Uncle Sam, the thief, taking citizens for a ride!!!
CONVENTION of STATES
BECOME a MEMBER-PARTICIPANT of CONVENTION of STATES here.
Get into the Action; Get information. Join here.
The article below, posted on Daily Signal, presents the Birthright Citizenship misunderstanding, i.e., for 150 years since 1869, citizens and the government have understood only small parts of the debate
that occurred in CONgress to pass this Amendment and eventually be ratified by 3/4ths of the States. The author's original intent, Senator Jacob Howard, R-MI (January 17, 1862 � March 3, 1871), of the
14th Amendment's Citizenship Clause was to deny Birthright Citizenship to "Foreigners" including Aliens who have no or very little understanding of the American ideals and why America was created by the
Founders.
Editor's Note: It should seem obvious that America needs an impenetrable WALL on the southern border with Mexico. Illegal Aliens drain the wealth of America expanding debt and increasing financial vulnerability.
Many Illegal Aliens are criminals committing various felonies throughout our country. Educated Legal Aliens who are capable of earning a self-sufficient living, assimilating to American life, and becoming a Naturalized
Citizen are the only immigrants that America (or any country) should want. The image of a fence below might keep cattle in, but it doesn't keep criminals out. Emphasis Added below.
When it comes to the 14th Amendment, my good friend and fellow Justice Department veteran Andy McCarthy agrees that it does not require birthright citizenship.
And we�re not alone: Other experts, such as noted constitutional law scholar John Eastman, law professor and former dean of the Fowler School of Law at Chapman
University and a senior fellow at the Claremont Institute, take the same position on the citizenship clause (�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�).
But Andy and I differ on one very important point: whether the misinterpretation of the amendment can be changed by executive order. He doesn�t think so; I say that it can.
Simply put, the president does have the ability through executive action to direct federal agencies to act in accordance with the original meaning and intent of the citizenship
clause, and to direct those agencies to issue passports, Social Security numbers, etc., only to those individuals whose status as citizens meet the requirements of the law.
This is especially true here where, contrary to Andy�s speculation, Congress actually did not clarify that its later statutory provision was somehow inconsistent with the
original understanding of the amendment.
Congress codified the citizenship clause in Section 301 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952. Section 301 of the INA (
8 U.S.C. �1401(a)) simply repeats a portion of the language of the 14th
Amendment, stating that an individual shall be a citizen of the U.S. if he is �born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.� As Andy correctly says, the
term �subject to the jurisdiction� of the U.S. was understood at the time this Reconstruction-era amendment was adopted �to mean not owing allegiance to any other sovereign.�
It seems rather obvious that children born to aliens who are in this country either legally or illegally are citizens of the native countries of their parents. Those children owe
political allegiance to their parents� native countries and thus are not within the political jurisdiction of the U.S. As Andy points out, if a �child is born in France to a married
couple who are both American citizens, the child is an American citizen� and thus �subject to the jurisdiction� of the United States.
The fact that any alien in the U.S. is subject to our territorial jurisdiction, and can therefore be prosecuted for breaking our laws, does not make them subject to the complete,
political jurisdiction of the U.S. They owe no allegiance to the U.S. government and can�t be drafted into the military (if we re-imposed a draft); can�t be forced to serve on a
jury; don�t have all of the same obligations, responsibilities, and rights that citizens do.
But Andy doubts that the president can change this through an executive order. The �issue is not just what jurisdiction was understood to mean in 1868 when the 14th Amendment
was adopted, but what it meant in 1952, when the statute defining U.S. citizenship was enacted,� he writes. That is a cogent observation.
But, in fact, the legislative history of the INA does not reflect that Congress had a different understanding of �jurisdiction� in 1952. There is almost no discussion of this
provision in the congressional record.
One of the only lengthy discussions (but not about the jurisdiction requirement) is by Joseph Rider Farrington, who was the Territory of Hawaii�s delegate in the U.S. House of
Representatives. He complained about the restrictive immigration measures at the time that didn�t allow permanent, resident aliens from Asian countries who were the parents
of American citizens born in Hawaii to apply for citizenship.
This discussion by Farrington does not add any more to this debate than the 1898 holding in U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, which stands only for the very narrow proposition that the
U.S.-born children of lawful permanent resident aliens are U.S. citizens. It says nothing about the U.S.-born children of illegal aliens or aliens who are here temporarily like
tourists.
There is nothing in the congressional record of the passage of what became 8 U.S.C. �1401(a) that indicates that members of Congress had any different understanding or
intent with regard to the citizenship requirement of being �subject to the jurisdiction� of the U.S.
Birthright Citizenship for Those Who Pledge 100% Allegiance to the USA
In fact, at one point in the debate in the House of Representatives on April 23, 1952, Rep. Thomas A. Jenkins, R-Ohio, asked Rep. Louis E. Graham, R.-Pa., whether the bill
changes any of the �legal definitions that have from practice become practically a part of the law� on immigration and naturalization. Graham�s answer? The Immigration and
Nationality Act �restates the former definitions in accordance with existing law and the most recent decision of the Supreme Court of the United States.� So no change in the
definition of �jurisdiction.�
Andy correctly says that a president cannot �unilaterally change an understanding of the law that has been in effect for decades under a duly enacted federal law.� But that
assumes the �understanding� is the correct one. If that understanding actually violates the plain text and intent of the law, the president as the chief law enforcement officer
can, and indeed has an obligation, to direct the federal government to begin applying and enforcing it correctly.
That is the key issue here�Section 301 of the INA and the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment have been incorrectly enforced in violation of their terms.
There is no question that if President Donald Trump issues an executive order directing federal agencies to apply federal law according to what Andy, I, and others believe
is the correct interpretation, that the government will be sued.
This issue, whether the U.S.-born children of aliens who are only here temporarily as tourists or students or who are in this country illegally are citizens, has never been
directly addressed by the U.S. Supreme Court.
Just ask yourself a question: Does it make sense that people who cross our borders illegally, commit crimes (some violent), don't speak functional English, don't know the norms
and mores of American life, don't want to assimilate into American life, i.e., be an American citizen and not still from another country with a different socio-economic-political system,
and whose children (who will be raised by these illegals) will automatically be awarded citizenship at birth? Not only this, but these Illegals
cost the America's citizens $134,900,000,000 (billions) in taxes, deficits, and debt
EVERY YEAR that they live on USA soil illegally!
Foreigners who earn the right to be citizens through the Naturalization process when they learn American history, the Constitution, the Declaration if Independence and understand
these ideals of freedom and liberty deserve that their children be confered Birthright Citizenship. Naturalized Citizens are Americans! They will teach their children to be Americans!
]
A new Congress has been seated, and it brings the prospect of perhaps, maybe, potentially, in a possible way doing something about the runaway federal deficits. And in other news, several New York area bridges are for sale, which you can acquire at a bargain price.
Excessive Spending Destroys!
Feds Have a Spending Problem — DO NOT RAISE THE CEILING!
Feds Have a Sewage Problem!
DEBT PERSPECTIVE!
Social Security (SS) monies flow into the Feds via paycheck withholding. The Feds buy
US Treasuries and the Bond purchase money is deposited into the treasury. Benefit money
must therefore be paid out of the Treasury. If there had been a SS brokerage account
(instead of the Feds spending it), the monies could have been invested very conservatively
to receive a modest 5-8% annual return on investment and the SS "Trust" Fund would
be solvent even with retiring baby-boomers. Another mismanagement failure is SS Disability
which has been defrauded by mendacious citizen malingerers especially from 2000 to 2016.
James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Rod Rosenstein, Peter Strzok, Bruce Ohr and wife, Lisa Page, and Hillary Clinton
SHOULD BE CHARGED AND TRIED for their violations!
CONVENTION of STATES
BECOME a MEMBER-PARTICIPANT of CONVENTION of STATES here.
Get into the Action; Get information. Join here.
Joseph Story, Supreme Court Justice ... when the court wasn't part of the L-E-J Cabal
Joseph Story (1779�1845) was born during the American Revolution, and came of age in the early years of the new United States of America. He was a scholar of the U.S. Constitution, and, eventually helped found the Harvard Law School.
In 1811, Story was appointed to the Supreme Court by President James Madison � who knew a few things about the U.S. Constitution, in that he helped write it. Story was a contemporary of another famous member of the Supreme Court, Chief Justice John Marshall (1755�1835).
"The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them."
See the following links for more related articles:
[Editor's Note: what I have dubbed the "Legislative-Executive-Judicial Cabal" which the American People have caused by ignoring the generational transition from our Constitutional Republic to what now is, in effect, an "elected" dictatorship. Never mind who is elected. Never mind which bogus party is in power. The superficial, theatrically staged, choreographed appearance of debate, disagreement, and stalled legislation always resolves into more government and less FREEDOM. We the People still lose more freedom after every "emergency" or unnoticeably when CON-gress passes another general, open-ended law that enables the Executive (dictator) and its unaccountable agencies to formulate more freedom-restricting regulations (200 pages a day get posted to the Federal Register). The "Dictator's" agencies (police force) continue to pile-up more weapons to squelch uprising(s) when the People finally realize and understand their tyrannical government.
Currently, CONgress is just a group of socialists, progressives, and faux-conservatives (career politicians) that, on a daily basis, ignores the Constitution, many of their own past statutes, and cedes their responsibilities to the president ("elected" dictator). A comparison to the history of Rome becomes more and more credible with the Executive and its "featherbedded" lackeys gaining more power while CONgress sits back all fat-dumb-and-happy.
CONgress has made recent efforts to expose State Dept. failures in Benghazi (inept political leader), Fast-and-Furious gun-running (criminal AG), IRS 1st amendment violations, gov't union Veterans Administration fraud, and whining about Obama(Reid)-killer-Care, but these efforts are mostly politics as usual. Most "citizens" will forget about these infringements from our unaccountable, uncontrollable Executive branch with its tyrannical agencies staffed by socialist unions that extort "juicy" contracts from the "elected" dictatorship.
Most positions in the federal government whether elected, appointed, or hired are nominal, make-work jobs (confidentially) designed merely to grow government, bilk money from private businesses and citizens, and eventually fully transform America into a totalitarian state. When this happens, CONgress will have destroyed the economy and the country by their negligence and counter-liberty policies, and it will be almost impossible to Restore America. The 'Restore America' list is only a beginning too.]
"The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny."
James Madison, Federalist Paper 47, Friday, February 1, 1788
Anyone who believes this country is free is an idiot!
"Extortion and thuggery are good things when they're called law!"
Larken Rose
[Editor's Note: a Constitutional Convention is required to reverse the damage to freedom and liberty since 1900. This Article V was ratified by the participants at America's founding Constitutional Convention as an alternate path for repairing damage to freedom and liberty, a path for the People to restore damage caused by our failed representatives in the Legislative, Executive, and Judicial branches of a government designed to represent the wishes of We the People.
The States must "demand" a Convention and explicitly specify an agenda of:
laws to be repealed or modified,
Amendments to existing constitutional clauses that define the co-equal branches to further specify and define, and
new Amendments or statutes to be eventually ratified by States.
These Amendments should further specify and clarify the powers of the Legislature and Executive Branches. A good example is the definition of a "Bill".
A Bill should contain ONLY verbiage in regards to the topic of the future law. NO earmarks and NO unrelated sections or attacments.
Many past Bills sent to a president for signature contained unrelated but essential funding sections that rendered the Bill veto-proof when it warranted a veto.
CON-gress can override a veto if the Bill is deemed absolutely necessary by CON-gress.
If the Bill requires SPECIFICALLY related amendments, the CON-gress can "debate" (with its usual theater) and vote any new amendments.
The original text of the Constitution contains some very GENERAL clauses enabling both CON-gress and Executive branches to write laws and
regulations with their particular nuances expanding powers beyond intent. "Intent" may be gleaned from a complete understanding of
Federalist Papers.
An example of further specification and clarity for CON-gress should be a clear, very specific definition of the boundaries for the interstate Commerce Clause.
To restore freedom, liberty, and individuality - minimally these must be repealed:
Currently, even with computer-searching systems, the list of antiquated and/or obsolete statutes (and related regulations) is unwieldy.
These statutes must be invalidated unless there remains an applicable reason for retaining the law(s).
Aside from invalidating statutes, there are many regulations that are biased in favor of large enterprises (who buy support from bureaucrats)
at the expense of the competition, effectively repressing the Free Market. Any regulations not related to public safety that gives a financial advantage
to some companies over their smaller rivals must be rescinded to enable all companies with good consumer products to excel without burdensome regulations.
Additionally, the Convention should adopt for ratification at least these new Amendments or statute modifications:
clearly define and limit the role of government in regards to the term "general welfare",
Term Limits for CON-gress (12 years) including a 6 month limit on time residing in DC,
strict Prohibition of Lobbying (with a comprehensive definition of "lobbying"), and
a Balanced Budget Amendment to stop wreckless spending. During a CON-gressionally declared "war" (only after USA is attacked or attack is proven "imminent"),
deficit spending is permissible.
Restore America to its roots, i.e. Defense, State, Treasury, and Justice. Some Agencies are required like CIA and NSA, both respectively focused on defense against real foreign aggressors and not fictitious paranoid delusions of war mongers. Other agencies help where certain interstate communications are necessary. Most agencies like Agriculture, Education, DEA, IRS (eliminated with 16th Amendment) and many other listed here should be eliminated.
Restore the world Gold Standard with five contentious steps, and
Replace the IMF, World Bank, and Export-Import Bank with facilities that reflect the new Gold Standard, and
After decentralizing and economizing, if tax revenue is needed to fund all or part of the federal government, then implement the Fair Tax.
Regarding a Constitutional Convention itself, some of the available literature warns the reader about a possible "unstructured" and "mismanaged"
Convention that might propose and adopt amendments that could damage the Republic.
Possible, however, it is difficult to envisage how much more damage could done over what the L-E-J Cabal has already done.
If the Convention's agenda and rules of order strictly prohibit violation of the rules and enable a vote on unlisted Amendments AFTER all others are adopted,
then the Convention will be properly structured and managed. ]
The FairTax is a consumption tax unilaterally applied to all Americans at the same rate. For businesses, payroll taxes would no longer exist. Our exports would include a heavy tax for overseas buyers purchasing our products, while our imports would be cheaper for us to purchase. I'm not sure how this would affect GDP, as more information is necessary.
According to the FairTax website, "Under the FairTax, every person living in the United States pays a sales tax on purchases of new goods and services, excluding necessities due to the prebate." The prebate gives every legal resident household an "advance refund" at the beginning of each month so that purchases made up to the poverty level are tax-free.
So a family of four making something like $50,000/year should not have to pay taxes, thus preventing an unfair burden on low-income families. Since the FairTax eliminates both federal and payroll taxes, you get to keep your gross pay amount of each paycheck earned.
John Adams said, �Without [term limits] every man in power becomes a ravenous beast of prey�. That being said, here are some of the reasons we believe our country needs Term Limits.
Term Limits can help break the cycle of corruption in Congress. Case studies show that the longer an individual stays in office, the more likely they are to stop serving the public and begin serving their own interests.
Term Limits will encourage regular citizens to run for office. Presently, there is a 94% re-election rate in the House and 83% in the Senate. Because of name recognition, and usually the advantage of money, it can be easy to stay in office. Without legitimate competition, what is the incentive for a member of Congress to serve the public? Furthermore, it is almost a lost cause for the average citizen to try to campaign against current members of Congress.
Term Limits will break the power special interest groups have in Congress.
Term Limits will force politicians to think about the impact of their legislation because they will be returning to their communities shortly to live under the laws they enacted.
Term Limits will bring diversity of people and fresh ideas to Congress.
[Editor's Note: If you want to get rich, i.e. advance from a low paying government bureaucrat job on the local or state level, THEN GET ELECTED TO THE US CONGRESS (House or Senate). Once you're elected, it's easy to steal from your campaign contributions or the Congressional budget allocated to your seat and staff. You can go on a government-funded junket with 'lavishly' paid expenses. The list of ways to steal from the government while in office is inexhaustible. There are only a few Congressmen who left Congress just wealthy instead of a multi-millionaire. Of course, there are several who arrived in Congress as multi-millionaires and don't need to steal from the government.]
