CDR Kerchner (Ret)'s Blog

September 17, 2014

Constitution Day – 17 Sep 2014: A Lesson from History. Is Being a Born Citizen of the United States Sufficient Citizenship Status to be President? The Founders and Framers Emphatically Decided It Was Not! | by CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret)

Obama Not Constitutionally Eligible to be the President and Commander of our Military.  Click Image for the Proof.

Obama Not Constitutionally Eligible to be the President and Commander of our Military. Click Image for the Proof.

Constitution Day – 17 Sep 2014: A Lesson from History. Is Being Born a Citizen (Citizen at/by Birth) of the United States of Sufficient Citizenship Status to be President of the United States and Commander in Chief of Our Military? The Founders and Framers Emphatically Decided … It Was Not!

By: CDR Charles F. Kerchner, Jr., P.E. (Retired)
17 September 2014 – Constitution Day

During the process of developing a new U.S. Constitution Alexander Hamilton submitted a suggested draft for a Constitution on June 18, 1787. At some point, he also suggested 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 had a fear of foreign influence on the person who would in the future be President of the United States since this particular office was singularly and uniquely powerful under the proposed new Constitution. The President was also to be the Commander in Chief of the military. This fear of foreign influence on a future President and Commander in Chief was particularly strongly felt by John Jay, who later became the first Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. He felt so strongly about the issue of potential foreign influence that he 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. 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” or “born a Citizen” was sufficient enough protection from foreign influence in the singular most powerful office in the new form of government. 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, both of them, when their child is born, as per natural law.

The below is the relevant proposed change language from Jay’s letter which he proposed to strengthen the citizenship requirements in Article II and to require more than just being a “born Citizen” of the United States to serve as a future Commander in Chief and President.

John Jay wrote in a letter to George Washington dated 25 Jul 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 Commander 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. This letter from Jay was written on July 25, 1787. General Washington passed on the recommendation from Jay to the convention and it was adopted in the final draft and was accepted adding the adjective “natural” making it “natural born Citizen of the United States” for future Presidents and Commanders in Chief of the military, rather than Hamilton’s proposed “born a Citizen”. 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 Sep 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 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 the person with foreign allegiances or claims on their allegiance at birth from becoming President and Commander of the Military. No person having any foreign influence or claim of allegiance on them at birth could serve as a future President. The person must be a “natural born citizen” with unity of citizenship and sole allegiance to the United States at birth.

Jay’s proposal recommended clause added the additional adjective before “born Citizen” that was proposed by Hamilton. And that word and adjective “natural” means something special from the laws of nature that modifies just being born a Citizen of the USA such as being simply born on the soil of the United States. Natural means from nature by the facts of nature of one’s birth. Not created retroactively after the fact by a man-made law. A natural born Citizen needs no man-made law to bestow Citizenship on them. The added adjective “natural” comes from Natural Law which is recognized the world over as universal law and which is the foundation of the Law of Nations which was codified by Vattel in 1758 in his preeminent legal treatise used by the founders, The Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law. In Vol.1 Chapter 19 of Vattel’s Law of Nations, the “Des citoyens et naturels“, Vattel in Section 212 explains to us (the French term “naturels” was translated to English in 1781 in the Journal of the Continental Congress and in the 1797 English edition of Vattel), to tell us that the “natural born Citizens” are those born in the country to parents (plural) who are Citizens of the country when their child is born. These are the natural Citizens of the nation per universal principles of natural law for which no man-made law is necessary to explain or justify. Such a person, a natural born Citizen, is born with unity of Citizenship and sole allegiance at birth due to having been both born on the soil AND being born to two Citizen parents. The person who would be President must be a second generation American with no foreign claims of allegiance on them at birth under the law of nations and natural law, the child of two Citizens and born in the USA. This is a much stronger check to foreign influence than simply being born a Citizen say on the soil of the USA but with one or the other parent being a foreigner, such as is the case of Obama. The situation with Obama’s birth Citizenship status is exactly the problem that the founders and framers did not want. They did not want the child of a foreign national, non-U.S. citizen serving as President and Commander of our military. This was a national security concern to them. And it is a national security concern now.

Another founder of our nation and great historian of the American Revolution named David Ramsay contemporaneously defined in a 1789 essay what the term “natural born Citizen” means. Read a copy of Ramsay’s original dissertation at this link. Other research papers from history on the term “natural born Citizen” published long before the current controversy was created by the 2008 election debacle can be read at this link. The paper by Breckenridge Long in 1916 is a particularly good one.

Barack Hussein Obama II may or may not be a born Citizen of the USA depending on what the 1961 contemporaneous birth registration documents sealed in Hawaii reveal. And Americans have good reason to be greatly concerned about the truth as to where he was physically born as opposed to where his birth may have been falsely registered by his maternal grandmother as occurring in Hawaii as this Catalog of Evidence details. But he can never be a “natural born Citizen of the United States” since his father was a foreigner, a British Subject who was never a U.S. Citizen and was not even an immigrant to the USA. Since his father was a British Subject and not a U.S. Citizen when Obama was born, Obama was born a British Subject. The founders and framers are probably rolling over in their graves knowing this person was sworn in as the putative President and Commander of our military.

The founders rejected acquisition of Citizenship by birth on the soil without consideration as to who were the parents. That is clear from the history and evolution of the writing the eligibility clause in Article II, Section 1, Clause 5, which specifies who can be President and Commander in Chief of the military.

So, can a “born Citizen” be President of the USA? The answer is a resounding NO per the founders and framers. Being a “born Citizen the United States” is a necessary but NOT sufficient part of being a “natural born Citizen of the United States”. Natural born Citizens are a subset of “born Citizens (citizens at birth)” but not all “born Citizens (citizens at birth)” are “natural born Citizens”: http://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2012/06/20/of-natural-born-citizens-and-citizens-at-birth-and-basic-logic-trees-are-plants-but-not-all-plants-are-trees-natural-born-citizens-nbc-are-citizens-at-birth-cab-but-not-all-cab/  Only a “natural born Citizen” can be the President of the USA and Commander in Chief of our military. Obama is not a natural born Citizen of the USA and is thus constitutionally eligible (to constitutional standards) to serve as President and Commander in Chief of the military.

SBTP Dolly Madison Quote du Jour,
” The Constitution was signed  September 17, 1787, by 39 brave men who changed the world.”

HAPPY CONSTITUTION DAY!

CDR Charles Kerchner, P.E. (Retired)
http://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com
http://www.protectourliberty.org
http://www.scribd.com/protectourliberty/collections/

P.S. Here is a chart which lists and explains the five (5) Citizenship terms used in the U.S. Constitution.
P.P.S. Being a “born Citizen” or “Citizen at Birth” is not identically the same as a being a “natural born Citizen”.
P.P.P.S. Obama is NOT a “natural born Citizen of the United States” to U.S. Constitutional standards. Read this essay regarding the legal term of art “natural born Citizen” and basic logic, i.e., trees are plants but not all plants are trees. Natural born Citizens are a subset of “born Citizens (citizens at birth)”.  All “natural born Citizens” are “born Citizens (citizens at birth) but not all “born Citizens (citizens at birth)” are “natural born Citizens”:  http://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2012/06/20/of-natural-born-citizens-and-citizens-at-birth-and-basic-logic-trees-are-plants-but-not-all-plants-are-trees-natural-born-citizens-nbc-are-citizens-at-birth-cab-but-not-all-cab/   Also read the “Three Legged Stool Test” for Natural Born Citizen http://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2013/11/15/the-three-legged-stool-test-analogy-for-natural-born-citizenship-of-the-united-states-to-constitutional-standards/ … AND … http://www.art2superpac.com/issues.html  Also watch this video by the renowned constitutional scholar Dr. Herb Titus: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=esiZZ-1R7e8

September 17, 2013

Constitution Day – 17 Sep 2013: A Lesson from History. Is Being a Born Citizen of the United States Sufficient Citizenship Status to be President? The Founders and Framers Emphatically Decided It Was Not! | by CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret)

Constitution Day – 17 Sep 2013: A Lesson from History. Is Being Born a Citizen (Citizen at/by Birth) of the United States of Sufficient Citizenship Status to be President of the United States and Commander in Chief of Our Military? The Founders and Framers Emphatically Decided … It Was Not!

By: CDR Charles F. Kerchner, Jr., (Retired)
17 September 2013 – Constitution Day

During the process of developing a new U.S. Constitution Alexander Hamilton submitted a suggested draft for a Constitution on June 18, 1787. At some point, he also suggested 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 had a fear of foreign influence on the person who would in the future be President of the United States since this particular office was singularly and uniquely powerful under the proposed new Constitution. The President was also to be the Commander in Chief of the military. This fear of foreign influence on a future President and Commander in Chief was particularly strongly felt by John Jay, who later became the first Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. He felt so strongly about the issue of potential foreign influence that he 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. 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” or “born a Citizen” was sufficient enough protection from foreign influence in the singular most powerful office in the new form of government. 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, both of them, when their child is born, as per natural law.

The below is the relevant proposed change language from Jay’s letter which he proposed to strengthen the citizenship requirements in Article II and to require more than just being a “born Citizen” of the United States to serve as a future Commander in Chief and President.

John Jay wrote in a letter to George Washington dated 25 Jul 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 Commander 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. This letter from Jay was written on July 25, 1787. General Washington passed on the recommendation from Jay to the convention and it was adopted in the final draft and was accepted adding the adjective “natural” making it “natural born Citizen of the United States” for future Presidents and Commanders in Chief of the military, rather than Hamilton’s proposed “born a Citizen”. 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 Sep 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 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 the person with foreign allegiances or claims on their allegiance at birth from becoming President and Commander of the Military. No person having any foreign influence or claim of allegiance on them at birth could serve as a future President. The person must be a “natural born citizen” with unity of citizenship and sole allegiance to the United States at birth.

Jay’s proposal recommended clause added the additional adjective before “born Citizen” that was proposed by Hamilton. And that word and adjective “natural” means something special from the laws of nature that modifies just being born a Citizen of the USA such as being simply born on the soil of the United States. Natural means from nature by the facts of nature of one’s birth. Not created retroactively after the fact by a man-made law. A natural born Citizen needs no man-made law to bestow Citizenship on them. The added adjective “natural” comes from Natural Law which is recognized the world over as universal law and which is the foundation of the Law of Nations which was codified by Vattel in 1758 in his preeminent legal treatise used by the founders, The Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law. In Vol.1 Chapter 19 of Vattel’s Law of Nations, the “Des citoyens et naturels“, Vattel in Section 212 explains to us (the French term “naturels” was translated to English in 1781 in the Journal of the Continental Congress and in the 1797 English edition of Vattel), to tell us that the “natural born Citizens” are those born in the country to parents (plural) who are Citizens of the country when their child is born. These are the natural Citizens of the nation per universal principles of natural law for which no man-made law is necessary to explain or justify. Such a person, a natural born Citizen, is born with unity of Citizenship and sole allegiance at birth due to having been both born on the soil AND being born to two Citizen parents. The person who would be President must be a second generation American with no foreign claims of allegiance on them at birth under the law of nations and natural law, the child of two Citizens and born in the USA. This is a much stronger check to foreign influence than simply being born a Citizen say on the soil of the USA but with one or the other parent being a foreigner, such as is the case of Obama. The situation with Obama’s birth Citizenship status is exactly the problem that the founders and framers did not want. They did not want the child of a foreign national, non-U.S. citizen serving as President and Commander of our military. This was a national security concern to them. And it is a national security concern now.

Another founder of our nation and great historian of the American Revolution named David Ramsay contemporaneously defined in a 1789 essay what the term “natural born Citizen” means. Read a copy of Ramsay’s original dissertation at this link. Other research papers from history on the term “natural born Citizen” published long before the current controversy was created by the 2008 election debacle can be read at this link. The paper by Breckenridge Long in 1916 is a particularly good one.

Barack Hussein Obama II may or may not be a born Citizen of the USA depending on what the 1961 contemporaneous birth registration documents sealed in Hawaii reveal. And Americans have good reason to be greatly concerned about the truth as to where he was physically born as opposed to where his birth may have been falsely registered by his maternal grandmother as occurring in Hawaii as this Catalog of Evidence details. But he can never be a “natural born Citizen of the United States” since his father was a foreigner, a British Subject who was never a U.S. Citizen and was not even an immigrant to the USA. Since his father was a British Subject and not a U.S. Citizen when Obama was born, Obama was born a British Subject. The founders and framers are probably rolling over in their graves knowing this person was sworn in as the putative President and Commander of our military.

The founders rejected acquisition of Citizenship by birth on the soil without consideration as to who were the parents. That is clear from the history and evolution of the writing the eligibility clause in Article II, Section 1, Clause 5, which specifies who can be President and Commander in Chief of the military.

So, can a “born Citizen” be President of the USA? The answer is a resounding NO per the founders and framers. Being a “born Citizen the United States” is a necessary but NOT sufficient part of being a “natural born Citizen of the United States”. Natural born Citizens are a subset of “born Citizens (citizens at birth)” but not all “born Citizens (citizens at birth)” are “natural born Citizens”: http://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2012/06/20/of-natural-born-citizens-and-citizens-at-birth-and-basic-logic-trees-are-plants-but-not-all-plants-are-trees-natural-born-citizens-nbc-are-citizens-at-birth-cab-but-not-all-cab/  Only a “natural born Citizen” can be the President of the USA and Commander in Chief of our military. Obama is not a natural born Citizen of the USA and is thus constitutionally eligible (to constitutional standards) to serve as President and Commander in Chief of the military.

SBTP Dolly Madison Quote du Jour,
” The Constitution was signed  September 17, 1787, by 39 brave men who changed the world.”

HAPPY CONSTITUTION DAY!

CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret)
http://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com
http://www.protectourliberty.org

P.S. Here is a chart which lists and explains the five (5) Citizenship terms used in the U.S. Constitution.
P.P.S. Being a “born Citizen” or “Citizen at Birth” is not identically the same as a being a “natural born Citizen”.
P.P.S. Also read this essay regarding the legal term of art “natural born Citizen” and basic logic, i.e., trees are plants but not all plants are trees.  Natural born Citizens are a subset of “born Citizens (citizens at birth)” but not all “born Citizens (citizens at birth)” are “natural born Citizens”: http://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2012/06/20/of-natural-born-citizens-and-citizens-at-birth-and-basic-logic-trees-are-plants-but-not-all-plants-are-trees-natural-born-citizens-nbc-are-citizens-at-birth-cab-but-not-all-cab/ … AND … http://www.art2superpac.com/issues.html

August 30, 2013

Mark Levin Showed All The Traits of a Scoundrel on His Radio Show Thursday

For more click on the image for the correct definition of "natural born Citizen of the United States"

For more click on the image for the correct definition of “natural born Citizen of the United States”

Mark Levin Showed All The Traits of a Scoundrel on His Radio Show Thursday

Click image for more information on the constitutional legal term of art "natural born Citizen"

Click image for more information on the historical and constitutional legal term of art “natural born Citizen”

Mark Levin’s brazen misstatements and disinformation on his radio show Thursday were unbelievable and shocking. He said Ted Cruz is eligible to be President even though he said Ted Cruz was a “naturalized Citizen”.  He also said that a person who is simply a “Citizen” at/by birth is identically equal to a “natural born Citizen” at/by birth, which is of course not true. The adjectives mean something even if Levin ignores them and reads them into statutory nationality act man-made laws wherein the words natural born are not even mentioned. As I said, unbelievable. I guess Mark, it’s hard to keep your mind straight when you are twisting the truth about what a “natural born Citizen” truly means to constitutional standards. And this disinformation is coming from a man who holds himself out as a constitutional expert. He is doing this on purpose. In my opinion, he is a coward on this issue of presidential eligibility since he will not allow anyone on the air, constitutional expert or otherwise, to debate him in a courteous, intelligent, and respectful way on this. All he spews out on this issue is anger, intimidation, disinformation, and ridicule. And he blocks all calls from listeners on this issue. What is he so afraid of?  Maybe that the real truth might get onto the national airways. By way of a note as to correct historical information given to him in the past, a team of constitutionalists, me included, attending a conference in Washington DC in 2010, presented him and other dignitaries attending that event with historical and legal information on the founders and framers intent and true meaning of “natural born Citizen” of the United States”. Levin is obviously ignoring it when he says nothing in history supports the definition of natural born Citizen that to be such one must be born in the USA to two Citizen parents and the founders purpose and intent for its true meaning, i.e., a person born with sole allegiance and unity of citizenship at birth. Dual-citizens by birth need not apply to be President and Commander-in-Chief. He cited the 1790 Act of Congress but neglected to tell his listeners it was repealed 5 years later with the 1795 Act to correct mistakes made in that first act such as removing any mention of declaring people born out of the country to be considered natural born Citizens if born of parents who are citizens. People born outside the USA in the 1795 Act were considered simply Citizens, not natural born Citizens. In addition his citing of other man-made statutory laws such as the U.S. Nationality Acts are meaningless to the true meaning of natural born Citizen, which can only be created by the laws of nature, not man-made laws. The man-made laws he alluded to do not even address the term natural born Citizen but only address who is a basic Citizen of the United States due to some circumstance of that person’s birth, such as birth outside the USA, that preclude that person from being automatically a natural born Citizen of the United States, for which no law or act of Congress is needed, and which need no paper citizenship document issued to the parents from the U.S. State Department. Levin instead is using intimidation and ridicule and other tools straight out of the far-left’s training book – Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals”. If Mark Levin was even remotely fair he would at least have either Atty Mario Apuzzo, Atty Herb Titus PhD, and/or Atty Larry Klayman or maybe all of them on his show to debate the issue fair and openly for an hour or two.  But he won’t. His agenda is to keep the cloud of disinformation and cover-up in effect on this blatant usurpation of Article II Section 1, the presidential eligibility clause of the U.S. Constitution by both major political parties. I believe he’s a coward on this issue. He is sure acting like one. Or maybe the Obama regime has something on him and is threatening him, his family, or his show producers. Whatever the reason, he is not telling the truth on the historical and legal facts regarding the constitutional term “natural born Citizen”. On his show this time he even ridiculed by implication and innuendo the great legal writers of the founding era such as Emer de Vattel and his preeminent legal treatise of that time, “The Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law” which our founders along with the Bible used to help write the U.S. Constitution and other founding documents, and which treatise contained a legal definition of “natural born Citizen” therein. This is not the actions of a historical and constitutional scholar seeking to air the truth. Mark Levin on his show demonstrated the traits of a scoundrel. Mark Levin should be ashamed of himself for his tirade and disinformation rant on his radio show Thursday.

CDR Charles Kerchner, P.E. (Retired)
Lehigh Valley PA USA
http://www.protectourliberty.org/
http://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/
http://www.scribd.com/protectourliberty/collections/

Click on the Image for Details about Obama's Forged Birth Certificate and Selective Service (Draft) Registration Form

Click on the Image for Details about Obama’s Forged Birth Certificate and Selective Service (Draft) Registration Form

P.S. Also read this essay regarding the legal term of art “natural born Citizen” and basic logic, i.e., trees are plants but not all plants are trees.  Natural born Citizens are a subset of “born Citizens (citizens at birth)” but not all “born Citizens (citizens at birth)” are “natural born Citizens”: http://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2012/06/20/of-natural-born-citizens-and-citizens-at-birth-and-basic-logic-trees-are-plants-but-not-all-plants-are-trees-natural-born-citizens-nbc-are-citizens-at-birth-cab-but-not-all-cab/ … AND … http://www.art2superpac.com/issues.html

August 20, 2013

A Very Significant Additional Difference Between the Obama Questions and Cruz Questions — Obama is Proffering Forged Documents

Click on the Image for Details about Obama's Forged Birth Certificate and Selective Service (Draft) Registration Form

Click on the Image for Details about Obama’s Forged Birth Certificate and Selective Service (Draft) Registration Form

Click on image to learn what a “natural born Citizen” of the United States truly is

Click on image to learn what a “natural born Citizen” of the United States truly is

While Both are Not Constitutionally Eligible, a Very Significant Additional Difference Exists Between the Obama Questions and Cruz Questions — Obama is Proffering Forged Documents — Congress needs to hold hearings and investigate Obama’s using forged ID documents and also the Constitutional eligibility questions.

Ted Cruz was born a dual-Citizen and Obama was born a dual-Citizen, if you are to believe Obama’s proffered life narrative, since both had non-U.S. Citizen fathers.  If Ted Cruz is not eligible per the main stream media due to being born a dual-Citizen then that same argument must be made in the major media against Obama.

Obama eligibility skeptic goes public on Cruz

Congressman: Case more about documents than birthplace

By Garth Kant @ WorldNetDaily:   WASHINGTON – To hear Rep. Steve Stockman, R-Texas, describe it, the difference between President Obama and Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas – on the question of their eligibility for the highest office in the land – may be a case of comparing apples and oranges.

The congressman said with Cruz, it is a legal question of whether he is eligible to serve as president – whereas the issue with Obama is not really about where he was born, but whether his documentation is authentic. …

Continue reading here:  http://www.wnd.com/2013/08/obama-eligibility-skeptic-goes-public-on-cruz/print

Exactly what is a “natural born Citizen of the United States” a critical national security part of the presidential eligibility clause in Article II of the U.S. Constitution? Watch video here:  http://youtu.be/C_pKLeWhlwU

.

CDR Charles Kerchner, P.E. (Retired)
Lehigh Valley PA USA
http://www.protectourliberty.org/
http://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/
http://www.scribd.com/protectourliberty/collections/

Click image for more information on the constitutional legal term of art "natural born Citizen"

Click image for more information on the constitutional legal term of art “natural born Citizen”

P.S. Also read this essay regarding the legal term of art “natural born Citizen” and basic logic, i.e., trees are plants but not all plants are trees.  Natural born Citizens are a subset of “born Citizens (citizens at birth)” but not all “born Citizens (citizens at birth)” are “natural born Citizens”: http://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2012/06/20/of-natural-born-citizens-and-citizens-at-birth-and-basic-logic-trees-are-plants-but-not-all-plants-are-trees-natural-born-citizens-nbc-are-citizens-at-birth-cab-but-not-all-cab/ … AND … http://www.art2superpac.com/issues.html

P.P.S  A warning from the past — some conspiracies are very real and are also large and well organized and in process for a long time.  Such is the nature of Communist activities in the USA.  The target of the seditious political conspiracy we are currently faced with is to destroy our U.S. Constitution, our Republic, our culture, and our military.  Remember this quote from history: “We must now face the harsh truth that the objectives of communism are being steadily advanced because many of us do not recognize the means used to advance them. … The individual is handicapped by coming face to face with a Conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists. The American mind simply has not come to a realization of the evil which has been introduced into our midst.” Quote by: J. Edgar Hoover former FBI director. Source: Elks Magazine (August 1956).

When will we return to the rule of law and enforce our identity theft protection laws and the U.S. Constitution in regards to Obama, the Usurper and Fraud-in-Chief residing in the White House? When will Congress take action and launch a full Congressional investigation into Obama’s forged and stolen ID documents!?

August 13, 2013

What is a Natural Born Citizen of the U.S.? | by John Greschak

Click image for more information on the constitutional legal term of art "natural born Citizen"

Click image for more information on the constitutional legal term of art “natural born Citizen”

What is a Natural Born Citizen of the U.S.? | by John Greschak

Read his scholarly analysis and essay synopsis here:   http://www.scribd.com/doc/160067303/

Also watch these video to learn more about the true meaning “natural born Citizen” per constitutional scholar Herb Titus: Pt1: http://youtu.be/esiZZ-1R7e8  and Pt2: http://youtu.be/xoaZ8WextxQ

Barack Obama, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Bobby Jindal, and Nikki Haley are clearly not eligible per the original meaning and intent of the “natural born Citizen” term in the presidential eligibility clause in Article II of the U.S. Constitution. To use a man-made statute or law, amendment, or treaty which makes one only a “Citizen” of the United States, either at birth or otherwise, means one would have had to be alive at the time of the creation of the Constitution. Read the actual words in the Constitution: “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.”  After those original Citizens were gone it took a “natural born Citizen” to be eligible, that is, the children of Citizens of the United States, plural — two Citizen parents (naturalized after immigration to the USA or born here) when one was born in the USA. Any law or Act of Congress cited making one simply a “Citizen at Birth” or “Citizen by Birth” , or simply a born Citizen, is not sufficient. Such laws do not address or supersede or even mention Article II of the U.S. Constitution. Such laws do not even have the words/adjectives “natural born” in them.  A “natural born Citizen” is created by the laws of nature and nature’s God, governed by the facts of nature at the person’s birth, not the laws of men. The vast majority of U.S. Citizens are “natural born Citizens”.  It is from those ranks that we are constitutionally supposed to choose our Presidents and Vice Presidents.

CDR Charles Kerchner, P.E. (Retired)
Lehigh Valley PA USA
http://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/
http://www.protectourliberty.org/
http://www.scribd.com/protectourliberty/collections/

“The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the veil of indifference to their necessity to continually be “on watch” and at times to stand up and protect our U.S. Constitution from usurpation by progressive/marxist/radical politicians operating in relative secrecy protected by an enabling press and major media … thinking and saying it’s the job of someone else … and living their lives in general apathy about what the national government is up to, they will allow the adoption of every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation without knowing how it happened.” CDR Kerchner (Ret)’s alert and paraphrasing earlier warnings about the socialist/progressives’ long-term stealth agenda to transform the USA from a constitutional republic into a top-down, central controlled, socialist form of government.

P.S. Also read this essay regarding the legal term of art “natural born Citizen” and basic logic, i.e., trees are plants but not all plants are trees.  Natural born Citizens are a subset of “born Citizens (citizens at birth)” but not all “born Citizens (citizens at birth)” are “natural born Citizens”: http://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2012/06/20/of-natural-born-citizens-and-citizens-at-birth-and-basic-logic-trees-are-plants-but-not-all-plants-are-trees-natural-born-citizens-nbc-are-citizens-at-birth-cab-but-not-all-cab/ … AND … http://www.art2superpac.com/issues.html

Who is Eligible to Run for President (per CNN)?

For more click on the image for the correct definition of "natural born Citizen of the United States"

For more click on the image for the correct definition of “natural born Citizen of the United States”

Who is Eligible to Run for President (per CNN’s Z. Bryon Wolf)?

.

Read his historically and legally inaccurate disinformation piece by CNN’s Z. Bryon Wolf here:  http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2013/08/cnn-goes-there-extensive-report-on.html

.

THE CONGRESSIONAL “CRS” MEMOS CITED BY CNN STORY THOROUGHLY DEBUNKED HERE:  http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/search?q=CRS+Memo
.
A “natural born Citizen of the United States” per the founders and framers intent and constitutional standards must be born in the USA to parents who were both U.S. Citizens (naturalized immigrant or a born Citizens) at the time of their child’s birth.
.
Read these historical and legal papers which tell one the true meaning of the “natural born Citizen” clause in our U.S. Constitution:  http://www.scribd.com/collections/3301209/Papers-Discussing-National-Born-Citizen-Meaning-to-Constitutional-Standards
.
Read this essay about the difference between the two legal terms of art — “natural born Citizen” and “Citizen at/by Birth” — that the Mainstream Media, Obama’s Obot Minions online, and Congress are trying to foist on the American people as being synonymous when they are not.   Of Trees and Plants – Natural born Citizen and Basic Logic: http://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2012/06/20/of-natural-born-citizens-and-citizens-at-birth-and-basic-logic-trees-are-plants-but-not-all-plants-are-trees-natural-born-citizens-nbc-are-citizens-at-birth-cab-but-not-all-cab/
.
“There is no greater national security threat to our nation and Constitutional Republic than having a person in the office of the Presidency and Commander in Chief of our military who is of unknown true legal identity who is engaging in crimes to cover up his true legal identity by proffering forged and stolen ID docs.” CDR Kerchner (Ret)
.
# # # #
Obama the Enigma: Click on the image to learn more about Obama he does not want you to know.

Obama the Enigma: Click on the image to learn more about Obama he does not want you to know.

A warning from the past — some conspiracies are very real and are also large and well organized and in process for a long time.   The target of the one we are currently faced with is to destroy our U.S. Constitution, our Republic, our culture, and our military.  Remember this quote from history: “We must now face the harsh truth that the objectives of communism are being steadily advanced because many of us do not recognize the means used to advance them. … The individual is handicapped by coming face to face with a Conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists. The American mind simply has not come to a realization of the evil which has been introduced into our midst.” Quote by: J. Edgar Hoover former FBI director. Source: Elks Magazine (August 1956).

When will we return to the rule of law and enforce our identity theft protection laws and the U.S. Constitution in regards to Obama, the Usurper and Fraud-in-Chief residing in the White House? When will Congress take action!?

CDR Charles Kerchner, P.E. (Retired)
Lehigh Valley PA USA
http://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/
http://www.protectourliberty.org/
http://www.scribd.com/protectourliberty/collections/

“The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the veil of indifference to their necessity to continually be “on watch” and at times to stand up and protect our U.S. Constitution from usurpation by progressive/marxist/radical politicians operating in relative secrecy protected by an enabling press and major media … thinking and saying it’s the job of someone else … and living their lives in general apathy about what the national government is up to, they will allow the adoption of every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation without knowing how it happened.” CDR Kerchner (Ret)’s alert and paraphrasing earlier warnings about the socialist/progressives’ long-term stealth agenda to transform the USA from a constitutional republic into a top-down, central controlled, socialist form of government.

P.S. Also read this essay regarding the legal term of art “natural born Citizen” and basic logic, i.e., trees are plants but not all plants are trees.  Natural born Citizens are a subset of “born Citizens (citizens at birth)” but not all “born Citizens (citizens at birth)” are “natural born Citizens”: http://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2012/06/20/of-natural-born-citizens-and-citizens-at-birth-and-basic-logic-trees-are-plants-but-not-all-plants-are-trees-natural-born-citizens-nbc-are-citizens-at-birth-cab-but-not-all-cab/ … AND … http://www.art2superpac.com/issues.html

Next Page »

Theme: Rubric. Get a free blog at WordPress.com

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,163 other followers

%d bloggers like this: