Homestead

TEXAS REFUSES TO ANSWER CRUZ QUESTION

By J.B. Williams
March 30, 2016
NewsWithViews.com

It is no secret that Ted Cruz is not eligible for the Oval Office. What remains a secret to many, is why the Republican Party is allowing known frauds to appear on the Republican p**********l b****t.

In a letter dated March 10, 2016 and received by the Texas Secretary of State on March 15, 2016, The North American Law Center asking the following question:

“In light of the attached official citizenship records for Sen. Rafael Edward (Ted) Cruz in Calgary, Alberta Canada, dated December 22, 1970 (attached) and a document confirming the renunciation of his Canadian citizenship dated May 14, 2014 (attached), is it your official opinion as the Chief E******ns Officer for Texas that U.S. Senator Rafael Edward (Ted) Cruz was in fact a legal citizen of Canada in November of 2012, when he ran for, was elected and certified by the Texas Secretary of State as the new U.S. Senator representing the good people of Texas, as a legal citizen of Canada?”
As of today, March 29, 2016, Texas Secretary of State has declined to respond to this one simple question with only one possible honest answer…. YES

The official Canadian document accepting and affirming Sen. Ted Cruz’s wish to renounce his Canadian citizenship documents two very important facts…

1. Sen. Rafael Edward (Ted) Cruz became a legal citizen of Canada on December 22, 1970, the day he was born in Alberta, Ontario, Canada.
2. Sen. Rafael Edward (Ted) Cruz remained a legally documented citizen of Canada until Canada accepted his request to terminate or “renounce” his legal citizenship in Canada on May 14, 2014.
This means that Sen. Rafael Edward (Ted) Cruz was indeed a “legal citizen of Canada” when he sought a seat in the U.S. Senate in 2012 and accepted that sworn office in January of 2013. It also means that Sen. Ted Cruz defrauded Texas v**ers in 2012 by never disclosing this fact and not allowing Texas v**ers to decide whether or not they wanted a Canadian citizen to represent them in the U.S. Senate.

Today, the GOP race is looking more like a shootout at the OK Corral than a political primary process. At present, two out of seventeen GOP contenders remain in the race, Trump with 739 delegates (61.4%) and Cruz with 465 delegates (38.6%).

I find it very interesting that Cruz supporters claim that Ted is “the only one who can beat Hillary” when Ted can’t even beat Trump. I also find it very interesting that Cruz supporters claim to be “constitutionalists” who support our nation’s best “constitutionalist” – a man who was a legal citizen of Canada at birth, and remained a legal citizen of Canada until May 14, 2014, a direct violation of the U.S. Constitution regarding Oval Office eligibility.

The documented facts surrounding the legal citizenship of Ted Cruz create a serious problem not only for the Cruz p**********l campaign, but for his seat in the U.S. Senate as well.

One document alone sinks the Cruz ship… the official Canadian document accepting Senator Cruz’s request to renounce his legal citizenship in Canada. On that document, it states that Ted Cruz became a legal citizen of Canada on December 22, 1970, his date of birth, and during a time when Canada did not allow any “dual citizenship.” It also states that Ted Cruz remained a legal citizen of Canada until he officially renounced on May 14, 2014.

This document alone proves that Ted Cruz was NOT a citizen of the United States at birth, much less a “natural born Citizen” of the United States, that he was NOT a “dual citizen” at birth and that he was indeed a legal citizen of Canada in 2012, when he misled Texas v**ers in his campaign for the U.S. Senate. Texas v**ers had no idea that Ted was a legal citizen of Canada in 2012… they were misled by Ted.

In December of 2013, North American Law Center asked Ted to do the right thing in a letter. A letter which Ted Cruz has never responded to…

In March of 2015, I wrote about a Republican Party official from Texas who heard Ted Cruz state face-to-face, that neither he nor Barack Obama are eligible for the Oval Office. The name of the witness remains protected still today, due to concerns over vicious backlashes against his family from blind Cruz loyalists.

Interviewer: “Hello Mr. Cruz, it's a pleasure to meet you. My name is (redacted). I am a (redacted) County GOP Precinct Chair and you have my support and v**e. I have one question for you if I may?”
Cruz: “Sure, go ahead.”

Interviewer: “What is your understanding of how one becomes a natural born Citizen?”

Cruz: “Two citizen parents and born on the soil.”

Interviewer: “Not exactly, but as I don't have enough time to fully explain how one does become an natural born Citizen, based on your understanding, would you agree that Barack Obama is ineligible to be POTUS?”

Cruz: “I would agree.”

Interviewer: “So when we get you elected, will you expose him for the usurping fraud he is?”

