Of Neologisms, End-Around Runs and Gorillas: The Congressional Research Service 2016 Report (CRS Report) on Presidential Eligibility | by Joseph DeMaio | @ The Post & Email
” … The Deceptions Begin With The Title: The title of the January 11, 2016 CRS Report is “Qualifications for President and the ‘Natural Born’ Citizenship Eligibility Requirement.” To begin with, the terms “qualifications” and “eligibility” are not synonyms. One can be eminently “qualified” for a job, and yet still be “ineligible.” … “
Read the entire four chapter/part article [Part 1- “NOT WHAT THE FOUNDERS INTENDED”, Part 2 – “DANGEROUS NONSENSE”, Part 3 – “A FALSE IMPRESSION” , Part 4 (final)-“NONSENSE ELEVATED TO AN ART FORM” ] about the latest in the series of duplicitous, disinformation CRS Memos/Reports (2009-2016) about presidential eligibility put out by Atty Jack Maskell of the Congressional Research Service of the Library of Congress to aid the members of Congress deceptively answer constituent questions in their continuing efforts to continue the cover-up of their allowing abrogation of the presidential eligibility clause in Article II of our U.S. Constitution, provide major media talking points to aid the deception, and to confuse the American Electorate.
This masterful new article in the series written by Joseph DeMaio about the CRS’s multi-paper, multi-year deceptions on the presidential eligibility clause is a must read. He clearly and factually exposes and debunks Maskell’s latest deceptive techniques, significant omissions, and flawed historical and legal arguments in the CRS Report (CRSR) which Maskell prepared at the behest of the political party controlled establishment leadership of the Congress to help enable politically attractive but constitutionally ineligible candidates to run for President and CINC (or VP) and, hopefully to the posers, to get away with it.
>Cruz and Rubio were Citizens at Birth of a Foreign Country (Ted of 2 Foreign Countries) – Both NOT a “natural born Citizen” of the United States
Get PDF Copy of Ted Cruz Foreign Citizenship Facts Petition Here — Get PDF Copy of Marco Rubio Foreign Citizenship Facts Petition Here – Neither is constitutionally eligible to serve as President and Commander in Chief or Vice President!
A Simple Euler Logic Diagram Shows Logical Relationship of “natural born Citizens” to Other Type “Citizens” of the United States. Only a “natural born Citizen” Can Constitutionally be the President and Commander in Chief or the Vice-President. Click on Image For More Information.
A New CRS Memo re Qualifications for President and Natural Born Citizen Clause – 2016 Version – Misquotes Key Laws Once Again.
Yet Another One from the Duplicitous Political Attorney Maskell of the Politically Party Controlled Congressional Research Service (CRS). What is This, Maskell’s 4th or 5th Try at Disinformation as to the Founders and Framers Understanding and Intent When They Wrote the Constitution? How Will This One Affect Ted Cruz’s Constitutional Eligibility? Did Mitch McConnell Request This Update? Did the Congressional Research Service Once Again Ignore the Influence of Emer de Vattel and Principles of Natural Law on the Founders of Our Nation and Framers of Our Founding Documents as We Broke Away from England. Vattel’s Writings on Natural Law is the Source of the “natural born Citizen” Term and Its Meaning.
Does This New CRS Memo Tell the Readers that the Often Touted 1790 Naturalization Act was Totally Repealed as an Error Containing First Attempt at a Naturalization Law? The Total Repeal of This First Error Ridden Naturalization Law was Instigated via the Efforts of Madison and Jefferson, and was Totally Replaced by a new Corrected Naturalization Law Signed by George Washington – the 1795 Naturalization Act – Which Removed All Mention of the Term Natural Born Citizen Since Congress Only Has Naturalization Powers and Cannot Create Natural Born Citizens Who Can Only be Created by Natural Law and the Laws of Nature. These Key Founders and Framers Realized the First Congress Made an Error with the 1790 Law and Totally Repealed It. They Did Not Amend it Or Try to Fix It – They Working with the 3rd Congress Totally Repealed and Replaced It as a Bad First Attempt at a Naturalization Law.
Also see This Below Linked Site re the 1934 Naturalization Law Change for ‘Children Born Abroad’ where Only the Mother was a U.S. Citizen, as is the Case for Ted Cruz. Ted Cruz Would Not be a Citizen at All if Born Prior to 1934. Ted Cruz is a Naturalized ‘Citizen’ at Birth by Act of Congress Under Its Naturalization Powers per Congressional Acts and Statutory Laws and Not a ‘Natural Born Citizen‘ at Birth per Natural Law and Constitutional Standards. Adjectives Means Something. See This re 1934 Naturalization Law Changes: http://www.americanlaw.com/citabrd.html
Read my essay on logic, adjectives, and common sense which totally rebuts the CRS Memo’s conflation of the two terms “Citizen at Birth” and “natural born Citizen” — a “Citizen” at birth is not logically identically equal to a “natural born Citizen” at birth. Adjectives mean something and modify the noun as to unique characteristics and type and how it was obtained. Compare the terms “natural born” Citizen and “naturalized” Citizen. Adjectives convey special meaning to the the term. Being a Citizen at birth tells you WHEN they person became a Citizen but not HOW they became a Citizen. Were they Citizens by Natural Law or by Man-Made, Statutory, Positive Law or Acts. Adjectives mean something. Any legal term with the adjective “natural” in front of the noun denotes it came from natural origins and the laws of nature and not of man-made creation/statutory laws. Congress can make all the Citizens it wants, either “at birth” or later as adults. But only the facts at birth per the Laws of Nature and Natural Law can create a “natural born Citizen” at birth, i.e., a person born in the country to parents who were both Citizens (born or naturalized) of that country. The CRS Memo writer is deliberately conflating two terms as being logically identically the same, i.e., “natural born Citizen” and “Citizen at birth” and is trying to deceive the American Electorate and to provide cover for the Members of Congress to do nothing to live up to their Oath of Office to support and defend the Constitution: 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/
My comment: Despite what any politically controlled Congress and their politically inspired Congressional Research Service memo puts out, neither Ted Cruz or Marco Rubio who are two active candidates [and the candidate Jindal whose campaign is in suspension] were at birth born to two U.S. Citizen parents in the USA and thus all three are NOT a “natural born Citizen” of the United States with sole allegiance at birth to only the USA. Each of the above were born with citizenship in more than one country and thus have divided allegiance and foreign influences on them by and at birth. No matter what you think of their politics, like them or not, they are NOT constitutionally eligible for the office they seek. Obama has shown us what one can get when one allows a person with divided allegiances via birth into the Oval Office. The “natural born Citizen” clause in our Constitution is a national security clause and must be defended and upheld as originally understood and intended. We must defend the Constitution no matter which political party seeks to subvert it – CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret).
