by Tom Arnold, ©2021

Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution requires the president and
commander-in-chief to be a “natural born Citizen”

(Jan. 12, 2021) — [Editor’s Note: The following was sent on Tuesday to dozens of media executives, journalists and commentators, members of Congress and private citizens.]

You probably won’t agree with me (or maybe not even know what I’m talking about), but “NATURAL BORN AMERICAN CITIZEN” is a prominent and very important concept in our U.S. Constitution (Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5).  It is one of the constitutional requirements for someone to run for and become elected our country’s Vice-President and President.  If one is NOT a natural born American citizen, he/she is constitutionally INELIGIBLE for these high offices.  In recent years, there has been controversy regarding the meaning of natural born American citizen.  Especially, I might add, since 2008-09, and I presume you know what happened then!  U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John G Roberts Jr swore in, as our country’s 44th “president,” an INELIGIBLE Barack Hussein Obama, and Chief Justice Roberts KNEW IT!  For those of you who doubt or refuse to believe that Obama was ineligible, allow me to give you just one of the reasons.  He had been a citizen of two and possibly three countries at different times throughout his life (British Kenya, Indonesia, and possibly the United States, although the latter would have been a naturalized citizenship and NOT a natural born American citizenship).  All of this (and add to it the INELIGIBILITY of the current VP-elect Kamala Harris) is, as Joe Biden once whispered in Barack Obama’s ear, a “big friggin’ deal!”  Why?  Because not being a natural born American citizen vice-president or president puts our country IN DANGER AND AT RISK IN MANY WAYS INCLUDING ESPECIALLY FROM A NATIONAL SECURITY STANDPOINT.  This was the thinking of our framers, and we now are seeing the consequences, which they wisely foresaw and did what they could to prevent, playing out right before our eyes.  In fact, our “constitutional crisis” didn’t just happen.  It started over a decade ago in 2008-09.  In my opinion, everything that is going wrong in our society and government today stems from the mistake we made in 2008-09.  We elected (by defrauding the voters, and doesn’t that sound familiar!) Barack Hussein Obama. 

SO, I ASK YOU, THE ELECTED AND APPOINTED PEOPLES’ “REPRESENTATIVES” IN OUR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND THE NO LONGER-TO-BE-TRUSTED “JOURNALISTS” AND TALKING HEADS IN THE NEWS MEDIA, WHY IS “NATURAL BORN AMERICAN CITIZEN” A TABOO SUBJECT?  COULD IT BE BECAUSE CHIEF JUSTICE JOHN ROBERTS IGNORED THE CONSTITUTION IN 2009 AND SWORE IN AN INELIGIBLE ARAB-AMERICAN MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA AS “PRESIDENT” OF THE UNITED STATES?  ROBERTS DID IT AGAIN IN 2013.  AND, THE DEMOCRAT PARTY LOVED IT ALL THE TIME!  Those of us, on the other hand, who are able to take a rational and nonpartisan look at what has transpired, begin to see the real reasons, albeit completely unacceptable, that the topic of natural born American citizenship is TABOO!  Only problem is that our constitutional democratic republic will not survive without enlightenment and truth.  This matter is not going away, at least not as long as our citizens have freedom of speech and thought.  In this case, TOO MUCH WOKE WON’T WORK!          

Join the Conversation

9 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. Thank you Tom Arnold,
    So many people in both parties are complicit in the Obama fraud, which effectively gave America’s government and her military to the enemy when the Soros funded, CIA created Obama usurped the presidency after being sworn-in by Chief Justice John Roberts in 2009, that the federal governments number one job became to protect Obama’s usurpation to protect themselves. They effectively gave America’s government and her military to the enemy. Members of Congress used the excuse to do doing nothing of, “there will be riots in the cities”, if they did anything to expose Obama’s illegitimacy. Obviously, that excuse is no longer valid and the riots are happening anyway. The only way out of this is to expose and act on the Obama fraud in it’s entirety. That is what I and many others believed President Trump intended to do…. and it’s the only way to “reset” our Constitutional Republic and reaffirm the original meaning of natural born citizen for future presidents………..
    It that does not happen, and it appears it won’t, our Constitutional Republic will continue to disappear……..likely forever….

  2. Is there anyone from the Post & Email know, or, have any idea what the status of
    the investigation concerning Kamala Harris’s eligibility is? Will the Chief Justice of
    the Supreme Court swear her in as he did twice for Obama, also an illegal person. I’d
    appreciate any information that anyone can provide. Thanks

    1. There are some pending lawsuits, but no official entity is “investigating” Harris’ eligibility.

      There is no indication that she will not be sworn in on the 20th.

  3. GOD BLESS your tenacity Mr. Arnold! I am in lockstep with you on this issue. Unfortunately, more than three quarters of the Federal government, and half the state governments are complicit in Obama’s usurpation! Firing all those people most likely would cripple our country. To my knowledge we have no one in the wings waiting to fill those positions, and keep our government systems operational. Now, with two usurpers about to occupy our White House, the Swamp, Deep State and the Media are going to double down on this issue and bury it! But, keep fighting, I’m with you! I for one, will not let them forget it!

