REBUTTAL: MSNBC Lies about the Fourteenth Amendment
The video above originally appeared on MSNBC at:
We are glad the media is drawing attention to the legal basis of citizenship, but this is the WRONG way: with DECEPTION. We provide the video here in order to comment on LIES by Velshi about the Fourteenth Amendment. These lies about citizenship are so pervasive we need to point them out and correct them so they do not ever repeat again. His tactics in this video are part of a GRAND SCHEME by statists and the legally ignorant to ROB you of your private property using sophistry and equivocation as described in:
PROOF OF FACTS: Why the government CAN’T AND WON’T RECOGNIZE PRIVATE OF FOREIGN and ONLY RECOGNIZES PUBLIC and DOMESTIC, SEDM
https://sedm.org/proof-of-facts-why-the-government-cant-and-wont-recognize-private-of-foreign-and-only-recognizes-public-and-domestic/
In all fairness, Velshi is certainly not the first news anchor to engage in such LIES. Sean Hannity on Fox lied about citizenship in trying to apply the provisions of 8 U.S.C. §1401 to Fourteenth Amendment citizenship. Fourteenth Amendment citizenship is NOT equivalent to 8 U.S.C. §1401 citizenship.
The Fourteenth Amendment reads in pertinent part:
Fourteenth Amendment
Section 1. Rights GuaranteedAll persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
[SOURCE: https://law.justia.com/constitution/us/amendment-14/]
In this video, Velshi falsely states at 2:40:
“Now a little bit of history. The Fourteenth Amendment was ratified in 1868 to address this countries original sin of slavery, to reverse previous law and court precedent that denied the citizenship and basic humanity of nearly 4 million formerly enslaved people. But it was Wong’s case that made it clear that the Fourteenth Amendment applied to ALMOST, ALMOST all people born on American soil regardless of race or ancestry. The reason I say “ALMOST” is that the Fourteenth Amendment did not apply to native Americans until the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924.“
[Minute 2:40]
This is a gross misrepresentation of the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924 and of the Fourteenth Amendment.
- Congress CANNOT by legislation AMEND, EXPAND, REPEAL or even DEFINE terms in any part of the constitution, INCLUDING the Fourteenth Amendment.
- The Indian Citizenship Act of 1924 merely EXPANDED those included under 8 U.S.C. §1401, which deals ONLY with territorial citizens such as those in Puerto Rico. This act was also called the “Snyder Act”.
- A SUBSET of the language of the Fourteenth Amendment does appear in 8 U.S.C. §1401, but it relies on a DIFFERENT “United States” that is MUTUALLY exclusive to the CONSTITUTIONAL “United States”.
3.1. The “United States” under Title 8 of the U.S. Code relates ONLY to territories and not constitutional states.
3.2. The “United States” for the purpose of the Fourteenth Amendment includes areas under the exclusive jurisdiction of states mentioned in the Constitution and EXCLUDES areas under the exclusive jurisdiction of Congress such as territories. - Thus, one can be “subject to the jurisdiction of the United States” in the context of the CONSTITUTIONAL “United States***” while NOT being “subject to the jurisdiction of the United States**” (federal territory) in 8 U.S.C. §1401.
Understanding this issue correctly is the HEART at proving you aren’t subject to the income tax, because territorial citizens are the ONLY ones EXPRESSLY made subject to the income tax in 26 C.F.R. §1.1-1(a). Fourteenth Amendment POLITICAL/CONSTITUTIONAL “citizens* of the United States***” are NOT.
26 C.F.R. § 1.1-1 – Income tax on individuals.
§ 1.1-1 Income tax on individuals.
(c) Who is a citizen.
Every person born or naturalized in the United States and subject to its jurisdiction is a citizen. For other rules governing the acquisition of citizenship, see chapters 1 and 2 of title III of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1401–1459). For rules governing loss of citizenship, see sections 349 to 357, inclusive, of such Act (8 U.S.C. 1481–1489), Schneider v. Rusk, (1964) 377 U.S. 163, and Rev. Rul. 70-506, C.B. 1970-2, 1. For rules pertaining to persons who are nationals but not citizens at birth, e.g., a person born in American Samoa, see section 308 of such Act (8 U.S.C. 1408). For special rules applicable to certain expatriates who have lost citizenship with a principal purpose of avoiding certain taxes, see section 877. A foreigner who has filed his declaration of intention of becoming a citizen but who has not yet been admitted to citizenship by a final order of a naturalization court is an alien.
Do you see the Fourteenth Amendment listed in the above definition? NO! The only “citizen” listed is that in 8 U.S.C. §1401, which is POLITICAL/TERRITORIAL citizens* born on federal territory not within the exclusive jurisdiction of a constitutional state. Further, the DC appeals court said NO STATUTE is needed to describe Fourteenth Amendment POLITICAL/CONSTITUTIONAL “citizens* or the United States***” because the Fourteenth Amendment already DOES:
“Finally, this Court is mindful of the years of past practice in which territorial citizenship has been treated as a statutory [PRIVILEGE!], and not a constitutional, right. In the unincorporated territories of Puerto Rico, Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and the Northern Mariana Islands, birthright citizenship was conferred upon their inhabitants by various statutes many years after the United States acquired them. See Amicus Br. at 10-11. If the Citizenship Clause guaranteed birthright citizenship in unincorporated territories, these statutes [8 U.S.C. §1401-1459 mentioned in 26 C.F.R. §1.1-1(c)] would have been unnecessary.”
Thus, FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT citizenship is a RIGHT that cannot be taken away per the U.S. Supreme Court in Afroyim v. Rusk while 8 U.S.C. §1401 is a Congressionally granted STATUTORY PRIVILEGE that can be taken away upon any whim Congress wants. Velshi wants you to believe they are the SAME thing. This is the LIE of equivocation. The fact that Congress can TAKE AWAY something is an affirmative exercise of the “right to exclude” aspect of ownership, demonstrating that the CIVIL STATUS “national and citizen* of the United States**” (federal zone) is a Congressionally created right and therefore PUBLIC PROPERTY of its creator.
The Court today holds that the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment has no application to Bellei [an 8 U.S.C. §1401(a) POLITICAL/TERRITORIAL citizen whose parents were Fourteenth Amendment citizens]. The Court first notes that Afroyim was essentially a case construing the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Since the Citizenship Clause declares that: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States . . . are citizens of the United States . . . ,” the Court reasons that the protections against involuntary expatriation declared in Afroyim do not protect all American citizens, but only those “born or naturalized in the United States[*** states of the Union, not federal territories or abroad].” Afroyim, the argument runs, was naturalized in this country so he was protected by the Citizenship Clause, but Bellei, since he acquired his American citizenship at birth in Italy as a foreign-born child of an American citizen, was neither born nor naturalized in the United States[*** states of the Union in the constitution, not federal territory] and, hence, falls outside the scope of the Fourteenth Amendment guarantees declared in Afroyim. One could hardly call this a generous reading of the 839*839 great purposes the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted to bring about.
While conceding that Bellei is an American citizen, the majority states: “He simply is not a Fourteenth-Amendment-first-sentence citizen.” Therefore, the majority reasons, the congressional revocation of his citizenship is not barred by the Constitution. I cannot accept the Court’s conclusion that the Fourteenth Amendment protects the citizenship of some Americans and not others.
[Rogers v. Bellei, 401 U.S. 815, 838-839 (1971); SOURCE: https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=3117430109405641226]
Further, under the rules of statutory construction and interpretation, Fourteenth Amendment citizens are therefore PURPOSEFULLY excluded from the operation of the income tax.
“When a statute includes an explicit definition, we must follow that definition, even if it varies from that term’s ordinary meaning. Meese v. Keene, 481 U.S. 465, 484-485 (1987) (“It is axiomatic that the statutory definition of the term excludes unstated meanings of that term”); Colautti v. Franklin, 439 U.S. at 392-393, n. 10 (“As a rule, `a definition which declares what a term “means” . . . excludes any meaning that is not stated'”); Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Lenroot, 323 U.S. 490, 502 (1945); Fox v. Standard Oil Co. of N.J., 294 U.S. 87, 95-96 (1935) (Cardozo, J.); see also 2A N. Singer, Sutherland on Statutes and Statutory Construction § 47.07, p. 152, and n. 10 (5th ed. 1992) (collecting cases). That is to say, the statute, read “as a whole,” post at 998 [530 U.S. 943] (THOMAS, J., dissenting), leads the reader to a definition. That definition does not include the Attorney General’s restriction — “the child up to the head.” Its words, “substantial portion,” indicate the contrary.”
You don’t need to take our word for it on this subject. Compare what Velshi says to the following:
- How You are Illegally Deceived or Compelled to Transition from Being a POLITICAL Citizen to a CIVIL Citizen: By Confusing the Two Contexts, Family Guardian
https://famguardian.org/Subjects/LawAndGovt/Citizenship/HowCitObfuscated.htm - Truth in Taxation Hearings Website, Section 14: Citizenship
https://truthintaxationhearings.famguardian.org - Why You are a “national”, “state national”, and Constitutional but not Statutory Citizen, Form #05.006
https://sedm.org/Forms/05-MemLaw/WhyANational.pdf - 8 U.S.C. 1401
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1408 - The Annotated Fourteenth Amendment, Justia
https://law.justia.com/constitution/us/amendment-14/ - Citizenship Status v. Tax Status, Form #10.011
http://sedm.org/Forms/10-Emancipation/CitizenshipStatusVTaxStatus/CitizenshipVTaxStatus.htm - COPILOT: WHICH “citizen” in 26 C.F.R. 1.1-1?, SEDM
https://sedm.org/copilot-which-citizen-in-26-c-f-r-1-1-1/ - BING ChatGPT: Proof that the “citizen” the income tax is imposed on is not a Fourteenth Amendment “citizen of the United States”, SEDM
https://sedm.org/bingchatgpt-proof-that-the-citizen-the-income-tax-is-imposed-on-is-not-a-fourteenth-amendment-citizen-of-the-united-states/
So there is some magnanimous posturing going on by Velshi to mislead you:
- He pretends to want to appeal the illegal immigrant community that they can come up here and have an anchorbaby, and later use that as an excuse to get their own citizenship.
- In the process he EQUOVICATES in order to deceive you into believing that CIVIL/DOMICILED Citizens**+D domiciled within the exclusive jurisdiction of Congress are the same as POLITICAL/CONSTITUTIONAL Fourteenth Amendment citizens, when the two groups in fact are MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE and non-overlapping.
- In doing the equivocation, he is also deceiving you into believing that Congress has civil legislative jurisdiction within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Constitution. This is a violation of the separation of powers at the heart of the Constitution. See:
Government Conspiracy to Destroy the Separation of Powers, Form #05.023
https://sedm.org/Forms/05-MemLaw/SeparationOfPowers.pdf
The result of the above is that you are a TAX SLAVE on your WORLDWIDE earnings called a CIVIL/DOMICILED STATUTORY “U.S. person” in 26 U.S.C. §7701(a)(30) who works in the Department of the Treasury for the Secretary of the Treasury. Velcome to the federal plantation, fellow comrade cow! Don’t believe us? Look at the evidence for yourself:
How American Nationals Volunteer to Pay Income Tax, Form #08.024
https://sedm.org/Forms/08-PolicyDocs/HowYouVolForIncomeTax.pdf
He’s doin a damn good job playing “useful idiot” for socialists in what Mark Twain famously called “The District of Criminals”. Why would he do this? Because:’
- The income tax originally only applied to corporation franchises.
- He works for a corporation franchise.
- Corporations have lobbyists and corporate counsel but the small guy doesn’t.
- Corporations always want to shift the tax burden AWAY from themselves so they pay less or not tax. This means the SMALL guy ends up holding the bag.
- Anything they can say to shift the tax burden away from them and onto you is therefore in their best financial interests.
- The Sixteenth Amendment congressional debates CONFIRM the all the above. Read them for yourself.
Sixteenth Amendment Congressional Debates, Exhibit #02.007
https://sedm.org/Exhibits/EX02.007.pdf
SCUM BAG! He’s not “informing you”. He’s recruiting you into slavery to pay off an endless mountain of public debt created by an unconstitutional fiat currency system that is a product of national emergency, as documented in:
The Money Scam, Form #05.041
https://sedm.org/Forms/05-MemLaw/MoneyScam.pdf
It’s ironic that he claims to want o prevent slavery and yet promotes it with his own false views about the difference between Fourteenth Amendment POLITICAL/CONSTITUTIONAL Citizens and 8 U.S.C. §1401 POLITICAL/TERRITORIAL “citizens* of the United States**”.
For much more on the DECEPTION he is engaging in and how to lawfully ESCAPE it, see:
Foreign Status Information Group (FTSIG) Website
https://ftsig.org
Lastly, for more on the subject of birthright citizenship, see:
- The Case Against Birthright Citizenship, SEDM Exhibit #01.021-Heritage Foundation, SEDM
https://sedm.org/the-case-against-birthright-citizenship-heritage-foundation/ - The Terrible Truth About Birthright Citizenship, SEDM Exhibit #01.020-Stefan Molyneyx
https://sedm.org/the-terrible-truth-about-birthright-citizenship-stefan-molyneyx/