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.
Here is a quick question for you looney birthiers, if the current president is found ineligible after he is elected who will be president? Right BIDEN!! Is this what you all are pushing for? If so, you guys are crazier than anyone can imagine!
I have avoided this thread for some time because it is obvious that those who keep it going are about 9 - 1 people who don't want any part of the conspiracy to be true. I keep wondering why these threads go on and on and it is mostly the same people who keep it going. It gets funnier and funnier as you people try and try to convince each other that the OP has to be wrong.
The Judge didn't quash her subpoena asking for it did he?
nope. he rejected a motion to dismiss the subpoena from the defense for lacking a reference to legal authority ( sloppy work by the defense ). the judge has made no decision/statement on the actual subpoena. there is still no order from the judge to compel to release any records.
....are about 9 - 1 people who don't want any part of the conspiracy to be true.
if ever there was some rational evidence for a massive 50+ year conspiracy involving all branches of the government, the military, legal/historical community, civics authors, few dozen librarians and a handful of immigration officers i'd be happy to see it.
Quote:
I keep wondering why these threads go on and on....
because the same debunked information keeps being repeated as fact. just this morning we have the "relative said he was born in kenya" and the "hoax BC as real" get presented.
His mother was a US citizen and he is eligible for citizenship through her. His citizenship is not the issue. What is crucial for his eligibility for the Presidency is the place of birth. I have two children, one born in the US and one born overseas. The first is eligible for the presidency, the second is not. They are both US citizens from birth.
How many times are you going to post this falsehood? Mitt Romney's father is evidence that the above is not true; he was born in Mexico and ran for pres. in 1968.
Not in 1961 due to the citizenship statutes on the books she couldn't.
Of course she could have. She was an American citizen and a resident of the United States. Even if citizenship weren't passed on automatically, she could have easily had his citizenship naturalized. So why would she engage in a conspiracy? Why?
The Judge didn't quash her subpoena asking for it did he?
Uh, a judge can't quash anything. Its up to the other party to make a motion to quash. Which was done and denied, due to reason that it didn't list pertinent law as to why it needed to be quashed.
birthers, every post they show how ignorant of the law they really are
Which one? Also, the judge wants to see the original microfilm of Obama's vital birth record from Honolulu.
The judge does? Says who? Because the judge hasn't indicated an interest in any of these records at all. The judge has simply let the plaintiffs go forward. Give 'em enough rope, and all that.
How many times are you going to post this falsehood? Mitt Romney's father is evidence that the above is not true; he was born in Mexico and ran for pres. in 1968.
Yes Romney ran because anyone can, ineligible or not, like Nicaraguan born Roger Colero in 08. He wasn't truly eligible but he did run.
Lets take a peek the Indiana judges....what was the source their decision..it was WKA.
"Based upon the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are “natural born Citizens” for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents."
"We note the fact that the Court in Wong Kim Ark did not actually pronounce the plaintiff a “natural born Citizen” using the Constitution‟s Article II language ..."
They relied on WKA to claim the defendant is a nbc when they knew WKA was NEVER determined a natural born citizen.
Orly is correct..there is a vast conspiracy to protect the perpetual defendant.
They relied on WKA to claim the defendant is a nbc when they knew WKA was NEVER determined a natural born citizen.
Orly is correct..there is a vast conspiracy to protect the perpetual defendant.
and Dragging again show his dishonesty. He takes the conclusion and only offers up the first sentence in the footnote. why he does so, because anyone can look up the case and see that in the footnote, they explained it quite clearly why the conclusion for the case is supported by Wong Kim Ark. and omits an entire footnote that followed:
Ankeny v Gov of Indiana – Natural Born Defined – Born on US Soil regardless of citizenship parents « Native and Natural Born Citizenship Explored (http://nativeborncitizen.wordpress.com/2009/11/12/ankeny-v-gov-of-indiana-natural-born-defined-born-on-us-soil-regardless-of-citizenship-parents/#more-7312 - broken link)
The entire passage in whole ( the part that Dragging purposefully left out is bolded):
Quote:
The Court in Wong Kim Ark also cited authority which notes that:
All persons born in the allegiance of the king are natural-born subjects, and all persons born in the allegiance of the United States are natural-born citizens. Birth and allegiance go together. Such is the rule of the common law, and it is the common law of this country, as well as of England. We find no warrant for the opinion that this great principle of the common law has ever been changed in the United States. It has always obtained here with the same vigor, and subject only to the same exceptions, since as before the Revolution.
Id. at 662-663, 18 S. Ct. at 462 (quotations and citations omitted). The Court held that Mr. Wong Kim Ark was a citizen of the United States “at the time of his birth.”14 Id. at 705, 18 S. Ct. at 478.
Based upon the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are “natural born Citizens” for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents. Just as a person “born within the British dominions [was] a natural-born British subject” at the time of the framing of the U.S. Constitution, so too were those “born in the allegiance of the United States [] natural-born citizens.”15
[14] We note the fact that the Court in Wong Kim Ark did not actually pronounce the plaintiff a “natural born Citizen” using the Constitution‟s Article II language is immaterial.For all but forty-four people in our nation‟s history (the forty-four Presidents), the dichotomy between who is a natural born citizen and who is a naturalized citizen under the Fourteenth Amendment is irrelevant. The issue addressed in Wong Kim Ark was whether Mr. Wong Kim Ark was a citizen of the United States on the basis that he was born in the United States. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. at 705, 18 S. Ct. at 478.
[15]We reiterate that we do not address the question of natural born citizen status for persons who became United States citizens at birth by virtue of being born of United States citizen parents, despite the fact that they were born abroad. That question was not properly presented to this court. Without addressing the question,however, we note that nothing in our opinion today should be understood to hold that being born within the fifty United States is the only way one can receive natural born citizen status.
There is no wonder why that birthers are considered nothing but liars.
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.
