Posted on 05/03/2016 5:16:13 AM PDT by iontheball
In the midst of questions arising as to why presidential candidate Ted Cruz, U.S. Senator from Texas, has produced no documentation to support his claim that he was born a U.S. citizen in Canada in December 1970, author, former congressional candidate and former Hawaii resident Miki Booth provided a copy of her birth certificate, prepared by the American consulate in Sapporo, Japan, indicating that she was a U.S. citizen born abroad.
The certificate was sent to The Post & Email by surface mail and returned in the same manner.
Booth was born on December 18, 1949 in Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan while her father, Thomas William Snyder, Jr., was stationed there in the U.S. Marine Corps.
(Excerpt) Read more at thepostemail.com ...
In order to obtain a CRBA, the applicant must produce a birth certificate or equivalent from the jurisdiction in which the child was born, among other evidence to support a finding of US citizenship.
Yes, Rubio, Cruz, Jindal, and Haley are all ineligible. They were the future of the party and why the Republicans would not object to the Kenyanesian Usurpation.
“Nature” does not mean “not of man.” Like trees, squirrels, etc. There is HUMAN NATURE. There are NATURAL HUMAN RIGHTS.
“Nagural born citizen” is an artificial human conceot if there ever was one. What matters is, does Cruz’s birth in Canada to two non-U.S. citizens make him a “natural born citizen as understood by the framers? Of course not.
Cruz is an illegal alien.
I believe it is a deliberate attack on the natural born clause. It seems they have had much difficulty legislating it away so they have turned to precidence to get rid of it.
The democrats snuck one by (Obama) and now it was the republicans turn to do the same. I mean heck at one point it was Cruz, Rubio, and Trump. We all know Trump was not supposed to run, so we come to the unfavorable conclusion that the republicans were set and ready to hoist the follow up non NBC on us.
The uniparty is looking for the kill ahot on the natural born clause, and as far as I am concerned it is absolute treason.
Until I worked a job where I needed to see someone’s birth certificate, I never knew there was such a thing as a Consular Report of Birth Abroad. I would guess that many people don’t realize this exists, so perhaps that is the reason that Mrs. Cruz did not apply for one at the time of Ted’s birth.
This is also the reason why everyone should be against Cruz and Rubio and if you help them get elected you are helping destroy the natural born clause.
If you knowingly do that.....leave us in peace and may your chains rest lightly....
My daughter also. As I have stated here before, the Certificate stating that she is a US Citizen born abroad arrived from the Consul’s office in the same diplomatic pouch as her infant passport to enter the country for the first time. She also has a hospital birth certificate from the US Air Force Hospital at Lajes Field signed by US Air Force officers.
Citation ...
f. The Form FS-240 is not a birth certificate, such as is issued by a government-authorized bureau or office of vital statistics, because consular officers are not authorized to assume a foreign local or state vital statistics function. The Form FS-240 is a consular declaration of the fact of acquisition of U.S. citizenship at birth ...
7 FAM 1440 CONSULAR REPORT OF BIRTH OF A CITIZEN/NON-CITIZEN NATIONAL OF THE UNITED STATES
“BS. Persons serving the government abroad are US citizens by birth. You fail civics 101.”
Time and again you have been supplied with quotations from the U.S. Department of State and the U.S. Supreme Court that unequivocally say such persons born abroad can only be naturalized U.S. citizens. If you continue to deny the quoted official authorities, so we can only conclude in the future you are choosing to deliberately lie.
Foreign Affairs Manual: 7 FAM Consular Affairs
7 FAM 1130
ACQUISITION OF U.S. CITIZENSHIP BY BIRTH ABROAD TO U.S. CITIZEN PARENT
(CT:CON-636; 02-24-2016)
(Office of Origin: CA/OCS/L)
7 FAM 1131 BASIS FOR DETERMINATION OF ACQUISITION
7 FAM 1131.1 Authority
7 FAM 1131.1-1 Federal Statutes
(CT:CON-349; 12-13-2010)
a. Acquisition of U.S. citizenship by birth abroad to a U.S. citizen parent is governed by Federal statutes. Only insofar as Congress has provided in such statutes, does the United States follow the traditionally Roman law principle of “jus sanguinis” under which citizenship is acquired by descent (see 7 FAM 1111 a(2)).
[Note, the statutory laws stated above only have the power to make naturalized citizens.]
7 FAM 1100
ACQUISITION AND RETENTION OF U.S. CITIZENSHIP AND NATIONALITY
7 FAM 1110
ACQUISITION OF U.S. CITIZENSHIP BY BIRTH IN THE UNITED STATES
7 FAM 1112 what is birth “in the united states”?
“I always thought it was US soil which means the actual place someone was born was the most important thing, not one or both parents being a citizen.”
(CT:CON-538; 10-242014)
a. INA 101(a)(38) (8 U.S.C. 1101 (a)(38)) provides that “the term ‘United States,’ when used in a geographical sense, means the continental United States, Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Virgin Islands of the United States.”
b. On November 3, 1986, Public Law 94-241, “approving the Covenant to Establish a Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands in Political Union with the United States of America”, (Section 506(c)),took effect. From that point on, the Northern Mariana Islands have been treated as part of the United States for the purposes of INA 301 (8 U.S.C. 1401) and INA 308 (8 U.S.C. 1408). (See 7 FAM 1120 Acquisition of U.S. Nationality in U.S. Territories and Possessions.)
c. The Nationality Act of 1940 (NA), Section 101(d) (54 Statutes at Large 1172) (effective January 13, 1941 until December 23, 1952) provided that “the term ‘United States’ when used in a geographical sense means the continental United States, Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands of the United States.” The 1940 Act did not include Guam or the Northern Mariana Islands as coming within the definition of “United States.”
d. Prior to January 13, 1941, there was no statutory definition of “the United States” for citizenship purposes. The phrase “in the United States” as used in Section 1993 of the Revised Statues of 1878 clearly includes states that have been admitted to the Union. (See 7 FAM 1119 b.)
e. INA 304 (8 U.S.C. 1404) and INA 305 (8 U.S.C. 1405) provide a basis for citizenship of persons born in Alaska and Hawaii, respectively, while they
7 FAM 1113 Not Included in the Meaning of “In the United States”
a. Birth on U.S. Registered Vessel On High Seas or in the Exclusive Economic Zone: A U.S.-registered or documented ship on the high seas or in the exclusive economic zone is not considered to be part of the United States. Under the law of the sea, an Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) is a maritime zone over which a State has special rights over the exploration and use of natural resources. The Exclusive Economic Zone extends up to 200 nautical miles from the coastal baseline. A child born on such a vessel does not acquire U.S. citizenship by reason of the place of birth (Lam Mow v. Nagle, 24 F.2d 316 (9th Cir., 1928)).
b. A U.S.-registered aircraft outside U.S. airspace is not considered to be part of U.S. territory. A child born on such an aircraft outside U.S. airspace does not acquire U.S. citizenship by reason of the place of birth.
c. Birth on U.S. Military Base Outside of the United States or Birth on U.S. Embassy or Consulate Premises Abroad:
(1) Despite widespread popular belief, U.S. military installations abroad and U.S. diplomatic or consular facilities abroad are not part of the United States within the meaning of the 14th Amendment. A child born on the premises of such a facility is not born in the United States and does not acquire U.S. citizenship by reason of birth.
(2) The status of diplomatic and consular premises arises from the rules of law relating to immunity from the prescriptive and enforcement jurisdiction of the receiving State; the premises are not part of the territory of the United States of America. (See Restatement (Third) of Foreign Relations Law, Vol. 1, Sec. 466, Comment a and c (1987). See also, Persinger v. Iran, 729 F.2d 835 (D.C. Cir. 1984).
d. Birth on Foreign Ships In Foreign Government Non-Commercial Service:
(1) A child born on a foreign merchant ship or privately owned vessel in U.S. internal waters is considered as having been born subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. (See U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark.)
(2) Foreign warships, naval auxiliaries, and other vessels or aircraft owned or operated by a State and used for governmental non-commercial service are not subject to jurisdiction of the United States. Persons born on such vessels while in U.S. internal waters (or, of course, anywhere else) do not acquire U.S. citizenship by virtue of place of birth.
e. Alien Enemies During Hostile Occupation:
(1) If part of the United States were occupied by foreign armed forces against the wishes of the United States, children born to enemy aliens in the occupied areas would not be subject to U.S. jurisdiction and would not acquire U.S. citizenship at birth.
(2) Children born to persons other than enemy aliens in an area temporarily occupied by hostile forces would acquire U.S. citizenship at birth because sovereignty would not have been transferred to the other country. (See U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark.)
You stated: “Ted Cruz is so clearly not a natural born citizen for the purposes of constitutional office that it is laughable.”
—
Was/is BHO a natural born citizen? There is no original COLB. No it did not exist. There is no hospital record of the birth either. This is old crap, but the rule of law died with BHO. Insane ComDem corruption of our institutions.
The only problem with this supposition is that she filed one earlier for her son Michael who was born in England and died in infancy.
Ted Cruz is not a natural born citizen. No way the framers meant to allow King George himself to sire a child with an American woman and that child be president. It simply does not pass the smell test.
The natural born clause was a protection to the highest office in the land. If all you need is one parent being American to be natural born then how is it a protection? They could have said you need to be a citizen, but they did not, they specified natural born.
This is a special class of citizen with no divided loyalties at birth. The clause has always been and will always be about divided loyalties at birth.
“Until I worked a job where I needed to see someone’s birth certificate, I never knew there was such a thing as a Consular Report of Birth Abroad. I would guess that many people don’t realize this exists, so perhaps that is the reason that Mrs. Cruz did not apply for one at the time of Ted’s birth.”
Eleanor knew full well the CRBA existed, because she obtained on for her illegitimate son in London, England. There are news reports quoting a woman who says she was a neighbor of the Cruz family and drove Eleanor to some appointments to get her Canadian citizenship and sign up for Canadian social benefits. She also said that Eleanor went to the U.S. consulate to get the necessary documents claiming U.S.. citizenship for baby Ted Cruz, but the U.S. Consulate refused, citing Ted Cruz was a Canadian and not a U..S. citizen. The claim is made that she took Ted Cruz across the border and into the United States using her birth certificate and not a passport.
Cruz born in Canada which the USA was at war with from April 19, 1775 to September 3, 1783, with the Treaty of Paris and then again from June 18, 1812 to December 24, 1814, with The Treaty of Ghent that was the peace treaty that ended the War of 1812 between The United States Of America and the United Kingdom, No. Never!
You posted nothing of substance there Mr. Know-it-all. First off, that isn’t the complete reference for the FAM. Second, the FAM isn’t the law. It is only a guide printed by some State Dept employee for State Dept employees. It isn’t a legal reference.
Your barracks lawyers are all alike and know nothing.
Yeah, but...
It is NOT odd that two Ivy league lawyers who are ineligible have been offered up for the office of the presidency.
THIS IS A DELIBERATE PLAN TO UNDERMINE AND DILUTE THE US CONSTITUTION AND THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENCY AND ITS CONTROL OVER OUR MILITARY AS COMMANDER IN CHEIF.
Don’t kid yourself people. These two individuals have been assisted by many NWO globalist handlers along the way. It is completely 100% deliberate, not a coincidence. Quite the contrary and I was shocked to see that FR was supporting Cruz .
There are plenty of gifted students at the Ivy League schools and many that are much smarter academically than Ted Cruz. Ted did not come in through a feeder Ivy Prep School, he is not a minority in terms of scholarships. He has not rambled on about student loans. Why him? Who paid? How did he line up the prestigious SCOTUS clerkships and then happen to land with the Bushes. He is being lifted up and assisted by globalist that plan the new world order.
Cruz = Barry White II
republican white version of -> barry soetoro hussein flimflam alien foreign harvard-law first-year-senator with an obscured family background.
“Was/is BHO a natural born citizen?”
Of course not, his father was a british loyal subject for crying out loud. He is exactly what the framers meant to stop. Heck he is King George’s son!
Of course we all know that. The uniparty is here and they want it all!
None of it matters unless Cruz gets the nomination. Then the media will be on it 24/7, doing all they can to trash his chances at being elected.
“Cruz is an illegal alien.”
If he was an illegal alien, he stopped being an illegal alien after the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA), Pub.L. 99–603, 100 Stat. 3445, enacted November 6, 1986, also known as the Simpson–Mazzoli Act, signed into law by Ronald Reagan on November 6, 1986. After that, Ted Cruz was another naturalized U.S. citizen and not a natural born citizen.
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.