  4. The term natural-born citizen is not well understood today but was commonly understood in the 18th and 19th centuries. It is not defined in the Constitution, but neither is General Welfare or Commerce. The Constitution is not a dictionary. The term was first used in the legal treaties, “the Law of Nations”, by Swiss writer Emmerich de Vattel in 1758. In chapter 19, Section 212, Vattel stated: “natural-born citizens are those born in the country, of parents (plural) who are citizens.” It was not defined in the Constitution nor in later statutes, because the meaning was self-evident to everyone when it was written. A natural born citizen was a person whose citizenship was beyond dispute.

    In 1775, Benjamin Franklin noted the importance of the Law of Nations to the founders by ordering 3 of the latest editions. Franklin in a letter to Charles Dumas in December 1775 stated:

    “…the Law of Nations….has been continually in the hands of the members of our Congress, now sitting, who are much pleased with your notes and preface, and have entertained high and just esteem for their author?”

    Another indication the founders relied on Vattel is found in Article I, Section 8, which grants Congress the authority to “punish…offenses against the Law of Nations.”

    The term natural-born citizen applied only to the President (later the Vice-President also). Members of the House, Senate and the Courts were required to be citizens, but not necessarily natural-born citizens.

    The clause was first introduced for constitutional consideration in a letter from John Jay to George Washington. The letter, dated July 25, 1787, stated the following:

    Permit me to hint whether it would not be wise and reasonable 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.

    Jay and other founders wanted the President as Commander in Chief to have no other loyalty but to the United States. The natural-born Citizen clause applied to future generations only. Simply stated, a natural-born Citizen is a second (or more) generation citizen by birth right. Non-citizen, foreign born parents might cause a President to have a second allegiance to his parent’s homeland. Additionally, only the takes an oath to “Preserve, Protect and Defend” the Constitution. Other Constitutional officials take an oath to “support and defend” the Constitution.

    1. “Another indication the founders relied on Vattel is found in Article I, Section 8, which grants Congress the authority to “punish…offenses against the Law of Nations.””

      Point of Order.

      There are several indications this statement is not true.

      1) the Term Law Of Nations pre-dates Vattels book by decades. One example is the 1726 “A Dissertation on the Law Of Nature, the Law Of Nations and the Civil Law in General.” by J. Roberts.

      https://books.google.com/books?id=8ABjAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA32&dq=%22A+Dissertation+on+the+Law+Of+Nature,+the+Law+Of+Nations+and+the+Civil+Law+in+General.%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwi6gIiulZnuAhWBLn0KHRnfB2sQuwUwAHoECAAQBQ#v=onepage&q=%22A%20Dissertation%20on%20the%20Law%20Of%20Nature%2C%20the%20Law%20Of%20Nations%20and%20the%20Civil%20Law%20in%20General.%22&f=false

      2) the Framers used Blackstone’s Commentaries during the Constitutional Convention as a legal guide. As we can see by this statement by James Madison,

      “Mr. DICKENSON mentioned to the House that on examining Blackstone’s Commentaries, he found that the terms, “ex post facto” related to criminal cases only; that they would not consequently restrain the States from retrospective laws in civil cases, and that some further provision for this purpose would be requisite.”

      https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/debates_829.asp

      3) Blackstone’s Commentaries has an entire chapter titled “Of Offences Against the Law of Nations”

      a) Blackstone lists piracy as one of the offenses, Vattel does not discuss piracy.

      b) Blackstone describes piracy as a felony committed on the high seas. Vattel does not.

      c) Blackstone’s Commentaries tracks with Article 1, Section 8, Clause 10;

      “To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations”

      https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/blackstone_bk4ch5.asp

      Other than that – carry on.

      1. Regardless of whether or not Blackstone was relied upon in drafting Article I, Sec. 8, the fact is that Vattel was ALSO relied upon by the founders. Vattel did NOT write the Law of Nations. He merely translated it into French. The Law of Nations existed in Roman times. That Blackstone had ” an entire chapter on offenses of the law of nations” does NOT negate the fact that Vattel’s works ALSO discussed the same issue. We are not discussing “Piracy” in the context of this thread. Natural Born Citizenship is the subject of this debate. The fact is, that while the term of art “Natural Born Citizen” is not defined in the Constitution there are now at least SEVEN established U.S. Supreme Court decisions (some unanimous) that an NBC IS “one born IN the United States to parents who are BOTH U.S. Citizens themselves”. Regardless of from which person, Blackstone or Vattel, the inspiration to enumerate the power to “Punish offenses of the law of nations” originated, it is in the constitution. It is an offense of international law (the law of nations) to attribute the status of NBC to anyone BUT one born in a country to parents who are both citizens of said country. It is a violation of US Federal Law and Constitutional law to allow someone who was not born in the US to two US Citizen parents to enter the Presidency and/or the vice-Presidency.