Kamala is not a US Citizen

Author: Amber

Posts

Total: 205
#181
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,265
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
-->
@HistoryBuff
I wasn't going to waste even a single second on that since I know Amber doesn't listen to a single thing anyone says that doesn't reinforce their already held beliefs.
Hypocrite:



[HistoryBuff] nazi's were rioting. When asked to condemn the nazi's, he would only say there was very fine people on both sides."

Thing you won't listen to because it doesn't reinforce your already held beliefs: https://youtu.be/JmaZR8E12bs?t=117
#182
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
Thing you won't listen to because it doesn't reinforce your already held beliefs: https://youtu.be/JmaZR8E12bs?t=117
we've been through this conversation before. You just ignore what I say. But I will repeat it anyway. This is what trump does, he says completely opposite things knowing his followers will choose to believe what he wants them to. So he denounces nazi's, then praises nazis. He says go to the capitol peacefully, but then says "'If you don't fight like hell you're not going to have a country anymore'". 

This is what he does. His cultists hear they parts they like and ignore the rest. They hear the call to violence and ignore the call to be peaceful. They hear the praising of nazi's and ignore him denouncing them. 

#183
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,265
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
-->
@HistoryBuff
we've been through this conversation before.
You've hid in the sand before.


You just ignore what I say.
Your excuse was shifting the goalpost. You spread disinformation. Own it, or I will continue to point out your hypocrisy.


They hear the praising of nazi's and ignore him denouncing them. 
You ignore him denouncing them and wish to imagine non-existent praise. Stop projecting.
#184
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
You ignore him denouncing them and wish to imagine non-existent praise. Stop projecting.
I don't ignore. I hear him denounce. I also hear him praise. Just as I heard him say "peacefully" but also that his cultists had to fight. If I told you not to murder your wife, then told you to murder your wife. I still told you to do it. It doesn't matter if I say both things. Trump says it both ways. You choose to point to the times he says what you want to hear. Then you ignore the times he says what you don't want to hear. Just like all trump cultists. To me it doesn't matter if he contradicts himself. If you say the terrible thing, there is no walking it back by saying the opposite.
#185
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,265
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
-->
@HistoryBuff
You ignore him denouncing them and wish to imagine non-existent praise. Stop projecting.
I hear him denounce.
Good, is this statement true:

[HistoryBuff] nazi's were rioting. When asked to condemn the nazi's, he would only say "there was very fine people on both sides."


To me it doesn't matter if he contradicts himself.
Until it matters to you that you contradict yourself I will keep pointing out that you are contradicting yourself.
Topic's author
#186
Amber
Amber's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 394
1
2
6
Amber's avatar
Amber
1
2
6
This claim is demonstrably false. The evidence Owens used to suggest Harris' grandmother died in 1960 refers to a person born in a different year with a different last name.

Owens, in her coverage of this "scoop," flooded the zone with additional questions about Harris' grandmother, suggesting that documents prove she married a man who was not Harris' grandfather while noting a suspicious lack of documentation about the birth of Harris' father, Stanford economist Donald Harris.
LOL! Citing far left incredibly uncredible sources trying to twist (strawman) Owen's research and those whom have helped her find all the birth, death, marriage, and other ancestorial records, even finding direct relatives of Harris' family who are Jewish and Irish, NOT black, and the Indian side of her.  The facts don't lie, but Snopes and other sources like Vox would say anything to discredit Owens, but you just cannot discredit fact-based data like genealogical & historical (newspaper) records. 

You, like your buddy, are denialists of the truth. 

You did nothing here but prove that denialism. 
Topic's author
#187
Amber
Amber's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 394
1
2
6
Amber's avatar
Amber
1
2
6
History Butt,

The US Constitution's Bill of Rights, 14th Amendment, legislative history on the Citizenship Clause = truth.
that is something we agree on. However, I agree with the interpretation the US courts have used for the last 100 years. You have a different opinion. 
Agreeing with the interpretation of the US Courts is a fallacious appeal to authority.
The Courts often overrule previous rulings, changing or invalidating the previous ruling (e.g. Roe V Wade, Dred Scott, etc.).
No serious federal question has been brought to the Courts over the legislative history of the Citizenship clause for over a century because no one has done so. It needs to be, and Trump has put forth that question and maybe in the next term, it will be looked at. 

My interpretation based on the recorded legislative history, that which the courts have NEVER considered, is accurate. Fallacious sappeals to authority doesn't discredit that reality. 

Her father is not 'black,' he is Indian-Irish-Jewish. Candace Owens has proven this as a fact of her family heritage. 
any sentence that starts with "candace owens has proven" is almost certainly laughably false. Provide evidence of this, or I will disregard it. 
"is almost certainly laughably false."

Then prove it false. Otherwise, your ignorance emotively driven subjective obfuscating opinion means nothing and carries no weight here. 

Evidence has been proven via her podcast putting up on the screen birth, death, and marriage records as well as newspaper stories and interviews with people who knew Harris' grandmother personally (who unequivocally stated he is white, not black) and her direct relatives. You are an coward in refusing to watch either the podcast or review the Deep Cast site with transcripts that I have linked to.

No, the court has not ruled that I am wrong. They misinterpreted the 14th, just as SCOTUS did over Roe v Wade and reversed itself on it 50 years after the fact.
lol you say the court did not rule something, then immediately confirm that the court has ruled that way. You just think they ruled wrong. Do you even read the things you write?
I confirmed no such thing, fool. I don't think they ruled wrong, I know they ruled wrong just like they did in Roe v Wade. There is nothing in the 14th that allows personal privacy translated to abortion rights. However there is legal precedent for 'personal liberty' which does give everyone the right to personal privacy, namely with medical health decisions. Had SCOTUS focused on that in Roe v Wade, that ruling would still stand to this day.

If a serious case does come before SCOTUS citing the legislative history of the Citizenship Clause, I am more than confident they would reverse a lot of citizenship status from people who were never entitled to have it to begin with, starting with Kamala Harris. 

 I've mentioned Candace Owens over a dozen times, and in your response(s) you keep making fallacious allegations of racism about her
oh gotcha. yeah she went SUPER far right and that has lead her to saying all kinds of horrible things. And yes, she is engaging in racist bullshit against a black woman. 
Truth =/= horrible things. Unless you let the truth hurt you, should we provide you with a doll so you can point to where the truth really hurts you?

Harris is not black. Period. The more you double and triple down on that proven lie, the more of a fool you paint yourself to be. 

Yes, a podcast is evidence when she is bringing the receipts: news clippings, photos, birth records, death records, family tree history, discussions with actual family members and individuals like Judge Joe Brown who knew Harris' parents - personally!
If these things exist, please provide them. If you cannot, I will ignore this as more bullshit. 
Already cited to the source where they have been provided. You've ignored them. Your problem, not mine, ignorant denialist.

I have linked to the podcasts; you refuse to watch it and see the evidence she gives on chicken bullshit excuses of racism.
I'm not going to do your research for you. This is a debating site. Provide proof of your claims or stop making those claims. 

There is no research for you to do. It's been done. You just ignorant refuse to review it. Lazy chicken shit coward move. 

(PS. Why am I not surprised that you only have two people willing to be added to your friend's list, and one of them is FLRW, your DebartArt twin *FP*)
I don't even know what a "friends" list on an anonymous debate site would be for. But thank you for calling yourself out for being creepy and looking through my profile. 
Thanks for proving how far, or rather how low (IQ) your ignorance and denialism goes. 




#188
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
[HistoryBuff] nazi's were rioting. When asked to condemn the nazi's, he would only say "there was very fine people on both sides."
oh my, you caught me making a slight mis-statement where the underlying sentiment was accurate. how ever will I recover....

Until it matters to you that you contradict yourself I will keep pointing out that you are contradicting yourself.
I didn't contradict myself. My point was that trump praises nazis. That was true then, it is true now. I have not contradicted that. I slightly mis-spoke when i said he ONLY praises nazis. But my point was still accurate. 
#189
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
Agreeing with the interpretation of the US Courts is a fallacious appeal to authority.
you say appeal to authority. I say IT'S LITERALLY THE LAW.

The Courts often overrule previous rulings, changing or invalidating the previous ruling (e.g. Roe V Wade, Dred Scott, etc.).
true. And a court could hypothetically overrule this. And if they did that, you saying she isn't a citizen might make sense. But they haven't overruled that, so you're wrong. 

No serious federal question has been brought to the Courts over the legislative history of the Citizenship clause for over a century because no one has done so.
because no one really questions it. Everyone understands that it is perfectly valid and a good thing. Only a few right wing crackpots say differently. 

Then prove it false. 
someone else already did that for you. but here you go.

Evidence has been proven via her podcast putting up on the screen birth, death, and marriage records as well as newspaper stories and interviews with people who knew Harris' grandmother personally (who unequivocally stated he is white, not black) and her direct relatives. 
candace owens is a liar.

I don't think they ruled wrong, I know they ruled wrong just like they did in Roe v Wade.
lol, you just confirmed it again. You confirmed that the courts have ruled that you are wrong. Ego, you are wrong until a court overrules that decision. You can believe that she shouldn't have citizenship. But it is factually untrue to say she isn't a citizen. And you know that, and just confirmed that you know that.


#190
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,265
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
-->
@HistoryBuff
[HistoryBuff] nazi's were rioting. When asked to condemn the nazi's, he would only say "there was very fine people on both sides."
oh my, you caught me making a slight mis-statement where the underlying sentiment was accurate. how ever will I recover....
For a slight misstatement you act like you'd be damned to hell if you told the truth.

That's what derangement feels like to the deranged.

How to recover? Start by admitting you have a problem.


Until it matters to you that you contradict yourself I will keep pointing out that you are contradicting yourself.
I didn't contradict myself.
"I wasn't going to waste even a single second on that since I know Amber doesn't listen to a single thing anyone says that doesn't reinforce their already held beliefs."

This implies that you would not waste a single second on people that won't listen to a single thing anyone says that doesn't reinforce their already held beliefs. Since you are a person who doesn't listen to a single thing anyone says that doesn't reinforce your already held beliefs you would not waste time on typing.
Topic's author
#191
Amber
Amber's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 394
1
2
6
Amber's avatar
Amber
1
2
6
Agreeing with the interpretation of the US Courts is a fallacious appeal to authority.
you say appeal to authority. I say IT'S LITERALLY THE LAW.
False law. The court NEVER took the legislative history of the citizenship clause into account. They did a prima facie (a non-originalist) reading of the 14th Amendment without consideration of what the writers of it intended.

The Courts often overrule previous rulings, changing or invalidating the previous ruling (e.g. Roe V Wade, Dred Scott, etc.).
true. And a court could hypothetically overrule this. And if they did that, you saying she isn't a citizen might make sense. But they haven't overruled that, so you're wrong. 
Just because they haven't ruled yet does not prove I am wrong. LOL! 
Talk about faulty logic right there. 

No serious federal question has been brought to the Courts over the legislative history of the Citizenship clause for over a century because no one has done so.
because no one really questions it. Everyone understands that it is perfectly valid and a good thing. Only a few right wing crackpots say differently. 
That's because no one except the Heritage Foundation and a small handful of others have but none have taken the time, effort or money to pursue the matter in the Courts. 

Everyone thinks it's valid because they are wholeheartedly ignorant of Constitutional Law and just trust whatever the Justices have to say without question. That's blind ignorance right there. People should question the Courts, as they should government institutions. Like 2A advocates questioning patently unconstitutional laws and filing suit to get whatever a legislature or non-legislating body like the ATF through regulations make up shit that is illegal.

Ad hominem attacks doesn't negate the truth of a proffered legal position that you clearly lack the intellect and academic experience(s) to understand. 

Then prove it false. 
someone else already did that for you. but here you go.
BWAHAHA!!! 

That actually tries to disprove her, but actually proves her case. There have been several more follow-up reporting and podcasts clarifying what was posited in previous ones. Snopes even used the same public records in proving what Owens has already asserted. 

Evidence has been proven via her podcast putting up on the screen birth, death, and marriage records as well as newspaper stories and interviews with people who knew Harris' grandmother personally (who unequivocally stated he is white, not black) and her direct relatives. 
candace owens is a liar.

I don't think they ruled wrong, I know they ruled wrong just like they did in Roe v Wade.
lol, you just confirmed it again. You confirmed that the courts have ruled that you are wrong. Ego, you are wrong until a court overrules that decision. You can believe that she shouldn't have citizenship. But it is factually untrue to say she isn't a citizen. And you know that, and just confirmed that you know that.
No, I confirmed no such thing.

As argued and supported by the legislative history I have cited, among other legal sources, she is not a legitimate citizen.
Just because you're too stupid to grasp this legal argument is your problem, not mine. 
Just because on paper it says she doesn't make it so. Like a law student passing their PhD courses and the bar doesn't mean they are a great or even a good lawyer. 
And just because the Court(s) haven't been given an opportunity to take up this legal matter doesn't prove me wrong. Dunce.








#192
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
For a slight misstatement you act like you'd be damned to hell if you told the truth.
I have no idea what you mean. 

How to recover? Start by admitting you have a problem.
because i slightly mis phrased his love of nazi's? He said he wanted nazi generals for god's sake.

This implies that you would not waste a single second on people that won't listen to a single thing anyone says that doesn't reinforce their already held beliefs. Since you are a person who doesn't listen to a single thing anyone says that doesn't reinforce your already held beliefs you would not waste time on typing.
I literally just read what you said, and corrected myself. Thus proving do listen to things you say even if it doesn't reinforce my beliefs. I am not perfect. I can get things wrong sometimes. I admit that. I said he "only" praised nazis after he praised nazis, but also condemned them. I didn't go into the nuance of how he praises nazis and says terrible things, but then walks them back, only to say them again later. Mea Culpa. 

#193
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
False law. The court NEVER took the legislative history of the citizenship clause into account. They did a prima facie (a non-originalist) reading of the 14th Amendment without consideration of what the writers of it intended.
they made a ruling on what they believe the law says. Until the law is changed to clarify or the court over rules the decision, then that is the law. Period. Full stop. 

Just because they haven't ruled yet does not prove I am wrong. LOL! 
Talk about faulty logic right there. 
you might be misunderstanding me. I'm not saying it proves your opinion on what the law should be is wrong. I am saying it proves that Kamala is a citizenship. The way the law is interpreted today says she is a citizen. She was issued citizenship by the government. So your statement that she is not a citizen is provably wrong. If you want to say that she shouldn't have been given citizenship, then that isn't "wrong", it's just a matter of opinion. But you can't say she doesn't have it.

that's because no one except the Heritage Foundation and a small handful of others have but none have taken the time, effort or money to pursue the matter in the Courts. 
I already said that. ". Only a few right wing crackpots say differently." you are describing that no one but the right wing crackpots wants this law changed.

Citing the same dated article doesn't debunk what was just said. As I mentioned above this reply, there has been more follow-up reports and podcasts disclosing more affirming that Kamala is not BLACK.
I'm not going to argue any further about the lies of a right wing loon.

As argued and supported by the legislative history I have cited, among other legal sources, she is not a legitimate citizen.
There, right there is your problem. You said "legitimate citizen". That is the reason you're wrong. You have an opinion that says she should not have been given citizenship. But your statement isn't that she shouldn't have been given citizenship. Your statement is that she is not a citizen. But that is provably false. She is a citizen. You just think she shouldn't be. Your statements seem to acknowledge that she is a citizen, you just think she should not have been given it. 

Just because on paper it says she doesn't make it so.
lol that is exactly what it means. That "paper" is the law. The only reason you have citizenship is that paper. She has that paper too. That makes you both citizens (assuming you're american)

Like a law student passing their PhD courses and the bar doesn't mean they are a great or even a good lawyer. 
but it does mean they are a lawyer. Just like it means that she is a citizen.

 And just because the Court(s) haven't been given an opportunity to take up this legal matter doesn't prove me wrong. 
it does actually. The court rules A. You can argue that they should have ruled B. But if you argue that the law is B, you are wrong. It is A until the law is changed or the court overrules the decision. 
#194
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,265
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
-->
@HistoryBuff
How to recover? Start by admitting you have a problem.
because i slightly mis phrased his love of nazi's? He said he wanted nazi generals for god's sake.
That's what denying a problem looks like.

