The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Kamala Harris's Birth Certificate?
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

This is said to be Kamala Harris’s birth certificate. I can’t say that it’s authentic, but it looks plausible. From Tariq Nasheed’s twitter account:

For “Color or Race of Mother,” Kamala’s South Asian mother put “Caucasian,” which was a standard term in the 1960s (see the LAPD cop show Adam-12 for where most people in L.A. were described by the radio dispatcher as Caucasian). In the 1970s, South Asians got jealous of “Oriental” businessmen getting low interest loans and government contracting privileges while they were stuck with worthless Caucasian Privilege, so they had themselves regrouped with Orientals as “Asians” for the 1980 Census.

Her father, the economist, put himself down for Color or Race of Father as “Jamaican.”

Back home he’s a middle-class mulatto, a status that isn’t really recognized in the U.S. outside of Louisiana.

The Spanish ruled Jamaica from 1494 to 1655, when the English conquered it, so Jamaica still uses the Latin color continuum rather than the North American color line.

So describing himself as “Jamaican” is a reasonable way for Dr. Harris to fill in a small space with a simple answer that Americans would grasp.

As I said, no proof that this is real, but it seems pretty likely.

iSteve commenter TamJam writes:

Move over, Orange. TamJam is the new Black.

Both self-identifications are curious.

First the TamBram half.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Bhagat_Singh_Thind

Indian-Americans self-identifying as “Caucasian” has a rich history starting with “United States v. Bhagat Singh Thind” (1923), when Thind, a founding member of Ghadar party, argued

“that he was a white person by arguing that he was a member of the Caucasian race. Thind argued using “a number of anthropological texts” that people in Punjab and other Northwestern Indian states belonged to the “Aryan race”, and Thind cited scientific authorities such as Johann Friedrich Blumenbach as classifying Aryans as belonging to the Caucasian race. Thind argued that, although some racial mixing did indeed occur between the Indian castes, the caste system had largely succeeded in India at preventing race-mixing. Thind argued that by being a “high-caste, of full Indian blood” he was a “Caucasian” according to the anthropological definitions of his day.”

He lost.

“As a result of the U.S. Supreme Court decision finding that no person of Indian origin could become a naturalized American, the first person from the Indian subcontinent to become an American citizen, A. K. Mozumdar, had his citizenship revoked.”

Indians had to wait until Luce–Celler Act (1946) which “reversed the Thind decision by explicitly extending racial eligibility for naturalization to natives of India, and set a token quota for their immigration at 100 per year.”

And Shyamala could legally self-identify as “Caucasian”.

Now that “Asians” are becoming elite, at least from a university admission officer’s perspective, it might be worthwhile to reclaim “Caucasian” status and rehash Thind’s argument.

Unless of course you are half Jam.

On Jamaica Global Online, Donald Harris wrote eloquently about his mulatto heritage –

“My roots go back, within my lifetime, to my paternal grandmother Miss Chrishy (née Christiana Brown, descendant of Hamilton Brown who is on record as plantation and slave owner and founder of Brown’s Town) and to my maternal grandmother Miss Iris (née Iris Finegan, farmer and educator, from Aenon Town and Inverness, ancestry unknown to me).”

https://tinyurl.com/y5oorugz

And then dissociated himself from his daughter’s Marijuana smoking joke – “Half my family’s from Jamaica. Are you kidding me?” – by commenting on the same Jamaican portal –

“My dear departed grandmothers (whose extraordinary legacy I described in a recent essay on this website), as well as my deceased parents , must be turning in their grave right now to see their family’s name, reputation and proud Jamaican identity being connected, in any way, jokingly or not with the fraudulent stereotype of a pot-smoking joy seeker and in the pursuit of identity politics. Speaking for myself and my immediate Jamaican family, we wish to categorically dissociate ourselves from this travesty.”

https://tinyurl.com/y6qamh2t

This second page, however, is now 404 and can only be retrieved from Google cache. That also is curious.

 
Hide 118 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Kams is not eligible to be VP. Her parents were legal immigrants but neither was an American citizen when she was born. Therefor she is not a natural born citizen, which you must be to hold the office of President and Vice President.

    • Replies: @Gianni in Guernsey
    @Clyde

    Shouldn t that have been noticed when she was running for the white House?

    Replies: @Jack D

    , @GeraldB
    @Clyde

    We all wish that this were true, but it's not. She's an "anchor baby." As the law stands right now, any child born on American soil is automagically a US citizen. Which, by the way, is another Trump campaign promise broken.

    , @education realist
    @Clyde

    So by that standard, Donald Trump just barely qualifies as "American" because his dad was born here?

    That's really batshit crazy, and I loathe Harris. Focus on her early prostitution with Willie Brown, but good god, people, stop with the stupid.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @Anonymous

    , @Buck Ransom
    @Clyde

    Willie Brown to the young and nubile Kamala: "Won't you be my anchor baby tonight?"

    , @BenKenobi
    @Clyde

    Silly commenter, rules are for White people!

    , @pepperinmono
    @Clyde

    This is correct though no one is going to do anything about it
    Surprised so few here get it
    Founding Fathers wanted no question of loyalty in executive
    Obama experience showed how correct they were
    Even at end 1/3 thought he was illegitimate or had divided loyalty
    Need to be born here of citizens
    Would take an amendment to change

    , @Jonathan Mason
    @Clyde


    Kams is not eligible to be VP. Her parents were legal immigrants but neither was an American citizen when she was born. Therefor she is not a natural born citizen, which you must be to hold the office of President and Vice President.
     
    Unfortunately the Constitution does not define "natural born citizen".

    British Prime Minister Boris Johnson was born in the US when his father was studying economics in New York, his parents not being citizens, but he was registered as a US citizen, a status that he only gave up in 2018 for tax reasons.

    By renouncing his US citizenship Johnson gave up any chance of becoming the U.S. president once he was done leading the U.K. But perhaps he was never eligible anyway.

    But can anybody show definitively that there is a clear line between natural-born citizens, and other citizens born in the US?

    If Harris is not a natural born citizen and was never naturalized, then she would be a stateless person, and not a US citizen at all, and in the same position as the Dreamers, except that when her parents were naturalized, she would also have been automatically naturalized at the same time.

    But then why did Johnson have to pay US taxes even though his parents were not Americans and he never lived in the US after the age of 5?

    But the 14th Amendment says that 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.

    It does not make any distinction between people just physically born in the US and people "natural born" in the US. It says there are only two types of citizens, those born on site, and those immigrants who were naturalized later in life.

    The US really needs to get its act together. Isn't it ageist to have age restrictions on who can run for President at the lower end, but not at the upper end?

    Replies: @Alden, @RadicalCenter

    , @Douglas Self
    @Clyde

    The common-law definition of a "natural-born" citizen is one for whose circumstance of birth does not require him/her to undergo the naturalization process under Federal law to become a citizen. US law does recognize both "Jus Soli" (by being born on American soil) or "Jus Sanguis" (by virtue of "blood", or having one parent who is an American citizen). Unfortunately, Ms. Harris qualifies based on the former, as she has a valid BC from California, regardless of the citizenship (not!) or immigration status of her parents...she is what's commonly known as an "ANCHOR Baby".

    Replies: @Clyde, @dvorak

    , @Alden
    @Clyde

    The question of whether or not children of legal immigrants who are citizens of foreign countries are natural born citizens was decided in March 1989 by the Supreme Court. The ruling was made March 28 1889

    The Supreme Court ruled that such children are indeed considered natural born citizens. And thus eligible for all the rights privileges and responsibility of citizenship including becoming president.

    United States vs Wong Kim Ark.argued in 1887 decided in March 1889.

    , @AnotherDad
    @Clyde

    This is just the dumbest nonsense imaginable.

    We need to fight and win on core principle of preserving nation and civilization against this evil nation and civilization destroying barbarism of minoritarianism.

    I'll just clone what i said in the other thread:

    The point is she is politically unAmerican–anti-American.

    She represents a party and ideology that stands
    — against republican government and majority rule
    — against our heritage rooted in Western Civilization, specifically Anglo-American traditions
    — against the historic liberties of Americans
    — against the interests of white people–whose ancestors built this nation–in favor of the interests of favored minorities under some sort of phony narrative of relative “oppression”
    — against the interests of productive law-abiding middle class people (who actually make the country function) and for the Democrats collection of various parasitic grifters
    — against the idea of borders
    — against the interests of citizens in favor of the interests of foreigners
    and now quite clearly
    — against “the rule of law”!
    in sum Harris is against the American nation.

    That’s what any patriot would run against–against her and Biden being against the nation! Everything that defines it, maintains it and makes it special and decent and prosperous.

    Yapping about tiddlywink nonsense, is a distraction from what matters, what is critical. And unfortunately a Trump specialty.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @Cato

  2. One Black Man Opinion, For What It Be Worth

    If he wanted black, Joe picked a lemon;
    Willie Brown didn’t screw no black women.
    Goodbye to the ghetto!
    No black or mulatto
    Women deserved Willie’s semen.

    Why Biden picked Kamala Harris?
    She black as that Jackson gal, Paris!
    If you gonna go black,
    Pick a black Cadillac—
    She mo’ like a Toyota Yaris!

    • Thanks: Gabe Ruth
    • LOL: Buffalo Joe
  3. Tariq pushes the hashtag #FBA which stands for ‘Foundational Black Americans’. It’s a way of saying Black Americans who’ve been here a long time have a unique identity (as opposed to Nigerians who just got here).

    Upshot? It won’t be that hard to form alliances with other groups and play them against each other when White people finally get serious about racial politics.

    It just requires neutering the Good Doggie White Cucks. The libertarians, the civnats, the boomer conservatives, the hipster Whites, and the godawful Really Smart set. They are all that’s holding us back.

    • LOL: IHTG
    • Replies: @Not Only Wrathful
    @RichardTaylor


    It just requires neutering the Good Doggie White Cucks. The libertarians, the civnats, the boomer conservatives, the hipster Whites, and the godawful Really Smart set. They are all that’s holding us back.
     
    How many people does that leave and which neutral political label would you attach to them?

    Replies: @Anonymous

    , @TomSchmidt
    @RichardTaylor

    You do know that Steve is a
    CivNat, right?

  4. The woman was born in the same hospital I was, and the home address is about seven blocks from where I grew up.

  5. Certainly more plausible than Obama’s. This parody of “proof” misses all the real smoking guns except for the one about ukeleles.

    • Replies: @anon
    @The Alarmist

    Yes; it uses all the wrong fonts, the pdf file has wrong number of layers and whatever happened to the long form birth certificate. We want to see the long form. That will show she was born in Jamaica (or India). This is a fake inserted by Democratic sympathizer recorder in Oakland file cabinet.

    Where is Sheriff Joe Arpaio when we need him?

    https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2011/04/27/president-obamas-long-form-birth-certificate

    https://www.abc15.com/news/region-phoenix-metro/central-phoenix/sheriff-joe-arpaio-to-talk-obama-birth-certificate-investigation

    https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2012/03/01/147737446/ariz-sheriff-arpaio-will-release-findings-on-obamas-birth-certificate

  6. Move over, Orange. TamJam is the new Black.

    Both self-identifications are curious.

    First the TamBram half.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Bhagat_Singh_Thind

    Indian-Americans self-identifying as “Caucasian” has a rich history starting with “United States v. Bhagat Singh Thind” (1923), when Thind, a founding member of Ghadar party, argued

    “that he was a white person by arguing that he was a member of the Caucasian race. Thind argued using “a number of anthropological texts” that people in Punjab and other Northwestern Indian states belonged to the “Aryan race”, and Thind cited scientific authorities such as Johann Friedrich Blumenbach as classifying Aryans as belonging to the Caucasian race. Thind argued that, although some racial mixing did indeed occur between the Indian castes, the caste system had largely succeeded in India at preventing race-mixing. Thind argued that by being a “high-caste, of full Indian blood” he was a “Caucasian” according to the anthropological definitions of his day.”

    He lost.

    “As a result of the U.S. Supreme Court decision finding that no person of Indian origin could become a naturalized American, the first person from the Indian subcontinent to become an American citizen, A. K. Mozumdar, had his citizenship revoked.”

    Indians had to wait until Luce–Celler Act (1946) which “reversed the Thind decision by explicitly extending racial eligibility for naturalization to natives of India, and set a token quota for their immigration at 100 per year.”

    And Shyamala could legally self-identify as “Caucasian”.

    Now that “Asians” are becoming elite, at least from a university admission officer’s perspective, it might be worthwhile to reclaim “Caucasian” status and rehash Thind’s argument.

    Unless of course you are half Jam.

    On Jamaica Global Online, Donald Harris wrote eloquently about his mulatto heritage –

    “My roots go back, within my lifetime, to my paternal grandmother Miss Chrishy (née Christiana Brown, descendant of Hamilton Brown who is on record as plantation and slave owner and founder of Brown’s Town) and to my maternal grandmother Miss Iris (née Iris Finegan, farmer and educator, from Aenon Town and Inverness, ancestry unknown to me).”

    https://tinyurl.com/y5oorugz

    And then dissociated himself from his daughter’s Marijuana smoking joke – “Half my family’s from Jamaica. Are you kidding me?” – by commenting on the same Jamaican portal –

    “My dear departed grandmothers (whose extraordinary legacy I described in a recent essay on this website), as well as my deceased parents , must be turning in their grave right now to see their family’s name, reputation and proud Jamaican identity being connected, in any way, jokingly or not with the fraudulent stereotype of a pot-smoking joy seeker and in the pursuit of identity politics. Speaking for myself and my immediate Jamaican family, we wish to categorically dissociate ourselves from this travesty.”

    https://tinyurl.com/y6qamh2t

    This second page, however, is now 404 and can only be retrieved from Google cache. That also is curious.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @TamJam

    Thanks.

    , @anonymous
    @TamJam

    Donald Harris has to be part Chinese judging by looks.

  7. Where was Kamala Harris mostly peacefully jogging to, when her fellow mostly peaceful jogger mostly peacefully shot a five-year-old boy in the head at point blank range?

    Are these joggers capable of mostly peacefully jogging, without committing mostly peaceful murders and peaceful rape every day of the peaceful week?

    I think we deserve an answer to a typical jogger’s mostly peaceful question… before we too become, you know, mostly peaceful.

  8. @TamJam
    Move over, Orange. TamJam is the new Black.

    Both self-identifications are curious.

    First the TamBram half.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Bhagat_Singh_Thind

    Indian-Americans self-identifying as "Caucasian" has a rich history starting with "United States v. Bhagat Singh Thind" (1923), when Thind, a founding member of Ghadar party, argued

    "that he was a white person by arguing that he was a member of the Caucasian race. Thind argued using "a number of anthropological texts" that people in Punjab and other Northwestern Indian states belonged to the "Aryan race", and Thind cited scientific authorities such as Johann Friedrich Blumenbach as classifying Aryans as belonging to the Caucasian race. Thind argued that, although some racial mixing did indeed occur between the Indian castes, the caste system had largely succeeded in India at preventing race-mixing. Thind argued that by being a "high-caste, of full Indian blood" he was a "Caucasian" according to the anthropological definitions of his day."

    He lost.

    "As a result of the U.S. Supreme Court decision finding that no person of Indian origin could become a naturalized American, the first person from the Indian subcontinent to become an American citizen, A. K. Mozumdar, had his citizenship revoked."

    Indians had to wait until Luce–Celler Act (1946) which "reversed the Thind decision by explicitly extending racial eligibility for naturalization to natives of India, and set a token quota for their immigration at 100 per year."

    And Shyamala could legally self-identify as "Caucasian".

    Now that "Asians" are becoming elite, at least from a university admission officer's perspective, it might be worthwhile to reclaim "Caucasian" status and rehash Thind's argument.

    Unless of course you are half Jam.

    On Jamaica Global Online, Donald Harris wrote eloquently about his mulatto heritage -

    "My roots go back, within my lifetime, to my paternal grandmother Miss Chrishy (née Christiana Brown, descendant of Hamilton Brown who is on record as plantation and slave owner and founder of Brown’s Town) and to my maternal grandmother Miss Iris (née Iris Finegan, farmer and educator, from Aenon Town and Inverness, ancestry unknown to me)."

    https://tinyurl.com/y5oorugz

    And then dissociated himself from his daughter's Marijuana smoking joke - "Half my family’s from Jamaica. Are you kidding me?" - by commenting on the same Jamaican portal -

    "My dear departed grandmothers (whose extraordinary legacy I described in a recent essay on this website), as well as my deceased parents , must be turning in their grave right now to see their family’s name, reputation and proud Jamaican identity being connected, in any way, jokingly or not with the fraudulent stereotype of a pot-smoking joy seeker and in the pursuit of identity politics. Speaking for myself and my immediate Jamaican family, we wish to categorically dissociate ourselves from this travesty.”

    https://tinyurl.com/y6qamh2t

    This second page, however, is now 404 and can only be retrieved from Google cache. That also is curious.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @anonymous

    Thanks.

  9. The Spanish ruled Jamaica from 1494 to 1655, when the English conquered it

    https://www.britishempire.co.uk/maproom/jamaica1655.htm

    The artist is Angus McBride, well known to collectors of the Osprey books.

  10. This second page, however, is now 404 and can only be retrieved from Google cache. That also is curious.

    Mopping up are they, clever, and probably with some big tech or organs of the state help.

    And does Kamala’s old dad faintly resemble Gus from ‘Breaking Bad’?

    • Replies: @Herzog
    @Gordo

    You nailed it: Ms. Harris' father could star as an older Gus, or as Gus's father or uncle.

    Fortunately, Mr. Harris senior is clearly a much more decent character than the fictional Gus, by several orders of magnitude. Unfortunately, he also seems to be a substantively more decent character than his daughter Kamala.

  11. Will anyone tell who the Asian lady in the picture is?
    Apart from that, the father seems to have some slight Chinese mixture as well.

    • Replies: @anonymous
    @SZ

    She is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meena_Harris

    Meea Harris doesn't look Asian in other pics.

    Donald Harris is at most 1/8 Chinese, perhaps the father of his maternal grandmother, who was born in the late 1880s. There had been a Chinese wave in the early 1880s landing in Jamaica. If this were the case then Meena would be 1/32 Chinese without additional infusion. She was born in Oakland, California to Maya Harris (Kamala's sister) and an unknown father.

  12. @RichardTaylor
    Tariq pushes the hashtag #FBA which stands for 'Foundational Black Americans'. It's a way of saying Black Americans who've been here a long time have a unique identity (as opposed to Nigerians who just got here).

    Upshot? It won't be that hard to form alliances with other groups and play them against each other when White people finally get serious about racial politics.

    It just requires neutering the Good Doggie White Cucks. The libertarians, the civnats, the boomer conservatives, the hipster Whites, and the godawful Really Smart set. They are all that's holding us back.

    Replies: @Not Only Wrathful, @TomSchmidt

    It just requires neutering the Good Doggie White Cucks. The libertarians, the civnats, the boomer conservatives, the hipster Whites, and the godawful Really Smart set. They are all that’s holding us back.

    How many people does that leave and which neutral political label would you attach to them?

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Not Only Wrathful

    I’d say it’s about 2/3 of white people. The working class and a lot of the middle class. About 1/3 of whites are either useless or active enemies.

    I’d call the 2/3 majority of whites just regular white folks with normal racial instincts.

    If those white took over for the white block, it showed they were serious (by whatever means that took), many Asians and Latinos would be happy to ally with them.

  13. Middle name – Iyer

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iyer

    Iyer (also spelt as Ayyar, Aiyar, Ayer or Aiyer) is a caste of Hindu Brahmin communities of Tamil origin

    The legacy of Iyers have often been marred by accusations of racism and counter-racism against them by non-Brahmins and vice versa.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @Wicks Cherrycoke

    Although they may all look the same to us (and probably due to intermixing over the centuries are), in Tamil Nadu the Iyer are seen as Aryan interlopers from the north who put themselves at the top of the heap over the local (darker) Dravidians of southern India. Originally the priestly class, during British times due to their superior literacy and brains they formed the elite and ran the local government. After independence there was a backlash by the more numerous "locals" (keep in mind the Brahmins had been there for thousand of years) and they were largely excluded from political power.

    So the joke is that in India, Harris is from the elite "white" caste. Likewise, in Jamaica, mulattoes like her dad also sit at the top of the social heap. Only when they get to America do these educated elites suddenly count as "oppressed minorities" and qualify for AA.

    Replies: @PiltdownMan, @Hypnotoad666

    , @Dr. Dre
    @Wicks Cherrycoke

    I thought I saw that Kamala's middle name is Devi, which combined with her first name, refers to some Hindu goddess-or other.

  14. @Clyde
    Kams is not eligible to be VP. Her parents were legal immigrants but neither was an American citizen when she was born. Therefor she is not a natural born citizen, which you must be to hold the office of President and Vice President.

    Replies: @Gianni in Guernsey, @GeraldB, @education realist, @Buck Ransom, @BenKenobi, @pepperinmono, @Jonathan Mason, @Douglas Self, @Alden, @AnotherDad

    Shouldn t that have been noticed when she was running for the white House?

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @Gianni in Guernsey

    It was noticed and it's not true. The US has "birthright citizenship". Generally speaking, if you were born in the US (unless you were the child of foreign diplomats with immunity) you are an American citizen regardless of whether your parents are. This may or may not be a good thing but that's how the law stands. There is no impediment to Harris being President.

    Replies: @Ron Mexico, @Thirdtwin, @BB753, @Jim Don Bob, @Anonymous

  15. She has two entries in the California Birth Index, one under “Kamala I. Harris” and one under “Kamala D. Harris”. There was another Kamala Harris born in California some months later and another born in New York some months earlier.

    You can order the original document via Ancestry.com if you’re interested. Since a copy is available to any mope with an Ancestry subscription and a willingness to order merchandise online, I would wager that’s a true replica. At some point her middle name was changed; the one on the certificate would appear to be the original.

  16. Why would anyone think Kamala Harris is “Black” or even a POC? See photo of Kamala next to an authentic black woman:

    https://spectator.org/?utm_source=LibertyNation&utm_campaign=Top20ConservativeNewsSites2020

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @TheJester

    Never say this in front of a black person if you value your safety. Among themselves and in private, black people can make whatever assessment they want (most likely unfavorable) of Kamala's "authenticity" but as a white person don't you dare question it unless you axing for a beating. Nor is any black person going to share with you, whitey, his or her honest assessment.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    , @Reg Cæsar
    @TheJester


    Why would anyone think Kamala Harris is “Black” or even a POC?
     
    She has one drop.
    , @Jonathan Mason
    @TheJester

    In the United States the word black with respect to the race of human beings is not used to describe the color of somebody's skin, it is a term used to describe anybody who has visibly discernible African ancestry.

    You could be somebody from South India or Sri Lanka with skin that is very very dark, but that would not make you black. Oh you could be somebody from Jamaica who has a very light skin or beige skin and you would still be classified as black.

    Hope this helps.

    , @BB753
    @TheJester

    Are South Asians (especially Tamils) elated about the thought of a half-Indian VP candidate or ashamed because Kamala's Brahmin mother married a mulatto Jamaican?

    , @Truth
    @TheJester

    If a dude his color starting porking your daughter, what race would he be?

  17. @Gianni in Guernsey
    @Clyde

    Shouldn t that have been noticed when she was running for the white House?

    Replies: @Jack D

    It was noticed and it’s not true. The US has “birthright citizenship”. Generally speaking, if you were born in the US (unless you were the child of foreign diplomats with immunity) you are an American citizen regardless of whether your parents are. This may or may not be a good thing but that’s how the law stands. There is no impediment to Harris being President.

    • Replies: @Ron Mexico
    @Jack D

    The Supreme Court has never ruled on the definition of "natural born citizen," which is different than American citizen.

    Replies: @Alden

    , @Thirdtwin
    @Jack D

    The Dems want so badly to have Birtherism be a thing again. Let’s not gift them.

    And for the love of all that is good, please, please, PLEASE, President Trump, DO NOT TWEET about this at all.

    Replies: @anon

    , @BB753
    @Jack D

    All of which still makes Kamala Harris zero percent American in heritage.

    Replies: @Jack D

    , @Jim Don Bob
    @Jack D

    The historical record shows that birthright citizenship was far from the intent of the 14th Amendement, but like so many other parts of the Constitution, it has been twisted by judges into what Jack said. Babies born here are US citizens and then the family reunification racket kicks in.

    No other country in the world is this stupid. DJT tweeted once about doing something about it, and I think he should have because many Americans don't know about it. But, like much else about him that raised my hopes, he moved on to his next tweet.

    Replies: @anon, @AnotherDad

    , @Anonymous
    @Jack D


    Generally speaking, if you were born in the US (unless you were the child of foreign diplomats with immunity) you are an American citizen regardless of whether your parents are. This may or may not be a good thing but that’s how the law stands.
     
    That may or may not be an accurate statement of the law, but what is your opinion of it from a policy standpoint? Is it good for American Whites?

    Replies: @Alden

  18. @Wicks Cherrycoke
    Middle name - Iyer

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iyer

    Iyer (also spelt as Ayyar, Aiyar, Ayer or Aiyer) is a caste of Hindu Brahmin communities of Tamil origin

     


    The legacy of Iyers have often been marred by accusations of racism and counter-racism against them by non-Brahmins and vice versa.
     

    Replies: @Jack D, @Dr. Dre

    Although they may all look the same to us (and probably due to intermixing over the centuries are), in Tamil Nadu the Iyer are seen as Aryan interlopers from the north who put themselves at the top of the heap over the local (darker) Dravidians of southern India. Originally the priestly class, during British times due to their superior literacy and brains they formed the elite and ran the local government. After independence there was a backlash by the more numerous “locals” (keep in mind the Brahmins had been there for thousand of years) and they were largely excluded from political power.

    So the joke is that in India, Harris is from the elite “white” caste. Likewise, in Jamaica, mulattoes like her dad also sit at the top of the social heap. Only when they get to America do these educated elites suddenly count as “oppressed minorities” and qualify for AA.

    • Agree: Escher
    • Thanks: Ron Mexico
    • Replies: @PiltdownMan
    @Jack D

    Tamil brahmins belong to one of two sub-castes, Iyers and Iyengars (or Aiyyangars).

    Sundar Pichai, of Google, is an Iyer, AFAIK. Srinivasa Ramanujam, the mathematical genius, was an Ayyangar as was the Iyengar yoga guy.

    The differences, to the outsider, as you say, are invisible, but in their metaphysical beliefs, Iyers are monists while Iyengars are dualists.

    Replies: @Bill Jones

    , @Hypnotoad666
    @Jack D


    So the joke is that in India, Harris is from the elite “white” caste. Likewise, in Jamaica, mulattoes like her dad also sit at the top of the social heap. Only when they get to America do these educated elites suddenly count as “oppressed minorities” and qualify for AA.
     
    Since, as we all know, race is a "social construct," that means Kamala is 100% descended from socially constructed white ancestry.

    At least the Dems have definitely locked up the all-important upper-caste Tamil demographic.
  19. @TamJam
    Move over, Orange. TamJam is the new Black.

    Both self-identifications are curious.

    First the TamBram half.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Bhagat_Singh_Thind

    Indian-Americans self-identifying as "Caucasian" has a rich history starting with "United States v. Bhagat Singh Thind" (1923), when Thind, a founding member of Ghadar party, argued

    "that he was a white person by arguing that he was a member of the Caucasian race. Thind argued using "a number of anthropological texts" that people in Punjab and other Northwestern Indian states belonged to the "Aryan race", and Thind cited scientific authorities such as Johann Friedrich Blumenbach as classifying Aryans as belonging to the Caucasian race. Thind argued that, although some racial mixing did indeed occur between the Indian castes, the caste system had largely succeeded in India at preventing race-mixing. Thind argued that by being a "high-caste, of full Indian blood" he was a "Caucasian" according to the anthropological definitions of his day."

    He lost.

    "As a result of the U.S. Supreme Court decision finding that no person of Indian origin could become a naturalized American, the first person from the Indian subcontinent to become an American citizen, A. K. Mozumdar, had his citizenship revoked."

    Indians had to wait until Luce–Celler Act (1946) which "reversed the Thind decision by explicitly extending racial eligibility for naturalization to natives of India, and set a token quota for their immigration at 100 per year."

    And Shyamala could legally self-identify as "Caucasian".

    Now that "Asians" are becoming elite, at least from a university admission officer's perspective, it might be worthwhile to reclaim "Caucasian" status and rehash Thind's argument.

    Unless of course you are half Jam.

    On Jamaica Global Online, Donald Harris wrote eloquently about his mulatto heritage -

    "My roots go back, within my lifetime, to my paternal grandmother Miss Chrishy (née Christiana Brown, descendant of Hamilton Brown who is on record as plantation and slave owner and founder of Brown’s Town) and to my maternal grandmother Miss Iris (née Iris Finegan, farmer and educator, from Aenon Town and Inverness, ancestry unknown to me)."

    https://tinyurl.com/y5oorugz

    And then dissociated himself from his daughter's Marijuana smoking joke - "Half my family’s from Jamaica. Are you kidding me?" - by commenting on the same Jamaican portal -

    "My dear departed grandmothers (whose extraordinary legacy I described in a recent essay on this website), as well as my deceased parents , must be turning in their grave right now to see their family’s name, reputation and proud Jamaican identity being connected, in any way, jokingly or not with the fraudulent stereotype of a pot-smoking joy seeker and in the pursuit of identity politics. Speaking for myself and my immediate Jamaican family, we wish to categorically dissociate ourselves from this travesty.”

    https://tinyurl.com/y6qamh2t

    This second page, however, is now 404 and can only be retrieved from Google cache. That also is curious.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @anonymous

    Donald Harris has to be part Chinese judging by looks.

  20. @Jack D
    @Gianni in Guernsey

    It was noticed and it's not true. The US has "birthright citizenship". Generally speaking, if you were born in the US (unless you were the child of foreign diplomats with immunity) you are an American citizen regardless of whether your parents are. This may or may not be a good thing but that's how the law stands. There is no impediment to Harris being President.

    Replies: @Ron Mexico, @Thirdtwin, @BB753, @Jim Don Bob, @Anonymous

    The Supreme Court has never ruled on the definition of “natural born citizen,” which is different than American citizen.

    • Replies: @Alden
    @Ron Mexico

    The Supreme Court did make the definitive ruling on people born in the United States of legal immigrant parents back in 1889. The precedent still stands

    Check the case of United States vs Wong Kim Ark 1887/1889. Mr Wong and Ms Harris, identical circumstances of birth. Court ruled Mr Wong was a natural born citizen. Precedent still stands.

    Some people need to use google more.

    US vs Wong Kim Ark 1887/1889

    Look it up

  21. @Clyde
    Kams is not eligible to be VP. Her parents were legal immigrants but neither was an American citizen when she was born. Therefor she is not a natural born citizen, which you must be to hold the office of President and Vice President.

    Replies: @Gianni in Guernsey, @GeraldB, @education realist, @Buck Ransom, @BenKenobi, @pepperinmono, @Jonathan Mason, @Douglas Self, @Alden, @AnotherDad

    We all wish that this were true, but it’s not. She’s an “anchor baby.” As the law stands right now, any child born on American soil is automagically a US citizen. Which, by the way, is another Trump campaign promise broken.

  22. anonymous[129] • Disclaimer says:
    @SZ
    Will anyone tell who the Asian lady in the picture is?
    Apart from that, the father seems to have some slight Chinese mixture as well.

    Replies: @anonymous

    She is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meena_Harris

    Meea Harris doesn’t look Asian in other pics.

    Donald Harris is at most 1/8 Chinese, perhaps the father of his maternal grandmother, who was born in the late 1880s. There had been a Chinese wave in the early 1880s landing in Jamaica. If this were the case then Meena would be 1/32 Chinese without additional infusion. She was born in Oakland, California to Maya Harris (Kamala’s sister) and an unknown father.

  23. @Jack D
    @Wicks Cherrycoke

    Although they may all look the same to us (and probably due to intermixing over the centuries are), in Tamil Nadu the Iyer are seen as Aryan interlopers from the north who put themselves at the top of the heap over the local (darker) Dravidians of southern India. Originally the priestly class, during British times due to their superior literacy and brains they formed the elite and ran the local government. After independence there was a backlash by the more numerous "locals" (keep in mind the Brahmins had been there for thousand of years) and they were largely excluded from political power.

    So the joke is that in India, Harris is from the elite "white" caste. Likewise, in Jamaica, mulattoes like her dad also sit at the top of the social heap. Only when they get to America do these educated elites suddenly count as "oppressed minorities" and qualify for AA.

    Replies: @PiltdownMan, @Hypnotoad666

    Tamil brahmins belong to one of two sub-castes, Iyers and Iyengars (or Aiyyangars).

    Sundar Pichai, of Google, is an Iyer, AFAIK. Srinivasa Ramanujam, the mathematical genius, was an Ayyangar as was the Iyengar yoga guy.

    The differences, to the outsider, as you say, are invisible, but in their metaphysical beliefs, Iyers are monists while Iyengars are dualists.

    • Replies: @Bill Jones
    @PiltdownMan

    "Tamil brahmins belong to one of two sub-castes, Iyers and Iyengars (or Aiyyangars). "

    But only Whites can be racist, no?

  24. Anonymous[337] • Disclaimer says:

    Hamilton Brown.
    Alot of Scots rebels got exiled there and a joke is there are more Campbells there than in Argyll. The Jamaican flag is a variation of the St. Andrews cross or Saltire, much like the Confederate battle flag that is so well known, though the links there are more informal.

  25. J says:

    The Iyers are possibly the highest IQ population in the world. It is a highly literate elite group. No doubt that Kamala Harris’ ancestry has nothing to do with AfroAmericans. Married to a Jewish lawyer, she is very high class. I think she assumed the fake AfroAmerican identity as a political move, exactly as Obama.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @J

    Gee ya think ? There are obvious templates on how to work the diversity rackets for shakedown money, career advancement etc. BLM is just the military wing of the operation.

    A massive response of force would shut that down, but not the stealth part of the operations.

  26. Anonymous[416] • Disclaimer says:
    @Not Only Wrathful
    @RichardTaylor


    It just requires neutering the Good Doggie White Cucks. The libertarians, the civnats, the boomer conservatives, the hipster Whites, and the godawful Really Smart set. They are all that’s holding us back.
     
    How many people does that leave and which neutral political label would you attach to them?

    Replies: @Anonymous

    I’d say it’s about 2/3 of white people. The working class and a lot of the middle class. About 1/3 of whites are either useless or active enemies.

    I’d call the 2/3 majority of whites just regular white folks with normal racial instincts.

    If those white took over for the white block, it showed they were serious (by whatever means that took), many Asians and Latinos would be happy to ally with them.

  27. A black candidate on the ticket assures riots after the election, win or lose.
    Win? NBA-style victory riots
    Lose? Well.. you know…

  28. @Jack D
    @Gianni in Guernsey

    It was noticed and it's not true. The US has "birthright citizenship". Generally speaking, if you were born in the US (unless you were the child of foreign diplomats with immunity) you are an American citizen regardless of whether your parents are. This may or may not be a good thing but that's how the law stands. There is no impediment to Harris being President.

    Replies: @Ron Mexico, @Thirdtwin, @BB753, @Jim Don Bob, @Anonymous

    The Dems want so badly to have Birtherism be a thing again. Let’s not gift them.

    And for the love of all that is good, please, please, PLEASE, President Trump, DO NOT TWEET about this at all.

    • Agree: AnotherDad
    • Disagree: Abolish_public_education
    • Replies: @anon
    @Thirdtwin

    Too late; The Dog has already returned to the Vomit:

    https://www.npr.org/2020/08/13/902362014/trump-and-his-campaign-amplify-birther-conspiracy-against-kamala-harris

    Replies: @Mike_from_SGV

  29. @Jack D
    @Gianni in Guernsey

    It was noticed and it's not true. The US has "birthright citizenship". Generally speaking, if you were born in the US (unless you were the child of foreign diplomats with immunity) you are an American citizen regardless of whether your parents are. This may or may not be a good thing but that's how the law stands. There is no impediment to Harris being President.

    Replies: @Ron Mexico, @Thirdtwin, @BB753, @Jim Don Bob, @Anonymous

    All of which still makes Kamala Harris zero percent American in heritage.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @BB753

    She is literally as American as I am. I don't think my parents had completed their naturalization at the time I was born - it came thru maybe a year later. I can tell you that America is the nation of my birth and the only country I have ever known and I feel as American as anyone. The Constitution says that the President must be a natural born citizen, not his ancestors.

    Trump's mother was born in Scotland as were his paternal grandparents so he is also from recent immigrant stock. I think if Kamala's parents were German and Scottish instead of Indian and Jamaican you'd have no issue so it's not a stretch to say that racism is involved here.

    Replies: @dvorak, @Jonathan Mason, @BB753, @ATBOTL

  30. “I can’t say that it’s authentic, but it looks plausible.”

    LOL. Sailer’s “Plausible Undeniability”–Incorporate “winks and nods” in the narrative for your audience to understand your alleged stone cold truth is in reality wild speculation.

    • Troll: YetAnotherAnon
    • Replies: @Aeronerauk
    @Corvinus

    This is a statement on the document's source, Tariq Nasheed, rather than Sailer alleging Kamala Harris is not an American citizen.

    Oh but you knew that, by all means then, troll on.

  31. @Clyde
    Kams is not eligible to be VP. Her parents were legal immigrants but neither was an American citizen when she was born. Therefor she is not a natural born citizen, which you must be to hold the office of President and Vice President.

    Replies: @Gianni in Guernsey, @GeraldB, @education realist, @Buck Ransom, @BenKenobi, @pepperinmono, @Jonathan Mason, @Douglas Self, @Alden, @AnotherDad

    So by that standard, Donald Trump just barely qualifies as “American” because his dad was born here?

    That’s really batshit crazy, and I loathe Harris. Focus on her early prostitution with Willie Brown, but good god, people, stop with the stupid.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @education realist


    So by that standard, Donald Trump just barely qualifies as “American” because his dad was born here?
    That’s really batshit crazy...
     
    Not necessarily. The matter is actually unsettled.

    Ann Coulter Doubles Down On Ted Cruz’ Ineligibility For The Presidency

    Cruz no 'natural born' citizen

    We'd have to wait for the courts to decide. It's rather late in the game for that-- courts have no reservation to overturning laws, but overturning elections is not something they're in any hurry to do. If you want to disqualify someone, file your objection the day she announces.

    Replies: @Alden

    , @Anonymous
    @education realist

    If you mean that birth-certificate slide posts/threads are more likely near-term to benefit and probably to originate from the Biden-Harris side, I agree... After all Hillary's Praetorians did architect birtherism, fair and square (and, in the Mark Penn rendition of it, even had a valid point)

  32. @Gordo

    This second page, however, is now 404 and can only be retrieved from Google cache. That also is curious.
     
    Mopping up are they, clever, and probably with some big tech or organs of the state help.

    And does Kamala's old dad faintly resemble Gus from 'Breaking Bad'?

    Replies: @Herzog

    You nailed it: Ms. Harris’ father could star as an older Gus, or as Gus’s father or uncle.

    Fortunately, Mr. Harris senior is clearly a much more decent character than the fictional Gus, by several orders of magnitude. Unfortunately, he also seems to be a substantively more decent character than his daughter Kamala.

  33. Jamaican + Caucasian = Jackassian

  34. Anonymous[504] • Disclaimer says:

    It matters not the government-form “race” of any Real American a couple semesters removed from Greater India-Pakistan-Etc. Ocean Zone, because these cannot, in accordance with protective-stupidity theodicy, be racist — rather, only the white can wield the Force. a.k.a. racism.

    If Kamala’s mom had been a white indian, or white parsi, or white seychellois, that’s different. But she is a Non-White Trans-Caucasian and therefore uninitiated into the mysteries of the racism caste, QED

  35. @Clyde
    Kams is not eligible to be VP. Her parents were legal immigrants but neither was an American citizen when she was born. Therefor she is not a natural born citizen, which you must be to hold the office of President and Vice President.

    Replies: @Gianni in Guernsey, @GeraldB, @education realist, @Buck Ransom, @BenKenobi, @pepperinmono, @Jonathan Mason, @Douglas Self, @Alden, @AnotherDad

    Willie Brown to the young and nubile Kamala: “Won’t you be my anchor baby tonight?”

  36. @Jack D
    @Gianni in Guernsey

    It was noticed and it's not true. The US has "birthright citizenship". Generally speaking, if you were born in the US (unless you were the child of foreign diplomats with immunity) you are an American citizen regardless of whether your parents are. This may or may not be a good thing but that's how the law stands. There is no impediment to Harris being President.

    Replies: @Ron Mexico, @Thirdtwin, @BB753, @Jim Don Bob, @Anonymous

    The historical record shows that birthright citizenship was far from the intent of the 14th Amendement, but like so many other parts of the Constitution, it has been twisted by judges into what Jack said. Babies born here are US citizens and then the family reunification racket kicks in.

    No other country in the world is this stupid. DJT tweeted once about doing something about it, and I think he should have because many Americans don’t know about it. But, like much else about him that raised my hopes, he moved on to his next tweet.

    • Replies: @anon
    @Jim Don Bob

    true

    There was enough confusion after the 14th amendment was ratified about American Indian citizenship that in 1870, the Senate Judiciary committee was asked to clarify the issue. The committee said it was clear that “the 14th amendment to the Constitution has no effect whatever upon the status of the Indians within the limits of the United States,”

    The issue of American Indian birthright citizenship wouldn’t be settled until 1924 when the Indian Citizenship Act conferred citizenship on all American Indians.

    , @AnotherDad
    @Jim Don Bob


    No other country in the world is this stupid. DJT tweeted once about doing something about it, and I think he should have because many Americans don’t know about it. But, like much else about him that raised my hopes, he moved on to his next tweet.
     
    All tweet and no cattle.
  37. @PiltdownMan
    @Jack D

    Tamil brahmins belong to one of two sub-castes, Iyers and Iyengars (or Aiyyangars).

    Sundar Pichai, of Google, is an Iyer, AFAIK. Srinivasa Ramanujam, the mathematical genius, was an Ayyangar as was the Iyengar yoga guy.

    The differences, to the outsider, as you say, are invisible, but in their metaphysical beliefs, Iyers are monists while Iyengars are dualists.

    Replies: @Bill Jones

    “Tamil brahmins belong to one of two sub-castes, Iyers and Iyengars (or Aiyyangars). ”

    But only Whites can be racist, no?

  38. This gal, a machine DEM, knows less than nothing.

    She’s perfect.

    (Btw, has this blabber mouth had anything to say about the peaceful protests occurring in her old hometown? I think some innocent victims of racism even started a fire at her drab, old, government office building; private businesses nearby had already been de-gentrified.)

    Still, these two de facto nominees are JV compared to the cookie-cutter, brilliant, Ivy-educated, know-nothing lawyers the party usually puts up.

  39. @Corvinus
    "I can’t say that it’s authentic, but it looks plausible."

    LOL. Sailer’s “Plausible Undeniability”–Incorporate “winks and nods” in the narrative for your audience to understand your alleged stone cold truth is in reality wild speculation.

    Replies: @Aeronerauk

    This is a statement on the document’s source, Tariq Nasheed, rather than Sailer alleging Kamala Harris is not an American citizen.

    Oh but you knew that, by all means then, troll on.

  40. Kamala Iyer Harris = Hairy mask-era liar.

    Is she related to Pico?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pico_Iyer

    (Shows how much I pay attention to modern “literature”. I’d always assumed Pico was Latin American. “Pico”, though, comes from the Mirandolese, so it’s forgivable.)

  41. @Clyde
    Kams is not eligible to be VP. Her parents were legal immigrants but neither was an American citizen when she was born. Therefor she is not a natural born citizen, which you must be to hold the office of President and Vice President.

    Replies: @Gianni in Guernsey, @GeraldB, @education realist, @Buck Ransom, @BenKenobi, @pepperinmono, @Jonathan Mason, @Douglas Self, @Alden, @AnotherDad

    Silly commenter, rules are for White people!

  42. Luce-Cellar Act (1946).

    So this has got to be the same guy featured in the Hart-Cellar Act of 1965, right? So this pogue slithered around for 20 years twisting our immigration laws to destroy America? Any more evidence of his sedition?

    • Replies: @anon
    @SteveRogers42

    Luce-Cellar Act (1946).

    Yes. Claire Booth Luce and Emanuel Cellar.

    https://infogalactic.com/info/Luce%E2%80%93Celler_Act_of_1946

    So this has got to be the same guy featured in the Hart-Cellar Act of 1965, right?

    Co sponsor.
    https://infogalactic.com/info/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_of_1965

    So this pogue slithered around for 20 years twisting our immigration laws to destroy America?

    More like 50 years.

    https://infogalactic.com/info/Emanuel_Celler

    Any more evidence of his sedition?

    Parable of the scorpion and the frog comes to mind.

    , @Alden
    @SteveRogers42

    Not the Luce-Celler act 1946. The Supreme Court ruling in 1889

    United States vs Wong Kim Ark.

    Children born in America of legal immigrants are natural born citizens. The precedent still stands.

    The decision in US vs Wong Kim Ark didn’t change anything. It had been assumed from the 1790s that just being born in America made one a natural born citizen. Mr Wong ran into trouble because he made a trip to China and was denied entrance home because of a Chinese exclusion rule. The Supreme Court ruled in his favor, that because he was born in America, he was a natural born citizen

    Instead of blathering in ignorance, why not learn about US vs Wong Kim Ark 1889?

  43. anon[429] • Disclaimer says:
    @The Alarmist
    Certainly more plausible than Obama's. This parody of "proof" misses all the real smoking guns except for the one about ukeleles.

    http://i.huffpost.com/gen/271205/OBAMAS-BIRTH-CERTIFICATE.jpg

    Replies: @anon

    Yes; it uses all the wrong fonts, the pdf file has wrong number of layers and whatever happened to the long form birth certificate. We want to see the long form. That will show she was born in Jamaica (or India). This is a fake inserted by Democratic sympathizer recorder in Oakland file cabinet.

    Where is Sheriff Joe Arpaio when we need him?

    https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2011/04/27/president-obamas-long-form-birth-certificate

    https://www.abc15.com/news/region-phoenix-metro/central-phoenix/sheriff-joe-arpaio-to-talk-obama-birth-certificate-investigation

    https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2012/03/01/147737446/ariz-sheriff-arpaio-will-release-findings-on-obamas-birth-certificate

  44. @education realist
    @Clyde

    So by that standard, Donald Trump just barely qualifies as "American" because his dad was born here?

    That's really batshit crazy, and I loathe Harris. Focus on her early prostitution with Willie Brown, but good god, people, stop with the stupid.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @Anonymous

    So by that standard, Donald Trump just barely qualifies as “American” because his dad was born here?
    That’s really batshit crazy…

    Not necessarily. The matter is actually unsettled.

    Ann Coulter Doubles Down On Ted Cruz’ Ineligibility For The Presidency

    Cruz no ‘natural born’ citizen

    We’d have to wait for the courts to decide. It’s rather late in the game for that– courts have no reservation to overturning laws, but overturning elections is not something they’re in any hurry to do. If you want to disqualify someone, file your objection the day she announces.

    • Troll: ScarletNumber
    • Replies: @Alden
    @Reg Cæsar

    Question was decided in 1889 by the Supreme Court United States vs Wong Kim Ark 130 years ago. Children born in the US of legal immigrants are natural born citizens.

    Replies: @RadicalCenter, @Reg Cæsar

  45. @Clyde
    Kams is not eligible to be VP. Her parents were legal immigrants but neither was an American citizen when she was born. Therefor she is not a natural born citizen, which you must be to hold the office of President and Vice President.

    Replies: @Gianni in Guernsey, @GeraldB, @education realist, @Buck Ransom, @BenKenobi, @pepperinmono, @Jonathan Mason, @Douglas Self, @Alden, @AnotherDad

    This is correct though no one is going to do anything about it
    Surprised so few here get it
    Founding Fathers wanted no question of loyalty in executive
    Obama experience showed how correct they were
    Even at end 1/3 thought he was illegitimate or had divided loyalty
    Need to be born here of citizens
    Would take an amendment to change

  46. Anonymous[405] • Disclaimer says:

    Jack D (the D stands for disingenuous) says:

    The US has “birthright citizenship”. Generally speaking, if you were born in the US (unless you were the child of foreign diplomats with immunity) you are an American citizen regardless of whether your parents are.

    The requirement for POTUS is not simply being an American citizen. The requirement is being Natural Born. Obviously that means born without any naturalization issues surrounding the birth whatsoever.

    Both Kamala parents were recent immigrants not citizens. It’s a clear case.

    Natural Born has meaning. Certain dishonest voices are trying to render the term meaningless and claim essentially that anchor babies are Natural Born.

    Natural Born is a simple logical political barrier to hostile alien immigrants trying to install their offspring as our rulers. We saw how Obama’s deep attachment to his hostile alien father (Dreams of My Father) absolutely poisoned the office.

    • Replies: @dearieme
    @Anonymous

    Largely balls. The chaps who wrote the Constitution used Blackstone as their legal guide so "natural born" implies a requirement to be an American citizen by birth. Which she is.

    , @Alden
    @Anonymous

    Another UNZ moron who can’t be bothered to check United States vs Wong Kim Ark 1889. The precedent stands.

  47. @Clyde
    Kams is not eligible to be VP. Her parents were legal immigrants but neither was an American citizen when she was born. Therefor she is not a natural born citizen, which you must be to hold the office of President and Vice President.

    Replies: @Gianni in Guernsey, @GeraldB, @education realist, @Buck Ransom, @BenKenobi, @pepperinmono, @Jonathan Mason, @Douglas Self, @Alden, @AnotherDad

    Kams is not eligible to be VP. Her parents were legal immigrants but neither was an American citizen when she was born. Therefor she is not a natural born citizen, which you must be to hold the office of President and Vice President.

    Unfortunately the Constitution does not define “natural born citizen”.

    British Prime Minister Boris Johnson was born in the US when his father was studying economics in New York, his parents not being citizens, but he was registered as a US citizen, a status that he only gave up in 2018 for tax reasons.

    By renouncing his US citizenship Johnson gave up any chance of becoming the U.S. president once he was done leading the U.K. But perhaps he was never eligible anyway.

    But can anybody show definitively that there is a clear line between natural-born citizens, and other citizens born in the US?

    If Harris is not a natural born citizen and was never naturalized, then she would be a stateless person, and not a US citizen at all, and in the same position as the Dreamers, except that when her parents were naturalized, she would also have been automatically naturalized at the same time.

    But then why did Johnson have to pay US taxes even though his parents were not Americans and he never lived in the US after the age of 5?

    But the 14th Amendment says that 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.

    It does not make any distinction between people just physically born in the US and people “natural born” in the US. It says there are only two types of citizens, those born on site, and those immigrants who were naturalized later in life.

    The US really needs to get its act together. Isn’t it ageist to have age restrictions on who can run for President at the lower end, but not at the upper end?

    • Troll: ScarletNumber
    • Replies: @Alden
    @Jonathan Mason

    Check United States vs Wong Kim Ark.

    Mr Wong was in the same situation as Harris, born in the United States of legal immigrants.

    On Match 28, 1889, 130 years ago the Supreme Court ruled that Mr Wong was a natural born citizen with all the rights, privileges and responsibilities of other natural born citizens regardless of parental citizenship status.

    That case decided the question once and for all.

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason, @Ancient Briton

    , @RadicalCenter
    @Jonathan Mason

    Your interpretation — the prevailing interpretation — renders the words “and subject to its jurisdiction thereof”, of no effect at all.

    The phrase is a limiting qualifier. The words necessarily mean that there are some people “born ... in the United States” who are not “subject to its jurisdiction.” This can mean people born here whose parents are both NON-citizens, i.e. people who have no irrevocable legal right to remain here.

    Replies: @Jack D, @Jonathan Mason

  48. @Clyde
    Kams is not eligible to be VP. Her parents were legal immigrants but neither was an American citizen when she was born. Therefor she is not a natural born citizen, which you must be to hold the office of President and Vice President.

    Replies: @Gianni in Guernsey, @GeraldB, @education realist, @Buck Ransom, @BenKenobi, @pepperinmono, @Jonathan Mason, @Douglas Self, @Alden, @AnotherDad

    The common-law definition of a “natural-born” citizen is one for whose circumstance of birth does not require him/her to undergo the naturalization process under Federal law to become a citizen. US law does recognize both “Jus Soli” (by being born on American soil) or “Jus Sanguis” (by virtue of “blood”, or having one parent who is an American citizen). Unfortunately, Ms. Harris qualifies based on the former, as she has a valid BC from California, regardless of the citizenship (not!) or immigration status of her parents…she is what’s commonly known as an “ANCHOR Baby”.

    • Replies: @Clyde
    @Douglas Self

    The Constitution requires you to be a natural born citizen for only two offices. The President and the VP. This was done for a reason. What did natural born citizen mean when the Constitution was written?

    , @dvorak
    @Douglas Self


    The common-law definition of a “natural-born” citizen is one for whose circumstance of birth does not require him/her to undergo the naturalization process under Federal law to become a citizen.
     
    You're quite confident and completely wrong; you and the late Justice Scalia (who once gave his uninformed understanding of the matter, off the cuff) are both wrong.

    Natural-born is by blood, as opposed to by soil. Naturalization later in life is a third category and is irrelevant to the distinction that the Founding Fathers were making.

    Barack Obama is a natural-born subject of Great Britain.

    The case of baby Harris is clear, where baby Obama's is murkier. Kamala is not a natural-born US citizen.

    Replies: @Art Deco

  49. @Jack D
    @Wicks Cherrycoke

    Although they may all look the same to us (and probably due to intermixing over the centuries are), in Tamil Nadu the Iyer are seen as Aryan interlopers from the north who put themselves at the top of the heap over the local (darker) Dravidians of southern India. Originally the priestly class, during British times due to their superior literacy and brains they formed the elite and ran the local government. After independence there was a backlash by the more numerous "locals" (keep in mind the Brahmins had been there for thousand of years) and they were largely excluded from political power.

    So the joke is that in India, Harris is from the elite "white" caste. Likewise, in Jamaica, mulattoes like her dad also sit at the top of the social heap. Only when they get to America do these educated elites suddenly count as "oppressed minorities" and qualify for AA.

    Replies: @PiltdownMan, @Hypnotoad666

    So the joke is that in India, Harris is from the elite “white” caste. Likewise, in Jamaica, mulattoes like her dad also sit at the top of the social heap. Only when they get to America do these educated elites suddenly count as “oppressed minorities” and qualify for AA.

    Since, as we all know, race is a “social construct,” that means Kamala is 100% descended from socially constructed white ancestry.

    At least the Dems have definitely locked up the all-important upper-caste Tamil demographic.

  50. Indians had to wait until Luce–Celler Act (1946) which “reversed the Thind decision by explicitly extending racial eligibility for naturalization to natives of India

    Luce-Celler Act?

    As in Emanuel Celler, of Hart-Celler fame? He sure was dogged in pursuing the destruction of the American nation.

  51. Very interesting…but what’s the verdict on the facelift?

  52. Another interesting subject is Commala’s religion, if any.

    I did a quick Google search and it turned up a rather vague reply. Her mother took her to Hindu temple in Montreal, but to a Baptist church in Oakland.

    There is no religious test of course for office in the US. Others here note that her high caste Hindu status is memorialized as part of her family’s name.

    There has been no mention of any Hindu religious observance in accounts of her life. Nor any particularly Christian ones either. Sleeping with a married man is not a Baptist belief. No word on whether or not she was ever officially confirmed or a formal member of any Christian church (or Hindu temple sect.)

    Normally by early teens most raised in a Christian church go through some formal instruction and are “made members” afterwards, given a bible, etc. That varies widely of course.

    None of this is important to me but American blacks ( Blacks!) are known to be more religious than others and nearly all are Protestant Christians. The middle class women are the backbone of black churches. Hillary’s turnout was supposedly hurt in Detroit in 2016 due to rumors that she secretly practiced satanism.

    I don’t think “Hindu Harris” would improve her black vote turnout. Of course she probably isn’t any more of a Hindu than a Christian.

    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
    @Muggles

    Completely wrong to say that Africans in the usa are more religious than other Americans. That is at best an out-of-date stereotype, if it ever was accurate in the first place.

    For every “black church lady” with her hat and Bible, there are her numerous non-religious (and very, very often violent thug) children and grandchildren. They may go to church incident to a funeral following one of the millions of incidents where they shoot each other. That is about it. This describes many millions of african-“Americans” (sic).

    Replies: @Muggles

    , @Jack D
    @Muggles

    Maybe she's Jewish like her husband. They stomped on a glass at their wedding - a Jewish tradition.

    https://www.oprahmag.com/entertainment/a25905360/kamala-harris-husband-douglas-emhoff/

    She is a step-mother to Emhoff's children. It wouldn't surprise me if Emhoff's children were raised Jewish (although their mother Mrs. Emhoff No. 1 was not Jewish) so maybe she celebrates Hanukkah with them and so on.

    Chances are none of them really have any serious religious beliefs at all. They might observe some cultural customs but as far as really seriously believing the dogma of any religion, I doubt it.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @Abolish_public_education

  53. Has this guy been living– or locked down– in one of his famous caverns? Tamila obviously contains much more curry than corn syrup.

    Virginia mayor urged to resign after saying Biden picked ‘Aunt Jemima as his VP’

  54. @Clyde
    Kams is not eligible to be VP. Her parents were legal immigrants but neither was an American citizen when she was born. Therefor she is not a natural born citizen, which you must be to hold the office of President and Vice President.

    Replies: @Gianni in Guernsey, @GeraldB, @education realist, @Buck Ransom, @BenKenobi, @pepperinmono, @Jonathan Mason, @Douglas Self, @Alden, @AnotherDad

    The question of whether or not children of legal immigrants who are citizens of foreign countries are natural born citizens was decided in March 1989 by the Supreme Court. The ruling was made March 28 1889

    The Supreme Court ruled that such children are indeed considered natural born citizens. And thus eligible for all the rights privileges and responsibility of citizenship including becoming president.

    United States vs Wong Kim Ark.argued in 1887 decided in March 1889.

  55. @Jonathan Mason
    @Clyde


    Kams is not eligible to be VP. Her parents were legal immigrants but neither was an American citizen when she was born. Therefor she is not a natural born citizen, which you must be to hold the office of President and Vice President.
     
    Unfortunately the Constitution does not define "natural born citizen".

    British Prime Minister Boris Johnson was born in the US when his father was studying economics in New York, his parents not being citizens, but he was registered as a US citizen, a status that he only gave up in 2018 for tax reasons.

    By renouncing his US citizenship Johnson gave up any chance of becoming the U.S. president once he was done leading the U.K. But perhaps he was never eligible anyway.

    But can anybody show definitively that there is a clear line between natural-born citizens, and other citizens born in the US?

    If Harris is not a natural born citizen and was never naturalized, then she would be a stateless person, and not a US citizen at all, and in the same position as the Dreamers, except that when her parents were naturalized, she would also have been automatically naturalized at the same time.

    But then why did Johnson have to pay US taxes even though his parents were not Americans and he never lived in the US after the age of 5?

    But the 14th Amendment says that 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.

    It does not make any distinction between people just physically born in the US and people "natural born" in the US. It says there are only two types of citizens, those born on site, and those immigrants who were naturalized later in life.

    The US really needs to get its act together. Isn't it ageist to have age restrictions on who can run for President at the lower end, but not at the upper end?

    Replies: @Alden, @RadicalCenter

    Check United States vs Wong Kim Ark.

    Mr Wong was in the same situation as Harris, born in the United States of legal immigrants.

    On Match 28, 1889, 130 years ago the Supreme Court ruled that Mr Wong was a natural born citizen with all the rights, privileges and responsibilities of other natural born citizens regardless of parental citizenship status.

    That case decided the question once and for all.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Mason
    @Alden

    I agree with you but what is a legal immigrant? My niece spent four years playing soccer in college in the United States, but she was never an immigrant, and she returned to England later when she graduated.

    If she had had a baby during that time, and it was born in the US, the baby would still have been a US citizen, and subject to pay US taxes on an income for its whole life, even if it never lived in the US.

    Of course if she had become pregnant while in the US, but the baby was born in the summer vacation in England, then the baby would not necessarily have US citizenship, unless its father was a US citizen and made a formal application for citizenship for the child, in which case a consular record of birth overseas would have been issued and the child would have been a natural born American.

    But she didn't get pregnant or have a baby.

    , @Ancient Briton
    @Alden

    I think the Harrises were in the US on non-immigrant student visas when KH was born.

  56. @Reg Cæsar
    @education realist


    So by that standard, Donald Trump just barely qualifies as “American” because his dad was born here?
    That’s really batshit crazy...
     
    Not necessarily. The matter is actually unsettled.

    Ann Coulter Doubles Down On Ted Cruz’ Ineligibility For The Presidency

    Cruz no 'natural born' citizen

    We'd have to wait for the courts to decide. It's rather late in the game for that-- courts have no reservation to overturning laws, but overturning elections is not something they're in any hurry to do. If you want to disqualify someone, file your objection the day she announces.

    Replies: @Alden

    Question was decided in 1889 by the Supreme Court United States vs Wong Kim Ark 130 years ago. Children born in the US of legal immigrants are natural born citizens.

    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
    @Alden

    It was wrong then and it is wrong now, as a matter of textual and historical interpretation. In any event, it is suicidally stupid for us to allow this.

    It needs to be overturned by the nine robed assholes or properly defined and clarified by federal statute (or if need be, constitutional amendment).

    , @Reg Cæsar
    @Alden


    Question was decided in 1889 by the Supreme Court United States vs Wong Kim Ark 130 years ago. Children born in the US of legal immigrants are natural born citizens.
     
    Are you absolutely sure they are "natural born"? There is a distinction between that and plain old citizenship.

    At any rate, the Wong court was the same five guys that gave us Plessy v. Ferguson. How's that decision holding up?

  57. @Jonathan Mason
    @Clyde


    Kams is not eligible to be VP. Her parents were legal immigrants but neither was an American citizen when she was born. Therefor she is not a natural born citizen, which you must be to hold the office of President and Vice President.
     
    Unfortunately the Constitution does not define "natural born citizen".

    British Prime Minister Boris Johnson was born in the US when his father was studying economics in New York, his parents not being citizens, but he was registered as a US citizen, a status that he only gave up in 2018 for tax reasons.

    By renouncing his US citizenship Johnson gave up any chance of becoming the U.S. president once he was done leading the U.K. But perhaps he was never eligible anyway.

    But can anybody show definitively that there is a clear line between natural-born citizens, and other citizens born in the US?

    If Harris is not a natural born citizen and was never naturalized, then she would be a stateless person, and not a US citizen at all, and in the same position as the Dreamers, except that when her parents were naturalized, she would also have been automatically naturalized at the same time.

    But then why did Johnson have to pay US taxes even though his parents were not Americans and he never lived in the US after the age of 5?

    But the 14th Amendment says that 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.

    It does not make any distinction between people just physically born in the US and people "natural born" in the US. It says there are only two types of citizens, those born on site, and those immigrants who were naturalized later in life.

    The US really needs to get its act together. Isn't it ageist to have age restrictions on who can run for President at the lower end, but not at the upper end?

    Replies: @Alden, @RadicalCenter

    Your interpretation — the prevailing interpretation — renders the words “and subject to its jurisdiction thereof”, of no effect at all.

    The phrase is a limiting qualifier. The words necessarily mean that there are some people “born … in the United States” who are not “subject to its jurisdiction.” This can mean people born here whose parents are both NON-citizens, i.e. people who have no irrevocable legal right to remain here.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @RadicalCenter

    If you are not subject to the jurisdiction of the US, that means that you are immune from its laws. Diplomats in fact have this status. If they kill someone, the most the US can do is declare them persona non grata and send them home and ask their mother country to prosecute them. So if what you are saying is true (that (non-diplomatic) non-citizens present in the US are not "subject to its jurisdiction" then they can literally commit murder and not be prosecuted for it - is this what you really want?


    And the general consensus is that the Founders were indeed talking about diplomats (and maybe Indians) when they added the "subject to its jurisdiction" qualifier. If you are the child of Russian diplomats born in America, you are not subject to its jurisdiction and therefore not a natural born US citizen and you can't become President - you are a citizen of Russia (and conversely the children of American diplomats born in Moscow ARE natural born American citizens).

    Replies: @AnotherDad

    , @Jonathan Mason
    @RadicalCenter

    So why did Boris Johnson have to pay US taxes even though he never lived in the US after the age of 5 and his parents were not US citizens.

    Replies: @dearieme, @Muggles

  58. @Muggles
    Another interesting subject is Commala's religion, if any.

    I did a quick Google search and it turned up a rather vague reply. Her mother took her to Hindu temple in Montreal, but to a Baptist church in Oakland.

    There is no religious test of course for office in the US. Others here note that her high caste Hindu status is memorialized as part of her family's name.

    There has been no mention of any Hindu religious observance in accounts of her life. Nor any particularly Christian ones either. Sleeping with a married man is not a Baptist belief. No word on whether or not she was ever officially confirmed or a formal member of any Christian church (or Hindu temple sect.)

    Normally by early teens most raised in a Christian church go through some formal instruction and are "made members" afterwards, given a bible, etc. That varies widely of course.

    None of this is important to me but American blacks ( Blacks!) are known to be more religious than others and nearly all are Protestant Christians. The middle class women are the backbone of black churches. Hillary's turnout was supposedly hurt in Detroit in 2016 due to rumors that she secretly practiced satanism.

    I don't think "Hindu Harris" would improve her black vote turnout. Of course she probably isn't any more of a Hindu than a Christian.

    Replies: @RadicalCenter, @Jack D

    Completely wrong to say that Africans in the usa are more religious than other Americans. That is at best an out-of-date stereotype, if it ever was accurate in the first place.

    For every “black church lady” with her hat and Bible, there are her numerous non-religious (and very, very often violent thug) children and grandchildren. They may go to church incident to a funeral following one of the millions of incidents where they shoot each other. That is about it. This describes many millions of african-“Americans” (sic).

    • Agree: Alden
    • Replies: @Muggles
    @RadicalCenter

    You are of course entitled to your opinion.

    But from my observations and close reading, you are wrong. I live in a large urban area with many blacks and many black churches large and small.

    Don't equate "churchgoing" with "non criminal."

    Most black American families are run by the mothers. Most of them at some point in their lives, after running wild perhaps when young, end up going back to their black church. (Same does happen to white lower class women, single moms). The church is a major focal point of black lives, especially in lower income neighborhoods.

    George Floyd is a case in point. He went to church, it is said, when in Houston residing w/ mama, along with her other kids. Even as an adult. His church paid for his initial trip to Minneapolis in his 40s, to attend some kind of (unsuccessful) drug rehab program. He was hardly a model Christian but probably did consider himself a church member.

    Church is mainly social for women, especially single women raising lots of children. It is also part of their social welfare network.

    As for men, many black prison inmates end up in prison ministries inside. Some stay on that path outside.

    Black female household leaders may be pretty forgiving about their children or neighbors, but they do rely on the church for moral authority, rules. Generally as a result they aren't big fans of gay men or non Christians/atheists. Since they can be pretty racist themselves, not crazy about south Asians who are Hindus either. (Also, as an aside, many aren't crazy about pale "black women" either since most of them aren't. The ones who are darker resent "pale privilege.")

  59. @Alden
    @Reg Cæsar

    Question was decided in 1889 by the Supreme Court United States vs Wong Kim Ark 130 years ago. Children born in the US of legal immigrants are natural born citizens.

    Replies: @RadicalCenter, @Reg Cæsar

    It was wrong then and it is wrong now, as a matter of textual and historical interpretation. In any event, it is suicidally stupid for us to allow this.

    It needs to be overturned by the nine robed assholes or properly defined and clarified by federal statute (or if need be, constitutional amendment).

  60. @education realist
    @Clyde

    So by that standard, Donald Trump just barely qualifies as "American" because his dad was born here?

    That's really batshit crazy, and I loathe Harris. Focus on her early prostitution with Willie Brown, but good god, people, stop with the stupid.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @Anonymous

    If you mean that birth-certificate slide posts/threads are more likely near-term to benefit and probably to originate from the Biden-Harris side, I agree… After all Hillary’s Praetorians did architect birtherism, fair and square (and, in the Mark Penn rendition of it, even had a valid point)

  61. @TheJester
    Why would anyone think Kamala Harris is "Black" or even a POC? See photo of Kamala next to an authentic black woman:

    https://spectator.org/?utm_source=LibertyNation&utm_campaign=Top20ConservativeNewsSites2020

    Replies: @Jack D, @Reg Cæsar, @Jonathan Mason, @BB753, @Truth

    Never say this in front of a black person if you value your safety. Among themselves and in private, black people can make whatever assessment they want (most likely unfavorable) of Kamala’s “authenticity” but as a white person don’t you dare question it unless you axing for a beating. Nor is any black person going to share with you, whitey, his or her honest assessment.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Jack D

    Hahaha... what black ?

  62. @Alden
    @Reg Cæsar

    Question was decided in 1889 by the Supreme Court United States vs Wong Kim Ark 130 years ago. Children born in the US of legal immigrants are natural born citizens.

    Replies: @RadicalCenter, @Reg Cæsar

    Question was decided in 1889 by the Supreme Court United States vs Wong Kim Ark 130 years ago. Children born in the US of legal immigrants are natural born citizens.

    Are you absolutely sure they are “natural born”? There is a distinction between that and plain old citizenship.

    At any rate, the Wong court was the same five guys that gave us Plessy v. Ferguson. How’s that decision holding up?

  63. @RadicalCenter
    @Muggles

    Completely wrong to say that Africans in the usa are more religious than other Americans. That is at best an out-of-date stereotype, if it ever was accurate in the first place.

    For every “black church lady” with her hat and Bible, there are her numerous non-religious (and very, very often violent thug) children and grandchildren. They may go to church incident to a funeral following one of the millions of incidents where they shoot each other. That is about it. This describes many millions of african-“Americans” (sic).

    Replies: @Muggles

    You are of course entitled to your opinion.

    But from my observations and close reading, you are wrong. I live in a large urban area with many blacks and many black churches large and small.

    Don’t equate “churchgoing” with “non criminal.”

    Most black American families are run by the mothers. Most of them at some point in their lives, after running wild perhaps when young, end up going back to their black church. (Same does happen to white lower class women, single moms). The church is a major focal point of black lives, especially in lower income neighborhoods.

    George Floyd is a case in point. He went to church, it is said, when in Houston residing w/ mama, along with her other kids. Even as an adult. His church paid for his initial trip to Minneapolis in his 40s, to attend some kind of (unsuccessful) drug rehab program. He was hardly a model Christian but probably did consider himself a church member.

    Church is mainly social for women, especially single women raising lots of children. It is also part of their social welfare network.

    As for men, many black prison inmates end up in prison ministries inside. Some stay on that path outside.

    Black female household leaders may be pretty forgiving about their children or neighbors, but they do rely on the church for moral authority, rules. Generally as a result they aren’t big fans of gay men or non Christians/atheists. Since they can be pretty racist themselves, not crazy about south Asians who are Hindus either. (Also, as an aside, many aren’t crazy about pale “black women” either since most of them aren’t. The ones who are darker resent “pale privilege.”)

    • Agree: Alden
  64. @TheJester
    Why would anyone think Kamala Harris is "Black" or even a POC? See photo of Kamala next to an authentic black woman:

    https://spectator.org/?utm_source=LibertyNation&utm_campaign=Top20ConservativeNewsSites2020

    Replies: @Jack D, @Reg Cæsar, @Jonathan Mason, @BB753, @Truth

    Why would anyone think Kamala Harris is “Black” or even a POC?

    She has one drop.

  65. @RadicalCenter
    @Jonathan Mason

    Your interpretation — the prevailing interpretation — renders the words “and subject to its jurisdiction thereof”, of no effect at all.

    The phrase is a limiting qualifier. The words necessarily mean that there are some people “born ... in the United States” who are not “subject to its jurisdiction.” This can mean people born here whose parents are both NON-citizens, i.e. people who have no irrevocable legal right to remain here.

    Replies: @Jack D, @Jonathan Mason

    If you are not subject to the jurisdiction of the US, that means that you are immune from its laws. Diplomats in fact have this status. If they kill someone, the most the US can do is declare them persona non grata and send them home and ask their mother country to prosecute them. So if what you are saying is true (that (non-diplomatic) non-citizens present in the US are not “subject to its jurisdiction” then they can literally commit murder and not be prosecuted for it – is this what you really want?

    And the general consensus is that the Founders were indeed talking about diplomats (and maybe Indians) when they added the “subject to its jurisdiction” qualifier. If you are the child of Russian diplomats born in America, you are not subject to its jurisdiction and therefore not a natural born US citizen and you can’t become President – you are a citizen of Russia (and conversely the children of American diplomats born in Moscow ARE natural born American citizens).

    • Agree: Jonathan Mason
    • Replies: @AnotherDad
    @Jack D


    And the general consensus is that the Founders were indeed talking about diplomats (and maybe Indians) when they added the “subject to its jurisdiction” qualifier.
     
    (By "founders" here you're talking about the Republicans who drafted the 14th amendment. What they clearly meant to do was say "ex-slaves count".)

    Your take is a reasonable/consensus view.

    However, it does strike me that there are other cases that could qualify.

    For instance, what if Harris' mom pops her in Berkeley but then when the marriage folds up takes her back and raises her in India? Kamala is not "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" then.

    This is essentially the birth tourism case and i think it's a great loophole to close by law--even if getting to sane Jus Sanguinis policy may take an amendment.

    Replies: @Anonymous

  66. @TheJester
    Why would anyone think Kamala Harris is "Black" or even a POC? See photo of Kamala next to an authentic black woman:

    https://spectator.org/?utm_source=LibertyNation&utm_campaign=Top20ConservativeNewsSites2020

    Replies: @Jack D, @Reg Cæsar, @Jonathan Mason, @BB753, @Truth

    In the United States the word black with respect to the race of human beings is not used to describe the color of somebody’s skin, it is a term used to describe anybody who has visibly discernible African ancestry.

    You could be somebody from South India or Sri Lanka with skin that is very very dark, but that would not make you black. Oh you could be somebody from Jamaica who has a very light skin or beige skin and you would still be classified as black.

    Hope this helps.

    • Agree: Hugo Silva
  67. @RadicalCenter
    @Jonathan Mason

    Your interpretation — the prevailing interpretation — renders the words “and subject to its jurisdiction thereof”, of no effect at all.

    The phrase is a limiting qualifier. The words necessarily mean that there are some people “born ... in the United States” who are not “subject to its jurisdiction.” This can mean people born here whose parents are both NON-citizens, i.e. people who have no irrevocable legal right to remain here.

    Replies: @Jack D, @Jonathan Mason

    So why did Boris Johnson have to pay US taxes even though he never lived in the US after the age of 5 and his parents were not US citizens.

    • Replies: @dearieme
    @Jonathan Mason

    The cause is American taxation imperialism. Or, if you prefer a dramatic phrasing, the fact that all US citizens anywhere in the world are treated by the Internal Revenue as its perpetual serfs.

    , @Muggles
    @Jonathan Mason

    >>So why did Boris Johnson have to pay US taxes even though he never lived in the US after the age of 5 and his parents were not US citizens.<<

    I am not familiar with Boris Johnson's tax situation. But there are many reasons why someone not a US citizen might have to pay US taxes.

    Unlike most nations, US citizens have to (or are supposed to) pay US taxes on income earned anywhere in the world. Of course tax treaties and credits for foreign income taxes come into play.

    If Mr. Johnson had US sourced income of most kinds he might owe US taxes. Foreign directed dividend/interest payments (royalties, etc.) are required in most cases to withhold a certain percentage of that even if recipients aren't US citizens. In some cases you as a non US citizen might want to file a US tax return to get those back or perhaps get a credit for your home nation's tax.

    Tax treatments and treaty provisions can be quite complex. The US undoubtedly has the most complicated and far reaching individual tax set up on the planet. Our contribution to Planet Earth.

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason

  68. @Muggles
    Another interesting subject is Commala's religion, if any.

    I did a quick Google search and it turned up a rather vague reply. Her mother took her to Hindu temple in Montreal, but to a Baptist church in Oakland.

    There is no religious test of course for office in the US. Others here note that her high caste Hindu status is memorialized as part of her family's name.

    There has been no mention of any Hindu religious observance in accounts of her life. Nor any particularly Christian ones either. Sleeping with a married man is not a Baptist belief. No word on whether or not she was ever officially confirmed or a formal member of any Christian church (or Hindu temple sect.)

    Normally by early teens most raised in a Christian church go through some formal instruction and are "made members" afterwards, given a bible, etc. That varies widely of course.

    None of this is important to me but American blacks ( Blacks!) are known to be more religious than others and nearly all are Protestant Christians. The middle class women are the backbone of black churches. Hillary's turnout was supposedly hurt in Detroit in 2016 due to rumors that she secretly practiced satanism.

    I don't think "Hindu Harris" would improve her black vote turnout. Of course she probably isn't any more of a Hindu than a Christian.

    Replies: @RadicalCenter, @Jack D

    Maybe she’s Jewish like her husband. They stomped on a glass at their wedding – a Jewish tradition.

    https://www.oprahmag.com/entertainment/a25905360/kamala-harris-husband-douglas-emhoff/

    She is a step-mother to Emhoff’s children. It wouldn’t surprise me if Emhoff’s children were raised Jewish (although their mother Mrs. Emhoff No. 1 was not Jewish) so maybe she celebrates Hanukkah with them and so on.

    Chances are none of them really have any serious religious beliefs at all. They might observe some cultural customs but as far as really seriously believing the dogma of any religion, I doubt it.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @Jack D


    Chances are none of them really have any serious religious beliefs at all.
     
    Just like Obama.

    Say, do you think Willie Brown has compromising pictures of Kam on his hard drive?

    Assuming he has a hard drive. We know he has a sex drive.

    Bill Clinton sent all of two e-mails his entire eight years in office. Of course not-- he didn't want to leave a pixel trail.
    , @Abolish_public_education
    @Jack D

    Traditionally, the kallah is not the glass stomper.

    But then, in a Reformed-Jewish wedding, it could be a same-sex couple wherein both gals stomp on a glass framed picture of Trump.

    Mazel Tof!

  69. @Alden
    @Jonathan Mason

    Check United States vs Wong Kim Ark.

    Mr Wong was in the same situation as Harris, born in the United States of legal immigrants.

    On Match 28, 1889, 130 years ago the Supreme Court ruled that Mr Wong was a natural born citizen with all the rights, privileges and responsibilities of other natural born citizens regardless of parental citizenship status.

    That case decided the question once and for all.

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason, @Ancient Briton

    I agree with you but what is a legal immigrant? My niece spent four years playing soccer in college in the United States, but she was never an immigrant, and she returned to England later when she graduated.

    If she had had a baby during that time, and it was born in the US, the baby would still have been a US citizen, and subject to pay US taxes on an income for its whole life, even if it never lived in the US.

    Of course if she had become pregnant while in the US, but the baby was born in the summer vacation in England, then the baby would not necessarily have US citizenship, unless its father was a US citizen and made a formal application for citizenship for the child, in which case a consular record of birth overseas would have been issued and the child would have been a natural born American.

    But she didn’t get pregnant or have a baby.

  70. @Thirdtwin
    @Jack D

    The Dems want so badly to have Birtherism be a thing again. Let’s not gift them.

    And for the love of all that is good, please, please, PLEASE, President Trump, DO NOT TWEET about this at all.

    Replies: @anon

    • Replies: @Mike_from_SGV
    @anon

    Can't someone do an intervention to prevent conservatives/republicans from becoming a deranged cult? This birth stuff is embarrassing.

  71. @TheJester
    Why would anyone think Kamala Harris is "Black" or even a POC? See photo of Kamala next to an authentic black woman:

    https://spectator.org/?utm_source=LibertyNation&utm_campaign=Top20ConservativeNewsSites2020

    Replies: @Jack D, @Reg Cæsar, @Jonathan Mason, @BB753, @Truth

    Are South Asians (especially Tamils) elated about the thought of a half-Indian VP candidate or ashamed because Kamala’s Brahmin mother married a mulatto Jamaican?

  72. @TheJester
    Why would anyone think Kamala Harris is "Black" or even a POC? See photo of Kamala next to an authentic black woman:

    https://spectator.org/?utm_source=LibertyNation&utm_campaign=Top20ConservativeNewsSites2020

    Replies: @Jack D, @Reg Cæsar, @Jonathan Mason, @BB753, @Truth

    If a dude his color starting porking your daughter, what race would he be?

  73. @J
    The Iyers are possibly the highest IQ population in the world. It is a highly literate elite group. No doubt that Kamala Harris' ancestry has nothing to do with AfroAmericans. Married to a Jewish lawyer, she is very high class. I think she assumed the fake AfroAmerican identity as a political move, exactly as Obama.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    Gee ya think ? There are obvious templates on how to work the diversity rackets for shakedown money, career advancement etc. BLM is just the military wing of the operation.

    A massive response of force would shut that down, but not the stealth part of the operations.

  74. The natural born citizen thing is vague for a reason. I believe none of the first 8 presidents were within the US, and Ulysses Grant was born in Ohio before it was a state, and John Mccain was born in Panama.

  75. @Anonymous
    Jack D (the D stands for disingenuous) says:

    The US has “birthright citizenship”. Generally speaking, if you were born in the US (unless you were the child of foreign diplomats with immunity) you are an American citizen regardless of whether your parents are.

    The requirement for POTUS is not simply being an American citizen. The requirement is being Natural Born. Obviously that means born without any naturalization issues surrounding the birth whatsoever.

    Both Kamala parents were recent immigrants not citizens. It's a clear case.

    Natural Born has meaning. Certain dishonest voices are trying to render the term meaningless and claim essentially that anchor babies are Natural Born.

    Natural Born is a simple logical political barrier to hostile alien immigrants trying to install their offspring as our rulers. We saw how Obama's deep attachment to his hostile alien father (Dreams of My Father) absolutely poisoned the office.

    Replies: @dearieme, @Alden

    Largely balls. The chaps who wrote the Constitution used Blackstone as their legal guide so “natural born” implies a requirement to be an American citizen by birth. Which she is.

    • Agree: Jack D
    • Thanks: Johann Ricke
  76. @Jonathan Mason
    @RadicalCenter

    So why did Boris Johnson have to pay US taxes even though he never lived in the US after the age of 5 and his parents were not US citizens.

    Replies: @dearieme, @Muggles

    The cause is American taxation imperialism. Or, if you prefer a dramatic phrasing, the fact that all US citizens anywhere in the world are treated by the Internal Revenue as its perpetual serfs.

    • Agree: BB753
  77. anon[908] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jim Don Bob
    @Jack D

    The historical record shows that birthright citizenship was far from the intent of the 14th Amendement, but like so many other parts of the Constitution, it has been twisted by judges into what Jack said. Babies born here are US citizens and then the family reunification racket kicks in.

    No other country in the world is this stupid. DJT tweeted once about doing something about it, and I think he should have because many Americans don't know about it. But, like much else about him that raised my hopes, he moved on to his next tweet.

    Replies: @anon, @AnotherDad

    true

    There was enough confusion after the 14th amendment was ratified about American Indian citizenship that in 1870, the Senate Judiciary committee was asked to clarify the issue. The committee said it was clear that “the 14th amendment to the Constitution has no effect whatever upon the status of the Indians within the limits of the United States,”

    The issue of American Indian birthright citizenship wouldn’t be settled until 1924 when the Indian Citizenship Act conferred citizenship on all American Indians.

  78. @Clyde
    Kams is not eligible to be VP. Her parents were legal immigrants but neither was an American citizen when she was born. Therefor she is not a natural born citizen, which you must be to hold the office of President and Vice President.

    Replies: @Gianni in Guernsey, @GeraldB, @education realist, @Buck Ransom, @BenKenobi, @pepperinmono, @Jonathan Mason, @Douglas Self, @Alden, @AnotherDad

    This is just the dumbest nonsense imaginable.

    We need to fight and win on core principle of preserving nation and civilization against this evil nation and civilization destroying barbarism of minoritarianism.

    I’ll just clone what i said in the other thread:

    The point is she is politically unAmerican–anti-American.

    She represents a party and ideology that stands
    — against republican government and majority rule
    — against our heritage rooted in Western Civilization, specifically Anglo-American traditions
    — against the historic liberties of Americans
    — against the interests of white people–whose ancestors built this nation–in favor of the interests of favored minorities under some sort of phony narrative of relative “oppression”
    — against the interests of productive law-abiding middle class people (who actually make the country function) and for the Democrats collection of various parasitic grifters
    — against the idea of borders
    — against the interests of citizens in favor of the interests of foreigners
    and now quite clearly
    — against “the rule of law”!
    in sum Harris is against the American nation.

    That’s what any patriot would run against–against her and Biden being against the nation! Everything that defines it, maintains it and makes it special and decent and prosperous.

    Yapping about tiddlywink nonsense, is a distraction from what matters, what is critical. And unfortunately a Trump specialty.

    • Agree: Alden
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @AnotherDad


    She represents a party and ideology that stands
    — against republican government and majority rule...
     
    The latter for the time being.

    Just wait a decade or two. We'll get majority rule good and hard.

    , @Cato
    @AnotherDad


    — against the interests of productive law-abiding middle class people (who actually make the country function) and for the Democrats collection of various parasitic grifters

     

    Nice list. For me, the above is sufficient reason to resist.
  79. In the 1970s, South Asians got jealous of “Oriental” businessmen getting low interest loans and government contracting privileges while they were stuck with worthless Caucasian Privilege, so they had themselves regrouped with Orientals as “Asians” for the 1980 Census.

    Writing Southwest Asians into census and employment law as “white” is a good idea and should be done.
    One way around it without a direct attack would be Congressional action to provide definition around “white”, for example, first of all, to retitle it “Caucasion” which is more accurate, and to make explicit reference to people of Indo-European descent – which is much more broadly understood in 2020 than in 1975.
    Thereby – if anyone says, “but I don’t know if I’m ‘Indo-European’” you ask their mother tongue, and if necessary for example with recent immigrants, their parent’s mother tongue. Indo-European mother tongue? …question answered, you are ethnically (if not racially) Indo-European.
    This would provide considerably more basis than the nebulous definition we have today which encourages racial rather than ethnic thinking – helping no one.

  80. @Jack D
    @RadicalCenter

    If you are not subject to the jurisdiction of the US, that means that you are immune from its laws. Diplomats in fact have this status. If they kill someone, the most the US can do is declare them persona non grata and send them home and ask their mother country to prosecute them. So if what you are saying is true (that (non-diplomatic) non-citizens present in the US are not "subject to its jurisdiction" then they can literally commit murder and not be prosecuted for it - is this what you really want?


    And the general consensus is that the Founders were indeed talking about diplomats (and maybe Indians) when they added the "subject to its jurisdiction" qualifier. If you are the child of Russian diplomats born in America, you are not subject to its jurisdiction and therefore not a natural born US citizen and you can't become President - you are a citizen of Russia (and conversely the children of American diplomats born in Moscow ARE natural born American citizens).

    Replies: @AnotherDad

    And the general consensus is that the Founders were indeed talking about diplomats (and maybe Indians) when they added the “subject to its jurisdiction” qualifier.

    (By “founders” here you’re talking about the Republicans who drafted the 14th amendment. What they clearly meant to do was say “ex-slaves count”.)

    Your take is a reasonable/consensus view.

    However, it does strike me that there are other cases that could qualify.

    For instance, what if Harris’ mom pops her in Berkeley but then when the marriage folds up takes her back and raises her in India? Kamala is not “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” then.

    This is essentially the birth tourism case and i think it’s a great loophole to close by law–even if getting to sane Jus Sanguinis policy may take an amendment.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @AnotherDad


    (By “founders” here you’re talking about the Republicans who drafted the 14th amendment. What they clearly meant to do was say “ex-slaves count”.)

    Your take is a reasonable/consensus view.
     
    If its purpose was to make ex-slaves count, how reasonable of a view is it really? Did the drafters really intend the amendment to confer citizenship on the offspring of invaders?

    As for “consensus,” would the powers that be allow any other view? What would happen to someone who tried to take that view in public?
  81. @Jim Don Bob
    @Jack D

    The historical record shows that birthright citizenship was far from the intent of the 14th Amendement, but like so many other parts of the Constitution, it has been twisted by judges into what Jack said. Babies born here are US citizens and then the family reunification racket kicks in.

    No other country in the world is this stupid. DJT tweeted once about doing something about it, and I think he should have because many Americans don't know about it. But, like much else about him that raised my hopes, he moved on to his next tweet.

    Replies: @anon, @AnotherDad

    No other country in the world is this stupid. DJT tweeted once about doing something about it, and I think he should have because many Americans don’t know about it. But, like much else about him that raised my hopes, he moved on to his next tweet.

    All tweet and no cattle.

  82. Anonymous[328] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jack D
    @Gianni in Guernsey

    It was noticed and it's not true. The US has "birthright citizenship". Generally speaking, if you were born in the US (unless you were the child of foreign diplomats with immunity) you are an American citizen regardless of whether your parents are. This may or may not be a good thing but that's how the law stands. There is no impediment to Harris being President.

    Replies: @Ron Mexico, @Thirdtwin, @BB753, @Jim Don Bob, @Anonymous

    Generally speaking, if you were born in the US (unless you were the child of foreign diplomats with immunity) you are an American citizen regardless of whether your parents are. This may or may not be a good thing but that’s how the law stands.

    That may or may not be an accurate statement of the law, but what is your opinion of it from a policy standpoint? Is it good for American Whites?

    • Replies: @Alden
    @Anonymous

    What matters is that persons born in the United States even if Mommy crawled under the border fence or on a beach beach or got off a plane 3 hours or 1 hour or 30 minutes before the birth are American citizens. Your, Jack’s and my opinion doesn’t matter.

    United States vs Wong Kim Ark 1889. The SC judges opinions both the majority and the dissenters are excellent explanations of how and why they decided that Wong, born in America of Chinese citizen immigrants was a natural born citizen. There are other articles explaining the reasoning. US vs Wong just decided in favor of the 200 year old assumption that. birth in America made one a natural born citizen. The decision just affirmed a long standing assumption.

    The 14th amendment isn’t really applicable as the purpose was to prevent blacks from going back to slavery or bound labor or becoming a different class of citizen.

  83. Anonymous[328] • Disclaimer says:
    @AnotherDad
    @Jack D


    And the general consensus is that the Founders were indeed talking about diplomats (and maybe Indians) when they added the “subject to its jurisdiction” qualifier.
     
    (By "founders" here you're talking about the Republicans who drafted the 14th amendment. What they clearly meant to do was say "ex-slaves count".)

    Your take is a reasonable/consensus view.

    However, it does strike me that there are other cases that could qualify.

    For instance, what if Harris' mom pops her in Berkeley but then when the marriage folds up takes her back and raises her in India? Kamala is not "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" then.

    This is essentially the birth tourism case and i think it's a great loophole to close by law--even if getting to sane Jus Sanguinis policy may take an amendment.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    (By “founders” here you’re talking about the Republicans who drafted the 14th amendment. What they clearly meant to do was say “ex-slaves count”.)

    Your take is a reasonable/consensus view.

    If its purpose was to make ex-slaves count, how reasonable of a view is it really? Did the drafters really intend the amendment to confer citizenship on the offspring of invaders?

    As for “consensus,” would the powers that be allow any other view? What would happen to someone who tried to take that view in public?

  84. @Jonathan Mason
    @RadicalCenter

    So why did Boris Johnson have to pay US taxes even though he never lived in the US after the age of 5 and his parents were not US citizens.

    Replies: @dearieme, @Muggles

    >>So why did Boris Johnson have to pay US taxes even though he never lived in the US after the age of 5 and his parents were not US citizens.<<

    I am not familiar with Boris Johnson's tax situation. But there are many reasons why someone not a US citizen might have to pay US taxes.

    Unlike most nations, US citizens have to (or are supposed to) pay US taxes on income earned anywhere in the world. Of course tax treaties and credits for foreign income taxes come into play.

    If Mr. Johnson had US sourced income of most kinds he might owe US taxes. Foreign directed dividend/interest payments (royalties, etc.) are required in most cases to withhold a certain percentage of that even if recipients aren't US citizens. In some cases you as a non US citizen might want to file a US tax return to get those back or perhaps get a credit for your home nation's tax.

    Tax treatments and treaty provisions can be quite complex. The US undoubtedly has the most complicated and far reaching individual tax set up on the planet. Our contribution to Planet Earth.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Mason
    @Muggles


    If Mr. Johnson had US sourced income of most kinds he might owe US taxes. Foreign directed dividend/interest payments (royalties, etc.) are required in most cases to withhold a certain percentage of that even if recipients aren't US citizens.
     
    The US wanted him to pay a large amount of tax on the profit from the sale of his house in London.

    Replies: @Muggles

  85. @Alden
    @Jonathan Mason

    Check United States vs Wong Kim Ark.

    Mr Wong was in the same situation as Harris, born in the United States of legal immigrants.

    On Match 28, 1889, 130 years ago the Supreme Court ruled that Mr Wong was a natural born citizen with all the rights, privileges and responsibilities of other natural born citizens regardless of parental citizenship status.

    That case decided the question once and for all.

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason, @Ancient Briton

    I think the Harrises were in the US on non-immigrant student visas when KH was born.

  86. anon[317] • Disclaimer says:
    @SteveRogers42
    Luce-Cellar Act (1946).

    So this has got to be the same guy featured in the Hart-Cellar Act of 1965, right? So this pogue slithered around for 20 years twisting our immigration laws to destroy America? Any more evidence of his sedition?

    Replies: @anon, @Alden

    Luce-Cellar Act (1946).

    Yes. Claire Booth Luce and Emanuel Cellar.

    https://infogalactic.com/info/Luce%E2%80%93Celler_Act_of_1946

    So this has got to be the same guy featured in the Hart-Cellar Act of 1965, right?

    Co sponsor.
    https://infogalactic.com/info/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_of_1965

    So this pogue slithered around for 20 years twisting our immigration laws to destroy America?

    More like 50 years.

    https://infogalactic.com/info/Emanuel_Celler

    Any more evidence of his sedition?

    Parable of the scorpion and the frog comes to mind.

  87. @Jack D
    @Muggles

    Maybe she's Jewish like her husband. They stomped on a glass at their wedding - a Jewish tradition.

    https://www.oprahmag.com/entertainment/a25905360/kamala-harris-husband-douglas-emhoff/

    She is a step-mother to Emhoff's children. It wouldn't surprise me if Emhoff's children were raised Jewish (although their mother Mrs. Emhoff No. 1 was not Jewish) so maybe she celebrates Hanukkah with them and so on.

    Chances are none of them really have any serious religious beliefs at all. They might observe some cultural customs but as far as really seriously believing the dogma of any religion, I doubt it.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @Abolish_public_education

    Chances are none of them really have any serious religious beliefs at all.

    Just like Obama.

    Say, do you think Willie Brown has compromising pictures of Kam on his hard drive?

    Assuming he has a hard drive. We know he has a sex drive.

    Bill Clinton sent all of two e-mails his entire eight years in office. Of course not– he didn’t want to leave a pixel trail.

  88. @Jack D
    @Muggles

    Maybe she's Jewish like her husband. They stomped on a glass at their wedding - a Jewish tradition.

    https://www.oprahmag.com/entertainment/a25905360/kamala-harris-husband-douglas-emhoff/

    She is a step-mother to Emhoff's children. It wouldn't surprise me if Emhoff's children were raised Jewish (although their mother Mrs. Emhoff No. 1 was not Jewish) so maybe she celebrates Hanukkah with them and so on.

    Chances are none of them really have any serious religious beliefs at all. They might observe some cultural customs but as far as really seriously believing the dogma of any religion, I doubt it.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @Abolish_public_education

    Traditionally, the kallah is not the glass stomper.

    But then, in a Reformed-Jewish wedding, it could be a same-sex couple wherein both gals stomp on a glass framed picture of Trump.

    Mazel Tof!

  89. @AnotherDad
    @Clyde

    This is just the dumbest nonsense imaginable.

    We need to fight and win on core principle of preserving nation and civilization against this evil nation and civilization destroying barbarism of minoritarianism.

    I'll just clone what i said in the other thread:

    The point is she is politically unAmerican–anti-American.

    She represents a party and ideology that stands
    — against republican government and majority rule
    — against our heritage rooted in Western Civilization, specifically Anglo-American traditions
    — against the historic liberties of Americans
    — against the interests of white people–whose ancestors built this nation–in favor of the interests of favored minorities under some sort of phony narrative of relative “oppression”
    — against the interests of productive law-abiding middle class people (who actually make the country function) and for the Democrats collection of various parasitic grifters
    — against the idea of borders
    — against the interests of citizens in favor of the interests of foreigners
    and now quite clearly
    — against “the rule of law”!
    in sum Harris is against the American nation.

    That’s what any patriot would run against–against her and Biden being against the nation! Everything that defines it, maintains it and makes it special and decent and prosperous.

    Yapping about tiddlywink nonsense, is a distraction from what matters, what is critical. And unfortunately a Trump specialty.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @Cato

    She represents a party and ideology that stands
    — against republican government and majority rule

    The latter for the time being.

    Just wait a decade or two. We’ll get majority rule good and hard.

  90. @AnotherDad
    @Clyde

    This is just the dumbest nonsense imaginable.

    We need to fight and win on core principle of preserving nation and civilization against this evil nation and civilization destroying barbarism of minoritarianism.

    I'll just clone what i said in the other thread:

    The point is she is politically unAmerican–anti-American.

    She represents a party and ideology that stands
    — against republican government and majority rule
    — against our heritage rooted in Western Civilization, specifically Anglo-American traditions
    — against the historic liberties of Americans
    — against the interests of white people–whose ancestors built this nation–in favor of the interests of favored minorities under some sort of phony narrative of relative “oppression”
    — against the interests of productive law-abiding middle class people (who actually make the country function) and for the Democrats collection of various parasitic grifters
    — against the idea of borders
    — against the interests of citizens in favor of the interests of foreigners
    and now quite clearly
    — against “the rule of law”!
    in sum Harris is against the American nation.

    That’s what any patriot would run against–against her and Biden being against the nation! Everything that defines it, maintains it and makes it special and decent and prosperous.

    Yapping about tiddlywink nonsense, is a distraction from what matters, what is critical. And unfortunately a Trump specialty.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @Cato

    — against the interests of productive law-abiding middle class people (who actually make the country function) and for the Democrats collection of various parasitic grifters

    Nice list. For me, the above is sufficient reason to resist.

  91. @Muggles
    @Jonathan Mason

    >>So why did Boris Johnson have to pay US taxes even though he never lived in the US after the age of 5 and his parents were not US citizens.<<

    I am not familiar with Boris Johnson's tax situation. But there are many reasons why someone not a US citizen might have to pay US taxes.

    Unlike most nations, US citizens have to (or are supposed to) pay US taxes on income earned anywhere in the world. Of course tax treaties and credits for foreign income taxes come into play.

    If Mr. Johnson had US sourced income of most kinds he might owe US taxes. Foreign directed dividend/interest payments (royalties, etc.) are required in most cases to withhold a certain percentage of that even if recipients aren't US citizens. In some cases you as a non US citizen might want to file a US tax return to get those back or perhaps get a credit for your home nation's tax.

    Tax treatments and treaty provisions can be quite complex. The US undoubtedly has the most complicated and far reaching individual tax set up on the planet. Our contribution to Planet Earth.

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason

    If Mr. Johnson had US sourced income of most kinds he might owe US taxes. Foreign directed dividend/interest payments (royalties, etc.) are required in most cases to withhold a certain percentage of that even if recipients aren’t US citizens.

    The US wanted him to pay a large amount of tax on the profit from the sale of his house in London.

    • Replies: @Muggles
    @Jonathan Mason

    Yes, Boris Johnson at the time of the sale was a dual US/UK citizen.

    Per the Forbes article I found this motivated him to renounce his US citizenship.

    As I mentioned previously, US citizens are unique in the world in that they are supposed to pay US income taxes on worldwide income.

    The rules about paying taxes on sale of your primary residence have varied in recent years but if the gain is large enough you might owe US tax. You have to wonder how they found out about the sales amount. In the US this is 1099'ed but I don't know about UK rules. Perhaps because he was a US citizen also the UK financial institutions did a report to the IRS.

    In recent years there are now expensive tax rules in place if you have assets or income greater than a certain amount, to have to pay an "exit tax" if you renounce your US citizenship. You have to formally renounce your US citizenship to avoid future income taxes. They will check your past income tax returns before they let you 'leave' for tax purposes. Nice, eh?

  92. @Jack D
    @TheJester

    Never say this in front of a black person if you value your safety. Among themselves and in private, black people can make whatever assessment they want (most likely unfavorable) of Kamala's "authenticity" but as a white person don't you dare question it unless you axing for a beating. Nor is any black person going to share with you, whitey, his or her honest assessment.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    Hahaha… what black ?

  93. @BB753
    @Jack D

    All of which still makes Kamala Harris zero percent American in heritage.

    Replies: @Jack D

    She is literally as American as I am. I don’t think my parents had completed their naturalization at the time I was born – it came thru maybe a year later. I can tell you that America is the nation of my birth and the only country I have ever known and I feel as American as anyone. The Constitution says that the President must be a natural born citizen, not his ancestors.

    Trump’s mother was born in Scotland as were his paternal grandparents so he is also from recent immigrant stock. I think if Kamala’s parents were German and Scottish instead of Indian and Jamaican you’d have no issue so it’s not a stretch to say that racism is involved here.

    • Replies: @dvorak
    @Jack D


    She is literally as American as I am. ... I can tell you that America is the nation of my birth and the only country I have ever known and I feel as American as anyone. The Constitution says that the President must be a natural born citizen, not his ancestors.
     
    Please keep your emotions out of this constitutional analysis, if you don't mind.

    You were naturalized (by soil) at birth as a US citizen. You are not (by blood) a natural-born US citizen.

    Replies: @epebble, @Jack D, @Alden

    , @Jonathan Mason
    @Jack D


    Trump’s mother was born in Scotland as were his paternal grandparents.
     
    If his father's parents were also Scots, then he is probably related to Tony Blair. But his dad's family were Drumpfs from Germany, so he is perhaps more likely to be related to Joseph Goebbels than Tony Blair.
    , @BB753
    @Jack D

    Is it racist to point out that second-generation Americans aren't as American as people who have older roots in the country? It's just a fact. For instance, you weren't related to any pre-1820 American when you were born, nor could you claim a piece of land somewhere in America belonging to an ancestor of yours. Your children will be more American than you in that sense, and so will your grandchildren, etc.

    , @ATBOTL
    @Jack D


    I think if Kamala’s parents were German and Scottish instead of Indian and Jamaican you’d have no issue so it’s not a stretch to say that racism is involved here.
     
    The anti-White hypocrisy of the jew knows no limits.
  94. @Jonathan Mason
    @Muggles


    If Mr. Johnson had US sourced income of most kinds he might owe US taxes. Foreign directed dividend/interest payments (royalties, etc.) are required in most cases to withhold a certain percentage of that even if recipients aren't US citizens.
     
    The US wanted him to pay a large amount of tax on the profit from the sale of his house in London.

    Replies: @Muggles

    Yes, Boris Johnson at the time of the sale was a dual US/UK citizen.

    Per the Forbes article I found this motivated him to renounce his US citizenship.

    As I mentioned previously, US citizens are unique in the world in that they are supposed to pay US income taxes on worldwide income.

    The rules about paying taxes on sale of your primary residence have varied in recent years but if the gain is large enough you might owe US tax. You have to wonder how they found out about the sales amount. In the US this is 1099’ed but I don’t know about UK rules. Perhaps because he was a US citizen also the UK financial institutions did a report to the IRS.

    In recent years there are now expensive tax rules in place if you have assets or income greater than a certain amount, to have to pay an “exit tax” if you renounce your US citizenship. You have to formally renounce your US citizenship to avoid future income taxes. They will check your past income tax returns before they let you ‘leave’ for tax purposes. Nice, eh?

  95. @Douglas Self
    @Clyde

    The common-law definition of a "natural-born" citizen is one for whose circumstance of birth does not require him/her to undergo the naturalization process under Federal law to become a citizen. US law does recognize both "Jus Soli" (by being born on American soil) or "Jus Sanguis" (by virtue of "blood", or having one parent who is an American citizen). Unfortunately, Ms. Harris qualifies based on the former, as she has a valid BC from California, regardless of the citizenship (not!) or immigration status of her parents...she is what's commonly known as an "ANCHOR Baby".

    Replies: @Clyde, @dvorak

    The Constitution requires you to be a natural born citizen for only two offices. The President and the VP. This was done for a reason. What did natural born citizen mean when the Constitution was written?

  96. @Douglas Self
    @Clyde

    The common-law definition of a "natural-born" citizen is one for whose circumstance of birth does not require him/her to undergo the naturalization process under Federal law to become a citizen. US law does recognize both "Jus Soli" (by being born on American soil) or "Jus Sanguis" (by virtue of "blood", or having one parent who is an American citizen). Unfortunately, Ms. Harris qualifies based on the former, as she has a valid BC from California, regardless of the citizenship (not!) or immigration status of her parents...she is what's commonly known as an "ANCHOR Baby".

    Replies: @Clyde, @dvorak

    The common-law definition of a “natural-born” citizen is one for whose circumstance of birth does not require him/her to undergo the naturalization process under Federal law to become a citizen.

    You’re quite confident and completely wrong; you and the late Justice Scalia (who once gave his uninformed understanding of the matter, off the cuff) are both wrong.

    Natural-born is by blood, as opposed to by soil. Naturalization later in life is a third category and is irrelevant to the distinction that the Founding Fathers were making.

    Barack Obama is a natural-born subject of Great Britain.

    The case of baby Harris is clear, where baby Obama’s is murkier. Kamala is not a natural-born US citizen.

    • Agree: Clyde
    • Troll: ScarletNumber
    • Replies: @Art Deco
    @dvorak

    Barack Obama is a natural-born subject of Great Britain.

    He was born in Honolulu and his mother's American citizenship was solid.

  97. @Jack D
    @BB753

    She is literally as American as I am. I don't think my parents had completed their naturalization at the time I was born - it came thru maybe a year later. I can tell you that America is the nation of my birth and the only country I have ever known and I feel as American as anyone. The Constitution says that the President must be a natural born citizen, not his ancestors.

    Trump's mother was born in Scotland as were his paternal grandparents so he is also from recent immigrant stock. I think if Kamala's parents were German and Scottish instead of Indian and Jamaican you'd have no issue so it's not a stretch to say that racism is involved here.

    Replies: @dvorak, @Jonathan Mason, @BB753, @ATBOTL

    She is literally as American as I am. … I can tell you that America is the nation of my birth and the only country I have ever known and I feel as American as anyone. The Constitution says that the President must be a natural born citizen, not his ancestors.

    Please keep your emotions out of this constitutional analysis, if you don’t mind.

    You were naturalized (by soil) at birth as a US citizen. You are not (by blood) a natural-born US citizen.

    • Troll: ScarletNumber
    • Replies: @epebble
    @dvorak


    You were naturalized (by soil) at birth as a US citizen.
     
    Never heard of this as a legal statement. Do you have anything to support this? There is something called Registration for children born abroad to U.S. Citizen parents (Consular Report of Birth Abroad). But, if the rules apply, they are considered Natural born and not Naturalized. Naturalization in U.S. always means applying N-400 paperwork with ICE and taking an oath. There is no other naturalization.
    , @Jack D
    @dvorak

    You want Constitutional analysis?

    Here is the Constitutional authority Rawle writing in 1825, so he is obviously not trying to score partisan points for the 2020 election :

    https://books.google.com/books?id=akEbAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA80&dq=%22The+citizens+of+each+state+constituted+the+citizens+of+the+United+States%22#v=onepage&q=%22The%20citizens%20of%20each%20state%20constituted%20the%20citizens%20of%20the%20United%20States%22&f=false


    [E]very 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 ... 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.

     

    "Naturalized (by soil) at birth" is complete double-talk unknown to law - there is no such thing. Naturalization is something that an alien must apply for and receive. Citizenship at birth is automatic.
    , @Alden
    @dvorak

    What’s naturalized by soil? Never heard of it.

    Never heard of a heritage blood American either.

    Had such a category existed, this proud descendant of the man who financed the Mayflower expedition, William Mullins, his daughter Priscilla and her husband John Alden would have heard of it.

    The oldest European settlers in what’s now the United States were Spanish, not British. Dvorak sounds like an Ellis Island name.

  98. You write, “Now that “Asians” are becoming elite, at least from a university admission officer’s perspective, it might be worthwhile to reclaim “Caucasian” status and rehash Thind’s argument.”

    This may not be true. According to Ron Unz, Caucasians who cannot claim to have a grandmother or great grandmother who suffered during the Holocaust are the least likely to be admitted into elite schools, all other factors being equal. Such Caucasians are discriminated even more against than Asians and constitute 97% of the Caucasians.

    https://www.unz.com/runz/the-myth-of-american-meritocracy/

    Indians are better off staying classified as Asian rather claiming Caucasian status.

    Balaji

  99. @Jack D
    @BB753

    She is literally as American as I am. I don't think my parents had completed their naturalization at the time I was born - it came thru maybe a year later. I can tell you that America is the nation of my birth and the only country I have ever known and I feel as American as anyone. The Constitution says that the President must be a natural born citizen, not his ancestors.

    Trump's mother was born in Scotland as were his paternal grandparents so he is also from recent immigrant stock. I think if Kamala's parents were German and Scottish instead of Indian and Jamaican you'd have no issue so it's not a stretch to say that racism is involved here.

    Replies: @dvorak, @Jonathan Mason, @BB753, @ATBOTL

    Trump’s mother was born in Scotland as were his paternal grandparents.

    If his father’s parents were also Scots, then he is probably related to Tony Blair. But his dad’s family were Drumpfs from Germany, so he is perhaps more likely to be related to Joseph Goebbels than Tony Blair.

  100. “What makes Kammy Run?” — Pretty clever by moi.

  101. @dvorak
    @Douglas Self


    The common-law definition of a “natural-born” citizen is one for whose circumstance of birth does not require him/her to undergo the naturalization process under Federal law to become a citizen.
     
    You're quite confident and completely wrong; you and the late Justice Scalia (who once gave his uninformed understanding of the matter, off the cuff) are both wrong.

    Natural-born is by blood, as opposed to by soil. Naturalization later in life is a third category and is irrelevant to the distinction that the Founding Fathers were making.

    Barack Obama is a natural-born subject of Great Britain.

    The case of baby Harris is clear, where baby Obama's is murkier. Kamala is not a natural-born US citizen.

    Replies: @Art Deco

    Barack Obama is a natural-born subject of Great Britain.

    He was born in Honolulu and his mother’s American citizenship was solid.

  102. @dvorak
    @Jack D


    She is literally as American as I am. ... I can tell you that America is the nation of my birth and the only country I have ever known and I feel as American as anyone. The Constitution says that the President must be a natural born citizen, not his ancestors.
     
    Please keep your emotions out of this constitutional analysis, if you don't mind.

    You were naturalized (by soil) at birth as a US citizen. You are not (by blood) a natural-born US citizen.

    Replies: @epebble, @Jack D, @Alden

    You were naturalized (by soil) at birth as a US citizen.

    Never heard of this as a legal statement. Do you have anything to support this? There is something called Registration for children born abroad to U.S. Citizen parents (Consular Report of Birth Abroad). But, if the rules apply, they are considered Natural born and not Naturalized. Naturalization in U.S. always means applying N-400 paperwork with ICE and taking an oath. There is no other naturalization.

  103. @anon
    @Thirdtwin

    Too late; The Dog has already returned to the Vomit:

    https://www.npr.org/2020/08/13/902362014/trump-and-his-campaign-amplify-birther-conspiracy-against-kamala-harris

    Replies: @Mike_from_SGV

    Can’t someone do an intervention to prevent conservatives/republicans from becoming a deranged cult? This birth stuff is embarrassing.

  104. @Ron Mexico
    @Jack D

    The Supreme Court has never ruled on the definition of "natural born citizen," which is different than American citizen.

    Replies: @Alden

    The Supreme Court did make the definitive ruling on people born in the United States of legal immigrant parents back in 1889. The precedent still stands

    Check the case of United States vs Wong Kim Ark 1887/1889. Mr Wong and Ms Harris, identical circumstances of birth. Court ruled Mr Wong was a natural born citizen. Precedent still stands.

    Some people need to use google more.

    US vs Wong Kim Ark 1887/1889

    Look it up

  105. @dvorak
    @Jack D


    She is literally as American as I am. ... I can tell you that America is the nation of my birth and the only country I have ever known and I feel as American as anyone. The Constitution says that the President must be a natural born citizen, not his ancestors.
     
    Please keep your emotions out of this constitutional analysis, if you don't mind.

    You were naturalized (by soil) at birth as a US citizen. You are not (by blood) a natural-born US citizen.

    Replies: @epebble, @Jack D, @Alden

    You want Constitutional analysis?

    Here is the Constitutional authority Rawle writing in 1825, so he is obviously not trying to score partisan points for the 2020 election :

    https://books.google.com/books?id=akEbAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA80&dq=%22The+citizens+of+each+state+constituted+the+citizens+of+the+United+States%22#v=onepage&q=%22The%20citizens%20of%20each%20state%20constituted%20the%20citizens%20of%20the%20United%20States%22&f=false

    [E]very 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 … 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.

    “Naturalized (by soil) at birth” is complete double-talk unknown to law – there is no such thing. Naturalization is something that an alien must apply for and receive. Citizenship at birth is automatic.

  106. @SteveRogers42
    Luce-Cellar Act (1946).

    So this has got to be the same guy featured in the Hart-Cellar Act of 1965, right? So this pogue slithered around for 20 years twisting our immigration laws to destroy America? Any more evidence of his sedition?

    Replies: @anon, @Alden

    Not the Luce-Celler act 1946. The Supreme Court ruling in 1889

    United States vs Wong Kim Ark.

    Children born in America of legal immigrants are natural born citizens. The precedent still stands.

    The decision in US vs Wong Kim Ark didn’t change anything. It had been assumed from the 1790s that just being born in America made one a natural born citizen. Mr Wong ran into trouble because he made a trip to China and was denied entrance home because of a Chinese exclusion rule. The Supreme Court ruled in his favor, that because he was born in America, he was a natural born citizen

    Instead of blathering in ignorance, why not learn about US vs Wong Kim Ark 1889?

  107. @Anonymous
    Jack D (the D stands for disingenuous) says:

    The US has “birthright citizenship”. Generally speaking, if you were born in the US (unless you were the child of foreign diplomats with immunity) you are an American citizen regardless of whether your parents are.

    The requirement for POTUS is not simply being an American citizen. The requirement is being Natural Born. Obviously that means born without any naturalization issues surrounding the birth whatsoever.

    Both Kamala parents were recent immigrants not citizens. It's a clear case.

    Natural Born has meaning. Certain dishonest voices are trying to render the term meaningless and claim essentially that anchor babies are Natural Born.

    Natural Born is a simple logical political barrier to hostile alien immigrants trying to install their offspring as our rulers. We saw how Obama's deep attachment to his hostile alien father (Dreams of My Father) absolutely poisoned the office.

    Replies: @dearieme, @Alden

    Another UNZ moron who can’t be bothered to check United States vs Wong Kim Ark 1889. The precedent stands.

  108. @RichardTaylor
    Tariq pushes the hashtag #FBA which stands for 'Foundational Black Americans'. It's a way of saying Black Americans who've been here a long time have a unique identity (as opposed to Nigerians who just got here).

    Upshot? It won't be that hard to form alliances with other groups and play them against each other when White people finally get serious about racial politics.

    It just requires neutering the Good Doggie White Cucks. The libertarians, the civnats, the boomer conservatives, the hipster Whites, and the godawful Really Smart set. They are all that's holding us back.

    Replies: @Not Only Wrathful, @TomSchmidt

    You do know that Steve is a
    CivNat, right?

  109. @Jack D
    @BB753

    She is literally as American as I am. I don't think my parents had completed their naturalization at the time I was born - it came thru maybe a year later. I can tell you that America is the nation of my birth and the only country I have ever known and I feel as American as anyone. The Constitution says that the President must be a natural born citizen, not his ancestors.

    Trump's mother was born in Scotland as were his paternal grandparents so he is also from recent immigrant stock. I think if Kamala's parents were German and Scottish instead of Indian and Jamaican you'd have no issue so it's not a stretch to say that racism is involved here.

    Replies: @dvorak, @Jonathan Mason, @BB753, @ATBOTL

    Is it racist to point out that second-generation Americans aren’t as American as people who have older roots in the country? It’s just a fact. For instance, you weren’t related to any pre-1820 American when you were born, nor could you claim a piece of land somewhere in America belonging to an ancestor of yours. Your children will be more American than you in that sense, and so will your grandchildren, etc.

  110. @Jack D
    @BB753

    She is literally as American as I am. I don't think my parents had completed their naturalization at the time I was born - it came thru maybe a year later. I can tell you that America is the nation of my birth and the only country I have ever known and I feel as American as anyone. The Constitution says that the President must be a natural born citizen, not his ancestors.

    Trump's mother was born in Scotland as were his paternal grandparents so he is also from recent immigrant stock. I think if Kamala's parents were German and Scottish instead of Indian and Jamaican you'd have no issue so it's not a stretch to say that racism is involved here.

    Replies: @dvorak, @Jonathan Mason, @BB753, @ATBOTL

    I think if Kamala’s parents were German and Scottish instead of Indian and Jamaican you’d have no issue so it’s not a stretch to say that racism is involved here.

    The anti-White hypocrisy of the jew knows no limits.

  111. @Anonymous
    @Jack D


    Generally speaking, if you were born in the US (unless you were the child of foreign diplomats with immunity) you are an American citizen regardless of whether your parents are. This may or may not be a good thing but that’s how the law stands.
     
    That may or may not be an accurate statement of the law, but what is your opinion of it from a policy standpoint? Is it good for American Whites?

    Replies: @Alden

    What matters is that persons born in the United States even if Mommy crawled under the border fence or on a beach beach or got off a plane 3 hours or 1 hour or 30 minutes before the birth are American citizens. Your, Jack’s and my opinion doesn’t matter.

    United States vs Wong Kim Ark 1889. The SC judges opinions both the majority and the dissenters are excellent explanations of how and why they decided that Wong, born in America of Chinese citizen immigrants was a natural born citizen. There are other articles explaining the reasoning. US vs Wong just decided in favor of the 200 year old assumption that. birth in America made one a natural born citizen. The decision just affirmed a long standing assumption.

    The 14th amendment isn’t really applicable as the purpose was to prevent blacks from going back to slavery or bound labor or becoming a different class of citizen.

  112. @dvorak
    @Jack D


    She is literally as American as I am. ... I can tell you that America is the nation of my birth and the only country I have ever known and I feel as American as anyone. The Constitution says that the President must be a natural born citizen, not his ancestors.
     
    Please keep your emotions out of this constitutional analysis, if you don't mind.

    You were naturalized (by soil) at birth as a US citizen. You are not (by blood) a natural-born US citizen.

    Replies: @epebble, @Jack D, @Alden

    What’s naturalized by soil? Never heard of it.

    Never heard of a heritage blood American either.

    Had such a category existed, this proud descendant of the man who financed the Mayflower expedition, William Mullins, his daughter Priscilla and her husband John Alden would have heard of it.

    The oldest European settlers in what’s now the United States were Spanish, not British. Dvorak sounds like an Ellis Island name.

  113. Semi OT:

    The NYT inserted commentary about the President’s lack of comment on Kamala’s natural born citizenship, or lack of such, in it’s obituary of Robert Trump.

    A short time later, the president held a wide-ranging news conference, where he refused to say whether Kamala Harris was eligible to run for national office, giving credence to a false assertion that Ms. Harris, born in California, was not eligible because her parents were immigrants.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/15/us/politics/robert-s-trump-dead.html

    • Replies: @Hibernian
    @Hibernian

    Wapo includes Robert's lawsuit against the niece who wrote the tell-all book in the headline
    of its obituary.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/obituaries/robert-trump-younger-brother-of-president-trump-who-filed-lawsuit-against-niece-dies-at-71/2020/08/15/6ec0f102-de62-11ea-8051-d5f887d73381_story.html

  114. @Hibernian
    Semi OT:

    The NYT inserted commentary about the President's lack of comment on Kamala's natural born citizenship, or lack of such, in it's obituary of Robert Trump.

    A short time later, the president held a wide-ranging news conference, where he refused to say whether Kamala Harris was eligible to run for national office, giving credence to a false assertion that Ms. Harris, born in California, was not eligible because her parents were immigrants.
     
    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/15/us/politics/robert-s-trump-dead.html

    Replies: @Hibernian

  115. Is the secret of Kamala Harris’ selection that she combines in her genome the two sectors of the Coalition of the Fringes that have the most friction?

    1.) Indian-Americans, including shopkeepers and gas station attendants

    2.) African-Americans, who deeply resent Indian-American shopkeepers and gas station attendants and therefore abuse them, violently

    Think about it. In Ferguson, Michael Brown harassed an Indian clerk. I think George Floyd paid his counterfeit money to an Indian clerk. In Milwaukee’s Weave Riot, a gas station was torched. It was staffed by Indians. Etc.

    I’ve seen this confrontation in person. In Milwaukee ca. 2002, when I was young and stupid, I visited a local convenience store around midnight. Two black teenagers were standing in the doorway, and one was inside. The two in the doorway protested when I entered. The Indian-American clerk, a young woman in her 20s or early 30s, told me it was fine for me to enter. I got to the checkout counter at the same time as the one black teenager who was allowed in. He asked the clerk, “What, you let him in and made my friends stand in the doorway because he’s white and we’re black?” She responded, in her Indian accent, “White people don’t steal things.”

    To their credit, the black teenagers reacted calmly. The one at the counter just glanced over at me in disbelief at the clerk’s forthrightness, then paid for his stuff. Then I guess the other two teenagers took their turns in the store, while I hightailed it out of there. That was before smartphones. What would kids today do in that situation?

  116. @Wicks Cherrycoke
    Middle name - Iyer

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iyer

    Iyer (also spelt as Ayyar, Aiyar, Ayer or Aiyer) is a caste of Hindu Brahmin communities of Tamil origin

     


    The legacy of Iyers have often been marred by accusations of racism and counter-racism against them by non-Brahmins and vice versa.
     

    Replies: @Jack D, @Dr. Dre

    I thought I saw that Kamala’s middle name is Devi, which combined with her first name, refers to some Hindu goddess-or other.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS