Posted on 07/27/2023 1:23:56 PM PDT by Macho MAGA Man
Trevor Sutcliffe @TrevorSutcliffe
Vivek Ramaswamy is not legally eligible to be President. The natural born citizen clause predates the Fourteenth Amendment by several decades. He is a Fourteenth Amendment/Wong Kim Ark citizen, not a natural-born citizen. His campaign for the Presidency is illegitimate.
(Excerpt) Read more at twitter.com ...
Are you talking about law or truth? Because I get confused.
*I* am talking about truth. We already know the law is bollixed and we shouldn't need to constantly point that out.
The Supreme Court could declare that a man has changed into a woman. It would still be incorrect.
It would be "the Law", but it wouldn't be the truth.
The 14th amendment naturalized everybody born on the territory.
Yes it did. And anyone that owes their citizenship to the 14th amendment is a naturalized at birth citizen.
It does describe that, but the portion you need to direct your attention at is the fact that it says congress declares certain classes of people as citizens, by conferring citizenship on them at birth.
You need to acknowledge that having citizenship conferred upon you "at birth" (such as is done with foreign born citizens) is *STILL* naturalization.
People mistakenly think that just because you have citizenship conferred upon you at birth, this makes you a natural born citizen. No, you are still naturalized, but that naturalization is bestowed at your birth.
Look at this thread. The proponents of this have variously claimed that the original constitution is superior to an amendment to the consitituion. They've cited English common law. They've put forth cases that deal with foreign diplomats as proof that other individual born here would not be a citizen. They've claimed "anchor babies" aren't citizens.
Finally, when cornered on the matter, they say "The law is wrong".
It's not healthy. It leads to a detachment from reality.
The 14th amendment says anybody born in the territory of the US is a natural born citizen citizen. Since Ramaswamy was born in the US, that makes him a natural born citizen.
Why would there be? The only place where they come into conflict is in eligibility requirements for the presidency. It is not something that comes up very often.
Look at this thread. The proponents of this have variously claimed that the original constitution is superior to an amendment to the consitituion.
Well firstly, I am not them. I did not put forth such an argument.
Secondly, I have long maintained that the vast majority of all amendments after the first 10 were mistakes. The 14th is one of the worst. It has given us gay marriage, abortion, banned prayer in schools, anchor babies, and numerous other idiot decisions by the court.
It is so vaguely worded that you can drive a truck through it.
It may be "the Law", but it is one of the dumber parts of it this nation has ever created.
They've claimed "anchor babies" aren't citizens.
They are not. Making anchor babies into citizens was never the intention of the 14th amendment. That is just the sort of nonsense which can be read out of it because of how badly it was written.
See my tagline? "of parents owning allegiance to no other sovereignty.."? That comes from John Bingham, who is the chief proponent of the 14th amendment.
He *NEVER* intended for it to apply to the children of aliens who still owe allegiance to their home country. He said so.
Finally, when cornered on the matter, they say "The law is wrong".
Well it is. Factually wrong, as I have shown by posting that excerpt from that 1817 law book.
The founders never intended to grant citizenship to the children of people who still owed allegiance elsewhere.
Except for Indians. That right there should tell you it is bullsh*t.
Since Ramaswamy was born in the US, that makes him a natural born citizen.
Natural citizens are not produced by laws, they are produced by nature.
Everyone that has made stolen elections at least somewhat part of their campaign has lost. IF you want to improve election integrity, I’m all for that, in order to do that, you first must win an election and gain power.
If you constantly lose the issue of election integrity, Kari Lake to this day is soliciting money to prove her election was stolen, even though every legal claim she’s made has been a loser.
My point, get elected, get a Republican legislature, then get laws passed, otherwise complaining about it, serves no purpose.
Do you find it at all odd that not one investigator has ever produced evidence of this? To my knowledge, not one writer, not one sleuth, no one, has ever produced evidence that Obama was born in Canada. Strange, isn't it?
You mean that in the corrupt rigged states like Georgia and Arizona, people who would remove the corruption get defeated during corrupt rigged elections?
Well i'm surprised at that. I would have thought someone vowing to investigate corrupt elections would get a majority of votes, even though the corrupt election officials who are the problem are the ones *COUNTING* the votes.
IF you want to improve election integrity, I’m all for that, in order to do that, you first must win an election and gain power.
And how does that work if they are rigging elections to make sure you can't win? You have some strange ideas here.
Your argument is that if you can't win, you can't fix corrupt elections.
My argument is, if you have corrupt elections, you can't win.
