Thursday, May 3, 2012

Request to Bret Baier of Fox News from CDR Charles Kerchner 
to Have Fair Discussion on Natural Born Citizen

An open letter to Mr. Bret Baier of Fox News from CDR Kerchner (Ret):

I strongly suggest you invite constitutional scholar and attorney Herb Titus and constitutional presidential eligibility attorney Mario Apuzzo on to any debate or discussion panel you put together to debate the true legal and historical meaning of the Natural Law legal term of art “natural born Citizen”. Invite anyone else you wish on to the panel who wishes to argue that the natural law “natural born Citizen” legal term of art is 100% synonymous with the man-made positive law, Congressional Statute Title 8 Section 1401, “Citizen at Birth” legal term, which is what you asserted. Both Herb Titus and Mario Apuzzo are nationally recognized experts in this field and are known for their in-depth knowledge and wisdom on the founding father’s true understanding and meaning when they put the term “natural born Citizen” in as a “strong check” against foreign influence requirement for who can be a future President and Commander in Chief of our military, at the suggestion of John Jay who became the first Chief Justice of the United States, to General George Washington, the president of the constitutional convention. Natural born Citizens are the children born in the USA of two Citizens, second generation Americans via both parents. This is per natural law, not the laws of man or any legal law making body be it Congress or anyone else. Neither Congress or you can redefine the Laws of Nature.

This nation was founded at the federal level as a totally new form of government, a constitutional republic, based on the guiding principles of “the Laws of Nature and Nature’s God”. Read the Declaration of Independence first paragraph to refresh your memory if uncertain about that. The progressive movement would like to forget that. But the truth can be buried for a time but not hidden forever. And the preeminent writer on Natural Law and that which was used heavily by the founders is the legal treatise by Vattel, The Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law. Read Vol.I, Chapter 19, Section 212. Benjamin Franklin, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and John Jay did. “natural born Citizen” is defined therein and the founders and framers knew exactly what it meant when they inserted into our Constitution. It means born in the country to parents who are both Citizens (born or naturalized) of the country — a person born with sole allegiance at the instant of birth to one and only one country.

Bret, a favorite retort is “natural born Citizen” is not defined in the Constitution. What a silly argument. The Constitution does not come with a glossary. The founders and framers knew what the words meant when they wrote them. It was written in plain English. Only for the last 100 years have the progressive academics been steadily trying to twist the meaning of the words to subvert the original intent. Here’s another word for you that is in the U.S. Constitution — Piracy. Piracy is not defined in the U.S. Constitution. But the founders and framers knew what it meant! And guess what source they chose to use to prescribe for punishment for said offenses — the Law of Nations. See the U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 8.

I strongly suggest you re-read the Declaration of Independence, the U.S. Constitution, the Federalist Papers, and also the enlightenment period legal treatise the founders and framers were reading in 1775 — Vattel’s Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law — especially Vol.1 on the forming of a new nation.

I look forward to a full and thorough debate by a balanced panel of experts from each side, including the two named above. Such a debate has been needed for over four years now.

Respectfully,

CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret)
Lehigh Valley PA
http://www.protectourliberty.org

Constitutional Scholar and Attorney Herb Titus corrects Bret Baier of Fox News on Natural Born Citizen Definition

Read the full response from Herb Titus, Esq., to Bret Baier at this link: http://www.art2superpac.com/herbtitus.html

MORE COMMENTARY FROM CDR KERCHNER ON ARTICLE II ELIGIBILITY HERE: http://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com

HD VIDEO FROM 3/31 TEA PARTY EVENT WITH SHERIFF JOE POSTED HERE: http://www.art2superpac.com/arizonavideo.html

-WATCH THE COMPLETE SHERIFF JOE PRESS CONFERENCE HERE: http://www.art2superpac.com/joe.html -

-ARTICLE II ELIGIBILITY FACTS HERE: http://www.art2superpac.com/issues.html

New Ad - AZ Sheriff Arpaio - Obama Birth Cert & Draft Reg Card Are Forged! Wash Times Natl Wkly - 12 Ma...

24 comments:

  1. Everyone should send the full text of Cdr Kerchner's open letter or the link to it directly to Bret Baier using this contact form - http://www.bretbaier.com/contact/index.php

    ReplyDelete
  2. Fox News is partly owned and controlled by the same Saudi Prince who used his wealth and influence to get Barack Obama into Harvard Law School in spite of his unimpressive grades.

    Learn More Here


    http://stop-obama-now.net/saudis-own-obama-fox/

    ReplyDelete
  3. When Bret Baier said "the Constitution didn't come with a definition of natural born citizen,"
    I challenge him to find a definition of the word "arms" in the second amendment, Or "freedom" in the first, or "speech", or "infringed" in the second?

    How stupid does he think the American public are? Or is it he who is the thin thinker?

    ReplyDelete
  4. fair and balanced?

    ReplyDelete
  5. And even more here...

    http://www.debbieschlussel.com/8331/rupert-murdoch-fox-news-parent-co-increase-ties-w-extremist-saudi-prince-seeking-share-of-arab-street/

    ReplyDelete
  6. Impressive words, I just hope they do not fall on deaf ears.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Orly wrote
    Bottom line, Obama regime and the Democrat AG of MS, Jim Hood, working hand in hand with the regime want this case in a friendly territory with a friendly Federal Judge. This is clear as day and night. there was no legitimate reason for the Secretary of State, a state elected official, to attempt to remove the case to the Federal judge, unless he knows that this particular judge will be friendly.

    Supreme Court of MS is elected by the people of the state, not appointed. So, the Supreme Court of M, consequently is more conservative.

    There is no answer from the Supreme Court of MS yet.

    Bottom line, the judge should look at the complaint and rule, what is paramount in this complaint. If the state elections statute is of paramount importance and RICO is secondary, he will grant the remand, meaning sending it back to the state court, as he should, particularly since the party seeking removal to the Federal Court is not a defendant in the RICO action. Often overburdened Federal judges look for any excuse to send any file back to the state court and unload their docket. However, this is not a regular case. If the judge was brought to help the regime, he will deny remand to the state court and might oblige the Sec of State by dispensing the case altogether.

    If the Supreme court rules that the attempt to remand was improper, the case will go to the 5th Circuit or even the Supreme court of the US.

    If they do not rule and the Federal judge will rule in favor of the regime, and further rules in their favor on their motion for a ruling on the pleadings it will go to the 5th Circuit anyways.

    Regardless of where the case ends up: state court or Federal court, both the Secretary of State and the Democratic party of MS filed their answers to the complaint, so I can continue with my discovery.

    Some obots attacked me, saying that I can’t do the depositions in CA, because the case was filed in MS. This is not the case. Parties can do depositions in other states. For example, movie producer Bettina Viviano is a resident of CA, she would prefer her deposition to be conducted in Los Angeles, CA. Orly Taitz is a California attorney, who is also a plaintiff in the case in MS, and one of the attorneys for the defendant is a resident of California. Based on all of the above, it is convenient to do depositions in CA. I hope, I answered this question.

    >>>>my question : who brought up RICO in the first place??? If someone did not bring up RICO in the first place, then perhaps the other side wouldn't be in a position to ask for a change in venue ??? :O Looks like someone is in process of blowing another friendly judge at expense of going to hostile obama friendly FEDERAL level judge.......bypassing the rightful STATE judge's jurisdiction. Another mis step ??????? You tell me.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Orly brought up RICO, because she is a complete and total idiot devoid of any knowledge of proper law and proceedure. She is your worst enemy, enjoy!

    ReplyDelete
  9. Let me get this straight. We're begging them? Fuck them. They made their bed, let'em lay in it. On the other hand, when the time comes, we would have not forgotten. Brett who, now?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Orly Taitz Deposing Hillary Clinton: Mississippi Election Challenge

    http://birtherheadlines.blogspot.com/2012/05/orly-taitz-deposing-hillary-clinton.html

    ReplyDelete
  11. I hope that I am wrong, but my guess is this whole panel will be made up of Soetoro's cronies.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Birther Headlines said...[Reply]
    Orly Taitz Deposing Hillary Clinton: Mississippi Election Challenge

    http://birtherheadlines.blogspot.com/2012/05/orly-taitz-deposing-hillary-clinton.html

    That is not going to happen. The subpoena is unenforcable because, even assuming that it is served properly, it is being served on a person outside the state. More importantly, it has a caption that is from a state court action which has been removed to Federal Court. The state court action is stayed unless and until the federal court remands the case back to state court.

    Orly is correct that she can take depositions in California in a case pending in another state, but this is true only one of two things is true: She seeks and obtains permission to take out of jurisidiction deposition OR she has the consent of the parties. I am quite certain that the defendants will not agree to go to a deposition in California unless gets permission from the Court and/or she agrees to pay all traveling expenses.

    ReplyDelete
  13. @Birther Headlines

    LOL... Never. Gonna. Happen.
    Nor Bill, who she's also "subpoenaed."

    And if she takes the ones of Viviano and Gastin (which I fully expect she will) they will be completely useless in this case or any other.

    ReplyDelete
  14. And if she takes the ones of Viviano and Gastin (which I fully expect she will) they will be completely useless in this case or any other.

    >>>why will they be useless? Hearsay ??

    ReplyDelete
  15. Part 1:
    I sent this edited version to Bret:

    RE: You opened the door; let TRUTH HAVE ITS SAY...

    Mr. Baier: 

    I strongly RECOMMEND you invite constitutional scholar and attorney, Herb Titus and constitutional presidential eligibility attorney, Mario Apuzzo to a panel debate, on the topic of PRESIDENTIAL ELIGIBILITY: The TRUE legal and historical meaning of the legal british LEXICON term of art, “natural born Citizen”,  placed in the CONSTITUTION BY OUR FOUNDERS.  

    Invite anyone else  to the panel who is an expert on the subject matter to argue that the “Natural Born Citizen” legal term of art is MERELY synonymous with the Congressional Statute Title 8, Section 1401: “Citizen at Birth” definition, therefore expanding the eligibility pool.

    Herb Titus and Mario Apuzzo are nationally recognized experts in Constitutional Law and are known for their in-depth knowledge and wisdom on this matter:  The Founding Fathers' semantic INTENTION, of the true understanding and meaning of the term “natural born Citizen”, written into the CONSTITUTION as a “strong check against a foreign-influence”-requirement for PRESIDENTIAL ELIGIBILITY,  INCLUDING Commander in Chief of our military.
     
    At the INSISTENCE of John Jay, (who later became the first Chief Justice of the United States,) to George Washington, the president of the constitutional convention, the clause was inserted.

    Natural born Citizens are the children born in the USA of TWO Citizens, second generation Americans via BOTH parents. This is per "natural" law, not the "laws of man", nor ANY legal law-making, by Congress or any "executive order".

    Neither Congress, nor you, nor any other fourth estate, press media outlet, nor any fifth estate, activist trade union or blogosphere, can redefine the "Laws of Nature".

    As you know, Bret, this nation, founded as a union of separate states, linked by a Constitution, was ased on the guiding principles of “the Laws of Nature and Nature’s God”. 

    Read the first paragraph of the Declaration of Independence first paragraph.

    The Truth can be buried for a time but not forever. 

    The legal treatise, " The Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law", on the subject of Natural Law, which was DILIGENTLY researched by our Founders, was written by by the preeminent  writer, Vattel:

    Vol. I, Chap.19, Sec.212: 
    George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, and John Jay read:  

    The definition of “Natural born Citizen”.

    The Founders and Framers knew EXACTLY what it meant when they inserted into our Constitution:

    Born in the country to parents who are BOTH Citizens (born or naturalized) of the country — a person born with sole allegiance at the instant of birth to one and only one country.

    Bret, a favorite defense of BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA'S ELIGIBILITY  is that “natural born Citizen” is NOT defined in the Constitution.

    What a silly argument!

    The Constitution does not come with a glossary. The Founders and Framers knew what the words meant when they wrote the SELECTIVE and distinctive requirement for the HIGHEST OFFICE IN THE LAND.

    Somehow , within  the last 100 years, the progressive academics have steadily endeavored to parse, and invalidate the meaning of the words, "natural born citizen" to subvert their candidates' eligibility. 

    I look forward to a full and an HONEST debate by a balanced panel of KNOWLEDGEABLE experts, including the aforementioned, Titus and Apuzzo.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Part 2:
    Bret BAIER Fox News:
    "If FOX NEWS truly wants to vett and qualify our candidates for the highest office, you will broadcast this topic; if you opt out, that speaks volumes about a hidden agenda.

    Such a debate has been needed for too many years.

    Respectfully,

    CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret)
    Lehigh Valley PA
    http://www.protectourliberty.org

    Link:  Constitutional Scholar and Attorney Herb Titus corrects Bret Baier of Fox News on Natural Born Citizen Definition:"

    http://www.art2superpac.com/UserFiles/file/HerbTitusEsqCorrectsBretBaierofFoxNewsonNaturalBornCitizenDefinition,05-01-2012.pdf

    ReplyDelete
  17. "Anonymous said...[Reply]

    And if she takes the ones of Viviano and Gastin (which I fully expect she will) they will be completely useless in this case or any other.

    >>>why will they be useless? Hearsay ??"

    Based on what they've stated publicly, yes.

    That's only one of many reasons, however.

    ReplyDelete
  18. He's a big pussy just like all of other fags at FuX News...

    ReplyDelete
  19. We need to do like the ORielly guy waters does. Find Bret and follow him with a camera and ask him to have the debate on NBC. Put him/them on the spot and get their response on camera. Is there anyone in NY that can do this?

    ReplyDelete
  20. Bret is just a pretty face who reads well. Fox has backed-off any investigation on BO's eligibility. Hannity, O'Reilly and Huckabee wear their muzzles well. Don't expect help from this bunch of silent co-conspirators.

    ReplyDelete
  21. MUST SEE VIDEO!!!


    THE STATES WANT TO SECEDE FROM THE UNION - FREE VT!


    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ne-R2rDibU


    Uploaded by truthvspropaganda on Sep 15, 2008

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123051100709638419.html

    FREE VERMONT!
    FREE ALASKA!
    FREE THE SOUTH!
    FREE THE STATES!

    http://www.akip.org/introduction.html
    http://www.vermontrepublic.org/

    Over 50% of the States in the Union want to secede from the Union! Red and Blue states alike.

    http://www.youtube.com/user/VTFREE

    ReplyDelete
  22. Judge Andrew Napolitano Says Court Will Strike Down Obamacare (Video)


    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&NR=1&v=5h2hKzimIyo

    ReplyDelete
  23. “If I Wanted America To Be A Dictatorship” (Video)


    May 3, 2012


    MUST WATCH Micro Documentary by Libertarian Film Maker and Activist Fabian4Liberty. If you like this video and its message HELP MAKE THIS VIDEO GO VIRAL email a link to everyone you know and post on social media.


    http://www.infowars.com/if-i-wanted-america-to-be-a-dictatorship/


    “If I Wanted America To Be A Dictatorship”

    (Video)


    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=SUy860bjnPI#at=28

    ReplyDelete

“As long as I am an American citizen and American blood runs in these veins I shall hold myself at liberty to speak, to write, and to publish whatever I please on any subject.” - Elijah Parish Lovejoy(1802-1837)

Comments posted here do not necessarily reflect the views of BirtherReport.com. Readers are solely responsible for the content of the comments they post on this web site.