By Anna Von Reitz

There is a big flap this morning because President Trump is trying to end the "Anchor Baby" provisions that immigrants and the INS have been abusing, by ending birthright citizenship claims related to "U.S. Citizenship".  

Many people have reacted in alarm and thought that this means that he has power to end their birthright claims of nationality and State Citizenship.  

The real answer is: yes, he can, and no, he can't. 

As President of a corporation, already empowered by over 350 "emergency powers" granted to his Office by the British Territorial United States Congress back in the 1930's and continued by their Successors, Donald J. Trump can do darn near anything in the wide world he wants to do with respect to the day to day operations of that corporation, its subsidiaries, its subcontractors, its employees, its policies, and its statutory "laws".  

It was, after all, their policy to allow "Anchor Babies" to provide their families with instant access to our country in the first place, and many would argue an irresponsible policy, too. It is Mr. Trump's job as President to alter corporate policies as necessary to deal with emergencies.  The "National Emergency" status as already been declared.  He is already in position to move.  God bless him.  Being born on American soil makes the baby an American, but doesn't (necessarily) make him a "U.S. Citizen".

I have been trying to get exactly this point across for many months.  

That said, as President of a foreign corporation, Donald J. Trump has no ability or authorization to tamper with any aspect of American nationality or American State Citizenship.  As above, it is entirely possible for a baby born on the soil of California to be a Californian, but there is nothing that makes his Mother or Father a Californian, too.  They have already been born on the soil of Honduras or Mexico or wherever else, which establishes their nationality and citizenship obligations, if any.  

This idea that they could busload hundreds of women in late pregnancy to the border, offload them like cattle, and then simply wait for them to give birth on American soil and thereby get a free pass for everyone in the family all the way back to the grandparents to become "U.S. citizens" was always crackpot and a means to end run around the Public Law.  

It is also a cruelly deceptive means to entrap these people who are seeking freedom in the corporate enslavement racket instead. 

Mexicans and Hondurans are not worth as much as slaves in the international slave market, but when they cross our border they magically gain in value astronomically, simply by having the label "U.S. citizen" attached to them.  This sets up a situation where both the corporations serving "as" governments can profit by their migration.  

All the U.S. Government has to do is provide a cut of the resulting profit to the Honduran or Mexican or other "government" corporation, and they will be happy to send an unending supply of new "U.S. citizens" to our borders.  This is profitable for both corporations, because the value of an average "U.S. citizen" is far and away above any welfare costs or benefits the people ever receive, and the "U.S." Inc. can borrow against the value of its "citizenry" in the world slave market, thus providing extra income for the vermin in DC.  

That is the dirty reason for all the dirty Democrats supporting mass immigration. 

It's also the reason for all the forced immigration of Muslims -- quite apart from the wars in the Middle East -- into Europe. 

A German "citizen" is worth a lot more than a Yemen "citizen" and the guilty governments are profiting themselves without regard for the people they are supposed to serve. 

I gave a citation yesterday regarding "U.S. citizenship" and got back a response that someone went online and couldn't find it.  

First, be aware that if you want to read law you have to go to a Law Library and read the hard copy, and if you want to know what really happened you have to go into the case files.  What appears online is often heavily redacted, simplified, and annotated in various ways. Second, it has been profitable to the knaves to hide key citations and they have done so, just as they have burned books and suppressed treaties throughout their history.  Third, that's far, far from the only citation giving you the same facts (and more) about the issue of "citizenship".  

Here's a few more to cut your teeth on, for all of you who aren't sure that there is a difference between being an American and being a "U.S. citizen": 

“We have in our political system a government of the United States and a government of each of the several States. Each one of these governments is distinct from the others, and each has citizens of its own...” United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1875)

“...he was not a citizen of the United States, he was a citizen and voter of the State,...” “One may be a citizen of a State and yet not a citizen of the United States”. McDonel v. The State, 90 Ind. 320 (1883)

“That there is a citizenship of the United States and citizenship of a state,...” Tashiro v. Jordan, 201 Cal. 236 (1927)

"A citizen of the United States is a citizen of the federal government ..." Kitchens v. Steele, 112 F.Supp 383

"On the other hand, there is a significant historical fact in all of this. Clearly, one of the purposes of the 13th and 14th Amendments and of the 1866 act and of section 1982 was to give the Negro citizenship. Jones v. Alfred H. Mayer Co. (1967), 379 F.2d 33, 43.

"The object of the 14th Amendment, as is well known, was to confer upon the colored race the right of citizenship. " United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U. S. 649, 692.

“The governments of the United States and of each state of the several states are distinct from one another. The rights of a citizen under one may be quite different from those which he has under the other”. Colgate v. Harvey, 296 U.S. 404; 56 S.Ct. 252 (1935)

“There is a difference between privileges and immunities belonging to the citizens of the United States as such, and those belonging to the citizens of each state as such”. 
Ruhstrat v. People, 57 N.E. 41 (1900) 

“The rights and privileges, and immunities which the fourteenth constitutional amendment and Rev. St. section 1979 [U.S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1262], for its enforcement, were designated to protect, are such as belonging to citizens of the United States as such, and not as citizens of a state”. Wadleigh v. Newhall 136 F. 941 (1905)

“...rights of national citizenship as distinct from the fundamental or natural rights inherent in state citizenship”. Madden v. Kentucky, 309 U.S. 83: 84 L.Ed. 590 (1940)

----And, always note, that the so-called "Revised Statutes" were never actually enrolled on the Federal Register, that is, never actually "Revised" except for internal corporate use, because those making the revisions never had the power or authority to make them apply generally. 

----------------------------

Views: 207

Comment

You need to be a member of 12160 Social Network to add comments!

Join 12160 Social Network

Comment by cheeki kea on November 1, 2018 at 5:42am

Here in the south colonies, It'll be Polynesian issues, ( due to climate change crisis/devastating sea levels and so on. ) We know where they'll end up, plus how they will get there. Agreements like the TTTA will have to be cancelled. (sadly) 

 

"Destroying the New World Order"

TOP CONTENT THIS WEEK

THANK YOU FOR SUPPORTING THE SITE!

mobile page

12160.info/m

12160 Administrators

 

Latest Activity

Keisha Ruan posted a blog post

The Alienadox – by Kaiya

In response to President Trumps decision to deport all illegal aliens, the aliens all bleach their…See More
7 hours ago
Keisha Ruan commented on Doc Vega's blog post To all of You members here on 12160 I wish the best for all of you!
"have a terrible year 🫶😻"
7 hours ago
Keisha Ruan commented on Doc Vega's blog post Veiled Aggression
"Taking time away, mind astray, with nothing to do and not much to say."
7 hours ago
Keisha Ruan posted a status
"End the FED."
7 hours ago
Doc Vega posted blog posts
8 hours ago
Sandy posted videos
9 hours ago
cheeki kea commented on cheeki kea's photo
yesterday
cheeki kea posted a photo
yesterday
tjdavis posted a video

Ian Carroll's Most Controversial Opinion

Check out Ian Carroll: @Iancarrollshow Subscribe for videos and live shows - https://www.youtube.com/wearechangeSign up for more content like this and live s...
Friday
Doc Vega favorited tjdavis's video
Thursday
Doc Vega commented on tjdavis's video
Thumbnail

Orson Welles' F for Fake Trailer (1976)

"Wow I would say Orson Welles out did himself and was more than an equal to anything Stanley Kubrick…"
Thursday
Doc Vega commented on Sandy's video
Thursday
Doc Vega posted a blog post

The Psycho-Political Assault on Americans and the West Today

 That we have been intentionally misled and lied to by the mainstream media, universities, and the…See More
Thursday
N.Morgan posted a discussion
Thursday
N.Morgan posted a status
""
Thursday
Burbia posted a photo
Thursday
Burbia posted a video

BUSH THE FATHER - CHAPTER 1

This is part one of three of a documentary covering George H.W. Bush's early career and entry into the CIA. Today the focus is mostly on Bush's father, Senat...
Thursday
tjdavis posted a video

Orson Welles' F for Fake Trailer (1976)

Dir: Orsan WellesSinopse: Em 1976, na ocasião do lançamento de "Verdades e Mentiras" nos EUA, Orson Welles teve a ideia de criar um trailer para promover o f...
Wednesday
Sandy posted a video

Vicki Devil Worship - 1st May 1989 Oprah Winfrey Show Interview With A Jewish Woman

Full episode can be watched here: https://www.bitchute.com/video/nydgPgyYSd1N/ - Note: Due to actions taken by the YouTube Community to remove the video "Sat...
Wednesday
Burbia commented on Doc Vega's blog post To all of You members here on 12160 I wish the best for all of you!
"Thnx. Much appreciated.  Let's hope Deagle is wrong for 2025."
Wednesday

© 2025   Created by truth.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service

content and site copyright 12160.info 2007-2019 - all rights reserved. unless otherwise noted