The other day I posted an Internet Article in which I tore into one of Mario Apuzzo, Esq.’s lines of reasoning. Apuzzo responded on his website in the comment section, and now I am responding to his response. A lot of this is long legal stuff, and to make it easier to follow, I am just going to post pdf”s and links here. If I didn’t this, this thing would be like 20 feet long or more. Plus, this is going to be boring to people who do not like legal arguments, and this will make it easier to skip past it.
Here is the link to the first salvo, from me:
Here is a pdf of Mario’s response, and a link to his website, where you can find it in the comment section:
Mario Apuzzo Esq.’s Response To Squeeky
Here is my latest response to Mario’s response:
Squeeky’s Response to Mario Apuzzo, Esq.
September 2nd, 2012 at 12:41 pm
So you agree with Mario that an Article II “natural born Citizen” . . . is defined under American “common-law”. And that common law means, it is basically JUDGE MADE LAW, or as I like to point out, as have Mario: by ‘positive law’, or by the ‘plenary authority of government‘.
I think too we can safely say that the foundation of “common law”, be it English, American or any other country, is ‘natural law’, which is based on self-evident truths; wouldn’t you agree?
CC: Mario Apuzzo
September 2nd, 2012 at 3:56 pm
Yes. WKA is very clear that the principle of “natural born subject-ness” began in England, and crossed the ocean to America where it became “natural born citizenship.”
There is probably a great degree of Natural Law built into common law. But it doesn’t turn into common law until a judge says so. In England, the judges said so (Calvin’s Case), and in the United States, the judges say said so (Rhodes, for example).
Then sometimes, even the legislature and the people says so (the 14th Amendment)
Luckily, we have the WKA decision which ties it all together for us!
September 2nd, 2012 at 5:39 pm
A body of law always emerges in a confederation of people or peoples. And it is not uniform for each body; hence, it is not “natural.” For example, in East Africa, before European colonization, land was the common patrimony of all in the group.
On the European Continent in the west, in the wake of Roman collapse, land belonged to whomever seized it by conquest and held it.
Among the Celtic tribes of the English Isles, it was common law that a Sovereign was bound to not only protect the subjects, but also, that the Sovereign was bound to obey certain rules vis-a-vis its subjects. He was constricted by common law in his behaviour.
Saxon England partially adopted the “common law of the realm” from the Celtics, and the concept of paterfamilias and feudalism from the Romans. But, still, English history is rife with Sovereigns who were replaced by a consensus of the Nobles for not holding up his end of the bargain. Note Richard II and Richard III, and later, Charles I, and “The Bonnie Prince” Charles.
The only thing natural about evolved law, is that each group adopts rules that are fitting to its own circumstance.
September 2nd, 2012 at 12:52 pm
ENOUGH OF THE BABBLE…WHERE ARE THE RECORDS OF TRUMPS BIRTH?????
IT TOO HIM “TWO DAYS” TO GET THEM, BUT IT’S TAKING FOREVER FOR YOU TO POINT US TO THEM.
IS IT POSSIBLE THAT YOU ARE JUST A LOQUACIOUS LIAR?
September 2nd, 2012 at 1:03 pm
The predicate you try to establish when you say:
September 2nd, 2012 at 1:17 pm
Chief Justice Wait went on, in the statement you provided, to describe a type of U.S. citizenship at birth that was present as much before the 14 Amendment was approved as it has been after the 14th Amendment was approved: that Virginia Minor was a U.S. citizen at birth because she was born within the borders of one of the united states, and that both of her parents were US citizens before her birth, she was a native or natural born Citizen.
Moreover, Mrs. Minor, Chief Justice Wait declared: has always been agreed upon as having the least doubt about such an acquired US citizenship at birth; wouldn’t you agree?
September 2nd, 2012 at 5:12 pm
WHERE, OH WHERE ARE TRUMP’S HOSPITAL BIRTH RECORDS THAT TOOK HIM “TWO DAYS TIME” TO ACQUIRE??????
OR, IS IT HE DID NO SUCH THING?
