I smell the smelly smell of desperation: Obama not a citizen.

[lee]

@xtisme

IANAL, but the claim is bullshit. AFAIK you can’t lose your dual citizenship as a child…the only way you lose it is that if, at 21, you decide to renounce your citizenship in the US for whatever country you have dual citizenship in. The US is funny that way…other countries actually allow you to maintain the dual status (though not all countries do this).

Basically think about it this way…if there was traction here then someone who knows what they are talking about WOULD be doing something about this. That this is coming, seemingly, from the loony fringe kind of says something about the validity of the claim.

-XT

You no longer have to choose. This site has details, but basically you can be dual, and they only way you lose being a US citizen if you voluntarily take citizenship in another country with the intent of renouncing your US citizenship. Just incidentally being a dual citizenship or gaining dual citizenship will not cancel your US citizenship. It does make you subject to the laws of both countries though.

I remember it was not this way when I was in high school, but I think it changed shortly thereafter.

[Cliffy]

@Leaper

but I do wonder why the Obama campaign isn’t just slapping this down as hard as possible just to get it over with.

'Cuz they did that months ago when they released his birth certificate. But the douchbags just pretend that isn’t good enough. What else is he supposed to do? When he provided conclusive evidence, they refused it. What other evidence could there be? And if it existed, why would they accept that when they haven’t accepted the indisputable evidence already produced? You can’t fight the irrational with reason.

–Cliffy

[Leaper]

Well, what I mean is, everything I’ve read about this lawsuit says that the docs that were provided to the media have NOT been provided to the court. Just seemed odd to me, if this were true.

OTOH, as I said, both he and McCain technically failed to get onto the ballot of one of the most EV-rich states in the country, so I fail to be surprised…

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@Leaper

Well, what I mean is, everything I’ve read about this lawsuit says that the docs that were provided to the media have NOT been provided to the court.

The court has not demanded any documents. Only the plaintiff has.

[Cliffy]

@Leaper

Well, what I mean is, everything I’ve read about this lawsuit says that the docs that were provided to the media have NOT been provided to the court. Just seemed odd to me, if this were true.

You can’t provide documents when you file a motion to dismiss. That converts it into a summary judgent motion which takes longer, requires a lot more discovery, and is a lot more expensive. That’s the way it works in the federal system. I assume that’s how it works in the state court as well.

–Cliffy

[Bricker]

@Leaper

Update: Philip Berg claims that Obama just admitted he’s not a citizen.

Ah ha!! I knew there was something fishy about that Obama guy!

[CurtC]

I got an email from a co-worker this morning, with the lawsuit details, and asking “So is he or a US Citizen or not?”

I replied-to-all with this:

The fact that Obama was born in the US settles the matter. All that obscure naturalized-citizen stuff might be germane had he been born outside the US, but he was in fact born in Hawaii, after Hawaii was adopted as a state.

One of the people in the dist list replied with:

Actually CurtC, that’s not the way it works. I’ve been following this situation for some time, even before the law suit was filed. But you are partially correct about it almost being settled. Let me explain:

In a federal law suit, the defendants (in this case, Mr. “Obama” and the DNC) have 60 days (90 days if the government is being sued) to answer a complaint. He did not, nor did the DNC. Failure to answer a complaint is known as a default. Short answer: you lose. If he truly had a birth certificate (BC) from Hawaii, then all that was necessary was for him to answer the complaint and produce a certified copy the BC and file an affidavit in this case. He did not. So when the judge, if he follows the FRCP as he is bound to do, grants the plaintiff’s summary judgment, Mr. Obama will be disqualified. But I predict that the judge will just sit on the motion until who knows when. But like you said, it’s almost settled.

To which I replied:

Micky’s email from the guy who filed the suit says that a motion to dismiss WAS filed on September 24, which was within the 60-day window, and I’ve read that the hearing for that motion has not yet happened. When it does happen, I’m pretty certain it will immediately be granted, after all it’s a crackpot frivolous lawsuit.

Even if Obama had not responded properly, there’s no way that a court would say that a president would be ruled ineligible to be president just because he didn’t properly file paperwork in response to a frivolous lawsuit. At worst, I could see him held in contempt, but those speculations don’t apply here anyway, because they did respond.

And by the way, Obama made his birth certificate public months ago. He hasn’t filed it with the court, because the court hasn’t asked him to.

Anything I missed?

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@CurtC

I got an email from a co-worker this morning, with the lawsuit details, and asking “So is he or a US Citizen or not?”

I replied-to-all with this:

One of the people in the dist list replied with:

To which I replied:

Anything I missed?

No, but I think you might make it just a little more clear that the motion to dismiss WAS the answer to the complaint. Obama has not been directed by any court to provide the documentation demanded in the complaint.

This Berg character is asking the court to make Obama provide documentation.

Obama is asking the court to dismiss this demand out of hand,

The court has not yet decided whether to dismiss or or force Obama to comply (the real chance of anything but a dismissal is pretty much non-existent).

Obama has answered the complaint and has “admitted” nothing. Berg’s assertion that a motion to dismiss is an admission of guilt is, as I said before, arrant, wingnut nonsense.

[Leaper]

Quickie question: is it true that the judge in this case said he’d dismiss immediately if Obama’s attorneys produced the birth documents in question? Is it something the legal system allows for?

[flickster]

@Diogenes_the_Cynic

No, but I think you might make it just a little more clear that the motion to dismiss WAS the answer to the complaint. Obama has not been directed by any court to provide the documentation demanded in the complaint.

This Berg character is asking the court to make Obama provide documentation.

Obama is asking the court to dismiss this demand out of hand,

The court has not yet decided whether to dismiss or or force Obama to comply (the real chance of anything but a dismissal is pretty much non-existent).

Obama has answered the complaint and has “admitted” nothing. Berg’s assertion that a motion to dismiss is an admission of guilt is, as I said before, arrant, wingnut nonsense.

Sorry if this has already been touched on (I didn’t read back through this entire string), but would it not be so much easier to provide the documentation in question than to fight this in court? Not to mention the fact that fighting this instead of just saying “Here it is, MF’r, go suck on that” puts the stink of guilt on him with a large number of voters.

[AtomicDog]

So you want Obama to assume the burden of proof? I wouldn’t.

[Kozmik]

Ah. The oldest strategy in the books. For if candidate x is not a citizen (opposition implies) then candidate x cannot be President (voters infer). Even if the voters know candidate x is a citizen, the strategy may subconsciously make them think candidate x should not be President.

[flickster]

@AtomicDog

So you want Obama to assume the burden of proof? I wouldn’t.

Frankly, I would expect the same of any candidate. I still fail to see the merit in not providing the documentation.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@flickster

Sorry if this has already been touched on (I didn’t read back through this entire string), but would it not be so much easier to provide the documentation in question than to fight this in court? Not to mention the fact that fighting this instead of just saying “Here it is, MF’r, go suck on that” puts the stink of guilt on him with a large number of voters.

Obama has already publicly provided his birth certificate. Berg is entitled to nothing else.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@Leaper

Quickie question: is it true that the judge in this case said he’d dismiss immediately if Obama’s attorneys produced the birth documents in question?

No.

[dropzone]

@Diogenes_the_Cynic

No.

And why the fuck should he? This is, on the face of it, a frivolous lawsuit brought by a party with a clear political agenda and an even clearer mental problem. There was obviously nothing to back it up so Hizzoner gave it the respect it was due, but no more.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

Judge tosses lawsuit.

Not exactly a bombshell.

[mswas]

@xtisme

IANAL, but the claim is bullshit. AFAIK you can’t lose your dual citizenship as a child…the only way you lose it is that if, at 21, you decide to renounce your citizenship in the US for whatever country you have dual citizenship in. The US is funny that way…other countries actually allow you to maintain the dual status (though not all countries do this).

Basically think about it this way…if there was traction here then someone who knows what they are talking about WOULD be doing something about this. That this is coming, seemingly, from the loony fringe kind of says something about the validity of the claim.

-XT

As I understand it, dual citizenship is a recent development in the US. Perhaps there was no such thing as dual citizenship at the time he lived in Indonesia.

[BrainGlutton]

@Kozmik

Ah. The oldest strategy in the books. For if candidate x is not a citizen (opposition implies) then candidate x cannot be President (voters infer). Even if the voters know candidate x is a citizen, the strategy may subconsciously make them think candidate x should not be President.

That’s the newest strategy in the books. At least, I cannot recall any major-party president nominee’s citizenship being brought into question ever before.

[Frank]

@mswas

As I understand it, dual citizenship is a recent development in the US. Perhaps there was no such thing as dual citizenship at the time he lived in Indonesia.

The only remotely, vaguely, even within shouting distance of the realm of maybe
is Kenya. My understanding is that Obama could have selected Kenyan citizenship at 21 if he had so chosen. He did not.

The Indonesia nonsense is an utterly ludicrous non-starter. Berg’s argument is that Obama’s mother lost her citizenship by marrying an Indonesian and moving to Indonesia, and that therefore Obama lost his too. Surely you see the fallacies in this?