Private AG Mitchell, Berg v. Obama

Adelante · **Posted:** Mon Sep 14, 2009 9:45 am

I'm not sure if this is old or new or what but copying from Keyes v. Obama II.

bogus info wrote:

What the heck is this BS?

http://www.oilforimmigration.org/facts/?p=3340
SUBPOENA IN A CIVIL CASE served on Consulate General of Kenya in Los Angeles (Obama eligibility)

Berg, Paul Mitchell, private AG, Orly Taiz and a bunch of other people?

Images of document filed

http://216.221.102.26/blogger/image.axd ... ador.1.jpg

http://216.221.102.26/blogger/image.axd ... ador.2.jpg

http://216.221.102.26/blogger/image.axd ... ador.3.jpg

mimi · **Posted:** Mon Sep 14, 2009 10:45 am

Not that it seems to matter much anymore

but how is it that the subpoena the hairdresser filled out has a stamp on it that looks like a court clerk stamp. I am assuming that it is not official, except in the fantasy world of Paul.

Also, in his letter he says he represents the federal government?

Yet, he lists himself and Phil Berg as Plaintiffs. I wonder if Phil knows?

Quote:

Greetings Honorable Consul General:

My office legally represents the United States (Federal Government) at the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in Philadelphia, in the case of Berg v. Obama et al., Appeal No. 08-4443:

But... all the crazy stuff he's filed, I suppose it doesn't matter.

http://www.paulandrewmitchell.com/LETTERS/

wavey davey · **Posted:** Mon Sep 14, 2009 10:47 am

Adelante wrote:

I'm not sure if this is old or new or what but copying from Keyes v. Obama II.

bogus info wrote:

What the heck is this BS?

http://www.oilforimmigration.org/facts/?p=3340
SUBPOENA IN A CIVIL CASE served on Consulate General of Kenya in Los Angeles (Obama eligibility)

Berg, Paul Mitchell, private AG, Orly Taiz and a bunch of other people?

Images of document filed

http://216.221.102.26/blogger/image.axd ... ador.1.jpg

http://216.221.102.26/blogger/image.axd ... ador.2.jpg

http://216.221.102.26/blogger/image.axd ... ador.3.jpg

I think it is VERY new.

I wonder if it is real. I have doubts.

So Berg has teamed up with Private Attorney General Paul Mitchell, and issued a subpoena. They are fooling themselves if they think this will go anywhere. The timing is interesting too - looks like they wanted to beat Orly to the punch (with all of her talk of serving subpoenas today).

Is it all a futile effort by Berg to make it appear to his paypal donors that he is back in the game?

If I get time, I'll pop over to OC and see if they what they are saying about this.

Tes · **Posted:** Mon Sep 14, 2009 10:55 am

Yeah - I think we now have this in three threads, including this one.

I may have dreamt it because I now can't find it, but I was SURE that he'd previously posted a similar subpoena several weeks ago, from, I believe, DC court.

Edit: FOUND it - not exactly as I remember, but close enough! See this prior notice of intent to serve subpoena in civil case

mimi · **Posted:** Mon Sep 14, 2009 10:58 am

Yes, Tes. I remember the old ones. We've been talking about Mitchell since February or March.

I did see Bogus's post. But, I didn't want to post in the Rhodes thread. Sorry.

Tes · **Posted:** Mon Sep 14, 2009 11:01 am

wavey davey wrote:

So Berg has teamed up with Private Attorney General Paul Mitchell, and issued a subpoena. They are fooling themselves if they think this will go anywhere. The timing is interesting too - looks like they wanted to beat Orly to the punch (with all of her talk of serving subpoenas today).

Is it all a futile effort by Berg to make it appear to his paypal donors that he is back in the game?

If I get time, I'll pop over to OC and see if they what they are saying about this.

I'm not convinced at all that Berg has teamed up with Mitchell. Mitchell has a way of inserting himself into cases. He tried (but failed) to insert himself into Berg v. Obama and my SUSPICION is that he's seeking this subpoena on that basis - even though the court in Berg v. Obama dismissed him. I have been shocked before, but I would be very shocked to find out that Berg and Mitchell were now working together.

Welsh Dragon · **Posted:** Mon Sep 14, 2009 11:03 am

I saw a post (most likely FR or Betrayal) from a 'Private AG' a couple of weeks ago claiming he'd served subpoenas on the Kenyan consul General but on closer reading he was only saying he was going to. I think this is the same guy - handwriting looks familiar.

Don't know if he's done it or not or what he could do if they refuse to accept service. This Private AG idea is very strange to the rest of the world so I hope the Consul General has a sense of humor!

realist · **Joined:** Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm **Posts:** 23936

This is the second time he's done this sort of thing. The first was a month ago, perhaps two, and I "think" it was done sort of in connection with the AGJ. I have the info somewhere, I'm sure someone here has it handy.

