Please be patient - the pages in this grouping are taking time! Come back often!
Each and Every candidate is being researched!
Each and Every candidate is being researched!
"In selecting men for office, let principle be your guide. Regard not the particular sect or denomination of the candidate - look to his character. . . When a citizen gives his suffrage [his vote] to a man of known immorality he abuses his trust [civic responsibility]; he sacrifices not only his own interest, but that of his neighbor;
he betrays the interest of his country."
Noah Webster, Lexicographer, Educator,
Statesman, the "Schoolmaster of the Nation" 1758-1843
he betrays the interest of his country."
Noah Webster, Lexicographer, Educator,
Statesman, the "Schoolmaster of the Nation" 1758-1843
I am dedicating Campaign 2016 to Fred Thompson - a true PATRIOT who died on Nov 1, 2015. His wisdom and gentleness will be sadly missed. Before he died he did this video and stated: "“God said, ‘I need someone who even after crushing defeats rises up and stands tall — someone who hears the clarion call that these are the times that try men’s souls and does not shrink from the trial — someone who will cross a frozen river in the dead of winter when all logic and reason says turn back, abandon hope.” He has left the following video for all Patriots in this country and to those we hope decides to join us!
AMERICA Needs To Understand Neither Cruz or Rubio Are Eligible
To Be the President of the United States
The very fact that Ted Cruz knew he still had citizenship with Canada at the time he ran for the Senate in 2012 shows deceit. He can't possibly have thought it didn't make any difference. It was not until the Dallas Daily News called him out about it that he gave up his Canadian citizenship in 2014. In fact, Cruz could have voted and ran for the
Canadian Parliment while a United States Senator.
Is that what you want for this country?
To Be the President of the United States
The very fact that Ted Cruz knew he still had citizenship with Canada at the time he ran for the Senate in 2012 shows deceit. He can't possibly have thought it didn't make any difference. It was not until the Dallas Daily News called him out about it that he gave up his Canadian citizenship in 2014. In fact, Cruz could have voted and ran for the
Canadian Parliment while a United States Senator.
Is that what you want for this country?
Natural Born Versus Naturalized- Why It Is So Important To Know The Difference
Those of us arguing that Cruz, Rubio and others are not eligible to sit as a Senator or President of the United States are not doing so in support of another candidate. However, we have in place a president who has refused to present a US Birth Certificate as has Cruz and Rubio. They only want to site examples of the belief they want you to follow. The following is why this issue is so important:
My Name is Bakht Awar Ahmadi an Afghani Patriot…I’m a very devout Muslim.I am married to an Native born American woman who converted to Islam shortly after our marriage in order to please me…Allah has blessed us with two wonderful sons who are taught only in the ways of Islam.
We have raised our two sons, Ahmed Ibrahim and Abdul Shahid in the Mideast for 30 years and I could not be any more prouder of my sons than I am today, as they have both become very devout followers of Allah, their desires to please Muhammad will make it absolutely impossible for them to be loyal or to assimilate into any other culture than Islam, or, to serve anyone but Allah. Their loyalties are to Allah, Muhammad, and the Koran only…
My family, Catherine Mosley Ahmadi, and our two sons who are [naturalized American citizens] through their mothers American citizenship moved to America when they were 28 and 30 years of age, and are still waiting to be Naturalized myself…
" Abdul today is an elected Representative for Chicago’s District 7 and has become very well liked in his district"
"our youngest son Abdul Shahid Abmadi desires to run for the Presidency as a faithful Democrat so that he can make the necessary changes he believes will better the treatment of Muslims across this nation". READ MORE
I am not saying this story is true but it is accurate as to what could evolve if the person elected president was not a Native/Natural born citizen of this country.
My Name is Bakht Awar Ahmadi an Afghani Patriot…I’m a very devout Muslim.I am married to an Native born American woman who converted to Islam shortly after our marriage in order to please me…Allah has blessed us with two wonderful sons who are taught only in the ways of Islam.
We have raised our two sons, Ahmed Ibrahim and Abdul Shahid in the Mideast for 30 years and I could not be any more prouder of my sons than I am today, as they have both become very devout followers of Allah, their desires to please Muhammad will make it absolutely impossible for them to be loyal or to assimilate into any other culture than Islam, or, to serve anyone but Allah. Their loyalties are to Allah, Muhammad, and the Koran only…
My family, Catherine Mosley Ahmadi, and our two sons who are [naturalized American citizens] through their mothers American citizenship moved to America when they were 28 and 30 years of age, and are still waiting to be Naturalized myself…
" Abdul today is an elected Representative for Chicago’s District 7 and has become very well liked in his district"
"our youngest son Abdul Shahid Abmadi desires to run for the Presidency as a faithful Democrat so that he can make the necessary changes he believes will better the treatment of Muslims across this nation". READ MORE
I am not saying this story is true but it is accurate as to what could evolve if the person elected president was not a Native/Natural born citizen of this country.
“A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear.”Marcus Tullius Cicero
Understanding Your American Citizenship
Our Founders established the criteria of Natural Born Citizen upon our President for a very important reason. Natural Born Citizen meant, to our framers, a child born of two parents who were citizens of the United States at the time of the birth of that child. If you are not sure of this, or perhaps disagree, please read this article based upon fact & history before you go on: https://goo.gl/sFkKUm
A person who is born of just one parent who is a citizen of the United States is a citizen by birth, but not Natural Born Citizen. Someone cannot hold or have held dual citizenship with a foreign country and be a Natural Born Citizen. The fact that we are confused by this qualification, or perhaps even wish to alter this qualification, must be because we do not understand WHY this qualification was established in the first place. So, before we take a stand either way, we must consider the reasons why this qualification was established by the framers of the American Constitution.
The whole reason the president must be a Natural Born Citizen is because our framers had a history full of foreign kings imposing foreign law and foreign favor upon the people and they knew how dangerous foreign influence was to Liberty. George Washington spent a great bit of effort trying to drive this understanding home in his Farewell Address of 1796:
“Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government.”
- See more at: http://krisannehall.com/understanding-citizenship/#sthash.rM7YFmcI.etcvOfqF.dpuf
A person who is born of just one parent who is a citizen of the United States is a citizen by birth, but not Natural Born Citizen. Someone cannot hold or have held dual citizenship with a foreign country and be a Natural Born Citizen. The fact that we are confused by this qualification, or perhaps even wish to alter this qualification, must be because we do not understand WHY this qualification was established in the first place. So, before we take a stand either way, we must consider the reasons why this qualification was established by the framers of the American Constitution.
The whole reason the president must be a Natural Born Citizen is because our framers had a history full of foreign kings imposing foreign law and foreign favor upon the people and they knew how dangerous foreign influence was to Liberty. George Washington spent a great bit of effort trying to drive this understanding home in his Farewell Address of 1796:
“Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government.”
- See more at: http://krisannehall.com/understanding-citizenship/#sthash.rM7YFmcI.etcvOfqF.dpuf
The Constitution, Vattel, and “Natural Born Citizen”: What Our Framers Knew By Publius Huldah.
We have been visited recently with several very silly articles which assert that Marco Rubio is a “natural born Citizen” within the meaning of Art. II, §1, cl. 5, U.S. Constitution (ratified 1789), and hence is qualified to be President:
Bret Baier (Fox News) asserts that Congress may define (and presumably redefine, from time to time) terms in the Constitution by means of law.
Chet Arthur in American Thinker quips that “the original meaning of ‘natural born citizen’” is determined by reference to “The Heritage Guide to the Constitution” and to the definition of “citizen” at Sec. 1 of the 14th Amendment, ratified 1868.
Human Events claims that anyone born within The United States is a “natural born citizen” eligible to be President.
Jake Walker at Red State purports to show how the term has been used from 1795 to the present. After quoting James Madison on the citizenship requirements imposed by Art. I, §2, cl. 2, to be a member of the House, Walker gleefully quotes a 1795 discussion of “natural born subject” to “prove” that anyone born here is a “natural born citizen”:
“It is an established maxim, received by all political writers, that every person owes a natural allegiance to the government of that country in which he is born. Allegiance is defined to be a tie, that binds the subject to the state, and in consequence of his obedience, he is entitled to protection…” [emphasis mine]
“The children of aliens, born in this state, are considered as natural born subjects, and have the same rights with the rest of the citizens.” [emphasis mine]
But “subjects” are not “citizens”; and we fought a war so that we could be transformed from“subjects of the British Crown” to Citizens of a Republic!
The four writers don’t know what they are talking about. But I will tell you the Truth and prove it. We first address Word Definitions. READ MORE
We have been visited recently with several very silly articles which assert that Marco Rubio is a “natural born Citizen” within the meaning of Art. II, §1, cl. 5, U.S. Constitution (ratified 1789), and hence is qualified to be President:
Bret Baier (Fox News) asserts that Congress may define (and presumably redefine, from time to time) terms in the Constitution by means of law.
Chet Arthur in American Thinker quips that “the original meaning of ‘natural born citizen’” is determined by reference to “The Heritage Guide to the Constitution” and to the definition of “citizen” at Sec. 1 of the 14th Amendment, ratified 1868.
Human Events claims that anyone born within The United States is a “natural born citizen” eligible to be President.
Jake Walker at Red State purports to show how the term has been used from 1795 to the present. After quoting James Madison on the citizenship requirements imposed by Art. I, §2, cl. 2, to be a member of the House, Walker gleefully quotes a 1795 discussion of “natural born subject” to “prove” that anyone born here is a “natural born citizen”:
“It is an established maxim, received by all political writers, that every person owes a natural allegiance to the government of that country in which he is born. Allegiance is defined to be a tie, that binds the subject to the state, and in consequence of his obedience, he is entitled to protection…” [emphasis mine]
“The children of aliens, born in this state, are considered as natural born subjects, and have the same rights with the rest of the citizens.” [emphasis mine]
But “subjects” are not “citizens”; and we fought a war so that we could be transformed from“subjects of the British Crown” to Citizens of a Republic!
The four writers don’t know what they are talking about. But I will tell you the Truth and prove it. We first address Word Definitions. READ MORE
RUINATION OF AMERICAN EDUCATION
It seems every new Trojan Horse comes along in relationship to the education of our children, the Republican's grap it as if it was a new love in their life while they destroy our chidren.
Using tax-payer funds to send children to private or parochial schools is "taxation without representation".
On April 15, Rand Paul (R-KY) introduced an amendment to an omnibus education bill that would have spelled the end to federal education aid as we know it. Under the amendment to the Senate bill, which is a revamp of the No Child Left Behind Act, federal Title I dollars, intended to support public schools with a high proportion of low-income students, would instead follow individual students even if they choose to attend private schools.
This would have paved the way for a multi-billion-dollar nationwide voucher system, siphoning money from public school districts to private and possibly religious schools that—unlike their public counterpart—have no obligation to serve minority, at-risk or special-needs students. These schools are also free to ditch the science curriculum in favor of climate-denial and creationism. Shame on him!
Jeb Bush spent almost the whole 8 years he was governor of Florida trying by hook or crook to get vouchers passed by the legislators or by an amnedment on the ballot. In 2006 the Florida Supreme Court ruled vouchers unconstitutional. I have no way to express to you how angry Bush was when he lost the fight - but it has never stopped him and Rubio was part of his deceit.
In 2013, Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) introduced an "Educational Opportunities Act" which would have created a voucher-like system allowing children from low- or middle-income families to attend private schools funded through tax-deductible corporate and private donations. The businesses get the write-off and taxpayers lose out on public revenue.
Reminding America's parents that each of the governor's who are running for the office of the President of the United States at sometime were in favor of the Common Core Standards. Some now have backed away stating they no longer support it, but regardless Common Core is implemented in their states.
Even if they have turned away from the support of the CCSS, they are still supporting Charter/Choice/Voucher of which are also not helping our children.
New Jersey Governor Chris Christie has implemented a slew of school “reforms,” including an expansion of the state’s charter school program and a new law making it easier to fire tenured teachers. But he now has his eyes set on vouchers, or what he calls “opportunity scholarships,” as well.
Using tax-payer funds to send children to private or parochial schools is "taxation without representation".
On April 15, Rand Paul (R-KY) introduced an amendment to an omnibus education bill that would have spelled the end to federal education aid as we know it. Under the amendment to the Senate bill, which is a revamp of the No Child Left Behind Act, federal Title I dollars, intended to support public schools with a high proportion of low-income students, would instead follow individual students even if they choose to attend private schools.
This would have paved the way for a multi-billion-dollar nationwide voucher system, siphoning money from public school districts to private and possibly religious schools that—unlike their public counterpart—have no obligation to serve minority, at-risk or special-needs students. These schools are also free to ditch the science curriculum in favor of climate-denial and creationism. Shame on him!
Jeb Bush spent almost the whole 8 years he was governor of Florida trying by hook or crook to get vouchers passed by the legislators or by an amnedment on the ballot. In 2006 the Florida Supreme Court ruled vouchers unconstitutional. I have no way to express to you how angry Bush was when he lost the fight - but it has never stopped him and Rubio was part of his deceit.
In 2013, Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) introduced an "Educational Opportunities Act" which would have created a voucher-like system allowing children from low- or middle-income families to attend private schools funded through tax-deductible corporate and private donations. The businesses get the write-off and taxpayers lose out on public revenue.
Reminding America's parents that each of the governor's who are running for the office of the President of the United States at sometime were in favor of the Common Core Standards. Some now have backed away stating they no longer support it, but regardless Common Core is implemented in their states.
Even if they have turned away from the support of the CCSS, they are still supporting Charter/Choice/Voucher of which are also not helping our children.
New Jersey Governor Chris Christie has implemented a slew of school “reforms,” including an expansion of the state’s charter school program and a new law making it easier to fire tenured teachers. But he now has his eyes set on vouchers, or what he calls “opportunity scholarships,” as well.
|
First Debate-A Documentary: Aug 6, 2015
|
Google Manipulating Elections!
| ||
|
Republican Debate August 6, 2015
|
Republican Debate September 16, 2015
|
|
Republican Debate October 28, 2915
|
Republican Debate November 10, 2015
|
Republican Debate 2/6/2015 NH
Original Intent Derived from from de Vattel's
The Law of Nations
The Law of Nations
"Before the Constitution the closest reference we have to Natural Born Citizen is from the legal treatise “the Law of Nations,” written by Emerich de Vattel in 1758. In book one chapter 19,"
§ 212. Of the citizens and natives (naturals).
“The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.”
And then you have John Jays letter to Washington, July 1787, which drove the change in the draft Constitution from citizen to natural born citizen..."Permit me to hint, whether it would not be wise & seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expresly that the Command in chief of the american army shall not be given to, nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen."
§ 212. Of the citizens and natives (naturals).
“The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.”
And then you have John Jays letter to Washington, July 1787, which drove the change in the draft Constitution from citizen to natural born citizen..."Permit me to hint, whether it would not be wise & seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expresly that the Command in chief of the american army shall not be given to, nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen."
Time to Explain about the Difference Between a Natural Born Citizen and A Naturalized Citizen!
by JB Williams of the North American Law Center 2014 JB Williams is a writer on matters of history and American politics with more than 3000 pieces published over a twenty-year span. He has a decidedly conservative reverence for the Charters of Freedom, the men and women who have paid the price of freedom and liberty for all, and action oriented real-time solutions for modern challenges. He is a Christian, a husband, a father, a researcher, writer and a business owner. He is co-founder of action organizations The United States Patriots Union, a civilian parent organization for The Veteran Defenders of America. He is also co-founder of The North American Law Center, a citizen run investigative legal research and activism organization preparing to take on American's greatest legal battles. www.PatriotsUnion.org www.VeteranDefenders.org www.newswithviews.com
Republican U.S. Senator from Texas Ted Cruz represents a perfect opportunity for the American “constitutionalist” to examine the true Founders intent and meaning of the Natural Born Citizen clause found in Article II of the U.S. Constitution, a condition of eligibility for the highest political office in our land, the Oval Office.
Before discussing the case study, I want to state for the record that it is Ted Cruz’s unique condition which makes him perfect for the study, not his vigorous conservative stance in the U.S. Senate. No matter how much I may agree with Senator Cruz’s political positions, I am first and foremost, an American Constitutionalist, defined as one who has studied, knows, understands and respects the Rule of Constitutional Law.
Further, I issue this study because I believe that we will either study, know and respect the U.S. Constitution as it was written and ratified, or we will lose our Constitutional Republic and system of self-governance forever. Last, this is a letter sent to Ted Cruz in December of 2013 asking him to clear this matter for the sake of our Constitutional Republic. Cruz never responded to the letter.
The purpose of this study is not to harm Senator Cruz in any way, but rather to establish the facts about his individual citizenship status as it relates to Article II requirements for the Oval Office, which include the following requirement – “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;”
Fundamentally, the term Natural Born, while commonly acknowledged in many common law courts around the globe, is a term based in Natural Law. It is a condition that exists in Nature, as opposed to only in man-made laws. Not only is it a condition which exists in Natural Law, as such, it is inalienable by any man-made law or even constitutional amendment.
Simply stated, “As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.”
Many competing opinions have been issued on the “true meaning” of the term Natural Born Citizen. The Cruz circumstance presents an opportunity to delve into that true meaning in great detail and demonstrate in the end, not only what Natural Born Citizen means, but why our Founders made it a condition for the highest political office in our land.
The information presented in this case study should be used to vet all political persons, no matter their partisan leanings. It should be applied equally to all who seek high political office in the United States, without regard for partisan ambitions.
The Cruz Facts:
• Ted Cruz was born Rafael Edward Cruz on 22 December, 1970.
• Ted Cruz was born in Alberta, Calgary – Canada.
• Ted Cruz was registered as a Native Born citizen of Canada on 31 December, 1970.
• Ted Cruz was born the son of father Rafael Bienvenido Cruz, a citizen of Cuba.
• Ted Cruz was born the son of mother Eleanor Elizabeth Wilson, Delaware, U.S.A.
• Ted Cruz was not registered at birth as a citizen of the United States. His only existing birth record is his Canadian birth records. There are no U.S.A. birth records for Ted Cruz. As a result, he was born a dual citizen of Canada and Cuba. (I will address the influence of his mother’s condition in a moment.)
• The Cruz family immigrated to the United States from Canada in 1974, when Ted was approximately four years old.
The obvious legal conclusion based on these documented facts is that Ted Cruz is a Native Born citizen of Calgary via his birth place, due to Canadian laws; and a Natural Born Citizen of Cuba via his father’s citizenship status at the time of Ted’s birth, under Natural Law.
These are indisputable facts based on the Birth Record presented by Ted Cruz and all known U.S. citizenship laws.
This study was initiated in response to a question regarding the U.S. citizenship status of Ted Cruz -- Not is he a Natural Born Citizen eligible for the Oval Office, a question already answered by the facts presented above… But is Ted Cruz a U.S. citizen at all, eligible to even hold a seat in the U.S. Senate?
“He’s a Canadian,” said Toronto lawyer Stephen Green, past chairman of the Canadian Bar Association’s Citizenship and Immigration Section. “Generally speaking, under the Citizenship Act of 1947, those born in Canada were automatically citizens at birth unless their parent was a foreign diplomat,” said ministry spokeswoman Julie Lafortune.
Ted’s father and mother were not foreign diplomats living in Canada. Ted was therefore, a Native Born citizen of Canada at birth. On this basis alone, he could not possibly be a Natural Born Citizen of the United States as a simple matter of legal fact.
To be honest, this was a question I had not even considered until now. Like most Americans, I had “assumed” that Ted Cruz was naturalized under U.S. Immigration laws at the time his parents left Canada and became naturalized citizens of the United States living in Texas. Under U.S. law, it is not possible for any individual to be both “Natural Born Citizen” and “Naturalized citizen.” Ted is one or the other, not both… and the same is true for every individual.
I will no longer make that assumption, but will instead, look at the facts.
Is Ted even eligible for the U.S. Senate?
Under Article I of the U.S. Constitution, to hold a seat in the U.S. Senate, one must meet the following conditions – “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.”
So, the issue is not whether or not Ted Cruz has ever denounced his Canadian citizenship, as it pertains to holding a Senate seat, but rather whether or not, and when, Ted became a Naturalized citizen of the United States?
As a Native citizen of Canada, Ted would have had to naturalize to the United States at some point, at least nine years prior to seeking office in the U.S. Senate. As the son of a U.S. citizen mother, the process of naturalization for Ted would have been very simple, but it would have still required a naturalization process since he was not born in the United States, nor did his parents register him as a U.S. citizen at the time of his birth in Canada.
However, as of this writing, I have been unable to find any records of Ted or his father naturalizing to the United States from Canada. (If anyone has proof of U.S. naturalization for Rafael Edward Cruz, please send it to my email.)
This means that the question of Ted’s eligibility for the U.S. Senate is not yet answered. However, the question of whether or not Ted Cruz is a Natural Born Citizen of the United States, eligible for the Oval Office, is indeed answered.
As Natural Born is a status passed from Father to son at birth, Ted could only be a Natural Born Citizen of Cuba, as that is the citizenship held by his natural birth father at the time Ted was born in Canada.
Because his mother Eleanor held citizenship in the U.S. at the time of Ted’s birth, she could have registered Ted as a dual citizen at birth, Canada by Native birth right and citizen of the U.S. through his mother’s citizenship in the U.S. She did not register Ted as a dual citizen at birth, but rather as a Native Born Citizen of Canada alone.
Because his parents immigrated from Canada to the U.S. in 1974, they could have naturalized both Ted and his father Rafael in 1974, or sometime thereafter, making Ted anaturalized citizen, not a Natural Born Citizen. However, we have so far been unable to confirm that any such naturalization process ever happened.
Is Ted a Native Born Citizen of the United States?
No… because he was born a Native Born citizen of Canada alone.
Is Ted a Natural Born Citizen of the United States?
No… because his father was only a legal citizen of Cuba at the time of Ted’s birth in Canada.
Is Ted a Naturalized citizen of the United States, eligible to hold a seat in the U.S. Senate, but not eligible to hold the Oval Office?
We simply do not have adequate documentation to either confirm or deny Ted’s naturalized U.S. citizenship status. But if we are able to confirm that Ted is indeed a naturalized citizen of the United States, we will have also confirmed that it is not possible for him to also be a Natural Born Citizen of the United States.
The issue of whether or not Ted Cruz is eligible for the Oval Office has been completely answered and the answer is no…
But the issue of Ted’s eligibility for the U.S. Senate remains open to further investigation. An update on this matter will be issued once adequate documentation can be found and confirmed.
What about Obama?
Applying the same sound legal standards to Obama just applied to Cruz, the answer is again a resounding no…
Barack Hussein Obama was born the son of a Kenyan Father who held at no time in his life, U.S. citizenship. Obama’s birthplace is still in question, as is his mother’s identity and legal status at the time of Obama’s birth.
Like Cruz, Obama may or may not be a legal “citizen” of the United States. But like Cruz, he is absolutely not a Natural Born Citizen of the United States.
Why is this important?
First, because we are either a nation which respects the rule of constitutional law or we are nothing at all.
Second, because if Ted Cruz, or any other ineligible candidate becomes the GOP nominee for 2016, it will divide the pro-American vote between those who know and care about the constitution and those who do not.
The surest way to see another Democrat seize the Oval Office in 2016 is to run a blatantly unconstitutional candidate for the GOP.
Last, it is very unfortunate that people like Ted and Rubio are more focused on their personal political ambitions than the best interest of our Republic. Obama could be taken down so easy by anyone in this position. Once they proclaim themselves ineligible for office, it naturally follows that Obama is also ineligible. But as long as no Republican will stand up and rightly disqualify themselves, the charade of Obama eligibility continues.
Any real American patriot would have already taken these simple steps to end the Obama fraud.
Republican U.S. Senator from Texas Ted Cruz represents a perfect opportunity for the American “constitutionalist” to examine the true Founders intent and meaning of the Natural Born Citizen clause found in Article II of the U.S. Constitution, a condition of eligibility for the highest political office in our land, the Oval Office.
Before discussing the case study, I want to state for the record that it is Ted Cruz’s unique condition which makes him perfect for the study, not his vigorous conservative stance in the U.S. Senate. No matter how much I may agree with Senator Cruz’s political positions, I am first and foremost, an American Constitutionalist, defined as one who has studied, knows, understands and respects the Rule of Constitutional Law.
Further, I issue this study because I believe that we will either study, know and respect the U.S. Constitution as it was written and ratified, or we will lose our Constitutional Republic and system of self-governance forever. Last, this is a letter sent to Ted Cruz in December of 2013 asking him to clear this matter for the sake of our Constitutional Republic. Cruz never responded to the letter.
The purpose of this study is not to harm Senator Cruz in any way, but rather to establish the facts about his individual citizenship status as it relates to Article II requirements for the Oval Office, which include the following requirement – “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;”
Fundamentally, the term Natural Born, while commonly acknowledged in many common law courts around the globe, is a term based in Natural Law. It is a condition that exists in Nature, as opposed to only in man-made laws. Not only is it a condition which exists in Natural Law, as such, it is inalienable by any man-made law or even constitutional amendment.
Simply stated, “As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.”
Many competing opinions have been issued on the “true meaning” of the term Natural Born Citizen. The Cruz circumstance presents an opportunity to delve into that true meaning in great detail and demonstrate in the end, not only what Natural Born Citizen means, but why our Founders made it a condition for the highest political office in our land.
The information presented in this case study should be used to vet all political persons, no matter their partisan leanings. It should be applied equally to all who seek high political office in the United States, without regard for partisan ambitions.
The Cruz Facts:
• Ted Cruz was born Rafael Edward Cruz on 22 December, 1970.
• Ted Cruz was born in Alberta, Calgary – Canada.
• Ted Cruz was registered as a Native Born citizen of Canada on 31 December, 1970.
• Ted Cruz was born the son of father Rafael Bienvenido Cruz, a citizen of Cuba.
• Ted Cruz was born the son of mother Eleanor Elizabeth Wilson, Delaware, U.S.A.
• Ted Cruz was not registered at birth as a citizen of the United States. His only existing birth record is his Canadian birth records. There are no U.S.A. birth records for Ted Cruz. As a result, he was born a dual citizen of Canada and Cuba. (I will address the influence of his mother’s condition in a moment.)
• The Cruz family immigrated to the United States from Canada in 1974, when Ted was approximately four years old.
The obvious legal conclusion based on these documented facts is that Ted Cruz is a Native Born citizen of Calgary via his birth place, due to Canadian laws; and a Natural Born Citizen of Cuba via his father’s citizenship status at the time of Ted’s birth, under Natural Law.
These are indisputable facts based on the Birth Record presented by Ted Cruz and all known U.S. citizenship laws.
This study was initiated in response to a question regarding the U.S. citizenship status of Ted Cruz -- Not is he a Natural Born Citizen eligible for the Oval Office, a question already answered by the facts presented above… But is Ted Cruz a U.S. citizen at all, eligible to even hold a seat in the U.S. Senate?
“He’s a Canadian,” said Toronto lawyer Stephen Green, past chairman of the Canadian Bar Association’s Citizenship and Immigration Section. “Generally speaking, under the Citizenship Act of 1947, those born in Canada were automatically citizens at birth unless their parent was a foreign diplomat,” said ministry spokeswoman Julie Lafortune.
Ted’s father and mother were not foreign diplomats living in Canada. Ted was therefore, a Native Born citizen of Canada at birth. On this basis alone, he could not possibly be a Natural Born Citizen of the United States as a simple matter of legal fact.
To be honest, this was a question I had not even considered until now. Like most Americans, I had “assumed” that Ted Cruz was naturalized under U.S. Immigration laws at the time his parents left Canada and became naturalized citizens of the United States living in Texas. Under U.S. law, it is not possible for any individual to be both “Natural Born Citizen” and “Naturalized citizen.” Ted is one or the other, not both… and the same is true for every individual.
I will no longer make that assumption, but will instead, look at the facts.
Is Ted even eligible for the U.S. Senate?
Under Article I of the U.S. Constitution, to hold a seat in the U.S. Senate, one must meet the following conditions – “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.”
So, the issue is not whether or not Ted Cruz has ever denounced his Canadian citizenship, as it pertains to holding a Senate seat, but rather whether or not, and when, Ted became a Naturalized citizen of the United States?
As a Native citizen of Canada, Ted would have had to naturalize to the United States at some point, at least nine years prior to seeking office in the U.S. Senate. As the son of a U.S. citizen mother, the process of naturalization for Ted would have been very simple, but it would have still required a naturalization process since he was not born in the United States, nor did his parents register him as a U.S. citizen at the time of his birth in Canada.
However, as of this writing, I have been unable to find any records of Ted or his father naturalizing to the United States from Canada. (If anyone has proof of U.S. naturalization for Rafael Edward Cruz, please send it to my email.)
This means that the question of Ted’s eligibility for the U.S. Senate is not yet answered. However, the question of whether or not Ted Cruz is a Natural Born Citizen of the United States, eligible for the Oval Office, is indeed answered.
As Natural Born is a status passed from Father to son at birth, Ted could only be a Natural Born Citizen of Cuba, as that is the citizenship held by his natural birth father at the time Ted was born in Canada.
Because his mother Eleanor held citizenship in the U.S. at the time of Ted’s birth, she could have registered Ted as a dual citizen at birth, Canada by Native birth right and citizen of the U.S. through his mother’s citizenship in the U.S. She did not register Ted as a dual citizen at birth, but rather as a Native Born Citizen of Canada alone.
Because his parents immigrated from Canada to the U.S. in 1974, they could have naturalized both Ted and his father Rafael in 1974, or sometime thereafter, making Ted anaturalized citizen, not a Natural Born Citizen. However, we have so far been unable to confirm that any such naturalization process ever happened.
Is Ted a Native Born Citizen of the United States?
No… because he was born a Native Born citizen of Canada alone.
Is Ted a Natural Born Citizen of the United States?
No… because his father was only a legal citizen of Cuba at the time of Ted’s birth in Canada.
Is Ted a Naturalized citizen of the United States, eligible to hold a seat in the U.S. Senate, but not eligible to hold the Oval Office?
We simply do not have adequate documentation to either confirm or deny Ted’s naturalized U.S. citizenship status. But if we are able to confirm that Ted is indeed a naturalized citizen of the United States, we will have also confirmed that it is not possible for him to also be a Natural Born Citizen of the United States.
The issue of whether or not Ted Cruz is eligible for the Oval Office has been completely answered and the answer is no…
But the issue of Ted’s eligibility for the U.S. Senate remains open to further investigation. An update on this matter will be issued once adequate documentation can be found and confirmed.
What about Obama?
Applying the same sound legal standards to Obama just applied to Cruz, the answer is again a resounding no…
Barack Hussein Obama was born the son of a Kenyan Father who held at no time in his life, U.S. citizenship. Obama’s birthplace is still in question, as is his mother’s identity and legal status at the time of Obama’s birth.
Like Cruz, Obama may or may not be a legal “citizen” of the United States. But like Cruz, he is absolutely not a Natural Born Citizen of the United States.
Why is this important?
First, because we are either a nation which respects the rule of constitutional law or we are nothing at all.
Second, because if Ted Cruz, or any other ineligible candidate becomes the GOP nominee for 2016, it will divide the pro-American vote between those who know and care about the constitution and those who do not.
The surest way to see another Democrat seize the Oval Office in 2016 is to run a blatantly unconstitutional candidate for the GOP.
Last, it is very unfortunate that people like Ted and Rubio are more focused on their personal political ambitions than the best interest of our Republic. Obama could be taken down so easy by anyone in this position. Once they proclaim themselves ineligible for office, it naturally follows that Obama is also ineligible. But as long as no Republican will stand up and rightly disqualify themselves, the charade of Obama eligibility continues.
Any real American patriot would have already taken these simple steps to end the Obama fraud.
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/connor-williams/2015/08/13/jonathan-alter-grover-norquists-anti-tax-pledge-helped-wreck-us
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/02/19/grover-norquists-alleged-islamist-ties-threaten-reelection-to-nra-board-of-directors/
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/02/19/grover-norquists-alleged-islamist-ties-threaten-reelection-to-nra-board-of-directors/
