A Constitutional Crisis: Birth of Kamala Harris and Qualification for a VP (Page 2): Funny he supports a president that loves to be pised on lol...

Lonewolf

Tiptop789 wrote:

Jimbo, so beneath you. I think your better than this. Btw, hope you got your money out b4 things started going south?

Funny he supports a president that loves to be pised on lol

Radiance3

Leave the gun. Take the cannoli. wrote:

Oh, you want to argue morality? You're on shaky ground here.
Which is worse - sleeping your way TO the top or sleeping FROM the top using your position of power and wealth?

==============
You must be talking of Bill Clinton, and Joe Biden. Have you forgotten?
Clnton even practiced that in the WH, and Biden enacted at the House of Congress and the Senate. That was why Kamala the anchor baby, called Joe Biden sexual predator during the primary election.

Due to president Trump's wealth, prior to him being the president, many whores were running after him during the 90's. Not his fault, examples of those whores were paid for by the democrats campaign election to accuse and create fake allegations against Donald Trump. These were all proven false, fake, and a political stunt to destroy the president's reputation.

President Trump and his family live in the WH, with clean reputation, He never blemish his presidential position unlike Bill Clinton. President Trump has repented for what ever humanly failures he had done in the past, and now follow both the highest morals of the Christian faith and the dignity and integrity of his possession as president of the United States.

Unlike Clinton, Barack and all democrats who sat at the Oval Office, they had left stints and dents at the WH.

Radiance3

Lonewolf wrote:

Funny he supports a president that loves to be pised on lol

==============
Check your spelling Looneytune.

Sicilianthing

Radiance3 wrote:

The real Kamala Harris:
Kamala Harris has no integrity, an impostor, unreliable and deceptive. She spins where ever the wind blows in her favor. She used a knee pad to move her up. During the primary, she called Joe a "racist", and a sex predator. She hates Catholics, and suggested one time that Catholics do not fit for higher office. But now she praises Joe, a Catholic who was excommunicated from the Catholic Church due to his allegiance to PP abortions.

Born on Oct. 20, 1964, her parents with student visas were not yet citizens, and not yet considered permanent legal residence. She could be not be a VP based on a natural born citizen requirement. Natural born citizen used to be interpreted as those born in the US with US citizen parents. Recently been altered by many legal experts' interpretations and Court cases, that natural born are those born in the US. Therefore all anchor babies could assume the office of a VP or the president of the US?

These challenges started on when Barack Obama run for presidential office in 2008. So many Court cases cited and Court challenges that only born in the US regardless of foreign allegiance and status. I think "natural born" case must be clearly defined only by Congress legislative process and not by the Courts.
-----------------------
Kamala Harris qualifies as an Anchor baby?
CORRUPTION, ELECTIONS, U. S. POLITICSAugust 12, 2020

Is Kamala Harris an illegal alien? She even fails the “anchor baby” test!
Kamala Harris fails even the “anchor baby” claim
Some Kamala-defenders claim she is an anchor baby and qualified for U.S. citizenship solely by her place of birth.

In the last 24 hours, our exposé of Kamala’s bogus citizenship claims, we have received some push back by an almost visceral “she’s an anchor baby!” reaction to the question of Kamala Harris’ citizenship. It should not be a question at all if Kamala were being sincere about her interest to serve the American public.

Given her father Donald’s resume, she looks like just another groomed recruit for the Pilgrims Society and their offspring at the U.N. and Council on Foreign Relations.

At best, the anchor baby concept is thin legal theory.
It takes a leap of logic to interpret the 13th Amendment to allow for citizenship by arguing that a newborn baby is under the jurisdiction of the U.S. at birth merely by virtual of his or her presence in the U.S.

Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”[10]

In 1898, the U.S. Supreme Court did take a precedent steps to clarify what “jurisdiction” meant in United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898). The Wong circumstances were not dissimilar to Kamala’s whose father was a PhD graduate student at the University of California Berkeley.

In addition, every non-US parent of a baby born in the U.S. has natural citizenship rights for himself and his child based upon the citizenship laws of his home country. Those rights cannot be usurped just because a citizen is a student in America.

In Donald Jasper Harris’ case, that is Jamaica. Jamaican law is very clear about Kamala’s citizenship at birth:
“Every person born outside Jamaica shall become a citizen of Jamaica . . . on that the date of his birth.”

Section 3C(b), Citizenship by decent, Jamaica (Constitution) Order in Council 1962. (Jul. 25, 1962). Caribbean and North Atlantic Territories, Statutory Instruments, 1962 No. 1550, Amendments through 2011 appended. Queen Elizabeth and Privy Council.
India has a similar law if one chooses to focus on Kamala’s Indian mother’s citizenship instead. See Part II, Sec. 5, Citizenship. The Constitution of India. (Nov. 9, 2015). Government of India, Ministry of Law and Justice.
So, unambiguously, by the laws of citizenship in Donald’s Jamaica, Kamala was born with Jamaican citizenship.
The open question remains whether she is a dual citizen by virtue of her birth in the United States.

To answer this we must turn to the 14th Amendment and the Supreme Court’s clarification of “jurisdiction” in United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898).
The Wong Kim Ark decision created a simple test for jurisdiction for which all the elements must be true before it applies:
1. Child was born in the U.S;
2. Birth parents are citizens of, and subject to the laws of, a foreign country;
3. Birth parents have “a permanent domicile and residence in the United States;”
4. Birth parents “are carrying on business;” and
5. Birth parents “ are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity” by the country of their citizenship”
This is Kamala’s test to qualify as an “anchor baby:”
1. Child was born in the U.S.?
YES, Kamala’s birth certificate says she was born at Kaiser Foundation Hospital at 9:28pm on Oct. 20, 1964
2. Birth parents are citizens of, and subject to the laws of, a foreign country;
YES, Kamala’s birth certificate shows that her father Donald is a citizen of Jamaica and her mother Gopalan is from India.
3. Birth parents have “a permanent domicile and residence in the United States;”
NO, a student residence is generally not considered a permanent domicile and residence. Rather, for a college student, for example, a home residence is considered his legal domicile while his student abode is temporary. For example, a student cannot list her student housing residence in another state in order to qualify for in-state tuition. Likewise, a student cannot claim a student address as permanent domicile to meet the Wong rule and enable his or her newborn to become a U.S. citizen!

When Kamala was 12, her mother moved Kamala and her sister to Canada for graduate work at McGill University. Kamala attended high school in Westmount, Quebec, graduating in 1981. Did she claim Canadian citizenship during that period? That would put her under the jurisdication of the British Crown with regard to the Wong test.

Occasionally, a student residence can be used as legal domicile, if the person has the provable intent to make it permanent. Even that was not the case with Donald Harris. Kamala was born in 1964. Donald received his PhD at Berkeley in 1966, two years later, then they moved to the University of Illinois (Asst. Prof., 1966-67), then Northwestern (Asst. Prof., 1967-68), then University of Wisconsin (Assoc. Prof., 1968-72), then Stanford (Econ. Prof., 1978-98). The evidence is clear that Donald had no intention of making his Berkeley address at the time of Kamala’s birth his legal domicile..

Therefore, Kamala does not qualify as a U.S. Citizen under Wong based on the domicile test.
4. Birth parents “are carrying on business;” and
NO. Donald Jasper Harris was a full time PhD student at Berkeley when Kamala was born. See also Kamala’s birth certificate. Therefore, Kamala does not qualify as a U.S. Citizen under Wong based on the business test.

5. Birth parents “ are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity” by the country of their citizenship”
NO, the evidence is clear that Donald Jasper Harris was working for the U.N. and Jamaican government. His resume is a litany of relationships to foreign governments: Shell Scholar (Jamaica), 1957; Issa Scholar (Jamaica), 1961; Faculty Fellow, Economics, Cambridge University, England, 1966; Ford Foundation Visiting Fellow, Delhi School of Economics, India, 1968; Associate Fellow, Clare Hall, Cambridge University, England, 1969, 1971; Distinguished Visiting Professor, Yale University, 1977-78; Associate Fellow, Trinity College, Cambridge University, England, 1982; National Research Council-Ford Foundation Fellow, 1984-85; Fulbright Scholar, Brazil, 1990, 1991; Fulbright Scholar, Mexico, 1992; Visiting Scholar, Inter-American Development Bank, Washington, DC, 1993-94.
Donald’s resume states “Consultant to international agencies (UN, UNCTAD, UNDP, IDB, World Bank), governments, and private foundations.”

Therefore, Kamala fails this test as well. Her father was indeed being directed by non-US powers, including the U.N., by virtue of not passing the “not a diplomat or official capacity” test.
.
No proof of citizenship
Has Kamala become a naturalized American citizen?
She has produced no record of that, as was her duty the first time she ran for public office in California, and certainly is her duty now that she is the presumed Biden vice presidential running mate.

Put up, or shut up Kamala. We’re tired of having to dig around in your past because you are hiding secrets.
Grab your Kamala Harris independent media kit under the headline link below and spread around your information downline:
Biden picks not black-not eligible Kamala Harris as VP nominee.
Kamala Harris fails even the “anchor baby” claim Some Kamala-defenders claim she is an anchor baby and qualified for U.S. citizenship solely by her place of birth. In the last 24 hours, our exposé.

i The real Kamala Harris: br Kamala Harris has no... (show quote)

>>>

Neither Trump nor the King Rat Barr have done nothing to stop her !

Radiance3

Sicilianthing wrote:

>>>

Neither Trump nor the King Rat Barr have done nothing to stop her !

=============
As I have repeated number of times, this problem falls under Congress. It is a congressional problem. Lindsey Graham made a wrong opinion concerning Kamala's qualification. That is why we need to demand Congress to resolve this crisis. They must provide a clear definition of what constitute a Natural Born. Court cases and legal opinions have no power to fix this because it involves the constitution.
Only Congress could be able to fix this amendment. We must ensure that GOP takes Pelosi out and put back the power to GOP where it must belong.

Sicilianthing

Radiance3 wrote:

============= br i As I have repeated number of ... (show quote)

>>>

Congress is a Criminal Enterprise and will do NOTHING !

Wake up

Take the Red Pill and Wake UP !

Leave the gun. Take the cannoli. Loc: Pa

Radiance3 wrote:

============== br i b You must be talking of Bil... (show quote)

Clean reputation? Are we talking about the same guy?

At least 25 women have made sexual misconduct allegations against Trump since the 1970s.

A deluge of women made their accusations public following the October 2016 release of the "Access Hollywood" tape, in which Trump was recorded boasting about grabbing women's genitals in 2005. Some others made their stories public months before the tape's release, and still others came forward in the months following.

Trump has denied the allegations, which include ogling, harassment, groping, and rape, as "fabricated" and politically motivated accounts pushed by the media and his political opponents.

He stated "Every woman lied when they came forward to hurt my campaign. Total fabrication. The events never happened. Never. All of these liars will be sued after the election is over."

Trump also said these "false allegations" against him were made by "women who got paid a lot of money to make up stories about me." And then alleged that the "mainstream media" refused to report on evidence that the accusations were made up. REALLY? WHAT EVIDENCE?

TRUMP HAS NEVER SUED ANY OF THESE WOMEN – ALTHOUGH TWO WOMEN HAVE SUED HIM.

SO, THE “LIAR IN CHIEF” WANTS US BELIEVE HIM OVER 25 OTHER PEOPLE. THAT’S ABSURD

Radiance3

Leave the gun. Take the cannoli. wrote:

Clean reputation? Are we talking about the same gu... (show quote)

=================
Cannoli, give me a break. 24 of those women were sexual predators. The democrats paid them to create false accusation against president Trump to extort money. All the allegations against him prior to being president were FAKE, FABRICATED. One women was a whore extortionist, making money by luring rich men. However, Trump did not buy her sale. She got mad and accused the Donald instead. She also became a victim of her greedy lawyer. Oh, my goodness how evil these people are. I think they all stink.

One good thing was Donald did not put up with her. But she made alibis and sued knowing that Donald has a lot of money. She lost. Until now, she is a stinking an will end up going to jail.

President Trump has repented since 8 years ago. He was not perfect but no one is perfect. But he knows how to run our country. He repented, and the WH is pure and clean unlike the times of Barack Obama, and Bill Clinton. Those people left the house stinky, while the family of Donald is clean as pure breeze in the air.

By the way, I am tired of your huge mouth. Now get lost! You are not worth of my time.

Leave the gun. Take the cannoli. Loc: Pa

Radiance3 wrote:

================= br i Cannoli, give me a break. ... (show quote)

Poor Donald, he was a victim, right. Sure, ALL of those women were predators. If so, what does he have to repent for? Little contradiction there eh?

Trump promised to sue these women after the election – what happened to that?
Payed hush money to “Stormy” hoping to keep it quiet, that didn’t work.

And then there’s the Access Hollywood tape of Trump bragging about grabbing women "by the pussy" without their consent.

Yeah, Clinton was a womanizer too, but he doesn’t hold a candle to Trump who made a career out it.

Poor you, you’ve been conned and can’t bring yourself to admit it. You drank too much of the Fool Aid.

By the way, get used to me, I’ll be here until the Liar In Chief is swept out of office.

And once he no longer has the protection of being in office, he’ll spend years in court being prosecuted for his numerous transgressions. As they say, “pay back is a bitch”.

Carol Kelly

Lonewolf wrote:

It is she was born in the us and unlike trump she loves America,
Trumps comited do many felony's when he leaves office all he has left is prision time.

She doesn’t love this America, she dreams of changing us and our precious Constitution.

Carol Kelly

Leave the gun. Take the cannoli. wrote:

Poor Donald, he was a victim, right. Sure, ALL of ... (show quote)

You need to revisit Clinton, boy.

Carol Kelly

Radiance3 wrote:

================= br i Cannoli, give me a break. ... (show quote)

He’s not worth your time.

Radiance3

Carol Kelly wrote:

He’s not worth your time.

============
Indeed, I won't drag myself to the basement to put up with this thug.

Leave the gun. Take the cannoli. Loc: Pa

Carol Kelly wrote:

You need to revisit Clinton, boy.

What ever Clinton did was minuscule compared to Trump

JimMe

Radiance3 wrote:

The real Kamala Harris:
Kamala Harris has no integrity, an impostor, unreliable and deceptive. She spins where ever the wind blows in her favor. She used a knee pad to move her up. During the primary, she called Joe a "racist", and a sex predator. She hates Catholics, and suggested one time that Catholics do not fit for higher office. But now she praises Joe, a Catholic who was excommunicated from the Catholic Church due to his allegiance to PP abortions.

Born on Oct. 20, 1964, her parents with student visas were not yet citizens, and not yet considered permanent legal residence. She could be not be a VP based on a natural born citizen requirement. Natural born citizen used to be interpreted as those born in the US with US citizen parents. Recently been altered by many legal experts' interpretations and Court cases, that natural born are those born in the US. Therefore all anchor babies could assume the office of a VP or the president of the US?

These challenges started on when Barack Obama run for presidential office in 2008. So many Court cases cited and Court challenges that only born in the US regardless of foreign allegiance and status. I think "natural born" case must be clearly defined only by Congress legislative process and not by the Courts.
-----------------------
Kamala Harris qualifies as an Anchor baby?
CORRUPTION, ELECTIONS, U. S. POLITICSAugust 12, 2020

Is Kamala Harris an illegal alien? She even fails the “anchor baby” test!
Kamala Harris fails even the “anchor baby” claim
Some Kamala-defenders claim she is an anchor baby and qualified for U.S. citizenship solely by her place of birth.

In the last 24 hours, our exposé of Kamala’s bogus citizenship claims, we have received some push back by an almost visceral “she’s an anchor baby!” reaction to the question of Kamala Harris’ citizenship. It should not be a question at all if Kamala were being sincere about her interest to serve the American public.

Given her father Donald’s resume, she looks like just another groomed recruit for the Pilgrims Society and their offspring at the U.N. and Council on Foreign Relations.

At best, the anchor baby concept is thin legal theory.
It takes a leap of logic to interpret the 13th Amendment to allow for citizenship by arguing that a newborn baby is under the jurisdiction of the U.S. at birth merely by virtual of his or her presence in the U.S.

Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”[10]

In 1898, the U.S. Supreme Court did take a precedent steps to clarify what “jurisdiction” meant in United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898). The Wong circumstances were not dissimilar to Kamala’s whose father was a PhD graduate student at the University of California Berkeley.

In addition, every non-US parent of a baby born in the U.S. has natural citizenship rights for himself and his child based upon the citizenship laws of his home country. Those rights cannot be usurped just because a citizen is a student in America.

In Donald Jasper Harris’ case, that is Jamaica. Jamaican law is very clear about Kamala’s citizenship at birth:
“Every person born outside Jamaica shall become a citizen of Jamaica . . . on that the date of his birth.”

Section 3C(b), Citizenship by decent, Jamaica (Constitution) Order in Council 1962. (Jul. 25, 1962). Caribbean and North Atlantic Territories, Statutory Instruments, 1962 No. 1550, Amendments through 2011 appended. Queen Elizabeth and Privy Council.
India has a similar law if one chooses to focus on Kamala’s Indian mother’s citizenship instead. See Part II, Sec. 5, Citizenship. The Constitution of India. (Nov. 9, 2015). Government of India, Ministry of Law and Justice.
So, unambiguously, by the laws of citizenship in Donald’s Jamaica, Kamala was born with Jamaican citizenship.
The open question remains whether she is a dual citizen by virtue of her birth in the United States.

To answer this we must turn to the 14th Amendment and the Supreme Court’s clarification of “jurisdiction” in United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898).
The Wong Kim Ark decision created a simple test for jurisdiction for which all the elements must be true before it applies:
1. Child was born in the U.S;
2. Birth parents are citizens of, and subject to the laws of, a foreign country;
3. Birth parents have “a permanent domicile and residence in the United States;”
4. Birth parents “are carrying on business;” and
5. Birth parents “ are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity” by the country of their citizenship”
This is Kamala’s test to qualify as an “anchor baby:”
1. Child was born in the U.S.?
YES, Kamala’s birth certificate says she was born at Kaiser Foundation Hospital at 9:28pm on Oct. 20, 1964
2. Birth parents are citizens of, and subject to the laws of, a foreign country;
YES, Kamala’s birth certificate shows that her father Donald is a citizen of Jamaica and her mother Gopalan is from India.
3. Birth parents have “a permanent domicile and residence in the United States;”
NO, a student residence is generally not considered a permanent domicile and residence. Rather, for a college student, for example, a home residence is considered his legal domicile while his student abode is temporary. For example, a student cannot list her student housing residence in another state in order to qualify for in-state tuition. Likewise, a student cannot claim a student address as permanent domicile to meet the Wong rule and enable his or her newborn to become a U.S. citizen!

When Kamala was 12, her mother moved Kamala and her sister to Canada for graduate work at McGill University. Kamala attended high school in Westmount, Quebec, graduating in 1981. Did she claim Canadian citizenship during that period? That would put her under the jurisdication of the British Crown with regard to the Wong test.

Occasionally, a student residence can be used as legal domicile, if the person has the provable intent to make it permanent. Even that was not the case with Donald Harris. Kamala was born in 1964. Donald received his PhD at Berkeley in 1966, two years later, then they moved to the University of Illinois (Asst. Prof., 1966-67), then Northwestern (Asst. Prof., 1967-68), then University of Wisconsin (Assoc. Prof., 1968-72), then Stanford (Econ. Prof., 1978-98). The evidence is clear that Donald had no intention of making his Berkeley address at the time of Kamala’s birth his legal domicile..

Therefore, Kamala does not qualify as a U.S. Citizen under Wong based on the domicile test.
4. Birth parents “are carrying on business;” and
NO. Donald Jasper Harris was a full time PhD student at Berkeley when Kamala was born. See also Kamala’s birth certificate. Therefore, Kamala does not qualify as a U.S. Citizen under Wong based on the business test.

5. Birth parents “ are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity” by the country of their citizenship”
NO, the evidence is clear that Donald Jasper Harris was working for the U.N. and Jamaican government. His resume is a litany of relationships to foreign governments: Shell Scholar (Jamaica), 1957; Issa Scholar (Jamaica), 1961; Faculty Fellow, Economics, Cambridge University, England, 1966; Ford Foundation Visiting Fellow, Delhi School of Economics, India, 1968; Associate Fellow, Clare Hall, Cambridge University, England, 1969, 1971; Distinguished Visiting Professor, Yale University, 1977-78; Associate Fellow, Trinity College, Cambridge University, England, 1982; National Research Council-Ford Foundation Fellow, 1984-85; Fulbright Scholar, Brazil, 1990, 1991; Fulbright Scholar, Mexico, 1992; Visiting Scholar, Inter-American Development Bank, Washington, DC, 1993-94.
Donald’s resume states “Consultant to international agencies (UN, UNCTAD, UNDP, IDB, World Bank), governments, and private foundations.”

Therefore, Kamala fails this test as well. Her father was indeed being directed by non-US powers, including the U.N., by virtue of not passing the “not a diplomat or official capacity” test.
.
No proof of citizenship
Has Kamala become a naturalized American citizen?
She has produced no record of that, as was her duty the first time she ran for public office in California, and certainly is her duty now that she is the presumed Biden vice presidential running mate.

Put up, or shut up Kamala. We’re tired of having to dig around in your past because you are hiding secrets.
Grab your Kamala Harris independent media kit under the headline link below and spread around your information downline:
Biden picks not black-not eligible Kamala Harris as VP nominee.
Kamala Harris fails even the “anchor baby” claim Some Kamala-defenders claim she is an anchor baby and qualified for U.S. citizenship solely by her place of birth. In the last 24 hours, our exposé.

i The real Kamala Harris: br Kamala Harris has no... (show quote)

Radiance3... What really matters is what has been applied as to who is a "Natural Born Citizen", and so can be President or Vice-President of Our USA...

And in 2016, several State Legislatures proclaimed Ted Cruz to be a "Natural Born Citizen" even though he was born in Canada to only one parent who was a USA Citizen, his mother...

The defacto criteria for being a "Natural Born Citizen" has been established as anyone gaining USA Citizenship at birth...

As of 2020, all other applications are moot...