by A2Guardians, ©2022

(Nov. 22, 2022) — Immediately following the 2022 mid-term elections, Donald J. Trump formally launched his Presidential election campaign for 2024 by filing his Statement of Candidacy with the Federal Election Commission. At this dizzying pace, even Ron DeSantis; the newly re-elected Governor of the State of Florida appealed for everyone to just “chill out.” However, with 532 candidates already registered for President with the FEC, enforcing Constitutional eligibility for the Office of the President and Commander-in-Chief in 2024 as in the past, can be challenging; literally.

As the saying goes, history is a set of lies agreed upon. For context, let’s open a portal into a day-in-the-life of Congress in 1798 as they convened to deliberate the need for strengthening our nation’s security posture. The legislation being proposed was for amending the U.S. Constitution to require members of Congress to also be a natural born citizen, not merely a citizen. The intent in requiring sole-allegiance for members of Congress would align with that of POTUS, and prevent with the greatest degree possible the introduction of foreign influence into our National Councils.

In Senate, August 17th, 1798

WHEREAS, it is highly expedient that every constitutional barrier should be opposed to the introduction of foreign influence into our National Councils, and that the Constitution of the United States should be amended as to effect and secure, in the best manner, the great objects for which it was designed: thereupon,

Resolved, That the Senators and Representatives of this State in the Congress of the United States be, and they hereby are requested to use their best endeavors that Congress propose to the Legislatures of the several States, the following amendment to the Constitution of the United States. viz. That (in addition to the other qualifications prescribed in the said Constitution) no person shall hereafter be eligible, as President or Vice President of the United States, nor shall any person be a Senator or Representative in the Congress of the United States, except a natural born citizen, or unless he shall have been a resident in the United States at the time of the declaration of Independence, and shall have continued either to reside within the same, or be employed in its service from that period to the time of his election.

If a citizen and natural born citizen were the same, there would have been no need for the States to propose new legislation to amend the Constitution beyond what was adopted in 1787. And since this legislation and other recent attempts never passed, you may be eligible for Congress while at the same time not eligible for President and Commander-in-Chief! Like it or not, Barack Obama, Kamala Harris, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Bobby Jindal, Tulsi Gabbard, Nikki Haley, et. al., didn’t get the memo codified by the Founders in Article 2 of the Constitution.

While we are on the subject of hard truths and facts, even though the requirements for the Office of the President are enshrined in the Constitution, the actual practice of vetting and eligibility enforcement is de facto forbidden.


Read the rest here.

Join the Conversation

8 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. “let’s open a portal into a day-in-the-life of Congress in 1798”

    Was this proposed amendment ever taken up by the US Congress?

    The proposed amendment came to the New York legislature from the Massachusetts legislature (sent from Governor Sumner to Governor Jay). Massachusetts passed their version in June, 1798.

    John Jay called the proposal “interesting.”

    The Massachusetts proposed amendment of June 1789 is repeated in the New York Senate’s proposal.

    Interesting footnote – the title of the Massachusetts amendment is “RESOLVE REQUESTING THE SENATORS AND REPRESENTATIVES IN CONGRESS TO PROPOSE AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION PROVIDING, THAT NONE BUT NATURAL BORN SUBJECTS BE ELIGIBLE TO CERTAIN OFFICES.”

    “NATURAL BORN SUBJECTS” in the title and natural born Citizen in the body of the proposal.

    https://archive.org/details/actsresolvespass179899mass/page/210/mode/2up

      1. “Many people” is not specific; it is the opposite of specific.

        Why is it so difficult to identify even one person who said the terms were synonymous?

        1. Barack Obama actually KNEW that the two are not synonymous. He actually PAID Perkins Coie to find a way to circumvent Article II. There is no one that can make the statement that the two terms are synonymous because they would be prevaricating. McCain, Obama, Gabbard,Cruz, Rubio,Jindal, Duckworth, and others have ALL tried to become President. Harris has also claimed no difference in the Citizen and NBC definitions. They have ALL committed fraud.

        2. When, exactly, did Vice President Harris ever say citizen and natural born citizen are synonymous?

          Perkins Coie represented President Obama only in a handful eligibility challenges, and they won every one of them.

          Although Perkins Coie did represent President Obama, there’s no evidence he “PAID Perkins Coie to find a way to circumvent Article II.”

      1. Of course not: all natural born citizens are also citizens, but not all citizens are natural born citizens. Some citizens aren’t natural born citizens.

        But the question remains: who, exactly does “A2 Guardian” believe is conflating the terms?