Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Not necessarily true. If the illegal alien's child was born owing allegiance to a foreign sovereignty (i.e. dual citizenship at birth), the child is a U.S. citizen (Wong Kim Ark) but not a natural born citizen.
That's only the 10,000th time you've had to state this to overcome the Government's organized lying machine.
Sure, and that is why their is soooo much smoke, because there is absolutley no fire.
Myt understanding, from reading on a website about this issue, is that the COLB can be petitioned for and received on the strength or an application and vouching by two relatives. That is all it takes to get one.
That is what the article said. Whether that is true, or still true, or completely false, I can't say, but it was discussed.
However a document, not original, and produced upon demand in 2007 is slim evidence.
Reasonable people can disagree on the validity of those insisting on a standard Birth Certificate issues at or near the time of birther, but one that is force certain - that Obama is destroing our country step by step. Those that support him are co-conspirators in political "treason".
A document that is a state certified birth certificate is the highest amount of evidence you can possibly get to prove eligibility under U.S law.... Now, perhaps you think non-certified documents somehow hold more weight, but under this little thing we call U.S law they do not.
Attorneys work with hard evidence obtained thru discovery, so stop using legaleeze you don't understand. No less than 3 forensic experts have declared the short form posted on the internet to be a forgery. Even that wasn't real. He's a phony and you are buying the snake oil because you like the salesman. Pitiful. We are all paying dearly for your foolishness.
Trump is a modern day PT Barnum. He's getting a TON of attention and free advertising for his new show on FOX right now. IMO, this run-up to declaring his candidacy for President is just a dog and pony show to promote his TV endeavors like everything else he does. I don't believe for a second that he's seriously considering running. His new show will get big ratings and he'll deem himself a "terrific success" then find a convenient "out" to actually running.
The birthers are just the low-hanging fruit, and have fallen into line like rubes on the midway.
Hmmmm. Trump is getting a show on FOX....... but wasn't there some distancing of other FOX commentators recently because they were contemplating running for office and FOX didn't want to appear (ahem) partisan?
So in view of this, is Trump just blowing smoke about running to promote this new show and other things he is doing- or has FOX decided it does not need to distance itself from possible candidates?
Attorneys work with hard evidence obtained thru discovery, so stop using legaleeze you don't understand.
I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that you're not an attorney. Otherwise you wouldn't have pooh-poohed a state's certified copy of a birth certificate like that.
Quote:
No less than 3 forensic experts have declared the short form posted on the internet to be a forgery. Even that wasn't real. He's a phony and you are buying the snake oil because you like the salesman. Pitiful. We are all paying dearly for your foolishness.
1. Please list who these experts are, what qualifications they have to make them forensic experts, and the basis for their determinations that the form posted on the internet was a forgery.
2. If the birth certificate posted on Obama's website is a forgery, how come the director of the Department of Health (a Republican appointee) testified under oath that what Obama put on his website was a certified copy of his birth certificate? If the form is a forgery, why have all the relevant officials who would be in a position to know about this alleged fraud instead authenticate the COLB?
IT would be a neat trick since the term "natural born citizen" never appears in the "law of nations' that birhters like to use (which shows that claudhopper only repeats the lies of birthers)
The Law of Nations was written in French, and the first English version wasn't published until 17 years AFTER the US Constitution was RATIFIED (our forefathers must have had some strong time Machine)
BTW, Much of the US Constitution was based on the writings of BLACKSTONE (his passages quoted quoted over a hundred times during the first Constitutional Convention) - of which, US CITIZENSHIP was discussed based on his publishings.
De Vattel was quoted a mere 17 times, and for the PURPOSE of establishing FOREIGN relations, not CITIZENSHIP.
and you can tell that BIRTHERS have never bothered to READ "the Law of Nations" since they are only repeating the lies by Mario Apuzzo (the original ambulance chasing , poker playing lawyer who came up with this BS) because Citizenship as explained in "The Law of Nations" was written by Vattel, as a means to SHOW EXAMPLES of how different COUNTRIES determined citizenship of their people. HE provided MANY EXAMPLES including at that time, how ENGLISH SUBJECTS earned citizenship (by being born with the boundaries of that country). He never "claimed" in his book that the only way to obtain citizenship was through the parents (he never specified how many). In one example he explained how jus sanguis was used by only passing on citizenship through the father.
Wish these morons would stop relying on what other people say and ACTUALLY READ THE FREAKING SOURCE They are trying to use to support their CLAIMS!
As we have seen with World Nut Daily, many times the source original content DOESN:T match the "spin" they put on it.
you don't know what you are talking about: for those that want to know the truth
Scroll down to the paragraph
What further discredits Blackstone as being the author of "Natural Born Citizen" Vattel’s Influence on the term Natural Born Citizen
It won't let me copy over the relevant paragraphs.
You, Arus, are playing revisionist history.
you don't know what you are talking about: for those that want to know the truth
Scroll down to the paragraph
What further discredits Blackstone as being the author of "Natural Born Citizen" Vattel’s Influence on the term Natural Born Citizen
It won't let me copy over the relevant paragraphs.
You, Arus, are playing revisionist history.
First of all, I'm going to note that your source isn't exactly neutral on the matter. Birthers.org? Really?
Secondly, I'll say again and again until any birther proves me wrong that this birther interpretation of the natural born citizen clause is one that no current judge, congressman, constitutional scholar or law professor agrees with. There are former presidents, VPs, major party nominees and candidates who had non-citizen parents, and none had their eligibility for office seriously questioned on that basis.
Third, their arguments are pretty much verbatim that of the losing side in the Wong Kim Ark case.
I'll also note as an aside that this interpretation of the natural born citizen clause was invoked by the majority in the Dred Scott case. Ironic, using a argument that was used to uphold slavery in an attempt to declare ineligible the first black President.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
