require an anal examine. I know, I was PRP qualified. Had to be, to work with nukes. Birth certificate, finger prints...again, and again. They even checked my elementary school teachers, high school classmates, and neighbors. I'm surprised I cleared.
Maybe we need Mr. Berg to get John F'n Kerry to release his SF 180.
5.56mm
They want to get elected. If it's up to the USSC, the Dems will be able to keep their base in a rage by claiming a Republican USSC staged a coup.
What do you all make of post #32?
Robt notes that you cannot get ANY security (classified military or nuclear power related or even FBI-related) unless you have a birth record, NO drug use after age 16, NO associations with felons, NOR communist party officers (Angela Davis has run for Pres as a Communist Party candidate, NO drinking problems ....
...unless elected to political office.
In which instance, there are no rules.
So what happens now, I wonder ????
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.