Tag Archives: Jeff Schreiber

Philip J Berg lawsuit, Supreme Court petition, Update, November 3, 2008, Jeff Schreiber, Eve of Election ,Berg Cautiously Optimistic

Philip J Berg is cautiously optimistic regarding his petition to the US Supreme Court to delay the election until a ruling can be made. Jeff Schreiber has Mr. Berg’s latest remarks:

“Monday, November 3, 2008
Berg Cautiously Optimistic on Eve of Election
On a day which saw another eligibility-related lawsuit, this one in Connecticut, bite the dust, Philadelphia attorney Philip Berg remains cautiously optimistic after taking his own dismissed case to the highest court in all the land.

“At this point, we’re waiting and hoping and praying that Justice Souter rules in our favor and delays tomorrow’s election,” said Berg, mentioning as well that he filed a supplemental argument with the Court today. “They have the power. The United States Supreme Court has the power. They stopped the count in Florida in 2000, I was there in the panhandle when they stopped the count.”

As has been written in these pages before, the odds are extremely long that Berg’s case is given an audience with the Supreme Court, as only 70 to 120 of the 8,000 or so petitions are granted, and the odds are infinitely longer that Berg’s emergency motion is granted.

“The odds are slim,” Berg said. “If the election goes on tomorrow as planned, we start going after the Electoral College on Wednesday. December 15 becomes our deadline. There’s still time. The Electoral College requires that a candidate be eligible, so we’re not stopping, that’s for sure.”

Unless, of course, Obama does not prevail tomorrow, in which case Berg says that he will continue his efforts “to bring out the truth about the fraud perpetrated against this nation.””

Read more here:


Help Philip J Berg uphold the Constitution:



Sarah Obama tape, Obama born in Kenya, Update, Jeff Schreiber, Grandmother present at Kenyan birth, Supreme Court filing, Tape released soon, Legal issues resolved

Jeff Schreiber has provided an update on the Sarah Obama tape. The tape
recording has Sarah Obama, Obama’s paternal grandmother, stating that
she was present at his birth in Kenya.

“It was almost ten days ago that I first reported that Berg was in possession of a taped conversation with Sarah Obama, Kenyan paternal grandmother to Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, during which she says that her famous grandson was born in Kenya and that she was present at the hospital for his birth.

Truth be told, I had known about this for some time before then, and had actually heard something, a conversation in a language which I sure did not understand. Berg maintained that the conversation had taken place on the night of the third and final presidential debate, and that he was waiting on affidavits from his contact here–a minister–as well as the minister who taped the conversation in Kenya. That, he said, is what took so long.

Saying on Michael Savage’s radio show that he was going to release the tape in a few days without having the affidavits was a mistake, Berg said, but things have changed.

“I have the tape,” Berg said. “The transcript of the tape is in the Supreme Court filings, along with the two affidavits from the individuals.”

The audio of the tape will be released, Berg said, as soon as he “reviews some legal issues.””

Read more here:


Help Philip J Berg uphold the Constitution:


Philip J Berg lawsuit, Update, October 6, 2008, Jeff Schreiber, Berg Files Motion for Leave to File an Amended Complaint, Obama is ineligible, Pedro Cortes added, Secretary of the Commonwealth, Pennsylvania

Jeff Schreiber has provided an update in the Philip J Berg lawsuit. Mr.
Berg has filed a Motion for Leave to File an Amended Complaint. Here are
some exerpts from Jeff Schreiber’s explanation:

“This morning, prominent Philadelphia attorney and former Deputy Attorney General for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Philip Berg filed a Motion for Leave to File an Amended Complaint in his ongoing case against Illinois Sen. Barack Obama and others, arguing that Obama is in fact not a natural born United States citizen and, pursuant to Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution is ineligible to serve as president of the United States of America.

Now, this does not mean that the amended complaint has been filed. You cannot file an amended complaint, which is why Berg filed a Motion for Leave to File.”
“In the amended complaint which Berg is seeking to file in the wake of a motion to dismiss filed on September 24 by Obama and the Democratic National Committee and his own Opposition and Brief filed last week, Berg added a few claims and a few defendants, as well as rehashed the original allegations made more than a month ago in the initial complaint.

As expected, Berg added Pedro Cortes, Secretary of the Commonwealth for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, given Cortes’ role in fomenting and overseeing the electoral process in the Keystone State. He has also added, however, California Sen. Diane Feinstein in her role as Chairwoman of the U.S. Senate Commission on Rules and Administration, and the U.S. Senate Commission on Rules and Administration itself. The latter, according to the amended complaint, is “responsible for investigations into the qualifications of the President and Vice President candidates Federal elections” while the former “has primary authority” for oversight with regard to aspects related to ethics, campaign and election reform.

Berg is seeking, among other things, an order that Feinstein and the Rules Commission–along with the FEC–immediately conduct an investigation into “the fraudulent tactics of Obama” and into his citizenship status as well.”

“He also added a paragraph further addressing and supporting the court’s jurisdiction over the matter at hand, questioned in the motion to dismiss filed by Obama and the DNC.”

“They are responsible for verifying the credentials and qualifications of Members of the Senate, contested elections and acceptance of incompatible offices. Moreover, in addition to the verification of a candidates qualifications, eligibility and credentials, they are responsible for Federal elections generally, including the election of the President, Vice President and Members of the Congress.”

“There is absolutely no other way for Plaintiff to ensure his constitutionally protected rights. The only option Plaintiff had was to bring this action. This is the first time in American History a “naturalized” citizen and/or illegal alien have been allowed to campaign for the Office of President of the United States. There are not any other ways to establish or determine the legal status of our Presidential Candidates, whether Republican and/or Democratic. The FEC and DNC have refused to verify and furnish Plaintiff with Obama’s eligibility or lack thereof. Plaintiff has standing to challenge any person(s) citizenship and/or nationality status pursuant to statute, 8 U.S. C. §1481(b).”

“Berg states that, even if Obama was indeed born in Hawaii to a mother who was a U.S. citizen, the situation in Indonesia, where Obama went to school and may have been formally adopted by his stepfather, it doesn’t matter. As I mentioned in Is This For Real, and Why Hasn’t the Mainstream Media Covered it Yet?, the Indonesian government only began acknowledging dual citizenship in November of 2006; in his amended complaint, Berg cites The Hague Convention of 1930 and argues that since Indonesia did not allow dual citizenship, neither did the United States when it came to Indonesia.”

Read the rest of this important article here:


Help Philip J Berg expose the truth about Obama:


Philip J Berg files opposition and brief, Obama motion to dismiss, September 29, 2008, Berg response, Pre filing analysis, Jeff Schreiber

Philip J Berg is filing a opposition and brief to the Obama motion to
dismiss his lawsuit. Mr. Berg makes the filing today, Monday, September 29,
2008. Obama filed the motion to dismiss instead of producing a vault
COLB or pledge of allegiance to the US.

Jeff Schreiber has reviewed a draft of the response. Here are exerpts from Mr. Schreiber:
“Among other authority cited by Obama and the DNC in support of the first defense was Hollander v. McCain, a recent case from New Hampshire in which the court held that Fred Hollander, asserting the claim that Arizona Sen. John McCain was ineligible for the presidency based upon his birth in the Panama Canal Zone, lacked standing to sue. In that case, the court cited several factors in its decision:
Regardless of McCain’s eligibility for the presidency, his candidacy did not constitute a “restriction on voters’ rights” as it did not preclude Hollander or anyone else from voting for another candidate in the New Hampshire primary.
The “generalized interest of of all citizens in constitutional governance” was not enough to claim harm.

Hollander failed to allege that any harm was indeed proximately “traceable” to McCain’s alleged unlawful conduct.
McCain was “unquestionably an American citizen.”
Berg is quick to distinguish Hollander. First, he says, Obama’s candidacy for the presidency in the general election prevents citizens from voting for Hillary Clinton despite her 18 million votes received in the primary election. Second, the harm Berg suffered is particular to him because he has been denied the constitutional right to cast his ballot for an eligible candidate. Third, his claims of injury can indeed be traced to Obama’s unlawful behavior, his “failure to disclose information to which American voters are entited.” And finally, the defendants have failed to show, as mentioned by the New Hampshire court in Hollander, that Sen. Obama is “unquestionably an American citizen.”

“If you take a closer look at the factors used by the court to decide Hollander v. McCain,” Berg said, “Those very same factors clearly come down in favor of me having standing in this case.””

“Interestingly enough, Berg also cites a case I had brought to his attention and asked him about, something we had read in school a while ago. Though Federal Election Commission v. Akins was a case which has nothing to do with citizenship–it questioned whether or not the American Israel Public Affair Commitee (AIPAC) could be considered a “political committee” under the Federal Election Campaign Act–the thing that struck me about it was the Court’s treatment of the plaintiffs. The Court, in that case, was concerned with “informational injury.” When the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit reversed the trial court’s dismissal of the plaintiff’s action, the court stated the following:

A voter deprived of useful information at the time he or she votes suffers a particularized injury in some respects unique to him or herself just as a government contractor, allegedly wrongfully deprived of information to be made available at the time bids are due, would suffer a particularized injury even if all other bidders also suffered an injury.
Berg insists that he has similarly suffered an “informational injury” as a voter, and cites another part of the D.C. Circuit’s opinion which mentions that “anyone denied information under the Freedom of Information Act … has standing to sue regardless of his or her reasons.””

Read more analysis and facts from Jeff Schreiber:


Philip J Berg lawsuit, Obama, Fox News, Media, PA, Jeff Schreiber, September 24, 2008, Obama response

Obama has until Wednesday, September 24, 2008 to respond to the Philip J Berg lawsuit that states Obama is not qualified to be president. Citizen Wells has issued challenges to the media in NC to cover this important story. Just yesterday, at the Obama rally in Charlotte NC, I spoke to a man in the military that was aware of the lawsuit and shocked that the media had not covered the story.

Jeff Schreiber, a law student, writer and blog host was in Media PA for a McCain Palin rally and mentioned the lawsuit deadline to a Fox News reporter. Here is what happened:

“After attending a McCain-Palin rally in Media, PA (photos and story coming later), I hunted down Fox News Channel’s Carl Cameron and asked him whether he know about Philip Berg’s suit.

He did not.

He originally thought I was referring to some state-level action regarding ballots. When I told him it was a federal suit and that ANSWERS FROM BARACK OBAMA AND THE DNC ARE DUE ON WEDNESDAY, he made a phone call and referred someone to this site.

So, to those from Fox News currently checking here, all of the materials and links for the Berg suit is located on the right-hand side of this page, under the “BERG v. OBAMA @ AMERICA’S RIGHT” header.

If y’all have any questions, shoot me an e-mail.”

Read more here:


Jeff Schreiber is in contact with Philip J Berg and provides some excellent legal perspectives. My hat is off to Jeff for informing Fox News.

Philip J Berg interview, Jeff Schreiber, America’s Right blog, Berg answers questions, Complaint, Obama Lawsuit, Obama not US citizen, Truth about Philip J Berg, Great interview

Philip J Berg filed a lawsuit in Philadephia Federal Court, and it
has been served on Barack Obama, DNC and FEC. The basis of the suit
is Obama:
Is not a natural-born citizen; and/or
Lost his citizenship when he was adopted in Indonesia; and/or
Has dual loyalties because of his citizenship with Kenya and Indonesia

The MSM has failed the American public. Philip J Berg is a Democrat who tried to provide information to the Democratic Delegates before the convention, and because of a lack of coverage by the MSM and pressure from the DNC and the likes of Nancy Pelosi to push the nomination of Obama, was unable to affect the nomination. However, Mr. Berg is still trying to prevent a constitutional crisis and is moving ahead with the lawsuit. Obama has been served and must respond by September 24, 2008. Many commenters on this blog have questioned the motives of the lawsuit. Jeff Schreiber, who studies law and writes articles on his excellent blog site, interviewed Philip J Berg on August 23, 2008. Here are some exerpts from this must read interview:

“Saturday, August 23, 2008
A Conversation with Philip J. Berg, Esq.
Fairly late yesterday evening, I had the opportunity to speak with Philip Berg, the Philadelphia attorney who filed suit against Illinois senator Barack Obama in Federal Court in Philadelphia, questioning the constitutional eligibility of his candidacy for president.”

“I have had no direct or indirect contact with anyone on the Hillary Clinton campaign. Did I help her in the primaries? Yes. Was I in favor of her over Obama? Yes. What did I do? I contributed some money and made some phone calls to various states for her. Other than that, I attended one Montgomery County [PA] Democratic Committee dinner at which her daughter spoke, though for the record, Obama’s representative was also at the same function. So, am I closely involved with them? No.

And as I told you this afternoon, even among those who helped me prepare for this case, while I know they may be against Obama’s violation of the Constitution, I do not even know nor have I asked where they stand politically.”

“That, and he had an excuse for everything. His phony responses to the Rev. [Jeremiah] Wright issue turned me off. He said “I never knew what he was like.” He was a member of that church for twenty years. Twenty years! When the story first broke, he went on all of the television and cable stations and claimed he was never in the pew when Rev. Wright made any of these remarks. By the time he made his speech in Philadelphia days later—a speech that the mainstream media agreed might have been the best in the history of the world—he did a complete turnabout and admitted that he was in the pew at the time of the remarks. At what point is enough, enough?”

“I chalk much of his success up to the influence and agenda setting of the mainstream media. Speaking of which, are you happy with the coverage which the mainstream press has given your civil action?

Well, no. First of all, the mainstream media hasn’t covered it yet. I’m doing an interview with a journalist tomorrow morning at 10:00 who says he’ll be able to get it out into the mainstream media.”

“Of course some people might look at me and assume I’m doing this because he’s black. I’m not. I’m Jewish, and I’m a life-long member of the NAACP, so people will be hard-pressed to confront me on any of those issues.”

“Look, the truth comes down to this — at this point in time, it’s time to fish or cut bait, time to stop pussy-footing around. At this point in time, Obama owes it to people to produce the documents. If I’m wrong, even if he doesn’t want to handle it himself and has the person in charge of his campaign communications come out and say, “here is the vault copy of the birth certificate, here is the certified copy of his oath of allegiance from when he came back from Indonesia, this issue should be put to bed and Mr. Berg should withdraw his suit immediately or we’ll sue him to high heaven,” then I’m wrong. If they do not do that within the next day or so, then I know we’re right. If they let the case linger, then I believe we’re right. The challenge I’ve made to them is that, if they don’t produce these documents, then we know they’re wrong.”
“In terms of credibility, my very successful record in big cases shows some of that. I’m the only attorney in the country to defeat “cell phone” legislation in Hilltown Township, Bucks County, PA, meant to ban the use of hand-held cell phones while behind the wheel of a car, and did that pro bono. I have also represented PAWS—Performing Animal Welfare Society—in California, pro bono, protecting the rights of abused circus elephants, and was extremely successful in that case. My record, over the years, is such that I can stand on my own two feet in front of anyone.”

There is much more to this great interview by Jeff Schreiber: