Donald Trump Targets Ted Cruz [and it's helping Cruz]

Wall Street Journal ^ | January 10, 2016 | Heather Haddon and Janet Hook

[Cincinatus' Wife]

Donald Trump is taking aim at Republican presidential rival Sen. Ted Cruz, a tactical shift that could be risky on two fronts: It may have come too late, and the Texas senator might actually be benefiting from the attacks......

For Mr. Cruz, being under attack by other Republicans is a badge of honor, another backer said. "It's a quasi-endorsement of Cruz to the grass roots," said Saul Anuzis, former Michigan GOP chairman.

Polls show a growing number of Trump backers see Mr. Cruz as their second choice. Cruz spokesman Rick Tyler said that when the campaign began, polls showed that only 4% of Trump backers saw his boss as their second choice. A new poll by NBC/SurveyMonkey finds that number has risen to 39%.

The latest Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll found that 66% of Trump voters said they would consider supporting Mr. Cruz -- far more than other major candidates....

[County Agent Hank Kimball]

To support what you say here, it’s noteworthy that Trump has only once backed off criticism of one of his fellow candidates. That was went he called Cruz a “maniac.”

The next day, very influential conservative voices - notably Rush Limbaugh and Mark Levin - who had to that point given Trump a pass on his ideological apostacies, began fiercely attacking him.

It was pretty clear that Trump (or his people) quickly concluded that it would be unwise to have the full force of these two in focused opposition to him. Having the MSM mock him is one thing - that’s a badge of honor among conservatives. But if Levin and Limbaugh take the YUGE amount of available evidence that Trump is no movement conservative and start hammering him with it night after night? That would really have hurt him - and Trump knew it.

So how did he respond, given a chance to slam Cruz at the next debate? By saying Cruz’s temperament is “just fine.”

No coincidence, that.

Hank

[Yosemitest]

" ...Cruz said that "our immigration system is broken".
A liberal talking point.
It is, of course, not enforced.
If it were enforced, there would not be any problem.

Does that sound "consistently conservative" to you?
Add to that his stated desire to get the illegals "out of the shadows" (before Trump started his run).
Add to that his vote for the Corker bill, his vote for TPA, his reluctance to call for deportation (I don't INTEND to allow them to stay), and the man has liberal talking points in his mind."

Well, let's talk a detailed look at what TED CRUZ positions are, and EXACTLY WHAT he said.

TED CRUZ chose to stand with others like Jeff Sessions and Steve King and the American people, to secure the border.

Source:

... Cruz even indicated he would back deporting those who came here illegally -- another proposal he has usually rebuffed.

"I would enforce the law," Cruz said, explaining that he would first deport criminals without proper papers.
"Federal immigration law provides that
if someone is here illegally and is apprehended,
that they should be sent back to their home country."

Cruz has recently begun stressing that he believes the number of undocumented immigrants would decrease with strict border enforcement.
...

"The only people I'm under fire from are reporters who want to throw rocks," Cruz said in Harlan.
"Once we've demonstrated that we can solve the problem, then we can have a conversation about what to do about whatever people remain illegally."

The Rubio campaign ...
"He has attempted to muddy the waters," Cruz said on the stage. "Where there was a battle over amnesty
and some chose, like Sen. Rubio to stand with Barack Obama and Chuck Schemer
and support a massive amnesty plan.
Others chose to stand with Jeff Sessions and Steve King and the American people
and secure the border."

Let's get VERY CLEAR on TED CRUZ and Immigration:

Immigration

As the son of a Cuban immigrant, Sen. Cruz celebrates LEGAL immigration.
He has championed measures
to secure the border,
reform the LEGAL immigration system,
and uphold the rule of law.

Americans, and particularly Texans, have witnessed the harmful effects of an unsecure border,
endangering the lives both of citizens and those who enter illegally.
President Obama's policies have encouraged drug smugglers, child abusers, murderers, and other dangerous criminals to traffick immigrant children into our nation under life-threatening conditions.
In the summer of 2013 we witnessed a humanitarian crisis at our Southern Border, propelled by PROMISES OF AMNESTY FROM THE WHITE HOUSE .
Immigrants deserve a better system in which they will be welcomed to the United States safely and with dignity.

