Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Mitt Romney not a natural-born citizen?
World Net Daily ^ | January 16, 2012 | Jerome R. Corsi

Posted on 01/16/2012 11:28:00 PM PST by Seizethecarp

In 1968, when he decided to run for president, the only serious debate at the time was whether George W. Romney was a natural-born citizen under Article 2, Section 1, not whether or not he was a U.S. citizen.

Mitt Romney, then, was born on March 12, 1947, in Detroit, Mich., to two U.S. citizen parents – George W. Romney and Lenore Emily LaFount; LaFount was a U.S. citizen, born on Nov. 9, 1908, in Logan, Utah.

Interestingly, LaFount, even though she was a U.S. citizen under the 14th Amendment because she was born in the United States and considered under the jurisdiction of the United States at the time of her birth, may not have been a natural-born citizen. It’s possible her father had not been naturalized as a U.S. citizen by the time she was born.

Her father, Harold Arundel LaFount was born in Birmingham, Warwickshire, England, Jan. 5, 1880, and without further research it is uncertain whether he was naturalized as a U.S. citizen by the time his daughter was born.

(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: birthcertificate; congress; illegals4romney; ineligibileromney; mexicanromney; military; mittromney; mitttheineligible; naturalborncitizen; noaccountability; notransparency; obama; romney; romney4obama; romneyismexican; sarahpalin
Hmmm...so Mitt's mom's dad might not have been naturalized at the time of her birth...yet to be determined, according to Corsi. Mitt's mom might have only been a 14th Amendment anchor baby...yet another ruling awaiting SCOTUS consideration.
1 posted on 01/16/2012 11:28:05 PM PST by Seizethecarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: LucyT

ping...


2 posted on 01/16/2012 11:28:48 PM PST by Seizethecarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

OFGS you must be kidding.

Romney sucks swamp water because he’s a lying two faced RINO. Can’t we stick to nailing him on that?


3 posted on 01/16/2012 11:42:32 PM PST by dayglored (Listen, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Photobucket
4 posted on 01/17/2012 12:02:21 AM PST by Doofer (Still, a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp
"Hmmm...so Mitt's mom's dad might not have been naturalized at the time of her birth...yet to be determined, according to Corsi. Mitt's mom might have only been a 14th Amendment anchor baby...yet another ruling awaiting SCOTUS consideration."

Seizethecarp, there has never been a requirement that the parents of a natural born citizen be natural born. More people wonder about children born overseas to citizen parents, a mistake make by the 1st Congress in 1790 and corrected in the 3rd Congress in 1795, some, like Obama’s Con Law Professor, claim, knowing the truth, but in the interest of misdirection, that these children, born overseas, as was John McCain, are natural born citizens.

Here is the decided law, which repeats the common-law, since virtually all definitions of terms in the Constitution are from our common language and common law. But this statement by Chief Justice Morrison Waite established precedent, cited at least twenty six times, but which citations were conveniently edited out of on-line supreme court decisions provided by Google partner, Justia.com in the Summer of 2008.

At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.”

The statement above is postive law, stare decisis, precedence, and has never been challenged by the Supreme Court or Congress. One would need to ask the numb-skulls at the Indiana Supreme Court about their basis for a different interpretation in Ankeny, but, politics finding the Constitution's interpretations an inconvenient truth, since Democrats ran Obama, Republicans ran McCain and Green's ran Colero, none of whom are natural born citizens. Besides, the decision in Ankeny didn't depend upon the definition, if I recall correctly. Indiana, as have all courts so far, hid behind lack of standing. Since every citizen is injured, no citizen has the right to ask a court for redress, which they couldn't satisfy anyway. The law is a wonderful opportunity to deploy sophistry.

5 posted on 01/17/2012 12:04:24 AM PST by Spaulding
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp
You guys are just funny...sad too, but funny.
6 posted on 01/17/2012 12:09:04 AM PST by starlifter (Pullum sapit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dayglored

Precisely the kind of nonsense that keeps me out of WND.


7 posted on 01/17/2012 12:10:23 AM PST by stormhill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: dayglored

We damn sure better. This stuff is a distraction and a waste of time.


8 posted on 01/17/2012 12:33:20 AM PST by Gator113 (~Just livin' life, my way~..... GO NEWT GO.....!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

ROFLMBO


9 posted on 01/17/2012 1:26:27 AM PST by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp
This is the most grasping, nonsensical over-reaching I have yet read.

I hear his second cousin on his mothers side had a great aunt whose neighbor was a communist. Does that disqualify him?

10 posted on 01/17/2012 2:37:51 AM PST by muir_redwoods (No wonder this administration favors abortion; everything they have done is an abortion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

ON,NTSA


11 posted on 01/17/2012 2:59:44 AM PST by MindBender26 (New Army SF amd Ranger Slogan: Vengence is Mine, sayeth the Lord.... but He subcontracts!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

This may get hits for worldnutdaily but it will do nothing to hurt romney, because its nonsense.

It will however hurt obama as the leftists use it to paint all conservatives as lunatics.


12 posted on 01/17/2012 3:01:02 AM PST by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

Wait till he finds out Santorums Dad was an immigrant.


13 posted on 01/17/2012 3:31:06 AM PST by mylife (The Roar Of The Masses Could Be Farts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

Oh for crying out loud.


14 posted on 01/17/2012 3:46:17 AM PST by Cymbaline ("Allahu Akbar": Arabic for "Nothing To See Here" - Mark Steyn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

Lemme get this straight: Romney is not a natural born citizen because his grandfather may not have finished becoming naturalized at the time his mother was born in America, yet Obie-Won is a naturalized citizen because he was illegitimate to a illegal alien father?


15 posted on 01/17/2012 3:58:35 AM PST by Lonesome in Massachussets (Ceterum autem censeo, Obama delenda est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp
Well, it's not called World NUT Daily for fun.
(and Corsi better get back to The Home. He's missed too many doses of his meds after he went 'cuckoo' (medical term) in 2005.)
16 posted on 01/17/2012 4:33:01 AM PST by Condor51 (Yo Hoffa, so you want to 'take out conservatives'. Well okay Jr - I'm your Huckleberry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dayglored

Exactly. Also, they need to lay off the tax return stuff and keep hammering Romneycare.


17 posted on 01/17/2012 4:48:36 AM PST by Bigg Red (Pray for our republic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Bigg Red
Joe Farrah is not only a nut case but also one of the biggest spammers out there, Corsi is just trying to find something to salvage his reputation.
And finally according to what the birther movement has evolved into, only Sarah Palin and Ron Paul are natural born and qualified.
Damn where is the next Jim Jones and a couple of gallons of Kool Aid when you need it!
18 posted on 01/17/2012 4:59:54 AM PST by Wooly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Bigg Red
Joe Farrah is not only a nut case but also one of the biggest spammers out there, Corsi is just trying to find something to salvage his reputation.
And finally according to what the birther movement has evolved into, only Sarah Palin and Ron Paul are natural born and qualified.
Damn where is the next Jim Jones and a couple of gallons of Kool Aid when you need it!
19 posted on 01/17/2012 5:00:09 AM PST by Wooly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: stormhill

All Corsi explained was the difference between a NBC and a citizen. He did not say that Mitt was other than NBC.


20 posted on 01/17/2012 5:00:27 AM PST by healy61
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: stormhill; Seizethecarp
Precisely the kind of nonsense that keeps me out of WND.

I didn't realize until I read your comment that this was from WND, I normally ignore anything from that source.

I wonder how many generations one must go back in the "natural born" order to be constitutionally acceptable with these yahoos?

My g/g/g/g/g/grand father came here from England, in about 1690, would I be eligible?

21 posted on 01/17/2012 5:14:45 AM PST by Graybeard58 (Eccl 10 v. 19 A feast is made for laughter, and wine maketh merry: but money answereth all things.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: dayglored

I guess not - apparently now he’s a filthy MudBlood, too.


22 posted on 01/17/2012 5:14:44 AM PST by liberty_lvr (Drill Gaia like a 3 am prom date)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58
You inherit citizenship from your parents, so one generation is it.

Pretty simple. Born Dual citizens and foreigners need not apply.

23 posted on 01/17/2012 5:41:24 AM PST by PA-RIVER
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Wooly
Your Kenyan born president likes wiping his ass with your constitution and looting our children's future with 6 trillion of new debt.

Looks like the founders were spot on in disqualifying him from the presidency.

Your turn.

24 posted on 01/17/2012 5:48:27 AM PST by PA-RIVER
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: healy61
Geraldo Rivera was on TV this past weekend announcing that Romney is a Mexican citizen and would be the first Latino president.

Mr. Corsi is setting the record straight.

It's not like Mitt was born a Kenyan citizen and then watched his Kenyan Dad get deported. Thats Obamas problem.

25 posted on 01/17/2012 6:04:39 AM PST by PA-RIVER
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

26 posted on 01/17/2012 6:56:40 AM PST by Tex-Con-Man (T. Coddington Van Voorhees VII 2012 - "Together, I Shall Ride You To Victory")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

For later.


27 posted on 01/17/2012 7:08:47 AM PST by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Spaulding; LucyT
“Seizethecarp, there has never been a requirement that the parents of a natural born citizen be natural born.”

I agree and so does Corsi, who has declared Mitt to be NBC.

The only point I made (and it is only remotely probable) is that Mitt's mom MIGHT NOT have met the 14A requirement of being born “under the jurisdiction” of the US, depending on what further evidence shows. Corsi says she was “considered to be” but doesn't go into the evidence.

It is currently an open question as to whether “anchor babies” are 14A citizens. I happen to believe they are not because Wong Kim Ark was a narrow case which depended not just on his birth on US soil but on his parents domicile etc. Did Mitt's English grandfather enter the US legally and establish US domicile and was he under US jurisdiction, or did he only briefly enter the US as a UK subject and then return to the UK shortly after the birth of his daughter. Not likely, but what are the facts?

It is highly probable that Mitt's mom was NOT an “anchor baby” and was a 14A citizen as affirmed by WKA, but I haven't seen the evidence.

At a minimum it is clear that George Romney was NOT NBC and this would be a further embarrassment to the GOP elites and to Mitt to have to admit that his own father ignored the Constitution, just like Obama, to further his own ambitions.

28 posted on 01/17/2012 8:01:16 AM PST by Seizethecarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: dayglored

Romney sucks swamp water because he’s a lying two faced RINO. Can’t we stick to nailing him on that?

Yes, we can, as a matter of fact, I would prefer that over making myself look like an idiot over asking for his birth certificate, or his tax returns any day.


29 posted on 01/17/2012 8:14:39 AM PST by Morpheus2009
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Tex-Con-Man
Farrah is so “out there”.

People with foreign citizenship born on US soil are entitled to run for president and run America into the ground. Obama established this fact in 2008.

These Birtho-Whackos need to learn to accept that America and its constitution are on the ash heap of history.

30 posted on 01/17/2012 8:17:43 AM PST by PA-RIVER
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp
It’s possible her father had not been naturalized as a U.S. citizen by the time she was born.

Her father, Harold Arundel LaFount was born in Birmingham, Warwickshire, England, Jan. 5, 1880, and without further research it is uncertain whether he was naturalized as a U.S. citizen by the time his daughter was born.


Typical Corsi and his baiting.............

31 posted on 01/17/2012 8:22:16 AM PST by deport (..............God Bless Texas............)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tennessee Nana

Who are the natural children since the ratification of the Constitution?


32 posted on 01/17/2012 10:35:46 AM PST by bushpilot1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp
We agree Seizethecarp. I don't believe Corsi has tried to address McCain's ineligibility, which was probably part of a likely agreement not to vet, or even to talk honestly about Obama’s ineligibility. All of a sudden it was not an issue anyone cared about. They cared about it in 2000. There were eight attempts to amend Article II Section 1 between 2000 and 2008. But suddenly, no one cares. McCaskill and Obama attempted to pass a law SB2678, in February 2008,to make McCain eligible but no one cares? There are three Congressional Research Service legal papers providing talking points about how to avoid what they don't care about. Sure they care. Our legislators in both parties now find the Constitution an inconvenient truth. The think so little of our citizenry that the tactics of Alinsky, and the perquisits of power and a lap-dog media can get away with "Oh no one cares about that!"

This has been a remarkable public deception campaign. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that Justia.com and Center for American Progress have been working with the Republican legislature, encouraging them with promises that Congress, even a Republican Congress, will ask no questions. Needless to say the Justice Department will never prosecute, and federal judges will never grant standing with Obama in office.

If you don't follow the remarkable analysis being done by Leo Donofrio, you should. Reading Wong Kim Ark was always difficult, but it turns out, there was a reason. Justice Gray was, probably with full knowledge, ignoring a written warning by the court that a citation upon which Gray was depending, and which was key to what eventually enabled naturalizing children of illegal aliens. The court had noted that error in a previous case, and the history is well-documented. As he has discovered and documented the illegitimacy of Chester Arthur, and provided a cogent analysis of Minor v. Happersett Donofrio has begun to explore and explain the error in Justice Gray's case, Wong Kim Ark.

While no one is currently talking about the precedent created in Minor, many lawyers clearly understood, or they wouldn't have scrubbed the versions of the cases published on the Internet, and at Cornell. Our framers meant The Constitution to be understandable to literate citizens. They said so. It was part of the reason for not including definitions of terms in The Constitution. Madison explained that definitions of terms change. As Justice Waite pointed out, "At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar..." No one should lament that we will never be provided access to Obama's historical documents. We have clear law, but those afraid to lose their prerogatives, their jobs as sycophants, our legislators, pretend now that, perhaps just in this case, that the Constitution doesn't matter.

It may be that there was a purpose behind the labyrinthine, and largely irrelevant meandering of Gray's argument. He obscured the issue of having had alien parents to obscure the illegitimacy of his patron, Chester Arthur, and, probably inadvertently, created the opportunity which wasn't realized for at least fifty years, which drew so many mothers and families to cross our borders illegally so that their children would be made citizens.

There was another attempt by a Republican, former Supreme Court Justice Charles Evans Hughes was born to British subjects. He knew he wasn't qualified. He was exposed in the largest law journal in the US in 1916 by Breckenridge Long, later to work in Roosevelt's state department and also made and ambassador. Huges returned to the court and was made Chief Justice. The case made by Long sites all the usual sources, though I don't recall whether he realized that Minor made Vattel’s common-law into positive law. There is and was no law preventing Hughes from running, just as Calero, McCain, and Obama may have broken no law, even when all three knew they failed to satisfy Article II Section 1. But Hughes later wrote the decision, in 1939, Perkins v. Elg, in which Marie Elg, born to recent immigrants from Sweden, in New York, and taken back to Sweden when her father got a job during the depression, to never have lost her natural born citizenship, since it was granted by nature (he may have said God), and could not be removed by statute. She, the decision said, could, after 14 years residence and attaining the age of 35, run for president.

I do believe, much as I appreciated the Swift Boat revelations, that WND would always have clarified the undoubted legal definition included in over a dozen Supreme Court Cases, and helped the public understand JustiaGate and other proof that they were victims of a remarkable confidence deception, a con job, to hide Republican complicity.

About Mitt there seems little doubt that he is eligible, and a natural born citizen, just as there is no doubt that Marco Rubio and Bobby Jindal, along with McCain and Obama, are not. There is a Latina governor, who is clearly conservative in a Southwestern state - perhaps New Mexico. Someone will correct me, because I probably have it wrong, and have not followed her career, but I believe her name is Susana Martinez. I vaguely recall that the left is already attacking her, which is a good sign.

It is most remarkable that no legislator, no “conservative pundit,” has the clarity or courage to publicly explain why the words of two Chief Justices, including our greatest, the originator of the 14th Amendment, and crystalline writing of Chief Justice Morrison Waite, are not still as valid as they have been since George Washington followed John Jay's advice and approved their inclusion in the Constitution. When Chief Justice John Marshall, then the representative to the Constitutional Convention, approved the meaning of Article II, can anyone argue that he didn't know what the words meant? When Marshall later cited Vattel as the most concise source for the definition, would anyone believe that he had changed his mind about the meaning he quoted, from our Nation's first law book, at our Nation's first law school, which Marshall attended? Our pundits have feet of clay. Our legislators are all cowards. Hatch and Conyers submitted bills to amend Article II, as did Obama, Clinton, McCaskill, Leahy... They have subverted The Constitution, both parties, and the result may result in a third party.

33 posted on 01/17/2012 12:52:58 PM PST by Spaulding
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]




Boop the Bottle! Don't Annoy the Baby!

All Babies Love Their Bottles

Donate monthly and end FReepathons!
Sponsors will donate $10
For each new monthly sign-up

34 posted on 01/17/2012 2:10:36 PM PST by TheOldLady (FReepmail me to get ON or OFF the ZOT LIGHTNING ping list)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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