Visit America Conservative 2 Conservative at: http://americac2c.com/?xg_source=msg_mes_network |
All posts by thenewbostonteaparty
THE REAL ANGELA MERKEL CHANNELS BARACK OBAMA
Angela Merkel is doing to Germany what Barack Obama is doing to the United States; we are witnessing the destruction of the white race – follow is a subhuman culture of welfare zealots, mass murders, jihadists and self anointed perverts.
German dictator Angela Merkel praises book predicting the extinction of the German people
In a book praised by Angela Merkel – “Future Dialogues – Visions 2050,” the term “migration background” will disappear by the year 2050, because Germans will be so mixed (with Arab and African Muslims), everyone will have a migration background.
EVEN DOGS FIND HILLARY REPULSIVE
THE GENERAL ELECTRIC-UTES CONNECTICUT
General Electric, an iconic Connecticut company, located in Fairfield has thrown the switch, literally given Connecticut the electric chair; to add insult to injury they are moving to the state once known as Taxachusetts. Connecticut is one of only three states that has seen a decrease in population during the past decade,things can only get worse. Connecticut is shocked by the decision.
General Electric
To top it off the Constitution State (another joke) has an approximately 100 billion dollar pension and health care liability. Before the door closes expect the population to decrease by at least 400-500 million. The reason being the onerous tax system which will force those remaining to pay up for the union controlled state where an employee can retire with a pension exceeding their last year salary in some cases by 50% or more.
But as the Democrats, who by the way control the state legislature and governorship find more ways to spend the peoples money. Our advice, head south where you are welcomed by not only the weather, but the government too. 
ALLIGATORS NIPPING HER TAIL
Hillary is running hard from three pursuers, Donald Trump, Bernie Sanders and the FBI; all three nibbling on on her tail. Like a robber or rapist who leaves their DNA at the scene then proceeds to flee with blood dripping from a knife wound, Hillary is about to be caught, arrested, indicted and jailed. Her only hope is to become President where she will be immune for the years of presidency, but this is not likely to happen.
Sanders has her number in Iowa and New Hampshire, remember Hillary was the 100% favorite, now she claims that the race would always be competitive. Who believes that. A Vermont Senator, one of socialist convictions, little known outside New England, an Independent at that, has now caught the chronological liar.
The FBI is about to bring a RICO case against her and Slick Willie and then there is Donald Trump. She tries to ignore him by touting that he is living in his own version of reality. Look at the audiences Hillary plays to, notice their lack of enthusiasm, no cheers, only silent murmurs. Trump on the other hand brings the crowd to its feet, SRO crowds, boisterous with vigor, the want to make America great again. The message has stuck.
America has learned from the past pandering politically correct politicians.
ATTORNEY GENERAL LYNCH’S DAUGHTER TELLS UBER CABBY TO TAKE THIS
NEW YORK – New York City police say the stepdaughter of U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch was taken into custody after an argument with an Uber taxi driver over an unpaid fare.
Kia Absalom was riding in the car Dec. 28. Police say she believed her fare was automatically paid via the Uber app. But the driver tells the Daily News she hadn’t paid.
Police say the two argued and the driver took her to a Brooklyn police station. They say after it was determined she owed the driver about $20 she was detained in a cell while her boyfriend went to pay the fare.
After she paid, she was released.
Messages left with the attorney general’s office and Absalom on Monday haven’t been returned. San Francisco-based Uber has declined to comment.
ALLAHU AKBAR SCUM SHOOTS PHILLY POLICE OFFICER POINT BLANK
UPDATE, Archer could be part of a group threat. CLICK HERE.
Yesterday, in Philadelphia, the city of Brotherly Love, (click here)a violent Jihadist shot one of Philadelphia’s finest 13 times. The officer has enough left to shoot the runaway fugitive in the ass, other officers apprehended the human excrement before he got away. Of course the Muslim Community has assuaged the narrative. Americans are not sucked into this diatribe. 
Soon, America will be overwhelmed by the Muslim Community, the takeover will be complete when Sharia laws will be sanctioned by judges, legislatures and regulations. America, we have seen our best days. Muslims will never culturally integrate with the Judeo-Christian ethic. Political correctness, the enemy of We the People, has targeted Americans and the Constitution for the past three decades.
Listen to Hannity video, the Mayor of Philadelphia says this has nothing to do with Islam, the Police Commissioner said it the shooter was an Islamist schooled in Jihad.
OBAMA – THE ANTI CHRIST
|
IS A HILLARY INDICTMENT COMING?
Is a Hillary Indictment Coming?
Hillary Clinton could be criminally indicted for mishandling classified information, and within the next 60 days, according to former U.S. Attorney Joseph DiGenova.
“They have reached a critical mass in their investigation of the secretary and all of her senior staff,” DiGenova told radio host Laura Ingraham. “And, it’s going to come to a head, I would suggest, in the next 60 days.”…
“I believe that the evidence that the FBI is compiling will be so compelling that, unless [Lynch] agrees to the charges, there will be a massive revolt inside the FBI, which she will not be able to survive as an attorney general. It will be like Watergate. It will be unbelievable,” DiGenova said.
“The evidence against the Clinton staff and the secretary is so overwhelming at this point that if, in fact, she chooses not to charge Hillary, they will never be able to charge another federal employee with the negligent handling of classified information,” he added. “The intelligence community will not stand for that. They will fight for indictment and they are already in the process of gearing themselves to basically revolt if she refuses to bring charges.”
Others say not so fast, pointing out that decision would rest with Obama’s loyal Attorney General, Loretta Lynch.
– See more at: http://americanactionnews.com/articles/is-a-hillary-indictment-coming#sthash.I02xaiWb.dpuf
DOES TRUMP HAVE A VALID QUESTION?
“Republicans are going to have to ask themselves the question: ‘Do we want a candidate who could be tied up in court for two years?’ That’d be a big problem,” Trump told The Washington Post in an interview published Tuesday night.
Donald Trump is not a lawyer, Ted Cruz is. Senator Cruz, a Harvard graduate cum laude, should no if he is qualified or not. According to the Constitution, the President must be a natural born citizen. Naturalized has not been wholly defined. In addition to requiring thirty-five years of age and fourteen years of residency, the Constitution limits the presidency to “a natural born Citizen.”
The Naturalization Act of 17908×8. Ch. 3, 1 Stat. 103 (repealed 1795). provided that “the children of citizens of the United States, that may be born beyond sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens: Provided, That the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States . . . .”
The Naturalization Act of 1790 expanded the class of citizens at birth to include children born abroad of citizen mothers as long as the father had at least been resident in the United States at some point. But Congress eliminated that differential treatment of citizen mothers and fathers before any of the potential candidates in the current presidential election were born. Thus, in the relevant time period, and subject to certain residency requirements, children born abroad of a citizen parent were citizens from the moment of birth, and thus are “natural born Citizens.”
That conclusion about what the drafters meant is based partly on a law passed in 1790 by the first Congress, providing that the children of U.S. citizens born outside the country “shall be considered as natural born citizens.” The law is no longer in effect, but it’s considered evidence of the intent of the founders.
Then, in 1964, the Supreme Court muddied the waters by seeming to say, without deciding, that “natural born” meant born inside the United States.
In an opinion on an unrelated issue, the court observed, “The rights of citizenship of the native born and of the naturalized person are of the same dignity and are coextensive. The only difference drawn by the Constitution is that only the ‘natural born’ citizen is eligible to be President.”
But that language is not legally binding, and the Supreme Court has never actually ruled on what “natural born” means.
Writing last year in the Harvard law Review, two former holders of the Justice Department’s top courtroom advocate job — Solicitor General — said Cruz met the qualification.
“All the sources routinely used to interpret the Constitution confirm that the phrase “natural born citizen” has a specific meaning: namely, someone who was a U.S. citizen at birth with no need to go through a naturalization proceeding,” Neal Katyal and Paul Clement wrote.
But until the Supreme Court rules on the issue, or the Constitution is amended, the issue will remain officially unsettled.
St. George Tucker, the editor, says this in a footnote:
Persons naturalized according to these acts, are entitled to all the rights of natural born citizens, except, first, that they cannot be elected as representatives in congress until seven years, thereafter. Secondly, nor can they be elected senators of the United States, until nine years thereafter. Thirdly, they are forever incapable of being chosen to the office of president of the United States. Persons naturalized before the adoption of the constitution, it is presumed, have all the capacities of natural born citizens. See C. U. S. Art. 1, 2.
In an 1829 treatise, A View of the Constitution of the United States of America, William Rawle (1759-1836), formerly the U.S. Attorney for Pennsylvania (1791-1799), wrote that
The citizens of each state constituted the citizens of the United States when the Constitution was adopted. … [He] who was subsequently born the citizen of a State, became at the moment of his birth a citizen of the United States. Therefore every person born within the United States, its territories or districts, whether the parents are citizens or aliens, is a natural born citizen in the sense of the Constitution, and entitled to all the rights and privileges appertaining to that capacity. …. Under our Constitution the question is settled by its express language, and when we are informed that … no person is eligible to the office of President unless he is a natural born citizen, the principle that the place of birth creates the relative quality is established as to us.
The issue was examined by the U.S. Supreme Court in the dissenting opinion of J. Curtis (which should be read in combination with the dissenting opinion of J. McLean for a better understanding of the issues in the case) in Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U. S. 576 (1856):
The first section of the second article of the Constitution uses the language, “a natural-born citizen.” It thus assumes that citizenship may be acquired by birth. Undoubtedly, this language of the Constitution was used in reference to that principle of public law, well understood in this country at the time of the adoption of the Constitution, which referred citizenship to the place of birth. At the Declaration of Independence, and ever since, the received general doctrine has been in conformity with the common law that free persons born within either of the colonies were subjects of the King that by the Declaration of Independence, and the consequent acquisition of sovereignty by the several States, all such persons ceased to be subjects, and became citizens of the several States, except so far as some of them were disfranchised by the legislative power of the States, or availed themselves, seasonably, of the right to adhere to the British Crown in the civil contest, and thus to continue British subjects.
ustice Gray explained in that case:
A person born out of the jurisdiction of the United States can only become a citizen by being naturalized, either by treaty, as in the case of the annexation of foreign territory, or by authority of Congress, exercised either by declaring certain classes of persons to be citizens, as in the enactments conferring citizenship upon foreign-born children of citizens, or by enabling foreigners individually to become citizens by proceedings in the judicial tribunals, as in the ordinary provisions of the naturalization acts.
It was also touched upon in Luria v. United States, 231 U.S. 9 (1913):
Under our Constitution, a naturalized citizen stands on an equal footing with the native citizen in all respects save that of eligibility to the Presidency.
The closest the U.S. Supreme Court has come to addressing eligibility to be president was in Perkins v. Elg, 307 U.S. 325 (1939):
There is no law of the United States under which his father or any other person can deprive him of his birthright. He can return to America at the age of twenty-one, and in due time, if the people elect, he can become President of the United States… [citing to Steinkauler’s Case, which was an opinion given by Edwards Pierrepont, who was Attorney General for Ulysses S. Grant].
CLICK HERE FOR MORE INTRIGUE ON THE QUESTION, WHAT DOES NATURAL BORN MEAN. WILL THE SUPREME COURT RULE ON THIS RUDIMENTARY QUESTION?