Put your Obama conspiracy comments (I hope not grossly inappropriate ones) that don’t relate to the current articles here. This thread will close in two weeks.
Welcome
Obama Conspiracy Theories since 2008 has been your destination for conspiracy theories and fringe views about Barack Obama. Having an argument with your buddies at the office? You're in the right place. Use the Search box below or check out our featured articles. If you don't agree with what you see, feel free to add your thoughts to the over 250,000 comments others have left. To leave a comment visit the Open Thread.
Also check out The debunker's guide to Obama conspiracy theoriesConspiracies
Recent Comments
View the site's Comment feed.Donate
Recommended books
- 935 Lies: The Future of Truth and the Decline of America's Moral Integrity
- A Culture of Conspiracy: Apocalyptic Visions in Contemporary America
- Arpaio De Facto Lawman
- Barack Obama: The Story
- Beyond Fear: Thinking Sensibly About Security in an Uncertain World
- Bullspotting: Finding Facts in the Age of Misinformation
- Chasing Phantoms: Reality, Imagination, and Homeland Security Since 9/11
- Conspiracy Nation: The Politics of Paranoia in Postwar America
- Conspiracy Theories: Secrecy and Power in American Culture
- Cults, Conspiracies, and Secret Societies: The Straight Scoop on Freemasons, The Illuminati, Skull and Bones, Black Helicopters, The New World Order, and many, many more
- Idiot America: How Stupidity Became a Virtue in the Land of the Free
- Is Barack Obama's Birth Certificate a Fraud?
- One Electorate Under God?: A Dialogue on Religion and American Politics (Pew Forum Dialogues on Religion & Public Life)
- Our Friend Barry: Classmates' Recollections of Barack Obama and Punahou School
- Religion and the Racist Right: The Origins of the Christian Identity Movement
- The Authoritarians
- The Believing Brain: From Ghosts and Gods to Politics and Conspiracies—How We Construct Beliefs and Reinforce Them as Truths
- The Citizenship Debates: A Reader
- The Development of American Citizenship, 1608-1870
- The New Hate: A History of Fear and Loathing on the Populist Right
- The Paranoid Style in American Politics
- The Scapegoat
- The United States of Paranoia: A Conspiracy Theory
- Them: Adventures with Extremists
Quick Reference
- Birther aggregator
- Congressional Research Service report on presidential eligibility
- Donald, You're FIred! – FactCheck.org
- Hawaii Department of Health Obama FAQ
- Hawaii verification of birth certificate
- Jack Ryan document collection on Scribd
- Made in the U.S.A. – FactCheck.org
- Nordyke twins birth certificate
- Obama Certificate of Live Birth – Gurhrie Photo
- Obama Certificate of Live Birth – Press
- Obama Certificate of Live Birth – White House
- Obama Certification of Live Birth
- Obama presidential library
- Obama White House archive site
- Politifact Birth Certificate articles
- Recent court rulings on presidential eligibility
- The debunker's guide to Obama conspiracy theories
- The Great Mother of all Natural Born Citizenship Quotation Pages
Archives
- October 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- June 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- Mastodon
Quick Reference
- Birther aggregator
- Congressional Research Service report on presidential eligibility
- Donald, You're FIred! – FactCheck.org
- Hawaii Department of Health Obama FAQ
- Hawaii verification of birth certificate
- Jack Ryan document collection on Scribd
- Made in the U.S.A. – FactCheck.org
- Nordyke twins birth certificate
- Obama Certificate of Live Birth – Gurhrie Photo
- Obama Certificate of Live Birth – Press
- Obama Certificate of Live Birth – White House
- Obama Certification of Live Birth
- Obama presidential library
- Obama White House archive site
- Politifact Birth Certificate articles
- Recent court rulings on presidential eligibility
- The debunker's guide to Obama conspiracy theories
- The Great Mother of all Natural Born Citizenship Quotation Pages
“I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn’t lose any voters, OK?” Trump said to laughter at a rally he held at a Christian college in northwest Iowa. “It’s like, incredible.”
Trump in Sioux center Iowa today:
“Two lawsuits have been filed against Ted Cruz , but neither have standing.
I have standing. Should I file?
I’m thinking of it , but that’s so NASTY! ..I don’t know.”
Someone should advise him he is the only one who can resolve this issue to its finality.
— furtive
— Comment at Birther Report
Illinois pharmacist files Cruz ballot challenge in Illinois
http://www.wnd.com/2016/01/motion-demands-cruz-be-removed-from-illinois-ballot/#C3VrEGZekwMihmYE.99
The sad thing is, he might be right.
I found this to be an equally incredible statement with at this point, no impact on his support.
“And you know what, there’s a point at which let’s get to be a little establishment; we’ve got to get things done, folks. Okay. Believe me, don’t worry. We’re going to make such great deals. But at a certain point you can’t be so strident, you can’t not get along. We got to get along with people. You know in the old days Ronald Reagan, and I remember it so vividly, I was a young guy, I helped Ronald Reagan, I really like him. …So what happens, Ronald Reagan would get along with Tip O’Neill. And they’d sit down and they’d make great deals for everybody. That’s what the country’s about really isn’t it? You know. I mean we can all be tough and we can be the …but you know at some point we gotta get our country back on track.”
It’s like he is already pivoting to the center for the general election.
That balloon is just about one breath short of bursting.
Back in 2008, Joyce filed an amicus brief in support of Berg’s cert. petition.
Update on Paige v. SoS and AG of Vermont
http://citizenwells.com/2016/01/18/vermont-cruz-rubio-eligibility-lawsuit-update-january-18-2016-ted-cruz-and-marco-rubio-served-summons-and-amended-complaint-h-brooke-paige-hired-process-servers-baker-investigations/
Doc, don’t know if you’ve seen this, but it reminds me of your article months ago about how birthers are authoritarians.
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/01/donald-trump-2016-authoritarian-213533
I hope everyone’s watching the X-Files special. It’s ripping the lid off of everything.
I don’t remember the quote they are attributing to Tribe at all. Particularly since it contradicts reality as well as the law of the time. So Paige filed an amended brief and may have actually served the parties he is trying to sue or involve in the case.
Curiously, I met a woman at the Mensa meeting Sunday who was born a US citizen in Canada. I explained what the fuss was over Cruz.
Yes, that was an interesting article, but not a surprising result insofar as it concluded that authoritarian followers go for Trump. It surprised me a little, and perhaps it shouldn’t have, that none of the other variables seemed to matter.
Interesting post on the wonderful Lawyers, Guns and Money blog: Guest post from Mark Field regarding Ted Cruz’s eligibility for the presidency”
http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2016/01/guest-post-from-mark-field-regarding-ted-cruzs-eligibility-for-the-presidency
Sheriff Joe heads to Iowa to endorse Trump
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/267069-sheriff-joe-heading-to-iowa-to-endorse-trump
Well he would, wouldn’t he?
“Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, who endorsed her fellow reality television veteran last week, has also been touted as a potential member of a Trump administration. The two bonded in recent years over pizza and the Barack Obama birth certificate, and Palin even joked about Trump as her potential running mate in an appearance on Saturday Night Live last year.”
— InsideSources
http://www.insidesources.com/veepstakes-revisited-possible-trump-sanders-running-mates/
Apparently, use of the term “dumbass birthers” sends a comment at the Washington Times into moderation. It’s the kind of thing a person should know.
Oh, no no no. She’s going to be soooo disappointed, because once again, the Free Wood Post has the scoop:
http://www.freewoodpost.com/2016/01/26/trump-announces-running-mate-himself/
I’m starting to like that site. They seem to know how it’s done.
The birther who’s polling at 35% of Republicans has stated he will not show up for the debate tomorrow because Meghan Kelly will be moderating.
Trump can’t come out of this looking good — either he shows up, which is backing down, or he doesn’t show up, demonstrating that the guy who says he’s the only one strong enough to face Russia and China somehow can’t face Meghan Kelly.
And yet, his remarkable Times Square comment seems to be true — his supporters are so stupid that it doesn’t matter how enormous a chasm opens up between Trump’s words and his deeds. It doesn’t even matter if he points this out to their faces.
That won’t lose him the primary (as his followers have thrown FoxNews under the bus long ago), but it surely would guarantee a loss in the general election.
Hillary’s ads would be all over how she faced the Benghazi committee for 11 hours yet Trump couldn’t face a blond host at his fellow conservatives’ favourite channel.
This may very well prove to be the moment Trump jumps the shark (like Carson with his disastrous statements about foreign policy which caused him to go from 28 to 10 percent within a week).
I won’t be surprised if Trump’s polling stays at 35% no matter what. 35% of Republicans is not that many people — about 10% of voters. I could believe that 10% of voters are brainless bigoted idiots.
Just a reminder:
Users who want their own custom avatar may accomplish it in three ways, as detailed in the site User Guide:
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/visitor-guide/#contents-avatars
One of the militia occupiers in Oregon who were arrested yesterday was none other than birther/right-wing radio host. Pete Santilli.
http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2016/01/27/cincinnatian-peter-santilli-arrested-oregon-standoff/79386528/
You may recall that Santilli said on his radio show that he wanted to shoot Hillary Clinton in the vagina and watch her suffer a slow, painful death.
Missed that one, but Santilli interviewed Mike Volin, and suggested that Zullo hop over the White House fence and arrest Obama.
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2014/10/birthers-basket-case/
Just for sh**s and giggles, I’d be really interested to know what Nancy R. Owens thinks is in this safe. LOL 😛
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jan/26/pablo-escobar-mansion-locked-safe-found?CMP=fb_gu
The story about Santilli’s comments about Hillary Clinton are here:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/18/pete-santilli-hillary-clinton_n_3299247.html
I thought about that too, but then I remembered that old Arabian proverb–
It doesn’t stink if you don’t kick it over.
I’ll lose all faith in her if she doesn’t know the combination.
That settles that then.
I won’t be voting for him in Iowa, and I probably won’t vote for him in New Hampshire either.
So smoke on your pipe and put that in.
I will not vote for him
in a house.
I will not vote for him
with a mouse.
I will not vote for him
here or there.
I will not vote for him
anywhere.
I do not like Donald Trump.
I do not like him, Doc-I-am.
lol But you know how that one turned out. 😉
I think Trump has learned something from Obama: he just won the GOP debate by employing the “empty chair” method.
A state judge ordered Atlah Worldwide Church to be sold at a public foreclosure auction after failing to pay creditors more than $1.02 million, court records show.
The Rev. James Manning said in a phone conversation with DNAinfo New York that the foreclosure was mostly over unpaid water and sewage bills and vowed to fight the order, claiming his church’s tax exempt status means he doesn’t have to pay.
“I assure you, it’s about a water bill and a tax that can’t be levied against this church,” Manning said. “I think it’s a land grab quite frankly.”
https://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20160128/central-harlem/homophobic-pastors-harlem-church-up-for-public-auction-over-unpaid-debts
Couldn’t happen to a nicer guy.
Somebody haz sadd:
“The article also mentions the H. Brooke Paige lawsuit in Vermont but links to a highly biased obot site instead of Citizen Wells where the Paige lawsuit was first reported.”
http://citizenwells.com/tag/msn-quotes-obot-site-instead-of-citizen-wells/
Poor birfer, can’t get no respect.
It gets even better. The attorney who filed the Answer for the church in October, 2009, Anthony C. Jones, wasn’t even licensed to practice law at the time. His law license was suspended on 2/5/08 and has never been reinstated. He then was censured on 1/27/09.
Manning is lying when he says that he didn’t know about the foreclosure action. Anthony Jones is or was an elder in Manning’s church.
MSN is a news aggregator. The article originated at FactCheck.org. I think they rather defer to me than mess with birthers 😉
The FCO article links to my article about Voeltz, not Paige.
They don’t want to get any on ’em. That’s understandable, especially for those who lack the proper training and protective equipment.
Trump calls Cruz An Anchor Baby in Canada http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/trump-ted-cruz-pummeled-debate
And for the record, Cruz couldn’t get elected dog catcher in Canada, let alone PM. I remember that we once had a discussion here about electing dog catchers and it turns out that Duxbury, Vermont actually does elect one at their Town Meeting. I’ve been there-lovely place at the foot of Mt. Mansfield. I didn’t see the dog catcher.
Zullo was on “Freedom Friday” today. Citing the ongoing litigation, Zullo declined to discuss “the investigation.” Instead, Zullo gave his opinion on what he thinks natural-born citizen means (hint: the imaginary “rule” that every other birther also wishes were the law).
Of course not: anyone who can sneak up on dogs is too stealthy to be spotted by a human 😉
Ironic, isn’t it? Many of us hoped that the Melendres case would lead to the unraveling of the scam, but it seems to have prolonged it, instead.
He and Carl also devoted some time to patting each other on the back, claiming that Zullo’s non-investigation of the non-document had something to do with the fact that people are paying attention to the legal issue Cruz is facing.
Zullo finds it suspicious that Cruz hasn’t simply taken his case to the Supreme Court himself. It’s obvious that he’s telling the truth about still being in AZ, because there haven’t been any news reports about a sudden jump in the state’s average IQ.
Maybe even the Kommandant is capable of learning, when to keep his mouth shut, albeit way too late. I think he’s seeing visions of indictments future at this point, as well he should.
As I’ve been telling the Trumpistas, that ain’t gonna fly: Nixon got away with it, because he did it before the digital age, when file footage from the primaries was comparatively scarce and hard to get. Now, everything every candidate ever said in the presence of a cellphone is available to come back and haunt him.
We got a taste of that with Romney’s “47%” and Santorum’s “macaca” moments. This time, it’s going to be much worse: there won’t just be quotes from newspaper articles flashed on the screen as in years past, there’ll be actual video of the candidate making the contradictory statements to cheering crowds. If Trump gets the nomination, one of the major campaign themes will be “Which Trump is the real one?”.
And it’ll be a double whammy for him: not only will some of his base get turned off by “Trump 2.0”, but the “Trump 1.0” statements will turn off some voters he’s trying to recruit with the new image.
That was George Allen.
Looking at his positions over the years, it’s clear`that there is one constant, a lodestar, a rock of Gibraltar, a beacon. It is that Donald Trump knows that Donald Trump is the greatest human being who ever walked the Earth.
Anybody remember Mitt Romney’s Etch-A-Sketch remark?
Donald Trump Admits He Says Horrible Things Just To Keep People Interested In Him
Sharon Rondeau figured out she could get a certified copy of Cruz’s mother’s birth certificate from Delaware:
http://www.thepostemail.com/2016/01/31/the-post-email-obtains-certified-copy-of-ted-cruzs-mothers-birth-certificate/
So, I wonder which candidate has no brain, and which has no courage?
I think it is far worse. If Trump wins (which is not a remote possibility) he will not carry out his promises and offer only excuses. And folks already disaffected by politics (often without reason) will become more disaffected.
I’m not sure what you mean by “wins”: I’ll concede, sadly, that getting the GOP nomination is credible, but that would just mean he’d get hammered in the general election campaign. Despite his whining, he’s really having a pretty easy time of it right now, with almost no one pressing him hard for the answers he’s not willing/able to give. I’ve half-joked that the GOP primary has resembled a competition for high school prom king/queen, with Trump’s rhetoric mostly consisting of “I’m cool, and they suck, so vote for me”. If it comes down to one-on-one against Clinton or Sanders, Trump’s lack of suitability for the office is going to shine like a second sun.
So, I believe he’s not going to have the opportunity to make excuses for anything other than losing the election.
I wish I could share your confidence but may I remind you that you’re the country that elected a second-rate western actor with a scandalous past private life, already half-gaga, accusing trees of polluting.
Mario’s up and at ’em over at the New American:
http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/22433-congressional-report-examines-cruzs-natural-born-citizen-status
Isn’t Mario more of an Old American by now?
Lupin, I had said before that the citizenship of children of French citizens born overseas was a form of extraterritoriality. I found where I got that from. It was this citation from US v. Wong:
“children born in a foreign country, of a French father who had not established his domicil there nor given up the intention of returning, were also deemed Frenchmen, as Laurent says, by “a favor, a sort of fiction,” and Calvo, “by a sort of fiction of exterritoriality, considered as born in France, and therefore invested with French nationality.” Pothier Trait des Personnes, pt. 1, tit. 2, sect. 1, nos. 43, 45; Walsh-Serrant v. Walsh-Serrant, (1802) 3 Journal du Palais, 384; S.C., S. Merlin, Jurisprudence, (5th ed.) Domicile, § 13; Prefet du Nord v. Lebeau, (1862) Journal du Palais, 1863, 312 and note; 1 Laurent Droit Civil, no. 321; 2 Calvo Droit International, (5th ed.) § 542; Cockburn on Nationality, 13, 14; Hall’s International Law, (4th ed.) § 68. The general principle of citizenship by birth within French territory prevailed until after the French Revolution, and was affirmed in successive constitutions from the one adopted by the Constituent Assembly in 1791 to that of the French Republic in 1799. Constitutions et Chartes, (ed. 1830) pp. 100, 136, 148, 186.”
Anyone remember Manning? THe harlem Pastor (in)famous-ish for holding the trial that convicted Obama of treason and accomplished…….. absolutely nothing?
Looks like he’s got himself some financial troubles. A Judge has ordered his church property sold at auction, and, sweet irony that it is, an organization for LGBT youth wants to buy it.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/dispatches/2016/02/01/harlem-hate-church-could-become-lgbt-youth-center/#sthash.rddO471U.gbpl&st_refDomain=www.facebook.com&st_refQuery=/
To be honest, it seems to me a rather tortured interpretation of a basic jus sanguinis principle as established in the Napoleonic Code.
Children born of a French father in another country (let’s say, the US) would have inherited their French citizenship from their father irrespective of the place of birth or the father’s intention or not to ever return to France under the Napoleonic Code.
Clearly, paperwork would have had to be filled at the local French Consulate/Embassy in order to register the birth under French law, but ultimately the child would have been granted French citizenship.
Maybe looking at it from purely a jus soli angle, that’s what they mean by a fiction of extraterritoriality, but in all honesty I don’t quite see how one should equate a basic jus sanguinis concept (through the father) with the notion of “some fiction of extraterritoriality”.
The reverse was far more complicated: a child born of foreign parents of French soil MAY have obtained French citizenship if he/she applied for it but it was not automatic.
Okay, David Farrar’s on a roll over at the New American:
“By placing a comma between the words “natives — which, by the way is actually “naturals”, not natives —
“naturals, or natural born citizens, the author is saying, “I am saying “naturals”, but a more precise meaning is “indigious” peoples, those who live in the land of their births and that of their anchestors, i.e. natual born citizens.”
http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/22433-congressional-report-examines-cruzs-natural-born-citizen-status#comment-2492071298
My only concern with this question is whether my memory is just making stuff up or not. I have no “skin in the game” otherwise.
Doc, I see you’re participating in the New American thread with David Farrar.
I would like to nominate this, from him, for a Quote of the Day:
“My claim against Judge Malihi was that he was way in over his head.”
It’s interesting to see how the birther candidate manages expectations: he does it after the fact: “The media has not covered my long-shot great finish in Iowa fairly.”
Oh, the other birther candidate.
Anyone know how Cody Robert Judy did in the Iowa Caucuses?
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
He’s come up with so many over there.
I don’t think the media covered his long-shot finish either, but at least he’s not whining about it.
It’s difficult to decipher what’s going on inside of Judy’s head, but it appears that he believes that some of the uncommitted county delegates were somehow supporting him. Even if that were the case, the country delegates don’t really count. It is the “Candidate State Delegate Equivalents” which actually matter.
Would that be the “great finish” where he turned a 4.7% lead in the final RCP average into a 3.3% loss in the actual voting?
It wasn’t exactly a “great finish” for me, who’s been saying from the beginning (as have some of the professional pundits) that his support in telephone polls wouldn’t hold up when people got serious about voting, because he still exceeded my expectations. But it looks like I had the basic idea right 😉
When did the town of clewiston get renamed Miami Beach?
At least he finally gave me an answer about not filing a case against Romney despite promising to. It only took months of prodding him on different websites
I was reminded of a tongue twister about a skunk, in which I’ll substitute Trump.
The Trump went on the stump.
The Trump thunk the stump stunk.
But the stump thunk the Trump stunk.
Yup.
Breitbart suddenly collapsed and died in the perfect spot for a assassination, directly beneath a street lamp and standing in the middle of an unmarked street light construction zone. In fact he had just stepped onto a HIGH VOLTAGE STREET LIGHT ACCESS COVER PLATE which was incompletely installed, There were no warning signs for this Electrical hazard.
The spot where he fell was within 10 feet of the darkened entrance alcove of the Brentwood Starbucks. Anyone standing in the alcove would be in total darkness while Breitbart was in the direct light of the street light.
There was no on-scene investigation of his death by the LA police or the coroner.
I’m using the hashtag #soreloser for Donald Trump’s latest claims that Cruz stole the Iowa vote.
i don’t suppose that being overweight, and according to close friend bill whittle (go on, call him a liberal) had a serious heart attack months earlier had anything to do with it?
no, it had to be colonel plum in the library with the heart attack gun
tell you what, write NOROM on a piece of paper, hold it on your chest and look in the mirror, and you’ll find the solution to this conspiracy!
I should learn from your example and avoid the tautology “failed birther litigant.”
“Less than 48 hours after an Iowa caucus defeat, Donald Trump is calling for a do-over. The New York business man accused the Ted Cruz campaign of fraudulent activities during the Iowa caucuses, after controversial voter mailers and reports that Cruz staffers lied to caucus goers by indicating Dr. Ben Carson was dropping out in order to gain votes for Cruz. Cruz has since called for the firing of those people and apologized.”
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/trump-hits-cruz-fraud-calls-do-over-iowa-n510431
The incident you referred to happened the previous year when Breitbart checked into UCLA Emergency with chest pains and shortness of breath. He was admitted for tests lasting several days. He was attended by some of the world’s top Cardiologists. They released him with the recommendation to lose some weight.
Following his death the autopsy uncovered a congenital hearth condition (Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy).
The Coroner’s office reported that Breitbart was admitted to UCLA for several days in 2011 for tests under the care of the world class Cardiologists at UCLA. The coroner did not echo any diagnosis made by the UCLA heart experts.
The diagnosis of Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy is an easily diagnosed heart condition especially an advanced case like the Coroner claims that Breitbart had. The diagnosis is preliminarily made via ultrasound followed by a CT scan.
Nevertheless, the autopsy report mentions no prior diagnosis of HCT or any medical records obtained from UCLA and reviewed by the Coroner or any consultation between the coroner and Breitbart’s cardiologists. This disconnect is suspicious.
The polls clearly had Trump leading and all of a sudden that lead disappears? Yeah, something’s not right.
Trump2016
Are you sure it wasn’t the Romulans?
That is incorrect. Breitbart collapsed outside the Brentwood Restaurant & Lounge at 148 S. Barrington Avenue, which is located at the corner of S. Barrington Avenue and Sunset Boulevard. There is no Starbucks on S. Barrington Avenue or on Sunset Boulevard.
Why would there be an on-scene investigation? There was no sign of foul play. He collapsed on the sidewalk, 911 was called, and an ambulance was dispatched.
Breitbart collapsed just outside the Starbucks on the corner of S. Barrington Ave. and Barrington Ct. He had just departed the Brentwood Restaurant and Lounge which is diagonally across the street. The lounge is not on the corner but rather Café Brentwood and Saketini are. These two are on the corner of S. Barrington Ave. and S. Barrington Pl. The address for Starbucks is:
Brentwood Village, 11700 Barrington Ct, Los Angeles, CA 90049.
It strikes me that if you were to develop a list of people who were Enemies of the Evul Usurpin’ State in 2011, Andrew Breitbart would be pretty low on the Putinizer List. Yet he’s the one they went after?
Can we hope that Trump will sue to change the Iowa caucus results?
Can we hope he will be represented by Klayman?
Has anyone ever seen CRJ and Kenley Noltensmeier in the same room at the same time?
I only ask because I noticed that KN started out using [brackets] instead of ‘quote’ marks in his/her/its posts and that reminded me of a certain terrorist about whom we all know.
Just curious.
If by “months” you mean “years”, then yeah.
I think this message from Cruz to Trump is appropriate about now… http://americandigest.org/sidelines/l_shaped_on_48288d6d29cad.jpg.pagespeed.ce.jpg
Edit: (at least it will be when I figure out how to link to it).
Edit 2: (yea, I think)
Maybe because he promised to finally vet Obama before the election?
http://dailycaller.com/2012/03/05/breitbart-legacy-lives-on-in-relaunched-websites-final-column/
Breitbart was also credited with the exposure of Congressman Weiner’s sexting.
Well, sure. He was going to rip the lid off that thing — you know, that amazing thing — that no other reporter, oppo researcher, or enemy government had found out yet, because only he could uncover amazing stories with global impact like…
“Exposure”, heh heh. I see what you did there.
Breitbart’s trademark hard-hitting, investigative journalism in this case seems to boil down to:
1. Idiot horndog congressman posts a picture of his junk on giant social media site.
2. Someone screenshots the post and sends it to Breitbart.
I think this qualifies more as “self-exposure” (callback!) on Weiner’s part rather than as “contributing factor to why the US government up and killed them a journalist.”
Lots of answers to the question at Quora:
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-craziest-accusation-made-against-President-Obama
Wow… and they still missed a bunch! What about his “hip-hop barbecue”? What about the golf?? All that golf?! What about the $200 kajillion trip to India?
The “Exposure” was unintended. I totally missed it.
So if you are interested in what went down at Starbucks then go here:
http://www.crimefilenews.com/2012/03/eyewitness-speaks-out-about-andrew.html
As he lay dead on the sidewalk Breitbart was flat on his back with his head next to the base of the streetlight pole and his feet were extended out under the newspaper vending box. His body thus lay across the unguarded high voltage cover plate. Note the moat of asphalt surrounding the incompletely installed cover plate that if full of water from the Starbuck cleaning crew hosing the sidewalk would present an electrical hazard. The raised edges of the cover plate constitutes an unguarded tripping hazard. I contacted CAL OSHA but they weren’t interested.
Be sure and watch the Paul Huebl’s video interview of an eye witnesses.
I made a couple of comments way down at the bottom of Huebl’s web page.
The autopsy report says that he collapsed at 148 S. Barrington Avenue.
Where is the alcove which you claim was hiding a killer from sight?
They lied. The police report stated that he died on the sidewalk just outside of his house. But his home is 1.4 miles from the spot where he died, (across the 405 in Westwood). At the time that he collapsed, he was walking in the opposite direction from his home (toward the parking lot on the other side of the entrance to Starbucks and across Barrington Ct). He likely was walking toward his parked car.
Go here:
https://www.google.com/maps/place/11700+Barrington+Ct,+Los+Angeles,+CA+90049/@34.064474,-118.4715148,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m2!3m1!1s0x80c2bcbb64bfb903:0xe4316872bd966d8f
The alcove is shown in the picture at the left of the page. The street light pole and newspaper vending machine where Breitbart collapsed and died (on the spot) are just past the alcove. In the distance and across the street is the Brentwood Restaurant and Lounge. Breitbart’s body lay flat on his back with his head at the base of the street light pole and his feet extended underneath the newspaper vending machine.
If you want a different view of the entrance, then click on the bottom image on the left of the page to go to “Google street view”. Then move the “arrow inside the circle” to your desired vantage point on the street and left click the mouse. You can also “zoom in” or “zoom out”. Click on the + or – on the right side of the screen. Click on the curved white arrows (also on the right edge) to rotate the view left or right. Drag the mouse up or down to tilt the view up or down. If you like, you can walk the view down to the Brentwood Restaurant and Lounge. Just move the “arrow inside the circle” down the street to the point at the entrance of the “Lounge” and left click and then rotate left.
Unfortunately, Google re-shot the street view scene outside Starbucks in 2015 and the view of the spot where Breitbart died is now blocked by an illegally parked Black SUV.
The entrance to Brentwood Restaurant and Lounge is here:
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0645488,-118.4690468,3a,75y,90t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sTPtTCDZBt18AAAQZSFFFvA!2e0!3e2!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1
If you want to go inside then place the cursor on the door opening and left click. Then repeat as desired. You can look around the last room that Breitbart visited. I don’t see any commendatory plaque. But they really need to embed it in the sidewalk outside Starbucks in the “sidewalk hall of fame”.
Rickey
Here’s a close-up view of the alcove and sidewalk outside of Starbucks:
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0646743,-118.4695795,3a,30y,161.7h,79.7t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sMYv031Ue7Jhl38o-7UrRog!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
No because what you claim never happened.
According to an interview of Breitbart’s wife, conducted by the Coroner’s Investigator shortly after his death, Breitbart had reported to the UCLA ER a year before with shortness of breath. He was admitted for several days for tests. He was diagnosed with congestive hearth failure which at his age is generally a chronic condition. He was released to home. He began exercising and dieting.
Tribe/Balkin debate over Cruz eligibility:
http://www.telegram.com/article/20160205/NEWS/160209483
Pablo had a lot of properties. His roots are in Clewiston, however. And, yes, he most certainly hid money everywhere. He did it in case the cops, who were protecting him, decided to arrest him instead.
What’s in it is most likely money, gold, and diamonds.
OK and where do the purple polkadot unicorns factor into this?
This one is in the “small world” category.
”
Kevin Smith’s Daughter Recounts ‘Very, Very Scary’ Encounter With Fake Uber Drivers
.
By ABC NEWS
22 hours ago
Good Morning America
https://gma.yahoo.com/kevin-smiths-daughter-recounts-very-very-scary-encounter-184633306–abc-news-topstories.html#
That Starbucks in Brentwood is in the news this morning. Pause the video when Starbucks pops up. These “faux Uber” guys were trolling for helpless 16-year-olds females. And their target pickup zone was the Brentwood Starbucks.
So you can see what the scene would look like at night.
Except that the inside lights are on in the video whereas they would have been turned off (after closing) when Breitbart stepped up on the curb.
How convenient it was to stop allowing comments before I could refute the absurd claims on the page I was commenting on. I will put my response here which is about the claim that George Washington was a natural born citizen.
What do you think I’ve been saying? His time of residency carried over, NOT the citizenship which he never had until the declaration of independence. This is why, in your story, the watch wouldn’t say ‘Acme’, it would say ‘United Autoparts’… yet it would also say “25 years” even though he wasn’t part of them for that long. His time there was carried over just like every other job in the real world where this happens.
Again, in order to be a natural born CITIZEN you have to be BORN as a CITIZEN of THAT society/civilization. That’s like saying Native Americans and Slaves became natural born when they were finally recognized as citizens. Were they native (natural born) to the land? YES. Were they natural born citizens? NO.
It is not exactly the situation of Mr. Smith. First, The requirement the defining requirement that Washington met was that of RESIDENCY. Mr. Smith was said not to have been a citizen for the number of years required of him. The difference between the two is that Washington had to remain there to meet the requirements whereas Mr. Smith just had to maintain his citizen status for whatever amount of time was expected of him.
As noted above the “the original compact, which made them altogether one society,” did not cease the moment they became a part of the United States. “The colonies remained as a political society.” To think that something such as their citizenship was stripped of them at that point but all other ties remained is absurd.
Here he recognizes those born there as natives of America which is precisely what I have been saying. He then also contends that, by the ruling of this case, there is a chance that it may also constitute those, also natives of America, who were against the revolution as citizens of the United States. Notice that he just classifies them as citizens.
Though he was out of the country his citizenship of Carolina remained. And as such it was changed to United States citizenship upon the Declaration of Independence which continued to hold true from the time of his return and thereafter. This is also evidenced here:
Notice that it’s very clear they they only recognized him as “citizen of the United States” at the time of the Declaration of Independence. There is nothing to suggest that he was a citizen (of the United States) before this point, nor has it ever been suggested by anyone to anyone. This is also evidenced here:
He cannot be a natural born citizen. This does not disprove or go against the mode of which he obtained citizenship status within the United States. He was a citizen of South Carolina and remained as such. And just like everyone else who remained a citizen there who also didn’t forfeit that right “by some neglect or overt act”, he became a United States citizen.
Thanks for proving my point. Did he say born a CITIZEN of the United States or born in the United States AS A CITIZEN? Nope.
That doesn’t change the fact that the autopsy report says that Breitbart collapsed outside of 148 S. Barrington Avenue, not outside of 11700 Barrington Court.
The fact of the matter is that Breitbart had a history of heart problems and he died of heart failure. You evidence-free conspiracy theorists act as if that has never happened before.
I keep telling you birthers– don’t try to implicate me in your fantasies.
Yes, you’ve uncovered one of the most diabolical aspects of our plot: long in advance, Doc set a two-week limit on each post just so you would be thwarted from leaving a comment exactly where you wanted to.
Like the fantasy that I just proved you wrong on?
Except that an ex-Chicago cop and his “on-the-spot” interview of an eyewitness both say you are wrong. Also his still shots of the death scene are irrefutable. Huebl also sold his original video to TMZ who proceeded to bury it. TMZ doesn’t pay good money just to bury faux videos that they buy from ex-Chicago cops. Huebl’s first still shot is the very spot where Breitbart collapsed and died. Huebl’s witness Chris Lasseter was standing on the curb where Breitbart stepped up onto just before he collapsed “like a sack of bricks” and died. Watch the witness interview video. Lasseter was the second witness to reach Breitbart prone on the sidewalk. The first witness to reach him was never identified.
http://www.crimefilenews.com/2012/03/eyewitness-speaks-out-about-andrew.html
So where are your death scene videos and still shots?
Huebl’s reports have not been refuted since he put them up on his web in March 2012.
You can always check with TMZ to verify Huebl’s account of the incident.
They were natural born-100%. A freed slave who was 35 or older could have run for President in the 1868 election as could any member of a First Nation from the time his tribe accepted citizenship. The fact that you wouldn’t have voted for them doesn’t change that.
The same would be true of those born in territory that the US subsequently acquired-the Louisiana Purchase, land ceded from Mexico, Alaska, Hawaii.
Irrefutable? They were taken in broad daylight, long after Breitbart collapsed, and prove nothing. I’m at a loss as to what you think they prove.
None were taken because there was nothing suspicious about Breitbart’s death.
I believe that he is referring to your fantasy that you have proven anyone wrong.
I haven’t. Until now it’s been more of the same nonsense where I say something and then you all say the same thing with a little added “natural born citizen” flare added to it with absolutely no proof pointing to the added flare. I haven’t even been commented on my very last statement yet lol. Either you’re choosing to ignore it or you didn’t see it… In that case scroll up on this page.
So, exactly when do YOU say that Congressman Smith became a citizen? And if you do not say it was at birth, then how could he have met the requirement of being a citizen for 7 years since he had not resided in the United States for 7 years after the Revolution?
You seem to be unwilling to look at the details of the issue.
You seem to not understand the details.
He became a citizen of the United States the day that they said he did. The day that everyone else and his property that he was tied to was established as being part of the United States.
And just like many before him that did the same and were put into similar positions…
You know as well as I do that you don’t cease to exist as a citizen when you leave the country. Especially one who does so for the reasons that he did.
Huebl’s still shots were the first (and only) taken of the death scene. He reported these on March 02, 2012 the morning that Breitbart died. Coroner personnel did not visit the scene. No evidence was found or collected regarding this case.
Huebl’s reports prove that Breitbart did not collapse where the authorities reported that he did. His photograph proves that Breitbart fell into an unbarricaded and unmarked street light electrical construction zone on top of a street light pull box cover plate. He fell onto the sidewalk approximately 10 feet from the front entrance to Starbucks in Brentwood. The place where he collapsed is 1.4 miles from his home in Westwood.
Nonsense.
It’s the same old birther nonsense. You, like every other birther, distort history and law as much as you need to in order to proof-text your desired conclusion.
Smith was born a subject of the Colony of South Carolina. His primary civic allegiance was to the Colony of South Carolina, and he held a secondary allegiance to the Crown.
When the Colony of South Carolina declared independence, as James Madison plainly stated, that did not dissolve the relationship of its people with that entity, although the entity itself changed from being a Colony to being a free State.
Smith therefore became, at that moment, a subject of the State of South Carolina.
When subjects stopped being called subjects, and began to be called citizens instead, Smith, at that moment, became known as a citizen of South Carolina. But his relationship to South Carolina did not significantly change. It’s not that his relationship was ever dissolved and then reformed anew, his relationship continued continuously from the moment of his birth. Its nature may have changed very slightly, if you buy the idea that there’s any definable difference between “subject” and “citizen.” But the relationship established at birth continued without interruption.
When it was decided that citizenship of any one State meant one was also a citizen of the union of States, Smith, and many others, began to be called “citizens of the United States.” But from the establishment of the United States, it was a union of existing States more than an overarching national identity. Citizenship of the United States was defined by the States, and if one had been a natural born subject of any of the Colonies, then one was automatically a natural born citizen of the United States. It took a massive, years-long Civil War close to 100 years later to establish the supremacy of the United States government over the individual States.
In related news, the grandfather clause for Presidential eligibility was never used. It might have been, if Alexander Hamilton had not been killed in a duel. But every President ever elected to the office has been a natural born citizen of the United States. No President ever qualified solely on the basis of having been merely “a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution.”
George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, and so on… they were all natural born citizens.
And so was Smith.
I re-watched the PJ media video in which Whittle made his remarks about Breitbart’s heart attack. He mentioned this twice, first beginning at 1min 30 sec and again beginning at 11 min 15 sec.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=RA2YIQr1XM4#!
When he first mentioned it he stated that Breitbart had “had a serious heart attack many months ago. He also connected this event to an outing with Breitbart at a barbeque restaurant two days before his attack.
When he mentioned it the second time he stated that Breitbart had “had a serious heart attack several months ago”. So he changed his statement from “many months” to “several months” in a time span of approximately 10 minutes.
He called Breitbart a friend but they were not as close as some other friends.
But according to Breitbart’s wife, he had had a spell of shortness of breath a year before his death which was diagnosed as congestive heart failure by UCLA staff.
At end of this video is a link to Bill Whittle’s “Afterburner” video on Breitbart’s death.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=95-C8uPez50&feature=iv&src_vid=RA2YIQr1XM4&annotation_id=annotation_920353
In this video Whittle recounts the outing with Breitbart at a barbeque restaurant in Burbank. He stated that it happened “about a year ago” and “the very next day Breitbart had a serious heart attack”.
Bill Whittle is not a doctor but UCLA has some of the world’s best Cardiologists.
Oh wow, okay lol… I knew you would refuse to believe what I said in spite of the evidence I put forth, but I at least expected you to cite factual evidence why it’s not true… similar to what I did to suggest that it is true. This is nothing new of course, it’s been like this many times throughout this discussion. Your opinion holds true over evidence that suggests otherwise.
I also didn’t expect you to go so far with it so as to suggest that the creation of the grandfather clause was pointless, but just as you try to justify that they were all seen to be Natural Born citizens because all of them were born there, I can just as easily say that they weren’t and that the grandfather clause is why they were able to become President… There’s absolutely no evidence to suggest otherwise. And if someone who was outside of the country during the the Declaration of Independence can retain their status from the time that they left til when they came back and be recognized no different than someone who stayed and became a citizen during the Declaration of Independence who’s to say that residency wasn’t carried over? You… with the complete lack of evidence that you have?
I just love how these things can be made up on a whim out of desperation just to make it seem like you know what you’re talking about. Until today there was no mention that they all were Natural Born citizens. It just so happened that one day Dr. Conspiracy was thinking “Hey wait, how could Washington have been President if no one had been a citizen for 14 years… He must have been a Natural Born citizen.” Such rubbish. I’m sure before this revelation of his he, yourself and other members of your crew, had believed that he must have met the residency requirement.
So let’s just completely ignore the fact that what I cited proved otherwise. Let’s ignore that fact that David Ramsay himself, someone you would say is a natural born citizen (of the United States), said that you “cannot be a citizen by birth or inheritance” if you were born before the Declaration of Independence let alone within a British colony. And that “no man can be born a citizen of a Government which did not exist at the time of his being born; nor can parents leave to their children any other political character than that which they themselves possessed.” For a man who’s supposed to be a Natural Born citizen, he sure doesn’t consider himself as one by what he said. Oh, but we can’t listen to David Ramsay, “He’s crazy” you’ll say. Yeah, keep telling yourself that.
It was also Ramsay who said that one could only become a citizen of the Unites States by one of the following modes: “1st, By birth or inheritance. 2dly, By having been a party to the late revolution. 3dly, By taking an oath of fidelity to some of the States. 4thly, By tacit consent. 5thly, By adoption.” One could easily discern from this that one’s involvement in the United States could have started before the Declaration of Independence by “having been a party to the late revolution”. It may have not been created then, but you were still contributing to its creation.
To further add, he also conceded “that birth and residence in this country, before the revolution, could not confer citizenship on Americans who were absent when independence was declared…” further suggesting that past residency would have contributed… It still remained impossible to be a natural born citizen (of the United States).
Oh, I’ve read your screeds. I’ve read your claim that the so-called “grandfather clause” is what made Washington eligible to be President, even though Justice Story made it clear in 1833 that the clause was inserted into the Constitution to make some American citizens who were born in foreign countries eligible. George Washington was not born in a foreign country, so the clause did not apply to him or any subsequent President.
I also pointed out that there were suspicions that Hamilton was responsible for the “grandfather clause” because he wanted to be eligible for the presidency. But if that clause was necessary for Washington, Adams, Jefferson, etc., why would anyone suspect that Hamilton was the person behind it? If your interpretation of the clause is correct, without it no one would have been eligible to be president until 1811.
You, on the other hand, cite no authority. You claim to have seen notes and transcripts of the debates on the Constitution but refuse to provide sources. You try to prove your point by citing the entirely irrelevant Inglis case (Inglis could have claimed U.S. citizenship but he never tried to – it was his heirs who tried to claim that he was a citizen).
And you still haven’t given a coherent explanation of how Washington could have met the 14-year United States residency requirement when he was sworn into office less than 13 years after the signing of the Declaration of Independence, unless the Founders considered the colonies to have been part of the United States. Indeed, George Clinton of New York, writing in 1788, wrote of “persons…such as were citizens on or before the fourth day of July, 1776…” (Debate on the Constitution, Vol. II, The Library of America, p. 541)
George Washington was a natural-born citizen. As Justice Sandra Day O’Connor wrote in 2011, “All of our Presidents have, to date, been born in the 50 states.”
No one is suggesting that someone who was born here and was out of the country during the Revolution could return at any time and be declared a citizen. They had to return as soon as practicable after the signing of the Treaty of Paris, demonstrate that they had not adhered to the British government during their absence, and that they had the intention to adhere to the United States government.
This is a good time to quote one of Doc C’s posts from four years ago regarding the case of William Loughton Smith:
The question was not whether Smith was a citizen, but how long he had been a citizen. The Constitution requires that Representatives must have been citizens for 7 years. It is impossible to determine how long he was a citizen without determining when he became a citizen, and when he became a citizen relies on the defining event (i.e. HOW).
Mr. Smith only returned to the United States 5 years before being elected to Congress. So either he was a citizen BEFORE he set foot in the United States, or he was not eligible to serve as a Representative. The House decided he was eligible.
That is, either Mr. Smith was a natural born citizen (a citizen from birth) through the accession of South Carolina into the United States, or he was a naturalized citizen who couldn’t have been eligible yet for a seat in the House.
Thus, Smith could not have been a citizen for 7 years when he was elected to the House unless his citizenship was retroactive. If he was naturalized, he was a citizen for only five years. If he was not naturalized, he was a citizen from birth. There is no in between in his case.
Given your record there is no reason anyone should believe what you say.
But let me ask why you think arguing that Washington wasn’t a natural born citizen in any way helps your case regarding Cruz or Rubio or anyone else. Washington was not born a US citizen-no fault of his the country didn’t exist. Rubio and Cruz were. So even if you could prove Washington wasn’t a natural born citizen, which you can’t, its impact on anyone today who is a citizen at birth would be zero, because the facts and circumstances are different.
You have expended enormous effort on something that does absolutely nothing to achieve the result you seek. But hey, knock yourself out…
Again with ignoring what I’ve said. How can someone be so dense?
He met the requirement because he had been a resident for 14 years… Plain and simple. No smoke and mirrors and no fancy business. Washington was born in Virginia… His residency there didn’t change. It didn’t start over once it and 12 other colonies stood together and announced themselves united as free independent states. They all still remained separate, with their own laws… Even the Declaration of Independence states that that the Thirteen Colonies were independent states. So I will say it again. No one was a natural born citizen of the united states… they would’ve had been born a citizen of the united states. They weren’t… They were born subjects to the crown. Some of them left and some of them stayed and fought for their independence.
Here you had 13 separate colonies, soon to establish themselves as independent states, united in one cause to achieve their independence from Britain.
In the Congressional declaration dated September 9, 1776, the delegates wrote, “That in all continental commissions, and other instruments, where, heretofore, the words ‘United Colonies’ have been used, the stile be altered for the future to the “United States.”
A resolution by Richard Henry Lee, which had been presented to Congress on June 7 and approved on July 2, 1776, issued the resolve, “That these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent States….”
To repeat, yet again, Washington was born in Virginia as a British subject… Not a natural born citizen of something that hadn’t existed. His time there, along with all the other things he did leading up to the Declaration of Independence, contributed to his residency there. When Virginia, and 12 other colonies, announced their independence they stripped themselves from the British Empire and they became 13 sovereign states… they called themselves, together, the United States, but they still retained their identity as independent states. Washington met the residency requirements because he had been a resident of Virginia since his birth and Virginia just so happens to be one of the United States..
It doesn’t require you to be a Resident of Virginia. It requires you to be a resident of the United States, which according to your own logic, didn’t exist 14 years before Washington was sworn in. So, if one cannot be a natural born citizen of a state that didn’t exist when he was born, then he also can’t be a resident for 14 years, when the place (“United States”) wasn’t actually around back then.
Nice try. Your logic still trips you up.
Maybe you missed that part when they said he became a citizen at the same time everyone else did. They did, like you said, find no reason to believe he adhered to the British government during their absence. He wasn’t naturalized, he was found to be a citizen. Not because of his birth… he wasn’t born after the creation of the United States to become one by birth… he was a citizen for the same reason everyone else became citizens.
Is Virginia not a State that is part of the United States? Geez, where do you people come from? Hur dur! *rasp*
The United Colonies became the United States… they are one and the same. If you live in a town called Granite City for 20 years at which point it was renamed to Rock City and then you continued living there for 5 years Would you say you’ve only been a resident of Rock City for 5 years?
It’s funny cause this same analogy was used against me to somehow prove that someone would be seen as a natural born citizen (of the United States), even though you couldn’t be a citizen of something that doesn’t exist, but when it comes to residence you think it doesn’t apply… pure comedy. You can’t make this shit up.
No, I would say that I had been a resident of Rock City for 25 years, just as Washington would have said he was a natural born citizen of Virginia, and therefore a natural born citizen of the United States.
I see what you did there. What part of being natural born citizen do you not understand? The place in which you’re born or the citizenship of which you’re born with? The citizenship you had at the moment of birth cannot change. Just like the place of your birth, your citizenship at the time of birth cannot be changed. Period.
I proposed the question earlier. Maybe you ignored it or just didn’t see it. When the Native Americans and Slaves became citizens did they become natural born citizens? Nope, they were said to be naturalized… they were given that citizenship. Natural Born Citizenship cannot be given, it is obtained at birth and at birth only.
So when was the citizenship of former slaves and other native-born persons of African descent effective from?
You can be Native born, as seen by the Native Americans and Slaves that were born here, but they didn’t have citizenship because we didn’t recognize them as citizens. It’s not something that you can just take and call your own regardless of where you’re born. It’s up to the society or civilization to determine who is to be a citizen. I can’t go find an aboriginal tribe in the middle of the Amazon and have a baby and expect them to take it as one of their own lol, it has to be accepted or something must be established before hand stating that “People or children who are to accepted as on of our own people”.
From the moment they are told “Here. You’re a citizen.” or “Based on our findings, we find that you have been a citizen since ‘Insert Date Here'” I shouldn’t have to tell you this.
Madison argued that “birth is a criterion of allegiance.” He said that allegiance to the community is primary, and that allegiance to a sovereign is secondary. He said:
You may quote Madison who said that Smith was (not “became”) a citizen at the Declaration of Independence; however, his argument shows that Smith was a natural born citizen of South Carolina, and that status never changed. If he is a natural born citizen of South Carolina, then he must be a natural born citizen of the United States, because at the start, national citizenship was state citizenship.
YES and NO.
They did not BECOME natural born citizens. They were ALWAYS natural born citizens.
They were natural born citizens because of the circumstances of their birth and the reasoning is exactly the same as the reasoning for George Washington.
When the First Nations citizens of which you speak were born, the ‘government’ under which whose jurisdiction they adhered to, e.g. their tribal nation, was not considered part of the United States. The same as Virginia in say 1770 and the same as Arizona in 1900. When those jurisdictions became part of the United States, their natural born citizens CONTINUED their natural born citizenship. They did not ‘become; natural born citizens, they always were natural born citizens.
The slavery issue is similar, but nuanced. Although slaves (born in the USA) were, from the moment of birth natural born citizens, that citizenship was suppressed by the condition of their servitude. When that condition was removed, the actuality of their natural born citizenship was reasserted, Scott v Sandford notwithstanding as demonstrated by the Constitutional amendment the American people had to put in place to correct that racist ruling.
There are exactly TWO possible values for your ‘Insert Date Here’ placeholder.
1) Your birthday
2) The day you took the naturalization oath.
I shouldn’t have to tell you that.
” I conceive that every person who owed this primary allegiance to the particular community in which he was born, retained his right of birth as a member of a new community” – Right, as in he was a natural born subject of the Britain Empire. In other words… The Empire of Britain retained his birthright when he joined a new community. If you’re gonna bold parts of a sentence… you should bold everything that it consists of.
“If he were a minor consent was involved in the decision of that society to which he belonged by the ties of nature.” – Again, you gotta consider the whole sentence lol. Consent was needed from the Empire of Britain to join a new community cause he was a minor and not old enough to make decisions on his own.
*facepalm* How fricking hard is it to understand lol.. They WERE NOT BORN CITIZENS they are Natural born inhabitants or Native Born YES, but NOT natural born citizens. Jesus, it’s like talking to a wall.
3. The date citizenship was created.
Not in the case of Mr. Smith. He was found to be citizen upon the Declaration of Independence just like everyone else.
Which was…when?