Vivek Ramaswamy NOT a “natural born Citizen” of the United States to Constitutional Standards – NOT Constitutionally Eligible to Be President and Commander-in-Chief of Our Military

I DO NOT CARE… and want nothing more than the LEFT (and liberals) to push this exact point; because, while I totally agree, it IMMEDIATELY disqualified barry soetoro! Just as it would have Chester Arthur, had his Canadian birth been known at the time. Just as the countless congressional bills presented, and avoided, ON THE TOPIC over the last 150 years in this nation. The reality is what it is, and barry’s garbage slammed that door open… and with all the ‘birther’ accusations from the left over barry, LET THE LEFT CRY WOLF! As Vivek becomes POTUS or VPotus!

Ted Cruz born American, Cuban, Canadian; Bobbie Jendal born American & Indian; Marco Rubio born American & Cuban; barry soetoro born American, Kenyan, British… NONE of which are technically or legally qualified UNDER the VATTEL doctrine, John Jay and the intent of the Founding Father’s… because of allegiance. However, barry boy’s 8 years negated all that; and ‘we’ (the people) should push Ramaswamy because he’s smart & capable, but also because his citizenship issue is the only ‘real dirt’ the left even kinda has on this man.

barry ran on rope & chains, though it sounded like hope & change. Vivek is running on REDUCING THE SPENDING, REDUCING the size of the government, actually ending and merging some of the alphabet agencies, and push the CONSTITUTION. While I don’t agree with 100% of what he says, like the feckless, under thought, knee jerk silliness of ‘3 armed guards in every school’ and ‘$250k savings account for everything student graduating from college.’ But otherwise, if he’s able to do a fraction of what he claims, plans, hopes… it would be GOOD FOR AMERICA(NS)!

According to “Constitutional standards” a person running as a candidate for POTUS “must be a Natural Borne Citizen borne to “U.S. Citizens” PERIOD!
Thus at the times of birth for Haley and Ramaswamy neither were born to U.S. Citizens (which is written in stone)! So why are these people trying to become POTUS ?

The United States will give automatic citizenship by birth to anyone born on US soil based on the 14 Amendment; this includes a person born in the USA to foreign parents or a legal migrant. The United States is a “soil born” country. Nowhere does it say that the parents have to be citizens.

Being that his parents were immigrants to the U.S.and he was born here could he have served in the military? If not how could you serve as Commander in Chief?

Actually, being born ON U.S. Soil is NOT a requirement to be a NATURAL BORN AMERICAN CITIZEN. Only that BOTH parents ARE LEGAL American Citizens at the time of birth of their child. IF BOTH parents ARE LEGAL U.S. Citizens, than the child CAN BE BORN ANYWHERE in the Universe and still be a LEGAL NATURAL BIRN AMERICAN CITIZEN. And that is the same reason ANCHOR BABIES are NOT LEGAL American Citizens! This is where the third requirement comes into play. MUST LIVE WITHING THE U.S. BORDERS for at least 14 years. The first has to do with ALLEGIANCE to THIS NATION and ONLT THIS NATION. The second requirement Must be at least 35 years of age, is a maturity issue. The third is required to understand AMERICAN LIFE, CUSTOMS and CULTURE. It also has to do with EDUCATION in American History and the Constitution as well as the understanding of PROPER GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS. Unfortunately MOST American have NO CLUR of our History, what the Constitutions even says, or how government is SUPPOSE work. MOST have never heard of the Lee Resolution, THE MOST IMPORTANT founding document we have. Without that THIST WOULD NOT BE# THe United States of America. This would STILL be the COLONIES of England and under BRITISH EMPIRE RULE.

I believe a president was set Obama which showed our country does not follow what I believe to be the true meaning of “natural born citizen”. In this case I am glad. Ramaswamy is the only candidate that I feel could resolve the problems this nation is feeling. He is absolutely correct in all he has said.

What about Nikki Haley , Ted Cruz , Marco Rubio and a few others who are NOT NATURAL BORN US CITIZENS who ran or are running for US President . It would seem the US Congress and US Supreme Court have IGNORED US Constitutional law Article ll Section 1 Clause 5 since 2008 in order to protect the fraud and usurper berry soetoro aka Barack Hussein Obama to protect themselves from the charge of TREASON in the 2008 and 2012 presidential elections ! Mr Ramaswamy is just the LATEST wannabe USURPER !

Your link for when Ramaswamy’s parents immigrated doesn’t work. Do you have some other source providing the evidence?

We know Haley, Harris, Obama, Rubio, Jindal were not natural born. It is the duty of every state’s Secretary of State to verify the candidates meet the Constitutional requirement. The KY SOS told me it is not his responsibility, but the people need to stand up and demand they do their jobs. Elections are state run, which means it is the states’ responsibility to verify requirements.

CDR Kerchner
I find it best to always stick with statements that have Constitutional authority behind them. For instance When someone states “He or she was born in the U.S. they are a natural born CITIZEN.” I go to the Supreme Court who has the Constitutional authority to say who is and who is not a natural born CITIZEN. Then post one or two of these quotes >>> The Supreme Court standard birth circumstance that must be met to be a natural born CITIZEN. Here is what the Supreme Court Justices say >>> Justice Gray “all children, born in a country of parents who were its citizens, became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens” >>> Chief Justice Fuller in the same case >> “The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country of parents who are citizens.” >>> Justice Grier “The natives or natural-born citizens are those born in the country of parents who are citizens.” >>> Chief Justice Waite “all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens,” >>> Justice Livingston “The natives or indigenes are those born in the country of parents who are citizens.” >>> Chief Justice Fuller (in dissent) “The natives or natural-born citizens are those born in the country of parents who are citizens.” Finally In Perkins v Elg Chief Justice Hughes called the defendant Ms Elg A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN then described her birth circumstances –Miss Elg was *****born in Brooklyn, New York, *****on October 2, 1907. Her parents, who were natives of Sweden, emigrated to the United States sometime prior to ***1906, and her father was naturalized here in that year.*** The law then was wives became U.S. Naturalized CITIZENS automatically when their husband’s were naturalized. <<< So Ms Elg ***was born in the U.S. of CITIZEN parents. I say the Supreme Court standard because that is the only way the Supreme Court has ever described the birth circumstances of a natural born CITIZEN. NEVER EVER has the Supreme Court stated "Anyone born in the U.S. is a natural born CITIZEN." By doing it this way I never give my personal opinion. It is always WORD for WORD quotes from Supreme Court Justices "who do have the Constitutional authority to decide who is and who is not a natural born CITIZEN. They have the last say. And the Supreme Court standard birth circumstances has been that way since 1814.

From where did America’s Founders learn what is required to become a Natural Born Citizen? (Prior to the 11th Amendment, Citizen was always spelled with a capital C in the Constitution.) In 1759 Emmerich Vattel published “Law of Nations” which contains the phrase and definition for Natural Born Citizen.
Briefly, Natural Born Citizenship requires both parents be either native born or naturalized Citizens of the nation at the moment their child is born. The place of birth of the parents means nothing, provided they have met the qualification for naturalization according to the law of their nation. Both parents must have been been naturalized prior to the child’s birth. As a matter of readily available public record, obama’s father was a british subject when obama was born. There are valid questions regarding his mother’s citizenship. “Vice-President” Harris’ father is from Jamaica, her mother is from India, both emigrated to the U.S. in the early 1960’s. Kamala Harris was born in 1964. Like Ramaswamy’s parents, Harris’s parents had not been in the U.S. long enough to become naturalized citizens. By this definition, both obama and Kamala harris occupied and occupy their respective presidential offices contrary to the Constitution. Their presidential acts and appointments are nullities, from a legal standpoint they never happened and do not, can not, exist, including SCOTUS appointments.
There exists an even greater qualification/disqualification for not only the Presidential office but for every single office of public trust in America, from dog catcher to President, to SCOTUS, jury member, and witness in all court cases. There was an 1830s court case, reported by Alexis DeToqueville in his Democracy in America, in which a Common Pleas Court refused to hear testimony from a witness who had publicly declared his “atheism.”
That qualification is the Oath of Office, the Sacred Oath of Office. How many Americans, “supposedly” protected by the Sacred Oath of all political candidates have the least clue why I term the Sacred Oath “Sacred?”
How many know the significance of the raised hand whilst uttering the mandated Oath? Can just anyone give the Sacred Oath? Are there no qualifications for the Oath? Failing to comprehend those questions, AND THE ANSWERS, has led to incalculable damage to this nation, the abomination now illegally occupying the Oval Office, not to mention the “freak show” that “abomination” has presented to the Senate for confirmation, AND THEY HAVE BEEN CONFIRMED! Affirming my point.
Question: Have America’s Founding Fathers truly left us as defenseless as we now appear? If the Sacred Oath mandate, found in every American Constitution, indeed imposes no conditions on the Oath giver, why bother imposing the Oath?
Let me provide two historical facts, quotes from our Founders, that may provide guidance. John Jay, first Chief Justice of SCOTUS, appointed by our First President, left us this caveat: “Providence (God) has given our people the choice of their rulers, it is their duty (to God), as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers.” Who set the standard for “Christian?” By what metric do we determine Christianity?
In his Farewell Address (1796), George Washington said, inter alia, “…the Oath is THE instrument of investigation in our courts of justice…” Not AN instrument, THE INSTRUMENT! What could Washington have meant by those words? “THE INSTRUMENT of investigation?” Do you suppose he has reference to some kind of “qualification” to raise one’s hand and utter the Sacred oath?
Let me add the Words of our Creator and Savior that shed further light on this issue: “Except a man be born again, he cannot see (or enter) the Kingdom of Heaven…You MUST be born again!” New Testament, Gospel of John 3:3,5,7.
Our Savior’s words, “You must be born again,” IS NOT a “suggestion,” it is a Command, a command from “Nature’s God, The Supreme Judge of the world,” (Declaration of Independence) Yeshua, Jesus Christ. There are no exemptions from His Command, no exceptions, it applies to all.
Many, Believer and non-believer, are familiar with Christ’s Command, “You must be born again.” Those who mock are nevertheless familiar. Are they familiar with the fate of those who ignore His Command? I suspect that answer is, “No.” How did our Savior describe the fate of those who mock? One response is, “Very clearly.” In the Book of the Revelation of Jesus Christ we find the following: “…they worshipped the dragon (satan)…ALL that dwell upon the earth shall worship him (satan), whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb (Jesus) slain from the foundation of the world.” Rev. 13:4 & 8.
What has our Savior declared by His words? One MUST be born again to have one’s name inscribed in The Lamb’s Book of Life, which Book is to be opened on God’s Great day of Judgment. Has Christ not clearly declared, ALL NOT BORN AGAIN WORSHIP SATAN?
Has our Creator identified a THIRD CHOICE? No “atheists,” no “agnostics,” no “deists,” Christ! Or satan! No third Choice! I have termed this precept, ONLY TWO CHOICES, THE BEST KEPT SECRET IN THE WORLD!
Which leads us back to the Sacred Oath and the significance of the raised hand whilst giving the Oath. The raised hand signifies the Oath giver is calling upon God as Witness to the Sacred Oath. Does not the calling upon God as Witness render the Sacred oath Sacred? (Who knew? And why haven’t we known?) Secondly, the raised hand is the Oath giver’s public declaration, “Yes, I am born again and possessed of the Lawful/legal Standing to enter Heaven’s Court to summon God as Witness to my Sacred Oath.”
Christ has clearly identified every person in our world as Christ Worshipper, or satan worshipper!
Question: Are satan worshippers possessed of the Lawful/legal Standing to enter Heaven’s Court to summon our Lord and Savior as witness to an “oath” that can only be described as “Blasphemy?” My Question is so easily answered, it is moot. There is no possible disagreement, argument, opposition or dissent from this position: SATAN WORSHIPPERS HAVE NO AUTHORITY, NO LEGAL STANDING, NO LAWFUL STANDING TO UTTER THE SACRED OATH, NO CONSTITUTIONAL STANDING TO CALL UPON GOD AS WITNESS TO A BLASPHEMOUS “OATH.”
Has Vivek Ramaswamy claimed to be Christian? If not, How has our Creator, Lord and Savior Identified Ramaswamy? NOT ME! Jesus Christ!
The Old Testament book of Hosea 4:6 tells us, “My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge.”
Several years ago, a lawyer (email) acquaintance sent me the following: (radically shortened excerpt) “Alan, You seem to be repeating the same statements,over and over and over. Are you just trying to comfort yourself with all that repetition? Do you not recognize the ban on religious tests in the Oath of Office Clause, U.S. Constitution?”
Part of my response included: “Our Founders mandated the Sacred Oath as both qualification and disqualification: Those not born again are not possessed of the lawful standing to raise their right hand to call upon God as Witness to what must surely be characterized as a “profane and blasphemous oath!”
Challenges may be raised against my position, referencing ‘a ban on religious tests,’ but nothing composed by man will permit a satan worshipper to Lawfully utter the Sacred Oath! That should explain exactly and precisely why the Sacred oath is mandated in every Constitution. Who but a satan worshipper would claim otherwise? That satan worshippers possess the Lawful Standing to call upon God to Witness their profane oath.”
I’m going to conclude with the these words of William Blackstone, English jurist and, arguably, the premier legal Mentor to America’s Founding Fathers:
“Upon these two foundations, the law of nature and the law of revelation (both of which God is The Author), depend all human laws; that is to say, no human laws should be suffered (allowed or permitted) to contradict these. No human law is of any validity, if contrary to the law of God.” 1 Blackstone’s Commentaries on the Laws of England. 40