One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
Cruz is bogus all around
Page <prev 2 of 10 next> last>>
Feb 8, 2016 05:54:16   #
Loki Loc: Georgia
 
ron vrooman wrote:
Loki,
I enlisted therefore the honorific does not fit. Just Ron.
I re posted it as the by line states.
I go with Pubius Huldah on this one. He is not a natural born regardless of Canadian birth because it follows the father just like obozo is not a lawful potus. Neither is Rubio.

One does not need to be an American to recognize the law. The Frenchy got it right

It is of no consequence where the mother was born as far as the Constitution is concerned, or what Canada says or anything else. It takes an amendment to make that change.
I think it should be the child of two natural born Americans is Constitutionally qualified.

the wife of cruz was on the committee and voted to have a North American Constitution.
Loki, br I enlisted therefore the honorific does n... (show quote)


Ron, there has been NO Supreme Court decision on this matter. What there have been are 3 presidents and five candidates, over a period of 150 years who have not met your definition of Natural Born. I provided you with the Canadian Law you claim disallows dual citizenship. You didn't even read it. I provided you with the US Law that makes Cruz a natural born citizen and you did not read it. I provided you with the names of the above mentioned presidents and candidates who did or do not meet your criteria and you ignored it. Publius Huldah is a questionable source. Don't you think that sometime in 150 years, one of those people I mentioned would have been found "not natural born?" British Law at the time of the Revolution provided that persons born to British subjects anywhere in the world were themselves British from birth. British Law formed the basis of US law much more than the writings of Emmerich de Vattel. So did the works of John Locke.
By your definition, no Native American Indian ever born would ever be a Natural born, or even a citizen, because they were made citizens by an Act of Congress in 1924, rather than a Constitutional Amendment. James Buchanan could never have been president because he was elected prior to the passage of the 14th Amendment, and Chester Arthur in the 1880s would have violated the 12th Amendment because he was not only president, he was also Vice-President, born to an Irish father, probably in Canada. His birthplace of VA that he claimed has been completely debunked, and the other one in Vermont was only a couple of miles from Canada at a time when the border was ill-defined, and he may well have been born in Canada, because his Irish citizen father was employed in Canada part of the time and maintained a residence there where he and Arthur's mother resided sometimes. John McCain was born in Panama before the Zone was considered a US territory. He, along with every other US citizen born there between 1915 and 1935, were grandfathered in as being born on US soil. George Romney, presidential candidate in the sixties, and Mitt's daddy, was born in Mexico and his status was NEVER ONCE seriously questioned. Even if Obama had been born in Kenya, he would still be eligible. As much as I hate that bastard, he is considered natural born. Congress was given power to determine laws of naturalization in Article I Section 8. At the time, the meaning of naturalization meant they could decide the requirements for citizenship. Meanings of words change over the years. The "well-regulated" part of the Second Amendment relates to proper functioning more so than Federal Control. I doubt if a denizen of 1890's America would appreciate being referred to as living in the Homosexual Nineties, yet that would be the assumed meaning of "Gay Nineties" today. Congress has held the power to determine what constitutes natural born since 1789. They have done so numerous times starting in 1790. The re-statment of the law that was in effect at the time of Cruz's birth stated that he was a US citizen at birth because he was born to one US citizen parent. There are 2 types of citizens: There is natural born and naturalized. If you are born to a US citizen parent you are born subject to the jurisdiction of the US and are natural born. You can argue this point all day long while using questionable sources who have cherry picked legal opinions, but the law is what it is. One reason the Supreme Court has been so reluctant to tackle these natural born cases is because Constitutionally most of them are not in it's purview.

Reply
Feb 8, 2016 06:14:55   #
Super Dave Loc: Realville, USA
 
I think it odd that a few people gather around and think they see something in the constitution or laws that nobody else sees.

It is odd when the SCOTUS, or any other small group 'discover' something in the constitution or legislation that has somehow been kept secret for so long.

Not being a legal scholar, I tend to rely on the plain words of the constitution and the law, and those that I find respectable within the field when the words are not clear.

In either case, Cruz and McCain are both eligible to become POTUS.

Reply
Feb 8, 2016 06:23:11   #
Loki Loc: Georgia
 
Super Dave wrote:
I think it odd that a few people gather around and think they see something in the constitution or laws that nobody else sees.

It is odd when the SCOTUS, or any other small group 'discover' something in the constitution or legislation that has somehow been kept secret for so long.

Not being a legal scholar, I tend to rely on the plain words of the constitution and the law, and those that I find respectable within the field when the words are not clear.

In either case, Cruz and McCain are both eligible to become POTUS.
I think it odd that a few people gather around and... (show quote)


Regarding Cruz, there is nothing to discover. His natural born status is defined by US law that has been in effect since 1790. The Act of 1952 was merely a re-statement of this legislation. The 1790 was "repealed and replaced" by the act of 1795, which actually kept most of 1790 intact via notation, and was itself repealed and re-stated in 1804 or 5, again in the 1840s, and so on up until the 1952 legislation that was operant US law at the time of Cruz's birth.

Reply
Feb 8, 2016 06:25:18   #
Super Dave Loc: Realville, USA
 
Loki wrote:
Regarding Cruz, there is nothing to discover. His natural born status is defined by US law that has been in effect since 1790. The Act of 1952 was merely a re-statement of this legislation. The 1790 was "repealed and replaced" by the act of 1795, which actually kept most of 1790 intact via notation, and was itself repealed and re-stated in 1804 or 5, again in the 1840s, and so on up until the 1952 legislation that was operant US law at the time of Cruz's birth.
I agree.

However, never be surprised at what the SCOTUS can dream up in order to make themselves feel personally more powerful.

Reply
Feb 8, 2016 08:05:36   #
Liberty Tree
 
ron vrooman wrote:
Ted Cruz is NOT a Legal U.S. Citizen at all

© JB Williams

jb.uspu@gmail.com



The debate over whether or not Senator Ted Cruz is eligible for the U.S. Presidency is about to end. It has now been confirmed that Senator Ted Cruz is neither a “U.S. natural born Citizen” or a “legal U.S. citizen.”

According to all relative legal citizenship documentation available at present, Senator Ted Cruz was born Rafael Edward Cruz, a legal citizen of Canada on December 22, 1970 and maintained his legal Canadian citizenship from birth until May 14, 2014, 43 years later.

The Cruz Campaign for the U.S. Presidency has claimed that Senator Ted Cruz was a “citizen at birth” via his U.S. mother and a “dual citizen” of both Canada and the United States in 1970 and that by renouncing his Canadian citizenship in 2014, he would become eligible for the Oval Office.

There are several problems with this claimÂ… which make the claim false
1.“citizen at birth” is a 14th Amendment naturalization term based upon “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.”

Senator Cruz was born in Canada, subject to the jurisdiction of Canada. Further, any U.S. citizen by virtue of the 14th Amendment only, is a “citizen” and not a “natural born Citizen,” as you will see below. (Source is Cornell Law on the 14th)
1.“dual citizenship” was prohibited in Canada in December 1970. (Source is Canadian Law)



From May 22, 1868 until December 31, 1946, all residents of Canada were British subjects. There was no such thing as a Canadian citizen or Canadian citizenship until January 1, 1947.



From January 1, 1947 until February 15, 1977, Canadian law prohibited “dual citizenship.” Foreign parents giving birth to a child in Canada in 1970 were forced to choose between Canadian citizenship only, or citizenship in another country, and to declare that with Canadian officials at the time of birth. The parents of Ted Cruz chose and declared “Canadian citizenship” for Rafael Edward Cruz.


1.United States laws make it possible to be a legal U.S. citizen by only the following meansÂ…



a) NATURAL BORN CITIZEN – “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 country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent.” (The Natural Law as understood by the Founders in Article II of the US Constitution)



b) NATIVE BORN CITIZEN - All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. (The 14th Amendment definition for “citizen”)



c) NATURALIZED CITIZEN - the legal act or process by which a non-citizen in a country may acquire citizenship or nationality of that country. It may be done by a statute, without any effort on the part of the individual (aka anchor baby), or it may involve an application and approval by legal authorities, (such as a Consular Report of Birth Abroad (CRBA) form filed with the US State Department at the time of birth). (This includes “anchor baby” or “citizen at birth” born here or abroad, under the 14th) Source is U.S. State Department


1.“dual citizens” are prohibited from being “natural born Citizens” as it pertains to Article II requirements for the Oval Office.



As the stated purpose of the Article II “natural born Citizen” requirement for the Oval Office is to prevent anyone with foreign allegiance at birth from ever occupying the Oval Office, and all “dual citizens” at birth are born with “dual national allegiance” at birth. The mere condition of “dual citizen at birth” would be a direct violation of the known purpose and intent of the natural born Citizen requirement in Article II. Source is a letter from Founder John Jay in proposing the NBC requirement for t....

Now, Senator Ted Cruz has repeatedly stated that he has never “naturalized” to the United States, which eliminated the possibility that Ted Cruz is a “naturalized” U.S. Citizen.

Senator Ted Cruz has also documented the fact that he was not a “native born citizen” of the United States, but rather a “native born citizen” of Canada on December 22, 1970, who maintained his legal Canadian citizenship until May 14, 2014.

The Harvard opinion letter written by two of Senator Cruz’s Harvard friends, Neal Katyal & Paul Clement, a mere “commentary” on the subject, relies upon the 14th Amendment naturalized citizen at birth concept, despite the fact that Ted Cruz was not “born in or under the jurisdiction of the United States,” was never “naturalized” to the United States, and completely ignoring the fact that Canada prohibited “dual citizenship” in 1970, as well as the fact that “dual citizenship” alone would prevent him from “natural born U.S.” status.

All of this explains why Senator Ted Cruz has no legal U.S. citizenship documentation of any kind. He is not a “natural born” – “native born” or “naturalized” citizen of the United States. Because someone must be one of the three in order to be a legal citizen of the United States, Senator Ted Cruz cannot possibly be a “legal U.S. citizen” of any form.

Only days ago, a 17-year-old first time voter at a New Hampshire town hall meeting for Senator Ted Cruz asked a very reasonable question… “How and why, until recently, were you unaware that you were a Cana...

As the young man explained, this is not an eligibility question, but a credibility question… which Senator Cruz refused to answer, preferring instead to regurgitate the talking points carefully crafted by his Harvard friends and eventually, shouting the young man down, after a Cruz fan in the audience shouted “better a Canadian than a Kenyan!” (VIDEO) Meanwhile, a growing number of Constitutional Law Professors agree, “Cruz is NOT eligible.”

Of course, Senator Marco Rubio is also “ineligible,” as a “native born citizen at birth” by virtue of 14th Amendment “anchor baby” policies only.

In the end, the only possible way to consider Senator Ted Cruz eligible for the Oval Office is if every “undocumented resident alien” is eligible for the Oval Office, which I personally believe is the real agenda of both political parties, as they work to meld the USA into the global commune where there is no legal difference between “natural born Americans” and “undocumented aliens.”

The fact that so many Americans do not know or care to know the truth about the Constitutional “natural born Citizen” requirement for the Oval Office, demonstrates just how far down the road of “hope and change” for the destruction of the Constitutional Republic, the enemy within has already achieved.

Soon, “natural born Americans” will be in the American minority… and they will be ruled by foreigners who have no legal U.S. citizenship at all.
Ted Cruz is NOT a Legal U.S. Citizen at all br br... (show quote)


You Cruz haters can beat this dead horse all you want but you cannot give it life. Cruz is a natural born citizen from birth and has been recognized as such by several states. I wish it would go to court but you would not accept a court decision either.

Reply
Feb 8, 2016 10:07:55   #
ron vrooman Loc: Now OR, born NV
 
Good Job Worried,
Great research and information. She is a piece of work.
As an attorney the truth is elusive, the argument is the task. She does great on muslims and the 1st. Terrible in defense of the fraud of the original 13th. She no longer posts what I share with her blog, :(


Worried for our children wrote:
“Publius Huldah” (AKA Joanna Ruth Martin) is a Florida lawyer. She has a degree from the Florida State University College of Law and was admitted to the Florida Bar in 1973, #168769 . In 1974, she was an Army JAG lawyer in Florida, Captain Joanna R. Martin

In 1982-84, she was an assistant attorney general in Tallahassee, Florida. In 1986-87, she was an attorney with Harris & Martin in Stuart, FL. This information is available by running a Google search on her maiden name, Joanna R. Martin. She is 70 years old and apparently is (or was) married to Frank Scutari of Martin Co. FL.

Scutari was arrested in 1985 on federal accessory charges to an armed car robbery in San Francisco. According to the book, Terrorism in America, Frank Scutari pleaded a 3-year sentence. It lists his age as 40 in 1985. That makes him 70 now, which is the same age as one Frank Scutari of Moss, TN. FrankÂ’s brother Richard pleaded a 60-year sentence. Joanna Martin also lived in Martin Co. and Port Salerno, FL in the mid 1980s. ScutariÂ’s address in the articles below is 4818 Grouper Av, Port Salerno, FL. A search of that address found:

Frank Scutari: F J Scutari; Frank J Scutari
Listings (Early 70s): Moss, TN; Stuart, FL; Port Salerno, FL
Family: Amy Alicia Scutari; Bret Harding Scutari; Fred Joseph Scutari; Jennifer C Scutari; Kelly C Hannouche
Notice the middle initial J, same as Frank J. Scutari of Moss, TN. Also notice the Moss, TN and Stuart, FL cities (same as Joanna Martin), as well as the name Bret Scutari (JoannaÂ’s son).

Here is Joanna MartinÂ’s listing for Port Salerno, FL:

Joanna R Martin: Joanna Ruth Martin; Joanne Martin; Joanne R Martin; Joanna Scutari; Joanne Scutari
Listings (Early 70s): Moss, TN; Tallahassee, FL; Port Salerno, FL; North Palm Beach, FL; Stuart, FL; Jupiter, FL
Here is Joanna ScutariÂ’s listing for Port Salerno, FL:

Joanna Scutari: Joanne Scutari; Joanna R Martin
Listings: Moss, TN
Conclusion: Frank Scutari mentioned in Terrorism in America is married to Joanna Scutari, AKA “Publius Huldah.”

(Palm Beach Post–Feb. 21, 1985) “Ex-Martin High Teacher’s Arrest Shocks Officials”

(Spokane Chronicle–Feb. 21, 1985) “Contractor Held in neo-Nazi Plot”

(The Silent Brotherhood: Inside America’s Racist Underground) Frank Scutari in “Epilogue: Blood Will Flow”

(Sun Sentinel–Mar. 6, 1985) “Neo-Nazi Case Suspect Freed”

(Associated Press Archive–Apr. 10, 1985) “Today’s Focus: Violent Neo-Nazi Group Apparently Smashed”

(Palm Beach Post–May 2, 1986) “Scutari Stymies Murder Investigation”

(Terrorism in America: Pipe Bombs and Pipe Dreams, Smith)

And one final note on Publius Halduh (Joanna Ruth Martin) the problem with her is she is pretending to be something she is not, a Constitutional Scholar. She is pretending her Law Degree is in Constitutional LAW and it is not. She continually makes false claims by using misdirected quotes from the Founders notes, letters and documents. I can provide a few examples if you'd like....
“Publius Huldah” (AKA Joanna Ruth Martin) is a Flo... (show quote)

Reply
Feb 8, 2016 10:20:16   #
ron vrooman Loc: Now OR, born NV
 
Detest in my case.
His wife is a new world orderer, wants a North American Constitution.
He acts like a scum bag. Similar outlook as Nixon and obozo if the POTUS says so it is law.


Liberty Tree wrote:
You Cruz haters can beat this dead horse all you want but you cannot give it life. Cruz is a natural born citizen from birth and has been recognized as such by several states. I wish it would go to court but you would not accept a court decision either.

Reply
Feb 8, 2016 10:48:13   #
Loki Loc: Georgia
 
ron vrooman wrote:
Detest in my case.
His wife is a new world orderer, wants a North American Constitution.
He acts like a scum bag. Similar outlook as Nixon and obozo if the POTUS says so it is law.


Where do you get the info that his wife wants a North American Constitution? I am not a committed Cruz supporter, I just hate all this misinformation being bruited about.

Reply
Feb 8, 2016 12:03:08   #
sisu77
 
Super Dave wrote:
I've read the law. The law of the land is on Cruz's side, just like it was on McCain's side. There is no serious person questioning that truth.

You declare me PINO? If I knew what you meant, it still wouldn't matter, because you aren't in a position to decide things about me.

But feel free to continue your temper tantrum.


Stupid, the evidence keeps coming in and Ted's mother was a Canadian citizen when Ted was born in Canada. Ted's father even said in two interviews that his wife and son were Canadian citizens. And the 1974 voting records shows that both of them were Canadian citizens. Get over it.

Reply
Feb 8, 2016 12:04:49   #
sisu77
 
Loki wrote:
Where do you get the info that his wife wants a North American Constitution? I am not a committed Cruz supporter, I just hate all this misinformation being bruited about.


Quit lying then.

Reply
Feb 8, 2016 12:19:26   #
Loki Loc: Georgia
 
sisu77 wrote:
Stupid, the evidence keeps coming in and Ted's mother was a Canadian citizen when Ted was born in Canada. Ted's father even said in two interviews that his wife and son were Canadian citizens. And the 1974 voting records shows that both of them were Canadian citizens. Get over it.


The only place the evidence keeps coming in is your otherwise empty head. How to explain to a moron that the National Enquirer is not a source? How to explain that insisting that 2 imaginary interviews occurred is not evidence? Answer, you cannot. There is a reason it is called invincible ignorance, and you are it's poster child.

Reply
Feb 8, 2016 12:42:04   #
nwtk2007 Loc: Texas
 
Super Dave wrote:
I've read the law. The law of the land is on Cruz's side, just like it was on McCain's side. There is no serious person questioning that truth.

You declare me PINO? If I knew what you meant, it still wouldn't matter, because you aren't in a position to decide things about me.

But feel free to continue your temper tantrum.


If the facts as stated by vrooman are true, and Cruz was born in Canada and declared to be a Canadian Citizen, then he has a point.

McCains father was, I believe, and American citizen and when he was born on the US military base, subject to the US laws and regulations.

They are in no way comparable.

Reply
Feb 8, 2016 13:50:12   #
ron vrooman Loc: Now OR, born NV
 
I do not have total recall. I read she was a member of a Canadian, multinational Committee, commission, counsel studying researching a North American Constitution and she voted for it.
Best I can do. I don't invent this stuff.
I looked it up.


Loki wrote:
Where do you get the info that his wife wants a North American Constitution? I am not a committed Cruz supporter, I just hate all this misinformation being bruited about.

Reply
Feb 8, 2016 13:51:32   #
Loki Loc: Georgia
 
nwtk2007 wrote:
If the facts as stated by vrooman are true, and Cruz was born in Canada and declared to be a Canadian Citizen, then he has a point.

McCains father was, I believe, and American citizen and when he was born on the US military base, subject to the US laws and regulations.

They are in no way comparable.

Once more, Cruz's mother was an American citizen. US military bases are considered foreign soil, they are not like embassies. The Canal Zone was not a US territory the year of McCain's birth. He was grandfathered in in 1937, along with everyone else born there since 1915. 8 USC specifies that a person born to a US citizen mother is a citizen from birth. That is the definition of a natural born citizen, period. There are natural born citizens, and there are citizens who require naturalization. Ted Cruz, by virtue of his mother's US citizenship, is a birth citizen requiring NO naturalization procedure, i.e., natural born. Unlike people who get their legal opinions from the Weekly World News, US LAW states that one US citizen parent is all that is required.
The claims that Canada did not allow dual citizenship in 1970 are bullshit.
I have read the Canadian statutes they supposedly emanate from and there is nothing of the sort in there. I just posted the statutes in question. Read them for yourself. The US Law stating that Cruz was and is natural born may be found in 8USC, in the 1400 section. It has been around since 1790. The 1790 law was repealed and replaced by the 1795 law which was repealed and replaced by the 1805 law and so on till 1952 when the re-statement that gives Cruz natural born status was promulgated. People do not understand legalese. When a statute is repealed and replaced, frequently, much of the statute is carried forward by means of notation, i.e.,except in this or that case. The 1790 law and the 1952 law are not that much different, when taken in their entirety.
Before I forget, here is the link about Military bases and US territory.


http://military.findlaw.com/family-employment-housing/military-children-born-abroad.html

Another fairy tale is that Cruz is not a US citizen because there does not seem to be a Consular Record of Birth Abroad. These forms are recommended, but have never, ever been a requirement.
Canadian law provides that anyone born in Canada is a Canadian until such time as they reach majority and can renounce, whether they like it or not.
Incontrovertible US Law states that a person born to a US citizen anywhere in the world is a natural born US citizen.
Ted Cruz was, actually, a natural born citizen of both the US and Canada.
His renunciation of Canadian Citizenship had NO EFFECT whatsoever on his natural born US status.
Of course, someone said, Cruz conspiracy theorists could have a Supreme Court decision slap them in the face and they would still believe what they please.

Those are the facts, as backed up by Canadian and US law, not by some barely literate hack writing for the National Enquirer.

Reply
Feb 8, 2016 14:06:06   #
Loki Loc: Georgia
 
ron vrooman wrote:
I do not have total recall. I read she was a member of a Canadian, multinational Committee, commission, counsel studying researching a North American Constitution and she voted for it.
Best I can do. I don't invent this stuff.
I looked it up.


Are you quite sure you looked it up? Heidi Cruz was a former member of the Council on Foreign Relations. She was an investment banker with Goldman Sachs. There was NO multinational commission studying a "North American Union" that she was a member of. She did a paper on some economic issues regarding a proposed trade agreement of some sort, that was included in this commissions findings. Nothing to do with with the CFR. Ted Cruz has taken the CFR to court and beaten them, when George Bush sided with them.
Donald Trump has had far more dealings with these bankers than either Cruz or his wife, and Ted Cruz's dealings with them were usually not friendly.

Reply
Page <prev 2 of 10 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.