AND COVERING UP FOR INELIGIBLE PRESIDENTIAL AND VICE-PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES

by Tom Arnold, ©2020

(Jul. 29, 2020) — [Editor’s Note:  The following was sent Wednesday evening to Fox News CEO Suzanne Scott, Sean Hannity, Tucker Carlson, and dozens of other media figures, Justice Department officials and congressmen.]

It appears that by the end of next week, this will have happened 3 times in the last 4 general elections!

In 2008, the constitutionally ineligible candidate was “Barack Hussein Obama.”  In a bio published in 1991 which remained intact and unchanged for sixteen years until 2007, “Obama’s” birthplace was reported to be British Kenya.  Do you, who are reading this, think that “Obama” forgot to proofread his own bio for all those years?  Actually, he most likely wrote it, or at least gave information about himself to the publisher.  Later, “Obama” even attempted to prove to the American people including “birthers” that he was born in Hawaii by producing a copy of what he claimed was his long-form birth certificate.  Only problem is-  THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE WAS FORENSICALLY EXAMINED AND TURNED OUT TO BE AN AMATEURISH, PIECED-TOGETHER, COMPUTER-GENERATED FORGERY!

In 2012, “Obama,” the fraud, was re-elected.

In 2020, Sean Hannity reported on FNC’s television program “Hannity” Tuesday night, July 28th, that an enhanced photograph of Joe Biden’s press conference notes strongly implied that Senator Kamala Harris would be Biden’s running mate.  The announcement of the running mate is scheduled for next week.  Only problem would be-  like “Obama,” Harris is constitutionally unqualified to be the VP or the president!  Although she was born in the United States (Oakland, CA, dob 10-20-1964), her father Donald J Harris, an acclaimed economist and university professor, was NOT AN AMERICAN CITIZEN, NATURALIZED OR OTHER, AT THE TIME.  In fact, he was a Jamaican citizen (who had emigrated to the United States in 1961).  Senator Harris’ mother Shyamala Gopalan was a Tamil Indian who had emigrated from India to the United States in 1960.  Neither parent had been in the United States for the necessary time of five years to be naturalized.  One other fact worthy of note is that Senator Harris likes to portray herself as being black, but in reality is a Jamaican Tamil Indian.

SO, FOX NEWS (Faux News), THERE YOU HAVE IT.  YOUR ORGANIZATION WITHHOLDING IMPORTANT FACTS FROM YOUR VIEWERS AND LISTENERS AND DISREGARDING OUR COUNTRY’S US CONSTITUTION FOR 3 OF THE LAST 4 GENERAL ELECTIONS!  Do you, as one of journalism’s “4th Estate” government watchdogs on behalf of the people, feel the least bit responsible for what is happening in our country today?  Do you suppose it has anything to do with failing to know about and abide by our US Constitution?  Do you further suppose that it has anything to do with the deceiving and dumbing down, caused by you and others, of our citizenry and electorate?  SHAME ON YOU!

Tucker Carlson Discusses “Birtherism,” Kamala Harris Background – The Post & Email

Tucker Carlson Discusses “Birtherism,” Kamala Harris Background – The Post & Email

Sharon Rondeau

DOES A BIRTH TO “IMMIGRANT PARENTS” PRECLUDE “NATURAL BORN” CITIZENSHIP? by Sharon Rondeau (Jul. 2, 2019) — Shor…

https://www.thepostemail.com/2019/07/02/tucker-carlson-discusses-birtherism-kamala-harris-background/

https://www.thepostemail.com/2020/07/23/u-s-senator-kamala-harris-is-not-a-natural-born-citizen-of-usa-not-eligible-to-be-president-and-cinc-or-vp/

Join the Conversation

19 Comments

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. “Only to make it as clear as clear can be that, in your disfavor, the liberal WaPo recognized that the Wong Kim Ark decision made him only a citizen, not a natural born citizen. Apparently your vision is blurred.”

    Chief Justice Fuller wrote this about Virginia Minor – “In Minor v. Happersett, 21 Wall. 162, this Court held that the word “citizen” is often used to convey the idea of membership in a nation, and, in that sense, women, if born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction of the United States, have always been considered citizens of the United States, as much so before the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution as since” In re Lockwood, 154 U.S. 116 (1894).

    He does not call her a natural born citizen. Justice Gray or the WaPo can both call Wong Kim Ark a citizen of the United States or they could call him a natural born citizen. Either term would be appropriate. Thus the Indiana Court of Appeals said it was immaterial that Justice Gray did not use the term “natural born” – like Virginia Minor, Wong Kim Ark is both.

    “What I do know is that English grammar dictates that all natural born citizens are also citizens but not all citizens are also natural born citizens.”

    Logic dictates this is true if there are at least two types of citizens. Naturalized citizens are citizens of the United States but they are not natural born citizens.

    The courts recognize two types of citizens – natural born and naturalized.

    “You CAN’T be serious!” — John McEnroe to umpire at Wimbledom”

    Just trying to figure out how many types of citizens you guys think there are.

    “Justice Grey wrote it that way because most people of that era took each other’s words at face value — just like a hand-shake of the same era was worth more than a 10-page legal document of today “

    You CAN’T be serious!” — John McEnroe to umpire at Wimbledom”

    “the Minor case was only about whether she was a citizen or not, not whether she was also a natural born citizen or not.”

    That would make the single sentence in Minor v Happersett – “These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners” dictum and not binding on lower courts.

    As it is the Court did not have to determine if she was a “citizen or not” as both sides agreed she was a citizen. There was never at any level a discussion of whether she was a citizen or not and no mention of her parents’ status. She called herself a “native-born citizen”. Reese Happersett did not even send a lawyer to represent him before the Supreme Court.

    FYI: here is the Missouri Supreme Court decision.

    https://cite.case.law/mo/53/58/

    “Yes, yes and yes.”

    You understand 1898 legal terms better than Supreme Court Justices, District Court judges, the US Government and practicing lawyers who argued cases before the same Supreme Court.

    Yeah, I don’t think so. And clearly courts today don’t think so.

    “I am also saying Judge Grey ERRED in that statement by saying the only part of the 1790 Act that the 1795 Act changed was the substitution he noted. You know as well as I do that the 1795 Act also substituted the word “citizen” for the {1790 Act] words “natural born citizen”.”

    His discussion of naturalization or children born to US citizens outside the US were dicta because those conditions were not germane to the facts of the Wong Kim Ark case.

    Hint: The same argument that lost a dozen times in various courts is by definition a losing argument.

    And no the lower courts did not overrule the Supreme Court. They just interpret the cases different than you guys.

  2. “I see you added the word only to the WaPo headline.”

    Only to make it as clear as clear can be that, in your disfavor, the liberal WaPo recognized that the Wong Kim Ark decision made him only a citizen, not a natural born citizen. Apparently your vision is blurred.

    “Does the class of citizens includes natural born citizen?”

    Since you didn’t say what class of citizens I don’t know if the class of citizens you meant includes natural born citizen or not. What I do know is that English grammar dictates that all natural born citizens are also citizens but not all citizens are also natural born citizens. I also know that Article 2 of the U.S. Constitution not only differentiates natural born citizen from citizen but elevates the former above the latter.

    “If it doesn’t then natural born citizens cannot be members of Congress.”

    “You CAN’T be serious!” — John McEnroe to umpire at Wimbledom

    “Here is what Justice Gray wrote about the Minor decision:
    ‘The decision in that case was that a woman born of citizen parents within the United States was a citizen of the United States, although not entitled to vote’
    See he said she was ‘only’ a citizen of the United States, not a natural born citizen.”

    Justice Grey wrote it that way because most people of that era took each other’s words at face value — just like a hand-shake of the same era was worth more than a 10-page legal document of today — and the Minor case was only about whether she was a citizen or not, not whether she was also a natural born citizen or not.

    “So are you also saying that Chief Justice Fuller ERRED when he said the majority opinion made someone like Wong eligible to be President?
    How about William Dameron Guthrie? Did he ERR when he wrote in 1898 that the Wong Kim Ark ruling made children born in US to aliens, eligible to be president?
    Or Alexander Porter Morse when he wrote in 1903 that a Supreme Court decision made children born in US to aliens, eligible to be president?”

    Yes, yes and yes.

    Here’s something Judge Grey wrote in his Wong Kim Ark decision:
    “In the act of 1790, the provision as to foreign-born children of American citizens was as follows: ‘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: provided, that the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been [169 U.S. 649, 673] resident in the United States.’ 1 Stat. 104. In 1795, this was re-enacted, in the same words, except in substituting, for the words ‘beyond sea, or out of the limits of the United States,’ the words, ‘out of the limits and jurisdiction of the United States.’ Id. 415.”

    I am also saying Judge Grey ERRED in that statement by saying the only part of the 1790 Act that the 1795 Act changed was the substitution he noted. You know as well as I do that the 1795 Act also substituted the word “citizen” for the {1790 Act] words “natural born citizen”.

    Hint: Give it up.

  3. Bud, Minor WAS born IN the U.S. to parents who were both U.S. Citizens themselves and WAS therefore a U.S. “Natural Born Citizen” as opposed to a “Citizen” by Statute. The SCOTUS in Minor v Happersett unanimously agreed in their opinion that such persons and only such persons are NO DOUBT NBCs.

    They said that as to all other classes of citizens there were doubts as to their being NBCs.

    You are losing the argument. You have no chance of winning this argument. It is futile for you to continue attempting to find a loophole or exit from it. Obama is NOT a Natural Born U.S. Citizen. Neither are several other frauds who continue to attempt to usurp our Presidency and vice-presidency.

    The United States, like any other nation, is entitled to have citizens that are entrenched by ancestry and 100% in full allegiance to it. The U.S. has offered citizenship to many people of many cultures and races. The requirement that our highest office not devolve upon people with foreign allegiances but only NBCs is a wise and prudent one requested by our nation’s first SCOTUS Chief Justice John Jay.

    It is also MANDATORY.

    To be President or VP one MUST be born IN the United States to Parents who are both U.S. Citizens themselves. If Congress did not believe this then WHY have they tried EIGHT TIMES in the last several decades to change Article II to allow non-NBCs to be President or VP?

    DYK that there is a bill in Congress as I write this that would require ALL Congressmen and Senators to be NBCs?

    BTW, Congress FAILED miserably in all attempts to erode the Article II requirement that a President and VP be Natural Born Citizens. Thank God a majority of Representatives on both sides of the aisle had the wisdom to strike down such a ludicrous idea. We should NEVER allow persons with any foreign allegiances to enter into OUR Presidency and OUR Vice-Presidency

    The couldn’t amend the Constitution to allow such foreigners in, which would be a great facilitator of the New World Order that Obama,bothBushes,both Clintons and Biden publicly advocated for in speeches they gave, so they flagrantly flouted Article II and usurped the Presidency by fraud, during time of war.

    Yes. ALL of them aided and abetted the usurpation of the Presidency by aiding and abetting Obama in doing so. They are all co-conspirators and accomplices,including Pelosi, in Obama’s treason and espionage against the United States. They are all subject to Court Martial under UCMJ Sec.103-Spies. They are all subject to prohibition from holding “any office under the U.S.” under 18USC, 2381-Treason. They are all subject to the death penalty for aid and abetting an enemy of the USA.

  4. Bud, Ark was not an NBC. The 14th Amendment does not and cannot confer Natural Born Citizenship. An NBC IS “One born in the U.S. to parents who are both U.S. Citizens themselves”-Minor v. Happersett, USSCt. (1874).

  5. Bud White, On July 4th,1776 as any American knows we CUT ALL TIES to Britain and ALL of it’s laws and precedents. We are a sovereign AMERICAN nation. WE are NOT a British Commonwealth nor do we have ANY legal obligation to honor the laws of England, except by Treaty duly ratified by Congress and signed by the President.

    Obama is NOT a Natural Born Citizen of the United States and never can be.

    The British Nationality Act extends British citizenship to ANY person born to a British Father, in Hawaii, which was previously under control of Britain,making said person a subject of the King of England.

    Furthermore, Obama,Sr. purported Father of Barack Obama was a British subject. Obama, if he was actually born in Hawaii to a British Father from Kenya IS a Natural Born Citizen of Britain and NOT the USA.

  6. “The Washington Post, the bastion of liberalism, recognized that Wong Kim Ark was only a citizen (not a natural born citizen)”

    I see you added the word only to the WaPo headline.

    Does the class of citizens includes natural born citizen?

    If it doesn’t then natural born citizens cannot be members of Congress.

    Here is what Justice Gray wrote about the Minor decision:

    “The decision in that case was that a woman born of citizen parents within the United States was a citizen of the United States, although not entitled to vote”

    See he said she was “only” a citizen of the United States, not a natural born citizen.

    “The U.S. government ERRED by misinterpreting Judge Morrow’s ruling.”

    So are you also saying that Chief Justice Fuller ERRED when he said the majority opinion made someone like Wong eligible to be President?

    How about William Dameron Guthrie? Did he ERR when he wrote in 1898 that the Wong Kim Ark ruling made children born in US to aliens, eligible to be president?

    Or Alexander Porter Morse when he wrote in 1903 that a Supreme Court decision made children born in US to aliens, eligible to be president?

    “there are is the same as the U.S. Constitution’s: “Citizens” and “natural born Citizens””

    You left off Naturalized Citizens.

    That is what the courts say – natural born and Naturalized make up the class – Citizens of the United States.

    Read Judge Morrow’s ruling, the appellant brief and Justice Gray’s decision. You will see why Gray cited the Minor quote. Hint he was not emphasizing the natural born citizen clause but the other authorities clause.

  7. District Court in Utah rules Wong Kim Ark is binding on lower court. Discussion of English Common Law was not dicta.

    “As explained below, the court agrees with Plaintiffs that the Supreme Court’s discussion in Wong Kim Ark that related to the English common-law rule for birthright citizenship was not simply dicta—the Court’s discussion of the English common-law rule was a determination of a matter of law that was pivotal to its decision, and is therefore binding on this court.”

    Fitisemanu v. United States, Case No. 1:18-cv-36 (D. Utah Dec. 12, 2019)

    https://casetext.com/case/fitisemanu-v-united-states

    The government has appealed and the case is now before the 10th Circuit.

    Could be interesting.

  8. So I was correct in pointing out that even The Washington Post, the bastion of liberalism, recognized that Wong Kim Ark was only a citizen (not a natural born citizen) — and therefore not eligible.

    The U.S. government ERRED by misinterpreting Judge Morrow’s ruling. And the Wong Kim Ark ruling did not answer the government’s question.

    My opinion as to how many kinds of citizens there are is the same as the U.S. Constitution’s: “Citizens” and “natural born Citizens”. Grammar dictates that “natural born Citizens” are also “Citizens” and that “Citizens” are not also “natural born Citizens”. The 14th Amendment defines “Citizens” (two kinds, born or naturalized) but nowhere does the U.S. Constitution define “natural born Citizens” and, therefore, resort must be found elsewhere.

    Wong Kim Ark does not define “natural born Citizen” but it does cite Minor v Happersett’s “born in the country to citizen parents of the country” without repudiation. SCOTUS cases The Venus 12 U.S. 8 Cranch 253 253 (1814), Shanks v DuPont, 28 U.S. 3 Pet. 242 242 (1830), Dred Scott v Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (1857) and Perkins v. Elg, 307 U.S. 325 (1939) also either determined “natural born Citizen” as meaning “born in the country to citizen parents of the country” and/or cited Minor v Happersett in agreement therewith.

    Since lower courts do not trump the SCOTUS, unless/until the SCOTUS determines otherwise it is, as (P)resident Obama often said, “settled. PERIOD”

  9. “No where in Judge Grey’s opinion for the court does he say Wong Kim Ark was a “natural born citizen”, rather only a “citizen”.”

    Nowhere in Judge Morrow’s district court ruling does he say Wong Kim Ark is a natural born citizen, rather only a citizen.

    Yet the US government wrote in their brief to the Supreme Court that Judge Morrow was wrong to rule that Wong Kim Ark was a “natural born citizen”. And they go on to ask if Chinese children born in the US are to be eligible to the Presidency. Eligibility being conferred by the Constitution in “recognition …of citizenship by birth?”

    In your opinion how many kinds of citizen are there?

    The courts say two.

  10. “Even in 1898 when Wong Kim Ark was decided it was recognized it made children born in US to alien parents eligible.”

    “WONG KIM ARK IS A CITIZEN” — The Washington Post
    https://reimaginingmigration.org/wong-kim-ark-14th-amendment-birthright-citizenship-u-s/

    No where in Judge Grey’s opinion for the court does he say Wong Kim Ark was a “natural born citizen”, rather only a “citizen”.

    Every “natural born Citizen” is also a “Citizen” but not every “Citizen” is also a “natural born Citizen”.

  11. “is pretty much moot.”

    Not sure how you come to that conclusion.

    Even in 1898 when Wong Kim Ark was decided it was recognized it made children born in US to alien parents eligible.

    That’s 122 years ago and the Republic and Constitution are still standing. Still very much alive.

  12. @ Bud White

    If, as you said, “It pretty much is a done deal.” then the rest of the U.S. Constitution and, therefore, the Democratic Republic our Founders gave us, is pretty much moot.

    Is that what you want?

  13. The report is that whether Halley or Harris, no eligibility lawsuit can will. Both will cite as Supreme Court precedent Wong Kim Ark and the dozen or so lower courts rulings involving Obama, Rubio and Jindal.

    It pretty much is a done deal.

  14. CDR Kerchner,
    “There is no need for them to do this. There are lots and lots of “natural born Citizen” candidates to choose from”.
    Correct, and I believe it is without a doubt being done with the hope of adding cover to the ineligible, identity fraud con-artist Barack Hussein Obama and to protect the many complicit in allowing, assisting and/or covering for his usurpation and its now panicked and still on-going cover-up. Those complicit effectively gave America’s government and her military to the enemy. The planned after Obama cover of Hillary Clinton failed and the “birther” Donald Trump won, sending them into a panic which will not stop until President Trump is out of office or the truth about Barry is fully revealed and acted on. Those complicit must be punished for their guilt in the biggest criminal act against America citizens and her Constitution in history……..IMO there is no option which can save America’s Constitutional Republic which only involves prosecuting a few low level criminals involved in the coup attempts to remove President Trump from office.………………..

  15. Bud is trying to be cute, me thinks. Nikki Haley is not constitutionally eligible either. See: https://www.scribd.com/document/388096854/Nikki-Haley-is-Not-a-Natural-Born-Citizen-of-USA-to-Constitutional-Standards All three political parties (Repub, Dems, and Socialist parites) were pushing constitutional eligibility questionable candidates in 2008 and they still are doing it. Ted Cruz is also not eligible. Neither is Harris: https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2020/07/23/u-s-senator-kamala-harris-is-not-a-natural-born-citizen-of-usa-not-eligible-to-be-president-and-cinc-or-vp/ and quite a few others are not eligible either.See: https://www.scribd.com/lists/22182725/Some-Politicians-Seeking-High-Office-Who-Are-Not-A-Natural-Born-Citizen-of-U-S The political parties lately seem to have a propensity to do this, probably in an attempt to totally abrogate the original intent, meaning, and understanding of the “natural born Citizen” term in the presidential eligibility clause of our Constitution, and per the 12th Amendment the VP eligibility too, and in doing said complete abrogation of the term, cover up for what Obama pulled off — usurpation of the office of the presidency and commander in chief by a dual-citizen, constitutionally ineligible person, and an identity fraud at that too using forged key ID documents. There is no need for them to do this. There are lots and lots of “natural born Citizen” candidates to choose from. See: http://www.kerchner.com/protectourliberty/goatsledge/20090308%20NBC%20=%203%20Not%204%20Leaf%20Clover.pdf CDR Kerchner (Ret) — http://www.ProtectOurLiberty.org

  16. Frankly, I have to tell you- I hope Biden does pick Kamala Harris as his running mate. IT SHOULD RE-IGNITE BIG TIME THE CONTROVERSY (“birtherism”) ABOUT “BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA!” I know that’s a little wishful thinking, but I can tell you that the thought is a righteous one and a completely justified one.
    SO, CAN ANYONE FROM ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD, HAVING ONE OR BOTH PARENTS ALSO FROM ANYWHERE, AND HAVING WORLD VIEWS, PHILOSOPHIES, AND ALLEGIANCES OTHER THAN TO AMERICA BE OUR PRESIDENT AND/OR VICE-PRESIDENT?
    Ask Chief “Justice” John Roberts Jr and his associate “justices!” Better yet- IMPEACH THEM ALL BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT GOING TO PROTECT AND FOLLOW OUR CONSTITUTION, AS IT WAS WRITTEN, ANYWAY!
    God help the United States of America assuming it isn’t already too late!