Posted on 07/26/2024 7:59:03 PM PDT by CDR Kerchner
(Jul. 26, 2024) — As posted Tuesday by the “X” account @Kancel Kamala, on August 20, 2020, then-Alabama Democratic Party Chairman Christopher John England sent a “Certification” to then-Alabama Secretary of State John H. Merrill naming the party’s 2020 nominees for President and Vice President, respectively, as “Joseph R. Biden” and “Kamala D. Harris.”
The 18-page set of documents remains available at the Alabama Secretary of State’s website.
As part of the “certification” process, each nominee provided a signed and notarized “Consent to Nomination of the Democratic Party” and “affirmed” he or she was constitutionally qualified for the position sought on November 3, 2020 (pp. 8 and 9 below).
(Excerpt) Read more at thepostemail.com ...
Yes or no. Please do not play dumb. If you don't know the answer, figure it out and answer the question.
Canada? Had not heard that. Thought he was born in Kenya - according to grandmother who was there at his birth!
If they believed that, it should have been in the holding, not left in dicta.
In fact it equates them by derivation from British law.
In dicta, not the holding. It is conspicuously absent from the holding, meaning they don't even believe their own claim.
And again, the error in judgement is to equate British Subject law with American citizenship law.
Perhaps you haven't seen this. This is a Pennsylvania law book from 1817. It says that citizenship law does *NOT* come from English common law. It comes from Natural law as articulated by Vattel.
Here it is in black and white that citizenship derives from parents, and British law and American law are distinctly different on this point.
And do you know where the US Constitutional convention was held?
It was held in Philadelphia Pennsylvania. Same place all the Judges who's work was involved in writing this book lived.
Some of the Judges upon who's work this book is based, were involved in the ratification process in Pennsylvania, and I think some of them were convention delegates.
Is there a better source for what the founders intended?
Remember when then ‘citizen’ Trump offered $5,000,000 payable to a charity of his choice if Obama would produce a certified copy of his birth certificate?
Yes, it should have been in the holding but the holding is necessarily short since there is so much else to discuss. The dissenters also conspicuously left out natural-born and simply declared that Wong was not a citizen.
I believe the dissent is more telling because it makes birth citizenship binary. It is not ternary.
What I do with the space on my servers is none of your business.
That claim is not very well supported. I heard the audio interview with the grandmother in which she was claimed to have said this. She did not say that.
The interviewer asks her a leading question, which if I recall went like this:
Do you remember when Obama was born? ... In Kenya?
With a long pause between "born" and "Kenya."
The interpreter starts translating, and the woman says "yes" before he finishes, and then after he translates the "In Kenya" part, she says "no."
The interviewer was trying to get her to say he was born in Kenya, he asked leading questions, and then ignored her efforts to correct what he said she said.
.
.
.
.
As for the Canada thing, I would like to lay out the circumstantial evidence that he was born in Canada.
The first piece is the form Stanley Ann Dunham filled out on August the 19th, 1961, in Person, to attend college in Seattle.
This proves she was *IN* Seattle 14 days after Obama was supposedly born on August 5th 1961. Trouble was, they wouldn't let women with 2 week old infants fly in that era. The pressure change could burst their eardrums.
Back in 2009, other freepers posted the flight guidelines for the air carriers flying between Hawaii and the mainland in 1961, and they didn't allow 2 week old infants to fly.
So it is reasonable to believe Stanley Ann Dunham was in the Pacific Northwest when Obama was born.
But that doesn't get us to Canada. It only places them in the region, not in the specific country.
Well guess what? What would Racist Kansas Parents do, if their daughter had been impregnated by a black man in 1960?
Well they would send her to live with a relative until the baby is born, and then they would want her to put it up for adoption, which is exactly what Barack Obama sr had said in a letter they were going to do.
Her aunt Eleanor Belle Dunham Berkebile lived in Blaine Washington in 1961. She was Stanley Dunham's sister.
Blaine Washington was right smack on the border with Canada, and actually shared the border with the city of White Rock Canada.
There was no hospital in Blaine. The only hospital for miles was in White Rock Canada.
If Stanley Ann was staying with Aunt Eleanor, and she went into labor, she would end up in the White Rock Hospital. (I used to know the name of it.)
So guess which side of the border the baby would have been born on?
There are some other bits and pieces, but that's the gist of the circumstantial evidence that explains everything we see, and makes more sense than the crap we see coming out of Hawaii.
There are a few other details to support this version of events that I will supply if you are interested. At this point, whether it is true or not doesn't really matter.
True. But what you do with the logs is my business. If you use the logs to tie my IP address (from the image fetch timestamp) to my post on the thread (which also has a timestamp), then you are invading my privacy. Specifically you are tying my IP address to my FR username.
So please answer: yes or no. If you don't use the logs, then that's fine. You also need to ensure that no one else uses the logs.
I like the way you think on this particular point.
Though if you are concerned about privacy, you can always use a VPN.
So glad he did !
His grabbing onto the Obama birth certificate controversy reassured me that he wasn't afraid to piss people off, and especially the milquetoast Republican weenies who won't fight for anything.
I know firsthand how violent leftists can be when they know who you are after you've pissed them off.
Also, the government can be pretty ruthless when you piss it off, and of course it is made up of mostly leftists.
If someone whose family all lived in Iran for generations and himself was born in Iran to two Iranian parents moved to the Us and ran for president, obviously he would be constitutionally ineligible. But the question is, who would have standing to bring a challenge? Anyone challenging his ineligibility would probably be ruled to not have standing by the courts the way things have been going. So who does have standing to bring a challenge?
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.