Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Trump Campaign Manager: Trump Will Debate Cruz Once Judge Rules Him Eligible To Run
BuzzFeed News ^ | 01/28/2016 | Christopher Massie

Posted on 01/28/2016 2:26:49 PM PST by SeekAndFind

Donald Trump's campaign manager Corey Lewandowski said on Thursday that his candidate would be "happy" to debate Ted Cruz once the Texas senator gets a federal judge to rule him eligible to run for president.

"Once you've gotten that ruling from the federal judge and you're the last man standing in this presidential contest next to Donald Trump, we'll be happy to have a debate with you one-on-one, anywhere you want, because that's the way the system works," Lewandowski said. "But, as it stands right now, we don't even know if Ted Cruz is legally eligible to run for president of the United States."

Trump and his supporters have argued that Cruz, who was born in Canada to a U.S. citizen, is not natural born and therefore ineligible to run for president under the Constitution.

Cruz challenged Trump to debate him one-on-one after Trump announced that he would not be attending the Fox News Republican presidential debate Thursday night because of objections to the presence of anchor Megyn Kelly and a statement Fox issued in response to his complaints. "What this is, is a publicity stunt by Senator Cruz who is continuing to fall in the polls in the state of Iowa," Lewandowski told Boston radio host Jeff Kuhner, before unleashing a slew of attacks at Cruz, arguing that he had used "dark money donors" through his super PAC to offer a donation to charity if Trump agreed to the debate.

"If Ted Cruz were able to disclose the loans that he's taken out from Goldman Sachs and Citi, then maybe he would use his own money for this, but instead he's using super PAC money which I don't even know if he can do legally," Lewandowski said, referring to loans Cruz took out during his 2012 run for Senate that he did not disclose in campaign filings. "And the bottom line is, you know what we've said to Ted Cruz, go into court, seek a declaratory judgment to find out if you're even legally eligible to run for president of the United States." In the interview, Lewandowski addressed his remark that Megyn Kelly had a "rough couple of days after that last debate" and "would hate to have her go through that again," which some at Fox News interpreted as a threat.

"That's not a threat. It's a factual statement," Lewandowski said. "And the bottom line, was, she did have a rough couple days after the debate because what she did during that first presidential debate was she made sure the debate was about her and not about the candidates who were actually on the stage."

Toward the end of the interview, Lewandowski took another shot at Cruz, this time over Cruz's criticism of Trump's support for eminent domain. Lewandowski said that eminent domain would be required to build the Keystone Pipeline, which Cruz supports. "The Keystone Pipeline, as you know, starts where Ted Cruz was born, in the country of Canada, and runs right down to where he lives now, in the state of Texas, and eminent domain is an issue that you know what unfortunately, sometimes you need to use it to get projects like that done," Lewandowski said.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: birthers; canadian; cruz; dividedloyalty; dualcitizenship; naturalborn; tinfoilhat; trump
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 261-280281-300301-320321-327 next last
To: hawaiianninja

>> it may behoove Cruz to “legally” set the matter straight.

How would that be possible?


281 posted on 01/28/2016 4:34:57 PM PST by Gene Eric (Don't be a statist!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: txhurl

Trump had Mafia associates involved in most of his construction deals and Trump’s dad had politicians and judgfes in his back pocket


282 posted on 01/28/2016 4:35:21 PM PST by SeaHawkFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: bushpilot2

That is a mere statement by a non-authoritive source?. How about citing a federal statute or US Supreme Court decusion.


283 posted on 01/28/2016 4:38:06 PM PST by SeaHawkFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: SeaHawkFan
Rogers v Bellei 1971  photo image_zps1khg0ikh.png
284 posted on 01/28/2016 4:41:06 PM PST by bushpilot2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 283 | View Replies]

To: Bryan24

Cruz has argued a number of times before the US Supreme Court.

You are mistaken about alot of things.


285 posted on 01/28/2016 4:41:15 PM PST by SeaHawkFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: SeaHawkFan
Rogers v Bellei  photo image_zps0haigbd8.jpeg
286 posted on 01/28/2016 4:47:15 PM PST by bushpilot2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 283 | View Replies]

To: bray

That was a masterful stroke of genius on Trump’s part.

Translation:

I’ll debate you any time anywhere as long as a judge certifies you eligible.

The art of the deal indeed. Simply an awesome man.


287 posted on 01/28/2016 4:49:17 PM PST by GilGil
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 151 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt
 photo image_zpsyaimz6ax.jpeg
288 posted on 01/28/2016 4:50:40 PM PST by bushpilot2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 256 | View Replies]

To: SeaHawkFan

That’s a given when big unions are involved isn’t it? You’re not saying Trump goes out looking to get the mob involved in his projects are you? Because if you are you should have more to back it up than just your good word.


289 posted on 01/28/2016 4:52:12 PM PST by uncitizen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 282 | View Replies]

To: uncitizen

Just Google Trump Mafia associates.


290 posted on 01/28/2016 4:56:17 PM PST by SeaHawkFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 289 | View Replies]

To: Gene Eric
That's a good question. I'm no lawyer. I did look up that article though, from Fox News. Judge Napalitano points out that Cruz's citizenship is settled and established.

Quote from the article: Napolitano said Cruz could benefit from getting this cleared up now, rather than later. But he noted that Trump is correct that the Supreme Court has never reviewed the law "because the issue has never come up."
291 posted on 01/28/2016 4:58:49 PM PST by hawaiianninja (Palm note to self: "Prepare for some serious 2016 house cleaning. Trump/Cruz or Cruz/Trump 2016!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 281 | View Replies]

To: DoodleDawg
ROTFL!!!! Having spent months publicly questioning Cruz's eligibility how can Trump turn around and then select him as VP? There is absolutely no way Trump can offer the position to Cruz, and absolutely no way Cruz would ever accept it if he did.

You would be surprised.

292 posted on 01/28/2016 5:05:27 PM PST by Irish Eyes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 231 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Bogus Pachysandra
Cruz needs to settle this issue. I don’t know how, but he MUST do it!

I agree it can't just be hanging out there. The dems will use it for sure.

293 posted on 01/28/2016 5:07:20 PM PST by Irish Eyes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 207 | View Replies]

To: hawaiianninja

Clarence Thomas admitted that they were ducking the question of The Usurper’s eligibilty.
They know he is ineligible.
So if they are forced to make a ruling it will be to find him eligible changing the definition from born here of citizen parents (Minor vs Happersett) to simply being born a citizen, making every anchor baby (with no loyalty to the US) and Winston Churchill eligible. (his mother was American)


294 posted on 01/28/2016 5:09:58 PM PST by Lurkinanloomin (Know Islam, No Peace - No Islam, Know Peace)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 291 | View Replies]

To: John S Mosby

Wow...hey thank you for taking the time to post that information - cheers!


295 posted on 01/28/2016 5:12:59 PM PST by Caipirabob (Communists... Socialists... Democrats...Traitors... Who can tell the difference?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 267 | View Replies]

To: Irish Eyes
You would be surprised.

In this case? I'd be flat-out amazed.

296 posted on 01/28/2016 5:31:19 PM PST by DoodleDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 292 | View Replies]

To: John S Mosby

That Resolution was a fig leaf. It carries no legal weight.
They can declare anyone to be anything but it does not change the Constitution.


297 posted on 01/28/2016 5:42:12 PM PST by Lurkinanloomin (Know Islam, No Peace - No Islam, Know Peace)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 267 | View Replies]

To: DoodleDawg

That’s just it; I have not heard Donald Trump say that Ted Cruz is not eligible. What I have heard is that Donald Trump thinks Ted Cruz should get a court verdict saying that Ted Cruz is eligible, or is not not eligible (if that’s a term). If you think those two statements mean the same thing, we can stop trying to come to an agreement.


298 posted on 01/28/2016 5:44:03 PM PST by Bernard (The Road To Hell Is Not Paved With Good Results)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 224 | View Replies]

To: John S Mosby

So what happens now obama becoming President has set a new idea of natural born.


299 posted on 01/28/2016 5:46:34 PM PST by Irish Eyes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 267 | View Replies]

To: bushpilot2
If you're going to be involved in government in the United States, citizenship is a must.
To be a Senator or Representative, you must be a citizen of the United States.
To be President, not only must you be a citizen, but you must also be natural-born.
Aside from participation in government, citizenship is an honor bestowed upon people by the citizenry of the United States when a non-citizen passes the required tests and submits to an oath.

Natural-born citizen

Who is a natural-born citizen?
Who, in other words, is a citizen at birth, such that that person can be a President someday?

The 14th Amendment defines citizenship this way:But even this does not get specific enough.
As usual, the Constitution provides the framework for the law, but it is the law that fills in the gaps.
The Constitution authorizes the Congress to create clarifying legislation inalso allows the Congress to create law regarding naturalization,


Currently, Title 8 of the U.S. Code fills in the gaps left by the Constitution.
Section 1401 defines the following as people who are "citizens of the United States at birth:"

  • Anyone born inside the United States *
      * There is an exception in the law - - the person must be "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States.
      This would exempt the child of a diplomat, for example, from this provision.
  • Any Indian or Eskimo born in the United States, provided being a citizen of the U.S. does not impair the person's status as a citizen of the tribe
  • Any one born outside the United States, both of whose parents are citizens of the U.S., as long as one parent has lived in the U.S.
  • Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year and the other parent is a U.S. national
  • Any one born in a U.S. possession, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year
  • Any one found in the U.S. under the age of five, whose parentage cannot be determined, as long as proof of non-citizenship is not provided by age 21
  • Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is an alien and as long as the other parent is a citizen of the U.S. who lived in the U.S. for at least five years (with military and diplomatic service included in this time)
  • A final, historical condition:
      a person born before 5/24/1934 of an alien father and a U.S. citizen mother who has lived in the U.S.

Anyone falling into these categories is considered natural-born, and is eligible to run for President or Vice President.
These provisions allow the children of military families to be considered natural-born,
for example.

Separate sections handle territories that the United States has acquired over time, such asEach of these sections confer citizenship on persons living in these territories as of a certain date,
and usually confer natural-born status on persons born in those territories after that date.
    For example, for Puerto Rico, all persons born in Puerto Rico between April 11, 1899, and January 12, 1941, are automatically conferred citizenship as of the date the law was signed by the President (June 27, 1952).
    Additionally, all persons born in Puerto Rico on or after January 13, 1941, are natural-born citizens of the United States.
      Note that because of when the law was passed, for some, the natural-born status was retroactive.

The law contains one other section of historical note, concerning the Panama Canal Zone and the nation of Panama.
In 8 USC 1403, the law states that
    anyone born in the Canal Zone or in Panama itself, on or after February 26, 1904, to a mother and/or father who is a United States citizen,
    was "declared" to be a United States citizen.
      Note that the terms "natural-born" or "citizen at birth" are missing from this section.

In 2008, when Arizona Senator John McCain ran for president on the Republican ticket, some theorized that
    because McCain was born in the Canal Zone,
    he was not actually qualified to be president.
However, it should be noted that section 1403 was written to apply to a small group of people to whom section 1401 did not apply.
McCain is a natural-born citizen under 8 USC 1401(c):
    "a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents both of whom are citizens of the United States
    and one of whom has had a residence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions, prior to the birth of such person."
Not everyone agrees that this section includes McCain - - but absent a court ruling either way, we must presume citizenship.

U.S. Nationals

A "national" is a person who is considered under the legal protection of a country, while not necessarily a citizen.
National status is generally conferred on persons who lived in places acquired by the U.S. before the date of acquisition.
A person can be a national-at-birth under a similar set of rules for a natural-born citizen.

U.S. nationals must go through the same processes as an immigrant to become a full citizen.
U.S. nationals who become citizens are not considered natural-born.

300 posted on 01/28/2016 5:53:15 PM PST by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 203 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 261-280281-300301-320321-327 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson