13 Responses to “My response to MercuryTimes.com”

1. Darren Hankins
   June 17th, 2012 @ 6:50 am

   All of these president were born to parent that were not born in the US.

   ……………………………………….

   Andrew Jackson (1829-1837) is the only president born of two immigrants, both Irish.

   Thomas Jefferson (1801-1809), whose mother was born in England,

   James Buchanan (1857-1861) and Chester Arthur (1881-1885), both of whom had Irish fathers,

   Woodrow Wilson (1913-1921) whose mother was born in England.

   Herbert Hoover (1929-1933),mother were born respectively Canada.

   By the way birthers are retarded hate fill idiot….what a group of looser and that mean every one of them.

2. Phil Thomas
   June 17th, 2012 @ 7:24 am

   Emerich Vatte:”Law of Nations” 1758

   Gives the definition of Natural Born Citizen as it was known by the Founding Fathers. Ben Franklin had 3 copies of the book.

   Law Of Nations:
   CHAP. XIX.
   OF OUR NATIVE COUNTRY, AND SEVERAL THINGS THAT RELATE TO IT.
   § 212. Citizens and natives.
   The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.

3. steve
   June 17th, 2012 @ 9:48 am

   The 12th article of Constitution defines Citizens of the United States as people born before the adoption of the Constitution and natural born citizens as born after the adoption of the Constitution. This group of people called Citizens of the United States in the 12th Article were all DEAD for the most part by 1850. At this point only natural born citizens qualified for Presidency. If any were alive today the would be over 211 years of age.

   Why does nobody ever think of the 1st sentence of 14th admendment to the Constitution which is what the State Department uses to define a citizen but not a natural born citizen. Anyone born outside the United States where the United States does not have jurisdiction is a native born citizen of county of birth and an Automatic Citizen of the United States. Anyone born on or off military bases is a citizen of the country of birth and an Automatic Citizen
   of the United States.
   Want proof. Download from States Department 86755.pdf

4. John Perram
   June 17th, 2012 @ 10:31 am

   Perkins v. Elg’s (1939) importance is that it actually gives examples of what a “natural born citizen” of the U.S. is; what a “citizen” of the U.S. is; and what a “native born citizen” of the U. S.
   In this case, the U. S. Supreme Court decided the same as in prior case law that a “natural born citizen” is a person who is born of two U.S. citizen parents (plural) AND born in the mainland of U.S.
   Citizen: On cross appeals, the Court of Appeals affirmed the decree, 69 App.D.C. 175, 99 F.2d 408. Certiorari was granted, December 5, 1938, 305 U.S. 591, 59 S.Ct. 245, 83 L.Ed. –. First.– On her birth in New York, the plaintiff became a citizen of the United States. Civil Rights Act of 1866: Ms. Elg was found to be a “citizen” because she was born in the mainland USA (New York)
   Native Born citizen: This principle was clearly stated by Attorney General Edwards Pierrepont in his letter of advice to the Secretary of State Hamilton Fish, in Steinkauler’s Case, 1875, 15 Op.Atty.Gen. 15. Steinkauler, a Prussian subject by birth, who emigrated to the United States in 1848 and was naturalized in 1854, and had a son who was born in St. Louis the following year. 4 years later Steinkauler returned to Germany taking this child and became domiciled at Weisbaden where they continuously resided. When the son reached 20 years of age the German Government called upon him to report for military duty but his father then requested intervention of the American Legation on the grounds that his son was a “native citizen of the United States”. On reviewing the pertinent points in the case, including the Naturalization Treaty of 1868 with North Germany, 15 Stat. 615, the Attorney General reached the following conclusion: ‘Young Steinkauler is a native-born American citizen. Mr. Steinkauler was found to be a “native born citizen” because he was born in the mainland USA (St. Louis)
   Natural Born Citizen: U. S. Supreme Court’s Relevant Facts: Miss Elg was born in Brooklyn, New York, on October 2, 1907. Her parents, who were natives of Sweden, emigrated to the United States sometime prior to 1906 and her father was naturalized here in that year. In 1911, her mother took her to Sweden where she continued to reside until September 7, 1929. Her father went to Sweden in 1922 and has not since returned to the United States. In November, 1934, he made a statement before an American consul in Sweden that he had voluntarily expatriated himself for the reason that he did not desire to retain the status of an American citizen and wished to preserve his allegiance to Sweden. [Perkins v. Elg, 307 U.S. 325, 327 (1939).]
   U. S. Supreme Court’s Holding: The court below, properly recognizing the existence of an actual controversy with the defendants (Aetna Life Ins. Co. v. Haworth, 300 U.S. 227, 57 S.Ct. 461, 81 L.Ed. 617, 108 A.L.R. 1000) declared Miss Elg ‘to be a natural born citizen of the United States’ (99 F.2d 414) and we think that the decree should include the Secretary of State as well as the other defendants. [Perkins v. Elg, 307 U.S. 325, 350 (1939).]

   Rationale of the logic is as follows: The U. S. Supreme Court in 1939 held that Elg was a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN because she was born in Brooklyn, New York on October 2, 1907, her father was naturalized as a U.S. citizen in 1906 under the Naturalization Act of 1906, and her mother derived her US citizenship in 1907 under the Expatriation Act of 1907 (federal statute) as proof, and being that, Elg was born prior to the 19th Amendment, ratified on August 18, 1920, her status was still tied to that of her husband.
   Ms. Elg was found to be a “natural born citizen” because she was born in the mainland USA (New York) of TWO US citizen parents. (plural)

   This all clearly shows: That a person can be a “citizen” under the following circumstances:
   1) Person was born of one citizen parent (Obama), or
   2) Person was born in the US mainland (“anchor babies”), or
   3) Person was naturalized (like Arnold Schwarzenegger, who most know is not eligible for President).

5. steve
   June 17th, 2012 @ 10:49 am

   86755.pdf page 6

   7 FAM 1116.1-4 Not Included in the Meaning of “In the United
   States”

   c. Despite widespread popular belief, U.S. military installations abroad and U.S.
   diplomatic or consular facilities are not part of the United States within the meaning of the
   14th Amendment. A child born on the premises of such a facility is not subject to the
   jurisdiction of the United States and does not acquire U.S. citizenship by reason of birth.

   This is why McCain was a native born citizen of Panama and an Automatic Citizen of the United States. The United States never owned the Panama Canal Zone. It only had the power to act as if they were sovereign in the defense and building of the Canal. Look at the Hays-Banau Varilla Treaty. To act as if they were sovereign did not give them sovereignity.

6. steve
   June 17th, 2012 @ 11:06 am

   By the way McCain was not born in the Panama Canal Zone but was born in Colon. I have a copy of birth certificate in Spanish from Colon.

7. Anonymous
   June 17th, 2012 @ 11:10 am

   Hey, Darren: were the parents citizens before the (presidents) were born? If so, get lost! And…where’s the proof of what you say?

8. dr_taitz@yahoo.com
   June 17th, 2012 @ 11:17 am

   can you please send it to me to orly.taitz@gmail.com

9. JAK
   June 17th, 2012 @ 11:21 am

   As I understand the requirements for parentage of POTUSA eligibility is that that the parents must be citizens of the USA.That parents were born somewhere else has no effect if they are citizens of the USA at the time of birth..

10. steve
    June 17th, 2012 @ 12:14 pm

    Orly
    i sengt 4 attachments regarding McCain birth in PDF. If there is a problem let me know. I have them under Nuance also.
    PDF seem to be a problem today.

11. Jim Fields
    June 17th, 2012 @ 1:53 pm

    I think that you only had to be a citizen at the adoption of the constitution. A couple hundred years before our time. When this country was first form, there was no constitution, come on people you got to think, how this country was form.

12. steve
    June 17th, 2012 @ 4:25 pm

    Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5 of the United States Constitution
    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.

    Don’t people know how to read. Everyone born before the adopion of the Constitution were grandfathered in as a Citizen of the United States and everyone born after the Adoption of
    the Constitution were eligible to be president.
    George Washington and other people became
    citizens of the United States at the adoption of the Constitution. Naturally, anyone born before the Constitution would have to be at least 211 years old. These people have been dead for at least 140 years.

13. JAK
    June 17th, 2012 @ 8:12 pm

    It all centers at what is a ‘Natural Born Citizen’. Some people would choose( for whatever purpose) to ignore/cast aside any connection with parentage and/or place of birth. I choose by Constitutional history not to do so.

Leave a Reply