One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
Cruz: Two Points of View
Page <prev 2 of 7 next> last>>
Mar 8, 2016 10:57:33   #
Workinman Loc: Bayou Pigeon
 
reconreb wrote:
If your choice is another politition thats great , I will vote Cruz if nominated . However I pre fer Trump a non politition to shake the very roots of the Washington D.C.establishment turn it upside down , just look how it is happening already . Yes part of my decision is emotional just as yours is ..


I agree Reb...but like i posted on another thread...Cruz would be much, much more useful as a Supreme Court judge...Trump should be making that deal with Cruz...he would do an excellent job upholding the Constitution for us the next 30 years.

Reply
Mar 8, 2016 11:03:24   #
Liberty Tree
 
Workinman wrote:
I agree Reb...but like i posted on another thread...Cruz would be much, much more useful as a Supreme Court judge...Trump should be making that deal with Cruz...he would do an excellent job upholding the Constitution for us the next 30 years.


It would have to be a behind the scenes deal and could you trust Trump to keep it?

Reply
Mar 8, 2016 11:13:56   #
Workinman Loc: Bayou Pigeon
 
Liberty Tree wrote:
It would have to be a behind the scenes deal and could you trust Trump to keep it?


Yes I do, as I have said several times now...the main driver behind Trump is his brand....if he does as promised the success of his brand goes through the roof....if he screws us he will be signing the death warrant for his businesses...I think that's good insurance, don't you?

Reply
 
 
Mar 8, 2016 11:59:32   #
Liberty Tree
 
Workinman wrote:
Yes I do, as I have said several times now...the main driver behind Trump is his brand....if he does as promised the success of his brand goes through the roof....if he screws us he will be signing the death warrant for his businesses...I think that's good insurance, don't you?


Yes, unless he can figure a way around it. I do not know if Cruz would go for it and I am nor sure I would be willing to risk a Trump Presidency for it.

Reply
Mar 8, 2016 12:22:57   #
Loki Loc: Georgia
 
Homestead wrote:
Ted Cruz cannot be president. He is not a Natural Born Citizen as the constitution requires.
As president he will have to swear an oath to uphold, defend and preserve the constitution.
None of which he can do without first violating it.
To uphold the constitution, his first act would be to remove himself from office.

The very first time our constitution gets in the way of his political ambitions, he wants to ignore or reinterpret the Constitution of the United States of America to suit his personal agenda.

What else, in our constitution is going to get in the way of his personal political ambitions.

Barack Obama is also not a Natural Born Citizen and maybe now we know why, as a United States Senator, Ted Cruz never called him on it.
Ted Cruz cannot be president. He is not a Natural... (show quote)


Ted Cruz is as natural born as I am, and I was born here to citizens who were born here. When you are a citizen at birth, it is the same as natural born. I even gave you the links to read it for yourself.
I quit. I give up. Publius Huldah, the First Weasel, and whatever other Weekly World News hacks that you have been quoting are obviously far more qualified to judge Cruz's elibility than generations of lawmakers and judges and Supreme Court Justices, at least in your eyes. I leave you to your conspiracy sniffing.

Reply
Mar 8, 2016 13:15:50   #
Liberty Tree
 
Loki wrote:
Ted Cruz is as natural born as I am, and I was born here to citizens who were born here. When you are a citizen at birth, it is the same as natural born. I even gave you the links to read it for yourself.
I quit. I give up. Publius Huldah, the First Weasel, and whatever other Weekly World News hacks that you have been quoting are obviously far more qualified to judge Cruz's elibility than generations of lawmakers and judges and Supreme Court Justices, at least in your eyes. I leave you to your conspiracy sniffing.
Ted Cruz is as natural born as I am, and I was bor... (show quote)


You are right Loki. It is pointless to keep trying to point out that a natural born citizen is one who was a citizen at birth. Anyone who was not has to be naturalized. There is nothing in between.

Reply
Mar 8, 2016 13:45:06   #
Olden McGroen Loc: Texas
 
snowbear37 wrote:
Cruz has a record one can look at and see that he is "conservative".

Trump has a record that is the opposite of what he says he believes in. He is a master salesman and has sold himself to many by "talking tough". It's anybody's guess as to whether he would conform to his campaign rhetoric or his past performance. I don't trust him.
==========================================================================

Nicely done!

Reply
Mar 8, 2016 16:28:22   #
Gatsby
 
Ted may not be the perfect candidate for everyone.

Ted IS he best hope that the United States Constitution has

There is no other candidate that I would trust as much to appoint Supreme Court justices who have demonstrated a firm belief in strict interpretation of the constitution and the bill of rights.

Reply
Mar 8, 2016 16:46:12   #
Liberty Tree
 
Gatsby wrote:
Ted may not be the perfect candidate for everyone.

Ted IS he best hope that the United States Constitution has

There is no other candidate that I would trust as much to appoint Supreme Court justices who have demonstrated a firm belief in strict interpretation of the constitution and the bill of rights.


Agreed!

Reply
Mar 9, 2016 02:41:15   #
Blondie725
 
Don G. Dinsdale wrote:
CRUZ: Two Points of View

3/7/2016


1st Point of View


Don't buy into this BS about Cruz. You already know he's not qualified to be President based on his non non natural born citizen status. Also, based on the 13th amendment he's not qualified since he holds a title of nobility, "Esquire" from a foreign country. After that you have to take a look at his membership in the Council on Foreign relations and his wife's association with Goldman Sacs and her work on TPP to get TPP banks established. Cruz is a NWO advocate through and through so don't be fooled by what he's saying out loud. Trump calls him liar Ted for a reason. Think about it carefully before you jump on the Cruz train.

I've watched Cruz twist half truths into something altogether different so the outcome would make Trump look bad and make Cruz look like a knight in shining armor. He's a Liar and a manipulator working for the NWO crowd and don't loose sight of that. How many in that crowd have you heard make bold statements about their goals then when elected find that they do exactly the opposite. Ted will be no different, he doesn't have the US in his DNA and he has questionable loyalty to this country, just look behind the curtains to see who he really is and you'll find a NWO puppet hiding there.

These things may not bother you, but they have my attention. A vote for Cruz would be in violation of the Constitution as he's not legally able to accept that vote and have it counted. Further more, when he gets placed on the ballot it's an act of fraud that could only be perpetrated in a system that has been usurped by foreign interests who choose to ignore our founding documents.

I may be wrong, but I think I can see the two parties consolidating into the one party we've been thinking all along was two. The mask is coming off now so we can see there really is only one party. If you vote left you'll get an establishment puppet and if you vote right you'll also get an establishment puppet. Trump is the only one that may, and I emphasize may be an outsider that can do this country some good, if he isn't assassinated first.


2nd Point of View


Ted Cruz is the real deal. He is a true conservative to the marrow of his bones. Not the kind of “conservative” you find in Washington, D.C., the kind that has betrayed us for decades — but a true constitutional conservative as the Founders intended. The Constitution isn’t just an afterthought to Ted Cruz. He memorized this sacred document when he was 13 years old, and those words are ingrained in the very fabric of his being.

When he was 15, Ted Cruz was one of five Houston kids selected by the Free Enterprise Institute to tour the country and speak about the Constitution. Prior to graduating high school, Ted had delivered 80 speeches on such topics as economics, the Austrian economist von Mises, and the importance and meaning of the Constitution.

Ted was accepted at Ivy League’s Princeton University. He naturally joined the Princeton debate team. He became a champion debater, winning multiple categories, including 1992 Team of the Year and 1992 Speaker of the Year. He additionally won significant national debates earning awards for the 1992 National Championship for Top Speaker and the North American Debating Championship Top Speaker. Today, he is forever enshrined in the Princeton debate hall of fame.

Ted continued his debating record at Harvard Law School where he became a world debating championship semifinalist.

Upon graduating from Harvard Law School, Ted landed a job as the first Hispanic Supreme Court justice law clerk in U.S. history, clerking for Chief Justice William Rehnquist. He later went into private practice defending his first love — the United States Constitution. Working on matters relating to the Second Amendment and the NRA, Ted helped prepare testimony for the impeachment proceedings against President Clinton. When he was 28, Cruz joined the George W. Bush presidential campaign in 1999 as a domestic policy adviser, advising then governor George W. Bush in a wide range of policy and legal matters, including civil justice, criminal justice, constitutional law, immigration and government reform.

He was still barely 30 years old.

At age 33, Ted Cruz became the youngest solicitor general of Texas in American history. He would go on to become the longest serving solicitor general, ferociously fighting for the Constitution. He sought out conservative, constitutional causes, distinguishing himself with exceptional achievements and victories:

• Cruz authored 70 United States Supreme Court briefs and presented 43 oral arguments, including nine before the United States Supreme Court — more than any practicing lawyer in all of Texas or any current member of Congress. He took on some of the biggest cases decided by the courts in decades — and won virtually every single time.

• Cruz won a huge Second Amendment victory in the District of Columbia versus Heller, drafting the amicus brief signed by the attorneys general of 31 different states and presenting the oral argument. This victory struck down a D.C. handgun ban as infringing upon the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms — and it changed everything regarding your right to carry a gun.

• Cruz wrote a brief on behalf all 50 states in the Elk Grove Unified School District versus Newdow case, in which atheist activist Michael Newdow sued on behalf of his daughter to stop schools from reciting the Pledge of Allegiance. He objected to the phrase, “One Nation Under God.” For months, the pledge was not spoken in nine western states — until Cruz argued the case. The Supreme Court upheld Cruz’s belief that Newdow had no standing to file suit on behalf of his daughter.

• Cruz successfully defended the constitutionality of the Ten Commandments Monument on the Texas State Capitol grounds before the Fifth Circuit Court and the U.S. Supreme Court. As a result, the Ten Commandments Monument currently stands on the grounds of the Texas State Capitol.

• Cruz fought on behalf of the state of Texas to uphold the death penalty sentence for a vicious gang member who was in the United States illegally when he and other gang members brutally beat, raped, tortured and killed two teenage girls in Houston. The Mexican Consulate became involved, as well as then President George W. Bush, who sided with the Mexican government and turned the case over to the International Court of Justice which ruled against Texas and stayed the execution. Texas then turned to Solicitor General Ted Cruz. Appearing before the U.S. Supreme Court, Cruz successfully defended the Constitution. In a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that decisions from the International Court of Justice were not binding in any domestic law and even the president had no power to enforce them. Ted Cruz won and gang member Jose Medellin met his maker.

Ted Cruz has a proven record of fighting for and defending the United States Constitution — even when it means going against the establishment. In the case of Medellin versus Texas, not only did he go against a brutal, illegal alien murderer, the country of Mexico, the Geneva Convention, the International Court of Justice — but also his former boss and the president of the United States, George W. Bush. This may provide insight into why George W. Bush broke his long-standing policy not to comment on politics to say recently about Cruz, “I just don’t like the guy.” Being embarrassed and beaten on the international stage isn’t generally followed by afternoon tea.

There’s a reason why the Republican establishment in D.C. is known for not liking Cruz. They stand for the party, for themselves and for their own political power. Ted Cruz doesn’t play party politics or political games. Ted Cruz stands for principles, values, integrity and the United States Constitution.

Ted understands the gravity of our situation, and he understands how to right the wrongs of the past eight years by holding true to the principles of the U.S. Constitution. It’s all there, written long ago by the brilliant men who fought the fierce battle for freedom and liberty. We don’t need a bailout, we don’t need any new government programs. We need to return to the First Principles laid out for us by James Madison and Thomas Jefferson.

Ted Cruz was raised with the Bible and the Constitution on his kitchen table every single day of his life.

As valedictorian, magnum cum laude graduate, Ivy League scholar, debating champion, Supreme Court law clerk, defender of our constitutional rights and U.S. senator, Ted Cruz has held firm to conservative beliefs and values. He is a dedicated husband, loving father and committed Christian. He is a constitutionalist. But, most of all, he is consistent, with a proven track record and history.

It’s time to send a man of honor and character to the White House, a man who says what he means and means what he says. It’s time to send a man that will proudly place his hand upon the Bible and solemnly swear to faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and to the best of his ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. That man is Ted Cruz, and his time is now.
CRUZ: Two Points of View br br 3/7/2016 br br b... (show quote)

____________
I agree with BOTH points of view. Ted Cruz does not qualify for 2 reasons: (1) he was not born on American soil; and (2) his father was not a U.S. citizen. That is just an unfortunate fact for him.
BUT after reading the 2nd point of view it definitely reinforces my opinion that the most valuable service Ted Cruz can perform for America is as a Supreme Court Justice. As president, he will only have 4 or 8 years, but as a Supreme Court Justice, America will have him for a lifetime!

