from wnd.com;’Trump: ‘Obama Was Born In The United States, Period’’ - Bob Unruh - September 16
(“Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump, whose questioning of Barack Obama’s presidential eligibility in 2011 preceded the White House’s release of what it claimed was Obama’s Hawaii birth certificate, said on Friday the issue is settled.
“President Barack Obama was born in the United States. Period,” Trump said. “And now we all want to get back to making American strong and great again.”
Um - hold on, Donald. Not so fast…and as for HilLIARy:
“Clinton, meanwhile, said Trump’s campaign “was founded on this outrageous lie” that Obama is not a natural-born citizen.
“There is no erasing it in history,” she said. “Just yesterday, Trump again refused to say with his own words that the president was born in the United States. Now, Donald’s advisers have a temerity to say he’s doing the country a service by pushing these lies.
“No, he isn’t. He is feeding into the worst impulses — the bigotry and bias that lurks in our country,” said Clinton.
“Barack Obama was born in America, plain and simple, and Donald Trump owes him and the American people an apology.
“Donald Trump looks at President Obama after eight years as our president — he still doesn’t see him as an American. Think of how dangerous that is,” she said. “Imagine a person in the Oval Office who traffics in conspiracy theories and refuses to let them go no matter what the facts are…”)
Let's see, just what are those "facts" you talk about, Hillary. The REAL facts, that is.
No. 1. The definitive tome of the day on such matters, E. de Vattel's 'The Law of Nations,' explains that the term, a 'natural born' citizen, refers to, quote, "those born in the country, of parents who are citizens..." (Book One, Ch. XIX, Sect. 212.)
No. 2. Proof that the constitutional Framers were conversant with this take on the matter? Well, for one historical fact: It is known that Benjamin Franklin, who was one of the delegates to the Constitutional Convention proceedings himself, and their respected elder mentor, was in the possession of 3 copies of that tome - which also was taught in the universities of the day. It became the basis for American Common Law, or Natural Law. (Some naysayers have tried to say that the Framers were going by English Common Law on the matter. But that refers to 'natural born SUBJECTS'. Which those men certainly were not any longer, were, after a long and bloody War of Independence, freemen, sovereigns in their own right - and damn proud of it.)
No. 3. John Jay, a respected statesman of the day - and who not so incidentally became the new nation's first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court - wrote a letter to G. Washington in his role as Chair of the C. Convention proceedings urging that they set as an eligibility requirement for the office of the presidency that the occupant needed to be a "natural born citizen," not a lesser kind of citizen. His main purpose for recommending that stringent requirement was so that the occupant of that office, who would as well, then, become the Commander in Chief of the nation's military forces, had NO DUAL OR OTHERWISE CONFLICTING LOYALTIES OR ALLEGIANCES OR INFLUENCES. Had SOLE ALLEGIANCE to the U.S. Washington passed on his recommendation to the Convention, and that recommendation was subsequently adopted. Thus, no naturalized citizens, or dual citizens, need apply.
No. 4. Some naysayers have tried to argue that there were and are only 2 kinds of citizens, naturalized or natural born. Not so, as conveniently, or inconveniently, depending on your position on the matter, demonstrated by the fact that Alexander Hamilton, as one of those delegates, proposed that the president need only be, quote, "born a Citizen" - and his proposal was SPECIFICALLY TURNED DOWN, in favor of the more stringent requirement, of needing to be a citizen by being born both in the country - what is called in legalese jus soli, i.e., law of the soil - and of citizen parents - or jus sanguinis, i.e., law of the blood. And that eligibility requirement for that particular office STILL STANDS, absent a constitutional amendment to the contrary.
The nation has been sold out in this matter not just by the Democrat Party, which put up an ineligible candidate for the office in 2008, but by the Republican Party, for not calling them on their illegal act. Why would they fail to do their responsibility in the matter as the official opposition party? The answer has become obvious, when they have subsequently tried to put up THEIR OWN INELIGIBLE CANDIDATES for the office, in the forms of Cruz, Rubio, and Jindal (for demographic purposes).
They both have known the true facts of the matter. And the proof of THAT fact is that they both tried a total of 8 times between them, between 2003 and '08 alone, to get a constitutional amendment going through Congress on the issue, in attempts to water down this requirement - including it as the common denominator of their various proposals - and they failed each time even to get their proposals out of committee, such was the sensitivity around this issue. So, what have they done? It is obvious what they have done: they have colluded in an attempt to do an end-around on the Constitution, and the American people, on the matter; figuring that, controlling the MSM and the judiciary between them, they could get away with their arrogant enterprise. Well, I have news for you, boys and girls: Along with the Usurper, both parties are going down, when the truth outs. As it will.
As. It. Will.
Sooner or later. When the American public wakes up to its responsibilities in this matter, and such matters. As the rightful sovereigns in this country, operating under THE RULE OF LAW.
Onteo1 Alexander Gofen • an hour ago
And here is another view on this very sad day of infamy of this despicable nation.
Today Mr. Trump (and a few days earlier Dr. Carlson) did willingly what many righteous men before them refused to do under threats of torture and death. With a little pressure from the enemy media, Trump and Carlson willingly swore something akin to the islamic oath ("There is no God but Allah..."): in this case "There is no illegitimacy ever...". By so doing they betrayed the very basics of a human decency, loyalty to Founders, and the special commission to America by God. Nothing else in the world matters. They both, and America have deserved a damnation.
- What are you talking about
- He is talking about the fact that Obama is in the office of the presidency illegitimately, because he is not a 'natural born' citizen, which is known to have been defined at the time that it was codified in the Constitution as an eligibility requirement for that (particular) office as being a person born in the country of parents who were citizens thereof. That's what makes it 'natural'. And that eligibility requirement for that office STILL STANDS, absent a constitutional amendment to the contrary.
The confusion has come in because the Republican Party failed in its duty as the official opposition party to call Obama and the Democrat Party on the matter, and so the public has assumed that there must not be anything to the issue. Bad call. It overlooks the fact that the Repubs might well have wanted to water down that stringent requirement for that office themselves, to run their OWN ineligible candidates for that office. As they have just done, with Cruz, Rubio, and Jindal not being NBC's either.
This is a crime of immense proportions, requiring, besides the Usurper being arrested and brought to trial (on a whole host of charges by now, including fraud, perjury, and treason), both major political parties to be brought to trial on RICO-statute charges, and being found guilty of being the criminal enterprises that they are, dissolved, fined, and their leaders imprisoned.
And this nation gets back to THE RULE OF LAW. Once its oath takers become the oath KEEPERS that they need to step up to the plate to become. Or the nation falls into the hands of its erstwhile masters, the New World Order crowd.
- from rickwells.us: ‘Angry Jake Tapper Still Doesn’t Know Why He, MSM Were Played By Trump’ - Rick Wells - September 16/17
- (Supposedly Trump got coverage on CNN by saying he would comment on the ‘birther’ issue, and then got some war-decorated Veterans to back him before he got to that part of his speech. Unfortunately, Trump doesn’t understand the ‘natural born citizen’ issue. But he at least got some coverage on the MSM out of the deal…
- Rick in the article, seems to think that the issue is where Obama was born. Sigh…)
- Stan // September 17, 2016 at 12:34 pm // Reply
- Your comment is awaiting moderation.
- Conservatives like you, Rick, need to be very clear about the so-called ‘birther’ issue, to pass on proper info to the public. In this case, it doesn’t matter where Obama was born. He has officially claimed that his father was BO Sr.; so he is toast right there. There is all manner of historical evidence that the definition of a ‘natural born citizen’ extant at the time that the constitutional Framers codified it in their contract as an eligibility requirement for that particular office is a person born in the country of parents who are citizens thereof. (That’s what makes it ‘natural,’ for heaven’s sake.) The source: the definitive tome of the day on such matters, and as taught in the universities of the day: E. de Vattel’s ‘The Law of Nations, Or Principles of Natural Law’. (Book One, CH. XIX, Sect. 212. See also, on this issue: puzo1dotblogspotdotcom.)
- 1. Cruz has tried to claim that he qualifies under the Naturalization Act of 1790. He fails to point out that that Act was repealed by the Naturalization Act of 1795 ON THIS VERY ISSUE: that the first one was wrong on this point. And both Madison and Washington signed off on the repeal, and reinstatement of the original meaning. And besides, nothing trumps the Constitution but a constitutional amendment – no Act of Congress can do that.
- 2. People assume that the Republican Party would have called Obama and the Dems on the issue if there were any substance to questioning the Usurper’s eligibility. But they fail to grasp the fact that the Repubs have wanted to water down that requirement for that office for their own purposes – and ended up running at least 3 ineligible candidates this year on the same issue: Cruz, Rubio, and Jindal. The proof that both major p. parties have known the truth of this matter is that they both tried a total of 8 times between them, between 2003 and ’08 alone, to get just such an amendment going through Congress (proposals that had this issue as their common denominator) – and they failed each time even to get their proposals out of committee, such was the sensitivity around this issue. So: They have know the truth of the matter. And need to be hauled into court on RICO-statute charges for it, and found guilty as the criminal enterprises that they obviously are. And dissolved, fined, and their officials jailed.
- And they can have conversations over this issue all they want, in their exercise strolls in a white collar prison, with their co-conspirator, Obama; who needs to be arrested (on a whole host of charges by now, including fraud, perjury, and treason), tried, and found, obviously, guilty AS charged. Who is to do this arrest? Oath takers becoming oath KEEPERS.
- And almost past time.