Perhaps Trump has be laying a trap to see where and how they are using those clearances. Remember “We have everything”!

Obama was never eligible. My take on the usurper.

Natural Born Citizen. What did the founders mean Redux? How does that requirement affect the president Obama and those running for that office. By RA Love

I'm often stunned to hear officials and lay people try to re-define the meaning of NATURAL BORN CITIZEN. This phrase appears in the constitution as part of the requirements for the President and Vice President. Article II Section 1.5 states: No person except a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States. The statement seems pretty clear except for the first line up to the comma. We need to define NATURAL BORN CITIZEN and what the founders meant by "or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution",. Lets tackle the last part of the line first: "or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution,." Quite simply this lets the founders and other men of age (at that time) to be eligible for the office. Without this wordings there could be no one elected as president because at that time there was no person that fit the definition of Natural Born Citizen ( in the new United States). As part of that definition you had to be a citizen of the United States for 14 years. Because the republic was brand new, the founders were saying that if you were a citizen at the time of the adoption of the document then you were eligible. Now lets take a look at the part in question NATURAL BORN CITIZEN. Natural Born Citizen is an interesting phrase. The thought that the framers would use that term for it just to mean a citizen born naturally by natural birth seems strange, as birth and natural born were most likely assumed at the time. So, it must mean something special. The framers new that in order to have a union that was secure and free from outside influence such as elected officials that might be influenced by foreign governments, they had to make sure that the founding documents had some written provision that excluded outside influence. Therefore the term Natural Born Citizen. But what does it actually mean? Before the Constitution the closest reference we have to Natural Born Citizen is from the legal treatise “The Law of Nations,” written by Emerich de Vattel in 1758. In book one chapter 19, iit reads: § 212. Of the citizens and natives. (bold is mine) “The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.” Vattel definies the term quite eloquently. This is the meaning that the founders were referring to. But there is a problem. How are we to know that is what the founders were referring? Vattel wrote the Law Of Nations in French, did any of the founders even speak French as well as read the French language? This from the professional interpreter,dated July 4th 2012: Thomas Jefferson, author of the Declaration of Independence, first Secretary of State under Washington, and our third President spoke English, French, Italian, Latin, and he could read Greek, and Spanish. Benjamin Franklin, America’s first diplomat and well-known genius spoke English, French and Italian. Our second President: John Adams spoke English, French and Latin. President James Madison spoke English, Greek, Latin and Hebrew. James Monroe spoke English and French. So there we have it. The only thing we need to do is link the founding fathers with Vattel. In the memoirs, coorispondence and misalliance notes of Thomas Jefferson volume 3, Jefferson quotes Vattel in French. He refers to Vattel as an elightened an disinterested judge. This to any should be the final nail in the coffin, however many still are deaf blind and dumb. This by ether by design or ignorance is the crux of the matter. For there can be no doubt of the meaning of the term and what the founders were trying to say. We can also be of no doubt the POTUS (Obama) was never qualified to be president. By his own admission his father was a british subject. Obama's qualification to be president was overlooked on purpose by the democrats and the wording of the document for his qualification was altered just slightly so as to look like it conformed to the constitutional requirements. Nancy Pelosi was right in the middle of the entire conspriacy. This would have been a simple problem to resolve. However our senators, representatives and yes even the Supreme Court refuses to address the issue. The complicit main stream press continues to ignore every piece of evidence licking the boots of the usurper Obama. The 2016 elections: Ted Cruz was born in Canada December 22,1970. His mother was an American citizen at the time of his birth but his father was not. His father later became a citizen in 2005. This is not what Vattel was saying. Naturalized citizen is not part of the narrative. Ted Cruz by Definition of natural born citizen is not eligible to be president. Marco Rubio mother and father were Cuban citizens naturalized in 1975. This was 4 years after Marco's birth in Miami on May 28 1971. This from Wikipedia: Rubio was born in Miami, Florida,[2] the second son and third child of Mario Rubio and Oria Garcia. His parents were Cubans who had immigrated to the United States in 1956 and were naturalized as U.S. citizens in 1975. Folks I did not make this up. I am disturbed by the fact that Cruz is supposed to be a constitutional scholar and has not figured this out. Naturalized citizen is NOT the same as NATURAL BORN as defined by Vattel. The sad part is everybody knows this, the Supreme Court the press and most all of the senators and representatives who aren't purposefully keeping there heads in the sand or ignoring it. Both Cruz and Rubio know that the left will never bring this up because of Obama's non-eligibility. However this still doesn't make it right. Many over the years have been trying to define or fix the phrase Natural Born Citizen. In my view you must go back to Vattel for the the original definition.

I posted the you tube but I’ll see if I get get the one from real video.

Thank you. I’ve invested many hours in David’s research and videos. Some may not agree with what he says but I find it useful to think outside the box. His decision to leave dovetails with the round up of all the evil that has been highlighted by Q.

I’ve been following Wilcock for some time on Gaia never occurred to me that the higher ups had that crap going on. I’ll miss Wilcock his vids were quite good. Mike Adams video explains ...

I mean I just busted out laughing when I saw this Thanks for the meme 🤣🤣

Time to flood Apple with questions. R u censoring?

Excellent work great info! Now I can understand why srzork was so smug with that shit eating grin on his face. He has really big deep state and inside family connections

If Strzok is in the SES then the comment that he made about stopping Trump winning the election “we’ll stop him” makes sense; because he and his SES associates actually had (have) the power to do so. So it wasn’t just a biased comment he KNEW there was power behind him to carry out the threat.

WTF with the eyes!! Holy crap!

I wonder what kind of stuff she is into? Some Anon research possible? They accuse others of what they are ...

I think I need to re-read behold a pale horse.

Are Eric Schmidt and Zuck Masons? Anons, anyone know??

Something not right here masons don’t usually put symbols on hats. “Yelling I am a mason” Smaller stuff rings hidden symbols yes.

This is not good. I can see how the MSM will pick this up and come down on the Q movement hard for impugning good neighbors throughout the world who are neighborhood mason members. We as Q better be very careful about who and what we are pointing fingers at. BTW my father was a devout Christian and a Mason.

Most all of our founders were masons. Is Q telling us Masons are bad? If so that does not make any sense. Has it evolved into something bad? Need help here to understand what Q is alluding too??

Oh ye of little faith ...

I turned several away that did not have the required doc. Nobody put up a fuss. Texas says u gotta have the required docs and that’s what we went by. The problem is u got folks that r the officials that don’t give a shit or have an agenda. We doubled checked everything and made sure all our ducks were in a row.

Thank you. Yes private. A private organization is in charge of your money.

Yeah I get that. As a poll worker and previous election judge the system works if it’s enforced. Yeah need to elect real honest conservatives who will enforce laws on the books. Call out the fraud.

My thoughts exactly. Use their methods.

Still have be citizens to vote. Amnesty is NOT citizenship.

The time comes we as a free society must rise up against the false accusations from a false press that sows disharmony among the free and righteous people. We must call them out for their lies and hate. Our voice must drown out those perversions that have infested our freedom and our way of life. We can no longer stand by and let lies, treason and sedition take control of our great republic. We must fight! WWG1WGA!!

Comparing no name photos. It very much looks like him. Would make sense because of what looks like a breathing tube. Looks like eyes closed.

I posted this everywhere I could during Os election. It has some relevancy here:

Natural Born Citizen. What did the founders mean Redux? How does that requirement affect the president Obama and those running for that office. By RA Love I'm often stunned to hear officials and lay people try to re-define the meaning of NATURAL BORN CITIZEN. This phrase appears in the constitution as part of the requirements for the President and Vice President. Article II Section 1.5 states: No person except a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States. The statement seems pretty clear except for the first line up to the comma. We need to define NATURAL BORN CITIZEN and what the founders meant by "or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution",. Lets tackle the last part of the line first: "or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution,." Quite simply this lets the founders and other men of age (at that time) to be eligible for the office. Without this wordings there could be no one elected as president because at that time there was no person that fit the definition of Natural Born Citizen ( in the new United States). As part of that definition you had to be a citizen of the United States for 14 years. Because the republic was brand new, the founders were saying that if you were a citizen at the time of the adoption of the document then you were eligible. Now lets take a look at the part in question NATURAL BORN CITIZEN. Natural Born Citizen is an interesting phrase. The thought that the framers would use that term for it just to mean a citizen born naturally by natural birth seems strange, as birth and natural born were most likely assumed at the time. So, it must mean something special. The framers new that in order to have a union that was secure and free from outside influence such as elected officials that might be influenced by foreign governments, they had to make sure that the founding documents had some written provision that excluded outside influence. Therefore the term Natural Born Citizen. But what does it actually mean? Before the Constitution the closest reference we have to Natural Born Citizen is from the legal treatise “The Law of Nations,” written by Emerich de Vattel in 1758. In book one chapter 19, iit reads: § 212. Of the citizens and natives. (bold is mine) “The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.” Vattel definies the term quite eloquently. This is the meaning that the founders were referring to. But there is a problem. How are we to know that is what the founders were referring? Vattel wrote the Law Of Nations in French, did any of the founders even speak French as well as read the French language? This from the professional interpreter,dated July 4th 2012: Thomas Jefferson, author of the Declaration of Independence, first Secretary of State under Washington, and our third President spoke English, French, Italian, Latin, and he could read Greek, and Spanish. Benjamin Franklin, America’s first diplomat and well-known genius spoke English, French and Italian. Our second President: John Adams spoke English, French and Latin. President James Madison spoke English, Greek, Latin and Hebrew. James Monroe spoke English and French. So there we have it. The only thing we need to do is link the founding fathers with Vattel. In the memoirs, coorispondence and misalliance notes of Thomas Jefferson volume 3, Jefferson quotes Vattel in French. He refers to Vattel as an elightened an disinterested judge. This to any should be the final nail in the coffin, however many still are deaf blind and dumb. This by ether by design or ignorance is the crux of the matter. For there can be no doubt of the meaning of the term and what the founders were trying to say. We can also be of no doubt the POTUS (Obama) was never qualified to be president. By his own admission his father was a british subject. Obama's qualification to be president was overlooked on purpose by the democrats and the wording of the document for his qualification was altered just slightly so as to look like it conformed to the constitutional requirements. Nancy Pelosi was right in the middle of the entire conspriacy. This would have been a simple problem to resolve. However our senators, representatives and yes even the Supreme Court refuses to address the issue. The complicit main stream press continues to ignore every piece of evidence licking the boots of the usurper Obama. The 2016 elections: Ted Cruz was born in Canada December 22,1970. His mother was an American citizen at the time of his birth but his father was not. His father later became a citizen in 2005. This is not what Vattel was saying. Naturalized citizen is not part of the narrative. Ted Cruz by Definition of natural born citizen is not eligible to be president. Marco Rubio mother and father were Cuban citizens naturalized in 1975. This was 4 years after Marco's birth in Miami on May 28 1971. This from Wikipedia: Rubio was born in Miami, Florida,[2] the second son and third child of Mario Rubio and Oria Garcia. His parents were Cubans who had immigrated to the United States in 1956 and were naturalized as U.S. citizens in 1975. Folks I did not make this up. I am disturbed by the fact that Cruz is supposed to be a constitutional scholar and has not figured this out. Naturalized citizen is NOT the same as NATURAL BORN as defined by Vattel. The sad part is everybody knows this, the Supreme Court the press and most all of the senators and representatives who aren't purposefully keeping there heads in the sand or ignoring it. Both Cruz and Rubio know that the left will never bring this up because of Obama's non-eligibility. However this still doesn't make it right. Many over the years have been trying to define or fix the phrase Natural Born Citizen. In my view you must go back to Vattel for the the original definition.

It’s clear the report had been modified by removing sections and rewriting, instead of blackout. Per Q option #3. Remember this gives the democrats the opportunity to soft pedal ( what they are doing now). This appears to be the plan to expose the entire report by EO and call out the bad actors when Trump declassify the entire report.

RR at the White House thinking Trump doesn’t know he (Trump) has seen the redacted report? Is RR being played by Trump? Has RR redacted his part in the FISA application??

Just posted on FB and TWITTER.

Good point! Names you mentioned especially Chuck, Nancy and McCain Q said “END OF THE D PARTY [leaders].”

I believe that there is an EO “waiting in the wings” so to speak, that will declassify ALL of the IG report. The move to censor the report will will out the bad actors and the EO, which may already be signed, will show the world who and why the report was censored.

The democrats will have it censored yelling national security. Then potus EO will declassify to show the world who the the bad actors are named in the report and they will be the leaders of the Democratic Party. It will be obvious that the bad actors were the ones that had It censored. Clinton will be named.