MAKES TRUMP AND YOU “SISTERS UNDER THE SKIN,” BRASH, BLOVIATING LIARS WITHOUT SHAME.
September 2nd, 2012 at 5:42 pm
I have just received word from “The Donald” that he has already “outed” Obama with the publication of his hospital birth certificate. If Obama will produce his own hospital birth certificate, then they can move on to the next stop of publishing their actual hospital records.
September 2nd, 2012 at 6:48 pm
Obama has already published his official and formal birth certificate (in two certified formats, no less), which the State of HI fully backs. There is no reason to expect that the hospital retains any other such records from that long ago.
Nor is a hospital souvenir birth document of ANY legal value at all. ONLY the STATE birth certificate is.
But hey David, keep demonstrating your unreasonable ever moving goal-posts of “show us your papers, boy”…
September 3rd, 2012 at 7:59 pm
David “out of breath”,
David “out of breath”,
Doubts existed after Minor but as has been explained to you ad infinitum no doubt remained as to children born on the soil after Wong Kim Ark. Your refusal to acknowledge that the Minor court’s “I don’t know” has been superseded by the answer “YES” by the court in Wong is shameful and your continuing attempts to smear the person who has the “consent of the governed” to be POTUS with baseless lies is seditious and unAmerican. You are despicable.
September 2nd, 2012 at 1:46 pm
BRAVO on your response Squeeky! I particularly enjoyed your Cat in the Hat analogies with Things 1-4 to eviscerate Mario’s bloviating retreads of his repeatedly debunked scam notions.
Sadly, there was NOTHING new in Mario’s original letter, which he hasn’t been utterly slapped down on by many, many others endless times.
He simply is another broken record – shamelessly repeating his failed lies, over and over and over again…because his gullible Cult followers (like David Farrar) need to live in the pretend fantasy world that Mario weaves for them…
September 2nd, 2012 at 1:47 pm
BTW – A major H/T for the Thing comic reference, including his signature “Its Clobbering Time” line… I love that stuff! 🙂
September 2nd, 2012 at 3:11 pm
Thank You!!! Oh, I am just now getting up. I guess I needed to make a Big Deposit in my sleep bank. Maybe this time Mario will engage and actually discuss his theory’s fatal flaws. There is always hope.
My father used to tell me about the Yancy Street Gang teasing The Thing and dropping flower pots on his head and stuff. I was sooo glad to work that in and am glad you like it.
September 2nd, 2012 at 3:18 pm
Just getting up??? Must have stayed up too late again, I see! 😉 Me, I’m starting to yawn and thinking that an extended holiday weekend is a great excuse for me to go take a break and get in a nice little afternoon nap. 😉
Your father sounds like a fascinating man, from all the anecdotes you share about him. He totally sounds like someone I would get along with well.
September 2nd, 2012 at 4:02 pm
I always stay up late on Saturday night to listen to Blues Before Sunrise on NPR. (midnite til 5:00 am) But I was all wound up finishing the Justice Scalia thing, and the the 8 pages of response to Mario. Sooo, when I crashed about 7:30, it was just lights out for a while.
Then the cat alarm clock went off. mew.mew.mew.mew.feed me. mew.mew.feed me. mew mew mew.
Cats just do not have snooze alarms.
September 2nd, 2012 at 5:38 pm
And did you’ll catch this little gem from Ray:
September 2nd, 2012 at 6:08 pm
Claims of serial liar,David Farrar, should always be disregarded. He lies about things when it would be beneficial to tell the truth. But, pathological liars have a compulsion to “put one over” on others.
Where are the Hospital records that you claim Trump received in “two days time” and showed all? Like almost everything else you assert, it is a flaming lie.
The founders were educated men who, undoubtedly, were familiar with de Vattel, as well as John Locke, and the Prophet Muhummad, peace be unto him. Thomas Paine was familiar with the New Testament, but rejected it. Indications are that Thomas Jefferson was agnostic concerning it.
So, merely reading something doesn’t imply that the ideas expressed in that reading becomes dogma to the reader. I once owned a copy of The Book of Mormon and started to read it out of intellectual curiosity, but didn’t become a LDS.
This is nothing, Fool. (King Lear: act I, scene 4)
The founders didn’t adopt de Vattel’s ideas of a monarchial Chief of State, nor establish a state-sponsored religion, nor forbid possession of armaments by commoners. Indeed, contrary to de Vattel, they established that ALL were commoners and forbade any official from accepting a title.
That’s nothing, fool.
September 2nd, 2012 at 6:14 pm
Nobody doubts that Vattel was a smart and well-respected man. But as I have shown, his implied position was never placed into the common law, is at odds with the common law, and is by definition not common law.
Vattel and the Birther MvH can not exist in the same place at the same time as the Rhodes decision.
September 2nd, 2012 at 8:07 pm
Still desperately trying to tout the irrelevant Vattel crap, I see. Not that it hasn’t been explained to you innumerable amount of times already, but I’ll summarize just once more for you. If you just took your fingers out of your ears and opened your eyes, maybe it would sink in:
Just because Vattel was published, known and even read means NOTHING. It only matters if his concepts ended up being used in drafting our framework of laws (e.g. The Constitution, etc.). Many of the “Founding Fathers” were learned men. They read A LOT of different authors and sources. But that neither means that they personally agreed with everything they read NOR that it ended up influencing our laws at all.
In terms of Vattel specifically, the only area of the Constitution that shows his influence, is within the scope of international trade. That is it. Period. Absolutely NO evidence correlating his views on citizenship to our laws.
Face it, you are a dupe, who has been attracted to a shiny bauble of false hope by slick con artists out there. All they’ve given you and all you are spewing here is nothing more than a red-herring argument, as Vattel has NO connection to Article II Section 1, whatsoever at all.
September 2nd, 2012 at 8:59 pm
It occurs to me that an obscure periodical in the bundogs of NC flogging de Vattel is not unlike the Weekly Standard flogging Milton Friedman. I.e., it means nothing in the grand scheme of things.
September 2nd, 2012 at 6:23 pm
I will charitably presume that you are making sport, but from someone with you level of ignorance, it’s difficult say definitively.
But, just in case, that you are trying to “put one over” on some dimwits, a souvenir certificate is not “hospital records,” and it is useless for any official purposes. Most people just dispose of them after the bloom of the birth fades. But, in any event, Trump’s demand was not for a souvenir certificate, but for actual records of admission.
September 2nd, 2012 at 8:13 pm
Note to Realist
Even if President Obama had been born outside the US, he bacame a citizen at birth, and therefore a NBC.
Sorry, this is in reference to a post on “Obotski Central.”
September 2nd, 2012 at 8:15 pm
LINK didn’t take in above post.
September 2nd, 2012 at 8:21 pm
You see, David, that’s how it’s done. When you make an assertion, know what you are talking about, and have verification at hand.
September 3rd, 2012 at 8:07 pm
Thanks for pointing out that last bit—I didn’t know that… and thanks for providing David “out of breath” with an example of the way rational people make a point—even though we all know that he is too dishonest to take it to heart.
September 3rd, 2012 at 8:37 pm
No Prob. Incidentally, John McCain is also covered:
INA: ACT 303 – PERSONS BORN IN THE CANAL ZONE OR REPUBLIC OF PANAMA ON OR AFTER FEBRUARY 26, 1904
Sec. 303. [8 U.S.C. 1403]
(a) Any person born in the Canal Zone on or after February 26, 1904, and whether before or after the effective date of this Act, whose father or mother or both at the time of the birth of such person was or is a citizen of the United States, is declared to be a citizen of the United States.
(b) Any person born in the Republic of Panama on or after February 26, 1904, and whether before or after the effective date of this Act, whose father or mother or both at the time of the birth of such person was or is a citizen of the United States employed by the Government of the United States or by the Panama Railroad Company, or its successor in title, is declared to be a citizen of the United States.
September 6th, 2012 at 6:20 pm
[…] https://birtherthinktank.wordpress.com/2012/09/02/the-squeeky-mario-discussions/ Like this:LikeBe the first to like this. […]