In that instance his wording was along the lines of Paul Andrew Mitchell, Private Attorney General "legally acting on behalf of the United States." Based on that language, that was reported to authorities...what they did at that time, I don't know, but based on the second attempt recently, I suppose they ignored it, and if not, he's ignoring them.

chinacreekpj · **Joined:** Tue Jun 23, 2009 4:09 pm **Posts:** 1334

realist wrote:

In that instance his wording was along the lines of Paul Andrew Mitchell, Private Attorney General "legally acting on behalf of the United States."

Well you know, legally acting on behalf of the United States is sorta what Private Attorney Generals do.

The Private Attorney General title is a joke. I'm Canadian and not a lawyer, yet I could cross the border and file a case pro se that is also in the public interest of the people of the United States and I would be considered a Private Attorney General.

I think. :lol:

TollandRCR · **Posted:** Tue Sep 15, 2009 9:34 am

chinacreekpj wrote:

realist wrote:

In that instance his wording was along the lines of Paul Andrew Mitchell, Private Attorney General "legally acting on behalf of the United States."

Well you know, legally acting on behalf of the United States is sorta what Private Attorney Generals do.

The Private Attorney General title is a joke. I'm Canadian and not a lawyer, yet I could cross the border and file a case pro se that is also in the public interest of the people of the United States and I would be considered a Private Attorney General.

I think. :lol:

Congress created the concept of Private Attorney General for use in civil rights cases, but it is now being applied (often by wingnuts and shysters) in virtually every type of case, such as RICO cases. See DISARMING THE PRIVATE ATTORNEY GENERAL by Pamela Karlan for a discussion of how the courts have undercut what was perhaps originally an important means for fighting discrimination.

OReally Factor · **Joined:** Mon Mar 23, 2009 11:52 am **Posts:** 62

He's surfaced again - trying to insert himeslf in Ankeny

realist · **Joined:** Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm **Posts:** 23936

OReally Factor wrote:

He's surfaced again - trying to insert himeslf in Ankeny

How so?

Edit: I located the post by OReally Factor in the Birther Cases Update thread and copied it into the Ankeny Folder for discussion there.

realist · **Joined:** Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm **Posts:** 23936

Mr. Private AG, et al. has once again reared his ugly head.

According to this website http://tekgnosis.typepad.com/tekgnosis/2010/04/berg-v-obama-et-al-confirming-delivery-of-verified-criminal-complaint-on-information-usps-shipment-i.html

He has forwarded this document to the Third Circuit, you know, OFFICIALLY accusing President Obama of treason and such, http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/obama/third.circuit/vcc.htm you know, for real this time.

He is also requesting his minions to send this to LTC Lakin and his supporters, you know, to use in his defense in his possible courts martial.

Quote:

From: Paul Andrew Mitchell <supremelawfirm@...>
To: chris@...
Sent: Tue, April 13, 2010 2:49:30 PM
Subject: Re: Berg v. Obama et al.: Barack Hussein Obama formally charged with multiple Federal Felonies, Third Circuit Court of Appeals, Philadelphia, 18 U.S.C. 4 etc.

Many thanks, Chris.

It was my formal legal obligation under 18 U.S.C. 4 (misprision of felony),
particularly after these two (2) NOTICES OF INTENT and
one (1) AFFIDAVIT OF PROBABLE CAUSE, to wit:

NOTICE OF INTENT TO LODGE VERIFIED CRIMINAL COMPLAINT,
ON INFORMATION:
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/obama/thir ... /nad01.htm

AFFIDAVIT OF PROBABLE CAUSE and SECOND NOTICE OF INTENT
TO LODGE VERIFIED CRIMINAL COMPLAINT, ON INFORMATION:
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/obama/thir ... /nad02.htm

Neither of the latter 2 pleadings was contested in any manner whatsoever!

Moreover, the Consul General of Kenya in Los Angeles
is now IN CONTEMPT of this SUBPOENA IN A CIVIL CASE
which was served via Registered U.S. Mail and also via fax
(see 2 separate PROOFs OF SERVICE)

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/obama/thir ... /subpoena/

p.s. Please make an effort to forward this VCC to Terry Lakin,
to help him with his defense in any court martial proceeding against him.

For some unknown reason, the Appeal Number placed on the document is the same as the number for his failed Petition for Writ of Mandamus which was denied in 2008.

I find nothing on PACER regarding this latest POS as of this time.

Whatever4 · **Posted:** Fri Apr 16, 2010 2:28 pm

realist wrote:

Moreover, the Consul General of Kenya in Los Angeles
is now IN CONTEMPT of this SUBPOENA IN A CIVIL CASE

I'm sure more than just the Consul General are in contempt of this subpoena.

Falsehoods unchallenged only fester and grow.

Private AG Mitchell, Berg v. Obama

Who is online