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

Skip to comments.

Ana Navarro, Christine Quinn meltdown – CNN implosion over Trump continues (VIDEO)
Fire Andrea Mitchell ^ | November 22, 2016 | Fire Andrea Mitchell

Posted on 11/23/2016 9:26:57 AM PST by GuavaCheesePuff

Ana Navarro is a bitter, pro-amnesty Bush hack who can’t handle the fact that Donald Trump not only won the presidency, but completely destroyed the Bush dynasty and any future in politics for Bush and their lackeys. Christine Quinn is a butch liberal New Yorker who ran for Mayor of NYC and failed to Communist Bill de Blasio. Both Ana Navarro and Christine Quinn were reduced to screamer at Kayleigh McEnany and Jeffrey Lord.

(Excerpt) Read more at fireandreamitchell.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events; US: New York
KEYWORDS: ananavarro; brooklyn; christinequinn; cnn; jamespolite; manhattan; media; mediabias; msm; newyork; newyorkcity; newyorkers; nyc; obamanation; quinn; trump
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-28 last
To: Lurkinanloomin

The problem lies not with the language, or even with its interpretation, but with the political will to let the Law of the Land speak for itself.

As with the Second Amendment, this is neither vague or ambiguous, and the context within the document, supported by histories, commentaries and analyses in the early history of the nation make it clear what a Natural-Born Citizen is, but both sides of the so-called aisle are both specifically and generally loathe to uphold the Constitution on any issue, especially this one.

Specifically, they want illegals to be citizens for votes (Democrats) or jobs (Republicans); generally, they want to avoid the unseemly precedent of actually having to adhere to the actual wording of the Constitution they have sworn to uphold - that could get messy on any issue where they want to ignore it.


21 posted on 11/23/2016 11:56:22 AM PST by YogicCowboy ("I am not entirely on anyone's side, because no one is entirely on mine." - JRRT)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Lurkinanloomin

Children of illegal aliens are not even citizens, that is a misinterpretation of the 14th Amendment that must be corrected.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Right or wrong, it’s the way the law stands right now. If it didn’t, there would be no anchor babies.

Until it’s corrected, George P. is just as valid as Obama, or even moreso if Obama was born in Kenya (which was the story before he was considered a POTUS candidate).


22 posted on 11/23/2016 1:26:49 PM PST by angryoldfatman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: angryoldfatman

Citizen is not the same as natural born citizen.
Children of foreign nationals are not natural born citizens.


23 posted on 11/23/2016 1:40:08 PM PST by Lurkinanloomin (Know Islam, No Peace - No Islam , Know Peace)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: GuavaCheesePuff

two things kept running through my mind as I watched this. “Jane you ignorant slut” and Roseann Roseann Adanna.


24 posted on 11/23/2016 4:57:11 PM PST by Ace the Biker (I wasn't born in Texas but I got here as fast as I could.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GuavaCheesePuff
I think her "wife" wears the man pants...


25 posted on 11/23/2016 4:59:20 PM PST by JediJones (We must deport all liberals until we can figure out what the hell is going on.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lurkinanloomin
You're telling the wrong guy. Take it up with Congress.

--------------------------------------

CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES

AMENDMENT XIV

Passed by Congress June 13, 1866. Ratified July 9, 1868.

Note: Article I, section 2, of the Constitution was modified by section 2 of the 14th amendment.

Section 1.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

----------------------------------

Show me where it is in the Constitution that says what you say.

Otherwise, there are signposts and brick walls you can argue with outside.


26 posted on 11/24/2016 7:45:46 PM PST by angryoldfatman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: angryoldfatman
he was born here, so he’s a natural born citizen.

you can think of him as an anchor baby.

Not if his father is a US citizen. He's a citizen.

his mother was still a Mexican national when he was born.

Then he's a Mexican citizen as well. A "natural born citizen" can have no other nationality.

Anchor babies are citizens

That's debatable. Not according to the author of the language of the 14th Amendment, Senator Jacob M. Howard of Michigan.

The only purpose was for granting citizenship to recently freed African slaves, not foreigners. It didn't even apply to American Indians.

In 1866, Howard wrote:

>> Every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers. <<

deportation “breaking up families”, because the babies unfortunately have a right to be here when Mommy and Daddy don’t.

Though that's been the practice, not so sure that they do. Congress needs to write clarifying legislation.

More RAT-BS. Nobody's forcing the children to stay here, they can go back to Mexico with their parents.

That's just a scam to dilute the real US citizens' birthright and give free stuff (that we have to pay for) to criminal invaders.

27 posted on 11/24/2016 8:11:14 PM PST by ROCKLOBSTER (The fear of stark justice sends hot urine down their thighs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: ROCKLOBSTER

Not if his father is a US citizen. He’s a citizen.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I was taking the premise of the argumentative opponent as true.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The only purpose was for granting citizenship to recently freed African slaves, not foreigners. It didn’t even apply to American Indians.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The only mention of the Indians is in section 2:

Section 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That’s debatable. Not according to the author of the language of the 14th Amendment, Senator Jacob M. Howard of Michigan.

The only purpose was for granting citizenship to recently freed African slaves, not foreigners. It didn’t even apply to American Indians.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Intentions are intentions, they were not in writing. The author should have put language in that made it more clear if what you say is true (though I have no idea if it is or isn’t and don’t really care).

I do know that what you said about African slaves is true; it was a Reconstruction amendment, after all.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Though that’s been the practice, not so sure that they do. Congress needs to write clarifying legislation.

More RAT-BS. Nobody’s forcing the children to stay here, they can go back to Mexico with their parents.

That’s just a scam to dilute the real US citizens’ birthright and give free stuff (that we have to pay for) to criminal invaders.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

My point exactly.

I don’t know why somebody here wanted to derail a Trump thread with this garbage of natural-born citizen, non-natural born citizen, naturalized citizen, bork bork bork citizen, or whatever. I suspect it was something to do with the autism spectrum.


28 posted on 11/25/2016 8:43:58 AM PST by angryoldfatman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-28 last

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.

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