Category Archives: DNC

Obama David Wilhelm pay to play politics history, Wilhelm Obama Blagojevich Clinton ties, Obama and Wilhelm played and escaped prosecution

Obama David Wilhelm pay to play politics history, Wilhelm Obama Blagojevich Clinton ties, Obama and Wilhelm played and escaped prosecution

“Why has David Wilhelm supported and protected Obama?”…Citizen Wells
“Why was Turning Point Solar, David Wilhelm’s venture, given federal loan guarantees?”…Citizen Wells
“Why were David Wilhelm and Barack Obama not prosecuted for their Operation Board Games involvement?…Citizen Wells

Barack Obama, Bill Clinton and David Wilhelm. Two occupants of the White House and a DNC chairman. That tells the tale. It seems that if you are high enough in the Democrat party you can get away with anything. We now have confirmation from Hollywood Producer Bettina Viviano that Bill Clinton knew in 2008 that Obama was not eligible. And Obama and Wilhelm have the goods on each other, have avoided prosecution and continue to be rewarded for pay to play politics.

Here is some background on David Wilhelm.

From Jake Tapper, ABC News, December 9, 2008.

“And, it should be pointed out, Mr. Obama has a relationship with Mr. Blagojevich, having not only endorsed Blagojevich in 2002 and 2006, but having served as a top adviser to the Illinois governor in his first 2002 run for the state house.

In the Democratic gubernatorial primary that year, then-state sen. Obama endorsed former Illinois Attorney General Roland Burris. But after Blagojevich won, Obama came around enthusiastically. At the same time, meanwhile, Axelrod had such serious concerns about whether Blagojevich was ready for governing he refused to work for his one-time client.

According to Rep. Rahm Emanuel, D-Ill., Mr. Obama’s incoming White House chief of staff, Emanuel, then-state senator Obama, a third Blagojevich aide, and Blagojevich’s campaign co-chair, David Wilhelm, were the top strategists of Blagojevich’s 2002 gubernatorial victory.

Emanuel told the New Yorker earlier this year that he and Obama “participated in a small group that met weekly when Rod was running for governor. We basically laid out the general election, Barack and I and these two.”

Wilhelm said that Emanuel had overstated Obama’s role. “There was an advisory council that was inclusive of Rahm and Barack but not limited to them,” Wilhelm said, and he disputed the notion that Obama was “an architect or one of the principal strategists.”

(An Obama Transition Team aide emails to note that Emanuel later changed his recollection of this story to Rich Miller’s “CAPITOL FAX,” saying, “David [Wilhelm] and I have worked together on campaigns for decades. Like always, he’s right and I’m wrong.”)”

“On the Chicago TV show “Public Affairs with Jeff Berkowitz” on June 27, 2002, state Sen. Obama said, “Right now, my main focus is to make sure that we elect Rod Blagojevich as Governor, we…”

“You working hard for Rod?” interrupted Berkowitz.

“You betcha,” said Obama.

“Hot Rod?” asked the host.

“That’s exactly right,” Obama said.

In 2004, then-Gov. Blagojevich enthusiastically endorsed Obama for the Senate seat after he won the nomination, and Obama endorsed Blagojevich for his 2006 re-election race in early 2005.

In the Summer of 2006, then-U.S. Sen. Obama backed Blagojevich even though there were serious questions at the time about Blago’s hiring practices.”

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2008/12/questions-arise/

From USA Today February 13, 2012.

“The man who served as national manager of former President Clinton’s 1992 campaign endorsed Sen. Barack Obama on Wednesday.
David Wilhelm, who led the campaign and later became chairman of the Democratic National Committee, said Obama had the unique ability to encourage cooperation as a 65-percent president after the divisive years of a 51-percent majority. He was referring to the notion that Obama could govern the country with the support of a large coalition, as opposed to more polarized support for President Bush.

Wilhelm is a superdelegate who was previously uncommitted in the race. His endorsement helps Obama in the delegate race, in which he pulled ahead after Tuesday’s sweeps of primaries in Virginia, Maryland and the District of Columbia. Clinton remains considerably ahead in superdelegates, which are party officials, elected officials and others who can vote however they choose at the nominating convention.

If the race for pledged delegates based on outcomes in caucuses and primaries across the country remains tight, superdelegates could decide the nomination.

Obama leads the delegate race with 1,275 to 1,220 to Clinton, according to the latest count by The Associated Press.

Persuading superdelegates to back Obama will be a crucial role for Wilhelm in the Obama campaign, he said.

“The only reason this race appears to be closer than it actually is is the number of superdelegates that bought into Senator Clinton’s inevitability early — too early, it seems,” Wilhelm said.

The Clinton campaign predicted Wednesday it would be in a virtual tie with Obama in delegates after March 4 primaries in Ohio, Texas, Vermont and Rhode Island, separated by no more than 25 delegates.

Wilhelm said the Democrats could never win a contest about experience over Sen. John McCain, the likely Republican nominee, but could win — with Obama — an election that was framed around change.”

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-02-13-obama-endorsement_N.htm

From the Chicago Tribune November 17, 2010.

“Secrecy shrouds some pension investments in Illinois”
“The Tribune was able to identify some assets underlying these investments only by reviewing thousands of pages of pension fund documents and scouring industry newsletters and Web sites.

“Private equity and real estate are the dark side,” said Jeremy Gold, a national pension expert formerly of the Wharton School’s Pension Research Council. “I say dark side because nobody really knows what real estate is worth until someone wants to buy it. Good luck figuring out what private equity is really worth.”

These issues come into play when analyzing the results achieved by Chicago-based Hopewell Ventures, a private equity investment firm that, according to the Tribune’s review of pension fund documents, is among the firms losing the most value in terms of percentage for city pension funds.

Hopewell’s co-founder is David Wilhelm, a native Chicagoan who has managed campaigns for Mayor Richard Daley and brought the 1996 Democratic National Convention to Chicago as national party chairman. He was also a campaign adviser for former Gov. Rod Blagojevich and an informal adviser to President Barack Obama’s presidential campaign.

In 2004, the municipal and laborers pension funds each invested about $5 million in Hopewell, whose holdings include a Minnesota printing company that filed for bankruptcy three years after the firm invested $2 million as well as an Illinois company that produces pasteurized eggs.

According to the Tribune’s analysis of pension fund documents, the funds’ investment of $10.2 million is now worth nearly $6 million less — for an annualized return of negative 9 percent. The funds also paid the firm $1.7 million in fees.”

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2010-11-17/news/ct-met-pension-transparency-20101117_1_national-pension-expert-pension-fund-pension-investments

From The Cleveland Plain Dealer October 5, 2010.

“Huge solar panel farm coming to southeast Ohio”

“The field will be built and owned by Turning Point Solar LLC, a joint venture of New Harvest Ventures of Ohio and Agile Energy LLC of California.

The cost of the solar field will be about $250 million, said David Wilhelm, a principal in New Harvest. The project will depend on state and federal tax credits, federal loan guarantees and a state advanced energy grant.

“All of these things are in motion,” Wilhelm said. “None of them are certain, but we are confident on all scores.”
Wilhelm, of Logan, was head of the Democratic National Committee in the 1990s but today is a venture capitalist, supporting sustainability, the concept of companies that “do well by doing good.””

http://www.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2010/10/huge_solar_panel_farm_coming_t.html

All of the above is interesting and certainly begins connecting the dots between David Wilhelm and Barack Obama, but as you have probably guessed, there is more.

Obama GA ballot challenge, Natural born citizen status, Judge Michael Malihi, Why did Obama refuse matching funds in 2008?, Part 3, Citizen Wells FEC FOIA, FEC bias?

Obama GA ballot challenge, Natural born citizen status, Judge Michael Malihi, Why did Obama refuse matching funds in 2008?, Part 3, Citizen Wells FEC FOIA, FEC bias?

“Education without values, as useful as it is, seems rather to make man a more clever devil.”…C. S. Lewis

“I am certain that the devil is watching Barack Obama and taking notes.”…Citizen Wells

“Why is Obama now employing private attorneys to keep his name on state ballots, despite compelling evidence that he is not a natural born citizen?…Citizen Wells

WHY DID OBAMA REFUSE MATCHING FUNDS IN 2008?

PART 3

Citizen Wells FEC FOIA request reveals FEC bias?

Part 1 in this series documented that Barack Obama opted out of Federal Matching Funds after a pledge to receive them and repeatedly spoke about campaign finance reform.

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2012/01/17/obama-ga-ballot-challenge-natural-born-citizen-status-judge-michael-malihi-why-did-obama-refuse-matching-funds-in-2008-part-1/

Part 2 dealt with the legal posturing involving Obama, Robert Bauer, et al with the FEC and the first lawsuit challenging Obama’s eligibility and Natural
Born Citizen status initiated by Philip J. Berg.

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2012/01/20/obama-ga-ballot-challenge-natural-born-citizen-status-judge-michael-malihi-why-did-obama-refuse-matching-funds-in-2008-part-2-robert-bauer-et-al-help-obama-hide-records/

From Part 2:

Philip J Berg files lawsuit in Philadelphia Federal Court

August 21, 2008

Defendants: Obama, DNC, FEC

Obama is not a Natural Born Citizen and therefore ineligible to be President.

August 27, 2008

Complaint served on the U.S. Attorney for DNC and FEC

Motion filed by Robert Bauer, et al October 6, 2008

“BRIEF OF DEFENDANT DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE
AND DEFENDANT SENATOR BARACK OBAMA
IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER
STAYING DISCOVERY PENDING DECISION ON
DISPOSITIVE MOTION”
“In his Complaint, plaintiff Berg alleges that Senator Barack Obama, the
Democratic Party’s nominee for President of the United States, is not eligible to serve as President under Article II, section 1 of the Constitution because,
Mr. Berg alleges (falsely), Senator Obama is purportedly not a natural-born citizen. Complaint ¶3. Mr. Berg seeks a declaratory judgment that Senator Obama
is ineligible to run for President; an injunction barring Senator Obama from running for that office; and an injunction barring the DNC from nominating him.

On September 15, 2008, plaintiff Berg served on Senator Obama’s office a
request for production of seventeen different categories of documents, including copies of all of the Senator’s college and law school applications, requests
for financial aid, college and law school papers, and “a copy of your entire presidential file pertaining to being vetted.” Plaintiff also served 56 requests
for admission on Senator Obama. On that same date, plaintiff served on the DNC 27 requests for admission and requests for production of five categories of
documents, including all documents in the possession of the DNC
relating to Senator Obama.1

On September 24, 2008, defendants filed a motion to dismiss the complaint for
lack of subject matter jurisdiction and failure to state a claim, on the grounds that, as a matter of law, plaintiff has no standing to challenge the
qualifications of a candidate for President of the U.S. and has no federal cause of action.”

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION’S OPPOSITION TO
EMERGENCY MOTION FOR AN IMMEDIATE INJUNCTION TO STAY
THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION OF NOVEMBER 4, 2008

October 21, 2008

“II. BECAUSE THE COMMISSION HAS NO JURISDICTION TO ENFORCE WHETHER CANDIDATES MEET THE CONSTITUTIONAL CRITERIA FOR PRESIDENTIAL ELIGIBILITY, IT SHOULD BE
DISMISSED FROM THIS CASE

The Commission is the independent agency of the United States government vested with exclusive jurisdiction to administer, interpret and enforce civilly the
FECA. See 2 U.S.C. §§ 437c(b)(1), 437d(a), 437d(e) and 437g. The Commission also exercises jurisdiction over the Presidential Election Campaign Fund Act, 26
U.S.C. §§ 9001 et seq., and the Presidential Primary Matching Payment Account Act, 26 U.S.C. §§ 9031 et seq.2 These statutes only confer on the Commission
jurisdiction over issues concerning the financing of federal campaigns: regulating the organization of campaign committees; the raising, spending, and
disclosing of campaign funds; and the receipt and use of public funding for qualifying candidates.

None of these statutes delegates to the FEC authority to determine the constitutional eligibility of federal candidates, and Berg does not allege otherwise.
Although the Commission determines whether certain presidential candidates are eligible for public funding, it has no power to determine who qualifies for
ballot access or who is eligible to serve as president. Thus, because the Commission has no authority to take action against Senator Obama as suggested by Berg, the Commission should be dismissed from this case with prejudice.”

The following are FEC statements of policy and law. They reveal at least a grey area and probably black and white in regard to the response that Philip J.
Berg received in 2008 when he challenged Obama’s eligibility.

General duties and procedures.

From the FEC website:

“Election Administration

The FEC’s Office of Election Administration (OEA) serves as a central exchange for information and research on issues related to the administration of
federal elections on the state and local level.”
“Filing a Complaint

Anyone who believes that a violation of the law has occurred may file a complaint with the FEC. The complaint should contain a statement of facts related to the alleged violation and any supporting evidence available.

The complaint must be signed and contain the complainant’s name and address. It must also be sworn to and notarized. A step-by-step description of the
enforcement process is available in the brochure Filing a Complaint.”
“Contested Elections

For information on how to challenge the results of a federal election, contact the Secretary of State in your state capital.”

Statutes

Since the FEC had provided an advisory opinion that Obama had the option to accept matching funds, it appears that Berg’s challenge to the FEC should not
have been dismissed.

TITLE 26 > Subtitle H > CHAPTER 95 > § 9011

§ 9011. JUDICIAL REVIEW
(a) Review of certification, determination, or other action by the Commission

Any certification, determination, or other action by the Commission made or taken pursuant to the provisions of this chapter shall be subject to review by
the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia upon petition filed in such Court by any interested person. Any petition filed pursuant to
this section shall be filed within thirty days after the certification, determination, or other action by the Commission for which review is sought.
(b) Suits to implement chapter
(1) The Commission, the national committee of any political party, and individuals eligible to vote for President are authorized to institute such actions,
including actions for declaratory judgment or injunctive relief, as may be appropriate to implement or contrue [1] any provisions of this chapter.
(2) The district courts of the United States shall have jurisdiction of proceedings instituted pursuant to this subsection and shall exercise the same
without regard to whether a person asserting rights under provisions of this subsection shall have exhausted any administrative or other remedies that may be provided at law. Such proceedings shall be heard and determined by a court of three judges in accordance with the provisions of section 2284 of title 28,
United States Code, and any appeal shall lie to the Supreme Court.

[1] So in original. Probably should be “construe”.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/usc_sec_26_00009011—-000-.html

Citizen Wells FOIA request and response.

As reported on Citizen Wells September 30, 2008, I submitted a FOIA request to the FEC on September 13, 2008.

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2008/09/20/philip-j-berg-lawsuit-obama-served-dnc-served-fec-served-foia-request-to-fec-fec-foia-status-fec-response-by-october-21-2008-citizen-wells-phone-call-to-fec/

The FEC responses can be viewed here:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/49423265/FEC-2008-FOIA-request-Philip-Berg-lawsuit

http://www.scribd.com/doc/49423694/FEC0002 through FEC0008

The Berg lawsuit was filed on August 21, 2008 and served on the FEC on August 27, 2008. The following email from David Kolker to Rebekah Harvey dated August 22, 2008 is certainly interesting. Rebekah Harvey was the assistant to Commissioner Ellen L. Weintraub. Prior to being appointed to the FEC, Weintraub was on the staff of Perkins Coie LLP and a member of it’s Political Law Group. More on Ellen Weintraub later.

“Victory in Berg v. Obama”

You may find the following a bit curious as well:

The letter to the FEC dated August 18, 2008 (Scribd FEC0006).

The individual, redacted, is requesting an advisory opinion from the FEC on Obama’s eligibility to be president. An email was sent with the request. The email
provides information on why Obama is not eligible. It begins with

“It seems that Barack Obama is not qualified to be president, after all, for the following reason:”

It ends with

“Interesting! Now what? Who dropped the ball or are we all being duped? Who do you know whom you can forward this to who might be able to help
answer this question?”
From the FEC response to the inquiry (Scribd FEC0004):

“The Act authorizes the Commission to issue an advisory opinion in response to a complete written request from any person about a specific transaction or
activity that the requesting person plans to undertake or is presently undertaking.”

Philip J. Berg’s challenge in court to Obama’s eligibility appears to meet this requirement.

Had Berg challenged the earlier ruling by the FEC which kept open the option for Obama receiving matching funds, perhaps the outcome would have been
different. However, to be revealed in part 4, the Obama camp and the DNC did their best to quash the effectiveness of the FEC over several years.

DISCLOSE ACT, HR 5175, Friday vote, June 18, 2010, First Amendment Rights, Democracy is Strengthened by Casting Light on Spending in Elections (DISCLOSE) Act

I received the following in an email a few minutes ago with a request to “PLEASE email, fax, call and otherwise reach out to your House member to vote NO on this legislation.”

 “DISCLOSE ACT (HR 5175) is set for vote FRIDAY AM!!!”

The DISCLOSE Act
June 16, 2010
 
On the Citizens United decision: “This is a defeat for arrogant elitists who wanted to carve out free speech as a privilege for themselves and deny it to the rest of us; and for those who believed that speech had a dollar value and should be treated and regulated like currency, and not a freedom.  Today’s decision reaffirms that the Bill of Rights was written for every American and it will amplify the voice of average citizens who want their voices heard.”
 
– Wayne LaPierre, National Rifle Association, January 21, 2010
 
“The proposals in the ‘DISCLOSE Act’ (Democratic Incumbents Seeking to Contain Losses by Outlawing Speech in Elections) amount to nothing more than political posturing…This bill would create another bureaucratic layer of political speech regulation, which would punish small business owners and grassroots groups who lack the resources to comply with such onerous provisions.”
 
– Bradley Smith, Center for Competitive Politics Chairman and Former FEC Commissioner, 2000-2005
 
 
On April 29, 2010, Congressman Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) introduced H.R. 5175, the Democracy is Strengthened by Casting Light on Spending in Elections (DISCLOSE) Act.  The bill is a direct response to Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission – a First Amendment victory in which the Supreme Court overturned the prohibition on corporations and unions using treasury funds for independent expenditures supporting or opposing political candidates at any time of the year.  Simply put, the DISCLOSE Act will limit the political speech that was protected and encouraged by Citizens United. 
 
The DISCLOSE Act was marked up on Thursday, May 20, 2010, and may come to the floor later this week after rumors that the Democrats have reached an agreement with certain key groups.  This is not meant to be an extensive analysis – which will be provided in the Legislative Bulletin once the bill comes to the floor – but rather to highlight some of the most egregious provisions of the bill.
 
Partisan ploy to get Democrats elected to Congress.  The bill, “coincidentally” sponsored by the chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee in charge of electing Democrats to Congress, re-writes campaign finance laws in favor of Democrats right before elections.  It was crafted behind closed doors with no input from Republican members of the House Administration Committee.  The bill was designed by Democrats to silence their political opponents.
 
Creates a special, narrow carve-out for specific organizations intended to sway votes toward passage of the bill.  The National Rifle Association (NRA), the Humane Society, and possibly a very small number of other groups, are reportedly covered in a last minute deal that creates an exemption from the financial disclosure requirements in the bill.  This carve out does nothing to protect the First Amendment rights of millions of Americans who want to engage in the political process but will instead be deterred by this bill. As stated in a Wall Street Journal editorial this morning, “Creating a special exception for the NRA, and thereby assuring the Democrats ‘good grades’ on Second Amendment rights, eases the way for the bill to be passed. A failing grade on First Amendment rights is somebody else’s problem.”  The exemption is intended to make it easier for a bad bill to get the votes it needs to pass.
 
Favors unions over corporations.  Current law already bans foreign nationals from contributing to elections. See the RSC Policy Paper on Citizens United for more details. DISCLOSE makes current law much more restrictive and bans independent expenditures on activity by American corporations with 20% or more foreign ownership.  However, similar restrictions are not included for unions with foreign members or non-citizen members.  As eight former Federal Election Commissioners stated in a recent Wall Street Journal article, “… Disclose does not ban foreign speech but speech by American citizen shareholders of U.S. companies that have some element of foreign ownership, even when those foreigners have no control over the decisions made by the Americans who run the company.”  Additionally, the new threshold for reporting ($600 in donations for independent expenditures) will have little effect on unions whose members’ annual dues average much lower than $600.  This would preclude unions from having to report.  The bill also prohibits independent expenditures or disbursing funds for electioneering communications by anyone with a government contract greater than $7 million.  (Originally, the threshold was $50,000, which was changed in mark-up.)  This does not apply to unions in collective bargaining agreements with the government.
 
Threatens organizations with lawsuits for non-compliance.  The bill becomes effective 30 days after enactment, giving the Federal Election Commission no time to craft regulations relating to the implementation of the bill, which will certainly be complicated, and not to mention expensive, to execute.  Organizations would have to operate without any guidance from the FEC and risk possible lawsuits.
 
Onerous disclosure and reporting requirements will deter citizen engagement.  The bill includes requirements that every incorporated entity engaged in independent campaign activity must list all donors of $600 or more with the Federal Election Commission (FEC).  The bill also requires CEOs of organizations to appear in the ads, and state their name and their organization two times.  Additionally, the top five funders of the organization must be listed in the ad (and top two for radio), and if there is a top “significant” funder, he or she must identify himself or herself, his or her title,  and state the name of the organization three times in the ad. These tedious and onerous requirements will have the effect of deterring organizations from getting involved in elections (and potentially take up most of the ad time). 
 
 
Citizens United was a triumph in defense of the First Amendment right to free speech and a reaffirmation of the rights of businesses, unions, and citizens’ associations to engage in political communications.  The DISCLOSE Act is the opposite, and the business community knows it.  This bill is an attack on the ability of non-party organizations to engage in the political realm during an election year. 
 
RSC Staff Contact: Natalie Farr, natalie.farr@mail.house.gov, (202) 226-0718

Obama attorneys facts, Obama and attorneys hide Obama birth certificate, College records, Perkins Coie, Robert F Bauer, Obama not eligible, Obama not natural born citizen, Why has Obama employed a legion of private and government attorneys?

Obama attorneys facts, Obama and attorneys hide Obama birth certificate, College records

Why has Obama employed a legion of private and government attorneys to avoid presenting a legitimate birth certificate and college records?…Citizen Wells and millions of concerned Americans

 

The above is the “deer in the headlights” question.
There is no argument. There is only one conclusion. Obama is hiding his records, his past.
This position is not intended to override or dispense with other arguments related to Obama not being eligible for the presidency. It is simply a way of clarifying what Obama has done. It is a well documented fact with no rational argument against it. When you are discussing Obama’s natual born citizen status or birth certificate, this is the bottom line statement and question.

Reported at CitizenWells.com May 22, 2010.
“Enquiring minds  want to know (you know, us pesky citizen journalists). So I checked the April Quarterly expenditures for Obama For America. The Total Disbursements for that Period were $ 632,263.18.  Well over a third of that total, $ 261,206.69, was paid to the law firm of Perkins Coie.”

Read more

Let’s say you are a skeptic. You might ask. Maybe Perkins Coie did other legal work for Obama. They probably have. However, they have spent much time helping obama keep his birth certificate, college records and other records hidden. Let’s examine a legal document from the Court cases of attorney Philip J Berg challenging Obama’s eligibility for the presidency.

“Case 2:08-cv-04083-RBS Document 15 Filed 10/06/2008 Page 2 of 10

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
PHILIP J. BERG, :
:
Plaintiff :
:
v. : Civ. Action No. 2:08-cv-04083-RBS
:
BARACK OBAMA, et al., :”
“MOTION OF DEFENDANTS
DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE AND
SENATOR BARACK OBAMA FOR A PROTECTIVE ORDER
STAYING DISCOVERY PENDING DECISION ON DISPOSITIVE MOTION
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c)(1), defendants Democratic National Committee
and Senator Barack Obama respectfully move the Court for a protective order staying all
discovery in this action pending the Court’s decision on defendants’ motion to dismiss
the action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim upon
which relief can be granted.”
“Respectfully submitted,”
“Robert F. Bauer
General Counsel, Obama for America
PERKINS COIE
607 Fourteenth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20005-2003
Telephone: (202) 628-6600
Facsimile: (202) 434-1690

RBauer@perkinscoie.com
“I. Procedural Background
In his Complaint, plaintiff Berg alleges that Senator Barack Obama, the
Democratic Party’s nominee for President of the United States, is not eligible to serve as
President under Article II, section 1 of the Constitution because, Mr. Berg alleges
(falsely), Senator Obama is purportedly not a natural-born citizen. Complaint ¶3. Mr.
Berg seeks a declaratory judgment that Senator Obama is ineligible to run for President;
an injunction barring Senator Obama from running for that office; and an injunction
barring the DNC from nominating him.

On September 15, 2008, plaintiff Berg served on Senator Obama’s office a
request for production of seventeen different categories of documents, including copies of
all of the Senator’s college and law school applications, requests for financial aid, college
and law school papers, and “a copy of your entire presidential file pertaining to being
vetted.” Plaintiff also served 56 requests for admission on Senator Obama. On that same
date, plaintiff served on the DNC 27 requests for admission and requests for production
of five categories of documents, including all documents in the possession of the DNC
relating to Senator Obama.1

On September 24, 2008, defendants filed a motion to dismiss the complaint for
lack of subject matter jurisdiction and failure to state a claim, on the grounds that, as a
matter of law, plaintiff has no standing to challenge the qualifications of a candidate for
President of the U.S. and has no federal cause of action.”

“In this case, as in Weisman and Norfolk Southern Rwy., defendants’ pending
motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction would dispose of the entire
action. The motion does not involve any disputed issues of fact: defendants contend that,
as a matter of law, plaintiff lacks standing to challenge the qualifications of a candidate
for President and that there is no federal cause of action that could serve as a means for
such a challenge. Thus, discovery is not needed in order to rule on the motion. In these
circumstances, a stay of discovery is warranted and appropriate.”

“For the reasons set forth above, the Court should grant the motion of defendants
DNC and Senator Barack Obama for a protective order staying discovery pending a

decision on their motion to dismiss.
Respectfully submitted,”
“Robert F. Bauer
General Counsel, Obama for America
PERKINS COIE
607 Fourteenth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20005-2003
Telephone: (202) 628-6600
Facsimile: (202) 434-1690

RBauer@perkinscoie.com

 ”
This document reveals that Perkins Coie was representing Obama in 2008 in an effort to keep his birth certificate, college records and other records hidden.

Perkins Coie has continued to represent Obama into 2010.
Anyone who continues to argue that Obama  has not hidden his records with the assistance of attorneys is mentally unstable, has severe reading comprehension disabilities or a clear agenda to support Obama to the detriment of this country or some combination of thereof.

Philip J Berg court documents can be found at:

http://obamacrimes.com

Obama’s hidden past, Obama records, Obama thugs, Obama camp attacks, Obama senate records, Larry Sinclair allegations

To: Obama thugs

Obots,

Obama paid bloggers,

Obama Kool aid drinkers,

Obama left wing supporters,

and other low life scum who attack decent Americans.

After journalists such as Tim Russert asked about Obama’s IL Senate records in late 2007 and after reading Larry Sinclair’s allegations in January 2008, I began researching Barack Obama’s past. By doing some old fashioned research, I discovered something about Obama’s past, something that led me to research more and ask more questions.

I put this question out on the internet:

“Where was Obama on November 4, 1999?”

And guess what happened next. I began receiving personal attacks.

This was a huge clue. I had struck a nerve for asking a simple, non accusatory question.

I am now certain that many of those responding to this simple question were paid Obama bloggers.

WHY?

FL district 24 elections, Florida congressional races, Larry Sinclair for Congress, Truth about Larry Sinclair, Barack Obama & Larry Sinclair: Cocaine Sex Lies & Murder

 FL district 24 elections, Florida congressional races, Larry Sinclair for Congress

Larry Sinclair is running for Congress in Florida District 24. Consistent with their actions of the past two years, the Obama camp has increased their attacks on Sinclair in an attempt to discredit him and revelations about Barack Obama. This blog and this article are here to set the record straight about Larry Sinclair, his past and his allegations. If you have any questions, please contact us for some straight answers. This blog has covered this story more than any other source.
Reported here earlier today.

“Larry Sinclair is running for Congress in Florida District 24. Since going public with his allegations in January 2008 of a drug and sex encounter with Barack Obama in November 1999, Sinclair has been the subject of non stop personal attacks, death threats and fabricated stories meant to discredit him. Methinks many protest too much.

I discovered early in 2008 that the Larry Sinclair story was a much larger story.

1. The initial encounter with Obama in 1999.
2. The Donald Young controversy.
3. The attacks made on Larry Sinclair, those following his story and anyone questioning
the “messiah” Obama.
4. The changing and withholding of internet information and attempts to prevent Larry Sinclair and others from reporting the truth.

When I began asking simple questions about Obama early in 2008 and received orchestrated attacks for doing so, my curiousity was aroused. Within a few months it was apparent that the responses that Larry Sinclair, myself, other bloggers and people like Jon Voight were receiving for questioning Obama werre not just coming from over zealous Obama supporters. Our suspicions were confirmed soon after that when the Obama camp admitted that they employed hundreds of internet warriors. Combined with a bombardment of attacks was an Orwellian effort to rewrite history with wholesale attempts to remove or rewrite internet articles. I constantly referred to the Obama thugs as Orwellian or Nazi Brownshirt in nature. A simple search of this blog will yield many articles on that subject.

Many attempts were made to silence Sinclair. Time after time his websites were shut down, attempts were made to try to stop his speech at the national Press Club and he was arrested on trumped up charges at the conclusion of that speech. The charges came from Delaware Attorney General Biden, the son of Joe Biden.

Twice, Larry Sinclair’s Social Security Disability benefits have been threatened. The last time just a few weeks ago.
The Obama camp believed they could silence Larry Sinclair. They also believed they could silence me and others. They are trying to silence all opposition. Just look at the way they handled the Health care Bill. They operated behind closed doors. This time they weren’t just trying to shut down Larry Sinclair, they were silencing the opposition party and American public. That is why the Larry Sinclair story and Larry Sinclair speaking out is so important. That is why it was so important for me personally, for the past two years, to make sure that the public heard this story.”

Larry Sinclair for Congress, Truth about Sinclair

http://larrysinclairforcongress2010.victorydiy.com/

Larry Sinclair speaks to FL District 24 locals, meet the candidates

Obama, FEC investigations, Update, February 27, 2010, Obama for America, Campaign funds for Obama’s personal use

Obama, FEC investigations, Update, February 27, 2010

Obama would have been under more FEC scrutiny if he had taken Federal matching funds.

From the FEC.

“FEC TAKES FINAL ACTION ON SIX CASES
WASHINGTON – The Federal Election Commission recently made public its final action on six matters under review (MURs). In one matter, respondents agreed to pay a civil penalty of $5,500; the Commission found no reason to believe a violation of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, as amended (the Act), occurred in connection with another allegation and it dismissed the remaining allegations. In another case, respondents agreed to pay a civil penalty of $3,600. The Commission exercised its prosecutorial discretion and dismissed the other four matters.
Under the law, the FEC must attempt to resolve its enforcement cases, or MURs, through a confidential investigative process that may lead to a negotiated conciliation agreement between the Commission and the individual or group.Additional information regarding MURs can be found on the FEC web site at http://www.fec.gov/em/mur.shtml.
This release contains only summary information.For additional details, please consult publicly available documents for each case in the Enforcement Query System (EQS) on the FEC web site at http://eqs.nictusa.com/eqs/searcheqs.”

“MUR 6127
 
 
RESPONDENTS:
 Obama for America and Martin Nesbitt, in his official capacity as treasurer; Barack Obama; Obama Victory Fund and Andrew Tobias, in his official capacity as treasurer; Democratic National Committee and Andrew Tobias, in his official capacity as treasurer; VIDA Fitness; Urban Salons, Inc. doing business as Bang Salon Spa; David von Storch; and Saul Ewing, LLP.
 
COMPLAINANTS:
 District of Columbia Republican Committee by its Chairman, Robert J. Kabel, and California Republican Party
 
SUBJECT:
 The complaint alleged that Obama for America (OFA) and Nesbitt, in his official capacity as treasurer, converted campaign funds to Obama’s personal use by paying some of his personal travel expenses during the 2008 presidential campaign. It alleged further that VIDA Fitness facilitated the making of contributions and made prohibited contributions to the Obama Victory Fund (OVF), a joint fundraising committee comprised of OFA and the Democratic National Committee, by using a corporate email list to distribute OVF fundraising solicitations and allowing OVF to use VIDA’s facilities for a fundraiser. The complaint also alleged that OFA failed to disclose the transfer of a donor list to Project Vote, an affiliate of ACORN, and that OFA intended to accept and Saul Ewing LLP intended to make an excessive contribution in the form of pro bono legal services.
 

OUTCOME:
 
 
The Commission exercised its prosecutorial discretion and dismissed the personal use allegations in connection with Obama for America, its treasurer, acting in his official capacity, and Obama, and sent letters of caution. The Commission exercised its prosecutorial discretion and dismissed the allegations in connection with Obama Victory Fund and the Democratic National Committee and their treasurers, acting in their official capacities. The Commission found no reason to believe violations occurred in connection with the third allegation concerning Obama for America and its treasurer, acting in his official capacity, and found no reason to believe a violation occurred in connected with Saul Ewing, LLP.The Commission found reason to believe that VIDA Fitness, Urban Salons, Inc., doing business as Bang Salon Spa, and von Storch failed to obtain advance payment for a corporate email list used to send invitations to a fundraiser for the Obama Victory Fund and for beverages served at the event, and solicited contributions outside VIDA Fitness’s and Bang Salon’s restricted class. In a conciliation agreement, VIDA Fitness, Urban Salons, Inc., d/b/a Bang Salon Spa, and von Storch agreed to pay a civil penalty of $5,500. ”
 
 

“MUR 6175
 
 
RESPONDENTS:
 Obama Victory Fund and Andrew Tobias, in his official capacity as treasurer
 
COMPLAINANT:
 Jane B. Freidson
 
SUBJECT:
 The complaint alleged that Obama Victory Fund and Tobias, in his official capacity as treasurer, incorrectly processed a $500, online contribution made by Freidson, and instead charged $5,000 to her credit card.
 

OUTCOME:
 The respondents acknowledged the mistake in processing the original contribution and issued a $4,500 refund to Freidson. The Commission exercised its prosecutorial discretion and dismissed the matter. ”

 http://www.fec.gov/press/press2010/20100226MUR.shtml

Philip J Berg, Update, February 18, 2010, Birth Certificate March on Washington, Berg to Attend CPAC 2010 in Washington, DC 2/18 to 2/20, Obama eligibility, Berg v Obama

From Philip J Berg, February 18, 2010.

For Immediate Release:  – 02/18/2010
For Further Information Contact:
Philip J. Berg, Esquire
555 Andorra Glen Court, Suite 12
Lafayette Hill, PA 19444-2531
Cell (610) 662-3005
(610) 825-3134
(800) 993-PHIL  [7445]
Fax (610) 834-7659
philjberg@obamacrimes.com
Berg to Attend CPAC 2010 in Washington, DC 2/18 to 2/20
* * *
Berg States that Announcement of
“Birth Certificate March on Washington”
to Demand Obama Resign
forced Obama to address the issue at
National Prayer Breakfast
* * *
Date for March to be Announced Soon
and
Urgent Need for Funds
(Lafayette Hill, PA – 02/18/10) – Philip J. Berg, Esquire, the first Attorney who filed suit against Barack H. Obama challenging Senator Obama’s lack of “qualifications” to serve as President of the United States stated that “WE THE PEOPLE” by and through Philip J. Berg and Obamacrimes.com forced Obama to address the issue at the National Prayer Breakfast on Thursday, February 4, 2009 !   Obama, in part of his speech referred for the first time since the question of his being “Constitutionally eligible” stated,
“But surely you can question my policies without questioning my faith, or, [pause] for that matter,my citizenship.“ [Laughter and applause.] [emphasis added]
Berg said, “I knew that if we continued our efforts, those of obamacrimes.com, to expose Obama not being ‘Constitutionally eligible’ to be President, as this is the greatest ‘HOAX’ in the history of our country, that being over 230 years and the fact that Obama’s actions are a fraud !”
The actual words stated by Obama:

“Civility also requires relearning how to disagree without being disagreeable; understanding, as President [Kennedy] said, that “civility is not a sign of weakness.” Now, I am the first to confess I am not always right.  Michelle will testify to that“. [Laughter.]
“But surely you can question my policies without questioning my faith, or, [pause] for that matter, my citizenship.” [Laughter and applause.] [emphasis added]
Berg said, “WOW, it is about time !  This is great. Our announcement of the ‘Birth Certificate March on Washington’ demanding Obama resign as President as he is ‘Constitutionally ineligible’ to be President was the Press Release that caused Obama to react.”

Berg stated, “Because of the response to date, shortly, we will announce the date for the “Birth Certificate March on Washington.”
Further, “We need Funds ASAP to be able to publicize the March and start to arrange specifics for the ‘Birth Certificate March on Washington.’  Go to obamacrimes.com to make your contribution.”
Berg is requesting all citizens of the United States to email, fax or mail a “copy” of their Birth Certificate that will be presented to Obama demanding that Obama resign because he has failed to produce his long form [vault] Birth Certificate and other citizenship documents [Obama, an Indonesian Citizen ?] to show he is “Constitutionally eligible” to be President.  Please redact any personal information that you wish.
Berg related an email he received.  A woman from Texas told me she registered her thirteen [13] year old nephew for school.  When registration was finished, her nephew asked the Principal, “Can I ask you a question?”  The Principal said, “Yes.”  Her nephew said, “How come I had to show my Birth Certificate to register for school, but Obama did not have to show his to be President ?”
Berg said, “That email motivated me to continue to expose Obama for the fraud he is !”
Berg continued, “Since the Courts are taking their time to get to the point of allowing ‘Discovery,’ it is time to motivate the citizens of the United States for a ‘Peaceful Revolution’ to expose the ‘HOAX’ of Obama, the biggest ‘HOAX’ in the history of our country, in over 230 years !”
Berg wants people to email, fax or mail a copy of their Birth Certificate to:
Email = philjberg@obamacrimes.com
Fax     = (610) 834-7659
Mail    = Obamacrimes
555 Andorra Glen Court, Suite 12
Lafayette Hill, PA 19444-2531
Berg said, “Then, we will be preparing them to deliver to Obama demanding that he resign from the Office of President as he has not proven that he is “Constitutionally eligible” to be President and that Obama has not produced legal documents to show he legally changed his name from his ‘adopted’ name of ‘Barry Soetoro’ from Indonesia.
I am proceeding for the 305 + million people in ‘our’ U.S.A., for ‘our’ forefathers and for the 3.2 million men and women that have died and/or been maimed defending our Constitution with our ‘Peaceful Revolution’ to prove that Obama is not Constitutionally qualified/eligible to be President.”
Berg continued, “I still have cases pending in the Federal Courts.  Go to obamacrimes.com to see the status of each case.”
Berg concluded, “I will be attending the CPAC 2010 Convention in Washington, DC from Thursday, 2/18 to Saturday, 2/20 at the Marriott Wardman Park Hotel.  The Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) will be helpful for me to spread the message that Obama is a fraud, a phony and Obama has put forth the biggest ‘HOAX’ in the history of our great nation,”
Phil Berg will be available for Press Interviews at CPAC 2010 – Contact Phil at cell (610) 662-3005.
For copies of all Press Releases and Court Pleadings, go to:
obamacrimes.com

Glenn Beck, call me, Citizen Wells, I am still waiting on a call

Doug Hoffman, GOP Tea Partiers Must Work Together, McLaughlin & Associates poll, Republicans, Hoffman deserves another chance, Republican ticket and Conservative line

From the National Journal, February 2, 2010.

“Hoffman: GOP, Tea Partiers Must Work Together”

“When Doug Hoffman, running on the Conservative Party line, was narrowly defeated by Democrat Bill Owens for New York’s 23rd Congressional District seat, some might have thought this was a fluke. But after Republican Scott Brown captured the Senate seat in Massachusetts, Hoffman’s near-win has been seen as a momentum-builder for conservatives and the Tea Party movement.”

“While he hasn’t announced his candidacy yet, a McLaughlin & Associates poll released last month showed 74 percent of Republicans in the district agreeing that Hoffman deserves another chance at the seat. NationalJournal.com caught up with Hoffman last week to ask him about his plans for November.
NJ: If you do decide to run, would you be running as a Conservative candidate or vying for the Republican nomination?
Hoffman: I’m going to try to get both of the tickets — the Republican ticket and the Conservative line.
NJ: One activist told me that the Tea Partiers are keeping the GOP “at arm’s length.” Given this attitude, do you think that running under the GOP umbrella might turn off some Tea Party voters or independent voters?
Hoffman: The people that supported me and came out to support me knew that I was a lifelong Republican and knew that I was fighting for the heart and soul of the Republican Party, so I don’t think it will turn it off. I think I can be the catalyst, especially in the 23rd District, to bring the two movements together and work effectively, not only for my campaign but for the other Republicans in the district.
NJ: How would you compare the reception that you’re getting from national Republican Party leaders this time around to that from last election?
Hoffman: 180 degrees. They’re very enthusiastic, receptive, and we’re going to work together to win in 2010.
NJ: Are you making plans to improve your ground game?
Hoffman: If I do make the announcement to run, I am certainly going to tap into the help that I received from the Tea Party organization. Now, I realize that across the country I won’t get the support I had the last time because they’re going to be busy in their own districts, but within my district we have a lot of volunteers that came from the Tea Party movement who are ready, willing and eager to get re-involved in my campaign.
NJ: While a lot of Tea Party groups agree on policy, there is some disagreement on how to meet those goals — whether it is forming their own party or taking over the GOP or just acting as a check on the GOP. What, in your mind, should be the goal of the Tea Party movement?

Hoffman: Well, I don’t think it’s a taking over of the Republican Party, I think it’s bringing them together, to work effectively together to achieve the common goal. … Not everybody running on the Conservative line can get 46 1/2 percent of the votes. In reality, we need to work together to win together.”

Read more:

http://insiderinterviews.nationaljournal.com/2010/02/hoffman-gop.php

Birth Certificate March on Washington, Philip J Berg, February 4 2010, Demand Obama Resign, Obama is not Constitutionally qualified to be President, Berg cases pending in the Federal Courts

Just in from Philip J Berg, February 4, 2010.

For Immediate Release:  – 02/03/2010

For Further Information Contact:

Philip J. Berg, Esquire

555 Andorra Glen Court, Suite 12

Lafayette Hill, PA 19444-2531

Cell (610) 662-3005

(610) 825-3134

(800) 993-PHIL  [7445]

Fax (610) 834-7659

philjberg@obamacrimes.com

Berg Announces


“Birth Certificate March on Washington”
to Demand Obama Resign
as Obama is not
“Constitutionally qualified”
to be President

(Lafayette Hill, PA – 02/03/10) – Philip J. Berg, Esquire, the first Attorney who filed suit against Barack H. Obama challenging Senator Obama’s lack of “qualifications” to serve as President of the United States announces “Birth Certificate March on Washington” demanding Obama resign as President as he is “Constitutionally ineligible” to be President.

Berg is requesting all citizens of the United States to email, fax or mail a “copy” of their Birth Certificate that will be presented to Obama demanding that Obama resign because he has failed to produce his long form [vault] Birth Certificate to show he is “Constitutionally eligible” to be President.

Berg related an email he received.  A woman from Texas told me she registered her thirteen [13] year old nephew for school.  When registration was finished, her nephew asked the Principal, “Can I ask you a question?”  The Principal said, “Yes.”  Her nephew said, “How come I had to show my Birth Certificate to register for school, but Obama did not have to show his to be President ?”

Berg said, “That email motivated me to continue to expose Obama for the fraud he is !”

Berg continued, “Since the Courts are taking their time to get to the point of allowing ‘Discovery,’ it is time to motivate the citizens of the United States for a ‘Peaceful Revolution’ to expose the ‘HOAX’ of Obama, the biggest ‘HOAX’ in the history of our country, in over 230 years !”

Berg wants people to email, fax or mail a copy of Their Birth Certificate to:

Email = philjberg@obamacrimes.com

Fax      = (610) 834-7659

Mail    =  Obamacrimes
555 Andorra Glen Court, Suite 12
Lafayette Hill, PA 19444-2531

Berg said, “Then, we will be preparing them to deliver to Obama demanding that he resign from the Office of President as he has not proven that he is “Constitutionally eligible” to be President and   that Obama has not produced legal documents to show he legally changed his name from his ‘adopted’ name of ‘Barry Soetoro’ from Indonesia.

I am proceeding for the 305 + million people in ‘our’ U.S.A., for ‘our’ forefathers and for the 3.2 million men and women that have died and/or been maimed defending our Constitution with our ‘Peaceful Revolution’ to prove that Obama is not Constitutionally qualified/eligible to be President.”   

Berg continued, “I still have cases pending in the Federal Courts.  Go to obamacrimes.com to see the status of each case.”

For copies of all Press Releases and Court Pleadings, go to:

obamacrimes.com