Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: B4Ranch

You’ll have to ask others. When you do, be sure to ask why that question was never raised in the case of Chester A. Arthur, born to an Irishman subject of the British crown (Not naturalized until young Arthur was about 14), and the case of Spiro Agnew, son of a Greek immigrant. Perhaps they just assumed that they were eligible to be President as was done with Mr. Obama.


355 posted on 12/04/2010 8:19:20 PM PST by centurion316
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 351 | View Replies ]


To: centurion316

*snip*

I’ve been forwarded the actual naturalization record for William Arthur on microfiche, obtained from the Library of Congress. He was naturalized in New York State and became a United States citizen in August 1843.

Chester Arthur perpetrated a fraud as to his eligibility to be Vice President by spreading various lies about his parents’ heritage. President Arthur’s father, William Arthur, became a United States citizen in August 1843. But Chester Arthur was born in 1829. Therefore, he was a British Citizen by descent, and a dual citizen at birth, if not his whole life.

He wasn’t a “natural born citizen” and he knew it.

We’ve also uncovered many lies told by Chester Arthur to the press which kept this fact from public view when he ran for Vice President in 1880. Garfield won the election, became President in 1881, and was assassinated by a fanatical Chester Arthur supporter that same year.

How ironic that the allegations started by Arthur Hinman in his pamphlet entitled, “How A British Subject Became President”, have turned out to be true…but not for the reason Hinman suggested.

Hinman alleged that Arthur was born in Ireland or Canada as a British subject. It was bunk. It’s been definitively established that Chester Arthur was born in Vermont. But Hinman turns out to be correct anyway since Chester Arthur was a British citizen/subject by virtue of his father not having naturalized as a United States citizen until Chester Arthur was almost 14 years old.

That means Chester Arthur was a British subject at the time of his birth.

Further here
http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/2008/12/06/urgent-historical-breakthrough-proof-chester-arthur-concealed-he-was-a-british-subject-at-birth/


356 posted on 12/04/2010 8:22:35 PM PST by STARWISE (The overlords are in place .. we are a nation under siege .. pray, go Galt & hunker down)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 355 | View Replies ]

To: centurion316

Arthur , I’m not familiar with. I know he was a Pres..
Spiro Agnew was the 39th Vice President of the United States, not the President.


362 posted on 12/04/2010 8:41:46 PM PST by B4Ranch (I have never met one, not one Veteran who enlisted to fight for Socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 355 | View Replies ]

To: centurion316

I don’t know about Spiro Agnew, but at least for Chester Arthur, he hid the records of when his parents naturalized. If the parents are US citizens at the time of the child’s birth in the US there would not be a problem.

Chester Arthur obviously thought there would be a problem if people were able to find out that his parents were not US citizens yet at the time of his birth. People knew that his parents were citizens but had no way of finding out WHEN they became citizens, because Arthur hid that.

Why do you think he hid that?


372 posted on 12/04/2010 10:43:17 PM PST by butterdezillion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 355 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson