Does NEWSMAX have an agenda? If so, what is it?

[Unkotare]

According to you,...

I'll wait for you to post proof of any baby born in the US today who is NOT a US citizen, or anyone stripped of their citizenship for the reasons you want to believe. Go on....................

 

[johnwk]

johnwk said:
According to you,...

I'll wait for you to post proof

I already posted what our Supreme Court has stated regarding acquiring United States Citizenship:

Here is what our Supreme Court stated in “Slaughter-House Cases”

“The phrase, “subject to its jurisdiction” was intended to exclude from its operation children of ministers, consuls, and citizens or subjects of foreign States born within the United States.” Slaughter-House Cases, 83 U.S. 36, 73 (1872)

A couple years later, in in Minor v. Happersett 88 U.S. 162, 167-68 (1875), all the Court’s members expressed “doubts” that citizenship was granted, by the terms of our constitution, to “children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents,” and the Court did so after expressly pointing out that citizenship attaches only when the immigrant owes “allegiance” to this country. And this is one reason why we have a National Oath of Allegience to the United States . . . so, children born to naturalized citizens, become citizens upon birth.

And let us not forget what our Supreme Court stated in Elk v. Wilkins, 112 U.S. 94, 101-2 (1884) regarding the Fourteenth Amendment:

“This section contemplates two sources of citizenship, and two sources only: birth and naturalization. The persons declared to be citizens are “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” The evident meaning of these last words is, not merely subject in some respect or degree to the jurisdiction of the United States, but completely subject to their political jurisdiction, and owing them direct and immediate allegiance. And the words relate to the time of birth in the one case, as they do to the time of naturalization in the other. Persons not thus subject to the jurisdiction of the United States at the time of birth cannot become so afterwards, except by being naturalized, either individually, as by proceedings under the naturalization acts, or collectively, as by the force of a treaty by which foreign territory is acquired.”

 

[Failzero]

They are trying to claim the Middle ( After Foxsnews abandoned the middle to move to Middle Left .

 

[Unkotare]

I'll wait for you to post proof of any baby born in the US today who is NOT a US citizen, or anyone stripped of their citizenship for the reasons you want to believe. Go on....................

^^^

 

[johnwk]

^^^

THE SUPREME COURT DISAGREES WITH YOU

 

[johnwk]

They are trying to claim the Middle ( After Foxsnews abandoned the middle to move to Middle Left .

Well, NEWSMAX certainly does not appear to be an ardent supporter and defender of our Constitution, and its documented legislative intent which gives context to its text.

 

[Unkotare]

I'll wait for you to post proof of any baby born in the US today who is NOT a US citizen, or anyone stripped of their citizenship for the reasons you want to believe. Go on....................

Not one baby born in the US today, or yesterday, or tomorrow is NOT a US citizen and recognized by all applicable laws as one. Nobody posting here can or will change that.

 

[johnwk]

Not one baby born in the US today, or yesterday, or tomorrow is NOT a US citizen

According to you, but not according to OUR UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT

 

[Unkotare]

According to you, but not according to OUR UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT

Link to the story of one baby, just one, who was born in the US today who is not fully and legally considered a US citizen. You won’t because you can’t. The baby born in the US today is every bit as much as citizen as you are, and for exactly the same reason. Bitch and moan about it as much as you want, but you are not changing it. I feel it is safe to say that you will never get off your dead ass and even try to amend the Constitution to reflect your particular prejudice in this matter. Copy and paste all you want but those are the facts.

 

[johnwk]

Link to the story of one baby, just one, who was born in the US today who is not fully and legally considered a US citizen.

You are the one interested in storytelling. I'm interested in the rule of law as found in our Constitution, and cases decided by our Supreme Court.

So, Unkotare, old chap, how about citing one Supreme Court case, just one, in which it held a child born to an illegal entrant foreign national, while on American soil, becomes a citizen of the United States upon birth. You won’t because you can’t. Can you?

JWK

Senator Schumer and his hate America crowd have turned New York City into a crime, rat, garbage and homeless infested ■■■■ hole.

 

[Unkotare]

Not one baby born in the US today, or yesterday, or tomorrow is NOT a US citizen and recognized by all applicable laws as one. Nobody posting here can or will change that.

^^^

You are the one interested in storytelling. ....

So you can't. Of course you can't because EVERY baby born in the US is 100% as much a US citizen as YOU are, and for the same reason.

 

[Unkotare]

^^^

So you can't. Of course you can't because EVERY baby born in the US is 100% as much a US citizen as YOU are, and for the same reason.

And those children can grow up to live 100% legally in the US, vote, and perhaps become President of the United States.



And there is NOTHING copy/paste boy can do about it (or will even try).

 

[Unkotare]

In a hospital just on the US side of the border, a future president of the United States may have been born today. His mother may be deported, but he will always be a US citizen with all the accompanying rights and responsibilities.

 

[johnwk]

EVERY baby born in the US is 100% as much a US citizen as YOU are, and for the same reason.

According to you, but not according to the preponderance of evidence found in the Congressional Globe, 39th Congress, which framed and debated the 14th Amendment, and provides the documented intentions and beliefs under which the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted. For example, in discussing the proposed 14th Amendment, Senator Howard explains the clear intentions of the 14th Amendment as follows:

The first amendment is to section one, declaring that all "persons born in the United States and Subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the States wherein they reside. I do not propose to say anything on that subject except that the question of citizenship has been fully discussed in this body as not to need any further elucidation, in my opinion. This amendment which I have offered is simply declaratory of what I regard as the law of the land already, that every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons. It settles the great question of citizenship and removes all doubt as to what persons are or are not citizens of the United States. This has long been a great desideratum in the jurisprudence and legislation of this country. see: Congressional Globe, 39th Congress (1866) pg. 2890

Later, and after the question was repeatedly asked as to who is and who is not a citizen of the United States, Mr. TRUMBULL responds as follows SEE: page 2893, Congressional Globe, 39th Congress (1866), 1st column halfway down

“The provision is, that “all persons born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens.” That means “subject to the complete jurisdiction thereof.” . . . “What do we mean by “subject to the jurisdiction of the United States?” Not owing allegiance to anybody else. That is what it means.”

Mr. Trumbull later emphasizes in crystal clear language that: “It cannot be said of any Indian who owes allegiance, partial allegiance if you please, to some other Government that he is “subject to the jurisdiction of the United States”

Mr. JOHNSON then rises to say: “…there is no definition in the Constitution as it now stands as to citizenship. Who is a citizen of the United States is an open question….there is no definition as to how citizenship can exist in the United States except through the medium of a citizenship in a State.

“Now, all that this amendment provides is, that all persons born in the United States and not subject to some foreign Power–for that, no doubt, is the meaning of the committee who have brought the matter before us–shall be considered as citizens of the United States.” …he then continues “…the amendment says that citizenship may depend upon birth, and I know of no better way to give rise to citizenship than the fact of birth within the territory of the United States, born of parents who at the time were subject to the authority of the United States.”

And then there is John A. Bingham, chief architect of the 14th Amendments first section who considered the proposed national law on citizenship as “simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen…” Cong. Globe, page 1291(March 9, 1866) middle column half way down.

So, contrary to your personal opinion, Unkotare, a baby born to a foreign national mother while on American soil is not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States within the meaning of the 14th Amendment, nor becomes a citizen of the United States upon birth.

Don't like? Then lump it!

JWK



The whole aim of construction, as applied to a provision of the Constitution, is to discover the meaning, to ascertain and give effect to the intent of its framers and the people who adopted it._____HOME BLDG. & LOAN ASSOCIATION v. BLAISDELL, 290 U.S. 398 (1934)

 

[Unkotare]

In a hospital just on the US side of the border, a future president of the United States may have been born today. His mother may be deported, but he will always be a US citizen with all the accompanying rights and responsibilities.

^^^

 

[Unkotare]

^^^

So you can't. Of course you can't because EVERY baby born in the US is 100% as much a US citizen as YOU are, and for the same reason.

^^^

 

[Unkotare]

^^^

So you can't. Of course you can't because EVERY baby born in the US is 100% as much a US citizen as YOU are, and for the same reason.

^^^

 

[johnwk]

So you can't. Of course you can't because EVERY baby born in the US is 100% as much a US citizen as YOU are, and for the same reason.
^^^

According to you, Unkotare, but not according to our Supreme Court, and Founders

JWK
When violent hate America demonstrations occur in the U.S. (as they now are) and terrorist attacks begin on American soil, let us not forget it was the current Democrat Party Leadership who encouraged and invited millions upon millions of poverty-stricken, poorly educated, low-skilled, diseased, disabled, criminal, and un-vetted terrorist foreign nationals, into our country.

 

[Unkotare]

According to you, ....

According to reality. Everyone born in the US yesterday IS a US citizen today and for the rest of their lives. That's reality.

 

[AquaAthena]

All mainstream "news" outlets have an agenda.

1) Say what their base wants to hear.
2) Make money.
3) Push their particular narrative in an effort to sway public opinion.

And NEWSMAX has become the most successful NEWS OPINION SHOW bypassing FOX News Channel since launching NewsmaxPlus. I became a member and watch one or two shows a day there in primetime. Too busy to be a news junkie but do read some online news commentary each morning.

Ditched FOX many years ago. Too left for my listening pleasure.

Napolitano? I often questioned him back in the day when he was on FOX. Now, I don't watch him. But Newsmax claims to have over 250,000 subscribers.