Posted on 04/08/2011 1:17:39 PM PDT by rxsid
"Attendee at Trump Meeting: “It Couldn’t Have Gone Any Better” (re: Obama & natural born Citizen's) "
Sounds like Trump is heading in the right direction (i.e. wanting to know more about "natural born Citizen.")
I don’t care what Donald’s up to - I would rather be fighting Hillary in ‘12 since the ‘Pubs are probably going to force a McCain Jr like Romney on us.
Obama is toast.
I care...because Article II, section 1, clause 5 of the Constitution must be upheld.
born June 14, 1946 in Queens, New York, NY (Meets the Jus Soli Requirement)
Parents were
Frederick Christ Trump, born October 11, 1905 in Queens, NY, died June 1999 in Queens, NY
Mary Ann MacLeod, born May 10, 1912 in SCOTLAND, died August 7, 2000 in Queens, NY. Arrived in US October 5, 1935. Married January 1936. Naturalized as a US Citizen March 10, 1942.
Both parents were US Citizens at the time of his birth (Meets the Jus Sanguinis Requirement)
Donald Trump is a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN unlike Comrade Barry Soetoro aka Barack Hussein Obama.
thanks for the “ping”
Another point that people need to be aware of is that if was not born in Hawaii, then he is not any kind of U.S. citizen, natural born or otherwise. At the time of his birth if one parent was not citizen (BO sr.) then the American parent (Stanley Anne Dunham) had to have lived in the U.S. for 5 years after reaching 16 years of age. His mother was only 18 and therefore not eligible to transfer citizenship to baby Barry.
“and I want to know about these reports from Kenya when members of the Kenyan Parliament had talked about Obama having been born there.”
Maybe he had a lot less than he hinted at.
Good. They should set up a research team who should put together a compendium from A to Z to brief Trump. A book that has everything that has been researched over the last 3 years. From news article that Obama was born in Kenya, to his Conn SSN number and others, to that scare on his head.
Donald Trump = WINNING!
Obama = YOU’RE FIRED!
Copy from another post of mine...
Hence, the Chester Arthur example is not and cannot be treated as any precedent since the nation was not aware of the truth about his father’s and mother’s non-U.S. citizenship status at the time of his birth.
Interesting, since it appears that the question of applicability of precedent would become the focus when the Natural-born issue is finally acknowledged for a week in the media, and I believe at some point it will be. From a practical standpoint, if this issue makes reelection probabilities dire enough, centrist Dems would attempt to primary nobama out, which would perhaps be the smartest thing for them to do, as the D party could move to the center and the R would have to move more solidly to the right. Except who would the D’s select (besides the thoroughly worn-out clintonistas) ? Well, whatever, my real points for comment follow.
Well, I found a reference to a SCOTUS case from 1874 that referred to “natural-born”. The link to Justia.com follows the relevant snippet from this women’s suffrage case, “MINOR V. HAPPERSETT, 88 U. S. 162 (1874)”,
“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 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.”
http://supreme.justia.com/us/88/162/case.html
The text I cite above appears to be quite telling in the logic of the actors of today.
If this ruling were the latest precedential ruling, it would make sense then, that the man elected in 2008 and his true backers, whoever they may be, are exerting such tremendous effort to establish the newly-minted State of Hawaii as his birthplace. That birthplace enables him to claim “natural-born” based on being in the second classification of children in the cited reference, those born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents. Absent that birthplace fact, he would fail the meaning of “natural-born” cited within this opinion on both counts, as the father he claims is acknowledged to not be a U.S. citizen.
Please comment; I very much look forward to more case research and opinions regarding the precedents of this case. Please keep them research-oriented; are there any legal scholars or “lay” people out there who can do some digging ?
If this holds water, then perhaps this is the case that needs to be presented, “Occam” style.
I am not sure of Mr. Trump’s true aims, so I try to write in an unbiased tone regarding his efforts which, so far, appear to have certain commonality with most Americans, however I caution that his overall vision may be less than ideal, as indicated by some simplistic protectionist bandages that he has advocated. In his defense, I would like to remind that the amount of his assets affected by slumping Real Estate may be motivating his desire to see the nation restored.
After some more poking around...
It appears that there has been no ruling overturning or affecting Minor v. Happersett as an opinion, though the 19th Amendment granted suffrage to women, which was the subject of the case. So the precedent apparently would be that of this case ?
Also, if this indeed is the rub, then it would appear that the man who wound up winning the election of 2008 had simply gained too much traction before it was discovered within the Democratic party that he was ineligible. That would explain the extraordinary facts surrounding how the Democratic party certified him in the various States and the last-minute secret wrangling of Democratic party leadership, i.e., Pelosi & co. in final certification. I had come across these claims on the internet but I always took them with a grain of salt and simply “filed them away”. I guess until now. Now this makes sense. It was a while until it was pointed out to leadership that there was an issue. Then it took a while to research and figure out what approach was to be taken.
Regarding Chester Arthur, I think nobama’s father’s non-citizenship was known fairly early on. Perhaps the Chester Arthur handling would or could be applied. I also submit that since nobama was sworn in, and is holding the office, any actions while in office are those of a sitting President. However, the whole idea of people knowing he was ineligible would and should result in many criminal prosecutions, including that of nobama if he knew before he was elected. No doubt if he stepped down he would pardon himself beforehand - is that possible ? I don’t know, but Pelosi and any others who knew - they seem like the really need pardons or they will be wide open to prosecution.
Mostly, if this came out, it would reflect terribly on the Democratic party for not vetting. Finding out after it’s too late and trying to avoid some “Constitutional crisis” is one thing, but knowing before the election and not going public - which would have, of course, ensured a clintonista win - that would look very bad.
IMHO.
The stupid media has taken on the wrong guy. He plays to win.
Assuming overseas birth, he would not have received U.S. citizenship based, only, on his mother's citizenship status. Per U.S. law at the time of his birth (December 24, 1952 to November 13, 1986). Birth Abroad to One Citizen and One Alien Parent in Wedlock: "For birth between December 24, 1952 and November 13, 1986, a period of ten years, five after the age of fourteen are required for physical presence in the U.S. to transmit U.S. citizenship to the child." http://travel.state.gov/law/info/info_609.html
**************PAGE AT LINK ABOVE NOW REMOVED - USE BELOW LINK***********************
http://germany.usembassy.gov/acs/claimtocitizenship/
Also found here:
"1952 Immigration and Nationality Act Title3 Chapter1"
http://www.scribd.com/doc/8693236/1952-Immigration-and-Nationality-Act-Title3-Chapter1
Of course, that, and his being born subject to the 1948 B.N.A. is dependant upon Sr. being his legal father at birth. Sr. was likely still married to Kezia Aoko, and therefore any marriage (of which there is no known marriage cert) to SADO (Barry's alleged mother) would have been illegal in HI.
IF that were the case, depending on just where the guy really was born and just who his parent(s) really were...he might be a "natural born Citizen."
However, Barry would then need to explain (at least): 1) why he took multiple oaths of office throughout his career, under the name "Obama" if that wasn't his legal father at birth and 2) why is there a clearly fraudulent government document (alleged HI short form) proudly displayed on his campaign web site.
Yeah, this clear Constitutional crisis probably couldn't get much more tangled.
It's way past time the country get the real answer's to these questions about the man with his finger on the nuclear trigger.
If SAD was not married BHO would be a citizen if the birth occurred outside the US. He would most likely have a CRBA in that case.
If SAD & BHO Sr. were married he would not be a citizen if he were born outside the US. In 1961, the requirements were that a married US citizen parent had to have been in the US for 10 years, 5 of those after the age of 14.
There have been several amendments to that statute since then.
I don't buy the premise Hillary automatically wins stuff.
Hillary gets slimed if Obama goes down along with the Democrat party in the biggest scandal ever.
The questions will be flying high and hard from everywhere.
For instance...
Hillary what did you know and when did you know it?
Hillary, did you make a deal with Obama when he offered the Secretary of State and you knew he was usurping the presidency?
Hillary, as Secretary of State, you had access to Stanley Ann Dunham's passport records -- so where was her passport records from 1960 - 1965 that came up missing?
Hillary, why did the Democrat Party and Nancy Pelosi certify Obama as being constitutionally eligible to be president when you knew he was not?
Hillary, was Obama's passport record destroyed when they were illegally accessed, and were there back up copies of Obama's passport records that could be checked against after they were "cauterized"?
Hillary, your PUMAs were the first "Birthers" ...did you know at that time Obama would be an illegal president?
Hillary, your husband, president Clinton questioned Obama's eligibility during the 2008 presidential campaign, and now he says questioning Obama's Constitutional eligibility is "Ludicrous" which was within 24 hours after Obama announced his election campaign for 2012?
So what happened here Hillary?
It looks like you Hillary made a deal to keep your mouth shut and aided and abetted an illegal presidency. Et cetera. You should get the picture...
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.