Posted on 01/24/2016 1:04:47 AM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
I usually enjoy reading Ann Coulter's columns thanks to her acerbic wit and gutsy grit. But, being human, she has flaws, among which is a penchant to suspend rationality when advocating for her flavor of the year in Republican presidential candidates. In past years, it was Chris Christie and Mitt Romney. Now, thanks mainly to his tough stance on immigration, it's Donald Trump.
This infatuation has caused her to write some ridiculous things about the eligibility of Ted Cruz for the presidency. Her use of the term "naturalization" is, frankly, unworthy of her status as a law school graduate. A recently published article from the Harvard Law Review holds that: "All the sources routinely used to interpret the Constitution confirm that the phrase 'natural born citizen' has a specific meaning - namely, someone who is a U.S. citizen at birth with no need to go through a naturalization proceeding at some later time." Cruz meets this requirement.
There are only two paths to citizenship: automatically at birth, or after one's birth through some legal process such as immigration and naturalization. The plain meaning of "natural born citizen" is understood to be a person who was a citizen "naturally" by reason of birth, as differentiated from obtaining citizenship later in life. In 1790, the First Congress passed a law providing, "And the children of citizens of the United States, that may be born beyond sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens."
Newton Schwartz, an 85-year-old lawyer, has filed a lawsuit in a federal district court in Texas challenging Cruz' eligibility. Schwartz told Bloomberg News that, while he's not linked to any particular presidential campaign, he will probably support Democrat/Socialist Bernie Sanders of Vermont. Nice company you're in, Annie!
Legally, this man has no "standing" to file this action. Only another presidential candidate could do so. If Trump actually thinks Cruz is ineligible, let him file suit and request expedited consideration which, along with any subsequent appeals, would surely be decided on an emergency basis. Otherwise, let's move on to real issues!
Trump said yesterday the Democrats are filing the lawsuit, and he is not going to for that reason and other reasons.
How is that a lie. I remember seeing it discussed here on FR. He’s used eminent domain numerous times from what I’ve read.
Actually not hard to figure out with Benedict Roberts at the helm.
Cruz is not a naturalized citizen.
Not in your mind he's not. But he is in the eyes of the law. See Rogers v. Bellei, if you can't "get there" by application of the constitution alone.
They are going to decide for political reasons, like they do everything else.
Law at the time of Cruz birth allowed for birth citizenship if either parent was an American citizen.
Benedict likes his Georgetown cocktail parties.
Imagine how he’d feel if he was on the “do not invite” list. The country be damned.
Two kinds of citizenship. Citizenship and birth and naturalized. Cruz was granted citizenship at birth. He did not petition a Court to become a citizen.
How is it a lie? Because it didn’t happen. Trump never acquired even one square inch of property through eminent domain.
Read and see the unbelievable contortions some go though to avoid admitting the statement is a lie;
http://freerepublic.com/focus/news/3387649/posts?page=13#13
As an outsider, here is what your Republican presidential race sounds like.
Natural Born Citizen
Settled law
No, it is not.
Yes, it is
No, it is not.
Yes, it is.
No, it is not.
Yes, it is
No, it is not.
Yes, it is.
Besides, Trump is a liar.
No, he is not,
Cruz is a liar.
No, he is not.
Trump is a liar.
No, he is not,
Cruz is a liar.
No, he is not.
Where is Ted Cruz’s CRBA?
Well according to numerous posts he tried to take it. Forcing the issue to the courts.
So your post that it was a lie was incomplete and misleading. An untruth.
Newborns lack the capacity to petition anybody. His Cuban citizenship at birth had as much validity as his US citizenship. His US citizenship is conferred by Act of Congress, otherwise he would be an alien. He is a citizen contained in the "naturalized" part of the 14th amendment to the US constitution.
I've gone around in this circle with a few people who hold as you do, most of whom haven't read the law (US constitution and SCOTUS precedent re: citizenship to a person born abroad), and those who have read the law and maintain Cruz is not naturalized have to either engage in some form or intellectual dishonesty or magic thinking.
Ted Cruz’s tweet in post 9 is a lie. There is no way around the fact it is a lie.
Ted Cruz’s tweet in post 9 is a lie. There is no way around the fact it is a lie.
By law he was a citizen at birth due to his mother’s citizenship.
What issue do you speak of?
And if having a 'northeastern twang' is denigration, well, so be it.
So trump didn’t take this woman to court in order to steal her property?
Drill down to the actual summation statement in the thread, at the ad site, and in Ted’s tweet;
“This is actually a pretty good ad exposing how Trump has used eminent domain to bulldoze an elderly woman’s home to create a limo parking lot for his casino:â€
That statement asserts - as fact - the following;
- An elderly woman’s home was bulldozed.
- Trump used eminent domain to bulldoze the woman’s home.
- a parking lot was built where the home was.
All three in factual reality are not true. They are lies.
Do you not have a problem with using lies to make a point? If there is a need to lie to make a point all credibility as a truth supporter disappears in a flash of short circuited logic.
Is that not a problem?? If not why not??
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.