Cruz Attorney Calls Eligibility Appeal “Birther” Challenge

TERM HAS BECOME “MAINSTREAM”

by Sharon Rondeau

(Oct. 8, 2017) — An attorney’s letter responsive to an appeal filed by New York State citizen and petitioner Robert C. Laity referred to the objection to his client’s placement on the New York presidential primary ballot as a “‘birther’ challenge.”

On October 3, The Post & Email reported that in late August, Laity appealed an August 10 ruling issued by the Appellate Division, Third Judicial Department of the New York State Unified Court System deeming his challenge to the constitutional eligibility for president of Sen. Ted Cruz, Sen. Marco Rubio, and former Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal as “moot” since the election is now over.

Laity v NY, Cruz et al 2017

The case, Laity v. State of New York, et al, began as a ballot challenge in February 2016, after which the New York State Board of Elections (NYSBOE) said that rendering a decision on presidential constitutional eligibility was “beyond the ministerial scope” of its authority.

Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution requires the president to be a “natural born Citizen,” a requirement not expressed in the founding documents for any other office.  The citizenship requirement for U.S. representatives and senators is stated as “a Citizen” for a given number of years in each case.

Cruz was born in Calgary, Alberta, Canada to a mother born a U.S. citizen and a father who at the time held Cuban citizenship.  Between late 1968 and 1973, Rafael Bienvenido and Eleanor Cruz ran a business tied to the Canadian oil boom of the era, during which Rafael claims he became a Canadian citizen.

After The Dallas Morning News reported in 2013 that the younger Cruz was born with dual U.S.-Canadian citizenship, he claimed to have been unaware that he retained Canadian citizenship and renounced it approximately ten months later.  After placing an inquiry, The Post & Email was informed by the Canadian government that renunciation documents, like birth and death records, are not released to the public without the subject’s written consent.

During the primaries early last year, Trump questioned whether or not Cruz was eligible to serve as president, and, according to The Washington Post, “said Cruz ‘may not be a U.S. citizen.’”

Cruz has released no documentation showing that he possesses U.S. citizenship, but as a sitting U.S. Senator, it is presumed that he does.  His presidential campaign acknowledged a certified letter of inquiry about his qualifications but yielded no other response.

In May of last year, The Post & Email was told by a highly credible source that information had come to light that Eleanor Cruz adopted Canadian citizenship at some point while living in Alberta but that the time frame in which she allegedly did so was not known.

During the 2016 presidential primary season, legal scholars appeared to be split as to whether or not Cruz meets the “natural born Citizen” requirement, with one, Victor Williams, filing his own challenge as a write-in presidential candidate to Cruz’s eligibility.

The two-page letter submitted by Daniel M. Sullivan, who represents Cruz, states in response to Laity’s appeal that “the case is moot, and obviously so” as a result of New York’s primary election having taken place on April 19, 2016.

Sullivan’s third paragraph contends that “there is no substantial constitutional question here.  Even if the ‘birther’ challenge Petitioner seeks to mount were a serious one (and it is not), this appeal does not present it.  The Third Department merely affirmed the trial court’s decision refusing to address the merits of the petition…”

The term “birther” was coined as doubts arose as to the constitutional eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama during the 2007/08 campaign cycle.  Used as a pejorative, the label was affixed to now-President Donald Trump in 2011 for having questioned Obama’s claimed birthplace in Hawaii, pressing the White House to release Obama’s “long-form,” or more detailed, birth certificate to prove his eligibility.

The New York Times, Business Insider and many other mainstream news outlets have insisted that Trump’s questioning of Obama’s birthplace amounted to a “conspiracy theory.” The media’s position did not change despite its knowledge of a criminal investigation conducted under the auspices of the Maricopa County, AZ Sheriff’s Office (MCSO) over an eventual five-year period which determined that the long-form birth certificate image posted at whitehouse.gov on April 27, 2011 is a “computer-generated forgery” in March 2012.

“Birther” is now an entry in the Oxford English Living Dictionary and the Urban Dictionary, both of which invoke Obama’s name.  Cable-news pundits have also used the term in recent years, although major media refused, and may have actually prevented, its on-air guests from seriously discussing whether or not Obama’s life narrative were true in light of numerous contradictions and the findings of the Maricopa County Cold Case Posse.

 

The court opined that Laity’s objections are “moot” and that “The substantive issue presented would not have evaded judicial review had petitioner timely commenced this proceeding, which would have enabled Supreme Court to hear the case before the presidential primary election and petitioner to take an expedited appeal therefrom.”

As attorney for the Respondent, Assistant Solicitor General Jeffrey Lang filed the following three-page response to Laity’s most recent appeal with the New York State Court of Appeals.

[Editor’s Note:  Laity said that the “September 28, 2016” date which appears on page 1 is a typographical error.]

Laity v NY at NYSCOA1pdf

Laity v NY at NYSCOA2

Laity v NY at NYSCOA3

Outside of specific candidates, in his lawsuit Laity petitioned the New York State Board of Elections to change its presidential citizenship requirement from “Born a citizen” to the actual language which appears in Article II of the Constitution, “natural born Citizen.”

On page 2, Lang addressed that point by stating, “This claim is not justiciable because it amounts to a challenge to future presidential elections, and thus is not ripe. The claim is premature because any harm ‘is contingent upon events which may not come to pass…'”

On October 3, The Post & Email contacted the NYSBOE through its website to ask why its wording differs from that of Article II of the Constitution but received no response.

In the state of Arizona, presidential candidates must declare that they meet the three requirements set forth in Article II of the U.S. Constitution, the first of which is expressed on the declaration as “natural born citizen.”

The Secretary of State of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts states on its website:

The qualifications for President of the United States are set forth in the U.S. Constitution. A candidate for president must be 35 years old, a natural born citizen of the United States, and must have been a resident of the United States for at least 14 years.

The State of Florida includes the term “natural born Citizen” for the president under the category of “residency requirements.”

The State of Montana asks a candidate for public office to “affirm” that he possesses, “or will possess within constitutional and statutory deadlines, the qualifications prescribed by the Constitution and laws of the United States and the State of Montana.”

The California Secretary of State’s office issues qualification summaries for presidential candidates in four categories, citing the verbiage from Article II, Section 1, clause 5 at the beginning of each.

36 Responses to "Cruz Attorney Calls Eligibility Appeal “Birther” Challenge"

  1. Mark Bellison   Saturday, October 14, 2017 at 3:53 PM

    My mistake, I assumed you were talking about citizenship at birth. A child born in the US to two citizen parents and Irish citizen grandparents would have dual citizenship

  2. Robert Laity   Saturday, October 14, 2017 at 4:46 AM

    Mark Bellison, A person born in the US to US Citizen Parents is a 100% “Natural Born” American. For an NBC to take on foreign citizenship it would have to be a voluntary act of subjecting him or herself to the foreign jurisdiction and would amount to an abrogation of the person’s status as an NBC and the right to run for President or VP., this insofar as the Presidency can ONLY devolve on someone without ANY foreign attachment whatsoever., an NBC.

  3. Robert Laity   Friday, October 13, 2017 at 3:13 PM

    Bendore, Give up. I am a subject matter expert on this issue. You are simply, wrong. Persons not born in the United States to two US Citizen Parents cannot be President.
    The persons you speak of are “Citizens” by virtue of naturalization statutes. Courts that recognize those people as NBCs are simply, wrong.

  4. Mark Bellison   Friday, October 13, 2017 at 12:53 PM

    Did everyone miss this in earlier post?

    “Citizenship through descent from Irish grandparents”

    “If one of your grandparents is an Irish citizen who was born in Ireland, but neither of your parents was born in Ireland, you may become an Irish citizen. You will need to have your birth registered in the Foreign Births Register”

    So a natural born citizen could be a dual Irish/US citizen through his grandparents.

  5. thinkwell   Friday, October 13, 2017 at 12:31 AM

    bendore, read my post. It is the logical conclusion of your nbC insanity.

  6. Gary Wilmott   Thursday, October 12, 2017 at 7:53 PM

    Bendore…you are making stuff up. The FACTS do not support your wishful thinking.

  7. bendore   Thursday, October 12, 2017 at 2:20 PM

    Anyone born on US soil regardless of the citizenship of their parents or born abroad to at least one US Citizen parent is recognized by the US Government and all US Courts to be Natural Born US Citizens who are eligible to serve as US President regardless of whether any other country also recognizes them as a citizen despite the protestations of Birthers.

    However for political considerations it is wise to renounce one’s citizenship in any other country before running for the office of President.

  8. jeffrey Harrison   Wednesday, October 11, 2017 at 5:27 PM

    Robert Laity, Thanks so much for your input and clearing up the fine points for me. I’ve been following this scam/fraud for several years and knew it was a scam and that spray from a skunk was more pleasant. That Senate Resolution 511 was a scam, smoke and mirrors, and a dog and pony show. Being that both Obama and Hillary were involved said it all.

    Again, a resolution is like having no teeth, it’s all gums.

  9. Robert Laity   Wednesday, October 11, 2017 at 2:35 AM

    Jeff Harrison, Both Obama and McCain are ineligible. The 2008 election was between two frauds. No Resolution can make an NBC out of someone who is not an NBC. If the same questions were asked about Obama that were asked of McCain (ie. Was he born in the US and Were both his parents US Citizens) Obama would have been exposed. That is why no investigation of Obama by the Senate was undertaken. The Senate thinks that Americans are airheaded and that they did not see through that effort in misprision of felony. As I have explained in the past, McCain was NOT born in the US nor in any of it’s incorporated territories. McCain was born in Colon, Panama, a foreign nation. That is where the hospital wherein he was born was located.,in Colon, Panama. We had a treaty with Panama called the Panama Canal Zone Treaty of 1903. The provisions of that treaty allowed for Panama to retain Colon and Panama City as Panamanian. Anyone born in Colon, Panama was therefore born in Panama. Panama was never a US Colony. EVER. The PCZ was never an incorporated territory of the US. EVER. A territory must be incorporated (made part of the Whole) in order for one born there to be able to claim NBC Status. Currently there are NO Incorporated territories in the United States except for Palmyra Atol. Puerto Rico, US Virgin Islands, Northern Marianas Islands, American Samoa and Guam are all unincorporated (not part of the US but under it’s control).

  10. jeffrey Harrison   Tuesday, October 10, 2017 at 7:36 PM

    Robert Laity

    I think you have excellent remarks about NBC. Would you be so kind to remark about
    Obama’s and Hillary’s Senate Resolution No.# 911 (whatever that number it was, I can’t
    actually recall…). To me it was about to giving McCain and Obama cover. Funny they
    didn’t do a resolution on Obama. How come?

    As I recall, McCain did not remark nor call Obama out for being a non natural born citizen.

  11. Three-Pound Sledge   Tuesday, October 10, 2017 at 3:41 PM

    Robert Laity, if you have read my past entries, you will find that I agree with your thoughts and especially Bob68.

    The geek website was definitely off, that is why I posted a narrative from someone who posted on the geek website.

  12. thinkwell   Tuesday, October 10, 2017 at 1:13 PM

    If Ted Cruz had been born exactly the same as he was (in a foreign land to a foreign father), but just a mere few decades earlier (before the naturalization statutes were relaxed), he would not have been a citizen of the USA at all, let alone have any tenuous claim of being a natural born Citizen (i.e., at most, he clearly is only a statutory born citizen).

    Those who supported Ted Cruz’s campaign must contend that being born anywhere in the world to just one American citizen parent is enough to make one a natural born Citizen and be eligible to become President. If these blind followers of Cruz were thinking clearly they would realize the horrible implications to our national sovereignty of such a belief.

    For example, imagine that a Chinese man naturalizes as a US citizen, then, without giving up his citizenship, returns to communist China where he starts a business selling his valuable US-citizen sperm to hundreds or thousands of communist Chinese women who wish to birth a natural born Citizen of the USA. These thousands of communist Chinese babies (who would be born overseas to just one US citizen parent) would be legally every bit as eligible as native Canadian-born (and Cuban-American) Ted, to move here in their twenties, then eventually become president.

    How can anyone really believe that is what the founders had in mind? This is as bad as or worse than our perverted anchor-baby law. Obviously, their clear goal is to subvert the Constitution, destroy our sovereignty and turn us into just another globalist, elitist run state.

  13. Bob68   Tuesday, October 10, 2017 at 9:31 AM

    Robert Laity, I agree with you on natural born citizen. I posted what is in the World Book encyclopedia for discussion here, and because it specifically mentions Canada, birthplace of Ted Cruz. Also, I believe the quote from the encyclopedia is saying the same thing you are saying. Please read it carefully again and think about it.

  14. Robert Laity   Tuesday, October 10, 2017 at 7:31 AM

    Three pound sledge, Wisegeek is a bit off on what an NBC is. Simply put it is one born in a country to parents who are both citizens of said country. Two Brits in London who have a child in England beget a brit.

    Two former Brits, who gave up their UK citizenship when they were naturalized and are now both Americans, who have a child in the US beget a 100% Natural Born American.

    Your NBC kids would only be Brits if you claimed it officially, thereby rejecting your previous rejection of maintaining any foreign allegiance when your took you oath of US Citizenship.

  15. Robert Laity   Tuesday, October 10, 2017 at 7:10 AM

    Bob 68, One must not merely be born in the USA to be an NBC. One’s parents must also have been US Citizens themselves. McCain is ineligible because, although his parents were both US Citizens, he was not born in the USA. John McCain was born in Colon, Panama. Panama is a foreign nation. McCain has statutory US Citizenship only and is not an NBC. Only people born in a State or an INCORPORATED territory are born in the United States. The Panama Canal Treaty specifically excluded the two major Panamanian cities of Colon and Panama City from the parameters of the Panama Canal Zone. The PCZ was never an incorporated territory of the United States. It was an unincorporated territory for a time. The laws with regard to basic rights and privileges in unincorporated territories are not as inclusive as the laws are in an incorporated territory or State.

  16. Robert Laity   Tuesday, October 10, 2017 at 6:51 AM

    David L, There are NO situations in which a Natural Born Citizen can claim to be a citizen of another country or be claimed as a citizen of another country. Natural Born Citizens are born of two US Citizens in the United States. Your example references persons who acquire US citizenship by birth. Natural Born Citizens are citizens by birth (jus soli) as well as by blood (jus sanquinis). NO law can controvert an NBC’s 100% Status. In your example you cite circumstance in which one has an Italian Citizen Mother and/or an Italian citizen Father. That fact alone would disqualify a candidate since one’s parents MUST be US Citizens under the Constitution for their child, if born in the US, to be an NBC.

  17. Robert Laity   Tuesday, October 10, 2017 at 6:36 AM

    Jon David, The term “Natural Born dual citizen” is oxymoronic. One cannot BE both.

  18. Robert Laity   Tuesday, October 10, 2017 at 6:33 AM

    TF Bow, One born in a Country to parents who are both Citizens of said country cannot claim citizenship to ANY other country, no matter what the other country’s law says. That would open up NBCs of the USA to foreign grasp. People with dual citizenship are NOT NBCs nor can they EVER be. Courts that have ruled that being merely born here confers NBC status are wrong.

  19. JONATHAN DAVID MOOERS   Monday, October 9, 2017 at 11:37 PM

    To all on this P&E website:

    1. The supreme law of the land is the U.S. Constitution: not sharia law, not the communist manifesto, not Mein Kampf et al. Does everyone herein agree?

    2. Our nation’s government and all its people can either follow the U.S. Constitution and its existing Amendments, or formally amend the U.S Constitution as it currently exists. Does everyone herein agree?

    3. In order to limit, or altogether avoid, any engrained foreign sympathies from influencing the decisions of any U.S. President/Commander-in-Chief, the Framers of 1789 deliberately included the requirement that any presidential candidate and any incumbent president MUST be a “natural born Citizen”. Does everyone herein agree?

    4. So, it appears to reasonable minds, that the Framers had two components in mind when they included the “natural born Citizen” art-phrase, namely, “pedigree” and “philosophy”. “Pedigree” requires being born on American soil of American citizen parents, this being the SIMPLEST and least contestable meaning of those three consecutive words, and “philosophy” attempts to ensure, as much as possible, that the daily invisible thinking of any president will remain pro-American (= “America First”) and never subordinate such engrained pro-American philosophy with pro-foreign-sympathies (= “Illegal aliens and offshore foreigners First”). Does everyone herein agree?

    5. Experience has shown that Congress will never defend said simplest meaning of “natural born Citizen” and publicize/indict/prosecute NEVER-presIDent SOETORO-OBAMA II (SO2) for ineligibility-ID-fraud 08-28-08- TODAY, therefore, ONLY UNITED KNOWLEDGE PATRIOTS HEREIN AND ON MAIN STREETS ACROSS AMERICA WILL EVER PUBLICIZE/INDICT/PROSECUTE SO2. Does everyone herein agree?

    6. Is anyone listening?

  20. Three-Pound Sledge   Monday, October 9, 2017 at 1:46 PM

    I must give credit where credit is due, found at:

    http://www.wisegeek.org/in-the-united-states-what-is-a-natural-born-citizen.htm

    The following is a posted comment from an individual who is ‘spot-on’ on the topic of natural born citizen:

    anon989814
    Post 56

    “First, very simply, the Supreme Court has ruled many times that when determining what the Constitution means, every word is important. The writers didn’t simply pad the document with unimportant words. This principle is called Verba intelligi ut aliquid operantur debent – words should be interpreted to give them some effect. So, any valid definition of the term ‘natural-born citizen’ must give some meaning to the word ‘natural’. Saying that ‘natural-born citizen’ is the same as ‘citizen at birth’ ignores that principle, and so is not valid.

    So, what does the word ‘natural’ add to the term ‘natural-born citizen’? It’s a reference to ‘natural law’. The term ‘natural-born citizen’ simply means just what it says – a citizen by birth according to natural law.

    Who is a citizen by natural law? Any citizen who was not made a citizen by positive law, e.g., naturalized.

    The issue that many seem to grasp is the fact that naturalization is not some process that ends with someone raising their hand, and becoming a citizen, it’s any process that results in Congress making someone a citizen. If someone would be a citizen without any laws passed by Congress, then they are a natural-born citizen.

    If you don’t understand, then you might say, “Who can be a citizen without any law making them a citizen?” And the answer is a ‘natural-born citizen’, and that is exactly what the court said in Minor v. Happersett. In that case a woman said that she was a citizen based on the 14th Amendment, and was therefore allowed to vote. The court said that no, you have always been a citizen, because you are a ‘natural-born citizen’. The court then went on to define who was a ‘natural-born citizen when it said, “The Constitution does not in words say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents.”

    If any law passed by Congress is required to exist in order for you to be a citizen you have been naturalized by Congress, if you would be a citizen without Congress passing any law to make you one, then you are a ‘natural-born citizen’. Ted Cruz would not be a US citizen had Congress not passed a law making him so, therefore he is a naturalized US citizen, and not a ‘natural-born citizen’. When a person is naturalized, or what is required of them, is irrelevant.

    One other thing. It doesn’t matter if one has any other citizenship. Those who argue about dual allegiances are simply wrong. No other country can define who is a natural-born citizen of the US. Example: My wife was born in England. She later came to America, and became a citizen. We got married and had kids. We were both US citizens, and the children were born in the US. They are natural-born US citizens. But, England grants citizenship to all children born of parents who were born in England. So, they were according to British law, British citizens at birth as well. The laws of England do not affect whether someone is a natural-born US citizen.”

    Parting thought: All these viscous and ignorant judges that are ruling on presidential eligibility cannot wrap their brains around the difference between positive law and natural law. Too much dirty money and blackmail has swayed their rulings.

  21. Bob68   Monday, October 9, 2017 at 1:44 PM

    From The World Book Encyclopedia
    Field Enterprises Educational Corporation
    Merchandise Mart Plaza
    Chicago 54, Illinois

    The following is from page 6559, volume “P”, Copyright 1958:

    Qualifications for the Presidency. The Constitution opens the opportunity for election to the presidency to all “natural-born citizens” of the United States, meaning citizens born in this Country. A person born of American parents in another Country, such as Canada or France, would not be eligible for election. The candidate must be at least 35 years old, and must have lived in the United States for at least 14 years.

  22. Ed Sunderland   Monday, October 9, 2017 at 1:27 PM

    Gary is right and other comments hold truth except I don’t know of any concrete information available other than what sodium pentothal might produce with whoever Barack/Barry Obama/Soetoro really is.

    What I find more disheartening and disappointing is not a single republican or democrat has had the spine to acknowledge there is a criminal element to the Obama/Soetoro tenure that requires a full scale criminal investigation regarding the fraudulent ID documents he produced with the intent to deceive Arpaio and Zullo tribe aside of which I am a proud member………..

    To hear anyone on either side of the isle talking about voter fraud without first addressing the former president might as well have “I’m stupid” written across their forehead with a black permanent marker.

  23. Gary Wilmott   Monday, October 9, 2017 at 1:20 PM

    To TF Bow: What birth certificate? There is no Obama birth certificate.

  24. James Carter   Monday, October 9, 2017 at 10:50 AM

    David L wrote: “If you look at the signature page image, there is a ghost image so the first page of the letter. Someone needs to clean or change the drum or the fuser unit. This is know as ghosting and is very common.

    FWIW, the same thing happened to the White House when they printed the birth certificate out as handouts for the press (AP copy).”

    Well darn, T.F.BOW et al anti-birthers had just about convinced me that the “ghosting” on the birth certificate handouts was due to “ghosting” on the original being a common result of the scanning software of the specific Xerox office machine used by the Obama White House. Now I’m back to thinking maybe it was the result of intentional image alteration.

  25. Three-Pound Sledge   Monday, October 9, 2017 at 9:37 AM

    Rafael E. Cruz – No CRBA, No passport records, No U.S. birth certificate.

    Rafael E. Cruz – just another undocumented alien.

    Rafael E. Cruz: “Your papers are not in order!!!”

    If you are not a birther, you may be an afterbirther.

  26. David L   Monday, October 9, 2017 at 9:33 AM

    Here is the Italian law for citizenship by descent:

    If you were born in the United States (or in any other country where citizenship is acquired by birth), and any one of the situations listed below pertains to you, you could be eligible to apply for recognition of Italian citizenship by descent.

    Eligibility Categories:

    Your father was an Italian citizen at the time of your birth (i.e. was not a citizen of the US or another country when you were born);

    Your mother was an Italian citizen at the time of your birth (was not yet citizen of the US and you were born after January 1, 1948);

    Your paternal grandfather was an Italian citizen, your father was born in the US or a country other than Italy, and your paternal grandfather was still an Italian citizen at the time of his birth;

    Your maternal grandfather was an Italian citizen, your mother was born in the US or a country other than Italy, and your maternal grandfather was still an Italian citizen at the time of her birth, and you were born after January 1, 1948;

    Your paternal or maternal great-grandfather was an Italian citizen, your paternal or maternal grandparent was born in the US or a country other than Italy, and your paternal or maternal great grandfather was an Italian citizen at the time of your grandparent’s birth.

    Limitations:

    If your Italian ancestor was a woman born before 1/1/1948 she can only transfer Italian citizenship to her children born after 1/1/48 and to their descendants. This law has been appealed in several trials at the High Court of Rome. Please visit Italian Citizenship for Descendants of Women for detailed information.

    If your Italian ancestor was born in the following localities, Veneto, Friuli-Venezia-Giulia, or Trentino Alto-Adige, in order to apply for the Italian citizenship you must prove that he or she left Italy after July 16th, 1920.

    http://www.icapbridging2worlds.com/italian-dual-citizenship-by-descent/

    Under Italian law and the US Constitution there could arise situations where children born in the US to two US citizens would have Italian citizenship.

  27. David L   Monday, October 9, 2017 at 9:27 AM

    Robert Laity,

    “A person born in the United States to two US Citizens is nothing other then a 100% American Citizen. No law, foreign or domestic confers any other citizenship on a 100% US NBC”

    I think I see why you keep failing in your court cases.

    “Citizenship through descent from Irish grandparents”

    “If one of your grandparents is an Irish citizen who was born in Ireland, but neither of your parents was born in Ireland, you may become an Irish citizen. You will need to have your birth registered in the Foreign Births Register”

    http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/moving_country/irish_citizenship/irish_citizenship_through_birth_or_descent.html

    Under Irish law and the US Constitution there could be situations where someone born to two US citizens could also have Irish citizenship.

    Ireland could change the portion of the law requiring birth registration and make anyone with Irish citizen grandparents automatically Irish citizens.

  28. JONATHAN DAVID MOOERS   Monday, October 9, 2017 at 8:47 AM

    SYNDICATED ATTORNEY-CRIMINAL LYIN’ TED THE UNDOCUMENTED FED

    NEVER-presIDent SOETORO-OBAMA II (= “SO2”, an assembly of human debris emitting a swamp gas odor)

    Where did anyone ratify an Amendment to the U.S. Constitution during or after 1789 that specifically permits “natural born dual-Citizen” to hold the highest office in America?

    What court, and any of its practicing attorney-criminals, in all America, can now permit any presIDential candIDate/incumbent presIDent/ex-presIDent/deceased presIDent to be a “natural born dual-Citizen [with dual-sympathies]” without first having a nationally-ratified Constitutional Amendment for same?

    ANSWER: Criminal-courts and attorney-criminals nurtured by an entertained apathetic voting public and a for-profit media circus

  29. T.F. BOW   Monday, October 9, 2017 at 7:38 AM

    No court has ever ruled that those with dual citizenship cannot also be natural-born citizens. And a few courts did rule that citizenship at birth is sufficient to confer natural-born citizenship.

    Regardless, Cruz and New York argue the court in Laity’s case lacks jurisdiction because the case is moot and unripe.

    The courts have ruled the California Secretary of State doesn’t have the authority to investigate a candidate’s eligibility. But the Secretary does has the authority to remove from the ballot a candidate who is obviously ineligible, such as the two presidential candidates who were removed because they were too young.

    With respect to Obama, there is no evidence that his parents are anyone else other than the people listed on his birth certificate. Nor is there any evidence that anyone paid $5 million to defend eligibility suits.

  30. Robert Laity   Monday, October 9, 2017 at 4:30 AM

    David L, Obama was born with dual British Citizenhip/Subjecthood under the British Nationality Act of 1948. But Obama was not born of two US Citizen Parents in the US.

    A person born in the United States to two US Citizens is nothing other then a 100% American Citizen. No law, foreign or domestic confers any other citizenship on a 100% US NBC.

    Any US Citizen Parent who was naturalized in order to become a US citizen, gave up ALL allegiances to any other nation when they were sworn in. No US Citizen or US NBC has allegiance to any other nation.

  31. David L   Sunday, October 8, 2017 at 11:24 PM

    If you look at the signature page image, there is a ghost image so the first page of the letter. Someone needs to clean or change the drum or the fuser unit. This is know as ghosting and is very common.

    FWIW, the same thing happened to the White House when they printed the birth certificate out as handouts for the press (AP copy).

  32. JONATHAN DAVID MOOERS   Sunday, October 8, 2017 at 10:16 PM

    LICENSED ATTORNEY-CRIMINAL LYIN’ TED THE UNCOUMENTED FED

    https://www.texasbar.com/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Find_A_Lawyer&template=/Customsource/MemberDirectory/MemberDirectoryDetail.cfm&ContactID=196697

    “Statutory Profile Last Certified On: 06/27/2017”. Really?

    LICENSED ATTORNEY-CRIMINAL DANIEL M. SULLIVAN S IS CRUZ’S LIAR FOR HIRE

    https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/attorney/AttorneyDetails?attorneyId=1sTZ75hswCRA4P5_PLUS_Yv7sew%3D%3D

    http://decisions.courts.state.ny.us/ad3/Decisions/2016/522647.pdf

    AND ALL 50+ ATTORNEY-CRIMINAL LICENSING BOARDS SEE natural born Canadian citizen CRUZ MOCK/VIOLATE THE U.S. CONSTITUTION, AND THEY DO NOT REVOKE ANY ASSOCIATED ATTORNEY-CRIMINAL LICENSES [TO STEAL].

    ONLY KNOWLEDGE PATRIOTS ON MAIN STREET USA, LIKE ROBERT LAITY, WILL EVER HOLD ATTORNEY-CRIMINAL-CRUZ AND NEVER-presIDent SOETORO-OBAMA II (SO2) ACCOUNTABLE TO THE RULE OF LAW AND ARRESTED FOR ID-FRAUD AND AFFIRMATIVE-RACISM CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY!

    I NOW SEE LICENSED ATTORNEYS AS SYNDICATED ALOOF BULLIES OF VOODOO LAW STUPIDITY WHERE LITTLE PEOPLE ARE ADDESSED LEGALLY AND DC ELITES ARE ADDRESSED REGALLY…NOT JUSTICE FOR ALL BUT “JUST US”!

  33. David L   Sunday, October 8, 2017 at 9:51 PM

    “And finally can someone explain why the current junior senator of Hawaii, Mazie Hirono, born in Japan in 1947 to a Japanese father and American mother, says that she became an American NATURALIZED citizen in 1959 while Ted Cruz claims he was born a Natural born citizen in Canada albeit to a Canadian-Cuban father and maybe American or Canadian mother?”

    Her mother was born in Hawaii but left for Japan before residing in the US long enough to be able to pass on US citizenship to her children born in Japan. Senator Hirono was not a citizen at birth.

    Senator Cruz did not need a CRBA to become or prove citizenship. All he needed to obtain a US passport was his birth certificate, his mother’s birth certificate, parent’s marriage certificate and a statement from his mother showing she met the residence requirement.

    Children born in the US to two US citizen parents could still be born with dual citizenship depending on the laws of the other countries.

  34. JM   Sunday, October 8, 2017 at 7:34 PM

    Obama was a dual citizen which he acquired as an Indonesian Constitutional Law requiring any adopted student child attending their schools to become a Citizen of Indonesia. Obama attended Jakarta’s Muslim Boy Prep School for 8 years. He was natural born from the affair with Malcolm X and Elizabeth Ann Newman from the Bronx (alias Ann Duke in The Weather Underground with Bill Ayers as a Domestic Terrorist and on the FBI Most Wanted List for years) even though out of the country and wedlock both parents were natural born Americans. Obama was born at Coast Province General Hospital in Mombasa, Kenya in 1961 where the mother Elizabeth changed her name on the long form COB to Stanley Ann Dunham from Kansas to decoy the chosen path for the DNC wonder boy and illegitimate child of an affair. Dreams Of My Father was an attempt by Ayers and DNC members to maintain the secrecy of Obama’s background. Obama’s papers have been held at DNC Law Firm Perkins Coie in Seattle at a cost to taxpayer’s of over $5 million since 2008. His POTUS eligibility was falsified by Pelosi and Biden in the 2008 DNC election as Constitutionally Eligible by them to 49 states where the center page clause certifying Obama as eligible for POTUS but the 50th paper had the clause left in center page with the blanks for the name of POTUS as eligible in place, as you cannot be a dual citizen and run for POTUS. Biden got Obama in the CIA from 1981 to 1984 as a Farsi Interpreter to try to cover up the dual citizenship and after that gig, Obama came to the U.S. and applied for a Foreign Student Scholarship to attend Harvard which the Ayers family and a wealthy Sheik from CAIR paid for Obama’s Harvard Education to become a front for Iranian Muslim Valleri Jarrett’s orders and directions. They are living together in the DC mansion at this time to manage DNC obstruction efforts and run media gas lighter operations against Trump and Conservatives. No one listened for 8 years and are still hiding Treason, Perjury, Election Fraud, Murders, Misprision Of Felony, Theft Of Funds, Criminal Sabotage of all Federal Agencies, the Military and other officials. Years from now, when people finally see what is and will happen, we can only say we told you so. Conspiracy? Yes, it was by the DNC like America has never seen. Much of the damage is not reversible though there are many people trying. The most damaging scenario is the combination of ignorance, press control, cover ups and corrupted politicians on both sides that have kept quiet through obfuscation, ignorance and pocket lining/pork barrel techniques that allow profiteering from the taxpayers at all costs with no recourse from taxpayer’s to hold them responsible since 1946 when the Judicial amended Law Under God in the dark of night without permission of Senate or Congress to the FRCP/Corporate Trust Law System that exists illegally today and works for them but not for us. Brace for big changes America in a Godless world that is out of control and out of the voters hands from here on out. Trump is trying but DNC obstructionism will continue being run by political criminals that will probably never see a jail cell. I’m all for law but the written law of our Constitution, not the DNC bench or the 340 DNC controlled liberal judges that Obama and Jarrett installed after 2008. Bari Soetoro, Bari Shabazz, Bari Malik Shabazz, Bari Owens, Barrack Obama, Barrack Hussein Obama, Barrack Obama II, on and on. The respect and dignity of all 6 American Vets that were illegally arrested and imprisoned during Obama’s two illegal terms as whistle blowers will never be returned to them nor will their lives and careers that were ruined and destroyed be shown in the press or media. It seems to be too big of an embarrassment to what is left of America and it’s corrupt or apathetic citizens that are now afraid of truth and more afraid to do anything about it. Many of these scenarios were depicted in many movies over decades especially Clint Eastwood’s decades of amazing life truths in all his productions. Now we live in a make believe world filled with millennial artificial celebrities and child like pretense and fantasy that has nothing to do with the real world. Maybe that’s why so many Millennials don’t like history or anyone older than themselves, it’s easier to pretend than to face reality and the truth. This is the new Roman Empire that the clock is ticking on. Without God, you will repeat history, just look around, it is everywhere you look.

  35. ELmo   Sunday, October 8, 2017 at 5:56 PM

    Dear Readers, I recall a challenge (I think it was by Orly Taitz) to the Secretary of State (I think California) To have Obama removed from the Ballot in the 2008 Election. She ( I forgot her name) refused saying she had no authority to remove him (Even though apparently someone had been removed previously in California by the Secretary of State for not meeting the Age requirement.
    I’m almost positive Cmdr. Kerchner witll have the case in his archive. My computer was hacked and all my eligibility archives were purged or I would have exact information.
    Cmdr Kerchner if you are reading perhaps you can recall the case in point.
    ELmo

  36. Gary Wilmott   Sunday, October 8, 2017 at 4:35 PM

    Cruz “claims” American citizenship through his mother (whose citizenship status at the time of his birth in 1970 has never been verified). Problem is that even if Rafael Jr. did acquire American citizenship as he claims it can never be NATURAL born citizenship: the constitutional requirement to be POTUS. In fact, such acquisition of citizenship would only be pursuant to a 1934 STATUTE which allowed a mother to transmit her American citizenship to her foreign born child. Prior to 1934 only the father could transmit his American citizenship to the foreign born child. Never the mother. Obviously the Constitution had not changed the definition of NBC so it is self-evident that Cruz could never have been an American citizen prior to 1934 under the same circumstances as his 1970 birth (foreign father and supposed American citizen mother). As I said ONLY a congressional naturalization law affords Cruz even a “sniff” at American citizenship and even that statute imposes residency requirements that must be complied with.

    Further I quote the following from an anonymous source:

    “Natural born citizen” and “citizen from birth” are not synonymous. The intent of a natural born citizen, is someone who is born in a situation where only American citizenship is available to them. A citizen from birth, or native born citizen, has the possibility of other citizenship, in addition to the possibility of American citizenship. Therefore, having only one parent who is American does confer American citizenship, but the other parent also confers their citizenship. Divided loyalty is where American citizenship is not an absolute, it is based upon decisions of the parents. A natural born citizen will have absolutely no chance of anything other than American citizenship, hence no chance of divided loyalty, hence an All-American person.
    .
    In fact, if Ted Cruz’s mother did not file a CRBA (Consular Report of Birth Abroad) for her son and perfect his derivative citizenship (naturalize him) before he became an adult, then he may not be citizen at all and may be an illegitimate senator.

    Ted Cruz is a servant of the citizens of Texas. He is a servant of the people. The burden of proof of his qualifications should rest entirely on him. What are you hiding Ted?

    Further, I would suggest that the disingenuous and slimy Mr. Cruz should be precluded from any opportunity to run for POTUS in the future on the basis of his obvious stupidity? A highly educated man like Ted Cruz claims that he never knew for 43 years that he possessed Canadian citizenship. Really? If we are to believe that canard then I would contend that Cruz is too stupid to even be considered thank you very much.

    In summary:

    Ted Cruz, the native-born Canadian (homeland of Canada), was born to an alien father and an expat mother who was a permanent resident of an alien land. In its 1971 holding of Rogers v. Bellei the USSC found that a person such as Ted Cruz is a derivative citizen (not even naturalized at birth). The Constitution demands that our presidents be born exclusively American. That is what natural born Citizen means. Ted Cruz is not eligible.

    And finally can someone explain why the current junior senator of Hawaii, Mazie Hirono, born in Japan in 1947 to a Japanese father and American mother, says that she became an American NATURALIZED citizen in 1959 while Ted Cruz claims he was born a Natural born citizen in Canada albeit to a Canadian-Cuban father and maybe American or Canadian mother? Hirono was not an American citizen until she moved to America and complied with the statutory residency requirements. Can’t figure out Cruz’ status for sure because he refuses to provide all the pieces to the puzzle. But one thing is for sure: Cruz IS NOT a Natural Born Citizen and his claims are laughable.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.