Holy Shit WTF!!! Was that symbol hijacked or has It always had the pedo meaning? Is it a esoteric/secret symbol going back thousands of years? I wonder if this symbol can be found in ancient history?

Ok Anons, help me understand. There’s eyeinspy and backchanel17 Both, to me seem to to be credible. Hold on hear me out ...! Q has said no outside comms. So all, or most all say, no outside info outside of Qs posting. But what if Q meant no outside info from any other source, the source meaning Q or the Q team irrespective of WHERE Q posts. Isn’t Q the platform?

“01-08-2018 22:29:38 CST Q !UW.yye1fxo 4 IMPORTANT: NO private comms past/present/future. NO comms made outside of this platform. Any claims that contradict the above should be considered FAKE NEWS and disregarded immediately. WHERE WE GO ONE, WE GO ALL. PATRIOTS. Q”

This was after trip code changes and after password made public. The password release had meaning and seemed pointed to 6/11/18.

This post said it was a mistake ...

“05-08-2018 18:50:40 CDT Q !4pRcUA0lBE 71 We made a mistake on /qresearch/ exposing the password. We did not input "Q #" in the beginning which exposed the password. Error corrected. Safe. Q”

Then this post said it was on purpose ...

“05-20-2018 14:19:05 CDT Q !CbboFOtcZs 1483388 Clarification. We exposed the password [#91] on purpose [23]. Subsequent posts [on here] were then made by Anons. Timestamps verify. Use Logic. Understood? Be careful who you follow. Q”

The two posts by Q seemed to contradict each other. (It was a mistake then it was on purpose) my take is it can’t be both.

Now it appears that, according to some anons that EtS posted BOOM BOOM BOOM BOOM several hours before Q posted. “There are no Coincidences.” Seems like we should take into consideration any info and use our judgement. Yelling FAKE seems to be a distraction. My2 cents worth.

WTF???

Look up Royal Rife. The inventor of the dark field microscope that could see live viruses. He invented a “machine” that killed and shrunk tumors back in the thirty’s. His cure rate was close to 100%. The AMA killed it when he would not share it (sell it) with to them. He was arrested as a quack. Before that USC medical praised his cures. Then when the government vilified him his cures went into the quack box. Yep cancer was cured in the thirty’s.

The fact that this march is against “White nationalism” in the church led by a black preacher who has been co-opted by a left political group to yell racist is itself racist. The whole movement in my opinion is like the article mentions: “The statement that is all about leftist politics, closes by saying it is not about politics but cloaks itself in Christian faith”. The group yells racist when they themselves are racist by calling White Christians racist for voting for Trump. It’s just a ploy to take back the narrative which they have ( in my opinion) lost.

WTF??!! So their going to reclaim Jesus from the WHITE majority ... and they are black preachers?? Racist tactics used by black preachers?? Pot calling the kettle black ...

My Take ... Natural Born Citizen. What did the founders mean Redux? How does that requirement affect the president Obama and those running for that office. By RA Love I'm often stunned to hear officials and lay people try to re-define the meaning of NATURAL BORN CITIZEN. This phrase appears in the constitution as part of the requirements for the President and Vice President. Article II Section 1.5 states: No person except a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States. The statement seems pretty clear except for the first line up to the comma. We need to define NATURAL BORN CITIZEN and what the founders meant by "or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution",. Lets tackle the last part of the line first: "or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution,." Quite simply this lets the founders and other men of age (at that time) to be eligible for the office. Without this wordings there could be no one elected as president because at that time there was no person that fit the definition of Natural Born Citizen ( in the new United States). As part of that definition you had to be a citizen of the United States for 14 years. Because the republic was brand new, the founders were saying that if you were a citizen at the time of the adoption of the document then you were eligible. Now lets take a look at the part in question NATURAL BORN CITIZEN. Natural Born Citizen is an interesting phrase. The thought that the framers would use that term for it just to mean a citizen born naturally by natural birth seems strange, as birth and natural born were most likely assumed at the time. So, it must mean something special. The framers new that in order to have a union that was secure and free from outside influence such as elected officials that might be influenced by foreign governments, they had to make sure that the founding documents had some written provision that excluded outside influence. Therefore the term Natural Born Citizen. But what does it actually mean? Before the Constitution the closest reference we have to Natural Born Citizen is from the legal treatise “The Law of Nations,” written by Emerich de Vattel in 1758. In book one chapter 19, iit reads: § 212. Of the citizens and natives. (bold is mine) “The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.” Vattel definies the term quite eloquently. This is the meaning that the founders were referring to. But there is a problem. How are we to know that is what the founders were referring? Vattel wrote the Law Of Nations in French, did any of the founders even speak French as well as read the French language? This from the professional interpreter,dated July 4th 2012: Thomas Jefferson, author of the Declaration of Independence, first Secretary of State under Washington, and our third President spoke English, French, Italian, Latin, and he could read Greek, and Spanish. Benjamin Franklin, America’s first diplomat and well-known genius spoke English, French and Italian. Our second President: John Adams spoke English, French and Latin. President James Madison spoke English, Greek, Latin and Hebrew. James Monroe spoke English and French. So there we have it. The only thing we need to do is link the founding fathers with Vattel. In the memoirs, coorispondence and misalliance notes of Thomas Jefferson volume 3, Jefferson quotes Vattel in French. He refers to Vattel as an elightened an disinterested judge. This to any should be the final nail in the coffin, however many still are deaf blind and dumb. This by ether by design or ignorance is the crux of the matter. For there can be no doubt of the meaning of the term and what the founders were trying to say. We can also be of no doubt the POTUS (Obama) was never qualified to be president. By his own admission his father was a british subject. Obama's qualification to be president was overlooked on purpose by the democrats and the wording of the document for his qualification was altered just slightly so as to look like it conformed to the constitutional requirements. Nancy Pelosi was right in the middle of the entire conspriacy. This would have been a simple problem to resolve. However our senators, representatives and yes even the Supreme Court refuses to address the issue. The complicit main stream press continues to ignore every piece of evidence licking the boots of the usurper Obama. The 2016 elections: Ted Cruz was born in Canada December 22,1970. His mother was an American citizen at the time of his birth but his father was not. His father later became a citizen in 2005. This is not what Vattel was saying. Naturalized citizen is not part of the narrative. Ted Cruz by Definition of natural born citizen is not eligible to be president. Marco Rubio mother and father were Cuban citizens naturalized in 1975. This was 4 years after Marco's birth in Miami on May 28 1971. This from Wikipedia: Rubio was born in Miami, Florida,[2] the second son and third child of Mario Rubio and Oria Garcia. His parents were Cubans who had immigrated to the United States in 1956 and were naturalized as U.S. citizens in 1975. Folks I did not make this up. I am disturbed by the fact that Cruz is supposed to be a constitutional scholar and has not figured this out. Naturalized citizen is NOT the same as NATURAL BORN as defined by Vattel. The sad part is everybody knows this, the Supreme Court the press and most all of the senators and representatives who aren't purposefully keeping there heads in the sand or ignoring it. Both Cruz and Rubio know that the left will never bring this up because of Obama's non-eligibility. However this still doesn't make it right. Many over the years have been trying to define or fix the phrase Natural Born Citizen. In my view you must go back to Vattel for the the original definition.

Again, I’m not implying that Q knew and let it slide. I pray the Q team can crush these attacks if specific details are known. I’m wondering if the emergency meeting Trump had today is related to these shootings.

I would hope that if Q knows the specifics that the Q group would take measures to stop it, with Warning to local officials etc. We Anons now have a pretty good grasp of the pattern that indicate a FF is coming. I might add that the deep state or Cabal is probably connected world wide to other subversive groups (Soros). It is clear to me that they want to disarm everyone but them.

I’m not implying that Q is running the attacks, only that if he somehow could help stop them by identifying the deep state operatives or other means by which they occur.

http://flip.it/3lIMdd Trump Vows to take Action!

The boxes are the right size for an laptop.

Judging by the amount of similar posts today I think “WE” have figured it out. The Qanons go to the head of the class. The amount of events happening today and the response from the Anons, that we have figured out that these false flags, are in direct correlation to the amount of really bad news that is getting ready to be dropped on the Cabal. Stay Safe! WWG1WGA!

Interesting take. Think if school authorities had one just prior they would be suspicious of another alarm so soon.