If you constantly lose the issue of election integrity, Kari Lake to this day is soliciting money to prove her election was stolen, even though every legal claim she’s made has been a loser.
That lying corrupt judge needs to be dragged out into the street and beaten until he confesses he's either so stupid that he shouldn't be allowed to be a judge, or he's on the take from the drug cartels and *THAT* is why his cockamamie decisions are so ridiculously wrong.
And yes, I do now believe the Mexican drug cartels run Arizona. Nothing else makes any sense. That woman testified to the Arizona senate that every important official in the State of Arizona is now controlled by the Drug cartels, and their behavior certainly makes that accusation look plausible.
My point, get elected, get a Republican legislature, then get laws passed, otherwise complaining about it, serves no purpose.
Yeah, I got your point. Your point doesn't require a great deal of thought, and that is the main problem with it. Did you get *MY* point?
We can't *FIX* corrupt elections as long as we *HAVE* corrupt elections.
What *I* find odd is that Obama and Hawaii together cannot produce anything that looks like a *REAL* American birth certificate.
Do you not find that odd?
You see, when someone cannot produce something that the vast majority of Americans can easily produced, the possibility that he was born in a foreign country, as he had previously claimed over and over again, becomes a lot more believable.
The Circumstantial evidence certainly makes it appear as if he was born in Canada. We don't see any good evidence that he was born in Hawaii.
To my knowledge, not one writer, not one sleuth, no one, has ever produced evidence that Obama was born in Canada. Strange, isn't it?
Strange that nobody has produced evidence that he was born in Hawaii.
The evidence we *DO* have points to Canada.
Dragging a lying corrupt Judge out onto the street and beating him until he confesses takes a lot thought and planning, is that’s your point, I would suggest your idea is a ticket to life in prison if you are lucky assuming you are not shot on the spot by police.
On other FR threads on election integrity, I’ve offered multiple ideas on how to improve the chances of winning without breaking any laws.
Where it’s legal you develop a ballot harvesting program, something the Republicans have failed to do anywhere.
Encourage your voters to vote early and not wait until election day, where conveniently the machines don’t always work.
Organize a door-to-door campaign, especially in Republican precincts to get people out to vote and harvest their votes where legal, something Republicans don’t do anywhere that I know of.
Stop trashing Republican voters that have voted for people like McCain and Ducey, especially don’t tell them to get the hell out of your rallies, Republican are in no position to tell any voter to get the hell out, especially when they might vote for you.
Instead of challenging the outcome of elections by individual candidates, the Republican Party must challenge things that are clearly required by the laws of most states and that is the integrity of voter rolls which often times contain thousands of names who are no longer voters in Arizona, either they moved or died, this is supposed to be done in most states but isn’t.
Stop blaming the machines for the outcome of elections.
Machines are at least #4 or #5 on the list of things that need to be fixed with elections.
My list is the following
Demand Univeral Voter ID
Demand the elimination of Universal Mail in Voting
Demand the end of ballot harvesting
Demand the voters rolls get cleaned up
What these election challenges have shown with 100% certainty is once the ballot is accepted it will get counted and the courts will do nothing about it.
The key is to stop fraudulent ballots from happening because once they get turned in, the method of how they are counted is immaterial.
The margin of error for Republicans to start winning is very small, Kari Lake lost by about 16,000 votes.
If she had just encouraged her voters to vote early and hadn’t trashed a bunch of potential voters, her chances would have gone up considerably.
She inadvertently created a single point of failure that was exploited by the Democrats.
Added to those things if the Republican Party had an effective ground game and ballot harvesting strategy in Arizona Kari Lake would probably be Governor right now.
Abe Hamadeh would almost assuredly have won, considering he lost by just a few hundred votes.
None of what I suggest is illegal and doesn’t require beating a Judge until they confess.
Were my grandparents anchor babies?
Born between 1893 and 1896, in Brooklyn and Rochester NY, and in Meriden CT, to subjects of Her Britannic Majesty Alexandrina Victoria and the German Emperor Friedrich Wilhelm.
You say anchor babies are not citizens. So, were my grandparents citizens, or not? My grandfathers 1917 draft cards have 3 choices for citizen status: Natural Born, Naturalized, and Alien.
The War Department classified both as “Natural Born”, not “Alien”.
Nobody is going to do that because modern people don't have the guts. If enough people were angry, it could be done and they could get away with it. The battle of Athens comes to mind.
You speak as if you don't know about the sh*tstorm that is the Kari lake election. It is clearly corrupt. It is so overwhelmingly demonstrably corrupt, that one can only conclude the Judge is also corrupt. Same thing with the Maricopa County audit of the 2020 election where so much fraud and corruption was revealed, that no sane honest man could dispute it.
Demand Univeral Voter ID
Demand the elimination of Universal Mail in Voting
Demand the end of ballot harvesting
Demand the voters rolls get cleaned up
All good ideas, but weren't you the one saying you have to win elections first?
How are you going to stop the *CORRUPT* election officials from resizing the ballots in Republican areas so as to wreck the whole balloting process? How are you going to stop that?
Their pet corrupt judge will let them get away with it.
The margin of error for Republicans to start winning is very small, Kari Lake lost by about 16,000 votes.
Given the information that has emerged about their corrupt practices, I don't think she lost at all. Same thing with Trump, where the margin of loss was 14,000, I believe.
They found 75,000 fake ballots, and 200,000 fake voters in the Maricopa County audit.
You are ignoring the real problem.
If she had just encouraged her voters to vote early and hadn’t trashed a bunch of potential voters, her chances would have gone up considerably.
You keep expressing faith in the system, while I utterly reject that belief. No matter what she did, she would have lost by 11,000 votes or so, because they would work the numbers until it came out like that.
Arizona is corrupt. They take no steps to fix it, so one can conclude nothing else. Same with Georgia.
Abe Hamadeh would almost assuredly have won, considering he lost by just a few hundred votes.
Every candidate of significance in a statewide election lost. Candidates that had no significant impact on national politics won.
The people who were *NO THREAT* to DC, won. Same thing happened in Georgia. Republican candidates would win statewide races in Georgia, but only for non important positions that did not pose a threat to DC.
But you see it as a "they just didn't get enough votes problem." I see it as "the election system is rigged to produce a result DC wants." problem.
Do not dismiss how corrupt things are in this nation. We now see Federal agencies engaged in behavior that is very Nazi like. We see them fabricating documents, testimony, evidence, lying to federal judges, and so forth.
And now they are prosecuting everyone who challenges their corruption.
You need to open your eyes to what is happening.
There were no laws limiting immigration back then. I thought I already addressed your situation in a previous message I had sent you.
You say anchor babies are not citizens. So, were my grandparents citizens, or not?
There was no need to "anchor" in that era. Immigration was open to everyone with no restrictions.
It is only after we have changed our laws to allow only approved immigration that there is a need to have an "anchor" in this country. During your family's era, there was no such need. People could come and go to this country as they pleased.
The War Department classified both as “Natural Born”, not “Alien”.
I am not familiar with when everyone decided that the "War Department" would be the agency determining citizenship status. Apart from that, it is my recollection that *YOU* said they just checked a box, and the military accepted it without question.
I said anchor babies are citizens.
Fed! Fed! Fed!
No, not at all. I've seen Obama's Certificate of Live Birth. This is the official birth certificate of the state of Hawaii stating that Obama was born in that state. I have not seen any credible evidence to suggest it is not authentic. I found "Polarik"'s reports, posted here many years ago, to be amateurish and borderline incoherent. Didn't Polarik flee Free Republic after being exposed as a fraud?
Others have attempted to suggest that Obama's birth certificate was a forgery, but not one of those reports ever gained traction.
I've seen Obama's Long Form Birth certificate stating that he was born in Hawaii and no credible nor probative evidence to suggest it is not authentic.
I've seen the birth announcement from the Honolulu Advertiser, the birth announcement from the Honolulu Star Bulletin, I've read the 2008 statement from Dr. Chiyome Fukino, and the 2009 statement from Dr. Fukino. I've seen the letter from Health Director Loretta Fuddy from April 25, 2011. I've seen his U.S. passport. These are all from the state of Hawaii.
There have been published references to his Hawaiian birth in the Chicago Tribune, the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Chicago Daily Herald, Columbia Today, Chicago Magazine, the Chicago Tribune, the Los Angeles Times, and Time Magazine.
I'm afraid all of that has been good enough for me.
I am fascinated by the audacity of your posts and your bold assertion that Obama was born in Canada. I have seen not a lick of evidence to support this, just hapless conjecture. That's why I just had to ask if you found it strange that not one investigator, not one journalist, not one writer, no one, has ever produced any sort of analysis about an Obama birth in Canada. If what you suggest is true, wouldn't someone, by now, have laid it all on the line?
I do wish you well.
You need to stop when even joking about dragging people into the street and beating them is an option
I’ve offered real suggestion after suggestion and you’ve offered nothing but threats of violence if only as a joke and you’ve offered nothing and I’m supposed to be the one needs to wake up
Debating you is pointless when bitching and complaining are your responses
The etymology suggests that the word "citizen" was already in use in English before the American (or French) Revolution. Britons used the word "subject" because they had a monarchy. Americans wanted to do away with monarchy so they adopted the word "citizen." They could have used "freeman," but the assumption was that everyone was now free (and the uncomfortable reality was that not everyone was). Was it really likely that the Framers threw out their whole inherited system of laws when they adopted one word in place of another? Or did they simply replace "subject" with citizen?
I saw one of the videos that Mike Zullo made for Joe Arpaio. It's not very convincing. Politicians don't release personal documents unless they have to, so there may be no big secret at all. There may or may not be other secrets in other documents that they also don't want you to see, but their unwillingness to make something public is the rule, not the exception.
And you regard that as proof of what?
The problem here is that I know things about how states deal with adoption and you don't. I also know things specific to Hawaii that I think you are unaware of. Or you just don't care about that.
This is the official birth certificate of the state of Hawaii stating that Obama was born in that state.
And here is the thing I know about Hawaii that you don't. Hawaii will issue birth certificates to people *NOT* born in Hawaii. The only requirement is one of their parents must be a Hawaii resident.
So a piece of paper put out by Hawaii that claims Obama was born in Hawaii is not good evidence at all.
An original, non-fake birth certificate would be reasonable, but because it's Hawaii, that's not even necessarily proof.
I have not seen any credible evidence to suggest it is not authentic.
Then why are you talking about this subject without getting the facts? Have you been hiding under a rock since 2008? The birth certificate Obama released is a ridiculous forgery. There are so many things wrong with it that it is laughable that they thought they should even try that.
Others have attempted to suggest that Obama's birth certificate was a forgery, but not one of those reports ever gained traction.
What does that mean? Do you mean the g*dd@mn media *LIE* machine didn't pick up the story and brainwash all of America with it? Why would they? It goes AGAINST their mission.
Do you know what *DID* gain "traction"? All the f***ing lies they spread about Trump, including the pee pee dossier, "Russian Collusion", and lately "overturning the election and Insurrection!"
So if your standard for believing something is that the nasty, corrupt, media lie machine didn't pick it up and run with it, then you are hopelessly naive about how things really work in this nation, and you are naive about human nature in general.
I've seen the birth announcement from the Honolulu Advertiser, the birth announcement from the Honolulu Star Bulletin, I've read the 2008 statement from Dr. Chiyome Fukino, and the 2009 statement from Dr. Fukino. I've seen the letter from Health Director Loretta Fuddy from April 25, 2011. I've seen his U.S. passport. These are all from the state of Hawaii.
Again, it's Hawaii. They have a law that allows them to issue birth certificates to people *NOT BORN THERE.*
You think the birth announcement means anything? As soon as someone files for a birth certificate, those automatically get sent to the newspaper. Madelyn Dunham was still living in Hawaii, and she could have simply filed the paperwork.
Your problem is that Stanley Ann was in Seattle in the latter part of August, and there is no reasonable way for her to get there after his birth. She had to already be in the area.
I am fascinated by the audacity of your posts and your bold assertion that Obama was born in Canada.
I see part of your problem. You don't read well. I never said he was born in Canada. I said the evidence makes it the most likely choice of where he was born.
I have seen not a lick of evidence to support this, just hapless conjecture.
I'm pretty sure you see what you want to see. It's a common human failing, and one which I deal with constantly in discussions on line with people. Your commentary on his fake birth certificate clued me in that you want to believe what you want to believe, and you will simply dismiss any evidence that is not overwhelmingly compelling.
That's why I just had to ask if you found it strange that not one investigator, not one journalist, not one writer, no one, has ever produced any sort of analysis about an Obama birth in Canada.
I actually think Jack Cashill (Author of many books) has written extensively about it, but I didn't expect you to be aware of it because you don't want to look in that direction.
And what sort of evidence do you think anyone could find? Canada won't admit to anything. They will give you the "I can neither confirm nor deny..." routine. Medical records are confidential, Aunt Eleanor is dead, and so is everyone else who might have known the truth, like Madelyn Dunham.
If what you suggest is true, wouldn't someone, by now, have laid it all on the line?
Why would you think it would be so easy? You have a strange way of thinking. You just want to look at everything that happens as confirming what you wish to believe.
Stanley Ann Dunham being in Seattle around August 19th, 1961 is the real hole in the official narrative. You can't explain it either, but you trust the "authorities" to tell you the truth.
Again, you have a different way of viewing the world.
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.