Spread the love


by Sharon Rondeau

(Oct. 30, 2018) — On Tuesday an unprecedented number of readers accessed our articles on the topic of presidential eligibility and the relevant term “natural born Citizen.”

Whether by design or happenstance, by far, the most popular article today was John Charlton’s “4 Supreme Court cases define ‘natural born citizen.'”

The term of art is found in Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution and has been the subject of much debate over the years among constitutional scholars and writers.  It again became a focus when the late Sen. John McCain sought the Republican presidential nomination in 2000 and again in 2008, when he received it.

McCain was born in Panama in 1936 to two U.S.-citizen parents when his father, a Navy admiral, was stationed there.  A key element of Americans’ understanding of “natural born Citizen” is generally having been born in the United States, at a minimum.

Many of those reviewing our articles were schools and institutions of higher learning; some were U.S. government departments.  Readers’ searches may have been prompted by a report by Axios Tuesday morning of an interview with President Trump stating that he plans to issue an executive order revoking the custom of granting “birthright citizenship” to children born in the country to illegal aliens and non-residents.

The reaction from the mainstream media was swift and condemning, claiming that Trump would be violating the 14th Amendment or the Constitution if he issues such an order.

There was little such reaction when Obama issued an “executive-action” memorandum to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in 2012 granting pseudo-legal status to approximately 800,000 illegal aliens age 30 and younger who were brought to the U.S. by their parents without documentation.

Some of those who registered for and were qualified for “DACA” were found to be criminals.

During the interview with Axios, Trump did not refer to the term “natural born Citizen,” reserved as a constitutional requirement only for the nation’s chief executive.

In 2007, many Americans raised concerns about the eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama given that a number of mainstream media reports stated that he was born in Indonesia or Kenya rather than Hawaii, as his oft-repeated life narrative claims.  The discrepancy between those previous reports and the “Hawaii” narrative has never been officially. explained.

After the White House posted what it said was an image of Obama’s “long-form” birth certificate from the Hawaii Department of Health (HDOH), several experts declared it a forgery.  That prompted a five-year investigation carried out by a former detective, Mike Zullo, under the authority of the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office (MCSO), concluding that the image, as well as Obama’s alleged Selective Service registration form, is fraudulent.

Despite being aware of the conclusions, neither the FBI, Justice Department nor Congress launched a probe to verify or disprove them.  Zullo has spoken on numerous radio shows detailing his findings, which were supported, in regard to the long-form birth certificate, by two reputable forensic analysts working independently from different disciplines.

Zullo has specifically said that the U.S. intelligence community, which appears to have taken part in circulating an unverified Russia “dossier” of political opposition research on Donald Trump in 2016, was aware that Obama did not meet the requirement of having “being born on American soil.”

Some readers were specifically reading our articles about Obama.

The above list does not include the unusually-high number of likely average citizens who accessed Charlton’s article and others Tuesday on the topic of “natural born Citizen” or Obama’s eligibility.

This article was updated at 10:58 p.m. EDT.

Join the Conversation


Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

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

  1. My two rubles worth:
    Senator Claire McCaskill and a handful of other complicit U.S. Senators were key originators to subvert the U.S. Constitution, Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 in order to disregard and circumvent the natural born Citizen specification for the Executive office by introducing the sham Senate Resolution (SR) 511, that falsely identified McCain as a natural born (US) Citizen, while doing and saying nothing about the Kenyan grifter’s own non-natural born (US) citizenship.

    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’s own statute defining the term natural born Citizen;”

    There’s no doubt in my military mind that the authors of SR 511 were 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:……”

    If so, 100 Senators pulled the wool over the eyes of the electorate in 2008. They did not consider telling the electorate that the first Naturalization Act (1790) was NULLIFIED by the following corrective text found in the 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.”

    Congress cannot make any person a natural born (US) Citizen; that is why SR 511 was a sham. People are natural born (US) citizens by the act of nature, otherwise known as natural law. Congress can only grant statutory (positive laws) citizenship. Only those persons born on US soil to two US citizen parents are natural born (US) citizens; all others that do not meet the natural born (US) citizen specification are statutory citizens and are only eligible for the US Congress or for the US Supreme Court. The authors and signers of SR 511 positively deceived through criminal trickery.

    John S. McCain’s parents were required 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. My nephew, born in England to two U.S. citizen parents (husband USAF enlisted), also needed immigration documentation to declare his U.S. citizenship. If the U.S. Supreme Court ever rules that I am wrong about what I have stated above, I will then be glad to eat a whole humble pie in one sitting.

    Everyone, including me, that voted for either McCain or Obama in the 2008 election, voted for an ineligible presidential candidate.

  2. It appears to me that NATURAL BORN CITIZENSHIP (Article 2, Section 1, Paragraph 5) is a subject that We, The People, and our so-called Representatives in Congress and Justices in our US Supreme Court don’t want to talk about. As Clarence Thomas said, we would rather “evade” it!
    All of us will live to regret it.
    “Barack Hussein Obama” is/was FOREIGN-BORN, a FRAUD, ANTI-AMERICAN, PHONY BLACK (ethnically 44% Arab, 6% Black, at most 50% White), RADICAL MUSLIM, SERIAL CRIMINAL, TERRORIST-AFFILIATED, USURPER, MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE (ask John Brennan and the CIA!), TREASONOR.
    These are facts, and I can prove them. But, then, why would you care.
    Tom Arnold.

  3. Buck nailed it with his astute observation that John McCain was already legally qualified as a “natural born” citizen, as his biological parents were actively serving under the “jurisdiction” of the United States military. (As noted in Vatel’s Laws of Nations, upon which the US Constitution is based)
    McCain sold out to the predictable dog-n-pony show of senatorial acceptance, to smooth the way for a completely ineligible presidential candidate to bamboozle an uninformed American public (Thanks to public education, or lack thereof?). If our President, Donald Trump, ever gets around to declassifying Obama’s (if that’s his real name?) birth, school, passports and social security records, we might just discover who really occupied the Oval Office for eight years? Thanks to the Post & Email (Sharon) for keeping this issue on the forefront until it’s resolved.

  4. If one believes a “natural born citizen” is one born of citizen parents of a country and on the soil of that country (which I do) they are following Vatel’s tone “Law of Nations.” Law of Nations, Book 1, Ch. X1X, paragraph 212: “The citizens are the members of the civil society: bound to this society by certain duties and are subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens.” However, Vattel also writes in paragraph 217 that “children born out of the country in the armies of the state, or in the house of its minister, at a foreign court, are reputed born in the country; for a citizen who is absent with his family, on the service of the state, but still dependent on it, and subject to its jurisdiction, cannot be considered to have quitted its territory.” So, John McCain was born a natural born citizen.

  5. A “Natural Born Citizen” is “one born in the United States to parents who are both U.S. Citizens themselves”-Minor v Happersett, U.S. Supreme Court (1874). BTW, Panama was never,EVER, a part of the United States. The Panama Canal Zone was an Unincorporated territory, except for Colon, Panama and Panama City,Panama. McCain was NOT born in the U.S. He was born in Colon, Panama. He was, at most, a naturalized American citizen, by Statute and like Obama, NOT a “Natural Born Citizen” of the U.S. http://www.thepostemail.com/11/19/2017/imposters-oval-office.