Interview I did with McKay Coppins

[Unified Serenity]

I did an interview last night with McKay Coppins over the Mitt Romney eligibility issue. He seems to bend to the left, but all in all, I think he did a fair job representing the things I said to him.

I do find it interesting that he talked about Romney's granparents being citizens of America, but failed to mention that Romney's father became a Mexican citizen and was still one when Mitt was born thus making him ineligible to be our President. The issue is about loyalties, and while Mitt might be a very patriotic American, he is not a natural born American.

Check out the interview:

http://www.buzzfeed.com/mckaycoppins/meet-the-romney-birthers

[noprophet]

To the best of my knowledge if the parents of a child have dual citizenship the children receive it as well.

I have a friend who is an american citizen but also received citizenship to sweden because his motheris from there.

This used to be done with Mexico as well as an ex of mines grandparents had dual with the USA and Mexico.

I'm not sure how this flows with all the birther stuff, but could be relevant.

[Unified Serenity]

The issue of the founders was about loyalty to America. If a child had a parent who was a citizen of another country then the child would more than likely have some sympathies for that country. Imagine if Putin had been alive in the 1920's and fathered a child of an American woman who later ran for President in 1948 at the height of our suspicions of the Russians. Now, this is an extreme example, but you can imagine that the American people upon finding out that the child's father was an avowed communist running Russia would not want him for our President. It's a rule that one must be natural born which means both Parents are American Citizens and not a citizen of another country as well.

[Maia Gabrial]

I thought Americans couldn't have dual citizenship....?

[noprophet]

I thought Americans couldn't have dual citizenship....?

Anyone who already has it is grandfathered in.

It is a new rule that only applies to Americans not living in America. I know this because while I was dating my ex her grandparents had to check their citizenship when that law came into effect. They were fine even though they lived in Mexico and only came to the states occasionally.

[we-R-one]

I do find it interesting that he talked about Romney's granparents being citizens of America, but failed to mention that Romney's father became a Mexican citizen and was still one when Mitt was born thus making him ineligible to be our President. The issue is about loyalties, and while Mitt might be a very patriotic American, he is not a natural born American.

Ya, but, here's the deal......it doesn't really matter because the "UNITED STATES OF AMERICA" is a corporation, so if I understand correctly the President doesn't have to be a natural born citizen, legally, wouldn't you say, as the organic Constitution is all ready irrelevant?

[noprophet]

Just so we can have some substance to play with...

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."
In the case of United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898), the Supreme Court ruled that a person becomes a citizen of the United States at the time of birth, by virtue of the first clause of the 14th Amendment, if that person:
Is born in the United States
Has parents that are subjects of a foreign power, but not in any diplomatic or official capacity of that foreign power
Has parents that have permanent domicile and residence in the United States
Has parents that are in the United States for business
The Supreme Court has never explicitly ruled on whether children born in the United States to illegal immigrant parents are entitled to birthright citizenship via the 14th Amendment,[6] although it has generally been assumed that they are.[7]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_nationality_law


Jus sanguinis (Latin: right of blood) is a social policy by which citizenship is not determined by place of birth but by having one or both parent who are citizens of the nation. It contrasts with jus soli (Latin for "right of soil").
At the end of the 19th century, the French-German debate on nationality saw the French, such as Ernest Renan, oppose the German conception, exemplified by Johann Fichte, who believed in an "objective nationality", based on blood, race or language. Renan's republican conception explains France's early adoption of jus soli. Many nations have a mixture of jus sanguinis and jus soli, including the United States, Canada, Israel, Germany (as of recently), Greece, the Republic of Ireland.
Apart from France, jus sanguinis is still the most common means of passing on citizenship in many continental European countries. Some countries provide almost the same rights as a citizen to people born in the country, without actually giving them citizenship. An example is Indfødsret in Denmark, which provides that upon reaching 18, non-citizen residents can decide to take a test to gain citizenship.
Unlike France, some European states (in their modern forms) are postempire creations within the past century. States arising out of the Austro-Hungarian Empire and the Ottoman Empire had huge numbers of ethnic populations outside of their new boundaries, as do most of the former Soviet states. Several had long-standing diasporas that did not conform to 20th century European nationalism and state creation.
In many cases, jus sanguinis rights were mandated by international treaty, with citizenship definitions imposed by the international community. In other cases, minorities were subject to legal and extra-legal persecution and their only option was immigration to their ancestral home country. States offering ius sanguinis rights to ethnic citizens and their descendants include Italy, Greece, Turkey, Bulgaria, and Romania. Each is required by international treaty to extend those rights.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jus_sanguinis


Status as a natural-born citizen of the United States is one of the eligibility requirements established in the United States Constitution for election to the office of President or Vice President. This requirement was an attempt to allay concerns that foreign aristocrats might immigrate to the new nation and use their wealth and influence to impose a monarchy.
The Constitution does not define the phrase natural-born citizen, and various opinions have been offered over time regarding its precise meaning. A 2011 Congressional Research Service report stated
The weight of legal and historical authority indicates that the term “natural born” citizen would mean a person who is entitled to U.S. citizenship “by birth” or “at birth,” either by being born “in” the United States and under its jurisdiction, even those born to alien parents; by being born abroad to U.S. citizen-parents; or by being born in other situations meeting legal requirements for U.S. citizenship “at birth.” Such term, however, would not include a person who was not a U.S. citizen by birth or at birth, and who was thus born an “alien” required to go through the legal process of “naturalization” to become a U.S. citizen.[1]
The natural-born-citizen clause has been mentioned in passing in several decisions of the United States Supreme Court and lower courts dealing with the question of eligibility for citizenship by birth, but the Supreme Court has never directly addressed the question of a specific presidential or vice-presidential candidate's eligibility as a natural-born citizen.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural-born-citizen_clause_of_the_U.S._Constitution

Seems the legality of the issue is not well defined, am I to assume the discussion is one of nationalism and not actual legal recourse?

[we-R-one]

Just so we can have some substance to play with...

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."
In the case of United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898), the Supreme Court ruled that a person becomes a citizen of the United States at the time of birth, by virtue of the first clause of the 14th Amendment, if that person:
Is born in the United States
Has parents that are subjects of a foreign power, but not in any diplomatic or official capacity of that foreign power
Has parents that have permanent domicile and residence in the United States
Has parents that are in the United States for business
The Supreme Court has never explicitly ruled on whether children born in the United States to illegal immigrant parents are entitled to birthright citizenship via the 14th Amendment,[6] although it has generally been assumed that they are.[7]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_nationality_law


Jus sanguinis (Latin: right of blood) is a social policy by which citizenship is not determined by place of birth but by having one or both parent who are citizens of the nation. It contrasts with jus soli (Latin for "right of soil").
At the end of the 19th century, the French-German debate on nationality saw the French, such as Ernest Renan, oppose the German conception, exemplified by Johann Fichte, who believed in an "objective nationality", based on blood, race or language. Renan's republican conception explains France's early adoption of jus soli. Many nations have a mixture of jus sanguinis and jus soli, including the United States, Canada, Israel, Germany (as of recently), Greece, the Republic of Ireland.
Apart from France, jus sanguinis is still the most common means of passing on citizenship in many continental European countries. Some countries provide almost the same rights as a citizen to people born in the country, without actually giving them citizenship. An example is Indfødsret in Denmark, which provides that upon reaching 18, non-citizen residents can decide to take a test to gain citizenship.
Unlike France, some European states (in their modern forms) are postempire creations within the past century. States arising out of the Austro-Hungarian Empire and the Ottoman Empire had huge numbers of ethnic populations outside of their new boundaries, as do most of the former Soviet states. Several had long-standing diasporas that did not conform to 20th century European nationalism and state creation.
In many cases, jus sanguinis rights were mandated by international treaty, with citizenship definitions imposed by the international community. In other cases, minorities were subject to legal and extra-legal persecution and their only option was immigration to their ancestral home country. States offering ius sanguinis rights to ethnic citizens and their descendants include Italy, Greece, Turkey, Bulgaria, and Romania. Each is required by international treaty to extend those rights.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jus_sanguinis


Status as a natural-born citizen of the United States is one of the eligibility requirements established in the United States Constitution for election to the office of President or Vice President. This requirement was an attempt to allay concerns that foreign aristocrats might immigrate to the new nation and use their wealth and influence to impose a monarchy.
The Constitution does not define the phrase natural-born citizen, and various opinions have been offered over time regarding its precise meaning. A 2011 Congressional Research Service report stated
The weight of legal and historical authority indicates that the term “natural born” citizen would mean a person who is entitled to U.S. citizenship “by birth” or “at birth,” either by being born “in” the United States and under its jurisdiction, even those born to alien parents; by being born abroad to U.S. citizen-parents; or by being born in other situations meeting legal requirements for U.S. citizenship “at birth.” Such term, however, would not include a person who was not a U.S. citizen by birth or at birth, and who was thus born an “alien” required to go through the legal process of “naturalization” to become a U.S. citizen.[1]
The natural-born-citizen clause has been mentioned in passing in several decisions of the United States Supreme Court and lower courts dealing with the question of eligibility for citizenship by birth, but the Supreme Court has never directly addressed the question of a specific presidential or vice-presidential candidate's eligibility as a natural-born citizen.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural-born-citizen_clause_of_the_U.S._Constitution

Seems the legality of the issue is not well defined, am I to assume the discussion is one of nationalism and not actual legal recourse?

What you don't understand is that the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA is a corporation, notice the all cap letters. The law of the land is corporate law or common-law, NOT common law, so they legally don't have to follow the Constitution. I've said this before as have others. Every city, county and state have an EIN number- look it up on Duns and Bradstreet- which signifies a corporate status. So all this talk about following the Constitution and that only a natural born citizen may apply, is obsolete. The legal system in this country is non-constitutional not unconstitutional.......legally!

So we can all cry foul till the cows come home, but it doesn't matter. I'm sorry if this is a shock to you, I'm not trying to be mean, this is the way it is.

[noprophet]

I wasn't in disagreement with you, I'm familiar with Jordan Maxwell.

I just thought I would elaborate within the illusion.

It's allowed! :P

[we-R-one]

I wasn't in disagreement with you, I'm familiar with Jordan Maxwell.

I just thought I would elaborate within the illusion.

It's allowed! :P

LOL! I hate to see people spend so much time on this issue, so I try to post when I see threads take this avenue.

[Maia Gabrial]

Ya, but, here's the deal......it doesn't really matter because the "UNITED STATES OF AMERICA" is a corporation, so if I understand correctly the President doesn't have to be a natural born citizen, legally, wouldn't you say, as the organic Constitution is all ready irrelevant?

The organic Constitution is alive and well for many of us. The DC criminals are the ones who think they've done away with it.... Jokes on them...!