Tom Fitton Questions Harris’s Eligibility

The Post & Email ^ | 21 Aug 2020 | Sharon Rondeau

[CDR Kerchner]

(Aug. 21, 2020) — At approximately the 20-minute mark in his weekly update from August 14, Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton touched on questions arising last week after former Vice President Joseph Biden announced California U.S. Senator Kamala Harris as his running mate in the November 3 presidential election.

Judicial Watch is a self-described “conservative” non-profit organization which frequently takes federal and local agencies to court over their refusal or failure to release government documents requested under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

The question of constitutional “eligibility” has become a subject which many in the mainstream media ridicule and attempt to silence without delving into the history or intended meaning of the Framers when they insisted that the president and commander-in-chief of the military be a “natural born Citizen.” That designation was mandated only for the nation’s chief executive, while members of Congress were required to simply be a “citizen” and resident in the state they wished to represent for a specific number of years.

Fitton referred to an article by Chapman University Professor of Law John Eastman which focused on the 14th Amendment’s “citizenship” provision and whether or not Harris’s parents at the time of their daughter’s birth were “lawful permanent residents” as opposed to “merely temporary visitors, perhaps on student visas issued pursuant to Section 101(15)(F) of Title I of the 1952 Immigration Act.” ... continue reading at: https://www.thepostemail.com/2020/08/21/tom-fitton-questions-harriss-eligibility/

[CDR Kerchner]

Here is a link to a list and information about various candidates in both major political parties who have sought or are talked about who are not constitutionally eligible to serve in our highest national offices: https://www.scribd.com/lists/22182725/Some-Politicians-Seeking-High-Office-Who-Are-Not-A-Natural-Born-Citizen-of-U-S

[mlo]

"The USA is a valuable prize that many groups are vying for. Right now it’s in the hands of domestic criminals, but they won’t be able to hold onto it for long. They’re pikers compared to the groups that want to peel it away from them."

What's your point here? You want to change the Constitution to make some more people ineligible? That's fine, advocate for that. It's got nothing to do with whatever it says now.

[mlo]

"Why would the founders have to write an exemption for themselves if citizen was all you needed to become president? The exemption is right there in the clause."

Who ever said all you needed to be was a citizen?

"Do you believe natural born citizen and citizen are one in the same? If so why the need for the exemption? They were all citizens at the time of the writing."

I already said. They were not natural born citizens because when they were born there was no USA to be born into. It had nothing to do with their parents.