Trump 'slam dunk' tweet questions Rubio's eligibility to run

Washington Examiner ^ | February 20, 2016 | Daniel Chaitin

[Dana1960]

You are correct and I suspect he knows this very well, btw.

[jpsb]

Rubio, that's what you get for helping Trump with his "Cruz lied" lies.

Was Cruz lying when he said "I don't what immigration reform to fail" and "I want immigration reform to pass"? I mean he was either lying then or he is lying now. Which is it?

[GBA]

Whatever his reason(s), in this fight Trump is fighting for Truth against mob emotion in an extremely high stakes game.

He fights by bringing up the ineligibility of Cruz and Rubio against the worldly ways and desires of those who want to change the exclusive definition of Natural Born.

The mob fights for redefining down to the lowest common denominator away from the highest standard.

In this, Trump's is a hero's fight for truth and integrity of the highest standard against the mob's desire for instant gratification.

This should have been Cruz's fight, but unfortunately he seems to be unworthy of it.

[mak5]

Tweeted from the same guy who won’t sue, but who tweets (from his iPhone) to tell his minions to boycott Apple and criticizes Rubio and Cruz for supporting Justice Roberts while saying that he supports the mandate.

Welcome to the Paradoxical World of the Teflon Don.

[hoosiermama]

Listen to the video you will understand that the sixteen amendment does not supercede the constitution You obviously don’t have the intelligenence to follow her well thought out and presented argument.

[Godebert]

Note the reference to Natural Law in the first sentence of our Declaration of Independence.

It is crystal clear that the Founding Fathers used the Natural Law definition of 'natural born Citizen' when they wrote Article II. By invoking "The Laws of Nature and Nature's God" the 56 signers of the Declaration incorporated a legal standard of freedom into the forms of government that would follow.

President John Quincy Adams, writing in 1839, looked back at the founding period and recognized the true meaning of the Declaration's reliance on the "Laws of Nature and of Nature's God." He observed that the American people's "charter was the Declaration of Independence. Their rights, the natural rights of mankind. Their government, such as should be instituted by the people, under the solemn mutual pledges of perpetual union, founded on the self-evident truth's proclaimed in the Declaration."

The Constitution, Vattel, and “Natural Born Citizen”: What Our Framers Knew

The Laws of Nature and of Nature's God: The True Foundation of American Law

The Supreme Court of the United States has never applied the term “natural born citizen” to any other category than “those born in the country of parents who are citizens thereof”.

MINOR V. HAPPERSETT IS BINDING PRECEDENT AS TO THE CONSTITUTIONAL DEFINITION OF A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN.

Neither the 14th Amendment nor Wong Kim Ark make one a Natural Born Citizen

The Harvard Law Review Article Taken Apart Piece by Piece and Utterly Destroyed

Citizenship Terms Used in the U.S. Constitution - The 5 Terms Defined & Some Legal Reference to Same

"The citizenship of no man could be previous to the declaration of independence, and, as a natural right, belongs to none but those who have been born of citizens since the 4th of July, 1776."....David Ramsay, 1789.

A Dissertation on Manner of Acquiring Character & Privileges of Citizen of U.S.-by David Ramsay-1789

The Law of Nations or the Principles of Natural Law (1758)

The Laws of Nature and of Nature's God: The True Foundation of American Law

Publications of the Colonial Society of Massachusetts, Volume 20 - Use of The Law of Nations by the Constitutional Convention

[SubMareener]

No, the 16th Amendment was introduced by the Progressives along with the 17th, to centralize power in the Federal Government. Both the 16th and 17th should be repealed.

Amendment XVII

The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each state, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each state shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the state legislatures.

When vacancies happen in the representation of any state in the Senate, the executive authority of such state shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, that the legislature of any state may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.

This amendment shall not be so construed as to affect the election or term of any Senator chosen before it becomes valid as part of the Constitution.

[r_barton]

I am tired of 1st generation anchor babies telling us who should be president, what laws we should have and how to interpret them. I will not vote for an anchor baby for president.

[grania]

Is it Trump’s daughter by Marla who is the only one who’s a NBC? Was Ivana a citizen by the time her youngest child was born?

[SubMareener]

You need to wipe the snoot from your nose.

[2nd Amendment]

Listen all you trumpsters. I intend to vote for Trump if he is the REPUBLICAN nominee in Nov. I will hold my nose and do so. He can’t get away calling foreign leaders “cow face” or some other epithet. He needs to start growing up and acting like a President. After all the Republic might be at stake. I am and have been a Ted Cruz supporter. But the Republican party is the only venue we have to stop the felon or the bolshevik!

[Godebert]

Well said!

[hoosiermama]

Trump is just repeating what judge Scalia has been saying. The speaker is repeating his philosophical interpretation of the constitution. You in turn are following a man instead of following the constitution. Shame on you. Your are not a conservative

[Qwackertoo]

Because of his Mother’s age. She didn’t have the years required living on US Soil after age 14 to give birth outside of the USA and pass on NBC to her baby.

Cruz’s Mother was old enough to meet that requirement.

[mazda77]

Federal? That is not the requirement for the NBC issue. That only applies to those whom might be President. Of course, that falls also to VP and also Speaker. It does not eliminate Congress but as the Speaker being in the top three, it should also apply there. Is this another reason why there is no concern for Congress to address this issue?

[Hawthorn]

>> He has serious mental issues <<

I’m beginning to think the same of some who defend him.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

Fox News Latino: May 8, 2013

Ted Cruz Files Amendment To Deny Path To Citizenship As Senate Works On Bill

......"The amendments filed today to strengthen border security and reform our legal immigration system will not only bring meaningful, effective improvements to our immigration system, but also have a chance of becoming law," said Cruz in a statement. "America is a nation of immigrants, built by immigrants and we need to honor that heritage by fixing our broken immigration system, while upholding the rule of law and championing legal immigration."

His amendments are among more than 300 filed by the Tuesday evening deadline. Republicans wanting tighter enforcement provisions filed a majority of the amendments, with Sen. Chuck Grassley, a Republican from Iowa, leading the pack with 77 amendments.

Supporters of the bill, mainly of the part of it that would legalize millions of undocumented immigrants, kept a steady drumbeat in defense of the measure though emails, websites and social media.

In a press release, America's Voice, a leading national group that advocates for more lenient immigration laws, singled out Cruz's anti-citizenship amendment as particularly worrisome.

"This would not only destroy the path to citizenship in the Senate bill - the popular heart of an immigration reform solution - but also turn its back on 100 years of precedent in immigration policy," said the release..........

[annieokie]

Delusions of Grandiose among other mental disturbances, yes he does have some serious problems, not what we want as our President with his hands on that football.

[hoosiermama]

Has nothing to do with the Natural Born citizen of the constitution only citizenship which if you bothered to listen to the video would be explained to you

The only thing you have proven is you are not smart enough to follow legal argument as presented in the video and that you are a follower of the liberal mantra that the constitution is a living document.
Why are you even on a conservative website?

[Bidimus1]

As usual DJT supporters would love for the founders only have read books that no one has heard of for the most part( while ignoring Blackstones commentaries which we know were used) and to not have done something like right the law of 1790 it specifically stated what a natural born citizen is in the words of the founders no less now I understand some will post a graphic from a Roman Emperor soon and it maybe will find an article written by some French philosopher or Swiss philosphilosopher to refute the actual written words in law that the founders of the nation