Cruz: “No, my main focus will be on repealing Obamacare.”

Interviewer: “But Mr. Cruz, if he is exposed as the usurping fraud he is, everything he has done will become null and void. Everything!”

Interviewer: “At that point, Cruz reiterated his main concern, so it was obvious the conversation was over as far as Cruz was concerned. I thanked him for his time and wished him success in the runoff.”

People have written asking about this witness numerous times since. The above dialogue is held by North American Law Center in the form of a sworn affidavit. The witness is willing to go public only when Texas, a court or congress has opened an investigation on Cruz lies and fraud. Until then, they wish to remain anonymous with good reason. I have witnessed the vicious nature of Cruz supporters myself, many times now.

Because Cruz defrauded Texas in 2012 and is currently defrauding the nation in his p**********l campaign, collecting millions in a fraudulent bid for the Oval Office, we do not expect to ever receive any answer at all from the Texas Secretary of State. If we do, I will issue an update to this column immediately.

Clearly, the effort to defraud American v**ers reaches far beyond any one candidate. Rubio was also an ineligible fraud, as were Bobby Jindal and Barack Obama. The current endorsements of Cruz by Republican Party insiders like Jeb Bush, Mitt Romney, Greg Abbott and Lindsey Graham confirms what many of us already knew… Ted is a Republican Party insider and a chosen fraud intended to forever eliminate the “natural born Citizen” (NBC) clause in Article II.

Take a look at all of the Republican Party insiders who now support Cruz, a known fraud from Canada masquerading as a legal U.S. citizen with no U.S. citizenship papers whatsoever. For a single American conservative to believe that Ted is anything but a Party shill, here to finish off the NBC requirement for the Oval Office requires that American to own stock in tin foil hat theories. You’d have to not only believe in the existence of alien life forms, but i*****l a***n eligibility as well.

The statement that “Ted Cruz is NOT a legal U.S. citizen at all” is a matter of documented fact. But many Cruz fans remain unimpressed by any facts. This is largely due to the fact that many Cruz supporters are blind loyalists who believe Ted is a “chosen messiah” anointed by God to save our country, in accordance with the d******nism doctrines of Ted’s religious beliefs. Many evangelicals, who are not subscribers to the d******nism cult, have fallen for Ted just because they seek a leader who wears his Christianity on his sleeve.

Ted Cruz isn’t “anti-establishment.” Ted is a constitutionally ineligible establishment shill now openly supported by a laundry list of Republican Establishment stooges. Former Tea Party darlings like Mark Levin and Glenn Beck have lost nearly half of their listening audience by openly supporting a known fraud, Cruz. Republican Party media groups like World Net Daily, Newsmax and American Thinker are tanking with the Cruz ship Oh Canada.

Bottom line… Both parties are in deep trouble in 2016. The DNC is running two Marxists, one a criminal and the other a total crackpot… And the RNC is trying to pass off a known fraud from Canada for U.S. Commander-in-Chief.

Contrary to Cruz supporter rhetoric, none of this has anything to do with Trump. All of it is about Cruz and his habit of lying and defrauding the people. All of this is about the Republican establishment working in concert with the Democratic Party to End the American Presidency.

If you are offended by the facts… you are on the wrong side of the t***h.

© 2016 JB Williams - All Rights Reserved

http://www.newswithviews.com/JBWilliams/williams330.htm

lpnmajor Loc: Arkansas

The t***h IS out there, it DOES have to do with aliens - just not aliens from outer space. :lol:

Loki Loc: Georgia

I don't know why I bother. Cruz was a citizen of Canada by birth, and a natural born citizen of the US by birth. I don't know why it is so hard for people to look up US v Wong Kim Ark 1898, in which the Court says that "citizen at birth" and "natural born" are the same thing, nor can I fathom why these same people are incapable of reading a link I provided, to 8 USC section 1401 sub section (g ), which states that a child born to a US citizen parent abroad is a citizen at birth. They insist on clinging to Minor v Happersatt, which was decided 24 years before Wong Kim Ark. Cruz meets the standard for citizen at birth, therefore, he is natural born.
Black's Law, which has been used as an authoritative cite in more than 600 Supreme Court decisions since 1891, also agrees that born to a US citizen parent meets the standard for natural born. When a baby is born to a US parent who is temporarily out of the country, it is a natural born citizen.

Perhaps you can point me to the place where a person with dual citizenship is ineligible, or that a natural born citizen cannot possess a dual citizenship. A Jew is automatically an Israeli. A Jew born in Canada is considered a natural born citizen of both countries. Had Cruz's mother been Jewish, you folks would have really had a field day.
You base your entire theory of eligibility on one Supreme Court decision that has since been modified, and ignore all case law since then.

