Nixon’s Pardon, A National Delusion, & Obama’s Election

~a history of illegitimacy

Recently I heard an insightful political commentator noting how the illegitimate pardon of Richard Nixon set a tone in Washington that has remained until this day, and has become a kind of underlying mind-set through which certain controversial issues are now viewed.  In a time when the country was outraged and enshrouded in the negativity of  the fetid stench of a President acting like a petty dictator, the nation’s strongly aroused sense of a sacred trust being betrayed and egregiously violated was met not by a catharsis of justice but by the deflating announcement that President Ford, appointed by Nixon as his Vice-President, had “pardoned” ex-President Nixon for any actions related to the Watergate cover-up.

The Power of Expediency

   The effect of that action had a chilling effect on the natural desire to see justice meted out, and replaced it with an unsatisfying philosophy that justice must take a backseat to what’s best for the country.  We all resented that kind of “Father Knows Best” attitude coming from Washington but had to grit our teeth and accept it as a bitter medicine that maybe would be best after all.  That was only acceptable begrudgingly because the nation was tired and kind of “shell shocked” by the whole ugly affair.  That pardon was to be the first time since the incarceration of 100,000 Japanese-Americans that Washington so openly “did what was best for the country” instead of doing what was right and lawful.

At that time I saw and felt that a grave mistake had been made from the perspective of respect for the law and the Constitution.  The mistake was not in pardoning a guilty ex-President, but in pardoning an innocent ex-President.  That was a horrible travesty against the whole system of innocent until proven guilty, -which is the foundation of our criminal justice system.

  Nixon had not even been charged with anything much less convicted and sentenced.  How can an innocent man be pardoned for anything?  He’s not legally guilty of anything therefore there is no basis to pardon him for anything.  That was putting the cart before the horse.   Thus the so-called pardon was a form of obstruction of justice because it illegitimately derailed the requisite criminal investigation which had not even started.  And no one said a single word about the illegitimacy of that pardon.
That set a precedent that was a terrible demonstration that political expediency trumped the Rule of Law because it would be better for the country.

That precedent took hold in Washington and came to bedevil us again when the  political elites decided that they would collaborate to ensure that the Republican Party would have John McCain as a legitimate candidate.  To ensure that, it was necessary to allay the doubt that he might not be constitutionally eligible because he was not born on U.S. soil but in the American controlled Panama Canal Zone.
A “unanimous consent” approval was recorded on behalf of all Senators for the resolution declaring McCain to be a “natural born citizen” and therefore eligible to be President.

The Phantom President

Did the Republicans knowingly or ignorantly strike some sort of bargain agreeing not make an issue of the obviously ineligible Democrat candidate Barack Obama, who clearly was not a natural born American citizen as required by the Constitution?  Accepting the first black party nominee, regardless of his candidacy being unconstitutional, was “what was best for the country”, so making waves and rocking the boat would not happen regardless of the crime against the Constitution.  The “fix was in” and the silence was total.

The media was enamored with him so they failed in their duty to even slightly vet him.  No questions were asked, -no thinking occurred about things that a reporter would naturally wonder about if focused on any Republican candidate.

Hence we have the most unvetted high-ranking public servant in American history.  We have as President, (in charge of all of the investigative and prosecutorial departments of government), someone who would never be able to pass a simple FBI investigation for a top-security clearance since his entire academic and professional history is a tightly kept secret, and his past associations were with radicals and Marxists.

How could someone whose life is a questionable and obscure mystery be viewed as a transparent, fully acceptable presidential candidate?  Because of two things, namely;
The big lie, and the big voice.  The golden voiced oratory of a demi-god inspired the masses on both sides of the Atlantic to cozy up to the warmth of his rich baritone which radiated inspiration and hope with soaring rhetoric.  Thus all the doors were opened to him as if fate had chosen him as its anointed one.

And the door to presidential eligibility was wide open because of the almost universal American ignorance about the principles of what determines citizenship.  Essentially no one was aware of the fact that within the life-span of our grandparents or great-grandparents, Barack Obama would have been understood to have been born as not an American citizen but as a British or Kenya citizen.  That’s due to the fact that a century ago American women who married foreigners lost their American citizenship and assumed that of their husband.  Thus the family and its children would all have one uniform citizenship, not messy complicated dual-citizenship with competing allegiance and competing national responsibilities.

Birth Parents versus Birth Place

His birth in Hawaii would have been irrelevant for two reasons.  The first is that the framers of the Constitution and its presidential eligibility requirements didn’t place any importance on birth in the States because they required only 14 years residency, which is only two fifths of the age of 35 -the minimum age required to be President. They left the door open to children born abroad to American Ambassadors (like Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, and John Adams), -to children who had grown up outside of the United States but who had been raised by parents who were trusted, politically-astute true-blue Americans, -totally solid in their love for and devotion to their country.   John McCain could have constitutionally been born in and lived in Panama for 56 of his years, then moved to the United States and lived 14 years here, thereby becoming eligible to be President at the age of 72 (the age at which he ran).

The second reason is that by the 14th Amendment, even with birth within U.S. borders, citizenship is only conveyed if the child (through the father) is subject to U.S. jurisdiction.  But foreign guests are immune from Washington’s jurisdiction since they’re under the umbrella of international treaties and are not subject to the federal laws and orders that citizens and legal permanent immigrants are subject to and responsible to obey. Such as registering with the Selective Service if male and 18 to 25 years old.  Thus, since his father was not subject to citizenship-related U.S. Federal authority, neither was he, and therefore was not covered by the 14th Amendment.  Birth within the U.S. is meaningless in his rare case.
Unfortunately, the public, the press, and the government are basically ignorant of that simple but significant truth.  Why?  Because the government operates by a policy that misconstrued a Supreme Court interpretation of the 14th Amendment, and also, it was never of any significance until the candidacy of Barack Obama for the Presidency.  That truth has been lost in a group-think delusion about the principles that determine citizenship.  That delusion is the belief that mere location of birth within U.S. borders conveys citizenship because that is what the 14th Amendment is misunderstood to say.
Three- to four percent of domestic births are to foreign parents, but in perhaps 97% of U.S. births, citizenship is conveyed naturally from American parents to their children, or historically, from father to child.   That is the principle that was never written because it was so fundamental and universally accepted that it never needed to be codified.

All natural citizens are citizens by that unwritten law.  But since 1898 all children of  immigrants are citizens by the 14th Amendment. They are constitutional citizens, while those born abroad of a foreign parent are declared citizens by CIS statutes.  They’re statutory citizens.  Neither are natural citizens.

Their citizenship does not exist without U.S. Law granting it, but natural citizens are Americans even in the absence of any law whatsoever.
By being the off-spring of a non-immigrant alien father, Barack Obama is a statutory citizen since his citizenship is solely due to Naturalization law applicable to his mother, though the government fails to recognize that fact.  Neither statutory citizens nor constitutional citizens are eligible to be the U.S. President because they are not natural citizens by birth to citizen parents, in particular, a citizen father.

But the political machine that backed Obama knew that his eligibility could be defended if they played on the common misconception that a U.S. birth equals citizenship, and that citizenship equals presidential eligibility.  So they focused on his supposed place of birth to show that he was a “native born” citizen, although that didn’t make him a true native citizen since only those born to natives are true natives, and Obama’s father was not a native of the United States.
But their tactics succeeded in pulling the wool over nearly everyone’s eyes, both inside and outside of government.  No one thought to ask any questions.  Truthfully, no one thought, period.  Combine ignorance with certainly about one’s assumptions, and you have a fully deluded population.

The left-wing Obamanites are counting on that not changing in the next election year, and they will probably find that it doesn’t.

   Prepare for The Travesty to Come

The unaware American electorate is poised for an election season of  propagandizing based on the perceived issues and desired outcomes without any awareness that the Democrats are not offering a candidate that is constitutionally eligible

That fact will go unrecognized and unacknowledged as state-by-state the people responsible for vetting candidates will simply shirk their responsibility and repeat the travesty against the Constitution that took place in 2008 when the National Democrat Party officials acted unconstitutionally  as the tail that wagged the dog by prevailing on everyone to accept Obama as an eligible candidate even though there was no proof that he was one, nor that he was even born in the United States.   Forged birth certificate images are not proof of anything except that you can fool all of the people some of the time.
As the coming bastardization of the certification of eligibility repeats the same travesty as in 2008, the impact on those who are fully awake and aware of what is happening will be felt strongly as it dawns on them that the nation has lost the appreciation of  authenticity, veracity, and honesty in our elections, in our media, and in our government.

Prepare to see the inconceivable happen again as an ineligible candidate is once more offered for the Office of the President.

No one with a national spotlight has the nerve, or the knowledge to challenge his eligibility.

Those who know he isn’t eligible aren’t talking because they view the issue either through the biased eyes of acolytes, or as knowledge that’s like strong medicine that’s worse than the disease.

Thus his candidacy will be shepherded back into the election to run against his opponent as if there is nothing out of the ordinary about him and his eligibility.

Prepare for the disappointment to come by resolving to work as an active citizen and voter to see that he and his illegitimate cadre of neo-progressive socialists are shown the exits.

But don’t hold your breath waiting for the dismantling of his illegitimate Presidential orders, appointments, and signed bills because no one in Washington is willing to even think about such a thing, much less doing something that would be embarrassing to the political elites that knowingly, or ignorantly, allowed his election to happen last time.   After all, that “would not be what is best for the country”.

And besides, who could possibly serve to question the 99 Senators who backed the McCain resolution that gave cover and distraction from the ineligibility of his opponent?  Who is there to ask:

“Senator, what did you know and when did you know it?”

   by a.r. nash  march 2012  (re-edited  august 31)