# # # #
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)
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. 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.
The current defacto president and unconstitutional occupier of the Oval Office 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.
Of Presidential Eligibility, Doubling Down and Linguistic Torts | by Joseph DeMaio | @ ThePostEmail.com
Comments by CDR Kerchner (Ret) on this latest series of essays by Joseph DeMaio: An excellent four-part series on the legal term of art “natural born Citizen” and rebuttal of the series of memos/reports by the progressive, far-left, government-employed lawyer, Legislative Attorney Jack Maskell, the writer of the infamous Congressional Research Service (CRS) Memos, which the U.S. Congress uses to hide behind when queried by their constituents as to why they are doing nothing about the usurper-in-chief and illegal and unconstitutional resident in the Oval Office.
There have been three CRS memos. One in the spring of 2009, published in secret a couple months after the Kerchner et al v Obama & Congress et al lawsuit was filed early on the morning of 20 Jan 2009. That one was leaked to Atty Mario Apuzzo, counsel for Kerchner v Obama & Congress, by a staffer working for a member of Congress who was sick and tired of the deliberate deceit and cover-up going on by Congress to keep the American people in the dark. Another one was published in 2010. And now another one was published in late 2011. The Congress is feeling the heat. Thus, they needed more ammunition to hide behind and to deceive their constituents with, which is why in my opinion this last massive one was written.
This latest CRS “product” of November 2011 is by far the most massive and cleverly written piece of deceit and deception and is cloaked as a scholarly legal piece, all published under the color of authority of the supposedly non-partisan Congressional Research Service. Non-partisan political party wise but not non-partisan when it comes to abrogating and ignoring the U.S. Constitution, Article II Section 1, and in deceiving the American electorate. The CRS and Congress is deliberately misleading the American electorate on the true meaning of “natural born Citizen”. The reason being, both political parties wish to run ineligible candidates who they think will make their ticket more attractive for political reasons, the U.S. Constitution be damned in their minds.
There are lots of footnotes and citations in this latest CRS Memo to make it look scholarly and accurate. But as Atty Mario Apuzzo has commented on in his blog, and also as Joseph DeMaio the author of these below four essays has written, they attest that this deceptively written CRS memo, like the others before it, is full of deliberate misstatements and errors of law and fact as to the true historical and legal meaning of “natural born Citizen of the United States”, as used in Article II Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution, the presidential eligibility clause.
Kudos to Joseph DeMaio for some fine research and writing and to The Post & Email for publishing these. Links to his four latest essays are below:
More from CDR Kerchner (Ret): Barack Obama is NOT a “natural born Citizen of the United States” and is thus constitutionally ineligible to be the President and Commander in Chief of our military. Obama was born to a FOREIGN NATIONAL FATHER who was NEVER a U.S. Citizen nor was Obama’s father even an immigrant to the USA or even a permanent resident in the USA. For no other U.S. President in the history of the nation since the founding generation (who were exempt from the natural born Citizen clause in the U.S. Constitution via a grandfather clause in Article II Section 1) was that the case, i.e., having a foreign national father who was never a U.S. Citizen or even an immigrant to this country. Obama being seated as the putative president is an outrageous violation of Article II Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution, the presidential eligibility clause. Obama was not born with sole allegiance to the USA. Sole allegiance and unity of Citizenship at birth was the goal and purpose for putting the natural born Citizen clause into Article II Section 1 of the Constitution as to who could serve as president once the founding generation has passed away. Obama (II) was born a British Subject via his foreign national father Obama (Sr.) who was a British Subject. Obama is not a “natural born Citizen of the United States” to constitutional standards since he was born with dual allegiance and citizenship. The founders and framers did not want anyone with foreign allegiance to ever get command of our military, i.e., be the president. Obama is constitutionally not eligible to be president and commander in chief of our military.
The Obama constitutional eligibility issue is not a fringe issue! South Carolina Poll Results – A poll done by Public Policy Polling (PPP) shows that almost 2/3 of GOP voters want Obama’s constitutional eligibility and true legal identity investigated. This is not a fringe issue: http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.printable&pageId=340805
“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.” Ronald Reagan alerting us to Norman Thomas’ and 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
“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.” Ronald Reagan alerting us to Norman Thomas’ and the socialist/progressive’s long-term stealth agenda to transform the USA from a constitutional republic into a socialist form of government