Super Dave Loc: Realville, USA

Hahaha... Yeah.. It's no secret.. That's why nobody with a 6th grade education believes it..

PeterS

Gosh, if only Ted could be disqualified. That way it would leave the path clear for ole what's his face? And hey, if you weren't born in this country can you still be first lady?

Homestead

Eligibility under U.S. Constitution Article II Section 1Original Citizenship Grandfather Clause (GFC)or Natural Born Citizenship Clause (NBC) or were they Fraudsand Unconstitutionally and Illegally Seated as Presidentby: CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret), Lehigh Valley PA USAOriginally Compiled: 16 Feb 2009 — Last Updated 2 Jan 2014http://www.protectourliberty.org
Note: For Natural Born Citizenship (NBC) clause status per natural law and the law of nations and relevant U.S.Supreme Court rulings such as Venus (1814), Minor v Happersett (1875), and Perkins v Elg (1939); it is not wherethe parents were born that is controlling but whether or not the both parents were Citizens of the United States(via birth or naturalization) at the time of the birth of their child in the USA.Both parents must be U.S. Citizenswhen their child is born in the USA for that child to be a “natural born Citizen” of the USA. It is important to notethat until recent times foreign born women gained naturalized status upon marrying a U.S. Citizen husband orupon the naturalization of the husband under the legal concept of citizenship fusion in a marriage. TheCitizenship of the wife was always legally fused to that of her husband until more recent times.
1.
George WASHINGTON – covered by Article II Grandfather Clause (GFC) –
was born on 22 Feb 1732 in VA.2.
John ADAMS – covered by Article II Grandfather Clause (GFC) –
was born on 30 Oct 1735 in MA.3.
Thomas JEFFERSON – covered by Article II Grandfather Clause (GFC) –
was born on 13 Apr 1743 in VA.4.
James MADISON – covered by Article II Grandfather Clause (GFC) –
was born on 16 Mar 1751 in VA.5.
James MONROE – covered by Article II Grandfather Clause (GFC) –
was born in 1758 in VA.6.
John Quincy ADAMS – covered by Article II Grandfather Clause (GFC)
– was born in 1767 in MA.7.
Andrew JACKSON – covered by Article II Grandfather Clause (GFC) –
was born in 1767 in Carolinas.8.
Martin VAN BUREN – Article II (NBC) both parents Citizens when he was born –
was born in 1782 in NY. This was the firstPresident qualified under the NBC clause. He was born in the USA to two Citizen parents. His parentswere original Citizens who gained their citizenship by adhering to the Revolution in 1776.9.
William Henry HARRISON – covered by Article II Grandfather Clause (GFC) –
was born in 1773 in VA.10.
John TYLER – Article II (NBC) both parents Citizens when he was born
– was born in 1790 in VA.11.
James K. POLK – Article II (NBC) both parents Citizens when he was born –
was born in 1795 in NC.12.
Zachary TAYLOR – Article II (NBC) both parents Citizens when he was born –
was born in 1784 in VA.13.
Millard FILLMORE – Article II (NBC) both parents Citizens when he was born –
was born in 1800 in NY.14.
Franklin PIERCE – Article II (NBC) both parents Citizens when he was born –
was born in 1804 in NY.15.
James BUCHANAN – Article II (NBC) both parents Citizens when he was born –
was born in 1791 in PA. His father JamesSr. was foreign born (Irish) who came to Pennsylvania in 1783. His parents married circa 1788, By thetime James Jr. was born in 1791 his father had already become a large land owner and a naturalized Citizenof the Sovereign Commonwealth of PA via the process outlined in the PA 1776 Constitution. He was alarge land owner and to own land in PA one had to “naturalize” under the process set forth in the PA 1776Constitution, i.e., take the Oath of Allegiance and live in the state for one year. In James Sr.’s case he wasliving in PA for 8 years prior to James Jr. being born. Thus James Sr. was a Citizen of the United States by being a Citizen of one of the original 13 colonies. Having a foreign born parent is OK if the foreign born parent has become a naturalized Citizen of the U.S. prior to the child being born.
16.
Abraham LINCOLN – Article II (NBC) both parents Citizens when he was born –
was born in 1809 in KY.17.
Andrew JOHNSON – Article II (NBC) both parents Citizens when he was born –
was born in 1808 in NC.
Seated due toassassination of President Lincoln.
18.
Ulysses S. GRANT – Article II (NBC) both parents Citizens when he was born –
was born in 1822 in OH.19.
Rutherford B. HAYES – Article II (NBC) both parents Citizens when he was born –
was born in 1822 in OH.20.
James GARFIELD – Article II (NBC) both parents Citizens when he was born –
was born in 1831 in OH.21.
Chester A. ARTHUR – Not an NBC or original Citizen . He was NOT an Article II NBC since he was born before father’snaturalization. Seated due to assassination of President Garfield. But based on the facts uncoveredin later history, he was unconstitutionally seated due to the falsified nativity story and fraud byChester Arthur which was not fully discovered and proven until long after his death. He burned allhis early family records to cover up his lies and fraud.
He was born circa1829, allegedly in VT.22.
Grover CLEVELAND – Article II (NBC) both parents Citizens when he was born –
was born in 1837 in NJ.23.
Benjamin HARRISON – Article II (NBC) both parents Citizens when he was born –
was born in 1833 in OH.24.
Grover CLEVELAND – Article II (NBC) both parents Citizens when he was born –
was born in 1837 in NJ.25.
William MCKINLEY – Article II (NBC) both parents Citizens when he was born –
was born in 1843 in OH.26.
Theodore ROOSEVELT – Article II (NBC) both parents Citizens when born
– was born in 1858 in NY.
Seated due toassassination of President McKinley.
27.
William Howard TAFT – Article II (NBC) both parents Citizens when he was born –
was born in 1857 in OH.28.
Woodrow WILSON – Article II (NBC) both parents Citizens when he was born –
was born in 1856 in VA. His mother wasforeign born U.S. Citizen, English, but when he was born she had become a naturalized Citizen of theUnited States prior to his birth due to her marriage to Woodrow’s father, a U.S. Citizen. Having a foreign born parent is OK if the foreign born parent has become a naturalized Citizen of the U.S. prior to the child being born.29.
Harden G. HARDING – Article II (NBC) both parents Citizens when he was born –
was born in 1865 in OH.30.
Calvin COOLIDGE – Article II (NBC) both parents Citizens when he was born –
was born in 1872 in VT.31.
Herbert HOOVER – Article II (NBC) both parents Citizens when he was born –
was born in 1874 in IA. His mother was aforeign born U.S. Citizen, a Canadian, but when he was born she had become a naturalized Citizen of theUnited States prior to his birth due to her marriage to Herbert’s father, a U.S. Citizen. Having a foreign born parent is OK if the foreign born parent has become a naturalized Citizen of the U.S. prior to the child being born.32.
Franklin D. ROOSEVELT – Article II (NBC) both parents Citizens when he was born –
was born in 1882 in NY.33.
Harry S. TRUMAN – Article II (NBC) both parents Citizens when he was born –
was born in 1884 in MO.34.
Dwight D. EISENHOWER – Article II (NBC) both parents Citizens when he was born –
was born in 1890 in TX.35.
John F. KENNEDY – Article II (NBC) both parents Citizens when he was born –
was born in 1917 in MA.36.
Lyndon B. JOHNSON – Article II (NBC) both parents Citizens when born –
was born in 1908 in TX.
Seated due to theassassination of President Kennedy.
37.
Richard M. NIXON – Article II (NBC) both parents Citizens when he was born –
was born in 1913 in CA.38.
Gerald R. FORD – Article II (NBC) both parents Citizens when he was born –
was born in 1913 in NE.39.
James CARTER – Article II (NBC) both parents Citizens when he was born –
was born in 1924 in GA.
0.
Ronald REAGAN – Article II (NBC) both parents Citizens when he was born –
was born in 1911 in IL.41.
George H. W. BUSH – Article II (NBC) both parents Citizens when he was born
– was born in 1924 in MA.42.
William J. CLINTON – Article II (NBC) both parents Citizens when he was born –
was born in 1946 in AR.43.
George W. BUSH – Article II (NBC) both parents Citizens when he was born –
was born in 1946 in CT.44.
(Putative President)

Barack Hussein OBAMA – Not a natural born Citizen (NBC). His father was a foreign national andBritish Subject and was NOT a U.S. Citizen. Obama was seated due to FRAUD about his nativitystory and the progressive domination and corruption in the main-stream media of the legal andconstitutional meaning of NBC and due to the willful complicity and neglect of Congress. Obama’sfather was a foreign national. His father was never a U.S. Citizen nor was Obama’s father even animmigrant to the USA or even a permanent resident in the USA. His father was only sojourning inthe USA attending college, first in HI and then later at Harvard University in Massachusetts, andwas deported back to Kenya at the request of Harvard University due to his unseemly activitiesthere.
Obama was born in 1961.Obama himself claimed he was born in Kenya for many years in hisvarious editions of his pre-2007 book agent’s biographies for him. After 2007 Obama claims he was bornin HI buthis birth registration there most likely was falsified by the maternal grandmother (to get her newgrandson much desired and coveted U.S. Citizenship) since no official hospital record of his birth has been produced . A PDF version of an alleged long-form birth certificate has been posted online by Obama but ithas been proved to be acomputer manufactured forgery by AZ Sheriff Arpaio and his Lead InvestigatorMike Zullo. They have also proved thatObama’s alleged draft registration card is a forgery too. The lawsin HI were very lax in regards to registration of births. There is no independent evidence of Obama being born in HI. No pre-natal records and no post-natal records for his mother being in HI during the alleged birth month in 1961 have been found. No name of an attending physician, mid-wife, or paramedic called tothe scene of a speculated home birth report exists. No independent witnesses to the claimed birth in Hawaiihave ever been named or surfaced. No post-natal care records exist in Hawaii for the care of Obama’smother or the child . In fact, there is no record at all for his mother even being in Hawaii in August 1961,the alleged month of Obama’s alleged birth in Hawaii. No records exist of her being in HI for the 6 months prior to the alleged birth date. As to the much touted two newspaper announcements, false registration of a birth at home in HI with no witnesses would have generated the vital record in HI and also would haveautomatically generated the two newspaper ads. Those ads were placed automatically by the state as aresult of ALL birth registrations – real or falsified! And to further contradict the Hawaiian birth nativitystory of Obama, there are many accounts by Obama’s paternal family in Kenya, Kenyan governmentofficials, and Kenyan and African newspapers — that Obama really was born in the hospital in Mombasa,Kenya. And again, prior to 2007 Obama himself touted to the world that he was born in Kenya asexemplified by the book agent’s biography published and re-edited over many years as Obama’s careerunfolded but always saying he was born in Kenya, up until 2007 when he decided to run for President andthe massive scrubbing, forging, and re-creation of his life history and records began. No other President inhistory has had so many accounts attesting to his being foreign born and/or can provide NOcontemporaneous birth witnesses or independent evidence to corroborate their subsequent claim to U.S. birth. There is a disinformation technique called “The Big Lie”.Obama is “The Big Lie”! 45.
TO BE DETERMINED – Must be an Article II (NBC). Both parents must be a U.S. Citizen (born or naturalized) whentheir child was born in the USA and said child must at the time of the e******n be a least 35 years of*ge and have been a resident of the USA for at least 14 years.

Loki Loc: Georgia

What does this have to do with Cruz, who has made no effort to hide anything about his birth because he doesn't have to? There is no US law that states born in the US to 2 citizen parents is the only way to meet the requirements for natural born. There is no law that states you must be born to 2 citizen parents if you are born abroad to be natural born. There is a Supreme Court decision that states citizen at birth and natural born are the same. There is a law that states birth to one US citizen constitutes citizen at birth.

This ridiculous adherence to a demonstrably false assumption reminds me of Matthew 23:24; straining at a gnat and swallowing a came.

BTW, you might want to rethink using Perkins v Elg as a positive cite for your opinion. It does not say anything close to what you claim it does.
In case anyone wants to read what the decision ACTUALLY says:

http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/307/325/case.html

Homestead

You find me the requirement in the Constitution that requires it and I'll look at it.

Otherwise, don't waste my time.

JW

The Constitution draws a clear distinction between a citizen and a natural born citizen. It further delineates by grandfathering an entire demographic into the process. It may not be defined specifically but at the time, the difference was clearly understood.

Loki Loc: Georgia

It is obviously not understood by people like you. The Supreme Court and Legislative branch have promulgated definitions of natural born. There is more than one definition. You are simply cherry-picking the definition that fits your pre-conceived notions and ignoring the others.

Super Dave Loc: Realville, USA

Or, just to pretend to be stupid in order to have an excuse to vomit h**e toward an enemy pic the golden boy.

Super Dave Loc: Realville, USA

Or, just to pretend to be stupid in order to have an excuse to vomit h**e toward an enemy pic the golden boy.

JW

What the Supreme Court/Congress says is irrelevant if it contravenes the Constitution and in this case, it does. If either party wants to change the Constitution, it requires an amendment, not a ruling or a new law.

Learn how this government is supposed to work before mouthing off about what's what and who understands what...

Loki Loc: Georgia

So tell me, smartass, where in the Constitution is natural born defined? Chapter and verse, Article and Clause. Where? Put up or shut up. Where did Congress/the Court "contravene" something in the constitution? Let's have the Article, Section and Clause where the Constitution defines Natural born. Wanna put your money where your mouth is, smartass?

JW

I imagine trying to connect both of my posts is too big a stretch for you but give it a try.