Posted on 02/16/2016 7:07:28 PM PST by NKP_Vet
US Senator Ted Cruz, from Texas, has been under fire in his bid for the White House due to his Canadian citizenship records which make it quite clear that he does not meet the Constitutional "natural born Citizen" requirement for the Oval Office, despite the opinion letter from his Harvard friends.
Following a total lack of vetting on Barack Hussein Obama in 2008 and 2012, many insist that no one ever enter the Oval Office again without proper vetting, including proof of meeting all Constitutional requirements for office. Obama's massive destruction of our Constitutional Republic has placed the issue of Constitutional eligibility on the front burner for many Americans, and partisanship has nothing to do with it.
In the effort to vet every 2016 presidential candidate, Cruz, who had once stated that both he and Barack Obama were ineligible for the Oval Office, found himself under tight scrutiny from the same people who tried to stop Obama from taking the Oval Office via fraud. Ted placed himself in the crosshairs of constitutionalists who do not care about partisan politics, by seeking an office he is not eligible to seek.
In investigating Cruz eligibility for the Oval Office, his eligibility for the US Senate came into question...
The Constitutional requirements for the US Senate are as follows;
"No Person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty Years, and been nine Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State for which he shall be chosen."
(Excerpt) Read more at northamericanlawcenter.org ...
If Cruz’s mother was a naturalized Canadian citizen (as some speculate or even allege) when she delivered Ted, then he would not be a U.S. citizen at all.
If she retained her American citizenship then he of course is a citizen as well.
How anyone can conclude that the son of a foreign citizen could be a natural born citizen which is distinct from being ‘a citizen’ of the United States is baffling to me
Probably because you attended a public skewel and your teacher was ignorant.
How long does this NBC condition remain in effect? Perpetuity?
Can persons who have never stepped foot in the United States pass on their NBC into the next generations forever?
This is the logic of your position.
If you keep on repeating your cherished fantasy that has been continually rejected by the courts, maybe it will magically come true! Is that how it works at the Happy Acres nursing home?
Then produce it, since he won't. You have seen nothing except his Canadian Birth Certificate and you don't just get to pick what country you want to be a citizen of. There has to exist documentation that was required for him to come to this country and reside other than my personal files and documentation have been sealed. Wo really can legally do that?
It really doesn't matter his is never going to be President in any case. Get used to it.
Actually I think they do since Canadians are born Subjects not Citizens. I don't think they get all bitchy about that sort of thing any more though.
where does your opinion appear in the Constitution?
The Constitution and its Bill of Rights aren’t the only documents utilized in the construction of Federal Law. In fact, the framers thereof also considered natural law and common law as reliable and important.
This isn’t BS if you take a minute to think ahead of the Nation’s future. Go back and re-read the thread because you obviously missed a few things.
The way modern times have chipped away at the family unit has a lot to do with why and how abortion issues exist now, and obviously that’s an issue of importance to you.
It is important to settle this issue before the toe in the door allows the entire camel into the tent. When our chief executive has NO allegiance to the people or to the nation, what sort of trickery is forbidden him then? What ground is there to stand on?
The fact that questions exist regarding the eligibility of any candidate should be enough to void that person’s candidacy for public office if he can’t or won’t produce the necessary paperwork for that office. Otherwise, the requirement of any paperwork at all is a total waste of materials and time. It’s much better to err on the side of caution, than to open Pandora’s box.
The man is young enough to make another run for the office if he should be disqualified at this time, or isn’t able to produce what he needs to produce, and needs more time to do so. However, it’s still a grave situation in that he should have had all those T’s crossed and I’s dotted. The fact that he didn’t, leaves the lid open on that box which has proven to cause problems and issues.
AND, the democrats are talking about suing him if he wins, or if Trump doesn’t. He’s sort of in a check/mate situation.
Obama should never have been allowed into office with the questions about his nationality. All records offered for public office should automatically become public..I’m surprised they aren’t! The fact that a person would pay out millions of dollars to hide the truth certainly casts a shadow on that person’s forthrightness and integrity.
The law demands we acquire and have certain documents for certain purposes. I’d like to see you withhold those required documents from say...the social security admin. when you retire and want to make a claim for your benefits. If you don’t produce them, and ssa can’t acquire them, then you forfeit your claim! You aren’t eligible.
If Cruz, or anybody else doesn’t have the required documents to supply for public office, then he/she must be considered ineligible. It’s that simple. Otherwise, by default, he doesn’t qualify.
Awesome article. Finally proof that a chimpanzee can operate a keyboard and post to the Internet.
There is not one shred of hard evidence that Cruz’s mom became a Canadian citizen and renounced her US citizenship. There are speculative items of interest and one or two possible items of circumstantial evidence but that’s it. Basically, until someone shows a renunciation of citizenship or a certificate of Canadian citizenship for Cruz’s mom then all of this is mere conjecture.
No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President
It was taught nationwide.
“Seriously, there were times in American history when foreign birth (natural) citizenship required the father to be a citizen, or both, but of course that was not the case at the time of the birth of Ted Cruz abroad.”
The only thing about that is that the citizenship requirements you mentioned are locked into the Constitution and can only be changed through the amendment process.
Sort of like the effort to change the meaning of “shall not be infringed”
< /sarc>
The only ‘evidence’ I am aware of is the charge that she was a registered Voter in Canada. I do not know if that is true. I also do not know if it is true that only Canadian citizens can register to vote there. That makes sense to me, but I still do not know.
I checked on that.
It seems that the rolls are kept by residence with a district and not by eligibility.
So, if you live in some precinct in Toronto, then your name is on that list whether you are an eligible voter or not.
That gets sorted out differently.
Why are his records sealed? What’s he hiding?
Yes, Yes, and Yes.
As xzins has observed, what WOULD make a difference would be actual PROOF that Cruz's mother had formally (not by implication or inference) renounced her American citizenship BEFORE giving birth to Ted.
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.