The Usurper And I

To: Dr. Gianni DeVincent Hayes, Ph.D, D.Min

Subject: NewsWithViews Columns of Sept. 14 & Sept. 22

Date: September 23

Dear Dr. Hayes,

I wish first of all to commend you on this 2-parter.  Important words for the public to digest - take in, and do something about. 

But - and especially with your obvious love for the Constitution - you really need to get up to speed on a major issue regarding the office of the presidency and the trouble that we are in.  Basically, we are in the trouble that we are in because The People have lost sight of their responsibility in this country to be the authority, and sovereign; NOT their political representatives, or anybody else.

I refer to the fact that Obama is not a legally sitting president, because he is not a ’natural born’ citizen.  And neither is Ted Cruz.  Or Marco Rubio, or Bobby Jindal, or Rick Santorum, for that matter; as the Republican Party honchos try to make two wrongs make a right - the original wrong having been Obama’s candidacy, and the Republican Party’s failure to do its job, as the official opposition party in this country to the Democrats, and call him and the Democrat Party on the attempted (and, unfortunately, successful) sleight of hand.  

Listen carefully.  And, it is not rocket science.  The whole POINT of the constitutional Framers putting that particular eligibility requirement in their contract for that particular office - and that particular office ONLY, please note - was to make sure 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/CONFLICTING LOYALTIES OR ALLEGIANCES.  As a naturalized citizen would be subject to. And as a DUAL citizen would MOST CERTAINly be subject to.

Like Obama.  And like Cruz, whose father was not a naturalized citizen at the time of Ted’s birth.  (Same for the others.)

It is obvious that said Framers were going by the definition of that term extant at the time in the definitive tome of the day on such matters, E. de Vattel’s ’The Law of Nations Or Principles of Natural Law’.  Three copies of which tome it is known that Benjamin Franklin, one of the delegates to the Constitutional Convention, is known to have been in the possession of.  (If any of the delegates were not clear as to the definition of the term that they were being asked to vote on, all they would have had to do was ask their elder, respected, and learned mentor, B. Franklin, sitting right there amongst them at the proceedings.)  And specifically to the point of the importance of the Commander in Chief role for that office, there is the letter (7/25/1787) from John Jay, a respected statesman of the day (who ended up becoming the first Chief Justice of the new United States Supreme Court, such was the respect for his acumen on political matters), to G. Washington in his role as Chair of the C.C. proceedings, making the point:

‘Dear Sir,

‘ Permit me to hint whether it would not be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of foreigners into the administration of our national government; and to declare expressly that the Commander in Chief of the American army shall not be given to, nor devolve on, any but a natural born citizen.’    

And to drive the point home even further, there is the historical fact that Alexander Hamilton, as one of the delegates to those proceedings, proposed that the president need only be a, quote, ‘citizen’  - and his proposal was SPECIFICALLY TURNED DOWN, in favor of the more stringent category of citizen.

A ’natural born’ citizen, then, according to their understanding of the term, being one born on the soil (jus soli) of (in this case, U.S.) citizen parents (jus sanguinis).  That’s PLURAL.  As in BOTH.  Thus, with SOLE ALLEGIANCE TO THE U.S.  Which, as I say, was the WHOLE POINT of the exercise.

I know that many liberal lawyers have been trying to make the Constitution ‘a living document,’ so that they can make of its contents whatever they wish to.  (‘Words mean what I say they mean’ - Humpty Dumpty.)  But we’re not there yet.  And as added proof of the political parties’s KNOWING what they were doing in this charade, there is the fact that between them, they made a total of 8 tries between 2003 and ’08 to get a constitutional amendment going through Congress on this very issue (in some cases, including it in their covering submissions), and they failed each time even to get it out of committee, such was the sensitivity around the issue.  So, what did they do?  It is obvious: they met in a smoke-filled back room, and colluded, in a conspiracy to take down the Constitution, and thus the rule of law in the country.  An assumption that will come out in a court of law, when they are both hauled into it on RICO-statute charges, of being the criminal enterprises that they are.

Which is another story.  For now, I simply urge you to check out my case, and get satisfied in your own mind and heart of that which I charge:

that we have a Usurper occupying the Oval Office.  And what needs to happen is that

* he is simply arrested - by Oathkeepers - and held for trial, on a whole host of charges by now, including perjury, and treason;  

* the officials of both major political parties are likewise arrested, and charged as I have indicated above;

* the sitting Congress be dissolved, for failing to do its constitutional duty to rein in a rogue executive; and that

* an Officer of The People be appointed to call for new elections within a time certain; and in the meantime, to clean out the executive branch departments and agencies of all of the vipers infesting them.     [and bring this country back to order.]

Actually, I don’t think there will be any more elections; because I think that this Event signals the end of The Play that we have been in.  But just in case, we can make plans for one - with new political parties.

There is more.  But that is enough for now. I mainly wanted to correct you on your thinking, that Cruz was an eligible candidate. And that Obama was just an unfortunate choice.   

He is far more than that.  

Very sincerely,

Duane ’Stan’ Stanfield  

--

You see, I will not live in a climate of Untruth.  And I am not going anywhere.

So it is.