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

It seems that the great Hindu Jamaican Presidential Hope has made a few enemies on the Left. It should be an entertaining Democratic Primary.
1 posted on 01/21/2019 10:39:32 AM PST by Pelham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Pelham

And now she is pushing free college for all. Cool. I always wanted to go so now I can. Plus free medicare for all so I don’t need to worry about that.


2 posted on 01/21/2019 10:41:42 AM PST by shelterguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Pelham

Wow this from the times!


3 posted on 01/21/2019 10:42:13 AM PST by ColdOne ((I miss my poochie... Tasha 2000~3/14/11~ Best Election Ever!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Pelham
This will be fun watching dumb as nails Kamala Harris go even further left than she already is to pacify the dumb as nails RAT electorate. Can eating too much popcorn be all that bad for you? 😀
5 posted on 01/21/2019 10:45:53 AM PST by dowcaet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Pelham
The New York Time is trying to disarm the American public about the true nature of Kamala Harris. She is a true progressive Communist.
6 posted on 01/21/2019 10:47:15 AM PST by jonrick46 (Cultural Marxism is the cult of the Left waiting for the Mothership.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Pelham

Swamp Thing


13 posted on 01/21/2019 10:55:20 AM PST by GSWarrior
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Pelham

Could be the Old Grey Lady’s money is on Julian Castro, and is starting early on winnowing the oppo. Interesting coincidence—didn’t DAVOS happen this past weekend? I wonder who THEY will be backing. Guess we’ll find out.


14 posted on 01/21/2019 10:56:47 AM PST by 4Runner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Pelham
::::::....the term “progressive prosecutor” has almost become trendy....::::::

Now she wants to make "poontronage" a trendy term.

16 posted on 01/21/2019 11:07:30 AM PST by SERKIT ("Blazing Saddles" explains it all.......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Pelham

"If you're as good in politics as you are in bed,
you could be president!"

18 posted on 01/21/2019 11:12:30 AM PST by Baynative ("A man is not old until regrets take the place of dreams." - John Barrymore)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Pelham


"During a recent interview, Harris reacted angrily when asked about her relationship with Willie Brown."
19 posted on 01/21/2019 11:15:30 AM PST by Antoninus ("In Washington, swamp drain you.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Pelham

sure she was she had the guy who taped planned parenthood admitting they sold body parts investigated and she let PP go.


21 posted on 01/21/2019 11:17:11 AM PST by morphing libertarian (Use Comey's Report; Indict Hillary now; build Kate's wall. --- Proud Smelly Walmart Deplorable)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Pelham

republicans impotent to stop her

From DMZFrank | 12/22/2018 2:58:29 PM PST

The SCOTUS has never directly ruled on the meaning of Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the constitution with regard to POTUS eligibility. But in SCOTUS cases wherein they have given a definition of what a NBC (or a 14th amendment citizen in the case of Wong Kim Ark)is, Minor vs Haperstatt, Venus Merchantman Case of 1814) they defined an NBC as a person born of TWO, count them TWO citizen parents (the parents don’t have to be NBC) and born in one of the states of the Union, or the territories.

The authors of the 14th amendment, in the Congressional debates on the matter, also defined an NBC in the same manner. Rep. Bimgham and Senator Jacob Howard were the principal authors of the 14th amendment. Here is a quote from Howard which clearly spelled out the intent of the 14th Amendment in 1866, which was to define citizenship. He stated: “Every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons. It settles the great question of citizenship and removes all doubt as to what persons are or are not citizens of the United States. This has long been a great desideratum in the jurisprudence and legislation of this country.”

Until this matter is formally adjudicated by the Court, I will defer to their NBC stare decisis definitions. Harris, Obama and a host of others were not, are not, and can NEVER be constitutionally eligible to be POTUS.

Whatever one thinks what the meaning of Article II, Section 1, clause 5 is, it is clear that the adoption of the 14th amendment did not alter it in any constitutional sense. How else can you account for the fact that the constitution only specifies for the office of senator and representative citizenship for a period of 9 and 7 years respectively, while the constitution requires the POTUS, to be NATURALLY born, owing allegiance to no other country? That is the ONLY constitutional provision for NBC. Obviously, there is a singular distinction with regard to that office. Under Jamaican and Indian citizenship law, for instance, It is conceivable that Jamaica or India could claim that Kamala Harris, thru her parents, is a citizen who owes allegiance to both of those countries FROM HER BIRTH. It was conferred upon her by those countries citizenship laws, just as valid as our own.

By the way, Ted Cruz (who I admire very much) made a very public demonstration of the fact that he was going to FORMALLY renounce his CANADIAN citizenship. What NATURALLY BORN US citizen has to do such a thing?

The framers of the constitution were patriarchs. (Yes I understand that is completely out of tune with modern sensibilities, but nonetheless it is true.) They believed that the citizenship of the FATHER was conferred upon his children. SCOUTUS incorporated in toto the ENTIRE 212th paragraph of Emerich De Vattel’s Law of Nations in their 1814 Venus merchantman case as they defined what an NBC is. Here is the money quote that Justice Livingstone that was cited when he wrote for the majority, “The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights.”

I suspect the reason that many do not want this issue formally examined is that they wish to foster and enhance the globalist influence on the office of POTUS. The NBC requirement was never intended to be a guarantee of allegiance, but a safeguard against undue foreign influence on the office of POTUS, PARTICULARLY from a father owing allegiance to a foreign sovereignty. The oath of naturalization requires a formal and legal renunciation of any prior national allegiances.

Jennie Spencer-Churchill, known as Lady Randolph Churchill, was a natural born US citizen, and a British socialite, the wife of Lord Randolph Churchill and the mother of British Prime Minister Sir Winston Churchill.

Under US citizenship law at the time of Churchill’s birth, despite the fact that his mother was a NATURAL BORN US citizen, she could not transmit her US citizenship on to young Winston owing to her marriage to a foreign national, Sir Randolph Spencer Churchill, who was Winston’s father. That would not be legally allowed until the passage of the Cable Act of 1922, well after Churchill’s birth in 1874. The Cable Act only confers citizenship, NOT NATURALLY BORN citizenship. It did not refer to, or alter the meaning of an Article II, Sec. 1, clause 5 “natural born citizen” in any way.

Churchill was granted HONORARY US citizenship by an act of Congress on 9 April 1963. It was understood that his birth to a an NBC citizen US mother in Great Britain did not make him a citizen by law.
This is just one more indication of the fact that Obama, Cruz, Rubio OR Harris can NEVER be constitutionally eligible to the office of POTUS. We need to have this issue finally adjudicated by SCOTUS for the first time in US history, and finally get a definitive answer one way or another.
We have enough naturally born anti-american, anti-constitutional cultural marxists in our country now who aspire to be POTUS. I say let’s eliminate all those who don’t even meet the basic Article II criteria. Winnow the opposition.

This matter is SCREAMING for a definitive ruling on the meaning of Article II, Section 1, clause 5, by the SCOTUS for the first time in the history of the US. It is revealing to note what Clarence Thomas told a House subcommittee that when it comes to determining whether a person born outside the 50 states can serve as U.S. president when he said that the high court is “evading” the issue. The comments came as part of Thomas’ testimony before a House appropriations panel discussing an increase in the Supreme Court’s budget in April of 2017. Thomas said that to Subcommittee Chairman Rep. Jose Serrano, D-N.Y.

After two Obama terms, I think they are terrified of the implications of a ruling based on originalist constitutional intent and interpretation. That does not excuse the cowardice in refusing a grant of certiorari for those who wish to have SCOTUS exercise it’s Article III oversight on this matter.


23 posted on 01/21/2019 11:18:25 AM PST by morphing libertarian (Use Comey's Report; Indict Hillary now; build Kate's wall. --- Proud Smelly Walmart Deplorable)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Pelham

She’s like Obama with a higher testosterone level.


25 posted on 01/21/2019 11:19:06 AM PST by Joe 6-pack (Qui me amat, amat et canem meum.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Pelham
All i know is that her 1st important position was serving under Willie Brown as his concubine.
26 posted on 01/21/2019 11:23:08 AM PST by fungoking (Tis a pleasure to live in the 0zarks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Pelham

Being one of the remaining conservatives in Mexifornia, I can confirm that Kamala Harris is one genuine corrupt POS of a politician. Unfortunately, her successor as Attorney General, one Xavier Beccera, a former Congressman, is even worse.


29 posted on 01/21/2019 11:36:21 AM PST by CdMGuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Pelham

Jiffy pop.


30 posted on 01/21/2019 11:42:04 AM PST by cowboyusa (America Cowboy Up)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Pelham

But she let all the Bankers slide for the Millions of Felonies they committed.


33 posted on 01/21/2019 12:55:06 PM PST by eyeamok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Pelham

Oh that she would fade into obscurity.

If she really did move towards some kind of morality, that’s exactly what she would do.

How do you live like that and have the unmitigated gall to run for President on a platform of morality? In front of God and the whole world?

In what universe does this occurr?

Go home, wash your mouth out with soap and stay out of sight.

Unbelievable.


37 posted on 01/28/2019 5:43:36 PM PST by Califreak (If Obama had been treated like Trump the US would have been burnt down before Inauguration Day)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

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