Posted on 01/30/2016 11:10:12 AM PST by GodGunsGuts
...
The first thought that comes to mind is that Trump keeps coming back to this attack against Cruz for a couple of reasons. The first is that he cannot make attacks on Cruz's record of standing up for conservative principles the centerpiece of his strategy because that leaves him open to greater scrutiny of his own liberal record...
(Excerpt) Read more at redstate.com ...
Red State reveals how ignorant they are of the law with statements like this, and so does Ted Cruz for that matter. I suspect it's deliberate, designed to confuse people who are not educated on the constitution and the natural born citizen issue.
Funny, you said two the first time.
Is Queen Noors sons eligible for POTUS under the Constitution?
How about Winston Churchill?
Both have American mothers.
The lifespan was shorter then and it was a substantial portion of a life. That is the decision they made. There are letters in which they discussed the requirement between themselves.
There is additional information on many sites as to the reasons 14 years was chosen. One site with good references is: http://birthers.org/USC/ArtIIS1.html
Do you have a source for that, I'd like to learn about it.
Most people refer to the CRBA, and if Ted lost his FS-545, it would be replaced, after 1990, with a CRBA.
As for the government applying law to itself, you have got to be kidding me! We are in a glorified banana republic.
How about a teeny tiny taste of what the dems will do to the Donald if he makes it to the general (just imagine all the stuff they could have put in there if they wanted to devote a little more time...they will turn him into a laughing stock in no time):
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3390733/posts
So you are standing firm on the legal inferiority of women under the Constitution? Good luck with that.
Re: 77. At birth. I think you know that.
So, what ever it is that Ted has lost, or found, or was created, or that he claimed, declares what? Sorry to be dense.
WTH is he, in your opinion, less the legalese? NBC, or naturalized?
LOL. I saw that. Some of these things I take with a grain of salt. We’ll see how it goes.
Of course it’s a lot nicer to read your guy looks good, but sometimes I’m a little leery.
Some people want to see his CRBA or equivalent. All that proves is that he was naturalized, and if is naturalized (he is), then he is not qualified to be president.
If he can't prove he is a citizen, that makes him an alien, and he is not qualified for the senate or the presidency. I doubt he is an alien, even though he was presumed to be one (Canada BC) until he presented evidence to the contrary.
The problem for the Democrats is that TRUMP has already, and will continue, to plead “GUILTY, as charged” and then move on.
They will hit jello really hard, like Cruz has tried. See where it has gotten Cruz.
Trump is the stephen colbert of the GOP. Its all an act.
Oh so you want more of the same insanity of the last 20 years?
Oh yeah “THIS TIME” the same old politicians will SAVE US just like they did in 2014 mid terms right?????
Pure insanity for doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result this time.
With this and his skipping the debate, I’m annoyed with Donald Trump. I still support him, but he’s made some avoidable mistakes.
This is why Conservatives and Republicans lose.
Trump makes a silly off-the-cuff remark and Conservatives analyze it to death and write endless arguments and columns justifying their position.
Our side gets so easily distracted and is so easily manipulated that it's embarrassing.
It’s virtually impossible for Cruz to “clear this up,” because he can’t just wander down to the courthouse and ask a judge’s opinion. It doesn’t work that way. Someone with standing (very hard to get) has to bring a case or controversy against him first. Some folks are trying to do that now. I believe they will probably all fail on standing. But even if one of them got through the standing barrier, SCOTUS would probably not take it up, because there is a political process in place by which such things can be determined, the whole “political question” doctrine, which gives SCOTUS a great way to duck the question.
It is one of the oddities of the law in this area. The only possible case in which SCOTUS could produce a binding precedential ruling on the constitutional term “natural born citizen” belongs to a category of case SCOTUS is unlikely to ever take up, presidential eligibility. Everything else misses the mark. There is a possibility it will never be adjudicated.
I have suggested this before. It is unfair to all born American candidates to leave in doubt their capacity to run for the highest office in the land. Bullies like Trump can use it to discredit good, well-qualified candidates much better than himself. We need a constitutional amendment. That would be about the only way to resolve this for everybody. I propose we call it the “Natural Born American Act,” or something like that. We could use it to settle once and for all whether our born American citizens can ever be considered truly one of us, to the extent we would trust them with the position of Commander in Chief. I can think of no one more qualified than Cruz to hold that position of trust. He and everyone in his situation ought to be able to make their case for that trust on something more substantial than their gps coordinates at the time of their birth.
Peace,
SR
Trump is the same old insanity of the last few decades.
Its time to elect someone who won’t make deals with that nice pelosi & schumer
“With this and his skipping the debate, I’m annoyed with Donald Trump.”
Oh...really? >>>YOU’RE ANNOYED?!?!?!<<<
Well, I’m sure DT is just inconsolable.
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.