Posted on 01/03/2014 12:16:29 PM PST by SoConPubbie
Sen. Ted Cruz isn’t leaving any room for doubt. He’s reached out to his lawyers — and met with billionaire businessman Donald Trump — and is taking steps to renounce his citizenship with Canada.
The tea-party favorite said he only discovered he held dual American-Canadian citizenship after the Dallas Morning News reported it a few months ago. But he doesn’t want the issue to become an albatross — as it did for President Obama over his birth certificate when a host of sources, from politicos to Mr. Trump, questioned his true place of birth. So Mr. Cruz is taking a dramatic action.
“I have retained counsel that is preparing the paperwork to renounce the citizenship” with Canada, he said, The Daily Mail reported.
Mr. Cruz said he expects the process will wrap in 2014.
The Dallas Morning News reported in August that Mr. Cruz’s parents lived in Calgary when he was born, and they only moved to America when he was 4 years old. Mr. Cruz’s citizenship has taken on especial importance in recent months as talk about the next presidential election simmers, and the Texas senator is thought to be a possible GOP candidate.
Mr. Cruz said to the Dallas Morning News that he’d discussed his birth with Mr. Trump — who once launched his own investigation into Mr. Obama’s birth certificate — but “not in any significant respect.”
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
He is also the principal framer of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
Even George Romney's birth in Mexico was an issue when he ran for the Republican nomination in 1968.
But any objections regarding Obama's father not being a citizen in 2008? Nary a peep. At least, not an audible one.
Not until after the election. Not until after the true location of his birth had become a credible question.
Which has been interpreted by SCOTUS in a manner contrary to his intentions. I understand that...and I'm not in favor of the "nuance".
However, Mr. Bingham's opinion on the separate matter of Article II is just that -- his opinion. Not known to be the Founders' true intent nor the court's interpretation.
Helpful...but not decisive.
Fear mostly. Fear of being labelled a racist by the liberal mainstream media. Roger Ailes shut down any dissent from commentators on FOX news.
I suggest you read some of the links I’ve provided if you would like to learn more about the Founders ‘true intent’.
Fear? Several thousands-or-so might fear media retribution.
But that leaves more than a few million who a.) knew that Obama's father was not a citizen and, since it's so obvious now, b.) should have known this automatically made him ineligible.
Why didn't anybody blow the whistle?
Not everybody reports to Roger Ailes. Not every constitutional scholar or law professor is a liberal.
In actuality, isn't it more likely that nobody in a position to know thought it was a disqualifying circumstance?
Remember to vote out the RINOs that condemned Cruz.
In August 2008, the Rocky Mountain News ran an online article asserting that Obama is both a U.S. and a Kenyan citizen.[90] This turned out to be incorrect according to FactCheck.org, which noted that Obama was indeed born a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies (CUKC) under British law, by virtue of his descent from a Kenyan father at a time when Kenya was a British colony, but lost CUKC citizenship and became a Kenyan citizen when that country gained independence in 1963. However, Kenya's constitution prohibits dual citizenship in adulthood. Obama therefore automatically lost his Kenyan citizenship on his 23rd birthday, in 1984, by failing to formally renounce any non-Kenyan citizenship and swear an oath of allegiance to Kenya.[91] Although the paper apologized for the error and published a correction, the article continued to provide fuel for online rumors about Obama's eligibility for the presidency.
I'll grant that an article in the Rocky Mountain News in August, 2008 -- even though it's based on an incorrect supposition -- counts as an "audible peep".
But barely...
Thank you very much for your reply..this will be very interesting.
Thanks for the reply..we will see what the left does with it...fun to follow.
Birthers need to be warned to stay off such threads.
Report: Ted Cruz could ride Tea Party support to White House
[birther trolls stay out! JimRob]
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3086488/posts?page=111#111
FYI: This website supports tea party constitutionalist Ted Cruz for president to the hilt. Those who join with the libs, RINOS and GOP-e to openly work against us on this will be considered our political foe and will be treated accordingly. FR will not be used to harm his chances. Take your birther trolling elsewhere.
[111 posted on 11/01/2013 9:51:04 PM PDT by Jim Robinson]
Ted Cruz: the second coming of Ronald Reagan.
Ted Cruz for president 2016/2020!
Oh God How I love this man!
You seem to rely heavily on mainstream media coverage of an issue rather than the facts and evidence surrounding the issue. Strange considering your tag line: (The Mainstream Media — IGNORANCE ON PARADE)
The fact remains, nobody was blowing any warning whistles about Obama's father not being a US citizen. Evidently, nobody of any authority or prominence or expertise was disturbed that this might affect his qualification for the office of the President.
Nor was Obama, or anybody else, trying to hide this fact.
There were (virtually) no warnings reported in the mainstream media prior to the election; nor was it reported in the conservative media; nor was it reported in the alternative media.
Indeed, the possibility that Daddy not being a US citizen might disqualify Obama seemingly wasn't "discovered" until around 2010 -- which makes me suspicious about who it was who was promoting the idea.
the possibility that Daddy not being a US citizen might disqualify Obama seemingly wasn’t “discovered” until around 2010 ...
____________________________________________________________
I don’t remember there being an issue of O’s being ineligible (based on where he was born/who his father was) to be US President during the 2008 election either...but it could be that I just don’t remember.
Re: Ted Cruz...could the issue also be that his parents didn’t register his birth or declare his US citizenship when they lived in Canada or when they moved back to US? His parents may not have thought they had to do anything to declare his US citizenship. I don’t know...but I don’t understand all the issues of renouncing citizenship of another country.
Cruz's birth was immediately reported to the U.S. Consulate in Calgary and he was registered as a U.S. citizen at birth.
End of story.
The fact that he also gained Canadian citizenship by virtue of being born on Canadian soil is irrelevant under US law. It would have been relevant only if, upon reaching his majority, Cruz had opted to become a Canadian citizen rather than a US citizen.
Not disputing his US citizenship. Was just wondering why it has taken so long to renounce his Canadian citizeship status. From the different reports I have read, some have written that it used to be fairly easy to renounce Canadian citizenship...but that some recent changes make it more diificult. I would think just from an optics prespective, Cruz would not wish to have dual citizenship. Why give someone even a chance to make his status an issue?
Cruz said he didn’t renounce it because he was told by his mother who hadn’t received it and his father who renounced it that he had to positive affirm it for it to be effective for him.
And, honestly, if you look at the Canadian immigration laws in effect when his family lived in Canada, dual citizenship was not preferred by the Canadian government. For the most part, Canadians were forbidden to have dual citizenship with some exceptions that were a matter of legaleze.
So, if his parents had that understanding, and it would have been a normal one, then Cruz believing he had to positively affirm Canadian citizenship is probably true and probably came from his parents.
To explain why Cruz says his parents told him he had to positively affirm his Canadian citizenship in order to retain it -- From the MapleLeaf website about Canadian citizenship. http://www.mapleleafweb.com/old/features/general/citizenship/canada-first-citizenship-act.html
However, this created problems for a group of individuals who, unknowingly, lost their Canadian citizenship as children. Under the terms of the 1947 Citizenship Act, although born in Canada, children automatically lost their Canadian citizenship if the “responsible parent” (usually the father) lost his Canadian citizenship when s/he emigrated to another country. The decision to move and take up residence in another country was frequently driven by financial considerations; in many cases the “responsible parent” was the only member of the family to leave Canada, doing so in order to find work. In other cases the family returned to Canada after only a few years, at which time the “responsible parent” took steps to regain his/her Canadian citizenship. Unfortunately, the family frequently remained unaware of the need to regain Canadian citizenship for the children as well.The 1977 Citizenship Act endeavoured to correct this flaw in the original legislation. From 1977 onwards children would not, under similar conditions, lose their Canadian citizenship. However, since the legislation was not retroactive, it had no impact on the legal status of children, born between 1947 and 1977, who lost their Canadian citizenship in this manner.
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.