by John Porter, ©2022

Pearl Harbor, Dec. 7, 1941: 2,335 military men and women killed; 19 American war ships destroyed, 188 U.S. Aircraft destroyed

(Jan. 8, 2022) — “Disgraceful,” “shameful,” “deplorable,” “despicable,” “reprehensible,” “shocking,” “outrageous.”

These are just a few of the words which come to my mind in seeing and hearing the vice president of the United States, Kamala Harris, on Thursday publicly comparing the event in Washington, D.C. on January 6, 2021 to December 7, 1941 and Sept 11, 2001. Lord above, please deliver us from people like this being in positions of guiding this nation’s affairs, and lay upon the hearts of those who had good intentions when they elected them, to help see that this kind of leadership never happens again. See the information below, and be your own judge.

Attack on U.S. Pentagon building, Sept. 11, 2001: 189 people killed: $500 million in Monetary damages.
Attack on Trade Center, New York City, Sept. 11, 2001: 2,977 people killed. Estimated $30.5 Billion dollars in monetary damages.
United Flight 93: all 44 people killed.
Washington D.C. Jan. 6, 2020: 1 person shot and killed. Estimated 1.5 million in monetary damages.

Join the Conversation

14 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Your email address will not be published.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. Kamala Harris. Isn’t she the Vice President? Number Two in line for POTUS. Does she qualify Constitutionally to sit in the Oval Office? No.

    Kamala Devi Harris was born on October 20, 1964, in Oakland, California to a Jamaican father, Donald J. Harris, who was a Stanford University emeritus professor of economics, who arrived from British Jamaica in 1961.

    Harris’s mother was Shyamala Gopalan, who was born on April 7, 1938, in the city of Madras (now Chennai) in the Madras Province (now Tamil Nadu) of British India.

    Neither parent had emigrated to the USA at the time of Kamala Harris’s birth. In fact, both were within the USA illegally on Expired Green Cards when Kamala was born. So, what is her nationality?

    The location of birth being in the U.S. to a U.S. father and U.S. mother … all being U.S. Citizens at the time of birth is the only way one achieves natural born Citizenship status. Natural born Citizenship is gained by the laws of nature, not by any man-made law or statute or even a constitutional amendment granting that status.

    1. No court has ever said that only those born in the United States to two U.S. citizen parents are natural-born citizens.

      Harris is a natural-born citizen of the United States because she was born in the United States. Harris also may have (or be entitled to) citizenship in other countries, but that’s not relevant to her eligibility to serve as vice president.

      There is no evidence that Harris’ parents were in the United States illegally; that’s also not relevant to Harris’ eligibility.

      The “laws of nature” (whatever that means) do not override the U.S. Constitution. Especially because the United States does not exist in nature; its existence and boundaries are determined by human written laws.

      1. “No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of the President; …” — Article II, Section 1, Clause 5, U.S. Constitution.

        That is the human written law of the U. S. Constitution. Had the author(s) thereof intended “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, …” (14th Amendment’s definition of “citizen”) to be eligible to the Office of the President they would have written “No person except a Citizen, at or after the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to serve as President; …”.

        Courts do not exist in nature either; their existence and boundaries are also determined by human written laws. Human opinions, including opinions of judges, do not override the human written laws of the U.S. Constitution.

        1. Glad we agree that the United States is bound by the U.S. Constitution, and not “laws of nature” (whatever they may be).

          Beliefs about the Framers’ intentions are, at best, speculative. How courts actually have ruled in eligibility cases, on the other hand, are objectively verifiable.

          No one has suggested judges may override the U.S. Constitution. Judges, however, can interpret and apply (and have interpreted and applied) the U.S. Constitution to cases appearing before them, including eligibility cases.

    2. The left does not understand the laws of nature. They are still trying to understand the differences between male and female………….or even to admit they exist………

    1. Harris was born in the United States. Various courts already have ruled those born in the United States are natural-born citizens, regardless of the parents’ citizenship.

      The few lawsuits against Harris’ eligibility already have been dismissed. (One is beginning the appellate process.) These lawsuits were all dismissed on procedural grounds; results likely exacerbated by no attorney being willing to file an eligibility lawsuit against her.

      One ruling dismissing on jurisdictional grounds, however, noted that, if the case were to be decided on the merits, it would have concluded Harris was eligible.

      1. Kaballa Harris was a fraudulent 2020 vice-presidential candidate because he/she/it is not a natural born Citizen; rather, he/she/it is a STATUTORY US citizen under misinterpreted US Constitutional wordings and positive US laws authorized under Article I of the US Constitution.

        Congressional laws of citizenship, nationalism, immigration, and naturalization precludes them from making, declaring, or deeming anyone a natural born Citizen. They simply do not have that authority. Research all current US citizenship laws and you will never find the phrase: “natural born Citizen” contained within any of these laws. That should tell you ‘something’.

        A natural born Citizen is a citizen by the act of nature (laws of nature) – born in the country to two citizen parents of THAT country.

        Both sides of the smelly pile of politicians have produced fake and fraudulent Article II candidates.

        1. You are free to believe that unspecified people have misinterpreted unspecified portions of the U.S. Constitution and federal laws. But every court that has considered the issue concluded “natural-born citizen,” as the term is used in the U.S. Constitution, includes (minor exceptions aside) those born in the United States

          And you are free to disagree with those rulings. But your disagreement is not the law, whereas courts’ rulings are the law.

          The “laws of nature” (whatever that means) do not override the U.S. Constitution. Nature does not define nations or even citizenship.

      2. Various Courts cannot change history or reinvent the meaning of terms within the Constitution. Not even the SCOTUS.

        So, what did the Founders say was an NBC, and why?

        * 1804 – 12th Amendment to US Constitution – “But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.”

        * 1814 – US Supreme Court ruling on The Venus, 12 U.S. 8 Cranch 253 253 case (in part) “The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives or indigenes are those born in the country of parents who are citizens.”

        * 1856 – John Bouvier, Law Dictionary, Letter N. —
        NATURALIZED CITIZEN. One who, being born an alien, has lawfully become a citizen of the United States Under the constitution and laws. …
        2. He has all the rights of a natural-born citizen, except that of being eligible as president or vice-president of the United States. In foreign countries, he has a right to be treated as such and will be so considered even in the country of his birth, at least for most purposes.

        Kamala Devi Harris was born on October 20, 1964, in Oakland, California to a Jamaican father, Donald J. Harris, who was a Stanford University emeritus professor of economics, who arrived from British Jamaica in 1961.

        Harris’s mother was Shyamala Gopalan, who was born on April 7, 1938, in the city of Madras (now Chennai) in the Madras Province (now Tamil Nadu) of British India.

        Neither parent had emigrated to the USA at the time of Kamala Harris’s birth. In fact, both were within the USA illegally on Expired Green Cards when Kamala was born. So, what is her nationality?

        The location of birth being in the U.S. to a U.S. father and U.S. mother … all being U.S. Citizens at the time of birth is the only way one achieves natural born Citizenship status. Natural born Citizenship is gained by the laws of nature, not by any man-made law or statute or even a constitutional amendment granting that status.

        1. Who said that various courts can “change history or reinvent the meaning of terms”? Courts can and have, however, interpreted and applied the U.S. Constitution. And in doing so, courts have concluded people such as Harris are natural-born citizens.

          The Framers did not decide “The Venus” case. “The Venus” does not even use the words “natural-born citizen.”

          John Bouvier was not a Framer; he was born when the U.S. Constitution was written. Nor is a dictionary a Framer. Regardless, Bouvier’s definition says only that a naturalized citizen is an alien who became a citizen. Harris never was an alien and she never “became” a citizen; she was born a citizen therefore also a natural-born citizen.

        2. William Rawle, picked by President Washington to be the US Attorney for Pennsylvania,

          “Therefore every person born within the United States, its territories or districts, whether the parents are citizens or aliens, is a natural born citizen in the sense of the Constitution, and entitled to all the rights and privileges appertaining to that capacity.”

          https://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/a1_8_4_citizenships23.html

          Zephaniah Swift, Connecticut lawyer and US Congressman, writing about Connecticut laws in 1795,

          “The children of aliens, born in this state, are considered as natural born subjects, and have the same rights with the rest of the citizens.”

          https://books.google.com/books?id=dBE4AAAAIAAJ&pg=PP17&source=gbs_selected_pages&cad=3#v=onepage&q&f=true