Godlike Productions - Discussion Forum
Users Online Now: 2,195 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 305,995
Pageviews Today: 611,032Threads Today: 201Posts Today: 4,168
09:16 AM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

Kamala Harris is Eligible VP and/or President

 
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 79025176
08/13/2020 10:01 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Kamala Harris is Eligible VP and/or President
Not according to what I was taught or letters on the subject written by John Jay and Alexander Hamilton to George Washington just prior to the Constitution being drafted.

[link to www.art2superpac.com]

1. Constitutional Convention – “Born a Citizen” v “Natural Born Citizen":

When developing a new U.S. Constitution for the United States of America, Alexander Hamilton submitted a suggested draft on June 18, 1787. In addition, he also submitted to the framers a proposal for the qualification requirements in Article II as to the necessary Citizenship status for the office of President and Commander in Chief of the Military.

Alexander Hamilton’s suggested presidential eligibility clause:

No person shall be eligible to the office of President of the United States unless he be now a Citizen of one of the States, or hereafter be born a Citizen of the United States.

Many of the founders and framers expressed fear of foreign influence on the person who would in the future serve as President of the United States since this particular office was singularly and uniquely powerful under the proposed new Constitution. This question of foreign influence was elevated when John Jay considered the additional power granted to the Presidency during times of war, that is when he serves as Commander in Chief of the military. Jay felt strongly that whoever served as President and Commander In Chief during times of war must owe their sole allegiance to and only to the United States.

Because this fear of foreign influence on a future President and Commander in Chief was strongly felt, Jay took it upon himself to draft a letter to General George Washington, the presiding officer of the Constitutional Convention, recommending/hinting that the framers should strengthen the Citizenship requirements for the office of the President.

John Jay was an avid reader and proponent of natural law and particularly Vattel’s codification of natural law and the Law of Nations. In his letter to Washington he said that the Citizenship requirement for the office of the commander of our armies should contain a “strong check” against foreign influence and he recommended to Washington that the command of the military be open only to a “natural born Citizen”. Thus Jay did not agree that simply being a “born Citizen” was sufficient enough protection from foreign influence in the singular most powerful office in the new form of government. Rather, Jay wanted to make sure the President and Commander In Chief owed his allegiance solely to the United States of America. He wanted another adjective added to the eligibility clause, i.e., ‘natural’. And that word ‘natural’ goes to the Citizenship status of one’s parents via natural law.

Below is the relevant change to Hamilton’s proposed language detailed in Jay’s letter written to George Washington dated 25 July 1787:

Permit me to hint, whether it would be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expressly that the Command in Chief of the American army shall not be given to nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen.


See a transcription of Jay’s letter to Washington at this link.

Upon receiving Jay’s letter, General Washington passed on the recommendation to the convention where it was adopted in the final draft. Thus Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution, the fundamental law of our nation reads:

Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of U.S. Constitution as adopted 17 September 1787:

No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

There you have the crux of the issue now before the nation and the answer.

Hamilton’s suggested presidential citizenship eligibility requirement was that a Citizen simply had to be ‘born a Citizen’ of the USA, i.e., a Citizen by Birth. But that citizenship status was overwhelmingly rejected by the framers as insufficient. Instead of allowing any person “born a citizen” to be President and Commander of the military, the framers chose to adopt the more stringent requirement recommended by John Jay, i.e., requiring the Citizen to be a “natural born Citizen“, to block any chance of future Presidents owing allegiance to other foreign nations or claims on their allegiance at birth from becoming President and Commander of the Military.. Therefore, the President of the United States must be a “natural born citizen” with unity of citizenship and sole allegiance to the United States at birth. [SOURCE CREDIT]

So why do we keep hearing about the President only needing to be “born a citizen”? Well, let’s start with the fallacy of the 14th amendment trumping Article II -
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 75641809
United States
08/13/2020 10:02 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Kamala Harris is Eligible VP and/or President
I don't fucking like her or Biden but it is what is is.

Pull your head out of your ass and tackle the real issues. While your bitching about her birth, missing the real issues, and looking like a fool she will be gaining votes and possibly marching right to that podium on Inauguration Day.

She's a scum bag whore and she wants you rattling on about his birth. That is how she wins. You gonna be left holding the bag and she will be counting the days til Pedo Joe resigns.

Be smart.
 Quoting: Dr. Acula


hesright

clappa
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 76030728
United States
08/13/2020 10:05 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Kamala Harris is Eligible VP and/or President
Not according to what I was taught or letters on the subject written by John Jay and Alexander Hamilton to George Washington just prior to the Constitution being drafted.

[link to www.art2superpac.com]

1. Constitutional Convention – “Born a Citizen” v “Natural Born Citizen":

When developing a new U.S. Constitution for the United States of America, Alexander Hamilton submitted a suggested draft on June 18, 1787. In addition, he also submitted to the framers a proposal for the qualification requirements in Article II as to the necessary Citizenship status for the office of President and Commander in Chief of the Military.

Alexander Hamilton’s suggested presidential eligibility clause:

No person shall be eligible to the office of President of the United States unless he be now a Citizen of one of the States, or hereafter be born a Citizen of the United States.

Many of the founders and framers expressed fear of foreign influence on the person who would in the future serve as President of the United States since this particular office was singularly and uniquely powerful under the proposed new Constitution. This question of foreign influence was elevated when John Jay considered the additional power granted to the Presidency during times of war, that is when he serves as Commander in Chief of the military. Jay felt strongly that whoever served as President and Commander In Chief during times of war must owe their sole allegiance to and only to the United States.

Because this fear of foreign influence on a future President and Commander in Chief was strongly felt, Jay took it upon himself to draft a letter to General George Washington, the presiding officer of the Constitutional Convention, recommending/hinting that the framers should strengthen the Citizenship requirements for the office of the President.

John Jay was an avid reader and proponent of natural law and particularly Vattel’s codification of natural law and the Law of Nations. In his letter to Washington he said that the Citizenship requirement for the office of the commander of our armies should contain a “strong check” against foreign influence and he recommended to Washington that the command of the military be open only to a “natural born Citizen”. Thus Jay did not agree that simply being a “born Citizen” was sufficient enough protection from foreign influence in the singular most powerful office in the new form of government. Rather, Jay wanted to make sure the President and Commander In Chief owed his allegiance solely to the United States of America. He wanted another adjective added to the eligibility clause, i.e., ‘natural’. And that word ‘natural’ goes to the Citizenship status of one’s parents via natural law.

Below is the relevant change to Hamilton’s proposed language detailed in Jay’s letter written to George Washington dated 25 July 1787:

Permit me to hint, whether it would be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expressly that the Command in Chief of the American army shall not be given to nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen.


See a transcription of Jay’s letter to Washington at this link.

Upon receiving Jay’s letter, General Washington passed on the recommendation to the convention where it was adopted in the final draft. Thus Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution, the fundamental law of our nation reads:

Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of U.S. Constitution as adopted 17 September 1787:

No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

There you have the crux of the issue now before the nation and the answer.

Hamilton’s suggested presidential citizenship eligibility requirement was that a Citizen simply had to be ‘born a Citizen’ of the USA, i.e., a Citizen by Birth. But that citizenship status was overwhelmingly rejected by the framers as insufficient. Instead of allowing any person “born a citizen” to be President and Commander of the military, the framers chose to adopt the more stringent requirement recommended by John Jay, i.e., requiring the Citizen to be a “natural born Citizen“, to block any chance of future Presidents owing allegiance to other foreign nations or claims on their allegiance at birth from becoming President and Commander of the Military.. Therefore, the President of the United States must be a “natural born citizen” with unity of citizenship and sole allegiance to the United States at birth. [SOURCE CREDIT]

So why do we keep hearing about the President only needing to be “born a citizen”? Well, let’s start with the fallacy of the 14th amendment trumping Article II -
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 79025176


Thanks for that. So the real battle is defining what a natural born citizen is. Looking around, no one can agree. Google pulls up the most liberal view of it.

I'm naturalized (born overseas to US dad, not US mom) and I know I am not eligible.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 75923591
United States
08/13/2020 10:06 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Kamala Harris is Eligible VP and/or President
They chose her for a reason and it wasn't her skin color or sex.
 Quoting: ~Jazz~


I think she's worn out her sex.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 76761163
Canada
08/13/2020 10:10 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Kamala Harris is Eligible VP and/or President
She does not qualify.

But neither did:

- McCain
- Rubio
- Cruze
- Jindal


To be a natural citizen you need both parents citizens and born within jurisdiction of the US. If you have to rely on a law or amendment to aquire your citizenship then you are not a "natural" citizen. You are a "naturalized" citizen who relies on "positive" (man-made) law to secure and confirm your citizenship.

A natural citizen has no law to point to - because they do not need it. Their citizenship is "natural" and needs no law.

Its that simple.

But may recent candidates from both parties do not qualify.
 Quoting: Redcat1


Whether she is qualified or not is moot!

The point is only Trump or Pence have the STANDING to file suit against her.

However none of them will dare, because of being labelled the DREADED term "RAYCIST", by the PEOPLE OF COLOR.

So swallow your BITTER COLORED MEDICINE cheerfully, without complaining, like good WHITE BOYS AND GIRLS!


lol
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 74827762
United States
08/13/2020 10:12 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Kamala Harris is Eligible VP and/or President
I don't fucking like her or Biden but it is what is is.

Pull your head out of your ass and tackle the real issues. While your bitching about her birth, missing the real issues, and looking like a fool she will be gaining votes and possibly marching right to that podium on Inauguration Day.
 Quoting: Dr. Acula


Not sure what you favor in terms of non-flattering publicity about her true nature and background.

If you believe that legitimate issues by themselves concerning her not meeting Constitutional qualifications instead of also focusing on her lousy, corruptocratic liberalism are unbalanced and incomplete, I'll agree with you.

Sometimes I think even various non-liberals, including some legitimate conservatives, tend to be more har-de-har-ha focused on a public figure's shortcomings that have nothing to do with his or her leftism but everything to do with his looks, sexual history, speech patterns, race/ethnicity, personality.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 74827762
United States
08/13/2020 10:18 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Kamala Harris is Eligible VP and/or President
The question that I have is this...

With the Democrats in win-at-all-costs mode. i.e. come hell or high water, Trump must be ousted!

a) Why did they choose Biden? Surely they could have come up with a far better candidate, then a 70 yearold who has 0 relatable elements to non-whites, LGBTQ, youth, BLM, antifa, immigrants...the list goes on. He does not inspire change, nor does he energize.

b) Why would they choose Kamala? She clearly has a bus load of skeletons in her closet, and the door is already open.
Additionally, her eligibility leaves a huge question mark.

I just dont get it. What am I missing here?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 78601779


It is curious.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 76030728



Not to me, not if you've observed the inner workings of a lot of liberal minds.

Through the years, I've dealt with people of the left who say things that are so brazenly dishonest, nonchalantly irrational, happily illogical, casually unethical and calculatingly non-compassionate, that I'd swear I was facing a CGIed-video creation of a rightwinger's stereotype of a leftwinger.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 79025176
08/13/2020 10:19 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Kamala Harris is Eligible VP and/or President
Not according to what I was taught or letters on the subject written by John Jay and Alexander Hamilton to George Washington just prior to the Constitution being drafted.

[link to www.art2superpac.com]

1. Constitutional Convention – “Born a Citizen” v “Natural Born Citizen":

When developing a new U.S. Constitution for the United States of America, Alexander Hamilton submitted a suggested draft on June 18, 1787. In addition, he also submitted to the framers a proposal for the qualification requirements in Article II as to the necessary Citizenship status for the office of President and Commander in Chief of the Military.

Alexander Hamilton’s suggested presidential eligibility clause:

No person shall be eligible to the office of President of the United States unless he be now a Citizen of one of the States, or hereafter be born a Citizen of the United States.

Many of the founders and framers expressed fear of foreign influence on the person who would in the future serve as President of the United States since this particular office was singularly and uniquely powerful under the proposed new Constitution. This question of foreign influence was elevated when John Jay considered the additional power granted to the Presidency during times of war, that is when he serves as Commander in Chief of the military. Jay felt strongly that whoever served as President and Commander In Chief during times of war must owe their sole allegiance to and only to the United States.

Because this fear of foreign influence on a future President and Commander in Chief was strongly felt, Jay took it upon himself to draft a letter to General George Washington, the presiding officer of the Constitutional Convention, recommending/hinting that the framers should strengthen the Citizenship requirements for the office of the President.

John Jay was an avid reader and proponent of natural law and particularly Vattel’s codification of natural law and the Law of Nations. In his letter to Washington he said that the Citizenship requirement for the office of the commander of our armies should contain a “strong check” against foreign influence and he recommended to Washington that the command of the military be open only to a “natural born Citizen”. Thus Jay did not agree that simply being a “born Citizen” was sufficient enough protection from foreign influence in the singular most powerful office in the new form of government. Rather, Jay wanted to make sure the President and Commander In Chief owed his allegiance solely to the United States of America. He wanted another adjective added to the eligibility clause, i.e., ‘natural’. And that word ‘natural’ goes to the Citizenship status of one’s parents via natural law.

Below is the relevant change to Hamilton’s proposed language detailed in Jay’s letter written to George Washington dated 25 July 1787:

Permit me to hint, whether it would be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expressly that the Command in Chief of the American army shall not be given to nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen.


See a transcription of Jay’s letter to Washington at this link.

Upon receiving Jay’s letter, General Washington passed on the recommendation to the convention where it was adopted in the final draft. Thus Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution, the fundamental law of our nation reads:

Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of U.S. Constitution as adopted 17 September 1787:

No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

There you have the crux of the issue now before the nation and the answer.

Hamilton’s suggested presidential citizenship eligibility requirement was that a Citizen simply had to be ‘born a Citizen’ of the USA, i.e., a Citizen by Birth. But that citizenship status was overwhelmingly rejected by the framers as insufficient. Instead of allowing any person “born a citizen” to be President and Commander of the military, the framers chose to adopt the more stringent requirement recommended by John Jay, i.e., requiring the Citizen to be a “natural born Citizen“, to block any chance of future Presidents owing allegiance to other foreign nations or claims on their allegiance at birth from becoming President and Commander of the Military.. Therefore, the President of the United States must be a “natural born citizen” with unity of citizenship and sole allegiance to the United States at birth. [SOURCE CREDIT]

So why do we keep hearing about the President only needing to be “born a citizen”? Well, let’s start with the fallacy of the 14th amendment trumping Article II -
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 79025176


Thanks for that. So the real battle is defining what a natural born citizen is. Looking around, no one can agree. Google pulls up the most liberal view of it.

I'm naturalized (born overseas to US dad, not US mom) and I know I am not eligible.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 76030728


The definition is clearly laid out in Vattel's Law of Nations, which was a huge influence on our Constitution.

We have to use a contemporary source for the definition. A definition on the internet by Cornell Law or any source that was NOT available to the Founding Fathers is irrelevant.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 76030728
United States
08/13/2020 10:24 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Kamala Harris is Eligible VP and/or President
Not according to what I was taught or letters on the subject written by John Jay and Alexander Hamilton to George Washington just prior to the Constitution being drafted.

[link to www.art2superpac.com]

1. Constitutional Convention – “Born a Citizen” v “Natural Born Citizen":

When developing a new U.S. Constitution for the United States of America, Alexander Hamilton submitted a suggested draft on June 18, 1787. In addition, he also submitted to the framers a proposal for the qualification requirements in Article II as to the necessary Citizenship status for the office of President and Commander in Chief of the Military.

Alexander Hamilton’s suggested presidential eligibility clause:

No person shall be eligible to the office of President of the United States unless he be now a Citizen of one of the States, or hereafter be born a Citizen of the United States.

Many of the founders and framers expressed fear of foreign influence on the person who would in the future serve as President of the United States since this particular office was singularly and uniquely powerful under the proposed new Constitution. This question of foreign influence was elevated when John Jay considered the additional power granted to the Presidency during times of war, that is when he serves as Commander in Chief of the military. Jay felt strongly that whoever served as President and Commander In Chief during times of war must owe their sole allegiance to and only to the United States.

Because this fear of foreign influence on a future President and Commander in Chief was strongly felt, Jay took it upon himself to draft a letter to General George Washington, the presiding officer of the Constitutional Convention, recommending/hinting that the framers should strengthen the Citizenship requirements for the office of the President.

John Jay was an avid reader and proponent of natural law and particularly Vattel’s codification of natural law and the Law of Nations. In his letter to Washington he said that the Citizenship requirement for the office of the commander of our armies should contain a “strong check” against foreign influence and he recommended to Washington that the command of the military be open only to a “natural born Citizen”. Thus Jay did not agree that simply being a “born Citizen” was sufficient enough protection from foreign influence in the singular most powerful office in the new form of government. Rather, Jay wanted to make sure the President and Commander In Chief owed his allegiance solely to the United States of America. He wanted another adjective added to the eligibility clause, i.e., ‘natural’. And that word ‘natural’ goes to the Citizenship status of one’s parents via natural law.

Below is the relevant change to Hamilton’s proposed language detailed in Jay’s letter written to George Washington dated 25 July 1787:

Permit me to hint, whether it would be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expressly that the Command in Chief of the American army shall not be given to nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen.


See a transcription of Jay’s letter to Washington at this link.

Upon receiving Jay’s letter, General Washington passed on the recommendation to the convention where it was adopted in the final draft. Thus Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution, the fundamental law of our nation reads:

Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of U.S. Constitution as adopted 17 September 1787:

No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

There you have the crux of the issue now before the nation and the answer.

Hamilton’s suggested presidential citizenship eligibility requirement was that a Citizen simply had to be ‘born a Citizen’ of the USA, i.e., a Citizen by Birth. But that citizenship status was overwhelmingly rejected by the framers as insufficient. Instead of allowing any person “born a citizen” to be President and Commander of the military, the framers chose to adopt the more stringent requirement recommended by John Jay, i.e., requiring the Citizen to be a “natural born Citizen“, to block any chance of future Presidents owing allegiance to other foreign nations or claims on their allegiance at birth from becoming President and Commander of the Military.. Therefore, the President of the United States must be a “natural born citizen” with unity of citizenship and sole allegiance to the United States at birth. [SOURCE CREDIT]

So why do we keep hearing about the President only needing to be “born a citizen”? Well, let’s start with the fallacy of the 14th amendment trumping Article II -
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 79025176


Thanks for that. So the real battle is defining what a natural born citizen is. Looking around, no one can agree. Google pulls up the most liberal view of it.

I'm naturalized (born overseas to US dad, not US mom) and I know I am not eligible.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 76030728


The definition is clearly laid out in Vattel's Law of Nations, which was a huge influence on our Constitution.

We have to use a contemporary source for the definition. A definition on the internet by Cornell Law or any source that was NOT available to the Founding Fathers is irrelevant.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 79025176


I agree. Craziness, it has all been puposefully muddled.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 77963966
United States
08/13/2020 10:24 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Kamala Harris is Eligible VP and/or President
Not according to what I was taught or letters on the subject written by John Jay and Alexander Hamilton to George Washington just prior to the Constitution being drafted.

[link to www.art2superpac.com]

1. Constitutional Convention – “Born a Citizen” v “Natural Born Citizen":

When developing a new U.S. Constitution for the United States of America, Alexander Hamilton submitted a suggested draft on June 18, 1787. In addition, he also submitted to the framers a proposal for the qualification requirements in Article II as to the necessary Citizenship status for the office of President and Commander in Chief of the Military.

Alexander Hamilton’s suggested presidential eligibility clause:

No person shall be eligible to the office of President of the United States unless he be now a Citizen of one of the States, or hereafter be born a Citizen of the United States.

Many of the founders and framers expressed fear of foreign influence on the person who would in the future serve as President of the United States since this particular office was singularly and uniquely powerful under the proposed new Constitution. This question of foreign influence was elevated when John Jay considered the additional power granted to the Presidency during times of war, that is when he serves as Commander in Chief of the military. Jay felt strongly that whoever served as President and Commander In Chief during times of war must owe their sole allegiance to and only to the United States.

Because this fear of foreign influence on a future President and Commander in Chief was strongly felt, Jay took it upon himself to draft a letter to General George Washington, the presiding officer of the Constitutional Convention, recommending/hinting that the framers should strengthen the Citizenship requirements for the office of the President.

John Jay was an avid reader and proponent of natural law and particularly Vattel’s codification of natural law and the Law of Nations. In his letter to Washington he said that the Citizenship requirement for the office of the commander of our armies should contain a “strong check” against foreign influence and he recommended to Washington that the command of the military be open only to a “natural born Citizen”. Thus Jay did not agree that simply being a “born Citizen” was sufficient enough protection from foreign influence in the singular most powerful office in the new form of government. Rather, Jay wanted to make sure the President and Commander In Chief owed his allegiance solely to the United States of America. He wanted another adjective added to the eligibility clause, i.e., ‘natural’. And that word ‘natural’ goes to the Citizenship status of one’s parents via natural law.

Below is the relevant change to Hamilton’s proposed language detailed in Jay’s letter written to George Washington dated 25 July 1787:

Permit me to hint, whether it would be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expressly that the Command in Chief of the American army shall not be given to nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen.


See a transcription of Jay’s letter to Washington at this link.

Upon receiving Jay’s letter, General Washington passed on the recommendation to the convention where it was adopted in the final draft. Thus Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution, the fundamental law of our nation reads:

Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of U.S. Constitution as adopted 17 September 1787:

No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

There you have the crux of the issue now before the nation and the answer.

Hamilton’s suggested presidential citizenship eligibility requirement was that a Citizen simply had to be ‘born a Citizen’ of the USA, i.e., a Citizen by Birth. But that citizenship status was overwhelmingly rejected by the framers as insufficient. Instead of allowing any person “born a citizen” to be President and Commander of the military, the framers chose to adopt the more stringent requirement recommended by John Jay, i.e., requiring the Citizen to be a “natural born Citizen“, to block any chance of future Presidents owing allegiance to other foreign nations or claims on their allegiance at birth from becoming President and Commander of the Military.. Therefore, the President of the United States must be a “natural born citizen” with unity of citizenship and sole allegiance to the United States at birth. [SOURCE CREDIT]

So why do we keep hearing about the President only needing to be “born a citizen”? Well, let’s start with the fallacy of the 14th amendment trumping Article II -
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 79025176


Thanks for that. So the real battle is defining what a natural born citizen is. Looking around, no one can agree. Google pulls up the most liberal view of it.

I'm naturalized (born overseas to US dad, not US mom) and I know I am not eligible.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 76030728


lmao....

My mother's side of the family were among the earliest settlers from England in America, during the 16th century. They actually descended from the Viking families that ruled England during Danelaw. While my father's side came over from Eastern Eruope in the 18th century.

However, I would NOT take the Presidency of the USA, even if it was handed over to me on a platter, since its turning into one giant cesspool, with zillions of 3rd worlders.

I may even emigrate to Eastern Eruope, where my grilfriend comes from, which is the last remaining White majority regions.

Let Biden and Kamala continue ruling over their cesspool!


flip
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 76030728
United States
08/13/2020 10:26 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Kamala Harris is Eligible VP and/or President
Not according to what I was taught or letters on the subject written by John Jay and Alexander Hamilton to George Washington just prior to the Constitution being drafted.

[link to www.art2superpac.com]

1. Constitutional Convention – “Born a Citizen” v “Natural Born Citizen":

When developing a new U.S. Constitution for the United States of America, Alexander Hamilton submitted a suggested draft on June 18, 1787. In addition, he also submitted to the framers a proposal for the qualification requirements in Article II as to the necessary Citizenship status for the office of President and Commander in Chief of the Military.

Alexander Hamilton’s suggested presidential eligibility clause:

No person shall be eligible to the office of President of the United States unless he be now a Citizen of one of the States, or hereafter be born a Citizen of the United States.

Many of the founders and framers expressed fear of foreign influence on the person who would in the future serve as President of the United States since this particular office was singularly and uniquely powerful under the proposed new Constitution. This question of foreign influence was elevated when John Jay considered the additional power granted to the Presidency during times of war, that is when he serves as Commander in Chief of the military. Jay felt strongly that whoever served as President and Commander In Chief during times of war must owe their sole allegiance to and only to the United States.

Because this fear of foreign influence on a future President and Commander in Chief was strongly felt, Jay took it upon himself to draft a letter to General George Washington, the presiding officer of the Constitutional Convention, recommending/hinting that the framers should strengthen the Citizenship requirements for the office of the President.

John Jay was an avid reader and proponent of natural law and particularly Vattel’s codification of natural law and the Law of Nations. In his letter to Washington he said that the Citizenship requirement for the office of the commander of our armies should contain a “strong check” against foreign influence and he recommended to Washington that the command of the military be open only to a “natural born Citizen”. Thus Jay did not agree that simply being a “born Citizen” was sufficient enough protection from foreign influence in the singular most powerful office in the new form of government. Rather, Jay wanted to make sure the President and Commander In Chief owed his allegiance solely to the United States of America. He wanted another adjective added to the eligibility clause, i.e., ‘natural’. And that word ‘natural’ goes to the Citizenship status of one’s parents via natural law.

Below is the relevant change to Hamilton’s proposed language detailed in Jay’s letter written to George Washington dated 25 July 1787:

Permit me to hint, whether it would be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expressly that the Command in Chief of the American army shall not be given to nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen.


See a transcription of Jay’s letter to Washington at this link.

Upon receiving Jay’s letter, General Washington passed on the recommendation to the convention where it was adopted in the final draft. Thus Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution, the fundamental law of our nation reads:

Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of U.S. Constitution as adopted 17 September 1787:

No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

There you have the crux of the issue now before the nation and the answer.

Hamilton’s suggested presidential citizenship eligibility requirement was that a Citizen simply had to be ‘born a Citizen’ of the USA, i.e., a Citizen by Birth. But that citizenship status was overwhelmingly rejected by the framers as insufficient. Instead of allowing any person “born a citizen” to be President and Commander of the military, the framers chose to adopt the more stringent requirement recommended by John Jay, i.e., requiring the Citizen to be a “natural born Citizen“, to block any chance of future Presidents owing allegiance to other foreign nations or claims on their allegiance at birth from becoming President and Commander of the Military.. Therefore, the President of the United States must be a “natural born citizen” with unity of citizenship and sole allegiance to the United States at birth. [SOURCE CREDIT]

So why do we keep hearing about the President only needing to be “born a citizen”? Well, let’s start with the fallacy of the 14th amendment trumping Article II -
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 79025176


Thanks for that. So the real battle is defining what a natural born citizen is. Looking around, no one can agree. Google pulls up the most liberal view of it.

I'm naturalized (born overseas to US dad, not US mom) and I know I am not eligible.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 76030728


lmao....

My mother's side of the family were among the earliest settlers from England in America, during the 16th century. They actually descended from the Viking families that ruled England during Danelaw. While my father's side came over from Eastern Eruope in the 18th century.

However, I would NOT take the Presidency of the USA, even if it was handed over to me on a platter, since its turning into one giant cesspool, with zillions of 3rd worlders.

I may even emigrate to Eastern Eruope, where my grilfriend comes from, which is the last remaining White majority regions.

Let Biden and Kamala continue ruling over their cesspool!


flip
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 77963966


"I may even emigrate to Eastern Eruope..."

Well, get on with it then. I have a good thing going here, not bothered.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 77963966
United States
08/13/2020 10:28 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Kamala Harris is Eligible VP and/or President
Not according to what I was taught or letters on the subject written by John Jay and Alexander Hamilton to George Washington just prior to the Constitution being drafted.

[link to www.art2superpac.com]

1. Constitutional Convention – “Born a Citizen” v “Natural Born Citizen":

When developing a new U.S. Constitution for the United States of America, Alexander Hamilton submitted a suggested draft on June 18, 1787. In addition, he also submitted to the framers a proposal for the qualification requirements in Article II as to the necessary Citizenship status for the office of President and Commander in Chief of the Military.

Alexander Hamilton’s suggested presidential eligibility clause:

No person shall be eligible to the office of President of the United States unless he be now a Citizen of one of the States, or hereafter be born a Citizen of the United States.

Many of the founders and framers expressed fear of foreign influence on the person who would in the future serve as President of the United States since this particular office was singularly and uniquely powerful under the proposed new Constitution. This question of foreign influence was elevated when John Jay considered the additional power granted to the Presidency during times of war, that is when he serves as Commander in Chief of the military. Jay felt strongly that whoever served as President and Commander In Chief during times of war must owe their sole allegiance to and only to the United States.

Because this fear of foreign influence on a future President and Commander in Chief was strongly felt, Jay took it upon himself to draft a letter to General George Washington, the presiding officer of the Constitutional Convention, recommending/hinting that the framers should strengthen the Citizenship requirements for the office of the President.

John Jay was an avid reader and proponent of natural law and particularly Vattel’s codification of natural law and the Law of Nations. In his letter to Washington he said that the Citizenship requirement for the office of the commander of our armies should contain a “strong check” against foreign influence and he recommended to Washington that the command of the military be open only to a “natural born Citizen”. Thus Jay did not agree that simply being a “born Citizen” was sufficient enough protection from foreign influence in the singular most powerful office in the new form of government. Rather, Jay wanted to make sure the President and Commander In Chief owed his allegiance solely to the United States of America. He wanted another adjective added to the eligibility clause, i.e., ‘natural’. And that word ‘natural’ goes to the Citizenship status of one’s parents via natural law.

Below is the relevant change to Hamilton’s proposed language detailed in Jay’s letter written to George Washington dated 25 July 1787:

Permit me to hint, whether it would be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expressly that the Command in Chief of the American army shall not be given to nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen.


See a transcription of Jay’s letter to Washington at this link.

Upon receiving Jay’s letter, General Washington passed on the recommendation to the convention where it was adopted in the final draft. Thus Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution, the fundamental law of our nation reads:

Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of U.S. Constitution as adopted 17 September 1787:

No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

There you have the crux of the issue now before the nation and the answer.

Hamilton’s suggested presidential citizenship eligibility requirement was that a Citizen simply had to be ‘born a Citizen’ of the USA, i.e., a Citizen by Birth. But that citizenship status was overwhelmingly rejected by the framers as insufficient. Instead of allowing any person “born a citizen” to be President and Commander of the military, the framers chose to adopt the more stringent requirement recommended by John Jay, i.e., requiring the Citizen to be a “natural born Citizen“, to block any chance of future Presidents owing allegiance to other foreign nations or claims on their allegiance at birth from becoming President and Commander of the Military.. Therefore, the President of the United States must be a “natural born citizen” with unity of citizenship and sole allegiance to the United States at birth. [SOURCE CREDIT]

So why do we keep hearing about the President only needing to be “born a citizen”? Well, let’s start with the fallacy of the 14th amendment trumping Article II -
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 79025176


Thanks for that. So the real battle is defining what a natural born citizen is. Looking around, no one can agree. Google pulls up the most liberal view of it.

I'm naturalized (born overseas to US dad, not US mom) and I know I am not eligible.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 76030728


lmao....

My mother's side of the family were among the earliest settlers from England in America, during the 16th century. They actually descended from the Viking families that ruled England during Danelaw. While my father's side came over from Eastern Eruope in the 18th century.

However, I would NOT take the Presidency of the USA, even if it was handed over to me on a platter, since its turning into one giant cesspool, with zillions of 3rd worlders.

I may even emigrate to Eastern Eruope, where my grilfriend comes from, which is the last remaining White majority regions.

Let Biden and Kamala continue ruling over their cesspool!


flip
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 77963966


"I may even emigrate to Eastern Eruope..."

Well, get on with it then. I have a good thing going here, not bothered.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 76030728


Obviously a 3rd world immigrant parasite, who is feeding off affirmative-action, freebies and handouts paid out from White taxpayer's money.

lmao
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 79259379
United States
08/13/2020 10:28 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Kamala Harris is Eligible VP and/or President
Thisalien16
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 79025176
08/13/2020 10:51 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Kamala Harris is Eligible VP and/or President
Not according to what I was taught or letters on the subject written by John Jay and Alexander Hamilton to George Washington just prior to the Constitution being drafted.

[link to www.art2superpac.com]

1. Constitutional Convention – “Born a Citizen” v “Natural Born Citizen":

When developing a new U.S. Constitution for the United States of America, Alexander Hamilton submitted a suggested draft on June 18, 1787. In addition, he also submitted to the framers a proposal for the qualification requirements in Article II as to the necessary Citizenship status for the office of President and Commander in Chief of the Military.

Alexander Hamilton’s suggested presidential eligibility clause:

No person shall be eligible to the office of President of the United States unless he be now a Citizen of one of the States, or hereafter be born a Citizen of the United States.

Many of the founders and framers expressed fear of foreign influence on the person who would in the future serve as President of the United States since this particular office was singularly and uniquely powerful under the proposed new Constitution. This question of foreign influence was elevated when John Jay considered the additional power granted to the Presidency during times of war, that is when he serves as Commander in Chief of the military. Jay felt strongly that whoever served as President and Commander In Chief during times of war must owe their sole allegiance to and only to the United States.

Because this fear of foreign influence on a future President and Commander in Chief was strongly felt, Jay took it upon himself to draft a letter to General George Washington, the presiding officer of the Constitutional Convention, recommending/hinting that the framers should strengthen the Citizenship requirements for the office of the President.

John Jay was an avid reader and proponent of natural law and particularly Vattel’s codification of natural law and the Law of Nations. In his letter to Washington he said that the Citizenship requirement for the office of the commander of our armies should contain a “strong check” against foreign influence and he recommended to Washington that the command of the military be open only to a “natural born Citizen”. Thus Jay did not agree that simply being a “born Citizen” was sufficient enough protection from foreign influence in the singular most powerful office in the new form of government. Rather, Jay wanted to make sure the President and Commander In Chief owed his allegiance solely to the United States of America. He wanted another adjective added to the eligibility clause, i.e., ‘natural’. And that word ‘natural’ goes to the Citizenship status of one’s parents via natural law.

Below is the relevant change to Hamilton’s proposed language detailed in Jay’s letter written to George Washington dated 25 July 1787:

Permit me to hint, whether it would be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expressly that the Command in Chief of the American army shall not be given to nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen.


See a transcription of Jay’s letter to Washington at this link.

Upon receiving Jay’s letter, General Washington passed on the recommendation to the convention where it was adopted in the final draft. Thus Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution, the fundamental law of our nation reads:

Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of U.S. Constitution as adopted 17 September 1787:

No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

There you have the crux of the issue now before the nation and the answer.

Hamilton’s suggested presidential citizenship eligibility requirement was that a Citizen simply had to be ‘born a Citizen’ of the USA, i.e., a Citizen by Birth. But that citizenship status was overwhelmingly rejected by the framers as insufficient. Instead of allowing any person “born a citizen” to be President and Commander of the military, the framers chose to adopt the more stringent requirement recommended by John Jay, i.e., requiring the Citizen to be a “natural born Citizen“, to block any chance of future Presidents owing allegiance to other foreign nations or claims on their allegiance at birth from becoming President and Commander of the Military.. Therefore, the President of the United States must be a “natural born citizen” with unity of citizenship and sole allegiance to the United States at birth. [SOURCE CREDIT]

So why do we keep hearing about the President only needing to be “born a citizen”? Well, let’s start with the fallacy of the 14th amendment trumping Article II -
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 79025176


Thanks for that. So the real battle is defining what a natural born citizen is. Looking around, no one can agree. Google pulls up the most liberal view of it.

I'm naturalized (born overseas to US dad, not US mom) and I know I am not eligible.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 76030728


The definition is clearly laid out in Vattel's Law of Nations, which was a huge influence on our Constitution.

We have to use a contemporary source for the definition. A definition on the internet by Cornell Law or any source that was NOT available to the Founding Fathers is irrelevant.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 79025176



I agree. Craziness, it has all been puposefully muddled.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 76030728


Yup. There used to be occasional efforts in Congress to make the eligibility requirements less strict, but those efforts have stopped because the public has been sufficiently dumbed down.
nimmerfall

User ID: 72716118
United States
08/13/2020 10:58 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Kamala Harris is Eligible VP and/or President
isn't this where we get anchor babies? If you're born on U.S. soil, you're a citizen.

OP is right, focus on fighting a battle you can win.
And in the end, as the darkness takes me, I am nothing.

Now I know how you felt, my friend.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 79249173
United States
08/13/2020 11:00 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Kamala Harris is Eligible VP and/or President
you're right, Constitution be damned!!

let's just let them ignore all of it.

it's just a worthless piece of paper anyway, right? and who has the time to read it? I mean, it's just words and besides, it was written over 30 years ago so that makes it ancient!!!!

let give it all away.

who cares? fuck it.



my god, the inanity.
 Quoting: Anonymous Cowherder


hesright99.9% of Amerkians can't read it must less understand it, the others don't care.fuckyeah5
Kpduties
User ID: 77900715
United States
08/13/2020 11:04 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Kamala Harris is Eligible VP and/or President
The fact of the matter here is that she ran for President. In doing so, she had to meet the qualifications to be on the ballot. Those are the same qualifications to be VP. If there had been a problem with her birth status, it would have been identified long before now. Those who keep raising the issue are either racists or idiots or both.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 79025176
08/13/2020 11:06 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Kamala Harris is Eligible VP and/or President
isn't this where we get anchor babies? If you're born on U.S. soil, you're a citizen.

OP is right, focus on fighting a battle you can win.
 Quoting: nimmerfall


Right, because the eligibility requirement is just being a citizen.

chuckle
Gucky
Ruler of the galaxy

User ID: 78107266
United States
08/13/2020 11:14 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Kamala Harris is Eligible VP and/or President
Let's be honest for a second...

Does anyone here believe for one second that a child of two foreigners that was raised in another country was what the framers had in mind when they wrote the Natural Born clause?

Or when they legally defined what Natural Born was in 1790?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 56380857
United States
08/13/2020 11:16 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Kamala Harris is Eligible VP and/or President
Lee Zeldin
@RepLeeZeldin
Durham.
Tomorrow.

8:11 PM · Aug 13, 2020·Twitter for iPhone
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 71611133
United States
08/13/2020 11:18 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Kamala Harris is Eligible VP and/or President
Let's be honest for a second...

Does anyone here believe for one second that a child of two foreigners that was raised in another country was what the framers had in mind when they wrote the Natural Born clause?

Or when they legally defined what Natural Born was in 1790?
 Quoting: Gucky


They didn't define it. It was already defined in Emmerich de Vattel's Law of Nations.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 79247427
United States
08/13/2020 11:30 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Kamala Harris is Eligible VP and/or President
....Be smart.
 Quoting: Dr. Acula


The irony...it burns.
Base12

User ID: 78222180
United States
08/13/2020 11:30 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Kamala Harris is Eligible VP and/or President
"William Rawle, formerly the U.S. Attorney for Pennsylvania (1791–1799) defined natural born citizen as every person born within the United States, regardless of the citizenship of their parents."

[link to en.wikipedia.org (secure)]

1dunno1
Visit my website...
[link to www.mostholyplace.com]
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 76630697
United States
08/13/2020 11:32 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Kamala Harris is Eligible VP and/or President
Nope you’re wrong. She has to have had parents born here to eligible. But if nobody challenges it then it doesn’t matter. At least they are going to try.
nimmerfall

User ID: 72716118
United States
08/13/2020 11:34 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Kamala Harris is Eligible VP and/or President
isn't this where we get anchor babies? If you're born on U.S. soil, you're a citizen.

OP is right, focus on fighting a battle you can win.
 Quoting: nimmerfall


Right, because the eligibility requirement is just being a citizen.

chuckle
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 79025176


correct. Natural born citizen. A citizen from birth.

s226

Last Edited by nimmerfall on 08/13/2020 11:35 PM
And in the end, as the darkness takes me, I am nothing.

Now I know how you felt, my friend.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 74273450
United States
08/13/2020 11:35 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Kamala Harris is Eligible VP and/or President
Who fucking cares, that's a distraction, she is a total bitch...wherever she is eligible. No one wants her or him.
nimmerfall

User ID: 72716118
United States
08/13/2020 11:36 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Kamala Harris is Eligible VP and/or President
Who fucking cares, that's a distraction, she is a total bitch...wherever she is eligible. No one wants her or him.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 74273450


I'd like to think that.
And in the end, as the darkness takes me, I am nothing.

Now I know how you felt, my friend.
Base12

User ID: 78222180
United States
08/13/2020 11:38 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Kamala Harris is Eligible VP and/or President
"The U.S. Constitution uses but does not define the phrase "natural born Citizen", and various opinions have been offered over time regarding its precise meaning."

[link to en.wikipedia.org (secure)]

Looks like all we have to go by are opinions, thus everyone is correct.

whatever

Last Edited by Base12 on 08/13/2020 11:39 PM
Visit my website...
[link to www.mostholyplace.com]
Callen

User ID: 78551315
United States
08/13/2020 11:39 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Kamala Harris is Eligible VP and/or President
"William Rawle, formerly the U.S. Attorney for Pennsylvania (1791–1799) defined natural born citizen as every person born within the United States, regardless of the citizenship of their parents."

[link to en.wikipedia.org (secure)]

1dunno1
 Quoting: Base12


The Supreme court defined it differently in MINOR v. HAPPERSETT in 1874

----
The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that 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, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.

----

[link to www.law.cornell.edu (secure)]


But you're right, we should go by what Wikipedia says, instead of the Supreme Court.
The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those that speak it - Orwell

If you’re backed by Hollywood, social media, the government, and practically the entire globalist system, you are not the resistance -- you're part of the problem
Gucky
Ruler of the galaxy

User ID: 78107266
United States
08/13/2020 11:45 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Kamala Harris is Eligible VP and/or President
Let's be honest for a second...

Does anyone here believe for one second that a child of two foreigners that was raised in another country was what the framers had in mind when they wrote the Natural Born clause?

Or when they legally defined what Natural Born was in 1790?
 Quoting: Gucky


They didn't define it. It was already defined in Emmerich de Vattel's Law of Nations.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 71611133


Actually it was defined by US law by the very first Congress in the Naturalization act of 1790 and signed into law by President George Washington.

No court or congress has since tried to legally redefine it.





GLP