Jack Maskell; an American Judas who betrayed the Constitution

http://thedailypen.blogspot.com/2011/12/congressional-research-service-attempts.html

Friday, December 2, 2011
CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE ATTEMPTS, ONCE AGAIN, TO DISMISS OBAMA’S INELIGIBLE PLURALITY

Lowering The Bar – Legislative Attorney, Jack Maskell, is the latest rectification agent employed by the liberal establishment to dishonestly prop Obama’s fraudulent presidency by over-intellectualizing the eligibility clause of the Constitution. Maskell’s 50 page creeping warrant in favor of plurality of citizenry for the U.S. Presidency is nothing short of an outright lie which fails in its promotion of American distinction, blood ransomed values and exceptionalism while suggesting that our founding fathers were too stupid to understand that someone as allegedly “elite and exceptional” as Obama in his perishing moment is somehow greater than the rules forged by generations of blood shed and sacrifice of millions to protect the office of the U.S. presidency in perpetuity.

by Dan Crosby of The Daily Pen

NEW YORK, NY – Jack Maskell is a liar and we have proven it. Someone wiser needs to tell him that shillery only compounds deviance.

First of all, however, let’s understand the psychology of a man like Jack Maskell before we even discuss what he has attempted with is recent, delusional CRS memo in defense of Obama’s fraudulent presidency.

When those who have committed epic crimes against humanity are, as a natural consequence, beginning to suffer the wrath they have created by such actions, they will often, as a final plea, forcefully and desperately attempt to over-intellectualize and elevate the reasons for their criminality by dismissing the validity of the original and fundamental truth which they have violated. Essentially, they attempt to deceive authority by making the reasons for their deviant behavior seem more complicated than our moral ability to comprehend, and therefore, they try to make the reasons for their destructive behavior the result of their “elite” understanding of righteousness and nobility.

In the end, though, we all know Obama is a liar, a criminal and a thief…and Maskell is just another abettor.

This behavior is a common defense mechanism which all living creatures attempt when the consequences of their foul actions become bigger than their ability to control them, or be accountable for them. This is not unique to fallen man. Even as early as the first moments of creation, Satan himself dismissed the validity of God’s constitution when he propositioned mankind to consider what God had intended, rather than what God had actually commanded not to do. Essentially, Satan masterfully and harmfully created a distinction between our behavior within the security of loving rulership and the motives of that rulership, causing us to doubt the consequences of violating the rules. Even then, the natural consequences of that single, historic violation of pristine rule led to three separate denials of responsibility on the part of three suspects along with division, hostility and the downfall of an entire species, as they blamed one another for their own transgression.

Tragically, reaching beyond the lies and crimes is always the irreparable damage to an essential alliance. Like the one between government and the people. For the first time, we became vulnerable to death and loss, having exceeded the moorings of our doctrinal commissions of safety, freedom, provision and security, by violating one simple command from our ultimate constitutional authority.

In the same spirit of Satan’s original aim, Legislative Attorney, Jack Maskell’s recent release through the Congressional Research Service of a document called, “Qualifications For President and the ‘Natural Born’ Citizen Requirement ” carries nothing more than the same millennial legacy of legalized deception into the realm of presidential eligibility, and even deeper into covert power mongering, usurpation and political horror.

In his 50+ page delusion, Maskell attempts to do one simple thing. He is acting as an Obama lobbyist to diminish the impact that Obama’s father was not a U.S. citizen. That’s it. Not very sexy, is it? However, even a propagandist like Maskell understands the cataclysmic impact this has on Obama’s eligibility to hold the office of the presidency. Even a dreg like Maskell understand that if the ramifications of such biological facts about Obama reaches the domain of consciousness in the collective mind of courageous authority, the subsequent logic of the legal mandate will ensue and Obama and his Obotic minions will go down in history as the most prolific political criminal enterprise in human history.
Maskell even has the audacity to insinuate that anyone who questions Obama’s eligibility to be president is too stupid to understand what our constitution really means. The facts remain, however. Barack Obama is not eligible to be president and he is the most prolific liar in American history.

On page 48 of his memo, Maskell writes, “In one case concerning the identity of a petitioner, the Supreme Court of the United States explained that “it is not disputed that if petitioner is the son” of two Chinese national citizens who were physically in the United States when petitioner was born, then he is “a natural born American citizen ….”

Quoting Case history, Maskell also includes the following from Kwok Jan Fat v. White, 253 U.S. 454, 457 (1920):
“The Supreme Court also noted that It is better that many Chinese immigrants should be improperly admitted than that one natural born citizen of the United States should be permanently excluded from his country.” 253 U.S. at 464.

Upon reviewing the actual case, we find that the Supreme Court said no such thing. Actually, contrary to Maskell’s blatant lies, we find that the petitioner was actually born to U.S. citizen parents, not Chinese citizens. The father was born in the United States and was a citizen by virtue of precedence set by US v. Wong Kim Ark. His mother was an American citizen by marriage to the father when the child was born.

Pathetically, Maskell also attempts to hinge his argument on the accusation that the petitioner had illegally acquired a false identity and that the citizen parents were not actually his real parents. The Supreme Court rejected the State’s “undisclosed” evidence on this point and conducted their citizenship analysis based on the assumption these were petitioner’s real parents. Therefore, having been born in the US of parents who were citizens, petitioner was indeed a natural-born citizen.

Maskell attempts to make it appear as if the petitioner was born of alien parents in order to illustrate that a person who was born of “foreign biology” was determined by the highest court to be a natural born citizen. This is a bald faced lie, and that makes Maskell a liar and a shill for Obama.

In fact, the Supreme Court ruled that the petitioner was a natural born citizen because, in fact, he WAS born to two U.S. citizen parents, not that he was a natural born citizen in spite of being born to foreigners.

Let’s take a closer look at Maskell’s drudgery. First, his use of quotation marks and their strategic positioning is an attempt to deceive the reader into believing that the entire quote is from the Supreme Court decision. It is not!

“It is not disputed that if petitioner is the son…”

This is the genuine part of the quote from the Court’s opinion. Now, the lies begin. Notice the next two parts are not in quotation marks:

…..of two Chinese national citizens who were physically in the United States when petitioner was born, then he is…..

Notice here that Maskell doesn’t actually state that the parents are citizens of China. Instead he uses the words CHINESE NATIONAL, knowing they are actually U.S. citizens who had immigrated from China at the time of the birth. Of course they were Chinese nationals! But they were immigrants who had become U.S. citizens!

Maskell’s lies continue as he then shamelessly plugs the idea that natal geography plays the only role in determining natural born citizenship when he says, ‘who were PHYSICALLY IN THE UNITED STATES WHEN PETITIONER WAS BORN..’

Maskell desperately wants his readers to believe that, based on this precedence, since Obama was allegedly born in Hawaii, though that has never been shown by any authority, it should not matter that his father was a citizen of Kenya (British Protectorate of East Africa) in 1961. Maskell wants his readers to accept the lie that Obama is a natural born citizen simply based on his geographic birth place, not his natal biology.

Unfortunately, for Maskell, Obama is a perfect example of the very candidate they intended to disqualify with the constitutional eligibilty clause. His father was even British for god’s sake. If Obama had tried to run for president in 1787 using these tactics, he would have been arrested and executed as an enemy spy secretly working for the British crown! The irony in that fact is historically breathtaking.

Then Maskell jerry-rigs a benign excerpt from the case which has no connection to his previous line:

“a natural born American citizen ….”

When you see written in Maskell’s propagandized memo, this is what it looks like:

“…the Supreme Court of the United States explained that “[i]t is not disputed that if petitioner is the son” of two Chinese national citizens who were physically in the United States when petitioner was born, then he is “a natural born American citizen ….”

Unfortunately for Maskell and abettors like him, the Supreme Court never said this!!!! Here is what the court actually decided about the case:

“It is not disputed that if petitioner is the son of Kwock Tuck Lee and his wife, Tom Ying Shee, he was born to them when they were permanently domiciled in the United States, is a citizen thereof, and is entitled to admission to the country. United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 , 18 Sup. Ct. 456.” Kwok Jan Fat v. White, 253 U.S. 454, 457 (1920).

