First Court Hearing on Obama's Birth Certificate on Tuesday, Nov 18, 2008

Right Side News ^ | 11/16/08

[mgist]

November 16, 2008
Right Side News
Andy Martin is in Honolulu this weekend preparing for the first court hearing on the Obama birth certificate controversy.  His press release is as follows:

This will be the first court hearing anywhere on access to the original, 1961 certificate. The only state that has jurisdiction over such a lawsuit is Hawai'i, because Hawai'i officials are the custodians of the 1961 typewritten paperwork.

Before we get to the back story, let me start with a disclaimer. I have no idea what the judge will do on Tuesday. I make no predictions, except one: I will prepare to the best of my ability and present as professional a case as the judge permits. Monday morning I will be on the street serving papers and filing with the Clerk in preparation for Tuesday.
 
And, looking ahead, whatever happens on Tuesday, on Wednesday we hope to launch my "Conversation With America" about our future course of action in an Obama administration. I invite all of you to join in and support this mission.
 
Just as the FBI always attends every Gambino Family funeral to see who is there, ContrarianCommentary.com was in Honolulu Friday to observe the "independent" (not family-sponsored) "memorial service" held in memory of Barack Obama's grandmother, Madelyn Dunham. We will have a full column later Sunday, or possibly Monday.
 
It occurred to me that you might appreciate some insight into the effort that goes into preparing and presenting a major piece of litigation 8,000 miles away from home.
 
Anyone who has read our Memorandum of Law (see the ContrarianCommentary.com blogs below for a full copy) will not be surprised that it took us the better part of a week to analyze, research, write and finalize a 25-page document (which we will be filing with the Clerk on Monday morning) setting forth why Obama's birth certificate must be made public.
 
If a large law firm was handling the case of Martin vs. Obama, they would probably send a minimum team of four lawyers as well as support personnel. They would have a trial counsel, a couple of associates, and a senior partner to guide the overall process. There would be at least one paralegal, possibly more. That's why high stakes litigation is so costly.
 
Martin vs. Obama is a high stakes lawsuit: it seeks to open a vital record of American history to public review and analysis.
 
And I will be working alone.
 
Ask any lawyer: it's not easy landing in a strange town, setting up an office and firing off legal documents in a controversial constitutional case. But we managed to file the lawsuit two days  after arriving in Honolulu in October, and now we are back for the first court hearing anywhere to address the issue of Barack Obama's origins.
 
Landing in an unfamiliar city, any lawyer would need a support network. We managed to recreate our October "fighting camp" in 24 hours and are up and running. I dragged a printer on the 12 hour flight because we have to be able to react immediately to any development. Saturday morning we were out assembling office supplies to be ready to move quickly on Monday morning.
 
I even purchased a box of envelopes so that if we have a breather, we can start mailing out thank you notes to everyone who contributed to the financial support of this very costly and complex venture. There is no wasted time on a trip of this nature, and no wasted money.
 
I will take time off Sunday morning to attend services at Saint Andrews (Episcopal) cathedral in downtown Honolulu. And I forgot to pack my sunglasses, so I need to go shopping for a pair.
 
Unlike other lawsuits involving Obama, mine is narrowly and specifically focused on access to the original, typewritten 1961 certificate which Hawai'i officials have confirmed they possess. There is no way anyone can express an opinion on the circumstances of Obama's birth without seeing the vital gateway document. I have refrained from speculating on the contents of the original because my focus is on expressing an informed opinion (a term CNN once made fund of).
 
Mr. Obama and his Chicago crew have been very crafty in creating a cloud of confusion over the "abstract" that he furnished to FactCheck.org as a purported original birth certificate, when obviously it was nothing of the sort. Many millions of people were confused even though the term "abstract" was clearly visible on the FactCheck.org site (and even though FactCheck.org seems to have missed that significance, as well).
 
We will also be continuing and conducting the research and investigation we began in October to document Obama's origins in Hawai'i with interviews and contacts with people who knew his family and the other "players" in the Honolulu dramas of the 1970's and 80's.
 
As these comments are being prepared Sunday morning I can only conclude with a sense of deep humility at the enormity of the task and the nature of the burden. I continue to bear Barack Obama no ill will. Nevertheless, I passionately and sincerely believe that he owes the American people a detailed exposition of both his personal and his family history, and that he has not been candid with the American people. Without candor, he will not be able to establish the legitimacy that is essential for national leadership. He remains a stranger to the American people.
 
Barack Obama and his character assassins such as Robert Gibbs have done everything they can to demonize and defeat and intimidate me. They have failed utterly and abjectly. Tuesday morning I will stand up in court, stand tall, and stand proud for every American who believes Barack Obama needs to start telling the truth about himself. The election may be over. But the search for the truth about Mr. Obama is continuing.

[Dante3]

The original birth certificate of anyone running for public office should be released.

[Pontiac]

At that point, National Command Authority could simply stop acknowledging him as President and pass the football to Biden.

Please elaborate.

When would this occur?

If you have a sworn in President I seriously doubt that the National Command Authority could simply stop acknowledging him as President before he was removed from office or resigned.

I think it would take more than simply having incontrovertible proof that Obama was not a citizen.

I think it would take removal from office by the Senate after he is sworn in. I don’t think even the SCOTUS could remove him after inauguration.

The real question is, given the heavily weighted extreme left democrat senate; Would the SENATE remove him from office after inauguration?

[SatinDoll]

Stanley Anne Dunham has been dead for quite some time. I doubt she will be filing a challenge any time soon.

[ravingnutter]

I go through it all the time...I’ve done two DSS Agent interviews and one written USOPM inquiry within the last two weeks for our employees.

[usurper]

My guess is they are naturalization papers.

Not a chance, naturalization is a completely different process. It appears he was born in Hawaii which means he is a US citizen. But there is something else there that will prove embarrassing.

The most likely is that he changed his name at some point to sound more ethnic. Another possibility is that his father is not who we were led to believe. At any rate I have no idea what he is hiding or why.

[Pontiac]

Stanley Anne Dunham has been dead for quite some time. I doubt she will be filing a challenge any time soon.

She does not need to.

Someone requesting access to medical records either has to supply a release form signed by the individual whose record are requested or a court order releasing those records.

Medical privacy laws have pretty severe penalties for those who do not keep medical records secure and private.

Considering that S. Anne Dunham is dead her next of kin would need to sign for release of her records. I don’t see that happening. So that leaves a court order. When did that happen?

[SatinDoll]

I doubt a court order happened. People are bribed, documents change hands.

So, who’re you going to prosecute? The people hiding facts and forgind documents in a RICO tainted conspiracy to hide the ineligibility of a President Elect, or some clerk who wants the truth made known.

[Centurion2000]

The real question is, given the heavily weighted extreme left democrat senate; Would the SENATE remove him from office after inauguration?

If they don't, it's pretty much a de facto / de jure acknowledgement that the Constitution is a silly piece of paper instead of our foundation of government.

Which them opens up all kind of interesting (chinese connotation) possibilities for the states.

[Goreknowshowtocheat]

Hugh is beginning to nauseate me. This legal mumbo jumbo about there is no remedy for the clear violation of the Constitution tells me our legal system is totally down the tubes. Of course there is a remedy, if there is any logic left in the system. He simply did not win on Nov 4th because he was eligible for the office. And, the judges can refuse to administer the oath of office to him and they can make it clear in writing that he has no right to the office.

[Goreknowshowtocheat]

“because he was not eligible”

[cookcounty]

"I got a note this morning that reported Alan Keyes confronted BO during the Senate debate about this. Alan said something to the effect “you are not even a natural born citizen” and BO responded that “Ok, but I am not running for President”..They are trying to find the tape of that. "

I just went thru transcripts of all 3 Senate debates (taken from Keyes own website). No such conversation in any of the 3 debates.......

[cookcounty]

"I would be surprised if he was actually able to get her medical records considering the restrictions today on access to medical records."

Agreed, though it would be easier to get records from a dead person's records than a living person's.

[MountainWoman]

well that’s great-—why have a constitution at all if you’re not going to follow it????????

[MrB]

Leftists don’t respect rules, they look at outcomes.

If the outcomes aren’t what they want, they ignore the rules or get some judge to change them.

[MountainWoman]

you know...it’s funny...i was driving around the other day and saw some lib with a bumper sticker that said

“Annoy a conservative...Defend the Constitution...”

i had to laugh out loud but isn’t it interesting if this whole conspiracy turns out to be true...

i just don’t see how people could be ok with this...maybe i’m just naive...

[CodeToad]

Before he takes office. I suspect the Constitution assumes vetting before being swornin.

[Question_Assumptions]

Actually, this would be a pretty good way for Hillary to become President, though I suspect she'd be a one-termer because of who it would alienate. Basically, if between now and the Electoral College vote, it can be shown that Barack Obama is ineligible to become President, the Democrat electors pledged to him need to decide who they are going to vote for. Could be Biden but somehow I doubt that and think it would be a disaster. Could be another candidate they could all get behind (Hillary). Some could even defect and vote McCain, making him President and Sarah Palin VP or maybe John McCain and President and Joe Biden as VP. Regardless, very interesting. I just hope that if this is a real issue, that it's resolved before the electors vote because that would create create chaos on the other side.

[PapaBear3625]

Prediction: He will lack standing.

An elector should be part of the suit (necessarily a McCain Elector). If a member of the Electoral College does not have standing, then NOBODY does.

[ExTxMarine]

Why did Senator Obama say half of the things that we have him on record as saying? Because he is “The One” that we have been waiting for to come and save America from itself!

At this point, he could admit to being a foreigner and most of those that support him would suggest (just as he did) that the Constitution is just old and useless and we have grown beyond that document’s constraints! You know, all those “negative rights!”

If it was not for newly created “positive rights” like civil rights legislation and the AD Act, etc... we wouldn’t have half the people in America thinking that every group should have their own “rights” listed in the Constitution! After all, even though I fall under the AD Act, I have no other specific positive rights listed in the constitution for white males; we need to correct this NOW!

[AFreeBird]

but I don’t see HOW someone could appease their consciousness to allow their word to be so useless. (Though there are, obviously, people whose word means less than nothing.)

Um, have you been watching Congress for the past few decades? To a democrat Marxist; oaths are just lip service. Part of a ritual they have to go through to obtain what they covet - POWER.

They don't give a damn about the Constitution or The People it is meant to protect.