California Constituent: Sen. Kamala Harris Not a Natural Born Citizen

“PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES MUST BE VETTED”

December 4, 2017

Sen. Kamala Harris
112 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510

Dear Ms. Harris:

My name is Gary Wilmott and I reside in Southern California.

I couldn’t help but notice that the press has recently been extolling you as the next “Obama” and the inevitable frontrunner for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2020. While this growing presidential buzz may be quite intoxicating for you, I suggest that you take a serious look at Article II of the U.S. Constitution, i.e., the presidential eligibility clause.

Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 mandates that a president be a NATURAL-born citizen, which you clearly are not. At the time of your birth, BOTH of your parents were citizens of foreign countries, so your birth in California makes you at best a NATIVE-born citizen (anchor baby?) under the prevailing view of the 14th Amendment. Lest you think that I have Republican bias I would also point out that presidential wannabes Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio also fail to meet this higher standard of citizenship. Their campaigns were fraudulent and in clear violation of the U.S. Constitution.

Before you waste too much time, energy, and donor money, I would ask that you reconsider your disingenuous efforts to position yourself as a presidential contender. Your leftist, socialist identity politics aside, you can expect to get tremendous push-back from constitutionalists such as myself who refuse to allow another fraud in the White House. Our presidential candidates must be vetted.

In this age of Trump, where the current president was fully informed of Obama’s identity fraud and lack of constitutional eligibility in April of 2011 (just weeks prior to Obama’s forged birth certificate release), you can expect ferocious opposition from equal opportunity “birthers” such as myself who only want the Constitution respected. The time is ripe for the American people to be fully informed as to how the elite media and our complicit so-called representatives in Congress allowed this greatest of crimes against the American people to occur both in 2008 and 2012. The American people are determined to take back their country and expose all the swamp creatures, both past and present.

Meantime, I would advise that your time would be better spent doing scholarly research on this issue. In the long run it will save you a lot of headaches and money! I would also suggest that you watch on YouTube the Sheriff Arpaio press conferences which PROVED that Obama proffered a forged birth certificate on April 27, 2011. Throw in a forged Selective Service registration and a stolen SSN for good measure, and you clearly have the “crime of the century.” Ms. Harris, there is so much information and truth available for the intellectually curious. Time to get your priorities straight, Ms. Harris, and do what is right.

Sincerely,

Gary M. Wilmott

33 Responses to "California Constituent: Sen. Kamala Harris Not a Natural Born Citizen"

  1. Charles   Wednesday, March 20, 2019 at 4:15 PM

    Natural Born Citizen for dummies ! And if you still need more info go to Dr. Herb Titus and natural born citizen .

  2. Charles   Sunday, February 24, 2019 at 12:17 PM

    The fraud and usurper Barack hussein Obama is not a US Citizen let alone a Natural Born US Citizen and the US Congress knew it January 2009 and again January 2013 when they allowed the fraud and usurper barack hussein obama to take the oath of office all because of his perceived RACE .

  3. Sandra Taylor   Sunday, February 24, 2019 at 11:43 AM

    Kamala Harris was born in Oakland, Ca. in 1964. Her mother, from India, moved to the U.S. in 1960. Her Jamaican father moved here in 1961. They had not lived in the U.S. long enough to have become citizens, prior to Kamala’s birth. They were foreign nationals. They also divorced when Kamala was 7 and her mother took her and her younger sister to Canada to live. Kamala came back to the states to attend college. She is a “citizen” through the 14th Amendment, which does not and cannot make anyone a “natural born citizen”. She is not a constitutionally eligible “natural born citizen”…one born on U.S. soil to parents who are themselves, citizens. Obama was not constitutionally eligible to be POTUS, either, because his father was not a citizen. Do we need or want another usurper in the Oval Office? Someone needs to stop this idiocracy!

  4. Jeffrey Hardin   Saturday, February 16, 2019 at 12:40 PM

    And the list Grows.
    McCain however is no longer a threat.
    Kamala Devi Harris is Naturalized….Not Natural Born
    Rafael Edward Cruz is Naturalized….Not Natural Born
    Marco Antonio Rubio is Naturalized….Not Natural Born
    Piyush Bobby Jindal…Is Naturalized….Not Natural Born
    Barack Hussein Obama is Naturalized….Not Natural Born
    Nimrata Randhawa Haley is Naturalized….Not Natural Born
    ❌ John Sidney McCain III is Naturalized….Not Natural Born
    Edit or delete this

  5. JONATHAN DAVID MOOERS   Tuesday, February 12, 2019 at 7:29 PM

    Choosing presidential and vice-presidential candidates to run will be contentious, possibly disastrous (re: Soetoro-Obama II), unless one Constitutional standard is followed:

    Candidate is born on U.S. soil to parents who are both U.S. citizens at time of birth and all three are fully identified for public perusal

    Our U.S. Government-citizenry is so politically saturated, that it now appears that it can not, and will not, adhere to this least dubious original common-sense standard that has the best chance of “culling brains” to secure a president and vice-president who both have natural allegiances to “America First”.

    When our errant paycheck-government abandons this basic common-sense standard, it willfully puts national security, right on down to your home-town public safety, at risk, by negligently wading thru the following murky zones to propagandize together any sort of flimsy citizenship-candidates who might win elections and make some drive-bys “feel good”:

    Place of birth:

    US soil
    US jurisdiction
    foreign soil and foreign jurisdiction

    Parents:

    one or both natural born U.S. citizens
    one or both naturalized U.S. citizens
    one or both foreign-born citizens

    Candidate identification:

    full verifiable ID and life history released to the public
    partial or intentionally hidden or forged IDs and sketchy life histories
    any foreign identification available

    Screening:

    Political parties
    Secretaries of State
    Voters
    Electoral College
    U.S. courts
    Congress

    So, it seems today, that only The Post and Email readers and President Trump and other informed Constitutional Americans might be the only union that attempts to enforce this common sense standard since our existing U.S. Government would need another “higher government” in place just to make sure it actually does its job vetting Constitutional candidates as prescribed!

    NO BORDER = NO ORDER = RISK OF FOREIGN TAKE-OVER

    NO nbC BORDER [Soetoro-Obama II] = RISK OF FOREIGN TAKE-OVER

  6. Nikita's_UN_Shoe   Saturday, February 9, 2019 at 4:21 PM

    No U.S. presidential qualification article is complete unless the following mini-dissertation is plastered in the Reply Section. I previously placed this opinion in a different U.S. presidential article, but I figured misery needs company. Hope I don’t get charged-by-the-word. To wit:

    Prelude: The U.S. Senate pulled the wool over the eyes of the electorate to enable two ineligible presidential candidates to run for the office of the POTUS during the 2008 presidential election – Obama and yes, McCain. All of the U.S. Senate who were in session in 2008 conspired to influence the 2008 presidential election through an apparently innocuous bill known as Senate Resolution (SR) 511 by referencing a repealed immigration document from the year 1790 to legitimize an otherwise illegitimate John S. McCain, III for the office of the president of the United States and at the same time, used horse blinders to willfully obfuscate and overlook aka Barry HUSSEIN Obama’s own unconstitutional status as a presidential contender for the 2008 presidential election.
    https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/110/sres511/text

    Background: Before any person of any political party decides that they want to be a candidate for the president of the United States of America, they must have been born in the U.S.A. to two U.S. citizen parents, one female mother and one male father. Hence the term “natural born Citizen” as cited in the U.S. Constitution, Article II, Section 1, Clause 5.

    Previous attempts to modify the U.S. Constitution, Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 requirement wording from “natural born Citizen’ to simply “born citizen” certainly met with resistance, obfuscation, and confusion. The UniParty realized this change to the U.S. Constitution was unattainable through the Amendment process so they distorted the meaning of natural born Citizen behind the scenes by tickling the electorate with a feather using the ‘technical’ term “natural born Citizen” found in the U.S.A.’s first naturalization law. The SR 511 process was kept low-profile, albeit low-key, and was designed to deceive the public. The actual votes rendered for SR 511 attained 99 Yea votes from the UniParty on this bill. Only U.S. Senator John McCain did not vote for it. His recusal helped with the ‘integrity’ deception.

    Details: On April 10, 2008, U.S. Senator Claire McCaskill (D) MO, introduced a simple resolution that stated: “S.Res. 511 — 110th Congress: A resolution recognizing that John Sidney McCain, III, is a natural born citizen.” A handful of other U.S. Senators joined-in on the resolution that same day. Those co-sponsors were: Hillary Clinton, [D-NY], Thomas Coburn [R-OK], Patrick Leahy [D-], Barack HUSSEIN Obama [D-IL], and Jim Webb [D-VA]. According to U.S. Senate protocol, SR 511 then went to the “Ordered Reported” status on April 24, 2008 that indicates that the committee has voted to issue a report to the full chamber recommending that the bill be considered further. Only about 1 in 4 bills are reported out of committee. Finally, on April 30, 2008, the SR 511 bill was advanced to the “Agreed To” status where SR 511 resolution was passed in a 99 Yea vote in the U.S. Senate.

    Audacity: It’s insulting to even fathom that the Democrat Party, in either chamber, would initiate any action item that would politically favor or financially benefit the opposition, as this resolution appeared to be on its face value. What it did do is create a phony bi-partisan endeavor by having select members on both side of the aisle show their support for it, both in the “Introduced” phase and then again in the final “Agreed To” phase with a near-unanimous 99 Yea vote. There had to be a reason why, all of a sudden, the Senate chamber became so cooperative on this issue. This is the UniParty in action.

    Further Thought: Corporate managers like to hire ‘results-oriented’ individuals. Well, the desired results of this SR 511 were achieved by the UniParty who underhandedly defined the meaning of a natural born citizen as any person who is born in the United States of America without regard to the citizenship of the person’s parents. That’s why they spent the time and energy to focus on McCain’s presidential eligibility – which he isn’t. By focusing on McCain, the implied eligibility was that anyone born in the United States is eligible for the office of the presidency. Otherwise, Barack HUSSEIN Obama’s own eligibility would have been scrutinized with a separate resolution. This behind-the-scenes unwritten definition was instilled into the documentation of the Congressional Research Service. That same “born in the U.S.A.” became a talking point boilerplate canned response for all of the Congressional Members who had to answer their constituents when questioned about Obama’s presidential eligibility.

    SR 511 text obfuscation: SR 511 stated in-part: “Whereas such limitations would be inconsistent with the purpose and intent of the natural born Citizen clause of the Constitution of the United States, as evidenced by the First Congress’ own statute (stop right there on “statute” and let that sink in) defining the term natural born Citizen;” Moving along – This writer believes that SR 511 focused not so much on the TWO parent factor, but rather focused on the born overseas factor to either one or two U.S. citizens parents. Nonetheless, there’s no doubt in my military mind that the SR 511 text was alluding to the first Naturalization Act (1790) whereby it stated that: [Excerpt] “And the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born Citizens:…so-on and so-forth…”

    Obfuscation by Omission: One hundred U.S. Senators definitely pulled the wool over the eyes of the electorate in 2008. Among other things, they did not consider telling the electorate that the first Naturalization Act (1790) was effectively nullified by the following corrective text found in the follow-on Naturalization Act (1795) that repealed the 1790 Act. The Naturalization Act (1795) now stated: “….and the children of citizens of the United States, born out of the limits and jurisdiction of the United States, shall be considered as citizens of the United States:….” Naturalization Act (1795) further stated: “SEC. 4. And be it further enacted, That the Act intituled, “An act to establish an uniform rule of naturalization,” passed the twenty-sixth day of March, one thousand seven hundred and ninety, be, and the same is hereby repealed.”

    It’s the Law: John S. McCain’s parents were required by law to document and to declare John III a U.S. citizen upon his first entry into continental U.S. If it takes a law to declare someone a U.S. citizen, they are not a natural born (U.S.) Citizen, instead they are a statutory U.S. citizen. My nephew, born in England to two U.S. citizen parents (husband USAF enlisted), also needed immigration documentation to declare U.S. citizenship for their son.

    Congress cannot make any person a natural born (U.S.) Citizen through a law; that is why SR 511 was a sham. Actually, Congress made John McCain a statutory U.S. citizen by enacting a law that states that certain persons born outside the limits of the U.S.A. are indeed, U.S. citizens, but not a natural born Citizen. See 8 U.S. Code § 1403. Persons born in the Canal Zone or Republic of Panama on or after February 26, 1904 at: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1403

    Summary: People are natural born (U.S.) Citizens by the act of nature (born in the U.S.A. to two U.S. citizen parents), otherwise known as natural law. Congress can only grant statutory (positive laws) U.S. citizenship. Repeated: Only those persons born in the U.S.A. to two U.S. citizen parents are natural born (U.S.) Citizens; all others that do not meet the natural born (U.S.) Citizen specification are statutory citizens and are only eligible for the U.S. Congress or for the U.S. Supreme Court. The authors and signers of SR 511 positively deceived through criminal trickery.

    Immigration laws are made to proclaim and lawfully make a person a U.S. citizen through positive law. No immigration law can make anyone a natural born Citizen. A natural born Citizen is a U.S. citizen through no laws enacted by Congress. A natural born Citizen is a U.S. Citizen by the law of nature – born on U.S. soil to two U.S. citizen parents. No positive law can do that. It is my opinion that everyone that voted for either McCain or Obama in the 2008 election and again Obama in 2012, voted for an ineligible presidential candidate.

  7. Nikita's_UN_Shoe   Saturday, February 9, 2019 at 3:43 PM

    For those commenters to this article that cannot add up to two (U.S. citizen parents), please read the articles at the below referenced weblink that are authored by a regular visitor and contributor to this website. Seems as though some misguided commenters want to be a ‘designer’ of what or who a natural born Citizen is by stating different parameters of country origin and number of U.S. citizen parents.

    The definition is so simple to understand that even this comrade has no problem comprehending, once the excitement of the shoe-pounding is over at the U.N. General Assembly. Simply put: the only natural born (U.S.) Citizens are those people that are born in the United States of America to two (2) U.S. citizen parents. O.K., I suppose we’ll have to include born in Washington D.C., too.

    Reference: https://www.scribd.com/document/385966818/Senator-Kamala-Harris-Not-a-Natural-Born-Citizen-of-USA-to-Constitutional-Standards

  8. kathryn laney   Thursday, February 7, 2019 at 8:15 PM

    You know what? She won’t win anyway. Wouldn’t worry about her. Don’t think she is that sharp!

  9. James Carter   Sunday, January 27, 2019 at 8:51 AM

    Jim Campbell,

    Even the “illustrious” Harvard Law Review gets it wrong. The article therein that you referenced — https://harvardlawreview.org/2015/03/on-the-meaning-of-natural-born-citizen/ — cites the Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1790 as determining who is a “natural born citizen”. However, just like the CRS article, it fails to mention that the Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1795 repealed and replaced the 1790 version in to to, and doesn’t even contain the verbiage “natural born citizen”.

  10. Theresa Rodriguez   Saturday, January 26, 2019 at 10:45 PM

    I see a lot of comments here. I agree, we have yet to cross the Constitutional Crisis that will be if/when obama is found to be NOT a Natural Born Citizen… but that is for another time. The long and the short of it is, as previously pointed out for both Cruz and Rubio, as defined by several SCOTUS decisions, a Natural Born Citizen is the US born child of at least ONE American Citizen Parent. If at least one of Harris parents did not attain full American Citizenship BEFORE Harris was born then NO she is not eligible to the office of the U S President. Period.

  11. Hlenn Garrison   Friday, January 11, 2019 at 5:34 PM

    It depends on what you mean by “definitively”: Every judge who heard an eligibility challenge on the merits ruled birth in the United States is sufficient to confer natural-born citizenship. The same for every professor or other expert that has considered the issue.

  12. Sharon Rondeau   Friday, January 11, 2019 at 4:13 PM

    Has it been definitively established that the authors of the article are correct?

  13. Jim Campbell   Friday, January 11, 2019 at 2:28 PM

    You all might consider going to the U.S. Constitution and looking up what a natural born citizen actually is. https://harvardlawreview.org/2015/03/on-the-meaning-of-natural-born-citizen/
    If she is deemed the candidate by her party it seems she passes all the qualifications mentioned in the Harvard Law Review link above. Thanks, J.C.

  14. Mark Bellison   Tuesday, December 5, 2017 at 1:35 PM

    “Everyone born in the US is” NOT “a natural born citizen”

    And yet you don’t seem to be able to convince anyone in the judicial system that you are right. Oh look another judge disagrees with your interpretation. And cites both Wong Kim Ark and Georgia’s Judge Mahili in determining the meaning of a natural born citizen.

    “The Georgia Secretary of State recently denied a similar challenge to Mr. Obama’s status as a natural born citizen in Farrar, et al. v. Obama, OSAH-SECSTATE-CE1215136-60-MAHIHI, where Georgia State Administrative Law Judge Mahili relied upon Ankeny and Wong Kim Ark for his ruling that the President was indeed a natural born Citizen.”

    “Time does not allow for the fullest discussion of the case law addressing these issues, but suffice it to say that the status of “natural born Citizen” for Mr. Obama has not been denied by any court or administrative agency that has addressed the merits of the issue. This is not the place to write a law review article on the full analysis of the subject, but there is no legal authority that has been cited or otherwise provided that supports a contrary position. The petitioners’ legal position on this issue, however well intentioned, has no merit in law. Thus, accepting for the point of this issue that Mr. Obama was born in Hawaii, he is a “natural born Citizen” regardless of the status of his father.“ Judge Jeffery Masin, New Jersey

  15. T.F. B0W   Monday, December 4, 2017 at 11:19 PM

    How does Robert Laity know that Harris was born in 1964 to two foreign nationals? Has he seen her birth certificate?

    Robert Laity is free, of course, to believe whatever he desires, but every judge who has heard an eligibility challenge had concluded that birth in the United States is sufficient to confer natural born citizenship. (Which is essentially what the 1828 Catchism on the Constitution says, a document that can be located on the website for the American Justice Foundation.)

  16. JONATHAN DAVID MOOERS   Monday, December 4, 2017 at 10:37 PM

    RAPES/RAPS/RICO Bill Jefferson “BJ” Clinton is an Arkansas-licensed ATTORNEY-CRIMINAL
    https://attorneyinfo.aoc.arkansas.gov/info/attorney/Attorney_Search_Detail.aspx?ID=f277c64b-b034-4086-8434-80096c270099

    LYIN’ TED THE UNDOCUMENTED FED, Rafael Cruz, is a Texas-licensed ATTORNEY-CRIMINAL for impersonating a “natural born Canadian citizen” for U.S. president
    https://www.texasbar.com/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Find_A_Lawyer&template=/Customsource/MemberDirectory/MemberDirectoryDetail.cfm&ContactID=196697

    NEVER-presIDent SOETORO-OBAMA II is a disgraced “retired” Illinois-licensed ATTORNEY-CRIMINAL guilty of national identity theft and Constitution Prostitution
    https://www.iardc.org/ldetail.asp?id=118121656

    KAMALA HARRIS is a California-licensed ATTORNEY-CRIMINAL-WANNABE presIDential candIDate impersonating a “natural born Citizen”
    http://members.calbar.ca.gov/fal/Member/Detail/146672

    THE PROBLEM: State attorney licensing Boards see attorney-crime everyday…and look the other way = The Flaw!

    THE SOLUTION: Revoke attorney-criminal licenses for criminal behavior OR REVOKE ALL STATE ATTORNEY-CRIMINAL LICENSING BOARDS IN USA…because ignorance of The Flaw is no excuse!

    JD Mooers, PE (licensed engineer in Maine since 1978)

  17. Talking Dog   Monday, December 4, 2017 at 10:34 PM

    Good editorial;
    The “Deep State” is a collection of like minded-anti-Constitution individuals who make up a confederacy (loosely connected) of the naive and corrupt to maintain the (previous?) status quo (Swamp) under any circumstances, and if it takes circumventing the Constitution to achieve self-defeating goals (forgive them? I’ll leave the forgiveness part to the Man upstairs) is of little (or no) consequence.
    Why?
    Good question but suffice to say that the more ignorant; the more provincial of thought; the more focused on protecting the status quo; the more unethical the tactics which is why there’s hues and cries of the impeachment of Trump when the focus should remain on Obama’s fake BIRTH CERTIFICATE (and the Uranium One deal) and all the other false records, including submitting a false Draft Registration number which is a clear felony.
    And, no, we don’t expect Harris to read the Post & Email but you can bet your bottom dollar that one of her trolls does.
    AG Sessions has to go.
    Look: Obama was never vetted:
    WHERE’S THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE?

  18. Robert Laity   Monday, December 4, 2017 at 10:32 PM

    TF Bow, Kamala Harris was born in 1964 in Oakland California to an Indian National Mother and a Jamaican National Father. Unless Harris PROVES that both of her parents were US Citizens before she was born then she is OUT as President or VP. President Trump should ask Congress to form a new agency whose sole purpose would be to determine whether or not a candidate for President meets ALL Article II requirements to be President or VP and that all States list these mandatory requirements uniformly. The State of NY is currently in non-comp liance with the US Constitution in that it represents “Born a Citizen” as the requirement for being POTUS versus the actual requirement that a POTUS and VP must be a “Natural Born Citizen”.

  19. T.F. B0W   Monday, December 4, 2017 at 10:22 PM

    It is a good that Jeffrey Harrison sees the importance in speaking truthfully.

  20. Robert Laity   Monday, December 4, 2017 at 10:20 PM

    Bellison, Still confused I see. “Everyone born in the US is” NOT “a natural born citizen”. An NBC is one born IN the country to parents who are both said country’s citizens”. Minor v Happersett, USSCt. unanimously defined an NBC as One born IN the United States to parents who are both US Citizens themselves.

  21. Robert Laity   Monday, December 4, 2017 at 10:14 PM

    Hiller, It makes a big difference. Breaking the law is breaking the law. If Kamala Harris’ Parents were not US Citizens when Kamala was born, Kamala is OUT as President or VP.

  22. Jeffrey Harrison   Monday, December 4, 2017 at 8:09 PM

    P.S. Gary, indeed you are free to believe and say anything you deem. Keep speaking the
    truth for scripture indicates darkness will not overcome the light. Keep letting your light
    shine. Amen.

  23. Jeffrey Harrison   Monday, December 4, 2017 at 8:02 PM

    Gary, Thanks for your article. Indeed, you covered it rather well.

  24. Mark Bellison   Monday, December 4, 2017 at 7:38 PM

    “…if you want to claim there’s a Supreme court case where an opinion or ruling states that everyone born in the US is a natural born citizen, perhaps you should find it FOR Ms Harris.”

    Well, Judge Stansfield of the Circuit Court of Carroll County, Maryland found one,

    “The issue of the definition of “natural born citizen” is firmly resolved by the United States Supreme Court in a prior opinion [Wong Kim Ark], and as this Court sees it, that holding is binding on the ultimate issue in this case. While Ms Fair and Ms. Miltenberger may disagree with the holding of the Supreme Court, from a perspective of stare decises, the only means by which an opinion of the Supreme Court concerning substantive law can be overturned is either by a subsequent holding of the Supreme Court or an Amendment to the U. S. Constitution. Both have occurred in the past on very rare occasions, but this Court does not believe that it has the discretion to simply disregard a holding which clearly applies to the definition of “natural born citizen” as it applies to President Obama.” Judge Thomas Stansfield in Fair v. Obama

  25. T.F. B0W   Monday, December 4, 2017 at 7:14 PM

    Gary Wilmott is, of course, free to believe whatever he desires, but there’s no indication of what Wilmott has given Harris notice of, or the consequences of Harris’s ignoring Wilmott’s “notice.” What would motivate a person to write a letter in which the author expects neither a response nor for the recipient to see it is rather a mystery; boredom, perhaps? Preening?

    Advising someone (especially someone as busy a sitting U.S. senator) to go do some research is a poor persuasion technique; the better practice would be to specify the materials, and include them.

    Because without these unspecified scholarly materials, Harris’s research would likely be what any attorney would do: read the judges’ rulings stating that birth in the United States is sufficient to confer natural-born citizenship. That’s what people, attorneys especially, do: they look to actual lawgivers, like real judges hearing real cases in real courtrooms.

    Catherine Hughes is, of course, free to believe whatever she desires, but no judge who considered the eligibility issue has read Minor’s dicta to suggest that birth in the United States to two U.S. citizen parents is constitutionally required. Mark Bellison, for example, quoted a real judge, who discounted how Hughes reads Minor.

    Speaking of materials to be sent, surely Harris, as a sitting U.S. senator, is entitled to see Arpaio’s reports. Has Arpaio sent them to her yet? Maybe Harris would be more impressed by the actual reports than Zullo’s online summary of them.

    It is interesting that Wilmott assumes Harris was born in California. (She might not be even a citizen!) Has he seen her birth certificate? Perhaps Wilmott should request to see Harris’s birth certificate, and provide copies of his request to regional newspapers, like the Los Angeles Times, the Orange County Register, and the San Diego Union-Tribune.

  26. Gary Wilmott   Monday, December 4, 2017 at 6:43 PM

    Additional follow-up for Totally False Bow. I don’t expect Senator Harris to personally see the letter and I certainly don’t expect a response. So you ask what was the purpose of the letter? It really is quite obvious but I will let you strain your brain and try to figure it out.

  27. Catherine Hughes   Monday, December 4, 2017 at 6:28 PM

    @T.F BOW – Your confusion over what a natural born citizen is astounding. Perhaps you and Ms Harris, as well as others, could benefit from actually reading Supreme Court cases and the opinions regarding citizenship. For instance, say something from Minor v Happersett – decided March 29 1875:

    “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.”

    By all means, if you want to claim there’s a Supreme court case where an opinion or ruling states that everyone born in the US is a natural born citizen, perhaps you should find it FOR Ms Harris.

  28. Mark Bellison   Monday, December 4, 2017 at 5:25 PM

    Boy, you better hope she doesn’t read Allen v. Obama

    “Most importantly, Arizona courts are bound by United States Supreme Court precedent in construing the United States Constitution Arizona v. Jay J. Garfield Bldg. Co., 39 Ariz. 45, 54, 3 P. 2d 983, 986 (1931), and this precedent fully supports that President Obama is a natural born citizen under the Constitution and thus qualified to hold the office of President. See United States v. Wong Kim Ark (addressing U. S. Const. amend. XIV) ; Ankeny v. Governor of the State of Indiana (addressing the precise issue). Contrary to Plaintiff’s assertion, Minor v. Happersett does not hold otherwise.” Judge Richard E. Gordon

    He was appointed by Governor Brewer and was re-elected in 2016 getting 76% of the vote.

  29. Gary Wilmott   Monday, December 4, 2017 at 2:56 PM

    Totally False Bow: ALWAYS spinning and making up stuff. The letter is unquestionably sufficient to put her (Harris) on notice. I have already indicated that the “system” is corrupt, so why would Harris have any inclination to “likely read” rulings on eligibility by corrupt left-leaning judges when she too is part of the swamp?

  30. Talking Dog   Monday, December 4, 2017 at 2:52 PM

    Dear Gary;
    Talking dog here. My master is typing my reply because I’m yelping (dog speak for laughing) because you asked this Harris character to do “the right thing”.
    You wasted your time and I’m asking you to not waste anymore of your time.
    Harris actually believes in the Obama/Hillary/Socialism/Elizabeth “Pocahontas” Warren stupidity.
    Us dogs have more lives than humans (but not as many as cats) and even we don’t ask people who support a group of people who hate, torture and kill dogs for sport and shame on those that do.
    Harris is of the group that does not like me or my K-9 friends; Service dogs for the Blind and other things; search and rescue; and just being a friend/companian for life. You can’t be for one and say you are for another: you either are or aren’t and Harris is an “isn’t”.
    Talking Dog

  31. T.F. B0W   Monday, December 4, 2017 at 12:40 PM

    It is interesting that Wilmott only suggested that Harris do some “scholarly research on this issue” — instead of providing Harris with that research. Because Harris (an attorney) will likely read the judges’ rulings from other eligibility challenges and conclude that her birth in California is sufficient to confer natural-born citizenship.

  32. Stephen Hiller   Monday, December 4, 2017 at 11:20 AM

    Hillary was right, “at this point what difference does it make?” NOTHING has been done to correct Obama’s 8 years of treason, nothing was done after Eric Holder’s contempt of congress charge. I won’t bother to mention Bill & Hill as their crimes are too numerous and there simply are NO consequences. Ms. Harris knows that.

  33. Miki Booth   Monday, December 4, 2017 at 10:54 AM

    When were her parents naturalized if at all? I see met at berkley says a lot.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.