Reply
Mar 9, 2016 06:44:40   #
Loki Loc: Georgia
 
Blondie725 wrote:
____________
I agree with BOTH points of view. Ted Cruz does not qualify for 2 reasons: (1) he was not born on American soil; and (2) his father was not a U.S. citizen. That is just an unfortunate fact for him.
BUT after reading the 2nd point of view it definitely reinforces my opinion that the most valuable service Ted Cruz can perform for America is as a Supreme Court Justice. As president, he will only have 4 or 8 years, but as a Supreme Court Justice, America will have him for a lifetime!
____________ br I agree with BOTH points of view. ... (show quote)


I said I was done with this, but apparently some people have not gotten h the message and don't read much history.
President James Buchanan's father was almost certainly a British subject at the time of Buchanan's birth.
Chester Arthur's father WAS a British subject at the time of Arthur's birth.
Obama's father was a Kenyan at the time of Obama's birth.
George Romney, 1968 presidential candidate was born in Mexico City.
John McCain was born in the Canal Zone before it became a recognized US Territory.
United States Law, found at 8USC section 1401 states that anyone born on foreign soil to ONE US citizen parent is a US citizen from birth, requiring no naturalization. In other words, they are natural born, as per the United States Supreme Court decision US v Wong Kim Ark 1898, in which the majority opinion held that "citizen from birth" and "natural born" are the same thing.
Ted Cruz was born to a US citizen mother. He is a US citizen by birth, ergo, he is a natural born US citizen, according to US law and a Supreme Court opinion.
One final word: Black's Law, which the Supreme Court has accepted as authority in more than 600 cases since 1891, defines natural born as born within the jurisdiction of the US OR outside the jurisdiction to US parent[s].
Have done with the Natural Born nonsense. The entire purpose of the phrase was to keep foreign nobility from gaining a foothold in the presidency. Ted Cruz was born to a chemical engineering consultant and has lived in the US since the age of four. How much "foreign influence" do you think a four year old child can absorb?

Reply
Mar 9, 2016 08:17:26   #
Olden McGroen Loc: Texas
 
Gatsby wrote:
Ted may not be the perfect candidate for everyone.

Ted IS he best hope that the United States Constitution has

There is no other candidate that I would trust as much to appoint Supreme Court justices who have demonstrated a firm belief in strict interpretation of the constitution and the bill of rights.

==========================================================================

Good to see the number of the sane growing on OPP.

Reply
Mar 9, 2016 11:52:53   #
Blondie725
 
Loki:
If you are the type of person who points to MISTAKES to continue justifying MISTAKES, you may be part of the problem. Just because of a few instances in the past, someone was allowed to run for president who did not meet the qualifications for president (as understood by the founding fathers and authors of the U. S. Constitution) does not justify continuing to make the same mistake.

It doesn't make any difference to me if the person is a Democrat, Republican, Independent or otherwise. I LIKE Ted Cruz and all he has accomplished. But the FACT remains that he is not a Natural Born Citizen of the U.S., although he certainly IS a U. S. CITIZEN due to his mother's citizenship. There is a difference.

The requirements to serve as President are a step up from being JUST a U. S. Citizen. A CITIZEN of the U.S. can have received citizenship if born in another country to non-citizen parents and then moved here and became a naturalized U.S. citizen (my grandparents, for instance); OR he can have been born, like Ted Cruz, in another country of a single parent U.S. citizen who received his citizenship thru that parent. Or, as in Marco Rubio's case, the parents may have come to America, had children, THEN became U. S. citizens. Or, as in Barack Obama's case, his mother was a U.S. citizen, but his father was not, thereby disqualifying him from being a Natural Born Citizen. (There was much confusion over where Obama was actually born, but there was never any doubt about where his father was born.)

So just to be clear, neither Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, nor Barack Obama (nor Mitt Romney for that matter) are NATURAL BORN CITIZENS.

A Natural Born Citizen is, per the original intent of the original authors of the Constitution, a person born on U.S. sovereign soil, of parents (plural) who were born on U. S. sovereign soil; the single exception to that rule was for persons alive at the time of the signing of the U.S. Constitution who may have been born in another country and moved to America during that time period, they being considered the first generation and their own children being considered the second generation. Now, there was later legislation making territories, U.S. bases, the Panama Canal Zone, etc, sovereign soil for the purposes of citizenship of children born there of U. S. citizen parents, some cases retroactively (i.e., John McCain's birth).

Try reading the following so you will have a better understanding of the meaning of the Natural Born Citizen clause in the U. S. Constitution:

1. http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2009/10/natural-born-citizen-graphic-picture.html
2. http://puzo1.blogspot.fi/2009/08/law-of-nations-and-not-english-common.html
3. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural-born-citizen_clause
(read the NOTES section at the bottom OF #3 for cites)

And if you read #3 above, you will see that MANY legal professionals, including at least one of Ted Cruz's professors, all agree that he does not meet the Natural Born Citizenship requirement.

Again, the perfect place for Ted Cruz is Supreme Court Justice where he can serve a lifetime instead of just four or eight years.

Reply
Mar 9, 2016 12:21:36   #
Worried for our children Loc: Massachusetts
 
Blondie725 wrote:
Loki:
If you are the type of person who points to MISTAKES to continue justifying MISTAKES, you may be part of the problem. Just because of a few instances in the past, someone was allowed to run for president who did not meet the qualifications for president (as understood by the founding fathers and authors of the U. S. Constitution) does not justify continuing to make the same mistake.

It doesn't make any difference to me if the person is a Democrat, Republican, Independent or otherwise. I LIKE Ted Cruz and all he has accomplished. But the FACT remains that he is not a Natural Born Citizen of the U.S., although he certainly IS a U. S. CITIZEN due to his mother's citizenship. There is a difference.

The requirements to serve as President are a step up from being JUST a U. S. Citizen. A CITIZEN of the U.S. can have received citizenship if born in another country to non-citizen parents and then moved here and became a naturalized U.S. citizen (my grandparents, for instance); OR he can have been born, like Ted Cruz, in another country of a single parent U.S. citizen who received his citizenship thru that parent. Or, as in Marco Rubio's case, the parents may have come to America, had children, THEN became U. S. citizens. Or, as in Barack Obama's case, his mother was a U.S. citizen, but his father was not, thereby disqualifying him from being a Natural Born Citizen. (There was much confusion over where Obama was actually born, but there was never any doubt about where his father was born.)

So just to be clear, neither Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, nor Barack Obama (nor Mitt Romney for that matter) are NATURAL BORN CITIZENS.

A Natural Born Citizen is, per the original intent of the original authors of the Constitution, a person born on U.S. sovereign soil, of parents (plural) who were born on U. S. sovereign soil; the single exception to that rule was for persons alive at the time of the signing of the U.S. Constitution who may have been born in another country and moved to America during that time period, they being considered the first generation and their own children being considered the second generation. Now, there was later legislation making territories, U.S. bases, the Panama Canal Zone, etc, sovereign soil for the purposes of citizenship of children born there of U. S. citizen parents, some cases retroactively (i.e., John McCain's birth).

Try reading the following so you will have a better understanding of the meaning of the Natural Born Citizen clause in the U. S. Constitution:

1. http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2009/10/natural-born-citizen-graphic-picture.html
2. http://puzo1.blogspot.fi/2009/08/law-of-nations-and-not-english-common.html
3. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural-born-citizen_clause
(read the NOTES section at the bottom OF #3 for cites)

And if you read #3 above, you will see that MANY legal professionals, including at least one of Ted Cruz's professors, all agree that he does not meet the Natural Born Citizenship requirement.

Again, the perfect place for Ted Cruz is Supreme Court Justice where he can serve a lifetime instead of just four or eight years.
Loki: br If you are the type of person who po... (show quote)



&#128077;&#128077;&#128077;&#128077;&#128077;

Awesome post. Nice to see a fellow originalist. Just to clarify a little further; the Ark case, is often cited as precedent, but it's not. Yes, Ark won the case, but as a matter of record, it is a "holding" - SCOTUS has never defined "natural born citizen" - the definition is still debated among constitutional scholars today.


Definition of "holding" can be found here:

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/holding

Reply
Mar 9, 2016 12:23:54   #
Loki Loc: Georgia
 
Blondie725 wrote:
Loki:
If you are the type of person who points to MISTAKES to continue justifying MISTAKES, you may be part of the problem. Just because of a few instances in the past, someone was allowed to run for president who did not meet the qualifications for president (as understood by the founding fathers and authors of the U. S. Constitution) does not justify continuing to make the same mistake.

It doesn't make any difference to me if the person is a Democrat, Republican, Independent or otherwise. I LIKE Ted Cruz and all he has accomplished. But the FACT remains that he is not a Natural Born Citizen of the U.S., although he certainly IS a U. S. CITIZEN due to his mother's citizenship. There is a difference.

The requirements to serve as President are a step up from being JUST a U. S. Citizen. A CITIZEN of the U.S. can have received citizenship if born in another country to non-citizen parents and then moved here and became a naturalized U.S. citizen (my grandparents, for instance); OR he can have been born, like Ted Cruz, in another country of a single parent U.S. citizen who received his citizenship thru that parent. Or, as in Marco Rubio's case, the parents may have come to America, had children, THEN became U. S. citizens. Or, as in Barack Obama's case, his mother was a U.S. citizen, but his father was not, thereby disqualifying him from being a Natural Born Citizen. (There was much confusion over where Obama was actually born, but there was never any doubt about where his father was born.)

So just to be clear, neither Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, nor Barack Obama (nor Mitt Romney for that matter) are NATURAL BORN CITIZENS.

A Natural Born Citizen is, per the original intent of the original authors of the Constitution, a person born on U.S. sovereign soil, of parents (plural) who were born on U. S. sovereign soil; the single exception to that rule was for persons alive at the time of the signing of the U.S. Constitution who may have been born in another country and moved to America during that time period, they being considered the first generation and their own children being considered the second generation. Now, there was later legislation making territories, U.S. bases, the Panama Canal Zone, etc, sovereign soil for the purposes of citizenship of children born there of U. S. citizen parents, some cases retroactively (i.e., John McCain's birth).

Try reading the following so you will have a better understanding of the meaning of the Natural Born Citizen clause in the U. S. Constitution:

1. http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2009/10/natural-born-citizen-graphic-picture.html
2. http://puzo1.blogspot.fi/2009/08/law-of-nations-and-not-english-common.html
3. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural-born-citizen_clause
(read the NOTES section at the bottom OF #3 for cites)

And if you read #3 above, you will see that MANY legal professionals, including at least one of Ted Cruz's professors, all agree that he does not meet the Natural Born Citizenship requirement.

Again, the perfect place for Ted Cruz is Supreme Court Justice where he can serve a lifetime instead of just four or eight years.
Loki: br If you are the type of person who po... (show quote)


I have seen that bullcrap blog so many times I want to puke. Do you think your blog vitiates United States Law?
US Law is codified into 54 Titles. The LAW, not some halfassed lawyer's opinion, states that a person born abroad to ONE or two US parents is a US citizen at birth. Period.

The US Supreme Court (remember them? ) has stated that "citizen at birth" and natural born are the same thing.


US v Wong Kim Ark 169 US 649, (1898 ).

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/169/649

Now I realize that black letter US Law, and a verbatim Supreme Court opinion don't carry nearly as much weight as a half-assed lawyer's blog, but try and humor me and read the links I supplied, which I do as a service to people who depend on blogs because they lack the knowledge of how to look up the actual laws themselves.

Your definition of "Natural Born" is one definition. It was used in Emmerich de Vattel's Law of Nations which was published in 1758. The Founders did use some of his writings. They used a lot more of Blackstone, whose definition includes the children of British Subjects born abroad. You say that is British? Vattel never referred to US citizens, because his book was written and published 8 years before the Declaration of Independence.
Your definition was used in Minor V Happersatt, a case in which the plaintiff's citizenship was never in doubt, only her right to vote.
Wong Kim Ark was decided years later.
Your claim of "mistake is ludicrous. Three Presidents, one Vice-President, and four Presidential candidates over a period of 160 years and no one suspected a thing until your lawyer wrote a blog that caught your eye.

We are indeed in your debt, and that of the blog's author, for discovering what the best legal minds in the past 160 years have overlooked.

I am sure that the Justices who decided Wong Kim Ark would also be grateful for the diligence of you and your ambulance chasing source, were any of them still alive to express their feelings.

Reply
Page <prev 2 of 7 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.