Jack Maskell is an unadulterated liar. As presented in the memo, Maskell avoids the inconvenient truth that the Court took direct notice of the authorities having established that the petitioner’s father was born in the US and that he was a voter, saying, “…the father of the boy was native born and was a voter in that community.” Id. at 460.

Maskell never mentions that the father and mother were US citizens at the time of petitioner’s birth in California.

This deceiptful attempt to convey an argument based on a lie guts Maskell of his credibility as an attorney and reduces his memo to nothing more than thumbs up for a bad movie. The memo is propaganda meant to prop Obama failing attempts to conceal the truth about his identity.

Maskell exploits the Congressional Research Service moniker as lipstick on his pro-Obama pig. Maskell makes no effort to address Obama’s offense against the blood-ransomed, constitutional freedoms endowed to generations of vintage American people. Instead, he attempts to promote considerations for our founder’s intentions by implying they would have used a different language in the ‘Natural Born’ Eligibility Clause had they known a man, so worthy and entitled, like Obama were to seek the presidency in the future.

Maskell, rather than err on the side of distinction by promoting the blatant command of our forefathers’ pristine authority which says that only the most loyal, comprehensive and exclusive of citizenship may be eligible to be president, or suggest measures for amending what he clearly believes is an absurd rule, attempts to propel a deceptive and creeping warrant which challenges the definition and intended meaning of the words “natural born” used by the framers of our Constitution. Unfortunately for Maskell, this merely indicates yet another desperate, sad and transparently liberal attempt to over-intellectualize the meaning of constitutional doctrine rather than simply redeem the destruction caused by Barack Obama’s fraudulent presidency.

Civil savagery comes in many forms, as Maskell demonstrates. Even in his opening, Maskell writes:

“There is no Supreme Court case which has ruled specifically on the presidential eligibility requirements…”

Here, Maskell implies incorrectly, that unless the judiciary approves it, presidential eligibility remains passive to interpretation. On the contrary, the constitution remains affirmative of the protections of American sovereignty, not passive to inclusiveness and plurality. The Constitution, rather than affording benefit of doubt under the absence of clarity, when the eligibility of a candidate is ambiguously defined, he or she is, by default, not eligible. Freedom to be declared a natural born American is available if circumstances and person are willing to provide such evidence of worthiness.

Contrary to this, however, Maskell’s fallow mooring portends as if legal constructs assume authority over political perception in the voter’s selection of a candidate. No legal mooring on earth will stabilize Obama’s political decline. Illegitimacy is greater than ineligibility at this point.

Advertisements

About arnash
“When you find yourself on the side of the majority, it’s time to pause and reflect.” - Mark Twain - Politicians and diapers - change 'em often, for the same reason. "Government is like a baby. An alimentary canal with a big appetite at one end and no sense of responsibility at the other." Ronald Reagan "Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views." William F. Buckley, Jr. “The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt.” - Bertrand Russell The people are the masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert it. Abraham Lincoln “Good people sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.” - George Orwell “Satan will use a lake of truth to hide a pint of poison”.

3 Responses to Jack Maskell; an American Judas who betrayed the Constitution

  1. slcraignbc says:

    Maskell and his pontificated errors are actually as egregious than Justice penumbra zone Gray’s given that Maskell writes under the authority of the CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE.

    Maskell, like Justice penumbra zone Gray, TOTALLY IGNORED the Act’s of the CONGRESS that set out the circumstances providing for U.S. Citizenship, including the requisite circumstances for being born as a U.S. natural born Citizen, but Justice penumbra zone Gray was exerting the POWER of the 3rd Branch by judicially kidnapping an alien foreign national whereas Maskell dismisses the authority of the 1st Branch of the Government by IGNORING the duly enacted Acts of the Congress pertinent to the subject.

    • arnash says:

      What kind of English is that? It’s unique and almost incomprehensible. But I get it.
      You err in claiming that Congress set out any “requisite circumstances for being born as a U.S. natural born Citizen”.
      No such legislation was ever passed nor even contemplated by Congress as a body. You’ve invented a fantasy congressional history. All Congress has ever done was describe circumstances which result in U.S. citizenship, (The Civil Rights Act of 1866 and the 14th Amendment) and write uniform rules for the States to follow in their naturalization requirements, along with certain mandates by congressional authority regarding unnatural circumstances involving foreign parentage and birth abroad.

      Everything else that Congress has written is explanatory, declaratory of the pre-existing facts of citizenship.
      As for: “judicially kidnapping an alien foreign national” -that is absurd legally, but not philosophically. The long history of common law native-birth being viewed as a basis of inclusion in national membership goes back, no doubt, to the conquest of England by the Normans in 1066.

      It came to be based on the expectation that one will be born where the parents are domiciled and will also grow up there. Such a child, though born of foreigners, will be as a foreigner to their nation which is totally unknown to the child, and will be a native member of the land of its birth, -its only home, -although not in a politically sense.

      Such circumstances come with dual nationality; by circumstance of birth & residency, and by blood. One is by a practical approach to applying a political solution to an unnatural circumstance, while the other follows the principle of natural membership as seen in all of nature.
      One is legal while the other is natural. The finite legal realm exists within the unlimited natural realm. That means that Natural Law is not an arcane sub-division of Human Law but is the ocean on which the ship of human law floats.

      Just consider: which came first; the Natural world or the contrivance of human laws? The natural laws of sentient life pre-date human law by hundreds of millions of years. In earlier eras, it was viewed instead from a perspective of natural law being traced back to the Garden of Eden and the creation of Mankind.
      In both scenarios, the child is a natural part and member of the union of the man and woman. That is a fact that law respects by honoring in a fundamental way the reality of natural membership in families, tribes, and nations. Natural members and natural citizens. The context is different but the principle is the very same. That is why foreign-born children of American couples are not merely citizens but are also natural citizens.

      • slcraignbc says:

        Under the provision of the 1790 Act did it NOT require TWO (2) U.S. Citizen parents in order to be “considered as” a U.S. natural born Citizen EVEN when born abroad…..???

        REPLY: “That is why foreign-born children of American couples are not merely citizens but are also natural citizens.” WHY ASK A QUESTION THAT WAS ANSWERED BY THE LAST SENTENCE THAT YOU READ???

        Are you suggesting that the 1795 Act’s “repeal” of the “foreign-born-U.S. natural born Citizen provision” ALSO repealed THOSE born within the limits of the U.S. ….???

        REPLY: WHAT ARE YOU EVEN REFERRING TO??? WHERE WOULD YOU GET SUCH AN IDEA, AND WHY DID YOU FAIL TO QUOTE ANYTHING THAT MIGHT BE REMOTELY A SOURCE OF SUCH AN ENIGMATIC QUESTION?
        ALSO, NO PROVISION OF THE 1790 ACT WAS REPEALED. RATHER, THE ENTIRETY OF THE ACT WAS REPEALED AND REPLACED BY THE NEW VERSION.

        You REALLY need to get a grip on what Statutory Construction and Interpretation is all about, given that it was the vernacular and nomenclature that the Founders were familiar with….!!!! …. as was Vattel, although much of his writing is in the narrative so people like you will grasp the principles without searching for them through the effects of statutes.

        REPLY: YOU REALLY NEED TO GET A GRIP ON HOW TO ENGAGE IN DISCOURSE AND DISAGREEMENT. YOU SEE, IT IS IMPERATIVE TO STATE EXACTLY WHAT IT IS THAT YOU DISAGREE WITH AND NOT JUST MAKE COMMENTS THAT ARE NOT GERMANE TO ANYTHING WRITTEN AND UP FOR DISCUSSION.

        YOU CONTINUE TO BLOVIATE WITHOUT REACHING ANY CONCLUSION OR POSITION. YOU ASK OFF-THE-WALL QUESTIONS THAT COME FROM NOWHERE AND GO NOWHERE. THEN YOU FOLLOW THEM WITH NO POSITION OF YOUR OWN. LIKE A COMPUTER JUST RANDOMLY SPEWING OUT VERBIAGE THAT IS INCOHERENT AND DISJOINTED.
        IT’S ABOUT TIME YOU GOT TO A POINT, SOME POINT, SOME STANCE, SOME EXPLICIT VIEWPOINT AND DROPPED THE VAGUE, PSEUDO-INTELLECTUALIZING LACKING ANY ATTACHED OPINION WHICH IS DISCERNIBLE.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: