Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: Mr Rogers
There was no need for a grandfather clause for Washington. All who were natural born subjects became natural born citizens automatically, with the treaty signed in 1783 although US courts held the date to be 4 July 1776.

... and yet there was. Please point to any credible published source to back up your novel assertions. All who were natural born subjects certainly did not become natural born citizens. There was a very important distinction there that is completely lost on you, due to your peculiar insistence that the US was just a continuance of English rule. I guess there was no need for the American Revolution just as there was no need for the grandfather clause under your tortured interpretation of not just Constitutional law but recorded history?

This isn’t open for dispute. It was involved in multiple inheritance cases. I’m sorry you have believed otherwise, but no court from early America agreed with you. You are completely wrong on the facts.

Point out an instance of an English natural born subject who remained so of their own free will who was ruled eligible to inherit property in early US history, immediately post-Revolution, Mr. Rogers. This should be interesting.

Oh, and by the way, I notice you haven't responded at all, as to just who is recorded in history books as having been our first natural born citizen President. Is there a particular reason you've chosen not to provide such an easily determined answer?

The answer negates your assertions, that's why you've not responded.

896 posted on 03/10/2013 7:17:01 PM PDT by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 873 | View Replies ]


To: RegulatorCountry

“Please point to any credible published source to back up your novel assertions.”

I already have. The court cases on inheritance made it clear that anyone who was a NB Subject in the colonies automatically became a NB Citizen in the US. There was no grandfather clause to make them citizens. All those who were subjects, and who did not go to England after the war, all automatically were citizens of the new country. And all NBS became NBC.

There is nothing novel about my ideas. The novel idea is that George Washington wasn’t considered a NBC of the USA. That is birtherism nonsense.

“Point out an instance of an English natural born subject who remained so of their own free will who was ruled eligible to inherit property in early US history, immediately post-Revolution, Mr. Rogers. This should be interesting.”

You are very confused. If the NBS went to England, they remained English subjects. If they chose to remain in the USA, they all, without exceptions, became NBCs.

That is my point. Those who stayed in the USA were NB Citizens, and eligible to inherit. If they hadn’t been, they would not have been able to inherit without being naturalized first - which never happened.

“Oh, and by the way, I notice you haven’t responded at all, as to just who is recorded in history books as having been our first natural born citizen President.”

Easy - George Washington. Only birther idiots would pretend otherwise. I give you my word - George Washington was acknowledged as a citizen, and was so by birth, not naturalization. George did not need a grandfather clause, and he would have beaten your butt like a soccer ball if you had tried to claim otherwise.


910 posted on 03/10/2013 7:40:37 PM PDT by Mr Rogers (America is becoming California, and California is becoming Detroit. Detroit is already hell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 896 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson