Donald Trump Meets The Eligibility Requirements For Article 2 Section 1 For President

[rightwinger]

I knew you didn't have the knowledge to answer and no, Obama didn't meet the required guidlines for eligibility. It was discovered last September that the DNC and HDP left out the constitutional provisional wording on the OCON forms to certify him eligible. The media won't touch it when asked. Obama actually usurped power on the American people to be honest and the media knows it. The reason he wasn't certified was because of his fathers British Nationality which was passed to him at birth despite being born in Hawaii. The Birth Certificate is a diversion from the real issue, his British National Kenyan father thus making Obama a non natural born citizen. If Obama's father had naturalized and became a citizen prior to Obama being born then he would be a naturally natural born citizen born to two American parents just like all of our Presidents post grandfather clause.

Fraid not....Obama met all the Constitutional requirements and was sworn in as eligible by Chief Justice Roberts

Being born in the state of Hawaii met all the requirements. His fathers status is irrelevant...except to birthers

No he didn't meet all the requirements and the Father Of The 14th Amendment, John Bingham disagrees. Here is the creator of the 14th Amendments words on being a Natural Born Citizen:

“All from other lands, who by the terms of [congressional] laws and a compliance with their provisions become naturalized, are adopted citizens of the United States; all other persons born within the Republic, of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty, are natural born citizens. Gentleman can find no exception to this statement touching natural-born citizens except what is said in the Constitution relating to Indians.” (Cong. Globe, 37th, 2nd Sess., 1639 (1862))

You see Obama's father does have relevance because his allegiance was to England because Kenya was a British Colony. The founders who wrote Article 2 Section 1 wanted a president with only sole allegiance to the United States.

Hpw can you argue with the creator of the 14th Amendment of the constitution? It's in his own words that a Natural Born Citizen for Article 2 Section 1 purposes is born to TWO parent's (plural) with allegiances to the United States. Obama usurped the office and doesn't pass the test. John Roberts did swear him in as protocol calls for but it is not up to him to raise the issue. Only a house investigation can make it happen and the way it is looking for Obama with Trump making headlines and the Chicago Sun pressing for him to release his original long form yesterday, it may happen.

Can't stop laughing at you. Obamas father was not elected president. His natural born son was

 

[USArmyRetired]

Fraid not....Obama met all the Constitutional requirements and was sworn in as eligible by Chief Justice Roberts

Being born in the state of Hawaii met all the requirements. His fathers status is irrelevant...except to birthers

No he didn't meet all the requirements and the Father Of The 14th Amendment, John Bingham disagrees. Here is the creator of the 14th Amendments words on being a Natural Born Citizen:

“All from other lands, who by the terms of [congressional] laws and a compliance with their provisions become naturalized, are adopted citizens of the United States; all other persons born within the Republic, of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty, are natural born citizens. Gentleman can find no exception to this statement touching natural-born citizens except what is said in the Constitution relating to Indians.” (Cong. Globe, 37th, 2nd Sess., 1639 (1862))

You see Obama's father does have relevance because his allegiance was to England because Kenya was a British Colony. The founders who wrote Article 2 Section 1 wanted a president with only sole allegiance to the United States.

Hpw can you argue with the creator of the 14th Amendment of the constitution? It's in his own words that a Natural Born Citizen for Article 2 Section 1 purposes is born to TWO parent's (plural) with allegiances to the United States. Obama usurped the office and doesn't pass the test. John Roberts did swear him in as protocol calls for but it is not up to him to raise the issue. Only a house investigation can make it happen and the way it is looking for Obama with Trump making headlines and the Chicago Sun pressing for him to release his original long form yesterday, it may happen.

Blah blah blah unfortunately for your weak argument, the SCOTUS and the Congress that unanimously voted for Obama's presidency disagree with you. Maybe the SCOTUS will take up your case. Ask Orly Taint how her case went. FAIL

LOL, when did the SCOTUS start voting for presidents as a group as you insinuate? Link please to prove your case or else your argument fails on epic proportions.

 

[USArmyRetired]

Fraid not....Obama met all the Constitutional requirements and was sworn in as eligible by Chief Justice Roberts

Being born in the state of Hawaii met all the requirements. His fathers status is irrelevant...except to birthers

No he didn't meet all the requirements and the Father Of The 14th Amendment, John Bingham disagrees. Here is the creator of the 14th Amendments words on being a Natural Born Citizen:

“All from other lands, who by the terms of [congressional] laws and a compliance with their provisions become naturalized, are adopted citizens of the United States; all other persons born within the Republic, of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty, are natural born citizens. Gentleman can find no exception to this statement touching natural-born citizens except what is said in the Constitution relating to Indians.” (Cong. Globe, 37th, 2nd Sess., 1639 (1862))

You see Obama's father does have relevance because his allegiance was to England because Kenya was a British Colony. The founders who wrote Article 2 Section 1 wanted a president with only sole allegiance to the United States.

Hpw can you argue with the creator of the 14th Amendment of the constitution? It's in his own words that a Natural Born Citizen for Article 2 Section 1 purposes is born to TWO parent's (plural) with allegiances to the United States. Obama usurped the office and doesn't pass the test. John Roberts did swear him in as protocol calls for but it is not up to him to raise the issue. Only a house investigation can make it happen and the way it is looking for Obama with Trump making headlines and the Chicago Sun pressing for him to release his original long form yesterday, it may happen.

Can't stop laughing at you. Obamas father was not elected president. His natural born son was

My god, are you that dense? I wasn't talking about his father being elected president. I was talking about his father's citizenship effecting his sons eligibility. Natural Born Citizenship follows your parents U.S. citizenship in case you didn't know. To be eligible for Article 2 Section 1 it depends on your parents allegiance and citizenship. That is what John Bingham, the creator of the 14th Amendment is talking about in his statement I posted. You have to have sole born allegiance to the U.S. to be president. That is what the founders intended and that is why they changed the presidential clause at the behest of the first chief justice John Jay from just being a citizen to being a natural born citizen to be commander of the armies. Obama doesn't pass the test because he was born a dual citizen in Hawaii. He was born with allegiance to the United States and allegiance to the British Crown. It took a little over two years for Watergate to take place and this eligibility problem is heating up in the news more and more every week. It won't be long before the damn will break.

By the way, the same thing is happening in Thailand with their Prime Minister. He has revealed he is a dual British Citizen and our media isn't touching the story. I wonder why? It's the same situation here. Please look:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...r-Abhisit-Vejajjiva-lose-job-hes-British.html

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011/02/dual_citizenship_could_force_t.html

 

[rightwinger]

No he didn't meet all the requirements and the Father Of The 14th Amendment, John Bingham disagrees. Here is the creator of the 14th Amendments words on being a Natural Born Citizen:

“All from other lands, who by the terms of [congressional] laws and a compliance with their provisions become naturalized, are adopted citizens of the United States; all other persons born within the Republic, of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty, are natural born citizens. Gentleman can find no exception to this statement touching natural-born citizens except what is said in the Constitution relating to Indians.” (Cong. Globe, 37th, 2nd Sess., 1639 (1862))

You see Obama's father does have relevance because his allegiance was to England because Kenya was a British Colony. The founders who wrote Article 2 Section 1 wanted a president with only sole allegiance to the United States.

Hpw can you argue with the creator of the 14th Amendment of the constitution? It's in his own words that a Natural Born Citizen for Article 2 Section 1 purposes is born to TWO parent's (plural) with allegiances to the United States. Obama usurped the office and doesn't pass the test. John Roberts did swear him in as protocol calls for but it is not up to him to raise the issue. Only a house investigation can make it happen and the way it is looking for Obama with Trump making headlines and the Chicago Sun pressing for him to release his original long form yesterday, it may happen.

Can't stop laughing at you. Obamas father was not elected president. His natural born son was

My god, are you that dense? I wasn't talking about his father being elected president. I was talking about his father's citizenship effecting his sons eligibility. Natural Born Citizenship follows your parents U.S. citizenship in case you didn't know. To be eligible for Article 2 Section 1 it depends on your parents allegiance and citizenship. That is what John Bingham, the creator of the 14th Amendment is talking about in his statement I posted. You have to have sole born allegiance to the U.S. to be president. That is what the founders intended and that is why they changed the presidential clause at the behest of the first chief justice John Jay from just being a citizen to being a natural born citizen to be commander of the armies. Obama doesn't pass the test because he was born a dual citizen in Hawaii. He was born with allegiance to the United States and allegiance to the British Crown. It took a little over two years for Watergate to take place and this eligibility problem is heating up in the news more and more every week. It won't be long before the damn will break.

By the way, the same thing is happening in Thailand with their Prime Minister. He has revealed he is a dual British Citizen and our media isn't touching the story. I wonder why? Please look:

American Thinker Blog: Dual citizenship could force Thai leader from office

I'm sorry......I try to take you seriously, but I can't stop laughing at you

You seem to have solved our immigration problems. All those Mexican children born in the US are not really citizens.

Hate to tell ya birther.......but the status of Obamas fathers citizenship was known well before he was elected. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court still swore him in

What does that tell you Sgt Birther?

 

[EriktheRed]

I doubt it. Newt Gingrich would destroy Obama, one-on-one! Fact.

 

[EriktheRed]

I guess Trump is the new Fred Thompson.

Or the latest new Fred Thompson.

And you'll continue to be an obedient little North Eastern dipshit and pull the lever that has a D marked on it. It doesn't matter what asshole, including the one in Air Force One presently, that your masters tell you to vote for.......... you and other thoughtless drones like you will continue supporting their idiocy.

Maybe you'll get lucky and be forced to vote for that super qualified wife of an ex President, shit she knows what colors the white house walls are........or at least before that skank Michelle painted them purple.

You're one of those wingnuts I'll be looking forward to reading on here if Pres. Obama gets re-elected next year.

 

[rightwinger]

Who are you most likely to avoid at a party?

1. An ex-girlfriend
2. Someone you owe money
3 Someone with poor hygiene
4. A Birther

 

[Cecilie1200]

Is he going to hold a reality show to pick his cabinet?

Couldn't be any worse than some of the cabinets we've seen. I've wondered on occasion if certain Presidents just drew names out of a hat.

 

[Cecilie1200]

This is what we know about the Billionaire who might run for President,


Donald Trump
born June 14, 1946 (Meets the 35 years Minimum age Requirement)

in Queens, New York, NY (Meets the Jus Soli Requirement)

Parents were:

Father: Frederick Christ Trump, born October 11, 1905 in Queens, NY, died June 1999 in Queens, NY

Mother: Mary Ann MacLeod, born May 10, 1912 in SCOTLAND, died August 7, 2000 in Queeens, NY. Arrived in US October 5, 1935. Married January 1936. Naturalized as a US Citizen March 10, 1942.

Both parents were US Citizens at the time of his birth (Meets the Jus Sanguninis Requirement)

Donald Trump is a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN with sole allegiance (due to both his parents being US Citizens) to the United States and thus meets the founders intent to meet Article 2 Section 1 of the constitution for President.

Trump will make a great candidate. He has knowledge of the corporate world and knows how to cut budgets and waste with his knowledge of bankruptcy laws. He is not afraid to speak his mind and is straight forward as Sarah Palin is.

I am really interested in him. If he enters the primaries, we will learn much more. He brings a sense of leadership, toughness and knowledge and as you mentioned, much global experience. Plus, he has the money to compete.

But he has baggage that the LEFT will rally to, and capitalize upon...

Is there any person in the United States over the age of 35 who DOESN'T have baggage the left will rally to and try to capitalize upon? And would you actually want to vote for someone who has essentially gone that long without taking his life out of the bubble wrap and plugging it in?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Newt's personal life basically destroys his chances. He doesn't walk the walk, and like many modern Messiahs, he basically admitted that he's exempt from the rules he espouses.

Really? Newt a messiah? NAH. His personal life got in the way in the 90's...he stepped down...It will dog him courtesy of the Left.

He literally cheated on his wife who was suffering from cancer. ANY person who does this deserves to be dogged-whether they're left, right or center. Period. Not to mention after he got married a 2nd time he had ANOTHER affair. Now he prances around like he's such a great, devote Catholic. I've been Catholic my whole life-and yes I've sinned. But I've never done anything that scumbaggish before.

If he doesn't show his wife(wives) respect-what makes you think he's going to respect the country?

Again this isn't a "he's a righty" thing. It's an "he's an asshole" thing.

::cough, cough::BillClinton::cough, cough:: Sorry 'bout that.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Until I see a long form birth certificate, I ain't buying it. That hairdo is far too French for him to be a natural born American.

Naturalized as a US Citizen March 10, 1942.

You can't be a naturalized citizen if you were born in Scotland. Naturalized means you were naturally born in America, so is Thumper running for President of Scotland?

Naturalize - 1: to confer the rights of a national on; especially : to admit to citizenship

Do you even OWN a dictionary, Mensa Boy?

 

[Garfield]

We don't need Trump for a candidate. We need someone who has a better character. Although I do like his ideas about the economy.

 

[Cecilie1200]

No he didn't meet all the requirements and the Father Of The 14th Amendment, John Bingham disagrees. Here is the creator of the 14th Amendments words on being a Natural Born Citizen:

“All from other lands, who by the terms of [congressional] laws and a compliance with their provisions become naturalized, are adopted citizens of the United States; all other persons born within the Republic, of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty, are natural born citizens. Gentleman can find no exception to this statement touching natural-born citizens except what is said in the Constitution relating to Indians.” (Cong. Globe, 37th, 2nd Sess., 1639 (1862))

You see Obama's father does have relevance because his allegiance was to England because Kenya was a British Colony. The founders who wrote Article 2 Section 1 wanted a president with only sole allegiance to the United States.

Hpw can you argue with the creator of the 14th Amendment of the constitution? It's in his own words that a Natural Born Citizen for Article 2 Section 1 purposes is born to TWO parent's (plural) with allegiances to the United States. Obama usurped the office and doesn't pass the test. John Roberts did swear him in as protocol calls for but it is not up to him to raise the issue. Only a house investigation can make it happen and the way it is looking for Obama with Trump making headlines and the Chicago Sun pressing for him to release his original long form yesterday, it may happen.

Blah blah blah unfortunately for your weak argument, the SCOTUS and the Congress that unanimously voted for Obama's presidency disagree with you. Maybe the SCOTUS will take up your case. Ask Orly Taint how her case went. FAIL

LOL, when did the SCOTUS start voting for presidents as a group as you insinuate? Link please to prove your case or else your argument fails on epic proportions.

When the hell did CONGRESS start voting for Presidents?

 

[Late2TheParty]

Really? Newt a messiah? NAH. His personal life got in the way in the 90's...he stepped down...It will dog him courtesy of the Left.

He literally cheated on his wife who was suffering from cancer. ANY person who does this deserves to be dogged-whether they're left, right or center. Period. Not to mention after he got married a 2nd time he had ANOTHER affair. Now he prances around like he's such a great, devote Catholic. I've been Catholic my whole life-and yes I've sinned. But I've never done anything that scumbaggish before.

If he doesn't show his wife(wives) respect-what makes you think he's going to respect the country?

Again this isn't a "he's a righty" thing. It's an "he's an asshole" thing.

::cough, cough::BillClinton::cough, cough:: Sorry 'bout that.

Newt was dogging Clinton over an affair with an intern WHILE he (Newt) was cheating on his wife. And that was Newt's second affair we know of, as he cheated on his 1st wife while she was having cancer, with a woman that eventually became his second wife. That's some serious hypocrisy there.

 

[SgtMeowenstein]

Blah blah blah unfortunately for your weak argument, the SCOTUS and the Congress that unanimously voted for Obama's presidency disagree with you. Maybe the SCOTUS will take up your case. Ask Orly Taint how her case went. FAIL

LOL, when did the SCOTUS start voting for presidents as a group as you insinuate? Link please to prove your case or else your argument fails on epic proportions.

When the hell did CONGRESS start voting for Presidents?

YEah yeah yeah you know what I meant. Congress unanimously approved him. And the Chief Justice of the SCOTUS swore him in. And then there are the birther cases that the SCOTUS has thrown out. So, tell me, professor, do you think Congress would unanimously approve him if they thought he wasn't eligible? Don't you think the SCOTUS would look into it if they thought there was a shred of evidence that he is ineligible? Do you have anything else, or do you just like to flap your lips just for the sake of flapping?

 

[Cecilie1200]

He literally cheated on his wife who was suffering from cancer. ANY person who does this deserves to be dogged-whether they're left, right or center. Period. Not to mention after he got married a 2nd time he had ANOTHER affair. Now he prances around like he's such a great, devote Catholic. I've been Catholic my whole life-and yes I've sinned. But I've never done anything that scumbaggish before.

If he doesn't show his wife(wives) respect-what makes you think he's going to respect the country?

Again this isn't a "he's a righty" thing. It's an "he's an asshole" thing.

::cough, cough::BillClinton::cough, cough:: Sorry 'bout that.

Newt was dogging Clinton over an affair with an intern WHILE he (Newt) was cheating on his wife. And that was Newt's second affair we know of, as he cheated on his 1st wife while she was having cancer, with a woman that eventually became his second wife. That's some serious hypocrisy there.

No, dumbass. Newt was dogging Clinton over BREAKING THE LAW. I realize your talking points have never mentioned that fact, so you were unaware of it, but it's absurd to think Clinton was impeached just over being a horndog, as though that wasn't already common knowledge. Newt, on the other hand, didn't break the law, so no hypocrisy there.

Speaking of hypocrisy, however, I believe I was pointing out YOURS when you said this:

"If he doesn't show his wife(wives) respect-what makes you think he's going to respect the country?"

Doesn't seem to have been a sticking point to the left before, so why is it now?

 

[Cecilie1200]

LOL, when did the SCOTUS start voting for presidents as a group as you insinuate? Link please to prove your case or else your argument fails on epic proportions.

When the hell did CONGRESS start voting for Presidents?

YEah yeah yeah you know what I meant. Congress unanimously approved him. And the Chief Justice of the SCOTUS swore him in. And then there are the birther cases that the SCOTUS has thrown out. So, tell me, professor, do you think Congress would unanimously approve him if they thought he wasn't eligible? Don't you think the SCOTUS would look into it if they thought there was a shred of evidence that he is ineligible? Do you have anything else, or do you just like to flap your lips just for the sake of flapping?

No, asshole, I DON'T know what you meant. Congress doesn't vote for President, nor do they "approve" the President. Neither does the Supreme Court. It means absolutely nothing to his qualifications for the office that the Chief Justice swore him in, since it is not the Supreme Court's job to investigate him. It's not ANYONE'S job, in point of fact. If you read up on the procedures for putting a person's name on the Presidential ballot in each state, you will find that none of them actually require him to PROVE that he's qualified. They essentially take his word for it.

Don't I think the Supreme Court would "look into it" if they thought he wasn't eligible? No, I don't. How, pray tell, are they supposed to do that? What is the investigative arm of the Supreme Court, hmmm? And what is this "Congressional approval" you think exists for the President? Where are you finding this in either Constitution OR actual practice?

Do you have any REAL proof that he's legally eligible, or do YOU just like to flap your lips for the sake of flapping?

 

[jillian]

No, asshole, I DON'T know what you meant. Congress doesn't vote for President, nor do they "approve" the President. Neither does the Supreme Court. It means absolutely nothing to his qualifications for the office that the Chief Justice swore him in, since it is not the Supreme Court's job to investigate him. It's not ANYONE'S job, in point of fact. If you read up on the procedures for putting a person's name on the Presidential ballot in each state, you will find that none of them actually require him to PROVE that he's qualified. They essentially take his word for it.

Don't I think the Supreme Court would "look into it" if they thought he wasn't eligible? No, I don't. How, pray tell, are they supposed to do that? What is the investigative arm of the Supreme Court, hmmm? And what is this "Congressional approval" you think exists for the President? Where are you finding this in either Constitution OR actual practice?

Do you have any REAL proof that he's legally eligible, or do YOU just like to flap your lips for the sake of flapping?

Really? Congress doesn't approve the president? Well, technically, I suppose that's true. But the House of Representatives certainly does. Might I direct your attention to the Electoral College, it's definition and process?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electoral_College_(United_States)

Actually, the Court could well have "looked into it" by allowing the pathetic, mentally ill, birfetr loons to go to trial. Instead, they keep letting their poor pathetic frivolosu cases get dismissed.

See how it works.

Or do YOU just like to flap your lips for the sake of flapping?

just sayin