Skip to comments.FEC joins call to throw out suit against Obama (Berg's challenge of BHO's citizenship)
Posted on 10/23/2008 7:18:55 AM PDT by Born Conservative
The Federal Election Commission has joined Barack Obama and the Democratic National Committee in asking a federal judge to dismiss a lawsuit filed by a Montgomery County attorney seeking Obama's ouster from the November ballot.
Philip Berg, who claims the Illinois senator was born in Kenya and can't run for president because he isn't a natural-born U.S. citizen, has no standing to make the claim, according to the FEC.
The motion, filed Tuesday in U.S. District Court in Philadelphia, echoes one filed last month by Obama and the DNC that states Berg hasn't demonstrated how he personally would suffer even if his ''ridiculous and patently false'' claims were true.
(Excerpt) Read more at mcall.com ...
Who the h*ll is the FEC to butt into this? Are they Obama shills working with ACORN.
The good news is his suit is starting to be taken seriously. It is on the radar now. I hope his pappy was not that Frank scumbag pedophile pervert guy. I am quite sure he was born in Kenya but what if that Frank guy was the father?
We need to file it in the other 48 states to go with Berg and the brave guy in WA.
Is it 48 other states or 56? I think our overlor and Big Brother want to be said it was 58 states.
Wrong....This remains news until Obama produces a birth certificate...
Who do you favor in this election?? Be truthful....
This news source is misreporting the facts according to someone I just spoke to at the FEC. They did not join the Obama campaign or the DNC in asking for a dismissal as the article claims. They simply said that they do not have standing being that they were listed as a defendant. They made no claim as to Bergs standing in the case.
You’ll find this common amongst those who ascribe to the leftist ideology -
if the rules don’t provide the desired social outcomes, the rules are wrong and must be ignored. Social outcomes trump the rule of law in every case (in their ideology).
There would be NO problem with standing if this action were taken by the United States Department of Justice.
But, given the hate in the Obamanation for the Bush administration, imagine what would happen if the government stepped in. Never happen.
I frankly do not see any reason for denying standing to a citizen asking for enforcement of constitutional requirements and the verification thereof BEFORE the election. The harm comes in potentially wasting a vote on an ineligible candidate. It seems obvious as sunshine to me.
If the plaintiff doesn’t have standing as a voting citizen, and the FEC doesn’t have standing, then who does? Somebody HAS to have standing for this constitutional issue. I think Obama would argue that no person or government body has standing so that his citizenship can’t be questioned.
But that won't CUT it, because of dual citizenship according to Michelle Ma Bell!!!
Why?? Is such action part of the federal law which charters the FEC?? or even implied??
There must be some merit to the case if there are so many groups entering the litigation on Obama’s side.
They sided with ACORN's criminal voter registrations in Ohio, hmmm!!!
or Davis is the father...maybe he is listed on the birth certificate.
Maybe He was born in Hawaii, is eligible, but davis is the father.
There is some reason why he isn’t producing it. If no father was listed this would not be a big deal but if Davis was listed..it would be.
All kinds of speculation taking place and so many possible reasons....
Excellent point. Because Berg donated to Hillary the Obama fraud harmed him. Berg has standing.
Here is what I think will be Obama’s defense.
1. Yes I was born in Kenya.
2. The embarrassing part is this Frank Davis pedophile/marxist/sex pervert is my real dad and he was an American so I Obama am an American.
Now the question is how do we prove who the dad is? Both men are dead? DNA from a family member in Kenya?
What a mess. The FEC will not touch this nor will the Supreme Court or Congress???
Nothing on their site shows that they are mandated to enforce the Constitutional requirements for POTUS. Their sole task is about financing!
We are voting for a person who can send our sons and daughters off to war and make decisions that effect our national safety and well-being. Every American has standing in this regard. Is it unreasonable to expect that someone seeking the presidency should therefore provide evidence of their ability to satisfy a few simple requirements for such high office? The willingness to look the other way with Obama has reached ridiculous proportions.
True. But under what bizarre theory of "standind" does ANY US citizen not have standing to challenge the legal qualification of a candidate for presidency.
I'm not a lawyer (though I am the Pro Se Defendant from Hell with plenty of battle scars to prove it). But as I understand it, to have standing you have to show that you have a direct interest in the matter before the court, and that you stand to suffer damages.
I would argue that any US citizen meets that standard. Clearly, having a president in office who is not Constitutionally qualified damages every US citizen.
That said, I am not taking a position here on whether or not Obama is, in fact, a natural-born US citizen (although I do have my suspicions).
the Constitution does not give standing to a private citizen? I don’t know, just asking!
A pox on all their houses!
Whoever I spoke to on the phone at the FEC lied to me. Here is their court filing for dismissal claiming that Berg has no standing.
I am calling back.
In Washington (202) 694-1000
This guy is only succeeding in looking like a lunatic,
So why did Obama post a patently fake birth certificate to the web?
A most excellent point and very well put. Wasn't the Dem cry "make every vote count"?
Berg named them as a defendant, so they had to respond. Basically, the FEC is claiming they have no authority or duty to investigate Obama's eligibility; and they do have a point. Berg was just coving all the bases because if he did not include the FEC, the Democrat party and Obama would have claimed that Berg did not include the FEC as a required party to the suit, which would have caused further delays.
So who WOULD have standing? ACORN? NOBODY? If Sarkozy decided he's like to be simultaneously President of France and the US, WHO would "have standing" to challenge that?
You lawyers can't explain anything.
Don't know and don't care. Doesn't change the fact that he would still be a citizen of the U.S.
The only thing that would carry any weight as regards his citizenship is if someone could product evidence that Obama, as an adult, renounced his citizenship. There's not even been a whisper of such a thing.
This is a silly waste of time and only makes this guy (and others like him) look like they are a couple of sandwiches short of a picnic. Better to concentrate on things that can actually get some traction, such as Obama's 'share the wealth' statement.
There are three requirements for standing: Injury, causation, and redressability.
Injury: The plaintiff must have suffered or imminently will suffer injury - an invasion of a legally protected interest which is concrete and particularized. The injury must be actual or imminent, distinct and palpable, not abstract. This injury could be economic as well as non-economic.
Causation: There must be a causal connection between the injury and the conduct complained of, so that the injury is fairly traceable to the challenged action of the defendant and not the result of the independent action of some third party who is not before the court.
Redressability: It must be likely, as opposed to merely speculative, that a favorable court decision will redress the injury.
It might sounds stupid to you, but those were the facts at that time, unfortunately for him!
Dallas Cowboys can't change the rules in the middle of the game when they are 4 touchdowns down!!
That is the reason we have reviews rules there!!!
LOL Please copy and paste where I ever said that. Oh, that's right, you can't. I never said such a thing.
You'll find out that you must be a "natural born citizen" which means that you have to meet certain standards of birth and parentage.
Indeed. And Obama was born of a natural born U.S. citizen mother who had not renounced her citizenship, which makes him a 'natural born citizen' even if he were born outside the U.S.
Lots of good information on their website ( http://www.fec.gov/ ) Unfortunately, no email addresses.
"The six Commissioners, no more than three of whom may represent the same political party, are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. The Commissioners serve full time and are responsible for administering and enforcing the Federal Election Campaign Act. They generally meet twice a week, once in closed session to discuss matters that, by law, must remain confidential, and once in a meeting open to the public. At these meetings, they formulate policy and vote on significant legal and administrative matters."
The voter or campaign contributer in an election is by definition subject to “injury”, like participation in any contest. But if the rules of the contest are violated, an injury to the process has occured.
I am seeing Scotus and potus in some responses.
Could you tell me what these mean?
WELL...isn’t THAT interesting....FEC lied to you....and probably are fronting for Obama too.....how special. This election is CRAZEEEEE.
Nope, and Secretary of States don't normally care about eligibility either. They assume the Party takes care of that matter.
Oh puhleeze. No court in the land, even the most conservative, would say an individual is not a natural born citizen who just happened to be born outside the U.S. to a mother who is a natural born citizen. This is grasping at straws and completely silly.
Rather than look like a bunch of lunatics, you'd think people who call themselves conservatives would prefer to spend their efforts on things that can actually have an impact on this election - such as sharing the truth about Obama's positions on the issues.
Actually, his argument states that in 1961, she did not meet the requirements. I have been unable to verify this, but the courts should hear all the available evidence and straighten it out there.
After all, it's what the Courts are there for.
Obama could easily clear this up. He doesn't and hasn't.
Sometimes, when there is smoke, there is indeed fire. It'd be a good idea to check wouldn't it?
In politics -- you only hurt the ones you love.
From Wikipedia entry on Matricide:
Known or Suspected Matricides
- Amastris, queen of Heraclea, was drowned by her two sons in 284 BC.
- Cleopatra III of Egypt was assassinated in 101 BC by order of her son, Ptolemy X, for her conspiring.
- Ptolemy XI of Egypt had his wife, Berenice III, murdered shortly after their wedding in 80 BC. She was also his stepmother, or perhaps his mother.
- In AD 59, the Roman Emperor Nero is said to have ordered the murder of his mother Agrippina the Younger, supposedly because she was conspiring against him.
Alright the person I talked to at the FEC corrected herself and actually agreed with my complaint about their position.
The FEC does claim that they are not responsible for oversight on this issue but they also did go even further in their motion taking the side of the Obama campaign and the DNC. I told the woman that if they do not have responsibility for oversight in regards to the complaint by berg then why are they also taking sides in the case as well??? She admitted that was a somewhat problematic position.
I told her that in a time when there is possible election fraud going that it is very bad press for the FEC which is supposed to be bi-partisan to be taking sides on whether or not fraud is being committed in regards to the elegibility of a presidential candidate. And that to make statements that a United States citizen has no standing to know the truth in this regard looks very very bad for the FEC.
Action must be taken to investigate the FEC in this regard. It is outrageous, imo.
You raise an interesting point. Who, then, would have standing for such a challenge, and when could the challenge be raised? Do we have to wait until he has won the election before a voter has standing to challenge Obama's meeting Constitutional requirements for the office?
If so, then what would the relief be? President Biden?
Is that all? This is a very big if, if the FEC is neutral, since it nullifies the point of the story, and turns this thread upside down. Am I right? I admit I know jack about this item.
Good points — teh FEC did more than beg “not my job” — they took a side.
If an individual is sued and doesn't respond, does the plaintiff not win by default? Maybe if the media won't cover this it is time to start asking the question why no answer was filed in every comment we leave on other websites.
Obama’s qualification to run for President?
Obama’s qualification to be President?
You can't challenge the latter yet, because Obama is not yet President (or even President-elect).
Correct me if I am wrong - I don't know if there are any rules laid down, either in the Constitution or otherwise, as to who may seek the office of President (run for President), the Constitution only sets out requirements of eligibility to be President.
Do you have to be eligible to be President in order to run for President? Could somebody who is going to turn 35 years old the day before inauguration run for President, as he would be 34 during his campaign and election?
The U.S. has been bought - committees have been bought - governing parties and candidates have been bought.
We are a nation up for auction.
I’ve never understood people who agree that Obama’s campaign has posted forged government documents as though they were real, and don’t care.
Thanks for the ping!
Which way would your suspicions run?
I really can’t figure out why he just doesn’t submit his Birth Certificate. Shouldn’t they check that before he begins running? Isn’t there ANY kind of paperwork to fill out before you begin running for office? Why does everything in this country require paperwork except this?
Confused in California
They make rules up to fit the situation.
For the FEC to take a side in this case and claim that United States citizens have no right to know whether or not fraud is being committed in regards to the elegibility of a candidate is outrageous.
I asked a FEC employee on the phone if I had the right to question the elegibility of another citizen to vote in the election and she Yes and that they would investigate it if I made a complaint.
So then I asked why the FEC was claiming that a United States citizen had no right and/or standing to do the same for a candidate and she had no answer and was moreso in agreement to it not sounding so good.
Apparently you can’t write OR read.
I already posted YOUR words in italics in my original post: “Even if Obama were born outside the U.S., that does not mean he isn’t a citizen.”
Of course it does not MEAN he isn’t a citizen. One has nothing to do with the other. Some people born outside the United States become citizens through a naturalization process. Others, like John McCain are US citizens by birth. So what?
And now we come to you next uninformed and dummass statement: “And Obama was born of a natural born U.S. citizen mother who had not renounced her citizenship, which makes him a ‘natural born citizen’ even if he were born outside the U.S.”
Please bone up on your stuff before mouthing off what you clearly don’t know jack about. The only way a child born overseas gets a clear “natural born” status is if BOTH parents are Citizens. If one is NOT (as was the case with young Barack) a whole other set of laws comes into play, and the laws in effect at the time of Barack’s birth, if it took place outside the United States, would not permit his natural born citizenship.
if you doubt that, get advice from someone who actually knows something about the subject, and stop relying on your own imaginings.