As a critical step to protecting families and inviting more people to enter LEGALLY, in 2014, Sen. Cruz proposed legislation TO PREVENT OBAMA FROM ILLEGALLY EXPANDING AMNESTY .
The House acted to solve the ongoing crisis and passed bills that closely mirrored Sen. Cruz's proposals,
but regrettably the Senate DemocRATS REFUSED TO ALLOW A VOTE on the measures.

In 2013, Sen. Cruz proposed amendments to the "Gang of 8";bill that would
strengthen border security,
expand green card opportunities,
increase high-skilled 'H1B'visas, PREVENT ILLEGAL ALIENS FROM RECEIVING WELFARE BENEFITS ,
and enforce the rule of law.

ALSO from On The Issues :

Ted Cruz on Immigration

End Obama's illegal amnesty via Congress' checks & balances
Q: How to respond to the split within your party on immigration?
What you're saying is
that the Republicans should vote to fund the governments for all departments except one:
no funding for the Department of Homeland Security,
which handles immigration, rescinding President Obama's executive action,
and if he vetoes that, he's responsible for shutting down the department.
The problem is
that's almost exactly what you did with the government shutdown across the entire government in 2013 with ObamaCare,
and it backfired badly on your party.

CRUZ: All across this country, Republicans campaigned, saying:
if you elect a Republican Senate, we will stop President Obama's illegal amnesty.
We need to HONOR WHAT WE SAID .
We should use the constitutional checks and balances that we have TO REIN IN THE ABUSE OF POWER OF THE EXECUTIVE.
Step #1 is IF the president implements this LAWLESS AMNESTY, that THE SENATE WILL NOT CONFIRM ANY executive or judicial nominees.


Defund amnesty; and refuse any nominees until rescinded

Q: How would you rescind President Obama's executive action on immigration?

CRUZ: We should use the constitutional checks and balances that we have TO REIN IN THE ABUSE OF POWER OF THE EXECUTIVE .
Step #1 that I have called for is the incoming majority leader should announce IF the president implements this LAWLESS AMNESTY, that THE SENATE WILL NOT CONFIRM ANY executive or judicial nominees,
other than VITALl national security positions,
for the next two years,
UNLESS AND UNTIL the president ENDS THIS LAWLESS AMNESTY .
That is AN EXPLICIT AUTHORITY given TO the Senate.

Q: Are you saying the Senate should REFUSE TO CONFIRM the president's new nominee for attorney general?

CRUZ: We have to REIN IN the executive.
And step #2, we've got is THE POWER OF THE PURSE,
and we should FUND ONE AT A TIME the CRITICAL PRIORITIES of the federal government,
but ALSO USE THE POWER OF THE PURSE TO ATTACH RIDERS .


No path to citizenship for 1.65 million illegals in Texas

When discussing what to do about the 1.65 million ILLEGAL immigrants living in Texas, . . . CRUZ again said
HE DID NOT SUPPORT A PATH TO CITIZENSHIP FOR ILLEGAL immigrants living in America, . . .

Give police more power to ask about immigration status

Cruz accused Dewhurst of using his position as head of the Texas Senate to KILL A BILL last year that would have given police more power to ask anyone they detain about their citizenship status--a charge Dewhurst denied.
Both agreed that the US has FAILED TO SECURE ITS BORDER with Mexico,
and said they OPPOSE AMNESTY for ILLEGAL immigrants and the Obama administration's new directive
allowing many young illegal immigrants brought to the US as children to be exempted from deportation.


Boots on the ground, plus a wall

Border wall: James and Leppert OPPOSE A WALL,
Dewhurst and CRUZ tout "boots on the ground" AND A WALL IN SOME PLACES .


Triple the size of the Border Patrol

CRUZ on immigration: Wants to TRIPLE [the]SIZE of Border Patrol.
Says Dewhurst supported in-state tuition for kids of ILLEGAL immigrants.
Dewhurst: I have always been against an amnesty program.
"If they want to be a citizen, they ought to go home and reapply."
Dewhurst says he was against tuition for children of illegal immigrants.


Strengthen border security and increase enforcement

Ted Cruz has worked to STRENGTHEN BORDER SECURITY and help ensure that America remains a nation of laws.
Among other efforts, he has worked on efforts to INCREASE PENALTIES for felons WHO ENTER THE COUNTRY ILLEGALLY .
Ted authored a U.S. Supreme Court amicus brief on behalf of 10 states in Lopez v. Gonzales,ILLEGALLY .

Let's take a close look at what TED CRUZ said at that time about his amendment to the "Gang of Eight amnesty/ citizenship bill" :

Cruz In 2013 On Providing Legal Status To Illegal Immigrants ( 2:14 )
Published on Nov 12, 2015

U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, Hearing, 5/21/2013:
"And I'd like to make a final point to those advocacy groups that are very engaged in this issue
and rightly concerned about addressing our immigration system
and, in particular, about addressing the situation for the 11 million who are currently in the shadows.
If this amendment is adopted to the current bill, the effect would be that those 11 million under this current bill would still be eligible for RPI status.
They would still be eligible for legal status and indeed, under the terms of the bill, they would be eligible for LPR status as well so that they are out of the shadows,
which the proponents of this bill repeatedly point to as THEIR principal objective to provide a legal status for those who are here illegally to be out of the shadows.
This amendment would allow that happen, ...

"But what it would do, is it would REMOVE the pathway to citizenship, for REAL consequences that RESPECT the RULE OF LAW,
and that treat LEGAL Immigrants with the fairness and respect they deserve,
And a second point to those advocates that are so passionately engaged,
In my view, if this committee rejects this amendment,
and I think everyone here views that it is quite likely that this committee will indeed reject this amendment,

In my view that decision will make it much, much more likely that this entire bill will FAIL in the House of Representatives.

I don't want immigration reform to fail.
I want immigration reform to pass.
And so I would urge people of good faith on both sides of the aisle,
if the objective is to pass common sense immigration reform that SECURES THE BORDERS, that improves LEGAL immigration, and that allows those who are here illegally to come in out of the shadows;
then we should look for areas of bipartisan agreement and compromised to come together.
And this amendment,
I believe, if this amendment were to pass, the chances of this bill passing into law would increase dramatically."

The intent was TO EXPOSE the "ESTABLISHMENT REPUBLICANS" AND THE DemocRATS for their dishonesty.
THEY were trying to LEGISLATE the ILLEGAL ALIENS a PATHWAY TO CITIZENSHIP.

TED CRUZ was trying to amend the Bill so as TO STOP THEM,

by REMOVING the pathway to citizenship,
for REAL consequences that RESPECT the RULE OF LAW,
and that treat LEGAL Immigrants with the fairness and respect they deserve.

[County Agent Hank Kimball]

BTTT

[Yosemitest]

"If the taking of the property is for private use, it’s not eminent domain under the definition of the term."

I know.
Tell me about it.


But that's Donald Trump, for ya'.

Donald Trump and Eminent Domain, August 22nd, 2015

... More, Trump has publicly defended the confiscation of private property for eminent domain, even when the use for which the property is confiscated is purely private in nature:

Trump consistently defended the use of eminent domain.
Interviewed by John Stossel on ABC News, he said:
"Cities have the right to condemn for the good of the city.
Everybody coming into Atlantic City sees this terrible house instead of staring at beautiful fountains and beautiful other things that would be good."
Challenged by Stossel, he said
that eminent domain was necessary to build schools and roads.
But of course he just wanted to build a limousine parking lot.

Once again, this is Donald Trump's vision of private property rights when he was just another private citizen.
Imagine how much more damage he could do as the leader of the Federal executive branch.

[South40]

Ted Cruz says he is "unequivocally opposed to amnesty" (his exact words) at the 4:27 mark in this video dated May 30, 2015.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hL0FFJzqxwg

[odawg]

“As the son of a Cuban immigrant, Sen. Cruz celebrates LEGAL immigration.”

As Ann Coulter has documented, LEGAL immigration will destroy us much quicker than illegal immigration.

Sen. Sessions has projected that based on today’s legal immigration laws, in 50 years, only 1 out 7 births will be traditional American.

Cruz has been all over the board on immigration which is why anyone can find any position they choose.

[Yosemitest]

"NO NO NO one can use eminent domain for private use - only government officials can do that."

If the government take someone property, just to give it to another private company, because they think they can get a larger tax income, from the deal,
then it's WRONG !

It's UNCONSTITUTIONAL !
So ... the guilty SHOULD BE BLAMED !

[Yosemitest]

"Cruz cannot be a natural born citizen by the original standards."

WRONG ! TED CRUZ IS A "NATURAL BORN CITIZEN" by the original standards !

The Naturalization Act of 1790, let's read it , too ( written by our ORIGINAL FOUNDING FATHERS) !

United States Congress, "An act to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization" (March 26, 1790).

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled,

That any Alien being a free white person,
who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years,
may be admitted to become a citizen thereof on application to any common law Court of record in any one of the States
wherein he shall have resided for the term of one year at least,
and making proof to the satisfaction of such Court  that
he is a person of good character,
and taking the oath or affirmation prescribed by law
to support the Constitution of the United States,
which Oath or Affirmation such Court shall administer,
and the Clerk of such Court shall record such Application, and the proceedings thereon;
and thereupon such person shall be considered as a Citizen of the United States. 


And the children of such person so naturalized,
dwelling within the United States,
being under the age of twenty one years at the time of such naturalization,
shall also be considered as citizens of the United States. 

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: 
Provided, that
the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States: 
Provided also, that
no person heretofore proscribed by any States, shall be admitted a citizen as aforesaid,
except by an Act of the Legislature of the State in which such person was proscribed.

[Yosemitest]

NEVER trust a SOCIALIST, especially Donald Trump !

[Yosemitest]

Thank you for noticing.

[Yosemitest]

Donald Trump view of "EMINENT DOMAIN FOR PRIVATE USE" Read the history of "Eminent Domain" for yourself.
Donald Trump didn't have the power to take it, as a private citizen.
BUT ...the Government taking someone's property and giving not to Donald Trump's company, DID GO AGAINST THE CONSTITUTION, pure and simple !

[eyedigress]

Did he break the law?

[eyedigress]

You may hate him for being a developer but lets let the public know what this was.

Tell me.

[JayGalt]

Both parents citizens not one.

[Yosemitest]

"Did Donald Trump break the law?"

Donald Trump view of "EMINENT DOMAIN FOR PRIVATE USE" IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL !
Read the history of "Eminent Domain" for yourself.
Donald Trump didn't have the power to take it, as a private citizen.

BUT ...the Government taking someone's property and giving to Donald Trump's company, DID GO AGAINST THE CONSTITUTION, pure and simple !
If the government take someone property, just to give it to another private company, because they think they can get a larger tax income from the deal,
then it IS WRONG AND ILLEGAL as the LAW was ORIGINALLY INTENDED TO BE !

It's UNCONSTITUTIONAL !
So ... the guilty SHOULD BE BLAMED !

Once again, this is Donald Trump's vision of private property rights when he was just another private citizen.
So, AGAIN I SAY ....

Imagine how much more damage he could do as the leader of the Federal executive branch.

[eyedigress]

Who allowed it?

[katiedidit1]

Right, the pipeline would add a few billion dollars to Americas economy not to Trump’s wallet. Trump does not care if eminent domain involves tossing out homeowners to build HIS parking lots or improve his business. Whole different ballgame in the meaning of eminent domain.

[Yosemitest]

WRONG !
I can be just as STUPID as you can.

So I guess that means that
if there are not TWINS born at the same time, they cannot be citizens ? < /sarc>

Not only could the Founding Father define "natural born citizen", BUT ... THE FOUNDING FATHERS DID DEFINE IT !
And you ARE refusing the definition of "natural born citizen" CLEARLY DEFINED by our FOUNDING FATHERS !

Ted Cruz's PARENTS fulfilled ALL those requirements of the law that time, for Ted Cruz to be a "Natural Born Citizen".
Ted Cruz did NOT NEED a Court and a Judge to "Nationalize" him.

“Senator Cruz became a U.S. citizen at birth, and he never had to go through a naturalization process after birth to become a U.S. citizen,” said spokeswoman Catherine Frazier.
... The U.S. Constitution allows only a “natural born” American citizen to serve as president.
Most legal scholars who have studied the question agree that includes an American born overseas to an American parent, such as Cruz.

The only definition that matters is the one GIVEN BY OUR FOUNDING FATHERS.

They addressed children of citizens,
where one parent who was a citizen,
and one parent who was an immigrant who had resident in the United States for a period of time,
and the child's RIGHT to be a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN,
EVEN IF "born beyond Sea, or OUT of the limits of the United States, SHALL BE CONSIDERED AS NATURAL BORN CITIZENS :
Provided, that the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have NEVER been RESIDENT IN the United States:"

The Naturalization Act of 1790, let's read it !

United States Congress, "An act to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization" (March 26, 1790).

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled,
That any Alien being a free white person,
who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years,
may be admitted to become a citizen thereof on application to any common law Court of record in any one of the States
wherein he shall have resided for the term of one year at least,
and making proof to the satisfaction of such Court  that
he is a person of good character,
and taking the oath or affirmation prescribed by law
to support the Constitution of the United States,
which Oath or Affirmation such Court shall administer,
and the Clerk of such Court shall record such Application, and the proceedings thereon;
and thereupon such person shall be considered as a Citizen of the United States. 


And the children of such person so naturalized,
dwelling within the United States,
being under the age of twenty one years at the time of such naturalization,
shall also be considered as citizens of the United States. 

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: 
Provided, that
the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States: 
Provided also, that
no person heretofore proscribed by any States, shall be admitted a citizen as aforesaid,
except by an Act of the Legislature of the State in which such person was proscribed.

[Yosemitest]

"Cruz has been all over the board on immigration which is why anyone can find any position they choose."

Oh, BULLSH1T !

TED CRUZ chose to stand with others like Jeff Sessions and Steve King and the American people, to secure the border.
Source:

... Cruz even indicated he would back deporting those who came here illegally -- another proposal he has usually rebuffed.

"I would enforce the law," Cruz said, explaining that he would first deport criminals without proper papers.
"Federal immigration law provides that
if someone is here illegally and is apprehended,
that they should be sent back to their home country."

Cruz has recently begun stressing that he believes the number of undocumented immigrants would decrease with strict border enforcement.
...

"The only people I'm under fire from are reporters who want to throw rocks," Cruz said in Harlan.
"Once we've demonstrated that we can solve the problem, then we can have a conversation about what to do about whatever people remain illegally."

The Rubio campaign ...
"He has attempted to muddy the waters," Cruz said on the stage. "Where there was a battle over amnesty
and some chose, like Sen. Rubio to stand with Barack Obama and Chuck Schemer
and support a massive amnesty plan.
Others chose to stand with Jeff Sessions and Steve King and the American people
and secure the border."

Let's get VERY CLEAR on TED CRUZ and Immigration:

Immigration

As the son of a Cuban immigrant, Sen. Cruz celebrates LEGAL immigration.
He has championed measures
to secure the border,
reform the LEGAL immigration system,
and uphold the rule of law.

Americans, and particularly Texans, have witnessed the harmful effects of an unsecure border,
endangering the lives both of citizens and those who enter illegally.
President Obama's policies have encouraged drug smugglers, child abusers, murderers, and other dangerous criminals to traffick immigrant children into our nation under life-threatening conditions.
In the summer of 2013 we witnessed a humanitarian crisis at our Southern Border, propelled by PROMISES OF AMNESTY FROM THE WHITE HOUSE .
Immigrants deserve a better system in which they will be welcomed to the United States safely and with dignity.

As a critical step to protecting families and inviting more people to enter LEGALLY, in 2014, Sen. Cruz proposed legislation TO PREVENT OBAMA FROM ILLEGALLY EXPANDING AMNESTY .
The House acted to solve the ongoing crisis and passed bills that closely mirrored Sen. Cruz’s proposals,
but regrettably the Senate DemocRATS REFUSED TO ALLOW A VOTE on the measures.

In 2013, Sen. Cruz proposed amendments to the "Gang of 8";bill that would
strengthen border security,
expand green card opportunities,
increase high-skilled 'H1B'visas, PREVENT ILLEGAL ALIENS FROM RECEIVING WELFARE BENEFITS ,
and enforce the rule of law.

ALSO from On The Issues :

Ted Cruz on Immigration

End Obama's illegal amnesty via Congress' checks & balances
Q: How to respond to the split within your party on immigration?
What you're saying is
that the Republicans should vote to fund the governments for all departments except one:
no funding for the Department of Homeland Security,
which handles immigration, rescinding President Obama's executive action,
and if he vetoes that, he's responsible for shutting down the department.
The problem is
that's almost exactly what you did with the government shutdown across the entire government in 2013 with ObamaCare,
and it backfired badly on your party.

CRUZ: All across this country, Republicans campaigned, saying:
if you elect a Republican Senate, we will stop President Obama's illegal amnesty.
We need to HONOR WHAT WE SAID .
We should use the constitutional checks and balances that we have TO REIN IN THE ABUSE OF POWER OF THE EXECUTIVE.
Step #1 is IF the president implements this LAWLESS AMNESTY, that THE SENATE WILL NOT CONFIRM ANY executive or judicial nominees.


Defund amnesty; and refuse any nominees until rescinded

Q: How would you rescind President Obama's executive action on immigration?

CRUZ: We should use the constitutional checks and balances that we have TO REIN IN THE ABUSE OF POWER OF THE EXECUTIVE .
Step #1 that I have called for is the incoming majority leader should announce IF the president implements this LAWLESS AMNESTY, that THE SENATE WILL NOT CONFIRM ANY executive or judicial nominees,
other than VITALl national security positions,
for the next two years,
UNLESS AND UNTIL the president ENDS THIS LAWLESS AMNESTY .
That is AN EXPLICIT AUTHORITY given TO the Senate.

Q: Are you saying the Senate should REFUSE TO CONFIRM the president's new nominee for attorney general?

CRUZ: We have to REIN IN the executive.
And step #2, we've got is THE POWER OF THE PURSE,
and we should FUND ONE AT A TIME the CRITICAL PRIORITIES of the federal government,
but ALSO USE THE POWER OF THE PURSE TO ATTACH RIDERS .


No path to citizenship for 1.65 million illegals in Texas

When discussing what to do about the 1.65 million ILLEGAL immigrants living in Texas, . . . CRUZ again said
HE DID NOT SUPPORT A PATH TO CITIZENSHIP FOR ILLEGAL immigrants living in America, . . .

Give police more power to ask about immigration status

Cruz accused Dewhurst of using his position as head of the Texas Senate to KILL A BILL last year that would have given police more power to ask anyone they detain about their citizenship status--a charge Dewhurst denied.
Both agreed that the US has FAILED TO SECURE ITS BORDER with Mexico,
and said they OPPOSE AMNESTY for ILLEGAL immigrants and the Obama administration's new directive
allowing many young illegal immigrants brought to the US as children to be exempted from deportation.


Boots on the ground, plus a wall

Border wall: James and Leppert OPPOSE A WALL,
Dewhurst and CRUZ tout "boots on the ground" AND A WALL IN SOME PLACES .


Triple the size of the Border Patrol

CRUZ on immigration: Wants to TRIPLE [the]SIZE of Border Patrol.
Says Dewhurst supported in-state tuition for kids of ILLEGAL immigrants.
Dewhurst: I have always been against an amnesty program.
"If they want to be a citizen, they ought to go home and reapply."
Dewhurst says he was against tuition for children of illegal immigrants.


Strengthen border security and increase enforcement

Ted Cruz has worked to STRENGTHEN BORDER SECURITY and help ensure that America remains a nation of laws.
Among other efforts, he has worked on efforts to INCREASE PENALTIES for felons WHO ENTER THE COUNTRY ILLEGALLY .
Ted authored a U.S. Supreme Court amicus brief on behalf of 10 states in Lopez v. Gonzales,ILLEGALLY .

Let's take a close look at what TED CRUZ said at that time about his amendment to the "Gang of Eight amnesty/ citizenship bill" :

Cruz In 2013 On Providing Legal Status To Illegal Immigrants ( 2:14 )
Published on Nov 12, 2015

U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, Hearing, 5/21/2013:
"And I'd like to make a final point to those advocacy groups that are very engaged in this issue
and rightly concerned about addressing our immigration system
and, in particular, about addressing the situation for the 11 million who are currently in the shadows.
If this amendment is adopted to the current bill, the effect would be that those 11 million under this current bill would still be eligible for RPI status.
They would still be eligible for legal status and indeed, under the terms of the bill, they would be eligible for LPR status as well so that they are out of the shadows,
which the proponents of this bill repeatedly point to as THEIR principal objective to provide a legal status for those who are here illegally to be out of the shadows.
This amendment would allow that happen, ...

"But what it would do, is it would REMOVE the pathway to citizenship, for REAL consequences that RESPECT the RULE OF LAW,
and that treat LEGAL Immigrants with the fairness and respect they deserve,
And a second point to those advocates that are so passionately engaged,
In my view, if this committee rejects this amendment,
and I think everyone here views that it is quite likely that this committee will indeed reject this amendment,

In my view that decision will make it much, much more likely that this entire bill will FAIL in the House of Representatives.

I don't want immigration reform to fail.
I want immigration reform to pass.
And so I would urge people of good faith on both sides of the aisle,
if the objective is to pass common sense immigration reform that SECURES THE BORDERS, that improves LEGAL immigration, and that allows those who are here illegally to come in out of the shadows;
then we should look for areas of bipartisan agreement and compromised to come together.
And this amendment,
I believe, if this amendment were to pass, the chances of this bill passing into law would increase dramatically."

The intent was TO EXPOSE the "ESTABLISHMENT REPUBLICANS" AND THE DemocRATS for their dishonesty.
THEY were trying to LEGISLATE the ILLEGAL ALIENS a PATHWAY TO CITIZENSHIP.

TED CRUZ was trying to amend the Bill so as TO STOP THEM,

by REMOVING the pathway to citizenship,
for REAL consequences that RESPECT the RULE OF LAW,
and that treat LEGAL Immigrants with the fairness and respect they deserve.

[JayGalt]

The Naturalization act of 1790 is the first immigration act passed by our First Congress in 1790. In chapter III we find direct references to Vattel's assertion that citizenship is derived from the father, in that citizenship was prohibited to children whose fathers have never gave intent to permanently reside of the Untied States.

Interestingly in this same act, we also find the clarification of a Natural Born Citizen, as being one "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: Provided, That the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been a resident in the United States:

Residency was defined in that same act as someone under oath declaring that they wished to remain and live in the Untied States. Obviously Cruz did not fulfill that definition since his father was not in that situation when he was born. The naturalization laws and requirements have changed many times and birthright citizenship has crept in, even though it is not codified nor in America's interest, but the definition of natural born citizen has not been redefined by congress.