"I just had a little too much to drink, I don't have a problem"

You lied, you didn't care, it took 8 posts of the video evidence before you even admitted there was anything wrong with your entirely (not a bit) entirely false statement.

You have not reevaluated anything. See if I said something that was proven to be completely wrong I would question the conclusions I made while I believed the falsehoods. I would questions the sources of information which led me to be so wrong. You haven't. You wish only to sweep it under the rug, not only in the public of the forum but in your own mind. It does not confirm your worldview therefore it is threatening information and you do not want to deal with it.
#195
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
That's what denying a problem looks like.
I agree. you are denying he praises nazis. that is a problem.

You lied, you didn't care
I didn't lie. I slightly misphrased his evil. 

You have not reevaluated anything.
I acknowledged that you are right and that I misphrased it. But the fact that he praises nazi's is the critical part. 
#196
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,265
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
-->
@HistoryBuff
the fact that he praises nazi's is the critical part. 
That is not a fact. Your error which is not corrected so long as you minimize it is.

How about you phrase it correctly. Here is an example of your statement corrected to be truthful:

Nazi's were rioting. When asked to condemn the nazi's, he would only say "[the neonazis and white supremacists] should be condemned totally. You had many people in that group other than neonazis and white supremacists. The press has treated them absolutely unfairly."

If you can post that, then you will be on the road to recovery.
#197
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,265
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
-->
@HistoryBuff
You lied, you didn't care
I didn't lie. I slightly misphrased his evil. 
You could have claimed you didn't lie the first time. After I posted the video with the exact timestamp that could no longer be claimed.

#198
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,775
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
At one 2016 rally in Orlando, Trump asked his supporters to raise their right arm and pledge to vote for him. This prompted condemnation from Abe Foxman, former national director of the Anti-Defamation League, who said: "As a Jew who survived the Holocaust, to see an audience of thousands of people raising their hands in what looks like the 'Heil Hitler' salute is about as offensive, obnoxious and disgusting as anything I thought I would ever witness in the United States of America."
#199
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
we're just going around in circles. I know he praised nazis. You pretend like he didn't. we go around and around. it's boring and pointless. I'm not going to respond any further to this.
#200
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,265
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
-->
@HistoryBuff
I know he praised nazis.
You have faith, the same way you 'knew' he refused to condemn them.


I'm not going to respond any further to this.
I'm shocked, how dare you! (greta thunberg voice)
Topic's author
#201
Amber
Amber's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 394
1
2
6
Amber's avatar
Amber
1
2
6
@HistoryBuff
I know he praised nazis.
The only thing you [know] is shit stinks.

You do not [know] he praised nazis. You and your ilk constant take the words he writes and speaks completely and utterly out of context and get all butthurt and spin it into a ridiculous strawman fallacy ad hominem attack. 
#202
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,775
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
Trump's and Hitler's statements are not quite the same, and there is obvious, significant context that separates these sets of quotes.
However, it is true that phrases and statements used by Trump, like "vermin," "poisoning the blood," and "threat from within," bear a remarkable similarity to some quotations and writings attributed to Hitler.
Topic's author
#203
Amber
Amber's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 394
1
2
6
Amber's avatar
Amber
1
2
6
So, what if they bear some similarity!?! 

It's not as if the democrats haven't done the same, using words or phrases that can be similar to past despots, dictators, or those they accuse their opponent of using whilst using the same themselves. Like all the rhetoric they accuse trump of saying that spawned J6, yet there are hours of recordings (news) of democrats using the same shit, if not worse, when speaking about him and "MAGA" supporters. #hypocrisy 
#204
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,265
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
-->
@Amber
It's not as if the democrats haven't done the same, using words or phrases that can be similar to past despots, dictators
That would be an interesting compilation. This one would rank highly:


So ugh, she is worried about the state losing total control over expressed opinions. How not fascist of her.
Topic's author
#205
Amber
Amber's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 394
1
2
6
Amber's avatar
Amber
1
2
6
Candace Owens has successfully proved that Scamala is a LIAR about her family lineage.

She is not BLACK. Never has been.

She comes from an elitist Jewish bloodline, along with Irish and Indian, obviously. That's it.