Posted on 01/15/2016 7:37:32 AM PST by RoosterRedux
For next in line, see 20th amendment and 3 USC. VP-elect is correct, statutes go futher down the line. Losing party still lost. Obama is out of office.
We should understand that the Bush v. Gore fiasco ALSO involved State offices that could be negated (The Palm Beach Pokey!).
State rules, to my limited understanding are such that if there are no challenges to the federal slate by political parties, the vote moves forward and becomes “federal” in the sense of Bush v. Gore.
The State party can challenge the slate (and has, actually) but what good would it do for a state Pubbie party to challenge it’s own slate?
And, ironically enough, being of the same party...would they have standing!
:-)
The correct answer is that until around 1985, a woman giving birth outside the country had to have lived within the USA for something like 5 years after the age of 15, and obama’s mama was only barely 18 when she gave birth. Probably in Canada, and probably to give the mulatto baby up for adoption. Clearly she changed her mind when she gave birth and kept him.
Obama skated because whoever ran against him conceded eligibility. McCain and some other dipstick, I forget who.
Jeantel, Trump didn’t accuse.
Trump was asked a question point blank by a journalist about Cruz’ eligibility vis a vis natural born citizenship. Trump reflected it was problematic.
Now Jeantel honey, not only did Trump not create or raise this issue, the Journalist who asked the question and got your panties all in a bunch didn’t raise the question either. Because other journalists were raising the question when Ted was running for the senate.
It is wrong for you to try to place blame for this issue being raised on someone who wasn’t even involved in Ted Cruz’ senate run.
It worked in Missouri.
His Senate seat is sound on legal grounds. On political/credibility grounds, it’s just another “issue,” having no legal significance on its own.
I mean, wouldn’t they tell him he couldn’t run when he filed?The Constitution doesn't say anything about the requirements to run.
No, no, a thousand times no.
Choice of Electors for President of the United States are the sovereign and sole responsibility of the 50 State Legislatures (and Congress, which gave itself 3 electors in 1960).
The Federal government, and any "Federal commission", are the LAST people who have, or who should have, anything to do with the choice of a President.
Sure. Each state has it's own specific procedure, and they are pretty varied. But the loser has rights.
I will say that the extent of mess depends on the loser, fighting. Maybe Hillary or sanders or whoever will concede that Cruz is qualified.
-- The State party can challenge the slate (and has, actually) but what good would it do for a state Pubbie party to challenge it's own slate? --
The GOP has certified Cruz eligible. That precludes suing to find him otherwise, through the primaries.
I honestly thought he was a naturalized American. I knew he was born in Canada, but his family had lived here since he was four, so I naively assumed he had chosen a citizenship at 18.
The other two people I know born with dual citizenship had to.
The overt nature of his citizenship status is what makes him more dangerous than Obama. This opens the door for all kinds of trouble down the road.
In fact, "being nominated" and "running for President" have no constitutional existence. Both of those quaint customs could be done away with tomorrow, and the Constitution would remain undisturbed.
> His Senate seat is sound on legal grounds.
Is it? Presumably but not a certainty.
How, in the election process is this doubt resolved?"Doubt" will never be resolved now because Cruz was too stupid or arrogant to have done anything about it before it became an issue.
Now there will forever be "doubt" no matter what any court says.
Cruz will never be elected President and he's poison for VP (he is his own poison pill).
Probably untrue, because a loser, by definition, would not have a majority of electoral votes cast, and therefore would not be elected even if the "winner" were disqualified.
What is SUPPOSED to happen under those circumstances (which the Founders devoted quite a bit of time to) is that the House of Representatives, voting by states, is supposed to elect the President.
That is what should have happened in 2000, the country would have been much better for it, rather than the USSC's rash and unwise decision to hear Bush v. Gore, rather than to declare it a nonjusticeable political question (which it was).
That’s what it seems to suggest. Anything goes up until he tries to assume office, then there may well be a problem.
This is a bit of a bad situation. It makes me nervous, and I don’t like it.
No, he’s a citizen. There are rumors his mother wasn’t a US citizen when Cruz was born, but that’s BS. I believe Cruz will produce a CRBA sometime before the SC primary. That means he’s a citizen, not to a metaphysical certainty, but c’mon, close enough to say “fer sure.”
:: The GOP has certified Cruz eligible ::
And, therein, lies the rub.
DJT should STHU, citing this simple fact.
Thanks for the realtime input.
Of course, Cruz told people only what he needed to get elected....not the plain truth.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.