Wednesday, June 12, 2013

Original Birther Document





U.S. Constitution:
The Original Birther Document of the
United States of America




A Conversation About the
Original Intent of the Authors Who Wrote the
Original Presidential Birth and Soil Eligibility Words
Natural Born Citizen’ and ‘… or a Citizen’ in
Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5



A Conversation:
The Original Intent of ‘Natural Born Citizen’




This original intent conversation, updated for clarity and updated with topical news as it becomes known, is written in a table talk style, as if we are sitting at the kitchen table talking about this and that and someone asks ‘what does THAT mean?’, sometimes with ‘truth proof’ references thrown in to emphasize the original intent of the original birthers who wrote their original words for themselves first, of course, AND for their ‘posterity,’ that’s US in 2013 America.

All of ‘We the People’ must Speak Out about the ORIGINAL intent of the ORIGINAL birthers who were the ORIGINAL authors who wrote the ORIGINAL words of the ORIGINAL birther document of America, the U.S. Constitution, specifically Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5.

All of ‘We the People’ must Speak Out about what the Clause 5 words ‘… natural born Citizen, or a Citizen … time … Adoption Constitution … eligible Office President…’ meant to the original birthers, and what Clause 5 meant to the original delegates from the thirteen states at the Constitutional Convention who accepted the original intent of ALL of the words (including Article 5) in the U.S. Constitution.

All of ‘We the People’ must Speak Out about why a ‘natural born Citizen’ and an ‘… or a Citizen were BOTH ‘… eligible to the Office of the President’ in 1787, but since the last ‘…or a Citizen’ died in the 1800s, ONLY a ‘natural born Citizen’ is ‘…eligible to the Office of the President’ in the 21st century.


Introduction in a Nutshell

What and Who is a ‘Natural Born Citizen’
Wht and Who is an ‘…or a Citizen’
What and Who is a ‘Citizen’

What is the September 17, 1787 U.S. Constitution Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5 ‘natural born Citizen’ and ‘…or a Citizen’ issue in a nutshell?

Who is a ‘Citizen’ but NOT a 1787 Clause 5 ‘natural born Citizen?

Who is a ‘Citizen’ but NOT a 1787 Clause 5 ‘…or a Citizen?’

What was the definition of ‘natural born Citizen’ according to the original intent of the original birthers who wrote the original birther document of America, the U.S. Constitution, specifically in context, Clause 5?

The definition of ‘born’ in ‘natural born Citizen’ is not vague, it is right THERE in the word born itself.

The definition of ‘born’ is found in the sixth word of the presidential eligibility Clause 5.




Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5

No person except
a natural born Citizen,
or a Citizen …
United States, 
time 
Adoption …
Constitution …
eligible …
Office …
President.




Since the child has to be born on the soil that is already there, to the 1787 original birthers, the natural law word ‘born’ either meant ONLY born on 1787 U.S. soil, or ‘born’ ALSO meant born on 1787 foreign soil.



EVERYBODY'S opinion is valid,  and the original genesis of my opinion expressed here is ONLY the 1787 U.S. Constitution, specifically ‘natural born Citizen’ and ‘…or a Citizen’ in Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5 and the original intent of the original words written by the original authors, the original birthers, the Founders, Framers and Ratifiers.

The issue is not my opinion or our opinions, but the opinion(s) of the original birthers, right?



That's all.


The issue is the original intent of the original birthers, aka the Founders, Framers and Ratifiers, who wrote the original words of the original birther document of the republic, the 1787 U.S. Constitution, specifically Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5 and the contrast between ‘natural born Citizen’ and ‘...or a Citizen’ in the SAME Clause 5 in the SAME sentence, separated by a comma and the word or that was put there for a very good and practical 1787 reason.

The very good reason In 1787 America was that there were NO ‘natural
born Citizens’ old enough between July 4, 1776 and September 17, 1787, ONLY 11 years 3 months, who had been born ON U.S. soil and 35 years old with 14 years residence on the SAME U.S. soil, to qualify to be ‘...eligible to the Office of the President,’ so the original birthers in 1789 had to choose an ‘...or a Citizen’ who was naturalized on July 4, 1776 as a ‘citizen’ by adhering to the revolution and the war of independence.

The first naturalized citizen who was the first ‘...
or a Citizen’ citizen to be elected president was General George Washington, of course, followed by 6 more 1776 naturalized citizens as ‘...or a Citizen’ citizens as president, until president # 8, Martin van Buren, born 6 years 5 months AFTER 1776 on December 5, 1782.

My point is that the best place to start to analyze and clarify the perpetual meaning of the 1787 Article 2 words ‘natural
born Citizens’ is with the original intent of the Founders, Framers and Ratifiers, aka the original birthers.

That's all this is about, the original intent of the original birthrs, not the several states, not the SCOTUS, not the amendments or the acts of the Congress.

If we ALL start with the original intent of the original birthers, it will be easier to analyze and clarify the original intent of the original birthers themselves who, only one year after the inauguaration of George Washington as the first President, wrote the confusing 1790 Naturalization Act with the ‘natural
born Citizen’ designation for a child born on foreign soil with two (2) U.S. Citizen married parents and, even though naturalized, possibly, since it was never attempted, ‘…eligible to the Office of the President,’ and then corrected the language and rectified the confusion with the 1795 Naturalization Act and the ‘Citizen’ designation for a child born on foreign soil with two (2) U.S. Citizen married parents, so, as a naturalized ‘Citizen,’ the child would NOT be ‘…eligible to the Office of the President.’

If we ALL start with original intent it will be easier to analyze Acts of Congress such as the 1790 and 1795 Naturalization Acts, and amendments of Congress such as such as the 14th amendment ‘citizen’ designation, and more recent naturalization acts such as the 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act ‘Citizen’ designation, and the SCOTUS opinions about what makes a citizen a ‘citizen’ of the U.S., even though the SCOTUS has NEVER opined as to why EVERY ‘natural born Citizen’ child is ALSO a ‘Citizen’ child but NOT every ‘Citizen’ child is a ‘natural born Citizen.

The SCOTUS has NEVER opined about how being born on U.S. soil with two (2) U.S. Citizen married parents relates to POTUS eligibility, and the connection to the original intent of original birther John Jay and his concern about protecting access to the executive office and control of the U.S. military.

Original intent, what a concept, right?

Original intent, what an original genesis place to start to analyze and clarify the original words of the original birthers, right?
 
ONLY or BOTH

Question #1

Did the 1787 original birthers have one (1) original intent definition of ‘natural born Citizen’ as ONLY born on U.S. soil?

ONLY one (1) ‘original intent’ definition makes common sense, right?

Question #2

Did the 1787 original birthers have one (1) original intent definition of ‘natural born Citizen’ expressed in two parts?

(i) Born on U.S. soil AND
(ii) Born on foreign soil ALSO

One (1) ‘original intent’ definition in two (2) parts does NOT make common sense, right?

Question #3

Did the 1787 original birthers have two (2) original intent definitions of ‘natural born Citizen?’

(i) Born on U.S. soil AND
(ii) Born on foreign soil ALSO

Two (2) ‘original intent’ definitions definitely does NOT make common sense, right?

The Original Genesis of the Original Intent Umbrella Point

The original genesis of the original intent umbrella major point here is the common sense original intent of original birther John Jay to protect 1787 America into perpetuity from foreign influence over the executive office and control of the military.

The major point is the fact that original birther John Jay suggested to original birther George Washington that the natural law word ‘natural’ should be added to original birther Alexander Hamilton's natural law word ‘born’ and associated with Hamilton's positive law words ‘a Citizen.’



Alexander Hamilton said
be now a Citizen” … “or” … “be born a Citizen

The POTUS eligibility quote below is the June 18, 1787 Alexander Hamilton suggestion.

“No person shall be eligible to the office of President of the United States unless he be now a Citizen of one of the States, or hereafter be born a Citizen of the United States.”

The 1787 original intent of Alexander Hamilton is obvious, right?

Obviously be now = the grandfather words to make the 1776 patriots POTUS eligible
Obviously or = one or the other, NOT both are the same as the other
Obviously born = ONLY born on U.S. soil
Obviously Citizen = ONLY citizenship from two (2) U.S. Citizen married parents
Obviously United States = ONLY U.S. Citizen on U.S. soil


Included in the major point is the acceptance by the 1787 original birthers at the 1787 constitutional convention with NO comment about the 1787 original intent meaning of ‘natural born Citizen’ because the 1787 delegates were obviously already aware that to be ‘natural born in 1787 America meant ONLY being born on 1787 U.S. soil with two (2) U.S. Citizen married parents and ‘natural born in 1787 America did NOT include being born on 1787 foreign soil.

Included in the major point is that the U.S. ‘natural born Citizen’ citizenship status of the child derived from the U.S. Citizen status of the parents who were U.S. Citizens BEFORE their child was born on U.S. soil, NOT born on foreign soil.

The definition of ‘born’ in ‘natural born Citizen’ was understood by the original birthers because they ALREADY understood in 1787 what Emer de Vattel had written in 1758 in The Law of Nations, sec. 212, and they understood the uses of natural law, positive law, common law, American law, and British law as related to the natural born subject of the monarchy, etc.

What ‘born’ obviously meant to the original birthers was 'born' on the U.S. soil of the 1787 original thirteen colonies, NOT ‘born’ on the 1787 foreign soil of England—Canada, NOT 'born' on the 1787 foreign soil of Spain—Florida, NOT ‘born’ on the 1787 foreign soil of Spain—Louisiana colony from the gulf waters to the Canadian border, or Mexico, or Central America, or South America, or Europe, or Africa, or etc.

The 1795 Naturalization Act ‘Citizen’ designation replaced the repealed 1790 Naturalization Act ‘natural born citizen’ designation.

So far, since the 1795 Naturalization Act, the original intent of the original birthers has been confirmed by the SCOTUS which has NEVER opined that a ‘natural born Citizen’ is a child born on U.S. soil with two (2) U.S. Citizen married parents and ALSO a child born on foreign soil with two (2) U.S. Citizen married parents.

The SCOTUS has been consistent since the 1790 Naturalization Act that said that a child born on foreign soil with two (2) U.S. Citizen married parents was a ‘natural born Citizen’ was repealed by the 1795 Naturalization Act that states that a child born on foreign soil with two (2) U.S. Citizen married parents was ONLY a ‘Citizen’ and consequently NOT ‘...eligible to the Office of the President.’

Finally, the SCOTUS has also NEVER opined that a ‘natural born Citizen’ is a child born on foreign soil with one (1) U.S. Citizen parent married to a foreign citizen.

The 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) does say that a child born on foreign soil with one (1) U.S. Citizen parent married to a foreign citizen definitely IS a ‘Citizen’ who is consequently NOT ‘...eligible to the Office of the President,’ but a 1952 INA ‘Citizen’ is NOT a 1787 U.S. Constitution Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5 ‘natural born Citizen’ who IS ‘...eligible to the Office of the President.’

Common Sense Original Intent Conclusion

The original intent definition of ‘natural born Citizen’ was either ONLY being born on 1787 U.S. soil or the original intent definition of ‘natural born Citizen’ was ALSO being born on 1787 foreign soil.

Since September 17, 1787, to be ‘natural born in Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5 'natural born Citizen' is a natural law reference to the natural law physical union of two (2) persons and then the child being physically born on U.S. soil, with the original intent that the children of their posterity will fulfill the original intent of the original birthers to protect and defend U.S. soil, NOT to protect and defend foreign soil.

Since September 17, 1787 and the 1795 Naturalization Act, to be ‘natural born is obviously NOT a natural law reference to the physical union of two (2) U.S. Citizen married persons and then the child being born on foreign soil to protect and defend U.S. soil AND to protect and defend foreign soil, right?

Since September 17, 1787 and the 1795 Naturalization Act, to be ‘natural born is obviously NOT a positive law reference to being naturalized by ‘oath’ to protect and defend U.S. soil AND to protect and defend foreign soil, right?

The Clause 5 positive law word ‘Citizen’ in ‘natural born Citizen’ is a positive law reference to deriving U.S. Citizen status from two (2) U.S. Citizen married parents, NOT only one (1) U.S. Citizen parent, right?

The Clause 5 positive law word ‘Citizen’ is obviously NOT a positive law reference to deriving U.S. Citizen status from foreign citizens, right?


Introduction in a Nutshell

Mnemonic Intent

Common sense in 2013 about original intent tells us that the original genesis of the original intent of the original birthers in 1787 America was from 1758 Emer de Vattel, the law of nations, natural law, common law, etc.

The common sense of the original birthers in 1787 America is the original genesis of our common sense in 2013 America about the original intent of the original birthers.

Yes, the word ‘original’ and the word ‘intent’ with the associated words is a play on words, with mnemonic intent,  repeat—repeat—repeat until it sinks into the subconscious. Otherwise, what is a memory aid for, right?

To the original birthers in 1787 America, ‘born’ in ‘natural born Citizen’ obviously meant ONLY born on U.S. soil, NOT foreign soil.

To the original birthers in 1787 America, ‘born’ in ‘natural born Citizen’ obviously meant ONLY born as the result of the union of two (2) U.S. Citizen married parents.

To the original birthers in 1787 America, ‘born’ in ‘natural born Citizen’ obviously did NOT mean ALSO born as the result of the union of two (2) persons who were NOT married to each other.

To the original birthers in 1787 America, ‘born’ in ‘natural born Citizen’ obviously did NOT mean ALSO born as the result of the union of ONLY one (1) U.S. Citizen parent who may or may not have been married to a U.S. resident foreign born citizen.

To the original birthers in 1787 America, ‘born’ in ‘natural born Citizen’ obviously did NOT mean the same thing as the 1787 Clause 5 ‘…or a Citizen’ because the 1787 Clause 5 ‘…or a Citizen’ citizens were ALREADY born BEFORE the U.S. Constitution was adopted September 17, 1787.

To the original birthers in 1787 America, ‘born’ in ‘natural born Citizen’ obviously did NOT mean the same thing as the 1787 Clause 5 ‘…or a Citizen’ because the LAST 1787 Clause 5 ‘…or a Citizen’ died sometime in the 1800s.

To the original birthers in 1787 America, ‘born’ in ‘natural born Citizen’ obviously did NOT mean the same thing as a foreign born person naturalized by ‘oath’ as a ‘Citizen’ of the United States.

Common sense, right?

To the original birthers in 1787 America, a child ‘born’ a ‘natural born Citizen’ on U.S. soil obviously did NOT mean the same thing as a child born on U.S. soil with a foreign born father who had NOT naturalized by ‘oath’ BEFORE his child was born on U.S. soil.

Every 1787 Clause 5 ‘natural born Citizen’ is a U.S. ‘Citizen’ at birth, but not every U.S. ‘Citizens’ is at birth a 1787 Clause 5 ‘natural born Citizen.’

Common sense, right?

When 1787 original birther John Jay suggested to 1787 original birther George Washington that to prevent foreign influence over the executive office and foreign control of the military that the natural law word ‘natural’ should be added to 1787 original birther Alexander Hamilton's natural law word ‘born’ and to Hamilton's positive law words ‘a Citizen,’ was it John’s original intent to suggest to George that ‘natural born Citizen’ was a reference to ONLY being born on 1787 U.S. soil or ALSO being born on 1787 foreign soil?

Obviously, a reference to ONLY being born on 1787 U.S. soil.

Did John Jay mean to say to George that the positive law word ‘Citizen’ in ‘natural born Citizen’ was a reference to ONLY being born with two (2) U.S. Citizen married parents or to ALSO being born with ONLY one (1) U.S. Citizen parent who was married or not married to a foreign citizen?

Obviously, in 1787 America, John Jay’s original intent was that ‘natural born Citizen’ was a reference to ONLY being born with two (2) U.S. Citizen married parents who were U.S. Citizens BEFORE their child was born on U.S. soil.

John Jay and George Washington and ALL of the delegates to the 1787 Constitutional Convention were NOT confused about the natural law original intent meaning of Jay's word ‘natural’ and Hamilton's words ‘born a Citizen’ as a reference to ONLY being born on U.S. soil, so they NEVER had the need to discuss the meaning of ‘natural born Citizen’ before Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5 was adopted on September 17, 1787.

Original intent, what a concept, right'

Original intent, what a way to start to analyze the original words of the original birthers who were the original authors of the 1787 Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5 words ‘natural born Citizen’ and ‘...or a Citizen.’

Original intent, what a way to start to analyze the difference between the 1790 Naturalization Act ‘natural born Citizen’ designation that was repealed by the 1795 Naturalization Act and was replaced with the ‘Citizen’ designation.

Original intent, what a way for the original birthers to start to ‘...form a more perfect Union’ for themselves and for their posterity... into perpetuity, right?

Original intent, what a way to continue to analyze the original words of the original birthers, right?


Introduction in a Nutshell

Senator Ted Cruz

The newest original intent issue at this time concerns the POTUS eligibility of Sen. Rafael Edward ‘Ted’ Cruz since he is a 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act ‘Citizen’ and not a 1787 U.S. Constitution Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5 U.S. ‘natural born Citizen.’


“Cruz isn’t worried that his birth certificate will be a problem.

“Though he was born in Canada, he and his advisers are confident
that they could win any legal battle over his eligibility.

“Cruz’s mother was a U.S. citizen when he was born, and
he considers himself to be a natural-born citizen.”


“Ted Cruz is eligible to be president under almost any reading
of the Constitution—except his own”

Although I do not know everything about everything to know everything about any one thing, one thing I do know is that while there are four seminal Birth documents of the ‘Union,’ as President Lincoln called it in 1861, only one – ONLY 1 – the 1787 U.S. Constitution, is being ridiculed by progressive (liberal) transformers – progressive Republicans – progressive Democrats – progressive Libertarians – progressive Independents – as a nuisance and restrictive because of its negative libertiy original intent..

It is a nuisance because, with negative liberty language that stipulates what the Federal government can NOT do FOR and TO citizens, that negative liberty language impedes the expansion of Federal government power over the states and the people.

With 18th century (1787) original intent the original birthers, who were the original authors of the original words, restricted the new tripartite government with negative liberty language for the good of the 1787 ‘We the People’ who understood the original intent, and for the good of their posterity too, ‘We the People’ in the 21st century (2013) who also understand original intent of original words.

What the progressive (liberal) eligibility truthers & birthers want is positive liberty language that stipulates what the tripartite government MUST do FOR and TO citizens, by increasing Federal government power over the states and the people who created the Federal government in 1787.



FOR = free health care from womb to tomb
(for those lucky to get out of the womb)

TO = buy health care insurance – or else – you will be punished
(ultimately ‘death paneled’—even if you need a lung transplant at age ten)



To the positive liberty opponents of the negative liberty U.S. Constitution, it is just an old fashioned birther document for that negative liberty reason.


Introduction in a Nutshell

Laura Ingraham:
“Pretty Sure” Canadian-Born Ted Cruz is Eligible to be President

Here is a July 15, 2013 BirtherReport.com three minute audio snippet of a Laura Ingraham interview with Rafael Cruz, the father of Rafael Edward ‘Ted’ Cruz.

Laura, by her use of the words “I’m pretty sure,” reveals that she is really not sure of the original intent of the 1787 Clause 5 words ‘natural born Citizen’ and ‘…or a Citizen,’ and if Senator Ted Cruz is, according to Clause 5, ‘…eligible to the Office of the President.’

     BirtherReport.com – YouTube 3min. 8 sec. –

At 1min. 53 sec.

Rafael Cruz –
“So, we moved back to Texas when Ted was four years old, and then started the [oil] business again, here.”

Laura Ingraham –
“And then you became a citizen, a U.S. citizen in 2005, something like that?”

Rafael Cruz –
“There about.”

Laura Ingraham –
“Some people say that Ted can’t become president because he wasn’t born in the United States.”

[…]

Rafael Cruz –
“From what I understand, most constitutional scholars agree that if someone is born of a U.S. citizen who was born in the U.S., that person is a U.S. citizen by birth, regardless of where they’re born.”

Laura Ingraham –
“And your wife was a U.S. citizen, right?”

Rafael Cruz –
“Yes, she was born in Delaware.”

[…]

Laura Ingraham –
“I get all these emails, ‘Oh, you’re such a good friend of Ted Cruz’s, but, he can’t become president.

“I don’t think that’s….

“I’m pretty sure that’s not right.

“I’m focusing on killing this immigration bill, so, that’s what I’m focusing on right now.”

~ ~ ~

Here is my brief 'nutshell' comment at BirtherReport.com

Laura said she is '... focusing on this immigration bill right now...,'

- - - - - - - - - -

Laura, dear lady.

The 1787 Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5 'natural born Citizen' issue has been discussed on the internet for more than 5 ... 5!!! ... years, so, where have you been?

Laura, dear lady.

With your law education and law background as a Supreme Court clerk, to get up to speed about 'natural born Citizen,' go to Puzo1.blogspot.com, the lawyers happy hunting ground for the full-throated lawyer talk with case law history.

Laura, dear lady.

Maybe you can start focusing on Clause 5 and why the 1787 U.S. Constitution, specifically Clause 5, is the ONLY seminal document of America  that contrasts 'natural born Citizen' and '...or a Citizen' in the SAME Clause 5, in the SAME sentence, followed by the words '... at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution.'

Hint....

The 1787 words 'natural born' simply refer to nature, aka a child born, of course, to 2 married people.

Married?
In 1787... definitely YES!

Hint...

The 1787 word 'Citizen' simply refers to a child born naturally to 2 parents who are U.S. Citizen BEFORE their child is born.

Hint.

The 1787 words '...or a Citizen' simply refer to people born BEFORE July 4, 1776 who were grandfathered into presidential eligibility ONLY until the LAST 1787 '...or a Citizen' died [sometime in the 1800s].

Laura, dear lady.

Since the last 1787 '...or a Citizen' died, ONLY a 'natural born Citizen' is '...eligible to the Office of the President.' and ONLY if born with 2 U.S. Citizen married parents who were U.S. Citizens BEFORE their child was born on U.S. soil... NOT foreign soil ... Canada ... Mexico ... France ... or ... England.

Laura, dear lady.

That's the 'natural born Citizen' vs. 'Citizen' issue in a nutshell.

- - - - - - - - - -

Oh, you're welcome.

Art


ORIGINAL INTENT COMMON SENSE

Yes, after studying the Original Words of the U.S. Constitution,  the
Original Document of American President Soil and Birth Eligibility;
after analyzing
the original intent
of the original words
of the original birthers
aka the original authors of
Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5;
after considering original intent
relevance to the authors of the words
natural born Citizen and ‘…or a Citizen
I now understand that original intent means
I am not definitely a Clause 5 ‘…or a Citizen.’
I am not a Clause 5 natural born Citizen by birth.
I am not Clause 5 eligible to be President of America.
I am not U.S. Soil Born with two U.S. Citizen Parents.
|
U.S. Soil Born
U.S. Citizen Parents

COMMON SENSE ORIGINAL INTENT




Original Birther Document Contents


Original Birther Document 1

A Conversation: The Original Intent of ‘Natural Born Citizen’

Introduction in a Nutshell
What and Who is a ‘Natural Born Citizen’
What and Who is an ‘…or a Citizen’
What and Who is a ‘Citizen’
ONLY or BOTH
Alexander Hamilton said
“be now a Citizen” … “or” … “be born a Citizen”
Mnemonic Intent
Laura Ingraham: “Pretty Sure” Canadian-Born Ted Cruz is Eligible to be President
Senator Ted Cruz

Liberty Bell Original Intent Common Sense

Copyright Information


Original Birther Document 2

1774 Articles of Association
1776 Declaration of Independence
1781 Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union
1787 ‘We the People’ U.S. Constitution

Original Intent: Seminal Birth Documents of the ‘Union’

President Abraham Lincoln: What he said about the ‘Union’

U.S. Constitution Introduction

IMAGINE: It Takes a ‘Citizen’ who is Not a ‘Natural Born Citizen’ to WAKE UP!!! AMERICA


Original Birther Document 3

Soil and Birth Eligibility Requirements

Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5: Analysis and Internal Definition

1787 U.S. Constitution
Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5

Part 1a –
No Person except a natural born Citizen,
Part 1b –
or a Citizen of the United States,
Part 1c
at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution
Part 1d
shall be eligible to the Office of the President;
Part 2a –
neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office
who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years,
Part 2b –
and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

Part 1a Analysis
Clarifying Phrase #1: ‘Natural Born Citizen’

Part 1a –
1787 Soil & Birth—Natural Born Citizen
1787 Soil & Oath—Naturalized Citizen

(1) The birth of a ‘natural born Citizen.’
(2) The oath of a naturalized citizen.

An Obvious Conclusion about the 'Original Intent Truther & Birther'

An Original Birther Similarity vs. A Truther & Birther Contrast

U.S. SOIL—U.S. BORN—U.S. OATH

Part 1b Analysis
Clarifying Phrase #2: ‘…or a Citizen’

The First ‘natural born Citizen’ President

Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5: The ‘Original Intent’ Purpose

Part 2a Analysis
Part 2a & Part 2b do NOT… NOT… NOT… apply to Part 1b ‘… or a Citizen’.

Part 2b Analysis

Part 2a & Part 2b Analysis

Clause 5 Analysis Conclusion


Original Birther Document 4

‘Natural Born Citizen’ & ‘…or a Citizen’: Permanent & Temporary

I Was Not Clear About Original Intent Until…

Four POTUS Eligibility Requirements

Where—How—Who—What Is A Natural Born Citizen?

1758 Emer de Vattel
1875 SCOTUS
Emer de Vattel
The Law of Nations and Principles of Natural Law
A 1758 ‘natural born Citizen’ Definition
SCOTUS
Minor v. Happersett Definition
A 1875 ‘natural born Citizen’ Dictum

Original Source Proof: ‘Natural Born Citizen’ Original Intent

A Major Conflict Resolved
1790 Naturalization Act – 'natural born Citizen'
1795 Naturalization Act – 'Citizen'


Original Birther Document 5

24 ‘Original Intent’ Soil & Birth Possibilities
Born on U.S. Soil
Born on Foreign Soil
Donor Fathers, Surrogate Mothers and Rape
Islam & Shariah Compliant Muslim Husbands With Multiple Wives
Muslim and Born on U.S. Soil
Muslim and Born on Foreign Soil

The ‘Original Intent’

1787 U.S. Constitution Introduction

Five 1787 Clause 5 ‘Original Intent’ Implications
Heterosexual—Homosexual—In Vitro & In Vivo—Rape—Islam & Multiple Wives

Implicit ‘original intent’ #1:
Heterosexual

Implicit ‘original intent’ #2:
Homosexual

Implicit ‘original intent’ #3:
‘In Vitro’ (in the glass) Fertilization
‘In Vivo’ (in the body) Gestation

Implicit ‘original intent’ #4:
Rape—Conception—Birth
What about birth of a child after conception by rape?

Implicit ‘original intent’ #5:
Islam and Muslim Husband with Multiple Wives


Original Birther Document 6

The Difference: ‘Natural Born Citizen’ and ‘… or a Citizen’

Exactly What Is A Natural Born Citizen? (8 minute video)

A 1787 Original Intent Citizenship:
One Parent—Two Parent
Natural Law—Positive Law

Four Requirements: To be ‘…eligible to the Office of the President’

What does ‘OR’ mean in ‘…or a Citizen?’

‘OR’ Truth Proof

‘Citizen’ POTUS Aspirants and GOPe Truthers & Birthers
Senator Rafael Edward ‘Ted’ Cruz:
Senator Marco Antonio Rubio:
Senator Richard John ‘Rick’ Santorum:
Governor Nimrata Nikki Randhawa Haley:
Governor Piyush ‘Bobby’ Jindal:
Future POTUS Aspirant ____?___:

U.S. Representative – 7 Years a ‘Citizen’
U.S. Senator – 9 Years a ‘Citizen’

Sen. Ted Cruz: Will anyone ‘birther’ him?
Did the New York Times ‘birther’ Sen. Ted Cruz?
Did Breitbart.com ‘birther’ Sen. Ted Cruz by quoting the NYT?

GOPe Eligibility Truther & Birther Legal Battles
‘Legal Battle’ Questions: For Future POTUS Aspirants and Their Advisers

President # 8 Martin Van Buren: A 1787 ‘natural born Citizen’

‘Citizen’ Statesman
‘Citizen’ Stateswoman


Original Birther Document 7

Paging—BIG Talkers
Paging—BIG Bloggers

President Abraham Lincoln 1861 Inaugural Address
The Union is much older than the Constitution.

A Hypothetical Scenario
Ted Cruz vs. Hillary Clinton
or
Will Prophecy Be Fulfilled Some Other Way?

A Prophecy Fulfilled Some Other Way?

I Wonder, BIG Talkers and BIG Bloggers

Did the New York Times ‘birther’ Sen. Ted Cruz?
In quoting the NYT did Breitbart.com ‘birther’ Sen. Ted Cruz?

NYT Goes Birther: Attacks 'Canadian-Born' Cruz, Calls Him 'McCarthyite'

Some ‘Original Intent’ Sources
1787 U.S. Constitution:
1790 Naturalization Act:
1795 Naturalization Act:
1866 Civil Rights Act:
1868 Fourteenth Amendment:
1875 Minor v. Happersett:
1952 Immigration and Nationality Act:

1 BIG Blogger Example
1 Big Talker Example


Original Birther Document 8

A-B-C-D: Birth Parents and Birth Soil Questions
(A) Birth on U.S. soil with two (2) U.S. Citizen Parents
(B) Birth on U.S. soil with one (1) U.S. Citizen Parent
(C) Birth on U.S. soil with zero (0) U.S. Citizen Parents
(D) Birth on foreign soil with two (2) or one (1) or zero (0) U.S. Citizen Parents

13 Presidential Eligibility Questions

Original Genesis and Original Intent: The Perpetual Relevance of ‘Natural Born Citizen’

A 2nd look at Question 2: ‘Presidential Eligibility Questions’

What If…

Nature and Nurture

A 2nd look at Question 10: Presidential Eligibility Questions

Part 1: What Clause 5 does NOT mean
Part 2: What Clause 5 does NOT mean
Clause 5: Part 1 & Part 2
THAT is what Clause 5 does NOT mean.
What Clause 5 DOES Mean

Birth—Residence—Age: Clause 5 Requirements to be ‘…eligible to the Office of the President’

Things to Remember
Parent and Place – Jus Sanguinis and Jus Soli

Perpetual and Temporary Original Intent


Original Birther Document 9

Four Seminal 'Union' Documents
1. Articles of Association
2. Declaration of Independence
3. Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union
4. ‘We the People’ Constitution

A Brief Constitutional Convention Timeline


Original Birther Document 10

The ‘Union’

First Continental Congress
Second Continental Congress
Congress of the Confederation
Tripartite Federal Government Formed

14 Presidents of the ‘Union’ before April 30, 1789
44 Presidents of the ‘Union’ after April 30, 1789

U.S. History Example: George Washington and Thomas Jefferson

Four Presidents and their Parents

Liberty Timeline


Original Birther Document 11

Perpetual Original Intent: Something to Remember about the ‘Union’

Natural Born Citizen Status of Two Presidents:
#21 Chester Alan Arthur
#44 Barack Hussein Obama

Why the “Natural Born Citizen” Clause of  Our Constitution Is Important and Worth Preserving

What is Citizenship?

Two (2) U.S. Citizen Parents
One (1) U.S. Citizen Parent
Zero (0) U.S. Citizen Parents


Original Birther Document 12

Imagine: It Takes a ‘Citizen’ Who Is Not a ‘Natural Born Citizen’ To WAKE UP!!! AMERICA

Forever Free Existence: The Original Intent Purpose of America

Imagine: A Citizen Senator
Imagine: A U.S. Senator Born on Foreign Soil with Two U.S. Citizen Married Parents
Imagine: A U.S. Senator Born on U.S. Soil with One U.S. Citizen Parent
Imagine: A Citizen Statesman
Imagine: ‘Citizens’ Naturalized Can Defend ‘Original Intent’ & ‘Natural Born Citizen’
Imagine That: A Statesman!


Original Birther Document 13

For those Who Want the ‘Lawyer Talk’

Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1875) Syllabus &  Opinion
U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898) Syllabus & Opinion
Inglis v. Trustees of Sailor’s Snug Harbor, 28 U.S. 3 Pet. 99 99 (1830) Syllabus & Opinions

The Change: From British ‘Subject’ To American ‘Citizen’

Eight ‘Lawyer Talk’ Sources
Puzo1.blogspot.com – Mario Appuzo
BirtherReport.com
ProtectOurLiberty.org
Art2SuperPac.com
PeopleMags.net/tonchen/birthers.htm – Stephen Tonchen
TheObamaFile.com
Birthers.org
NaturalBornCitizen.wordpress.com – Leo Donofrio


Original Birther Document 14

President Abraham Lincoln: The Union is Much Older than the U.S. Constitution
President Abraham Lincoln: 1861 First Inaugural Speech
Abraham Lincoln vs. Barack Obama

Original Intent:  A Mnemonic Device


Original Birther Document 15

The Barack Hussein Obama Documents:
A Birth Certificate
A Selective Service Number
A Social Security Number

What Fraud Means

Joel Gilbert has a Theory


Original Birther Document 16

Clause 5 ‘Original Intent’:
Soil & Birth Trojan Horse Possibilities

Trojan Horse Possibility #1: Political & Religious Islam
Trojan Horse Possibility #2: I-I-I-OCCUPY-America-in-Chief Obama
Trojan Horse Possibility #3: I-I-I-Shariaize-America-in-Chief Obama

I-I-I-OCCUPY-America-in-Chief Obama Trojan Horse Titles

Trojan Horse Possibility #1: Political & Religious Islam

Muslim Etymology:The Meaning of Muslim
Islam Etymology:The Meaning of Islam

Trojan Horse Possibility #2: I-I-I-OCCUPY-America-in-Chief Obama
Trojan Horse Possibility #3: I-I-I-Shariaize-America-in-Chief Obama

President Barack Obama
“The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.

The Past & The Future

A Quick Look:
‘I AM’ (ehyh) Ehyeh
‘HE IS’ (yhwh) Yahwah

Hebrew Greek English Transliteration Interlinear


Original Birther Document 17

Cold Case Posse:
The March 1, 2012 Investigation News Conference

What Is The Difference?

WHY?

Sheriff Joe Arpaio
A transcript of Sheriff Arpaio’s 13 minute comments in Sun City, Arizona March 31, 2012.
The media blackout started at the March 1, 2012 Cold Case Posse news conference.

Jerome Corsi WND.com Archive


Original Birther Document 18

The 1790 Naturalization Act
The 1795 Naturalization Act

1952 Immigration and Nationality Act

S. 301: Birthright Citizenship Act of 2013

The 1790 Naturalization Act Common Sense Original Intent
The 1795 Naturalization Act Common Sense Original Intent

Why Did Congress Change the 1795 Naturalization Act Language?
Original Intent Authority?
Original Intent Foreign Influence?
Both Authority & Influence?


Original Birther Document 19

Nine Attempts to Redefine ‘Natural Born Citizen’
Nine Resolutions to Define-Redefine ‘Natural Born Citizen’


Original Birther Document 20

Original Intent Common Sense: Natural Law is the Basis of Positive Law

2 of A Kind:
Both Citizen Married Parents Naturally Produce a 1 of a Kind ‘natural born Citizen’

2 NOT of A Kind:
Mixed Citizen Married Parents Naturally Produce a 1 of a Kind ‘Citizen’

U.S. Soil –
1787 US. Constitution
Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5

Foreign Soil –
1795 Naturalization Act
1952 Immigration and Nationality Act

U.S. Soil –
ZERO U.S. Citizen Married or Not Married Parents

U.S. Constitution –
Controlling Legal Authority

Natural Law & Positive Law

Free Citizens Made the Documents

Natural Law: Perpetual Common Sense Original Intent


Original Birther Document 21

Individualist Freedom to Want (desire)
Collectivist Freedom to Want (desire) Freedom from Want (need)

Freedom FROM Freedom

Melissa Harris-Perry:
Our Children are not our Private Property

The Debate:
Not About Me – About Us

What is the Social Contract of Society?

The Ancient Tyranny


Original Birther Document 22

TheRightScoop.com Polls
July 25 – 27, 2013
Three Polls With
Sen. Cruz IS Eligible & Sen. Cruz is NOT Eligible Comments

Opinion vs. Opinion
Or
Our ‘Original Intent’ Opinion vs. Their ‘Current Intent’ Opinion

NT Wright Transcripts
Can A Scientist Believe the Resurrection?
“Did Jesus Really Rise From the Dead?”


Original Birther Document 23

Copyright and the Public Domain



U.S. Constitution:
The ORIGINAL Birther Document of the United States of America

This eBook is copyright 2012-2013 ©, and it is not in the public domain
It may be copied and shared FREE without modification


Art Telles
OriginalBirtherDocument.blogspot.com©

March 2012
June 2013
September 2013


WAKE UP!!! AMERICA

See the Hebrew names for the heavenly WAKE UP!!! AMERICA Helper at


Ruach
Comforter
Eternal Spirit
Holy Spirit
Revelation Spirit
Truth Spirit
Wisdom Spirit

~ ~ ~

To find this page in search engines use original birther document




Wake UP   Look UP   Sit UP   Stand UP   Speak UP
      Speak UP
     Stand UP
   Sit UP
  Look UP
 Wake UP
  Look UP
   Sit UP
     Stand UP
      Speak UP
     Stand UP
   Sit UP
  Look UP
 Wake UP
  Look UP
   Sit UP
     Stand UP
      Speak UP
     Stand UP
   Sit UP
  Look UP
 Wake UP
Wake UP   Look UP   Sit UP   Stand UP   Speak UP