Constitution Day – 17 Sep 2021: 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 No 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.

Constitution Day – 17 Sep 2021: 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 … No, It Was Not!

By: CDR Charles F. Kerchner, Jr., P.E. (Retired)
17 September 2021 – Constitution Day

During the process of developing the 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.  Another version of Hamilton’s proposed Constitution and which principles were stated during the convention’s deliberations per Madison notes and journal (see work of Farrand – pg 619), was given to Madison near the close of the convention for inclusion in Madison record of events for the convention. Hamilton’s proposed Constitution was not accepted.

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 rightly 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 treatise on 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 proposed principles for a Constitution and a presidential citizenship eligibility requirement therein requiring that a Citizen simply had to be ‘born a Citizen’ of the USA, i.e., a Citizen by Birth.  See Madison’s comment in his journal of the convention re this fact in which it reports as follows:  ” … Copy of a paper Communicated to J. M. by Col. Hamilton, about the close of the Convention in Philada. 1787, which he said delineated the Constitution which he would have wished to be proposed by the Convention: He had stated the principles of it in the course of the deliberations.  …” —  3 Max Farrand, The Records of the Federal Convention of 1787, at 619-630 (1911) – page 619.  But that citizenship status for who could be President 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 via George Washington, i.e., requiring the Citizen to be a “natural born Citizen“, to block any chance of the person with foreign influence or 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 and recommended clause added the additional adjective of “natural” before simply being a “born Citizen” which 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”: https://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 not eligible (to constitutional standards) to serve as President and Commander in Chief of the military.

Other politicians aspiring to high political office who are also not constitutionally eligible:  Kamala Harris (D), Tammy Duckworth (D),  Ted Cruz (R), Marco Rubio (R), Nikki Haley (R), and Bobby Jindal (R) are not a “natural born Citizen” of the U.S. to constitutional standards.

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)
https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com
http://www.scribd.com/user/52640192/protectourliberty/lists
http://www.protectourliberty.org

Other suggested reading and viewing on being a “natural born Citizen” of the United States:

1.  A chart which lists and explains the five (5) Citizenship terms used in the U.S. Constitution.

2. Being a “born Citizen” or “Citizen at Birth” is not identically the same as a being a “natural born Citizen”.

3. Read this essay regarding the constitutional term “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)”. Adjectives mean something.  All “natural born Citizens” are “born Citizens (citizens at birth) but not all “born Citizens (citizens at birth)” are “natural born Citizens”:  https://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/ 

4. A Euler Diagram which logically shows the kinds of U.S. Citizens and their set and subset relationships: https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2018/06/16/natural-born-citizen/

5. The “Three Legged Stool Test” for being a Natural Born Citizen: https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2013/11/15/the-three-legged-stool-test-analogy-for-natural-born-citizenship-of-the-united-states-to-constitutional-standards/ …

6. Article II Presidential Eligibility Facts:  http://www.art2superpac.com/issues.html  or  https://www.scribd.com/document/161994312/Article-II-Presidential-Eligibility-Facts 

7. Watch these videos (Parts I and II) by the renowned constitutional scholar Dr. Herb Titus: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=esiZZ-1R7e8  and  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xoaZ8WextxQ

8. Read, download, and print a PDF copy of this White Paper by CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret) about the “natural born Citizen” term and presidential eligibility clause in Article II of our U.S. Constitution here: http://www.kerchner.com/protectourliberty/The-Who-What-When-Where-Why-and-How-of-NBC-Term-in-Constitution.pdf

A Powerful Teaching Lesson Re Our Declaration of Independence and Our U.S. Constitution

A Powerful Teaching Lesson and New Movie about our Declaration of Independence, our U.S. Constitution, and our Constitutional Republic | by Krisanne Hall of Liberty First University

A friend sent me this message with the included link to the new movie titled, “NonCompliant Movie” . I am sharing his message and the link to the new movie herein with all of you:

” Interesting recent paper on the great Swiss jurist, Emer de Vattel: “Vattel’s argument that states should be understood as free and independent bodies operating as moral persons in the international sphere is credited with launching a doctrine of sovereignty that hardened national borders against external interference or obligation. It also helped launch one of the world’s first modern states through its influence on the American founding. Vattel’s theory rests upon the critical role of judgment, specifically, the judgment of interests. That doctrine requires that states must always think for themselves, but not only about themselves. Offering some justification for international action, even in the midst of disagreement or war, is what separates civilized from villainous nations. Vattel’s distinctive combination of independence and interests is set within a global community that makes the fate of outsiders the business of every state. Emer de Vattel’s 1758 The Law of Nations is among a select group of works credited with framing the birth of modern internationalism. His writings were pivotal for the American founding and Armitage calls Vattel “the single most globally influential moral and political writer” of the late eighteenth to early nineteenth centuries, saying the period could be considered a “Vattelian moment.” The argument is that for Vattel states are like people first, because they have interests, and second, because they communicate with one another about those interests. State interests not only affirm their independence, they also underwrite interconnectedness through wise diplomacy. The struggle to pin down the requirements of self-interest makes the readiness to communicate one’s position candidly and thoroughly a central lynchpin in the international equation.” To which I say, therefore, “Arizona First and America First!” Read the rest HERE. See Vattel on “natural born Citizen” (driving USC Art II Sec 1 Cl 5 POTUS CINC) HERE. See KrisAnne Hall’s “Non-Compliant Movie” HERE.”

Be sure to watch the very powerful and so, so true and historically accurate new movie “NonCompliant Movie” featuring Krisanne Hall of Liberty First University. I did. This outstanding, free, streaming online, new educational movie about our constitutional republic form of government should be shown as a Lyceum Class in every Middle School, High School, and College.

CDR Charles Kerchner, P.E. (Retired)
Lehigh Valley PA USA
http://www.protectourliberty.org/
https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/
http://www.scribd.com/user/52640192/protectourliberty/lists http://www.kerchner.com/protectourliberty/naturalborncitizen/TheWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyandHowofNBC-WhitePaper.pdf

“Speechless: Controlling Words, Controlling Minds” by Michael Knowles

A new book is out about the Culture War and the manipulation of the meaning of words, speech, and language by the left to undermine and subvert the nation’s culture and in the process achieve political objectives. “Speechless: Controlling Words, Controlling Minds” by Michael Knowles

# # # #

My comment:

What we are experiencing has a name. It is derived from its communist, linguist, founder Antonio Gramsci— “Gramscian Gradualism” or “Gramscism”.

What has happened with the redefining of the “natural born Citizen” term in the U.S. Constitution is one prime example of what the linguist and communist Antonio Gramsci suggested in his “Prison Notebooks” writings as the way to undermine the western democracies and their constitutions, i.e., over time redefine the meaning of words and language to help achieve one’s political objective, enabled by long-term infiltration by far-left permanent influencers of the cultural institutions of a nation (and eventual hegemony over them) such as the academia, entertainment industry, churches, court systems, main-stream major media, and other major institutions of the targeted western democracy.

In the prime example of the term “natural born Citizen” the Gramscian Gradualists in both major political parties have abrogated a national security term in the presidential eligibility clause of Article II Section 1 Clause in our U.S. Constitution, and have redefined it (with the help of useful idiots in the Republican Party thinking only on their own political ambitions or political party ambitions) to mean anyone “born a Citizen” even if that Citizen is born with dual-Citizenship and allegiances to a foreign nation, as opposed to what the founders and framers intended, i.e., the “natural born Citizen” requirement was to be a “strong check” against foreign influence on those who would be allowed to serve as Commander-in-Chief of our military forces once the founding generation was gone. The founders and framers considered and rejected the requirement to be only “born a Citizen” to serve as a future President and Commander-in-Chief of our military and instead made the requirement to be a “natural born Citizen“. Read more about that here.

By allowing persons born with foreign influence on them from birth, and bringing said foreign influenced culture of theirs into the highest elected offices of our nation, the President and Commander-in-Chief of our military, we have seen what we get. See the cases of Barack Obama (born a British Subject) as President and CinC, and the Vice Presidency and the current the case of Kamala Harris (born a Citizen of Jamaica). Both did not and do not have allegiance solely and only to America because they also hold allegiance since birth to a foreign country. Both consider themselves to be citizens of the world, and not solely and only to the USA. Both would rather see America and its world power brought down and not built up.

Antonio Gramsci – Italian Marxist philosopher, Communist, journalist, linguist, writer, and politician

We have been dealing with the far-left slow-roll gradualism strategy of Antonio Gramsci to bring down the western democracies including the USA for a long time. Key institutions have been infiltrated and controlled by the far-left organic intellectuals and permanent persuaders, as Gramsci called them, under the Marxist plan which Gramscian gradualists call “The Long March Through the Institutions.”

They’ve been at it for generations, encouraged by other radical leaders and writers such as Rudolph Dutschke and Saul Alinsky, for the last 100 years and are at the apex of their hegemony in the institutions and thus control virtually all of our national institutions. If Trump had not won the election they would have come forward and out of the woodwork and totally taken over under Clinton and moved the nation at a quicker pace to a Socialist one, which status to the Communists is a temporary state, and just one more step towards Communism, which end state they believe is a Utopian form of government. They must be stopped now. We need to learn more about the enemy within and their tactics, projects, and strategy. Know thy enemy! Read what Jeff Carlson summarized. I’ve read lengthy works about Gramsci and what Jeff Carlson summarized about Gramsci is excellent. See: https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2020/10/13/gramsci-alinsky-the-left-by-jeff-carlson/

The article excerpted and linked to above by Jeff Carlson is spot-on about Gramsci and a good summary of Gramsci’s long-term political agenda to bring socialism and communism to the western democratic nations. Modern “Progressives” believe in and use his tactics and strategy all the time. And they know what they are “progressing” towards … Socialism … and then in the very long-term Communism.

Learn what Jeff Carlson is sharing in his article and spread it to your friends and associates and anyone and everyone who needs to learn that what we see is happening in our country, and the co-opting and destruction of our institutions and changing the meaning of words in our language, is not an accident. Gramsci was educated as a linguist. He advocated the manipulation of language to further political goals. What we are experiencing is the result of the Gramscian long-term plan all along. We are just the generation at the end point of his long-march strategy in which we see it coming to full fruition and a head.

What we are feeling and seeing now, that we know something is wrong in our country, we can all now understand that it has has a name “Gramscism”. It’s “progress” must be stopped before it is too late. Control of the the House and Senate must be taken away in 2022 from the Democratic Socialist Party lead by Pelosi and her ilk. President Donald Trump must be re-elected in 2024. They tried to cripple him in his first term at every step. Now he knows what he’s up against. He will be the only one with enough power, authority, and courage to take them on if he gets a second term. Give him the opportunity to save our constitutional republic. Take back the House and Senate in 2022. Re-elect Donald Trump 2024.

Norman Thomas stated that what we now see happening in plain sight, would first happen gradually, and in the end people would wonder how it happened: “The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of ‘liberalism’ they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened.” ~ Norman Thomas ~ Source: http://libertytree.ca/quotes/Norman.Thomas.Quote.FFB1

We now know the name of the communist linguist strategist who gave them all the ideas and tactics of how to do it — Antonio Gramsci. Know your enemy and his play book. Read the new book “Speechless: Controlling Words, Controlling Minds” by Michael Knowles.

CDR Charles Kerchner, P.E. (Retired)
Lehigh Valley PA USA
http://www.ProtectOurLiberty.org
http://www.kerchner.com/protectourliberty/naturalborncitizen/TheWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyandHowofNBC-WhitePaper.pdf
https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/tag/antonio-gramsci/

Quote by Benito Mussolini

With now open collaboration of big tech oligarchs, big media, and big government to suppress, censor, cancel, and de-platform political opposition and debate, we are rapidly moving towards a Fascist form of government. We must learn from history. We must not allow the past to be repeated. These are words from history as to how Fascists handle opposition:

“We do not argue with those who disagree with us, we destroy them!” ― Benito Mussolini

Benito Mussolini – Italian Fascist and Dictator

Before becoming a Fascist, Mussolini was a Socialist and Communist.

CDR Charles Kerchner, P.E. (Retired)
Lehigh Valley PA USA
http://www.protectourliberty.org/
https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/
http://www.scribd.com/user/52640192/protectourliberty/lists http://www.kerchner.com/protectourliberty/naturalborncitizen/TheWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyandHowofNBC-WhitePaper.pdf