Hollister v "Soetoro" - update for 11 Feb 2009

Thanks again to Tesibria at What's Your Evidence for the update.

On 9 Feb, Berg filed an amended complaint in his "Hollister v "Soetoro" case.

It's a complete and total rehash of every other claim he's made. Examples:

"The school record, attached hereto as Exhibit "D", indicates that Soetoro's name is "Barry Soetoro;" his nationality is "Indonesia;" and his religion as "Islam"."

....and his birthplace as Honolulu, Hawaii....

"The evidence that Soetoro is not a "natural-born" citizen is so substantial that as things stand right now, unless this Court affirmatively declares that Soetoro is indeed constitutionally qualified to be President, Plaintiff will be of the opinion that he must refuse to recognize as being lawful the reactivation order and any other orders to him pursuant to the reactivation order."

What evidence?? Berg, you're repeating the same old long-since
disproven tired claims.

"Plaintiff moves this Court for the Court's Orders to be issued nunc pro tunc in the event this Court declares Soetoro to be constitutionally ineligible to serve as President of the United States, after Soetoro and Biden have been sworn in."

So he wants the court to make these orders retroactive then?

"Award Plaintiff his Attorney Fees and Costs and Grant Plaintiff such other and further relief as this Honorable Court deems just and proper."

I am really starting to hope they come after Berg and crowd for court costs.

And what does Berg want from all this??

"A. Declare Barry Soetoro a/k/a Barack Hussein Obama, in his capacity as a natural person is hereby constitutionally ineligible to be President of the United States pursuant to Article II, § 1, Cl. 5 of the Constitution of the United States and the same is hereby Ordered to refrain from assuming, or taking the oath of, said office or exercising the duties and functions thereof, and to refrain from interfering with, or claiming, the properties and/or the obligations of the Plaintiff alleged in this Complaint; or

B. Declare Barry Soetoro a/k/a Barack Hussein Obama, in his capacity as de facto President of the United States in posse is hereby constitutionally ineligible to be President of the United States pursuant to Article II, § 1, Cl. 5 of the Constitution of the United States and the same is hereby Ordered to refrain from assuming, or taking the oath of, said office or exercising the duties and functions thereof, and to refrain from interfering with, or claiming, the properties and/or the obligations of the Plaintiff alleged in this Complaint; or

C. Declare, if this Court finds on the merits that Barry Soetoro a/k/a Barack Hussein Obama is not eligible to be President after Barry Soetoro a/k/a Barack Hussein Obama has been sworn in as President, that Barry Soetoro a/k/a Barack Hussein Obama is further barred and prohibited nunc pro tunc from holding the Office of President and from exercising the functions and duties of said Office, and from interfering with, or making any claim to, the properties and/or the obligations of the Plaintiff alleged in this Complaint; and

D. Order Plaintiff to refrain from recognizing Barry Soetoro a/k/a Barack Hussein Obama as President of the United States and Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces thereof; or

E. Declare Barry Soetoro a/k/a Barack Hussein Obama, in his capacity as a natural person is hereby eligible to be President of the United States, pursuant to Article II, § 1, Cl. 5 of the Constitution of the United States, and that he may rightfully claim the properties and/or the obligations of the Plaintiff alleged in this Complaint upon assuming the Office of President of the United States; or

F. Declare Barry Soetoro a/k/a Barack Hussein Obama, in his capacity as de jure President of the United States in posse is hereby eligible, pursuant to Article II § 1, Cl. 5 of the Constitution of the United States, to be President of the United States, and that he may rightfully claim the properties and/or the obligations of the Plaintiff alleged in this Complaint upon assuming the Office of President of the United States; and

G. Order Plaintiff to recognize Barry Soetoro a/k/a Barack Hussein Obama as de jure President of the United States and Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces thereof from the time of his inauguration into that office and Joseph R. Biden as de jure Vice-President of the United States from the time of his inauguration into that office, for the term of each office beginning at Noon, Eastern Standard Time, January 20, 2009; or

H. Order Plaintiff to look to Joseph R. Biden for Orders if this Court finds Barry Soetoro a/k/a Barack Hussein Obama constitutionally ineligible pursuant to Article II, § 1, Cl. 5 of the U.S. Constitution; and

J. Award Plaintiff his Attorney Fees and Costs and Grant Plaintiff such other and further relief as this Honorable Court deems just and proper."

Notice the wording of some of that. Much of it looks like it was written BEFORE President Obama was sworn in and took office. The entire document is full of that, looking like it was just cut and pasted from previous complaints. Again, the complaint was filed on 9 Feb, but it is full of references to "if Obama is sworn in", or "if he takes office."

The only things I could find that indicated Obama
actually having been sworn in, was the above remedies and the defendants, listed as:

"BARRY SOETORO, a/k/a Barack Hussein Obama, in his capacity as a natural person; in his capacity as de facto President in posse; and in his capacity as de jure President in posse"

And:

"JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR., in his capacity as a natural person; in his capacity as de jure Acting President in posse; in his capacity as de jure President in posse; and in his capacity as de jure Vice- President in posse"

And notice that wording - Berg is claiming from the start that Biden is actually the President of the United States. I'm surprised he hasn't put into his claim that "Soetoro" is depriving the United States of having a Vice-President due to Biden being the *real* President.

And based on his reply, I get the idea that James Robertson is getting VERY tired of Berg's games. Because this is what Judge Robertson said in his order of 11 Feb 2009:

"ORDER

Plaintiff's amended complaint [#11] adds nothing to the original complaint except rhetoric and legal theory and creates no obligation upon the defendants to respond to it. Nor is the amended complaint responsive to defendants' motion to dismiss [#9], opposition to which was due on 2/9/09. Unless points and authorities in opposition to the motion to dismiss are filed by 2/13/09, the motion will be treated as conceded and granted. It is SO ORDERED.

JAMES ROBERTSON
United States District Judge"

So lets see what games Berg plays next......

Comments

[bogus info]

http://pub29.bravenet.com/forum/2442810129/show/978760

The above is a thread on Plains Radio. Marie is a poster there--her comments--where is the source for her comments?

Patrick,

Have you been to Orly's blog lately? I will be honest. This lady worries me because she is so NUTS. I can't decide if she truly believes what she says or this is a scam for donations.

[Abroadsider]

If you mean her first takedown of Limbaugh, I think it's from a Washington Monthly article

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2009_02/016841.php

but Memorandum shows it's been picked up by various blogs.

Her second takedown appears to be from Media Matters

http://mediamatters.org/items/200406210002

as does her third

http://mediamatters.org/items/200406150006

and her fourth

http://mediamatters.org/items/200408130005

Go Marie! ;)

[bogus info]

"So lets see what games Berg plays next......"

I'm not a lawyer, obviously, LOL, but it appears to me that the Judge has not given Berg much room to play many games? What is going to be interesting to watch is how Berg wiggles out of this with his followers, yes? Some over there don't seem to be as naive as others but they may be O-bots?

[bogus info]

Patrick,

This is per Mimi, Dr. C., blog:

"I also heard, on Ed Hale’s board, that Senator Dolores Greshman of TN joined."

"I haven’t checked Orly’s blog yet."

"Ed Hale closed his board to all posters unless they pay $10/month. Need a password now."

"He also removed all the posts that questioned Berg and Orly. Those threads are GONE."

"Orly has been on Ed’s program. And, I’m sure some of the posters as Ed’s place emailed her."

Seems to me they are protecting their "messiahs", Orly/Berg don't you think? However, the information posted regarding Orly/Berg has a source provided so they can check it out for themselves. Interesting, don't you think?

Dr. C., has sent a good letter to TN Rep. Swafford and posted that open letter on his blog.

[bogus info]

Here is a comment by a blogger on The Right Side of Life:

"Now the State Legislators have a right to start dismissing judges who decide that Phil Berg or Orly Taitz is a crackpot and they just don’t feel like hearing from a crackpot. It is supposed to be a law that you are to meet the certain criteria as set forth in the Constitution. Everybody has to meet those requirements that is running for this particular office and if you are elected without meeting that criteria you have achieved coup d’etat. This is a very shameful day in American history and as bad as this fella’ wants to be President I fear the worse. I fear that he is going to be discovered not to meet the qualifications. I fear that judges may be removed for taking bribes to dismiss these cases. I fear that this is not going to go away anytime until background checks down to the day he was born are properly fulfilled and to the satisfaction of “We the People”. Stay tuned and you’ll have a good one."

I don't think State Legislators can "dismiss" Judges just because they don't like the way they rule? I think Judges are elected here in Texas at local/District/State level. Not sure if some are appointed--never really gave it much thought until now--LOL. Not sure about TN. Anybody know?

[guess who]

Do you realize there are over 30 law suits questioning Obamas eligibility and more everyday.Obama could end all this by showing his original birth certificate.Is that asking too much?Honest people do not hide from the truth.It seems you don't seem to care about learning the truth.Obama has a team of lawyers fighting these lawsuits,why?It has to be costing a fortune.Something just smells fishy here.Sorry.

[Patrick McKinnion]

guess who - We're keeping track of the lawsuits. You do realize that 19 cases TO DATE have been dismissed, at least three at the Supreme Court level and one (Berg v Obama) where the attorney tried to do an end-run around the court of appeals and the Supreme Court rejected that, right?

Not a good track record.

The thing is, he has shown people his birth certificate. There's been claims by two faceless, nameless internet "experts" claiming it was forged, but since they have not provided any evidence of their background or training, (and their results have actually been debunked by real forensic experts and computer document specialists. The only one coming close to agreeing with them, Sandra Lines, only said that the document on-line couldn't be proven as authentic unless it was compared to the real thing - something that Dr. Neal Krawetz said when debunking those supposed nameless "experts".0

It may interest you to know that the copy of McCain's birth certificate floating around the internet that was supposedly released by his campaign was never proven to be authentic either.

I care very much about learning the truth. The problem I've seen from day one is that the "birthers" have never presented any credible evidence to support their claims. Berg's original lawsuit, (that Taitz borrowed heavily from), was full of claims made on various internet blogs with no real evidence. And some of the evidence the birthers site contradicts each other, (case in point, the Indonesian school record used as the single bit of evidence to support the claim that Lolo Soetoro adopted Barack Obama and that Obama's religion was Islam, ALSO cites his birthplace as Honolulu, Hawaii. And the US legal codes used to claim that Obama lost his US citizenship state VERY clearly that a minor cannot renounce his or her citizenship or have it renounced for them, meaning he never lost his US citizenship as claimed.)

Dr. Orly herself is very bad at proving her claims. Case in point from a few weeks ago was a breathless claim that she found proof that President Obama HAD gone by Barry Soetoro and HAD been a foreign exchange student at Occidental. But the newspaper and magazine links she provided as proof only said he had used his nickname of "Barry" until his first year of college or so, and while there were several comments about "Barry Obama", there was nothing about "Soetoro" or "Indonesia" anywhere in those articles at all. All they "proved" was something already known - that he used to use the nickname "Barry".

[StrangeAppar8us]

guess who -- And if he produces his "original birth certificate," you'll just claim THAT's a forgery, and that he surrendered his American citizenship when his family moved to Indonesia, and that Hawaii isn't really a state...ad infinitum.

For as little as it actually costs to quash all these cases, Obama is wise to discourage frivolous plaintiffs. There are days, though, when I almost wish a court would evaluate the "evidence" that Berg and others have assembled, and expose the Birther fraud for what it is -- Internet rumors, worthless "documentation" and the "testimony" of poseurs and fakes. Tin foil, wrapped around a solid core of other-hatred and election-denial.

That there are more than 30 of these suits is a useless metric. You can multiply a baseless, unproven, unactionable claim times a million...and you still end up with zero.

[Mnemosyne]

I'm always astounded that not a single one of these people has even been in a blended family or known anyone in a blended family. One of my stepbrothers went by his first stepfather's name until he graduated from high school, because it was easier to have three boys with the same last name than to have one with a different last name. My nephew went by his stepfather's last name since he was about 9 years old, again because it was easier for things like health insurance since it was his mother's new last name. Neither of them were legally adopted by their stepfathers. It happens ALL. THE. TIME.