Kamala Harris "Birtherism 2.0" -- Here Birthers Go Again -- Donald Jr

User avatar
Foggy
Posts: 29105
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: Fogbow HQ
Occupation: Dick Tater

Re: Kamala Harris "Birtherism 2.0" -- Here Birthers Go Again -- Donald Jr

#51

Post by Foggy » Thu Jul 11, 2019 2:46 pm

I still think "not black enough" or "no authentic black American experience" are not birtherism.

Birtherism is "not eligible because her parents weren't citizens". All else is shabby politics, but not amounting to real birtherism.

YMMV.


I put the 'fun' in dysfunctional.

User avatar
p0rtia
Posts: 2975
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2012 11:44 am

Re: Kamala Harris "Birtherism 2.0" -- Here Birthers Go Again -- Donald Jr

#52

Post by p0rtia » Thu Jul 11, 2019 2:48 pm

Foggy wrote:
Thu Jul 11, 2019 2:46 pm
I still think "not black enough" or "no authentic black American experience" are not birtherism.

Birtherism is "not eligible because her parents weren't citizens". All else is shabby politics, but not amounting to real birtherism.

YMMV.
I think they are first cousins, whose parents are siblings in racism.


No matter where you go, there you are! :towel:
ImageImageImage

User avatar
Foggy
Posts: 29105
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: Fogbow HQ
Occupation: Dick Tater

Re: Kamala Harris "Birtherism 2.0" -- Here Birthers Go Again -- Donald Jr

#53

Post by Foggy » Thu Jul 11, 2019 2:49 pm

OK, I can see that. Yeah.


I put the 'fun' in dysfunctional.

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 45279
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Re: Kamala Harris "Birtherism 2.0" -- Here Birthers Go Again -- Donald Jr

#54

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Thu Jul 11, 2019 2:53 pm

p0rtia wrote:
Thu Jul 11, 2019 2:48 pm
Foggy wrote:
Thu Jul 11, 2019 2:46 pm
I still think "not black enough" or "no authentic black American experience" are not birtherism.

Birtherism is "not eligible because her parents weren't citizens". All else is shabby politics, but not amounting to real birtherism.

YMMV.
I think they are first cousins, whose parents are siblings in racism.
:like:



User avatar
bob
Posts: 27345
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Kamala Harris "Birtherism 2.0" -- Here Birthers Go Again -- Donald Jr

#55

Post by bob » Thu Jul 11, 2019 2:56 pm

p0rtia wrote:
Thu Jul 11, 2019 2:48 pm
I think they are first cousins, whose parents are siblings in racism.
And the birfering against Obama was preceded by plain ole racism.

So there's a historical pattern as to what may come next for Harris.


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

Jeffrey
Posts: 1222
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 11:27 pm

Re: Kamala Harris "Birtherism 2.0" -- Here Birthers Go Again -- Donald Jr

#56

Post by Jeffrey » Thu Jul 11, 2019 3:07 pm

I’m in the “not true birtherism” camp as well but it’s clearly the spiritual sequel to birtherism. Makes sense to call it that.



User avatar
RVInit
Posts: 8316
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2016 4:31 pm

Re: Kamala Harris "Birtherism 2.0" -- Here Birthers Go Again -- Donald Jr

#57

Post by RVInit » Thu Jul 11, 2019 6:51 pm

According to this article, Jacob Wohl has already claimed on Twitter that Harris is not an American citizen and does not qualify to run for President. It may not have caught on widely yet, but yes, the birther crap has been claimed by at least one person on Twitter.

https://www.marieclaire.com/politics/a2 ... tizenship/


"I know that human being and fish can coexist peacefully"
--- George W Bush

ImageImage

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 45279
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Re: Kamala Harris "Birtherism 2.0" -- Here Birthers Go Again -- Donald Jr

#58

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Thu Jul 11, 2019 9:51 pm

I'm expecting an Apuzzo-like attack on Senator Harris' citizenship. If not by him by others, like Taitz. Birtherism is not dead.



User avatar
bob
Posts: 27345
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Kamala Harris "Birtherism 2.0" -- Here Birthers Go Again -- Donald Jr

#59

Post by bob » Thu Jul 11, 2019 10:17 pm

Sterngard Friegen wrote:
Thu Jul 11, 2019 9:51 pm
I'm expecting an Apuzzo-like attack on Senator Harris' citizenship. If not by him by others, like Taitz.
Apuzzo and Kerchner are likely candidates to Harris birf. Laity too (also). Voeltz as well. With the usual encouragement from Rondeau, Booth, Judy, etc.

Taitz always was wishy-washy on the two-citizen-parents fantasy. She'd occasionally bring it up, but mostly just poo-poo it. She didn't file anything in 2016 against Cruz, Rubio, or Jindal.
Birtherism is not dead.
Concur. We're around five months out from the first lawsuit.


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
Northland10
Posts: 8584
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 9:19 am
Location: Chicago area - North burbs

Re: Kamala Harris "Birtherism 2.0" -- Here Birthers Go Again -- Donald Jr

#60

Post by Northland10 » Thu Jul 11, 2019 10:41 pm

Will the two-parent citizen Birthers get upset if Trump does not support them? He may be lest than consistent with reality on his statements, but he might actually realize that, by the two parent birther rules, Don Jr, Ivanka, and Eric are all not natural-born citizens.


North-land: of the family 10

UCC 1-106 Plural is Singular, Singular is Plural.

User avatar
bob
Posts: 27345
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Kamala Harris "Birtherism 2.0" -- Here Birthers Go Again -- Donald Jr

#61

Post by bob » Thu Jul 11, 2019 10:47 pm

Northland10 wrote:
Thu Jul 11, 2019 10:41 pm
Will the two-parent citizen Birthers get upset if Trump does not support them?
"Deep State." "Can't act until his second term."

The usual excuses to explain reality away, i.e., "President Obama was born in the United States. Period." was the president's last (public) pronouncement.


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
bob
Posts: 27345
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Kamala Harris "Birtherism 2.0" -- Here Birthers Go Again -- Donald Jr

#62

Post by bob » Fri Jul 12, 2019 2:19 pm

Renew America: Harris and Gabbard not constitutionally qualified to be president:
Larry Klayman wrote:Not "Natural Born Citizens"

Senator Kamala Devi Harris (D-California) cannot become president unless she is a "natural born Citizen." The U.S. Constitution contains few eligibility criteria for our nation's highest post. But being born to the country is one of them. Since a vice president must be able to succeed to the presidency, Harris could not run as vice president, either.


* * *

The same rule of law and legal principles apply to Senators Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio, and I said so during the 2016 Republican presidential primary. Even John McCain in 2008 had to answer challenges to his eligibility to run for president as a natural born citizen. McCain was born at a U.S. military base in Panama in the Canal Zone. Some believe that a military base counts as U.S. soil.

Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard was born on American Samoa (not on a military base). Like McCain's Canal Zone birth, it is doubtful that birth in the American Samoa qualifies Gabbard as a natural born citizen. Her father Mike Gabbard was also born in American Samoa but apparently has no other claim to citizenship. Her mother Carole Porter Gabbard was born in Decatur, Illinois. A respect for our Constitution and the law requires challenging Gabbard's qualifications, the same as anyone else of whatever political party. Their background is irrelevant.

So what is a "natural born citizen?" The phrase is not separately defined in the Constitution, indicating that those who wrote it and ratified it understood it as a term of art with a well-established interpretation (understood by Congress and all thirteen original states).

The U.S. Supreme Court has held that it was "never doubted" that natural born citizens are those born in the U.S. of U.S. citizen parents. Minor v. Happersett, 88 US 162, 167 (1875).

* * *

Treatises of the time explained the concept: "The natural born, or native is one who is born in the country, of citizen parents." Morse, Alexander Peter, A Treatise on Citizenship pp. xi (1881). "Under the view of the law of nations, natives, or natural born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens." Id. at §7

The framers of our Constitution were students of Swiss jurist and political philosopher Emmerich de Vattel, who wrote the seminal 1758 treatise "The Law of Nations." Vattel defines in Section 212 "The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens." That is, one must not only be born within the United States, but also to parents who are both U.S. citizens.

Conservative originalist Justice Antonin Scalia made clear that "The Law of Nations" is a definitive guide to help interpret the U.S. Constitution in his concurring opinion in Arizona v. United States, 567 U.S. 387 (2012). The U.S. Supreme Court also relied upon Section 212 of Vattel in The Venus, 12 U.S. 8 Cranch 253 253 (1814). On October 5, 1789, President George Washington borrowed from the New York Society Library a copy of Vattel's "Law of Nations," as evidenced by his entry in the ledger.

* * *

As I have before, I will take a consistent stand with lawsuits in my home state of Florida to ensure that only candidates who constitutionally qualify appear on the presidential ballot, no matter what their race, religion, ethnicity or national origin.


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
bob
Posts: 27345
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Kamala Harris "Birtherism 2.0" -- Here Birthers Go Again -- Donald Jr

#63

Post by bob » Fri Jul 12, 2019 4:22 pm


"Maybe I was wrong on the question of two parents"? :swoon:


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
bob
Posts: 27345
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Kamala Harris "Birtherism 2.0" -- Here Birthers Go Again -- Donald Jr

#64

Post by bob » Mon Jul 15, 2019 4:20 pm

I've been doing some "field research"*:

* No one argues that Harris wasn't born in the United States, or otherwise is challenging the validity of her birth certificate.

* The usual birthers (and others) argue the two-citizen-parent "rule." (With respect to the prior eligibility rulings, the usual "the judges were wrong," "judges can't make law," "SCOTUS hasn't spoken," etc.)

* A creative argument that Obama was eligible because he had one citizen parent at the time of his birth (as opposed to Harris' none).

* A very creative argument that birth in the United States with at least one noncitizen parent legally in the country is a form naturalization. (So Harris would be ineligible to serve as president but otherwise is a citizen and therefore can be in Congress.)



* Trolling on Twitter. :bag:


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 12992
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: Kamala Harris "Birtherism 2.0" -- Here Birthers Go Again -- Donald Jr

#65

Post by Notorial Dissent » Mon Jul 15, 2019 4:44 pm

Nice selection.
*1 give them time.

*2 the usual. Expected.
*3 heresy.
*4 not quite tortured enough.

:rotflmao:


The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.

Post Reply

Return to “Debunking the Lies”