Posted on 08/23/2017 3:47:18 AM PDT by GregNH
Former Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore, a Republican candidate for US Senate, has cast doubt on former President Barack Obama's citizenship repeatedly and as recently as December 2016, fueling the debunked "birther" movement that sought to delegitimize Obama's presidency.
Moore, who started questioning the legitimacy of Obama's citizenship back in 2008, last year told a meeting of the Constitution Party that he personally did not believe Obama was a natural-born citizen. "My opinion is, there is a big question about that," Moore said when asked how he defines natural-born citizen as it relates to qualifications for president. CNN's KFile reviewed video from the event.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
BOTH mother and father MUST be US citizens for their child to be eligible to serve as president.
Weasel worded, watered down but currently accepted value of the same text:
As long as one parent is probably a US citizen then you will not have enough cash in lawyers fees nor standing to bring forth a law suite to challenge eligibility.
You are aware that no constitutional clause can be amended by an act of congress?
Both must be US citizens at the time of the childs birth, that is.
What Constitutional clause was this legislation amending?
In his book, the puny little president admitted his final two years were a drug-induced blur. Yet he got into college. I suspect it was because he applied as a foreign national - whereupon the legend of his status began. That’s why the records have been suppressed.
I thought Obama’s mother surrendered his US citizenship so he could become eligible to attend Madrasa school in the Indonesia? Did he ever re-apply for citizenship if this is a provable fact?
Thanks.
I dispute your point here. We didn't allow it to work. We were simply in no position to stop it from working. Liberals control the entire broadcasting system in this nation, and until we can bypass their ability to censor us, they can get away with making pronouncements and getting the public to believe them.
Give us a years worth of time on a network where we can hammer our position over and over and over again, and we would convince the public that there is something there when it comes to questioning Obama's citizenship.
But in addition to the Liberal attacks on the issue, the Rinos of our side could not wait to jump into the fray and chime in with the Liberals. Many many many Republicans condemned any efforts to question Obama's legitimacy. They effectively gave aid and comfort to the enemy because they thought the issue would be politically bad. (Again, based on how the Liberal Media would treat them, making it once again about control of the airwaves.)
You can call it a "hit piece" or "Fake News".. but IT'S TRUE.
I am aware of no evidence which demonstrates he attended any of the Universities he attended as a foreign student. If you have any such evidence, please post a link to it.
It wasn't, and that is exactly my point. Those people who think you can use legislation to change the meaning of the words in the US Constitution as a backdoor amendment process, are simply incorrect.
The meaning of the words are rigid, having been frozen in 1787. Alternative meanings or new interpretations of words are an attempt to amend the constitution. They mean what the founders meant them to mean when the constitution was written.
I disagree. His records are suppressed because they would demonstrate that the man is an imbecile and that would damage him politically.
His supporters think he is a "genius" but when the college records are produced, they will be all "D's" and perhaps some "F's". The man was only in college as a consequence of his color.
He is a moron. His college records will show that he is a moron, and therefore they are suppressed.
Title 8 U.S. Code § 1481 spells out the methods by which you can lose your U.S. citizenship:
- Loss of nationality by native-born or naturalized citizen; voluntary action; burden of proof; presumptions
(a) A person who is a national of the United States whether by birth or naturalization, shall lose his nationality by voluntarily performing any of the following acts with the intention of relinquishing United States nationality—
(1) obtaining naturalization in a foreign state upon his own application or upon an application filed by a duly authorized agent, after having attained the age of eighteen years; or
(2) taking an oath or making an affirmation or other formal declaration of allegiance to a foreign state or a political subdivision thereof, after having attained the age of eighteen years; or
(3) entering, or serving in, the armed forces of a foreign state if (A) such armed forces are engaged in hostilities against the United States, or (B) such persons serve as a commissioned or non-commissioned officer; or
(4)(A) accepting, serving in, or performing the duties of any office, post, or employment under the government of a foreign state or a political subdivision thereof, after attaining the age of eighteen years if he has or acquires the nationality of such foreign state; or (B) accepting, serving in, or performing the duties of any office, post, or employment under the government of a foreign state or a political subdivision thereof, after attaining the age of eighteen years for which office, post, or employment an oath, affirmation, or declaration of allegiance is required; or
(5) making a formal renunciation of nationality before a diplomatic or consular officer of the United States in a foreign state, in such form as may be prescribed by the Secretary of State; or
(6) making in the United States a formal written renunciation of nationality in such form as may be prescribed by, and before such officer as may be designated by, the Attorney General, whenever the United States shall be in a state of war and the Attorney General shall approve such renunciation as not contrary to the interests of national defense; or
(7) committing any act of treason against, or attempting by force to overthrow, or bearing arms against, the United States, violating or conspiring to violate any of the provisions of section 2383 of title 18, or willfully performing any act in violation of section 2385 of title 18, or violating section 2384 of title 18 by engaging in a conspiracy to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, if and when he is convicted thereof by a court martial or by a court of competent jurisdiction.
Mr. Obama's mother could have taken some action that the Indonesian government considered a renunciation of U.S. citizenship, but the U.S. government would have considered it irrelevant.
And where is natural-born citizen defined in the Constitution?
I don’t disagree with you at all. But I suspect that the reason he was able to enter college in spite of the poor grades was because he was granted admission as a foreign national.
Where is the term "Letters of Marque" defined in the Constitution? It appears there.
The Constitution is not a dictionary.
It isn't. Neither were a lot of other commonly understood terms for that era. For example, the definition of the word "arms" is not in there either, but everyone in 1787 knew what it meant. So too did they know what the term "natural born citizen" meant. A definition was unnecessary.
The word self defines because the word identifies it's own origin.
GOOD! NEITHER DO I.
If he was, he would not have to keep producing FAKE birth certificates. He would be aware you can buy your own BC online for $35 and not need to send a team of lawyers to “sign waivers” to get one. (Can we see those waivers?)
The last one he produced is a PROVEN forgery, and they even found some source documents. They found a birth certificate from around that same time frame that matches up bit by bit 100% in all areas (except the name and dates)- which is a statistical impossibility.
I have written document imaging software for a living. I have had my software certified by the government at Fort Huachuka in Arizona. I would be qualified to be an expert witness in court.
I knew 5 minutes after it was released that it was a fake. Since I do document software my default image software was NOT the pdf viewer, it was photohop itself. And when I opened it up and saw LAYERS I said “WF?”.
The LAYERS are the key- if they had been compressed, it would have been far more difficult to prove it was a fake, but it would still be possible with all the many OTHER reasons in the document.
All the things you see discussed in YouTube videos online about grey-scale, lines lining up, straight lines that should curve with the paper, centering, pixel resolution, etc.- ALL OF THOSE ARE CORRECT!
The “OCR” argument is 100% bull$hit.
Khalid Al-Mansour (Black Muslim that changed his name from Don Warden) got Obama into college by convincing the Saudis to fund black student scholarships. That is how Obama got into college.
Dealing with you is a never ending source of amusement. I can think of at least two different definitions that were commonly held at the time.
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.