CDR Kerchner (Ret)'s Blog

June 24, 2015

Blast From Past – Gov Jindal Born a Citizen of India – Also a Born U.S. Citizen – But Gov. Bobby Jindal is NOT a “natural born Citizen” of the U.S. Adjectives Mean Something. He is NOT Constitutionally Eligible to be President or Vice President

Gov Bobby Jindal is NOT a “natural born Citizen” of the United States as is required in Article II of our U.S. Constitution in the Presidential Eligibility Clause. Click on Image to Learn More.

Since Gov Bobby Jindal has announced today that he is running for the office of President it is time to re-visit his lack of constitutional eligibility issues.  Jindal is not constitutionally eligible to hold the office of President or Vice-President.

I had originally posted about Jindal’s ineligibility to be President or VP in this/my blog on 22 May 2011.  Re-posted here with some updates.

Reporters need to ask people mentioned as Presidential and Vice-Presidential candidates the right question. Not are you a “Citizen” but per the presidential eligibility clause in Article II of our U.S. Constitution, are you a “natural born Citizen” of the United States.  Those adjectives mean something and should not be ignored.  A “natural born Citizen” is a person born in the USA to parents who are both Citizens of the USA, a person born with sole allegiance and unity of citizenship to the USA.  Not a dual Citizen at birth as Bobby Jindal is.

Gov. Bobby Jindal of Louisiana was born a Citizen of India via his Citizens of India father and mother.  They had only recently arrived in the USA when Bobby was born.  By being born in the USA he is a “born Citizen” of the U.S. at birth. But Gov. Bobby Jindal is definitely NOT a “natural born Citizen” at birth of the United States. Adjectives mean something. His parents were not U.S. Citizens when he was born in the USA and thus Gov. Bobby Jindal can never be a natural born Citizen at birth. He was NOT born with sole allegiance to the USA. He was born with dual-citizenship and dual-allegiances, India and U.S.  He is NOT constitutionally eligible to be President or Vice President or Commander in Chief of our military.

One cannot ignore a word or term in our U.S. Constitution.

  Every word in it was chosen carefully and put there for a reason.

As U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice Roger B. Taney wrote in Holmes v. Jennison, 39 U.S. 540 (1840):

“In expounding the Constitution of the United States, every word must have its due force, and appropriate meaning; for it is evident from the whole instrument, that no word was unnecessarily used, or needlessly added. The many discussions which have taken place upon the construction of the constitution, have proved the correctness of this proposition; and shown the high talent, the caution, and the foresight of the illustrious men who framed it. Every word appears to have been weighed with the utmost deliberation, and its force and effect to have been fully understood.”

Thus reporters should not be asking if Gov Bobby Jindal is a Citizen.  Instead they should be asking if he is a “natural born Citizen” —  to constitutional standards.  The adjective “natural” before the words “born Citizen” means something very specific.   It means created by nature or natural law, not by positive, man-made laws such as Title 8 Section 1401, amendments, or treaties.  Man-made laws cannot create a “natural born Citizen“. Only the laws of nature and the facts at the time of the persons birth can create a natural born Citizen. The word “natural” points to the laws of nature and were your parents both U.S. citizens when you were born.  It takes two U.S. citizens to procreate a natural born Citizen born in this country.  A “natural born Citizen” is a person born in the country to parents who are both Citizens of the country.

Gov. Bobby Jindal is a good, conservative Governor for the State of Louisiana. Unfortunately, similar to U.S. Senator Marco Rubio and U.S. Senator Ted Cruz, Gov. Jindal cannot be classified as a natural-born Citizen, and thus he also is not constitutionally eligible to run for President and Commander in Chief of our military.  And per the last line of the 12th Amendment to our U.S. Constitution,  he is not eligible to run for Vice President either.  I know this is a sad thought for conservatives like myself, but if we wish to protect and uphold the Constitution, we must uphold our Constitution and look to history and original intent and understanding of the words and terms used for an explanation.

Gov. Bobby Jindal was born in Louisiana, as his recently released birth certificate attests (below). However, at the time of his birth, both of his parents were very recent immigrants to the US from India.  His mother was three months pregnant when she arrived in Louisiana. Thus, Jindal is simply a “born citizen“, not a constitutional Article II Section 1 “natural born Citizen” of the United States.  Gov Bobby Jindal is a dual-Citizen, dual-allegiances person by birth gaining citizenship in India via his non-U.S. Citizen parents and gaining basic U.S. Citizen at Birth status via being born in the USA to people legally allowed to be here. The good news is that if Bobby Jindal’s wife was a citizen when their children were born in the US, then their children will have attained the status of natural born citizenship, which means they can one day run for President. Natural born Citizen is a legal term of art from Natural Law and the Laws of Nature and the Law of Nations. Natural born Citizens are the children of Citizens with said children born in the USA of two U.S. Citizens (who themselves both were either born Citizens or naturalized citizens at the time of birth of their child). Gov Bobby Jindal can serve as a terrific Governor of Louisiana,  or a U.S. Senator from Louisiana, but he is not constitutionally eligible for the office of President and Commander of the Military, or the office of Vice President.

Read this article for more information on the subject of Gov Jindal’s exact citizenship status:  http://jeffersonsrebels.blogspot.com/2011/05/native-born-citizen-yes-but-gov-bobby.html

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

P.S. Also read this essay regarding the constitutional term in the presidential eligibility clause “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”: 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/ … AND … http://www.art2superpac.com/issues.html Also watch this video by the renowned constitutional scholar Dr. Herb Titus — Part I: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=esiZZ-1R7e8 and Part II: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xoaZ8WextxQ

ProtectOurLiberty WebsiteSpaceMy BlogSpaceDocs Collections Re Obama SpaceMy YouTube SpaceMost Recent Full Pg Ad SpaceAd Archives SpaceFliers/Handouts SpaceBlock Ads SpaceSheriff to Sheriffs – Sheriff Kit Project SpaceGet A Sheriff Kit SpaceInterviews-Audio/Print SpaceBooks SpaceGoat’s Ledge SpaceContact Me

P.P.S.  This is NOT about politics or anything else but the U.S. Constitution, the fundamental law of our land. If we lose the full force and effect of every word in it, we lose our constitutional republic and our rule of law.  Amend it via a properly brought and approved constitutional amendment or respect and obey it.  Don’t try to dissemble the true original intent, understood meaning, and purpose of the words chosen and used therein when the founders and framers wrote them to achieve some political agenda and goal.

May 17, 2015

Reporters Need to Ask the Correct Question – Gov Jindal Born a Citizen of India – Also a Born U.S. Citizen – But Gov. Bobby Jindal is NOT a “natural born Citizen” of the U.S. Adjectives Mean Something. He is NOT Constitutionally Eligible to be President or Vice President.

Gov Bobby Jindal is NOT a “natural born Citizen” of the United States as is required in Article II of our U.S. Constitution in the Presidential Eligibility Clause. Click on Image to Learn More.

I had originally posted about Jindal’s ineligibility to be President or VP in this/my blog on 22 May 2011.  Re-posted here with some updates.

Reporters need to ask people mentioned as Presidential and Vice-Presidential candidates the right question. Not are you a “Citizen” but per the presidential eligibility clause in Article II of our U.S. Constitution, are you a “natural born Citizen” of the United States.

Gov. Bobby Jindal of Louisiana was born a Citizen of India via his Citizens of India father and mother.  They had only recently arrived in the USA when Bobby was born.  By being born in the USA he is a “born Citizen” of the U.S. at birth. But Gov. Bobby Jindal is definitely NOT a “natural born Citizen” at birth of the United States. Adjectives mean something. His parents were not U.S. Citizens when he was born in the USA and thus Gov. Bobby Jindal can never be a natural born Citizen at birth. He was NOT born with sole allegiance to the USA. He was born with dual-citizenship and dual-allegiances, India and U.S.  He is NOT constitutionally eligible to be President or Vice President or Commander in Chief of our military.

One cannot ignore a word or term in our U.S. Constitution.

  Every word in it was chosen carefully and put there for a reason.

As U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice Roger B. Taney wrote in Holmes v. Jennison, 39 U.S. 540 (1840):

“In expounding the Constitution of the United States, every word must have its due force, and appropriate meaning; for it is evident from the whole instrument, that no word was unnecessarily used, or needlessly added. The many discussions which have taken place upon the construction of the constitution, have proved the correctness of this proposition; and shown the high talent, the caution, and the foresight of the illustrious men who framed it. Every word appears to have been weighed with the utmost deliberation, and its force and effect to have been fully understood.”

Thus reporters should not be asking if Gov Bobby Jindal is a Citizen.  Instead they should be asking if he is a “natural born Citizen” —  to constitutional standards.  The adjective “natural” before the words “born Citizen” means something very specific.   It means created by nature or natural law, not by positive, man-made laws such as Title 8 Section 1401, amendments, or treaties.  Man-made laws cannot create a “natural born Citizen“. Only the laws of nature and the facts at the time of the persons birth can create a natural born Citizen. The word “natural” points to the laws of nature and were your parents both U.S. citizens when you were born.  It takes two U.S. citizens to procreate a natural born Citizen born in this country.  A “natural born Citizen” is a person born in the country to parents who are both Citizens of the country.

Gov. Bobby Jindal is a good, conservative Governor for the State of Louisiana. Unfortunately, similar to U.S. Senator Marco Rubio and U.S. Senator Ted Cruz, Gov. Jindal cannot be classified as a natural-born Citizen, and thus he also is not constitutionally eligible to run for President and Commander in Chief of our military.  And per the last line of the 12th Amendment to our U.S. Constitution,  he is not eligible to run for Vice President either.  I know this is a sad thought for conservatives like myself, but if we wish to protect and uphold the Constitution, we must uphold our Constitution and look to history and original intent and understanding of the words and terms used for an explanation.

Gov. Bobby Jindal was born in Louisiana, as his recently released birth certificate attests (below). However, at the time of his birth, both of his parents were very recent immigrants to the US from India.  His mother was three months pregnant when she arrived in Louisiana. Thus, Jindal is simply a “born citizen“, not a constitutional Article II Section 1 “natural born Citizen” of the United States.  Gov Bobby Jindal is a dual-Citizen, dual-allegiances person by birth gaining citizenship in India via his non-U.S. Citizen parents and gaining basic U.S. Citizen at Birth status via being born in the USA to people legally allowed to be here. The good news is that if Bobby Jindal’s wife was a citizen when their children were born in the US, then their children will have attained the status of natural born citizenship, which means they can one day run for President. Natural born Citizen is a legal term of art from Natural Law and the Laws of Nature and the Law of Nations. Natural born Citizens are the children of Citizens with said children born in the USA of two U.S. Citizens (who themselves both were either born Citizens or naturalized citizens at the time of birth of their child). Gov Bobby Jindal can serve as a terrific Governor of Louisiana,  or a U.S. Senator from Louisiana, but he is not constitutionally eligible for the office of President and Commander of the Military, or the office of Vice President.

Read this article for more information on the subject of Gov Jindal’s exact citizenship status:  http://jeffersonsrebels.blogspot.com/2011/05/native-born-citizen-yes-but-gov-bobby.html

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

P.S. Also read this essay regarding the constitutional term in the presidential eligibility clause “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”: 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/ … AND … http://www.art2superpac.com/issues.html Also watch this video by the renowned constitutional scholar Dr. Herb Titus — Part I: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=esiZZ-1R7e8 and Part II: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xoaZ8WextxQ

ProtectOurLiberty WebsiteSpaceMy BlogSpaceDocs Collections Re Obama SpaceMy YouTube SpaceMost Recent Full Pg Ad SpaceAd Archives SpaceFliers/Handouts SpaceBlock Ads SpaceSheriff to Sheriffs – Sheriff Kit Project SpaceGet A Sheriff Kit SpaceInterviews-Audio/Print SpaceBooks SpaceGoat’s Ledge SpaceContact Me

P.P.S.  This is NOT about politics or anything else but the U.S. Constitution, the fundamental law of our land. If we lose the full force and effect of every word in it, we lose our constitutional republic and our rule of law.  Amend it via a properly brought and approved constitutional amendment or respect and obey it.  Don’t try to dissemble the true original intent, understood meaning, and purpose of the words chosen and used therein when the founders and framers wrote them to achieve some political agenda and goal.

June 28, 2012

It’s Deja Vu All Over Again with Chief Justice Roberts — A Statement from CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret) about the U.S. Supreme Court Decision

With “CINO” (Conservative in Name Only) Chief Justice Roberts and his Neville Chamberlain leadership of the Supreme Court it is Deja Vu all over again.  Roberts has been the problem all along in allowing our Constitution to be trampled by Obama – in particular Article II Section 1 Clause 5.  Now Roberts has done it again — siding with the liberal wing of the court to “Move Forward” Obama’s fascist and socialist agenda to socialize America and ignore our  constitutional republic system of government to help Obama “Move Forward” to a dictatorial federal fascist socialist form of government.  See below post from the fall of 2010.

# # # #

Originally Written & Posted Online by CDR Kerchner @ Puzo1.BlogSpot.com:  Monday, November 29, 2010 @ 2:57 PM

A Statement from CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret) about the U.S. Supreme Court Decision on Kerchner et al v Obama & Congress et al

For Immediate Release – 29 November 2010 2:30 p.m. EST

A Statement from CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret) about the U.S. Supreme Court Decision on Kerchner et al v Obama & Congress et al

The “Roberts Court” of the U.S. Supreme Court in my opinion will be known in history as the “Neville Chamberlain Supreme Court”, the great Obama appeaser court. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neville_Chamberlain
Appeasement due to fear that some immediate small amount of veiled and threatened violence from the far left socialists and Saul Alinsky goons, tyrants and bullies, and thus not doing the right thing early on to support the rule of law and the Constitution, ultimately leads to much bigger problems later. History has shown us that over and over. The Obama eligibility matter should have been fully and thoroughly addressed and openly investigated by the investigative reporters in the major media and political parties early in the spring of 2008 during the primaries to get all of Obama’s documents released to the public as part of the vetting process. It wasn’t done.
 
Congress should have addressed this when asked by 100s of thousands of constituent letters and petitions sent to them and when constitutionally it was required to so under the 20th Amendment. It didn’t. The courts should have addressed the merits of the questions when appealed to early on. They didn’t. Everyone in our system of government chose ignoring the problem and appeasement over confrontation and punted the ball to someone else. Now it is far worse. The Supreme Court has chosen appeasement and inaction over action and dealing with the issue and questions openly in a court of law under the rules of evidence and law. Our constitutional republic and legal system is now compromised and broken top to bottom and bottom to top. And it will only get worse as our legal system and constitutional republic further deteriorates and the rule of law gives way more and more to appeasement of bullies and tyrants in waiting such as Obama and his far left Marxist cronies and puppet masters. Appeasement of the constitutional usurpers will not make it go away. It will only delay the inevitable and fester and grow and in the end be a far worse situation to deal with when the real nature of the tyrant reveals himself in a much bolder way and attempts to take away all our protections to our unalienable rights and liberty. Neville Chamberlain tactics never work with bullies, alinskyites, tyrants, and national socialists.
The U.S. Supreme Court orders were posted at 10:00 a.m. on 29 Nov 2010. See below. Certiorari for our case was denied. The two justices appointed by Obama who in my opinion had a direct financial conflict of interest (their very jobs and appointments to the court) in the outcome of this petition and case did not recuse themselves even though they should have! Their recusal was called for in our petition on page 36 with the relevant U.S. Code cited. The two justices and the court ignored that. There were recusals declared by these two Obama appointees in many other petitions including the one immediately before our petition in the orders list and the one immediately after. Imo, apparently the court needed all nine justices in the room to kill the petition. With the full court of 9 justices it’s the rule/vote of 4 to grant certiorari to move the case forward. With two recusals that would have left only 7 justices and it’s then the rule/vote of 3 to grant certiorari to move the case forward. For information on the Rule of 3 see:  Supreme Court Practices, 9th edition, by Eugene Cressman, et al, page 324. The lawsuit Pryor v United States (1971) is an example case of the Rule of 3 being used.  I suspect the water cooler buzz at SCOTUS was that 3 justices were leaning for granting certiorari. So it looks like Sotomayer and Kagan ignored ethical considerations and stayed in the review of the petition to be sure it got killed, i.e., to be in that room to argue against Certiorari, and to require 4 votes to grant cert instead of 3 … financial conflict of interest and ethics be damned by those two justices. JMHO.

10-446
KERCHNER, CHARLES, ET AL. V. OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF U.S., ET AL.
The motion of Western Center for Journalism for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae is granted.
The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/44359775/U-S-Supreme-Court-Order-List-562-U-S-dated-2010-11-29-Kerchner-v-Obama-Petition-Decison-on-Pg-15

CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret)
Lehigh Valley PA USA
Lead Plaintiff, Kerchner et al v Obama et al
http://www.protectourliberty.org
http://puzo1.blogspot.com
####

June 20, 2012

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” are “NBC”!

Nothing in Title 8 Section 1401 Grants Anyone “natural born Citizen” Status.  The Word Natural Does Not Even Appear in That Naturalization Act/Law.  The Following Essay May Help — Of Trees and Plants and Basic Logic (set and subset theory): Trees are plants but not all plants are trees. “natural born Citizens (NBC)” are “native born Citizens” or “Citizens at birth (CAB)” but not all “native born Citizens” or “CAB” are “NBC” at Birth!

Re-Post – Originally Written & Posted Online by CDR Kerchner (Ret) on  Friday, November 5, 2010 @ 9:12 AM

Of Trees and Plants and Basic Logic: Trees are plants but not all plants are trees. Likewise, “natural born Citizens” are “Citizens at Birth” but not all “Citizens at Birth” are “natural born Citizens”! Citizen at Birth (CAB) does NOT identically equal Natural Born Citizen (NBC) at Birth. Obama is NOT a Natural Born Citizen of the USA. 
by: Charles Kerchner, Commander USNR (Retired)
http://www.protectourliberty.org

While a natural born Citizen is obviously a Citizen at birth, not all Citizens at birth are natural born Citizens at birth. The two legal terms of art are not identical and are not equal. All “natural born Citizens” are Citizens at birth but not all Citizens at birth are “natural born Citizens” at birth. If you cannot grasp that logic concept then try this analogy, “all trees are plants but not all plants are trees”.

There are five types of Citizenship mentioned in the U.S. Constitution. All Citizens have equal rights as a member of the society but not all Citizens have the privilege and legal constitutional eligibility requirements to be the President and Commander in Chief of the Military under Article II of our Constitution, the fundamental law of our nation. The natural born Citizen clause in our Constitution is a restrictive clause not an inclusive clause.  The “natural born Citizen” legal term of art is rooted and defined by “natural law”, not man-made positive “statutory laws”.  The laws of nature and nature’s God create natural born Citizens. Man-made statutory laws can create new and more “Citizens” but they cannot create “natural born Citizens”.

There is absolutely nothing in U.S. Statute, USC Title 8 Section 1401 which is a statutory law which grants basic Citizenship at Birth, that addresses “natural born Citizenship”. The law addresses basic “Citizenship at Birth”, i.e., who is a “Citizen by Birth”, (which is needed under various situations and conditions of a child’s birth spelled out in Section 1401) which requires such a man-made act of law to grant the Citizenship by an act of Congress, i.e., naturalized at birth by act of Congress. USC 1401 does not grant “natural born Citizenship” to anyone. Natural born Citizens do not need man-made laws to grant them Citizenship. The facts of nature of their birth do that. The legal term of art “natural born Citizen” is not even mentioned in that law. USC Title 8 Section 1401 only determines by law who is a “Citizen” or a “National” of the U.S. at birth, i.e., a basic “Citizen at birth”, i.e., a person entitled to the rights and privileges of membership in the society of our nation under our Constitution, the supreme and fundamental law of our nation. The Section 1401 law is a naturalization law which grants citizenship by law, not by nature. The legal term of art “Citizen at birth” is not the same legally as the legal term of art “natural born Citizen”. Simply note that in one case we are talking about who is at least an ordinary, basic “Citizen” at birth with no adjectives in front of the word Citizen, and in the other case we have two very important adjectives placed in front of the word Citizen by the framers of the Constitution, i.e., “natural born” Citizen. Since that term was used in the Constitution only once in Article II for the singular most powerful office in our new federal government, the framers intended that it have special meaning. And the source of that meaning is written down and well known by legal scholars. That specific type of citizenship and “legal term of art” natural born Citizen was codified by Vattel in his legal treatise “The Law of Nations and Principles of Natural Law“, published in 1758, in which he said that … a natural born citizen is a person born in the country to parents who are both citizens of the country. And this group or class of citizens are the most populous group of any nation. They do not need statutory law to be considered Citizens of the nation. Nature and the facts of their birth in the country to two Citizen parents granted that to them, not Congress.

Most citizens of the USA are natural born citizens. Natural born Citizens of the USA are the three leaf clovers of the types of Citizens, not four leaf clovers. By the vast majority, most citizens of the USA were born in the USA to two parents who were citizens of the USA. And that is the pool of citizens that must be chosen from for the singular most powerful office in our nation, the President and Commander-in-Chief of our military. Simple citizenship at birth by being born in the USA without regard to the citizenship status of both your parents … or by naturalization and swearing an oath to this country and renouncing all allegiances foreign kings, princes, and potentates later as an adult, is adequate for the offices of Senator, Representative, or a Governor of a state. But it is not sufficient to be the President under Article II, to Constitutional standards. Article II requires that the person to be eligible to be President must be a “natural born Citizen”. And that means that person must be born in the USA … AND … both his parents must be citizens of the USA.

Natural born citizenship status in a nation is granted by the facts of nature of your birth. No law or statute is necessary to grant it. The nations can make any law they wish to make a person a citizen at birth or later. But natural born citizenship can only be conveyed by nature by the facts at birth of the child. If you are born in the country of two citizen parents you are “naturally” … a “natural born Citizen” … a citizen too … but a specific kind of citizen who is eligible to be the President and Commander-in-Chief of our military since the child when born has sole allegiance to this country and there is no claim on him/her by a foreign country or power as to their citizenship at birth by that country too. Natural born Citizens have unity of citizenship at birth. A natural born Citizen is NOT a dual citizen at birth. A natural born Citizen has no divided loyalty issues by his birth since the child was born in the country to two citizens of the country.

See this chart showing the five types of citizenship mentioned in the U.S Constitution:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/11737124/

And “natural born Citizens” are not rare in the USA. The “natural born Citizens” are by far the most populous group in the nation. And it from this group, under Article II of our Constitution, we are to choose our President and Commander-in-Chief, the group with sole allegiance at birth to the USA and only the USA, not someone who has foreign and/or dual citizenship and divided loyalties at and by birth. And the reason for this is as important today as it was when the founders and framers added those additional words to the eligibility clause in Article II. And given the vast power of the military today, having a President and Commander in Chief of the military with sole allegiance at birth to only the USA is even more so.

Obama’s father was not a citizen of the USA, nor was he an immigrant to the USA, nor was he even a permanent resident of the USA. Obama when born in 1961 was a British Subject via his British Subject father, per the British Nationality Act of 1948 which governed the status of children born to British Subjects. Obama thus was born with dual citizenship and dual allegiances and a foreign claim on his allegiance. Obama is not a natural born citizen of the USA and he is not eligible to be the President under Article II of our U.S. Constitution. He is a Usurper.

Of Trees and Plants and Basic Logic: Trees are plants but not all plants are trees. Likewise, “natural born Citizens” are “Citizens at Birth” but not all “Citizens at Birth” are “natural born Citizens”! Obama is NOT a “natural born Citizen” of the United States! And neither is Marco Rubio or Bobby Jindal!

Charles F. Kerchner, Jr.
Commander USNR (Retired)
https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com
http://www.protectourliberty.org/
####

P.S.  In addition, the status of simply being “born a Citizen” was proposed by Hamilton to the Constitutional Convention and was rejected for the more restrictive term “natural born Citizen” proposed by John Jay to provide a strong check against foreign influence which could occur with a child who is not a “natural born Citizen”.  A “natural born Citizen” created by natural law, with parents who are both Citizens of the country when their child is born in the country, has sole allegiance and unity of citizenship at birth to only one nation at birth and thus is much more likely to not have foreign influence on them.  A “Citizen at Birth” created by man-made laws may or may not have sole allegiance at birth as one or more of their parents could be foreign nationals who never naturalized and pledged their allegiance to the USA and renounced their foreign allegiance.  Non U.S. Citizen parents could exert influence on their child that is not in the best interest of our nation.  The President is Commander-in-Chief of our military and thus the “natural born Citizen” clause is one of national security interest. This was John Jay’s main concern and the reason for suggesting “natural born Citizen” instead of only a “Citizen at Birth”.

August 27, 2011

FEC Drafts Opinions for Guyana-Born Man About Presidential Run | by Alex Knott | @ Roll Call Politics

FEC Drafts Opinions for Guyana-Born Man About Presidential Run | by Alex Knott | @ Roll Call Politics

http://www.rollcall.com/news/fec_drafts_opinions_for_guyana_born_man_about_presidential_run-208330-1.html?pos=htmbtxt

Additional coverage of this matter here: http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2011/08/action-alert-fec-draft-opinion-saying.html

Is there no end to the complete ignoring and trampling of our U.S. Constitution and the Rule of Law?

CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret)
http://www.protectourliberty.org
http://cdrkerchner.wordpre​ss.com/

Next Page »

The Rubric Theme. Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,261 other followers

%d bloggers like this: