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

Skip to comments.

Kamala Harris: Documents (a British subject)?
US National Archives ^ | January 21, 2019 | research99

Posted on 01/21/2019 12:25:55 PM PST by research99

Monday, January 21, 2019, California Senator Kamala Devi Harris announced her candidacy for the 2020 Presidential election.

Outstanding questions pertaining to her candidacy include her eligibility for this office. The US Constitution specifies only a "natural born" US citizen may hold this post. Definitions of that term, according to the intent of the writers of the Constitution, as well as some later court rulings, indicate this means "born to two US citizen parents." The requirement was intended so that only someone with undivided loyalties to the US, someone not with possible divided loyalties to other nations, could assume the title of commander-in-chief of our armed forces.


TOPICS: FReeper Editorial; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2020; democrat; kamala; naturalborncitizen; presidential
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 261-269 next last
This thread pertains to that question, particularly to available public records which may indicate whether her foreign-born parents had become citizens by the October 20, 1964 date of Kamala's birth. Results of some preliminary searching have been withheld until today, as what could be seen as "personal" records have now entered the public domain (with Kamala's public pronouncement).

Some of the Harris family records have been suppressed, such as the divorce complaint originally filed in Alameda County, California in late 1971. Only a decree from that case survives.

Others have been obtained, including one that is available via the ancestry.com service.

The document imaged in this thread formally verifies that Kamala's father, Mr. Donald Harris, was in fact a subject of Britain, including a holder of a British passport, back when he traveled to the US in the year 1959. (This was verified by a date match of his 1938 birthday, to other records that have been acquired).

The critical question is: What was the date of the naturalization of Kamala's parents, including Donald Harris? A search of Northern California records, does not turn up documentation of that sort under that name, and no question has been addressed to any of the Harris family regarding this unanswered question. Legally, only a Harris family member can access the "alien file" held by USCIS for Mr. Donald Harris.

There are other documents, which point to other potential research angles: Should be FReeper researchers act on these?

1 posted on 01/21/2019 12:25:55 PM PST by research99
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: research99

No court will disqualify her.


2 posted on 01/21/2019 12:27:44 PM PST by CatOwner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: research99

She was born in California


3 posted on 01/21/2019 12:28:59 PM PST by BlackAdderess (I remember when a person's thoughts were their own and not everyone else's responsibility)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: research99
The document referenced in this thread:

https://imgur.com/a/kMfmaAb

4 posted on 01/21/2019 12:29:27 PM PST by research99
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: research99

Had she been white, this could have been an issue, but no one dare challenge...


5 posted on 01/21/2019 12:30:22 PM PST by Chauncey Gardiner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: research99

Needless to say if this was Donald Trump’s ancestry he’d be ineligible but since it’s a rat..of color...of female parts...then nevermind.

That Obama thing was such a fiasco...they used a word “birther” to defend him...just like they use “racist” to try and stop every one who disagrees.

I say let’s start using “Christianphobe” at them...or “whiteophobe” or something. Why should we continue to let them use words to get away with the worst?


6 posted on 01/21/2019 12:31:37 PM PST by Aria
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: research99

If her father was still a British royal subject at the time of her birth then she does not qualify.

To think otherwise is to admit that the founding fathers meant to allow the child of king George himself to be president. Which is lunacy.


7 posted on 01/21/2019 12:33:14 PM PST by walkingdead (It's easy, you just don't lead 'em as much....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Aria

They didn’t have a problem of accusing McCain of being ineligible due to being born somewhere else.


8 posted on 01/21/2019 12:33:28 PM PST by shelterguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

Democrats in general and KamelToe in particular dont care about laws


9 posted on 01/21/2019 12:33:45 PM PST by dsrtsage (For Leftists, World History starts every day at breakfast)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: research99

No, she is not going to be ruled a British citizen. She was born in California and the law of the land long before she was born was that she is a citizen.


10 posted on 01/21/2019 12:34:26 PM PST by BlackAdderess (I remember when a person's thoughts were their own and not everyone else's responsibility)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: research99
HTML posting attempt: Donald Harris' British Citizenship Document
11 posted on 01/21/2019 12:34:47 PM PST by research99
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: BlackAdderess
“She was born in California”

Her parents are foreign born.

12 posted on 01/21/2019 12:35:01 PM PST by dljordan (WhoVoltaire: "To find out who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: research99

Honest to goodness, the trolls are out in force today, trying to gin up the conspiracy theories. First there was the one that the country would have to split over immigration and now this.


13 posted on 01/21/2019 12:35:38 PM PST by BlackAdderess (I remember when a person's thoughts were their own and not everyone else's responsibility)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BlackAdderess

I do not think anyone is questioning her citizenship just her natural born status (i.e. no divided loyalties at birth)


14 posted on 01/21/2019 12:36:39 PM PST by walkingdead (It's easy, you just don't lead 'em as much....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: walkingdead

You people do not want to get it. If the Democrat is black and/or female, they CANNOT BE CHALLENGED. You are a white privileged RACISSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS.


15 posted on 01/21/2019 12:36:48 PM PST by gathersnomoss (Grace and Dignity Will Win The Day)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: research99
Here we go again..

The female version of Odunga.

16 posted on 01/21/2019 12:37:39 PM PST by CivilWarBrewing (Get off my back for my usage of CAPS, especially you snowflake males! MAN UP!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: research99

About the only thing that is going to convince the rank and file Democrat to vote for this trainwreck of a candidate is for the Right to attack her. That way she can be a victim and they will all support her.


17 posted on 01/21/2019 12:37:41 PM PST by BlackAdderess (I remember when a person's thoughts were their own and not everyone else's responsibility)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CatOwner

No court will disqualify her.
……………………………………………………………………..
The SC would. But if not, a big enough row by the American people would well and truly disqualify her.


18 posted on 01/21/2019 12:38:24 PM PST by Mollypitcher1 (I have not yet begun to fight....John Paul Jones)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: gathersnomoss

Haha, they can call me what they may.


19 posted on 01/21/2019 12:39:04 PM PST by walkingdead (It's easy, you just don't lead 'em as much....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: BlackAdderess
This is real. Anyone with ancestry.com can verify the source.
20 posted on 01/21/2019 12:39:22 PM PST by research99
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 261-269 next last

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