Is This For Real, and Why Hasn't the Mainstream Media Covered it Yet?

I received more e-mails today than I had all year. My Blackberry was buzzing so much that I was worried it would wear a hole through my pocket and end up in my shoe. Most were very nice, many offered ideas, viewpoints and arguments which I had not considered before, and very few were ill-intentioned. Thank you.

Almost all, however, touched on one of two themes: (1) Whether this story is for real, and (2) the lack of coverage by the mainstream media. For the sake of those who come to America's Right for information and updates on Philip Berg's case against Sen. Barack Obama--and for the sake of my left pants pocket--I will attempt to address both issues here.

Jeff, is this story for real?

To evoke the 42nd president of the United States, it depends upon what the definition of "story" is. If you are asking me to confirm whether Philip Berg indeed did file a lawsuit against Illinois Sen. Barack Hussein Obama, I can handle that. If you are asking me to attest to the veracity of the allegations within Berg's civil action, I cannot do so.

First, the suit was indeed filed. It was filed at approximately 4:45 p.m. on Thursday, August 21 in the Clerk's office on the second floor of the James A. Byrne Federal Court House in Philadelphia--I was in the room at the time, but I was not paying attention until the documents were handed to me--and the complaint itself can be obtained HERE. The case number is 2:08cv04083. The judge assigned to the case is the Hon. R. Barclay Surrick who, oddly enough, was appointed to the federal bench by President William Jefferson Clinton.

Secondly, I did not file the lawsuit myself. Therefore, I cannot attest to the authenticity of the claims and charges found within the pages of the filings. It boils down to questions of law and questions of fact.

The question of law is fairly simple--who exactly is eligible to serve as president of the United States?--and the answer may be found in Article II, Section 1 of the United States Constitution:

No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States.

The questions of fact are slightly more complex -- Was Barack Obama born in the United States of America? Assuming Barack Obama was a natural born citizen of the United States, did he maintain that citizenship after moving to Indonesia? How credible is Philip Berg, the filing attorney presenting the claim that Obama is constitutionally ineligible to serve as president?

First, the birth issue.

I do not know for sure where Obama was born. I have never delivered a baby, and am far too young to have been serving drinks in the room when Stanley Ann Dunham gave birth to her son, Barack Hussein Obama, Jr., in early August 1961. Therefore, I cannot confirm or deny whether that room was in Mombasa, Kenya or Honolulu, Hawaii. As I see it, this information can be confirmed, either way, by a vault copy of Obama's birth certificate or by sworn testimony of those present when he was born.

I also cannot confirm or deny Berg's claim that Obama's mother was prevented from flying back to Hawaii from Kenya to deliver her son because of a custom at that time to prohibit women in such a late stage of pregnancy from flying for fear of in-flight births. It seems too perfect an argument at first, but remember that we're talking about 1961 and even now, 47 years after Obama was born, most airlines maintain restrictions and policies regarding air travel during the late stages of pregnancy. This, from the American Airlines Web site:

A medical certificate is required if travel is within 4 weeks of the delivery date in a normal, uncomplicated pregnancy

For domestic flights under 5 hours, travel is not permitted within 7 days before and after the delivery date. If you should need to travel within 7 days before or after delivery, a medical certificate is required as well as clearance from our Special Assistance Coordinator.

For International travel or any flights over the water, travel is not advised within 30 days of the due date, unless the passenger is examined by an obstetrician within 48 hours of outbound departure and certified in writing as medically stable for flight. Travel within 10 days of the due date for International travel must have clearance from our Special Assistance Coordinators. Travel within 7 days after delivery requires clearance as well.

I am also not a forensic document expert, so I cannot attest to the authenticity of the documents provided by Barack Obama so far. What I can do, however, is point you toward the parties arguing that Obama's documents are genuine, and those arguing that the documents in question have been forged. Please keep in mind, though, that the parties providing such information may very well have an agenda. Factcheck.org, arguing that the senator's documents are genuine, is owned by The Annenberg Foundation, which has been accused of sweeping potentially damaging information about Obama under the proverbial rug. Similarly, the Web blog reporting the information questioning the authenticity of Obama's documents--supposedly performed by an expert touted as being an active member of the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, American College of Forensic Examiners and more--must be questioned as it, like America's Right, does not hide its rightward ideological bias.

Second, the maintenance of the citizenship.

I do not know whether Barack Obama, when his mother married Lolo Soetoro--the marriage itself is proven by the divorce docket--and moved herself and Barack to Indonesia, was formally adopted by his new stepfather. I also cannot attest to the authenticity of the record from Obama's Indonesian school cited by Berg in his complaint.

What I can confirm is that, if the school record is proven authentic, it does in fact show Obama's birthplace as Honolulu and not Mombasa, but it also shows that he adopted his step-father's last name and was registered as an Indonesian citizen. Furthermore, because the Indonesian government only began acknowledging dual citizenships in November of 2006, the natural progression seems toward the argument that, should Obama have been formally adopted by Lolo Soetoro, he would have been considered an Indonesian citizen and, as far as Indonesia is concerned, not an American one.

Of course, just as the entire confusion as to the authenticity of his birth certificate could be cleared up by the production of a vault copy, the entire argument that Barack Obama relinquished his U.S. citizenship upon moving to Indonesia and being adopted by his step-father, if proven to be true, could be effectively countered by (1) the production of documentation showing that he did, in fact, regain that citizenship by taking the oath of allegiance, or (2) definitive evidence showing that the laws on the books at the time in the United States--not in Indonesia--would have permitted him to retain both citizenships.

As you can tell, I simply cannot verify the claims in Philip Berg's lawsuit. Would I like them to be true? Sure, but only because I do not agree with Barack Obama ideologically. Besides, the information should absolutely be scrutinized -- Obama is looking to be president of the United States, not just a mailroom clerk in the department in charge of the White House Easter Egg Hunt. If it were John McCain, Hillary Clinton or anyone else in the same position, I would want questions about their eligibility answered as well. Got it?

Finally, just how credible is Philip Berg, anyway?

When the John Edwards adultery scandal was first broken by the National Enquirer in October of last year, the mainstream media, ever protective of Barack Obama as the Iowa Caucus and other primary contests loomed on the horizon, had a perfect excuse to sit on and disregard the story -- it was broken by the National Enquirer, after all, home to Oprah and Tom Cruise's love child, that crazy-looking face on Mars, and Nostradamus' Guide to the Apolalypse (Seventh Edition).

In this case, the party wanting for credibility is Philip Berg, home to theories that the World Trade Center was brought down by controlled demolition, that the Pentagon was actually hit by a cruise missile, and that President George W. Bush and a federal government which cannot keep confidential battle plans out of the hands of the traitorous New York Times were somehow complicitous in it all.

When I spoke with him in the lobby of the courthouse on Friday afternoon and on the telephone later that evening, he graciously acknowledged certain items in his past which could undermine his credibility with regard to the legal action at hand.

Today, however, I received an e-mail from William Rodriguez, the plaintiff in Philip Berg's second racketeering (RICO) action against President Bush and the federal government in the wake of the attacks of September 11, 2001. He mentioned that his no longer has a professional relationship with Berg, yet his former attorney continues to solicit donations on his Web site in Rodriguez's name. As for the reason for the termination of his relationship with Berg, Rodriguez maintained that, while he was traveling around the world giving presentations about his heroism on that awful Tuesday morning in September, he received the content of his lawsuit--which he hoped would "honestly get answers for many of the victims of 9/11"--and was "rightly surprised to see the amount of allegations that I did not subscribe to."

"I believe that it was spiced up with every conspiracy theory in the book," Rodriguez told me. "I did not agree with that, and do not subscribe to that."

Furthermore, regarding the action against Barack Obama, Rodriguez said simply that Berg "is looking for a landmark case so he can make a name for himself."

Just as Berg is perceived by many to have an agenda with regard to his lawsuit against Sen. Obama, after looking at Rodriguez's Web site and finding thank you messages to Rosie O'Donnell, photographs showing Rodriguez and Charlie Sheen and event posters showing his co-billing with Cindy Sheehan, I wondered if William Rodriguez could have ulterior motives as well. Note, though, that there is also a picture showing him with President Bush.

Regardless, asking such a notable hero about his political leanings and knowing why I was asking the question was extremely difficult for me. After all, the man went back into the burning World Trade Center and saved countless lives by doing so. Still, I reluctantly asked who he supported in the primaries, and he told me that he was "out of the country." I asked who he'll support in the general election, and after a little hesitation, he simply said that he had been "promised Heaven and Earth by both parties" and was dissatisfied with Democrats and Republicans alike. Certainly understandable.

No comment has come yet from Philip Berg, but to his credit I did not send an e-mail to him until 1:30 a.m. today. If he was awake at that point, after doing a radio interview on Coast To Coast AM at that time the previous morning, he's a better man than I. Regardless, as soon as he responds, his response will be included in this space shortly thereafter.

In terms of Berg's credibility as it pertains to this matter, remember that the National Enquirer is still the National Enquirer. Its credibility and journalistic integrity remains in question despite the existence of an uppity blonde mistress and little silky-haired Breck baby skipping around between interviews with People magazine, Extra! and Entertainment Tonight. The issue here is not Philip Berg, as tempting as it may be to make it so. The issue is the Constitutional eligibility of Barack Obama to serve as 44th president of the United States of America. Berg and his idiosyncrasies must be taken into consideration but cannot be transmogrified into the determining factor alone.

Why hasn't this been picked up by the mainstream media?

Well, there's the issue with Philip Berg's credibility, and there's also the issue with mine. I'm not a journalist -- I'm a writer, father, husband and law student who has a habit of torturing myself by finding other things to do with what little spare time I have. America's Right was borne from a little too much spare time on a cold January day, as well as my frustration as an unapologetic conservative and staunch federalist. I am not out to hide by rightward bias, though I have honestly tried to be as fair as possible with regard to this matter.

Regardless, why in the world would a major news outlet want to take a chance on me?

It took almost eleven months for the mainstream media to pick up on the John Edwards scandal. Personally, I believe that the media's reticence to cover the story arose not from an effort to protect Edwards but rather to protect Barack Obama. If Edwards had been forced out of the race before the Iowa caucus or soon afterwards, Hillary Clinton may have received enough of the Edwards vote to put her over the top for the nomination.

The mainstream media has shown, again and again, the propensity to protect its chosen candidate, so much so that the people at Saturday Night Live took the obvious bias and used it to anchor their broadcasts.

I do believe that this story will make the jump to the mainstream media. Where it goes from there is beyond my control. It has already spread across the Internet blogs and forums like genital warts in the Clinton White House, and was picked up by the Media Research Center's NewsBusters.org, a well-trafficked Web site highlighting overt bias in the mainstream media. It's only a matter of time.

This story, absent something else which falls into my lap, is out of my hands. To borrow a line from the Illinois senator, it is now "beyond my pay grade." Still, please check back here at America's Right from time to time for any updates on this case should news or further insight comes in. Despite time constraints, I try to update the site every day, at the very least with a list of Assigned Reading -- a smattering of stories somehow skipped over by the mainstream press.

Until then, I hope I've been able to address some glaring issues, enough at least to conserve the batteries on the Blackberry and avoid the need to sew up burned out pockets in my pants.





RELATED ITEMS:

The America's Right story which started it all: Obama Sued in Philadelphia Federal Court on Grounds he is Constitutionally Ineligible for the Presidency

America's Right commentary: Eligibility Goes Beyond Citizenship

America's Right interview: A Conversation with Philip Berg, Esq.

See periodic updates at America's Right.com (Click HERE)