Posted on

EXCLUSIVE: Another Supreme Court Filing DROPS against Barack Obama

EXCLUSIVE: Here’s the most recent Supreme Court Filing against Barack Obama.  It keeps PILING UP against Barack Obama.  He’s in a load of trouble now.  I think it’s all over for him.  The internet powerhouses have truly done it this time with another great example of their legal minds.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF HAWAI’I
SUPREME COURT DOCKET NUMBER: CONFIDENTIAL

CHRISTOPHER JONES,
Petitioner,
HON. LINDA LINGLE, Governor; DEREK JETER, NY Yankees
HON. SARAH PALIN, Governor and VP Candidate;
Respondents.

EMERGENCY PETITION FOR A BILL OF LADING
INTRODUCTION AND PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
The question of the authenticity, public availability, and carbon content of the birth certificate of Senator Barack Obama (hereinafter “Senator Barack Obama”) has become a source of increasing embarrassment for me, myself, and especially I. Although Sena”tor” Barack Obama has posted a copy of his birth certificate on his own web site, and despite the fact that it has been corroborated to be a true short form birth certificate by the Hawai’i Department of Health, Senator Barack Obama still refuses to acknowledge that the birth certificate is fake, despite the fact that there is not even an iota of proof that it is, in fact fake. Accordingly, it is clear now – and do not ask how I know this because, let’s just say, I know this – that he was, in fact, born in Kenya, much less born at all.

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
1. The Petitioner
Petitioner Christopher Jones has been writing about Obama for over sixty-three years. Despite the fact that Senator Barack Obama was “purportedly” born in 1961 (a year that, as we all know, was the first “upside down year” and thus does not exist in duality or singularly for that matter), I have been following him for much longer than that. Trust me. I had an eye on him for some time and frankly I can’t trust an uppity intellectual such as Senator Barack Obama, who, according to my sources, is related to Sadam Hussein and is without question the Anti-Christ. I am the author of a book that hasn’t been published yet, “The History of Toilet Paper and the Asses That Loved Them.”

Although I am not a practicing attorney, I did go to law school but my passage to the Bar was steadfastly blocked by so-called “administrators” because, apparently, “they” thought I had some sort of “moderately servere character defect.” Yeah, whatever. We all know everyone who disagrees with me is a just a liberal, socialist, marxist bastard bent on burning the constitution and replacing it with the pig latin version of the Communist Manifesto, which, according to my sources, was written by the Isreali Mossad in 1987 and first drafted by Dr. Seuss in 1783 before he received his MD.

2. Birth certificate
I, along with about seven thousand others, including Santa Claus of all people, have applied for and was denied a copy of Senator Barack Obama’s birth certificate, along with a list of the last twenty things he had eaten from the frozen foods section. This is clearly an issue of national importance, because although we know that Senator Obama is qualified, we just can’t “trust” someone like Obama because, well, we can’t. I don’t think it would be a “safe” choice, particularly with this financial crisis, which was started by marxists such as Alan Greenspan and The Invisible Hand.

RELIEF REQUESTED
The Court should decide that the misapplication, misinterpretation, miscommunication, miscombubulation, and misappropriation of the relevant statue (see Statue of Liberty, Ellis Island, a photograph which is attached to this Petition) raises issues of sufficiently massive public and national importance that this Court has no choice but to entertain.

BASIS FOR GRANTING RELIEF
The constitutional issue
In Miranda v. Arizona, 384 US 436 (1966), the Supreme Court of the “United States of America” ruled that when a defendant is interrograted while in custody, the police, prior to that interrogation, must provide certain warnings and, if they don’t, the resulting confession will be suppressed. Similarly, this Court should give me Obama’s original birth certificate as well as the list of the last twenty things he has consumed from the frozen foods section, FORTHWITH.

The procedural issue
There is an anomaly under the procedues of Hawaii law, i.e., to provide someone with no standing to even request such items to get such items, and to provide someone with such items even though the request in the first place is frivolous. Of course, as we all know, legal procedures are simply procedures of the intellectual and we all have seen what has happened when we are too “intellectual” with things. After all, just look at the Constitution. Thus, procedurally, I am asking, and again pursuant to Miranda v. Arizona, 384 US 436, and it’s companion case, Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954), that this Court should grant me RELIEF as well as the money to publish my next book, “Obama: The Love of My Life and His Connection to the Crisis in the Suez and the Race to Space (Part 7: Where is the Dog?).”

The substantive issue
There are clearly no substantive issues here.

CONCLUSION
Most respectfully, Petitioner asks this Court to call me as soon as possible. I’ll be hanging out on 73rd Street and Lexington tonight with my friend Lester.

DATED: October 24, 2008
Honolulu, HI
Respectfully submitted,
CHRISTOPHER JONES

Advertisements

About Mr. Cheeseburger 9000

I am Mr. Cheeseburger 9000. I like my burgers medium-rare with a side order of french fries.

11 responses to “EXCLUSIVE: Another Supreme Court Filing DROPS against Barack Obama

  1. Akira ⋅

    Q. If Obama has in fact already released the details of his birth, then why does he refuse to grant permission to make his birth records public?

  2. Akira ⋅

    Something to read while you’re pondering my previous question:

    “What Obama could be trying to hide”

    http://brianakira.wordpress.com/2008/10/25/what-could-obama-be-trying-to-hide/

  3. Dear Akira,

    To answer your questions, I will leave some statements below that convey the logic you are using:

    1) Because Bill Clinton supported gun-control and fascists support gun-control, Bill Clinton must have been a fascist.

    2) Everyone wants to get married. Good self-esteem is important in attracting a husband or wife. Therefore, everyone should develop good self-esteem.

    3) Students who take geography instead of physics are lazy. Chris took geography instead of physics. Lazy Chris should be kicked out of school.

    4) Chris is an impressive speaker because he always touches his listeners deeply.

    5) No, you vegetarians cannot order a bacon, lettuce, and tomato sandwich with peanut butter instead of bacon! Then everyone would start wanting substitutions on their BLT sandwiches.

    6) All heroin addicts smoked marijuana in their youth. Therefore, smoking marijuana leads to heroin addiction.

    7) Wasila Community College should not require a freshman writing course. Yale does not require a freshman writing course and the students there get along just fine without it

    Tautologically yours,
    Mr. Cheeseburger 9000

  4. Akira ⋅

    Have you misunderstood?

    1. Obama claims that he released his birth records.

    2. He refuses to permit the registrar in Hawaii to release his birth records, claiming that it would be a violation of his pivacy.

    There is no logic in his argument.

    Either he didn’t in fact release his birth records or he’s asserting a privacy right that he himself claims to have already waived.

    I don’t believe you are stupid, therefore, if you continue to brush off the obvious illogicality of Obama’s position, I can only conclude that you are somehow in thrall to Obama to the extent that your critical faculties have been impaired.

    I pray that you will not continue to delude yourself.

    Therefore:

    Q. If Obama has in fact already released the details of his birth, then why does he refuse to grant permission to make his birth records public?

  5. Greg S. ⋅

    I don’t think Akira gets it.

  6. Akira ⋅

    Greg,

    I’ll type really slowly, just for you.

    1. Obama’s lawyers have actually argued in court that Obama should not be expected to grant the state of Hawaii permission to make his birth records public, as per HRS §338-18, because such a disclosure would be a violation of the privacy rights that the supreme court found in the penumbra of the constitution.

    2. In Hawaii, birth certificates are a private matter. Vital records for events that occurred in Hawaii are received and preserved by the Office of Health Status Monitoring, a unit of the Department of Health (DOH); and access to such records is restricted by statute (HRS §338-18), according to which only obama or a parent may grant access.

    3. Obama’s campaign has asserted that he has already released his birth records online in three public [albeit merely electronic, i.e, intangible] forae, and that any curious individual [i.e. any citizen concerned about the constitutional validity of Obama’s candidacy] may discover whatever they need to know by perusing said records electronically.

    4. These assertions are logically disharmonious. They negate one another, logically-speaking. They clash. In the realm of reason, they war against each other, in eternal futility. Obama cannot synchronologically assert that (a) he has already released the genealogical details of his birth, and (b) such a release would be harmful to his privacy. To hold two such mutually contradictory position at the same time is indicative of stupidity and/or insanity.

    5. Furthermore, continued speculations regarding his motive(s) for refusing to grant permission could fuel enough discontent to cost him the election in key battleground states, and thereby lose him the presidency. He is set to win the election, if present conditions prevail. Therefore, the only possible set-back would be an increase in concerns about his character. In conclusions, any rational person must conclude that his continued secretiveness is illogical and counter-productive, unless he in fact has something to hide.

    6. What Obama could be trying to hide:

    http://brianakira.wordpress.com/2008/10/25/what-obama-could-be-trying-to-hide

    + + +

    The reason you decline to respond to this very simple question, is because the only sensible answer would challenge your ideologically pre-determined mind-set.

    Or do you “get it” now?

    With absolutely no expectation of a cogent, sensible, rational response, i nevertheless repeat:

    Q. If Obama has in fact already released the details of his birth, then why does he refuse to grant permission to make his birth records public?

  7. Ryan Hartman ⋅

    I can’t figure out how to send you a private message, but I have talked about Obama being a war criminal in other posts. He has voted to continue funding the occupation numerous times, and he will continue to do this (along with sending more troops into Afghanistan and possibly Pakistan) once he is elected. There are many other problems I have with him – such as voting to give the telecoms immunity, voting for the bailout, and changing his story on just about everything – that only involve taking away our rights, no so much war criminal things.

  8. Akira and Greg,

    Good discussion on the issues.

    As for Akira, your question raises significant issues but in the end I do not think the question is legally logical. I’m not sure in what respects Canadian law is different from American law, but here is where some of the legal logic (as opposed to the common sense logic) of your question breaks down.

    First, the main issue with regard to the Hawaii lawsuit had to do with standing as opposed to the privacy rights interpreted to be in the constitution. The argument was that Andy Martin did not have standing to even request the birth records at issue. Of course, as you point out, the reasoning behind this is that the birth records can only be disseminated to certain individuals absent an exception — an exception that Andy Martin did not fit.

    Second, while your point that Obama revealed his records should negate any claims for privacy is not, at least under American law, correct. Apart from issues of discovery, the disclosure of materials deemed protected from the public do not automatically negate a person’s right of privacy. This is fundamentally different than a 5th amendment example. Put another way, someone can’t start testifying to a particular matter and then state, a few questions later, that he/she is invoking his/her 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination.The person waived his/her 5th Amendment right. In this situation, the waiver analogy does not apply.

    However, Akira, your questions raise a knee-jerk question: why doesn’t the Obama camp just release the damn records if there’s such a question about it? Of course, the premise in that question is that there’s an issue about those “damn records” . . . probably one that the Obama camp doesn’t think too much of, or more precisely, they think they can win the election despite a certain segment of the population taking issue with it.

    For that segment of the population, it seems that Obama’s legal arguments only go to show that he is hiding something, much like a defendant that invokes his right to silence upon his arrest. I think perhaps the Obama camp knows that this is a “lost segment” already.

    I’ve heard some theorists say that although Obama was born in the U.S., his birth certificate listed his religion as Muslim. I can see why the Obama camp may not want this out there. Thoughts?

    Mr. Cheeseburger 9000

  9. Ryan,

    A thought provoking charge that Obama is a war criminal. I could not find the posts you were talking about. I’d be curious to know your reasoning behind this. Post it here if you can.

    Mr. Cheeseburger 9000

  10. Akira ⋅

    Mr C9

    While I would tend to take the legal side of those who are seeking access to Obama’s birth record in court — on the grounds that any citizen should be considered as having “a tangible interest” in his ability to meet the pre-requisite conditions for the presidency [1. natural-born, 2. 35+, 3. resident min. 14 yrs], my main argument is NOT legalistic.

    As far as I’m concerned, I myself would never vote for someone to the highest office in the land if he refused to even make his birth record public; and I’m confident that enough Americans would share my point-of-view — enough to cost him the election. I am 100% sure that McCain would win by a landslaide if every major TV network would start tonight’s news with the headline: “OBAMA REFUSES TO RELEASE OFFICIAL BIRTH CERTIFICATE!”

    That brings up the point of media bias. They either don’t report this story or openly laugh about it, exaggerating aspects such as people claiming he was born in Kenya or Canada etc, and ignoring the more basic and indisputable fact that you have a presidential candidate spending a fortune and a considerable amount of time and effort fighting court battles in 8 states to keep his birth records private.

    Also there’s the point of logic. Also honesty. If Obama had refused to even address the question, that would be bad enough. But instead he posted an image on a website and said: “That’s my birth certificate.” Then he went to court to prevent people from seeing his actual birth certificate. It stinks to high heaven. And it’s completely illogical.

    [More on that on the post I mentioned above:

    http://brianakira.wordpress.com/2008/10/25/what-obama-could-be-trying-to-hide%5D

    While I disagree with Ryan’s positions, his posts above confirm my own opinion that an Obama presidency will be a disaster, since he can’t possibly live up to even half of his promises; he’s forever alienated a large section of the Democratic party, he’s angered anybody who opposed him on political principle and was labeled a racist or whatever for daring to question THE ONE.

    Regarding his inability to live up to his promises: he said he won’t raise any taxes of any person or business earning less than a quarter of a mill, but has also led supporters to believe he’s going to help unions, raise the minimum wage, increase welfare programs, spend more on education, introduce a universal health care system etc etc etc etc. Actually, I doubt he’ll do even a quarter of what he’s promised, and if he runs the nation in the same way he ran illinois, there’s no way in hell he’ll be re-elected. In 2012 the Dems will be calling for his blood. [Clinton is the likeliest nominee in 2012 — actually she’ll be kind of the Dem’s “McCain” — as in – “She’s moderate, we should have gone with her last time, she was cheated … ” etc]

    I also think the media will turn on him with a vengeance as soon as they’ve safely gotten him elected. It’s almost universal amongst non-partisans that the MSM has shamelessly backed Obama. Even “al-Guardian” [“Pravda West”] has commented on it. In a vain attempt o salvage their reputations, they’ll start tearing Obama to pieces.

    It wouldn’t surprise me if by 2012 he’s less popular than Bush is now. he far left will hate him for not delivering. Conservatives will never accept him, Feminists will be ashamed of how Clinton and Palin have been treated. Pacifists will despise him for his nuclear bombing of Pakistan, and the 2nd Kosovo War, and the coming war with Iran… And Black Americans will start referring to Obama as “half-white” when they realize that their lives have only CHANGEd for the worse and their HOPE was misplaced.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s