Posted on 03/19/2024 11:28:56 AM PDT by Macho MAGA Man
Bloomberg News reported on Monday, “Trump personally told Ramaswamy he won’t be his vice presidential pick, according to people briefed on the discussion, but is considering him for posts including Homeland Security secretary. Some Trump allies see Ramaswamy as ideal for the job because they say he excels at public speaking and, as an Indian-American son of an immigrant, could neutralize criticism of sweeping immigration restrictions.”
Ramaswamy has been a loyal supporter of Trump, even when the two were battling in the Republican primary.
After leaving the race, Ramaswamy promptly endorsed and began campaigning for Trump
(Excerpt) Read more at thegatewaypundit.com ...
Thank God ... Ramaswamy should NOT be the VP. he flips over to the progressive ‘can’t we all get along’ crap waaaay to fast. DeSantis is a better choice and on the abortion issue call for ALL States to settle the issue for their own states and STOP seeing it in national terms.
Exactly. I had been following him on social media since his CPAC 2023 and NRA speeches and he was generating a lot of enthusiasm among the young, including among people who had never voted or been interested in politics. And I hate to use Obama as an example but similar to how Obama was in 2007/8. If Vivek were a Democrat he would be a special guest on every late night show and the media would be heralding him as the third coming of Christ (Obama being second).
I think we all pretty much knew that wasn’t happening. 🙄
Vivek would be a good cabinet pick or on the whitehouse staff.
Tulsi Gabbard is my sleeper pick.
Stefanik Noem and Scott will not bring in independents or young democrats. Gabbard would do both.
Wherever Vivek ends up in the Trump power circle, he brings an ability to explain and defend Trump's positions better than anyone I've heard. He will be extremely valuable doing just that every day from now until the election. Win and he will hold the leftist press at bay for four years.
I really like that.
Been posting Gabbard will be his pick since before cpac. She had a speaking slot, it was a test, could tell she prepped for it and passed it according to the response there. Trump probably was watching.
After cpac, I am more than convinced that Gabbard will be his VP pick.
It is the politically smart play.
Bullshit, stop posting that nonsense........
You just never give up to the fact that you are wrong and have been proven wrong time and time again here on this site.......
You're a broken record and all you do is thread hijack.........
Make a great Press Secretary.
Nope! Everything I say is the truth about natural born Citizenship. Vivek, Tulsi, Jindal, Cruz, Obama,and Haley were never natural born Citizens at birth. All are anchor babies. Anchor babies are subject to foreign governments. Anchor babies are not born with sole allegiance to one government. I am right. You are wrong.
Oh, add Harris to that list too.
Read the wiki page on Ramaswamy. He committed stock fraud. Promised a miracle drug, raises money, no miracle, he ends up wealthy and investors lose their money.
How can you be right if they were allowed to run for office....LOL!
You've become nothing more than an obnoxious broken record dude, give it up and go away. Tired of you constant crap.
(How can you be right if they were allowed to run for office)
Oh they can run but if they get the nomination through corruption they would surely be challenged, especially after Obama usurped Article 2 Section 1 with the help of Pelosi. Plus think of this, the original founders never wanted third world brown or black people to be commander in chief. Obama got in under the shield of the race card being pulled on anyone who challenged his eligibility.
Same with Kamala!
Using those criteria of carrying on Trumps legacy (which Vivek is far and away the most capable of doing) and 2028 electability (bit tougher if the NBC crowd continues to not recognize he is a NBC having been born to legal immigrants, just as Kamala was and no one has been able to get anywhere with a challenge on that), his performance as a VP would make him electable.
But we’re dealing with politics, not competence, and the critical goal is to get Trump elected, which will mean bringing in a lot from the middle. Vivek would only solidify the base as he’s Trump without the offensive to many tweets.
He most certainly is, which even a cursory amount of knowledge and research on the subject would reveal.
Saying the same false statement over and over and over again does not make it anymore true than the first time it was said.
No, it is not - nor much about anything else, either.
It was just reported by Gretta on Newsmax that Trump is considering McCarthy as COS, OH HELL NO!!!
But, of course, the Rats would push the NBC button on a Republican.
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/4208296/posts
“My definition of a natural born Citizen is a PURE WHITE AMERICAN BORN OF TWO WHITE UNITED STATES CITIZEN PARENTS.” - Macho MAGA Man, 1/6/2024
If the Framers did not intend for the phrase they put into the Constitution - Natural Born Citizen - to mean what it meant at the time they wrote it, they would have written out a definition into the Constitution to redefine it. Since they did not, we can only assume it meant what the phrase meant when they wrote it out - the English common law definition - those born within the borders of the realm are naturally born citizens. There are a number of court cases where it is defined in this manner with regard to those born with far looser connections to the United States than Marco Rubio, Chester Arthur, (or Kamala Harris). The first case where it seems this was dealt with by a court was Lynch vs. Clarke in New York over a dispute with who could inherit property - there was a law on the books stating that only a “U.S. Citizen” could inherit property, and the presiding judge (apparently in this court the judge was called a “Vice Chancellor”) made this declaration: “Suppose a person should be elected president who was native born, but of alien parents; could there be any reasonable doubt that he was eligible under the Constitution? I think not. The position would be decisive in his favor, that by the rule of the common law, in force when the Constitution was adopted, he is a citizen...Upon principle, therefore, I can entertain no doubt, but that by the law of the United States, every person born within the dominions and allegiance of the United States, whatever the situation of his parents, is a natural born citizen. It is surprising that there has been no judicial decision upon this question.” In another case decided by the U.S. Supreme Court over the citizenship of a person born who was born to Chinese parents (it was illegal at that time for Chinese immigrants to become U.S. Citizens) it was declared that he was a natural born citizen by virtue of having been born in the United States, and Justice Field, who wrote the opinion, actually referenced the Lynch v. Clarke decision in the ruling of the Court: “After an exhaustive examination of the law, the Vice-Chancellor said that he entertained no doubt that every person born within the dominions and allegiance of the United States, whatever the situation of his parents, was a natural-born citizen, and added that this was the general understanding of the legal profession, and the universal impression of the public mind.” This case was In re Look Tin Sing. Another U.S. Supreme Court case was United States v. Wong Kim Ark https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/169/649 dealing with the same issue of a child born to Chinese parents made the same ruling and also declared him to be a natural born citizen in the ruling by virtue of his right to citizenship by birth. All of those cases were in the 1800s.
There was a U.S. Supreme Court case in 1939 with the title Perkins v. Elg http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/307/325.html which dealt with the issue of a woman who was born in the U.S. to Swedish citizens who returned to Sweden with her when she was four years old. Her father was naturalized prior to this as a U.S. Citizen and held dual citizenship. She then came back to the U.S. and was admitted entry as a citizen at the age of 21. For whatever reason, her father later did away with his U.S. Citizenship status and the equivalent of the INS at the time declared she was to be deported. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled against this, finding she was a natural born U.S. Citizen by right of birth and even declared she was eligible to be President of the United States in the ruling. A past President, Chester Arthur, was born with an Irish father who was not yet naturalized as a U.S. Citizen, though his mother was born in Vermont where Arthur himself was born.
Detractors like to ignore all of information and court cases and instead rely totally on a case Minor v. Happersett - seeming to deliberately misquote the ruling - indeed, the justices specifically stated they were not making a finding of every scenario that constitutes a natural born citizen in their ruling: “The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their [p168] parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first. ***For the purposes of this case it is not necessary to solve these doubts.***” Minor v. Happersett - full text of ruling https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/88/162
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.