\n<\/strong><\/h1>\n
by\u00a0Joseph DeMaio<\/a>, \u00a92019<\/em><\/p>\n Due process and the presumption of innocence \u2013 let alone actual proof or competent evidence of the actual commission of a crime \u2013 are principles of law which are foreign to Democrats in general, and seemingly altogether alien to Ms. Harris in particular.\u00a0 Interesting trait in a lawyer\u2026, no?<\/p>\n These circumstances make it all the more ironic and hypocritical \u2013 par for the course with Democrats, of course \u2013 that Harris, a former San Francisco District Attorney and California Attorney General, would now claim that, because of her \u201cprosecutorial\u201d experience, she is the best situated candidate among the Democrat field to \u201cgo after Trump\u201d once she is elected to the presidency.\u00a0 She has even analogized her zeal to pursue President Trump with a reference to a\u00a0\u201crap\u201d sheet<\/a>\u00a0concocted against the president.<\/p>\n But here\u2019s the juicy part: she recently promised a crowd of supporters in South Carolina that she would \u201cprosecute the case against Trump on the debate stage\u201d prior to the election, if she were the Democrats\u2019 nominee.\u00a0 Please\u2026, please\u2026, D\u2019s\u2026, nominate her and put her on stage next to Trump.\u00a0 Your faithful servant would pay a big-time sum for tickets to be in that same room when the questions begin flying.<\/p>\n One of the first questions that Trump should pose to Harris (regardless of whether it is \u2018on topic\u2019 as dictated by the moderators) is this: \u201cAre you eligible under the Constitution as a \u2018natural born Citizen?\u2019\u201d\u00a0 Her answer would likely be: \u201cSeriously?\u00a0 You\u2019re going to the \u2018birther\u2019 nonsense again?\u00a0 Of\u00a0course<\/em>\u00a0I\u2019m eligible.\u00a0 I was born in Oakland, California.\u201d\u00a0 Trump (or whoever the moderators might be) should follow up: \u201cBut when you were born, were your parents already U.S. citizens?\u201d\u00a0 Her likely response: \u201cThat doesn\u2019t matter.\u00a0 I have it on good authority that anyone born here, regardless of the citizenship of their parents, is a natural born Citizen.\u201d\u00a0 Trump should then grin and say: \u201cProve it.\u201d<\/p>\n P&E readers, you see where this is going, right?\u00a0 As your faithful servant has attempted to explain over the years, it was the demonstrable intent of the Founders, for anyone willing to see, to absolutely restrict eligibility to the office of the \u201cChief Magistrate\u201d \u2013 the President \u2013 to a \u201cnatural born Citizen,\u201d and\u00a0only<\/em><\/strong>\u00a0to someone who met the criteria for same.\u00a0 That restriction, adopted by the Founders in Art. 2, \u00a7 1, Cl. 5 of the Constitution, was taken from \u00a7 212 of\u00a0The Law of Nations<\/em>, the seminal work of one Emmerich de Vattel, a 17th<\/sup>\u00a0Century jurist and philosopher.\u00a0 In order to be a \u201cnatural born citizen,\u201d as opposed to a \u201cnative born citizen\u201d or a \u201cnaturalized citizen,\u201d both of one\u2019s parents must be, at the moment of the person\u2019s birth, citizens of the country where the birth occurs.<\/p>\n DeVattel\u2019s work, as recognized by the U.S. Supreme Court, was continually in the hands of the Founders as they labored over the drafting of the Constitution and was the work \u201cmost widely cited in the 50 years after the [American] Revolution.\u201d\u00a0\u00a0See\u00a0<\/em>United States Steel Corp. v. Multistate Tax Commission<\/em>, 434 U.S. 452, 462, n.12 (1977).<\/p>\n As it turns out,\u00a0Kamala Harris<\/a>\u00a0was born to a Tamil Indian mother, Shyamala Gopalan Harris, and a Jamaican father, Donald Harris. Given that one Barack Hussein Obama II continues to refuse to remove the dark cloud of constitutional ineligibility still hanging over his usurpation of the presidency, Ms. Harris might expect similar problems.<\/p>\n Bear in mind, Monsieur Obama\u2019s \u201coriginal Hawaiian birth certificate,\u201d thought by many to be (and likely in reality) a computerized forgery, listed his father as being a citizen of Kenya, not the United States.\u00a0 Thus, even if the .pdf image of a document posted to the Internet which he claims is his \u201creal deal\u201d birth certificate were treated as \u201cauthentic,\u201d he would\u00a0still<\/em>\u00a0have been ineligible.\u00a0 The fact that his mother (some would even question that \u201cfact\u201d) was a U.S. citizen in 1961 is irrelevant: because his father was never a U.S. citizen, he was, as we say \u201cfrom the get-go,\u201d ineligible to hold the office of the president.\u00a0 The fact that he\u00a0occupied\u00a0<\/em>the office illegitimately merely recognizes that he \u201cgot away with it.\u201d\u00a0 So far\u2026, that is.<\/p>\n Nor will the Harvard Law Review Journal\u2019s \u201cOn the Meaning of Natural Born Citizen\u201d magazine\u00a0article<\/a>\u00a0by distinguished law professors and practitioners Mr. Paul Clement and Prof. Neal Katyal be of any assistance to her.\u00a0 As explained\u00a0here<\/a>, the Clement\/Katyal commentary suffers from the same misinterpretations of the Founders\u2019 intent as do the CRS documents, but without the deceptive alterations of language committed by personnel in \u201cthe repository of the Nation\u2019s best thinking.\u201d<\/p>\n Long story short: unless Ms. Harris can prove that her parents were already naturalized U.S. citizens when she was born in Oakland back in 1964, her claim of constitutional eligibility is as flawed as that of Barack Hussein Obama II.\u00a0 Who knows, maybe as the Democrats\u2019 2019 Circular Firing Squad Extravaganza (aka<\/em>, the Democrat Primary Debates) gets under way, these questions will be posed by one or more of Ms. Harris\u2019s Democrat rivals instead of President Trump. \u00a0Think of it: how great would it be to watch Elizabeth (\u201cPocahontas\u201d) Warren delve into Ms. Harris\u2019s constitutional eligibility?\u00a0 Wow\u2026 time to buy some popcorn and soda pop\u2026 this could get\u00a0really\u00a0<\/em>entertaining.<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/149359435.v2.pressablecdn.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/01\/Kamala-Harris-presidential-twitter-270x450.png\")
(Jun. 25, 2019) \u2014 One of the Democrat wanna-be candidates yearning for the opportunity to get bludgeoned by President Trump in the 2020 general election is Sen. Kamala Harris.\u00a0 You will recall from her classless performance in the now-Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh Senate Judiciary Committee hearings, she believes that the mere allegation of a crime \u2013 and particularly a sexual assault crime \u2013 is sufficient to warrant a conclusion of guilt in the alleged perpetrator.<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/149359435.v2.pressablecdn.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/07\/Obama-in-Kogelo-Kenya-07-16-18-300x166.jpg\")
Returning to the eligibility of Ms. Harris, because the available public records fail to confirm that both her mother and her father were, on October 20, 1964, naturalized U.S. citizens, her eligibility remains very much in doubt. \u00a0The several deeply flawed and deceitfully structured Congressional Research Service (\u201cCRS\u201d) Memos and Reports from\u00a02009<\/a>,\u00a02011<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a02016<\/a>, seeking to prop up the purported (but false) legitimacy of Monsieur Obama as a natural born Citizen, will not help her.\u00a0 Memo to P&E readers: as noted\u00a0here<\/a>, the 2009 CRS \u201cWhat to Tell your Constituents\u2026 Memorandum\u201d has been scrubbed from the Scribd.com website and is no longer accessible there, but you can learn about what it said\u00a0here<\/a>,\u00a0here<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0here<\/a>.<\/p>\n