I sure hope so.
And I hope the US military will get involved, although that entails a lot of bloodshed.
The left need to be dealt with (with their own medicine).
I would suggest they are pandering to the black and secondarily the female vote.
Note really about most qualified but who brings the most votes to the table.
But this candidate is a reject and will she really bring in votes?
You have to ask the useful idiots.
They have their own logic.
Mainstream media is much more powerful than you might think. He who owns it, owns the country.
This article lays out a strong case as to why she is not eligible
1 Like
They are not subject to the FULL jurisdiction of US law which is the intended language. They can not be drafted, vote nor serve on a jury for example.
What is the difference between “natural-born citizen” in Article 2 Section 1 of the USC and “citizen” in Article 1 Section 2 of the USC? There must be a difference since almost every word of the text was well debated. In 1789 there were not yet any naturalization laws adopted. We immediately understand that “natural rights” never come from any legislative actions, so it goes that one who is a “natural-born citizen” does not require legislation (or a Senate Resolution [SR-511]) to be a citizen. It requires legislation to recognize Cruz, Kamala Harris, Obama, Jindal, Haley & Rubio as citizens of the USA.
1 Like
Alexander Hamilton suggested that the presidential citizenship eligibility requirement was that a Citizen simply had to be ‘born a Citizen’ of the USA, i.e., a Citizen by Birth, but that status of citizenship was overwhelmingly rejected by the framers as insufficient.
Instead of allowing any person “born a citizen” to be President and Commander of the military, the framers chose to adopt the more stringent requirement recommended by John Jay, i.e., requiring the Citizen to be a “natural born Citizen“, to block any chance of future Presidents owing allegiance to other foreign nations or claims on their allegiance at birth from becoming President and Commander of the Military… Therefore, the President of the United States must be a “natural born citizen” with unity of citizenship and sole allegiance to the United States at birth.
1 Like
If they’re legal immigrants, they damn sure are subject to full US law. I’m sorry but if you were born to Americans or to immigrants that are here legally, you’re a natural born US citizen. What’s the purpose of identifying natural born citizens? To ensure loyalty to the US. Do you think she, being born here, has allegiance to India or Jamaica? Again, this is a distraction, much like the Obama birther movement and it isn’t going to gain traction with the public so it’s not productive to argue it. Let’s argue something that make sense… like her horrific policies. The fact that she claims to have smoked pot and listened to rap in college, long before those “singers” were making albums. Let’s focus on the fact that she’s 1/2 Indian while her other side is entertaining. It’s part black, her father claims that he was a descendant of a slave OWNER and part white. Effectively, she’s trying to gain the black vote by emphasizing her black heritage but she has no ties to US slavery. She has a white husband. She is a total fraud and there’s a TON to go after her on but let’s make it about HER and not about whether or not she’s a citizen. That bit Republicans in the ass with Obama, let’s learn from the past.
No, she has no loyalty to the US.
She has loyalty to Israel, more so than average ■■■■■
As I already posted
https://www.timesofisrael.com/5-■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
She will laugh at the dying US if it’s attacked by Israeli nukes.
There you go again.
Define for me what you believe the difference is between a born citizen, a naturalized citizen and a natural born citizen. Article II requires one to be a natural born citizen. Article I requires one to be a born citizen. Obviously something is different, unless you believe the men writing and debating the US Constitution were inept.
You must be kidding, she hates Israel as much if not more than you do.
1 Like
U.S. Senator Kamala Harris was born a dual-Citizen and thus is NOT a “natural born Citizen” of United States with Unity of Citizenship and Sole Allegiance to USA. She was a Citizen of Jamaica at Birth.
U.S. Senator Kamala Harris is a dual-Citizen at birth who was born in California to a Jamaican Citizen father and a Citizen of India mother. She was thus born a Citizen of Jamaica via her father per the Constitution of Jamaica, and also gets special privileged [Person of Indian] status via her mother. She also claims basic citizenship of the USA by being born in California under the 14th Amendment.
A “natural born Citizen” is a term of “Natural Law” and needs no congressional man-made“ Positive Law” to make one a U.S. Citizen.
Sweet, another ■■■ rant. 
1 Like
Instead of questioning why the dems ignore the qualification when selecting a VP, some focus on Israel of all stupid inane qualities making it up as they go.
1 Like
There is no distinction between a “born citizen” and a “natural born citizen” in the Constitution. It simply speaks of citizens and natural born citizens.
Citizen appears in the following sections:
Article 1 Section 2. No Person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of twenty five Years, and been seven Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen.
Article 1 Section 3. No Person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty Years, and been nine Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State for which he shall be chosen.
Article 2 Section 1. No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.
Then we have the 14th Amendment.
14th Amendment
Section 1
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. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
As much as I despise her, she’s a natural born citizen and eligible to be President. She’s damn sure not QUALIFIED… but fighting this battle isn’t going to do a damn thing but make Conservatives look unhinged.
Nowhere in the 14th Amendment is “natural born citizen” mentioned. If you finbd it, show me.
The intent and purpose of the (14th) amendment was to provide equal citizenship to all Americans either born on U.S. soil or naturalized therein and subject to the jurisdiction thereof. It does not grant “natural born Citizen” status. It only confers “citizen” status, as that is the exact word used by the Amendment itself and that is the same word that appears in Article I, II, III, and IV of the Constitution. It just conveys the status of “citizen,” and as we learned from how the Framers handled the Naturalization Acts of 1790 and 1795, being a “citizen” does not necessarily mean that one is a “natural born Citizen.”
BTW, you never did show the difference between natural born citizen and citizen or born citizen. Try again?
You didn’t show me where it refers to a “born citizen” and a “natural born citizen” as if they’re different beasts. It simply says people ‘born or naturalized’ which tells me that’s the ONLY two categories recognized.
So effectively, it’s your opinion that a person cannot be President unless they’re 3rd Generation American?
Born, naturalized and in Article II NATURAL born obviously a separate class.