Is Kamala Harris Eligible to be President? | Junior CA Senator May Run In 2020 | by Sharon Rondeau | @ ThePostEmail.com
(Aug. 19, 2018) — Given that California Sen. Kamala Harris’s Wikipedia biography states that she was born in Oakland, CA in 1964 to immigrant parents and speculation exists that she plans to run for president in 2020, Golden State citizen Gary Wilmott has been seeking information as to her citizenship status and whether or not she meets the constitutional requirement of “natural born Citizen.”
The Wikipedia entry states that Harris’s mother, Dr. Shyamala G. Harris, was from India, arriving in Berkeley, CA in 1960.
Dr. Harris passed away in February 2009. Her “Legacy” obituary states that she arrived alone in the U.S. at the age of 19 after having earned her undergraduate degree from Delhi University.
Kamala’s father, Donald Harris, is a retired Stanford University economics professor whose biography affirms that he arrived in the U.S. in 1961 as an “Issa Scholar” from Jamaica. It adds that he was born in Jamaica and naturalized in the U.S. but does not provide the year.
Neither parent reportedly was present in the U.S. as a legal resident for five years prior to Harris’s birth, a requirement to apply for naturalization, Wilmott observed in an interview with The Post & Email on Thursday.
After her parents divorced when she was seven, Wikipedia reports, Harris’s mother was granted full custody of her two daughters, after which they moved to Quebec, Canada. Dr. Harris’s obituary, reposted at SFGate on March 22, 2009, states that her medical research took her to McGill University in Montreal for 16 years. … continue reading at: https://www.thepostemail.com/2018/08/19/is-kamala-harris-eligible-to-be-president/
# # # #
My immediate first reaction comment re the above article: No, Kamala Harris is not eligible. Per the report above, Senator Kamala Harris talks in her bio how she was born in and grew up in CA. But, she did not grow up there during her formative years! She is engaging in clever wordsmith-ing deception about her early life narrative. She is avoiding any focus on how much of her early life was spent living in Canada. She is also avoiding transparency about her parents citizenship status when Kamala was born. Kamala actually spent all her formative years in Canada with her foreign born mother when her mother moved there when Kamala was age 7. She graduated from high school in Canada. Kamala Harris is definitely not a person the founders and framers envisioned as being eligible to be President and Commander-in-Chief of our military, that is a future person after the founding generation was gone who is free from any foreign influences at and by birth, i.e., a person born with sole allegiance and unity of citizenship to the USA and only the USA. She was born with lots of foreign influence and allegiance claims on her via her two foreign national, non-U.S. Citizen parents when she was born and spending all her formative years in a foreign country. Likewise she is not eligible to be the Vice President per the last sentence of the 12th Amendment to our U.S. Constitution. She is NOT a natural born Citizen of the United States. She fails the Three Legged Stool Test.
Some other politicians besides Kamala Harris (D) in the two major political parties who have been mentioned for future election to high national political office, who are also not a “natural born Citizen” to constitutional standards are: Marco Rubio (R), Ted Cruz (R), Bobby Jindal (R), and Nikki Haley (R). Both major political parties are choosing to ignore the founders and framers intent and understanding of what a “natural born Citizen” is in order to run candidates that they believe are very marketable political candidates. This started in a major way in the 2008 election cycle with Obama vs McCain.
California Constituent: U.S. Senator Kamala Harris NOT a Natural Born Citizen | by Gary Wilmott | @ ThePostEmail.com
“PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES MUST BE VETTED”
December 4, 2017
Senator Kamala Harris
112 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510
Dear Ms. Harris:
My name is Gary Wilmott and I reside in Southern California.
I couldn’t help but notice that the press has recently been extolling you as the next “Obama” and the inevitable frontrunner for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2020. While this growing presidential buzz may be quite intoxicating for you, I suggest that you take a serious look at Article II of the U.S. Constitution, i.e., the presidential eligibility clause.
Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 mandates that a president be a NATURAL-born citizen, which you clearly are not. At the time of your birth, BOTH of your parents were citizens of foreign countries, so your birth in California makes you at best a NATIVE-born citizen (anchor baby?) under the prevailing view of the 14th Amendment. Lest you think that I have Republican bias I would also point out that presidential wannabes Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio also fail to meet this higher standard of citizenship. Their campaigns were fraudulent and in clear violation of the U.S. Constitution.
Before you waste too much time, energy, and donor money, I would ask that you reconsider your disingenuous efforts to position yourself as a presidential contender. Your leftist, socialist identity politics aside, you can expect to get tremendous push-back from constitutionalists such as myself who refuse to allow another fraud in the White House. Our presidential candidates must be vetted.
In this age of Trump, where the current president was fully informed of Obama’s identity fraud and lack of constitutional eligibility in April of 2011 (just weeks prior to Obama’s forged birth certificate release), you can expect ferocious opposition from equal opportunity “birthers” such as myself who only want the Constitution respected. The time is ripe for the American people to be fully informed as to how the elite media and our complicit so-called representatives in Congress allowed this greatest of crimes against the American people to occur both in 2008 and 2012. The American people are determined to take back their country and expose all the swamp creatures, both past and present.
Meantime, I would advise that your time would be better spent doing scholarly research on this issue. In the long run it will save you a lot of headaches and money! I would also suggest that you watch on YouTube the Sheriff Arpaio press conferences which PROVED that Obama proffered a forged birth certificate on April 27, 2011. Throw in a forged Selective Service registration and a stolen SSN for good measure, and you clearly have the “crime of the century.” Ms. Harris, there is so much information and truth available for the intellectually curious. Time to get your priorities straight, Ms. Harris, and do what is right.
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/Marxist anti-American 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 [anti-American forces] 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).
UPDATE 20 Feb 2017: The petition has closed due to expiration of the 30 day time frame limit with signer counter reaching 6143 signers for former Lt Col Terry Lakin’s petition for a full pardon, reinstatement, and restitution. It reached about the middle of the pack for the petitions in the White House listings of public petitions. It should be noted however that it initially got off to a glitched start during the first three days of its launch with the counter being stuck at a count of one for three days but the counter has since then been working fine. Thank you all who signed already. Keep spreading the word about Terry Lakin. If anyone deserves a pardon it is Terry Lakin. Read his story here.
UPDATE 27 Jan 2017: Counter passed 150 threshold today. Thus the petition now has been moved to the public listings of petitions in process.
UPDATE 26 Jan 2017: Counter now working correctly – sign the petition.
UPDATE 24 Jan 2017: See below if you signed this petition between Saturday 21 Jan 17 and late Tuesday 24 Jan 17.
Due to a website glitch, signings over the past weekend & and up to and including sometime late Tuesday afternoon of 24 Jan 2017 were not recorded / counted properly. Please re-SIGN the petition. White House Website IT Glitch … We need to re-SIGN the petition to promote the pardon for former Lt Col Terry Lakin. Re-sign here: https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/reinstate-lt-col-terry-lakin-us-army-full-rank-pay-benefits-and-pension-immediately Read more about the White House IT problems with the petition counter here: http://www.thepostemail.com/2017/01/24/is-the-lakin-petition-signature-count-accurate/ The count has to reach 150 before it will be put in the site’s main directory index. It’s a shame that the hundreds who already signed got lost. So we must try again. Pass this along to anyone else who might wish to sign so we can get the count past 150 ASAP. And thence once visible in the site’s main listings, we can push hard to make the 100,000 needed to insure White House action on the petition. Thank you to all in advance for the extra effort.
UPDATE 21-23 Jan 2017: Signature count stuck at 1 despite many having signed it over the weekend and Monday.
Please read and then sign the petition Mr. Gary Wilmott created on the WhiteHouse.gov We the People website for former Lt Col Terry Lakin, a commissioned officer who in 2010 stood up for his oath to the U.S. Constitution, his prime-directive as a Commissioned Officer in the military – to support and defend the U.S. Constitution against all enemies of same – said Constitution which is the supreme law of the land and that which trumps all unlawful orders, and was quickly and summarily punished without being permitted to present to the court and court martial panel the exact reason and evidence as to why he disobeyed orders for military deployments overseas directed by Obama via Obama’s speech at West Point, which former Lt Col Terry Lakin considered unlawful given the facts in hand and due to the lack of any meaningful investigative response to his questions and concerns sent to higher military authorities and the U.S. Congress by former Lt Col Terry Lakin and others, that he decided he had to stand up for his oath to the U.S. Constitution and to defend the same from a domestic enemy of the Constitution. For standing up for his prime directive and supreme order, his oath, he was punished for disobeying a lesser order and not being allowed to explain to the court why. Please sign: https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/reinstate-lt-col-terry-lakin-us-army-full-rank-pay-benefits-and-pension-immediately
Media Continues Trying to Black Out COGENT Discussions About “natural born Citizenship”
IGNORANCE IS BLISS! by Gary Wilmott
” Talk Show host invites calls and then goes into full blackout mode when caller tries to explain why Ted Cruz is ineligible to be POTUS.
While the media blackout continues over the largest story in American history, the ongoing investigation into Barack Hussein Obama’s fraudulent birth certificate as well as his Selective Service registration, both of which it have been deemed forgeries by the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Investigation, it continues to be business as usual with the talking heads in the media who wish to perpetuate the deceit and fraud by covering for the constitutionally ineligible Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio.
Consider this exchange with Gary Wilmott of Give Us Liberty1776 who called in to KABC’s Peter Tilden Show yesterday to discuss Ted Cruz and his ineligibility. This is an example of how the media continue to control the message and will not allow a dialogue. Hence the vast majority of Americans continue to be ridivuled or fed lies, falsehoods and propaganda on this issue. … “
A Lesson from History. Is Being Simply 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.