What you call “..making the assertion in defiance of historical fact...” is more correctly called “referencing and quoting the law”
Whiskeyx - If you have a ping list, would you PLEASE send them the link below?? Thanks!!
taxcontrol - Remember our “conversation” concerning this??
I can re-post it if you have forgotten.
http://powderedwigsociety.com/eligibility-of-cruz-and-rubio/#
Pretty straightforward and easy to understand presentation about Cruz and Rubio’s eligibility to run for POTUS.
“What you call “..making the assertion in defiance of historical fact...” is more correctly called “referencing and quoting the law””
You cited a law and then proceeded to use a commonplace misrepresentation of the law in defiance of the historical application of that law. The problems with the interpretation of that law have been brought to your attention, and rather than reconcile your mis-interpretation of that law to the historical applications of the naturalization laws, you instead just adamantly refuse to acknowledge the conflicts with reality. You also keep attempting to claim that an unnatural naturalization act can somehow confer natural born citizenship, despite the fact that no legislative act or statutory law can ever have the authority to make any person a natural born citizen.