John McCain ineligible to be President of United States?
McCain ineligible to be President?
Besides the below also see: http://tekgnosis.typepad.com/tekgnosis/2008/01/ron-paul-200-11.html
Frank is absolutely correct about this application of law. However, there is a problem since there are already five presidents, who have held office illegally in the past Grant, Garfield and McKinley were three of the five. But then no one is allowed to hold office, who has been convicted of TREASON against the United States, and Ronald Reagan was convicted of Treason in 1949, he was a Communist Spy. However, Dwight David Eisenhower, an AshkeNAZI, gave Ronnie, his comrade, a presidential pardon. How sweet of him!
The Communist and Fascist rulers of this Nation do as they please and the HELL with the law and the people. But then, too, that is exactly what Bo Gritz recently told (page3 of his speech) the recruits at the FBI Academy; do what you are told by the President and Director of Homeland Security, and to HELL with the law and conscience.
McCain is a hu-man without soul or conscience; he is more dangerous then the two digit half-wit presently in the Whitehouse. And now, it is clear that it is illegal for him to hold that Office.
"No person except a natural born citizen shall be eligible to the office of President"
John McCain was born August 29, 1936 in Panama
by Francis Steffan
John McCain was born August 29, 1936 in the Panama Canal Zone, to two U.S. citizens. It's a common misunderstanding that the zone was a U.S. territory - in fact, the U.S. had lease rights, but not territorial rights.
The US Constitution states, "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."
"Natural Born Citizen" - "is where ONLY the natural act of one being born in a place determines the status of ones citizenship with no additional stipulations necessary to influence that status"
No law or court ruling has ever established the precise definition of a natural born citizen. It is generally agreed that a natural born citizen of the United States is any person born in one of the 50 states or the District of Columbia.
John McCain's father "Jack" was born in Council Bluffs, Iowa. McCain graduated from the United States Naval Academy in 1931. Like his father and son, he graduated near the bottom of his class. He married Roberta Wright, a wealthy oil heiress, on January 21, 1933, in Caesar's Bar, Tijuana, Mexico. During WW II he commanded the submarine Gunnel at Operation Torch. After the end of the war, he was assigned to the Office of the Chief of Naval Personnel until 1948. He assumed command of Submarine Division 71 in the Pacific the next year. In 1950, he was assigned to a series of posts at The Pentagon. He spent the 1960s in a series of commands in the Atlantic, becoming Commander in Chief, U.S. Naval Forces in Europe in 1967 and 1968. Admiral McCain directed an investigation into the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty and he wanted the investigation done in less than a week even though the court’s president, Rear Admiral Isaac Kidd, said that it would take 6 months to conduct properly. Admiral McCain also wouldn’t permit Admiral Kidd to travel to Israel or to contact any potential Israeli witnesses. In fact, the written affidavits of 60 witnesses from the Liberty itself who were hospitalized at the time of the restricted inquiry, were also excluded from the final report and not considered as part of the evidentiary record. The investigation was completed in just ten days. The National Archives in College Park, Maryland includes in its files on casualties from the Liberty copies of the original telegrams the Navy sent out to family members. The telegrams which called the attack accidental, were sent out June 9, the day before the Navy court of inquiry convened .
When Senator McCain was asked to reopen and conduct a proper investigation into the USS Liberty's attack he stated that he wasn’t going to do anything about it because the “matter was thoroughly reviewed.”
Senator McCain also collaborated with ultra liberal Senator Ted Kennedy to attempt to provide amnesty to nearly 40 million illegal aliens, mostly Mexican.
When the Constitution was established, the United States government did not have a empire builder foreign policy. The United States military was for defensive purposes only. As a matter of fact, the U.S. is not to have a "standing Army" and all the documents evidencing the intent of the authors of the Constitution, warned against becoming involved in foreign entanglements. The U.S. had zero foreign based military forces and certainly did not approve of, envision, or condone having babies and raising families on foreign based U.S. military installations. The intent of the authors of the Constitution is exactly opposite the policy twentieth century U.S. government has pursued.
The Constitution of the United States, Article 1, Section 8, vests in Congress the power "to establish an uniform rule of naturalization." "Naturalization" is NOT synonymous with "Natural Born Citizen."
In order to come to a Constitutional definition of "Natural Born Citizen," one must look to the common meaning and understanding of the phrase at the time it was written.
The Constitution has been called a "living document" by liberal progressives who think they know better than the authors of the Constitution and want what they want with disregard for The Supreme Law of the Land. In one way, and one way only, is the Constitution a living document. The authors of the Constitution gave a specific process to add to or subtract from the Constitution and that is by amendment. The Supreme Court, the U.S. Congress nor the President of the United States are granted the authority to define or change the Constitution in any way, they only have an obligation and duty to obey it.
There were no foreign based US military forces at the writing of the U.S. Constitution, therefore, it is impossible that the intent of the Constitution was to have babies born to civilian wives of military personnel be considered "Natural Born Citizens." The only authority the government may lawfully exercise, through the U.S. Congress, is to declare these children to be "naturalized Citizens" at birth based upon the U.S. , Congress's authority "establish an uniform rule of Naturalization." I must reiterate, not the U.S. Congress, the U.S. Supreme Court nor the President of the United States is "authorized" to define or change the meaning, definition, or intent of "Natural Born Citizen" as prescribed by the authors of the Constitution.
The original "intent" and therefore meaning and definition of "Natural Born Citizen" is one free white man being delivered through natural progression of a pregnancy, born within the geographical boundaries of one of the several States of the union, and later the District of Columbia. This is very clear and simple and what it means is born HERE.
In the Fourteenth Amendment the eligible group allowed Citizenship was expanded from free white men to "All persons." This would have been better stated “all people” to avoid the bogus recognition of a corporation being a "person.” This would have been better as it would have clarified the meaning as intended, which is having rights of people but lacking any of the liabilities. One cannot imprison a corporation, but that is for a later article.
The Fourteenth Amendment, Section 1 actually defines "natural born citizen" by stating, "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."
One’s wishes of what one feels things should be must yield to facts of law and one must accept the way things are according to the law until such time one is able to change the law.
There are two types of Citizenship in the United States, Natural Born and Naturalized. The fourteenth amendment defines "Natural Born Citizen" as persons born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof. It goes on to explain that there exists a dual Citizenship that includes the United States and of the State in which on lives. This in itself serves to demonstrate that Natural Born Citizen being born in the United States means within one of the several united States of America.
People may feel that it is not right that John McCain is not eligible to be President of the United States of America, however, this is a fact of law. "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. There are two types of Citizenship in the United States "Natural Born" and "Naturalized." Congress has authority to make rules as to how to become a "naturalized citizen." There is no such authority granted to Congress, the Court, or the President to define "Natural Born Citizen."
Given the fact the United States official and long term military enclaves presence within foreign nations was not authorized and in fact was cautioned against by the authors of the founding documents of this nation including but not limited to the Constitution it is not only unlikely but impossible that the authors intended anyone born outside the several States of the United States, for any reason, to be considered "Natural Born Citizens" of the United States. This position and fact is second witnessed and verified by the fourteenth amendment, section 1 where it states clearly the two forms of United States Citizenship and defines Natural Born Citizen as "all persons born...in the United States...".
Some will attempt to argue the point that U.S. military bases are under the jurisdiction of the United States and the fourteenth amendment mentions that. The fourteenth amendment states, "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." The word "and" means "as well as" being born in the United States. Being born only under the jurisdiction of the United States, as some misguided military people would like to imagine, is not good enough. Some would like to believe that because the "United States" has a Status of Forces Agreement with a foreign government that military bases are somehow "sovereign" U.S. territory. If you murder a Panamanian citizen in Oregon you will be arrested by Oregon police, go through the Oregon courts and be imprisoned in Oregon, and now some other state maybe, but still within the U.S. If you murder a Panamanian citizen on a U.S. military base in Panama you will be arrested by Panamanian police, go through the Panamanian courts and be imprisoned in Panama. So much for "sovereignty."
All this discussion is nothing more than hot air and a waste of time that is off point. The point is that one cannot build a viable position on a non-existent foundation. In this case the foundation is the Constitution and the intent of the authors, NOT Status of Forces Agreements and worthless arguments by military men who would like to have babies on foreign soil, calling them natural born Citizens and have them run for President some day.
The authors of the U.S. founding documents counseled against becoming entangled in foreign wars. They also had a distinct distaste for colonial empire building. So now we are to believe that it was their intent to designate the prodigy, born on foreign soil, of the American centurion colonizing for the empire as a Natural Born Citizen?
The fourteenth amendment states "born or naturalized in the United States," that is IN the United States. At the time of the writing of the Constitution it was properly written as united States of America as the word “united” was describing the condition of the States not a proper name of a thing. The Congress can direct that persons may be "Naturalized" "in" the United States to mean embassies, military bases or wherever else they decide. That is what they are authorized to do. However, they are NOT authorized to redefine what "Natural Born Citizen" means. It means what it meant to the authors of the Constitution. The US did not have foreign military bases at the time the Constitution was authored. Therefore "born on a US military base in a foreign country" is NOT what they meant by "Natural Born Citizen."
The intention of the authors of the Constitution was that no person born outside the geographical boundaries of the several States of the United States of America be eligible to hold the office of President of the United States of America. Animus ad se omne jus ducit - It is to the intention that all law applies. Animus moninis est anima scripti - The intention of the party is the soul of the instrument. 3 Bulstr 67 - Maxims of Law from Bouvier's 1856 Law Dictionary.
There are consequences to disregarding the Constitution and the intent of the authors of our founding documents. There are consequences to following a course of empire building by military might. There are consequences to being born on foreign soil as a son or daughter of a centurion of that empire building military. You are not Constitutionally eligible to be President of the United States of America.
You may think it's not fair. You may feel it's not right. You may think because military and government "experts" tell you a military base in a foreign country is actually the United States that it's okay for John McCain to hold the office of President of the United States. You are nevertheless wrong and so are they, no matter how long they have told the falsehood and believed in error. communis error no facit just - A common error does not make law. -Maxims of Law from Bouvier's 1856 Law Dictionary.
The position stated in this article is based only upon the Constitution and the intent of the authors of the founding documents of this nation. The only authority on this matter is the Constitution and the intent of the authors. Argumentum ab authoritate est fortissimum in lege - An argument drawn from authority is the strongest in law. Co. Litt. 254.-Maxims of Law from Bouvier's 1856 Law Dictionary.
If you don't like the law, by all means
work to change it, however, until such time that it is changed John
McCain III is not a natural born citizen and therefore not eligible to
be President of the United States of America.
Spiker, thank you for this information on citizen per birth in Panama. Please note it states, "citizen of the United States." A citizen of the United Sates or United States citizen is Fourteenth Amendment citizen. Fourteenth Amendment citizen is a freedman, not a free man. If you have been watching the Wesley Snipes' IRS trial this week, it should be noted that he told the Court that he was not a citizen of the United States, and that he was a "non-resident alien". A non-resident alien is a free man. Fourteenth Amendment citizens are property of the State, which can be bought and sold by the State.
As Frank has correctly stated, McCain is not a natural born Citizen; therefore, is he not eligible to hold the office of the presidency. I suspect that there is a deal between McCain and Clinton over this very issue. After Clinton steals the DemocRATic nomination and McCain steals the Republican nomination, and then Clinton planned on challenging McCain about his citizenship and McCain would be more then willing to bow out the election a week or two before the General Election. Leveling Billary to steal the election unopposed.
However, Blomberg most likely is aware of this fix and is ready to step in and run as well, or maybe, Blomberg was planning on bumping McCain himself with is trump card. Either way, both Clinton and Blomberg are both able to buy McCain's loyalty.
Can McCain lawfully hold the Office of the President of the United States? HELL NO! He can be a Congressman or Senator, but he cannot lawfully hold the Office of the presidency. It is all a scam!
-------- Original Message --------
|Subject:||Re: McCain was born in Panama|
|Date:||Thu, 31 Jan 2008 16:15:33 -0700|
Here is what I sent to Francis Steffan a couple of days ago.
What is your opinion?
IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY ACT
INA: ACT 303 - PERSONS BORN IN THE CANAL ZONE OR REPUBLIC OF PANAMA ON OR AFTER FEBRUARY 26, 1994
Sec. 303. [8 U.S.C. 1403]
(a) Any person born in the Canal Zone on or after February 26, 1904, and whether before or after the effective date of this Act, whose father or mother or both at the time of the birth of such person was or is a citizen of the United States, is declared to be a citizen of the United States.
(b) Any person born in the Republic of Panama on or after February 26, 1904, and whether before or after the effective date of this Act, whose father or mother or both at the time of the birth of such person was or is a citizen of the United States employed by the Government of the United States or by the Panama Railroad Company, or its successor in title, is declared to be a citizen of the United States.
INA Sec. 303(a) states:
"(a) Any person born in the Canal Zone on or after February 26,
1904, and whether before or after the effective date of this Act, whose
father or mother or both at the time of the birth of such person was or
is a citizen of the United States, is declared to be a citizen of the
A reading of the limitations on
Congressional power seems to confirm that Congress had no authority to pass the
statute you referred to. Congress apparently only has the power to “effect
a uniform process of naturalization,” but NOT the power to declare anyone “native
I am sorry to “correct your correction,” so to speak, but although, of course, John McCain IS a citizen, as you correctly stated, he is a NATURALIZED citizen, NOT a native born one—and I happen to know this for an absolute fact, because my own mother is in exactly the same boat (she was born overseas to military parents), and the State of California challenged her teacher’s credential many years ago based on that very fact. She had always thought that she counted as “native born,” and, since there are two different pathways to a California teacher’s credential, she had applied, over 50 years ago, for the “native born” path, and in the early 80’s, some bureaucrat in Sacramento caught the fact that she had taken the “wrong” path to a credential, and she was forced to back up (after she had already taught in the state for more than 20 years!), and reapply the “correct” way.
Furthermore, I can also assure you the U.S. Military itself acknowledges this fact, because I was able to use it as an excuse to refuse orders to Korea in 1977, when I (like Dr. Paul—probably the closest I will ever get to his sterling record!) was serving in the U.S. Air Force. My wife was expecting our first, and I did not want my daughter to be a “naturalized” citizen of the U.S..
So, although McCain IS indisputably a U.S. Citizen, he is only a naturalized one. He can vote, run for, and hold, any elective office in the United States… EXCEPT for the Presidency.
Love, admiration, and luck to all,
Sent: January 31, 2008 6:52 PM
Here is the data from a friend:
"It's not true.
Born to a US citzen outside of the US = he is still a US citizen. Born on a US Military base anywhere = a US citizen. Born to any active US military personell anywhere and he will be granted citizenship after some simple paperwork that the military will help with to make sure it is done correctly.
I'm not a McCain fan and don't know anything about his father or mother but if the basic data in the email is true, then being born out of the country on a US Military Base to active military personnel = McCain is a citizen.
This is standard data in military family law. Nothing special. "
More in this thread:
(1) The "Right of Election" is established and recognized
by the Maine Supreme Court, Appleton concurring at 44
Maine 528-529 (1859). The Maine Legislature had
requested that court's judicial opinion, in response to
the holding in Dred Scott v. Sandford, 19 How. 393
(2) The existence of two (2) classes of citizenship
American law, never repealed, is also recognized by
numerous authorities infra, both state and federal.
(3) The proper construction and common understanding of the
Qualifications Clauses are also explored thoroughly,
with pertinent citations dating back to the California
Constitution of 1849, and subsequently in People v. De
La Guerra, 40 Cal. 311, 337 (1870) infra.
(4) The cases recognize that one may be a citizen of
United States ("federal citizen") without also being a
Citizen of any particular Union state. See e.g. Hough
v. Societe Electrique Westinghouse de Russie, 231 F.
341, (USDC, NY, 1916).
(5) The cases also recognize that Americans may be Citizens
of a Union state without also being federal citizens.
See McDonel v. State, 90 Ind. 320 (1883); Crosse v.
Board of Supervisors of Elections, 221 A.2d 431
11 C.J., Section 3, page 777 and cases cited therein
(Harding, McDonel, Fowler).
(6) The cases also recognize that, both before and after
the so-called Fourteenth amendment [sic], it has not
been necessary for one to be a federal citizen in order
to be a Citizen of a Union state.
(7) The failure to capitalize the "C" in "Citizen", as that
term is used in the Qualifications Clauses, has created
an immense, nearly
immeasurable, amount of confusion
among references to state and federal citizenship in
all federal and state laws which utilize the phrase
"citizen of the United States" [sic].
(8) It is also clear that this confusion was intentional,
in order to co-opt the American People into associating
with a political jurisdiction which is not protected by
the Guarantee Clause. The United States (federal
government) is not
required to guarantee a Republican
Form of Government to the federal zone, only to the
state zone [sic]. See Guarantee Clause.
(9) Congress cannot by legislation alter the Constitution,
from which alone it derives its power to legislate, and
within whose limitations alone that power can be
lawfully exercised. See Eisner v. Macomber, 252 U.S.
189 (1919) (holding predicated on ratification of the
16th amendment [sic] as
applied to the term "income").
(10) The Qualifications Clauses have never been amended,
despite recent efforts to impose limits on the terms of
federal Representatives and/or Senators. Appellant
agrees that limits upon the terms of federal lawmakers
would require an amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
See U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton, 115 S.Ct. 1842,
131 L.Ed.2d 881 (1995).
(11) It is a cardinal rule in dealing with
instruments that they are to receive an unvarying
interpretation, and that their practical construction
is to be uniform. See Cory et al. v. Carter, 48 Ind.
327, 335 (1874); Qualifications Clauses, 3:2:1, 4:2:1.
(12) Citizenship is a term of municipal law. Prior to the
1866 Civil Rights Act, which legislated federal
citizenship into existence as a municipal franchise,
only one class of citizenship was recognized by
the U.S. Constitution. Thus, prior to 1866, all
constitutional references to "Citizen of the United
States" and "citizen of the United States" were
identical in all respects. See Roa v. Collector of
Customs, 23 Philippine 315, 332 (1912); Murphy v.
Ramsey, 114 U.S. 15 (1885); People v. De La Guerra, 40
Cal. 311, 342 (1870)
p.s. There is much additional (and free) reading
at the links below my name here ...
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Private Attorney General, 18 U.S.C. 1964(a)
Criminal Investigator and Federal Witness: 18 U.S.C. 1510, 1512-13
/index.htm (Home Page)
/support.policy.htm (Support Policy)
/guidelines.htm (Client Guidelines)
/support.guidelines.htm (Policy + Guidelines)
All Rights Reserved without Prejudice
Our condensed list of IRS outreach resources:
/nutshell.htm <-- START HERE
CONGRESS CANNOT AMEND THE CONSTITUTION: McCain: Bill Would [TRY TO] Remove Doubt on Presidential Eligibility
(10) The Qualifications Clauses have never been amended,
despite recent efforts to impose limits on the terms of
federal Representatives and/or Senators. Appellant
agrees that limits upon the terms of federal lawmakers
would require an amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
See U.S. Term Limits, Inc.
v. Thornton, 115 S.Ct. 1842,
131 L.Ed.2d 881 (1995).
MCAC <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
Does this mean McCain is NOT eligible, now???
Bill Would Remove Doubt on Presidential Eligibility
By CARL HULSE
Published: February 29, 2008
WASHINGTON — Senator John McCain said Thursday that he had no concerns about his meeting the constitutional qualifications for the presidency because of his birth in the Panama Canal Zone. A Democratic colleague said she wanted to remove even a trace of doubt.
McCain’s Canal Zone Birth Prompts Queries About Whether That Rules Him Out (February 28, 2008)
The latest political news from around the nation. Join the discussion.
The Democrat, Senator Claire McCaskill of Missouri, introduced legislation that would declare that any child born abroad to citizens serving in the United States military would meet the constitutional requirement that anyone serving as president be a “natural born” citizen.
“In America, so many parents say to their young children, ‘If you work hard and you play by the rules, in America someday you can be president of the United States,’ ” said Ms. McCaskill, a supporter of the presidential bid of Senator Barack Obama, Democrat of Illinois. “Our brave and respected military should never have to spend a minute worrying whether or not that saying is true for their child.”
Traveling on his presidential campaign, Mr. McCain, Republican of Arizona, said that he was convinced he was eligible under the natural-born definition and that from his perspective the matter had been reviewed and settled in earlier campaigns. Mr. McCain was born in 1936 on a military base in the Canal Zone, where his father, a Navy officer, was stationed at the time.
“It’s very clear,” Mr. McCain said. “An American born in a territory of the United States whose father is serving in the military could not be eligible for presidency of the United States is certainly not something our founding fathers envisioned.”
Legal scholars who have explored the issue say that a conclusive legal finding on the clause has never been delivered and that there is the potential for some uncertainty about whether someone born outside the nation proper would qualify.
To date, no president has been born outside what would become one of the 50 states. A handful of serious candidates have been born elsewhere but none were elected and the citizenship question was not tested.
Senior members of Mr. McCain’s campaign team have also said they are very comfortable that Mr. McCain meets the definition of natural born and that he could overcome any challenge should one be made.
They have asked Theodore B. Olson, a veteran Supreme Court lawyer and McCain supporter, to prepare a legal analysis of the issue.
A group of lawmakers made an unsuccessful effort four years ago to eliminate any lingering doubts about the meaning of the provision through legislation that would have said children born outside the country to American citizens are eligible for the presidency.
Ms. McCaskill said that her legislation should be noncontroversial and that Congress should move rapidly to clear up any ambiguity. She acknowledged there could be some who believe the only route to resolve the confusion is through a constitutional amendment.
“We can at least make a legislative declaration that the definition of ‘natural born’ includes children of the active military,” she said. “This should be done quickly and easily.”
Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington DC West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming United States South America Great Britain England Europe Middle East Asia Melbourne World
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference John McCain ineligible to be President of United States?:
I think I agree with your conclusion and your reasoning in your article. There is more at http://PanamaJohn.dominates.us that you might find interesting and useful for your argument.
Read Rogers v. Bellei which is a case I have recently been citing because of the explicit language that can leave no doubt. It has also been cited by many other court decisions on citizenship for the foreign born. The case of McCain's citizenship problem should be a no-brainer to keep him out of the White House, but there are many reasons why it is not recognized as such.
Posted by: scottwww | Jun 11, 2008 12:59:25 AM