Help support alternative media by visiting our advertisers

Here We Go Again!! by Chris Brumbles

The Democrat party has tried to redefine the term Natural Born Citizen by legislation

Here We Go Again!!

Here We Go Again!!

There has been an all-out attack on our Constitution for many years now by mostly the Far Left Radicals that are controlling the Democrat Party, but Republicans are not immune to usurpation either. We find ourselves in the position we are in now, on the cusp of civil war, because our elected employees have strayed so far from the delegated powers that we loaned them.

Butt crack Insane Obozo was elected contrary to the rules concerning eligibility for becoming President. Our Constitution requires that to be eligible for President, you must be a Natural Born Citizen, and the Bozo was not. It does not even matter where he was born in this case, which I will explain in a minute.

When President Trump ran for President, the Republicans fielded three candidates that were not Natural Born Citizens. Neither Ted Cruz, Mark Rubio, nor Bobby Jindal were or are Natural Born Citizens and this really disappointed me because I had great admiration for Ted Cruz and his stance on the Constitution. When he ran for President in spite of his lack of eligibility, some of the respect I had for him withered.

Here we go again, the Demon-crat party is trying to sell Kamala Harris as their VP, and not only is she not a Natural Born Citizen, she is not even a citizen in my opinion. Of course the news claims she is a citizen under the 14th amendment (anchor baby), but their interpretation of the 14th amendment is wrong. The 14th Amendment requires a person born here to be under the jurisdiction of the United States. Just being born here to foreign parents does not mean you are a citizen, those parents would have had to have been Naturalized, and they weren’t, at least at the time of her birth. Under Natural Law, which is backed up by the Law of Nations, you are under the jurisdiction of the country you were born in. Kamala’s father was born in Jamaica, and her Mother identified as Indian-American/Canadian…she was born in India.  Notes: (ELK v Willkins, 112 U.S. 94 (1884) (“the children of subjects of any foreign government born within the United States, of ambassadors or other public ministers of foreign nations”, are not citizens under the 14th Amendment because they are not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States) /( Slaughter-House Cases, 83 U.S. 36, 21 L.Ed. 394, 16 Wall. 36 (1872) (in explaining meaning of 14th Amendment clause “subject to jurisdiction thereof” , said that the clause “was intended to exclude from its operation children of ministers, consuls, and citizens or subjects of foreign States born within the United States;”)

There is a difference between a citizen and a Natural Born Citizen, In fact, Patrick Henry used to describe people as an Immigrant, citizen, or Native (Natural Born Citizen).  So I bet you want to know what a Natural Born Citizen is. To find the answer to any Constitutional question, you must remember that the Constitution is a Compact (Contract) between States. With any contract you must interpret it by what was meant at the time it was written, and uphold those meanings. The founders did not leave a lot of clues about what a Natural Born Citizen was because at the time, it was well known.  If you were writing a book today and mentioned a tennis shoe, you would not write the definition of a tennis shoe, because everyone knows what a tennis shoe is.

Several years ago I researched what a Natural Born Citizen was in order to prove that Obozo was not one. Emerich De Vattel wrote the Law of Nations which greatly inspired our founders when writing our Constitution. The Law of Nations was at the Constitutional Convention and was referred to often; Ben Franklin writes about this fact. The Law of Nations describes a Natural Born Citizen as a child born in the country to citizen parents. In other words, to be a NBC, both of your parents would have to be citizens BEFORE your birth. There was such thing as the coverture doctrine at the time, which basically meant that two is one and one is the man. Under the coverture doctrine, a women lost the right to own property or make contracts once she was married because he was basically the boss, and she was just part of him. This is why we still hear women refer to themselves as Mrs. John Smith…something left over from the coverture days.

So yes, both parents had to be a citizen when the child was born for a child to be a Natural Born Citizen, but there was special emphasis on the Father since a Mother would probably have automatically become a citizen when marrying a citizen that was a male. Our Founders knew that the Fathers loyalty’s would most likely be the child’s. The reason our Founders included the Natural Born Citizen clause was because they wanted the President to be loyal only to the US, and not have loyalties elsewhere or  duel  loyalties. Remember that Obozo said he loved America, just wanted to change everything about it…he was not a Natural Born Citizen, he had no loyalty to the US, his Father was a Communist that hated us, and I believe he shared his father’s  feeling of hatred toward our country.

Dave Ramsay was a brilliant man who was a delegate from SC to the Continental Congress in 1782-1783 and 1785- 1786. He was also the acting President of the US in congress assembled. Dr. Ramsay was a well-respected physician and one of the first historians; he had the advantage of knowing all of the founders personally and of attending the events that he wrote about. In 1789, the same year that the Constitution was established, Dr. Ramsay wrote a dissertation on citizenship which was entitled “A Dissertation on the Manner of Acquiring The Character and Privileges Of a Citizen of The United States”. In this Dissertation, he describes a Natural Born Citizen the same way as Vattel did, as a “ child born in the country to citizen parents”.  This man was there, and if this was not a correct definition, the other Founding Fathers would have rebutted it.

The Supreme Court has chimed in on Natural Born Citizen, but that was back when the Supreme Court actually had a spine. Here are some of the cases that agreed with Vattel and Ramsay’s definition of Natural Born Citizen. Minor v Happersett 88 U.S. 162, 167-68 (1875) , Ex-Parte Reynolds, 1879, 5 Dill., 394, 402, US v Ward, 42 F.320 (C.C.S.D 1890). There are more, but you get the message; a Natural Born Citizen is a child born in our country of citizen parents. It does not mean one parent is a citizen like Obozo had, it does not mean your parents can give birth to you and many years later they can become citizens like Cruz, Jindal, and Rubio, and it definitely does not mean that you are a Natural Born Citizen just because you were born in California like Harris. Harris is the most obscene attempt yet because I cannot find anywhere that says that her parents are citizens to this day, they may or may not be, but at the time of her birth they definitely were not.

The Democrat party has tried at least 10 times to redefine the term Natural Born Citizen by legislation, starting in the 70’s and their last attempt came right before Obozo ran for office. Everyone in congress knew that Bozo was not a Natural Born Citizen and they let him do his very best to destroy our country as he violated the Constitution on a daily basis. The division that he spread across the country is continuing today and has emboldened the left to the point that they will run anyone for office. Our Founders were brilliant, and were word smiths; they had a reason for everything that they wrote and they meant for it to be complied with. It’s time to return to the standard of having only Natural Born Citizens run for President, while we still have a country.    

In Liberty,

Chris Brumbles
Columbia County Coordinator
Oregon Firearms Federation
Founder, Oregon Irregulars 3%
Radio Host, am1600KOHI, Trigger Warning

 

The views, opinions, or positions expressed by the authors and those providing comments are theirs alone, and do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, positions of Redoubt News. Social Media, including Facebook, has greatly diminished distribution of our content to our readers’ newsfeeds and is instead promoting Main Stream Media sources. This is called ‘Shadow-banning’. Please take a moment and consider sharing this article with your friends and family. Thank you. Please support our coverage of your rights. Donate here: paypal.me/RedoubtNews

1 Comment on Here We Go Again!! by Chris Brumbles

  1. Sheriff Arpaio in Phoenix brought up serious questions about Obama’s birth certificate…besides the “birther issue” there was the enhancer that without a clean verifiable birth certificate this clause could not be confirmed, “…neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years,….”

    Brumbles article is the first I have heard about Kamala Harris’s status as a citizen…and it is an eye opener. Hope this comes up more until an answer is determined. Of course, hopefully that does not come before Chief Justice Roberts.

Comments are closed.